only activity.

County

(e.g., (required r",,-orting) hvdrol c code,Eeviouslv

A .ppllcant Organization:

greg.silbernagel@umatillawatershedcouncil.org Person:Greg Silbernagel

A ,gent Organization:Umatilla

greg.silbernagel@umatillawatershedcouncil.or[ Person: Greg Silbernagel

rOJect anager Name:Greg Silbernagel Organization:

greg.silbernagel@umatillawatershedcouncil.or

_G_re-'g"'-S_tl_be_ rn_a""-ge_l ________ Title:

Umatilla Basin Watershed Council Address:PO BOX 1551, Pendleton, OR 97801

Phone:541-276-2l90 Fax:54 1-276-2275 Email: Contact

Umatilla Basin Watershed Council Address:PO BOX 1551, Pendleton, OR 97801

Phone:541-276-2190 Fax:541-276-2275 Email:

213-6017 ION

Type the infonnation for Sections I and II.

Name of project: Broun Dam Removal - Phase 1

OWEB funds requested: $23,160.00 Total cost of projed: $50,060.00

uwt:D GrwIt Cycle Data

t This dollar amount refers to the tOLaI cost o/the technical assistance and does noi include the subsequent planned restoration work.

PROJECT LOCATION:

This project occurs in one region only. Region 1 0 Region 2 0 Region 3 0 Region 4 0 Region 5 0 Region 6 [8J

This project occurs in multiple regions. Check all that apply. Region 10 Region 20 Region 30 Region 40 Region 50 Region 60

This project occurs statewide / in all regions. 0

This project occurs at (check one): o Site unknown at this time A single site o Multiple sites

Watershed Name s or Counties

Umatilla Basin Watershed - Birch Creek Umatilla County

Township, Range, Section(s) Longitude, Latitude (e.g., -123.789,45.6\3) Watershed code(s) - Please note the lO-digit TIN. R5E. S12) for federal/state unit 51h Field HUe

T1 N, R32E, S22 45.54967, -118.794436

r

F' IIsca Basin Watershed Foundation

Address:PO BOX 1551, Pendleton, OR 97801

Phone:(541 )276-2190 Fax:(541 )276-2275 Email: Contact

CERTIFICATION:

1707010306

P M

I certify that this application is a true and accurate representation of the proposed work for watershed restoration and that I am authorized to sign as the Applicant or Co-Applicant. By the following signature, the Applicant certifies that they are aware of the requirements (see Application Instructions) of an OWEB grant and are prepared to implement the project if awarded.

Applicant Signature:

Print Name:

Date:

Co-Applicant Signature: Date:

Print Name: Agency:

if/13/d-OIJ,..

Executive Director

2011-13 OWEB Technical Assistance Appl ication - Section 1 & I] - April 2012 Page I

Section II

PROJECT SUMMARY

1. Summary. Give a bnef summary (max. 150 words) of the proposed technical assistance activity on/v (do not confuse the technical assistance with planned restoration). Be sure to mention partners and how OWEB funds will be used.

Broun Dam is located on Birch Creek at river mile 10 between Pilot Rock and Pendleton, Oregon. It has been a

priority structure for modification or removal by ODFW and CmIR since 2005 due to fish passage concerns and outdated, unscreened, flood irrigation practices. The UBWC has been pro-active in organizing landowners and determining the best option of success for this project since 2010. The best option is to transfer landowner's point of diversion away from the ditch. This will remove the need of the flood irrigation ditch and fish passage barrier while decreasing the landowner's use of irrigation water through installation of an efficient, piped, irrigation system. This proposal will assist three landowners holding water rights to the ditch system with point of diversion transfer application's, develop future irrigation plan designs and planning for future Broun Dam removal. Partners include Umatilla Basin Restoration Team and Landowners.

2. What type of technical assistance are you applying for (see Instructions first):

o TA#1 Project Design T A#2 Implementation o T A#3 Landowner Recruitment

3. What type of support are you seeking? (select only one)

o Part-time or full-time in-house support o Part-time or full-time outside contract support Both

4. Was this application submitted previously? If yes, what was the month and year, or application number? 211-6041

5. Does this application propose a grant for a property in which OWEB previously invested funds for purchase of fee title or a conservation easement; or is OWEB currently considering an acquisition grant for this property?

If yes, what is the grant number(s)?

6. Is this project a continuation of a previously OWEB-funded project(s)? If yes, what was the month and year, or application(s) number?

