Comment on proposed FY 2006 budget

The budget amount stated ($701,117) does not reflect the FY 05 Within-Year Modification approved for $167,280. Our FY 05 contract total is $868,397, which should be the figure used for FY 06. In addition, this July (05) the administrative overhead (Indirect) cost goes up nearly 8%. This will amount to a difference of $50,639 and the reduction will have to be taken out of on the ground projects(S&S) unless we get an increase to account for it. In terms of fish screen replacement projects, the reduction of S&S will result in 3 screen projects not getting completed. To stay at the level of 20 existing screen replacements and one passage project (if identified) per contract, we would need a FY 06 budget of $919,036 to achieve this goal. When we complete FY 05 projects, we should have approximately 88 existing screens left for replacement.

Accomplishments since the last review

2003 – 21 fish screens were replaced, all meeting current NOAA criteria. 59.03 CFS of diverted water was protected by the completed projects. 2 – New headgates were installed at projects. 2 – measuring devices installed at projects. 1- Permanent pool and chute ladder installed on Thirtymile Creek. New heating system installed in John Day Fabrication Shop. 2004 – 22 fish screens were replaced, all meeting current NOAA criteria. 52.9 CFS of diverted water was protected by the completed projects. 4 – New headgates were installed at projects. 1 – Temporary Denil ladder installed on Rock Creek, pending a permanent fix. An underground sprinkler system was installed to water facility grounds. To Date 2005 - 9 fish screens replaced all meeting current NOAA criteria. 2 – pump screens installed, both meeting current NOAA criteria. 21.6 CFS of diverted water was protected by the completed projects. 1 – New headgate installed at projects. 1 – Temporary Denil ladder re-installed on Rock Creek, pending a permanent fix. 1 – Permanent Alaska Steeppass ladder installed on Beech Creek. Work in progress; fire exit for upstairs offices occupancy.

FY 2006 goals and anticipated accomplishments

2006 – Complete 20 fish screen replacement projects, all meeting current NOAA criteria. Estimated 45 - 65 CFS of diverted water will be protected by the completed projects. Cost-share to install headgates and measuring devices (as requested by water users). Complete one passage project, with all associated NEPA Compliance, if identified. The scope of our project is to replace existing operating screens that currently do not meet NOAA's screening criteria. The benefit of providing fish protection in irrigation diversions by implementing new effective fish screening devices has been well documented. Expected survivability of the fish, while they inhabit their spawning, rearing and migration areas, will be in the range of 90-99%, if the screening devices are constructed to current NOAA Fisheries criteria and are properly operated and maintained.

Subbasin planning

How is this project consistent with subbasin plans?

There are 10 restoration strategies listed in the John Day subbasin plan (page 6) of which Strategy A: Improve fish passage and Strategy B: Install fish screens on water diversions, are the top 2 strategies. This project is consistent with and implements these strategies (Section 5.2.2.4, page 244) (Strategy A, page 252) by removing and or replacing existing barriers with fish friendly alternatives that minimize stresses on traveling fish. (Strategy B, page 255) Replace existing screens that don't meet current screening criteria, install screens on both ditch and pump diversions that are currently unscreened to eliminate or reduce fish entrainment at these withdrawals.

How do goals match subbasin plan priorities?

This project accomplishes priority work, as stated in the subbasin plan (page 248) by Improving Fish Passage and Fish Screening. The technical teams, for the plan, frequently rated these two strategies at a “Very High” or “High” priority for the subbasin. Priorities rankings for each of the three sub-geographic areas can be found in the plan on page 249, Tables 70 & 71, page 250, Tables 72 & 73 and page 251, Tables 74 & 75. A map (Figure 51) of the Relative Priority of Strategy A: Fish Passage is on page 254 and a map (Figure 52) of Relative Priority of Strategy B: Fish Screens is on page 256. These priorities are consistent with our current project goals.

Other comments

The current program of screen replacement began in 1997. Earlier BPA funding was provided for a pump screen installation program and a new screen shop facility in John Day. Since 1997 the project has upgraded 166 screens to meet current screening criteria and 5 fishways. Annual Reports have been provided to BPA that detail results. From 1997 through the end of 2005 the John Day Program will have spent $4,709,442 upgrading screen installations and fixing passage barriers. Historically we have completed 20 projects per year but always had additional funds from other sources to cost-share with BPA funds to reach this goal. In 2005 these other funds (NOAA/MA and OWEB/M66) were no longer available, so we submitted a with-in budget modification for a funding increase. The budget increase was approved through BPA and NPCC and should allow us to complete 20 projects in FY 05. An inventory was conducted in 2004 to determine the status of the 525 historic screens installed in the John Day basin in the 1950's and 1960's. We knew that over time, due to changes in land ownerships, agricultural practices, floods and changes in irrigation delivery methods, that a number of the historic screens had been abandoned. The inventory showed that most of these sites were permanently abandoned but 42 were again actively flood irrigating with no screening components in place. Five unscreened diversions and 5 permanent passage barriers were also located, along with numerous push-up dam problems. Ongoing inventory work, within the basin by other agencies, may find additional sites that will need attention. Future funding and a timeframe to address the issue of unscreened diversions (both ditch and pump) and passage barriers need to be considered. This project compliments and coordinates with various other local, state and federal agencies (i.e. SWCD’s, Local Tribes, Watershed Councils, BOR, BPA, NOAA, DSL, WRD, OSP, DOF, BLM, USFS, COE, etc.) on riparian and fish habitat improvement efforts, identifying passage barriers, eliminating gravel push-up dams and identifying screening problems. These programs all work to help increase anadromous and resident fish production by minimizing mortality associated with irrigation withdrawals and passage barriers on public and private lands.