FY 2001 High Priority proposal 23008

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleImprove Stream Habitat by Reducing Discharge from Animal Feeding Operations in Salmon and Clearwater Basins
Proposal ID23008
OrganizationIdaho State Office of Species Conservation (IOSC)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameJohn Chatburn
Mailing addressP.O. Box 790 Boise, Idaho 83701-0790
Phone / email2083328540 / jchatbur@agri.state.id.us
Manager authorizing this projectJohn Chatburn
Review cycleFY 2001 High Priority
Province / SubbasinMountain Snake /
Short descriptionEnhance tributary and main stem fish habitat by reducing runoff from CAFO operations by supporting on-farm improvements with cost-share funding and technical assistance.
Target speciesSalmon and Bull Trout
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
45 -114.98 Salmon subbasin
46.44 -115.65 Clearwater subbasin
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2001 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 2001 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2001 costSubcontractor
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 2001 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
FY 2002FY 2003FY 2004FY 2005
$40,000$40,000$40,000$40,000

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2001 cost
Personnel FTE: 6 $250,000
Fringe (Benefits are 33% of salary) $82,000
Supplies supplies, computers, eng.equip.,etc $98,000
Travel Lease Vehicles, fuel, per diem, Lodging, etc. $142,000
Indirect $144,000
Capital 70% match for Cost Share Grants $2,500,000
Subcontractor IDEQ for baseline monitoring $75,000
Other Nez Perce Tribe for coordination with ISDA $75,000
$3,366,000
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2001 cost$3,366,000
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2001 budget request$3,366,000
FY 2001 forecast from 2000$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
1. Idaho Department of Agriculture Supplemental support functions and ongoing monitoring of cost-share funded projects. $230,000 in-kind
2. Idaho Soil Conservation Commission Cooperating in guidelines and application form creation, Coordination of outreach meetings and dissemination of materials $20,000 in-kind
3. University of Idaho/ Extension Service Identification of CAFO's, dissemination of materials, and providing technical assistance $50,000 in-kind
4. Idaho Cattle Association Coordinating outreach meetings, and dissemination of materials $10,000 in-kind
5. Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Identification of projects, provide existing water quality data, inform interested publics of benefits and values, and ongoing monitoring of water quality benefits from projects $60,000 in-kind
6. Idaho Department of Water Resources Identification of projects, provide hydrologic data, and inform interested publics of benefits and values $20,000 in-kind
7. Army Corps of Engineers Evaluate, plan, and implement projects. and inform interested publics of benefits and values $10,000 in-kind
8. Bureau of Reclamation Provide data and inform interested publics of benefits and values $10,000 in-kind
9. IDFG Perform ongoing regional fish monitoring activities $40,000 in-kind
10. Landowners 30% match for cost share funding of AFO impact mitigation $750,000 in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
D
Date:
Feb 1, 2001

Comment:

Not all parts of this proposal meet the basic criteria of the solicitation for one-time funding. However, if carried to full implementation it would address risks to ESA stocks by offering direct on-the-ground benefits. The project focus is on planning and identification of problem sites. Location and priority of sites for on-the-ground actions is not adequately described. This proposal could be expanded and then reconsidered as part of the Province Review.
Recommendation:
HP "B" W
Date:
Feb 1, 2001

Comment:

This project is establishing a cost share grant program to add value to an existing regulation-based improvement effort. There are small operations and multi-species facilities that fall outside of the Beef Cattle Environmental Control Act. The Act was designed to address CAFO's impact on Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act requirements. The IDAG is inspecting these operations and finding additional work that needs to be performed that falls outside of the BCECA. The program proposed here would provide a cost-share opportunity for additional improvements that would reduce animal nutrient loading in the streams but may not be required by law. Work is not being directed according to any subbasin planning effort that prioritizes efforts. Specific activities and locations are unknown at this time. Questions of in-lieu were also raised.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 26, 2001

Comment:


Recommendation:
RPA: N/A
Date:
Apr 20, 2001

Comment:

This project would reduce runoff from animal feed lots. NMFS commented on this proposal based on the information provided in November 2000 using the criteria provided by BPA to determine if the project required "High Priority status" for funding in 2001. This proposal appeared likely to provide some benefit to Endangered Species Act (ESA)-listed fish species in the Salmon and Clearwater river basins by improving water quality. Projects like this would be expected to contribute to recovery efforts identified in the FCRPS Biological Opinion and the Basinwide Recovery Strategy. Several reviewers, including NMFS, concluded that this project fell short in providing adequate project description, leaving reviewers unable to predict improvement to fish habitat and population response. Without specific designs and locations of individual actions and adequate descriptions of the baseline habitat conditions, reviewers were not able to support this project as meeting the criteria for high priority funding.

The proposal might merit a higher priority if the component projects were more fully developed and if it was part of a scientifically-based, watershed-level plan with measurable biological objectives. The Basinwide Recovery Strategy identified a desire to integrate ESA and Clean Water Act (CWA) requirements and supports Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) development by the state. Generally, improving water quality for ESA-listed fish species by reducing animal waste entering streams benefits fish. But, the approach should be based on the demonstration that the actions that are funded will result in success compared to the other opportunities that are necessarily forgone. This proposal should be more fully developed as described above and reconsidered during the Mountain Snake provincial review.


Recommendation:
Do Not Fund: Defer to Mtn Snake Review
Date:
May 8, 2001

Comment:

At this time, we do not intend to fund proposal no. 23008… it is difficult to determine from the proposal how and to what magnitude the benefit to listed stocks would accrue to the project. It seems appropriate for this project to be resubmitted in the Mountain Snake Provincial Review Process