Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Acquire 27,000 Camp Creek Ranch at Zumwalt Prairie |
| Proposal ID | 200104300 |
| Organization | The Nature Conservancy (TNC) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Catherine Macdonald |
| Mailing address | 821 S.E. 14th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97214-2537 |
| Phone / email | 5032301221 / cmacdonald@tnc.org |
| Manager authorizing this project | Catherine Macdonald |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 High Priority |
| Province / Subbasin | Blue Mountain / Imnaha |
| Short description | Secure, restore and protect steelhead, bull trout, redband trout and chinook habitat on tributaries to the Imnaha River, including entire Camp Creek watershed. Restore and protect 27,000 acres of wildlife habitat on the Zumwalt Prairie. |
| Target species | Snake River steelhead, Columbia River bull trout, redband trout, Snake River chinook, Columbian sharp-tail grouse, Ferruginous and Swainson's Hawks |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
| 45.6285 |
-116.9715 |
Zumwalt Prairie |
| 45.62 |
-116.95 |
Camp Creek |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
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
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
| FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
|---|
| $200,000 | $208,000 | $216,320 | $224,973 |
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 | FY 2005 |
|---|
| $40,000 | $41,600 | $43,264 | $44,994 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2001 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
FTE: .20 FTE @ $60,000/yr; 1 FTE Manager @ $39,500/yr; 1.75 FTE Tech @ $20,000 |
$86,616 |
| Fringe |
(Total Salary x .38%) |
$32,914 |
| Supplies |
air photos, monitoring equipment, |
$3,600 |
| Travel |
3000 miles @.32; $500 lodging; $1000 vehicle fuel; $1,200 insurance; $750 maintenance |
$3,800 |
| Indirect |
(22%) |
$27,925 |
| Capital |
$11,700,000 (land); $4500 title ins & closing costs
Truck $20,000 |
$11,724,500 |
| Subcontractor |
Level 1 Hazardous Materials Assessment |
$8,000 |
| Other |
Appraisal |
$19,650 |
| Subcontractor |
Complete a HEP Assessment |
$20,000 |
| Subcontractor |
Cultural Resources Assessment |
$10,000 |
| $11,937,005 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $11,937,005 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $11,937,005 |
| FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
| The Nature Conservancy |
Land acquisition negotiations, land management planning and assessments |
$207,005 |
in-kind |
| The Nature Conservancy |
Land acquisition costs |
$9,730,000 |
cash |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
A
Date:
Feb 1, 2001
Comment:
This is an excellent proposal that makes a good case for a cost share from the Fish and Wildlife Program for the purchase of 27,000 acres that would protect a watershed, benefit ESA listed anadromous fish, and also benefit wildlife. The Council's criteria are satisfied. The funding requests in the narrative and data proposal forms are different, the narrative specifies that the request is for a $2 million cost share of the overall $11,937,005 purchase.
Recommendation:
HP "A" -BiOp
Date:
Feb 1, 2001
Comment:
The reviewers assumed that the request to BPA was for $2 million of the total purchase price. This project would provide significant benefits to wildlife.
Recommendation:
Fund: Lower Priority
Date:
Feb 26, 2001
Comment:
Lower PriorityAs described in our cover letter, several of these proposals have associated monitoring to determine the status of these properties before actions are implemented. This monitoring does not fall in the Tier 3 category but is extremely worthwhile and NMFS recommends that it be fully funded: 23094 - Acquire Sumwalt prairie land. Actions not planned until assessment of property is complete - no actions to monitor at this time.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 26, 2001
Comment:
Recommendation:
RPA 150
Date:
Apr 20, 2001
Comment:
Meets "high Priority" project criteria required in the Council's program (ESA screen, not "in lieu", and all planning, permitting in place for 10/01/01 implementation). Furthermore, this project is a "time-limited" opportunity and a "one-time" only funding commitment with immediate "on the ground" tangible biological benefits.Other criteria that the project meets are: the project is largely self-sustaining after project completion, the project has measurable/quantitative biological objectives resulting in 'species' survival benefits, provides connectivity, and improves conditions in a 303d, water quality-limited stream.
The project also fulfills more than one criterion above, provides for cost-sharing with other entities, is part of a collaborative effort with other entities or has a synergistic effect with, is recommended by an action plan derived from science-based assessment, and is approved by Tribal and/or state authority with F&W management authority. In addition, the project proposal details a baseline monitoring program as well as intended techniques to monitor project effects.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
May 8, 2001
Comment:
