FY07-09 proposal 200711900
Jump to Reviews and Recommendations
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Restore Access to Upper Musselshell Creek |
| Proposal ID | 200711900 |
| Organization | Nez Perce Tribe DFRM Watershed Division |
| Short description | Enhance the upper Musselshell Creek Watershed to restore access and provide quality habitat for all aquatic species by reversing past mining activities that have diverted a portion of Musselshell Creek creating a passage barrier. |
| Information transfer | Data will be housed at the Nez Perce Tribe Department of Fisheries Resource Management, Watershed Division offices. Any data will be submitted to StreamNet for information sharing. Data will also be summarized in report form and submitted to Bonneville Power Administration. |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Contacts
| Contact | Organization | |
|---|---|---|
| Form submitter | ||
| Heidi McRoberts | Nez Perce Tribe | heidim@nezperce.org |
| All assigned contacts | ||
| Arleen Henry | Nez Perce Tribe | arleenh@nezperce.org |
| Mark Johnson | Nez Perce Tribe | markj@nezperce.org |
| Heidi McRoberts | Nez Perce Tribe | heidim@nezperce.org |
Section 2. Locations
Province / subbasin: Mountain Snake / Clearwater
| Latitude | Longitude | Waterbody | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Musselshell Creek | 10.7 air miles NE from Weippe, ID near the junction of Clearwater National Forest Roads 540 and 5156 |
Section 3. Focal species
primary: Chinook Snake River Spring/Summer ESUprimary: Steelhead Snake River ESU
secondary: Coho Unspecified Population
secondary: Westslope Cutthroat
Section 4. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishments |
|---|
Section 5. Relationships to other projects
| Funding source | Related ID | Related title | Relationship |
|---|---|---|---|
| BPA | 199607702 | Lolo Creek Watershed | Watershed resotration: projects such as culvert replacement, road obliteration, and streambank stabilization. |
| PCSRF - Idaho | 031 04 CW | Lolo Creek Passage Restoration | Watershed restoration: road obliteration and culvert replacements |
| BPA | 198335000 | Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery O&M | Hatchery supplementation to restore and recover Snake River Basin salmon stocks |
| BPA | 198335003 | Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery M&E | Evaluation of effectiveness of supplementation: snorkeling and redd counts |
| BPA | 199706000 | Clearwater Focus Watershed Np | Cooperative project to coordinate watershed activities within the Clearwater River Subbasin |
Section 6. Biological objectives
| Biological objectives | Full description | Associated subbasin plan | Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anadromous fish habitat improvement | Increase available habitat for anadromous fish by eliminating existing barrier to provide access. | Clearwater | 2) Evaluate alternative habitat treatments and outcomes to address limiting factors 5) Implement projects following prioritization developed in Strategy 1 and 2. 7)Monitor and evaluate habitat improvement projects. |
| Improve aquatic habitat diversity and complexity | Improve habitat diversity to levels consitent with other objectives in the subbasin plan, with particular emphasis on recovery of andadromous and fluvil stocks. | Clearwater | 2) Follow existing plans--continue aquatic habitat improvement efforts. 4) Restore complexity--address priority problems with protection and restoration activities 7) Monitor long-term effectiveness of habitat improvement efforts. |
| Increase populations of westslope cutthroat trout | Increase westslope cutthroat populations by providing access to currently unavailable habitat. | Clearwater | 2) Improve habitat conditions for native resident populations. 3) Evaluate the physical and biological response to habitat projects. 4) Provide research, monitoring and evaluation data. |
| Protect/restore add'l miles of riparian habitat | Protect and restore riparian habitats that are critical for both aquatic and terrestrial species. | Clearwater | 1. Identify and prioritize riparian habitats for protection and restoration. 2. Protect & restore riparian habitats. 3. Increase stewardship and public knowledge of riparian habitats through educational programs. |
| Reduce artificially blocked streams | Restore natural channel and eliminate velocity barrier to accomodate for aquatic species passage and properly functioning stream simulation. | Clearwater | 3) Remove or modify human-caused barriers--emphasize alteration/removal of unnatural barriers over natural barriers. 5) Monitor and evaluate biological response resulting from Strategy 3 and 4. |
Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)
| Work element name | Work element title | Description | Start date | End date | Est budget |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manage and Administer Projects | Management, Administration, and Communication | Provide project oversight and management, administration and accounting, and communication with partners and public | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $76,847 |
|
Biological objectives Anadromous fish habitat improvement |
Metrics |
||||
| Coordination | Prepare Partnering Agreements with Clearwater National Forest | Prepare partnership agreements, coordinate survey and design, and plan implementation schedule | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $29,460 |
|
Biological objectives Increase populations of westslope cutthroat trout |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Plan | Complete feasibility study for barrier removal | Complete a comprehensive study of the proposed passage barrier removal and channel restroation including preliminary design and cost estimate. | 10/1/2006 | 12/3/2007 | $64,878 |
|
Biological objectives Anadromous fish habitat improvement |
Metrics |
||||
| Other | Reporting | Submit quarterly and annual reports at designated timeframes | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $20,000 |
|
Biological objectives Anadromous fish habitat improvement |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation | Complete and obtain all necessary enivronmental compliance documentation | Complete NEPA process, ESA consultation, cultural resource surveys, and all other requirements for environmental compliance. | 6/1/2007 | 12/31/2008 | $110,433 |
|
Biological objectives Anadromous fish habitat improvement |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Design and/or Specifications | Design/cost estimate for road location and stream channel restortation | Complete field survey of the tunnel area, detailed plan drawings and specifications and detailed cost estimate for the porposed road relocation, channel restoration, and riparian improvements | 10/1/2008 | 9/30/2009 | $78,598 |
|
Biological objectives Anadromous fish habitat improvement |
Metrics |
||||
| Improve/Relocate Road | Relocate Road #540 | Relocate approximately 800 feet of existing road away from riparian area creating room for new stream channel | 5/1/2010 | 9/30/2010 | $0 |
|
Biological objectives Reduce artificially blocked streams |
Metrics * # of road miles improved, upgraded, or restored: 0.15 |
||||
| Increase Instream Habitat Complexity | Restore and rebuild stream channel | Restore and rebuild approximately 300 feet of stream channel leading into the tunnel adding complexity and cover, decreasing velocities, and restoring riparian vegitation | 6/1/2010 | 9/30/2010 | $0 |
|
Biological objectives Improve aquatic habitat diversity and complexity |
Metrics * # of stream miles treated: .06 |
||||
| Remove/Install Diversion | Divert Musselshell Creek from tunnel diversion to newly built channel | Realign FS Road #540, construct new stream channel, restore and improve a portion of the existing channel, and divert Musselshell Creek from the man made tunnel which is a passage barrier | 5/1/2010 | 9/30/2010 | $0 |
|
Biological objectives Reduce artificially blocked streams |
Metrics * # of miles of habitat accessed: 0.1 |
||||
| Plant Vegetation | Revegetate the riparian zone of Musselshell Creek | Riparian areas in the project area on Musselshell Creek will be revegetated to improve stream habitat. | 9/1/2010 | 9/30/2010 | $0 |
|
Biological objectives Protect/restore add'l miles of riparian habitat |
Metrics * # of riparian miles treated: .02 |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Collect M & E data on project effectiveness | Collect physical and biological data to assure construction compliance with plans & specifications and to validate project effectiveness. | 6/1/2010 | 9/30/2010 | $3,371 |
|
Biological objectives Reduce artificially blocked streams |
Metrics Primary R, M, and E Type: Project Implementation/ Compliance Monitoring |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | Summarize monitroing data on the tunnel bypass and new channel construction | Write report summarrizing data from the project monitoring. | 9/1/2010 | 9/30/2010 | $0 |
|
Biological objectives Reduce artificially blocked streams |
Metrics Primary R, M, and E Type: Project Implementation/ Compliance Monitoring |
||||
Section 8. Budgets
Itemized estimated budget
| Item | Note | FY07 | FY08 | FY09 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personnel | .4 FTE | $23,776 | $27,255 | $28,890 |
| Fringe Benefits | 30 % | $7,133 | $8,176 | $8,667 |
| Supplies | supplies, planting stock, etc. | $4,000 | $4,000 | $4,000 |
| Travel | vehicle & travel | $10,000 | $10,000 | $10,000 |
| Overhead | 29.64% | $15,089 | $15,541 | $17,060 |
| Other | sub-contracts | $60,000 | $65,000 | $50,000 |
| Capital Equipment | computer | $3,000 | $0 | $3,000 |
| Other | training/conferences | $3,000 | $3,000 | $3,000 |
| Totals | $125,998 | $132,972 | $124,617 | |
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
| Total itemized budget: | $383,587 |
| Total work element budget: | $383,587 |
Cost sharing
| Funding source/org | Item or service provided | FY 07 est value ($) | FY 08 est value ($) | FY 09 est value ($) | Cash or in-kind? | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clearwater National Forest | project oversight, input, and administration | $13,000 | $13,000 | $13,000 | In-Kind | Under Development |
| NOAA, US Fish & Wildlife, National Forest Found. | portion of subcontract costs | $26,000 | $26,000 | $26,000 | Cash | Under Development |
| Totals | $39,000 | $39,000 | $39,000 | |||
Section 9. Project future
|
FY 2010 estimated budget: $300,000 FY 2011 estimated budget: $300,000 |
Comments: Barrier removal and continued action effectiveness monitoring |
Future O&M costs: Field implementation will occur in 2010 with monitoring to follow. The results of the proposed barrier removal will continued to be monitored and reported on for a 5 year period following project completion.
Termination date: 1/1/2016
Comments: The results of the proposed barrier removal will continued to be monitored and reported on for a 5 year period following project completion.
Final deliverables: Post-project monitoring and evaluation report.
Section 10. Narrative and other documents
| NPT DFRM Watershed Umbrella Comments | Jul 2006 |
| Mtn Snake NPT DFRM Project Recommendations with comments | Jul 2006 |
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: Response requested
NPCC comments: The ISRP finds the quality of this proposal very marginal but will consider a response on the issues raised below before making a final recommendation. In the response loop, the ISRP recommends that the Nez Perce Tribe suggest a priority and rank of the numerous proposals submitted under the titles “protect” and “restore.” Where do habitat actions and protection in the Clearwater offer the most potential benefit? Sponsors do not prioritize this watershed in terms of biological benefit. It is not tied to critical needs based on EDT or other limiting factor analysis. The proposal should include a description of the basis for, and a projection of the gains in abundance of focal species that are expected from removal of the barrier. The tunnel removal must be feasible, and the proposal should be limited to the tunnel. The response needs to include a convincing argument that access for exotics will not be improved too. It is not clear why new personnel are required; the USFS has the engineering and technology capabilities to complete this project if it is justified. Monitoring and evaluation needs development.
ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)
Recommendation: Not fundable
NPCC comments: The original review stated: Sponsors do not prioritize this watershed in terms of biological benefit. It is not tied to critical needs based on EDT or other limiting factor analysis. The proposal should include a description of the basis for, and a projection of the gains in abundance of focal species that are expected from removal of the barrier. The tunnel removal must be feasible, and the proposal should be limited to the tunnel. The response needs to include a convincing argument that access for exotics will not be improved too. It is not clear why new personnel are required; the USFS has the engineering and technology capabilities to complete this project if it is justified. Monitoring and evaluation needs development. There was no response to these requests except a ranking of all the Tribe’s 20+ proposals and a generic memo. Lack of a specific response precludes a “fundable” recommendation. In addition, the Tribe ranked this second tier. For full comments on "restore and protect" type projects, please see heading “General comments concerning Nez Perce Tribe proposals to protect and restore various watersheds” at the beginning of the ISRP comments on project # 199607702, Protect & Restore Lolo Creek Watershed.