FY 2000 proposal 199802800

Additional documents

199802800 Narrative Narrative
199802800 Sponsor Response to the ISRP Response

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleTrout Creek Watershed Improvement Project Multi Year Funding Proposal
Proposal ID199802800
OrganizationJefferson County Soil & Water Conservation District (Jefferson Co. SWCD)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameMarie Horn
Mailing address625 SE Salmon Ave., Suite 6 Redmond, OR 97756
Phone / email5419238018 / Marie-Horn@or.nacdnet.org
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 2000
Province / SubbasinColumbia Plateau / Deschutes
Short descriptionImplementation of practices that will enhance smolt production and habitat recovery. A Coordinator to work with the watershed Council and local landowners to develop a Long Range Plan and strategies for implementation.
Target speciesSummer steelhead, redband trout
Project location
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)



Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

1995 Published Assessment of Trout Creek
1998 Installed two infiltration Galleries to address hindered fish passage
1999 Funds for two infiltration galleries in lower Trout Creek
1999 NRCS has declared the watershed a Geographical Priority Area for EQIP funds
1999 Funds for streambank stabilization

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
9304000 Fifteenmile Cr.habitat restoration Share equipment and manpower
Corps of Engineers Berm removal
9306600 Oregon Screens
9900600 Bakeoven Riparian Assessment
9303000 Buckhollow watershed restoration
9405420 Bull Trout studies

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2000 cost
Personnel The next three amounts include Long Range planning and Project coordination and implementation $84,000
Fringe overhead and personnel costs-10% of budget $10,965
Supplies 10 milesfencing, 5280 ft. riparian improvement, 300 acres brush control, 2-3 retention basins, $109,000
NEPA $10,000
Construction streambed reestablishment, $220,000
Travel Planning and implementation $10,000
Indirect 3% of budget $14,180
Subcontractor Wasco SWCD/Planning/Technical support $10,650
Subcontractor ODFW Planning/Technical support $15,000
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2000 cost$483,795
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2000 budget request$483,795
FY 2000 forecast from 1999$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
Conservation Resource Program Resting of erodible soils in the baisn $300,000 unknown
NRCS EQIP $100,000 unknown
USFS new culverts and road obliteration $320,000 unknown
Farm Service Agency Riparian Buffer Rental program(CREP) $85,000 unknown
Corps of Engineers Stream restoration and berm removal $309,000 unknown
GWEB Stream restoration & match funds for COE project $152,000 unknown
BPA Trout Creek Improvement & match funds for COE Project $464,400 unknown
NRCS Engineering and Farm plans $75,000 unknown
ODFW NMFS fish screening and passage $150,000 unknown
Landowners in kind services $25,000 unknown
Jefferson County Bridge and stream bank repair $75,000 unknown
Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: None foreseen

Reviews and recommendations

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

Do Not Fund
Jun 15, 1999


Recommendation: Do not fund, technically inadequate. The authors still have not addressed shortcomings identified in FY99 ISRP review.

Comments: There is insufficient detail to biologically justify this proposal. It does not appear that an adequate assessment has been performed to document the extent of the habitat problem these measures address, nor is there evidence that previous restoration efforts have produced significant improvements that directly benefit fish and wildlife. The proposed activities are not placed in the context of limiting factors in the watershed. Although references are given, they are general in nature; too few apply to Trout Creek. Methods are not described in sufficient detail. For example, the proposal calls for 300 acres of brush control: how will this occur, where, out of how many acres that "need" this treatment, etc.? The methods for Objective 3 are uncertain. How will these objectives be achieved? This proposal shares text with 9404200, but no coordination is described between the two. The abstract should be edited and abbreviated, and the budget better justified and described. The completion date is listed as August 2001, yet out year budget costs continue to increase through 2004.

Aug 20, 1999


Aug 20, 1999


Cut WS coordinator & technician to 1/2; eliminate other personnel $; emphasize upland treatment & riparian fencing. No funding for sediment retention basins;$1000 for riparian reveg.; $107 K for stream channel restoration.
Technically Sound? No
Aug 20, 1999


Not well connected to umbrella project 20511.

Provide more detail about the projects and the expected biological response.

Show the link to project 9404200.

Oct 29, 1999


Fund. However, the response presents a substantially different proposal than the proposal originally submitted for FY 2000 funding. The response was written by a new watershed coordinator who came on board after the original proposal was reviewed by the ISRP. Details on what is known and what actually would be completed with the FY2000 and FY2001 funds are still sketchy, but that may be expected given the recent changes in this program; progress, however, seems quite promising.

The response is a step in the right direction in that it stresses the need for a comprehensive watershed assessment and long-term restoration plan; however, the current knowledge of limiting factors within the Trout Creek system appears to still be fairly incomplete. The general sequence of steps is good. But this proposal should be completely re-written from the ground up and re-submitted for complete evaluation in the Council's proposed ecological province review. For example, results of the EDT analysis should be summarized in order for the ISRP to make an informed judgment. It is not sufficient simply to say that an EDT analysis has been done. Likewise, it was not clear from the response how the results from the 1983 habitat survey will be used, or other surveys by other agencies.

Nov 8, 1999


Mar 1, 2000


[Decision made in 11-3-99 Council Meeting]
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
Funding category:
May 2005
FY05 NPCC start of year:FY06 NPCC staff preliminary:FY06 NPCC July draft start of year:
$130,560 $130,560 $130,560

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website