Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 1996-094-01 - Scotch Creek Wildlife Mitigation Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 1996-094-01 - Scotch Creek Wildlife Mitigation
Project Number:
1996-094-01
Title:
Scotch Creek Wildlife Mitigation
Summary:
The Scotch Creek Wildlife Area is a complex of 6 separate management units located in Okanogan county in North Central Washington State. The project is located within the Columbia Cascade Province (Okanogan sub-basin) and partially addresses adverse impacts caused by the construction of Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee hydroelectric dams. The total size of the wildlife area is 19,860 acres. The Scotch Creek Wildlife Area was approved as a wildlife mitigation project in 1996 and habitat enhancement efforts to meet mitigation objectives have been underway since the spring of 1997 on Scotch Creek. Recent population estimates of Sharp-tailed grouse on the Scotch Creek unit show a halt to the decline observed since 1960, and have increased every year since 2000. Habitat enhancements and genetic supplementation through augmentation appear to be having a positive effect.

Maintenance of BPA funded enhancements are necessary to protect and enhance shrub-steppe and to recover and sustain populations of Sharp-tailed grouse and other obligate species. This contract will maintain shrub and tree plantings to ensure continued growth and survival, and the benefit of winter STG habitat. We will restore natural stream function to Scotch Creek by re-constructing a meandering channel where previous flooding, due to Reed Canary grass invasion has killed riparian vegetation along a .5 mile stretch of the creek. This is a critical habitat area for wintering Sharp-tailed grouse. Future Riparian plantings along this channel will restore habitat units. Boundary fence repair will be performed to prevent trespass livestock on all wildlife area units. Weed control on all acres of the wildlife area will be performed to restore quality habitat as well as protection from new invaders and maintain existing HU's. Maintenance of signs, physical improvements, roads and parking areas will protect habitat by directing and informing the public. Funding of administrative duties will keep project staff informed of new procedures and developments, BPA and DFW personnel informed of on-going projects, keep planning and project reporting on track, and insure smooth operations between all interested parties.
Proposer:
None
Proponent Orgs:
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) (Govt - State)
Starting FY:
1997
Ending FY:
2022
BPA PM:
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Columbia Cascade Okanogan 100.00%
Purpose:
Habitat
Emphasis:
Restoration/Protection
Focal Species:
Steelhead - Upper Columbia River DPS
Trout, Brook
Trout, Rainbow
Wildlife
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 0.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 100.0%
Special:
None
BiOp Association:
None

Description: Page: 1 Cover: Cover photo

Project: 1996-094-01

Document: P118637

Dimensions: 1024 x 819

Description: Page: 2 Figure 1: No caption provided.

Project: 1996-094-01

Document: P118637

Dimensions: 698 x 837

Description: Page: 6 Figure 2: No caption provided.

Project: 1996-094-01

Document: P118637

Dimensions: 900 x 600

Description: Page: 1 Cover: Cover photo

Project: 1996-094-01

Document: P124275

Dimensions: 819 x 1024

Description: Page: 2 Map 1: Scotch Creek Wildlife Area

Project: 1996-094-01

Document: P124275

Dimensions: 555 x 768

Description: Page: 4 Photo 1: No caption provided.

Project: 1996-094-01

Document: P124275

Dimensions: 715 x 536

Description: Page: 4 Photo 2: No caption provided.

Project: 1996-094-01

Document: P124275

Dimensions: 715 x 536

Description: Page: 6 Photo 3: No caption provided.

Project: 1996-094-01

Document: P124275

Dimensions: 812 x 609

Description: Page: 7 Photo 4: No caption provided.

Project: 1996-094-01

Document: P124275

Dimensions: 865 x 649

Description: Page: 8 Photo 5: No caption provided.

Project: 1996-094-01

Document: P124275

Dimensions: 724 x 543

Description: Page: 8 Photo 6: No caption provided.

Project: 1996-094-01

Document: P124275

Dimensions: 770 x 578


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

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2020 - FY2022)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2020 Expense $22,580 From: General Cloned from: Wildlife O&M 06/05/2019
FY2020 Expense $427,416 From: General FY20 SOY 06/05/2019
FY2020 Expense $76,451 From: General Wildlife Agreement Transfers 01/20/2021
FY2021 Expense $449,996 From: General FY21 SOY 06/09/2020
FY2021 Expense $34,530 From: General WDFW Wildlife budget adjustments (FY21 increases) - 4/13/2021 04/13/2021
FY2021 Expense $76,451 From: General WDFW Wildlife budget adjustments (to FY21 SOY) - 4/13/2021 04/14/2021
FY2022 Expense $449,996 From: General SOY FY22 Project Upload 05/18/2021
FY2022 Expense $110,981 From: General WDFW Adjusted Value 05/26/2021

Pending Budget Decision?  No


Actual Project Cost Share

Current Fiscal Year — 2021   DRAFT
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
2020 $129,350 20%
2019 $33,350 7%
2018 $1,147,623 73%
2017 $31,296 7%
2016 $145,000 27%
2015 $45,000 7%
2014 $225,000 37%
2013 $165,000 30%
2012 $7,000 2%
2011 $265,000 41%
2010 $140,000 27%
2009 $121,756 25%
2008 $11,543 4%
2007 $12,758 4%

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.
Expense Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Total Contracted Amount Dates
BPA-011363 Bonneville Power Administration FY96 Land Acquisitions Active $0 10/1/1995 - 9/30/1996
BPA-011364 Bonneville Power Administration FY98 Land Acquisitions Active $651,200 10/1/1997 - 9/30/1998
4292 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA History $509,956 4/2/2001 - 1/31/2003
17574 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA Closed $289,225 10/1/2003 - 9/30/2004
20037 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA Closed $289,225 10/1/2004 - 9/30/2005
25422 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 PL SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA Closed $289,224 10/1/2005 - 9/30/2006
29302 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 PL SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA Closed $277,623 10/1/2006 - 9/30/2007
BPA-011365 Bonneville Power Administration FY07 Land Acquisitions Active $3,033,832 10/1/2006 - 9/30/2007
32306 SOW Colville Confederated Tribes SCOTCH CREEK FIELD SURVEY - AREA C Closed $2,270 3/30/2007 - 8/15/2007
33304 SOW Colville Confederated Tribes SCOTCH CREEK CHANNEL WORK - AREAS A & B Closed $8,468 6/1/2007 - 8/31/2007
34926 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 PL SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA Closed $215,111 10/1/2007 - 9/30/2008
39276 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 199609401 EXP SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA Closed $391,072 10/1/2008 - 11/30/2009
39881 REL 1 SOW Plateau Archaeological Investigations, LLC SCOTCH CREEK EDER PROPERTY CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Closed $3,819 7/13/2009 - 7/30/2009
45139 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 EXP SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA Closed $364,118 12/1/2009 - 11/30/2010
50929 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 EXP SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA Closed $371,518 12/1/2010 - 11/30/2011
55402 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 EXP SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA Closed $331,269 12/1/2011 - 11/30/2012
59275 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 EXP SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA Closed $380,662 12/1/2012 - 11/30/2013
63648 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 EXP SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA (O&M) Closed $376,589 12/1/2013 - 11/30/2014
67596 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 EXP SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA: O&M (ENHANCEMENTS) Closed $601,497 12/1/2014 - 6/30/2016
72952 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 EXP SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA: O&M (ENHANCEMENTS) Closed $395,192 7/1/2016 - 6/30/2017
74314 REL 8 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 EXP SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA: O&M (ENHANCEMENTS) Closed $399,933 7/1/2017 - 6/30/2018
74314 REL 36 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 EXP SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA: O&M (ENHANCEMENTS) Closed $427,416 7/1/2018 - 6/30/2019
74314 REL 70 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 EXP SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA O&M: OPERATE & ENHANCE Closed $449,676 7/1/2019 - 6/30/2020
74314 REL 104 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 EXP SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA O&M: OPERATE & ENHANCE Issued $526,447 7/1/2020 - 6/30/2021
74314 REL 141 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1996-094-01 EXP SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA O&M: PROTECT & ENHANCE Issued $560,977 7/1/2021 - 6/30/2022



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):15
Completed:11
On time:10
Status Reports
Completed:63
On time:23
Avg Days Late:8

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
BPA-011364 FY98 Land Acquisitions Bonneville Power Administration 10/1997 10/1997 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4292 17574, 20037, 25422, 29302, 34926, 39276, 45139, 50929, 55402, 59275, 63648, 67596, 72952, 74314 REL 8, 74314 REL 36, 74314 REL 70, 74314 REL 104, 74314 REL 141 1996-094-01 SCOTCH CREEK WILDLIFE AREA Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 04/2001 04/2001 Issued 63 209 0 0 17 226 92.48% 18
BPA-011365 FY07 Land Acquisitions Bonneville Power Administration 10/2006 10/2006 Active 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Totals 63 209 0 0 17 226 92.48% 18


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: 2017 Wildlife Category Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1996-094-01-NPCC-20210312
Project: 1996-094-01 - Scotch Creek Wildlife Mitigation
Review: 2017 Wildlife Category Review
Approved Date: 10/13/2017
Recommendation: Implement
Comments: Recommendation: Sponsor to address ISRP qualification in revised management plan (per programmatic issue recommendations in this Decision Document Part 1).

[Background: See https://www.nwcouncil.org/fish-and-wildlife/project-reviews-and-recommendations/2017-wildlife-project-review]

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1996-094-01-ISRP-20201118
Project: 1996-094-01 - Scotch Creek Wildlife Mitigation
Review: 2017 Wildlife Category Review
Completed Date: 11/18/2020
Final Round ISRP Date: 6/28/2017
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
Final Round ISRP Comment:

The primary goal has been to convert agricultural fields to shrub steppe habitat to support focal species (i.e., threatened Columbia sharp-tailed grouse and mule deer). The project appears to be on track in that 3500 acres of agricultural land have now been converted and the abundance trend for Columbia sharp-tailed grouse is increasing. However, the management plan does not include quantitative objectives with timelines for expected outcomes. 

It is not clear if monitoring exists to track continuing changes in vegetation in the converted agricultural fields. The 2012 update of the management plan provided results to 2010-2011; if possible, these results should be updated through 2016 in the next annual report. 

1. Objectives and outcomes 

The 2006 Management Plan states “the primary goal and specific reason for purchasing the property is to establish a viable sharp-tailed grouse population in and adjacent to the SCWA" (Scotch Creek Wildlife Area). The 2017 Summary Report states “the primary biological objective is to increase the Columbia sharp-tailed grouse population through habitat manipulation, maintenance, and protection measures, and by local population recruitment and population augmentation if necessary. A closely related secondary goal is to protect, enhance, and maintain shrub-steppe and riparian habitats for Columbia sharp-tailed grouse and other shrubsteppe obligate species, and forested habitats to increase mule deer use of the project area.” 

These objectives are clear statements of intention and are adequately justified as supporting the recovery of the threatened Columbia sharp-tailed grouse (extensive references are provided). However, because they are not quantitative and lack timelines, they cannot be used to track progress or re-evaluate assumptions as part of adaptive management. On the other hand, the ISRP was pleased to see that the 2012 update to the management plan did provide an explicit set of quantitative performance measures for 2011 for the purpose of evaluation. 

Has an abundance target been identified for Columbia sharp-tailed grouse in the SCWA? A target exists for the entire state of Washington, but what fraction of that target is expected to be achieved by this project? The objective has been to increase breeding abundance from very low levels, but the premise of the habitat mitigation project is that shrub-steppe habitat has been or will become a limiting factor. Has the carrying capacity of current habitat in the SCWA been estimated? It would have been useful to include lek counts in the SCWA and surrounding areas in the Summary Report (instead of just citing the status and trends report for the entire state). 

Similarly, an abundance target for mule deer was not mentioned, perhaps because the species is not listed. Even so, expected outcomes and timelines should be identified to help track progress and re-evaluate assumptions. 

2. Scientific principles and methods 

An extensive set of management plans, research reports, and published scientific papers was provided to justify habitat restoration actions in support of the threatened Columbia sharptailed grouse. Much of the research and monitoring was conducted in the SCWA and adjacent wildlife areas (e.g., Swanson Lake and Sagebrush Flat). The cited reports indicate a high level of understanding of the natural history and habitat requirements for Columbia sharp-tailed grouse and provide a good scientific basis for the translocation experiments. 

No information or discussion is provided about how this project might be affected by expected changes in climate. Will the project still be viable if climate changes in this region as predicted? 

3. Monitoring and evaluation 

Excellent monitoring and thorough evaluation of benefits for focal species is evident in the scientific reports cited. For example, several theses focus on studying the responses of translocated Columbia sharp-tailed grouse. It is noted that this work was funded by organizations other than BPA, primarily WDFW and USFWS. 

In contrast, it is not clear if monitoring exists to track continuing changes in vegetation in the converted agricultural fields. The 2012 update of the management plan provided results to 2010-2011. If possible, these results should be updated through 2016. For example, are reference pictures (i.e., small scale photos, landscape photos) available for these sites for future comparisons? Also, is there any information to show successful use of the nest platforms installed for great grey owls? Any such information should be included in the next annual report.

4. Results: benefits to fish and wildlife and adaptive management 

The project is maintaining various improvements to habitat that benefits focal species. Efforts to bolster Columbia sharp-tailed grouse abundance by translocating birds from other areas between 2009 and 2013 have been discontinued pending evaluation of benefits. So far the program appears to have been successful. 

The Summary Report also includes a useful summary of lessons learned about specific habitat restoration actions and administrative policies. The decisions or recommendations for changes are described clearly, and seem reasonable, but are not well supported by evidence or references to analyses in other documents. No formal adaptive management process is evident. 

Clearly the proponents of this project and others are finding some activities will require more funding or a different approach. More planning is needed to budget long-term maintenance and repair, with appropriate consideration for the impacts of wild fires or other unscheduled events.

Qualification #1 - Inclusion in Next Management Plan
The ISRP recommends that the proponents update the management plan to include quantitative objectives with timelines for expected outcomes so that progress can be tracked and assumptions re-evaluated as part of adaptive management.
Documentation Links:
Review: Wildlife Category Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1996-094-01-NPCC-20091217
Project: 1996-094-01 - Scotch Creek Wildlife Mitigation
Review: Wildlife Category Review
Approved Date: 5/31/2009
Recommendation: Fund
Comments: Programmatic issue #2-3 and # 9
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 Programmatic Issue: Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) - interaction between wildlife crediting and monitoring
Council Condition #2 Programmatic Issue: Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) participation funding
Council Condition #3 Programmatic Issue: Equipment/facilities purchase and replacement

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1996-094-01-ISRP-20090618
Project: 1996-094-01 - Scotch Creek Wildlife Mitigation
Review: Wildlife Category Review
Completed Date: 5/19/2009
Final Round ISRP Date: None
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria
Final Round ISRP Comment:
This project supports the recovery of sharp-tailed grouse and mule deer and complements sharp-tail projects at several other locations in the region. The goals and objectives described in the Scotch Creek mitigation project support both the WDFW management strategies and goals for sharp-tailed grouse and the Okanogan Subbasin Plan goals and objectives. Much progress has been made at Scotch Creek on weed control and seeding with about 3200 acres converted back to native shrub-steppe habitat.

This project is linked and coordinated with a number of other similar projects including sharp-tailed grouse and shrub-steppe recovery efforts at Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area, Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area and on the Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) Reservation. This project has collaborated with the CCT in many ways to develop strategies to establish and maintain meta- populations within the Okanogan (Columbia Cascade Province), Crab Creek (Columbia Plateau Province), and Lake Roosevelt (Mountain Columbia Province) subbasins.

The inter-project cooperation and collaboration is commendable. The ISRP asks that because all of the sharp-tailed grouse populations on the various Wildlife Areas are not responding in a similar manner (some increasing, some decreasing), in the future can the habitat data being collected (apparently using the same protocols with Schroeder as the coordinator) be used effectively to better understand observed sharp-tailed grouse population responses to habitat conditions at each Wildlife Area? Perhaps the issues are more complicated than general habitat condition, e.g., wintering habitat issues at some areas vs. nesting conditions at others?

Basically, the ISRP is asking if the other Wildlife Areas are benefiting, or can benefit more, from the knowledge gained at Scotch Creek. It was noted that future data analyses will compare treatment sites with reference sites (hopefully among the Wildlife Areas and not just at local sites on a Management Area). Some Scotch Creek habitat data were presented (1996 vs. 2006) from HEP sites, but there appears to be a desire to collect additional habitat information. The ISRP believes that results from this and other similar projects have great potential to result in adaptive management at a regional scale.
First Round ISRP Date: 3/26/2009
First Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria
First Round ISRP Comment:
This project supports the recovery of sharp-tailed grouse and mule deer and complements sharp-tail projects at several other locations in the region. The goals and objectives described in the Scotch Creek mitigation project support both the WDFW management strategies and goals for sharp-tailed grouse and the Okanogan Subbasin Plan goals and objectives. Much progress has been made at Scotch Creek on weed control and seeding with about 3200 acres converted back to native shrub-steppe habitat.

This project is linked and coordinated with a number of other similar projects including sharp-tailed grouse and shrub-steppe recovery efforts at Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area, Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area and on the Colville Confederated Tribes (CCT) Reservation. This project has collaborated with the CCT in many ways to develop strategies to establish and maintain meta- populations within the Okanogan (Columbia Cascade Province), Crab Creek (Columbia Plateau Province), and Lake Roosevelt (Mountain Columbia Province) subbasins.

The inter-project cooperation and collaboration is commendable. The ISRP asks that because all of the sharp-tailed grouse populations on the various Wildlife Areas are not responding in a similar manner (some increasing, some decreasing), in the future can the habitat data being collected (apparently using the same protocols with Schroeder as the coordinator) be used effectively to better understand observed sharp-tailed grouse population responses to habitat conditions at each Wildlife Area? Perhaps the issues are more complicated than general habitat condition, e.g., wintering habitat issues at some areas vs. nesting conditions at others?

Basically, the ISRP is asking if the other Wildlife Areas are benefitting, or can benefit more, from the knowledge gained at Scotch Creek. It was noted that future data analyses will compare treatment sites with reference sites (hopefully among the Wildlife Areas and not just at local sites on a Management Area). Some Scotch Creek habitat data were presented (1996 vs. 2006) from HEP sites, but there appears to be a desire to collect additional habitat information. The ISRP believes that results from this and other similar projects have great potential to result in adaptive management at a regional scale.
Documentation Links:
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1996-094-01-NPCC-20090924
Project: 1996-094-01 - Scotch Creek Wildlife Mitigation
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Fund
Comments: Interim funding pending wildlife o&m review.

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1996-094-01-ISRP-20060831
Project: 1996-094-01 - Scotch Creek Wildlife Mitigation
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 8/31/2006
Final Round ISRP Date: None
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria
Final Round ISRP Comment:
This project began in 1991 with major land purchases (now 16,500 acres). Much habitat work has been completed including collecting native plant seeds and commercially growing them to develop a large quantity of locally adapted seed stock for reseeding.

This project has meaningful goals with appropriate monitoring data collected to evaluate the sharp-tailed grouse population change over time. With much management activity on a relatively large study area, the ISRP was pleased to see grouse population increases in recent years. Additionally, the ISRP was impressed with the inclusion of the grouse data in the proposal.
Documentation Links:

Legal Assessment (In-Lieu)

Assessment Number: 1996-094-01-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 1996-094-01
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 10/6/2006
In Lieu Rating: Problems Exist
Cost Share Rating: None
Comment: Multiple land & recreation management (parking etc) activities on state-owned & managed habitat; not clear if this is BPA-funded acquired lands for wildlife mitigation or combination. Need to separate BPA-funded from state-acquired, and also clarify which activities are appropriate for BPA fish/wildlife mitigation funding and which are responsibility of the state as landowner. Upon review, concerns that sponsor not funding consistent with the MOA resulting in BPA funding of activities in lieu of the state. Will require cost-share or other resolution. Rating retained as "3."

Capital Assessment

Assessment Number: 1996-094-01-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 1996-094-01
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 2/27/2007
Capital Rating: Does Not Qualify for Capital Funding
Capital Asset Category: None
Comment: None

Project Relationships: None

Name Role Organization
Jim Olson Interested Party Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
June Skye Interested Party Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Peter Lofy Supervisor Bonneville Power Administration
Bryan Dupont Project Lead Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Andre L'Heureux Project SME Bonneville Power Administration
Daniel Gambetta Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration
Andre L'Heureux Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration