Views/Actions
Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 2000-021-00 - Ladd Marsh Wildlife Mitigation Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 2000-021-00 - Ladd Marsh Wildlife Mitigation
Project Number:
2000-021-00
Title:
Ladd Marsh Wildlife Mitigation
Summary:
Project Background

The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has been participating in BPA's wildlife mitigation efforts since the mid 1980s. Since 1991, Oregon wildlife managers have been working together to coordinate the planning, selection, and implementation of BPA-funded wildlife mitigation projects under the Northwest Power and Conservation Council's (NWPCC's) Fish and Wildlife Program as outlined in Sections 7 and 11, specifically measures 7.6, 11.2D, 11.3E, and 11.3F (NWPPC 1995).

The Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area (LMWA) is located 6.9 miles south of La Grande, Oregon in the southwest corner of the Grande Ronde Valley. Before the addition of the project properties, the LMWA consisted of 3,208 acres of grain fields, tree and shrub areas, native prairie, marsh and open water. In addition to being an important staging area for migratory waterfowl, the LMWA serves as nesting area for many species. Over 2,000 ducks and 400 Canada geese are produced each year. The LMWA hosts over 200 species of birds, 40 species of mammals, and 10 species of reptiles and amphibians either as residents or visiting migrants.

The Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Additions project was approved by the NWPPC in 1998-99. Three parcels known as the Simonis, Wallender and Conley Lake totaling 844 acres were purchased from The Nature Conservancy in 2001. Fiscal year 2002 saw major construction and restoration on the Wallender parcel and part of the Simonis parcel. Restoration on the Simonis property was completed in the winter of 2002-03. Restoration included construction of approximately 30,000 feet of dikes and placement of twenty-three water control structures. Nearly three miles of Ladd Creek were restored to a more natural, meandering channel. Two water control/fish ladders were also installed in Ladd Creek to improve fish passage. Other activities included construction of perimeter fences, seeding uplands and planting shrubs and trees along riparian areas.

A five-year habitat management plan for the project was completed and submitted to BPA. A comprehensive monitoring and evaluation (M&E) plan was developed and included in the five-year habitat management plan. Formal monitoring was begun in FY 2002 with the placement of point-count survey locations and photo point locations and development of waterfowl survey routes. Baseline photos were taken at photo points.

This project has protected and enhanced 844 acres of high priority upland, wetland and riparian habitats. Restored seasonal wetlands have begun to produce abundant stands of aquatic plants (e.g., sedges and rushes) that will provide food for water birds. These plant communities also provide habitat for many other species of birds and wetland wildlife. At least some of the wetlands dry out during most years, allowing the natural processes of recycling nutrients to occur, which is important for maintaining wetland system productivity. Restored riparian habitats will provide much improved habitat conditions for a variety of wildlife species, especially neotropical migrants and locally nesting passerine species. Wetland margins are being restored to a tufted hairgrass community and upland areas are being restored to a greasewood/basin wildrye plant community. Restoration efforts will also dramatically improve winter and summer habitat for steelhead, Chinook salmon, and resident fish in Ladd Creek and Catherine Creek. Summer water temperatures will decrease, winter water temperatures will increase, there will be more pools and deep instream habitat areas for anadromous and resident fish, winter rearing habitats will be improved for juvenile steelhead, and there will be improved quality and quantity of water flowing into Catherine Creek from Ladd Creek.

The overall goal of the LMWA Additions mitigation project is to protect existing habitat values and restore degraded values that have occurred as a result of past and current land management practices on lands adjacent to or near the existing LMWA. This Statement of Work (SOW) and associated budget address the maintenance and operation (O&M) and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of enhancements on Wallender, Conley Lake, and Simonis properties. Project Work Elements are outlined below and will be achieved with funds approved by the BPA for the LMWA Additions project. The total estimated Fiscal Year 2008 budget based on the BPA funding decision is $48,000.
Proposer:
None
Proponent Orgs:
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (Govt - State)
Starting FY:
2001
Ending FY:
2017
BPA PM:
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Blue Mountain Grande Ronde 100.00%
Purpose:
Habitat
Emphasis:
Restoration/Protection
Focal Species:
All Anadromous Salmonids
Bass, Largemouth
Bass, Smallmouth
Chinook - Snake River Fall ESU (threatened)
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer ESU (threatened)
Cutthroat Trout, Westslope
Freshwater Mussels
Kokanee
Lamprey, Western Brook
OBSOLETE-Carp, Common
OBSOLETE-Catfish
OBSOLETE-Crappie, Black
OBSOLETE-Crappie, White
OBSOLETE-Perch, Yellow
OBSOLETE-Pike, Northern
OBSOLETE-Pikeminnow, Northern
OBSOLETE-Trout, Lake
Steelhead - Snake River DPS (threatened)
Sturgeon, White - All Populations except Kootenai R. DPS
Trout, Brook
Trout, Bull (threatened)
Trout, Interior Redband
Trout, Rainbow
Whitefish, Mountain
Wildlife
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 0.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 100.0%
Special:
None
BiOp Association:
None

Cover photo

Figure Name: Cover

Document ID: P123968

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #1, on the West Simonis Tract. Photograph taken in 2004 (A).

Figure Name: Figure 1a

Document ID: P123968

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 8

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #1, on the West Simonis Tract. Photograph taken in 2010 (B).

Figure Name: Figure 1b

Document ID: P123968

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 8

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #1, on the West Simonis Tract. Photograph taken in 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 1c

Document ID: P123968

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 8

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #4, Ladd Creek at the upper fish ladder. Photograph taken in 2005 (A).

Figure Name: Figure 2a

Document ID: P123968

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 9

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #4, Ladd Creek at the upper fish ladder. Photograph taken in 2010 (B).

Figure Name: Figure 2b

Document ID: P123968

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 9

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #4, Ladd Creek at the upper fish ladder. Photograph taken in 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 2c

Document ID: P123968

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 9

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #15, on the East Simonis Tract. Photograph taken in 2003 (A).

Figure Name: Figure 3a

Document ID: P123968

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 10

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #15, on the East Simonis Tract. Photographs taken in 2010 (B) and 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 3b

Document ID: P123968

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 10

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #9, Ladd Creek. Photograph taken in 2003 (A).

Figure Name: Figure 4a

Document ID: P123968

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 11

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #9, Ladd Creek. Photograph taken in 2010 (B).

Figure Name: Figure 4b

Document ID: P123968

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 11

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #9, Ladd Creek. Photograph taken in 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 4c

Document ID: P123968

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 11

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Cover photo

Figure Name: Cover

Document ID: P125993

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 1

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #1, on the West Simonis Tract. Photographs taken in 2004 (A), 2010 (B) and 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 1A

Document ID: P125993

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 8

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #1, on the West Simonis Tract. Photographs taken in 2004 (A), 2010 (B) and 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 1B

Document ID: P125993

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 8

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #1, on the West Simonis Tract. Photographs taken in 2004 (A), 2010 (B) and 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 1C

Document ID: P125993

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 8

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #4, Ladd Creek at the upper fish ladder. Photographs taken in 2005 (A), 2010 (B) and 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 2A

Document ID: P125993

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 9

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #4, Ladd Creek at the upper fish ladder. Photographs taken in 2005 (A), 2010 (B) and 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 2B

Document ID: P125993

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 9

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #4, Ladd Creek at the upper fish ladder. Photographs taken in 2005 (A), 2010 (B) and 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 2C

Document ID: P125993

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 9

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #15, on the East Simonis Tract. Photographs taken in 2003 (A), 2010 (B) and 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 3A

Document ID: P125993

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 10

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #15, on the East Simonis Tract. Photographs taken in 2003 (A), 2010 (B) and 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 3B

Document ID: P125993

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 10

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #9, Ladd Creek. Photographs taken in 2003 (A), 2010 (B) and 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 4A

Document ID: P125993

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 11

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #9, Ladd Creek. Photographs taken in 2003 (A), 2010 (B) and 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 4B

Document ID: P125993

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 11

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039

Photopoint #9, Ladd Creek. Photographs taken in 2003 (A), 2010 (B) and 2011 (C).

Figure Name: Figure 4C

Document ID: P125993

Document: Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Mitigation Project; 10/10 - 9/11

Page Number: 11

Project: 2000-021-00

Contract: 55039


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) $79,199 $79,199 $77,725 $77,725 $75,218

General $79,199 $77,725 $77,725 $75,218
FY2017 (Current) $79,199 $79,199 $79,199 $79,199 $47,842

General $79,199 $79,199 $79,199 $47,842
FY2018 (Next) $0 $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 $79,199 From: General FY16 Initial Planning Budgets - Expense 05/22/2015
FY2017 Expense $79,199 From: General FY17 SOY Budgets 06/02/2016

Pending Budget Decision?  No


Project Cost Share:

FY2016 49 %
FY2015 47 %
FY2014 48 %
FY2013 50 %
FY2012 45 %
FY2011 44 %
FY2010 0 %
FY2009 47 %
FY2008 48 %
FY2007 58 %
Fiscal Year Cost Share Partner Total Proposed
Contribution
Total Confirmed
Contribution
FY2015 Oregon Department Of Fish and Wildlife $68,666
FY2016 Oregon Department Of Fish and Wildlife $76,666

Contracts

The table below contains contracts with the following statuses: Active, Complete, History, Issued.
Expense Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Contracted Amount Dates
592 REL 1 SOW Eastern Washington University CULTURAL RES SURVEY/LADD MARSH WILDLIFE MGMT. AREA History $34,274 8/28/2000 - 5/31/2001
70108 SOW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 2000-021-00 EXP LADD MARSH WILDLIFE MITIGATION Issued $77,725 10/1/2015 - 9/30/2016
73980 SOW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 2000-021-00 EXP LADD MARSH WILDLIFE MITIGATION 2017 Issued $79,199 10/1/2016 - 9/30/2017



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):13
Completed:10
On time:10
Status Reports
Completed:49
On time:26
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
4656 25169, 29442, 35446, 44273, 49831, 55039, 59608, 63235, 66854, 70108, 73980 2000-021-00 LADD MARSH Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 05/2001 05/2001 Issued 49 106 7 0 5 118 95.76% 0
Project Totals 49 106 7 0 5 118 95.76% 0


Review: Wildlife Category Review

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 2000-021-00-ISRP-20090618
Project: 2000-021-00 - Ladd Marsh 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:
The sponsors should be complimented for the partnership and outreach aspects of the project and their use of a multidisciplinary approach. With a few exceptions the project is on track and meeting objectives. M&E data collected in the past are shown. Additional monitoring effort will be required in the coming years for fish, notably if water from Conley Lake will be used to recharge the aquifer.

1. Technical Justification, Program Significance and Consistency, and Project Relationships
The justification for the project is described well in the proposal. The significance of the additions to the Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area is demonstrated by the close alignment with subbasin priorities and is amply substantiated by the presentation of some monitoring data. This project is obviously well coordinated with the Ladd Marsh program but also compliments many other BPA-funded efforts in the Grande Ronde Subbasin. The sponsors have engaged a wide variety of additional organizations ranging from other ODFW biologists to a nearby city (La Grande) to local school groups, and the relationships among the groups are working well.

2. Project History and Results
The proposal provides not only a chronology of activities since project inception in 1998 but also provides an indication of biological response to project implementation by summarizing some of the monitoring data that has been collected. Improvements in habitat condition and the response of wildlife populations to these changes clearly illustrate the effectiveness of the restoration measures that have been implemented at the project site. Activities detailed include purchases, easements, dikes, stream channel construction, fish ladder, planting shrubs and native grasses, weed control, and water management. Results have generally been positive - some invasive species such as reed canary grass have out-competed native vegetation in some areas but the sponsors are confident their management methods will reverse this trend.

3. Objectives, Work Elements, and Methods
The objectives, work elements, and methods are appropriate for the project. The activities to be supported by this proposal are largely maintenance of habitat improvements that have been implemented over the last decade. The methods have been successful to date, as indicated by monitoring data. The manner in which this section was organized required a considerable amount of repetition of work elements and methods. Some streamlining of the text would have made review of the proposal a bit easier. Objectives include: install nest structures; control water levels and vegetation; install perimeter fencing; compile and analyze data already collected; and conduct vegetation and wildlife surveys.

4. M&E
The M&E program for this project is very complete. Both habitat condition as well as population responses to the restoration actions are being monitored. Despite the authors’ claim that resources are insufficient to implement a comprehensive monitoring strategy, they are conducting a very thorough assessment of project effectiveness. In addition, it is quite evident from the discussions in this proposal that the monitoring results are being used to inform management decisions.

The photo points are producing good qualitative data but should be combined with vegetation measurements wherever possible.

Additional monitoring effort will be required in the coming years for fish, notably if water from Conley Lake will be used to recharge the aquifer. Monitoring of this work will be ODFW’s responsibility. The proposal indicates that the current fish trap has not been operated since 2004 due to some design problems. However, the trap worked well enough to establish the presence of Chinook fry and an adult bull trout in the project area. The fact that these key fish species did use the new channel of Ladd Creek is important information. The water temperature monitoring data is important, although the data might be related to thermal tolerances of fish and turtles for more effective interpretation. Some information on seasonal patterns of use and the survival and growth of the fish at this site would also have been very useful. Improvements to the fish trap, as suggested in this proposal, would help improve the understanding of fish response to the project. In view of the fact that a proposal has been submitted to restore habitat on six miles of Ladd
Creek upstream from the project location, a more intensive monitoring effort for fish at the project site and upstream becomes even more important. Much of this type of monitoring is outside the primary focus of the Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Additions Project. The sponsors should work with those proposing or conducting fish habitat restoration work in the subbasin to ensure that sufficient monitoring resources are directed towards the fish habitat restoration efforts on Ladd Creek.
First Round ISRP Date: 3/26/2009
First Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria
First Round ISRP Comment:
The sponsors should be complimented for the partnership and outreach aspects of the project and their use of a multidisciplinary approach. With a few exceptions the project is on track and meeting objectives. M&E data collected in the past are shown. Additional monitoring effort will be required in the coming years for fish, notably if water from Conley Lake will be used to recharge the aquifer.

1. Technical Justification, Program Significance and Consistency, and Project Relationships
The justification for the project is described well in the proposal. The significance of the additions to the Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area is demonstrated by the close alignment with subbasin priorities and is amply substantiated by the presentation of some monitoring data. This project is obviously well coordinated with the Ladd Marsh program but also compliments many other BPA-funded efforts in the Grande Ronde Subbasin. The sponsors have engaged a wide variety of additional organizations ranging from other ODFW biologists to a nearby city (La Grande) to local school groups, and the relationships among the groups are working well.

2. Project History and Results
The proposal provides not only a chronology of activities since project inception in 1998 but also provides an indication of biological response to project implementation by summarizing some of the monitoring data that has been collected. Improvements in habitat condition and the response of wildlife populations to these changes clearly illustrate the effectiveness of the restoration measures that have been implemented at the project site. Activities detailed include purchases, easements, dikes, stream channel construction, fish ladder, planting shrubs and native grasses, weed control, and water management. Results have generally been positive - some invasive species such as reed canary grass have out-competed native vegetation in some areas but the sponsors are confident their management methods will reverse this trend.

3. Objectives, Work Elements, and Methods
The objectives, work elements, and methods are appropriate for the project. The activities to be supported by this proposal are largely maintenance of habitat improvements that have been implemented over the last decade. The methods have been successful to date, as indicated by monitoring data. The manner in which this section was organized required a considerable amount of repetition of work elements and methods. Some streamlining of the text would have made review of the proposal a bit easier. Objectives include: install nest structures; control water levels and vegetation; install perimeter fencing; compile and analyze data already collected; and conduct vegetation and wildlife surveys.

4. M&E
The M&E program for this project is very complete. Both habitat condition as well as population responses to the restoration actions are being monitored. Despite the authors’ claim that resources are insufficient to implement a comprehensive monitoring strategy, they are conducting a very thorough assessment of project effectiveness. In addition, it is quite evident from the discussions in this proposal that the monitoring results are being used to inform management decisions.

The photo points are producing good qualitative data but should be combined with vegetation measurements wherever possible.

Additional monitoring effort will be required in the coming years for fish, notably if water from Conley Lake will be used to recharge the aquifer. Monitoring of this work will be ODFW’s responsibility. The proposal indicates that the current fish trap has not been operated since 2004 due to some design problems. However, the trap worked well enough to establish the presence of Chinook fry and an adult bull trout in the project area. The fact that these key fish species did use the new channel of Ladd Creek is important information. The water temperature monitoring data is important, although the data might be related to thermal tolerances of fish and turtles for more effective interpretation. Some information on seasonal patterns of use and the survival and growth of the fish at this site would also have been very useful. Improvements to the fish trap, as suggested in this proposal, would help improve the understanding of fish response to the project. In view of the fact that a proposal has been submitted to restore habitat on six miles of Ladd
Creek upstream from the project location, a more intensive monitoring effort for fish at the project site and upstream becomes even more important. Much of this type of monitoring is outside the primary focus of the Ladd Marsh Wildlife Area Additions Project. The sponsors should work with those proposing or conducting fish habitat restoration work in the subbasin to ensure that sufficient monitoring resources are directed towards the fish habitat restoration efforts on Ladd Creek.
Documentation Links:

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 2000-021-00-NPCC-20091217
Project: 2000-021-00 - Ladd Marsh Wildlife Mitigation
Review: Wildlife Category Review
Approved Date: 5/31/2009
Recommendation: Fund
Comments: Cost savings to be determined pending outcome of litigation.
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

Legal Assessment (In-Lieu)

Assessment Number: 2000-021-00-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 2000-021-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 10/6/2006
In Lieu Rating: No Problems Exist
Cost Share Rating: None
Comment: O&M on BPA-funded wildlife mitigation site; assume requested funds consistent with terms of MOA.

Capital Assessment

Assessment Number: 2000-021-00-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 2000-021-00
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: 2000-021-00-ISRP-20060831
Project: 2000-021-00 - Ladd Marsh 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:
The response made clear that the project has sources of relevant monitoring data, and it provided some descriptive detail that evidences project progress. Although the response states that monitoring must be limited to largely descriptive/qualitative studies, the activities that are described appear to include many quantitative data, and descriptive/qualitative data can be perfectly adequate to evaluate some biological objectives (e.g., use of photopoints). Photopoints are useful in evaluation, and some census data are shown. This project has shown improvement in monitoring and evaluation over the years, and future proposals should continue to provide improved description of the evaluation of the project's progress, using relevant monitoring information

The ISRP emphasizes that the proponents need to analyze the information they have gathered and are continuing to gather, not create an expensive monitoring program. With this project, there is no necessary conflict between the ISRP and NPCC guidance on project level M&E. There is no need to spend more than 5% of the project budget to produce relevant analyzed monitoring data that index project progress. Projects are required, under review criteria, to provide adequate monitoring and evaluation, and it appears that what this project has been doing could readily address that requirement. There is no apparent need for expanded experimental monitoring; there simply is a need to analyze and think about the information that is available. Further analysis and reporting of relevant data would likely not take as much as two weeks, especially if some analyses are already included in Annual Reports, as the response indicates. In future reports, the results of some data analysis should be shown and their interpretation described to indicate what the project proponents understand the data to tell them about the progress and success of their project; the ISRP should not be referred to annual M&E reports to see what those data show.
Documentation Links:

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 2000-021-00-NPCC-20090924
Project: 2000-021-00 - Ladd Marsh Wildlife Mitigation
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Fund
Comments: Budget reduction reflects the removal of work elements associated with wetland work on private land, pre-acquisition activity and moving to strictly O&M budget. Interim funding pending wildlife o&m review.

Project Relationships: None

Name Role Organization
Dave Larson (Inactive) Supervisor Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
Cathy Nowak Project Lead Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
Paul (CBFWF) Ashley (Inactive) Interested Party Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Foundation
Dan Gambetta Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration
Tracy Hauser Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration
John Skidmore Supervisor Bonneville Power Administration