FY 2000 proposal 199401500
Contents
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 |
---|---|
199401500 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | Idaho Fish Screen Improvement - O&M |
Proposal ID | 199401500 |
Organization | Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Name | Patrick Marcuson |
Mailing address | P.O. Box 1336 Salmon, ID 83467-1336 |
Phone / email | 2087566022 / pmarcuso@idfg.state.id.us |
Manager authorizing this project | |
Review cycle | FY 2000 |
Province / Subbasin | Mountain Snake / Salmon |
Short description | Enhance passage of juvenile and adult fish in Idaho's anadromous fish corridors by consolidation and elimination of irrigation diversions. Minimize impact of irrigation diversion dams, screen pump intakes and loss of fish to irrigation canals. |
Target species | Chinook, Sockeye, Steelhead, Bull Trout and other indigenous resident salmonids. |
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 |
---|---|
1993 | Built Anadromous Fish Screen Shop |
1994 | Equipment purchased and screen construction to NMFS criteria. |
1997 | Constructed fish screens on consolidated canals, three fish friendly diversions, 20 pump intake screens, 2 infiltration screens and 17 headgates. |
1998 | Constructed fish screens, 4 fish friendly diversions, safety fences, canal eliminations and two stream reconnects, 20 pump intake screens, and 12 headgates. |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Project ID | Title | Description |
---|---|---|
9401700 | Idaho Model Watershed Habitat | Joint projects |
9202603 | Idaho Model Watershed Admin/Improvement | Technical Work Group advise/priorities |
9107200 | Redfish Lake Sockeye | Keep sockeye smolts from diversions |
8909800 | Idaho Supplementation Studies | Movement vs. fish screen efficiencies |
9600700 | Consolidation Program | Joint projects |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 cost |
---|---|---|
Personnel | Fisheries and Engineering Technicians | $41,670 |
Fringe | $14,420 | |
Supplies | $54,000 | |
Capital | Contracts | $629,840 |
Construction | $12,000 | |
Travel | $7,000 | |
Indirect | $31,000 | |
Subcontractor | Contracts | $210,070 |
$1,000,000 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2000 cost | $1,000,000 |
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
Total FY 2000 budget request | $1,000,000 |
FY 2000 forecast from 1999 | $0 |
% change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
---|---|---|---|
Mitchell Act | Grant award O-M | $1,516,208 | unknown |
Irrigators/Landowners | Cost sharing | $120,000 | unknown |
NRCS | Professional employee assistance | $0 | unknown |
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: Some proposed consolidations, eliminations and conservation agreements of irrigation diversions fail at last hour because one or more ditch owners cannot agree. Inconsistent or delayed date-of-issuance of grant awards.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
Recommendation: Fund, ok for multiyear funding, run to completion in 2005.Comments: This is an excellent proposal to continue an expensive fish screening program. Apparently no monitoring and evaluation of results is conducted so it is not possible to gauge the cost per smolt protected. If smolts are considered priceless, that is appropriate; otherwise, this may simply represent a subsidy to engineers and construction workers. The reviewers suggest incorporating monitoring and evaluation protocols and benchmarks into the project. There appears to be good collaboration among agencies and landowners. The proposal notes that screening should be complete by 2005. If the project is not linked with a smolt monitoring project it should be considered.
Comment:
Comment:
Capital project. $1 M requested. Title is misleading; Mitchell Act pays the O & M.Technically Sound? No
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Sections 1, 2, 3, and 4, should provide more details and demonstrate links to the biological opinions and recovery plan goals. Proposal should include measurable biological objectives.The effectiveness of the screens should be monitored.
What is the return on investment?
Comment:
[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting]NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
expense
May 2005
FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
$1,000,000 | $1,000,000 | $1,000,000 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website