FY 2002 Columbia Plateau proposal 200203300

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleJohn Day Salmonid Recovery Monitoring Program
Proposal ID200203300
OrganizationConfederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon (CTWSRO)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameJennifer M. Stafford
Mailing addressPO Box 480 Canyon City, OR 97820
Phone / email5415754212 / [email protected]
Manager authorizing this projectTerry A. Luther
Review cycleColumbia Plateau
Province / SubbasinColumbia Plateau / John Day
Short descriptionUpdate salmonid reproduction goals, compile data to develop predictive models to guide future restoration efforts, compile data that presents historical riparian condition, investigate missing bull trout status information.
Target speciesSpring chinook salmon, summer steelhead trout, bull trout.
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
44.6856 -118.7867 Approximate location of proposed MFJDR above Camp Creek monitoring station.
44.4589 -119.5097 Approximate location of proposed JDR above Dayville, OR monitoring station.
44.6223 -118.5732 Approximate location of proposed MFJDR above Caribou Creek monitoring station
44.4556 -118.6898 Approximate location of proposed JDR near Prairie City, OR monitoring station.
44.7802 -119.5793 Approximate location of proposed Rudio Creek below Gilmore Creek monitoring station.
44.8082 -119.4216 Approximate location of proposed Cottonwood Creek near Monument, Or monitoring station.
44.886 -119.4081 Approximate location of proposed Big Wall Creek above NFJDR monitoring station
45.0063 -118.9872 Approximate location of proposed Camas Creek below Stover Canyon monitoring station.
*** Note: The remainder of the project focuses on a specific area or property rather than a point. Therefore, they cannot be accurately described by lat/long descriptions.
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription
NMFS Action 183 NMFS Initiate at least three tier 3 studies (each necessarily comprising several sites) within each ESU (a single action may affect more than one ESU). In addition, at least two studies focusing on each major management action must take place within the Columbia River basin. The Action Agencies shall work with NMFS and the Technical Recovery Teams to identify key studies in the 1-year plan. Those studies will be implemented no later than 2003.

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment
on-going Fish abundance monitoring and mark-recapture surveys corresponding to specific restoration projects.

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
8402100 Protect and Enhance John Day River Fish Habitat Concurrent CTWSRO-ODFW project areas, support potentially significant cumulative beneficial effects.
980160 John Day Basin Spring Chinook Salmon Escapement and Production Monitoring Data gaps will be addressed and all will be compiled into the predictive chinook and steelhead distribution model.
7900400 Study of Wild Spring Chinook Salmon in the John Day River system. Data gaps will be addressed and all will be compiled into the predictive chinook and steelhead distribution model.
9405400 Bull Trout Life History Project - NE Oregon Program has not been able to address migratory improvement and genetic exchange between tributaries on the Middle Fork John Day River.

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
1. Collect Historic Riparian Information. a. Aquire historical photos and documentation. 1 $6,930
b. Scan photos 0.02 $614
c. Georeference points 0.04 $5,600 Yes
d. Digitize features. 0.2 $7,373
2. Research Steelhead trout and chinook salmon life history a. Search archives for historic spawning information. 0.02 $440
b. Enter survey cards into database. 0.1 $2,200
c. Map spawning areas by GIS 0.5 $614
3. Study redd scouring a. Purchase supplies 1 $100
b. Specify spawning areas 0.01 $246
4. Monitor water quantity and quality conditions. a. Select sites. 0.02 $0
5. Conduct flood irrigation study. a. Purchase staff gages. 1 $237
b. Purchase measuring devices. 1 $2,640
c. Purchase rain gage 1 $36
d. Survey sites. 0.01 $275
e. Complete study design. 0.06 $0
6. Provide for administrative costs. a. Fringe benefits for personnel conducting above tasks. 1 $2,603
b. Provide for indirect costs associated with above tasks. 1 $13,707
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
1. Continue historic riparian information collection and analysis. 2003 2004 $43,085
2. Continue to provide administrative costs associated with outyear activities.` 2003 2004 $188,893
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
FY 2003FY 2004
$40,435$40,435

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
1. Monitor Water Quantity and Quality Conditions. a. Construct two stations to be operated and maintained by OWRD. 0.02 $7,863
b. Construct two stations to be operated and maintained by CTWSRO 0.02 $20,889
c. Construct four stations to be operated and maintained by the NFJDWC 0.02 $40,805
2. Conduct Flood Irrigation Study. a. Install 10 piezometers .02 $5,500 Yes
3. Provide administrative costs for above tasks a. Provide indirect costs 1 $18,990
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
All construction/implementation tasks will be completed in 2002. $0
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
1. Provide for administrative costs associated with proposed projects. a. Provide office space, utilities, phone, computer access. 3 $690
b. Provide vehicle and travel funds. 3 $1,850
c. Provide administrative and secretarial oversight. 0.13 $3,080
d. Provide administrative and technical oversight. 0.15 $0
e. Provide fringe benefits for involved personnel. 1 $708
f. Provide for indirect costs with the above tasks. 1 $2,620
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
1. Continue to provide administrative oversight associated with project activities. 2003 2004 $13,288
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
FY 2003FY 2004
$6,644$6,644

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
1. Collect historic riparian information. a. Analyze data. 0.01 $614
2. Review steelhead trout and chinook salmon life histories. a. Summarize data. 0.01 $614
b. Prepare final report 0.04 $1,228
3. Assess red scouring a. Monitor scour chain stations and flows 0.06 $1,938
4. Assess redd scouring. a. Relate flows to scour chain data and compose report. 0.01 $246
5. Monitor Water Quantity and Quality Conditions. a. Train operators. 0.02 $0
b. Conduct monthly inspections and flow measurements. 3 $3,163
c. Validate data. 0.01 $246
d. Create rating table. 0.02 $615
6. Conduct Flood Irrigation study. a. Monitor flow, rain, and withdrawals. 0.03 $861
b. Download temperature information seasonally (In-kind) 0.01 $615
c. Validate data. 0.01 $246
d. Compile data into report. 0.02 $615
7. Provide for administrative costs. a. Provide fringe benefits for involved personnel. 1 $1,803
b. Provide for indirect costs of above tasks. 1 $4,719
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
1. Continue to collect historic riparian information. 2003 2004 $1,290
2. Complete redd scour study. 2003 2003 $2,293
3. Continue water quality monitoring. 2003 2004 $904
4. Continue flood irrigation study. 2003 2004 $2,454
5. Continue to provide for administrative costs associated with above tasks. 2003 2004 $5,130
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
FY 2003FY 2004
$12,071$9,778

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2002 cost
Personnel FTE: 1.25 $22,505
Fringe $5,114
Supplies $82,838
Travel $1,850
Indirect $40,036
Subcontractor $11,100
Other $690
$164,133
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2002 cost$164,133
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2002 budget request$164,133
FY 2002 forecast from 2001$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
ODFW Spring chinook, steelhead, and bull trout distribution, habitat, and life history data $0 in-kind
Public libraries, landowners, local residents, universities Historical riparian photos, documentation $0 in-kind
OWRD technical assistance, training, and assistance with all phases of the project. $9,849 in-kind
NRJDWC labor for O&M and M&E $2,360 in-kind
CTWSRO, John Day Basin Office technical other assistance with all phases, as well as temperature and flow monitoring equipment. $17,959 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:
Jun 15, 2001

Comment:

Do not fund unless a response adequately addresses the ISRP concerns.

Objectives 1 and 2 are fundable. They are well-developed objectives to compile and summarize historic spawning ground data and changes in riparian condition along mainstem streams. We support this effort wholeheartedly and are concerned that historic records have not been better maintained; if the historic records are not in STREAMNET they should be lodged and maintained there. This project would complement several ongoing projects providing baseline data for Tier I and II monitoring called for in the 2000 BiOp Objectives 3 (effect of scouring on redds), 4 (monitor water quantity and quality) and 5 (effects of flood irrigation on adjacent stream flows and temperatures) are fundable but have little relationship to the other objectives and should be organized and justified separately with unique requirements for timetables, reporting, etc. Objective 4 is fundable as a separate project only if the water quality component can be integrated with Project #25010 with a rigorous sampling design for collection of water quality samples.


Recommendation:
High Priority
Date:
Aug 3, 2001

Comment:

This project will expand monitoring activities in the John Day Subbasin. There appears to be overlap of Objective 4 of P&D phase (water quality monitoring) with Project Number 25010. This project needs to coordinate with 25010, 199801600, and 25088b to avoid duplicative activities. Funding should be delayed until coordination will insure data overlaps will be minimized.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Aug 10, 2001

Comment:

Fundable if the protocols of this project are consistent with project 25010 in terms of water quality parameters and measurement methodology (if not sampling site selection). Data from this project should be compatible with broad scale monitoring projects (e.g #25010) so that inferences can be drawn about changes observed in the John Day in the context of changes occurring in the larger region.
Recommendation:
Date:
Oct 1, 2001

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Potential indirect benefit through monitoring program

Comments
Fish abundance monitoring & mark-re-capture surveys corresponding to specific restoration projects. There appears to be overlap of Objective 4 of P&D phase (water quality monitoring) with #25010 -- protocols need to be consistent with Project #25010 in terms of water quality parameters, measurement methodology, & sampling site selection. Data from this project should be compatible with broad scale monitoring projects (e.g., #25010) so that inferences can be drawn about changes observed in the John Day in the context of changes occurring in the larger region.

Already ESA Req? no

Biop? yes


Recommendation:
Rank A with modification to enhance coordination.
Date:
Oct 16, 2001

Comment:

Coordinate with other monitoring activities proposed by OWRD, OWEB, ODFW, and ODEQ. This proposal is a high priority and fundable, but should not be funded until it is integrated and coordinated with other M&E efforts in the subbasin. For example, the first two objectives may be funded by a direct contract with OWEB. Other objectives relate closely to tiers 1 and 3 monitoring that is desirable (e.g., flood irrigation study) and/or being proposed or conducted by other projects (e.g., water quantity and quality monitoring). Both CBFWA and the ISRP point out the need to coordinate to reduce overlap and to ensure that data protocols are consistent with ODEQ proposal #25010. This will take some time. Although the proposal looks like a cost-effective and innovative project, it lacks some details regarding methods (e.g., for evaluating flood irrigation)
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Jan 3, 2002

Comment:

Proposal 25069 appears to conduct priority monitoring in the John Day. Bonneville ranked the proposal as a category A. BPA commented that the proposal should coordinate with the other John Day monitoring proposals, including the ODFW work in 199801600 and the ODEQ proposal 25010. NMFS commented that the above projects correspond to 400(153), 500, and 183 respectively. Staff concurs with the Bonneville recommendation on the need to coordinate the monitoring in the John Day and the Council should emphasize that requirement in the contracting process for the John Day monitoring proposals.

Budget effect on base program (Project 25069):

FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004
Increase $164,133 Increase $59,150 Increase $56,857

Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 6, 2002

Comment:


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

Project just starting, everything has shifted a year. 04 costs not good estimates. Equipment purchase in 03, but tasks rescheduled into 04. Possibly reschedule into 05.
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:
$59,150 $59,150 $59,150

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website