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
Montana Model Watershed Program

BPA project number   9502600

Business name of agency, institution or organization requesting funding

Sponsor type   MT-State/Local Agency

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

 NameShelley Spalding
 Mailing addressMontana Fish, Wildlife & Parks
490 N. Meridian Rd.
Kalispell, MT 59901

BPA technical contact   Ron Morinaka, EWP 503/230-5365

Biological opinion ID   N/A

NWPPC Program number   10.2C.1

Short description
Establish Kootenai and Flathead basin coordinators to facilitate local, state, tribal, federal and private prioritization and implementation of projects for enhancement and restoration of native fish habitat and overall watershed health. This will provide for a locally based, grass-roots approach for the future protection and improvement of habitat on both private and public lands.

Project start year   1997    End year   2001

Start of operation and/or maintenance   1998

Project development phase   Implementation

Section 2. Narrative

Related projects
Libby Dam, Lake Koocanusa, Kootenai River:

BPA funded projects:
8346700 Libby Reservoir Levels, MFWP
8446500 Libby Tech. Analysis, MFWP
9501200 Libby IRC Monitoring, MFWP/CSKT*
9500400 Libby Mitigation Plan, MFWP/CSKT

Cultural resources protection activities, USFS/ACOE/CSKT

Kootenai River white sturgeon recovery efforts, USFWS, MFWP et al.

Grizzly bear management zone, USFS/USFWS

Kootenai River Fisheries Management Plan, MFWP et al.

International resource issues with B.C.

County planning efforts and Conservation District activities

F.S. land management planning

Hungry Horse (HH) Dam and Reservoir, Flathead Lake and River System:

BPA funded projects:
9101901 Hungry Horse Mitigation Flathead Lake Monitoring, CSKT
9101904 Hungry Horse Mitigation Kokanee at Creston, USFWS
9101903 Hungry Horse Mitigation Habitat Improvements, MFWP
9502500 Flathead River IFIM study, MFWP*

Cultural resources protection activities, USFS/BOR, CSKT

Kerr Dam fish and wildlife mitigation, FERC/MPC et al.

Flathead Indian Reservation management activities, CSKT

Comanagement on fisheries issues, MFWP/CSKT

Grizzly bear management zone, USFS/USFWS

Glacier Park management activities, NPS/NBS

Flathead Basin Commission activities

County planning and Conservation District activities

Flathead River Partnership


Project history
A Comprehensive Watershed Management Program applicable to resident fish was first defined in the NPPC Phase IV amendment process (Document 93-20). As stated within that document, relevant parties were to implement the cooperative habitat protection and improvement with private landowners measures as stated in Section 6.5 of the Salmon Strategy. Model watershed programs have been established in Washington, Oregon and Idaho through these measures.

In the most recent version of the NPPC Fish and Wildlife Program (Document 95-20), Section 10.2B again directs relevant parties to implement model watershed programs. This project is intended to implement Section 10.2B within the Kootenai and Flathead River drainages of western Montana.

Biological results achieved

Annual reports and technical papers

Management implications

Specific measureable objectives
Facilitate and assist with communication among members of basin working groups (individuals, landowners, tribes, interest groups, agencies and others) in their efforts to enhance and restore watershed function; assist these groups in finding and implementing the most effective methods of mitigation and enhancement of habitat in these basins; and coordinate these projects with other mitigation and cost-share projects within the basin.

Testable hypothesis
Coordination of all interested parties and all land management activities in a watershed will enhance and protect that watershed.

Underlying assumptions or critical constraints
Cooperation and participation of agencies and individuals in the basin groups reflecting sources of risk and major landownership in the basin, as well as other local interests.


Brief schedule of activities
1996, 1997 Develop Basin Coordinator positions, description and duties
Select Basin Coordinators
Identify entities involved in the management of and having interest in watershed resources of the basin; identify existing management status, regulations, procedures, work plans, etc. which now affect watershed management
Hold initial working group meetings and establish a communication network among parties within the basin
Hold additional meetings to identify watershed conditions which are limiting factors to native fish; develop a prioritization and criteria evaluation process for sub-basins and projects; and establish the means for cooperative implementation and funding of projects among all interested parties
Establish and implement an effective watershed and project specific monitoring and evaluation process
Coordinate and implement activities directed to fisheries habitat improvement by different
interest groups and agencies within the basin
Prepare annual progress report
1998-2001 Continue to work with basin working groups while securing funding; prioritizing, implementing, monitoring and evaluating projects; and coordinating implementation of activities directed to fisheries habitat improvement by different groups and agencies
Prepare annual progress reports

Biological need
The sustainability of migrating resident fish species is depended upon the coordinated management and protection of their entire range of habitats. These systems must be managed and maintained regardless of political and/or land ownership boundaries. The model watershed program proposed here is to serve the function of coordinating ongoing land management activities within complex drainages containing many unique and valued resident fish species.

Critical uncertainties
Degree of involvement and participation by major stakeholders; response of watershed functions to the projects and management decisions may be longer than anticipated; human degradation of watersheds may continue.

Summary of expected outcome
Grass roots and public involvement will lead to support for policy and project decisions; cost-share opportunities; greater public education about conservation/resource needs; improved, restored watershed functions.

Dependencies/opportunities for cooperation
Montana's Bull Trout Restoration Team; Sturgeon Recovery Plan, Flathead Basin Commission's water quality plan; revised Flathead Basin Co-Management Plan (to be done in 1996-97); Hungry Horse Mitigation Implementation Group; Kerr Dam mitigation plan; Libby Dam mitigation plan.

Lack of participation and cooperation of major stakeholders; length of time for watershed functions to respond to projects and policy changes; conflict with other plans and strategies.

Monitoring activity
Measures of the projects outcome include implementation of high priority projects; the regular (monthly, quarterly or semiannually) continued functioning of and coordinating by the basin groups; and a participation in these groups reflecting the sources of risk and landownership in the basin, as well as other local interests.

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: 114,720
1998: 100,000
1999: 100,000
2000: 100,000
2001: 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   Resident Fish

Recommendation    Tier 2 - fund when funds available

Recommended funding level   $114,720