FY 2003 Middle Snake proposal 200002700

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
200002700 Narrative	Narrative
200002700 Sponsor Response to the ISRP	Response
200002700 Powerpoint Presentation	Powerpoint Presentation
Middle Snake: Malheur Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects	Subbasin Map
Middle Snake: Malheur Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects	Subbasin Map

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Malheur Wildlife Mitigation Project
Proposal ID	200002700
Organization	Burns Paiute Tribe (BPT)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Jess J. Wenick
Mailing address	HC 71, 100 Pasigo Street Burns, OR 97720
Phone / email	5415731375 / jessw@centurytel.net
Manager authorizing this project	Jess J. Wenick
Review cycle	Middle Snake
Province / Subbasin	Middle Snake / Malheur
Short description	Restore and enhance critical fish and wildlife habitat, maintain BLM allotments, enhance historic home range and wintering habitat for resident and migratory species, control weeds, and improve water quality along the Malheur River.
Target species	mule deer, elk, blackcapped chickadee, sage grouse, redband trout, big horn sheep

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description
43.7883	-117.9107	T20S R39E sec. 25, 26, 27, 28, 33, 34, 35, 36
		T20S R40E sec. 30, 31
		T21S R39E sec. 2, 10, 11, 14, 15, 25, 26, 35, 36
		Seven miles east of Juntura, Oregon.

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
2001	Initiated a cooperative fencing project with the BLM to protect/enhance redband trout habitat.
2001	Evaluated the seven-mile stretch of the Malheur River, as well as one of its tributaries that is located within the project area with the assistance of the National Riparian Team.
2001	Began negotiations with Oregon Department of State Lands to enhance the ecological value of the state grazing allotment that is associated with the project.
2001	Hosted a tour with Malheur County Soil and Water Conservation District personnel to ensure that the project is in full compliance with the Clean Water Act and associated legislation.
2001	Completed the gathering of data for the baseline Habitat Evaluation Procedure for the project site.
2001	Initiated the mapping of plant association boundaries for vegetation trend analyses.
2001	Completed pertinent archaeological surveys.
2001	Created and began corresponding with the project's Advisory Committee.
2001	Initiated the planning of a noxious weed study that will be done in conjunction with Agricultural Research Service scientists.
2000	Reduced stocking rates (AUMs) on the associated BLM allotment that is run in common with a majority of the deeded land.

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
2009000	Logan Valley Wildlife Mitigation Project	Co-managed by Department, located near the headwaters of the Malheur River Basin.

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost
1. Annually update management plan.	a. Update and adjust plan to reflect accomplishments and ongoing efforts.	10	$7,000
2. Coordinate with all federal and state agencies that are involved in the active management of the project site.	a. Continue to ensure that management within the subbasin is consistent with agency goals and objectives and compliments the ongoing efforts of restoration and enhancement.	10	$5,000
3. Coordinate with advisory group, local governments, and watershed councils on annual activities, accomplishments, and future strategies.	a. Continue to coordinate with participating agencies and advisory group to update plan and plan design.	5	$5,000
4. Coordinate with BLM to extend existing MOU on management cooperation between the Tribe and BLM on the allotment permits.	a. Annually update MOU with BLM to ensure management on permitted allotments reflects our plans goals and objectives.	10	$5,000
	b. Coordinate and plan efforts to exclude particular allotments from grazing that have sensitive fish and wildlife issues.	10	$5,000

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Annually update plan.	2004	2007	$36,000
2. Coordinate management activities with agencies and advisory panel.	2004	2007	$5,000
3. Public outreach to special interest groups, educational institutions, loval governments and civic organizations.	2004	2007	$5,000
4. Coordinate and implement cultural management into our fish and widlife efforts.	2004	2007	$5,000

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006	FY 2007
$51,000	$30,000	$20,000	$20,000

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
1. Rehabilitate wet/moist plant communities through reseeding and enhancing irrigation efficiency.	a. Alter field topography to improve biomass production of preferred irrigable plant species and reestablish stands of native vegetation.	7	$43,600
	b. Reseed meadows with species that aide in achieving management objectives for the site.	7	$8,920
	c. Replace Malheur irrigation dam.	1	$20,000	Yes
2. Control and eradicate weed populations.	a. Helicopter spray major infestations of scotch thistle, perennial pepperweed, and hoary cress.	2	$20,430	Yes
	b. Spot-spray remaining populations.	ongoing	$2,600
	c. Begin researching the use of herbicides and interspecific competition in rehabilitating medusahead infested uplands.	5	$6,000
3. Protect riparian areas and associated uplands from uncontrolled impacts of domestic herbivores.	a. Construct/ maintain fences where appropriate.	ongoing	$21,450
	b. Install alternate watering sources for those areas that are excluded from use by wildlife.	5	$5,400
	c. Protect streambed from livestock through the placement of gravel in existing water gap on Hunter Creek	1	$1,500
4. Complete and maintain tasks described in the Malheur Wildlife Mitigation Project Implementation Work Plan.	a. Maintain equipment, facilities, vehicles, irrigation systems, and infrastructure in a manner that is appropriate to fulfill all work plan activities.	ongoing	$155,000

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
Rehabilitate wet/moist plant communities through reseeding and enhancing irrigation efficiency.	2004	2007	$56,000
2. Control and eradicate weed populations.	2004	2007	$16,300
3. Protect riparian areas and associated uplands from uncontrolled impacts of domestic herbivores.	2004	2007	$15,000
4. Complete and maintain tasks described in the Malheur Wildlife Mitigation Project Implementation Work Plan.	2004	2007	$68,000

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006	FY 2007
$155,300	$140,000	$120,000	$120,000

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
1.Enhance/maintain meadow production.	a. Apply fertilizer to meadows to facilitate regrowth for fall and winter habitat.	ongoing	$4,200	Yes
2. Control and eradicate weed populations.	a. Spot-spray weed populations.	ongoing	$2,000
3. Protect riparian areas and associated uplands from uncontrolled impacts of domestic herbivores.	a. Maintain fences located throughout the mitigation site.	ongoing	$7,800
4. Complete and maintain tasks described in the Malheur Wildlife Mitigation Project Implementation Work Plan.	a. Maintain equipment, facilities, vehicles, irrigation systems, and infrastructure in a manner that is appropriate to fulfill all work plan activities	ongoing	$26,000
5. Road Maintenance	a. Maintain access roads.	ongoing	$8,000
6. Manage Public Access	a. Control access according to management plan.	ongoing	$5,000
	b. Control recreational activities according to management plan.	ongoing	$1,000
7. Education and Information	a. Inform local community of activities and progress of project.	ongoing	$1,000
	b. Educate Tribal people of the status and progress of our program and project.	ongoing	$1,000
	c. Inform local governments and councils of activites and progress.	ongoing	$500
8. Irrigation Maintenance	a. Maintain ditches and concrete runways on areas that will be irrigated for management purposes.	ongoing	$16,000
	b. Maintain headgates on water control structures.	ongoing	$2,500
	c. Maintain culverts on road ways for irrigation and fish passage.	ongoing	$3,000
	d. Maintain irrigation pumps and water withdrawl equipment.	ongoing	$3,200
9. Habitat Enhancement	Continue to convert introduced stands of meadow/wetland/riparian vegetation with native seedings and plugs where appropriate.	ongoing	$8,780

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Enhance/maintain meadow production.	2004	2007	$20,000
2. Control and eradicate weed populations.	2004	2007	$10,000
3. Protect riparian areas and associated uplands from uncontrolled impacts of domestic herbivores.	2004	2007	$7,000
4. Complete and maintain tasks described in the Malheur Wildlife Mitigation Project Implementation Work Plan.	2004	2007	$5,000
5. Road maintenance.	2004	2007	$8,000
6. Manage public access.	2004	2007	$15,000
7. Education and information	2004	2007	$5,000
8. Habitat enhancement.	2004	2007	$10,000

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006	FY 2007
$80,000	$60,000	$50,000	$50,000

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost
1. Document seasonal/annual vegetation trends in plant communities located within the project area.	a. Map plant associations on deeded land.	ongoing	$5,000
	b. Place transects within each identified plant association to collect cover, density, biomass, frequency, and shrub cover data.	ongoing	$5,000
	c. Install/ maintain photopoints in areas of special interest/concern.	ongoing	$1,000
	d. Transfer all relevant data to GIS.	ongoing	$3,000
	e. Map weed populations through GIS and monitor response to management.		$1,000
2. Document seasonal/annual wildlife population trends within the project area.	a. Conduct surveys as outlined in the Tribal M&E plan.	ongoing	$15,000

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Document seasonal/annual vegetation trends in plant communities located within the project area.	2003	2007	$15,000
2. Document seasonal/annual wildlife population trends within the project area.	2003	2007	$15,000

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006	FY 2007
$30,000	$30,000	$30,000	$30,000

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Item	Note	FY 2003 cost
Personnel	FTE: 5	$175,000
Fringe	28%	$49,000
Supplies		$61,957
Travel	25000 miles/yr x 2 @$.345/mile	$17,250
Indirect	28%	$94,473
Capital	Land Improvements	$30,000
NEPA	N/A	$0
PIT tags		$0
Subcontractor	fertilizer	$4,200
		$431,880

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2003 cost	$431,880
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2003 budget request	$431,880
FY 2003 forecast from 2002	$370,000
% change from forecast	16.7%

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind
Agricultural Research Service	Research	$80,000	in-kind
Oregon State University	Riparian monitoring	$10,000	in-kind
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife	Technical assistance	$3,000	in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

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

REVIEW:
ISRP Preliminary Review (ISRP 2002-2)

Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate

Date:
Mar 1, 2002

Comment:

A response is needed. The management plan, with methods, needs to be described in more detail in the proposal's objective, tasks and methods section, particularly for weed control, native and introduced plantings and seeding, and grazing plans. Brief resumes for the BPT wildlife staff are needed.

This proposal also contains a large M&E component to study mule deer and elk migration patterns, habitat preference and forage utilization, interaction with livestock, changes in forage consumption relative to habitat improvements, and herd population trends. The objectives go beyond basic M&E and include a large-scale research effort involving radio-tagged deer and elk. The ISRP supports the basic M&E in Objective 5 for tracking population trends of target species if the specific sample areas, methods, and sampling frequency and intensity (i.e., how many samples of what type where and when) and data collection protocols are specified in more detail. The sponsors might also consider the expanded use of aerial and ground counts of target species to meet the other M&E objectives, admittedly with less precision than with the use of radio-tagged individuals. However, the need for a research program to study interaction of deer, elk and livestock management in a desert environment is not clear. We suggest that a comprehensive literature review on this issue including work conducted by the ODFW in LaGrange, Oregon, be included in the response. The sponsors should clearly indicate data gaps that are limiting their ability to create an effective operations and management plan for this property.

The proponents should work with the interagency work group supporting Proposal #1992-06100 "Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation," to develop the plans for terrestrial monitoring and evaluation. These plans were reviewed by the ISRP in the addendum to report ISRP 2001-4 "Review of Draft Albeni Falls M&E Plan."

For monitoring and evaluation of aquatic resources, the proponents may wish to work with the sponsors of Project 199405400 from the ODFW for methods of selection of sampling sites for study of aquatic resources. Please refer to Johnson et al. (2001) for data collection protocols on aquatic habitat.

Johnson, D. H., N. Pittman, E. Wilder, J. A. Silver, R. W. Plotnikoff, B. C. Mason, K. K. Jones, P. Roger, T. A. O'Neil, C. Barrett. 2001. Inventory and Monitoring of Salmon Habitat in the Pacific Northwest - Directory and Synthesis of Protocols for Management/Research and Volunteers in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. 211pp.

A few additional comments and questions should be addressed in the response. Plans for management and/or improvement of fish resources in the seven miles of river should be emphasized in the overall O&M plan. What water rights are associated with this property and how would they be used? What are the possibilities for augmenting stream flow through this section? Could sponsors purchase and retire the grazing allotment?

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
High Priority

Date:
May 17, 2002

Comment:

The elk study component has been removed (M&E objectives 1,2, and 3 as well as the elk objectives of objectives 4 and 5) thus the budget has been reduced to $426,880

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 2002-11)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Jun 7, 2002

Comment:

Fundable in part and as amended. Operation and management plans appear to be adequate, while monitoring and evaluation plans were not. Funding should support only the O&M component at this time. Plans for management of the property appear to be sound, but unfortunately, the long term monitoring and evaluation plans are not adequate and should not be implemented. Detailed plans for M&E should be developed and reviewed by the ISRP before funding is recommended. The ISRP believes that it is not appropriate to recommend unconditional funding for projects when one of the ISRP's four primary review criteria (from the 1996 Power Act Amendment) is that we review and recommend only projects that "have provisions for monitoring and evaluation of results."

Communication has been received from the project sponsor on 4/10/02 that they wish to amend the proposed elk study from the 2003-2005 budget for project #200002700. Specifically, the communication that we reviewed indicated that they propose to drop the elk study and substitute their standard M&E efforts. The ISRP assumes that this means that they are now proposing to drop both the elk and deer radio tagging study and substitute their standard M&E efforts for both elk and deer. The ISRP would, at this time, continue to recommend against a radio tagging study of deer distribution and behavior.

Plans for management of the property appear to be sound, but unfortunately, the long term monitoring and evaluation plans are not adequate and should not be implemented. The ISRP suggests that the proponents work with the interagency work group supporting Proposal #1992-06100"Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation," to develop plans for terrestrial monitoring and evaluation. These plans were reviewed by the ISRP in the addendum to report ISRP 2001-4"Review of Draft Albeni Falls M&E Plan." The proponents should review the response provided by the sponsors of the four wildlife mitigation project proposals in southern Idaho (199505700-03). Also, the draft wildlife monitoring and evaluation plan provided by the sponsors of Proposal #32008 is a significant step toward development of wildlife monitoring protocols that might be recommended to Provinces in the Columbia Basin.

Long-term monitoring for habitat must have some probabilistic procedures for site selection with economical data collection procedures. Intensive procedures for subsampling a few subjectively selected macroplots or clumps of willows, i.e., "index" sites, do not provide the coverage necessary to evaluate long-term trends and changes in habitat over large areas. The ISRP encourages the proponents to join the interagency work group to develop plans for monitoring and evaluation of wildlife and terrestrial habitat and to review the Draft Albeni Falls M&E Plan. While we recognize this is a wildlife project, habitat improvement projects on the tributaries should also address remnant redband trout population status in these locations.

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
A w/conditions

Date:
Jul 23, 2002

Comment:

Recommend funding O&M only until M&E plan is developed that receives support from ISRP.

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Oct 30, 2002

Comment:

Project Issue 2: Burns Paiute Tribe ongoing projects 200000900 -- Logan Valley Wildlife Mitigation Project; and 200002700 -- Malheur River Wildlife Mitigation Project.

Both of these ongoing projects were rated as "Fund in Part", with the ISRP supporting the O&M components. Bonneville comments support funding for each ("A" ratings) with the condition that the ISRP concerns about monitoring and evaluation are addressed. CBFWA rated both as High Priority.

Many of the objectives and tasks outlined in the in Section 2 (Budget for Planning & Design phase), and Section 5 (Budget for Construction/Implementation phase) should appropriately be defined under Section 6 (Budget for O&M phase). The Council staff worked with the project sponsor to make these corrections. In addition, after the proposals were submitted additional needs have been defined due to the recent acquisitions and implementation of the management plans associated with the projects. Finally, and again after the original proposals were developed, the complexity of the acquisitions have required additional effort beyond that originally anticipated, especially as it relates to the grazing allotments associated with the state and BLM lands (total of 38,377 acres). Bonneville has realigned the budgets of the project to protect the acquisitions.

Council Recommendation: The Council recommends funding these ongoing proposals with the following modifications and conditions:

Project 2000-009-00 - Shift objectives and tasks in Sections 4 and 5 to Section 6 (per September 3, 2002 letter from BPT to the Council). Consolidate appropriate objectives and tasks. During contracting Bonneville and the sponsor should ensure that objectives currently defined in Section 5, objective 2, task (a) is appropriate for O&M support. Funding for Fiscal Year 2004 and 2005 are conditioned on the approval of an M&E plan to be submitted by the sponsor and reviewed by the ISRP. Funding to remain at $146,842 for Fiscal Years 2003 through 2005.

Project 2000-027-00 - Shift objectives and tasks in Sections 4 and 5 to Section 6 for a total budget of $285,000 for Fiscal Year 2003 (per July 29, 2002 meeting discussion and August 19, 2002 letter from BPT). The M&E funding in the proposal in FY 2004 and 2005 at $30,000 is conditioned on the approval of an M & E plan by the ISRP. Project funding for Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005 are conditioned on the approval of M&E plan and will be increased by 3.4% each of those years.

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Decision

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Apr 30, 2003

Comment:

Fund as recommended

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

On track. Additional funds above base dependant upon M&E plan review and approval, per Council conditional recommendation.

REVIEW:
Project Sponsor Request for FY04-05

Recommendation:

Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

REVIEW:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review

Funding category:
expense

Date:
May 2005

FY05 NPCC start of year:	FY06 NPCC staff preliminary:	FY06 NPCC July draft start of year:
$324,690	$324,690	$324,690

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website