FY 2002 Mountain Columbia proposal 24020
Contents
Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary
Reviews and Recommendations
Additional documents
| Title | Type |
|---|---|
| 24020 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Center for GIS Analysis and Information in the Coeur d'Alene Subbasin |
| Proposal ID | 24020 |
| Organization | Coeur d'Alene Tribe (CDA Tribe) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Frank Roberts |
| Mailing address | PO Box 408 Plummer, ID 83851 |
| Phone / email | 2086865307 / fmroberts@cdatribe.org |
| Manager authorizing this project | Frank Roberts |
| Review cycle | Mountain Columbia |
| Province / Subbasin | Mountain Columbia / Coeur d'Alene |
| Short description | Provide GIS analysis and act as central data repository for all organizations within the Coeur d'Alene Subbasin |
| Target species | All species |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 47.4 | -116.19 | Coeur d'Alene subbasin |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|---|
| 2000 | Produced majority of maps and GIS analysis for Coeur d'Alene Subbasin Summary |
| 1993 -2000 | Acted as central data repository for Natural Resources Damage Assessment of the Coeur d'Alene Basin |
| 1995 | Completed all primary base GIS layers for the Coeur d'Alene Subbasin |
| 1991 | Started GIS at the Coeur d'Alene Tribe |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 21017 | Implement Wildlife Habitat Protection and Restoration on the Coeur d'Alene Indian Reservation: Hangman Watershed. | The GIS project will maintain data for Hangman Watershed that covers the western 43% of the Coeur d'Alene Indian Reservation. |
| 21018 | Implement Fisheries Enhancement on the Coeur d'Alene Indian Reservation: Hangman Watershed. | The GIS project will maintain data for Hangman Watershed that covers the western 43% of the Coeur d'Alene Indian Reservation. |
| 199004400 | Implement Fisheries Enhancement on the Coeur d'Alene Reservation | The four main focus watersheds for this project, Benewah Creek, Lake Creek, Evans Creek, and Alder Creek are within the Coeur d'Alene Subbasin and currently have data in the Tribal GIS system. |
| 199004401 | Lake Creek Land Acquisition | GIS will be used in support of this project to identify land owners and other needed information. |
| 199004402 | Coeur d'Alene Tribe Trout Production Facility | In support of the Facility, water quality information will be available on the GIS as well as other information that will be used by the Facility. |
| 9206100 | Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Project | The GIS will allow the Albeni Falls Interagency Workgroup to have a central location for GIS analysis to evaluate alternatives for the protection and enhancement of riparian, wetland and other priority habitat types in the Idaho Panhandle. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Determine GIS server specifications | a. Review current literature on servers and software | 1 | $2,000 | |
| b. Meet with BPA GIS and ESRI staff on recommended specifications on servers and software | 1 | $1,500 | ||
| c. Write server specification | 1 | $1,500 | ||
| 2. Develop contact list of participants for data sharing on GIS server for project | a. Contact BPA and other organizations to determine list of participants | 1 | $1,000 | |
| b. Contact participants and collect contact information | 1 | $2,000 | ||
| 3. Develop plan for habitat type model | a. Review current literature on habitat type modeling | 1 | $2,000 | |
| b. Contact key authors of applicable models | 1 | $1,500 | ||
| c. Write plan for habitat type model | 1 | $2,000 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| No out of year funding for Planning and Design phase | $0 |
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Implement GIS data and Map server. | a. Purchase computer server | 1 | $25,000 | |
| b. Move existing NRDA GIS data to server and implement web based interface for data access. | 1 | $8,000 | ||
| c. Coordinate data acquisition Coeur d'Alene Subbasin GIS data | 1 | $60,000 | ||
| 2. Develop practical contact-coordination mechanism | a. Create email coordination list | 1 | $200 | |
| b. Create project web site | 1 | $1,000 | ||
| 3. Create habitat type model | a. Collect and modify data to use as input variables for model | 1 | $6,000 | |
| b. Implement model inside of ArcInfo | 1 | $10,000 | ||
| c. Run model for Subbasin | 1 | $6,000 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| No out of year funding for Construction/Implementation phase | $0 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Collect data and make data available for use in GIS analysis | a. Using participant list, coordinate and acquire new data as it is made available by various participants. | 3 | $0 | |
| 2. Provide data training on GIS datasets | a. Refine ArcView online web training material | 4 | $4,000 | |
| b. Give training in Subbasin to scientist and other interested individuals | 4 | $7,000 | ||
| 3. Work with Fish and Wildlife programs in Subbasin to accomplish Subbasin Summary goals. | a. Enter other Subbasin project information into GIS | 3 | $0 | |
| b. Perform analysis using GIS and create needed datasets for decision making | 4 | $40,000 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Collect data and make data available for use in GIS analysis | 2003 | 2006 | $400,000 |
| 2. Provide data training on GIS datasets | 2003 | 2006 | $24,000 |
| 3. Work with BPA funded programs in Subbasin to accomplish Subbasin Summary goals. | 2003 | 2006 | $240,000 |
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $166,000 | $166,000 | $166,000 | $166,000 |
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Evaluate habitat model | a. Compare habitat model results to sample sites stored in GIS | 2 | $0 | |
| b. Modify model to incorporate derivations found in above step. | 1 | $0 | ||
| c. Bring results of model out for peer review in Subbasin | 1 | $0 | ||
| 2. Evaluate effectiveness of GIS training | a. Create GIS training review questionnaire | 1 | $0 | |
| b. Evaluate feed back from questionnaires | 3 | $0 | ||
| c. Modify course training material based on questionnaire feed back | 3 | $0 | ||
| 3. Evaluate GIS data server | a. Coordinate email discussion of needs of the web server. | 3 | $0 | |
| b. Modify web server content to reflect needed changes | 3 | $0 | ||
| c. Update server hardware and software as needed to keep user needs | 3 | $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Evaluate habitat model | 2004 | 2006 | $17,000 |
| 2. Evaluate effectiveness of GIS training | 2004 | 2006 | $3,500 |
| 3. Evaluate GIS data server | 2004 | 2006 | $71,000 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $29,300 | $21,100 | $21,100 | $21,100 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2002 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 1.75 | $82,347 |
| Fringe | Calculated at 40% of personnel cost | $32,939 |
| Supplies | $328 | |
| Travel | $1,000 | |
| Indirect | $39,086 | |
| Capital | Computer Server to hold all data for Subbasin | $25,000 |
| NEPA | NEPA not needed for this project | $0 |
| Subcontractor | No Subcontractors used | $0 |
| $180,700 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $180,700 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $180,700 |
| FY 2002 forecast from 2001 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Reason for change in estimated budget
N/A
Reason for change in scope
N/A
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coeur d'Alene Tribe | 2 Windows 2000 workstations | $10,000 | in-kind |
| Coeur d'Alene Tribe | 1 HP Design Jet Printer | $10,000 | in-kind |
| Coeur d'Alene Tribe | 4 ESRI ArcInfo and ArcView Licenses | $10,000 | in-kind |
| Coeur d'Alene Tribe | Office Space, at $400 month | $4,800 | in-kind |
| Coeur d'Alene Tribe | 1 Calcomp Digitizing Board | $9,000 | in-kind |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Fundable - no response required
Feb 9, 2001
Comment:
Fundable, but the priority given to this activity is a policy issue that depends on the extent to which this project duplicates other efforts, including the Council's subbasin planning.This is a proposal to develop a Coeur d'Alene Tribe GIS central data repository and to provide GIS training and analysis services in the Coeur d'Alene Subbasin. It builds on work already done in water and soils for the subbasin with plans to update the server and integrate biological data to the existing GIS system. There are good plans for coordinating with other agencies and GIS users and for monitoring the effectiveness of each stage of the project. Plans for information transfer are reasonable. The education component looks good. Personnel are well qualified to perform the tasks described.
Given that there is a need for GIS capability within the subbasin, the project proponents still need to think about how this can best be provided. Duplicating services available elsewhere makes little sense. For example, aren't well-developed GIS services available through the federal land management agencies (USFS, BLM)? Couldn't funding be requested for a high-speed network connection to state and/or federal agencies to help local GIS expertise support FWP activities in the basin?
The history of GIS centers is that they take on a life of their own with escalating costs over time. The GIS center should work toward being self-supporting, an idea to which the Tribe is receptive.
Comment:
This project should be well coordinated with Project 199700400. This project should be funded under the subbasin planning efforts planned by the NWPPC. This project is a high priority at the subbasin level.Comment:
Fundable on the basis of scientific and technical merit, but the priority given to this project is a policy issue that depends on the extent to which this project duplicates other efforts, including the Council's subbasin planning. This is a proposal to develop a Coeur d'Alene Tribe GIS central data repository and to provide GIS training and analysis services in the Coeur d'Alene Subbasin. It builds on work already done in water and soils for the subbasin with plans to update the server and integrate biological data to the existing GIS system. There are good plans for coordinating with other agencies and GIS users and for monitoring the effectiveness of each stage of the project. Plans for information transfer are reasonable. The education component looks good. Personnel are well qualified to perform the tasks described. The presentation was excellent and informative.Having demonstrated a need for GIS capability within the subbasin, the project proponents still need to think about how this capability can best be provided. Duplicating services available elsewhere makes little sense. For example, aren't well-developed GIS services available through the federal land management agencies (USFS, BLM)? Could not funding be requested for a high-speed network connection to state and/or federal agencies to help local GIS expertise support FWP activities in the basin? The history of GIS centers is that they take on a life of their own with escalating costs over time. The GIS center should work toward being self-supporting, an idea to which the Tribe is receptive.
BPA Funding Recommendation
Fundable after Subbasin Planning w/cond
May 30, 2001
Comment:
- This is a fundable project provided there is coordination with existing GIS services and there is no duplication of effort. We agree that the GIS center should eventually become a self-supporting endeavor.Comment:
Comment:
Consistent with Council recommendation, BPA does not intend to fund.