FY 2003 Columbia Cascade proposal 29003

Additional documents

TitleType
29003 Narrative Narrative
29003 Sponsor Response to ISRP Response
29003 Powerpoint Presentation Powerpoint Presentation

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleAcquire Property for Partial Wildlife Mitigation
Proposal ID29003
OrganizationConfederated Tribes of the Colville Indian Reservation (CCT)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameMatt Berger
Mailing addressPO Box 150 Nespelem, WA 99155
Phone / email5096342122 / matt.berger@colvilletribes.com
Manager authorizing this projectJoe Peone, Director, Tribal Fish & Wildlife Dept.
Review cycleColumbia Cascade
Province / SubbasinColumbia Cascade / Okanogan
Short descriptionAcquire, protect, enhance and evaluate wildlife habitat and species for partial mitigation for losses to wildlife resulting from Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dams.
Target speciesMule deer, elk, northern goshawk, golden eagle, ferruginous hawk, peregrine falcon, sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse, sage thrasher, sage sparrow, sandhill crane, mourning dove, willow flycatcher, white-breasted nuthatch, sagebrush lizard, western toad.
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
22,000+ acres collectively known as Joy Property located in four townships: T 31 N R26 E, T 31 N R 27 E, T 30 N R26 E, and T 30 N R27 E
48.29 -119.21 Joy Property
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment
1992 Acquired 4,814 acres (W. Kuehne Ranch)
1995 Acquired 4,800 acres (H. Kuehne Ranch)
1995 Acquired 6,300 acres (Berg Ranch)
1997 Acquired 798 acres (Nespelem & Redford Canyon)
1998 Acquired 2,164 acres (Hinman & Sand Hills)
1999 Acquired Long-term Management Rights on 2,388 acres (Agency Butte)
2000 Acquired 2,760 acres (Graves and Friedlander Properties)
2000 Acquired Long-term management rights on 120 acres (Covington lands-Tribal Property)

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
1. Acquire Property a.Negotiate transactions 50 years $1,460,000
b.Amend to CCT-BPA agreement 99 years $0
2. Conduct baseline HEP a. Conduct HEP 1 year $7,000
b. Analyze data 1 year $1,000
3. Develop site plans a. Collect Data 1 year $2,000
b. Analyze Data 1 year $1,000
c. Produce Site Plans 1 year $1,000
4. Short-term O & M a. Secure Property 0.5 year $20,000
b. Maintain Boundary Fences 0.5 year $4,000
c. Remove Trespass Livestock 0.3 year $1,000
d. Noxious Weed Control 0.6 year $1,000
5. Monitoring & Evaluation a Implement based on Obj.3 1 year $2,000
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
1. Acquire Property 2004 2007 $5,840,000
2. Conduct Baseline HEP 2004 2007 $32,000
3. Develop Site Plans 2004 2007 $16,000
4. Short-term O& M 2004 2007 $104,000
5. Monitoring & Evaluation 2004 2007 $8,000
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
FY 2004FY 2005FY 2006FY 2007
$1,500,000$1,500,000$1,500,000$1,500,000

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
O & M Activities after year of acquisition are covered under Hellsgate Big Game Winter Range Operation and Maintenance Project # 199204800 $0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2003 costSubcontractor
Same as section # 5 $0
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2003 cost
Capital $1,500,000
$1,500,000
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2003 cost$1,500,000
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2003 budget request$1,500,000
FY 2003 forecast from 2002$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate
Date:
Mar 1, 2002

Comment:

A response is needed. The tasks and methods included in the "Proposal objectives, tasks, and methods" are too brief to allow adequate review. A detailed plan for prioritizing and acquiring land should be given.

The monitoring and evaluation section mentions the species and habitats that are being monitored, but again is too brief to allow adequate review. It is not adequate to simply state that monitoring will be done. The specific sample areas, methods, and sampling frequency and intensity (i.e., how many samples of what type where and when) need to be specified or references must be given to published literature.

They also need to describe their project prioritization. The proponents are referred to the ISRP Review of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes' Habitat Acquisition and Restoration Plan (19910600) ( http://www.nwcouncil.org/library/isrp/isrp2001-4addendum.htm). The project was reviewed in the Mountain Columbia Province to determine whether it provided scientifically sound criteria and protocol to prioritize habitat acquisitions. The ISRP found that document described a good plan for habitat acquisition and restoration of wildlife habitat in mitigation for lost aquatic and riparian habitat due to the Kerr Project No. 5 located on the Flathead River and could serve as a useful model to other habitat and restoration proposals with some minor revision of the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) component of the plan. The M&E component has subsequently been reviewed and approved subject to minor modifications in ISRP report (www.nwcouncil.org/library/isrp/isrp2001-4AlbeniFalls.pdf). The proponents are also referred to the programmatic section of this report on Monitoring, the specific comments on Aquatic Monitoring and Evaluation, and the specific comments on Terrestrial Monitoring and Evaluation.


Recommendation:
High Priority
Date:
May 17, 2002

Comment:

CBFWA's ranking of this project focuses on the Tumwater Basin parcels that the CCT is currently pursuing. The project sponsor has reduced the budget by $500,000 in 2003.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Jun 7, 2002

Comment:

Fundable for establishment of options to purchase properties only. The respondents did not reference or provide adequate detailed plans for monitoring and evaluation of results of this project. Monitoring should include establishment of baseline conditions at the time of purchase. Detailed plans for M&E should be developed and reviewed by the ISRP before purchase of properties.

The ISRP believes that it is not appropriate to recommend funding for projects when one of the four primary ISRP review criteria is that we review and recommend only projects that "have provisions for monitoring and evaluation of results."


Recommendation:
Date:
Jul 19, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU

Comments
Wildlife Project - Not Reviewed

Already ESA Req?

Biop? No


Recommendation:
C
Date:
Jul 26, 2002

Comment:

Recommend deferral to Subbasin Planning
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Oct 30, 2002

Comment: