Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | Western Pond Turtle Recovery - Columbia River Gorge |
Proposal ID | 200102700 |
Organization | Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
Name | Harriet Allen/David P. Anderson |
Mailing address | 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA 98650-1091 |
Phone / email | 3609022694 / [email protected] |
Manager authorizing this project | Harriet Allen/David P. Anderson |
Review cycle | Columbia Gorge |
Province / Subbasin | Columbia Gorge / Fifteenmile |
Short description | Protect existing WPT population through habitat improvements, expand WPT population through "head start " program and continue reintroductions at USFWS Pierce National Wildlife Refuge. |
Target species | Western Pond Turtle |
Project location
Latitude | Longitude | Description |
45.63 |
-122 |
Pierce National Wildlife Refuge |
45.64 |
-121.93 |
Bergen Wildlife Area |
|
|
Sondino Wildlife Area |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Year | Accomplishment |
91-99 |
Released 302 juvenile western pond turtles through "head start" program in the Columbia River Gorge. |
94-99 |
WDFW purchased approximately 250 in Klickitat County for protection of western pond turtle. |
1999 |
Completed state recovery paln for western pond turtle. |
2000 |
Conducted first releases for establishment of third population in Columbia River Gorge - Pierce NWR. |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Project ID | Title | Description |
|
Western Pond Turtle Recovery Project - ALEA |
Volunteer program to assist WDFW with recovery of WPT |
|
Western Pond Turtle Partnerships |
USFWS cost share grant for WPT work in Gorge |
|
WDFW/USFS/TNC WPT Habitat Development |
Private/Agency program to protect WPT habitat |
|
Woodland Park Zoo and Oregon Zoo "head start" |
Zoos currently assisting with captive breeding and juvenile care |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
Recover western pond turtle in Columbia River Gorge |
a. Develop budget and plan for field activites associated with WPT recovery.
Staff hiring, schedule, equipment purchase and coordination with USFWS/Woodland Park and Oregon Zoo |
ongoing |
$7,600 |
|
|
b. Purchase equipment |
FY 01 |
$28,020 |
|
|
c. contract development including overhead |
ongoing |
$33,405 |
|
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
---|
$7,600 | $7,600 | $7,600 | $7,600 |
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
Inventory and monitor WPT in Columbia River Gorge |
a. Annual surveys at Sondino, Bergen, Pierce NWR |
ongoing |
$7,500 |
|
|
b. mark re-capture at Sondino, Bergen, Pierce NWR |
ongoing |
$7,500 |
|
Conserve and enhance WPT population |
a. Maintain head starting program and evaluate survival |
ongoing |
$33,000 |
|
|
b. Establish new populaions &
c. Control bullfrog population
|
ongoing |
$14,000 |
|
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
---|
$62,000 | $62,000 | $62,000 | $62,000 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
Manage habitat to maximize WPT survival and productivity |
a. Upland areas adjacent to ponds will be mainatained to meadow condition |
ongoing |
$14,000 |
|
|
b. Improve basking sites |
ongoing |
$2,000 |
|
Maintain headstart program support |
c. Woodland Park and Oregon Zoo participation - funding to support husbandry efforts. $10,000/Zoo |
ongoing |
$20,000 |
|
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
---|
$35,000 | $20,000 | $30,000 | $30,000 |
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 |
|
$67,600 |
Supplies |
habitat improvement $16,000, equipment costs $28,020 |
$44,020 |
Indirect |
overhead |
$33,405 |
Subcontractor |
Woodland Park & Oregon Zoo $10,000 each
bullfrog control $2000 |
$22,000 |
| $167,025 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2001 cost | $167,025 |
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
Total FY 2001 budget request | $167,025 |
FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $0 |
% change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
WDFW |
Salary |
$12,000 |
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 makes a better case for the proposal's tie to the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. Although this project relates to a Washington State Recovery Plan, it does not make any reference to the Fish and Wildlife Program. It was unclear if this was a species of concern across the region, e.g. in Oregon.
Otherwise, the project was well described, with clear objectives, a competent research and implementation team, and offers what appears to be a high likelihood of success. It was a bit difficult to assess PI credentials - no CVs provided.
This proposal addresses a recovery problem that already involves a number of agencies and NGOs. There were no explicit plans for information transfer from the project's results, however. The presentation was good and addressed several questions generated from the proposal review such as the results of the "head start" effort.
Recommendation:
Urgent/High Priority
Date:
Nov 15, 2000
Comment:
This project addresses a wildlife species that has been negatively affected by the hydrosystem. This species is listed as sensitive in the State of Washington.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Dec 1, 2000
Comment:
Fundable, the response was adequate. We raised only a few, mainly administrative, issues such as the proposal's lack of reference to Fish & Wildlife Program. The response addresses all those items satisfactorily and makes the case for the proposal's tie to the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. CVs of researchers are provided.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 16, 2001
Comment:
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Sep 11, 2001
Comment:
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Sep 20, 2003
Comment:
Contract period does not match fiscal year. Looks like pace of work is tracking well. Overhead bump coming in to increase costs for 04 and 05. Check back. Project has asked for two adjustments in 03. 02 affected 03 budget.
Recommendation:
Date:
Sep 20, 2003
Comment:
REVIEW:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
Funding category:
expense
Date:
May 2005
FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
$89,000 |
$89,000 |
$89,000 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website