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
Upper Salmon River Diversion Consolidation Program
BPA project number 9600700
Business name of agency, institution or organization requesting funding
Sponsor type ID-Tribe
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
|Mailing address||SHOSHONE-BANNOCK TRIBE
FORT HALL INDIAN RESERVATION
PO BOX 306
FORT HALL ID 83203
BPA technical contact Allyn Meuleman, EWP 208/334-1005
Biological opinion ID None
NWPPC Program number 3.1D.1, 7.0A1, 7.7B
Consolidate diversions at two upper Salmon River sites: S-14 (near Salmon, ID) would consolidate four diversions into one, and S-28 (near Challis, ID) would incorporate three diversions and one unscreened pump intake into one diversion. In addition, a new screen at S-32 (phase I of the project) would be constructed to accomodate the additional flow from the consolidated diversions.
Project start year 1996 End year 2001
Start of operation and/or maintenance 1996
Project development phase Implementation and Planning
Section 2. Narrative
Idaho Fish Screening Program (Project #9401500
The first phase of the project (S-32 diversion consolidation) is underway, construction (canal enlargement) will start late winter or early spring of 1996.
Biological results achieved
As the diversion consolidation at S-32 will not be completed until later this year, no biological results have yet been realized.
Annual reports and technical papers
Preliminary plans have been completed for both the S-32 and S-28 consolidations. Final plans for the on-farm delivery and sprinkler systems associated with the S-32 phase of the project are being prepared.
Specific measureable objectives
elimination of eight irrigation diversions and one unscreened pump intake
Underlying assumptions or critical constraints
The canals of the diversions to be retained (S-14 and S-28) will need to be enlarged to accomodate water from the eliminated diversions. Delivery systems to transport water from the retained diversion canal to the new irrigators will be built. The newly enlarged canals (including S-32) will also need new fish screens to accomodate additional amounts of water. Financial assistance in purchasing on-farm sprinkler systems will be provided.
Brief schedule of activities
FY97 - S-28; Engineering, canal enlargement, sprinkler system purchase and installation, fish screen design
S-14; Survey and preliminary engineering
FY98 - S-28; Complete consolidation, fish screen construction
S-14; Canal enlargement and fish screen design
FY99 - S-28; Complete all unfinished work
S-14; Fish screen construction
FY00 - S-14; Complete all unfinished work
S-32; Fish screen design
FY01 - S-32; Fish screen construction
Irrigation diversions can be detrimental to migrating fish in several ways. Juvenile fish can be diverted into the irrigation canal causing migration delays. Gravel berms contructed in the river to divert water can act as passage impediments to adult fish and may result in dewatering downstream sections. Operation of heavy equipment to construct the gravel berms causes streambed distrubance releasing sediment into the stream. In addition, any time equipment is operated in a stream there is a risk of spills of pertroleum or other toxic substances.
Summary of expected outcome
Several benefits are gained by implementation of the project. Immediate benefits for fish include reducing points of diversion that entrain juveniles in irrigation canals, eliminating gravel berms which act as passage impediments to adults, and increasing instream flows (through conversion from flood to sprinkler irrigation). Several of the fish screens on the diversions do not currently meet the latest National Marine Fisheries Service criteria. By eliminating diversions, fish screen construction, operation, and maintenance costs will be substantially reduced. The affected irrigators will realize reduced canal maintenance costs, reduced time and money to construct gravel berms, and, for those irrigators converting to sprinkler, improved crop production.
Dependencies/opportunities for cooperation
This project will require irrigators’ approval, NEPA compliance, 404 permits from the Army Corps of Engineers, consultation with NMFS, and archaelogical clearance.
Cooperators include: Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, Bureau of Reclamation, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Custer Soil and Water Conservation District, Lemhi Soil and Water Conservation District, individual irrigators.
Following elimination of the diversions and unscreened pump intake, no further monitoring is planned.
Section 3. BudgetData 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 costs||FY 1996 budget data*||Current and future funding needs|
* 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.
CBFWA funding review group Snake River
Recommendation Tier 1 - fund
Recommended funding level $645,000
BPA 1997 authorized budget (approved start-of-year budget) $645,000