FY07-09 proposal 200205400
Jump to Reviews and Recommendations
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Protect & Restore the Asotin Creek Watershed |
| Proposal ID | 200205400 |
| Organization | Nez Perce Tribe DFRM Watershed Division |
| Short description | Continuation and enhancement of cooperative project to protect and restore critical riparian/stream habitat in the Asotin Creek Subbasin thru road decommissioning, streambank stablization and fish passage restoration. |
| Information transfer | Road and fish passage inventory, assessment and implementation as well as compliance/implementation M&E efforts will be completed and compiled by our program. This information will be housed and available at the NPT DFRM Watershed Division. Data will be forwarded to StreamNet. The infomation will be provided to the Umatilla National Forest (UNF), Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW), Asotin County Conservation District (ACCD) and the Snake River Salmon Recovery Board in both printed and electronic format. In addition, information from this project will utilized to update the Asotin Subbasin Plan and SE Washington Recovery Plan. |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Contacts
| Contact | Organization | |
|---|---|---|
| Form submitter | ||
| Paul Kraynak | Nez Perce Tribe | pkraynak@nezperce.org |
| All assigned contacts | ||
| Paul Kraynak | Nez Perce Tribe | pkraynak@nezperce.org |
| Mark D. Reaney, Jr., P.E. | Nez Perce Tribe DFRM/Watershed Div. | markr@nezperce.org |
| Emmit Taylor, Jr. | Nez Perce Tribe DFRM/Watershed Div. | emmitt@nezperce.org |
Section 2. Locations
Province / subbasin: Blue Mountain / Asotin
| Latitude | Longitude | Waterbody | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Charley Creek | WDFW roads. Stream channel for fish passage | ||
| George Creek | USFS roads. Stream channel for fish passage. | ||
| George Creek | USFS and WDFW roads. Stream channel for fish passage. | ||
| North Fork Asotin River | WDFW roads. Stream channel for fish passage | ||
| South Fork Asotin Creek | WDFW roads. Stream channel for fish passage | ||
| South Fork Asotin Creek | USFS and WDFW roads. Stream channel for fish passage. |
Section 3. Focal species
primary: Chinook Snake River Spring/Summer ESUprimary: Steelhead Snake River ESU
secondary: Bull Trout
Section 4. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishments |
|---|---|
| 2005 | Surveyed >35 miles road S. Fork Asotin Creek uplands. Charley Creek: recontoured 10.16 miles; subsoiled 4.98 miles; blocked 1.59 for natural regeneration. Planted 28 acres with native seed . Restored 160 feet streambank. Installed 36 pieces LWD >8" dia. |
| 2004 | Surveyed 10.7 miles of roads in Charley Creek drainage. Planned to decommission 17.86 miles (includes 7.16 remainder Lick Creek) but contract overbid & fire danger prevented machine work. Effectivness monitor began in Lick Creek. |
| 2003 | Surveyed 28.45 miles of forest road in the Lick Creek. Recontoured 9.69 miles; subsoiled 2.49 miles; blocked off 9.11 miles for natural regeneration. Planted 24 acres native seed. Leveraged BPA & RAC grant to install 1.3 miles of fence to exclude cattle. |
| 2002 | Project started November of 2002. Began primary contacts and planning. |
Section 5. Relationships to other projects
| Funding source | Related ID | Related title | Relationship |
|---|---|---|---|
| BPA | 199401805 | Asotin Enhancement/Restoration | Our project proposal completments this effort by addressing upland sediment sources due to forest roads and addressing fish passage barriers. |
| BPA | 200205300 | Assess Salmonids Asotin Cr Ws | This project evaluates productivity and survival rates on anadromous and resident fish. Our proposal will reduce sedimentation from forest roads and address fish passage barriers, therefore protecting and restoring fish habitat. |
| Other: SRFB -WA | 00-1696n | Brief Assessment of Salmonids and Stream Habitat | The Brief Assessment of Salmonids and Stream Habitat Conditions in the Snake River Tributaries of Asotin, Whitman and Garfield Counties in Washington sampled streams for salmonid presence, absence and abundance in streams that are part of this proposal. The report gave insight into possible fish barriers and was the basis for the statement that "we need a complete inventory and assessment of the barriers" in the Asotin Subbasin that we plan to complete. |
Section 6. Biological objectives
| Biological objectives | Full description | Associated subbasin plan | Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Objective LG6.1: Reduce Bedscour depths to less... | Reduce Bedscour depths to less than or equal to 10cm. Road decommissioning in the Lower George Creek, Lower North Fork and Charley Creek areas within WDFW lands would help improve watershed conditions and facilitate greater floodplain accessability thereby helping to reduce Bedscour in the areas toward reaching the goal of depths less than or equal to 10cm. The current estimate of Bedscour in the Lower George area is 16.4cm, 12.1cm in the Lower North Fork, 12.8 in Charley Creek while it is historically estimated that each was around 6cm. | Asotin | LG6.1.6, LG6.1.7 |
| Objective LG7.1: Increase stream discharge........ | Increase stream discharge through the area to maintain continuous surface folws in 90% of years. Road decommissioning in the Lower George Creek area within WDFW lands would help improve watershed conditions and the resultant increase in water infiltration to help maintain continuous surface stream flow with the goal being continuous surface stream flow in 90% of the years. Currently the stream drys up in sections throughout summer. | Asotin | LG7.1.5 |
| Objective UA1.1: Reduce embeddedness to <10% | Help reduce sediment entering the stream which will in turn help reduce embeddedness from current estimated 18% towards the historical estimate of less than 10% in upper Asotin creeks, a goal of 20% in lower George Creek and 10% in the lower North Fork, lower South Fork and Charley Creek.This will also stimulate a corresponding decrease in percent fines and turbidity. | Asotin | UA1.1.5, UA1.1.6 |
| Objective UA3.1: Reach or exceed 1 piece of LWD... | Reach or exceed 1 piece of LWD per channel width. Road removal or realignment will help enhance floodplain connectivity, natural stream meanders and long-term recruitment of LWD in the Upper Asotin on WDFW lands towards the goal of one piece LWD per channell width. It is currently estimated at 0.7 pieces now with a historical estimate of 4.75 LWD/CW. Removal/realignment in the Lower George, Lower North Fork and Lower South Fork areas within WDFW property boundaries would help reach the same goal. Estimates for the Lower George area are currently 0.33 pieces LWD/CW; In the Lower North Fork 0.6 pieces LWD/CW; in the Lower South Fork0.67 pieces LWD/CW. | Asotin | UA2.1.8 |
| Objective UA4.2: Decrease manmade confinement | Decrease manmade confinement to no greater than 25% of stream bank length. Removal or realignment of roads will help decrease manmade confinement in the Upper Asotin on WDFW lands from the current estimate of 42% towards the goal of no greater that 25% of stream bank length, in turn, facilitating greater floodplain accessibility. Removal/realignment of roads on Charley Creek, Lower North Fork and Lower South Fork within WDFW lands will help decrease manmade confinement from the current estimate of 25% toward meeting the goal of only 10% streambank length. | Asotin | UA4.2.1, NF4.3.1 |
| Objective UA5.1: Decrease stream temperature to no | Decrease summer daily maximum stream temperatures to no more than 4 days greater than 75 degrees F from the current estimate of more than 4 days above 75F and show progress toward meeting Washington State temperature standards and TMDL goals. Reducing sediment influx by decommissioning roads on Forest Service and WDFW lands in this subbasin will help towards meeting this goal in the Upper Asotin and Lower George creeks. In the Lower South Fork the goal is to decrease the summer daily max temperatures to no more than 12 days greater than 61 degrees F and head towards meeting TMDL goals there. | Asotin | UA5.1.5, UA5.1.9 |
| Remove Fish Passage Barriers | A comprehensive inventory will be completed of all road crossings to determine barriers to adult and juvenile fish within the entire Asotin Creek watershed. Barriers will be prioritized for replacement based on habitat returned and priority restoration areas, with design and implementation of remediation measures to follow. This project works towards returning blocked stream habitat to ESU-listed fish species. | Asotin | The Asotin Subbasin plan states this is a high priority due to its status as an imminent threat. |
Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)
| Work element name | Work element title | Description | Start date | End date | Est budget |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manage and Administer Projects | Management, Coordination, and Communication | Project management includes coordinating project activities, attending meetings, seeking additional funding, preparing statements of work, managing budgets, completing reports, and responding to BPA requests. | 11/1/2006 | 10/30/2009 | $110,881 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Develop RM&E Methods and Designs | Involvement and Development of Watershed Level Monitoring and Evaluation Plan | No watershed level status and trend M&E was proposed per NWPCC direction due to current efforts through PNAMP, CSMEP, Snake River Salmon Recovery Board and state efforts. Project manager or designated personnel will engage in these forums and coordinate with federal, state and local groups in the development of a M&E strategy for the Asotin Creek Watershed. | 11/1/2006 | 10/30/2009 | $67,773 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Status Report | Complete Quarterly Status Reports | Complete quartely status reports to BPA on milestones progress in Pisces. | 11/1/2006 | 10/15/2009 | $24,730 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Annual Report | Produce Annual Report | Annual report describes all yearly activities, successes and problems encountered including photos and summary of all data collected and analysis completed. | 9/30/2007 | 11/30/2009 | $24,730 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Coordination | Partnering Agreement: Nez Perce Tribe, Umatilla National Forest, WDFW and ACCD | Update and finalize Partnering Agreement between the Umatilla National Forest and the Nez Perce Tribe. Create new Partnering Agreement between the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife and the Nez Perce Tribe. The agreements will cover project scope, cost-sharing and responsibilities of each agency regarding road survey, assessment, transportation planning and decommissioning. Agreements will be updated yearly in 2007, 2008 and 2009. | 11/1/2006 | 10/30/2009 | $26,251 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Create/Manage/Maintain Database | Develop and Maintain Database for Road Data Collection | Develop and Maintain a road database for data housing and analysis. Database is needed to dissiminate information about the project to UNF and WDFW as well StreamNet and BPA reporting. | 11/1/2006 | 10/30/2009 | $30,645 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Survey Roads Using WEPP Methodology | Survey roads on Umatilla National Forest and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Lands within the South Fork Asotin, George Creek, and North Fork Asotin Creek subwatersheds. Survey will be completed using the Water Erosion Prediction Potential (WEPP) methology. Target is to survey 100 miles of road per year in 2007, 2008 and 2009. | 5/1/2007 | 10/30/2009 | $154,899 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | Analyze and Interpret WEPP Road Data Collected | Run WEPP model to determine road sediment production and interpret data. Create GIS layers and maps to present and dissiminate anaylsis. | 9/1/2007 | 10/30/2009 | $52,173 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Plan | Produce Transportation/Restoration Plan | Based on WEPP analyzed data and transportation infrustructure needs, coordinate with the Umatilla NF and WDFW on transportation/restoration planning to determine roads for decommissioning, long-term intermittent use and road upgrades or maintenance. Target road densities are less than 1 mile of road per square mile (high habitat quality) per "Matrix of Pathways and Indicators of Watershed Condition" analysis completed by NOAA Fisheries. | 11/1/2007 | 10/30/2009 | $39,901 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation | NEPA, ESA and Cultural Resource Compliance | The Umatilla National Forest and the WDFW will take the lead in completing NEPA, ESA and Cultural Resource compliance for road decommissioning projects. Tribal staff will assist in this effort. | 11/1/2006 | 6/30/2009 | $35,251 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Design and/or Specifications | Contract Development for Decommissioning of Roads | The UNF and the WDFW will take the lead in bidding and contract development. The Tribe will assist in this effort. | 11/1/2006 | 6/30/2009 | $19,335 |
|
Biological objectives Objective LG6.1: Reduce Bedscour depths to less... Objective LG7.1: Increase stream discharge........ Objective UA1.1: Reduce embeddedness to <10% Objective UA3.1: Reach or exceed 1 piece of LWD... Objective UA4.2: Decrease manmade confinement Objective UA5.1: Decrease stream temperature to no |
Metrics * # of road miles decommissioned : Minimum 10.0 mi/year |
||||
| Decommission Road | Implement Road Decommissioning | Decommision roads within the South Fork Asotin, George Creek and North Fork Asotin sub-watersheds. Implementation will occur with a contractor and a project inspector will be onsite to guide and ensure proper techniques are followed. Target is to decommission 15 miles of road per year in 2007, 2008 and 2009 on UNF and WDFW lands. | 5/1/2007 | 10/30/2009 | $213,911 |
|
Biological objectives Objective LG6.1: Reduce Bedscour depths to less... Objective LG7.1: Increase stream discharge........ Objective UA1.1: Reduce embeddedness to <10% Objective UA3.1: Reach or exceed 1 piece of LWD... Objective UA4.2: Decrease manmade confinement Objective UA5.1: Decrease stream temperature to no |
Metrics * # of road miles decommissioned : Target is to decommission 15 miles of road per yr. |
||||
| Plant Vegetation | Road Decommissioning: Planting/Revegetation | In cooperation with the Umatilla National Forest and Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife, all decommissioned roads will be revegetated with native grass seed. Target is to revegetate 20 acres of decommissioned road per year in 2007, 2008 and 2009. | 6/1/2007 | 10/30/2009 | $22,377 |
|
Biological objectives Objective LG7.1: Increase stream discharge........ Objective UA1.1: Reduce embeddedness to <10% |
Metrics * # of acres of planted: Target is to revegetate 20 acres per year. |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Road Decommissioning: Monitoring & Evaluation | Review and finalize road decommissioning monitoring sites. Collect field data using an already established and approved protocol. Target is to monitor 5% of all decommissioned roads. | 7/1/2007 | 10/30/2009 | $19,335 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics Primary R, M, and E Type: Monitor 5% of total miles road decommissioned |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | Analyze and Interpret Data From Decommissioning M&E | Coordinate with UNF and WDFW to analyze and interpret road decommissioning M&E data collected. Analysis will determine effectiveness and any adjustments needed to on-the-ground methodology to maximize restoration success. | 10/1/2007 | 10/30/2009 | $19,335 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Coordination | Road Crosing Surveys: Coordination, Maps and Permission | Coordinate with UNF, WDFW and ACCD on project logistics, scope of work, methodologies and time lines. Collect existing data and map layers from UNF, WDFW and ACCD and get into a single standard format. Secure permission from private landowners, and Asotin County Road Department and others to perform road crossing surveys. | 11/1/2006 | 10/30/2009 | $29,293 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Outreach and Education | Outreach to Community on Passage Project | Outreach to educate the Community and agencies on the importance and process of the fish passage assessment project. Outreach will occur through mailings, and presentations to the public, county commissioners, UNF, ACCD, WDFW and the Asotin County road department. | 11/1/2006 | 10/30/2009 | $37,977 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics * # of general public reached: 1000 |
||||
| Create/Manage/Maintain Database | Develop and Maintain Database for Passage Data Collection | Develop and maintain a database for data housing and analysis. Database will be used to dissiminate information about the project to UNF, WDFW, ACCD, Asotin County Road Department and the public as well as StreamNet and for BPA reporting. | 11/1/2006 | 10/30/2009 | $31,971 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Survey Road Crossings and Other Potential Anthropogenic and Natural Barriers | Survey road crossings (culverts, bridges, fords) and other potential anthopogenic (diversions, push up dams, etc.) and natural (waterfalls, etc) barriers to fish passage. Survey methodology will follow a national protocol developed by the US Forest Service to determine barriers to adult and juvenile fish species. Protocol and methodology will be coordinated and finalized with UNF and the WDFW. Target is to survey all protential barriers on the mainstem and all tributaries. Depending on number of crossing, surveys may be limited to 2 order streams and greater. | 3/1/2007 | 11/1/2008 | $115,873 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | Analyze Road Crossing Data for Fish Passage | Analyze data collected to determine fish passage barriers for adult and juvenile fish species using flow charts in approved protocol and Fish Xing