FY 2003 Columbia Cascade proposal 29009
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
| Title | Type |
|---|---|
| 29009 Sponsor Response to ISRP | Response |
| 29009 Narrative | Narrative |
| 29009 Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
| Letter from T. Fitzsimmons (WA Dept of Ecology) and J. Koenings (WDFW) to F. Cassidy and T. Karier (NPCC) RE: State of Washington project proposals for the Columbia Cascade and Lower Columbia Provinces | Correspondence |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Acquire Dole-Beebe Property and Associated Water Rights |
| Proposal ID | 29009 |
| Organization | Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Dennis Beich |
| Mailing address | 1550 Alder Street NW Ephrata, WA 98823 |
| Phone / email | 5097544624 / beichdvb@dfw.wa.gov |
| Manager authorizing this project | Dennis Beich |
| Review cycle | Columbia Cascade |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Cascade / Columbia Upper Middle |
| Short description | Protect and enhance rare Columbia River frontage habitat through acquision of Dole Northwest, Inc. Beebe orchard property and associated water right. |
| Target species | Summer steelhead, spring chinook salmon, coho salmon, western grey squirrel, and bald eagle |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 47.841 | -120.015 | Parcel No. 27-23-20-120-000, and Parcel No. 27-23-20-523-145 |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
| Action 150 |
| Action 153 |
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| NMFS | Action 150 | NMFS | In subbasins with listed salmon and steelhead, BPA shall fund protection of currently productive non-Federal habitat, especially if at risk of being degraded, in accordance with criteria and priorities BPA and NMFS will develop by June 1, 2001. |
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|---|
| 2000 | Enhance 100,609 acres of land owned by WDFW (generally existing WDFW wildlife areas) |
| 2001 | Conservation purchases of key Yakima River floodplain properties in the Kittitas Valley reach |
| 2000 | Protect sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse, and enhance associated shrub-steppe at Scotch Creek Wildlife Area |
| 2000 | Protect sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse, and enhance associated shrub-steppe at Swanson Lake Wildlife Area |
| Multi | Manage wildlife areas in Upper Middle Mainstem Subbasin including: Chelan Butte, Colockum, Entiat and Swakane, Quilomene, Quincy Lakes, Bridgeport Bar, Indian Dan Canyon, Unit, Washburn Island, West Foster Creek, Sagebrush Flat, and Whiskey Dick |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 9609400 | WDFW Habitat Unit Acquisition. Restore and enhance 27,600 acres of wildlife habitat in Washington to mitigate for losses associated with the construction of Grand Coulee, Chief Joseph, McNary, and John Day dams. | Land acquisition in Cascade Columbia Province |
| 9604000 | Mid-Columbia Coho Feasibility Reintroduction Study. Determine the feasibility of re-establishing a naturally spawning coho population within the mid-Columbia tributaries. Focus on Methow and Wenatchee Subbasins in the Cascade Columbia Province | Reintroduced coho would use mainstem Columbia for migration, and possibly spawning and rearing |
| 1996042 | Restore & Enhance Anadromous Fish Populations in Salmon Creek. Increase instream flows in order to accommodate the year-round life cycles of anadromous fish. | ESA and non-listed salmonids use the mainstem Columbia River as a migration corridor. |
| 26033 | Okanogan Watershed Land and Water Rights Acquisition. Protect and enhance listed and non-listed salmonid habitat in the Okanogan Watershed through the acquistion of land with river frontage and water and/or water rights. | Land and water right acquisition in Cascade Columbia Province. ESA and non-listed salmonids use the mainstem Columbia River as a migration corridor. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Protect Columbia River mainstem frontage property | a. Acquire necessary permits | 1 | $5,000 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Protect Columbia River mainstem frontage property | a. Written baseline estimate | 1 | $3,000 | Yes |
| b. Hazardous waste assessment | 1 | $2,500 | Yes | |
| c. Appraisal | 1 | $13,000 | Yes | |
| d. Appraisal review | 1 | $1,000 | Yes | |
| e. Property purchase | 1 | $800,000 | ||
| f. Purchase title insurance | 1 | $2,000 | ||
| 2. Restore and enhance Columbia River mainstem frontage property | a. Plant 5,000 feet of low-bank riparian habitat with native trees and shrubs | 1 | $40,000 | |
| b. Plant 5,000 feet of low-bank riparian habitat with native seed mix | 1 | $6,000 | ||
| c. Purchase and install drip irrigation system | 1 | $10,000 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Protect Columbia River mainstem frontage property | a. Replace native riparian plantings that fail initially | 2 | $0 | |
| 1. | b. Weed control | 3 | $14,000 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Protect Columbia River mainstem frontage property (a. Replace any native riparian plantings that fail initially) | 2004 | 2005 | $27,200 |
| 1. (b. Weed control) | 2004 | 2005 | $6,000 |
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
|---|---|
| $23,200 | $10,000 |
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2003 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Supplies | $6,000 | |
| Capital | Aquire property | $863,000 |
| NEPA | $5,000 | |
| Subcontractor | Land acquisition related subcontracting | $19,500 |
| Subcontractor | Install irrigation system | $3,000 |
| $896,500 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2003 cost | $896,500 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2003 budget request | $896,500 |
| FY 2003 forecast from 2002 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
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.
Fundable only if response is adequate
Mar 1, 2002
Comment:
A response is needed. The "Objectives, tasks and methods section" is too brief and has no M&E component. The Dole-Beebe property is located adjacent to the Chelan Falls Hatchery, which is funded by Chelan County P.U. D. and operated by WDFW. The ISRP viewed the property during our October site visit. The site possesses many desirable features, including a spring fed rivulet, where newly reintroduced coho salmon were recently observed. The 227-acre property has 6,000 feet of relatively undisturbed Columbia River mainstem riparian habitat. A decision on the project is urgent, because it faces extreme pressure for development. Has the property been recently sold to a developer?The author needs to work with the game division of the WDFW to include a HEP analysis for value to wildlife, and identification of mitigation credit to BPA. Also, see the other proposals for acquisition or protection of wildlife habitat. The technical background, relationship to other projects, etc. is well written and includes much detail. The author should fill in the detail for methods to establish baseline data and long-term monitoring and evaluation (M&E).
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.
The response should describe the plans and methods for their planned stream restoration work. The property has potential for benefits to fish and wildlife but some restoration work is warranted.
Comment:
WDFW is going to contribute $500,000 towards the purchase of this property in FY03, the budget has been modified to reflect this action. Question cost of the property because appraisal is not completed Fair Market Value. NMFS has identified this project as a BiOp project.Comment:
Fundable for establishment of options to purchase the property. The response did not reference or provide adequate detailed plans for monitoring and evaluation of results of the project including establishment of baseline conditions prior to purchase. Detailed plans for M&E should be developed and reviewed by the ISRP before purchase of the property. The ISRP believes that it is not appropriate to recommend unconditional funding for projects when one of the four primary ISRP evaluation criteria is not met (that we review and recommend only projects that "have provisions for monitoring and evaluation of results.") As suggested in the preliminary review, the project sponsors are referred to the ISRP's review of the Draft Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for the Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Project (www.nwcouncil.org/library/isrp/isrp2001-4AlbeniFalls.pdf).A binding agreement for a conservation easement in perpetuity should be in place before purchase. This is a valuable and unique property currently being threatened by development. It includes over 227 acres of important riparian and shrub steppe habitat both adjacent to and uplands of the Columbia River. Several important aquatic habitats for Upper Columbia River summer steelhead and spring chinook salmon are also found within the project's boundaries including a watercress lined, 10 to12 cfs spring tributary to the Columbia River. In addition to the land itself, two valuable water rights are attached to the property, one for 10 cfs (of which WDFW currently uses 4 cfs for its WDFW Chelan Fish Hatchery operations) and another for 15 cfs.
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUWould protect an undisclosed amount of riparian area and a springbrook along the mainstem Columbia River. Could also result in modest instream flow contribution which could improve habitat and therefore survival.
Comments
Actual transferable water right is likely much less than the 15 cfs reported (probably closer to 0.5 cfs). Benefits appear more at protecting hatchery water supply than listed fish. Little evidence provided to support the importance of the site to fish. Much of the property is isolated from the river.
Already ESA Req? No
Biop? Yes
Comment:
Recommend deferral to Subbasin Planning; this kind of activity could support RPA 150.Comment: