FY 2003 Columbia Cascade proposal 29023

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
29023 Narrative	Narrative
29023 Sponsor Response to ISRP	Response
29023 Powerpoint Presentation	Powerpoint Presentation

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Restoration/Protection of Kartar Creek In-stream, riparian, and Wetland Habitats
Proposal ID	29023
Organization	Colville Confederated Tribes, Fish and Wildlife Department (CCT)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	John Arterburn, Sherri Sears, And Tahnea Jafari
Mailing address	PO Box 150 Nespelem, WA 99155
Phone / email	5096342110 / [email protected]
Manager authorizing this project	Joe Peone
Review cycle	Columbia Cascade
Province / Subbasin	Columbia Cascade / Okanogan
Short description	Enhance natural reproduction, establishment of a sustainable fishery, provide a riparian corridor located between seasonal wildlife to partcially mitigate for loss of andromous fish and wildlife created by the building of Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dam
Target species	Lahontan cutthroat trout, elk, big horn sheep, other mamals, Tailed frog and other anphibians, migratory and non-migratory birds, reptiles, and Ute ladies'-tresses plus other plants with cultural significants.

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description
48.3127	-119.4336	From the southern most part of Omak Lake upstream 6 miles

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
Not Applicable

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Year	Accomplishment
many	The Colville Tribes Fishand Wildlfie Department has many successful on-going and completed projects

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
8503800	Colville Tribal Hatchery	Currently stocks fish into Omak Lake, this could be reduced or eliminated depending upon the success of this project.
9001800	Lake Roosevelt Habitat Improvement	The Biologist in charge of this program will assisst and consult with the project lead on fisheries and ecological process issues (In-kind Support)
9204800	Hellsgate project	Will provide in-kind support for this project by helping with fencing needs and maitenance

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
Objective 1. Modifying water allocations or obtaining water rights, increase wetland storage to increase the quantity of available in-stream, riparian, and wetland habitat for lahotan cutthroat trout and wildlife within the lower 6 miles of Kartar Creek.	Task a. Conduct a hydrogeology survey in the Kartar Creek watershed to establish the best ways to improve in-stream flow in an ecologically sound manner.	2003	$60,000	Yes
	Task b and c. Develop designs for wetland storage, reconnecting overland flow between stream sections disconnected by over utilization of local ground water sources, and modification of in-stream, riparian and wetland habitats.	2003	$80,000	Yes
	Task d. Report writing, bid compliance, contracting, permitting	2003	$159,659

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
All	2004	2007	$0

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
All	All	none	$0

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
Objective 2. Modify current stream course, enhance wetland storage, restore riparian areas to increase the quality of habitats for lahotan cutthroat trout and wildlife within the lower 6 miles of Kartar Creek..	2004	2004	$485,659

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

FY 2004
$485,659

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
All	All		$0

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
Objective 3 (First year). Monitor, evaluate, and maintain improvements made to Kartar Creek to ensure long-term benefits to Lahotan cutthroat trout and wildlife are achieved and sustained.	2005	2005	$4,000
Objective 3 (Second and third year). Monitor, evaluate, and maintain improvements made to Kartar Creek to ensure long-term benefits to Lahotan cutthroat trout and wildlife are achieved and sustained.	2006	2007	$4,000

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

FY 2005	FY 2006	FY 2007
$4,000	$4,000	$4,000

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
Objective 1. Modifying water allocations or obtaining water rights, increase wetland storage to increase the quantity of available in-stream, riparian, and wetland habitat for lahotan cutthroat trout and wildlife within the lower 6 miles of Kartar Creek.	Task a. Baseline fish, wildlife and habitat surveys.	2003	$138,164

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
Objective 2. Modify current stream course, enhance wetland storage, restore riparian areas to increase the quality of habitats for lahotan cutthroat trout and wildlife within the lower 6 miles of Kartar Creek..	2004	2004	$16,164
Objective 3 (First year). Monitor, evaluate, and maintain improvements made to Kartar Creek to ensure long-term benefits to Lahotan cutthroat trout and wildlife are achieved and sustained.	2005	2005	$231,823
Objective 3 (Second and third year). Monitor, evaluate, and maintain improvements made to Kartar Creek to ensure long-term benefits to Lahotan cutthroat trout and wildlife are achieved and sustained.	2006	2007	$203,783

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006	FY 2007
$16,164	$231,823	$203,783	$203,783

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Item	Note	FY 2003 cost
Personnel	FTE: 3.5	$96,751
Fringe	22.92% of salaries	$22,175
Supplies		$64,605
Travel		$7,560
Indirect	42.1 % of salaries 1	$40,732
Capital	Land/water rights acquisition and conservation easements	$56,000
NEPA	In house	$0
Subcontractor		$150,000
		$437,823

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2003 cost	$437,823
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2003 budget request	$437,823
FY 2003 forecast from 2002	$0
% change from forecast	0.0%

Reason for change in estimated budget

N/A

Reason for change in scope

N/A

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind
CCT Hellsgate project (#9204800)	Fence installation and maintenance labor	$40,000	in-kind
CCT Habitat improvement (#9001800)	Fisheries and ecological consultation	$25,000	in-kind
CCT Tribal Hatchery (#9204800)	Project administration and consultation	$20,000	in-kind
NRCS	Remote water facilaties	$15,000	in-kind

Other budget explanation

2005 M&E phase dollars are higher to allow employees to become proficent and to allow necessary equipment to be purchased and these cost should not be incured in 2006 or 2007.

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. Kartar Creek has a dewatered section in the agricultural area above the lake. The goal of this project is to get water back in the creek. Perhaps the creek would need to be lined or detoured in the reach where it surrounds the agricultural lands. The proposal is primarily to assess options, followed by planning and implementation. They also plan wetlands creation and riparian fencing and planting.

The project focuses on Lahontan cutthroat trout (LCT), a non-native species, which is currently planted in Omak Lake and supports a trophy class recreational fishery that has strong local and regional support. The lake is highly alkaline and unlikely to support salmonids, other than alkaline-adapted stocks like Lahontan Cutthroat trout. The project seems logical with a laudable goal of attempting to convert a hatchery-supported recreational fishery to a self-supporting self-sustaining fishery.

More detail needs to be provided in the budget section that links specific costs to specific objectives and tasks. As presented, large dollar amounts are associated with generalized multiple objectives making it difficult to assess task-specific effort and cost.

There should be discussion of the potential numbers of Lahontan trout that might be produced in Kartar Creek. Some reasonable estimate ought to be possible, given experience in similar streams. Such a number could be compared with the number of fish currently being planted to evaluate the feasibility of the project's objective. The number could be too high or too low.

Historically, this should have been redband trout habitat, although the highly alkaline nature of the natural Omak Lake may have prevented their occurrence in the lake and portions of the watershed. Nevertheless, the Kartar Creek watershed above the lake should be surveyed for the existence of native salmonids such as redband trout. The existence of remnant redband trout populations in the upper Kartar Creek watershed could complicate the plans for introducing Lahontan cutthroat trout into the creek, Redband trout are a species of special concern and their protection would be threatened by potential hybridization with Lahontan cutthroat trout, if they occur together.

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
High Priority (Objective 1)

Date:
May 17, 2002

Comment:

Columbia Cascade Province Budget Work Group supports funding Objective 1 with a phased approach and reduced costs. There are only two resident fish proposals in this province. This would convert a supplementation project funded by BPA into a natural production program. The budget has been adjusted to reflect the recommendation for High Priority.

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 2002-11)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Jun 7, 2002

Comment:

Fundable. Kartar Creek has a dewatered section in the agricultural area above the lake. The goal of this project is to get water back in the creek. Perhaps the creek would need to be lined or detoured in the reach where it surrounds the agricultural lands. The proposal is primarily to assess options, followed by planning and implementation. They also plan wetlands creation and riparian fencing and planting.

The proponents provided a good response to the ISRP including conducting field surveys for presence of redband trout. No redband trout were detected in the surveys. The response also provided good attempts at calculating numbers of fish that could be produced. The project would replace hatchery planting with natural reproduction.

REVIEW:
NMFS Review

Recommendation:

Date:
Jul 19, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU

Comments
Not Reviewed

Already ESA Req?

Biop? No

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
C

Date:
Jul 26, 2002

Comment:

Recommend deferral to Subbasin Planning

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Do Not Fund

Date:
Oct 30, 2002

Comment: