SW Idaho Resource Advisory Committee

Minutes

May 17, 2006

 

 

Attendees

SW Idaho RAC Members:  Phil Davis (RAC Chairperson), Lois Van Hoover, Terry Gestrin, David Whaley, Sandra Mitchell, John Gebhards, Tom Glass, Dale Hanson, Joe Hinson, Darel Harris, Scott Stouder, John Cramer (by phone), Herb Malaney

 

Designated Federal Officer:  Doug Gochnour

 

Others:  Andy Brunelle (Legislative Affairs, USFS), Joey Pearson (Notetaker)

 

 

Welcome, Meeting Objectives and Agenda Review

 

• Chair, Phil Davis, called the meeting to order at 10:30 a.m.
• Introduction and congratulations to Suzanne Rainville on her appointment to Forest Supervisor on the Payette NF effective in June.
• Andy Brunelle introduced Dustin Miller, Natural Resources Staff for Senator Craig’s office.  Doug reviewed the renewal process for the funding of RAC and what the future may hold.  Discussed the need for clarification of how to fund projects in the near term and what the budget will be for FY07.  Doug has drafted a letter to County Commissioners and County Clerks for discussion later this afternoon.
• Doug reviewed the agenda for today.  Delete the “Trout in the Classroom” project. 

 

 

Review and approval of April meeting minutes

Doug reviewed minutes from the April 19 meeting.

 

Joe Hinson moved to accept minutes as written

Scott Stouder seconded the motion

Unanimous decision to accept minutes as written

 

Harris suggested we put the names of members back into the Discussion section of the minutes.

Whaley asked for an updated RAC membership list with names and what they represent.

Harris also asked for an updated phone list for RAC members.

 

 

Approval of RAC Expenses

 

Meeting expenses of $464.00 for April meeting were reviewed.

 

Joe Hinson moved to approve

Scott Stouder seconded the motion

Unanimous decision to approve April meeting expenses

 

 

RAC Funding Balance Update

RAC has a $667,884.00 balance as of today.  We also anticipate receiving some $900K for FY07 (don’t know the exact amount at this time). 

 

 

MISC

·        Doug distributed a list of all proposed RAC projects so far this fiscal year (yellow sheet). 

·        A letter of rejection from National Forest Counties & Schools Coalition regarding the nomination for the project at Council was distributed.

·        Need an alternate assigned for Group B

 

 

Project Log Update

The team reviewed the Project Log and projects to be presented today. 

 

 

REVIEW OF PROJECTS

 

Amount Requested:  $200,000.00

 

Project Description:  Replace the Goat Creek culvert with an open-bottomed structure to reconnect the 1.2 miles of habitat for listed fishes upstream of the culvert (a tributary of the South Fork Salmon River (SFSR). Attempts to tunnel under the road and install an open-bottomed culvert in 2001 were not completed due to unforeseen problems excavating into the road fill and contractor default.  The current best estimate for replacement of the culvert with an open bottom arch culvert and associated channel rehabilitation is now approximately $450,000 (construction contract cost only).  Matching agency funds are $240,000 from the Payette NF, and $10,000 from US Fish and Wildlife Service.  Workforce and materials/supplies will be funded by the Payette NF in FY 2006-2008.

 

NEPA requirements (ROD) and ESA concurrence from NMFS and USFWS have been covered by the Payette NF for ESA-listed species.  Corps of Engineers 404, IDWR, and IDEQ water quality permits are not yet secured.

 

Local fisheries and advocacy groups support the Goat Creek culvert replacement, which reconnects fragmented fish habitats.  Valley County, and Idaho Department of Fish and Game, have written letters of support for the project.

 

Discussion:

Quinn Carver (Krassel District Ranger) reviewed the project purpose and expected outcomes.  This project has been ongoing since 1990, with involvement from the Boise and Payette Forests.

 

Tom Crawford (Krassel District Hydrologist) discussed the cost breakdown of this analysis (see Table 1).  They would like to award this contract before the Payette loses allocation for this project.  Also, they are working with the Council School District for plants for this project. 

 

Carver stated the process used in the past was to tunnel under the road and insert a liner. 

Crawford stated this project will not impede traffic.  During the last design, the contractor defaulted and the project was shut down.

 

Harris – would you be doing more tunneling?

Crawford - they will have to remove fill (8,000 cubic yards).  Elevation of new pipe would be 7’ below substrate of channel.  Construct 300 feet of new channel.  Contract time would be three months.

Hanson - how wide is the road bed?

Crawford - minimum 18 feet widths for that area (will vary)

Hinson – did you talk to NOAA about salmon recovery?

Carver - yes, that is where the USFWS $10,000 money came from.

Hinson - suggested there is environmental money available for projects like this

Carver – material will be stored onsite to save on costs

Gochnour – read message from McCarthy – in favor of this project

Stouder – have you looked at a bridge? Or fish ladder?

Crawford - there is no way for either.  Bridge was studied in detail but is a higher cost

Harris – what is the missing 25% of design?

Crawford – design is probably 85% complete at this time – still need to know quantity of material to be stored on site.  Engineer is making final calculations at this time.

Davis – was this existing prior to SFSR road project?

Crawford – it was (since 1953)

Harris – what about indirect costs (overhead @ 12.5%) – does this affect RAC money?

Crawford – No, RAC money is purely directed toward the contract.  All overhead costs are paid by the Forest Service.

Van Hoover – will you be hiring locals?

Quinn – as much as possible - it’s pretty hard to get contractors in Valley County right now.

Glass – what about Item b (NEPA and Sec 7)?  Has this already been done or is this in addition?

Crawford – NEPA and Sec 7 consultation are already done.

Stouder – what about rip rap in upper portion of culvert?

Crawford – yes, rip rap is placed there because they have to have a bank (from the old 2000 contract work)

Stouder – is this culvert hydrologically OK?

Crawford – this is a sound culvert from an engineering standpoint

Hinson – You said you missed the deadline to apply for BPA money for salmon/steelhead recovery funds.  When is the next opportunity to apply?

Gebhards – BPA is now approving money for 2007–2009.

Brunelle – Pacific Salmon Funds through OSC is currently open.  This applies across entire salmon drainage.

Van Hoover – could make a requirement that they apply for alternative funds and report back

Carver – at this point, they risk losing $300,000 of appropriated funds if they don’t move on it now.  Could return money they didn’t need that might be paid by Pacific Salmon funds.

 

John McCarthy sent Doug an email in support of this project.  We will use his vote of approval to complete votes needed for Group B.

 

Part 1 Evaluation

Matching   Funds	Multiple Benefits	Affordable	Completed in One Year or    Annual Increments	Long-term  Benefits	Finite Project	Admin  Costs
Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N

 

David Whaley moved to go to Part 2

Lois Van Hoover seconded motion

Unanimous decision to move to Part 2

 

Part 2 Evaluation

Multiple Benefits	Community Stability & Job Opps	Cooperative   Relations	Benefit/ Cost & Affordable	Project Quality & Coord	Matching Funds	Urgency To Implement	Tangible Outcome
5	5	4	4	5	5	5	5

 

Sandra Mitchell moved to approve – with the stipulation they apply for other funds (Pacific Salmon Funds) and if those funds are received, they will return RAC funds by that amount.  They will also use best value contracting, if possible.

David Whaley seconded the motion

Unanimous decision to approve project

 

 

 

Amount Requested = 22,985.00

Project Description:  Last year an NYC Backcountry Leadership crew was evacuated in advance of a threatening fire in the Frank Church Wilderness.  Their premature departure from the project left a remainder of two weeks of crew work to be accomplished and unutilized RTP grant funding.  Since the project location is so remote, it is not cost effective to transport a crew into the area and establish a base camp for only two weeks.  The funds requested will increase the effectiveness of the crew by adding three weeks of crew labor to the project allowing the crew to complete the remaining two weeks of funded projects and add additional projects to fill a standard five week NYC program schedule.

 

Discussion:

Carver – reviewed project (see handout)

Davis – what about $1,000 for indirect/overhead.  Did we approve this before (NYC cost for transportation to get crews here)

Harris – could we change to show “transportation” cost if that is what it is?

Davis – where is $41,447 from?

Carver – see previous page – Item 15

Whaley – what is “Other” $640.00

Carver – this is the additional 3% in anticipation of 2007 rates (inflation) - Item 18

Gochnour – Recommended we drop the $1,000 (overhead/administrative costs). The new request amount will be $21,985.00.

Stouder – is this complete trail reconstruction?

Carver – yes

 

John Gebhards moved to skip the process and approve this project, subject to deleting the $640.35 (Other) and $1,000 (Indirect Costs) from the requested amount, for a new RAC request of $21,345

David Whaley seconded the motion

Unanimous decision to approve

 

 

Lunch

 

Rodger Batt gave a demonstration of RAC-funded weed projects with Idaho Weed Awareness Campaign.  This is a website with 360 degree panorama.

 

 

Public Forum

 

Phil Davis asked if anyone from the public wished to comment.  No comments were received.

 

Phil Davis said Elmore Co. Commissioner, Mary Esquiza, called to let us know their weed building went $65,600 over budget.  (Project #05028) Is there a process to increase funding for these RAC projects?  They are meeting tomorrow to decide what to do with their building.

Van Hoover – did the county put in Title III money? Search and rescue would have qualified for that kind of funding. 

Gochnour – Elmore County contributed value of land, utilities, funds from community, and title III money.

Glass - 5/13/05 is the date on the request.  Cost of construction has apparently gone up.

Harris – Would keep it in the same percent as we approved last time.

Davis – If we wait until July, they lose the construction season.

Malaney – proceed with the percentage we already gave.  (40% of $65K, or $26K)

Davis – tell them our intent now

 

Dale Hanson moved to inform them that it is our intent to approve 40% of $65K, or $26K.  They must still make a presentation for those funds at the July meeting.

Joe Hinson seconded the motion

Unanimous decision to approve

 

 

 

Amount Requested = $6,100.00

Project description:  The cooperative project is expected to treat a combined 5,835 acres that are included in nine high priority Focus Projects (see Attachment 1) within the Upper Payette CWMA.  An estimated 2,615 public contacts are targeted through the implementation of this overall effort.  This is a 62% increase in treated acres from the previous year and a 73% increase in public contacts.  See Attachment 1 for recent trends within the area.  The number of focus project participants has almost doubled over the last two years.

 

Discussion:

Mike Diem gave a power-point presentation for the Upper Payette River Coop – Weed Management Area Integrated Noxious Weed Control.  He discussed accomplishments to date of this cooperative effort.  This project takes place in Boise, Gem and Valley Counties. 

 

Why this request – now?

• Increasing landowner participation is occurring
• Increasing numbers of acres being treated
• 1^st year that project demands exceeding actual funding levels
• Funding needed to meet this fortunate and successful demand
• Future success of UPCWMA at risk

 

Darel Harris – moved to skip the process and approve project

David Whaley – seconded the motion

Unanimous decision to approve project

 

 

 

Amount Requested = $27,292.00

Project description:  From Highway 21, segments of the Forest Road 531 and 025NB provide access to the Lowman Collection Site.  The collection site is the community’s solid waste depository.  (See minutes from April 19 meeting).

 

Bosworth - This project will be providing the following:

• Achieving fisheries restoration
• Reduce sedimentation
• Special use to the public
• Reduce maintenance cost of the road
• Reduce dust at fishing ponds

 

They may get material out of FS pit run for this project.

Bosworth – The State has a Special Use Permit for that pit.  There will be some coordination on use of that pit as well as coordination with the county.

Davis – can we get the county involved with this project?

Bosworth – don’t see a problem with that

Harris – There are other contributions from Boise County

 

Joe Hinson moved to approve project

Sandra Mitchell seconded the motion

Unanimous decision to approve

 

 

MISC – Letter to Counties regarding future of RAC

 

Doug Gochnour presented a draft letter he wrote for county commissioners and county clerks regarding reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act.

 

Andy Brunelle suggested we delete the last large paragraph because counties probably are not concerned with this.  Leave the sentence about “The RAC members have at least another year….”

 

Gochnour would like our message to be that we would like to have until December to program 2007 funding.

Van Hoover – would like to ask Board of County Commissioners, “where do they want this money to go?”  This is county money we are using.

 

There is still confusion about how this will work out the closer we get to the Sept 30 date.

Larry Craig rep will take this topic of concern back to their office for clarification. 

 

 

Next RAC meeting

 

June 20

If anyone wants to golf in Cascade on June 20^th (the day before), please let Phil know and he will make tee times for around 2:00.  For those of you coming up from the Boise Valley the morning of the 20^th, John McCarthy has offered space in his car for additional riders.  Please contact John at 343-8153 ext 14.

 

June 21 – Summer Field Trip (Landmark and Warm Lake)

Arrive at Cascade District Office at 10:00

Lunch will be provided.  Forest Service vans/transportation will be provided.

Visit site(s) at Landmark and Warm Lake

Leave Cascade at 3:00

 

There will possibly be media coverage along for this trip (TV and Statesman)

 

Next regular meetings:

July 19

August 16

Sept 6

Sept 28

 

Meeting locations will be announced.

 

Meeting adjourned at 2:15 pm