Return to Proposal Finder FY 2003 Columbia Estuary Proposal 200300600

Proposal Table of Contents

Additional Documents

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
Title Type File Size File Date


Section 1. General Administrative Information

Title of Project Proposal Effectiveness monitoring of the Chinook River estuary restoration project.
BPA Project Proposal Number 200300600
Business name of agency, institution,
or organization requesting funding
Sea Resources
Business acronym (if appropriate)
 

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

Name Robert Warren
Mailing Address P.O. Box 187
City, State, Zip Chinook, WA 98614
Phone 3607778229
Fax 3607778254
E-mail robert@searesources.org
 
Manager of program authorizing this project Robert Warren
 
Review Cycle Columbia Estuary
Province Columbia Estuary
Subbasin Columbia Estuary
 
Short Description This is a project to monitor and evaluate changes in habitat attributes and juvenile salmonid use before and after the Chinook River estuary restoration project.
Target Species chum salmon, chinook salmon, coho salmon, coastal cutthroat trout, steelhead trout, and other estuarine dependent fishes, and wildlife.


Project Location

Latitude Longitude Description
46d 17' 30" 123d 57' 30" Lower Chinook River, Southwestern Washington.


Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-Reported Relevant RPAs

RPA
Action 9
Habitat Action 157
Habitat Action 158
Habitat Action 159
RM&E Action 162

Relevant RPAs based upon NMFS & BPA Review

This information comes from National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) reviews of this project proposal. The following table represents BPA & NMFS determinations as to this proposal's relevance to particular Biological Opinion Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs).

Reviewing Agency Action Number BiOp Agency Description
NMFS Action 157 NMFS BPA shall fund actions to improve and restore tributary and mainstem habitat for CR chum salmon in the reach between The Dalles Dam and the mouth of the Columbia River.


Information Transfer

The expected outcomes of this project are:
Quantitative

Data generated by this project are:
Primary

Are there restrictions on the use of this data?
None

Where do the data reside?
Private/Managed Locally:

Printed
Electronic

Public Access: [no information]


In what other ways will information from this project be transferred or used?

[no information]


CBFWA-Generated Information

Database Administrator notes on the history of this proposal form: Fund designation from 4/30/03 BPA decisions spreadsheet
Type of Project (assigned by CBFWA Analysts): anadromous


Section 2. Past Accomplishments

Year Accomplishment
1997 Completion of restoration plan for Chinook River watershed.
1999 Installation of fourteen new culverts and new forest road drainage system to alleviate sedimentation problems in the upper Chinook River watershed.
Replacement of a bridge in the middle Chinook River impeding adult fish passage.
Creation of off-channel wetland area to provide rearing habitat for juvenile salmon.
Initiation of Lower Columbia River chum salmon reintroduction project in the Chinook River in cooperation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Initiation of Sea Resources' native plant propagation program and subsequent planting of over 3,000 trees/shrubs in riparian areas.
2000 Initiation of hatchery marking program with the goal of marking all fish reared in the Sea Resources hatchery.
Documentation of juvenile salmonid migration patterns in the Chinook River by operating two rotary screw smolt traps located at the river's mouth and at Sea Resources' facilities - just downstream from natural spawning areas.
2001 Initiation of salmonid life history monitoring program to document existing life history patterns among salmonid populations in the Chinook River watershed. Monitoring included various sampling and marking techniques and collection of scale samples.
2001 Initiation of water quality monitoring program to characterize the gradient of conditions along the lower 7 kilometers of the Chinook River.
2001 Completion of ground truthing tasks in the pre-restored Chinook River estuary for the Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership's hyperspectral remote sensing project.


Section 3. Relationships to Other Projects

Project ID Title Description
na


Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design Phase

Task-based Budget

Objective Task Duration in FYs Estimated 2003 cost Subcontractor
1. Complete project planning, coordination, and management activities for water quality monitoring component. a. Select monitoring sites for installation of water quality data loggers. 1 $ 500  
b. Obtain necessary permissions and permits from appropriate landowners and agencies. 1 $ 800  
d. Solicit bids for fabrication of data logger housings and installation assemblies. 1 $ 500  
2. Complete project planning, coordination, and management activities for juvenile salmonid life history monitoring component. a. Complete NEPA and state scientific collection permitting tasks. 1 $ 1,500  
b. Consult with science advisory committee regarding sampling and marking techniques. 1 $ 800  
c. Select monitoring sites for juvenile salmonid sampling. 1 $ 600  
d. Obtain necessary permissions from appropriate landowners. 1 $ 550  


Outyear Objective-Based Budget

Objective Starting FY Ending FY Estimated cost
Not applicable $ 0


Outyear Budgets for Planning and Design Phase

n/a or no information


Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation Phase

Task-based Budget

Objective Task Duration in FYs Estimated 2003 cost Subcontractor
1. Install array of water quality data loggers. a. Fabricate data logger housings. 1 $ 1,060  
b. Purchase and install data loggers and housings at selected sites. 1 $ 34,220  
2. Implement plan to determine level of juvenile salmonid use in estuary and reference sites. a. Purchase and install trap net attachment structures at selected sampling sites. 1 $ 1,100  


Outyear Objective-Based Budget

Objective Starting FY Ending FY Estimated cost
Not applicable $ 0


Outyear Budgets for Construction and Implementation Phase

n/a or no information


Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance Phase

Task-based Budget

Objective Task Duration in FYs Estimated 2003 cost Subcontractor
1. Determine relative abundance and length of residence of both hatchery reared and naturally produced salmonids in the Chinook River estuary prior to and after restoration. a. Mark all hatchery-reared salmon. 10 $ 10,550  
b. Capture, mark, tag, and collect scale samples from juvenile salmonids according to pre-determined year-round schedule. 10 $ 26,449  
c. Detect previously PIT tagged and marked fish during continued monitoring at project sites and at rotary screw smolt traps. 10 $ 10,400  
2. Determine origin and life history of juvenile salmonids utilizing the Chinook River estuary. a. Prepare scale samples for anaysis 10 $ 1,800  
3. Characterize water quality conditions and tidal dynamics in the lower Chinook River and estuary prior to and after restoration actions. a. Maintain and operate data loggers according to year-round schedule. 10 $ 11,500  
4. Develop a computer database to house all life history information collected through this and past projects. a. Create and maintain a computer database that will contain all data collected during this and other relevent projects. 10 $ 8,200  
5. Complete data analysis on an annual basis. a. Analysis of juvenile salmonid life history data. 10 $ 5,275  
b. Analysis of water quality data. 10 $ 4,800  
c. Analysis of salmonid scale samples. 10 $ 4,200  


Outyear Objective-Based Budget

Objective Starting FY Ending FY Estimated cost
Objective 1 2003 2007 $190,000
Objective 2 2003 2007 $ 7,200
Objective 3 2003 2007 $ 43,000
Objective 4 2003 2007 $ 28,400
Objective 5 2003 2007 $ 52,000


Outyear Budgets for Operations and Maintenance Phase

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007
$ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000


Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation Phase

Task-based Budget

Objective Task Duration in FYs Estimated 2003 cost Subcontractor
Not applicable $ 0  


Outyear Objective-Based Budget

Objective Starting FY Ending FY Estimated cost
Not applicable $ 0


Outyear Budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation Phase

n/a or no information


Section 8. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 2003 Cost
Personnel FTE: 2.25 $ 72,259
Fringe Included in Personnel. $ 0
Supplies $ 40,520
Travel Mileage costs @ 0.345 per mile. $ 600
PIT tags # of tags: 2500 $ 5,625
Subcontractor WDFW coded wire tagging. $ 5,800
Total Itemized Budget $124,804


Total estimated budget

Total FY 2003 project cost $124,804
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $ 0
Total FY 2003 budget request $124,804
FY 2003 forecast from 2002 $ 0
% change from forecast 0.0%


Reason for change in estimated budget

Not applicable


Reason for change in scope

Not applicable


Cost Sharing

Organization Item or service provided Amount Cash or In-Kind
Sea Resources (2) Rotary screw smolt traps $ 20,000 in-kind
Sea Resources Boat, motor and Accessories $ 1,500 in-kind

 

Outyear Budget Totals

2004 2005 2006 2007
Operations and maintenance $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000
Total Outyear Budgets $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000
 

Other Budget Explanation

Not applicable


Reviews and Recommendations

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

ISRP Preliminary Review , ISRP 2002-2 Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate
Date:
Mar 1, 2002
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
A response is needed. The sponsors propose to monitor changes in water quality, and salmon abundance and life history diversity following restoration efforts in the Chinook River estuary. The proposed work is one of the first major efforts to evaluate the response of salmonid fishes to estuary restoration in the lower Columbia and as such it is an important proposal. A major value of this work is that the tidegate will be removed, possibly providing greater access for salmonids to the estuary than if the tidegate were left in place. Is there a firm commitment and funding in place for tidegate removal? What is the status of negotiations/discussions for breaching the causeway?

The work is needed but the proposal lacks adequate description of the research design and methods for accomplishing the work. Why was Baker Bay chosen as a reference site? What are the locations of the fish sampling sites? How will fish be sampled? Will tidal channels be trap netted? Will all major habitat types within the estuary be sampled? Will the same sampling methods be used in Baker Bay as in the Chinook estuary? More detail is needed concerning the scale analysis. How will the origin of fish be determined from scales? How will freshwater and estuarine growth be distinguished? How will growth rate be determined from scales? Many water quality sampling stations are shown on the map in Figure 2. How will water quality be sampled at these locations? How often? How will structural changes in the estuary as a result of restoration efforts (e.g., redevelopment of tidal channels, vegetation changes) be quantified and related to fish distribution and abundance? The sponsors plan to develop a computer database. Will an existing database structure and monitoring protocol be used so data is applicable across the basin?


CBFWA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
High Priority
Date:
May 17, 2002
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
$124,804 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000
Comment:
This project should be coordinated with other estuary assessment projects. Budget should be reviewed in line with other assessments funded in the estuary. NMFS has identified this project as a BiOp project.

ISRP Final Review , ISRP 2002-11 Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Jun 7, 2002
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
Fundable. The sponsors propose to monitor changes in water quality, salmon abundance, and life history diversity following restoration efforts in the Chinook River estuary. The proposed work is one of the first major efforts to evaluate the response of salmonid fishes to estuary restoration in the lower Columbia and as such it is an important proposal. A major value of this work is that the tidegate will be removed, possibly providing greater access for salmonids to the estuary than if the tidegate were left in place. The potential for this proposal is strongly dependent upon how much of the road causeway is removed. What might really benefit this project is the provision of engineering support, possibly even more than the funding.

The response indicates a firm level of funding for basic tidegate removal and describes an approach to design of tidegate removal and modification of channel width that is a practical compromise between available budget, ecological goals, and flood protection. The response indicates that proposers are well aware of the tradeoffs associated with each level of budget and the project has excellent support from partners.

This proposal is similar to 30004 in that it would benefit from more analytical advice on sampling and study design. Explanations of the reference site and the sample design are still too brief. For example, will the scale analysis as described in the response produce the desired information?


NMFS Review Recommendation:
Date:
Jul 19, 2002
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Benefits are Indirect. Evaluation and monitoring of salmon responses to estuarine restoration.

Comments
The Chinook River project is an excellent example of how to design a restoration project. It is part of a larger restoration program proposed by LCREP and member organizations (Sea Resources). Project will increase our knowledge of salmonid utilization of the estuarine environment. Important M&E to provide a measure of the success of estuarine restoration projects. It is complete and ready to implement. Fulfills Biop requirements in part.

Already ESA Req? No

Biop? Yes


BPA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
A
Date:
Jul 23, 2002
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
Support funding pending actual removal of the Tide Gate.

NWPPC Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Oct 30, 2002
2003 2004 2005
$124,804 $ 80,000 $ 80,000
Comment:

Columbia Estuary Issue 3: Columbia Estuary Assessment and Monitoring Projects Effectiveness Monitoring of Chinook Estuary (Project 30006); Lower Columbia River Ecosystem Monitoring and Data Management (Project 30015)

Council Recommendation: Proposed by Sea Resources, project 30006 would monitor and evaluate changes in habitat attributes and juvenile salmonid use before and after the Chinook River estuary restoration project. The project seeks no implementation funding, merely funding for monitoring and evaluation. Washington's Salmon Recovery Funding Board provided funds for actions to restore the Chinook estuary ($375,000). (See Lower Columbia and Estuary General Issue 4.)

The project was supported by CBFWA as a High Priority, the ISRP as fundable, NOAA Fisheries as an excellent example of a restoration project and Bonneville as supportive of funding to remove the tidegate and address several RPAs. The Council recommends funding this project and believes project 30006 is an excellent opportunity to leverage outside program funding for relatively little cost.

Project 30015 proposed by LCREP would develop protocols, procedures, and indicators for measuring habitat condition, assess exposure levels to toxic contaminants, develop ecosystem restoration information center for housing and accessing data specific to lower Columbia River and estuary. Supported by CBFWA as High Priority, the ISRP expressed some concerns in its fundable recommendation. ISRP wanted the project's database development to tie in closely with existing WDFW and ODFW databases. They also raised concern about the budget and recommended the Council require a more comprehensive description of the monitoring plan and components of the database.

NOAA Fisheries supports the project and notes its ties to the plume study 199801400 and to the proposed plume study 30002. Bonneville also supported the project as responsive to RPA 198 (development of a common data management system), though they cautioned to negotiate a statement of work that avoided overlap with other projects.

Although the Council supports the monitoring effort of LCREP, we must condition that support. The Council recommends close coordination of this effort with the NOAA Fisheries/ NWPPC project for the Columbia Basin Cooperative Information System (CBCIS). Therefore, the Council does not support the development of a database for this project until that regional effort has had the opportunity to make its recommendations on a coordinated approach to database development. The Council would not support the funding of objective three in either the Planning and Design and Construction and Implementation portions of the budget for project 30015.

The Council also notes the costs of the project ramp-up sharply in Fiscal Year 2004, well beyond the 3.4% increase that has been used for project expansion in the provincial reviews. However, the costs appear justified, since the monitoring program implementation largely does not take place until Fiscal Year 2004. The Council supports the ISRP recommendation that it receive a more comprehensive description of the monitoring plan, to ISRP and Council satisfaction, prior to the initiation of those tasks.

Monies for both of these projects would come from the unallocated placeholder, since funding these projects would exceed the Council's recommended budget for these provinces.


BPA Funding Decision Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Apr 30, 2003
2003
$124,804
Comment:
Fund to implement RPA 160, 161, 180, and 183

NWPPC Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Sep 20, 2003
2004 2005 2006
$ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000

Funding Category: Expense

Comment:
Up to about $52K for last invoice spent, getting implementation work done. Permitting issue that will take some time. Work will not shift from 03 to 04, expenditures for staff time greater than what was budgeted. Objectives and tasks have not changed.

Project Sponsor Request for FY04-05 Recommendation:
Date:
Sep 20, 2003
2004 2005
$112,000 $112,000

Funding Category: Expense

Comment:
Revised estimated budget figures for 04 and 05 are based on current (03) project expenditure rates required to meet project objectives.

NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review Funding category:
expense
Date:
May 2005
FY05 NPCC Start of Year:
$ 80,000
FY06 NPCC Staff Preliminary:
$ 80,000
FY06 NPCC July Draft Start of Year:
$ 80,000
Sponsor (Sea Resources Inc) Comments (Go to Original on NPCC Website):

Return to top of page