Rainwater Wildlife Area - Columbia Basin Fish _ Wildlife Authority by wuzhenguang


									                                   Rainwater Wildlife Area
                       Northwest Power Conservation Council
                           Fiscal Years 2007-09 Project Solicitation

                                             Project # 200002600

A. Abstract
The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) plan ongoing
habitat protection and enhancement, operations and maintenance, and monitoring and
evaluation under the Rainwater Wildlife Mitigation Project. The project provides
perpetual habitat protection and habitat enhancement in the Walla Walla Subbasin. The
8,678 acre project area was established in 1998 by the CTUIR under the Northwest
Power Conservation Council (NPCC) Fish and Wildlife Program and Washington Interim
Wildlife Mitigation Agreement (BPA et al., 1993) to protect, enhance, and mitigate
wildlife impacted by development of the John Day and McNary hydroelectric dams. The
project is located in the South Fork Touchet River watershed, in Columbia County, about
8 miles south of Dayton, Washington adjacent to the Umatilla National Forest. The area
was selected by the CTUIR and BPA as a regional mitigation project because of its
relatively large size, location in the upper headwaters of the Touchet River watershed,
and ability to provide dual benefits for fish and wildlife resources and provide in-kind
wildlife mitigation.

The project contains 5,000 acres coniferous forest, 2,900 acre grassland, and 800 of acres
riparian habitat. Nearly 10 miles of headwater spawning and rearing habitat exists for
Threatened summer steelhead and bull trout, and resident trout. The project provides
5,185 Habitat Units (HU’s) of protection credit and 1,850 enhancement HU’s for nine
target mitigation species, including: yellow warbler, great blue heron, mink, spotted
sandpiper, black-capped chickadee, downy woodpecker, western meadowlark, blue
grouse, and mule deer.

Project objectives include: 1) Protect habitat to maintain 5,185 baseline/protection HU’s;
and 2) enhance habitat to develop 1,850 enhancement HU’s. In addition, the Rainwater
Wildlife Area, in conjunction with the CTUIR Walla Walla Fish and Enhancement
Project, incorporate an objective enhance anadromous fish productivity within wildlife
area streams (South Fork Touchet and Griffin Fork). Operations and maintenance
include fence maintenance, noxious weed control, and implementation of a
comprehensive access and travel management plan. Habitat enhancement includes
instream, floodplain/riparian, and upland restoration. Activities include new fence
construction, weed control, tree thinning, road obliteration, large wood additions to
instream and floodplain habitat, and planting. Propagation of native plant materials in
support of habitat restoration efforts will be accomplished through the CTUIR native
plant nursery. Monitoring and evaluation will be accomplished to evaluate project
effectiveness through various CTUIR programs.

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                           Page 1
B. Technical and/or scientific background

The 1980 Power Act established and charged the Northwest Power Conservation Council
(NPCC) with the task of developing a comprehensive fish and wildlife mitigation
program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife habitat in the Columbia Basin
(Power Act 1980, Section 4 (H)(1)(A), page 12; NPPC 1994, Section 2, page 2-1).
Consistent with Section 1003(7) of the Program, BPA is authorized and obligated to fund
implementation of projects that will help reach NPCC wildlife mitigation goals and
objectives. The Rainwater Wildlife Area is an integral component of the Program, which
provides partial mitigation for the impacts on Columbia River Basin wildlife resources as
well as dual benefits for fish and wildlife.

The development of dams for hydropower, navigation, flood control, and irrigation in the
Columbia River Basin resulted in widespread inundation of riparian, riverine, and upland
wildlife habitats (NPPC, 1994; BPA et. al., 1993). In the Wildlife Impact Assessments
for the John Day and McNary Projects, Rassmussen and Wright (1990a and b) estimated
losses of 36,555 and 23,545 Habitat Units resulted from the John Day and McNary
Hydroelectric facilities, respectively. Mainland habitats, totaling an estimated 20,858
acres for the John Day facility and 12,898 acres for the McNary facility, consisted of
shrub-steppe/grassland, riparian hardwood, riparian shrub, riparian herb, emergent
wetland, sand dune, sand/gravel/cobble/mud, disturbed/bare/riprap, and open water cover
types. Approximately 6,708 acres of island habitats associated with the John Day facility
and 2,741 acres associated with the McNary facility were also impacted. Under the
mitigation program, protection and enhancement of wildlife habitats are expressed in
terms of Habitat Units (HUs). Habitat Units were developed by the USFWS Habitat
Evaluation Procedures (HEP) (1980) and were designed to track habitat gains and/or
losses associated with mitigation and/or development projects. Habitat Units for a given
species are a product of habitat quantity (expressed in acres) and habitat quality
estimates. Habitat quality estimates are developed using Habitat Suitability Indices
(HSI). These indices are based on quantifiable habitat features such as vegetation height,
vegetation cover, or other parameters, which are known to provide life history requisites
for mitigation species. Habitat Suitability Indices range from 0 to 1, with an HSI of 1
providing optimum habitat conditions for selected target species. One acre of optimum
habitat provides one HU.

Interior grassland, riparian and wetland habitat, and associated fish and wildlife habitat
has been significantly impacted and/or lost by past management practices in the Walla
Walla Subbasin (NPCC, 2004). The following description of vegetation in the Subbasin
was excerpted from the Subbasin Summary (NPPC 2001): “Current vegetative
conditions in the Walla Walla River Subbasin reflect the land use practices that have
occurred in the area throughout its history (U. S. Department of Agriculture 1941). The
most significant changes as they relate to surface water, fish, and wildlife have occurred
in the last 150 years…. Ultimately the rangelands were overgrazed, which led to native
plant species such as steppe grass vegetation associations being replaced by more
competitive and/or introduced plant species (Grable 1974). Dominant species include

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                            Page 2
cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), yellow starthistle
(Centaurea solstitialis), barnyard grass (Echinochloa crusgual alli), tansy (Tanacetum
vulgare), and rattlegrass (Bromus brizaeformis). From historic to current times, the
Subbasin Plan documented an estimated 39 percent decrease in riparian wetland habitat
and an 84 percent decrease in interior grassland habitat. Some of the factors impacting
the quality of the remaining habitat included agriculture and urban development, exotic
plant invasion, timber harvest, livestock grazing, and recreational activities.

Similarly, native grasslands in the wildlife area have been significantly altered by past
grazing and fire exclusion activities. Poor cover conditions limit the suitability of the
cover type to provide nesting, foraging, and brooding habitat. In terms of ecological
status, the majority (over 90%) of the grasslands in the study area are classified in an
early and very early sere with a very low percentage of perennial bunchgrasses (5%) and
forbs (2.5%) (Johnson, 2000). Field surveys also documented grassland dominance by
annual vegetation (20.6%) with 15% coverage of noxious weeds (yellow starthistle
(Centaurea solstitialis, 4%), ventenata (Ventenata dubia, 8.5%), tarweed (Madia gracilis,
1%), and medusahead wildrye (Taeniatherum caput-medusae, 5%) (Childs, 2002). These
invader species are native to the Mediterranean but have thrived in the Subbasin due to
similarities in climate between the two locations (Quigley and Arbelbide 1997a). All 19
grassland transects sampled in the study area contained exotic grasses and forbs.
Historically, native, intact bunchgrass communities would have been in the 15-25 percent
range. (Johnson, Charles Geier, Clausnitzer, Rodrick R. 1992 and Johnson, C. G.; Simon,
Steven A. 1987). The analysis also noted that a threshold has been exceeded in project
area grassland communities that will require human intervention to facilitate restoration.

As part of the Subbasin planning process, and analysis was conducted on terrestrial
wildlife habitat protection status in the Subbasin. The analysis revealed that
approximately 0.5 percent the Subbasin is in a high protection status, 0.5 percent in
medium protection status, 11 percent in low protection status, and 88 percent has no
protection status. Because most wildlife habitat in the Subbasin has little or no
administrative protection, increasing the amount of habitat under protected status was
identified as a key strategy for most habitat types.

Fish habitat in the project area along the South Fork Touchet River and Griffin Fork has
been highly degraded as well. Large woody debris, channel confinement, riparian
function, sediment (embeddedness, turbidity, and percent fines), key habitat (pools),
temperature, and bedscour were found to be limiting natural fish production in wildlife
area streams (NPCC, 2004, Appendix C). Kuttel (2001) reported that the South Fork
Touchet River lacked large woody debris and shade and has highly unstable channels; 67
percent of streams lacking shade were Type 1 or 2 waters (fish bearing streams).
Reckendorf and Tice (2000) characterized the South Fork of the Touchet River riparian
zones as narrow buffers with minimal mature trees providing some shade. Further
upstream in the Rainwater Wildlife Area, riparian areas were comprised of immature
coniferous trees. Canopy closure averaged 38 percent. Dozens of stumps 12 to 35 inches
in diameter were noted in the floodplain (Childs 2001). Viola (1997) and Reckendorf
and Tice (2000) observed 20 percent of the stream banks eroding. Childs (2001) reported

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                          Page 3
37 percent of assessed banks actively eroding. In 1998, McKinney described channel
incision occurring nearly everywhere and reported channel instability as a problem on
approximately 16 miles of banks. Dikes, levees and roads are reported to have
disconnected the floodplain in much of the Rainwater Wildlife Area (McKinney 1998,
Childs 2001). Braiding and confinement caused by roads and dikes caused a reduction in
stream length by approximately 12 percent between 1937 and 1995 (McKinney). Viola
(1997) calculated a mean width/depth ratio of 108 following the 1996 flood. Large
woody debris and pools were found to be severely lacking in all sections of the stream
(Childs 2001, McKinney 1998). Where pools are present they are generally shallow with
a mean depth of .75ft (Viola, 1997). “Off-channel habitat is nearly non-existent on the
South Fork of the Touchet River” (Kuttel, 2001). Stream temperatures are reported to be
exceeding 65 degrees Fahrenheit from early July to early August (Mendel et.al 2000;
Mendel and Karl 2000). The South Fork Touchet River is identified as “priority” for
restoration and protection in the Walla Walla Subbasin Plan (page 59).

The 8,678 acre Rainwater Wildlife Area, containing 5,000 acres of coniferous forest,
2,900 acres of grassland/shrub habitat, 800 acres of floodplain riparian habitat, and nearly
10 miles of protected, headwater spawning and rearing habitat for anadromous and
resident fish is relevant and complementary to the priorities and objectives of the
Subbasin Plan. The primary purpose of the area is to protect and enhance fish and
wildlife habitat and contribute to the NPCC Fish and Wildlife Program and associated
Subbasin Plan. The wildlife area provides protection and enhancement credits for habitat
lost due to hydropower development and relates directly to the vision and biological
objectives for fish and wildlife habitat as outlined in the WWSB (NPCC, 2004).

The wildlife area was established by the CTUIR to offset habitat losses related to the
John Day and McNary hydroelectric projects and to provide dual benefits to fish and
wildlife. The project area is located outside the Columbia River corridor, and therefore
provides off-site mitigation. However, individual habitat types and species impacted by
hydroelectric development are addressed by this project, therefore in-kind mitigation is
provided. The wildlife area also provides critical big game winter range in the WDFW
Dayton Big Game Management Unit (162). Target wildlife mitigation species include:
spotted sandpiper (Actitis macularia), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), yellow warbler
(Dendroica petechia), mink (mustela vison), Western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta),
black-capped chickadee (Parus atricopillus), downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens),
mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), and blue grouse (Dendragapus obscurus). An
estimated 5m185 baseline HU’s were protected through land acquisition. An additional
estimated 1m850 HU’s will be achieved through habitat enhancements for a total project
benefit of 7,035 HU’s. Focal fish species include threatened summer steelhead (O.
mykiss) and bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus).

The South Fork of the Touchet was ranked 12 out of 47 priority reaches for restoration
potential for summer steelhead and 15th for spring Chinook salmon. The South Touchet
was also ranked 10th for protection of summer steelhead and 3rd for spring Chinook
(NPCC, 2004).

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                            Page 4
Figure 1             Rainwater Wildlife Area Project Vicinity

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative     Page 5
Table 1              Key habitat limiting factors identified in the Walla Walla Subbasin
                     Plan and actions/strategies to address limiting conditions

    Subbasin Summary                     Project Actions/ Management Strategies for Addressing Limiting
  Limiting Factors for the                                         Factors
 South Fork Touchet River

 Embeddedness                          Long-term conservation easements, wide stream buffers, livestock
                                       exclusion, native revegetation, off-channel watering, weed control,
                                       encouragement of participation in various farm programs that reduce soil
                                       erosion, shoreline sloping, landowner education.
 Large Woody Debris                    Protect and enhance native riparian tree and shrub communities. LWD
                                       placement in those areas incapable of producing large wood in the near
                                       term. Long term conservation easements that protect naturally recruited
                                       wood to the system
 Pools                                 Revegetation, levee removals and thus improved channel form, instream
                                       structures, reestablished channel meander and stable channel form
                                       through the use of point-bar enhancement and placement of LWD where
 Riparian Function                     Livestock exclusion fencing, revegetation, management of beaver
                                       populations, shoreline sloping, landowner education, long-term
                                       conservation easements and/or acquisition.

 Confinement                           Levee removal, road obliteration, levee-set-back, wide riparian buffers,
                                       shoreline sloping, private landowner education.
 Summer Maximum                        Enhance and protect riparian vegetation and thus elevate shade,
 Temperatures                          encourage stream meander important for sub-surface flow and reduction
                                       in water temperatures. Protect back-water areas, beaver ponds, springs,
                                       and areas known to provide hyporheic input. Encourage water
                                       conservation, protect instream flows.
 Bedscour                              Reduce stream velocities through improved floodplain function,
                                       shoreline sloping, and stream meander. Encourage large wood, point bar
                                       enhancement, removal of levees, and restoration/protection of riparian
                                       and floodplain corridors.
 Summer Flow                           Reestablish riparian vegetation through livestock exclusion and planting.
                                       Enhance stream meander through levee removal, road obliteration and
                                       shoreline sloping. Enhance floodplain function thus elevating bank
                                       storage and hyporheic flow. Protect back-water areas, beaver ponds,
                                       springs, and areas known to provide hyporheic input. Encourage water
                                       conservation, protect instream flows.

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                                                 Page 6
C. Rationale and significance to regional programs

The Rainwater Wildlife Area contributes directly to the NPCC Fish and Wildlife Program
(NPCC, 2000). The overall vision for the program is a Columbia River ecosystem that
sustains an abundant, productive, and diverse community of fish and wildlife, mitigating
across the basin for the adverse effects to fish and wildlife caused by the development
and operation of the hydrosystem and providing benefits from fish and wildlife valued by
the people of the region. Perpetual protection and management of the wildlife area
provides habitat for a wide variety of species and is consistent with the primary habitat
strategy of protection as the most effective means of restoring and sustaining fish and
wildlife populations.

By virtue of its size, the project area lends itself to the protection and enhancement of
biological diversity and ecological integrity in the Walla Walla Subbasin. The area
supports a wide variety of fish and wildlife including summer steelhead, resident trout,
and bull trout, Rocky Mountain elk, mule deer, white-tailed deer, black bear, cougar,
numerous birds of prey, beaver, songbirds, and various other forest ecosystem species.
More specifically, the Rainwater Wildlife Area contributes directly to the primary
strategy for wildlife through the current wildlife mitigation program. The property
contains 5,000 acres of forested environments, which benefit target wildlife mitigation
species such as the downy woodpecker, black-capped chickadee, mule deer, and blue
grouse. Approximately 2,900 acres of native grasslands provide suitable habitat for target
species such as western meadowlark. In addition, 800 acres of riparian/floodplain cover
types provide habitat for the yellow warbler, great blue heron, and mink. The inter-
agency HEP team supported the incorporation of mule deer and blue grouse into the
analysis in order to address native upland and forested environments of the watershed.
Because of its size and location adjacent to National Forest System lands, the property
will contribute to the protection and enhancement Blue Mountain ecosystems.

Implementation guidelines suggest that mitigation programs should provide protection of
habitat through fee-title acquisition (or other methods) for the life of the project. Nearly
8,700 acres have been purchased in the upper South Fork Touchet River watershed, is in
in high protected status, and provides mitigation. The Rainwater Wildlife Area is also
consistent with the wildlife mitigation priorities identified in the Subbasin Plan (NPCC,
2004, pgs 129-131). Riparian and river habitat types are high priorities for the Walla
Walla Subbasin.

Within the Walla Walla Subbasin, the Rainwater Wildlife Area contributes toward the
vision articulated in the Subbasin Plan. Protection of high quality wildlife habitats,
restoration and enhancement of degraded habitats, and maintenance and enhancement of
diverse, abundant, and productive fish wildlife populations are goals of the plan.

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                             Page 7
D. Relationships to other projects
The Rainwater Wildlife Area was developed under the Washington Wildlife Mitigation
Agreement (BPA et. al., 1993) involving state agencies, and federal and tribal
governments. Thus, the Rainwater Project is, through the NPPC program, related to
wildlife mitigation projects developed by other agencies and tribes in the State of
Washington that collectively have been developed to offset habitat losses from
hydroelectric development along the Columbia River.

In addition, the Rainwater project is also related to various anadromous fish
habitat/watershed, and research efforts in the Walla Walla River Basin. Internally,
CTUIR staff coordinate program efforts, including the CTUIR/BPA Walla Walla Basin
Fish Habitat Enhancement Project (#19604601), and the CTUIR/BPA Walla Walla Basin
Natural Fish Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project (#20127). Project 19604601
provides technical assistance in developing fish habitat enhancement and restoration
activities within the project area. Project 20127 provides research and
monitoring/evaluation on aquatic habitat within the wildlife area. Project 901100
(BPA/WDFW) also relates to the Rainwater Project. CTUIR and WDFW staffs
coordinate data collection and assessment associated with the project.

Staff from this project coordinate regularly with management staff of the Wanaket
Wildlife Area (19909200) and the Iskuulpa Water Project (199506001) and share
equipment and technical staff for operations and maintenance, monitoring and evaluation,
and habitat enhancements.

E. Project history

The Rainwater Wildlife Area was established in September 1998 through a land
acquisition agreement developed by the CTUIR. The acquisition was a major milestone
for the CTUIR following several years of wildlife mitigation project planning in
southeastern Washington. From 1998 through 2002, the management plan and
associated HEP analysis were completed through an extensive public review process
involving establishment of an advisory committee and numerous public meetings and

In support of the management plan and HEP development process, and extensive baseline
resource assessment was completed involving survey along nearly 12 miles of transect,
594 square meter plots, and 117, 1/10th acre plots in forest, riparian, and grassland cover
types. In addition to the HEP baseline assessment, fish habitat surveys and
presence/absence sampling were completed along nearly 10 miles of stream located on
the wildlife area using methods developed by the Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife (Moore, 1993) and baseline juvenile fish population sites were established along
7 miles of the South Fork Touchet River and 2 miles of the Griffin Fork. In 2004, this
RM&E effort was expanded to collect data from two adjacent watersheds to provide
comparison of changes observed in wildlife area streams (See Section F below).

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                           Page 8
Infrastructure developments in the wildlife area completed since 1998 include:
construction of 3 public parking areas with public information boards, installation of 8
gates and closure of approximately 32 miles of road under the Management Plan Access
and Travel Management strategy, installation and/or repair of approximately 8 miles of
boundary fence, and installation of 2 cattle guards in conjunction with fence construction
to reduce trespass livestock.

In 2000, the CTUIR implemented a restoration project through the Washington State
Salmon Recovery Program, accomplishing 4.5 miles drawbottom road obliteration, 5
miles road drainage improvement/repair, removal of a failed log stringer bridge (fish
passage barrier in Griffin Fork), 1.5 miles large woody debris additions along the Griffin
Fork (over 120 whole trees installed), stabilization of headwater landslide areas through
whole tree additions, road outsloping, cross-drain repair, seeding, and planting,
installation of 14,000 trees and shrubs, and 30 acres native seed installation. Additional
road maintenance and obliteration has since been completed along an additional 4 mile of
existing road to improve road drainage, reduce erosion, and facilitate vegetative recovery.

The CTUIR has completed landline survey and boundary monumentation along nearly 17
miles of wildlife area boundary through subcontracts with landline survey firms. CTUIR
staff have posted carsonite posts with wildlife area boundary signs every 200 feet along
the boundary to provide recognizable property lines between adjacent private lands and
the wildlife area. The survey has also provided legal property boundary monuments
necessary to plan and develop additional boundary fencing to protect the wildlife area
from trespass livestock.

Noxious weed control efforts have been ongoing since 1999, with an average 125 acres
treated annually. Initial weed control efforts have included herbicide, manual, and
biological techniques. Herbicide treatments have been focused along existing roads in
areas of heavy yellow star thistle, Canada thistle, and spotted knapweed infestations to
minimize potential for vectors and to provide a basis from which to evaluate vegetative
response. Curtail has been the primary herbicide utilized up until the 2004 treatment
period, where previous control efforts identified the need to utilize a herbicide with
greater residual effect. Yellow star thistle can germinate throughout the season, and
spring treatments have been found to be marginally successful, particularly during
summers with precipitation which facilitates star thistle germination during late summer
and fall period.

Adaptive management has lead project staff to utilize Tordon on upland sites to evaluate
effectiveness in addressing this issue. During the summer of 2005, several infested sites
treated with Tordon during spring treatment sites, exhibited less than 2% yellow star
thistle cover, compared to a 50% coverage in May. Recognizing limitations of chemical
treatments, 10 biological control release sites were established during spring, 1999 and 4
additional sites in 2003. These sites have been focused along the South Fork Touchet
River corridor and along the Robinette mountain in the central portion of the wildlife area
where the largest noxious weed infestations occur. Approximately 2,000 yellow

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                           Page 9
starthistle gallflies (Urophora sirunaseva), which attack yellow star thistle seedheads.
Monitoring of colony establishment is ongoing and the initial 1999 release is presumed to
have not resulted in establishment of gallfly colonies. The failure is likely the result of
inadequate availability of gallfly populations that are adapted to higher elevation, cold-
moist environments (2003 personal communication with Columbia County Weed Board
staff). The 2003 release sites show more promising results, with gallfly populations
observed during 2004. In addition, manual techniques (hand-pulling) have been
successfully employed along the South Fork Touchet River. During 2002, approximately
5 acres of heavily infested yellow starthistle was hand-pulled by CTUIR Salmon Corps
crews. The site is currently devoid of starthistle.

Riparian and instream habitat has been documented as highly degraded in the baseline
condition, as previously presented. Additional restoration and enhancement work is
planned to address additional drawbottom roads segments along the South Fork Touchet
and large wood deficiencies throughout the system in cooperation with CTUIR and
WDFW programs.

Resting the wildlife area from livestock grazing, initiation of road obliteration and
drainage repair on roads located in floodplains, and large woody debris additions
completed along the Griffin Fork, are resulting in improving trends with increasing
colonization of floodplains with hydyophytic trees and shrubs and greater instream
habitat diversity. Since 2002, the CTUIR and WDFW have coordinated release of beaver
trapped from nearby private lands at selected locations along the upper South Fork
Touchet River and Griffin Fork. Suitable forage habitat is available and several small
colonies have been established with associated lodges and beaver dams. Following are
some select photos illustrating habitat enhancement accomplished on the wildlife area.

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                          Page 10
Photo Point 1, June 1999: Pre-project photo of drawbottom road in the Burnt Fork watershed
illustrating bare soil, rut/gully formation, and erosion.

Photo Point 1, October 2001. Post-project photo illustrates road obliteration. Techniques included
subsoiling, reconnecting cross drains, and placement of large woody debris.

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                                   Page 11
Photo Point 4, June 1999: Failed log stringer bridge and fish passage barrier on Griffin Fork

       Photo Point 4, May 2001. Photo illustrates bridge removal, incorporation of rock grade control
                       structures, use of large wood, and hydrophytic shrub planting

    FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                                   Page 12
                               2004 Photo illustrating beaver recolonization
                    along the South Fork Touchet River on the Rainwater Wildlife Area

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                             Page 13
Riparian recovery from passive strategies (primarily livestock exclusion). Photo illustration natural
                         recolonization of hydrophytic trees and shrub

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                                    Page 14
F. Proposal biological objectives, work elements, and methods

The Rainwater Wildlife Area provides dual benefits to fish and wildlife: Project
objectives include: 1) Protect fish and wildlife habitat, protect 5,185 habitat units; 2)
Enhance habitat, develop 1,850 habitat units; and 3) Enhance/restore natural salmonid
habitat and production. The following table illustrates work elements (tasks) and
estimated funding needed to completed each task. Descriptions of the methods under
each task is provided in the following sections.

Table 3              Work Elements and Estimated Expenditure

                               Work Element                        Estimated Annual
                                                                  Average Expenditure
 1. Produce Environmental Compliance Documentation                      $15,000
 2. Provide Public Access/Information                                   $80,000
 3. Investigate Trespass                                                $20,000
 4. Increase Instream Habitat Complexity                                $10,000
 5. Maintain Vegetation                                                 $30,000
 6. Plant Vegetation                                                    $15,000
 7. Install Fence                                                       $35,000
 8. Remove Debris                                                        $5,000
 9. Operate and Maintain Habitat                                        $15,000
 10. Manage and Administer Projects                                     $40,000
 11. Improve/Relocate Road                                               19,000
 12. Conduct Monitoring and Evaluation                                  $15,000
 13. Produce Pisces State Reports                                         $926
 14. Produce Annual Report                                               $5,000

Project Objective 1: Protect habitat and maintain habitat protection habitat units.

Operate and maintain the Rainwater Wildlife Area to provide 5,185 Habitat Units of
protection credit towards NPCC Fish and Wildlife mitigation program, and protect
interior grassland, riparian wetland, ponderosa pine, mixed conifer habitat, and instream
habitat types, as identified in the Walla Walla Subbasin Plan. This objective also relates
to the goal of improving salmonid habitat by protecting and enhancing aquatic habitat
and watershed function. Habitat protection is achieved through removal of livestock
grazing, noxious weed removal, controlling tresspass livestock, and controlling public

Project Objective 2: Enhance habitat and develop habitat enhancement units.

Implement enhancements that will contribute towards the provision of 1,850
enhancement credits and enhance 300 acres of riparian wetland and 125 acres of
grassland. Strategies to enhance habitats include removing noxious and competing and

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                            Page 15
unwanted vegetation, drawbottom road relocation, planting riparian areas, and planting
native grasses in grassland habitats.

Project Objective 3: Enhance/restore natural salmonids habitat and production. This
objective is secondary to wildlife mitigation objectives, but incorporated into the proposal
with dual opportunities presented by the wildlife area. The Rainwater Wildlife Area
contains nearly 10 miles of the South Fork Touchet River and tributary habitat identified
as priority under the Subbasin Plan. Under this objective, approximately 7 miles of
instream habitat along the South Fork Touchet River and Griffin Fork will be enhanced
through protection (passive) and active restoration strategies.

Work Elements and Methods

Work Element 1 – Produce Environmental Compliance (biological objectives 1-3):
Environmental compliance methods include development of appropriate documentation
under various federal and state laws and regulations governing the project area. Federal
funding requires compliance with federal laws and regulations. Because Rainwater is
held in fee title by the CTUIR, the property also falls under the purview of state land use
laws and regulations. Methods involve coordination with various federal and state
agencies and development and submittal of various permit applications, biological
assessments, checklists, etc. Environmental compliance also includes the need to conduct
site-specific surveys as is the case for cultural resource laws and regulations and the
possible need to determine whether, for example, a federally protected species occurs
within the project area.

Part of the environmental compliance work element includes planning to develop site-
specific techniques and designs such as where individual treatments units are located,
how specific treatments will be implemented, and preparations for putting efforts on the
ground, including preparations for subcontracting if necessary. Much of the planning and
design needs for this objective have been completed through the management plan
development process. However, additional work is required to prepare to initiate and
implement a given activity. Examples include unit layout in the field, developing project
designs, specifications, and prescriptions, and scheduling work.

Work Element 2 - Provide Public Access/Information (biological objective 1): The
project area requires regular property patrols to administer the access and travel plan, and
monitor trespass livestock and public recreational uses. The project area is patrolled by
project staff by motor vehicle or ATV. As part of the access and travel management
plan, 8 gates and three public bulletin boards are maintained

Work Element 3 - Investigate Trespass (biological objective 1): The wildlife area is
managed to preclude livestock grazing and provide range rest. The project area was
historically heavily grazed habitats were negatively affected. Livestock rest allows plant
communities to move toward recovery. Passive restoration through livestock grazing
removal is a primary strategy. Removing livestock grazing from riparian wetland habitat
allows riparian shrubs, trees, and herbaceous vegetation to colonize sites, mature, and

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                            Page 16
provide nesting and foraging cover for riparian dependent species. Protecting these
habitats also contributes to benefits for fishery resources.

Work Element 4 - Increase Instream Habitat Complexity (biological objectives 2
and 3): A comprehensive restoration and enhancement effort is currently underway
along a 7 mile reach of the South Fork Touchet River within the wildlife area in
cooperation with the CTUIR/BPA Walla Walla Fish Habitat Enhancement Project
(199604601), WDFW, and the Washington State Salmon Recovery Board (SFRB) which
has obligated $189,000 to the project. The initial project involves placement of 300-400
whole trees with rootwad to facilitate gravel bar formation and enhance instream
structural diversity. Whole trees will be secured from ridgetop locations and flown by
helicopter to selected locations. Large woody debris will be placed in debris jam
configuration with 2-3 key members for structural stability. An additional $35,000 has
been requested to assist with a necessary road design and evaluation to develop a detailed
road relocation/reconstruction plan for a 3 mile section of the South Fork Touchet River
Road. This road segment has bee, and continues to be a significant contributor to habitat
degradation in the upper South Fork drainage and we have been unable to resolve access
issues with private landowners that utilize the road as their only access in the central,
western portion of the wildlife area. The road is located in the floodplain, is a chronic
source of sediment, and in contributing to unstable channel morphology. Annual peak
flow events have resulted in nearly 2,500 feet of road prism capture by the South
Touchet. The CTUIR installed a new gate in 2004 and closed the upper road segments to
general public access to minimize resource damage.

Additional road-related work includes conducting maintenance and drainage repair
approximately 1 mile of road annually to address drainage needs on several forest road
segments contributing sediment to project area streams. Techniques include installation
of water bars and drains, cleaning culverts, and possible spot rock applications at
drainage crossings.

Work Element 5 - Maintain Vegetation (biological objectives 1-3): The control,
eradication, and prevention of noxious weed infestations is both necessary and desirable
to maintain habitat values. Noxious weeds such as yellow star thistle and Canada thistle
adversely affect habitat values. Noxious weeds can replace native plant communities and
decrease the abundance and quality of cover and forage habitats. Treatment methods
include a combination of prevention, manual, chemical, and biological. Methods for
prevention involve limiting vectors (transport mechanisms of seeds and/or plant parts).
Implementation of access and travel restrictions, prohibiting use of infested livestock feed
and seed stock, and requiring contracted equipment operators to clean equipment are all
components of the prevention strategy. Manual treatment methods include hand-pulling
and burning collected noxious weed material. Chemical treatments include use of
certified herbicides. Project staff conduct weed surveys at the start of each growing
season (determined by weather and plant phenology). Herbicide applications may be
made 2 - 3 times per growing season depending on the target species life cycle and
growth habit, and success of initial application. Application equipment includes backpack
and all terrain vehicle (ATV) mounted spraying equipment. Project staff follows

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                           Page 17
recommendations of the Columbia County Weed Board on control methods and annually
enters into agreements with the board to purchase discount, bulk herbicides and
biological agents, as available. Hand-pulling of small infestations is also utilized.
Noxious weeds were identified as a factor in degradation of riparian wetland and
grassland habitat types. Left unchecked, they can dominate a site, outcompeting
desirable native vegetation. Many weeds provide little in terms of wildlife habitat or
watershed function

Pre-commercial will be implemented to maintain and/or promote tree health and forest
conditions. Pre-commercial thinning involves selecting healthy, regenerating conifers on
variable width spacing criteria (i.e., 8x8, 10x10, etc.) and felling adjacent seedlings to
reduce competition and facilitate tree growth. Pre-commercial thinning is defined as
thinning any forested stand not involving cutting of commercial trees (e..g, greater than 6
inches dbh). Approximately 50 acres of pre-commercial thinning is planned to facilitate
cover development.

Commercial thinning needs will be identified during FY 2001 and 02’. Thinning of
commercial sized trees is necessary to maintain tree health and minimize competition for
available resources (i.e., soil moisture, sunlight). Thinning is utilized as a forest
management tool to facilitate tree growth, development of thermal cover, and accelerate
development of structural habitat conditions provided by larger diameter trees. Key areas
anticipated for commercial thinning include an estimated 300-400 acres located on
Robinette Mountain. The management prescription for these areas include maintaining
optimum basal area and snag recruitments, thinning from below (spacing individual trees
by their crown) which results in variable width spacing of tree boles. Forest management
activities are regulated under the Washington State Forestry Practices Act, and as such,
management activities will need to be reviewed under the appropriate Forest Practice Act
permitting process.

Work Element 6 – Install Fence (biological objective 1-3): Boundary fence
construction is an ongoing effort to address trespass livestock from adjacent private
lands. Approximately 2 miles of new fence will be constructed annually. Typically,
four-strand barbed wire fences with metal posts and wooden structural elements (h-braces
and rock jacks) have been utilized on the project area depending on site conditions,
accessibility, and availability of local materials. Due to steep topography and difficult
access presented in the wildlife area, drift fences have been successfully along livestock
travel routes to minimize trespass. The eastern and northern property lines are priority
areas to address trespass livestock issues from adjacent private land.

Work Element 7 - Plant Vegetation (biological objectives 1-3): Restoration and
enhancement sites located in the grassland cover type will be planted following site
preparation activities (prescribed burning/herbicide application) by a combination of
broadcast seeding and rangeland drilling. Approximately 125 acres are planned for
treatment. Grass seed mixtures will be dominated by native perennial grasses. In
addition, bunchgrass plugs will be utilized to plant individual units as available through
tribal propagation or through outside vendors. Seed sources will include native cultivars

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                           Page 18
and seed collected from the project site and propagated off-site. Based on ecological
reconnaissance surveys, primary species utilized in seeding operations will be Bluebunch
wheatgrass and Sandberg’s bluegrass and/or acceptable cultivar species.

Hydrophylic shrub planting is completed by project technical staff utilizing hand-tools
and 1-2 year-old containerized stock or cuttings from locally derived plant stock.
Planting hydrophytic shrubs will help speed recovery of riparian wetland habitat,
improving habitat for yellow warbler and providing increased stream shading.

A variety of planting methods could be utilized, depending on specific sites chosen. On
ridge tops, a rangeland drill could be used. On steep slopes, aerial seeding will be
necessary. To supplement seeding efforts, plugs of locally collected seed could be hand-
planted. Results of HEP and ecological surveys will aid in the identification of strategies
and sites for restoration. Seeding/planting prescriptions are developed in consultation
with USDA Forest Service and Natural Resource Conservation Service staff. Species
planted could include Sandberg’s bluegrass, bluebunch wheatgrass and native forbs, as
recommended by Johnson (2000).

Work Element 8 - Remove Debris (biological objective 1): Work element includes
retrieving garbage and debris from wildlife area, primarily along roads open to public
motorized travel. In the past, there have been instances of unknown individuals dumping
refuse at selected sites in the wildlife area. CTUIR staff promptly identify, retrieve, and
dispose of , all debris left at the wildlife area in order to maintain a clean environment. In
addition, some debris removal is necessary as a part of project operations. For example,
removal of old fence segments planned for reconstruction and parts of logging equipment
left during previous logging operations is removed and disposed at landfills.

Work Element 9 - Operate and Maintain Habitat (biological objective 1): Operations
and maintenance activities address the custodial needs of the project area, such as fence
and road maintenance and repair as well as administrative needs. Public use and access
and travel management includes the implementation of area and seasonal access
restrictions, including means of travel, and installation of facilities necessary to
effectively educate the user and implement the restrictions. Project administration will be
accomplished primarily by the CTUIR. Administrative functions include, but are not
limited to: budget planning, development and implementation of maintenance and
enhancement activities, patrolling, signing, public information and assistance, and
interagency coordination.

Administrative tasks are necessary to protect existing resource values. Annual tasks
include, but are not limited to: preparing and managing annual budgets and staff,
vehicles, tools, etc; contracting for various project-related services; conducting and
maintaining public involvement; and maintaining an active presence on the property.
Management plan administration includes conducting patrols on the property to monitor
and enforce access and travel restrictions to maintain habitat security and prevent
resource damage, monitoring recreational uses and non-permitted activities such as
motorized travel on closed roads, trespass livestock, dumping, vandalism, etc.

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                             Page 19
Coordination with local law enforcement to enforce property regulations is also an
administrative activity. Posting and maintaining information on the property is required
to inform user groups of regulations and access and travel requirements. Posted
information may include kiosks showing maps of the property, regulations governing
appropriate uses of the lands, seasonal restriction notices such as extreme fire danger
periods or seasonal road closures, notices of changes in regulations, and scheduled public

A project caretaker will be responsible for monitoring road closures, conducting weekly
and seasonal inspections of road systems and closure devices, monitoring for trespass
livestock and other non-permitted uses and coordinating with law enforcement. We
anticipate property inspections to occur on a weekly basis with increased efforts during
fall hunting seasons. Making contacts with property users is also an administrative tasks
and is necessary to make contacts with individuals to ensure property regulations are
understood and adhered to as well as provide an opportunity for individuals to provide
input on management of the property and/or to ask questions. Specific methods include
traveling road network via ATV or 4X4 truck on scheduled intervals to check condition
of closure devices, non-conformance with property regulations.

Fire protection activities are also part of administrative duties and involves monitoring
local fire conditions in conjunction with US Forest Service and Washington DNR and
issuing fire precaution warnings and/or restrictions on certain types of use depending on
severity of conditions. Fire protection also includes posting information about how to
prevent wildfires and patrolling the property to monitor uses

In addition, coordination with WDNR will be accomplished on forest practice act
standards (i.e., road maintenance, forest management activities, and prescribed fire).
Coordination with other local, state, and federal agencies involved in statutory and
regulatory authority over property management (local land-use regulations, game laws,
threatened and endangered species, cultural resource protection, etc.)

Primary maintenance functions include maintaining roads and drainage devices, signs,
parking areas and informational signs, fences, gates, and habitat developments. Existing
and newly construction fences will be maintained in cooperation with adjacent
landowners. Approximately 8 miles of boundary fence is annually maintained on the
wildlife area. Fencing, typically four-strand barbwire, is used to protect upland and
riparian habitats from livestock trespass and to regulate visitor access. Maintenance
typically consists of repairing support structures, splicing wire, tightening wires, and
replacing stays. Fences are monitored annually, prior to livestock turn-out on
neighboring private land. Fence monitoring and repair is shared with the neighboring
landowners. The wildlife area is bordered on the north and east by private grazing lands.
Regular fence maintenance is necessary to minimize trespass livestock and resource

The WDFW Enforcement Program is responsible for law enforcement on the wildlife
area. Hunting and fishing regulations will be enforced by the WDFW, as well as other

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                          Page 20
enforcement issues such as trespassing, motorized vehicle access on closed roads, etc.
All laws, rules, and regulations on the Rainwater Wildlife Area will be strictly enforced.

Work Element 10 - Manage and Administer Projects (biological objective 1-3): This
work element includes inspection and oversight of project activities, including activities
subcontracted to private vendors.

Work Element 11 – Maintain Road (biological objective 1): Road maintenance of
forest roads is required under the Washington Administrative Code. Specifically, WAC
222-24-050 requires that all forest roads be improved and maintained to the standards of
the rules by 2015, including resource policy goals and direction contained within the
Salmon Recovery Act of 1999. During the next two year period, a comprehensive road
management plan will be developed and approved by the WADNR. Full implementation
of the plan is required by 2015.

Work Element 12 - Conduct Monitoring and Evaluation (biological objectives 1-3:
Monitoring and evaluation will be conducted to assess effectiveness of administrative,
maintenance, and enhancement/restoration strategies. Administrative monitoring
includes conducting property patrols, recording visitor use, and documenting trespass
livestock, violations of access and travel management plan, and hunting violations under
WDFW Game Regulations and/or CTUIR Wildlife Code. Administrative monitoring
assists with reporting to appropriate regulatory agencies and assisting in investigations.

HEP monitoring, through transects and plots is not scheduled to be repeated until 2012
for the wildlife area to evaluate changes in habitat suitability indices for target wildlife
mitigation species. However, additional vegetation and habitat monitoring will be
undertaken to evaluate effectiveness of habitat enhancement activities, including photo
points and installation of transects and plots in treatment areas. Transects will be
established in areas revegetated during 2007-2009. Type of data collected will vary by
seeding/planting strategy. Grass plugs will be monitored using transects. All plugs
within a 10-meter band on either side of the transect will be mapped. Within the belt
transects, each plug will be located and an x and y coordinate recorded. The y coordinate
is the length down the transect from the start point. The x coordinate is the distance from
the transect to the plug, along a line perpendicular to the transect. For grass, forb, and
shrub seeds, density of new plants will be recorded within a 60 by 20-meter belt transect.
Density of seedlings and young plants will be compared to seeding rates to estimate
success rate. Monitoring transects will be surveyed for three growing seasons after each
revegetation effort to determine seedling survival and seeding success.

Songbird point counts are planned for spring 2006, pending availability of trained staff
from the Iskuulpa and Wanaket projects. Project staff intend to establish three transects
in the grassland cover type, containing 10 points each, which will be systematically
established. Methods will follow Huff et al (2000). Each transect will be visited 3 times
during the breeding season. Five minute counts will be conducted with detection distance
bands of 0-50 meters and > 50 meters. Songbird presence/absence and abundance will be

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                            Page 21
estimated. Data will provide a baseline for songbird populations in grassland habitats for
long-term trend monitoring.

Fish habitat and water quality monitoring activities will be conducted in cooperation
with the CTUIR/BPA Walla Walla Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project
(#19604601), and the CTUIR/BPA Walla Walla Basin Natural Fish Production
Monitoring and Evaluation Project (#20127). In addition the WDFW/BPA Project
participates in fish research on the South Touchet watershed. These cooperative efforts
include: annual redd surveys, annual juvenile fish population index site surveys, repeat
habitat surveys, streamflow monitoring (stream gage on South Fork Touchet), and water
quality monitoring (primarily temperature).

A number of monitoring and evaluation guidance documents have been published since
the last provincial review of BPA supported projects (e.g. (EPA 2002, Hillman and
Giorgi 2002, Ruckelshaus et al. 2002, Hillman 2003, Jordan et al. 2003, NPPC 2004).
This wealth of literature includes a broad spectrum of ideas regarding which performance
metrics are most powerful, and how they should be applied and interpreted locally and/or
regionally. The biological reality of this topic is that salmon and their ecosystems are
complex; thus there are a large number of approaches to salmonid performance metrics
that can be considered “correct”, “reasonable”, or “applicable”.

The most promising lessons for salmonid monitoring were recently summarized in the
ISRP’s recent retrospective (ISRP 2005). In addition, the Interior Columbia Technical
Recovery Team (ICTRT) has re-summarized and begun to apply the basic categories of
performance metrics as part of salmon restoration and recovery (TRT 2004, 2005). The
TRT recognized a set of four common suites of indicators that represent the basic
building blocks of evaluating performance in salmonid populations:

     1. Abundance – the number or biomass of fishes at a given life-cycle in time and
     2. Productivity – the rate of salmonid production through time
     3. Spatial Structure – the distribution, range, and connectivity of a population
     4. Diversity – genetic, phenotypic, and life-history diversity

The CTUIR Walla Walla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation, the
WDFW, and ODFW are collaborating to test the hypothesis that salmonid performance
increases in treated priority geographic areas as compared to reference geographic areas
that do not receive extensive habitat actions. In addition, the M&E project assesses the
performance of Umatilla populations as a whole and in comparison to other Columbia
Plateau stocks, and assists in the evaluation of provincial and Columbia Basin
performance. The monitoring and evaluation program uses a mixture of probabilistic and
census surveys of natural production performance metrics. For a detailed description of
the methods and experimental design please see the proposal for that project.

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                          Page 22
Primary biological monitoring completed on the wildlife area previously consisted of
sampling juvenile fish rearing densities along the South Fork Touchet and Griffin Fork
and presence absence sampling in the upper Griffin Fork under (#20127) in cooperation
with the Rainwater project (See Contour, et al. 2004). Steelhead redd surveys have been
completed by WDFW staff (Mendel, 2004) along index reaches within the wildlife area
on the South Fork Touchet. During 2004, the study design and sample was expanded to
collect data from control watersheds to compare response of fish in project area streams
to planned habitat enhancement activities. Additional detail is provided in the proposal
for the 20127 project.

Work Element 13 - Produce Pisces Status Reports: Quarterly reports will be prepared
under BPA PISCES program initiated in 2005. Reports provide regular updates by work
element and milestone, help identify project progress towards achieving statement of
work, and assist with contract modifications as necessary to addresses changes in work
schedule and/or budget needs.

Work Element 14 - Produce Annual Report: Annual reports provide updates on
project progress on an annual basis and follow standard BPA formatting.

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                         Page 23
G. Facilities and equipment

As a full service Tribal Government, the CTUIR possesses a full range of support
facilities and services, including both technical and administrative staff. Tribal
government offices are located in the Tribal Government Complex near the Umatilla
Reservation center where other community facilities are located. The Tribal Fish and
Wildlife Department complex contains sufficient office space for existing and future
professional and management staff, a fully equipped secretarial services center, a
conference/meeting room, library, and supply storage space. Administrate support
services available from the tribe include budget tracking and compliance, legal review,
and purchasing. CTUIR has an excellent GIS department, which provides assistance and
technical support for GPS equipment and GIS software. GIS staff is capable of
completing complex spatial tasks such are satellite image interpretation and mapping.
Database managers are also available to assist with data management and integration, and
web site development.

Tribal offices are electronically interconnected through a LAN network and feature
modern personal computer workstations. Current software capabilities include extensive
word processing, spreadsheet, data base development and management, and GIS
(ArcGIS) capabilities. General Service Administration (GSA) vehicles (primarily 4X4
trucks) and all terrain vehicles and trailers are available to wildlife program staff. Field
and sampling equipment is available for data collection and management in support of
evaluation and monitoring efforts.

CTUIR is also developing a native plant nursery. The nursery can collection and
propagate native plants needed for revegetation projects. This capability allows plant
sources from on or near project sites to be used in revegetation, ensuring the materials are
locally adapted to the site.

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                            Page 24
H. References
BPA et al. 1993. Bonneville Power Administration, Washington Dept. Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and
   Wildlife Service, Conf Tribes Colville Reservation, Conf. Tribes Umatilla Indian Reservation, Yakama
   Indian Nation. 1993. Washington Wildlife Mitigation Agreement.

BPA. 1997. Bonnevill Power Administration Wildlife Mitigation Program Environmental Impact
   Statement and Record of Decision (FEIS/ROD), (DOE/BPA-0246, June 1997

Childs, A. B.; Scheeler, C. A.; Quaempts, E.; and Alexander, R. 1997. Wildlife Mitigation Plan for the
    John Day and McNary Dams, Columbia River. Basin. Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian
    Reservation. Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration.

Childs. A. B. 2002. Revised 2004. Rainwater Wildlife Area Habitat Evaluation Report. United States
    Department of Energy. Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. Bonneville Power
    Administration, Contract Number 000000515.

Childs, A. B. 2001. Rainwater Wildlife Area Management Plan. Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla
    Indian Reservation. Bonneville Power Administration, Contract Number 000000515

Contour, et al. 2004. Annual Report. CTUIR/BPA Walla Walla Basin Natural Fish Production
Monitoring and Evaluation Project

CTUIR. 1993. Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation and Bonneville Power
   Administration (April, 1993), Washington Wildlife Mitigation Agreement (DEMS79-93BP94146)

CTUIR. 1993. Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation and Bonneville Power
   Administration Washington Wildlife Mitigation Agreement (DEMS79-93BP94146, April, 1993) and
   Memorandum Of Agreement (MOA), October, 1997 between the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla
   Indian Reservation and Bonneville Power Administration

Hicks, L. L.; Light, J.; Watson, G.; Sugden, B.; Hillman, T. W. and Berg, D. (1999). Adaptive
    Management: Concepts and Applications to Plum Creek's Native Fish Habitat Conservation Plan.
    Seattle: Plum Creek Timber Company.

Johnson, Charles Geier, Clausnitzer, Rodrick R. 1992. Plant associations of the Blue and Ochoco
    Mountains. Publication R6-ERW-TP-036-92. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
    Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. 164 p.

Johnson, C. G.; Simon, Steven A. 1987. Plant associations of the Wallowa-Snake province. Pub. R6-
    ECOL-TP-225b-86. Baker City, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific
    Northwest Region, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. 272 p.

Johnson, Charles. 2000. Rainwater Wildlife Area Technical Report. Historic Range of Variability

Kuttel, M. J. (2000). Draft Salmonid Habitat Limiting Factors WRIA 32, Walla Walla Watershed.
    Washington Conservation Commission. This report compiles watershed history, description, stock
    status of salmonids, limiting factors assessment, subbasin descriptions, recommendations, and data

Moore, Kelley M.S., Jones, Kim, K. Dambacher, Jeffrey M. (1993) Methods for stream habitat surveys:
   Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Aquatic Inventory Projects. Corvallis, OR 97730.

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                                         Page 25
NPCC. 2000. Northwest Power Conservation Council. Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program.
   Council Document 2000-19.

NPCC, 2004. Northwest Power Conservation Council.Walla Walla Subbasin Plan.

Rassmussen, L. and P. Wright. 1990b. Wildlife Impact Assessment, John Day Project, Oregon and
    Washington. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Portland, Ore. 27 pp.

Rassmussen, L. and P. Wright. 1990d. Wildlife Impact Assessment, McNary Project, Oregon and
    Washington. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Portland, Ore. 28 pp.

Rich, T.D. 2002. Using Breeding Land Birds in the Assessment of Western Riparian Systems. Wildl. Soc.
    Bull., 30(4):1128-1139.

Swindell, E. G. 1942. Report on source, nature and extent of the fishing, hunting and miscellaneous rights
    of certain Indian Tribes in Washington and Oregon together with affidavits showing location of a
    number of usual and accustomed fishing grounds and stations. Office of Indian Affairs, Division of
    Forestry and Grazing, Los Angeles, CA.

U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1980. Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP). Ecol.
    Serv. Manual 102. Div. Ecol. Servi., Washington D.C

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1995. Priority Habitats and Species Habitat Program. 24pp

USFWS. 2002. Bull Trout Draft Recovery Plan. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Paged by section.
   Available from http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plans/2002/021129.pdf

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                                          Page 26
I. Key personnel

      NAME                            TITLE                       FTE/Months        EXPERIENCE
Carl Scheeler                   Program Manager               0.1 FTE/204 hrs.    26 years
Allen B. Childs                 Project Leader/Fish           0.5 FTE/1040 hrs.   17 years
                                and Wildlife
Tanya Harrison                  Assistant Biologist           0.5 FTE/1040 hrs    12 years
Troy Rodriquez                  Biological                    0.5 FTE/1040 hrs.   3 years
Matt Farrow                     Biological                    0.2 FTE/416 hrs.    9 years
Amos Pond                       Biological                    0.2 FTE/416 hrs.    5 years
Larry Minthorn                  Biological                    0.1 FTE/204 hrs.    5 years

CTUIR Department of Natural Resource staff funded under this project are professionally
trained and meet standard job descriptions (professional and technical grade and series
requirements) established under the CTUIR Personnel Policy and Procedures Manual
(under current revision, 1998). Tribal staff involved in implementing the work identified
under this proposal includes biological, technical, and administrative staff. Following are
resumes of key staff involved in implementing this project.

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                                  Page 27
                                             ALLEN B. CHILDS
                                          Statement of Qualifications

Address                                                                       Telephone
CTUIR Department of Natural Resources
Fish and Wildlife Program
P.O. Box 638                                                                   (541) 966-2392
Pendleton, Oregon 97801                                                 allenchilds@ctuir.com


1985-89              Eastern Oregon University; Bachelor of Biology/Wildlife Management
                     Degree with major course of study in wildlife biology, terrestrial and
                     aquatic ecology, zoology, and biochemistry. Elective course work in
                     rangeland sciences, environmental chemistry, statistics, and technical
                     report writing.
1983-85              College of Eastern Utah; Associate of Science Degree with studies
                     focused on general education, electives in natural resource areas, aquatic
                     ecology, rangeland science. Other electives included technical report
                     writing and creative writing.


Confederated Tribes Umatilla Indian Reservation
Supervisory Fish and Wildlife Biologist/Project Leader
April 1993 to Present

Responsibilities: Lead project biologist for development and implementation of Tribal
Columbia Basin Wildlife Mitigation Projects and CTUIR Grande Ronde Subbasin
Restoration Project. Responsibilities include: identification of and development of
project opportunities, land acquisition, management plan development, baseline resource
assessments, field surveys, monitoring and evaluation, environmental compliance
(NEPA/SEPA, ESA consultation, hydraulic/fill-removal permits, State Forest Practice
Act permits, etc), restoration designs and implementation, subcontracting and inspection,
and administrative duties (budgets, workplans, annual reports, personnel etc).

USDA Forest Service, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest
Natural Resource Planner/Biologist
December 1989 to April 1993

Responsibilities: Facilitated interdisciplinary team analyses as project leader for a land
and resource management projects under NEPA, NFMA, ESA, and applicable laws and
regulations. Facilitated environmental planning process and environmental compliance
documentation. Processed environmental appeals, prepared appeal records, and
documented process.

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                                     Page 28
                                             TANYA HARRISON
                                          Statement of Qualifications

Address                                                                       Telephone
CTUIR Department of Natural Resources
Fish and Wildlife Program
P.O. Box 638                                                                   (541) 966-2297
Pendleton, Oregon 97801                                                 tanyaharrison@ctuir.com


1997-2000  Eastern Oregon University; Bachelor of Science in Biology with major
           course of study in botany, rangeland sciences, environmental chemistry,
           statistics, and technical report writing.
1990-1994  Lewis and Clark College; Bachelor of Arts

Confederated Tribes of the
Umatilla Indian Reservation
Supervisory Fish and Wildlife Biologist/Project Leader
December 2003 to Present

Responsibilities: Responsible for assisting with data collection, analysis, and
management. Plan and implement noxious weed, wetland plant, and wildlife surveys,
and conduct groundwater monitoring program. Developing a noxious weed control plan.
Program, deploy, and download data from data collection devices for water quality
monitoring. Assist with native plant collection and rangeland, wetland, and forest land
restoration, and coordinate closely with native plant nursery. Assist with NEPA
compliance, biological assessments, oversight of technicians, writing reports and
contracts, hunt program, fishery and stream habitat surveys, and other duties as assigned.

Other Employment/Experience:
2003 Biological technician, McNary NWR, USFW, Burbank WA
2003 Columbia River Avian Predation Project intern, State of Oregon, Hermiston, OR
2002-2003 Biological technician Umatilla NWR, USFW, Irrigon, OR
2002 Fisheries Biological technician USGS, Cook, WA
2002 Wolf handler intern Wolf Education and Research Center, Winchester, ID
2001 Wildlife Biological technician USFS, Silver Lake, OR
1994-2000 seasonal jobs with various biological duties through out Oregon and

FY 2007-09 Rainwater Project Proposal (20002600), Narrative                                   Page 29

To top