Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | Evaluate Effects of Habitat Work Conducted in Fifteenmile Creek |
Proposal ID | 9146 |
Organization | Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
Name | Erik Olsen |
Mailing address | 3430 W 10th St. The Dalles, OR 97058 |
Phone / email | 5412968045 / |
Manager authorizing this project | |
Review cycle | FY 1999 |
Province / Subbasin | Lower Mid-Columbia / Fifteenmile |
Short description | Estimate smolt production and adult escapements for the indigenous wild population of winter steelhead in Fifteenmile Creek and collect information on selected life history and biological characteristics of the population. |
Target species | |
Project location
Latitude | Longitude | Description |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Project ID | Title | Description |
93040 |
Fifteenmile Creek Habitat Restoration Project |
This project will be evaluated by the proposed project. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 1999 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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 cost |
Personnel |
|
$43,955 |
Fringe |
|
$17,582 |
Supplies |
|
$14,210 |
Travel |
|
$2,880 |
Indirect |
|
$18,005 |
Subcontractor |
|
$0 |
| $96,632 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 1999 cost | $96,632 |
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
Total FY 1999 budget request | $96,632 |
FY 1999 forecast from 1998 | $0 |
% change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints:
Our ability to implement this project, as proposed and budgeted, will be determined by how effectively we can integrate this project with the Hood River/Pelton ladder project and The Fifteenmile Creek project..
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Criteria 1: Technical Criteria - Incomplete: This is primarily a watershed proposal and should be reviewed as such. The criteria used are insufficient to fully evaluate watershed proposals. The study proposes to monitor trends in survival and relate them to habitat improvements. These improvements, however, were initiated in 1986. There is no apparent way to establish a baseline against which improvement is measured. In addition, it is unclear how an upward trend in survival can be related to improvements in habitat in light of the myriad of factors affecting the life cycle.
Criteria 2: Objectives Criteria - Incomplete For reasons stated above.
Criteria 3: Milestones Criteria - Incomplete
Criteria 4: Resources Criteria - Incomplete
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Adult monitoring reduced and screw trap not needed
Recommendation:
Adequate
Date:
Jun 18, 1998
Comment:
The technical justification for this project is poor. If there are data going back to 1960s, they should have been summarized and presented in the proposal. Given the availability of historical data, the power of the proposed tests should have been determined. The proposal needs to take into account ocean productivity, drought, floods and other environmental conditions. The proposal does not show the relationship to other monitoring projects.