View and print project details including project summary, purpose, associations to Biological Opinions, and area. To learn more about any of the project properties, hold your mouse cursor over the field label.
Please Note: This project is the product of one or more merges and/or splits from other projects. Historical data automatically included here are limited to the current project and previous generation (the “parent” projects) only. The Project Relationships section details the nature of the relationships between this project and the previous generation. To learn about the complete ancestry of this project, please review the Project Relationships section on the Project Summary page of each parent project.
Province | Subbasin | % |
---|---|---|
Columbia Plateau | Yakima | 100.00% |
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
Acct FY | Acct Type | Amount | Fund | Budget Decision | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
FY2020 | Expense | $801,476 | From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) | FY20 SOY | 06/05/2019 |
FY2021 | Expense | $801,476 | From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) | FY21 SOY | 06/09/2020 |
Number | Contractor Name | Title | Status | Total Contracted Amount | Dates |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
BPA-003324 | Bonneville Power Administration | Realty Support for ROW Acquisition | Active | $0 | 10/1/2006 - 9/30/2007 |
32463
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 200739800 CAP YAKIMA TRIB/PASS&FLOW- YTAHP | Closed | $742,553 | 4/1/2007 - 3/31/2008 |
35408
![]() |
Kittitas County Conservation District | 200739800 CAP MANASTASH FLOW ENHANCEMENT | Closed | $578,500 | 9/30/2007 - 1/31/2010 |
37460
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 CAP YAKIMA TRIBUTARY PASSAGE/HABITAT (YTAHP) | Closed | $749,448 | 4/1/2008 - 3/31/2009 |
23380 REL 6
![]() |
Fishpro, Inc. | 2007-398-00 CAP MANASTASH CONSTRUCTION SERVICES - FISHPRO | Closed | $2,044,963 | 6/1/2008 - 12/31/2011 |
BPA-004328 | Bonneville Power Administration | Realty Support for ROW acquisition | Active | $14,500 | 10/1/2008 - 9/30/2009 |
41195
![]() |
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) | 2007-398-00 CAP MANASTASH SCREEN FABRICATION - WDFW | Closed | $356,891 | 2/1/2009 - 4/30/2011 |
42079
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 200739800 CAP YAKIMA TRIBUTARY PASSAGE/HABITAT (YTAHP) | Closed | $633,008 | 4/1/2009 - 3/31/2010 |
BPA-005762 | Bonneville Power Administration | Land & realty svcs | Active | $33,800 | 10/1/2009 - 9/30/2010 |
45233
![]() |
Kittitas County Conservation District | 2007-398-00 CAP MANASTASH FLOW ENHANCEMENT | Closed | $814,718 | 11/15/2009 - 11/14/2012 |
46802
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 CAP YAKIMA TRIBUTARY PASSAGE/HABITAT (YTAHP) | Closed | $749,267 | 4/1/2010 - 3/31/2011 |
52299
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 CAP YAKIMA B TRIB/PASS & FLOW (YTAHP CAP) | Closed | $641,931 | 4/1/2011 - 3/31/2012 |
54966
![]() |
HDR Constructors, Inc. | 2007-398-00 CAP MANASTASH CONSTRUCTION SERVICES | Closed | $253,985 | 9/30/2011 - 9/30/2013 |
56617
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 CAP YAKIMA B TRIB/PASS & FLOW (YTAHP CAP) | Closed | $774,236 | 4/1/2012 - 3/31/2013 |
57921
![]() |
HDR Constructors, Inc. | 2007-398-00 CAP YAKIMA B TRIB/PASS & FLOW-CAP | Closed | $511,236 | 7/1/2012 - 6/30/2013 |
58058
![]() |
Kittitas County Conservation District | 2007-398-00 CAP MANASTASH FLOW ENHANCEMENT | Closed | $339,000 | 9/1/2012 - 8/31/2013 |
60456
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 CAP YTAHP (CAP) | Closed | $770,127 | 4/1/2013 - 3/31/2014 |
64516
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 CAP YTAHP (CAP) 2014 | Closed | $716,695 | 4/1/2014 - 3/31/2015 |
68444
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 CAP YTAHP (CAP) 2015 | Closed | $398,413 | 4/1/2015 - 3/31/2016 |
Number | Contractor Name | Title | Status | Total Contracted Amount | Dates |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
32462
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 200739800 EXP YAKIMA TRIB/PASS&FLOW - YTAHP | Closed | $113,614 | 4/1/2007 - 3/31/2008 |
35145
![]() |
Kittitas County Conservation District | 200739800 EXP MANASTASH FLOW ENHANCEMENT | Closed | $16,712 | 9/30/2007 - 9/29/2009 |
37461
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 EXP YAKIMA TRIBUTARY HABITAT/PASSAGE (YTAHP) | Closed | $105,441 | 4/1/2008 - 3/31/2009 |
BPA-004327 | Bonneville Power Administration | Realty Support for ROW Acquisition | Active | $0 | 10/1/2008 - 9/30/2009 |
39807 REL 1
![]() |
Historical Research Associates, Inc. | NAT'L REG MULTIPLE PROPERTY DOCUMENTATION | Closed | $49,977 | 11/12/2008 - 9/30/2010 |
42458
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 200739800 EXP YAKIMA TRIBUTARY PASSAGE/HABITAT (YTAHP) | Closed | $120,525 | 4/1/2009 - 3/31/2010 |
44291
![]() |
Kittitas County Conservation District | 2007-398-00 EXP MANASTASH FLOW ENHANCEMENT | Closed | $10,000 | 9/30/2009 - 9/30/2011 |
BPA-005763 | Bonneville Power Administration | Realty Svcs | Active | $47,500 | 10/1/2009 - 9/30/2010 |
46861
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 EXP YAKIMA TRIBUTARY PASSAGE/HABITAT (YTAHP) | Closed | $118,899 | 4/1/2010 - 3/31/2011 |
BPA-005425 | Bonneville Power Administration | TBL Land Support | Active | $3,237 | 10/1/2010 - 9/30/2011 |
51799
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 EXP YAKIMA B TRIB/PASS & FLOW (YTAHP EXP) | Closed | $112,057 | 4/1/2011 - 3/31/2012 |
54283
![]() |
Kittitas County Conservation District | 2007-398-00 EXP MANASTASH FLOW ENHANCEMENT | Closed | $9,804 | 10/1/2011 - 9/30/2012 |
56682
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 EXP YAKIMA B TRIB/PASS & FLOW (YTAHP EXP) | Closed | $118,942 | 4/1/2012 - 3/31/2013 |
60457
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 EXP YTAHP (EXP) | Closed | $123,842 | 4/1/2013 - 3/31/2014 |
64515
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 EXP YTAHP (EXP) 2014 | Closed | $109,928 | 4/1/2014 - 3/31/2015 |
68714
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 EXP YTAHP (EXP) 2015 | Closed | $434,226 | 4/1/2015 - 3/31/2016 |
71584
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 EXP YTHAP 2016 | Closed | $892,234 | 4/1/2016 - 3/31/2017 |
75738
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 EXP YTAHP 2017 | Closed | $829,153 | 4/1/2017 - 3/31/2018 |
78789
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 EXP YTAHP 2018 | Closed | $890,072 | 4/1/2018 - 3/31/2019 |
81849
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 EXP YTAHP 2019 | Closed | $777,690 | 4/1/2019 - 3/31/2020 |
84929
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 EXP YTAHP 2020 | Issued | $801,476 | 4/1/2020 - 3/31/2021 |
CR-344089
![]() |
Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 2007-398-00 EXP YTAHP 2021 | Pending | $801,476 | 4/1/2021 - 3/31/2022 |
Annual Progress Reports | |
---|---|
Expected (since FY2004): | 32 |
Completed: | 22 |
On time: | 22 |
Status Reports | |
---|---|
Completed: | 172 |
On time: | 90 |
Avg Days Late: | 22 |
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 |
429 REL 27 | 429 REL 28 | PI 200300100 MANASTASH CREEK CONSOLIDATED DIVERSION PROJECT | Fishpro, Inc. | 04/2004 | 04/2004 | History | 6 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 7 | 71.43% | 0 |
23380 REL 4 | 23380 REL 6, 54966 | 2003-001-00 CAP MANASTASH FINAL DESIGN/CONST. MGMT | HDR Constructors, Inc. | 06/2006 | 06/2006 | Closed | 31 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 100.00% | 4 |
23380 REL 2 | 2003-01-00 EXP MANASTASH PERMITTING SUPPORT | Fishpro, Inc. | 07/2006 | 07/2006 | History | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0.00% | 0 | |
BPA-005559 | Land Acquisition costs | Bonneville Power Administration | 10/2008 | 10/2008 | Active | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Project Totals | 205 | 400 | 18 | 2 | 149 | 569 | 73.46% | 120 |
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 |
11926 | 24722, 30496 | 2002-025-01 YAKIMA TRIBUTARY ACCESS & HABITAT PROGRAM PHASE 2 | Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 10/2002 | 10/2002 | History | 7 | 56 | 1 | 0 | 21 | 78 | 73.08% | 8 |
BPA-011260 | FY05 Land Acquisition | Bonneville Power Administration | 10/2004 | 10/2004 | Active | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
30495 | 2002-025-01 EXP YAKIMA TRIBUTARY ACCESS AND HABITAT PROJECT | Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 10/2006 | 10/2006 | History | 2 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 100.00% | 0 | |
Project Totals | 205 | 400 | 18 | 2 | 149 | 569 | 73.46% | 120 |
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-003324 | Realty Support for ROW Acquisition | Bonneville Power Administration | 10/2006 | 10/2006 | Active | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
32463 | 37460, 42079, 46802, 52299, 56617, 60456, 64516, 68444 | 200739800 CAP YAKIMA TRIB/PASS&FLOW- YTAHP | Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 04/2007 | 04/2007 | Closed | 36 | 107 | 0 | 0 | 62 | 169 | 63.31% | 96 |
32462 | 37461, 42458, 46861, 51799, 56682, 60457, 64515, 68714, 71584, 75738, 78789, 81849, 84929 | 200739800 EXP YAKIMA TRIB/PASS&FLOW - YTAHP | Washington Resource Conservation and Development | 04/2007 | 04/2007 | Pending | 55 | 146 | 17 | 2 | 50 | 215 | 75.81% | 10 |
35145 | 44291, 54283 | 200739800 EXP MANASTASH FLOW ENHANCEMENT | Kittitas County Conservation District | 09/2007 | 09/2007 | Closed | 20 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 100.00% | 1 |
35408 | 45233, 58058 | 200739800 CAP MANASTASH FLOW ENHANCEMENT | Kittitas County Conservation District | 09/2007 | 09/2007 | Closed | 26 | 39 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 51 | 76.47% | 1 |
BPA-004327 | Realty Support for ROW Acquisition | Bonneville Power Administration | 10/2008 | 10/2008 | Active | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
BPA-004328 | Realty Support for ROW acquisition | Bonneville Power Administration | 10/2008 | 10/2008 | Active | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
41195 | 2007-398-00 CAP MANASTASH SCREEN FABRICATION - WDFW | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) | 02/2009 | 02/2009 | Closed | 9 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 100.00% | 0 | |
BPA-005762 | Land & realty svcs | Bonneville Power Administration | 10/2009 | 10/2009 | Active | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
BPA-005763 | Realty Svcs | Bonneville Power Administration | 10/2009 | 10/2009 | Active | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
BPA-005425 | TBL Land Support | Bonneville Power Administration | 10/2010 | 10/2010 | Active | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
57921 | 2007-398-00 CAP YAKIMA B TRIB/PASS & FLOW-CAP | HDR Constructors, Inc. | 07/2012 | 07/2012 | Closed | 4 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 100.00% | 0 | |
Project Totals | 205 | 400 | 18 | 2 | 149 | 569 | 73.46% | 120 |
Assessment Number: | 2007-398-00-NPCC-20131126 |
---|---|
Project: | 2007-398-00 - Yakima Basinwide Tributary Passage and Flow |
Review: | 2013 Geographic Category Review |
Proposal: | GEOREV-2007-398-00 |
Proposal State: | Pending BPA Response |
Approved Date: | 11/5/2013 |
Recommendation: | Implement with Conditions |
Comments: | Implement through FY 2018. See Programmatic Issue and Recommendation A for effectiveness monitoring. |
Conditions: | |
Council Condition #1 Programmatic Issue: A. Implement Monitoring, and Evaluation at a Regional Scale—See Programmatic Issue and Recommendation A for effectiveness monitoring. |
Assessment Number: | 2007-398-00-ISRP-20130610 |
---|---|
Project: | 2007-398-00 - Yakima Basinwide Tributary Passage and Flow |
Review: | 2013 Geographic Category Review |
Proposal Number: | GEOREV-2007-398-00 |
Completed Date: | 6/11/2013 |
Final Round ISRP Date: | 6/10/2013 |
Final Round ISRP Rating: | Meets Scientific Review Criteria |
Final Round ISRP Comment: | |
This project is well done, especially with their efforts to build and maintain a team of partners from many agencies and groups. As an example of the type of effort, members of the team meet monthly to ensure that all members are aware of impending work, accomplishments, identify special needs, and discuss emerging issues. Additionally, the team has had discussions about their efforts in light of climate change and has discussed options. We commend the personnel on their work and suggest this project could be used as an example for other projects. 1. Purpose: Significance to Regional Programs, Technical Background, and Objectives The sponsors clearly described the significance of their efforts relative to regional programs such as the 2009 Fish and Wildlife Program, the 2008 BiOp, and the Yakima Subbasin Plan. The sponsors also strongly made the point that tributary rearing is, for a number of reasons, a life history pattern more beneficial to salmon and steelhead than is mainstem rearing provided the habitat is of high quality and the out-migrants are not entrained in irrigation systems. The ISRP was pleased to see the sponsor’s use of literature citations to support the association between project activities and potential benefits to fish. This could serve as an example for other habitat projects to follow on the use of simple fish metrics to demonstrate benefits as well as the use of literature citations. This approach helps connect the project work to expected benefits for fishery resources. The five objectives were clearly presented and reasonable. 2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management (Evaluation of Results) The ISRP appreciated the lengthy, extensive presentation of accomplishments. There are detailed discussions of monitoring and assessing benefits to anadromous and resident fishes. The proposal provided good detail and photos for the several examples of completed projects highlighted in this proposal. Since 2003, YTAHP has implemented 133 projects, screened 190 cfs, and added 217 miles of rearing and spawning habitat. The review team offers the following as an example of the team’s use of coordinated adaptive management. When an ISRP team member asked the sponsors about their efforts to prioritize and respond to changes, he was told that field personnel rely heavily on Technical Working Groups (TWG) to help prioritize actions. Currently, TWG are most involved during the engineering phase to help ensure that what happens on the ground will meet needs of the fish and habitat, but because of good working relationships, TWGs are often used. 3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions One of the strengths of this project is its relationship to other entities in the region. The presentation of emerging limiting factors is well done. 4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods The sponsors describe 51 deliverables. The ISRP team was pleased to read the detailed description of work planned and believed this is an indication of team organization. The ISRP also interpreted these descriptions as an indication that there is some acceptance of the program by private landowners. The ISRP would have appreciated some degree of prioritization among the numerous individual sites to be screened or to receive other project actions. It is not clear that all 51 projects can be completed in the funding cycle. Specific comments on protocols and methods described in MonitoringMethods.org The ISRP appreciated the sponsor’s inclusion of fish metrics, such as redds, before and after past actions. |
|
First Round ISRP Date: | 6/10/2013 |
First Round ISRP Rating: | Meets Scientific Review Criteria |
First Round ISRP Comment: | |
This project is well done, especially with their efforts to build and maintain a team of partners from many agencies and groups. As an example of the type of effort, members of the team meet monthly to ensure that all members are aware of impending work, accomplishments, identify special needs, and discuss emerging issues. Additionally, the team has had discussions about their efforts in light of climate change and has discussed options. We commend the personnel on their work and suggest this project could be used as an example for other projects. 1. Purpose: Significance to Regional Programs, Technical Background, and Objectives The sponsors clearly described the significance of their efforts relative to regional programs such as the 2009 Fish and Wildlife Program, the 2008 BiOp, and the Yakima Subbasin Plan. The sponsors also strongly made the point that tributary rearing is, for a number of reasons, a life history pattern more beneficial to salmon and steelhead than is mainstem rearing provided the habitat is of high quality and the out-migrants are not entrained in irrigation systems. The ISRP was pleased to see the sponsor’s use of literature citations to support the association between project activities and potential benefits to fish. This could serve as an example for other habitat projects to follow on the use of simple fish metrics to demonstrate benefits as well as the use of literature citations. This approach helps connect the project work to expected benefits for fishery resources. The five objectives were clearly presented and reasonable. 2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management (Evaluation of Results) The ISRP appreciated the lengthy, extensive presentation of accomplishments. There are detailed discussions of monitoring and assessing benefits to anadromous and resident fishes. The proposal provided good detail and photos for the several examples of completed projects highlighted in this proposal. Since 2003, YTAHP has implemented 133 projects, screened 190 cfs, and added 217 miles of rearing and spawning habitat. The review team offers the following as an example of the team’s use of coordinated adaptive management. When an ISRP team member asked the sponsors about their efforts to prioritize and respond to changes, he was told that field personnel rely heavily on Technical Working Groups (TWG) to help prioritize actions. Currently, TWG are most involved during the engineering phase to help ensure that what happens on the ground will meet needs of the fish and habitat, but because of good working relationships, TWGs are often used. 3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions One of the strengths of this project is its relationship to other entities in the region. The presentation of emerging limiting factors is well done. 4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods The sponsors describe 51 deliverables. The ISRP team was pleased to read the detailed description of work planned and believed this is an indication of team organization. The ISRP also interpreted these descriptions as an indication that there is some acceptance of the program by private landowners. The ISRP would have appreciated some degree of prioritization among the numerous individual sites to be screened or to receive other project actions. It is not clear that all 51 projects can be completed in the funding cycle. Specific comments on protocols and methods described in MonitoringMethods.org The ISRP appreciated the sponsor’s inclusion of fish metrics, such as redds, before and after past actions. Modified by Dal Marsters on 6/11/2013 1:22:56 PM. |
|
Documentation Links: |
|
Assessment Number: | 2002-025-01-NPCC-20090924 |
---|---|
Project: | 2002-025-01 - Yakima Tributary Access and Habitat Program (YTAHP) |
Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
Approved Date: | 10/23/2006 |
Recommendation: | Fund |
Comments: | ISRP fundable (qualified): Programmatic Issue: habitat m&e. See decision memo discussion. On BPA's list of possible capital project. Request restoration of expense funds through the within-year request process to implement projects. |
Assessment Number: | 2003-001-00-NPCC-20090924 |
---|---|
Project: | 2003-001-00 - Manastash Creek Fish Passage and Screening |
Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
Approved Date: | 10/23/2006 |
Recommendation: | Fund |
Comments: |
Assessment Number: | 2007-020-00-NPCC-20090924 |
---|---|
Project: | 2007-020-00 - Manastash Instream Flow Enhanc |
Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
Approved Date: | 10/23/2006 |
Recommendation: | Fund |
Comments: | Capital: On BPA's list of possible capital project. Need to determine capital elements. ISRP not fundable (qualified): habitat m&e programmatic issue. See decision memo discussion. Expense: ISRP not fundable (qualified): programmatic habitat m&e issue, see decision memo discussion. Fund from the Water/land brokerage if possible. If it does get funded through the water/land brokerage, then funding should go to 200300100. Request restoration of expense funds through the within-year request process to implement projects. No capital component. |
Assessment Number: | 2002-025-01-ISRP-20060831 |
---|---|
Project: | 2002-025-01 - Yakima Tributary Access and Habitat Program (YTAHP) |
Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
Completed Date: | 8/31/2006 |
Final Round ISRP Date: | None |
Final Round ISRP Rating: | Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified) |
Final Round ISRP Comment: | |
This project is in its early years and has the potential to produce some valuable information to guide further projects. The sponsors provided a good summary of passage work. However, there was no effort made in the proposal to translate the structural changes being made in these tributaries into biological changes and the project proposal did not contain an adequate description of benefits to fish populations. The response was very thin in terms of realized or potential benefits to fish. The sponsors are referred to Marmorek et al (2004) (see below) for specific information and methods to assess effectiveness of screening in the Yakima River basin. Reporting of past results was diffused throughout the narrative.
The sponsors concurred with the ISRP that M&E is needed and a newly created Monitoring Plan (submitted to BPA last year) was included in the response. In the response they state that in the near future empirical data will be available to show actual benefits to steelhead and other fish species. However, the commitment to monitoring for benefits to fish still appears tentative. Statements in the response such as, "As long as project sites provide a fish friendly environment, habitat improvements are maintained, and the structures are functioning as intended and meeting the needs of water users/landowners/operators, projects will be considered successful." Another statement, "It is generally assumed that removal of fish passage barriers and correctly designed fish passage structures leads to reestablished access for salmonids" indicates that the sponsors need to be encouraged to include biologically oriented monitoring in addition to engineering indicators of success. One part of the monitoring plan will focus on selected tributaries, which harks to an index stream approach rather than the highly regarded probabilistic approach. Guidance may be required to make sure the proponents use appropriate monitoring methods. Perhaps there is scope to use the Yakima Tributary Access and Habitat Program as a demonstration project to develop and use realistic and cost-effective monitoring protocols that could be used elsewhere in the Columbia River Basin. This Fundable recommendation is Qualified to indicate that a better monitoring protocol should be developed so project staff can report on fish results. In developing the monitoring design they should consider a probabilistic design, rather than an index stream approach. The ISRP will look for better reporting in the next review. This monitoring can be done through another agency/entity, but the sponsors should describe those efforts and report the results. Reference: Marmorek et al 2004. A Multiple Watershed Approach to Assessing the Effects of Habitat Restoration Actions on Anadromous and Resident Fish Populations. 420 p. (efw.bpa.gov/publications/H00012481-1.pdf). |
|
Documentation Links: |
|
Assessment Number: | 2003-001-00-ISRP-20060831 |
---|---|
Project: | 2003-001-00 - Manastash Creek Fish Passage and Screening |
Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
Completed Date: | 8/31/2006 |
Final Round ISRP Date: | None |
Final Round ISRP Rating: | Does Not Meet Scientific Review Criteria |
Final Round ISRP Comment: | |
This proposal and its companion 20070200 are viewed by the ISRP as not fundable (Qualified) because these two projects have a history of the sponsor failing to give evidence of fish benefits. This "Not fundable" recommendation is qualified because, in general, adding flow and removing barriers and screening diversion have the potential to be beneficial to fish populations. However, the response by the sponsors did not provide an adequate reply to the ISRP's concerns:
(a) Please provide a brief summary of current use of the project area by steelhead and resident trout species. What specific benefits for them are anticipated as a result of this project?(b) There is inadequate mention of monitoring and evaluation. It is not likely that project personnel would provide the M&E, but they should describe coverage from other projects or agencies. The proponents should be thinking about baseline biological studies to measure project effectiveness. (c) This proposal is directly related to the currently considered proposal 200702000 to increase flow, which would complement the screening work. To what extent do achieving substantial benefits to fish depend upon both issues (screening and flow enhancement) being addressed? The sponsors note that coordination with Yakima Species Interaction Study, for long-term rainbow trout monitoring, will be essential to measure project effectiveness. However, not enough information is presented to determine the nature of any coordination. The sponsors assert that "correction of the passage barriers would allow access for both juvenile and adult upstream migration of summer steelhead, rainbow trout and other resident species to an additional 10 miles of habitat above the uppermost diversion during most of the year," but there are no plans to monitor for this occurrence. The engineering aspects of the project are well described but the link to biological response is lacking. It is not possible for reviewers to assess the extent to which the project will benefit anadromous fish. The ISRP was expecting a summary of how the recovered habitat would be used (e.g., what life history stages would use?). Without this kind of information the proposal retains the characteristics of a strictly engineering/hydrology project, and the ISRP has to take it on faith that there will be a benefit to fish. A revised narrative was provided that appeared to contain more detail on construction scope and scheduling. The issue of the extent to which this project will benefit fish without implementation of the instream flow enhancement (in the new, separate proposal 200702000) was not addressed. |
|
Documentation Links: |
|
Assessment Number: | 2007-020-00-ISRP-20060831 |
---|---|
Project: | 2007-020-00 - Manastash Instream Flow Enhanc |
Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
Completed Date: | 8/31/2006 |
Final Round ISRP Date: | None |
Final Round ISRP Rating: | Does Not Meet Scientific Review Criteria |
Final Round ISRP Comment: | |
The link with project 200300100 is made clearer in the response and the sequential nature of the two efforts (screening followed by flow enhancement) makes sense, but when this proposal and project 200300100 are considered together the ISRP maintains its concern that the projected benefits to the target fish species of the irrigation diversion screening and the experimental flow pulse are inadequately monitored. Therefore, this proposal is ranked Not Fundable because of its weak monitoring and evaluation section; however, the proposal does rate a "Qualified" because adding flow, removing barriers, and screening diversions are all actions that have the potential to be beneficial to fish populations. We encourage the project sponsors to re-submit the two proposals (next time combined) with a stronger biological monitoring component at the next solicitation.
The response addressed some of the ISRP's questions and project sponsors have demonstrated a willingness to alter their proposal in a beneficial way. In particular, their willingness to approach the flow pulse as an experiment is worthwhile, although the revision provides no more specific details about how the experiment would be conducted than the original proposal (e.g., what would be the control situation?). Actual experimental design is left to future planning. Assurances that that the conserved water would be dedicated to increasing stream flow is a critical item that was not well described in the initial proposal but was made clear in the response. There was a good faith effort to estimate the surface flow savings for Manastash Creek, although admittedly the estimate was somewhat crude. It was helpful that the project sponsors stated all additional flow would be dedicated to the WDOE's water trust program. The response does describe water quality monitoring, but it does not address the ISRP's strong suggestion that steelhead use of the watershed be studied in order to help evaluate the pulse flow treatment. We believe this should be a critical part of the work and encourage the sponsors to work with other stakeholders to ensure that an effective steelhead monitoring program is formulated. Although we do not recommend the project for funding at this time, we believe it can be successfully accomplished as an adaptive management experiment with clear treatments and controls coupled with development of an adequate biological monitoring effort. |
|
Documentation Links: |
|
Assessment Number: | 2002-025-01-INLIEU-20090521 |
---|---|
Project Number: | 2002-025-01 |
Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
Completed Date: | 10/6/2006 |
In Lieu Rating: | Problems May Exist |
Cost Share Rating: | 2 - May be reasonable |
Comment: | Multiple tributary fish passage related activities; other entities may be authorized required; recommend confirming that screening criteria or other mechanism in place to ensure specific projects are not funded by BPA when another entity already required to perform. |
Assessment Number: | 2003-001-00-INLIEU-20090521 |
---|---|
Project Number: | 2003-001-00 |
Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
Completed Date: | 10/6/2006 |
In Lieu Rating: | Problems May Exist |
Cost Share Rating: | 2 - May be reasonable |
Comment: | Irrigation division screening; assuming that irrigation owners/diverters not already required to screen, cost share appears reasonable. |
Assessment Number: | 2007-020-00-INLIEU-20090521 |
---|---|
Project Number: | 2007-020-00 |
Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
Completed Date: | 10/6/2006 |
In Lieu Rating: | No Problems Exist |
Cost Share Rating: | None |
Comment: | Close piping of irrigation, other efficiencies (assuming irrigators not required to do). |
Assessment Number: | 2007-398-00-CAPITAL-20090618 |
---|---|
Project Number: | 2007-398-00 |
Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
Completed Date: | 11/16/2007 |
Capital Rating: | Qualifies for Capital Funding |
Capital Asset Category: | Fish Passage Improvement |
Comment: | This project is a result of combining projects: 2002-025-01 Yakima Tributary Access & Habitat Program; 2003-001-00 Manastash Creek passage & Screening; and 2007-020-00 Manastash Instream Flow Enhancement. Capital funding approval submitted by BPA COTR. The COTR, COTR's Manager and BPA Accountant certified that the request meets the BPA F&W capital policy and is approved for capital funding (if capital funds are available). Based on civil engineers assessment, rock weirs are designed for 100-year floods and at least 20-year duration. |
Assessment Number: | 2002-025-01-CAPITAL-20090618 |
---|---|
Project Number: | 2002-025-01 |
Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
Completed Date: | 2/27/2007 |
Capital Rating: | Does Not Qualify for Capital Funding |
Capital Asset Category: | None |
Comment: | None |
Assessment Number: | 2003-001-00-CAPITAL-20090618 |
---|---|
Project Number: | 2003-001-00 |
Review: | FY07-09 Solicitation Review |
Completed Date: | 2/27/2007 |
Capital Rating: | Does Not Qualify for Capital Funding |
Capital Asset Category: | None |
Comment: | None |
Assessment Number: | 2007-020-00-CAPITAL-20090618 |
---|---|
Project Number: | 2007-020-00 |
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: |
This project Merged From 2002-025-01 effective on 7/2/2007 Relationship Description: Move all work and budgets from projects 2002-025-01, 2003-001-00 and 2007-020-00 into project 2007-398-00. This project Merged From 2003-001-00 effective on 7/2/2007 Relationship Description: Move all work and budgets from projects 2002-025-01, 2003-001-00 and 2007-020-00 into project 2007-398-00. This project Merged From 2007-020-00 effective on 7/2/2007 Relationship Description: Move all work and budgets from projects 2002-025-01, 2003-001-00 and 2007-020-00 into project 2007-398-00. |
---|
Name | Role | Organization |
---|---|---|
Anna Lael | Project Lead | Kittitas County Conservation District |
Sherry Swanson | Technical Contact | Kittitas County Conservation District |
Dave Myra (Inactive) | Project Lead | Washington Resource Conservation and Development |
Sherry Jeffery | Project Lead | HDR Engineering, Inc. |
Ed Donahue (Inactive) | Supervisor | Fishpro, Inc. |
Peter Lofy | Supervisor | Bonneville Power Administration |
Michael Garello | Project Lead | Fishpro, Inc. |
Michael Milstein (Inactive) | Interested Party | Bonneville Power Administration |
Molly Moreland (Inactive) | Interested Party | Bonneville Power Administration |
John Tyler | Interested Party | Bonneville Power Administration |
Sarah Bettmann | Administrative Contact | HDR Constructors, Inc. |
Brian Miller | Project Lead | Washington Resource Conservation and Development |
Michelle O'Malley | Project Manager | Bonneville Power Administration |
Mark Crowley | Technical Contact | Kittitas County Conservation District |
Brenda Aguirre | Env. Compliance Lead | Bonneville Power Administration |