Return to Proposal Finder FY 1999 Proposal 199303501

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 Enhance Fish, Riparian and Wildlife Habitat within the Red River Watershed
BPA Project Proposal Number 199303501
Business name of agency, institution,
or organization requesting funding
Idaho County Soil and Water Conservation District
Business acronym (if appropriate) ISWCD

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

Name Denny Dawes
Mailing Address Route 1 Box 102-A
City, State, Zip Princeton, ID 83857
Phone 2088751246
Fax 2088758704
Manager of program authorizing this project
Review Cycle FY 1999
Province Lower Snake
Subbasin Clearwater
Short Description **Restore physical and biological processes to create a self-sustaining river/meadow ecosystem using a holistic approach and adaptive management principles to enhance fish, riparian, and wildlife habitat and water quality within the Red River watershed.
Target Species Chinook salmon, steelhead trout, bull trout

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: 4.1 (Salmon and Steelhead Goal: Double Salmon and Steelhead Runs Without Loss of Biological Diveristy), 7.6 (Habitat Goal, Policies, and Objectives), 7.7 (Cooperative Habitat Protection and Improvement with Private Land Owners).
FWS/NMFS Biological Opinion Number(s) which this project addresses: **n/a - project does not relate directly to these programs; however, project is a habitat enhancement project for anandromous and resident fish species, specifically, spring Chinook salmon, steelhead trout, and bulltrout.
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

Project ID Title Description Umbrella
n/a - no other projects depend on this one for funding n/a No

Section 4. Objectives, Tasks and Schedules

Objectives and Tasks

Objective Task
1. Restore natural river channel shape, meander pattern, and substrate conditions to enhance the diversity of spawning and rearing habitat for Chinook salmon, steelhead trout, and resident fish species a. Re-evaluate watershed conditions and engineering design criteria using adaptive management principles
. b. Perform topographic survey of project site and future site within watershed
. c. Develop conceptual restoration design
. d. Review design with Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and project sponsor
. e. Complete the detailed engineering design and specifications
. f. Develop permit application package
. g. Survey and stake project site
. h. Set up field office
. i. Deliver materials and equipment and create access roads
. j. Install restoration design features
. k. Establish final grade and prepare for revegetation
2. Restore meadow and riparian plant communities to enhance fish and wildlife habitat and stablize streambanks a. Re-evaluate revegetation design criteria using adapative management principles
. b. Develop conceptual revegetation design
. c. Review design with Technical Advisor Committee and project sponsor
. d. Complete detailed revegetation specifications
. e. Collect native seed, on-site
. f. Grow container seedlings
. g. Collect and store willow cuttings
. h. Provide and install container seedlings and cuttings
. i. Prepare and plant disturbed construction areas with native grass seed mix
. j. Fertilize and irrigate
. k. Build wildlife exclosures and plant with native riparian trees and shrubs
3. Raise public awareness of watershed restoration principles and techniques a. Re-evaluate public information plan with Technical Advisory Committee and project sponsor
. b. Continue public presentations of educational video and slide shows
. c. Maintain and update web site
. d. Publish journal articles, conference papers, and press releases
. e. Distribute informational brochures and update on-site public information signs
. f. Add to image library
. g. Maintain GIS database and produce maps
. h. Conduct field tours
. i. Continue local volunteer activities
. j. Provide outdoor classroom opportunities for students of all ages
. k. Update the river restoration model that assists future designs of this project and add information to the associated manual that transfers technology to other watershed projects
4. Measure success in satisfying long-term project goals, objectives, and outcomes a. Re-evaluate success criteria using adaptive management principles
. b. Monitor construction turbidity and suspended sediment loads
. c. Measure plant survival rates
. d. Complete Technical Advisory Committee field reviews
. e. Evaluate stream channel response
. f. Measure change in water temperature regime
. g. Measure change in greenline and riparian vegetation composition
. h. Document photopoints for changes in channel stability and riparian vegetation
. i. Evaluate fish populations through snorkel and redd counts
. j. Map changes in fish habitat units
. k. Complete Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP)
. l. Measure changes in groundwater elevation
. m. Evaluate surface substrate composition
5. Manage and communicate project activities to efficiently accomplish project goals a. Assist project sponsor with personnel contract preparation
. b. Develop project and personnel time schedules
. c. Assist project sponsor with permit application submittal
. d. Update and distribute communication plans
. e. Coordinate and facilitate Technical Advisory Committee meetings
. f. Coordinate project activities with project sponsor, landowner, Tribes, agencies, and consultants
. g. Share information with adjacent landowners and other public and private interests
. h. Provide on-site construction supervision, communications, and administrative support
. i. Prepare quarterly and annual reports

Objective Schedules and Costs

Objective Start Date End Date Measurable Biological Objectives Milestone FY 2000 Cost %
1 03/01/99 02/01/00 50.2%
2 03/01/99 02/01/00 16.7%
3 03/01/99 02/01/00 8.8%
4 03/01/99 02/01/00 12.5%
5 03/01/99 02/01/00 11.9%

Section 5. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 1999 Cost
Personnel $333,047
Fringe $116,566
Supplies $ 76,300
Operating $ 25,500
Travel $ 29,555
Indirect $ 8,992
Subcontractor Wildlife Habitat Institute; Pocket Water, Inc.; LRK Communications; University of Idaho, College of Engineering; Idaho Department of Fish and Game (responsible for long-term O & M $ 0
Total Itemized Budget $589,960

Total estimated budget

Total FY 1999 project cost $589,960
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $ 0
Total FY 1999 budget request $589,960
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 $580,000 $570,000 $560,000 $550,000
Total Outyear Budgets $580,000 $570,000 $560,000 $550,000

Other Budget Explanation

Schedule Constraints: **Extreme weather causing saturated soils or high flow conditions, delay in approval of the 1999 design elements or permits, extreme natural event damaging previously constructed channel features, major equipment breakdown, injury/death of consultant(s)

Section 6. References

n/a or no information

Section 7. Abstract


The Red River has been channelized and the riparian habitat corridor eliminated. The river responded by incision resulting in steepened banks, increased sedimentation, degraded fish habitat, elevated water temperatures, depressed groundwater levels, and significantly reduced hydroperiods. The ongoing Lower Red River Meadow Restoration Project is an on-the-ground ecosystem enhancement effort that restores natural physical and biological processes to establish a sustainable diversity of habitats consistent with the 1994 Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. February 1998 will conclude the fifth year of our ten-year restoration/enhancement plan. Construction of the first two phases (over one mile of river) is complete. Plantings accelerate the native plant colonization, provide diverse habitat features, and increase channel stabilization. State-of-the-science hydrologic and geomorphic models are used to design future phases, provide decision support for adaptive management, and develop interpretative displays. Comprehensive monitoring of physical and ecological parameters is used to determine whether the success criteria have been achieved. Linkages and benefits between the local restoration site and watershed are quantified. The educational and outreach components of the project include interpretive signage, integration of students in monitoring or research activities, a manual of restoration lessons learned in the watershed, and scientific publications. A web-site describing the project, including real-time site conditions and imaging, is maintained and updated regularly. Monitoring is expected to continue beyond the project time frame for education and research.

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: Basically, the same as the original FY98 proposal – need to provide the additional information that was provided in FY98, plus an explanation of new work in FY99 resulting from FY98 funding.

Technical Issue: Explain how $1.2M is necessary for one mile of restored creek

Management Issue: Explain whether the entire goal of 4.4 miles is critical to the watershed. Seems expensive considering results and scope. Living on site and "counting every willow" are expensive approaches.

Management Issue: Put this into context of why things are being measured so intensely; and how it relates to other watershed activities in the basin – and how the information is used for local and system-wide decision-making.

CBFWA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
May 13, 1998
1999 2000 2001
$500,000 $580,000 $570,000
Slight reduction for increased efficiencies

ISRP Review , ISRP 1998-1 Recommendation:
Jun 18, 1998
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
The proposal’s emphasis on experimental restoration is a strength, as are the inclusion of strong monitoring and evaluation protocols, and the transferal of these to education. The methods seem unnecessarily invasive and intensive. For instance, fertilizing and irrigating plantings suggests that the plantings are not expected to be self-sustaining. BPA should look at this budget, which seems expensive for restoration of only 4.4 miles of stream.

NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review Funding category:
May 2005
FY05 NPCC Start of Year:
$ 0
FY06 NPCC Staff Preliminary:
$ 99,570
FY06 NPCC July Draft Start of Year:
$ 99,570
Sponsor (IDFG) Comments (Go to Original on NPCC Website):

Return to top of page