FY 2000 proposal 20136

Additional documents

TitleType
20136 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleBurns Paiute Mitigation Coordinator
Proposal ID20136
OrganizationBurns Paiute Tribe (BPT)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameHaace St. Martin
Mailing addressHC 71 - 100 Pasigo St. Burns OR 97720
Phone / email5415731533 / burns@orednet.org
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 2000
Province / SubbasinMiddle Snake / Malheur
Short descriptionDevelop wildife mitigation strategies consisting of selection, scientific analysis, implemention (acquistion, enhancement, etc.), O&M, and evaluation of wildlife Mitigation projects for the Burns Paiute Tribe.
Target species
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
1 Stinkingwater salmonid project

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
9705900 Stinkingwater Salmonid Fisheries project sponsored by BPT in the same Watershed (Malheur River Basin).
9107 North Fork Malheur Bull Trout Assessment Fisheries project that has been added in addition to the Stinkingwater Salmonid assesments (North Fork Malheur Basin).
9705900 Securing Wildlife Mitigation Sites - Oregon
9106 Acquisition Malheur Wildlife site
975900 Securing Wildlife Mitigation Sites - Oregon
5519400 Burns Paiute Tribe - Mitigation Coordinator

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2000 cost
Personnel 25,527 $25,527
Fringe 6,382 $6,382
Supplies 3,915 $3,915
Travel 4,179 $4,179
Indirect 26.3% of 39,888 $10,491
$50,494
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2000 cost$50,494
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2000 budget request$50,494
FY 2000 forecast from 1999$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: Delays due to extensive landowner negotiations and slow responsive time from the regulatory agencies regarding issuance of permits for proposed in-stream work. Disagreement on language in MOA between state, Federal and Tribal agencies.


Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Jun 15, 1999

Comment:

Recommendation: Fund, fold into the related Burns Paiute Tribe projects, as an administrative/staffing cost. This proposal requests a reasonable coordination position, but, as a separate proposal, it does not allow for a scientific review. The relationship to the other proposals that describe the actions for which this position is responsible must be made clear. There appears to be no reason to separate this from the other proposals. As the ISRP commented last year, funding for administrative functions should be incorporated in the action proposal.

Comments: The proposal is included under the Oregon Wildlife Mitigation Umbrella. The employment of a coordinator-planner for the Burns Paiute Tribe is probably justified. However, this proposal cannot be evaluated well for scientific criteria, as it does not include the specific acquisition or OM, ME with which the coordinator will be involved. However, the Oregon Mitigation proposal is well formulated as to acquisition and the planner is a reasonable position. It appears that the Malheur acquisition is to be supervised by the planner and that proposal is well justified. Budget detail is good.

Reference is made to projects that have been started but not completed. How do these relate to work being proposed? The proposal has a lot of detail on the total effort to secure wildlife mitigation sites but much less on the role and actions of the mitigation coordinator position, for which funding is requested. The specifics of the Burns Paiute activities are hard to discern except in the table of objectives and tasks. This is probably a reasonable proposal, but the specifics are not explained well.


Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:


Recommendation:
Not Fundable
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Contained within OWC projects above the line
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000

Comment:

[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting];