The ISRP is pleased to see stronger ties to fish and aquatic habitat here than in most SWCD proposals; this still works to implement Best Management Practices, but the authors have done an assessment and prioritized the tributaries with an understanding of what needs to be worked on first. This is a very strong point of this proposal. They used information from their assessment to actually inform their current understanding; i.e., some of the assessment data changed their minds. There is also a strong working connection, not just lip service, to IDFG steelhead studies on the Potlatch system.

The M&E needs to be better developed and coordinated; see ISRP's programmatic comments on M&E. Fish monitoring would be dependent upon IDFG. This is not likely a situation where in-depth habitat effectiveness monitoring is needed. The effectiveness monitoring should use methods that are peer reviewed and up to Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership (PNAMP) and Collaborative Systemwide Evaluation Program (CSMEP) standards.

In order to track progress toward a "restored" state, abundance targets (in this case, numbers of steelhead) are needed. Project staff will need to work with others to better identify abundance goals for fish in the Potlatch River. On page 9, paragraph 2 of the proposal, 5,900 - 10,000 adult A-run steelhead are identified as the goal for the Clearwater, and sponsors suggest that the Potlatch could produce a significant number of these fish. These goals should largely be identified by management agencies and perhaps a recovery plan.