FY07-09 proposal 200724200
Jump to Reviews and Recommendations
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Fifteenmile Subbasin Efficient Irrigation Technology |
| Proposal ID | 200724200 |
| Organization | Wasco County Soil & Water Conservation District (SWCD) |
| Short description | Project will upgrade irrigation technology on 1,000 acres of orchard land from impact sprinklers (~65% efficient) to microsprinklers or drip irrigation with mulch (95% efficient or better). Total water savings are estimated at 900 acre-feet per year. |
| Information transfer | Wasco County SWCD will report to BPA, report results in the District Annual Report, and report results in local news media. |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Contacts
| Contact | Organization | |
|---|---|---|
| Form submitter | ||
| Jennifer Clark | Wasco County SWCD | [email protected] |
| All assigned contacts | ||
| Ron Graves | Wasco County SWCD | [email protected] |
Section 2. Locations
Province / subbasin: Columbia Gorge / Fifteenmile
| Latitude | Longitude | Waterbody | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 45.75N | 121.5W | Mill, Threemile, Mosier Creek | Northern Wasco County |
| 45.5 N | 121.25 W | Fifteenmile Watershed, Mill Creek, Mosier Creek | Irrigated orchards throughout the Fifteenmile Subbasin will be eligible for assistance. |
Section 3. Focal species
primary: Steelhead Middle Columbia River ESUsecondary: Pacific Lamprey
secondary: All Resident Fish
secondary: Cutthroat Trout
secondary: Rainbow Trout
secondary: All Wildlife
Section 4. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishments |
|---|
Section 5. Relationships to other projects
| Funding source | Related ID | Related title | Relationship |
|---|---|---|---|
| BPA | [no entry] | Water and Economic Optimization Project | Synergistic Effects on water savings from implementing both projects together |
| BPA | 200102000 | 15 Mile Cr Riparian Fence/Surv | Increased flow will help all efforts to improve habitat |
| BPA | 200102100 | 15 Mile Creek Riparian Buffers | Increased summer flow and higher water tables will aid in recovery of riparian vegetation and function |
| OWEB - State | 204-223 | North Wasco Co Direct Seed | Part of a suite of projects coordinated between agencies to address the four highest fish restoration priorities in Fifteenmile Subbasin. Direct seed address upland hydrologic effects, thus affecting both high and low flows. |
| OWEB - State | 205-050 | Hood-Deschutes Basin Direct Se | Part of a suite of projects coordinated between agencies to address the four highest fish restoration priorities in Fifteenmile Subbasin. Direct seed address upland hydrologic effects, thus affecting both high and low flows. |
| OWEB - State | 206-118 | Endersby Culvert Replacement | Culvert is being replaced to enhance passage at a critical spot in Eightmile Creek. Downstream of this spot, summer temperatures exceed acute lethal levels. Flow restoration also enhances passage and improves temperatures both upstream and downstream of this culvert. |
| OWEB - State | 205-196 | Fifteenmile Riverkeeper Phase | The value of this instream enhancement project will be enhanced by saving water at an upstream irrigation diversion. |
| OWEB - State | 206-122 | Dry Cr Gully Erosion Control | This upland erosion control project addresses the hydrologic function of the watershed in an attempt to address both high and low flows in Dry Creek, as well as to avoid sediment delivery to creek. |
| BPA | 199304000 | Fifteenmile Creek Habitat Impr | Instream and riparian practices protect the stream from upland infuences and promote floodplain connectivity, but would be enhanced in value by higher summer flows. |
Section 6. Biological objectives
| Biological objectives | Full description | Associated subbasin plan | Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Increase steelhead smolt production | Increase winter steelhead smolt production from the current range of 4,559-10,504 smolts per year (Fifteenmile Subbasin Assessment, page 17) to the target range of 8,125-18,697 smolts per year(Fifteenmile Subbasin Assessment, page 95 and Subbasin Plan, page 8). This project will address the critical habitat factor of low summer flows. The physical objective of this project is to decrease water diversions by 900 ac-ft/yr by 2010. New irrigation systems will save ~30% of the water currently being applied. In combination with WEOP, savings will total ~50%. | Fifteenmile | Biological Objective of Fifteenmile Subbasin Plan; Low flow restoration: 50% restoration of flows compared to presettlement condition; Groundwater conservation in Mosier Watershed |
Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)
| Work element name | Work element title | Description | Start date | End date | Est budget |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coordination | Solicit for landowner participation | Advertise availability of program through newsletters (SWCD and Extension Service), articles, neighborhood meetings, grower events, etc. | 1/1/2007 | 5/1/2009 | $8,000 |
|
Biological objectives Increase steelhead smolt production |
Metrics |
||||
| Identify and Select Projects | Prioritize and select fields and orchard blocks. | Landowners will sign up for the program in the SWCD office. SWCD staff will work first with those projects with greatest potential impact to streamflows. | 2/1/2007 | 5/30/2009 | $8,000 |
|
Biological objectives Increase steelhead smolt production |
Metrics |
||||
| Manage and Administer Projects | Manage and administer project | Coordinate with participating landowners, WEOP project, subcontractors, Oregon Water Resources, etc. Track project expenses, request reimbursements, etc. | 1/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $19,200 |
|
Biological objectives Increase steelhead smolt production |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Design and/or Specifications | Design new irrigation system | This work will be subcontracted to one of two local irrigation supply companies, who will produce system designs, parts lists, cost estimates and estimates of water savings. | 3/1/2007 | 6/30/2009 | $71,000 |
|
Biological objectives Increase steelhead smolt production |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Plan | Develop and finalize landowner contracts | Landowner contracts specifying work to be completed and instream rights transfers will be developed and signed with each participating landowner. | 4/1/2007 | 10/30/2009 | $7,000 |
|
Biological objectives Increase steelhead smolt production |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Annual Report | SWCD reports to BPA | SWCD will complete the annual report and submit it to COTR | 12/1/2007 | 12/31/2009 | $830 |
|
Biological objectives Increase steelhead smolt production |
Metrics |
||||
| Produce Status Report | SWCD reports quarterly to BPA | SWCD will complete quarterly reports and submit them to COTR | 3/1/2007 | 10/30/2009 | $5,000 |
|
Biological objectives Increase steelhead smolt production |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Sprinkler | Install upgraded sprinkler systems | Upon completion of landowner contracts, on-the-ground work will be completed by the landowners, who will then submit bills to the SWCD for reimbursement. | 4/1/2007 | 10/30/2009 | $1,142,000 |
|
Biological objectives Increase steelhead smolt production |
Metrics * Amount of unprotected water flow returned to the stream by conservation in acre-feet: 900 |
||||
| Acquire Water Instream | Coordinate with OWRD for water rights transfers. | SWCD will assist the landowner and Oregon Water Resources Department to complete paperwork for the instream water rights transfers. This step applies only to withdrawals from surface water sources within the subbasin | 4/1/2007 | 10/30/2009 | $5,300 |
|
Biological objectives Increase steelhead smolt production |
Metrics *Start month for water instream: June *End month for water instream: September * Amount of water secured: 225 |
||||
| Develop and Negotiate Water Right Transaction | Negotiate with landowner to convert saved water to instream rights | Based on potential surface water savings, SWCD will negotiate instream water right transfers with participating orchardists. Typically, 50-75% of saved surface water will be converted instream. Groundwater savings will not result in an instream right, but will result in 100% of saved water remaining in the aquifer. | 4/1/2007 | 5/30/2009 | $7,000 |
|
Biological objectives Increase steelhead smolt production |
Metrics |
||||
Section 8. Budgets
Itemized estimated budget
| Item | Note | FY07 | FY08 | FY09 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personnel | District manager/Coordinator: $31/hr (+COLA) x 376 hrs/yr (+ final report) | $11,656 | $12,005 | $12,366 |
| Fringe Benefits | District mgr/Coordinator (30%) | $3,497 | $3,602 | $3,710 |
| Personnel | Clerical: $19.42/hr (+COLA) x 60 hrs/yr | $1,165 | $1,200 | $1,236 |
| Fringe Benefits | Clerical (30%) | $350 | $362 | $373 |
| Other | Design: $65/acre | $21,500 | $21,500 | $21,500 |
| Supplies | Install micro or drip systems and mulches | $346,932 | $346,932 | $346,932 |
| Travel | 3 days/yr x $120/day | $360 | $360 | $360 |
| Overhead | 10% | $38,452 | $38,452 | $38,528 |
| Totals | $423,912 | $424,413 | $425,005 | |
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
| Total itemized budget: | $1,273,330 |
| Total work element budget: | $1,273,330 |
Cost sharing
| Funding source/org | Item or service provided | FY 07 est value ($) | FY 08 est value ($) | FY 09 est value ($) | Cash or in-kind? | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Individual Participants | 25% cost-share required for participation | $116,800 | $116,800 | $116,800 | Cash | Confirmed |
| NRCS: EQIP Program | Funding for additional acres | $50,000 | $50,000 | $50,000 | Cash | Under Development |
| Totals | $166,800 | $166,800 | $166,800 | |||
Section 9. Project future
|
FY 2010 estimated budget: $422,980 FY 2011 estimated budget: $422,980 |
Comments: Project will continue until all irrigated acres are upgraded for maximum efficiency |
Future O&M costs: No O&M. Landowners responsible for maintenance and operation.
Termination date: None
Comments: SWCD will write final report after 2009 for this proposal. Based on success rate of this program, SWCD will submit for further funding until all irrigated acres have been upgraded for maximum efficiency.
Final deliverables: 1,000 acres of upgraded irrigation systems for which BPA will provide 75% cost-share. Additional acres will be upgraded at the same rate by EQIP program.
Section 10. Narrative and other documents
Reviews and recommendations
| FY07 budget | FY08 budget | FY09 budget | Total budget | Type | Category | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NPCC FINAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Oct 23, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Expense | ProvinceExpense | Do Not Fund |
| NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | ProvinceExpense | ||
ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)
Recommendation: Response requested
NPCC comments: Overall, this is a promising proposal for reducing water loss through evaporation. This project does include provisions for reserving water saved to instream rights, which is good. However, the ISRP requests that certain issues be addressed before a final funding recommendation is made: An important missing piece from the proposal is whether this additional water saved would be meaningful in terms of benefits to fish and wildlife. How far downstream on the creek would the saved water accrue? It appears that the water saved would be in the lower portion of the watershed for orchardists. Is this the key area for steelhead rearing? Or is the water really needed in the upper watershed? The project should meet the criteria used to select and prioritize projects by the Fish and Wildlife Program's Water Transaction project run by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, project 200201301. Would it be more cost effective to purchase the water rights? A response is needed to describe the monitoring plan to evaluate the effectiveness of the project. The technical background is fairly well explained, but it is not clear why this project was separated from the Water and Economics Optimization project, which also provides tools for irrigation water conservation. This proposal is for upgrading the orchard irrigation systems on about 450 acres per year. It was a little unclear how much additional instream flow this would provide to the Fifteen Mile Creek system, but later in the proposal it is claimed that mulching 200 acres yielded 1/2 cfs over 100 days. It would have been helpful if the proposal had presented a map of fish distribution and the location of orchards where new technology might be applied -- this would have provided better context for the work. The proposal links the work to the Fish and Wildlife Program, the Fifteenmile subbasin assessment, and the BiOp; it supports the Low Flow Restoration strategy of the Fifteenmile Subbasin Plan, which calls for a 50% recovery of historic flows as a high priority strategy for steelhead restoration. The proposal listed other projects but did not go into a lot of detail about how it would be directly related to them. However, the restoration diagram (Figure 1) was an effective means of showing the overall goals of the different Fifteenmile Creek efforts. A little more detail about how this project would directly collaborate with the others would be helpful. The biological objective given was the general objective of approximately doubling the number of steelhead smolts from Fifteenmile Creek, which included a 50% recovery of historic streamflows. The proposal does not specify how much incremental flow this particular project would supply by itself, but it does say that if combined with the water optimization modeling project the total increase in flow may amount to 50%. However, under a best-case scenario of improving irrigation systems on 1,000 acres, the proposal states that water diversions for those 1,000 acres would be reduced by about 30%. It would have been helpful if the proposal had translated this change into monthly streamflow increments. In terms of science, there is not much in the work elements on which to comment. Most are process-related. It would help if priority setting included fields and orchards upstream from known spawning and important rearing sites. The proposal did not include any provisions for monitoring streamflows after the upgraded irrigation systems were installed. Facilities and personnel seemed reasonable. Information will apparently be disseminated locally by Wasco County SWCD staff. Focal species are likely to enjoy long-term benefits of increased flows, although the incremental increase in total flow in Fifteenmile Creek, and the projected benefits to steelhead, cutthroat trout, and lamprey are not provided in the proposal. Non-focal species are not mentioned, but aquatic species are likely to benefit from the project.
ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)
Recommendation: Response requested
NPCC comments: Overall, this is a promising proposal for reducing water loss through evaporation. This project does include provisions for reserving water saved to instream rights, which is good. However, the ISRP requests that certain issues be addressed before a final funding recommendation is made: An important missing piece from the proposal is whether this additional water saved would be meaningful in terms of benefits to fish and wildlife. How far downstream on the creek would the saved water accrue? It appears that the water saved would be in the lower portion of the watershed for orchardists. Is this the key area for steelhead rearing? Or is the water really needed in the upper watershed? The project should meet the criteria used to select and prioritize projects by the Fish and Wildlife Program's Water Transaction project run by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, project 200201301. Would it be more cost effective to purchase the water rights? A response is needed to describe the monitoring plan to evaluate the effectiveness of the project. The technical background is fairly well explained, but it is not clear why this project was separated from the Water and Economics Optimization project, which also provides tools for irrigation water conservation. This proposal is for upgrading the orchard irrigation systems on about 450 acres per year. It was a little unclear how much additional instream flow this would provide to the Fifteen Mile Creek system, but later in the proposal it is claimed that mulching 200 acres yielded 1/2 cfs over 100 days. It would have been helpful if the proposal had presented a map of fish distribution and the location of orchards where new technology might be applied -- this would have provided better context for the work. The proposal links the work to the Fish and Wildlife Program, the Fifteenmile subbasin assessment, and the BiOp; it supports the Low Flow Restoration strategy of the Fifteenmile Subbasin Plan, which calls for a 50% recovery of historic flows as a high priority strategy for steelhead restoration. The proposal listed other projects but did not go into a lot of detail about how it would be directly related to them. However, the restoration diagram (Figure 1) was an effective means of showing the overall goals of the different Fifteenmile Creek efforts. A little more detail about how this project would directly collaborate with the others would be helpful. The biological objective given was the general objective of approximately doubling the number of steelhead smolts from Fifteenmile Creek, which included a 50% recovery of historic streamflows. The proposal does not specify how much incremental flow this particular project would supply by itself, but it does say that if combined with the water optimization modeling project the total increase in flow may amount to 50%. However, under a best-case scenario of improving irrigation systems on 1,000 acres, the proposal states that water diversions for those 1,000 acres would be reduced by about 30%. It would have been helpful if the proposal had translated this change into monthly streamflow increments. In terms of science, there is not much in the work elements on which to comment. Most are process-related. It would help if priority setting included fields and orchards upstream from known spawning and important rearing sites. The proposal did not include any provisions for monitoring streamflows after the upgraded irrigation systems were installed. Facilities and personnel seemed reasonable. Information will apparently be disseminated locally by Wasco County SWCD staff. Focal species are likely to enjoy long-term benefits of increased flows, although the incremental increase in total flow in Fifteenmile Creek, and the projected benefits to steelhead, cutthroat trout, and lamprey are not provided in the proposal. Non-focal species are not mentioned, but aquatic species are likely to benefit from the project.