FY 2003 Mainstem/Systemwide proposal 200311100
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 |
|---|---|
| 35062 Narrative | Narrative |
| 35062 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
| Letter from J. Braatne (University of Idaho) and M. Lorang (University of Montana) to T. Iverson (CBFWA) RE: Project Proposal 35062 | Correspondence |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Impacts of Flow Regulation on Riparian Cottonwood Ecosystems in the Columbia River Basin |
| Proposal ID | 200311100 |
| Organization | University of Idaho (UI) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Dr. Jeffrey H. Braatne |
| Mailing address | Department of Fish and Wildlife, University of Idaho, PO Box 441136 Moscow, Idaho 83844-1136 |
| Phone / email | 2088859712 / braatne@uidaho.edu |
| Manager authorizing this project | Ted Mordhorst, UI-Grants & Contracts Office |
| Review cycle | Mainstem/Systemwide |
| Province / Subbasin | Mainstem/Systemwide / |
| Short description | Research riparian cottonwoods and geomorphic responses to regulated flows in the Yakima Basin, compare responses to an unregulated reach of the Flathead River with the objective of enhancing flows to restore riparian habitats in the Columbia Basin. |
| Target species | Black and Narrowleaf Cottonwood and a range of anadromous and resident fish and wildlife species associated with alluvial floodplain habitats. |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 47.2 | -121.034 | Cle Elum Reach of the Yakima River |
| 47.106 | -120.728 | Kittitas Reach of the Yakima River |
| 46.756 | -120.822 | Middle and Lower Reaches of Naches River |
| 46.628 | -120.528 | Union Gap Reach of the Yakima River |
| 46.4808 | -120.4235 | Upper and Lower Wapato Reaches of the Yakima River |
| 48.5 | -113.875 | Nyack Reach of the Middle Fork of the Flathead River |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
| 151 to 183 |
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|---|
| 2002 | Draft manuscript of current research findings in review for publication in Ecological Applications |
| 2002 | Overview of research findings presented at 2002 Transboundary - WDAFS Conference, Spokane, WA |
| 2002 | Research findings presented via an invited seminar at the Dept. of Forest Resources, University of Idaho |
| 2001 | Final BPA Report: Impacts of Flow Regulation on Riparian Cottonwood Forests along the Yakima River |
| 2001 | Final BPA Report: Impacts of Flow Regulation on Riparian Cottonwood Forests along the Kootenai River |
| 2001 | Final BPA Report: Use of Remote Sensing Tools to Assess the Distribution of Riparian Cottonwood in the Columbia Basin |
| 2001 | Research findings presented via an invited seminar at the Dept. of Fish/Wildlife, University of Idaho |
| 2001 | Research findings presented via an invited seminar at the UMT-Flathead Lake Biological Station |
| 2001 | Research findings presented at Annual Research Mtg of the Bureau of Reclamation, Yakima - February 2001 |
| 2001 | Provided research findings & assisted with review/writing on the riparian habitat components of the Yakima Subbasin Plan |
| 2001 | Research findings presented at Annual Research Mtg. for the Yakama Indian Nations Fisheries Project - March 2001 |
| 2000 | Preliminary research findings presented at AWRA International Riparian Conference, Portland, Oregon - August 2000 |
| 2000 | Preliminary esearch findings presented via an invited seminar in College of Forest Resources, University of Washington |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BoR -- Yakima Critical River Reaches Project | Research support for restoring riparian and fisheries habitat, critical stage/discharge functions for cottonwood recruitment UnionGap Floodplain Restoration Project | |
| BoR -- Yakima Critical River Reaches Project: Linking Fluvial Processes to Floodplain Ecology of the Yakima River: Stream Flow, Sediment Loads and Potential for Geomorphic Work | Parallel research studies by Drs. Mark Lorang and Jack Stanford | |
| BoR -- Assessing Salmonid Habitat on Floodplains of the Yakima River, using Remote-Sensing Imagery | Assistance with identification of riparian vegetation components of alluvial floodplains | |
| BoR -- Biologically Based Management for the Upper Snake Basin | Comparative life history responses of cottonwoods to differing seasonal stage/discharge patterns | |
| NSF Biocomplexity Grant -- Dynamic Controls on Emergent Properties of River Floodplains | Research support on critical stage/discharge functions for cottonwood recruitment; reproductive ecology, sex ratios and structural attributes of cottonwood populations | |
| 199201000 | Habitat Protection and Restoration Project on the Fort Hall Indian Reservation | Research support for restoring riparian and fisheries habitat, critical stage/discharge function for cottonwood recruitment in the restoration of riparian habitats |
| 20057 | Oregon State University - Strategies for Riparian Recovery: Plant Succession and Salmon | Parallel studies of riparian vegetation in the John Day Basin; provide critical life history data on cottonwood recruitment |
| 20006 | Washington Trout -- Yakima Basin Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity | Research findings to correlate biotic integrity indices with complexity and diversity of cottonwood forests |
| 20117 | Yakima River Sub-Basin Assessment | Provide research findings for inclusion in the Yakima Sub-Basin Summary Plan |
| 20510 | Yakama Indian Nations Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Research Project | Research support for restoring habitat for anadrmous and resident fish and wildlife; stage/discharge functions for cottonwood recruitment to parameterize riverine and riparian habitat functions for EDT modeling efforts |
| 9206200 | Yakama Indian Nations Riparian/Wetland Restoration Project | Research support for restoring riparian and fisheries habitat, critical stage/discharge function for cottonwood recruitment to be used in restoration projects on Cle Elum and Wapato reaches |
| 20510 | Yakama Indian Nations Habitat/Watershed Project | Research support for restoring riparian and fisheries habitat, critical stage/discharge function for cottonwood recruitment in watershed restoration projects |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Objective 1. Document how the different flow regimes (flip-flop) of the Naches River and select reaches of the Yakima River has altered the population structure and long-term survival of riparian cottonwoods. | Task a. Assess the influence of different flow regimes on the population structure of riparian cottonwood populations along the Naches River and select reaches of the Yakima River. | 2003-05 | $106,526 | |
| Task b. Measure the sex ratios and the reproductive fitness (local patterns of natural seedfall) of riparian cottonwoods to define how distinctive patterns of flow regulation alter the sex ratios and reproductive fitness of cottonwood populations. | 2003-05 | $26,000 | ||
| Task c. Identify and document historic changes in the areal extent of cottonwood forests along the Naches River and the Kittitas and lower Wapato reach of the Yakima River | 2003-05 | $20,000 | Yes | |
| Task d. Document the extent to which regulated flows decline faster than the rate of root growth by cottonwood seedlings during the period of seed dispersal. | 2003-05 | $20,000 | ||
| Objective 2. Document fluvial geomorphic processes critical to the recruitment of riparian cottonwoods along flow-regulated reaches of the Naches and select reaches of the Yakima River. | Task a. Measure detailed topography, subtrate size, water surface elevations and distribution of cottonowood seedlings along selected reaches. | 2003-05 | $32,525 | Yes |
| Task b. Model inundation patterns vs. discharge for all selected reaches | 2003-05 | $32,925 | Yes | |
| Task c. Measure the rates of groundwater recession and river stage decline associated with the recruitment sites colonized by cottonwood seedlings. | 2003-05 | $36,550 | Yes | |
| Objective 3. Document fluvial geomorphic processes critical to the recruitment of riparian cottonwoods along the free-flowing Middle Fork (Nyack Reach) of the Flathead River. | Task a. Correlate the historical discharge regime to the observed and measurable patterns of fluvial geomorphic response. | 2004-05 | $33,625 | Yes |
| Task b. Measure changes in morphology, substrate composition and vegetative colonization of newly formed fluvial features (i.e. scroll and side-channel bars) relative to the next two years of discharge. | 2004-05 | $30,398 | Yes | |
| Task c. Measure the rates of groundwater recession and river stage decline associated with the recruitment sites colonized by cottonwood seedlings. | 2004-05 | $30,325 | Yes | |
| Objective 4. Develop "process" models for modifying regulated flows on the Naches and Yakima River to promote the recovery of riparian cottonwood ecosystems in these reaches and other flow-regulated alluvial reaches of the Columbia River Basin. | Tasks a-f. (all tasks will be completed in years 2 & 3 of the project, included here for consistency in the presentation) | 2004-05 | $0 | |
| Objective 5. Project management/review | Task a. Project Review Mtgs. | 2003-05 | $5,000 | |
| Task b. Project Management | 2003-05 | $4,650 | ||
| Objective 6. Annual and final reports of research findings | Task a. Annual Reports | 2003-05 | $3,500 | |
| Task b. Final Report (Will be completed in year 3 of the project, included here for consistency in the presentation) | 2003-05 | $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Objective 1. Document how the different flow regimes (flip-flop) of the Naches River and select reaches of the Yakima River has altered the population structure and long-term survival of riparian cottonwoods. (Tasks a.- d.) | 2004 | 2005 | $136,584 |
| Objective 2. Document fluvial geomorphic processes critical to the recruitment of riparian cottonwoods along flow-regulated reaches of the Naches River and select reaches of the Yakima River. | 2004 | 2005 | $134,685 |
| Objective 3. Document fluvial geomorphic processes critical to the recruitment of riparian cottonwoods along the free-flowing Middle Fork (Nyack Reach) of the Flathead River in Western Montana. | 2004 | 2005 | $123,940 |
| Objective 4. Develop models for modifying regulated flows on the Naches and Yakima River to promote the recovery of riparian cottonwood ecosystems along these and other flow-regulated alluvial reaches of the Columbia River. | 2004 | 2005 | $136,250 |
| Objective 5. Project monitoring and review | 2004 | 2005 | $60,080 |
| Objective 6. Annual and final reports of research findings | 2004 | 2005 | $70,355 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
|---|---|
| $328,383 | $333,511 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2003 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 4.5 | $81,206 |
| Fringe | $15,717 | |
| Supplies | $5,600 | |
| Travel | $15,850 | |
| Indirect | $36,925 | |
| Capital | $25,876 | |
| NEPA | $0 | |
| PIT tags | $0 | |
| Subcontractor | University of Montana ~ FLBS | $156,250 |
| Subcontractor | Central Washington University | $20,000 |
| Subcontractor | University of Lethbridge | $15,000 |
| Other | U of I - Graduate Student Fees | $9,600 |
| $382,024 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2003 cost | $382,024 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2003 budget request | $382,024 |
| FY 2003 forecast from 2002 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate
Fundable only if response is adequate
Date:
Aug 2, 2002
Aug 2, 2002
Comment:
This proposal builds on work begun under one-year innovative funding to examine the impact of regulation flows on riparian cottonwoods in the Yakima and Kootenai River Basins. The use of remote-sensing tools and field sampling methods for further studies of riparian cottonwoods in other alluvial reaches of the Columbia River Basin was the "proof of concept" aspect of the innovative project. This is worthwhile research project that should provide recommendations for normative changes in flow regimes in the Yakima that maximize recruitment of cottonwoods. The scientific background is extensive and well written. The project is related to other projects and regional programs. Objectives, tasks and methods are well written and complete. The sponsors need to address the following:- The sponsors need to provide better evidence of the linkage of changes in flow regimes, geomorphic processes, and cottonwood recruitment to changes in stream habitat and in the aquatic community, especially the fish community. What kinds of habitat changes are to be expected from improved cottonwood recruitment? Perhaps the research needs an empirical component that specifically addresses the relationship between changes in cottonwood communities and changes in the channel and aquatic community. At a minimum a much more comprehensive discussion of the relevance and benefits of this research to fish communities is needed.
- How do differences in surface elevations (A and B in Figure 2 and Objective 2, Task a) relate to cottonwood recruitment? What relative values of A and B are desirable and what ones are not?
- In discussing the results of the innovative project some empirical evidence needs to be presented supporting the contention that the current flow regime disrupts recruitment processes (page 26). A more thorough and concise discussion of the kinds of flow management options that could improve recruitment would be beneficial.
- Objective 4 related to model development needs to be expanded. What kinds of models are being considered? What are the critical parameters in the models? Exactly how will the data collected in the previous three objectives be used in model development?
- The sponsors propose additional studies to extend research to other important reaches (with distinct flow regimes) within the Yakima. Observation of variation among reaches of the Yakima Basin is claimed to be critical to the extension of research findings to other alluvial reaches of the Columbia Basin. The sponsors claim "Since cottonwoods are a keystone species in the biodiversity of riverine corridors, our findings will be critical to a number of large flow-regulated rivers in the western United States. Hence, our results will not only be significant for managing regulated flows in the Naches and Yakima rivers, they will also be relevant where flows are regulated on alluvial reaches elsewhere in the Columbia River Basin." If additional studies are necessary to extend the research to other important reaches within the Yakima Basin is it likely that the results will be relevant elsewhere?
- The project needs an M&E plan.
Action Agency/NMFS RME Group Comments:
HABITAT ACTION EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH SUBGROUP -- Does the Proposal meet RPA Objectives?
They have one stated objective that suggests a potential experimental base upon which to ask the RPA 183 relevant question of action effectiveness: can regulated flows be modified to promote recovery of riparian cottonwood ecosystems? However, the sponsors do not propose to measure any listed salmonid survival rates or other variables directly relevant to 183, nor would this be possible in their Flathead control area. As such, 35062's direct relevant to 183 is very limited.
Elements the proposal is lacking.
Measurements of salmonid survival rates, variables directly relevant to 183, and site location to meet these objectives are lacking.
Means and Opportunities to Strengthen Proposal.
This is a clear, focused and well-supported proposal. The focus is on the ecology of the trees with some superficial references to how that in turn affects habitat for anadromous fish. It is unclear if this project can be modified to address questions regarding the affects of riparian improvement projects on fish.
ISRP Remarks on RME Group Comments:
The ISRP's comments, especially question 1, are consistent with RM&E comments.
Comment:
This project was recently reviewed by CBFWA as a within year request. CBFWA recommended to the Council that this project should be funded. CBFWA recommends that the project investigators coordinate with the regional fish and wildlife managers and related projects (e.g., Project Number 2002001100, 199705900, etc.) to better facilitate regional ecological based assessment efforts.Comment:
Fundable (qualified). Disagree with CBFWA's High Priority ranking; this is of lower priority. The project represents good science conducted by well-qualified investigators. The scientific background is extensive and well written. The project is related to other projects and regional programs. Objectives, tasks and methods are well written and complete. This proposal builds on work begun under one-year innovative funding to examine the impact of regulation flows on riparian cottonwoods in the Yakima and Kootenai River Basins. The use of remote-sensing tools and field sampling methods for further studies of riparian cottonwoods in other alluvial reaches of the Columbia River Basin was the "proof of concept" aspect of the innovative project. This project should provide recommendations for normative changes in flow regimes in the Yakima that maximize recruitment of cottonwoods, and the sponsors make a convincing case based on published literature that normative changes in flow regime will improve fish habitat. However, the project does not provide direct measurement of habitat and fish community changes associated with flow regime change. This unmeasured applicability to stream habitat and aquatic communities is a distinct shortcoming of the proposal.The response repeats many of the assertions from the original proposal. Some members of the sponsors' proposed "review team" appear to have close connections to project personnel, raising a question of objectivity.
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological BenefitIndirect. Research riparian cottonwoods and geomorphic responses to regulated flows in the Yakima Basin, compare responses to an unregulated reach of the Flathead River with the objective of enhancing flows to restore riparian habitats in the Columbia Basin
Comments
The sponsors need to provide better evidence of the linkage of changes in flow regimes, geomorphic processes, and cottonwood recruitment to changes in stream habitat and in the aquatic community, especially the fish community. This could be valuable research but does not respond to a specific RPA action.
Already ESA Required?
No
Biop?
No
Comment:
Category:3. Other projects not recommended by staff
Comments: