FY 2007 Solicitation Homepage

Project Proposal Request for FY 2007 - FY 2009 Funding (Revised Summer 2006)

Proposal 200706400: Protect and Restore Slate Creek

Download this document in MS Word format
Open this document in PDF format

Table of Contents
Part 1. Administration and Budgeting
Section 1: General Administrative
Section 2: Project Location
Section 3: Project Species
Section 4: Past Accomplishments
Section 5: Relationship to Other Projects
Section 6: Biological Objectives
Section 7: Work Elements
Section 8: Budget
Section 9: Project Future
Section 10: Documents
Part 2. Reviews
Part 1 of 2. Administration and Budgeting
Section 1: General Administrative Information
Process Information:
Date Proposal Submitted & Finalized Status Form Generator
July 13, 2006 Finalized Jennifer Boie

Proposal Type: New
Proposal Number: 200706400
Proposal Name: Protect and Restore Slate Creek
Agency, Institution or Organization: Nez Perce Tribe Dept. Fisheries Resource Management Watershed Division
Short Description: Restore and protect the Slate Creek Watershed for the benefit of both resident and anadromous fish using an overall watershed approach. Restoration and protection efforts will be done cooperatively with the Nez Perce National Forest.
Information Transfer: Results from restoration and watershed improvement activities will be published in monitoring and evaluation reports. New findings, restoration techniques, and any other new technologies incorporated into design and implementation will be published in project specific reports. Results of restoration work will be shared between Forest Service Districts, other Forests, within the Nez Perce Tribe, and other various agencies.
 
Project Proposal Contacts
Contact Organization Address Phone/Email Roles Notes
Form Submitter
Jennifer Boie Nez Perce Tribe P.O. Box 365
Lapwai ID 83540
Ph: 208.621.3541
Fax: 208.843.9192
Email: jenniferb@nezperce.org
Form Submitter
All Assigned Contacts
Jennifer Boie Nez Perce Tribe P.O. Box 365
Lapwai ID 83540
Ph: 208.621.3541
Fax: 208.843.9192
Email: jenniferb@nezperce.org
Project Lead
Arleen Henry Nez Perce Tribe PO Box 365
Lapwai, ID 83540
Ph: 208-843-7317
Fax: 208-843-7319
Email: arleenh@nezperce.org
Administrative Contact
NPT Finance Department accountant
Ira Jones Nez Perce Tribe P.O. Box 365
Lapwai ID 83540
Ph: 208.843.7144
Fax: 208.843.9192
Email: iraj@nezperce.org
Contract Manager
Watershed Division Program Manager

Section 2: Project Location
Sponsor Province: Mountain Snake ARG Province: No Change
Sponsor Subbasin: Salmon ARG Subbasin: No Change
Location(s) at which the action will be implemented
Latitude Longitude Waterbody Location Description County/State Subbasin Primary?
45.586 -116.076 Slate Creek These lat. and lon. are an overall approximation of the entire watershed. The Slate Creek Watershed encompasses approximately 83, 034 acres. Please see narrative for more detailed description. Idaho, Idaho Salmon Yes

Section 3: Focal Species
Focal Species:
Primary Secondary Additional Species
Chinook Snake River Spring/Summer ESU
Steelhead Snake River ESU
All Resident Fish
Bull Trout
Interior Redband Trout
Westslope Cutthroat

Section 4: Past Accomplishments
Past Accomplishments for Each Fiscal Year of This Project This proposal is for funding a new project, and has no past accomplishments.

