Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Salmon River Production Program |
| Proposal ID | 199705700 |
| Organization | Shoshone-Bannock Tribes (SBT) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Michael Haddix |
| Mailing address | Fort Hall, ID. 83203 |
| Phone / email | 2084783743 / salmon1@cyberhighway.net |
| Manager authorizing this project | Chad Colter |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 Ongoing |
| Province / Subbasin | Mountain Snake / Salmon |
| Short description | Rehabilitate salmon and steelhead populations in the upper Salmon River basin |
| 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
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
| 1997 |
Planted 1,000,000 Steelhead and 345,660 chinook eggs, with hatch rates of 75.5 and 19.7 percent respectively. |
| 1998 |
Planted 1,050,210 steelhead and 29,992 chinook eggs ,with hatch rates of 81.6 and 84.0 percent respectively |
| 1999 |
Planted 836,960 steelhead and 150,000 chinook eggs |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
| Continue development and evolution of basin production and harvest Master Plan |
develop annual production and harvest plans within Master Plan framework |
continuous |
$116,830 |
|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
| FY 2005 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2002 |
|---|
| $10,000 | $29,000 | $15,000 | $57,000 |
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
| Continue production program as defined by basin Master Plan |
a.continue on site production including supplementation via egg plants fry acclimation, smolt releases and smolt acclimation facilities. |
continuous |
$63,777 |
|
|
b.Construct on site incubation ,central incubation egg holding and transfer facilities , fry and smolt acclimation facilities |
|
$68,777 |
|
| Implement full scale M&E program to quantify results of production programs |
a. construct adult counting facilities at production sites . |
|
$73,777 |
|
|
b. develop juvenile enumeration and marking facilities |
|
$0 |
|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
| FY 2005 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2002 |
|---|
| $115,000 | $110,000 | $110,000 | $100,000 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 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 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
| Expand M&E program to adequately access production programs , and develop recommendations for future basin wide artificial production |
a. develop ongoing evaluation program to quantify results of production programs . |
continuous |
$48,165 |
|
|
b. Access production programs and adjust to produce efficient and successful on site production. |
|
$48,165 |
|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2005 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2002 |
|---|
| $120,000 | $115,000 | $120,000 | $110,000 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2001 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
FTE: 3 |
$39,627 |
| Fringe |
|
$13,653 |
| Travel |
|
$2,000 |
| Indirect |
|
$11,550 |
| NEPA |
|
$25,000 |
| Subcontractor |
|
$25,000 |
| Personnel |
FTE: 3 |
$39,630 |
| Fringe |
|
$13,651 |
| Supplies |
|
$12,500 |
| Travel |
|
$9,000 |
| Indirect |
|
$11,550 |
| Capital |
|
$100,000 |
| NEPA |
|
$10,000 |
| Subcontractor |
|
$10,000 |
| Personnel |
FTE: 3 |
$39,627 |
| Fringe |
|
$13,653 |
| Supplies |
|
$12,500 |
| Travel |
|
$9,000 |
| Indirect |
|
$11,550 |
| PIT tags |
|
$5,000 |
| Subcontractor |
|
$5,000 |
| $419,491 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $419,491 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $5,000 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $414,491 |
| FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $900,000 |
| % change from forecast | -53.9% |
Reason for change in estimated budget
Initial cost of developing Master Plan and expanding production and Monitoring and
Evaluation over estimated. Ability to proceed at previously proposed level of production is not possible at this time. Work on Master Plan has identified limiting factors which in the short term of two to three life cycles precludes such rapid expansion of production .
Reason for change in scope
same as above
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.
Recommendation:
Ongoing Funding: yes; New Funding: no
Date:
Jul 14, 2000
Comment:
Proposed $5,000 in FY 2000 carry forward.Initial cost of developing a Master Plan and expanding production and Monitoring and
Evaluation was over estimated. The ability to proceed at previously proposed level of production is not possible at this time. Work on the Master Plan has identified limiting factors, which in the short term of two to three life cycles, precludes such rapid expansion of production.
This project is proceeding through the three step process and progress will be determined by that process. In FY 2000, the NWPPC indicated that no new funds would be available for this project until completion of the master plan.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Sep 13, 2000
Comment:
Rationale: Previous commitments remain available for scope of work; Previous commitments depend on approval of step review.