BPA Fish and Wildlife FY 1997 Proposal
Section 1. Administrative
Section 2. Narrative
Section 3. Budget
see CBFWA and BPA funding recommendations
Title of project
Spring Creek Restoration
BPA project number 5511900
Business name of agency, institution or organization requesting funding
Yakama Indian Nation
Sponsor type WA-Tribe
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
|Mailing address||P.O. Box 151
Toppenish, WA 98948
BPA technical contact ,
Biological opinion ID
NWPPC Program number
Rearing habitat quality in Spring Creek is optimal for juvenile fish. Winter temperatures are benign and the hydrograph is relatively very stable. However, juveniles cannot access this important channel because of a migration barrier just above the mouth. Opportunities for improving habitat complexity also exist in some reaches. This project will focus on restoring juvenile access by building juvenile weirs at the mouth, rebuilding channel complexity by adding angular rock and large woody debris, and restoring native riparian vegetation where needed. Conservation easements along two miles will be purchased. Ten acres of land at the mouth of the creek will be purchased. Storm water treatment features at the headwaters of the drainage will also be built.
Project start year 1997 End year 1999
Start of operation and/or maintenance
Project development phase Implementation
Biological results achieved
Annual reports and technical papers
Specific measureable objectives
Change in riparian canopy closure will also be measured.
Restoring access, improving water quality, and replanting riparian vegetation will increase rearing habitat productivity.
Underlying assumptions or critical constraints
The hydrograph will be similar to historic; acute discharge of toxic substances to the stream will not occur; a minimum of twenty percent of the landowners in the project area will participate.
Canopy closure will be measured with a densiometer. Juvenile rearing will be quantified by installing a smolt trap at the mouth of the channel during smolt out-migration. Water quality will be monitored.
Brief schedule of activities
The project would be initiated with the mailing of fliers to landowners. Affected public agencies would also be contacted. Public meetings would be held to discuss stream functions, appropriate management and the goals of the project. Past habitat restoration/protection successes that the Yakama Indian Nation has undertaken would be displayed. Landowners would be solicited to voluntarily initiate riparian restoration/protection on their land. A purchase agreement would be signed with the landowner at the mouth of the channel. In-stream structures, such as large woody debris, would be placed at appropriate locations. Riparian easements at critical locations would be purchased. Engineering studies would be completed to determine the best approach to address stormwater problems. A stormwater management plan would be written and the end of year one. Also in year two, further riparian restoration projects would be implemented. The action items identified in the stormwater plan would be implemented. Monitoring would occur in years three and four. Ultimately, field trips would be scheduled to display individual restoration projects.
Managers believe rearing habitat for juvenile fish is severely limited in the Yakima Basin. This project would redress rearing habitat function through creating access into a high-quality channel, increasing riparian canopy closure, improving stormwater treatment and increasing in-channel habitat complexity.
Rearing habitat for juvenile fish is severely limited in the Yakima Basin, so much so that fish managers believe rearing habitat restoration is one of most important actions to restore stock health.
Summary of expected outcome
Access into this channel will be regained. Stormwater treatment will improve. Native riparian vegetation density will increase. In turn, water quality will improve, in-channel habitat complexity will increase and stream banks will become more stable. Landowners will become more aware of anadromous fish needs and other reasons for effectively treating stormwater and preserving/restoring riparian vegetation. Ultimately, the project will be used as a local demonstration area to encourage additional landowners to protect and restore streams.
Dependencies/opportunities for cooperation
The restoration project will be developed in consultation with the City of Union Gap, the USDA - NRCS and the WDOE. Cost-share applications will be presented to the USDA - CFSA, the WDNR, the USFWS, and other agencies that administer funding programs.
Invasive weedy species may out-competent replanted species, stormwater may still be inadequately treated.
Monitoring of revegetation and weed invasion will be done for three years. Corrective measures will be taken where necessary.
|Historic costs||FY 1996 budget data*||Current and future funding needs|
|(none)||New project - no FY96 data available||1997: 896,000|
* For most projects, Authorized is the amount recommended by CBFWA and the Council. Planned is amount currently allocated. Contracted is the amount obligated to date of printout.
CBFWA funding review group Bonneville Dam - Priest Rapids Dam
Recommendation Tier 2 - fund when funds available
Recommended funding level $896,000