FY 1999 proposal 199607703
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Protecting and Restoring the Squaw and Papoose Creek Watersheds |
| Proposal ID | 199607703 |
| Organization | Nez Perce Tribal Fisheries/Watershed Management Program (NPT) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Ira Jones |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box 365 Lapwai, ID 83540 |
| Phone / email | 2088437406 / iraj@nezperce.org |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 1999 |
| Province / Subbasin | Lower Snake / Clearwater |
| Short description | PROTECTING AND RESTORING THE SQUAW AND PAPOOSE CREEK WATERSHEDS IS THE OVERALL GOAL OF THIS PROJECT. WE WILL ACHIEVE THIS WORKING WITHIN AN OVERALL WATERSHED APPROACH, COMPLETING FOUR OBJECTIVES IN MANY AREAS OF THE WATERSHED. |
| Target species | Fall Chinook, Coho, Resident Fish (Bull Trout, Cut Throat) |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
| 83350 |
NEZ PERCE TRIBAL HATCHERY |
WATERSHED PROTECTION AND RESTORATION FOR ANADROMOUS AND RESIDENT FISH. |
| 970600 |
NEZ PERCE TRIBE FOCUS WATERSHED PROGRAM |
FOCUS PROGRAM IS CO-COORDINATED BETWEENM NPT AND STATE OF IDAHO. |
| 9608600 |
IDAHO SOIL CONSERVATION COMMISSION FOCUS WATERSHED PROGRAM |
FOCUS PROGRAM IS CO-COORDINATED BETWEEN NPT AND STATE OF IDAHO. |
| 9809802 |
SALMON SUPPLEMENTATION IN IDAHO RIVERS. |
WATERSHED PROTECTION AND RESTORATION FOR ANADROMOUS AND RESIDENT FISH. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 1999 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 1999 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 1999 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 1999 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 1999 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
|
$58,525 |
| Fringe |
|
$8,546 |
| Supplies |
|
$1,263 |
| Operating |
COSTS ABSORBED IN REST OF TABLE. |
$0 |
| Travel |
|
$23,176 |
| Indirect |
|
$29,398 |
| Subcontractor |
Clearwater Nat’l Forest; Earth Conservation Corps/Salmon Corps at Nez Perce |
$111,616 |
| Other |
|
$9,169 |
| Other |
|
$9,169 |
| $250,862 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 1999 cost | $250,862 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 1999 budget request | $250,862 |
| FY 1999 forecast from 1998 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: EXISTING SCHEDULES FOR THE 1999 BUDGET YEAR MAY CHANGE DUE TO WEATHER CONDITIONS. ALL ON-THE-GROUND PROJECTS OCCUR IN MOUNTAINOUS AREAS AT ELEVATIONS UP TO 5500 FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL, WHERE UNPREDICTABLE WEATHER PATTERNS MAY OCCUR.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:Return to Sponsor for Revision <p>
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Management Issue: Management flag – concern about the "in-lieu" issue and the delegation of funding responsibility. The Forest Service should fund some of this work because their activities caused many of the problems.Technical Issue: Explain how placing logs and backfill reduces surface erosion.
Technical Issue: Explain how the action proposed by this technique will not cause another failure?
Technical Issue: Explain how the costs are not excessive for road obliteration.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Recommendation:
Adequate
Date:
Jun 18, 1998
Comment:
These proposals (199607703 and 199607707) adequately describe the problems and the likely benefits to fish and wildlife. However, each also has some negative aspects, as detailed below. The proposals do not tell how reduction in sediment delivery will be measured. BPA should look at the budget. Is this cost sharing for BPA when Forest Service and NPT do the work and BPA is the funding source for both. It appears that in 1998, $109,328 will be spent to obliterate 10 miles of road. This is $10,900 per mile or 4 times as much as in project #9607706 (Lolo Watershed). Why the disparity?
REVIEW:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
Funding category:
expense
Date:
May 2005
| FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
| $420,000 |
$420,000 |
$420,000 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website