FY 2001 Ongoing proposal 199607708

Additional documents

TitleType

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleProtect and Restore the Lolo Creek Watershed
Proposal ID199607708
OrganizationNez Perce Fisheries/Watershed Program (NPT)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameHeidi Mcroberts
Mailing addressP.O. Box 365 Lapwai, ID 83540
Phone / email2088437406 / heidim@nezperce.org
Manager authorizing this projectIra Jones
Review cycleFY 2001 Ongoing
Province / SubbasinMountain Snake / Clearwater
Short descriptionProtect, restore, and enhance the Lolo Creek Watershed to provide quality habitat for chinook salmon, coho salmon, steelhead trout, pacific lamprey, and resident fish. This will be accomplished by working with an overall watershed approach.
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
1997 Construct 3.6 miles of fence for riparian habitat, cultural resource, and spawning habitat protection
1997 Completed 12 miles of road obliteration to reduce sediment delivery to streams
1998 Construction on 10 miles of riparian protection/cattle exclusion fence
1998 Installation of one off-site watering development to keep cattle in the uplands and out of riparian areas
1998 Completed 15 miles of road obliteration to reduce sediment delivery to streams
1999 Installation of an additional off-site watering development to keep cattle in the uplands and out of riparian areas
1999 Completed 20 miles of road obliteration to reduce sediment delivery to streams
1999 Constructed 2 miles of riparian protection/cattle exclusion fence

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2001 costSubcontractor
1. Protect and enhance critical riparian habitat as it creates fish and wildlife habitat a. Coordinate with the Coordinated Resource Management (CRM) group and private landowners to protect critical habitat. 1 and on-going year-to-year $1,980
1. b. Coordinate with the Clearwater National Forest (CNF) on pre-work planning and logistics for habitat projects through a Cost-Share Agreement. 1 and on-going year-to-year $1,980
1. c. Consult with the CNF on any NEPA, ESA consultation, or permits needed. 1 and on-going year-to-year $4,979
2. Enhance bank stability within the Lolo Creek watershed, starting in the tributaries a. Coordinate with CRM and Potlatch Corporation to plan and implement bank stabilization projects. 1 and on-going year-to-year $1,980
2. b. Complete any NEPA, ESA consultation, or permits needed for the project. 1 and on-going year-to-year $7,646
3. Manage project to effectively accomplish project goals. a. Develop project time schedules. 1 and on-going year-to-year $1,470
b. Update and communicate with the Clearwater Policy Advisory Committee and the CRM. 1 and on-going year-to-year $1,470
3. c. Prepare quarterly and annual reports. 1 and on-going year-to-year $5,646
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
FY 2003FY 2005FY 2004FY 2002
$32,850$39,750$36,138$29,900

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2001 costSubcontractor
1. Protect and enhance critical riparian habitat as it creates fish and wildlife habitat. a. Survey culverts to be repaired or replaced. 1 and on-going year-to-year $9,060
1. b. Replace culverts to make available critical habitat areas and/or to eliminate potential sediment problems. 1 and on-going year-to-year $200,327 Yes
2. Enhance bank stability within the Lolo Creek Watershed, starting in the tributaries a. Gather/obtain materials (logs, boulders, erosion control matting, seed) needed to complete the project. 1 and on-going year-to-year $6,633
2. b. Implement bank stabilization. 1 and on-going year-to-year $13,378 Yes
3. Restore riparian plant communities to enhance fish and wildlife habitat, reduce sediment delivery to stream, stabilize banks, and improve water quality. a. Evaluate re-vegetation designs. 1 and on-going year-to-year $1,500
3. b. Gather/obtain plants to be installed. 1 and on-going year-to-year $5,850
3. c. Plant materials in riparian areas in need of habitat and stabilization. 1 and on-going year-to-year $6,550
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
FY 2003FY 2005FY 2004FY 2002
$294,400$356,200$323,800$267,600

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2001 costSubcontractor
1. Protect critical riparian habitat. a. Maintain all previously constructed riparian protection fence. 1 and on-going year-to-year $40,385
1. b. Maintain off-site watering developments. 1 and on-going year-to-year $8,516
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
FY 2003FY 2005FY 2004FY 2002
$59,000$71,400$64,900$54,000

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2001 costSubcontractor
1. Monitor the success of excluding cattle from critical riparian areas. a. Collect data on the success of riparian regeneration. 1 and on-going year-to-year $4,147
1. b. Collect data on stream characteristics which have been identified as limiting factors within this watershed. 1 and on-going year-to-year $8,807
1. c. Analyze parameters which data collection is complete. 1 and on-going year-to-year $6,520
2. Monitor and evaluate success of road obliteration practices. a. Collect data on vegetation growth, stabilization, and new failures. 1 and on-going year-to-year $5,358
2. b. Conduct stream surveys to collect data related to sediment and water quality downstream from obliterated roads 1 and on-going year-to-year $13,448
2. c. Analyze the effectiveness of road obliteration on improving stream habitat. 1 and on-going year-to-year $9,414
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
FY 2003FY 2005FY 2004FY 2002
$57,700$69,800$63,500$52,500

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2001 cost
Personnel FTE: 3 $11,156
Fringe 30% $2,521
Supplies Office Supplies $10
Travel GSA Vehicles & Per Diem $4,146
Indirect 26.61% $4,318
NEPA In coord. with CNF $5,000
Personnel FTE: 3 $22,652
Fringe 30% $6,795
Supplies Office Supplies, Tools, Equipment $2,700
Travel GSA Vehicles, Per Diem $6,000
Indirect 26.61% $10,151
Subcontractor Clearwater National Forest and Heavy Equipment $195,000
Personnel FTE: 3 $20,864
Fringe 30% $6,259
Supplies Fencing materials, Office supplies $3,000
Travel GSA Vehicles & Per Diem $8,500
Indirect 26.61% $10,278
Personnel FTE: 3 $22,592
Fringe 30% $6,777
Supplies Monitoring supplies, Office Supplies $2,300
Travel GSA Vehicles & Per Diem $6,000
Indirect 26.61% $10,025
$367,044
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2001 cost$367,044
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2001 budget request$367,044
FY 2001 forecast from 2000$150,000
% change from forecast144.7%
Reason for change in estimated budget

The reason for the estimated change in budget is that through the analysis for the watershed assessment, culverts were identified as a high priority and a potential for large sediment problems in the watershed. This task is within the goals and objectives of this project, although it was not foreseeable when the FY2000 proposal were written; therefore, the funding was not projected.

Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Ongoing Funding: yes; New Funding: yes
Date:
Jul 14, 2000

Comment:

The reason for the estimated change in budget is that, through the analysis for the watershed assessment, culverts were identified as a high priority and a potential for large sediment problems in the watershed. A new task was proposed to remove culverts (Objective 1b under Section 4 - $199,930). This new task is within the goals and objectives of this project, although it was not foreseen when the FY 2000 proposal was written; therefore, the funding was not projected. This task should be technically reviewed by CBFWA before funding.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Sep 13, 2000

Comment: