FY07-09 proposal 199306600
Jump to Reviews and Recommendations
Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | Oregon Fish Screens Project |
Proposal ID | 199306600 |
Organization | Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife (ODFW) |
Short description | The project provides immediate and long-term protection for anadromous and resident fish species in the John Day, Umatilla, and Walla Walla basins by the installation or replacement of out dated fish protection and passage devices on irrigation diversions |
Information transfer | All of the annual reports, proposals, and metrics (etc.), will be displayed on cbfwa's and BPA's website @: www.cbfwa.org and www.efw.bpa.gov |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
Contacts
Contact | Organization | |
---|---|---|
Form submitter | ||
Steve Allen | ODFW | Steven.R.Allen@state.or.us |
All assigned contacts | ||
Steve Allen | ODFW | Steven.R.Allen@state.or.us |
Gail Samura | ODFW | Gail.Samura@state.or.us |
Sandra Sovay | ODFW | Sandy.E.Sovay@state.or.us |
Kelly Stokes | ODFW | Kelly.S.Stokes@state.or.us |
Section 2. Locations
Province / subbasin: Columbia Plateau / John Day
Latitude | Longitude | Waterbody | Description |
---|---|---|---|
44 39 45.08 N | 118 40 12.47 W | Beaver Creek | Beaver Creek #1 Middle Fork |
44 39 10.82 N | 118 40 35.72 W | Beaver Creek | Beaver Creek #2 Middle Fork |
44 27 29.30 N | 119 2 11.03 W | Beech Creek | Beech Creek #1 Near Mt. Vernon |
44 46 21.14 N | 118 52 4.25 W | Big Creek | Big Creek #1 Below Camp Creek on the Middle Fork Highway. |
44 46 10.83 N | 118 52 17.41 W | Big Creek | Big Creek #2 Below Camp Creek on the Middle Fork Highway. |
44 30 33.24 N | 120 9 6.89 W | Bridge Creek | Bridge Creek #1 Above Mitchell |
44 30 33.82 N | 120 9 7.91 W | Bridge Creek | Bridge Creek #2 Mitchell |
44 38 29.19 N | 118 39 6.04 W | Butte Creek | Butte Creek #1 Middle Fork |
44 19 1.72 N | 118 57 5.67 W | Canyon Creek | Canyon Creek #6 |
44 27 39.10 N | 118 42 56.56 W | Dixie Creek | Dixie Creek #6 Prairie City |
44 14 47.68 N | 118 54 40.44 W | East Fork Canyon Creek | East Fork Canyon Creek #2 |
44 23 49.72 N | 119 18 27.05 W | Fields Creek | Fields Creek #1 |
44 23 51.91 N | 119 18 24.21 W | Fields Creek | Fields Creek #2 Mainstem |
44 24 13.36 N | 119 18 20.89 W | Fields Creek | Fields Creek #3 Mainstem |
44 24 24.68 N | 119 18 24.89 W | Fields Creek | Fields Creek #4 Mainstem |
44 24 37.73 N | 119 18 19.68 W | Fields Creek | Fields Creek #5 Mainstem |
44 25 7.36 N | 119 18 9.54 W | Fields Creek | Fields Creek #6 Mainstem |
44 25 47.95 N | 119 18 3.86 W | Fields Creek | Fields Creek #10 Mainstem |
44 25 53.74 N | 119 17 57.85 W | Fields Creek | Fields Creek #11 Mainstem |
44 26 4.50 N | 119 17 47.95 W | Fields Creek | Fields Creek #12 |
44 23 21.61 N | 119 18 33.27 W | Fields Creek | Fields Creek Upper |
44 39 25.95 N | 118 38 47.50 W | Granite Boulder Creek | Granite Boulder #2 |
44 39 4.39 N | 118 39 2.48 W | Granite Boulder Creek | Granite Boulder #3 |
44 39 1.40 N | 118 39 5.90 W | Granite Boulder Creek | Granite Boulder #4 |
44 38 43.94 N | 118 39 14.54 W | Granite Boulder Creek | Granite Boulder #5 |
44 24 49.09 N | 118 46 6.84 W | Indian Creek | Indian Creek #7 |
44 24 49.20 N | 118 46 23.94 W | Indian Creek | Indian Creek #8 |
44 24 59.88 N | 118 46 18.95 W | Indian Creek | Indian Creek #9 |
44 24 59.73 N | 118 46 20.44 W | Indian Creek | Indian Creek #10 |
44 25 15.95 N | 118 46 54.33 W | Indian Creek | Indian Creek #11 |
44 25 28.45 N | 118 46 53.66 W | Indian Creek | Indian Creek #13 |
44 26 14.46 N | 118 47 44.44 W | Indian Creek | Indian Creek #14 |
44 22 40.88 N | 118 34 45.58 W | John Day River | John Day River #6 |
44 22 41.27 N | 118 34 40.44 W | John Day River | John Day River #7 |
44 22 59.50 N | 118 34 30.45 W | John Day River | John Day River #8 |
44 25 25.97 N | 118 36 58.03 W | John Day River | John Day River #16 |
44 25 48.41 N | 118 37 2 W | John Day River | John Day River #17 |
44 25 48.04 N | 118 37 31.49 W | John Day River | John Day River #19 |
44 26 55.37 N | 118 39 17.87 W | John Day River | John Day River #22 |
44 25 27.07 N | 119 0 32.73 W | John Day River | John Day River #44 |
44 25 1.37 N | 119 3 26.42 W | John Day River | John Day River #46 |
44 25 1 N | 119 12 57.95 W | John Day River | John Day River #52 |
44 26 19.31 N | 119 17 41.71 W | John Day River | John Day River #55 |
44 27 52.41 N | 119 27 10.66 W | John Day River | John Day River #58 |
44 27 53.95 N | 119 30 59.06 W | John Day River | John Day River #61 |
44 28 40.61 N | 119 32 52.88 W | John Day River | John Day River #62 |
44 30 8.86 N | 119 36 6.88 W | John Day River | John Day River #65 |
44 40 55.82 N | 118 46 8.01 W | Middle Fork John Day River | Middle Fork John Day River #9 |
44 41 50.57 N | 118 48 19.52 W | Middle Fork John Day River | Middle Fork John Day River #10 |
44 43 56.58 N | 118 50 2.24 W | Middle Fork John Day River | Middle Fork John Day River #11 |
44 20 34.71 N | 118 34 59.68 W | Roberts Creek | Roberts Creek #1 |
44 20 47.48 N | 118 34 39.51 W | Roberts Creek | Roberts Creek #2 |
44 31 14.57 N | 119 42 57.06 W | Rock Creek | Rock Creek #6 |
44 38 43.88 N | 118 40 7.60 W | Ruby Creek | Ruby Creek #1 |
44 26 8.32 N | 119 32 28.30 W | South Fork John Day River | South Fork John Day River #5 |
44 26 51.47 N | 119 31 38.63 W | South Fork John Day River | South Fork John Day River #7 |
44 26 59.35 N | 119 31 53.83 W | South Fork John Day River | South Fork John Day River #8 |
44 27 20.03 N | 119 32 10.05 W | South Fork John Day River | South Fork John Day River #9 |
44 27 31.31 N | 119 31 38.03 W | South Fork John Day River | South Fork John Day River #10 |
44 35 25.07 N | 119 38 57.30 W | Squaw Creek | Squaw Creek #1 |
Section 3. Focal species
primary: Chinook Mid-Columbia River Spring ESUprimary: Steelhead Middle Columbia River ESU
secondary: Westslope Cutthroat
secondary: Pacific Lamprey
secondary: Western Brook Lamprey
secondary: Bull Trout
secondary: Interior Redband Trout
secondary: Mountain Whitefish
Section 4. Past accomplishments
Year | Accomplishments |
---|---|
2005 | 19 screens replaced, 6 pump screens, 2 fish passage projects |
2004 | 22 screens replaced |
2003 | 21 screens replaced |
2002 | 24 screens replaced 2 fish passage projects |
2001 | 19 screens replaced 1 passage project |
2000 | 16 screens replaced 1 passage project |
1999 | 19 screens replaced |
1998 | 22 screens replaced |
1997 | 27 screens replaced. |
Section 5. Relationships to other projects
Funding source | Related ID | Related title | Relationship |
---|---|---|---|
BPA | 198402100 | John Day Habitat Enhancement | Without adequate maintenance on these passage facilities, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species that are produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
BPA | 199801600 | Escapement/Productivity Spring | Reduced survival of chinook and steelhead, because they have been diverted into an irrigation ditch, may compromise results of the evaluation. |
BPA | 199801700 | Gravel Push-Up Dam Removal Low | Without adequate passage, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may become stranded or diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
BPA | 199801800 | John Day Watershed Restoration | Without adequate passage, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may become stranded or diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
BPA | 199802200 | Pine Creek/Wagner Management | Without adequate screening, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
BPA | 200001500 | Oxbow Ranch Management | Without adequate screening, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
BPA | 200003100 | Enhance North Fork John Day Ri | Without adequate screening, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
BPA | 199405400 | Bull Trout Life History Projec | Assist with fish trapping, equipment contstruction and repair, and use of personnel for monitoring the effectiveness of project. |
BPA | 198343600 | Umatilla Passage O&M | Without adequate maintenance on these passage facilities, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species that are produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
BPA | 199303800 | N Fork John Day R Enhancement | Without adequate maintenance on these passage facilities, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species that are produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
BPA | 199401500 | Idaho Fish Screening Improveme | Exchange of designs and technology related to screening devices. |
BPA | 199105700 | Yakima Bas Screen Fab Ph 2 | Exchange of designs and technology related to screening devices. |
OWEB - State | 204-042 | Gilliam-East John Day WSC Supp | Technical support and prioritization for screening, passage and flow projects |
OWEB - State | 204-052 | North Fork John Day WSC Suppor | Technical support and prioritization for screening, passage and flow projects |
OWEB - State | 204-055 | Wheeler SWCD Support | Technical support and prioritization for screening, passage and flow projects |
OWEB - State | 204-161 | Campbell/Martin Ditch Diversio | Grant SWCD removed barrier, installed headgate and measuring device. The John Day Fish Screening and Passage Program installed the fish screens. |
OWEB - State | 204-162 | Upper SF John Day River WS Res | Culvert replacement on USFS, Sunshine Creek. Without adequate screening, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
OWEB - State | 205-081 | Hashknife Irrigation | Replaced fish passage barrier with lay-flat stanchion, headgate and measuring device on Bridge Creek. Without adequate screening, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
OWEB - State | 205-091 | Nelson Cr Diversion Replacemen | Converted flood to sprinkler and replaced diversion structure with lay-flat stanchion dam. Without adequate screening, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
OWEB - State | 205-092 | L Bridge Cr Diversion Improvem | Replaced fish barrier with lay-flat stanchion dam, headgate and measuring device. Without adequate screening, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
OWEB - State | 205-201 | Wheeler SWCD Project Assistanc | Technical support and prioritization for screening, passage and flow projects |
OWEB - State | 205-204 | Mountain Cr Ditch Conversion | Improved fish passage with rock weirs. Without adequate screening, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
OWEB - State | 205-205 | Sweet Diversion Replacement | Replaced fish barrier with lay-flat stanchion dam, headgate and measuring device. Without adequate screening, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
OWEB - State | 205-206 | Hashknife Bridge | Replaced culvert (passage barrier) with bridge. Without adequate screening, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
OWEB - State | 206-139 | Upper Rhea Cr Diversion & Culv | Replaced fish barrier with lay-flat stanchion dam, headgate and measuring device. Without adequate screening, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
OWEB - State | 206-140 | Upper John Day River WS Restor | Technical support and prioritization for screening, passage and flow projects |
OWEB - State | 206-144 | City of Fossil Culvert Replace | Replaced culverts for fish passage. Without adequate screening, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
OWEB - State | 206-145 | Alder Cr Culvert Replacement | Replaced culverts for fish passage. Without adequate screening, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
OWEB - State | 206-146 | Lower Twickenham Irrigation Pr | Improved irrigation system for increased stream flows. Without adequate screening, the additional steelhead and salmon, as well as all resident species produced by habitat improvements from the project may be diverted into inadequately screened diversions where they would likely perish. |
PCSRF - OWEB | 204-052A | North Fork John Day WSC Suppor | Technical support and prioritization for screening, passage and flow projects |
PCSRF - OWEB | 204-055A | Wheeler SWCD Support | Technical support and prioritization for screening, passage and flow projects |
PCSRF - OWEB | 204-310 | North & Middle Forks John Day | Technical support and prioritization for screening, passage and flow projects |
PCSRF - OWEB | 204-308 | Butte Cr Watershed Assessment | Technical support and prioritization for screening, passage and flow projects |
PCSRF - OWEB | 205-201A | Wheeler SWCD Project Assistanc | Technical support and prioritization for screening, passage and flow projects |
PCSRF - OWEB | 206-052 | North Fork John Day Council Su | Technical support and prioritization for screening, passage and flow projects |
PCSRF - OWEB | 206-055 | Bridge Creek & Mid-John Day Co | Technical support and prioritization for screening, passage and flow projects |
Section 6. Biological objectives
Biological objectives | Full description | Associated subbasin plan | Strategy |
---|---|---|---|
Annual Fisheries for Focal Salmonid Species | 25 year goal to support predictable annual fisheries of the strongest populations on all of the Focal Salmonid Species except for Bull Trout which is the 50 year goal. | John Day | Strategies A, B, and C: All populations should show increasing trends in abundance or be at the capacity of the restored habitat. Control Pollution Sources. |
Control Pollution Sources | To help adjust irrigation practices which helps reduce negative impacts on water quality and quantity. | John Day | Strategies A, B, and C: Return Flow Improvement Projects; Installing screens or fish barriers on return flows throughout the basin. Installing siphons with supplemental screens that cross tributaries causing false attraction, barriers & excess water use. |
Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity | Emphasis on Tributary and juvenile passage, with Mainstem passage to follow. Aside from the limiting factor of low flows, achieving Fish passage throughout the John Day Subbasin is feasible provided that financial assistance continues to be available to landowners installing passage. | John Day | Strategy A: The primary emphasis of passage improvement is to remove passage barriers and replacing them with fish passage-friendly alternatives that enable juvenile and adults to access high quality habitat during critical stages of fish migration. |
Increase Bull Trout | 25 year goal to increase the total estimated abundance of adult bull trout to 5,000 | John Day | Strategies A, B, and C: Restore and maintain suitable habitat conditions for all bull trout life history stages. Conserve Genetic diversity and reestablish connected environments between existing populations. Control Pollution Sources. |
Increase Cutthroat Trout | 25 year goal to achieve stable Cutthroat Trout population sizes in all populations and increasing trends in half of the present populations. | John Day | Strategies A, B, and C: Prevent loss of Salmonids to unscreened or inadequately screened irrigation diversions. Removing or adequately improving fish passage barriers. Control Pollution Sources. |
Increase Smolt and Adult Chinook Return | 25 year goal to increase the adult population to 12,000 and increase the smolt population to 113 per spawner. | John Day | Strategies A, B and C: Prevent loss of Salmonids to unscreened or inadequately screened irrigation diversions. Removing or adequately improving fish passage barriers. Control Pollution Sources. |
Increase Smolt and Adult Steelhead Return** | 25 year goal to increase the adult population to 29,400 and increase the smolt population to 136 per spawner. **Achieve stable Redband Trout population sizes in all populations and increasing trends in half of the present populations. | John Day | Strategies A, B, and C: Prevent loss of Salmonids to unscreened or inadequately screened irrigation diversions. Removing or adequately improving fish passage barriers. Control Pollution Sources. |
Increase/stabilize all Fish Species Populations | 40 year goal is to restore the John Day Subbasin to the level that will allow interactions between existing populations in a metapopulation context. | John Day | Strategies A, B, and C: Restore and maintain suitable habitat conditions for all Resident Fish Species at all life history stages. Conserve Genetic diversity and reestablish connected environments between existing populations. Control Pollution Sources. |
Install Fish Screens on Water Diversions | Achieving 100% screening is a realistic goal in the John Day Subbasin provided that financial assistance continues to be available to landowners installing screens. | John Day | Strategy B: Irrigation diversions that are either unscreened or inadequately screened (due to aging or inadequate design of the original screen) should be screened to eliminate any related mortality. |
Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)
Work element name | Work element title | Description | Start date | End date | Est budget |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation | Complete NEPA Checklist Or Prepare Biological Assessment | Work with BPA NEPA Contact to prepare NEPA Checklist or Prepare Biological Assessment when applicable. | 11/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $22,833 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity Install Fish Screens on Water Diversions |
Metrics |
||||
Identify and Select Projects | Project Pre-Work | Identify, prioritize, assess, and select multiple screen projects, and 1 fish passage project (if timing and funding allow). | 6/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $13,701 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity Install Fish Screens on Water Diversions |
Metrics |
||||
Coordination | Landowner Coordination | This activity entails working closely with landowners to obtain permission for access and timing of project. Economic impact and cost-share availability for the project are also discussed. | 1/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $129,380 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity Install Fish Screens on Water Diversions |
Metrics |
||||
Provide Technical Review | Technical Review Of Screens & Passage Projects | Provide Technical Review of outside ODFW Fish Screening & Passage projects within John Day, Umatilla, and Walla Walla Basins. | 1/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $10,641 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity Install Fish Screens on Water Diversions |
Metrics |
||||
Produce Design and/or Specifications | Prepare Design & Layout | Project planning includes designing and layout of all work to be completed on site. Contacts are made with Oregon Department of Water Resources (to insure fish screen size is adequate to handle user's legal water right). District Fisheries Biologist, and other agencies as needed. | 1/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $184,647 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity Install Fish Screens on Water Diversions |
Metrics |
||||
Operate and Maintain Habitat/Passage | Operate/Maintain Facility--Maintenance of Form and Fabrication Shops | Maintenance of Form and Fabrication Shops: Complete routine major and preventative maintenance of facilities, includes utilities. | 1/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $162,678 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity Install Fish Screens on Water Diversions |
Metrics |
||||
Remove/Install Diversion | Existing Passage Improvement | Remove or Install Diversion structure to meet NOAA approved Fish Passage. Project timing may vary due to John Day District Biologist priority, engineering, landowner cooperation, instream work windows, and permit process. | 1/1/2007 | 8/31/2009 | $31,968 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity |
Metrics * # of miles of habitat accessed: # of miles determined once site is identified |
||||
Install Fish Passage Structure | Passage Improvement | Make improvement to an exhisting fish passage structure in order to meet NOAA criteria for fish species that are present when identified. Project timing may vary due to John Day District Biologist priority, engineering, landowner cooperation, instream work windows, and permit process. | 1/1/2007 | 8/31/2009 | $159,867 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity |
Metrics * Does the structure remove or replace a fish passage barrier?: Yes * If installing a ladder, does the ladder meet NOAA specs for attraction flow, pool dimensions, jump height, etc?: Yes * # of miles of habitat accessed: # of miles determined once site is identified * Was barrier Full or Partial?: unknown until identified |
||||
Install Fish Screen | Install 60 Fish Screens | Install 60 Fish Screens in Anadromous basins of Northeast Oregon. Project location may change due to weather, irrigation, crop rotations and harvest, access conditions and landowner cooperation. The previous listed factors make it difficult to set priorities. We always have numerous project sites lined up so as to meet our commitment of 20 completed projects for the work period. | 1/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $2,280,729 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Install Fish Screens on Water Diversions |
Metrics * Does the screen meet NOAA/FSOC specs?: Yes * Is the screen New or a Replacement?: Replacement * Quantity of water protected by screening, as determined by what is stated in the water right or calculated based on flow rate: The 60 screens will protect 186.1 CFS * Flow rate at the screen diversion allowed by the water right: The 60 screens will protect 186.1 CFS |
||||
Install Fish Monitoring Equipment | Install NOAA Approved Fish Trap | Install NOAA approved fish trap for use in collecting data for generating reports used in Annual Matrix. | 1/1/2007 | 10/28/2009 | $9,560 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity Install Fish Screens on Water Diversions |
Metrics |
||||
Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Data Collection Of Fish Traps | Collect data for use in the Quarterly and Annual reports. | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $9,132 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity Install Fish Screens on Water Diversions |
Metrics Focal Area: Systemwide Primary R, M, and E Type: Action Effectiveness Secondary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend Monitoring |
||||
Analyze/Interpret Data | Analyze/Interpret Data From Fish Trap Reports | ODFW has recorded and tracked fish trap data since the first fish screens were installed in the early 1950's. Although data is not collected for scientifically statistical approach, it does correlate to effectiveness of screens, stream flows, and fluctuation in fish populations. The data also aids in managing the overall fish restoration efforts in the John Day River system. | 11/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $6,850 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity Install Fish Screens on Water Diversions |
Metrics Focal Area: Systemwide Primary R, M, and E Type: Action Effectiveness Research Secondary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend Monitoring |
||||
Other | 141-Produce Pisces Status Report - Pisces Status Report - Red/Yellow/Green | Produce Pisces Status Report on BPA's new filing system. | 1/1/2009 | 2/15/2010 | $9,195 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity Install Fish Screens on Water Diversions |
Metrics |
||||
Produce Annual Report | Produce FY07, 08, and 09 Annual Reports | Annual Report created for contract performance period 1/1/2007 thru 12/31/2007, 1/1/2008 thru 12/31/2008, and 1/1/2009 thru 12/31/2009. | 1/1/2007 | 2/15/2010 | $8,630 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity Install Fish Screens on Water Diversions |
Metrics |
||||
Manage and Administer Projects | Manage & Administer Projects | Covers project management and administrative work related to the contract excluding environmental compliance. | 6/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $185,510 |
Biological objectives Control Pollution Sources Fish Passage & Habitat Connectivity Install Fish Screens on Water Diversions |
Metrics |
Section 8. Budgets
Itemized estimated budget
Item | Note | FY07 | FY08 | FY09 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Personnel | 8.5FTE's | $316,816 | $338,993 | $362,723 |
Fringe Benefits | OPE @ 59% | $186,921 | $200,006 | $214,007 |
Supplies | Service and Supplies | $238,484 | $246,116 | $253,992 |
Travel | Per Diem | $3,269 | $3,374 | $3,482 |
Overhead | Administrative overhead @ 35.87% | $267,407 | $282,831 | $299,229 |
Other | Janitorial | $2,477 | $2,556 | $2,638 |
Totals | $1,015,374 | $1,073,876 | $1,136,071 |
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
Total itemized budget: | $3,225,321 |
Total work element budget: | $3,225,321 |
Cost sharing
Funding source/org | Item or service provided | FY 07 est value ($) | FY 08 est value ($) | FY 09 est value ($) | Cash or in-kind? | Status |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M66 - ODFW | Cost-share on unscreened diversions, passage projects, replacement screens, staff time and equipment | $250,000 | $250,000 | $250,000 | Cash | Confirmed |
MA - NOAA | Screen and Passage O&M, administration, staff time, equipment and facility O&M. | $680,000 | $680,000 | $680,000 | Cash | Confirmed |
Totals | $930,000 | $930,000 | $930,000 |
Section 9. Project future
FY 2010 estimated budget: $1,201,963 FY 2011 estimated budget: $1,201,963 |
Comments: Outyear budgets was figured with factors to cover PS increases, inflation for S&S items and admin/overhead. |
Future O&M costs: We should have most screen and passage issues resolved to NOAA criteria by these outyears. Factors like floods, additional listed species, changes in criteria, new screening and passage technologies, new water delivery systems, installation of permanent diversion structures, basins that are not currently anadromous but historically were that are opened back up to anadromous, etc.all influence the number of projects we may incure in these outyears.
Termination date:
Comments:
Final deliverables:
Section 10. Narrative and other documents
Reviews and recommendations
FY07 budget | FY08 budget | FY09 budget | Total budget | Type | Category | Recommendation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NPCC FINAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Oct 23, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
$1,006,400 | $1,064,700 | $1,027,000 | $3,098,100 | Capital | ProvinceCapital | Fund |
NPCC FINAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Oct 23, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
$10,000 | $10,000 | $10,000 | $30,000 | Expense | ProvinceExpense | Fund |
NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
$819,374 | $877,676 | $836,071 | $0 | ProvinceCapital | ||
NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
$196,000 | $196,000 | $196,000 | $0 | ProvinceExpense | ||
Comments: Expense portion of project. See capital budget for capital recommendation ($196k per year) |
ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)
Recommendation: Fundable
NPCC comments: This project provides direct, long-term benefits for salmon and other aquatic species. Screening, especially for rare and much reduced species, can be critical to rebuilding populations. It is important that screening technologies be updated and that the best available methods be used to benefit different species and sizes of fish. This drainage is a significant wild fish "control" system in the Columbia Basin. Objectives are straightforward and tasks are identified appropriately. Success in screen projects is highly dependent on the skills of the people implementing them and requirements can be quite site-specific. It is not clear in the proposal exactly how success will be measured, before and after rates of entrainment? Monitoring for effectiveness should be essential. Is this cost effective in terms of fringe and overhead? These costs seem high.
ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)
Recommendation: Fundable
NPCC comments: This project provides direct, long-term benefits for salmon and other aquatic species. Screening, especially for rare and much reduced species, can be critical to rebuilding populations. It is important that screening technologies be updated and that the best available methods be used to benefit different species and sizes of fish. This drainage is a significant wild fish "control" system in the Columbia Basin. Objectives are straightforward and tasks are identified appropriately. Success in screen projects is highly dependent on the skills of the people implementing them and requirements can be quite site-specific. It is not clear in the proposal exactly how success will be measured, before and after rates of entrainment? Monitoring for effectiveness should be essential. Is this cost effective in terms of fringe and overhead? These costs seem high.