Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Enhance and Protect Fisheries in the Wolf Creek Watershed |
| Proposal ID | 9015 |
| Organization | Wolf Creek Reclamation District (WCRD) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Jeremy Titcomb, Chairman |
| Mailing address | 41 - B Wandling Road Winthrop, WA 98862 |
| Phone / email | 5099963302 / |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 1999 |
| Province / Subbasin | Upper Mid-Columbia / Methow |
| Short description |
Reconstruct diversion structure to provide for fish passage, fish screen, and measuring devices; line/rebuild 5,100 lineal feet of distribution system piping to eliminate transmission loss; relocate diversion on Wolf Creek to prevent stream dewatering. |
| Target species | |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
|
None |
|
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 |
|---|
| Personnel |
Temporary Employee for WCRD |
$20,000 |
| Fringe |
10% |
$2,000 |
| Supplies |
Fish Screen, Piping, Monitoring Equip., Access Road Dam Improvements. Cost includes installation. |
$360,000 |
| Operating |
None |
$0 |
| Capital |
None |
$0 |
| Tag |
None |
$0 |
| Travel |
|
$250 |
| Indirect |
|
$500 |
| Subcontractor |
Not Selected |
$75,000 |
| Other |
|
$91,550 |
| $549,300 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 1999 cost | $549,300 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 1999 budget request | $549,300 |
| FY 1999 forecast from 1998 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: All tasks, except those associated with Object 2, Task C, can be completed in 1999. This Task will be implemented after changes to the related water rights have been authorized by Washington Dept. of Ecology. Other potential delays relate to permitting.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Criteria 1: Technical Criteria - Yes: This project is inappropriately designated as a Flow/survival project type. It is primarily a watershed project and should so indicate. Difficult to evaluate because criteria are insufficient to fully evaluate watershed projects.
Criteria 2: Objectives Criteria - Yes
Criteria 3: Milestones Criteria - Yes
Criteria 4: Resources Criteria - Yes:
Recommendation:
Fund (low priority)
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Budget reduction justification forthcoming
Recommendation:
Adequate
Date:
Jun 18, 1998
Comment:
Overall, the goals appear worthy. However, the proposal does not specify that the water saved will be reserved for instream uses. It also does not describe the benefits to fish and wildlife. This is an irrigation improvement to a large private ranch and the ISRP wondered if BPA was the right funding source.