FY 2000 proposal 20132

Additional documents

TitleType
20132 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleYakima River Basin Water Temperature Monitoring and Modeling Project
Proposal ID20132
OrganizationYakima Basin Joint Board
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NamePatrick Monk
Mailing address1042 Riverbottom Road Ellensburg, WA 98926
Phone / email5099254696 / patrickm@ellensburg.com
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 2000
Province / SubbasinColumbia Plateau / Yakima
Short descriptionImplement a water temperature monitoring program in the Yakima River Basin that will provide data for the SNTEMP water temperature model. Model water temp as a function of other environmental variables, including land and water management activities.
Target speciesSalmon, steelhead, resident fish, benthic macroinvertebrates
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
20510 Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Project

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
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 2000 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 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2000 cost
Personnel Principal associate, computer programmer, field technicians $74,700
Fringe $0
Supplies $2,000
Capital Computer for programmer, technicians. $5,000
Indirect $3,000
$84,700
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2000 cost$84,700
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2000 budget request$84,700
FY 2000 forecast from 1999$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
Yakima Basin Joint Board Equipement and Labor $22,000 unknown

Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Jun 15, 1999

Comment:

Recommendation: Do not fund, inadequate programmatic justification, no assurances of use by management authorities. The proposal should have explicitly stated what is known about temperatures in the Yakima River, what modeling capabilities exist now, what information is needed, whether the needed information can be obtained from the existing models, and how this project will meet the needs.

Comments: It is not clear from the proposal whether there is a specific use or need that this project would fulfill. There could be many potential uses for temperature data or the model. But the proposal does not appear to be driven by a particular question or problem. Much of the justification for the work seems to be that temperature has never been fully monitored or modeled rather than why it is now important to do so. What specific management alternatives will the model be used to evaluate? We question whether the projected results will yield direct benefits to fish and wildlife.

The proposal provides minimal information about the performance, strengths, and weaknesses of the model itself. The sampling design needed to calibrate the model is vague. What assumptions drive the model, how does it perform under varying environmental and stream conditions, and what are its limitations? What evidence is there that the model can, in fact, be applied to any river system once it is calibrated with local data? It is not clear whether output from the model will continue to be validated following its initial calibration. The lack of information about the model makes it difficult to evaluate whether this approach will be useful or if other alternatives exist that should be considered.

Little information is given about the relationship and significance of this to other projects in the basin. Given the importance of water temperatures to the success of many programs in the Yakima Basin, it is difficult to accept that there has been no attempt to monitor or model these factors. The proposal should state what is known about temperatures in the Yakima River, what modeling capabilities exist now, what information is needed and why it can't be obtained from existing models, and how will this project fill that need. The objectives of the proposal are described as three study phases, which are logical and well described. The multi-agency technical advisory group is a strength of phase I and helps assure that project has a high likelihood of agency support and scientific credibility.

The proposal does a less than adequate job of linking this project to the Fish and Wildlife Program. Although the importance of temperatures seems self-evident to biologists, the proposal could better describe the rationale and significance to other projects. This would also help justify why BPA should fund the program, another area that was not explicitly addressed.


Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:


Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

WA SRT views this project as supportable, meeting a defined need and use that should seek other more appropriate funding sources. This project would provide critical information pertinent to the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project (YRBWEP), Systems Operations Advisory Committee and could possibly be funded in that arena.
Recommendation:
Technically Sound? Yes
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Temperature is a critical water quality problem and has not been adequately addressed.

Basin-wide application.

Good advisory board.


Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000

Comment:

[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting];