200003100 - North Fork John Day Basin Anadromous Fish Habitat Enhancement Project
Sponsor: Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
Budgets: FY07: $269,609 | FY08: $283,090 | FY09: $297,244
Short description: Increase habitat for Chinook salmon and steelhead on private and public-owned lands via implementing fencing, off-stream water development, revegetation, culvert replacement, pool development, mine tailing removal and large wood placement projects.
Final Council recommendation (Nov 2006)
Funding category: Expense
Recommended budgets: FY07: $200,000 | FY08: $200,000 | FY09: $200,000
ISRP final recommendation: Fundable
Chinook Mid-Columbia ESU steelhead, Mid-Columbia ESU bull trout and interior redband trout should all realize long-term benefits from the habitat improvements proposed. This project is well planned, and the objectives and methods have been thought through. Clear ties are made to the Fish and Wildlife Program, the BPA Watershed Management Program, the BiOp RPAs, Wy-Kan-Ush-Mi Wa-Kish-Wit, and the Subbasin Plan. There are many complementarities between this project and others in the subbasin, with clear descriptions of who does what, how they are related, and presentation of the role of CTUIR in the communities and watershed council. This project proposes tributary habitat improvements in priority areas identified in the Subbasin Plan and tied to EDT results. Habitat limiting factors are linked with strategies and restoration activities. Detailed descriptions of habitat problems and activities to date are provided by geographic area. There is a clear description of project history and actions, but little evaluation of project outcomes and impacts. A table lays out the rationale for proposed actions. Objectives are specific to location, expressed in measurable units and relate actions to time lags for discerning measurable effects. Work elements are similarly specific, with milestones and dates. M&E will be done through collection of well-described, pre- and-post implementation data on channel hydrology and vegetative response. No direct monitoring of fish use of habitat. The sponsors should coordinate with ODFW so that fish monitoring occurs and can be tied to habitat improvements. Information transfer is accomplished through outreach and education activities, watershed council participation, landowner collaborations, and periodic reporting.
State/province recommendation: Fundable when money available
Review group: OSPIT - Plateau
Recommended budgets: FY07: (n/a) | FY08: (n/a) | FY09: (n/a)
Comment: Budgetary restrictions keep us from funding this highly rated project. Another example of the capital to expense dilemma.