FY 1999 proposal 198346700

Additional documents

TitleType
198346700 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleMitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam
Proposal ID198346700
OrganizationMontana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameBrian Marotz / Steve Dalbey
Mailing address490 N. Meridian Rd. Kalispell, MT 59901
Phone / email4067514546 / marotz@digisys.net
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 1999
Province / SubbasinUpper Columbia / Kootenai
Short description Execute watershed / habitat enhancement projects mitigating hydropower impacted native fish populations. Implement operational plan for Kootenai River and Libby Reservoir. Recover endangered Kootenai white sturgeon. Develop burbot recovery program.
Target speciesbull trout (proposed ESA listing) Naturally spawning fish without targeted artificial enhancement, contributes to rebuilding weak but recoverable native population. Kootenai River white sturgeon ESA listed, artificial production to delay or avoid extinction. mountain whitefish Contributes to rebuilding weak but recoverable native population, restoration through hatchery production or imprint planting to restore wild runs. westslope cutthroat trout Naturally spawning native fish without targeted artificial enhancement, contributes to rebuilding weak but recoverable native population. interior redband trout Naturally spawning native populations, initiation of spawning runs in historic range using experimental imprint planting. Some areas naturally spawning fish without targeted artificial enhancement, contributes to rebuilding weak but recoverable native population. kokanee Naturally spawning fish without targeted artificial enhancement. Kootenai River burbot Naturally spawning fish with possible experimental outplanting, contributes to rebuilding weak but recoverable native population
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
9401000 MFWP- Libby Reservoir Excessive Drawdown Habitat Enhancement
9608702 MFWP- Focus Watershed Native Species Recovery
8806500 IDFG-Kootenai River Fisheries Investigations White Sturgeon Revovery
8806400 KTI – White Sturgeon Experimental Aquaculture White Sturgeon Recovery
8346500 Libby and Hungry Horse Modeling Technical Analysis Reservoir Modeling
9404900 Kootenai River Ecosystem Improvement Study Ecosystem Function

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 $143,609
Fringe $46,795
Supplies Includes Equipment $50,232
Operating $9,904
Travel $24,427
Indirect $38,536
Subcontractor Payne and Associates; University of Idaho; Wildlands Hydrology; WestWater Consultants $13,490
Other $173,007
Other $173,007
Other $173,007
Other $173,007
$1,019,021
Total estimated budget
Total FY 1999 cost$1,019,021
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 1999 budget request$1,019,021
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: None


Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Fundable
Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

Presentation: This project is the primary Kootenai mitigation project and is in transition from finishing the IFIM (9502500) to implementing mitigation. The public review process is complete and the plan now goes to the Council. This project will replace the excessive drawdown project (9401001) if the IRCs are implemented. Construction of Libby Dam caused the initial impacts but the operations continue to cause impacts. Until the IRCs are implemented, damage from excessive drawdowns will be covered under project 9401001.

Questions/Answers: Is this a watershed project? Answer: Yes, it is driven by the watershed coordinator but that project does not provide money for on-the-ground projects in other areas. The Libby Mitigation Plan equals the Libby Watershed Plan.

Would it be more cost effective to have one group do all of the sturgeon work? Answer: Not really because they share equipment. Work on the ESA sturgeon is non-discretionary. Most of the work is done in Idaho, however Montana does

some population estimates.

Screening Criteria: Yes

Technical Criteria: Yes

Programmatic Criteria: Yes


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:


Recommendation:
Adequate
Date:
Jun 18, 1998

Comment:

This project has been going on since 1982, but the first tasks listed are documentary (administrative planning) tasks. These tasks include completing the Final Libby Mitigation Program (needed to be on a par with the Flathead subbasin) and operational guidelines for target fish species at various flow regimes. These will likely be good planning products, but the proposal seems to duplicate what other Kootenai projects may be doing and offers little physical mitigation. Coordination with other Kootenai projects should be explained. The reliance on instream flow incremental method (IFIM) should be viewed with caution. If IFIM is implemented, it would hardwire use of heavy bioengineering techniques that could be costly to maintain in the long-term. This program should be organized into an umbrella proposal with subproposals on the major objectives. Extending the project to 2055 seems optimistic, especially for "pilot" projects. The proposal quality was in the midrange of the set.