FY 2003 Middle Snake proposal 200302800
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 |
|---|---|
| 32011 Narrative | Narrative |
| 32011 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
| 32011 Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
| Middle Snake: Payette Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
| Middle Snake: Payette Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
| Letter from S. McNary (BPA) to G. Servheen (IDFG) Re: Final Funding Decision for project proposal 32011 | BPA Decision Letter |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Mitigation of marine-derived nutrient loss in the Boise-Payette-Weiser subbasin. |
| Proposal ID | 200302800 |
| Organization | Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Washington State University, University of Idaho, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Idaho Office of Species Conservation (IDFG/IOSC) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Gregg Servheen |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box 25 Boise, ID 83707 |
| Phone / email | 2083343180 / |
| Manager authorizing this project | Tracey Trent, Chief, Natural Resource Policy |
| Review cycle | Middle Snake |
| Province / Subbasin | Middle Snake / Boise |
| Short description | The project replaces marine derived nutrients using salmon analogs and salmon carcasses in the Boise-Payetter-Weiser subbasin. Aquatic and terrestrial effects of nutrient treatments will be monitored using isotope and lipid analysis. |
| Target species | bull trout, bald eagle, westslope cutthroat trout, mink, dipper |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Boise-Payette-Weiser subbasin | ||
| 44.19 | -116.18 | Payette subbasin |
| 43.66 | -115.81 | Boise subbasin |
| 44.58 | -116.57 | Weiser subbasin |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
| 152 |
| 153 |
| 154 |
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 199800200 | Native Salmonid Assessment | use survey data and sampling cooperatively |
| Streamnet | use Streamnet data for bull trout distribution |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Objective 1. Delineate treatment and control areas within the Boise-Payette-Weiser subbasins. | Task 1.1 Define and delineate elements affecting selection of treatment sites; including known bull trout distribution, historical occurrence of anadromous fish spawning areas, and cattle grazing allotments. | 0.25 | $4,000 | |
| Task 1.2 Choose treatment and control sites. | 0.25 | $4,000 | ||
| Task 1.3 Complete necessary NEPA | 0.5 | $10,000 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Objective 1. Delineate treatment and control areas within the Boise-Payette-Weiser subbasins. | $0 |
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Objective 2 Reintroduce marine-derived nutrients in selected watersheds using briquettes and salmon kelts eggs in each of 3 years. | Task 2.1 Seed selected streams with nutrient briquettes and salmon and steelhead kelts and eggs based on historical nutirent levels contributed by salmon. | 1 month | $30,332 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Objective 2. Reintroduce marine-derived nutrients in selected watersheds using briquettes and salmon kelts eggs in each of 3 years. | 4 | 5 | $63,884 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
|---|---|
| $31,393 | $32,491 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 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 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Objective 3. Following reintroduction of nutrient brikets, and salmon kelts eggs in each of 3 years, quantify and model the contribution of nitrogen within the terrestrial vertebrate food chain in treated and control areas. | Task 3.1Capture selected vertebrate species including avian (dipper and kingfisher) and mammalian (mink, shrews, bats, small mammals) in treated and untreated watersheds. | 3 | $42,273 | |
| Task 3.2 Measure the occurrence of 15N in captured species. | 3 | $31,704 | ||
| Task 3.3 Analyze and report on results. | 3 | $10,568 | ||
| Objective 4.0 . Following reintroduction of nutrient briquettes, salmon kelts, and eggs in each of 3 years, quantify and model the contribution of nitrogen using conifer foliar samples. | Task 4.1 Sample foliage from bankside, adjacent upslope, and upslope mature/old growth conifers and evaluate patterns of foliar 15N to assess historic inputs of marine derived nitrogen | 3 | $18,984 | |
| Task 4.2 Determine if low level annual fertilization of conifer seedlings using salmon carcasses and briquettes has significant impacts on foliar nutrient levels. | 3 | $60,179 | ||
| Task 4.3 Analyze and report on results. | 3 | $12,035 | ||
| Objective 5.0 Following reintroduction of nutrient briquettes, salmon kelts, and eggs in each of 3 years, quantify the contribution of nitrogen within the aquatic food chain. | Task 5.1 Sample selected food web components (biofilm, invertebrates, and fishes) in treated and control reaches. | 3 | $56,092 | |
| Task 5.2 Measure biofilm mass, chlorophyll-a, invertebrate densities and mass, and fish densities and mass. | 3 | $35,124 | ||
| Task 5.3 Measure 13C and 15N in biofilm, invertebrates, and fishes | $20,627 | |||
| Task 5.4 Analyze and report on results. | 3 | $18,871 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Objective 3.0. Following reintroduction of nutrient brikets, and salmon kelts eggs in each of 3 years, quantify and model the contribution of nitrogen within the terrestrial vertebrate food chain in treated and control areas. | 4 | 5 | $177,669 |
| Objective 4.0 . Following reintroduction of nutrient briquettes, salmon kelts, and eggs in each of 3 years, quantify and model the contribution of nitrogen using conifer foliar samples. | 4 | 5 | $182,396 |
| Objective 5.0 Following reintroduction of nutrient briquettes, salmon kelts, and eggs in each of 3 years, quantify the contribution of nitrogen within the aquatic food chain. | 4 | 5 | $293,810 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
|---|---|
| $325,309 | $328,566 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2003 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 4 grad students, .11 yr PI, .66 yr PI, 4 temps | $145,434 |
| Fringe | $33,562 | |
| Supplies | $39,642 | |
| Travel | $57,900 | |
| Indirect | $63,251 | |
| NEPA | $15,000 | |
| $354,789 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2003 cost | $354,789 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2003 budget request | $354,789 |
| FY 2003 forecast from 2002 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| IDFG | office, admin, field support | $10,000 | in-kind |
| Bio-Oregon | salmon analogs | $30,000 | in-kind |
| University of Idaho | cost share with existing project | $15,000 | in-kind |
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
Mar 1, 2002
Comment:
Response needed. This is a research project: of the first year budget, approximately $306K is for research (4 graduate students from 2 schools) and about $40K is to actually distribute the nutrients. This is a potentially well-designed study, especially in its examination of terrestrial effects, but it might be premature, given the proposals funded by the Council and BPA last year as part of the Innovative Solicitation. The proposal needs to better describe how it might fit with the other ongoing nutrient supplementation studies in the Columbia basin. What does this proposal offer beyond those? Go to www.nwcouncil.org/innovative and see projects 200105500, 200101300. Is there some attribute of this project, some synergy, that makes it very fundable? The "innovative" projects are pilot studies to test the efficacy of nutrient supplementation before proceeding with other studies or implementation, and unless the response convinces otherwise implementation of this project should await findings from those.Comment:
The loss of marine derived nutrients has been identified as a factor limiting the productivity of bull trout in Idaho and Oregon and is viewed as an issue that should be a region-wide concern/investigation. Reviewers believe that results from this study could likely be applied throughout the range of distribution for bull trout where anadromous fish have been removed. Reviewers suggested that the proposed work, as it relates to bull trout, should be implemented in a basin-wide approach; however, reviewers questioned whether the work should be initiated now or wait until results become available from some of the nutrient projects that were funded through the 2001 Innovative process. The reviewers suggested that pursuing this work is a High Priority; however, review of data from the innovative projects may be useful before the implementation of this project thus coordination with ongoing projects is essential.Comment:
Fundable. This is a research project: of the first year budget, approximately $306K is for research (4 graduate students from 2 schools) and about $40K is to actually distribute the nutrients. It is a technically well-designed effort. It does go beyond ongoing BPA-funded studies by evaluating terrestrial effects; however, its long-term benefits to resident fish are uncertain, and the potential application of results to anadromous fish is not described. Because, as the response states, this is a management action to mitigate for nutrient loss related to anadromous fish loss in these subbasins, the critical issue is how practical and feasible is annual fertilization in the blocked areas (unlike that in areas currently occupied by anadromous fish, where results of fertilization studies indicate a value of restoring those runs). Unfortunately this study might not directly include bull trout responses to fertilization and that weakness should be corrected if at all possible. Reviewers were supportive of the basic research aspects of the proposal, but concerned that long-term management applications were not more developed in the proposal and response.Comment:
Do not recommend. The discussions are agreements among responsible entities, as called for in the Council's 1995 F&W Program have not yet taken place. Findings on Section 10.5B. As BPA commented in 1995, FWL Program amendments, it may not be an FCRPS responsibility to mitigate above Hells Canyon dam if not affected by the construction or operation of Black Canyon, Anderson Ranch, Boise Diversion, Minidoka, or Palisades reservoirs.Comment:
Project Issue 7: New projects that were prioritized by the Middle Snake province group
The sponsors in the province have proposed four new projects to utilize the funds within the Council's province allocation that remains after the existing projects discussed above have been funded.
(a) IDFG/OSC/et al -- 32011 (Mitigate for marine derived nutrient loss in Boise R.) ($30,000 in Fiscal Year 2003 and no funds in Fiscal Year 2004 and 2005)
The ISRP rated this project as "Fundable" and CBFWA rated it as "High Priority." Bonneville gave the project a "D" rating, stating that the regional agreement regarding Bonneville's responsibility for such projects above Hell's Canyon Dam that were called for in the Council's 1995 program have not been achieved. Bonneville questions if the project is within the scope of its obligations under the Act.
Responding to Bonneville's comments about a linkage to hydrosystem projects, the sponsor points to projects in the Boise-Payette-Weiser subbasin affecting anadromous and resident fish passage, bull trout populations, and associated watershed nutrient budgets including the Boise Diversion, Anderson Ranch and Black Canyon projects (and several others).
Council Recommendation: The project was made a consensus priority by the province group. The Council does not believe that the failure of the region to respond to the Council's request in its 1995 program to reach an agreement about Bonneville's responsibility above the Hell's Canyon complex is sufficient basis for a deferral -- Bonneville was one of the primary parties that was called upon to engage that discussion, and could have done so, but did not. In any case, the sponsor has demonstrated a plausible link to federal projects for which Bonneville has acknowledged at least partial resident fish responsibility.
The Council recommends limited funding for this project. Funds should be provided to address Section 4, objective 1, tasks 1, 2 and 3 at $18,000 (e.g. NEPA and site selection) and Section 7, Objective 3 at $12,000 (i.e. baseline monitoring) totaling $30,000 for Fiscal Year 2003 and no funds for Fiscal Year 2004 and 2005. Future funds for implementation are dependent on subsequent reviews.
Comment:
Phase 3 will be initiated upon resolution of identified issues. BPA will reengage with the Council regarding applicability of this project to the FCRPS mitigation responsibility prior to issuing a final decision.Comment:
Phase III. Realign budget one year.Comment: