FY 2003 Columbia Cascade proposal 29041

Additional documents

TitleType
29041 Narrative Narrative
FY 2003 Powerpoint Presentation Update for Project 200302300 Powerpoint Presentation

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleEvaluate Distribution, Abundance, Genetic Structure, and Habitat Use of Bull Trout Populations in the Columbia Cascade Province
Proposal ID29041
OrganizationU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Wenatchee Office (USFWS)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameJudy De La Vergne
Mailing address215 Melody Lane Wenatchee, WA 98801
Phone / email5096653510 / judy_delavergne@fws.gov
Manager authorizing this projectJodi Bush
Review cycleColumbia Cascade
Province / SubbasinColumbia Cascade / Columbia Upper Middle
Short descriptionEvaluate distribution, abundance, genetic structure and habitat use of bull trout in the Wenatchee, Entiat, and Methow Rivers. Identify habitat limiting factors for bull trout .
Target speciesColumbia River Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus), listed as part of the Columbia River Distincnt Population Segment (DPS). This province is within the UFWS Draft Recovery Plan,Upper Columbia River Bull Trout Recovery Unit.
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
47.4733 -120.3217 Approximately at the mouth of the Wenatchee River at Wenatchee
47.6606 -120.2169 Approximately at the mouth of the Entiat River at Entiat
48.1033 -119.72 Approximately at the mouth of the Methow River at Pateros
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
1-Develop 1-5 year Plans
7-Develop offsite mitig
155-Develop sampl/surveys
167-Incidental Mortality
193-Fish detect/tagging
198-Data Mgmt

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment
1989-1995 Completed miles of Hankin and Reeves stream surveys in the Chelan, Entiat, and Wenatchee subbasins
1993-1996 Completed instream fish habitat restoration projects, flood repair and fish habitat restoration projects, and road decomissioning projects in the Wenatchee River sub-basin
1990-prese Conduct bull trout redd surveys within the Wenatchee subasin: collected 10+ years worth of data in the Chiwawa River w/in Rock and Chikamin Creeks; 5+ years worth of data in Nason and Mill Creeks; and 3 yrs of data in White River w/in Panther Creek..
1990-prese Conduct bull trout night snorkel surveys: 1) Snorkeled within the Wenatchee subbasin and located resident forms of bull trout in upper Nason Creek and above the Little Wenatchee Falls on the Little Wenatchee River; 2)conducted surveys in Stehikin River
1997 Conducted a bull trout redd survey on the S. Fork Skykomish R. with Kurt Kramer, WDFW.
1997-prese Complete multiple ESA consultations with the US Forest Service on the Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forests
1998-prese Conduct bull trout redd surveys in the Methow in Gold Creek, Buttermilk Creek, EarlyWinters Creek, and Wolf Creek
2000 Conducted training for redd surveys and snorkeling in accorcance with USFWS and USFS Rocky Mountain Research Station for the draft bull trout presence/ absence protocol
2000 Coordinated with USFS Rocky Mountain Research Station to implement bull trout presence/absence protocol in Eastern Washington
2000 Received USFWS money to help implement radio tagging study in the Wenatchee subbasin
2000-2001 Coordinated with USFS, WDFW, USGS-BRD, PUD's, BioAnalyst, Inc., Yakima Nation and USFWS to implement bull trout telemetry project, use services, and to use equipment.
2000 Tagged/tracked 30 bull trout in the Wenatchee subbasin with 2 year tags and one thermal tag; Tracked two into the Columbia River and back again into spawning tributary in upper Chiwawa R.(~140 mile round trip)
2001 Tagged/tracked 40 (10 new) bull trout in the Wenatchee subbasin with 2 year tags and three thermal tags.
2001 Presented radio telemtry project to interagency, university, recovery, tribal biologists and university and consulting statisticians at Mt.Hood, OR at Bull trout Recovery Monitoring Workshop
2001 Sponsored the Salvelinus Confluentus Curiosity Society meeting in Leavenworth, Wa and helped design survey work for 9 crews containing bull trout biologists from four states.

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
NMFS BO Provides information necessary in order to develop plans to implement BO including offsite mitigation, population monitoring, and data management
USFWS BO Provides information that can be used to develop measures for monitoring and adaptive management and meeting criteria for bull trout
BPA SubBasin Plans Provides data for gaps in information and for limiting factors such as connectivity, temperatures, bull trout dist. in lower tributares, baseline populations
0 USFWS Recovery Plan Proposal gathers data for determining research need, for connectivity of core areas, baseline populations for recovery
0 Non-BPA Project. Genetic Analysis of Bull Trout Provides data for determining population assemblages and baselines for comparison, connectivity of populations

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
Overall Objective: To evaluate the status of bull trout populations in the Methow, Entiat and Wenatchee sub-basins and to identify habitat limiting factors for bull trout. The following are the foundational elements of this objective. $0
1.Determine population genetic structure a.Acquire permits from WDFW, USFWS, NMFS if necessary 2003 (1) $600
b.purchase ethanol, vials, anesthetic, scissors, measure board, nets, snorkel gear 2003 (1) $3,200
2.Evaluate connectivity and identify migratory patterns of adult bull trout a.Acquire permits from WDFW, USFWS, NMFS if necessary 2003 (1) $600
b.purchase 1 receiver, 50 radio tags and archival tags from Lotek 2003 (1) $32,250
c.Coordinate use of receivers and boxes with USGS and PUD and coordinate tag frequencies and channels with Lotek, and Univ. of ID. 2003-2006 (3) $0
d.Coordinate with USFS on National Forest 2003-2006 (3) $0
e. acquire technical assisstance from USGS-BRD for setup of stationary sites 2004-2006 (2) $0
3.Estimate abundance of adult bull trout a.acquire permits from WDFW, USFWS, NMFS if necessary. 2003 (1) $600
b.Coordinate with USFS on National Forest. 2003-2004 (2) $0
3A. Enumerate redds in streams presumed to be spawning habiat a.acquire permits from WDFW, USFWS, NMFS if necessary 2003 (1) $600
b.Coordinate with USFS on National Forest. 2003-2005 (3) $0
3B. Estimate number of fish per redd in tributaries in the Chiwawa River a. Purchase video equipment, solar pannels, batteries, tapes, mounting device 2003 (1) $5,000
b. Coordinate with USFS on National Forest 2003-2005 (3) $0
4: Identify habitat limiting factors (Costs and tasks for this objective included in obj.2) 2003-2006 $0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
n/a $0
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
1.Determine population genetic structure a. collect tissues samples for genetic variation analysis 2003-2004 (2) $14,703
b. analysis for genetic variation between local populations of bull trout 2003-2004 (2) $94,000 Yes
c. vehicle use 2003 (1) $5,000
2. Evaluate connectivity and identify migratory patterns of adult bull trout 2004-2006 (3) $0
3. Estimate abundance of adult bull trout 2004-2004 (1) $0
3A. Enumerate redds in streams presumed to be spawning habitat 2004-2005 (2) $0
3B. Estimate number of fish per redd in tributaries in the Chiwawa River 2004-2004 (1) $0
4: Identify habitat limiting factors (Costs and tasks for this objective included in obj.2) 2003-2006 (3) $0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
2. Evaluate connectivity and identify migratory patterns of adult bull trout 2004 2006 $113,400
3. Estimate abundance of adult bull trout 2004 2004 $137,400
3A. Enumerate redds in streams presumed to be spawning habiat 2004 2005 $15,000
3B. Estimate number of fish per redd in tributaries in the Chiwawa River 2004 2004 $8,160
4: Identify habitat limiting factors (Costs and tasks for this objective included in obj.2) 2004 2006 $0
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
FY 2004FY 2005
$221,260$52,700

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
1.Determine population genetic structure a.Overhead - Filing, office organization, building use, etc. 2003-2006 (3) $29,463
a. Maintenance and Replacement of Equip-Vehicles 2003-2006 (3) $350
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
2. Evaluate connectivity and identify migratory patterns of adult bull trout 2004 2005 $43,063
3. Estimate abundance of adult bull trout 2004 2005 $35,188
3A. Enumerate redds in streams presumed to be spawning habitat 2004 2005 $4,588
3B. Estimate number of fish per redd in tributaries in the Chiwawa River 2004 2005 $3,977
4. Identify habitat limiting factors (Costs and tasks for this objective included in obj.2) 2004 2006 $0
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
FY 2004FY 2005
$61,540$25,276

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
1.Determine population genetic structure a. Data analysis, reporting. summaries 2003-2004 (2) $0 Yes
2.Evaluate connectivity and identify migratory patterns of adult bull trout 2004-2006(3) $0
3. Estimate abundance of adult bull trout 2004-2005 (2) $0
3A. Enumerate redds in streams presumed to be spawning habiat 2004-2005 (2) $0
3B. Estimate number of fish per redd in tributaries in the Chiwawa River 2004-2005 (2) $0
4.Identify habitat limiting factors (Costs and tasks for this objective included in obj.2) 2004-2006 (3) $0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
2. Evaluate connectivity and identify migratory patterns of adult bull trout 2004 2006 $4,000
3. Estimate abundance of adult bull trout 2004 2005 $1,000
3A. Enumerate redds in streams presumed to be spawning habiat 2004 2005 $1,000
3B. Estimate number of fish per redd in tributaries in the Chiwawa River 2004 2005 $1,000
4. Identify habitat limiting factors (Costs and tasks for this objective included in obj.2) 2004 2006 $0
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
FY 2005FY 2006
$3,000$4,000

