Description:
Specific Assignments for Fiscal Year 2015
For FY 2015, the ISAB anticipates working on a mix of long, medium, and short-term assignments of varying priority that allows for an efficient use of the ISAB’s expertise and resources. Ongoing and potential topics for assignments are described below. In addition, the ISAB is on-call for assignments from the Council, Tribes, and NOAA Fisheries. These on-call assignments will likely pertain to science issues raised in the Council’s Program, Tribal programs, and NOAA analyses that inform Columbia River fish management including mainstem passage analyses and experiments.
1. Density Dependence Impacts on Management and Restoration Programs in the Columbia Basin
Summary Request: On March 10, 2014, the ISAB Administrative Oversight Panel approved the ISAB to review the issue of density dependence impacts on management and restoration programs in the Columbia Basin. This report will explore the biological issue of density dependence in and among salmonid, lamprey, and sturgeon populations in the Basin and how measuring and analyzing density dependent interactions could be used to inform conservation and recovery actions. Density dependence occurs when salmon growth, age, fecundity, or survival change as a function of population density. Typically, density-dependent effects result in higher population productivity when densities are low and lower productivity as a population approaches carrying capacity. Recent project reviews by the ISAB and ISRP found apparently strong density dependence (reduced productivity as abundance increased) in areas of relatively low densities. NMFS also reported density dependence for spring Chinook salmon in its most recent FCRPS biological opinion.
Rationale: Abundance of adult anadromous natural salmonids in the Columbia Basin is low compared to historical levels, suggesting that competitive interactions among salmonids might only weakly affect their growth and survival. However, recent reviews of Columbia Basin programs by the ISRP and ISAB indicate that strong density-dependent interactions in many monitored streams may be constraining population growth even at current relatively low abundances in some watersheds (ISRP 2011-14, ISAB 2011-1, ISAB 2013-5). Density-dependence stems, in part, from competition for limited resources such as spawning habitat, food, or rearing habitat. The outcomes of density dependence (e.g., changes in juvenile growth, age, and survival) can be used to identify the limiting factors such as habitat (e.g., spawning, rearing) or food supply that are constraining salmon population growth. Such information could be used to guide and improve habitat restoration efforts. Density-dependent relationships also may be used to inform spawning escapement goals and juvenile abundance targets, and might have implications for how to most effectively and strategically apply conservation measures such as hatchery supplementation and habitat restoration.
Review Questions
1. Where and for which species has density dependence been studied in the Basin?
2. What limiting factors are leading to density-dependent recruitment?
3. How do “novel ecosystems” and related changes in climate, flow, habitat, land use, and artificial or toxic chemicals affect carrying capacity for focal, native species?
4. Have findings related to density dependence been used to develop targets or guidelines for adult spawning abundances, juvenile production, and habitat restoration?
5. How does density dependence affect or constrain strategies to meet Program goals?
6. How do historical adult salmon abundance estimates inform current and future carrying capacity of salmon in the Basin?
7. To what degree does a loss of life history diversity correspond with a decrease in abundance or reduced carrying capacity? What proportion of the reduction from historical abundance is due to elimination of specific life-history patterns compared to lower abundance overall for all life-history patterns?
Products: Report (~75 p.) and presentations to the Council and professional forums in the Basin. Although work to draft journal publications is generally not funded through the ISAB budget, the authors may also publish a summary of the report in a peer-reviewed journal, to ensure wide access and distribution.
Methods: The ISAB began the review in March 2014, and the review process is benefiting from hatchery and habitat project reports; ISAB/ISRP reviews of hatchery and habitat programs (e.g., Lower Snake Compensation Program, CHaMP/ISEMP, Geographic Review); and briefings by specific individuals in federal, tribal, and state agencies. Historical estimates of salmon abundance and the historical template of life histories are being examined and evaluated as a basis for potential carrying capacity of the Basin.
Timeline: The ISAB has made significant progress on the report in FY 2014 and intends to complete the report no later than March 2015.
2. Potential Assignment: Comparative Examination of Fish and Wildlife Recovery and Mitigation Planning Documents
In June 2014, the ISAB Administrative Oversight Panel discussed collectively shaping a request to the ISAB to assist in a review pertaining to the amended Fish and Wildlife Program, the updated Wy-Kan-Ush-Mi Wa-Kish-Wit tribal salmon restoration plan, and possibly NOAA’s Columbia Basin Long-term Recovery Situation Assessment and other recovery planning documents. Such a review would be collaboratively discussed and developed by the Council, CRITFC in consultation with the upriver tribes, and NOAA’s Northwest Fisheries Science Center and Regional Office. The review would be complementary to and coordinated with any related or planned efforts of NOAA, the Tribes, or the Council. The review might be patterned off the ISAB’s 1999 report “Work-In-Progress Report: Looking for Common Ground: Comparison of Recent Reports Pertaining to Salmon Recovery in the Columbia River Basin.” The ISAB could potentially look at areas of scientific consensus and disagreement, shared uncertainties and strategies, and recovery goals and visions. The potential assignment will be discussed further, likely in the winter 2014/2015, after the Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program is amended.
3. Review of NOAA Fisheries Recovery Planning and Life-cycle Modeling Products
One of the ISAB’s past roles was to review draft products of NOAA’s Technical Recovery Teams (TRTs) that address Columbia River salmon ESA listings and thus affect recovery planning and Council fish and wildlife program planning. Much of the Columbia River Basin TRTs work is complete, but the ISAB’s role to review other analyses for NOAA recovery and Biological Opinion planning continues. For example, the 2010 Supplemental Biological Opinion called for development of a life-cycle model and a subsequent scientific review. In October 2013, the ISAB completed a review of NOAA Fisheries’ draft Life-Cycle Model of Salmonid Populations in the Interior Columbia River Basin (ISAB 2013-5). The ISAB found that progress was evident on developing the model. However, not all model components were finished and the model is evolving. Consequently, the ISAB anticipates reviewing draft model components as they become sufficiently developed to benefit from scientific review.
4. Mainstem Passage Reviews and Regular Review of Fish Passage Center Products
Since its formation, the ISAB has been continuously engaged in reviews of projects, programs, study designs, and analyses related to fish passage at the mainstem Columbia and Snake River dams. The ISAB will continue to be on-call to address mainstem issues including reviews identified in the Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program and in NOAA’s Biological Opinion. For example, the 2014 Federal Columbia River Power System BiOp’s section 3.3.3.5 on Reasonable and Prudent Alternative implementation regarding System Survival, page 382, specifies that regional consideration of a spill test include “independent review of (a) data to address potential spurious correlations and (b) alternative experimental design proposals (by the ISAB or other qualified entities).” In 2014, the ISAB completed a review of the spill experiment proposed by the State of Oregon, the Nez Perce Tribe, and others for inclusion in the Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program (ISAB 2014-2). If other regional spill proposals are developed in FY 2015 and if requested by the Oversight Board, the ISAB is prepared to review them.
In response to language in the Council’s 2009 Program, the Fish Passage Center (FPC), its Oversight Board, and the ISAB have organized a regular system of independent and timely reviews of the FPC’s analytical products. FPC products take several forms, and the review guidelines are tailored to reflect the scientific content of these various products. Scientific review by the ISAB is recommended for selected FPC products including the Comparative Survival Study (CSS) annual report as well as analytical products that are identified for review based on the following criteria: (1) new or novel analyses are introduced; (2) new conditions or data bring old analyses into question; and/or (3) consensus cannot be reached in the region on the science involved in the product. As appropriate, these reviews are not limited to only the FPC’s analysis but, as identified, can also include reviews of similar analyses by others. In FY 2015, the ISAB will complete a review of the CSS’s draft 2014 annual report. The review period will begin in early September and end in mid-October 2014.
5. Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation (RME) Reviews
In FY 2015, the ISAB will continue its shared role with the ISRP in reviewing regional plans aimed at monitoring and evaluating the status of fish and wildlife populations in the Basin and the effectiveness of projects at benefiting those populations. The ISRP and ISAB closely coordinate reviews of RME plans and products, such as the Council’s Research Plan, draft Council documents related to Program RME activities and guidance, Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership (PNAMP) products, Action Agency RME plans, and RME proposals.
In FY 2015, the ISAB will assist with the further development of the Council’s RME program including the research plan, high level indicators, science-based assessments, data management, and RME guidance and implementation strategies. Specifically, the ISAB and ISRP might assist with updating the critical uncertainties, taking into account evolving topics and reporting on the results of past research.
6. Potential Reviews Identified in the Draft Fish and Wildlife Program
The Council is in the process of amending the Fish and Wildlife Program. Although a final amended program is not scheduled for adoption until September 2014, the May 2014 draft amended Program identifies potential roles for the ISAB in a number of processes. These are in addition to those already specified in the ISAB’s Terms of Reference as described above under general responsibilities.
Although subject to revision or deletion, potential roles described in the draft Program include:
• Objectives: The draft program proposes that the Council with others in the region would oversee a regional process to survey, collect, identify, and refine a realistic set of quantitative objectives for program focal species and their habitat. The potential role for the ISAB would be to review draft objectives for scientific quality and usefulness in tracking progress and adaptively managing Program efforts.
• Hatchery Effectiveness: The draft program proposes that with Bonneville a leading partner in the effort, the action agencies would work with the state agencies and tribes and the independent science panels to design and present to the Council by the end of 2015 a proposal and feasibility study for a comprehensive umbrella approach to the evaluation and reporting of artificial production effectiveness and effects. The outcomes of this work would be reported to the Council annually. If this draft program language is adopted, the specific ISAB/ISRP role would need to be further defined.
7. State of Science and Other Potential Reviews
The ISAB partners and the ISAB regularly identify issues that might benefit from ISAB evaluation. The ISAB’s FY 2014 Statement of Work describes more than twenty topics that might benefit from scientific review. In 2014, the ISAB selected and developed three topics from this larger set: density dependence, novel ecosystems, and life history diversity. The ISAB Administrative Oversight Panel considered these three topics and approved the review of density dependence. The assignment included questions on novel ecosystems and life history diversity as relevant to density dependence with the intent that the ISAB could further scope and refine potential review proposals for those topics.
Here are the summary requests for novel ecosystems and life history diversity as proposed in 2014 that could be refined and developed into revised proposals for FY 2015:
• Novel ecosystems (also called hybrid or no-analogue ecosystems) are defined as those with species composition and abundance unlike any that have occurred previously in the region. The ISAB proposes to evaluate how novel ecosystems in the Columbia River Basin can be best managed to protect and enhance native species affected by the Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS). The report would focus on identifying management approaches that are practical and effective under changing conditions, and identify key metrics for measuring the benefits and costs to society of ecological services provided by native versus hybridized and nonnative species that are prevalent in novel ecosystems.
• Measuring, Monitoring, and Managing Life History Diversity for Sustainable Restoration of Anadromous and Resident Fish Species: This ISAB review would provide in-depth information on what is known and needs to be known about basin-scale trends in loss of life history diversity of key anadromous and resident fish species in the Basin. It would also provide recommendations for specific quantitative measures and methods to monitor and manage life history diversity. This review is needed to better incorporate life history diversity into management, conservation, and restoration goals and objectives.
The Oversight Panel approves, modifies, or disapproves assignments requested by the region or generated by the ISAB and would again consider these or other topics if brought forward for consideration.
WE Agreement Type:
Contracted
Mitigation work
Reporting
Funding
Search
Log in
Notice:
ATTENTION BPA USERS: The data sync between Asset Suite and CBFish failed last night, so changes made in Asset Suite yesterday are not reflected in CBFish today. Note that changes made within CBFish are not impacted. 
Select a work element:
Help