FY07-09 proposal 199706000
Jump to Reviews and Recommendations
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Focus Watershed Coordinator - Nez Perce Tribe |
| Proposal ID | 199706000 |
| Organization | Nez Perce Tribe |
| Short description | Manage and implement a comprehensive system to coordinate multiple jurisdictions, agencies, and private landwoners within the Nez Perce Tribe's Treaty Territory. These efforts work toward protecting, restoring, and enhancing watersheds. |
| Information transfer | Information will be available upon request and through the submittal of quarterly and annual reports. |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Contacts
| Contact | Organization | |
|---|---|---|
| Form submitter | ||
| Heidi McRoberts | Nez Perce Tribe | heidim@nezperce.org |
| All assigned contacts | ||
| Arleen Henry | Nez Perce Tribe | arleenh@nezperce.org |
| Ira Jones | Nez Perce Tribe | iraj@nezperce.org |
| Heidi McRoberts | Nez Perce Tribe | heidim@nezperce.org |
Section 2. Locations
Province / subbasin: Mainstem/Systemwide / Systemwide
| Latitude | Longitude | Waterbody | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| River | Clearwater River Subbasin | ||
| River | Salmon River Subbasin | ||
| River | Grande Ronde River | ||
| River | Imnaha River Subbasin | ||
| River | Snake Hells Canyon | ||
| River | Lower Snake River | ||
| Stream | Tucannon River Watershed | ||
| Stream | Asotin Creek watershed |
Section 3. Focal species
primary: Chinook Snake River Fall ESUprimary: Steelhead Snake River ESU
secondary: Cutthroat Trout
secondary: Westslope Cutthroat
secondary: Pacific Lamprey
secondary: Rainbow Trout
Additional: Bull Trout
Section 4. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishments |
|---|---|
| 2005 | Completed Master Participating Agreement on the Wallowa Whitman National Forest. |
| 2004 | Finialized Subbasin Plans in the Imnaha River, Lower Snake River, Tucannon River, Asotin Creek, Salmon River, Snake Hells Canyon Complex. |
| 2003 | Finalized the Clearwater River Subbasin Assessment and Management Plan. Completed Master Participating Agreement with Nez Perce National Forest. |
| 2002 | Took the role of co-lead on the following Subbasin Assessments and Management Plans: Asotin Creek, Tucannon River and Lower Snake River. The Nez Perce Tribe was the lead agency on the Snake Hells Canyon, Imnaha River, & Salmon River Subbasin Plans. |
| 2001 | Completed final draft of Clearwater Subbasin Summary, and added terrestrial component to the assessment. Developed and finalized the Master Challenge Cost Share Agreement with the Clearwater and Nez Perce National Forests. |
| 2000 | Implemented a contract for the development of the Clearwater River Subbasin Assessment and received the Chief of the Forest Service Rise to the Future Award for Colaborative Aquatic Restoration. |
| 1999 | Coordinated the organization of the Clearwater River Policy Advisory Committee and provided administrative structure. |
| 1998 | Coordinated multiple agency Challenge Cost Share Agreement between the CNF, Potlatch Corp., Idaho Dept of Lands, and private grazing permittees for the construction of riparian protection fence across multiple land jurisdictions. |
| 1997 | Coordinated and developed cost share projects with the Clearwater and Nez Perce National Forests to implement road decommissionning in Lolo Creek and the Upper Lochsa River. In addition, design and construction of riparian protection fences on CNF & NPNF |
| 1996 | Coordinated Salmon Corps to remove six miles of dilapidated fence and to stabilize the Glory Hole landslide. |
Section 5. Relationships to other projects
| Funding source | Related ID | Related title | Relationship |
|---|---|---|---|
| BPA | 198335000 | Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery O&M | Hatchery supplementation to restore and recover Snake River Basin salmon stocks |
| BPA | 198335003 | Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery M&E | M&E of hatuchery supplementation within Tribal Treaty Territory. |
| BPA | 199608600 | Clearwater Focus Program-IDSCC | Co-coordination of watershed activities within the Clearwater River Subbasin. |
| BPA | 199607702 | Lolo Creek Watershed | Watershed restoration activities within Lolo Creek drainage |
| BPA | 199607703 | Restore Fishing to Bear Creek | Watershed restoration activities within the Fishing to Bear Creek Analysis Area. |
| BPA | 199607705 | Restore Mccomas Meadows | Watershed restoration activities within the Meadow Creek watershed. |
| BPA | 199901600 | Protect/Restore Big Canyon Cr. | Watershed restoration activities within Big Canyon Creek watershed. |
| BPA | 199901700 | Rehabilitate Lapwai Creek | Watershed restoration activities within Lapwai Creek watershed. |
| BPA | 200003500 | Rehabilitate Newsome Creek - S | Watershed restoration activities within Newsome Creek watershed. |
| BPA | 200003600 | Protect And Restore Mill Creek | Watershed restoration activities within Mill Creek watershed. |
| BPA | 200207300 | Wallowa Culvert Inventory | Culvert Inventory and assessment within Wallowa County, Oregon. |
| PCSRF - CRITFC | 2000-1-01 | Restore Habitat Access within Lolo Creek | Culvert replacement projects within Lolo Creek Drainage. |
| PCSRF - CRITFC | 2002-1-01 | Little Salmon Falls Adjustment | Evaluation of feasability of Little Salmon Falls Adjustment. |
| PCSRF - CRITFC | 2003-1-02 | Little Salmon River Passage An | Analysis of passage of Little Salmon River. |
| PCSRF - CRITFC | 2001-1-02 | Wallowa County Culvert Invento | Analysis of fish passage through culverts in Wallowa County, Oregon. |
| PCSRF - Idaho | 031 04 CW | Lolo Creek Passage Restoration | Culvert replacements within the Lolo Creek watershed. |
| PCSRF - Idaho | 032 04 CW | Crooked Brushy Road Decommisio | Road decommissionning within the Upper Lochsa River. |
| PCSRF - Idaho | 033 04 CW | Lochsa River Fish Passage Impr | Culvert replacements within the upper Lochsa River. |
| PCSRF - Idaho | 035 04 CW | Nez Perce Aquatic Restoration | Watershed restoration within the Nez Perce National Forest. |
Section 6. Biological objectives
| Biological objectives | Full description | Associated subbasin plan | Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Continue riparian recovery | Continue riparian recovery to achieve at least 75 % riparian function | Tucannon | Increase landowner participation in federal, state, tribal, and local programs that enhance watershed health. Seek additional funding sources consistent with CRP and CrEP guidelines to increase individual landowner enrollment in programs. |
| Continue riparian recovery | Continue riparian recovery to achieve at least 75 % riparian function | Asotin | Increase landowner participation in federal, state, tribal, and local programs that enhance watershed health. Seek additional funding sources consistent with CRP and CrEP guidelines to increase individual landowner enrollment in programs. |
| Coord. Implementation of Habitat Strategies | Coordinate implementation of habitat strategies to maximize efficiencies in implementation; develop coordinated activiities in the lower subbasin | Salmon | 66A1 - 66A9: Specifically 66A5: Coordinate plan implementation with federal, tribal, state, local, and other interest and avoid program and project duplication & 66A6: form a group in the lower Salmon focused on fish and wildlife planning & implementation |
| Coordinate with groups and the public | Coordinate with groups and the public when developing and implementing fish and wildlife activities in the subbasin. | Imnaha | 3. Organize project goals and implementation strategies and coordinate plan implementation with agencies. 4. Prioritize and make funding recommendations. 7. Implement information and education. 8. Implement public meetings and newsletters |
| Coordination and Implementation | Coordinate efforts to implement the Pacific Northwest Electric Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, tribal treaties, and other local, state, federal, and tribal programs, obligations, and authorities. | Imnaha | Provide ridge top-to-ridge top stewardship of natural resouces, recognizing all components of the ecosystem, including the human component. |
| Coordination and Implementation | Coordinate efforts to implement the Pacific Northwest Electric Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, tribal treaties, and other local, state, federal, and tribal programs, obligations, and authorities. | Grande Ronde | Provide ridge top-to-ridge top stewardship of natural resouces, recognizing all components of the ecosystem, including the human component. |
| Develop programs and project proposals | Develop programs and project proposals compatible with existing community needs and that integrate with local watershed protection, restoration, and management objectives and activities. | Clearwater | 1. Involve communities in program and project planning. 2. Coordinate plan implementation with all agencies. 3. Seek local support for programs and project proposals. |
| Evaluate needs and opportunities of resident popln | Evaluate needs and opportunities to increase native resident populations throughout the subbasin. | Snake Hells Canyon | Coordinate efforts to implement the existing bull trout recovery plan to address needs of bull trout and other resident fish. |
| Facilitate riparian recovery | Facilitate riparian recovery in heavily degraded areas to achieve > 82% riparian function. | Lower Snake | Increase landowner participation in federal, state, tribal, and local programs that enhance watershed health. Seek additional funding sources consistent with CRP and CrEP guidelines to increase individual landowner enrollment in programs. |
| Identify igh priority habitat areas | Identify high priority habitat area requiring protection or restoration. | Clearwater | 1. Develop prioritization process to achieve multiple objectives, values, & benefits. 2. Integrate prioritzation process for projects in the subbasin. 3. The PAC will invlve fed, tribal, state, and local policy makers. |
| Improve coordination of activities | Improve coordination of activities in the subbasin to promote steardship of natural resouces and increase long-term implementation success | Snake Hells Canyon | 1. Form a group focused on fish and wildlife planning and implementation to prioritize and coordinate activities in the subbasin. 2. Involve local stakeholders. 3. Organize project goals and strategies. 4. Information and education. 5. Public Involvement. |
| Increase resource information and education | Increase resouce information and education delivery in the subbasin | Clearwater | 1. Promote ridgetop to ridgetop stewardship of natural resources. 2. Implement information and education actions identified in plan. 3. Provie information and assistance to SWCS, WAG, and other parties. 4. Provide opportunites for subbasin information. |
| Maximize social and economic benefits | Maximize social and economic benefits as much as possible while implementing the Clearwater Subbasin Plan | Clearwater | 1. Maximize economic benefits of plan for land purchases or easements. 2. Effot should be made to utilize local labor forces, contractors, and suppliers when implementing habitat improvement projects. 3. Monitor and evaluate the effort local areas. |
| Participate in technical advisory groups | Participate in existing and contribute to the further development of local watershed and technical advisory groups. | Clearwater | 1. Assist Soil and Water Conservation Districts, Watershed Advisory Groups, and other existing groups to organize project goals and implementation strategies. 2. Assist interested groups with watershed programs. 3. Facilitate networking of these groups. |
| Prioritize and coordinate efforts to address data | Prioritize and coordinate efforts to address data gaps. | Clearwater | 1. Develop process to prioritze efforts to fill data gaps. 2. Prioritize data gaps to use limited data resources. 3. The PAC will involve federal, state, triba, and local policy makers in the process. |
| Protect existing wetlands and restablish wetland | Protect existing wetlands and reestablish wetland and wet meadow compleses where feasible | Grande Ronde | Coordinate weed control efforts on both public and private lands. Work with soil and water conservation districts, NRCS, FSA, landowners et al to implement best management practices in wetland and riparian areas. |
| Protect habitat and habitat function | Protect habitats through education and outreach. Protect habitat based on outcomes of habitat conditons. | Lower Snake | Provide inforation, outreach, and coordination with public and private land managers. Enter into cooperative projects and management agreements with Federal, State, and Tribal, and private landowners to restore and conserve habitat function. |
| Protect habitat and habitat function | Protect habitats through education and outreach. Protect habitat based on outcomes of habitat conditons. | Lower Snake | Work with county, state, and federal agencies and private landowners to develop livestock grazing programs on publc and private lands. Use easements, leases, cooperative agreements and acquisitions to protect habitats. |
| Reduce embeddedness to < 50% | Reduce embeddedness to < 50% , which will stimulate a corresponding decrease in percent fines and turbidity. | Tucannon | Increase landowner participation in federal, state, tribal, and local programs that enhance watershed conditions. |
| Reduce embeddedness to < 50% | Reduce embeddedness to < 50% , which will stimulate a corresponding decrease in percent fines and turbidity. | Lower Snake | Increase landowner participation in federal, state, tribal, and local programs that enhance watershed health. |
| Restore areas where grasslands degraded | Maintain coordination between the Wallowa county Natural Resource Advisory Committee (NRAC), Wallowa County Soil and Water Conservation District and NRCS, the US Forest Service and other interested landowner agencies and organizations. | Imnaha | Cost effective and biologically beneficial restoration for the resouces. |
Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)
| Work element name | Work element title | Description | Start date | End date | Est budget |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Identify and Select Projects | Identify and select highest priority watershed restoration projects | Identify and select highest priority watershed restoration projects within the treaty territory. | 6/1/2007 | 5/31/2010 | $100,000 |
|
Biological objectives Continue riparian recovery Continue riparian recovery Coord. Implementation of Habitat Strategies Coordinate with groups and the public Coordination and Implementation Coordination and Implementation Develop programs and project proposals Evaluate needs and opportunities of resident popln Facilitate riparian recovery Identify igh priority habitat areas Improve coordination of activities Increase resource information and education Maximize social and economic benefits Participate in technical advisory groups Prioritize and coordinate efforts to address data Protect existing wetlands and restablish wetland Protect habitat and habitat function Protect habitat and habitat function Reduce embeddedness to < 50% Reduce embeddedness to < 50% Restore areas where grasslands degraded |
Metrics |
||||
| Coordination | Coordinate watershed project development within the 1855 treaty territory of the Nez Perce Tribe | Coordinate watershed restoration and protection project development within the treaty territory of the Nez Perce Tribe, including prioritizing projects for submittal to additonal funding sources. | 6/1/2007 | 5/31/2010 | $562,294 |
|
Biological objectives Continue riparian recovery Continue riparian recovery Coord. Implementation of Habitat Strategies Coordinate with groups and the public Coordination and Implementation Coordination and Implementation Develop programs and project proposals Evaluate needs and opportunities of resident popln Facilitate riparian recovery Identify igh priority habitat areas Improve coordination of activities Increase resource information and education Maximize social and economic benefits Participate in technical advisory groups Prioritize and coordinate efforts to address data Protect existing wetlands and restablish wetland Protect habitat and habitat function Protect habitat and habitat function Reduce embeddedness to < 50% Reduce embeddedness to < 50% Restore areas where grasslands degraded |
Metrics |
||||
| Manage and Administer Projects | Management, Coordination and Communication | Manage and coordinate watershed restoration projects within all subbasins within the treaty territory of the Nez Perce Tribe. | 6/1/2007 | 5/31/2010 | $500,000 |
|
Biological objectives Continue riparian recovery Continue riparian recovery Coord. Implementation of Habitat Strategies Coordinate with groups and the public Coordination and Implementation Coordination and Implementation Develop programs and project proposals Evaluate needs and opportunities of resident popln Facilitate riparian recovery Identify igh priority habitat areas Improve coordination of activities Increase resource information and education Maximize social and economic benefits Participate in technical advisory groups Prioritize and coordinate efforts to address data Protect existing wetlands and restablish wetland Protect habitat and habitat function Protect habitat and habitat function Reduce embeddedness to < 50% Reduce embeddedness to < 50% Restore areas where grasslands degraded |
Metrics |
||||
| Outreach and Education | Coordinate outreach opportunities related to watershed restoration and cultural history | Coordinate and plan outreach opporunities related to watershed restoration, treaty responsiblities, and cultural resouces throughout the treaty territory. | 6/1/2007 | 5/31/2010 | $80,000 |
|
Biological objectives Continue riparian recovery Continue riparian recovery Coord. Implementation of Habitat Strategies Coordinate with groups and the public Coordination and Implementation Coordination and Implementation Develop programs and project proposals Evaluate needs and opportunities of resident popln Facilitate riparian recovery Identify igh priority habitat areas Improve coordination of activities Increase resource information and education Maximize social and economic benefits Participate in technical advisory groups Prioritize and coordinate efforts to address data Protect existing wetlands and restablish wetland Protect habitat and habitat function Protect habitat and habitat function Reduce embeddedness to < 50% Reduce embeddedness to < 50% Restore areas where grasslands degraded |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Status Report | Produce Status Report | Produce status reports in PISCES on a quarterly basis for BPA to summarize activies completed during the specified timeframe. | 6/1/2007 | 5/31/2010 | $20,000 |
|
Biological objectives Continue riparian recovery Continue riparian recovery Coord. Implementation of Habitat Strategies Coordinate with groups and the public Coordination and Implementation Coordination and Implementation Develop programs and project proposals Evaluate needs and opportunities of resident popln Facilitate riparian recovery Identify igh priority habitat areas Improve coordination of activities Increase resource information and education Maximize social and economic benefits Participate in technical advisory groups Prioritize and coordinate efforts to address data Protect existing wetlands and restablish wetland Protect habitat and habitat function Protect habitat and habitat function Reduce embeddedness to < 50% Reduce embeddedness to < 50% Restore areas where grasslands degraded |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Annual Report | Annual Report | Write annual report summarizing activities within the specified contract year. | 6/1/2007 | 5/31/2010 | $40,000 |
|
Biological objectives Continue riparian recovery Continue riparian recovery Coord. Implementation of Habitat Strategies Coordinate with groups and the public Coordination and Implementation Coordination and Implementation Develop programs and project proposals Evaluate needs and opportunities of resident popln Facilitate riparian recovery Identify igh priority habitat areas Improve coordination of activities Increase resource information and education Maximize social and economic benefits Participate in technical advisory groups Prioritize and coordinate efforts to address data Protect existing wetlands and restablish wetland Protect habitat and habitat function Protect habitat and habitat function Reduce embeddedness to < 50% Reduce embeddedness to < 50% Restore areas where grasslands degraded |
Metrics |
||||
Section 8. Budgets
Itemized estimated budget
| Item | Note | FY07 | FY08 | FY09 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personnel | 3.3 FTE | $231,365 | $245,247 | $259,962 |
| Fringe Benefits | 30% | $69,410 | $73,574 | $77,989 |
| Supplies | Office supplies & computer | $4,500 | $2,000 | $4,500 |
| Travel | Mileage and Travel Expenses | $12,000 | $12,000 | $12,000 |
| Overhead | 29.64% | $94,040 | $98,648 | $105,059 |
| Totals | $411,315 | $431,469 | $459,510 | |
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
| Total itemized budget: | $1,302,294 |
| Total work element budget: | $1,302,294 |
Cost sharing
| Funding source/org | Item or service provided | FY 07 est value ($) | FY 08 est value ($) | FY 09 est value ($) | Cash or in-kind? | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Totals | $0 | $0 | $0 | |||
Section 9. Project future
|
FY 2010 estimated budget: $460,000 FY 2011 estimated budget: $460,000 |
Comments: Coordination of watershed activities within the Nez Perce Tribe Treaty Territory |
Future O&M costs:
Termination date: 2100
Comments: Continued effort until all treaty resources within the Nez Perce Tribe's Treaty Territory fully support the culture of the Nez Perce.
Final deliverables:
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] | ||||||
| $147,000 | $147,000 | $147,000 | $441,000 | Expense | Multi-province | Fund |
| NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | ProvinceExpense | ||
| NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $147,000 | $147,000 | $147,000 | $0 | Multi-province | ||
|
Comments: proposed scope expansion not accepted; started w/ ’06 budget for on-going scope, then bumped up a bit (approx. 5%) to illustrate possible budget situation in ’07 on existing scope; if took this path, would need to get ’07 budget based on work elements. MSRT recommends $140,000. |
||||||
ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)
Recommendation: Admin (see comments)
NPCC comments: Although the ISRP places this proposal in the administrative category, this proposal is not justified as presented. This proposal provides similar functions as the Soil and Water Conservation Districts’ coordinator, proposal 199608600, and the ISRP comments for both projects apply to each. This project may be an essential element of stewardship for the subbasin. But based on the proposal, it is not clear that this project is showing results in the basin for restoration and evaluation. This project is supposed to provide vital services, but it is not clear what essential functions this individual provides, and what would happen regarding Clearwater subbasin integration and facilitation of other Council Fish and Wildlife Program proposals if this coordination was not available. Almost all the proposals covered under this focus coordination project also request FTE and funding to perform the same tasks. It does not appear that critical monitoring and evaluation or watershed assessment coordination is being performed under this project. The projects under the NPT Focus watershed auspices from the Clearwater and Grand Ronde subbasins need substantial improvement. So it is unclear how the supervision provided by this project is informing those efforts. Further evidence of essential functions being provided by this coordination is needed. The ISRP’s province review recommendation included the statement: “This project should demonstrate performance by the next review cycle otherwise it should be terminated.” As with other watershed coordinator proposals, the proposed effort would be better integrated into a proposal that is directed toward management based on science including on-the-ground work and monitoring. Technical and scientific background: The details of the essential functions this project provides to the various subbasins in the Nez Perce ceded lands in not clear from the technical and scientific background. Coordination across the subbasins in developing standards for conducting habitat and fish inventories, watershed assessments, decision matrices for picking projects, and evaluating the efficacy of habitat restoration is not sufficiently described. Rationale and significance to subbasin plans and regional programs: There is identification throughout this section that the Fish and Wildlife Program and NOAA recovery programs call for integration and coordination. What is not clear is that the tasks executed through this project actually accomplish that integration and coordination. Relationships to other projects: There are a number of important projects listed. What is missing is the actual tasks this project performed for these other projects. Each of these other projects request time and funds for their own coordination and integration and BPA and NEPA permitting. It is not clear what functions this project adds to those. Project history: A short history of the origin of the Focus Watershed Coordinator for the Nez Perce tribe is given. The history does not provide evidence of implications for management, i.e., that management actions have been influenced by the outcome of the coordination. Objectives: The objectives are laudable. Note, however, that the project history does not contain results in terms of the stated objectives. There are some measurable objectives identified, for example, "Continue riparian recovery to achieve at least 75% riparian function (Tucannon River).” For other objectives, like "Coordinate with groups and the public when developing and implementing fish and wildlife activities in the subbasin" (Imnaha), it is more difficult to define measurable objectives. The coordination objectives are quite vague in almost all cases. Tasks (work elements) and methods: The exact work elements are vague. For example, page 19: Identify and select highest priority watershed restoration projects with the treaty territory based on the respective subbasin management plans. This does not tell reviewers what decision and analytical framework is employed in establishing the priority list. Monitoring and evaluation: Coordinating monitoring and evaluation is not formally discussed. Facilities, equipment, and personnel: 3.3 FTEs are requested. The specific tasks these individuals perform and the time allocated is not adequately described. Information transfer: Information will be provided upon request and in quarterly and annual BPA reports. The documentation is not likely to provide easy evaluation of the need for the coordination.
ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)
Recommendation: Admin (see comments)
NPCC comments: Although the ISRP places this proposal in the administrative category, this proposal is not justified as presented. This proposal provides similar functions as the Soil and Water Conservation Districts’ coordinator, proposal 199608600, and the ISRP comments for both projects apply to each. This project may be an essential element of stewardship for the subbasin. But based on the proposal, it is not clear that this project is showing results in the basin for restoration and evaluation. This project is supposed to provide vital services, but it is not clear what essential functions this individual provides, and what would happen regarding Clearwater subbasin integration and facilitation of other Council Fish and Wildlife Program proposals if this coordination was not available. Almost all the proposals covered under this focus coordination project also request FTE and funding to perform the same tasks. It does not appear that critical monitoring and evaluation or watershed assessment coordination is being performed under this project. The projects under the NPT Focus watershed auspices from the Clearwater and Grand Ronde subbasins need substantial improvement. So it is unclear how the supervision provided by this project is informing those efforts. Further evidence of essential functions being provided by this coordination is needed. The ISRP’s province review recommendation included the statement: “This project should demonstrate performance by the next review cycle otherwise it should be terminated.” As with other watershed coordinator proposals, the proposed effort would be better integrated into a proposal that is directed toward management based on science including on-the-ground work and monitoring. Technical and scientific background: The details of the essential functions this project provides to the various subbasins in the Nez Perce ceded lands in not clear from the technical and scientific background. Coordination across the subbasins in developing standards for conducting habitat and fish inventories, watershed assessments, decision matrices for picking projects, and evaluating the efficacy of habitat restoration is not sufficiently described. Rationale and significance to subbasin plans and regional programs: There is identification throughout this section that the Fish and Wildlife Program and NOAA recovery programs call for integration and coordination. What is not clear is that the tasks executed through this project actually accomplish that integration and coordination. Relationships to other projects: There are a number of important projects listed. What is missing is the actual tasks this project performed for these other projects. Each of these other projects request time and funds for their own coordination and integration and BPA and NEPA permitting. It is not clear what functions this project adds to those. Project history: A short history of the origin of the Focus Watershed Coordinator for the Nez Perce tribe is given. The history does not provide evidence of implications for management, i.e., that management actions have been influenced by the outcome of the coordination. Objectives: The objectives are laudable. Note, however, that the project history does not contain results in terms of the stated objectives. There are some measurable objectives identified, for example, "Continue riparian recovery to achieve at least 75% riparian function (Tucannon River).” For other objectives, like "Coordinate with groups and the public when developing and implementing fish and wildlife activities in the subbasin" (Imnaha), it is more difficult to define measurable objectives. The coordination objectives are quite vague in almost all cases. Tasks (work elements) and methods: The exact work elements are vague. For example, page 19: Identify and select highest priority watershed restoration projects with the treaty territory based on the respective subbasin management plans. This does not tell reviewers what decision and analytical framework is employed in establishing the priority list. Monitoring and evaluation: Coordinating monitoring and evaluation is not formally discussed. Facilities, equipment, and personnel: 3.3 FTEs are requested. The specific tasks these individuals perform and the time allocated is not adequately described. Information transfer: Information will be provided upon request and in quarterly and annual BPA reports. The documentation is not likely to provide easy evaluation of the need for the coordination.