DRAFT
Highlights from Tributary Streamflow Technical Committee
February 9, 2006
The first meeting of the Tributary Streamflow Technical Committee (formerly known as
Prioritization of Tributaries) was hosted by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe on February 9,
2006. The focus of the meeting was to understand the context and purpose of the group’s
work and begin to develop a scope, workplan, and ranking criteria. Below are key points
discussed and agreed to by the group.













Purpose of the committee is to review existing biological and hydrology information
to determine the locations and priority ranking of flow-impaired tributary stream
areas most in need of flow restoration to help maintain and recover salmon runs. The
committee agreed that this work does not eliminate the need for ongoing activities by
all parties to protect the flow regimes of all streams from degradation due to land use
and/or excessive water withdrawals.
It is expected that the Source Exchange Strategies Committee will look at the “how”
of restoring/augmenting flow. The Tributary Streamflow Committee will need to
work closely with that group.
Short-term goal: by June 30th, reach consensus to recommend 2-4 reaches or stream
areas per basin that would most benefit from flow restoration particularly where there
are willing participants.
Initial geographic scope: WRIAs 8 and 9 (Lake Washington and Green River basins)
Anadromous fish are the primary target, although other species would benefit as well
Will start with WDFW/Shared Strategy criteria and ranking approach and adapt it as
needed to WRIA 8 and 9 situation.
Considerable analysis of low flow problems and hydraulic continuity has already
been done by Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, King County, Department of Fish and
Wildlife, Ecology, US Geological Service, and others. Carla Carlson (MIT) will
prepare an initial reference list with links that others are invited to contribute to.
Fisheries expertise is already at the table.
Muckleshoot Tribe, WDFW, and Ecology are co-leads of committee. Holly Coccoli
(MIT) agreed to serve as main point of contact.
Focus will be on where restoration/augmentation can make the most difference
Expectation is to meet perhaps 4 more times by June 30th. Technical assistance may
be needed from a hydrogeologist to finalize the initial priority list of stream segments
Utilities and water purveyors are encouraged to participate.
Discussion began on criteria for recommending stream reaches: e.g., known survival
problems (where salmon are actually dying due to flow-related problems; where
thermal refuges may be needed; where restoring a few CFS will make a major
difference; where the impacts of groundwater withdrawals are well known.
The committee name was changed to Tributary Streamflow Committee from
Prioritization of Tributaries to avoid any unintended suggestion that protection is
unimportant in streams not be assigned a high ranking for flow restoration.
Next steps:
 Next meeting scheduled for morning of March 7 at MIT
 Holly and Steve Hirschey will compile an initial list of criteria and circulate by
February 24th for discussion at the next meeting, looking at what Ecology and
WDFW have already proposed; they also encourage committee members to submit
suggestions to them
 Holly and Steve will also draft an initial scope and workplan and circulate by
February 24th for discussion at the next meeting
 Holly will break the basins down into reaches/chunks for discussion purposes
 Carla will assemble and mail CDs of MIT reports and will circulate a list of
references to the group