7. Do you plan to submit a restoration grant application to OWEB as a result of this technical assistance project?

8. What are the proposed start and end dates for the technical assistance project? Start: October 2012 End: October 2013

9. Is this project related to a proposed or funded Oregon State Weed Board grant application(s)? If yes, list the month and year, or grant application(s) number, and briefly describe how this project is related to the Weed Board application or grant.

Yes 0 No

o Yes No

o Yes No

Yes 0 No

o Yes No

10. Project Partners. Show all anticipated funding sources, and indicate the dollar value for cash or in-kind contributions. Be sure to provide a dollar value for each funding source. If the funding source is providing in-kind contributions, briefly describe the nature of the contribution in the Funding Source Column. Check the appropriate box to denote if the funding status is secured or pending. In the AmountlValue Column, provide a total dollar amount or value for each funding source. Match should be directly related to the technical assistance project and not for the restoration phase.

Funding Source Cash In-Kind Secured Pending

Name the Partner and what their contribution is. AmountlValue (x) (x)

2011-13 OWEB Technical Assistance Application Section 1 & 11 April 2012 Page 2

project sp cificallv designed bene fit

box, Project [)esciption.

Targeted Populations:

http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/ESA-Salmon-Listings/Salmon­E.2pulations/Mapsllndex.cfm.

(Oncorhynchus [

0 Oregon spring-run OregonINorthern

0 Oregon mykiss)

SpringfSummer-run Oregon

Upper Klamath-Trimty Upper Oregon

Washington Washington) [ ] Upper 0 ESQ

D

Expected

OWEB $23,160.00 $ 0 $23,160.00

Landowner(s) or other partners: $ $ 0 0 $

CTUlR $15,000.00 $ 0 $15,000.00

Umatilla Basin Restoration Team $ $4,000.00 0 $4,000.00

Landowner - Gabe Garton $ $2,000.00 0 $2,000.00

Landowner - Phil Hummel $ $2,000.00 0 $2,000.00

Landowner - James Hurrunel $ $2,000.00 0 $2,000.00

UBWC - Greg Silbernagel $1,900.00 $ 0 $1,900.00

$ $ 0 0 $

$ $ 0 0 $

Total Estimated Funds (add all amounts in the far-right Column): *$50,060.00

*The total should equal the total cost of the project on page I of the application.

11. Have any conditions been placed on match funds from other sources that may affect project completion? o Yes No

If yes, explain:

*12. Salmon/Steelhead Populations Targeted and Expected Benefits to Salmon/Steelhead

The information provided wilJ be used to by OWEB to better meet federal and state reporting requirements. Completion of this section is required but will not be used to evaluate this application for funding.

o ·n1is is NOT to salmon or slcc1head.

If vou check this STOP here and GO TO Section III -

12(a) SalmoniSteelhead Select one or more of the salmon ESUs (Evolutionary Significant Unit) or steelhead DPSs (Distinct Population Segment) that the project will addresslbenefit. For species where the ESU/DPS name is not known or determined, use the species name with unidentified ESU (e.g., Chinook salmon - unidentified ESU). Additional information on the designation and location of the salmonlsteelhead populations can be found at

Chinook Salmon tshawytscha) Coho Salmon (0 kisutch) Deschutes River summer/fall-run ESU 0 Lower Columbia River ESU

0 Lower Columbia River ESU Coast ESU Mid-Columbia River ESU 0 Southern California ESU

Coast ESU unidentified ESU

0 Snake River Fall-run ESU Steelhead (0

0 Snake River ESU 0 Klamath Mountains Province DPS

0 Southern and Northern California Coastal ESU 0 Lower Columbia River DPS 0 Rivers ESV Middle Columbia River DPS 0 Willamette River ESU 0 Coast DPS 0 unidentified ESU 0 Snake River Basin DPS Chum Salmon (0 ketal 0 Coast DPS (SW

Columbia River ESU 0 Willamette River DPS Pacific Coast D SteelheadiTrout unidentified DPS unidentified ESU

12(b) Benefits: Write a brief description of the goals and purpose of the project and how it is expected to benefit salmon/steelhead or salmonlsteelhead habitat. This answer should be no longer than 2000 characters which is

2011-13 OWEB Technical Assistance Application - Section I & II - April 2012 Page 3

••

approximately 330 words) See Application Instructions for examples and ideas on how to calculate the number of words or characters in your answer.

The Broun Dam is a fish passage barrier to juvenile Mid Columbia Steelhead, Spring and Fall Chinook and

Coho Salmon. Transfering the point of diversion away from the ditch will increase survivability of both juvenile

and adult fish that swim into the unscreened flood irrigation ditch and into agricultural fields. Transfering the point

of diversion away from the ditch will allow for the removal of the diversion structure and fish passage barrier.

Eliminating all future maintenance and repair expenses associated with installation of a fish ladder. Individual

instream water rights will allow more water to stay in stream for greater periods of time, increasing overall

watershed benefit.

20 J J -13 OWEB Technical Assistance Application - Section I & 11 April 2012 Page 4 -

Activity

problem

Section III

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Check one box only and answer the set of questions that applies to the type of technical assistance for which you are applying. Refer to the Application Instructions for clarification and helpful examples.

You may use the application form to respond to the questions, using additional sheets of paper as necessary OR answer the questions on separate pages. Be sure to include the question numbers and text of the questions before you begin typing your answers to assist the reviewers in evaluating your application.

Use 8;1/' x 11" paper. A double-sided application and materials are optional except for oversize maps and designs or multiple sets for reviewers. All materials should be single-spaced wherever possible, unstapled and unbound, except for sets of maps/photos/designs (see Page 3 of the application instructions for assembling multiples for reviewers). Use a l2-pt type size to answer the questions and a IO-pt type size for tables. Do not use color highlights for text emphasis or in tables as the highlight turns black when the application is scanned. Instead, use bold face and italics for emphasis only. Use bullets where appropriate. If the project involves mUltiple sites, be specific for each.

TA#l PROJECT DESIGN

Technical Assistance

1. Describe the (not the solution). The technical assistance for which you are seeking support will address which specific watershed priority(ies) or limiting factor(s) and benefit which specific resource(s)? If the technical assistance need is identified in an existing watershed-scale assessment or action plan, or in a subbasin plan, identify the plan and page number.

The Broun Ditch is an unscreened irrigation ditch on Birch Creek at river mile ten. The diversion structure, Broun Dam, is a significant passage barrier to juvenile ESA Mid Columbia Steelhead. It spans 43 feet across and hosts a 29 square foot concrete apron. Surface to surface jump height has been measured by ODFW at 1.46 feet during low flows. Adult and juvenile salmonids entering the ditch are flood irrigated into agricultural fields, causing death and decline to species population.

The ditch headgate is in need of repair or abandonment. It currently leaks water while closed, causing agriculture fie1ds to remain flooded during the winter season. The ditch does not have a flow meter that allows highly accurate monitoring of water usage by Oregon Water Resources Department. The inefficient flood irrigation system could be improved to a sprinkler system.

Watershed Priorities: Oregon Conservation Strategy, February 2006 - Columbia Plateau Region - Water quality and quantity and invasive species are of greatest concern in this ecoregion. (pg 16) - Goals and Actions - 4.1 - Continue working with OWEB, ODOT, USFS, BLM, and other partners to

prioritize and remove fish passage barriers, leveraging work done by ODFW's Fish Passage Task Force to expand implementation of fish passage priorities. (pg 56)

Watershed Limiting Factors: Umatilla Basin Long Term Monitoring Plan - March 2012 - High priority water quality parameters for Birch Creek mainstem include - flow, temperature, bacteria,

iron (Fe) and manganese (Mn) for new listings, macroinvertebrates. (pg 113)

2011-13 OWEB Technical Assistance Application - Section III - April 2012 Page 1

Mid Columbia Stee1head Recovery Plan, February 2010 Section 9.2.10 - Primary limiting factors: high water temperature, sediment routing, impaired fish passage, degraded

channel structure and complexity and altered hydrology (low flow). (pg 9-159)

Action Plans: Mid Columbia Steelhead Recovery Plan, February 2010 - Birch Creek River Mile 10, Irrigation Dam, Step height estimate 1.0 foot, partial barrier, Recommended

action - Remove. Medium Priority. (Table 8-35) - Habitat Strategies and Actions for the Umatilla River Steelhead Population - Stategy #2 - The watershed

with the greatest need for passage remediation is Birch Creek. (pg 9-163)

CTUIR Umatilla River Basin Anadromous Fish Habitat Enhancement Projects - Riparian Function. Broun Dam removal is listed as a target.

ODFW - Umatilla River Subbasin Fish Habitat Improvement Program, Fish Management Program. Reference Mid Columbia Steelhead Recovery Plan.

2. Describe the solution (not the problem). What is the technical design solution (not the restoration solution)? What range of alternatives will be evaluated?

The Umatilla Basin Watershed Council has worked extensively with landowners since 2010. The most logical solution is to transfer point of diversion for water right holders to an instream water right. In doing so, this will remove the need of the Broun Dam and Broun Ditch system. A fish screen on new pump stations will be required of the project which will increase survivability of all stages of life for fish species. Flow meter installation is also required on all new point of diversions. Flow meters will allow Oregon Water Resources Department to be highly accurate in regulating water right. Individual pump stations will allow landowners to use only the water they need and leave remaining water instream for water quality and fish benefit.

Alternatives evaluated have consisted of a temporary fish screen to be installed by ODFW. This is estimated at $53,000. This alternative only addresses the open ditch system and does not address the fish passage barrier. Recently, ODFW has been encouraged by the UBWC to install this fish screen due to the uncertainty of this proposal being accepted and dam removal several years out. The significant amount of fish prevented from entering the ditch while dam removal plans are prepared would be worth the cost and save lives of countless ESA listed species. Should response from the OWEB review team come quickly, ODWF may reconsider this expense and be able to better spend their money elsewhere or contribute these funds slated for the screen to removal of the barrier.

Discussion has taken place regarding temporary or permanent fish ladder systems to improve passage over flash boards during irrigation season. This alternative is least desired as it is a temporary fix and expensive to manage and maintain. The question has also been asked - At what point do temporary fixes become permanent and the project then becomes less of a priority? It makes the most sense from the UBWC perspective to eliminate the need of the dam completely and remove all expenses associated with future maintenance and repair.

3. What specific technical assistance expertise will you need? How will the technical assistance provider be selected?

2011-13 OWES Technical Assistance Application - Section III April 2012 Page 2 -

Resulting Restoration Project

6.

The Umatilla Basin Watershed Council requests salary for project manager to work with landowners and file point of diversion applications, design new irrigation system for landowners and detail costs of new pump station expenses. Irrigation equipment must be installed five years from point of diversion application acceptance by OWRD. This is scheduled for Phase II of this project. Phase III consists of darn removal and restoration efforts.

4. Who will provide guidance for and supervise the technical assistance provider? How will this guidance and supervision be ensured?

The Umatilla Basin Watershed Council Executive Director will oversee UBWC project manager. The Umatilla Basin Restoration Team will be updated at regular meetings on accomplishments and provide technical support.

The source of funding for point of diversion transfer originates through BPA mitigation dollars. CTUIR is the administrator of these funds and will be updated regularly to assure funding is spent appropriately.

ODFW has expressed high interest in overseeing project management for removal of the dam. If their work load allows, the dam removal and restoration process is expected to be turned over to them after water right transfers have been completed by the UBWC.

5. How will the success of the completed technical assistance phase be determined? What technical review and design criteria will you employ to evaluate success?

Successful completion of Phase I will be determined through completion of point of diversion transfers for irrigators who currently use the ditch system, design of future irrigation system and funding proposals submitted. This will allow headgate to remain shut and ditch inactive during restoration planning efforts.

Briefly (a) describe the proposed restoration project practice(s) and priorities to result from the technical assistance grant; (b) state measurable objective(s); (c) provide a brief but detailed description of the project; and (d) specify the expected ecological benefits from the project.

A) Upon transfer of water rights to instream and away from Broun Ditch. The Broun Dam may be removed and stream bank restored.

B) Measureable objectives include removal of the 43' spanning Broun Dam and 29' concrete apron.

C) Remove dam and restore incised stream bank. Secondary alternative is to leave concrete in river and create a step system to meet minimum jump height requirements.

D) Expected ecological benefits include removal of fish passage barrier for ESA listed Mid-Columbia Steelhead and improved irrigation practices. This will lead to greater instream water quality and water quantity in Birch Creek.

7. Provide evidence of the commitment to implement a restoration project(s) resulting from the project design/development of the technical assistance grant (e.g., what sites and are landowners committed to project implementation?).

2011-13 OWEB Technical Assistance Application - Section III - April 2012 Page 3

Landowner letters of support from 3 of the 4 water right holders have been provided with this funding proposal. Landowners contacted would like to participate due to the improvement to their irrigation system. The 4th landowner, Mr. Homer Peterson, was unable to provide a letter of suppol1 at this time due to recent heart surgery. His use of ditch is minimal and UBWC does not believe his participation is necessary and should not be required for approval of this proposal or success of this project to be achieved.

This has been a frequent topic at Umatilla Basin Restoration Team meetings and identified as a project that all partners could play a significant role in, either financially or through technical assistance. ODFW is believed to have work lined out for the next three years. This could potentially be their four year project after POD transfer and irrigation system is in place. This is the estimated time for Phases One and Two to be completed.

8. Discuss in general terms the process and schedule for implementing the restoration project design(s) that will result from the technical assistance grant. Be sure to include whether permits are required.

The UBWC will begin immediately seeking a project manager for this project who hosts water right transfer, irrigation and restoration experience. There is a significant amount of time associated to working with landowners and scheduled meetings at the Oregon Water Resources Department. A certified water rights examiner will need to be hired to assure there will be no damage to other water users with the transfer. This process is expected to take up to one year for OWRD to approve the transfer. While OWRD is reviewing the transfer application, the project manager will begin Phase II and seeking funding for the irrigation equipment identified in designs created in Phase 1. No permits are required for Phase I or Phase II.

Phase III will be completed after installation of equipment and all water rights have been approved. Permits will be required at this phase. ODFW, if schedule permits, is anticipated to lead dam removal and restoration efforts.

2011-13 OWEB Technical Assistance Application - Section III April 2012 Page 4 -

following

Manager

(1) applicant employee portion project.

Greg Silbernagel

(2) supplies, rovided non-staff Ql"olect imQIementation.

(3) Mileage, per lodging, Oregon

trips

(4)

(5) Design, production, printing, developing,

Section IV

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE BUDGET IMPORTANT: Read the application instructions. Add additional lines, ifnecessary

Totals automatically round to the nearest dollar

A B C D E F

Itemize projected costs under each of Unit Unit In-Kind Cash Match OWEB Total Costs

the categories. Number Cost Match* Funds* Funds

(e.g., # of hours) (e.g., hourly (add columns rate) C, D,E)

PROJECT MANAGEMENT. Includes actual in-house staff or contractors who coordinate project implementation. Line items should identify who will be responsible for project management and their affiliation.

UBWC - Project 704hrs/(4 mths) $35 / hr 18,400 18,400 Umatilla Basin Restoration Team 100/ hrs $40 / hr 4,000 4,000 Landowner Contribution 300/ hrs $20 / hr 6,000 6,000

0 SUBTOTAL 10,000 0 18,400 28,400

IN-HOUSE PERSONNEL. Includes only costs and the of their time devoted to this UBWC - 160 hours $35/hr 1,400 1,400 2,800

0 0 0

SUBTOTAL 0 1,400 1,400 2,800 CONTRACTED SERVICES. Labor, and materials to be by for POD Transfer Process Fee's 3 $5,000 I each 15,000 15,000

0 0 0

SUBTOTAL 0 15,000 0 15,000 TRAVEL. diem, etc. Must use current State of rate. Travel - 25 miles RT x 20 500 .511mile 255 255

0 0

SUBTOTAL 0 0 255 255

SUPPLIESIMATERIALS. Refers to items that typically are "used up" during the project. Costs to OWEB must be directly related to on-the-ground work. Group similar supplies and materials on the same line.

0 0 0

SUBTOT AL 0 0 0 0 PRODUCTION. video direct mail, film etc. Map Printing, mailings, photo 1 1,500 500 1,000 1,500 processrng

0 0 0

SUBTOTAL (6) 0 500 1,000 1,500

EQUIPMENT. List equipment costing $250 or more per unit. Useful life of equipment is for the duration of project and will be used only for this project. Identify any portable equipment (items with useful life of generally 2 years or more). Must be property of a governmental entity, tribe, watershed council, SWCD, institution of higher learning or school district.

0 0 0 0

SUBTOTAL (7) 0 0 0 0

[Add all subtotals (1-7) from above] CATEGORY TOTALS (8) 10,000 16,900 21,055 47,955

2011-13 OWEB Technical Assistance Application - Section IV - April 2012 Page 1

far tllr;: QWEB P[Qjr;:�t,

Itemize projected costs under each of theIollowing categories.

A

Unit

Number

B

Unit

Cost

C

In-Kind

Match*

D

Cash Match

Funds*

E

OWEB

Funds

F

Total Costs

(e.g., # of hours) (e.g., hourly

rate)

(add columns

C, D, E) FISCAL ADMINISTRATION. Not to exceed 10% of Category Totals (8) Funds. Compute by mUltiplying by 0.10 or less. Costs

associated with accounting; auditing (fiscal management); contract management (complying with the terms and conditions of the grant

agreement); and fiscal reporting expenses including final report expenses (e.g., film developing) for the grant.

Fiscal Administration - 10% 2,105 2,105

0

FJSCAL ADMINISTRATJON TOT AL(9) 0 0 2,105 2,105

[Add Category Totals (8) & Fiscal Total (9)) BUDGET TOTAL (10) 10,000 16,900 23,160 50,060

* The totals for these two columns must mirror the match totals provided in Section II(10) of the application and on the attached

Match Funding fonn (Attachment A). Match should be for the technical assistance phase only and not for the restoration phase.

2011-13 OWES Technical Assistance Application - Section IV April 2012 Page 2 -

accepts

may

funding sought.

www.oregon.gov/OWEB/GRA apR

fio�t-

ATTACHMENT A

MATCH FUNDING FORM Document here the match funding

OWES shown on the budget page of your grant application

OWER all non-OWER funds as match. An applicant may not use another o WEB grant to match an OWEB grant. However, an applicant who benefits from a pass-through OWEB agreement with another state agency, by receiving either staff expertise or a grant from that state agency, mav use those benefits as match for an OWEB grant. (Example: A grantee use as match the effort provided by ODFW restoration biologists because OWEB funding for those positions is the result of a pass-through agreement).

At the time of application, match funding for OWEB funds requested does not have to be secured, but you must show that at least 25% of match has been On this fonn, you do not necessarily need to show authorized signatures ("secured match"), but the more match that is secured, the stronger the application. Identify the type of match (cash or in-kind), the status of the match (secured or pending), and either a dollar amount or a dollar value (based on local market rates) of the in-kind contribution.

If you have questions about whether your proposed match is eligible or not, visi t our website at TSh!rant materials.shtml, or contact your local OWEB regional program representative

(contact information available in the instructions to this application).

Project Name: Broun Dam Removal - Phase I Applicant: UWBC - Greg Silbernagel

Match Funding Source Type Status Dollar Match Funding Source

(-1 one) (--J one)* Value SignatureIDate*

Confederated Tribes of Umatilla [8J cash o secured

o in kind [8J pending $15,000.00

Indian Reservation

Umatilla Basin Restoration Team o cash o secured

[8J in kind [8J pending $4,000.00

Umatilla Basin Watershed Council [8J cash [8J secured

o in kind o pending $1,900.00

Landowner - Gabe Garton o cash [8J secured e c.,-'\ k C.ht.(( \e er [8J in kind o pending $2,000.00

Landowners - Phil and James o cash o secured

[8J in kind [8J pending $4,000.00 e. 0.. C·-C.\"fJ. \e. H-er Hummel

o cash o secured

o in kind o pending

o cash o secured

o in kind o pending

o cash o secured

o in kind o pending

* IMPORT ANT: If you checked the "Secured" box in the Status Column for any match funding source, you must provide either the signature of an authorized representative of the match source in the final Column, or attach a letter of support from the match funding source that specifically mentions the dollar amount you show in the Dollar Value Column.

20 I 1-13 OWEB Technical Assistance Appl ication - Attachment A - April 2012

I project designs proposals

project plans designs specific

$75,000

project. you eJSPec project

[g]

I

ATTACHMENT B

Technical Assistance Project - Proposed Metrics Form

OWEB

OWEB receives a portion of its funds from the federal government and is required to report how its grantees have used both federal and state funds. The information you provide in the following form will be used for federal and state reporting purposes.

Please review all five sections (A through E) and complete all portions of the form as they apply to your project. Submit all pages (do not exclude any pages). Please provide specific values, do not enter values like "2-3" or "<100". Enter your best approximation of what the project will accomplish.

If you have any questions, please contact Cecilia Noyes, o WEB Performance Analyst and Reporting Specialist at 503-986-0204 or cecilia.noyes@State.or.us.

Section A. Project Designs/Proposals and/or Landowner Recruitment

1. Will this project develop or and/or recruit landowners for habitat protection and/or restoration'7

Yes D No If you answer yes, complete Section A questions 2 through 5 and then continue on to Section B. If you answer no, skip to Section B.

2. :l Estimated number of landowners/managers contacted for the purpose of assisting them in future watershed conservation, protection or restoration projects

3. Will or be developed for a restoration or conservation action?

Yes D No

4. Estimated cost of the habitat restoration to be applied as a result of this technical assistance project

5. Select one or more of the following types of habitat restoration expected to be applied as a result of this techn I If d t h b t t l f h' I 'NIca assIstance o not . a Itat res oratIOn o resu t rom t IS se ect

[g] Fish Screening [g] Riparian Habitat 0 Urban-Impact Reduction

[g] Fish Passage 0 Upland Habitat 0 Other (explain): __

[g] Instream Flow 0 Wetland 0 None

Instream Habitat 0 LstuarinelNearshore

Section B. Outreach Events

6. Will this project conduct outreach events (e.g. workshop/training events and other community events)?

one

Yes D No If you answer yes, complete Section B questions and then continue on to Section C. If you answer no, skip to Section C.

7. Estimated total number of events* [includes workshop/training events and other community events (e.g., a booth at a public/user group event, a public presentation, a press briefing, or a site tour)]

7.a Estimated number of workshop/training events* [this is a sub-set of the total number of recruitment events reported above for question 7]

* Events that occur over multiple days or have multiple sessions but are located at the same location are counted as one event.

2011-13 OWEB Technical Assistance Application - Attachment B - April 2012 Page I

I

unique

unique

Interpretative Signs

unique

unique

I planning

planning and coordination

o Develop monitoring plans or sampling protocols o Design/maintain restoration data systems

o Develop restoration/action plan o Other (explain): __

Section C. Outreach Materials

8. Will this project fund the development or preparation of outreach materials (e.g. brochures, posters, interpretative signs, newspaper articles, radio announcements, websites, etc.)?

Yes 0 No If you answer yes, complete Section C questions 9 through 16 and then continue on to Section D. If you answer no, skip to Section D.

Outreach documents (e.g. reports, brochures, handouts, press releases)

9. Estimated number of outreach documents to be developed **

10. Estimated total number of outreach documents to be prepared**

Exhibits (displays, posters)

11. Estimated number of exhibits to be developed **

12. Estimated total number of exhibits to be prepared**

(don't include signs listed above for exhibits)

13. Q Estimated number of interpretative signs to be developed **

14. 0 Estimated total number of interpretative signs to be prepared**

Media (videos, radio or TV spots, websites, newspaper or magazine articles, and social network media such as Facebook or Twitter)

15. 2 Estimated number of media materials to be developed **

16. Estimated total number of media materials to be prepared**

**Report the number of unique materials to be developed and the total number of materials you plan to prepare.

Example I: A project plans to develop two different (unique) educational documents and print 100 copies of each document; you would report 2 for the number of unique documents developed and 200 for the total number of documents prepared.

Example 2: A project will create a video and produce six copies of the video to show at multiple outreach events; you would report one for the number of unique media developed and six for the total number of media prepared.

Example 3: A project will develop a website; you would report one for the number of unique media developed and one for the total number of media prepared.

Section D. Restoration Planning and Coordination

17. Will this project conduct restoration or coordination (e.g. restoration action plan, monitoring plan, project prioritization, feasibility studies, etc.)?

Yes 0 No If you answer yes, complete Section D questions 18 through 21 and then continue on to Section E. If you answer no, skip to Section E.

18. Check all of the planning and coordination activities to be conducted

Coordination of watershed conservation and restoration o Evaluate/prioritize/analyze restoration plans and efforts projects

Support for local entities or agencies involved in restoration [gl Habitat restoration scoping and feasibility studies

2011-13 OWEB Technical Assistance Application - Attachment B - April 2012 Page 2

scope

I surveys?

assessment/survev

assessment/survey

19. If this project will complete a planning document (e.g. restoration action plan) show the document title, a h d d D h d . h bl b Iut or, ate, an or eac ocument m t e ta e e ow.

Title Author(s) Estimated Description/scope of date of planning document

publication

20. Estimated acres of habitat encompassed by planning activities (to nearest 0.1 acre) (required if you answer yes to question 17)

21. Estimated miles of stream encompassed by planning activities (to nearest 0.01 mile) (optional)

Section E: Assessments/Surveys

22. Will this project conduct stream or habitat assessments or

o Yes No lfyou answer yes, complete Section E questions 23 through 27.

23. Check all of the stream activities to be conducted

D Salmonid presence/absence survey o Fish passage impediments assessed/inventoried

D Instream habitat condition assessment o Habitat use by salmonids assessed/surveyed

o Other (explain): __

24. Estimated total miles of stream(s) assessed/surveyed (to nearest 0.01 mile) [do not double count areas 0/ overlap}

25. Estimated number of fish passage impediments/barriers to be assessedlinventoried.

26. Check all of the habitat activities to be conducted

.0 Riparian Condition o Lidar or other remote sensing

D Road condition/inventory o Landscape mapping

o Upland habitat conditions o Floodplain mapping

o Wetland habitat conditions o Forest Inventories

o Estuarine/near shore habitat conditions o Overall watershed condition assessment or mapping

o Invasive species o Stream typing

o Other (explain): __

27. Estimated total acres of habitat to be assessed/surveyed (to nearest 0.1 acre) [do no! double count areas % verlap}

20 ll-J 3 OWES Technical Assistance Application - Attachment S - April 2012 Page 3

-

Mr. Gabe Garton

Broun Dam Landowner- Birch Creek

43839 Hoeft Rd

Pendleton, OR 97801 (541)969-0951

April 10th, 2012

Mr. Greg Silbernagel

Executive Director

Umatilla Basin Watershed Council

PO Box 1551 Pendleton, OR 97801

Dear Mr. Silbernagel,

My family and I own the property on Birch Creek surrounding the Broun Dam. We currently irrigate

approximately 20 acres through flood irrigation provided from the Broun Ditch. This system is extremely

inefficient and we would like to pursue other alternatives for irrigation.

The alternative we favor the most is the option to transfer the point of diversion in-stream. This would

remove the need of the ditch and concrete diversion structure that spans 43 feet across Birch Creek. The

current head gate is in need of repair and is currently unscreened. We would like to work with you in

transferring the point of diversion in-stream and removing the need of the irrigation ditch.

We understand this to be a phased approach leading up to removal of the Broun Dam. We fully support

the removal and any restoration work with the condition our irrigation needs are met. We request

support from the Umatilla Basin Watershed Council to assist us through this process.

You are welcome to use our time as in kind match as we anticipate being fully involved in the transfer

and future restoration objectives. This time is estimated at 100 hours at $20 per hour - totaling $2,000 of in-kind match. We are also to understand the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation

have generously contributed all point of diversion application fees during this phase due to the

significant fish benefit associated with this transfer.

Please contact me at (541)969-0951 with any questions.

Sincerely,--I

/"

/

..... ,/L.- ." /

Gabe Garton

Broun Dam Landowner

Mr. Phil Hummel

Birch Creek Landowner

Broun Dam Water Right Holder

69012 Hummel Lane

Pendleton, OR 97801

(541)377-1043

April 10th, 2012

Mr. Greg Silbernagel

Executive Director

Umatilla Basin Watershed Council

PO Box 1551

Pendleton, OR 97801

Dear Mr. Silbernagel,

My brother and I would be willing participants in the UBWCs Broun Dam project. We have been

discussing this with you for almost two years and even considered selling our instream right at one time.

We decided this option would not be to our greatest benefit due to the loss of priority date our

secondary water right holds.

We believe the proposed point of diversion transfer would lead to greater irrigation efficiency for our

farm. We would greatly appreciate UBWC assistance in the POD transfer application process and

support in a more efficient, piped, irrigation system.

We understand and believe this project will significantly increase water quantity in Birch Creek through

improved management of our water supply. We are also to understand that, upon transfer of our water

right, we would no longer hold any ties to the Broun Dam or Broun Ditch and it may be removed to

benefit fish in Birch Creek.

This process appears to be well thought out through the years, with many entities being involved at one

point or another, and receives our full support. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me

at the information provided above.

Phil Hummel

o

"'-'

''

''

18

•

==

--

--

ZL

L'. •

cO

<'l

J,

" 1.ll

<'l

J,

"

., ..

...

..

.

.

-]1'

." .

..

, l.�i

'

1,1;-

.t> "1I

Ir. ....'(4 ?

r.. {

T'-�. ...

ti ' .:.

--.J 0

_

1-......

,1 .... Z

Br

ou

n

Da

m -

Bir

ch

Cr

ee

k -

Um

atilla

Ba

sin

Wa

ter

sh

ed

.t>

tn

W0

Z

oN

.,.,

" Z

o

cO

118

·48

·0 W

-,

118

·47

-40

W 2

50

5

00

7

50

m. 1

18

-47

-20

W

Z

.t>tn W

w

N

o

Z

• .

. -.-.:,

. C

. .... j.."

-: ,, -

• I·....

�-'

"1-

11

8-4

7-0

W

.t>tn W

w

6

Z

Ma

p c

en

ter: 17

50

42

3, 1

39

08

60

Th

is m

ap

is a

us

er g

en

era

ted

sta

tic o

utp

ut fro

m O

reg

on

Ex

plo

rer (o

reg

on

ex

plo

rer,in

fo) a

nd

is

No

tes

: Bro

un

Da

m is

loc

ate

d o

n B

irch C

ree

k b

etw

ee

n P

en

dle

ton

an

d P

ilot R

oc

k.

for g

en

era

l refe

ren

ce

on

ly,

Da

ta la

yers

tha

t ap

pe

ar o

n Ih

is ma

p m

ay

or m

ay

no

t be

ac

cu

rate

, O

reg

on

c

urre

nt, o

r oth

erwis

e re

liab

le.

TH

IS M

AP

IS N

OT

TO

BE

US

ED

FO

R N

AV

IGA

TIO

N.

Legen

d

Ma

Jor C

ities

La

ke

s and R

es

erv

oirs

$

Sc

ale

: 1 :8,6

28