model. Create GIS layers and maps to present analysis. | 11/1/2007 | 10/30/2009 | $34,909 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Plan | Produce Fish Passage Restoration Plan | In coordination with the UNF, WDFW and ACCD, produce a fish passage restoration plan. The plan will be based on the barrier data analysis, restoration priority areas determined by Subbasin Planing, amount of habitat returned to juvenile and adult fish, and a cost benefit analysis. | 11/1/2008 | 10/30/2009 | $32,101 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Design and/or Specifications | Produce Design, Specification and Cost-Estimate for Top 3 Barriers | Based on the Fish Passage Plan, complete a full survey, design, specifications and cost estimates for the top 3 barriers identified. Search for alternative funding for project implementation. | 3/1/2008 | 10/30/2009 | $25,419 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
Section 8. Budgets
Itemized estimated budget
| Item | Note | FY07 | FY08 | FY09 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personnel | Salaries & Wages | $161,600 | $180,780 | $167,180 |
| Fringe Benefits | Employee Benefits | $48,480 | $54,234 | $50,154 |
| Travel | Travel & Per Diem | $5,518 | $5,518 | $5,518 |
| Other | Training Expense | $2,238 | $2,238 | $2,238 |
| Overhead | Telecommunications | $2,920 | $2,920 | $2,920 |
| Supplies | Office Supplies | $1,800 | $1,800 | $1,800 |
| Supplies | Field Supplies/Hardware/Materials | $5,429 | $1,000 | $1,000 |
| Overhead | GSA Vehicles | $16,490 | $16,490 | $16,490 |
| Capital Equipment | @-Trimble GPS Units, ATV w/ramps | $12,000 | $0 | $0 |
| Overhead | Office Rent | $683 | $683 | $683 |
| Other | Construction Contracts | $55,500 | $55,500 | $55,500 |
| Personnel | Indirect Administrative Cost (29.64%) | $74,167 | $78,540 | $73,300 |
| Other | Desk Top & Laptop PC's, External Hard Drive, Virus Protection, 1 MB USB Storage | $5,750 | $0 | $0 |
| Totals | $392,574 | $399,703 | $376,782 | |
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
| Total itemized budget: | $1,169,059 |
| Total work element budget: | $1,169,061 |
Cost sharing
| Funding source/org | Item or service provided | FY 07 est value ($) | FY 08 est value ($) | FY 09 est value ($) | Cash or in-kind? | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asotin County | Culvert Surveys: landowner permission, maps, logisitic, planning | $2,500 | $3,000 | $3,500 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Umatialla NF | Road maps, survey, analysis, transporation planning | $5,000 | $5,500 | $6,250 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Umatialla NF | Road decom. project: contract development; bidding; logistics; site inspection; M&E complinace/imple | $18,750 | $19,500 | $20,500 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Umatialla NF | Road decommissioning funding | $25,000 | $25,000 | $25,000 | Cash | Under Development |
| Umatialla NF | Rd. Decomm: NEPA/ESA/Cultural Resouce Compliance | $5,000 | $5,500 | $6,000 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Umatialla NF | Culvert Suvey and Analysis: logisitics, maps, tech support, planning | $4,750 | $5,500 | $6,250 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| WDFW | Culvert Suvey and Analysis: logisitics, maps, tech support, planning | $5,750 | $5,500 | $6,000 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| WDFW | Road maps, survey, analysis, transporation planning | $5,000 | $5,500 | $6,000 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| WDFW | Rd. Decomm: NEPA/ESA/Cultural Resouce Compliance | $5,000 | $5,500 | $6,250 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| WDFW | Road decom. project: contract development; bidding; logistics; site inspection; M&E complinace/imple | $0 | $9,500 | $10,500 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Totals | $76,750 | $90,000 | $96,250 | |||
Section 9. Project future
|
FY 2010 estimated budget: $400,000 FY 2011 estimated budget: $400,000 |
Comments: Project will continue tranportation planning and decommissioning on Umatiall National Forest and WDFW lands. Project will begin passage barrier work based on survey, analysis and planning. |
Future O&M costs: None
Termination date: On-going
Comments: This project will be on-going until tribal and regional habitat monitoring parameters are achieved that are currently under development, and tribal and recovery fish numbers are met for specific species (Spring Chinook, Steelhead, Coho, Lamprey, Bull Trout) that are also under development.
Final deliverables: Asotin Creek and tributaries watersheds will be intact, healthy, and properly functioning so that it is able to support all native anadromous and resident fish species at historical or near-historical levels. Streams within the watershed will meet Watershed/Stream standards.
Section 10. Narrative and other documents
| 200205400 Narrative Corrected | Jul 2006 |
| Comment Response To ISRP | Jul 2006 |
| NPT Umbrella Comment Memo | Jul 2006 |
| NPT DFRM Watershed Umbrella Comments | Jul 2006 |
Reviews and recommendations
| FY07 budget | FY08 budget | FY09 budget | Total budget | Type | Category | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NPCC FINAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Oct 23, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Expense | ProvinceExpense | Do Not Fund |
| NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | ProvinceExpense | ||
ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)
Recommendation: Response requested
NPCC comments: This project, a spin-off of the Asotin Creek Implementation Project, added partnerships with new landowners and built on the trust and credibility gained by funding sources and local agencies for complex ESA habitat issues. The Asotin Subbasin Plan includes Couse and Tenmile Creeks and other streams within Asotin County that have salmonids and implementation of the actions on private property is the main goal of this ongoing project. Momentum is building and projects are being completed with new ones identified for protection of prioritized habitat. Specific results of watershed analysis need were not included in the proposal and need to be described in the sponsor’s response. Reviewers are concerned that achieving an embeddedness of 10% is unlikely to be achieved using the proposed methods. Alternative methods, such as those proposed in Montgomery and Buffington (1997: GSA Bulletin May 1997 - Channel-reach morphology in mountain drainage basins) should be considered. Connectivity with the floodplain and sinuosity should be maintained or restored in order to achieve the desired objectives. Technical and scientific background: A watershed analysis is not presented as part of this section. Therefore, the problem analyses may be deficient, despite the probable ability of project personnel to identify various obvious ones. None of the strategies described are likely to "Reduce [embeddedness] within the area to 10%." If the existing imbrication is to be removed, the stream's width:depth ratio, sinuosity and connectivity with the floodplain need to be restored in order to enable the stream to re-work its gravels and sort them, leaving the fines on the downstream end of point bars. Rationale and significance to subbasin plans and regional programs: The portion of the proposal for developing buffers and implement CRP / CREP riparian buffer plans directly supports many of the goals, objectives and strategies identified in the Asotin Subbasin Plan. Relationships to other projects: This project proposal is to continue ongoing restoration activities and will coordinate and integrate the Asotin Subbasin Plan, Strategy and Continue Coordination and Implementation of Asotin Creek Watershed funding. These work together to protect fish habitat in the Asotin County. This proposal will continue to help bridge the gap between landowners and agency representatives on sensitive resource issues on Asotin County streams. The Asotin Subbasin Plan provides the framework for such recovery efforts. Project history: This project has not existed long, so detailed results can't be expected. There is a good general recounting of progress to date. Some of the material in this section should have been in the technical and scientific section. Riparian Projects completed for water and grazing. Comprehensive objectives are provided that are tied to Asotin Subbasin Plan. The facilities, equipment, personnel, and information transfer are adequate.
ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)
Recommendation: Fundable in part (Qualified)
NPCC comments: The ISRP recommends the project as fundable with the qualifications that sponsors complete the geomorphic assessment and "classify" the stream (e.g., Montgomery and Buffington) on where it is now and where they want to be. The proposed works of decommissioning roads are probably needed to reduce sediment delivery to the stream system. However, reducing “bedscour” by which it's assumed is meant restoring historical bed levels (?) is unlikely to be assisted by stabilizing streambanks. The creek widens in order to entrain more gravel to its carrying capacity, and restricting this process is likely to increase bed lowering or “incision.” A proper geomorphic assessment seems to be needed to clarify what is needed. It is of concern, but of no great surprise, that the word geomorph... cannot be found by word-searching the Asotin Subbasin Plan. Given these concerns, we recommend that, until a geomorphic assessment is made, streambank stabilization is limited to those areas where the creek is not yet actively eroding its banks. The concern is that this action may exacerbate the problem by causing down-cutting of the streambed (which will undermine any streambank bioengineered works). ISRP comments on proposal 199401805 (and 20020500) apply to this proposal.