MIRROR POND SEDIMENTATION

Figure Source: Maxdepth Aquatics, Inc. June 2005.

BEND PUBLIC WORKS STAFF WORKING PAPER PREPARED FOR THE BEND CITY COUNCIL

April 17, 2006

REVISED DRAFT Mirror Pond Sedimentation City of Bend Public Works Department

CREDITS

City of Bend Public Works Department

Mr. Ken Fuller, Public Works Director Mr. Mike Miller, Assistant Public Works Director Mr. Tom Hickman, Water Department Supervisor Mr. Michael Magee, Engineering Manager Mr. Oliver Fick, Management Analyst Ms. Wendy Edde, Conservation Specialist

City of Bend Public Works Department 575 NE 15th Street Bend, OR 97701 (541) 317-3000 www.ci.bend.or.us

Page i REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

INTRODUCTION

Mirror Pond is an icon of Bend; to the majority of our citizens it contributes identity, tranquility, and aesthetic beauty.1 An identifying feature of the City of Bend since the early 1900s, Mirror Pond is created by the PacificCorp hydroelectric dam that is located just below Newport Avenue Bridge (see Figure 1). The Pond extends upstream from the dam to the Galveston Bridge. Casual observers understand that the Pond is filling in with sediment at an unnaturally rapid rate. Large swaths of the Pond are less than 1.75 feet deep during June flows (see Figure 1). If sedimentation continues unchecked, eventually broad mudflats will characterize portions of the Pond in late summer and fall, raising odor and aesthetic issues for the community.2

Sedimentation first became a major problem in Mirror Pond in the late 1970s and early 1980s. In 1984 the City dredged the Pond. At that time, the project engineer predicted that unless changes were made in the management of upstream flow, the Pond would again require dredging in about 20 years.3 Pond sedimentation was not a problem prior to then due to sawmill pond operations that included nearly continual dredging above the Mill Pond Dam at Colorado Avenue. When the mills stopped floating logs on the mill pond, the dredging stopped. That pond area has since been partially filled in and the river there, adjacent to the Les Schwab Amphitheater, has developed a channel, creating higher stream velocity in that reach. Due to the higher stream velocity, the sediment that used to drop there now continues down to Mirror Pond (see Figure 1).4

Newport Street HarmonHarmon Bridge ParkPark Drake Park Drake Park

Colorado Street Bridge Figure 1. Mirror Pond Bathymetry

Note: This chart shows the pattern of sediment deposition into Mirror Pond; the brown color is less than 1.75 ft. deep.

Figure 1. Mirror Pond Bathymetry

1 Bend Riverway Project, May 1999; Parametrix, September 2005; Miller, 2005; Miller 2004; Bend Metro Park & Recreation District, 2005. 2 Miller, 2004. 3 Winzler and Kelly et. al., August 1981. 4 MaxDepth Aquatics, June 2005.

Page 1 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

Median Flows Below Wickiup for 30 year base-period

1800

1600

1400

1200

1000

800

Discharge (cfs) 600

400

200

0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Month

Natural Flow Below Wickiup Regulated Flow Below Wickiup

Source: Water Resources Department as quoted in Upper Deschutes Watershed Council and City of Bend presentation to the Bend City Council, September 2004. Figure 2. Change in Seasonal Flows Below Wickiup

The Bend City Council has directed formation of a community Task Force to examine options and alternatives for the future of Mirror Pond. The purpose of this briefing is as follows: • to provide an overview of the causes of this sedimentation; • to identify issues associated with the problem; and • to propose a community-based process for developing a solution to the problem.

UNDERLYING CAUSES OF SEDIMENTATION

The sedimentation of Mirror Pond is the most visual and obvious adverse effect arising from the operation of the federally owned Deschutes Project, which stores and delivers irrigation water from the mountain reservoirs to 98,000 acres within the North Unit Irrigation District, Irrigation District and Crook County Improvement District No.1. The Project’s dominant feature is , which is managed by the Bureau of Reclamation to provide irrigation water with grain, hay, pasture, mint, potatoes, and seeds being the principal crops. It has been postulated that management and use of the river upstream of Bend substantially increases sediment loads above those that would occur naturally.5

5 Garvin, William F., 1977; UDWC, 2004; UDWC, 2005; Winzler and Kelly et. al, 1981.

Page 2 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

There are a number of factors which, taken together, result in a significant, unnatural rate of upstream erosion, and downstream sediment deposition into Mirror Pond and the Bend urban area. Most importantly, experts agree that the zone in which most of this erosion occurs is the riverbanks between the dam itself and the Bend city limits. In general, our current understanding is that the following elements contribute to the problem:

• Releases from Wickiup Reservoir drop dramatically (from 1, 700 cfs to 30 cfs) in the fall and winter, exposing the downstream banks to weathering (see Figure 2). • Freeze/thaw periods cause sloughing of the saturated soil zone into the river. • Water is released at a higher-than-natural rate throughout the spring and summer to provide water for irrigation (see Figure 2). With higher peak flows, limited ramping periods, and numerous flow changes in the spring and summer, the net effect is that the rising and falling water level causes an increased rate of erosion. • The streambank parent material is rich in highly erodable materials such as pumice. • Fluctuating water levels tend to prevent vegetation from establishing, nature’s defense against erosion. • The demand for irrigation water is affected by the requirement to move water across many miles of leaky canals, constructed across a fractured lava bed plain. Depending on the irrigation district, roughly one-half of the water entering the canals at Bend reaches the destination farms.67

When the Deschutes River enters the Bend city limits, a number of other factors conspire against a healthy, sustainable river system:

• Several historical impoundments cause a wider, shallower river channel, increasing the water surface area, slowing the flow, and decreasing the available shade from a streambank canopy. The main impoundments within Bend are (starting from upstream down): Colorado Dam, Newport Dam (Pacific Power), Portland Bridge/Tumalo Dam, and North Dam. None of these are owned or operated by the City. Sediment accumulates where flow is slowed. • Reduced shading and water depth generates higher water temperature, promoting weeds and algae. • The resulting increases in algal and aquatic plant growth may be contributing to water quality concerns for pH and dissolved oxygen.8 • With sedimentation, as the rising mud flats and weeds begin to daylight, odors increase. The weeds shade out plant life below, resulting in a die-off cycle. As large amounts of vegetation die, the decomposition process uses up available oxygen resulting in fish kills, other aquatic effects and odor problems.

6 USGS, 2001. 7 Upper Deschutes Local Advisory Committee et. al., March 2003. 8 Upper Deschutes Watershed Council (UDWC), October 2005.

Page 3 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

In the 1970’s, recreational powerboat use in upstream locations was found to stir up bottom sediments and cause bank erosion.9 However, since this study a no wake 5 mph speed limit has been placed on boats between Wickiup Dam and the Deschutes National Forest Boundary to help alleviate erosion from boat use. Personal watercraft are prohibited in the upper segment of the Deschutes, and motor boats are prohibited between the Deschutes National Forest Boundary and Jefferson County line, including Mirror Pond in Bend.10

EMERGENCE OF WETLANDS AND RATE OF SEDIMENTATION

The emergence of wetlands could increase the cost of the project alternatives due to the need to mitigate loss to wetlands per the federal regulations (Clean Water Act Section 404). According to EPA regulations (40 CFR 230.3(t)), wetlands are:

those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas.11

Therefore, developing and acting on a preferred alternative prior to the emergence of large wetlands would be cost-beneficial.

The timing of the emergence of wetlands is dependent on the rate of sedimentation and the level of water in the Pond. Modeling to determine sedimentation rates for Mirror Pond has not been conducted. Basic models just upstream at Farewell Bend Park where proactive efforts are being made to establish wetlands, show a sedimentation rate there of about 1 cm per year.12 (For comparison, a USGS study of the rates and patterns of net sedimentation in backwaters of three pools in the Upper Mississippi River showed mean rates over a five year period of 0.04, 0.27, and 0.52 cm/yr respectively.13 ) The river level at the mudflats at Farewell Bend Park, mentioned above, is shallower than at Mirror Pond and yet it is expected to take several more years for wetlands to emerge there.14 Furthermore, sedimentation rates may slow as the water gets shallower due to reduced amount of water flowing over the shallow areas. Sedimentation over time is not a linear relationship.

In performing the bathymetry in June 2005 illustrated in Figure 1, depths of less than 0.53 m (1.7 feet) could not be surveyed by boat. In estimating a mean depth of 0.88 m (2.9 ft) for Mirror Pond, these shallow areas of less than 0.53 m were set to a depth of 30

9 Garvin, William F., 1977. 10 OSMB, 2005. 11 EPA, 2006. 12 Houston, 2006. 13 USGS, 2004. 14 Houston, 2006.

Page 4 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

cm.15 Informal water depth measurements taken by City staff from the bank on March 16, 2006 showed shoreline depths ranging from 3.75 inches to 2 feet at various locations near Harmon Footbridge and along Drake Park. Additional information is needed to determine when significant wetland issues may be expected to arise, and whether they may do so prior to the completion of the process outlined in this paper.

Aquatic Plants. Widespread growth of aquatic plants may be considered an aesthetic eyesore. Although no field identification work has been conducted, aquatic plants such as Duckweed (Lemna sp.) American Elodea (Elodea Canadensis), and/or various algae can be noticed in Mirror Pond, especially during the late summer when the plants typically reach their maximum growth. Aquatic plants are typically controlled either through chemical or mechanical means, though chemical means are not recommended for use in the river for environmental reasons.16 Mechanical means can include shading; draining and allowing bottom sediments to freeze in the winter, thereby damaging or destroying many aquatic plant seeds; dredging; or harvesting. For dredging to have a long term impact on plants, the dredging must be deep enough so that bed level sunlight infiltration will not support photosynthesis and growth of seedlings (generally at about 8 feet of depth).17 Mechanical controls, including dredging, are ineffective for algae control, except to the degree that dredging would have an effect on keeping water temperatures lower. Cooler stream temperatures likely would result in slowed algal growth, depending on the species involved.

JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES

The City of Bend has little authority over the Pond and its restoration. Of course, the City Council and City Government represent the interests of the Bend community, and it is this responsibility that puts the City in the leadership position to determine the future of Mirror Pond. Following is a general summation of the agencies and their jurisdiction over Mirror Pond.

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Bureau). The Deschutes Project consists primarily of Crane Prairie, Wickiup, and Haystack reservoirs, and the system of canals and laterals distributing stored water to Deschutes, Crook, and Jefferson County farms. Deschutes Project facilities are owned by the Federal Government under the stewardship of the Bureau of Reclamation and project partners. The cost of construction, operation and maintenance of Deschutes Project facilities is subject to reimbursement by the sponsoring irrigation districts.

Wickiup Dam was built in 1949 by the Bureau, in partnership with the North Unit Irrigation District, primarily for irrigation. Project purposes also include recreation and the conservation of fish and wildlife. (Construction of was built earlier by a consortium of irrigation districts, led by Central Oregon Irrigation District.)

15 MaxDepth Aquatics, Inc., June 2005. 16 Winzler and Kelly, Clark and Joyce, 1981. 17 Ibid.

Page 5 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

The primary responsible official for Wickiup operations is Ronald Eggers, Area Manager, Lower Columbia Area Office based in Portland; he reports to Bill McDonald, Northwest Regional Director, based in Boise.

The Bureau has a Sedimentation and River Hydraulics Group that is well positioned to provide technical assistance to the Mirror Pond effort.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). The Corps has premier expertise in sediment movement and deposition in river systems, and could be a source of technical assistance to the Mirror Pond effort. The Corps’ authority over Mirror Pond is limited; the Corps has jurisdiction over navigable waterways and their tributaries; and the protection of wetlands through the administration of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Staff’s current understanding is that the Upper Deschutes River in the area of Bend is not considered navigable, though it may be considered a tributary to a navigable river.

The Corps would also be a permitting agency depending on the alternative selected for addressing Mirror Pond issues. For instance, for projects that alter a waterway, a permit from the Corps and the Oregon Division of State Lands is necessary as part of Section 401 Water Quality Certification Compliance. Once the joint permit application is received, the two agencies forward it to the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (see also next) for review to ensure that streams and wetlands are not endangered and that the plans meet water quality laws and standards.18

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In Oregon, the EPA has delegated authority to administer the Federal Clean Water Act, protecting water quality in domestic rivers and streams, to the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). In this role, the Oregon DEQ has placed the Deschutes River through Bend on the list of impaired waterbodies for the following pollutants:19,20

• Chlorophyll a (Deschutes River Mile 168.2 to 189.4, Columbia Street to Harper Bridge, June 1 – September 30): Chlorophyll a is an indicator of algae and other water plants that form the basis of the aquatic food chain. If production is extremely high, then eutrophication can occur, resulting in high daily fluctuations in pH and DO that can negatively affect the numbers and types of organisms available to survive in the reach. The growth rate of these primary producers can be elevated by phosphorous and other artificial nutrients introduced to the waterway. • Dissolved Oxygen (DO) (Deschutes River Mile 168.2 to 189.4, Columbia Street to Harper Bridge, all year; 189.4 to 222.2 (Harper Bridge to Downstream of Wickiup, September 1- June 30): a measure of the concentration of oxygen in the water, DO is needed by fish and aquatic life to survive; elevated levels of algae

18 Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, October 2005. 19 Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 303(d) List, 2003. 20 UDWC, 2005.

Page 6 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

and aquatic plants can lead to the reduction of the availability of this DO, resulting in harm to fish and aquatic habitat. • pH (Deschutes River Mile 126.4 to 162.6, Steelhead Falls to upstream end of , all year; 162.6 to 168.2, Upstream end of Tumalo State Park to Columbia Street, summer): A logarithmic measure of the hydrogen ion concentration of the water, pH levels outside the generally preferred range of 6.5 to 8.5 can affect the toxicity of and availability of pollutants (e.g., ammonia and metals) to aquatic organisms. pH fluctuates depending on the activity of primary producers, and may change as a result of failing septic or sewer systems and urban or agricultural runoff. • Temperature (Deschutes River Mile 126.4 to 168.2, Steelhead Falls to Columbia Street, all year; 168.2 to 189.4(Columbia Street to Harper Bridge, September 1- June 30): Outside of preferred ranges, temperature can directly or indirectly result in mortality for aquatic organisms. Additionally broad, shallow zones in rivers cause warming, leading to increased algae production and the resulting harm to habitat (see Chlorophyll a and DO). • Turbidity (Deschutes River Mile 168.2 to 222.2, Columbia Street to Downstream of Wickiup, Spring/Summer): Turbidity measures the clarity of the water column. Long exposure to high turbidity levels can reduce a fish’s ability to see and obtain food and can clog fish gills affecting the ability to breathe. Turbidity can also reduce the penetration of sunlight into the water column, leading to algal die off. • Sedimentation (Deschutes River Mile 168.2 to 222.2, non season stated): Sediment loading can occur both naturally and as a result of human activities, such as land management, storm water, construction, logging, roadway, flow regulations and agricultural activities. Sediment can smother fish eggs and benthic organisms.

The State will calculate the maximum amount of each of these pollutants that the Deschutes River can receive and still meet water quality standards, as well as an allocation of that amount to each of the pollutant sources. These calculations are known as Total Maximum Daily Loads, or TMDLs.21 Not meeting the load allocations can result in violations of the Federal Clean Water Act and the resulting penalties.

Meanwhile, the City is conducting a 3-year monitoring effort in conjunction with the Upper Deschutes Watershed Council that will provide additional data on the presence of these pollutants on the Deschutes River within the Bend Urban Boundary (Deschutes River Miles 172 and 159).

PacificCorp. PacificCorp owns the hydroelectric dam just below the Newport Bridge. Private dams on navigable rivers are regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) through the granting of a license to operate; however, during the re-

21 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, February 2005.

Page 7 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

licensing process in 1999, FERC determined that the river is not navigable in the vicinity of the dam so no FERC license is required.

The dam generates less than 1 MW of power. The facility does not depend on stored water for its operation, just the hydraulic head. Sedimentation does not affect the operation, but weeds do. At least one of the three turbines has to be shut down in August and September each year due to an accumulation of weeds floating down from Mirror Pond.

MidAmerican Energy Holdings has offered to purchase PacificCorp from British Scottish Power and the acquisition is going through the regulatory approval process with a final decision expected in the spring of 2006.

Should the new owner choose to decommission the dam, it would likely pursue a least cost scenario that eliminates all future liability for the facility. Should that scenario involve removal of the dam, that action would be subject to additional regulations and requirements yet to be determined by staff. Pacific Corp has a recorded easement for, but not title to, lands flooded by the pond.

Homeowners Along the Pond. According to Nicole Navis of the Oregon Department of State Lands, the Deschutes River in the area of Mirror Pond is considered a non- navigable waterway (Navis, 2006; Minoura 2005). On non-navigable waters, the State has no jurisdiction over the waterway and, typically, riparian owners own submerged land to the center of the natural channel.

Others. Other agencies such as United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the United States Forest Service, Oregon Water Resources Department, Oregon Parks and Recreation, Deschutes County, Deschutes County Soil and Water Conservation District, Deschutes County Weed District may potentially have some jurisdictional authority or stakeholder interest in commenting on or participating in the process.

PROCESS

To facilitate the determination of the future of Mirror Pond, the City Council has directed formation of a Task Force to examine alternatives and develop a plan representing the best interests of the Bend community. In preparing a possible process, the staff identified three distinct discussions and efforts that should occur:

• Development of a medium to long term plan establishing, at minimum, a twenty year solution to river conditions through town. This is an effort to answer the question, “What does Bend want to accomplish on the Deschutes River as it flows through town?”

Page 8 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

• Initiation of a regional conversation about addressing excessive sediment in the Upper Deschutes River and the federal role and responsibilities for addressing short and long-term solutions. This is an effort to solve the underlying problem of excessive sediment and assign responsibility for covering the clean-up costs. • If necessary, should the Technical Committee directly determine (or recommend studies that determine) that significant wetlands or weed issues would likely arise prior to the time needed to complete the public process given the timeline of the approved process, such that the issues would preclude consideration by the public of medium to long term alternatives as discussed under the first bullet, short-term temporary actions to protect options and water quality in Mirror Pond.

This overall proposed process is illustrated in Figure 3.

I. LOCAL AREA PROCESS ON THE FUTURE OF MIRROR POND

The City Council has already approved the formation of a community Task Force to examine opportunities and make recommendations regarding the future of the Deschutes River through Bend. The staff proposes a process to garner community input and ideas early in the process when they can be more easily incorporated, and to use the Task Force to tailor the ideas into viable options for the City Council to consider and decide. As part of the proposed process, staff also envisions a Technical Committee (TC) that would assist the Task Force in molding viable options. After a brief discussion on those communities that City staff feel will be most interested in a Mirror Pond sediment solution, the proposed City-led process on the future of Mirror Pond is then described in a phased fashion.

Communities of Interest. Regardless of their particular vision for Mirror Pond, the staff believes that all stakeholders will approach a Mirror Pond discussion in a positive, constructive manner. All of us want to see an environmentally healthy river system that offers the community tranquility, recreation, and rare aesthetic beauty. That’s our starting point: if people disagree in their vision for Mirror Pond – and they very well may – it will be over the fine print, the subservient details to the dominant, obvious value that we place on the river and the pond.

The staff has identified the following communities of interest related to a Mirror Pond solution.

• The Bend Community. The staff and City Council perceive that “doing nothing” to restore Mirror Pond would be unacceptable to the community; the presence of an aesthetic, environmentally healthy river system through town is a core community value.

• Irrigated Agriculture. The extensive system of irrigation canals and ditches was essential to the settlement of Central Oregon. Agricultural water is delivered through unlined canals. As a result of the manner in which the canals are

Page 9 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

constructed together with the local geology (porous soils and fractured lava beds), about half of the river water that is diverted for irrigation does not reach its target due to infiltration23. The canals in Bend have proven popular with residents (i.e., establishment of “Save our Canals” group) for their aesthetic value; and with others over a belief that this leakage is replenishing the aquifer.

As farming continues to decline in the region, the demand for irrigation water will naturally decrease. This introduces several issues and options with regard to regulation of the river for irrigation purposes. Groups such as the Deschutes River Conservancy and the related Deschutes Water Alliance are working on some of these issues.

• Upper Deschutes Watershed Council (UDWC) and related groups. The UDWC is the regional leader in identifying issues and promoting solutions related to the restoration of healthy habitats and river ecological conditions in the Upper Deschutes River. The UDWC works on a collaborative basis with the broad community of river interests. Currently, the UDWC is, in conjunction with the City of Bend, in the midst of preparing a three-year water quality monitoring study within the Bend Urban Growth Boundary. The results of the study will expand knowledge of the presence and impact of pollutants of concern within the river in Bend.24

• Bend Metropolitan Parks and Recreation District (BMPRD) and Recreational Interests: Fishermen, rafters, canoeists, kayakers, etc. BMPRD has identified a river wish list including the following:

o Completion of the river trail through town. o Development of a canoe and paddle trail through town. o A whitewater play area, as is currently advocated by POCO (Paddlers of Central Oregon, the local association of whitewater boaters). This involves installing river features that enable recreational whitewater boating, both for Bend residents and enhancing Bend’s status as a center of diverse outdoor recreation. o Water passage and/or portage routes across the Colorado Street and Pacific Power dam structures.

• Homeowners Along the Pond. While restoration of Mirror Pond involves aesthetic values shared by the community, the residents along the pond also have strong interests in the future of the Pond. These residents may claim ownership rights to the center of the natural river channel (see Jurisdiction section, previous).

23 USGS, 2001. 24 UDWC, October 2005.

Page 10 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

I. Local Process on the Future of II. Regional Mirror Pond Discussion About Process to Address the Reducing Sediment in Symptom of Sedimentation in Mirror Pond the Deschutes River Process to Address the Root Cause of Sedimentation

Bend City Council City Council Requests Bureau to examine underlying causes of sediment and Hold 6 Public Technical Committee: address. Meetings/Workshops; Task 1—Determine Immediacy of Local Issues Conduct Survey Bureau of Reclamation Stakeholder groups develop ideas or full alternatives for Bend City Council consideration by Task Decision Force. On Need for Short Term Action

Basinwide Mirror Pond Technical Committee: Stakeholders Community Task Task 2—Provide Technical Input to Force Task Force

Prepare and provide recommended action. Bend City Council Decision Basinwide Sediment Transfer: Local Long-Term Mirror Pond: Solution and Symptomatic Responsibility Solution Assignment

Figure 3. Proposed Overall Mirror Pond Process.

Page 11 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

PHASE 1: APPOINT A TECHNICAL COMMITTEE (TC) AND DETERMINE IF SHORT-TERM ACTION IS NEEDED

In the first phase, the City would create a committee of technical experts (TC) to determine when significant wetland issues may be expected to arise. They would recommend any additional studies needed to make such a determination, and examine the necessity of short term stop-gap measures as part of Task 1. As part of Task 2 the TC will assist the Task Force with understanding the necessary technical issues and implications of the options that they would be considering. For example, the Task Force would want to know the cost, science, and practicalities of various alternatives/features that are proposed. The TC’s job would be to help assess those.

TC Task 1. The first task of the TC would be to determine the scientific pros and cons as to whether short term measures (e.g., limited sediment removal or weed control) are necessary to allow options to remain open while the City engages in the public input process. The City is considering a long-term solution to the problem of sediment deposition in Mirror Pond. However, it is estimated that it will take 1 year or more to come up with a solution and several additional years to implement it. In the mean time, it is not clear how soon the sedimentation will result in vegetation or wetlands, and, depending on this timing, whether some sediment removal or vegetation control may be necessary to restore Mirror Pond to a minimally acceptable condition to allow all options to remain available for consideration by the Task Force. The TC will also provide input on whether the Pond could increasingly present odor and aesthetic problems as a result should no action be taken.

The two sediment-related problems that the TC would first examine are to estimate when the increasing islands of sediment may eventually become defined wetlands, and when the growth of aquatic weeds in the shallowest, slowest moving water may be expected to present odor, aesthetic, and water quality problems. The TC would also provide input as to regulatory requirements protecting wetlands and wildlife habitat.25 Based on the TCs technical input, City policy makers will make a recommendation to the Council as to how to proceed in the near term.

The drawback to conducting immediate action is the threat of losing momentum for solving the underlying problems causing excessive sediment in Mirror Pond. Should implementation of a short term action occur prior to formation of the Task Force (see Phase II next), the action could remove impetus for conducting the proposed process as outlined above. One result could be a de facto short term solution, rather than action, and

25 Definition of Wetlands. According to EPA regulations (40 CFR 230.3(t)), wetlands are: Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas.

Page 12 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

could cause political fallout if the public felt that the City was acting without hearing and addressing the public’s concerns or interests.

Based on the results of discussions with the regulatory agencies involved and the TC, should staff determine that immediate steps are necessary to maintain options, then staff would propose a short term, stopgap measure to prevent further deterioration of Mirror Pond to the Council for consideration. Upon Council approval the staff would pursue permitting, and the resolution of issues, for the plan. In addition to the actual work of planning and permitting, staff efforts would include:

• Management of the project to eliminate adverse effects to the irrigation districts; • Coordination (and possible reimbursement for lost power revenue) with PacifiCorp; and • Coordination with Mirror Pond residents and other stakeholders on their concerns.

The TC would also provide input to the Task Force (see TC Task 2 in the Phase II section, next, for a detailed description). In all five to six meetings over a twelve to eighteen month period are estimated for the TC, not including the optional community workshops. Staff propose the following individuals, listed in Table 1, representing key elements be considered to serve as TC members. These individuals have expressed a willingness to participate.

Table 1. Proposed Technical Committee Members Name Affiliation Expertise Herb Blank Private Consultant Hydrologist; Civil Engineer Jim Clinton City Councilmember, City of Bend Facilitator; Physics Susan Cunningham Vigil-Agrimis, Inc. Wetlands, Water Quality; Fisheries Biologist J. Ned Dempsey President & CEO, Civil and Environmental Engineer Century West Engineering Corporation Joe Eilers MaxDepth Aquatics Hydrogeologist Tom Hickman Water Utility Manager, City of Bend Engineer Ryan Houston Executive Director, Watershed Management, Water Upper Deschutes Watershed Council Quality David Howe Battalion Chief, Fire Department, Public Safety City of Bend Steve Johnson Manager, Central Oregon Irrigation Irrigation District Brad Kerr Spring Creek Aquatic Concepts Habitat Construction, Fisheries Bonnie Lamb Oregon Department of Environmental Water Quality/ Regulatory Permitting Quality Steve Marx District Fish Biologist, Threatened/Endangered Species; Upper Deschutes Watershed, Habitat; Regulatory Permitting Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Nicole Navis Division of State Lands Ownership; Regulatory Permitting Mel Oberst Community Development Director, Growth, Livability, City of Bend Economic Impacts Roger Raeburn Pacific Power Hydroelectric Dam Bruce Ronning Director of Planning and Development, Recreation Bend Metro Park and Rec. District

Page 13 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

Name Affiliation Expertise Karen Swirsky David Evans & Associates Water Resource/ Rehabilitation Planner Louis Wasniewski Deschutes National Forest Hydrologist Fluvial hydrologist/USFS Wendy Edde Water Conservation Specialist, Process Manager/Support Staff City of Bend

In addition, staff suggests securing a commitment from the Bureau of Reclamation to provide support upon request. Input from other regulatory agencies may be gathered by City staff as necessary.

PHASE II: OBTAIN COMMUNITY INPUT / DEVELOP INITIAL ALTERNATIVES

In an effort to be respectful of the time and energy of the Task Force, we propose the development of Mirror Pond alternatives proposed by broad community interests. In an effort to identify ideas, we propose that the City Council invite community groups to propose any of the following:

• Identify options for managing Mirror Pond; • Describe specific elements or features that should be considered in the final restoration and management plan for Mirror Pond.

In addition, staff proposes that the City ask the following coalitions of interests to work together on a single conceptual presentation of goals. To achieve this, staff proposes that the City Manager, interested councilors, and Public Works staff would meet with each of these coalitions separately when the request is made. These meetings would include a short 10 minute presentation providing an overview of the problem and the input that we are seeking, and an extended (45 min to 1 hour) brainstorming discussion to gather their ideas, interests, and concerns. At the end of the meeting, staff would invite the group to work together as a community of interest or provide a separate submission of their goals and ideas for Mirror Pond, and staff would describe the overall process to the meeting attendees. Attendees would be given one month to submit their proposed goals, ideas and initial alternatives to the Task Force for Task Force consideration. Each of the groups would be encouraged to work together as one community of interest, but separate submissions would also be accepted. During the month period, the communities of interest could request input from or to meet with city staff and TC members to assist them in developing their submission(s).

These meetings would set the tone for the entire process and would allow the City Manager to introduce himself on a substantive issue to different segments of the community, while illustrating that the City is including varied interests in a meaningful discussion about the future of the pond and river. Five potential communities of interest are noted below.

Page 14 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

• The Bend Metro Parks and Recreation District (BMPRD), Paddlers of Central Oregon, and (the Bend River Trail group), under the leadership of BMPRD; • The Upper Deschutes Watershed Council • The community of interests represented through the Central Oregon Environmental Center; • The Bend Chamber of Commerce • Bend Neighborhood Associations.

Individuals who believe they are not represented in the shadow of these organizations shall be invited to a workshop with city staff to provide their suggestions for elements and alternatives for consideration by the Task Force. For those unable to attend a workshop, an online survey via the Bend’s website and/or written comments could also be accepted.

Based on these meetings, City staff would begin to create a series of alternatives from which the Task Force could begin evaluating and refining. On a parallel path, based on direction from the City Council, City staff would also create a list of constraints (financial, environmental, etc.) that would either need to be addressed or adhered to in the final development and evaluation of the alternatives.

PHASE III: APPOINT THE COMMUNITY TASK FORCE TO REFINE ALTERNATIVES, WITH TECHNICAL INPUT FROM THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE

The mission of the Mirror Pond Community Task Force (Task Force) is to make a recommendation to the Bend City Council regarding the best interests of the Bend Community in Mirror Pond; in short, to answer the question, “What does Bend want the Deschutes River through town to look like?”

A representative Task Force of not more than 12 members is recommended. Chairs may be selected by the City Council. The Task Force should be truly representative of the community both in terms of interests and socio-economic status. City staff may recommend high functioning members from the initial meetings/workshop to serve on the Task Force. Representatives should include the following communities:

• Agriculture • Arts • Downtown business • Development • Environmental—Water/Habitat Quality • General Public • Homeowners along Pond • Recreational • General Business

Page 15 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

The Task Force should be appointed by the City Council upon completion of the initial meetings. Ideally, the Task Force would be co-chaired by two individuals who have a track record of working well together, and who each represent the two sides of Bend (politically, geographically, etc.)

With City staff coordinating and facilitating, the Task Force would meet to review and tailor the initial input and alternatives into a list of feasible alternatives. At the first meeting, communities of interest may present their proposed goals and alternatives to the Task Force. The Task Force would be able to consult with the TC via joint meetings to address technical information needs (see TC Task 2, next). An estimated five to six number of two-hour Task Force meetings would be held over a period of twelve to eighteen months. Additionally, the Task Force should have a liaison member attend and report on the regional long-term effort discussed in Section II, next.

TC Task 2. The second task of the Technical Committee would be to provide technical input to the Task Force on the alternatives that the Task Force develop. TC members would be invited to attend the community workshops (optional). One TC meeting may be set per request of community groups to ask questions of TC members in preparing their initial proposals. TC members would also attend a joint meeting with the Task Force wherein community members or Task Force members present the initial ideas and proposals. TC members would then meet separately to discuss the technical merits and concerns associated Task Force ideas, and TC input would be provided at joint meeting(s) with the Task Force.

PHASE IV: PRESENT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL DECISION

Upon completion of their primary task, the Task Force would bring their recommendations to the Council for review and consideration. Recommendations should address potential suggestions for funding the implementation of the alternative. Upon appropriate follow-up, the City Council would make a decision regarding the future appearance of Mirror Pond.

PHASE V: IMPLEMENT COUNCIL DECISION

With direction from Council, City staff would work to implement the mid- to long-term alternative selected by the Council.

II. A REGIONAL DISCUSSION ABOUT REDUCING SEDIMENT IN THE DESCHUTES RIVER

With regard to the Deschutes River, the City of Bend has consistently sought a constructive relationship with the other communities, agricultural interests, and other users of the river as it passes through Central Oregon.

Page 16 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

The need to examine practical solutions to the underlying causes of sedimentation to Mirror Pond rather than continually addressing just the immediate symptom (excessive sediment) is apparent. Therefore, the staff recommends that the Council propose a basinwide examination of the problems facing the basin, and solutions that the region might pursue.

Action Proposed. The City Council should direct the staff to meet with basin stakeholders in an effort to design a process of defining the major problems in the Deschutes River, and to develop regionally-supported solutions to those problems. As part of this effort, staff would examine existing related efforts to determine opportunities for linkages to improve sediment reduction. Stakeholders potentially include (but may not be limited to):

• Bureau of Reclamation • Agricultural Interests • Irrigation Districts • Upper Deschutes Watershed Council • Deschutes River Conservancy • United States Forest Service • Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife • United States Fish and Wildlife Service • Division of State Lands • Oregon Department of Environmental Quality • Powerboat Enthusiasts • Interested Task Force Interested Members • Interested TC members

The schedule would allow for parallel efforts with Section II. The exact resource needs and schedule have yet to be determined. Sample letters addressed to the Bureau of Reclamation (Attachment 1), and congressional leaders (Attachment 2) are included at the end of this document.

Additionally, the City will ask for federal appropriations to help fund the process (Attachment 3).

RESOURCE NEEDS

For addressing the local issue, resource needs would consist of staff and City Manager’s time and materials to coordinate and conduct the six meetings/workshop. Additional staff time may be needed upon request by the community groups; and to prepare website information and collect survey responses. Additional staff and/or consultant time would be needed to create and facilitate the TC and Task Force meetings, and to coordinate any additional studies necessary.

Page 17 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

For addressing the regional discussion, City Manager, Council and staff time would be needed to encourage the dialogue, and to push the federal appropriations process.

Implementation costs are dependent on the outcomes of the above processes.

ESTIMATED SCHEDULE

The estimated schedule would take roughly 1 year to develop a plan of action, as illustrated in Figure 5 below, and additional time to implement. Modifications to the schedule may be necessary subject to the amount and timing of additional data collection that may be necessary prior to decisionmaking.

Page 18 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

Figure 5. Estimated Schedule

2006 2007 Step April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. April Segment I. City-Led Local Mirror Pond Solution Phase I: Determine if Short-Term Action Is Needed Convene Technical Committee

TC Meetings (exact dates TBD)

Phase II: Obtain Community Input/ Develop Initial Ideas and Alternatives Convene Initial Stakeholder Meetings & Workshop Obtain Post Meeting Citizen Input

Phase III: Refine Alternatives

Convene Community Task Force

Task Force Creates Recommendations

Phase IV: Present Recommendations to Council for Review and Approval Phase V: Implement Council Decisions TBD

Page 19 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

2006 2007

Step April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. April

Segment II. Basinwide Sediment Transfer Solution Make Request to Bureau of Reclamation Conduct Discussions with Basinwide Stakeholders* Determine Responsibility and Sediment Transfer Solutions* TBD: To be determined. * Note: Schedule is not within City’s control; schedule is rough estimate only.

Page 20 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

REFERENCES CITED

Bend Metro Park & Recreation District, “Drake Park and Mirror Pond,” http://www.bendparksandrec.org/parkdetails.asp?ID=21, 2005.

Bend Riverway Project, The Bend Riverway—A Community Vision, May 15, 1999.

Century Testing Laboratories, Streambank Erosion Inventory on the Deschutes River from Wickiup Dam to Bend, 1978.

Garvin, William F., Deschutes River Sediment Study: Powerboats, Deschutes National Forest, March 1977.

An intensive study conducted by the Deschutes National Forest in 1976 to determine the effects of power boats on the erosion of the river banks. The report states that “Average discharge [flow] on the Deschutes River is 1,400 cfs. Estimating an average normal sediment concentration of 3 mg/L, yearly sediment discharge, discounting the effects of boats, is 2,960 tons. The sediment produced by boats alone during less than 1/3 of the year is estimated to be 28 percent of the total sediment produced. However, sediment produced by boating causes the sediment load of the river to be increased by 39 percent.” The report made several recommendations for managing boat use. A 5 mph motor boat speed limit is now in effect.

Geo-spatial Solutions, “Map2: Irrigation Districts Within Bend UGB”, City of Bend, August 2003.

Houston, Ryan, personal communication with Wendy Edde (City of Bend), March 15, 2006.

MaxDepth Aquatics, Inc., Bathymetry of Mirror Pond from Newport Bridge to Galveston Bridge, June 2005.

Miller, H. Bruce. “River Visions—Looking at the Deschutes and Its Place in Bend.” The Source, Vol. 9, Issue 32, August 11, 2005.

Miller, H. Bruce, “The Big Muddy—Mirror Pond mess is a symptom of a sick river,” the Source, p. 20, September 2-9, 2004.

Minoura, Yoko. “Concern Heightens Over Deschutes Litter—Murky Jurisdiction Complicates Cleanup Efforts,” Bend Bulletin, p. A1; A7, August 22, 2005.

Navis, Nicole, personal communication, February 24, 2006.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Final 2002 303(d) database, http://www.deq.state.or.us/, 2003.

Page 21 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, “DEQ Permit Handbook: Section 401 Certification of Water Quality Compliance,” http://www.deq.state.or.us/pubs/permithandbook/sqsection401.htm, October 2005.

Oregon State Marine Board, Waterbody Regulations A-D, http://www.marinebd.osmb.state.or.us/Laws/RegsA-D.html, 2005.

Parametrix, Bend Central Area Plan Phases I and II, vision, Historic Downtown Core, draft, p. 33, September 2005.

United States Bureau of Reclamation, Deschutes Project, Oregon, http://www.usbr.gov/dataweb/html/deschutes.html, 2006.

United States Environmental Protection Agency, http://www.epagov/owow/tmdl/intro.html, February 16, 2005.

United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Wetlands Definitions,” http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/what/definitions.html, Last updated February 22, 2006.

United States Geological Survey, Ground-Water Hydrology of the Upper Deschutes Basin, Oregon, Water-resources Investigations Report 00-4162, pp.23-26, 2001.

United States Geological Survey, “Rates and Patterns of Net Sedimentation in Backwater of Polls 4, 8, and 13 of the Upper Mississippi River,” James T. Rogala, Pete J. Boma, and Brian R. Gray (Upper Midwest Environmental Science Center), http://www.umesc.usgs.gov/data_library/sedimentation/documents/rates_patterns/page1.h tml, May 25, 2004.

Upper Deschutes Local Advisory Committee, Oregon Department of Agriculture, and Deschutes Soil and Water Conservation District, Upper Deschutes Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plan, p. 24, March 17, 2003.

Upper Deschutes Watershed Council, City of Bend Water Quality Monitoring Report 2004, October 2005.

The 2004 Water Quality Monitoring Report found that all sites tested were well within state criteria for total dissolved solids/turbidity; Escherichia coli (E-coli), chlorophyll-a, and compounds of potential concern (ammonia, nitrates, chloride, copper, lead and zinc.). The report also determined that the Deschutes River and are nitrogen limited systems so that small inputs of nitrogen will cause eutrophication. Phosphorous is naturally high).

Upper Deschutes Watershed Council, “Water Quality in the City of Bend—Mirror Pond Pale Ale or Wetland Wheat?” Ryan Houston presentation to City Water Summit.

Page 22 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

Upper Deschutes Watershed Council and City of Bend, Mirror Pond Sedimentation presentation to City of Bend City Council, September 2004.

U.S. v. State of Oregon, 295 U.S. 1 (1935), U.S. Supreme Court http://www.coid.org/overview.htm

Brief history of Central Oregon Irrigation District.

Winzler and Kelly Consulting Engineers, and Clark and Joyce, Inc. Consulting Engineers, Mirror Pond Rehabilitation Study, City of Bend and Bend Parks and Recreation District, August 1981.

Page 23 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

APPENDIX A

Irrigation Rights and Reservoirs Affecting the Upper Deschutes

Page 24 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

APPENDIX A: Irrigation Rights and Reservoirs Affecting the Upper Deschutes

Central Oregon hosts eight irrigation districts: Arnold, Central Oregon, Lone Pine, North Unit, Ochoco, Squaw Creek, Swalley, and Tumalo Irrigation Districts. The two largest districts, Ochoco and North Unit, serve Crook and Jefferson Counties respectively and were built by the Bureau of Reclamation. The remaining six irrigation districts are in Deschutes County and were built privately and remain privately owned.

The Bureau of Reclamation built or rehabilitated five dams/reservoirs used for storing irrigation water in central Oregon. These dams/reservoirs include: Crane Prairie, Haystack, Prineville, Ochoco, and Wickiup reservoirs. The Bureau conducts operations of the dams/reservoirs by contracting with the irrigation districts holding the right to store water in the reservoir.

Arnold, Central Oregon and Lone Pine Irrigation Districts hold the water right certificates for Crane Prairie Reservoir. The Crane Prairie Reservoir was built around 1922 and rehabilitated by the Bureau in 1940 and has a capacity of 55,300 acre-feet of water.

Wickiup Reservoir was built over ten years (1939-1949) as the storage for North Unit Irrigation District. It has a capacity of 200,000 acre-feet of water.

Haystack Dam and Reservoir, built in 1956-57 by North Unit Irrigation District, as a reregulating reservoir for releases made from Wickiup Reservoir. Haystack has a capacity of 5600 acre-feet of water.

Ochoco Dam, privately built in 1920 and repaired and reconstructed by the Bureau in 1950, has a capacity of 39,000 acre-feet of water. Bowman Dam, which creates the , was built in 1961 and has a capacity of 149,000 acre-feet of water.

Each irrigation district has a priority date for water right (Table 1). Priority dates reflect the concept of first in time and first in right. In other words, the older the water right, the more secure the right.

Six of the eight irrigation districts have water rights to the Deschutes River: Swalley has the oldest with a priority date of 1899. This right means Swalley water allotment must be filled before any other districts receive their water. North Unit Irrigation District has the youngest water rights established in 1913. In general, North Unit is able to draw from live river flows in the spring, thereby saving stored water for use later in the season when the Deschutes River is running lower.

Page 25 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

ATTACHMENT 1

Sample Letter to U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

Page 26 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

Mr. Bill McDonald Northwest Regional Director Bureau of Reclamation Department of the Interior

Mr. Ronald Eggers Area Manager Lower Columbia Area Office Bureau of Reclamation

Dear Mr. McDonald and Mr. Eggers:

The City of Bend is initiating a process for the restoration of Mirror Pond on the Deschutes River. The purpose of this letter is to request Bureau support for a community-led planning process to determine the appropriate measures to restore the pond.

Experts agree that the disproportionate amount of sedimentation in Mirror Pond is caused by the operating regime of the Bureau’s Wickiup Reservoir, a major feature of the Deschutes Project. The flow regime at Wickiup has changed the natural hydrograph of the river below Wickiup reservoir by providing for minimum flows during winter that exposes downstream zones to freeze-thaw action, and for frequent changes in flow rates during the irrigation season. Moreover the fluctuating water levels tend to prevent streamside vegetation, a natural defense against erosion. A side effect of these stream flow variations is increased erosion of the pumice-laden, unvegetated stream banks below the reservoir.

Mirror Pond is an icon of Bend, contributing aesthetic beauty and tranquility to the Bend cityscape. Today, Mirror Pond is immediately threatened by the emergence of broad mudflats, decomposing weeds and algae, and loss of aquatic habitat. The City Council and the community at large understand that active measures are necessary to restore a quality environment in the Deschutes River as it passes through Bend.

When Mirror Pond was last dredged in 1984, it was predicted that without significant changes to the operation of Wickiup Reservoir, the pond would fill up again with sediment in about 20 years. That prediction was accurate. In a reach of river that is not subject to undue natural sediment, our view is that Federal actions have served to silt up the pond; we now ask for Federal assistance to resolve the problem of excessive sediment in Mirror Pond.

We request Bureau of Reclamation assistance in several ways.

First, we request technical assistance in the development of both a short term and long term solution to this problem. The City Council will shortly convene a citizen task force to craft a plan for the restoration of Mirror Pond. While the community will strongly support restoration of the pond, we expect competing visions about how this should

Page 27 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

occur. In that discussion, we may need the Bureau’s expertise in analyzing different scenarios that may be proposed.

Second, we request working together to begin budgeting for the significant expense of implementing the restoration plan. Clearly, there is a Federal responsibility for the problem; we should begin working together to establish this as a funding priority for future Bureau efforts.

We appreciate your consideration of this important issue to the people of Bend. We would appreciate any opportunity to meet with you in the furtherance of this effort.

Sincerely,

(name/title)

Attachments

Page 28 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

ATTACHMENT 2

Sample Letter to Congressional Leaders

Page 29 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

March 24, 2006

The Honorable Greg Walden 1404 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Representative Walden,

As you can see from our letterhead, Mirror Pond serves as an icon to the City of Bend. Unfortunately Mirror Pond is threatened by excessive sedimentation that is impacting both the aesthetics and water quality of our Pond. As you may expect, this excessive sedimentation and the health of Mirror Pond is emerging as an extremely high priority for our citizens and City management.

To address this issue, we are entering a community-based process to determine how best to restore Mirror Pond. However the problem goes beyond our City limits. Whereas we recognize the importance of irrigation to our farmlands, the current flow regime results in excessive sedimentation caused primarily by the management of the federal Deschutes Project, especially with regard to the operation of Wickiup Reservoir and the use of the Deschutes River as an irrigation conduit.

I am attaching our FY 2007 Energy and Water Development Subcommittee Appropriations Bill request sheet, and a background information sheet for your information and use. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss with you our issues in person during a tour of Mirror Pond, should the opportunity arise for you to visit our beautiful City. I would greatly appreciate your attention to and active support for our request.

Sincerely yours,

(name/title)

Page 30 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

ATTACHMENT 3

FY 2007 Energy and Water Development Subcommittee Appropriations Bill Request

Page 31 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc

FY 2007 Energy and Water Development Subcommittee Appropriations Bill REQUEST SHEET

MEMBER: Wyden Priority of

Member Staff Contact: Sarah Bittleman 4-3163 David Blair (541) 330-9142; cell 541-410-6121

Explanation/Justification of Request: The City of Bend seeks financial and technical assistance in addressing excessive sedimentation in Mirror Pond, the icon of the City of Bend. Excessive sedimentation is caused primarily by the operation and management of the federal (Bureau of Reclamation (USBR)) Deschutes Project, especially with regard to the operation of Wickiup Reservoir and the use of the Deschutes River as an irrigation conduit. The current operating regime results in sediment deposition within Mirror Pond, and impacts water quality in that reach of river. Under the current Deschutes Project flow regime, active measures are necessary approximately every 20 years in order to maintain a healthy aesthetic Mirror Pond.

Funds and report language would serve three purposes: • Enable BoR technical assistance to a community based process examining restoration alternatives in Mirror Pond. • Provide financing for implementation of interim measures to protect Mirror Pond. • Conduct analysis of the systemic problems and possible solutions related to the long term restoration and protection of Mirror Pond.

Agency: Bureau of Reclamation Bill Title: Title II Program Account: Water and Related Resources Project/Study Name: Mirror Pond Sedimentation Solution FY 2005 Funding Level: $0.00 FY 2006 Funding Level: $0.00 Amount in President’s FY 2007 Budget: $0.00 Member’s FY 2007 Funding Request: $2,000,000 New Study or Construction Start: April 2006 Authorization: Reclamation Act of 1902, PL 68-292 Report Language: To provide technical assistance to the City of Bend to evaluate alternatives for the long term restoration of Mirror Pond.

Page 32 REVISED DRAFT Last Revised: April 17, 2006 S:\Public Works Public\MIRROR POND\MP Process 062006.doc