Proposal title | Enhance Umatilla River Basin Anadromous Fish Habitat |
Proposal ID | 198710001 |
Organization | Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
Name | R. Todd Shaw |
Mailing address | P.O. Box 638 Pendleton, OR 97801 |
Phone / email | 5412764109 / toddshaw@ctuir.com |
Manager authorizing this project | Gary James |
Review cycle | FY 2001 Ongoing |
Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Umatilla |
Short description | Increase natural production of summer steelhead, chinook salmon and coho salmon in the Umatilla River Basin. |
Target species | |
Year | Accomplishment |
1999 |
Three barriers addressed to provide fish passage to approximately 12 stream miles of previously inaccessible habitat. |
1999 |
Installation of one rock vane. |
2000 |
A total of 37 riparian easements secured since 1988. |
2000 |
A total of 16 stream miles enhanced since 1988. |
2000 |
A total of 20.44 miles of riparian livestock enclosure fencing constructed since 1988. |
2000 |
A total of 5,900 pounds of native grasses seeded since 1988. |
2000 |
A total of 51,000 native trees/shrubs planted since 1988. |
2000 |
A total of 351 trees/root wads placed in stream since 1988. |
2000 |
A total of 65 tree/root wad revetments installed since 1988. |
2000 |
A total of 95 sediment retention structures constructed since 1994. |
2000 |
A total of 17 log or boulder weirs constructed since 1988. |
2000 |
A total of 39 log and boulder deflectors constructed since 1988. |
2000 |
A total of ten cultural/archeological surveys and associated reports since 1988. |
2000 |
A total of 88 photo points established since 1988. |
2000 |
A total of 94 stream channel cross sections established and monitored since 1988. |
2000 |
Four years of macroinvertebrate survey data (4 reports, 60 samples) since 1996. |
2000 |
Stream temperature data from 21 sites since 1989. |
2000 |
Suspended sediment data from 3 sites since 1989. |
2000 |
Two bioengineering workshops since 1995. |
2000 |
Five public scoping meetings since 1993. |
2000 |
Numerous presentations, tours, etc. |
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
1. Continue to identify detrimental land use practices and develop watershed-wide solutions to address habitat impacts in the Umatilla River Basin. |
a. Continue and complete a watershed assessment to assist with identification of fisheries habitat limiting factors and determination/prioritization of remedial measures. |
3 years |
$10,000 |
Yes |
|
b. Continue to conduct outreach efforts (public meetings, tours and presentations) to obtain input, identify landowner concerns, provide educational opportunities, and promote habitat restoration and protection. |
indefinite |
$20,790 |
|
2. Plan, design and propose fiscal year 2001 habitat enhancement projects. |
a. Prepare grant proposals and coordinate with local, state and federal resource agencies to develop cost-share projects. |
indefinite |
$5,198 |
|
|
b. Develop and secure riparian easements on private properties for proposed habitat enhancements. |
indefinite |
$10,395 |
|
|
c. Obtain necessary environmental clearances, including Section 106 National Historic Preservation Act cultural and archeological compliance, Sections 401 and 404 Federal Clean Water Act Permits and Section 7 U.S. Endangered Species Act consultations |
indefinite |
$25,988 |
|
|
d. Complete project design and layout. |
indefinite |
$15,592 |
|
|
e. Solicit bids and award subcontracts for fence construction, operated equipment, rock purchase and delivery, log purchase and delivery, native tree and shrub plantings, and noxious weed control. |
indefinite |
$25,988 |
|
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
5. Collect baseline data and conduct post-project monitoring to identify habitat limiting factors and to quantify effects of habitat enhancement measures. |
a. Measure changes in channel morphology and vegetative responses to habitat enhancements at new and established photo point and stream channel transect sites. |
life of project |
$4,921 |
|
|
b. Conduct habitat surveys in proposed habitat enhancement project areas to obtain baseline physical data. |
life of project |
$6,860 |
|
|
c. Conduct biological inventories to determine pre and post-project anadromous fish presence. |
life of project |
$4,621 |
|
|
d. Sample macroinvertebrate populations to document macroinvertebrate response to enhanced versus unenhanced areas. |
life of project. |
$4,984 |
|
|
e. Monitor stream temperatures during summer months to determine effectiveness of habitat enhancements on cooling water temperatures. |
|
$4,825 |
|
|
f. Collect suspended sediment samples to obtain total suspended sediment, total dissolved sediment and conductivity data. |
life of project |
$1,116 |
|
Item | Note | FY 2001 cost |
Personnel |
FTE: 13 months (various personnel) |
$47,998 |
Fringe |
30% |
$14,399 |
Supplies |
phone services, office supplies, duplication/printing, educational materials |
$9,828 |
Travel |
GSA vehicle lease, mileage, insurance, fuel and maintenance, and training and per diem |
$5,350 |
Indirect |
34% of personnel & fringe, supplies and travel |
$26,376 |
NEPA |
included above in Personnel |
$0 |
Subcontractor |
Washington State University - Watershed Assessment |
$10,000 |
Personnel |
FTE: 10.5 months (biologist, assistant biologist, technician, seasonal) |
$22,534 |
Fringe |
30% |
$6,760 |
Supplies |
fence materials, native trees/shrubs, native grass seed and field materials |
$45,000 |
Travel |
GSA vehicle lease, mileage, insurance, fuel and maintenance, and training and per diem |
$5,350 |
Indirect |
34% of personnel, fringe benefits, construction materials, field materials and travel |
$27,079 |
Subcontractor |
fence construction, operated heavy equipment, rock & root wad transport and noxious weed control |
$50,000 |
Personnel |
FTE: 2.5 months (biologist, technician, seasonal) |
$9,214 |
Fringe |
30% |
$2,764 |
Supplies |
tools, fence materials, tree mats and tree shelters |
$7,000 |
Travel |
GSA vehicle lease, vehicle mileage, vehicle insurance, fuel and vehicle maintenance |
$1,700 |
Indirect |
34% of personnel, fringe benefits, supplies & materials and travel |
$7,031 |
Subcontractor |
noxious weed control |
$15,000 |
Personnel |
FTE: 4 months (biologist, assistant biologist, technician and seasonal) |
$11,908 |
Fringe |
30% |
$3,572 |
Supplies |
lab fees for macroinvertebrate samples and suspended sediment samples |
$3,213 |
Travel |
GSA vehicle lease, vehicle mileage, vehicle insurance, fuel and vehicle maintenance |
$1,700 |
Indirect |
34% of personnel, fringe benefits and travel |
$6,934 |
| $340,710 |
Budget is slightly higher than anticipated because of additional funds required for: (1) increased project personnel time to develop biological assessments for proposed enhancements, including proposed noxious weed treatments and 404 fill and removal permit activitities, due to recent ESA listings (compliance with ESA Section 7 Consultation and NMFS 4d rules), and (2) recent noxious weed invasions ( kochia and wild mustard) in the Wild Horse Creek Project Area, requiring additional subcontract dollars for increased herbicide applications. These weeds are currently out-competing native trees/shrubs and bunch grasses in this project area and more intensive weed treatments are required to restore this project area to a naturally functioning state.
Scope has not changed, just more effort is required to develop projects consistent with ESA requirements and additional dollars are needed to treat noxious weeds.
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
The scope has not changed, just more effort is required to develop projects consistent with ESA requirements and additional dollars are needed to treat noxious weeds. There is a real inconsistency with the application of NEPA by BPA on these types of projects. For this project, CTUIR is paying for maintenance on fencing and weed control whereas the Districts are not generally paying for ongoing O&M.
This SRT wants to raise a flag on the inconsistency among BPA projects for O&M/M&E requirements under the agreements that are being negotiated with landowners. Application of NEPA also has been inconsistent among BPA COTRs.