FY07-09 proposal 199500400
Jump to Reviews and Recommendations
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Libby Mitigation Program |
| Proposal ID | 199500400 |
| Organization | Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks |
| Short description | Fisheries mitigation for the construction and operation of Libby Dam. Implements habitat restoration, improves fish passage, protects and recovers native fish populations and reestablishes fish harvest opportunities. |
| Information transfer | The expected outcomes of this project will be quantitative and qualitative. Fisheries and environmental data are archived in electronic format on project computers and backed up on CD. Stream specific fisheries abundance and genetic data are available on MFWP's web page in an interactive file called MFISH. Hatchery outplants are appended annually to a statewide database called FINS. Project results (data, photopoints etc.) are reported in annual agency reports and reports to BPA or published in peer review journals. Model results for Hungry Horse Reservoir and Flathead River are shared with operating agencies or published. |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Contacts
| Contact | Organization | |
|---|---|---|
| Form submitter | ||
| Brian Marotz | Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks | bmarotz@mt.gov |
| All assigned contacts | ||
| Jim Dunnigan | Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks | jdunnigan@mt.gov |
| Brian Marotz | Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks | bmarotz@mt.gov |
Section 2. Locations
Province / subbasin: Mountain Columbia / Kootenai
| Latitude | Longitude | Waterbody | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kootenai | Kootenai Watershed in Montana |
Section 3. Focal species
primary: Westslope Cutthroatprimary: Bull Trout
primary: Interior Redband Trout
secondary: Burbot
secondary: Kokanee
secondary: Brook Trout
secondary: Rainbow Trout
secondary: Interior Redband Trout
secondary: Mountain Whitefish
Section 4. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishments |
|---|---|
| 2005 | In 2005, Montana FWP coordinated and completed the Therriault Creek Restoration Project with facilitation through the Kootenai River Network. We also completed the first phase of the Libby Creek lower Cleveland Restoration Project. |
| 2004 | The Libby Mitigation Project completed the Grave Phase II Restoration Project and began construction of the Therriault Creek restoration projects. These projects were facilitated through the Kootenai River Network (KRN). |
| 2003 | The Libby Mitigation Project completed the Young Creek State Lands Restoration Project. |
| 2002 | The Libby Mitigation Project completed three mitigation projects in 2002 including the Grave Creek Phase I and Libby Creek Upper Cleveland’s restoration projects and the Lincoln County Fair Ground Community Fishing Pond. |
| 2001 | Implemented six mitigation projects, including the Sinclair Creek, Libby Creek Demonstration, Grave Creek Demonstration, restoration project, the Banana Lake Chemical Rehabilitation Project, GLID Diiversion and Fish Screen on Grave Creek. |
| 2000 | Implemented: Parmenter Creek Re-channelization/Rehabilitation Project (Project Impact), the O’Brien Creek Delta Project, the O’Brien Creek Troy Water Works Project, and the Libby Field Station Spring Creek Restoration Project and Fish Screen. |
Section 5. Relationships to other projects
| Funding source | Related ID | Related title | Relationship |
|---|---|---|---|
| BPA | 198806500 | Kootenai R White Sturgeon Inve | The project manager is on the Kootenai white sturgeon recovery team and works closely with project sponsors from IDFG and KTOI. Results and implementation of recommendations derived from the IRCs, sturgeon tiered flow strategy and IFIM models affect white sturgeon recovery activities. |
| BPA | 198806400 | Kootenai R White Sturgeon | The project manager is on the Kootenai white sturgeon recovery team and works closely with project sponsors from IDFG and KTOI. Results and implementation of recommendations derived from the IRCs, sturgeon tiered flow strategy and IFIM models affect white sturgeon recovery activities. |
| BPA | 199101903 | Hungry Horse Mitigation/Habita | This Libby Mitigation Project works effectively with the Hungry Horse Mitigation Project to transfer habitat restoration information, technical strategies and methodologies and species specific life history information that is non-basin specific. |
| BPA | 199404900 | Kootenai River Resident Fish A | This project is completing monitoring activities on the lower Kootenai River in Montana that will gather data to serve as baseline, control information for Kootenai River Ecosystem Improvement Study. The intent of the study is to determine if fertilization of the Kootenai River is a viable alternative for increasing primary productivity in the Idaho portion of the river. |
| BPA | 200000400 | Protect Wigwam R Bull Trout-Ko | This project has been cooperating with the efforts of the bull trout recovery project in Canada for several years to monitor the status of bull trout in the upper Kootenai River, it’s tributaries, and Koocanusa Reservoir. Our cooperative activities have included radio-tagging and tracking of adult bull trout, redd counts, sediment and temperature monitoring, and migrant fish trip operations. |
| BPA | 199608702 | Focus Watershed Coordination I | The Focus Watershed Coordinator position was originally contracted with Montana FWP, but has since been contracted with the Kootenai River Network (KRN). MT FWP maintains an effective working relationship with this position, with the the Project Biologist serving on the Board of Directors for the KRN. MT FWP plays an active roll in providing funding for several restoration project facilitated by the KRN, and cooperating and assisting many of the education and outreach programs sponsored by the KRN. |
Section 6. Biological objectives
| Biological objectives | Full description | Associated subbasin plan | Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Improve stream habitat diversity. | Improve stream habitat diversity to a level equivalent to the QHA-generated habitat diversity scores of reference streams. | Kootenai | A) Increase instream habitat by restoring recruitment of LWD, pool development, etc. B) Place large rocks and LWD instream to restore channel morphometry using Rosgen-type techniques. C) Restore spawning habitat, D) Restore habitat to favor native spp. |
| Improve tributary channel stability. | Improve channel stability to a level equivalent to the QHA-generated channel stability scores of reference and Class 1 streams. | Kootenai | A) Identify losses in biological functions and performance. B) Restore stream channels. C) Improve instream habitat. D) Minimize potential stream channel degredation, E) Restore habitat to favor native species. |
| Maintain or increase native populations | Complete assessments of resident fish losses throughout the basin resulting from the hydrosystem, expressed in terms of the various critical population characteristics of key resident fish species. | Kootenai | A) Monitor fish community dynamics annually at index sites, B) Research mechanisms that limit recruitment, C) Research micro-elemental signatures in scales and otoliths, D) Evaluate existing bull trout fishery, E) Monitor burbot status (p. 68) |
| Maintain/increase redband trout populations. | Maintain or increase the total number of genetically pure local populations of redband trout in the Kootenai Subbasin. A prerequisite is to be able to non-lethally identify pure populations. | Kootenai | A) Characterize, conserve, and monitor genetic diversity in isolate populations, B) Protect remaining redband populations. |
| Maintain/increase westslope cutthroat trt. pop'ns | Maintain or increase the total number of genetically pure local populations of westslope cutthroat trout, and maintain a broad distribution of local population in existing metapopulations. | Kootenai | A) Establish wild populations where native stocks have been extripated. |
| Manage the Libby Mitigation Project | Necessary activities for the management and administration of this project are included under this objective. | Kootenai | Without effective project managment, none of the work activities in the project proposal would be accomplished. Therefore, all strategies listed in the previous objectives are relevant to this objective. |
| Restore and provide passage to migratory fish. | Restore and provide passage to migratory fish by removing potential man caused barriers, i.e. impassable culverts, hydraulic headcuts, water diversion blockages, landslides, and impassable deltas. | Kootenai | A) Improve instream flows, B) Identify barriers, and use to prevent expansion of exotics, C) Implement passage projects to establish passage or prevent entrainment, D) Eliminate entrainmetn in diversions, E) Provide passage around diversions. |
| Restore productivity of Koot. R. below Libby Dam | Restore primary, secondary, and tertiary productivity rates and nutrient values downstream from Libby Dam to pre-dam condition (equal to those of inflows into Koocanusa Reservoir, corrected for downstream lateral input). | Kootenai | A) Model and evaluate experimental river-scale fertilization in Kootenai River, B) Determine the effect of nutrients on sport fish pop'ns., C) Monitor and evaluate primary, secondary, and tertiary trophic levels, D) Restore native fish community. |
