Return to Proposal Finder FY 2001 Ongoing Proposal 199206100

Proposal Table of Contents

Additional Documents

Section 1. General Administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget Summary

Reviews and Recommendations
No documents associated with this request

Section 1. General Administrative Information

Title of Project Proposal Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Project
BPA Project Proposal Number 199206100
Business name of agency, institution,
or organization requesting funding
Albeni Falls Interagency Work Group
Business acronym (if appropriate) AFIWG

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

Name Stacey Stovall, Idaho Department Of Fish And Game
Mailing Address P.O. Box 386
City, State, Zip Laclede, ID 83841
Phone 2082656381
Fax 2082636381
Manager of program authorizing this project Stacey Stovall
Review Cycle FY 2001 Ongoing
Province Mountain Columbia
Subbasin Pend Oreille
Short Description Protect, enhance, and maintain important wetland wildlife habitat in all Mountain Columbia subbasins (except the Bitterroot, Flathead, and Blackfoot) as ongoing mitigation for construction impacts associated with the Albeni Falls hydroelectric project.
Target Species

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

Biological Outcomes of this project: The process of protecting and enhancing land for wildlife would provide both immediate and long-term benefits to habitat and wildlife populations. Wetland protection and enhancement would result in an increase of wetland plant and animal diversity and in vegetative cover types that range from freshwater deep marsh to seasonally flooded wet meadows. Site protection activities and termination of land use practices harmful to native vegetation, such as livestock grazing, would be sufficient in itself to improve habitat conditions and increase healthy wildlife populations. Habitat protection and the elimination of animal grazing could increase plant cover, and, as native, non-woody plants become re-established, waterfowl, and aquatic furbearers, such as muskrat, would be provided with an increase in essential food resources. Protection and restoration of lacustrine and palustrine systems would increase shoreline habitat for waterfowl production, shorebird feeding and use by colonial nesting birds. Site protection and habitat restoration in riverine areas would contribute to increased water quality and quantity. In the long-term, this could increase the amount of submerged macrophytes and invertebrates in the river and creek systems. Waterfowl and other avian species that feed on these plants and animals would benefit in direct proportion to the amount of food supply available. Through site protection and passive management, wetland vegetation will become more mature and increasingly dense resulting in increased deer browse availability, and nongame birds, such as yellow warbler, would benefit from the increase in structural diversity. Over time, structural improvements in the forest canopies could increase the quality and number of bald eagle nests, perch trees, and roost areas. A variety of other riparian-dependent species, such as black-capped chickadees, would benefit from increased diversity in forest layers. Wetland protection and enhancement would help to restore the original diversity of instream and riparian habitats important for fish production. Site protection and habitat improvement activities would help to increase fish habitat structure and quality over existing conditions. An increase in riparian foliage would provide further security for fish and additional shading essential for lowering summer water temperatures. The increase in fallen foliage would expand a critical food source for aquatic insects that are consumed by fish.
Biological Data: Available habitat data includes: tree canopy closure, average height of overstory trees, number of snags, height and density of residual vegetation, presence of seasonal wetlands, percent shoreline dominated by emergent and/or scrub vegetation, ground cover height, percent canopy cover of emergent herbaceous vegetation, percent deciduous shrub crown cover, and average height shrub canopy. Available wildlife data includes: bald eagle nest location and nesting activity, Canada goose nesting activity and brood counts, waterfowl nesting activity and brood counts, neotropical migratory bird presence/absence, and white-tailed deer counts.

CBFWA-Generated Information

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

Section 2. Past Accomplishments

Year Accomplishment
1985 Completed Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Status Report.
1988 Completed Albeni Falls Protection, Mitigation, and Enhancement Plan.
1996 Completed Albeni Falls Wildlife Management Plan: Final Environmental Assessment.
1997 Protected 353 acres (726 HUs) of high quality wetland habitat in the Hope/Clark Fork area of Bonner County, ID: Henderson Ranch (240 acres; 373.27 HUs), Denton Slough (16.76 acres; 41.44 HUs), and Carter's Island (95.9 acres; 311.82 HUs).
1998 Protected 110 acres (187 HUs) of wetland habitat on the Pack River in Bonner County, ID: Ginter (109.95 acres; 187.02 HUs).
1999 Protected 1,884 acres (HUs to be determined) of wetland habitat in Boundary and Bonner County, ID: Boundary Creek (1,405 acres; 287.40 HUs), Hunter Ranch (216 acres), McMahon (30 acres), Albeni Cove (70 acres), Westmond Lake (65 acres), Eich (98 acres).
2000 Protection of 1,070 acres and an estimated 800 HUs is expected in Pend Oreille County, WA and Bonner County, ID by Summer 2000.

Section 3. Relationships to Other Projects

n/a or no information

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design Phase

Task-based Budget

Objective Task Duration in FYs Estimated 2001 cost Subcontractor
1. Conduct pre-acquisition activities associated with the protection of 6,323 acres and 7,778 HUs through FY 2004. a. Identify willing landowner participants. 4 $ 74,000  
b. Consult and coordinate throughout the process with the NPPC, CBWA, BPA, local governments, and the public. 4 $ 65,167  
c. Complete federal compliance requirements (appraisal, environmental survey, cultural resource survey, etc.). 4 $261,020 x
d. Complete NEPA requirements 4 $ 13,422  
e. Credit HUs in intergovernmental contract with BPA. 4 $ 5,000  

Outyear Objective-Based Budget

n/a or no information

Outyear Budgets for Planning and Design Phase

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2002 FY 2003
$490,000 $515,000 $440,000 $462,000

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation Phase

Task-based Budget

Objective Task Duration in FYs Estimated 2001 cost Subcontractor
1. Protect 6,323 acres and provide 7,778 HUs through acquisition of fee-title or conservation easements through FY 2004. a. Secure fee-title, conservation easement, or long-term lease agreement. 4 $6,158,580  
b. Complete HEP report and wildlife management plan for review. 4 $ 30,000  
2. Enhance 1,200 acres. a. Construct boundary fences to prevent trespass grazing. 1 $ 25,000  
b. Plant native shrubs to increase vegetative diversity and waterfowl nesting habitat suitability. 3 $ 30,000  
c. Conduct prescribed burns to increase forage and vegetative diversity. 3 $ 13,000  
d. Create nesting islands to increase nesting habitat. 3 $ 45,000 x
e. Develop water control structures to manage water levels and aquatic vegetation. 2 $ 41,000 x
f. Construct public access areas using fencing to reduce human disturbance. 2 $ 13,732  
g. Establish on-site management office 1 $ 73,000  
h. Apply chemical, biological, mechanical control to retard spread of noxious weeds. 4 $ 14,000 x

Outyear Objective-Based Budget

n/a or no information

Outyear Budgets for Construction and Implementation Phase

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2002 FY 2003
$6,100,000 $6,400,000 $5,500,000 $5,800,000

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance Phase

Task-based Budget

Objective Task Duration in FYs Estimated 2001 cost Subcontractor
1. Maintain 3,416 acres and 3,304 HUs. a. Maintain brood pastures. on-going for life of project $ 36,000  
b. Maintain habitat improvements. on-going for life of project $ 52,000 x
c. Maintain gates and fence lines. on-going for life of project $ 36,000 x
d. Control the spread of non-native invasive annuals (noxious weeds). on-going for life of project $ 19,892 x
e. Maintain water control structures. on-going for life of project $ 61,000 x
f. Control nuisance animals. on-going for life of project $ 20,000  
g. Maintain public access sites. on-going for life of project $ 27,000  
h. Implement seasonal closures to protect nesting waterfowl from disturbance. on-going for life of project $ 17,000  

Outyear Objective-Based Budget

n/a or no information

Outyear Budgets for Operations and Maintenance Phase

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2002 FY 2003
$560,000 $590,000 $500,000 $525,000

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation Phase

Task-based Budget

Objective Task Duration in FYs Estimated 2001 cost Subcontractor
1. Monitor and evaluate wildlife habitat and management activities on 3,416 acres. a. Conduct 5-year HEP to determine increase in HUs from enhancement activities. on-going for life of project $ 7,000  
b. Conduct appropriate wildlife surveys on annual and random basis. on-going for life of project $ 27,000 x
c. Monitor burned areas at regular intervals. on-going for life of project $ 5,500  
d. Monitor vegetative response to planting prescriptions and water level manipulations. on-going for life of project $ 5,000  
e. Monitor the control of noxious weeds. on-going for life of project $ 5,500 x
f. Collect vegetation monitoring data (habitat variables community composition and structure, etc.) and build database . on-going for life of project $ 17,000 x
g. Amend and update management plans as necessary. on-going for life of project $ 2,500  
h. Monitor human use. on-going for life of project $ 2,727 x

Outyear Objective-Based Budget

n/a or no information

Outyear Budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation Phase

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2002 FY 2003
$101,000 $107,000 $ 90,000 $ 95,000

Section 8. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 2001 Cost
Personnel FTE: 1.5 $ 61,888
Fringe $ 20,809
Supplies $ 13,725
Travel $ 6,385
Indirect $ 21,405
NEPA $ 13,422
Subcontractor $261,020
Other Overhead $ 19,955
Personnel FTE: 2 $ 80,020
Fringe $ 24,295
Supplies $ 47,300
Travel $ 10,216
Indirect $ 29,248
Capital $6,201,580
Subcontractor Equipment & operators $ 4,725
Subcontractor Professional weed control $ 14,000
Other Overhead $ 31,928
Personnel FTE: 4 $118,888
Fringe $ 36,809
Supplies $ 35,725
Travel $ 6,385
Indirect $ 34,405
Subcontractor Equipment & operator $ 4,725
Subcontractor Professional weed control $ 9,000
Other Overhead $ 22,955
Personnel FTE: 0.5 FTE $ 12,755
Fringe $ 3,324
Supplies $ 5,000
Travel $ 2,554
Indirect $ 5,562
Subcontractor Wildlife and habitat surveys $ 12,550
Subcontractor EWU Biology Dept. $ 10,500
Subcontractor Idaho Conservation Data Center $ 15,000
Other Overhead $ 4,982
Total Itemized Budget $7,203,040

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2001 project cost $7,203,040
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $ 0
Total FY 2001 budget request $7,203,040
FY 2001 forecast from 2000 $4,500,000
% change from forecast 60.1%

Reason for change in estimated budget

The Albeni Falls Interagency Work Group's FY 2000 project proposal was ranked as a Tier 1 project, but did not receive the full amount of FY 2000 funds it requested due to a lack of Wildlife Program funding. The Work Group requested a total of $4,417,686 and received $2,302,200, resulting in a 48% budget shortfall ($2,115,486). The Work Group was unable to secure several targeted land acquisitions due to the lack of funding. Those acquisitions are now no longer available and considered to be lost opportunities. The Work Group requests the FY 2000 shortfall of $2,115,486 and an additional $5,087,554 (11.5% above what was forecasted for FY 2001) to meet the actual FY 2001 funding need of $7,203,040 in order to fulfill approved objectives and tasks associated with the project in FY's 2000 and 2001.

Reason for change in scope

The Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Project has not changed in scope. The tasks included in the Planning and Design section (section three) were previously included in the FY 2000 proposal under the primary land protection objective (the Construction/ Implementation section). Given the section three instructions to include NEPA-related work, the Work Group simply moved the tasks and costs associated with "pre-acquisition" of mitigation sites to the Planning and Design section of the proposal.

Cost Sharing

Not applicable

Outyear Budget Totals

2002 2003 2004 2005
Planning and design $440,000 $462,000 $490,000 $515,000
Construction/implementation $5,500,000 $5,800,000 $6,100,000 $6,400,000
Operations and maintenance $500,000 $525,000 $560,000 $590,000
Monitoring and evaluation $ 90,000 $ 95,000 $101,000 $107,000
Total Outyear Budgets $6,530,000 $6,882,000 $7,251,000 $7,612,000

Other Budget Explanation

Not applicable

Reviews and Recommendations

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

CBFWA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Jul 14, 2000

BPA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Sep 8, 2000
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
This project includes five (5) subprojects with sequential project numbers of 199206102/03/04/05/06 for each of the Tribal aspects of the overall mitigation work. Each has it's own budget and SOW, even though it's under the 9206100 umbrella contract.

NWPPC Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Sep 13, 2000

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 (IDFG) Comments (Go to Original on NPCC Website):

Sponsor (IDFG) Comments (Go to Original on NPCC Website):

Return to top of page