![]() |
|
Download this document in MS Word format
Open this document in PDF format
Section 1: General AdministrativePart 2. Reviews
Section 2: Project Location
Section 3: Project Species
Section 4: Past Accomplishments
Section 5: Relationship to Other Projects
Section 6: Biological Objectives
Section 7: Work Elements
Section 8: Budget
Section 9: Project Future
Section 10: Documents
| Part 1 of 2. Administration and Budgeting |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Section 1: General Administrative Information | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Process Information: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Proposal Type: | New | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Proposal Number: | 200737900 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Proposal Name: | Surveying Jobs that Depend on the Existence of Lower Snake River Reservoirs | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Agency, Institution or Organization: | bluefish.org | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Short Description: | It is proposed here that a thorough survey be performed to investigate the current level of employment that is dependent upon the continued existence of the Lower Snake Reservoirs. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Information Transfer: | A report of all results will be submitted to Northwest Power and Conservation Council, federal Action Agencies, States and Tribes. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Proposal Contacts | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Section 2: Project Location | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sponsor Province: | Mainstem/Systemwide | ARG Province: | No Change | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sponsor Subbasin: | Systemwide | ARG Subbasin: | No Change | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Location(s) at which the action will be implemented |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Section 3: Focal Species | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Focal Species: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Section 4: Past Accomplishments | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Past Accomplishments for Each Fiscal Year of This Project | This proposal is for funding a new project, and has no past accomplishments. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Section 5: Relationships to Other Projects | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other Current Projects Related to this Project (any funding source) | There are no projects related to this proposal. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Section 6: Biological Objectives | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Biological Objectives of this Proposed Project |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Section 7: Work Elements | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Work Elements and Associated Biological Objectives |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Section 8: Budget | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Itemized Estimated Budget | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Estimated FY 2007-2009 Budgets | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cost sharing | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Section 9: Project Future | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Future Costs and/or Termination |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Section 10: Narrative | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Part 2 of 2. Reviews of Proposal |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Administrative Review Group (ARG) Results | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Account Type: Expense |
No changes were made to this proposal | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| BPA's in lieu Rating: 3.0 Approx. BPA share of total costs: BPA 100% Status of Cost Share: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Notes: Economic impacts of breaching 4 lower snake dams (Corps/others authorized/required and already evaluated) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| FY 2007 Budget $ 0 |
FY 2008 Budget $ 0 |
FY 2009 Budget $ 0 |
Total NPCC Rec $ 0 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Budget Type: | Expense | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Budget Category: | Basinwide | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Recommendation: | Do Not Fund | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| FY 2007 Budget $ 0 |
FY 2008 Budget $ 0 |
FY 2009 Budget $ 0 |
Total NPCC Rec $ 0 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| FY 2007 MSRT Rec $ 0 |
FY 2008 MSRT Rec $ 0 |
FY 2009 MSRT Rec $ 0 |
Total MSRT Rec $ 0 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Budget Category: | Basinwide | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Recommendation: Not fundable | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| NPCC Comments: This is an inadequate proposal. It presents an inadequate description of survey methods and does not demonstrate relevance of the survey information. No explanation or itemization of the $10k budget is provided. The background section duplicates information presented in other proposals from this sponsor. It discusses different perspectives on the problem of Snake River juvenile salmon mortality and the question of improving survival. It provides extensive excerpts from the US Army Corps of Engineers’ report "Lower Snake River Juvenile Salmon Migration Feasibility" to demonstrate that although dam breaching is identified by the Corps as a less preferable alternative to major system improvement, it may become a more realistic alternative if adaptive migration efforts are not successful. This proposal is to provide a survey of jobs dependent on the continued existence of Snake River Reservoirs, in preparation for the contingency of dam breaching. The rationale is based on citations of Court findings and the 2000 BiOp RPAs 147 and 148 describing the Corps’ responsibilities for developing project management plans and engineering and design work. Also included are extensive excerpts from the Lower Snake and Salmon Subbasin Plans, including the vision and strategies designed to achieve objectives related to terrestrial species and habitats. These include reference to the Snake River dams but don't appear to have direct relevance to the work proposed here. Nothing presented here is specifically related to the question of job loss. The objective is stated as "expanding the list of alternatives to be considered in a reevaluation study which would follow a failed check-in..." However, it is not clear how an employment survey would expand the opportunities except for the brief mention of the utility of clarifying the economic costs of dam breaching. The methods are described in inadequate detail. From the detail provided, however, it is clear that the proposed approach does not represent good survey design, would not provide representative sampling, and would generate biased results. A similar survey is referenced but not cited. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Recommendation: Not fundable | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| NPCC Comments: This is an inadequate proposal. It presents an inadequate description of survey methods and does not demonstrate relevance of the survey information. No explanation or itemization of the $10k budget is provided. The background section duplicates information presented in other proposals from this sponsor. It discusses different perspectives on the problem of Snake River juvenile salmon mortality and the question of improving survival. It provides extensive excerpts from the US Army Corps of Engineers’ report "Lower Snake River Juvenile Salmon Migration Feasibility" to demonstrate that although dam breaching is identified by the Corps as a less preferable alternative to major system improvement, it may become a more realistic alternative if adaptive migration efforts are not successful. This proposal is to provide a survey of jobs dependent on the continued existence of Snake River Reservoirs, in preparation for the contingency of dam breaching. The rationale is based on citations of Court findings and the 2000 BiOp RPAs 147 and 148 describing the Corps’ responsibilities for developing project management plans and engineering and design work. Also included are extensive excerpts from the Lower Snake and Salmon Subbasin Plans, including the vision and strategies designed to achieve objectives related to terrestrial species and habitats. These include reference to the Snake River dams but don't appear to have direct relevance to the work proposed here. Nothing presented here is specifically related to the question of job loss. The objective is stated as "expanding the list of alternatives to be considered in a reevaluation study which would follow a failed check-in..." However, it is not clear how an employment survey would expand the opportunities except for the brief mention of the utility of clarifying the economic costs of dam breaching. The methods are described in inadequate detail. From the detail provided, however, it is clear that the proposed approach does not represent good survey design, would not provide representative sampling, and would generate biased results. A similar survey is referenced but not cited. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Maintained by the Columbia Basin Fish & Wildlife Authority. Please direct comments or questions to the webmaster.