Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 2008-106-00 - Tribal Conservation Enforcement-Colville Tribe Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 2008-106-00 - Tribal Conservation Enforcement-Colville Tribe
Project Number:
2008-106-00
Title:
Tribal Conservation Enforcement-Colville Tribe
Summary:
The Colville Reservation is located in north-central Washington and was established by Executive Order in 1872. At that time, the Reservation consisted of all the lands within the Untied States bounded by the Columbia and Okanogan Rivers, roughly 3.0 million acres. In 1891, the Colville Tribes entered into an Agreement with the United States in which the Tribes ceded the lands within the North Half of the 1872 Reservation. The ceded area consists of roughly 1.5 million acres between the Canadian border and the current northern boundary of the Reservation. In the 1891 Agreement, the Tribes expressly reserved the rights to hunt and fish, which were “not to be abridged in any way”.

Natural resource law enforcement is an integral and essential component of natural resource management. Enforcement of existing fish, wildlife and habitat regulations is needed to insure compliance rates and protect fish stocks, wildlife populations and their critical habitats. Coordination of State and Tribal government operations, public awareness and public participation are all benefits of natural resource enforcement. The Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) Natural Resource Enforcement division will provide (2) two enforcement officers for enforcement activities on the Okanogan River, Columbia mainstem (Wells Pool) and tributaries. Coordination between all jurisdictions involved in the enforcement effort will increase effectiveness and alleviate duplication of efforts. Officers will enforce fisheries and habitat regulations on reservation and ceded lands. Natural resource enforcement officers will protect anadromous fish, resident fish and critical habitats on reservation and ceded lands. An organized evaluation of desired and actual achievement (budget, personnel, equipment, coordination, contacts, warnings, arrests, seizures and critical habitat protected) will analyze the impact of the program.

Increased enforcement presence will act as a deterrent to illegal activity and public awareness programs will increase support and understanding of the goals of the program. Increased survival rates of both juvenile and adult salmonids and protection of critical habitats are the goal of this program. Along with assuring compliance of the Live Selective Gear Project. The Colville Tribe will release all listed Endangered stocks utilizing the live capture method. In addition, all natural origin Summer/Fall Chinook will be released as well.

Natural resource enforcement plays a vital role for the protection of the investments made by BPA., past, present and future projects.
Proposer:
None
Proponent Orgs:
Colville Confederated Tribes (Tribe)
Starting FY:
2008
Ending FY:
2032
BPA PM:
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Columbia Cascade Okanogan 100.00%
Purpose:
Harvest
Emphasis:
Law Enforcement
Focal Species:
Chinook - Upper Columbia River Spring ESU
Chinook - Upper Columbia River Summer/Fall ESU
Sockeye - Okanogan River ESU
Steelhead - Upper Columbia River DPS
Sturgeon, White - Lower Columbia River
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Special:
None
BiOp Association:
None

No caption provided.

Figure Name: Figure 1

Document ID: P123909

Document: BPA Semi Annual Report 2008-2010

Page Number: 1

Project: 2008-106-00

Contract: 50459

No caption provided.

Figure Name: Figure 2

Document ID: P123909

Document: BPA Semi Annual Report 2008-2010

Page Number: 3

Project: 2008-106-00

Contract: 50459

No caption provided.

Figure Name: Figure 3

Document ID: P123909

Document: BPA Semi Annual Report 2008-2010

Page Number: 4

Project: 2008-106-00

Contract: 50459

No caption provided.

Figure Name: Figure 4

Document ID: P123909

Document: BPA Semi Annual Report 2008-2010

Page Number: 5

Project: 2008-106-00

Contract: 50459


Summary of Budgets

To view all expenditures for all fiscal years, click "Project Exp. by FY"

Expense SOY Budget Working Budget Contracted Amount Modified Contract Amount Expenditures *
FY2017 (Previous) $226,146 $206,146 $171,732 $171,732 $219,898

Fish Accord - Colville $206,146 $171,732 $171,732 $219,898
FY2018 (Current) $210,634 $230,634 $210,634 $210,634 $129,469

Post 2018 - Colville $160,829 $146,882 $146,882 $90,283
Fish Accord - Colville $69,805 $63,752 $63,752 $39,186
FY2019 (Next) $0 $160,829 $160,829 $0

Fish Accord - Colville $0 $48,677 $48,677 $0
Post 2018 - Colville $0 $112,152 $112,152 $0

* Expenditures data includes accruals and are based on data through 31-Aug-2018

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2017 - FY2019)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2017 Expense $132,000 From: Fish Accord - Colville Fish Accord Review 05/02/2008
FY2017 Expense $28,829 From: Fish Accord - Colville Fish Accord project COLA 11/21/2008
FY2017 Expense $19,094 To: Fish Accord - Colville CCT adjust FY12 budgets due to Admin project (2009-007-00) 05/09/2011
FY2017 Expense $11,583 To: Fish Accord - Colville CCT Accord budget transfers (cleanup of FY08/09/10/11) 5/12/2011 05/13/2011
FY2017 Expense $20,908 To: Fish Accord - Colville CCT (2009-007-00) establish FY13-17 budget 03/08/2012
FY2017 Expense $20,908 From: Fish Accord - Colville CCT (2009-007-00) un-do FY16-FY17 project adjustments 09/10/2012
FY2017 Expense $20,908 To: Fish Accord - Colville CCT (2009-007-00) establish FY16-17 budget 07/29/2013
FY2017 Expense $26,999 To: Fish Accord - Colville Accord Budget Adjustments (CCT) 10/16/2013
FY2017 Expense $30,860 To: Fish Accord - Colville Accord Budget Transfers (CCT, Idaho) 11/07/2013
FY2017 Expense $19,176 From: Fish Accord - Colville CCT Budget Adjustments (2/21/2014) 02/21/2014
FY2017 Expense $70,561 To: Fish Accord - Colville CCT Budget Adjustment (2008-106-00,2008-104-00) 8/18/2014 08/18/2014
FY2017 Expense $271,491 From: Fish Accord - Colville Accord Budget Transfers (CCT, CTUIR) 12/8/2014 12/09/2014
FY2017 Expense $45,345 To: Fish Accord - Colville Various Budget transfers (CCT, CRITFC) 7/10/2015 07/10/2015
FY2017 Expense $49,805 From: Fish Accord - Colville Accord Budget Transfers (CCT) 2/10/2017 02/10/2017
FY2017 Expense $49,805 To: Fish Accord - Colville Accord Budget Transfers (CRITFC, CCT) 8/9/2017 08/09/2017
FY2017 Expense $20,000 To: Fish Accord - Colville Accord Budget Transfers (CCT) 6/22/18 06/22/2018
FY2018 Expense $160,829 From: Post 2018 - Colville FY18 Initial Planning Budgets (WS, CTUIR, YN, CRITFC, CCT, ID) 2/10/2017 02/13/2017
FY2018 Expense $49,805 From: Fish Accord - Colville Accord Budget Transfers (CRITFC, CCT) 8/9/2017 08/09/2017
FY2018 Expense $0 From: Post 2018 - Colville CCT Establish FY18 budget for 2009-007-00 Accord Administration. 02/21/2018
FY2018 Expense $20,000 From: Fish Accord - Colville Accord Budget Transfers (CCT) 6/22/18 06/22/2018

Pending Budget Decision?  No


Actual Project Cost Share

Current Fiscal Year — 2018
Cost Share Partner Total Proposed Contribution Total Confirmed Contribution
There are no project cost share contributions to show.
Previous Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year Total Contributions % of Budget
2016 (Draft)
2015
2014
2013 $0 0 %
2012 $20,900 13 %
2011
2010 $29,900 18 %
2009

Contracts

The table below contains contracts with the following statuses: Active, Complete, History, Issued.
Expense Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Contracted Amount Dates
73548 REL 16 SOW Colville Confederated Tribes 2008-106-00 EXP ESA F&W LAW ENFORCEMENT Issued $210,634 12/1/2017 - 11/30/2018
CR-325330 SOW Colville Confederated Tribes 2008-106-00 EXP ESA F&W LAW ENFORCEMENT (COLVILLE TRIBE) Pending $160,829 12/1/2018 - 11/30/2019



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):7
Completed:7
On time:7
Status Reports
Completed:37
On time:25
Avg Days Late:0

Earliest Subsequent           Accepted Count of Contract Deliverables
Contract Contract(s) Title Contractor Start End Status Reports Complete Green Yellow Red Total % Green and Complete Canceled
40848 50459, 59637, 63530, 67011, 70942, 74454, 73548 REL 16 200810600 EXP COLVILLE ESA F&W LAW ENFORCEMENT 2009-2010 Colville Confederated Tribes 04/2009 04/2009 Pending 37 52 5 0 1 58 98.28% 1
Project Totals 37 52 5 0 1 58 98.28% 1


Review: RME / AP Category Review

2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Assessment

Assessment Number: 2008-106-00-BIOP-20101105
Project Number: 2008-106-00
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-2008-106-00
Completed Date: None
2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Rating: Supports 2008 FCRPS BiOp
Comments: BiOp Workgroup Comments: No BiOp Workgroup Comments

The BiOp RM&E Workgroups made the following determinations regarding the proposal's ability or need to support BiOp Research, Monitoring and Evaluation (RME) RPAs. If you have questions regarding these RPA association conclusions, please contact your BPA COTR and they will help clarify, or they will arrange further discussion with the appropriate RM&E Workgroup Leads. BiOp RPA associations for the proposed work are: ()
All Questionable RPA Associations () and
All Deleted RPA Associations ()
Proponent Response:

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 2008-106-00-ISRP-20101015
Project: 2008-106-00 - Tribal Conservation Enforcement-Colville Tribe
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-2008-106-00
Completed Date: 12/17/2010
Final Round ISRP Date: 12/17/2010
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
Final Round ISRP Comment:
Qualification: The proponents should update their online proposal for future reviews to provide information requested by the ISRP on enforcement data, public education, significance of the project to regional program, and deliverables, methods, and metrics for Objectives 2, 4, and 5. Additional new information should be provided, as acquired, in the annual report. The annual report should include an evaluation of the project’s efforts to educate people about fish and
habitat conservation.

The ISRP appreciates the organized, concise and constructive response by the proponents to review comments. The response is brief but acknowledges the utility of the ISRP comments in helping the project think about how to assess effectiveness.

The ISRP requested further information in four areas: enforcement data, public education, significance of the project to regional program, and deliverables, methods and metrics for Objectives 2, 4 and 5.

The response provides information on the specific type of data the proponents plan to collect, and more detail on the way public education is conducted. Significance to regional programs is indirectly addressed through reference to ESA protections. The discussion of methods and metrics for Objectives 2, 4, and 5 describes an intent to collect data to address performance.
First Round ISRP Date: 10/18/2010
First Round ISRP Rating: Response Requested
First Round ISRP Comment:
The project of the Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) is clearly relevant and related to regional programs. However, the proposal needs to make a better case as to specifically how it is related. It also needs to develop and describe deliverables associated with Objectives 2, 4 and 5, including performance indicators.

The proposal would be more informative if it described the enforcement challenges, discussed any adaptive changes in approach as a result of operational learning, and assessed the educational needs and success of the project approach to meet these. Major compliance issues could be described. In common with other enforcement projects, useful lessons could be learned by taking a more analytical approach to evaluate the overall picture of compliance. The ISRP encourages the recording and mapping of information on illegal activities.

A response should specifically:

1. Address ISRP comments on the need for data development and summary analysis by describing the existing enforcement data and plans for its analysis.

2. Address ISRP comments on the need for conservation education by addressing the type of public education that is conducted.

3. Provide information on significance of the project to regional programs.

4. Address ISRP comments about the need for deliverables and methods by developing and describing deliverables and methods and metrics for Objectives 2 (increase cost-effectiveness of enforcement), 4 (maximize the efficacy of enforcement) and 5 (maximize the accountability of enforcement). These may exist in the newly developed conservation enforcement work plan.

1. Purpose, Significance to Regional Programs, Technical Background, and Objectives

The purpose of this project is to enhance the CCT conservation enforcement program for the protection of ESA-listed species, other anadromous species, and resident fish. Natural resource law enforcement is an integral and essential component of natural resource management. Enforcement of existing fish, wildlife, and habitat regulations is needed to ensure compliance rates and protect fish stocks, wildlife populations and their critical habitats. Coordination of state and tribal government operations, public awareness, and public participation are all benefits of natural resource enforcement.

The CCT Natural Resource Enforcement division will provide two enforcement officers for enforcement activities on the Okanagan River, Columbia mainstem (Wells Pool) and tributaries. It will coordinate among all jurisdictions involved in the enforcement effort and will increase effectiveness and alleviate duplication of efforts. Officers will enforce fisheries and habitat regulations on reservation and ceded lands.

The proposal states that existing enforcement activities will be enhanced through the enforcement of new mark-selective tribal fishing regulations for upper Columbia spring and summer Chinook and summer steelhead within tribal fishing areas covering about 1.5 million acres. The project will also address compliance issues associated with the live-capture selective gear project.

The proposal states that an increased enforcement presence will act as a deterrent to illegal activity and public awareness programs will increase support and understanding of the goals of the program.

The goal of CCT enforcement is to increase survival rates of both juvenile and adult salmonids and to protect critical habitats. In a brief technical background, the proposal ties its enforcement activities to larger regional conservation and recovery goals, particularly through the protection of ESA listed stocks. Along with assuring compliance of the Live Selective Gear Project, the CCT will release all ESA-listed stocks utilizing the live capture method. In addition, all natural origin Summer/Fall Chinook will be released.

The proposal emphasizes coordination of state and tribal government actions, public awareness and public participation as benefits of enforcement. It is encouraging to see that the tribe supports the mark-selective fishery.

The project has five objectives: 1. provide enhanced enforcement of laws and rules for the protection of anadromous and resident fish; 2. improve cost-effectiveness of fisheries and habitat enforcement; 3. optimize voluntary compliance of laws and rules to protect fish; 4. maximize the annual and long-term efficacy of enforcement efforts; and 5. maximize the accountability of the enhanced law enforcement program.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management

A brief financial history is provided.

A review of conservation enforcement objectives and performance measures relative to those of other conservation enforcement projects (e.g., WDFW, ODFW and lower river tribes) was performed, and on this basis the plan for enforcement and RME was refined. New objectives and performance measures were established for protection of in-stream habitat, riparian zones, fish screening, salmon and steelhead fisheries. These new criteria were then adapted to best meet the tribal conservation enforcement program opportunities, efficiencies and effectiveness. A conservation enforcement work plan has been developed with a schedule of enforcement activities based on priority species, seasons, fishery locations and habitats for conservation enforcement. The first year of focused conservation enforcement has been completed. More than 1000 patrol hours were logged during this initial period in the Chinook and steelhead fisheries, 20 citations issued, and 374 contacts made. No arrests or seizures occurred.

The proposal states that the project has been in place for one year and as yet has not made adaptive management changes. However, the description of project accomplishments describes adaptive changes that have been made to RME methods and design.

The proposal states that an organized evaluation of desired and actual achievement (budget, personnel, equipment, coordination, contacts, warnings, arrests, seizures and critical habitat protected) will analyze the impact of the program.

3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions for Type of Work (Hatchery, RME, Tagging)

Project relationships are described in general terms; no specific relationships to programs or projects are described, despite the obvious connection to the live-capture selective gear project (#200810500). Other projects will be supported and enhanced by the role of CCT Natural Resource Law Enforcement. Fisheries habitat enhancement projects, hatchery satellite facilities and restoration programs will be supported by the enforcement of regulations and a reduction in illegal activities such as poaching and vandalism. Wildlife mitigation acquisition projects will be maximized by reducing activities which illegally alter and impact habitats.

Limiting factors for the Subbasin are described but are not related to this project or assessed in terms of how they might affect project success.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Deliverables are described only for Objectives 1 and 3, and only in general terms. Objectives 2 (increase cost-effectiveness of enforcement), 4 (maximize the efficacy of enforcement), and 5 (maximize the accountability of enforcement) do not have deliverables, despite the description of Objective 5 as tied to performance indicators.

Metrics and methods are not described for any of the five objectives.
Documentation Links:
  • Proponent Response (11/15/2010)

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 2008-106-00-NPCC-20110107
Project: 2008-106-00 - Tribal Conservation Enforcement-Colville Tribe
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal: RMECAT-2008-106-00
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 6/10/2011
Recommendation: Fund (Qualified)
Comments: Implement with condition through FY 2016: Sponsor to address ISRP qualifications in 2012 contract.
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 Qualification: The proponents should update their online proposal for future reviews to provide information requested by the ISRP on enforcement data, public education, significance of the project to regional program, and deliverables, methods, and metrics for Objectives 2, 4, and 5. Additional new information should be provided, as acquired, in the annual report. The annual report should include an evaluation of the project’s efforts to educate people about fish and
habitat conservation.

Project Relationships: None

Name Role Organization
Cindy McCartney Administrative Contact Colville Confederated Tribes
Norma Sanchez (Inactive) Administrative Contact Colville Confederated Tribes
Linda Palmer Administrative Contact Colville Confederated Tribes
Billy Gunn Administrative Contact Colville Confederated Tribes
Randy Friedlander Supervisor Colville Confederated Tribes
Henry Hix (Inactive) Interested Party Colville Confederated Tribes
Anne Creason Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration
John Skidmore Supervisor Bonneville Power Administration
Rich Swan Project Lead Colville Confederated Tribes