Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Application of Biological Assessment Protocol to Evaluate Passage of Juvenile Salmonids Through Culverts in the Yakima Basin |
| Proposal ID | 25044 |
| Organization | Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Steve Anglea |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box 999;MSIN K6-85 Richland, WA 99352 |
| Phone / email | 5093763964 / steven.anglea@pnl.gov |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | Columbia Plateau |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Yakima |
| Short description | Apply laboratory developed protocol for assessing juvenile salmonid passage through roadway culverts. |
| Target species | Bulltrout, steelhead, coho, chinook. |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
| 47.4 |
-121.3 |
Upper boundary of Yakima River basin study area |
| 46.37 |
-120 |
Lower boundary of Yakima River basin study area |
| 46.2537 |
-119.2269 |
Yakima River |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
| NMFS |
Action 153 |
NMFS |
BPA shall, working with agricultural incentive programs such as the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program, negotiate and fund long-term protection for 100 miles of riparian buffers per year in accordance with criteria BPA and NMFS will develop by June 1, 2001. |
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
|
This is a new (proposed) project |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
| 20547 |
Yakima Subbasin Habitat/Watershed Project Umbrella |
Project will provide passage for target species |
| 20526 |
Multi-Year Yakima Anadromous Fish Plan |
Project will provide passage for target species |
| 198506200 |
Passage Improvement Evaluation |
Project will follow methodology for developing evaluation techniue |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
| 1. Develop technique for assessing juvenile salmonid culvert passage. |
a. Review federal, state, county and tribal agencies for previous culvert inventories and barrier classification. |
1 |
$9,410 |
|
| 1 |
b. Review data regarding juvenile fish usage and distribution within study basin. |
1 |
$11,307 |
|
| 1 |
c. Incorporate GPS data into GIS database |
1 |
$4,345 |
|
| 1 |
d. Acquire culvert design manuals |
1 |
$1,387 |
|
| 1 |
e. Acquire necessary training for physical and hydraulic assessment techniques. |
1 |
$5,674 |
|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
| 1. Develop technique for assessing juvenile salmonid culvert passage. |
2003 |
2004 |
$211,270 |
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
|---|
| $103,986 | $107,284 |
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
| 1. Develop technique for assessing juvenile salmonid culvert passage |
a. Conduct physical assessment of selected culvert(s) |
ongoing |
$16,870 |
|
| 1. |
b. Conduct hydraulic assessment of selected culvert(s) |
ongoing |
$19,595 |
|
| 1. |
c. Conduct biological assessment of selected culvert(s) |
ongoing |
$26,965 |
|
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 2002 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 2002 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 2002 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
FTE: 0.40 |
$24,267 |
| Fringe |
|
$8,570 |
| Supplies |
|
$7,025 |
| Travel |
|
$6,381 |
| Indirect |
|
$43,569 |
| Capital |
|
$0 |
| NEPA |
|
$0 |
| PIT tags |
|
$0 |
| Subcontractor |
|
$5,504 |
| Other |
|
$237 |
| $95,553 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $95,553 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $95,553 |
| FY 2002 forecast from 2001 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
| Washington State Department of Transportation |
Laboratory facilities and tools to develop assessment protocol |
$75,000 |
in-kind |
Other budget explanation
Currently, PNNL is under contract with WSDOT to develop a protocol for field assessment of juvenile salmonid passage through culverts. Development of the field protocol is scheduled to be completed in 2001. The project address the lack of standardized field techniques in Washington State for evaluating passage success of different species and sizes of fish in relation to measureable hydraulic conditions and culvert physical characteristics. The outcome of this effort, principally the development of a standardized and statistically valid protocol for quantitively assessing juvenile salmonid passage through culverts in the field, will be the basis for the proposed research.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Do not fund - no response required
Date:
Jun 15, 2001
Comment:
Do not fund. A response is not warranted. The proposed project acts as a field test of a protocol being developed by WDOT and PNNL to evaluate juvenile passage through culverts. There are a number of shortcomings in this proposal. An inadequate number of culverts are proposed for study in the first year. Specific capture techniques have not been determined which provides little confidence that meaningful results can be obtained. Training for physical and hydraulic assessment techniques is requested indicating that personnel may not be appropriate to achieve objectives. The proposers ignored fish passage work done outside of WA. There is a protocol that already exists for improving fish passage by WDFW (see proposal 25058) that indicates that this work is not needed.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Aug 10, 2001
Comment:
Do not fund. A response was not warranted. The proposed project acts as a field test of a protocol being developed by WDOT and PNNL to evaluate juvenile passage through culverts. There are a number of shortcomings in this proposal. An inadequate number of culverts are proposed for study in the first year. Specific capture techniques have not been determined, which provides little confidence that meaningful results can be obtained. Training for physical and hydraulic assessment techniques is requested indicating that personnel may not be appropriate to achieve objectives. The proposers ignored fish passage work done outside of WA. There is a protocol that already exists for improving fish passage by WDFW (see proposal 25058) that indicates that this work is not needed.
Recommendation:
Date:
Oct 1, 2001
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Indirect effect. Project will apply laboratory developed protocol for assessing juvenile salmonid passage through roadway culverts.
Comments
Difficult to assess. Could this be combined with work done by the WDFW?
Already ESA Req? no
Biop? yes
Recommendation:
Rank D
Date:
Oct 16, 2001
Comment:
This proposal would apply laboratory-developed protocol for assessing juvenile salmonid passage through roadway culverts. It is probably not a critical uncertainty (therefore, does not meet an RPA). Other guidelines (WDFW) exist that can be used for culvert improvements to allow fish passage. It should be deferred for now.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Jan 3, 2002
Comment: