BPA Fish and Wildlife FY 1997 Proposal

Section 1. Administrative
Section 2. Narrative
Section 3. Budget

see CBFWA and BPA funding recommendations

Section 1. Administrative

Title of project
Yakima Nation Riparian/Wetlands Restoration

BPA project number   9206200

Business name of agency, institution or organization requesting funding
Yakama Indian Nation

Sponsor type   WA-Tribe

Proposal contact person or principal investigator
 NameTracy Hames
 Mailing addressYakima Indian Nation
Wildlife Resource Management
P.O. Box 151
Toppenish, WA 98948
 Phone509/865-6262

BPA technical contact   Joe DeHerrera, EWP 503/230-3442

Biological opinion ID   Wildlife

NWPPC Program number   11.3F.5

Short description
Planning and implementation of YIN activities under Washington Wildlife Agreement.

Project start year   1992    End year   perpetuity

Start of operation and/or maintenance   1994

Project development phase   Planning, Implementation, Maintenance

Section 2. Narrative

Related projects
N/A

Project history
Planning for this project began in 1989. It was approved and prioritized in 1991. The first purchase of property was in 1993. This property was enhanced in 1995. Two other properties are nearing inclusion into the project. The total acreage of these three properties will be approximately 4,500 acres. The long-term goal of the project is to permanently protect, enhance and manage 27,000 acres of wetland and riparian habitat along Toppenish and Satus Creeks, and the Yakima River.

Biological results achieved
The South Lateral A property (453 acres) has been protected and enhanced. Satus Wildlife Area (3,100 acres) has been secured in the short term. Protection and enhancement plans are being developed. It should be included into the project this year. The Wapato Wildlife Area is in the planning stages now. A final decision for inclusion into the project has not yet been made.

Annual reports and technical papers
The Yakama Nation Wildlife Mitigation Plan (1991)
Satus Creek Wildlife Area Cultural Resources Reconnaissance Survey (1993)
Yakama Nation Lower Yakima Valley Wetlands and Riparian Restoration Project Predesign Management Plan (1994)
Lower Yakima Valley Wetlands and Riparian Restoration Project Environmental Assessment (1994)

Management implications
Wetland restoration is a fairly new concept in the arid portions of the Pacific Northwest. This project will not only be providing very important habitat restoration opportunities, but also will be increasing the data base on how to best conduct wetland restoration in these systems. What is learned in the beginning will be applied as the project progresses to allow for extremely cost-effective wildlife mitigation.

Specific measureable objectives
Benefits will be measured in Habitat Units (HUs), and in acres of specific habitat types. Losses in terms of HUs or acres at the Lower 4 Columbia River Dams will be offset by these activities.

Testable hypothesis
N/A

Underlying assumptions or critical constraints
Presently there is not enough money allocated to YIN under the Washington Coalition Agreement to meet the goals of the project. Funding beyond the agreement for further acquisition, enhancement and O&M will be necessary.

Methods
The methods used in securing, enhancing and managing the project are described in detail in the “Lower Yakima Valley Wetland/Riparian Restoration Project Environmental Assessment.”

Brief schedule of activities
FY 1997: Management and vegetation establishment at S. Lateral A property. Protection and restoration planning for Satus Wildlife Area. Pre-protection planning for other priority areas identified in the predesign management plan.
FY 1998-2001: Continue protection, enhancement and management activities as described in the predesign management plan according to the levels of funding available.

Biological need
The biological need for this project is to mitigate for the losses to wildlife which resulted from Columbia River hydroelectric development. This project has been designed to restore native floodplain areas in salmonid bearing waters. This will provide watershed benefits beyond just wildlife habitat. Benefits will occur in relation to river and creek hydrology, groundwater, anadromous fish, flood management, and cultural resources.

Critical uncertainties
The most important limiting factor to the success of this project relates to future funding. The Yakama Nation has the means necessary to implement a 27,000 acre wetlands and riparian restoration effort in the project area. As funds become less and less available, the cumulative benefits of a project like this become more difficult to realize.

Summary of expected outcome
Beside the obvious outcome of credit toward the wildlife habitat losses for construction of the lower 4 dams, this project will provide benefits related to flood control, fish habitat, watershed restoration and groundwater supply.

Dependencies/opportunities for cooperation
NEPA work is completed for this project. There are many opportunities for cooperation with other agencies and organizations. Ducks Unlimited and Pheasants Forever chapters are providing services and materials. The BIA is providing services and assistance on land securing, enhancement and management. BOR is providing funds for land protection in areas adjacent to the project area, and is providing funds under the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Plan legislation to tie in with efforts on Toppenish Creek. USFWS manages property within the project area. Negotiations are proceeding to coordinate the management of these lands with the project. The Intermountain West Joint Venture under the North American Waterfowl Management Plan has been established. The project area has been designated as a priority area under this plan. Funds may become available under this effort to compliment the project. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife owns land adjacent to the project area. These lands could also be managed in a complimentary fashion to increase the cumulative effects and landscape values of the project.

Risks
As long as adequate funding is available, there should be no risks involved in this project. The science of wildlife habitat enhancement and management has progressed enough over the years that the methods employed are very likely to provide the expected benefits.

Monitoring activity
Monitoring has begun on the project. This consists of baseline HEP analyses. Population surveys are being conducted pre-, during-, and post-enhancement to ensure actual wildlife responses to habitat restoration. HEP and vegetation measurements will be used to monitor the success of enhancement activities and to gather information related to adaptive management.

Section 3. Budget

Data shown are the total of expense and capital obligations by fiscal year. Obligations for any given year may not equal actual expenditures or accruals within the year, due to carryover, pre-funding, capitalization and difference between operating year and BPA fiscal year.

Historic costsFY 1996 budget data*Current and future funding needs
1992: 216,386
1993: 0
1994: 400,000
1995: 610,383
1996: 320,000
Obligation: 320,000
Authorized: 0
Planned: 320,000
1997: 0
1998: 1,500,000
1999: 1,500,000
2000: 1,500,000
2001: 1,500,000

* 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.

Funding recommendations

CBFWA funding review group   Wildlife

Recommendation    No recommendation