1. November 3-5, 2009 Stevenson, WA Columbia Basin Coordinated Anadromous Monitoring Strategy Workshop Upper Columbia Sub-Region 2 Listed ESU/DPS Steelhead- Threatened Spr Chinook- Endangered 1 MPG each Populations: 4 steelhead, 3 Chinook Other anadromous salmonids: sockeye, summer/fall Chinook, coho

2.  Determine abundance and productivity for all “Primary” populations in the Upper Columbia ESUs with known accuracy and precision. ◦spring Chinook--census redd surveys & carcass recovery ◦steelhead--combination of redd surveys and PIT/Radio tags for mark-recapture validation and bio-data (i.e. origin, age structure, sex ratio) ◦juvenile productivity– smolt traps  Monitor spatial structure and diversity metrics to provide information for risk assessments consistent with the ICTRT viability criteria. ◦distribution using redd surveys and remote PIT tag arrays ◦phenotypic traits via all of the above (carcasses, broodstock collection, redd surveys, smolt traps) PIT tags allow for refinement and detail not possible with aggregate methods  Genotypic diversity through periodic (1-2 generations) sampling within each population. Summarize Strategy (VSP)

3.  Determine the hatchery impacts on wild populations of spring Chinook and Steelhead throughout the Upper Columbia (Mostly funded under HCP and PRCC)  Productivity (NRR) and abundance that compares treatment (Wenatchee and Methow to unsupplemented reference streams/populations  Implementing RSS studies in a subset of populations with different PNI’s (steelhead)  Continue RSS for Spring Chinook in Wenatchee long term  Monitoring for genetic divergence and straying  Comparing spatial distribution between hatchery and naturally produced fish Summarize Strategy (Hatchery Effectiveness)

4.  Status and Trend (long term, population level, random design) ◦Under way in Wenatchee and Okanogan for 5-6 yrs ◦Entiat and Methow (proposed)  Effectiveness ◦Entiat; IMW experimental design (Reach and Population level) ◦Reach level effectiveness monitoring in the Methow (USGS/USBR) ◦Project/Reach level effectiveness monitoring in the Wenatchee Summarize Strategy (Habitat Effectiveness)

5. ◦How it (existing monitoring) conforms with your strategy  The strategy is built around the ongoing monitoring under the HCPs and previous federal BiOps. ◦How it informs the BIOP RPA’s  Existing monitoring covers the majority of the RPA requirements. ◦Where there adjustments identified  Yes, 3 reductions, 3 neutral shifts, and 2 increases  ISEMP shifts for analysis  MOA adjustments ◦Were these adjustments cost plus, cost minus or cost neutral, include total amounts Reductions = $240k (Within MOA) Increases = $450k ($300k in MOA) Summarize the confirmed existing monitoring and its relation to your strategy and the BIOP RPA’s

6. ◦Needed for the RPA requirements  OBMEP (large fish and habitat project in Okanogan)  UC habitat restoration  Nason Creek smolt trap  Omak Creek smolt and adult traps  Kelt reconditioning  Nutrient supplementation  Status and trend annual reporting ◦Needed for non-RPA strategy  CRITFC sockeye projects  UC Coho  Chief Joseph Hatchery monitoring Summarize any Accord monitoring within your strategy

7.  Highest: (New) RPA 50.3, 50.4, 50.6; Upper Columbia “RPA umbrella project” ◦Steelhead radio tracking ◦Expansion of PIT tag output and interrogation  automation of PIT tag analysis ◦Precision and accuracy of adult and juvenile abundance and productivity (smolt traps and redd surveys)  Highest: (Modified) RPA 50.3, 50.6; Expansion of PIT tag output and interrogation in the Okanogan. ◦RPA 50.6 “Linking fish in fish out monitoring to populations with relatively large survival gaps.” Summarize, by priority, the new monitoring efforts needed to meet the RPA requirements VSP

8. ◦Highest: New, RPA 56; Habitat status and trend in the Methow ◦Highest: New, RPA 56; Status and Trend Water Quantity and Quality Monitoring; Replaces diminishing WDOE efforts ◦Highest: New, RPA 56.2; Habitat status and trend for Entiat (random sites in tributaries are not covered under ISEMP effectiveness monitoring). ◦Highest: New, RPA 57.4; Implement project level habitat action effectiveness monitoring in the Wenatchee. Summarize, by priority, the new monitoring efforts needed to meet the RPA requirements Habitat

9. ◦Highest: New, RPA 64.3; Study reproductive success of hatchery and natural origin steelhead in the Methow. Summarize, by priority, the new monitoring efforts needed to meet the RPA requirements Hatchery

10. ◦Highest; New; RPA 71, 72, 73; Implementation monitoring for restoration and protection projects, data management, and reporting. Independent “audit” and tracking of implemented projects for BPA and other funding sources. Non-Sub-regional Response: “FUNDING NEEDS TO BE COVERED UNDER THE CATEGORICAL REVIEW“. ◦Lower; New; Develop temperature models to predict benefits or to properly size projects proposed to reduce water temperatures. Summarize, by priority, the new additional monitoring efforts needed to meet the strategy Habitat

11.  Highest: New; Estimate exploitation of natural origin summer Chinook (related to harvest increases resulting from hatchery increases).  High: New; Summer Chinook sonic/radio tracking study  Lower: New; Juvenile life history pathways for summer Chinook Summarize, by priority, the new additional monitoring efforts needed to meet the strategy. Summer Chinook

12.  Highest; New; Implement Lake Wenatchee sockeye trophic status study. ◦ THERE COULD BE SOME CRITFC MOA STUDIES IN LAKE W ENATCHEE BUT THEIR STUDY PLANS ARE NOT FINALIZED.  High; New; Relocate Lake Wenatchee smolt traps downstream where mark-recapture efficiency is higher. Summarize, by priority, the new additional monitoring efforts needed to meet the strategy. Sockeye

13.  RPA 50.7: externally mark all fish produced with funding from Action Agencies. ◦Okanogan steelhead ◦Coho ◦Winthrop NFH Spring Chinook? ◦PUD funded programs are not 100% marked. Unresolved RPA workgroup recommendations