FY 2007 Solicitation Homepage

Project Proposal Request for FY 2007 - FY 2009 Funding

Proposal 199404900: Kootenai River Ecosystem Improvements Project

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
January 10, 2006 Finalized Charlie Holderman

Proposal Type: Ongoing
Proposal Number: 199404900
Proposal Name: Kootenai River Ecosystem Improvements Project
BPA Project Manager: Virgil Watts III
Agency, Institution or Organization: Kootenai Tribe of Idaho
Short Description: The Kootenai River Ecosystem Improvements Project proposes to continue monitoring key ecological functions of the Kootenai River ecosystem and to mitigate for nutrients lost to hydro operations at Libby Dam. Habitat complexity evaluation is proposed.
Information Transfer: Information generated by the Kootenai River Ecosystem Improvements Project will be shared in a number of venues to include the Bonneville Power Administration and Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority (www.bpa.gov and www.cbfwa.org). This project also maintains a database where monitoring and reporting information can be shared (www.ktoi.scsnetw.com). Additionally, when appropriate, project information will be published in peer reviewed journals. The Kootenai River Ecosystem Improvements Project also serves as a important data collection and monitoring project for the sub-basin. Water quality and aquatic trophic-level information dervied from this project is used to supplement other fish and wildlife projects working on the Kootenai River.
 
Project Proposal Contacts
Contact Organization Address Phone/Email Roles Notes
Form Submitter
Charlie Holderman Kootenai Tribe of Idaho PO Box 1269
Bonners Ferry, Idaho 83805
Ph: 208.267.3620
Fax: 208.267.1131
Email: Cholderman@kootenai.org
Form Submitter
All Assigned Contacts
Paul Anders S.P. Cramer and Associates, UI 121 Suite Avenue, Suite 124
Moscow, ID, 83843
Ph: 208-885-5035
Fax: 208-885-3803
Email: anders@spcramer.com
Technical Contact
Kym Cooper Kootenai Tribe of Idaho County Rd. 38A P.O. Box 1269
Bonners Ferry ID 83805
Ph: 208.267.3519
Fax: 208.267.2960
Email: kym@kootenai.org
Supervisor
Charlie Holderman Kootenai Tribe of Idaho PO Box 1269
Bonners Ferry, Idaho 83805
Ph: 208.267.3620
Fax: 208.267.1131
Email: Cholderman@kootenai.org
Form Submitter
Project Lead

Section 2: Project Location
Sponsor Province: Mountain Columbia ARG Province: No Change
Sponsor Subbasin: Kootenai ARG Subbasin: No Change
Location(s) at which the action will be implemented
Latitude Longitude Waterbody Location Description County/State Subbasin Primary?
48 45' N 116 15' W Kootenai River The Kootenai River sub-basin from Lake Koocanusa, B.C.through the Idaho panhandle to Kootenay Lake, B.C. Boundary, Idaho Kootenai Yes

Section 3: Focal Species
Focal Species:
Primary Secondary Additional Species
Interior Redband Trout
Kokanee
Mountain Whitefish
Bull Trout
Burbot
Northern Pikeminnow
Rainbow Trout
Westslope Cutthroat
White Sturgeon Kootenai River DPS

Section 4: Past Accomplishments
Past Accomplishments for Each Fiscal Year of This Project
Fiscal Year Accomplishments
2005 Added 920 tons nitrogen to Kootenay Lake. Added 5600 gallons phosphate to Kootenai River. Biological and water quality monitoring, 25 sites. Planning, Permitting for nutrient additions. Planted trees/shrubs, tributaries. Annual Progress Report.
2004 Added 450 tons nitrogen to Kootenai Lake. IKERT group decides to move forward with 5 yr experimental nutrient additions to Kootenai River. Performed biological, water quality monitoring. Planted trees/shrubs. Research Finding Report.
2003 Biological, water quality monitoring at 14 sites, Kootenai River. Mitigated costs associated with nutrient monitoring, productivity metrics; Kootenay L. Planted trees/shrubs, Kootenai tributaries. IKERT meeting. Biological monitoring, key Tribs
2002 Monitoring of Water Quality. Monitoring of primary and secondary productivity (Kootenai River). Monitoring of fish community (4 sites, Kootenai River). IKERT meeting. Performed controlled, replicated, in-river nutrient experiment. Eval tributaries.
2001 Performed controlled, replicated, in-river nutrient experiment. Evaluated physical, chemical, and biological condition of 2 tributaries.Monitoring of water quality, algae, macroinvertebrate, and fish communities (Kootenai River). IKERT meeting.
2000 Formation of the International Kootenai Ecosystem Restoration Team (IKERT) to develop and guide ecosystem restoration of the Kooteani River. IKERT develops Kootenai River Monitoring Plan covering multiple trophic levels and key water quality parameters.
1999 Completed findings report for I year macroinvertebrate study. Summary of Adaptive Management modeling exercise completed. Summary of Water quality for Kootenai River tributaries completed. Pilot study to evaluate white sturgeon embryo hatching success.
1998 Kootenai River Macroinvertebrate Investigation initiated. Stream biota and habitat survey of Long Canyon, Parker, and Trout Creeks.Kootenai River Model to evaluate sturgeon responses to various flow scenerios completed. Kootenai R. Water Quality Summary.
1997 Adaptive management conference held to discuss ideas and generate hypotheses concerning declining fish stocks in the Kootenia River, with an emphasis on white sturgeon recruitment failure. Publication: Kootenai R. Baseline Status Report completed.
1996 Publication: Implications of ecosystem collapse on white sturgeon in Kootenai River, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia. Completion report for trophic status and productivity study, in part, Kootenai River (Synder and Minshall).
1995 Participation and input to trophic status and productivity study meetings, in part, Kootenai River (Synder and Minshall).
1994 Project initiation. Emphasis changes form single species fisheries managment to Ecosystem Level Investigation to disclose underlying problems associated with fisheries collapse in the Kootenai River, Idaho.

Section 5: Relationships to Other Projects
Other Current Projects Related to this Project (any funding source)
Funding Source Related ID Related Project Title Relationship
[Funding Source left blank] [no entry] [Relationship field left blank]
BPA 198806400 Kootenai R White Sturgeon Kootenai River White Sturgeon conservation aquaculture project. Produces annual class of juvenile sturgeon to supplement recruitment in the Kootenai River. Cooperative sharing of personnel, data and equipment occur between the projects.
BPA 198806500 Kootenai R White Sturgeon Inve Determines the status and limiting factors for the Kootenai River white sturgeon, burbot, whitefish, bull trout and redband rainbow trout stocks in the Kootenai River and effects of water fluctuations and ecosystem changes on these stocks. Cooperative database sharing and biomonitoring sampling occur between the projects.
BPA 199500400 Libby Reservoir Mitigation Pla Implements watershed based enhancement and fish recovery actions in the Montana portion of the Kootenai Subbasin to mitigate the losses caused by hydropower development. Shared electrofishing between this project and 199404900 to assess fish community in MT canyon reaches.
BPA 200200200 Enhance White Sturgeon Habitat Assesses feasibility of and designs scenarios to enhance white sturgeon spawning substrate, studies the temporal/transient changes in sediment type, bed form, and erosion/deposition of spawning substrate to address spawning habitat limitations.
BPA 200200800 Reconnect Floodplain Kootenair Determines feasibility and designs of floodplain reconnections in the Kootenai Valley area to improve habitat and productivity. Cooperative database management, data and personnel sharing occur between the projects.
BPA 200201100 L. Kootenai Floodplain Assess. Assesses, investigates and monitors key parameters of the lower Kootenai River floodpain to determine the feasibility of reconnecting historical floodpalin habitat to the mainstem Kootenai River. Cooperative sharing of personnel and data occur between the projects.

