FY 1999 proposal 9009
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 |
|---|---|
| 9009 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Restore Salmon River (Challis, ID) Area to Healthy Condition |
| Proposal ID | 9009 |
| Organization | Custer County Watershed Group (USFWS, IFRO) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Mark Olson |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box 305 Challis, ID 83226 |
| Phone / email | 2088794428 / |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 1999 |
| Province / Subbasin | Lower Snake / Salmon |
| Short description | Restore river corridor to a healthy condition by reestablishing riparian vegatation and allowing the floodplain to become functional. Social and political factors are being addressed through a county-based watershed group. |
| Target species | Chinook, steelhead, bull trout, rainbow trout, westslope cutthroat trout. |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 1999 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Supplies | $95,000 | |
| Indirect | $5,000 | |
| Subcontractor | $0 | |
| $100,000 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 1999 cost | $100,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 1999 budget request | $100,000 |
| FY 1999 forecast from 1998 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Return to Sponsor for Revision
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Technical Issue: Need to provide more specifics on the restoration techniques and monitoring plan.Good concept, coordination, cost-share.
Comment:
Comment:
This is a reasonable proposal to restore twelve miles of the Salmon River. The work is biologically justified, but there is little description of methods; in particular, are natural features to be restored? Geomorphological expertise should be included. The monitoring section lists who will do the monitoring but does not describe the monitoring adequately. The budget is efficiently allocated to restoration activities with low administrative costs.