Return to Proposal Finder FY 2000 Proposal 199202400

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 Protect Anadromous Salmonids in the Mainstem Corridor
BPA Project Proposal Number 199202400
Business name of agency, institution,
or organization requesting funding
Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission – Law Enforcement Department
Business acronym (if appropriate) CRITFE

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

Name Captain John B. Johnson
Mailing Address 4270 Westcliff Drive
City, State, Zip Hood River, OR 97031
Phone 5413866363
Fax 5413866620
Manager of program authorizing this project
Review Cycle FY 2000
Province Mainstem/Systemwide
Subbasin Systemwide
Short Description Protect anadromous fish species throughout the Columbia Basin with an emphasis on protection of weak stocks. Protection will be concentrated within the hydro-corridor (e.g., between Bonneville and McNary dams) and focus on adult spawners.
Target Species Anadromous Salmon

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: Law Enforcement – Section 8.5C.2
FWS/NMFS Biological Opinion Number(s) which this project addresses: The Biological Assessment of CRFMP fisheries (Jan-July 2000) is currently being prepared by the U.S. vs Oregon Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). The subsequent NMFS Biological Opinion will be completed by Dec. 31, 1999. Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(1) -- Specifically lists law enforcement as one of the conservation measures to be used to rebuild threatened or endangered species to achieve de-listing (Section 3(3).
Other Planning Document References (1) Wy-Kan-Ush-Mi Wa-Kish-Wit Section 5A-4 -- Law Enforcement: "Continue coordinated harvest law enforcement; develop habitat protection law enforcement." (2) Snake River Draft Final - Recovery Plan Section 8 entitled "Law Enforcement Coordination" which states (in part) under Task B - Maintain or increase law enforcement presence to achieve high levels of deterrence." (3) Needs Assessment of Tribal Law Enforcement (Vigg and Stevens 1996): This research was initiated by the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Enforcement Department for the purpose determining the status of existing, overall enforcement efforts in the sub-basins of the Columbia River and to assess the need for additional "tribal tributary" enforcement and to develop a strategic plan for implementation of enhanced tribal tributary enforcement protection of anadromous and resident fish. (4) Research Into Action Law Enforcement Evaluation conducted by Jane Peters, Ph.D, Research Into Action; John Pizzimenti, Ph.D. - Harza Northwest; Darryll Olson - The Pacific Northwest Project; Andy Dunau - Dunau Associates; and John Campbell, Campbell-DeLong Resources, Inc. (September 24, 1997). (5) The Columbia River Fisheries Management Plan (1987): The Treaty Tribes have unequivocal co-management responsibility for anadromous salmonids in the Columbia River Basin through treaties and litigation. (6) The Snake River Salmon Recovery Team (1994): The BPA, the fishery agencies and the tribes should continue the Enhanced Fishery Enforcement Program." (7) The Memorandum of Agreement relative to BPA Fish and Wildlife Funding (1996): “....pursuant to the Parties’ significant and continuing responsibilities toward the Indian Tribes of the Columbia River Basin and their fish and wildlife resources, arising under the United States’ trust obligations, treaties, statutes and executive orders.” (8) BPA Tribal Policy, April 29, 1996: “BPA recognizes that a trust responsibility derives from the historical relationship between the Federal government and the Tribes as expressed in Treaties......,” “BPA commits to a government-to-government relationship with the Tribal governments....” (9) Secretarial Order 3206: American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act - June 5, 1997.

CBFWA-Generated Information

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

Section 2. Past Accomplishments

Year Accomplishment
1992 BPA enhanced funding was used to hire additional CRITFE enforcement personnel commencing in 1992. This resulted in a 32% increase in field enforcement patrol effort (field patrol hours) above base-level funding (i.e., 1991 and previous years).
1993 Additional (above 1992 level) enforcement personnel were hired in 1993 which resulted in a cumulative 45% increase in field patrol effort above the pre-1992 base-level (pre-BPA funded years).
1994 The overall goal at this point in time was to create a deterrent effect on unlawful activities by utilizing highly visible enforcement patrols. Enforcement statistical data trends strongly indicated high levels of compliance in the Indian Treaty Fishery.
1995 Enforcement actions this year (compared to the first year of enhanced BPA funding) were as follows: Arrests were down 43%; net seizures were down 35%; and fish seizures were down 39%.
1996 Enforcement action trends remained reasonable stable indicating that enhanced, long-term, enforcement effort creates a deterrent effect on unlawful fishing activities.
1997 From 1992 (the first year of enhanced BPA funding) through 1997, tribal arrests have decreased by 59%. Tribal gillnet, setline and hoopnet seizures have decreased by 63%. From 1991 (before BPA enhanced funding) through 1997, patrol effort (expressed in

Section 3. Relationships to Other Projects

Project ID Title Description Umbrella
9202409 Nez Perce Fisheries Enforcement No
Umatilla Fisheries Enforcement No
Other Fisheries Enforcement Programs/Mainstem or Sub-basins No

Section 4. Objectives, Tasks and Schedules

Objectives and Tasks

Objective Task
1. Enhanced enforcement for protection of anadromous & resident fish throughout the Columbia Basin. A. Maintain enhanced level of enforcement personnel over baseline (2 officers).
1. B. Increase overall fisheries and habitat enforcement effectiveness focused within the hydro corridor (Zone 6) over pre-1991 baseline.
1. C. Coordinate with other enforcement entities to enhance protection for depleted fish stocks throughout the Columbia Basin in conjunction with tribal policy directives and guidelines. Specific coordination action plans developed in coordination with tribal f
1. D. Maintain an enhanced level of overt and covert operations, aircraft surveillance, inter-agency task force operations and public awareness efforts via cooperation with other enforcement entities.
1. E. Where possible, provide other enforcement entities with assistance for protection of resident fish in tribal fishing areas and provide task force support in coordination with the four Treaty Tribes (within constraints of current funding levels).
1. F. Where possible, provide other enforcement entities with assistance for protection of critical habitat of anadromous and resident fish throughout tribal fishing areas and provide task force support in coordination with the four Treaty Tribes (within constr
1. G. Provide required basic and advanced training of fisheries enforcement personnel relative to specific tribal and Inter-Tribal enforcement responsibilities.
2. Develop and conduct environmental and habitat enforcement programs and projects in coordination with tribal, state and federal regulatory agencies. A. Seek opportunities for specialized training for law enforcement personnel in the area of environmental and habitat enforcement application techniques via inter-agency cooperation & resource sharing.
2. B. To the extent practicable, coordinate field operations in a specific location with local enforcement agencies, e.g., city police, county sheriffs, and tribal police.
2. C. Where possible, work within tribal policy guidelines and in coordination with state, tribal and federal agencies in an effort to , provide other enforcement entities with assistance for protection of spawning and habitat areas in conjunction with “gravel-
2. D. To the extent possible assist other agencies in the coordination and integration and expansion of the currently funded Tribal Tributary Enforcement Programs -- within the constraints of current funding levels.
2. Optimize voluntary compliance with laws and rules to protect Columbia Basin fishes and their critical habitats -- via increased public involvement and deterrence of illegal activities. A. Coordinate with the Public Information Departments of the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission and the four Treaty Tribes in an effort to increase public awareness of the effects of illegal take and habitat degradation on anadromous salmonid and re
2. B. Educate the public (both Indian and non-Indian) on the major issues related to restoration of depleted fish stocks in the Columbia Basin -- with a focus on the role of enforcement by providing information in a variety of formats and developing objective n
4. Continue coordination with CRITFC fisheries management to assure that enforcement efforts are conducive to tribal fish and wildlife protection and enhancement priorities. A. Coordinate with fish and wildlife biologists, managers, and policy makers within CRITFC, individual tribes, and other cognizant entities -- to identify and prioritize law enforcement activities in the Columbia Basin. Promote inter-agency cooperation to c
4. B. Coordinate with regional fish and wildlife management, planning, and funding entities within Columbia Basin (e.g., PFMC, PSMFC, the Columbia River Compact committees, Recovery Plan Teams, CBFWA, NPPC, and BPA) to identify and prioritize law enforcement a
4. C. Develop annual cooperative enforcement plans for the protection and enhancement of Columbia Basin fish stocks and their critical habitats, using the input and review derived from the coordination described in the above tasks.
5. Maximize the accountability of CRITFE enhanced law enforcement for the protection of fish and their critical habitats. A. Develop performance standards and specific quantitative and qualitative criteria to objectively measure achievement of biological results from law enforcement efforts.
5. B. Collect and summarize law enforcement statistics using a consistent methodology and document the results of the CRITFE enhanced law enforcement program through required quarterly and annual reports.
5. C. Contract periodic independent scientific evaluations of the efficacy of enhanced Inter-Tribal fishery enforcement efforts in Zone 6 of the Columbia River.
5. D. Use strategic planning and an adaptive management protocol to make annual refinements to CRITFE enforcement efforts.

Objective Schedules and Costs

Objective Start Date End Date Measurable Biological Objectives Milestone FY 2000 Cost %
1 01/01/00 12/01/00 Increased protection and survival of anadromous salmonid (and other fish species). X 52.0%
2 01/01/00 12/01/00 Increased habitat protection. X 40.0%
3 01/01/00 12/01/00 Optimize voluntary compliance – increased fish protection & survival via increased public involvement and deterrence of illegal activities.  
4 01/01/00 12/01/00 3.0%
5 01/01/00 12/01/00 Accountability for protection and survival of fish. X 5.0%

Section 5. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 2000 Cost
Personnel $ 97,242
Fringe $ 30,631
Supplies $ 24,500
Operating $ 67,100
Capital $ 29,250
Travel $ 5,800
Indirect $ 98,904
Subcontractor $ 35,000
Total Itemized Budget $388,427

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2000 project cost $388,427
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $ 0
Total FY 2000 budget request $388,427
FY 2000 forecast from 1999 $ 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
Dept. of Interior Baseline Enforcement $800,000 unknown
BPA Request Enhanced Enforcement $388,427 unknown


Outyear Budget Totals

2001 2002 2003 2004
All Phases $407,848 $428,240 $449,652 $472,134
Total Outyear Budgets $407,848 $428,240 $449,652 $472,134

Other Budget Explanation

Not applicable

Section 6. References

Reference Watershed?
Research Into Action, Jane Peters, John Pizzimenti. Evaluation of the BPA funded Law Enforcement Program, September 1997. Initiated and funded by BPA. No
Bevan, D., J. Harville, P. Bergman, T. Bjornn, J. Crutchfield, P. Klingeman, and J. Litchfield. 1994. Snake River Salmon Recovery Team: final recommendations to the National Marine Fisheries Service. May 1994. Rob Jones, Recovery Plan Coordinator. Nat No
ESA (The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended through the 100th Congress). 1973. The ESA as Amended by P.L. 94-325, June 30, 1976; P.L. 94-359, July 12, 1976; P.L. 95-212, December 19, 1977; P.L. 95-632, November 10, 1978; and P.L. 96-159, December No
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). 1996. Memorandum of Agreement among the Departments of Army, Commerce, Energy, and Interior concerning The Bonneville Power Administration's financial commitment for Columbia River Basin Fish & Wildlife Costs -- with an Anne No
Nez Perce, Umatilla, Warm Springs and Yakama Tribes. 1995. WY-KAN-USH-MI WA-KISH-WIT, The Spirit of the Salmon. The Columbia River Anadromous Fish Plan of the Nez Perce, Umatilla, Warm Springs and Yakama Tribes. No
Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC). 1994. Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. Publication 94-55. December 15, 1994. Northwest Power Planning Council, Portland, Oregon. No
US v. Oregon. 1987. The Columbia River Fish Management Plan. Parties to US v Oregon, November 9, 1987. 61 Pages + Appendices. No
S.P. Cramer & Associates, Vigg S. 1998. Response to CBFWA Criteria for Recommending BPA funding of FY 1999 Columbia Basin Law Enforcement Proposals. No
Vigg, S. 1991. Increased levels of fishery harvest law enforcement and public awareness for anadromous salmonids in the Columbia River Basin. Grant Proposal and Project Description for Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Oregon Department of Sta No
Vigg, S. 1994. Increased levels of harvest & habitat Law Enforcement and Public Awareness for anadromous salmonids and resident fish in the Columbia River Basin. Project 92-024. Project Description for a comprehensive Columbia Basin cooperative Law Enfo No
Vigg, S. (editor). 1995a. Increased levels of harvest & habitat law enforcement and public awareness for anadromous salmonids and resident fish in the Columbia River Basin -- Project 92-024 Final Report for the demonstration period, 1992-94. June 31, 199 No
Vigg, S. 1996. Tribal component of the enhanced harvest & habitat law enforcement and public awareness for anadromous salmonids and resident fish in the Columbia River Basin -- FY 1997 Statement of Work. A Comprehensive Columbia Basin Fishery Law Enforc No
Vigg, S. and R. Stevens. 1996. Needs Assessment of Tribal law enforcement in Columbia River tributaries relative to anadromous salmonid mitigation & restoration. Final Report prepared on August 1, 1996 for CRITFC, by S.P. Cramer and Associates, Inc., Gr No
Vigg, S. 1997. Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Department of Fisheries Enforcement (CRITFE) Five-Year Performance Report, 1992 - 1996. August 21, 1997. Submitted to the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission by S.P. Cramer & Associates No
Letter from Chuck Gehling, Chairman, Hood River Watershed Group. April 28, 1998. No

Section 7. Abstract


Reviews and Recommendations

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

This project has not yet been reviewed

Return to top of page