FY 2001 High Priority proposal 200204000
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
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Return Spawning/Rearing Habitat to Anadromous/Resident Fish within the Squaw Creek to Papoose Creek Analysis Area Watersheds |
| Proposal ID | 200204000 |
| Organization | Nez Perce Tribal Fisheries/Watershed Program (NPT) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Emmit E. Taylor Jr. |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box 365 Lapwai, ID 83540 |
| Phone / email | 2088437144 / emmitt@nezperce.org |
| Manager authorizing this project | Ira Jones |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 High Priority |
| Province / Subbasin | Mountain Snake / Clearwater |
| Short description | Provide 20 miles of fisheries habitat within the Squaw to Papoose Creeks Analysis Area by replacing the top 10 fish barrier culverts, a critical component of an on-going watershed restoration effort, based on a completed watershed assessment. |
| Target species | Spring Chinook Salmon, Steelhead, Bull Trout, Westslope Cutthroat Trout |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 46.4923 | -114.8567 | Squaw Creek |
| 46.5114 | -114.7606 | Papoose Creek |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| NMFS | Action 149 | NMFS | BOR shall initiate programs in three priority subbasins (identified in the Basinwide Recovery Strategy) per year over 5 years, in coordination with NMFS, FWS, the states and others, to address all flow, passage, and screening problems in each subbasin over 10 years. The Corps shall implement demonstration projects to improve habitat in subbasins where water-diversion-related problems could cause take of listed species. Under the NWPPC program, BPA addresses passage, screening, and flow problems, where they are not the responsibility of others. BPA expects to expand on these measures in coordination with the NWPPC process to complement BOR actions described in the action above. |
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
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 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
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 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
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 2001 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 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
|---|---|---|
| $3,500 | $3,850 | $4,235 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2001 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Capital | Culverts | $100,000 |
| Subcontractor | $320,000 | |
| $420,000 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $420,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $420,000 |
| FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| NPFWP - BPA Project #199607709 | Site Survey - 10 sites @ $150/site | $1,500 | in-kind |
| NPFWP - BPA Project #199607709 | Design - 10 sites @ $750/site | $7,500 | in-kind |
| NPFWP - BPA Project #199607709 | Contract Administration - 10 sites @ $750/site | $7,500 | in-kind |
| Clearwater National Forest | 3 additional replacement pipe arch culvert purchaces | $50,000 | cash |
| Clearwater National Forest | 3 additional replacement pipe arch culvert installations (6 miles of fisheries habitat returned) | $100,000 | cash |
| Clearwater National Forest | Site Survey Assistance - 10 sites @ $1000/site | $10,000 | in-kind |
| Clearwater National Forest | Design Assistance - 10 sites @ $1000/site | $10,000 | in-kind |
| Clearwater National Forest | NEPA - 1 document for all | $4,000 | in-kind |
| Clearwater National Forest | Contract Development - 10 sites @ $360/site | $3,600 | in-kind |
| Clearwater National Forest | Contract Administration Assistance - 10 sites @ $1000/site | $10,000 | in-kind |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
This is a good straight-forward proposal that includes a map and describes the location of activities. The proposal meets the Council's criteria. This is a high priority area. They should consider potential impacts on native resident stocks if they are present above the culverts. The USFS will provide monitoring in the future.Comment:
Comment:
ISRP Comment: They should consider potential impacts on native resident stocks if they are present above the culverts.Response: There will be no impact on native resident stocks by the culvert replacements through this proposal by non-native fish species, in particular brook trout. Brook trout occur in very low numbers in the mainstem Lochsa River. There are no documented brook trout occurrences in Squaw, Papoose, Badger, Wendover, or Parachute Creek drainages; therefore the risks for impacts are very low. Replacing the culverts would not have any impact on the existing native fish populations (Draft Environmental Assessment, Clearwater National Forest and Nez Perce Tribe, 2001).
Comment:
Comment:
This project would replace or remove several culverts that have barred passage to productive spawning habitat. Removing passage barriers is a high priority. The project would benefit listed salmonids immediately and tangibly. In addition, it could provide data necessary to quantify the benefits of removing passage barriers. We understand that BPA has concerns regarding the "in lieu" status of this project.Comment:
Proposal no. 23032, although a sound proposal from a biological perspective, appears to be one that could or should be funded by the U.S. Forest Service as part of their obligation under the Endangered Species Act and their enabling Acts. We note that in the Basinwide Salmon Recovery Strategy (All-H Strategy) released by the Federal Caucus agencies in December 2000, the Federal land managers have primary responsibility for protection of existing high quality habitat and accelerated restoration of habitat on Federal lands located in high priority subbasins. We recognize that similar actions have been funded through the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program in the past, however, we want to stress that in implementing our responsibilities under the All-H Strategy, BPA is focused on actions on non-Federal lands and is calling upon our fellow Federal agencies to seek the Federal appropriations necessary to implement their All-H responsibilities. We do not intent to fund this proposal at this time, but we recognize the biological benefits this project would produce and will pursue discussions with the U.S. Forest Service to determine other funding mechanisms that may be available.