FY 2002 Mountain Snake proposal 28060

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleAssess Stream Quality for Salmonid Recovery in the Lower Clearwater Subbasin
Proposal ID28060
OrganizationNez Perce Soil and Water Conservation Distric (Nez Perce SWCD)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameDeb Koziol
Mailing address3113 East Main Lewiston, Idaho 83501
Phone / email2087469886 / Deb.Koziol@id.usda.gov
Manager authorizing this projectKyle J. Wilson, Chair, NPSWCD
Review cycleMountain Snake
Province / SubbasinMountain Snake / Clearwater
Short descriptionComplete a stream health assessment in order to identify priority areas for fish habitat restoration.
Target speciesSnake River Steelhead (ESU - threatened), Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon (ESU-threatened)
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
46.45 -116.8 Lower Clearwater
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
Habitat RPA Action 150
Habitat RPA Action 151

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription
NMFS Action 183 NMFS Initiate at least three tier 3 studies (each necessarily comprising several sites) within each ESU (a single action may affect more than one ESU). In addition, at least two studies focusing on each major management action must take place within the Columbia River basin. The Action Agencies shall work with NMFS and the Technical Recovery Teams to identify key studies in the 1-year plan. Those studies will be implemented no later than 2003.

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
199608600 Idaho Soil Conservation Commission Clearwater Focus Program This project implements the goals and objectives of this program.
19970600 Nez Perce Tribal Focus Watershed Program This project implements the goals and objectives of this program.

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
1. Assess the stream health of 6 watersheds A. Identify landowners .0.02 $2,000
B. Develop a GIS based land ownership coverage identifying specific landowners and tracts $4,000 Yes
C. Compile maps, select sites, determine access needs. .02 $2,000
D. Obtain access to assessment sites. .02 $2,000
E. Advertise and select field crew .02 $2,000
F. Train field Crew 0.06 $4,000
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
1. Assess the stream health of 6 watersheds 3 3 $4,500
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
FY 2003
$4,500

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 costSubcontractor
1. Assess the stream health of 6 watersheds. G. Collect field data. 1.2 $52,000
H. Analyze Data .2 $6,148
I. Complete a final report .2 $6,000
I. Complete a final report - publishing $5,000 Yes
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
1. Assess the stream health of 6 watersheds 3 4 $47,000
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
FY 2003FY 2004
$39,000$12,000

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2002 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 2002 costSubcontractor
2. Monitor stream temperature within the project area watersheds. A. Collect stream temperature data. .2 $5,000
B. Compile stream temperature data and distribute report. .2 $5,000
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
2. Monitor stream temperature within the project area watersheds. 3 4 $14,000
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
FY 2003FY 2004
$7,000$7,000

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2002 cost
Personnel FTE: 2.34 $53,748
Fringe 34% $10,000
Supplies $7,000
Travel $7,000
Indirect 10% $9,400
Subcontractor $8,000
$95,148
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2002 cost$95,148
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2002 budget request$95,148
FY 2002 forecast from 2001$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
NRCS training $6,000 in-kind
IDFG training, SVAP protocol review $6,000 in-kind
DEQ coordinate temperature monitoring $2,000 in-kind

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
Date:
Sep 28, 2001

Comment:

A response is needed. Project goal is to complete a stream health assessment in order to identify priority areas for fish habitat restoration using the SVAP protocol - stream visual assessment protocol (NRCS) - in six very small Clearwater mainstem tributaries. The Clearwater Watershed Assessment does not get to the needed resolution on these small streams. An earlier demonstration project in Hatwai Creek has proven to be very effective in engaging local landowners. The initially reluctantly participating landowner in Hatwai Creek realized economic gains to his operation (as well as the predicted biological gains) became one of the project's greatest advocates.

A response is needed to provide additional information on the SVAP method of the NRCS. Additionally, more discussion of how the assessment information will be used to identify prioritized restoration alternatives.


Recommendation:
Recommended Action
Date:
Nov 30, 2001

Comment:


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Dec 21, 2001

Comment:

Fundable (relatively low priority) if local watershed councils are formed as part of this project in conjunction with the Clearwater Focus Program and the Clearwater Subbasin Focus Watershed Program. The project goal is to complete a stream health assessment in order to identify priority areas for fish habitat restoration using the SVAP - stream visual assessment protocol (NRCS) - in six small lower Clearwater mainstem tributaries. The Clearwater Watershed Assessment does not get to the needed resolution on these small streams.

The primary value of the project is educational, performing the sorely-needed role of involving private landowners who will be pivotal in any continued rehabilitation of these six streams that produce wild A-run steelhead. An earlier demonstration project in Hatwai Creek has proven to be very effective in engaging local landowners.

The SVAP may be a good educational and public involvement tool, but elsewhere by itself its snapshot approach has added virtually nothing to what is already known. To keep that from occurring, proponents of this project have secured a significant collaborative commitment by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game to concurrently assess fish populations. That significantly enhances the proposal in the reviewers eyes.


Recommendation:
Date:
Feb 1, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Benefits are indirect. Will assist in prioritizing restoration actions.

Comments
This project is likely to confirm that six small streams have been severely degraded by past land use. Needed actions such as riparian easements or fences, may already be known.

Already ESA Req? No

Biop? Yes


Recommendation:
C
Date:
Feb 11, 2002

Comment:

Do not recommend. This project should wait until subbasin planning is completed and the need for this project can be properly assessed.

BPA RPA RPM:
--

NMFS RPA/USFWS RPM:
183


Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Apr 19, 2002

Comment: