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
Coordination of Watershed Projects in Umatilla River Basin

BPA project number   9608500

Business name of agency, institution or organization requesting funding
Umatilla Basin Watershed Council

Sponsor type   

Proposal contact person or principal investigator
 NameLuise Langheinrich
 Mailing addressUmatilla Basin Watershed Council
P.O. Box 1551
Pendleton, OR 97801
 Phone541/278-3836

BPA technical contact   Mark Shaw, EWP 503/230-5239

Biological opinion ID   N/A

NWPPC Program number   3.1D.1

Short description
Provide coordination, through a Umatilla Basin Watershed Council Coordinator, for 1) planning of sub-watershed enhancement and restoration projects and for 2) watershed education projects with the public and schools grade K through 12.

Project start year   1997    End year   1998

Start of operation and/or maintenance   

Project development phase   Planning

Section 2. Narrative

Related projects
Coordination of sub-watershed enhancement and restoration projects will tie in with CTUIR's (Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation) on-going and planned projects such as Project 95-060 and Project 87-100-01.

Project history

Biological results achieved

Annual reports and technical papers
Sub-watershed planning efforts.

Management implications

Specific measureable objectives
Coordination of sub-watershed enhancement and restoration projects will generate watershed plans that will in turn be implemented by the appropriate landowners, agencies, and community volunteers. Coordination of watershed education projects will increase the knowledge level on watershed issues.

Testable hypothesis
Coordination, via a watershed council coordinator, of sub-watershed enhancement and restoration projects with cooperating landowners, agencies, and the community at large will result in the successful and timely development of watershed plans. Coordination of watershed education projects with Morrow and Umatilla county school districts will facilitate implementation of these projects in the classroom.

Underlying assumptions or critical constraints
Securing adequate funding for the coordination effort.

Methods
Coordination on a sub-watershed basis to develop a specific watershed plan will be accomplished through development of a sub-watershed planning committee composed of the coordinator, interested landowners, soil & water conservation district representative, and Umatilla Basin Watershed Council representatives. CTUIR representatives will be a member for those sub-watersheds in their areas of interest. Agencies will be kept informed and drawn in on an as-needed basis. The planning committee will be the group charged with planning the meeting agendas and analyzing the output of the meetings. Meetings will be held for all residents and landowners in the sub-watershed for the purpose of identifying areas of concern, developing innovative methods for land use practices, education on watershed issues, and the formulation and implementation of a watershed plan.

Coordination for education projects will involve the coordinator, Umatilla Basin Watershed Council members, Morrow/Umatilla Education Service District, and teachers of the various school districts. These individuals will plan projects that are appropriate for implementation in the classrooms. This effort will include listing curriculum sources, training for teachers, defining equipment and material needs, and obtaining funding for implementing the specific project.

Brief schedule of activities
1997: coordinate the development of sub-watershed enhancement and restoration plans; coordinate the development of watershed education projects for schools and for public outreach; coordinate the implementation of the sub-watershed enhancement and restoration plans and the watershed education projects.

1998 and on: coordinate the development of sub-watershed enhancement and restoration plans; coordinate the development of watershed education projects for schools and for public outreach; coordinate the implementation of the sub-watershed enhancement and restoration plans and the watershed education projects.

Biological need
The current factor limiting anadromous and resident fish productivity in the Umatilla Basin is summer/fall rearing habitat. An ideal opportunity to meet the biological need (egg deposition to smolt) is presented through the need for coordination of watershed plan development and their subsequent implementation.

Critical uncertainties
Adequate funding for a coordinator to facilitate sub-watershed planning efforts.

Summary of expected outcome
Development of sub-watershed enhancement and restoration plans which in turn will be implemented. The development of watershed education projects which will be implemented in the classrooms and with the public.

Dependencies/opportunities for cooperation
This project represents a unique opportunity to combine objectives and funding sources from several agencies and organizations to accomplish a common enhancement and restoration objective in a watershed context.

Cooperation with the agencies, organizations, and landowners is key for success.

Risks
None identified. Project should result in plans which, upon implementation, will improve fish and wildlife habitat with resulting downstream benefits for cold water aquatic species.

Monitoring activity
Monitoring activity will be based on measuring the successful development of sub-watershed enhancement and restoration plans and the cooperation of landowners willing to implement these plans. Success on developing watershed education projects will be in the development of these plans and the cooperation of school teachers willing to implement these plans.

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
(none) New project - no FY96 data available 1997: 65,000
1998: 68,000
1999: 72,000
2000: 75,000
2001: 79,000

* 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   Bonneville Dam - Priest Rapids Dam

Recommendation    Tier 1 - fund

Recommended funding level   $65,000