Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?
View and print project details including project summary, purpose, associations to Biological Opinions, and area. To learn more about any of the project properties, hold your mouse cursor over the field label.
Please Note: This project is the product of one or more merges and/or splits from other projects. Historical data automatically included here are limited to the current project and previous generation (the “parent” projects) only. The Project Relationships section details the nature of the relationships between this project and the previous generation. To learn about the complete ancestry of this project, please review the Project Relationships section on the Project Summary page of each parent project.
| Province | Subbasin | % |
|---|---|---|
| Mountain Columbia | Kootenai | 100.00% |
|
|
Description: Page: 10 Figure 2: A 1-meter land cover classification of the OLA project area. Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 880 x 670 Description: Page: 13 Figure 4: A portion of the study area near Bonners Ferry from the 1958 aerial photo mosaic. Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 1000 x 1371 Description: Page: 134 Appendix D, Figure 1: The Kootenai River basin. Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 879 x 655 Description: Page: 149 Appendix E, Figure 2: The Kootenai River meandering reach test site, indicated by the red rectangle. Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 643 x 575 Description: Page: 150 Appendix E, Figure 3: Vegetation mapped along the study site. Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 953 x 732 Description: Page: 151 Appendix E, Figure 5: Simulated landscape analysis area Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 726 x 410 Description: Page: 152 Appendix E, Figure 6: No shift scenario- Simulated year 1994 (22nd Simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 727 x 407 Description: Page: 153 Appendix E, Figure 7: 10th year Shift Scenario-Simulated year 1994 (22nd Simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 733 x 408 Description: Page: 153 Appendix E, Figure 8: 3rd Year Shift Scenario-Simulated year 1994 (22nd Simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 738 x 409 Description: Page: 156 Appendix E, Annex I, Figure 2: Start Condition. Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 924 x 608 Description: Page: 157 Appendix E, Annex I, Figure 3: No Shift scenario, simulated year 1983 (10th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 926 x 608 Description: Page: 158 Appendix E, Annex I, Figure 4: No Shift scenario, simulated year 1987 (15th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 924 x 609 Description: Page: 159 Appendix E, Annex I, Figure 5: No Shift scenario, simulated year 1994 (22nd simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 932 x 608 Description: Page: 159 Appendix E, Annex I, Figure 6: No Shift scenario, simulated year 1997 (25th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 932 x 608 Description: Page: 160 Appendix E, Annex I, Figure 7: 10th year Shift scenario, simulated year 1983 (10th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 934 x 613 Description: Page: 161 Appendix E, Annex I, Figure 8: 10th year Shift scenario, simulated year 1987 (15th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 932 x 608 Description: Page: 162 Appendix E, Annex I, Figure 9: 10th year Shift scenario, simulated year 1994 (22nd simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 931 x 612 Description: Page: 163 Appendix E, Annex I, Figure 10: 10th year Shift scenario, simulated year 1997 (25th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 927 x 605 Description: Page: 164 Appendix E, Annex I, Figure 11: 3rd Year Shift scenario, simulated year 1983 (10th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 932 x 641 Description: Page: 165 Appendix E, Annex I, Figure 12: 3rd Year Shift scenario, simulated year 1987 (15th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 928 x 636 Description: Page: 166 Appendix E, Annex I, Figure 13: 3rd Year Shift scenario, simulated year 1994 (22nd simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 934 x 640 Description: Page: 167 Appendix E, Annex I, Figure 14: 3rd Year Shift scenario, simulated year 1997 (25th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 925 x 640 Description: Page: 17 Figure 2: A 1-meter land cover classification of the OLA project area. Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 880 x 670 Description: Page: 20 Figure 4: A portion of the study area near Bonners Ferry from the 1958 aerial photo mosaic. Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 1000 x 1371 Description: Page: 116 Appendix C-Figure 2: Simulated vegetation maps indicating various phases of vegetation communities for different years (Benjankar, 2009) Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 722 x 764 Description: Page: 141 Appendix D-Figure 1: The Kootenai River basin. Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 879 x 655 Description: Page: 156 Appendix E-Figure 2: The Kootenai River meandering reach test site, indicated by the red rectangle. Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 643 x 575 Description: Page: 157 Appendix E-Figure 3: Vegetation mapped along the study site. Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 953 x 732 Description: Page: 158 Appendix E-Figure 5: Simulated landscape analysis area. Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 726 x 410 Description: Page: 159 Appendix E-Figure 6: No shift scenario- Simulated year 1994 (22nd Simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 727 x 407 Description: Page: 160 Appendix E-Figure 7: 10th year Shift Scenario-Simulated year 1994 (22nd Simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 733 x 408 Description: Page: 160 Appendix E-Figure 8: 3rd Year Shift Scenario-Simulated year 1994 (22nd Simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 738 x 409 Description: Page: 163 Appendix E-Annex I-Figure 2: Start Condition. Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 924 x 608 Description: Page: 164 Appendix E-Annex I-Figure 3: No Shift scenario, simulated year 1983 (10th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 926 x 608 Description: Page: 165 Appendix E-Annex I-Figure 4: No Shift scenario, simulated year 1987 (15th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 924 x 609 Description: Page: 166 Appendix E-Annex I-Figure 5: No Shift scenario, simulated year 1994 (22nd simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 932 x 608 Description: Page: 166 Appendix E-Annex I-Figure 6: No Shift scenario, simulated year 1997 (25th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 932 x 608 Description: Page: 167 Appendix E-Annex I-Figure 7: 10th year Shift scenario, simulated year 1983 (10th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 934 x 613 Description: Page: 168 Appendix E-Annex I-Figure 8: 10th year Shift scenario, simulated year 1987 (15th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 932 x 608 Description: Page: 169 Appendix E-Annex I-Figure 9: 10th year Shift scenario, simulated year 1994 (22nd simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 931 x 612 Description: Page: 170 Appendix E-Annex I-Figure 10: 10th year Shift scenario, simulated year 1997 (25th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 927 x 605 Description: Page: 171 Appendix E-Annex I-Figure 11: 3rd Year Shift scenario, simulated year 1983 (10th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 932 x 641 Description: Page: 172 Appendix E-Annex I-Figure 12: 3rd Year Shift scenario, simulated year 1987 (15th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 928 x 636 Description: Page: 173 Appendix E-Annex I-Figure 13: 3rd Year Shift scenario, simulated year 1994 (22nd simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 934 x 640 Description: Page: 174 Appendix E-Annex I-Figure 14: 3rd Year Shift scenario, simulated year 1997 (25th simulated year). Project(s): 2002-011-00 Document: P122092 Dimensions: 925 x 640 |
To view all expenditures for all fiscal years, click "Project Exp. by FY"
To see more detailed project budget information, please visit the "Project Budget" page
| Acct FY | Acct Type | Amount | Fund | Budget Decision | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FY2024 | Expense | $1,014,339 | From: Fish Accord - Kootenai | Kootenai Tribe of Idaho (KToI) 2023-2025 MOA Extension | 09/30/2022 |
| FY2024 | Expense | $245,884 | From: Fish Accord - Montana | State of Montana (MT) 2023-2025 Accord Extension | 09/30/2022 |
| FY2024 | Expense | $81,362 | From: Fish Accord - Montana | Accord Transfers (Montana) 11/2/2023 | 11/02/2023 |
| FY2024 | Expense | $180,854 | From: Fish Accord - Montana | Accord Transfers (Montana) 11/2/2023 | 11/02/2023 |
| FY2024 | Expense | $282,421 | From: Fish Accord - Montana | Accord Transfers (Montana) 11/2/2023 | 11/02/2023 |
| FY2024 | Expense | $239,887 | From: Fish Accord - Montana | Accord Transfers (Montana) 11/2/2023 | 11/02/2023 |
| FY2024 | Expense | $252,031 | From: Fish Accord - Montana | Accord Transfers (Montana) 11/2/2023 | 11/02/2023 |
| FY2025 | Expense | $1,039,697 | From: Fish Accord - Kootenai | Kootenai Tribe of Idaho (KToI) 2023-2025 MOA Extension | 09/30/2022 |
| FY2025 | Expense | $252,031 | From: Fish Accord - Montana | State of Montana (MT) 2023-2025 Accord Extension | 09/30/2022 |
| FY2025 | Expense | $252,031 | To: Fish Accord - Montana | Accord Transfers (Montana) 11/2/2023 | 11/02/2023 |
| Number | Contractor Name | Title | Status | Total Contracted Amount | Dates |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CR-30182
 SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 FLOODPLAIN OPERATION LOSS ASSESSMENT | Complete | $293,864 | 10/1/2001 - 9/30/2003 |
|
12098
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 FLOODPLAIN OPERATION LOSS ASSESSMENT | Closed | $1,168,472 | 4/1/2002 - 9/30/2005 |
|
24640
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 KOOTENAI RIVER FLOODPLAIN ASSESSMENT | Closed | $455,083 | 10/1/2005 - 10/31/2006 |
|
30578
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 KOOTENAI RIVER FLOODPLAIN ASSESSMENT | Closed | $693,589 | 11/1/2006 - 10/31/2007 |
|
35521
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 KOOTENAI FLOODPLAIN ASSESSMENT | Closed | $699,885 | 11/1/2007 - 10/31/2008 |
|
39852
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | KOOTENAI RIVER FLOODPLAIN ASSESSMENT | Closed | $666,304 | 11/1/2008 - 10/31/2009 |
|
45079
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 200201100 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER FLOODPLAIN ASSESSMENT | Closed | $677,144 | 11/1/2009 - 10/31/2010 |
|
50164
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPERATIONAL LOSS ASSESSMENT | Closed | $717,408 | 11/1/2010 - 10/31/2011 |
|
54924
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP FLFPL. OPER. LOSS ASSMT. KOOT. | Closed | $735,377 | 11/1/2011 - 10/31/2012 |
|
60124
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OP'S LOSS | Closed | $648,269 | 11/1/2012 - 10/31/2013 |
|
63143
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPS LOSS ASSESSMENT & IMPLEMENT | Closed | $693,701 | 11/1/2013 - 10/31/2014 |
|
66918
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPERATIONAL LOSS IMPLEMENTATION | Closed | $708,383 | 11/1/2014 - 11/30/2015 |
|
70698
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPS MITIGATION AND EVALUATION | Closed | $735,461 | 12/1/2015 - 11/30/2016 |
|
74469
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPS MITIGATION & EVALUATION | Closed | $730,936 | 12/1/2016 - 11/30/2017 |
|
76826 REL 1
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPS MITIGATION & EVALUATION | Closed | $733,712 | 12/1/2017 - 11/30/2018 |
| BPA-010838 | Bonneville Power Administration | FY19 Land Acquisitions | Active | $0 | 10/1/2018 - 9/30/2019 |
|
76826 REL 8
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPS MITIGATION & EVALUATION | Closed | $951,485 | 12/1/2018 - 11/30/2019 |
|
76916 REL 7
SOW
|
Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPERATIONAL LOSS ASSESSMENT MT | Closed | $191,466 | 12/1/2018 - 6/30/2020 |
| BPA-011333 | Bonneville Power Administration | FY20 Land Acquisitions/Misc. | Active | $0 | 10/1/2019 - 9/30/2020 |
|
76826 REL 14
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPERATIONAL LOSS ASSESSMENT | Closed | $965,133 | 12/1/2019 - 11/30/2020 |
|
76916 REL 12
SOW
|
Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPERATIONAL LOSS ASSESSMENT | Closed | $121,089 | 7/1/2020 - 6/30/2021 |
| BPA-012045 | Bonneville Power Administration | FY21 Land Acquisitions | Active | $0 | 10/1/2020 - 9/30/2021 |
|
76826 REL 21
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPERATIONAL LOSS ASSESSMENT | Closed | $935,690 | 12/1/2020 - 11/30/2021 |
|
76916 REL 20
SOW
|
Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPERATIONAL LOSS ASSESSMENT | Closed | $87,620 | 7/1/2021 - 6/30/2023 |
|
76826 REL 27
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPERATIONAL LOSS ASSESSMENT | Closed | $727,922 | 12/1/2021 - 11/30/2022 |
|
84055 REL 1
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPERATIONAL LOSS ASSESSMENT | Closed | $757,214 | 12/1/2022 - 11/30/2023 |
|
84064 REL 6
SOW
|
Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPERATIONAL LOSS ASSESSMENT | Issued | $1,223,730 | 11/1/2023 - 10/31/2025 |
|
84055 REL 7
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPERATIONAL LOSS ASSESSMENT | Issued | $976,000 | 12/1/2023 - 11/30/2024 |
|
84055 REL 15
SOW
|
Kootenai Tribe | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPERATIONAL LOSS ASSESSMENT | Signature | $2,054,036 | 12/1/2024 - 11/30/2026 |
| Annual Progress Reports | |
|---|---|
| Expected (since FY2004): | 24 |
| Completed: | 23 |
| On time: | 23 |
| Status Reports | |
|---|---|
| Completed: | 108 |
| On time: | 56 |
| Avg Days Late: | 6 |
| Count of Contract Deliverables | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earliest Contract | Subsequent Contracts | Title | Contractor | Earliest Start | Latest End | Latest Status | Accepted Reports | Complete | Green | Yellow | Red | Total | % Green and Complete | Canceled |
| 12098 | 24640, 30578, 35521, 39852, 45079, 50164, 54924, 60124, 63143, 66918, 70698, 74469, 76826 REL 1, 76826 REL 8, 76826 REL 14, 76826 REL 21, 76826 REL 27, 84055 REL 1, 84055 REL 7, 84055 REL 15 | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPERATIONAL LOSS ASSESSMENT | Kootenai Tribe | 04/01/2002 | 11/30/2026 | Signature | 86 | 267 | 14 | 0 | 5 | 286 | 98.25% | 0 |
| BPA-10838 | FY19 Land Acquisitions | Bonneville Power Administration | 10/01/2018 | 09/30/2019 | Active | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 76916 REL 7 | 76916 REL 12, 76916 REL 20, 84064 REL 6 | 2002-011-00 EXP KOOTENAI RIVER OPERATIONAL LOSS ASSESSMENT | Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) | 12/01/2018 | 10/31/2025 | Issued | 21 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 11 | 31 | 64.52% | 1 |
| BPA-11333 | FY20 Land Acquisitions/Misc. | Bonneville Power Administration | 10/01/2019 | 09/30/2020 | Active | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Project Totals | 107 | 277 | 24 | 0 | 16 | 317 | 94.95% | 1 | ||||||
| Assessment Number: | 2002-011-00-NPCC-20210312 |
|---|---|
| Project: | 2002-011-00 - Kootenai River Floodplain Ecosystem Operational Loss Assessment, Protection, Mitigation and Rehabilitation Project |
| Review: | 2017 Wildlife Category Review |
| Approved Date: | 10/13/2017 |
| Recommendation: | Implement |
| Comments: |
Recommendation: Transition project from pilot phase--methodology development of the operational loss assessment -- to habitat action implementation (e.g. consider combining with the Kootenai Tribe's Reconnect Kootenai River with Historic Floodplain, Project #2002-008-00). [Background: See https://www.nwcouncil.org/fish-and-wildlife/project-reviews-and-recommendations/2017-wildlife-project-review] |
| Assessment Number: | 2002-011-00-ISRP-20201030 |
|---|---|
| Project: | 2002-011-00 - Kootenai River Floodplain Ecosystem Operational Loss Assessment, Protection, Mitigation and Rehabilitation Project |
| Review: | 2017 Wildlife Category Review |
| Completed Date: | 10/30/2020 |
| Final Round ISRP Date: | 6/28/2017 |
| Final Round ISRP Rating: | Meets Scientific Review Criteria |
| Final Round ISRP Comment: | |
|
The ISRP views this as a well-run program while also seeing opportunities for improvement. Recognizing that there will be challenges in identifying sites for protection and restoration, the ISRP thinks it would be useful to have additional information on several items, including more details on quantitative objectives, in the next annual report. The additional information does not need to be overly long or detailed since the acquisition of sites remains a fundamental issue. The additional items to include are:
|
|
| Documentation Links: |
|
| Assessment Number: | 2002-011-00-NPCC-20091217 |
|---|---|
| Project: | 2002-011-00 - Kootenai River Floodplain Ecosystem Operational Loss Assessment, Protection, Mitigation and Rehabilitation Project |
| Review: | Wildlife Category Review |
| Approved Date: | 5/31/2009 |
| Recommendation: | Fund |
| Comments: | Staff recommended budget is a 3-year average (FY2010-2012) to cover the time anticpated to complete the operational loss assessment. Staff recommends an ISRP and Council review of the competed operational loss assessment. Out-year budgets for capital and expense to be determined based on that review. Programmatic issue # 10. |
| Conditions: | |
| Council Condition #1 Programmatic Issue: Regional Coordination funding |
| Assessment Number: | 2002-011-00-ISRP-20090618 |
|---|---|
| Project: | 2002-011-00 - Kootenai River Floodplain Ecosystem Operational Loss Assessment, Protection, Mitigation and Rehabilitation Project |
| Review: | Wildlife Category Review |
| Completed Date: | 5/19/2009 |
| Final Round ISRP Date: | None |
| Final Round ISRP Rating: | Meets Scientific Review Criteria |
| Final Round ISRP Comment: | |
|
Development and validation of the Operational Loss Assessment tool are technically and scientifically justified. Although long and detailed, this is an outstanding proposal that continues to model how research can be usefully integrated into more immediate program goals. This project is not only benefiting the subbasin but the Program overall by demonstrating what could be achieved elsewhere in terms of interdisciplinary value, program integration, and community involvement, all to benefit fish and wildlife.
There is an excellent discussion of problems with HSI/HEP relative to interactions and subjective assessment of variables. This promises a more usable model for accounting and effectiveness monitoring based on current science, as a future alternative to HEP. This model might be considered for adaptation/application in the Willamette Valley where HEP has been particularly problematic and similar regional integration exists. 1. Technical Justification, Program Significance and Consistency, and Project Relationships The development of a process to determine habitat and wildlife resource losses related to dam operations is a very worthwhile objective, and the approach being used by the sponsors is technically sound. Success in developing a tool that can be applied at other locations in the Columbia Basin will make a significant contribution to the region. The clear relationship to the subbasin plan, degree of integration with other regional efforts and Program-funded projects is exemplary. Continuing community involvement following subbasin planning is a wise investment. Table D-1 concisely demonstrates relationships among projects. In some ways it seems to be premature to request funding for property acquisition and restoration projects before the Operational Loss Assessment (OLA) methodology has been completed. 2. Project History and Results The project history is thoroughly described, and it is evident that significant progress has been made towards developing a comprehensive Operational Loss Assessment tool. They have assembled a 17-member research design and review team, started avian point counts; evaluated hydrologic data before and after the dam; continued avian and invertebrate point counts; used remote sensing land classifications; validated avian data 2002-2007; assessed sampling design and intensity; evaluated vegetation hydraulic model; and assessed sample size and power of invertebrate sampling in 2008. Publications and presentations are useful results that add scientific credibility. The timeline makes flow from history to future clear. 3. Objectives, Work Elements, and Methods The project has four phases: (1) operational loss assessment, (2) habitat and population protection, (3) mitigation, and (4) restoration. It is currently in phase 1 with objectives to collect and refine monitoring data based upon statistical needs, to document methodologies and analyses, to develop an Operational Loss Framework Manual in 2010- 2012, and to develop an Index of Ecological Integrity. The objectives, work elements, and methods for development of the OLA process appear to be appropriate. Assessing sample size and power of data collection protocols add rigor and credibility to the data and their use in model development. The centralized database is an advantage. References cite current efforts of project participants and others active in the fields of science involved. There were several work elements for which additional information would be useful. The method by which the avian and invertebrate IBIs will be combined into a terrestrial IBI was not fully explained. Similarly, the method by which the IHA, IFA, IVA, T-IBI, A-IBI and any other information sources will be combined into an overall IEA was only described briefly. The pie-chart diagrams used to display the deviation from historical function for the IFA are one possible method for combining metrics into an IEA. This would indicate which components were most severely degraded but how would this be interpreted in terms of establishing restoration priorities? More description of possible approaches to developing the IEA would provide a better idea how difficult this final step is likely to be. Validation of many model parts will be occurring during 2010 and 2011. Therefore, determination of the value of this approach for informing restoration planning processes will not be complete until late 2011 or 2012. Is there a plan for external review of results at this point? 4. M&E The OLA development is essentially a research effort. A large proportion of the proposal could be considered as RM&E, and most of these elements are very well done. The model development and database are a foundation for future M&E. A comprehensive M&E plan will be developed as a part of the restoration plan that will be based on OLA results. Evaluation of the M&E approach in the restoration plan cannot occur until that time. |
|
| First Round ISRP Date: | 3/26/2009 |
| First Round ISRP Rating: | Meets Scientific Review Criteria |
| First Round ISRP Comment: | |
|
Development and validation of the Operational Loss Assessment tool are technically and scientifically justified. Although long and detailed, this is an outstanding proposal that continues to model how research can be usefully integrated into more immediate program goals. This project is not only benefiting the subbasin but the Program overall by demonstrating what could be achieved elsewhere in terms of interdisciplinary value, program integration, and community involvement, all to benefit fish and wildlife. There is an excellent discussion of problems with HSI/HEP relative to interactions and subjective assessment of variables. This promises a more usable model for accounting and effectiveness monitoring based on current science, as a future alternative to HEP. This model might be considered for adaptation/application in the Willamette Valley where HEP has been particularly problematic and similar regional integration exists. 1. Technical Justification, Program Significance and Consistency, and Project Relationships The development of a process to determine habitat and wildlife resource losses related to dam operations is a very worthwhile objective, and the approach being used by the sponsors is technically sound. Success in developing a tool that can be applied at other locations in the Columbia Basin will make a significant contribution to the region. The clear relationship to the subbasin plan, degree of integration with other regional efforts and Program-funded projects is exemplary. Continuing community involvement following subbasin planning is a wise investment. Table D-1 concisely demonstrates relationships among projects. In some ways it seems to be premature to request funding for property acquisition and restoration projects before the Operational Loss Assessment (OLA) methodology has been completed. 2. Project History and Results The project history is thoroughly described, and it is evident that significant progress has been made towards developing a comprehensive Operational Loss Assessment tool. They have assembled a 17-member research design and review team, started avian point counts; evaluated hydrologic data before and after the dam; continued avian and invertebrate point counts; used remote sensing land classifications; validated avian data 2002-2007; assessed sampling design and intensity; evaluated vegetation hydraulic model; and assessed sample size and power of invertebrate sampling in 2008. Publications and presentations are useful results that add scientific credibility. The timeline makes flow from history to future clear. 3. Objectives, Work Elements, and Methods The project has four phases: (1) operational loss assessment, (2) habitat and population protection, (3) mitigation, and (4) restoration. It is currently in phase 1 with objectives to collect and refine monitoring data based upon statistical needs, to document methodologies and analyses, to develop an Operational Loss Framework Manual in 2010- 2012, and to develop an Index of Ecological Integrity. The objectives, work elements, and methods for development of the OLA process appear to be appropriate. Assessing sample size and power of data collection protocols add rigor and credibility to the data and their use in model development. The centralized database is an advantage. References cite current efforts of project participants and others active in the fields of science involved. There were several work elements for which additional information would be useful. The method by which the avian and invertebrate IBIs will be combined into a terrestrial IBI was not fully explained. Similarly, the method by which the IHA, IFA, IVA, T-IBI, A-IBI and any other information sources will be combined into an overall IEA was only described briefly. The pie-chart diagrams used to display the deviation from historical function for the IFA are one possible method for combining metrics into an IEA. This would indicate which components were most severely degraded but how would this be interpreted in terms of establishing restoration priorities? More description of possible approaches to developing the IEA would provide a better idea how difficult this final step is likely to be. Validation of many model parts will be occurring during 2010 and 2011. Therefore, determination of the value of this approach for informing restoration planning processes will not be complete until late 2011 or 2012. Is there a plan for external review of results at this point? 4. M&E The OLA development is essentially a research effort. A large proportion of the proposal could be considered as RM&E, and most of these elements are very well done. The model development and database are a foundation for future M&E. A comprehensive M&E plan will be developed as a part of the restoration plan that will be based on OLA results. Evaluation of the M&E approach in the restoration plan cannot occur until that time. |
|
| Documentation Links: |
|
| Assessment Number: | 2002-011-00-NPCC-20090924 |
|---|---|
| Project: | 2002-011-00 - Kootenai River Floodplain Ecosystem Operational Loss Assessment, Protection, Mitigation and Rehabilitation Project |
| Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
| Approved Date: | 10/23/2006 |
| Recommendation: | Fund |
| Comments: |
| Assessment Number: | 2002-011-00-ISRP-20060831 |
|---|---|
| Project: | 2002-011-00 - Kootenai River Floodplain Ecosystem Operational Loss Assessment, Protection, Mitigation and Rehabilitation Project |
| Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
| Completed Date: | 8/31/2006 |
| Final Round ISRP Date: | None |
| Final Round ISRP Rating: | Meets Scientific Review Criteria |
| Final Round ISRP Comment: | |
|
This 116-page proposal reads more like a dissertation and would probably be more effective if edited to eliminate non-essential (from review standpoint) background and explanation of terms and processes. Eliminating redundancies would streamline the proposal, making its strong structure more apparent. The proposal clearly relates to Program, subbasin plan and other initiatives in the region. Focal species and habitats are considered in model development. This is a highly technical proposal involving many cooperators and consultants. Including staff training is an excellent move to keep staff growing with the project, fostering ownership of the process and products. The budget for travel does seem excessive, however, even given the training component. This proposal should be closely coordinated with Albeni Falls Operational Assessment, 200731200, from the Kalispel Tribe. Major accomplishments are lost in reams of detail in narrative. Summary in form is more useful as an overview. The plan to report results in peer-reviewed outlets is laudatory. M&E is actually part of the design process rather than an after-thought, consistent with the exploratory nature of the project.
|
|
| Documentation Links: |
|
| Assessment Number: | 2002-011-00-INLIEU-20090521 |
|---|---|
| Project Number: | 2002-011-00 |
| Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
| Completed Date: | 10/6/2006 |
| In Lieu Rating: | No Problems Exist |
| Cost Share Rating: | None |
| Comment: | Developing "operational" loss assessment for Libby Dam. |
| Assessment Number: | 2002-011-00-CAPITAL-20090618 |
|---|---|
| Project Number: | 2002-011-00 |
| Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
| Completed Date: | 2/27/2007 |
| Capital Rating: | Does Not Qualify for Capital Funding |
| Capital Asset Category: | None |
| Comment: | None |
| Project Relationships: |
This project Merged From 2019-002-00 effective on 10/29/2018 Relationship Description: All work/$ moved from 2019-002-00 to 2002-011-00 where work/$ previously was held (with MT as subcontractor to KTOI). Going forward, both MT & KTOI will have separate contracts with BPA. |
|---|
| Name | Role | Organization |
|---|---|---|
| Edward Gresh | Env. Compliance Lead | Bonneville Power Administration |
| Chris Hammond | Interested Party | Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) |
| David Kaplowe | Supervisor | Bonneville Power Administration |
| Virgil Watts III | Project Manager | Bonneville Power Administration |
| Shelby Therrian | Project Lead | Kootenai Tribe |
| Ashley Gray | Administrative Contact | Kootenai Tribe |
| Gary Aitken, Jr | Supervisor | Kootenai Tribe |
| Tonya Chilton-Radandt | Interested Party | Montana State Library |
