FY 2002 Columbia Plateau proposal 200202100
Contents
Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary
Reviews and Recommendations
Additional documents
| Title | Type |
|---|---|
| 25021 Narrative | Narrative |
| 25021 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
| 25021 Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
| Columbia Plateau: Yakima Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
| Columbia Plateau: Yakima Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Implement Actions to Reduce Water Temperatures in the Teanaway Basin |
| Proposal ID | 200202100 |
| Organization | Washington State Department of Ecology (WA Ecology) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Max Linden |
| Mailing address | 15 W. Yakima Ave., Suite 200 Yakima, WA 98902 |
| Phone / email | 5094547207 / mali461@ecy.wa.gov |
| Manager authorizing this project | Tom Tebb |
| Review cycle | Columbia Plateau |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Yakima |
| Short description | Implement actions to reduce stream temperatures, reduce suspended sediment, meet water quality standards and improve salmonid habitat. Actions implemented will include irrigation improvements, tree planting, bank stabilization and road improvements. |
| Target species | Chinook Salmon Resident Rainbow Trout Steelhead Trout Bull Trout |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 47.17 | -120.83 | The Teanaway River joins the Yakima River about 3 miles SE of Cle Elum, WA. |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| NMFS | Action 153 | NMFS | BPA shall, working with agricultural incentive programs such as the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program, negotiate and fund long-term protection for 100 miles of riparian buffers per year in accordance with criteria BPA and NMFS will develop by June 1, 2001. |
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|---|
| NOTE: Accomplishments limited to Ecology's work in the Teanaway Basin | |
| 1995 | Supported YRMC study of sediment in Teanaway Basin |
| 1998 | Field study of water temperatures in the Teanaway Basin. |
| 2000 | Technical assessment of water temperature in Teanaway Basin published -- includes recommendations for reducing water temperatures in this area. |
| 2000 | Teanaway Temperature TMDL ("Total Maximum Daily Load" or water cleanup plan) formally initiated; numerous public workgroup meetings held and informational publications released. |
| 2001 | Provided funding and direction for tree planting in riparian areas of Teanaway Basin and Upper Yakima Basin. Trees planted by Washington Conservation Corps. |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 9704900 | Teanaway River Instream Flow Restoration | Proposed project provides additional instream flow restoration in the Teanway River (builds on efforts of earlier project) |
| 8811500 | Yakima Hatchery - Construction | Proposed project improves habitat for smolts released from Teanaway River acclimation facility built under previous project |
| 5510800 | Upper Yakima Tributary Irrigation Improvement | Proposed project provides additional irrigation improvement and instream flow restoration in the Teanway River (builds on efforts of earlier project) |
| NOTE: This project supports RPA Action 150 -- see narrative section. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Increase in-stream flows in Teanaway River by increasing irrigation efficiencies | a. Design conversion from rill irrigation to sprinkler | 1 | $5,000 | Yes |
| 1. | b. Secure permitting for changes in points of diversion | 2 | $2,000 | Yes |
| 1. | c. Design new pump system (to move point of diversion) | 1 | $4,000 | Yes |
| 2. Stablilize streambanks of Teanaway River by installing rock barbs for bank stabilization | a. Design rock barbs | 1 | $5,000 | Yes |
| 2. | b. Secure permitting for installation of rock barbs | 2 | $6,000 | Yes |
| 3. Restore riparian vegetation in Teanaway Basin | a. Design and coordinate tree planting | 1 | $3,000 | Yes |
| 4. Upgrade stream crossings and widen riparian buffer on Stafford Cr. Road | a. Design Stafford Cr. Road improvements | 1 | $4,000 | Yes |
| 4. | b. Secure permitting for Stafford Cr. Road improvements | 1 | $2,500 | Yes |
| 5. Replace inadequate culvert on Jack Creek | a. Design culvert replacement | 1 | $8,000 | Yes |
| 5. | b. Secure permitting for culvert replacements | 1 | $6,000 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.b. Secure permitting for changes in points of diversion | 2003 | 2003 | $3,000 |
| 2.b. Secure permitting for installation of rock barbs | 2003 | 2003 | $5,000 |
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
| FY 2003 |
|---|
| $8,000 |
