Return to Proposal Finder FY 2000 Proposal 199401807

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 Continue with Implementation of Pataha Creek Model Watershed Projects
BPA Project Proposal Number 199401807
Business name of agency, institution,
or organization requesting funding
Pomeroy Conservation District
Business acronym (if appropriate) PCD
 

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

Name Duane G. Bartels
Mailing Address P.O. Box 468
City, State, Zip Pomeroy, WA 99347
Phone 5098431998
Fax 5098433665
E-mail duanebar@pomeroy-wa.com
 
Manager of program authorizing this project
 
Review Cycle FY 2000
Province Columbia Plateau
Subbasin Tucannon
 
Short Description Reduce the sedimentation from the Pataha Creek Watershed into the critical spawning and rearing area of the fall chinook salmon in the lower Tucannon River. Improve habitat for spawning and rearing steelhead in upper portion of Pataha Creek
Target Species Fall Chinook Salmon, Steelhead


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: 7.6D, 7.7, 7.7A, 7.7B.3, 7.8B1
FWS/NMFS Biological Opinion Number(s) which this project addresses:
Other Planning Document References Pataha Creek Model Watershed Plan, Snake River Salmon Recovery Plan, Washingtion Department of Wildlife Wild Salmonid Recovery Plan, Wy Kan Ush Mi Wa Kish Wit, Bonneville Power Administration Tucannon Sub-Basin Plan.


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

Year Accomplishment
1994 Initiated Collaboration with Citizens and Agency Representatives on salmon issue in Pataha Creek Watershed
1995 Pataha Creek Riparian Fencing Demonstration Project
1995 Continue plan research and development
1996 Fish Aquarium for Pomeroy Grade School
1996 Continue plan research and development
1996 Began cost-share program by installing upland and riparian practices for bank stability and erosion reduction
1996 Involved local schools in tree planting, invertabrate education
1997 Continued plan research and development
1997 ISCO samplers and temperature monitoring devices deployed in lower and upper Pataha Creek
1997 Continued installation of upland and riparian practices for bank stability and erosion reduction using cost share incentive program.
1998 Draft of Pataha Creek Model Watershed Plan printed.
1998 Database being built from ISCO sampling with testing for total suspended solids. Temperature monitoring ongoing.
1998 Continued installation of upland and riparian practices for bank stability and erosion reduction using cost share incentive program.
1998 FY 99 installation of practices to date
1998 Contracted with WSU for additional monitoring of water quality, invertabrates and upland conservation practices.


Section 3. Relationships to Other Projects

Project ID Title Description Umbrella
9401806 Restore habitat for Fall and Spring Chinook, Steelhead, and Bull Trout Pataha Creek is largest tributary into the Tucannon River and affects lower 12 miles. No
9008 Lower Snake River Comp Plan Sedimentation study of artifical redds in Tucannon River No


Section 4. Objectives, Tasks and Schedules

Objectives and Tasks

Objective Task
1. Continue to implement the Pataha Creek Model Watershed projects as outlined in watershed plan. a. Continue to coordinate the watershed plan as directed by the landowner/steering and technical advisory committees.
1. b. Coordinate further plan development and modification, Biological assessment, permit requirements and landowner contracts.
1. c. Administer district cost-share program between cooperator, contractors, NRCS and other state and local agencies.
1. d. Continue monitoring program in cooperation with WDFW, NRCS staff to evaluate effectiveness and success of practices installed. Maintain existing monitoring equipment and demonstration projects.
1. e. Continue information education program through newsletters, news articles, school programs and tours.
2. Reduce Sediment Deposition in Spawning Gravels by reducing cropland and streambank erosion. a. Increase no-till and two pass seeding in watershed by 25% over previous year’s installation.
2. b. Construct or rebuild existing structural practices (terraces, waterways, sediment basins) where needed and other practices are not feasible.
2. c. Construct riparian fencing to protect new plantings and protect buffer strips where needed. Also manage livestock in this area to allow for critical vegetative regrowth.
2. d. Develop riparian buffer strips where Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program does not apply.
2. e. Plant trees and shrubs along eroding banks to jump start revegetation process.
2. f. Promote Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program along Pataha Creek and other small tributaries.
2. g. Promote riparian restoration and enhancement projects.
3. Improve riparian corridor to maintain lower water temperatures and reduce stream bank erosion a. Develop additional riparian buffer strips to promote growth of natural vegetation that will shade stream.
3. b. Install riparian fencing where needed to allow natural vegetative regrowth during critical times of year.
3. c. Plant trees and shrubs to generate shade, stabilize banks, and LWD recruitment.
4. Secure additional funding and develop funding partnerships for practice installation. a. Continue matching Bonneville funding with landowner, local and state agencies.
4. b. Provide data and information on results of practice installation and the resulting sediment reduction.
4. c. Provide legislators with watershed activities and results to secure additional state funding.
5. Continue with implementation of monitoring program a. Coordinate monitoring program with WSU, WDFW, and schools.
5. b. Continue water quality monitoring program with local schools.
5. c. Continue monitoring of water quality with WSU or other reputable agency.
5. d. Analyze data from upland conservation practice comparison and continue study with WSU if necessary.
6. Continue watershed education/outreach program for landowners, residents and local schools. a. Provide landowners, residents access to workshops, field visits, field trips, etc. Continue to provide watershed education and monitoring project curriculum to local schools.
6. b. Continue “Salmon in Classroom” program and provide classroom instruction on watershed health.
6. c. Sponsor field trip to WSU water quality lab for high school class.
6. d. Sponsor registrations to conferences, field tours and other seminars.

Objective Schedules and Costs

Objective Start Date End Date Measurable Biological Objectives Milestone FY 2000 Cost %
1 12/01/99 12/01/00 Increase presence and effectiveness of conservation efforts with cost-share programs to off-set practice installation costs to landowners and operators. Match funds from BPA, WDFW, Conservation Commission, WA HB 2496 24.0%
2 12/01/99 12/01/00 Increase number of tons saved each year by installing more cost efficient and effective conservation practices. No-till, 2 pass seeding will be major focus for erosion reduction. 130,732 tons of soil saved since 1994. Average cost per ton saved $2.91. 19% reduction since 1994. 45.0%
3 12/01/99 12/01/00 Increase acres of riparian buffer strips, footage of riparian fencing, tree plantings, off-site watering facilities. In last three years: 25,579 feet of riparian fence constructed, 22 acres of riparian buffer, 7880 trees planted, and 3 off-site watering facilities developed. 14.0%
4 12/01/99 12/01/00 Increase funding from all sources to level where effective conservation practice installation will continue to increase. BPA, Wash. Department of Fish & Wildlife, State Legislature through HB2496 have provided funding. 1.0%
5 12/01/99 12/01/00 Work with WSU and schools to gather needed information through monitoring to determine effectiveness of practices installed. PCD soil lab has conducted testing in past. Teachers are using water quality as part of class room curriculum 14.0%
6 12/01/99 12/01/00 Continue tours, newsletters/articles and other materials on improvement methods Annual cropping, no-till seeding being accepted and used in county at increasing rate. 2.0%


Section 5. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 2000 Cost
Personnel .8 FTE Watershed Technical Lead .5 FTE Admin. Assistant $ 34,622
Fringe Insurance, Soc. Sec., medicare $ 11,693
Supplies Office supplies, monitoring supplies, mailings $ 3,980
Operating Maintenance of existing demonstration projects and monitoring sites $ 1,300
Travel Travel to, registration for meetings, seminars, conferences. $ 3,900
Other Tree planting and other practices $ 2,500
Subcontractor No-till and two pass seeding $ 81,000
Subcontractor Terrace, Grassed WW, sediment basins, other practices $ 15,000
Subcontractor Riparian Fencing, buffer strips $ 20,000
Subcontractor Off-site watering $ 10,000
Subcontractor Water quality, soil erosion monitoring $ 29,000
Total Itemized Budget $212,995


Total estimated budget

Total FY 2000 project cost $212,995
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $ 0
Total FY 2000 budget request $212,995
FY 2000 forecast from 1999 $ 0
% change from forecast 0.0%


