|
<br />FY 99 Draft Work Plan Summary (Wrth Pgm. Oir. & technical committee comments and Pgm. Oir. responses)
<br />
<br />07123/98
<br />
<br />NUMBER TTll.. SEC. 7 FYas COMMENTS (PO. TECH. COMM., PO RESPONSE)
<br />STATUS COMMITTEE TOTAL ANN. FUND CAP. FUND FUNDS FUNDS IN-I(IND/OTHER
<br /> po: Needs peer review, BC: Pat said ttlls.SOW will be revised based on peer review comments. BC would
<br /> NEW Effects ofFBR on wtlite.top dIstr. Be $22,700 $22,700 like to see those comments and the revised SOW before gIving tl\eir flnal appn:oval.
<br /> PO: Needs revisIon and peer review. BC: Pat said this SOW will be revised based on peer review comments.
<br /> NEW Role of levee removal on mosquitoes BC would like to see those comment and the revised SOW before giving final approval. RevIewers should
<br /> Be $20,700 $20,700 Include mosquito experts.
<br /> OR Floodplain public InVOlvement plan ,. i?D: Budget forthis Is shown in the I&E section (VI.).
<br />Ul. Reduce Nonnative Fish and Sportfish Impacts $718,000 $446,000 $171,800 '0 $0 $100,200
<br /> 0 Green R~r Nonnative Fish mgmt. Be $70,000 $7Q,OOO ~~:;n~~e= ~~3g~I~~ ~~~a~~%tJ~9~~tahWJll loole. into !his and provide revisionsorjustificalion.
<br />" Small Nonnative Cyprinld Removal Be
<br />87. 0 Cyprinidremoval_utah oe $87,5(10 $87,500
<br />87b OR Cyprlnld removal. Colorado Be $54,000 $54,000 ~~~:~:3s'::r:~~~~i~ ~p~~8=1:}~t1 anti dropping the reaches done In t'Y 98 (until We need
<br />as 0 Yampa Cttannel CatfISh Removal Be $90,800 $90,800 po: SOW revised to show FY 2000 wttl:t!to addfficnal funds. Be: Change PI to Tim Modde.
<br /> PO: This SOWwas approved for FY 98, but ltwas deferrec:l one year so that ISMP nonnative evaluation could
<br /> be completed, Be: The main difference between this study ~ld #87b Is that 1hl:s uses electrofishlng and
<br /> #a7b uses =>eining (both studies wm remoye all nonnative fishes captured). The COfIlmittee questioned the
<br /> need for the diet work In this study "nd Frank reported that M 000 could be cut out for that portion. The
<br /> Committee agreed. The sentence about ISM? on palle 4 ~flrst full paragraph) should be replaced with an
<br />as OR Colorado R. Centrarchld Removal oe $50,000 $50,000 explanation of how success will be, rre1llatecl (not With IMP).
<br /> ,
<br /> . PO: Recommend borrowing CDOW boats or finding some otherwa~ to cut the budget. BC: This SOW
<br /> should be revised based o~r review comments, ElC would like see those comments and the reVised
<br />~:~ Yampa RlverNonnatJve Fish Control Be $93,700 $93,700 sow before giving thelrfi apPlYval. .
<br /> Po: sow should discuss coordination ofprioriUes ~tween this and the flood~'ain restoration program.
<br />Col'orado RIver Pond Reclamation Be: The Committee expressed concerns baSed on past perlormance. This wil be addressed by the
<br />oe $272,000 $171,800 $100,200 Management Committee. ,
<br />CAP.20 0 HighUnescreenlng Be $0 $0 po: All FY 98 funds.
<br />.UO'&G.""~",,,g.m.", . $1,1.18,700 $388,000 $406,700 $0 $0 $324,000
<br /> PO: PO reeommends monitorln? onlY the ProfeS$orValley site {don't monitor the second site}. Be: Update
<br /> SOW to reflect cumlnt status 0 flow-tralnlng worn; proVide status report to BC on this. BC would like to see
<br /> OR 8onytalllnb'oductlon oe ...."" $5&,000 results of f1OW-trainlng studieS from first fewyears of this sWcly. Be restored funding to monitor both sites.
<br />29 OR O&M Propagatio_n Facilities Be . .
<br /> ~... ' PO: These costs are underestlmatec/. At. least an additional $SOK will be needed for O&M of the new f:acil~
<br /> to hatch and raise Colorado squawfiSh. Recommend FWS il:'leStIgate getting base funding for this facility.
<br />29. OR Grand ValTey oe $189,000 $189,000 Be: BC added $25K needed for additional O&M costs at new facll~.
<br /> OR 0,,., Be $31:18,000 $308,000 k~j,~:S.~a:~o~~d~fenfi~J:~:::s~ontribution. BC: Costs seem high in comparlson to other _
<br /> OR Wo....., Be $83,000 $83,000 - Be: Is $8K needed to culture and transport bonytail if we're not :loing llow training?
<br />29<1 OR Aclultraxor1lackcolleetfon Be $20,000 $2lJ,oGO
<br /> po: PO recommends $16K cost-$hare from utah again In FY 99. BC: In light ofoutyear costs, the BC asked
<br /> If the MC commltt.ed to fundl~ 50% ofthl$ study everrr year? utah needs to assess their deslrew continue
<br /> tlliswol1<:.ba$edotlflsh aY<'l1l 1:.% and cost-$harlng. n a C<.mmltteevote, 3 favored keepln~this proJect!n
<br /> the 'o'I'Orlt plan to provide basic' nnatlon aboutt.r,e speeles th:twa ctUf need; 4 voted aga nst ~ ft In
<br /> the plan because they believe Irs a low priority In light of other studies (the Infonnation would be g to
<br /> OR Gila hybridization Be $16,000 $16,000 have, but isn't vltal to Ollr recovery effocts). See contingency list.
<br />
<br />Page 3
<br />
|