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Increase irrigation efficiency on agricultural lands in lower Teanaway Basin | a. Move points of diversion | 2 | $46,500 | Yes |
| 1. | b. Upgrade irrigation equipment from rill to sprinkler | 1 | $67,800 | Yes |
| 1. | c. Administer Objective 1 | 2 | $5,000 | Yes |
| 2. Stablilize streambanks of Teanaway River by installing rock barbs for bank stabilization | a. Install rock barbs (note: will need about a year to secure permits before this in-stream work begins) | 3 | $0 | Yes |
| 2. | b. Administer Objective 2 | 3 | $1,000 | Yes |
| 3. Restore riparian vegetation in Teanaway Basin | a. Plant trees in riparian areas | 1 | $9,200 | Yes |
| 3. | b. Administer Objective 3 | 1 | $3,500 | Yes |
| 4. Upgrade stream crossings and widen riparian buffer on Stafford Cr. Road (Stafford Cr. is a tributary of the Teanaway R.) | a. Upgrade stream crossings | 1 | $50,000 | Yes |
| 4. | b. Improve road to reduce erosion, widen riparian buffer | 1 | $30,000 | Yes |
| 4. | c. Administer Objective 4 | 1 | $10,000 | Yes |
| 5. Replace undersized culvert on Jack Creek (Jack Creek is a tributary of the Teanaway R.) | a. Replace culvert on Jack Creek (NOTE: work will begin in FY 2003 on this project, following permitting) | 2 | $0 | Yes |
| 5. | b. Administer Objective 5 | 2 | $1,000 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.a. Move points of diversion (for irrigation improvements) | 2003 | 2003 | $10,000 |
| 1.c. Administer Objective 1 | 2003 | 2003 | $5,000 |
| 2.a. Install rock barbs | 2003 | 2004 | $104,525 |
| 2.b. Administer Objective 2 | 2003 | 2004 | $9,000 |
| 5.a. Culvert replacement on Jack Creek | 2003 | 2003 | $76,000 |
| 5.b. Administer Objective 5 | 2003 | 2003 | $8,000 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
|---|---|
| $152,025 | $60,500 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| None | $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| None | $0 |
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Monitor effectiveness of actions taken under this project | a. Irrigation improvements: model water saving and sediment reduction | 3 | $1,000 | Yes |
| 1. | b. Bank stabilization: calculate reduction in voided areas | 3 | $1,000 | Yes |
| 1. | c. Tree planting: assess survival rates, model temperature reduction | 3 | $2,000 | Yes |
| 1. | d. Road improvements (including culvert replacements): model sediment reduction and increase in infiltration | 3 | $3,000 | Yes |
| 2. Monitor water quality (temperature and sediment) in the Teanaway Basin | a. Collect water temperature and sediment data throughout Teanaway Basin | 3 | $38,500 | Yes |
| 2. | b. Determine sediment loading and identify primary sediment sources in Teanaway Basin | 3 | $23,000 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Monitor effectiveness of stream restoration activities | 2003 | 2004 | $12,000 |
| 2. Monitor water quality in the Teanaway Basin | 2003 | 2004 | $81,500 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
|---|---|
| $63,500 | $30,000 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2002 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Fringe | Incorporated into Subcontractor costs | $0 |
| Supplies | Incorporated into Subcontractor costs | $0 |
| Travel | Incorporated into Subcontractor costs | $0 |
| Indirect | Incorporated into Subcontractor costs | $0 |
| Capital | N/A | $0 |
| NEPA | Incorporated into Subcontractor costs | $0 |
| PIT tags | # of tags: N/A | $0 |
| Subcontractor | Kittitas County Conservation District | $190,000 |
| Subcontractor | Natural Resources Conservation Service | $36,500 |
| Subcontractor | US Forest Service | $96,500 |
| Subcontractor | Kittitas County Public Works Dept. | $15,000 |
| $338,000 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $338,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $338,000 |
| FY 2002 forecast from 2001 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Reason for change in estimated budget
N/A
Reason for change in scope
N/A
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | $0 | cash |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Fundable - no response required
Jun 15, 2001
Comment:
Fundable, the proposal is well written and is especially good in that it includes provision for analysis of the data collected. The proposal is better than the presentation, which raised more questions than it answered. The sites should have been described and identified on the tour. The Teanaway was one of the top producers of spring chinook, steelhead, and coho in the Yakima watershed. Apparently it has good restoration potential. This is a continuation of an earlier project to provide additional instream flow by increasing irrigation efficiency, stabilizing streambanks, etc.
Although the ISRP does not request a response the proposal could be strengthened. Strategies for transferring the information learned from this project to others involved in restoration activities could be better developed. Also, potential effects of upstream timber company ownership should be addressed. What is the coordination with the BOR projects? There needs to be better demonstration of coordination among the projects in the Teanaway Basin.
Comment:
After consultation with CBFWA reviewers, the project sponsor has provided a modified budget through reducing the number of culvert replacements (USFS responsibility) and eliminated rock barbs. There is a difference of opinion in this area whether rock barbs should be used or reconnection with the flood plain is better approach. The project sponsor will attempt to address those concerns before proceeding with those actions.Comment:
Fundable. The proposal is well written and is especially good in that it includes provision for analysis of the data collected. This is a continuation of an earlier project to provide additional instream flow by increasing irrigation efficiency, stabilizing streambanks, etc. The Teanaway was one of the top producers of spring chinook, steelhead, and coho in the Yakima watershed. It has good restoration potential.No response was required but questions raised by ISRP were addressed. Details are lacking in the response such as where and how the "widely distributed" focus sheets will be distributed, for whom the "field tours in the future" will be conducted, and how subcontractors "will be fully informed about all the activities". These shortcomings do not seriously compromise the benefits of the project.
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUProject could help lower summer water temperatures and improve riparian function, and increase instream flows in the Teanaway River, one of the few Upper Yakima tributaries known to support mid-Columbia sthd.
Comments
Stream bank stabilization piece (that involving rock) should not be implemented. Instream flow improvements, while modest will help the system. Riparian easements should be part of program and should follow at least CREP standards.
Already ESA Req? no
Biop? yes
Comment:
No cost-share. Although this is a priority subbasin for the State of Washington and contains spring chinook and bull trout, we may want to defer until subbasin planning is complete.Comment:
New proposals in the Yakima subbasin
As discussed in the general issues of this memorandum, there is not sufficient funding to initiate all of the new proposals that were rated as "fundable" by the ISRP and rated as "High Priority" by CBFWA in the Columbia Plateau province within the basinwide funding target of $186 million for Fiscal Year 2002. This is because funding all such proposals would not leave sufficient funds to initiate new proposals in the provinces that remain to be reviewed in the provincial review process. Therefore, the Council and its staff have worked with local entities to further prioritize new work, and asked them to put a premium on new work that represents consensus of the state and tribal resource managers that is consistent with Bonneville's BiOp needs. In the Yakima subbasin a collaborative effort was undertaken to prioritize Fiscal Year 2002 new needs along these guidelines. The following new proposals are those that were rated in this process as the highest priority at this time:
Project ID: 25021: Implement Actions to Reduce Water Temperatures in the Teanaway Basin
NMFS has designated this project as consistent with the overall strategy of the BiOp off-site mitigation strategy and actions (assigned a"400" rating as a riparian implementation project. The ISRP is supportive, finding that ,"The proposal is well written and is especially good in that it includes provision for analysis of the data collected. This is a continuation of an earlier project to provide additional instream flow by increasing irrigation efficiency, stabilizing streambanks, etc. The Teanaway was one of the top producers of spring chinook, steelhead, and coho in the Yakima watershed. It has good restoration potential."
Budget effect on base program (Project 25021):
| FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
|---|---|---|
| Increase $172,950 | Increase $100,825 | Increase $27,500 |
Comment:
Comment:
Comment:
FY03 should be revised, based on our best current estimate, to $130,438 to include staff time and irrigation equipment. tree planting is expected to start in October