Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 2007-252-00 - Hyporheic Flow Assessment in Columbia River Tributaries Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 2007-252-00 - Hyporheic Flow Assessment in Columbia River Tributaries
Project Number:
2007-252-00
Title:
Hyporheic Flow Assessment in Columbia River Tributaries
Summary:
Project summary

We propose to develop floodplain assessment methods to evaluate the
importance of hyporheic exchange, geomorphic diversity and temperature
patterns to salmon productivity in the Umatilla River. This approach
will use several remotely sensed and field data sets to identify drivers
of hyporheic flows and the critical late summer salmon habitats. Prior
research has shown that geomorphically diverse floodplains maintain
thermal and physical habitats that salmon rely on. Historically, the
Umatilla River included critically important habitats that are now rare.
A uniform assessment of hyporheic flows creates a basin-wide dataset to
better understand and manage these habitats. Using modeled, field and
remotely sensed information from this river, we will quantify
relationships between physical and biological habitat parameters that
impact salmon productivity. This effort represents the culmination of a
variety of past and ongoing research efforts that began in Umatilla
Basin and would build upon existing facilities, stream databases, and
remote-sensing imagery compiled by the Confederated Tribes of the
Umatilla Indian Reservation. Additionally, this project continues an
integrated collaborative effort between Tribal Government, federal
researchers, and small business. Additionally, this project continues
work begun in a 2001 Innovative Project (~$340,000) and is also
supported by a NASA #NAG 13-02030, (~$1,900,000). These past and ongoing
projects continue to contribute to peer reviewed publications (3
published and 2 in review) and increased effectiveness in understanding
and addressing floodplain habitats. Thus the CTUIR is able to leverage a
significant investment (>$2,200,000) of data and scientific knowledge to
provide a highly efficient use of requested funds. Expected benefits of
this project include: 1) development of rapid assessment techniques to
document nodes of diverse floodplain habitats and build a basis for
hyporheic habitat management and 2) provision of new methods to measure
the effect of shallow hyporheic exchange over entire tributary rivers.
This research will provide a means to link salmon habitats to dynamic
physical environments that create and maintain them.
Proposer:
None
Proponent Orgs:
Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) (Tribe)
Starting FY:
2007
Ending FY:
2032
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Columbia Plateau Umatilla 100.00%
Purpose:
Habitat
Emphasis:
RM and E
Focal Species:
Chinook - Mid-Columbia River Spring ESU
Coho - Unspecified Population
Freshwater Mussels
Lamprey, Pacific
Lamprey, Western Brook
Steelhead - Middle Columbia River DPS
Trout, Bull
Trout, Interior Redband
Trout, Rainbow
Whitefish, Mountain
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Special:
None
BiOp Association:
None

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"

Expense SOY Budget Working Budget Contracted Amount Modified Contract Amount Expenditures *
FY2018 (Previous) $90,064 $179,563 $179,563 $179,563 $147,651

Post 2018 – Umatilla $179,563 $179,563 $179,563 $147,651
FY2019 (Current) $179,563 $179,563 $179,563 $8,156

Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla $179,563 $179,563 $179,563 $8,156
FY2020 (Next) $179,563 $179,563 $0 $13,813 $0

Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla $179,563 $0 $13,813 $0

* Expenditures data includes accruals and are based on data through 31-Oct-2018

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2018 - FY2020)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2018 Expense $93,817 From: Post 2018 – Umatilla FY18 Initial Planning Budgets (WS, CTUIR, YN, CRITFC) 7/18/2017 07/18/2017
FY2018 Expense $3,753 To: Post 2018 – Umatilla CTUIR Establish FY18 budget for 2012-010-00 Accord Administration 08/21/2017
FY2018 Expense $59,746 From: Post 2018 – Umatilla Accord Budget (CTUIR) 1/3/2018 01/03/2018
FY2018 Expense $29,753 From: Post 2018 – Umatilla Accord Budget (CTUIR) 1/3/2018 01/03/2018
FY2019 Expense $179,563 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Accord Extensions (Umatilla Tribe) 10/1/2018 10/01/2018
FY2020 Expense $179,563 From: Fish Accord - LRT - Umatilla Accord Extensions (Umatilla Tribe) 10/1/2018 10/01/2018

Pending Budget Decision?  No


Actual Project Cost Share

Current Fiscal Year — 2019
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
2016 (Draft)
2015 $1,722 1 %
2014 $1,722 1 %
2013 $1,722 2 %
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008 $6,502 7 %
2007 $1,154,369 94 %

Contracts

The table below contains contracts with the following statuses: Active, Complete, History, Issued.
Expense Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Contracted Amount Dates
73982 REL 19 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2007-252-00 EXP HYPORHEIC FLOW ASSESSMENT Issued $179,563 5/15/2017 - 5/14/2018
73982 REL 46 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2007-252-00 EXP HYPORHEIC FLOW ASSESSMENT Issued $143,386 5/15/2018 - 5/14/2019
CR-326595 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2007-252-00 EXP HYPORHEIC FLOW ASSESSMENT Pending $179,563 5/15/2019 - 5/14/2020



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):8
Completed:7
On time:7
Status Reports
Completed:33
On time:21
Avg Days Late:24

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
31247 34929, 57411, 65619, 72651, 73982 REL 19, 73982 REL 46 2007-252-00 EXP HYPORHEIC FLOW ASSESSMENT Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 01/2007 01/2007 Pending 33 43 8 0 3 54 94.44% 0
Project Totals 33 43 8 0 3 54 94.44% 0


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: RME / AP Category Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 2007-252-00-NPCC-20110106
Project: 2007-252-00 - Hyporheic Flow Assessment in Columbia River Tributaries
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal: RMECAT-2007-252-00
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 6/10/2011
Recommendation: Fund (Qualified)
Comments: Implement with condition through FY 2014: Implementation beyond 2014 based on addressing ISRP qualification and Council review of the results report and recommendation of future work.
Publish Date: 09/06/2011 BPA Response: Agree
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 Qualifications: This is an interesting project that has the potential to provide a useful approach and important information beneficial to habitat restoration. More detail could have been provided on how the project will link hyporheic processes and the geomorphic classification to restoration planning and actions, habitat effectiveness evaluation, and salmonid performances, as outlined in the comments below. The ISRP requests that the proponents produce a progress report that provides results to date and outlines a plan or study design that explicitly address these issues identified above. The progress report should be submitted within one year. The ISRP looks forward to reviewing this report.
BPA Response to Council Condition #1: <no comment>
Council Condition #2 Programmatic Issue: RMECAT #6 Research projects in general—.
BPA Response to Council Condition #2: Accept Report will be part of contract.

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 2007-252-00-ISRP-20101015
Project: 2007-252-00 - Hyporheic Flow Assessment in Columbia River Tributaries
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-2007-252-00
Completed Date: 12/17/2010
Final Round ISRP Date: 12/17/2010
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
Final Round ISRP Comment:
Qualification: This is an interesting project that has the potential to provide a useful approach and important information beneficial to habitat restoration. More detail could have been provided on how the project will link hyporheic processes and the geomorphic classification to restoration planning and actions, habitat effectiveness evaluation, and salmonid performances, as outlined in the comments below. The ISRP requests that the proponents produce a progress report that provides results to date and outlines a plan or study design that explicitly address these issues identified above. The progress report should be submitted within one year. The ISRP looks forward to reviewing this report.

The response provided a useful description of the method for determining reach scale hyporheic exchange based on LiDAR, geomorphic channel segment classification and Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR). According to the proposal the Hyporheic Potential Index (HPI) assessment for the Umatilla River has been concluded, but the estimation of this index needs to be completed for portions of the Grande Ronde and Walla Walla River subbasins. It was not clear whether HPI determination for the Umatilla would be repeated. Completion of HPI for the additional sites covered in the proposal is a worthwhile goal.

While the proposal describes the importance of floodplain reconnection to maintaining cooler water in channels where summer temperatures exceed the thermal tolerance of salmonids (e.g., breaching levees, restoring access to side channels, and removing other constraints to channel complexity to achieve "restoration of normative floodplain morphology") in general terms, it does not present direct evidence that existing restoration actions have facilitated surface-hyporheic water exchange to the extent that there have been reductions in summer stream temperature. For tributaries such as Meacham and Iskuulpa Creeks, in which there have been extensive restoration efforts, demonstrating that restoration of floodplain connectivity promotes hyporheic processes at the site scale is important. This should be a key objective of the project.

The project's goals have been clarified: "1) basin-wide assessments of potential hyporheic exchange (Hyporheic Potential Index; HPI) and stream temperature response in the target watersheds (Walla Walla, Umatilla and Grand Ronde) and 2) reach scale assessments of geomorphic characteristics associated with stream sections where hyporheic response drives variable temperature patterns (a subset of analysis in part 1)." The proposal mentions that temperature measurements of surface and hyporheic water will be monitored in [shallow] wells, but the locations of the well networks are not specified in the response, nor are funds for equipment such as temperature loggers and well building materials requested in the budget. The ISRP is still not certain about the extent and design of the field elements of this project, or other monitoring details. In addition, it was not clear how often FLIR flights would occur, and over what locations. FLIR technology is expensive, but more than one flight may be needed to locate parts of the stream network that experience unusually warm or cool waters. Additional details about temperature characterization, particularly in relation to ongoing restoration projects that affect hyporheic flows, would have been helpful.

The proposal emphasizes restoring natural channel morphological patterns as a key to maintaining habitable rivers in late summer, but we also wonder if shallow wells for irrigation water (if they occur) also might be having a significant impact on exchanges between surface and hyporheic flows.

The value of this project is not only in understanding hyporheic processes but also in using this understanding in evaluation of the effectiveness of habitat enhancement actions and in understanding salmonid use of hyporheic influenced areas. The proponents are well aware of these issues. They define two objectives but a third is evident. In several places in the initial proposal and in their response, they mention determining relationships between hyporheic influenced habitats and salmonid performances. However, in spite of their importance, little detailed information is given about how these studies will be conducted. Salmonid performances should be confined not just to redds and growth (if it has been measured) but should also include adult distribution and juvenile abundance and distribution, as these performances will respond to decreases in water temperature from enhanced hyporheic exchange.

An IMW project is planned for the Umatilla River. It would seem that the proponent's project would be beneficial to the IMW project and should be integrated with it. The proponents did not explicitly discuss their role, if any, in the IMW project.

The proponents should consider evaluation of hyporheic influences on reach scale thermal refugia along stream margins and in side channels. As the proponents are aware, these refugia can provide important habitats for salmonids even if hyporheic processes have little influence on mainstem temperatures.
First Round ISRP Date: 10/18/2010
First Round ISRP Rating: Response Requested
First Round ISRP Comment:
This project can provide valuable information for stream habitat restoration programs throughout the Columbia River Basin. The presentation to the ISRP was good and alleviated many of our concerns about the soundness of the science behind the proposed work. The proponent’s presentation and response to questions demonstrated a solid grasp of hyporheic and riparian function. However, as the proposal now stands, the information provided was insufficient for scientific review. A response patterned after the presentation would be a good approach in responding to the ISRP’s concerns.

The proponents need to provide more detail concerning study design, work elements, methods, and metrics for this proposal to be sufficient for scientific review. Specifically, the proposal needs to state whether the principal focus is on landscape-scale hyporheic identification using remote sensing tools or a more localized objective of assessing the effect of in-stream restoration activities on hyporheic-surface water interactions. We recommend that the project concentrate on one or the other, with additional details provided on where and how the studies would be carried out and the data would be analyzed and reported. We suggest that better integration with other regional habitat programs is needed. A more fully-developed adaptive management process should be provided.

The proponents should explain how altered hyporheic flow was identified as an important limiting factor in the drainages to be studied? They also should discuss how the results of this project would be incorporated into watershed and reach scale restoration strategies.

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

A better understanding of hypothetic processes in the Columbia River Basin could make a significant contribution to habitat and salmon restoration efforts. Although many habitat restoration projects have included increased hyporheic exchange as an objective, virtually none of the monitoring efforts associated with these projects have evaluated this process. This proposal contains the elements that would be required to conduct an evaluation of hyporheic exchange and how it is influenced by the application of stream channel reconstruction or other habitat enhancement measures. The development of a floodplain classification system that characterizes the nature and magnitude of hyporheic exchange based on field and remotely-sensed data sets also would be a valuable tool. But the proposal lacked sufficient detail to enable a through technical review.

The technical background was well documented, although text was missing from some paragraphs in the Problem Statement. Even so, it was apparent that the proponents were familiar with the subject. One aspect of the technical background information that would have been helpful would have been a more complete discussion of the importance of hyporheic flows to salmonid production, and why the issue is so important in this region of the Columbia River Basin (e.g., water withdrawals have disrupted hyporheic-surface water exchanges).

The proponents should explain how altered hyporheic flow identified as an important limiting factor in the drainages to be studied? Was the conclusion based on the lack of thermal refugia in the stream channels and evidence that restoring hyporheic flowpaths would create some cool water locations during the summer low flow period?

The significance of the project to regional programs was inadequately described. The proposal describes how the project is integrated into the CTUIR restoration strategy. To what other restoration projects in these drainage systems is it related?

The objectives were clearly stated and reasonably well supported. The objectives contained the only descriptions of the work elements in the proposal.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management

This proposal builds from a project on hyporheic processes that was completed last year in a reach of the Umatilla River. An annual report from this project was linked to the proposal, clearly indicating that the proponents of this proposal have the necessary experience and expertise to conduct the work.

There was only a very brief paragraph in the proposal dedicated to adaptive management and this text simply stated that previous work in the Umatilla River had persuaded CTUIR habitat project leaders that hyporheic processes are important. More consideration should be given to the process by which the information and tools generated by this project will be delivered to project leaders and managers and the process by which this information could be used in the future restoration planning. The multi-scale aspects of this work, especially the development of a tool that will enable the identification of floodplain locations with high potential for hyporheic exchange, suggest that this project could have a direct effect on management decisions.

As stated in the proposal, the project has been active for less than a year so there are few accomplishments to date. However, results of floodplain hyporheic flow mapping that are apparently in press were displayed. These results suggest that locations in the mainstem Umatilla River where hyporheic-surface water exchanges are significant are patchily distributed, as would be expected. Knowing where these places are is helpful in designing habitat restoration projects.

There was little explicit discussion of how the results of this project would be incorporated into either overall watershed restoration strategies or into different types of restoration actions.

3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions for Type of Work (Hatchery, RME, Tagging)

More information is needed on project relationships, particularly details on how this project would be integrated with other habitat restoration efforts – both CTUIR and other programs. A list of projects was provided with which this effort will “directly coordinate.” But the nature of the interaction was not described. Presumably, some of these projects will provide habitat treatments for before-after assessments of hyporheic processes. If so, these projects should be identified and a brief description of the types of habitat projects provided. One project was listed that did not seem to have any relationship with the proposed effort. Since this project will occur in the Walla Walla, Grande Ronde and Umatilla watersheds, why is the North Fork John Day River Basin Anadromous Fish Habitat Enhancement indicated as an effort with which this project will directly coordinate?

Climate change or other emerging factors are not explicitly addressed in this proposal.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Only a single deliverable is provided in the proposal: “Assess spatial and temporal relationships of hyporheic exchange, changing channel forms, geomorphic setting and altered temperature patterns.” As a generic deliverable, this is fine. But the introductory material in the proposal described a project that included a field effort at the project and reach scale coupled with a remote-sensing component to expand the finer-scale results. Deliverables articulated by spatial scale might have provided a clearer indication of project organization as the work elements associated with each scale are quite different.

Although only a single deliverable was given, the executive summary gives two major objectives: (1) “the Multi-Scale Hyporheic Exchange project seeks to conduct a suite of field tests to document the changes in physical habitats related to surface/groundwater exchange. We anticipate that these activities will include field components for data collection and analysis, including, topographic data collection, dye releases and monitoring, temperature monitoring and tracer tests, as well as, analysis of field and remotely sensed data” and (2) “The second portion of this work seeks to develop a remote sensing-based classification of floodplains in the target watersheds (Umatilla, Walla Walla and Grand Ronde).” These two objectives should generate multiple deliverables.

The work elements, metrics, and methods are only very briefly described in the proposal. These project elements appear to be generally appropriate for the objective and deliverable, but much more detail is required to enable a thorough evaluation of the experimental design and methodologies. Limited information was given on the field techniques and modeling methods, other than to list them without providing details about how they would be implemented at the proposed study sites. It is unclear how this project will be conducted, the locations of study sites, what measurement will be made and how they will be made. A major shortcoming of the proposal was that a study design was not provided. The lack of detail prevented a scientific assessment of the proposal’s merits.

It appears that the evaluation of hyporheic functioning will take place at only one spatial scale (floodplain segments). What are the larger spatial scales and how will floodplain information be “rolled up” to these scales? What “distribution and characteristics of floodplain segments” will be assessed and how? How will floodplain characteristics be related to “salmon diversity and productivity?” The proponent states that they will evaluate how “geomorphically and thermally complex habitats affect growth and survival of juvenile salmon by using existing productivity datasets.” How will the relationship between habitat factors (presumably hyporheic influenced, but this is not clear) and fish growth and survival be determined? What data sets will be used?
Documentation Links:
  • Proponent Response (11/15/2010)

2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Assessment

Assessment Number: 2007-252-00-BIOP-20101105
Project Number: 2007-252-00
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal Number: RMECAT-2007-252-00
Completed Date: None
2008 FCRPS BiOp Workgroup Rating: Response Requested
Comments: BiOp Workgroup Comments: BPA has questions regarding the action effectiveness for habitat restoration based on the PNAMP rating criteria provided in the June 1st letter to sponsors.


The BiOp RM&E Workgroups made the following determinations regarding the proposal's ability or need to support BiOp Research, Monitoring and Evaluation (RME) RPAs. If you have questions regarding these RPA association conclusions, please contact your BPA COTR and they will help clarify, or they will arrange further discussion with the appropriate RM&E Workgroup Leads. BiOp RPA associations for the proposed work are: ()
All Questionable RPA Associations () and
All Deleted RPA Associations ()
Proponent Response:

Currently I am unaware of hyporheic parameters considered by the PNAMP rating criteria.

Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 2007-252-00-NPCC-20090924
Project: 2007-252-00 - Hyporheic Flow Assessment in Columbia River Tributaries
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Do Not Fund
Comments:

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 2007-252-00-ISRP-20060831
Project: 2007-252-00 - Hyporheic Flow Assessment in Columbia River Tributaries
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:
Floodplains are among the most productive areas of rivers for salmonid fishes. An important process influencing floodplain productivity is hyporheic flow that creates thermal regimes highly favorable for spawning, incubation, and rearing. The proposed work will identify hyporheic areas in subbasins, predict their effects on stream temperatures, and assess the importance of hyporheic flows fish productivity in floodplain habitats. The work addresses a critical need for habitat restoration in large rivers and is the only work of its kind in the Columbia River Basin. The work will help identify areas of subbasins where restoration would likely yield large benefits for salmonids.

The sponsors list an expected benefit as "classification all major floodplains in the Columbia River Basin." While this benefit may accrue in the future, the funded work should be restricted to the eight key test basins.

Technical and scientific background: Parts of the technical background are quite good. The graphics describing large-scale hyporheic analyses are excellent and would be a valuable addition to any subbasin analysis and plan. The background also makes a strong connection between hyporheic flow paths and stream cooling, which will certainly influence where some of the most productive segments of the drainage system for salmonids will be located.

There are also some questions that deserved greater attention. The actual influence of hyporheic flow (apart from temperature moderation) could have been more fully explored. Hyporheic zones influence nutrient dynamics, which in turn will affect stream productivity; however, nutrients are not really addressed. The ways in which anthropogenic disturbances have altered hyporheic development (and how these disturbances can be undone) also need to be addressed -- otherwise, how will the information generated by this project be effectively used? Are there some changes (e.g., severe downcutting) that have altered the hyporheos to the point that natural conditions can't be restored for decades or more? Can such changes be detected by the proposed analytical methods?

Although a minor point, some of the figures appeared to have been misplaced in the text (several pages from where they were referenced) and legends were missing, e.g., Fig. 2.

Rationale and significance to subbasin plans and regional programs: Developing a cost-effective, accessible technique for identifying areas with high hyporheic potential would clearly benefit subbasin plans. The selection of study areas would seem to be most applicable to Mid-Columbia and Columbia Cascade provinces. The stated goal of classifying "all major floodplains in the Columbia River Basin" would seem to be a bit optimistic without a broader spectrum of study areas; e.g., none of the sites were located in tributaries of the Lower Columbia or Willamette River. However, for the area in which the study takes place, the project would likely provide valuable information.

Relationships to other projects: The proposal references many linkages but is not entirely clear about how these linkages would occur. For example, the statement "Outcomes of this project will be directly coordinated with several projects in the Umatilla River Basin; specifically, Quantitative Assessment of Migrating Upstream Lamprey, Project #9402600, Umatilla Habitat Project, #8710002, Walla Walla Basin Habitat Enhancement, #9604601, North Fork John Day River Basin Anadromous Fish Habitat Enhancement, #200003100, Walla Walla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project, #200003900 and Characterize Genetic Differences and Distribution of Freshwater Mussels, #200203700" simply states the relationship but does not describe how the integration would be achieved; i.e., what products or information will be exchanged.

Nearly all the other projects are located in the Mid-Columbia and there is no mention of linkages to related projects in other parts of the basin. This would not be a problem except one of the project's objectives is to classify hyporheic potential throughout the Columbia River Basin, and referencing floodplain work in other areas would be helpful.

Objectives: The four objectives were clearly defined, although without much specificity with regard to products or timelines. The objectives also were not explicitly tied to elements of the Fish and Wildlife Program or to individual subbasin plans. The first three objectives describe the methods to be used for classifying floodplains with regard to hyporheic potential. These objectives were very specific.

The fourth objective (Relating the importance of hyporheic flows to fish use) was concerned primarily with relating areas with well-developed hyporheic flowpaths to spawner abundance. While this is worthwhile, many of the focal species may not be primarily floodplain spawners but instead may spawn in smaller montane streams. Juvenile salmonid abundance would certainly be worth associating with floodplains with well-developed hyporheic systems. Perhaps this component could be added to the project.

Objective 4 also states that geomorphically and thermally diverse stream segments will be related to salmon abundance, species diversity, and life history diversity. While this is also a worthy goal, the proposal does not provide a clear indication of how spatially defined existing biological data are, relative to the stream segments in question.

Tasks (work elements) and methods: For the geographic analyses, the proposal describes the methods very completely. For the biological parameters, not enough information is presented to adequately judge the methods. The investigators are experienced with the methodologies required for this work and have successfully applied the approach in the Umatilla basin.

Monitoring and evaluation: There are not very many places in the proposal where ground-truthing model predictions are mentioned. While this is probably not a problem in the Umatilla subbasin where CTUIR maintains a very complete database, it could be a real problem for areas of the Columbia River Basin that do not include study sites.

Facilities, equipment, and personnel: Facilities are well equipped for this work and the sponsors are well qualified with demonstrated peer-reviewed publication records.

Information transfer: The proposal mentions only online data storage and retrieval. There is no mention of reports, publications, or scientific presentations. The sponsors have a good record of peer-reviewed publications and surely results of this work will be published in scientific journals.

Benefits to focal and non-focal species: This project has the potential to be of great benefit to focal species if areas with high hyporheic potential can be accurately identified and either protected or restored. The effects of anthropogenic alterations such as diking, shallow water wells, stream downcutting, and removal of riparian vegetation are inadequately discussed. Protecting and/or restoring hyporheic potential should benefit non-focal species too.
Documentation Links:

Legal Assessment (In-Lieu)

Assessment Number: 2007-252-00-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 2007-252-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 10/6/2006
In Lieu Rating: Problems May Exist
Cost Share Rating: 2 - May be reasonable
Comment: Floodplain/water temp study/interactions; multiple entities authorized/required (fishery managers, DEQs, other hydro operators, etc).

Capital Assessment

Assessment Number: 2007-252-00-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 2007-252-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 2/27/2007
Capital Rating: Does Not Qualify for Capital Funding
Capital Asset Category: None
Comment: None

Project Relationships: None

Name Role Organization
Scott O'Daniel Project Lead Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Paul Rabb Administrative Contact Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Stacy Schumacher Supervisor Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Deborah Docherty Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration
Dorothy Welch Supervisor Bonneville Power Administration
Jennifer Snyder Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration