The proposal did not describe the project adequately for scientific review. Despite being an O&M project, all elements of the proposal template are relevant to assessing the scientific merit of the proposed work. At a minimum, the proposal needed a clearer statement of the proposed work, how work is being coordinated among projects, and some indication of how the proponents reflect on the success in supporting fish passage (and how it can be more effective). In addition to clearing debris from the passage structures and to ensure that the project is protecting fish, some strategy is needed to evaluate whether the passage structures themselves are adequate for supporting fish passage and to identify when the project and individual structures need adaptation.

The ISRP found this proposal to be Not Applicable under the review process and does not request response from the proponents. Nevertheless, the proponents should carefully address the following issues in their next annual report and future work plans:

1. SMART objectives. The proposal provides a goal related to increasing adult returns and increasing survival of juvenile and adult salmonids. However, this is not a SMART objective, and it is not clear how or if the proponents are assessing their success at meeting that goal. The proponents should develop SMART objectives (see proposal instructions) focused on the O&M activities conducted under this project. 
   
   
2. Monitoring and evaluation. There was no content provided on monitoring evaluation of the project, except the statement that it is not relevant to the project due to its O&M focus. However, despite there being no M&E funded on this project, it is still an important practice to learn lessons from the years of maintaining these facilities. For example, is a log kept of the regular (or irregular) issues faced at different facilities? What are the proponents doing to reduce the frequency or severity of those issues, and their impacts on fish passage? In addition, with no consideration of confounding factors, how do proponents anticipate being proactive and responsive to changing flow conditions from climate change? Will passage structures need to be modified, and if so, how will that work be prioritized and funded? Are there other ways in which the O&M needs to be evaluated or adjusted to ensure that the objectives of increasing adult returns and increasing survival of migration juveniles and adults can still be met? 
   
   
3. Benefits to fish and wildlife: Furthermore, the ISRP encourages the proponents to work with project partners to develop simple tools for enumerating the benefits of the project to fish. The 2013 Geographic Review indicated that the proponents were partnering with ODFW for M&E using PIT tag arrays. Is that collaboration still occurring? If so, what do the data indicate regarding how many fish are being protected by this project? If the collaboration has ended, then please explain why and provide an alternate approach for documenting the benefits to fish. Simple calculations for the number of fish protected could be based on run abundance, passage efficiency, and Smolt-Adult Return rates, if those data exist. If not, more details about the number and types of activities performed and population estimates for the river would provide some basic information to support the benefit of the project.

The maintenance of the passage and screening facilities on the Walla Walla River will contribute to improved survival of adult and juvenile salmonids in this system. The proposal does a good job describing the maintenance problems and the methods being used to correct problems. Like other passage structure projects, the sponsors should look into the opportunity to use the facilities for juvenile migrant enumeration.

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

The purpose of this proposal is to obtain support to maintain four fish-passage and diversion screen installations in the Walla Walla River. The issues with fish passage at these sites and a summary of the history of the installation and improvements of the screens and ladders was adequately described. The objective of this project is to manage and maintain these installations. These facilities have had a positive impact on adult and juvenile survival of migrating salmonids and their maintenance will be critical to recovery of steelhead and the success of the spring Chinook re-introduction effort.

While maintaining these facilities, the sponsors also cooperate with ongoing M&E efforts including helping the USFWS preserve its PIT tag arrays. Also when passage facilities are shut down for routine maintenance they perform fish salvage operations. For example, Brook and Pacific Lamprey juveniles are often recovered in mud deposits adjacent to irrigation screens. These fish are returned back to the river. A variety of material including large woody debris needs to be removed from the passage and diversion facilities. The sponsors use guidelines in the BiOp to determine what can be removed from the river what should be returned. An ongoing challenge is budgeting for equipment replacement.

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

Since their construction the Hudson Bay District Improvement Company (HBDIC) and Gardena Farms Irrigation District (GFID) have operated and maintained the fish ladders and diversions located at the Little Walla Walla River, Nursery Bridge, Gardena, and Garden City/Lowden. Silt and other debris move throughout the Walla Walla River. This project removes debris from dam forebays and tailraces, fish ladder entrances, slots, and exits. It also cleans diversion channels, screens and bypass structures. During the irrigation season, project personnel make daily visits to these facilities inspecting them for damage and debris loads to ensure that flows and water levels meet operating criteria. Standard maintenance is also performed and flow and water level data are recorded. The project does engage in adaptive management as flow and water use conditions affect maintenance cycles. In addition operating criteria and infrastructure at the sites are changed as needed to facilitate fish passage.

Evaluation of Results

Inadequate upstream and downstream passage were largely responsible for the extirpation of spring Chinook and decline in abundance of summer steelhead in the Walla Walla subbasin. The subbasin plan for the Walla Walla identified fish passage improvement as a critical factor for salmon and steelhead restoration. In the mid 1990s the CTUIR requested that outdated fish screening and passage facilities in the Walla Walla subbasin be replaced. Shortly thereafter, BPA, Walla Walla Irrigation Districts, NOAA Fisheries, WDFW, ODFW, WDOE, and the CTUIR met to establish easement agreements, develop, review and modify plans for passage facilities, and inspect on-site work. From 1999 to 2003 four significant fish passage facilities were built in the Walla Walla subbasin. Two of them, the Little Walla Walla River Diversion and Passage facility and Nursery Bridge fish ladder are operated and maintained by the Hudson Bay District Improvement Company (HBDIC). The Gardena Farms Irrigation District (GFID) operates and maintains the remaining two projects, the Gardena or Burlingame fish ladder and the Garden City/Lowden #2 diversion. Flow conditions, water withdrawals for irrigation and other factors can affect up- and downstream passage through these structures. For the past 10 to 14 years the GFID and HBDIC irrigation districts have been maintaining and operating these facilities.

The successful re-introduction of spring Chinook salmon by the CTUIR into the Walla Walla subbasin indicates that both upstream and downstream passage has been significantly improved. Spring Chinook had been extirpated from the Walla Walla River since 1925. Their disappearance was due to the construction of the Nine Mile (Reese) Dam in 1905 which caused the Walla Walla River to run dry each summer. In 2001, an agreement was reached among three irrigation districts, the Umatilla Tribe, and federal agencies that allowed year-around water flows to occur in the Walla Walla River. The spring Chinook reintroduction program began in 2000 and the first adults returned in 2004. Since then returns of spring Chinook into the upper Walla Walla River and Mill Creek have increased from 200 adults in 2004 to 1,135 in 2009 (CRITFC web page). This program has benefitted from the flow agreement and the operation and maintenance of the four fish passage facilities performed by the HBDIC and GFID.

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

Project personnel work closely with Walla Walla Fish Passage Operations staff to coordinate canal startups and shutdowns, fish removal operations, screen inspections, annual heavy equipment use, and debris removal from fish ladders, screens, and diversion channels. WDFW and ODFW are also consulted and involved with the approval of annual operation and maintenance plans. NOAA Fisheries, WDOE, the Walla Walla Basin Watershed Council, Walla Walla Habitat Conservation Plan, and Walla Walla Watershed management Partnership also interact with project staff.

The project focuses on O&M at four existing fish passage and screening facilities. Monitoring for these facilities is limited to maintaining a log of operational and maintenance issues encountered during each site visit. These records provide information useful in improving project operation. This type of monitoring is adequate for the project objectives.

No emerging limiting factors were listed. However climate change may produce more frequent extreme storm events which could impact the operation and maintenance of the project’s fish passage structures. Have any risk analyses been performed to estimate how the structures might perform under extreme conditions? For example, will extreme precipitation events put the structures at risk? Perhaps some floodplains above the barriers can be established to increase storage? Similarly in the case of low precipitation events, will there be enough water in the entire system for the fish passage devices to work? Another potential emerging limiting factor is the projected lifetime of fish passage and irrigation diversion structures. Are regular reviews undertaken to determine when or if existing structures should be updated? If updates are required how will planning, design, and implementation costs be covered?

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

The project has one deliverable, to operate and maintain BPA’s Walla Walla fish passage facilities per NOAA guidelines. To accomplish that, regular daily visits and inspections are conducted along with routine annual maintenance work. Water flow and height data are collected at each site and recorded in site-specific log books. The work elements are all related to the maintenance and repair of the facilities. They are adequately described and appropriate.

Specific comments on protocols and methods described in MonitoringMethods.org

No RM&E protocols were listed.

The maintenance of the passage and screening facilities on the Walla Walla River will contribute to improved survival of adult and juvenile salmonids in this system. The proposal does a good job describing the maintenance problems and the methods being used to correct problems. Like other passage structure projects, the sponsors should look into the opportunity to use the facilities for juvenile migrant enumeration.

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

The purpose of this proposal is to obtain support to maintain four fish-passage and diversion screen installations in the Walla Walla River. The issues with fish passage at these sites and a summary of the history of the installation and improvements of the screens and ladders was adequately described. The objective of this project is to manage and maintain these installations. These facilities have had a positive impact on adult and juvenile survival of migrating salmonids and their maintenance will be critical to recovery of steelhead and the success of the spring Chinook re-introduction effort.

While maintaining these facilities, the sponsors also cooperate with ongoing M&E efforts including helping the USFWS preserve its PIT tag arrays. Also when passage facilities are shut down for routine maintenance they perform fish salvage operations. For example, Brook and Pacific Lamprey juveniles are often recovered in mud deposits adjacent to irrigation screens. These fish are returned back to the river. A variety of material including large woody debris needs to be removed from the passage and diversion facilities. The sponsors use guidelines in the BiOp to determine what can be removed from the river what should be returned. An ongoing challenge is budgeting for equipment replacement.

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

Since their construction the Hudson Bay District Improvement Company (HBDIC) and Gardena Farms Irrigation District (GFID) have operated and maintained the fish ladders and diversions located at the Little Walla Walla River, Nursery Bridge, Gardena, and Garden City/Lowden. Silt and other debris move throughout the Walla Walla River. This project removes debris from dam forebays and tailraces, fish ladder entrances, slots, and exits. It also cleans diversion channels, screens and bypass structures. During the irrigation season, project personnel make daily visits to these facilities inspecting them for damage and debris loads to ensure that flows and water levels meet operating criteria. Standard maintenance is also performed and flow and water level data are recorded. The project does engage in adaptive management as flow and water use conditions affect maintenance cycles. In addition operating criteria and infrastructure at the sites are changed as needed to facilitate fish passage.

Evaluation of Results

Inadequate upstream and downstream passage were largely responsible for the extirpation of spring Chinook and decline in abundance of summer steelhead in the Walla Walla subbasin. The subbasin plan for the Walla Walla identified fish passage improvement as a critical factor for salmon and steelhead restoration. In the mid 1990s the CTUIR requested that outdated fish screening and passage facilities in the Walla Walla subbasin be replaced. Shortly thereafter, BPA, Walla Walla Irrigation Districts, NOAA Fisheries, WDFW, ODFW, WDOE, and the CTUIR met to establish easement agreements, develop, review and modify plans for passage facilities, and inspect on-site work. From 1999 to 2003 four significant fish passage facilities were built in the Walla Walla subbasin. Two of them, the Little Walla Walla River Diversion and Passage facility and Nursery Bridge fish ladder are operated and maintained by the Hudson Bay District Improvement Company (HBDIC). The Gardena Farms Irrigation District (GFID) operates and maintains the remaining two projects, the Gardena or Burlingame fish ladder and the Garden City/Lowden #2 diversion. Flow conditions, water withdrawals for irrigation and other factors can affect up- and downstream passage through these structures. For the past 10 to 14 years the GFID and HBDIC irrigation districts have been maintaining and operating these facilities.

The successful re-introduction of spring Chinook salmon by the CTUIR into the Walla Walla subbasin indicates that both upstream and downstream passage has been significantly improved. Spring Chinook had been extirpated from the Walla Walla River since 1925. Their disappearance was due to the construction of the Nine Mile (Reese) Dam in 1905 which caused the Walla Walla River to run dry each summer. In 2001, an agreement was reached among three irrigation districts, the Umatilla Tribe, and federal agencies that allowed year-around water flows to occur in the Walla Walla River. The spring Chinook reintroduction program began in 2000 and the first adults returned in 2004. Since then returns of spring Chinook into the upper Walla Walla River and Mill Creek have increased from 200 adults in 2004 to 1,135 in 2009 (CRITFC web page). This program has benefitted from the flow agreement and the operation and maintenance of the four fish passage facilities performed by the HBDIC and GFID.

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

Project personnel work closely with Walla Walla Fish Passage Operations staff to coordinate canal startups and shutdowns, fish removal operations, screen inspections, annual heavy equipment use, and debris removal from fish ladders, screens, and diversion channels. WDFW and ODFW are also consulted and involved with the approval of annual operation and maintenance plans. NOAA Fisheries, WDOE, the Walla Walla Basin Watershed Council, Walla Walla Habitat Conservation Plan, and Walla Walla Watershed management Partnership also interact with project staff.

The project focuses on O&M at four existing fish passage and screening facilities. Monitoring for these facilities is limited to maintaining a log of operational and maintenance issues encountered during each site visit. These records provide information useful in improving project operation. This type of monitoring is adequate for the project objectives.

No emerging limiting factors were listed. However climate change may produce more frequent extreme storm events which could impact the operation and maintenance of the project’s fish passage structures. Have any risk analyses been performed to estimate how the structures might perform under extreme conditions? For example, will extreme precipitation events put the structures at risk? Perhaps some floodplains above the barriers can be established to increase storage? Similarly in the case of low precipitation events, will there be enough water in the entire system for the fish passage devices to work? Another potential emerging limiting factor is the projected lifetime of fish passage and irrigation diversion structures. Are regular reviews undertaken to determine when or if existing structures should be updated? If updates are required how will planning, design, and implementation costs be covered?

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

The project has one deliverable, to operate and maintain BPA’s Walla Walla fish passage facilities per NOAA guidelines. To accomplish that, regular daily visits and inspections are conducted along with routine annual maintenance work. Water flow and height data are collected at each site and recorded in site-specific log books. The work elements are all related to the maintenance and repair of the facilities. They are adequately described and appropriate.

Specific comments on protocols and methods described in MonitoringMethods.org

No RM&E protocols were listed.