Columbia Basin Coordinated Anadromous Monitoring Strategy Workshop Upper

Columbia Basin Coordinated Anadromous Monitoring Strategy Workshop Upper Columbia Sub-Region 2 Listed ESU/DPS Steelhead- Threatened Spr Chinook- Endangered 1 MPG each Populations: 4 steelhead, 3 Chinook Other anadromous salmonids: sockeye, summer/fall Chinook, coho November 3 -5, 2009 Stevenson, WA

Summarize Strategy (VSP) Determine abundance and productivity for all “Primary” populations in the Upper Columbia ESUs with known accuracy and precision. ◦ spring Chinook--census redd surveys & carcass recovery ◦ steelhead--combination of redd surveys and PIT/Radio tags for mark-recapture validation and bio-data (i. e. origin, age structure, sex ratio) ◦ juvenile productivity– smolt traps Monitor spatial structure and diversity metrics to provide information for risk assessments consistent with the ICTRT viability criteria. ◦ distribution using redd surveys and remote PIT tag arrays ◦ phenotypic traits via all of the above (carcasses, broodstock collection, redd surveys, smolt traps) PIT tags allow for refinement and detail not possible with aggregate methods Genotypic diversity through periodic (1 -2 generations) sampling within each population.

Summarize Strategy (Hatchery Effectiveness) Determine the hatchery impacts on wild populations of spring Chinook and Steelhead throughout the Upper Columbia (Mostly funded under HCP and PRCC) Productivity (NRR) and abundance that compares treatment (Wenatchee and Methow to unsupplemented reference streams/populations Implementing RSS studies in a subset of populations with different PNI’s (steelhead) Continue RSS for Spring Chinook in Wenatchee long term Monitoring for genetic divergence and straying Comparing spatial distribution between hatchery and naturally produced fish

Summarize Strategy (Habitat Effectiveness) Status and Trend (long term, population level, random design) ◦ Under way in Wenatchee and Okanogan for 5 -6 yrs ◦ Entiat and Methow (proposed) Effectiveness ◦ Entiat; IMW experimental design (Reach and Population level) ◦ Reach level effectiveness monitoring in the Methow (USGS/USBR) ◦ Project/Reach level effectiveness monitoring in the Wenatchee

Summarize the confirmed existing monitoring and its relation to your strategy and the BIOP RPA’s ◦ How it (existing monitoring) conforms with your strategy The strategy is built around the ongoing monitoring under the HCPs and previous federal Bi. Ops. ◦ How it informs the BIOP RPA’s Existing monitoring covers the majority of the RPA requirements. ◦ Where there adjustments identified Yes, 3 reductions, 3 neutral shifts, and 2 increases ISEMP shifts for analysis MOA adjustments ◦ Were these adjustments cost plus, cost minus or cost neutral, include total amounts Reductions = $240 k (Within MOA) Increases = $450 k ($300 k in MOA)

Summarize any Accord monitoring within your strategy ◦ Needed for the RPA requirements OBMEP (large fish and habitat project in Okanogan) UC habitat restoration Nason Creek smolt trap Omak Creek smolt and adult traps Kelt reconditioning Nutrient supplementation Status and trend annual reporting ◦ Needed for non-RPA strategy CRITFC sockeye projects UC Coho Chief Joseph Hatchery monitoring

Summarize, by priority, the new monitoring efforts needed to meet the RPA requirements Highest: (New) RPA 50. 3, 50. 4, 50. 6; Upper Columbia “RPA umbrella project” ◦ Steelhead radio tracking ◦ Expansion of PIT tag output and interrogation automation of PIT tag analysis ◦ Precision and accuracy of adult and juvenile abundance and productivity (smolt traps and redd surveys) VSP Highest: (Modified) RPA 50. 3, 50. 6; Expansion of PIT tag output and interrogation in the Okanogan. ◦ RPA 50. 6 “Linking fish in fish out monitoring to populations with relatively large survival gaps. ”

Summarize, by priority, the new monitoring efforts needed to meet the RPA requirements ◦ Highest: New, RPA 56; Habitat status and trend in the Methow ◦ Highest: New, RPA 56; Status and Trend Water Quantity and Quality Monitoring; Replaces diminishing WDOE efforts ◦ Highest: New, RPA 56. 2; Habitat status and trend for Entiat (random sites in tributaries are not covered under ISEMP effectiveness monitoring). ◦ Highest: New, RPA 57. 4; Implement project level habitat action effectiveness monitoring in the Wenatchee. Habitat

Summarize, by priority, the new monitoring efforts needed to meet the RPA requirements ◦ Highest: New, RPA 64. 3; Study reproductive success of hatchery and natural origin steelhead in the Methow. Hatchery

Summarize, by priority, the new additional monitoring efforts needed to meet the strategy ◦ Highest; New; RPA 71, 72, 73; Implementation monitoring for restoration and protection projects, data management, and reporting. Independent “audit” and tracking of implemented projects for BPA and other funding sources. Non-Sub-regional Response: “FUNDING NEEDS TO BE COVERED UNDER THE CATEGORICAL REVIEW“. ◦ Lower; New; Develop temperature models to predict benefits or to properly size projects proposed to reduce water temperatures. Habitat

Summarize, by priority, the new additional monitoring efforts needed to meet the strategy. Highest: New; Estimate exploitation of natural origin summer Chinook (related to harvest increases resulting from hatchery increases). High: New; Summer Chinook sonic/radio tracking study Lower: New; Juvenile life history pathways for summer Chinook Summer Chinook

Summarize, by priority, the new additional monitoring efforts needed to meet the strategy. Highest; New; Implement Lake Wenatchee sockeye trophic status study. ◦ THERE COULD BE SOME CRITFC MOA STUDIES IN LAKE WENATCHEE BUT THEIR STUDY PLANS ARE NOT FINALIZED. High; New; Relocate Lake Wenatchee smolt traps downstream where mark-recapture efficiency is higher. Sockeye

Unresolved RPA workgroup recommendations RPA 50. 7: externally mark all fish produced with funding from Action Agencies. ◦ Okanogan steelhead ◦ Coho ◦ Winthrop NFH Spring Chinook? ◦ PUD funded programs are not 100% marked.