FY 2000 proposal 20136
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Burns Paiute Mitigation Coordinator |
| Proposal ID | 20136 |
| Organization | Burns Paiute Tribe (BPT) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Haace St. Martin |
| Mailing address | HC 71 - 100 Pasigo St. Burns OR 97720 |
| Phone / email | 5415731533 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 2000 |
| Province / Subbasin | Middle Snake / Malheur |
| Short description | Develop wildife mitigation strategies consisting of selection, scientific analysis, implemention (acquistion, enhancement, etc.), O&M, and evaluation of wildlife Mitigation projects for the Burns Paiute Tribe. |
| 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
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
| 1 |
Stinkingwater salmonid project |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
| 9705900 |
Stinkingwater Salmonid |
Fisheries project sponsored by BPT in the same Watershed (Malheur River Basin). |
| 9107 |
North Fork Malheur Bull Trout Assessment |
Fisheries project that has been added in addition to the Stinkingwater Salmonid assesments (North Fork Malheur Basin). |
| 9705900 |
Securing Wildlife Mitigation Sites - Oregon |
|
| 9106 |
Acquisition Malheur Wildlife site |
|
| 975900 |
Securing Wildlife Mitigation Sites - Oregon |
|
| 5519400 |
Burns Paiute Tribe - Mitigation Coordinator |
|
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
25,527 |
$25,527 |
| Fringe |
6,382 |
$6,382 |
| Supplies |
3,915 |
$3,915 |
| Travel |
4,179 |
$4,179 |
| Indirect |
26.3% of 39,888 |
$10,491 |
| $50,494 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2000 cost | $50,494 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2000 budget request | $50,494 |
| FY 2000 forecast from 1999 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: Delays due to extensive landowner negotiations and slow responsive time from the regulatory agencies regarding issuance of permits for proposed in-stream work. Disagreement on language in MOA between state, Federal and Tribal agencies.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Jun 15, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Fund, fold into the related Burns Paiute Tribe projects, as an administrative/staffing cost. This proposal requests a reasonable coordination position, but, as a separate proposal, it does not allow for a scientific review. The relationship to the other proposals that describe the actions for which this position is responsible must be made clear. There appears to be no reason to separate this from the other proposals. As the ISRP commented last year, funding for administrative functions should be incorporated in the action proposal.
Comments:
The proposal is included under the Oregon Wildlife Mitigation Umbrella. The employment of a coordinator-planner for the Burns Paiute Tribe is probably justified. However, this proposal cannot be evaluated well for scientific criteria, as it does not include the specific acquisition or OM, ME with which the coordinator will be involved. However, the Oregon Mitigation proposal is well formulated as to acquisition and the planner is a reasonable position. It appears that the Malheur acquisition is to be supervised by the planner and that proposal is well justified. Budget detail is good.
Reference is made to projects that have been started but not completed. How do these relate to work being proposed? The proposal has a lot of detail on the total effort to secure wildlife mitigation sites but much less on the role and actions of the mitigation coordinator position, for which funding is requested. The specifics of the Burns Paiute activities are hard to discern except in the table of objectives and tasks. This is probably a reasonable proposal, but the specifics are not explained well.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Not Fundable
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Contained within OWC projects above the line
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000
Comment:
[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting];