Return to Proposal Finder FY 1999 Proposal 198710002

Proposal Table of Contents

Additional Documents

Section 1. General Administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Objectives, tasks and schedules
Section 5. Budget
Section 6. References
Section 7. Abstract

Reviews and Recommendations
Title Type File Size File Date

Section 1. General Administrative Information

Title of Project Proposal Protect & Enhance Coldwater Fish Habitat in the Umatilla River Basin
BPA Project Proposal Number 198710002
Business name of agency, institution,
or organization requesting funding
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
Business acronym (if appropriate) ODFW

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

Name Troy Laws
Mailing Address 73471 Mytinger Lane
City, State, Zip Pendleton OR 97801
Phone 5412762344
Fax 5412764414
Manager of program authorizing this project
Review Cycle FY 1999
Province Lower Mid-Columbia
Subbasin Umatilla
Short Description Protect and enhance coldwater fish habitat on private lands in the Umatilla River basin in a manner that achieves self-sustaining salmonid populations and their associated habitat by utilizing natural stream functions to the fullest extent.
Target Species Summer steelhead, spring/summer chinook, coho, and resident fishes.

Project Location

[No information]

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-Reported Relevant RPAs

Sponsor listed no RPAs for this project proposal

Relevant RPAs based upon NMFS & BPA Review

NMFS and BPA did not associate any reasonable and prudent alternatives with this project proposal

NPPC Program Measure Number(s) which this project addresses: 7.6; 7.7; 7.8; 7.10
FWS/NMFS Biological Opinion Number(s) which this project addresses: N/A (project is not directly associated with mainstem Columbia River hydroelectric projects, nor ESA requirements yet.)
Other Planning Document References

CBFWA-Generated Information

Database Administrator notes on the history of this proposal form: None
Type of Project (assigned by CBFWA Analysts): anadromous

Section 2. Past Accomplishments

n/a or no information

Section 3. Relationships to Other Projects

n/a or no information

Section 4. Objectives, Tasks and Schedules

Objectives and Tasks

Objective Task
1. Conduct administrative activities necessary to insure maximum program benefits in a cost effective manner. a. Coordinate project activities with ODFW fiscal, realty, regional and district staff; with BPA contracting officer and NPPC staff to insure program operations are consistent with ODFW and BPA policies.
1. b. Maintain habitat program databases, records and files.
1. c. Hire, train and supervise activities of project employees.
1. d. Prepare annual work statements and budgets, write quarterly, annual and other reports. Write and administer contracts, and purchase necessary equipment, materials and supplies.
1. e. Pursue cost share opportunities with other programs and agencies (GWEB, ODFW Fish R&E, FEMA, etc.) and private landowners. Adminster and track these additional funds.
2. O & M - Insure maximum program benefits within leased areas by providing maintenance on all existing riparian exclosure fences, bioengineering treatments, planting, and instream habitat improvements. a. Assess project leases for O&M needs after spring run-off. Conduct onsite preparation activities (e.g. staking, surveying, etc. for project maintenence) on all properties needing O&M work in FY 1999
2. b. Inspect and maintain approximately 15 miles of fence which currently protects. 12.5 miles of stream and the associated riparian habitat from livestock over utilization.
2. c. Inspect and maintain instream fish habitat structures and streambank restoration treatments on all projects.
2. d. Control noxious weeds within all leased riparian areas.
2. e. Revegetate riparian areas disturbed by flood/PFC restoration activities conducted during FY98. Seed and plant native vegetation from local plant donor sites and native plant nurseries.
2. f. Install additional off-channel livestock water developments to eliminate more watergaps and reduce program maintenance obligations.
3. Implementation--Prework: Analyze existing information and prioritize potnetial projects; procure long term lease agreements on private lands; develop plans; and obtain permits to implement new fish habitat projects. a. Analyze existing information available from documents listed in Section 1, consult with local districts fisheries biologists, Umatilla Basin Watershed Council, CTUIR, etc. and prioritize potential new projects.
3. b. Work copperatively with private landowners to procure long term riparian lease agreements in high priorty areas.
3. c. Conduct onsite activities (surveying, staking, etc), prepare contracts, and obtain any permits needed to complete work.
4. Implementation--Onsite: Contribute to improving watershed conditions by improving the quality and quantity of riparian and instream habitat on selected streams. a. Construct livestock exclosure fences on stream(s) impacted by grazing, and remove any human caused barriers to fish migration.
4. b. Construct off-site livestock water developments to encourage utilization of uplands and focus grazing pressure away from streams.
4. c. Construct streambank, instream, and riparian buffer treatments (if needed) using native vegetation/materials and bioengineering or other “soft” habitat restoration techniques.
5. Monitor and evaluate existing habitat leases and prepare reports of the results. a. Retake pictures (annually) during the Fall at approximately 65 photopoints, which were established prior to project implementation on each of the leases.
5. b. Continue year round (1 hr. interval)collection of stream temperature data from 10 monitoring sites located within project streams. Summarize existing data collected from these same thermographs.
5. c. Collect data from existing habitat monitoring transects established on project leases to assess stream channel response to habitat restoration (as time permits).
5. d. Conduct biological surveys of project streams to assess presence/absence of salmonids and species composition. (as time and water conditions permit).
5. e. Report the results of all project M&E activities in quarterly, annual and special reports. Distribute to ODFW fish districts, BPA, and other interested parties.
6. Insure maximum communication, education and coordination of habitat enhancement activities by actively pursuing opportunities to work with, educate and learn from personnel involved with other agencies, organizations, and programs. a. Work cooperatively with the Umatilla Basin Watershed Council and other local groups involved with stream habitat restoration to identify and prioritize projects and activities beneficial to the protection and restoration of basin watershed lands.
6. b. Coordinate field activities with other agencies, organizations, and programs to insure maximum technology transfer, program consistency and coordination of habitat enhancement efforts.
6. c. Answer coorespondence, respond to information needs, and make presentations to other agencies, private organizations, school/youth groups and the news media.
6. d. Work cooperatively with private landowners to promote management activities that protect and restore instream and riparian habitat and watersheds on private lands.

Objective Schedules and Costs

Objective Start Date End Date Measurable Biological Objectives Milestone FY 2000 Cost %
1 03/01/99 03/01/00 10.0%
2 03/01/99 03/01/00 60.0%
3 03/01/99 03/01/00 5.0%
4 03/01/99 03/01/00 10.0%
5 03/01/99 03/01/00 10.0%
6 03/01/99 03/01/00 5.0%

Section 5. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 1999 Cost
Personnel FY99 budget; 2-FTE’s & 1 seasonal @ 36 mo.; ODFW Administrative & Engineering assistance, 6 mo. $106,578
Fringe FY99 OPE @ 38% $ 40,499
Supplies FY99 Office S&S. $ 5,859
Operating FY99 (O&M & new implementation) Field S&S, Vehicles, equipment operation, milage, etc. $ 32,418
Capital 1)10-12yd Dump Truck, 1) 12-15ton 30ft. equipment trailer & 1) 16ft. utillity trailer $ 45,000
Tag n/a $ 0
Travel FY99 contract review meetings, I & E activities, professional development. $ 3,625
Indirect Adminstrative overhead @ 22.9%, note: subcontracts listed below are not subject to this charge. $ 53,581
Subcontractor Various equipment, construction, and fence contractors; Umatilla County Weed Control; Bioengineering consultanting services; Project material vendors $ 33,000
Total Itemized Budget $320,560

Total estimated budget

Total FY 1999 project cost $320,560
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $ 0
Total FY 1999 budget request $320,560
FY 1999 forecast from 1998 $ 0
% change from forecast 0.0%

Reason for change in estimated budget

Not applicable

Reason for change in scope

Not applicable

Cost Sharing

Not applicable

Outyear Budget Totals

2000 2001 2002 2003
All Phases $280,000 $295,000 $310,000 $325,000
Total Outyear Budgets $280,000 $295,000 $310,000 $325,000

Other Budget Explanation

Schedule Constraints: a) Catastrophic natural events (e.g. floods, storms, etc.). b) Change of landownership & level of commitment to the project by new landowner, c) Compliance with state & federal environmental laws (ODSL, ODEQ, COE,etc.) d) Political/funding constraints.

Section 6. References

n/a or no information

Section 7. Abstract


The Umatilla Fish Habitat Improvement program establishes long term stream/fish habitat improvement projects on private lands through riparian leases, cooperative agreements, and easements with private landowners. Individual projects contribute to ecosystem/basin wide watershed restoration/management efforts that are underway by state, federal and tribal agencies. Project planning includes the participation/involvement of private landowners, state/federal agencies, tribes, stakeholders, and watershed council(s) as called for in measure 7.7 of the 1994 CBFW Program. The Umatilla program goal is to rehabilitate and improve anadromous fish spawning, rearing habitat, and tributary passage as outlined in Program Measure 7.6 & 7.10 to contribute to the NPPC’s interim goal of doubling anadromous fish runs in the Columbia River basin. Individual projects incorporate Best Management Practices (BMP’s) as called for in Program Measure 7.8. Initiated by ODFW in 1987, this project protects and enhances coldwater fish habitat primarily using passive restoration techniques. Riparian exclosure fencing is a primary tool for this work. Where applicable, active remediation techniques are also used. These strategies incorporate bioengineering techniques, plantings, off-site water developments, and site specific instream structures. While the focus of this project is on summer steelhead, spring/summer chinook, coho, and resident fishes, many species of wildlife also benefit. The Umatilla program in FY 1999 will complete flood restoration work initiated during FY97-98 on its existing projects and break away from its six year O&M/M&E status to begin implementing new projects. Long term monitoring and evaluation is an ongoing and vital element of this program. Monitoring includes: stream temperature data, physical & biological stream surveys, photopoints, and habitat transects.

Reviews and Recommendations

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

CBFWA: Watershed Technical Group Comments Recommendation:
Return to Sponsor for Revision
May 13, 1998
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Technical Issue: Concern that the costs are excessive to achieve the O&M objectives. Technically, it is important to maintain the past investments, but within reasonable cost.

Technical Issue: Need to describe the management strategies, objectives, and tasks that may have changed since FY98.

Technical Issue: Address the fact that the objectives do not indicate doing new work, yet the narrative describes new fence (which is not shown in the materials budget).

Technical Issue: Also – need to expand the monitoring to address cover the adaptive management discussed in the proposal.

CBFWA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
May 13, 1998
1999 2000 2001
$481,000 $280,000 $295,000
Increase due to availability of increased FEMA funding

ISRP Review , ISRP 1998-1 Recommendation:
Adequate after revision
Jun 18, 1998
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
The revised proposal placed an emphasis on soft engineering and wider buffers to protect a 50-year floodplain. Comments on the original proposal (before revision) suggested that results should be measured in terms of fish and their life histories. In addition, the project history was insufficiently described, methods were vague, administration costs were high, the core purpose was not expressed well, and site-specific projects and watershed analysis were not described. However, these shortcomings were substantially improved in the revised proposal.

NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review Funding category:
May 2005
FY05 NPCC Start of Year:
FY06 NPCC Staff Preliminary:
FY06 NPCC July Draft Start of Year:
Sponsor (ODFW) Comments (Go to Original on NPCC Website):

Return to top of page