Response requested comment:

1.      Provide a synthesis of the overall approach and methodology used to achieve project objectives. Please include additional information on how the fall Chinook surveys are conducted. How often do they occur, how are redd locations identified and marked, are genetic samples being collected, are egg retention counts being made, are otoliths being collected for possible microchemistry analyses, and what type of length data are collected (e.g., FL, MEHP)? Provide variance measures of the spawning population estimates, as previously requested by the ISRP.

2.      Describe lessons learned and adaptive management resulting from past and ongoing research and monitoring. It is possible that the project consistently reviews its operations and methods on a regular basis to determine if anything might be improved. If this is the case, this procedure should be described in future reports. On the other hand, if a formal or quasi-formal adaptive management process is not yet in place, the proponents should establish one. This will provide them opportunities to discuss and possibly implement changes to existing procedures.

3.      Describe the extent to which FCRPS operators use information from this project to alter hydropower operations, as emphasized in the overall project goals. The ultimate goal of this project is to collect data that can be used to reduce potential impacts of hydropower operations on salmon spawning below the dams. The effectiveness of this effort should be reported in the proposal and annual reports. As part of this analysis, the proponents should describe and discuss the extent to which salmon redds were dewatered, if at all.

Comment:

1. Objectives, Significance to Regional Programs, and Technical Background

The purpose of this ongoing research and monitoring project is two-fold: (1) to assess the extent of spawning by ESA-listed fall Chinook salmon in the mainstem Columbia River so that the Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS) can be managed to protect and enhance these populations, and (2) to collect riverbed temperature data so that the emergence timing of ESA-listed chum salmon can be estimated. This allows managers to know when chum salmon emergence is complete and FCRPS operations can shift from protecting incubating chum salmon to supporting spring spill operations to aid other species.

Real-time water temperature and water surface elevation data supplied by the project, for example, are used by managers to prevent redd dewatering and estimate when chum salmon fry emergence has ended. Additionally, field surveys are used to count fall Chinook adults, carcasses, and redds, as well as collect biological information (scales, gender, length, fin clips, CWT retrieval etc.) from carcasses. This information is passed on weekly to another project for use in run-reconstruction, abundance forecasting, and VSP monitoring. The project seems to be well-integrated with other regional programs that use these data, and it addresses BiOp RPA Action 17.

2. Results and Adaptive Management

The project has routinely supplied environmental data to hydrosystem managers. This information has been used by managers to regulate hydrosystem flows to protect ESA-listed chum salmon spawning immediately below Bonneville Dam. Additionally, biological information on ESA-listed fall Chinook has consistently been sent to personnel supported by project 2010-036-00 who use it to track the status and trends of fall Chinook spawning below Bonneville Dam. Data from the project are helping to address questions in the Mainstem Habitat, Hydrosystem Flow, and Passage Operations, Population Structure and Diversity, and Climate Change categories of the Council's 2017 Research Plan. It is also directly linked to the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program which calls for sustaining abundant, productive, and diverse communities of fish and wildlife. Although the project reportedly collects and shares these data, the proposal and annual reports do not describe the extent to which this information was used to shift FCRPS operations as stated in its goals, nor do they discuss the extent to which salmon redds were dewatered.

Although an example of external adaptive management is described, no direct examples are provided on how the project has used adaptive management internally to modify or improve its objectives or methods. The proposal states that data supplied by the project are used by hydrosystem managers to adaptively manage flows to protect chum and Chinook using spawning and incubation habitats below Bonneville Dam. This is an important use of project's data for external adaptive management, but it does not address how or if the project has an internal process to refine its own operations. Clearly some changes in methods have occurred. The development of the real-time data system that is being used to convey hourly temperature and water height data would be one example how the project has changed. There are likely others as well.

In general, the results produced by the project are largely applicable to the project and its end users. However, the development and use of its "real time" data system to gather and send hourly water temperature and water height information could be a valuable tool for others examining the possible effects of dam operations on fish and wildlife populations.

Project reports have been produced on a timely basis, data has been provided to end users on a regular basis, and peer-reviewed publications on some of the project's results have been published.

While the information provided by this project are undoubtedly useful, there are some short-comings that need more discussion in the annual reports and proposal. For example, annual reports should describe the extent to which salmon redds were dewatered, if at all in response to water elevation fluctuations. To what extent were data from this project used to shift FCRPS operations as a means to protect salmon redds, as stated in its goals? To what extent has the project addressed previous ISRP qualifications, including the development of confidence intervals for spawning Chinook salmon? Specific information on lessons learned and adaptive management are needed.

3. Methods: Project Relationships, Work Types, and Deliverables

Methods seem appropriate but are not described in sufficient detail (or linked adequately via ~10 protocols) in the proposal. Methods for monitoring water temperature and elevation at chum spawning sites are described in detail in previous annual reports. Methods for estimating fall Chinook abundance below McNary, John Day and The Dalles dams were well documented in the Annual Report for 2001-2006, but no comparable documentation has been provided for surveys below Bonneville Dam. A qualification of the ISRP (2010-44b) review was to provide more detail on methods. For example, how often are boat and foot surveys conducted, how are redd locations identified and marked, are genetic samples being collected, are egg retention counts being made, are otoliths being collected for possible microchemistry analyses, and what type of length data are collected (e.g., FL, MEHP)?

No formal description is provided on how the project monitors whether it is meeting its objectives. However, the expected hourly delivery of environmental information and weekly submission of biological data to end users likely serves this purpose. Because of the immediate need for some of the project's data, any interruptions in data flow would be quickly recognized and corrected if possible. Nevertheless, the proposal and annual report should discuss these issues.

1.      Provide a synthesis of the overall approach and methodology used to achieve project objectives. Please include additional information on how the fall Chinook surveys are conducted. How often do they occur, how are redd locations identified and marked, are genetic samples being collected, are egg retention counts being made, are otoliths being collected for possible microchemistry analyses, and what type of length data are collected (e.g., FL, MEHP)? Provide variance measures of the spawning population estimates, as previously requested by the ISRP.

Fall Chinook surveys are conducted mid-September to October 31 two days per week. They are conducting by jet sled with two observers and one boat operator or by foot with three observers.  If water is not deep enough to access the spawning area by boat the area is surveyed by foot.  Redds are enumerated on each survey from mid-September to October 31.  Redds are identified and assigned to a species by presence of fish, location and size.

In the past, redd locations were marked and GPS locations were recorded.  Due to the large amount of Chinook redds and deep water redd locations and error built into the GPS units, redds are no longer individually marked or GPS’d but the spawning areas are plotted on a map.  Genetic samples are not collected as part of this project.  Female Chinook egg retention counts are made and are categorized as spawned (less than 75% egg retention) Y/N to identify pre-spawn mortalities.  If chum carcasses are encountered during a survey they are examined for egg retention as well and graded in quarter percentages (e.g. 0, >25, >50% retained). 

We collect 100 Chinook otoliths throughout the spawning timeframe. However microchemistry analysis occurs under a non-BPA funded project.  Fork lengths are recorded to the nearest half centimeter.

Population estimates have been calculated using the trapezoidal Area-Under-the-Curve methodology (AUC) with a hierarchical modeled apparent resident time (ART) since 2013. The 2013-2017 estimates ranged from a low of 868 in 2015 to a high of 7,988 in 2016.  The 2013-2017 estimates were recently re-evaluated and while there were small changes to the annual point estimates, the “old” estimates fell within the 2.5% - 97.5% CI range of the new estimates.  The 2018 preliminary estimate is about 14,000 but is still being evaluated and should be available by late July.

Riverbed temperature monitoring was used to determine chum salmon emergence timing and water surface elevation monitoring was conducted to provide BPA with data that could be used to assess redd dewatering.  Data were collected from spawning areas adjacent to the Pierce National Wildlife Refuge in the north Ives Island channel (rkm 230).  We used monitoring locations in the Ives Island area where chum salmon spawning is known to occur, as previously documented by Geist et al. (2002).  Many monitoring locations have been studied during the history of this project, with results documented in several journal articles and annual technical reports.   The current scope involves monitoring paired river/hyporheic temperature at one Ives Island location, and monitoring temperature and water surface elevation at three surface water locations within the general vicinity of Ives Island. At our hyporheic monitoring location, a cellular modem was attached to a custom buoy in order to provide remote access to data.  The sensors used were LevelScout (INW, Kirkland, WA), and record temperature with a resolution of 0.1°C and water level is recorded with an accuracy of ±0.6 cm.  River conditions were monitored in piezometers that were screened to the river while hyporheic (riverbed) conditions were monitored in screens installed over a depth interval from 10 cm to 45 cm below the riverbed.  Sensor elevations were surveyed in order to relate water level readings to a vertical datum using a combination of differential leveling with an optical transit (Model NA730, Leica Geosystems Inc., Norcross GA) and real time kinematic GPS (RTK) survey equipment. 

To estimate emergence timing, riverbed temperatures were used to approximate temperatures at egg pocket depth.  The daily average egg pocket temperature (in degrees centigrade) was summed, starting from two different times:  50% of spawning completed and 90% of spawning completed.  The percentage of spawning completed was determined using weekly redd counts in the Ives Island area obtained from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.  Emergence was assumed to occur when 932 accumulated thermal units (ATU) had accumulated.  This represents the mean temperature accumulation at which 50% emergence occurred in control fish during a laboratory experiment conducted at PNNL (Arntzen et al. 2009).

2.      Describe lessons learned and adaptive management resulting from past and ongoing research and monitoring. It is possible that the project consistently reviews its operations and methods on a regular basis to determine if anything might be improved. If this is the case, this procedure should be described in future reports. On the other hand, if a formal or quasi-formal adaptive management process is not yet in place, the proponents should establish one. This will provide them opportunities to discuss and possibly implement changes to existing procedures.

Lessons learned; there are approximately 145 river miles from Bonneville Dam to the mouth of the Columbia River and the river elevation drops by about 11 feet in that distance. Almost all main-stem Chinook and the majority of chum spawning in the Columbia occur in the 4-5 miles below Bonneville Dam which is the focus of this project.  Coho are observed during spawning surveys but are rarely found on redds. Lamprey have not been observed during the September - October timeframe, but sturgeon are observed once Chinook spawning is reaching the peak.  Most of the sediment movement in this area comes from the tributaries (specifically Hamilton Creek) but only effects a small portion of the spawning area.  No physical data is collected on sediment movement but most of the spawning area is stable.  High water fluctuation encourages spawning to occur outside of ordinary flows and leaves redds vulnerable to the possibility of becoming dewatered.

Techniques to monitor riverbed temperatures and provide emergence timing results have evolved during the life of this project.  Our current system provides real time data using a buoy system that is deployed each fall and retrieved in the spring, and this system is upgraded annually based on lessons learned the previous year.  Our efforts to discover the relationship between chum salmon spawning locations and elevated hyporheic temperature eventually lead to many lessons learned and adaptive management of field efforts to determine chum emergence timing.  These efforts included a collaboration with a project funded by the U.S. Corps of Engineers to create a chum emergence timing model using spatially distributed temperature data collected as part of this project.  We continue to refine our efforts annually depending on lessons learned, regional input and the information required for BPA.

3.      Describe the extent to which FCRPS operators use information from this project to alter hydropower operations, as emphasized in the overall project goals. The ultimate goal of this project is to collect data that can be used to reduce potential impacts of hydropower operations on salmon spawning below the dams. The effectiveness of this effort should be reported in the proposal and annual reports. As part of this analysis, the proponents should describe and discuss the extent to which salmon redds were dewatered, if at all.

Hydropower manager use the information from this project to help determine chum and Chinook spawn timing and emergence.  Hydropower managers also use the data from this project for flow management and to reduce the unintended dewatering of redds.  If chum are observed during these surveys (September – October) FCRPS managers use the information to manage the hydro-system to minimize impacts on fall Chinook and chum salmon spawning in the mainstem Columbia River below Bonneville Dam.

Temperature data collected to estimate the incubation timing of chum salmon are used to inform the TMT.  These data have historically been an important piece of information for this group as they balance the competing interests of species they are attempting to protect-for example providing spring spill operations while attempting to protect chum salmon from elevated TDG levels, or to simply ensure that flow levels are established that protect a sufficient number of chum salmon redds from dewatering.  BPA conducts RTK elevation surveys of chum redds in the fall with elevations that can be directly related to water surface elevations collected by our project.   It is critical for BPA to know when chum salmon are still incubating and to be able to relate redd elevations to water surface elevations so they can balance protection for chum salmon with other considerations as they consult with regional fisheries managers.