< Back to list of FY 2007-2009 projects

198805307 - Hood River Production O&M - Warm Springs/ODFW

Sponsor: Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon

Budgets: FY07: $270,282 | FY08: $277,906 | FY09: $285,530

Short description: Restore and maintain populations of summer and winter steelhead, and re-establish and maintain the spring chinook population in the Hood River subbasin. Steelhead and chinook broodstock will be held and spawned at the Parkdale Fish Facility.

view full proposal

Final Council recommendation (Nov 2006)

Funding category: Expense

Recommended budgets: FY07: $270,282 | FY08: $277,906 | FY09: $285,530

Comment:

ISRP final recommendation: Fundable

Comment:

The ISRP particularly welcomes the pledge by the sponsors to dedicate staff in FY 2007 to synthesizing data and submitting manuscripts for publication in peer reviewed journals, using information collected by the Hood River monitoring and evaluation projects, the Parkdale Fish Facility, and the Powerdale Fish Trap. A concern identified by the ISRP in the Hood River habitat project (199802100) is the need to assess the extent to which the residualism of hatchery steelhead is resulting in the displacement of wild fish from Hood River habitat. It is expected that much of this task will be done in close conjunction with projects 199805303 and 198805304. It is important to ensure that the benefits to wild salmon and steelhead are fully realized because some of the fish response to the habitat work might be confounded by residualized steelhead. An over-riding issue with respect to the suite of Hood River projects is to more fully define the future timeline and objectives for the project, particularly with the impending loss of Powerdale as a counting and monitoring station. Sponsor’s judgment on success of the program is premature. For example, statements such as "Underwood et al. (2003) used Hood River adult returns and smolt to adult rates to determine whether or not the hatchery component of the program was contributing to the wild fish runs. The winter steelhead hatchery supplementation has benefited the wild population and has met or exceeded program goals (Underwood et al., 2003, p.218)" need to be examined more closely and peer reviewed. In this particular proposal, the reporting of results is merely a list of tasks accomplished; however, the M&E component should cover the monitoring for this project. The following are the seven ISRP concerns from the preliminary review and an assessment of the sponsor’s responses: 1) “The incomplete nature of this proposal, both potential missing sections as well as a lack of needed data should be addressed before funding is considered.” The following was the basis for the rest of the detailed response to this issue, “There was a formatting error in the text of the original proposal (on page 8 of the narrative) that made it seem as though section C was missing, This section was actually there. Otherwise the proposal contains all required sections.” The response was adequate. 2) “The proposal uses these new goals, but fails to mention at all how much progress is being made.” Much explanation (with figures) was added to help in this area. 3) “Project history: There is some history, but with little presentation of results to assess any level of success. Some of this is addressed in other sections of the proposal.” An adequate explanation was given. 4) “Objectives: The proposal describes a termination date of 2020 or beyond. This is part of a supplementation program, not a long-term hatchery intervention program. Sponsors go on to say, ‘It is uncertain at what point artificial production will not be necessary to maintain steelhead and Chinook runs in Hood River, or if further data will support different management scenarios.’ A statement such as this does not seem compatible with the purpose of supplementation programs in general.” An adequate explanation was given, followed by “The co-managers will discuss the termination date of the program and the future of the supplementation project in FY 2007. This will be included in the FY 2007 statement of work and the results of this work will be incorporated into the Hood River Master Plan revision.” 5) “Monitoring and evaluation needs to be better described in the response.” The response consisted of a simple rehash of a short list – no real contribution. 6) “Information transfer: The lack of publications and the lack of a sense of need to do so is disturbing in all the Hood River related projects.” A similar promise as another, “The sponsor will dedicate staff in FY 2007 to synthesizing data and submitting manuscripts for publication in peer reviewed journals.” Accomplishment will be monitored. 7) “Benefits to focal and non-focal species: Unknown and not discussed.” This oversight was addressed briefly, but adequately.

Response loop edit

See the sponsor's revised proposal from the response loop. You'll be taken to CBFWA's proposal system in Section 10 where most sponsors uploaded revised narratives or other responses to the ISRP comments.

State/province recommendation: Fundable, but at a reduced level

Review group: OSPIT - Gorge

Recommended budgets: FY07: $225,000 | FY08: $225,000 | FY09: $225,000

Comment: OSPIT recommends ruducions in staffing and materials for equipment to very minimal levels.