FY 2002 Columbia Plateau proposal 200002500
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 |
|---|---|
| 200002500 Narrative | Narrative |
| 200002500 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
| 200002500 Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Eagle Lakes Ranch Acquisition and Restoration |
| Proposal ID | 200002500 |
| Organization | U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Columbia National Wildlife Refuge (USFWS) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Randy Hill |
| Mailing address | PO Drawer F Othello WA 99344 |
| Phone / email | 5094882668 / randy_hill@fws.gov |
| Manager authorizing this project | Robert Flores |
| Review cycle | Columbia Plateau |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Mainstem Columbia |
| Short description | Protect and restore proper function to shrub steppe and wetland habitats to offset losses due to hydropower development on the Columbia River system. |
| Target species | Mallard, Calif. Quail, Spotted Sandpiper, Yellow Warbler, Willow Flycatcher, Yellow-breasted Chat, Prairie Falcon, Ferruginous Hawk, Sage Thrasher, Sage Sparrow, Brewer's Sparrow, Burrowing Owl, WA Ground Squirrel, Badger, Mule Deer, Sagebrush Lizard |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 46.7008 | -119.1325 | Eagle Lakes |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|---|
| 2000 | Funding agreement between USFWS and TCF |
| 2000 | Contaminant Survey completed |
| 2000 | Boundaries for fee and easement areas established |
| 2000 | Two appraisals completed |
| 2000 | Letter of intent from FWS Director to prioritize Land and Water Conservation Fund purchase |
| 2000 | Approval of BPA funds from three sources (total $1,695,000) for partial purchase |
| 2001 | Public notification for NEPA |
| 2001 | Designation of specific areas for BPA, LCWF, AND MBF purchase |
| 2001 | Purchase agreement executed with landowner |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Pre-acquisition planning process for purchase of Eagle Lakes Ranch | a. Complete public involvement process | two | $0 | |
| b. Land Acquisition Planning document | two | $0 | ||
| c. NEPA document and review | two | $0 | ||
| 2. Evaluate conditions | a. Conduct detailed baseline inventories: engineering, riparian, wetland, upland vegetation, weeds, wildlife, T&E species | two | $52,000 | |
| b. HEP analysis (CNWR participation) | one | $1,000 | ||
| c. Write evaluation reports | two | $10,000 | Yes | |
| 3. Develop restoration plans | a. Work with DU, WDFW, and other appropriate local, State, and Federal entities | one | $5,000 | |
| b. Begin Wetland Restoration Plan | two | $5,000 | ||
| c. Begin Riparian Restoration Plan | two | $5,000 | ||
| d. Begin Upland Restoration Plan | two | $5,000 | ||
| 4. Develop management plans | a. Write Prescribed Fire Plan (FY2004) | one | $0 | |
| b. Write habitat management plan (FY2005) | one | $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Evaluate conditions | 2003 | 2003 | $20,000 |
| 2. Complete restoration plans | 2003 | 2003 | $12,000 |
| 3. Develop management plans | 2004 | 2005 | $10,000 |
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
|---|---|---|
| $32,000 | $5,000 | $5,000 |
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Land protection | a. Purchase land in fee (BPA portion; amount approved for 2001 but not yet contracted) | two | $1,695,000 | |
| a. Purchase land in fee (LCWF and MBF provide remaining $2.1 million) | two | $0 | ||
| b. Purchase conservation easements for private portion ($500,000 from MBF) | two | $0 | ||
| 2. Implement restoration projects | a. Riparian restoration | five | $20,000 | Yes |
| b. Upland restoration | five | $20,000 | Yes | |
| c. Wetland restoration | four | $4,500 | ||
| d. Weed control | three | $9,200 | ||
| e. Boundary posting | one | $2,000 | ||
| f. NEPA/permits | four | $1,200 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Implement restoration projects | 2003 | 2006 | $1,422,000 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $651,000 | $341,000 | $230,000 | $200,000 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Habitat maintenance | a. Weed control | ongoing | $0 | |
| b. Equipment maintenance | ongoing | $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Habitat maintenance | 2003 | 2006 | $155,000 |
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $10,000 | $15,000 | $15,000 | $15,000 |
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Monitor restoration areas | a. plant and habitat photo/transects | ten | $5,000 | |
| b. bird point counts/MAPS stations | ten | $10,000 | ||
| c. small mammal trapping/bat netting | ten | $2,000 | ||
| d. reptile and amphibian surveys | twice | $3,000 | ||
| 2. Evaluate restoration success | a. aerial photography (outyear) | one | $0 | Yes |
| b. compare data to mitigation objectives | five | $0 | ||
| c. develop/apply adaptive management | five | $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Monitor restoration areas | 2002 | 2006 | $71,000 |
| 2. Evaluate restoration success | 2004 | 2006 | $15,000 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $20,000 | $18,000 | $23,000 | $25,000 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2002 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 1.4 (biologist, inventory team, maintenance, fire, cultural resource) | $63,000 |
| Fringe | @30% | $18,900 |
| Supplies | binoculars, nets, traps, photography, herbicide, computer | $24,000 |
| Capital | land purchase, pickup | $1,718,000 |
| NEPA | ESA, Cultural Resources compliance | $1,000 |
| Subcontractor | spray helicopter, excavator, report writer | $30,000 |
| $1,854,900 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $1,854,900 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $1,695,000 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $159,900 |
| FY 2002 forecast from 2001 | $730,000 |
| % change from forecast | -78.1% |
Reason for change in estimated budget
Purchase was not completed in predicted time frame, and most costs planned for 2002 had to be pushed back to 2003. Purchase of the BPA portion of the property is expected during FY2001 but has not yet been contracted and is therefore reflected in the FY2002 budget. The increase in FY2002 budget reflects carry forward acquisition funds budgetted for 2001 for $700,000. It also includes $395,000 in the wildlife placeholder from the Rasor Ranch project #1997-800. An additional $600,000 comes from the Washington Wildlife Mitigation Agreement project #1993-058.
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| USFWS | Land and Water Conservation Fund and Migratory Bird Funds - fee purchase | $2,100,000 | cash |
| USFWS | LWCF and - easement purchase | $500,000 | cash |
| USFWS | Acquisition planning, inventory, restoration, GIS, surveys, equipment, prescribed burning, NEPA compliance | $480,000 | in-kind |
| NAWCA | wetland/upland restoration | $250,000 | in-kind |
| Ducks Unlimited | survey and design | $20,000 | in-kind |
| WDFW | wetland restoration funds | $10,000 | 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
Jun 15, 2001
Comment:
Fundable if adequate responses are given to ISRP request for a more detailed description of monitoring and restoration objectives and methods. More information on the monitoring effort is needed to provide documentation for evaluation of future funding (See "Tier 1 under the ISRP's general comment on monitoring and evaluation at the beginning of the report). A detailed strategy for information transfer is also necessary.
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:
* 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. The project would fund approximately 30% of the fee acquisition and easement purchase for shrubsteppe, basalt cliff, and wetland complex. Out-year funding is mainly for restoration and monitoring. The response adequately addressed the ISRP's request for more detailed description of monitoring and restoration objectives and methods. This response provided good summary information and is a good example of how the response loop should work.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 involved 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:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUN/A
Comments
Terrestrial habitat/pothole wetlands
Already ESA Req? no
Biop? no
Comment:
Comment:
Comment:
Comment: