Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 2010-077-00 - Tucannon River Programmatic Habitat Project Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 2010-077-00 - Tucannon River Programmatic Habitat Project
Project Number:
2010-077-00
Title:
Tucannon River Programmatic Habitat Project
Summary:
Work order: 00270089 task 01

Independent assessments have concluded that the following habitat factors are the most significant limiting factors for spring Chinook salmon in the Tucannon River:
• Elevated fine sediment • Elevated water temperature • Lack of channel complexity • Lack of floodplain connectivity • Reduced streamflow

Objectives of this proposal:
OBJ-1: Increase riparian function to 75% of maximum: Restore and protect riparian species composition and density to improve canopy cover, riparian area (acreage) and riparian structure.
OBJ-2: Increase large woody debris to 2 or more pieces per channel width: Add LWD to increase pool quantity and quality, promote development of side channel and backwater habitat and streambed aggradation to increase floodplain connectivity.
OBJ-3: Increase pool frequency to 15% of stream area: The desired outcome of this objective is to increase stream depth, habitat complexity, substrate sorting, and promote stable pool-out habitat for spawning.
OBJ-4: Reduce channel confinement/increase floodplain connectivity to at least 25% of river length: The desired outcome of this objective is improved channel function, increased stream length and side channel habitat, restored hyporheic conditions and riparian survival.
OBJ-5: Reduce maximum daily water temperature so that it does not exceed 72F at confluence of Pataha Creek (RM 11.8): The outcome of this objective is to improve water temperature, increase useable habitat, and expand the geographic range of spring Chinook.
OBJ-6: Decrease substrate embeddedness to 20% in all reaches above confluence of Pataha Creek (RM 11.8): The outcome of this objective is to increase egg survival, improve invertebrate species diversity and abundance, and increase interstitial spaces.
Proponent Orgs:
Snake River Salmon Recovery Board (Non-Profit)
Starting FY:
2011
Ending FY:
2024
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Columbia Plateau Tucannon 100.00%
Purpose:
Habitat
Emphasis:
Restoration/Protection
Focal Species:
Chinook - Mid-Columbia River Spring ESU
Chinook - Snake River Fall ESU
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer ESU
Freshwater Mussels
Lamprey, Pacific
Lamprey, River
Steelhead - Middle Columbia River DPS
Steelhead - Snake River DPS
Trout, Bull
Trout, Rainbow
Whitefish, Mountain
Wildlife
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Special:
None
BiOp Association:
FCRPS 2008 – view list of FCRPS 2008 BiOp Actions

Tributary Habitat Implementation 2010 to 2018

Contract(s):

74314 REL 85

Dimensions: 1832 x 1377

Contract(s):

74314 REL 85

Dimensions: 2383 x 1532

Contract(s):

74314 REL 85

Dimensions: 2099 x 1561

Contract(s):

74314 REL 85

Dimensions: 1963 x 854

Contract(s):

74314 REL 85

Dimensions: 1742 x 1350

Contract(s):

74314 REL 85

Dimensions: 1739 x 1428

Contract(s):

74314 REL 85

Dimensions: 1738 x 1488

Contract(s):

74314 REL 85

Dimensions: 2264 x 1440

Contract(s):

74314 REL 85

Dimensions: 1798 x 1522

Contract(s):

74314 REL 85

Dimensions: 2328 x 1497

Contract(s):

84042 REL 24

Dimensions: 2048 x 1536

Contract(s):

84042 REL 24

Dimensions: 2048 x 1536


Summary of Budgets

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

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2022 - FY2024)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2022 Expense $1,368,570 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) SOY Transfers Over $1M 06/04/2021
FY2023 Expense $1,368,570 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY23 SOY Budget Upload 06/01/2022

Pending Budget Decision?  Yes


Actual Project Cost Share

Current Fiscal Year — 2023   DRAFT
Cost Share Partner Total Proposed Contribution Total Confirmed Contribution
Washington State Conservation Commission $375,000
Salmon Recovery Funding Board $399,000
Total $0 $774,000
Previous Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year Total Contributions % of Budget
2022 $478,076 26%
2021 $551,932 15%
2020 $345,378 20%
2019 $275,059 17%
2018 $105,697 7%
2017 $726,282 35%
2016 $413,243 23%
2015 $448,043 25%
2014 $476,043 25%
2013 $330,043 21%
2012 $621,965 33%
2011 $4,092 1%

Contracts

The table below contains contracts with the following statuses: Active, Closed, Complete, History, Issued.
* "Total Contracted Amount" column includes contracted amount from both capital and expense components of the contract.
Expense Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Total Contracted Amount Dates
51166 SOW Walla Walla Community College 201007700 EXP TUCANNON RVR PROGRAMMATIC HABITAT Closed $70,217 1/28/2011 - 1/31/2012
54636 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP WDFW LWD & BLDG REMOVAL IN THE TUCANNON Closed $492,778 9/15/2011 - 9/30/2012
56233 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON RVR PROGRAMMATIC HABITAT Closed $137,720 2/1/2012 - 1/31/2013
58777 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 14) REMOVE HARD BANK & ADD WOOD Closed $1,057,795 9/16/2012 - 12/31/2014
58975 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 15) DESIGN - CHANNEL COMPLEXITY Closed $72,199 9/25/2012 - 12/31/2013
60562 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PARENT) HABITAT PROGRAM: ADMIN & MANAGE Closed $168,522 2/1/2013 - 3/31/2014
39881 REL 4 SOW Plateau Archaeological Investigations, LLC TUCANNON AREA 14 PROJECT Closed $4,148 3/29/2013 - 5/10/2013
62642 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 3) BUILD - ADD LWD AND BOULDERS Closed $494,440 9/16/2013 - 12/31/2014
62573 SOW Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 15) BUILD - CHANNEL COMPLEXITY Closed $616,917 9/16/2013 - 12/31/2014
63605 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 1) BUILD - HABITAT COMPLEXITY Closed $400,000 11/1/2013 - 12/31/2014
64003 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 11) LWD: DESIGN-SITE PREP-MATERIAL Closed $347,262 1/1/2014 - 3/31/2015
64018 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 24) DESIGN - FUNCTION & COMPLEXITY Closed $78,071 1/1/2014 - 12/31/2014
65249 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PARENT) HABITAT PROGRAM: ADMIN & MANAGE Closed $155,213 4/1/2014 - 3/31/2015
65148 SOW Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 15) PHASE II BUILD: HAB COMPLEXITY Closed $481,699 4/1/2014 - 3/31/2016
66844 SOW Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 24) BUILD: FUNCTION AND COMPLEXITY Closed $677,071 10/1/2014 - 3/31/2016
68874 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (WDFW) PA-11 BUILD: ADD LWD & COMPLEXITY Closed $424,653 4/1/2015 - 3/31/2016
68810 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PARENT) HABITAT PROGRAM: ADMIN & MANAGE Closed $203,277 4/1/2015 - 3/31/2016
72042 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PARENT) HABITAT PROGRAM: ADMIN & MANAGE Closed $203,436 4/1/2016 - 3/31/2017
72044 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (WDFW) ADMIN: PA-13 (DESIGN), CONST-PREP Closed $152,765 4/1/2016 - 3/31/2017
72405 SOW Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 2010-077-00 TUCANNON (PA-28) PHASE 1-A: ADD FUNCTION & COMPLEXITY Closed $209,718 5/1/2016 - 4/30/2018
73400 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-17/18) BUILD-I: ADD LWD & COMPLEXITY Closed $1,246,627 8/1/2016 - 7/31/2018
73343 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-6, 8-9) BUILD: ADD LWD & COMPLEXITY Closed $335,472 8/1/2016 - 6/30/2018
75494 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PARENT) HABITAT PROGRAM: ADMIN & MANAGE Closed $187,356 4/1/2017 - 3/31/2018
75493 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (WDFW) ADMIN: PA 6-9 MANAGE PA-13 DESIGN Closed $149,180 4/1/2017 - 6/30/2018
76992 SOW Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-28) PHASE III: FUNCTION & COMPLEXITY Closed $679,060 9/1/2017 - 3/31/2020
78510 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PARENT) HABITAT PROGRAM: ADMIN & MANAGE Closed $174,943 4/1/2018 - 3/31/2019
73982 REL 42 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-3) SUPPLEMENT LWD AND ADD COMPLEXITY Issued $715,450 4/1/2018 - 10/31/2020
74314 REL 52 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (WDFW) ADMIN: (PA-13) DESIGN & PRE-CONST Closed $52,341 9/16/2018 - 3/31/2019
81783 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PARENT) HABITAT PROGRAM: ADMIN & MANAGE Closed $171,988 4/1/2019 - 3/31/2020
74314 REL 65 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (WDFW) ADMIN: (PA-13) DESIGN & PRE-CONST Closed $81,578 4/1/2019 - 3/31/2020
74314 REL 85 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-13) PHASE I: FUNCTION AND COMPLEXITY Closed $1,115,000 9/16/2019 - 12/31/2022
73982 REL 98 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-27/28.1): ADD FUNCTION & COMPLEXITY Closed $827,466 3/1/2020 - 9/30/2022
84038 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PARENT) HABITAT PROGRAM: ADMIN & MANAGE Closed $189,815 4/1/2020 - 3/31/2021
74314 REL 96 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (WDFW) ADMIN: PRGRM SUPRT & MANAGE PA-13 Closed $94,278 4/1/2020 - 9/30/2021
84836 SOW Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-26) PHASE II: ADD FUNCTION & COMPLEX Issued $375,360 4/1/2020 - 9/30/2022
86153 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON WATERSHED HABITAT LIDAR DATA ACQUISITION Closed $182,785 9/16/2020 - 3/15/2022
86820 SOW Tri-State Steelheaders 2010-077-00 EXP MILL CREEK PASSAGE: CONCRETE PANELS (FABRICATION) Issued $850,000 1/1/2021 - 6/30/2023
73982 REL 111 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-17) PHASE I: FUNCTION & COMPLEXITY Issued $15,850 4/1/2021 - 9/30/2022
73982 REL 132 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-27/28) PHASE I-B: CONNECT FLOODPLAIN Issued $928,988 4/1/2021 - 9/30/2023
87504 SOW Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-26) PHASE II-B FUNCTION & COMPLEXITY Closed $227,735 4/1/2021 - 9/30/2022
87213 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PARENT) HABITAT PROGRAM: ADMIN & MANAGE Issued $195,970 4/1/2021 - 3/31/2022
74314 REL 151 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (WDFW) ADMIN: WATERSHED PROGRAM SUPPORT Issued $121,875 10/1/2021 - 3/31/2023
74017 REL 100 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (TUMALUM) BUILD: PASSAGE AND COMPLEXITY Issued $215,150 4/1/2022 - 12/31/2023
89977 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PARENT) HABITAT PROGRAM: ADMIN & MANAGE Issued $195,695 4/1/2022 - 3/31/2023
73982 REL 164 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (LAKES): ASSESSMENT & CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS Issued $210,350 6/1/2022 - 9/30/2024
73982 REL 168 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-27/28) PHASE III: CONNECT FLOODPLAIN Issued $625,500 9/1/2022 - 12/31/2024
84042 REL 24 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-13) PHASE II: FLOODPLAIN CONNECTION Issued $485,000 12/1/2022 - 11/30/2024
91598 SOW Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-26) PHASE 3-4: FLOODPLAIN COMPLEXITY Issued $515,000 1/1/2023 - 12/31/2024
84042 REL 34 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (WDFW) ADMIN: WATERSHED PROGRAM SUPPORT Issued $91,025 4/1/2023 - 3/31/2024
92034 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (SRSRB) DEVELOP & MANAGE HABITAT PROGRAM Issued $192,859 4/1/2023 - 3/31/2024
CR-356078 SOW Nez Perce Tribe 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (CUMMINGS CREEK): STRUCTURE & COMPLEXITY Pending $84,686 9/1/2023 - 12/31/2024
CR-364933 SOW Tri-State Steelheaders 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON RIVER PROGRAMMATIC HABITAT Pending $5,000 9/1/2023 - 2/28/2025
CR-343949 SOW Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-15/17) BUILD FLOODPLAIN & COMPLEXITY Pending $710,000 4/1/2024 - 12/31/2025
CR-352740 SOW Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-34) BUILD: FLOODPLAIN AND COMPLEXITY Pending $625,000 4/1/2024 - 12/31/2025
CR-356080 SOW Walla Walla Community College 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (SRSRB) DEVELOP & MANAGE HABITAT PROGRAM Pending $191,345 4/1/2024 - 3/31/2025
CR-356081 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (WDFW) ADMIN: WATERSHED PROGRAM SUPPORT Pending $92,225 4/1/2024 - 3/31/2025
CR-343036 SOW Tri-State Steelheaders 2010-077-00 EXP MILL CREEK (CLINTON TO DIVISION): IMPROVE PASSAGE Pending $0 10/1/2024 - 9/30/2026
CR-343037 SOW Tri-State Steelheaders 2010-077-00 EXP MILL CREEK (DIVISION - ROOSEVELT) IMPROVE PASSAGE Pending $0 10/1/2024 - 9/30/2026



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):42
Completed:37
On time:35
Status Reports
Completed:262
On time:145
Avg Days Late:0

                Count of Contract Deliverables
Earliest Contract Subsequent Contracts Title Contractor Earliest Start Latest End Latest Status Accepted Reports Complete Green Yellow Red Total % Green and Complete Canceled
51166 56233, 60562, 65249, 68810, 72042, 75494, 78510, 81783, 84038, 87213, 89977, 92034 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (SRSRB) DEVELOP & MANAGE HABITAT PROGRAM Walla Walla Community College 01/28/2011 03/31/2024 Issued 49 108 0 0 3 111 97.30% 9
54636 2010-077-00 EXP WDFW LWD & BLDG REMOVAL IN THE TUCANNON Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 09/15/2011 09/30/2012 Closed 4 7 0 0 0 7 100.00% 1
58777 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 14) REMOVE HARD BANK & ADD WOOD Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 09/16/2012 12/31/2014 Closed 9 5 0 0 0 5 100.00% 0
58975 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 15) DESIGN - CHANNEL COMPLEXITY Walla Walla Community College 09/25/2012 12/31/2013 Closed 5 4 0 0 0 4 100.00% 0
62573 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 15) BUILD - CHANNEL COMPLEXITY Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 09/16/2013 12/31/2014 Closed 5 5 0 0 0 5 100.00% 0
62642 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 3) BUILD - ADD LWD AND BOULDERS Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 09/16/2013 12/31/2014 Closed 5 5 0 0 0 5 100.00% 0
63605 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 1) BUILD - HABITAT COMPLEXITY Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 11/01/2013 12/31/2014 Closed 5 5 0 0 0 5 100.00% 0
64018 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 24) DESIGN - FUNCTION & COMPLEXITY Walla Walla Community College 01/01/2014 12/31/2014 Closed 4 3 0 0 0 3 100.00% 0
64003 68874, 72044, 75493, 74314 REL 52, 74314 REL 65, 74314 REL 96, 74314 REL 151, 84042 REL 34 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (WDFW) ADMIN: WATERSHED PROGRAM SUPPORT Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 01/01/2014 03/31/2024 Issued 36 43 0 0 0 43 100.00% 0
65148 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 15) PHASE II BUILD: HAB COMPLEXITY Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 04/01/2014 03/31/2016 Closed 8 7 0 0 0 7 100.00% 0
66844 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (AREA 24) BUILD: FUNCTION AND COMPLEXITY Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 10/01/2014 03/31/2016 Closed 6 7 0 0 0 7 100.00% 0
72405 76992 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-28) PHASE III: FUNCTION & COMPLEXITY Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 05/01/2016 03/31/2020 Closed 19 17 0 0 0 17 100.00% 0
73400 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-17/18) BUILD-I: ADD LWD & COMPLEXITY Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 08/01/2016 07/31/2018 Closed 9 5 0 0 0 5 100.00% 1
73343 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-6, 8-9) BUILD: ADD LWD & COMPLEXITY Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 08/01/2016 06/30/2018 Closed 8 7 0 0 0 7 100.00% 0
73982 REL 42 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-3) SUPPLEMENT LWD AND ADD COMPLEXITY Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 04/01/2018 10/31/2020 Issued 11 7 0 0 0 7 100.00% 6
74314 REL 85 84042 REL 24 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-13) PHASE II: FLOODPLAIN CONNECTION Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 09/16/2019 11/30/2024 Issued 14 8 7 0 0 15 100.00% 0
73982 REL 98 73982 REL 132 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-27/28) PHASE I-B: CONNECT FLOODPLAIN Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 03/01/2020 09/30/2023 Issued 18 10 3 0 0 13 100.00% 0
84836 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-26) PHASE II: ADD FUNCTION & COMPLEX Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 04/01/2020 09/30/2022 Issued 10 8 0 0 0 8 100.00% 0
86153 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON WATERSHED HABITAT LIDAR DATA ACQUISITION Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 09/16/2020 03/15/2022 Closed 6 2 0 0 0 2 100.00% 0
86820 2010-077-00 EXP MILL CREEK PASSAGE: CONCRETE PANELS (FABRICATION) Tri-State Steelheaders 01/01/2021 06/30/2024 Issued 8 1 2 0 0 3 100.00% 0
87504 91598 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-26) PHASE 3-4: FLOODPLAIN COMPLEXITY Columbia Conservation District (SWCD) 04/01/2021 12/31/2024 Issued 7 6 8 0 0 14 100.00% 0
73982 REL 111 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-17) PHASE I: FUNCTION & COMPLEXITY Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 04/01/2021 09/30/2022 Issued 6 1 0 0 0 1 100.00% 7
74017 REL 100 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (TUMALUM) BUILD: PASSAGE AND COMPLEXITY Nez Perce Tribe 04/01/2022 12/31/2023 Issued 4 0 4 1 2 7 57.14% 0
73982 REL 164 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (LAKES): ASSESSMENT & CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 06/01/2022 09/30/2024 Issued 3 0 5 0 0 5 100.00% 0
73982 REL 168 2010-077-00 EXP TUCANNON (PA-27/28) PHASE III: CONNECT FLOODPLAIN Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR) 09/01/2022 12/31/2024 Issued 2 0 8 0 0 8 100.00% 0
Project Totals 261 271 37 1 5 314 98.09% 24


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: 2022 Anadromous Fish Habitat & Hatchery Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 2010-077-00-NPCC-20230316
Project: 2010-077-00 - Tucannon River Programmatic Habitat Project
Review: 2022 Anadromous Fish Habitat & Hatchery Review
Approved Date: 4/15/2022
Recommendation: Implement
Comments: Bonneville and Sponsor to take the review remarks into consideration in project documentation. See Policy Issue III.b.

[Background: See https://www.nwcouncil.org/2021-2022-anadromous-habitat-and-hatchery-review/]

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 2010-077-00-ISRP-20230407
Project: 2010-077-00 - Tucannon River Programmatic Habitat Project
Review: 2022 Anadromous Fish Habitat & Hatchery Review
Completed Date: 4/7/2023
Final Round ISRP Date: 2/10/2022
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria
Final Round ISRP Comment:

In our initial review, we asked the proponents to provide an M&E Matrix to summarize the linkages between implementation and monitoring projects in the subbasins. They provided a thorough summary of M&E efforts in the Tucannon subbasin and linkages between implementation and monitoring projects in their response. They explain their coordination with other partners, the Asotin Creek IMW, development of critical studies, use of prior data, development of HSI with CTUIR, data storage with the CTUIR Centralized Data Management System, and creation of a web map. The response also explains the linkages between the habitat implementation projects, hatchery projects, and monitoring elements for each. The proponents provided five maps that identified the location and type of monitoring throughout the subbasin. In addition, they produced a matrix of the M&E activities in the subbasin for 17 BPA-funded projects, which describes the types of monitoring actions, locations, timing of monitoring, and projects responsible for the monitoring. They also created a table that identifies the M&E actions associated with 27 project areas that are currently ongoing. The table includes information on the biological and physical components that are monitored, the timing of the monitoring, and the project sponsors. Working with their partners, the Tucannon River Programmatic Habitat Project coordinated the development of a thorough and informative summary of M&E activities in their subbasin and the linkages between monitoring and implementation and hatchery projects. The framework should serve as a valuable foundation for their continued collaborative efforts and provides a useful model for other proponents to follow to summarize M&E activities.

The thoughtful response from the proponents on linkages between physical habitat restoration and fish population response, however, highlights a key confounding issue:

“Hatchery management for both spring Chinook and steelhead have recently played an important role in maintaining the populations and in meeting NOAA ESA criteria, but these actions have limited the value and ability to conduct biological monitoring as a response to habitat improvements made through the Program or to continue the work initiated by Crawford (2019).”

It is important for decision-makers to understand that implementing multiple management actions at the same time (changes in hatchery production and habitat restoration) may make it difficult or impossible to separate their individual effects, especially if all hatchery fish are not marked or tagged. In other words, benefits of habitat restoration will be much harder or impossible to quantify, thus complicating decisions on future investment in habitat or hatchery projects. Many marked and unmarked steelhead from other watersheds enter the Tucannon River each year, which complicate evaluations according to WDFW. Regardless, we encourage investigators in the Tucannon watershed to monitor trends in abundance and productivity of natural origin steelhead and Chinook salmon.

Preliminary ISRP report comments: response requested (Provided for context. The proponents responded to the ISRP’s questions; see response link and final review above.)

Response request comment:

This proposal does a thorough job of describing the hierarchy of objectives, the history of actions and accomplishments, the methods, and the project evaluation and adjustment process. Based on the documentation of habitat improvements and the insightful discussion of lag effects, high flows, and climate change, the implementation of habitat work and its physical effects on fish habitat are being well evaluated.

Our only major concern with the proposal is that monitoring, evaluation, and adjustment is restricted to physical metrics (e.g., LWD, pools, flood plain reconnection, substrate). The ISRP expects projects that focus on restoration of fish habitat to be closely collaborating with projects that monitor fish populations and to demonstrate this collaboration by providing some details about the response of targeted fish populations to habitat improvements. Unfortunately, there is no mention of measurements of biological conditions and processes such as fry and parr densities, egg-to-fry survival, or juvenile growth rates in the proposal. The proponents briefly mention some biological data related to escapement and smolt production. This limitation was also identified in the ISRP’s 2017 Umbrella review and the 2013 Geographic Review. The lack of biological information in the current proposal, in spite of a repeated recommendation from the ISRP on this topic, suggests that little progress will be made on this front.

Biological observations are critical to link physical changes resulting from restoration actions to biological effects. The proponents state they have “no influence or funding in the monitoring or management of biological resources within the basin but will continue to support fish co-managers in filling critical data gaps necessary for project prioritization and adaptive management.” (p. 23). We encourage the proponents to establish the linkage between physical restoration outcomes and biological benefits. We are concerned by the lack of discussion in the proposal on the existing biological data and how it will be used in the future.

The ISRP requests a response from the proponents to address the following items:

M&E matrix – lead. One of the challenges for ISRP reviewers is understanding the specific monitoring that is being conducted for multiple implementation projects. Habitat restoration projects or hatchery projects implement actions that are intended to address limiting factors and benefit fish and wildlife. Most of these projects do not directly monitor habitat conditions or biological outcomes, but most identify other projects in the basin that monitor aspects of physical habitat or focal fish species. The monitoring project(s) in the basin provides essential monitoring data for habitat, juvenile salmonid abundance and distribution, outmigration, survival, and adult returns for salmon and steelhead. Some monitoring projects focus on status and trends in basins, while others focus on habitat relationships and responses to local actions. It is unclear what monitoring the monitoring project(s) conducts for each implementation project.

Given the regional leadership responsibilities of this programmatic project, the ISRP is requesting the Tucannon River Programmatic Habitat Project to summarize the linkages between implementation and monitoring projects in the basins. The summary should provide a table or matrix to identify what is being monitored for each implementation project and where and when the monitoring occurs. The summary also should explain how the projects are working together to evaluate progress toward addressing limiting factors and identify future actions. A map or maps could help identify the locations of monitoring actions. The monitoring information should clearly explain whether the biological monitoring is local information for the specific implementation site or basin scale monitoring of status and trends or fish in/fish out. We are asking implementation and other monitoring projects to assist this project in producing this summary.

Q1: Clearly defined objectives and outcomes

The linkage between goals and actions is clearly described. Future annual reports and proposals should include descriptions of what biological states and vital rates are expected to improve given the quantitative implementation objectives (Fig. 3-1). This might better define the biological monitoring needs, and also highlight what data that is currently available will be useful in this regard.

Q2: Methods

The proposed methods are scientifically valid and are useful for evaluating physical responses to restoration actions. There is no biological monitoring conducted as part of the proposed actions, and the proponents rely on other groups to provide this information. Given the absence of biological results in the current proposal, this interaction does not appear to be effective. The ISRP expects habitat restoration practitioners to be working closely with the projects that monitor fish responses to the actions. For example, WDFW is implementing the Tucannon River Steelhead Supplementation M&E (201005000) that is monitoring natural and hatchery steelhead productivity, spawning escapement, and distribution in the Tucannon watershed which is providing data that may be useful for evaluating habitat response.

Q3: Provisions for M&E

The monitoring and evaluation of physical states and processes influenced by habitat restoration is well described. There is no mention of how biological monitoring and evaluation will be conducted.

Q4: Results – benefits to fish and wildlife

The proposal does a good job summarizing the physical changes that have resulted from restoration actions. There is a lack of biological information, so benefits to targeted fish populations have not been determined, and this is the sole but significant weakness of the proposal.

Modified by Thomas Ono on 4/7/2023 2:33:50 PM.

Modified by Thomas Ono on 4/7/2023 2:34:00 PM.
Documentation Links:
Review: 2013 Geographic Category Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 2010-077-00-NPCC-20131126
Project: 2010-077-00 - Tucannon River Programmatic Habitat Project
Review: 2013 Geographic Category Review
Proposal: GEOREV-2010-077-00
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 11/5/2013
Recommendation: Implement with Conditions
Comments: Implement with conditions through 2016. Sponsor should consider addressing ISRP qualifications #1 and #4 in future reviews. Also see Programmatic Issue and Recommendation A for effectiveness monitoring (Qualifications #2 and #3). See Programmatic Issue and Recommendation B for umbrella projects.
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 ISRP Qualification: Qualification #1—Sponsor should consider addressing ISRP qualifications #1 and #4 in future reviews.
Council Condition #2 ISRP Qualification: Qualifications #2—See Programmatic Issue and Recommendation A for effectiveness monitoring (Qualifications #2 and #3).
Council Condition #3 ISRP Qualification: Qualification #3—See Programmatic Issue and Recommendation A for effectiveness monitoring (Qualifications #2 and #3).
Council Condition #4 ISRP Qualification: Qualification #4—Sponsor should consider addressing ISRP qualifications #1 and #4 in future reviews.
Council Condition #5 Programmatic Issue: A. Implement Monitoring, and Evaluation at a Regional Scale—see Programmatic Issue and Recommendation A for effectiveness monitoring (Qualifications #2 and #3).
Council Condition #6 Programmatic Issue: B. Evaluate and Improve Umbrella Projects—See Programmatic Issue and Recommendation B for umbrella projects.

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 2010-077-00-ISRP-20130610
Project: 2010-077-00 - Tucannon River Programmatic Habitat Project
Review: 2013 Geographic Category Review
Proposal Number: GEOREV-2010-077-00
Completed Date: 9/26/2013
Final Round ISRP Date: 8/15/2013
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
Final Round ISRP Comment:
Qualification #1 - Qualification #1
What is the landscape strategy for implementing these restoration actions? If such a strategy has been developed, but is part of a different project, more information should be given on how the projects fit together and are coordinated.
Qualification #2 - Qualifications #2
The ISRP is pleased that the project sponsors will be conducting surveys using CHaMP protocols, but how will ISEMP's biological effectiveness monitoring take place, who will do the work, and how will results of fish response studies be incorporated into revised restoration actions?
Qualification #3 - Qualification #3
Project-scale biological monitoring does not appear to be part of this project. Will ISEMP/IMW projects elsewhere provide an assessment of the project-scale effectiveness of the types of projects being implemented under this program? If not, this project should include some of project-scale biological assessment.
Qualification #4 - Qualification #4
The project sponsors should consider some assessment of how factors such as climate change or increase in human population could compromise the effectiveness of the restoration effort.
First Round ISRP Date: 6/10/2013
First Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria (Qualified)
First Round ISRP Comment:

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

This proposal seeks support to implement 28 reach scale restoration projects in the 30-mile section of the Tucannon River where the majority of spring Chinook salmon spawning and rearing takes place. The groups working in this watershed have also identified the life stage for spring Chinook that is limiting productivity: egg to parr survival. The projects are designed to address habitat problems that are impacting survival of this life-history stage. The ISRP has previously reviewed the process used by the authors of this proposal to identify the highest priority projects in the watershed. This selection process is based on a thorough geomorphic assessment of all reaches accessible to anadromous fish in the basin and information from the fish research that is occurring; the approach is technically sound. This information is reviewed by a regional technical team that selects and prioritizes project sites and implementation sequencing. Overall, the project is well integrated into regional programs. The technical background was adequately described.

The project objectives are consistent with priorities identified in various restoration plans for this watershed. However, it is not clear how the numeric targets provided in the objectives (for example, two pieces or more of LWD per channel width) were derived. The meaning of the target for riparian function is unclear (“Increase riparian function to 75% of maximum”- maximum what?). Apparently, these targets were included in the Tucannon Subbasin Plan, which is ten years old. Does any of the new information that has been collected suggest that these targets should be modified or varied from reach to reach depending on site conditions?

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

History and past accomplishments of this study are well described in the proposal and links are provided to documents containing detailed information. The project has played a significant role in protecting Tucannon River riparian areas through the CREP program. The project has also been involved in a variety of conservation activities typical of the region, for example road improvements, riparian revegetation, fish screening, and water right acquisition. The results given in the proposal were primarily descriptive and were loosely related to increased salmonid productivity. As the ISEMP results become more available, this should improve.

The project has changed its focus adaptively over the last several years. Initially, restoration efforts were focused on reducing water temperature and sediment levels. Significant progress has been made on both of these concerns. To identify the next tier of factors limiting spring Chinook productivity, a geomorphic assessment was completed for all reaches accessible to anadromous fishes. This assessment was the basis for identifying key areas for restoration and the habitat improvements at those reaches that would make the greatest contribution to increased egg-parr survival. The RM&E effort associated with this project and the existence of the Technical Review Team should enable the improvement over time in the identification of critical habitat needs.

Results from monitoring and assessment efforts in the basin were briefly discussed in the proposal and more detailed information was available through links provided.

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

The relationship between this project and the projects that will be involved in implementing priority habitat actions is clearly described. This linkage was not explained well in some of the supporting proposals. The association among the projects addressing habitat deficiencies prioritized for treatment in the Tucannon Program should be clear in all of the related project proposals.

The RM&E program associated with this project is very complete. It includes CHaMP assessment of trends in habitat condition supplemented with four additional sites located at habitat restoration installations. There is a good working relationship with CHaMP. In addition, WDFW operates a fish-in/fish-out monitoring program on the Tucannon that provides an indication of watershed-scale changes in anadromous fish populations. An element that may be lacking in the RM&E program is an assessment of fish response to the restoration projects. These projects have been selected to improve survival of the egg-parr life history of spring Chinook. Adding some evaluations of the actual effect of the projects on this metric would be very valuable for assessing the effectiveness of the selected projects. Because this project will not involve fish monitoring, no tagging will occur. The CHaMP protocols include macroinvertebrate sampling, but the proposal does not confirm that such sampling will occur. It also was not clear whether ISEMP biological effectiveness monitoring would take place at all 28 restoration reaches.

It was not clear from the proposal whether emerging limiting factors such as climate change or the expansion of invasive aquatic and riparian species could be adequately accommodated with existing habitat models. The project sponsors should consider a more comprehensive assessment of emerging limiting factors in prioritizing future habitat projects.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Most of the deliverables and work elements were adequately described. The proposal also provides links to project plans that provide details for those projects that are currently being implemented or will be initiated in 2013-14. Additional information needed was whether a landscape-based strategy had been developed specific to the Tucannon River. That is, has there been an effort to plan the location and sequencing of restoration actions that builds a connected network of restored sites instead of a disconnected collection of sites with significant environmental problems in between them that keep focal species from making full use of the restoration?

Specific comments on protocols and methods described in MonitoringMethods.org

This proposal was very well tied into the monitoring methods protocols.


===========QUALIFICATIONS FOLLOW================

This is a well-designed habitat restoration program and the proposal, on the whole, was well written. The project prioritizations are based on a thorough understanding of current habitat conditions and the factors that are limiting spring Chinook productivity.

Four areas of the proposal would have benefitted from additional detail. These qualifications can be addressed in contracting and responses to these concerns provided in future reviews and reports. A response is not requested.

Modified by Dal Marsters on 9/26/2013 2:33:33 PM.
Documentation Links:
Review: Proposals for New FCRPS BiOp work (FY10-July)

Project Relationships: None

Name Role Organization
Kris Buelow Project Lead Snake River Salmon Recovery Board
Andre L'Heureux (Inactive) Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration
Daniel Gambetta Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration
Sean Welch Technical Contact Bonneville Power Administration
John Foltz Supervisor Snake River Salmon Recovery Board
David Karl Technical Contact Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Kris Fischer Technical Contact Umatilla Confederated Tribes (CTUIR)
Terry Bruegman Technical Contact Columbia Conservation District (SWCD)
Jody Lando Project SME Bonneville Power Administration