![](media/image1.png){width="1.1354166666666667in"
height="1.3423611111111111in"}

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Western Washington Restoration Programs

Lacey, WA

Request for Project Proposals

Fiscal Year 2005Number range CHAPTER

# 

# [General Information]{.underline}

This package contains information and forms pertaining to funding
opportunities through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)
Western Washington Restoration Programs (Programs) for fiscal year (FY)
2005. These Programs include the Puget Sound (PSP), Partners for Fish
and Wildlife (PFW), and Chehalis Fisheries Restoration (CFRP) Programs.
These Programs have some similarities and some differences. For Program
specific information, see Table 2 on page 3 and sections: PSP = p.9; PFW
= p.10; CFRP = p.10*.*

The Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office focuses its efforts on
actions that recover listed species or preclude the listing of species
under the Endangered Species Act, and protect Service trust species.
These species include Service listed species and species of concern, and
Service trust species. See SpeciesList.doc for listed species and
species of concern. Service trust species also include salmon,
steelhead, and migratory birds.

Pre-proposals need to be submitted for all potential projects and are
due by **September 17, 2004.** Final applications are due by **December
3, 2004.**

Funding for each restoration Program is contingent upon Congressional
and Service authorization. Approximate amounts of Program funds
anticipated available in FY2005 are:

  ----------------------------------------------- -----------------------
  **Program**                                     **Amount (\$)**

  Puget Sound                                     75,000 -- 125,000

  Partners for Fish and Wildlife                  75,000 -- 150,000

  Chehalis Fisheries Restoration                  150,000 -- 200,000
  ----------------------------------------------- -----------------------

# 

In addition, information is provided for several other Service
restoration programs, including the following: National Fish Passage
Program (NFPP); Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation Mitigation Act
(FRIMA); Private Stewardship Grant Program (PSG). Eligibility criteria
and the request for proposal process differs for these programs. For
specific information see sections: NFPP = p.11; FRIMA = p.11; PSG =
p.11.

# [Who Can Apply]{.underline}

Any private, state, tribal, nonprofit organization or community group
(such as a watershed team), land trust, or individual entity can apply
for these watershed restoration funds, as long as the individual
restoration Program requirements are met. Some Programs can also provide
funding to federal partners.

**[Project Eligibility]{.underline}**

### ![](media/image2.jpeg){width="5.142361111111111in" height="6.768055555555556in"}

### 

Your proposal may be eligible for funding from more than one Program,
but you only need to fill out one application per project when applying
for PSP, PFW, or CFRP funds. To apply for these Programs, use the
guidance and application forms included in this packet.

### Project Development Assistance

Technical assistance in developing your proposal is available from the
Service. We strongly recommend you contact a biologist (see Table 1,
p.3) for guidance and questions you may have regarding development of
your pre-proposal and final application. Service biologists will work
closely with project sponsors; when possible, conduct site visits to
project locations; provide technical assistance; and determine if
projects are eligible for funding. Project sponsors are expected to plan
projects, coordinate with landowners and partners, hire and run crews,
and handle project details.

Table 1. Program Contacts

  ----------------------- ------------- -------------- -------------------------
  **Program**             **Service     **Phone        **E-mail**
                          Contact**     Number**       

  Puget Sound             Curtis Tanner 360-753-4326   curtis_tanner@fws.gov

                          Rich Carlson  360-753-5829   rich_carlson@fws.gov

  Partners for Fish and   J.F. (Paco)   360-753-4066   julio_rodriguez@fws.gov
  Wildlife                Rodriguez                    

  Chehalis Fisheries      Brian Peck    360-753-9560   brian_peck@fws.gov
  Restoration                                          
  ----------------------- ------------- -------------- -------------------------

Table 2. Summary table of Program eligibility according to project type
and geographic area.

+-------------------+----------------+--------------+-----------------+
|                   | **Puget Sound  | **Partners   | **Chehalis      |
|                   | Program**      | for Fish and | Fisheries       |
|                   |                | Wildlife**   | Restoration     |
|                   | **(Page 9)**   |              | Program (Page   |
|                   |                | **(Page      | 10)**           |
|                   |                | 10)**        |                 |
+-------------------+----------------+--------------+-----------------+
| **Geographic      | Coastal areas  | Western      | Grays Harbor    |
| Focus Area (see   | within Puget   | Washington   | Basin and       |
| map on page 2 and | Sound and      |              | Chehalis River  |
| specific          | along the WA   |              | Basin - WRIA's  |
| information in    | coast          |              | \# 22 & 23      |
| Program           | (includes      |              |                 |
| sections).**      | coastal        |              |                 |
|                   | uplands)       |              |                 |
+-------------------+----------------+--------------+-----------------+
| **On-the-Ground** | Yes, preferred | Yes          | Yes             |
+-------------------+----------------+--------------+-----------------+
| **Outreach and    | Yes, lower     | Yes, if part | Yes             |
| Education**       | proportion of  | of on the    |                 |
|                   | funds          | ground       |                 |
|                   |                | project      |                 |
+-------------------+----------------+--------------+-----------------+
| **Assessment and  | Yes, lower     | Monitoring   | Yes             |
| Monitoring**      | proportion of  | only         |                 |
|                   | funds          |              |                 |
+-------------------+----------------+--------------+-----------------+
| **Maximum \$**    | Approximately  | \$25,000     | Approximately   |
|                   | \$20,000       |              | \$60,000        |
| **per project**   |                |              |                 |
+-------------------+----------------+--------------+-----------------+
| **Max. Admin.     | 15%            | 15%          | 15%             |
| Overhead charged  |                |              |                 |
| to Program (p.    |                |              |                 |
| 7)**              |                |              |                 |
+-------------------+----------------+--------------+-----------------+
| **Cost share      | 25% minimum,   | A            | Approximately   |
| Requirement (also |                | pproximately |                 |
| see p. 6 and 7)** | prefer 50%     | 50%          | 25% minimum,    |
|                   |                |              |                 |
|                   |                |              | prefer 50%      |
+-------------------+----------------+--------------+-----------------+
| **Minimum years   | 10             | 10           | 10              |
| maintained by     |                |              |                 |
| cooperator/       |                |              |                 |
| landowner**       |                |              |                 |
+-------------------+----------------+--------------+-----------------+
| **Projects        | Yes -          | No           | Yes -           |
| allowed on        | preference is  |              | preference is   |
| federal land?**   | for            |              | for non-federal |
|                   | non-federal    |              |                 |
+-------------------+----------------+--------------+-----------------+
| **Projects        | Yes            | No           | Yes             |
| allowed on state  |                |              |                 |
| land?**           |                |              |                 |
+-------------------+----------------+--------------+-----------------+

# [Restoration Strategy]{.underline}

The restoration Programs promote the care and restoration of fish and
wildlife habitat through on-the-ground activities, public education, and
assessment efforts. With the goal of restoring the health of an
ecosystem or watershed, we emphasize protecting and reconnecting
functioning habitats, and engaging in efforts that sustain and restore
the physical processes that form and maintain habitat (rather than
treating symptoms caused by altered processes).

We believe there is a sequence of events that most effectively leads to
the restoration of ecosystem or species health. The first step is to
complete an assessment or analysis. The assessment should describe the
status of, and impacts to, ecosystem processes. Information from the
assessment should be used to develop a restoration plan. The plan should
provide specific prescriptions for protection and restoration
activities.

##### The restoration plan should give top priority to protecting functioning habitat and to reconnecting fragmented functioning habitats. Efforts to actively restore habitat should target areas with low to moderate disturbance, for which we have the best information about anthropogenic impacts. Ideally, we should focus efforts in selected areas or with certain species in order to achieve the highest level of beneficial cumulative effects. {#the-restoration-plan-should-give-top-priority-to-protecting-functioning-habitat-and-to-reconnecting-fragmented-functioning-habitats.-efforts-to-actively-restore-habitat-should-target-areas-with-low-to-moderate-disturbance-for-which-we-have-the-best-information-about-anthropogenic-impacts.-ideally-we-should-focus-efforts-in-selected-areas-or-with-certain-species-in-order-to-achieve-the-highest-level-of-beneficial-cumulative-effects. .unnumbered}

#####  {#section-4 .unnumbered}

##### [Types of Projects Typically Eligible for Funding]{.underline} {#types-of-projects-typically-eligible-for-funding .unnumbered}

[Riparian and Wetland (Complete ApplicationOTGAquatic.doc)]{.underline}

Silviculture treatments (alder girdling, conifer release, conifer
interplanting, brush control)

Reducing livestock impacts (installation of fencing, crossings, and
off-channel watering devices)

Woody debris supplementation for amphibian and riparian dependent
species habitat diversity

Non-native plant removal/control and/or Native plant
establishment/diversification

Fill removal

Hydrologic regime improvements (dike breaching, ditch plugging, drainage
tile removal)

[Instream (Complete ApplicationOTGAquatic.doc)]{.underline}

Culvert replacements to improve fish passage using WDFW Stream
Simulation or No-slope

design criteria

Culvert and associated fill removal to restore stream channel
configuration

Nutrient cycling supplementation (such as salmon carcass deployment)

Placement of key wood pieces to induce large woody debris jams

[Upland (Complete ApplicationOTGUpland.doc)]{.underline}

Road abandonment, decommissioning, obliteration (beyond Requirements p.
5)

Road drainage improvements and storm proofing (beyond Requirements p. 5)

Re-establishment of historic contours (sidecast pullback, fill of cuts,
swale re-creation)

Habitat diversity activities (creation of cavities, bat slits, snags,
coarse woody debris)

Silvicultural treatments (oak release, thinning/planting to benefit
wildlife habitat)

Non-native plant removal

Native plant establishment/diversification

Reducing livestock impacts (installation of fencing to reduce
competition with wildlife)

[Monitoring & Assessment (Complete
ApplicationAssessment.doc)]{.underline}

Pre- and post-project monitoring (photo-documentation and data
collection)

Watershed or reach level assessments to identify and support restoration
opportunities

[Outreach and Education (Complete ApplicationOutreach.doc)]{.underline}

Restoration workshops and site tours for watershed stakeholders

Educational displays and brochures

Site signage

Newsletters

School teacher training and classroom environmental education

**[Types of Projects Not Eligible for Funding]{.underline}**

Artificial pond creation

Cleanup of federal or state designated environmental contaminant sites

Community beautification and/or Recreational access

Cross fencing for pasture management

Fines/penalties due to non-compliance with federal, state, or local laws

Fish passage using WDFW Hydraulic design criteria

Gravel bar mining

Gravel trap development or maintenance

Hatchery, broodstock, or artificial propagation operations and
facilities

Improvement of natural resources for commercial or private profit

Land acquisition and appraisals

Required Habitat Conservation Plan activity

Required mitigation

Streambank hardening (rip-rap, bulkheads, or other armoring)

Structure-based restoration planned without primary consideration of
habitat protection,

habitat connectivity, or habitat-forming processes

[Washington State Forest Practice Rules (WAC 222); Hydraulic Code Rules
of Washington (WAC 220); Conservation Lands; and Habitat Conservation
Plan Eligibility Information]{.underline}

Number range CHAPTER**Habitat Conservation Plan Agreements**

Only those activities, or parts of activities, that are over and above
the requirements of a Habitat Conservation Plan are eligible for funding
at Program specific cost share requirements (see Table 2, p. 3). The
Programs will not provide funding for an activity that is a requirement
or mitigation in a Habitat Conservation Plan.

**Road work on Conservation and Protection Lands**

For landowners that own or acquire land or a conservation easement
(conservation easement must be at least 30 years), primarily for the
purpose of permanent protection, conservation and restoration, and
inherit a road network that is in need of assessment, planning
maintenance, decommissioning, or abandoning: The Programs will apply the
standard cost share requirements for assessment, planning, maintenance,
decommissioning, or abandonment activities.

**Washington State Forest Practice Rules for Forest Roads and Fish
Passage and** **Hydraulic Codes of Washington**

The Forest Practice Rules negotiated under the Forest and Fish Agreement
became effective in July, 2001. The rules state that all forest roads
must be covered under an approved Road Maintenance and Abandonment Plan
(RMAP) within 5 years of the effective date of this rule, or by December
31, 2005, and that all forest roads must be improved and maintained to
the standards of the WAC 222-24 within 15 years of the effective date of
these rules. See Table 3 for cost share requirements.

[Table 3.]{.underline} The following table shows the Programs' minimum
cost share requirements for road related project types that are required
by the Washington State Forest Practice Rules and Hydraulic Code Rules
of Washington. These figures represent the percentage (%) of the total
cost that the project sponsor would have to contribute towards the
project.

+-------------------------+---------------+----------+-----------------+
|                         | **Industrial  | **       | **Family Forest |
|                         | Forest        | Public\* | Owner (FFO) and |
|                         | Landowners /  | (state,  | Small           |
|                         | Managers\***  | city,    | Landowners**    |
|                         |               | c        |                 |
|                         |               | ounty)** |                 |
+-------------------------+---------------+----------+-----------------+
| ##### Road Abandonment: |               |          |                 |
+-------------------------+---------------+----------+-----------------+
| **- Orphaned Roads**    | 25\*\*        | 25\*\*   | 25\*\*          |
+-------------------------+---------------+----------+-----------------+
| **- Active & Inactive   | 75            | 50       | 25\*\*          |
| Roads**                 |               |          |                 |
+-------------------------+---------------+----------+-----------------+
|                         |               |          |                 |
+-------------------------+---------------+----------+-----------------+
| **Fish Passage Barriers | 75            | 50       | 25\*\*          |
| at Road Crossings**     |               |          |                 |
+-------------------------+---------------+----------+-----------------+
| **Road Maintenance and  | Not eligible  | 50       | 25\*\*          |
| Storm-proofing**        | for funding   |          |                 |
+-------------------------+---------------+----------+-----------------+
| **Assessments and       | Not eligible  | 50       | 25\*\*          |
| Inventories -- culvert  | for funding   |          |                 |
| and road**              |               |          |                 |
+-------------------------+---------------+----------+-----------------+

\* For the purpose of determining project cost share within this RFP,
the Washington Department of Natural Resources, which has a mandate to
maximize income from forest harvest, is considered to be an Industrial
Forest Manager, not Public.

\*\* The Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program has a minimum cost share
requirement of approximately 50% for all project types.

**1. Orphaned Roads** -- [Definition:]{.underline} Orphaned roads are
roads that were built before 1974, prior to modern construction
standards and have not been used for forest practice activities since
1974. [Eligibility:]{.underline} If an orphaned road is identified in
the RMAP as a potential or actual damage risk to public resources, and
landowners are willing to abandon the orphaned road, then the project is
eligible for funding.

**2. Active & Inactive Roads** -- [Definition:]{.underline} Active roads
are roads actively being used for hauling forest products or road
building materials. Inactive roads are roads not actively being used,
but will be used in the future. [Eligibility:]{.underline} If an active
or inactive road is identified in the RMAP as a potential or actual
damage risk to public resources, and landowners are willing to abandon
the active/inactive road, then the project is eligible for funding.

**3. Fish Passage Barriers** -

A. [Definition:]{.underline} The Forest Practices Rules, as updated,
also requires the provision of fish passage at water road crossings as a
part of the RMAP process. All fish passage barriers on privately owned
forest land should be addressed within the 15 year time frame.
[Eligibility:]{.underline} Fish passage barriers that have been
identified as high priority through an RMAP process; see Table 3 for
cost share requirements.

B. [Definition:]{.underline} The Hydraulic Code Rules of Washington
require that owners of roads provide for fish passage at water/road
crossings. [Eligibility:]{.underline} Fish passage barriers that have
been identified as high priority through a watershed (or other defined
area) assessment process and plan; see Table 3 for cost share
requirements.

### Riparian Buffer

Number range CHAPTERThe Programs work with partners to voluntarily
restore riparian buffers on their property. The purpose of the riparian
buffers is to improve water quality, including reducing water
temperatures and nutrient runoff; reduce sedimentation; provide wildlife
corridors; increase large wood recruitment; and increase habitat
complexity. Projects with larger buffer widths will receive higher
ratings during our review process.

### 

### Administrative Issues that Apply to all Programs

Project costs, administrative overhead, and cost-share contributions
must be incurred only during project implementation and must be directly
tied to overall project costs. All costs must be supported by
appropriate invoices, purchase orders, and/or other records.

**Administrative Overhead Definition**

Administrative overhead expenses are those mandatory costs required by
the cooperator to support the primary organization. If the cooperator
has not established a mandatory rate, project specific costs should be
listed as Administrative Overhead Expenses on the Budget sheet. Typical
expenses include: office rent, utilities, accounting, and fleet
vehicles. Administrative overhead expenses charged to the Program can
not exceed 15% of the amount of direct costs requested from the Service.
Any additional overhead charges should be counted as cooperator cost
share.

**Cost Share Definition**

Cost Share, as used in this RFP, is defined as the amount or percentage
of the total project cost that the cooperator (or their partners) must
contribute towards the project. For example: You estimate your project
will cost \$26,000, and the Program you are applying for requires a 25%
minimum cost share. The most you could request from the Service would be
\$19,950, and you, or your partners would have to provide the remaining
\$6,650.

[Cash:]{.underline} Funds that have been secured or are pending final
approval from federal, state, or private sources will be counted as
eligible cost share. Project sponsors must differentiate between secured
and pending cash cost share amounts.

In-Kind: Eligible in-kind cost share types include those services
committed from other federal, state, or private sources such as: labor,
use of personnel equipment, surveying, or other contributions that would
otherwise require funds.

> Ineligible in-kind cost share types include: value of the land, costs
> associated with unrelated or ineligible projects, and work performed
> by Service personnel.

**[Proposal Evaluation, Selection, and Funding Process]{.underline}**

Information requested on these applications may be subject to release to
the general public. Your submission of an application for federal funds
from the Programs offered in this RFP authorizes the release of
appropriate application information. See p.13 for Submission Timeline,
and for the email and mail address.

**Pre-Proposal**

If you intend to apply for fiscal year 2005 restoration funds, you are
required to complete a brief project description, objectives, and
location by September 17, 2004 (see PreProposal.doc). This information
will assist program biologists in managing workloads, conducting field
reviews, and ensuring that project sponsors have timely access to
technical assistance.

**Field Review**

When possible, Service personnel will conduct field site visits to
discuss project and Program eligibility, and to provide technical
assistance to potential project applicants in project development and
preparation of application materials. Field site visits should be
completed by October 29, 2004.

**Application**

Each project must have been submitted as a pre-proposal. The Application
is due by December 3, 2004 (see ApplicationOTGAquatic.doc;
ApplicationOTGUpland.doc; ApplicationAssessment.doc; or,
ApplicationOutreach.doc).

The information provided in this application will allow
interdisciplinary teams to review, score, and prioritize all of the
project applications. Based upon this review, your Application will be
placed within Tier 1, 2, or 3 category. Projects that fully meet the
criteria in questions A and B (see ReviewQuestions.xls) will be
prioritized and placed in Tier 1 and will be considered for funding
first. Projects that do not fully meet the criteria in questions A and B
will be prioritized and placed in Tier 2 and will be considered for
funding second. Projects will be placed in Tier 3 if any of the
following are met: Pre-proposal is late, Application is late, or Not all
applicable Application questions were answered. Tier 3 projects will not
be reviewed or ranked, and therefore will not be considered for funding
under this RFP.

Final decisions regarding project funding are made by the Western
Washington Fish and Wildlife Office manager or his / her designee. The
Service reserves the right to fund projects outside of this competitive
process, if necessary, in order to maximize ecological benefits and meet
program goals. Proposals that are not funded through this RFP may be
referred to other funding sources as appropriate.

**Additional Information for Funded Projects**

For projects that will receive funding, additional information will be
required by March 12, 2005, in order for Program biologists to complete
the cooperative agreement and environmental compliance. Some of the
information requested includes:

Cost Share Commitment Letter

> For projects that will receive funding, the agency, non-profit group,
> or other entity will be required to document cost share contributions
> in a Cost Share Commitment Letter. This letter documents the type and
> amount of cost share contributions provided from project partners.

Landowner Agreements

> For projects that will receive funding, the landowner, the cooperator,
> and the Service must sign a Landowner Agreement for restoration
> activities before funding is made available. This agreement provides
> for the following purposes: 1) describes the restoration activity that
> will take place; 2) ensures that all parties understand the
> restoration activities that will be undertaken; 3) secures the federal
> investment for at least 10 years, preferably longer; 4) allows access
> to the cooperator and the Service to the project site for post-project
> monitoring (with advance notification); 5) outlines modification
> procedures; and, 6) outlines the rights and responsibilities of the
> Service, the landowner, and the cooperator.

**Cooperative Agreements**

The landowner, agency, or other entity that is the recipient of funds
for a project is the Cooperator. A cooperative agreement is required
between the Service and the Cooperator. This is a fiscal document that
provides for the transfer of funds for the project, on a reimbursable
basis. Electronic funds transfer payment is required to ensure timely
processing.

### Environmental/Cultural Resource Requirements and Permits

The Cooperator is responsible for ensuring that all funded projects meet
applicable federal, state, and local environmental and cultural resource
regulations before project activities begin. Service biologists will
complete compliance processes for the National Environmental Policy Act,
contaminants review, the Endangered Species Act, and the National
Historic Preservation Act. Project site visits by Service restoration
personnel are necessary to complete required environmental
documentation.

Landowners, cooperators, and/or land management agencies are required to
secure any federal, state, and local land use permits necessary to
implement the project, such as Clean Water Act Section 404, WA
Department of Fish and Wildlife Hydraulics Project Approval, or State
Environmental Policy Act compliance. Meeting all applicable requirements
and obtaining permits may take up to a year or more depending on the
type of the project.

The Service has completed consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act for projects in western Washington. This consultation covers
16 restoration project types that are most commonly funded by the
Programs. If your project is selected for funding, a Service biologist
will work with you to ensure compliance with the Terms and Conditions of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries (NOAA
Fisheries) Programmatic Biological Opinion (PBO). Some of the required
items include: a pollution and erosion control plan for the project
site; spill response kit; monitoring before, during, and after project
completion; proper handling, transfer, and documentation of fish removed
when an in-stream project site is dewatered; photographic documentation
using photo points; and, reporting project information to NOAA
Fisheries.

**[Restoration Program Information]{.underline}**

**Puget Sound Program (PSP)**

##### [Background]{.underline}

Number range CHAPTERThe PSP is part of the Services' National Coastal
Program. In 1991, the Puget Sound Program was established to protect,
restore, and enhance the natural resources of Washington's coastal
ecosystems. We work closely with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's National Estuary Program, and their State partner, the Puget
Sound Water Quality Action Team to conserve fish and wildlife and their
habitats in Puget Sound, an "estuary of national significance".
Partnerships with other agencies, Native American Tribes, citizens, and
organizations are emphasized.

##### [Goals]{.underline}

1.  Restore and protect coastal habitats through completion of
    interagency projects; provide technical assistance in the
    restoration process; and, provide cost share where appropriate.

2.  Collect and develop information on the status of and threats to fish
    and wildlife and their habitats in Puget Sound. Provide this
    information to decision makers.

3.  Use outreach and education to promote improved stewardship of
    coastal resources.

[Types of projects preferred for funding for PSP:]{.underline}

Due to the highly developed and/or impacted state of most of our coastal
resources in Washington, projects tend to be large, expensive, and
multi-partner in nature. Our primary focus is on-the-ground projects.

4.  Tide gate or dike removal to restore tidal hydrology to estuarine
    wetlands.

5.  Estuarine habitat protection and restoration.

6.  Protection and restoration of unique coastal upland habitats and
    those that support federally listed species or species of concern.

7.  Removal of blockages in tidally influenced waters for the
    restoration of fish passage.

8.  Monitor and assess the status of selected species in Puget Sound and
    the outer coast, including seabirds and species of concern, to help
    evaluate threats to the species and necessary management activities.

9.  Outreach and education activities that will help control the
    introduction and spread of coastal and marine non-indigenous
    species.

**Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program (PFW)**

##### [Background]{.underline}

The PFW is a national voluntary habitat restoration program that
provides financial and technical assistance to private landowners,
Tribes and other conservation partners. PFW focuses on restoring habitat
for migratory birds, anadromous fish, and declining plant and animal
species. Focus areas in western Washington include prairies and wetland,
riparian, and in-stream habitats.

##### [Goals]{.underline}

10. Develop partnerships through proactive, voluntary cooperative
    efforts with other agencies, private and non-federal landowners, and
    Native Americans

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  Improve water quality

2.  Provide corridors for wildlife and decrease impediments to native
    fish and wildlife migration

[Types of projects preferred for funding for PFW:]{.underline}

Projects may include, but are not limited to: planting native trees and
shrubs and other vegetation; installing fencing and off-stream livestock
watering facilities; restoring wetland hydrology; remaoval of stream
blockages; and removal of invasive plants.

**Chehalis Fisheries Restoration Program (CFRP)**

####### [Background and General Information:]{.underline}

Number range CHAPTERSignificant runs of salmon, steelhead, and cutthroat
trout have declined throughout the Chehalis Basin, the second largest
watershed in Washington. Commercial and sport fishing have been greatly
diminished in the area.

[The CFRP's goal is to recover Chehalis Basin fisheries by:]{.underline}

1.  Forming partnerships with private landowners, non-profit
    organizations, and local, tribal, and state agencies

2.  Implementing habitat restoration, habitat assessment, and public
    education projects

####### [Objectives:]{.underline} 

3.  Improve water quality in Inner Grays Harbor and the Upper Chehalis
    River Basin.

4.  Restore or improve natural spawning and rearing habitat.

5.  Extend the range of wild spawning anadromous fish within the Basin
    to achieve optimum habitat use.

6.  Increase public awareness of fisheries habitat restoration values in
    the Chehalis Basin.

[Types of projects preferred for funding for CFRP:]{.underline}

Projects located in watersheds that are in relatively good condition,
have ongoing focused restoration efforts, and that have a complete
watershed assessment will be given priority for on-the-ground projects.
For assessment projects, priority will be given to projects that fill
identified data gaps in existing watershed assessments. For outreach
projects, priority will be given to projects that are established and
successful or that are new and innovative.

**[Other Service Restoration Programs]{.underline}**

**National Fish Passage Program (NFPP)**

Each year the Service solicits and inputs select fish passage projects
into the Fisheries Operational Needs System database. Projects are
prioritized and selected based upon the benefits to species and the
geographical area. Typical projects include barrier culvert removal or
replacement with a fish passable culvert or bridge, and re-opening oxbow
and off channel habitats. Typical funding amounts range from \$30,000 to
\$110,000 with a minimum 25% cost share requested.

More information is at the following internet address:
http://fisheries.fws.gov/FWSMA/fishpassage/

Contact Brian Peck for more information: brian_peck@fws.gov or
(360)753-9560.

**Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation Mitigation Act (FRIMA)**

This is a voluntary, cost-shared fish screen construction program for
water withdrawal projects in Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and western
Montana. This program is being implemented by the Service in cooperation
with state and tribal partners within the Northwest.

Water diversions send water from streams and rivers to crop irrigation,
drinking water, industrial use, power generation, and other beneficial
uses. However, nearly 80 percent of the water diversions in the Pacific
Northwest are unscreened. These unscreened diversions can pose a major
risk to the juveniles of endangered species like salmon, steelhead, and
to endangered or declining trout such as the coastal cutthroat and bull
trout and other native fishes. Diversion structures can also block the
upstream and downstream movement of juvenile and adult fish, resulting
in further mortality and lost production. This program is thus a
powerful new tool to reduce fish mortality and blockage of fish passage
at water diversions.

More information is at the following internet address:
http://www.r1.fws.gov/Fisheries/Fish%20Passage-Screening%20Program.htm

Contact Brian Peck for more information: brian_peck@fws.gov or
(360)753-9560.

**Private Stewardship Grant Program (PSG)**

The Private Stewardship Grant Program is a National program that
provides grants and other assistance on a competitive basis to
individuals and groups engaged in local, private, and voluntary
conservation efforts that benefit federally listed, proposed, or
candidate species, or other at-risk species. Diverse panels of
representatives from State and Federal government, conservation
organizations, agriculture and development interests, and the science
community assess applications and make recommendations to the Secretary
of the Interior, who awards the grants. The Private Stewardship Grant
Program was initiated during Fiscal Year (FY) 2002, with grants awarded
during FY 2003 and FY 2004.

More information is at the following internet address:
http://endangered.fws.gov/grants/private_stewardship/index.html

Contact Ginger Phalen for more information: ginger_phalen@fws.gov or
(360)753-5819.

**[Guidelines for a Successful Proposal]{.underline}**

-   Consider our restoration strategy in developing your proposal. We
    actively promote:

    -   **On-the ground restoration projects** that address the causes,
        not the symptoms, of habitat degradation.

    -   **Assessment projects** that seek to understand habitat forming
        processes in addition to habitat condition, and the status and
        trends of important fish and wildlife resources.

    -   **Outreach projects** that help people become aware of the
        relationship between their actions and fish, wildlife, and the
        habitats upon which these species depend.

-   Submit proposals with a clear understanding of our evaluation
    criteria. These include:

    -   Basis/priority: the extent to which

        -   **restoration** projects address needs identified and
            prioritized in a watershed assessment or related document

        -   **assessment** projects address an identified and
            prioritized data or analysis gap

        -   **outreach** projects address a prioritized educational need
            or outreach goal

    -   Design/effectiveness: the extent to which

        -   **restoration** projects have well defined, attainable
            objectives that address causes of watershed degradation
            rather than symptoms

        -   **assessment** projects comprehensively and effectively
            address data gaps, including both physical and biological
            habitat forming processes in addition to habitat condition,
            and species trends in addition to current status

        -   **outreach** projects have well defined objectives, and
            proposed methods will effectively connect the intended
            audience with the intended issues and actions

    -   Location/benefits: the importance or priority of the project
        location to targeted species or habitats, and the importance of
        benefits being provided to species or habitats of concern.

    -   Complement: the relationship of the proposed project to other
        activities, as part of an ongoing or larger-scale effort.

    -   Partners: the diversity and strength of the project partnership,
        and the demonstrated commitment of other organizations to the
        project.

    -   Outreach: the appropriateness of the outreach element to the
        proposed project and the extent that it educates the target
        audience.

    -   Monitoring plan: the extent to which an approach to monitoring
        that addresses project objectives has been described and will be
        implemented (not for assessment projects).

    -   Feasibility/permits: the extent to which the project has been
        well planned, including identification of necessary
        environmental compliance and landowner commitment.

    -   Cost benefit: the relationship between Service contributions
        relative to likely project benefits, including consideration of
        administrative overhead and cost-share amounts.

[Submission Timeline]{.underline}

In order to qualify for FY2005 funding, your pre-proposal and project
application must be **received in our office** (not just postmarked) by
the dates listed in the table below by 5 pm. **Our preference is to
receive electronic copies by e-mail.** If you choose to complete a
hardcopy, one paper original is required by mail or hand delivered (**no
fax**).

+-----------------------------+-----------------------------+----------+
| **Item Description**        | **Applicable File Name**    | **Date   |
|                             |                             | Due by 5 |
|                             |                             | pm**     |
+-----------------------------+-----------------------------+----------+
| Pre-proposal for FY2005     | PreProposal.doc             | 9        |
| funds                       |                             | /17/2004 |
+-----------------------------+-----------------------------+----------+
| Site visit completed by     | NA                          | 10       |
| Service biologists          |                             | /29/2004 |
+-----------------------------+-----------------------------+----------+
| Project Application         | ApplicationOTGAquatic.doc;  | 1        |
|                             |                             | 2/3/2004 |
|                             | ApplicationOTGUpland.doc;   |          |
|                             |                             |          |
|                             | ApplicationOutreach.doc;    |          |
|                             |                             |          |
|                             | ApplicationAssessment.doc   |          |
+-----------------------------+-----------------------------+----------+
| Additional Information for  | Will be sent out after      | 3        |
| Funded Projects             | review and ranking          | /12/2005 |
+-----------------------------+-----------------------------+----------+
| Project sponsors will be    | NA                          | March -  |
| notified of scoring and     |                             | June     |
| funding awards              |                             | 2005     |
+-----------------------------+-----------------------------+----------+
| Funds available for         | NA                          | May -    |
| projects (subject to        |                             | July     |
| authorization)              |                             | 2005     |
+-----------------------------+-----------------------------+----------+

**[Send your Pre-Proposal and Application to:]{.underline}**

fy05projects@fws.gov

**or**

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office

Attention: Vickie Richardson

#####  510 Desmond Drive, Suite 102

Lacey, WA 98503