| Strategy / Actions | Lead(s) | Participants | Total Budget |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strategy 1: Crossing Rehabilitation | $16,137,390.00 | ||
| 1.1 - Rehabilitate resource road barriers | CWF | $8,500,000.00 | |
| 1.2 - Rehabilitate dams | CWF | $435,000,000.00 | |
| 1.3 - Rehabilitate major infrastructure crossings | CWF | $6,700,000.00 | |
| 1.4 - Barrier mititgation | CWF, SERN | CWF | *Built-in to 1.1 and 1.2 |
| 1.5 - Work with crossing owners to identify and rehabilitate barriers | Elk River Alliance (ERA) | (Windsight), CWF | $20,000 |
| 1.6 - Advocate for increased compliance and enforcement for specific, priority barriers | ERA | (Windsight), CWF | $20,000.00 |
| 1.7 - Work with FLNRORD to encourage road decommissioning that returns sites to a more natural condition | ERA | (Windsight) | $5,000.00 |
| 1.8 - Integrate with other regional initiatives | CWF | ERA | $25,000.00 |
| 1.9 - Raise funds to rehabilitate barriers (ownership dependent) | CWF | $200,000.00 | |
| 1.10 - Knowledge Gap: Assess barriers by applying the provincial fish passage framework | CWF | $84,890.00 | |
| 1.11 - Knowledge Gap: Identify key barriers for hybridization prevention below Elko Dam | CWF | $11,000.00 | |
| 1.12 - Knowledge Gap: Identify and map owners of priority barriers | ERA | CWF | $1,500.00 |
| 1.13 - Knowledge Gap: Prioritize barriers for the Upper Fording and Grave-Harmon populations | CWF | Completed | |
| 1.14 - Knowledge Gap: Continue updating the barrier prioritization model | CWF | $50,000 | |
| 1.15 - Knowledge Gap: Desktop mapping of lateral habitat and barriers; define lateral connectivity goals | ERA | CWF | $20,000.00 |
| 1.16 - Knowledge gap: Ground truth lateral habitat and barriers | CWF, ERA | $65,000 | |
| 1.17 - Knowledge gap: Monitor temperature and flows; assess effectiveness of barrier rehabilitation projects | ERA | CWF | $50,000 |
| Strategy 2: Barrier Prevention | $250,000.00 | ||
| 2.1 - Engage with land managers to share and implement best practices on stream crossings and fish passage | ERA | CWF | $100,000.00 |
| 2.2 - Support and engage with First Nations guardians programs where appropriate | CWF, KNC? | $140,000.00 | |
| 2.3 - Engage with ATV clubs/recreation groups to share and implement best practices on stream crossings and fish passage | |||
| Total: | $17,024,140.00 | ||
| Fundraising total: | $9,024,140 | ||
| Proponent/government contribution total: | $8,000,000 |
Annual Progress Report
CWF continues to work with program partners to identify and address priority barriers in the Elk River watershed. CWF worked with BC Parks to replace a barrier culvert on a tributary to Lizard Creek with an clearspan bridge in Mount Fernie Park in 2023 and is developing designs for a second replacement in the park on Stove Creek, with the intent of replacing that crossing with a geotextile reinforced arch culvert in 2025. The BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure is advancing plans for the Hartley Creek crossing, with work currently going through the regulatory approvals process. Teck Coal is actively advancing work to remove the Harmer dam, and a multiplate crossing on the FRO Coal Haul road is anticipated in the near future. CWF is also working with program partners to continue to complete barrier assessments in the watershed during summer/fall 2024 and has begun to investigate ways to improve the Westslope Cutthroat Trout habitat model that is currently being used to assist in identify potential candidate sites for assessment.
Operational Plan
The operational plan represents a preliminary exercise undertaken by the planning team to identify the potential leads, potential participants, and estimated cost for the implementation of each action in the Elk River watershed. Table 8 summarizes individuals, groups, or organizations that the planning team felt could lead or participate in the implementation of the plan and should be interpreted as the first step in on-going planning and engagement to develop more detailed plan for entries into this table. The individuals, groups, and organizations listed under the “Lead(s)” or “Potential Participants” columns are those that provisionally expressed interest in participating in one of those roles or were suggested by the planning team for further engagement (denoted in parentheses), for those that are not members of the planning team. The leads, participants, and estimated costs in the operational plan are not binding nor an official commitment of resources, but rather provide a roadmap for future coordination and engagement to work towards implementation of the WCRP.