Return to Proposal Finder FY 1999 Proposal 199501300

Proposal Table of Contents

Additional Documents

Section 1. General Administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Objectives, tasks and schedules
Section 5. Budget
Section 6. References
Section 7. Abstract

Reviews and Recommendations
Title Type File Size File Date

Section 1. General Administrative Information

Title of Project Proposal Nez Perce Trout Ponds
BPA Project Proposal Number 199501300
Business name of agency, institution,
or organization requesting funding
Nez Perce Tribe
Business acronym (if appropriate) NPT

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

Name James L Mauney
Mailing Address P.O. Box 365
City, State, Zip Lapwai, ID 83540
Phone 2088437320
Fax 2088437322
Manager of program authorizing this project
Review Cycle FY 1999
Province Lower Snake
Subbasin Clearwater
Short Description Repair 2 existing trout ponds, conduct site inventory, design, construction, management of up to 12 more fish ponds to provide consumptive resident fisheries to compensate for losses caused by Dworshak Dam.
Target Species trout

Project Location

[No information]

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-Reported Relevant RPAs

Sponsor listed no RPAs for this project proposal

Relevant RPAs based upon NMFS & BPA Review

NMFS and BPA did not associate any reasonable and prudent alternatives with this project proposal

NPPC Program Measure Number(s) which this project addresses:
FWS/NMFS Biological Opinion Number(s) which this project addresses:
Other Planning Document References

CBFWA-Generated Information

Database Administrator notes on the history of this proposal form: None
Type of Project (assigned by CBFWA Analysts): resident

Section 2. Past Accomplishments

n/a or no information

Section 3. Relationships to Other Projects

n/a or no information

Section 4. Objectives, Tasks and Schedules

Objectives and Tasks

Objective Task
1. Pond maintenance to support 8,750 - 10,500 pounds of trout annually for harvest a. maintain vegetated perimeter
. b. maintain silt retention basins
. c. monitor pond depth
. d. monitor dam structural integrity
. e. periodic silt removal
2. New pond development to support 8,750 - 10,500 pounds of trout annually for harvest. construct additional ponds a. engineering design
. b. land acquisition
. c. environmental (NEPA) analyses
. d. construction
3. Pond habitat management and fishery management to support 8,750 - 10,500 ponds of trout annually for harvest. a. monitor water quality
. b. monitor and regulate water quantity
. c. stock trout for harvest
. d. monitor fish growth
. e. monitor fisheries (catch rate, harvest, return to creel)

Objective Schedules and Costs

Objective Start Date End Date Measurable Biological Objectives Milestone FY 2000 Cost %
1 09/01/96 12/01/50 25.0%
2 01/01/97 12/01/01 25.0%
3 09/01/96 12/01/50 50.0%

Section 5. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 1999 Cost
Personnel $156,467
Fringe $ 30,167
Supplies $ 14,000
Operating $ 2,400
Capital $100,000
Travel $ 4,000
Indirect $ 65,894
Subcontractor $360,000
Other $ 16,335
Total Itemized Budget $749,263

Total estimated budget

Total FY 1999 project cost $749,263
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $ 0
Total FY 1999 budget request $749,263
FY 1999 forecast from 1998 $ 0
% change from forecast 0.0%

Reason for change in estimated budget

Not applicable

Reason for change in scope

Not applicable

Cost Sharing

Not applicable

Outyear Budget Totals

2000 2001 2002 2003
All Phases $750,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000
Total Outyear Budgets $750,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000

Other Budget Explanation

Schedule Constraints: Detail of NEPA documentation, annual budget constraints, land negotiations, weather

Section 6. References

n/a or no information

Section 7. Abstract


The Nez Perce Trout Ponds project is funded by Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) pursuant to measures 10.8D.1 and 10.8D2 of the Northwest Plower Planning Council's 1995 Resident Fish and Wildlife Amendments to the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (Program). The 1995 Fish and Wildlife Program recognizes that there are irretrievable losses associated with areas permanently blocked to anadromous fish. The resident fish substitution portion of the Program is intended to partially offest these losses through development of additional resident fishery opportunities. As a resident fish substitution project, the NPT goal is to develop trout ponds to substantively increase harvest. Our approach to using isolated ponds for the developing fisheries is to minimize inter- and inter-specific competition and hybridization with naturally producing native species. This approach also isolates the fishery to avoid incidental harvest and mortality on sensitive native populations. The expected outcome is to have sufficient pond habitat constructed by 2001 to support an annual harvest of 10,500 pounds of resident salmonids. Project evaluation will be conducted via: (a) creel surveys to determine harvest rates and harvest (b) fish sampling via gill nets, seining, and the fishery to determine fish growth and condition (c) temperature, oxygen, and other parameters to track water quality, and (d) echo-sounding and direct sounding to monitor sedimentation.

Reviews and Recommendations

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

CBFWA: Resident Fish Review Comments Recommendation:
Fundable if funds available
May 13, 1998
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Presentation: This is a resident fish substitution project to compensate for the loss of anadromous fish caused by Dworshak Dam. The goal of the project is to develop trout ponds to substantively increase harvest. The tribe currently has 2 ponds and would like to construct 2 more (and is waiting for the geotechnical reports). A number of activities will occur this year including; deepening existing ponds; working with Corps on the design of the dams for the new ponds; writing legal descriptions; repairing a damaged spillway; constructing two silt retention ponds to catch drain; conducting creel censuses; conducting a feasibility study; monitoring the channel; surveying boundaries; and working with the watershed group.


Currently there are 2 small trout ponds. What do the 7 people do? Answer: The land is owned by tribal members. There are 4 full time people and 3 part-time people in administration. Two or three people survey, write legal descriptions, collect data from 3 transects on each site, and monitor the channel.

Are the ponds open to the public? Answer: The two new ones will be, the two existing ponds are heavily used by tribal members.

What are the subcontractors used for? Answer: The budget includes $360,000 for pond construction.

How are the existing ponds used? Answer: The existing ponds (totaling 11.2 acres) are used quite a bit. They are stocked with rainbow trout and used for ice fishing, camping and swimming.

Screening Criteria: Yes

Technical: Criteria: No. The project does not meet criteria 4 (the resources proposed are excessive to achieve objectives).

Programmatic: No. Project does not meet criteria 12, 13, 14, and 17.

CBFWA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
May 13, 1998
1999 2000 2001
$749,263 $750,000 $300,000

ISRP Review , ISRP 1998-1 Recommendation:
Jun 18, 1998
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
This proposal for a put-and-take sports fishery is poorly written. Reviewers comment that the proposed work is not in the best interest of native species in the Columbia River Basin. The project deals with one of the most manageable of fishery situations (trout in ponds), yet there is evidence of mistakes in the past. The proposal does not demonstrate that the project managers implemented elementary principles of pond construction and management, which possibly would have avoided the mistakes. The proposal indicates that steps will be taken toward correcting past mistakes, but some major types of improvement in construction do not seem to have been considered (e.g., most advantageous pond location with respect to water supply, and ability to drain). Increasing depth of the existing ponds is essential, but the plan does not indicate that enough depth will be added to prevent winterkill or increase trout growth. Trout growth in these ponds has been poor compared with other ponds in the region which are better built. The water sources for the ponds are inadequately described. The plan does not show that creating off-stream-channel ponds was considered; this would be far preferable and could probably greatly reduce or eliminate the ponds’ apparent severe problems with siltation and nutrients. The proposal also indicates weak measures to reduce the bullhead population. Stronger measures should have been described such as for the ponds to be drained and the bullheads completely eradicated. The reference list is inadequate. It should contain basic books and articles on pond management for fish.

NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review Funding category:
May 2005
FY05 NPCC Start of Year:
FY06 NPCC Staff Preliminary:
FY06 NPCC July Draft Start of Year:
Sponsor (Nez Perce Tribe) Comments (Go to Original on NPCC Website):

Return to top of page