Show new navigation
On
Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program

Assessment Summary

ISRP Assessment 1991-051-00-ISRP-20060831
Assessment Number: 1991-051-00-ISRP-20060831
Project: 1991-051-00 - Modeling and Evaluation Statistical Support for Life-Cycle Studies
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 8/31/2006
Final Round ISRP Date: None
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria
Final Round ISRP Comment:
This is a high priority project deserving support. The proposal provides an extensive background and justification of the technical and scientific background. The Fish and Wildlife Program (FWP) calls for status and trends monitoring for the hydrosystem, tributaries, estuary, and harvest. This project addresses these issues by providing in-season and post-season evaluation of smolt outmigration success, adult return information, stream escapement, habitat mitigation activities, and harvest.

There appears to be collaboration with a number of other projects (six BPA projects indicated), but linkage is only generally described.

The history is extremely well documented indicating significant benefits and accomplishments. Nevertheless the following comments from the most recent ISRP review still apply: "The main elements of the project are to provide real-time analyses of PIT-tag data and smolt passage indices to predict outmigration timing and to provide value-added analyses of historical tagging data by testing hypotheses, estimating parameters, and investigating interrelationships. An additional element is to provide statistical assistance to the BPA and the NW fisheries community on an as-needed basis. The response provides information on clients and contributions. The project provides a valuable service. The ISRP suggests that in the future a summary of the following be provided in support of proposals: 1) data on the amount and nature of use of electronic data and analyses posted on the web, 2) responses to satisfaction surveys by internet users, 3) number of requests for analyses and the time taken to respond to those requests."

These comments are still applicable including the request for information concerning use and satisfaction by users. Only a response to (3)(the number of project requests and the number of hours spent in responding to those requests) was included in this proposal. It would still be useful to include recommendations # (1)&(2). The ISRP notes that such activities would also provide feedback for quality improvement of this ongoing project.
Documentation Links:
Proponent Response: