FY 2000 proposal 20514
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | John Day River Umbrella |
| Proposal ID | 20514 |
| Organization | Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Tony Nigro |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box 59 Portland, OR 97207 |
| Phone / email | 5038725310 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 2000 |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / John Day |
| Short description | Increase egg to adult survival of wild salmonids and decrease pre-spawning mortality of adult spring chinook. The research portion of this proposal is to aid in development of bull trout recovery strategies. |
| Target species | Target is wild spring chinook salmon, wild summer steelhead (proposed for listing as threatened), and bull trout (listed as threatened). Other species that will benefit are westslope cutthroat trout (petitioned for listing), lamprey, and redband rainbow |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
| 1985 |
Completion of John Day River chinook salmon study |
| 1985 |
Beginning of John Day River habitat enhancement project |
| 1998 |
Beginning of John Day River natural escapement study as part of PATH |
| 1997 |
John Day River Fish Screens |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
| 9600800 |
PATH |
Data collected by project #9801600 will be used by PATH |
| 9012 |
Mitigate Effects of Runoff & Erosion on Salmonid Habitat in Pine Hollow |
Watershed Council Project that should improve water quality and steelhead habitat |
| 9045 |
Eliminate Gravel Push-up Dams on Lower North Fork John Day River |
Watershed Council project that will improve fish passage and screening and promote more efficient use of water |
| 9137 |
John Day Watershed Restoration |
Remove gravel push-up dams, install more efficient irrigation systems, monitor water temperatures |
| 9303800 |
North Fork John Day Riparian Fencing |
Construct riparian fencing to control livestock grazing |
| 9605300 |
North Fork John Day River Dredge Tailings Restoration |
Reclaim historic dredge tailings to re-establish flood-plain function |
| 8402100 |
John Day River Habitat |
|
| 9801600 |
Natural Escapement-John Day River |
|
| 9306600 |
John Day River Fish Screens |
|
| 20514 |
John Day River Umbrella |
|
| 9405400 |
Oregon Bull/Cutthroat Trout Research |
|
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 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 2000 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 2000 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
|
$0 |
| Fringe |
|
$0 |
| Supplies |
|
$0 |
| $0 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2000 cost | $0 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2000 budget request | $0 |
| FY 2000 forecast from 1999 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: If steelhead are listed as threatened, a biological opinion will need to be issued by NMFS. A biological opinion has been issued by USFWS for work in bull trout streams.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
NA - Umbrella Proposal
Date:
Jun 15, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
NA - Umbrella Proposal
Comments:
Many of the criticisms of Project No. 20522 are appropriate here. The proposal is too general and neglects to adequately identify and define the listed objectives. While it provides some useful background information, the proposal might better explain the interrelationships of an array of complex projects. Failing this, it is difficult to scientifically assess objectives and proposals. The presentation leads one to believe that the projects are only loosely associated. This umbrella proposal and the Multi-Year John Day Anadromous Fish Plan submitted by the Columbia Basin Fish & Wildlife Authority appear to be developed along agency lines rather that to integrate or explain relationships of proposals.
A comprehensive plan for monitoring of current and future use by anadromous and resident fish should be developed in an expansion of Proposal No. 9801600 and in cooperation with all other projects in the John Day Basin. Most proposals for projects in the John Day Basin suffer from the lack of adequate baseline data and monitoring for effectiveness.
The proposal makes no mention of success in spawning and security of egg deposits. Adults may return to their native streams, but may not successfully spawn and deposit eggs. Alternatively, gravel and flow conditions may be inadequate for holding/securing eggs in the redd before hatching. The proposal should include some discussion of these elements.
Objectives (particularly No. 1) seem overly broad, and include sub-objectives and associated strategies beyond project control (e.g., ocean escapement and ocean productivity). These should be narrowed to measurable goals that are clearly within the scope of the projects (e.g., increase numbers and densities of successful redds relative to number of adult chinook which enter the watershed each year).
The authors describe project results and note increased redd counts and increased neo-tropical bird counts, thus inferring causality. There should be greater documentation or science-based evidence, however.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Not Reviewed
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Not reviewed