Proposal 2017INDR-2017-006-00 - Non-native predator recruitment reduction

View the dynamic Proposal Summary

This Proposal Summary page updates dynamically to always display the latest data from the associated project and contracts. This means changes, like updating the Project Lead or other contacts, will be immediately reflected here.

Download a snapshot PDF

To view a point-in-time PDF snapshot of this page, select one of the Download links in the Proposal History section. These PDFs are created automatically by important events like submitting your proposal or responding to the ISRP. You can also create one at any time by using the PDF button, located next to the Expand All and Collapse All buttons.

Proposal History

Archive	Date	Time	Type	From	To	By
	10/10/2017	7:15 PM	Status		Draft	<System>
Download	10/19/2017	10:59 AM	Status	Draft	ISRP - Pending First Review	<System>

This online form is dynamically updated with the most recent information. To view the content as reviewed by the ISRP and Council for this review cycle, download an archived PDF version using the Download link(s) above.

Basics

Proposal Number:		2017INDR-2017-006-00
Proposal Status:		ISRP - Pending First Review
Proposal Version:		Proposal Version 1
Review:		2017 Individual Review
Portfolio:		Contains 2017-006-00
Type:		Existing Project: 2017-006-00
Primary Contact:		Geoffrey McMichael
Created:		10/10/2017 by (Not yet saved)
Proponent Organizations:		Mainstem Fish Research, LLC.

Project Title:		Non-native predator recruitment reduction

Proposal Short Description:		The overall goal of this project is to develop and test a simple and cost-effective management action intended to reduce non-native predator fish productivity. Opportunities exist to use the hydropower system to create short-term changes in the habitat characteristics that are critical for the reproduction and recruitment of these non-native salmon predators. Well-timed short-term changes in water surface elevation may be able to reduce the productivity of walleye and smallmouth bass.

Proposal Executive Summary:		Non-native predator fishes require stable spawning and early rearing environments to maintain productive populations. For example larval walleye need near zero velocity rapidly warming water during in the first few weeks after hatch to successfully recruit to the population. Further, smallmouth bass nesting can be disrupted by changes in water velocity and temperature. Opportunities exist to use the hydropower system to create short-term changes in the habitat characteristics that are critical for the reproduction and recruitment of these non-native salmon predators. Well-timed short-term changes in water surface elevation at McNary Dam may be able to flush larval walleye from currently used recruitment areas (zero velocity/warm) into habitats where they will not survive (swift current/cold). Smallmouth bass nesting in similar habitats can be disrupted by these same changes in water depth, velocity, and temperature. The primary goal of this project is to develop and test a simple and cost-effective management action intended to reduce non-native predator fish productivity. This work is important because it addresses a critical factor affecting juvenile anadromous fish rearing and emigration survival. Expected outcomes are quantitative results showing the effect of the test management actions on walleye larval abundance and distribution. These results, and the management actions that led to them, should be readily transferable to other areas within and outside of the basin where there is a desire to reduce the productivity of non-native fish predators. This work is also important to the recovery of ESA listed species in the middle and Upper Columbia River and Snake River. The project will occur in three phases. In the first phase, existing hydrodynamic models will be used to predict changes in habitat characteristics based on a variety of water surface elevation changes and durations and the full experimental design and statistical analyses plan will be developed. In the second phase, the vulnerability of critical life stages of non-native predators will be determined. The third phase of the project will consist of multiple management action implementation tests with rigorous before, during, and after monitoring and data analyses and reporting. The work will be conducted in the Yakima River Delta area and McNary Reservoir on the Columbia River. The proposed duration is five years, with Phases 1 and 2 (described above) occurring in the first 2 years (2018 and 2019) and Phase 3 (the management action tests) taking place over 3 years (2020-2022). The study team consists of individuals from Mainstem Fish Research, Columbia Basin Research, Northwest Hydraulic Consultants, and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. The effectiveness of the project will be monitored using a Before-After-Control-Impact study design. The full experimental design and statistical analysis plan will be a deliverable in Phase 1 of the project and will benefit from data collection in the first year that will allow for rigorous power analyses to facilitate completion of the full statistical analysis plan.

Purpose:		Predation
Emphasis:		Predator Removal
Species Benefit:		Anadromous: 100.0% Resident: 0.0% Wildlife: 0.0%
Supports 2009 NPCC Program:		Yes
Subbasin Plan:		Intermountain, Lower Snake, Middle Snake, Tucannon, Upper Middle Columbia, Upper Snake, Walla Walla, Yakima
Fish Accords:		None
Biological Opinions:		None

Contacts

Contacts:

John Skidmore (Inactive) (Project Manager)

Project Significance & Problem Statement

Project Significance to Regional Programs:

NOAA Fisheries and the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NWPCC) have generally not addressed survival or productivity issues associated with the Hanford Reach stock of fall Chinook salmon because they are not listed under the ESA and their efforts have been and continue to be directed almost entirely upon ESA-listed salmon stocks.  However, several ESA-listed salmonid stocks also migrate through the Hanford Reach and/or McNary Reservoir, including Upper Columbia spring Chinook salmon, Snake River fall Chinook salmon, Snake River spring and summer Chinook salmon, Upper Columbia River and Snake River Steelhead, and Snake River Sockeye salmon.  All of these ESA-listed groups are exposed to predation as they migrate through this stretch of the Columbia River system. Thus there are potential ESA-related benefits from the proposed project.  To date NOAA and the NWPPC have concentrated efforts on these ESA-listed stocks in locations other than in the McNary Reservoir.  Nonetheless, the proposed project is directly related to Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs) and Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation (RME) actions listed in the 2008 NOAA Fisheries Biological Opinion on the Federal Columbia River Power System (NOAA 2008) as well as Northwest Power and Conservation Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program (NWPCC 2014). 

Several areas of the NWPCC’s 2014 Fish and Wildlife Program (NWPCC 2014) underscore the importance of managing and mitigating predation on juvenile salmonids in the Columbia River basin.  For example, under “Emerging Program Priorities”, Item 3 is, “Preserve program effectiveness by supporting: (1) expanded management of predators; (2) mapping and determining hotspots for toxic contaminants; and (3) aggressively addressing non-native and invasive species” (page 116). Also, multiple program goals under “Theme One: Protect and Enhance Habitat to Provide a Home for Species” include “non-native and invasive species and predation control” (pages 153-155; NWPCC 2014). More recently, the ISAB and ISRP identified two new uncertainties related to predation (ISAB/ISRP 2016). The first uncertainty relates to which predators jeopardize the viability of native fishes and the second relates to the effectiveness of management actions to ameliorate undesirable impacts of predation. The proposed project will squarely address this second uncertainty.

Further, the proposed project is directly related to Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs) and Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation (RME) actions listed in the 2008 NOAA Fisheries Biological Opinion on the Federal Columbia River Power System (NOAA 2008). The following table shows the relevant RPAs and RMEs.

No.	Action Description
RPA 44	Develop strategies to reduce non-indigenous fish
RPA 47	Inland Avian Predation
RME 2	Performance Monitoring
RME 7/RPA 68	Monitor and Evaluate Inland Avian Predators
RME 7/RPA 70	Monitoring Related to Piscivorous (Fish) Predation

Problem Statement:

Problem

Survival of juvenile salmonids through the lower Yakima River, Hanford Reach and McNary Reservoir is low
Predation by fish is a major contributor to juvenile salmonid mortality in these areas
Non-native fish predator populations are increasing
Changes in system operations in the Columbia River and in water quality in the past 10 to 15 years in the lower Yakima River may have inadvertently benefitted non-native predator productivity
Non-native predator populations need to be reduced to improve survival of rearing and emigrating juvenile salmonids (and lamprey)
Larval walleye require rapidly warming, near zero-velocity water to recruit to the population
Walleye recruitment habitat is likely limited in the study area
Smallmouth bass nesting activity can be disrupted by changes in water velocity and/or temperature
The regulated hydroelectric system provides the opportunity to manipulate or manage flows and affect large areas of habitat

Need

Non-native predator populations need to be reduced to improve survival of rearing and emigrating juvenile salmonids (and lamprey)

Opportunity

Larval walleye require rapidly warming, near zero-velocity water to recruit to the population
Walleye recruitment habitat is likely limited in the study area
Smallmouth bass nesting activity can be disrupted by changes in water velocity and/or temperature
The regulated hydroelectric system provides the opportunity to manipulate or manage flows and affect large areas of habitat
Relatively small and short-term changes in water surface elevation (WSE) at the appropriate times may substantially reduce the productivity of non-native fish predators
Relative to methods targeted at removal of adult predators, a WSE change would cost little

Background

Predation Losses to Piscivorous Fishes is a Problem

Predation by non-native (and native) fish predators reduces the survival of emigrating and rearing juvenile salmonids in the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River and the McNary Reservoir (Tabor et al. 1993, McMichael et al. 2006, 2010, Harnish et al. 2014, McMichael and James 2017). For example, survival from release in the Hanford Reach to McNary Dam has averaged just 37% since 1995 for PIT-tagged wild fall Chinook salmon juveniles (M. DeHart, Fish Passage Center, unpublished data). Similarly, survival of emigrating salmonids, especially subyearling fall Chinook salmon, through the lower Yakima River has been alarmingly low at times, and predation by smallmouth bass (e.g., Fritts and Pearsons 2004) and northern pikeminnow (e.g., Sampson et al. 2016) may account for a large portion of the salmonid mortality (McMichael 2017).

Harnish et al. (2014a) examined the estimated predation losses of subyearling Chinook salmon in the Hanford Reach/McNary Reservoir area to better understand the relative contributions of predation by fish and birds. They concluded that avian predation rates have consistently been very low (<2%; Evans et al. 2012, Roby et al. 2013) on subyearling Chinook salmon, and that piscivorous fish may be consuming 17% of the population of juvenile salmonids annually. Subsequently, McMichael and James (2017) examined salmonid consumption by smallmouth bass and walleye in the Columbia River between McNary and Priest Rapids dams and found that juvenile salmonids dominated the diet composition in smallmouth bass and walleye sampled between McNary and Priest Rapids dams in May and June 2016. Smallmouth bass and walleye were estimated to have consumed 1.33 and 2.52 salmonids per day, respectively. Extrapolating their consumption estimates (based on a series of stated assumptions), McMichael and James (2017) estimated that fish predation may account for annual losses of about 24 million juvenile fall Chinook salmon, or about 46% of the fall Chinook pre-smolts produced in the Hanford Reach.

NOAA Fisheries and the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NWPCC) have generally not addressed survival or productivity issues associated with the Hanford Reach stock of fall Chinook salmon because they are not listed under the ESA and their efforts have been and continue to be directed almost entirely upon ESA-listed salmonid stocks. However, several ESA-listed salmonid stocks also migrate through the Hanford Reach and/or McNary Reservoir, including Upper Columbia spring Chinook salmon, Snake River fall Chinook salmon, Snake River spring and summer Chinook salmon, Upper Columbia River and Snake River Steelhead, and Snake River Sockeye salmon. All of these ESA-listed groups are exposed to predation as they migrate through this stretch of the Columbia River system. Thus there are likely ESA-related benefits from the proposed project. To date NOAA and the NWPPC have concentrated efforts on these ESA-listed stocks in locations other than in the McNary Reservoir. Nonetheless, the proposed project is directly related to Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs) and Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation (RME) actions listed in the 2008 NOAA Fisheries Biological Opinion on the Federal Columbia River Power System (NOAA 2008) as well as the Northwest Power and Conservation Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program (NWPCC 2014).

Several areas of the NWPCC’s 2014 Fish and Wildlife Program (NWPCC 2014) underscore the importance of managing and mitigating predation on juvenile salmonids in the Columbia River basin. For example, under “Emerging Program Priorities”, Item 3 is, “Preserve program effectiveness by supporting: (1) expanded management of predators; (2) mapping and determining hotspots for toxic contaminants; and (3) aggressively addressing non-native and invasive species” (page 116). Also, multiple program goals and strategies under “Theme One: Protect and Enhance Habitat to Provide a Home for Species”, including “non-native and invasive species and predation control” (pages 153-155; NWPCC 2014).

More recently, the ISAB and ISRP identified two new uncertainties related to predation (ISAB/ISRP 2016). The first uncertainty relates to which predators jeopardize the viability of native fishes and the second relates to the effectiveness of management actions to ameliorate undesirable impacts of predation. The proposed project will squarely address this second uncertainty.

Predator Fish Populations Appear to be Increasing

Non-native predator fish such as smallmouth bass and walleye are abundant in the reach between Priest Rapids Dam (rkm 639) and McNary Dam (rkm 470). Electrofishing data collected during the salmonid smolt emigration period by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (ODFW) Northern Pikeminnow Management Program (NPMP) monitoring crews between 1993 and 2010 show Northern pikeminnow are the dominant predator fish captured upstream of the mouth of the Yakima River and smallmouth bass are more abundant downstream of this point (Figure 1). Low susceptibility of walleye to electrofishing in this large river/reservoir habitat is (Beamesderfer and Rieman 1988, Schoenebeck and Hansen 2005, Ruetz et al. 2007) likely to underestimate actual or even relative walleye abundance due to their benthic orientation in the water column. Despite the reduced effectiveness of electrofishing for capturing walleye in deeper waters, catch per unit effort by the ODFW monitoring crews has shown an increasing trend between 1993 and 2010 (Figure 2). Further, angling catch per unit effort (CPUE) for walleye in the Hanford Reach/McNary Reservoir area has shown an increasing trend for the past 6-8 years (Figure 3). For context, Hansen et al. (2000) concluded that angler catch per hour was significantly linearly related to walleye abundance in northern Wisconsin lakes. Finally, during the spring and summer of 2017 catch rates of putative Age-2 walleye in the Columbia River downstream of McNary Dam were very high, with reported catches by anglers of up to 70 fish per day. These fish were likely produced during the record low flows of 2015. Interestingly, survival estimates of juvenile salmonids in the McNary Dam to John Day Dam reach of the Columbia River in 2017 were the lowest on record (NOAA Memorandum, September 18, 2017). http://pweb.crohms.org/tmt/agendas/2017/1004_2017_Preliminary_Survival_Estimation_Memo.pdf).

Figure 1.Total numbers of Northern pikeminnow (NPM), smallmouth bass (SMB), and walleye (WAL) captured during Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife electrofishing surveys conducted annually from 1993–2010 between McNary and Priest Rapids dams. For reference, the mouth of the Yakima River is at river km 539. (Data from P. McHugh, ODFW, 2011).

Figure 2.Electrofishing CPUE (fish captured per 15-minutes of electrofishing) for walleye captured during Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife electrofishing efforts conducted annually from 2000–2010 between McNary and Priest Rapids dams. (Data from P. McHugh, ODFW, 2011).

Figure 3. Walleye captured by angling in the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River.

The high rate of salmonid smolt predation observed by Rieman et al. (1991) for resident piscivorous fish in John Day Reservoir led to development of the Northern Pikeminnow Management Program (NPMP) in 1990–1991. The NPMP consists of a “sport-reward” fishery, which offers public anglers a monetary incentive to catch Northern pikeminnow, and “dam-angling”, whereby agency personnel are hired to angle for Northern pikeminnow at FCRPS dams. The program was founded on modeling simulations that indicated a 10–20% exploitation rate on predator-sized Northern pikeminnow could reduce predation on juvenile salmonids by up to 50% (Rieman and Beamesderfer 1990). The program has appeared effective at reducing the abundance of Northern pikeminnow. The CPUE and abundance index data have shown a continued and persistent decrease in the number of Northern pikeminnow ≥250 mm in the Snake and Columbia rivers since the NPMP was implemented (Gardner et al. 2013; Barr et al. 2014). However, localized changes in catch rates of northern pikeminnow may indicate a shift in Northern pikeminnow distribution. For example, catch and effort data for the Sport Reward Program at Columbia Point (adjacent to the Yakima River mouth on McNary Reservoir near Richland, Washington), shows a dramatic increase in total catch of Northern pikeminnow over the last five years relative to the Vernita station located about 85 km upstream (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Combined total catch of Northern pikeminnow turned in to the Sport-Reward Program stations at Vernita (green) and Columbia Point (blue) between 2000 and 2016. The CPUE (catch per angler day) is shown in the red line. (Data from http://www.pikeminnow.org)(from McMichael and James 2017).

Removal of Northern pikeminnow will improve survival of migrating juvenile salmonids if compensatory responses by other predatory fishes do not offset the net benefit of removal (ISAB/ISRP 2016). Although an increase in the proportion of smallmouth bass diets containing juvenile salmonids has not been observed from smallmouth bass captured annually during electrofishing and dam-angling efforts of the NPMP, smallmouth bass abundance and predation index values have increased in recent years in some areas of Snake and Columbia River reservoirs (Gardner et al. 2013; Barr et al. 2014). As noted by Carey et al. (2011), smallmouth bass have become a large component of the fish community of the Snake and Columbia rivers, largely due to the habitat created by human modifications (e.g., dams) of the landscape.

Juvenile salmonids continue to be a common item in the diets of Columbia River walleye (Figure 5), which have also shown an increase in abundance index in areas of John Day and The Dalles reservoirs (Gardner et al. 2013). Increases in the abundance indices of these predators may be an early indication of a compensatory response to the reduction of Northern pikeminnow in the system (Gardner et al. 2013; Barr et al. 2014).

Figure 5. Walleye captured in the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River on May 21, 2015. This walleye contained 39 subyearling Chinook salmon (photo: G. McMichael).

