HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-02-11 Business Meeting MinutesDeschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701 -1960
(541) 388 -6570 - Fax (541) 385 -3202 - www.deschutes.org
MINUTES OF BUSINESS MEETING
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2009
Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend
Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke and Alan Unger; Commissioner
Tammy Baney was out of the office. Also present was Dave Kanner, County
Administrator; Nick Lelack, George Read, Will Groves and Peter Gutowsky,
Community Development; Laurie Craghead, Legal Counsel; Sue Brewster, Capt.
Tim Edwards and Lt Gary Decker, Sheriff's Office; and approximately thirty other
citizens, including media representatives of KOHD TV and Hillary Borrud of The
Bulletin.
Commissioner Unger opened the meeting at 10:00 a.m.
1. Before the Board was Citizen Input.
None was offered.
2. Before the Board was a Presentation of the Annual Report on the
Deschutes River Mitigation and Enhancement Program.
Steve Johnson of Central Oregon Irrigation District gave an overview of the
program, how it is funded and the joint efforts to protect the Deschutes River.
These efforts began in the late 1980's.
Jack Williamson of the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife then explained a
PowerPoint presentation on the program. He emphasized because of irrigation,
the level of the River fluctuates widely during the year. Plants cannot grow in
these conditions and this causes erosion. An objective is to try to reduce the
fluctuation and enhance vegetation to reduce bank erosion through various
means.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Page 1 of 8 Pages
Another objective is to measure water temperature and the level of nitrates and
other pollutants. They will also work with property owners to help them with
bank protection efforts. He said he would like to see elements of the program
incorporated into the County's comprehensive plan, which is now being
revised.
He asked the Commissioners for a letter of support of the strategy as well.
3. Before the Board was Consideration of First Reading, by Title Only, of
Ordinance No. 2009 -005, Amending County Code Violation Procedures,
Adopting Statutory Provisions, regarding Issuance of Citations.
Sue Brewster, Capt. Tim Edwards and Lt. Gary Decker explained the reason for
the Ordinance, which relates to animal control issue. An enforcement officer
does not necessarily have to be a peace officer. Field technicians can issue
these citations. Previously the County adopted State law, which requires an
officer to be physically present.
Lt. Decker said that four individuals are authorized to handle these cases but
have not been able to issue citations per Code. They have had to ask the
complainant or victim to sign a citation. This situation also makes it difficult to
remove dangerous dogs from the street.
Commissioner Unger asked if anyone from the public wished to speak. Being
none, action was taken.
LUKE: Move first reading, by title only.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: LUKE: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
Commissioner Unger conducted the first reading at this time. The second
reading will take place on Wednesday, February 25.
4. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2009 -014,
Authorizing Specific Individuals to Act as Designees to Order a Peace
Officer to Take a Person into Custody for Immediate Treatment for
Mental Illness.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Page 2 of 8 Pages
Lori Hill gave a brief overview of the item, which would authorize nine Mental
Health staff to direct Peace Officers to take specific action.
Commissioner Unger asked if it makes a difference who initiates the action, if it
ends up in Court. Ms. Hill stated that this just gets the person to the hospital.
Capt. Edwards said that the Sheriff's Office supports this, and appreciates
clarification. He added that they hope that someone is waiting to accept the
person, and that the cities Peace Officers work with this, as appropriate.
LUKE: Move approval.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: LUKE: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
5. Before the Board was Consideration of Second Reading, by Title Only, and
Adoption of Ordinance No. 2009 -001 and Ordinance No. 2009 -002
regarding Amendments to the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary.
Peter Gutowsky and Laurie Craghead briefly described the Ordinances, which
among other things recognize a new urban growth boundary for the City of
Bend. Ms. Craghead said there have been no changes since the first readings.
LUKE: Move second reading, by title only, of Ordinance No. 2009 -001.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: LUKE: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
Commissioner Unger did the second reading, by title only.
LUKE: Move adoption.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: LUKE: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
LUKE: Move second reading, by title only, of Ordinance No. 2009 -002.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: LUKE: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Page 3 of 8 Pages
Commissioner Unger did the second reading, by title only.
LUKE: Move adoption.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: LUKE: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
6. Before the Board was Consideration of Second Reading, by Title Only, and
Adoption of Ordinance No. 2009 -004, Changing the Zone Designation for
Certain Property from Forest Use Zone F -1 to F -2.
Will Groves explained the item. The findings and decision are a part of the
Ordinance as Exhibit C. Ms. Craghead stated that the Board approved the
findings and decision at the last meeting. No changes have been made.
LUKE: Move second reading, by title only, of Ordinance No. 2009 -004.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: LUKE: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
Commissioner Unger conducted the second reading, by title only.
LUKE: Move adoption.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: LUKE: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of the Consent Agenda.
LUKE: Move approval, with the removal of item #17 and the minutes of the
February 4 work session.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: LUKE: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
Regarding item #17, Commissioner Luke asked for details. Mr. Kanner said
that this is to address Humane Society of Redmond bank loans. A settlement
was negotiated with the banks at about a 30% discount, and unsecured debts are
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Page 4 of 8 Pages
being covered along with a monthly amount for a period of time. This gives
them a year to get their operations back into place. The total amount is about
$1.7 million although some negotiations are still underway regarding the
unsecured debts. The landfill closure fund was the best one to use since there
are a number of years before these funds will need to be used for that purpose.
LUKE: Move approval.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: LUKE: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
Consent Agenda Items
7. Signature of Document No. 2009 -048, an Amendment to an Agreement with
the Oregon Department of Human Services regarding the Financing of Mental
Health Services Provided by Deschutes County
8. Signature of Document No. 2009 -041, the Oregon Commission on Children &
Families' Signature Authorization Form for 2009
9. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -003, Transferring Appropriations in the
Welcome Center Fund
10. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -007, Establishing a Bank Account for
Property Tax Payments
11. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -009, Appropriating a New Grant in the
Mental Health Department Fund
12. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -010, Transferring Appropriations in the
Sheriff's Office Fund
13. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -011, Transferring Appropriations in the
Healthy Start Prenatal Fund
14. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -012, Transferring Appropriations in the
Mental Health Department Fund
15. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -013, Transferring Appropriations in the Tax
Improvement Fund
16. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -014, Transferring Appropriations in the
School Fund
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Page 5 of 8 Pages
17. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -015, Authorizing a Loan from the County's
Landfill Closure Fund to the County's Humane Society of Redmond Fund
18. Approval of Minutes:
• Business Meeting: February 2 and 4
• Work Session: February 2 and 4
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9 -1 -1 COUNTY
SERVICE DISTRICT
19. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Accounts Payable
Vouchers for the 9 -1 -1 County Service District in the Amount of $6,892.50.
LUKE: Move approval, subject to review.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: LUKE: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION /4 -H
COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT
20. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Accounts Payable
Vouchers for the Extension /4 -H County Service District in the Amount of
$5,758.73.
LUKE: Move approval, subject to review.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: LUKE: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
RECONVENED AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
21. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Accounts Payable
Vouchers for Deschutes County in the Amount of $2,552,792.70.
LUKE: Move approval, subject to review.
UNGER: Second.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Page 6 of 8 Pages
VOTE: UNGER: Yes.
LUKE: Vice Chair votes yes.
22. Before the Board was an Addition to the Agenda.
Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Document No. 2009-
042, Authorizing Partial Release of Improvement Agreement Bonds
(Caldera Springs).
Will Groves gave a brief overview of the item. Ms. Craghead stated that the
property owners are allowed to sell property if bonds are in place. The amount
is the estimated cost plus 10% to 20 %. The agreement allows for partial
releases of bond amounts, so they can continue to build more as they finish
building a portion.
Commissioner Luke asked if there is proof it has been done. Ms. Craghead said
that the County Engineer verifies the cost and that the infrastructure work has
been done. Planning staff reviews the improvements. Commissioner Luke said
they have gone through the building process and the buildings would have been
inspected through the permit requirements. Mr. Groves stated that the Planners
review the County documents in this regard and do a drive -by of the stated
improvements.
Mr. Groves then went over the list of improvements that have been done to
date. Many of the buildings have been in place for over a year, beyond the
warranty requirement.
LUKE: Move signature.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: LUKE: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
Another matter is a request from the applicant regarding how the partial
releases are handled. The County has required a full construction estimate each
time the releases are requested. The applicant would like to see this done once
a year instead. Staff feels that the cost of construction can vary during that
time. The bond anticipates that if something happens to the applicant, the bond
will cover the completion of the project. The County has the authority to enter
the property through the improvement agreement. The bonding company
covers the financial part.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Page 7 of 8 Pages
Commissioner Luke asked if this item could be addressed at a work session
when Commissioner Baney can be present.
Being no further items to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at
11:10 a.m.
DATED this 11th Day of February 2009 for the Deschutes County Board
of Commissioners.
ATTEST:
Texthe,
Recording Secretary
TammL. aney, Cha
Dennis R. Luke, Vice Chair
Alan Unger, Commissioner
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting
Page 8 of 8 Pages
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701 -1960
(541) 388 -6570 - Fax (541) 385 -3202 - www.deschutes.org,
BUSINESS MEETING AGENDA
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
10:00 A.M., WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2009
Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend
1. CITIZEN INPUT
This is the time provided for individuals wishing to address the Board, at the Board's
discretion, regarding issues that are not already on the agenda. Citizens who wish to speak
should sign up prior to the beginning of the meeting on the sign -up cards provided. Please
use the microphone and also state your name and address at the time the Board calls on you
to speak. PLEASE NOTE: Citizen input regarding matters that are or have been the subject
of a public hearing will NOT be included in the record of that hearing.
2. A PRESENTATION of the Annual Report on the Deschutes River Mitigation
and Enhancement Program — Jack Williamson, ODF &W; Steve Johnson,
Central Oregon Irrigation District
3. CONSIDERATION of First Reading, by Title Only, of Ordinance No. 2009-
005, Amending County Code Violation Procedures, Adopting Statutory
Provisions, regarding Issuance of Citations — Capt. Tim Edwards and Lt. Gary
Decker, Sheriff's Office
4. CONSIDERATION of Signature of Order No. 2009 -014, Authorizing
Specific Individuals to Act as Designees to Order a Peace Officer to Take a
Person into Custody for Immediate Treatment for Mental Illness — Lori Hill,
Mental Health Department
5. CONSIDERATION of Second Reading, by Title Only, and Adoption of
Ordinance No. 2009 -001 (Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C, and Exhibit D) and
Ordinance No. 2009 -002 (Exhibit A and Exhibit B), regarding Amendments to
the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary — Peter Gutowsky, Community
Development
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Page 1 of 6 Pages
6. CONSIDERATION of Second Reading, by Title Only, and Adoption of
Ordinance No. 2009 -004, Changing the Zone Designation for Certain Property
from Forest Use Zone F -1 to F -2 — Will Groves, Community Development
CONSENT AGENDA
7. Signature of Document No. 2009 -048, an Amendment to an Agreement with
the Oregon Department of Human Services regarding the Financing of Mental
Health Services Provided by Deschutes County
8. Signature of Document No. 2009 -041, the Oregon Commission on Children &
Families' Signature Authorization Form for 2009
9. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -003, Transferring Appropriations in the
Welcome Center Fund
10. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -007, Establishing a Bank Account for
Property Tax Payments
11. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -009, Appropriating a New Grant in the
Mental Health Department Fund
12. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -010, Transferring Appropriations in the
Sheriff's Office Fund
13. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -011, Transferring Appropriations in the
Healthy Start Prenatal Fund
14. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -012, Transferring Appropriations in the
Mental Health Department Fund
15. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -013, Transferring Appropriations in the Tax
Improvement Fund
16. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -014, Transferring Appropriations in the
School Fund
17. Signature of Resolution No. 2009 -015, Authorizing a Loan from the County's
Landfill Closure Fund to the County's Humane Society of Redmond Fund
18. Approval of Minutes:
• Business Meeting: February 2 and 4
• Work Session: February 2 and 4
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Page 2 of 6 Pages
CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9 -1 -1 COUNTY
SERVICE DISTRICT
19. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Accounts Payable Vouchers for the 9 -1 -1
County Service District
CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION /4 -H
COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT
20. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Accounts Payable Vouchers for the
Extension/4 -H County Service District
RECONVENE AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
21. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Accounts Payable Vouchers for
Deschutes County
22. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
Deschutes County meeting locations are wheelchair accessible.
Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities.
For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7 -1 -1 to access the state transfer relay service for TTY.
Please call (541) 388 -6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information.
FUTURE MEETINGS:
(Please note: Meeting dates and times are subject to change. All meetings take place in the Board of
Commissioners ' meeting rooms at 13001 VW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. If you have questions
regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572.)
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
9:30 a.m. Bend Airport Meeting, at Bend City Hall
3:00 p.m. Regular Update with the Sheriff
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Page 3 of 6 Pages
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
7:30 a.m. Conference Call with Public Affairs Council (State Lobbyist) regarding Legislation
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Monday, February 16, 2009
Most County offices will be closed to observe President's Day.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
12:00 noon Regular Meeting of Board and Department Directors
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
11:00 a.m. Annual Meeting with Black Butte Ranch Board — BBR Administration Building
2:00 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s) — note later time
Monday, February 23, 2009
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
7:30 a.m. Conference Call with Public Affairs Council (State Lobbyist) regarding Legislation
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Thursday, February 26, 2009
9:00 a.m. Tri- County Work Session (Deschutes, Jefferson, Crook) — Fairgrounds Board
Room, Redmond
Monday, March 2, 2009
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council)
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Page 4 of 6 Pages
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Thursday, March 5, 2009
10:00 a.m. Regular Update with District Attorney
11:00 a.m. Regular Update with Community Development Department
1:30 p.m. Regular Update with Road Department
2:30 p.m. Regular Update with Solid Waste Department
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
7:30 a.m. Conference Call with Public Affairs Council (State Lobbyist) regarding Legislation
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Thursday, March 12, 2009
7:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the City of Redmond Council, in Redmond
11:00 a.m. Regular Update with Health & Human Services Department
Monday, March 16, 2009
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Thursday, March 19, 2009
10:00 a.m. Regular Update with Community Justice Department
Monday, March 23, 2009
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Page 5 of 6 Pages
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
7:30 a.m. Conference Call with Public Affairs Council (State Lobbyist) regarding Legislation
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Thursday, March 26, 2009
9:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with Fair & Expo Department
10:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the Assessor
11:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with Commission on Children & Families
Monday, March 30, 2009
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Thursday, April 2, 2009
8:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the City of Sisters Council, Sisters City Hall
Monday, April 6, 2009
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council)
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
7:30 a.m. Conference Call with Public Affairs Council (State Lobbyist) regarding Legislation
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Page 6 of 6 Pages
Upper Deschutes River Restoration Strategy
October 7, 2008
Deschutes River Conservancy,
Upper Deschutes Watershed Council,
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
1
This page intentionally left blank.
2
Vision
We envision a healthy river that supports high quality riparian and aquatic habitats and the
processes necessary to sustain them.
Purpose
The Upper Deschutes River Restoration Strategy (the Strategy) outlines the steps necessary to
restore the structure and function of the Deschutes River between Wickiup Reservoir and North
Canal Dam. The Upper Deschutes Watershed Council, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife,
and Deschutes River Conservancy believe that restoring the river will require coordination
between irrigation districts, non - profit organizations, public agencies, and private landowners.
The Strategy identifies and prioritizes the suite of restoration actions necessary to achieve our
vision.
Geographic Context
The Deschutes River is one of the most well known waterways in the western United States. The
river originates at Little Lava Lake in Oregon's Cascade Mountains and flows north, dropping
4,500 feet over 250 miles before emptying into the Columbia River. It provides water for the
irrigation of agricultural lands, critical habitat for fish and wildlife, a rich history of culture,
tradition and sustenance for Native Americans, power for generating electricity, and recreation
benefits that draw sporting enthusiasts from all over the country.
Historically, the upper Deschutes River and its tributaries supported healthy populations of
redband and bull trout. Stream flows were naturally stable and the river supported resilient
wetlands and verdant riparian areas. Over the past 100 years, however, fish and wildlife have
suffered as a result of basin -wide habitat degradation. Explosive population growth in the region
and all that has come with it — municipal and residential development, irrigation of agricultural
lands, logging, and recreation — has all contributed to a decline in habitat quality throughout the
Deschutes Basin.
Flows in the upper Deschutes River were remarkably stable under natural conditions. Irrigation
storage in Wickiup and Crane Prairie Reservoirs now largely dewaters this reach between
October and April and artificially increases flow in the reach during the late spring, summer, and
early fall. The shift from a naturally stable flow pattern to a highly variable flow pattern has
limited fish populations in the Deschutes River. The 2004 Deschutes Subbasin Plan identified
that "stream flow extremes, especially low or intermittent flows, are probably the most
significant factors limiting fish production in much of the Deschutes River subbasin [sic] today."
The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife identifies improving redband trout and whitefish
populations and determining the feasibility of re- introducing bull trout as goals for the upper
Deschutes River.
The upper Deschutes River can be divided into two reaches at Benham Falls. Upstream of the
falls, the river meanders through pine forests and wet meadows. Healthy redband trout
populations historically extended through this low- gradient reach, but habitat degradation
associated with irrigation storage and release operations has reduced these populations.
3
Reservoir operations lead to huge seasonal flow fluctuations in this reach. Winter storage
reduces flows as low as 20 cfs, and summer discharge raises flows up to 1,800 cfs. These
fluctuating flows cause bank erosion, decrease water quality, and limit spawning habitat. The
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality has listed this reach for not meeting several water
quality standards (turbidity) 82, temperature', chlorophyll A1, and dissolved oxygen1 &2) in large
part due to flow fluctuations. Correspondingly, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has
identified flow fluctuations as the greatest factor limiting fish abundance in the Upper Deschutes
River.
Downstream from Benham Falls, the upper Deschutes River cascades over several natural falls
before reaching irrigation diversions in the City of Bend. Redband trout populations improve
from Benham Falls to Bend. This improvement in trout populations can be attributed to more
stable winter streamflow. Upstream inputs from Fall River and Spring River combine with
groundwater discharge into the Deschutes River to attenuate the flow fluctuations associated
with areas immediately below Wickiup Reservoir. Nevertheless, spawning habitat is still limited
spawning in this reach.
Strategy Elements
The Deschutes River Conservancy, the Upper Deschutes Watershed Council, and the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife have identified a suite of activities to help us achieve our vision
for the upper Deschutes River. We believe that a clear set of actions and recognizable outcomes
will be necessary for success.
We believe that streamflow is the greatest limiting factor in the upper Deschutes River.
Streamflow restoration and related actions have the greatest potential for improving ecological
conditions in the long -term. However, improving intra- and inter - annual flow patterns alone will
not be sufficient to achieve our vision.
We see a need for short-term, local scale habitat enhancement and long -term, reach scale channel
reconstruction to complement streamflow restoration in the upper Deschutes River. These
actions should be completed strategically based on their ability to build community support or
improve ecological conditions. We do not believe that disconnected, local -scale actions should
be a priority unless they have high amounts of private match funding or have been strategically
selected for their social or ecological value.
We believe that comprehensive restoration effectiveness monitoring will help us to document
current status and trends while improving our actions in the future. All monitoring should be
tied to specific metrics related to ecological conditions. We also see the need for a research
program to document emerging issues in the upper Deschutes River, including water quality
issues related to plant growth and nutrient inputs.
1 RM 189 at Meadow Camp to RM 162 at North Unit Dam
2 RM 222 at Pringle Falls to RM 189 at Meadow Camp
4
Following the work of other organizations, we have separated our strategy into different
components (see Figure 1). We do not always explicitly identify these components in the
narrative, but we do identify them in detailed tables following the narrative. Goals identify
broad -scale impacts that that will help us to achieve our vision. Under each goal we specify
measurable objectives. Objectives represent the desired changes that we hope to see in the upper
Deschutes River system. We achieve our objectives through actions. Actions represent specific
management activities intended to change some social, political, or ecological aspect of the
upper Deschutes River. We have created hypotheses that link each action to a measurable
objective. Our hypotheses allow us to determine whether our actions are having the intended
effect on the system. We use metrics, or measurable components of the system, to test our
hypotheses. In many cases, these metrics need to be refined and developed as part of the
comprehensive monitoring plan discussed in this strategy. Different stakeholders in the upper
Deschutes Basin have different roles under each goal. We identify confirmed or potential roles
and outline some of the tasks involved in these roles. Some roles remain unfulfilled, and we
acknowledge that no stakeholders currently plan to pursue some of the identified actions. We
also roughly identify timelines for when an action should be completed. We know that some
actions depend on other actions occurring first, and we expect that some actions will be easier to
complete than others. Finally, we have prioritized our actions based on their ecological
importance, social and economic feasibility, and timeliness. Actions that are ecologically
important but rely on other actions occurring first may be listed as a lower priority. For example,
we believe that a monitoring plan should be implemented as soon as it is established.
Establishing the plan needs to come first, though, so implementing the plan remains a medium
priority at this point.
Figure 1. Sample Action. We identified this action as a high priority action necessary to restore the
upper Deschutes River. The action has a measurable objective, a testable hypothesis with associated
metrics, appropriate benchmarks, an approximate timeline, and clear roles and responsibilities.
Objective
Move the oxisung
hydrograph lowaids
the desired future
hydrograph.
'Action Priority 'Hypothesis [Metrics
'Benchmarks 'Timeline 'Roles & Responsibilities
111 i if-unclog secured; working
�( Desired hydrograph Hydregraph elements - Deschutes River
!Identify desired ; 9 Wilt be dfife rent (magromde. ! mrng, (group yarogr established. ecologically Conservancy will facilitate
hyd∎ograph and j Hlgh lOnil hydrograph developed: 5 Years
;tram exi;liny 'frequency, and rate of hydrograph idenyficabon
benchmarks. 3tr dro ra )h. ;Chan e of flows) feasible hydroyrapYi •
endrnr fundin i
j Y 4 I d t [developed. (P J 9.
5
Recommended Actions
We have organized this document by goals, objectives and actions. We have prioritized our
recommended actions based on their ecological importance, timeliness, and feasibility (see
Figure 2). A full narrative and detailed tables explaining the recommended actions follow this
section.
Figure 2. Summary of Recommended Actions. We identified the following actions
as contributing to our vision for the upper Deschutes River. Some actions appear twice,
and an action may have a different priority depending on its context. We have not
sorted the actions at each priority level because actions will be more or less appropriate
at different times depending on their context. However, streamflow is generally
acknowledged as the greatest limiting factor along the upper Deschutes River.
• High Priority Actions
o Identify the desired dimension, pattern, and profile of the upper
Deschutes River.
o Identify target hydrograph and benchmarks.
o Restore individual components of the hydrograph through
temporary and permanent water transactions.
o Identify high - value, at -risk riparian areas.
o Establish a comprehensive monitoring plan.
o Support community organizing and information sharing.
o Establish a research program to study emerging water quality
issues.
• Medium Priority Actions
o Restore the dimension, pattern and profile through channel and
bank restoration.
o Add large wood [strategic].
o Implement local channel and bank restoration projects [strategic].
o Create the institutional framework necessary to more the existing
hydrograph closer to the desired hydrograph.
o Review and revise county, state, and city land use regulations.
o Implement a comprehensive monitoring plan.
• Low Priority Actions
o Create the infrastructure necessary to improve reservoir operations
and meet target ramping rates.
o Add large wood [stand - alone].
o Implement local channel and bank restoration projects [stand-
alone].
o Clarify and communicate land -use regulations.
o Establish regular communication with elected officials.
o Add spawning gravel.
6
The partner organizations that developed the Strategy prioritized actions based on their
feasibility and their ecological importance. We recognize that institutional capacity and
resources vary and that agencies and organizations do not currently have the capacity to
implement some high priority actions. We suggest that restoration partners review high priority
actions in relation to other work in the basin as opportunities to implement them arise. Different
actions will be more or less timely depending on the status of related actions. For example, we
can improve minimum flows without identifying a target hydrograph. As flow restoration
progresses, through, identifying the appropriate hydrograph becomes more important. We
believe that some medium priority actions are necessary but will require additional work before
they can be implemented.
The narrative in the following section provides the context for and the reasoning behind our
prioritization. The narrative clearly identifies the steps necessary to implement each action. We
suggest reviewing actions in the narrative before moving forward and implementing them.
7
Narrative of Recommended Actions
The following narrative outlines the actions that we believe will move the upper Deschutes River
closer to our vision. The narrative divides these actions into different sections based on the goals
and objectives that they support (see Table 1). In spite of these divisions, we believe that they
stand together as a suite of inter - connected activities necessary to restore the upper Deschutes
River. Each goal and its associated objectives and actions appears in a separate section.
Table 1. Goals and Objectives. The Deschutes River Conservancy, Upper Deschutes
Watershed Council, and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife identified four goals and eight
objectives necessary to achieve our vision of a healthy upper Deschutes River.
Goal
By 2030, degraded ecosystem
structures and functions will be
improved in the Upper Deschutes
River.
Objectives
Restore the dimension, pattern, and profile of the
upper Deschutes River
Move the existing hydrograph towards the
desired future hydrograph.
By 2030, existing ecosystem functions
and processes will be maintained and
protected from further degradation.
Enhance local instream habitat
Protect areas with high ecological value
By 2030, the community will
demonstrate greater stewardship of the
upper Deschutes River.
Engage riparian landowners in protecting and
restoring the upper Deschutes River.
Engage community members in protecting and
restoring the upper Deschutes River.
By 2030, the restoration community will
have an increased understanding of the
upper Deschutes River system.
Understand effectiveness of the suite of
restoration actions.
Understand emerging water quality issues related
to land use and water management.
8
Goal: By 2030, degraded ecosystem structures and functions will be improved in
the upper Deschutes River.
This strategy identifies two objectives and six actions under the goal, "By 2030, degraded
ecosystem structures and functions will be improved in the upper Deschutes River" (see Table
2). The following sections describe the actions under each objective.
Table 2. Objective and actions necessary to restore degraded ecosystem structures and
functions.
Objective I Action
Identify the desired dimension, pattern and profile.
Restore the dimension,
pattern, and profile of the
upper Deschutes River.
Move the existing
hydrograph towards the
desired future hydrograph.
Restore the desired channel dimension, pattern, and profile through
channel and bank restoration.
Identify desired hydrograph and benchmarks.
Create institutional framework to improve hydrograph through water
transactions.
Create the infrastructure necessary to improve reservoir operations
and meet target ramping rates.
Restore components of the hydrograph using temporary and
permanent water transactions.
Objective: Restore the physical dimension, pattern, and profile along the upper Deschutes
River.
Action: Identify the desired dimension, pattern, and profile.
Three physical characteristics define a river. The dimension describes the depth and
width of the river channel as you look across it. The pattern refers to how the river
moves across the landscape. Does it pass straight through in a straight line? Does it
wander sinuously? The profile describes how the elevation of the river falls as the river
flows from its headwaters to its mouth.
Seasonal flow patterns and local geology determine the dimension, pattern, and profile of
a river. Winter reservoir storage and summer reservoir releases have changed flows
patterns in the upper Deschutes River, and they have likely affected its physical form.
We hypothesize that the dimension, pattern and profile necessary to improve the health of
the Deschutes River is different from the existing dimension, pattern, and profile.
Identifying the desired dimension, pattern and profile is a critical first step towards
restoring the upper Deschutes River. We cannot implement large scale physical habitat
9
restoration projects until we identify our desired river form. Based on their land
ownership and their existing activities, the Deschutes National Forest will be the most
appropriate lead partner for this action.
This high priority action can be completed within five years and should be funded
accordingly.
Action: Restore the dimension, pattern, and profile through channel and bank
restoration.
The upper Deschutes River corridor looks much different in the summer, when the river
fills its channel, than it does in the winter, when the river recedes and leaves bare banks
along most of the upper reach. The river's bare banks freeze during the winter and erode
during the summer, sloughing off material that later travels downstream. Restoring the
Deschutes River requires, among other actions, restoring its physical form. We
hypothesize that, over the long term, we can change the river's dimension, pattern and
profile from its existing form to our desired form through a combination of seasonal
streamflow restoration and large scale channel and bank restoration projects. However,
until the hydrograph more closely matches the desired condition (see below), our ability
to restore the dimension, pattern and profile will be severely limited.
This action exemplifies the long -term approach necessary to restore the upper Deschutes
River. We cannot restore the form of the Deschutes River until we identify the desired
form (see above) and, correspondingly, the desired hydrograph (see below). While we
agree that it is ecologically critical to implement this action, its success depends on
completing other actions first. Once we have identified the proper form and its related
hydrograph, we can incrementally restore the Deschutes River channel.
Based on their existing activities, the Deschutes National Forest and the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife will be the most appropriate lead partners for this action.
The Upper Deschutes Watershed Council can provide funding but does not have the
resources to implement the large -scale restoration required to reach our goals.
This action is a medium priority action that will require long -term investments. We
expect to implement this action after five years because of its stated dependencies on
other activities in this strategy.
Objective: Move the existing hydrograph towards the desired future hydrograph.
Action: Identify target hydrograph and benchmarks.
A river's hydrograph describes how the river's flow changes over time. It identifies the
magnitude, duration, frequency, timing, and rate of change of streamflow in a river. The
hydrograph affects the form of the river and how fish and wildlife behave in and around
the river.
10
Under natural conditions, flows in the Deschutes River did not vary much between
seasons. Groundwater discharge maintained a relatively steady flow in the river
throughout the year, and it was one of the more stable flowing rivers of its size in the
United States. Reservoir operations have changed the how much water flows through the
upper Deschutes River each season, leading to unnaturally low winter and unnaturally
high summer flows.
These changes are important because seasonal flow patterns drive the river's biological
functions. Instream flow restoration efforts historically focused on identifying the
minimum or optimum flows needed to support selected fish populations. As our
understanding of river restoration has evolved, our understanding of instream flow needs
has changed as well. Restoration practitioners have begun to focus on the whole
hydrograph necessary to support fish, wildlife, channel structure, recreation, agriculture,
and riparian vegetation. Instead of looking at minimum or optimum flows, they identify
how each portion of the hydrograph supports river structure and function.
We hypothesize that the desired hydrograph in the upper Deschutes River will look much
different from the existing hydrograph. We suggest identifying the desired hydrograph
through a collaborative process that considers irrigation, recreation, and ecological needs.
The existing instream flow targets for the upper Deschutes River identify one component
of the desired future hydrograph. The desired hydrograph identified through a
collaborative process should account for the full suite of component (high flow events,
low flow events, inter - annual variability, etc.) that define a river's hydrologic regime.
We recommend moving beyond the single -value hydrograph approach and towards a
collaborative approach that incorporates inter - annual and intra- annual variability.
The Nature Conservancy has pursued collaborative processes across the United States.
They have expressed interest in working the Deschutes Basin, and may be able to provide
technical support. We suggest establishing a multi - stakeholder working group to
implement this process. The working group should first develop a summary of existing,
appropriate research relating to streamflow, habitat structure, and river functions. After
developing and sharing this information, they should convene a multi -day conference
where a wide range of stakeholders meets and collaboratively develops the desired
hydrograph.
The Deschutes River Conservancy will be an appropriate lead partner for this action
given their current collaborative approach and experience working with streamflow
restoration.3 We consider this action to be a high priority for funding because of its
relationship to channel restoration (see above). It can be completed within five years.
