FY 2002 Columbia Plateau proposal 200001500

Section 1. Administrative

Project location

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Total estimated budget

Reason for change in estimated budget

The original Oxbow property acquisition was delayed for over a year as BPA considered a number of technical issues. During this time the property value increased significantly due to interest payment accrual. These interest payments were paid using construction, maintenance, and monitoring funds that were appropriated in FY2001. In preparing the FY2001 budget request, we assumed that the property closing would occur in a timely manner and that futher interest payments were unnecessary. Consequently, we anticipated completing most of the construction implementation and other tasks in FY2001 and did not project them into 2002 and beyond. The 2002 budget is higher than anticipated in 2001 to restore the funds that were used in 2001 for interest payments and to complete the planned implementation tasks as originally proposed.

Reason for change in scope

The proposal adds considerable new monitoring and evaluation tasks in response to the BPA COTR's requests to gather additional baseline and project effectiveness information. Further, BPA added additional tasks in the property memorandum of understanding which were not anticipated in the FY2001 proposal. The budget reflects these additional tasks.

Cost sharing

Other budget explanation

The property management plan may propose continuation of management activities on the property, which have the potential to generate revenue. Under the Tribal--BPA MOA, these revenues can be used to offset O&M costs within the "property management fund". Further, the John Day Basin Office has been successful in the past in securing grants from other sources which have effectively reduced BPA's cost share amounts on individual projects to approximately 50% on average. Under the Tribal--BPA MOA for the Oxbow Ranch, if cost share grants can be secured, funds appropriated under this budget proposal can be carried forward into future fiscal years, thereby reducing future base appropriations.

Reviews and recommendations

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

Comment:

Fundable if adequate responses are given to ISRP concerns. This proposal is to restore management funds for Oxbow Ranch after its delayed acquisition and to complete actions identified in the original proposal. The proposal contains good detail of riparian and in-stream problems requiring remediation. Property management and restoration activities are placed in the context of the FWP, BiOp and Subbasin summary. Some tasks are required by the Ranch purchase MOA with BPA. The proposal is fairly straightforward. A list of monitoring activities is presented and a M&E document is referenced. However, more information on the specific recovery objectives for the Ranch and the how progress toward those objectives will be measured would be helpful.

The response should describe the project's selection of monitoring approach (tier) for establishing the project's biologically measurable results and the justification of this selection (see ISRP's general comments on monitoring).

BPA is apparently required to provide funding for as long as the hydropower system operates. Regardless, the proposed budget should be reviewed carefully.

Plans for initial construction are appropriate for remediation of leveled tailings piles and headgates for monitoring irrigation water entering ditches on the property. O&M activities appear to be appropriate for this newly acquired property.

We recommend that the monitoring and evaluation component be coordinated with that being conducted on the Pine Creek Ranch by ODFW, DEQ and maybe others. Monitoring for fish should be coordinated with the EMAP John Day basin study being conducted by Oregon DEQ and the USFS's Hankin and Reeves survey protocol (required by BPA). This may require that the ODFW add survey sites for summer steelhead, spring chinook and other fish species. Traditional survey sites for fish might be maintained, but should be supplemented by a random sampling procedure.

Are there plans for public access?

Comment:

Comment:

The proponents choose not to describe their monitoring programs in terms of the hierarchical Tier I, II, or III monitoring as described in the ISRP report and referenced to the 2000 BiOp. This was not a requirement in the proposal preparation, but the ISRP notes that it would be helpful to adhere to common jargon across watersheds and basins.

The ISRP recommends that terrestrial sampling on Fish and Wildlife Program lands follow a common sampling method and some common data collection protocols across the four States in order to enhance monitoring and evaluation of terrestrial systems on subbasin and basin scales. Perhaps the National Resources Inventory sampling procedures and data collection protocols would serve the region well. See the Proposals #200002300 and #200020116 and ISRP reviews.

Comment:

Comments
Proposal is to restore management funds for Oxbow Ranch after its delayed acquisition and to complete actions identified in the original proposal. Property management and restoration activities are placed in the context of the FWP, BiOp, and Subbasin summary.

Already ESA Req? no

Biop? yes

Comment:

Comment:

Comment:

Comment:

Comment:

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website