FY 2000 proposal 20522
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Multi-Year John Day Anadromous Fish Plan |
| Proposal ID | 20522 |
| Organization | Columbia Basin Fish & Wildlife Authority (CBFWA) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Tom Giese |
| Mailing address | 2501 SW First Ave., Suite 200 Portland, OR 97201 |
| Phone / email | 5032290191 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 2000 |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / John Day |
| Short description | |
| Target species | |
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
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
| 9045 |
Eliminate gravel push-up dams on lower N.Fork John Day River. |
|
| 9901000 |
Mitigate Effects Of Runoff & Erosion On Salmonid Habitat In Pine Hollow |
|
| 9144 |
Provide annual estimates of spring chinook spawner escapement, age structur |
|
| 9139 |
Allow protection/restoration of normal ecosystem in Pine Creek watershed. |
|
| 9012 |
Slow runoff during peak flow to improve habitat and improve spawning/rearin |
|
| 9137 |
Increase in-season river flows. |
|
| 9605300 |
Continuation of multi-year project: restore N.Fork John Day floodplain. |
|
| 9303800 |
Protect/restore 60 mi. riparian habitat. |
|
| 8402100 |
Long term protection, maintenance, restoration of private land habitat. |
|
| 20522 |
MYP John Day Subbasin Anadromous Fish Plan |
|
| 9703400 |
Measure surface fine sediment & overwinter sedimentation in spawning habita |
|
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 |
|---|
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. 20514 are appropriate here. Reviewers have numerous reservations concerning this umbrella proposal. Principal among them is its neglect in integrating projects one with the others. Scientists should be able to link cause and effect and determine which projects have succeeded, or are succeeding, in cost-effectively achieving biological objectives. Projects are scientifically evaluated for that purpose, and this proposal neglects to emphasize that type of framework. The presentation leads one to believe that the projects are only loosely associated. This umbrella proposal and the John Day River Umbrella submitted by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife appear to be developed along agency lines rather that to integrate or explain interrelationships of proposals.
A comprehensive plan for monitoring of current and future use by anadromous and resident fish should be developed in cooperation with an expanded Oregon Department of Fish and Game Proposal No. 9801600. Most proposals for projects in the John Day Basin suffer from the lack of adequate baseline data and monitoring for effectiveness.
The proposal is unclear what proportion of the watershed these projects collectively address.
In addition, reviewers noted that the proposal neglects to include a task directed at measuring and sampling egg deposition rates, hatching rates, and survival, health/morbidity and population size of juveniles. Each of these life stages needs to be measured/sampled in order to evaluate cause-and-effect and the success or failure of projects. Indirect measures may not necessarily be an acceptable proxy for actual growth and survival.
The proposal invites greater clarity and specifics in advancing such comments as:
"Monitoring results indicate that the fences are 98 percent effective in excluding livestock."
Eliminating introduction of hatchery fish can reduce disease and competition and eliminate mixed breeding. Hence Objective No. 3 might better read, "Improve health and survival of all life historic stages and improve genetic integrity and diversity.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Criteria all: Met? NA -