Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | Little Naches Streambank Restoration |
Proposal ID | 9065 |
Organization | U.S. Forest Service, Wenatchee National Forest, Naches Ranger District (USFS) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
Name | Scott Hoefer |
Mailing address | 10061 Hwy. 12 Naches, WA 98937 |
Phone / email | 5096532205 / shoefer/[email protected] |
Manager authorizing this project | |
Review cycle | FY 1999 |
Province / Subbasin | Lower Mid-Columbia / Yakima |
Short description | Restore degraded streambanks of the Little Naches River using bioengineering techniques. |
Target species | |
Project location
Latitude | Longitude | Description |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 cost | Subcontractor |
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 1999 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 1999 cost |
Personnel |
|
$3,040 |
Fringe |
|
$2,000 |
Subcontractor |
|
$19,200 |
| $24,240 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 1999 cost | $24,240 |
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
Total FY 1999 budget request | $24,240 |
FY 1999 forecast from 1998 | $0 |
% change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: The streambank stabilization structures using live cuttings need to be implemented immediately after the snowpack melts off while the cuttings are still dormant. If there is a heavy snowpack, the project may not be able to be started until May, instead of March or April.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Pass (Fundable)
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Recommendation:
Fund (low priority)
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
In-lieu funding issue. Proposed tasks appear to be "in lieu of other expenditures authorized or required from other entities under other agreements or provisions of law". (Section 4.(h)(10)(A) of PNW Power Act).
Recommendation:
Adequate
Date:
Jun 18, 1998
Comment:
This is a brief, straightforward proposal that includes clear objectives and links to another project. The proposal needs more detail on monitoring and evaluation. The proposal explained its objective to fix the stream banks but did not adequately explain the fishery benefits in the context of the local populations. The proposal briefly mentioned a watershed analysis but did not detail the prescriptions gleaned from it. Photo-points and snorkeling are not going to be enough monitoring to determine whether there have been fishery benefits. The proposal should provide more information on life histories and on fish use in the reach and in downstream and upstream reaches. It should be linked to 9158.