Views/Actions
Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 1988-022-00 - Umatilla Fish Passage Operations Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 1988-022-00 - Umatilla Fish Passage Operations

Please Note: This project is the product of one or more merges and/or splits from other projects. Historical data automatically included here are limited to the current project and previous generation (the “parent” projects) only. The Project Relationships section details the nature of the relationships between this project and the previous generation. To learn about the complete ancestry of this project, please review the Project Relationships section on the Project Summary page of each parent project.

Project Number:
1988-022-00
Title:
Umatilla Fish Passage Operations
Summary:
Background

In the 1980's, CTUIR and ODFW began implementing the Umatilla Fisheries Restoration Plan. An integral part of that effort was to address inadequate flow and migration conditions by constructing fish passage facilities, initiating a trap and haul program, and implementing the Umatilla Basin Project flow enhancement effort. The Fish Passage Operations Project objective is to increase adult and juvenile migrant survival in the Umatilla Basin. The project provides survival benefits for both hatchery and natural production by operating and maintaining ladders, bypasses, screen sites, trap facilities, and hauling equipment and coordinating these operations with flow enhancement measures and diversion activities. The project also provides valuable support to other projects by refining fish passage criteria, collecting return and migration data, and collecting and transporting broodstock.
Proposer:
None
Proponent Orgs:
Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) (Tribe)
Starting FY:
1988
Ending FY:
2032
BPA PM:
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Columbia Plateau Umatilla 100.00%
Purpose:
Habitat
Emphasis:
Restoration/Protection
Focal Species:
All Anadromous Fish
All Anadromous Salmonids
Bass, Largemouth
Bass, Smallmouth
Burbot
Chinook - All Populations
Chinook - Mid-Columbia River Spring ESU
Chinook - Upper Columbia River Summer/Fall ESU
Coho - Unspecified Population
Cutthroat Trout, Coastal - Resident Populations
Freshwater Mussels
Lamprey, Pacific
Lamprey, Western Brook
OBSOLETE-Carp, Common
OBSOLETE-Catfish
OBSOLETE-Crappie, Black
OBSOLETE-Crappie, White
OBSOLETE-Perch, Yellow
OBSOLETE-Pikeminnow, Northern
OBSOLETE-Trout, Brown
OBSOLETE-Walleye
Steelhead - Middle Columbia River DPS (threatened)
Sturgeon, White - All Populations except Kootenai R. DPS
Trout, Bull (threatened)
Trout, Interior Redband
Trout, Rainbow
Whitefish, Mountain
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Special:
None

Threemile Dam Adult Trapping: The main collection facility is located on the east bank and includes a vertical slot ladder, Denil steeppass, raceway type holding ponds and fish handling and sorting complex.

Figure Name: Methods-Obj 2-Task 2.1-Figure 2

Document ID: P124119

Document: Umatilla Fish Passage Operations Project for the Umatilla River 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 9

Project: 1988-022-00

Contract: 51647

The Westland Canal juvenile facility

Figure Name: Methods-Obj 3-Task 3.1-Figure 3

Document ID: P124119

Document: Umatilla Fish Passage Operations Project for the Umatilla River 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 11

Project: 1988-022-00

Contract: 51647

Stanfield Juvenile Bypass Pipe with deposited gravels in September 2010.

Figure Name: Discussion-Obj 1-Task 1.2-Figure 1

Document ID: P124119

Document: Umatilla Fish Passage Operations Project for the Umatilla River 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 25

Project: 1988-022-00

Contract: 51647

Bank erosion at the Stanfield bypass pipe outfall.

Figure Name: Discussion-Obj 1-Task 1.2-Figure 2

Document ID: P124119

Document: Umatilla Fish Passage Operations Project for the Umatilla River 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 26

Project: 1988-022-00

Contract: 51647

Stanfield Juvenile Bypass Pipe.

Figure Name: Discussion-Obj 1-Task 1.2-Figure 3

Document ID: P124119

Document: Umatilla Fish Passage Operations Project for the Umatilla River 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 27

Project: 1988-022-00

Contract: 51647

Stanfield’s Wasteway Pipe.

Figure Name: Discussion-Obj 1-Task 1.2-Figure 4

Document ID: P124119

Document: Umatilla Fish Passage Operations Project for the Umatilla River 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 27

Project: 1988-022-00

Contract: 51647

Westland Ladder on January 18, 2011 (approx. 7,000 cfs).

Figure Name: Discussion-Obj 1-Task 1.2-Figure 5

Document ID: P124119

Document: Umatilla Fish Passage Operations Project for the Umatilla River 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 29

Project: 1988-022-00

Contract: 51647


Summary of Budgets

To view all expenditures for all fiscal years, click "Project Exp. by FY"

Expense SOY Budget Working Budget Contracted Amount Modified Contract Amount Expenditures *
FY2016 (Previous) $617,907 $617,844 $542,543 $542,543 $508,463

Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla $617,844 $542,543 $542,543 $508,463
FY2017 (Current) $551,590 $623,571 $623,571 $623,571 $347,853

Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla $623,571 $623,571 $623,571 $347,853
FY2018 (Next) $593,299 $593,299 $0 $0 $0

Post 2018 – Umatilla $593,299 $0 $0 $0

* Expenditures data includes accruals and are based on data through 30-Apr-2017

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2016 - FY2018)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2016 Expense $362,164 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Fish Accord Review 05/02/2008
FY2016 Expense $68,335 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Fish Accord project COLA 11/21/2008
FY2016 Expense $148,329 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla 1988-022-00 original combination (CTUIR) 10/20/2010
FY2016 Expense $17,365 To: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Establish CTUIR FY13-17 Admin Budget (2012-010-00) 07/19/2012
FY2016 Expense $52,185 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla CTUIR (FY13 budget cleanup) 10/03/2013
FY2016 Expense $4,259 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla CTUIR (FY13 budget cleanup) 10/03/2013
FY2016 Expense $63 To: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Accord Budget Transfers (CTUIR) 10/21/16 10/21/2016
FY2017 Expense $362,164 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Fish Accord Review 05/02/2008
FY2017 Expense $79,098 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Fish Accord project COLA 11/21/2008
FY2017 Expense $152,037 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla 1988-022-00 original combination (CTUIR) 10/20/2010
FY2017 Expense $17,087 To: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Establish CTUIR FY12 Admin Budget (2012-010-00) 01/26/2012
FY2017 Expense $17,799 To: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Establish CTUIR FY13-17 Admin Budget (2012-010-00) 07/19/2012
FY2017 Expense $6,823 To: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Add funding to CTUIR FY17 Admin Budget (2012-010-00) 02/24/2016
FY2017 Expense $15,506 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Accord Budget Transfers (CTUIR) 10/21/16 10/21/2016
FY2017 Expense $56,412 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Accord Budget Transfers (CTUIR) 10/21/16 10/21/2016
FY2017 Expense $63 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Accord Budget Transfers (CTUIR) 10/21/16 10/21/2016
FY2018 Expense $593,299 From: Post 2018 – Umatilla FY18 Initial Planning Budgets (WS, CTUIR, YN, CRITFC, CCT, ID) 2/10/2017 02/13/2017

Pending Budget Decision?  No


No Project Cost Share

FY2016 0 %
FY2015 0 %
FY2014 0 %
FY2013 0 %
FY2012 0 %
FY2011 0 %
FY2010 0 %
FY2009 0 %
FY2008 0 %
FY2007 0 %
Fiscal Year Cost Share Partner Total Proposed
Contribution
Total Confirmed
Contribution

Contracts

The table below contains contracts with the following statuses: Active, Complete, History, Issued.
Expense Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Contracted Amount Dates
73982 REL 2 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 1988-022-00 EXP UMATILLA FISH PASSAGE OPERATIONS Issued $623,571 1/1/2017 - 12/31/2017



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):18
Completed:16
On time:16
Status Reports
Completed:47
On time:31
Avg Days Late:1

Historical from: 2000-033-00
Earliest Subsequent           Accepted Count of Contract Deliverables
Contract Contract(s) Title Contractor Start End Status Reports Complete Green Yellow Red Total % Green and Complete Canceled
12779 25691, 32105, 36187, 40877, 45649 2000-033-00 WALLA WALLA FISH PASSAGE OPERATIONS Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 01/2003 01/2003 History 22 53 0 0 7 60 88.33% 0
Project Totals 69 250 22 0 9 281 96.80% 0


Earliest Subsequent           Accepted Count of Contract Deliverables
Contract Contract(s) Title Contractor Start End Status Reports Complete Green Yellow Red Total % Green and Complete Canceled
4112 20592, 25827, 30969, 36317, 40875, 45652, 51647, 56131, 60664, 63950, 68012, 71454, 73982 REL 2 1988-022-00 UMATILLA FISH PASSAGE OPERATIONS Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 03/2001 03/2001 Issued 47 197 22 0 2 221 99.10% 0
Project Totals 69 250 22 0 9 281 96.80% 0


Review: 2013 Geographic Category Review

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1988-022-00-ISRP-20130610
Project: 1988-022-00 - Umatilla Fish Passage Operations
Review: 2013 Geographic Category Review
Proposal Number: GEOREV-1988-022-00
Completed Date: 6/12/2013
Final Round ISRP Date: 6/10/2013
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
Final Round ISRP Comment:

1. Purpose: Significance to Regional Programs, Technical Background, and Objectives

This project conducts trap and haul and fish passage facility maintenance and operations in the Umatilla and Walla Walla Rivers. It provides the personnel and equipment for capturing hatchery broodstock for propagating Chinook, steelhead, and coho at hatcheries in the two subbasins. As the proposal states, it is not itself a habitat restoration project but is a member of a suite of projects that are attempting to restore natural production to both river systems.

The significance to regional programs, technical background, and objectives of the project are described in a straightforward way. The project's actions have evolved over the years and now include various fish passage O&M activities as well as trap and haul. In addition, some activities have been transferred to other projects.

Project personnel monitor flow and passage conditions, provide oversight for the operation and maintenance of fish passage and trapping facilities, maintain fish hauling equipment, offer technical input and coordinate passage improvement efforts and produce annual operating plans. The project also provides the broodstock for the Umatilla Hatchery programs. The two objectives are to increase the survival of migrating adult and juvenile salmonids and to collect and disseminate adult return information for the Umatilla River.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management (Evaluation of Results)

Agricultural activities in the Umatilla and Walla Walla subbasins have created significant fish passage issues for adult and juvenile salmonids. In the lower Umatilla, modern fish screens were installed at the five major irrigation canals, juvenile bypasses and adult ladders were constructed, and adult and juvenile trapping facilities were built so that fish could be transported around river reaches during low flow periods. In the Walla Walla, irrigation diversions have been removed, fish passage facilities have been constructed, trap and haul efforts have been initiated, and minimum instream flow requirements have been established. This project is responsible for trapping fall Chinook, spring Chinook, coho, and summer steelhead broodstock for the artificial propagation programs in the Umatilla River.

Currently, principal activities include river flow regulation and enhancement, facility maintenance, broodstock collection, and overall coordination of the fish passage programs in the Walla Walla and Umatilla basins. Some adaptive management has occurred, as initially there was an emphasis on trap and haul. Now natural volitional up- and down-stream migration is preferred over transportation where natural migration results in higher overall survival rates.

Accomplishments of the project were described in qualitative terms; data on returning numbers of adults trapped and hauled or smolts counted at Threemile Dam were not presented. The proposal mentions observations made during fish migration seasons, but does not give any examples of what kind of observations are recorded or how the observations are used to guide management. The proposal also did not describe if any changes had been made to the trapping and hauling procedures, adult release points, or other techniques as a result of learning from past actions.

Because this project has been in place for about 25 years, it would have been helpful to identify efficiency improvements in O&M that have been implemented since the project's inception.

3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions

The project is closely linked to the Umatilla Basin Project Power Repay and the Umatilla Fish Passage Facilities O&M projects. Coordination with BOR’s Umatilla Basin Project, the Oregon Department of Water Resources, and local irrigation districts occurs in the Umatilla subbasin. In the Walla Walla subbasin, the project is closely associated with the Walla Walla River Juvenile and Adult Passage Improvements project. In the Walla Walla, the project interacts with ODFW, WDFW, USACE, Oregon Department of Water Resources, the Washington Department of Ecology, and local irrigation districts. Relationships with other projects in the two subbasins are adequately described.

The proposal does not address emerging limiting factors, but it would be helpful to know if trap and haul mortality has changed over the years, or if they have noticed any unusual sources of anadromous salmonid mortality at any of the new fish passage facilities. When low flows occur, poor water quality leads to poor survival and an increase in trapping and hauling fish. Such years may be a consequence of climate change.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Nine deliverables were described. They included: inspection of river conditions and facility operations, coordinating the Umatilla passage program, transportation of adult and juvenile fish, maintaining and operating fish hauling equipment, collecting and disseminating adult fish counts, providing broodstock for the Umatilla Hatchery programs, out-planting adults for natural production, and performing technical reviews of fish passage improvement efforts. Some of the methods used for data collection are fairly well described while others, for example determining adult fish condition, needed more detail.

One aspect of the work that needs additional description is how a random sample of returning adults is selected for broodstock (see p. 4 of the proposal). Are fish for broodstock selected over the entire run time? Are fish selected randomly with respect to sex, size and age, for example are jacks included in broodstock? If the run is small, are hatchery needs satisfied before surplus fish are allowed to spawn naturally, or does the hatchery simply get a fixed proportion of the escapement? It would have been helpful to address these questions in the proposal.

Specific comments on protocols and methods described in MonitoringMethods.org

One Protocol entitled Umatilla 3 Mile Falls Fish Passage Operation was listed. It has six monitoring methods. The video enumeration of adults, salmonid processing at migrant traps, fork length and mid-orbital to hypural length methods are fairly well described. The hypural plate method, however, should be refined. As it currently exists, no clear instruction is provided for identifying the posterior edge of the hypural plate. This can be consistently found by laying a fish on its side and bending the caudal fin up toward the head. A visible crease occurs at the trailing edge of the hypural plate. The methods used to determine fish abundance and condition could use some additional explanation.


===========QUALIFICATIONS FOLLOW================

This is a straightforward project that is needed for the operation and maintenance of fish passage facilities. Two qualifications should be addressed in contracting and in future reviews:

 

Qualification #1 - Qualification #1
There should be a clear procedure describing how observations on fish passage mentioned in the proposal will be incorporated into management actions. The project sponsors should look for opportunities to use trap/haul and fish passage facilities to monitor juvenile migration. In addition, progress reports should explain how O&M procedures have changed as a result of learning from past operations.
Qualification #2 - Qualification #2
Collection of adult salmon and steelhead selected for use as broodstock should continue to follow HSRG guidelines for the Umatilla and Walla Walla subbasins.
First Round ISRP Date: 6/10/2013
First Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
First Round ISRP Comment:

1. Purpose: Significance to Regional Programs, Technical Background, and Objectives

This project conducts trap and haul and fish passage facility maintenance and operations in the Umatilla and Walla Walla Rivers. It provides the personnel and equipment for capturing hatchery broodstock for propagating Chinook, steelhead, and coho at hatcheries in the two subbasins. As the proposal states, it is not itself a habitat restoration project but is a member of a suite of projects that are attempting to restore natural production to both river systems.

The significance to regional programs, technical background, and objectives of the project are described in a straightforward way. The project's actions have evolved over the years and now include various fish passage O&M activities as well as trap and haul. In addition, some activities have been transferred to other projects.

Project personnel monitor flow and passage conditions, provide oversight for the operation and maintenance of fish passage and trapping facilities, maintain fish hauling equipment, offer technical input and coordinate passage improvement efforts and produce annual operating plans. The project also provides the broodstock for the Umatilla Hatchery programs. The two objectives are to increase the survival of migrating adult and juvenile salmonids and to collect and disseminate adult return information for the Umatilla River.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management (Evaluation of Results)

Agricultural activities in the Umatilla and Walla Walla subbasins have created significant fish passage issues for adult and juvenile salmonids. In the lower Umatilla, modern fish screens were installed at the five major irrigation canals, juvenile bypasses and adult ladders were constructed, and adult and juvenile trapping facilities were built so that fish could be transported around river reaches during low flow periods. In the Walla Walla, irrigation diversions have been removed, fish passage facilities have been constructed, trap and haul efforts have been initiated, and minimum instream flow requirements have been established. This project is responsible for trapping fall Chinook, spring Chinook, coho, and summer steelhead broodstock for the artificial propagation programs in the Umatilla River.

Currently, principal activities include river flow regulation and enhancement, facility maintenance, broodstock collection, and overall coordination of the fish passage programs in the Walla Walla and Umatilla basins. Some adaptive management has occurred, as initially there was an emphasis on trap and haul. Now natural volitional up- and down-stream migration is preferred over transportation where natural migration results in higher overall survival rates.

Accomplishments of the project were described in qualitative terms; data on returning numbers of adults trapped and hauled or smolts counted at Threemile Dam were not presented. The proposal mentions observations made during fish migration seasons, but does not give any examples of what kind of observations are recorded or how the observations are used to guide management. The proposal also did not describe if any changes had been made to the trapping and hauling procedures, adult release points, or other techniques as a result of learning from past actions.

Because this project has been in place for about 25 years, it would have been helpful to identify efficiency improvements in O&M that have been implemented since the project's inception.

3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions

The project is closely linked to the Umatilla Basin Project Power Repay and the Umatilla Fish Passage Facilities O&M projects. Coordination with BOR’s Umatilla Basin Project, the Oregon Department of Water Resources, and local irrigation districts occurs in the Umatilla subbasin. In the Walla Walla subbasin, the project is closely associated with the Walla Walla River Juvenile and Adult Passage Improvements project. In the Walla Walla, the project interacts with ODFW, WDFW, USACE, Oregon Department of Water Resources, the Washington Department of Ecology, and local irrigation districts. Relationships with other projects in the two subbasins are adequately described.

The proposal does not address emerging limiting factors, but it would be helpful to know if trap and haul mortality has changed over the years, or if they have noticed any unusual sources of anadromous salmonid mortality at any of the new fish passage facilities. When low flows occur, poor water quality leads to poor survival and an increase in trapping and hauling fish. Such years may be a consequence of climate change.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Nine deliverables were described. They included: inspection of river conditions and facility operations, coordinating the Umatilla passage program, transportation of adult and juvenile fish, maintaining and operating fish hauling equipment, collecting and disseminating adult fish counts, providing broodstock for the Umatilla Hatchery programs, out-planting adults for natural production, and performing technical reviews of fish passage improvement efforts. Some of the methods used for data collection are fairly well described while others, for example determining adult fish condition, needed more detail.

One aspect of the work that needs additional description is how a random sample of returning adults is selected for broodstock (see p. 4 of the proposal). Are fish for broodstock selected over the entire run time? Are fish selected randomly with respect to sex, size and age, for example are jacks included in broodstock? If the run is small, are hatchery needs satisfied before surplus fish are allowed to spawn naturally, or does the hatchery simply get a fixed proportion of the escapement? It would have been helpful to address these questions in the proposal.

Specific comments on protocols and methods described in MonitoringMethods.org

One Protocol entitled Umatilla 3 Mile Falls Fish Passage Operation was listed. It has six monitoring methods. The video enumeration of adults, salmonid processing at migrant traps, fork length and mid-orbital to hypural length methods are fairly well described. The hypural plate method, however, should be refined. As it currently exists, no clear instruction is provided for identifying the posterior edge of the hypural plate. This can be consistently found by laying a fish on its side and bending the caudal fin up toward the head. A visible crease occurs at the trailing edge of the hypural plate. The methods used to determine fish abundance and condition could use some additional explanation.


===========QUALIFICATIONS FOLLOW================

This is a straightforward project that is needed for the operation and maintenance of fish passage facilities. Two qualifications should be addressed in contracting and in future reviews:

 

Modified by Dal Marsters on 6/12/2013 9:27:26 AM.
Documentation Links:

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1988-022-00-NPCC-20131125
Project: 1988-022-00 - Umatilla Fish Passage Operations
Review: 2013 Geographic Category Review
Proposal: GEOREV-1988-022-00
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 11/5/2013
Recommendation: Implement with Conditions
Comments: Implement with condition through FY 2018: Bonneville and sponsor to address ISRP qualification regarding progress reports in contracting and in future reviews. See Programmatic Issue and Recommendation And Recommendation C for long term maintenance.
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 ISRP Qualification: Qualification #1—Bonneville and sponsor to address ISRP qualification regarding progress reports in contracting and in future reviews.
Council Condition #2 ISRP Qualification: Qualification #2—Bonneville and sponsor to address ISRP qualification regarding progress reports in contracting and in future reviews.
Council Condition #3 Part 4: Council explanations addressing the formal requirements of Section 4h(10)(D) of the Northwest Power Act

Explanations as to how the Council responded to the recommendations of the Independent Scientific Review Panel

Umatilla Fish Passage Operations (Project #1988-022-00). The ISRP concluded that this project meets scientific review criteria with two qualifications that “should be addressed in contracting and in future reviews.” The first qualification, concerning monitoring and progress reports, the Council did include as a condition on the recommendation for funding. The ISRP’s second qualification was that “[c]ollection of adult salmon and steelhead selected for use as broodstock should continue to follow the Hatchery Scientific Review Group’s (HSRG) guidelines for the Umatilla and Walla Walla subbasins.” (To explain, the project not only provides for coordination and operation of passage facilities and other measures to provide adequate passage conditions, it also “is responsible for collecting broodstock for the Umatilla production program and adult return data for the Umatilla River.”) The project sponsor currently operates consistent with the HSRG guidelines. The Council has no reason to believe that it will not continue to do so, and the ISRP is free to inquire about it in future reviews. But the Council decided not to impose this qualification as a requirement in contracting. The issue of the HSRG guidelines as imposed requirements versus best practices guidelines is an issue at play in the process to amend the Council’s program that is in progress (as of October 2013).
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

Legal Assessment (In-Lieu)

Assessment Number: 1988-022-00-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 1988-022-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 10/6/2006
In Lieu Rating: No Problems Exist
Cost Share Rating: None
Comment: Increase survival of migrating juvenile and adult salmon and steelhead in the Umatilla Basin by operating passage facilities, flow enhancement measures, trapping facilities, and transport equipment to provide adequate passage conditions. A "1" rating on assumption these are mitigating for the FCRPS (and credited as such) as opposed to mitigating for irrigation in the Umatilla Basin.
Assessment Number: 2000-033-00-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 2000-033-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 10/6/2006
In Lieu Rating: Problems Exist
Cost Share Rating: None
Comment: Coordination and other O&M efforts for Walla Walla irrigation diversions; other entities (irrigators) and fishery managers authorized/required; need to address whether cost-share or other remedy needed.

