FY 2002 Columbia Plateau proposal 200202400
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 |
---|---|
25025 Narrative | Narrative |
Overview Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
Overview Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
Columbia Plateau: Yakima Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
Columbia Plateau: Yakima Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | YKFP -- Secure Salmonid Spawning and Rearing Habitat on the Upper Yakima River |
Proposal ID | 200202400 |
Organization | Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Name | Bill Weiler |
Mailing address | 1701 S. 24th. Ave. Yakima, WA 98902 |
Phone / email | 5094579310 / weilewjw@dfw.wa.gov |
Manager authorizing this project | Ted Clausing |
Review cycle | Columbia Plateau |
Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Yakima |
Short description | Purchase of 370 acres of upper Yakima River wetlands through fee simple acquisition to secure spawning and rearing habitat for salmonids. |
Target species | Spring chinook, Mid-Columbia steelhead, bulltrout |
Project location
Latitude | Longitude | Description |
---|---|---|
47.30953 | -121.31657 | Parcel 1: T21N, R12E, Section 15: 80 acres |
47.23306 | -121.16675 | Parcel 2: T20N, R13E, Sections 12, 13: 96.06 acres |
T22N, R11E, Section 11 |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
RPA |
---|
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 |
---|---|
New Projects |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Project ID | Title | Description |
---|---|---|
YKFP (Yakama Nation acquisitions in the upper Yakima Basin | Yakama Nation conducted the appraisal on Parcel 2. | |
Big Creek Fish Passage | Separate BPA proposal. Focus on Upper Yakima River product. | |
Manastash Fish Passage | Separate BPA proposal. Focus on Upper Yakima River production | |
Yakama Nation Habitat Improvement & Acquisition BPA Proposal | Concurrent proposal/WDFW is the project sponsor |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
---|---|---|---|---|
$0 | ||||
$0 |
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 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
---|---|---|---|---|
1.Coordinate and participate in habitat planning/development initiatives in the Upper Yakima River watershed | Purchase Crystal Springs property | 1 | $1,000,000 | |
Purchase Easton Wetlands | 1 | $800,000 | ||
Purchase Gold Creek Bull Trout Property | $500,000 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|---|---|---|
1.Program Administration | 2003 | 2004 | $138,000 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
---|---|
$69,000 | $69,000 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
---|---|---|---|---|
1. Coordinate and participate in water and habitat planning | a.Monitor and evaluate critical habitat in the Upper Yakima River basin | 3 | $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|---|---|---|
1. Coordinate and participate in water and habitat planning | 2003 | 2006 | $0 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
Item | Note | FY 2002 cost |
---|---|---|
Capital | Lands Purchase | $2,300,000 |
$2,300,000 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2002 cost | $2,300,000 |
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
Total FY 2002 budget request | $2,300,000 |
FY 2002 forecast from 2001 | $0 |
% change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
---|---|---|---|
Yakama Nation | Appraisals | $10,000 | in-kind |
WDFW | Appraisal Reviews/envir. review report | $9,000 | in-kind |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Fundable - no response required
Jun 15, 2001
Comment:
Fundable, but at a low priority. Would purchase three land parcels in upper Yakima basin: two of 80 acres and 96 acres, part of wetland complexes with undefined anadromous fish use, and one parcel of 300 acres that is valuable for bull trout habitat.
This is a minimal proposal. There is surprisingly little information on their importance to fish production. There is no indication that these parcels rate high in subbasin priority. It is difficult to assess the level of support from other agencies and groups. These small, relatively expensive parcels by themselves would be higher priority if part of a coordinated "plan " but there is no indication of that at this point.
A related High Priority Proposal to acquire the two smaller parcels was previously reviewed by the ISRP and ranked at the C level. Review comments included: "Although the proposal meets the solicitation's basic criteria, the proposal is inadequate and fails to provide adequate information on fish passage concerns into the restored area, stock status, and expected benefits from the proposed work". Those comments appear to remain appropriate for the current proposal.
Comment:
M&E fits under the YKFP umbrella. There is an existing threat for one of the parcels to be developed for a gravel mine if this purchase is not completed. There is also tremendous development pressure in the upper Yakima basin.* Identified by the CBFWA as a proposal that could potentially be implemented as High Priority projects pending crediting resolution with BPA and NWPPC. The CBFWA will formally request a policy level meeting to resolve this issue.
Comment:
* Identified by the CBFWA as a proposal that could potentially be implemented as High Priority projects pending crediting resolution with BPA and NWPPC. The CBFWA will formally request a policy level meeting to resolve this issue.Comment:
Fundable, but at a low priority. Would purchase three land parcels in upper Yakima basin: two of 80 acres and 96 acres, part of wetland complexes with undefined anadromous fish use, and one parcel of 300 acres that is valuable for bull trout habitat.This is a minimal proposal. There is surprisingly little information on their importance to fish production. There is no indication that these parcels rate high in subbasin priority. It is difficult to assess the level of support from other agencies and groups. These small, relatively expensive parcels by themselves would be higher priority if part of a coordinated "plan " but there is no indication of that at this point.
A related High Priority Proposal to acquire the two smaller parcels was previously reviewed by the ISRP and ranked at the C level. Review comments included: "Although the proposal meets the solicitation's basic criteria, the proposal is inadequate and fails to provide adequate information on fish passage concerns into the restored area, stock status, and expected benefits from the proposed work". Those comments appear to remain appropriate for the current proposal.
See detailed ISRP comments on the YKFPs.
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUAcquisitions include some valuable, at risk salmonid habitat. Two of the parcels are in key anadromous production areas and contain good quality riparian habitats and floodplain features.
Comments
500,000 of project costs will benefit bull trout. Parcels are essentially functional "as is".
Already ESA Req? no
Biop? yes
Comment:
Defer until the development of sub-basin plans and BPA’s land and water acquisition policies. This is currently productive habitat, a very expensive project, and may not be the best value for the investment.Comment:
New proposals in the Yakima subbasin
As discussed in the general issues of this memorandum, there is not sufficient funding to initiate all of the new proposals that were rated as "fundable" by the ISRP and rated as "High Priority" by CBFWA in the Columbia Plateau province within the basinwide funding target of $186 million for Fiscal Year 2002. This is because funding all such proposals would not leave sufficient funds to initiate new proposals in the provinces that remain to be reviewed in the provincial review process. Therefore, the Council and its staff have worked with local entities to further prioritize new work, and asked them to put a premium on new work that represents consensus of the state and tribal resource managers that is consistent with Bonneville's BiOp needs. In the Yakima subbasin a collaborative effort was undertaken to prioritize Fiscal Year 2002 new needs along these guidelines. The following new proposals are those that were rated in this process as the highest priority at this time:
Project ID: 25025: YKFP -- Secure Salmonid Spawning and Rearing Habitat on the Upper Yakima River
NMFS has designated this project as corresponding directly to RPA action item 150, which seeks to protect currently productive non-federal habitat in subbasins with listed species. This project is designed to purchase 370 acres of upper Yakima River wetlands through fee simple acquisition to secure spawning and rearing habitat for salmonids.
Budget effect on base program (Project 25025):
FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
---|---|---|
Increase $2,300,000 | Increase $69,000 | Increase $69,000 |
Habitat acquisition proposals.
There are many proposals (both new and ongoing) that focus on habitat acquisition in the Yakima subbasin (25002, 25020, 25024, 25025, 25032, 25078, 199206200, 199603501, and 199705100). Some of these proposals focus on acquisitions of habitat primarily as a strategy to benefit listed anadromous fish, others appear to focus on habitat for wildlife, and others appear to address both. Given the limits available under the target budget for Fiscal Year 2002, each of these projects cannot be fully funded. In order to prioritize among these proposals, the Council may wish to consider the following. First, as stated throughout this memorandum, those proposals that received consensus support by local resource managers that are consistent with the BiOp or are consistent with its off-site mitigation strategy are favored. This would prioritize those acquisition proposals that are exclusively or primarily designed to benefit anadromous fish. Further, the Council should consider its program language that puts a priority on mitigating for wildlife habitat losses in areas of the basin where mitigation efforts have lagged. This program principle was one of the driving considerations for the Council's support for extensive habitat acquisition funding in the Mountain Columbia and Inter-Mountain provinces completed earlier. The Yakima subbasin has received substantial mitigation funding for construction/inundation losses to wildlife habitat in the past, and is not, relatively speaking, an area where wildlife mitigation efforts are lagging behind.
Projects 25024, 25025, 25078, 199603501, 199206200 and 199705100 all have a substantial focus on protecting habitat for listed anadromous fish in the Yakima subbasin. In addition, the first five of those projects were identified in the local collaborative process as priority projects. (See Yakima Issues 1 and 2 above). On the other hand, project 25020, 25002, and 25032, while apparently meritorious projects based on the ISRP and CBFWA reviews, have a substantial wildlife habitat component.
Staff recommendation: In light of the above considerations -- emphasis on anadromous fish, local priorities, the Yakima subbasins relatively advanced level of wildlife mitigation for construction losses -- the staff recommendation is to support funding for the proposals that focus on anadromous fish benefits -- 25002, 25024, 25025, 25078, 199603501, and 199705100. The amounts of funding for each of those proposals have been discussed identified in the issues discussed previously.
Budget effect on base program (Projects 25002, 25020, 25024, 25025, 25032, 25078, 199206200, 199603501, and 199705100):
ProjectNo | FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
---|---|---|---|
25078 | Increase of $875,000 | Increase of $875,000 | 0 |
Comment:
Although Proposal No. 25025 includes purchase of the Easton Reach (Lanphere) parcel, BPA is funding its acquisition under the ongoing Yakima Side Channels Project No. 199705100; funds for this $800,000 purchase are Carry Forward from FY01, PBA will not obligate new FY02 funds to Proposal No. 25025 or Project No. 199705100 until agreement is reached among WDFW, YN, and the Council and BPA regarding the priority and timing of parcel acquisition under both projects, I.e., agreement on Proposal No. 25025 parcels of Crystal Springs ($1,000,000), Gold Green Bull Trout ($500,000), and Project No. 199705100 parcels of the Dalle property ($241,000), the Browitt property ($210,000) and Scatter Creek Property ($2,706,025).Comment:
Project has merged with the 199705100. 02 Funds not obligated by BPA for timing and parcel acquisition. Collaborative plan developed and project should be consolidated. O&M absorbed in the Side Channels project.Comment: