FY 2007 Solicitation Homepage

Project Proposal Request for FY 2007 - FY 2009 Funding (Revised Summer 2006)

Proposal 200200300: Secure & Restore Resident Fish Habitat

Download this document in MS Word format
Open this document in PDF format

Table of Contents
Part 1. Administration and Budgeting
Section 1: General Administrative
Section 2: Project Location
Section 3: Project Species
Section 4: Past Accomplishments
Section 5: Relationship to Other Projects
Section 6: Biological Objectives
Section 7: Work Elements
Section 8: Budget
Section 9: Project Future
Section 10: Documents
Part 2. Reviews
Part 1 of 2. Administration and Budgeting
Section 1: General Administrative Information
Process Information:
Date Proposal Submitted & Finalized Status Form Generator
July 14, 2006 Finalized Lynn DuCharme

Proposal Type: Ongoing
Proposal Number: 200200300
Proposal Name: Secure & Restore Resident Fish Habitat
BPA Project Manager: Joe Deherrera
Agency, Institution or Organization: Salish & Kootenai Confederated Tribes
Short Description: The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes and Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks will jointly pursue the protection of fisheries habitat through land acquisitions and conservation easements to offst losses due tho the construction of Hungry Horse Dam.
Information Transfer: Aerial photographs and ground surveys used to rank lands proposed for selection will be stored electronically at CSKT or MFWP. Stream lengths used for BPA credits against the NPCC-approved loss statement will be digitized form photos and plat map overlays. Physical locations will be provided as GPS coordinates (UTMs and Lat. Long.) and township and range. Titles and conservation easements will be archived by the signatory agency along with maps and stipulations requested by BPA. Stream miles protected by this project will be credited to BPA as per the 3-way MOA between MFWP, CSKT and BPA.
 
Project Proposal Contacts
Contact Organization Address Phone/Email Roles Notes
Form Submitter
Lynn DuCharme Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation Highway 93 W P.O. Box 278
Pablo MT 59855
Ph: 406.883.2888
Fax: 406.883.2897
Email: lynnd@cskt.org
Form Submitter
All Assigned Contacts
Lynn DuCharme Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation Highway 93 W P.O. Box 278
Pablo MT 59855
Ph: 406.883.2888
Fax: 406.883.2897
Email: lynnd@cskt.org
Form Submitter
Project Lead
Brian Marotz Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks 490 N Meridian Rd.
Kalispell MT 59901
Ph: 406.751.4546
Fax: 406.257.0349
Email: bmarotz@mt.gov
Form Submitter
Project Lead
I am project manager for all MFWP contracts including Libby and Hungry Horse Mitigation, NPCC Mainstem Amendment monitoring and upcoming joint proposal with CSKT for capital funds for land acquisitions and conservation easements

Section 2: Project Location
Sponsor Province: Mountain Columbia ARG Province: No Change
Sponsor Subbasin: Flathead ARG Subbasin: No Change
Location(s) at which the action will be implemented
Latitude Longitude Waterbody Location Description County/State Subbasin Primary?
48N W114 Flathead River The entire Flathead watershed Flathead/Lake, Montana Flathead Yes

Section 3: Focal Species
Focal Species:
Primary Secondary Additional Species
Bull Trout
Westslope Cutthroat
Mountain Whitefish
Northern Pikeminnow

Section 4: Past Accomplishments
Past Accomplishments for Each Fiscal Year of This Project
Fiscal Year Accomplishments
2006 Contacted over 75 landowners, conducted 25 preliminary appraisals, 13 full Federal appraisals, and purchased 12 additional properties crediting BPA with a total of 10.45 km of habitat under the FY05 and FY06 MOAs negotiated with BPA.
2005 Conducted 3 preliminary appraisals and one appraisal in accordance with the Federal Land Acquisitions and Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice

Section 5: Relationships to Other Projects
Other Current Projects Related to this Project (any funding source)
Funding Source Related ID Related Project Title Relationship
BPA 199101901 Hungry Horse Mitigation/Flathe Sister project. CSKT mitigation and monitoring program to offset losses due to Hungry Horse Dam. Restoration costs on acquired parcels also built into this ongoing program to allow BPA/NPCC the discression of where/how to find restoration actions
BPA 199101903 Hungry Horse Mitigation/Habita Sister project. MFWP mitigation program to offset losses due to Hungry Horse Dam. Restoration costs on acquired parcels also built into this ongoing program to allow BPA/NPCC the discression of where/how to find restoration actions
BPA 199608701 Montana Focus Watershed Coordi Sister project. This project assists in coordinating with other BPA projects, landowners, and other agencies to avoid duplication and increase efficiency in implementing land protection and restoration activities..

Section 6: Biological Objectives
Biological Objectives of this Proposed Project
Biological Objective Full Description Associated Subbasin Plan Strategy Page Nos
Improve channel stability Improve channel stability to a level equivalent to the channel stability habitat restoration score of reference streams Flathead Enhance channel stability. When possible, provide long term habitat protection through purchase and conservation easements... 27,28
Improve habitat connectivity Restore passage to migratory fish by removing potential man-caused barriers, i.e. impassable culverts, hydraulic headcuts, water diversion blockages, landslides, and impassable deltas. Flathead Restore connectivity. Provide long term habitat availability through purchase, conservation easements... 31
Improve habitat diversity in the mainstem river Restore the habiat diversity of the mainstem to a level that supports sustainable population levels of focal species that function naturally and may be capable of supporting appropriate forms of human use. Flathead Enhance/protect habitat diversity. Provide long term channel stability through purchase, conservation easements... 22,23
Improve habitat diversity in the tributaries Improve habitat diversity to a level equivalent to the habitat diversity restoration score of reference streams Flathead Enhance/protect habitat diversity. Provide long-term channel stability through purchase, conservation easements... 28
Improve riparian condition in the mainstem river Improve riparian condition to a level that supports sustainable population levels of focal species that function naturally and may be capable of supporting appropriate forms of human use. Flathead When possible, provide long term habitat protection through purchase and conservation easements... 21,22
Improve riparian condition in the tributaries Restore riparian habitats to a level equivalent to the riparian condition habitat restoration score of reference streams Flathead Protect riparian habitats. When possible, provide long term habitat protection through purchase and conservation easements... 26,27
Improve shoreline condition Restore lake shoreline conditions to a level equivalent to the shoreline condition habitat restoration score of reference lakes Flathead Protect/resotre lakeshore habitats. Provide long term habitat protection through purchase, conservation easements... 37
Protect Class 1 waters Protect and maintain prime, functioning tributary habitat Flathead Protect habitat. Provide long term habitat protection through purchase, conservation easements... 32
Reduce fine sediment in the mainstem river Reduce the delivery of fine sediments to a level that supports sustainable populations of focal species that function naturally and may be capable of supporting appropriate forms of human use. Flathead Eliminate/reduce sediment sources. When possible, provide long term habitat protection through purchase and conservation easements... 24,25
Reduce fine sediment in the tributaries Reduce the delivery of fine sediments to a level equivalent to the fine sediment habitat restoration score of reference streams Flathead Reduce sediment sources. Provide long-term habitat protection through purchase, conservation easements... 29,30
Reduce lake pollutants Reduce pollution to a level equivalent to the pollution habitat restoration score of reference lakes. Flathead Eliminate/reduce pollutant sources. Provide long term habitat protection through purchase, conservation easements... 38

Section 7: Work Elements
Work Elements and Associated Biological Objectives
Work Element Name Work Element Title Description Start Date End Date Estimated Budget
1: Conduct Pre-Acquisition Activities Conduct all pre-acquisition activities for potential acquisitions/easements Conduct all pre-acquisition activities on potential land purchases including negotiations, appraisals, title searches, surveys, etc 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $811,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Improve channel stability
Improve habitat connectivity
Improve habitat diversity in the mainstem river
Improve habitat diversity in the tributaries
Improve riparian condition in the mainstem river
Improve riparian condition in the tributaries
Improve shoreline condition
Protect Class 1 waters
Reduce fine sediment in the mainstem river
Reduce fine sediment in the tributaries
Reduce lake pollutants
No Metrics for this Work Element

2: Lease Land Protect habitat important to resident fish through acquisition and/or conservation easement This project will secure habitat through land acquisition and conservation easements 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $15,000,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Improve channel stability
Improve habitat connectivity
Improve habitat diversity in the mainstem river
Improve habitat diversity in the tributaries
Improve riparian condition in the mainstem river
Improve riparian condition in the tributaries
Improve shoreline condition
Protect Class 1 waters
Reduce fine sediment in the mainstem river
Reduce fine sediment in the tributaries
Reduce lake pollutants
No Metrics for this Work Element

3: Produce Plan Develop management plans & habitat restoration plans Once lands are secured by purchase or easement, a management plan will be developed for each parcel or group of parcels. The management plans will include habitat protection measures including fencing, native plant establishment, noxious weed control, riparian/wetland restoration and stock trespass issues. Habitat project plans will be developed to restore and enhance habitats on newly acquired/protected parcels. Restoration activities will be based upon the latest and best available science. 10/1/2007 9/30/2009 $ 0
Biological Objectives Metrics
Improve channel stability
Improve habitat connectivity
Improve habitat diversity in the mainstem river
Improve habitat diversity in the tributaries
Improve riparian condition in the mainstem river
Improve riparian condition in the tributaries
Improve shoreline condition
Protect Class 1 waters
Reduce fine sediment in the mainstem river
Reduce fine sediment in the tributaries
Reduce lake pollutants
No Metrics for this Work Element

4: Other Habitat Improvement Activities as Needed on parcels acquired or protected via conservation easement This work element encompasses any habitat restoration or enhancement activities needed on parcels acquired and/or protected via conservation easement under this program. This work was also built into ongoing habitat proposals 199101901 and 199101903 to give BPA/NPCC the choice of funding under this proposal or under ongoing habitat restoration and monitoring projects. 10/1/2007 9/30/2009 $1,000,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Improve channel stability
Improve habitat connectivity
Improve habitat diversity in the mainstem river
Improve habitat diversity in the tributaries
Improve riparian condition in the mainstem river
Improve riparian condition in the tributaries
Improve shoreline condition
Protect Class 1 waters
Reduce fine sediment in the mainstem river
Reduce fine sediment in the tributaries
Reduce lake pollutants
No Metrics for this Work Element

5: Maintain Vegetation Conduct necessary activities to maintain restored/enhanced conditions of acquired property This work element may include activities such as weed spraying, fence maintenance, etc needed to keep habitat on protected properties in tact. This work was also built into ongoing habitat proposals 199101901 and 199101903 to give BPA/NPCC the choice of funding under this proposal or under ongoing habitat restoration and monitoring projects. 10/1/2007 9/30/2009 $250,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Improve channel stability
Improve habitat connectivity
Improve habitat diversity in the mainstem river
Improve habitat diversity in the tributaries
Improve riparian condition in the mainstem river
Improve riparian condition in the tributaries
Improve shoreline condition
Protect Class 1 waters
Reduce fine sediment in the mainstem river
Reduce fine sediment in the tributaries
Reduce lake pollutants
No Metrics for this Work Element

6: Investigate Trespass Monitor Terms of Conservation Easements Monitor the conditions of any conservation easements funded under this project. Land technicians will work with landowners to assure compliance. 10/1/2007 9/30/2009 $20,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Improve channel stability
Improve habitat connectivity
Improve habitat diversity in the mainstem river
Improve habitat diversity in the tributaries
Improve riparian condition in the mainstem river
Improve riparian condition in the tributaries
Improve shoreline condition
Protect Class 1 waters
Reduce fine sediment in the mainstem river
Reduce fine sediment in the tributaries
Reduce lake pollutants
No Metrics for this Work Element

7: Analyze/Interpret Data Monitor Management Plans and Restoration Efforts Periodic measures will be obtained at five-to-ten-year intervals to compare with baseline information upon purchase or easement. Aerial photographs will be obtained to monitor major shifts in plant communities. The coverage of noxious weeds will be estimated and monitored on all properties 10/1/2007 9/30/2009 $ 0
Biological Objectives Metrics
Improve channel stability
Improve habitat connectivity
Improve habitat diversity in the mainstem river
Improve habitat diversity in the tributaries
Improve riparian condition in the mainstem river
Improve riparian condition in the tributaries
Improve shoreline condition
Protect Class 1 waters
Reduce fine sediment in the mainstem river
Reduce fine sediment in the tributaries
Reduce lake pollutants
No Metrics for this Work Element


Section 8: Budget

Itemized Estimated Budget
Item Note FY 2007 Cost FY 2008 Cost FY 2009 Cost
Capital Equipment Property acquisition $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000
Personnel CSKT & MFWP $114,000 $127,000 $131,000
Supplies Appraisals, surveys, prelim. title $120,000 $120,000 $120,000
Other Restoration Costs $ 0 $500,000 $500,000
Other O & M $ 0 $125,000 $125,000
Fringe Benefits CSKT & MFWP $31,000 $33,000 $35,000
Totals $5,265,000 $5,905,000 $5,911,000

Total Estimated FY 2007-2009 Budgets
Total Itemized Budget$17,081,000
Total Work Element budget$17,081,000

Cost sharing
Funding Source or Organization Item or Service Provided FY 2007 Est Value ($) FY 2008 Est Value ($) FY 2009 Est Value ($) Cash or in-kind? Status
CSKT Technical support $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 In-Kind Under Development
CSKT facilities $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 In-Kind Confirmed
Flathead Land Trust/Flathead Lakers Technical assistance & landowner contacts $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 In-Kind Under Development
MFWP facilities $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 Cash Confirmed
NRCS grant dollars $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 Cash Under Development
NRCS Technical support $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 In-Kind Under Development
TBD cost share $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 Cash Under Development
USFWS Technical support $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 In-Kind Under Development
USFWS Grant dollars $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 Cash Confirmed
Totals $645,000 $645,000 $645,000

Section 9: Project Future
Project Future Costs and/or Termination
FY 2010 Est Budget FY 2011 Est Budget Comments
$5,870,000 $5,874,000 [Outyear comment field left blank]
Future Operations & Maintenance Costs
O& M costs should decline over time as native vegetation becomes established.
 
Termination Date Comments
Unknown When Hungry Horse Dam filled, it innundated 125 km of the South Fork of the Flathead River and its tributaries to adfluvial trout. This project will hopefully continue at some level until the mitigation debt has been retired.
 
Final Deliverables
Vast acres of valuable habitat for resident fish protected imperpetuity. BPA or other appropriate entity will hold a perpetual habitat easement on all acquired or protected properties.

Section 10: Narrative
Document Type Size Date
Fix-it Loop Documents
Documents Originally Submitted with this Proposal

Part 2 of 2. Reviews of Proposal
Administrative Review Group (ARG) Results
Account Type:
Both Capital and Expense
Location:
Province: No Change
Subbasin: No Change
Primary Focal Species
No Change
ARG Comments:


BPA Capital/Expense Review Results (March 14, 2006) [Download full document]

Initial BPA Capital/Expense Determination (Subject to final review):
Capitalize acquisition and permanent easement
Primary Uncertainty for Capitalization: Land acquisition requirements


NPCC Final Funding Recommendations (October 23, 2006) [Full NPCC Council Recs]

FY 2007 NPCC Rec
$5,265,000
FY 2008 NPCC Rec
$5,905,000
FY 2009 NPCC Rec
$5,911,000
Total NPCC Rec
$17,081,000
Budget Type:Capital
Budget Category:ProvinceCapital
Recommendation:Fund
NPCC Comments: Funding contingent on Council review of revised proposal, with improved selection criteria and objectives. Revised proposal due end of December, 06. Determine if expense element is needed.


NPCC Draft Funding Recommendations (September 15, 2006) [Full NPCC Council Recs]

FY 2007 NPCC Rec
$5,265,000
FY 2008 NPCC Rec
$5,905,000
FY 2009 NPCC Rec
$5,911,000
Total NPCC Rec
$17,081,000
FY 2007 MSRT Rec
$ 0
FY 2008 MSRT Rec
$ 0
FY 2009 MSRT Rec
$ 0
Total MSRT Rec
$ 0
Budget Category:ProvinceCapital
NPCC Comments: Funding contingent on Council review of revised proposal, with improved selection criteria and objectives. Revised proposal due end of December, 06. Determine if expense element is needed.

Local or MSRT Comments: Provincial Oversight Group (OG) expects this project to stay with a capital designation.


Independent Scientific Review Panel Final Review (August 31, 2006) [Download full document]

Recommendation: Not fundable
Comments: The response is not adequate. The sponsors do not seem to understand the nature of a funding proposal. They are defensive about having to supply needed information for a technical evaluation of their project. Reviewers suggest that if their proposal is "substantiated by the science," as the authors say, then it is the obligation to outline that science, as they understand it. Apparently there have been no results from the 2002 funding. Their strategy of land acquisition for ecosystem protection is fine, but the proposal must go beyond that. The response gives statements about what they intend, but these are not given as measurable objectives. It is understandable that they do not want to show their hand on specific properties, but the objectives for a generic property can be given (in the context of the paper cited in the ISRP review, which was intended to be helpful for formulating a response). Development of criteria for selecting properties ought to have been the first objective for the 2002 funding, and given as results in this proposal. Ironically, many of the comments in the response, if presented in proposal format and not as a criticism of the ISRP and its reviewers, could have constituted several elements in a logical proposal and useful response.

As the ISRP commented, this project has elements that make it a very worthwhile. The problem is that the sponsors have inadequately presented it and have shown no progress from the previous funding. These deficiencies give a technical reviewer no justification for recommending it. A defensive response criticizing the ISRP reviewers is not helpful. Sponsors of this proposal need to organize their approach and thoughts regarding this process and develop a sound, science-based proposal.

Other issues include the lack of justification for acquiring properties based on limiting factors. They need to come with criteria for future acquisitions. What criteria did they use for the 2.36 km of credited property they have already purchased?


Independent Scientific Review Panel Preliminary Review (June 2, 2006) [Download full document]

Recommendation: Response requested
Comments: As submitted this is not a scientifically reviewable project, but it should be. The sponsors plan to acquire properties. The proposal would benefit by including descriptions of the properties to be purchased and the species to benefit, and/or the criteria to be used for selection of the properties targeted for protection. Please provide a response on these issues.

A response is also needed to show how selected properties will help restore fluvial functions (e.g., see Palmer et al. 2005. Standards for ecologically successful river restoration. Journal of Applied Ecology 42, 208–217, and cited references). This is basically the same issue raised in our previous review.

Previous ISRP comments were: "Do not fund in its present form. This request is for 'base funding' rather than 'project funding' oriented to specific topics, the norm for most BPA-funded work. The proposal does not include the elements expected in a technically sound program. It should include clear and specific objectives, detailed methods, and how the progress in attaining specific objectives will be tracked and evaluated. The reporting of results is inadequate; progress in past activities of the project need to be included as a basis for continuing similar work. Adaptive management requires data for regular assessments and decisions regarding the project strategy."

Maintained by the Columbia Basin Fish & Wildlife Authority. Please direct comments or questions to the webmaster.