199206200 - Yakama Nation - Riparian/Wetlands Restoration
Sponsor: Yakama Confederated Tribes
Budgets: FY07: $1,575,163 | FY08: $1,623,313 | FY09: $1,673,842
Short description: Continue implementation on YN Wetlands/Riparian Restoration Project by protecting and restoring native floodplain habitats along anadromous fish-bearing waterways in the agricultural area of the Yakama Reservation (~2,000 acres per year).
Final Council recommendation (Nov 2006)
Funding category: Expense
Recommended budgets: FY07: $0 | FY08: $0 | FY09: $0
Comment: Tier 2. Fund at a level consistent with ISRP comment during contracting when funds become available.
ISRP final recommendation: Fundable
This is an important project working toward habitat conservation goals in some critical areas of the Yakima basin. Missing from the proposal was evidence of a strong biological monitoring component. The proposal stated that their website will be updated in FY 07 to include all the biological monitoring results, but reviewers requested an interim synthesis to show benefits to focal species and demonstrate restoration is working. The proponents have gone to a lot of effort to provide a detailed response. The response effectively provided detail on M&E procedure and results of management activities on one management unit encompassing 440 acres (of a total of 20,000 acres in the project). The monitoring protocol described is that used on all management units. Impressive changes were shown in the time-series of aerial photos, photopoints, habitat cover type data, and bird density/diversity summaries. Those M&E methods seem appropriate and the data resulting indicates the project is achieving its wetland-related goals. If this is representative of what has been done and is planned for other management units, this portion of project could serve as a model for riparian/wetlands restoration. Unfortunately only one table gave data on fish use of the restored habitat. On the other hand only one goal is directly concerned with anadromous fish. The Yakama Nation Fisheries Program has a fish-monitoring program underway, and it would be in the proponent's best interest to include more fisheries information, although reviewers appreciate there are often indirect (but important) ties to fish that can be assessed using habitat measures. They are encouraged include more fisheries information for their next submission.
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