C1. Describe the present situation in the watershed and explain why a coordinator is needed. Explain what is happening in the watershed that prompts the need for a watershed council coordinator and/or other related support.
Leadership and resources are critical to the success of any
organization. In the case of the Upper & Lower Nehalem Watershed
Councils the coordinator takes responsibility for encouraging
volunteer support, helping the council(s) understand and use the
watershed assessment to develop, implement and articulate the
council(s) action plans, enlisting private timber and farm/dairy
interests in water quality improvement projects, providing outreach
to the local communities (schools, local government, civic groups)
reaching out to local landowners to identify and recruit potential
restoration opportunities, cooperating with agencies at the state,
federal, and local levels, reporting and grant writing, overseeing
restoration crews, and supervising the technical staff. This work
requires funds for project, office, and outreach expenses.
Additional funding for technical assistance is needed for the
Lower Nehalem Watershed Council to implement projects identified
in the action plan, maintain and update databases, coordinate
volunteer activities including: water quality monitoring, riparian
reforestation, salmon habitat/passage improvement, estuary clean-up
and daily oversight of council operations.
C2. For councils with ongoing watershed support grants,
describe the accomplishments of the council over the last year.
Highlight the accomplishments both in restoration and community
organization of the council. Identify areas where the council
has particular strengths. Identify areas where the council has
had or continues to have difficulties. How were these addressed?
The Upper and Lower Nehalem Councils have made significant
gains in restoration and community organization over the past
year
Both councils have maintained a diverse stakeholder representation
in membership. Members are actively involved in council organizational
development and participate regularly in council sponsored activities.
Participants have learned to use a consensus based decision making
process that has enabled them to make measurable progress in identifying
and prioritizing restoration goals while building a sense of community.
When controversial issues need to be addressed a skilled facilitator
is called upon to guide group process and aid discussions. The
LNWC was fortunate to have a community volunteer facilitate their
meetings over the last year. She recently stepped down from her
role a facilitator because she felt the council had acquired the
skills to manage group process on their own.
The Councils have been active in creating several new databases
that further watershed health and salmon recovery goals and, significantly,
increase accountability. These include Nehalem GIS statistics,
volunteer contribution numbers, water quality information, an
index of biotic integrity, cooperator/project inventory records,
and a digital camera jpeg series.
The LNWC has developed its own fiscal accounting system for expenses
and grants over the last year.
The councils have continued to build a strong technical support network, which includes representatives from all the natural resource agencies concerned as well as local interest groups and private consultants. Individuals are called upon to aid councils in prioritizing, designing, implementing, and monitoring project effectiveness.
The LNWC has strong representation from local municipalities who have been actively involved in the council process since its origin in 1996.
The City of Vernonia recently donated office, meeting and shop space to the UNWC.
Over the last year 22 council/public meetings were held with approximately 20 in attendance at each session, 2 public forums that included 60 attendees and 14 steering committee meetings have been held. The coordinator has kept the councils, SWCD and others interested apprised of watershed health and council developments by writing a series of 36 reports.
Community organization has been enhanced through the recent completion of the final draft (riparian conditions analysis still in progress) of the Nehalem Watershed Assessment. Over the last 2 years the councils have persevered through a long, complicated and sometimes tedious watershed assessment process. The assessment was greatly improved through the input and good works of many of the council representatives and technical supporters. The resulting document and GIS database will serve as baseline from which to guide future restoration, assessment and the integration of improved watershed health management practices.
The process of assessment furthered the development of the LNWC action plan that was recently completed and includes prioritized goals, objectives, tasks, timelines, project leaders and effectiveness monitoring components. Over the last year this process was greatly enhanced with the aid of a UofO RARE community participant who worked with the coordinator and committee members to develop the plan. The UNWC is modeling the LNWC impressive effort and has begun to draft a similar action plan.
Restoration work which has resulted in measurable improvement includes: two fish passage projects-one railcar bridge installation (Boxler Creek) and one culvert replacement (Reflection Creek), riparian work resulting in 6 miles of interplanting with approximately 20,000 native trees and 1 mile of fence. The Councils followed state restoration standards in project implementation and engaged in project effectiveness and photopoint monitoring for all of these projects.
In order to accomplish the above, the Councils went through two Joint Permit Removal Fill processes successfully. The Upper Nehalem also developed an MOU with the Fishhawk Recreation Club, Inc. on the Boxler Creek project.
Both councils actively supported salmon habitat improvement projects on public and private land. The LNWC recently developed their first grant proposal for large wood placement in a core area salmon stream in collaboration with Longview Fibre and ODF&W.
Engaging local youth in hands-on restoration projects is of
high priority to both councils. The UNWC has developed a working
relationship with the local Youth Conservation Corp program and
provides work experience and environmental education opportunities
to them on a regular basis. Youth have participated in several
riparian restoration projects, placed salmon carcass in local
streams and monitored water quality. The Boy Scouts of America,
science students from Vernonia schools and students from Pacific
University have also participated in streamside reforestation
projects. In the lower Nehalem local school children regularly
participate in council sponsored activities such as: tree plants,
salmon carcass placement, macroinvertebrate sampling and estuary
clean up.
Establishing watershed health benchmarks is of great importance
to the councils. To this end a basin wide monitoring strategy
has been set in motion. Water quality monitoring is taking place
at approximately 152 sampling sites throughout the watershed on
an annual basis.
In the Lower Nehalem there are 15 water quality sites that are
sampled by volunteers monthly for e-coli, total coliform, pH,
dissolved oxygen, turbidity, conductivity, temperature, + 15 sites
for continuous summer temperature recording and 15 sites for macroinvertebrate
sampling in the fall. In the Upper Nehalem there are 30 turbidity
sites sampled during the rainy season, 10 Do sites sampled in
the late summer, 17 macroinvertebrate sites sampled in the fall,
and 55 continuous summer temperature recording sites. Council
volunteers are the backbone of this effort. The councils collect
data according to state approved standards and have received an
"A" rating from the DEQ for data quality. Water quality
data collected by the councils is being used along with DEQ collected
data to form the TMDL database which will be used to analysis
current riparian and water quality conditions and drive future
TMDL reduction basin planning efforts.
A strong volunteer commitment and the ability to realize measurable success are the most remarkable strengths of the Upper and Lower Nehalem Watershed Councils. Volunteers can be counted on to help plant trees (approximately 4000) and to collect water quality data. This data, as well as numerous fish sitings at both passage projects, provides the councils with assurance that while slow, work is contributing to long-range goals.
Volunteers also contribute to the biennial Nehalem Bay cleanup. At the February 2000 event, 100 volunteers (totaling $12,000 in-kind labor) who gathered 65 cu.yds. of solid waste and recyclable for processing by Les Schwab Tires, Cart-man Recycling, and the County Dump.
Strong volunteer leadership in both the Upper and Lower Nehalem has been responsible for strengthening watershed council cohesiveness for developing the assessment and action plans. This base of support facilitates consensus building that effectively prioritizes restoration goals.
The main difficulty the Councils have encountered is having enough staff hours to complete reporting and database management associated with the growing number of restoration projects and increased need for accountability. One way this was addressed was to write a successful grant for hiring a RARE intern. In this application we are applying to OWEB for funds for a part time assistant to address this problem. The assistant will come aboard when the RARE intern leaves, enabling a smooth workload transition allowing the council to accomplish its workplan.
C3. Provide a work plan (including products, measurable
outcomes, and a time line) for the coordinator.
Describe specific tasks for the coordinator and the products that
will result. For example, "The coordinator will set-up and
advertise each monthly meeting, produce a monthly newsletter,
work with the council and agency staff to prepare a work plan
for conducting a watershed assessment," etc. If funding is
requested for subcontracting for specific technical expertise,
explain your rationale and describe what will be accomplished.
See attached work plan for NWC Coordinator and LNWC Technician.
C4. What are the priority efforts the council will undertake
during the grant period?
Describe how the work plan of the coordinator addresses local
objectives. For instance, it may be a council objective to work
with small livestock owners and hobby farmers to improve the condition
of riparian zones and wetlands. Relate how having a coordinator
will advance the work of the council. Explain how work priorities
were established.
The Councils' main objectives are to advance riparian restoration through riparian reforestation and livestock fencing and improve salmon habitat by removing migration barriers to essential habitat areas and increase habitat structure and complexity with-in the estuary and river system. The council(s) recognize that additional assessment focused in priority areas along with the continued establishment of cooperative partnerships with private and public land managers are critical components of realizing measurable objectives.
The Councils have used the watershed assessment, techncical and public review, and a concensus process to prioritize these Action Plan objectives.
The coordinator will advance the councils overall agendas by continuing to develop a community support base through education outreach, facilitate discussion between diverse interests, maintain open communication with technical supporters, promote cooperative restoration efforts, uphold restoration standards, coordinate monitoring efforts basin wide, uphold monitoring standards, continue assessment at a sub-basin scale, involve local youth in hands-on watershed health projects, maintain current volunteer base, recruit new volunteers, seek project funding support and provide for public funding accountability.
C5. Explain the level of local support for this position,
specifically from residents, local government, and agencies.
Describe the watershed council membership and the recognition/participation
by local government(s). Discuss how the council works with the
local government and local agencies, what their role is with the
council and how the council connects to other local efforts. Also,
explain the level of voluntary citizen involvement in the work
of the council and the role of council members in raising community
support and awareness for watershed enhancement.
The councils are increasingly enjoying recognition at the local level. The city newspapers provide favorable coverage of watershed events, the municipalities have donated office space, and the schools' appreciation of the councils' outreach activities is growing.
The number of landowners interested in affiliating with the councils is climbing as well. For example, in the Upper Nehalem where the population of Vernonia is 2000, the council has completed projects with 50 landowners and is beginning to get self-initiated calls from others. Door to door canvassing along stream stretches where the council is interested in restoration work has helped council members introduce themselves to the local landowning population. It has taken time and persistence and will take even more, but as the volunteer roster grows (on the Lower Nehalem 100 volunteers came out for the estuary cleanup) it is evident that community support for the watershed councils is growing along with awareness for watershed enhancement.
C6. Explain who will be responsible for supervising the
coordinator's work and who will be responsible for maintaining
payroll and insurance records.
Generally, watershed councils are an alliance of interested stakeholders
in a watershed. They may not have the formal structure required
to hire an employee and manage the fiscal responsibilities related
to being an employer. Other entities (quite often a soil and water
conservation district) may be willing to accept these responsibilities.
Identify to whom the coordinator will report and who will maintain
employee records. Who provides directions to the coordinator?
How often is the communication between supervisor and employee?
What process is used to review work of the coordinator?
The coordinator serves at the pleasure of the Councils. Each of which has a steering committee that has accepted supervisory responsibility over the coordinator.
The coordinator reports to the Columbia SWCD where employee records are maintained and payroll services provided. Through its role as fiscal agent for grants, the SWCD also has some oversight with regard to product the councils and coordinator generate. It helped the coordinator establish fencing standards, for example, and provides other direction to the coordinator on an informal basis.
C7. How will the council evaluate its effectiveness?
Every project must have a monitoring component to assess progress
toward meeting goals. Watershed council support projects need
a plan for evaluating the success of each element and for tracking
long-term benefits. Discuss the way the council sets goals and
evaluates its efforts. Describe how the evaluation will be used
to adjust priorities. If the council has been in existence for
over one year, give examples of previous council evaluation efforts
and their outcomes.
The councils both have established action plans based on the identification and prioritization of local watershed health issues. Issues affecting watershed health and native salmonid production were identified originally by a locally driven in-formal assessment process, which included technical review. This process eventually evolved into a formal process of assessment when the state assessment guidelines became available. The LNWC recently finalized their action plan after a lengthy public process involving assessment, extensive research and data review, goal setting and public project prioritization. The UNWC is currently implementing an 'interim action plan" based on a cooperative local prioritization process designed to identify and address issues of immediate watershed health concern, activities include: extensive temperature, turbidity and macroinvertebrate sampling and project effectiveness monitoring. Preliminary riparian condition analysis resulting in the development of extensive cooperative streamside reforestation and riparian fencing projects along identified reaches. Fish passage sub-basin assessment resulted in the removal of several migration barriers in core salmonid production areas. The UNWC steering committee is moving into a formal action plan development process utilizing the findings of the Nehalem Watershed Assessment which will result in an action plan modeled after the LNWC efforts complete with goals, measurable objectives, tasks, timelines, project leaders and a effectivess monitoring components.
The work plans of the NWC Coordinator, LNWC Technical assistant and council committees are directly related to the project tasks and timelines outlined in the respective council actions plans and measured for effectiveness accordingly.
Each project lead person provides a quarterly project status report for the councils in January, April, July, and October. During the monthly Council Steering Committee meetings, progress on reports are reviewed and any problems encountered in implementing the Action Plans are discussed.
Since the reports include quantifiable data related to water quality improvement and fish habitat restoration, the Steering Committees and Councils are able to identify aspects of projects that require further consideration.
Examples of previous council evaluation efforts include fish
observation and structural integrity measurement at the Boxler
Creek Project site and monitoring landowner support and project
effectiveness of riparian restoration work. In each case the Councils
concluded that original project objectives were being met.
Beyond that which is mentioned above the councils judge their
effectiveness with-in the watershed communities by the citizen
attendance and participation in council meetings and projects,
by the diversity of representation of participating members, by
their ability to discuss controversial issues, by their ability
to reach consensus in a timely manner and from feedback from community
members, participating natural resource agency and funding supporters.
Founding members from both councils have maintained active roles over time through thick and thin
C8. How will the council evaluate the coordinator's performance?
Explain what criteria have been established to evaluate how well
the coordinator fulfills the council expectations. Who is responsible
to evaluate the performance? How will results of the evaluation
be communicated to the council? How will exemplary/substandard
results be recognized/communicated?
See attached performance evaluation form.
The coordinator serves at the pleasure of the Councils. Each
council has a steering committee that has accepted supervisory
responsibility over the coordinator. The technical assistant will
serve under the coordinator for the LNWC. The LNWC will oversee
the work plan of the technician. The coordinator will conduct
regular performance reviews and work plan updates with technician.
The coordinator provides a monthly report to the steering committees
and councils who provide informal evaluation. The committees are
in the process of adopting the attached Performance Review guidelines
for formal evaluation of the coordinator's performance. The council
chairs will communicate the results of the evaluation to the councils.
The Performance Review guidelines will be used to recognize exemplary/substandard
performance. The chair will communicate these results to the coordinator.
C9. Which elements of the project will OWEB funds be used
for?
Expand upon the information given on the budget page. Be sure
to specify whether the funding level requested includes expenses
in addition to coordinator salary and benefits and the time period
to be covered with the requested funding. List the specific items
OWEB funds will be used for. OWEB has limited its contribution
to coordinator salary and benefits to $37,500/year. Your budget
needs to be within this limitation for state funds.
OWEB funds will be used for personnel, council operating costs, travel, supplies/materials, production costs, and equipment. The time period to be covered with the requested funding is the biennium 2001-2003, which begins July 1, 2001.
Coordinator salary is budgeted at $75,000 and additional technical support staff at $30,000. Council operating costs are divided between the two offices with the Upper Nehalem needing utilities, phone, postage, and support services for $11000, and the Lower Nehalem requiring utilities, phone, postage, and a copy machine totaling $11,000.
Travel for the coordinator includes mileage, training, and lodging for $6000. LNWC staff and Upper and Lower volunteers are also budgeted for training, mileage, and lodging at $5,500.
Office supplies for both the Upper and Lower are at $3,600 for the biennium. Another $1,500 is earmarked for production costs associated with the Action Plan, Assessment, and developing film. Finally, field equipment and a digital camera are figured at $1,500.
C10. Identify the geographic area of the council on a map
and explain the manner the council proposes to coordinate with
adjacent councils.
New councils need to have a clear idea of their geographic boundaries
and the relationship with adjacent councils. Specify how the council
interacts with adjacent councils.
The UNWC and LNWC between them cover the entire geographic
area of the Nehalem Watershed of 855 square miles.
The councils have a history of working with their neighbors. The
coordinator serves on the Clatsop Coordinating Council for Watershed
Councils that helped Clatsop County's watershed councils begin
operations. The coordinator also regularly exchanges information,
provides advice, loans equipment, crews, and materials to neighboring
councils. She was especially helpful to the Lower Columbia River
Watershed Council in getting its first riparian project off the
ground.
Attach to your application:
· Budget
· Match Funding Form
· Legal Requirements Form
· Council Work Plan
· Watershed Council Membership List
Attach a list of watershed council members and their interest
represented to demonstrate that the council has a balance of interests
in the watershed and that it has the necessary skills and expertise
to guide watershed management activities.
See attached
· Watershed Council Documentation of Local Recognition
and Bylaws
Attach documentation to show that the council has local government
recognition (or was formed before 1995). This documentation may
be a formal order, letter of recognition, resolution, etc. from
the city, county, water supply district, or sewer district.
See attached
AGREEMENTS:
I/we,__________________________________________________________________
of ______________________________________, Oregon, hereby make
application for financial assistance under the terms and conditions
of the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board in the amount of $______________.
The total cost of the project is $______________, as shown on
page 1.
I/we understand that if this proposal is funded, I/we will be required to:
· Sign a Grant Agreement containing the terms and conditions
upon which funds will be released, including submission of necessary
permits and documents, a certification to comply with state, federal
and local regulations, and a release of liability for the State
of Oregon;
· Obtain landowner, monitoring and maintenance agreements;
· Certify that the project complies with state, federal
and local regulations;
· Submit a report at the completion of project construction
and subsequent periodic reports to the Board on the project's
performance; and
· Agree that educational products resulting from projects
are public domain.
Signed: Date:
Title:
Please document below that you have requested the match funding
listed on question 2 of your grant application
Match funding does not have to be secured at the time of application but you must document that at least 25% of match funding has been sought. Should you receive a grant from OWEB, at least 25% in match must be secured prior to beginning your project.
Match funding may be in the form of cash on-hand, cash that is pledged to be on-hand before the project begins, secured funding commitments, pending funding commitments (must be secured before the project begins and no later than 12 months from the date of the OWEB award), the value of donated conservation easements, or the value of donated labor and materials essential to the project.
This form is provided for your convenience. You may use it, or provide letters or other appropriate documentation from your project contributors.
Project Name:
Applicant:
Match Funding Source Signature of
Authorized Representative Dollar
Value Secured/
Pending Date
PERSONNEL (Position title, wages, benefits, etc. maximum OWEB contribution per council = $37,500/yr.)
| Itemize projected costs under each of the following categories: | Unit (i.e. hours, each, foot) | Unit Cost |
Donated Services/ Supplies* |
Other Funds* |
OWEB Funds |
Total Costs |
| NWC Coordinator wage, employer expenses, workman's comp. | hour | 15/hr + | 75,000.00 | 75,000.00 | ||
| LNWC - Technician | hour | 12/hr | 30,000.00 | 30,000.00 | ||
| Technical support, council volunteers | hour | 10-48/hr | 151,200.00 |
| UNWC - utilities, phone, postage | 8,000.00 | 8,000.00 | ||||
| City of Vernonia - office space | 7,200.00 | 7,200.00 | ||||
| Contracted support services - UNWC | 3,000.00 | 3,000.00 | ||||
| LNWC - utilities, copy, phone, postage | 11,000.00 | 11,000.00 | ||||
| City of Nehalem - office space | 7,200.00 | 7,2000.00 |
| NWC - Coordinator | mile/day | 32.5/10 perdiem | 6,000.00 | 6,000.00 | ||
| UNWC - volunteers | mile | 32.5 | 2,000.00 | 2,000.00 | ||
| LNWC - volunteers and technician | mile | 32.5 | 2,500.00 | 2,500.00 |
| NWC - Coordinator/councils office supplies, software |
3,600.00 | 3,600.00 | ||||
| BLM - Trees | 15,000.00 | 15,000.00 |
| NWC Coordinator/councils | 1,500.00 | 1,500.00 |
| Digital camera, field gear | 1,500.00 | 1,500.00 |
| Sub-totals | 180,800.00 | 144,100.00 | 324,900.00 |
ADMINISTRATION** (Costs associated with administering the
grant, i.e., fiscal management)
| Col. SWCD | 14,410.00 |
| TOTALS | 180,800.00 | $158,510.00 | 339,310.00 |
The council understands the challenges facing the watershed and has developed a clear work plan with specific objectives and a means to evaluate progress toward meeting these challenges.
Watershed councils must have a clear idea of the nature and range of natural resource issues facing the watershed. Priority watershed issues should be identified. Councils that have a clear idea of what they wish to accomplish and have a way to review their efforts are more likely to succeed. The council's objectives should be clear, reflect the natural resource issues of the basin, be achievable, and have priorities to direct the work of the council. Recognizing that circumstances and opportunities change during implementation, there should be an evaluation process that allows the council to adjust priorities.
Provides a work plan that identifies anticipated work products, measurable outcomes, and time schedules for completion.
A detailed coordinator work plan demonstrates that the council has clearly defined what will be accomplished within a given time frame. It is important to have a clear idea of how the coordinator will assist and support council work, and to establish who will hire, supervise, and track the coordinator's work.
The council can demonstrate good community support and involvement.
Voluntary citizen involvement and participation in the work of the council is essential to ensure watershed sustainability locally. Council members have a vital role to play in raising community support and awareness for watershed enhancement. Councils that are part of the community and are recognized in the community have a greater opportunity to be successful. This criteria is not measured by how many people show up at meetings, it is more a function of relationships between existing community groups (local governments, SWCDs, agencies, etc.) and the council.
The council has a clear way to review and evaluate the performance
of the coordinator.
Watershed council coordinators provide local coordination between
agencies and landowners, compile information on watershed conditions,
and facilitate the day-to-day work of the council. The duties
and responsibilities of the council coordinator should be clearly
defined. Clear identification of the person or people who will
supervise and review the performance of the coordinator is a critical
element for success of the coordinator.
The council has a clear idea of how it fits with adjacent councils and coordinates with them to achieve goals.
Often the objectives of a council involve efforts that go beyond
their boundaries. For example to achieve compliance with state
water quality standards, it may be important to act cooperatively
with an adjacent council. Salmon recovery cannot be achieved in
a single watershed, therefore coordinated actions may be needed.
The council has a plan for self-evaluation and/or goal setting.
In addition to coordinator performance, the council should have an established procedure for reviewing its effectiveness and making necessary adjustments.