Section 5: Relationships to Other Projects
Other Current Projects Related to this Project (any funding source)
Funding Source Related ID Related Project Title Relationship
PCSRF - Idaho 035 04 CW Nez Perce Aquatic Restoration The Nez Perce Tribe Dept. of Fisheries Watershed received PCSRF funds (PCSRF 035 04 CW) for the Nez Perce Aquatic Restoration project in 2004. The goal of the Nez Perce Aquatic Restoration project is to work towards the re-establishment of healthy self-sustaining populations of key fish species (spring Chinook salmon, steelhead, bull trout, and westslope cutthroat trout) through increasing habitat in all life stages on the Nez Perce National Forest, including the Salmon River and SF Clearwater River subbasins. Target drainages include Slate Creek, White Bird Creek , Red River, Meadow Creek, and Mill Creek. The NPNF is a partner in completing these projects. The NPT and the NPNF have been working cooperatively in the area of watershed restoration since 1997. The completion of these projects will replace 9 barrier (adult and juvenile) culverts, decommission 53 miles of road, improve 6 miles of trail, restore 1.5 miles of stream, and enhance 23 sites within meadow/riparian habitat. Projects in the Slate Creek watershed include road decommissioning, trail work, riparian planting, and riparian fencing.
BPA 198909801 Salmon Studies Id Rvrs USFWS The Idaho Salmon Supplementation Studies, Project #8909801-8909803, is a project that is funded by BPA and has direct ties to the Slate Creek Watershed. Since 1992 the Idaho Fish and Game, the Nez Perce Tribe, Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have conducted baseline monitoring including snorkeling and Redd surveys for Chinook salmon. The Idaho Salmon Supplementation Studies is a cooperative research project to test supplementation on an experimental basis. In order for this project to be successful, habitat conditions for fish need to be as propitious as possible. Sedimentation is presently occurring and the potential from further road degradation is great. Restoration work by this project proposal targets alleviating the potential for further habitat degradation in these supplementation streams by reducing road-derived damage. Slate Creek is used as a control stream in the study, since supplementation efforts have been dropped due to the listing of spring Chinook salmon (part of the larger ESA protected Snake River population).
BPA 198909802 Salmon Studies Id Rvrs NPT The Idaho Salmon Supplementation Studies, Project #8909801-8909803, is a project that is funded by BPA and has direct ties to the Slate Creek Watershed. Since 1992 the Idaho Fish and Game, the Nez Perce Tribe, Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have conducted baseline monitoring including snorkeling and Redd surveys for Chinook salmon. The Idaho Salmon Supplementation Studies is a cooperative research project to test supplementation on an experimental basis. In order for this project to be successful, habitat conditions for fish need to be as propitious as possible. Sedimentation is presently occurring and the potential from further road degradation is great. Restoration work by this project proposal targets alleviating the potential for further habitat degradation in these supplementation streams by reducing road-derived damage. Slate Creek is used as a control stream in the study, since supplementation efforts have been dropped due to the listing of spring Chinook salmon (part of the larger ESA protected Snake River population).
Other: Forest Service Clean Slate Clean Slate EIS The Nez Perce National Forest has a Clean Slate EIS that defines needs in the watershed. Clean Slate is a watershed restoration project within the Slate Creek Watershed. The proposed action is designed to provide aquatic and terrestrial restoration through the reduction of roads, tree density, and fuel loading, and improved structural diversity of timber. Road decommissioning of some non-primary roads is suggested as activity to provide aquatic and terrestrial restoration. Many of the EIS proposed projects have already been completed . In addition to these projects (occurring primarily in the northern portion of the Slate Creek watershed), a larger restoration effort is also on-going in the Slate Creek watershed. The US Forest Service is an active partner in restoring the Slate Creek watershed, as they cost share portions of these projects in an effort to improve aquatic and terrestrial vegetation conditions.

Section 6: Biological Objectives
Biological Objectives of this Proposed Project
Biological Objective Full Description Associated Subbasin Plan Strategy Page Nos
Environmental Problem 10, Aquatic Objective 10A Starting in important habitats, reduce instream sedimentation to levels meeting applicable water quality standards (e.g., TMDLs) and measures, with an established upward trend in the number of stream miles meeting such criterion by 2019. Salmon 10A3, 10A5, 10A6, 10A8, 10A9, 61A5 49-50, 99
Environmental Problem 12, Aquatic Objective 12A Rehabilitate connectivity where it will benefit native fish populations, with emphasis on bull trout. Improve access to habitat currently blocked by manmade barriers. Salmon 12A1, 12A2, 28A2, 8D5 53, 63, 47
Environmental Problem 49, Aquatic Objective 49C Reduce floodplain/channel encroachment (e.g., roads, development, etc.). Salmon 8B4, 8C1, 8C2, 8C3, 9A13, 49C1 72, 46-47, 49
Environmental Problem 51,Terrestrial Objective 51B Restore 50% of degraded (functional at risk or non-functional) riparian areas to proper functioning condition by 2019. Salmon 51B1, 51B2, 51B4, 51B6, 51B8, 8A1, 8A2, 8D1, 9A13, 45A2, 45A3, 51A4, 51A5 75-76,46-49,71
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56A Prevent the introduction of exotic invasive plant species into native habitats (see section 6.2: Terrestrial Prioritizations) to conserve quality, quantity, and diversity of native plant communities providing habitat to native wildlife species. Salmon 56A2, 56A3, 56A5, 56A8 86-87
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56B Reduce the extent and density of established exotic invasive plant species. Salmon 56B1, 56B3, 56B4, 56B5, 56B6 89
Environmental Problem 59,Terrestrial Objective 59A Reduce the impact of the transportation system and motorized access on wildlife and fish populations and habitats. Salmon 59A1, 59A2, 59A4, 61A5, 8B4, 10A3 96, 99, 47, 50
Socioeconomic Prob. 64,Socioeconomic Objective 64A In the lower portion of the Salmon subbasin, minimize negative impacts on and maximize benefits to local communities while maximizing benefits to fish and wildlife and users of those resources. Salmon 64A2, 64A3, 64A4, 64A5 104
Socioeconomic Prob. 65,Socioeconomic Objective 65A Protect and foster both Indian and non-Indian cultural uses of natural resources in the Salmon subbasin. Salmon 65A1 105
Socioeconomic Prob. 66,Socioeconomic Objective 66A In the lower portion of the Salmon subbasin, develop a group to guide implementation of this plan and to coordinate recommendations with co-managers for funding, implementation, and other management activities. Salmon 66A2, 66A3, 66A7, 66A8, 66A9 106

Section 7: Work Elements
Work Elements and Associated Biological Objectives
Work Element Name Work Element Title Description Start Date End Date Estimated Budget
01: Manage and Administer Projects Management, Coordination and Communication Project management includes coordination project activities, attending meetings, seeking additional funding, attending trainings to stay abreast of innovative techniques, preparing statements of work, managing budgets, and completing reports. Includes: Produce Annual Report (WE 132)- annual reports summarize yearly activities, Produce Status Report (WE 141 &185)- quarterly reports will track project work element completion 3/1/2007 2/28/2010 $97,381
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

02: Coordination General Project Coordination Activities include meetings, phone calls, grant writing, preparing partnering agreements with Nez Perce National Forest and other communication tasks with partners. The Nez Perce Tribe has been partners with the Nez Perce National Forest since 1996, which includes sharing funds and resources to complete projects. Each year, project specifics are spelled out in an agreement signed by both parties. 3/1/2007 2/28/2010 $77,065
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element

03: Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation Provide NEPA Information to BPA NEPA compliance must be obtained before implementing projects. The Nez Perce National Forest will complete NEPA, cultural clearance, and ESA consultation for watershed restoration projects. 3/1/2007 2/28/2010 $55,279
Biological Objectives Metrics
Environmental Problem 10, Aquatic Objective 10A
Environmental Problem 12, Aquatic Objective 12A
Environmental Problem 49, Aquatic Objective 49C
Environmental Problem 51,Terrestrial Objective 51B
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56A
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56B
Environmental Problem 59,Terrestrial Objective 59A
No Metrics for this Work Element

04: Outreach and Education Slate Creek Watershed Education and Outreach The education and outreach component will focus on informing the public about the watershed restoration activities that are happening in Slate Creek. Emphasis will be placed on informing the public on important watershed issues including fish passage, road impacts and invasive weeds. Education and outreach materials will encourage the public to participate in or support restoration efforts. This information will be relayed through several different formats, examples being: informational brochures, workshops, public field trips, interpretive signs at project sites, and classroom/field presentations and activities for students 3/1/2007 2/28/2010 $46,163
Biological Objectives Metrics
Environmental Problem 10, Aquatic Objective 10A
Environmental Problem 12, Aquatic Objective 12A
Environmental Problem 49, Aquatic Objective 49C
Environmental Problem 51,Terrestrial Objective 51B
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56A
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56B
Environmental Problem 59,Terrestrial Objective 59A
Socioeconomic Prob. 64,Socioeconomic Objective 64A
Socioeconomic Prob. 65,Socioeconomic Objective 65A
Socioeconomic Prob. 66,Socioeconomic Objective 66A
* # of general public reached: 50
* # of students reached: 100
* # of teachers reached: 5

05: Produce Inventory or Assessment Survey Stream Crossings in Little Slate drainage 1) Survey all sites where roads cross streams within the Little Slate drainage. 2) Assess these crossings to determine if they are upstream migration barriers to juvenile and/or adult fish. 3) Select the highest priority man-made barriers for future replacement recommendations. 6/1/2007 8/31/2007 $77,356
Biological Objectives Metrics
Environmental Problem 12, Aquatic Objective 12A
No Metrics for this Work Element

06: Produce Plan Report findings on Little Slate Stream Crossings Survey and Prioritize Culverts for Replacement A comprehensive plan needs to be developed identifying fish passage barriers and prioritizing culverts for replacement/barriers for removal. The plan will summarize all findings from the Little Slate Stream Crossings Survey and will prioritize culverts for replacement. 10/1/2007 2/28/2008 $62,368
Biological Objectives Metrics
Environmental Problem 12, Aquatic Objective 12A
No Metrics for this Work Element

07: Produce Design and/or Specifications Culvert Design Designs for culvert replacement are a cooperative effort between the NPT and the Nez Perce NF. For designs on Forest Service lands, the Forest Service generally takes the lead, and the Nez Perce Tribe reviews and approves all designs before being solicited for bids on construction projects. Culvert design may be subcontracted. 4/1/2008 8/31/2008 $21,482
Biological Objectives Metrics
Environmental Problem 10, Aquatic Objective 10A
Environmental Problem 12, Aquatic Objective 12A
No Metrics for this Work Element

08: Install Fish Passage Structure Replace Culvert in Little Slate Use report findings on Little Slate Stream Crossings Survey to determine priority culvert for replacement to reestablish connectivity and fish passage. 7/1/2009 8/31/2009 $75,869
Biological Objectives Metrics
Environmental Problem 10, Aquatic Objective 10A
Environmental Problem 12, Aquatic Objective 12A
* Does the structure remove or replace a fish passage barrier?: yes

09: Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Culvert Replacement Data Collection Data to be collected for the replaced culvert includes: redd counts, profile measurements, fish presence/absence and abundance (collected by snorkeling), in-culvert substrate, and gradient measurements. Monitoring stations will be set up at this site in order to record data for several seasons to monitor for effectiveness and proper construction. The purpose is to determine whether the new culvert is successful. 3/1/2008 2/28/2010 $25,176
Biological Objectives Metrics
Environmental Problem 10, Aquatic Objective 10A
Environmental Problem 12, Aquatic Objective 12A
Primary R, M, and E Type: Project Implementation

10: Decommission Road Decommission 20 miles of road within Little Slate Creek Approximately 20 miles of roads (10 miles per year for 2008 and 2009) will be obliterated to reduce sediment delivery to streams via surface erosion and landslide prone roads. Weed infestations will be treated prior to obliteration and weed control will continue following obliteration. 3/1/2008 11/30/2009 $156,754
Biological Objectives Metrics
Environmental Problem 10, Aquatic Objective 10A
Environmental Problem 49, Aquatic Objective 49C
Environmental Problem 51,Terrestrial Objective 51B
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56A
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56B
Environmental Problem 59,Terrestrial Objective 59A
Socioeconomic Prob. 64,Socioeconomic Objective 64A
* # of road miles decommissioned : 20

11: Plant Vegetation Seed Decommissioned Road Upon road obliteration, seeding and fertilizing the recontoured road prism is done to prevent short-term surface erosion until native grasses and vegetation take hold. 3/1/2008 11/30/2009 $75,063
Biological Objectives Metrics
Environmental Problem 10, Aquatic Objective 10A
Environmental Problem 49, Aquatic Objective 49C
Environmental Problem 51,Terrestrial Objective 51B
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56A
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56B
Environmental Problem 59,Terrestrial Objective 59A
Socioeconomic Prob. 64,Socioeconomic Objective 64A
* # of acres of planted: 20 miles

12: Upland Erosion and Sedimentation Control Erosion Control on Decommissioned Road Upon completion of recontouring the road prism, weed free straw is placed on stream crossings, springs, and or seep areas. Native slash is placed all along on recontoured road prism. 3/1/2008 11/30/2009 $35,063
Biological Objectives Metrics
Environmental Problem 10, Aquatic Objective 10A
Environmental Problem 59,Terrestrial Objective 59A
* # of acres treated: 20 miles

13: Remove vegetation Reduce Noxious and Invasive Weeds along Decommissioned Roads Weeds are a problem on newly disturbed soils such as decommissioned roads. Treatment of roads, prior to decommissioning and following decommissioning will become practice. 3/1/2008 2/28/2010 $25,176
Biological Objectives Metrics
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56A
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56B
Socioeconomic Prob. 64,Socioeconomic Objective 64A
* # of acres treated: 20 miles

14: Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data Decommissioned Road Data Collection The Nez Perce NF has developed a monitoring plan for decommissioned roads. Data is used to monitor success and for suggesting improvements that could be made. 3/1/2008 2/28/2010 $25,176
Biological Objectives Metrics
Environmental Problem 10, Aquatic Objective 10A
Environmental Problem 49, Aquatic Objective 49C
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56A
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56B
Environmental Problem 59,Terrestrial Objective 59A
Primary R, M, and E Type: Project Implementation

15: Create/Manage/Maintain Database Maintain Slate Creek Project Database Develop and update database and GIS layers to track project installation location and project specific information over time. This database will be in coordination with the Nez Perce National Forest and shared with other agencies as well as BPA annual reporting. 3/1/2007 2/28/2010 $62,658
Biological Objectives Metrics
Environmental Problem 10, Aquatic Objective 10A
Environmental Problem 12, Aquatic Objective 12A
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56A
Environmental Problem 56,Terrestrial Objective 56B
Environmental Problem 59,Terrestrial Objective 59A
No Metrics for this Work Element

16: Disseminate Raw/Summary Data and Results Disseminate Project Results to Professional Audiences at Scientific and Professional Conferences Project details and results may be presented to professional audiences at scientific and professional conferences and workshops. 3/1/2007 2/28/2010 $35,224
Biological Objectives Metrics
No Metrics for this Work Element


Section 8: Budget

Itemized Estimated Budget
Item Note FY 2007 Cost FY 2008 Cost FY 2009 Cost
Personnel 2 FTE includes: Project Lead, Support Staff, and Technical Staff $97,998 $103,877 $110,110
Fringe Benefits NPT employee fringe 30% $29,399 $31,163 $33,033
Supplies Field Supplies, Office Supplies, Non-expendable property $27,724 $9,491 $8,639
Travel Travel to meetings/conferences and perdiem $4,411 $4,411 $4,411
Overhead NPT indirect rate 29.64 % $50,422 $47,288 $49,434
Other Consultants and Contracts- subcontracted items $ 0 $120,000 $180,000
Other Training $2,169 $2,169 $2,169
Other 2 GSA Vehicles $8,645 $8,645 $8,645
Other Office Space Rental $3,000 $3,000 $3,000
Totals $223,768 $330,044 $399,440

Total Estimated FY 2007-2009 Budgets
Total Itemized Budget$953,252
Total Work Element budget$953,252

Cost sharing
Funding Source or Organization Item or Service Provided FY 2007 Est Value ($) FY 2008 Est Value ($) FY 2009 Est Value ($) Cash or in-kind? Status
Nez Perce National Forest NEPA Analysis & Decision (Little Slate portion of watershed) $175,000 $ 0 $ 0 In-Kind Under Development
Nez Perce National Forest Project design, contract preparation, contract administration, monitoring, etc $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 In-Kind Under Development
Nez Perce National Forest, PCSRF, Central ID RAC Portion of contract award funding $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 Cash Under Review
Totals $215,000 $40,000 $40,000

Section 9: Project Future
Project Future Costs and/or Termination
FY 2010 Est Budget FY 2011 Est Budget Comments
$430,000 $440,000 Slate Creek has been identified as a Forest Service priority watershed. Future work will primarily include road decommissioning, culvert replacement, habitat restoration, and monitoring.
Future Operations & Maintenance Costs
Noxious weed control and project success monitoring
 
Termination Date Comments
2020
 
Final Deliverables
Slate Creek Watershed will be an intact, healthy, functioning watershed that is able to sustain all species at historical or near-historical levels. Slate Creek Watershed will meet TMDL and Nez Perce National Forest Plan standards.

Section 10: Narrative
Document Type Size Date
Fix-it Loop Documents
Documents Originally Submitted with this Proposal

Part 2 of 2. Reviews of Proposal
Administrative Review Group (ARG) Results
Account Type:
Expense
No changes were made to this proposal


BPA's in lieu Funding Review of new project proposals (August 3, 2006) [Download letter and table]

BPA's in lieu Rating: 1.0
Approx. BPA share of total costs: BPA 70%(76)
Status of Cost Share: Mixed
Notes: Road decommission/culvert replacement on FS lands; assume covered by BPA-FS MOU


NPCC Final Funding Recommendations (October 23, 2006) [Full NPCC Council Recs]

FY 2007 NPCC Rec
$80,000
FY 2008 NPCC Rec
$80,000
FY 2009 NPCC Rec
$80,000
Total NPCC Rec
$240,000
Budget Type:Expense
Budget Category:ProvinceExpense
Recommendation:Fund
NPCC Comments: 2007 Revised Budget: FTE reduced, complete culvert survey in Little Slate remains unchanged, reduced road decommissioning and culvert replacement (contingent on supplemental funding).


NPCC Draft Funding Recommendations (September 15, 2006) [Full NPCC Council Recs]

FY 2007 NPCC Rec
$80,000
FY 2008 NPCC Rec
$80,000
FY 2009 NPCC Rec
$80,000
Total NPCC Rec
$240,000
FY 2007 MSRT Rec
$ 0
FY 2008 MSRT Rec
$ 0
FY 2009 MSRT Rec
$ 0
Total MSRT Rec
$ 0
Budget Category:ProvinceExpense
NPCC Comments:

Local or MSRT Comments: 2007 Revised Budget: FTE reduced, complete culvert survey in Little Slate remains unchanged, reduced road decommissioning and culvert replacement (contingent on supplemental funding).


Independent Scientific Review Panel Final Review (August 31, 2006) [Download full document]

Recommendation: Fundable in part
Comments: The original proposal was a generic, broad-brush habitat improvement project including barrier removal, road decommissioning, hydrologic restructuring, vegetation management and other practices, none of which were sufficiently justified or described. The response trims the project scope to surveying road crossings and producing a prioritized list of barriers whose replacement provides the greatest chance for providing important benefits to native fish. The modified proposal described in the response is fundable at $80K per year, which represents partial funding of the original proposal. The proposed plan and survey should include fish distribution data including that of exotics, in recognition of the hazard of upstream invasion of exotic fish when barriers are removed.

When this survey and planning is completed, a separate implementation proposal can be developed based upon results. This could be the basis for significant collaboration with other landowners and interested parties to leverage investments and generate commitment to larger habitat protection and improvement goals.

The sponsors should be encouraged to include some criteria in their surveys for the amount and productivity (for desired species and based on historic use) of habitat that would become available to migrating fish with a successful project. The hypothesis guiding this work is that of access to productive habitat for the target species. The test of the hypothesis, and thus the science of the project, is whether or not the target species re-inhabits the area, so monitoring fish response to complete the test is needed.

For full comments on "restore and protect" type projects, please see heading “General comments concerning Nez Perce Tribe proposals to protect and restore various watersheds” at the beginning of the ISRP comments on project # 199607702, Protect & Restore Lolo Creek Watershed.


Independent Scientific Review Panel Preliminary Review (June 2, 2006) [Download full document]

Recommendation: Response requested
Comments: This is exactly the same proposal as 200710400 (White Bird Cr.) with only the name changed.

A response is requested on:

1. Justification of benefits to fish.

2. Provisions of M&E to show benefits to fish.

Despite the acknowledged similarity to #200710400, the subbasin plan did not prioritize it similarly. The proposal would benefit and the response should include description of the distribution and abundance of migratory fish in the basin. Numbers must be available given the assessment of the stream's importance for fish populations. It also would be beneficial to describe what has happened to these numbers through time compared to fish in a Middle Fork Salmon River tributary for example, and to assess the chances that stream flow and access to the flood plain can be restored. If chances of that happening were low, it would be useful to know what the proponents believe are realistic goals regarding fish production in the system. The response should include a description of past studies that support their strategy for enhancing salmonid numbers.

The response should show how the objectives, presently to replace culverts and decommission roads, could be restated as actions to increase fish populations by some well-founded amount.

The project includes barrier removal to expand available habitat, but that can provide access to exotic species, a risk that needs to be addressed in any barrier removal project and in the response. Efforts to restore the hydrograph and regain access to the floodplain should be high priority.

Where vegetation will be "treated," an IPM approach is needed. Seeding annual rye is not re-vegetation in any long-term sense. If the goal is to manage invasive plants, establishment of adapted native species is more effective. Monitoring looks perfunctory in that no methods, sampling, analysis or adaptive management provisions are described. Plans seem to be for monitoring tasks rather than resource conditions. In response, please show how monitoring will provide assessment of resource conditions.

Methods for data storage, sharing, or amalgamation at regional level are missing. Information and education programs are not information transfer in a scientific sense, but road decommissioning in particular is rarely popular and could benefit from some public understanding. Sponsors might look to State and NRCS programs on private lands to expand available technical and financial resources.

Maintained by the Columbia Basin Fish & Wildlife Authority. Please direct comments or questions to the webmaster.