Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 1996-011-00 - Walla Walla Juvenile and Adult Passage Improvements Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 1996-011-00 - Walla Walla Juvenile and Adult Passage Improvements

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:
1996-011-00
Title:
Walla Walla Juvenile and Adult Passage Improvements
Summary:
Provide safe passage for migrating juvenile and adult salmonids in the Walla Walla Subbasin by constructing and maintaining passage facilities at irrigation diversion dams and canals and other passage barriers.
Proposer:
None
Proponent Orgs:
Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) (Tribe)
Starting FY:
2004
Ending FY:
2022
Stage:
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Columbia Plateau Walla Walla 100.00%
Purpose:
Habitat
Emphasis:
Restoration/Protection
Focal Species:
All Anadromous Fish
All Anadromous Salmonids
Bass, Largemouth
Bass, Smallmouth
Carp, Common
Catfish
Crappie, Black
Crappie, White
Freshwater Mussels
Lamprey, Pacific
Lamprey, Western Brook
Perch, Yellow
Pikeminnow, Northern
Trout, Brown
Trout, Bull
Trout, Interior Redband
Trout, Rainbow
Whitefish, Mountain
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Tags:
None
Special:
None
BiOp Association:
FCRPS 2008 – view list of FCRPS 2008 BiOp Actions

Tributary Habitat Implementation 2007 to 2009,
Tributary Habitat Implementation 2007 to 2009,
Tributary Habitat Implementation 2007 to 2009

No photos have been uploaded yet for this Project.

Summary of Budgets

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

To see more detailed project budget information, please visit the "Project Budget" page

No Decided Budget Transfers

Pending Budget Decision?  No


Actual Project Cost Share

Current Fiscal Year — 2024
Cost Share Partner Total Proposed Contribution Total Confirmed Contribution
There are no project cost share contributions to show.
Previous Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year Total Contributions % of Budget
2009

Contracts

The table below contains contracts with the following statuses: Active, Closed, Complete, History, Issued.
* "Total Contracted Amount" column includes contracted amount from both capital and expense components of the contract.
Capital Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Total Contracted Amount Dates
422 REL 27 SOW MWH Global, Inc. 1996-011-02 GARDEN CITY/LOWDEN 2 FISH PASSAGE FACILITY Closed $83,768 9/10/2001 - 6/30/2003
422 REL 24 SOW MWH Global, Inc. 1996-011-00 MILTON DITCH CONSOLIDATION PROJECT Closed $146,174 11/5/2001 - 9/30/2004
422 REL 36 SOW MWH Global, Inc. PI 199601100 JUV SCREENS & TRAPS WALLA WALLA History $1,269,447 10/1/2003 - 9/30/2005
422 REL 37 SOW MWH Global, Inc. PI 1996-011-00 LITTLE WALLA WALLA RUBBER DAM Closed $9,035 3/1/2004 - 4/30/2004
Expense Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Total Contracted Amount Dates
3889 SOW City of Walla Walla 1996-011-00 MILL CREEK FISH SCREENS Closed $200,000 3/1/2000 - 5/31/2001
422 REL 9 SOW MWH Global, Inc. 1996-011-00 CONS MGMT SCVCS-LITTLE WALLA WALLA SCREENS/TRAP-NCTE Closed $83,341 5/8/2000 - 12/30/2000
422 REL 13 SOW MWH Global, Inc. 1996-011-05 WALLA WALLA BASIN PASSAGE IMPROVEMENTS Closed $92,010 5/8/2000 - 12/30/2000
452 REL 1 SOW JD White Company, Inc. BA PREPARATION FOR GARDEN CITY/LOWDEN 2 DIVERSION PROJECTS History $3,952 9/25/2000 - 12/31/2000
2362 SOW Applied Archaeological Research MILTON DITCH SURVEY History $3,885 9/28/2000 - 11/15/2000
652 REL 11 SOW Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 1996-011-00 WALLA WALLA SCREENS EVALUATION Terminated $25,000 3/1/2001 - 11/1/2001
5545 SOW Hudson Bay District Improvement Company 1996-011-00 O&M FOR LITTLE WALLA WALLA SCREENS/TRAP Closed $344,459 5/23/2001 - 12/31/2005
429 REL 18 SOW Fishpro, Inc. 1996-011-00 FACILITIES EXPANSION AT HAGERMAN FISH CULTURE EXPER. History $10,000 6/1/2001 - 6/30/2001
428 REL 7 SOW MWH Global, Inc. 1996-011-00 HOFER DAM PASSAGE IMPROVEMENTS - HARZA History $202,000 8/14/2001 - 6/29/2002
652 REL 13 SOW Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 1996-011-00 WALLA WALLA SCREENS EVALUATIONS Closed $23,545 8/15/2001 - 11/1/2001
428 REL 8 SOW MWH Global, Inc. 1996-011-02 GARDEN CITY/LOWDEN2 - PHASE 3 History $155,080 8/15/2001 - 12/31/2001
422 REL 22 SOW MWH Global, Inc. 1996-011-01 LITTLE WALLA WALLA SCREENS & TRAP - CONSTRUCTION Closed $58,940 8/15/2001 - 5/31/2002
7402 SOW Gardena Farms Irrigation District #13 1996-011-00 O & M FOR BURLINGAME SCREENS & LADDER History $156,063 9/1/2001 - 9/30/2004
428 REL 9 SOW MWH Global, Inc. 1996-011-02 GARDEN CITY/LOWDEN 2 FISH PASSAGE FACILITY Terminated $186,000 9/21/2001 - 12/31/2002
428 REL 10 SOW MWH Global, Inc. 1996-011-00 HOFER DAM FISH PASSAGE IMPROVEMENT History $15,000 10/26/2001 - 12/16/2001
428 REL 11 SOW MWH Global, Inc. 1996-011-00 HOFER DAM FISH PASSAGE IMPROVEMENT-STREAM GAUGE INS History $9,500 10/26/2001 - 12/31/2001
428 REL 12 SOW MWH Global, Inc. 1996-011-00 GARDEN CITY CONSTRUCTION Terminated $1,481,700 11/15/2001 - 9/30/2002
422 REL 28 SOW MWH Global, Inc. 1996-011-00 GARDEN CITY CONSTRUCTION History $1,157,540 11/15/2001 - 2/28/2003
652 REL 19 SOW Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 1996-011-00 WALLA WALLA FISH PASSAGE M&E Closed $91,714 1/1/2002 - 5/31/2006
14153 SOW Gorge Earthworks, Inc. 1996-011-00 WALLA WALLA RIVER JUVENILE & ADULT PASSAGE IMPROVE Closed $116,082 7/29/2003 - 10/31/2003
14887 SOW Milton Freewater Water Control District 1996-011-00 WALLA WALLA JUVENILE AND ADULT PASSAGE IMPROVEMENTS History $13,000 8/15/2003 - 9/30/2003
20328 SOW Gardena Farms Irrigation District #13 1996-011-00 O&M FOR BURLINGAME & GARDEN CITY LOWDEN 2 FACILITIES History $79,756 10/1/2004 - 9/30/2005
24409 SOW Milton Freewater Water Control District 199601100 EXP NURSERY BRIDGE COST-SHARE, WALLA WALLA History $30,940 9/1/2005 - 12/31/2005
24598 SOW Gardena Farms Irrigation District #13 1996-011-00 EXP O&M - GARDENA & GARDEN CITY/LOWDEN 2 FACILITIES History $66,358 10/1/2005 - 9/30/2006
26095 SOW Hudson Bay District Improvement Company 1996-011-00 EXP O&M LITTLE WALLA WALLA & NURSERY BRIDGE History $68,699 1/1/2006 - 12/31/2006
652 REL 34 SOW Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 199601100 EXP WALLA WALLA FISH PASSAGE M&E Closed $19,082 1/1/2006 - 9/30/2007
28891 SOW Walla Walla County Conservation District (SWCD) 199601100 EXP GOSE STREET FISH PASSAGE IMPROVEMENTS History $250,000 8/23/2006 - 12/30/2006



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):6
Completed:5
On time:5
Status Reports
Completed:28
On time:17
Avg Days Late:0

                Count of Contract Deliverables
Earliest Contract Subsequent Contracts Title Contractor Earliest Start Latest End Latest Status Accepted Reports Complete Green Yellow Red Total % Green and Complete Canceled
7402 20328, 24598 1996-011-00 EXP O&M - GARDENA & GARDEN CITY/LOWDEN 2 FACILITIES Gardena Farms Irrigation District #13 09/01/2001 09/30/2006 History 5 13 0 0 0 13 100.00% 0
24409 199601100 EXP NURSERY BRIDGE COST-SHARE, WALLA WALLA Milton Freewater Water Control District 09/01/2005 12/31/2005 History 2 4 0 0 1 5 80.00% 0
5545 26095 1996-011-00 EXP O&M LITTLE WALLA WALLA & NURSERY BRIDGE Hudson Bay District Improvement Company 05/23/2001 12/31/2006 History 6 11 3 0 0 14 100.00% 0
652 REL 19 652 REL 34, 26934 REL 6, 26934 REL 17, 26934 REL 24, 26934 REL 38, 56065 REL 4, 56065 REL 9, 56065 REL 11 2009-026-00 EXP WALLA WALLA JUVENILE AND ADULT Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 01/01/2002 10/31/2015 Closed 45 44 0 0 1 45 97.78% 1
28891 199601100 EXP GOSE STREET FISH PASSAGE IMPROVEMENTS Walla Walla County Conservation District (SWCD) 08/23/2006 12/30/2006 History 4 2 0 0 0 2 100.00% 0
Project Totals 230 445 23 0 60 528 88.64% 31


Historical from: 2007-396-00
                Count of Contract Deliverables
Earliest Contract Subsequent Contracts Title Contractor Earliest Start Latest End Latest Status Accepted Reports Complete Green Yellow Red Total % Green and Complete Canceled
33295 2007-396-00 CAP TOUCHET CONSOLIDATION Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 06/01/2007 05/31/2008 Closed 3 5 0 0 0 5 100.00% 0
34855 38897, 44015, 49225, 54456, 59331, 63566, 67282, 70741, 74306, 77247, 80649, 83750, 86499, 88982, 91260, 93223, CR-373087 2007-396-00 EXP WALLA WALLA BASINWIDE TRIB PASSAGE Walla Walla Basin Watershed Council 09/01/2007 10/31/2025 Pending 79 247 20 0 29 296 90.20% 15
38680 2007-396-00 CAP GOSE STREET PASSAGE - FINISH Walla Walla County Conservation District (SWCD) 07/15/2008 01/31/2009 Closed 2 4 0 0 0 4 100.00% 0
38293 2007-396-00 CAP NURSERY BRIDGE COST-SHARE Milton Freewater Water Control District 06/16/2008 06/30/2009 Closed 4 4 0 0 0 4 100.00% 0
36326 43565, 57872 2009-026-00 CAP CONSTRUCT BW-OL CONSOLIDATION Walla Walla County Conservation District (SWCD) 01/15/2008 09/30/2013 Closed 15 10 0 0 10 20 50.00% 0
40082 2007-396-00 CAP GFID IRRIGATION EFFICIENCY& IS FLOW Gardena Farms Irrigation District #13 09/30/2008 10/31/2009 Closed 3 2 0 0 2 4 50.00% 2
39456 2007-396-00 CAP SPRING CREEK PASSAGE - WWCCD Walla Walla County Conservation District (SWCD) 09/22/2008 05/31/2010 Closed 6 5 0 0 0 5 100.00% 0
35684 49378, 60272, 63647, 67276 2007-396-00 CAP WALLA WALLA BASINWIDE TRIB PASSAGE Walla Walla Basin Watershed Council 09/01/2007 10/31/2015 Closed 35 68 0 0 15 83 81.93% 13
42762 54088, 58147, 63329 2007-396-00 CAP WALLA WALLA BASINWIDE TRIB PASSAGE Walla Walla County Conservation District (SWCD) 05/15/2009 10/30/2014 Closed 17 20 0 0 2 22 90.91% 0
BPA-4913 HBDIC Recharge Site Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2010 09/30/2011 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-6209 HBDIC Recharge site purchase or easement Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2011 09/30/2012 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
49521 2007-396-00 CAP OL-BW PIPELINE, AQUIFER RECHARGE- WWCCD Walla Walla County Conservation District (SWCD) 09/15/2010 12/31/2012 Closed 4 6 0 0 0 6 100.00% 0
BPA-6859 Walla Walla Basin Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2012 09/30/2013 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-7589 Walla Walla Basin Recharge Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2013 09/30/2014 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-8132 2015 Land Acquisiton Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2014 09/30/2015 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-8674 FY16 Land Acquisition/Task Order Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2015 09/30/2016 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BPA-9469 FY17 Land Acquisitions & TBL Task Orders Bonneville Power Administration 10/01/2016 09/30/2017 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Totals 230 445 23 0 60 528 88.64% 31


The table content is updated frequently and thus contains more recent information than what was in the original proposal reviewed by ISRP and Council.

Review: 2022 Anadromous Fish Habitat & Hatchery Review

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 2007-396-00-ISRP-20230310
Project: 2007-396-00 - Walla Walla Basinwide Tributary Passage and Flow
Review: 2022 Anadromous Fish Habitat & Hatchery Review
Completed Date: 3/14/2023
Final Round ISRP Date: 2/10/2022
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
Final Round ISRP Comment:

The ISRP commends the proponents for a sound proposal along with a strong record of accomplishments and progress toward program goals. Past restoration actions performed by the project have helped reduce fish passage barriers, enhanced habitat complexity and availability, and improved water quality. Proposed work is scheduled to occur in the upper tributaries and forks of the Walla Walla River. Ten new projects are scheduled for the next funding period. As with previous work, these projects are focused on removing migration barriers, restoring watershed functions via fencing, culvert removal, bank sloping, riparian planting, floodplain and side channel reconnections, and pool creation. In one project, Beaver Dam Analogs or BDAs will be used to slow and spread water during periods of moderate to high flows to reconnect floodplains, encourage riparian plant growth, and gradually deliver water to the channels after high flows.

Project site selection is based on numerous criteria. The proponents follow the hierarchical strategy of Roni et al. (2002, 2018, and references therein) and focus on restoration with an appropriate set of techniques at multiple scales. Methodologies and standard practices for implementation objectives were provided from BPA’s HIP and screening protocols. The links to implementation monitoring methods published in MonitoringResources.org along with brief descriptions of methods in the text were especially helpful. Finally, the incorporation of concepts of resiliency and incorporation of climate change more explicitly in their work were noteworthy.

The ISRP’s recommended Conditions are listed below. The proponents need to assist with development of an M&E Matrix during the response loop (September 24 to November 22, 2021) and to provide information to address the other following Conditions in future annual reports and work plans:

  1. SMART objectives. Proponents should continue to work toward framing their objectives to align more with the SMART format (see proposal instructions) in future proposals, work plans, and annual reports. The implementation monitoring objectives generally lacked some elements of SMART objectives. 

  2. Explanation of objectives. We note there was also some disconnect with the presentation of Progress by Objective. Specifically, in the diagram Objectives are listed as A-G (n=7), while in the Progress section they are listed as 1-10. Given that BPA is no longer funding a couple of previous objectives, ISRP recommends that the proponents provide a crosswalk of the different set of objectives for improved clarity in the final work plan or next annual report. 

  3. Links between implementation, outcomes, and monitoring. The ISRP recommends a couple of refinements to the descriptions of implementation methods and subsequent monitoring to include in the work plan or next annual report. Specifically, the proponents could list each of the projects by objective and then present methods for the restoration activities (e.g., plant X trees in the riparian zone) and then follow-up with the monitoring. Ultimately, each of the monitoring methods poses a similar kind of question, i.e., can we detect a physical or hydrological change(s) due to restoration activities? While this may appear to be a simple question, there is the issue of separating signal (effect of restoration) from the noise (all the other things going on). There are also issues associated with scale (e.g., local reach v. subbasin-wide) which complicate detecting an effect. If for example stream temperatures do not change, does that suggest there is a problem with the objective or approach? Or is some other explanation likely. While the ISRP recognizes these points are not fatal flaws for the project, it would be useful for the monitoring to have some expectations for effects from the project(s) and over what time scale. 

  4. M&E matrix - support. As habitat projects and monitoring projects are not presented as part of an integrated proposal or plan, the need for a crosswalk to identify the linkages between implementation and monitoring is extremely important for basins or geographic areas. The ISRP is requesting a response from the Walla Walla Sub-Basin Salmonid Monitoring and Evaluation Project (200003900) to summarize the linkages between implementation and monitoring projects in the basin. In the response loop, we ask this project to assist them in creating the summary and provide information to them about what is being monitored for this implementation project and where and when the monitoring occurs. A map or maps of locations of monitoring actions would be helpful in this regard. 

  5. Explanation of aquifer recharge activities. The ISRP recommends adding some brief text to clarify the aquifer recharge (MAR) activities. The proposal mentions that water conservation efforts have reduced groundwater recharge. The reason for this was not obvious until discussed during the presentation. This should be explained more clearly in future annual reports and proposals. Also during the presentation was a discussion of recharge projects, including last year’s effort as the largest to date. These apparently are not funded by BPA and other local funding sources are being sought. These appear highly relevant to the project’s passage and flow goals and should be briefly discussed in that context. 

  6. Climate change and prioritization. The proponents provided an excellent discussion of how climate change will likely affect the Walla Walla Subbasin and to recovery of imperiled species in this system. The CTUIR fish habitat project (199604601) also included a strong presentation on climate change, which indicates considerable thinking on this topic and how it will affect the subbasin. What was not clear, however, is how the climate change analysis is used to screen specific project actions. A high priority action under present or past conditions, for example, might be quite different from those under likely climate change scenarios. The ISRP encourages the proponents to continue to refine their projections, coordinate with other projects, and adjust project activities accordingly.

Q1: Clearly defined objectives and outcomes

The proposal focuses on Walla Walla Basin Watershed Council’s set of actions in the upper tributaries of the subbasin (especially North Fork Walla Walla, Couse, Cup Gulch, and Big and Little Meadow Canyon creeks). Proponents frame the problem(s) in the subbasin very well, especially in relationship to current hydrological and geomorphic challenges compared with historical conditions.

An overview of the substantial changes that occurred in the Walla Walla subbasin caused by agriculture, forestry, grazing, and human development was provided. These changes have brought about a suite of deleterious effects, including reductions in stream flow, increases in the occurrence of fish passage barriers, decreases in water quality (e.g., increases in water temperatures, sedimentation, and toxics), isolation of floodplains and side channels, and simplification of stream habitats. In aggregate these alterations from historical conditions have impaired the subbasin’s native fish populations. The proponents, along with other groups working in the subbasin, are engaged in efforts to correct and improve conditions in the subbasin for salmonid fishes.

The proponents do a commendable job of linking their proposal to a broader set of 14 plans and documents with a good description of how the proposal fits in (e.g., Walla Walla Subbasin Plan to Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program addendum, and others). The project’s four overarching goals, to increase fish passage for salmonids; enhance habitat complexity; restore floodplain and riparian functions; and improve water quality are clearly expressed. A hierarchical flow diagram depicting the goals and objectives of the project shows how the project’s proposed implementation and monitoring objectives are linked to each of the project’s overarching goals.

In the Progress to Date section, the proponents provide a description of outcomes to date. They frame this by laying out their 10 Objectives along with the implementation metrics and benchmarks. This was well presented and framed although the Objectives as presented are stated as broad topical goals, although the SMART framework is interwoven (see Condition 1 above). A couple of previous activities are no longer funded by BPA (e.g., irrigation efficiency and MAR projects in the basin), the rationale for which was not provided.

In the Goals and Objectives Section, the diagram on pages 22-23 that connects four goals with seven objectives is easy to follow and a nice presentation. However, there was also some disconnect with the presentation of Progress by objective. Specifically, in the diagram Objectives are listed as A-G (n=7), while in the Progress section they are listed as 1-10 (see Condition 2 above).

Q2: Methods

The general approach taken by the project, to address the core causes of habitat loss by restoring watershed processes and functions, is far-sighted and commendable. Implementation methods are appropriately described at a brief and basic level. The proponents provide links to documents for proposed actions (e.g., NRCS 2003, OWEB 1999) that further embellish standard methodology for actions/objectives.

For the implementation monitoring methods, it looks like basin-scale and project-scale monitoring is the focus (see Condition 3).

The proponents also indicate that they regularly deposit and share data with subbasin partners. Interpreted summary data are publicly available on the wwbwc.org website.

Q3: Provisions for M&E

The proponents plan on using an adaptive management process described by Wheaton et al. (2019). A schematic of this method is provided, and it was developed to address adaptive management in projects using process-based habitat restoration. Therefore, it should be suitable for the project. Both annual and periodic (once every 5-year) assessments are planned, and adjustments will be based on the results of their effectiveness monitoring. The WWBWC project committee, landowners, and BPA representatives will participate in the adaptive management process. Federal, state, and Tribal agencies will be invited to evaluate project designs. All adjustments will be made through consensus. Quarterly and annual reports will be used to document the decisions and evaluations made.

The ISRP notes that the specifics of what is being biologically monitored for each objective needs some additional coordination and clarity in the final work plan and next annual report (see Condition 4 above).

Q4: Results – benefits to fish and wildlife

The chief beneficiaries of the proposed actions are ESA-listed summer steelhead, bull trout, and reintroduced spring Chinook. These benefits can be observed by way of subbasin biomonitoring (e.g., Project 200003900 or others). While the project addresses elements of the limiting factors in the subbasin, connecting the actions to these factors would complete the presentation. The ISRP recommends including linkages to subbasin biomonitoring (e.g., Project 200003900 or others) to how the activities benefit target species.

Previous and recent restoration actions by the project have helped remove passage barriers, improved habitat complexity by reconnecting floodplain and side channels, planted riparian vegetation to create shading to reduce water temperatures, and worked with landowners to increase irrigation efficiency to improve river flows. Many of the proponents’ water conservation projects have also been paired with managed aquifer recharge sites or MARs (see Condition 5 above). In past site visits, the ISRP has been impressed with the benefits generated by MARs which capture water in the winter/spring months and through infiltration will recharge groundwater sources. BPA, however, has decided to discontinue funding MARs. Fortunately, the proponents have secured outside funding that can be used to continue to support these sites and their eventual delivery of relatively cool waters to springs and other outlets. The project has also collected and managed hydrologic data that is used by many of its restoration partners.

The ISRP commends the proponents and others in the subbasin that are trying to understand what the effects of future climate change in the basin may be by doing some modeling and forecasting. There are opportunities to extend and coordinate these considerations as the project progresses (see Condition 6 above).

Documentation Links:
Review: 2013 Geographic Category Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 2007-396-00-NPCC-20131126
Project: 2007-396-00 - Walla Walla Basinwide Tributary Passage and Flow
Review: 2013 Geographic Category Review
Proposal: GEOREV-2007-396-00
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 11/5/2013
Recommendation: Implement with Conditions
Comments: Implement through FY 2018. See Programmatic Issue and Recommendation A for effectiveness monitoring.
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 Programmatic Issue: A. Implement Monitoring, and Evaluation at a Regional Scale—See Programmatic Issue and Recommendation A for effectiveness monitoring.

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 2007-396-00-ISRP-20130610
Project: 2007-396-00 - Walla Walla Basinwide Tributary Passage and Flow
Review: 2013 Geographic Category Review
Proposal Number: GEOREV-2007-396-00
Completed Date: 6/11/2013
Final Round ISRP Date: 6/10/2013
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria
Final Round ISRP Comment:

This project is clearly addressing a factor that is limiting fish production in the Walla Walla Basin: limited instream flow. There is very good evidence that they have made significant progress in addressing this issue. For example, the project has performed useful fish passage and habitat restoration in the Walla Walla subbasin and has identified additional sites where irrigation efficiencies, aquifer recharge actions, fish passage improvements and restoration of floodplain processes should occur. The project has a strong RM&E component and is using the information generated to modify restoration plans. In future proposals, the project sponsors should include additional information on project relationships in the Walla Walla Basin. A little more detail on how fish movement and presence/absence data will be collected would have been helpful. Also, some additional information on the bank stabilization deliverable below the Nursery Bridge grade control structures should have been included in the proposal.

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

This project is significant regionally as seasonal lack of instream flow impacts listed fishes in the Walla Walla River. The activities proposed are consistent with the Walla Walla Subbasin Plan, the priority actions listed in the Bi-State Habitat Conservation Process, and in the Draft Bull Trout and Steelhead Recovery Plans. The project has three goals, to restore up- and downstream passage for juvenile and adult salmonids; to recharge aquifers to sustain and augment river, tributary, and spring flows; and to implement irrigation efficiency programs to increase stream flows. Ten objectives, including improving water quality, providing additional instream flows, promoting water conservation, protecting conserved water via Oregon and Washington Water Trust laws, monitoring and management of hydrologic data, expanding the size and duration of cold water refugia, and improving base river flows through floodplains are being used to address these goals. The objectives are appropriate for this project. They all focus on restoring appropriate flow conditions and water quality throughout the Walla Walla River watershed.

The history of the water projects on the Walla Walla is described sufficiently. Efforts to enhance flow in the river have been ongoing for over a decade with some notable successes. Previously dewatered reaches now have year-round flow. The extensive hydrology monitoring network enabled the identification of declining groundwater levels (partly due to increased efficiency of the irrigation system). Reduced ground water levels have eliminated many springs, which had made an important contribution to summer base flow and provided thermal refuge. They have been experimenting with various methods of enhancing groundwater storage in the basin and have had some success.

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

The Walla Walla Basin Watershed Council (WWBWC) and partners developed a water monitoring network in 2001 to understand the role that ditches and irrigation practices had in aquifer maintenance in the subbasin. Results from this monitoring work have guided future restoration actions. For example, during the past eight years the WWBWC has worked with multiple partners to develop aquifer recharge projects, for example the Hulette Johnson, Hall-Wentland, and Stiller Pond sites and the Anspach and Trumbull projects. Also the WWBWC recently completed a Walla Walla Basin Aquifer Recharge Plan. Additionally, the WWBWC collects groundwater and surface water data and distributes it to basin partners and local, state, and federal agencies. Some of these data were used to develop the TMDL for water temperature in Oregon’s part of the Walla Walla River.

A thorough discussion of project history is provided in the proposal along with links to other project related documents. The project has been using adaptive management processes to improve its program of flow enhancement. Initially the project focused on areas where immediate short-term savings in water would occur. Now, projects are taking place in areas where water savings can improve stream flow later on. Experiments were performed that evaluated the effectiveness of four water distribution systems in an aquifer recharge area. One distribution system that was identified as being the most effective is now being used in other aquifer recharge projects. Additionally, the newly completed Walla Walla River Alternatives Analysis and Conceptual Design Milton-Freewater Levee and Habitat analysis is being used to identify opportunities for fish passage and fish habitat improvements. The analysis includes some HEC-RAS modeling which performs channel flow determinations and floodplain identification.

Evaluation of Results

Prior to this proposal submission, the Walla Walla Basin Watershed Council, Walla Walla Conservation District, Gardena Farms Irrigation District, CTUIR, and WDFW had projects funded by this project. Previous work involved establishing over 100 monitoring wells, 60 stream flow gauges, the production of a hydrologic data base called AQUARIS, the creation of 124 miles of Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) riparian buffers, the installation of over 300 fish screens by ODFW and WDFW, removal of 15 significant fish barriers, over 18.6 miles of ditch piping in Oregon, 85 on-farm water efficiency projects, aquifer recharge research and implementation, the enactment of soil retention practices on 80% of the steep wheat land in Columbia County (WA), and the completion of the Walla Walla Basin Aquifer Recharge Strategic Plan. This work has helped restore fish passage, instream flows, and recharge shallow aquifers.

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

The project is linked to the Walla Walla River Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement, Walla Walla River Juvenile and Adult Passage Improvements, Walla Walla River Basin Monitoring and Evaluation, Walla Walla River Hatchery Operations and Maintenance, and Umatilla Fish Passage Operations projects. Partners include ODFW, WDFW, CTUIR, OWRD, WDOE, OSU, USDA, Hudson Bay District Improvement Company, Walla Walla Irrigation District and Fruitvale Water Users Association, ODEQ, Walla Walla County Conservation District, and private landowners. However, how this project and the other projects mentioned above coordinate with one another is incompletely described. Some additional discussion of how this project interacts with the habitat restoration and fish monitoring efforts in the watershed would have been useful.

The sponsors have established a very thorough hydrological monitoring system in the watershed. Detailed data on river and stream flow, groundwater level, water temperature and water chemistry are being collected. The proposal also demonstrates that these data are being used to inform restoration project designs. There is a good data storage system in place and the data are available online. Maintaining this system is critical to ensure compliance with water agreements.

Climate change was recognized as an emerging limiting factor. A climate change projection specifically for the Walla Walla Basin has been produced and results indicate that there will be an increase in cold-season flows and a decrease in late spring-summer stream flows. They are planning for such changes by shunting higher winter flows into aquifer recharge areas so that summer flows can be augmented from the recharged aquifers. Additionally, new piping is being installed to reduce seepage and improve irrigation efficiencies, so this emerging limiting factor is being addressed. There was no discussion, however, of how future development or changes in agriculture could influence water availability. Some consideration of these factors should be included in the project. Additionally, it is not clear if the hydrological model has been used to forecast what happens under extreme events? For example, suppose that drought conditions occur in two or more consecutive years, can the model be used to forecast water availability under this circumstance? And if so, have plans been made on how water will be allocated to irrigators as well as for fish passage?

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

The project has seventeen deliverables; fourteen of them are directed toward specific projects in the Walla Walla subbasin. The general goals of the specific projects are to improve irrigation efficiency and fish passage, restore floodplain processes, and start aquifer recharge programs. In several instances, engineered drawings or other plans have already been developed for these projects. The remaining three deliverables have more general goals. In one case, the objective is to monitor irrigation flows via telemetry and use automation to open and close valves or gates to improve water management. In another instance the sponsors wish to establish water right “maps” in project areas so that easements or other arrangements can be made to protect instream flow enhancements. The project has also used hydrologic mapping and monitoring to help determine where restoration projects should occur. The sponsors wish to continue this work to monitor status and trends in water temperatures and flow. Additionally, these data will be connected to fish presence and movement information to see how fish react to water flow and temperature improvements. Some information on how fish movement and presence/absence data are collected should have been included in the proposal.

The deliverables are mostly appropriate for the objectives of this project, and the work elements are described adequately. The deliverable for channel stabilization below the Nursery Bridge grade control structures, however, does not contain enough detail on the nature of the bank stability issue or the measures that are planned to address the problem. More detail on this deliverable should be included.

Specific comments on protocols and methods described in MonitoringMethods.org

Three major RM&E protocols are listed and all were developed by project personnel. Most are largely complete and are appropriate for the types of data being collected.

First Round ISRP Date: 6/10/2013
First Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria
First Round ISRP Comment:

This project is clearly addressing a factor that is limiting fish production in the Walla Walla Basin: limited instream flow. There is very good evidence that they have made significant progress in addressing this issue. For example, the project has performed useful fish passage and habitat restoration in the Walla Walla subbasin and has identified additional sites where irrigation efficiencies, aquifer recharge actions, fish passage improvements and restoration of floodplain processes should occur. The project has a strong RM&E component and is using the information generated to modify restoration plans. In future proposals, the project sponsors should include additional information on project relationships in the Walla Walla Basin. A little more detail on how fish movement and presence/absence data will be collected would have been helpful. Also, some additional information on the bank stabilization deliverable below the Nursery Bridge grade control structures should have been included in the proposal.

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

This project is significant regionally as seasonal lack of instream flow impacts listed fishes in the Walla Walla River. The activities proposed are consistent with the Walla Walla Subbasin Plan, the priority actions listed in the Bi-State Habitat Conservation Process, and in the Draft Bull Trout and Steelhead Recovery Plans. The project has three goals, to restore up- and downstream passage for juvenile and adult salmonids; to recharge aquifers to sustain and augment river, tributary, and spring flows; and to implement irrigation efficiency programs to increase stream flows. Ten objectives, including improving water quality, providing additional instream flows, promoting water conservation, protecting conserved water via Oregon and Washington Water Trust laws, monitoring and management of hydrologic data, expanding the size and duration of cold water refugia, and improving base river flows through floodplains are being used to address these goals. The objectives are appropriate for this project. They all focus on restoring appropriate flow conditions and water quality throughout the Walla Walla River watershed.

The history of the water projects on the Walla Walla is described sufficiently. Efforts to enhance flow in the river have been ongoing for over a decade with some notable successes. Previously dewatered reaches now have year-round flow. The extensive hydrology monitoring network enabled the identification of declining groundwater levels (partly due to increased efficiency of the irrigation system). Reduced ground water levels have eliminated many springs, which had made an important contribution to summer base flow and provided thermal refuge. They have been experimenting with various methods of enhancing groundwater storage in the basin and have had some success.

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

The Walla Walla Basin Watershed Council (WWBWC) and partners developed a water monitoring network in 2001 to understand the role that ditches and irrigation practices had in aquifer maintenance in the subbasin. Results from this monitoring work have guided future restoration actions. For example, during the past eight years the WWBWC has worked with multiple partners to develop aquifer recharge projects, for example the Hulette Johnson, Hall-Wentland, and Stiller Pond sites and the Anspach and Trumbull projects. Also the WWBWC recently completed a Walla Walla Basin Aquifer Recharge Plan. Additionally, the WWBWC collects groundwater and surface water data and distributes it to basin partners and local, state, and federal agencies. Some of these data were used to develop the TMDL for water temperature in Oregon’s part of the Walla Walla River.

A thorough discussion of project history is provided in the proposal along with links to other project related documents. The project has been using adaptive management processes to improve its program of flow enhancement. Initially the project focused on areas where immediate short-term savings in water would occur. Now, projects are taking place in areas where water savings can improve stream flow later on. Experiments were performed that evaluated the effectiveness of four water distribution systems in an aquifer recharge area. One distribution system that was identified as being the most effective is now being used in other aquifer recharge projects. Additionally, the newly completed Walla Walla River Alternatives Analysis and Conceptual Design Milton-Freewater Levee and Habitat analysis is being used to identify opportunities for fish passage and fish habitat improvements. The analysis includes some HEC-RAS modeling which performs channel flow determinations and floodplain identification.

Evaluation of Results

Prior to this proposal submission, the Walla Walla Basin Watershed Council, Walla Walla Conservation District, Gardena Farms Irrigation District, CTUIR, and WDFW had projects funded by this project. Previous work involved establishing over 100 monitoring wells, 60 stream flow gauges, the production of a hydrologic data base called AQUARIS, the creation of 124 miles of Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) riparian buffers, the installation of over 300 fish screens by ODFW and WDFW, removal of 15 significant fish barriers, over 18.6 miles of ditch piping in Oregon, 85 on-farm water efficiency projects, aquifer recharge research and implementation, the enactment of soil retention practices on 80% of the steep wheat land in Columbia County (WA), and the completion of the Walla Walla Basin Aquifer Recharge Strategic Plan. This work has helped restore fish passage, instream flows, and recharge shallow aquifers.

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

The project is linked to the Walla Walla River Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement, Walla Walla River Juvenile and Adult Passage Improvements, Walla Walla River Basin Monitoring and Evaluation, Walla Walla River Hatchery Operations and Maintenance, and Umatilla Fish Passage Operations projects. Partners include ODFW, WDFW, CTUIR, OWRD, WDOE, OSU, USDA, Hudson Bay District Improvement Company, Walla Walla Irrigation District and Fruitvale Water Users Association, ODEQ, Walla Walla County Conservation District, and private landowners. However, how this project and the other projects mentioned above coordinate with one another is incompletely described. Some additional discussion of how this project interacts with the habitat restoration and fish monitoring efforts in the watershed would have been useful.

The sponsors have established a very thorough hydrological monitoring system in the watershed. Detailed data on river and stream flow, groundwater level, water temperature and water chemistry are being collected. The proposal also demonstrates that these data are being used to inform restoration project designs. There is a good data storage system in place and the data are available online. Maintaining this system is critical to ensure compliance with water agreements.

Climate change was recognized as an emerging limiting factor. A climate change projection specifically for the Walla Walla Basin has been produced and results indicate that there will be an increase in cold-season flows and a decrease in late spring-summer stream flows. They are planning for such changes by shunting higher winter flows into aquifer recharge areas so that summer flows can be augmented from the recharged aquifers. Additionally, new piping is being installed to reduce seepage and improve irrigation efficiencies, so this emerging limiting factor is being addressed. There was no discussion, however, of how future development or changes in agriculture could influence water availability. Some consideration of these factors should be included in the project. Additionally, it is not clear if the hydrological model has been used to forecast what happens under extreme events? For example, suppose that drought conditions occur in two or more consecutive years, can the model be used to forecast water availability under this circumstance? And if so, have plans been made on how water will be allocated to irrigators as well as for fish passage?

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

The project has seventeen deliverables; fourteen of them are directed toward specific projects in the Walla Walla subbasin. The general goals of the specific projects are to improve irrigation efficiency and fish passage, restore floodplain processes, and start aquifer recharge programs. In several instances, engineered drawings or other plans have already been developed for these projects. The remaining three deliverables have more general goals. In one case, the objective is to monitor irrigation flows via telemetry and use automation to open and close valves or gates to improve water management. In another instance the sponsors wish to establish water right “maps” in project areas so that easements or other arrangements can be made to protect instream flow enhancements. The project has also used hydrologic mapping and monitoring to help determine where restoration projects should occur. The sponsors wish to continue this work to monitor status and trends in water temperatures and flow. Additionally, these data will be connected to fish presence and movement information to see how fish react to water flow and temperature improvements. Some information on how fish movement and presence/absence data are collected should have been included in the proposal.

The deliverables are mostly appropriate for the objectives of this project, and the work elements are described adequately. The deliverable for channel stabilization below the Nursery Bridge grade control structures, however, does not contain enough detail on the nature of the bank stability issue or the measures that are planned to address the problem. More detail on this deliverable should be included.

Specific comments on protocols and methods described in MonitoringMethods.org

Three major RM&E protocols are listed and all were developed by project personnel. Most are largely complete and are appropriate for the types of data being collected.

Modified by Dal Marsters on 6/11/2013 1:14:29 PM.
Documentation Links:
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1996-011-00-NPCC-20090924
Project: 1996-011-00 - Walla Walla Juvenile and Adult Passage Improvements
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Fund
Comments: Combine the Walla Walla Juvenile and Adult passage Improvement project (199601100) with Gardena Irrigation Project and Walla Walla Flow.

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1996-011-00-ISRP-20060831
Project: 1996-011-00 - Walla Walla Juvenile and Adult Passage Improvements
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:
This is one of three closely linked passage proposals in the Walla Walla subbasin. Most of the proposal is well done. The proposal would be improved by reporting results from the subbasin level M&E project in summary format. The project needs to make the connection to biological data collected in the M&E project. This was a similar concern with previous ISRP reviews, and while there has been some improvement, it should be clear by now that projects must indicate results of past efforts clearly, particularly after 10 years of efforts. The efforts and results must be linked to subbasin plans, and this was not a strong area of the proposal. What data will be collected by other entities to evaluate success (or failure)? What are the key reference points from this data that will affect management decisions?
Documentation Links:

Legal Assessment (In-Lieu)

Assessment Number: 1996-011-00-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 1996-011-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 10/6/2006
In Lieu Rating: Problems May Exist
Cost Share Rating: 3 - Does not appear reasonable
Comment: Fish passage projects (screening, ladders etc) for agricultural/irrigation diversions; not clear whether entities receiving the fixes already authorized/required to provide for passage; needs confirmation that cost share adequate.

Capital Assessment

Assessment Number: 1996-011-00-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 1996-011-00
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: 2007-396-00-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 2007-396-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 11/16/2007
Capital Rating: Qualifies for Capital Funding
Capital Asset Category: Fish Passage Improvement
Comment: This project is a result of combining projects: 2002-036-00 Restore Walla Walla River Flow (which previously was the result of combining 1996-011-00 Walla Walla Juvenile and Adult Passage Improvements; and 2007-330-00 Gardena Farms Irrigation District Irrigation Efficiency and Instream Flow). Capital funding approval submitted by BPA COTR. The COTR, COTR's Manager and BPA Accountant certified that the request meets the BPA F&W capital policy and is approved for capital funding (if capital funds are available).

Project Relationships: This project Merged To 2002-036-00 effective on 2/26/2007
Relationship Description: Work and budgets from projects 2007-330-00, 1996-011-00 and 2007-288-00 combined into 2002-036-00. Later, this combined effort will be combined into 2007-396-00.

This project Split From 2007-396-00 effective on 5/2/2008
Relationship Description: Due to the Fish Accords, starting in FY09, work by the Umatilla Tribe and the associated Fish Accord budget is split from 2007-396-00.

This project Merged To 2009-026-00 effective on 9/11/2009
Relationship Description: Project 1996-011-00 was combined with 2007-396-00, however with the signing of the Fish Accords, the Umatilla Tribe portion was split out again. Initially, 1996-011-00 was used and contracts were set up, since that project hasn't been funded since 2006, BPA management decided to start a new project


Name Role Organization
Gary James (Inactive) Project Lead Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Julie Burke Administrative Contact Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Sarah Branum (Inactive) Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration
Lisa Marko MacLellan (Inactive) Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration
Peter Lofy Supervisor Bonneville Power Administration