FY07-09 proposal 200205900
Jump to Reviews and Recommendations
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Yankee Fork Salmon River Dredge Tailings Restoration Project |
| Proposal ID | 200205900 |
| Organization | Shoshone Bannock Tribes |
| Short description | Reconnect the Yankee Fork River to its floodplain and restore natural channel characteristics and processes in a segment impacted by dredge-mining. Integrate biological and physical data with project experiences to develop future restoration alternatives. |
| Information transfer | Data will be transfered to STREAMNET for public availaiblity, and findings disseminated through formal reporting, scientific publications, and prestentations at scientific meetings. |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Contacts
| Contact | Organization | |
|---|---|---|
| Form submitter | ||
| Andrew Ray | Fish & Wildlife Department, Shoshone-Bannock Tribes | [email protected] |
| All assigned contacts | ||
| Andrew Ray | Fish & Wildlife Department, Shoshone-Bannock Tribes | [email protected] |
Section 2. Locations
Province / subbasin: Mountain Snake / Salmon
| Latitude | Longitude | Waterbody | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Yankee Fork | Yankee Fork Salmon River Dredge Tailings Restoration Project |
Section 3. Focal species
primary: Chinook Snake River Spring/Summer ESUsecondary: Steelhead Snake River ESU
Section 4. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishments |
|---|---|
| 2005 | Reviewed existing biological, chemical, and physical data, developed cooperations with other agencies, drafted a plan for the restoration of a pilot project on the YFSR, and initiated research on key riverine processes. Presented preliminary findings. |
Section 5. Relationships to other projects
| Funding source | Related ID | Related title | Relationship |
|---|---|---|---|
| BPA | 199405000 | Salmon River Habitat Enhance | Data sharing, technical assistance, equipment sharing, field assistance, and office support |
| BPA | 199201000 | Habitat Imprvmnt/Enhnmnt - For | Technical assistance, field assistance |
| BPA | 199605300 | North Fork John Day Dredge-Tai | Data and information sharing, project guidance |
Section 6. Biological objectives
| Biological objectives | Full description | Associated subbasin plan | Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eliminate data gaps | Eliminate existing data gaps in the YFSR watershed through the ongoing monitoring of key riverine processes and exchanges of energy and nutrients between river and floodplain using within watershed comparisons (upstream-downstream comparisons) and paired watershed comparisons with reference ecosystems | Salmon | 3B1, 2A4 |
| Integrate adaptive RM&E plan | Integrate a monitoring and evaluation plan to examine physical, chemical, and biological response from the resulting reestablishment of connectivity. | Salmon | 18B3 |
| Monitor water quality conditions in the YFSR brack | Monitoring water quality in the YFSR using continuous monitoring equipment and conventional water sampling techniques. Particular attention will be paid to monitoring the the diffuser and also the project site before, during, and following restoration | Salmon | 18A1 |
| Produce restoration plan for YFSR | Produce a restoration design for the 10-km segment of the YFSR impacted by dredge-mining activities by adopting successful strategies from the 1-km pilot project and adaptively evaluating and incorporating the newest information. | Salmon | 18B2 |
| Use remote sensing technologies | Use remote sensing technologies to characterize the existing stream-floodplain complex and support design and modeling future restoration alternatives. | Salmon | 18B1 |
Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)
| Work element name | Work element title | Description | Start date | End date | Est budget |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation | Obtain Permits, NEPA and cultural resources | Obtain necessary environmental and biological compliance, cultural resources, construction, and other necessary permits. This work will be administered by the project sponsor but a contractor will be used to assist with necessary permits (e.g. local and regional construction permits) and to consult with the appropriate agencies on behalf of the project sponsor | 4/1/2007 | 3/31/2008 | $92,366 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Conduct Pre-Acquisition Activities | Conservation Easement Activites | The proposed activity will occur, in part, on private lands and will require a conservation easement or similar action. Tribal attorneys and a contractor will facilitate with the easement negotations | 4/1/2007 | 3/31/2008 | $74,859 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Other | 185 - Produce Pices Status Report | Produce quarterly Pices status report | 4/1/2007 | 3/31/2010 | $3,000 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Manage and Administer Projects | Manage and Administer Yankee Fork Project | Manage and adminster project components, mentor biologist and technician, mentor graduate students, work with subcontractors, cooperate and coordinate work with agencies, interact with COTR and funding agency, interact with interal administrative staff | 4/1/2007 | 3/31/2010 | $200,174 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Design and/or Specifications | Produce restoration designs and Specifications | A contractor will be used to develop engineering designs and provide the appropriate specifications. All materials will be stamped by a liscensed engeer. | 4/1/2007 | 3/31/2010 | $435,024 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Plan | Produce plan for pilot project and for 3 alternatives for the 10-km restoration | Production of design and engineering drawings for the 1-km pilot project and the 3 designs for the 10-km segment impacted by historic mining. This plan will also include the planting design and other associated design elements. | 4/1/2007 | 3/31/2010 | $351,490 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Annual Report | Produce Annual Report | Write annual report for BPA | 4/1/2007 | 3/31/2010 | $30,000 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | Data management, analysis, and interpretation | This will be a major component of the work carried out and required to interpret and report findings from data collection activites and for the dissemination of project information. The project sponsor will participate in these activities but contracts from ISU and DRI and other key investigators will be participate in this element. | 4/1/2007 | 3/31/2010 | $215,741 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Field and laboratory data collection | Collection of data for water quality monitoring, eliminating data gaps, remote sensing needs, and pre restoration monitoring. The project sponsor will administer all data collection, but data collection activites will occur by subcontractors (e.g. ISU graduate student). | 4/1/2007 | 3/31/2010 | $349,989 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Create/Manage/Maintain Database | Database Management | Collected data (e.g. water quality monitoring data) will be managed in spreadsheets/databases requiring management by the project sponsor. | 4/1/2007 | 3/31/2010 | $27,945 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Develop RM&E Methods and Designs | Research monitoring and evaluation | This element describes RM&E associated with all proposed monitoring activities (i.e. water quality, remote sensing, and post construciton RM&E). All key investigators will assist the project sponsor in the development of specific RM&E methods and designs | 4/1/2007 | 3/31/2010 | $80,000 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Disseminate Raw/Summary Data and Results | Data dissemination | Data will be dissmeniated using various means include public meeings, presentations, and publication of reports and manuscripts. This work will be initiated by the project sponsor, but contractors like ISU will be especially helpful with data dissemination. | 4/1/2007 | 3/31/2010 | $67,000 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Submit/Acquire Data | Submission and Acquistion of Data | Data collected from various monitoring efforts will be submitted to StreamNet or equivalent data management outlets. | 4/1/2007 | 3/31/2010 | $18,000 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
Section 8. Budgets
Itemized estimated budget
| Item | Note | FY07 | FY08 | FY09 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personnel | Coordinator | $11,324 | $11,891 | $12,486 |
| Personnel | Project Manager | $49,818 | $52,308 | $54,924 |
| Personnel | Biologist | $40,950 | $42,998 | $45,147 |
| Personnel | Technician | $8,339 | $8,756 | $9,194 |
| Personnel | Assistant/Contracts | $1,092 | $1,147 | $1,204 |
| Personnel | Clerk | $7,817 | $8,208 | $8,618 |
| Fringe Benefits | Fringe (31%) | $36,809 | $38,650 | $40,582 |
| Supplies | Office Supplies/Equipment | $5,100 | $5,202 | $5,306 |
| Supplies | Field Supplies | $7,400 | $4,968 | $5,037 |
| Travel | per diem (100 days) | $13,545 | $14,222 | $14,933 |
| Travel | Lodging (12 nights) | $693 | $728 | $764 |
| Travel | BPA training | $1,000 | $1,000 | $1,000 |
| Travel | Professional Meetings (2/year) | $4,000 | $4,000 | $4,000 |
| Travel | Vehicles | $14,688 | $14,982 | $15,281 |
| Capital Equipment | Water Quality Insturments | $19,783 | $9,490 | $9,490 |
| Other | Subcontractors - ISU Stream Ecology Center | $40,111 | $40,811 | $41,627 |
| Other | Subcontractor/Remote Sensing | $61,000 | $20,492 | $0 |
| Other | Subcontractor - Water Quality DRI | $10,000 | $10,000 | $10,000 |
| Other | Subcontractor - Hydraulic/Engineering Consultation | $12,000 | $12,000 | $12,000 |
| Other | Water Quality Analysis | $8,224 | $8,635 | $9,067 |
| Overhead | Overhead (28%) | $43,722 | $45,908 | $48,204 |
| Other | Subcontractor/restoration design/engineering/permitting | $280,971 | $280,971 | $280,971 |
| Totals | $678,386 | $637,367 | $629,835 | |
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
| Total itemized budget: | $1,945,588 |
| Total work element budget: | $1,945,588 |
Cost sharing
| Funding source/org | Item or service provided | FY 07 est value ($) | FY 08 est value ($) | FY 09 est value ($) | Cash or in-kind? | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Idaho Department of Environmental Quality | calibration standards | $1,327 | $1,327 | $1,327 | Cash | Under Review |
| Idaho State University CERE | Provided equipment for water quality monitoring and stream discharge measurements during high flows | $1,800 | $0 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Idaho State University Remote Sensing Laboratory | Provide technical and engineering services associated with proposed airborne remote sensing methods | $3,000 | $0 | $0 | In-Kind | Under Review |
| Idaho State University Stream Ecology Center | Developing and implementing monitoring and evaluation plan for the YFSR | $3,860 | $0 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Land Information Services | Provided GIS services describing changes in river length and sinuosity and illustrating historic red | $4,000 | $0 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| US Geological Survey | Performed high flow stream measurments using ADCP | $3,600 | $0 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| US Geological Survy | Preparation of report on Hg and Se concentrations in aquatic biota of the YFSR | $11,400 | $0 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| USDA Forest Service | Watershed Analysis (Overton et al. 1999) | $130,000 | $0 | $0 | Cash | Confirmed |
| USDA Forest Service | Physical survey work | $20,000 | $0 | $0 | Cash | Confirmed |
| USDA Forest Service | Examination of Hg and Se concentrations in aquatic biota in the YFSR | $112,800 | $0 | $0 | Cash | Confirmed |
| USDA Forest Service | Purchased and permitting for bank-operated travelling block cableway | $4,955 | $0 | $0 | Cash | Confirmed |
| USDA Forest Service | Funded Reports on Historical Context and Cultural Resources Narrative for the YFSR Dredge Tailings | $34,997 | $0 | $0 | Cash | Confirmed |
| USDA Forest Service | Administration on Cultural Resources Work | $3,000 | $0 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| USDS Forest Service | Physical surveys to support design for hydraulic modelling and restoration plan development | $95,621 | $0 | $0 | Cash | Confirmed |
| Totals | $430,360 | $1,327 | $1,327 | |||
Section 9. Project future
|
FY 2010 estimated budget: $5,000,000 FY 2011 estimated budget: $5,000,000 |
Comments: Although many of the tasks outlined in this proposal will also be used for implementation of a full-scale restoration of the YFSR 10-km impacted segment it is impossible to predict the cost of implementation until the work outlined here is completed. |
Future O&M costs: Cost associatied with ongoing monitoring and assessment of the implementation of the restoration, continued plantings in the pilot area, continued coordination with all stakeholders, planning and coordination with future conservation easements, implementation of full scale restoration.
Termination date:
Comments:
Final deliverables:
Section 10. Narrative and other documents
| Revised Narrative for proposal 200205900 | Jul 2006 |
| ISRP Response | Jul 2006 |
Reviews and recommendations
| FY07 budget | FY08 budget | FY09 budget | Total budget | Type | Category | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NPCC FINAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Oct 23, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $160,373 | $160,373 | $160,373 | $481,119 | Expense | ProvinceExpense | Fund |
| NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $160,373 | $160,373 | $160,373 | $0 | ProvinceExpense | ||
|
Comments: Fundable in part (qualified). Fund completion of planning work for step submittal to address ISRP concerns. Funding for implementation contingent upon favorable ISRP and Council review. |
||||||
ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)
Recommendation: Not fundable
NPCC comments: The proposal itself is well put together and easy to read, but the scientific rationale for benefits to fish and wildlife is not convincing. A stated goal is to increase chinook smolt production by an order of magnitude. This is certainly a gross exaggeration of the project's potential. The ISRP previously concluded that fishery benefits on this project are likely to be low. The impacted area is a relatively short stretch of moderately high gradient. The primary chinook salmon rearing area is upstream, and passage doesn't seem to be impeded. Some objectives do not seem reasonable, and methods for the actual stream engineering are not given. Previous ISRP concern over the need for a conservation easement that would limit future development of lands associated with the stream channel restoration was not addressed. It is interesting that a similar project funded in the past by BPA (Crooked River on South Fork Clearwater) and now perhaps in need of re-doing was not mentioned in the proposal. If resources were unlimited and the availability of effective methods were assured, this might be the right thing to do at this profoundly altered site. Cost estimates are $15 million through 2011 and that certainly is an underestimate. No cost-share is identified.
ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)
Recommendation: Fundable in part (Qualified)
NPCC comments: The sponsors provided a quality response that is further evidence of the strength of their team. Some progress in negotiating with Simplot is evident. However, significant issues of concern to the ISRP remain. Reviewers continue to agree there can be little doubt that the dredge impacted reach of Yankee Fork could be better habitat for native salmonids. Even with their careful analysis of responses provided by the sponsor, reviewers remain skeptical that significant gains in smolt production from the area and adult production in the upper Salmon River basin will result even if the project sponsors are successful in increasing productivity of the reach. And, because of the profound alteration of the system, reviewers remain unconvinced that the desired rehabilitation is even possible. The ISRP strongly recommends that this project needs a benefits analysis by the Council with comparison to other alternative protection and restoration activities in the area. The ISRP recommends Fundable in Part (Qualified) for this project. The qualification includes two requirements. First, a thorough analysis of the likely benefits for Chinook salmon and other focal species in the area is required. Second, the sponsors need to obtain pre-implementation reviews of project plans that describe the scientific basis of the methods to be applied and for what purpose. A report of these findings should be submitted to the Council and reviewed by the ISRP before any Fish and Wildlife Program funds are committed to project activities. The ISRP understands that the Council's Three-Step Review Process can be used for complex and high cost restoration projects; this project would benefit from such a review. In sum, this project is scientifically justified to complete this planning phase but is not justified to begin implementation.