FY 2000 proposal 199802100

Additional documents

TitleType
199802100 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleHood River Fish Habitat Project
Proposal ID199802100
OrganizationConfederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon (CTWSRO)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameMichael Lambert
Mailing address3450 W 10th St. The Dalles, OR 97058
Phone / email5412966866 / hoodriverproject@netcnct.net
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 2000
Province / SubbasinColumbia Gorge / Hood
Short descriptionImplement habitat improvement actions that will support supplementation efforts within the Hood River subbasin as approved by the NPPC and supported by the BPA Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Hood River Production Program (HRPP).
Target speciesSpring chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), summer and winter steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment
1996 Completed .5 miles of riparian livestock exclosure fencing on Neal Creek (Kirby property).
1996 Completed 75 feet of bioengineered rip rap, which included vegetative plantings, on Neal Creek (Kirby property).
1998 Completed 1.2 miles of riparian livestock exclosure fencing on Neal Creek (Guisto & Meyers property).
1998 Completed 75 feet of bioengineered rip rap, which included vegetative plantings, on Neal Creek (Guisto property).
1998 Planted 130 ponderosa pine conifer seedlings on Neal Creek (Kirby property).
1998 Removed a portion of the Tony Creek Dee Mill diversion concrete apron.
1998 Completed a preliminary feasibility evaluation for East Fork Irrigation District in developing an NMFS approved diversion and screen or pipe bypass system on Neal Creek.
1999 Completed 100 feet of bioengineered rip rap, which included vegetative plantings, on Neal Creek (Meyers property) [In progress].
1999 Eliminated the lower Evans Creek irrigation diversion (Higgins pond) by constructing a gravity pressure pipe system [In progress].

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
8902900 Hood River Production Program / Round Butte Hatchery production and Pelton
9301900 Hood River Production Program - Oak Springs, Powerdale, and Parkdale / O&M
8805304 Hood River Production Program / ODFW M&E
9500700 Pelton Ladder Hood River Production / PGE O&M
20513 Hood River / Fifteenmile Creek
8805303 Hood River Production Program / CTWSRO M&E

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2000 cost
Personnel 1 month project leader salary $3,124
Fringe benefits @ 23% $719
Supplies $0
NEPA Supplement analysis under the Programmatic EIS’s $7,500
Indirect Indirect @ 41.4% $1,591
Subcontractor Middle Fork Irrigation District $55,000
Subcontractor Interfluve $20,000
Subcontractor Farmers Irrigation District $100,000
Subcontractor Hood River Soil & Water Conservation District $20,000
Subcontractor East Fork Irrigation District $20,000
$227,934
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2000 cost$227,934
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2000 budget request$227,934
FY 2000 forecast from 1999$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
Hood River Soil & Water Conservation District A Watershed/Habitat Coordinator to oversee all habitat actions and seek cost share dollars for all habitat projects. $20,000 unknown
Middle Fork Irrigation District (MFID) Pipe 3.25 miles of ditch to eliminate the use of two irrigation water diversions on Evans Creek. $900,000 unknown
Farmers Irrigation District (FID) Engineer, construct, and install a new fish screen facility that meets criteria on the mainstem Hood River. $985,000 unknown
East Fork Irrigation District (EFID) Install an alternative screen and diversion or bypass system on Neal Creek. $350,000 unknown
ODFW Assist in Neal Creek ditch (EFID) and Farmers canal ditch (FID). $1,045 unknown
Hood River Watershed Group Assist in fish salvage and spawning ground surveys (habitat monitoring). $1,400 unknown
Hood River Production Program - CTWS M&E contract 8805303 Assist in fish salvage, population estimates, and spawning ground surveys (monitoring activities which coincides with habitat monitoring). $4,750 unknown
Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: No schedule constraints for FY 2000 projects. Milestones listed under the above table (objective schedules and costs) apply to the Hood River Fish Habitat Project and all individual implemented projects.


Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

Recommendation:
Fund (medium to high priority).
Date:
Jun 15, 1999

Comment:

Recommendation: Fund (medium to high priority). OK for multi-year funding but review on an annual basis for progress towards meeting objectives, particularly the monitoring methods.

Comments: This is a very complex project involving substantial funding from a large number of sources. It is linked to a number of other projects and the cost share looks good, as does the rationale. It is a fairly complete proposal, but it needs more detail in several critical areas: (1) how will the results of watershed assessment be used to identify habitat restoration priorities? (2) has passive restoration been considered as a viable alternative to bioengineering? (3) what is being done to reduce the source of damage to streambanks and riparian vegetation?, and (4) how will results of salmon and steelhead life history studies be used to identify potential habitat limitations to production (e.g., what is the biological basis for believing that creation of a spawning channel will significantly increase production)? In addition, they list four site-specific projects in the objectives but describe three of the four in the narrative. The weakest part of the proposal is the lack of a clear evaluation methodology for assessing long-term success of the alterations. How will success/failure be defined? For example, "spawning ground surveys will be completed annually to assess the upstream passage/spawning benefits." Will one more fish define success? How will variability be addressed? Time lags? At this cost, they need to assure that the work is providing measurable benefits to fish and wildlife. They need to better document the interaction of this project with 8805303 the monitoring and evaluation component of the HFPP. The emphasis on improving the water diversion screens looks good.


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:


Recommendation:
Technically Sound? Yes
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Clarify relationship between passage at these diversions and the overall plan for the basin. Demonstrate that habitat issues will be addressed after passage has been improved.

Show that these are the most important projects. State expected results (e.g. specific fish benefits).

Analysis has clearly been done.

Describe longer- term strategy to address other issues.


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000

Comment:

[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting]
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:
$699,626 $699,626 $699,626

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website