3 Pending funding availability
11
Action: Create the institutional framework necessary to move the existing
hydrograph closer to the desired future hydrograph.
The institutional framework governing how water moves through the upper Deschutes
River consists of existing contractual arrangements, inter - district agreements, state
statutes, and federal regulations. It defines who gets how much water from Wickiup and
Crane Prairie Reservoirs, where they can use it, and what they can use it for. The
existing framework makes it difficult to move water between willing buyers and willing
sellers even when a transaction will benefit all parties.
The Deschutes River Conservancy currently uses a relatively obscure federal statue to
temporarily restore winter streamflow.4 This method works, but it involves a high
transaction cost and does not provide the most benefits to instream or agricultural water
users. We have provided examples of several changes to changes to reservoir
management that could improve streamflow in the upper Deschutes River.
• Allow Inter - annual Carry -over. The Oregon Water Resources Department
maintains accounts for each of the four irrigation districts that store water in
Crane Prairie or Wickiup Reservoir. These accounts track how much water each
district has available in storage. Currently, the Oregon Water Resources
Department resets those accounts at the end of each irrigation season. An
irrigation district does not necessarily benefit the following year if it has extra
storage in its account at the end of the season. Instead of resetting district
accounts, the Oregon Water Resources Department could allow them to carry
stored water in their accounts through the following season.
• Explicitly Operate Reservoirs Together. Crescent Lake, Crane Prairie Reservoir
and Wickiup Reservoir all leak water. They leak at different rates depending on
how full they are. They also fill with different reliability. From a water -
availability perspective, it makes sense to fill the leakiest reservoirs last and
empty the most reliable reservoirs first. This change would allow districts to keep
their storage accounts but physically store their water in different reservoirs.
• Fill Reservoirs Vertically. The Oregon Water Resources Department currently
fills irrigation district accounts in Crane Prairie and Wickiup Reservoirs following
a complicated set of rules set out in a 1938 inter - district agreement. Since the
reservoirs fill account -by- account, we refer to them as filling `horizontally.' We
suggest that the Oregon Water Resources Department could instead fill the
reservoirs vertically. Each district would receive a portion of the water entering
the reservoir based on its relative priority date and total storage right. When
combined with inter - annual carryover, this option may improve water use
efficiency.
• Reservoir Re- authorization. The Bureau of Reclamation restricts the use of water
in Crane Prairie and Wickiup Reservoirs. Wickiup Reservoir has the strictest
4 43 CFR 12.8 (2005)
12
restrictions. A Congressional re- authorization of these two reservoirs for multiple
uses would allow for water to be stored and used for streamflow restoration.
• Title Transfer. The Bureau of Reclamation currently holds the titles to Crane
Prairie and Wickiup Reservoirs. A title transfer from federal to irrigation district
control would make it much easier to change how these reservoirs operate.
It will be much easier to move water between different users and uses if we adapt the
existing institutional framework to allow these changes. We hypothesize that a new
institutional framework will help us move towards the desired hydrograph without
impacting existing water users and uses. We do not define which changes would be most
appropriate. Instead, we acknowledge that several possible sets of changes would
achieve our desired outcomes.
We consider this action to be a medium priority to be completed within 5 -10 years. The
Deschutes River Conservancy has demonstrated that short-term streamflow restoration
can occur under the existing framework, albeit with a relatively high transaction cost.
Any long -term solution will likely involve one or more of the changes described above.
We suggest funding this action based on a long -term timeline.
Action: Create the infrastructure necessary to improve reservoir operations and
meet target ramping rates.
The flow in the upper Deschutes River depends on the outflow from Wickiup Reservoir.
Adjusting the flow in the Deschutes River requires manually adjusting the outflow from
the reservoir. The desired flow pattern in the Deschutes River will likely have specific
peaks, troughs, and rates of change. It will be difficult to create this flow pattern by
manually adjusting flow in the river.
We hypothesize that installing new infrastructure to control the outflow from Wickiup
Reservoir will allow water managers to more easily adjust the flow in the Deschutes
River and move towards the desired hydrograph.
We consider this action to be a low priority relative to other actions and suggest that it be
funded accordingly. The priority of this action should increase if the action can be
leveraged against multiple purposes, such as the installation of a hydroelectric generating
facility. We foresee this action being completed within a 10 -15 year time period.
Action: Restore individual components of the hydrograph through temporary and
permanent water transactions.
A water transaction moves water between users or uses through voluntary arrangements.
Water transactions can be permanent or temporary. In the Deschutes Basin, they
regularly occur between or within irrigation districts, municipal water providers, and
environmental interests.
13
Oregon owns the water in the Deschutes Rivers. Individual entities own the right to use
that water for specific purposes. Four irrigation districts own the right to store water in
and use water from Wickiup and Crane Prairie Reservoirs. We hypothesize that water
transactions with these irrigation districts will restore different components of the
hydrograph.
We envision a three- tiered approach to water transactions in the upper Deschutes River.
The first tier involves short-term, low- volume transactions. The Deschutes River
Conservancy leased a small amount of stored water from Crook County Irrigation District
#1 in 2006 -2007 and 2007 -2008. These two one -year transactions demonstrated that
water transactions are a successful tool for streamflow restoration in the upper Deschutes
River.
The second tier involves medium -term, higher volume water transactions. The Deschutes
River Conservancy suggests maintaining a minimum flow of 50 cfs over a 5 year period
as a next step. We have worked with the Oregon Water Resources Department to model
the difference in irrigation storage availability under a 20 cfs base flow and a 50 cfs base
flow, and we are confident that we can mitigate for the impacts of increased base flow on
district storage availability during most years. Some districts use more of their stored
water than others, and water can be temporarily moved between districts to improve
reliability.
The third tier involves permanent water transactions implemented as part of a broad -scale
restoration strategy. We expect that the long -term reallocation of water between uses and
users will increase the volume and reliability of live flow available for diversion and will
reduce the districts' reliance on stored water.
When we transfer existing irrigation rights instream, we increase the amount of water
available for other irrigators to use in two ways. First, we do not transfer any storage
rights instream. Most irrigation water rights have both live flow and stored water
components. The Deschutes River Conservancy only transfers the live flow components,
leaving the stored water in Crane Prairie and Wickiup Reservoirs to shore up irrigation
water supplies. Second, we only transfer a portion of the live flow water right instream.
Most water rights in the upper Deschutes Basin consist of two parts — a volume of water
to be used on -farm and a volume of water to aid delivery through district canals. We
only transfer the on -farm portion instream, theoretically leaving the delivery portion
available for other water users to divert. These instream transfers increase the `live flow'
available to districts, reducing their reliance on stored water. In the long -term, the
Deschutes River Conservancy hopes to contract with irrigation districts for a portion of
the stored water that they may no longer need.
Some irrigation districts, such as North Unit Irrigation District, rely on storage more than
others, such as Central Oregon Irrigation District. As irrigation districts with reliable live
flow rights urbanize, we foresee the potential to trade their water rights for a combination
less reliable live flow rights and stored water rights. A water rights switch of this type
could permanently restore flow while having a minimum impact on irrigation districts.
14
Goal: By 2030, existing ecosystem functions and processes will be
maintained and protected from further degradation.
This strategy identifies two objectives and six actions under the goal, "By 2030, existing
ecosystem functions and processes will be maintained and protected from further degradation"
(see Table 3). The actions under this goal focus on maintaining existing functions. In some
cases, such as adding spawning gravel, maintaining existing functions requires maintenance that
would be considered restoration in other systems. We believe that these actions are not
necessarily improving the system but are maintaining it at existing baseline levels. The
following sections describe the actions under each objective.
Table 3. Objective and actions necessary to maintain and protect
existing ecosystem functions and processes.
Objective
Enhance local instream
habitat.
Protect areas with high
ecological value.
Action
Add spawning gravel.
Add large wood.
Local channel and bank restoration projects.
Identify at -risk, high value riparian areas.
Implement land transactions to protect
identified valuable areas.
Review and revise city, county, and state and
use regulations.
Objective: Enhance local instream habitat.
Action: Add spawning gravel.
Native fish need cool, clean water and suitable substrate to successfully spawn in the
upper Deschutes River. Substrate refers to the material along the bottom of a stream.
Redband trout spawn in areas with well- aerated gravel substrate. They form redds,
places where they deposit their eggs, in these areas. Dams along the upper Deschutes
River prevent gravel from entering the system from upstream tributaries. At the same
time, sediments eroding off of the banks settle out and cover existing gravel areas. These
changes limit the amount of clean, correctly sized gravel available for native fish
spawning.
We hypothesize that adding spawning gravel in areas with the correct streamflow and
riparian cover will reduce overall gravel embeddedness and increase the number of
15
redband trout redds. When coupled with channel dimension restoration, we expect that
adding spawning gravel will improve native fish populations.
We consider this action to be a low priority for long -term restoration. Enhancing
spawning gravel will maintain spawning grounds but will not restore additional
functionality to the upper Deschutes River. However, we do believe that spawning
gravel restoration provides short-term benefits for fish populations and should be funded
accordingly. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will lead, implement, and
monitor gravel enhancement projects.
Action: Add large wood.
The high summer flows and low winter flows described earlier limit the riparian
vegetation growing along the upper Deschutes River. Large wood enters a river when
trees or limbs fall along its bank. When we refer to large wood, we generally mean logs
or whole trees measuring greater than 6 feet in length. Limited riparian vegetation
means limited large wood entering the river.
Why does large wood matter? Large wood changes stream morphology. It increases
pool formation, accumulates sediments and organic matter, and provides a substrate and
energy source for stream - dwelling macroinvertebrates. Agencies and organizations have
already completed several large wood projects along the upper Deschutes River.
The Deschutes River Conservancy commissioned a review of eleven bank stabilization
projects along the upper Deschutes River in 2005. Several of these projects included
large wood placement. The review suggested that placing multiple pieces of large wood
in simulated debris jams was more effective than placing individual pieces of wood
instream, and it recommended that future large wood placement projects emulate natural
debris jams for more immediate results. According to the reviewers, large wood
improved habitat at both low flows and high flows only when it was correctly placed in
the channel. They suggested completing detailed pre - implementation site surveys and,
where appropriate, integrating large wood placement with bank shaping projects.
Randomly adding large wood increases organic matter in the system, but strategically
adding large wood provides additional benefits for fish habitat, riparian vegetation, and
channel form. We hypothesize that strategically adding large wood will bring both low
flow and high flow habitat conditions closer to the desired conditions.
We consider adding large wood to be a low priority when project objectives do not
extend beyond increasing organic matter in the stream. We rank large wood
enhancement as a medium priority when it is strategically placed and coordinated with
other local habitat enhancement actions.
Action: Implement local channel and bank restoration projects.
Water management and land use practices both affect local habitat conditions. We have
discussed water management extensively earlier in this strategy. Land use practices,
16
particularly riparian development in the Sunriver - LaPine corridor, has also impacted the
upper Deschutes River. The conversion of riparian areas to homes, lawns, and roads has
altered riparian vegetation and likely exacerbated water quality impairments.
The Deschutes River Conservancy's review of upper Deschutes River restoration projects
recommended that local habitat restoration projects could be most effective if they were
implemented in areas where land management caused instream habitat or water quality
degradation. For example, local habitat restoration may be effective in areas where
development has encroached on the river channel and altered conditions. Local projects
will restore local habitat condition if they are well planned and strategically designed to
address multiple limiting factors. They should include detailed site assessments and be
explicitly designed to improve habitat at both low and high flows.
Local channel and bank restoration projects will not restore the structure and function of
the upper Deschutes River across the whole degraded reach because of the overwhelming
impact of water management in the river. We recognize local channel and bank
restoration as a medium priority for both funding and implementation when it follows the
above recommendations. Some local restoration projects intend to improve community
relations rather than meeting ecological objectives. These projects have value for
different reasons, and we address them below.
The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Deschutes National Forest both
design, implement, and monitor local channel and bank restoration projects.
Objective: Protect riparian and upland areas with high ecological value from
encroachment.
Action: Identify at -risk, high value riparian areas.
The upper Deschutes River flows through both public and private lands. Riparian areas
along the upper Deschutes River provide wetlands that store and release water, habitat for
wildlife, and shade for fish. Further development of these areas may affect how well
they support a functioning Deschutes River.
We hypothesize that some ecologically important riparian areas are at risk for
development. These areas may have been fully developed, or they may already be
protected from development. Identifying these areas is the first step in protecting them
from degradation.
Deschutes County has a pending grant application to identify and protect wetlands within
its boundary. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will identify areas of
importance for fish and wildlife in the upper Deschutes River corridor as funding allows.
We suggest that these agencies leverage their limited funding and work towards a
coordinated map of these at -risk areas.
We believe that this action should rank as a high priority, as preventing degradation is
generally more effective and efficient than restoration. We recommend funding this type
17
of action accordingly if the proposed action has either very specific ecological goals or a
broad, cross - agency scope. This action can be completed within five years.
Action: Review and revise city, county, and state land use regulation.
The existing patchwork of land use regulations offers varying levels of protection to
riparian areas along the upper Deschutes River. Riparian road development, timber
thinning and harvesting, and exurban property development have all affected the upper
Deschutes River corridor. Development pressure will likely increase along this reach as
the population of Central Oregon grows. Identifying where improved land -use
regulations will protect high value ecological areas and revising those regulations
accordingly may lead to additional riparian area protections.
We hypothesize that existing land use regulations are different from ideal land use
regulations that balance urban and exurban development with environmental protection.
We also hypothesize that improved land use regulations will prevent the degradation of
more at -risk, high value ecological areas than current land use regulations.
Although traditional land use regulations often create tension between development and
environmental interest, emerging non - traditional regulations allow opportunities for
growth while protecting ecological functions. We support any reviews and
improvements of land regulations as they pertain to Deschutes River protection. Future
reviews should consider the different layers of protection offered at the local, state, and
federal levels and ensure that their regulations are compatible.
Currently, Deschutes County is the only entity pursuing this action. They will be
reviewing their comprehensive plan in the near future, and they will look at Deschutes
River protection as part of their review.
We believe that this action should be a medium priority and funded as such. Its eventual
success depends in part on completing the preceding action, identifying ecologically
important areas. We expect that this action can be completed in five to ten years if
agencies or organizations have the funding to pursue it.
Action: Land transactions protect identified ecologically valuable areas.
Land transactions have protected socially and ecologically important areas across the
United States. The Deschutes Land Trust has pioneered land transactions in the
Deschutes Basin, proving that land transactions can be important tools for conservation
here in Central Oregon. Land values have increased in Deschutes County, though, and
purchasing large areas of riparian land may be prohibitively expensive.
Targeted land acquisitions may be useful restoration tools along the upper Deschutes
Basin. As experiences in southern Deschutes County show, lands along the Deschutes
River may have a high water table and a potential to flood. These two factors may limit
the development of existing open space in the future. We suggest using land transactions
to protect ecologically important land that may be unsuitable for building.
18
We hypothesize that land transactions will be useful at protecting these ecologically
important areas and preventing future degradation. Although the Wetlands Conservancy
has expressed interest in this area in the past, no agencies or organizations are openly
pursuing land transactions along the upper Deschutes River. We recommend funding
these voluntary transactions as a high priority if and when an entity does pursue them.
19
Goal: By 2030, the community will demonstrate greater stewardship of the upper
Deschutes River.
This strategy identifies two objectives and four actions under the goal, "By 2030, the community
will demonstrate greater stewardship of the upper Deschutes River" (see Table 4). The
following sections describe the actions under each objective.
Table 4. Objective and actions leading to improved community
stewardship.
Objective
Engage riparian
landowners in protecting
and restoring the upper
Deschutes River.
Engage community
members in protecting and
restoring the upper
Deschutes River.
Action
Local channel and bank restoration.
Clarify and communicate land use
regulations.
Support community organizing and
information sharing.
Establish regular communication with elected
officials.
Objective: Engage riparian landowners in protecting and restoring the upper Deschutes
River.
Action: Implement local channel and bank restoration projects.
As described earlier, small scale channel and bank restoration projects will not restore the
structure and function of the upper Deschutes River. However, riparian landowners
provide entry points into local communities.
We hypothesize that small -scale projects will engage riparian landowners and increase
their awareness of the interactions between riparian development and aquatic ecosystems.
Over the long -term, an informed riparian landowner will help influence and motivate
improved river management.
Strategic local restoration projects that follow the suggestions described earlier should be
a medium priority for funding and implementation. Individual restoration projects
without strong ecological goals or unique community goals should be a low priority for
funding. We do see exceptions if local community members provide match funding for
projects on private property.
Action: Clarify and communicate land use regulations.
A conglomeration of city, county, state, and federal regulations govern land use along the
upper Deschutes River. This daunting collection of regulations is not user friendly for
riparian landowners. Anecdotal evidence suggests that some landowners simply ignore
land use regulations rather than trying to understand them.
20
We hypothesize that clarifying these regulations and communicating them in non-
technical language will improve landowner understanding of and involvement in river
stewardship. Creating an easy step -by -step explanation for riparian land owners to use
when they develop their property will help us to protect the upper Deschutes River.
We view this action as a low priority and suggest that it be funded accordingly. While
this action could improve land use practices along the upper Deschutes River, we suggest
that this action be incorporated into any efforts to improve land use regulations. This
action should be a medium priority when completed in conjunction with improvements in
land use regulation or when completed as part of a larger landowner outreach and
communication effort.
Objective: Engage community members in protecting and restoring the upper Deschutes
River.
Action: Support community organizing and information sharing.
We hope to contribute to landowner education through community meetings and
encourage landowner involvement in strategic restoration projects. Long -term success in
restoring the Upper Deschutes will require an increased level of understanding,
awareness and involvement among the stakeholders involved in the area.
We hypothesize that, through a committed, sustained and well - implemented community
outreach program, we can improve community comprehension of the issues surrounding
the upper Deschutes River. The Upper Deschutes Resources Coalition has been active in
promoting river health. This group plays an important role in community restoration and
should have a lead role in any organizing process.
We consider this action to be a high priority and expect it to be funded accordingly. The
Upper Deschutes Watershed Council and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
currently work with landowners on a limited basis. We suggest a coordinated approach
that involves meeting with small groups of landowners in order to share the strategy and
incorporate their needs into future actions.
Action: Establish regular communication with elected officials.
Elected officials do not always see the wide range of stakeholder view and values along
the upper Deschutes River. At the same time, they do not always understand the
ecological limitations along the river and how different agencies and organizations are
attempting to address those issues. Partner organizations should communicate with
officials in an organized, strategic manner that reveals how each organization and suite of
activities contributes to community goals. We consider this action to be a medium
priority but a low priority for funding. It should be incorporated into project financing
and implementation and outreach efforts rather than being a stand -alone action.
21
Goal: By 2030, the restoration community will have an increased understanding
of the upper Deschutes River system.
This strategy identifies two objectives and three actions under the goal, `By 2030, the restoration
community will have an increased understanding of the upper Deschutes River system" (see
Table 5). The following sections describe the actions under each objective.
Table 5. Objective and actions leading to an increased understanding of
the upper Deschutes River.
Objective
Understand effectiveness
of the suite of restoration
actions.
Understand emerging
water quality issues related
to land use and water
management.
Action
Establish a comprehensive monitoring plan
based on recommended objectives and tasks.
Implement comprehensive monitoring plan
based on recommended objectives and tasks.
Establish and implement a research program
based on our understanding of these issues.
Objective: Understand the effectiveness of the suite of restoration actions.
Action: Establish a comprehensive monitoring plan based on the recommended
objectives and actions.
This restoration plan focuses on achieving ecological goals through specific objectives
and actions. Effectiveness monitoring needs to account for both the individual actions
and their cumulative effects.
Researchers classify restoration monitoring as one of two general types. Status and trend
monitoring looks at how ecological conditions change over time. Ambient water quality
monitoring provides one example of status and trend monitoring. It does not attempt to
link actions with ecological outcomes. Cause and effect monitoring looks at whether a
particular action led to a particular outcome. The adaptive management approach
incorporates cause and effect monitoring. Traditionally, restoration programs monitor
ecosystem status and trends but not cause and effect.
We acknowledge that determining cause and effect relationships for ecological
restoration can be very difficult in the real world. Common techniques for evaluating
management activities (such as paired watershed studies) do not necessarily work in the
upper Deschutes River. We recommend a combination of status and trend monitoring
and cause and effect monitoring to achieve this objective. We suggest the development
of a strong conceptual model to support reach level status and trend monitoring. At the
same time, we support project level cause and effect monitoring to determine whether
individual projects have had local effects on the upper Deschutes River.
22
We hypothesize that we can design a monitoring program to identify whether individual
actions achieve their objectives and whether the suite of actions improves ecological
conditions. A programmatic monitoring plan that reaches across organizations and
agencies will be more efficient and yield better outcomes than individual monitoring
activities. It should be collaboratively developed and fully implemented prior to
implementing restoration activities.
We recommend that this action have a high priority and be funded accordingly.
Restoration literature and experience consistently emphasize that monitoring should be
implemented at the earliest possible point in the restoration process. It should be
completed within two years. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will lead the
development of this plan with staff support from other agencies and organizations.
Action: Implement a comprehensive monitoring plan.
Establishing a coordinated, comprehensive monitoring plan depends on the
interrelationships between different organizations and agencies. Implementing the plan
will likely depend on these individual groups as well. An efficient monitoring plan will
divide activities among different organizations and leverage each of their strengths.
We hypothesize that a comprehensive monitoring plan will identify whether individual
actions have achieved their objectives and whether the entire suite of actions has
improved ecological conditions. Again, the plan should be fully implemented prior to
implementing restoration activities to demonstrate project and program effectiveness.
The Oregon Water Resources Department, the upper Deschutes Watershed Council, the
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, the City of Bend, and the Deschutes
National Forest all monitor conditions in the upper Deschutes River. These agencies
should collaborate to efficiently implement the monitoring plan developed under this
strategy.
We recommend that this action have a high priority and be funded accordingly. It should
be funded over a long time period to account for inter - annual variation in ecological
conditions. Although this action depends on the preceding action, we rank it as a high
priority due to its importance. It should begin with two years and continue as necessary.
Objective: Understand emerging water quality issues related to land use and water
management.
Action: Establish and implement a research program based on our existing
understanding of these issues.
A variety of water quality concerns have emerged in the upper Deschutes River. These
concerns include temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, sedimentation and algal growth.
We have a general understanding of the relationship between these issues, their root
causes, and potential restoration actions, but we have not documented cause and effect
23
relationships between management conditions (e.g., development, reservoir operations,
etc.) and observed water quality conditions.
A long -term, comprehensive research program will allow us to collect and evaluate data
in a way that can produce direct management recommendations. This effort will need to
be adaptive so that emerging issues and new data are continually assessed. It will need to
document both long -term trends and conditions and cause and effect relationships. In
addition, research will need to occur over many years so that it can track long -term
changes and account for short term climate variability.
A fundamental component of the monitoring plan will be the regular communication of
results to natural resource managers, the community at large and the leaders of the
restoration actions proposed in this strategy. This task will ensure that the monitoring
results help support community understanding and lead to effective restoration projects.
We recommend this action as a high priority and suggest that it is funded appropriately.
The joint Water Quality Monitoring Program led by the Upper Deschutes Watershed
Council may be the proper venue for developing and leading this action. We foresee it
being implemented within two years given appropriate funding.
24
Matrices of Recommended Actions
The following pages include four tables identifying actions and their associated strategy
elements. Actions include varying levels of detail. For some actions we know who will
complete each task and we have the resources available to fully implement the action. For other
actions, we know which tasks we need to complete but we do not have the capacity to complete
them right now.
25
This page intentionally left blank.
26
Goal: By 2030, degraded ecosystem structures and functions will be improved in the upper Deschutes River.
27
Priority
Hypothesis
Metrics
Benchmarks
Timeline
Roles & Responsibilities
Hi h
g
Existing dimension. pattern,
and profile are different from
desired dimension. pattern,
and profile.
Channel dimension,
pattern and profile.
Options for desired dimension,
pattern. and profile developed;
stakeholders agree on desired
dimension, pattern. and profile.
< 5 ears
y
Deschutes National Forest will identifiy the desired dimension, pattern,
and profile.
Medium
Physical restoration will
restore the desired dimension,
pattern, and profile.
Channel dimension,
pattern and profile.
Resources available; restoration
sites identifited: restoration
implemented.
10 -20 Years
The Deschutes National Forest and the Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife will implement habitat restoration. The Upper Deschutes
Watershed Council will help fund habitat restoration.
Restored dimension, pattern,
and profile will improve
riparian conditions.
To Be Determined
To Be Determined.
10 -20 years
High
Desired hydrograph will be
different from existing
hydrograph.
Hydrograph elements
(magnitude. timing,
frequency. and rate of
change of flows)
Funding secured: working group
established: ecologically ideal
hydrograph developed: socially
feasible hydrograph developed.
5 Years
Deschutes River Conservancy will facilitate hydrograph identification
(pending funding).
Medium
Existing institutional
arrangements are not
adequate to restore flow.
Changes to
management
agreements. contracts,
authorizations, etc.
Consensus among stakeholders
regarding acceptable changes;
changes initiated: changes
completed.
5 -10 years
Deschutes River Conservancy will lead discussions about possible
changes to institutional framework.
Low
New infrastructure will allow
water managers to meet
target ramping rates. Existing
Infrastructure not adequate to
meet target ramping rates.
Ramping rates
Infrastructure needs identified:
funding secured: infrastructure
created.
10 -15 years
To Be Determined.
High
Water transactions will restore
tow flow,
Legally protected
instream flow;
streamflow
Resources available; multi -year
transaction developed; 50 cfs . up
to 10,000 AF legally protected; 50
cfs 7 -Day Average Minimum Flow
<5 years
Deschutes River Conservancy will develop funding, implement, and
monitor transaction; Oregon Water Resources Department will process
transaction and monitor streamflow.
27
Goal: By 2030, existing ecosystem functions and processes will be maintained and protected from further degradation.
28
Objective
Action
Priority
Hypothesis
Metrics
Benchmarks
Timeline
Roles & Responsibilities
Enhance Iocat
instream habitat.
Add spawning gravel.
Low
More spawning habitat
after gravel
enhancement.
Spawning habitat
availability
Site identified: sites prioritized:
sites enhanced; Ecological
benchmarks to be determined.
< 5 years
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will
lead. implement. and monitor gravel
enhancement projects.
More redds after
gravel enhancement.
Redband trout
redds
Add large wood.
Low
(Opportunistic),
Medium
(Strategic)
Low flow conditions
closer to desired
conditions after
enhancement.
To Be Determined
Site identified; sites prioritized:
sites enhanced; Ecological
benchmarks to be determined.
<5 years
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will lead.
implement, and monitor large wood
enhancement projects.
High flow conditions
closer to desired
conditions after
enhancement.
To Be Determined
Local channel and bank
restoration projects.
Low
Opportunistic),
Medium
(Strategic)
Low flow conditions
closer to desired
conditions after
restoration.
To Be Determined
Site identified; sites prioritized;
sites enhanced; Ecological
benchmarks to be determined.
<5 years
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will lead.
implement. and monitor local restoration projects.
High flow conditions
closer to desired
conditions after
restoration.
To Be Determined
Protect areas with
high ecological
value.
Identify at -risk. high value
riparian areas.
High
Some ecologtically
important areas at risk
for development,
Size of areas at
risk; ecological
functions served
by areas at risk
Areas at risk for development
identified: ecologically important
areas at risk for development
identified: Coordinated map of at-
risk areas and protection levels
developed.
<5 years
Deschutes County will identify and protect
wetlands within County boundaries (pending
funding); Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
will identify site- specific ecological functions at
proposed restoration sites: Deschutes National
Forest will identify ecologically important riparian
areas within National Forest boundaries (pending
funding).
Implement land
transactions to protect
dentified valuable areas.
Medium
Land transactions will
Protect some
ecologically important
areas.
To Be Determined
Initial resources secured;
communication with landowner,
transaction resources secured:
transaction completed.
c 5 years
To Be Determined.
Review and revise city,
county, and state and use
regulations.
High
Existing land use
regulations differ from
deal land use
regulations.
Size and
ecological value of
protected areas
Ideal land use regulations
identified: Actual and ideal land
use regulations compared: land
use regulations revised closer to
ideal.
>5 years
Deschutes County w ll revise its Comprehensive
Plan in 2009,
28
Goal: By 2030, the community will demonstrate greater stewardship of the upper Deschutes River.
Objective
Action Priority Hypothesis Metrics Benchmarks Timeline Roles & Responsibilities
Projects will engage riparian (Number of cooperating
Low '`landowners, landowners
Local channel and (opportunistic).
banic restoration. Medium
e
Ende human 'Projects will increase
landowners B' (strategic) :comprehension of riparian- Landowners'
protecting and restoring , { aquatic interactions.
comprehension
the upper Desch :es
River. i {
Clarify and :Action wr1N increase
Landowners'
communicate land j Low #landowner comprehension of ;comprehension
use regulations. ¢ land use regulations.
Support community '; 'Comrnr rr y outreach will
r :zing and i;gh rrcrease landowner
o p Landowners Engage community irformat+on sharing. :comp eners!on of upper comprehension
members ,n pro=.ecl ng .Deschutes River system.
and restoring the upper
Deschutes Raver. j.
Establish regular Regular communication wilt
communication with Low increase comprehension of .Elected officials'
elected officials. (issues and work being done #comprehension
Ito address them.
. To Be Determined.
r 5 years
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will design.
implement and monitor local restoration projects.
To Be Determined. 5 years To Be Determined.
Fund ng secured outreach program
developed outreach program 10 years
Implemented.
lTo Be Determined,
Tc Be Determined.
years To Be Determined.
29
Goal: By 2030, the restoration community will have an increased understanding of the upper Deschutes River system.
Objective
Action
Priority Hypothesis
Metrics
Benchmarks
Timeline
Roles & Responsibilities
Understand
effectiveness of the
suite of restoration
actions.
Establish a
comprehensive
monitoring plan based
on recommended
objectives and tasks.
High
Monitoring program can be
designed to identify if suite of
restoration actions have
improved ecological
conditions.
Monitoring can be designed to
identify if individual restoration
actions have achived goals.
To Be
Determined
Working group
established;
monitoring plan
written: monitoring
plan passes
academic review;
stakeholders accept
monitoring plan.
2 years
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will
develop fish and aquatic habitat monitoring;
Deschutes River Conservancy will develop
surface water monitoring; Upper Deschutes
Watershed Council will develop water
quality monitoring.
Implement
comprehensive
monitoring plan based
on recommended
objectives and tasks.
High
Monitoring will identify that
suite of restoration actions
have improved ecological
conditions.
Monitoring will identify that
individual restoration actions
have achieved goals.
To Be
Determined
Understand emerging
water quality issues
related to land use
and water
management.
Establish and
implement a research
program based on our
understanding of these
issues.
High
A directed research program
will allow us to inform future
land and water management
decisions.
To Be
Determined
Resources secured;
plan implemented.
15 years
To Be Determined.
Hypotheses
developed: Program
designed: funding
secured; program
implemented.
5 years
The Upper Deschutes Watershed Council
will lead the development and
implementation of this plan.
30