FY 2002 Innovative proposal 200300300
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 |
|---|---|
| 34008 Narrative | Narrative |
| Letter from D. Marmorek (ESSA Technologies ) to B. Maslen (BPA) RE: Response to BPA Comments on project 34008 | Correspondence |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Use a Multi-Watershed Approach to Increase the Rate of Learning from Columbia Basin Watershed Restoration Projects |
| Proposal ID | 200300300 |
| Organization | ESSA Technologies Ltd. (ESSA) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | David Marmorek |
| Mailing address | 300-1765 W. 8th Ave Vancouver BC Canada V6J 5C6 |
| Phone / email | 6047332996 / dmarmorek@essa.com |
| Manager authorizing this project | David Marmorek |
| Review cycle | FY 2002 Innovative |
| Province / Subbasin | Systemwide / Systemwide |
| Short description | Compile and compare data from habitat restoration projects in multiple watersheds to enhance the rate of learning about effects of restoration actions on fish populations, optimize the design of future restoration programs and improve monitoring. |
| Target species | Chinook salmon and steelhead (ESUs: Snake River spring/summer chinook, Snake River fall chinook, Snake River steelhead, Lower Columbia River chinook), bull trout (Middle Columbia River Recovery Unit, Clark Fork Recovery Unit) |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| BPA | Action 180 | NMFS | The Action Agencies and NMFS shall work within regional prioritization and congressional appropriation processes to establish and provide the level of FCRPS funding to develop and implement a basinwide hierarchical monitoring program. This program shall be developed collaboratively with appropriate regional agencies and shall determine population and environmental status (including assessment of performance measures and standards) and allow ground-truthing of regional databases. A draft program including protocols for specific data to be collected, frequency of samples, and sampling sites shall be developed by September 2001. Implementation should begin no later than the spring of 2002 and will be fully implemented no later than 2003. |
| NMFS/BPA | 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 |
|---|
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
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. Scope and formulate initial habitat-related hypotheses to test with the pilot analyses | a. Identify Core Group and prepare for scoping meeting | $4,263 | ||
| 1. | b. 2-day scoping meeting with Core Group | $13,473 | ||
| 1. | c. Summarize scoping meeting results | $6,223 | ||
| 2.Identify pilot watersheds and compile information | a. Prepare for workshop | $6,318 | ||
| 2. | b. Conduct 3-day watershed reconnaissance workshop | $20,082 | ||
| 2. | c. Consolidate inventory of restoration projects and monitoring in pilot watersheds | $14,855 | ||
| 2. | d. Summarize existing monitoring data in database | $11,952 | ||
| 2. | e. Analyze database to identify potential control/treatment/ contrast watersheds | $16,155 | Yes | |
| 3. Explore statistical approaches | a. Develop statistical methods for analyzing the data and from pilot watersheds | $26,400 | Yes | |
| 3. | b. Evaluate existing restoration and monitoring programs in pilot watersheds | $14,554 | Yes | |
| 3. | c. Evaluate alternative restoration and monitoring programs | $14,054 | Yes | |
| 3. | d. Summary Report and journal article | $29,508 | Yes | |
| 3. | e. Multi-agency briefing to review results | $21,927 |
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: 1.1 | $62,678 |
| Fringe | $13,036 | |
| Supplies | includes communication costs | $3,000 |
| Travel | $27,500 | |
| Indirect | Overhead, administrative costs | $83,650 |
| Subcontractor | Statistical Advisor | $9,900 |
| $199,764 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $199,764 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $199,764 |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| The following in-kind contributions are assumed given initial discussions with agency personnel, but we do not yet have formal confirmation of these contributions. | $0 | in-kind | |
| USFWS | Participation of agency personnel at workshops (assume 2 people for 7 days at $200/day) | $2,800 | in-kind |
| USFS | Participation of agency personnel at workshops (assume 3 people for 7 days at $200/day) | $4,200 | in-kind |
| B.C. Ministry of Water, Land, Air Protection | Participation of agency personnel at workshops (assume 1 person for 7 days at $200/day) | $1,400 | in-kind |
| NPPC | Participation of agency personnel at workshops (assume 2 people for 7 days at $200/day) | $2,800 | in-kind |
| CRITFC | Participation of agency personnel at workshops (assume 2 people for 7 days at $200/day) | $2,800 | in-kind |
| NMFS | Participation of agency personnel at workshops (assume 1 person for 7 days at $200/day) | $1,400 | in-kind |
| BPA | Participation of agency personnel at workshops (assume 1 person for 7 days at $200/day) | $1,400 | in-kind |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
This number one ranked proposal is innovative and needed. Excellent detail is provided in each section. The project has a high probability of contributing benefit to fish and wildlife. It proposes to use existing information to generate understanding of the relation between fish and habitat needed to guide salmonid restoration programs. It addresses statistical challenges explicitly. Even the first step, simple systematic gathering of background information, will be of value. Reviewers strongly support this proposal for much-needed work that will be of value basinwide.Because project planning and implementation in the Basin has taken place at a local level, the benefits to fish may also be local. This project is an attempt to look at the problem at higher scales (watersheds or multiple watersheds), using available information, to assess the habitat needs at the scales relevant to fish populations or metapopulations. Specifically, the proponents propose to systematically look at current projects in multiple watersheds, take an inventory of actions taken and information collected, and explore the opportunities to make between-watershed comparisons to enhance learning and improve the design of current and future restoration actions. This is an innovative, viable alternative and more design based approach to evaluation of habitat improvement and watershed restoration techniques than is the expert system and model based approach in EDT. The ISRP recommends funding this cost-effective, innovative pilot project to provide an independent check on evaluation of watershed restoration procedures. We agree with the proponents that"...an exploration of multi-watershed approaches to testing tributary restoration hypotheses, using both actual data from existing projects and potential data from future projects, can act as a catalyst to improving Columbia Basin tributary restoration programs."
The proposal is improved from last year's submittal that ranked 13 out of 66. This version is on a more appropriate scale with more of a workshop approach than the previously submitted proposal. The PIs are well qualified, and clearly have a grasp of Fish and Wildlife Program issues and the contents of ISRP reports. The sponsor demonstrates understanding of the role of experimental design, randomization, sampling units, etc. that is required in order to compare alternatives in watershed restoration projects.
Comment:
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological BenefitIndirect benefit. Analyze the effects of various restoration treatments on salmonids (specifically Chinook and Bull Trout) identifying both existing constraints and future opportunities for improving experimental designs, monitoring, and restoration programs.
Comments
This project will collect and organize data to identify what information is available to adequately test hypotheses and also to identify gaps in current knowledge to help prioritize future planning. There are two critically important regional goals that are served by this type of program:
- maximizing the efficiency of information acquisition within specific monitoring project types, and
- maximizing the efficiency of regional planning of future recovery actions and monitoring projects.
Already ESA Required?
No
Biop?
No
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUIndirect Benefit. Analyze the effects of various restoration treatments on salmonids (specifically Chinook and Bull Trout) identifying both existing constraints and future opportunities for improving experimental designs, monitoring, and restoration programs.
Comments
This project will collect and organize data to identify what information is available to adequately test hypotheses and also to identify gaps in current knowledge to help prioritize future planning. There are two critically important regional goals that are served by this type of program – 1) maximizing the efficiency of information acquisition within specific monitoring project types, and 2) maximizing the efficiency of regional planning of future recovery actions and monitoring projects. This project closely relates to RPA 183 as defined in the BiOp. This proposal could be strengthened by more directly demonstrating how it will tie in with RPA 183.
Already ESA Req? No
Biop? No
Comment:
Do not recommend at this time. Proposal overlaps with ongoing work and proposals submitted to Mainstem/Systemwide Provincial Review. Defer consideration pending coordination of needs and assurances that there is not duplication of effort or funding of unnecessary activities.Comment:
Comment: