FY 1999 proposal 199401807
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Enhance Habitat For Fall Chinook, Steelhead and Bulltrout |
| Proposal ID | 199401807 |
| Organization | Pomeroy Conservation District (PCD) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Duane G. Bartels |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box 468 Pomeroy, WA 99347 |
| Phone / email | 5098431998 / duanebar@pomeroy-wa.com |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 1999 |
| Province / Subbasin | Lower Snake / Tucannon |
| Short description | Enhance fish habitat, reduce sediment load from Pataha Creek, reduce water temperature, improve and enhance riparian vegetation and promote cooperation between landowners and agencies involved in Pataha Creek Model Watershed Plan. |
| Target species | Fall Chinook, Steelhead, Bulltrout |
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 |
|---|
| 9202602 |
WA Model Watershed Leads |
Technical lead to Implement WS Plans |
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 |
Wages for tech lead and clerical |
$29,505 |
| Fringe |
Insurance, district share Soc. Sec., medicare |
$10,521 |
| Supplies |
Office supplies, monitoring supplies |
$3,230 |
| Operating |
Maintanence of existing demonstration projects. |
$5,000 |
| Travel |
Travel to meetings, seminars |
$1,232 |
| Subcontractor |
N/A |
$40,000 |
| Other |
|
$123,512 |
| $213,000 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 1999 cost | $213,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 1999 budget request | $213,000 |
| 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: Improving and maintaining habitat requires long term commitments between landowners and all agencies involved. Long term cost-share availability on all projects and practices is necessary for continued landowner involvement in the watershed program.
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: Explain why the costs doubled although the proposal appears unchanged from FY98.Technical Issue: Identify the watershed plan upon which project implementation is based.
Technical Issue: Identify the existing resource condition (what fish are currently in the habitat area).
Technical Issue: Resubmit the proposal for FY99 work based on FY98 funding.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Recommendation:
Adequate after revision
Date:
Jun 18, 1998
Comment:
The revised proposal provides more information. The location of sediment sampling sites should be shown on a map. Since the project has a history, the proposal should present results obtained to date (pre-project temperatures, sedimentation, etc). The no-till practices may lead to more herbicide and pesticide use; they should describe to what extent they will limit herbicide and pesticide use. The proposal includes language about fecal coliform counts, but this is not the easiest or most relevant way to monitor fish habitat. The terms "clearing" and "snagging" raise a red flag; does this mean the removal of beneficial structures. The removal of fish migration barriers is not described in enough detail to ensure that they are not removing snags that are beneficial to fish. The benefits to fish and wildlife are not well explained. The methods and monitoring for this project are not well described.
REVIEW:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
Funding category:
expense
Date:
May 2005
| FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
| $80,000 |
$80,000 |
$80,000 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website