FY 2003 Columbia Cascade proposal 29009

Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary

Reviews and Recommendations

Additional documents

Title	Type
29009 Sponsor Response to ISRP	Response
29009 Narrative	Narrative
29009 Powerpoint Presentation	Powerpoint Presentation
Letter from T. Fitzsimmons (WA Dept of Ecology) and J. Koenings (WDFW) to F. Cassidy and T. Karier (NPCC) RE: State of Washington project proposals for the Columbia Cascade and Lower Columbia Provinces	Correspondence

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Acquire Dole-Beebe Property and Associated Water Rights
Proposal ID	29009
Organization	Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Dennis Beich
Mailing address	1550 Alder Street NW Ephrata, WA 98823
Phone / email	5097544624 / [email protected]
Manager authorizing this project	Dennis Beich
Review cycle	Columbia Cascade
Province / Subbasin	Columbia Cascade / Columbia Upper Middle
Short description	Protect and enhance rare Columbia River frontage habitat through acquision of Dole Northwest, Inc. Beebe orchard property and associated water right.
Target species	Summer steelhead, spring chinook salmon, coho salmon, western grey squirrel, and bald eagle

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description
47.841	-120.015	Parcel No. 27-23-20-120-000, and Parcel No. 27-23-20-523-145

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
Action 150
Action 153

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description
NMFS	Action 150	NMFS	In subbasins with listed salmon and steelhead, BPA shall fund protection of currently productive non-Federal habitat, especially if at risk of being degraded, in accordance with criteria and priorities BPA and NMFS will develop by June 1, 2001.

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Year	Accomplishment
2000	Enhance 100,609 acres of land owned by WDFW (generally existing WDFW wildlife areas)
2001	Conservation purchases of key Yakima River floodplain properties in the Kittitas Valley reach
2000	Protect sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse, and enhance associated shrub-steppe at Scotch Creek Wildlife Area
2000	Protect sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse, and enhance associated shrub-steppe at Swanson Lake Wildlife Area
Multi	Manage wildlife areas in Upper Middle Mainstem Subbasin including: Chelan Butte, Colockum, Entiat and Swakane, Quilomene, Quincy Lakes, Bridgeport Bar, Indian Dan Canyon, Unit, Washburn Island, West Foster Creek, Sagebrush Flat, and Whiskey Dick

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
9609400	WDFW Habitat Unit Acquisition. Restore and enhance 27,600 acres of wildlife habitat in Washington to mitigate for losses associated with the construction of Grand Coulee, Chief Joseph, McNary, and John Day dams.	Land acquisition in Cascade Columbia Province
9604000	Mid-Columbia Coho Feasibility Reintroduction Study. Determine the feasibility of re-establishing a naturally spawning coho population within the mid-Columbia tributaries. Focus on Methow and Wenatchee Subbasins in the Cascade Columbia Province	Reintroduced coho would use mainstem Columbia for migration, and possibly spawning and rearing
1996042	Restore & Enhance Anadromous Fish Populations in Salmon Creek. Increase instream flows in order to accommodate the year-round life cycles of anadromous fish.	ESA and non-listed salmonids use the mainstem Columbia River as a migration corridor.
26033	Okanogan Watershed Land and Water Rights Acquisition. Protect and enhance listed and non-listed salmonid habitat in the Okanogan Watershed through the acquistion of land with river frontage and water and/or water rights.	Land and water right acquisition in Cascade Columbia Province. ESA and non-listed salmonids use the mainstem Columbia River as a migration corridor.

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
1. Protect Columbia River mainstem frontage property	a. Acquire necessary permits	1	$5,000

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
1. Protect Columbia River mainstem frontage property	a. Written baseline estimate	1	$3,000	Yes
	b. Hazardous waste assessment	1	$2,500	Yes
	c. Appraisal	1	$13,000	Yes
	d. Appraisal review	1	$1,000	Yes
	e. Property purchase	1	$800,000
	f. Purchase title insurance	1	$2,000
2. Restore and enhance Columbia River mainstem frontage property	a. Plant 5,000 feet of low-bank riparian habitat with native trees and shrubs	1	$40,000
	b. Plant 5,000 feet of low-bank riparian habitat with native seed mix	1	$6,000
	c. Purchase and install drip irrigation system	1	$10,000	Yes

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
1. Protect Columbia River mainstem frontage property	a. Replace native riparian plantings that fail initially	2	$0
1.	b. Weed control	3	$14,000

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Protect Columbia River mainstem frontage property (a. Replace any native riparian plantings that fail initially)	2004	2005	$27,200
1. (b. Weed control)	2004	2005	$6,000

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

FY 2004	FY 2005
$23,200	$10,000

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Item	Note	FY 2003 cost
Supplies		$6,000
Capital	Aquire property	$863,000
NEPA		$5,000
Subcontractor	Land acquisition related subcontracting	$19,500
Subcontractor	Install irrigation system	$3,000
		$896,500

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2003 cost	$896,500
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2003 budget request	$896,500
FY 2003 forecast from 2002	$0
% change from forecast	0.0%

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

REVIEW:
ISRP Preliminary Review (ISRP 2002-2)

Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate

Date:
Mar 1, 2002

Comment:

A response is needed. The "Objectives, tasks and methods section" is too brief and has no M&E component. The Dole-Beebe property is located adjacent to the Chelan Falls Hatchery, which is funded by Chelan County P.U. D. and operated by WDFW. The ISRP viewed the property during our October site visit. The site possesses many desirable features, including a spring fed rivulet, where newly reintroduced coho salmon were recently observed. The 227-acre property has 6,000 feet of relatively undisturbed Columbia River mainstem riparian habitat. A decision on the project is urgent, because it faces extreme pressure for development. Has the property been recently sold to a developer?

The author needs to work with the game division of the WDFW to include a HEP analysis for value to wildlife, and identification of mitigation credit to BPA. Also, see the other proposals for acquisition or protection of wildlife habitat. The technical background, relationship to other projects, etc. is well written and includes much detail. The author should fill in the detail for methods to establish baseline data and long-term monitoring and evaluation (M&E).

The proponents are referred to the ISRP Review of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes' Habitat Acquisition and Restoration Plan (19910600) ( http://www.nwcouncil.org/library/isrp/isrp2001-4addendum.htm). The project was reviewed in the Mountain Columbia Province to determine whether it provided scientifically sound criteria and protocol to prioritize habitat acquisitions. The ISRP found that document described a good plan for habitat acquisition and restoration of wildlife habitat in mitigation for lost aquatic and riparian habitat due to the Kerr Project No. 5 located on the Flathead River and could serve as a useful model to other habitat and restoration proposals with some minor revision of the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) component of the plan. The M&E component has subsequently been reviewed and approved subject to minor modifications in ISRP report (www.nwcouncil.org/library/isrp/isrp2001-4AlbeniFalls.pdf). The proponents are also referred to the programmatic section of this report on Monitoring, the specific comments on Aquatic Monitoring and Evaluation, and the specific comments on Terrestrial Monitoring and Evaluation.

The response should describe the plans and methods for their planned stream restoration work. The property has potential for benefits to fish and wildlife but some restoration work is warranted.

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
High Priority

Date:
May 17, 2002

Comment:

WDFW is going to contribute $500,000 towards the purchase of this property in FY03, the budget has been modified to reflect this action. Question cost of the property because appraisal is not completed Fair Market Value. NMFS has identified this project as a BiOp project.

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 2002-11)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Jun 7, 2002

Comment:

Fundable for establishment of options to purchase the property. The response did not reference or provide adequate detailed plans for monitoring and evaluation of results of the project including establishment of baseline conditions prior to purchase. Detailed plans for M&E should be developed and reviewed by the ISRP before purchase of the property. The ISRP believes that it is not appropriate to recommend unconditional funding for projects when one of the four primary ISRP evaluation criteria is not met (that we review and recommend only projects that "have provisions for monitoring and evaluation of results.") As suggested in the preliminary review, the project sponsors are referred to the ISRP's review of the Draft Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for the Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Project (www.nwcouncil.org/library/isrp/isrp2001-4AlbeniFalls.pdf).

A binding agreement for a conservation easement in perpetuity should be in place before purchase. This is a valuable and unique property currently being threatened by development. It includes over 227 acres of important riparian and shrub steppe habitat both adjacent to and uplands of the Columbia River. Several important aquatic habitats for Upper Columbia River summer steelhead and spring chinook salmon are also found within the project's boundaries including a watercress lined, 10 to12 cfs spring tributary to the Columbia River. In addition to the land itself, two valuable water rights are attached to the property, one for 10 cfs (of which WDFW currently uses 4 cfs for its WDFW Chelan Fish Hatchery operations) and another for 15 cfs.

REVIEW:
NMFS Review

Recommendation:

Date:
Jul 19, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Would protect an undisclosed amount of riparian area and a springbrook along the mainstem Columbia River. Could also result in modest instream flow contribution which could improve habitat and therefore survival.

Comments
Actual transferable water right is likely much less than the 15 cfs reported (probably closer to 0.5 cfs). Benefits appear more at protecting hatchery water supply than listed fish. Little evidence provided to support the importance of the site to fish. Much of the property is isolated from the river.

Already ESA Req? No

Biop? Yes

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
C

Date:
Jul 26, 2002

Comment:

Recommend deferral to Subbasin Planning; this kind of activity could support RPA 150.

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Do Not Fund

Date:
Oct 30, 2002

Comment: