Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 2012-006-00 - Nez Perce Tribe Regional Coordination Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 2012-006-00 - Nez Perce Tribe Regional Coordination
Project Number:
2012-006-00
Title:
Nez Perce Tribe Regional Coordination
Summary:
The primary programmatic goal of Nez Perce Tribe regional coordination is to support effective protection, mitigation and enhancement of Columbia Basin fish and wildlife resources by actively engaging in and contributing to key regional forums, processes and initiatives. This work is important to address impacts of hydroelectric facilities on resident and anadromous fish, wildlife and ecosystem functions. Vital regional and cultural resources are at stake, including listed species and Pacific lamprey.
Proposer:
Proponent Orgs:
Nez Perce Tribe (Tribe)
Starting FY:
2012
Ending FY:
2021
BPA PM:
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Mountain Snake Clearwater 100.00%
Purpose:
Programmatic
Emphasis:
Regional Coordination
Focal Species:
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Special:
None
BiOp Association:
None

No photos have been uploaded yet for this Project.

Summary of Budgets

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

To see more detailed project budget information, please visit the "Project Budget" page

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2020 - FY2022)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2020 Expense $82,926 From: General FY20 SOY 06/05/2019
FY2021 Expense $82,926 From: General FY21 SOY 06/09/2020

Pending Budget Decision?  No


Actual Project Cost Share

Current Fiscal Year — 2021
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
2019 (Draft)

Contracts

The table below contains contracts with the following statuses: Active, Complete, History, Issued.
* "Total Contracted Amount" column includes contracted amount from both capital and expense components of the contract.
Expense Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Total Contracted Amount Dates
74017 REL 67 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 2012-006-00 EXP NEZ PERCE TRIBE COORDINATION Issued $82,926 4/1/2020 - 3/31/2021



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):9
Completed:6
On time:6
Status Reports
Completed:34
On time:19
Avg Days Late:2

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
56519 60173, 63663, 68297, 72106, 75522, 74017 REL 24, 74017 REL 49, 74017 REL 67 2012-006-00 EXP NEZ PERCE TRIBE COORDINATION 2012 Nez Perce Tribe 04/2012 04/2012 Issued 34 37 4 0 3 44 93.18% 0
Project Totals 34 37 4 0 3 44 93.18% 0


The table content is updated frequently and thus contains more recent information than what was in the original proposal reviewed by ISRP and Council.

Review: Resident Fish, Regional Coordination, and Data Management Category Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 2012-006-00-NPCC-20130807
Project: 2012-006-00 - Nez Perce Tribe Regional Coordination
Review: Resident Fish, Regional Coordination, and Data Management Category Review
Proposal: RESCAT-2012-006-00
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 3/5/2014
Recommendation: Other
Comments: See Regional Coordination Review and Recommendations - Part 4.

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 2012-006-00-ISRP-20120215
Project: 2012-006-00 - Nez Perce Tribe Regional Coordination
Review: Resident Fish, Regional Coordination, and Data Management Category Review
Proposal Number: RESCAT-2012-006-00
Completed Date: 4/17/2012
Final Round ISRP Date: 4/3/2012
Final Round ISRP Rating: Qualified
Final Round ISRP Comment:
Qualification #1 - Qualification #1
See programmatic comments on coordination projects. A sound scientific proposal should respond to the six questions and related material at the beginning of the regional coordination section.
First Round ISRP Date: 2/8/2012
First Round ISRP Rating: Qualified
First Round ISRP Comment:

Several parts of this proposal provide excellent detail. The out-of-basin emphasis of this proposal is a valuable idea and coordination is a very important part of addressing this issue. Development of the proposal to strengthen this insight would be very useful. Proposal sponsors should be able to add greater detail about methods, the approach they will take to adaptive management, the project's relationship to other projects, and how effectiveness will be assessed (see Qualifications).

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

The Nez Perce Tribe has chosen to represent its interests and engage in technical and policy issues with resource managers in the Upper Columbia Basin. “The primary programmatic goal of Nez Perce Tribe regional coordination is to support effective protection, mitigation and enhancement of Columbia Basin fish and wildlife resources by actively engaging in and contributing to key regional forums, processes and initiatives.”

Significance to regional programs: The sponsors relate the project to the subbasin plan, coordination to address out of subbasin effects, lamprey restoration, MERR, the FCRPS BiOp, and other regional fora and processes.

Problem statement: The statement makes the point of the complexity of implementing the 2009 Fish and Wildlife Program, given the many competing interests, and how this complexity requires good coordination among the many interests. The proposal describes the Nez Perce interests in effective Fish and Wildlife Program implementation, especially as it pertains to salmon and lamprey.

Objectives: The proposal lists four objectives. The objectives are worded as desired process outcomes. The sponsors could consider working some of their explanatory text into their statements of objectives to explain desirable achievements beyond process.

Deliverables include participation in meetings and other communications, coordinated planning and implementation forums for Pacific lamprey restoration, recommendations to amend the Fish and Wildlife Program, and coordinated assessments for salmon and steelhead. These are mainly inputs to coordination. What were the outcomes from meetings, communications, forums, and recommendations?

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management (ISRP Review of Results)

Although the Nez Perce Tribe has been a member of CBFWA, this is a new project, so technically there are no results to evaluate. Historical data on performance is available with the project, “Proposal RESCAT-1989-062-01 - Program Coordination and Facilitation Services provided through the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Foundation.” See the section, “Reporting & Contracted Deliverables Performance.”

Reference is made to the Nez Perce contribution to adaptive management through CBFWA. The proposal would benefit from adopting an adaptive management framework.

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

The geographic interests are regional to all out-of-basin areas affecting returns of salmon, steelhead, and lamprey to the Upper Snake River basin.

Project relationships: Reference is made to the previous relationship to the CBFWA coordination project. No additional projects are listed as related to this project

Emerging limiting factors: This is a good summary that includes climate change effects on precipitation, predation dynamics and alterations in food webs.

Tailored questions: The section on data sharing is excellent. The Nez Perce Tribe has data that Upper Snake River runs cannot be restored to upriver basins unless out-of-basin factors are addressed. These include “estuarine and ocean conditions, hydropower impacts such as water quality and fish passage, mainstem Snake/Columbia river water quality and quantity conditions, and downriver and oceanic fisheries—are key factors limiting recruitment of anadromous spawners to the upper Snake River basins.” This is a very valuable systems perspective on the difficulties facing salmon, steelhead, and lamprey restoration. Relating out-of-basin issues to the effectiveness or lack of effectiveness in coordination could provide valuable insights to the Fish and Wildlife Program.

The restoration of lamprey is of special concern.

Meetings are identified. What have been the outcomes from these meeting? How does coordination differ from that handled by CBFWA? In what ways is it more effective and efficient?

More development of the information dissemination work element would be desirable. The primary audience appears to be local schools and universities. What are the key messages to be emphasized? What education styles or media will be used? How will effectiveness of understanding the message be monitored. Can this be placed in an adaptive management framework, where on project renewal lessons learned inform the next round of funding. The information in the annual report for Contract # 48252, Project # 207-106-00, Contract Period 08/15/2010 – 08/14/2011 gives very little detail.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Deliverables: Four deliverables are identical to the objectives. Adequate detail is provided for each.

Regional coordination components: There are eight project components: Data management (10%); participating in Basinwide Data Sharing Strategy (10%); participating in the Anadromous Salmonid Monitoring Strategy (10%); participation in forums (40%); Project proposal review (10%); Coordination within subbasins (5%); Focus workgroups on Program issues (10%); and Information dissemination (5%). Good examples are provided for each component.

Work elements: Six work elements are identified – 99. Outreach and Education, 114. Identify and Select Projects, 122. Provide Technical Review, 159. Transfer/Consolidate Regionally Standardized Data, 160. Create/Manage/Maintain Database, and 189. Coordination-Columbia Basinwide. Only 99 has metrics, but they are more inputs rather than outcomes. Can output metrics be identified to go with these work elements? Ideally, the hypothesis(es) developed in the proposal would be measured during the course of the coordination activities and results presented in the report on this project. There are many ideas discussed in the proposal that are amenable to this approach. Selecting a few of the most important questions, concerns, or hypotheses and monitoring them is recommended.

Methods and metrics: Some information is provided in the descriptions of work components and deliverables. As a new project, no information is provided regarding value added or assessment of effectiveness.

4a. Specific comments on protocols and methods described in MonitoringMethods.org

The protocols for the six work elements are published but do not provide adequate guidance on the methods and metrics. Guidance is available from ISRP (2007-14:2). Project sponsors have to design the metrics into their proposal and no rely on the definitions for Work Elements.

Modified by Dal Marsters on 4/17/2012 3:07:11 PM.
Documentation Links:

Project Relationships: None

Name Role Organization
Arleen Henry Administrative Contact Nez Perce Tribe
Kristi Van Leuven (Inactive) Interested Party Bonneville Power Administration
Rosemary Mazaika Interested Party Bonneville Power Administration
Tracy Hauser Interested Party Bonneville Power Administration
Dave Johnson Supervisor Nez Perce Tribe
Jay Hesse Project Lead Nez Perce Tribe
Eric Leitzinger Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration