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 4

Last updated: April 2 2021

This update has been a long time coming and is meant to inform planning participants of our progress towards completing the Integrated Fisheries Restoration and Monitoring Plan (IFRMP). The USFWS also wishes to thank you, our great stakeholder team, for your patience as we worked behind the scenes to identify additional Plan elements that would provide more depth and context to the interim restoration priorities identified in the Phase 3 Plan and provide additional time to identify funding needed for completion of our work. This work included responding to immediate stakeholder feedback on the Phase 2 report and Klamath IFRMP Restoration Prioritization Tool web tool to add user-friendly interactive mapping features to support clearer navigation of the subwatershed locations for the proposed restoration projects and provide suggested revisions on these locations during the peer-review process.

We encourage you to take a look at the updated tool after starting with the tutorial videos:

You can access the Klamath IFRMP Restoration Prioritization Tool here: http://klamath.essa.com/ (Guest Username: ifrmpguest / Guest Password: ifrmp2020). 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.


Next Steps

The USFWS had planned to instruct PSMFC and ESSA to complete an interim stakeholder review of the draft Plan in February 2021, but instead directed PSMFC and ESSA work with you in the coming months to incorporate additional information on restoration costs and monitoring to ensure the Plan document is in a more complete state before asking you to spend additional hours reviewing the next draft.

Towards that end, we hope to engage with you over the next several months through electronic correspondence, one-on-one conversations, and collaborative virtual workshops as we add these important details to the IFRMP. Themes we expect to touch on during these next steps for engagement would include:

  1. verifying rough cost estimates for carrying out the priority restoration actions identified in each sub-basin;
  2. identifying the best approach to monitoring so we can track basin-wide recovery to assess the collective effectiveness of the suite of restoration actions implemented through the IFRMP;
  3. identifying key gaps in monitoring;
  4. identifying costs associated with closing these monitoring gaps; and,
  5. ensuring that the IFRMP is aligned with other regional plans that are underway in the Basin.

Once this additional information is incorporated into the Plan document this summer and fall, 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.  One of the final steps at that time will be a stakeholder review from you all in the fall to provide your perspectives and help us smooth over any rough edges that still exist. 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.

We have been working diligently towards an IFRMP for several years now and the level of collaboration sustained since 2016 has been exceptional. We want to once again express our gratitude for the time, commitment, and patience of all of those who have been involved to date. The commitment from the USFWS and federal team to complete the IFRMP remains strong, and there will be more work for us ahead.

Please be on the lookout for more details on next steps in the IFRMP planning process in the coming weeks. In the meantime, please reach out to our team should you have any questions or concerns. Contact us via email at: klamath-ifrmp@essa.com.

Previously Completed Plan Components:
Klamath IFRMP Restoration Prioritization Tool (Phase 3) – June 2020
Guest, read-only access:
username: ifrmpguest
password: ifrmp2020

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)
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.


Background

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

Sub-basin teams as of Jan 2020 – Subject to change

Map of Sub-regional Boundaries (pdf)
Federal Coordination Group
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)
Terrance Conlon  United States Geological Survey (USGS)
Jenny Ericson  US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS)
Bob Pagliuco  NOAA - National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
Basin-wide Technical Working Group
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
ESSA Core Team
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
COSTING - R1 - Upper Basin
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
COSTING - R2a - Upper-Mid Klamath River
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
COSTING - R2b - Mid-Upper Basin
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
COSTING - R3 - Lower Basin
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
MONITORING - SA1 - Watershed Inputs & WQ
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 Kahn  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
MONITORING - SA2 - Fluvial Geomorphology
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
MONITORING - SA3 - Fish Habitat & Connectivity
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
MONITORING - SA4 - Biological Interactions
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

Join our mailing list