FY07-09 proposal 200715300
Jump to Reviews and Recommendations
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Cardwell Hills Wildlife Mitigation and regional Biodiversity Protection Project |
| Proposal ID | 200715300 |
| Organization | David Evans and Associates, Inc. |
| Short description | Wildlife mitigation project to implement Cardwell Hills Regional Conservation Planning Strategy and Willamette Subbasin Plan through purchase or easement of up to 500 acres of upland prairie/savanna, oak woodlands, and riparian forest in Benton County, OR |
| Information transfer | |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Contacts
| Contact | Organization | |
|---|---|---|
| Form submitter | ||
| Kevin O'Hara | David Evans and Associates, Inc. | kro@deainc.com |
| All assigned contacts | ||
| Kevin O'Hara | David Evans and Associates, Inc. | kro@deainc.com |
Section 2. Locations
Province / subbasin: Lower Columbia / Willamette
| Latitude | Longitude | Waterbody | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| [none] | All locations within the following sixth-field subwatersheds within the Marys River 5th-field watershed: Blakesley Creek, Oak Creek, Woods Creek, Rock Creek, and Newton Creek |
Section 3. Focal species
primary: All Wildlifesecondary: Cutthroat Trout
Additional: Fender’s blue butterfly, Kincaid’s lupine, Taylor’s checkerspot butterfly, Streaked horned lark, Vesper sparrow, Western meadowlark, Western bluebird, Acorn woodpecker, Red-legged frog, Western gray squirrel
Section 4. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishments |
|---|
Section 5. Relationships to other projects
| Funding source | Related ID | Related title | Relationship |
|---|---|---|---|
| Other: ODFW | ODFW Contract N | Alternative Conservation Reserve Design for Viable Metapopulations | BPA, through ODFW (ODFW Contract Number.: 006-5305-S-Wildlife pursuant to contract number 00014862 with BPA for Project No. 1992-068-00) has provided funding for the pilot project to link habitat suitability mapping, site selection algorithms and population viability models to inform managers where limited monetary resources should be invested to best achieve the Subbasin Plan’s conservation goal of protecting self-sustaining populations of focal species for the least possible cost. |
| Other: OWED | 205-121 | Cardwell Hills Restoration Strategy | Set the stage for this project and the Oregon Solutions Process. |
Section 6. Biological objectives
| Biological objectives | Full description | Associated subbasin plan | Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Develop restoration projects | Develop projects and coordinate project delivery per Regional Master Plans | Willamette | Conserve and restore biological communities and connect high valued habitats. |
| Identify Strategic Planning Regions | Identify Strategic Planning Regions for incorporation of the Cardwell Hills Strategy | Willamette | The Subbasin Plan’s primary strategy for achieving the vision of the subbasin is “to protect self-sustaining populations and habitats, especially those that are rarest or have declined the most historically.” |
| Maintain and increase oak woodland species | Maintain and increase current populations and distribution of acorn woodpecker, chipping sparrow, western wood-pewee, white-breasted nuthatch, southern alligator lizard, sharptail snake, and western gray squirrel through acquisition of land or purchase of conservation easements protecting 100 acres of existing high quality habitats and land suitable for rehabilitation/restoration of oak woodland habitats. | Willamette | Protect existing high-quality habitats and restore viable habitats identified in the Corvallis Philomath Oaks Priority Conservation Areas of the Nature Conservancy |
| Maintain and increase upland prairie species | Maintain and increase current populations and distribution of Fender’s blue butterfly, Kincaid’s lupine, Taylor’s checkerspot butterfly, streaked horned lark, vesper sparrow, western meadowlark, western bluebird, and other upland prairie/savanna focal species through acquisition of land or purchase of conservation easements of approximately 300 acres of existing high quality habitats and land suitable for rehabilitation/restoration of upland prairie/savanna and oak woodland habitats. | Willamette | Protect existing high-quality habitats and restore viable habitats identified in the Corvallis Philomath Oaks Priority Conservation Areas of the Nature Conservancy |
| Maintain and increase wetland prairie species | Maintain and increase current populations and distribution of red legged frog, sora rail, common yellowthroat and other wetland prairie and seasonal marsh focal species through the acquisition of land or purchase of conservation easements protecting a total of 25 acres of existing high quality habitats and land suitable for rehabilitation/restoration of wetland prairie and seasonal marsh habitat. | Willamette | Protect existing high-quality habitats and restore viable habitats identified in the Corvallis Philomath Oaks Priority Conservation Areas of the Nature Conservancy |
| Monitoring and Evaluation Program | Development of a successful Maintenance, Research, Monitoring and Evaluation Program. | Willamette | [Strategy left blank] |
| Produce Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan | Produce Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan, for each Strategic Planning Region, identifying high value habitat lands available for acquisition/ permanent protection. | Willamette | The Subbasin Plan’s primary strategy for achieving the vision of the subbasin is “to protect self-sustaining populations and habitats, especially those that are rarest or have declined the most historically.” |
| Protect priority cutthroat trout habitat | Maintain and increase current populations and distribution of American dipper, red-eyed vireo, willow flycatcher, river otter, western pond turtle, and resident cutthroat trout through acquisition of land or purchase of conservation easements protecting a total of 75 acres of priority cutthroat trout habitat and adjacent riparian habitat. | Willamette | Protect existing high-quality habitats and restore viable habitats identified in the Corvallis Philomath Oaks Priority Conservation Areas of the Nature Conservancy |
| Restore oak woodland habitat | Rehabilitation/restoration of a total of 100 acres of protected oak woodland habitat. | Willamette | Conserve and restore biological communities and connect high valued habitats. |
| Restore riparian habitat | Rehabilitation/restoration of a total of 75 acres of protected riparian habitat. | Willamette | Conserve and restore biological communities and connect high valued habitats. |
| Restore upland prairie/savanna habitat | Rehabilitation/restoration of a total of 300 acres of protected upland prairie/savanna and oak woodland habitat. | Willamette | Conserve and restore biological communities and connect high valued habitats. |
| Restore wetland prairie habitat | Rehabilitation/restoration of a total of 25 acres of protected wetland prairie and seasonal marsh habitat. | Willamette | Conserve and restore biological communities and connect high valued habitats. |
Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)
| Work element name | Work element title | Description | Start date | End date | Est budget |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Land Purchase | Purchase land, conservation easements | Budgeting task. Assumes 500 acres to be permanently protected by acquisition or conservation easement. Assumes $5,000 per acre. Benton County to assume ownership of land and hold conservation easements | 6/1/2007 | 6/1/2009 | $2,500,000 |
|
