FY 2000 proposal 199902500

Additional documents

TitleType
199902500 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleLower Columbia River Wetlands Restoration and Evaluation Program
Proposal ID199902500
OrganizationUSDA Forest Service, Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area (USFS)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameVirginia Kelly
Mailing address902 Wasco Ave., Suite 200 Hood River, OR 97031
Phone / email5413862333 / vkelly/r6pnw_crgnsa@fs.fed.us
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 2000
Province / SubbasinLower Columbia / Columbia Lower
Short descriptionRestore 200 acres of wetland and associated upland habitat at Sandy River Delta. Restoration would be part of a series of large scale Lower Columbia River wetlands GIS mapping, habitat restoration, and evaluation and monitoring experiments.
Target speciesBreeding/migrating waterfowl, herptiles, raptors, other native wildlife/plants. Great blue heron, Spotted sandpiper, yellow warbler, black-capped chickadee, band-tailed pigeon, painted turtle, red-legged frog, Western pond turtle, lesser scaup, and mink.
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment
1997 Installed water control structures
1998 Developed baseline data, strategies
1999 Disked 200 acres, began monitoring

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
9902600 Sandy River Delta Riparian ReForestation Close physical proximity

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 Water level monitoring $3,000
Fringe $0
Supplies $0
Capital Land purchased by Forest Service in 1991. $0
NEPA EIS completed by USFS in 1996 $0
Subcontractor $122,000
$125,000
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2000 cost$125,000
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2000 budget request$125,000
FY 2000 forecast from 1999$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
Ducks Unlimited Cash, Engineering, Wildlife Monitoring, Admin. $36,000 unknown
US Fish and Wildlife In-kind, Cash $94,000 unknown
OR Dept Fish/Wildlife Cash $3,000 unknown
National Forest Found Cash $15,000 unknown
National F&W Found Cash $18,000 unknown
Portland State Univ. Wetland Delineation $6,000 unknown
USDA Forest Service Administration, Coordination $5,000 unknown
Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: None known at this time.


Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Fund for one year with low priority
Date:
Jun 15, 1999

Comment:

Recommendation: Fund for one year with low priority. Subsequent funding contingent on addressing ISRP comments.

Comments: The recommendation is mild, given that the proposal lacks clarity and focus and is derelict in several important areas. Habitat restoration in any location is assumed to encourage increased populations of target wildlife species, but there is virtually no quantified data offered here about the 200 acre site under consideration. The proposal contains insufficient details about any integration or coordination with other projects in or near the Sandy River Delta.

Specific comments and questions that should also be addressed are: The proposal should describe existing wildlife conditions in and adjacent to the 200 acres involved here: How badly depressed are those conditions, and how and by what degree is this proposal intended to improve? Assuming that local topography, differences in hydrology and other factors will affect the wetlands' response to three different management options listed in the proposal (Task No. 2(k) (Page 14)), what measurements are intended to compare and assess those responses? How, where, how frequently and on what basis will that evaluative procedure be conducted? Greater detail should be offered under Objective No. 3 (Pages 14-15) to explain survey techniques and measurements in order to assess the efficacy of proposed monitoring. The proposal includes a number of activities not proposed for BPA funding and not related to the Sandy River Delta. This discussion appears extraneous to the proposal, and might well have been omitted entirely or moved to the Project History section (8d).

The amount of overhead intended to multiple subcontractors should be closely examined. Layering of subcontracts (BPA to the U. S. Forest Service to Ducks Unlimited to the University of Idaho) is questionable.


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:


Recommendation:
Technically Sound? Yes
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Explain how this project fits into a watershed context.

Logical sequence of events, good monitoring program, good wetland restoration plans.

Methods are unclear.

Proximity to high population areas may lessen wildlife values.


Recommendation:
Fundable
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

FY 99 funds to be used for this request
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000

Comment:

[Decision made in 9-22-99 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:
$902,000 $235,000 $235,000

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website