BPA Fish and Wildlife FY 1997 Proposal

Section 1. Administrative
Section 2. Narrative
Section 3. Budget

see CBFWA and BPA funding recommendations

Section 1. Administrative

Title of project
Youth Labor Pool Development and Augmentation

BPA project number   5504700

Business name of agency, institution or organization requesting funding
Clouston Energy Research

Sponsor type   OR-Consultant

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

 NameLarry Davies
 Mailing addressPan Terra Alternative School
Larry Davies
2800 Stapleton Road
Vancouver, WA 98661

BPA technical contact   , EWP

Biological opinion ID   

NWPPC Program number   3.1B, 7.1C

Short description
There is a need for labor that can be provided by youths. The youths may have skills taught in schools and/or job sites, gaining experience. The benefit to Fish and Wildlife (F&W) managers will be an ever improving skill level of support personnel. Participating youth will gain skills transferable to the market place and other functional skills that can be provided in this plan.

Project start year   1997    End year   1997

Start of operation and/or maintenance   1998

Project development phase   Planning, Implementation

Section 2. Narrative

Related projects
Salmon Corps and Alternative Schools.

Project history

Biological results achieved

Annual reports and technical papers

Management implications

Specific measureable objectives
Support Fish and Wildlife projects with general labor and other more skilled workers.
Cultivate technical support personnel by coordinated systems. A successful result will
improve usefulness of the participants to F&W managers in appropriate missions.

In at risk youth and first time offender groups, behavior may be altered by additional
educational opportunities such as the introduction of Ecopsychology programs.

Testable hypothesis
Coordinated delivery systems can modify behavior, develop self-esteem, and tend to
develop a model citizen. In collaboration with state and local organizations, the private
sector can provide valuable services for mission successes. The wildlife mitigation efforts can benefit with supportive labor, while skill levels are improved in participating
youth groups. The present (1996) flood has created an emergency situation in the loss
affecting not only citizens in the northwest, but the fragile fish and wildlife ecosystems. These systems need attention now and in the foreseeable future.

Directed in fish and wildlife projects, as well as being provided both physical and
mental tools, reconstruction of habitat and citizenship will be the anticipated result.
evidence of behavior modification and productive action is available. (See below).

Underlying assumptions or critical constraints
Presently there is need for additional labor in the disaster areas of the northwest.
A labor pool can be made available and developed for increasing technical skill job
requirements by F&W managers. Coordinated action at local areas are desirable.

There ought to be a two way flow of the cost-benefits. The cost to participating
at risk youth and first time offender populations will be time and physical energy applied
to study and work tasks. The benefiting organizations ought to pay for those things of value and the administration of the program. This may include a cost share aspect because of shared benefits. The cost shared aspect might include revenue by camp ground inclusion to some wildlife mitigation projects. Citizens using the sites would pay to park and recreation departments a camping fee to maintain the site and perhaps a portion can go back into the mitigation system for additional wildlife mitigation areas.

The benefits expected are many. The mission of F&W managers especially now due
to the Flood of 1996, are greater now. Kay Brown Fish Specialist of the Oregon Depart-
ment of Fish and Wildlife (ODF&W) stated;" We need all the help that we can get". Chris Wheaton of the ODF&W stated; "Sauve Island's wildlife refuge is a disaster."
"Hatchery ponds, coverts and some spawning streams need action now." This would be
of the general labor type work. However, skills in more technical levels are required. The mitigation effort requires tree and shrub planting and cultivation workers. The skill
of Nurseryman and women can lead to good jobs for youth in this program. Landscape
technicians can have a beginning in this program. An improved appreciation for life, from shrub and tree to creatures wild, is expected. In addition, it is expected that the
acquired appreciation of those life forms would be transferable to fellow humans.
The wildlife and fish populations will have an immediate benefitial impact.

Brief schedule of activities
At present, Sidney Clouston of Clouston Energy Research will meet on or about
March 15th with Tony Nigro at ODF&W to review projects that could use support
that this effort can provide for wildlife mitigation. Alternative schools will be contacted
in the northwest region regarding this action.

Plant propagation tasks and clean up tasks started as soon as possible. Other carbon
emitter companies will be contacted regarding support for carbon mitigation credit in
reports to the Federal Department of Energy, as required in Title XVI of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 in return for their additional support.

Coordination with on-going programs in the region. An example of developing State
projects involving youth is the Rajneesh property that the State of Oregon is willing to get from Mr. D. Washington. This property can benefit youth, wildlife mitigation and
Salmon In addition, in dual purpose locations salmon spawning streams can benefit
if nursery activity is part of the activity there. Greenhouse environments can grow the kind of plants that are native to the area of various projects. Another example is the
Pan Terra alternative school of Washington State Department of Education. They have
been involved with salmon stream restoration work and Ecopsychology programs. Prof.
Larry Davies of the school can help design the programs educational aspect inclusive of
Dr. M. Cohen's Ecopsychology methods in a pilot study project. Possible coordination
with the State's Park and Recreation Dept. will be developed.

Biological need
The need for dual purpose mitigation activities has been declared preferential by the Northwest Power Planning Council. They had the biological need in mind. Although at this level of implementation planning is the purpose of this proposal entry.

Critical uncertainties
None identified.

Summary of expected outcome
A pool of improved implementor support personnel for F&W projects. Lower
cost of mitigation after initial investment in camp creation near some wildlife refuge areas. Dual purpose projects will improve salmon spawning areas, wildlife will have
improved windbreak and cold weather protection. Public support may be greater
due to camping improvements for seasonal use. A reduction in crime and the pain
caused to citizens when recidivism is lowered.

Dependencies/opportunities for cooperation
Mentioned above is the "flagging" of proposed wildlife mitigation and salmon habitat improvement projects that could benefit from the youths labors by ODF&W's Tony
Nigro. A discussion with Bill Nickleberry of Oregon Division of State Lands about
nursery work on the (still possible) donated land of Bagwan Rajneesh/D.Washington.
A pilot demonstration with at risk youth of Washington State's Pan Terra school at the
approved mitigation sites, both wildlife only and dual or multi-purpose. The application
of Ecopsychology programs and vocational/technical education may be useful to the
first time offender population in county level work programs statewide.

Liability wavers ought to be agreed upon for the training of at risk youth and the first
time offender youth. There is no risk seen for the wildlife and salmon benefits. Only a
delay in implementation can reduce the benefit expected.

Monitoring activity
The experience of F&W managers in mission accomplishment with the support of
the population discussed will be reported. Other monitoring will be of interest to non
F&W managers.

Section 3. Budget

Data shown are the total of expense and capital obligations by fiscal year. Obligations for any given year may not equal actual expenditures or accruals within the year, due to carryover, pre-funding, capitalization and difference between operating year and BPA fiscal year.

Historic costsFY 1996 budget data*Current and future funding needs
(none) New project - no FY96 data available 1997: 100,000

* For most projects, Authorized is the amount recommended by CBFWA and the Council. Planned is amount currently allocated. Contracted is the amount obligated to date of printout.

Funding recommendations

CBFWA funding review group   Mainstem

Recommendation    Tier 3 - do not fund