FY 2002 Columbia Plateau proposal 200203300
Contents
Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary
Reviews and Recommendations
Additional documents
Title | Type |
---|---|
25069 Narrative | Narrative |
25069 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
Columbia Plateau: John Day Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
Columbia Plateau: John Day Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | John Day Salmonid Recovery Monitoring Program |
Proposal ID | 200203300 |
Organization | Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon (CTWSRO) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Name | Jennifer M. Stafford |
Mailing address | PO Box 480 Canyon City, OR 97820 |
Phone / email | 5415754212 / [email protected] |
Manager authorizing this project | Terry A. Luther |
Review cycle | Columbia Plateau |
Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / John Day |
Short description | Update 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 species | Spring chinook salmon, summer steelhead trout, bull trout. |
Project location
Latitude | Longitude | Description |
---|---|---|
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 agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
---|---|---|---|
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
Year | Accomplishment |
---|---|
on-going | Fish abundance monitoring and mark-recapture surveys corresponding to specific restoration projects. |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Project ID | Title | Description |
---|---|---|
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
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
---|---|---|---|---|
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
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated 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 2003 | FY 2004 |
---|---|
$40,435 | $40,435 |
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
---|---|---|---|---|
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
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated 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
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
---|---|---|---|---|
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
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|---|---|---|
1. Continue to provide administrative oversight associated with project activities. | 2003 | 2004 | $13,288 |
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
---|---|
$6,644 | $6,644 |
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
---|---|---|---|---|
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
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated 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 2003 | FY 2004 |
---|---|
$12,071 | $9,778 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
Item | Note | FY 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 forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash 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.
Fundable only if response is adequate
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.
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.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.Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUPotential 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
BPA Funding Recommendation
Rank A with modification to enhance coordination.
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)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 |
Comment:
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.Comment:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
expense
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