FY 1999 proposal 9088

Additional documents

TitleType
9088 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleImplement Best Management Practices
Proposal ID9088
OrganizationCowlitz and Wahkiakum Conservation Districts (CCD and WCD)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameDarin Houpt
Mailing address2125 8th Avenue Longview, WA 98632
Phone / email3604251880 / dhoupt@longv.walongview.fsc.usda.gov
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 1999
Province / SubbasinLower Columbia / Cowlitz
Short descriptionAssist landowners with improving water quality and fish habitat. Examples include: livestock fencing, riparian plantings, and instream structures.
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
N/A

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 Project Administration, Hydrologist, Resource Technician, Engineer Technician $40,255
Fringe Medical, retirement, annual and sick leave $13,704
Supplies Materials to implement BMP’s (plant materials, fencing, instream habitat, etc) $40,142
Operating Landowner responsibility with some staff time $0
Capital N/A $0
Travel $1,250
Indirect $2,860
Subcontractor no subcontractors will be used $0
$98,211
Total estimated budget
Total FY 1999 cost$98,211
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 1999 budget request$98,211
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: Permits and/or Design approval


Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Return to Sponsor for Revision
Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

Technical Issue: Need to more clearly define the objectives and explain how the funding will be used to achieve those objectives. The objectives in section 4 are not consistent with those in the narrative (section 7).

Technical Issue: Explain how the budget is appropriate to fulfill the objectives; e.g., how many acres of land will be BMPs be applied to, miles of fence, need clarification on how much implementation will be done and how much it will cost versus the cost of coordination functions.

Technical Issue: The specific measurable expected results are not detailed. Need to describe relationship and coordination with project 9127.


Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

Questionable management value. Proposal was either incomplete but did not provide adequate information to determine whether management criteria were met or complete but did not meet critical management criteria.
Recommendation:
Inadequate proposal, adequate purpose
Date:
Jun 18, 1998

Comment:

This proposal presents a logical sequence of tasks and objectives to improve water quality and habitat conditions in the local watershed. However, no specific benchmarks are identified, so it is difficult to judge how the principal investigators are going to conduct monitoring and evaluation. The proposal demands a leap of faith that best management practices are sufficient and adequate to achieve habitat restoration and to increase salmon abundance. Other than an initial link to the Fish and Wildlife Program, no mention was made of the project’s effects on salmon or habitat. This proposal is similar to other watershed proposals in that it does not give a good summary of its funding portfolio.