FY 1999 proposal 9053

Additional documents

TitleType
9053 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleKirby (Atlanta) Dam Fish Ladder
Proposal ID9053
OrganizationJoint sponsors: USDA Forest Service, Boise National Forest - Idaho Dept. Fish & Game (USFS, BNF)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameTim Burton
Mailing address1249 Vinnell Way Boise, ID 83709
Phone / email2083734100 / tim.burton/r4_boise@fs.fed.us
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 1999
Province / SubbasinUpper Snake / Mid Snake
Short descriptionDesign and construct a fish ladder at Kirby Dam, near Atlanta, Idaho to restore approximately 56.6 miles of stream to spawning and early rearing of bull trout in the Middle Fork Boise River Basin. This project would restore 39% of their historic range.
Target species
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 1999 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 1999 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 1999 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 1999 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 1999 cost
Personnel Engineering and construction $50,000
Fringe Overhead @ 20% $50,000
Supplies Fish ladder $175,000
Subcontractor Idaho Fish & Game $0
Other $25,000
$300,000
Total estimated budget
Total FY 1999 cost$300,000
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 1999 budget request$300,000
FY 1999 forecast from 1998$0
% change from forecast0.ToString("0.0%"))
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
Outyear budget totals

(working on it)

Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: Let contract in spring/summer 1998. Begin construction in October, 1998. Complete construction by end of calendar year 1998. Begin monitoring when bull trout begin migration in the spring of 1999. No constraints are anticipated other than weather.


Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Pass (Fundable)
Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

Technical Issue: Need better monitoring.
Recommendation:
Not fundable
Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

Presentation: The objective of this project is to restore passage at Kirby Dam (a hydropower dam owned by the Forest Service) for bull trout spawning and rearing in the Upper Middle Fork of the Boise River. This area has the best habitat in the basin and can produce excellent results. The Forest Service provided recommendations for bull trout passage. A preliminary design of fish ladder has been conducted. Kirby dam failed in failed in 1991 and passage was not provided over the new structure because of time constraints. Recent studies show the importance of migratory component of the bull trout population. Atlanta Power is a partner, along with BOR, USFS, and IDFG. The bull trout conservation plan for Idaho includes a plan for each key watershed which highlights the risks and threats.

Questions/ Answers:

Have any other passage structures been considered? Answer: The preferred method is vertical slot fish passage. Joe Teeter looked at blasting for jump pools with limited ladders. The engineering was too difficult because of existing roadways etc. The best design is the one proposed.

Does this address specific Council Measures? Answer: I am not familiar with the Program. This is a new project that addresses weak bull trout populations that will go extinct above dam. It meets the criteria for a blocked area.

The original dam was built in 1906. What dams on the system were constructed prior to that date? Answer: None. The loss of fish would be due to Kirby Dam. The diversion dams were built after 1906.

What about the FERC license? Answer: Atlanta Power Company to serves 60 residents year round and will be required to get a FERC license.

Are brook trout present above or below dam? Answer: We only found brook trout in high lakes that have outlets, we are not finding them in other areas in big numbers.

Is there any cost-share? Answer: The Forest Service funds the NEPA work, IDFG is doing the design engineering. Atlanta Power will be getting a FERC license and could maintain the ladder.

What is the tie to the Federal Hydropower system? Answer: This dam blocked passage. The original dam had fish passage that didn't work. Fish had access to the spillway until 1915 but the upper country was blocked after that.

Screening Criteria: No. The proposed projects doesn't meet a specific Council Measure.

Technical Criteria: No. The proposal didn't demonstrate that adequate measures have been taken to prevent exotic species from using the ladder.

Programmatic Criteria: No. The proposal doesn't meet criteria 11, 15, 16,

General Comment: This looks like a worthwhile project. The Forest Service should apply for Bring Back Natives money.

This is not a BPA responsibility.


Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

See CBFWA Committee Comments
Recommendation:
Adequate
Date:
Jun 18, 1998

Comment:

This is a poorly written proposal, but a good idea. The objective is biologically sound and should be done. Scientific background and justification are provided. The proposal should not be in the "Watershed" category.