FY 2003 Middle Snake proposal 32015
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 |
|---|---|
| 32015 Narrative | Narrative |
| 32015 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
| 32015 Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Deadwood River and Clear Creek Drainages Roads Analysis and Repair |
| Proposal ID | 32015 |
| Organization | USDA Forest Service, Boise National Forest (USFS) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Kari Grover Wier |
| Mailing address | 7359 Hwy 21 Lowman, Idaho 83637 |
| Phone / email | 2082593361 / kgroverwier@fs.fed.us |
| Manager authorizing this project | T.J. Clifford, Forest Hydrologist, Boise N.F. |
| Review cycle | Middle Snake |
| Province / Subbasin | Middle Snake / Payette |
| Short description | Inventory, analyze, identify and repair road problems (road segments contributing sediment, culverts blocking fish passage, or culverts at high risk of failure) in the Deadwood River and Clear Creek drainages. |
| Target species | Bull Trout |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Hydrological Unit Codes: 1705012005, 1705012004, 1705012003, 1705012007 | ||
| Located on the Lowman Ranger District, Boise National Forest, ID | ||
| 44.0792 | -115.6572 | Deadwood River |
| 44.0816 | -115.6102 | Clear Creek |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
| N/A |
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|---|
| The following projects were all implemented in Bear Valley, Middle Fork Salmon River Subbasin and partially funded by BPA: | |
| 1987 | Bearskin Creek Oxbow project, erosion control at oxbow |
| Bearskin Dry Channel project, headcut control | |
| 1988 | Juniper Revetment Project on Elk and Bear Valley Creeks, control streambank erosion |
| Bearskin Wet Meadows project, headcut control | |
| Big Meadows Mine Rehabilitation, stabilization and revegetation of heavily downcut stream reaches | |
| 1989 | Bearskin Dry Meadow Gully stabilization, grade control and streambank erosion control |
| Bear Valley Creek Barbs, 2 large rock barbs constructed to control streambank scouring | |
| Elk Creek Rock/Log Structures, 5 rock and large wood structures installed to increase instream habitat complexity | |
| Elk Creek Oxbow, 217 feet of new channel construction to enhance inchannel sediment storage | |
| Willow planting, 2500 willows planted to increase streambank cover and stability | |
| 1990 | Bearskin Borrow Pit, 4 rock check dams constructed to divert intermittent flow into pit for sediment storage |
| Bearskin Dry Meadow, 16 rock check dams, 9 rock structures and woody debris anchoring on 400 ft of bank installed to enhance sediment storage, raise water table and establish riparian vegetation | |
| Bruce Meadows Gully Erosion, treated 7 headcuts with rock check dams to halt headcutting | |
| Bear Valley Alpine Fir Revetments, treated 300 feet of channel with fir revetments, planted willow to stabilize streambank | |
| Bear Valley Creek Habitat Diversity Structures, Constructed 21 log/rock structures to increase instream habitat complexity | |
| Lower Bear Valley Creek Barbs, constructed 3 large barbs to divert flow away from eroding streambanks | |
| Bear Valley Creek Willow Planting, planted 4,600 willows to increase streambank stability and cover | |
| 1991 | Elk Creek Oxbow Sedge & Willow Planting, planted in new channel (constructed in 89) to increase streambank stability |
| Bear Valley bank deflectors, installed tree deflectors to focus flow away from eroding streambanks on 400 feet of channel | |
| DEQ's "adopt-a-stream" project, planting willow cutting along Bear Valley Creek | |
| Bear Valley Creek Habitat Complexity, installed 57 log/rock structures on Bear Valley Creek | |
| Cold Creek (Bruce Meadows), installed 3 rock check dams in Bruce Meadow and relocated 300 feet of Wyoming Creek road to prevent sediment transport to stream | |
| 1992 | Ayer Meadow Enclosure Fence, constructed 2.3 mi of fence to protect eroding banks during grazing activities |
| Big Meadow Enclosure Fence, constructed 5.3 mi of fence to protect eroding banks during grazing activities | |
| 1993 | Poker Meadows Enclosure Fence, constructed 2.3 mil of fence to protect eroding banks during grazing activities |
| 1997 | Bear Valley and Elk Creek Log Barbs, log barbs installed in 6 stream reaches to encourage bank building |
| The following projects were implemented in the Deadwood River and Clear Creek drainages (not BPA projects): | |
| 1994 | Fish population surveys (electrofishing) conducted in Clear Creek |
| 1995 | Stream Habitat Surveys conducted in the Deadwood River watershed (continued through 1996) |
| Temperature (data loggers) monitoring in the Deadwood River and Clear Creek drainages (continued through 2001) | |
| 1996 | Deadwood Watershed Analysis |
| 1997 | Stream Habitat Surveys conducted in Clear Creek watershed |
| Fish population surveys (snorkeling) conducted in Clear Creek and tributaries | |
| 1998 | Clear Creek Watershed Analysis |
| Bull trout spawning surveys completed in Clear Creek (continued annually through 2001) | |
| Report - Lowman Ranger District Bull Trout Study Progress | |
| Bull trout monitored at long-term stations on Clear Creek and Deadwood River (continued annually through 2001) | |
| 1998 | Lowman Nature Fishing Ponds, constructed, in cooperation with IDFG, to provide off-river consumptive fishing opportunities for hatchery-reared fish, while eliminating many impacts on wild and native fish |
| 1999 | Analysis of and Endangered Species Act consultation on all ongoing projects in bull trout habitat in the Upper South Fork Payette watershed |
| Removal of kokanee weir in Deadwood River above Reservoir to allow for bull trout migration | |
| 2000 | Fish population surveys (snorkeling) conducted in the upper Deadwood River |
| Bull trout spawning surveys completed in South Fork Deer Creek (Deadwood River drainage) | |
| Gravel and lignin sulfonate surfacing on Clear Creek Road to reduce sediment inputs to streams | |
| Report - Effects of Uncharacteristically Large and Intense Wildfire on Native Fish: 14 years of observations |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| N/A | ||
| See Part 2 Narrative for description of relationships to non-BPA projects. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OBJECTIVE 1: Restore quality bull trout habitat through reducing chronic road-related sediment inputs to streams within the Deadwood River and Clear Creek drainages.. | a) Inventory approximately 303 miles of road within the Deadwood River and Clear Creek drainages. | 1 | $56,800 | |
| b) Analyze road segments through a Roads Analysis. | 1 | $16,000 | ||
| c)Identify road segments for repair, closure or obliteration. | 1 | $5,000 | ||
| d) Conduct NEPA and consultation | 2 | $0 | ||
| OBJECTIVE 2: Restore fish connectivity where it is blocked by culvert barriers within the Deadwood River and Clear Creek drainages. | a)Inventory culverts on all fish-bearing streams within the Deadwood River and Clear Creek drainages. | 1 | $5,000 | |
| b) Analyze culverts using FishXing, or similar fish passage program. | 1 | $2,500 | ||
| c) Identify culverts for removal or replacement | 1 | $1,500 | ||
| d) Conduct NEPA and consultation | 1 | $0 | ||
| OBJECTIVE 3: Protect fish habitat through reduction of road-stream crossings at a high-risk of failure to large, pulse-events. | a)Inventory culverts on all perennial and non-perennial channels within the Deadwood River and Clear Creek drainages. | 1 | $5,000 | |
| b)Analyze culverts for risk of failure. | 1 | $2,500 | ||
| c) Identify culverts for removal, replacement | 1 | $1,500 | ||
| d) Conduct NEPA and consultation | $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Obj. 1-3 , Task d)Conduct NEPA and consultation | 2004 | 2005 | $24,000 |
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
| FY 2004 |
|---|
| $24,000 |
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Obj. 1 | e) Implement road repairs, closures, obliterations | 3 | $0 | Yes |
| Obj. 2-3 | e) Implement culvert replacements, removals | 3 | $0 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Obj.1, Task e) Implement road repairs, closures and obliterations | 2004 | 2007 | $600,000 |
| Obj. 2-3, Task e) Implement culvert replacements, removals | 2004 | 2007 | $300,000 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
| FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
|---|---|---|
| $300,000 | $300,000 | $300,000 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Obj. 1-3 | Tasks a-f, project management | 5 | $10,000 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Obj. 1-3, Tasks a-f, Project Management | 2004 | 2007 | $40,000 |
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $10,000 | $10,000 | $10,000 | $10,000 |
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Obj. 1-3, | Task f) Monitor and evaluate project effectiveness | 5 | $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Obj. 1-3, Task f) Monitor and evaluate project effectiveness | 2004 | 2007 | $19,000 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $10,000 | $3,000 | $3,000 | $3,000 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2003 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: SCA field crew (3 months), Analysis Team (5 months) | $63,000 |
| Supplies | 3 GPS units ($4,000/each), 3 field computers ($3,000/ea) | $21,000 |
| Travel | 4 vehicles @ $900/month for 3 months | $10,800 |
| Indirect | FS overhead/Project Management | $11,000 |
| $105,800 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2003 cost | $105,800 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2003 budget request | $105,800 |
| FY 2003 forecast from 2002 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| Student Conservation Corps | $0 | cash | |
| Watershed Restoration Corps | Field inventory | $25,000 | in-kind |
| GIS/GPS equipment and supplies | $21,000 | in-kind | |
| Training | $6,000 | in-kind | |
| Vehicle insurance and liability | $3,000 | in-kind | |
| Personnel Health insurance | $1,800 | in-kind | |
| Tuition stipend | $12,000 | in-kind | |
| Forest Service | Facilities, supplies, equipment and computer support (for project duration) | $100,000 | in-kind |
Other budget explanation
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate
Fundable only if response is adequate
Date:
Mar 1, 2002
Mar 1, 2002
Comment:
Response needed that clarifies the priority of this project in the watershed, including benefits to fish. Is there evidence that fine sediment levels in the stream are at or above a threshold that would cause major biological damage? Is this project likely to provide benefits to bull trout without fish passage at Deadwood Dam? Has an Ecosystem Analysis at the Watershed Scale been done? The proponents are referred to the programmatic section of this report.Comment:
CBFWA believes that analyzing and correcting problems with roads, culverts and such seem to be reasonable approaches to improving conditions for bull trout; however, CBFWA believes that BPA funds should not be used for this work which is sponsored by the US Forest Service on Forest Service administered land to correct previous Forest Service sponsored actions.The potential actions to address listed bull trout needs is extensive. CBFWA questions where BPA's responsibility to mitigate for hydrosystem impacts end and the responsibilities of others begin.
Comment:
Fundable. This would provide some definite long-term reductions in sediment delivery, but benefits to fish may be difficult to assess. The response indicated that a watershed analysis has been completed.Comment: