FY07-09 proposal 200707200

Jump to Reviews and Recommendations

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleFlathead Subbasin Flowering Rush and Yellowflag Iris Project
Proposal ID200707200
OrganizationSalish Kootenai College/University of Montana
Short descriptionThis research, demonstration, and education project on the environmenal impacts of flowering rush and yellowflag iris on wetland and aquatic habitats will help determine the biological potential and identify the future impact and test control measures.
Information transferResults from research on biological potential and control methods on flowering rush and yellowflag iris will be made available through mailings, conference presentations, and educational sections for higher education on invasive plant species and general public education strategy will be identified.
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Contacts
ContactOrganizationEmail
Form submitter
Virgil Dupuis Salish Kootenai College virgil_dupuis@skc.edu
All assigned contacts

Section 2. Locations

Province / subbasin: Mountain Columbia / Flathead

LatitudeLongitudeWaterbodyDescription
[none] East bay of Flathead Lake

Section 3. Focal species

primary: Bull Trout
secondary: Westslope Cutthroat

Section 4. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishments

Section 5. Relationships to other projects

Funding sourceRelated IDRelated titleRelationship
BPA 199502500 Flathead River Instream Flow Flathead Subbasin flowering rush and yellowflag iris project will coordinate closely with Barry Hansen, Tribal Fisheries throughout the project. Barry will conduct the macroinvetebrate study in conjunction with the research. Barry will provide biological input and represent Tribal interest during the project.
BPA 199608701 Montana Focus Watershed Coordi The Flathead Subbasin flowering rush and yellowflag iris project will coordinate with Lynn Ducharme and the Montana Focus watershed group. We will priovide educational opportunities, project updates, and respond to Focus issues.

Section 6. Biological objectives

Biological objectivesFull descriptionAssociated subbasin planStrategy
Lakes Shoreline Condition Restore lake shoreline conditions to a level equivalent to the shoreline condition habitat restoration score of reference lakes. Flathead 1. Protect critical lake wetland and riparian habitats Identify and rank all high priority areas 2 Work with the Focus Watershed Coordination project to identify site specific lake wetland riparian restoration projects to coordinate with landowners,
Regulated Mainstem Fine Sediment Reduce the delivery of fine sediment in the mainstem to a level that supports sustainable population levels of focal species that function naturally and may be capable of supporting appropriate forms of human use. Flathead 1. Implement riparian revegetation/rehabilitation projects.
Regulated Mainstem Habitat Diversity Restore the habitat diversity of the mainstem to a level that supports sustainable population levels of focal species that function naturally and may be capable of supporting appropriate forms of human use. Flathead 1. Restore recruitment of large woody debris, pool development, or other appropriate stream components to benefit native fish 2. Coordinate projects through the Focus Watershed Program to work collaboratively with landowners, agencies and other fundin
Regulated Mainstem Riparian Condition Improve riparian condition of the mainstem to a level that supports sustainable population levels of focal species that function naturally and may be capable of supporting appropriate forms of human use. Flathead 1. Consolidated riparian and wetland habitat map for the regulated mainstem of the Flathead River 2. Identify losses in biological functions and performance. 3. Develop riparian and wetland habitat protection, rehabilitation, and enhancement plan.
Reservoirs Habitat Diversity Improve the habitat diversity of Flathead Lake to a level equivalent to the habitat diversity habitat restoration score in LWHAQ for reference lakes. Flathead Increase or improve in-lake habitat by restoring appropriate components and by placing artificial and natural habitat structures where investigation indicates such actions are likely to benefit native fish.
Reservoirs Shoireline Condition Improve the shoreline condition of Flathead Lake to a level equivalent to the shoreline condition habitat restoration score in LQHA for reference lakes Flathead ·1. Initiate and develop noxious weed management strategies with International entities
Riparian /Wetland Prevent establishment of new non-native species in all subunits when they are identified treat an average of 10% of acres over the next 10 to 15 years in those subunits for which the non native vegetation index in the TBA spreadsheet tool exceeds a value of five consistent with management and mitigation plans. Flathead 1 & 2. .Address human and livestock impacts to riparian habitats with adaptive management 3. Coordinate effort with all natural resource mangers to develop comprehensive noxious weed management plans Coordinate subbasin noxious weed activities
Tributaries Channel Stability Improve channel stability to a level equivalent to the channel stability habitat restoration score of reference streams. Flathead 1. Improve stream habitat 2. Restore stream channels 3.Coordinate projects through the Focus Watershed Program to assist with identifying projects and to coordinate with landowners, agencies, and other funding sources.
Tributaries Habitat Diversity Improve habitat diversity to a level equivalent to the habitat diversity habitat restoration score of reference streams. Flathead 1. Restoring recruitment of large woody debris, pool development to benefit native fish. 2 Enhance/protect habitat diversity. Provide long-term channel stability through purchase, conservation easements, landowner incentives, management plans, and ot
Tributaries Protection of Class 1 Waters Protect and maintain prime, functioning tributary habitat (identified as class 1 in QHA analysis) Flathead 1. Periodically evaluate and update habitat condition. Implement actions necessary to maintain Class 1 status. 2. Work with the Focus Watershed Coordination project to assist with coordinating with landowners, agencies, and other funding sources to fa
Tributaries Riparian Condition Restore riparian habitats to a level equivalent to the riparian condition habitat restoration score of reference streams Flathead Identify impaired stream channel and riparian areas and implement tasks to restore their appropriate functions. Ø Conduct watershed problem assessments. Identify site-specific threats (problem assessment) that may be limiting focal species in watershed

Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)

Work element nameWork element titleDescriptionStart dateEnd dateEst budget
Develop RM&E Methods and Designs Flowering rush and yellow iris biology, control and biologic potential reserach We propose to investigate the following aspects of flowering rush invasion in the Flathead sub-basin: 1) genetic ploidy, 2) genetic variation, 3) impact on native organisms, 4) control methodology, and 5) impact of control methods on native species. We propose to investigate the following aspects of yellowflag iris invasion in the Flathead sub-basin: 1) impact on native organisms, 2) control methodology, and 3) impact of control methods on natives. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $677,778
Biological objectives
Lakes Shoreline Condition
Regulated Mainstem Fine Sediment
Regulated Mainstem Habitat Diversity
Regulated Mainstem Riparian Condition
Reservoirs Habitat Diversity
Reservoirs Shoireline Condition
Riparian /Wetland
Tributaries Channel Stability
Tributaries Habitat Diversity
Tributaries Protection of Class 1 Waters
Tributaries Riparian Condition
Metrics
Develop RM&E Methods and Designs Flowering rush and yellow iris inventory, spatial model, demonstration, and survey Conduct an accurate inventory of the south end of Flathead Lake, lower Flathead River, tributaries and wetlands for flowering rush and yellowflag iris for those waters on the Flathead Reservation. Inventory data will be utilized to develop a spatial model to predict the potential spread. A general inventory will be conducted by survey in other regions of the Columbia Basin. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $237,580
Biological objectives
Lakes Shoreline Condition
Regulated Mainstem Fine Sediment
Regulated Mainstem Habitat Diversity
Regulated Mainstem Riparian Condition
Reservoirs Habitat Diversity
Reservoirs Shoireline Condition
Riparian /Wetland
Tributaries Channel Stability
Tributaries Habitat Diversity
Tributaries Protection of Class 1 Waters
Tributaries Riparian Condition
Metrics

