Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Investigate Re-establishing Anadromous Fish Populations Above man-made Barriers |
| Proposal ID | 31013 |
| Organization | Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Suzanne Knapp |
| Mailing address | 7118 NE Vandenberg Ave. Corvallis, Or. 97330 |
| Phone / email | 5417574186 / |
| Manager authorizing this project | Christopher Wheaton |
| Review cycle | Lower Columbia |
| Province / Subbasin | Lower Columbia / Willamette |
| Short description | Investigate the possiblliites of re-establishing spring chinook and winter steelhead populations into historic habitat above impassable man-made barriers in the Willamette basin to link them with existing populations below barriers. |
| Target species | Spring Chinook (Upper Willamette ESU), Winter Steelhead (Upper Willamette ESU), Bull Trout |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
|
|
Foster, Cougar, Fall Creek, Dexter/Lookout Point, Dorena, Scoggins, Big Cliff/Detroit, Fern Ridge, Cottage Grove, Hills Creek, and other man-made dams in the Willamette basin without fish passage or with passage that impedes fish production. |
| 44.127 |
-122.2353 |
Cougar Reservoir |
| 43.706 |
-122.4223 |
Hills Creek Reservoir |
| 43.9093 |
-122.7505 |
Dexter/Lookout Point reservoirs |
| 43.9353 |
-122.7538 |
Fall Creek Reservoir |
| 44.3833 |
-122.2393 |
Big Cliff/Detroit reservoirs |
| 44.4092 |
-122.6713 |
Foster/Green Peter reservoirs |
| 43.7097 |
-123.0395 |
Cottage Grove Reservoir |
| 43.782 |
-122.9522 |
Dorena Reservoir |
| 44.1223 |
-123.289 |
Fern Ridge Reservoir |
| 45.4735 |
-123.1898 |
Scoggins Reservoir |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
| Willamette Hatchery BiOp |
| 10.3 Terms and Conditions |
| 2c and 5f apply. |
| 2c and 5f apply. |
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
| 1992-2001 |
Spring chinook adults have been released above certain Corps. dams in the upper Willamette basin since 1992. Juveniles have been released in these areas for decades. |
|
Release programs have demonstrated that there is spawning capacity above dams, juveniles can survive passage through dams with varying mortality rates, and these juveniles can successfully migrate, rear in the ocean and return. |
|
The release of fish upstream of dams may result in a burden on operators to provide or improve passage at these facilities. Delineation of the potential for re-establsihment is a key step in potential restoration in the Willamette basin. |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
| 199405300 |
McKenzie/Willamette Bull Trout Population and Habitat Surveys |
|
| 199206800 |
Willamette Basin Habitat Mitigation |
|
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
| 1. Plan, design, and coordinate an integrated re-establishment program for spring Chinook and winter steelhead above impassable man-made barriers in the Willamette basin. |
a. Delineate available habitat |
2 |
$59,148 |
|
|
b. Plan re-establishment priorities |
4 |
$44,362 |
|
|
c. Coordinate status, passage, permitting, and related issues with state and federal agencies |
ongoing |
$44,362 |
|
|
d. Complete NEPA process |
1 |
$25,000 |
Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
| 1. c. Coordinate passage, permitting, and related issues to allow re-establishment to occur |
2004 |
2007 |
$183,120 |
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
|---|
| $45,780 | $45,780 | $45,780 | $45,780 |
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation 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 Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
| 1. Prioritize available habitat |
Use habitat surveys to select best intro sites |
2 |
$0 |
|
| 2. Expermentally re-establish fish |
Trap and haul surplus hatchery fish |
ongoing |
$43,003 |
|
| 3. Establish connectivity with downstream populations |
Monitor recruitment and downstream passage |
ongoing |
$0 |
|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
| 1. Delineate habitat |
2004 |
2005 |
$72,203 |
| 2. Re-establish Fish |
2004 |
2007 |
$227,089 |
| 3. Establish connectivity |
2004 |
2007 |
$578,030 |
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
|---|
| $184,910 | $176,105 | $221,885 | $294,431 |
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
| 1. Monitor survival, productivity, and distribution of transplanted spawners |
a. Conduct spawning and juvenile surveys. |
ongoing |
$0 |
|
|
b. Operate screw traps below dams |
ongoing |
$0 |
|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
| 1. Monitor survival, productivity, and distribution of transplanted spawners |
2005 |
2007 |
$137,340 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
|---|
| $45,780 | $45,780 | $45,780 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2003 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
FTE: 3.0 |
$87,810 |
| Fringe |
|
$36,339 |
| Supplies |
|
$20,000 |
| Travel |
|
$9,164 |
| Indirect |
|
$37,562 |
| Capital |
|
$0 |
| NEPA |
contracted EA |
$25,000 |
| $215,875 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2003 cost | $215,875 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2003 budget request | $215,875 |
| FY 2003 forecast from 2002 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
| ODFW |
Administrative and biological support |
$20,000 |
in-kind |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate
Date:
Mar 1, 2002
Comment:
A response is needed. Like the upper Cowlitz watersheds (proposals #31005, 31017) this proposal could have exciting research opportunities and utilize extensive habitats for re-establishment of spring chinook and winter steelhead production. A response is needed, however, as the proposal is technically inadequate and very short on details of methods and the budget (basis of the estimated values?). The presentation was slightly more informative but a technical review will require information on the availability of habitat, availability of fish for transport and release above the barriers, an experimental design to the research program, and a monitoring and evaluation program to assess effectiveness.
Numerous questions come to mind that are not addressed in the proposal:
How would "trapped-and-hauled" hatchery surplus adults be chosen with respect to adaptedness of run timing, spawn timing, embryo development, egg size, etc.? What is the genetic background of the surplus hatchery fish and would their release be consistent with ESA limitations? By what criteria would "best" potential reintroduction sites be chosen? By what criteria would available habitat be identified? How would re-establishment priorities be set? What impacts could these outplants have on resident fishes and where would risk of impacts be greatest?
These habitats that have been barren of Pacific salmon for years provide an important opportunity for study. Researchers could investigate several important issues including the role of marine derived nutrients in the ecosystem, reproductive success of hatchery-reared stocks in the natural environment, hatchery and wild interactions in the natural environment. However these studies would be seriously limited if downstream passage of the smolts were not effective. If naturalized fish cannot return to spawn then it limits what we can learn about the re-introduction of Pacific salmon. The ability to collect and transport smolts and adults may be a major factor in prioritizing study sites and programs. Is there any commitment by ODFW (or others) to establish smolt collection programs or will these fish simply pass over the dams or through the turbines? We need to know this before proceeding.
Recommendation:
Recommended Action
Date:
May 17, 2002
Comment:
This project has a very broad scope without clearly defined decision points relative to success or failure of establishing sustainable populations.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Jun 7, 2002
Comment:
Fundable, at low to medium priority. The response is marginal in provision of details for design of the study, etc. but does generally address questions presented by the ISRP. Broodstock for the project would be based on availability (which is currently good) at local State hatcheries, downstream migration of smolts would be over or through the dams, and monitoring programs would involve annual downstream traps, etc. Concerning how representative the broodstock would be, the reply notes that the hatchery stocks were derived from the local populations but that the available fish would "not truly (be) representative" of the returning fish. Commitment to investment in these hatchery and dam facilities will likely increase as the Willamette Recovery plan is finalized. The project is comparable to projects #31005/31017 in objective, but the ISRP has greater confidence, based on the technical presentation and facilities, that the Basin will learn more by investing in those programs rather than this one. However, technically there is no serious reason to not fund this project, especially given the amount of habitat available above these dams and current availability of adult production.
Recommendation:
Date:
Jul 19, 2002
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Increase in productionComments
Result from Hills Creek/Dexter Dams show real production and downstream survival past dams
Already ESA Req? No
Biop? No
Recommendation:
C
Date:
Jul 23, 2002
Comment:
Recommend deferring consideration of new anadromous fish mitigation proposals in the Willamette subbasin until issuance of the NMFS/USFWS BiOp for the Willamette Basin federal hydroprojects.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Oct 30, 2002
Comment: