FY 2007 Solicitation Homepage

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

Proposal 199505701: S Idaho Wildlife Mitigation

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 Bob Martin

Proposal Type: Ongoing
Proposal Number: 199505701
Proposal Name: S Idaho Wildlife Mitigation
BPA Project Manager: Dorothy Welch
Agency, Institution or Organization: Idaho Department of Fish & Game
Short Description: This is for on-going coordination within the Council's CBF&W Program; and for on-going annual operation, maintenance, and monitoring for the Krueger property, purchased by BPA 1999 as part of the Southern Idaho Wildlife Mitigation Project.
Information Transfer: Project tracking and reporting in Pisces.
 
Project Proposal Contacts
Contact Organization Address Phone/Email Roles Notes
Form Submitter
Bob Martin Idaho Department of Fish & Game P.O. Box 25
Boise ID 83707
Ph: 208.287.2712
Fax: 208.334.2114
Email: bmartin@idfg.idaho.gov
Form Submitter
All Assigned Contacts
Bob Martin Idaho Department of Fish & Game P.O. Box 25
Boise ID 83707
Ph: 208.287.2712
Fax: 208.334.2114
Email: bmartin@idfg.idaho.gov
Form Submitter

Section 2: Project Location
Sponsor Province: Middle Snake ARG Province: No Change
Sponsor Subbasin: Boise ARG Subbasin: No Change
Location(s) at which the action will be implemented
Latitude Longitude Waterbody Location Description County/State Subbasin Primary?
Middle Snake Province for coordination; 166 acres within Section 2 of T 2 N, R 3 E for annual O&M&M&E. , Idaho Boise Yes

Section 3: Focal Species
Focal Species:
Primary Secondary Additional Species
All Wildlife
Primary focal: Mule deer. Other species: mallard, mink, ruffed grouse, blue grouse, yellow warbler, black-capped chickadee, sharp-tailed grouse, Canada goose, ring-necked pheasant, bald eagle, elk.

Section 4: Past Accomplishments
Past Accomplishments for Each Fiscal Year of This Project
Fiscal Year Accomplishments
2005 On Krueger property, manage noxious weeds and maintain fences.
2004 On Krueger property, manage noxious weeds and maintain fences.
2003 Coordinate and plan wildlife mitigation implementation activities within the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program. On Krueger property, manage noxious weeds and maintain fences.
2002 Coordinate and plan wildlife mitigation implementation activities within the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program. On Krueger property, manage noxious weeds and maintain fences.
2001 Coordinate and plan wildlife mitigation implementation activities within the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program. On Krueger property, manage noxious weeds and maintain fences.
2000 Coordinate and plan mitigation implementation activities within the Council's Fish and Wildlife Prog. On Krueger property, conduct Hab't Eval Procedure and determine baseline HUs for wildl mitigation crediting. Manage noxious weeds and maintain fences.
1999 Coordinate and plan wildlife mitigation implementation activities within the Council's Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. Acquire the 166-acre Krueger property in the lower Boise foothills for $339,893.
1998 Coordinate and plan wildlife mitigation implementation activities within the Council's Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program.
1997 Coordinate and plan wildlife mitigation implementation activities within the Council's Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program.
1996 Coordinate and plan wildlife mitigation implementation activities within the Council's Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program.
1995 Coordinate and plan wildlife mitigation implementation activities within the Council's Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program.

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 199505700 S Idaho Wildlife Mitigation Administered by same IDFG staff within the same Southern Idaho Wildlife Mitigation project.
BPA 199505702 S Idaho Wildlife Mitigation This Shoshone-Bannock Tribes project is part of the collaborative Southern Idaho Wildlife Mitigation program.
BPA 199505703 S Idaho Wildlife Mitigation This Shoshone-Paiute Tribes project is part of the collaborative Southern Idaho Wildlife Mitigation program.

Section 6: Biological Objectives
Biological Objectives of this Proposed Project
Biological Objective Full Description Associated Subbasin Plan Strategy Page Nos
Mitigation...for effects to wildl. from hydropower From NW Power Act and NWPCC's Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. Boise/Payette/Weiser Numerous 13 (management plan)
Protect BPA-purchased mitigation property Protect 164 acres of shrub-steppe and 2 acres of deciduous scrub-shrub wetland on Krueger property, and its 46 mule deer HUs and 2 yellow warbler HUs. Boise/Payette/Weiser Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program wildlife mitigation targets. Wildlife appendix
Protect, enhance, or restore riparian habitats... 3 strategies concerning riparian habitat protection and monitoring. Boise/Payette/Weiser 14B2, 14B3, 14B9 51-53 (management plan)
Protect, enhance, or restore shrub-steppe hab't... 3 strategies concerning shrub-steppe protection, restoration, and monitoring. Boise/Payette/Weiser 15A2, 15A6, 15A7 53-54 (Management Plan)
Protect, enhance, or restore wetlands... 4 strategies concerning riparian habitat protection and monitoring. Boise/Payette/Weiser 14A4, 14A3, 14A6, 14A7 50-51 (Management Plan)
Protect...native plant comm's by preventing weeds. 10 strategies dealing with weed monitoring, treatments, and prevention of spread. Boise/Payette/Weiser 10A1 through 10A6, 10B1 through10B4 42-45 (management plan)
Protect/enhance/acquire mitigation properties Protect, enhance, and/or acquire wildlife mitigation properties in the Middle Snake province Boise/Payette/Weiser Re-start wildlife mitigation implementation in the Middle Snake portion of the Southern Idaho Wildlife Mitigation program area through coordination and planning with the Sho-Ban and Sho-Pai tribes, BPA, NWPCC, and others. [Pg no blank]
Reduce conflicts betw. livestock and native wildl. 2 strategies concerning protecting wildlife and plants from livestock grazing. Boise/Payette/Weiser 12B2, 12B4 48-49 (Management Plan)
Reduce negative impacts of livestock grazing .. 2 strategies concerning livestock grazing elimination and monitoring impacts of exclusion. Boise/Payette/Weiser 12A2, 12A4 47-48 (Management Plan)

Section 7: Work Elements
Work Elements and Associated Biological Objectives
Work Element Name Work Element Title Description Start Date End Date Estimated Budget
Remove vegetation Remove noxious weeds on Krueger property. Manage noxious weeds through herbicide application. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $4,500
Biological Objectives Metrics
Mitigation...for effects to wildl. from hydropower
Protect, enhance, or restore riparian habitats...
Protect, enhance, or restore shrub-steppe hab't...
Protect...native plant comm's by preventing weeds.
* # of acres treated: Survey 166 ac. Treat as needed.

Operate and Maintain Habitat/Passage Maintain fences and gates Manage fences and gates to restrict undesirable livestock grazing and motorized recreation. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $3,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Mitigation...for effects to wildl. from hydropower
Protect, enhance, or restore riparian habitats...
Protect, enhance, or restore shrub-steppe hab't...
Protect, enhance, or restore wetlands...
Protect...native plant comm's by preventing weeds.
Reduce conflicts betw. livestock and native wildl.
Reduce negative impacts of livestock grazing ..
No Metrics for this Work Element

Remove Debris Remove trash One-time trash removal from site to improve wildlife habitat and aesthetics of the property. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $2,500
Biological Objectives Metrics
Protect, enhance, or restore shrub-steppe hab't...
No Metrics for this Work Element

Coordination Coordinate Fish and Wildlife Program activities and planning with CBFWA, NWPCC, BPA, Sho-Ban and Sho-Pai tribes, etc. Includes coordination with Tribes, BPA, and NWPPC to continue mitigation implementation for Anderson Ranch, Black Canyon, and Deadwood dams. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $49,952
Biological Objectives Metrics
Protect, enhance, or restore riparian habitats...
Protect, enhance, or restore shrub-steppe hab't...
Protect, enhance, or restore wetlands...
Protect...native plant comm's by preventing weeds.
Reduce conflicts betw. livestock and native wildl.
Reduce negative impacts of livestock grazing ..
No Metrics for this Work Element

Manage and Administer Projects Manage and administer the contract and tasks included in the contract Required contract oversight. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $463
Biological Objectives Metrics
Protect, enhance, or restore riparian habitats...
Protect, enhance, or restore shrub-steppe hab't...
Protect, enhance, or restore wetlands...
Protect...native plant comm's by preventing weeds.
Reduce conflicts betw. livestock and native wildl.
Reduce negative impacts of livestock grazing ..
No Metrics for this Work Element

Produce Annual Report Produce annual report for FY04 Contract requirement. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $300
Biological Objectives Metrics
Protect, enhance, or restore riparian habitats...
Protect, enhance, or restore shrub-steppe hab't...
Protect, enhance, or restore wetlands...
Protect...native plant comm's by preventing weeds.
Reduce conflicts betw. livestock and native wildl.
Reduce negative impacts of livestock grazing ..
No Metrics for this Work Element

Produce Status Report Produce quarterly status reports Contract requirement. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $600
Biological Objectives Metrics
Protect, enhance, or restore riparian habitats...
Protect, enhance, or restore shrub-steppe hab't...
Protect, enhance, or restore wetlands...
Protect...native plant comm's by preventing weeds.
Reduce conflicts betw. livestock and native wildl.
Reduce negative impacts of livestock grazing ..
No Metrics for this Work Element

Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Collect and analyze field monitoring data. Contract requirement. 10/1/2007 9/30/2009 $3,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Protect, enhance, or restore riparian habitats...
Protect, enhance, or restore shrub-steppe hab't...
Protect, enhance, or restore wetlands...
Protect...native plant comm's by preventing weeds.
Reduce conflicts betw. livestock and native wildl.
Reduce negative impacts of livestock grazing ..
No Metrics for this Work Element

Develop RM&E Methods and Designs Coordinate a monitoring and evaluation program Develop site-specific monitoring plan for vegetation and wildlife. 10/1/2006 9/30/2009 $1,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Protect, enhance, or restore riparian habitats...
Protect, enhance, or restore shrub-steppe hab't...
Protect, enhance, or restore wetlands...
Protect...native plant comm's by preventing weeds.
Reduce conflicts betw. livestock and native wildl.
Reduce negative impacts of livestock grazing ..
No Metrics for this Work Element


Section 8: Budget

Itemized Estimated Budget
Item Note FY 2007 Cost FY 2008 Cost FY 2009 Cost
Personnel [blank] $11,430 $11,774 $12,129
Fringe Benefits [blank] $3,709 $3,820 $3,935
Supplies [blank] $3,000 $2,600 $2,600
Overhead [blank] $3,475 $3,376 $3,467
Totals $21,614 $21,570 $22,131

Total Estimated FY 2007-2009 Budgets
Total Itemized Budget$65,315
Total Work Element budget$65,315

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

Section 9: Project Future
Project Future Costs and/or Termination
FY 2010 Est Budget FY 2011 Est Budget Comments
$23,048 $24,200 Based on FY09 and 5% annual inflation.
Future Operations & Maintenance Costs
For Krueger property, $4,630 in FY2010, $4,800 in FY2011. For Middle Snake province program coordination and Krueger contract administration, $8,800 in FY2010, $9,100 in FY1011.
 
Termination Date Comments
N/A This ongoing work is required under Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program guidance for BPA to provide reasonable funding for operation, maintenance, monitoring, and evaluation at previously acquired wildlife mitigation properties.
 
Final Deliverables
Wildlife mitigation HU credits protected in perpetuity.

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:
Expense
No changes were made to this proposal


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

FY 2007 NPCC Rec
$21,614
FY 2008 NPCC Rec
$21,570
FY 2009 NPCC Rec
$22,131
Total NPCC Rec
$65,315
Budget Type:Expense
Budget Category:ProvinceExpense
Recommendation:Fund
NPCC Comments: Interim funding pending wildlife o&m review.


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

FY 2007 NPCC Rec
$21,614
FY 2008 NPCC Rec
$21,570
FY 2009 NPCC Rec
$22,131
Total NPCC Rec
$65,315
FY 2007 MSRT Rec
$ 0
FY 2008 MSRT Rec
$ 0
FY 2009 MSRT Rec
$ 0
Total MSRT Rec
$ 0
Budget Category:ProvinceExpense
NPCC Comments:

Local or MSRT Comments: No change to proposed budget


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

Recommendation: Fundable
Comments: The sponsors were asked to respond concerning this parcel’s role in the landscape, goals in terms of measurable biological outcomes, more detailed work elements, and monitoring and evaluation activities. Specific questions were raised about weed control strategies.

The response clarified many issues, particularly weed control and the landscape context for management of this parcel. The scope of the project, 166 acres of winter mule deer habitat, justifies limited monitoring and evaluation. The revised project proposes to increase the budget to develop a monitoring plan beyond HEP. HEP is not recommended unless they need to do it for some compliance reason. Not particular to this proposal, but illustrated within is the intent to repeat HEP analysis as monitoring, an ongoing concern for ISRP and ISAB. For this project, monitoring could be limited to presence of necessary habitat elements for expected season of use, presence of target species during anticipated season of use, and status of weed populations.


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

Recommendation: Response requested
Comments: It appears that these funds are already contractually committed, but if that were not the case, this proposal is not fundable as currently written. The scientific background section focuses more on mitigation policy than science. For instance, it is not clear in the current proposal that any species will benefit now or in the future. Authors must make this link explicit. The proposal should be rewritten to be specific to the parcel in question, the parcels role in the landscape, and benefits to both focal and non-focal fish and wildlife. Management should be linked to State program goals relating to threatened and endangered or sensitive species. Currently there is no indication of any Federal or NGO collaboration although shrub-steppe is a priority with the Nature Conservancy.

Objectives are stated as activities rather than outcomes and it appears objectives have been unchanged for some time and are continuous rather than goal oriented. It seems that some of the text is being recycled from earlier proposals, with reference to revegetation and monitoring that "will be" done, but apparently already have been. There is no mention of monitoring results to date, or the success in general of revegetation, weed management, and site protection. Are any species besides deer being monitored - this is not clear? There are sagebrush obligate species that should be monitored such as shrike, jackrabbits, and others mentioned in the proposal background. Objective 3 is unclear. It would be difficult to measure outcomes, yet this is the largest portion of the budget. All objectives should be stated in terms of measurable biological outcomes. Work elements are too general. Integrated weed management is discussed, but there is no indication that this is being pursued as only spraying has been conducted. The ISRP requests an evaluation of the results from spraying. Towards this goal, authors should address if annual spraying is on same sites year after year, or if previously sprayed sites have improved. Spraying alone is rarely the best method of weed control without being part of an overall Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategy in coordination with neighboring land managers. In general, details on monitoring are not sufficient to determine what is being done and if results are being used in adaptive management.

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