| Suppress and prevent expansions of exotic species. | Suppress and prevent expansions of populations of non-native fish species beyond current levels in the Kootenai Subbasin. | Kootenai | A) Evaluate opportunites to remove non-native species. B) Erradicate non-native species where ecological interactions occur. C) Restore habitat to favor native fish communities. |
Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)
| Work element name | Work element title | Description | Start date | End date | Est budget |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation | Produce BPA Environmental Compliance and obtain required permits for stream restorations projects. | Produce BPA Environmental Compliance and obtain required permits for the following projects: Libby Creek Lower Cleveland Phase 3, Pipe Creek Phase 2, Grave Creek Phases 4 and 5, Libby Creek Highway 2, Dunn Creek, and Young Creek. | 10/1/2006 | 6/30/2009 | $42,840 |
|
Biological objectives Improve stream habitat diversity. |
Metrics |
||||
| Increase Instream Habitat Complexity | Increase instream habitat complexity Libby Creek lower Cleveland Phase 3 | Increase instream habitat complexity Libby Creek lower Cleveland Phase 3. Project length will be approximately 3,000 feet of stream channel. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2007 | $89,250 |
|
Biological objectives Improve stream habitat diversity. |
Metrics * # of stream miles treated: 0.57 |
||||
| Realign, Connect, and/or Create Channel | Realign, connect and create channel Libby Creek lower Cleveland Phase 3. | Realign, connect and create channel Libby Creek lower Cleveland Phase 3. This restoration project will create approximately 3,000 feet of stream channel. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2007 | $101,150 |
|
Biological objectives Improve tributary channel stability. |
Metrics * # of stream miles treated, including off-channels, after realignment: 0.57 |
||||
| Plant Vegetation | Plant riparian vegetation Libby Creek lower Clevelend Phase 3 Project | Plant riparian vegetation Libby Creek lower Clevelend Phase 3 Project. This project will revegetate approximately 3,000 feet of stream banks (both sides = 6,000 feet). | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2007 | $17,850 |
|
Biological objectives Improve tributary channel stability. |
Metrics * # of riparian miles treated: 1.14 |
||||
| Increase Instream Habitat Complexity | Increase instream habitat complexity Pipe Creek Phase 2. | Increase instream habitat complexity Pipe Creek Phase 2, to restore and increase diversity of habitat in approximately 1,400 feet of stream channel. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2007 | $35,700 |
|
Biological objectives Improve stream habitat diversity. |
Metrics * # of stream miles treated: 0.27 |
||||
| Realign, Connect, and/or Create Channel | Realign, connect and create channel Pipe Creek Phase 2. | Realign, connect and create channel Pipe Creek Phase 2. This project will construct approximately 1,400 feet of stream channel. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2007 | $17,850 |
|
Biological objectives Improve tributary channel stability. |
Metrics * # of stream miles treated, including off-channels, after realignment: 0.27 |
||||
| Plant Vegetation | Plant riparian vegetation Pipe Creek Phase 2. | Plant riparian vegetation Pipe Creek Phase 2. This project will plant native plant species to stabilize and promote long term riparian function. The project will plant approximately 2800 feet of riparian area (both banks). | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2007 | $5,950 |
|
Biological objectives Improve tributary channel stability. |
Metrics |
||||
| Increase Instream Habitat Complexity | Increase instream habitat complexity Grave Creek Phase 4. | Increase instream habitat complexity Grave Creek Phase 4. This restoration project will increase habitat complexity on approximately 4,000 feet of stream channel. | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $59,500 |
|
Biological objectives Improve stream habitat diversity. |
Metrics * # of stream miles treated: 0.76 |
||||
| Realign, Connect, and/or Create Channel | Realign, connect and create channel Grave Creek Phase 4. | Realign, connect and create channel Grave Creek Phase 4. This project will use Rosgen based restoration techniques to stabilize stream banks and promote properly functioning geomorphological processes and improved salmonid habitat within the treated reach. The project will reconstruct approximately 4000 feet of stream channel to accomplish the objectives. | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $41,650 |
|
Biological objectives Improve tributary channel stability. |
Metrics * # of stream miles treated, including off-channels, after realignment: 0.76 |
||||
| Plant Vegetation | Plant riparian vegetation Grave Creek Phase 4. | Plant riparian vegetation Grave Creek Phase 4. This project will plant native plant species to stabilize and promote long term riparian function. The project will plant approximately 8000 feet of riparian area (both banks). | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $17,850 |
|
Biological objectives Improve tributary channel stability. |
Metrics |
||||
| Increase Instream Habitat Complexity | Increase instream habitat complexity Libby Creek Highway 2 Reach. | Increase instream habitat complexity Libby Creek Highway 2 Reach. This reach of stream is approximately 4,300 feet in length. | 10/1/2008 | 9/30/2009 | $107,100 |
|
Biological objectives Improve stream habitat diversity. |
Metrics * # of stream miles treated: 0.81 |
||||
| Realign, Connect, and/or Create Channel | Realign, connect and create channel Libby Creek Highway 2 Reach. | This project will use Rosgen based restoration techniques to stabilize stream banks and promote properly functioning geomorphological processes and improved salmonid habitat within the treated reach. The project will reconstruct approximately 4300 feet of stream channel to accomplish the objectives. | 10/1/2008 | 9/30/2009 | $89,250 |
|
Biological objectives Improve tributary channel stability. |
Metrics * # of stream miles treated, including off-channels, after realignment: 0.81 |
||||
| Plant Vegetation | Plant riparian vegetation Libby Creek Highway 2 Reach. | Plant riparian vegetation on Libby Creek Highway 2 Reach. This project will plant native plant species to stabilize and promote long term riparian function. The project will plant approximately 8600 feet of riparian area (both banks). | 10/1/2008 | 9/30/2009 | $23,800 |
|
Biological objectives Improve tributary channel stability. |
Metrics * # of riparian miles treated: 1.62 |
||||
| Increase Instream Habitat Complexity | Increase instream habitat complexity Grave Creek Phase 5. | Increase instream habitat complexity Grave Creek Phase 5. This restoration project will increase diversity on approximately 4,000 feet of stream channel. | 10/1/2008 | 9/30/2009 | $59,500 |
|
Biological objectives Improve stream habitat diversity. |
Metrics * # of stream miles treated: 0.76 |
||||
| Realign, Connect, and/or Create Channel | Realign, connect and create channel Grave Creek Phase 5. | Realign, connect and create channel Grave Creek Phase 5. This project will use Rosgen based restoration techniques to stabilize stream banks and promote properly functioning geomorphological processes and improved salmonid habitat within the treated reach. The project will reconstruct approximately 4000 feet of stream channel to accomplish the objectives. | 10/1/2008 | 9/30/2009 | $41,650 |
|
Biological objectives Improve tributary channel stability. |
Metrics * # of stream miles treated, including off-channels, after realignment: 0.76 |
||||
| Plant Vegetation | Plant riparian vegetation Grave Creek Phase 5. | Plant riparian vegetation Grave Creek Phase 5. This project will plant native plant species to stabilize and promote long term riparian function. The project will plant approximately 8000 feet of riparian area (both banks). | 10/1/2008 | 9/30/2009 | $17,850 |
|
Biological objectives Improve tributary channel stability. |
Metrics * # of riparian miles treated: 1.52 |
||||
| Increase Instream Habitat Complexity | Increase instream habitat complexity Dunn Creek. | Increase instream habitat complexity Dunn Creek. This restoration project will increase habitat complexity on approximately 4,200 feet of Dunn Creek. | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $95,200 |
|
Biological objectives Improve stream habitat diversity. |
Metrics * # of stream miles treated: 0.80 |
||||
| Realign, Connect, and/or Create Channel | Realign, connect and create channel Dunn Creek. | Realign, connect and create channel Dunn Creek. This project will use Rosgen based restoration techniques to stabilize stream banks and promote properly functioning geomorphological processes and improved salmonid habitat within the treated reach. The project will reconstruct approximately 4200 feet of stream channel to accomplish the objectives. | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $71,400 |
|
Biological objectives Improve tributary channel stability. |
Metrics * # of stream miles treated, including off-channels, after realignment: 0.80 |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Remove fish barrier Dunn Creek. | Remove fish barrier Dunn Creek. This project will remove several culverts that barriers to upstream migration. The target species for this action will be fluvial rainbow trout in the Kootenai River. | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $11,900 |
|
Biological objectives Restore and provide passage to migratory fish. |
Metrics * Does the structure remove or replace a fish passage barrier?: Yes it will provide passage * Does the structure remove or replace a fish passage barrier?: Yes it will provide passage at 3 barriers |
||||
| Install Fish Screen | Install fish screen Young Creek. | Install fish screen Young Creek. This project will screen an irrigation diversion that diverts approximately 750 gallons per minute at peak use. The target species is westslope cutthroat trout. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2007 | $47,600 |
|
Biological objectives Restore and provide passage to migratory fish. |
Metrics * Quantity of water protected by screening, as determined by what is stated in the water right or calculated based on flow rate: 750 gallons per minute |
||||
| Operate and Maintain Habitat/Passage | Replace or maintain existing stream restoration structures on Libby, Grave, Therriault, Pipe, and Young creeks restoration projects. | Replace or maintain existing stream restoration structures on Libby, Grave, Therriault, Pipe, and Young creeks restoration projects. Periodic maintenance is required to ensure function and protect initial investment. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $28,560 |
|
Biological objectives Improve stream habitat diversity. |
Metrics |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Monitor and evaluate for effectiveness previously completed stream restoration projects. | Monitor and evaluate for effectiveness previously completed stream restoration projects, including biological and physical responses to implementation of projects. In most cases, pre and post-construction monitoring will be included to evaluate responses of the fish, macroinvertebrate and stream channel pattern, profile and dimensions. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $276,675 |
|
Biological objectives Improve stream habitat diversity. |
Metrics Primary R, M, and E Type: See narrative |
||||
| Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation | Produce BPA Environmental Compliance and obtain required permits for the Boulder and Loon Lakes Chemical Rehabilitation Projects. | Produce BPA Environmental Compliance and obtain required permits for the Boulder and Loon Lakes Chemical Rehabilitation Projects. This includes producing NEPA and MT State MEPA, and all state, federal and local permits. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2007 | $14,280 |
|
Biological objectives Suppress and prevent expansions of exotic species. |
Metrics |
||||
| Remove or Relocate Non-predaceous Animals | Remove non-predacious exotic fish from Boulder Lake and Boulder Creek. | Remove non-native Yellowstone cutthroat trout fish from Boulder Lake and Boulder Creek. The target species for this restoration activity is westslope cutthroat trout. | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $89,250 |
|
Biological objectives Suppress and prevent expansions of exotic species. |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Hatchery Fish | Produce and stock fish in Boulder Lake and Boulder Creek. | This project does not produce hatchery fish. The hatchery division of Montana FWP accomplishes this task. However, in order to roduce and stock fish in Boulder Lake and Boulder Creek, we will need to assist the hatchery staff. | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $1,190 |
|
Biological objectives Suppress and prevent expansions of exotic species. |
Metrics * Production: # juveniles (presmolt) released from program: numbers to be determined |
||||
| Remove or Relocate Non-predaceous Animals | Remove non-predacious exotic fish from Loon Lake. | This project will remove non-predacious brook trout from Loon Lake. This lake serves as a chronic source of brook trout that hybridize with bull trout in Pipe Creek. The lake will be restocked with westslope cutthroat trout. | 10/1/2008 | 9/30/2009 | $89,250 |
|
Biological objectives Suppress and prevent expansions of exotic species. |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Hatchery Fish | Produce and stock fish in Loon Lake. | This project does not produce hatchery fish. The hatchery division of Montana FWP accomplishes this task. However, this project will coordinate and assist the hatchery division accomplish the work. The lake will be restocked with westslope cutthroat trout. | 10/1/2008 | 9/30/2009 | $1,190 |
|
Biological objectives Suppress and prevent expansions of exotic species. |
Metrics * Production: # juveniles (presmolt) released from program: Numbers to be determined later |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Monitor and evaluate for effectiveness. | Monitor and evaluate for effectiveness. The monitoring will include fish species composition in the lakes to ensure that non-native fish have not re-invaded the lakes, zooplankton monitoring to track the species composition, and abundance pre- and post-restoration. | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $5,355 |
|
Biological objectives Suppress and prevent expansions of exotic species. |
Metrics Focal Area: Bull trout and Westslope cutthroat trout core area |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Restore primary, secondary, and tertiary productivity rates and nutrient values downstream from Libby Dam to pre-dam condition. | Restore primary, secondary, and tertiary productivity rates and nutrient values downstream from Libby Dam to pre-dam condition. This portion of the project will collect field data from the Montana portion of the Kootenai River to serve as a control for the Kootenai River Ecosystem Project (see narrative section). | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $14,280 |
|
Biological objectives Restore productivity of Koot. R. below Libby Dam |
Metrics Focal Area: Length at age, CPUE, spp. composition, K, Wr. |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Conduct Bull Trout Redd Counts | Conduct bull trout redd counts in Wigwam River, Quartz, Grave, West Fork Quartz, Pipe, Keeler, and O'Brien creeks in the US and Canada. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $42,840 |
|
Biological objectives Maintain or increase native populations |
Metrics Focal Area: Bull trout redd counts |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Conduct Mcneil Sediment Core Samples in Bull Trout Streams | Conduct Mcneil sediment core samples in bull trout streams including the Wigwam River, Quartz, O'Brien, Pipe, Bear, Keeler and Grave Creeks. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $76,755 |
|
Biological objectives Maintain or increase native populations |
Metrics Focal Area: Percent fines |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Conduct Adult Bull Trout Population in Kootenai River | Conduct abundance estimates of adult bull trout in the Kootenai River directly below Libby Dam. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $85,680 |
|
Biological objectives Maintain or increase native populations |
Metrics Primary R, M, and E Type: Adult bull trout abundance estimates |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Bull Trout Natal Tributary Origin Research Project | Investigate the efficacy of using rare earth element concentrations in bull trout scales and otoliths and/or genetic techniques in order to identify natal tributary origin of adult bull trout in the Kootenai Basin. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $71,400 |
|
Biological objectives Maintain or increase native populations |
Metrics Primary R, M, and E Type: See narrative |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Monitor Burbot Population Trend and Status Directly Below Libby Dam | Monitor the burbot population trend and status in the Kootenai River directly downstream of Libby Dam. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $85,680 |
|
Biological objectives Maintain or increase native populations |
Metrics |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Monitor relative abundance and spawning distribution of burbot in Koocanusa Reservoir | Monitor relative abundance and status of burbot in Koocanusa Reservoir using hoop traps to capture burbot, and trends in CPUE for comparision. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2008 | $95,200 |
|
Biological objectives Maintain or increase native populations |
Metrics Primary R, M, and E Type: Relative abundance estimates (CPUE) |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Monitor zooplankton and fish populations in Koocanusa Reservoir. | Monitor zooplankton and fish populations in Koocanusa Reservoir using Wisconsin tows and gill netting, respectively. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $301,665 |
|
Biological objectives Maintain or increase native populations |
Metrics |
||||
| Develop RM&E Methods and Designs | Develop non-lethal genetic markers capable of discriminating between coastal rainbow trout, westslope cutthroat trout and redband trout. | Develop non-lethal genetic markers capable of discriminating between coastal rainbow trout, westslope cutthroat trout and redband trout. This work will be accomplished by a Master's of Science position at the University of Montana. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2007 | $47,600 |
|
Biological objectives Maintain/increase redband trout populations. |
Metrics |
||||
| Identify and Select Projects | Identify and select and prioritize mitigation projects for the Libby Mitigation Project. | Identify and select and prioritize mitigation projects for the Libby Mitigation Project. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $37,485 |
|
Biological objectives Manage the Libby Mitigation Project |
Metrics |
||||
| Manage and Administer Projects | Manage and administer projects for the Libby Mitigation Program. | Manage and administer projects for the Libby Mitigation Program. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $23,205 |
|
Biological objectives Manage the Libby Mitigation Project |
Metrics |
||||
| Other | Prepare Project Proposal and annual Statement of Work and associated budget for Libby Mitigation Project. | Prepare Project Proposal and annual Statement of Work and associated budget for Libby Mitigation Project. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $20,230 |
|
Biological objectives Manage the Libby Mitigation Project |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Annual Report | Prepare and produce quarterly, annual and peer reviewed reports that summarize the results of this project. | Prepare and produce quarterly, annual and peer reviewed reports that summarize the results of this project. | 10/1/2006 | 9/30/2009 | $99,960 |
|
Biological objectives Manage the Libby Mitigation Project |
Metrics |
||||
Section 8. Budgets
Itemized estimated budget
| Item | Note | FY07 | FY08 | FY09 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personnel | [blank] | $214,427 | $214,427 | $214,427 |
| Fringe Benefits | [blank] | $73,231 | $73,231 | $73,231 |
| Supplies | Includes construction materials and heavy equipment for restoration projects and operating supplies. | $341,842 | $357,842 | $354,342 |
| Travel | [blank] | $34,000 | $34,000 | $34,000 |
| Capital Equipment | Includes electrofishing replacment gear and jetboat purchase | $10,000 | $15,000 | $20,000 |
| Overhead | Overhead rate 19% | $130,435 | $134,425 | $134,710 |
| Other | Includes maintenance and repair @ $6,000, utilities @ $2,500, and communications @ $4,500 | $13,000 | $13,000 | $13,000 |
| Totals | $816,935 | $841,925 | $843,710 | |
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
| Total itemized budget: | $2,502,570 |
| Total work element budget: | $2,502,570 |
Cost sharing
| Funding source/org | Item or service provided | FY 07 est value ($) | FY 08 est value ($) | FY 09 est value ($) | Cash or in-kind? | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Land owner | Construction materials | $59,000 | $30,000 | $35,000 | In-Kind | Under Review |
| MT DEQ | cash | $0 | $150,000 | $100,000 | Cash | Under Development |
| NRCS | technical service | $5,000 | $0 | $0 | In-Kind | Under Development |
| US ACOE | Technical services | $0 | $5,000 | $0 | In-Kind | Under Development |
| USFS | Technical services | $0 | $5,000 | $0 | In-Kind | Under Review |
| USFWS | cash | $0 | $21,000 | $25,000 | Cash | Under Development |
| Totals | $64,000 | $211,000 | $160,000 | |||
Section 9. Project future
|
FY 2010 estimated budget: $850,000 FY 2011 estimated budget: $850,000 |
Comments: [Outyear comment field left blank] |
Future O&M costs: Stream restoration activities require periodic maintenance in order to ensure proper function, especially during the first 3-5 years after construction. This work includes the rebuilding of stream restoration structures, and typcially ranges from 5-10% of the original construction cost. The Libby Mitigation Project typically spends approximately $10,000-15,000 per year performing such work. The project will also continue to mitigate for the impacts due to the construction and continual operation of Libby Dam. We expect to continue to expend approximately 30-40% of the annual budget toward on the ground mitigation projects to benefit fisheries resources and their habitats in the Montana portion of the Kootenai Subbasin.
Termination date: Indefinite
Comments: Fisheries losses caused by the construction and operation of Libby Dam, site-specific mitigation actions and monitoring strategies were documented in the Libby Dam Fisheries Mitigation and Implementation Plan (MFWP et al. 1998). Mitigation for losses attributable to the construction of Libby Dam may eventually be accomplished, however losses attributed to the operation of Libby Dam are also substantial, and occur annually.
Final deliverables: The overall goal of the Libby Mitigation Project is to correct effects caused by the Federal hydropower operations and mitigate for fisheries losses attributed to the construction and operation of Libby Dam using watershed-based, habitat enhancement, fish passage improvements, and offsite fisheries habitat improvement measures. Although fisheries losses attributable to the construction of Libby Dam may be offset in the future, annual operational impacts to the fishery will require mitigation for the life of Libby Dam.
Section 10. Narrative and other documents
| Response to ISRP Libby Mitigation | 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] | ||||||
| $816,935 | $841,925 | $843,710 | $2,502,570 | Expense | ProvinceExpense | Fund |
| NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $816,935 | $841,925 | $843,710 | $0 | ProvinceExpense | ||
ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)
Recommendation: Response requested
NPCC comments: This is a reasonably thorough proposal for mitigation via habitat enhancement that nonetheless needs better justification through monitoring results for continuing its “hard” stream restoration approaches. The proposal provides generally good background, from general Libby Dam effects to specific project streams. The work is largely related to the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program and Libby Mitigation Plan, although justification might have gone broader. There is a rather good narrative of interrelationships with other projects. The objectives for the proposed work include continued stream restoration, removal of non-native salmonids with toxicants, and burbot stock assessment. Soundness of the techniques depends on the results produced. Results of the enhancement actions presented here do not provide convincing evidence that the methods are generating benefits. The proposal provides a good history that emphasizes actual results not just tasks undertaken. Results of the recent phase of the Libby Creek lower Cleveland restoration are given in good detail for physical and biological attributes. Results of this one restoration effort were presented and reviewers were asked to seek results of other projects in reference material. Detailed results of the one project were useful, but it would have been helpful had some statements been included to summarize results of other projects. The previous ISRP reviewers were concerned that stream restoration efforts seemed to be following too much of a "hard-engineering" path. That concern is heightened by the proposal’s reporting of the lower Cleveland results. These results call into question the "hard" fixes/active restoration, but the proposal continues to emphasize heavy equipment, logs, and rocks. The cutthroat trout seem to be responding to the restoration activities as a disturbance and avoiding the area. Response is needed to address: a) the extent to which passive rehab has been considered, and why the approach was discounted, and b) reasons why proposed stream work (nearly 1/2 of funding requested is for heavy equipment and structural materials) is expected to produce better results than shown so far. The proposal needs to judge whether the sponsors see the lower Cleveland project as "successful" with reasons why or why not. Monitoring should be enhanced until the present projects show the strategy described is beneficial.
ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)
Recommendation: Fundable
NPCC comments: This is a reasonably thorough proposal for continued mitigation of Libby Dam environmental impacts via stream habitat enhancement. The current and previous ISRP reviewers were concerned that the stream restoration efforts seemed to be following too much of a "hard-engineering" path. That concern was heightened by the proposal’s reporting of the lower Cleveland results. These results call into question the "hard" fixes/active restoration, but the proposal continues to emphasize heavy equipment, logs, and rocks. The cutthroat trout seem to be responding to the restoration activities as a disturbance and avoiding the area. The responses adequately clarified the ISRP's questions. The rationale for assisting natural, passive restoration with "hard" construction techniques as well as riparian plantings seems reasonable. Physical data and narrative results were presented that indicated the success of creating stream habitat desired by salmonids (according to literature cited). It is reasonable to expect some time to elapse before biological responses are evident. There is a commitment to monitoring biological features (proposal) that will test for the expected biological responses in the long run. Knowing how labile (apt to change) some other physical stream improvement projects have been and the vagaries of biological expansion, the ISRP strongly supports the continued M&E as well as further stream rehabilitation. The proposal provides generally good background, from general Libby Dam effects to specific project streams. The work is largely related to the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program and Libby Mitigation Plan, although justification might have gone broader. There is a rather good narrative of interrelationships with other projects. The objectives for the proposed work include continued stream restoration, removal of non-native salmonids with toxicants, and burbot stock assessment. The proposal provides a good history that emphasizes actual results not just tasks undertaken. Results of the recent phase of the Libby Creek Lower Cleveland restoration are given in good detail for physical and biological attributes. The soundness of the techniques depends on the results produced. Results of the enhancement actions presented in the proposal did not provide convincing evidence that the methods are generating fish benefits, but the response helped place these in perspective. The sponsors are confident that this project will provide significant and lasting fishery benefits. They completed a project in Upper Cleveland Creek in 2002 and they are accumulating fish productivity data beginning in 2003 to test their hypothesis concerning what was necessary to increase productivity for the fish populations. Given that it is a test, it would be best if it were completed before the assumption is made that it was successful and similar methods applied elsewhere. The ISRP suggests that the test include comparison of the recruitment to adult stages from production in the treated area and in a similar but untreated area.