FY 2002 Columbia Plateau proposal 200203300

Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary

Reviews and Recommendations

Additional documents

Title	Type
25069 Narrative	Narrative
25069 Sponsor Response to the ISRP	Response
Columbia Plateau: John Day Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects	Subbasin Map
Columbia Plateau: John Day Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects	Subbasin Map

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	John Day Salmonid Recovery Monitoring Program
Proposal ID	200203300
Organization	Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon (CTWSRO)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Jennifer M. Stafford
Mailing address	PO Box 480 Canyon City, OR 97820
Phone / email	5415754212 / wstribe@highdesertnet.com
Manager authorizing this project	Terry A. Luther
Review cycle	Columbia Plateau
Province / Subbasin	Columbia Plateau / John Day
Short description	Update salmonid reproduction goals, compile data to develop predictive models to guide future restoration efforts, compile data that presents historical riparian condition, investigate missing bull trout status information.
Target species	Spring chinook salmon, summer steelhead trout, bull trout.

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description
44.6856	-118.7867	Approximate location of proposed MFJDR above Camp Creek monitoring station.
44.4589	-119.5097	Approximate location of proposed JDR above Dayville, OR monitoring station.
44.6223	-118.5732	Approximate location of proposed MFJDR above Caribou Creek monitoring station
44.4556	-118.6898	Approximate location of proposed JDR near Prairie City, OR monitoring station.
44.7802	-119.5793	Approximate location of proposed Rudio Creek below Gilmore Creek monitoring station.
44.8082	-119.4216	Approximate location of proposed Cottonwood Creek near Monument, Or monitoring station.
44.886	-119.4081	Approximate location of proposed Big Wall Creek above NFJDR monitoring station
45.0063	-118.9872	Approximate location of proposed Camas Creek below Stover Canyon monitoring station.
		*** Note: The remainder of the project focuses on a specific area or property rather than a point. Therefore, they cannot be accurately described by lat/long descriptions.

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description
NMFS	Action 183	NMFS	Initiate at least three tier 3 studies (each necessarily comprising several sites) within each ESU (a single action may affect more than one ESU). In addition, at least two studies focusing on each major management action must take place within the Columbia River basin. The Action Agencies shall work with NMFS and the Technical Recovery Teams to identify key studies in the 1-year plan. Those studies will be implemented no later than 2003.

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Year	Accomplishment
on-going	Fish abundance monitoring and mark-recapture surveys corresponding to specific restoration projects.

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
8402100	Protect and Enhance John Day River Fish Habitat	Concurrent CTWSRO-ODFW project areas, support potentially significant cumulative beneficial effects.
980160	John Day Basin Spring Chinook Salmon Escapement and Production Monitoring	Data gaps will be addressed and all will be compiled into the predictive chinook and steelhead distribution model.
7900400	Study of Wild Spring Chinook Salmon in the John Day River system.	Data gaps will be addressed and all will be compiled into the predictive chinook and steelhead distribution model.
9405400	Bull Trout Life History Project - NE Oregon	Program has not been able to address migratory improvement and genetic exchange between tributaries on the Middle Fork John Day River.

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost	Subcontractor
1. Collect Historic Riparian Information.	a. Aquire historical photos and documentation.	1	$6,930
	b. Scan photos	0.02	$614
	c. Georeference points	0.04	$5,600	Yes
	d. Digitize features.	0.2	$7,373
2. Research Steelhead trout and chinook salmon life history	a. Search archives for historic spawning information.	0.02	$440
	b. Enter survey cards into database.	0.1	$2,200
	c. Map spawning areas by GIS	0.5	$614
3. Study redd scouring	a. Purchase supplies	1	$100
	b. Specify spawning areas	0.01	$246
4. Monitor water quantity and quality conditions.	a. Select sites.	0.02	$0
5. Conduct flood irrigation study.	a. Purchase staff gages.	1	$237
	b. Purchase measuring devices.	1	$2,640
	c. Purchase rain gage	1	$36
	d. Survey sites.	0.01	$275
	e. Complete study design.	0.06	$0
6. Provide for administrative costs.	a. Fringe benefits for personnel conducting above tasks.	1	$2,603
	b. Provide for indirect costs associated with above tasks.	1	$13,707

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Continue historic riparian information collection and analysis.	2003	2004	$43,085
2. Continue to provide administrative costs associated with outyear activities.`	2003	2004	$188,893

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

FY 2003	FY 2004
$40,435	$40,435

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost	Subcontractor
1. Monitor Water Quantity and Quality Conditions.	a. Construct two stations to be operated and maintained by OWRD.	0.02	$7,863
	b. Construct two stations to be operated and maintained by CTWSRO	0.02	$20,889
	c. Construct four stations to be operated and maintained by the NFJDWC	0.02	$40,805
2. Conduct Flood Irrigation Study.	a. Install 10 piezometers	.02	$5,500	Yes
3. Provide administrative costs for above tasks	a. Provide indirect costs	1	$18,990

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
All construction/implementation tasks will be completed in 2002.			$0

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
1. Provide for administrative costs associated with proposed projects.	a. Provide office space, utilities, phone, computer access.	3	$690
	b. Provide vehicle and travel funds.	3	$1,850
	c. Provide administrative and secretarial oversight.	0.13	$3,080
	d. Provide administrative and technical oversight.	0.15	$0
	e. Provide fringe benefits for involved personnel.	1	$708
	f. Provide for indirect costs with the above tasks.	1	$2,620

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Continue to provide administrative oversight associated with project activities.	2003	2004	$13,288

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

FY 2003	FY 2004
$6,644	$6,644

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost
1. Collect historic riparian information.	a. Analyze data.	0.01	$614
2. Review steelhead trout and chinook salmon life histories.	a. Summarize data.	0.01	$614
	b. Prepare final report	0.04	$1,228
3. Assess red scouring	a. Monitor scour chain stations and flows	0.06	$1,938
4. Assess redd scouring.	a. Relate flows to scour chain data and compose report.	0.01	$246
5. Monitor Water Quantity and Quality Conditions.	a. Train operators.	0.02	$0
	b. Conduct monthly inspections and flow measurements.	3	$3,163
	c. Validate data.	0.01	$246
	d. Create rating table.	0.02	$615
6. Conduct Flood Irrigation study.	a. Monitor flow, rain, and withdrawals.	0.03	$861
	b. Download temperature information seasonally (In-kind)	0.01	$615
	c. Validate data.	0.01	$246
	d. Compile data into report.	0.02	$615
7. Provide for administrative costs.	a. Provide fringe benefits for involved personnel.	1	$1,803
	b. Provide for indirect costs of above tasks.	1	$4,719

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Continue to collect historic riparian information.	2003	2004	$1,290
2. Complete redd scour study.	2003	2003	$2,293
3. Continue water quality monitoring.	2003	2004	$904
4. Continue flood irrigation study.	2003	2004	$2,454
5. Continue to provide for administrative costs associated with above tasks.	2003	2004	$5,130

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

FY 2003	FY 2004
$12,071	$9,778

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Item	Note	FY 2002 cost
Personnel	FTE: 1.25	$22,505
Fringe		$5,114
Supplies		$82,838
Travel		$1,850
Indirect		$40,036
Subcontractor		$11,100
Other		$690
		$164,133

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2002 cost	$164,133
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2002 budget request	$164,133
FY 2002 forecast from 2001	$0
% change from forecast	0.0%

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind
ODFW	Spring chinook, steelhead, and bull trout distribution, habitat, and life history data	$0	in-kind
Public libraries, landowners, local residents, universities	Historical riparian photos, documentation	$0	in-kind
OWRD	technical assistance, training, and assistance with all phases of the project.	$9,849	in-kind
NRJDWC	labor for O&M and M&E	$2,360	in-kind
CTWSRO, John Day Basin Office	technical other assistance with all phases, as well as temperature and flow monitoring equipment.	$17,959	in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

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

REVIEW:
ISRP Preliminary Review (ISRP 2001-6)

Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate

Date:
Jun 15, 2001

Comment:

Do not fund unless a response adequately addresses the ISRP concerns.

Objectives 1 and 2 are fundable. They are well-developed objectives to compile and summarize historic spawning ground data and changes in riparian condition along mainstem streams. We support this effort wholeheartedly and are concerned that historic records have not been better maintained; if the historic records are not in STREAMNET they should be lodged and maintained there. This project would complement several ongoing projects providing baseline data for Tier I and II monitoring called for in the 2000 BiOp Objectives 3 (effect of scouring on redds), 4 (monitor water quantity and quality) and 5 (effects of flood irrigation on adjacent stream flows and temperatures) are fundable but have little relationship to the other objectives and should be organized and justified separately with unique requirements for timetables, reporting, etc. Objective 4 is fundable as a separate project only if the water quality component can be integrated with Project #25010 with a rigorous sampling design for collection of water quality samples.

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
High Priority

Date:
Aug 3, 2001

Comment:

This project will expand monitoring activities in the John Day Subbasin. There appears to be overlap of Objective 4 of P&D phase (water quality monitoring) with Project Number 25010. This project needs to coordinate with 25010, 199801600, and 25088b to avoid duplicative activities. Funding should be delayed until coordination will insure data overlaps will be minimized.

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 2001-8)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Aug 10, 2001

Comment:

Fundable if the protocols of this project are consistent with project 25010 in terms of water quality parameters and measurement methodology (if not sampling site selection). Data from this project should be compatible with broad scale monitoring projects (e.g #25010) so that inferences can be drawn about changes observed in the John Day in the context of changes occurring in the larger region.

REVIEW:
NMFS Review

Recommendation:

Date:
Oct 1, 2001

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Potential indirect benefit through monitoring program

Comments
Fish abundance monitoring & mark-re-capture surveys corresponding to specific restoration projects. There appears to be overlap of Objective 4 of P&D phase (water quality monitoring) with #25010 -- protocols need to be consistent with Project #25010 in terms of water quality parameters, measurement methodology, & sampling site selection. Data from this project should be compatible with broad scale monitoring projects (e.g., #25010) so that inferences can be drawn about changes observed in the John Day in the context of changes occurring in the larger region.

Already ESA Req? no

Biop? yes

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Rank A with modification to enhance coordination.

Date:
Oct 16, 2001

Comment:

Coordinate with other monitoring activities proposed by OWRD, OWEB, ODFW, and ODEQ. This proposal is a high priority and fundable, but should not be funded until it is integrated and coordinated with other M&E efforts in the subbasin. For example, the first two objectives may be funded by a direct contract with OWEB. Other objectives relate closely to tiers 1 and 3 monitoring that is desirable (e.g., flood irrigation study) and/or being proposed or conducted by other projects (e.g., water quantity and quality monitoring). Both CBFWA and the ISRP point out the need to coordinate to reduce overlap and to ensure that data protocols are consistent with ODEQ proposal #25010. This will take some time. Although the proposal looks like a cost-effective and innovative project, it lacks some details regarding methods (e.g., for evaluating flood irrigation)

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Jan 3, 2002

Comment:

Proposal 25069 appears to conduct priority monitoring in the John Day. Bonneville ranked the proposal as a category A. BPA commented that the proposal should coordinate with the other John Day monitoring proposals, including the ODFW work in 199801600 and the ODEQ proposal 25010. NMFS commented that the above projects correspond to 400(153), 500, and 183 respectively. Staff concurs with the Bonneville recommendation on the need to coordinate the monitoring in the John Day and the Council should emphasize that requirement in the contracting process for the John Day monitoring proposals.

Budget effect on base program (Project 25069):

FY 2002	FY 2003	FY 2004
Increase $164,133	Increase $59,150	Increase $56,857

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Decision

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Mar 6, 2002

Comment:

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

Project just starting, everything has shifted a year. 04 costs not good estimates. Equipment purchase in 03, but tasks rescheduled into 04. Possibly reschedule into 05.

REVIEW:
Project Sponsor Request for FY04-05

Recommendation:

Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

REVIEW:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review

Funding category:
expense

Date:
May 2005

FY05 NPCC start of year:	FY06 NPCC staff preliminary:	FY06 NPCC July draft start of year:
$59,150	$59,150	$59,150

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website