Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Wagner Ranch Acquisition |
| Proposal ID | 200104000 |
| Organization | Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon (CTWSRO) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Terry A. Luther |
| Mailing address | Department of Natural Resources, P.O. Box C Warm Springs , Or. 97761 |
| Phone / email | 5415532026 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | Robert Bruno, Natural Resources Manager |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 High Priority |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / John Day |
| Short description | Aquire Wagner Ranch to provide a contiguous corridor of habitat along the lower mainstem John Day River. |
| Target species | Spring Chinook, Summer Steelhead, Pacific lamprey, Mule deer, Rocky Mountain elk, Bighorn sheep |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
| 44.9 |
-120.46 |
Wagner Ranch |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
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
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
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 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
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 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2002 |
|---|
| $62,396 | $65,516 | $68,792 | $59,425 |
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
|---|
| $18,000 | $8,000 | $8,000 | $8,000 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2001 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
FTE: .9 |
$28,240 |
| Fringe |
23% |
$6,495 |
| Supplies |
tools, equipment, fencing materials, gates, office supplies |
$15,000 |
| Travel |
vehicles, mileage and fuel |
$3,500 |
| Indirect |
41.4% |
$22,039 |
| Capital |
land purchase |
$2,550,000 |
| Subcontractor |
|
$33,500 |
| $2,658,774 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $2,658,774 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $2,658,774 |
| FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
| ODFW |
Biological surveys |
$2,000 |
in-kind |
| OMSI |
Biological surveys |
$5,000 |
in-kind |
| BLM |
Habitat surveys |
$2,000 |
in-kind |
| OSP |
Enforcement assistance |
$2,000 |
in-kind |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
A
Date:
Feb 1, 2001
Comment:
This is a well-written proposal with justification as high priority project. The proposal is to acquire a large ranch that would lead to the protection of ten miles of the mainstem of the John Day River. This proposed purchase looks like an excellent opportunity, the purchase of property will link to adjacent public owned pieces, and the opportunity is time limited. The option to purchase the ranch will expire in September 2001. The ISRP supports the proposal and suggests that the proposal might be funded at a reduced level for acquisition only while a better proposal for long-term O&M and M&E is prepared and reviewed as part of the regular rolling review that is to take place in this Province in the Spring of 2001.
Recommendation:
HP "A" -BiOp
Date:
Feb 1, 2001
Comment:
Some question of the extent to which this project by itself would address imminent survival. This project would have the lowest priority of the four John Day Subbasin acquisitions. This project would provide significant benefits to wildlife.
Recommendation:
Rank 4
Date:
Feb 26, 2001
Comment:
25053 - Wagner Ranch Acquisition, and 23054 - Forrest Ranch Acquisition, 23073 - Holliday Ranch and Crown Ranch conservation easements. All three acquisition proposals plan substantial riparian restoration. These projects could provide excellent opportunities to evaluate different restoration methods and activities
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 26, 2001
Comment:
Recommendation:
RPA 150
Date:
Apr 20, 2001
Comment:
This project would result in the acquisition of currently productive, high quality habitat in the John Day subbasin. The Ranch is one of the last remaining pieces to be acquired for contiguous protection of riparian habitat along the lower mainstem John Day River. Meets "High Priority" project criteria required in the Council's program (ESA screen, not "in lieu", and all planning, permitting, etc. in place for 10/10/01 implementation). Furthermore, this project is a "time-limited" opportunity and a "one-time" only funding commitment with immediate "on the ground" tangible biological benefits.Other criteria that the project meets are: the project is largely self-sustaining after project completion, the project has measurable/quantitative biological objectives resulting in 'species' survival benefits, provides connectivity, and improves conditions in a 303d, water quality-limited stream.
The project also fulfills more than one criteria above, provides for cost-sharing with other entities, is part of a collaborative effort with other entities or has a synergistic effect with, is recommended by an action plan derived from science-based assessment, is approved by tribal and/or state authority with F&W management authority. In addition, the project proposal details a baseline monitoring program as well as intended techniques to monitor project effects.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
May 8, 2001
Comment:
