FY 2000 proposal 20509

Additional documents

TitleType
20509 Narrative Narrative
20509 Sponsor Response to the ISRP Response

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleHellsgate Big Game Winter Range Umbrella Project
Proposal ID20509
OrganizationColville Confederated Tribes (CCT)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameSteven L. Judd
Mailing addressP.O. Box 150 Nespelem, WA 99155
Phone / email5096342117 /
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 2000
Province / SubbasinInter-Mountain / Columbia Upper
Short descriptionUmbrella project to protect, mitigate, enhance and evaluate wildlife habitats and species for partial mitigation for losses to wildlife resulting from Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dams.
Target speciesMule deer, sharp-tailed and blue grouse, mourning dove, Lewis and downy woodpecker, yellow warbler, bobcat, mink, bald eagle, and spotted sandpiper.
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
1993 Acquired W.K. property-4814 ac.
1995 Acquired H.K. property-4800 ac.
1995 Acquired Berg property-6300 ac.
1997 Acquired Nespelem Bend property-517 ac.
1997 Acquired Redford Canyon property-221 ac.
1998 Acquired Friedlander property-60 ac.
1998 Acquired Hinman property-770 ac.
1998 Acquired Sand Hills property-1030 ac.
1998 Conducted baseline HEP's (1993-1998) on acquisitions
1998 Implemented O & M on acquisitions (1993-1998)
1998 Implemented M & E on acquisitions (1993-1998)

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
9506700 CCT Performance Contract for Continuing Acquisition
20509 Hellsgate Big Game Winter Range Wildlife Mitigation Umbrella Project
9204800 Hellsgate Big Game Winter Range Operation and Maintenance Project

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 See Individual proposals under this section for costs. $0
Fringe $0
Supplies $0
$0
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2000 cost$0
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2000 budget request$0
FY 2000 forecast from 1999$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
See Hellsgate O&M Project No. 9204800 for specifics. We receive cost sharing periodically on a project by project basis from agencies such as BIA & NRCS. BIA has the responsibility for major fire control efforts on Hellsgate Project lands $0 unknown
Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: Note: Above items 5 through 7 are on going and costs are to be dtermined. Breakdown of negotiations with landowners could casue schedule changes and delays. Catastrophic events such as wildfires could cause setbacks in meeting time lines on objectives.


Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
NA - Umbrella Proposal
Date:
Jun 15, 1999

Comment:

Recommendation: NA - Umbrella Proposal

Comments: Reviewers commented on the inadequacy of this umbrella proposal. Land acquisition is extremely important in the region but the umbrella was not informative. The authors should supply a history of their efforts not just of funding. They should provide more details on their objectives. This umbrella proposal, intended to be an overall explanation of why a set of projects needs to be done, falls short in a number of ways. First is the relationship between past and proposed land acquisitions to each other. Do they tend to form continuous or connected parcels or are they essentially all independent of each other? The former is preferred. Second, whether or not there are any potential benefits to other organisms by the proposed acquisitions is not even considered. What parcels are targeted for acquisition and why and how they relate to the overall goals of the Fish and Wildlife Program are not discussed. In general, the umbrella was not useful.


Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:


Recommendation:
Not Reviewed
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Not reviewed