Return to Proposal Finder FY 2000 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 Tribe Resident Fish Substitution Program
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 Mauney
Mailing Address P.O. Box 365
City, State, Zip Lapwai, ID 83541
Phone 2088437320
Fax 2088437322
E-mail jamesm@nezperce.org
 
Manager of program authorizing this project
 
Review Cycle FY 2000
Province Mountain Snake
Subbasin Clearwater
 
Short Description Increase fish harvest opportunities to mitigate partially for anadromous and resident fish losses incurred as a result of the construction and operation of Dworshak Dam on the North Fork Clearwater River.
Target Species Multiple Resident Species


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: 10.8D.1, 10.8D.2
FWS/NMFS Biological Opinion Number(s) which this project addresses:
Other Planning Document References Section 6.6.5.3.B of the Multi-Year Implementation Plan for Resident Fish Protection, Enhancement, and Mitigation in the Columbia River Basin (CBFWA 1997) addresses the need to develop resident fishery opportunities to substitute for anadromous and resident fish losses until these fish impacted by federally licenced and operated facilities are restored.


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

Year Accomplishment
1997 Completed restoration of the Talmaks Reservoir fishery
1998 Completed restoration of Mud Springs Reservoir fishery
1998 Identified Cold Springs and Deer Creek fishery sites. Collected environmental and cultural information needed to assess site suitability, develop engineering designs, and compile NEPA documentation


Section 3. Relationships to Other Projects

n/a or no information


Section 4. Objectives, Tasks and Schedules

Objectives and Tasks

Objective Task
1. Develop new resident fisheries within the Nez Perce Reservation to provide 4750 kg of resident fish annually for harvest to mitigate in part for loss of anadromous fishing opportunities. a. Conduct site feasibility studies. Identify potential sites for development. Collect environmental and cultural information needed to assess site suitability, develop engineering designs, and compile NEPA documentation.
1. b. Develop engineering designs and cost estimates in coordination with U.S. Corps of Engineer, that address safety, engineering, as well as specific biological requirements proposed by NPT fisheries biologists.
1. c. Compile required environmental impact documentation pursuant to NEPA. Assess potential environmental impacts due to the proposed fishery following NEPA guidelines.
1. d. Phase construction of new fisheries in accordance with the site feasibility and design studies. Increase resident fish harvest opportunities on the Nez Perce Reservation to mitigate for loss of anadromous fish due to the construction and operation of Dwor
2. Maintain new and existing resident fisheries within the Nez Perce Reservation to provide 4750 kg of resident fish annually to mitigate in part for loss of anadromous fishing opportunities. a. Implement structural improvement plans and water quality/habitat management action plans at existing fisheries. Increase carrying capacity and harvest potential at Talmaks and Mud Springs Reservoirs.
2. b. Monitor temperature, oxygen, depth and other pertinent chemical, biological, and habitat parameters to evaluate water quality and habitat at new fisheries as a result of the completion of Task 2a.
2. c. Monitor and evaluate effects of watershed use on water quality and habitat quantity. Assess fisheries response to land use practices in the watershed and gauge implemented best (grazing, logging and agricultural) management practices (BMPs).
2. d. Conduct periodic site maintenance to maintain structural integrity of the dam and habitat quality to maximize potential carrying capacity and fish harvest.
3. Manage new and existing resident fisheries within the Nez Perce Reservation to provide 4750 kg of resident fish annually to mitigate in part for loss of anadromous fishing opportunities. a. Develop individual fishery management and stocking plans to provide maximum return to harvest based on the existing carrying capacity and environmental conditions/ limitations of the fishery.
3. b. Implement fisheries management plans to creating multi-species systems that maximize potential resident fish harvest and reduce the needed for stocking.
3. c. Monitor fish growth and condition reflecting health of the fisheries, and harvest.
3. d. Evaluate and revise management and stocking plans based on health of the fishery and harvest information (Task 3c) to maximize fish growth, condition, and harvest.

Objective Schedules and Costs

Objective Start Date End Date Measurable Biological Objectives Milestone FY 2000 Cost %
01/01/96 Identify new fisheries sites, collected baseline data 1998 - Deer Creek and Cold Springs; 1999 Zenner Meadows 5.0%
01/01/98 Develop engineering designs and cost estimates 1999 - Deer Creek completed; Zenner Meadows started 7.5%
01/01/98 Compile information for NEPA documentation 1999 - Deer Creek EA completed; Zenner Meadow started 7.5%
06/01/99 Construction of new fisheries 1999 - begin Deer Creek construction 60.0%
06/01/95 09/01/98 Restoration of existing fisheries 1997 - Talmaks completed; 1998 - Mud Springs completed 0.0%
05/01/99 Monitor changes in environmental conditions 2.0%
05/01/99 Evaluate restoration and need for maintenance 1.0%
01/01/95 Site maintenance 2.0%
01/01/99 Development of fish management plans 1999 Talmaks and Mud Springs 2.5%
05/01/99 Implementation of plans 1999 Talmaks and Mud Springs 5.0%
05/01/95 Monitor status of fishery 5.0%
05/01/00 Evaluate and revise plans 2.5%


Section 5. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 2000 Cost
Personnel FTEs: 1 Project Leader, 4 Technicians, 0.5 Administrative support $200,000
Fringe 20 % of personnel costs $ 40,000
Supplies $ 5,000
Operating at existing sites (Talmaks and Mud Springs) $ 20,000
Capital See cost sharing below $ 0
NEPA Collection of environmental data covered in Personnel and Supplies line items. - see subcontracts. $ 0
Construction for Phase 1 of Deer Creek site construction - see subcontracts $ 0
Travel $ 2,500
Indirect 23 % $ 61,500
Subcontractor -Construction of Deer Creek Reservoir and Dam -Compiling of NEPA documentat $521,000
Total Itemized Budget $850,000


Total estimated budget

Total FY 2000 project cost $850,000
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $ 0
Total FY 2000 budget request $850,000
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
Nez Perce Tribe Land acquisition at proposed Deer Creek site. $160,000 unknown
Nez Perce Tribe Land acquisition at Zenner Meadows site. $460,000 unknown

 

Outyear Budget Totals

2001 2002 2003 2004
All Phases $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000
Total Outyear Budgets $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000
 

Other Budget Explanation

Schedule Constraints: Scheduled development at new sites is dependent on the completion of NEPA permitting requirements, and environmental analyses.


Section 6. References

Reference Watershed?
Brusven, P. 1991. Baseline monitoring and analysis of Talmaks Reservoir and Mud Springs Reservoir. Report to EPA by the Water Resources Division of the Nez Perce Tribe. Grant # S-000498-01-3. Lapwai, ID No
Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority. 1997. Draft multi-year implementation plan for resident fish protection, enhancement, and mitigation in the Columbia River Basin. CBFWA Tech. Planning Document. Portland, OR No
Cramer S.P., C.W. Huntington, and C.R. Steward.1993. Harvest of Anadromous Fishes Lost by the Nez Perce Indian Tribe as a Result of the Lewiston and Harpster Dams in the Clearwater Basin. S.P. Cramer and Associates, Inc. No
Everhart, W.H. and W.D. Youngs. 1981. Principle of Fishery Science (2nd ed.). Cornell University Press. Ithaca NY No
Matthews, J.P. 1995a. Talmaks Reservior: Phase 1 Diagnostic and Feasibility Water Quality Study. Final Report Nez Perce Tribe Water Resources Division. Lapwai, ID. No
Matthews, J.P. 1995b. Mud Springs Reservior: Phase 1 Diagnostic and Feasibility Water Quality Study. Final Report Nez Perce Tribe Water Resources Division. Lapwai, ID. No
McLarney W. 1987. The Freshwater Aquaculture Book. Hartley and Marks Inc. Point Roberts, WA No
Nielsen, L.A. and D.L. Johnson. 1983. Fisheries Techniques. American Fisheries Society. Bethesda, MD No
Noble, R.L. 1986. Management of reservoir fish communities by influencing species interactions. pages 137-143 in G.E. Hall and M..J. Van Den Avyle, (eds.) Reservoir Fisheries Management: Strategies for the 80's. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD No
Northwest Power Planning Council. 1994. Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. Report 94-48. Portland OR No
Ott,L. 1984. An introduction to statistical methods and data analysis. Second Edition. PWS Publishers, Boston MA. No


Section 7. Abstract

Abstract


Reviews and Recommendations

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

ISRP Preliminary Review , ISRP 99-2 Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Jun 15, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
Recommendation: Do not fund. The proposal is technically inadequate and scientifically weak

Comments: This proposal is in need of clearly defined objectives and substantial editorial revision to avoid (or to succinctly define) such references as "a multi-species ecosystem approach," "water quality and habitat problems" and "environmental conditions that limit fishery success." To what approaches, problems and conditions do the proponents refer? Are tribal members capturing a significant number of the fish stocked and/or is all the harvest designated for tribal members? If not, are there fees, creel limits, etc. for non-tribal members? How is harvest monitored? What strains of fish are used in the pond? Are five full-time people truly required for the project? If so, experiments with species combinations and densities should be possible. Future proposals should offer more data on past accomplishments and performance of various ponds or fisheries, particularly with the manpower involved.

A serious concern among reviewers was a statement indicating that a "multi-species ecosystem approach" involving trout, bass, and sturgeon is to be used. What species of trout, bass, or sturgeon are considered? The approach on its face seems infeasible because trout and bass are not compatible. This leads to a lack of confidence in the proposal and concern that the work is not based on sound science principles. The proposal states that "both the Deer Creek and Cold Springs sites were considered suitable," but neglects to say in what respects and for what? Material in the proposal is needlessly repetitive; for example, much of the project history is repeated in the methods section


CBFWA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
2000
$750,000
Comment:

CBFWA: Resident Fish Review Comments Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
Screening Criteria: yes

Technical Criteria: yes- The sponsor was not able to clarify budget concerns. budget should be investigated for criteria 9. Is above 10% rule.

Programmatic Criteria: yes (these are for trout pond use)

Milestone Criteria: no-The biological objectives are actually tasks.

General comments: This is a substitution project whose intent is to raise fish for harvest. concerned about building more dams.


ISRP Final Review , ISRP 99-4 Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Oct 29, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
Do not fund. The original proposal and response do not convince the reviewers that this is a scientifically sound proposal. The basic idea is supportable both in the Fish and Wildlife Program (the objective to use "substitute fisheries") and scientifically, but the proposal is not adequate as it stands. A simpler, lower-cost, more practical project could be developed.

This pond fishery project is interesting and should be a relatively simple one to manage. The responses (and the original proposal) point to some serious problems in management that may be overcome by relatively simple, practical measures, such as watershed BMPs and the fencing that the proposal mentions. If the BMPs are being followed to remedy past watershed abuses (but exactly what sorts of abuses and BMPs are not described in the proposal), they should probably be given several years to take full effect before complicated in-pond management schemes are tried.

The proposal indicated that a good, practical watershed-analysis was probably done. However, the proposal and responses did not describe the analysis or how the proposal's justification, objectives, and methods stem from it.

Additional consultation with specialists, including possibly an engineer and hydrologist, as well as biologists, who have had success in fish-pond-ecosystem-management might help identify remedies to some of the persistent problems identified in the proposal. Improvements in managing existing ponds might be recommended, and mistakes in siting and building future ponds might be avoided. Future proposals should provide maps that show existing ponds, reservoirs, streams, etc. and proposed sites.

More specifically, the sponsor states a laudable desire to "reduce the need and costs associated with the continual stocking of 'catchables.'" However, it may well be that the proposed approach of studying in-pond conditions and trying different predator-prey combinations is not the right tack to take until the BMPs are put into effect and the watershed has had time to heal. The sponsor also wants an "ecosystem" approach, but may be viewing this too narrowly (yet perhaps too complexly) as "maintaining the equilibrium between predators and prey, and maximizing biotic interactions." The evident pond problems point to a need to focus more on the larger ecosystem of each pond—its watershed.

The sponsor points to "high temperatures, low oxygen levels, elevated nutrient levels and associated algal blooms during summer and oxygen depletions during winter." These are classic symptoms of watershed abuse (and perhaps secondarily a water supply and/or siting and/or pond-basin-shape problem). The watershed (drainage basin) sources of nutrients, which usually result from land-management problems; the water supply; and the shape of the pond basin and dam/outlet structure usually govern fish-production success in ponds, not finding some special mix of species. Even if a pond is thermally more suitable for warmwater fishes than for trout, the warmwater species will also do poorly if certain (often correctable) physical attributes of the pond ecosystem are wrong.


NWPPC Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Do not fund
Date:
Nov 8, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:

NWPPC Funding Recommendation , NWPPC 2000-6 Recommendation:
No further funding
Date:
Mar 1, 2000
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
(17). Nez Perce Tribe Resident Fish Substitution Program, Project ID #9501300, FY00 CBFWA Rec. $750,000

Discussion/Background: On January 29, 1998, Council staff met with Nez Perce Tribal and Bonneville staff to discuss the status of the Nez Perce Trout Ponds (9501300) with regard to the 3-step review. It is our understanding that in Fiscal Year 1998, the project calls for an "emergency repair" of two existing rainbow trout ponds, with site inventory, design and construction of up to 12 additional fish ponds for rainbow trout, as well as continued operations and maintenance of facilities.

This project calls for the "emergency repair of two existing trout ponds and site inventory, design and construction of up to 12 additional fish ponds," as well as continued operations and maintenance of facilities. As we understand it, the simplicity of this project makes it unnecessary to prepare preliminary designs. For that reason, National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) compliance and final design will be accomplished on approximately the same schedule. Therefore, the requirements of step 1, 2, and 3 reviews will be combined into a single step 3 review for the Nez Perce Trout Ponds and will include both a scientific and fiscal review. All applicable master-planning requirements will be addressed as part of the required NEPA compliance. Final design and cost estimates will also be provided to the Council at the same time as the NEPA documents are submitted.

ISRP Review: Do not fund. The original proposal and response do not convince the reviewers that this is a scientifically sound proposal. The basic idea is supportable both in the Fish and Wildlife Program (the objective to use "substitute fisheries") and scientifically, but the proposal is not adequate as it stands. A simpler, lower-cost, more practical project could be developed.

Sponsor Policy Response: The NPT specified that the following criteria applied to their project. Criteria "a" since the ISRP's comments are critical of the strategies and objectives and evaluation of the scientific soundness of the project. Criteria "b" due to the program measures and language in Section 10.8D.1 of the Council Program.

Council Recommendation: The Fiscal Year 2000 proposal has a new title "Nez Perce Tribe Resident Fish Substitution Program" and appears to have a new focus on "resident species" (i.e. trout, bass and sturgeon). This project was originally in a combined step review process. Additionally, the Fiscal Year 2000 proposal addresses "trout, bass and sturgeon" that are not covered under the program measures and language in Section 10.8D.1 of the Council Program.

On March 26, 1999 Council and BPA staffs met with NPT staff to discuss the status of the project. The two existing ponds (i.e. Mud Springs and Talmaks) have had the required emergency repairs completed. To date, site inventory has included the identification of 15 new sites, of which only two sites seem suitable at this time for development. The two new sites that will be explored further include the Deer Creek (proposed at 115 surface acres) and Tunnel Pond sites. At this time the NPT will emphasis the Deer Creek site, but depending on the outcome of budgetary, land ownership and NEPA issues, the NPT may want to explore other opportunities for the implementation of this program. As discussed at the meeting, the Council is still anticipating the submittal of Three-Step Review Process documents, as outlined in the memo sent to the NPT and Bonneville on February 20, 1998. Additionally, at the meeting tribal staff mentioned the interest to approach this program under a multi-species approach. To date the site development at Tunnel Ponds is nearing completion.

A letter was sent to James Muaney (NPT) on April 16, 1999 stating that upon "reviewing the program language and discussing with Council staff, Council reaction is that the program measure is specific to trout and does not support expansion or revision to the production of other species.

This project has gone beyond the original intent as outlined in the program measure. Therefore the Council accepts the ISRP's recommendation not to fund this project. Transition activities should solely focus on the operation and maintenance of the three existing ponds. The existing Fiscal Year 1999 contract expires on May 31, 2000, and currently there is approximately $474,081 remaining. Through no-cost extensions, these monies seem to be adequate for the above maintenance activities. Therefore the Fiscal Year 2000 request within the CBFWA budget could be reallocated.


NWPPC Funding Recommendation , NWPPC 2000-6 Recommendation:
Fund with carryover
Date:
Mar 1, 2000
2000
$ 0
Comment:
[Decision made in 12-7-99 Council Meeting]; Fund O&M with FY Carryover of $474,081

NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review Funding category:
expense
Date:
May 2005
FY05 NPCC Start of Year:
$183,561
FY06 NPCC Staff Preliminary:
$183,561
FY06 NPCC July Draft Start of Year:
$183,561
Sponsor (Nez Perce Tribe) Comments (Go to Original on NPCC Website):

Return to top of page