FY 1999 proposal 199705600

Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary

Reviews and Recommendations

Additional documents

Title	Type
199705600 Narrative	Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Lower Klickitat River Riparian & In-Channel Habitat Enhancement Project
Proposal ID	199705600
Organization	Yakama Indian Nation Fisheries Program (YIN)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Mel Sampson
Mailing address	P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948
Phone / email	5098656262 / yinfish@yakama.com
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycle	FY 1999
Province / Subbasin	Lower Mid-Columbia / Klickitat
Short description	Improve habitat and riparian conditions for steelhead, coho with cattle exclosure fencing, land aquistions, large woody debris, enhance pool formation, capture spawning gravels, revegetation of riparian areas, augment summer flows, reduce sediment.
Target species

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Year	Accomplishment

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
9506800	Klickitat Passage/Habitat Preliminary Design	Baseline data collection through project 9506800 can used to more effectively direct watershed project in the Klickitat basin.

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	1/2 Bookkeeper, 1/12 YIN Biologist, 1/4 WDFW biologist no cost. additional cost share NRCS USFWS	$11,000
Fringe	15.3 %	$1,683
Supplies	Fencing supplies, tools, rooted stock, cuttings, in-channel structures	$70,000
Operating	Materials and analysis TFW habitat monitoring for project	$7,000
Capital	Land acquisition, off-channel livestock watering	$95,000
Tag	none	$0
Travel	none	$0
Indirect	23.6%	$40,000
Subcontractor	Northwest Service Academy (NWSA); Cahill's Well Drilling; Land Appraisal; Archaeological Survey	$71,000
		$295,683

Total estimated budget

Total FY 1999 cost	$295,683
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 1999 budget request	$295,683
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: None are anticipated

Reviews and recommendations

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

REVIEW:
CBFWA: Watershed Technical Group Comments

Recommendation:
Return to Sponsor for Revision*

Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

Technical Issue: Clearly describe how the proposed action addresses the critical limiting factor, the assessment that identified those factors as being limiting, specifically what the measurable objectives are, and how the results will be monitored to determine if they are as expected.

Technical Issue: Need site-specific information (miles of fencing, etc.)

Technical Issue: Clarify specifically what is being proposed and what the expected results are.

Technical Issue: Need to clearly describe how the techniques are valid and appropriate to achieve the objectives, and the specific fish and wildlife benefit.

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

REVIEW:
ISRP Review (ISRP 1998-1)

Recommendation:
Inadequate

Date:
Jun 18, 1998

Comment:

This is a well-written proposal, but it should provide more specifics regarding methods and better technical justification. The proposal does not provide enough information to ensure that they will arrive at a technically justifiable baseline. Photo-monitoring would be useful, but vegetative surveys should be used to document project success.

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:
$397,414	$397,414	$397,414

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website