Capital Assessment

Assessment Number: 1988-022-00-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 1988-022-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 2/27/2007
Capital Rating: Does Not Qualify for Capital Funding
Capital Asset Category: None
Comment: None
Assessment Number: 2000-033-00-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 2000-033-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 2/27/2007
Capital Rating: Does Not Qualify for Capital Funding
Capital Asset Category: None
Comment: None

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1988-022-00-ISRP-20060831
Project: 1988-022-00 - Umatilla Fish Passage Operations
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 8/31/2006
Final Round ISRP Date: None
Final Round ISRP Rating: Does Not Meet Scientific Review Criteria
Final Round ISRP Comment:
The response helped to clarify operational procedures and decisions. The figures presented in the response suggested that a substantial reduction in the numbers of fish hauled has resulted in recent years. Still, the relationship with flow is not clear. There remain sections of the river, between Birch Creek and Threemile dam, which continue to dewater - if our interpretation is correct. Are we to assume that no fish mortality occurs in the trap and haul operation? One assumes that volitional migration versus truck and haul is to the fish's benefit, and that this is occurring at an increased frequency, thus towards fish benefits, but we find no attempt to document the extent to which the assumption holds or does not.

There is a very large expenditure on the flow projects in this basin, thus it seems worthy of more in-depth and on-site review and evaluation. In addition, the large expenditure calls for evaluation of biological benefits, as the ISRP has repeatedly requested. It is difficult to suggest a design for the evaluation of biological benefits without a better understanding of the flow and fish passage operations.

It is apparent the proponents have made a serious effort to address the comments and questions raised by the ISRP, and we appreciate it. However, the more we learn, the more we question. An overriding question has to do with evaluation of effectiveness (in benefiting fish) of one of the primary measures being undertaken, ostensibly to benefit fish, namely the pumping of water from the Columbia River into the Umatilla Basin to be shared equally, "bucket for bucket" to benefit irrigators and fish. We find no proposal in the Umatilla collection that addresses the evaluation of benefits to fish of this measure. Yet, the results of all the other measures being undertaken in the Umatilla Basin certainly are affected by the amount and timing of water made available by the pumping strategy.
Accordingly, we recommend that these proposals be reviewed in the near future as a package, the "Umatilla Initiative."

The ISRP's recommendation of "Not Fundable (Qualified)" for the set of projects that constitute the Umatilla Initiative is explained under project 198343600, Umatilla Passage O&M.
Documentation Links:
Assessment Number: 2000-033-00-ISRP-20060831
Project: 2000-033-00 - Walla Walla River Fish Passage Operations
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 8/31/2006
Final Round ISRP Date: None
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
Final Round ISRP Comment:
See comments on 199601100 - Walla Walla Juvenile and Adult Passage Improvements. Is there any evidence of improvement to fish numbers as a result of these efforts?
Documentation Links:

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1988-022-00-NPCC-20090924
Project: 1988-022-00 - Umatilla Fish Passage Operations
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Fund
Comments: The project sponsors are to work with the Council and others to structure an ISRP/Council review of the coordinated subbasin activities in the Umatilla at some point in the next two years.
Assessment Number: 2000-033-00-NPCC-20090924
Project: 2000-033-00 - Walla Walla River Fish Passage Operations
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Fund
Comments: ISRP fundable qualified: sponsors should address the ISRP M&E comments the next time they report to Bonneville (copy to Council staff).

Project Relationships: This project Merged From 2000-033-00 effective on 1/1/2011
Relationship Description: Effective 1/1/2011 (when contracts renew), project 2000-033-00 is merged with 1988-022-00. These projects used to be under one, but BPA split them since they were in different subbasins. Since we have better tools to manage location, we can now combine them again.


Name Role Organization
Preston Bronson (Inactive) Technical Contact Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Brian Zimmerman Supervisor Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Gary James Supervisor Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Rosemary Mazaika Interested Party Bonneville Power Administration
Katey Grange Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration
Mike Richards Project Lead Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Tracey Yerxa Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration