FY 2003 Columbia Cascade proposal 29043

Additional documents

29043 Narrative Narrative
29043 Sponsor Response to the ISRP Response
29043 Powerpoint Presentation Powerpoint Presentation

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleSSHIAP - Columbia Cascade Province
Proposal ID29043
OrganizationWashington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameDavid H. Johnson
Mailing address600 Capitol Way N. Olympia, WA 98501-1091
Phone / email3609022603 / johnsdhj@dfw.wa.gov
Manager authorizing this projectTimothy Quinn
Review cycleColumbia Cascade
Province / SubbasinColumbia Cascade / Columbia Upper Middle
Short descriptionProject will provide routed & segmented hydrolayer, and collate and synthesize data on 19 aquatic habitat variables over an estimated 22,500 mi of streams in the subbasins of the Columbia Cascade Province.
Target speciesSalmonids
Project location
All subbasins within the Columbia Cascade Province in Washington
48.08 -120.13 Columbia Cascade Province
48.49 -120.22 Methow subbasin
47.85 -120.44 Entiat subbasin
47.7 -120.77 Wenatchee subbasin
48.64 -119.54 Okanogan subbasin
47.53 -119.91 Columbia Upper Middle subbasin
48.2 -120.57 Lake Chelan subbasin
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)


Hydro RPA Action 141
Habitat RPA Action 149
Habitat RPA Action 150
Habitat RPA Action 151
Habitat RPA Action 153
Habitat RPA Action 155

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription
NMFS Action 154 NMFS BPA shall work with the NWPPC to ensure development and updating of subbasin assessments and plans; match state and local funding for coordinated development of watershed assessments and plans; and help fund technical support for subbasin and watershed plan implementation from 2001 to 2006. Planning for priority subbasins should be completed by the 2003 check-in. The action agencies will work with other Federal agencies to ensure that subbasin and watershed assessments and plans are coordinated across non-Federal and Federal land ownerships and programs.

Section 2. Past accomplishments


Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
StreamNet SSHIAP fish distribution and fish passage barriers feed into StreamNet

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
This project is operational in 29 watersheds in w. WA; no planning or design phase is needed at this time; see Implementation Phase. A BPA proposal for SSHIAP in the Col. Plateau & Blue Mtn Provinces are currently in process. $0
The Col. Plateau Province was rated as a "High Priority" for funding by the ISRP. $0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
1. Provide a consistent, comprehensive, and scientifically-robust freshwater and riparian data system for salmonid-bearing areas (subbasins) in the Washington portion of Columbia Cascade Province. a. Clean, route, and segment hydrolayer (6 subbasins); conduct QA/QC on key streams for GIS-based hydrosystem accuracy (1:24,000 scale). 0.75 $50,000
b. With SSHIAP Partners and staff; collate and synthesize data on 19 habitat attributes; update/upgrade fish passage barrier and water diversion dataset; enter into SSHIAP system. 1.0 $280,000
c. Deliver web-accessible, hardcopy maps, hydrolayer, and summary products to users. 1.0 $60,000
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
1. Perform routine annual updates to SSHIAP data system: track repairs to fish passage barriers & screened diversions, & changes related to the habitat attributes in all salmonid-bearing watersheds in the Columbia Cascades Province. 2003 $50,000
Perform further integration and upgrades to the EDT analyses after routine SSHIAP data upgrades have been completed. Deliver updated SSHIAP data and results (hardcopy & web) to key users & planners in the Columbia Cascade Province. $0
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
FY 2004FY 2005FY 2006

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2003 cost
Personnel FTE: 5.5 $276,500
Supplies $20,000
Travel $15,000
Indirect $78,500
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2003 cost$390,000
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2003 budget request$390,000
FY 2003 forecast from 2002$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
Yakama Nation Habitat Inventories, $100,000 in-kind
WA Conservation Commission Habitat Inventories, fish distribution $125,000 in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

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

Fundable only if response is adequate
Mar 1, 2002


A response is needed. The two page "Objectives, tasks and methods section" is too brief to allow review. Detailed methods should be given.

The proposal is to extend the data collection and management system developed under SSHIAP for western Washington to include the Columbia Cascade Province. It would provide a central source for data available on 10,000 miles of streams, and present these data at a 1:24000 scale. Members of the review team have used the information on fish distribution from the SSHIAP and found it to be extremely helpful. Parts of the proposal are complete, clearly presented, and reference pertinent basic literature on the subject. The staff appears highly qualified for and experienced in the work involved.

The sponsor should incorporate elements of their response from the Blue Mountain Province. See http://www.cbfwa.org/files/province/blue/projects/27009.htm#reviews.

The proponents should discuss the quality of existing data and whether they are adequate to support the proposed work. Methods for providing meta-data for each of the data sources should be described.

There should be a monitoring and evaluation section in the 'Objectives, tasks and methods' section that is more than the usual QA/QC work in mapping projects. How are errors quantified and what are acceptable error rates for each of the data layers? For example, what is the error rate for "known fish distribution?" For habitat types? For Fish Passage Barriers? How will one know that a good job was done? Or, that the project was a success in quantitative terms? The CBFWA review remarks for the proposal 27009 in the Blue Mt. Province were "The reviewers question whether the 75-80% accuracy rate is acceptable and whether the work would be performed at the correct scale." The ISRP saw no discussion of accuracy rate in the objectives, tasks, and methods section.

The proposal would be stronger with a "ground-truth" component in the tasks, perhaps in cooperation with other WDFW departments to confirm the accuracy and precision of mapped components. Complete detail should be given concerning a double-blind sampling and evaluation procedures. The specific sample areas, methods, and sampling frequency and intensity (i.e., how many samples of what type where and when) would need to be specified.

To assist in formulating a sound basinwide monitoring program, the proponents are referred to the programmatic section of this report on Monitoring, the specific comments on Aquatic Monitoring and Evaluation, and the specific comments on Terrestrial Monitoring and Evaluation.

Recommended Action
May 17, 2002


NMFS has identified this project as a BiOp project.
Jun 7, 2002


Fundable. The vision for SSHIAP (Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Inventory and Assessment Project is an information system that is accessible to many stakeholders and provides a starting place (hypotheses) for planning future data collection needs. They propose to also provide EDT input variables by reach in the SSHIAP database. Users will be able to query SSHIAP in a point or reach-specific manner. The cleaned and routed hydrolayer in SSHIAP can also act as a backbone upon which users may attach other information (beyond the SSHIAP attributes) that is unique to their own programs or needs. This is potentially a worthwhile and useful project.

However, it should be realized that precise estimates of classification errors in SSHIAP products remain outside the practical scope of the SSHIAP project. Within the proposed budget, SSHIAP personnel propose to assemble an information system that others in the Columbia Cascade Province can store their data in. It remains for other projects and investigators to address assessment of error for fish distribution and other information. The ISRP acknowledges that this is a good information system with very competent and dedicated personnel and the project is fundable. However, the region should recognize the substantial problem acknowledged by the proponents in their response, namely, that SSHIAP is largely dependent on existing data, some or most of which has unknown accuracy and precision. The importance of ground truthing the data is fully recognized by the proponents, but the many spatial and temporal problems of a systematic effort of this kind in which one can have confidence is beyond the current capability and responsibility of SSHIAP. The substantial spatial and temporal problems that must be solved to arrive at data in which one can have confidence have been unequivocally demonstrated in, for example, development of the bull trout detection protocols by the U.S. Forest Service.

Jul 19, 2002


Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Indirect benefit. Assemble analysis to support subbasin planning and direct restoration actions.

Both this and 29037 submitted by WDFW. Relationship/coordination between the two efforts needs to be better explained.

Already ESA Req? No

Biop? Yes

Jul 26, 2002


Recommend deferral to Subbasin Planning
Do Not Fund
Oct 30, 2002