Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Salmon Review
Salmon Review
pdf
From: Bruce Suzumoto
To: Sara McNary; Coby Howell
Cc: Lorri Bodi; Stier,Jeffrey K - KE-4; Katherine.Cheney@noaa.gov; Lear, Gayle N NWD; Ponganis, David J NWD;
Peters, Rock D NWD; Kathryn Puckett; Harwood,Holly C - PGB-5; Graham, Gregory S NWW; Coffey, Michael A
NWD; McNeil, Bridget (ENRD); john >> "John.W.Ferguson"
Subject: Two-Pagers
Date: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 5:13:27 PM
Attachments: Immediate Action climate change.pdf
Immediate Action Fish-in Fish-out.pdf
Immediate Action IMW.pdf
Immediate Action pikeminnow.pdf
Immediate Action Predator Control Invasives.pdf
Immediate Action RME to reduce uncertainty.pdf
Immediate Actions Life-Cycle Modeling.pdf
Immediate Actions non-indigenous species.pdf
Rapid Response Harvest.pdf
Rapid Response Hydro.pdf
Rapid Response predator control.pdf
Rapid Response Safety Net Hatcheries.pdf
Long Term Actions Hatchery Reforms.pdf
Long term Hydro phase 2.pdf
Long term John Day MOP.pdf
Triggers Document 080509 415pm.pdf
Coby:
Attached are the "Two-Pagers" and the trigger document that were sent to
Dr. Lubchenco today. They were sent with the understanding that some of
the documents did not have Action Agency review and therefore need
further discussion. They were also sent knowing that more work needs to
be done on which actions are immediate, rapid-response and long-term as
well as how they will be funded. Thanks.
000075
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
Proposed enhancements:
The FCRPS BiOp includes a commitment from the Action Agencies to
report annually in their progress reports on climate change research. The
Federal agencies will expand and strengthen this approach through joint
NOAA and Action Agency review of climate change information, with
reporting of this information to the RIOG and the public in the annual and
cumulative progress reports. RPA 56 and 57 identify the implementation
and objectives of IMWs. This enhancement would utilize existing flow
and temperature data available in the IMWs to augment habitat/fish
response relationships.
000076
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
000077
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
000078
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
To address the need for improved local and basin-wide coordination of fish-
in/fish-out and other monitoring efforts, BPA, CBFWA, NOAA and NPCC
are convening a series of sub-regional workshops with state and tribal co-
managers to develop a shared Columbia Basin Monitoring Strategy.
These workshops will develop an efficient monitoring framework and
project specific implementation strategy for salmonid VSP monitoring
(including fish-in/fish-out), and habitat and hatchery effectiveness
monitoring that meets the needs of recovery plans, BiOp requirements, as
well as other program and regional fisheries management objectives. By
October 2009 this collaborative process will have prioritized population-
specific monitoring needs, and identified project modifications or new
projects needed to fill remaining gaps.
000079
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
and agreements state and tribal co-managers to develop a shared Columbia Basin
• Implementation monitoring strategy.
potential/ do-
ability Implementation potential: The AA’s, NOAA, and regional co-managers
are committed to and engaged in the above described collaborative
processes to improve fish-in/fish-out monitoring in the Columbia River
Basin. Modifications to existing programs and the augmentation of existing
efforts with the addition of BPA’s BiOp placeholder funds and staff support
will contribute to filling monitoring gaps identified through these
collaborative processes and ensuring a robust, integrated and efficient
monitoring framework for adult and juvenile status and trend monitoring.
000080
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
000081
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
• Involved
parties and Implementation potential/do-ability: See Fish In/Fish Out Monitoring
agreements Issue Paper.
• Implementation
potential/ do-
ability
000082
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
000083
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
Current Activity Regional partners are currently working on a strategy to reduce non-native
Description piscivorous predation on juvenile salmonids consistent with BiOp RPA
• FCRPS BiOp 44.
activity
• Involved parties Assess impacts of non-native species at regional scales. Combine
and/or spatially explicit information on non-native species populations
agreements (abundance, size, etc) and mechanisms and magnitudes of impact to
identify areas where risks to salmon are the greatest and where
management strategies are needed to minimize these impacts. We will
evaluate multiple mechanisms of impact (predation, competition) for a
number of key taxa (including but not excluded to smallmouth bass,
largemouth bass, channel catfish, walleye, shad, brook trout). These
assessments are needed to identify regions in the Columbia with greatest
potential impacts from non-native species. In addition, results of this
effort can be linked with proposed climate studies that will identify ESUs
that are most susceptible to the effects of climate change to help identify
potential synergistic interactions between climate and non-native species.
000084
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
Smallmouth Bass, Walleye, Channel Catfish and American Shad are all
introduced species in the Columbia Basin. With the exception of
American shad, they are also predators on juvenile salmonids. American
shad do not consume juvenile salmonids, but are thought to substantially
affect food webs in the mainstem migration corridor. In addition, the
nutrients provided by juvenile American shad in the fall may serve to
increase condition and survival of predators, therefore increasing net
predation on juvenile salmonids. Conversely, they may reduce predation
rates on subyearling Chinook salmon by providing an abundant,
alternative source of food to predators.
Estimated Cost BiOp three year funding to develop management actions is $350K/year for
three years.
000085
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
Proposed enhancements:
The Action Agencies and NOAA are jointly reviewing existing federal
RM&E efforts to identify and address critical gaps, if any, regarding:
• Faster, more efficient reporting of annual adult returns (at population
and MPG level)
• Expanded habitat status and trend monitoring (e.g., flow, temperature,
sediment, channel complexity, riparian area/composition, floodplain
connectivity, habitat access, land use conversion, etc.)
• Improved understanding of relationships between habitat quality and
fish response (e.g., stream/watershed- and population-scale estimates
of juvenile outmigrants per adult spawner; size and condition of
juveniles, etc.)
• Effects of non-native predator/competitor species in mainstem reaches
and tributaries:
- Develop quantitative descriptions of interactions with salmon and
steelhead (productivity, smolt size and condition, food web, etc.)
- Expand capabilities of COMPASS model to incorporate predation
impacts
- Evaluate impacts of non-native species and develop and test
000086
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
Current Situation: Implementation potential/ do- ability: The Action Agencies and NOAA have
• Background conducted regional workshops to review RM&E coverage and priorities (see for
• Involved parties example, June 2009 “Recommendations for Implementing Research, Monitoring
and agreements
and Evaluation for the 2008 NOAA Fisheries FCRPS BiOp”.
• Implementation
potential/ do-
ability
000087
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
This will be accomplished in two ways: First, we will update the Interior
Columbia Technical Recovery Teams stochastic life-cycle models to incorporate
most recent population data (abundance of adults and juveniles, stage-specific
survival, etc.) and expand the number of populations considered where possible
(Snake River spring/summer Chinook; Snake River steelhead; Upper Columbia
spring Chinook; and Mid Columbia steelhead). We will also explore data
availability and, to the extent possible, develop data-supported models for
populations within ESUs that have not been modeled to date (Snake River fall
Chinook; Snake River sockeye; and Upper Columbia steelhead). Second, we will
expand the current models to address:
000088
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
000089
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
000090
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
000091
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
000092
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
000093
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
• Implementation and other collaborations will need to be built for successful completion of
potential/ do- the listed tasks.
ability
Implementation potential: High: we are conducting spatially explicit
modeling using existing information, pursuing analyses and conducting
additional research using proven techniques (stable isotopes,
ecopath/ecosim, etc.), and hosting a workshop on ideas proposed by the
ISAB. Cooperation and collaboration from state, federal, tribal and
academic communities will further the success of these efforts.
000094
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
Current Activity Ensure that hatchery programs funded by the FCRPS Action Agencies are
Description not impeding recovery of ESA listed salmon ESUs or steelhead DPSs.
• FCRPS BiOp Best Management Practices will be defined in ESA consultations with
NOAA fisheries.
activity
• Involved parties Oregon, Washington, Idaho, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service,
and/or and the Nez Perce, Yakama, Colville, Warm Springs, Umatilla and
agreements Shoshone Bannock Indian tribes.
Clarification for Accelerate ESA consultations to implement best management practices
Contingency Action and hatchery reforms including; 1. Limit hatchery fish from spawning
naturally, 2. Reduce ecological effects on natural populations from
juvenile and adult hatchery fish, 3. Allow natural re-colonization of rivers
and streams blocked by hatchery facilities, 4. Prevent entrainment and
injury of listed fish at hatchery water diversions, and 5. Monitor hatchery
compliance with ESA requirements.
000095
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
In the event that triggers are tripped and rapid response actions are not
sufficient to put the ESU on track, the Action Agencies will: 1) review the
most recent Long-term Contingency Plan for the ESU in question and the
current status of the recent biological research at the dams with the regional
agencies and Tribes, 2) initiate a discussion with RIOG and appropriate
000096
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
Implementation Would require discussions with regional partners on options and project
considerations implementation. Likely to be some disagreement on which projects to
implement.
000097
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
In general, project facilities at John Day Dam are designed for operation at
MOP as this was within the authorized operating range for the reservoir.
However, the study identified significant impacts associated with operating
at MOP, for which the Corps does not have authority to mitigate. These
include impacts to: irrigation, municipal water supplies, hatchery water
supplies, anadromous and resident fish habitat, wildlife habitat, recreation
sites, cultural resource sites, and adult passage facilities.
Clarification for By 2012, the Action Agencies will prepare a detailed study plan to layout
Long Term the scope, schedule and budget for reevaluation if warranted from review
Contingency of the biological analysis. The scope will address biological, engineering,
environmental, socio-economic impacts, and other necessary tasks and
activities required to assess the feasibility of implementing the planned
reservoir operation. It will include assessment of: biological effects
(benefits and/or decrements); physical impacts; funding options;
000098
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
000099
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
000100
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
All SR fall Chinook harvest in the Columbia River occurs in fall season
fisheries that are subject to the U.S. v. Oregon agreement. SR fall
Chinook in the Columbia River are managed subject to an abundance
based harvest rate schedule. Under the current schedule harvest rates on
SR fall Chinook vary between 21.5% and 45%. At the lowest level of
abundance, fisheries for fall Chinook are allocated 1.5% to the non-Treaty
fishery and 20% to the Treaty fishery.
Ocean Fisheries - Of the seven ESUs and DPSs considered here SR fall
Chinook is the only one caught in ocean fisheries. SR fall Chinook are
caught in fisheries in Alaska, Canada, and off the Washington/Oregon
coast. Ocean fisheries are subject to provisions of the Pacific Salmon
000101
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
000102
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
The RPA also requires the use of Configuration and Operational Plans
(COPS) to describe existing dam configuration and operations, and identify
additional dam improvements needed to achieve the performance standards.
These plans are based on the best available scientific information in
collaboration with sovereign representatives. The COPS include a process
to assess, following installation and testing of planned fish passage features,
whether performance standards are being met. In the event performance
standards are not being met, Phase II contingency actions will be discussed
and implemented as long term contingency actions. Phase II measures may
include, for example, additional surface passage and other juvenile passage
improvements.
000103
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
Clarification for If a biological trigger is tripped, the Action Agencies and NOAA, in
Rapid Response collaboration with RIOG and appropriate technical groups (hydro
coordination team), will review the current status of the biological research
at the dams and discuss where additional project survival benefits could be
gained in relation to the specific ESU in question. This will include
assessing whether there are potential spill and/or transport operational
adjustments that could be made to address the problem contributing to the
decline or the condition affecting survival, in order to maximize additional
survival benefits.
This discussion will inform the spill and transport operations the Action
Agencies will implement. These rapid response actions could include
actions taken in the short term that may exceed performance standards for a
particular species. (e.g. increase steelhead transport or increase spill at
mainstem dams, if warranted)
000104
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
000105
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
000106
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
The BiOp RPA (RPA 48) requires the Corps to continue to implement and
improve avian deterrent programs at all lower Snake and Columbia River
dams. Gulls and other avian predators feed in the near vicinity of
spillways and juvenile bypass outlets to feed on passing juvenile salmon
and steelhead. For instance in 2009, gull activity increased in the spillway
tailrace at John Day Dam. Several key avian wires had failed allowing for
increased gull predation. Operations were altered during the season to
decrease take on listed salmon. In 2010, improvements in bird wires and
potential for additional hazing are being discussed to improve the
condition.
Avian hazing at McNary and Lower Snake River dam currently occurs
from 1 April through 1 July, eight hours per day at each dam. Activity is
land based using pyrotechnics.
Wire arrays are in place at all dams to reduce avian predation in the
tailrace. They are efficient in reducing avian activity where they are in
place.
Clarification for Sea Lion: No additional actions contemplated for rapid response or long
Rapid Response term contingencies related to pinnipeds.
000107
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
per day, and by extending the season though July. Lethal measures could
also be employed.
Increase the coverage of wire arrays at dams. This will further limit gull
and tern access to juvenile salmonids that are rolled to the surface or
disorientated below the dams.
Estimated Cost Fish -The current cost of the Dam Angling program component of the
NPMP is $100K/year for a two-dam crew. Two additional crews would
add $200K/year to the overall program. Additional flexibility and
potential efficiency is also possible if the ACOE and BPA merged the
avian hazing and pikeminnow dam angling programs. Cost savings TBD.
Avian - Eight hours additional hazing per day for 3 months at 8 dams
would be $400k.
New extended wire arrays $75K per Snake River project; $300k per
Columbia River project.
Implementation Fish - Increasing our dam angling effort is within current ESA, NEPA and
considerations other compliance regulations. No new authority is needed.
000108
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
Lead Implementing • BPA (for any safety-net programs at F&W Program and LSRCP hatcheries)
Agency • BOR (for any safety-net programs at Leavenworth NFH Complex hatcheries)
• NOAA (for any safety-net programs at other hatchery facilities in the
Columbia Basin)
Current Description Under RPA 41 and 42 of the 2008 FCRPS BiOp, BPA will fund ongoing and
• FCRPS BiOp new safety net and conservation hatchery programs to preserve genetic resources,
activity reduce short-term extinction risk and promote recovery of ESA-listed
• Involved parties populations of Snake River sockeye salmon, Snake River spring/summer
and agreements Chinook salmon, Upper Columbia spring Chinook salmon, Upper Columbia
steelhead, Middle Columbia steelhead, and Columbia River chum salmon. Under
RPA 39, the FCRPS Action Agencies will continue funding FCRPS mitigation
hatcheries in accordance with existing programs and will adopt programmatic
funding criteria for funding decisions.
Involved parties include NOAA, BPA, BOR, COE, USFWS, NPCC, state, tribal,
and federal hatchery operators and project sponsors.
1 000109
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
Hatchery Operations
HSRG recommendations will be considered as we identify reforms to specific
programs. Ultimately, program-specific reforms will be determined in the context
2 000110
Privileged and Confidential – PREPARED FOR LITIGATION PURPOSES – Do Not Distribute
of NOAA Fisheries' ESA consultation process, described in the BiOp's RPA 39.
That process will be informed by Hatchery and Genetic Management Plans
developed by hatchery program managers.
Biological issues:
Minimizing potential domestication/fitness loss resulting from
hatchery culture of new safety net populations
Guidelines for safety net culture of new populations, e.g., optimal number of
generations for safety net program and/or a “sunset clause” or “trigger” for
ending program.
Developing an ESU-wide strategy that balances the conservation benefits of
a safety-net program with conservation benefits of maintaining some
populations free from hatchery effects.
Reprogramming of National Fish Hatchery System facilities could amount to
a significant policy change that could raise scientific, biological, operational
and legal issues that could make “rapid” response more difficult.
Funding issues:
Source(s) of funds and funding process for new programs.
Sequencing issues:
Completion of ESA and NEPA compliance prior to implementation.
Congressional approval for capital funds prior to any new major
construction
3 000111
Contingency Framework
Adult Triggers
As part of the administration’s review of the FCRPS BiOp, scientists suggested that a refinement
of the BiOp’s adaptive management and contingency planning processes could provide
additional surety that the BiOp is implemented in a precautionary fashion through 2018.
Specifically, the scientists suggested that additional “early warning” triggers be developed that
would be sensitive to 1) unexpected declines in adult abundance and 2) natural disasters or
environmental degradation (either biological or environmental) in combination with preliminary
abundance indicators. They further advised that these triggers be based on simple metrics that are
readily available.
This document describes two triggers – as refinements of the adaptive management and
contingency planning processes – that are responsive to the scientists’ advice, are transparent to
ongoing regional processes, and are not likely to result in a series of “false-positive” events.
The first trigger (Unexpected Severe Declines) relies upon 4-year rolling averages 1 of the
estimated numbers of naturally produced adults at key locations (typically dams where fish can
readily be counted) in the Snake and Columbia Rivers.
The second trigger (Early Warning) is a surrogate for the Unexpected Severe Decline trigger
which considers both recent abundance information (in relation to the Unexpected Severe
Decline triggers) as well as biological or environmental information that strongly suggests that
substantially reduced productivity would be expected to continue for several additional years.
The remainder of this document describes the formulation of these triggers in greater detail.
It is important to remember that triggering the proposed Unexpected Severe Decline or Early
Warning Triggers within the term of the 2008 FCRPS BiOp is not an expected or even likely
outcome. Indeed, under the 2008 BiOp the abundance of the ESUs on average are expected to
increase over time. However, inclusion of these triggers as part of the 2008 BiOp's adaptive
management and contingency implementation processes provides additional assurances that the
2008 BiOp is implemented in a precautionary fashion from the perspective of the ESA-listed
salmon and steelhead species.
1
Note: Four succeeding years of declining abundance was considered as a Unexpected Severe Decline trigger, but
was rejected in favor of a four year average abundance trigger based on a review of the available data. A trigger
using four succeeding years of decline, regardless of the magnitude of the decline, is expected to result in many
“false negative” results (i.e., the decline during those four years would not negate the expectation that the longer-
term trend analyzed in the BiOp will remain positive). The detailed evaluation of trends is appropriately considered
at the 2013 and 2016 check-ins to evaluate the BiOp’s assumptions about the recovery prong of the jeopardy
standard, whereas the Unexpected Severe Decline trigger is more indicative of increased extinction risk and extreme
changes in trend should abundances fall to very low levels.
1
000112
Unexpected Severe Decline Trigger for Chinook Salmon and Steelhead
The purpose of the Unexpected Severe Decline Trigger is to detect unexpected and severe
declines in the abundance of ESUs 2 so that rapid response actions can be implemented in a
timely fashion to minimize or mitigate for an unforeseen downturn. The metric of exceptionally
low abundance measured over a four-year period was selected as a trigger for rapid responses for
several reasons. First, this metric is relatively easy to measure in a rapid manner and is easily
interpretable. The four-year period corresponds approximately to a generation for most ESUs,
and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) recommends examining
population declines over a time period representing one generation. Furthermore, the ICTRT
risk assessments incorporated a quasi extinction threshold expressed in terms of a 4-year sum of
abundance.
Development of the Unexpected Sever Decline Trigger was based on the following steps:
Step 1: Identify available data. The proposed approach uses US v. Oregon Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) run reconstructions (estimates of naturally produced adult Chinook Salmon 3
and steelhead) based on adult dam counts. Counts at Lower Granite Dam are used for Snake
River ESUs, counts at Priest Rapids or Rock Island dams are used for Upper Columbia River
ESUs and counts at Prosser Dam are used for the Yakima River MPG of Mid-Columbia River
steelhead. 4 The available data varies by ESU within the 1975 to 2008 time frame.
Step 2: Evaluate the historical Abundance Pattern Relied Upon in the BiOp. The proposed
approach uses four-year rolling averages of the TAC data (e.g., the average of the 1997 through
2000 returns make up the 2000 four-year average, 1998 through 2001 returns make up the 2001
four-year average, etc.). Based on the historical period evaluated in the BiOp (approximately
1980 to present), the observed four-year rolling averages were sorted from high to low and
plotted to create exceedence curves (cumulative density functions). These depict the percent of
years in the data set in which the four-year rolling average was greater than a particular
abundance level. See Figure 1 for Chinook salmon ESUs and Figure 2 for steelhead ESUs.
Step 3: Identify Abundance Levels That Were Not Expected in the BiOp. An examination of the
resultant exceedence curves for Chinook salmon (Figure 1) indicate that of the observed four-
year average abundances, about 15-25% are relatively high; about 5-15% are relatively low, and
2
ESU-level adult abundance information is the most readily available information at present. Future refinements of
the Unexpected Severe Decline trigger could potentially be extended to the Major Population Group (MPG) or the
population level.
3
Chinook “Jacks” are excluded from this data as they are predominantly small males which return to spawn after
spending only a single year in the ocean and generally represent a minor contribution to the viability of a population.
4
Mid Columbia River steelhead populations pass 1-4 mainstem dams and cannot be distinguished at those dams
from other listed species traveling further upstream. Prosser Dam is an adult counting site on the Yakima River that
does provide a census of adults in this MPG. In addition to the Yakima River MPG, it may be possible to develop
MPG level indices for other MPGs in the future.
2
000113
the remainder are close to average, showing relatively little variation. The pattern is less clear for
steelhead ESUs, whose distribution is more continuous (Figure 2).
Declines to these levels, given the analysis in the BiOp, would indicate that abundance levels are
lower than expected—triggering actions to improve survival while abundance levels are still high
enough to prevent extinction.
The Action Agencies conducted a prospective analysis of the likelihood that the Snake River
spring/summer Chinook salmon ESU would fall below certain abundance thresholds
representing four year running averages. A Beverton-Holt production function was fit to Lower
Granite Dam natural adult abundances during the 1978-1994 period and then projected forward
24 years. Four thousand simulated trajectories were used in the probability calculation. The
"future" trajectories were initialized with the geometric mean of the time series of spawners from
1994-2003. The results of this analysis indicated that an abundance threshold of 4,500 average
adults would be expected to occur in only about 10% of the years, which is very similar to the
estimate based on the exceedence curves (Figure 1). This analysis confirmed that the simpler
exceedence curve methodology is reasonable for determining the likelihood of reaching
particular abundance levels.
Step 4: Specify the Triggers. Thus, we propose that the 90th percentile (dashed vertical line on
Figures 1 and 2) be used as a “hard” trigger for implementing Rapid Response Actions (see
Contingency Planning and RM&E Document); and the 80th percentile (dotted vertical line on
Figures 1 and 2) be used as a “soft” trigger that would engage closer examination and potential
readying of Rapid Response actions for more rapid implementation if the ESU(s) in question
continue to decline.
The 90th percentile exceedence level was selected as a threshold level because this is a level
below which mean four-year abundances for Chinook salmon dropped rapidly (Figure 1). This
level represents a marked departure from median abundance levels (especially for Chinook
salmon), but is also somewhat above the lowest observed four-year period for both Chinook
salmon and steelhead (the 1990 levels that led to ESA listings). While falling to these levels is a
cause for concern, they are precautionary in that they represent ESU abundance that is at least 3-
4 times higher than the abundance if all populations dropped to the 50 fish quasi-extinction
threshold.
In addition, the Action Agencies conducted a prospective analysis of the likelihood that the
Snake River spring/summer Chinook salmon ESU would fall below certain abundance
thresholds representing four year running averages. The estimation was accomplished by fitting
a Beverton-Holt production function to the ESU level data, then projecting forward 24 years.
Four thousand simulated trajectories were used in the probability calculation. The base case
expected fraction was estimated from brood years 1978-1994. The "future" trajectories were
initialized with the geometric mean of the time series of spawners from 1994-2003. The results
3
000114
Figure 1. Exceedence Chart of 4‐year Average Adult Returns of
Naturally Produced Adult Chinook Salmon
Adult Returns (Avg 4‐year Abundance)
10,000
1,000
100
‐ 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600 0.700 0.800 0.900 1.000
Proportion of Years Equalled or Exceeded
SR fall Chinook (1978‐2007) SR spr‐sum Chinook (1982‐2008)
UCR Chinook (1982‐2008)
Figure 2. Exceedence Chart of 4‐year Average Adult Returns of
Naturally Produced Adult Steelhead
Adult Returns (Avg 4‐year Abundance)
10,000
1,000
100
‐ 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600 0.700 0.800 0.900 1.000
Proportion of Years Equalled or Exceeded
SR Steelhead A‐run (1990‐2008) SR Steelhead B‐run (1990‐2008)
4
000115
of this analysis were very similar to the exceedence curves developed by NOAA Fisheries for
Snake River spring/summer Chinook salmon.
Taken together, use of the 90th percentile as a threshold protects against false negatives while
kicking in well before historic low levels are reached.
As an additional precaution, the 80th percentile will serve as a “soft” trigger requiring closer
examination of the available data and the readying of Rapid Response actions for more rapid
implementation if the ESU(s) in question continue to decline.
Table 1 summarizes the four-year average abundance levels corresponding (closest value or
average of two nearest values rounded to the nearest 25 fish) to the 90th and 80th percentiles in
Figures 1 and 2.
The purpose of the Early Warning Trigger is to detect factors indicating that the Unexpected
Severe Decline ESU 5 abundance levels are likely to be reached within one to two years so that
rapid response actions can be implemented in a timely fashion to minimize or mitigate for an
unforeseen downturn. It is intended to be a failsafe that could be triggered before the Unexpected
Severe Declines triggers are exceeded. The trigger would evaluate whether an ESU is likely to
have substantially reduced abundance (and productivity) in the future, based on two years of
adult return information, preliminary biological information and environmental indicators or
5
ESU-level adult abundance information is the most readily available information at present. Where feasible, future
refinements of the Early Warning trigger could potentially be extended to the Major Population Group (MPG) or the
population level.
5
000116
known natural disasters. These indicators may included, but are not limited to, low jack counts or
juvenile migrants (biological), indicators of ocean conditions predicting very low abundance of
adult returns for recent outmigrant (environmental indicators), or wide-spread forest fires,
increased distribution and virulence of pathogens, new invasive species, prolonged severe
droughts etc. (natural disasters).
Initial assessments suggest that juvenile monitoring (numbers, sizes, condition, etc.) of interior
Columbia River basin ESUs (or MPGs or a subset of populations) at dams and in tributaries
would likely provide information that could complement the adult monitoring information and
further enhance the Early Warning Trigger in the future. Additional work will be required in
order to inventory the current monitoring program, determine what additional monitoring might
be needed, and assess how best to collect and use this information to inform the Early Warning
Trigger at the ESU, MPG, or population scale.
Implementation of the Early Warning Trigger would involve the following steps:
Step 1: Determine if the most recent two-year average of adult returns is near the threshold
levels used for the Unexpected Severe Decline Trigger (above).
Step 2: Determine if there are any biological or environmental indicators that would suggest that
ESUs are likely to experience low abundance in the next two or more years. This information
could include, as an example, extremely low jack counts (a preliminary biological indicator that
next years returns will be much lower than average) and ocean indicators (both biological and
environmental) that indicate that recent outmigrants are likely experiencing extremely poor
ocean conditions that would be expected to result in substantially reduced numbers of naturally
produced adults in the next two years.
Step 3: Assess whether there have been any "natural disasters" such as wide-scale forest fires,
volcanic eruptions, rapid increases in the distribution or virulence of fish pathogens, or mud-
slides that would be likely to substantially reduce the productivity of freshwater habitat or
severely limit the ability of adults or juveniles to migrate to or from this habitat. Responses to
impacts affecting a specific MPG or subset of populations would be tailored to the appropriate
scale.
After evaluating each of the factors in steps 1-3, a determination would need to be made as to
whether or not there is a reasonable likelihood that future adult returns would fall to levels
triggering the Unexpected Severe Decline Trigger (see above) or the existing BA/BiOp trigger. If
the determination is affirmative, then the Rapid Response Actions would be implemented.
Purpose: Establish a juvenile monitoring program for Interior Columbia basin ESUs that
provides for early warning of regional or population specific changes in juvenile production or
6
000117
survival. The program would be designed to complement adult monitoring, providing an early
opportunity to detect substantial changes in productivity (measured as abundance or survival) at
the ESU, major population group or population level. In addition to abundance based metrics,
the program would monitor changes in parr/smolt size or timing that might translate into changes
in cumulative life cycle survival or productivity.
Juvenile out-migrant metrics would complement adult based measures and should provide an
early opportunity to detect patterns or trends than adult based approaches that might otherwise be
masked by the relatively high year to year variation in ocean survival rates typical of salmon
runs. The primary objectives for an juvenile monitoring program would be to:
• Enable detection of within ESU (specific to particular MPGs, populations, major life
history groupings) sudden downturns in natural production levels.
• Complement environmental measures, jack return metrics etc. to detect sudden
downturns in abundance at the ESU/MPG level.
• Detect changes in size, timing other condition factors that could be early warning signs of
regional environmental impacts (e.g., local or subregional climate change impacts, etc.)
The approach would incorporate at least three types of juvenile monitoring efforts. At the ESU
or major population group level, the monitoring framework would incorporate estimates of
aggregate juvenile abundance or productivity generated through updated sampling programs
targeting the aggregate wild run from an ESU or MPG (e.g., Lower Granite Dam smolt
sampling, Rock Island Dam juvenile sampling, Prosser Dam outmigrant monitoring in the lower
Yakima River. Sampling programs designed to estimate juvenile production from a specific
tributary would also be included (e.g., Grande Ronde River sampling programs, Yanke et al,
2007). A third major program component would include out-migrant marking/downstream
monitoring designed to collect information on the timing/size of migration from a given reach
(e.g., Achord, et al. 2007). The tributary production and out-migrant evaluation programs
generate information on the size and timing of annual outmigrants. The size individuals attain
during the juvenile life stage has direct consequences for fitness through size-selective mortality
in later life stages (e.g., Zabel and Williams 2002) and enhanced reproductive success of larger
individuals (Kingsolver & Huey 2008). Further, migration timing is related to growth, with
larger individuals within a population out-migrating earlier than smaller ones (Achord et al.
2007). Thus, juvenile fish size is an indicator of habitat quality, particularly for higher elevation,
lower nutrient streams found in the interior Columbia River basin. Deviation from long-term
average fish size is potentially an indicator of deterioration in conditions related to juvenile fish
growth.
Monitoring fish size at a specific time in the season can provide several benefits:
1) A general indication of the fish and habitat status.
2) An early indication if habitat conditions have changed for the worse and further actions
are required.
3) An indication of whether habitat actions are effective.
7
000118
Each population has different growth patterns, and thus annual measures of fish size should be
compared to long-term patterns for the population.
Annual results from a structured juvenile monitoring program would serve as inputs into early
warning assessments. Life cycle assessment tools would incorporate results from annual
juvenile modeling along with environmental indices and recent adult return data to generate
probability based projections of near term risks (see Life Cycle Modeling attachment). A second
general application would be to detect or confirm changes in production among populations
within ESUs. For example, patterns in smolt per spawner or population size characteristics could
indicate impacts of changing climate conditions or the effects of local changes in habitat
conditions, etc.
Implementation
As a first step, ongoing juvenile monitoring efforts will be inventoried and evaluated as potential
contributors to the annual juvenile trigger program. Some of these metrics have been employed
for past evaluations or could be implemented with information from ongoing studies. Those
metrics would be verified and updated for application beginning with the 2010 out-migration.
This step would also include defining explicit technical guidelines for metrics and triggers
considering each of the categories of juvenile monitoring listed above. The trigger guidelines for
juvenile monitoring would include an evaluation of alternative criteria applicable to each
category. For example, annual indices of total natural origin smolt production from a given
region that are generated from an effort with a relatively long historical series might incorporate
a trigger based on a statistical analysis of the time series or on stochastic modeling. The same
general approach could also be used to define specific criteria based on the size distribution of
migrants or on timing metrics. Smolt per spawner metrics could be evaluated against minimums
based on past performance or estimates generated by stochastic population modeling.
The inventory of current juvenile monitoring activities would also be a starting point for
identifying opportunities for expanding on the initial set to ensure appropriate coverage at least at
the major population group level across each ESU in the Columbia River basin. The review
would be used to identify additional monitoring sites or metrics for implementation, specifically
identifying opportunities that could begin to generate information prior to 2013
status/implementation check-in called for in the FCRPS Biological Opinion. Selecting and
implementing additional monitoring actions for the program could be carried out in conjunction
with the ongoing process to develop annual population level fish-in fish-out monitoring
(described in accompanying attachment Fish In/Fish Out monitoring support to BiOp
contingency planning). The guidelines for early warning trigger metrics and criteria will inform
the design and selection of additional monitoring actions through that effort.
8
000119