FY 2001 Ongoing proposal 199401700
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
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Idaho Model Watershed Habitat Project |
| Proposal ID | 199401700 |
| Organization | Lemhi and Custer Soil and Water Conservation Districts (Lemhi SWCD/Custer SWCD) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Katie Slavin |
| Mailing address | 206 Van Dreff, Ste. A Salmon, ID 83467 |
| Phone / email | 2087566322 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | John Folsom |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 Ongoing |
| Province / Subbasin | Mountain Snake / Salmon |
| Short description | To protect, enhance and restore anadromous and resident fish habitat in a sustainable manner that balances resource protection and landuse practices. Emphasis is on holistic watershed assessment &implementation projects that maximize regional benefits. |
| Target species | |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| NMFS/BPA | Action 149 | NMFS | BOR shall initiate programs in three priority subbasins (identified in the Basinwide Recovery Strategy) per year over 5 years, in coordination with NMFS, FWS, the states and others, to address all flow, passage, and screening problems in each subbasin over 10 years. The Corps shall implement demonstration projects to improve habitat in subbasins where water-diversion-related problems could cause take of listed species. Under the NWPPC program, BPA addresses passage, screening, and flow problems, where they are not the responsibility of others. BPA expects to expand on these measures in coordination with the NWPPC process to complement BOR actions described in the action above. |
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|---|
| 1995 | Riparian enhancement fence completed on 1.9 miles of streambank on two ranches in Pahsimeroi to establish riparian vegetative cover, reduce water temperatures and stabilize streambanks. |
| 1996 | Constructed fencing on 3 ranches near Leadore on Lemhi River and implemented grazing/pasture management systems along 5.5 miles of critical stream habitat. |
| 1996 | Constructed riparian enhancement fences on 2 ranches in East Fork along 1.75 miles of river. |
| 1997 | Constructed .75 miles of fence and developed a grazing system for on ranch along Lemhi River. |
| 1997 | Constructed 15 miles of fence on 8.5 miles of the upper Lemhi River along critical chinook spawning and rearing habitat. |
| 1997 | A series of 8 rock barbs were used to stabilize 800 feet of streambank and preserve 200 feet of off-channel rearing habitat along lower Lemhi River. |
| 1997 | Construct .85 miles of fence on lower Lemhi stream reach. |
| 1997 | Construct .75 miles of fence along Pattee Creek, tributary to Lemhi River. |
| 1997 | Riparian pasture management fencing constructed on 3 ranches along 3 miles of Pahsimeroi River. |
| 1997 | Fence constructed on 2.7 miles along 1.2 miles of the East Fork River and 308 acres of pasture and hayland converted to center-pivot irrigation system. |
| 1997 | Constructed .75 miles of fence along Salmon River and constructed 8 bank barbs to stabilize 1,000 feet of streambank. |
| 1997 | Construction of 5 bank barbs to stabilize 500 feet of streambank on Lemhi River. |
| 1997 | Phase I of riparian management project on the East Fork installed with a series of 31 instream bank stabilization structures. |
| 1998 | Built riparian fence along .9 miles of upper Lemhi River and Texas Creek. |
| 1998 | Riparian fence along 1 mile of Eighteenmile Creek, a headwater tributary of the Lemhi River. |
| 1998 | Constructed riparian enhancement fences on East Fork River on 3 ranches along 2.5 miles of streambank. |
| 1998 | Riparian fence and grazing management system along 1 mile of Pahsimeroi River/Patterson Creek. |
| 1999 | Constructed riparian enhancement fences on 3 ranches along 2.5 miles of East Fork River. |
| 1999 | Phase II of streambank stabilization project on East Fork River. Installed a series of 32 instream bank stabilization structures. |
| 1999 | Pipeline and sprinkler systems installed to allow more efficient management of irrigation water on 540 acres and allows approximately 3 cfs of water to reconnect habitat on Canyon Creek, a tributary to the Lemhi River. |
| 1999 | 2,000 feet of streambank on lower Lemhi River stabilized by construction of 4 rock barbs and 5 tree revetments to allow the river access to the floodplain. |
| 1999 | Constructed riparian enhancement fence along 1.2 miles of the upper Lemhi. |
| 1999 | Riparian enhancement fence in progress on 1 mile of Wimpy Creek, a tributary of the Lemhi. |
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 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Subbasin Assessment Interpretation | a. Select proposed sites for detailed restoration/management plans | 1 | $5,000 | Yes |
| 2. Restoration Plan for Specific Sites. Objective include: restore floodplain function, restore geomorphic characteristics of channel, retore physical processes that will result in natural and minimum maintenance channel form. | a. Obtain cross section surveys and floodplain topographic data. b. Understand hydrology & hydraulics c. Characterize existing geomorphic and sediment characteristics d. Project changes under different alternatives e. obtain permits and agency approval | 1 | $370,000 | Yes |
| 3. Assessment of Benefits at Watershed Scale | a. Identify major causes and locations of thermal gains b. Identify major causes and sources of fine sediments or excess sediment delivery c. Quantify expected benefits of channel restoration or other management actions | 1 | $5,000 | |
| 4. Prepare detailed project designs and Periodic Review of Cumulative Effects and Performance of MWP Actions | a. Prepare detailed report for TAC and agency review b. Quantify extent of similar restoration activities required to achieve habitat standards for temperature, substrate, and other habitat conditions. | 1 | $50,000 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2002 | FY 2003 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $435,000 | $440,000 | $430,000 | $435,000 |
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Restore physical processes to sustain natural river channel characteristics and floodplain function for fish habitat. | a. secure conservation easements b. preparation of engineering documents c. implementation of biostabilization projects to reduce unnatural rates of bank erosion or channel scour. d. restoration of riparian vegetation | 1 | $50,000 | Yes |
| 2. Enhancement of anadromous and resident fish habitat | a. enhance habitat features in locations where intervention can be sustained by natural processes or minimum maintenance intervention b. | 1 | $100,000 | Yes |
| 3. Implement BMPs on key slopes adjacent to river corridor. | a. Develop alternative managemnet practices or fence riparian areas and develop grazing plans or conservation easements with private landowners b. Reestablish riparian communities with willow plantings. c. Control stream access by livestock with fencing. | 1 | $50,000 | Yes |
| 4 Stabilize Roads and maintain contiguous water in streams | a. identify, stabilize and obliterate appropriate roads. b. Work with water users to allow natural tributary flows to connect with mainstem creeks and rivers to the maximum extent feasible (including education of the importance of this strategy) | 1 | $200,000 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2002 | FY 2003 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $800,000 | $1,000,000 | $500,000 | $600,000 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Preserve investment in Project | a. Continue to develop adaptive management tools. b. Modify and maintain existing projects as needed, such as fence repair, revegetation, repair stream channel restoration features if necessary. | 1 | $19,500 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2002 | FY 2003 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $20,000 | $20,000 | $15,000 | $20,000 |
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Refine Performance Criteria | a. Review and assess quantitative metrics of project performance for different management actions b. Coordinate with TAC and agencies on adequacy of frequency and spatial density of data | 1 | $3,000 | |
| 2. Collect monitoring data. Objective will include coordination an archiving of data from other agency monitoring programs. | a. Current agency surveys of redds and fish counts will be supplemented as directed by the TAC. b. Fish habitat quality assessment will include available aerial imagery, substrate, temperature, flows and channel surveys. | 1 | $2,000 | |
| 3. Analysis and Interpretation of Data | a. Data will be incorporated in MWP databases b. Standard protocols will be applied to assess trends in habitat quality and fish numbers at different life stages. Consistent measures of geomorphic, biologic and hydrologic conditions will be made. | 1 | $5,000 | |
| 4. Review and recommendations | a. A pre-construction field tour and review of the monitoring report will be organized in March. b. A post flood season and post-construction field tour will be conducted for the TAC other interested parties in October. | 1 | $500 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2002 | FY 2003 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $20,000 | $20,000 | $15,000 | $20,000 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2001 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Indirect | 5% SWCD Overhead | $20,480 |
| NEPA | $20,000 | |
| Subcontractor | Geomorphology, GIS, Archeology | $389,520 |
| Personnel | FTE: Planner 2088 hours x $16/hour 11% of salary witholdings x 2/3 of time | $24,500 |
| Fringe | Benefits@ 2/3 | $2,080 |
| Supplies | Construction materials | $353,312 |
| Travel | Planner travel @ 2/3 | $1,060 |
| Indirect | 5% SWCD Overhead | $19,048 |
| Personnel | FTE: Planner 2088 hours x $16/hour 11% of salary witholdings x 1/3 of time | $12,250 |
| Fringe | @ 1/3 | $1,040 |
| Supplies | $2,300 | |
| Travel | @ 1/3 | $940 |
| Indirect | 5% SWCD Overhead | $670 |
| Subcontractor | $2,300 | |
| Personnel | FTE: Temporary Contract Biologist | $5,000 |
| Supplies | $5,000 | |
| Indirect | 5% SWCD Overhead | $500 |
| $860,000 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $860,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $860,000 |
| FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $400,000 |
| % change from forecast | 115.0% |
Reason for change in estimated budget
Expansion of Model Watershed Project in response to NPPC and ISRP evaluation to address a holistic approach for expanding the MWP boundaries from 3 watersheds to the entire upper Salmon Sub-basin. In response to ISRP's comments, site specific restoration plans give the guidance in restoring physical process for fish habitat restoration.
Reason for change in scope
Expansion of Model Watershed boundaries.
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation
CBFWA Funding Recommendation
Recommendation:
Ongoing Funding: yes; New Funding: yes
Ongoing Funding: yes; New Funding: yes
Date:
Jul 14, 2000
Jul 14, 2000
Comment:
In an effort to take a more holistic approach, the Model Watershed Project, in response to NWPPC and ISRP evaluation, plans to expand the MWP boundaries from three watersheds to the entire Upper Salmon Subbasin. In response to ISRP's comments, site specific restoration plans give the guidance in restoring physical processes for fish migration habitat restoration.The increase in scope is because it's the Model Watershed boundaries have enlarged to include the Salmon Subbasin from headwaters to the mouth of the Middle Fork Salmon River. The increase in budget is due to the use of the most current technology, using aerial surveys with 2-ft contours, to achieve the objectives that were approved for FY 2000 (Section 3, Objective 2 for $370,000). This new work will significantly contribute to the subbasin assessment work being performed to support the subbasin planning efforts expected in the next several years.
This new work should be technically reviewed by CBFWA before funding.
Comment:
Comment:
Comment:
REVIEW:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
Funding category:
expense
expense
Date:
May 2005
May 2005
| FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
| $1,135,632 | $1,135,632 | $1,135,632 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website