Reason for change in estimated budget

Not applicable


Reason for change in scope

Not applicable


Cost Sharing

Organization Item or service provided Amount Cash or In-Kind
Bonneville Power Cash Match $213,000 unknown
Wash. St HB 2496 Cash Match for restoration on Alpowa and other county creeks $125,000 unknown
Conservation Commission Cash Match for implementation projects, Basic Funding $ 50,000 unknown
WSU SARE Grant to study upland erosion $ 40,000 unknown
NRCS Office space, utilities, phone and vehicle use $ 25,000 unknown
Landowners Cash match of Cost Share Practices Implemented $ 45,000 unknown

 

Outyear Budget Totals

2001 2002 2003 2004
All Phases $200,000 $190,000 $180,000 $170,000
Total Outyear Budgets $200,000 $190,000 $180,000 $170,000
 

Other Budget Explanation

Schedule Constraints: There should be no schedule constraints. This is a continuation proposal that will aid in the implementation of conservation and enhancement practices to reduce sedimentation into the spawning/rearing area of the lower Tucannon River.


Section 6. References

Reference Watershed?
Reckondorf & VanLiew, 1989. Determine the affect of sedimentation on artificial redds at four sites in the Tucannon Watershed. Study completed. Soil Conservation Service. Yes
Tucannon River Watershed Plan (USDA 1991) This plan was prepared under authority of PL-566 and recommends certain conservation practices that would lower water temperature and reduce the amount of sediment delivered to the stream. Yes
Hecht et al. 1982. Sediment Transport, Water Quality and Changing Bed Conditions, Tucannon River, Washington. This plan identified and discussed the efforts of land use and other watershed influences on the water quality and fish habitat of the river. Yes
Southeast Washington Cooperative River Basin Study (USDA 1984), The objective of this study was to provide a basin-wide evaluation of existing land management and stream habitat conditions related to erosion and sediment problems. Yes


Section 7. Abstract

Abstract


Reviews and Recommendations

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

ISRP Preliminary Review , ISRP 99-2 Recommendation:
Fund for one year
Date:
Jun 15, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
Recommendation: Fund for one year. Subsequent funding contingent on comprehensive review of restoration programs within the basin, and demonstration of biological benefits.

Comments: This project is very similar to Proposals 9401805 and 9401806. The geographic focus is slightly different. This project has been ongoing since 1996or before, and is projected to continue indefinitely. It is very difficult to review projects such as this on an annual basis, particularly when little or no information is given about project objectives and milestones. Proper oversight is not possible, nor is it likely to be, unless the project has a) a clear end date, and b) a set of project milestones pertinent to individual years, against which progress can be measured. The information presented is insufficient to determine whether project objectives are being achieved. Furthermore, the proposal talks about such goals as tons of soil "saved". Is this really a Program goal, that is somehow related to the hydropower system? It sounds much more appropriate to NRCS programs, one would at least hope for some cost sharing.


CBFWA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
2000
$120,000
Comment:

CBFWA: Subregional Team Comments Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
Reduce Objective 5-monitoring, + implementation. Low priority objectives were reduced or eliminated. General reduction in the scope of the project.

CBFWA: Watershed Technical Group Comments Recommendation:
Technically Sound? No
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
The Pataha watershed is severely abused (e.g., riparian feedlots, agriculture up to the stream bank, vertical unstable banks up to 15' high).

Work in the Pataha Creek is intended to enhance fall chinook spawning habitat in the Lower Tucannon River, but that stretch of the river has other limiting factors that need to be addressed first.

What is the biological return on the investment in terms of mitigation achieved?


NWPPC Funding Recommendation , NWPPC 2000-6 Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000
2000
$120,000
Comment:
[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting]

NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review Funding category:
expense
Date:
May 2005
FY05 NPCC Start of Year:
$ 80,000
FY06 NPCC Staff Preliminary:
$ 80,000
FY06 NPCC July Draft Start of Year:
$ 80,000
Sponsor (Pomeroy Soil & Water) Comments (Go to Original on NPCC Website):

Return to top of page