The Klamath Basin Integrated Fisheries Restoration and Monitoring Plan (IFRMP) will use the best available science within an Adaptive Management framework to develop basin-scale goals and objectives for the restoration and monitoring of fisheries within the Klamath Basin
IFRMP Planning Effort Now Moves into Phase 5
Last updated: February 16, 2022
We are pleased to announce that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has directed PSMFC and ESSA to move forward with review of the Draft Phase 4 IFRMP.
Klamath IFRMP participant review February 17, 2022 presentation
Download the Draft Klamath IFRMP Document (Phase 4) (47MB PDF)
Prior to April 15th 2022, please provide your feedback using the following Klamath IFRMP Phase 4 Survey.
The stakeholder review of the draft plan period will run February 18, 2022, to April 15 2022. Using the survey noted, we need your input to help ensure the information in the Plan is as accurate and as complete as possible. The survey identifies the specific questions and portions of the Plan to focus your input. This will be the penultimate opportunity to comment on the IFRMP, with a final major workshop on the completed IFRMP slated in September-October 2022.
For those new, the Integrated Fisheries Restoration and Monitoring Plan (IFRMP) candidate restoration actions, associated prioritization, costing and monitoring results are the product of the coordinated efforts of a vast team committed to improving fishery restoration practices in the Klamath Basin. Lower down on this page you can find links to prior phase products assembled since 2016. The Service has set a goal to complete the IFRMP by the end of the year (Dec 2022) and move towards specific implementation advice and actions.
The USFWS wishes to thank you, our great stakeholder team – more than one hundred and thirty (130) Federal Coordination Group and Sub-basin Working Group members – for contributing invaluable advice and data over the course of Phase 2 (2017-2018), Phase 3 (2019-2020) and Phase 4 (2020-2021).
Previously Completed Plan Components:
Draft Klamath IFRMP Document (Phase 4) – Expected February 18, 2022 (47MB PDF)
Klamath IFRMP Restoration Prioritization Tool (Phase 3 and 4) – June 2020 - present
Guest, read-only access:
username: ifrmpguest
password: ifrmp2020
These tutorial videos (esp. videos 1 and 2) are a short and simple way to get acquainted with most features of the tool (some newer features are not reflected in these videos):
We encourage you to take a look at the updated Tool after starting with the tutorial videos:
Note, the tool also supports user revision recommendations (as summarized in video 3) using sub-basin team logins. If you are a sub-basin working group member, and do not recall these credentials, please send us a request to klamath-ifrmp@essa.com.
Prioritization methods explainers (Phase 3) – Feb 2020
Accessible with sub-basin team logins
Provisional Draft Klamath IFRMP Document (Phase 2) - Oct 15, 2019 (8MB PDF) {*This document is superseded in value by the Phase 4 report released February 17 2022}
Klamath IFRMP Synthesis Report (Phase 1)- Aug 14, 2017 (20MB PDF)
We continue to collect contemporary documents, plans, studies, and data related to fish habitat restoration and monitoring (including innovative concepts and approaches from similar planning efforts such as the Elwha). Documents and data collected during this process will be catalogued in the searchable Document Library on this website. If you have relevant information you think should be included please contact us via email at: klamath-ifrmp@essa.com.
Next Steps
After completing an interim participant review of the draft (Phase 4) Plan February 18 2022 - April 15 2022, and subject to further refinements and direction from the FCG and PSMFC the focus of Phase 5 (2022-2023) is anticipated to include the following tasks:
- Identify cost ranges to close priority monitoring gaps.
- Refine initial implementability ratings for candidate restoration actions via participant validation survey to generate more granular, project-based implementabilty ratings.
- Create an Adaptive Management (AM) report card template to support bringing the IFRMP ‘to life’ during future implementation. This AM report card would be a key part of standard IFRMP bi-annual reporting during future envisioned Klamath Basin Adaptive Management symposia.
- We will design and conduct a IFRMP implementation workshop in summer/fall 2022. At this workshop, it will be critical to ensure balanced regional representation when reviewing restoration and monitoring priorities. The key outcome of this workshop would be a concise IFRMP implementation recommendation document to add to the IFRMP report.
- Final IFRMP Restoration Prioritization Tool updates and knowledge transfer.
- Building on the tasks above, we will conclude by producing an updated and final IFRMP document, with new subsections that summarize monitoring cost information, updated implementability ratings (i.e., adjusted priority sequence of restoration actions), links to the AM report card template, final monitoring plan recommendations and links to IFRMP implementation recommendations generated by the implementation workshop.
Once this additional information is incorporated into the Plan document in 2022 (or 2023), we will have as complete a picture as possible at the moment of what it will take to restore the Basin; we will have good estimates on what it will cost to do the work in each sub-basin; and, we will have an approach for coordinated monitoring. While we cannot make any commitments at the moment, we are also looking for ways to identify additional funding to help support participation by those who might need financial assistance for ongoing engagement with these ongoing planning efforts.
Later this spring and summer, be on the lookout for more details on next steps in the IFRMP planning process. As always, please reach out to our team should you have any questions or concerns. Contact us via email at: klamath-ifrmp@essa.com.
Background
Phase 4 of the IFRMP planning process (2020-2021) centered on three major tasks. First, generating cost estimates for the identified IFRMP restoration actions. Second, delivering monitoring plan recommendations that close key gaps in tracking basin-wide recovery affixed to status and trends Core Performance Indictors (CPIs) across all biophysical tiers. Ongoing monitoring of these CPIs will detect worrisome signals that could indicate the need for further diagnostic investigations and indicate when habitat conditions were improving in response to restoration efforts. Third, Phase 4 of the IFRMP planning process reviewed the alignment of IFRMP restoration actions and CPIs with other regional restoration Plans to ensure the IFRMP was filling important gaps and otherwise coordinating with what is being learned from these other initiatives.
Previous work during Phase 3 (2019-2020) of IFRMP development focused on developing and applying a multi-criterion scoring methodology for systematic, repeatable, and transparent ranking of Klamath Basin restoration actions for focal fish populations throughout all sub-basins of the Klamath Basin. This included refining Core Performance Indicators (CPIs) for consistently characterizing levels of watershed impairment at the basin-wide scale. The data and mechanics needed to execute this approach are unified in the web-based Klamath IFRMP Restoration Prioritization Tool.
The intent of the IFRMP is not to replace other existing planning efforts, but to address key gaps and strategically bring existing plans and planning efforts together using an adaptive management framework. The vision of the Klamath Basin IFRMP is to provide a unifying framework for planning the restoration and recovery of native fish species from the headwaters to the Pacific Ocean, while improving flows, water quality, habitat and ecosystem processes. The IFRMP (or Plan) will serve as a blueprint that describes the highest priority watershed process and habitat restoration and monitoring actions that in combination with related restoration initiatives can help reverse the declines of multiple native Klamath Basin fish populations. The Plan will provide an answer to the basic question: given all we know; which habitat and watershed process restoration actions will provide the broadest possible benefits to native Klamath Basin fish species– throughout the Basin and within each sub-basin watershed. The IFRMP will also help inform the wise allocation of funds for restoration and monitoring work in the Klamath Basin. Funding to do broad scale restoration and monitoring work is limited so it is imperative to ensure that funds are used as strategically as possible to maximize the value of restoration efforts in the Basin. Please note: the IFRMP is a planning document that will help inform and guide restoration practitioners and agency resource managers alike. However, nothing in the IFRMP constitutes an official federal agency position or obligation for current or future action. Implementation of any restoration activity depends on future appropriation of necessary funds, as well as cooperation and support of private landowners, states, Tribes, local governments and other organizations that call the Klamath Basin home.
Plan Coordination & Working Groups
Matt Baun | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Chris Wheaton | Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC) |
Tommy Williams | National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) |
Ryan Fogerty | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Jim Simondet | NOAA - National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) |
Nick Hetrick | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Robert Clarke | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Mike Edwards | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Shari Witmore | National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) |
Terrence Conlon | United States Geological Survey (USGS) |
Jenny Ericson | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Bob Pagliuco | NOAA - National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) |
Megan Skinner | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Chauncey Anderson | United States Geological Survey (USGS) |
Matt Baun | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Caitlin Bean | California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW) |
Michael Belchik | Yurok Tribe |
Megan Skinner | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Clayton Creager | North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board |
Mike Edwards | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Robert Franklin | Fishwater Consulting |
Ryan Fogerty | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Damon Goodman | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Nick Hetrick | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Mike Hiatt | Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) |
Eric Janney | United States Geological Survey (USGS) |
Barry McCovey | Yurok Tribe |
Bob Pagliuco | NOAA - National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) |
Bill Pinnix | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Eli Scott | North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board |
Jim Simondet | NOAA - National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) |
Wade Sinnen | California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW) |
Toz Soto | Karuk Tribe |
Chris Wheaton | Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC) |
Tommy Williams | National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) |
Ted Wise | Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) |
George Pess | National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) |
Greg Schrott | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Stan Swerdloff | Klamath Tribes |
Clint Alexander | Sr. Project Manager / Lead Facilitator |
Natascia Tamburello | Associate Project Manager / Restoration Cost Lead |
Cedar Morton | Restoration Cost Co-lead |
Darcy Pickard | Monitoring Component Lead |
Marc Porter | Monitoring Component Co-Lead |
Hugh Stimson | Klamath IFRMP Prioritization Tool Developer |
Matthew Bailey | Klamath IFRMP Prioritization Tool Developer |
Laurelle Santana | Communication Liaison |
Clayton Creager | North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board |
Eric Reiland | Bureau of Reclamation |
Leigh Ann Vradenberg | Klamath Watershed Partnership |
Mark Buettner | Klamath Tribes |
Mark Johnson | Klamath Water Users Association |
Melissa Olson | The Nature Conservancy |
Tyler Hammersmith | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Barry McCovey | Yurok Tribe |
Bob Pagliuco | NOAA - National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) |
Charles Wickman | Mid Klamath Watershed Council |
Eric Reiland | Bureau of Reclamation |
Jon Grunbaum | Klamath National Forest |
Mitzi Wickman | Mid Klamath Watershed Council |
Ryan Fogerty | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Toz Soto | Karuk Tribe |
Ada Fowler | California Trout |
Amy Campbell | The Nature Conservancy |
Betsy Stapleton | Scott River Watershed Council |
Bill Pinnix | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Eli Scott | North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board |
Ethan Brown | Shasta Valley Resource Conservation District |
Grant Johnson | Karuk Tribe |
Karuna Greenberg | Salmon River Restoration Council |
Leroy Cyr | Six Rivers National Forest |
Matt Parker | Siskiyou County California |
Michael Belchik | Yurok Tribe |
Rod Dowse | Shasta Valley Resource Conservation District |
Ryan Fogerty | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Toz Soto | Karuk Tribe |
Barry McCovey | Yurok Tribe |
Bill Pinnix | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Chad Abel | Bureau of Reclamation |
Dan Gale | Arcata USFWS Office PFW Program |
Eric Reiland | Bureau of Reclamation |
Gregory Schrott | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Justin Alvarez | Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries |
Kyle de Julio | Yurok Tribe |
Mike Dixon | Bureau of Reclamation |
Nick Hetrick | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Oliver Rogers | Bureau of Reclamation |
Sarah Beesley | Yurok Tribe |
Chauncey Anderson | United States Geological Survey - Water Science Center |
Clayton Creager | North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board |
Crystal Robinson | Quartz Valley Indian Reservation |
Eli Scott | North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board |
Grant Johnson | Karuk Tribe |
Jacob Kann | Aquatic Ecosystems Sciences |
Mark Buettener | Klamath Tribes |
Megan Skinner | US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) |
Olivia Stoken | Oregon Dept of Environmental Quality |
Randy Turner | Klamath Basin Monitoring Program |
Betsy Stapleton | Scott River Watershed Council |
Brian Cluer | National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration |
Chauncey Anderson | United States Geological Survey - Water Science Center |
Conor Shea | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Dave Gaeuman | Yurok Tribe |
Eric Reiland | Bureau of Reclamation |
George Pess | National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration |
Karuna Greenberg | Salmon River Restoration Council |
Sarah Beasley | Yurok Tribe |
Alex Corum | Karuk Tribe |
Barry McCovey | Yurok Tribe |
Benji Ramirez | Oregon Dept of Fish and Wildlife |
Bill Pinnix | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Damon Goodman | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Erich Yokel | Scott River Watershed Council |
George Pess | National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) |
Jacob Krause | USGS Klamath Falls Field Station |
Jon Grunbaum | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Josh Rasmussen | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Karuna Greenberg | Salmon River Restoration Council |
Kurt Bainbridge | California Department of Fish & Wildlife |
Kyle DeJulio | Yurok Tribe |
Leroy Cyr | Six Rivers National Forest |
Mark Buettener | Klamath Tribes |
Mark Hereford | Oregon Dept of Fish and Wildlife |
Mark Johnson | Klamath Water Users Association |
Maureen Purcell | USGS Northwest-Pacific Islands Region |
Ryan Fogerty | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Sarah Beasley | Yurok Tribe |
Ted Wise | Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife |
Tommy Williams | National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration |
Toz Soto | Karuk Tribe |
Wade Sinnen | California Department of Fish & Wildlife |
Anne Voss | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Benji Ramirez | Oregon Dept of Fish and Wildlife |
Dr Julie Alexander | Oregon State University |
Grant Johnson | Yurok Tribe |
Justin Alvarez | Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries |
Kurt Bainbridge | California Department of Fish & Wildlife |
Maureen Purcell | USGS Northwest-Pacific Islands Region |
Nicholas Som | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Ryan Fogerty | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Sascha Hallett | Oregon State University |
Scott Foott | US Fish & Wildlife Service |
Wade Sinnen | California Department of Fish & Wildlife |