FY 2001 Columbia Gorge proposal 199902400

Section 1. Administrative

Project location

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Total estimated budget

Reason for change in estimated budget

There was an increase in cost due to a 3% cost of living salary increase across the board and a substantial increase in office rent.

Reason for change in scope

Although surveys for the Wind and Little White Salmon River are not completed, there is little expectation of discovering bull trout based upon preliminary surveys at this time. If bull trout are discovered in these subbasins, they would be subject to the same scrutiny as populations in the White Salmon and Klickitat.

Cost sharing

Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

Comment:

Contrary to the project number, this is a new program begun with BPA funds in March 2000. Columbia River populations of Bull trout were listed as "threatened" under the ESA in 1998, and bull trout in the White Salmon and Klickitat as distinct sub-populations within the Columbia population segment. Obviously there is an understandable requirement to conduct surveys such as these and this proposal is part of a larger inventory, the data from which is all be collated via the Rocky Mountain Research Station. Sampling methods apply an agreed AFS protocol developed to assess Bull trout due to their fragmented and small populations. Objectives of the program were portrayed in a logical clear sequence and each has a stated task and method. Within the Basin, the proposal provides good evidence of interaction with agencies.

While we support this investigation and the application of a sampling protocol, the nature of bull trout populations and the apparent difficulties in locating populations lead us to discuss two additional suggestions. If the population are fragmented and small, encountering them during a snorkel survey (protocol method) is likely to be a rare event. However, the investigators could experiment with low-light videography at fixed locations/habitats were bull trout were known to exist or are suspected. Such a fixed station could greatly increase the numbers of hours sampled as opposed to the distance covered during a snorkel survey. Secondly, the review panel heard of two bull trout recoveries in cool water refugees along the north shore of the Bonneville Pool. These observations were from sport fishermen who by chance encountered these fish. If these investigators need to locate spawning and rearing populations of bull trout, could a targeted program to net or sport fish for adfluvial bull trout in these cool refugees provide a means to capture pre-adults for radio-tagging? Shore-based fixed monitors could detect entrance of the tagged fish and portable monitors could subsequently be used to monitor distribution within rivers. Given the difficulty in detecting this species, we recommend that the investigators examine several means to assess their status.

A significant concern identified by the review panel was the presence of brook trout in the Klickitat River and the possible competition and/or introgression with bull trout. We strongly recommend this aspect of investigation be incorporated in the genetic analyses and habitat surveys.

Comment:

FY 01 Budget Review Comments: This project is important in evaluating the status of a threatened species. This information is not being gathered through any other process.

Comment:

Contrary to the project number, this is a new program begun with BPA funds in March 2000. Columbia River populations of Bull trout were listed as "threatened" under the ESA in 1998, and bull trout in the White Salmon and Klickitat as distinct sub-populations within the Columbia population segment. Obviously there is an understandable requirement to conduct surveys such as these and this proposal is part of a larger inventory, the data from which is all be collated via the Rocky Mountain Research Station. Sampling methods apply an agreed AFS protocol developed to assess Bull trout due to their fragmented and small populations. Objectives of the program were portrayed in a logical clear sequence and each has a stated task and method. Within the Basin, the proposal provides good evidence of interaction with agencies.

While we support this investigation and the application of a sampling protocol, the nature of bull trout populations and the apparent difficulties in locating populations lead us to discuss two additional suggestions. If the populations are fragmented and small, encountering them during a snorkel survey (protocol method) is likely to be a rare event. However, the investigators could experiment with low-light videography at fixed locations/habitats were bull trout were known to exist or are suspected. Such a fixed station could greatly increase the numbers of hours sampled as opposed to the distance covered during a snorkel survey. Secondly, the review panel heard of two bull trout recoveries in cool water refugees along the north shore of the Bonneville Pool. These observations were from sport fishermen who by chance encountered these fish. If these investigators need to locate spawning and rearing populations of bull trout, could a targeted program to net or sport fish for adfluvial bull trout in these cool refugees provide a means to capture pre-adults for radio-tagging? Shore-based fixed monitors could detect entrance of the tagged fish and portable monitors could subsequently be used to monitor distribution within rivers. Given the difficulty in detecting this species, we recommend that the investigators examine several means to assess their status.

A significant concern identified by the review panel was the presence of brook trout in the Klickitat River and the possible competition and/or introgression with bull trout. We strongly recommend this aspect of investigation be incorporated in the genetic analyses and habitat surveys.

Comment:

Comment:

Comment:

Comment:

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website