FY07-09 proposal 200704600
Jump to Reviews and Recommendations
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Steelhead Spawning Ground Surveys, Flow, and Temperature Monitoring of Small Tributaries of the Upper Middle Mainstem Columbia River. |
| Proposal ID | 200704600 |
| Organization | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) |
| Short description | Twelve small tributaries of the Columbia River, between Crab Creek and the Entiat River, will be surveyed to determine the abundance of steelhead redds, presence of adult steelhead, collect carcasses, and monitor flow and water temperature. |
| Information transfer | This information will be made available to any interested party and will be specifically provided to the Bonneville Power Administration and to the Regional Technical Team of the Upper Columbia Salmon Recovery Board. This information will be transferred electronically in .pdf format in the form of an annual report. This information will be used to help inform recovery planning and monitoring effort for the Upper Columbia steelhead ESU. It may also be useful for identifying potential restoration and protection priorities and projects for the Upper Middle Mainstem Subbasin. |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Contacts
| Contact | Organization | |
|---|---|---|
| Form submitter | ||
| Casey Baldwin | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife | baldwcmb@dfw.wa.gov |
| All assigned contacts | ||
| Casey Baldwin | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife | baldwcmb@dfw.wa.gov |
| Casey Baldwin | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife | baldwcmb@dfw.wa.gov |
| Casey Baldwin | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife | baldwcmb@dfw.wa.gov |
Section 2. Locations
Province / subbasin: Columbia Cascade / Columbia Upper Middle
| Latitude | Longitude | Waterbody | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 47.2203213 | 120.0071525 | various | Various small tributaries of the Columbia River between Crab Creek and the Entiat River |
Section 3. Focal species
primary: Steelhead Upper Columbia River ESUsecondary: Interior Redband Trout
Section 4. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishments |
|---|
Section 5. Relationships to other projects
| Funding source | Related ID | Related title | Relationship |
|---|---|---|---|
| Other: Chelan and Douglas County PUD | ? | various monitoring efforts under the HCP | Providing information on steelhead status in the same ESU. Similar methods and objectives as PUD funded spawning ground surveys throughout the Upper Columbia. |
| BPA | 200301700 | Integrated Status/Effect Progr | Providing information on steelhead status in the same ESU. Similar methods and objectives as Wenatchee steelhead spawning ground surveys. UMM tribs are a data gap that is not covered by this project or any other funding source. |
| BPA | 200302200 | Monitor/Eval Okanogan Basin Pr | Providing information on steelhead status in the same ESU. Similar methods and objectives as the Okanogan steelhead spawning ground surveys. |
| Other: USFWS/USFS | NA | [Related Project Title left blank] | Programatic monitoring of fish populations by these agencies on federal lands is linked to state, PUD, and Conservation District efforts to acheive monitoring throughout all reaches of the fishes distribution. Tied together through the Monitoring Strategy of the Regional Technical Team for the Upper Columbia Salmon Recovery Board |
| [Funding Source left blank] | [no entry] | [Relationship field left blank] |
Section 6. Biological objectives
| Biological objectives | Full description | Associated subbasin plan | Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Determine if each stream has adequate physical cha | Determine if each stream has adequate physical characteristics to support steelhead spawning and rearing. | Upper Middle Columbia | Determine existing and potential fish use in the watershed. |
| Determine spawner origin and physical characterist | Collect biological data from steelhead carcasses, if/when they can be recovered. | Upper Middle Columbia | Determine existing and potential fish use of entire watershed. |
| Determine steelhead abundance and distribution. | Determine the abundance and distribution of steelhead redds and presence of adult steelhead in 13 tributaries of the mainstem Columbia River between Crab Creek and the Entiat River. | Upper Middle Columbia | Determine existing and potential fish use of watershed. |
| Manage project, report results, coordinate. | Manage the project, summarize and report results for objectives 1-3, coordinate with and disseminate information to local and regional groups. | Upper Middle Columbia | I recognize that this is not a "biological objective", however, I did not want to be reduntant with the related work elements for the 3 biological objectives. |
Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)
| Work element name | Work element title | Description | Start date | End date | Est budget |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Produce Annual Report | Summarize data, create maps, and write an annual report that summarizes the results of Objectives 1-3. | 6/1/2007 | 12/31/2007 | $26,223 |
|
Biological objectives Manage project, report results, coordinate. |
Metrics |
||||
| Coordination | Coordinate with local and regional monitoring and habitat protection/restoration efforts. | Coordinate with local and regional groups to be sure that results are used in ESU wide monitoring of steelhead abundance and distribution. Also, coordinate with local or regional efforts to identify opportunities for protection or restoration of habitat that will benefit listed species in the Upper Columbia ESU. | 1/1/2007 | 12/31/2007 | $1,748 |
|
Biological objectives Manage project, report results, coordinate. |
Metrics |
||||
| Manage and Administer Projects | Manage and Administer Project | Manage the on the ground efforts and administrative work related to BPA’s programmatic requirements. | 1/1/2007 | 12/31/2007 | $8,741 |
|
Biological objectives Manage project, report results, coordinate. |
Metrics |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Carcass recovery. | Determine the origin (hatchery or wild), and physical characteristics (gender, length, fin clip, scales, otoliths, and tissue for genetics analysis) of recovered steelhead carcasses. | 3/15/2007 | 6/1/2007 | $5,245 |
|
Biological objectives Determine spawner origin and physical characterist |
Metrics |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Enumerate steelhead redds. | Determine the abundance and distribution of steelhead redds and presence of adult steelhead in 13 tributaries of the mainstem Columbia River between Crab Creek and the Entiat River. | 3/15/2007 | 6/1/2007 | $96,156 |
|
Biological objectives Determine steelhead abundance and distribution. |
Metrics Focal Area: Tributaries Primary R, M, and E Type: Uncertainties Research Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend Monitoring |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Evaluate stream connectivity with the Columbia River. | Qualitatively evaluate the connection of each stream to the Columbia River at various reservoir pool elevations. | 3/15/2007 | 12/31/2007 | $8,741 |
|
Biological objectives Determine spawner origin and physical characterist |
Metrics |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Flow monitoring. | Determine the flow [discharge (m3/s)] of each tributary at biologically important time periods. | 3/15/2007 | 12/31/2007 | $17,482 |
|
Biological objectives Determine if each stream has adequate physical cha |
Metrics |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Temperature monitoring. | Monitor the temperature of each tributary throughout the year. | 1/1/2007 | 12/31/2007 | $8,741 |
|
Biological objectives Determine if each stream has adequate physical cha |
Metrics |
||||
| Disseminate Raw/Summary Data and Results | Provide reports and/or data summaries to local and regional monitoring and natural resource planning processes. | Provide reports and/or data summaries to local and regional monitoring and natural resource planning processes. | 6/1/2007 | 12/31/2007 | $1,748 |
|
Biological objectives Manage project, report results, coordinate. |
Metrics |
||||
Section 8. Budgets
Itemized estimated budget
| Item | Note | FY07 | FY08 | FY09 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personnel | Project leader and 2 technicians | $24,758 | $25,500 | $25,805 |
| Fringe Benefits | [blank] | $9,023 | $9,098 | $9,129 |
| Supplies | [blank] | $13,042 | $9,392 | $9,892 |
| Travel | no overnight travel required, motorpool lease and mileage covered under supplies category | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Capital Equipment | WDFW boat supplied as "In-kind" | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Overhead | estimated at 28.89% | $13,527 | $12,709 | $12,950 |
| Totals | $60,350 | $56,699 | $57,776 | |
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
| Total itemized budget: | $174,825 |
| Total work element budget: | $174,825 |
Cost sharing
| Funding source/org | Item or service provided | FY 07 est value ($) | FY 08 est value ($) | FY 09 est value ($) | Cash or in-kind? | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WDFW | Boat & motor | $25,000 | $0 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Totals | $25,000 | $0 | $0 | |||
Section 9. Project future
|
FY 2010 estimated budget: $30,000 FY 2011 estimated budget: $30,000 |
Comments: Estimate some reduction based on reducing the scope of the project once we know where the important areas are for continued monitoring and how it should fit into the larger monitoring scheme for the Wenatchee and the Upper Columbia ESU. |
Future O&M costs:
Termination date: Uncertain?
Comments: It depends on the results of the monitoring and how the streams need to be incorporated into the larger monitoring scheme of the Wenatchee summer steelhead population. There may be one or more index reaches in these streams or they may just be part of the rotating panel of potential sites.
Final deliverables: Annual reports.
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] | ||||||
| $58,333 | $58,333 | $58,334 | $175,000 | Expense | ProvinceExpense | Fund |
| NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $58,333 | $58,333 | $58,334 | $0 | ProvinceExpense | ||
ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)
Recommendation: Fundable
NPCC comments: This is a well-prepared proposal for a worthwhile project. The sponsors should consider the ISRP suggestions below. There is good background rationale for studying steelhead in these small tributaries. Sponsors provide indicative preliminary data and good references. The proposal could have used a map to orient reviewers. The need for more complete information on the fish populations and habitat characteristics of the small tributaries of the Columbia in this subbasin was identified as a key priority in the subbasin plan. The data collected also would contribute to development of recovery plans and is integrated with other spawner survey efforts in the Columbia Cascade Province, which are described. This project proposes to use methods comparable to those being employed in other watersheds and indicates that all these efforts will be closely coordinated. The objectives are stated clearly. The methods are generally appropriate for the objectives. There are several issues the sponsor might want to consider prior to initiating the project. 1) Is there empirical support for the assumption that O. mykiss below 500 mm in length are resident redband rainbow and those over this length are steelhead? Unless there is a firm foundation for this assumption, there is the possibility of introducing some error into the steelhead spawner and redd counts. Could genetic analysis of the recovered carcasses and samples taken from verified resident fish be used to substantiate this assumption? 2) The genetic samples collected from carcasses in this project are only to be stored, not analyzed. It would seem that completing the genetic analysis would be an important part of this project. Answering the questions about the origins of the steelhead using these small streams could be important in understanding the population structure of the ESU. This could be done on the assumption that a genetic baseline exists. 3) The methods for temperature characterization of the streams are not clear. What is the purpose of installing a second thermistor at the upper end of anadromous access in May in a subset of the streams? Given that recording thermistors are relatively inexpensive, it would seem that two thermistors, deployed full time at the mouth and the upper end of anadromous access would provide a much better indication of the thermal environment provided by these streams. 4) Periodic flow measurements cannot capture short-term variation in discharge. One possible approach to developing a more comprehensive record of flow would be to develop a relationship between the flow measures taken on the study streams and discharge at a nearby flow recorder. If an appropriate flow recording station is available, this approach would enable the construction of a continuous flow record for each stream. There is minimal description of facilities, although the personnel are good. The information transfer process described should be effective. Coordination with groups conducting similar studies in the province also should enhance the effectiveness of information transfer. The information generated by the project should be very beneficial to the steelhead of the Upper Columbia ESU.
ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)
Recommendation: Fundable
NPCC comments: This is a well-prepared proposal for a worthwhile project. The sponsors should consider the ISRP suggestions below. There is good background rationale for studying steelhead in these small tributaries. Sponsors provide indicative preliminary data and good references. The proposal could have used a map to orient reviewers. The need for more complete information on the fish populations and habitat characteristics of the small tributaries of the Columbia in this subbasin was identified as a key priority in the subbasin plan. The data collected also would contribute to development of recovery plans and is integrated with other spawner survey efforts in the Columbia Cascade Province, which are described. This project proposes to use methods comparable to those being employed in other watersheds and indicates that all these efforts will be closely coordinated. The objectives are stated clearly. The methods are generally appropriate for the objectives. There are several issues the sponsor might want to consider prior to initiating the project. 1) Is there empirical support for the assumption that O. mykiss below 500 mm in length are resident redband rainbow and those over this length are steelhead? Unless there is a firm foundation for this assumption, there is the possibility of introducing some error into the steelhead spawner and redd counts. Could genetic analysis of the recovered carcasses and samples taken from verified resident fish be used to substantiate this assumption? 2) The genetic samples collected from carcasses in this project are only to be stored, not analyzed. It would seem that completing the genetic analysis would be an important part of this project. Answering the questions about the origins of the steelhead using these small streams could be important in understanding the population structure of the ESU. This could be done on the assumption that a genetic baseline exists. 3) The methods for temperature characterization of the streams are not clear. What is the purpose of installing a second thermistor at the upper end of anadromous access in May in a subset of the streams? Given that recording thermistors are relatively inexpensive, it would seem that two thermistors, deployed full time at the mouth and the upper end of anadromous access would provide a much better indication of the thermal environment provided by these streams. 4) Periodic flow measurements cannot capture short-term variation in discharge. One possible approach to developing a more comprehensive record of flow would be to develop a relationship between the flow measures taken on the study streams and discharge at a nearby flow recorder. If an appropriate flow recording station is available, this approach would enable the construction of a continuous flow record for each stream. There is minimal description of facilities, although the personnel are good. The information transfer process described should be effective. Coordination with groups conducting similar studies in the province also should enhance the effectiveness of information transfer. The information generated by the project should be very beneficial to the steelhead of the Upper Columbia ESU.