The ISRP thanks the project sponsors for clarifying the role of ISEMP in monitoring the effects of the proposed enhancement project. The information collected in the surveys will be very helpful in determining this project's effectiveness, assuming that ISEMP monitoring will actually include the side channel itself.

Questions about the potential benefits of the work to focal species remain, however. In their response, project sponsors compare the abundance of Chinook and redband trout (RBT)/steelhead in side- and mainstem channels elsewhere in the Entiat River. From 2005 ISEMP snorkel surveys they noted that there was an approximate 10-fold increase in fish density (Chinook and RBT/steelhead) in side channels compared to the main river, with fish densities in side channels averaging 1.1 per square meter. They further state that the site of this proposal compares in features to the nearby Knapp-Wham irrigation channel, which contained 550 Chinook and RBT/steelhead per 1,000 square meters in 2005. This statement implied that the Knapp-Wham channel represents the potential summer rearing capacity for the site in question once restoration work was completed. When the 0.55 fish/square meter target is applied to the 521 square meters of channel and pond habitat made available in this project, the result is an annual incremental increase in rearing capacity of 287 Chinook and RBT/steelhead. However, project sponsors project an annual increase of 564 juveniles, not 287. They may have derived this figure from the product of 1.1 fish per square meter (from natural side channel surveys) and 521 square meters of newly available habitat according to the proposal (1.085 x 521 = 565). However, in order to achieve a target of 564 juveniles, this project site would need to have twice the rearing capacity of the Knapp-Wham site, and there was no explanation why this should be so. Therefore, the ISRP is still uncertain what the improved capacity of this short irrigation channel would be after the culverts are fixed, the log structure is installed, and riparian plantings are completed. Equally important, in this type of proposal, the sponsors should be able to relate their project to subbasin objectives for habitat improvement and adult projections on a quantitative basis. For example, in this case, the sponsors anticipate being able to produce approximately 300-600 juvenile anadromous salmonids by the habitat project they are proposing. If these are actually smolts, and if there is a 0.5% SAR, then this project will produce 1.5-3 adults annually.

Nevertheless, as the project sponsors point out, this is a modest proposal with modest costs, and the monitoring should be adequate if this site is actually included in the ISEMP Entiat monitoring effort.