FY 2003 Columbia Estuary proposal 30009

Additional documents

TitleType
30009 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleCoastal Cutthroat Movements in the Columbia River Estuary
Proposal ID30009
OrganizationU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameJoseph Zydlewski
Mailing addressUS Fish and Wildlife Service, CRFPO, 9317 Highway 99, Suite I Vancouver, WA 98665
Phone / email3606967605 / joe_zydlewski@fws.gov
Manager authorizing this projectHoward Schaller
Review cycleColumbia Estuary
Province / SubbasinColumbia Estuary / Columbia Estuary
Short descriptionJuvenile and adult cutthroat trout from four Columbia River tributaries will be tagged. Movements will be monitored by aerial surveys (radio tags) or a tethered array (acoustic tags). Data will be analyzed using the CORIE model for physical parameters.
Target speciesCoastal cutthroat trout, southwest Washington/Columbia River Distinct Population Segment (DPS), currently being considered for listing.
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
46.185 -123.1575 Abernathy Creek (mouth) tagging site for juveniles and adults
46.1825 -123.1725 Mill Creek (mouth) tagging site for juveniles and adults
46.1833 -123.1233 Germany Creek (mouth) tagging site for juveniles and adults
46.3 -123.97 Chinook River (mouth) tagging site for juveniles and adults
46.23 -123.5 Columbia River Estuary - area for deployment of acoustic array
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
197
161
159
9
193

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment
New Not Appicable

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
Evaluation of delayed mortality of juvenile salmonids in the near ocean environment following passage through the Columbia River hydrosystem COE project #BP-00-10 Collaboration, coordination and cost sharing for aerial surveys, deployment and maintenance of acoustic array

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
1 $0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
$0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
1. Identify mainstem and plume habitat use by juveniles a. tag juveniles at Abernathy, Germany and Mill Creeks with radio tags 4 $67,546 Yes
b. monitor movements using aerial survey 4 $35,775
c. tag juvenile from Chinook River with acoustic tags 4 $16,707
d. deploy and maintain acoustic array 4 $21,773
e. compile and analyze data $12,443
2. Identify mainstem and plume habitat use by adults a. capture and tag adults in Abernathy, Mill, Germany Creeks and the Chinook River with acoustic tags 4 $57,777
b. deploy and maintain reduced acoustic array year-round and conduct monthly boat surveys using towed acoustic receiver 4 $62,206
c. compile and analyze data 4 $20,324
3. Identify physical parameters associated with Columbia River estuary cutthroat habitat a. compile hitorical data from state and federal sources, including WDFW, ODFW, NMFS and USFWS 4 $13,352
b. compile telemetry data from Objectives 1 and 2 4 $13,352
c. model trends in estuary and plume physical parameters associated with spatial and temporal trends in presence 4 $13,352
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
1. Identify mainstem and plume habitat use by juveniles 2003 2006 $154,243
2. Identify mainstem and plume habitat use by adults 2003 2006 $140,309
3. Identify physical parameters associated with Columbia River estuary cutthroat habitat 2003 2005 $40,055
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
FY 2004FY 2005FY 2006
$351,337$368,904$340,980

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2003 cost
Personnel FTE: GS-11 (1.0),GS-9 (1.0), GS-9(6) (0.05), GS-5 (1.0) $112,923
Fringe 35% $31,049
Supplies $98,625
Travel $3,000
Indirect overhead 28.4 % $74,010
NEPA Corps of Engineers to provide necessary NEPA documentation for restoration ($109,000) $0
PIT tags $0
Subcontractor Oregon State University $15,000
$334,607
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2003 cost$334,607
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2003 budget request$334,607
FY 2003 forecast from 2002$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
Abernathy Fish Technology Center, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Longview, WA Rearing of cutthroat for tag retention evaluation $15,000 in-kind
Oregon Cooperative Fishery Research Unit, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR Coordination and financial sharing of boats and personnel for the deployment of and maintenance of acoustic array in the Lower Columbia, aerial survey charges, use of mobile telemetry units. $25,000 in-kind
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Capture of migrating coastal cuttroat trout for tagging in Mill, Germany and Abernathy Creeks $10,000 in-kind
Sea Resources, Chinook, WA Capture of migrating coastal cuttroat trout from Chinook River, Coordination with the deployment of acoustic units $5,000 in-kind
Oregon Health and Science University Provide modeling experteise, data handling and super computer time for CORIE model evaluations of telemetry data and past catch data $15,000 in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

Recommendation:
withdrawn
Date:
Mar 1, 2002

Comment:

withdrawn
Recommendation:
withdrawn
Date:
May 17, 2002

Comment:

This project was funded by the USCOE and has therefore been withdrawn from this process.
Recommendation:
Withdrawn
Date:
Jun 7, 2002

Comment:

Proposal Withdrawn. Funded through a non-BPA source, USACE
Recommendation:
Date:
Jul 19, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Withdrawn - funded by Corps of Engineers

Comments

Already ESA Req?

Biop? No


Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Oct 30, 2002

Comment: