< Back to list of FY 2007-2009 projects

199401806 - Tucannon Stream and Riparian Protection, Enhancement, and Restoration

Sponsor: Columbia Conservation District

Budgets: FY07: $330,780 | FY08: $348,928 | FY09: $365,502

Short description: Implement habitat protection, enhancement, and recovery strategies to support Subbasin Plan identified ESA focal, cultural significant and species of interest recovery within the Tucannon Subbasin.

view full proposal

Final Council recommendation (Nov 2006)

Funding category: Expense

Recommended budgets: FY07: $331,333 | FY08: $331,333 | FY09: $331,333

Comment: ISRP fundable qualified. Also see Programmatic Issue: habitat m&e.

ISRP final recommendation: Fundable (Qualified)


Questions and comments from the ISRP were clarified for a number of issues as best as possible. Some data is reported on fish density, but it is not clear that the project personnel are adaptively managing based on these data. It's not clear that the structures are actually benefiting the fish. They likely need another year to see if anything is changing. Project sponsors provided some sediment/embeddedness measures from sampling by the U.S. Forest Service in 2005. These data can at least provide a baseline for assessments in the future, both in the mainstem and to help assess activities in the Pataha Creek basin. They also provided a 2002 progress report that provided some baseline data for temperature and for fish densities at several index sites, data that might be useful in the future. Statistical analysis of fish density data from control and treatment sites showed no significant differences between sites. Temperature data did not provide a basis for describing any trends in the system. Qualification: Since there are no data and thus no scientific justification for continuing this project, it would have to be continued based on a qualification that the substrate, temperature, and fish density work be continued in such a way that decisions are possible regarding the effectiveness of project activities. The sponsors should make full use of data from other fish monitoring projects in the basin to help meet this requirement.

Response loop edit

See the sponsor's revised proposal from the response loop. You'll be taken to CBFWA's proposal system in Section 10 where most sponsors uploaded revised narratives or other responses to the ISRP comments.

State/province recommendation: Washington

Review group: Washington list

Recommended budgets: FY07: (n/a) | FY08: (n/a) | FY09: (n/a)

Comment: See Washington guidance