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.

The ISRP was provided a response to the fix-it loop for proposal 199901700 Protect and Restore Lapwai Creek Watershed (NPT) and 200207000 Lapwai Creek Anadromous Habitat (NPSWCD) - integrated sister projects to address habitat restoration and protection on Lapwai Creek on tribal and private land.

The sponsors addressed the questions raised by the ISRP in the preliminary review. The adequacy of the answers to inform and assist the ISRP in their proposal evaluation varied. The ISRP thanks the sponsors for the time and effort in producing the revised proposal narrative and explanations of the projects' history.

The sponsors indicated that stream habitat and watershed inventories, and a compilation on fish population abundance will be completed soon; final assessments shall be available in 2007. Based on that commitment, these projects are Fundable in Part (incrementally). In 2007, the fundable work includes completion of the inventory and assessments. Following that, work possibly fundable in 2008 and 2009 might be for restoration actions, contingent upon a written plan that uses those assessments to establish biological objectives, strategies and actions, and an approach to measure whether progress is being made in achieving the objectives.

The reporting of results was limited to a reporting of tasks accomplished, i.e., compliance monitoring. When they are developing their prescriptions they should include an evaluation of the biological results of their past actions. What is needed is a specific goal, with a timeframe for changes in habitat conditions and fish population abundance and productivity. Sponsors clarify for the ISRP their understanding of compliance and effectiveness monitoring, and inform the ISRP that they appreciate the necessity of effectiveness monitoring, but state that it is beyond the willingness of Council and BPA to fund those data collections and analysis. The ISRP understands the constraints placed on sponsors, but also believes sponsors need to be creative in developing methods to determine whether their restoration efforts are providing a benefit. Can riparian habitat be evaluated by photo points or aerial photography and be cost effective? How can stream flow and stream temperature be monitored to determine if treatments were effective? How can adult fish in and smolts out be measured? An evaluation plan is expected.

An integrated process of watershed assessment remains incomplete after several years, but they can be credited with developing conservation plans and completion of several small actions. The revised narrative for the proposed work was a much better presentation than the original, and may have been acceptable if originally submitted in this manner. It also outlined the acceptable qualifications of the proponents.

This work in Lapwai Creek is supportable because of the potential for anadromous fish production. The answers to the questions and the narrative revision go a long way to clarifying for the ISRP the status and progress of anadromous fish species (primarily steelhead) and restoration potential in this watershed. The ISRP had many questions for the sponsors, so the detailed evaluation of the response to each is beyond the space and time available in this fix it loop review.