FY 2000 proposal 199306000
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 |
|---|---|
| 199306000 Narrative | Narrative |
| 199306000 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Select Area Fishery Evaluation Project |
| Proposal ID | 199306000 |
| Organization | Oregon Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, Clatsop County Economic Development Council (ODFW/WDFW/CEDC) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Paul Hirose |
| Mailing address | 17330 SE Evelyn St. Clackamas, OR 97015 |
| Phone / email | 5036572000 / |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 2000 |
| Province / Subbasin | Lower Columbia / Columbia Lower |
| Short description | Enhance harvest opportunities through creation and expansion of hatchery salmonid fisheries in the lower Columbia River while protecting depressed stocks. Develop fisheries through application of results from experimental net-pen rearing, and monitor and |
| Target species | Lower Columbia River early stock coho, select area bright (Rogue stock) fall chinook, Willamette and Cowlitz spring chinook are targeted for harvest. Listed and weak stocks are keyed for protection. |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|---|
| 1994 | Categorized, ranked and selected potential sites for further study. |
| 1994 | Established water quality monitoring programs at each selected site. |
| 1995 | Implemented coho rearing and release activities at three selected sites (Tongue Point, Blind Slough and Deep River) and expanded existing Youngs Bay production. |
| 1996 | Established fall salmon harvest opportunities in the three new selected areas and Youngs Bay in 1996, 1997, and 1998. |
| 1996 | Attained expected survival advantage from select area releases of coho. |
| 1995 | Implemented fall chinook rearing and release activity in Youngs Bay. |
| 1995 | Implemented spring chinook rearing and release activities in the three new sites and Youngs Bay. |
| 1997 | Established spring chinook harvest opportunities in Youngs Bay, Blind Slough and Tongue Point. |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 9702400 | Avian Predation on Juvenile Salmonids | Effects of Predation on SAFE Project. |
| 9202200 | Wild Smolt Behavior/Physiology (ESA) | Rearing Strategies Using Net Pens |
| 8201300 | Coded-Wire Tag Recovery | Coordinated CWT Recovery Program |
| 8906900 | Annual Coded-Wire Tag Program-Missing Production OR HTC (ODFW) | CWT Program for Comparison of Study Fish to Production Fish |
| 8906600 | Annual Coded-Wire Tag Program - Missing Production WA HTCH (WDFW) | CWT Program for Comparison of Study Fish to Production Fish |
| 20515 | Mainstem Columbia and Snake Rivers (ODFW umbrella) | |
| 9306000 | Evaluate Columbia River Select Area Fisheries |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | $501,683 | |
| Fringe | $191,749 | |
| Supplies | Variable costs (ie. fish food, CWTs, replacement supplies, tagging) | $386,705 |
| Operating | Annual fixed costs (ie. leases and fees) | $91,518 |
| Capital | Includes new site development. | $88,686 |
| Travel | $37,832 | |
| Indirect | $157,233 | |
| Subcontractor | $44,594 | |
| $1,500,000 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2000 cost | $1,500,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2000 budget request | $1,500,000 |
| FY 2000 forecast from 1999 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| BPA | Project research | $1,500,000 | unknown |
| Commercial Fishermen | Voluntary assessments | $20,000 | unknown |
| WDFW/ODFW/NMFS hatcheries | Hatchery facility rental and fish for research | $350,000 | unknown |
| WDFW | CWT tagging | $50,000 | unknown |
| Salmon for All | Education / Promotion | $50,000 | unknown |
| City of Astoria | Site lease | $10,000 | unknown |
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: Project is most influenced by availability of juvenile fish; time lines of local permit approvals, favorable biological opinions, and FONSIs related to environmental assessments; and unforseen environmental influences.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Fund for one year with medium priority
Jun 15, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation: Fund for one year with medium priority. Subsequent funding contingent on an extensive programmatic performance review of the project.Comments: This project has been in progress for five years (excepting a two-year non-funded pilot project), with an investment to date of $5.6 million. It has been closely monitored by National Marine Fisheries Service, has produced an Environmental Assessment and was recently the subject of an independent peer review. Annual reports are cited in the proposal, but there is little summary material to aid reviewers. The proposal would benefit from a listing of results and accomplishments to date. While multi-year funding is viewed favorably, there should first be an extensive programmatic review of the project by ISRP or ISAB.
Specific questions and comments that should also be addressed are: The proposal is well-written and documented, with well connected and logical objectives and tasks. Methods are not so well presented, however. One of the project's strongest elements is the collaborative effort (with NMFS) to develop a more natural rearing regime and increase the quality of smolts released. So long as this project continues to maintain separation from natural stocks, it will represent a valid use of hatchery fish. Thus far, compared with traditional hatchery rearing, returns have been good in the face of low ocean survival. Use of winter dormancy and accelerated spring feeding appear promising, though it will be some time before results are realized from this experiment.
The role of avian predation, briefly referenced, is not addressed. One reason for improved survival of Young's Bay smolts may be their release down-river from a large tern colony, and any move to up-river rearing and release sites may heighten exposure of the migrating smolts to predation. Is the monthly schedule for water quality sampling adequate to address temporal variations? Details of monitoring techniques are sketchy. Given so many experimental variables (smolt size/condition, rearing density, release time and date, etc.), different fish species and uncontrolled environmental conditions, the question arises whether adequate tests have been developed to statistically account for them all in evaluating results.
Comment:
Comment:
Technical Criteria 1: Met? yes - Explain how subjected to NPPC 3 step processProgrammatic Criteria 2: Met? yes -
Milestone Criteria 3: Met? yes - How will mass marking affect program?
Resource Criteria 4: Met? yes -
Comment:
Defer Obj 5 =$100K. Concerns that the majority of Subregion budget going to harvest study. #6-future harvest options. #7-but loss of half the study's info.Comment:
[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting]NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
expense
May 2005
| FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
| $1,673,567 | $1,673,567 | $1,673,567 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website