This proposal is for operations and maintenance (O&M) of fish screens and fish ladders at five dams and diversions in the lower 33 miles of the Umatilla River, which allow juveniles and adults of wild and hatchery Chinook and coho salmon, and ESA listed steelhead trout, as well as a few bull trout to pass these migration barriers. The proponents also provide O&M for five aquaculture facilities to acclimate juvenile salmonids or hold and spawn adults in the Umatilla and Walla Walla rivers.

The ISRP found this proposal to be Not Applicable under the review process and does not request response from the proponents.

Nevertheless, the proponents should carefully address several points in their future proposals and annual reports.

1. SMART objectives. The goals and objectives appear sound, overall, but need to be framed as SMART objectives (see proposal instructions). For example, suggested wording for the two main objectives could be:
   1. "Perform cleaning, repair, and maintenance of mechanical, electrical, and hydraulic systems to maximize passage of adult and juvenile salmonids at five migration barriers in the lower 33 miles of the Umatilla River, through FY 2027.
   2.  Provide operations and maintenance services required to mitigate high flow events that cause flooding of facilities, through 2027.” 
      
      
2. Summary of criteria and functioning of fish passage facilities. The proponents state that project activities are evaluated primarily by whether the operations and maintenance meet the criteria for fish passage outline by NOAA Fisheries, apparently in a NMFS (2011) document. These criteria are not presented in this proposal but are linked in the proposal for Umatilla and Walla Walla Fish Passage Operations (198802200).  
   
   The citation is: NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2011. Anadromous Salmonid Passage Facility Design. NMFS, Northwest Region, Portland, Oregon. 
   
   If the objective is to meet these criteria on a daily basis, then the ISRP asks the proponents to, first, present the criteria in a table. Second, please provide a table showing the dates each fish ladder and screen was inspected and whether fish passage was likely impeded or not based on the inspection. For example, you could color code these entries (red vs. green shading) to provide a quick visual summary of how well the facilities were functioning. These data are critical to evaluate whether these facilities are meeting the objectives laid out in the proposal. 
   
   
3. Lamprey passage. The proposal indicates O&M activities are to be conducted to minimize adverse effects on Pacific lamprey, apparently by minimizing effects on bed materials that provide habitat for their larvae. However, adult lampreys also need to pass upstream over migration barriers to reach their spawning grounds. The proponents should clarify what O&M activities are undertaken to ensure passage of adult lamprey, in addition to that of salmonids. 
   
   
4. Update to current program objectives. The proponents refer to biological objectives listed in the Council’s 2000 Fish and Wildlife Program, but the current plan was approved in 2014 with a 2020 addendum (see: https://www.nwcouncil.org/reports/2014-columbia-river-basin-fish-and-wildlife-program). Please update these objectives, if needed, using the most recent plan amendments, and reference this plan. 
   
   
5. Maintenance costs. In the proposal and the presentation to the ISRP, the proponents emphasized that funds are lacking to maintain more than 30 drum screens, which will create major problems for fish passage when these eventually fail. The costs for needed maintenance were not specified in the proposal but should be presented to the Fish and Wildlife Program to allow planning for them. 
   
   
6. Climate adaptation for future flooding. The Umatilla River sustained a “500-year” flood in February 2020, which damaged various fish passage and fish holding facilities, and all facilities required substantial maintenance. The ISRP suggests that, given ongoing climate change, severe events like these will increase future O&M costs. Climate adaptation for these facilities will require thinking carefully about infrastructure improvements and increased maintenance. 
   
   
7. M&E matrix – support. As habitat projects and monitoring projects are not presented as part of an integrated proposal or plan, the need for a crosswalk to identify the linkages between implementation and monitoring is extremely important for basins or geographic areas. The ISRP is requesting a response from the Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project (199000501) to summarize the linkages between implementation and monitoring projects in the basin. We ask your project to assist them in creating the summary and provide information to them about what is being monitored for your implementation project and where and when the monitoring occurs. A map or maps of locations of monitoring actions would be helpful in this regard.