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2003 cost
Personnel FTE: GS5/7/9/11s to do work on all activiites $14,703
Fringe misc. $0
Supplies Incudes tags, snorkel gear, ethanol, vials, batteries, video equiment, solar panels, etc $26,450
Travel Includes travel, vehicles $5,000
Indirect 25% Overhead $29,463
Capital Receiver (can coord. use of other existing receivers) $14,000
NEPA Likely a CE, but includes Cost of application for permits $2,400
PIT tags $0
Subcontractor Genetic analysis $94,000
Other equipment maintenance $350
$186,366
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2003 cost$186,366
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2003 budget request$186,366
FY 2003 forecast from 2002$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
USGS BPA, Cook, WA Equipment, technical help $67,000 in-kind
PUD's- Chelan,Douglas County Equipment, technical help $65,000 in-kind
BioAnalyst, Inc. Technical help $1,000 in-kind
USFS Use of structures/equipment/technical help $1,000 in-kind
USFS-Rocky Mountain Research Technical Help $10,500 cash
USFWS-BTCMER Group, NWFP Technical help and funding $1,000 in-kind
WDFW help with tracking $1,000 in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Fundable - no response required
Date:
Mar 1, 2002

Comment:

Fundable. No response is needed. This is a high-quality project with a finely tuned cost-effective budget. The proposal is well written, informative, provides appropriate detail on methods and background; links to other work throughout the Columbia Basin; and cites current and appropriate references. The proposal describes linkages to larger regional bull trout database and evaluation efforts spearheaded by Dunham and Riemen out of the Boise USFS Rocky Mountain Experimental Station. Much background work has already been done on bull trout in the Wenatchee River by the FWS and its collaborators, which was funded by others. The proposal relates the work to the BiOps, (NMFS and FWS), Subbasin summary, Washington watershed plans, Forest Service watershed assessments, and the listings by FWS. Oddly, the study is fully laid out in the background section (including methods), which makes the later sections redundant. The proposed work is nicely related to FWS recovery plan development and to several other pertinent studies, mostly not BPA funded.

The project will gather genetic data by sampling 30 fish from each of 40 tributaries to the Wenatchee, Entiat and Methow rivers (what about the Okanogan?). Radiotelemetry will be used to track bull trout migrations. The objective is to determine whether differences exist within and among bull trout from the subbasins. The proponents should include some probabilistic sampling of sites in addition to the traditional index sites and sites selected by radio-tracking. References are needed on dolly varden, bull trout, hybrid.

The contractor for the genetics work is well qualified, and the regional genetics data banking is excellent. There are many literature references. There are good resumes of well-qualified staff, including a likely contractor for the genetics work. The study will certainly yield information about bull trout that will be important for its conservation (as the prior work by the proposer has already done). The information is needed for effective management of this species.

The budget for this proposal is noteworthy; indeed, it is modest (half or less) in comparison to many other similar bull trout proposals we have reviewed in earlier provincial reviews. It is targeted very specifically and the very helpful budget information is tightly linked to the objectives and tasks identified for the project. Good job!


Recommendation:
High Priority
Date:
May 17, 2002

Comment:

Supplies and equipment could be available at the research station and genetics cost seem high. Could other cost reductions can be achieved? USFWS has identified this project as a BiOp project.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Jun 7, 2002

Comment:

Fundable. A response was not needed. This is a high-quality project with a finely tuned cost-effective budget. The proposal is well written, informative, provides appropriate detail on methods and background; links to other work throughout the Columbia Basin; and cites current and appropriate references. The proposal describes linkages to larger regional bull trout database and evaluation efforts spearheaded by Dunham and Riemen out of the Boise USFS Rocky Mountain Experimental Station. Much background work has already been done on bull trout in the Wenatchee River by the FWS and its collaborators, which was funded by others. The proposal relates the work to the BiOps, (NMFS and FWS), Subbasin summary, Washington watershed plans, Forest Service watershed assessments, and the listings by FWS. Oddly, the study is fully laid out in the background section (including methods), which makes the later sections redundant. The proposed work is nicely related to FWS recovery plan development and to several other pertinent studies, mostly not BPA funded.

The project will gather genetic data by sampling 30 fish from each of 40 tributaries to the Wenatchee, Entiat and Methow rivers (what about the Okanogan?). Radiotelemetry will be used to track bull trout migrations. The objective is to determine whether differences exist within and among bull trout from the subbasins. The proponents should include some probabilistic sampling of sites in addition to the traditional index sites and sites selected by radio-tracking. References are needed on dolly varden, bull trout, hybrid.

The contractor for the genetics work is well qualified, and the regional genetics data banking is excellent. There are many literature references. There are good resumes of well-qualified staff, including a likely contractor for the genetics work. The study will certainly yield information about bull trout that will be important for its conservation (as the prior work by the proposer has already done). The information is needed for effective management of this species.

The budget for this proposal is noteworthy; indeed, it is modest (half or less) in comparison to many other similar bull trout proposals we have reviewed in earlier provincial reviews. It is targeted very specifically and the very helpful budget information is tightly linked to the objectives and tasks identified for the project.


Recommendation:
Date:
Jul 19, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU

Comments
Not Reviewed

Already ESA Req?

Biop? No


Recommendation:
D
Date:
Jul 26, 2002

Comment:

Do not recommend.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Oct 30, 2002

Comment: