FY 2002 Mountain Snake proposal 28002

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
28002 Narrative	Narrative
28002 Powerpoint Presentation	Powerpoint Presentation
Letter from H. Schaller (USFWS) to Resident Fish Committee (CBFWA) Re: Support for resident fish projects in provincial review process	Correspondence

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Fluvial Bull Trout Migration and Life History Investigations in the upper Salmon River Subbasin
Proposal ID	28002
Organization	Shoshone-Bannock Tribes (SBT)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Jeffry L. Anderson
Mailing address	P.O. Box 306 Ft. Hall, ID 83203
Phone / email	2084783764 / [email protected]
Manager authorizing this project	Chad Colter, SBT Fish and Wildlife Coordinator
Review cycle	Mountain Snake
Province / Subbasin	Mountain Snake / Salmon
Short description	Identify the distribution and status of fluvial bull trout populations. Identify seasonal habitat use and migration patterns of fluvial bull trout. Determine bull trout presence/absence, densities, population status, and spawning times.
Target species	Columbia River Basin bull trout

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description
43.955	-114.785	Upper Salmon River
44.225	-114.9272	Valley Creek, tributary to Salmon River
44.2682	-114.3265	East Fork Salmon River, tributary to Salmon River
44.2696	-114.7337	Yankee Fork Salmon River, tributary to Salmon River
44.1537	-114.3002	Herd Creek, tributary to Salmon River

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Year	Accomplishment
	N/A, New Project

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
199405000	Salmon River Habitat Enhancement M&E	Assist in collection of field data and telemetry.
198909803	Salmon Supplementation Studies in Idaho Rivers	Assist in collection of field data and telemetry.
199107100	Snake River Sockey Salmon Habitat	Assist in collection of field data and telemetry.

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost	Subcontractor
1. Determine bull trout presence/absence, densities, population status, and spawning times in the upper Salmon River subbasin.	a. Work with agency biologists in the upper Salmon River subbasin to develop priorities for project implementation	3	$15,000
	b. Secure USFWS and NMFS Section 10 permits for scientific research.	1	$5,000

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Determine bull trout presence/absence, densities, population status, and spawning times in the upper Salmon River subbasin.	2003	2004	$30,000

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

FY 2003	FY 2004
$15,000	$15,000

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost
1. Identify the distribution and status of fluvial bull trout populations in the upper Salmon River subbasin.	a. During winter and early spring, collect and surgically implant radio transmitters in fluvial bull trout in the mainstem Salmon, East Fork Salmon, and Yankee Fork Salmon rivers and track throughout the year with radio receivers.	5	$30,000
1.	b. Sample as necessary in tributary streams where fluvial bull trout are found to exist.	5	$20,000
2. Identify seasonal habitat use and migration patterns of fluvial bull trout in the upper Salmon River subbasin.	a. Surgically implant radio transmitters and track at least 50 bull trout per year and track with radio receivers throughout the year.	5	$50,000
3. Determine bull trout presence/absence, densities, population status, and spawning times in the upper Salmon River subbasin.	a. Sample streams using snorkel and electrofishing surveys.	5	$30,000
	b. Conduct spawning ground surveys.	5	$13,440

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Identify the distribution and status of fluvial bull trout populations in the upper Salmon River subbasin.	2003	2006	$172,000
2. Identify seasonal habitat use and migration patterns of fluvial bull trout in the upper Salmon River subbasin.	2003	2006	$180,000
3. Determine bull trout presence/absence, densities, population status, and spawning times in the upper Salmon River subbasin.	2003	2006	$160,000

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

FY 2003	FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006
$128,000	$130,000	$130,000	$130,000

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 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 2002 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 2002 cost
Personnel	FTE: 1 FTE, 2 Season Technicians, partial salary for administrative assistant.	$68,000
Fringe	34% of salary	$23,120
Supplies	2 radio receivers, 50 radio transmitters, laptop computer and printer, misc. field and office supls.	$29,420
Travel	Field work per diem, lodging, and travel to meetings/training.	$8,200
Indirect	28% of salary and fringe benefits	$23,700
Capital		$0
NEPA	Secure USFWS and NMFS Section 10 permits for scientific research	$5,000
PIT tags		$0
Subcontractor		$0
Other	4X4 vehicle lease	$6,000
		$163,440

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2002 cost	$163,440
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2002 budget request	$163,440
FY 2002 forecast from 2001	$0
% change from forecast	0.0%

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind

Other budget explanation

The first year's budget includes start-up equipment purchases which will not need to be repeated in future years. The long-term equipment costs will include 50 radio transmitter tags annually at approximately $200 per tag ($10,000/year).

Reviews and recommendations

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

REVIEW:
ISRP Preliminary Review (ISRP 2001-9)

Recommendation:
Do not fund - no response required

Date:
Sep 28, 2001

Comment:

Do not fund. A response is not needed because of significant deficiencies in the proposal. The proposal is to "fill all data gaps" concerning bull trout distribution, abundance, and migration patterns for fluvial bull trout in the upper Salmon River basin. It endeavors to justify this new effort based solely on a perceived lack of knowledge, a premise that was not convincing to reviewers who would have been more receptive to investigation of specific significant hypotheses. The work did not appear linked to the extensive work conducted by Thurow, Rieman and Dunham in the state. In addition to a radio-tracking component, the sponsor intends to describe distributions and abundances across the sub-basin. No argument in presented to justify what seems to be an insufficient sample size for the objectives of the radio-telemetry tracking portion of the study. A systematic procedure was not presented for estimating abundance or distribution. It is known, as stated, that bull trout spawn from mid-August to mid-late September. The proposal includes action to further define spawning time, but no reason was provided for the need.

The literature on bull trout life history contains significant information on adult capture, radio tag mortalities, day vs. night snorkeling, and other study methodologies that could streamline, fine tune, and focus the proposed study. Lack of discussion and reference to this extensive literature and its implications was viewed as a serious deficit for this proposal.

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Recommended Action

Date:
Nov 30, 2001

Comment:

This proposal addresses data gaps in bull trout distribution and life history in the upper Salmon River Subbasin. The RFC suggests this information is needed for the development of recovery actions for the Salmon River Bull Trout Recovery Unit; however, the geographical scope of this project appears too large for the proposed approach, and the 50 fish radio tagging sample seems too small for the size of the subbasin.

The RFC suggests a more systematic approach would lend itself well to project success. The project could be strengthened by concentrating on one major drainage at a time. Each of the 3 drainages (Yankee Fork, Mainstem, and East Fork) should receive about 50 tagged fish and 2-3 years sampling effort. It appears the proponents need to include more specific information on telemetry equipment to be used, and details such as transmitter life, size, frequencies and costs. There may be remote tracking sites currently available in the subbasin that could be utilized for this project, and if so, the project efficiency could be greatly improved by utilizing them. If there are no remote sites currently in place, it would be wise to establish some. The use of data loggers would also narrow the focus of equipment manufacturers and save time and money in data collection. Specific plans for radio-tracking are lacking in the proposal. Some additional plans need to be prepared in regards to tracking methods, frequency, and approach.

"The USFWS feels if the proposal can meet the above concerns and those raised by the ISRP, there are elements of the project that warrant funding."

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 2001-12A)

Recommendation:
Do Not Fund

Date:
Dec 21, 2001

Comment:

REVIEW:
NMFS Review

Recommendation:

Date:
Feb 1, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU

Comments

Already ESA Req?

Biop?

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
D

Date:
Feb 11, 2002

Comment:

Do not recommend.

BPA RPA RPM:
Not USFWS BiOp Related

NMFS RPA/USFWS RPM:
--

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Do Not Fund

Date:
Apr 19, 2002

Comment: