Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Feasibility of Sockeye Reintroduction to Wallowa and Warm Lakes |
| Proposal ID | 9152 |
| Organization | Nez Perce Tribe Department of Fisheries Resources Management (NPT) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Billy D. Arnsberg |
| Mailing address | 3404 Hwy. 12 Orofino, ID 83544 |
| Phone / email | 2084767296 / billa@nezperce.org |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 1999 |
| Province / Subbasin | Lower Snake / Salmon |
| Short description | Determine the feasibility of reintroducing Snake River sockeye salmon into Warm Lake, Idaho and Wallowa Lake, Oregon. |
| Target species | |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 1999 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
|
$103,000 |
| Fringe |
|
$24,700 |
| Supplies |
|
$10,000 |
| Operating |
|
$7,500 |
| Capital |
|
$32,500 |
| Travel |
|
$16,000 |
| Indirect |
|
$56,600 |
| Subcontractor |
|
$10,000 |
| $260,300 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 1999 cost | $260,300 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 1999 budget request | $260,300 |
| FY 1999 forecast from 1998 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: The availability of Snake River sockeye salmon eggs and/or fry will not be limited to the Stanley Basin lakes in the future. The genetic structure of Redfish Lake sockeye salmon will not restrain reintroduction success to Wallowa and Warm Lakes. The migration corridor will be sufficient to pass sockeye salmon adults and juveniles to and from the ocean.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Criteria 1: Technical Criteria - Incomplete: This proposal needs to be rewritten. Most of the proposal is focused on review of existing information and not enough detail is presented on what is proposed to judge whether it meets criteria.
Criteria 2: Objectives Criteria - Incomplete
Criteria 3: Milestones Criteria - Incomplete
Criteria 4: Resources Criteria - Incomplete
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
urgent. Proposed activities would not produce significant near-term survival improvement nor risk a lost opportunity within the next 1-3 years.Questionable management value. Proposal was either incomplete but did not provide adequate information to determine whether management criteria were met or complete but did not meet critical management criteria.
Recommendation:
Inadequate proposal, adequate purpose
Date:
Jun 18, 1998
Comment:
This proposal is for a good purpose, but the work as proposed is not supportable. The project endorses an ecosystem approach to the problem, which is a positive, but a clear conceptual framework is not posed. The work relies on models, which are not described, and no personnel are shown as having the needed modeling expertise. It is not clear how this could support successful salmon reintroduction. The proposal should have a defined window for success, beyond which efforts should not be extended.