FY 2002 Mountain Snake proposal 28014

Additional documents

TitleType
28014 Narrative Narrative
28014 Sponsor Response to the ISRP Response

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleBull trout population assessment and life history characteristics in association with habitat quality and land use: template for recovery planning.
Proposal ID28014
OrganizationUtah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, USGS (USGS)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NamePhaedra E. Budy, Ph.D
Mailing addressDept. of Fish and Wildlife, Utah State University Logan, UT 84322-5290
Phone / email4357977564 / phaedra.budy@cnr.usu.edu
Manager authorizing this projectPhaedra E. Budy
Review cycleMountain Snake
Province / SubbasinMountain Snake / Salmon
Short descriptionAssess bull trout population density, abundance and life history characteristics for core areas of the Imnaha Subbasin and evaluate relationships to habitat quality and land use based on field evaluations and mark/recapture techniques.
Target speciesbull trout
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
Little Salmon River: Rapid River, Boulder Creek and tributaries
45.4168 -116.3132 Little Salmon River
45.3745 -116.3546 Rapid River
45.2042 -116.31 Boulder Creek
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
Habitat RPA Action 149
Habitat RPA Action 150
Habitat RPA Action 153
Habitat RPA Action 155

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment
NA, new project

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
199405400 Characterize the Migratory Patterns, Structure, Abundance, and Status of Bull Trout Populations from Subbasins in the Columbia Plateau complimentary
IDFG General Parr Monitoring provides information for
NWPPC Ecosystem Diagnostics and Treatment (EDT) project data can be use to validate EDT model

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
Objectives 1-3 NEPA permitting, project planning and logistics 1 $5,600
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Objectives 1-3 2003 2003 $5,600
Objectives 1-3 2004 2004 $5,600
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
FY 2003FY 2004
$5,600$5,600

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
Objective 1. Comprehensive bull trout population assessment and monitoring. Task 1.1 Marking. 1 $18,200
?Task 1.2 Recapture. 1 $30,233
Objective 2. Comprehensive stream and riparian habitat assessment and monitoring.Objective 2. Task 2.1 Habitat assessment. 1 $2,576
Objective 3. Feasibility of innovative pass-through PIT tag monitoring system. Task 3.1 Tagging, detection, and fish movement. 1 $70,742
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Objective 1. Comprehensive bull trout population assessment and monitoring. 2003 2004 $4,200
Objective 2. Comprehensive stream and riparian habitat assessment and monitoring. 2003 2004 $2,576
Objective 3. Feasibility of innovative pass-through PIT tag monitoring system. 2003 2004 $14,000
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
FY 2003FY 2004
$10,388$10,388

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
Pertains to all objectives and tasks, annual vehicle, lodging, and travel costs all tasks 1 $42,000
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Pertains to all objectives and tasks, annual vehicle, lodging, and travel costs 2003 2003 $42,000
Pertains to all objectives and tasks, annual vehicle, lodging, and travel costs 2004 2004 $42,000
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
FY 2003FY 2004
$42,000$42,000

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
Objective 1. Comprehensive bull trout population assessment and monitoring. Task 1.1 Marking. 1 $35,840
Task 1.2 Recapture. 1 $42,420
Task 1.3 Snorkel surveys for juvenile densities. 1 $19,390
Task 1.4 Adult and egg information, egg-to-parr survival. 1 $16,310
Objective 2. Comprehensive stream and riparian habitat assessment and monitoring. Task 2.1 Habitat assessment. 1 $106,400
Objective 4. Data analysis. Task 4.1 Analysis of mark/recapture data; population estimates and movement. 1 $10,920
Task 4.2 Analysis of snorkel data: parr density and habitat use. 1 $10,920
Task 4.3 Analysis of adult and egg data: egg-to-parr survival. 1 $10,920
Task 4.4 Analysis of habitat attributes in relation to fish survival and density. 1 $10,920
Objective 5. Summarizing available information into a simple population model. Task 5.1 Assemble and summarize all existing bull trout population and life history data for the selected tributaries of the Imnaha sub-basin. 1 $9,100
Task 5.2 Building the population life-cycle model. 1 $9,100
Objective 6. Describe current habitat conditions and land use patterns as they relate to bull trout survival and growth. Task 6.1 Summarize and quantify all available habitat data. 1 $6,067
Task 6.2 Exploring the relationship between habitat and bull trout population status indicators. 1 $6,067
Task 6.5 Model calibration and validation. 1 $6,067
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Objective 1. Comprehensive bull trout population assessment and monitoring. 2003 2004 $157,400
Objective 2. Comprehensive stream and riparian habitat assessment and monitoring.Objective 2003 2004 $152,000
Objective 4. Data analysis. 2003 2004 $62,400
Objective 5. Summarizing available information into a simple population model. 2003 2004 $26,000
Objective 6. Describe current habitat conditions and land use patterns as they relate to bull trout survival and growth. 2003 2004 $26,000
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
FY 2003FY 2004
$211,900$211,900

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2002 cost
Personnel FTE: 4 $109,000
Fringe $13,650
Supplies $26,685
Travel $26,000
Indirect $132,626
Capital $65,530
NEPA $4,000
PIT tags $8,001
Subcontractor USFS Habitat Assessment included here $76,000
Other expendible $8,300
$469,792
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2002 cost$469,792
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2002 budget request$469,792
FY 2002 forecast from 2001$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
USGS Principle Investigator Salary $25,476 in-kind
USFWS Co- Principle Investigator Salary $16,249 in-kind
USFWS Screw Trap $15,000 in-kind
USFS Co- Principle Investigator Salary $10,833 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:
Sep 28, 2001

Comment:

Response needed. Similar proposals were submitted by the sponsors for bull trout in Rapid River/Boulder Creek, Idaho, and in the Imnaha River, Oregon. One reason for the duplicate submission was to examine geographic differences. The ISRP concluded that these proposals would not provide a sound basis for understanding variability across the species' range. A suitable proposal for that part of the study should include a sample of populations that is representative of the species across its range. The ISRP also is concerned that a paired stream approach with limited replication has generally not been fruitful for populations of stream dwelling salmonids because of the abundance of confounding environmental factors. Reviewers felt the proposed study would provide some more basic bull trout data, but stops short of assessing critical limiting factors. Ten years ago gathering of basic data on bull trout was appropriate, but now it is time to test some elegant hypotheses and begin implementing recovery.

The ISRP recommends that the study site be limited to either Rapid River/Boulder Creek, or the Imnaha River, and that a single proposal be developed as a pilot study to evaluate the proposed application of Pradel's ideas, and the PIT tag applications and detection methods to fluvial bull trout. The new proposal should include a discussion of why the effectiveness of a new PIT-tag system is necessary if it is already under evaluation elsewhere. The sponsors need to show full coordination of proposal development with research presently underway with fish habitat and bull trout at the site of choice.


Recommendation:
Withdrawn
Date:
Nov 30, 2001

Comment:

This proposal was not reviewed. Per the ISRP's request, the sponsors have resubmitted the proposal for review in just one subbasin (i.e., Imnaha Subbasin in the Blue Mountain Province (Proposal 27017)).
Recommendation:
Withdrawn
Date:
Dec 21, 2001

Comment:

[Withdrawn]
Recommendation:
Date:
Feb 1, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU

Comments
Important basic work for Bull Trout.

Already ESA Req?

Biop?


Recommendation:
C
Date:
Feb 11, 2002

Comment:

Withdrawn from consideration.

BPA RPA RPM:
--

NMFS RPA/USFWS RPM:
--


Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Apr 19, 2002

Comment: