BPA Fish and Wildlife FY 1998 Proposal
Section 1. Summary
Section 2. Goals
Section 3. Background
Section 4. Purpose and methods
Section 5. Planned activities
Section 6. Outcomes, monitoring and evaluation
Section 7. Relationships
Section 8. Costs and FTE
see CBFWA and BPA funding recommendations
Section 1. Summary
Title of project
Washington Model Watershed Habitat Projects
BPA project number 9401800
Implement model watershed plans for Asotin Creek, Pataha Creek and Tucannon River. Enhance fish habitat, reduce water temperatures, erosion and sedimentation, enhance and re-establish riparian vegetation, promote cooperation and agreement between landowners and resource agencies.
Business name of agency, institution or organization requesting funding
Asotin Conservation District Pomeroy Conservation District Columbia Conservation District
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Section 2. Goals
Supports a healthy Columbia basin; increases run sizes or populations; provides needed habitat protection; adaptive management (research or M&E)
|Target stock||Life stage||Mgmt code (see below)|
|Snake River Spring Chinook (Asotin Creek)||Adult and juvenile||(L)|
|Snake River Spring Chinook (Pataha Creek)||Adult and juvenile||(L)|
|Snake River Spring Chinook, Fall Chinook (Tucannon River)||Adult and juvenile||(L)|
|Snake River Steelhead and Bulltrout (Asotin Creek)||Adult and juvenile||(P)|
|Snake River Steelhead and Bulltrout (Pataha Creek)||Adult and juvenile||P|
|Snake River Steelhead and Bulltrout (Tucannon River)||Adult and juvenile||P|
|Affected stock||Benefit or detriment|
|Rainbow trout and Rough Fish||Beneficial|
Section 3. Background
Stream area affected
Stream name Asotin Creek
Stream miles affected 20 miles (Asotin)
40 miles (Pataha)
Hydro project Mid to lower Snake River Dams (Lower Granite Dam; Asotin Creek)( Lower Monumental; Pataha and Tucannon)
Tucannon River (Pataha)
Tucannon River (Tucannon)
Land ownership Public & Private (Asotin)Public & Private (Pataha)Public & Private (Tucannon)
Acres affected 60,000 acres approximately affected of 208,260 watershed acres (Asotin)
35,000 acres approximately affected of 118,388 watershed acres (Pataha)
60,000 acres approximately affected of 203,520 watershed acres (Tucannon
Habitat types Upland; wetlands, cropland, rangeland, forestland. Riparian corridor; white fur, ponderosa pine, cottonwoods, alders and willows. Instream; pools, riffles, runs, glides and large woody debris. (Asotin, Pataha, Tucannon)
To implement habitat restoration and enhancement of projects as developed in the Asotin, Pataha and Tucannon Model Watershed Plans.
Biological results achieved
Data that is currently being collected can only be compared to data that was taken before the plans were developed. We believe that by the year 2000 we should have a reliable database from monitoring and be able to use that data to determine biological results achieved. Our overall goal is to improve fisheries. In years to come, after project implementation is complete, we will be able to assess the effectiveness of the project implementation.
1996 was the first year of habitat project implementation. First year projects are currently being evaluated for effectiveness.
Project reports and papers
Project statement of work and implementation reports. Final draft of the Asotin Creek Model Watershed Plan has been submitted. Drafts of the Tucannon River and Pataha Creek Watershed Plans are expected in the spring of 1997. Quarterly reports will be sent to concerned parties documenting project activity.
Adaptive management implications
The watersheds have previously received grant funding to accomplish established goals and have administered all projects within budget and in a timely manner. Past administration shows project management capability. Communication and relationships are in great working order between District personnel, cooperating agencies, and landowner cooperators ensuring successful administration.
Section 4. Purpose and methods
Specific measureable objectives
Our goals and objectives include decreasing water temperatures, reducing sedimentation delivered to the stream, lowering fecal coliform levels, increasing spawning availability, and increasing available fish habitat.
Sources of funding are uncertain at this time. If project implementation is started and then funding is ceased this could cause problems. The timeliness of obtaining permits is also a concern. Improved coordination between the permitting and designing process will ensure proper design and implementation and that projects are completed within the work windows identified through the permitting authorization. Landowner buy-in is also critical to the success of these projects. The landowner must be willing to cooperate and agree to maintenance standards while still feeling that he is benefiting from the proposed practice. These are all factors that will take continued determination and commitment. We will work to the best of our ability to ensure that project implementation is a success.