Other factors that may contribute to the apparent increased abundance of non-native predator fishes in the Columbia River downstream of Priest Rapids Dam are the reduced flow fluctuations adopted to reduce stranding and entrapment losses of fall Chinook salmon in the Hanford Reach, as well as water quality changes in the lower Yakima River. The Hanford Reach Fall Chinook Protection Program Agreement (HRFCPPA) implemented biologically-based constraints on the magnitude and timing of flow fluctuations downstream of Priest Rapids Dam beginning in 2004 to reduce stranding and entrapment of early-rearing juvenile fall Chinook salmon in the Hanford Reach (Langshaw and Pearsons 2010). While this program has been very successful in increasing productivity of fall Chinook salmon in the Hanford Reach, it may also have improved conditions for reproduction and/or recruitment of piscivorous fishes by providing more stable habitat conditions during predator fish spawning, incubation, and early rearing periods (Harnish et al. 2014b: McMichael 2017). Several studies have demonstrated that fluctuations in discharge can negatively affect the reproductive success of smallmouth bass by flooding nests with cooler water, depositing silt, driving away adult bass guarding nests, exposing eggs to desiccation, increasing predation on, and/or stranding emerged fry (Henderson and Foster 1957, Becker et al. 1981, Lukas and Orth 1995). A study of factors that influence smallmouth bass production in the Hanford Reach indicated fluctuations in discharge from hydroelectric power generation at Priest Rapids Dam reduced productivity (Montgomery et al. 1980). Therefore, reducing flow fluctuations to prevent stranding and entrapment of juvenile salmon may have the unintended consequence of increasing productivity of smallmouth bass in the Hanford Reach. Water quality changes in the lower Yakima River may influence the productivity and/or effectiveness of predator fishes in the area. Details on this concept are presented McMichael (2017). Briefly, dramatic reductions in suspended sediment in lower Yakima River and the associated expansion of water star grass may have contributed to changes in the predator fish community and effectiveness of both fish and avian predators.

While walleye are broadcast spawners and do not nest like smallmouth bass do, reduced fluctuations and more stable velocity and temperature conditions in off-channel areas of the Hanford Reach and McNary Reservoir would be expected to increase their productivity as well. Research in the native range of walleye indicates that river discharge fluctuations and elevated suspended sediment loads reduce larval walleye recruitment (Mion et al. 1998, Quist et al. 2004, Hoxmeier et al. 2006, Ivan et al. 2010). Age class strength and subsequent population levels of predator fishes is often determined? during critical early recruitment life stages (Mion et al. 1998, Quist et al. 2004, Manny et al. 2007, Ivan et al. 2010). It appears that walleye recruitment is best when the larvae quickly reach low to zero-velocity and rapidly warming water without high suspended sediment loads.

Reduced flow fluctuations in the Hanford Reach resulting from the implementation of the HRFCPPA as well as the increased focus on reducing suspended sediment loads in the lower Yakima River over the past 15 years (e.g., Johnson et al. 2010) are likely to have benefitted walleye recruitment in the area between Priest Rapids and McNary dams (McMichael and James 2017, McMichael 2017).

Objectives

Objectives:

Hydrodynamic Modeling and Experimental Design (OBJ-1)

Determine operations necessary to displace larval non-native predators

Vulnerability Assessment, Baseline Condition (OBJ-2)

Determine maximum vulnerability of early life stages of non-native predators

Test Management Actions (OBJ-3)

Implement and evaluate predator recruitment reduction management actions

Project History

Financials

Explanation of Recent Financial Performance:

None

Explanation of Financial History:

None

Reporting & Contracted Deliverables Performance

None

Results: Reporting, Accomplishments, and Impact

Please do the following to help the ISRP and Council assess project performance:
List important activities and then report results.
List each objective and summarize accomplishments and results for each one, including the projects previous objectives. If the objectives were not met, were changed, or dropped, please explain why. For research projects, list hypotheses that have been and will be tested.
Whenever possible, describe results in terms of the quantifiable biological and physical habitat objectives of the Fish and Wildlife Program, i.e., benefit to fish and wildlife or to the ecosystems that sustain them. Include summary tables and graphs of key metrics showing trends. Summarize and cite (with links when available) your annual reports, peer reviewed papers, and other technical documents. If another project tracks physical habitat or biological information related to your project’s actions please summarize and expand on, as necessary, the results and evaluation conducted under that project that apply to your project, and cite that project briefly here and fully in the Relationships section below. Research or M&E projects that have existed for a significant period should, besides showing accumulated data, also present statistical analyses and conclusions based on those data. Also, summarize the project’s influence on resource management and other economic or social benefits. Expand as needed in the Adaptive Management section below. The ISRP will use this information in its Retrospective Review of prior year results. If your proposal is for continuation of work, your proposal should focus on updating this section. If yours is an umbrella project, click here for additional instructions. Clearly report the impacts of your project, what you have learned, not just what you did.

All Proposals:

Umbrella Proposals:

This project would begin in 2018:

Some recently completed/related projects are listed below.

Upriver bright predation bottleneck (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312320843_Upriver_Bright_Predation_Bottleneck)

Factors influencing predation on juvenile fishes emigrating through the lower Yakima River Basin (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320269988_Factors_Influencing_Predation_on_Juvenile_Fishes_Emigrating_Through_the_Lower_Yakima_River_Basin)

A related project that is ongoing (with field work scheduled for spring/summer 2018) is Upriver Bright Predator Abundance Estimation (Pacific Salmon Commission fudning through the LOA process)

Past Council Recommendations and ISRP Reviews

The table content is updated frequently and thus contains more recent information than what was in the original proposal reviewed by ISRP and Council.

No assessments are available for this project.

Response to past ISRP and Council comments and recommendations:

None

Adaptive Management

Management Changes:

This is a new project. Results from hydrodynamic modeling and preliminary biological sampling from Phase 1 will be incorporated into the final management tests. Model validation data will be used to adaptively refine the hydrodynamic model. Results from management implementation tests will be incorporated into plans for subsequent tests during Phase 3 of the project.

Project Documents & Reports

The table content is updated frequently and thus contains more recent information than what was in the original proposal reviewed by ISRP and Council.

Public Attachments in CBFish

None listed.

Project Relationships

The Project Relationships tracked automatically in CBFish provide a history of how work and budgets move between projects. The terms "Merged" and "Split" describe the transfer of some or all of the Work and budgets from one or more source projects to one or more target projects. For example, some of one project's budget may be split from it and merged into a different project. Project relationships change for a variety of reasons including the creation of efficiency gains.

Project Relationships:	None

Additional Relationships Explanation:

The proposed project is being undertaken to ultimately reduce predator fish populations. This work is similar in that regard to the Northern Pikeminnow Management Program (Project# 1990-077-00), which focuses on the removal of predator-sized northern pikeminnow and collects program evaluation data throughout the FCRPS, including McNary Reservoir. The proposed project will compliment this ongoing effort by addressing potential compensatory responses by non-native predator fishes to the high exploitation rates of northern pikeminnow in the project area.

Other projects that are related to the proposed project are recent projects completed by McMichael and James (2017) and McMichael (2017). Further, the planned (funded by the Pacific Salmon Commission through the LOA process administered by the Chinook Technical Committee) estimation of abundance of non-native (walleye and smallmouth bass) and native (northern pikeminnow) predator fishes in the spring of 2018 may contribute baseline predator abundance data to the ‘before’ time period for this project and will provide access to adult predator fishes for radio telemetry to facilitate completion of Phase 2 of the proposed project.

Focal Species

Primary Focal Species

Chinook (O. tshawytscha) - Upper Columbia River Summer/Fall ESU

Secondary Focal Species

Chinook (O. tshawytscha) - Snake River Fall ESU (Threatened)

Threats to program investments and project success:

It is likely that predation rates may increase in the future. Survival estimates were generally lower for years when Yakima River discharge was lower (and water temperatures were higher; Sampson et al. 2016). With increased demands on water from the Yakima Basin and potential effects of climate change (lower flows/warmer water temperatures (Salathe 2003; Mantua et al. 2010)), predation losses would be be exacerbated (e.g., Petersen and Kitchell 2001). The models we will use will allow us to predict the effects of a range of discharge scenarios. The management action we are developing will be more effective in water years with lower discharge (such as those predicted in climate change models for the Yakima Basin (Salathe 2003)).

We have worked extensively with a workgroup formed specifically to facilitate development of this concept; The Predator Recruitment Reduction Team (PRRT). This team met 4 times in 2017 to discuss this concept, including the limitations to implementing it. Members on the team represented the State of Washington, Yakama Nation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Bonneville Power Administration, Grant Public Utility District, NOAA Fisheries, U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Columbia Intertribal Fish Commission, and Mainstem Fish Research. The PRRT helped to define the scenarios of operations that could be implemented within the currently known constraints. This group also helped identify stakeholders that will be interested in the management action as it nears implementation testing.

Types of Work

Work Classes

Work Elements

Habitat:

Habitat work elements typically address the known limiting factors of each location defined for each deliverable. Details about each deliverable’s locations, limiting factors and work elements are found under the Deliverables sections.

190. Remove, Exclude and/or Relocate Animals

RM & E and Data Management:

157. Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data
158. Mark/Tag Animals
161. Disseminate Raw/Summary Data and Results
162. Analyze/Interpret Data
183. Produce Journal Article

Tagging

Please explain why the tagging technology used in this project was selected. Include a discussion of how the cost and applicability of the selected tagging technology influenced your selection. Enter "NA" if not applicable to your project.

radio telemetry was selected for this project to provide the information necessary to determine the spawning time and location of walleye and smallmouth bass in the project area. The fish will be available to this project as part of another project that is funded separately (by the Pacific Salmon Commission). Radio telemetry was selected over other telemetry methods (e.g. acoustic or PIT) as it allows for remote tracking from air, boat, vehicle and the tagged fish are expected to be in shallow water (< 5 m) during spawning.

Describe any of the innovative approaches that your projects proposes that are in direct support of the ISAB/ISRP's recommendations to improve techniques for surgical insertion of internal tags, or external attachment of acoustic, radio, or data storage tags that reduce handling time, fish injury and stress. Enter "NA" if not applicable to your project.

Standard surgical procedures and tracking methodologies will be used. We will tag the fish a full 9 months or more prior to spawning to take advantage of access to a large number of adult fish and to minimize the influence of capture/handling/tagging on spawning behavior (as you may see if fish are collected and tagged much closer to initiation of spawning).

For specific tagging technologies, please address the tagging report's recommendations for genetic markers, otolith thermal marking, PIT tags, acoustic tags and radio tags for improving technologies in any way applicable. Enter "NA" if not applicable to your project.

The procedures used for tagging, tracking, and data management will be consistent with current tagging report recommendations.

If your project involves ocean port sampling and lower river sampling for coded wire tag (CWT) recovery, address the tagging and tag recovery issues (statistical validity of tagging rates, tag recovery rates, and fishery sampling rates) presented in the Pacific Salmon Commission's Action Plan to Address the CWT Expert Panel (PSC Tech. Rep. No. 25, March 2008).

NA

Explain how your tagging and tag recovery rates ensure a statistically valid result for your project. Enter "NA" if not applicable to your project.

The primary purpose of the radio telemetry work is to identify the general spawning locations and times. These data will be used to guide the data collection efforts focused on larval and age-0 non-native predator fish species.

Data Management

Please explain how you manage the data and corresponding metadata you collect.

We will collect biological data on the fish tagged (species, sex (if possible to determine), length, weight, release date/time, release location) and on subsequent detections of each tagged fish (date/time, location (GPS)). Metadata on environmental conditions will be stored in a different file in the same physical location as the biological and tracking data.

Describe how you distribute your project's data to data users and what requirements or restrictions there may be for data access.

Data collected will include biological data (species, counts, length, weight); habitat data (river discharge, water temperature); geographic data; remote sensing (radio telemetry). Metadata will follow the CSDGM standard, including the Biological Data Profile and remote sensing extension. will be quality checked and made available upon request to other users, consistent with 2009 Program guidance. Project proponents will retain first publishing rights, but will not hold exclusive rights beyond 2 years after final data collection. Data will be made available through ResearchGate.

RM&E

What type(s) of RM&E will you be doing?

Uncertainties Research (Validation Monitoring and Innovation Research)

Where will you post or publish the data your project generates?

NONE - No data repository or not electronically available

Location

Loading ...

Layers

Legend

Name (Identifier)	Area Type	Source for Limiting Factor Information
Name (Identifier)	Area Type	Type of Location	Count
Upper Columbia-Priest Rapids (17020016)	HUC 4	EDT (Ecosystem Diagnosis and Treatment)	1
Lower Yakima, Washington (17030003)	HUC 4	EDT (Ecosystem Diagnosis and Treatment)	113
Middle Columbia-Lake Wallula (17070101)	HUC 4		None
Zintel Canyon-Columbia River (1702001606)	HUC 5	EDT (Ecosystem Diagnosis and Treatment)	1

Project Deliverables

Project Deliverables:

Hydrodynamic Modeling - Threshold Setting (DELV-1)

An existing 1D model developed by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) will be used to identify a threshold value for Columbia River discharge from PRD above which it would not be feasible to effectively use the proposed management action. We have set the threshold value to be a WSE reduction at the Yakima River Delta (Rkm 539) of <50% of the WSE reduction at McNary Dam. For example, under conditions where mean daily discharge from Priest Rapids Dam (PRD) was 300 kcfs, if the WSE drop at McNary Dam was 4 feet under a particular scenario and the drop at Rkm 539 was less than 2 feet, then we would conclude that the particular scenario would not be effective when PRD discharge exceeds 300 kcfs. Output from this sub-task will be used to finalize the list of scenarios that will be modeled using the two-dimensional model described in DELV-2 and to provide managers with guidelines for when the proposed action would not likely be useful for reducing predator fish productivity.

Types of Work:

Work Class

Work Elements

Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation + Data Management

162. Analyze/Interpret Data

Hydrodynamic Modeling - 2D Scenario Modeling (DELV-2)

A 2D hydrodynamic model for the Yakima River Delta area was recently developed for a project related to a proposed habitat modification in that area (Gray & Osborne 2016). For details on this proposed habitat work, please refer to Gray & Osborne (2016) or to McMichael (2017) for a discussion of how this project may influence predation. Figure 7 illustrates an example of the type of model output related to predicted water velocity and direction in the Yakima River Delta area in a proposed habitat modification scenario for that area. The objective of this sub-task is to identify the necessary operations at McNary Dam to produce the WSE change that would be expected to move larval and age-0 non-native predator fishes into areas where recruitment will be eliminated or reduced as well as to disrupt smallmouth bass nesting success. Larval walleye swimming ability is limited, with velocities of 3 to 5 cm/s being expected to transport the larvae with the water movement (Houde 1969), and smallmouth bass nesting success is negatively influenced by changes in water velocity, depth, and temperature (Henderson and Foster 1957, Becker et al. 1981, Lukas and Orth 1995).

[unable to paste Figure 7 in, please see in file attached to hydrodynamic modeling protocols at https://www.monitoringresources.org]

The specific McNary Dam operation options and boundary conditions selected for the simulations are expected to include a subset similar to those listed in Table 1. However, output from DELV-1 will be used to define the PRD discharge levels that are modeled. At this stage we have identified the 75%, 50%, and 25% PRD discharge exceedance levels for April and May (116, 130, and 165 kcfs, respectively). The Yakima River discharge used will be the 50% exceedance values for April-May.

The simulations will be performed iteratively in two sets. The first set of simulations will be performed to identify the operating conditions (i.e. Columbia River discharge, McNary Dam WSE reduction rate, and WSE reduction magnitude) that maximize the movement of water (and larval and age-0 fishes) from the west side of Bateman Island north into the Yakima River and into the Columbia River. Then, following review by the study team, another set of simulations will be performed to identify the optimal operations to be used for the Phase 3 test of the recruitment reduction management action. The specific rates and discharges used in the second set of model runs may deviate slightly from the specific values listed in Table 1 if output from DELV-1 and initial runs from this deliverable indicate further refinement is needed.

Table 1: Hydrodynamic model simulation scenario operations options for evaluation of predator recruitment reduction management.

Scenario WSE Reduction Duration McNary Dam forebay WSE reduction from 340.0 to Columbia River Discharge at Priest Rapids Dam (kcfs) Yakima River Discharge at Kiona (cfs)
Baseline None None 116 Q50 April-May
Option 1 12-hour 338.0 116 Q50 April-May
Option 2 12-hour 337.0 116 Q50 April-May
Option 3 24-hour 338.0 116 Q50 April-May
Option 4 24-hour 337.0 116 Q50 April-May
Option 5 12-hour 335.0 116 Q50 April-May
Option 6 24-hour 335.0 116 Q50 April-May
Option 7 12-hour 338.0 130 Q50 April-May
Option 8 12-hour 337.0 130 Q50 April-May
Option 9 24-hour 338.0 130 Q50 April-May
Option 10 24-hour 337.0 130 Q50 April-May
Option 11 12-hour 335.0 130 Q50 April-May
Option 12 24-hour 335.0 130 Q50 April-May
Option 13 12-hour 338.0 165 Q50 April-May
Option 14 12-hour 337.0 165 Q50 April-May
Option 15 24-hour 338.0 165 Q50 April-May
Option 16 24-hour 337.0 165 Q50 April-May
Option 17 12-hour 335.0 165 Q50 April-May
Option 18 24-hour 335.0 165 Q50 April-May

For context, PRD discharge during the spawning and recruitment period for non-native fish predators typically ranges from 100 to 200 kcfs, with 2017 discharges being well above average (Figure 8). Output from DELV-1 and analyses during Phase 3 of the project will be used to determine the threshold PRD discharge above which the biological effectiveness of the management action will be negligible. Based on available anecdotal information, we anticipate that the proposed management action will be most effective during lower discharge years.

[unable to paste Figure 8 in, please see hydrodynamic modeling protocols at https://www.monitoringresources.org]]

Types of Work:

Work Class

Work Elements

Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation + Data Management

162. Analyze/Interpret Data

Hydrodynamic Modeling - 2D Model Validation (DELV-3)

Following identification of a preferred WSE reduction scenario based on results from DELV-2, a validation test will be conducted during which empirical data will be collected to provide calibration and/or validation data for the 2D model. Water level and velocity data on the west side of Bateman Island will be collected during the validation test. Velocities will be collected with an Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP) and/or Acoustic Doppler Velocimeters (ADVs) depending on water depths and velocities. GPS bathymetric survey data will be collected during all boat movement in order to cross check ADCP data and hydrodynamic model bathymetry. These data will then be used to validate model output and possibly to refine the model to best predict the physical parameters of interest. This validation test will be coordinated with river managers and be planned for a time that minimizes unintended effects on other river/reservoir uses.

Types of Work:

Work Class

Work Elements

Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation + Data Management

157. Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data
162. Analyze/Interpret Data

Hydrodynamic Modeling - Fall Chinook Salmon Stranding and Entrapment Risk Assessment (DELV-4)

The same 1-D modeling approach used in DELV-1 will be used to examine the relative stranding and entrapment risk to rearing fall Chinook salmon in the lower Hanford Reach based on the various operational scenarios under consideration for predator management. The backwater effects of McNary Dam can extend as far upstream as Ringold Flats (RM 355, Rkm 571). It is possible that proposed McNary Dam operations could affect juvenile salmon habitat in the lower Hanford Reach. The steady discharge scenarios will be simulated using MASS1 (Richmond and Perkins, 2009). The decreases in water surface elevation and channel top width (and their rates) due to lower McNary Dam forebay stage will be quantified and compared to previously simulated (Niehus et al., 2014) historic conditions to assess relative changes in stranding and entrapment risk along a longitudinal profile of the Hanford Reach.

Types of Work:

Work Class

Work Elements

Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation + Data Management

162. Analyze/Interpret Data

Experimental Design and Statistical Analysis Plan (DELV-5)

The experimental design for the larval sampling in Phase 2 and the effectiveness testing in Phase 3 will be developed in detail, and in conjunction with the statistical analysis plan for both phases. Developing both the experimental design and the statistical plan at the same time will ensure that the data collection in Phases 2 and 3 will be appropriate to analysis needs.

The experimental design will include the number, timing, and duration of larval sampling in Phases 2 and 3. In particular, the larval sampling in Phase 2 must be sufficient to provide data in the ‘before’ and ‘after’ components of a ‘control’ population for a Before-After Control-Impact (BACI) analysis in Phase 3 (Green 1979); that is, Phase 2 sampling will be used as a temporal control for the BACI analysis. To ensure that sampling is sufficient, initial field sampling will be conducted as part of Phase 1 to provide the necessary data on sample variance needed to conduct a power analysis. Twice weekly larval sampling at 5 locations within the YRD area will take place from March 20 through May 10 using methods described in detail under Phase 2 of this proposal. Based on these field data, power analyses will be performed in Phase 1 to identify the extent and intensity of sampling necessary in both Phases 2 and 3 in order to detect a treatment effect in Phase 3 of predetermined size, confidence level, and error rate. The appropriate effect size, confidence level, and error rate will be determined based on a literature review and consultation with biologists familiar with walleye recruitment. The power analysis will also be used to identify the intensity of Phase 2 sampling necessary to achieve sufficient precision of estimates of larval abundance, distribution, and/or vulnerability to detect differences between regions and at different levels of factors such as river discharge, temperature, wind speed and direction, or day or week of year.

The statistical analysis plan will identify the data structure for both phases, as well as data storage, transfer, and manipulation. Statistical software will be developed (e.g., in R; R Core Team 2016) during Phase 1 to facilitate timely data analysis and reporting within Phases 2 and 3. The statistical analysis plan will be created as a Word document.

The statistical analysis plan for Phase 2 will include the form of the statistical models and tests used to relate larval density or abundance, distribution, and vulnerability to covariates such as river discharge, water temperature, wind speed and direction, and day of year. The estimator and variance structure of larval density or index of abundance will be defined (Seber 1982). Methods will be defined to identify the best timing of the WSE test in Phase 3. Also included in the analysis plan for Phase 2 will be a review and possibly refinement of the power analysis for larval sampling in Phase 3, using data collected in Phase 2. The experimental design for Phase 3 will be updated accordingly.

For Phase 3, the statistical analysis plan will include the model and test(s) used in a BACI framework (Green 1979) to estimate the effectiveness of the WSE test in manipulating larval abundance in the YRD. The estimator of the treatment effect will be defined along with its variance estimator and structure, in order to make inferences about the WSE change effectiveness. Analysis of the BACI design will use Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), time series models, generalized linear models, or other appropriate methods (Green 1979, McDonald et al. 2000). Also included in the Phase 3 statistical plan will be methods to analyze larval samples during the WSE test to assess short-term effects of WSE manipulations on larval abundance and distribution.

The deliverable for this phase will be a progress report that details the methods and results for the hydrodynamic modeling and identifies the range of vertical WSE changes and durations that may be used to test the recruitment reduction management action.

While the Yakima River Delta represents only one of the areas that may be suitable for larval non-native fish predator recruitment, we are focusing on this as a representative site of the McNary Reservoir. Similar areas may exist downstream of the mouth of the Snake River, in the McNary Wildlife Refuge near Burbank, Washington and near the mouth of the Walla Walla River. As those areas are closer to McNary Dam, we expect similar or stronger hydrodynamic effects to occur in those areas as a result of WSE management actions. Further, due to the substantial investment that has already been made in the collection of the bathymetry data and development of the 2-D model for the Yakima River Delta area, it is possible to conduct the necessary modeling at a much lower cost than if new models were to be built for the other potential walleye recruitment areas.

Types of Work:

Work Class

Work Elements

Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation + Data Management

162. Analyze/Interpret Data

Biological Variance Assessment (DELV-6)

To ensure that sampling is sufficient, initial field sampling will be conducted as part of Phase 1 (2018) to provide the necessary data on sample variance needed to conduct power analyses. Twice weekly larval sampling at 5 locations within the YRD area will take place from March 20 through May 10 using methods described in detail under Phase 2 (2019, DELV- 10) of this proposal.

Types of Work:

Work Class

Work Elements

Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation + Data Management

157. Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data

Non-Native Predator Spawning Area Determination- Part 1 (DELV-7)

There will be an opportunity to coordinate a radio telemetry effort with planned electrofishing for mark-recapture predator abundance efforts (funded by the Pacific Salmon Commission) in the McNary Reservoir in the spring and early summer of 2018. Tagging of 50 adult walleye, and 50 smallmouth bass with long-life (>365 day) radio transmitters will be conducted in 2018, with tracking taking place in 2019.

Please see DELV-9 for additional details on the specifics and connection to project objectives.

Types of Work:

Work Class

Work Elements

Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation + Data Management

157. Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data
162. Analyze/Interpret Data

Egg Mat Sampling (DELV-8)

Egg mats are used widely to document spawning of various broadcast spawning fishes, including walleye (Manny et al. 2007, Ivan et al. 2010, Rutherford et al. 2016). Strategic placement in suspected spawning locations throughout the suspected range of suitable spawning temperatures should allow for determination of walleye spawn timing and location in the lower Yakima River. Egg mats (Manny et al. 2007) and/or egg discs (Katt et al. 2012) will be deployed in early March, or when Yakima River temperatures exceed 5° C. Sampling locations will be located in moderate velocity areas downstream of suitable walleye spawning habitat in the lower 30 km of the Yakima River. Anticipated sample size is 30 mats and sampling frequency is 2 x/week, however sample sizes and frequency will be determined based on power analyses conducted on initial biological sampling completed in 2018.

Types of Work:

Work Class

Work Elements

Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation + Data Management

157. Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data

Non-Native Predator Spawning Area Determination- Part 2 (DELV-9)

There will be an opportunity to coordinate a radio telemetry effort with planned electrofishing for mark-recapture predator abundance efforts in the McNary Reservoir in the spring and early summer of 2018. Tagging of 50 adult walleye, and 50 smallmouth bass with long-life (>365 day) radio transmitters will be conducted in 2018, with tracking taking place in 2019. Active tracking of these transmitters during the early spring of 2019 will allow for a better understanding of the spatial distribution and timing of walleye and smallmouth bass spawning. Vehicle and/or boat based tracking on the lower Yakima River Basin and YRD area will take place 2x/week from mid-February through mid-April, and 1x/week from April-June 15. Flights covering a larger area (Mouth of Snake River to Ringold on Hanford Reach) will be conducted every 2 weeks from early March through May 15.Results from DELV-7 and DELV-9 will inform the sampling schedule for larval walleye in the delta area (DELV-10), using published relationships between water temperature and hatch timing (see bulleted list above for examples of days to hatch versus water temperature).

Types of Work:

Work Class

Work Elements

Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation + Data Management

157. Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data
158. Mark/Tag Animals
162. Analyze/Interpret Data

Larval Abundance and Distribution (DELV-10)

Specific sampling transects will be sampled 2x/week from the time walleye spawn through two weeks after the last estimated hatch date (driven by spawn timing and water temperature data).

Paired Bongo nets (50 cm diameter opening, 1.5 m length, 500 micron mesh) will be towed following methods described by Nielsen and Johnson (1983) in four sampling areas within the YRD area and one area in the Columbia River downstream of the mouth of the Yakima River (Figure 9). Initial plans are to sample twice weekly between March 15 and May 15, 2019.

[not able to paste Figure 9, please see larval sampling protocols at https://www.monitoringresources.org]

Larval walleye (Figure 10) will be identified under a dissecting microscope using published information on larval fish identification (Auer 1982, Snyder 1983) and through correspondence with larval fish identification experts such as Dr. Darrell Snyder (Colorado State University) and Ed Roseman (USGS, Great Lakes Science Center). Key characteristics to be examined are length, snout to vent length vs. total length ratio, form of the gut, postanal myomere count, and postanal ventral pigmentation.

[not able to paste Figure 10, please see larval sampling protocols at https://www.monitoringresources.org]

Samples will be sorted to remove fish larvae from other organisms and debris. Rose bengal stain may be used to stain samples to aid in sorting and specimen identification (Snyder 1983). Larvae will be identified to the lowest taxon possible (usually Family), with emphasis on quantifying piscivorous species. Published keys and expert assistance will be used to identify fish larvae and reference collections will be developed and stored to facilitate information transfer.

Sampling will occur during daylight for a 5 minute-long tow period centered on each of the five sampling locations. Sample sizes, timing, and duration of each sample will be based on the power analyses completed in Phase 1 (2018). Target tow speed (course over ground from onboard GPS) will be 1.3 m/s (3 mph) and will be recorded. To estimate the volume of water passing through the nets, a velocity meter will be mounted on the net frame and velocities will be recorded during each sampling event to estimate the volume of water filtered. Sample contents will be washed with river water from the sample collection jar into a concentration funnel with 500-micron mesh and then preserved in labeled sample jars with 5% formalin.

A model using water temperature, discharge, day of year and possibly other variables (such as a discharge variation metric) will be developed to predict the timing of maximum larval abundance in the delta area. Water temperature and discharge data for the lower Yakima River (Kiona station at USBR Hydromet site: http://www.usbr.gov/pn/hydromet/yakima/yakwebdayread.html) will be used to compare to larval fish abundance and distribution data through time. Other physical data will be acquired from publicly available sources (e.g., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Water Control information (http://www.nwd-wc.usace.army.mil/report/projdata.htm and the Hanford Meteorological Station data (http://www.hanford.gov/page.cfm/hms/weatherCharts/Historical).

Developmental status of the larvae will also be considered when identifying optimal timing for a WSE manipulation. In other words, the swimming ability of larvae/fry will be taken into account when estimating the period of peak vulnerability.

The deliverable for Phase 2 will be a progress report that provides quantitative data on piscivorous fish larvae through space and time in the Yakima River Delta area in the spring of 2019. The report will provide detailed descriptions of methods and identification of periods of peak walleye larval abundance to facilitate development of WSE management actions intended to affect the greatest number of larval walleye. Larval densities and distribution will be related via statistical methods to readily available data such as river discharges (Yakima and Columbia) and temperatures as well as other factors that may influence the temporal and spatial distribution of larval fishes such as wind speed and direction and day of year. The report will include a review and refinement of the power analysis that was conducted in Phase 1 (DELV-5), using data collected in Phase 2 (2019). This report will conclude with a recommendation of the factors to consider when planning the timing of a recruitment reduction management action to be tested in Phase 3 of this project.

Types of Work:

Work Class

Work Elements

Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation + Data Management

157. Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data
162. Analyze/Interpret Data

Management Action Tests (2020-2022) (DELV-11)

Using the information obtained through Phases 1 (2018) and 2 (2019) to identify the specific action and the timing of that action, we will coordinate with the appropriate water managers and stakeholders to perform a test of the WSE change management action. The effectiveness of this action will be monitored with a modified BACI (Before, After, Control, Impact) design (Green 1979), as developed in Phase 1, DELV-5. To do this, we will collect data on larvae abundance and distribution for several weeks prior to the test action, during the action, and for several weeks after the action. The ‘Before’ and ‘After’, sampling will be conducted in the same locations and using the same methods as those described above for Phase 2 (DELV-10) activities. Thus, the larval abundance data collected in Phase 1 (2018) and in Phase 2 (2019) will be used as the (temporal) ‘Control’ component of the BACI analysis, along with the assumption that the extent to which factors affect larval vulnerability is essentially the same from year to year, in the absence of WSE manipulations. In other words, the BACI framework will depend on the assumption that the Phase 1 and 2 sampling is sufficient to capture the typical change in larval vulnerability to be expected with changes in factors such as river discharge, water temperature, and day of year. The power analysis in Phase 1, DELV-5, will help ensure that Phase 2 sampling is sufficient. In addition, during Phase 3 (2020, 2021, 2022), we will sample hourly during the WSE change tests to determine whether larvae are moved from the off-channel areas into areas of higher velocities and lower temperatures.

The management action tests will be performed in the early spring of 2020, 2021, and 2022. The deliverables for Phase 3 will be two progress reports (in 2020 and 2021) and a final report (in 2022) that will document all of the methods and results from all three phases of the project and will conclude with recommendations for further application of the management action and any additional research or testing that will be necessary to achieve the overall goal of reducing predator fish recruitment on an annual basis into the future. Of note, is that one of the deliverables from the project will be guidelines for when the management action would not be recommended due to high flows.

The estimated budget provided is the combination of the 3 FYs.

Types of Work:

Work Class

Work Elements

Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation + Data Management

157. Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data
162. Analyze/Interpret Data
183. Produce Journal Article

Objectives & Project Deliverables

Objective: Hydrodynamic Modeling and Experimental Design (OBJ-1)

Project Deliverables	How the project deliverables help meet this objective*


Hydrodynamic Modeling - Threshold Setting (DELV-1)	This is the first stage of the hydrodynamic modeling to determine the Columbia River discharge above which the proposed management action would be considered unnecessary and ineffective.

Hydrodynamic Modeling - 2D Scenario Modeling (DELV-2)	This is the second stage of the hydrodynamic modeling to model the various scenarios that have been identified by the PRRT workgroup.

Hydrodynamic Modeling - 2D Model Validation (DELV-3)	This is the third stage of the hydrodynamic modeling, to test the accuracy of the predictions from the 2D model.

Hydrodynamic Modeling - Fall Chinook Salmon Stranding and Entrapment Risk Assessment (DELV-4)	This is the fourth (last) stage of the hydrodynamic modeling, to determine whether the preferred management scenario(s) increase risk of stranding and entrapment of juvenile fall Chinook salmon in the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River.

Experimental Design and Statistical Analysis Plan (DELV-5)	This is the development of the full experimental design and stats plan for the project. This deliverable is dependent on DELV-6 as well.

Biological Variance Assessment (DELV-6)	This deliverable is necessary to characterize the variance in our primary biological response variable (larval abundance) to be used in power analyses in support of the full experimental design and stats analysis plan.

Objective: Vulnerability Assessment, Baseline Condition (OBJ-2)

Project Deliverables	How the project deliverables help meet this objective*


Non-Native Predator Spawning Area Determination- Part 1 (DELV-7)	This opportuinistic tagging of adult non-native predator fishes will support completion of Objective 2 by allowing us to determine when and where these fish spawn. Then, based on available data and the published literature, we will be able to better target our vulnerability assessments and subsequent management action tests and related sampling.

Egg Mat Sampling (DELV-8)	Egg mat sampling will be used to determine timing of spawning - which will then be used to estimate when larval abundance should peak in the areas that will be affected by the proposed management actions. This deliverable supports Objective 2.

Non-Native Predator Spawning Area Determination- Part 2 (DELV-9)	Similar to DELV-7, this is the tracking portion of the work (in 2019) in support of Objective 2.

Larval Abundance and Distribution (DELV-10)	This is the central sampling effort (and subsequent lab work) to support Objective 2.

Objective: Test Management Actions (OBJ-3)

Project Deliverables	How the project deliverables help meet this objective*


Management Action Tests (2020-2022) (DELV-11)	This are the three years of tests of management actions. These deliverable are directly in support of Objective 3 and will used methods presented in DELV-10.

*This section was not available on proposals submitted prior to 9/1/2011

RM&E Protocols and Methods

RM&E Protocol	Deliverable	Method Name and Citation
Hydrodynamic Modeling - Yakima River Delta v1.0		Hydrology (water level) - Roegner et al. 2009 v1.0 (Roegner, G.C., Diefenderfer, H.L., Borde, A.B., Thom, R.M., Dawley, E.M., Whiting, A.H., Zimmerman, S.A., and Johnson, G.E. 2009) Hydrodynamic Modeling v1.0 (Geoff McMichael, et al. 2017)
Experimental Design and Statistical Plan - Predator Recruitment Reduction v1.0		Zooplankton Identification and Enumeration Method v1.0 (Tamara Knudson 2016) Collecting Dispersing White Sturgeon Larvae (1995-027-00) v1.0 Limnological survey- Collecting Zooplankton v1.0 (Wilson, S.M., Dux, A.M., Stark, E.J., and Brandt, D. 2009) Larval fish sampling v1.0 (Geoff McMichael, et al.) BACI Design for Predator Recruitment Reduction v1.0 (Geoff McMichael, et al.)
Predator Fish Productivity Vulnerability Determination v1.0		Radio Telemetry v1.0 (Bellgraph, B.J., & Deters, K.A. 2007) Evaluate fish movements using telemetry equipment v1.0 (Amber Steed) Larval fish sampling v1.0 (Geoff McMichael, et al.)

Project Deliverables & Budget

Project Deliverable	Start	End	Budget
Hydrodynamic Modeling - Threshold Setting (DELV-1)	2018	2018	$13,805
Hydrodynamic Modeling - 2D Scenario Modeling (DELV-2)	2018	2018	$37,420
Hydrodynamic Modeling - 2D Model Validation (DELV-3)	2018	2018	$24,087
Hydrodynamic Modeling - Fall Chinook Salmon Stranding and Entrapment Risk Assessment (DELV-4)	2018	2018	$21,797
Experimental Design and Statistical Analysis Plan (DELV-5)	2018	2018	$59,216
Biological Variance Assessment (DELV-6)	2018	2018	$79,970
Non-Native Predator Spawning Area Determination- Part 1 (DELV-7)	2018	2018	$53,589
Egg Mat Sampling (DELV-8)	2019	2019	$57,914
Non-Native Predator Spawning Area Determination- Part 2 (DELV-9)	2019	2019	$51,565
Larval Abundance and Distribution (DELV-10)	2019	2019	$58,057
Management Action Tests (2020-2022) (DELV-11)	2020	2022	$499,040
		Total	$956,460

Requested Budget by Fiscal Year

Fiscal Year	Proposal Budget Limit	Actual Request
2018		$289,884
2019		$167,536
2020		$149,522
2021		$150,504
2022		$199,014
Total	$0	$956,460

Item	Notes	FY 2018	FY 2019	FY 2020	FY 2021	FY 2022
Personnel		$74,515	$97,060	$93,261	$93,261	$108,589
Travel		$840	$1,319	$482	$482	$1,025
Prof. Meetings & Training		$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
Vehicles		$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
Facilities/Equipment	(See explanation below)	$44,300	$9,000	$5,000	$5,000	$5,000
Rent/Utilities		$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
Capital Equipment		$28,000	$0	$0	$0	$0
Overhead/Indirect		$44,266	$25,583	$22,832	$22,982	$30,390
Other		$97,963	$34,574	$27,947	$28,779	$54,010
PIT Tags		$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
Total		$289,884	$167,536	$149,522	$150,504	$199,014

Major Facilities and Equipment explanation:
A small (18 foot) jet outboard-powered boat is needed to conduct biological sampling in the lower Yakima River and Yakima River Delta area. The request for this boat is included in the first year (FY2018) budget request and is associated with DELV-6, however it will be used in subsequent years for DELVs 8, 9, 10, and 11. If a suitable boat is available from BPA for the duration of the project, this capital item can be removed from the budget. Note: 'Other' expenses listed in line item budget are subcontracts to Columbia Basin Research (all FYs), Northwest Hydraulic Consultants (FY18) and PNNL (FY18).

Cost Share

None

Project References or Citations

Auer, N. A.  1982.  Identification of larval fishes of the Great Lakes basin with emphasis on the Lake Michigan drainage. Great Lakes Fishery Commission, Special Publication 82-3, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Barr, C. M., E. Tinus, M. Gardner, C. Mallette, and A. J. Storch.  2014.  System-wide predator control program: Fisheries and biological evaluation. Pages 46-93 in Williams, S.  2014.  Report on the predation index, predator control fisheries, and program evaluation for the Columbia River Basin experimental northern pikeminnow management program. Project Number 1990-077-00. 2013 Annual report to the Bonneville Power Administration (available 10/07/17 at  http://www.pikeminnow.org/project-reports-2/annual-reports).

Barton, B. A., and T. P. Barry. 2011. Reproduction and environmental biology. Pages 199-231 in B. A. Barton, editor. Biology, management, and culture of walleye and sauger. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.

Beamesderfer, R. C., and B. E. Rieman.  1988.  Size selectivity and bias in estimates of population statistics of smallmouth bass, walleye, and northern squawfish in a Columbia River reservoir.  North American Journal of Fisheries Management 8:505-510.

Becker, C. D., D. H. Fickeisen, and J.C . Montgomery. 1981. Assessment of impacts from water level fluctuations on fish in the Hanford Reach, Columbia River. PNL-3813, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Carey, M.P., B.L. Sanderson, T.A. Friesen, K.A. Barnas, and J.D. Olden.  2011.  Smallmouth bass in the Pacific Northwest: a threat to native species; a benefit for anglers.  Reviews in Fisheries Science 19:305–315.

Evans, A. F., N. J. Hostetter, D. D. Roby, K. Collis, D. E. Lyons, B. P. Sandford, R. D. Ledgerwood, and S. Sebring.  2012.  Systemwide evaluation of avian predation on juvenile salmonids from the Columbia River based on recoveries of passive integrated transponder tags.  Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 141:975–989.

Fritts, A. L., and T. N. Pearsons.  2004.  Smallmouth bass predation on hatchery and wild salmonids in the Yakima River, Washington.  Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 133:880–895.

Gardner, E. Tinus, M. H. Weaver, C. Mallette, and E. S. Van Dyke.  2013.  System-wide predator control program: Indexing and fisheries evaluation. Pages 52-94 in Porter, R.  2013.  Report on the predation index, predator control fisheries, and program evaluation for the Columbia River Basin experimental northern pikeminnow management program. Project Number 1990-077-00. 2012 Annual report to the Bonneville Power Administration. Available at: http://www.pikeminnow.org/project-reports-2/annual-reports [Accessed 7 March 2016]

Gray & Osborne, Inc.  2016.  Bateman Island causeway modification conceptual design report. G&O Report#14542 to Mid-Columbia Fisheries Enhancement Group. Gray & Osborne, Inc., Arlington, Washington. 256 p.

Green, R. H.  1979.  Sampling design and statistical methods for environmental biologists. Wiley-Interscience, New York.

Hansen, M. J., T. D. Beard, and S. W. Hewett.  2000.  Catch rates and catchability of walleyes in angling and spearing fisheries in northern Wisconsin lakes. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 20:109-118.

Harnish, R. A., E. D. Green, K. A. Deters, K. D. Ham, Z. Deng, H. Li, B. Rayamajhi, K. W. Jung, and G. A. McMichael. 2014a. Survival of wild Hanford Reach and Priest Rapids Hatchery fall Chinook salmon juveniles in the Columbia River: predation implications. PNNL-23719. Prepared for the Pacific Salmon Commission by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Harnish, R. A., R. Sharma, G. A. McMichael, R. B. Langshaw, and T. N. Pearsons. 2014b. Effect of hydroelectric dam operations on the freshwater productivity of a Columbia River fall Chinook salmon population. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 71:1-14. doi:10.1139/cjfas-2013-0276.
Henderson, C., and R.F. Foster. 1957. Studies of smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) in the Columbia River near Richland, Washington. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 86: 112–127.
Houde, E. D.  1969.  Sustained swimming ability of larvae of walleye (Stizostedion vitreum) and yellow perch (Perca flavescens). Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 26:1647-1659.
Hoxmeier, R. J., D. H. Wahl, R. C. Brooks, and R. C. Heidinger.  2006.  Growth and survival of age-0 walleye (Sander vitreus): interactions among walleye size, prey availability, predation, and abiotic factors. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 63:2173-2182.
ISAB (Independent Scientific Advisory Board) and ISRP (Independent Scientific Review Panel).  2016.  Critical uncertainties for the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. ISAB/ISRP 2016-1. Available at: http://www.nwcouncil.org/media/7149870/isabisrp2016-1.pdf [Accessed 7 March 2016]

Ivan, L. N. E. S. Rutherford, C. Riseng, and J. A. Tyler.  2010.  Density, production, and survival of walleye (Sander vitreus) eggs in the Muskegon River, Michigan. Journal of Great Lakes Research 36:328-337.

Johnson, A., K. Carmack, B. Era-Miller, B. Lubliner, S. Golding, and R. Coots.  2010.  Yakima River pesticides and PCBs Total Maximum Daily Load, Volume 1. Water quality study findings.  Washington Department of Ecology, Environmental Assessment Program, Publication No. 10-03-018. Available at: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/documents/1003018.pdf [Accessed 9 March 2016]

Katt, J. D., K. D. Koupal, C. W. Schoenebeck, and W. Hoback.  2012.  Assessment of a new gear to sample walleye eggs. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 32:44-48.

Langshaw, R. B., and T. N. Pearsons. 2010. Final study plan and designs to determine impacts on fall Chinook in the Hanford Reach under the Hanford Reach Fall Chinook Protection Program – License Article 401(a)(14). Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County, Ephrata, Washington.

Lukas, J.A., and D.J. Orth. 1995. Factors affecting nesting success of smallmouth bass in a regulated Virginia stream. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 124: 726–735.

Manny, B. A., G. W. Kennedy, J. D. Allan, and J. R. P. French.  2007.  First evidence of egg deposition by walleye (Sander vitreus) in the Detroit River. Journal of Great Lakes Research 33:512-516.

McDonald, T. L., W. P. Erickson, and L. L. McDonald. 2000. Analysis of count data from before-after control-impact studies. Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics 5(3): 262-279.

McMichael, G. A., A. L. Fritts, T. N. Pearsons, and J. L. Dunnigan. 1999.  Lower Yakima River Predatory Fish Monitoring: Progress Report 1998. Pages 93-124 In ODFW and NMFS. 1999. Management Implications of Co-occurring Native and Introduced Fishes: Proceedings of the Workshop. October 27-28, 1998, Portland, Oregon. 243 pgs. Available from: National Marine Fisheries Service, 525 N.E. Oregon St., Suite 510, Portland, OR 97232.

McMichael, G. A., M. D. Bleich, . M. Anglea, R. J. Richmond, R. L. Townsend, and J. R. Skalski.  2006.  A study to determine the feasibility of PIT-tagging wild juvenile subyearling Chinook salmon in the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River. Report PNWD-3604 to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Battelle- Pacific Northwest Division, Richland, Washington. 

McMichael, G. A., R. A. Buchanan, B. J. Bellgraph, K. A. Deters, J. A. Carter, J. R. Skalski, E. V. Arntzen, J. P. Duncan, A. Solcz, and K. D. Ham.  2010.  Subyearling Chinook salmon fate determination pilot study in Priest Rapids pool, 2009. PNWD-4128, Final report to the Public Utility District Number 2, of Grant County. Battelle, Pacific Northwest Division, Richland, Washington. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267751361_Subyearling_Chinook_Salmon_Fate_Determination_Pilot_Study_in_Priest_Rapids_Pool_2009_FINAL_REPORT [Accessed 4 March 2016]

McMichael, G. A.  2017.  Factors influencing predation on juvenile fishes emigrating through the lower Yakima River Basin. Final report to the Yakima Basin Fish & Wildlife Recovery Board. Mainstem Fish Research, LLC, Richland, Washington. 55 pages.
McMichael, G. A., and B. B. James.  2017.  Upriver bright predation bottleneck. Final report to the Letter of Agreement- Chinook Technical Committee, Pacific Salmon Commission, under contract CTC-2015-2. Mainstem Fish Research, LLC, Richland, Washington. 33 p. Available September 20, 2017 at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312320843_Upriver_Bright_Predation_Bottleneck.
Mion, J. B., R. A. Stein, and E. A. Marschall.  1998.  River discharge drives survival of larval walleye.  Ecological Applications 8:88-103.

Montgomery, J.C., D.H. Fickeisen, and C.D. Becker. 1980. Factors influencing smallmouth bass production in the Hanford Area, Columbia River. Northwest Science 54: 296–305.

NHC (Northwest Hydraulic Consultants).  2015.  Bateman Island Causeway modification project. Hydrodynamic modeling and geomorphic assessment final report. Prepared for Gray & Osborne on behalf of Mid-Columbia Fisheries Enhancement Group.  Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Inc., Seattle, Washington.

Nielsen, L. A., and D. L. Johnson.  1983.  Fisheries Techniques.  American Fisheries Society. Printed by the Southern Printing Company, Inc., Blacksburg, Virginia.

Niehus, S. E., W.A. Perkins, M.C. Richmond, 2014. Simulation of Columbia River Hydrodynamics and Water Temperature from 1917 through 2011 in the Hanford Reach (Final Report No. PNWD-3278). Battelle-Pacific Northwest Division, Richland, Washington

NOAA.  2008.  NOAA Fisheries Biological Opinion for the operation of the Federal Columbia River Power System.  National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration.  Available at:  https://pcts.nmfs.noaa.gov/pcts-web/dispatcher/trackable/NWR-2005-5883?overrideUserGroup=PUBLIC&referer=/pcts-web/publicAdvancedQuery.pcts?searchAction=SESSION_SEARCH [Accessed 7 March 2016].

NWPCC.  2009.  Northwest Power and Conservation Council Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program.  Available at:  http://www.nwcouncil.org/fw/program/program-2009-amendments/
[Accessed 7 March 2016].

NWPCC.  2014. Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program 2014.  Available at:  https://www.nwcouncil.org/fw/program/2014-12/program/
[Accessed 8 October 2017].

Quist, M. C., C. S. Guy, R. J. Bernot, and J. L. Stephen.  2004.  Factors related to growth and survival of larval walleyes: implications for recruitment in a southern Great Plains reservoir. Fisheries Research 67:215-225.

R Core Team. 2016. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org/.

Richmond, M. C. and W. A., Perkins, 2009. Efficient calculation of dewatered and entrapped areas using hydrodynamic modeling and GIS. Environmental Modelling & Software 24, 1447–1456.

Rieman, B.E., and R.C. Beamesderfer.  1990.  Dynamics of a northern squawfish population and the potential to reduce predation on juvenile salmonids in a Columbia River reservoir.  North American Journal of Fisheries Management 10:228–241.

Rieman, B. E., R. C. Beamesderfer, S. Vigg, and T. P. Poe. 1991. Estimated loss of juvenile salmonids to predation by northern squawfish, walleyes, and smallmouth bass in John Day Reservoir, Columbia River. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 120:448–458.

Roby, D. D., K. Collis, D. E. Lyons, J. Y. Adkins, Y. Suzuki, P. Loschl, T. Lawes, K. Bixler, A. Peck-Richardson, E. Dykstra, J. Harms, W. Mashburn, J. Tennyson, N. Ventolini, A. Evans, B. Cramer, M. Hawbecker, N. Hostetter, R. D. Ledgerwood, and S. Sebring.  2012.  Research, monitoring, and evaluation of avian predation on salmonid smolts of the lower and mid-Columbia River.  Final 2011 annual report.  Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.  

Ruetz, C. R. III, D. G. Uzarski, D. M. Krueger, and E. S. Rutherford.  2007.  Sampling a littoral fish assemblage: Comparison of small-mesh fyke netting and boat electrofishing. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 27:825-831.

Schoenebeck, C. W. and M. J. Hansen.  2005.  Electrofishing catchability of walleyes, largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, northern pike, and muskellunge in Wisconsin Lakes. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 25:1341-1352.

Seber, G. A. F. 1982. The Estimation of Animal Abundance and related parameters. The Blackburn Press, Caldwell, New Jersey.

Snyder, D. E.  1983.  Fish eggs and larvae. Pages 165-197 in Nielsen, L. A., and D. L. Johnson.  1983.  Fisheries Techniques.  American Fisheries Society. Printed by the Southern Printing Company, Inc., Blacksburg, Virginia.

Tabor, R. A., R. S. Shively, and T. P. Poe.  1993.  Predation on juvenile salmonids by smallmouth bass and northern squawfish in the Columbia River near Richland, Washington. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 13:831-838.

Vigg, S, T. P. Poe, L. A. Prendergast, and H. C. Hansel. 1991. Rates of consumption of juvenile salmonids and alternative prey fish by northern squawfish, walleyes, smallmouth bass, and channel catfish in John Day Reservoir, Columbia River. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 120:421-438.

Ward, D. L., J. H. Petersen, and J. J. Loch. 1995. Index of predation on juvenile salmonids by northern squawfish in the lower and middle Columbia River and in the lower Snake River. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 124:321–334.

Zimmerman, M. P., and D. L. Ward. 1999. Index of predation on juvenile salmonids by northern pikeminnow in the lower Columbia River basin, 1994–1996. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 128:995–1007.

Notes

None

Proposal Summary

Please correct the errors noted below.

View the dynamic Proposal Summary

Download a snapshot PDF

Proposal History

Basics

Contacts

Project Significance & Problem Statement

Problem

Need

Opportunity

Background

Predation Losses to Piscivorous Fishes is a Problem

Predator Fish Populations Appear to be Increasing

Objectives

Project History

Financials

Reporting & Contracted Deliverables Performance

Results: Reporting, Accomplishments, and Impact

Past Council Recommendations and ISRP Reviews

Adaptive Management

Project Documents & Reports

Public Attachments in CBFish

Other Project Documents on the Web

Project Relationships

Focal Species

Types of Work

Tagging

Data Management

RM&E

Location

Project Deliverables

Objectives & Project Deliverables

RM&E Protocols and Methods

Project Deliverables & Budget

Cost Share

Project References or Citations

Notes

Map Visibility:
Map Name:
Description: