FY 2003 Lower Columbia proposal 199205900

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
199205900 Narrative	Narrative
199205900 Sponsor Response to the ISRP	Response
199205900 Powerpoint Presentation	Powerpoint Presentation
Lower Columbia: Willamette Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects	Subbasin Map
Lower Columbia: Willamette Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects	Subbasin Map

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Amazon Basin/Eugene Wetlands Phase Two
Proposal ID	199205900
Organization	The Nature Conservancy (TNC)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Cathy Macdonald
Mailing address	858 Pearl Street Eugene, OR 97401
Phone / email	5416825586 / [email protected]
Manager authorizing this project	Catherine A. Macdonald
Review cycle	Lower Columbia
Province / Subbasin	Lower Columbia / Willamette
Short description	Continue the restoration and enhancement of existing mitigation lands. Habitats being protected or restored include riparian zones of seasonal streams, wet prairie, upland prairie, forested wetland, oak woodland, and dry coniferous forest.
Target species	Beaver, black-capped chickadee, red-tailed hawk, valley quail, western meadowlark, yellow warbler, and western pond turtle

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description
44.13	-123.24	Located in the Willamette Valley ecoregion, situated at the margin of the valley floor on the western edge of Eugene. The site is in the Willow Creek watershed. Willow Creek is a tributary of Amazon Creek and the Long Tom River.

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Year	Accomplishment
1995	Acquired conservation easement over 330 acres of habitat.
1995	Completed the Willow Creek wildlife management plan and Environmental Assessment proposing restoration and enhancement actions and wildlife mitigation credits that would be produced.
1996	Implementation of restoration and enhancement actions proposed in management plan.
1997	Implementation of restoration and enhancement actions proposed in management plan.
1998	Implementation of restoration and enhancement actions proposed in management plan.
1999	Implementation of restoration and enhancement actions proposed in management plan.
2000	Implementation of restoration and enhancement actions proposed in management plan.
2001	Implementation of restoration and enhancement actions proposed in management plan.
2001	Acquired additional 99 acres adjacent to Willow Creek Wildlife Mitigation Project.
2001	Completed baseline Habitat Evaluation on new tracts (99 acres).
2001	Performed follow-up Habitat Evaluation on 330 acres.

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
9206800	Implementation of Willamette Basin Mitigation Program - Wildlife	Umbrella project
9705900	Securing Wildlife Mitigation sites - Oregon	Umbrella project

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
Perform management planning, NEPA documentation, and habitat evaluation to guide acquisition and management of new land acquisitions.	2004	2007	$41,900

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006	FY 2007
$10,000	$10,300	$10,600	$11,000

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
Acquire adjacent habitat to expand wildlife credits and improve overall viability of the site for wildlife use.	2004	2007	$1,000,000

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006	FY 2007
$250,000	$250,000	$250,000	$250,000

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
1. Implement wildlife habitat management activities as outlined in the Willow Creek management plan to maintain a baseline of 575 habitat units and provide additional habitat units through restoration and enhancement of wildlife habitats.	a. Continue non-native vegetation control efforts; reduce or eliminate the top 10 problem non-native plant species from the site.	through FY05	$14,500	Yes
	b. Reduce adult bullfrog levels by 50% from pre-control levels	through FY05	$1,500	Yes
	c. Enhance three acres of oak woodland by reducing trunk density and removing non-native understory vegetation.	through FY05	$5,000	Yes
	d. Restore eight acres of invaded wet prairie to wet prairie and ash savanna habitats.	through FY05	$13,500	Yes
	e. Restore native grasses and forbs to establish one acre of native upland prairie on former agricultural land.	through FY05	$5,700	Yes
	f. Install and maintain "soft" erosion and stream restoration methods to prevent erosion and restore original stream channels.	through FY05	$1,000	Yes
	g. Remove unnecessary interior fencing, and repair boundary fencing as necessary.	through FY05	$2,000	Yes

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Implement wildlife habitat management activities as outlined in the Willow Creek management plan to maintain a baseline of 575 habitat units and provide additional habitat units through restoration and enhancement of wildlife habitats.	2004	2007	$186,100

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006	FY 2007
$44,500	$45,800	$47,200	$48,600

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
1. Monitor and evaluate invasive and non-native species control activities.	a. Monitor permanent vegetation plots and permanent photo plots on an annual basis.	through FY05	$9,500
2. Monitor hydrology and water quality conditions to compare with baseline conditions regarding stream flows and water quality inputs to the Willow Creek site.	a. Continue to monitor stream hydrology and water quality conditions with automated equipment and manually.	through FY05	$1,600
	b. Continue precipitation monitoring.	through FY05	$300	Yes
	c. Continue turbidity monitoring.	through FY05	$400	Yes
	d. Continue groundwater well monitoring	through FY05	$500	Yes
3. Monitor selected target wildlife species to document wildlife use and promote an adaptive management approach to habitat restoration.	a. Monitor response of selected wildlife species to prescribed burning and other management actions.	through FY05	$1,600	Yes
4. Improve defensibility of the site to reduce unauthorized use and associated impacts.	a. Continue volunteer defensibility monitoring.	through FY05	$400
	b. Monitor fences and signage and maintain or repair as necessary.	through FY05	$750
5. Prepare quarterly and annual reports to document methods and results of habitat management.	a. Prepare and submit quarterly and annual reports.	through FY05	$2,400

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Monitor and evaluate invasive and non-native species control activities.	2004	2007	$40,925
2. Monitor hydrology and water quality conditions to compare with baseline conditions regarding stream flows and water quality inputs to the Willow Creek site.	2004	2007	$12,062
3. Monitor selected target wildlife species to document wildlife use and promote an adaptive management approach to habitat restoration.	2004	2007	$6,893
4. Improve defensibility of the site to reduce unauthorized use and associated impacts.	2004	2007	$4,931
5. Prepare quarterly and annual reports to document methods and results of habitat management.	2004	2007	$10,339

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006	FY 2007
$18,000	$18,500	$19,000	$19,650

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Item	Note	FY 2003 cost
Personnel	FTE: 0.77	$19,703
Fringe		$7,290
Supplies		$5,086
Travel		$800
Indirect		$7,831
Subcontractor		$19,940
		$60,650

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2003 cost	$60,650
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2003 budget request	$60,650
FY 2003 forecast from 2002	$60,650
% change from forecast	0.0%

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind
Oregon Youth Conservation Corps	Youth work crews	$6,000	cash

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. This proposal is to continue enhancement of wildlife and aquatic habitat in the Willow Creek Natural Area. This 429 acre tract is part of a larger protected area totaling 1200 acres. The proposal asks for funds to manage and restore habitats on a 99 acre parcel acquired in 2001 and to continue restoration on the remaining (earlier acquired) 330 acres.

The management goal is to maximize wildlife and biodiversity values on the site. The objectives address this overall goal but in a very general way. The response should present objectives that are more specific and measurable. The tasks, however, do contain measurable targets and specific methods.

Results of part restoration actions are briefly summarized. A more evaluative presentation of results assessing successes and failures would be more informative and should be presented. Reports documenting results are cited, but summaries of information contained in these reports should be included in the proposal. The presentation included graphs of results.

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
High Priority

Date:
May 17, 2002

Comment:

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 2002-11)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Jun 7, 2002

Comment:

Fundable. The response addressed the ISRP comments and indicates a reasonable level of monitoring and local involvement. This proposal is to continue enhancement of wildlife and aquatic habitat in the Willow Creek Natural Area. This 429-acre tract is part of a larger protected area totaling 1200 acres. The proposal asks for funds to manage and restore habitats on a 99-acre parcel acquired in 2001 and to continue restoration on the remaining (earlier acquired) 330 acres.

The management goal is to maximize wildlife and biodiversity values on the site. The response presents objectives rewritten to be measurable and removes former redundancy. Evaluation of the results of past actions is presented by objective and task.

The links to the hydrosystem and mitigation are not well demonstrated. The priority of this effort should be further analyzed as to benefits to fish and wildlife. Our recommendation does not support CBFWA's High Priority ranking.

REVIEW:
NMFS Review

Recommendation:

Date:
Jul 19, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Potential for indirect WQ watershed enhancement

Comments
Downstream barriers Amazon Creek/Long Tom River w/ limited potential direct benefit yet good headwater scenario for downstream properly functioning conditions.

Already ESA Req? No

Biop? No

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
A w/conditions

Date:
Jul 23, 2002

Comment:

Recommend funding of O&M and M&E portion of the project for preservation of existing investment as a wildlife mitigation project. However, consistent with ISRP comments, new acquisitions would be enhanced by a review of the effectiveness of these types of projects to mitigate for the FDCRPS wildlife responsibilities in the Willamette basin. Any new acquisitions must insure that appropriate habitat types and species are targeted. We recommend a thorough review of the overall strategy for wildlife mitigation in the Willamette Basin. We intend to work with the project sponsors and the Council to investigate alternatives for achieving wildlife mitigation that may be more cost effective than current land acquisitions.

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Oct 30, 2002

Comment:

Willamette Issue 1: Wildlife Habitat Project Funding, Burlington Bottoms Wildlife Mitigation Project (Project 199107800), Amazon Basin/Eugene Wetlands Phase Two (Project 199205900), Implement Willamette Basin Mitigation Program (Project 199206800) and Protect and Enhance Tualatin River NWF Additions (Project 200001600)

Council Recommendation: The suite of wildlife projects proposed in the Willamette generates the same set of issues and the Council treats them as a group for recommendation purposes. Historically, most Fish and Wildlife Program funding in the Willamette Subbasin has involved mitigation for the construction and inundation losses associated with the series of federal projects on the Willamette system. These projects have primarily been the method of addressing those construction and inundation losses in the Willamette, although some funding for Willamette losses has also come from the Oregon wildlife umbrella project (199705900) covered in the Mainstem/Systemwide review.

All four projects identified above include funding requests for operations and maintenance, monitoring and evaluation and for habitat enhancement activities. Amazon Basin, the Willamette Mitigation and the Tualatin River NWF contain requests for habitat purchases associated with the expansion of the mitigation area (Tualatin and Amazon Basin) or with continued purchase of biologically significant parcels (Willamette). The Willamette project also includes a new objective - the cost share portion of a Corps of Engineers study for floodplain restoration study for the Coast and Middle Forks of the Willamette. Corps funds would come from their General Investigations program and the request for the Willamette project would provide the non- federal cost share for that feasibility study.

The Independent Scientific Review Panel rated all four projects as "Fundable", although they questioned the priority of all four projects. The Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority rated these projects as a High Priority. NOAA Fisheries comments indicated that although the projects may have some incidental benefits to fish populations, none of the projects implement a Biological Opinion RPA (the FCRPS Biological Opinion does not apply to Willamette stocks). Bonneville had fairly consistent comments on all four projects. BPA supported ongoing Operations and Maintenance and Monitoring and Evaluation funding to preserve past investments as wildlife mitigation. They generally did not support expansion of the projects through habitat purchase. However, Bonneville did indicate that the Willamette project and Amazon Basin could target new acquisitions after "a thorough review of the overall strategy for wildlife mitigation in the Willamette Basin. We [BPA] intend to work with the project sponsors and the Council to investigate alternatives for achieving wildlife mitigation that may be more cost effective than current land acquisitions."

The Council supports the general approach of reducing the current scope of land acquisition in the Willamette Basin. These projects have received ISRP and manager support and merit continued operations and maintenance and monitoring funding to preserve the past investments of the Fish and Wildlife Program. There is apparently no dispute that unmitigated construction and inundation credits remain in the Willamette. Also not in dispute is the crediting ratio for enhancement activities on wildlife mitigation projects, which provide Bonneville with habitat credits at a one-to-one ratio. Thus, the Council recommends funding the aspects of these projects that support habitat enhancement objectives.

The Council believes that given the need to address the Endangered Species Act, particularly as it relates to the Reasonable and Prudent Actions applicable to the Estuary and Lower Columbia mainstem, and to chum salmon recovery (see Lower Columbia and Estuary General Issue 2), will require some temporary change of emphasis to the Fish and Wildlife Program in the Lower Columbia. Therefore, the Council recommends placing a hold on land acquisitions for these projects and reprogramming those funds to address the ESA considerations in these provinces, with one exception.

The Council recommends continued support for at least some acquisition strategy for the overall Willamette Mitigation project 199206800, although we would recommend reducing the scope of habitat acquisition funding by two-thirds of the proposed budget for that task. Per Bonneville's comments, the Council supports a review of the overall strategy of wildlife mitigation in the Willamette. The Council encourages an expedited review of the Willamette mitigation strategy, but believes that acquisitions to address the Bonneville mitigation responsibility should continue, albeit at the recommended reduced scale. The project had a base budget in Fiscal Year 2002 of $2.7 million. The CBFWA proposed amount for Fiscal Year 2003 was $1,567,500 and the Council proposed budget is $938,500.

In Fiscal Year 2003, the Tualatin project (200001600) had a CBFWA proposed budget of $256,000. By removing the acquisition funding, the Council revised budget recommendation is $91,000 for Fiscal Year 2003. Amazon Basin (199205900) had its acquisition funding placed in years two and three of the funding cycle. Under the Council revision, the project's budget decreased to $62,712 in Fiscal Year 2004 from the CBFWA proposed $322,500.

To leverage other funding sources (see Lower Columbia and Estuary General Issue 4), the Council recommends funding the new floodplain restoration study task of project 199206800. The Corps will fund fifty percent of the study costs and will then fund up to 65 percent of implementation costs for projects developed from the study. As the Corps notes in their comments on the project, "[T]he Corps cannot conduct the feasibility study or implement projects without a local match." (Letter of June 21 from Davis Moriuchi, Deputy District Engineer for Project Management.) Similar to leveraging funding opportunities in the Estuary (Columbia Estuary Issue 2), the Council believes that funding this task will help leverage other federal funds and the study results could provide direction for mitigation activities in the Willamette.

All funds for these projects would come from the base funding allocation for the Lower Columbia and Estuary Provinces.

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Decision

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Apr 30, 2003

Comment:

Fund as Recommended

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

Are spending without a contract, but APR 1 to March 1 schedule, new contract is not executed yet, but still operating under the old contract. Modified accrual estimate to 84903, 02 accrual captured in this. Some of the expenses have carried between fiscal years. Approved acquisition in 2001, proposed to sell 394K of property, appraised at 584K. Interest costs make them out 400K. Budget would have to increase to handle new lands. 74150 for O&M, 450360 for land. If project acquisition not funded, then numbers for 04 and 05 would be correct. Could go on the list of projects that could move forward this year.

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

REVIEW:
Project Sponsor Request for FY04-05

Recommendation:

Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

REVIEW:
Project Sponsor Request for FY04-05

Recommendation:

Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

REVIEW:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review

Funding category:
expense

Date:
May 2005

FY05 NPCC start of year:	FY06 NPCC staff preliminary:	FY06 NPCC July draft start of year:
$62,712	$62,712	$62,712

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website