BPA Fish and Wildlife FY 1997 Proposal

Section 1. Administrative
Section 2. Narrative
Section 3. Budget

see CBFWA and BPA funding recommendations

Section 1. Administrative

Title of project
Enhanced Tribal Tributary Fish and Wildlife Law Enforcement-- Part 5. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes

BPA project number   5502700

Business name of agency, institution or organization requesting funding
Shoshone-Bannock Tribes

Sponsor type   ID-Tribe

Proposal contact person or principal investigator
 NameBret Haskett
 Mailing addressP.O. Box 306
Fort Hall, ID 83203
 Phone208/238-3867

BPA technical contact   , EWN

Biological opinion ID   

NWPPC Program number   8.5C

Short description
Provides enhanced resource protection for off-Reservation resources as part of the enforcement component of co-management by the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes along with the four lower Columbia River Basin Tribes.

Project start year   1997    End year   2001

Start of operation and/or maintenance   0

Project development phase   Implementation

Section 2. Narrative

Related projects
BPA Project 92-024 Enhanced Columbia Basin Law Enforcement-- Unified contract with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to administer funds to five Law Enforcement agencies, i.e. CRITFC, OSP, WDFW, IDFG and MDFWP. The proposed new enforcement project with the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes will be integrated with the ongoing BPA-funded law enforcement project (92-024), the Columbia Basin Law Enforcement Council (CBLEC), and proposed fish and wildlife law enforcement projects of other Columbia Basin Indian Tribes.

Project history
In the fall of 1991, the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) initiated funding for an enhanced fisheries and habitat law enforcement (LE) program (920024)-- targeted on depleted fish stocks proposed for listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). BPA has spent over $19 million on implementation of the LE program during 1992-1996-- doubling the enforcement effort of state fish and wildlife LE agencies throughout the Columbia Basin And CRITFE in Zone 6 of the Mainstem Columbia River. The inter-agency Columbia Basin Law Enforcement Council (CBLEC) coordinates the program. Although the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes are a member of CBLEC and do provide off-reservation enforcement for their Tribes, they have not received any of the BPA funding. Enforcement efforts and needs in the recent years have increased for salmon since the listing in 1992. The other effort treaty Tribes are routinely represented in the CBLEC forum by CRITFE and on an individual basis as needed. The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes as members of CBLEC do attend the inter-agency meetings on a regular basis. Columbia Basin Indian Tribes have authority and responsibility for management and protection of their natural resources on reservation, co-management of Columbia River fisheries (for example the Columbia River Fish Management Plan (CRFMP) derived from U.S. v. Oregon), and enforcement of fish and wildlife laws, rules and codes pertaining to activities of tribal members throughout the Columbia River Basin. Since 1991, the Columbia River Basin Tribes have expressed an interest- to BPA and CBLEC- for enhanced law enforcement resource protection off-Reservation. Letters requesting funding and unsolicited proposals have been sent to upper level BPA management by the Warm Springs Tribe (1991), the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes (1991, 1995), the Nez Perce Tribes (1992, 1994), the Umatilla Tribes (1992, 1994) and the Colville Tribes (1993). To date, funding for enhanced Tribal tributary law enforcement projects has not been planned or allocated by BPA management or the CBFWA-NPPC Fish and Wildlife Project prioritization process.

Biological results achieved
N/A

Annual reports and technical papers
N/A

Management implications
Indian Tribes have the responsibility to enforce laws, rules, and codes pertaining to their treaty rights as co-managers of the Columbia Basin fishery resources. Authority for Tribal fisheries law enforcement is derived from Treaties with he U.S. Government. Co-management responsibilities for Columbia Basin fisheries has been upheld by U.S. V. Oregon and Columbia River Fish Management Plan. The Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fisheries Enforcement Department derives authority for Mainstem (Zone 6) enforcement by virtue of the four Columbia River Treaty Tribes, i.e. the Yakama, Umatilla, Nez Perce and Warm Springs Tribes. As a result of Settler v. Lameer, Tribes have the authority to enforce tribal fishing regulations : “off -reservation” in treaty fishing areas (Captain John B. Johnson, personal Correspondence, December 2, 1993). From the Tribal perspective institutional changes are needed to: “Modify the existing basin-wide mechanisms of the CRFMP, the Fish and Wildlife Program, and the FERC Orders to more fully implement treaty fishing rights to take fish at usual and accustomed fishing places” and to “use the Endangered Species act in a manner that is consistent with implementation of treaty rights to natural resources.” (The Columbia River Anadromous Fish Plan of the Nez Perce, Umatilla, Warm Springs and Yakama Tribes, 1995). In that tribal salmon restoration plan, one of the primary institutional recommendations is: “10. Continue coordinated harvest law enforcement; develop habitat protection law enforcement.” The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes concur in coordination of basin-wide enforcement and in the need to develop habitat protection law enforcement as the Plan of the four Tribes is consistent with the objectives and project proposals of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. See Letter from Chairman Farmer to other four Tribes’ Chairpersons, January 9, 1996.. This Department is responsible for enforcement of off-Reservation regulations as well as for reporting any damages to the resources and any harassment of tribal members or employees who are involved in the management of the off-Reservation treaty protected resources. See 1992-1993, 1993-1994, and 1994-1995 Annual Reports submitted to the Bureau of Indian Affairs on behalf of Shoshone-Bannock Tribal Fish and Game Department. It is to the benefit of all regional fishery management entities to work in concert with tribal tributary enforcement efforts, and to integrate these efforts within the framework of the ongoing BPA-funded Law Enforcement Program coordinated by the Columbia Basin Law Enforcement Council.

Specific measureable objectives
1. Increased adult salmon passage survival though the tributaries to the spawning grounds via reductions in illegal take and elimination of unauthorized obstructions.
2. Protection of critical spawning and rearing habitat of anadromous salmonids via enhanced compliance with existing habitat and environmental regulations.
3. Increased juvenile salmonid out-migration survival though the tributary migration corridor via compliance with fishing an habitat (e.g. screening and diversion) regulations.
4. Increased cost-effectiveness of the law enforcement efforts via inter-agency coordination and public participation.
5. Increased life cycle survival of depleted resident fish populaitons via enhanced harvest and habitat enforcement.
6. Increased life cycle survival of depleted wildlife (including game and non-game) populations via enhanced harvest and habitat enforcement.

Testable hypothesis
H(1): A 100% increase in the level of enforcement in the tributaries of the Columbia River does not improve adult salmon survival. Metric: statistics on illegal take, and survival of tagged adult salmonids.
H(2): Enforcement of habitat regulations in tributary areas does not increase natural production success or improve the integrity of critical habitat. Metric: Compliance rates with laws and rules for the protection of stream habitat, riparian zones, watershids and ecosystems.
H(3): Enforcement of water diversion and screening regualtions does not increase juvenile salmonid survival tribautaries and Mainstem. Metric: Compliance rates with screening regulations on Mainstem pump and tributary diversions.
H(4): Enhanced inter-agency coordination and resource sharing does not improve efficiency and cost-effectiveness of LE efforts. Metric: contacts, enforcement statistics, habitat protected, and fish saved via interagency task forces per cost level.
H(5): Improved public education and awareness does not enhance LE efforts via public support and involvement. Metric: Public opinion polls, public volunteer work, voluntary compliance with laws and rules, “poacher hotline” information on violations.
H(6) : Increased level of law enforcement for Columbia Basin resident fish species and their critical habitats does not improve the species’ life cycle survival and population levels. Metric: Enforcement statistics; compliance rates with laws and rules; fisheries statistics; public awareness.
H(7): Increased levels of law enforcement for Columbia Basin wildlife species and their critical habitats does not improve the species’ life cycle survival and population levels. Metric: Enforcement statistics; compliance rates with laws and rules; wildlife statistics including survival of tagged individuals; public awareness.

Underlying assumptions or critical constraints
Assumptions: (1) law enforcement is an integral part of natural resource management; (2) an integral part of law enforcement is protection of Tribal Members and Treaty Rights; (3) enforcement of existing fish, wildlife, and habitat regulation is needed to improve compliance rates and protect fish stocks, wildlife populations, and their critical habitats; (4) heightened inter-agency coordination, public awareness and public participation benefits natural resource enforcement.

Constraints: (1) funding by BPA, CBFWA, and NPPC for fish and wildlife law enforcement; (2) adequate funding for effective tributary law enforcement; (3) active participation (funding constraint) is required for effective regional inter-agency coordination and cooperation.

Methods
(1) Experimental design:
ā Increase Tribal Tributary law enforcement efforts by two officer (i.e., 2 FTE) per Tribe
ā Enhance Law Enforcement Training to include appropriate state and federal police academies, and specific training on environmental crime and habitat regulations
ā Enhance effectiveness with adequate vehicles (including operation and maintenance) sophisticated equipment and communications -- for all tribal LE officers
ā Improve cost-effectiveness with inter-agency coordination and special emphasis task forces
ā Improve public participation and voluntary compliance through information and education Indian Treaty rights and responsibilities
ā Take directed actions to protect anadromous fish, resident fish, and critical habitats on and off reservations
ā Take directed actions to enforce both fisheries and habitat regulations on reservations
ā Integrate Tribal tributary enforcement with the ongoing BPA-funded law enforcement program coordinated by the Columbia Basin Law Enforcement Council
ā Adaptively manage the program via monitoring and evaluation (M&E)
ā Develop biologically based performance criteria for each operational objective
ā Improve data management systems to collect valid enforcement statistics, fisheries statistics, and habitat data
ā Organize the evaluation of desired/actual achievements in terms of:
 input (e.g., increased budget, personnel, equipment, coordination),
 Output (e.g., enforcement contacts, warnings, arrests, seizures and other statistics), and
 Outcome (e.g., salmon saved, critical habitat protected). Focus on Outcomes, i.e., biological results
(2) Evaluate outcomes using statistical trend analyses, opinion surveys, and qualitative analyses -- M&E will be conducted by a "third-party" independent fisheries law enforcement consultant as part of the CBLEC program coordination and oversight.
(3) No test fish will be required in 1996 or 1997.

Brief schedule of activities
1996 - plant for enhanced tribal tributary fish & wildlife law enforcement, integrated with BPA-CBLEC Program
1997 - initiate implementation of enhanced basin-wide tribal tributary fish and wildlife law enforcement
1998-2001 continued implementation of Tribal tributary LE, including M&E as a tool for adaptive management

Biological need
To increase survival of anadromous salmonids and resident fish throughout the Columbia Basin -- by reducing illegal take and protecting critical habitat from degradation caused by violation of water and land use regulations.

Critical uncertainties
Willingness of fisheries management agencies and regional planning entities -- to implement funding for Tribal tributary enforcement. Fish and wildlife law enforcement is central to Tribes' ability to be effective partners in natural resource management in the Columbia Basin.

Summary of expected outcome
1.Increased passage survival of adult salmonids during their upstream migration through Columbia and Snake river tributaries and escapement to hatcheries and spawning areas.
2.Increased passage survival of juvenile salmonids during their downstream migration through tributaries to the Columbia and Snake rivers.
3.Increased protection of critical habitats of anadromous salmonids throughout tributary subbasins of the Columbia Basin.
4.Increased life cycle of depleted species of ondemio resident fish, and protection of their critical habitats throughout tributary subbasins of the Columbia Basin.
5.Increased public awareness of Indian Tribal co-management responsibilities, tribal member participation voluntary compliance and deterrence of illegal take of depleted anadromous and resident fish throughout the Columbia Basin.
6.Increased effectiveness and biological benefits of the LE program through inter-agency cooperation M&E, and adaptive management.
7.Contribution to the regional fish and wildlife conservation and enhancement programs -- leading to expedited rebuilding and recovery of depleted Columbia Basin fish stocks.

Dependencies/opportunities for cooperation
The integration of fisheries and habitat law enforcement conducted by individual Tribes on tributary subbasins on and off reservations -- with the ongoing BPA-funded LE Program -- will enhance cooperation and efficiencies of resource protection throughout the Columbia Basin ecosystem. The law enforcement divisions of the following entities currently comprise the members and cooperators of the Columbia Basin Law Enforcement Council (CBLEC); the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission Columbia River Treaty Tribes (Yakama, Nez Perce, Umatilla and Warm Springs), the Shoshone-Bannock Indian Tribes, Oregon Department of State Police, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks, National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Coast Guard. The cooperation of all the above fish and wildlife enforcement entities with tribal enforcement efforts is essential to implement an ecosystem-wide Columbia Basin LE Program.

Risks
The risk of not funding Tribes to conduct adequate law enforcement in tributary subbasins is diminished protection of depleted fish and wildlife populations and their critical habitats, loss of efficiencies that could be gained through inter-agency cooperation, and an inability to implement a true "ecosystem" management. Law enforcement ensures the protection of natural resources from illegal take and habitat degradation -- during the years of rebuilding -- thus providing an "insurance policy" for investments in hatchery and habitat restoration efforts leading to the recovery of depleted stocks.

Monitoring activity
A plan is currently being developed by CBLEC to conduct monitoring and evaluation (M&E) on the overall law enforcement program. A request for proposal on a "third party" M&E is planned for procurement during 1996. Additional BPA funding is needed to implement this M&E project.

Section 3. Budget

Data shown are the total of expense and capital obligations by fiscal year. Obligations for any given year may not equal actual expenditures or accruals within the year, due to carryover, pre-funding, capitalization and difference between operating year and BPA fiscal year.

Historic costsFY 1996 budget data*Current and future funding needs
(none) New project - no FY96 data available 1997: 0
1998: 210,000
1999: 220,500
2000: 231,525
2001: 243,101

* For most projects, Authorized is the amount recommended by CBFWA and the Council. Planned is amount currently allocated. Contracted is the amount obligated to date of printout.

Funding recommendations

CBFWA funding review group   System Policy

Recommendation    Tier 1 - fund

Recommended funding level   $0