Proposal 199505703: Southern Idaho Wildlife Mitigation
|
1. Administrative 2. Location 3. Species 4. Past accomplishments 5. Relationships |
6. Objectives 7. Work elements 8. Budget 9. Future 10. Narrative |
Organization: Shoshone Paiute Tribes
Short description:
The Shoshone-Paiute Tribes propose to protect, enhance/restore and maintain native habitats through land acquisition in the Middle Snake Province as mitigation for the construction of Anderson Ranch, Deadwood, and Black Canyon hydroelectric project
Contacts
| Contact name | Role | Address | Phone | |
| Carol Perugini | Contract Manager | Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of Duck Valley Reservation Highway 51 Stateline P.O. Box 219 Owyhee NV 89832-0219 |
208.759.3246 | perugini.carol@shopai.org |
Section 2. Location
Province: Middle Snake Subbasin: Owyhee
Specific locations
| Lat/long | Location desc | Waterbody (lake or stream) | County/State | Subbasin | Resolution | Primary? |
| , | The Owyhee Canyonland area is an area that the Tribes are interested in for land acquisition, due to its cultural and fish/wildlife importance to the Tribes. | Owyhee River and tributaries | Owyhee ID | Owyhee | area | No |
| , | Land within the Bruneau subbasin is part of the Tribes' aboriginal territory and will be focused on when considering suitable wildlife mitigation parcels for protection. | Bruneau River and tributaries | Owyhee ID | Bruneau | area | No |
| , | Land within the Bruneau subbasin is part of the Tribes' aboriginal territory and will be focused on when considering suitable wildlife mitigation parcels for protection. | Bruneau River and tributaries | Elko NV | Bruneau | area | No |
| , | The upper Owyhee subbasin area is an area that the Tribes are interested in for land acquisition, due to its cultural and fish/wildlife importance to the Tribes. | Owyhee River and tributaries | Elko NV | Owyhee | area | Yes |
Section 3. Species
Primary: Wildlife: All Wildlife
Additional species: Species identified in loss assessments of Black Canyon, Deadwood and Anderson Ranch dams including: mule deer, mink, mallard, yellow warbler, yellow rumped warbler, ruffed grouse, blue grouse, spruce grouse, black-capped chickadee.
Section 4. Past accomplishments
| FY | Accomplishment |
| 1996 | IDFG and the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes signed an MOA, and SIWM program was created. |
| 1997 | The Shoshone-Paiute Tribes indicated an interest in joining IDFG and SBT as members of the SIWM collaborative group. |
| 1998 | The Shoshone-Paiute Tribes restated their interest in joining IDFG and SBT as members of the SIWM collaborative group. |
| 1999 | The Shoshone-Paiute Tribes restated their interest in joining IDFG and SBT as members of the SIWM collaborative group. |
| 2000 | The Shoshone-Paiute Tribes actively pursued inclusion into the SIWM collaborative group. |
| 2001 | The Shoshone-Paiute Tribes became a member of the SIWM collaborative group and began to pursue Perkins Ranch (Bruneau subbasin) for fee-title acquisition. The Tribes also identified Dave’s Island (Bruneau subbasin) for a potential conservation easement. |
| 2002 | The Tribes pursued Dave’s Island Property for fee-title acquisition. While the property is of critical importance to the Tribes fish, wildlife and cultural resources, negotiations stalled as the landowners disagreed with the original appraised value. |
| 2003 | The Shoshone-Paiute Tribes continued with efforts to acquire the Dave’s Island Property. However, a moratorium was placed on land acquisitions and hampered progress. |
| 2004 | Meetings were held between the SPT, SBT, IDFG, and BPA informing the group members that funding for land acquisition was being reinstated. Correspondence with the Dave’s Island owners was reinitiated. |
| 2005 | Search for potential land acquisitions has continued. However, an agreement between BPA and the three SIWM group members needs to be formalized before acquisition can occur. |
| 2006 | Search for suitable wildlife mitigation parcels suspended due to lack of BPA capital funding. Began work on drafting MOA with BPA. |
| 2007 | Negotiate with BPA on MOA in order to acquire wildlife mitigation parcels. Talks stalled June, 2007. SIWM partners contract with consultant to draft report to "Estimate Cost to Mitigate For Wildlife Habitat Lost to Five BOR Projects in Southern Idaho." |
| 2008 | Resume MOA talks with BPA in order to acquire wildlife mitigation properties.Identify parcels for possible acquisition, contract for appraisal, conduct pre-acquisition due diligence tasks. Work with SIWM partners on settlement proposal. |
Section 5. Relationships to other projects
| Funding source | Project ID | Project Title | Relationship |
| BPA | 199505700 | S Idaho Wildlife Mitigation | This is the umbrella wildlife mitigation program currently in place that provides funding for IDFG to conduct mitigation activities in the Upper Snake Province. In addition to the hydroelectric projects identified in this document, the SIWM conducts mitigation activities for Palisades and Minidoka Dams. |
| BPA | 199505701 | S Idaho Wildlife Mitigation | This is the umbrella wildlife mitigation program currently in place that provides funding for IDFG to conduct mitigation activities in the Middle Snake Province. |
| BPA | 199505702 | S Idaho Wildlife Mitigation | This is the umbrella wildlife mitigation program currently in place that provides funding for the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to conduct mitigation activities in the Middle and Upper Snake Provinces. In addition to the hydroelectric projects identified in this document, the SIWM conducts mitigation activities for Palisades and Minidoka Dams. |
| BPA | 199206100 | Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigati | This is a similar wildlife mitigation program in the northern part of Idaho. The Tribes will coordinate with the Albeni Falls Interagency Work Group when developing monitoring and evaluation plans and conducting HEP evaluations. |
| BPA | 199701100 | Shoshone-Paiute Habitat Enhanc | This is a fish and wildlife habitat protection/enhancement program in place at DVIR. Some of the restoration techniques that are currently being employed on the Reservation may be utilized on mitigation properties, such as spring protection, riparian fencing, and riparian area restoration. |
| Other: NWPCC | F&W Program | Substitution for Wildlife Losses | The program includes a commitment to mitigate for losses resulting from construction and inundation losses, direct operational losses or through secondary losses. |
Section 6. Objectives
| Objective title | Description | Relevant subbasin plan | Relevant strategy(ies) | Page number(s) |
| Coordinate land acquisitions | Coordinate land acquisitions, conservation easements and riparian habitat improvements. | Owyhee | (a) Fund and facilitate coordinator position in subbasins where the Tribes have historical natural resource, cultural interests, or aboriginal territory. (b) Funda nd implement habitat protection and restoration across state and jurisdictional boundaries | 104-105 |
| Protect habitat through fee-title acquisition | Protect 2000 HUs of wildlife habitat and associated aquatic habitat through fee-title acquisition or conservation easement | Owyhee | Control noxious weeds; construct/repair/maintain fencing; conduct stream protection activities; rehabilitate/restore habitat by planting native seed stock or by transplanting native plants; manipulate vegetation to achieve enhancement objectives | 107-108 |
| Protect/enhance/acquire mitigation properties | Protect, enhance, and/or acquire wildlife mitigation properties in the Bruneau and Owyhee subbasins | Owyhee | (a)work with landowners to discuss/identify acquisition opportunities (b) evaluate habitat of acquisition parcel(s) (c)work collaboratively with interested entities (d) explore opportunities to develop "grass banks" in the Owyhee/Bruneau subbasins | 104-105 |
| Restore habitat with enhancements | Protect wildlife habitat and associated aquatic habitat through habitat enhancement activities | Owyhee | Control noxious weeds; construct/repair/maintain fencing; conduct stream protection activities; rehabilitate/restore habitat by planting native seed stock or by transplanting native plants; manipulate vegetation to achieve enhancement objectives | 107-108 |
Section 7. Work elements
| Work element name | Work element title | Objective(s) | Start date | End date | Estimated budget> | Sponsor performs work? |
| Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation | Fulfill environmental compliance requirements | Coordinate land acquisitions | 4/1/2010 | 3/31/2013 | 60,000 | Yes |
| Description: Complete environmental review of individual project sites to fulfill environmental compliance requirements. This will occur as acquisitions are identified, which could occur at any time during the contract period. | ||||||
| Conduct Pre-Acquisition Activities | Secure conservation easements, fee-title, and lease agreements | Coordinate land acquisitions | 4/1/2010 | 3/31/2013 | 88,500 | Yes |
| Description: Pursue fee-title acquisitions, conservation easements, and lease agreements from willing landowners. Work tasks include: (1)completing environmental compliance documentation prior to securing land; (2)conducting title search, legal descriptions, verifying maps and property boundaries, site visits; (3) coordinate the completion of property appraisals and BPA review; (4) negotiate easement, acquisition or lease terms with landowner; (5) develop option/purchase agreement; and (6) coordinate with BPA throughout the preacquisition process (Real Property Services Group and COTR). | ||||||
| Identify and Select Projects | SIWM Parcel Identification | Coordinate land acquisitions | 4/1/2010 | 3/31/2013 | 66,000 | Yes |
| Description: Identify parcels that have potential for acquisition/easement under the SIWM program. Tasks include: (1) Use available information (GAP Analysis, Data from BLM, USFS, USFWS, ID/NV Fish and Game Departments, etc.) to identify important fish and wildlife habitat; (2) consult with real estate agents to obtain listings of available properties in the Owyhee and Bruneau subbasins; (3) consult with local working groups to identify potential properties for acquisition; (4) estimate minimum habitat units that will be protected as a result of property acquisition/easement; and (5) coordinate with BPA environmental compliance staff. | ||||||
| Land Purchase | BPA Land Purchase | Protect habitat through fee-title acquisition | 4/1/2010 | 3/31/2013 | 7,500,000 | Yes |
| Description: Habitat acquisition capital funding | ||||||
| Produce (Annual) Progress Report | Produce Annual Progress Report | Protect habitat through fee-title acquisition<br>Protect/enhance/acquire mitigation properties | 4/1/2010 | 10/31/2012 | 35,000 | Yes |
| Description: The annual report summarizes the project goal, objectives, completed and uncompleted deliverables, problems encountered, lessons learned, and long-term planning. Work tasks include: (1) review annual report format requirements; (2) submit report for internal contractor review; (3) email draft report to COTR at BPA for review; (4) finalize annual report; and (5) confirm BPA has posted the report | ||||||
| Produce Pisces Status Report | Periodic status reports for BPA | Protect/enhance/acquire mitigation properties | 4/1/2010 | 3/31/2013 | 7,500 | Yes |
| Description: Complete quarterly status reports in Pisces. | ||||||
| Install Fence | Install/repair/maintain fencing | Protect/enhance/acquire mitigation properties | 4/1/2010 | 3/31/2013 | 25,000 | Yes |
| Description: Installation, repair and maintenance involved with perimeter fencing, riparian area and exclosure fencing on acquired properties. | ||||||
| Manage and Administer Projects | Manage and administer projects | Protect/enhance/acquire mitigation properties<br>Restore habitat with enhancements | 4/1/2010 | 3/31/2013 | 430,000 | Yes |
| Description: Administer contract and subcontracts under this project. Tasks under this element include implementation of some habitat protection, enhancement and O&M costs. These must be estimated due to the fact that no properties have been acquired yet. Work tasks will include: (1) develop statement of work and contract renewal packages; (2) develop and manage subcontracts as needed; (3) develop budgets and statements of work for enhancement, operations and maintenance of completed acquisitions; (4) draft management plans for each mitigation parcel acquired; (5) implement management activities on mitigation parcels consistent with management plan; (6) send invoices to BPA; (6) submit budgets for BPA approval; and (7) provide accrual estimate to BPA. | ||||||
| work element budget total: | 8,212,000 | |||||
Section 8. Budget
| Item | Note | FY 2010 cost ($) | FY 2011 cost ($) | FY 2012 cost ($) | |
| Personnel | .3 FTE Director, .1 FTE Biologist, 1.0 FTE Technician for FY2010. Beginning with additional acquisitions and property management tasks, increase to 1.0 Biologist, 1.0 FTE Technician | 52,175 | 96,000 | 98,900 | |
| Fringe Benefits | To include health insurance, retirement, vacation. | 20,675 | 38,400 | 39,550 | |
| Supplies | Includes start-up equipment for maintaining acquired land and associated outbuildings to include fencing supplies, shovels, hand tools, ATV, etc. | 18,000 | 20,000 | 30,000 | |
| Travel | Travel to professional meetings, training, regional meetings with other wildlife professionals and groups. | 4,100 | 4,300 | 4,500 | |
| Other | Vehicle Lease and Insurance. | 9,900 | 11,800 | 12,400 | |
| Other | Professional Services including land appraisals, cultural resource surveys, hazardous materials surveys,etc. | 43,000 | 43,000 | 43,000 | |
| Overhead | Indirect rate calculated at 26.5% | 28,000 | 45,182 | 49,118 | |
| Other | Capital for Land Acquisition | 2,500,000 | 2,500,000 | 2,500,000 | |
| Itemized budget totals: | 2,675,850 | 2,758,682 | 2,777,468 | ||
(No cost sharing noted)
Section 9. Project future
| Outyear budgets | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 |
| 2,800,000 | 2,800,000 | 2,900,000 | 2,900,000 | 3,000,000 | 3,000,000 |
Note
This project should continue until all habitat unit losses have been mitigated for in the Middle Snake Province, or until such time as a settlement agreement is reached between the SIWM partners and BPA.
Likely project termination/end date: unknown
Termination notes:
This project will terminate when all wildlife habitat unit losses have been mitigated for that resulted from the construction and inundation of Anderson Ranch, Black Canyon and Deadwood Dams or until such time as the SIWM partners reach a settlement agreement with BPA.
Final deliverables:
All impacted habitat units will be mitigated for through land acquisitions and habitat enhancements.
Reviews
ISRP final recommendation: Meets Scientific criteria? Yes (Qualified)
This project is worthwhile; the purchase would link a considerable stretch of riparian area in shrub-steppe habitat. The qualification – the question of future grazing on the lands, and on the Wilson Ranch needs to be addressed. Proper management of grazing (if permitted) is important to the ability to restore the ecosystem. How and when will decisions on this be addressed? If the acquisition goal is fish and wildlife benefits, the land-use plan needs to be consistent with this.
1. Technical justification, program significance and consistency, and project relationships:
These sections are reasonable and appropriate given that no program lands are currently managed. This project attempts to provide out-of-place and out-of-kind mitigation for hydro impacts from dams in the Boise and Payette River drainages. The project proposes to acquire the Wilson Ranch property that includes about 75% of the Owyhee River riparian and floodplain corridor below Wild Horse Dam in Nevada.
The Owyhee River is home to native redband trout, and the riparian corridor is likely an important wildlife habitat, particularly for migrating and breeding birds. Having the opportunity to aggregate these lands into a conservation-directed management scheme would likely yield significant local and regional benefits.
2. Project History and Results
The sponsors are commended for their persistence in pursuing this project in spite of external obstacles. Some mention of the issue of potential pollution from upstream sources is needed in the proposal, as these effects could compromise expected biological benefits from habitat and management improvements (copper may be a problem from mining).
3. Objectives, work elements, and methods
This section is organizationally confusing, skipping from acquisition to management and back again. Until lands are acquired and management planning is complete, how can it be known if, or what fencing or other restoration activities will be needed? This section of the proposal focuses on aspects of acquisition and has yet to define more specific biological and conservation work elements and objectives, much less specific methods. However, all the acquisition pieces are in here somewhere and are presented credibly. The parcel identification and prioritization work element is particularly well thought out and presented.
4. M&E
This section is not well-developed and will require additional details from the sponsor to provide more specific biological objectives (and work elements) in order to specify appropriate M&E metrics and methods. We recognize that it is difficult for the sponsors to plan M&E for future parcels; however, there is concern that HEP may be being confused with biological monitoring. As the project moves forward with acquisitions and management planning, this should be clarified.
Beyond the need to mitigate and the Tribes' approach to identifying parcels, this project is not yet at a point where scientific criteria are key. As acquisition and management planning proceeds, there will be more need for evaluation of scientific merit. The general information presented here suggests that the sponsors will be able to provide all the necessary information and expertise as it is needed.
from May 19, 2009 ISRP 2009-17 report
ISRP preliminary recommendation: Meets scientific criteria? Yes (Qualified)
This project is worthwhile; the purchase would link a considerable stretch of riparian area in shrub-steppe habitat. The qualification – the question of future grazing on the lands, and on the Wilson Ranch needs to be addressed. Proper management of grazing (if permitted) is important to the ability to restore the ecosystem. How and when will decisions on this be addressed? If the acquisition goal is fish and wildlife benefits, the land-use plan needs to be consistent with this.
1. Technical justification, program significance and consistency, and project relationships:
These sections are reasonable and appropriate given that no program lands are currently managed. This project attempts to provide out-of-place and out-of-kind mitigation for hydro impacts from dams in the Boise and Payette River drainages. The project proposes to acquire the Wilson Ranch property that includes about 75% of the Owyhee River riparian and floodplain corridor below Wild Horse Dam in Nevada.
The Owyhee River is home to native redband trout, and the riparian corridor is likely an important wildlife habitat, particularly for migrating and breeding birds. Having the opportunity to aggregate these lands into a conservation-directed management scheme would likely yield significant local and regional benefits.
2. Project History and Results
The sponsors are commended for their persistence in pursuing this project in spite of external obstacles. Some mention of the issue of potential pollution from upstream sources is needed in the proposal, as these effects could compromise expected biological benefits from habitat and management improvements (copper may be a problem from mining).
3. Objectives, work elements, and methods
This section is organizationally confusing, skipping from acquisition to management and back again. Until lands are acquired and management planning is complete, how can it be known if, or what fencing or other restoration activities will be needed? This section of the proposal focuses on aspects of acquisition and has yet to define more specific biological and conservation work elements and objectives, much less specific methods. However, all the acquisition pieces are in here somewhere and are presented credibly. The parcel identification and prioritization work element is particularly well thought out and presented.
4. M&E
This section is not well-developed and will require additional details from the sponsor to provide more specific biological objectives (and work elements) in order to specify appropriate M&E metrics and methods. We recognize that it is difficult for the sponsors to plan M&E for future parcels; however, there is concern that HEP may be being confused with biological monitoring. As the project moves forward with acquisitions and management planning, this should be clarified.
Beyond the need to mitigate and the Tribes' approach to identifying parcels, this project is not yet at a point where scientific criteria are key. As acquisition and management planning proceeds, there will be more need for evaluation of scientific merit. The general information presented here suggests that the sponsors will be able to provide all the necessary information and expertise as it is needed.
from Mar 26, 2009 ISRP 2009-7 report