Section 8. Budgets

Itemized estimated budget
ItemNoteFY07FY08FY09
Personnel SKC, Virgil Dupuis $13,000 $13,000 $13,000
Personnel SKC, Alvin Mitchell $5,760 $5,760 $5,760
Personnel SKC, 3 Student Internships $19,200 $19,200 $19,200
Personnel UofM, Peter Rice $20,500 $20,500 $20,501
Personnel Uof M, Ray Callaway $9,138 $9,138 $9,138
Personnel UofM, Post Doc W. Ridenour $37,832 $37,832 $37,832
Personnel Uof M. 4 Temp Techs(RAII) $22,028 $22,028 $22,028
Personnel UofM, Student Aide AY $3,217 $3,217 $3,218
Personnel UofM, Computer GRA (AY) $10,791 $10,791 $10,790
Personnel UofM, Computer GRA (Summer) $3,616 $3,616 $3,616
Fringe Benefits SKC, Virgil Dupuis $3,270 $3,270 $3,270
Fringe Benefits SKC, Alvin Mitchell $1,440 $1,440 $1,440
Fringe Benefits SKC, 3 Student Internships $1,920 $1,920 $1,920
Fringe Benefits UofM, Peter Rice $8,313 $8,313 $8,313
Fringe Benefits Uof M, Ray Callaway $2,079 $2,079 $2,079
Fringe Benefits UofM, Post Doc W. Ridenour $19,016 $19,016 $19,016
Fringe Benefits UofM Temp Techs $3,192 $3,192 $3,192
Fringe Benefits UofM, Student Aide AY $32 $32 $33
Fringe Benefits UofM, Computer GRA (AY) $108 $108 $108
Fringe Benefits UofM, Computer GRA (Summer) $361 $361 $361
Other UofM Contracted Services (Genetics Lab) $15,000 $0 $0
Supplies SKC, Copy $300 $300 $300
Supplies SKC, Computer $1,000 $1,000 $1,000
Supplies SKC, Sampling Supplies $500 $500 $500
Supplies SKC, Boat Supplies $1,000 $1,000 $1,000
Supplies UofM Copy $100 $100 $100
Supplies UofM Computer $200 $200 $200
Supplies UofM Greenhouse Supplies $333 $334 $333
Supplies UofM, Commincations $1,080 $0 $0
Supplies UofM, Sprayer Parts $1,200 $0 $0
Travel SKC Local Vehicle $2,000 $2,000 $2,000
Travel SKC, Boat Fuel & Maintenance $4,000 $4,000 $4,000
Capital Equipment SKC, Argo wTrack $20,000 $0 $0
Capital Equipment SKC, Outboard Mud Motor $4,000 $0 $0
Travel UofM Local Vehicle $6,209 $6,208 $6,208
Travel UofM, Lodging $5,778 $5,778 $5,778
Other UofM Publication Costs $200 $200 $200
Overhead SKC Indirect 29% $17,804 $17,803 $17,803
Overhead UofM Indirect 41.378% $66,123 $66,122 $66,123
Other UofM Commuinications (Cell Phone) $600 $600 $600
Supplies UofM Sampling Supplies $400 $400 $400
Totals $332,640 $291,358 $291,360
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
Total itemized budget: $915,358
Total work element budget: $915,358
Cost sharing
Funding source/orgItem or service providedFY 07 est value ($)FY 08 est value ($)FY 09 est value ($)Cash or in-kind?Status
Totals $0 $0 $0

Section 9. Project future

FY 2010 estimated budget: $0
FY 2011 estimated budget: $0
Comments: [Outyear comment field left blank]

Future O&M costs: Implementation of control projects may evolve from this initial research and education effort. Part of our study is to determine costs, environmental issues, and public sentiment associated with invasive plant species.

Termination date: 2009
Comments: If funded, we ideally require additional time at the end of three field seasons to complete analysis and publish the results.

Final deliverables: Assessment of the impacts of flowering rush and yellowflag iris on aquatic and wetland habitats and native plant communities Assessment of various control methods and management strategies. Spatial model to predict infestation for management. Adaptive restoration demonstrations implementing control strategies and native shrub plantings.

Section 10. Narrative and other documents


Reviews and recommendations

FY07 budget FY08 budget FY09 budget Total budget Type Category Recommendation
NPCC FINAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Oct 23, 2006) [full Council recs]
$0 $0 $0 $0 Expense ProvinceExpense Do Not Fund
NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs]
$0 $0 $0 $0 ProvinceExpense

ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)

Recommendation: Not fundable

NPCC comments: This proposal is well written, technically sound, and thoughtfully constructed but the benefits to fish and wildlife are not sufficiently demonstrated. This proposal does not make a strong case that this is a problem outside of the Flathead Subbasin (perhaps they are a problem in the Flathead). The sponsors describe a case in the St. Lawrence where the rush exploded and subsequently died back. However, without evidence to the contrary this seems to be a regional problem. Neither plant species seems to gather more than passing mention, if that, in other subbasin plans. The iris has been present for many years in other basin provinces (Hells Canyon Dam complex in Idaho, for example), and has not become dominant. Discussion of the plant species with which the iris and rush interact, and the extent to which the iris and rush impact other plants and an ecosystem would be useful.


ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)

Recommendation: Not fundable

NPCC comments: This proposal is well written, technically sound, and thoughtfully constructed but the benefits to fish and wildlife are not sufficiently demonstrated. This proposal does not make a strong case that this is a problem outside of the Flathead Subbasin (perhaps they are a problem in the Flathead). The sponsors describe a case in the St. Lawrence where the rush exploded and subsequently died back. However, without evidence to the contrary this seems to be a regional problem. Neither plant species seems to gather more than passing mention, if that, in other subbasin plans. The iris has been present for many years in other basin provinces (Hells Canyon Dam complex in Idaho, for example), and has not become dominant. Discussion of the plant species with which the iris and rush interact, and the extent to which the iris and rush impact other plants and an ecosystem would be useful.