Response for project 199505700: S Idaho Wildlife Mitigation

Comment on proposed FY 2006 budget

This $444,602 budget request is comprised of 6 elements (also, see Notes below): 1: Council-developed budget for this project in the Upper Snake Province. 2: Moving most of the Council-developed budget for this project in the Middle Snake Province to its proper location in the Upper Snake Province. 3, 4, and 5: Minimum O&M needed to protect HUs for properties acquired since the provincial allocations were fixed after FY01. These properties were acquired in good faith that reasonable O&M would be provided by BPA, as required by the Council’s Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. Since acquisition, NO ADDITIONAL O&M FUNDING HAS BEEN ALLOCATED TO IDFG’S SOUTHERN IDAHO WILDLIFE MITIGATION (SIWM) BUDGET. IDFG’s management responsibilities on these properties and the Quarter-Circle-O property (717 ac) have been funded since acquisition only by underfunding critical activities at other SIWM properties. 1. $297,057 approved by Council for this project (O&M for IDFG’s SIWM Project in the Upper Snake Province) for FY06; 2. $ 79,669 ($81,169 approved by Council for IDFG’s SIWM Project and allocated to the Middle Snake Province for FY06 – comprised of 1) $79,669 for administration of O&M for the entire IDFG SIWM Project for FY06, but erroneously allocated to the Middle Snake Province since 2002 and 2) $1,500 for O&M at the Krueger property, which is in the Middle Snake Province) minus (the $1,500 for O&M at the Krueger property). 3. $43,876 approved by BPA for the Rice property for 3/1/05 – 2/28/06 ONLY for “O&M to protect existing HUs, no restoration.” This 1,364-ac (1,065 HU) property was acquired 3/02. 4. $3,000 estimated by IDFG as the cost of ONLY O&M to maintain existing HUs. This 81-acre (535 HU) property was acquired 11/02. 5. $21,000 estimated by IDFG as the cost of ONLY O&M to maintain existing HUs. This 120-acre (207 HU) property was acquired in 11/02. 6. An assumption that the project’s within year request for $72,000 is approved by the Council, and the $110,000 reschedule request is approved by BPA.

Accomplishments since the last review

2002 to present: Protection and management of 7 properties acquired by BPA, totaling 5,288 acres and 11,195 HUs. Acquisition of: Rice property (1,364 ac, 1,063 HUs), Horkley property (120 ac, 207 HUs), and Allen property (81 ac, 535 HUs).

FY 2006 goals and anticipated accomplishments

FY06: Continue performing tasks funded under BPA contracts 6339 and 4627, including: 119 Manage and Administer Projects 165 Produce Environmental Compliance Report 118 Coordination 174 Produce Plan 18 Maintain Terrestrial Structures 22 Maintain Vegetation 53 Remove Vegetation (noxious weeds) 26 Investigate Trespass 156 Develop RM&E Methods and Designs 157 Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data 141 Produce Status Report 132 Produce Annual Report

Subbasin planning

How is this project consistent with subbasin plans?

This project is consistent with and implements biological objectives 1 through 4 on p.3-1; Riparian/Wetland objectives A-1 (p.3-14), strategies a, c, d, e, f, h, i, and j on pp.3-14 to 3-15; A-5 (p.3-18), strategies a, b, d, e, f, and g on pp. 3-18 to 3-19; D-1, strategy b on p. 3-20; E-1, strategies a and b on p. 3-21; Open water/ponds objectives A-1, strategies b, c, f, and j on pp. 3-22 to 3-23; B-1, strategy a on pp. 3-23 to 3-24; Shrub-steppe objectives A-1, strategies a and b on p.3-31; A-2 strategy a on p. 3-32; B-1, strategies a, b, and c on p.3-32.

How do goals match subbasin plan priorities?

The project accomplishes high-priority work under the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program and the subbasin plan, because this ongoing project fulfills legal obligations to protect, mitigate, and enhance wildlife and protect existing HUs on properties previously purchased with Council-approved BPA funding. The prioritization framework of the draft Upper Snake Province subbasin plans is limited to establishing a process primarily to identify priorities for future mitigation projects, not ongoing projects. Regardless, the need and high-priority to protect previous mitigation investments is obvious.

Other comments

Please note: 1) IDFG’s SIWM Project is comprised of 8 properties totaling 5,288 ac in the Upper Snake Province and one 166-acre property (Krueger) in the Middle Snake Province. In 2002, the costs of administering O&M for the 8 SIWM properties were erroneously allocated entirely to the Middle Snake Province. This resulted from an arbitrary funding split of all SIWM O&M to 75% to the Upper Snake Province (with IDFG’s 7 properties receiving 50% of that; and the Sho-Ban Tribes 2 properties receiving 50% of that) and 25% to the Middle Snake Province (with IDFG’s one property and our entire SIWM administration receiving 50% of that; and the Sho-Pai Tribes receiving 50% while having no properties).