Response:  There are currently no anticipated changes to the monitoring method or protocols as listed on the Monitoring Method website (www.monitoringmethods.org). However, the project conducts regular reviews and evaluations of all trophic level and water quality monitoring data regarding site retention, sample size determination, sampling frequency, and statistical power analyses to insure adequate scientific representation at reasonable costs. This will allow the project to reallocate resources and distribute funds to other areas of need.

For example, in 2010, after a series of technical discussions, and following targeted statistical evaluations, the project personnel decided to drop four of the monitoring sites. These included sites KR3, KR7, KR11, and KR12. The decision was made primarily due to the constant rate of response in primary and secondary production, and redundancy observed between these and the other adjacent sites. To ensure continuity, however, it was further decided that the aforementioned sites will be revisited/sampled in the future on a longer periodic time horizon (3-5 years) to provide a more informative and robust picture of the Kootenai River aquatic ecosystem.

Several sampling strategies were also modified starting with the 2010 bio-monitoring season. These included dropping monthly metals sampling across the basin from the water quality protocol (due to lack of measureable responses), dropping water chlorophyll from the primary productivity protocol (due to redundancy: tile chlorophyll responses were highly correlated with water chlorophyll responses analyzed over several years), changing the taxonomic resolution for algae from species to division level (due to observed lack of discernible patterns in lower taxonomic groups), and collecting 5 macroinvertebrate samples per bio-monitoring season instead of 6 as in previous years (following sample size determination and cost analyses).

In 2010, based on 5 years of small and large scale monitoring results, the Kootenai Tribe and Idaho Department of Fish and Game, with input from other members of IKERT, proposed to increase the phosphorus loading concentration from the current level (3 ug/l) to 5 ug/l. Additionally, the project sponsors proposed to lengthen the nutrient addition period from the current period of 120 days (1 June to 30 September) to approximately 220 days (15 March to 31 October) annually. While it is likely that nutrients would not be added during the entire period, this new monitoring schedule would allow for more flexibility by project managers to mimic natural conditions that existed prior to Libby Dam and regulated river flows. For instance, a robust period of algae growth occurs in the early spring in most natural, unregulated rocky mountain rivers, starting around the spring equinox and proceeding until the first substantial snowmelt occurs (typically May). Furthermore, Libby Dam reduces downstream nutrient delivery year-round, and longer addition periods would better mitigate these losses.

Project managers have observed and collected empirical data in support of increased primary production within the upstream unregulated reach of the Kootenai River in British Columbia, Canada in the early spring prior to the annual freshet (Holderman et al. 2009). This early season algal productivity is likely very important for aquatic invertebrates that have over-wintered in various life stages and are preparing to complete their life-cycles during the upcoming growing season.  Currently, within the regulated portion of the Kootenai River, and particularly in the Idaho canyon reach, very little algae growth is observed during the spring period. Adding nutrients at an earlier time than allowed by the current permit would likely benefit aquatic invertebrate survival and reproductive abilities, which would ultimately enhance fisheries. Additionally, increasing the dosage concentration to 5 ug/l would likely extend these benefits further downriver than currently observed. Trophic level data within the nutrient addition zone are showing a decline in the effect of nutrient addition in the Kootenai River after 30-40 kilometers using a phosphorus concentration of 3 ug/l (also refer to project sponsors reply to ISRP item 3 above). 

References

Holderman, C., P. Anders and B. Shafii. 2009. Characterization of the Kootenai River algae and periphyton community before and after experimental nutrient addition, 2003-2006.  Report to Kootenai Tribe of Idaho and Bonneville Power Administration. 76 pp. http://www.restoringthekootenai.org/resources/F&W-Library/Nutrients/5NA-Characterizationof-Kootenai-River-Algae-Community-and-Primary-Productivity-before-and-after-Experimental-Nutrient-Addition,-2004-2007.pdf

8. Some of the protocols related to environmental and physiochemical sampling are not complete on the MonitoringMethods.org website, thereby making it difficult to evaluate. The ISRP would like to see a complete description of all protocols.

Response: (The following is a jointly prepared document for the Kootenai River projects currently under review).

The ISRP commented that the connections between the three Kootenai Tribe projects, and the Idaho Department of Fish and Game’s (IDFG) Kootenai River Resident Fish Mitigation project (198806500), presented as part of the resident fish, data management, and regional coordination category review, were not adequately described in any of the four proposals.  We acknowledge that this was a weakness in our collective proposals and appreciate the opportunity to better explain the relationships between these projects. In reading through the ISRP comments on each of the four project proposals we also recognized that a more thorough explanation of the various advisory groups associated with the Tribe’s projects would also assist the ISRP in better understanding the individual projects, relationship between projects, and the Tribe’s Program as a whole. 

Towards this end the following response includes: 1) an overview of the context for the Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program; 2) the history of the Kootenai Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program; 3) a summary of the relationship of three Kootenai Tribe projects included in Resident Fish, Data Management, and Regional Coordination Category Review and IDFG’s project 198806500; 4) additional information regarding the advisory and coordination groups used to inform the Tribe’s projects; and 5) additional information regarding the subbasin-scale adaptive management plan that the Tribe is currently developing.

In many of the Tribe’s proposals mention is made of the Kootenai people’s creation story and commitment to the long-term guardianship of the land.  It can sometimes be difficult not to gloss over such statements as mere platitudes.  However, the commitment outlined in the Kootenai Tribe’s creation story is a very real and living commitment and represents the foundation from which all of the Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program activities emerge.

Specifically, Kootenai Tribe elders pass down the history of the beginning of time, which tells that the Kootenai people were created by Quilxka Nupika, the supreme being, and placed on earth to keep the Creator-Spirit’s Covenant – to guard and keep the land forever.  The Kootenais have never lost sight of their original purpose as guardians of the land and the Tribe’s efforts today are a reflection of this commitment.

1.  Context for the Kootenai Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program

As described with varying emphasis in each of the Tribe’s project proposals, over the course of the last century the Kootenai subbasin has been extensively modified by agriculture, logging, mining, and flood control.  To protect and extend agricultural and development, levees were constructed on top of natural sand levees for flood control starting in the 1900s, reducing the hydrologic connection between the Kootenai River and its floodplain.  However, without river regulation this levee system failed, or was occasionally overtopped.  The Kootenai River was confined by the construction of Libby Dam in Montana, which created Koocanusa Reservoir, and Corra Linn Dam downstream in British Columbia, which impounds Kootenay Lake.  Over 50,000 acres of historically highly productive floodplain were converted to agricultural fields, resulting in the loss of riparian and wetland plant and animal species, and the related functions that normally support a healthy ecosystem (EPA 2004).  In 1972 Libby Dam became operational, effectively reducing annual peak flows by half and disrupting the hydrograph, which historically featured a single spring freshet that provided energy to drive ecosystem processes.  These modifications resulted in unnatural flow fluctuations and changes to the temperature regime in the Kootenai River and its floodplain, which exacerbated the effects of previous anthropogenic impacts.  Construction of Libby Dam (in concert with extensive diking) also resulted in a major loss of nutrient inputs to the Kootenai River. Cumulatively, these impacts have resulted in depressed biological system productivity, altered community structure and species composition across trophic levels, and loss of floodplain and riparian function. 

The Kootenai Tribe traditionally depended on the vast aquatic and terrestrial resources of the Kootenai River subbasin and other neighboring areas (i.e., Clark Fork, Pend Oreille and the upper mainstem of the Columbia and Kootenai rivers) for subsistence and ceremonial purposes.  A natural fish passage blockage at Bonnington Falls prevented anadromous fish from entering the Kootenai River.  However, the Tribe often traveled to salmon fishing areas within the Columbia River drainage in order to take advantage of the large salmon runs in the fall of the year.  The Tribe traditionally relied upon the Kootenai River basin’s resident fish year round.  “Their chief articles of food are roots and fish.  The waters of the Kootenai River afford them at all seasons an abundant supply of salmon-trout,” reported Lt. John Mullan (1885).  Schaeffer (1940) reported “the Kutenai fished for ling in the fall/winter months using weirs constructed on tributaries of the Kootenai River”. 

While the Tribe relied on roots and fish for their main sources of food (Mullan 1885), terrestrial game and other vegetative resources were also very important for food, medicinal, spiritual and ceremonial purposes.  In addition to fish, ducks were taken in great numbers and were a staple for the Kootenai people (Turney-High 1941).  Duck netting was a communal activity with the supervision of a Duck Chief. Other waterfowl were cherished, such as geese, but these were taken by means of bow and arrow (Turney-High 1941).  Historically nearly 22,000 acres of wetland habitat were maintained by flooding river conditions throughout the Idaho portion of the lower Kootenai Valley (EPA 2004).  This large wetland area incorporated high level of energy and nutrient exchanges within the ecosystem.  Waterfowl breeding and molting seasons corresponded to flooding and subsequent wetland filling.  Avian predators once thrived in the area as well as a result of excellent habitat conditions and thriving aquatic communities.  Intact riparian areas with mature cottonwood stands contributed to provide nesting and perching habitats.

The upland terrestrial habitat supported mammals such as white tailed deer, moose, elk, woodland caribou, mule deer, and mountain goat.  Woodland caribou were an abundant resource in the Kootenai (Turney-High 1941).  The aquatic and terrestrial components of the Kootenai River ecosystem supported mammalian predators such as grizzly bears, lynx, red fox, coyote, gray wolves, cougars, fisher, river otters, mink, bobcat and black bears.

Today the ability of the Tribe to exercise Treaty-reserved fishing rights and to engage in subsistence and cultural uses of aquatic and terrestrial resources is significantly curtailed.  The local community has also suffered from the losses of diversity of aquatic and terrestrial resources that would otherwise provide an important contribution to the vitality and economic viability of the region. 

2.  Kootenai Tribe Fish and Wildlife Program Overview and History

The Kootenai Tribe’s Fisheries Department was established in 1988 and the Wildlife Division was added in 1999.  The role of the Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program is to work towards restoration of the Kootenai River ecosystem and implement restoration and mitigation actions that will help achieve the Tribe’s vision of:

The Kootenai River and its floodplain as a healthy ecosystem with clean, connected terrestrial and aquatic habitats, which fully support traditional Tribal uses and other important societal uses. 

An additional component of the Tribe’s overarching vision for the Kootenai River subbasin recognizes that:

A healthy ecosystem reflects and promotes the cultural values and long-term sustainability of present and future generations.

The Tribe recognizes that implementation of this vision needs to occur within the context of a sustainable local community and economy.  In support of this approach Tribe is committed to developing and implementing innovative and collaborative approaches to shared guardianship of the land – an approach that is reflected throughout the Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program.  As part of their Fish and Wildlife Program activities the Kootenai Tribe also seeks specifically to restore their ability to exercise Treaty-reserved fishing rights and to assist the federal (U.S.) government in fulfilling its Tribal Trust responsibilities. 

From the outset the Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program has been structured around five core guiding principles: 

• Science-based
• Holistic
• Collaborative
• Consistent with Tribal cultural values
• Inclusive of local social and economic values
• Adaptively managed

The Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program grew initially out of the urgent need to address the precipitously declining Kootenai river white sturgeon population.  The Tribe’s Fisheries Department implemented the first Tribal fish and wildlife project in 1988 that included sampling of the white sturgeon population in the Kootenai River and the construction of an experimental Kootenai Sturgeon hatchery in 1991 (project 198806400).  During the late 1990s and early 2000s the impacts of declining fish populations were highlighted by a series of listing decisions and petitions to list species including Kootenai River white sturgeon (listed 1994), bull trout (listed 1998), burbot (petitioned 2000), and westslope cutthroat (petitioned 1998). 

By 1994 the Tribe and partner agencies in the Kootenai Subbasin were beginning to look beyond single species fisheries management projects and thinking about developing a more comprehensive ecosystem-based approach to investigating, identifying and addressing factors underlying the decline of native fish populations in the Kootenai subbasin.  The Kootenai River Ecosystem Restoration project (199404900), also known as the nutrient project, was started in 1994.  The project was initially an offshoot from the Tribe’s Conservation Aquaculture program (198806400), and focused on an ecosystem approach to addressing aquatic bioenergetic trophic levels and water chemistry to support fish life.  The nutrient project marked a fundamental shift in thinking at the time, from a belief that fish population declines were a stand-alone problem to be addressed, to a recognition that fish population declines were in fact symptoms of underlying ecological limitations and imbalances that needed to be addressed.  

In 1999 the Tribe added a wildlife division to the existing fisheries department and the full Kootenai Tribe Fish and Wildlife Program was created.  The Tribe’s wildlife division was added when the Tribe was incorporated into the Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Project (199206105) in 1999 (although the Albeni Falls project began formally in 1992).  Inclusion in this project represented the first opportunity for the Tribe to address mitigation for wildlife losses associated with construction, inundation and operation of Albeni Falls Dam (operational losses associated with Albeni Falls Dam have not been addressed yet) and subsequently operation of Libby Dam.

The Lower Kootenai Model Watershed Restoration Project began in 2000 as a request from a landowner for help with habitat restoration work to return historical fish populations to Trout Creek, a west-side tributary to the Kootenai River.  The Tribe sought funding from Bonneville Environmental Foundation (BEF) and secured a ten-year Model Watershed restoration grant to fund a restoration and monitoring program in Trout and Long Canyon Creeks beginning in 2003 (Kruse 2007).  The majority of restoration actions have now been completed and project monitoring continues under Project 199404900.

In 2002 the Operational Loss Assessment project (project 200201100) and Reconnect project (200200800) were both added as part of the Tribe’s overall wildlife mitigation program.  The NPCC subsequently re-characterized the Reconnect project as a fisheries project and it has been included in resident fish reviews of projects.  However, the Tribe still views the primary focus and purpose of the Reconnect project as being linked to the Operational Loss Assessment and to wildlife mitigation and restoration objectives.

From the mid 1990s through early 2000s a number of regional efforts were initiated in the Kootenai subbasin that ultimately resulted in completion of recovery and/or conservation plans for Kootenai River white sturgeon, Bull Trout and Burbot.  The Kootenai Tribe was an active participant in all of the coordinated planning associated with these efforts.  Collectively these various planning efforts helped to further inform and guide the focus of assessment activities conducted under the Conservation Aquaculture project (project 198806400), Ecosystem Restoration project (project 199404900), and Assess Feasibility of Enhancing White Sturgeon Spawning Substrate Habitat project (project 200200200). 

Table 1.  Summary Kootenai Tribe Fish and Wildlife Program projects, year projects were initiated, and BPA project number.  

The Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program grew initially in response to specific restoration issues and opportunities.  A more explicit identification of the framework within which the Tribe’s individual projects were nested began in 2003 with initiation of the NPCC efforts to develop standardized and collaboratively developed subbasin plans throughout the Columbia River Basin.  The Kootenai Tribe of Idaho and Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) took on a leadership role in this effort, producing the first complete subbasin plan in the Columbia River Basin.

The Kootenai River Subbasin Plan was completed in 2004 (KTOI and MFWP 2004).  The subbasin plan included an assessment of current conditions in the subbasin, and identified a management plan which incorporated a suite of primary and secondary limiting factors and quantifiable goals and objectives.  Figure 1 summarizes the primary and secondary limiting factors.  Figure 2 shows the role each of the Tribe’s projects plays in addressing the primary and secondary limiting factors and actions as identified in the 2004 Kootenai River Subbasin Plan (KTOI and MFWP 2004).  The Kootenai River Subbasin Plan (along with other Columbia River Basin subbasin plans) was subsequently amended into the NPCC Fish and Wildlife Program.

Figure 1. Primary and secondary limiting factors from Kootenai River Subbasin Plan (KTOI & MFWP 2004).

Figure 2.  Summary of relationship of primary and secondary limiting factors, actions (metrics/objectives from subbasin plan) and individual Tribal projects (KTOI & MFWP 2004).   

At the outset, the majority of the Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program projects were focused to a large extent on data collection and analysis.  Over the years as data and analysis, and monitoring and evaluation accomplished through the Tribe’s projects and through the projects of other regional partners (e.g., IDFG, MFWP, B.C. Ministry of Forest Land Natural and Resource Operations) and as the overall understanding of the Kootenai River subbasin ecosystem has improved -- the focus of the Tribe’s projects has shifted generally to more targeted feasibility analysis in support of implementation of specific restoration or mitigation actions, and to implementation of those actions.  This focus is reflected in the Tribe’s 2011 proposals. 

Another way to look at the interrelationship of the Kootenai Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program projects is related to how the projects address the impacts of climate, wetland disconnection and conversion, and Libby Dam hydrology on abiotic conditions, biotic communities, trophic dynamics, and species and population dynamics.  Table 2 illustrates the role that each of the Tribe’s projects plays in providing data and/or implementing actions related to each of these ecosystem components.

Table 2.  Relationship of Kootenai Tribe projects to Kootenai River ecosystem components.

As part of the initial work to develop a subbasin-scale adaptive management plan for the Kootenai Tribe’s projects (discussed later) the Tribe identified five draft overarching goals that unite the Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program and that are consistent with broader-scale initiatives such as the Kootenai Subbasin Plan and the NPCC Fish and Wildlife Program. 

The five draft goals are to protect, restore and maintain:

• Food web – As an oligotrophic (low nutrient) and fragmented ecosystem, the Kootenai River and its higher order organisms are likely impacted by a lack of food web support. 
• Ecological connectivity within Kootenai River subbasin – This includes reconnecting tributaries to the mainstem Kootenai River as well as connecting the mainstem Kootenai River to riparian areas, floodplains, and terrestrial habitats.  This connection is important for nutrient exchange and will increase available habitat diversity and quantity for fish and wildlife.
• Suitable, self-sustaining or aquatic and terrestrial habitat for fish and wildlife – Habitat is the ecosystem component that can be most directly affected by management actions such as active restoration projects.
• Biological populations – Some species in the Kootenai River ecosystem are either functionally extinct or on the verge of functional extinction. Restoring these populations, and populations of other species they depend on, is important both ecologically and culturally.
• River physical and chemical processes, and their inherent natural range of variability – Anthropogenic activities have affected the physical and chemical processes in the ecosystem, and understanding these changes is necessary to support management actions that will address them.

All of the Kootenai Tribe projects conduct data collection, analysis or implement actions related to achieving these five goals. 

3.  Relationship of Kootenai Tribe projects included in Resident Fish, Data Management, and Regional Coordination Category Review and relationships to Idaho Department of Fish and Game project 198806500

Three Kootenai Tribe projects were proposed as part of the Resident Fish, Data Management, and Regional Coordination Category Review.  The ISRP requested a clarification of the relationships between those projects: 

• Kootenai River Ecosystem Restoration (Nutrient Project) (199404900)
• Reconnect Kootenai River with the Historical Floodplain Project (200200800)
• Restore Natural Recruitment of Kootenai River White Sturgeon (Kootenai River Habitat Restoration Project) (200200200)

The ISRP also asked for clarification regarding the relationship of the three Tribal projects to the IDFG Fishery Investigations project in the Kootenai subbasin:

• Kootenai River Fishery Investigations (Kootenai River Resident Fish Mitigation) (198806500)

The short summary to the ISRP question is that:

• Project 199404900 (Kootenai River Ecosystem Restoration) provides nutrient addition in the Canyon Reach of the Kootenai River and Kootenay Lake in Canada, and aquatic based, trophic-level and water chemistry monitoring of a 235 km reach of the Kootenai River and key tributaries.
• Project 200200200 (Kootenai River Habitat Restoration Project) is implementing habitat restoration actions (including mainstem, substrate enhancement, off channel, riparian, and floodplain habitats) in the Braided Reaches, Straight Reach and Meander Reaches to address the habitat needs of all life stages of Kootenai sturgeon, burbot, bull trout, kokanee, westslope cutthroat trout, and redband trout and other native fish.
• Project 200200800 (Reconnect Kootenai River with the Historical Floodplain Project) is implementing habitat restoration to reconnect the Kootenai River with the historical Floodplain as part of wildlife habitat restoration activities associated with both the OpLoss Project and the Albeni Falls Project.  Reconnection projects identified in the 2013-2017 proposal include Ball Creek and Nimz Ranch in the Meander Reach.
• Project 198806500 (Kootenai River Resident Fish Mitigation) is conducting monitoring and evaluation activities associated with Kootenai sturgeon and burbot that help inform recovery, habitat restoration, Libby Dam operations for sturgeon and burbot, and evaluation and adaptive management in the Kootenai River.  IDFG is also a partner to the Tribe on project 199404900 assisting with implementation of nutrient addition and monitoring the fish community at established monitoring sites throughout the basin.

The following maps are provided to help clarify the physical relationships between the projects and the extent and location of monitoring activities.  Figure 3 shows the locations of project 200200200, 200200800, 199404900 and the IDFG project 198806500 electrofishing, egg mat sites, sturgeon free embryo release sites, and sturgeon and burbot sampling sites from project 198806500.  Figure 4 shows the location of the Kootenai River Ecosystem Restoration project (199404900) course-scale and fine-scale sampling sites.  Figure 5 shows just the location of the IDFG electrofishing, egg mat sites, sturgeon free embryo release sites, and sturgeon and burbot sampling sites from project 198806500 without the other projects.

Figure 3. Locations of Kootenai Subbasin projects 200200200, 200200800, 199404900, and 198806500.

Figure 4. Kootenai River Ecosystem Restoration project (199404900) course-scale and fine-scale sampling sites and Kootenai River Operational Loss (200201100) avian and invertebrate sampling sites.

Figure 5. Idaho Department of Fish and Game (project 198806500) electrofishing sites, egg mat sites, sturgeon free embryo release sites and sturgeon and burbot sampling sites.

 In the ISRP comments on the IDFG proposal and on some of the Tribe’s projects, reference was made to the various entities “claiming to coordinate”.  Something that is difficult to convey through the proposal format and to people who aren’t intimately familiar with the work in the subbasin is the extent of day-to-day coordination the occurs among the various management partners throughout the Kootenai subbasin (i.e., Kootenai Tribe, IDFG, MFWP, B.C. Ministry of Forest Land and Natural Resource Operations, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Bonneville Power Administration).  We communicate regularly by email and phone, we are in meetings together, we are in workshops together, and we are in the field together on a regular basis.  The level of coordination and integration could certainly always be better but there is an extraordinary effort going into working together and continuing to learn how to work together better.

An additional factor that sometimes confounds full integration of projects is the different and occasionally conflicting organizational missions, goals and objectives among different agencies and between agencies, and the Tribe.  Additionally, the BPA/Northwest Power and Conservation Council’s review and funding process has separated wildlife and resident fish into artificially independent categories, which minimizes and obscures the integration that occurs in the real world projects. 

In the context of this resident fish review, no single action will restore populations of Kootenai sturgeon, burbot, bull trout, or other native fish in the Kootenai River.  No single entity’s actions or project(s) will restore the ecosystem.  The Tribe and other partners in the Kootenai River subbasin work together to use human and fiscal resources as effectively as possible to achieve restoration of the Kootenai River ecosystem.  This effort includes flow and temperature operations at Libby Dam (USACE and BPA in coordination with Kootenai Tribe, MFWP, IDFG and USFWS), long-term monitoring and evaluation (IDFG, BCMFLNRO, Kootenai Tribe, MFWP), habitat restoration (Kootenai Tribe, IDFG, MFWP), and critical uncertainties research (Kootenai Tribe, USACE, IDFG, MFWP).

The following sections provide additional detail regarding major actions associated with each of the three Kootenai Tribe projects and the IDFG project currently under ISRP review, and a summary of the relationships between the four projects. 

Kootenai River Ecosystem Restoration (Nutrient Addition) (199404900)

The primary goal of this project is to recover a productive, healthy and biologically diverse Kootenai River aquatic ecosystem across multiple trophic layers.  This work is important to help mitigate the effects of Libby Dam impoundment on aquatic processes in downstream river reaches.  Currently the project is implementing several nutrient restoration efforts to help mitigate 30 years of lost productivity due to Libby Dam hydro operations.

The primary objective of the project has been to address factors limiting key fish species within an ecosystem perspective.  Major project components completed include: establishment of a comprehensive and thorough biomonitoring program, investigation of ecosystem-level productivity, testing the feasibility of a large-scale Kootenai River nutrient addition experiment, the rehabilitation of key Kootenai River spawning and rearing tributaries, the provision of funding for the Canadian government for nutrient enrichment and monitoring in Kootenay Lake, providing written summaries of all research activities, and, holding an annual workshop with other agencies to discuss management, research, and monitoring strategies related to Kootenai River basin activities.  

A portion of this project is jointly implemented by the Kootenai Tribe and IDFG (the nutrient addition component for the river is a shared responsibility between the agencies).  The Tribe is responsible for the monitoring of lower trophic levels (water quality, algae and invertebrates) while IDFG is responsible for fish community data collections and analyses associated with nutrient addition in the Kootenai River.  Additionally, the Tribe purchases the nutrient supply on an annual basis and IDFG is responsible for nutrient site day- to-day management activities. IDFG, the British Columbia Ministry of Forests Land Natural Resource Operations, and the Tribe coordinate to hold an annual two day workshop center largely around the nutrient restoration efforts on the Kootenai River and Kootenay Lake, referred to as the IKERT meeting. 

Project actions include the following major components:

• Addition of nutrients in the Idaho Canyon Reach of the Kootenai River and in the south arm of Kootenay Lake in Canada as a mitigative approach to addressing nutrient losses. 
• A large-scale biomonitoring program covering approximately 235 km of the Kootenai River and key tributaries (in place since 2002). 
• Targeted tributary restoration associated with Kokanee spawning habitat. 

Addition of nutrients in the Canyon Reach of the Kootenai River and in the south arm of Kootenay Lake (where Kootenai River discharges into the Lake) in Canada are being used as a mitigative approach to addressing nutrient losses.  Nutrient addition of this type are not possible in the Meander Reaches of the Kootenai River because critical environmental conditions that allow for significant primary productivity (i.e., clear, shallow water, rocky substrates) are not present in this reach.  However, nutrient effects, such as organic matter spiraling from the upriver nutrient addition zone, and fish migrations, such as kokanee spawner returns from Kootenay Lake, will likely augment trophic productivity in the Meander Reach over time.  Nutrient additions in the Canyon reach have helped reestablish the food web in the Canyon and further downstream into the Braided Reach (to a somewhat lesser degree, but still significant) since inception in 2005.  The Tribe anticipates that Canyon Reach nutrient addition will compliment habitat restoration work implemented through project 200200200 in the Braided  and Straight Reaches. 

The large-scale biomonitoring program associated with this project covers approximately 235 km of the Kootenai River and key tributaries (see Figure 4 for monitoring sites).  This biomonitoring program is designed to be sensitive to water borne nutrients, species and community level responses within the water chemistry, algal, macroinvertebrate, and fish communities.  In addition, the project developed a fine-scale biomonitoring program in 2005, specifically to monitor the effectiveness of the nutrient addition experiment in the Kootenai River.  This targeted monitoring project is collecting data on algae species dynamics and key water chemistry parameters in the heart of the nutrient addition zone to provide managers with fine-scale information for adaptive management of the nutrient project on a timely basis.

The biomonitoring program provides critical monitoring data to help measure and evaluate the biological response of habitat restoration actions conducted under projects 200200200 and 200200800 as well as supporting the Tribe’s conservation aquaculture program.  Data gathered through this biomonitoring program will also be critical to implementation of the Kootenai River Habitat Restoration Program adaptive management plan and the Tribe’s subbasin-scale adaptive management plan.   

The Tribe began a multi-year stream habitat/biota survey of lower Kootenai River tributaries (between Bonners Ferry and Porthill, Idaho) in 2000.  Similar to efforts in the Kootenai River, an ecosystem-based perspective has been used in development of monitoring plans and restoration work in tributaries. Streams where historical kokanee salmon spawning has occurred were given top priority in the selection of tributaries segments to be restored.  The critical stream segments this project has and will continue to focus on are the area near the confluence of several key tributaries with the Kootenai River on its historical floodplain.  This tributary restoration work and the kokanee response is an important component of larger-scale efforts to enhance the Kootenai River food web.

This project addresses in river conditions only i.e., work is targeted to the aquatic ecosystem within the confines of the river banks, for the most part (some tributary riparian work has occurred and is planned).  Other Kootenai Tribe projects, specifically projects 200200800 and 200200200 will address riparian, wetland and terrestrial ecosystem habitats.

Restore Natural Recruitment of Kootenai River White Sturgeon (Kootenai River Habitat Restoration Program) (200200200)

The goal of the Kootenai River Habitat Restoration Program is to restore and maintain Kootenai River habitat conditions that support (1) all life stages of endangered Kootenai sturgeon and (2) all life stages of native focal species (i.e., burbot, bull trout, kokanee, westslope cutthroat trout, redband trout) through design and implementation of a suite of habitat restoration projects in the Braided, Straight and Meander reaches of the Kootenai River.  Building on nearly two decades of data collection and modeling related to physical habitat conditions in the Kootenai River, and on monitoring and evaluation data collected through IDFG’s project 198806500, and the Tribe’s Nutrient, Operational Loss Assessment, Reconnect, and Conservation Aquaculture projects, and the expertise of regional and local experts, the Tribe in collaboration with regional partners developed the Kootenai River Habitat Restoration Project Master Plan (Master Plan).  The Master Plan identifies limiting factors associated with river morphology, riparian habitat, aquatic habitat (including limiting factors associated with the six focal fish species), and other constraints, treatments to address those limiting factors, and restoration strategies for each river reach. 

Restoration treatments implemented through this project are designed to address: bank erosion and fine sediment inputs to downstream reaches, lack of cover for juvenile fish, lack of off channel habitat for rearing, insufficient depth for Kootenai sturgeon migration, lack of mainstem hydraulic complexity in the form of variable depth and velocity, insufficient pool frequency, simplified food web, lack of surfaces that support riparian recruitment, loss of floodplain connection, lack of coarse substrate for Kootenai sturgeon egg attachment and larval hiding, lack of bank vegetation, lack of off-channel habitat, lack of fish passage into tributaries, and grazing and floodplain land use.

Project actions are based on ecosystem restoration principles and will help to provide habitat attributes for Kootenai sturgeon that are identified in the Libby Dam Biological Opinion (implementation of the project is included in the Libby Dam settlement agreement), in addition to habitat needs for a range of life stages of burbot, bull trout, kokanee, westslope cutthroat trout, and redband trout.  

Project actions include:

• Design and implementation of habitat restoration projects in the Braided Reaches, Straight Reach under Phase 2 (i.e., 1a and 1b extension, Bonners Ferry Islands, Straight Reach, Middle Braided 2 Meander, Lower Braided 2 Meander, Cow Creek Slough, Cow Creek, Lower Mill Slough, and Mill Slough).  Projects are designed to restore and enhance mainstem, off channel, wetland and floodplain habitat.
• Design and implementation of a substrate addition project in the Meander Reach near Shorty’s Island (currently presented as a CAP 1135 project) where Kootenai sturgeon are currently spawning over sand and clay substrates.
• Targeted feasibility analysis, design and implementation of 2 to 3 habitat restoration projects in the Meander Reaches under Phase 2.  Projects are designed to restore floodplain connectivity and off channel habitat in the Meander Reaches with a focus on aquatic species.  This project compliments work for terrestrial communities, but will not address wildlife mitigation or terrestrial objectives.
• Development and implementation of monitoring and evaluation plans for each individual Phase 2 and Phase 3 project.
• Implementation of the Kootenai River Habitat Restoration Program adaptive management plan.

Data and analysis to support development of the project Master Plan, concept designs for Phase 2 and Phase 3, and development of preliminary and final designs for all projects has, and will continue to, incorporate data collection and analysis associated with the Nutrient project and Reconnect project (as well as the Operational Loss Assessment project).  Information collected through IDFG monitoring and evaluation activities for Kootenai sturgeon and burbot was also used to support development of the Master Plan, concept designs for Phase 2 and Phase 3, and development of preliminary and final designs is provide through the data collection and analysis associated with the Nutrient project.  The Tribe is coordinating with IDFG, MFWP and other partners (i.e., BCMFLNRO, USACE, USFWS, BPA) to incorporate the most recent data and analysis in each stage of the project design process.  IDFG participates in the Co-manager and Agency Team (CMART) that has helped develop and review the suite of projects proposed under this project and is coordinating with the Tribe to refine the monitoring and evaluation associated with each project as it is designed. 

Biological monitoring and evaluation to determine the biological response to the habitat restoration projects (i.e., 1135 project, and Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 projects) will be conducted by IDFG under their project 198806500.  The Tribe is coordinating directly with IDFG to review monitoring and evaluation associated with individual projects as those projects are developed.  The Tribe coordinated with IDFG to conduct pre- and post-project side channel monitoring in support of the Phase 1a and 1b projects implemented under this program in 2011.  The Tribe will supplement the IDFG sturgeon and burbot monitoring with additional side channel monitoring in 2012 and is also coordinating with IDFG on development and design of additional side channel monitoring plans.

Information collected through the Nutrient project’s (199404900) biomonitoring will also be used to help measure the biological response to the suite of habitat restoration projects at various trophic levels and among other fish communities.

IDFG and the program managers for the Tribe’s Nutrient project, Reconnect project and Operational Loss project are also participants in this projects Core Adaptive Management Team which will assist in review and analysis of monitoring and evaluation information and in implementation of the project adaptive management plan.

Reconnect Kootenai River with the Historical Floodplain Project (200200800)

The primary goal of the Reconnect project is to investigate and implement actions that enhance terrestrial and lentic habitats by reconnecting the Kootenai River with its historical floodplain in the Kootenai River.  This project was originally categorized as a wildlife habitat restoration project and the project was closely linked to work conducted under the Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Project (199206100) and the Operational Loss Assessment Project (200201100).  The Oploss Project is developing the framework to assess and monitor reconnection opportunities.  Each reconnect or mitigation project can be folded back into the ecological framework developed by the Oploss Project to assess cumulative impacts of multiple projects over time.  Floodplain reconnection activities under this project are purposely associated with the Tribe’s wildlife mitigation program to ensure long-term protection and designed to address both lentic and terrestrial objectives.  Under this project the Tribe has examined the feasibility of reconnecting floodplain habitats with the mainstem in the Meander Reaches of the Kootenai River.  Since 2002, this included identification and initial assessment of the feasibility of reconnecting six tributary/wetland complexes to the mainstem Kootenai River. 

Project actions include the following major components:

• Complete design, permitting and implementation of the Ball Creek Stream Restoration project.  
• Complete other floodplain reconnection activities in association with the Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Project (199206100) and the Operational Loss Assessment Project (200201100). The Reconnect Project will initiate reconnection/restoration activities on a newly acquired property under the Albeni Falls project (Nimz Ranch). 
• Develop a restoration ranking plan for floodplain/wetland reconnection, restoration and wildlife mitigation opportunities.
• Explore opportunities to create biologic, social, and economic benefits using flood/groundwater storage and implement pilot project.
• Assess floodplain ecosystem restoration effectiveness and inform prioritization process by implementing adaptive management process.  This includes implementing invasive species control management techniques in floodplain habitats and developing a study plan to assess interaction of trophic and nutrient dynamics between restored floodplain lentic systems and the Kootenai River.

In addition to supporting feasibility assessment work for Ball Creek and completing initial feasibility analysis for reconnecting six other tributary/wetland complexes in the Meander Reaches, LiDAR data collected as part of this project has helped develop a 2D hydrodynamic model that is used to assess Libby Dam hydraulic impacts, model vegetation succession, and simulate restoration effects to the floodplain under the Oploss Project along with supporting development of the Kootenai River Habitat Restoration Program Master Plan and conceptual design of projects to be implemented under project 200200200.

This project will complement and augment habitat restoration work planned in the Meander Reaches under Phase 3 of project 200200200 by creating conditions that help support an enhanced food web, and contribute to a more complex and diverse terrestrial habitat communities for a variety of wildlife focal species and aquatic species.  An important aspect of the Reconnect Project is that it purposefully focuses on wildlife mitigation in the Kootenai River floodplain to ensure long-term protection and enhancement opportunities.  Moreover, the Reconnect Project targets floodplain biotic communities identified by Oploss Project assessments with an emphasis on the intersection between aquatic and terrestrial connectivity.  The complimentary work conducted under project 200200200 will be addressing sturgeon and other focal species (e.g., burbot, kokanee, etc.) mitigation restoration opportunities in the Meander Reaches and focusing primarily on aquatic/riparian restoration objectives.

Biomonitoring data conducted under the Nutrient project (199404900) are used to help inform project design and will help measure the biological benefits of this project.

Kootenai River Fishery Investigations (Kootenai River Resident Fish Mitigation) (198806500)

While the three Kootenai Tribe projects in this proposal cycle (199404900, 200200200 and 200200800) are largely focused on completion of targeted feasibility assessment and implementation of actions to restore habitat (e.g., nutrient addition, mainstem restoration, side-channel restoration, tributary and floodplain reconnection), the Kootenai River Resident Fish Mitigation project (in coordination with biomonitoring conducted under 199404900) is the monitoring backbone that supports the design, monitoring and adaptive management of the various restoration projects.  The Kootenai River Resident Fish Mitigation project is composed of several studies specifically focused on the recovery of white sturgeon (ESA listed), burbot, and salmonid fisheries.

Project actions include the following major components:

• Monitor spatial and temporal distribution of Kootenai sturgeon spawning events, early May through mid-July by collecting sturgeon eggs on artificial substrates (egg mats).
• Monitor and evaluate Kootenai sturgeon vital statistics in response to recovery.
• Monitor and evaluate juvenile and adult burbot population dynamics.
• Monitor and evaluate burbot early life survival strategies.
• Monitor and evaluate salmonid vital statistics in response to recovery strategies.
• Co-manage and evaluate nutrient restoration program.

This project provides monitoring and evaluation to help better understand Kootenai sturgeon response to flow and temperature management operations implemented by the USACE and BPA (in coordination with other partner agencies) and to help inform regional decision-making processes regarding future operations.

This project provides monitoring and evaluation that is helping develop design criteria for Kootenai sturgeon and burbot for the Kootenai Tribe’s project 200200200 including design of the Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3 and 1135 projects.

This project provides monitoring and evaluation of Kootenai sturgeon and burbot that will be used to help evaluate, in coordination with information collected through the Tribe’s biomonitoring sites (199404900), the biological response to actions implemented under project 200200200. 

Information developed through this project is used to inform discussions and recommendations developed in the Kootenai River White Sturgeon Recovery Team, Burbot Conservation Committee, Libby Dam Flow Policy and Technical Teams, and the Tribe’s various technical and expert advisory groups (see subsequent discussion).

IDFG is also a partner to the Tribe on project 199404900 which helps support ecosystem restoration through nutrient addition as well as the extensive biomonitoring project.

4. Technical advisory teams, coordination mechanisms, and other critical outreach

A critical element of many of the projects within the Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program is the use of technical advisory teams to provide expert technical advice and critical review at various stages of each project.  Not every expert is an expert on every topic .  To address the need for a rigorous and timely level of review and/or design analysis on various projects and to be sure we get interdisciplinary input, a number of the Tribe’s projects have identified specific teams of technical experts representing a range of disciplines specific to the needs of each project (e.g., river restoration implementation or hydraulic engineering, etc.).  These groups fulfill different roles on each of the projects but in all cases are used to enhance the quality of the projects and provide independent review and input at critical junctures.

It was clear from the ISRPs comments that our presentation of the role and purpose of the different groups relative to different Tribal projects was confusing.  For example, in order to make the best use of these expert resources, and in order to assist in integration and information sharing between projects, groups that provide a technical advisory/oversight role for one project (e.g., IKERT for the Nutrient project) may serve as stakeholder outreach or coordination for another project (e.g., Habitat restoration project). 

Following is a summary of the major advisory teams that have been assembled for the Tribal projects that make use of them. Table 3 summarizes the different technical oversight or advisory groups, stakeholder or educational outreach and other complimentary coordination mechanisms associated with each project. 

Table 3.  Summary of Kootenai Tribe project technical oversight and/or advisory groups, stakeholder or education outreach and other complimentary coordination associated with each project.

* Projects that are part of this ISRP review.

Following is a summary of the major advisory groups associated with each of the Tribe’s projects.  Where appropriate, membership details are provided for the unique expert technical groups to help illustrate the specific suite of technical expertise that has been assembled to help guide the projects.

Kootenai River Ecosystem Restoration (BPA Project 1994-049-00)

Technical Review Group: International Kootenay/i River Ecosystem Restoration Team (IKERT)

Purpose:  Annual IKERT meetings have occurred since 2000 and have played an important role in organizing and directing activities for this project.  The IKERT group assists with presenting, analyzing, and discussing monitoring and research data collected by Tribal staff and project contractors to meet project objectives.  During the past decade, the group has been heavily involved in review of the nutrient and productivity technical aspects of the project, both for the Kootenai River and Kootenay Lake.  The group has played an important role in designing the Tribe’s trophic level and water quality Biomonitoring program, and nutrient addition feasibility, testing, and implementation. 

Group composition:  All parties involved in the management and/or research of the Kootenai River ecosystem are regularly invited to attend the IKERT annual meeting.  Currently representatives from Kootenai Tribe of Idaho, Bonneville Power Administration, IDFG, MFWP, British Columbia Ministry of Forests Land Natural Resource Operations, the University of Idaho, Idaho State University, and the University of British Columbia attend IKERT functions during most years.  Table 4 lists the IKERT representatives.  

Table 4.  Core representatives of International Kootenay/i Ecosystem Restoration Team.

Frequency of meetings and/or other coordination:  The larger group meeting (all members) occurs once per year, typically in the spring.  This allows for review of the previous year’s data and to make adjustments prior to the nutrient addition and biomonitoring seasons.  Smaller sub-group meetings occur throughout the year.  One such group is the IKERT nutrient sub-committee which meets via conference call 1-2 times per month during the nutrient addition season (June-Sept.).  Other smaller meetings include discussions concerning sampling designs, sample size, sampling frequency, data analyses, and report and manuscript development occur on approximately a quarterly basis throughout the year.   

Purpose of meetings and/or other coordination:  The primary purpose of the IKERT meetings is to present and review project results within a technical workgroup setting that allows for the interchange of ideas and improvements.  Additionally, the group discusses ecosystem restoration ideas and techniques, and provides a forum for presenting information about related topics in other river systems and other inter-related Kootenai River projects.

Other desired outcomes include technical analyses and input on technical issues, such as nutrient limitation evaluations, that can be used by tribal management for decision-making and adaptive management.  For example this group was responsible for evaluating biological and water chemistry data and making a recommendation to the Tribe and Idaho Dept. of Fish and Game regarding whether to add or not add nutrients to the Kootenai River in 2004.

At times, the IKERT meeting will be combined with an Adaptive Environmental Assessment (AEA) workshop to plan and coordinate all Kootenai River Projects in the Idaho reaches of the river.  This allows for a "big-picture" view of fish and wildlife projects in the subbasin and how to best coordinate them to recover the Kootenai River ecosystem.  These have typically occurred on a 5-year basis.  As the Kootenai Tribe’s subbasin-scale adaptive management plan moves forward to completion we will review coordination with the AEA workshop.

Kootenai River Floodplain Ecosystem Operational Loss Assessment, Protection, Mitigation and Rehabilitation Project (BPA Project 200201100)

Technical Review Group: Research Design and Review Team (RDRT)

Purpose:  The purpose of the RDRT is to provide input, reviews, and critiques of project methodology, implementation, analyses results, and interpretation.  The RDRT helps to incorporate this information into the Operation Loss Assessment.

Group composition: RDRT includes invited experts from a range of relevant disciplines including terrestrial wildlife ecology, floodplain and vegetation ecology, wetland ecology, invertebrate ecology, hydrology, Libby Dam operations, modeling expertise, etc.  Table 5 presents the RDRT members.

Table 5. Research Design and Review Team (RDRT) participants.

 Frequency of meetings and/or other coordination:  The RDRT and RDRT subgroups are convened as necessary at appropriate times during the development of methods and/or review results of analyses.  Typically, a subgroup is convened at least quarterly, with a full group meeting occurring annually.

Purpose of meetings and/or other coordination:  The purpose of the annual meeting and quarterly subgroup meetings is to inform, discuss, review, critique and recommend project related activities and direction.

Kootenai River Habitat Restoration Project (BPA Project 2002-002-00)

Technical Review Groups: Peer Reviewer Advisory Team (PRAT), Co-manager/Agency Review Team (CMART), Kootenai River Habitat Restoration Program Policy Team (KRHRP PT), Modeling Review Group, and Core Adaptive Management Team (CAMT).

Peer Reviewer Advisory Team (PRAT): The purpose of the Peer Advisory Review Team (PRAT) is to provide additional depth of expertise to the Tribe’s design team.  The PRAT assists in development and review of design concepts, preliminary designs and feasibility analysis, and final design. PRAT members are also available on an on-call basis to provide specific input into development of design criteria, review or interpretation of modeling outputs, or one-on-one assistance with design components. The design team has made regular use of PRAT members in this capacity, seeking advice on subjects such as development of a literature review of salmonid habitat requirements, assistance in development of side channel design criteria, a site visit to the lower Columbia River to view and interpret sturgeon spawning habitat characteristics with a local expert, and review of structural feasibility of design components in the Phase 1a and 1b projects.  Table 6. summarizes the PRAT representation.

Table 6. KRHRP Peer Reviewer Advisory Team (PRAT) representatives.

 Frequency of meetings and/or other coordination: The PRAT meets formally on average twice a year for two-day workshops and is also available on call to provide input and review on an as needed basis.

Other advisory Kootenai River Habitat Restoration Project technical groups

Co-manager and Agency Review Team (CMART): The Tribe established the CMART to provide a venue for discussion, review of design concepts and preliminary and final design. The intent was to ensure comprehensive information sharing among the co-managers and agency partners who are working in the Kootenai subbasin, and also the Federal agencies who have legal obligations under the ESA and Tribal Trust with the project design team. The primary purpose of this group is to ensure that best available science is incorporated into the development, design and implementation of restoration projects and that projects are developed in a collaborative manner.

Participants include technical representatives from: Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG), Montana Department of Fish Wildlife and Parks (MFWP), B.C. Ministry of Forests Land Natural Resource Operations (BC MFLNRO formerly BC Ministry of Environment), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), BPA, Kootenai Tribe (including program managers for other projects), and University of Idaho.  This group also includes the Kootenai River White Sturgeon Recovery Team members, individuals involved in implementation of the Burbot Conservation Strategy, and project managers for the Tribe’s other ecosystem restoration projects (e.g., Operational Loss, Reconnect, and Ecosystem).

Core Adaptive Management Team (CAMT): The CAMT includes many participants from the CMART but the purpose of this group is specifically to review monitoring and evaluation plans for individual projects, and participate in annual adaptive management reviews of the KRHRP. The Tribe will also use the CAMT as a mechanism to ensure coordination with monitoring and evaluation activities conducted by co-managers (e.g., IDFG, BC MFLNRO, MFWP) to better understand the effect of KRHRP projects on focal populations. In the future, as the project progresses, the Tribe may recruit additional expertise to this team to assist in review and interpretation of KRHRP monitoring and evaluation information.

Modeling Review Team: The Tribe has also established a modeling review team, which includes the Tribe’s design team members, and representatives from USGS and USACE (and others as appropriate). The purpose of this group is to review model outputs and interpretations, validate and identify potential adjustments to models, and coordinate efforts to eliminate duplication of effort.

Policy Team: The Tribe also established a Kootenai Habitat Policy Team to help provide policy guidance for the project and to help support effective interaction between policy level agency representatives and field staff. Policy Team members include appointed policy level representatives for the USACE, BPA, USFWS, states of Idaho and Montana, and Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes.  NPPC members and staff have also regularly attended Policy Team meetings.

Other major coordination and outreach forums in the Kootenai River subbasin that influence all of three Kootenai Tribe and one IDFG proposal contained in this review.

The following additional coordination and outreach forums play a critical role in the coordination and integration of ecosystem restoration efforts in the Kootenai River.  This information is provided to assist the ISRP in understanding some of the other avenues through which project actions are coordinated.

Kootenai Valley Resource Initiative:  The Kootenai Tribe of Idaho, the City of Bonners Ferry, and Boundary County are working together to address resource issues affecting the Lower Kootenai subbasin. The Kootenai Valley Resource Initiative (KVRI) was formed under a Joint Powers Agreement between the Tribe, the City of Bonners Ferry, and Boundary County in October 2001 to foster community involvement and development in the restoration and enhancement of the resources of the Kootenai Valley.  The initiative includes membership and partners that represent the broad diversity of the community.  The group has been meeting monthly for over ten years.

KVRI is a proactive forum for the community to bring key players to the table, build connectivity between the community and the agencies for information sharing and exchange, as well as to use partnerships and a collaborative approach for community involvement in restoration efforts.  KVRI meets monthly and we use this forum to provide the KVRI board members, agency partners, and community members with information and periodic updates about our projects at key intervals during project implementation.  Additionally, subcommittees can be formed (with the approval of the KVRI board) to address a specific subject or issue in more detail.  Please see information about KVRI subcommittees and how our projects have used them below.  KVRI has also assisted with hosting broad scale public outreach meetings for our projects, as well as the outreach for the development of the Kootenai Subbasin Plan.

KVRI Co-Chairs include Kootenai Tribe of Idaho Tribal Chairperson, Boundary County Commissioner, and Mayor of Bonners Ferry.  KVRI Board Member Representatives include: landowner (Industrial), business/industry, conservationist, soil conservation district/ag landowner, corporate agriculture/landowner, U.S. Forest Service – Idaho Panhandle National Forest, Idaho Fish and Game Commission, and social/cultural/historical.

In addition to the board members, KVRI includes many partners.  KVRI partners include a diverse group of local, state and federal agencies, non-profit organizations, congressional representatives, and community members.  Project outreach occurs at least annually through KVRI and more frequently on an as-needed basis.

KVRI Burbot Subcommittee: Due to changes in the ecosystem over the last century, the burbot in the Lower Kootenai River had collapsed and was proposed for listing.  Through the Burbot Subcommittee of the KVRI, the Tribe facilitated a collaborative process to prepare and implement a conservation strategy to restore the burbot population.   An MOU developed to confirm commitment and guide implementation of the conservation strategy was signed by 16 agencies and entities. By building consensus through the development of the conservation strategy, actions needed to restore burbot and the habitat upon which it depends maintains strong community and agency support. The Tribe coordinates with the KVRI Burbot Subcommittee to gain community input for the support and implementation of this transboundary effort.

The KVRI Burbot Subcommittee includes over 30 members including action agency and co-managers, representatives from non-profit organizations, and community members.  The group meets a least semi-annually to coordinate and review progress.  

KVRI Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Subcommittee: This group was developed in response to an MOA between Kootenai Tribe of Idaho, Idaho Department of Environmental Quality and EPA region10, and the need to coordinate with City and county governments in association with the designation of this committee as a Watershed Advisory Group (WAG) by Idaho DEQ.  The group deals with: Subbasin assessment; load allocation, analysis and implementation; BMP’s for restoration; coordinating partners and responsibility; and looking at new approaches to Temperature TMDL (i.e., potential natural vegetation).

The KVRI TMDL Subcommittee includes 15 members including citizens, county government, Kootenai Tribe, State, Idaho DEQ, farmers, Natural Resources Conservation Service, NGOs, environmental representatives, and the county soil conservation district.  The subcommittee meeting quarterly.

KVRI Wetland/Riparian Subcommittee: This subcommittee developed a reference report for the Tribe, agencies and others to use documenting a decision-making process regarding wetlands and riparian areas in the Kootenai Valley.  The purpose of the group is to balance social, natural resources and economic perspectives; coordinate purchase and restoration of wetlands; work in partnership with IDFG and associated Wildlife Management Areas, and conduct education and outreach.

The KVRI Wetland/Riparian Subcommittee includes 15 to 20 members including citizens, county government, Tribe, IDFG, farmers, USFS, Natural Resources Conservation  Service, NGOs, environmental representatives, county soil conservation district, and forestry, agricultural, industrial representatives.  The group hasn’t met since 2006.  The report resulting from the group’s effort is available at: http://restoringthekootenai.org/resources/F&W-Library/Wildlife/7WL-Final-WRCS.pdf)

KVRI Grizzly Bear Conservation Subcommittee: This subcommittee serves as a forum to disseminate natural resource information, educate community on grizzly bear management and to determine management opportunities.  The purpose of the group is to enhance understanding of grizzly bear life history, population trends/genetics, and habitats needs. 

The KVRI Grizzly Bear Conservation Subcommittee includes 25 members including citizens, county government, Tribe, IDFG, farmers, USFS, Natural Resources Conservation  Service, NGOs, environmental representatives, county soil conservation district, and forestry, agricultural, industrial representatives.  The subcommittee meets quarterly.

KVRI Wildlife Auto-Collision Subcommittee:  This subcommittee serves as a conduit for reaching out to the community for feedback and guidance in considering ways to reduce wildlife conflicts and building support for transportation mitigation efforts.  The purpose of the subcommittee is to implementation of consensus based strategies, identify and increase line-of-sight in area hot spots, collect data to identify hotspots and hotspot changes due to development, and assist with the wildlife crossing database.

The KVRI Wildlife Auto-Collision Subcommittee includes 30 members including citizens, county government, Tribe, IDFG, Idaho Transportation Department, USFWS, USFS, NRCS, US Federal Highways Administration, forestry, agricultural, industrial representatives and NGO environmental representatives.  The subcommittee meets once or twice a year.

KVRI Forestry Subcommittee:  The subcommittee works to enhance understanding and help address federal forest resource issues with the community, including and base planning and coordination using a landscape approach.  The purpose of the is to approach decision making process with a balanced approach and make lands economically, ecologically and socially sustainable, use science-based approaches, develop common ground for natural resource managers and community alike, develop grants for additional restoration opportunities and provide education and outreach.

The KVRI Forestry Subcommittee includes 30 members and includes citizens, county government, Tribe, IDFG, Idaho Transportation Dept., USFWS, USFS, NRCS, loggers, forestry, agricultural, industrial representatives and NGO environmental representatives.  The subcommittee meets quarterly.

Libby Dam Flow Policy and Technical Teams:  Libby Dam flow management coordination, as it relates to BiOp requirements, occurs through the USFWS BiOp/Libby Dam Operations Regional Flow Policy Team coordinated by the USACE.  The Policy Team assigns a Technical Team to summarize the biological and physical considerations for a policy decision regarding sturgeon flow and temperature management at Libby Dam each year. The recommendation is prepared with the specific intent of achieving the requirements of clarified RPA 1 Action 1.5, along with the physical attributes in the Kootenai River thought to positively influence sturgeon spawning success. Success of obtaining certain habitat attributes implemented by the KRHRP will take place in this forum, as well as the USFWS white sturgeon recovery team.  

Group participants include the Federal action agencies and co-managers (BPA, USACE,
USFWS, Kootenai Tribe, IDFG, MFWP).  The group meets annually in the spring to develop and approve flow recommendations for implementation during the sturgeon spawning season.

Kootenai River White Sturgeon Recovery Team:  The Kootenai River White Sturgeon Recovery Team is convened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.  The Recovery Team shares information and analysis regarding Kootenai sturgeon population status, monitoring and evaluation, research work, habitat restoration initiatives, and provides advice to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.  The group also functions as a forum to review and discuss habitat restoration projects, the Tribe’s Conservation Aquaculture program, etc. 

The KRWSRT is lead by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and includes appointed representatives from BPA, MFWP, IDFG, USACE and BCMFLNRO.  In addition to the formal membership, KRWSRT meetings are attended by a broad range of experts including members of the Upper Columbia River White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Technical Working Group, sturgeon experts, and representatives of stakeholder groups.  Kootenai River White Sturgeon Recovery Team meetings occur two to three times a year.

5.  Kootenai Tribe’s Kootenai River Draft Subbasin Scale Adaptive Management Plan.  

In a number of the ISRP responses to the Tribe’s projects, the ISRP requested information regarding the draft Kootenai Subbasin Adaptive Management Plan being developed by the Tribe and requested that the draft document be provided.  The Tribe has loaded the working draft document onto the Tribe’s web site at http://www.restoringthekootenai.org/.

We were reluctant to provide this document at this time because this is a working document that is only partially complete and additional coordination and development of the document and associated processes still needs to occur.  This adaptive management plan is not a requirement of the NPCC program nor is it specifically required as a component of any of the Tribe’s projects, this is an initiative that the Tribe has undertaken in order to better manage their overall Fish and Wildlife Program. 

The purpose of the Kootenai Subbasin Adaptive Management Plan is to link each of the projects within the Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program via a subbasin scale framework in order to better understand and adaptively manage how those projects collectively contribute to ecosystem restoration in the Kootenai subbasin.  Once completed, the Kootenai Subbasin Adaptive Management Plan is intended to be a living document that will be refined and updated over time as new information becomes available, as results of previous restoration actions are realized, and as the Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program continues to mature. 

The Kootenai Subbasin Adaptive Management Plan is intended to provide a framework to formally integrate the Tribe’s various programs and projects.  However, it is important to understand that it is not intended to replace or supersede the specific, detailed monitoring and evaluation or adaptive management components of the individual projects that make up the Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program. 

The geographic scope of the adaptive management plan includes the Kootenai subbasin as measured from ridge top to ridge top.  Because this plan is designed to support the Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program projects, and because the Tribe has no authority to manage other agencies’ projects or programs, the administrative scope of the plan is limited to the Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife program projects.  However, in recognition of the size and geographic extent of the Kootenai subbasin, and cooperative efforts to manage fish and wildlife resources, data and analysis developed by other agencies will also be used to where possible provide critical supplementary information in support of this adaptive management plan.

The Tribe initially explored development of a program-scale adaptive management plan in 2004.  At that time the Tribe hosted a multi-agency adaptive management workshop designed to collect input from scientific experts and management stakeholders on development of a subbasin scale adaptive management plan.  Topics addressed in this workshop included: 1) identification of particular management options that have potential for restoring key functions in the Kootenai River ecosystem, and important attributes of these options, 2) evaluation of alternative plans for applying combinations of these options over the next few decades, and 3) review of key needs for improvement of monitoring programs in order to insure timely detection of intended immediate effects of each option as well as possible longer-term side effects.  The results of this workshop were recorded in 2005 in the document, Draft Kootenai River Adaptive Management Plan (Walters, Korman, Anders, Holderman, & Ireland, 2005).  For a variety of reasons, primarily related to work load on other projects, this effort was temporarily shelved. This initial document provided a general framework that helped guide the evolution of projects over time, particularly with respect to common ecosystem stressors and responses addressed by multiple projects. 

In 2010, with the completion of the Kootenai River Habitat Restoration Program and the general shift in emphasis of the Tribe’s Fish and Wildlife Program from assessment and evaluation to feasibility assessment and implementation, the Tribe reinitiated efforts to develop a subbasin-scale adaptive management plan in November 2010.  This effort has moved along in a start-and-stop fashion (interrupted by other program work, development of project proposals, etc.) and is currently on hold to be reinitiated in spring 2012. 

In the last review of the document internal Tribal team identified a number of missing items and areas of concern in the current draft document.  Future work sessions will occur in spring through fall of 2012 to: 1) identify and confirm program goals and objectives; 2) refine and finalize the list of metrics used in the program; 3) review and confirm protocols for data storage, confirm methods for data entry, validation, sharing and retrieval; 4) confirm details for coordination with critical non-Tribal entities (e.g., IDFG, BCMFLNRO, MFWP); and 5) develop the agenda and work plan for a fall 2012 meeting to review data from the 2012 field season and develop an initial set of adaptive management recommendations.  The results of this first meeting will be compiled and added to the current draft of the document.  A final review draft of the Kootenai Subbasin Adaptive Management Plan will be distributed prior to the Adaptive Management Team meeting in Fall 2012.  At the fall meeting, we will use the document as a guide for decision-making, and note any additional content that needs to be added so the document is an effective tool for guiding the adaptive management decision-making process.

In addition, the Tribe is in the process of identifying a team of external experts to assist in the review and refinement of the current draft document.  Completion of the final document is scheduled for January 31, 2013.

We hope the ISRP will recognize that this is a partial draft document and still very much a work in progress.  Toward this end, suggestions to improve the overall framework and content would be appreciated and will be incorporated into our future efforts to the extent possible.

 References

 EPA.  2004.  Kootenai river valley wetlands and riparian conservation strategy.  EPA Wetland Development  Grant Program.  EPA Contract No. CD-97001501.  Kootenai Valley Resource Initiative.  Bonners Ferry, ID.

Kootenai Tribe of Idaho.  1999.  Kootenai Tribe of Idaho Fish and Wildlife Management Plan.  Bonners Ferry, Idaho.

 Mullan, Lieutenant J.  1855.  Report of Lieutenant John Mullan, U.S.A. of his examination of the country from the Bitter Root Valley to the Flathead lake and Kootenay River.  Pages 516-526 in Report of the explorations for a route for the Pacific railroad near the forty-seventh and forty-ninth parallels of north latitude from St. Paul to Puget Sound.  Pacific Railroad Surveys.  Vol. I.  Part 2.  33^rd Congress, 2^nd session, Senate Executive Document No. 78 and House Executive Document No. 91.  Washington, D.C.

 Pennington, D. 1999. Personal communication on waterfowl population and production estimates for the USFWS Kootenai National Wildlife Refuge. Boundary County, Idaho.

 Richards, D.  1997.  Kootenai River Biological Baseline Status Report.  U.S. Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, Environment, Fish and Wildlife.  Portland, Oregon.

 Schaeffer, C.  1940.  The subsistence quest of the Kutenai:  a study of the interaction of culture and environment.  Kootenai Tribe.  Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation.  University of Pennsylvania.

 Turney-High, H.H.  1941.  Memoirs of the American Anthropological Association: Ethnography of the Kutenai.  American Anthropological Association.  Menasha, Wisconsin.

 KTOI and MFWP (Kootenai Tribe of Idaho and Montana Fish Wildlife & Parks).  2004. Kootenai Subbasin Plan. Volume I and II. Prepared for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council.  Portland, OR.

Walters, C. J., Korman, J., Anders, P., Holderman, C., & Ireland, S. (2005). Draft Kootenai River Adaptive Management Plan.