Return to Proposal Finder FY 2000 Proposal 198710002

Proposal Table of Contents

Additional Documents

Section 1. General Administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Objectives, tasks and schedules
Section 5. Budget
Section 6. References
Section 7. Abstract

Reviews and Recommendations
Title Type File Size File Date

Section 1. General Administrative Information

Title of Project Proposal Protect and Enhance Anadromous Fish Habitat in the Umatilla River Subbasin
BPA Project Proposal Number 198710002
Business name of agency, institution,
or organization requesting funding
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
Business acronym (if appropriate) ODFW

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

Name Tim Bailey
Mailing Address 73471 Mytinger Lane
City, State, Zip Pendleton, OR 97801
Phone 5412762344
Fax 5412764414
Manager of program authorizing this project
Review Cycle FY 2000
Province Columbia Plateau
Subbasin Umatilla
Short Description Protect and enhance coldwater fish habitat on private lands in the Umatilla River basin in a manner that achieves self-sustaining salmonid populations and their associated habitat by utilizing natural stream functions to the fullest extent.
Target Species Summer Steelhead

Project Location

[No information]

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-Reported Relevant RPAs

Sponsor listed no RPAs for this project proposal

Relevant RPAs based upon NMFS & BPA Review

NMFS and BPA did not associate any reasonable and prudent alternatives with this project proposal

NPPC Program Measure Number(s) which this project addresses: 2.1, 7.6A.2, 7.6B.1, 7.6B.3, 7.6B.4, 7.6B.5, 7.6B.6, 7.6C, 7.6D, 7.7, 7.8D.1, 7.8E.1, 7.10
FWS/NMFS Biological Opinion Number(s) which this project addresses: N/A
Other Planning Document References 1)CTUIR. 1994. Wildlife Mitigation Plan (Draft) May 1996, Columbia Basin Salmon Policy. 1995 pg 9-10, and Water Assessment Report; 2) NMFS - Salmon & Steelhead Enhancement Plan for the Washington and Columbia River Conservation areas.Vol 1. chpt 4, 37pgs; 3)Reeve, R. 1988. Umatilla River Drainage Anadromous Fish Habitat Improvement Plan; 4)CTUIR/ODFW. 1990. Umatilla Hatchery Master Plan; 5)OWRD. 1988. Umatilla Basin Report; 6)BOR. 1988. Umatilla basin Project Planning Report, 7)Umatilla County - Comprehensive Plan. 1983, chpt 8; 8)USNF - Umatilla National Forest Land & Resource Management Plan. 1990, chpt 2, pg 13. and Final EIS. 1990, chpt III, pgs 59-62; 9)CTUIR/ODFW. 1990. Umatilla River Subbasin Salmon and Steelhead Production Plan; 10)Boyce, R. 1986. A Comprehensive Plan for Rehabilitation of Anadromous Fish Stocks in the Umatilla River Basin; 11)USFWS & NMFS. 1982. Umatilla R. Planning Aid Report.

CBFWA-Generated Information

Database Administrator notes on the history of this proposal form: None
Type of Project (assigned by CBFWA Analysts): anadromous

Section 2. Past Accomplishments

Year Accomplishment
1998 Protected 11 miles of stream by installing 16 miles of fence and retrofitting existing projects with bioengineering treatments.

Section 3. Relationships to Other Projects

n/a or no information

Section 4. Objectives, Tasks and Schedules

Objectives and Tasks

Objective Task
1. Restore riparian vegetation species diversity and community structure so the positive interaction of the stream, riparian zone and floodplain perpetuate and maintain normative ecological and physical processes. a. Work cooperatively with two private landowners (Erwin and Brogiotti) to procure long term riparian lease agreements/conservation easments that protect habitat in the highest priority areas.
1. b. Walk streams to identify work areas, plan work, layout and mark specific sites where riparian fencing, offsite water developments and plantings will be implemented.
1. c. Conduct onsite activities on two projects (surveying, staking, etc.), prepare contracts, and obtain any permits needed to gain access and complete onsite work .
1. d. Construct 12 miles of livestock exclosure fences and associated stream crossings on streams impacted by grazing including: 10 miles of fence protecting 13 miles of stream on the Westgate Canyon/Erwin project and 2 miles of fence protecting one mile
1. e. Construct 4 off-site water developments to encourage livestock utilization of uplands and divert grazing pressure away from the streams and riparian areas.
2. Create naturally stable channels along stream reaches that have been destabilized by reach specific and watershed-wide impacts through the use of bioengineering techniques. a. Work cooperatively with one private landowner (Brogiotti) to procure a long term riparian lease agreement that protect habitat in the highest priority areas.
2. b. Conduct reach assessments and project designs for proposed FY2001 projects.
2. c. Develop construction schedules, engineer project specifications, advertise for construction bids, select contractors and obtain permits for implementation activities.
2. d. Purchase construction materials and supplies necessary to construct planned habitat improvements.
2. e. Layout and mark specific work sites.
2. f. Implement bioengineering techniques to create naturally stable channel forms on one mile of the East Birch Creek/Brogiotti property.
3. Insure maximum program benefits within leased areas by conducting operations and maintenance activities on all existing riparian exclosure fences, plantings and instream structures. These activities are conducted year around. a. Inspect and maintain 16 miles of riparian fence which currently protects 11 miles of stream and 280 acres of riparian habitat. This includes 20 livestock watering gaps and 5 off-site water developments.
3. b. Inspect all leased areas for revegetation success. Plant native trees and shrubs (such as willow & cottonwood cuttings, conifers) where needed to reduce bank erosion, and to improve degraded overstory & understory components of riparian plant communities.
3. c. Inspect all leased areas for noxious weeds and work with county weed agencies to control listed species on 280 acres of leased habitat.
3. d. Inspect streambank stability and instream structures in 11 miles of stream and perform necessary maintenance on a case by case basis. Cost share these activities with FEMA funds when available.
3. e. Coordinate the above O&M activities with 26 landowners to insure project goals and landowner needs are both met, and with minimal disturbance to landowner operations.
4. Monitor and evaluate Umatilla Basin fish habitat enhancement projects to determine if project goals and objectives are being met. Prepare reports of the results, and apply adaptive management based the information gathered. a. Annually take 65 photopoint pictures to document changes in vegetation and channel morphology attributable to habitat projects.
4. b. Continue year around monitoring of hourly stream temperatures at ten project sites, on 2 streams. Annually summarize and analyze the results of data collected from ten permanent thermographs.
4. c. Take 30 riparian habitat transects on Birch and Meacham creeks to assess stream channel and vegetative responses to habitat restoration projects.
4. d. Conduct biological surveys (spawning ground counts, fish population estimates, bird nesting) in selected study areas to determine if improvements in habitat result in increases in fish/wildlife populations.
4. e. Report the results of all project M&E activities in quarterly, annual and special reports. Distribute to ODFW fish districts, BPA, and other interested parties, and identify adaptive management implications.
5. Insure maximum communication, education and coordination of habitat enhancement activities by actively pursuing opportunities to work with, educate and learn from personnel involved with other agencies, organizations, and programs. a. Work cooperatively with the Umatilla Basin Watershed Council and other local groups involved with stream habitat restoration to identify and prioritize projects and activities beneficial to the protection and restoration of basin watershed lands.
5. b. Coordinate field activities with other agencies, organizations, and programs to insure maximum technology transfer, program consistency and coordination of habitat enhancement efforts.
5. c. Answer correspondence, respond to information needs, and make presentations to other agencies, private organizations, school/youth groups and the news media.
5. d. Work cooperatively with private landowners to promote management activities that protect and restore instream and riparian habitat and watersheds on private lands. Update individual landowners of the progress of their projects using the information gathe

Objective Schedules and Costs

Objective Start Date End Date Measurable Biological Objectives Milestone FY 2000 Cost %
1 03/01/00 02/01/01 35.0%
2 03/01/00 02/01/01 40.0%
3 03/01/00 02/01/01 15.0%
4 03/01/00 02/01/01 5.0%
5 03/01/00 02/01/01 5.0%

Section 5. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 2000 Cost
Personnel full time bio, Tech 2, Tech 1 and 1-2 seasonals, Prgm Ma., Office specialist, ODFW engineers $128,804
Fringe 38% of personnel $ 48,946
Supplies New Implementation $ 54,200
Operating This includes only materials, vehicles, mileage, office supplies, tools & equipment $ 34,337
Capital Equipment Trailer and Utility Trailer $ 15,000
Travel Vehicle Mileage and Training Perdiem $ 9,918
Indirect Admin. Overhead @ 35.5%, excluding capital and subcontracts $ 98,053
Subcontractor Fence construction, instream construction, weed control $ 75,900
Total Itemized Budget $465,158

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2000 project cost $465,158
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $ 0
Total FY 2000 budget request $465,158
FY 2000 forecast from 1999 $ 0
% change from forecast 0.0%

