FY 2003 Lower Columbia proposal 31013

Additional documents

TitleType
31013 Narrative Narrative
31013 Sponsor Response to the ISRP Response
31013 Powerpoint Presentation Powerpoint Presentation

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleInvestigate Re-establishing Anadromous Fish Populations Above man-made Barriers
Proposal ID31013
OrganizationOregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameSuzanne Knapp
Mailing address7118 NE Vandenberg Ave. Corvallis, Or. 97330
Phone / email5417574186 /
Manager authorizing this projectChristopher Wheaton
Review cycleLower Columbia
Province / SubbasinLower Columbia / Willamette
Short descriptionInvestigate the possiblliites of re-establishing spring chinook and winter steelhead populations into historic habitat above impassable man-made barriers in the Willamette basin to link them with existing populations below barriers.
Target speciesSpring Chinook (Upper Willamette ESU), Winter Steelhead (Upper Willamette ESU), Bull Trout
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
Foster, Cougar, Fall Creek, Dexter/Lookout Point, Dorena, Scoggins, Big Cliff/Detroit, Fern Ridge, Cottage Grove, Hills Creek, and other man-made dams in the Willamette basin without fish passage or with passage that impedes fish production.
44.127 -122.2353 Cougar Reservoir
43.706 -122.4223 Hills Creek Reservoir
43.9093 -122.7505 Dexter/Lookout Point reservoirs
43.9353 -122.7538 Fall Creek Reservoir
44.3833 -122.2393 Big Cliff/Detroit reservoirs
44.4092 -122.6713 Foster/Green Peter reservoirs
43.7097 -123.0395 Cottage Grove Reservoir
43.782 -122.9522 Dorena Reservoir
44.1223 -123.289 Fern Ridge Reservoir
45.4735 -123.1898 Scoggins Reservoir
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
Willamette Hatchery BiOp
10.3 Terms and Conditions
2c and 5f apply.
2c and 5f apply.

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment
1992-2001 Spring chinook adults have been released above certain Corps. dams in the upper Willamette basin since 1992. Juveniles have been released in these areas for decades.
Release programs have demonstrated that there is spawning capacity above dams, juveniles can survive passage through dams with varying mortality rates, and these juveniles can successfully migrate, rear in the ocean and return.
The release of fish upstream of dams may result in a burden on operators to provide or improve passage at these facilities. Delineation of the potential for re-establsihment is a key step in potential restoration in the Willamette basin.

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
199405300 McKenzie/Willamette Bull Trout Population and Habitat Surveys
199206800 Willamette Basin Habitat Mitigation

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
1. Plan, design, and coordinate an integrated re-establishment program for spring Chinook and winter steelhead above impassable man-made barriers in the Willamette basin. a. Delineate available habitat 2 $59,148
b. Plan re-establishment priorities 4 $44,362
c. Coordinate status, passage, permitting, and related issues with state and federal agencies ongoing $44,362
d. Complete NEPA process 1 $25,000 Yes
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
1. c. Coordinate passage, permitting, and related issues to allow re-establishment to occur 2004 2007 $183,120
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
FY 2004FY 2005FY 2006FY 2007
$45,780$45,780$45,780$45,780

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
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
1. Prioritize available habitat Use habitat surveys to select best intro sites 2 $0
2. Expermentally re-establish fish Trap and haul surplus hatchery fish ongoing $43,003
3. Establish connectivity with downstream populations Monitor recruitment and downstream passage ongoing $0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
1. Delineate habitat 2004 2005 $72,203
2. Re-establish Fish 2004 2007 $227,089
3. Establish connectivity 2004 2007 $578,030
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
FY 2004FY 2005FY 2006FY 2007
$184,910$176,105$221,885$294,431

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
1. Monitor survival, productivity, and distribution of transplanted spawners a. Conduct spawning and juvenile surveys. ongoing $0
b. Operate screw traps below dams ongoing $0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
1. Monitor survival, productivity, and distribution of transplanted spawners 2005 2007 $137,340
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
FY 2005FY 2006FY 2007
$45,780$45,780$45,780

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2003 cost
Personnel FTE: 3.0 $87,810
Fringe $36,339
Supplies $20,000
Travel $9,164
Indirect $37,562
Capital $0
NEPA contracted EA $25,000
$215,875
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2003 cost$215,875
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2003 budget request$215,875
FY 2003 forecast from 2002$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
ODFW Administrative and biological support $20,000 in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate
Date:
Mar 1, 2002

Comment:

A response is needed. Like the upper Cowlitz watersheds (proposals #31005, 31017) this proposal could have exciting research opportunities and utilize extensive habitats for re-establishment of spring chinook and winter steelhead production. A response is needed, however, as the proposal is technically inadequate and very short on details of methods and the budget (basis of the estimated values?). The presentation was slightly more informative but a technical review will require information on the availability of habitat, availability of fish for transport and release above the barriers, an experimental design to the research program, and a monitoring and evaluation program to assess effectiveness.

Numerous questions come to mind that are not addressed in the proposal: How would "trapped-and-hauled" hatchery surplus adults be chosen with respect to adaptedness of run timing, spawn timing, embryo development, egg size, etc.? What is the genetic background of the surplus hatchery fish and would their release be consistent with ESA limitations? By what criteria would "best" potential reintroduction sites be chosen? By what criteria would available habitat be identified? How would re-establishment priorities be set? What impacts could these outplants have on resident fishes and where would risk of impacts be greatest?

These habitats that have been barren of Pacific salmon for years provide an important opportunity for study. Researchers could investigate several important issues including the role of marine derived nutrients in the ecosystem, reproductive success of hatchery-reared stocks in the natural environment, hatchery and wild interactions in the natural environment. However these studies would be seriously limited if downstream passage of the smolts were not effective. If naturalized fish cannot return to spawn then it limits what we can learn about the re-introduction of Pacific salmon. The ability to collect and transport smolts and adults may be a major factor in prioritizing study sites and programs. Is there any commitment by ODFW (or others) to establish smolt collection programs or will these fish simply pass over the dams or through the turbines? We need to know this before proceeding.


Recommendation:
Recommended Action
Date:
May 17, 2002

Comment:

This project has a very broad scope without clearly defined decision points relative to success or failure of establishing sustainable populations.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Jun 7, 2002

Comment:

Fundable, at low to medium priority. The response is marginal in provision of details for design of the study, etc. but does generally address questions presented by the ISRP. Broodstock for the project would be based on availability (which is currently good) at local State hatcheries, downstream migration of smolts would be over or through the dams, and monitoring programs would involve annual downstream traps, etc. Concerning how representative the broodstock would be, the reply notes that the hatchery stocks were derived from the local populations but that the available fish would "not truly (be) representative" of the returning fish. Commitment to investment in these hatchery and dam facilities will likely increase as the Willamette Recovery plan is finalized. The project is comparable to projects #31005/31017 in objective, but the ISRP has greater confidence, based on the technical presentation and facilities, that the Basin will learn more by investing in those programs rather than this one. However, technically there is no serious reason to not fund this project, especially given the amount of habitat available above these dams and current availability of adult production.
Recommendation:
Date:
Jul 19, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Increase in production

Comments
Result from Hills Creek/Dexter Dams show real production and downstream survival past dams

Already ESA Req? No

Biop? No


Recommendation:
C
Date:
Jul 23, 2002

Comment:

Recommend deferring consideration of new anadromous fish mitigation proposals in the Willamette subbasin until issuance of the NMFS/USFWS BiOp for the Willamette Basin federal hydroprojects.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Oct 30, 2002

Comment: