Final Council recommendation (Nov 2006)

Funding category: Capital

Recommended budgets: FY07: $2,481,215 | FY08: $2,564,071 | FY09: $2,568,763

Comment: Capital component.

Funding category: Expense

Recommended budgets: FY07: $100,000 | FY08: $100,000 | FY09: $100,000

Comment: Expense portion of project. Pre-acquisition costs. See capital budget for capital component.

ISRP final recommendation: Fundable

Comment:

This is a cogent and compelling proposal. Where relevant, scientific resources are used well. The maps add clarity regarding benefits to sage grouse and mule deer and associated species. The technical and scientific background is complete, and even includes policy and cultural elements. The proposal is linked closely to the goals of the Program and subbasin plans involved. There may be some threatened and endangered and State agency programs that complement this proposal as well. The proposal identifies that the Tribes have a key leadership role and strong collaborations with many other stakeholders. Objectives are clear, measurable, and realistic. The tribes’ approach to locating suitable property was sound and yielded several prospects. Until the tribes reach the management planning phase, most of the described work is administrative and plans for this are appropriate. History to date is primarily administrative and development of collaborative links. Pre-acquisition work was technically and scientifically well grounded. Focal species include riparian species, sage grouse and mule deer. Potential links to other efforts are not fully explained, but proximity of USFS and Reservation lands implies opportunities. The isolation of these sites and location within watersheds will provide some protection from other, possibly deleterious activities in the basin. Fire management goals will be needed and fire protection and off-road vehicle use are threats that are not addressed. Elimination of livestock grazing (presumed?) may cause some invader and weed plants to become more problematic, but if properly managed these impacts should be minor. The need for monitoring is recognized and a preliminary plan is in place. Plans for storing and sharing data are included. Riparian PFC is not a monitoring tool so cause-effect relationships cannot be detected using this tool. Facilities and equipment are adequate and it appears they have well-trained staff.

State/province recommendation: Fundable

Review group: Snake

Recommended budgets: FY07: $100,000 | FY08: $100,000 | FY09: $100,000

Comment: Move to Capital $2,481,215/2007; $2,564,071/2008; $2,568,763/2009