FY 2000 proposal 199004400

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
199004400 Narrative	Narrative
199004400 Sponsor Response to the ISRP	Response

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Implement Fisheries Enhancement Opportunities: Coeur D'alene Reservation
Proposal ID	199004400
Organization	Coeur d'Alene Tribe (CDA Tribe)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Kelly Lillengreen
Mailing address	P.O. Box 408 Plummer, ID 83851
Phone / email	2086865302 / kellylil@iea.com
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycle	FY 2000
Province / Subbasin	Inter-Mountain / Coeur d'Alene
Short description	Enhance critical watershed habitat to mitigate limiting factors for westslope cutthroat and bull trout in the Coeur d'Alene subbasin. Maintain compensatory harvest opportunities and develop environmental educational programs in local schools.
Target species	Westslope cutthroat and bull trout

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description

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
1987	NPPC ammended the F&W Program to include baseline stream surveys of tributaries located on the Coeur d'Alene Indian Reservation.
1990	Conducted field surveys of Reservation streams.
1990	Completed annual report which assessed the enhancement potential of Reservation streams for westslope cutthroat and bull trout.
1991	Physical and biological surveys were completed on the ten tributaries identified for further study.
1991	Used a modified Missouri method of evaluating streams in combination with information on biological indicators to select target tributaries for restoration and enhancement.
1992	Began using watershed assessment techniques to describe watershed processes and resource conditions in target tributaries on the Coeur d'Alene Indian Reservation.
1993	Conducted baseline population evaluations for westslope cutthroat trout and macroinvertebrates in each target tributary.
1993	Identified limiting factors for westlope cutthroat and bull trout in target tributaries.
1994	Developed recommendations to improve and protect habitat while increasing numbers of westslope cutthroat and bull trout in target tributaries.
1994	Recommendations of the Coeur d'Alene Tribe were adopted by NPPC.
1995	Priority areas for restoration were identified in the four target watersheds.
1995	Initiated the first demonstration projects. Erected 2.8 km of exclusion fencing, installed bank protection structures, constructed pool habitat, and reestablished connections with historic floodplain channels at two locations.
1995	Implemented the first compensatory harvest project by planting 1000 rainbow trout into Worley Pond.
1996	Implemented additional demonstration projects. Erected 1.9 km of exclusion fencing, placed LWD in a 300 meter test reach, installed two current deflectors, and planted more than 9,000 trees and shrubs.
1996	Maintained and stocked Worley Trout Pond with over 3000 rainbow trout.
1997	Completed 5-year management plan for enhancement of Tribal fisheries.
1997	Continued project implementation. Constructed and enhanced 4 acres of wetland habitat, constructed a side-channel rearing pond, built a bio-revetment to protect 100 meters of streambank, and planted more than 9,000 trees and shrubs.
1997	Stocked Worley Pond with 2200 rainbow trout.
1998	Constructed and enhanced 2 acres of wetland habitat and planted more than 9,000 trees and shrubs.
1998	Stocked of Worley Pond with 1400 rainbow trout.
1998	Compiled comprehensive lists of landowner contacts in each of the target watersheds.
1998	Initiated a gravel study in known spawning tributaries of each target watershed to quantify the quality and quantity of available spawning gravel.
1998	Collected over 400 individual tissue samples from 13 location to determine stock purity and relatedness of westslope cutthroat trout stocks.
1998	Completed supplementation feasibility report for westslope cutthroat trout on Coeur d'Alene Indian Reservation.

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
9004400	Implement Fisheries Enhancement Opportunities: Coeur D'alene Reservation
9004401	Lake Creek Land Acquisition
9004402	Coeur d'Alene Tribe Trout Production Facility

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 cost
Personnel	4 FTE's, 2 Part-time, 6-8 seasonal	$307,000
Fringe	41% of personnel costs	$125,870
Supplies	office supplies, restoration materials, etc.	$48,624
Operating	equipment repair/maintenance, vehicles and milage	$22,165
Capital		$9,130
NEPA	To be completed by program staff.	$0
Travel	Includes training	$8,000
Indirect	Calculated @ 31.6% minus capital acquisitions and subcontracts	$129,887
Other	Communications	$4,166
Subcontractor	Restoration implementation, macroinvertebrate sample analysis	$30,412
		$685,254

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2000 cost	$685,254
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2000 budget request	$685,254
FY 2000 forecast from 1999	$0
% change from forecast	0.0%

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind
EPA Section 106	Water quality monitoring	$50,000	unknown
EPA Section 319	BMP Implementation	$10,000	unknown
Soil Conservation District	BMP Implementation	$12,000	unknown
USDA	Project monitoring	$25,000	unknown
CDA Tribe	Summer Intern Program	$5,000	unknown

Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: Critical constraints include: funding stability over time, timeliness of procurring funds, adequate landowner participation, and catastrophic natural events (floods, wind storms, etc.).

Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

REVIEW:
ISRP Preliminary Review (ISRP 99-2)

Recommendation:
Fund in part

Date:
Jun 15, 1999

Comment:

Recommendation: Fund in part. Objectives 1, 2, and 4 are OK for multi-year review cycle, review in FY2003 for reporting of results. Do not fund objective 3 (24% of budget), the put-and-take trout pond objectives, until they are better justified and subjected to environmental review for potential impacts to native biota.

Comments: This project is basically a habitat restoration and education program to enhance the natural reproduction of native westslope cutthroat trout to mitigate losses of Pacific salmon and steelhead. It has many strengths: a strong watershed/ecosystem approach in collaboration with other projects, a well thought out scientifically rational approach, a strong monitoring program, an emphasis on improvement through natural processes compared to human technological intervention, an emphasis on native species of fish and plants, and an awareness of the need to obtain public support, over a relatively long time frame, via education and demonstration of success. We stand to learn and gain a lot from this project.

This was a well written and comprehensive proposal. Reviewers especially commended the project's emphasis on the conservation/enhancement of native species, and on habitat improvement as a mechanism. In addition, the relationship to other projects is very strong and well documented. The project history is clearly explained. Objectives and methods are concisely related (although they could have been better "cross-walked" with the budget). Taken on balance, this project proposal is very compelling, well thought out and clearly articulated.

The FWP and 12 other planning documents are referenced. This is one of three CDA Tribe projects (9004401, 9004402) that could use an umbrella. There is a good history of accomplishments (many the same as 9004402, which suggests that an umbrella proposal might have been appropriate). There are good objectives and tasks for 4 target watersheds. Cost sharing with EPA and USDA is a definite plus, considering the high temperatures and high sediment loads. There are good sections on background and rationale, as well as excellent history, and objectives narratives. The methods narrative of objectives by tasks is excellent. Facilities and budget seem reasonable. The resumes look good, as do the plans for information transfer. This project has good coordination with other projects, but needs to specify how its activities justify a large budget and how they are different from enhancement under the wildlife project? It needs to present more detail on interim results – more interpretation of where they are in relation to where they began and where they want to go. The artificial put-and-take trout ponds are a separate objective in this proposal and deserve further specific review. They should describe assurances that these trout ponds are in a closed system. Will they be located in a floodplain? This objective deserves to be put on hold until better explained and justified.

The set of three interrelated Coeur d'Alene Tribe proposals (including 9004400, 9004401, 9004402) might have benefited from an umbrella.

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

REVIEW:
CBFWA: Resident Fish Review Comments

Recommendation:

Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Screening Criteria: yes

Technical Criteria: yes

Programmatic Criteria: yes

Milestone Criteria: no- There are no milestones listed.

General Comments:

REVIEW:
CBFWA: Watershed Technical Group Comments

Recommendation:
Technically Sound? Yes

Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Proposal identifies tremendous land use management and water quality problems but corrective methods are limited by land ownership patterns.

Proposal includes a detailed description of past accomplishments and biological objectives.

Watershed assessment has been completed.

Technically sound, but too small a scale for the scope of the problem.

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 99-4)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Oct 29, 1999

Comment:

Fund. The original proposal was generally excellent. The response to the ISRP's questions about Objective 3, the construction of put-and-take trout ponds, was of equally high quality. It is clear that the Tribe has thought through their management strategy, has emphasized native stocks, but also needs some interim fishing opportunities to take pressure off the native fish restoration efforts. The put-and-take ponds seem well located (in closed basins not accessible to native species) and are designed to avoid the problems that concerned the ISRP.

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Nov 8, 1999

Comment:

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation (NWPPC 2000-6)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Mar 1, 2000

Comment:

[Decision made in 11-3-99 Council Meeting]

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:
$1,197,873	$1,197,873	$1,197,873

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website