1. Purpose: Significance to Regional Programs, Technical Background, and Objectives

This proposal provides excellent technical background information that demonstrates the significance of the project to regional programs. A map with overview of landownership helps describe the physical setting. The descriptive summary of existing habitat and fundamental habitat problems is generally well done. Efforts in Lapwai Creek are conducted jointly by this project on private lands and by project #199001700 on land owned by the Nez Perce Tribe, tribal members, and public lands. Objectives for the two projects are the same and work is based upon the 2009 Lapwai Creek Restoration Strategy, developed by both organizations that delineated the priority stream assessment units in the watershed.

Limiting factors were identified and standards were established for reducing their impacts. Importantly, quantitative deliverables and objectives were presented so reviewers and stakeholders have a good idea of what may be accomplished by this effort.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management (Evaluation of Results)

The proposal provides an excellent, detailed, photographic and quantitative description of accomplishments associated with each objective during the past 10 years or so. Other proposals should take notice, as often other proposals simply provide reference to project reports. This approach makes it easy for reviewers and stakeholders to see that this effort has been successful in past efforts. The description of the prioritization process and the flow charts used are clear and nicely done.

The proposal indicates it will develop a robust adaptive management program that addresses concerns raised by the ISRP with regard to adaptive management in general. This is good, but given that the project has been in operation for many years it is not clear why a robust adaptive management plan has not already been developed. In the adaptive management section, the proposal provides examples of how it has learned from its ongoing activities.

3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions

The project has its own monitoring program, and the program discusses linkages to the Nez Perce Tribe's effort, action effectiveness monitoring, and the CHaMP effort that will begin in 2018. It would be good if the sponsor can directly address the issue of whether its proposed monitoring overlaps or duplicates that of other monitoring, and how well the proposed monitoring will contribute to programs that will begin in a few years, that is CHaMP.

The proposal provides a good discussion of several potential emerging limiting factors such as climate change impacts on temperature and flow, nonnative species, predators, and toxic chemicals. The proposal did not fully discuss, based on past experience, whether private landownership constrains implementation of the high priority projects; the sponsors did state that the success of certain objectives is dependent on cooperation by private landowners. This leads to high uncertainty. Past experience, as communicated on the site visit, is that landowners approach the SWCD for assistance during emergencies like the 1996 flood. The ISRP encourages the sponsors to continue their consideration of possible inducements.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Seven deliverables are proposed to support the objectives. They are presented in sufficient detail, with specific design criteria. Excellent benchmarks are provided with the proposed deliverables. Methods are briefly mentioned with each objective.

===========QUALIFICATIONS FOLLOW================

The ISRP has two concerns, both of which can be dealt with in contracting and future reviews:

 

Ensure that ongoing monitoring is consistent with and can be efficiently utilized by monitoring programs that will begin in a few years (CHaMP in 2018),

Further consider the issue of how private landownership inhibits high priority projects and develop additional approaches that encourage private landowners to participate.

1. Purpose: Significance to Regional Programs, Technical Background, and Objectives

This proposal provides excellent technical background information that demonstrates the significance of the project to regional programs. A map with overview of landownership helps describe the physical setting. The descriptive summary of existing habitat and fundamental habitat problems is generally well done. Efforts in Lapwai Creek are conducted jointly by this project on private lands and by project #199001700 on land owned by the Nez Perce Tribe, tribal members, and public lands. Objectives for the two projects are the same and work is based upon the 2009 Lapwai Creek Restoration Strategy, developed by both organizations that delineated the priority stream assessment units in the watershed.

Limiting factors were identified and standards were established for reducing their impacts. Importantly, quantitative deliverables and objectives were presented so reviewers and stakeholders have a good idea of what may be accomplished by this effort.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management (Evaluation of Results)

The proposal provides an excellent, detailed, photographic and quantitative description of accomplishments associated with each objective during the past 10 years or so. Other proposals should take notice, as often other proposals simply provide reference to project reports. This approach makes it easy for reviewers and stakeholders to see that this effort has been successful in past efforts. The description of the prioritization process and the flow charts used are clear and nicely done.

The proposal indicates it will develop a robust adaptive management program that addresses concerns raised by the ISRP with regard to adaptive management in general. This is good, but given that the project has been in operation for many years it is not clear why a robust adaptive management plan has not already been developed. In the adaptive management section, the proposal provides examples of how it has learned from its ongoing activities.

3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions

The project has its own monitoring program, and the program discusses linkages to the Nez Perce Tribe's effort, action effectiveness monitoring, and the CHaMP effort that will begin in 2018. It would be good if the sponsor can directly address the issue of whether its proposed monitoring overlaps or duplicates that of other monitoring, and how well the proposed monitoring will contribute to programs that will begin in a few years, that is CHaMP.

The proposal provides a good discussion of several potential emerging limiting factors such as climate change impacts on temperature and flow, nonnative species, predators, and toxic chemicals. The proposal did not fully discuss, based on past experience, whether private landownership constrains implementation of the high priority projects; the sponsors did state that the success of certain objectives is dependent on cooperation by private landowners. This leads to high uncertainty. Past experience, as communicated on the site visit, is that landowners approach the SWCD for assistance during emergencies like the 1996 flood. The ISRP encourages the sponsors to continue their consideration of possible inducements.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Seven deliverables are proposed to support the objectives. They are presented in sufficient detail, with specific design criteria. Excellent benchmarks are provided with the proposed deliverables. Methods are briefly mentioned with each objective.

===========QUALIFICATIONS FOLLOW================

The ISRP has two concerns, both of which can be dealt with in contracting and future reviews:

 

Modified by Dal Marsters on 6/11/2013 3:48:23 PM.