FY 2002 Mountain Snake proposal 200206000

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
28020 Narrative	Narrative
28020 Sponsor Response to the ISRP	Response
28020 Powerpoint Presentation	Powerpoint Presentation
Mountain Snake: Clearwater Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects	Subbasin Map
Mountain Snake: Clearwater Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects	Subbasin Map

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Nez Perce Tribe Harvest Monitoring Program
Proposal ID	200206000
Organization	Nez Perce Tribe Department of Fisheries Resource Management (NPT)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Joseph Y. Oatman
Mailing address	145 Lolo Street Lapwai, Idaho 83540
Phone / email	2088437320 / joeo@nezperce.org
Manager authorizing this project	Jaime Pinkham
Review cycle	Mountain Snake
Province / Subbasin	Mountain Snake / Clearwater
Short description	The objective is to develop and implement a comprehensive, biologically-sound monitoring program for the Nez Perce Tribe for the Columbia River Basin and tributaries.
Target species	Spring,summer, and fall chinook salmon, coho salmon, and steelhead

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description
46.4	-115.66	Clearwater River Subbasin

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
Harvest RPA Action 164

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
5522700	Enhanced Tribal Tributary Fish and Wildlife Law Enforcement--Part 1. Nez Perce Tribe	Enhanced law enforcement capabilities for resource protection on the reservation and ceded lands to monitor and enforce adopted tribal fishery regulations.

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost
1. Program Design	a. Consult CRITFC Biometrician to establish and implement a monitoring program for the Nez Perce Tribe for the Columbia River Basin.	1FY/ongoing	$9,375
	b. Consult TAC members to acquire current computer modeling exercises that will allow analysis of various harvest proposals.	1FY/ongoing	$15,625
	c. Establish harvest regimes based on escapement goals that enable the recovery and restoration of all salmon and other fish and wildlife species.	1FY/ongoing	$4,375
	d. Monitor the Tribe's position in the Pacific Salmon Treaty through interaction with the Tribe's representative.	1FY/ongoing	$2,500

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Program Design	2003	2006	$144,254

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

FY 2003	FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006
$33,469	$35,142	$36,899	$38,744

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation 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 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
1. Develop and implement a biologically sound harvest monitoring program.	a. Personnel hiring.	1FY/ongoing	$1,875
	b. Prepare a training program via technical review and field trials for hired staff.	1FY/ongoing	$5,000
	c. Supervise and evaluate staff; coordinate office and field work with management staff; monitor project expenditures and ensure contract deliverables are met; maintain inventory, order supplies and equipment maintenance.	1FY/ongoing	$201,021
	d. Coordinate with Project Leaders within the DFRM to address harvest and harvest monitoring issues of tribal projects.	1FY/ongoing	$18,125
	e. Facilitate Department of Fisheries Resource Management inter-office relations between Harvest Monitoring Program and Conservation Enforcement staff regarding enforcement issues.	1FY/ongoing	$8,125
	f. Develop and utilize a fisheries harvest monitoring database.	1FY/ongoing	$6,875
2. Develop, implement, and maintain harvest strategies that are consistent with Treaty Reserved fishing rights.	a. Prescribe Biological Assessment/Management Plans with review by Nez Perce Tribal Executive Committee and Nez Perce Tribe Fish and Wildlice Commission.	1FY/ongoing	$43,750
	b. Establish harvest regimes consistent with the Conservation Principles of U.S. v. Oregon, other applicable case law, Treaties and Executive Orders, that account for and properly appportion all direct and indirect sources of mortality.	1FY/ongoing	$8,125
	c. Create an interview process 1875with Tribal elders and fishers, documenting the impact of a reduction in fishing opportunities has on Tribal cultural values and fish consumption deficiencies in meeting our dietary needs.	1FY/ongoing	$1,875

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Develop and implement a biologically sound harvest monitoring program.	2003	2006	$1,090,773
2. Develop, implement, and maintain harvest strategies that are consistent with Treaty Reserved fishing rights.	2003	2006	$243,255

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

FY 2003	FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006
$309,763	$324,986	$341,235	$358,297

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Item	Note	FY 2002 cost
Personnel		$160,705
Fringe		$52,051
Supplies		$19,500
Travel		$11,620
Indirect		$50,970
Other	GSA Vehicles	$31,800
		$326,646

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2002 cost	$326,646
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2002 budget request	$326,646
FY 2002 forecast from 2001	$0
% change from forecast	0.0%

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or 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 2001-9)

Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate

Date:
Sep 28, 2001

Comment:

Response required. The data currently being collected may be inadequate to estimate harvest with the precision required. This information is fundamental to stock assessment. Adequate catch statistics are essential to stock assessment and management. Why, then, is this project split out, from the hatchery M and E? In this proposal, no biological information would be collected. Refine the proposal to correct this weakness. Questions remain about the consistency, quality, and reliability of the data that are being collected until more detail on the catch monitoring plan is provided.

Catch reporting should be a condition of licensing, but licensing is not an issue here since this project deals with Treaty Reserved Fishing Rights. Perhaps a first step should be to institute a process of licensing of the harvest, followed by design of a reporting template (form). Please provide the suggested catch reporting form. The cost of licensing should support the cost of the catch monitoring, and probably should be much lower than what is reported here. Support may be justified for Task A: Consult Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission (CRITFC) Biometrician to establish and implement monitoring strategies for the NPT for the Columbia River Basin and tributaries. We request a report from the biometrician that recommends a catch monitoring strategy, to be followed by a resubmitted proposal after peer review of the report. The proposal embodies the right approach, provided appropriate statisticians are available to design the sampling. Measuring catch per hour for the fishers contacted is fairly easy, but making valid estimates of fishing effort (number of fishers and how many hours they fished in total) will be very hard. An output of the project should be calculations of the degrees of uncertainty of the estimates. Please indicate how this uncertainty will be calculated.

The terms, TAC and DRFM, found in the proposal are not defined.

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
High Priority

Date:
Nov 30, 2001

Comment:

This project is important for assessment of harvest impacts and the development of run reconstructions. Accuracy and completeness of past reporting has been inconsistent. This project should address the previous problems and insure a statistically valid sampling design. The projected returns for 2002 indicate that significant sampling effort will be required.

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 2001-12A)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Dec 21, 2001

Comment:

Fundable. A well-designed sampling of harvest should be possible. The data currently being collected may not be adequate to estimate harvest with the precision required. This information is fundamental to stock assessment. Adequate catch statistics are essential to stock assessment and management. We endorse the consultation with a Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission (CRITFC) biometrician to establish and implement monitoring strategies for the NPT for the Columbia River Basin and tributaries. An output of the project should include annual harvest calculations with the degrees of uncertainty of the estimates, and peer-reviewed catch reports.

REVIEW:
NMFS Review

Recommendation:

Date:
Feb 1, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Benefits are indirect. Should provide valuable information to assess harvest composition and impacts, also useful for run reconstruction

Comments
Harvest reporting from NPT is very important for assessment of harvest impacts. The accuracy and completeness of past reports has been uncertain. Access to a biometrician is necessary to assure statistically valid samples. Already required under Fall 2001 Harvest Biop.

Already ESA Req? Yes

Biop? No

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
C

Date:
Feb 11, 2002

Comment:

Do not recommend. The project could be reconsidered when a regional RM&E plan is completed and the need for the project can be properly assessed.

BPA RPA RPM:
--

NMFS RPA/USFWS RPM:
--

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Apr 19, 2002

Comment:

Council recommendation: The project describes the Nez Perce Tribe's efforts to monitor the fisheries currently ongoing. Sampling strategies are designed to provide greater data precision in catch reports, age distribution, and exploitation rates during Nez Perce fishery seasons. Harvest management is intertwined with all Columbia Basin artificial production programs and affects the status of naturally produced stocks as well. The Council's program calls for subbasin plans to deal explicitly with harvest management plans. The Council recommends funding this new project. It is responsive the program's goals of bringing harvest management considerations into subbasin planning. The ISRP rates it as fundable and calls this information "essential" to stock assessment and management.

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Decision

Recommendation:
Do Not Fund

Date:
Jun 13, 2002

Comment:

Do Not Fund. NMFS review of this project indicates it is "Already required under the Fall 2001 Harvest BiOp." NMFS also indicates that this project is unrelated to the Action Agencies responsibilities under the 2000 BiOp. Bonneville considers U.S. v. Oregon harvest management issues to be a matter for the states, treaty tribes, and federal fishery management agencies to consider. While Bonneville recognizes that we fund projects for non-harvest related purposes, but which may contribute to harvest management issues, we have not assumed responsibility for implementation of non-FCRPS Biological Opinion requirements of these entities.

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

Designated Phase III. Project realigned to start in 2004

REVIEW:
Project Sponsor Request for FY04-05

Recommendation:

Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

The Nez Perce Tribe Harvest Monitoring Program was selected for funding in FY 2002 for $326,646. This budget was not obligated funding in FY 2002 or FY 2003, but the specific objectives and tasks as identified for both the Planning and Design and the Monitoring and Evaluation phases still need to be completed. I am submitting the original budget amount in place of the recommended $349,236 for FY 2004. In addition, I plan on using the recommended FY 2003 budget of $337,752 as the out-year budget for FY 2005.

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:
$326,646	$326,646	$326,646

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website