Return to Proposal Finder FY 2001 Ongoing Proposal 199206800

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 Implement Willamette Basin Mitigation Program
BPA Project Proposal Number 199206800
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 Gregory B. Sieglitz
Mailing Address 7118 NE Vandenberg Ave.
City, State, Zip Corvallis, OR 97370
Phone 5417574186
Fax 5417574252
E-mail greg.b.sieglitz@state.or.us
 
Manager of program authorizing this project Gregory B. Sieglitz
 
Review Cycle FY 2001 Ongoing
Province Lower Columbia
Subbasin Willamette
 
Short Description Mitigate for hydro-electric facilities through enhancement, easement development, acquisition, restoration, and management of wetlands and other target habitat types and their respective species in the Willamette Basin in Oregon.
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: It is anticipated that 200 - 300 Hus will be secured each year and credited to the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA). Habitat will be secured, in perpetuity, for the NW Power Planning Council's (Council) 19 target wildlife species and other Sensitive, Threatened, Endangered, and at-risk species. Further, the restoration of hydrologic period and function coupled with removal of non-native vegetation and re-establishment of native species will create a favorable environment for the development of native vegetative communities.
Biological Data: HEP will be used to quantify existing and post-enhancement habitat values. Standardized HEP models for target species will be used and information on plant species response to enhancement activities will be collected using photo points and line transects. Wildlife species surveys will be conducted also. These methods will be used to measure baseline habitat conditions and to monitor changes to habitat and species use over time. GAP Analysis methods will be used to depict the contribution of each acquired and enhanced mitigation site to the overall network of lands reserved for wildlife, natural function, and overall biodiversity of the region.


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
1993 Inventory of western pond turtle population in Confluence area. Final report.
1994 Inventory of western pond turtle population in remaining Willamette Basin suitable habitat. Final report.
1995 Background information collected and inventory of potential mitigation sites conducted. Telemetry of turtle population.
1996 Began development of partnerships for habitat projects on public lands. Graduate project and summary of turtle telemetry.
1997 GIS developed and Confluence Atlas of GIS data produced. Hydrologic data of Confluence area report compiled. Confluence HEP sampling and final report. Alternatives Team final report.
1998 Purchase of 44 acre riparian forest and agricultural land. Identified two new focus areas in the basin. Developed partnership with McKenzie River Trust and Watershed Council. HEP and NEPA surveys conducted on 44 acre site.
1999 Technical Advisory Group formed. Photo point monitoring methods established. Revegetation of portion of 44 acre site. Non-native vegetation removal on two project areas. HEP and NEPA surveys conducted on 200 acre and 66 acre sites. Appraisals complete
2000 Reforestation and non-native vegetation removal of portion of 44 acre and 220 acre sites. Completed hydrogeomorphic index to fish and wildlife habitats. Finalize ca.1850 vegetation map of basin. HEP and NEPA surveys and purchase of 100 acre site.


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 NEPA surveys on project lands a. Develop necessary agreements to work on public and private lands on-going $ 12,550 x
b. Coordinate and assist with cultural resource surveys on-going $ 5,200 x
c. Coordinate and assist with hazardous materials surveys on-going $ 5,200 x
d. Coordinate and assist with Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive species surveys on-going $ 2,600  
e. Evaluate enhancement measures using BPA NEPA checklists on-going $ 2,700  
2. Develop habitat enhancement and management plan for project areas a. Facilitate meetings with stakeholders on-going $ 18,300  
b. Develop goals, objectives, and strategies for habitat improvements and maintenance on-going $ 31,200 x
c. Produce document outlining strategies on-going $ 14,000 x
Note: Refer to project # 199705900 Securing Wildlife Mitigation Sites-Oregon. Willamette Basin staff will be funded to assist with the completion of Objectives 1-4 found in Section 3. on-going $ 0  


Outyear Objective-Based Budget

n/a or no information


Outyear Budgets for Planning and Design Phase

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2002 FY 2003
$130,000 $135,000 $120,000 $125,000


Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation Phase

Task-based Budget

Objective Task Duration in FYs Estimated 2001 cost Subcontractor
1. Implement wildlife mitigation projects by negotiating with landowners, purchasing fee-title or easement options, conducting appraisals, completing NEPA surveys, developing project IGCs. a. purchase fee-title/easements of priority project lands using FY 2000 CARRY FORWARD FUNDS. Priority projects are: Muddy Creek/Mary's River Confluence 220 acres: $600,000 Coast Fork State Park area 30 acres: $150,000 McKenzie River Island 20 acres: 2001 $2,419,237  
$50,000 Lower Middle Fork-Mt Pisgah 1700 acres:$1,619,237 $ 0  
Note:Refer to project # 199705900 Securing Wildlife Mitigation Sites-Oregon from which the following tasks would be funded. b. purchase fee-title/easements of priority project lands using FY 2001 OWC FUNDS Priority projects are, but not limited to: Mollala State Park area: $500,000 Stout Mountain 560 acres: $2,000,000 Short Mountain 265 acres: $500,000 2001 $ 0  
2. Restore or enhance hydrologic connectivity in riparian, wetland, and floodplain areas a. Remove artificial barriers to functional hydrologic system 2001 $ 10,000 x
b. Enhance existing hydrologic features to provide better functionality 2001 $ 5,000 x
c. In some cases construct artificial features to mimic natural function 2001 $ 5,000  
3. Remove non-native vegetation in preparation of restoration a. Remove or discourage reed canary grass, scotch broom, Himalaya blackberry and others through inundation, shading, and by hand 2001 $ 6,500  
b. In severe cases remove with equipment 2001 $ 4,575  
c. Apply herbicides if necessary and if risks minimized 2001 $ 3,000  
4. Plant native vegetation in areas where restoration of hydrologic function and removal of non-natives is insufficient to promote natives a. Prepare site with equipment or by hand 2001 $ 7,300  
b. Plant vegetation 2001 $ 4,000  
c. Irrigate or otherwise promote establishment when necessary 2001 $ 5,000  


Outyear Objective-Based Budget

n/a or no information


Outyear Budgets for Construction and Implementation Phase

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2002 FY 2003
$2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000


Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance Phase

Task-based Budget

Objective Task Duration in FYs Estimated 2001 cost Subcontractor
1. Maintain enhanced or artificial hydrologic features a. Perform maintenance to hydrologic connections, water control structures, and pumps periodic $ 1,750  
2. Control non-native vegetation expansion a. Remove vectors such as roads and fill intermittent $ 2,500 x
b. Hand remove where effective on-going $ 4,050  
c. Remove using equipment when necessary on-going $ 6,750  
d. Use herbicides where effective and safe on-going $ 1,000  
3. Maintain minimal site infrastructure a. Maintain fences, gates, signs, roadways, trails, irrigation systems, etc. on-going $ 1,200  


Outyear Objective-Based Budget

n/a or no information


Outyear Budgets for Operations and Maintenance Phase

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2002 FY 2003
$150,000 $200,000 $ 35,000 $ 50,000


Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation Phase

Task-based Budget

Objective Task Duration in FYs Estimated 2001 cost Subcontractor
1. Conduct vegetation surveys to monitor changes in plant communities. a. Use photo points for monitoring vegetative and hydrologic changes on-going $ 1,200  
b. Evaluate planting and cultivation methodology and correlate to survivability on-going $ 1,300  
c. Correlate micro-site deviations with survivability on-going $ 750  
d. Correlate age class and species with survivability on-going $ 1,375  
e. Monitor mortality and determine cause on-going $ 1,000  
2. Conduct wildlife surveys to monitor species response to habitat changes. a. Conduct periodic HEP sampling to quantify and qualify expected wildlife use periodic $ 2,000  
b. Conduct wildlife surveys with established protocols to determine actual use on-going $ 1,000  
3. Conduct hydrologic surveys to establish most effective techniques for restoring functionality a. Develop subcontract 2001 $ 32,000 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
$ 70,000 $ 80,000 $ 50,000 $ 60,000


Section 8. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 2001 Cost
Personnel FTE: 1 $ 26,290
Fringe @ 38 % $ 9,990
Supplies $ 5,000
Travel $ 1,500
Indirect @ 26 % $ 8,970
NEPA Subcontractors $ 10,000
Subcontractor Planning and design subcontractor; also see NEPA above $ 30,000
Personnel FTE: .45 $ 9,766
Fringe @ 38% $ 3,711
Supplies $ 8,000
Travel $ 1,000
Indirect @ 26% $ 7,898
Capital $2,419,237
Subcontractor Hydrologic engineering firms $ 20,000
Personnel FTE: .35 $ 5,228
Fringe @ 38 % $ 1,987
Supplies $ 2,700
Travel $ 1,000
Indirect @ 26 % $ 3,835
Subcontractor Construction firm $ 2,500
Personnel FTE: .20 $ 3,913
Fringe @ 38 % $ 1,487
Supplies $ 683
Travel $ 300
Indirect @26 % $ 2,242
Subcontractor Hydrogeomorphic analyses $ 32,000
Total Itemized Budget $2,619,237


Total estimated budget

Total FY 2001 project cost $2,619,237
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $2,419,237
Total FY 2001 budget request $200,000
FY 2001 forecast from 2000 $200,000
% change from forecast 0.0%


Reason for change in estimated budget

No change.


Reason for change in scope

No change.


Cost Sharing

Not applicable
 

Outyear Budget Totals

2002 2003 2004 2005
Planning and design $120,000 $125,000 $130,000 $135,000
Construction/implementation $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000
Operations and maintenance $ 35,000 $ 50,000 $150,000 $200,000
Monitoring and evaluation $ 50,000 $ 60,000 $ 70,000 $ 80,000
Total Outyear Budgets $2,205,000 $2,235,000 $2,350,000 $2,415,000
 

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:
Date:
Jul 14, 2000
2001
$2,619,237
Comment:

BPA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Does not fit with BPA program
Date:
Sep 8, 2000
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Comment:
Recommendation: Based on the very high cost of providing HU's, the type of future projects planned and the small number of HU's provided (15 HU's in 5 years) in the Willamette Basin, we recommend the Council review this project.

Budget Background:

2001 Planning and Design Budget Request $91,750
2001 Construction/Implementation phase Budget Request $2,419,237
2001 O&M Budget Request$17,250
2001 M&E Budget Request $40,625
 
Total 2001 Budget Request $2,619,237
Less carryover/carryforward $2,419,237
 
Total New Money 2001 Request $200,000

This project was originally authorized in 1992 as the Western Pond Turtle Project. From 1992 through April 1995, it carried that title, and received $330,684 in funding.

In April 1995, the project title was changed to Willamette Basin Mitigation Project. From April 1995 to present, BPA has invested $745,017 in project planning and design and $172,955 to purchase the Sorenson property for the project, bringing the total for the period to $917,972. In return, BPA received 15 Habitat Units of Credit which equates to $11,530 dollars per HU if just the cost of the Sorenson property is counted, or $61,198 per HU if you include the design and planning money.

It is ODFW's contention that there are several other projects that will come on line in the coming years. These will contribute approximately 200-300 HU's each year. Although no documentation of the habitat units has been provided. We were also told last year that some of these projects were close to be implemented but nothing concrete has yet been provided.

We question the wildlife HU value of some of these projects. Working with Lane County Parks to improve wildlife habitat on an urban park, is an example of a project of limited value to wildlife. The proposed plan speaks to providing opportunities for low intensity outdoor recreation and education while protecting habitat, it also talks of how increased use may require septic drain fields. While some reasonable uses are compatible, it seems like the main purpose here is recreation, as an urban park should. BPA funded wildlife habitat improvements should not be degraded by grazing, drain fields, hiking trails and interpretive centers. Other proposed projects may not be of this nature, but this is the one example of a proposed BPA funded wildlife management plan which does not fit with our program.


NWPPC Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Sep 13, 2000
2001
$2,619,237
Comment:

NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review Funding category:
capital
Date:
May 2005
FY05 NPCC Start of Year:
$350,000
FY06 NPCC Staff Preliminary:
$ 0
FY06 NPCC July Draft Start of Year:
$ 0
Sponsor (ODFW) Comments (Go to Original on NPCC Website):

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

Return to top of page