Section 6: Biological Objectives
Biological Objectives of this Proposed Project
Biological Objective Full Description Associated Subbasin Plan Strategy Page Nos
Biomonitoring and Evaluation (Mainstem) SBP Objective M3: Assess key water quality, algae, macroinvertebrate, and fish community dynamics at index sites on the Kootenai River. Kootenai Monitor key water quality, algae, macroinvertebrate, and fish community dynamics at index sites on the Kootenai River. 24
Biomonitoring and Evaluation (Tributaries) SBP Objective T3: Monitor key water quality, algal, and macroinvertebrate parameters, and fish community dynamics at index sites located on key tributaries of the lower Kootenai River. Kootenai Objective T3: Monitor key water quality, algal, and macroinvertebrate parameters, and fish community dynamics at index sites located on key tributaries of the lower Kootenai River. 31
Coordination, Outreach and Information Exchange SBP Objectives AP2, AP3, AP4, and AP5. Develop and maintain adequate regional and international coordination. Pursue and support independent peer review and scientific counsel. Support locally recognized stakeholder group to improve coordination and implementation. Provide for and support distribution of information. Kootenai Develop and maintain international, regional and local coordination to successfully implement project objectives. Support and enhance outreach and information exchange. Use SBP strategies as a guide. 90-92
Eval. and Restore Habitat Complexity (Tributaries) SBP Objective T3, T4, T5, T6: Reduce the delivery of fine sediments to a level equivalent to the QHA-generated fine sediment scores of reference streams or reaches. Improve channel stability to a level equivalent to the QHA-generated channel stability scores of reference streams or reaches. Protect and revegetate riparian areas to maintain shading and cool water temperatures, and, improve the thermograph to a level equivalent to the QHA-generated thermograph scores of reference and Class 1 streams. Improve habitat diversity to a level tequivalen to the QHA-generated habitat diversity scores of reference streams. Kootenai Increase instream habitat by restoring recruiting of large woody debris, pool development, and other critical components of stream ecosytems that benefit native fish. Design and implement solutions to increase habitat diversity, eg. slough reconnection. 31 through 35
Evaluate Habitat Complexity (Mainstem) SBP Objective M5. Improve habitat diversity to levels equivalent to the QHA-generated habitat diversity restoration scores, and habitat diversity conditions based on literature reviews and large-river reference conditions. Kootenai Design and implement creative solutions for increasing habitat diversity, creation and reconnection of side channel, slough, and backwater habitats. And in-river habitat modifications and creations to increase habitat complexity in critical reaches,areas. 27
Restore System Productivity (Kootenai River) SBP Objective WST1, BUR1, KOK1, BT5: Restore primary, secondary, and tertiary productivity rates and nutrient values downstream of Libby Dam to pre-dam conitions (equal to those of inflow conditions at Koocanusa Reservoir, and, corrected for downstream lateral input). Kootenai Design, Implement, monitor, and evaluate annually replicated large-scale, controlled, nutrient addition experiment.Continue to support implementation of South Arm Kootenay Lake Fertilization.Investigate potential of floodplain/river nutrient exchange. 60, 57, 61
Restore System Productivity (Kootenay Lake) SBP Objective WST1, BUR1, KOK1, BT5: Restore primary, secondary, and tertiary productivity and nutrient values in the south-arm of Kootenay Lake to pre-Libby Dam conditions (nutrient levels equal to those of inflow conditions at Koocanusa Reservoir, and, corrected for downstream lateral inputs). Kootenai Continue to support implementation of South Arm Kootenay Lake Fertilization. 57

Section 7: Work Elements
Work Elements and Associated Biological Objectives
Work Element Name Work Element Title Description Start Date End Date Estimated Budget
01: Enhance Nutrients Instream Kootenai River Nutrient Restoration Experiment--Nitrogen and Phosporus Additions Addition of direct nutrient introduction via fertilizer to improve biological diversity in a stream or river. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $120,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Restore System Productivity (Kootenai River)
No Metrics for this Work Element

02: Enhance Nutrients Instream Kootenay Lake Nutrient Restoration and Monitoring Addition of fish carcasses, or direct nutrient introduction via fertilizer to improve biological diversity in a stream or river 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $2,454,266
Biological Objectives Metrics
Restore System Productivity (Kootenay Lake)
No Metrics for this Work Element

03: Plant Vegetation Tributary Rehabilitation on Trout, Parker, and Long Canyon Creeks Install plants for purposes such as erosion control, roughness recruitment, shading, restoring native habitat, forage enhancement, road removal. May be riparian or upland and includes seeding. If maintaining vegetation, use WE# 22: Maintain Vegetation. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $100,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Eval. and Restore Habitat Complexity (Tributaries)
* # of riparian miles treated: 3.00

04: Outreach and Education Annual International Kootenai River Ecosystem Restoration Team (IKERT) Conference Covers work to educate or communicate with the public. Includes conducting classes, seminars, workshops, training, symposia, and conferences. Excludes work to coordinate landowners or other direct participants in on-the-ground conservation (see WE# 118: Coordination), or work to identify and select new projects (WE# 114: Identify and Select Projects). 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $60,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Biomonitoring and Evaluation (Mainstem)
* # of general public reached: 2000

05: Manage and Administer Projects Develop SOW, Accruals, Line Item Budget, Metric Reporting, personnel, indirect, and fringe ben Covers work by the contractor to manage on the ground efforts, or to manage subcontractors associated with the project e.g., construction management. Also covers administrative work in support of on the ground efforts and in support of BPA's programmatic requirements such as metric reporting, financial reporting (e.g., accruals), and development of an SOW package (includes draft SOW, budget, spending plan, and property inventory). 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $840,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Coordination, Outreach and Information Exchange
No Metrics for this Work Element

07: Produce Annual Report Annual Report of Findings/Activities For many contracts, this report is an essential product that - when published and posted on the BPA website - succinctly documents contract performance for the public record. The second type of report is technical and applies to projects that are gathering data, for example on a feasibility study. This report provides a summary and analysis of data gathered - such as smolt to adult return rates, etc. - typically in a technical report format. These reports usually include data summaries. Intensive research projects may only produce cursory technical reports in some years, if the COTR and contractor have negotiated for a full scientific findings report (see other work element) after a few (e.g. 2-4) years of data. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $150,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Coordination, Outreach and Information Exchange
No Metrics for this Work Element

08: Produce Status Report Produce Quartely Status Reports This work element covers any report required or produced for a contract, except those specifically covered under other work elements (e.g., WE# 132: Produce Annual Report, or WE# 183: Produce/Submit Scientific Findings Report, or WE# 185: Produce Pisces Status Report). If this work element is used for multiple reports in the same contract, then each report should be listed as a separate milestone. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $15,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Coordination, Outreach and Information Exchange
No Metrics for this Work Element

09: Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Biomonitoring--Algae Work to collect, create, generate, our capture source data. Includes initial entering of data into a computer spreadsheet/database, developing automated data capture programs/routines and related hardware/software (e.g., PDAs, data loggers, thermographs), preparing metadata, and quality assurance/quality control processes. Also includes taking samples for later analysis (e.g., fish tissues for DNA analysis, macroinvertebrate samples, etc.), and any preparations for collecting data if not covered by another work element. Also includes generating secondary/derived data when those data are stored in a database for access and use by other parties for analysis like primary data. Capturing data includes entering data into a computer from historical records, digitizing images, and other methods for converting information to digital format. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $96,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Biomonitoring and Evaluation (Mainstem)
Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend monitoring
Secondary R, M, and E Type: Action Effectiveness Research

10: Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Biomonitoring--Fish Community Dynamics The annual biological monitoring and evaluation of fish community dymanics in the Kootenai River at 6 index sites. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $96,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Biomonitoring and Evaluation (Mainstem)
Secondary R, M, and E Type: Action Effectiveness Research
Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend Monitoring

11: Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Biomonitoring--Littorial Zone Productivity Monitoring and evaluation of the littorial zone productivity during the experimental phase of nutrient restoration in the Kootenai River. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $75,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Biomonitoring and Evaluation (Mainstem)
Primary R, M, and E Type: Action Effectiveness Research
Secondary R, M, and E Type: Status and trend monitoring

12: Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Biomonitoring--Macroinvertebrates Monitoring the benthic invertebrate community abundance, biomass, and species composition at index sites on the Kootenai River. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $285,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Biomonitoring and Evaluation (Mainstem)
Primary R, M, and E Type: Action Effectiveness Research
Secondary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend Monitoring

13: Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Biomonitoring--Water Quality This work element produces nutrient and metals data critical to successful ecosystem-level fisheries management through the nutrient restoration effort. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $150,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Biomonitoring and Evaluation (Mainstem)
Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and trend monitoring
Secondary R, M, and E Type: Action Effectiveness

14: Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Contamination Study--Heavy Metals, Organochlorines, Pesticides & PCB compounds Evaluate and Monitor heavy metals, organochlorine pesticide and PCB contaminants in sediments downstream of the nutrient dripstation, and, within key white sturgeon habitat in the Kootenai River. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $27,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Biomonitoring and Evaluation (Mainstem)
Primary R, M, and E Type: Action effectiveness research
Secondary R, M, and E Type: Uncertainties research

16: Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Fine-Scale Algae & Water Quality Monitoring Intensive water quality and algae monitoring directly related to the nutrient restoration experiment, starting in 2005. Eleven (11) sites will be monitored for nutrients, heavy metal concentrations and algae taxonomy and chlorophyll content. One site is upstream of the nutrient addition outflow pipe and 10 are located downstream of the nutrient outflow pipe. This will allow river managers to track the effects of the added nutrients at a fine-scale level. The timing of this monitoring will mirror the timeframe of the nutrient additions (a 12 week period from July-Sept.). Three water quality samples testing nutrient concentrations and one sample to test total metals concentration will be taken at each site weekly totalling 528 for the season. Six algae core samples to estimate cholorphyll content will be taken at each site bi-weekly totalling 396 for the season. One algae core sample will be taken bi-weekly to monitor algal species composition at each of the 11 sites totalling 66 samples for the 12 week period. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $360,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Biomonitoring and Evaluation (Mainstem)
No Metrics for this Work Element

21: Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Monitoring on Trout, Parker, and Long Canyon Creeks On going monitoring of water quality, periphyton, macroinvertebrates, and fish community dynamicsas part of tributary assesssment and restoration activities. Water quality and periphyton will be monitored monthly from April to October, while macroinvertebrates and fish will be sampled once yearly, during the fall season. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $216,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Biomonitoring and Evaluation (Tributaries)
Primary R, M, and E Type: Action Effectiveness Research
Secondary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend monitoring

22: Create/Manage/Maintain Database Kootenai River Ecosystem Project DataBase Any work that maintains or improves the security, quality, accessibility, or utility of data in a structured database. Includes creation of relational databases; creation of computer applications to manage data, creation of standardized data formats, management of the data within the database, database hardware/software maintenance and improvement, QA/QC, buidling and maitaining connectivity with interrelated applications (e.g., GIS, web portals), and creation of metadata/documentation and user-support materials, etc. This applies both to larger regional, secondary databases and to local primary databases (can include spreadsheets) maintained on desktops for individual projects. This WE will continue work to maintain and further develop a web-based database to store the large volume of data generated by the Kootenai Tribe's Ecosystem Project responsible for monitoring water quality and the biological trophic levels within the river at 14 sites. Information generated from the KTOI's monitoring program will be organized and sent to the database manager to the web-based database during and after the fieldseason by project staff. The database management (uploading to web and some Quality Control measures) are conducted by Statistical Consulting Services, Inc. based in Clarkston, WA. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $70,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Coordination, Outreach and Information Exchange
No Metrics for this Work Element

23: Analyze/Interpret Data Kokanee Genetic Analyses--S.P. Cramer and Assoc., Inc. These activities apply analytical tools to render meaning from data for making better management decisions. They go beyond data summaries. Often involves tests of statistical significance and may include modeling, indices, and synthesis. Typically culminates in resource managment recommendations presented in a report of research/evaluation findings or analyses presented as formal publications. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $27,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Biomonitoring and Evaluation (Tributaries)
Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and Trend monitoring

24: Analyze/Interpret Data Statistical Analyses of Trophic & Water Chemistry Data These activities apply analytical tools to render meaning from data for making better management decisions. They go beyond data summaries. Often involves tests of statistical significance and may include modeling, indices, and synthesis. Typically culminates in resource managment recommendations presented in a report of research/evaluation findings or analyses presented as formal publications. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $80,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Biomonitoring and Evaluation (Mainstem)
Primary R, M, and E Type: Status and trend monitoring
Secondary R, M, and E Type: Action Effectiveness research

25: Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation NEPA Work for River Restoration Activities Covers any work by the Contractor to assemble, gather, acquire, or prepare documents in support of obtaining environmental compliance from BPA (such as filling out a NEPA Checklist, providing maps, drafting a Biological Assessment, obtaining permits, conducting public involvement activities, completing an archaeological survey, etc.). In all cases, environmental compliance work must be separated from all other work. It is not permitted to combine environmental compliance activities with any other work element. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $10,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Coordination, Outreach and Information Exchange
No Metrics for this Work Element

27: Produce Hatchery Fish Plant Eyed Kokanee Eggs BC Ministry staff will plant 3,000,000 eyed kokanee eggs in several tributaries to the South Arm of Kootenay Lake in October 2007 to October 2010. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $32,600
Biological Objectives Metrics
Restore System Productivity (Kootenay Lake)
* Incubation: # fertilized eggs into incubation program.: 3,000,000

28: Produce/Submit Scientific Findings Report Assistance with Reporting, Publications, and Public Relations Documents This applies to two general types of scientific publications: 1) Manuscripts being submitted for publication in a scientific journal and 2) Final technical reports. The latter category includes research and evaluation reports, and higher-level programmatic reviews. Monitoring reports (e.g., updated annual escapement counts) are usually considered part of annual progress reports. "Analysis" typically involves hypothesis testing and/or tests of statistical significance in differences across groups/treatments or time that directly support decisions regarding resource or program/project management. This contrasts with reports that primarily present raw or summarized data (including means, variances, and trends). Preliminary analyses are reported as progress toward Final Scientific Findings reports and should be covered by WE# 132: Produce Annual Report. 6/1/2007 5/31/2010 $135,000
Biological Objectives Metrics
Coordination, Outreach and Information Exchange
No Metrics for this Work Element


Section 8: Budget

Itemized Estimated Budget
Item Note FY 2007 Cost FY 2008 Cost FY 2009 Cost
Personnel 5 FTE $137,310 $141,430 $145,673
Fringe Benefits 33 % Personnel $45,312 $46,672 $48,072
Supplies field, lab, office supplies $5,000 $5,500 $6,000
Travel IKERT, NABS, AFS $5,000 $5,000 $5,000
Capital Equipment Truck purchase (07) $30,000 $ 0 $ 0
Overhead 60% of Personnel $82,386 $84,858 $87,404
Other B.C. Ministry Environment $818,089 $818,089 $818,089
Other Statistical Consulting Services, Inc $72,000 $72,000 $72,000
Other S.P. Cramer and Associates, Inc. $70,000 $70,000 $100,000
Other Ward and Associate, Inc. $60,000 $70,000 $75,000
Other Free Run Aquatic Research, Inc. $115,000 $115,000 $120,000
Other Ecoanalysts, Inc. $140,000 $150,000 $150,000
Other Dolecki Taxonmomy, Inc. $30,000 $32,000 $32,000
Other U. Idaho, Holm Research Lab $50,000 $50,000 $50,000
Other Aquatic Research Inc., Water quality analyses $60,000 $55,000 $55,000
Other Graduate Research Stipend, Phd or Post Doctoral Fellow $33,007 $33,007 $32,968
Other EQUIPMENT-PROPERTY MAINTENANCE (including nutrient drip station), Insurance $23,000 $25,000 $25,000
Other Land Lease, Nutrient Addition Site $3,000 $3,000 $3,000
Other Truck Lease (if Capital Equipment moratorium not lifted) $6,000 $6,000 $6,000
Totals $1,785,104 $1,782,556 $1,831,206

Total Estimated FY 2007-2009 Budgets
Total Itemized Budget$5,398,866
Total Work Element budget$5,398,866

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
Bonneville Environmental Foundation (BEF) Watershed M & E $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 Cash Confirmed
Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Pro. North Arm Kootenay Lake Fertilization and coordination $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 In-Kind Confirmed
Idaho Dept. Fish and Game support nutrient restoration, monitoring and evaluation $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 In-Kind Confirmed
United Columbia Tribes (UCUT) Funding $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 Cash Confirmed
Totals $935,000 $935,000 $935,000

Section 9: Project Future
Project Future Costs and/or Termination
FY 2010 Est Budget FY 2011 Est Budget Comments
$2,000,000 $2,000,000 Nutrient Restoration likely to continue after 5 year experiment ends in 2009, addition nutrient injection stations may be needed.
Future Operations & Maintenance Costs
Additional Nutrient drip stations are a possibility, especially in upriver locations toward the base of Libby Dam where phosphorus levels are depressed due to nutrient retention in Libby Reservoir.
 
Termination Date Comments
None noted This project provides direct mitigation for lost nutrients and biological productivity resulting from the construction and operation of Libby Dam and therefore should be implemented as long as Libby Dam is in place.
 
Final Deliverables

Section 10: Narrative
Document Type Size Date

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 Budget
$1,695,800
FY 2008 Budget
$1,695,800
FY 2009 Budget
$1,695,800
Total NPCC Rec
$5,087,400
Budget Type:Expense
Budget Category:ProvinceExpense
Recommendation:Fund
Comments:


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

FY 2007 Budget
$1,695,800
FY 2008 Budget
$1,695,800
FY 2009 Budget
$1,695,800
Total NPCC Rec
$5,087,400
FY 2007 MSRT Rec
$ 0
FY 2008 MSRT Rec
$ 0
FY 2009 MSRT Rec
$ 0
Total MSRT Rec
$ 0
Budget Category:ProvinceExpense
Comments:


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

Recommendation: Fundable
NPCC Comments: This is a worthwhile proposal that initially suffered from lack of reporting of results to support its continuation and expansion. The excellent response provided the necessary information and illustrates the kind of material that should be in the initial proposal. The problem identified is loss of productivity (at all ecosystem levels) as a result of land and water management practices, especially Libby Dam. Early studies have led to the conclusion that nutrients limit production of valuable fish populations. Fertilizer application is used experimentally in this project to test whether nutrients are limiting productivity at various levels in the Kootenai River ecosystem, including the fish. Justification includes the Fish and Wildlife Program, Kootenai subbasin plan, FWS BiOp for white sturgeon, and the Kootenai River Network. The narrative and tables on interactions with the several other projects on the Kootenai are helpful. The proposal demonstrates much enthusiasm for ecosystem improvement with an impressive list of potential contributors.

The response significantly answers the ISRP's concerns about the timing of the project with respect to experiments and implementation, and provides data and summary results for the work accomplished so far. The timeline in Table 1 is especially helpful, and we recommend that such a table be used in subsequent proposals and progress reports. It is clear now that this is a truly experimental phase and will continue to be so through the lifetime of this funding cycle. Results from the Kootenay Lake experiment still seem rather scant. Since phosphorus seems to be the limiting nutrient, we are still surprised that fertilization of the Kootenai River is heavy on nitrogen. Algae seem to have responded to nutrient addition, but the chemical results seem to require more interpretation. There was a useful discussion of other limiting factors and the multi-agency approach to evaluating them. The database development seems appropriate for assembling the results. The comprehensive discussion of fishery impacts since Libby Dam is informative and supportive of the existence of detrimental effects. Depleted nutrients are likely part of the picture, which justifies the well-planned research. The logic of planting kokanee eggs and creating a spawning channel is clearer in the response, but that work is still somewhat oddly placed in this proposal. The explanations of sampling sizes for monitoring help clarify this issue. The ISRP appreciates the additional clarifying information.


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

Recommendation: Response requested
NPCC Comments: This is a seemingly worthwhile proposal that suffers from lack of results to support its continuation and expansion. The problem identified is loss of productivity (at all ecosystem levels) as a result of land and water management practices. Early studies have led to the conclusion that nutrients limit production of valuable fish populations. Justification includes the Fish and Wildlife Program, Kootenai subbasin plan, FWS BiOp for white sturgeon, and the Kootenai River Network. The narrative and tables on interactions with the several other projects on the Kootenai are helpful.

Fertilizer application is used experimentally in this project to test whether nutrients are limiting productivity at various levels in the Kootenai River ecosystem, including the fish. Results of the 2004 application are available but not yet provided for review. It seems essential that project proponents have these analyses completed and presented at the earliest possible date even at the expense of forgoing further (sequential) applications.

The proposal would benefit from greater discussion of other potentially important limiting factors such as discharge, and opossum shrimp abundance trends and relations with kokanee salmon populations.

The proposal demonstrates much enthusiasm for ecosystem improvement with an impressive list of potential contributors. It is not clear at what point the project is moving from experiment to large-scale implementation. Before moving to implementation the sponsors need a synthesis of the results of their research. The proposed implementation objectives should not be funded until the results of the experiment are reported and reviewed by the ISRP. This is an important project that has precedent and application for river fertilization in other areas. A response is needed for better reporting of results.

The proposal provides a fairly clear presentation of project history but no data are presented regarding fish abundances and diversity. No data were found to describe Mysis relicta abundance and trends. For a project of this size and longevity the history is remarkably devoid of results in terms of synthesized data and evidence of benefits to fish. The proposal states: "The first year of experimental river fertilization was a success, and in addition to preparing FY07-09 project proposals, project personnel are busy analyzing 2005 experimental data to quantify and characterize the biological and ecological responses to the long-awaited first year of experimental nutrient addition in the Kootenai River." Data should be provided to show why the river fertilization was a "success." Results from this experimental river fertilization are needed before the project moves into full implementation.

The ISRP would like to see evidence to support statements like: fish abundance, fish body condition, and invertebrate abundance in project area "lags well behind similar-sized regional rivers" (p 2, 31) with the implication that Libby Dam is the cause. This is simplistic and at best misleading in that it disregards edaphic factors. To imply that Kootenai River invertebrate numbers should be similar to those of streams like the Henrys Fork in Idaho is not well supported.

Objectives seem mixed. The project seems to be described in some instances as a continuing mitigation project and in others as a research project. It really is a research project that should be associated with providing evidence for decision end-points. The data are now available but not included here to evaluate the 2004 fertilizer application. These data should be made available as soon as possible to provide guidance as to whether or not there is any reason to continue the treatment - a treatment that could have unintended consequences.

Objectives include things such as restoring productivity to pre-dam levels including abundances of several species of fish, but timelines are not associated with objectives. The project apparently intends to continue on into the foreseeable future and to alter its direction via adaptive management as results of various trials become available. This seems pretty loose.

One objective is to build a spawning channel; this doesn't seem justified if the limiting factor is nutrient levels. A response is needed on justification for the spawning channel.

It is not clear how the kokanee egg planting fits with the rest of the proposal. The methods are questionable for the egg planting. Sponsors should provide justification for the egg planting in general and for putting 60,000 eggs in one place.

Monitoring and evaluation for success are not well described. The project description reported that sampling will provide the statistical rigor necessary to make reliable decisions. Results of monitoring to-date were not presented to show what level of change would be detectable in the post-treatment sampling.

Reviewers need to see results from the experimental river fertilization before this project moves into full implementation. A response should estimate how many years of trial fertilization is needed for an appropriate experiment before the research results warrant a management decision whether to implement routine fertilization. Sponsors should provide a timetable for a synthesis of research results, which would lead to a proposal for implementation.

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