Biological objectives Maintain and increase oak woodland species Maintain and increase upland prairie species Maintain and increase wetland prairie species Protect priority cutthroat trout habitat |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation | Produce environmental compliance documents | Tasks completed under this work element will be those necessary to secure Oregon Department of State Lands and US Army Corps of Engineers permits for working in wetlands and other waters of the US. Tasks will also include securing Endangered Species Act compliance documentation from the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), if required. It is anticipated that landowners may wish to enter into a programmatic Safe Harbor agreement with the US Fish and Wildlife Service and NMFS. Coordination with the State Historic Preservation Office may also be required should archaeological artifacts be discovered during field surveys. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $217,200 |
|
Biological objectives Develop restoration projects |
Metrics |
||||
| Conduct Controlled Burn | Conduct controlled burn | Controlled burns will be used where feasible to improve habitat. Controlled burns function as part of an integrated pest management approach to control invasive and/or undesired successional plants, and also to stimulate growth of desirable, native plants that provide important vegetative structure for focal species . Controlled burns will take place using the Integrated Fire Management Framework prescribed by The Nature Conservancy. The TNC Fire Initiative’s Fire Management Manual (Seamon, 2005) details the framework, which is based on the following seven categories: • Assessment & Modeling • Collaborative Management Goals • Fire Prevention • Fire Use/Prescribed Fire • Preparedness and Response • Restoration / Recovery • Monitoring and Adaptive Management This approach evaluates and balances the risks posed by fire with the beneficial or necessary ecological and economic roles that it may play in a given conservation area, landscape or region. Controlled burns conducted during this project will follow this approach in consultation with TNC. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $265,200 |
|
Biological objectives Restore oak woodland habitat Restore upland prairie/savanna habitat Restore wetland prairie habitat |
Metrics |
||||
| Create, Restore, and/or Enhance Wetland | Restore and enhance wetland prairie habitat | Wetland prairies and seasonal marshes will be restored, created and/or enhanced to meet the biological objectives of focal wetland species as defined in the Subbasin plan. Wetlands will be constructed to maintain sufficient grade, hydrology, and biodiversity to fulfill biological objectives for focal species as defined by the Subbasin Plan. Wetlands plans will be implemented according to framework methodologies set forth by Campbell, 2005, Hammer, 1997, and the documented plans and specifications created by licensed engineers, landscape architects, and biologists under work elements under Objective VII. Restoration and Enhancement of existing wetlands will be completed under the permitted authority of federal and state agencies, including the Oregon Department of State Lands and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. | 10/1/2008 | 9/30/2009 | $153,000 |
|
Biological objectives Restore wetland prairie habitat |
Metrics * # of acres treated: 25 acres |
||||
| Develop Terrestrial Habitat Features | Develop habitat features | Habitat features will be installed on acquired lands to improve structural habitat conditions for focal savanna/prairie habitat species. The decision to install habitat features will be based on the ability for a given parcel to achieve the biological objectives and population objectives defined for focal species in Chapter 5 of the Willamette Subbasin Plan Chapter 5 and Technical Appendix D of the plan. Terrestrial habitat features that benefit wildlife species include, but are not limited to nest boxes, avian perches, snags, and artificial roosting sites. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $212,000 |
|
Biological objectives Restore oak woodland habitat Restore riparian habitat Restore upland prairie/savanna habitat Restore wetland prairie habitat |
Metrics * # of features: 120 habitat features |
||||
| Increase Instream Habitat Complexity | Increase instream habitat complexity | Instream interventions as described by produced plan drawings and specifications will be installed. All instream habitat features will be created of natural materials with the specific intention of improving habitat quality or channel morphology, to meet the biological objectives for focal species as defined in the Subbasin Plan. Examples of placed instream installations include large woody debris (LWD), bioengineered revetments, weir structures of natural materials. Installations prescribed to increase instream habitat complexity will be completed under the permitted authority of federal and state agencies, including the Oregon Department of State Lands and the United States Army Corps of Engineers | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $45,000 |
|
Biological objectives Restore riparian habitat |
Metrics * # of stream miles treated: 0.8 miles treated * # of structures installed: 10 structures installed |
||||
| Install Fence | Install fence | Fence will be installed to control livestock access to restoration parcels and prevent access by predators. Fence installation, which may include installation of gates, will take place according to Oregon Department of Transportation Standard Drawings, Specifications and Procedures. A total of 0.5 miles of fence will be installed to meet conservation objectives for upland prairie/savanna habitat. | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $151,420 |
|
Biological objectives Restore oak woodland habitat Restore riparian habitat Restore upland prairie/savanna habitat Restore wetland prairie habitat |
Metrics * # of miles of fence: 1.3 miles of fence |
||||
| Plant Vegetation | Plant vegetation | Vegetation will be planted consistent with the biological objectives of focal species identified for target habitats in the Subbasin Plan. To meet these objectives, trees, shrubs, livestakes, plugs, and seed may be installed. Plants will be installed to restore native habitat based on structural requirements required by species as defined by plans created in Biological Objective 7, work element 174. Plants may also be installed to provide erosion control, or seed disturbed areas following project installation, as defined by Objective 7, work element 174. Plant installation methods will take place to maximize the successful propagation of plant stock. To maximize planting success, plant stock will be cared for using the standards defined by the American Standard for Nursery Stock (American Nursery and Landscape Association, 2004). Plants will be installed according to Oregon Department of Transportation Standard Drawings and Specifications 300 acres of upland prairie/savanna will be treated by this work element. | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $1,229,800 |
|
Biological objectives Restore oak woodland habitat Restore riparian habitat Restore upland prairie/savanna habitat Restore wetland prairie habitat |
Metrics * # of acres of planted: 500 |
||||
| Remove vegetation | Remove non-native vegetation | Undesired vegetation will be removed to meet biological, objectives for focal species. This includes mechanical, biological, and/or chemical methods to remove exotic or nonnative plants or undesirable native plants. Vegetation will be removed according to the vegetation removal framework outlined in Restoring Rare Native Habitats in the Willamette Valley (Campbell, 2004). Specific methodologies for mechanical, biological, or chemical removal of plants will be carried out according to the TNC Weed Control Methods Handbook: Tools and Techniques for Use in Natural Areas (Tu et al, 2001). Areas that require targeted treatment for removal of specific species may also undergo specific removal treatments defined in TNC Element Stewardship Abstracts (The Nature Conservancy, various dates) for effective control of specific species. This work element also includes tree stand and shrub cover manipulation to create target structural habitat conditions for focal species. Where prescribed, this includes removal of tree canopy to maintain 5-30% tree cover in savannah areas, and less than 5% tree cover in upland prairie areas. Shrub cover may also be thinned to meet structural habitat requirements for focal species, as defined by the biological objectives defined in the Subbasin Plan, and information gleaned during searches of current and available scientific literature. 300 acres of upland prairie/savanna will be treated by this work element. | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $661,540 |
|
Biological objectives Restore oak woodland habitat Restore riparian habitat Restore upland prairie/savanna habitat Restore wetland prairie habitat |
Metrics * # of acres treated: 500 acres treated |
||||
| Upland Erosion and Sedimentation Control | Erosion and sedimentation control | Erosion and sediment control may be necessary in upland areas to control mass wasting, improve soil structure and planting conditions, and limit sediment inputs into water bodies. These actions may include installation of water bars, gully plugs, culvert outlets, grade stabilization, and other measures to limit erosional impacts of overland flow, shallow concentrated flow, interflow, and channelized flow. For this project, upland erosion and sediment control activities may be utilized to promote biological objectives for focal species as defined by the Subbasin Plan. Erosion prevention and sediment control methods will be carried out under the general guidance of the Best Management Practices defined in the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Erosion and Sediment Control Manual (Geosyntec Consultants, 2005). Additionally specific erosion and sediment control measures will be undertaken under the documented guidance of a licensed Engineer or Certified Professional Erosion and Sediment Control specialist. | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $88,500 |
|
Biological objectives Restore wetland prairie habitat |
Metrics |
||||
| Maintain Vegetation | Maintain plantings and vegetation | Following installation, vegetation will be maintained to create habitat conditions favorable for focal species, as defined by the Subbasin Plan. Activities included under this work element include herbicide application, plant competition reduction, mowing, irrigation as needed, fertilization, and browse protection. | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $100,000 |
|
Biological objectives Monitoring and Evaluation Program |
Metrics |
||||
| Operate and Maintain Habitat/Passage | Maintain habitat features | Fences, erosion control measures, and other habitat features will require periodic maintenance and operation to ensure proper function. The purpose of operating and maintaining these habitat features is to ensure that the biological objectives set forth during planning and installation are maintained in a properly functioning condition for the duration of the project. | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $50,000 |
|
Biological objectives Monitoring and Evaluation Program |
Metrics |
||||
| Provide Public Access/Information | Provide public access/information | Signs or information boards will be installed or maintained to locate project areas, access roads, and parking structures, and sign for trespass. All signage will follow design, permitting, and installation requirements as defined by local, county, and state development codes and requirements. | 10/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $57,540 |
|
Biological objectives Restore oak woodland habitat Restore riparian habitat Restore upland prairie/savanna habitat Restore wetland prairie habitat |
Metrics |
||||
| Conduct Pre-Acquisition Activities | Conduct pre-acquisition activities | Tasks completed under this work element include performing the appraisal, title searches, boundary surveys, provide legal descriptions, hazardous waste assessments, archaeological surveys, and identification of habitat units. Project sponsor will complete some, but not all of these tasks. | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $821,200 |
|
Biological objectives Maintain and increase oak woodland species Maintain and increase upland prairie species Maintain and increase wetland prairie species Protect priority cutthroat trout habitat |
Metrics |
||||
| Prepare HEP Report | Prepare HEP Report | Tasks completed under this work element will be done to present the HEP survey findings conducted by the Regional HEP team. | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $44,372 |
|
Biological objectives Maintain and increase oak woodland species Maintain and increase upland prairie species Maintain and increase wetland prairie species Protect priority cutthroat trout habitat |
Metrics |
||||
| Other | Produce annaul report | Tasks completed under this work element succinctly document contract performance showing progress and accomplishments for each work element of the work contract. These reports will be completed annually for the benefit of the public record. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $90,000 |
|
Biological objectives Develop restoration projects |
Metrics |
||||
| Coordination | Project management and coordination | Tasks that will be conducted under this work element include aspects of project management that involve coordination with participating entities. This coordination includes on-going and new discussions with agencies and organizations involved in the project. It also includes coordination with project partners developing aspects of the project, as well as contact with property owners interested in participating in the process. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $41,710 |
|
Biological objectives Develop restoration projects |
Metrics |
||||
| Coordination | Project management and coordination | Tasks conducted under this work element include aspects of project management that involve coordination with participating entities. This coordination includes on-going and new discussions with agencies and organizations involved in the project. It also includes coordination with project partners developing aspects of the project, as well as contact with property owners interested in participating in the process. | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2007 | $23,460 |
|
Biological objectives Identify Strategic Planning Regions |
Metrics |
||||
| Coordination | Project management and coordination | Tasks conducted under this work element include aspects of project management that involve coordination with participating entities. This coordination includes on-going and new discussions with agencies and organizations involved in the project. It also includes coordination with project partners developing aspects of the project, as well as contact with property owners interested in participating in the process. | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $35,000 |
|
Biological objectives Produce Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan |
Metrics |
||||
| Identify and Select Projects | Identify parcels for acquisition and wildlife mitigation | The habitat suitability map generated in Objective 1 (Identification of Strategic Planning Regions) is used to identify alternative conservation portfolios of actual landowner parcels that best meet the project goals while minimizing acquisition costs (Andelman, et., al. 1999; Court, et. al. 2000; TNC 2004). The method employs a software package developed by TNC (SITES) using a procedure known as simulated annealing. This procedure involves comparing a very large number of alternative collections of parcels to identify a least cost solution that best meets project goals, in this case a sustainable metapopulation of Fender’s blue butterfly or other species of concern. As used here, costs = (purchase price of selected individual parcels) + (a user defined penalty cost for not meeting the stated conservation goals for each element) + (a user defined cost of spatial dispersion of the selected sites as measured by the total boundary length of the portfolio) (Andelman, et., al. 1999). Thus the purchase price of each individual parcel is considered in developing the conservation reserve that best meets project goals while limiting the overall price tag. Where protecting a land base sufficient to support a self-sustaining population is a goal of the acquisition strategy, the patch structure of the alternative conservation portfolios will be imported into the population viability model (RAMAS/GIS 5.0) to predict the risk of focal species extinction, time to extinction, expected occupancy rates, and metapopulation abundance. As an example, the project currently funded by BPA through ODFW is developing a base population viability analysis (PVA) for Fender's blue butterfly using RAMAS/GIS 5.0. Parameterizing the PVA is based on the best and readily available science. Fender's blue butterfly has been subject to long-term population censuses in Benton County (Hammond 2003) and studies of its life history requirements, dispersal, minimum patch size, etc (Schultz 1998; Schultz 2001; Schultz and Crone 2001; Schultz and Crone 2005). These studies are being reviewed for relevant parameters. Experts will be consulted throughout the course of this project. Parameters used in the pilot project are first approximations of relevant life history data. This project will refine these parameters over the course of developing the Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan where appropriate. A key feature of the overall process is a replicable methodology that allows managers to make informed decisions regarding prioritization of parcels for permanent protection, given limited monetary resources. Another key feature of the model would be to predict the effects of management activities and habitat changes over time and their effects on population viability. This has successfully been done endangered bog fritillary butterfly in Norway (Schtickzelle and Baguette, 2004) and numerous other species (Akcakaya 2005). | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $88,180 |
|
Biological objectives Produce Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan |
Metrics |
||||
| Identify and Select Projects | Select Strategic Planning Regions | Biodiversity and habitat suitability mapping data generated by Work Element 2 will be overlaid with outreach data layers harvested from Work Element 1. Areas within the PCA study area will then be prioritized for inclusion in the remainder of the project. Prioritization will be based on a combination of habitat values and landowner interest. This evaluation will result in determination of the location of Strategic Planning Regions where application of the Regional Conservation Strategy will result in land acquisition and habitat restoration project success. | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2007 | $29,016 |
|
Biological objectives Identify Strategic Planning Regions |
Metrics |
||||
| Manage and Administer Projects | Manage restoration projects | Tasks included under this work element will include work by the contractor to manage on the ground projects, and the efforts of the subcontractors associated with the project. In addition to project management efforts, project reporting and Statement of Work packages and documentation are tasks that will be completed under this work element. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $335,250 |
|
Biological objectives Develop restoration projects |
Metrics |
||||
| Outreach and Education | Landowner Outreach and Education | Tasks conducted under this work element include expansion of the outreach program underway in the Cardwell Hills area (the Cardwell Hills Strategy) to other land bases within the Corvallis – Philomath Oaks PCA, the Corvallis Watershed PCA, and other areas along, but not limited to, Blakesly Creek, Newton Creek, Woods Creek, Rock Creek, and Oak Creek. As part of the outreach effort, the project will be introduced to landowners via landowner brochure distribution, project introduction presentations, landowner meetings and open houses, and one-on-one discussion with landowners. The goal of this effort is to generate support for the project effort and solicit landowner participation in the effort. Data will be collected via surveys, questionnaires, and landowner meetings to aid in determining community interest in this project type. The information generated will be incorporated as part of the project identification and selection process identified in Work Element 114 Produce Inventory or Assessment. | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2007 | $33,700 |
|
Biological objectives Identify Strategic Planning Regions |
Metrics * # of general public reached: Up to 40 landowners in project area |
||||
| Outreach and Education | Landowner outreach program | Tasks conducted under this work element include continuing the outreach program under way in the Cardwell Hills area, and expansion of the outreach program to the other Strategic Planning Regions identified in Objective I. Our experience with the Cardwell Hills project underscores the value of involving landowners as early as possible in the landscape planning process. We have found landowners who are involved early are more invested in the process, and more likely to participate in future acquisition and implementation efforts resulting from the Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan . The Regional Conservation Planning Strategy begins with continuing the public outreach begun under Objective 1 (Strategic Planning Regions), to further engage landowners in the project. This takes place via landowner meetings, open houses, and one-on-one discussion with landowners to generate support for the projects. For each Strategic Planning Region, landowner outreach will take place to aid in soliciting landowner interest and participation in the project. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $59,300 |
|
Biological objectives Produce Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan |
Metrics * # of general public reached: 150 landowners |
||||
| Produce Design and/or Specifications | Produce technical or engineering drawings/plans | All technical or engineering drawings and specifications in support of restoration plans and management plans will be produced under this work element. This includes wetland engineering drawings, instream habitat improvements, terrestrial habitat features and/or other necessary technical drawings and specifications. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $78,000 |
|
Biological objectives Develop restoration projects |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Inventory or Assessment | Produce inventory of strtegic planning regions | This work element will begin with an inventory and assessment of ecological biodiversity and land values within the larger study area. Existing data will be used to determine locations of existing high value target habitats including upland prairie/savanna, oak woodlands, wet prairies/seasonal marshes, and riparian areas. Locational point data for focal species will be acquired from the Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center and prepared as a spatial overlay to aid in prioritizing areas for biodiversity value. Habitat suitability mapping will also be competed, based on a modeling approach that estimates wildlife presence/absence using the best available scientific principles as they relate to wildlife ecology. This modeling approach is based on arrangement of spatial and behavioral species data gleaned from the scientific literature, to define the suitability of a given land base for use by focal wildlife species. The methodology for this approach is reviewed in prior habitat suitability projects (Metropolitan Council 2030 Blue Print, McKenzie Watershed Council/Alsea, Marion County, Metro Greenspaces Program, etc) as well as the Cardwell Hills Strategy itself. Where point data are available for project focal species, the habitat suitability map will be based on a quantitative relationship between habitat features (e.g., vegetation cover type, slope, aspect, etc.) and the presence/absence of the focal species (Akcakaya 2005). The statistical procedure involves a logistic regression analysis using presence/absence as the dependent variable and habitat characteristics as the set of independent variables to develop a habitat suitability function. This way, habitat variables that do not contribute significantly to the prediction of species occurrence are eliminated. The habitat suitability function is imported into the geographic information system (GIS) spatial data subprogram to map the spatial structure of suitable habitat patches by identifying areas of high habitat suitability. The model being used (RAMAS/GIS 5.0) has been instrumental in developing and refining management plans to benefit endangered species throughout the world (Akcakaya 2005, Schtickzelle and Baguette 2004). | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2007 | $25,116 |
|
Biological objectives Identify Strategic Planning Regions |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Inventory or Assessment | Produce land base assessment for Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan | The Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan, as developed by the Cardwell Hills project, will then be implemented in each of the identified key Strategic Planning Regions. The Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan is a conservation ‘reserve’ mapping method that inventories and assesses landscape condition using habitat suitability mapping, landowner interest, and land values within a Strategic Planning Region. This information is used in later work elements to identify conservation portfolios composed of parcels most suitable for land acquisition and conservation implementation. The Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan inventories and assesses the land base within a given Strategic Planning Region. Techniques involve habitat suitability mapping, and land valuation exercises, further refined by incorporating a framework for population viability analysis currently being funded as a pilot project by BPA through ODFW. The method, which will be fully transferable to other areas, will ultimately identify individual parcels for permanent protection and / or restoration to best achieve the Subbasin plan’s regional conservation goals. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $43,444 |
|
Biological objectives Produce Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Inventory or Assessment | Site-specific inventories and assessments | Tasks under this work element include site-specific inventories and assessments to determine presence/absence of subbasin focal species, habitat conditions, land cover characteristics, and potential restoration opportunities. Inventories will be completed for each parcel. Information collected and compiled during this phase will provide the information basis for technical restoration plans, details and specifications completed under work elements 174 and 175. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $79,800 |
|
Biological objectives Develop restoration projects |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Plan | Produce monitoring plan | Planning research, monitoring, and evaluation (RM&E) methods will generally involve integrating established monitoring methods, reviewing scientific literature, and consulting local experts. The major purpose of RM&E methods in this project will be to assess the success of restoration efforts within focal habitats and to determine whether adaptive management actions are needed. For specific protocols, we will consult other scientists monitoring similar habitat types within the region, such as those of The Nature Conservancy at Kingston Prairie. Using similar monitoring techniques will allow data sets between sites to be compared or combined in the future. “Ultimately, monitoring data collected within the Willamette Basin should be compatible with other regional date protocols and evaluation frameworks, allowing for evaluation across the Columbia system” (Primozich and Bastasch 2004). General methods for monitoring focal habitats and species are described in work elements sections below. During the RM&E planning stage, they will be further refined according to information obtained the above mentioned sources. Monitoring techniques will also be developed with the foresight that this project will eventually be expanded to a greater area. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $19,200 |
|
Biological objectives Monitoring and Evaluation Program |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Plan | Produce Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan | The result of tasks completed in the above work elements for Objective 2 will be a complete Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan for each Strategic Planning Region. The Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan forms the basis and roadmap for acquisition and conservation activities as they take place parcel-by-parcel within each Strategic Planning Region. The Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan is the composite map and document describing biodiversity targets, the goals and objectives for each target, how the biodiversity portfolios were developed and analyzed, the selection of the preferred portfolio, site restoration planning and prioritized implementation strategies. Since landowners have been involved in production of the plan during all phases, landowner agreements to participate in the project by selling land, acquiring conservation easements is an important and fundamental part of each Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan for each Strategic Planning Region. This plan is a critical element of the Oregon Solutions project which is to develop a replicable method of voluntary biodiversity planning and implementation. The plan will document the landowner outreach program, and methods used for developing the HS map and conservation portfolios, a discussion of the Fender's blue butterfly PVA, and the results of analyzing the alternative conservation portfolio scenarios. | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $51,740 |
|
Biological objectives Produce Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Plan | Produce restoration plans and construction documents | Tasks completed under this work element include production of restoration plans, management plans, and implementation for each parcel acquired under the project program. The plans provide a complete prescription of how each parcel will provide the habitat conditions and quality necessary for improvement of habitat viability of populations of focal species as they reside within the project. DEA will prepare habitat conservation and management plans for up to eight identified Phase One sites. DEA will work with one identified funding organization or agency (e.g. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife or Northwest Power and Conservation Council) to provide management level recommendations consistent with the funding application requirements necessary to implement the project. DEA will conduct one site visit per site in association with management planning to study and document site conditions. These management plans will be developed under action planning goals of the Marys River Watershed Council, the Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan, and and the individual requirements of each of the landowners. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $267,000 |
|
Biological objectives Develop restoration projects |
Metrics |
||||
| Provide Technical Review | Review restoration plans and documents | Tasks completed under this work element include review of project technical documents, including engineering plans, restoration plans, project selection decisions, and deliverables. In particular, work completed under this work element includes review of documents and technical products completed in work elements 174 and 175 of this objective, which will result in technical documents outlining implementation of the project. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $31,500 |
|
Biological objectives Develop restoration projects |
Metrics |
||||
| Provide Technical Review | Technical review of Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan | Tasks completed under this work element include review of project selection decisions and deliverables as they apply to this particular objective. Tasks completed under this work element will be completed by qualified personnel with commensurate experience and credentials qualifying them to review work for technical consistency, clarity, and completeness. Quality control and quality assurance processes will also be completed under this work element. | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $19,560 |
|
Biological objectives Produce Regional Biodiversity Protection Plan |
Metrics |
||||
| Provide Technical Review | Technical review of RM&E program | Tasks completed under this work element include review of project technical documents assosciated with the RM&E program. In particular RM&E methods, data analysis, data interpretation, and data management will be reviewed for quality control and quality assurance purposes. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $28,320 |
|
Biological objectives Monitoring and Evaluation Program |
Metrics |
||||
| Provide Technical Review | Technical review of Strategic Planning Regions | Tasks completed under this work element include review of project selection decisions and deliverables as they apply to this particular objective. Tasks completed under this work element will be completed by qualified personnel with commensurate experience and credentials qualifying them to review work for technical consistency, clarity, and completeness. Quality control and quality assurance processes will also be completed under this work element. | 1/1/2007 | 9/30/2007 | $19,560 |
|
Biological objectives Identify Strategic Planning Regions |
Metrics |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | Analyze and interpret data | Adaptive management is the process of continually improving management policies and practices by incorporating the results of past actions and new knowledge. During this process, monitoring results will be thoroughly reviewed to incorporate new knowledge into future project design. Project goals and objectives will be revisited to determine if they are being achieved. If they are not, a determination will be made that either the base assumptions were wrong, the restoration actions were implemented improperly, site conditions have changed, or the monitoring is faulty (e.g., results have not been reported accurately). Adaptive management involves the following six steps: • Documenting the problem, the desired future conditions, and goals and objectives used to determine success • Developing a plan to achieve the desired future conditions • Developing a monitoring plan to gauge whether the goals and objectives are being met • Implementing the project plan • Monitoring and evaluating the success of the project based on achieving the desired future conditions and project goals and objectives • Confronting the original project plans with the new data and adjusting plans accordingly Monitoring data will be analyzed and evaluated to determine whether restoration objectives are being met and whether adaptive management actions are warranted. Vegetation plot data will be examined to determine the success of restoration efforts such as the continued absence of invasive species and the survival of native species. Summary statistics of vegetation plot data will be evaluated to determine whether restored habitat is likely to meet the requirements of focal species. Based on habitat objectives recommended for focal species in Primozich and Bastasch (2004, see Chapter 5 and Appendix D), thresholds for particular key environmental characteristics will be determined. For example, thresholds based on habitat objectives defined for the acorn woodpecker would include a mean oak tree diameter of 15 inches with more than 20% of the trees larger than 22 inches, less than 5% canopy cover of Douglas fir, a deciduous canopy cover (predominately oak) canopy cover of less than 75%, and a subcanopy cover of less than 50%. Plot data will be compared to these thresholds. If it is determined after these comparisons that the thresholds are not being met, then further restoration efforts will be implemented to improve habitat conditions. Population data collected for focal species will also be analyzed and evaluated. Estimates of population size will be calculated for the focal species being monitored. Population estimates will be compared before and after restoration efforts are implemented and between consecutive years thereafter for the remainder of the project. We will use one-way ANOVA to detect significant variation in population size estimates within species across years. These analyses will be aimed to determine whether the population objective of maintaining or expanding existing numbers and geographic distribution of focal species is being achieved by restoration efforts. If analyses indicate that the population size of a focal species is decreasing, then further actions may be taken to improve the habitat of that species. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $55,800 |
|
Biological objectives Monitoring and Evaluation Program |
Metrics |
||||
| Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data | Collect field data | Field data will be collected within each focal habitat to monitor key environmental characteristics and focal species. Within focal habitats, a stratified random sampling technique will be applied in which transects are extended across parcels and sample points are randomly selected along transects. At each point, two vegetation plots of different sizes will be established. A quadrat of 2 by 2 meters will be used to record characteristics at the ground layer (> 1 meter), and a quadrat of 10 by 10 meters will be used to record characteristics at the shrub and canopy layers (< 1 meter). To permanently mark the location of plots, GPS coordinates will be recorded and survey stakes will be placed at the corners of survey plots and flagged. The type of data collected will vary depending on the focal habitat and the key environmental characteristics known to correlate with the focal species supported by each habitat type according to Appendix D of Primozich and Bastasch (2004): Oak Woodland: species composition; percent canopy cover by species; oak diameter at breast height; density of snags, tree cavities and downed wood; tree density by species; abundance of shrubs; tree height by species; understory native shrub cover Upland prairie-Savanna: height of vegetation layers; percent ground cover and percent shrub cover; species composition; presence of snags and tree cavities Wetland prairie: plant species composition; presence of standing water; soil characteristics Seasonal marshland riparian forest: tree density (stem density or canopy cover of trees) subtotaled by species; shrub density (stem density or canopy cover of trees) subtotaled by species; native herbaceous emergent plant cover; native aquatic plant cover; water regime (as recommended in the wetland chapter of Oregon’s State of the Environment Report by Morlan 2000 as cited Primozich and Bastasch 2004) Unlimited-distance point counts will be used to monitor birds at sample points along transects within each focal habitat type. Point counts are the most widely used quantitative method used for monitoring land birds. This method involves an observer recording birds from a single point for a standardized time period (Ralph et al. 1995). The methodology follows the recommendations of Ralph et al. (1995) and is consistent with the method employed by the USDA Forest Service Northern Region Land Bird Monitoring Project (Hutto et al. 2001). A ten-minute point count will be conducted at each of the randomly selected permanent sample points. All points will be visited for a minimum of two and preferably three times during the breeding season with a minimum of 7 days between counts. Point counts will be initiated 15 minutes after sunrise and completed by 1000 hours. Birds will be monitored during weather conditions that are warm and calm enough for birds to be detected by sight or sound. Walking transects in upland prairie/savanna habitat will be conducted to monitor for Fender’s blue butterfly and Taylor’s checkerspot butterfly within upland prairie/savanna (as described in Pollard and Yates 1993). During these censuses all observations of these two species along transects will be recorded. Censuses will occur during the peak of butterfly emergence and will be conducted every seven to ten days during census periods. A calibration method may be applied to the data to minimize double-counting between surveys and to account for missed individuals between surveys (Schultz and Dlugosch 1999). Walking surveys along transects will be conducted to monitor for western gray squirrel within oak woodland habitat (sensu Ryan and Cary 1995). Surveys will be conducted during the spring and/or summer when the squirrels are more active, searching the ground and trees for their occurrence. Several monitoring methods will be employed to estimate populations of reptile and amphibian focal species. Standard visual encounter surveys (Crump and Scott 1994) along edges of ponds and wetlands will be conducted for red legged frog adults, juveniles, and tadpoles during the warmest time of day (between 1000 and 1500 hours) and during the season when they are most active. Similar methods may be used along slow-moving rivers and streams, wetlands, and ponds to gain estimates of western pond turtles between March and June. Species presence and relative abundance of southern alligator lizards within oak woodlands can be estimated using one of two methods – drift lines with pitfall trapping or searches along transect lines (Bennett 1999; Ryan et al. 2002). A pitfall trapping line would consist of ten buckets (30 cm deep × 30 cm diameter) distributed at 10 m intervals along a drift fence (50 cm height, 100 m in length and buried to 5 cm depth) that would be checked daily for five consecutive days (as described in Scott et al. 2005). Monitoring data collected to date for the sharptail snake is currently depauperate (Primozich and Bastasch 2004). The sharptail snake is most likely to be observed in oak woodland habitat under boulders and downed wood during the rainy season because when the soil is dry, it retreats underground. Therefore, this species would be surveyed under boulders and downed wood along transects following periods of rain. To acquire population estimates for the western rattlesnake, walking surveys will be performed in open grassy areas in upland prairie/savanna habitat where individuals are likely to be foraging. During surveys, special attention will be paid to potential basking areas such as sunny, rocky areas and beneath scattered shrubs that could be used for shade. Surveys will be conducted during spring and summer when snakes are less likely to be in their dens. The methods for monitoring focal habitats and species described above will be further refined according to information obtained during consultation with local experts and other scientists conducting RM&E projects within the Columbia Basin. All data collected in the field will be entered into a computer program such as MS Excel for storage and handling. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $246,140 |
|
Biological objectives Monitoring and Evaluation Program |
Metrics Primary R, M, and E Type: Project implementation |
||||
| Create/Manage/Maintain Database | Create and maintain database | We anticipate that this monitoring effort will result in a wealth of data collected throughout its lifetime. In order for this information to be useful, it will need to be maintained in an organized, secure, and quality controlled database. Creation of this database will involve creating useful and meaningful standardized data formats for all variables measured. As data are entered, the database will be reviewed to eliminate errors. Spatial data for the project will be developed and maintained in ESRI Shapefile, Geodatabase, and GRID formats. Final data will be compiled into a coherent stand-alone database that can be easily integrated into partner agencies’ existing GIS databases. FGDC-compliant Metadata will be provided for all GIS data, in both ESRI XML and HTML format. | 6/1/2007 | 6/1/2009 | $109,800 |
|
Biological objectives Monitoring and Evaluation Program |
Metrics |
||||
| Develop RM&E Methods and Designs | Develop RM&E methods | This work element will include the development of a statistical monitoring sampling design (as summarized in ISAB and ISRP 2005). For each focal habitat and focal species, sampling points will be determined probabilistically (e.g., a stratified random distribution) within parcels. This design will allow inferences to be made at the population level based on samples. When sampling protocols are similar among species, they will share sampling points. Monitoring will be conducted before implementing restoration efforts to estimate baseline population sizes and annually thereafter for the life of the project to estimate changes in focal habitat conditions and in population sizes. ISAB and the ISRP (2005) define this technique as a Before-After quasi-experimental method. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2008 | $44,400 |
|
Biological objectives Monitoring and Evaluation Program |
Metrics |
||||
| Disseminate Raw/Summary Data and Results | Disseminate data and results | Data from the database of monitoring data will be made available to other scientists who submit requests. As explained above, data will be collected in a standard form that will be compatible with other regional data protocols. Therefore, they are likely to be useful to other scientists within the area who wish to compare or combine them with their own data. They could also be useful as a tool for informing future projects and restoration efforts. Final data will also be displayed on a project Internet page, through which individual datasets will be made available for download. FGDC-compliant Metadata will be provided for all GIS data, in both ESRI XML and HTML format | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $79,800 |
|
Biological objectives Monitoring and Evaluation Program |
Metrics |
||||
| Submit/Acquire Data | Data management | Raw data entered into Excel spreadsheets will be transferred to a centrally stored and organized, secure database. Data may then be transferred into a statistical program (e.g., Excel or JMP statistical software) for analysis. Transferring data among sources may involve reformatting in some cases. | 6/1/2007 | 9/30/2009 | $86,100 |
|
Biological objectives Monitoring and Evaluation Program |
Metrics |
||||
Section 8. Budgets
Itemized estimated budget
| Item | Note | FY07 | FY08 | FY09 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personnel | David Evans and Associates | $256,038 | $338,661 | $209,578 |
| Fringe Benefits | David Evans and Associates | $106,656 | $141,072 | $86,074 |
| Overhead | David Evans and Associates | $281,613 | $371,024 | $223,792 |
| Other | Marys River Watershed Council | $121,360 | $121,540 | $108,460 |
| Other | Land Survey | $75,000 | $125,000 | $50,000 |
| Other | Haz-Mat Surveys | $37,500 | $62,500 | $25,000 |
| Other | Archaeological Surveys | $54,000 | $90,000 | $36,000 |
| Other | Purchase Land | $750,000 | $1,250,000 | $500,000 |
| Other | Restoration Contractor | $156,624 | $1,338,521 | $1,518,855 |
| Travel | Portland to Corvallis | $7,050 | $9,750 | $10,200 |
| Capital Equipment | Trimble Explorer GPS (2) | $12,000 | $0 | $0 |
| Other | Misc. supplies | $7,800 | $5,500 | $5,500 |
| Other | Appraisal Services | $37,500 | $62,500 | $25,000 |
| Totals | $1,903,141 | $3,916,068 | $2,798,459 | |
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
| Total itemized budget: | $8,617,668 |
| Total work element budget: | $8,617,668 |
Cost sharing
| Funding source/org | Item or service provided | FY 07 est value ($) | FY 08 est value ($) | FY 09 est value ($) | Cash or in-kind? | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| David Evans and Associates, Inc. | RAMAS/GIS 5.0 | $3,000 | $0 | $0 | Cash | Confirmed |
| David Evans and Associates, Inc. | Labor for Oregon Solutions Process | $16,395 | $0 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Totals | $19,395 | $0 | $0 | |||
Section 9. Project future
|
FY 2010 estimated budget: $350,000 FY 2011 estimated budget: $350,000 |
Comments: Future operations and maintenance costs |
Future O&M costs:
Termination date: 9/31/20011
Comments:
Final deliverables: Final Reports of Strategic Planning Regions, Regional Biodiversity Protection Plans, and data sets. Complete restoration plans and RM&E plans for each parcel.
Section 10. Narrative and other documents
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 | Capital | ProvinceCapital | Do Not Fund |
| NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | ProvinceCapital | ||
ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)
Recommendation: Fundable
NPCC comments: ISRP found this proposal exemplary, well reasoned, and well written. Although this is a new project, the context for its development has been clearly and compellingly presented and should contribute to fulfilling the objectives of the Program. The proposal clearly explains the need to acquire and manage habitat for endangered and threatened species. The project is specifically designed to benefit focal species through habitat acquisition and habitat restoration. Long-term benefits will depend on other activities in the basin for some focal species. The potential impact of restoration activities, such as burning and vegetation removal, on non-focal species should be clearly addressed. The project appears to be a priority wildlife and habitat restoration project supported by the Willamette Subbasin Plan and OWEB. Specifically, the proposed project is a critical component of the Cardwell Hills Strategy that Governor Kulongoski has designated as an Oregon Solutions project. After 2 years, the project has initiated an intensive landowner outreach program that has identified up to 27 landowners who may voluntarily implement restoration activities to benefit upland prairie/savanna, oak woodland, wetland prairie and seasonal marsh, and riparian habitats. The next phases of the project involve determining which available parcels should be surveyed and protected, entering into negotiations with willing landowners, implementing restoration plans, and initiating a similar outreach program throughout the Corvallis – Philomath Oaks PCA, the Corvallis Watershed PCA, and other areas. This is an excellent model of collaboration. This large project involves many objectives that depend on the same approach but target different habitat types and focal species. It may be more prudent to proceed in steps to acquire and restore habitat types on a priority basis to allow refining and adapting the process over a series of funding cycles. It would be useful if the sponsors identified a priority order for the objectives. There are many, many objectives that are clearly defined. Expected results are identified but not all provide measurable benefits to fish and wildlife. There is extensive monitoring and evaluation that is adequately explained given much of the project is still in the planning and early implementation phase. This level of monitoring should be capable of determining the success of the project. The proposal mentions in general terms how the information from this project will be disseminated (annual report, technical report, or scientific publication). Plans for data storage and release are adequate. The ISRP encourages the consideration of information dissemination beyond the Willamette Valley as results and model could be widely useful if successful.
ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)
Recommendation: Fundable
NPCC comments: ISRP found this proposal exemplary, well reasoned, and well written. Although this is a new project, the context for its development has been clearly and compellingly presented and should contribute to fulfilling the objectives of the Program. The proposal clearly explains the need to acquire and manage habitat for endangered and threatened species. The project is specifically designed to benefit focal species through habitat acquisition and habitat restoration. Long-term benefits will depend on other activities in the basin for some focal species. The potential impact of restoration activities, such as burning and vegetation removal, on non-focal species should be clearly addressed. The project appears to be a priority wildlife and habitat restoration project supported by the Willamette Subbasin Plan and OWEB. Specifically, the proposed project is a critical component of the Cardwell Hills Strategy that Governor Kulongoski has designated as an Oregon Solutions project. After 2 years, the project has initiated an intensive landowner outreach program that has identified up to 27 landowners who may voluntarily implement restoration activities to benefit upland prairie/savanna, oak woodland, wetland prairie and seasonal marsh, and riparian habitats. The next phases of the project involve determining which available parcels should be surveyed and protected, entering into negotiations with willing landowners, implementing restoration plans, and initiating a similar outreach program throughout the Corvallis – Philomath Oaks PCA, the Corvallis Watershed PCA, and other areas. This is an excellent model of collaboration. This large project involves many objectives that depend on the same approach but target different habitat types and focal species. It may be more prudent to proceed in steps to acquire and restore habitat types on a priority basis to allow refining and adapting the process over a series of funding cycles. It would be useful if the sponsors identified a priority order for the objectives. There are many, many objectives that are clearly defined. Expected results are identified but not all provide measurable benefits to fish and wildlife. There is extensive monitoring and evaluation that is adequately explained given much of the project is still in the planning and early implementation phase. This level of monitoring should be capable of determining the success of the project. The proposal mentions in general terms how the information from this project will be disseminated (annual report, technical report, or scientific publication). Plans for data storage and release are adequate. The ISRP encourages the consideration of information dissemination beyond the Willamette Valley as results and model could be widely useful if successful.