Reason for change in estimated budget

Not applicable

Reason for change in scope

Not applicable

Cost Sharing

Organization Item or service provided Amount Cash or In-Kind
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (seeking) instream materials and construction $150,000 unknown
Governor's Watershed Enhancement Board (seeking) Fencing materials $ 27,750 unknown
ODFW Restoration & Enhancement Board (seeking) Fence construction $ 18,750 unknown
Landowner (secured) Fence materials fence construction and fence line surveying $ 50,000 unknown
ODFW - Wildlife (secured) Fence materials $ 3,900 unknown


Outyear Budget Totals

2001 2002 2003 2004
All Phases $450,000 $450,000 $468,000 $468,000
Total Outyear Budgets $450,000 $450,000 $468,000 $468,000

Other Budget Explanation

Schedule Constraints: Catastrophic events such as flooding, wildfire, etc.

Section 6. References

Reference Watershed?
Anderson, J.W., and others. 1992. Upper Grande Ronde River Anadromous Fish Habitat Protection, Restoration, and Monitoring Plan. USFS, PNWFRS, ODFW, CRITF, CTUIR, NPT, OSU. No
Armour, C.L., D.A. Duff, and W. Elmore. 1991. The effects of livestock grazing on riparian and stream ecosystems. Fisheries 16(9):7-11. No
Agua Tierra Environmental Consulting. 1998. Birch Creek restoration. Supplemental narrative report. For the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife. Pendleton, Oregon. Yes
Beschta, R.L., 1994. Restoration of riparian/aquatic ecosystems in Eastern Oregon: Turning back the clock to understand the future. Department of Forest Engineering, Oregon State University. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Oregon Chapter of the No
Beschta, R. L., W.S. Platts, and B. Kaufmann., 1991. Field review of fish habitat improvement projects in the Grande Ronde and John Day River basins of Eastern Oregon. 53 pgs. No
Beschta, R.L. 1978. Long-term patterns of sediment production following road construction and logging in the Oregon coast range. Water Resources Research 14:1011-1016. No
Bilby, R. E., and G. E. Likens. 1980. Importance of organic debris dams in the structure and function of stream ecosystems. Ecology 61(5): 1107-1113. No
Bisson, P.A., B.E. Bilby, M. Bryant, C. Dollof, G. Grette, R. House, M. Murphy, K. Koski, and J. Sedell. 1987. Large Woody Debirs in Forested Streams in the pacific Northwest. In Cundy, T; Salo, E., eds. Proceedings of a symposium streamside management - No
Bjornn, T.C., and D.W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat requirements of salmonids in streams. W.R. Mehan ed., Influences of Forest and Rangeland Mangement on Salmonid Fishes and Their Habitats. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19: 83-138. No
Cacek, C.C. 1989. The relationship of mass wasting to timber harvest activities in the Lightning Creek basin, Idaho and Montana. Master’s of Science Thesis. Eastern Washington State University, Cheney, Washington. No
CBFWA. 1997. Multi-Year Implementation Plan for the Protection, Restoration & Enhancement of Columbia River Basin Fish & Wildlife Resources. No
Chaney, E., W. Elmore, and W.S. Platts. 1993. Managing change - livestock grazing on western riparian areas. US EPA report. 32 pgs. No
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1990. Umatilla River Subbasin Salmon and Steelhead Production Plan. Northwest Power Planning Council. Portland, Oregon. Yes
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1990. Umatilla Hatchery Master Plan. Northwest Power Planning Council. Portland, Oregon. Yes
Cummins, K. W., G. W. Minshall, J. R. Sedell, C. E. Cushing and R. C. Peterson. 1984. Stream ecosystem theory. Verh. Internat. Verein. Limnol. 22: 1818-1827. No
Elmore, W., and R. L. Beschta. 1987. Riparian areas: perceptions in management. Rangelands 9(6): 250-265. No
Hammer, T.R. 1972. Stream channel enlargement due to urbanization. Water Resources Research 8:1530-1540. No
House, R. A. and P. L. Boehne. 1985. Evaluation of instream enhancement structures for salmonid spawning and rearing in a coastal Oregon stream. N. Amer. J. Fish. Mgmt. 5: 283-295. No
Jones, J.A., and G.E. Grant. 1996. Peak flow responses to clear-cutting and roads in small and large basins, western Cascades, Oregon. Water Resources Research 32:959-974. No
Karr, J.R., and I.J. Schlosser. 1978. Water resources and the land water interface. Science 201:229-234. No
Keller E.A., and F. J. Swanson. 1979. Effects of large organic material on channel form and fluvial processes. Earth Surface Processes vol. 4: 361-380. No
Lowrance, R., R. Todd, J. Fail, O. Hendrickson, R. Leonard, and L. Asmussen. 1984. Riparian forests as nutrient filters in agricultural watersheds. BioScience 34:374-377. No
Meehan, W. R., editor. 1991. Influences of forest and Rangeland management on salmonid fishes and their habitats. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19. pp. 419-420 fences, washed protection 525, instream 544, No
Meehan, W. R., and W. S. Platts. 1978. Livestock grazing and the aquatic environment. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 33:274-278. No
Nagel, G., 1997. Historical changes in riparian areas of the Umatilla Basin: preliminary findings, draft. USFS Forest Sciences Lab, Corvallis Oregon. 11pgs. No
NMFS. 1997. Snake River Salmon Recovery Plan. August 1997 Draft. No
NPPC. 1994. Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Plan. Portland Oregon. No
ODFW/CTUIR. 1990. Umatilla Hatchery Master Plan. No
Oregon State Game Commission. 1963. The fish and wildlife resources of the Umatilla basin, Oregon, and their water use requirements. Report to the State Water Resources Board. Portland No
Reeve, R., S. Williams, J. Sanchez and J. Neal. 1988. Umatilla River Drainage Anadromous Fish Habitat Improvement Plan. 37pgs. Yes
Reeves, G.H., J. D. Hall, T. D. Roelofs, T. L. Hickman, and C. O. Baker. 1991. Rehabilitating and modifying stream habitats. W.R. Meehan ed., Influences of Forest and Rangeland Mangement on Salmonid Fishes and Their Habitats. American Fisheries Society No
Reeves, G. H., D. B. Hohler, B. E. Hansen, F. H. Everest, J.R. Sedell, T. L. Hickman, and D. Shively. 1996. Fish habitat restoration in the pacific northwest: Fish Creek of Oregon. Pages 335-358 in J. E. Williams, C. A. Wood, and M. P. Dombeck ed. Wa No
Roper, B. R., D. Konnof, D. Heller and K. Wieman. 1998. Durability of pacific northwest instream structures following floods. North Amer. J. Fish. Mgmt. 18:686-693. No
Rosgen, D.R., 1996 Applied river morphology. Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, Colorado. No
Sedell, J.R., P.A. Bisson, F. J. Swanson, and S.V. Gregory. 1988. What we know about large trees that fall into streams and rivers. U.S. Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-GTR-229:47-81. No
Soloazzi, M. F., J. D. Rodgers, and S. L. Johnson. 1992. Annaul Progress Report. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Portland, OR. No
Thompson, R. N. and J. B. Haas. 1960. Environmental survey report pertaining to salmon and steelhead in certain rivers of eastern Oregon and the Willamette River ant its tributaries. Part I. Survey reports of eastern Oregon rivers. Fish Commission of No
USFWS. 1982. Umatilla River Planning Aide Report. Apr. 1982, pgs 24-37. No
White, R. J. 1975. In-stream management for wild trout. Pages 48-58 in W. King ed. Proceedings, wild trout management symposium. Trout Unlimited, Vienna, Virginia. No

Section 7. Abstract


Reviews and Recommendations

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

ISRP Preliminary Review , ISRP 99-2 Recommendation:
Jun 15, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Recommendation: Fund. Review next year for reporting of results.

Comments: This proposal is not a stand-alone project. It needs to be evaluated within the Umatilla Subbasin umbrella. The concept is good, but it is noted that only 3 of 13 projects are on schedule. Reviewers wondered how much of the budget goes for lease agreements.

CBFWA: Subregional Team Comments Recommendation:
Aug 20, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Reducing implementation. Costs reduced as a result of improved efficiencies. General reduction in the scope of the project.

CBFWA: Watershed Technical Group Comments Recommendation:
Technically Sound? Yes
Aug 20, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Is this program cost effective? How many fish have returned lately? What has been the trend?

Long term projects (programs) need to be evaluated for effectiveness to date.

Is it appropriate for BPA to fund conservation easements/ improvements on a NWPPC Member's property?

Proposal exceeds the page limit.

CBFWA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Aug 20, 1999

NWPPC Funding Recommendation , NWPPC 2000-6 Recommendation:
Mar 1, 2000
[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting]

NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review Funding category:
May 2005
FY05 NPCC Start of Year:
FY06 NPCC Staff Preliminary:
FY06 NPCC July Draft Start of Year:
Sponsor (ODFW) Comments (Go to Original on NPCC Website):

Return to top of page