These watersheds have been significantly impacted by human activities and catastrophic natural events, such as floods and droughts. Only remnant salmon and trout populations use these waters as compared to earlier years. To increase salmonid productivity it will require enhancement and restoration of fish habitat and riparian corridor. The barriers include high stream temperatures, lack of quality resting and rearing pools, sediment deposition in spawning gravels, and high fecal coliform levels.
Hypothesis to be tested
Our primary goal is to enhance and restore habitat for fisheries. We have many practices to install to reach this goal. Initial success will be measured on the number of practices installed.
Project success is crucial and relies on district coordination and cooperative efforts to address landowner concerns and agency acceptance. Biological objectives are more easily accomplished through a voluntary approach in comparison to the alternative of regulatory agency directives.
Justification for planning
N/A Implementation of BMPís on Asotin Creek, Pataha Creek and the Tucannon River are a primary focus for this project.
We will be implementing different types of biological engineering designs. We plan to use root wads, large woody debris placement, point barbs, off-site watering devices, planting trees for stabilization of eroding banks, and off-channel rearing ponds. Additional upland BMP practices will be installed to reduce erosion and therefore sediment entering the streams. Monitoring and evaluation will be compared to data collected in recent surveys. At the present time, current laws prohibit the reintroduction of fish into any of these streams.
In 1996, the three watersheds installed root wads, root wad revetments, rock barbs, rock vortex weirs, log weirs, log barbs, off channel rearing sites, off site watering facilities, upland BMP practices and streambank stabilization through vegetative plantings and bio engineering.
Section 5. Planned activities
|Phase Planning||Start 1995||End on-going||Subcontractor|
|Asotin Creek Model Watershed Plan was completed in 1995 Pataha Creek Model Watershed Plan is currently in the draft stage and will be completed in the spring of 1997. Tucannon Model Watershed Plan is currently in the draft stage and will be completed in the spring of 1997. Tucannon Model Watershed Plan is currently in the draft stage and will be completed in the spring of 1997.|
|Phase Implementation||Start 1995||End 2001||Subcontractor None at this time|
|Begin implementation of Asotin Creek Model Watershed Plan. Major limiting factors and solutions include 1) Lack of quality resting and rearing pools-158 in-stream structures; 2) High water temperatures-1/2 mile meander reconstruction, 36,000 feet vegetative planting, 23,760 feet riparian fencing; 3) Excessive sediment-26,400 feet fencing, 4 wells, 26,400 feet trails, 16,000 acres weed control, 6 spring developments, 6 ponds, 150,000 feet terrace, 50 sediment basins, 5 acres of filter strips, 5 acres grass waterways, 5 acres forest land planting; and 4) Elevated fecal coliform levels-21,000 feet fencing, 5 acres filter strips, 4 spring development, and 2 wells. Completion of these tasks depends on landowner cooperation and availability of funds. Projects on the Pataha Creek for the reduction of sedimentation and lowering of the water temperatures included construction of equipment creek crossing, streambank stabilization projects, riparian management through vegetation planting, riparian buffer strips and fencing, off-channel watering devices, implementation of more upland conservation practices such as terraces, waterways, and sediment basin construction, no-till seeding and grass plantings. Instream structures for increased fish habitat were construction of log and rock weirs. Additional project implementation will depend on available funding. Implementation projects on the Tucannon River will target reduced sedimentation, increase resting and rearing pools, decrease stream temperature, improve fish habitat, and decrease coliform levels. Using bio-engineering practices and landowner cooperation, specific projects, project sites and cost are being developed. Scope of projects completed will be determined by available funding.|
|Phase O&M||Start 1997||End 2001||Subcontractor None at this time|
|Following the flooding that occurred in the spring of 1996 and again in January of 1997, projects will have to be evaluated and decisions will have to be made concerning operation and maintenance of completed projects. Asotin Creek habitat projects were damaged by the floods. Prioritization of completed projects will access what projects will be repaired and what projects will be used as learning tools for further Creek projects. Of the seven BPA projects done in 1996, all are functioning as designed, but damage was substantial on two projects that will require repair. Pataha Creek habitat projects received some damage from flooding. One bank stabilization project received major damage and will require extensive repair while the other three sites only require minor repair. Tucannon River habitat projects received some damage from January 97 flooding. All projects requiring repairs will be repaired/modified to better serve their intended purposes. As projects are implemented in all three model watersheds, O&M will increase because protection of an initial investment is crucial for project success. Flood damage repairs are separate from O&M costs but are critical to maintaining structural integrity.|
Constraints or factors that may cause schedule or budget changes
Lack of funding is the only known risk at this time. This could pose a risk if project implementation is begun and then funding ceases in the middle of construction.
In 1996, constraints included receiving needed permits in a timely manner, availability of knowledgeable contractors, heavy workload on NRCS engineers and work window time frames made timing crucial.
Section 6. Outcomes, monitoring and evaluation
SUMMARY OF EXPECTED OUTCOMES
Expected performance of target population or quality change in land area affected
Complete and implement an integrated plan for the watersheds which will meet landowner objectives and agency acceptance, in order to protect and enhance all resource bases with concern for long-term sustainability through coordinated resource planning
Present utilization and convservation potential of target population or area
The present Upper Snake River Chinook Salmon population has reached dangerously low levels due to several factors. Our combined watershed projects of habitat conservation and restoration will enhance overall fisheries habitats. If sufficient target species return to our watersheds, population increases are possible.
Assumed historic status of utilization and conservation potential
Historically, Spring Chinook Salmon were present in Asotin Creek and the Tucannon River. The Tucannon River still supports a small run of Salmon but the fish returning to Asotin Creek have reached low levels of returning spawners. Historically, sufficient habitat was available throughout the watersheds but many factors have contributed to the reduction of available habitat.
Long term expected utilization and conservation potential for target population or habitat
To restore and enhance habitat to a level to sustain increased populations of adults and juvenile salmonoids.
Contribution toward long-term goal
Sustainable habitat for Spring Chinook, Bull Trout, Summer Steelhead and also Tucannon River, Fall Chinook.
Indirect biological or environmental changes
Ultimately, if all the enhancement and restoration goals can be met, the watersheds ecosystems will be improved.
Specific measurable objectives began in 1996 with the implementation of habitat enhancement projects in all three watersheds. (Asotin Creek; 7 BPA early action projects with the following habitat implementation: 13 root wads, 10 rock barbs, 8 boulder placements, 4 log barbs, 3 large woody debris placement and 3 vortex rock weirs) (Pataha Creek; 9 BPA early action projects: 2 off-site watering facilities, 3 stream bank stabilization projects, 1.5 miles riparian fencing, 15.2 acres riparian buffer strip, 1 fish passage removal and 1 stream crossing improvement) (Tucannon River; 7 BPA early action projects: 8 rock vortex weirs, 8 rock barbs, 81 root wad/revetments for streambank stabilization fish enhancement and 1 sediment basin repair).
Environmental attributes affected by the project
Implementation of BMPís resulted in the following: reduced sedimentation , reduced water temperature, enhanced instream fish habitat.
Changes assumed or expected for affected environmental attributes
Expected near and long term changes have not significantly impacted the watersheds. Continued protection and enhancement measures must be implemented in larger numbers than previously done to positively impact our habitat enhancement goals.
Measure of attribute changes
Individual watershed habitat enhancement goals for 1996 Early Action projects were met as identified in 101G. Currently we are identifying 1997 habitat enhancement goals for each watershed. All Districts currently have identified O&M costs from 1996 projects which impact available funding for new enhancement projects for 1997 and beyond.
Assessment of effects on project outcomes of critical uncertainty
Habitat enhancement projects are new to Southeastern Washington. Landowner acceptance on private property will be the key to the success of the implementation of the watershed plan goals. Once we have landowner participation, we need to have the commitment of long term funding to cost-share on approved BMPís.
Summary of expected outcomes are on a site by site basis. Each watershed is unique and has certain qualities that affect project implementation. Monitoring through temperature, sedimentation, flows, total suspended solids and fecal coliforms we can determine overall water quality. Evaluations of projects through photo documentation, modeling guidelines, on site evaluations and documented results can be used for public information and education.
Improved cooperation between Conservation Districts, Technical Advisory Committee, Landowner/steering Committee and landowners/operators enhances the implementation of individual watershed plans.
We will be experimenting with many different types of biological engineering designs. We will also be implementing approved BMPís on upland and forestland. We plan to use root wads, large woody debris placement, point barbs, rock barbs, vortex rock weirs, off-site watering devices, planting trees for stabilization of eroding banks, and off-channel rearing ponds. Upland and forest practices will be measured by reduced soil erosion and sedimentation reaching the streams. Monitoring and evaluation will be compared to data collected in recent surveys.
Provisions to monitor population status or habitat quality
The Conservation Districts involved in the three model watersheds are in cooperation with the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife, US Forest Service and the NRCS to monitor the status of the target stock, the availability or quality of habitat and success of the projects implemented.
Data analysis and evaluation
The Conservation Districts in cooperation with the model watershed technical advisory committees will act as a gathering and dissemination group for data collected regarding water quality and habitat.
Information feed back to management decisions
Information will be made available to the management agencies for review and input for modification. Requested project modification will be reviewed by Conservation District Supervisors, Model Watershed Technical Advisory and Landowner Steering Committees for project modification implementation.
Critical uncertainties affecting project's outcomes
Natural disasters impact the ability to predict projectís outcomes. Landowner acceptance of habitat projects utilizing bio-engineering techniques, vegetation development and large woody debris introduction are new management techniques that are meeting resistance by landowners due to historical rock/hardface control measure usage. An extensive information and education program must be maintained to keep landowners and public informed on status of implemented projects.
Committed long term funding allows Districts to work with landowners to develop long term implementation plans allowing for increased landowner cooperation and implementation of habitat projects on private property. This action would allow the landowner to financially plan and implement a long term commitment.
Landowner and public understanding of bio-engineering techniques is necessary. Details of plans, implementation and evaluation of projects must be made available for landowners and other interested parties. Newsletters and tours of project sites must be used.
Projects are implemented to increase large pool habitat relating to anadromous fisheries needs, reduce stream temperatures, reduce sedimentation and fecal coliform levels in the watersheds.
Incorporating new information regarding uncertainties
Through mutual agreement through adaptive management process between all concerned entities.
Increasing public awareness of F&W activities
Publication of Model Watershed Newsletters and newspaper articles along with project tours, school involvement in educational projects and presentations, volunteer group involvement in project implementation and other sources of communication are tools that will be used to increase public awareness.
Section 7. Relationships
|Related BPA project||Relationship|
|9202602 Washington State Conservation Commission; COMPETITIVE GRANT, WATER QUALITY GRANT, MODEL WATERSHED GRANT (all three watersheds)||Cost-share: (Competitive Grant) Administrative: (Water Quality Grant & Model Watershed Grant)|
|Related non-BPA project||Relationship|
|Washington State Conservation Commission; COMPETITIVE GRANT, WATER QUALITY GRANT, MODEL WATERSHED GRANT (all three watersheds)||Cost-share: (Competitive Grant) Administrative: (Water Quality Grant & Model Watershed Grant)|
Opportunities for cooperation
Each District began their planning by involving the community. They formed a landowner based committee, known as the Landowner Steering Committee (LSC), to represent the views and needs of the community. They also established a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to assist the LSC with meeting their goals. The TAC consists of personnel from the following agencies: USDA NRCS, USFS, WDFW, WDOE, WDNR, WSU CES, BPA, Inland Power and Light and Clearwater Power Company. Development of working relationship with Nez Perce and Umatilla Tribes.
The three Districts that are involved in these three model watersheds have been working closely together sharing ideas and information on projects. The three Districts may enter into a contract together to hire an individual to do project and water monitoring.
Section 8. Costs and FTE
1997 Planned $579,000
|Future funding needs||Past obligations (incl. 1997 if done)|
|FY||Other funding source||Amount||In-kind value|
|1998||NRCS assistance (engineering, planning assistance)||$60,000 value of plants raised for riparian plantings in watersheds||$200,000|
|1999||NRCS assistance (engineering, planning assistance)||$60,000 value of plants raised for riparian plantings in watersheds||$200,000|
|2000||NRCS assistance (engineering, planning assistance)||$60,000 value of plants raised for riparian plantings in watersheds||$200,000|
|2001||NRCS assistance (engineering, planning assistance)||$200,000|
|2002||NRCS assistance (engineering, planning assistance)||$200,000|
Other non-financial supporters
Area Schools, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, County Commissioners, Universities and group and individual volunteers.
FY97 overhead percent N/A The project money is divided between planning, implementation and O&M.
How does percentage apply to direct costs
N/A Same as 115
Subcontractor FTE None