Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Phase I Okanogan River Spring Chinook Production |
| Proposal ID | 29050 |
| Organization | Confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian Reservation (CCT) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Jerry Marco |
| Mailing address | CCT Fish and Wildlife Department P.O. Box 150 Nespelem, Washington 99155 |
| Phone / email | 5096342114 / cctfish@mail.wsu.edu |
| Manager authorizing this project | Joe Peone |
| Review cycle | Columbia Cascade |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Cascade / Okanogan |
| Short description | This project will reintroduce spring chinook into the Okanogan sub-basin to provide for tribal C&S and recreational fisheries. The program will also be used to collect information on the feasibility of reintroducing ESA-listed chinook in Phase II. |
| Target species | spring chinook |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
|
|
this proposal affects the entire 124 km length of the Okanogan River |
| 48.0985 |
-119.7334 |
Okanogan River |
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 |
|---|
| 1 |
Selective Fish Collection and Harvest Gear |
provide fish for gear research, development, and deployment |
| 7 |
Spring Chinook M&E |
evaluate the benefits and risks of this production program |
| 40 |
Net Pen Spring Chinook |
evaluate acclimation alternative for this production program |
| 41 |
Counting Facility at Zosel Dam |
used to collect unharvested spring chinook |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
| 1. Complete Okanogan Spring Chinook HGMP |
|
0 |
$0 |
Yes |
| 2. Complete NWPPC's 3-Step Process |
2.1 Complete step 1 - Master Plan |
0.3 |
$40,000 |
Yes |
|
2.2 Complete step 2 - NEPA |
0.75 |
$50,000 |
Yes |
| 3. Secure Use of OTID pond |
3.1 Test OTID Pond |
0 |
$0 |
|
|
3.2 Negotiate long-term agreement |
0.2 |
$0 |
|
|
3.3 Obtain water and discharge permits |
0.5 |
$5,000 |
Yes |
| 10. Contract Administration |
|
0.1 |
$5,000 |
|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
| 2. Complete NWPPC's 3-Step Process |
2004 |
2004 |
$10,000 |
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 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 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
| 4. Obtain spring Chinook eggs |
4.1 Collect brood stock at USFWS hatcheries and incubate eggs |
5 |
$10,000 |
Yes |
|
4.2 Transport eyed eggs to Beaver Creek Hatchery |
5 |
$2,000 |
Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
| 4. Obtain spring chinook eggs |
2004 |
2007 |
$53,000 |
| 5. Incubate, hatch, and rear spring Chinook at Beaver Creek Hatchery |
2004 |
2007 |
$1,500,000 |
| 6. Tranport juvenile Chinook to Okanogan Acclimation Facility |
2005 |
2007 |
$18,000 |
| 7. Operate and Maintain Acclimation Facility |
2005 |
2007 |
$250,000 |
| 10. Contract Administration |
2004 |
2007 |
$20,000 |
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
|---|
| $367,000 | $465,000 | $478,000 | $492,000 |
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
| 8. Monitor & Evaluate Acclimation Facility |
2005 |
2007 |
$16,000 |
| 9. Monitor & Evaluate Beaver Creek Hatchery |
2005 |
2007 |
$20,000 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
|---|
| $11,000 | $12,000 | $13,000 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2003 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
FTE: 0.15 |
$5,500 |
| Fringe |
@ 40% |
$2,200 |
| Travel |
|
$500 |
| Indirect |
@ 20% |
$1,100 |
| NEPA |
see below |
$50,000 |
| Subcontractor |
Master Plan development |
$40,000 |
| Subcontractor |
EA development |
$0 |
| Subcontractor |
USFWS egg collection & transport |
$12,000 |
| $111,300 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2003 cost | $111,300 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2003 budget request | $111,300 |
| FY 2003 forecast from 2002 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Reason for change in estimated budget
N/A
Reason for change in scope
N/A
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Other budget explanation
As unmet mitigation for Grand Coulee Dam, approximately half of all costs can be credited to BPA's U.S. Treasury repayment for the non-power purposes of the project.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate
Date:
Mar 1, 2002
Comment:
A response is needed. The proposal does not contain sufficient detail to allow scientific review of tasks and methods. There is a need for justification of the focus on spring chinook, when spring chinook apparently were never abundant in the area. There is an acclimation issue here, i.e. spring chinook may not be suited to the temperature regime and other factors present in the Okanogan River. There should be a comprehensive description of the program of which this project is a part, including proposals 29042 and 29008.
With the above exceptions, the proposal is well prepared, and the ISRP review criteria seem to be met. This is more than a limited one-year project that it initially appeared to be. It is the planning phase for a longer hatchery program to reintroduce spring Chinook to the Okanogan. The proposal is to use hatchery planted chinook (Carson stock from the complex of Leavenworth hatcheries) as a basis for a tribal fishery on returning adults. The juveniles would be transferred annually to the Ellesford acclimation facility (a pond owned by the Oroville-Tonasket Irrigation District), where they would be held over for winter rearing, acclimation, and release. All returning fish would either be harvested or retained as brood stock.
Recommendation:
High Priority
Date:
May 17, 2002
Comment:
Out year costs for objective 5 could be reduced in 2004-2007.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Jun 7, 2002
Comment:
Not fundable. The proposal and response lack sufficient technical detail on tasks and methods to allow review. The sponsors indicate that details are to be provided in the HGMP; however, the ISRP cannot support a recommendation for funding without reviewing the necessary technical details. This proposal is for the planning phase for a longer hatchery program to reintroduce spring Chinook to the Okanogan. The proposal is to use hatchery planted chinook (Carson stock from the complex of Leavenworth hatcheries) as a basis for a tribal fishery on returning adults. The juveniles would be transferred annually to the Ellesford acclimation facility (a pond owned by the Oroville-Tonasket Irrigation District), where they would be held over for winter rearing, acclimation, and release. All returning fish would either be harvested or retained as broodstock.
Recommendation:
Date:
Jul 19, 2002
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Hatchery/Supplementation Project - No direct benefit to listed population. Comments
The reintroduction of spring chinook into the Okanogan is an action agreed to by the fisheries co-managers since it furthers the Fish and Wildlife Program objectives. Initially using unlisted Carson stock, so no direct benefit to listed fish. Not RPA 171 project, the requirement that BOR fund NMFS approved hatchery reform measures identified in an approved HGMP does not translate to a requirement that all new hatchery actions, even good hatchery actions, are RPA 171 projects, especially when non-listed fish are involved. NMFS supports the phased approach that provides harvest opportunity while exploring the reintroduction issue.
Already ESA Req? No
Biop? No
Recommendation:
C
Date:
Jul 26, 2002
Comment:
Recommend deferral to Subbasin Planning
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Oct 30, 2002
Comment: