FY 2003 Lower Columbia proposal 31014
Contents
Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary
Reviews and Recommendations
Additional documents
Title | Type |
---|---|
31014 Narrative | Narrative |
31014 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
31014 Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | Evaluate juvenile salmonid use of restored floodplain wetlands in the Lower Columbia River Estuary |
Proposal ID | 31014 |
Organization | Ducks Unlimited, Inc. (DU) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Name | Cynthia Baker |
Mailing address | 1101 SE Tech Center Drive, Suite 115 Vancouver, WA 98683 |
Phone / email | 3608852011 / cbaker2@ducks.org |
Manager authorizing this project | Charles M. Lobdell |
Review cycle | Lower Columbia |
Province / Subbasin | Lower Columbia / Columbia Lower |
Short description | Evaluate benefits and effects of wetland habitat restoration on juvenile salmonids rearing and migrating through the Lower Columbia and implications for restoration and salmon recovery. |
Target species | Upper Willamette River chinook salmon, Lower Columbia River chinook salmon, Columbia River chum salmon, Lower Columbia/Southwest Washington coho salmon, Lower Columbia River steelhead |
Project location
Latitude | Longitude | Description |
---|---|---|
45.6067 | -122.7238 | Smith & Bybee Lakes |
45.816 | -122.8 | Sauvie Island, North Unit |
45.666 | -122.86 | West Multnomah Channel Wetlands |
46.325 | -123.667 | Lower Gray's River Wetlands |
45.6222 | -122.7373 | Bybee Lake |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
RPA |
---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
---|---|---|---|
NMFS | Action 158 | NMFS | During 2001, the Corps and BPA shall seek funding and develop an action plan to rapidly inventory estuarine habitat, model physical and biological features of the historical lower river and estuary, identify limiting biological and physical factors in the estuary, identify impacts of the FCRPS system on habitat and listed salmon in the estuary relative to other factors, and develop criteria for estuarine habitat restoration. |
NMFS | Action 160 | NMFS | The Corps and BPA, working with LCREP, shall develop and implement an estuary restoration program with a goal of protecting and enhancing 10,000 acres of tidal wetlands and other key habitats over 10 years, beginning in 2001, to rebuild productivity for listed populations in the lower 46 river miles of the Columbia River. The Corps shall seek funds for the Federal share of the program, and BPA shall provide funding for the non-Federal share. The Action Agencies shall provide planning and engineering expertise to implement the non-Federal share of on-the-ground habitat improvement efforts identified in LCREP, Action 2. |
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Year | Accomplishment |
---|---|
2001 | Published annual report to NRCS and NMFS on first years monitoring efforts at Sauvie Island and Multnomah Channel |
2000 | Initiated monitoring effort at Sauvie Island and Multnomah Channel- this project is the first of its kind in the Pacific Northwest |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Project ID | Title | Description |
---|
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
---|---|---|---|---|
Evaluate salmonid use, ingress/egress, growth and survival at 4 sites along Lower Columbia River | a) Seasonal wetland sampling (see narrative) b) Continuous trapping at 2 sites c) PIT tagging, radio telemetry, and VIE marking | 3 | $122,500 | |
Test effectiveness of water control structures at passing fish | a) Continuous sampling at 2 sites b) Mark- recapture experiments c) radio telemetry | 3 | $15,000 | |
Compare and contrast habitat uses and assess habitat values in terms of salmonid production and survival | a) Synthesis of all collected data, field observations and literature review | 3 | $2,500 | |
Monitor water temperature, chemistry, invertebrate and vegetation response | a) See narrative for details | 3 | $10,000 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|---|---|---|
Continuation of 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | $300,000 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
---|---|
$150,000 | $150,000 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
Item | Note | FY 2003 cost |
---|---|---|
Personnel | FTE: 2 | $96,000 |
Fringe | $24,000 | |
Supplies | Traps, nets and assoc. materials and equip. | $8,000 |
Indirect | 10% | $12,000 |
PIT tags | # of tags: 2000 | $0 |
Subcontractor | OSU consulting research scientist | $10,000 |
$150,000 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2003 cost | $150,000 |
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
Total FY 2003 budget request | $150,000 |
FY 2003 forecast from 2002 | $0 |
% change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
---|---|---|---|
U.S. Forest Service | project support for FY 02 | $80,000 | cash |
Ducks Unlimited, Inc | project support for FY 02 | $30,000 | cash |
EPA | Grant to Metro for subpart of project FY02 | $29,678 | cash |
National Marine Fisheries Service | project support and technical assistance | $20,000 | cash |
Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife | Inkind project assistance | $10,000 | in-kind |
Other budget explanation
DU and our partners have obtained the funding necessary for the first 2 field seasons for this project. This proposal requests project support for the next 3 field seasons.
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
Comment:
A response is needed that better describes and clarifies the research question and the study design.Comment:
It is not clear that this project is well coordinated with other assessment projects in the Lower Columbia/Estuary. The scope and budget should be reviewed in line with other assessments funded in the estuary. NMFS has identified that this project is aComment:
Not fundable, this is a technically inadequate proposal. The background material is interesting and the proponents state that the projects are expected to open habitat to salmon juveniles that will be valuable to them and that they'll look to see if salmon do indeed use them. However, neither the proposal nor response provided a clear statement of a research question and a rigorous study design.Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUIndirect. Contribute to our understanding of fish movement which could lead to better designed restoration projects.
Comments
Very site specific. Want to do habitat restoration for juvenile salmon that complements waterfowl habitat restoration.
Already ESA Req? No
Biop? Yes
Comment:
Concur with ISRP technical comments. This kind of project may be of use in evaluating the use of floodplain habitat by rearing and migrating salmonids, but technical deficiencies do not justify funding at this time.Comment: