< Back to list of FY 2007-2009 projects

199800703 - Grande Ronde Supplementation Operations and Maintenance

Sponsor: Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation

Budgets: FY07: $766,699 | FY08: $637,577 | FY09: $676,840

Short description: This project conducts O and M for a supplementation program in the upper Grande Ronde River and Catherine Creek. CTUIR operates an acclimation facility and an adult broodstock capture facility on each tributary.

view full proposal

Final Council recommendation (Nov 2006)

Funding category: Expense

Recommended budgets: FY07: $684,454 | FY08: $684,454 | FY09: $684,454

Comment: See discussion of Programmatc Issue: supplementation m&e. The budget reflects an anticipated land purchase removed from the FY 2007 budget. Project also ties to 200708300 for M&E component. The budget is considered a combined budget with 200708300 and CTUIR will define the split and work elements for each project

ISRP final recommendation: Fundable (Qualified)


See ISRP comments on the set of NEOH projects under proposal 198805301. As one of several projects that compose the Grande Ronde Endemic Spring Chinook Supplementation Program (GRESCSP), this project covers the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Nation's role through operating adult capture facilities and juvenile acclimation and release facilities in the upper Grande Ronde River and Catherine Creek. The project will provide side benefits to other species such as steelhead through monitoring at weirs. The proposal presents a strong case for continuation and funding as part of the GRESCSP. The project appears to be well integrated with the ODFW proposal 199800704 on spring Chinook in the Grande Ronde, both of which are needed to meet program goals. The proposal clarifies objectives and methods more than in the submissions of previous years. Methods were described in detail. Design was reasonable. The proposal relates clearly to priorities and objectives outlined in the GRESCSP. As a “conservation” project, it meets ISRP review criteria. The requested funds are solidly matched with cost-shared funds from other sources. The stated objectives are operational. A history of project activities, budgets, and results is presented in detail. In the narrative, unnecessarily repetitive data shown in the accompanying tables created confusion. Tables enable better overview of statistics than does narrative text. Moreover, many of the statistics stated in the narrative do not seem to match the values shown in the tables. This project’s future proposals should summarize the quantitative results in tables or graphs, and should devote the project history narrative mainly to interpreting the biological significance of those results. This sizeable project has continued for several years, but the data shown on returns indicate only modest success to date, especially with regard to natural production. As captive brood fish have returned in higher numbers, natural fish have responded much less dramatically, and dropped in 2005. The sponsors express little concern about this. Although the overall program may be under much internal NEOH scrutiny, there is little indication from the proposal or the response that it is. The ISRP commented that some of the proposal’s "biological objectives" are just tasks (activity objectives), and that, overall, the project is being run just as performances of operations, without its organization as a strategy directed toward reaching an outcome being explicitly set forth. The desired outcome(s) should form the project’s biological objectives. The sponsors did not revise their proposal to remedy the problems with biological objectives; however, some of their response discussion indicates their strategy. The ISRP pointed out that the proposal should include the objective of terminating the project when M&E determines that its supplementation either is not working or has been successful enough that it is no longer needed. The project is designed to provide emergency risk management of spring/summer Chinook in the subbasin and ultimately to recover self-sustaining populations if out-of-subbasin stressors are remedied. If those stressors are not remedied, the long-term viability of the spring/summer Chinook is uncertain. The ISRP commented that a response was needed, in coordination with the other GRESCSP proposals, showing a decision tree detailing criteria for termination based on results, whether positive or negative (see item 2, below). The fundable (qualified) recommendation is for two reasons: (1) Scientific justification for the project depends on the funding of the M&E proposal 200713200. (2) In response to the ISRP request for a decision tree detailing criteria for termination based on results, whether positive or negative, the sponsors clarified planned activities if the results are positive, including termination of the captive broodstock program, etc. However, no information was provided on the criteria for termination if the program fails to show adequate, sustained results. The sponsors indicate that such decision would be made at an administrative level above the project level and do not say how those decisions would be made. This constitutes a lack of transparency in the plan. For reviewers to be able to evaluate the plan, the proposal should contain the criteria and anticipated alternatives that this higher level will use. (See the decision tree provided under proposal 199800704.) Some of the data presented in the response are unclear. For example, some of the abbreviated column headings in Table 3a are not explained, so the material beneath them is not interpretable.

Response loop edit

See the sponsor's revised proposal from the response loop. You'll be taken to CBFWA's proposal system in Section 10 where most sponsors uploaded revised narratives or other responses to the ISRP comments.

State/province recommendation: Fundable, but at a reduced level

Review group: OSPIT - Blue Mountain

Recommended budgets: FY07: $684,454 | FY08: $684,454 | FY09: $684,454

Comment: OSPIT notes the land purchase in fiscal year 2007 was removed from the budget. Project also ties to 200708300 for M&E component. The budget is considered a combined budget with 200708300 and CTUIR will define the split and work elements for each project.