FY 1999 proposal 199607705

Additional documents

TitleType
199607705 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleRestore Mccomas Meadows
Proposal ID199607705
OrganizationNez Perce Tribal Fisheries/Watershed (NPT)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameIra Jones
Mailing addressP.O. Box 365 Lapwai, ID 83540
Phone / email2088437406 / iraj@nezperce.org
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 1999
Province / SubbasinLower Snake / Clearwater
Short descriptionRESTORING THE MEADOW CREEK (MCCOMAS MEADOWS) WITHIN THE CLEARWATER SUBBASIN IS THE OVERALL GOAL OF THIS PROJECT. WE WILL ACHIEVE THIS WORKING WITHIN AN OVERALL WATERSHED APPROACH, COMPLETING FOUR OBJECTIVES WITHIN THE MEADOW.
Target speciesFall Chinook Salmon, Steelhead, Resident Fish
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
9607701 McComas Meadows-Nez Perce National Forest Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
9607700 Clearwater Focus Watershed Co-coordinators with the Nez Perce Tribe and the State of Idaho.

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 $52,640
Fringe $6,947
Supplies $3,670
Operating all O & M is included within the other catergories included in the budget proposal. $0
Travel $10,100
Indirect $22,658
Subcontractor Nez Perce National Forest; Earth Conservation Corp.- Salmon Corp.-Nez Perce $23,100
Other $4,438
Other $4,438
$127,991
Total estimated budget
Total FY 1999 cost$127,991
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 1999 budget request$127,991
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: EXISTING SCHEDULES FOR THE 1999 BUDGET YEAR MAY CHANGE DUE TO WEATHER CONDITIONS. ALL ON-THE-GROUND PROJECTS OCCUR IN A MOUNTAINOUS AREA 2500 FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL, WHERE UNPREDICTABLE WEATHER PATTERNS MAY OCCUR


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:

Management Issue: Management flag – concerned about the "in-lieu" issue and the delegation of funding responsibility. The Forest Service should be contributing more of the cost share.

Technical Issue: Explain why a nursery needs constructed in order to revegetate the meadow.

Technical Issue: Explain how this project is coordinated with other projects in the watershed.


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:


Recommendation:
Inadequate after revision
Date:
Jun 18, 1998

Comment:

This proposal is unclear. It does not adequately describe the history of the project and the area. The proposal is for stream protection along with planting of riparian vegetation. Although the proposal states that grazing has been removed for ten years, it does not adequately describe what is causing the current problems. In particular, if livestock have been excluded, one would expect that ample vegetation should regenerate. The proposal does not demonstrate that planting is needed. The proposal also is vague on habitat improvement methods, and the horticultural center is not described in enough detail. The budget is not adequately explained and should be analyzed by BPA ($525,553 (1997-2003) to treat only 2.5 miles of stream)
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:
$320,987 $320,987 $320,987

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website