FY 2003 Columbia Cascade proposal 29055

Section 1. Administrative

Project location

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Total estimated budget

Cost sharing

Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

Comment:

This is a proposal for the Washington Department of Ecology to participate in a 50-50 matching program with BPA to acquire senior water rights for instream flows in targeted small streams and tributaries to restore critically needed water for spawning, rearing and migration of listed and depressed species within the Wenatchee, Methow, Okanogan and Entiat subbasins. Federally listed and state depressed fish species are present and in need of restoration. All of these subbasins are over-appropriated, with water rights that precede the state's instream flow and Trust Water Right programs. Thus, rights would have to be purchased or leased to obtain instream flows for fish. Streams would be targeted for the program with a prioritization scheme already in place (itemized in the proposal) under the Trust program (which has been implemented in other basins and in these basins to a limited extent). Streams would be those with a history of flow problems and listed species, rated by importance for life-history use, condition of habitat, number of diversions, size of stream, amount of water needed to make a difference, and opportunities for water right acquisitions. The state Trust would purchase or lease rights and hold them in WDOE's name.

This is a well-prepared proposal. The work is justified on the basis of the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program, the BiOp's RPA 151, and the goals and objectives of each of the relevant Subbasin Summaries. The work is also justified on the basis of the Department's own recent history of water right acquisitions (examples are provided that persuasively demonstrate the WDOE's ability to carry out the program). There are established criteria for prioritizing acquisitions. Objectives, strategies and tasks are well laid out. There were several relevant references cited, and brief resumes were provided for staff. The essentially 50-50 cost sharing between WDOE and BPA is a positive impetus.

A few questions remain, however, that should be answered in a brief response. Although the general operating criteria for the program were listed for prioritizing acquisitions, there was no reference to specific watershed assessments other than the subbasin summaries and their general goals and strategies. Have more specific watershed assessments been done to guide the initial efforts toward identification and evaluation of site-specific water needs and potentially available water rights? Also, the ISRP team would like to know how use of the general criteria actually worked when applied to the subbasins already targeted. Although monitoring and evaluation of physical and biological responses to the acquired water rights are included in the objectives and tasks, they are referred to WDFW for implementation without any methods provided. How will WDFW incorporate monitoring specifically for these acquisitions in its overall subbasin monitoring efforts?

Comment:

Comment:

This is a well-prepared proposal. The work is justified on the basis of the Council's Fish and Wildlife Program, the BiOp's RPA 151, and the goals and objectives of each of the relevant Subbasin Summaries. The work is also justified on the basis of the Department's own recent history of water right acquisitions (examples are provided that persuasively demonstrate the WDOE's ability to carry out the program). There are established criteria for prioritizing acquisitions. Objectives, strategies and tasks are well laid out. There were several relevant references cited, and brief resumes were provided for staff. The essentially 50-50 cost sharing between WDOE and BPA is a positive impetus.

The response adequately answered the ISRP's questions. The response provided five types of watershed assessments that have been prepared for the tributaries of the Wenatchee, Entiat, Methow, and Okanogan subbasins. These assessments should be sufficient to identify the water needs for use in guiding priorities for this project. The response described the criteria used for similar work in other subbasins, which the proponents cautiously view as successful (as new and a pilot program). There is good reason to believe that the proposed project could be successful using these criteria. The response described the development of a comprehensive monitoring strategy in Washington State, which would be the mechanism for long-term monitoring of the biological efficacy of the proposed water right acquisitions.

Comment:

Comments
Actions in the Entiat, Methow, and Wenatchee River are already required. Those in the Okanogan are not completely required. BOR is committed to resolving passage and flow problems in all but Okanogan. Request seems premature in that it is not yet know how much water, if any may be available for purchase. In many cases, flow improvement may be most efficiently and acceptably be achieved via change in point of diversion or conservation. Subject proposal assumes water purchase will be a significant tool. In either case, it will be important that the state is able to timely process water right changes and trust transfers to enable federal agency efforts to improve stream flows. Might be better to await the further development of BOR flow improvement effort before establishing water brokerages in priority subbasins.

Already ESA Req? No

Biop? Yes

Comment:

Comment: