FY 1999 proposal 199401807

Additional documents

TitleType
199401807 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleEnhance Habitat For Fall Chinook, Steelhead and Bulltrout
Proposal ID199401807
OrganizationPomeroy Conservation District (PCD)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameDuane G. Bartels
Mailing addressP.O. Box 468 Pomeroy, WA 99347
Phone / email5098431998 / duanebar@pomeroy-wa.com
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 1999
Province / SubbasinLower Snake / Tucannon
Short descriptionEnhance 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 speciesFall Chinook, Steelhead, Bulltrout
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
9202602 WA Model Watershed Leads Technical lead to Implement WS Plans

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 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 forecast0.ToString("0.0%"))
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
Outyear budget totals

(working on it)

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