Post on 27-Mar-2015
SOUTHERN IDAHO SOUTHERN IDAHO WILDLIFE MITIGATIONWILDLIFE MITIGATION
UPPER SNAKE WILDLIFE UPPER SNAKE WILDLIFE MITIGATONMITIGATON
Project # 199505700Project # 199505700THE SHOSHONE-BANNOCK THE SHOSHONE-BANNOCK
TRIBESTRIBES
PRESENTER: CHAD COLTERPRESENTER: CHAD COLTER
Southern Idaho Wildlife Southern Idaho Wildlife MitigationMitigation
Agencies InvolvedAgencies Involved– Shoshone-Bannock TribesShoshone-Bannock Tribes– Idaho Dept. of Fish & GameIdaho Dept. of Fish & Game– Shoshone-Paiute TribesShoshone-Paiute Tribes
Includes BLM and others interested in Includes BLM and others interested in mitigation effortsmitigation efforts
Focus efforts in the Middle and Upper Focus efforts in the Middle and Upper Snake River Provinces in order to meet Snake River Provinces in order to meet HU GoalsHU Goals
Southern Idaho Wildlife Southern Idaho Wildlife MitigationMitigation
Upper Snake Wildlife MitigationUpper Snake Wildlife Mitigation
ProgrammaticallyProgrammatically1.1. Protect 22,851 Habitat Protect 22,851 Habitat
Units (3/4 of the total Units (3/4 of the total remaining Habitat remaining Habitat Units)Units)
2.2. Enhance 7,617 Enhance 7,617 Habitat Units (1/4 of Habitat Units (1/4 of the total remaining the total remaining Habitat Units)Habitat Units)
Relationship to the NWPPC Relationship to the NWPPC F&W ProgramF&W Program
““Primary strategy: Complete the current mitigation program for Primary strategy: Complete the current mitigation program for construction and inundation losses and include wildlife mitigation construction and inundation losses and include wildlife mitigation for all operational losses as an integrated part of habitat for all operational losses as an integrated part of habitat protection and restorationprotection and restoration” (page 39, ” (page 39, NWPPC 2000-19NWPPC 2000-19).).
– Project addresses wildlife habitat losses for Minidoka and Palisades Project addresses wildlife habitat losses for Minidoka and Palisades Hydroelectric FacilitiesHydroelectric Facilities
““Project funding priorities: Wildlife mitigation should emphasize Project funding priorities: Wildlife mitigation should emphasize addressing areas of the basin with the highest proportion of addressing areas of the basin with the highest proportion of unmitigated losses” (page 64, NWPPC 2000-19).unmitigated losses” (page 64, NWPPC 2000-19).
– Projects implemented by SIWM through calendar year 2000 provided 17,105 HU’s of mitigation credit to BPA and leaves 30,468 HU’s (64%) remaining unmitigated.
Relationship to the Subbasin PlanRelationship to the Subbasin Plan
“ “In general, habitat-related issues encompass the primary In general, habitat-related issues encompass the primary limiting factors for fish and wildlife. These habitat issues fit limiting factors for fish and wildlife. These habitat issues fit into several non-exclusive categories: loss, degradation, into several non-exclusive categories: loss, degradation, fragmentation, quantity and quality (Gregory et al. 2001).”fragmentation, quantity and quality (Gregory et al. 2001).”
Goals and ObjectivesGoals and Objectives
Limiting Factor:Limiting Factor: Loss of habitat.Loss of habitat.– Goal:Goal: M Mitigate wildlife habitat losses associated with the itigate wildlife habitat losses associated with the
Minidoka and Palisades Hydroelectric Facilities within the Minidoka and Palisades Hydroelectric Facilities within the Upper Snake River Province.Upper Snake River Province.
» Objective 1:Objective 1: Protect 3,000 acres and 1,500 habitat unitsProtect 3,000 acres and 1,500 habitat units
» Objective 2:Objective 2: Enhance and restore 1,000 habitat units Enhance and restore 1,000 habitat units
» Objective 3:Objective 3: Maintain, monitor, and evaluate habitatMaintain, monitor, and evaluate habitat
» Objective 4:Objective 4: Adaptively manage mitigation projectsAdaptively manage mitigation projects
Potential Project PrioritizationPotential Project Prioritization
Plans were initially established by interagency Plans were initially established by interagency teams of biologists (Mueleman et al. 1991, Martin teams of biologists (Mueleman et al. 1991, Martin
et at. 1986, Martin et al. 1991)et at. 1986, Martin et al. 1991)
In addition to these plans, GAP (Scott et al.1993, In addition to these plans, GAP (Scott et al.1993, Caicco et al. 1995) cover types are used in a Caicco et al. 1995) cover types are used in a
coarse-filter/fine-filter approach to identify areas coarse-filter/fine-filter approach to identify areas with potential for mitigation projects.with potential for mitigation projects.
Project Locations and Planned Project Locations and Planned AcquisitionsAcquisitions
RUDEEN ACQUISITIONRUDEEN ACQUISITION
Bald Eagle Winter RoostingBald Eagle Winter RoostingBLM - ACECBLM - ACEC
SODA SPRINGS HILLSSODA SPRINGS HILLS
BLM - PROJECT AREABLM - PROJECT AREA
Deer/Elk Winter RangeDeer/Elk Winter RangeEaglesEaglesHabitat FragmentationHabitat Fragmentation
Blackfoot RiverBlackfoot RiverWild & Scenic Wild & Scenic StudyStudyDeer/Elk Winter Deer/Elk Winter RangeRangeNatural and Natural and Cultural Resource Cultural Resource ValuesValuesFort Hall Irrigation Fort Hall Irrigation ProjectProjectHabitat Habitat FragmentationFragmentationEPA 303(d) Water EPA 303(d) Water Quality LimitedQuality Limited
Fort Hall IRFort Hall IR
StateState
BLMBLM
Monitoring and EvaluationMonitoring and Evaluation
Assess Habitat Unit Gains Using HEPAssess Habitat Unit Gains Using HEP Monitor Vegetation StatusMonitor Vegetation Status
– Technique EvaluationTechnique Evaluation– Goal AchievementGoal Achievement
Monitor Vegetation ChangeMonitor Vegetation Change– Goal AchievementGoal Achievement
Monitor wildlife Abundance and Monitor wildlife Abundance and DiversityDiversity
Ongoing Efforts