FY 2001 High Priority proposal 200104300

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleAcquire 27,000 Camp Creek Ranch at Zumwalt Prairie
Proposal ID200104300
OrganizationThe Nature Conservancy (TNC)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameCatherine Macdonald
Mailing address821 S.E. 14th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97214-2537
Phone / email5032301221 / [email protected]
Manager authorizing this projectCatherine Macdonald
Review cycleFY 2001 High Priority
Province / SubbasinBlue Mountain / Imnaha
Short descriptionSecure, restore and protect steelhead, bull trout, redband trout and chinook habitat on tributaries to the Imnaha River, including entire Camp Creek watershed. Restore and protect 27,000 acres of wildlife habitat on the Zumwalt Prairie.
Target speciesSnake River steelhead, Columbia River bull trout, redband trout, Snake River chinook, Columbian sharp-tail grouse, Ferruginous and Swainson's Hawks
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
45.6285 -116.9715 Zumwalt Prairie
45.62 -116.95 Camp Creek
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription
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

YearAccomplishment

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2001 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2001 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2001 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
FY 2002FY 2003FY 2004FY 2005
$200,000$208,000$216,320$224,973

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2001 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
FY 2002FY 2003FY 2004FY 2005
$40,000$41,600$43,264$44,994

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2001 cost
Personnel FTE: .20 FTE @ $60,000/yr; 1 FTE Manager @ $39,500/yr; 1.75 FTE Tech @ $20,000 $86,616
Fringe (Total Salary x .38%) $32,914
Supplies air photos, monitoring equipment, $3,600
Travel 3000 miles @.32; $500 lodging; $1000 vehicle fuel; $1,200 insurance; $750 maintenance $3,800
Indirect (22%) $27,925
Capital $11,700,000 (land); $4500 title ins & closing costs Truck $20,000 $11,724,500
Subcontractor Level 1 Hazardous Materials Assessment $8,000
Other Appraisal $19,650
Subcontractor Complete a HEP Assessment $20,000
Subcontractor Cultural Resources Assessment $10,000
$11,937,005
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2001 cost$11,937,005
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2001 budget request$11,937,005
FY 2001 forecast from 2000$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
The Nature Conservancy Land acquisition negotiations, land management planning and assessments $207,005 in-kind
The Nature Conservancy Land acquisition costs $9,730,000 cash

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 an excellent proposal that makes a good case for a cost share from the Fish and Wildlife Program for the purchase of 27,000 acres that would protect a watershed, benefit ESA listed anadromous fish, and also benefit wildlife. The Council's criteria are satisfied. The funding requests in the narrative and data proposal forms are different, the narrative specifies that the request is for a $2 million cost share of the overall $11,937,005 purchase.
Recommendation:
HP "A" -BiOp
Date:
Feb 1, 2001

Comment:

The reviewers assumed that the request to BPA was for $2 million of the total purchase price. This project would provide significant benefits to wildlife.
Recommendation:
Fund: Lower Priority
Date:
Feb 26, 2001

Comment:

Lower Priority

As described in our cover letter, several of these proposals have associated monitoring to determine the status of these properties before actions are implemented. This monitoring does not fall in the Tier 3 category but is extremely worthwhile and NMFS recommends that it be fully funded: 23094 - Acquire Sumwalt prairie land. Actions not planned until assessment of property is complete - no actions to monitor at this time.


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 26, 2001

Comment:


Recommendation:
RPA 150
Date:
Apr 20, 2001

Comment:

Meets "high Priority" project criteria required in the Council's program (ESA screen, not "in lieu", and all planning, permitting in place for 10/01/01 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 criterion 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, and 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: