Fish & wildlife Subbasin planning Level 2 - Oregon

Guidance on "model" subbasin work plans

Related link: mainstem guidance

prepared by Oregon Coordination Group

November 14, 2002 revised

Based upon the subbasin work plans submitted and approved to date, the following recommendations on a ?model? plan are provided as guidance to subbasin planners.

1. As Council-approved work plans, the Deschutes Subbasin and Hood River Subbasin work plans should be reviewed as examples.
2. Work plans should indicate that the planning process will follow the tasks outlined in the Technical Guide for Subbasin Planners and in Section III.C of the Oregon Specific Guidance (1mb PDF). Also see Appendix C for a detailed outline of tasks. The Deschutes Subbasin work plan is a good example.
3. Detail on the organizational structure is needed, including composition of the Planning Team, Technical Team, and any advisory groups. Identify individuals where possible. The work plan needs to clearly describe where Tribes, federal land management agencies, state agencies, local governments and environmental groups will be involved. The Hood River Subbasin work plan provides a good example of organizational structure.
4. In subbasins where listed salmon and steelhead are present, the ?Purpose? section should include a statement that the subbasin plan is intended to serve as a building block of an ESA recovery plan. NMFS Local Recovery Plan Guidelines should be cited as the framework for what is needed for a subbasin plan to meet recovery plan needs. For ESA purposes, there needs to be an evaluation of the ability of existing programs to achieve recovery goals (NOAA Fisheries will be developing additional guidance on what this means).
5. If it is the intent to submit the subbasin plan to OWEB for adoption as the goals and priorities for watershed restoration under the state watershed council program, such a statement should be included in the "Purpose" section.
6. For the Assessment task, details are needed on the modeling/assessment methods to be used.
7. Work plans should describe proposed progress reporting procedures.
8. Draft plan sections should be submitted to the Oregon Coordination Group for informal review prior to finalizing the entire plan. Work plans should reflect submittal for review at 50% or 75% completion.
9. A 14-18 month schedule for plan completion should be reflected.
10. Time and monies should be reserved for post-submittal presentations to the Independent Scientific Review Panel and to Council if requested and for undertaking any requested amendments and resubmissions.
11. Budgets need to be developed for each task and provide details on expenses. All costs should be reflected (including financial and in-kind contributions by other entities that are separately funded). Assumptions should be detailed.