FY 2002 Columbia Plateau proposal 199701400
Contents
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 |
|---|---|
| 199701400 Narrative | Narrative |
| 199701400 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
| 199701400 Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
| Columbia Plateau: Columbia Lower Middle Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
| Columbia Plateau: Columbia Lower Middle Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Evaluation of Juvenile Fall Chinook Stranding on the Hanford Reach |
| Proposal ID | 199701400 |
| Organization | Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Paul Hoffarth |
| Mailing address | 3030 West Clearwater Suite 115 Kennewick, WA 99336 |
| Phone / email | 5097347434 / hoffaph@dfw.wa.gov |
| Manager authorizing this project | John Easterbrooks |
| Review cycle | Columbia Plateau |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Mainstem Columbia |
| Short description | Estimate the number of rearing wild juvenile upriver bright fall chinook killed or placed at risk in a 17 mile section of the Hanford Reach during the implementation period of the year 2002 Special Operations Plan for the Priest Rapids Project. |
| Target species | Fall Chinook |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Hanford Reach, Priest Rapids Dam to Richland | ||
| Hanford Reach, Priest Rapids Dam to Richland | ||
| 46.6708 | -119.4325 | Hanford Reach |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|---|
| 1997 | Pilot Evaluation - Observations/verification of fall chinook fry and resident fish stranding in the Hanford Reach. |
| 1997 | Development of benthic macroinvertebrate assessment plan (University of Idaho, Streamside Consultants subcontracts) |
| 1997 | Completion of Unsteady Flow Model for the Hanford Reach (PNNL subcontract) |
| 1998 | Field work to collect basic information pertaining to the physical and biological aspects of chinook and resident fish stranding/entrapment in the Hanford Reach |
| 1998 | First year of benthic macroinvertebrate assessment (determination of colonization variability, artificial substrate type and sample site selection University of Idaho, Streamside Programs Consultant subcontract). |
| 1998 | Collection of Scanning Hydrographic Operational Airborne LIDAR Survey (COE subcontract) detailed bathymetry data for 17 miles of the Hanford Reach (cost share with USGS/BRD fall chinook project). |
| 1998 | Conduct laboratory assessment of physiological and behavioral impacts of juvenile fall chinook exposure to warm water and temperature gradients within entrapments (USGS/BRD subcontract) |
| 1998 | Formation of Hanford Technical and Policy Groups (representatives from all affected tribal, hydro, and fish manager parties) to oversee and guide direction of the study |
| 1999 | Completion of temperature tolerance laboratory work |
| 1999 | Completion of benthic macroinvertebrate field assessment and laboratory work |
| 1999 | Technical and Policy Groups development of a Special Operations Plan for the Priest Rapids Project to minimize chinook stranding |
| 1999 | Completion of first year assessment of Special Operation Plan |
| 1999 | Integration of Unsteady Flow Model, detailed bathymetry (SHOALS) data, and Priest Rapids discharge data into a GIS to develop assessment plan and to assess results of Special Operation Plan |
| 2000 | Complete resident fish assessment |
| 2000 | First revision of Special Operations Plan for the Priest Rapids Project completed based upon 1999 results. |
| 2000 | Revised Special Operations Plan assessed. |
| 2000 | Second revision to Special Operations Plan for the Priest Rapids Project completed based upon results of year 2000 field season. |
| 2000 | Completion of second year assessment of Special Operation Plan |
| 2001 | Third revision to Special Operations Plan for the Priest Rapids Project completed based upon results of year 1999 and 2000 field seasons. |
| 2001 | Completion of second year assessment of Special Operation Plan (ongoing). |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Smolt Monitoring Program | Data sharing | |
| 9102900 | Identification of Spawning, Rearing, and Migratory Requirements of Fall Chinook Salmon in the Columbia River Basin | Shared staff, equipment, data, and past cost sharing |
| 9406900 | Spawning Habitat Model for Snake River Fall Chinook | Shared staff, equipment, and data |
| 8605000 | White Sturgeon, Productivity, Status, and Habitat Requirements | Data Sharing |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design 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 Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Determine Starting and Ending Dates of Special Operation Plan. | Ongoing | $12,500 | ||
| 2. Estimate the number of wild juvenile chinook killed and placed at risk within the 17 mile designated sampling area during the special operations period. | Ongoing | $241,500 | ||
| 3. Determine through daily monitoring the need for emergency re-wetting during the special operations period. | Ongoing | $33,000 | ||
| 4.Refine the juvenile fall chinook susceptibility model developed by PNNL | Ongoing | $55,000 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Determine Starting and Ending Dates of Special Operation Plan. | 2003 | 2003 | $12,500 |
| 2. Estimate the number of wild juvenile chinook killed and placed at risk within the 17 mile designated sampling area during the special operations period. | 2003 | 2003 | $241,500 |
| 3. Determine through daily monitoring the need for emergency re-wetting during the special operations period. | 2003 | 2003 | $33,000 |
| 4.Refine the juvenile fall chinook susceptibility model developed by PNNL | 2003 | 2003 | $10,000 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
| FY 2003 |
|---|
| $297,000 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Determine the starting and ending dates of the special operations period. | 2004 | 2006 | $37,500 |
| 2. Conduct index surveys for estimation of population abundance and length frequency. | 2004 | 2006 | $30,000 |
| 3.Determine through daily monitoring the need for emergency re-wetting and the impact of flow conditions on wild juvenile fall chinook during the special operations period. | 2004 | 2006 | $292,500 |
| 4. Continue to update and refine the juvenile fall chinook susceptibility model developed by PNNL. | 2004 | 2006 | $30,000 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
|---|---|---|
| $130,000 | $130,000 | $130,000 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2002 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 4.5 FTE's | $158,351 |
| Fringe | Medical Insurance, Soc. Sec., Retirement, etc. | $41,500 |
| Supplies | Boat gas, field equipment, etc. | $27,700 |
| Travel | Private and GSA vehicle mileage, GSA vehicle lease. | $16,500 |
| Indirect | Administrative Overhead | $46,949 |
| Capital | $0 | |
| NEPA | $0 | |
| PIT tags | $0 | |
| Subcontractor | PNNL (Objectives 2&4), Golder Assoc. (Objective 2) | $51,000 |
| Other | $0 | |
| $342,000 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $342,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $342,000 |
| FY 2002 forecast from 2001 | $342,000 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Reason for change in estimated budget
No Change
Reason for change in scope
No Change
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grant County Public Utility District | Project Funding | $70,000 | cash |
| Grant County Public Utility District | Staff, field equipment | $30,000 | in-kind |
Other budget explanation
Note that the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) will be subcontracted to perform Objective 4 but will also conduct a portion of the work included in Objective 2. Golder Associates will be subcontracted to perform a portion of the work included in Objective 2.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Fundable only if response is adequate
Jun 15, 2001
Comment:
Fundable after a response is given that adequately addresses the ISRP's larger concerns over the entire Hanford Reach study program and interrelated projects stated above.
This proposal involves two more years of study followed by three years of monitoring and evaluation (presumably to become ongoing). Past studies have provided an important understanding of the effect of flow fluctuations and the mortality associated with stranding of fall chinook juveniles. Mortality on fry is likely to be highest when they are very small and greatest in the nearshore areas (<1m depth). In recent years the mortality rates in the study area had been relatively small (estimated to be <2% of the chinook fry) but rates are expected to be higher during 2001. We support the continuation of this study, but note the need to address the three limitations noted in the proposal (page 1, section 9) and the need to begin applying flow dynamic models to predict mortality and to verify these results with field data. These in-depth sampling programs are not likely needed on an annual basis. Particular attention should be placed on inspection of the remaining river area that has not been sampled (i.e., the 34 miles of Hanford Reach not included in the study area).
Comment:
Long term funding for monitoring for this project needs to be considered by Grant County PUD.Comment:
Fundable, but the value of the project depends on whether there is still a question if the flow agreement is effective. This is primarily a monitoring effort to determine stranding mortality under various flow levels. The response was marginal. This proposal involves two more years of study followed by three years of monitoring and evaluation (presumably to become ongoing). Past studies have provided an important understanding of the effect of flow fluctuations and the mortality associated with stranding of fall chinook juveniles. Mortality on fry is likely to be highest when they are very small and greatest in the nearshore areas (<1m depth). In recent years the mortality rates in the study area had been relatively small (estimated to be <2% of the chinook fry) but rates are expected to be higher during 2001. We support the continuation of this study, but note the need to address the three limitations noted in the proposal (page 1, section 9) and the need to begin applying flow dynamic models to predict mortality and to verify these results with field data. Verification of the model is not likely to happen with the current level of coordination. These in-depth sampling programs are not likely needed on an annual basis. Particular attention should be placed on inspection of the remaining river area that has not been sampled (i.e., the 34 miles of Hanford Reach not included in the study area).See detailed ISRP comments on Hanford Reach projects
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUEvaluate effects of hydro operations on stranding of juveniles.
Comments
Completion of ongoing study,
Already ESA Req? NA
Biop? no
Comment:
This project began in 1997 as a 3-year project to be completed in 1999. It received additional funding for 2000 and 2001. Grant County PUD has been providing co-funding since 1997 under contract with WDFW. Grant County’s current contract with the WDFW expires in December of 2001 and the last completion report Grant received was for the 1998 sampling year. The proposal author has not contacted Grant regarding continued co-funding for 2002 and Grant has no plans to extend or renew the contract beyond 2001. We recommend that new funding not be provided for additional fieldwork on this project. Instead, efforts should be focused on finalizing reports that are already three years behind.This is an excessively detailed data collection and analysis project for a fish population that is healthy. This is especially true given the measured chinook mortalities the project has measured the past 3 years, i.e., 0.3% to 0.5% population mortality at the fry stage of a healthy population is likely inconsequential to the viability of the population. This impact, for this population, at the fry stage could be viability noise. BPA may consider having a consultant perform a PVA or similar analysis on this Hanford fall chinook population with the above mortality levels and report both the consequences of the mortality and options for ameliorating the mortality, should it be considered a problem. For example, the lost fry, if really significant, might be offset by allowing an additional 60 – 100 adult fish escape to spawn. Alternatively, the Priest Rapids hatchery could increase its six million production by 100,000 0+ smolts as this is already a heavily supplemented population. $1.6 million has already been spent on this project and $1 million more is proposed. These funds could be more usefully spent within a sub-basin.
Grant County PUD is also concerned about the perceived need for extending the duration of this study, regardless of the funding source. In Grant’s opinion, 5 more years of monitoring and intensive sampling will unnecessarily delay implementation of a long-term flow management program to address the effects of flow fluctuations on fall chinook fry. We now have detailed mortality data from 1999, 2000 and 2001 that correspond to high, average and very low water years. We believe that the data expected from the study are now available. An additional five years of funding would unnecessarily delay development of a long-term agreement as each party anticipates new data that might be more favorable to their position. This proposal needs to be deferred until its components can be reviewed for consistency and effectiveness.
Comment:
Stranding study (project 199701400)
This project began in 1997 to conduct a full-scale evaluation of the effect of controlled river elevation reductions on juvenile fall chinook and other species. It was originally planned to last two years, but continued to receive funding primarily from Bonneville and limited cost share by Grant County PUD. The sponsor (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife) is now requesting funding for a sixth year of activities.
The scope of work of project 199701400 has changed significantly from its original intent. Originally the project was designed as a limited research study, but has now turned into a long-term monitoring effort that proposes to assess the modified special Operations Plan for the Priest Rapids project. Priest Rapids Dam is operated by Grant County PUD.
Because of the excessive extension in the duration of this project, the total costs to date considerably exceed the original estimates. The funding estimate for the entire duration of the project when the original version (FY 1997) was first proposed was $225,000. The total spent to date (FY 2001) is $1,442,964, over six times the original budget expectations.
In FY 2000, the ISRP recommended funds for one year only to complete the analysis and write the final report. The final report has not been received yet. In FY 2002, the ISRP supported the monitoring observations gained through this project, but linked their value to the effectiveness of flow operations. The Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority, in its current FY 2002 recommendations, indicated that the long term funding for this project needs to be considered by Grant County PUD.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that funding of this project not be provided in FY 2002. No additional field work should be considered, given that the available mortality data collected to date reflect a complete spectrum of river conditions, including very low, medium and high water years. The sponsor should complete the final report to meet its contractual obligations.
Budget effect on base program (Project 199701400):
| FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
|---|---|---|
| Decrease $342,000 | Decrease $297,000 | Decrease $130,000 |
Comment:
BPA does not intend to Fund.Comment:
Comment: