DOCSLIB.ORG

Accountability Report Ver. 3

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Accountability Report Ver. 3 ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT ON VALUE ENGINEERING FORT PECK RESERVATION RURAL WATER SYSTEM: FORT PECK ASSINIBOINE AND SIOUX RURAL WATER SYSTEM AND DRY PRAIRIE RURAL WATER SYSTEM DECEMBER 7, 2001 FORT PECK ASSINIBOINE AND SIOUX TRIBES DRY PRAIRIE RURAL WATER TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. SUMMARY . 1 1.1 Sponsor Process for Evaluation . 1 1.2 Decisions by Sponsors . 2 2. DESCRIPTIONS OF DRAFT FER AND VE PROPOSALS . 5 2.1 Draft FER Proposals . 5 2.1.1 River Intake . 5 2.1.2 Water Treatment Plant . 7 2.1.3 Pipelines . 8 2.1.4 Pumping Stations . 10 2.1.5 Reservoirs . 11 2.2 VE Proposals . 12 2.2.1 Pipeline Reconfiguration with Intake and Water Treatment Plant at Poplar . 12 2.2.2 Pipeline Reconfiguration with Intake and Water Treatment Plant Below Fort Peck Dam . 13 2.2.3 Water Treatment Alternatives . 13 2.2.4 Chloramines . 15 2.2.5 Gravity Intake . 16 3. EVALUATION AND DISCUSSION OF VE PROPOSALS . 17 3.1 Proposal 1A: Revise Design Parameters and Flow Allocation in Main Pipeline System with Intake at Poplar . 17 3.2 Proposal 1B: Revise Design Parameters and Flow Allocation in Main Pipeline System, Change Intake to Dredge Ponds near Nashua, Account for Water Treatment Differences . 22 3.3 Water Treatment Alternatives to Conventional: Superpulsator Clarifier with Microfiltration, Nanofiltration or Media Filtration . 25 3.4 Chloramines . 28 3.5 Gravity Intake . 28 4. SYNOPSIS . 31 ii 1. SUMMARY This report describes the project sponsors' evaluation of and response to the value engineering study1 conducted by the Bureau of Reclamation on the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System, a municipal, rural and industrial water project in the northeast corner of Montana as authorized by PL 106-382 (114 Stat 1451, Oct. 27, 2000). Sponsors of the project are the Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes and Dry Prairie Rural Water. The Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes are responsible for the planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance and replacement of the Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water System within the boundaries of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation. Dry Prairie Rural Water is responsible for the Dry Prairie Rural Water System outside the Fort Peck Indian Reservation in Roosevelt, Sheridan, Daniels and parts of Valley counties in northeastern Montana. The two sponsors have participated individually and collectively in preparing the response which follows. While the two sponsors have separate areas of responsibility within the larger project (Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System), the activities of the sponsors are integrated and cooperative. 1.1 Sponsor Process for Evaluation The sponsors participated in a value engineering (VE) session conducted by the Bureau of Reclamation from February 25 through March 2, 2001. This participation provided a general understanding by the sponsors of the value engineering proposals as they were formulated by the VE team. When the sponsors received the VE Final Report in early May 2001, the engineer for the sponsors was directed to prepare an analysis of each value engineering proposal. The analysis was to include a recommendation to the sponsors to accept or reject each value engineering proposal based on confirmation of savings identified in the value engineering report. If a determination could not be made to accept or reject a proposal based on reconnaissance level VE cost estimating, the engineer was directed to recommend that a proposal receive further consideration when design-level investigations are undertaken. The process resulted in a draft Accountability Report that was transmitted to the Bureau of Reclamation on June 14, 2001. The report summarizes the initial findings of the sponsors. Input was sought from the Bureau of Reclamation on the format of a final report and the nature of its content. A two-day working meeting on July 19 and 20, 2001, was attended by the Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Indian Affairs and the sponsor at Canyon Ferry Dam near Helena, Montana. The purpose of the meeting was to further the understanding of the requirements for the evaluation and response. Both the sponsors and Bureau of Reclamation needed to improve the understanding of the methods and assumptions used by the VE team the sponsor's engineer. 1Bureau of Reclamation, April 30, 2001, Value Engineering, Final Report, Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Water Supply System, Dry Prairie Rural Water System. 1 After the Canyon Ferry meeting, the sponsor's engineer worked with Bureau of Reclamation staff and VE team members through conferencing, electronic transfer and facsimile to develop a VE response that would address the technical analysis in a manner to fully comply with the concepts advanced by the VE team. The sponsor's engineer developed spreadsheet models for reconfiguration of the main pipelines. These models expanded the hydraulic analysis from KY PipeTM by adding algorithms for computing construction, operation, maintenance and replacement costs of pipelines and pumping stations. These models were shared with Bureau of Reclamation staff and VE team members who made specific recommendations on modification of spreadsheet values and equations to insure that the intent of the VE team was properly reflected. Similarly, agreement between the sponsors and Bureau of Reclamation was reached on construction, operation, maintenance and replacement costs of water treatment plant alternatives to insure that the intent of the VE team was properly reflected. Both efforts were highly cooperative between the sponsors and Bureau of Reclamation. This phase of the response was concluded by letter of September 21, 2001, from the Bureau of Reclamation to the sponsors outlining the organization of a final accountability report. It was understood between the sponsors and the Bureau of Reclamation that the evaluation phase had been concluded satisfactorily and that the Accountability Report could be undertaken. This report conforms to the Bureau of Reclamation outline. 1.2 Decisions by Sponsors Table 1 summarizes the results of the evaluation of the VE proposals. The decision of the sponsors to accept or reject VE proposals is given in Table 1. Plentywood pipeline reconfiguration, Opheim pipeline reconfiguration and disinfection with chloramines were proposals of the VE Report that were accepted. The Flaxville Road reconfiguration, Nashua intake, nano filtration and gravity intake proposals of the VE report were not accepted. Reconfiguration design criteria (alternative 1A), such as permitting an increase in pressure from 200 to 250 psi and siting reservoirs on high points along the pipeline route are accepted by the sponsors as valid considerations for final design but with the caveat that final decisions during design will depend upon the impact of design criteria upon life-cycle costs. At this stage of preliminary design, the reconfiguration concepts have an added life-cycle cost of $9,649,035, including an increase in construction costs of $13,512,000 and a savings in annual operation, maintenance and replacement cost of $179,827. One of the primary purposes of reconfiguration was to reduce the number of pumping stations on the main transmission pipeline and on the branch lines to reduce initial pump station construction and future OMR costs. The VE proposal would decrease the number of pumping stations on the main transmission pipeline from 18 to 12. The impact of reduction of pumping stations on branch lines would be the less significant. The reduction in number of pumping stations would be achieved, however, at an additional life-cycle cost as given above. Because parts of the VE reconfiguration proposal has merit, the sponsors have chosen to "provisionally accept" the VE recommendations for reconfiguration subject to design-level costing. 2 3 Pilot testing of waters from the Missouri River will be required in design level investigations to more fully assess the value engineering proposals for conventional water treatment, micro-filtration and media filtration (VE alternatives 2A and 4A). Therefore, the sponsors have chosen to continue investigation of water treatment alternatives in design level investigations and will select among the water treatment alternatives based on more detailed life- cycle costing. Both the micro-filtration and media filtration alternatives were provisionally accepted. All decisions of the sponsors were based on life-cycle cost information as presented in Table 1. Had the life-cycle cost of the Nashua intake alternative been equal or lower than the Poplar intake alternative, the Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes would have not accepted the alternative for the reason that the Tribes based their invitation to Dry Prairie and the plan for development of a regional system on an intake and water treatment plant located on the Fort Peck Indian Reservation 4 2. DESCRIPTION OF DRAFT FER AND VE PROPOSALS 2.1 Draft FER Proposals 2.1.1 River Intake The location of the river intake proposed in the Draft Final Engineering Report, dated December 2000, (DFER) was determined by an alternative analysis described in the Draft Final Engineering Report. The location is not specific nor definite but is attached to a segment of the Missouri River between Poplar at the eastern end and an undefined stretch of Missouri River to the west, but not extending beyond Wolf Point, where total project costs of all intake, water treatment and pipeline facilities and the present value of future electrical costs is lower than at intake points to the east or west of the selected segment. Costs of alternatives for intake siting are strongly influenced in this project by the structure of demands. While Glasgow represents a large demand on the west side of the project, demands for Wolf Point, Poplar, Scobey, Plentywood and Culbertson dominate the east side of the project. Larger pipelines for longer distances are required with intake on the west side of the project. Similarly, if the intake were moved eastward from Poplar, larger pipelines for longer distances would be required than with the intake near Poplar.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Madison Development
    EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN MADISON DEVELOPMENT Missouri-Madison Project No. 2188-08 NATDAM-MT00561 Submitted October 1, 2009 E:\MAD-EAP2.doc E:\MAD-EAP2.doc E:\MAD-EAP2.doc TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. VERIFICATION…………………………………………………………………….. PLAN HOLDER LIST……………………………………………………………… i I. WARNING FLOWCHART/NOTIFICATION FLOWCHART………………… A. Failure is Imminent or Has Occurred………………………..……………………. 1 B. Potentially Hazardous Situation is Developing………………..…………………. 2 C. Non-failure Flood Warning……………..……………………………………….. 3 II. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE……………………………………………..…………. 4 III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION…………………………………………………………. 5 IV. EMERGENCY DETECTION, EVALUATION AND CLASSIFICATION………. 8 V. GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER THE EAP.……………………………. 10 VI. PREPAREDNESS………………………………………………………………….…. 26 VII. INUNDATION MAPS……………………………………………………………….. 31 VIII. APPENDICES………………………………………………………………………. A-1 E:\MAD-EAP2.doc MADISON EAP PLAN HOLDERS LIST FERC – Portland, Oregon Office PPL Montana O & M Supervisor – Polson, MT PPL Montana Madison Dam Foreman – Ennis, MT PPL Montana Hydro Engineering – Butte, MT PPL Montana Manager of Operations & Maintenance – Great Falls, MT PPL Montana Rainbow Operators – Great Falls, MT PPL Montana Resource Coordinator/Power Trading – Butte, MT PPL Montana Public Information Officer – Helena, MT PPL Montana Corporate Office – Billings, MT NorthWestern Energy SOCC – Butte, MT NorthWestern Energy Division Headquarters – Bozeman, MT Sheriffs Office – Gallatin County Sheriffs Office – Madison County Sheriffs Office – Broadwater County
    [Show full text]
  • 2003 Actual Operations
    INTRODUCTION Annual reports on actual operations and operating plans for reservoir regulation activities were initiated in 1953. The Montana Are Office, Wyoming Area Office, Dakota Area Office and the Regional Office are all responsible for preparing reports on actual operations and operating plans for reservoir within the Upper Missouri River Basin above Sioux City, Iowa. This report briefly summarizes weather and strearnflow conditions in the Upper Missouri river Basin during water year 2003, which are principal factors governing the pattern of reservoir operations. This report also describes operations during water year 2003 for reservoirs constructed by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) for providing flood control and water supplies for power generation, irrigation, municipal and industrial uses, and to enhance recreation, fish, and wildlife benefits. This report includes operating plans to show estimated ranges of operation for water 2004, with a graphical presentation on a monthly basis. The operating plans for the reservoirs are presented only to show possible operations under a wide range of inflows, most of which cannot be reliably forecasted at the time operating plans are prepared; therefore, plans are at best only probabilities. The plans are updated monthly, as the season progresses, to better coordinate the actual water and power requirements with more reliable estimates of inflow. A report devoted to "Energy Generation" is included at the end of this report. The energy generation and water used for power at Reclamation and Corps of Engineers' (Corps) plants are discusses, and the energy generated in 2003 is compared graphically with that of previous years. Energy produced at the Reclamation and Corps mainstem plants is marketed by the Department of Energy.
    [Show full text]
  • MISSOURI RIVER, SOUTH DAKOTA, NEBRASKA, NORTH DAKOTA, MONTANA Review Report for Water Resources Development, Volume 1 of 3
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln US Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Department of Defense 1977 MISSOURI RIVER, SOUTH DAKOTA, NEBRASKA, NORTH DAKOTA, MONTANA Review Report for Water Resources Development, Volume 1 of 3 Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usarmyceomaha Part of the Civil and Environmental Engineering Commons "MISSOURI RIVER, SOUTH DAKOTA, NEBRASKA, NORTH DAKOTA, MONTANA Review Report for Water Resources Development, Volume 1 of 3" (1977). US Army Corps of Engineers. 91. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usarmyceomaha/91 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the U.S. Department of Defense at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in US Army Corps of Engineers by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. MISSOURI RIVER SOUTH OAKOTA,NEBRAsKA,NORTH OAKOTA,MONTANA REVIEW REPORT FOR WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT "'-'• • WATER RESOURCE ENVIRONMENT , HYoRO·ELECTRIC POWER VOLUME 1 OF 3 AUGUST 1977 MISSOURI RIVER, SOUTH DAKOTA, NEBRASKA, NORTH DAKOTA, MONTANA Review Report for Water Resources Development A STUDY c'O REVIEW PERTINENT REPORTS ON THE MISSOURI RIVER AND TO DETERMINE THE ADVISABILITY OF PROVIDING ADDITIONAL ~1EAS· URES FOR FLOOD CONTROL. BANK STABILIZATION. NAVIGATION. HYDRO· POWER GENERATION. RECREATION. FISH AND WILDLIFE PROPAGATION AI'ID OTHER PURPOSES BETWEEN THREE FORKS. MONTANA A.."<'D SIOUX CITY. IOWA. U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS MISSOURI RIVER DIVISION AUGUST 1977 ...... --.---.---.-----~--.. Syllabus This atudy investigated a wide range of water resource probl... and opportunities related to the Missouri River and the six main stem d.... along an area extending over 1.500 miles from Sioux City.
    [Show full text]
  • Montana Fishing Regulations
    MONTANA FISHING REGULATIONS 20March 1, 2018 — F1ebruary 828, 2019 Fly fishing the Missouri River. Photo by Jason Savage For details on how to use these regulations, see page 2 fwp.mt.gov/fishing With your help, we can reduce poaching. MAKE THE CALL: 1-800-TIP-MONT FISH IDENTIFICATION KEY If you don’t know, let it go! CUTTHROAT TROUT are frequently mistaken for Rainbow Trout (see pictures below): 1. Turn the fish over and look under the jaw. Does it have a red or orange stripe? If yes—the fish is a Cutthroat Trout. Carefully release all Cutthroat Trout that cannot be legally harvested (see page 10, releasing fish). BULL TROUT are frequently mistaken for Brook Trout, Lake Trout or Brown Trout (see below): 1. Look for white edges on the front of the lower fins. If yes—it may be a Bull Trout. 2. Check the shape of the tail. Bull Trout have only a slightly forked tail compared to the lake trout’s deeply forked tail. 3. Is the dorsal (top) fin a clear olive color with no black spots or dark wavy lines? If yes—the fish is a Bull Trout. Carefully release Bull Trout (see page 10, releasing fish). MONTANA LAW REQUIRES: n All Bull Trout must be released immediately in Montana unless authorized. See Western District regulations. n Cutthroat Trout must be released immediately in many Montana waters. Check the district standard regulations and exceptions to know where you can harvest Cutthroat Trout. NATIVE FISH Westslope Cutthroat Trout Species of Concern small irregularly shaped black spots, sparse on belly Average Size: 6”–12” cutthroat slash— spots
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Peck Draft
    US Army Corps of Engineers Omaha District Draft Fort Peck Dam/Fort Peck Lake Project Montana Surplus Water Report Volume 1 Surplus Water Report Appendix A – Environmental Assessment August 2012 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FORT PECK DAM/FORT PECK LAKE PROJECT, MONTANA SURPLUS WATER REPORT Omaha District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers August 2012 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Fort Peck Dam / Fort Peck Lake, Montana FORT PECK DAM/FORT PECK LAKE MONTANA SURPLUS WATER REPORT August 2012 Prepared By: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District Omaha, NE Abstract: The Omaha District is proposing to temporarily make available 6,932 acre-feet/year of surplus water (equivalent to 17,816 acre-feet of storage) from the system-wide irrigation storage available at the Fort Peck Dam/Fort Peck Lake Project, Montana to meet municipal and industrial (M&I) water supply needs. Under Section 6 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 (Public Law 78-534), the Secretary of the Army is authorized to make agreements with states, municipalities, private concerns, or individuals for surplus water that may be available at any reservoir under the control of the Department. Terms of the agreements are normally for five (5) years, with an option for a five (5) year extension, subject to recalculation of reimbursement after the initial five (5) year period. This proposed action will allow the Omaha District to enter into surplus water agreements with interested water purveyors and to issue easements for up to the total amount of surplus water to meet regional water needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of the Canyon Ferry Dam 30´× 60´ Quadrangle, West-Central Montana
    Geologic Map of the Canyon Ferry Dam 30´× 60´ Quadrangle, West-Central Montana By Mitchell W. Reynolds and Theodore R. Brandt Adel Mountains Willow Mountain Sacajawea Mountain Mm Mann Mm Ml Gulch Mb Gates of the Coulter Canyon Rocky Mountains Ml Mm Mm *Mab Qgl Qa Missouri River Mm Scientific Investigations Map 2860 Canyon of the Missouri River above the Gates of the Rocky Mountains is incised through beds of the Upper and Lower Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation (Mm). On July 19, 1805, the Lewis and Clark expedition named the Gates of the 2005 Rocky Mountains, as the cliffs first appeared as a closed gate, then appeared to open as expedition boats changed course approaching the canyon mouth. Mann Gulch is the site of the infamous forest fire that took the lives of 13 U.S. Forest Service fire fighters in August 1949. View is north-northeast toward the Adel Mountains U.S. Department of the Interior from Upper Holter Lake in the northwest corner of the Canyon Ferry Dam quadrangle. Unit labels as on map explanation. U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Map of the Canyon Ferry Dam 30’ x 60’ Quadrangle, West-Central Montana By Mitchell W. Reynolds and Theodore R. Brandt Pamphlet to accompany Scientific Investigations Map 2860 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Charles G. Groat, Director For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services Box 25286, Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 For more information about the USGS and its products: Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ This publication is available online at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/2005/2860 Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Canyon Ferry Unit History
    Canyon Ferry Project Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program Eric A. Stene Bureau of Reclamation 1994 Table of Contents Canyon Ferry Unit .............................................................2 Project Location.........................................................2 Historic Setting .........................................................2 Project Authorization.....................................................4 Construction History .....................................................5 Post Construction History ................................................18 Settlement of Project ....................................................18 Uses of Project Water ...................................................19 Conclusion............................................................20 About the Author .............................................................20 Bibliography ................................................................21 Manuscripts and Archival Collections.......................................21 Government Documents .................................................21 Books ................................................................21 Articles...............................................................21 Index ......................................................................22 1 Canyon Ferry Unit Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program As the Bureau of Reclamation approached its fiftieth birthday, its leaders envisioned projects on an increasingly grand scale. Reclamation's counterpart from the War Department,
    [Show full text]
  • Corporate History of the Montana Power Company 1882-1913
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1951 Corporate history of the Montana Power Company 1882-1913 Douglas Frank Leighton The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Leighton, Douglas Frank, "Corporate history of the Montana Power Company 1882-1913" (1951). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 7465. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/7465 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE CORPORATE HISTORY OF THE MOHTARA POWER COMPANY 1882 -* 1913 by DOUGLAS F. ^IGHTOR B. A.* Montana State University, 1950 Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts li 1 | MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY 1951 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: EP38266 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMT OiftMKtation PubJIahing UMI EP38266 Published by ProQuest LLC (2013). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Reservation History Status and Alternatives
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1984 Protecting Montana's water for future use: Water reservation history status and alternatives Mark D. O'Keefe The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation O'Keefe, Mark D., "Protecting Montana's water for future use: Water reservation history status and alternatives" (1984). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 8522. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/8522 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PROTECTING MONTANA'S WATER FOR FUTURE USE: WATER RESERVATION HISTORY, STATUS AND ALTERNATIVES By Mark D. O'Keefe B.A., California State University, Sacramento, 1977 Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA 1984 Approved by: Chairman, Board of Examiners an. Graduate school / ' ' ” ' Date / Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: EP39323 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
    [Show full text]
  • Missouri River Dams Larval Walleye Entrainment Investigation
    Missouri River Dams Larval Walleye Entrainment Investigation PPL-Montana MOTAC project 781-12 Prepared by Grant Grisak and Brad Tribby Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks Andrea Spake and McKenzie Leonard University of Great Falls December 2012 Introduction Studies have shown that since the increase in walleye numbers in Canyon Ferry Reservoir in 1996-97 there has been a sustained increase in walleye numbers in the Missouri River below Holter Dam (Grisak et al. 2012). This relationship suggests that walleye produced upstream in Canyon Ferry, Hauser and/or Holter reservoirs may be flushing past the dams and residing in the Missouri River downstream of Holter Dam. During the annual brown trout population estimate in the Craig section (April/May) of the Missouri River, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (MFWP) fishery workers have observed a small number of post-spawn female walleye, which indicates natural reproduction is occurring in this section of river. Since 2009, seining surveys for young of the year (YOY) walleye in the Missouri River between Cascade and Great Falls have shown some preliminary but predictable trends in YOY walleye distribution and abundance. In general, YOY walleye are distributed throughout this 55-mile reach in low numbers consistent with the relatively low adult walleye numbers measured during trout population estimates. From 1983 to 2011, in the Craig section, during spring electrofishing walleye averaged 0.7% (range 0.1-3.0%) of the total fish handled. From 1982 to 2011, in the Craig section, during fall electrofishing, walleye have averaged 0.4% (range 0.1-2.9%) of the total fish handled.
    [Show full text]
  • Helena Climate Change Task Force Report
    Helena Climate Change Task Force Action Plan 2009 HELENA, MONTANA ACTION COMMITTEE: Stan Bradshaw Ben Brouwer Anna Jones-Crabtree DD Dowden Kristine Edwards Nancy Hall Patrick Judge Alan Peura Rebecca Ridenour Helena Climate Change Task Force Stan Bradshaw, Chair Patrick Judge (NWEC/MEIC), Vice Chair Task Force Working Groups: Implementation Anna Jones-Crabtree , IMP Chair Ben Brouwer (AERO) Patrick Judge (NWEC/MEIC) Stan Bradshaw ENERGY Patrick Judge (NWEC/MEIC), NRG Chair Anna Jones-Crabtree Thomas Murray Kristine Edwards Alan Peura (Liaison to ICLEI) Rebecca Ridenour Max Milton Els Van Woert Water Stan Bradshaw, WTR Chair Alan Peura (Liaison to ICLEI) Ken Wallace Shannon Downey Nancy Hall Transportation, Waste, RECYCLING, PUBLIC-Private Partnership Will Selser, TWRP Co-Chair Ben Brouwer (AERO), TWRP Co-Chair DD Dowden Rebecca Ridenour Stephanie Wallace PUblications DD Dowden Thomas Murray WEBMASTER Thomas Murray cover photos courtesy of www.MontanaPictures.net Helena Climate Change Task Force Stan Bradshaw, Chair Patrick Judge (NWEC/MEIC), Vice Chair Task Force Working Groups: IMPLementatiON Anna Jones-Crabtree , IMP Chair Ben Brouwer (AERO) Patrick Judge (NWEC/MEIC) Stan Bradshaw ENERGY Patrick Judge (NWEC/MEIC), NRG Chair Kristine Edwards Anna Jones-Crabtree Max Milton Thomas Murray Alan Peura (Liaison to ICLEI) Rebecca Ridenour Els Van Woert Water Stan Bradshaw, WTR Chair Shannon Downey Nancy Hall Alan Peura Ken Wallace TRANSPOrtatiON, Waste, RECYCLING, PUBLIC-Private Partnership Will Selser, TWRP Co-Chair Ben Brouwer (AERO), TWRP
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Missouri River Reservoir Fisheries Management Plan 2010-2019
    Upper Missouri River Reservoir Fisheries Management Plan 2010-2019 May 2010 Contents List of Figures List of Tables Executive Summary and Plan Implementation ........................................................ E-1 Section 1 Management Plan Area ................................................................................ 1 Canyon Ferry Reservoir and Missouri River (Toston Dam to Canyon Ferry Reservoir) ......... 1 Reservoir Operation ..............................................................................................................2 Fisheries and Water Quality ..................................................................................................5 Canyon Ferry Reservoir ..................................................................................................5 Missouri River (Toston Dam to Canyon Ferry Reservoir) ................................................. 6 Hauser Reservoir, Holter Reservoir, and Missouri River (Hauser Tailwater) .......................... 9 Reservoir Operation ...................................................................................................... 11 Fisheries and Water Quality .......................................................................................... 11 Hauser Reservoir ..................................................................................................... 11 Missouri River - Hauser Tailwater (Hauser Dam To Holter Reservoir) ..................... 12 Holter Reservoir ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]