FY 2000 proposal 199802200
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 |
|---|---|
| 199802200 Narrative | Narrative |
| 199802200 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Pine Creek Ranch Acquisition |
| Proposal ID | 199802200 |
| Organization | The Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon (CTWSRO) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Terry A. Luther |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box C Warm Springs, OR 97761 |
| Phone / email | 5415533233 / potoole@warm springs.com |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 2000 |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / John Day |
| Short description | Operations and Maintenance, Monitoring and Evaluation of Pine Creek Ranch. |
| Target species | Pine Creek provides spawning and rearing habitat for one of the few remaining native steelhead populations in the lower John Day River basin. Nine of the target wildlife species identified in conjunction with the John Day project are present. |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
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 |
|---|---|
| 1993 | Particpated in creating a list of potential wildlife mitigation projects throughout Oregon. |
| 1997 | Identified Pine Creek Ranch as a potential mitigation site. |
| 1998 | Began landowner negotiations for acquisition in cooperation with Trust for Public Lands and William Smith Properties. |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 9705900 | Securing wildlife mitigation sites - Oregon | Umbrella Project; explains intent for mitigation planning, coordination, and implementation by Oregon wildlife managers within Oregon. Indentifies priority projects with specific budgets that will help meet mitigation objectives. |
| 9565 | Assessing Oregon Trust Agreement Using GAP Analysis | A mitigation planning tool used to analyze and rank potential mitigation projects within the basin. |
| 9284 | Oregon Trust Agreement Planning Project | A mitigation planning tool that includes methods for assembling a trust agreement and a list of potential mitigation projects. |
| 9705907 | Securing wildlife mitigation sites - Oregon, E.E. Wilson WMA Additions | |
| 9705916 | Tualitin River National Wildlife Refuge Additions | |
| 9705915 | Juniper Canyon and Columbia Gorge Wildlife Mitigation Project | |
| 9705913 | Securing wildlife mitigation sites - Oregon, South Fork Crooked River | |
| 9705912 | Securing wildlife mitigation sites - Oregon, Wenaha WMA Additions | |
| 9705911 | Securing wildlife mitigation sites - Oregon, Irrigon WMA Additions | |
| 9705908 | Securing wildlife mitigation sites - Oregon, Multnomah Channel | |
| 9705906 | Securing wildlife mitigation sites - Oregon, McKenzie River Islands | |
| 9705905 | Securing wildlife mitigation sites - Oregon, Ladd Marsh WMA Additions | |
| 9705900 | Securing wildlife mitigation sites - Oregon | |
| 9705909 | Securing wildlife mitigation sites - Oregon, Ruthton Point | |
| 9705910 | Securing wildlife mitigation sites - Oregon, Trout Creek Canyon |
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 | Ranch Manager | $31,000 |
| Fringe | @23% | $7,130 |
| Supplies | range drill, ATV, native plant seed, noxious weed controls, fence supplies, gates, etc. | $15,000 |
| Operating | Buildings, vehicles, equipment | $15,000 |
| Indirect | @41.4 | $28,206 |
| Subcontractor | Helicopter game survey | $2,000 |
| $98,336 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2000 cost | $98,336 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2000 budget request | $98,336 |
| FY 2000 forecast from 1999 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| CTWSRO | field survey and project assistance | $10,000 | unknown |
| OMSI | project assistance | $10,000 | unknown |
| ODFW | field survey assistance | $1,000 | unknown |
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: The possible unwillingness of the landowner to sell the Ranch and funding problems.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
Recommendation: Delay funding until the sponsor provides evidence that the land is purchased. Review the proposal next year paying particular attention for adequacy of baseline fish and wildlife data, objectives, and methods.Comments: The proposal is lacking in detail. Operation and maintenance activities could be better described, and details of other elements -- fencing, type and extent of fencing and evaluation of the most sensitive areas should be expanded.
Specific comments and questions that should also be addressed are: The authors should indicate what riparian improvements are anticipated, and over how large an area. Inadequate details are provided for improving riparian habitat or monitoring and assessment. Objectives and methodology should be address in greater specifics. Rather than to purchase the property outright, greater cost-effectiveness might result if the existing property owner were contracted to repair riparian habitat and adjust management practices.
Comment:
Technically Sound? Yes
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Comment:
Fund pending compliance
Mar 1, 2000
Comment:
[Decision made in 12-7-99 Council Meeting]; Fund pending compliance with ISRP Comments through BPA's Contract ProcessNW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
expense
May 2005
| FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
| $154,722 | $154,722 | $154,722 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website