This is a good, detailed proposal. The ISRP benefitted from the site visit and discussions with project sponsors, including key members of the ISEMP monitoring effort. The Lemhi habitat restoration program has a strategy for addressing previously identified limiting factors of water flow and access to habitat, improving salmonid habitat, and implementing a monitoring program (ISEMP, CHaMP, IMW) for documenting progress. The program demonstrates broad coordination among stakeholders, and it has a good working relationship with private property owners, based on observations during our site visit, and these relationships are essential for improving salmon habitat. Although not discussed in the proposal, the ISRP was encouraged by the use of Hayden Creek as a control stream when evaluating the response of salmonids to the reconnection of a number of disconnected tributaries to the mainstem Lemhi River. Given that many salmonids seem to emigrate from the Lemhi River prior to winter, the ISRP encourages the program to identify and evaluate overwintering habitat, which is an important life stage for maintaining survival. Overall, the proposal and information gained at the site visit provide an adequate response to the previous review by the ISRP (ISRP 2011-22).

The comments below do not require a response by the sponsors. We provide these comments so that the sponsors may improve subsequent reports and proposals.

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

The regional significance and background to this Accord project are adequately described. The physical setting, nature of the problem, and an approach to a solution is clearly presented. Three habitat-related objectives and one administrative objective are given. The habitat projects aim to improve passage, to improve riparian and aquatic habitat, and to increase and protect flow. Specificity of the objectives is shown in 32 detailed deliverables. Habitat projects implemented by this project were selected by project 2007-394-00, currently also under ISRP review. Projects selected for implementation under 2007-072-00 were previously vetted by the USBWP Technical Team and received support from the USBWP Advisory Committee. Nevertheless, the proposal provided rational for the habitat projects. The ISRP recognizes that planning and coordination efforts were intentionally split from implementation efforts, but this approach led to some redundancy and confusion.

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

This project merges two former projects with the renamed 2007-394-00, and these projects have been collectively restoring habitat in the Lemhi River since 1994 as the Model Watershed Program. In the problem statement, and elsewhere, the sponsor identifies that there are 2,950 points of water diversion in the Lemhi watershed and 191 stream-alteration permits recorded. Local staff stated a much lower number of water diversions at the site visit. A long list of completed projects since 2009 is provided along with a summary statement that estimation of fish response is difficult to measure but is under IDFG and NOAA responsibility through ISEMP and IMW activities. The sponsors noted that there has been some positive response of salmonids to the reconnection of streams. The Lemhi program appears to have a decent monitoring program in place for adults and juveniles, based on discussions during the site visit, and we look forward to seeing details on how salmonids are responding to the habitat projects throughout the Lemhi basin. Presently, there is no supplementation with hatchery fish and reportedly few hatchery strays, therefore the response of naturally-produced salmonids to habitat changes will be easier to detect.

This project merges two former projects with the renamed 2007-394-00, and these projects have been collectively restoring habitat in the Lemhi River since 1994 as the Model Watershed Program. The proposal provides a long table of BPA funded projects implemented since 2009. These projects addressed key limiting factors for salmonids such as flow, fish passage, entrainment, riparian condition, and habitat complexity. Quantitative results of the habitat improvements were stated in the table. These projects and proposed projects have improved habitat quantity and quality.

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

The proposal states that this project implements projects identified by project 2007-394-00, but the proposal also describes how projects are prioritized to address factors that limit salmonids. Water flow is a key limiting factor in this region, and the proposal addressed the implications of a changing climate on flow.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Most of the proposed work is directed toward active in stream construction to address anthropogenic disturbance. There are 31 action deliverables and one administrative deliverable. Implementation of these 31 deliverables is a large undertaking, and it will be an important accomplishment. The proposal, in conjunction with the site visit, demonstrates that the sponsors have a strategy for improving salmonid habitat quantity and quality.

This is a good, detailed proposal. The ISRP benefitted from the site visit and discussions with project sponsors, including key members of the ISEMP monitoring effort. The Lemhi habitat restoration program has a strategy for addressing previously identified limiting factors of water flow and access to habitat, improving salmonid habitat, and implementing a monitoring program (ISEMP, CHaMP, IMW) for documenting progress. The program demonstrates broad coordination among stakeholders, and it has a good working relationship with private property owners, based on observations during our site visit, and these relationships are essential for improving salmon habitat. Although not discussed in the proposal, the ISRP was encouraged by the use of Hayden Creek as a control stream when evaluating the response of salmonids to the reconnection of a number of disconnected tributaries to the mainstem Lemhi River. Given that many salmonids seem to emigrate from the Lemhi River prior to winter, the ISRP encourages the program to identify and evaluate overwintering habitat, which is an important life stage for maintaining survival. Overall, the proposal and information gained at the site visit provide an adequate response to the previous review by the ISRP (ISRP 2011-22).

The comments below do not require a response by the sponsors. We provide these comments so that the sponsors may improve subsequent reports and proposals.

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

The regional significance and background to this Accord project are adequately described. The physical setting, nature of the problem, and an approach to a solution is clearly presented. Three habitat-related objectives and one administrative objective are given. The habitat projects aim to improve passage, to improve riparian and aquatic habitat, and to increase and protect flow. Specificity of the objectives is shown in 32 detailed deliverables. Habitat projects implemented by this project were selected by project 2007-394-00, currently also under ISRP review. Projects selected for implementation under 2007-072-00 were previously vetted by the USBWP Technical Team and received support from the USBWP Advisory Committee. Nevertheless, the proposal provided rational for the habitat projects. The ISRP recognizes that planning and coordination efforts were intentionally split from implementation efforts, but this approach led to some redundancy and confusion.

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

This project merges two former projects with the renamed 2007-394-00, and these projects have been collectively restoring habitat in the Lemhi River since 1994 as the Model Watershed Program. In the problem statement, and elsewhere, the sponsor identifies that there are 2,950 points of water diversion in the Lemhi watershed and 191 stream-alteration permits recorded. Local staff stated a much lower number of water diversions at the site visit. A long list of completed projects since 2009 is provided along with a summary statement that estimation of fish response is difficult to measure but is under IDFG and NOAA responsibility through ISEMP and IMW activities. The sponsors noted that there has been some positive response of salmonids to the reconnection of streams. The Lemhi program appears to have a decent monitoring program in place for adults and juveniles, based on discussions during the site visit, and we look forward to seeing details on how salmonids are responding to the habitat projects throughout the Lemhi basin. Presently, there is no supplementation with hatchery fish and reportedly few hatchery strays, therefore the response of naturally-produced salmonids to habitat changes will be easier to detect.

This project merges two former projects with the renamed 2007-394-00, and these projects have been collectively restoring habitat in the Lemhi River since 1994 as the Model Watershed Program. The proposal provides a long table of BPA funded projects implemented since 2009. These projects addressed key limiting factors for salmonids such as flow, fish passage, entrainment, riparian condition, and habitat complexity. Quantitative results of the habitat improvements were stated in the table. These projects and proposed projects have improved habitat quantity and quality.

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

The proposal states that this project implements projects identified by project 2007-394-00, but the proposal also describes how projects are prioritized to address factors that limit salmonids. Water flow is a key limiting factor in this region, and the proposal addressed the implications of a changing climate on flow.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Most of the proposed work is directed toward active in stream construction to address anthropogenic disturbance. There are 31 action deliverables and one administrative deliverable. Implementation of these 31 deliverables is a large undertaking, and it will be an important accomplishment. The proposal, in conjunction with the site visit, demonstrates that the sponsors have a strategy for improving salmonid habitat quantity and quality.