FY 2002 Mountain Columbia proposal 200204400
Contents
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 |
|---|---|
| 24023 Narrative | Narrative |
| Mountain Columbia: Kootenai Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
| Mountain Columbia: Kootenai Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Purchase Conservation Easement from Plum Creek Timber Company (PCT) along Fisher River |
| Proposal ID | 200204400 |
| Organization | Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Brian Marotz |
| Mailing address | 490 North Meridian Road Kalispell, MT 59901 |
| Phone / email | 4067514546 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | Brian Marotz |
| Review cycle | Mountain Columbia |
| Province / Subbasin | Mountain Columbia / Kootenai |
| Short description | Purchase perpetual conservation easement on 56,400 acres (163 stream miles) of PCT lands along the Fisher River to preclude subdivision/development; protect fish habitat, maintain public recreational opportunities, and insure responsible management. |
| Target species | bull trout, interior red-band rainbow trout, westslope cutthroat trout, burbot, other native fish, mule deer, elk, white-tailed deer, moose, black bear and riparian associated species. |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 48.22 | -115.28 | Fisher 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 |
|---|---|
| 1998 | Fisheries conservation easements included in Libby Fisheries Mitigation Plan, but none completed to date. |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 20517 | Libby Mitigation Program | Umbrella Program that includes all Libby Fisheries Mitigation Projects |
| 9608702 | MFWP - Focus Watershed Coordination-Kootenai Drainage | The umbrella projects of Libby Fisheries Mitigation is the mechanism by which local watershed plans developed by the FWC are funded and implemented. FWC provides technical support and faciltiates public input into mitigation program |
| 8806500 | IDFG-Kootenai River Fisheries Investigations | White Sturgeon Recovery |
| 8806400 | KTOI - White Sturgeon Experimental Aquaculture | White Sturgeon Recovery |
| 9404900 | Kootenai River Ecosystem Improvement Study | Ecosystem Function |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All planning has been completed with funding from the Montana Wildlife Mitigation Trust Fund and the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. | a. Appraisal | $0 | ||
| Conservation Easement Document | $0 | |||
| Environmental Assessment | $0 | |||
| Socioeconomic Analysis | $0 | |||
| Mineral Remoteness Determination | $0 | |||
| Necessary State Approvals | $0 |
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 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Purchase conservation easement | a. Finalize legal documents, | 3 | $500,000 | |
| b. Sign and record final agreement | $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Purchase conservation easement | 2003 | 2004 | $1,000,000 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
|---|---|
| $500,000 | $500,000 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monitor compliance and biological effectiveness of final agreement using money from MFWP and Mitigation Trust Fund. | a. Complete baseline inventory & reports | ongoing | $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 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 2002 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Capital | Purchase conservation easement for average cost of $231.06/acres | $500,000 |
| $500,000 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $500,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $500,000 |
| FY 2002 forecast from 2001 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| MFWP | Planning | $86,400 | cash |
| Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation | Planning | $24,000 | cash |
| Plum Creek Timber Company | Donated conservation easement value | $640,000 | cash |
| MFWP | Acquisition | $2,722,888 | cash |
| USFS Forest Legacy Program | Acquisition | $8,168,662 | cash |
Other budget explanation
All planning was completed for this project during FY 2000 and 2001 and paid for with money from MFWP, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and 9608702. This acquisition will be phased in over the next 3-4 years as funding is made available from all the funding partners.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Fundable - no response required
Feb 9, 2001
Comment:
Fundable, but benefits to fish and wildlife might be better assured with a more restrictive conservation easement. This is a proposal for partial funding (about 5 percent of the total cost) of purchase of a conservation easement for Plum Creek Timber Lands in the Fisher River watershed (a tributary of the Kootenai River below Libby Dam), primarily the bottomlands. Limiting development of the area will help establish refuges for wild stocks and prevent further habitat degradation. It will also provide a touchstone or reference point for habitat restoration efforts within the basin. Although this is a new proposal, it has been proposed and favorably reviewed for the past two years but not funded. The acquisition of a conservation easement for this huge block of land, in addition to the planned acquisition of the Thompson River project, "will result in completion of most, and possibly all, of the wildlife mitigation goals for both Libby and Hungry Horse dams." The current proposal has a reduced BPA commitment and greater commitment by other funding sources than the original proposal two years ago (now heavily supported by the state of Montana). The negotiated easement includes establishment of baseline forestry practices (not restoration projects), restriction of residential development, and preservation of recreation. The project would offer benefit to both fish and wildlife. Plum Creek would apply an existing Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) to these lands and is stated to have monitoring in place. The proposal is straightforward and succinct. The significance is illustrated by an array of relevant regional plans and other BPA-funded projects. The acquisition is related to other non-BPA projects. Conventional tasks and methods do not apply, although the narrative outlines the acquisition process.The ISRP offers the comments below for consideration by the sponsors:
* Success of this proposal seems to depend on things that have not proven dependable in the past. It needs the continuing support of the landowner (present and future), protection from politicians, adherence to water allocation guides during low flow periods and years, and adherence to what is referred to here as "reasonable" forest management practices. Can the required agreements be written so that they are enforceable, will exist in perpetuity, and even though the language says that the agreement can be changed by mutual consent, permit only trivial changes?
* Many of headwater areas are outside the area to be "protected." Is there any assurance that they will be protected from disruption?
Comment:
Monitoring for this project is to assure compliance with the conservations easements. Biological monitoring will be provided by MDFWP through the wildlife mitigation trust fund and through the Libby Dam mitigation project. There is some concern among a few of the reviewers that this may not be an appropriate use of Fish and Wildlife Program funding.Comment:
Fundable, but benefits to fish and wildlife might be better assured with a more restrictive conservation easement. This is a proposal for partial funding (about 5 percent of the total cost) of purchase of a conservation easement for Plum Creek Timber Lands in the Fisher River watershed (a tributary of the Kootenai River below Libby Dam), primarily the bottomlands. Limiting development of the area will help establish refuges for wild stocks and prevent further habitat degradation. It will also provide a touchstone or reference point for habitat restoration efforts within the basin. Although this is a new proposal, it has been proposed and favorably reviewed for the past two years but not funded. The acquisition of a conservation easement for this huge block of land, in addition to the planned acquisition of the Thompson River project, "will result in completion of most, and possibly all, of the wildlife mitigation goals for both Libby and Hungry Horse dams." The current proposal has a reduced BPA commitment and greater commitment by other funding sources than the original proposal two years ago (now heavily supported by the state of Montana). The negotiated easement includes establishment of baseline forestry practices (not restoration projects), restriction of residential development, and preservation of recreation. The project would offer benefit to both fish and wildlife. Plum Creek would apply an existing Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) to these lands and is stated to have monitoring in place. The proposal is straightforward and succinct. The significance is illustrated by an array of relevant regional plans and other BPA-funded projects. The acquisition is related to other non-BPA projects. Conventional tasks and methods do not apply, although the narrative outlines the acquisition process.The ISRP offers the comments below for consideration by the sponsors:
? Success of this proposal seems to depend on things that have not proven dependable in the past. It needs the continuing support of the landowner (present and future), protection from politicians, adherence to water allocation guides during low flow periods and years, and adherence to what is referred to here as "reasonable" forest management practices. Can the required agreements be written so that they are enforceable, will exist in perpetuity, and even though the language says that the agreement can be changed by mutual consent, permit only trivial changes?
? Many of headwater areas are outside the area to be "protected." Is there any assurance that they will be protected from disruption?
Comment:
This project should be reconsidered for funding after subbasin planning is completed as discussed in our cover letter. We have no comments in addition to the ISRP/CBFWA review comments.Comment:
Comment:
Funding will be provided on a yearly basis, and only after project deliverables are verified. Bonneville will require assurances that prescribed land and water management activities (such as meeting water allocations in all years and flow conditions, and adherence to prescribed forest management practices) can be adequately enforced.Comment:
Combine all years into 2004 - CAPITAL - Lands issue. MOA pending.Comment:
This project had been approved for several years, but had not been funded by BPA yet. Negotiations are ongoing to receive the first $ 1 million this year, If so, only $500,000 would remain. If however we only receive $ 1 Million in 2004, then $500,000 would