Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Determination of difficult passage areas, migration patterns and energetic use of upriver migrating salmon and steelhead |
| Proposal ID | 21004 |
| Organization | Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | David R. Geist |
| Mailing address | MS K6-85, P. O. Box 999 Richland, WA 99352 |
| Phone / email | 5093720590 / |
| Manager authorizing this project | David R. Geist |
| Review cycle | Columbia Gorge |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Gorge / Klickitat |
| Short description | The goal of this project is to pin-point areas of difficult fish passage under different flow regimes using EMG telemetry and to examine movements, habitat use, and energetic consumption of fish during the upstream migration |
| Target species | Chinook salmon, coho salmon, steelhead |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
| 45.71 |
-121.26 |
Lyle Falls |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
|
New Project |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
| 198811525 |
Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Project Design and Construction |
Identify areas of the Lyle and Castile Falls fishways which provide the largest problems for passage, aid in fine tuning attraction flows |
| 199506325 |
Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Project Monitoring and Evaluation |
Assist goal of assessing obstructions to fish passage |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
| 1. Improve our understanding of where difficult passage areas exist in the Klickitat Basin by evaluating the energetic costs of upstream passage of adult salmonids. |
a. Implant salmon and steelhead with EMG transmitters and calibrate transmiters to swimming speed. |
01-03 |
$57,962 |
|
|
b. Log output from EMG transmitter implanted fish as they ascend fish ladders and waterfalls. Specific plans will be developed with input from the Yakima / Klickitat Technical Advisory Committee. |
01-03 |
$124,147 |
|
| 2. Improve our understanding of the implications of energy use at difficult passage areas on the ultimate destination of upstream migrating fish. |
a. Determine the rate of movement of upstream migrating fish, identify key habitats of migrating and spawning fish such as holding areas and spawning locations and quantify the energetic demands of the spawning migrations and the actual spawning process. |
01-03 |
$89,525 |
Yes |
| 3. Prepare annual report |
a. Analyze data and produce report/paper |
01-03 |
$47,908 |
|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
| FY 2002 | FY 2003 |
|---|
| $330,000 | $320,000 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2001 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
|
$93,254 |
| Fringe |
26.7% |
$34,490 |
| Supplies |
|
$112,220 |
| Travel |
On-site per diem (173 man days) and 3 one-day trips for meetings |
$31,324 |
| Indirect |
Primarily organizational overheads (e.g., facilities, equipment, maintenance, etc.) |
$37,154 |
| Subcontractor |
|
$11,100 |
| $319,542 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $319,542 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $319,542 |
| FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate
Date:
Oct 6, 2000
Comment:
Fundable only if the response adequately addresses the ISRP's concerns. The reviewers strongly support a 1 to 3 year program. This project is innovative. The proposal would be appropriate for submittal in the innovative process, as is, because of the proposed sequencing of actions it is not well integrated with the subbasin effort. While this is a very brief proposal, it is innovative and provides an opportunity to critically examine the fish passage problems identified in the Klickitat River. The stated objectives are actually tasks, rather than target achievements for the work; and are very limited relative to the potential information to be gained from these tagged salmon (probably because the proposal is submitted for only one year). The review panel supports the one-year examination, but would strongly recommend re-submission of the proposal to include funds for tracking the fish up-river. Such a program would identify rate of movement, holding areas, and ultimately spawning locations.
In a logical progression of project development, however, there is an obvious concern about the submission of this project and the KFP request for $3.2 million to build a fishway. If there is concern about the degree of fish passage problems in the Klickitat, then this work should be undertaken before KFP proceeds with major expenditures on fish passage, etc. However, if at Lyle Falls, the decision has been made to proceed with construction of the fishway and broodstock capture site, then this investigation could be moved up-river to Castile Falls. From our discussions, we concluded that there was a definite need for this project to be more integrated with the KFP projects. For example, if the results of this study show that passage is not a problem at this site, will the construction projects at the falls be altered?
Recommendation:
Recommended Action
Date:
Nov 15, 2000
Comment:
Although this project provides a very interesting line of research, the co-managers are not convinced that the results will lend themselves to assist decision making on the river. The fish passage areas identified in the proposal are dynamic according to flow levels and results may be difficult to interpret. This would be an interesting project, but management and other activities on the Klickitat River cannot wait on the results from this project, particularly since it is unknown if the results will be useful. This proposal has not been fully developed to permit an adequate review.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Dec 1, 2000
Comment:
Fundable, the response is adequate although minimal. The ISRP comments were briefly addressed and a revised proposal was submitted, which included the additional tasks (Castille Falls, distribution in the subbasin) that the ISRP suggested. The ISRP believes the project is a high priority project for the Klickitat subbasin and will provide useful information for the design and management of fishways at Lyle and Castille Falls. The project is logical and should precede the decisions on the fishway work on Lyle and Castile falls. The project should do more than fine tune the Lyle Falls fishway proposal. It should provide information on whether the fishway improvements are indeed required and at what times of year (i.e., what flow conditions). Additionally the technique will provide valuable information on the upstream movement of migrating salmonids and important refuge habitats. The approach could have basinwide applicability on assessing fish passage at different sites.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 16, 2001
Comment:
The staff conclude from the sponsor's comment and the design issues at Lyle and Castile Falls that the proposal is unlikely to inform passage project design - the emphasis at Lyle Falls is on adult collection, not passage; and Castile Falls is undergoing repairs to flood-caused damages.
Nevertheless, the project is strongly supported by the ISRP, both for specific application in the Klickitat and for application to passage problems elsewhere. The staff support a scaled-down project test in the Klickitat because of the innovative qualities of the proposal and its potential to establish baseline information in the Klickitat. Alternatively, the Council could fund the project from the innovative project placeholder.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Sep 11, 2001
Comment:
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Sep 20, 2003
Comment:
Recommendation:
Date:
Sep 20, 2003
Comment: