|

 

Attached are two documents

I Title Page
Monitoring and Evaluation of Watersheds in the Middle East Region b. Submitting Institution: Inventory and Monitoring Institute, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service c. ID Number: M20-022 d. Investigators: Professor U. N. SAFRIEL*, Director of the Blaustein Institute for Desert Research, Sede Boqer Campus, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel. 84990 Phone 972-7-6596700 e-mail Dr. A. Kharabsheh*, Hydrologist, Department of Water Resources and Environmental Management, Al-Balqa'Applied University, Faculty of Agricultural Technology, Al-Salt, 199117, Jordan. Phone 962-5-3557348 e-mail Dr. A. Ghaleb Mohammad *, Dean of the Faculty of Agriculture, Hebron University, Hebron / West Bank, Palestine, Phone 02 2257654, email Dr. G. Kusek*, Agricultural Engineer, Agricultural Rural Services Directorate, Eastern Anatola Watershed Project, Malatya Koy Hizmetler, L Mudurlu, 4410000 Karakavak, Malatya Turkey. Phone 90-422-2381903 e-mail Dr. C. A. Troendle*, Hydrologist and Project Manager, Management Assistance Corporation of America, 2629 Redwing Road, Creekside Two, Suite 110, Fort Collins, CO 80526 United States Phone 970-295-5730 e-mail e. Administrative Official: Dr. THOMAS W. HOEKSTRA*, Director Inventory and Monitoring Institute U.S.D.A. Forest Service Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Ph 970-295-5710 e-mail f. Amount: $649,150 g. Duration: 5 years h. Collaborating Countries: Israel, Jordan, Palestinian Authority, Turkey, and United State II. Signature Page
Monitoring and Evaluation of Watersheds in the Middle East Region
Signature Page

Principal Investigator(s): The undersigned affirm that this proposal represents their individual and collective
original work, and that they individually and collectively agree to participate in the project as described, if funded.
Name:
Title: _
Signature: _
Name:
Title: _
Signature: _
Authorizing Signature(s): Each of the undersigned affirms that this proposal represents an authorized submission
of the institution that the undersigned represents, that it has been prepared using the appropriate accounting and
other practices of that institution, and that the institution intends to devote the specified staff, facilities, and
financial resources to the project, if funded.
Name: _
Title:
Institution: _
Signature:
Name:
Title: _
Institution: _
Signature:

Monitoring and Evaluation of Watersheds in the Middle East Region
Signature Page
Principal Investigator(s): The undersigned affirm that this proposal represents their individual and collective original work, and that they individually and collectively agree to participate in the project as described, if funded. Name: Title: _ Signature: _ Name: Title: _ Signature: _ Authorizing Signature(s): Each of the undersigned affirms that this proposal represents an authorized submission of the institution that the undersigned represents, that it has been prepared using the appropriate accounting and other practices of that institution, and that the institution intends to devote the specified staff, facilities, and financial resources to the project, if funded. Name: _ Title: Institution: _ Signature: Name: Title: _ Institution: _ Signature: Monitoring and Evaluation of Watersheds in the Middle East Region
Signature Page
Principal Investigator(s): The undersigned affirm that this proposal represents their individual and collective original work, and that they individually and collectively agree to participate in the project as described, if funded. Name: Title: _ Signature: _ Name: Title: _ Signature: _ Authorizing Signature(s): Each of the undersigned affirms that this proposal represents an authorized submission of the institution that the undersigned represents, that it has been prepared using the appropriate accounting and other practices of that institution, and that the institution intends to devote the specified staff, facilities, and financial resources to the project, if funded. Name: _ Title: Institution: _ Signature: Name: Title: _ Institution: _ Signature: Monitoring and Evaluation of Watersheds in the Middle East Region
Signature Page
Principal Investigator(s): The undersigned affirm that this proposal represents their individual and collective original work, and that they individually and collectively agree to participate in the project as described, if funded. Name: Title: _ Signature: _ Name: Title: _ Signature: _ Authorizing Signature(s): Each of the undersigned affirms that this proposal represents an authorized submission of the institution that the undersigned represents, that it has been prepared using the appropriate accounting and other practices of that institution, and that the institution intends to devote the specified staff, facilities, and financial resources to the project, if funded. Name: _ Title: Institution: _ Signature: Name: Title: _ Institution: _ Signature: Monitoring and Evaluation of Watersheds in the Middle East Region
Signature Page
Principal Investigator(s): The undersigned affirm that this proposal represents their individual and collective original work, and that they individually and collectively agree to participate in the project as described, if funded. Name: Title: _ Signature: _ Name: Title: _ Signature: _ Authorizing Signature(s): Each of the undersigned affirms that this proposal represents an authorized submission of the institution that the undersigned represents, that it has been prepared using the appropriate accounting and other practices of that institution, and that the institution intends to devote the specified staff, facilities, and financial resources to the project, if funded. Name: _ Title: Institution: _ Signature: Name: Title: _ Institution: _ Signature: III. Technical Summary
Monitoring and evaluation of the effectiveness of watershed treatments has been a key missing step in nearly all programs to reduce erosion and combat desertification resulting from the loss of vegetation, soil and water. The project technical objectives are: • Implement and evaluate effective watershed management practices to prevent erosion and sedimentation and increase the efficiency of water use in arid and semi-arid pilot watershed programs, while maintaining sustainable productivity. • Evaluate physical and biological measurements appropriate for evaluation of an operational watershed management involving forest and grassland management practices in arid and semi-arid regions. • Demonstrate effective watershed practices of forest and grassland management using pilot watershed programs. IV. Relevance to Regional Development
A. BACKGROUND Until the middle ages, people believed that water flowing from springs and in rivers simply came from the center of the earth. It wasn't until the late seventeenth century that Edmund Halley compared the flow from rivers draining into the Mediterranean Sea with the amount of precipitation falling on their watersheds and found them to be similar. This represented one of the first documentations that precipitation is the source of flow for both springs and rivers. (Biswas, 1970). Since that time, much has been learned about the disposition of precipitation and it's influence on flow. Precipitation is subject to interception and direct evaporation back to the atmosphere, it can infiltrate into the soil to be used by the vegetation or percolate to become part of the streamflow, springflow, or groundwater regime, or it can flow over the surface of the soil, often causing erosion, and become stormflow. The balance of these components can be quite sensitive, particularly in arid and semi-arid environments and easily disrupted by poor land use practices. Efficient management of the available water resources, beginning with precipitation and ending with high quality water in either spring or streamflow is critical to the sustainability and survival of both humans and natural resources. Vegetation has been demonstrated to be a key, if not the dominant, factor in detaining precipitation on-site, allowing greater infiltration, promoting efficient water use while maintaining soil stability and reducing erosion; all critical to long term sustainability of wildland resources especially in arid environments. Sound forest and grassland management focuses on maintaining the role vegetation plays in site preservation while allowing optimal utilization of the vegetative production for forage, fuel wood, timber, etc. Wise management insures resource sustainability which in turn assists communities and countries in their sustainable economic development. Typically, the recommended management practices conserve soil, by minimizing erosion, and preserve or increase soil productivity, while minimizing off-site sedimentation. Further, by enhancing infiltration and reducing surface run-off, water is more efficiently used on site to either increase vegetation productivity, maintain stream and spring flow, or recharge ground water. Soil erosion control and the related management of water are key ecosystem management concerns universally and most critical in semi-arid and arid regions. Rainfall events are often rare, but intense, in these environments and storm run-off can occur causing severe erosion and sedimentation problems. Forest and grassland management at the watershed level, supplemented with structural and other cultural treatments, is frequently implemented to mitigate the erosion and sedimentation problems; unfortunately these activities are rarely monitored for appropriateness and effectiveness. There are many site specific or regional structural and vegetation management practices that have been designed to address soil and water conservation issues but often times these practices have not been sufficiently evaluated in use to document either whether the response to treatment can actually be monitored and, if monitored or detected, whether effectiveness of the practice can be demonstrated and serve as a model for application elsewhere. Thus a vital linkage for converting our structure and vegetation management knowledge to more widespread application for soil and water conservation is dependent upon the existence of adequate, practical, and convincing evaluation, or response, data following implementation of these practices or treatments. This need for effectiveness monitoring was recognized by the UN Global Environmental Facility - STAP Workshop on Land Degradation (April 30-May 1, 1997, Agenda Item 9): ".monitoring of on-going efforts based on well-defined indicators must be improved." A similar call for improved monitoring and evaluation was made by the watershed management session of the World Forestry Congress in 1997. (Proceedings of the XI World Forestry Congress, 13-22 October 1997, Volume 7, Session 9.) Sound watershed management is a fundamental need in both the arid and semi-arid Middle East and western United States. Vegetation management is the primary component for effective soil and water conservation. The conservation of soil and water resources must be a part of any strategic plan for sustainable economic development. The parties in this proposal have already had experience in working together on the problems discussed. Further collaboration between Israel, Jordan, Palestine, in partnership with Turkey and the United States on these issues, so vital to the Middle East, would be a positive force in the Peace Process. Preliminary work plans have been developed and are included for the 5 proposed study sites. The work plan and the Palestinian study site have been revised in this draft. The Palestinians will continue to work closely with Israel and the International Study Team. In addition, International Study Team will work with Local Study Teams to develop the monitoring plan and will evaluate the monitoring tools. The scientific benefit will be development of guidelines for monitoring protocols for watershed projects. B. INNOVATIVE ASPECTS There already exists a solid body of science documenting the effectiveness of sound vegetation and land treatment management in soil and water conservation. In the United States there is a network of experimental watersheds and study sites that have been used to develop and then test these practices at the point, plot, and watershed scale. Unfortunately, a similar history of research on experimental sites is not as available in the Middle East. The opportunity exists to build on what has been learned elsewhere as the basis for addressing current Middle East soil and water conservation problems. The issue at hand is that a generally accepted suite of criteria and indicators of sustainability have to be developed. Once developed, they would provide the best way to measure or estimate the impact or effectiveness of management practices used in operational watershed management without having to repeat the detailed and costly studies traditionally associated with research watersheds. The objective is to build on what is understood locally and internationally and select those practices demonstrated to be most effective and having the greatest potential for extrapolation to Middle Eastern situations. Having experts from each country collaborate on the identification and selection of the best treatments and best monitoring approaches to address common problems will help insure that state of the art practices and monitoring techniques will be used and that all participants will function on a common plane. Furthermore there are new tools useful in the measurement and analysis of effectiveness such as remote sensing, geographic information systems, and global positioning technology that have great potential to assist monitoring watershed vegetation management actions. Additionally, obtaining key indicator data quickly and efficiently, combined with the basic understanding of watershed processes that already exists from the research watersheds will extend the state of the art in managing arid land watersheds dramatically. C. STRENGTH OF ARAB-ISRAELI COOPERATION Arab-Israel cooperation is insured by implementing the project via an International Study Team that will have oversight in planning and then evaluation of the monitoring protocols in each of the countries. The international team will be comprised of at least two people from each of the 5 countries. In concert, the team will have the appropriate expertise to address issues in hydrology, erosion and sedimentation, and vegetation dynamics. It is not expected that each country will have representatives in each discipline area on the International Team. The goal is to share resources so the key is to have a well-rounded study team capable of addressing the full spectrum of issues in all 5 countries. In addition to the International Study Team (IST), each country will have its own Local Study Team (LST) that has responsibility for implementation, and monitoring of the management practices or treatments within their respective country. The Local Study Team will work in concert with the International Study Team through joint participation. The role and responsibility of the two groups, in the overall project is shown in the following table. Local Study Team International Study Team Problem identification Treatment design Treatment evaluation Monitoring evaluation When implemented, the proposed project will ensure cooperation and collaboration between the participants over a wide spectrum of activities that range from designing mitigation treatments, or management strategies, to monitoring and evaluating response. It is the latter area, monitoring and evaluation of response, that is the focus of the collaboration effort. It is expected that the fundamental project design and implementation will be done by the local or "in country" implementation team. The rational is that the problem, and proposed solutions, may be specific to each individual country. The International Study Team will have oversight in refining and validating the treatment selection and experimental layout or design of these treatments within each of the 5 countries. The Local Study Teams for Jordan, Palestine and Israel will participate with the International Study Team on all visits to study sites in eacho of the 3 countries, thereby maximizing the Arab-Israeli collaboration. The focal point for collaboration, as intended in this proposal, begins with the identification and design of the monitoring system. The International Study Team, in concert with the local implementation team, will review the monitoring plan and validate what is proposed by the implementation or as an alternative propose revisions if necessary and appropriate. The intent is to allow each country to define the watershed problems and initially identify the most appropriate intervention or mitigation practice as well as identify the appropriate metric to monitor response and design the monitoring protocol/tools. The first opportunity for true international collaboration resides in the review process, by the International Study Team, of the monitoring plan for each project. If true collaboration is to be achieved, the local study team will accept and implement suggestions from the International Study Team. However, the primary objective of the MERC proposal, and the area of greatest collaboration between participating countries, is the process of collectively assessing or evaluating the effectiveness, appropriateness, and cost efficiency of the monitoring protocols or tools used by the individual countries. The International Study Team, composed of two individuals from each country, will share the responsibility of evaluating the monitoring in each of the 5 project areas. Weaknesses that exist in monitoring design will be reflected in the findings and subsequent judgement of the International Study Team. The opportunity for scientific collaboration among all participants is guaranteed by the design of this research proposal. The degree to which true collaboration, among all parties, actually occurs will be documented as the study is implemented and progresses. Part of the strategy of the project is to involve graduate research assistants on the in-country activities thereby providing both linkages to academic institutions and to provide training of future scientists. (The exact number will depend on the deliberations of the task groups but it is anticipated that there would be at least 10 students involved throughout the course of the project). A major component of the Palestinian project will be to collaborate with Israel as the two members of the Local Study Team, from Palestine, will actually enroll at Ben-Gurion University in a graduate program, with the field study being the Palestinian project. Although the most intense interaction would occur among the persons on the International Study Team, it is planned that whenever the International Team is working in a particular country, additional persons within that country would be involved. This would result in involvement of at least 50 additional professionals from all 5 countries. The USAID field staff will also be encouraged to participate in all in-country visits. D. RELEVANCE TO THE MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS The importance of preventing natural resource loss and rehabilitating eroded areas was recognized as a significant need by the Middle East Peace Process Multilateral Working Group on Environment. The World Bank was instrumental in coordinating a regional effort for the control of desertification: the Initiative for Collaboration to Control Natural Resource Degradation (Desertification) of Arid Lands in the Middle East. This initiative started in 1995 and is a collection projects in specific sites and in specific areas of high priority to each participant (Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Palestinian Authority, and Tunisia). Each specific national project has a related regional component with regional cooperators and experts focusing on the area in question: germplasm for arid lands, economic forestry and orchards, rangeland management, and marginal waters and saline soils. Like the MERC project, a major objective of the initiative is to improve Arab-Israeli relations. While this initiative has done much in its initial phase to address site-specific problems and support workshops, exchange of consultants and exchange research students. Little or no monitoring of the treatment impacts has been conducted. This proposed project on watershed treatment monitoring will cooperate with the World Bank project by helping - where possible - to monitor the treatment efforts implemented in the Desertification Initiative, and by providing a model for monitoring the impacts of this and other treatments in arid and semiarid areas. A second project, also focusing on strengthening the peace process in the Middle East is the Sandia project (LTER effort) involving the United States, Palestine and Israel. The project theme is the ecology of rangelands in semi-arid regions and involves sophisticated automated monitoring of environmental factors. No specific hypothesis is being tested but the Palestinian and Israeli sites are the same as those used in the MERC proposal. The data acquired through the Sandia project will compliment data collected in the MERC study. A third project, Danida, also focuses on improving Middle East cooperation. Involving Egypt, Israel and Palestine, the project addresses dryland-farming issues associated with agriculture, pastoralism and forestry. Emphasis is on training and applied research. The MERC proposal represents the fourth project, aimed at fostering Arab-Israeli collaboration. There is a certain degree of overlap in the four projects with respect to participating institutions and sectors (forestry, agriculture, pastoralism, waste management); however, the objectives of each effort differ. The MERC proposal focuses on monitoring response and evaluating monitoring protocols. The management practices being implemented may be appropriate to several of the programs. E. SUSTAINABILITY Just as there have been interactions among several of the participants before this project, it is anticipated that these exchanges would continue and be greatly enhanced as a result of the project. The main agent for sustainability however, will be through the establishment of the watershed demonstration projects. Experience in the U.S. has shown that effectively managed watershed projects serve as a magnet and draw other researches to them because of their established database and facilities. As the infrastructure associated with these sites grows, so does their attractiveness to other managers and scientists for a broader suite of activity. These study watersheds, along with the evaluative data, will serve as vital demonstration areas far into the future. Long-term activity, well beyond the life of the project proposed here, is anticipated because of the research activities built into the ongoing country programs that are not dependent on funding from the MERC portion of this project. Future potential is further enhanced by the involvement of universities during the initial start up phases. University involvement, through successive graduate programs is likely to grow. V. Table of Contents
Title Page
Signature Pages
Technical
Relevance
Regional
Development
Background
Innovative
Strength
Cooperation
D. Relevance to Middle East Peace Process
Contents 11
VI. Technical Analysis
Objectives
Background
Rationale
Technical
Overview
2. Objective 1
b. Jordanian
c. Palestinian
Authority
d. Turkey Site
e. United States Site
3. Objective 2
4. Objective 3
Selected
References
Technical
Antecedents
A. Grants History
B. Previous
Management
Analysis
Management
Approach
C. Training
D. Facilities
Concerns
Analysis
Budget Analysis
B. Budget Justification
Appendices
A. Biographical Data
VI. Technical Analysis
A. OVERALL AIM AND SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES The goal of this project is to support ongoing and new efforts to protect and improve natural resources and improve the socio-economic situation of the inhabitants by identifying appropriate monitoring and evaluation protocols and technologies for each of the management activities in common with regional partners. The specific objectives for the project are, as stated earlier: Monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of watershed management practices in preventing erosion and increasing the efficiency of water use in arid and semi-arid watershed pilot programs Evaluate the biophysical measurements appropriate for evaluation of operational watershed management practices implemented for erosion control and biomass production in arid and semi-arid regions Demonstrate effective practices for forest and grassland management using pilot watershed programs B. BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE The project is viewed as an adaptive research and development effort. The "research" effort is focused on two different levels. Level 1 is the evaluation of the effect of watershed treatments on vegetation, hydrology, and erosion/sedimentation. Level 2 is the evaluation of the monitoring tools used to assess Level 1 effectiveness. The "development" effort involves selecting the best tools for use by managers in monitoring effectiveness or response to the types of watershed management practices used on arid and semi-arid watersheds. This includes defining the metric and how it should be monitored. An inherent difficulty in monitoring and evaluation of watershed treatments is the high spatial and temporal variability of response. This is illustrated e.g. in the work of Shachak et al (1998) on shrubland ecosystems in Israel. They found that water, soil, and nutrient losses are very much dependent on the mosaic of source and sink patches in an ecosystem. Another example is the work of Iverson et al (1994) working on grasslands in southwest Idaho, USA. Shachak et al (1998) used a surface soil classification scheme to partition spatial variability in hydrologic and interrill erosion processes in a sagebrush community. The implications of this type of spatial variability for this study is that treatments, pits, lemans, terraces – are designed to harvest these flow resources and that monitoring must be designed with the "patchiness" of arid and semi-arid ecosystems firmly in mind. The temporal variability in these regions is driven largely by the infrequent but often, intense rain storms. A general reference for both the treatments being evaluated and the monitoring tools used is Hoekstra and Shachak (1999). Because of the limitation of funds, this project will concentrate on monitoring techniques for three biophsical factors: 1) Vegetation – especially density and structure, 2) hydrology – especially rainfall, runoff, and soil water recharge, and 3) erosion/sedimentation – especially on-site erosion and gully development related to various vegetation and land treatments. The core of the research effort is to find practical monitoring indicators based on the criteria of accuracy, precision, cost, ease of use, and appropriateness to the parameter (metric) being monitored. Vegetation modification, whether it results from harvesting, grazing, fire, or planting, alters the water balance of the site and can alter the hydrologic regime of the watershed. If vegetation is significantly reduced, such as after grazing or fire; and especially if the infiltration rate is reduced do to compaction, disturbance, or hydrophobicity; the flow path for precipitation can be altered and significant surface flow can occur causing erosion and sediment transport. This reduced infiltration, either because of a change in rate or opportunity, results in less soil and groundwater recharge thus further altering the spring and stream flow regime. A critical metric to be monitored when evaluating the effect of the proposed mitigation treatments is to monitor flow. Flow could be the surface flow component on-site (overland flow), soil water, spring flow, or stream flow. Perhaps the most direct response to on site mitigation, such as re-vegetation, will be in reduced surface flow and documentation would be to monitor surface runoff. The USGS National Handbook of Recommended Methods for Water-Data Acquisition (USGS 1997) addresses monitoring surface runoff. In addition to surface runoff, spring flow should be monitored in those situations where the expected outcome is to increase (or in cases where it may decrease) spring flow because of greater infiltration. Springs can be monitored in much the same way as stream flow (USGS, 1997). The same document, as well as numerous others describes the mechanics of monitoring flow. Harrelson et. Al (1994) presented an illustrated guide to the field techniques used in defining stream channel reference sites or gauging locations. Harrelson (1994) also presents criterion useful in defining channel characteristics, doing pebble counts, and generally defining channel condition. A key in the experimental design is matching the nature of the metric being monitored with the expected, or a reasonable estimate of the expected, response. For example, if only a small percentage of the contributing watershed above a gauging site is to be treated, the likelihood of detecting a response at the gage is negligible. Gauging flow might not be the best metric unless the objective is to document that a change cannot be detected. A more site- specific metric might be more appropriate such as monitoring surface runoff, soil moisture, or sediment accumulation. A major role of the International Study Team will be to collaborate on the appropriateness and the intensity of the proposed monitoring activities given the objectives of each project. Although specific treatments or mitigation practices vary by objective and country, altering the vegetation complex, on-site is universal. Depending on whether the desired vegetation is forest (trees), understory (seedings, forbs, grasses), or rangeland (grasses, forbs, etc.) the monitoring metric will vary. A mixture of aerial surveys, sample plots, and transects will be used to document vegetation response. The specifics are identified in the description of the study sites, objectives, and metrics or monitoring tools presented in the technical work plan (VI C). A practical guide for erosion and sedimentation measurements is given by Dunne in FAO Conservation Guide #1 (1997). The state of the art synthesis for predicting soil loss by water is found in Renard et al. (1997). This project falls somewhere between these two ends of the spectrum. There is not sufficient data in the region to anticipate using the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) although it is hoped that data collected during the project would contribute to its use. Recent modifications to RUSLE for use on mined and reclaimed lands (Toy et al, 1999) make its use for the harsh conditions of the study areas more promising. This project, however, focuses on some of the more common transect and indicator techniques for erosion and sediment monitoring and evaluating their usefulness. Several innovations will be tried including the use of silt fences to integrate losses from a slope and the use of bioassay as an indicator of erosion and associated nutrient loss. Standard runoff plots will be installed on some sites along with erosion transects on treated and untreated areas. The intensive gully survey to be applied at the Israeli, Turkish, Jordanian and Palestinian sites will be compared to aerial photo analysis and also related to rainfall/runoff events. The use of small check dams, ponds, and water spreading/capturing treatments all trap sediment and afford an additional opportunity to evaluate these structures as sediment monitoring tools. The basic suspended sediment measurements at streamgage sites will be by dept-integrating samplers and stage samplers as described in USDA Agricultural Handbook 274 (1979). The hypotheses being tested relative to erosion and sedimentation are: Level 1 – The watershed treatments are effective in reducing soil loss from slopes and export of sediments from the small catchments; Level 2 – Some erosion and sediment measurement tools are better than others for the conditions (environment and treatments) under study. One of the first tasks of the IST will be to review the proposed studies in each of the 5 countries, concur on problem definition, study design, mitigation practices, response metrics and monitoring protocols. The challenge will be to appreciate the unique nature of the issues in each of the 5 countries while also appreciating the need for identifying common ground in terms of intervention and monitoring techniques. C. TECHNICAL WORK PLAN General Overview Each participating country has submitted a draft study plan identifying problems, study design, intervention techniques and metrics to be monitored as well as monitoring tools. As noted above, the IST has the responsibility of reviewing those proposals and revising them as necessary, to strengthen problem definition, study design and metrics and protocols to maximize compatibility across countries. As the first approximation, proposed studies involve a two-level approach utilizing 5 study sites involving 13 watershed treatments, 27 metrics, and 25 monitoring tools (Tables 1-3). At the first level the watershed treatments (Table 1) will be evaluated by a local study team (LST) at each site for effectiveness of the treatments on selected watershed metrics for vegetation, erosion and sedimentation, and hydrology. At the second level, the International Study Team (IST) will evaluate the monitoring techniques across all sites (Tables 2 and 3). At first glance, there would appear to be a disparity in the treatments, or interventions proposed for application in each of the 5 countries (Table 1). What each participant has proposed reflects what has proven to be most successful in application. One objective of the IST collaboration would be to encourage each participant to consider the appropriateness of the entire suite of practices for application in their respective countries. Concurrence at this level is not critical, however because the interventions are intended to alter the vegetation, hydrology or erosion and sedimentation and these represent the common ground. It is at the level of the monitoring protocol or the metric measured that collaboration among the members of the IST will have its greatest influence. Although there is a great deal of similarity in parameters of interest, there are variations in how they will be measured (Tables 2 and 3). It will be the charge of the IST to concur on those parameters that are unique to each countries objective while insuring compatibility in monitoring those parameters all countries have in common. The LST or implementation team is led by the Principal Investigator in each country and consists of those persons involved in implementing and evaluating the treatments. The makeup of the LST is identified in Table 4. The IST is composed of two members from each country as identified in Table 4. The makeup of the Palestinian Team has been altered in response to the MERC review of the original proposal. This team represents a diversity of skills and includes members with both research and management backgrounds. Biographical sketches of most members are presented in the appendix. This mixture of expertise and experience is important because the purpose of the project is to evaluate watershed-monitoring tools useful in applied watershed projects. The IST will be responsible for assisting the LST in designing the in-country study and will have primary responsibility for providing and approving the protocols and evaluating the monitoring tools used for study purposes. The time frame for activity is presented in Table 5. These components and processes will now be discussed in detail under each of the objectives of the study. In writing this proposal the authors attempt to arrive at a balance between provide sufficient detail for proposal evaluation and yet providing flexibility to the IST to express creativity in refinement of what is proposed. The International Study Team is the principle mechanism for collaboration among the five countries involved and to be most effective, they need latitude in finalizing study design. Table 1 - Summary of Treatments planned and which country will implement them establishment/control Fire and Pest Protection Terraces and Contouring X 1 I = Israel, J = Jordan, P = Palestine, T = Turkey, U = United States Table 2 - Summary of metrics used in monitoring by country Vegetation Biomass Evapotranspiration X Erosion and Sedimentation Trapped Sediment 1 I = Israel, J = Jordan, P = Palestine, T = Turkey, U = United States Table 3 - List of monitoring tools by country Vegetation Field Hydrology Stream Hygrothermograph 2 X 2 X X Solarimeter Erosion and Sedimentation Field 1 I = Israel, J = Jordan, P = Palestine, T = Turkey, U = United States 2 This data may be available from the Sandia/LTER monitoring facility on the same sites Table 4: Partners and collaborators in the proposal Monitoring and Evaluation of Watersheds in the Middle East Region Project Administrator: Dr. Thomas Hoekstra*, USDA Forest Service, Inventory and Monitoring Institute, Fort Collins CO Technical Advisor: Dr. James Meiman, Professor Emeritus, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO Israel: Principal Investigator: Dr. Uriel Safriel* International Study Team: Dr. Uriel Safriel, Mr. Itzchak Moshe Local Study Team: Mr. Rami Garti, Dr. Moshe Getker, Mr. Ram Zaidenberg, and Dr. Ariel Novoplanski Jordan: Principal Investigator: Dr. Atef Kharabsheh International Study Team: Dr. Atef Karabsheh, Mr. Mohammad Shabez Local Study Team: Dr. Omar Rimawi, Dr.Radwan Wishah, Dr. Salem Al Oun and Mr. Rida Al Adamat Palestinian Authority: Principal Investigator: Dr. Ayed Ghaleb Mohammad (Formerly Mr. Ashraf Afaneh) International Study Team: Dr. Ayed Ghalb, Dr. Adram Tamini (Formerly Mr. Ashraf Afenah, Mr. Abdel Aziz Rayyan) Local Study Team: TBA Turkey: Principal investigator: Dr. Gursel Kusek International Study Team: Dr. Gursel Kusek, Mr. Ismail Atabay Local Study Team: TBA United States: Principal Investigator: Dr. Charles Troendle International Study Team: Dr. Charles Troendle, Ms. Susan Gray Local Study team: Mr. Fred Patten, Mr. Jim Thinnes, Dr. Merrill Kaufmann, Mr. Steve Culver, Mr. Chuck Dennis, Mr. Jeff Brudnick, and Mr. Gary Sheafer * Dr. Hoekstra will have administrative responsibilities for the study while the International Study Team, initially chaired by Dr. Uriel Safriel will have technical and programmatic oversight for the study. Table 5: Time chart for activities of International Study Team Activity and forms for each tool local study team Final workshop to sub-group, to assess specific problems that may arise (as needed) 2. Objective 1 Implement and evaluate effective watershed management practices to prevent erosion and sedimentation and increase the efficiency of water use in arid and semi-arid pilot watershed programs while maintaining sustainable productivity. The central hypothesis of this first objective is that these treatments do have a beneficial effect on vegetation, erosion, sedimentation, runoff, and water recharge. Each study site is described in a brief narrative that includes a basic study plan for that site as well as the proposed treatments, metrics, and tools in tabular form. The sites represent a diverse array of treatments and conditions and thus comparisons of treatment effects across countries are not warranted although some general summaries and observations by the International Study Team will be included in the final report. The site analyses will be the responsibility of the Local Study Team with advice and assistance from the International Study Team. These analyses are, for the most part, simple comparisons between treated and non-treated areas for vegetation and erosion, most frequently by transect and photo data. In the case of hydrology and sedimentation from small paired subcatchments, regression techniques comparing two microcatchments for each precipitation event will be used. Because of time constraints, it is likely that there would be only limited pretreatment calibration of the two areas and thus the assumption of similarity before treatment must be made. As indicated in the general statement above, the first task of the International Study Team would be to visit each site to assist the Local Study Teams, to refine their designs, to provide for the strongest statistical analysis possible, and to harmonize the measurement protocols for the common tools being used. a. Israel Study Site: Yatir Project The Site The site is the southeastern Yatir Region, an afforestation project of the KKL, at the edge of the semi-arid region of Israel (ca 250 mm of precipitation), close to the dry sub-humid dry land north of it, and to the arid dry land east of it. The site is a relatively new afforestation area, close to the Yatir Forest where 30,000 dunam of afforestation was initiated in 1964. The latter afforestation is dense, as compared to the new afforestation area. The landscape in the Project area is that of rolling hills with rocky outcrops, sodic soils on slopes and alluvial loessial soils in valleys. The area was overgrazed for centuries. There are also remnants of ancient agriculture reflected in badlands, gully head cuts and vertical banks. Management Objectives The goal is to arrest soil erosion due to overgrazing, by physical means and afforestation. This combined practice should reduce water losses through run-off and floods, and the rainwater will thus enrich groundwater and increase soil moisture. Other objectives are to increase plant productivity, which can be used as forage, or to simply enhance a biodiversity. Finally, the trees can provide firewood to the local population, and the whole ecosystem will restore its function as a carbon sink and reservoir, thus contributing to the amelioration of global warming. Treatments The management of the 5,000 dunams that comprise the study area initiated in 1997. The rationale is to plant and established trees on slopes, in a region where trees occur naturally only in the reparian channel. To enable this, the trees have to be watered by run-off in quantities larger than naturally provided by the non-managed landscape. The management therefore included first landscape physical manipulations for harvesting run-off water to be used by afforested trees, as well as by the remaining natural vegetation. On top of this, soil conservation measures such as stone terraces and drainage works to minimize erosion, were implemented. Then saplings of local and exotic broad-leave and conifer trees were planted and grazing excluded. In summers following extremely dry winter (e.g. 1999), irrigation is practiced. Road system to facilitate maintenance was installed. Already ca 3000 dunam were planted, and more is planned for future years. Yet, much area will be left intact. Cost of treatments Land preparation in bad land hilly area, soil conservation measures, water harvesting structures, road design and construction, plantations, maintenance during the first years of the 300 hectares by KKL are estimated as ca $1.5M. The annual maintenance (earthwork repairs, irrigation, pruning, grazing control) is $0.3M, for each of the Project's five years. The Monitoring Program We will monitor vegetation (afforested trees and natural vegetation), runoff, and soil erosion. We will choose metrics that are easy and inexpensive to measure, yet are indicative of the success of the treatments in arresting soil erosion, in reducing run-off, and in increasing vegetation productivity. Surface Vegetation We will test two vegetation-related hypotheses. The first hypothesis is directly related to afforested trees. The hypothesis is that a semi-arid dryland naturally devoid of trees as a significant landscape vegetation component can be sustainable afforested without long-term water subsidy, by employing relatively simple run-off harvesting practices. To test this hypothesis we will monitor the viability and the growth rate of trees of six Israeli and exotic species planted six years ago. This monitoring will be carried out once a year, at the end of the dry season, just prior to the initiation of the rainy season, in September. Age-dependent annual survival and growth rate will be calculated for the five years of the study. Growth rate will be inferred from tree height measurements. Trees for viability check and growth rate measurement will be selected using a random design stratified by environmental data (limans, valley terraces, slopes, channels, aspects, stoniness and other soil features) and biological data (tree canopy size category, tree species). The number of trees to be sampled will be determined iteratively in the field by adding trees to the sample until mean and variance values stabilize. The data will be compared with survival and growth values for these species collected from regions in which these species grow naturally, or from more mesic regions in which these species are used for afforestation. Such data will be taken from literature and from the database of the JNF. The second hypothesis relates to the effect of afforested trees in semi-arid dryland on the natural vegetation of the afforestation region. The hypothesis is that rather than reducing the cover and biomass of the natural vegetation (due to it being partly replaced by the afforested trees) afforestation increases the cover and biomass of the natural vegetation. This is due to the role of the introduced trees in soil and soil-moisture conservation. This hypothesis will be tested by monitoring vegetation cover and vegetation biomass in the afforested areas and in similar areas that have not yet been afforested. The monitoring will be carried out once a year, at the peak of the growing season just at the end of the rainy season, namely in May of each year. The plant community will be divided into two components - herbaceous plants (indicative of range quality) and perennial bushes (indicative of year-round soil protection hence instrumental in soil conservation). Percentage cover of each of the two components will be recorded using gridded frames, and biomass will be measured by harvesting aboveground vegetation in plots. Sampling plots will be selected using a stratified random design, and the number of plots will be determined iteratively, adding plots until mean and variance values stabilize. The vegetation under the tree canopy will be sampled separately from the vegetation in the larger, open area. The sampling under the tree cover will be stratified by environment types (soils, slope aspects, etc.) and by tree species. The sampling in the open areas will be stratified by within-rows and between-rows vegetation, and by environment types. The sampling design, the check of data quality, data storage, data reduction, analysis and interpretation will be carried out by a full-time graduate student. The study will be used by the student as part of his/her commitments towards the study degree (M.Sc. or Ph.D.). The student will be supervised by members of the local implementation team. The student will be assisted by field technicians carrying out the field sampling under the student's supervision. Besides this manpower, the budget includes expendables for marking plots and trees, for collecting filed data and for transportation during the sampling periods. Laptop computer and a desktop computer will be used for the vegetation monitoring, and statistical consultation is budgeted too. Run off The hypothesis is that the physical soil conservation measures, the run-off harvesting measures, the planted trees and the vegetation they promote, all combined reduce run-off peak discharges and flow volumes. This reduction achieves three goals: (a) it contributes to soil conservation and soil fertility; (b) it contributes to soil moisture, and through it - to increased productivity; and (c) the increased penetration may contribute to groundwater recharge. The metric to be measured as an indicator to the run-off is run-off volume and peak discharge. This, rather than measuring the whole flow, reduces expenses and work. The run-off data will be matched against rainfall data (depth and intensity) at the same region in which the run-off is measured. Rainfall observations in space and time will also be determined from meteorological radar images. Field measurements will be taken following each rainstorm, during the project's lifetime. Basins of first and second order and of three watershed sizes, treated and non-treated will be selected. There will be two replications of each basin type. Number of observation sites is thus 3 replicates x 2 watershed sizes x 2 order categories x 2 treatments (afforested and non-afforested) = 18. A student will supervise the technician taking the measurements, and participate in the measurements. The student will store, analyze and interpret the data, as part of the requirements toward his degree. Soil erosion The hypothesis is that soil erosion will be reduced in the watershed, due to the combined effect of the treatments. Soil erosion will be evaluated using two indicators, gully heads and banks advancement, and the loss of topsoil from slope surfaces. The hypothesis to be tested by the gully head measurements is that due to soil conservation measures and promotion of soil cover by vegetation, the velocity of run-off flows will be reduce hence gully erosion will be arrested. The first indicator will be measured using a benchmark metal peg that will be fixed to the ground at the channel above the gully head, and the distance to the gully head will be re-measured. Same procedure will be applied to changes in bank position. These measurements will be taken either once a year at the end of the rainy season (May), and following every rain storm, in order to elucidate the relations between run-off rates and gully head erosion. Gully heads and banks will be selected from those used for measuring run-off flows, such that there will be a sufficient number of them to cover the variation in the watershed, and to serve as replicates. The second indicator, rates of topsoil erosion from slope surfaces will be evaluated indirectly using a bioassay measuring change in topsoil productivity. The hypothesis is that topsoil erosion leaves soil of low productivity, being devoid of minerals and organic matter carried out as suspended or dissolved matter in the run-off water. Soil samples will be taken, using a random design, from slopes of varying nature, in treated and non-treated watersheds. The samples will be taken to the laboratory, laid in petri dishes, and sowed with seeds of garden peas of a uniform variety. Germination rates and growth rate of the seedling for a short observation period will provide indication on soil fertility, hence on the degree of loss of the most fertile topsoil. This study will be also carried out by the research student working on run-off. Other physical means to measure sediment deposition within the watershed, indicative of soil erosion, will be also used. Finally, the five-year data base will be compared to a longer rainfall and run-off data base (almost 30 years) taken in the region. This will enable a perspective of the 5 year-project, scaled against a meaningful period, with respect to both run-off data and soil erosion data. Project Management Equipment The only pieces of equipment are maxi miters (ca $200 each) and rain gages ($50 each). Most expenses are for installing these equipment pieces in the field (transportation, concrete, digging equipment). Other equipment are two laptop computers to serve the teams collecting data in the field, and two desktop computers to serve the two research students. Time table Year one - installing the monitoring equipment and determining the sampling design. Carrying out the first set of measurements. Years two, three, four - carrying out the monitoring. Year five - last year of monitoring, final analyses and reporting. Implementation team PI - Uriel Safriel, Blaustein Institute for Desert Research Vegetation monitoring - Dr. Ariel Novoplansky, Blaustein Institute for Desert Research Run-off and erosion - Dr. Rami Garti, Soil Erosion Research Station, Ministry of Agriculture. Israeli members of International Study Team Uriel Safriel. BGU (Researcher) Itzhak Moshe, KKL (Land Manager) Site Problem Identification and Study Design: Vegetation
Site: Yatir Forest, Southern Israel
Problem(s): Vegetation density and cover is too low, and the vegetation structure and composition is not desirable.
Recommended Treatment
Parameter(s) or metric to be measured
Tools available for taking
1. Grazing management (exclusion, then proper 1&3: a. Production of forage 1a-b: 1) Field survey of plots/transects Trees sampled once a year in (kilogram/unit area). (maybe remote sensing) September, Nandam design statified by 2. Plant trees (local and introduced species) b. Composition of all vegetative species 2a-c: 1) Field survey of entire area environmental and biological factors. 3. Soil disturbance to harvest flow resources (numbers of individuals in each species 2d: 1) Field survey of plots/transects (water, seeds, organic matter) and numbers of species per unit area). 3a: 1) Field survey entire area Vegetation cover and biomass sampled 4. Fire, disease, and insect protection, 2: a. Survival rate percentage every year 3b: 1) Field survey entire area and field in May in afforested and non- management, control. and every 5 years. afforested control areas. b. Health & development (height) - every year & every 5 years. c. Occurrence of native tree species (numbers/ unit measure) d. Understory vegetation (species diversity, numbers, & production) 4: a. Percentage of unit measures affected. b. numbers of incidences. Site Problem Identification and Study Design: Hydrology
Site: Yatir Forest, Southern Israel
Problem(s): High volumes and peak flow of rainfall due to land mismanagement.
Recommended Treatment
Parameter(s) or metric to be
Tools available for taking Design
measured
1. Water harvesting a. Analyze historical rainfall data, Measurements taken after each 2. Reconstruct ancient water harvesting fluctuations, intensities, drought info-raingage recorder rainfall for 3 replicates of 2 systems (terraces) occurrences, etc. watershed sizes on two different 3. Increase biomass/ vegetation cover b. Take rainfall measurements stream orders for afforested and (see vegetation treatments) c. Peak discharge and/or volumes, non-afforested control areas (total comparing treated and non-treated 6) Field channel survey Site Problem Identification and Study Design: Soil Erosion and Sedimentation
Site: Yatir Forest, Southern Israel
Problem(s): High peak discharge creates sheet, gully, and bank erosion, and leads to sedimentation in streams and ponds. Lack of maintenance of ancient
terraces creates sheet, gully, and bank erosion and leads to sedimentation in streams and ponds.
Parameter(s) or metric to be
Tools available for taking Design
measured
1. Water harvesting: contour bench terraces on a. gully head and bank head 1 Field survey at treated 1-3 Gully head and bank erosion slopes, stone check dams in wadis, earthen movement / development and untreated sites sites will be selected from those b. sediments in ponds and 2 transects (maps) used in hydrology study. ation cover (see vegetation) 3 automatic water samplers Measurements taken after each 3. Reconstruct and maintain ancient water c. solids / sediment rate or load in in streams. harvesting systems (terraces) 4. Stabilize gully using structures d. Topsoil erosion 4 soil samples by random design 5. Improve and maintain road system on various treated an non-treated slopes.
b. Jordan Study Site: Central Jordan Valley

Introduction
Water shortage in Jordan has been emphasized by high population growth, riparian conflict on shared water resources, forced
immigration of hundreds of thousands of Jordanians from the Arab Gulf countries, over-exploitation and the misuse of technology,
which may often inflict serious environmental damage. Jordan is not able to sustain its increasing water demands, even if it uses all
conventional water resources. In addition, there is a lack of comprehensive and efficiency in managing water resources. The situation
will become more critical with increased population; improved standard of living and limited financial resources to achieve
sustainable development has become one of the most important issues for the country.
Water resources issues are increasingly becoming a major complicating factor in the socio political issues of the Middle East. The lack
of comprehensive studies in managing water resources has become one of the most serious problems facing Jordan. The country is
located in an arid to semi-arid region. Current practices of over-exploitation and over pumping have resulted in the withdrawal of
water levels and water quality deterioration in most wells in the country. Water scarcity is becoming a significant problem especially
through the use of new technologies, affect the environment. Moreover, Jordan has one of the lowest levels of water resources per
capita in the Middle East, as well as one of the highest rates in the population growth (3.5 %). This means that the utilization of
surface water resource is very important for the different purposes in Jordan. In this proposal, watershed management including
surface water, groundwater, sediment transport, and ecological state will be carefully studied at the central part of the Jordan Valley.
The study area extends from the western part of Al-Salt near Kufur Huda to King Abdullah Canal (KAC) in the Jordan Valley. It is an
unpopulated area and includes many hills such as Al-Hawaieh and Rujum Al-Mintar. Many dendritic wadis are also present in the area
such as: Wadi Abu el-Shananir, Wadi Um-Butmah and Wadi Dafali. The slope of these wadis is directed from NE-SW to reach King
Abdullah Canal. The area shows an oval shape with its longest axis in the E-W direction. The elevation increases from 200 m below
the mean sea level (b.m.s.l) near KAC to 142 m above the mean sea level (a.m.s.l) at Rujum el-Mintar and to 437 m (a.m.s.l) at the
upper northern part of the area near the main road. The slope reaches about 8 percent in most of the areas, but it exceeds this value in
many areas such as El-Hawaieh and Wadi Abu el-Shananir where it reaches 20 %.
Many springs are located in the area such as: Ain el-Mirah, Ain Um el-Shananir and Ain Um Taineh (Arabic names). All these springs
are contact-fault springs discharging their water from the sandstone. Old roads are cutting all the area with high slopes, the most
prominent one is El-Dababat road, which is the best one and cuts the area in the E-W direction. (Other difficult roads are also located
in the area (without names)). Many collecting wells are distributed in the different parts of the area, which means that the area was
populated and the water harvesting projects are valuable to cover the increasing demands of the area, especially for the irrigation
purposes. Trees are also located in the area such as: Eucalyptus, Ziziphus and Acacia, the most famous trees are Al-Balqa, trees at Ain
el-Mirah. The priorities of the study in this project are as follows:
• Selection of two catchments. • Each catchment is composed of at least two tributaries. The following will be performed for the catchments: Conducted survey to determine the location of necessary weather stations, flood recorders, and soil erosion measures. Rain gauge network installed (four gauges) to cover the spatial distribution of rainfall variations from west to east. Two meteorological stations will be established to define the climatic parameters (wind direction and speed, solar radiation, humidity, temperature, class A pan evaporation, and atmospheric pressure). Four Flood recorders with the necessary control structures will be established. • One Infiltrometer will be installed in the channel to measure the infiltration rate in the treated and non-treated watersheds. • 10 Tensiometers and 10 Piezometers will be installed to monitor the water movement during infiltration and soil moisture • Automatic water sampler will be installed to measure the suspended sediment and the chemical water quality of the Contour terraces, gabions and detention ponds will be implemented at sloped areas. Erosion will be measured using different techniques. Stonewalls and afforestration will be used for erosion control (soil conservation measures). Construct gabion weirs along the wadi courses (to reduce flood energy and to retard the flow velocity) to enhance water infiltration reduce sediment load. At appropriate locations detention ponds will be constructed to provide water storage and / or infiltration capacity. Provide proper subsurface storage techniques and artificial recharge to enhance the existing springs discharge. Spatial soil characteristics will be characterized over the study area (soil type, moisture content, grain size analyses, infiltration rate, mineralogical composition). Ten neutron probes for soil moisture measurements with depth will be installed. Quantitative and qualitative measurements of spring's discharge will be monitored. Hydrological analyses (rainfall – runoff model) will be attempted. Water budget of the two catchments will be defined. Vegetation cover and other environmental indicators of improvement will be monitored. Socio–economic evaluation will be made. Geology of the Area The geology of the area is affecting both surface and groundwater resources, while their flow is dependent upon the nature of material in the path flow. The geology of the area is composed of the Kurnub sandstone (Lower Cretaceous age), which crops out in the northern part of the area and Ajlune group (Upper Cretaceous age), which crops out in the southwestern part of the area. The lithological characteristics of the rock units are as follows: The Kurnub sandstone of the Lower Cretaceous age consists predominantly of reddish to yellowish sandstone with proportion of marl, clay and siltstone in the upper part of the area. It is composed of fine, medium and coarse grained sandstone alternating with reddish and greenish marls. The upper most part shows gradual increase in fine sandy and marly sandstone with thickness more than 200 m and forms the upper part of the study area. The Naur formation of the Ajlune group overlies the Kurnub sandstone. It is subdivided into two subunits: A1 consists mainly of marls with thickness may reach about 80 m and A2 is the upper part with thickness reaches about 100 m consists of limestone and marly limestone. The A1/2 crops out at the southern part of the area. The geological structures of the area are highly affected by the Jordan Rift Valley structures. The area is faulted by many faults with NE-SW major trending system and with variable trends. Faults, anticlines and synclines in the different part of the area represent the structures. The tectonic structures increased the permeability of the water bearing formation and eventually the infiltration rate. The local recharge of the Kurnub sandstone appears as spring flows. Hydrology and Hydrogeology The climate of the Humra area is fairly hot, summer to warm with good rainfall, winter. The annual rainfall ranges from 150 mm near the King Abdullah Canal to 300 mm in the northern part of the area. The increase in the NE direction is related to the orographic effects. The Kurnub aquifer system is the only aquifer in the area. It is composed of varicolored sandstone and exposed in the northern part of the area; its thickness may reach more than 200 m. the springs in the area are emerging from this aquifer. Many wells are also drilled in this aquifer at the northern edge of the study area. The well, Sahn no.4, shows good quality groundwater (650 mg/l) with specific yield 40 m3/h. Sahn no. 2 shows groundwater with 475 mg/l salinity and specific yield 60 m3/h. The depth to reach the water level in these wells is about 14 m. While the wells Sahn no. 3 and no. 5 are bad wells and are closed due to their bad specific yield they are highly affected by the tectonics of the Jordan graben (WAJ Files). Springs The emergence of springs is a function of hydrogeological, geological and topographical conditions and interrelation among them. The springs in the study area are produced from faulting and fracturing related to the Jordan graben. They can be used for irrigation or may be for drinking purposes. The most important springs in the area are Ain el-Mirah and Ain Abu el-Shananir in the northern part of the study area. Site Problem Identification and Study Design: Vegetation
Site: Belka University experimental site, Jordan
Problem(s): Vegetation density and cover is too low, and the vegetation structure and composition is not desirable.
PI, Co-PI, and their institutions:
One researcher, one forestry/resource manager)
Recommended Treatment
Parameter(s) or metric to be measured
Tools available for taking
1. Grazing management (exclusion, then 1&3: a. Production of forage (kilogram/unit 1a&b&3: 1) Field Survey-biomass 1) Field survey to determine mapping – plots and aerial photos vegetation aspecies and effects 2. Plant trees (local and introduced species) b. Composition of all vegetative species (integrated in GIS framework) of soil erosion on vegetation 3. Soil disturbance to harvest flow (numbers of individuals in each species and resources (water, seeds, organic matter) numbers of species per unit area). 4a: 1) Plots, survey, aerial photos 2) Aerial photographs to determine 4. Fire, disease, and insect protection, 2: a. Survival rate per-centage every year and 4b: 1) Field reports vegetation cover and soil management, control. b. Health & development (height) - every 3) Integrate the results of aerial year & every 5 years. photos and survey on GIS c. Occurrence of native tree species (numbers/ unit measure) d. Understory vegetation (species diversity, numbers, & production) 4: a. Percentage of unit measures affected. b. numbers of incidences Site Problem Identification and Study Design: Hydrology
Site: Belka University experimental site, Jordan
Problem(s): High volume of runoff resulting from high-intensity rainfall; low recharge and steep slopes produce flood danger to local population.
Recommended Treatment
Parameter(s) or metric to be measured
Tools available for taking measurements
1. Terraces and contouring to 1) 2 Weather stations (upper & lower part) 1&3 2 weather stations: one at the upper part at decrease loss of surface water. b. Rainfall and other climatological 2) raingage network (4 raingages) the highest elevations, where rainfall around data(relative temperature and humidity, 3) evaporation stations (2 gages) 400 mm, the other one will be at the lowest 3. Increase vegetation cover evaporation, evapo-transpiration, etc) 4) 4 flood recorders part, where rainfall is less than 200 mm (see vegetation treatment 5) automatic water sampler (pressure, sunshine, wind, evaporaiton, relative section) to increase available d. Spring discharges humidity, temperature, and rainfall). water resources (recharge?) e. Soil moisture 2 Raingage network. 4 raingages distributed f. Other climatological elements to cover the whole area in addition to the weather stations. 4 4 flood recorders to cover the catchments in the study area. 5 One automatic water sampler to determine water quality and suspended solds of floods. 6&7 10 piezomters and 10 tensiometers to monitor water movements during infiltration and soil mositrue content distributed at different elevations in the project area. 8 10 neutron probes distributed in the study area for soil moisture with depth. Rainfall – runoff model using data from above measurements. Site Problem Identification and Study Design: Soil Erosion and Sedimentation
Site: Al-Balqaa' University experimental site, Jordan
Problem(s): Intense rains create high runoff in short time periods, and therefore, lead to channel sedimentation and unstable vegetation.
Recommended Treatment
Parameter(s) or metric to be
Tools available for
measured
taking measurements
1. Terraces and contouring, and stone walls. a. Soil erosion in treated areas 1 Transects covering the b. Sedimentation rate where study area to measure the 3. Detention ponds section – tools soil erosion in treated and 4. Increase vegetation cover (see vegetation c. Infiltration rate at top of non-treated areas treatment section) watershed and at sedimentation area d. soil moisture 3 Surveys to determine e. suspended solids and bedload in the areas affected by high soil erosion and making field measures and constructions to stop soil erosion (contour, terraces, gabions, and detention ponds). 4 Silt fences to cover selected slopes on the study area (subcatchment)
c. Palestinian Authority Study Area: Hebron District
Rangeland in the Palestinian territories has been exposed to misuse for many years, leading to the disappearance of
plant cover and severe soil erosion. Most of the rangeland soils have shallow depth, are located in the arid and semi
arid zone, and have lost their ability to conserve moisture. Rainfall events in this area are characterized by intense
storms of short duration. Therefore, most of the rainfall is lost as surface runoff and direct evaporation, with little
infiltration or retention on site.
The results of studies conducted in the area indicate that in order to improve the productivity of rangeland
conditions, proper management of the watershed is essential to reduce surface water runoff and soil erosion, to
increase infiltration and soil water storage, and to increase ground water discharge.

Study site and treatments
The study area is located near Samoa in the Hebron district and close to the Yatir site chosen by the Israeli's for
their study. The study watershed will be monitored and evaluated using three study sites that extend from North of
Hebron city to the East of the city. The area between the study sites will be used as the control and which is
estimated to be more than 10,000 dunum. The study sites, and the control area, generally have similar
environmental conditions and were all subject to grazing for many years. The primary difference between the three
study sites is that they will each receive a different treatment and they will provide an excellent opportunity to
evaluate, monitor and compare the response to different watershed management treatments.
Site 1

Site 1 is located in the Alsamoo'a area, and occupies about 200 dunum. Several treatments have already been
implemented with the main objectives of improving biodiversity. The study will monitor response.
Site 2

Site 2 is an area of about 40 dunum and has a long history of communal grazing. The land is owned by Hebron
University therefore monitoring and evaluation of the watershed management practices will continue to occur for
many years beyond the life of this project (more than 5 years). The site will be fenced, terraced, and planted with
shrubs.

Site 3

Site 3 is located in Bani-Noe'm, and occupies an area of about 400 dunum. This site has received several treatments
which include: stone terracing, fencing, planting trees and shrubs, construction of a small dam and building a well to
collect the running water. The work on this site started in 1995.
Grazing has been excluded from study sites 1 & 3, but with initiation of the MERC project, grazing management
will be applied at all three sites.

Monitoring
Several metrics will be monitored at each study site, including: vegetation, runoff, and soil erosion. Two graduate
students will do much of the monitoring work as part of their commitments towards a study degree (M.Sc. or Ph.D.)
under the guidance of the PI and their graduate advisors. The students will be assisted by field technicians
employed specifically for this study.

Equipment
The equipment needed to help in implementing the project and collecting the necessary data include:
Automatic water samplers (3). Recording Rain gage (1). Laptop computers (2). Desktop computer (1). Neutron probes (6). Flood recorders (6). - Maping. - Camera. As noted earlier, the specifics of the Palestinian project will be developed in more detail in concert with Israel (and input from the International Study Team as part of the project). The Palestinian study will be executed as part of graduate programs for the Local Study Team members (LST) and again much guidance will come from the Israeli's who will advise the students. The MERC review raised concerns over the political affiliation of administrators for the Palestinian study. In response, we have been working with Mr. Issa Mussa, Ministry of the Environmental Affairs for the Palestinian Authority, to move the responsibility for the study to Hebron University. Dr. Ayed Ghaleb Mohammad, Dean of the Faculty of Agriculture has been named the Principal Investigator replacing Dr. A. Afaneh. Dr. Ghalb's CV has been included in this response. Dr. Akram Tamini, of the same university, will be the new co-principal investigator. Site Problems Identification and Study Design: Vegetation

Site: Hebron District-Southern Palestine
Problem(s): Vegetation cover and density is too low, and the vegetation structure and composition are not desirable
Recommended Treatment Parameters or metric to be measured
Tools available for taking
1. Grazing management (exclusion and 1. A- production of forage kg/unit/area 1- a.b. field surveys (remote sensing Field surveys to determine vegetation then proper management) B- composition of all vegetation species and effects of soil erosion on 2. Trees and shrub planting (local species (number of individuals in 2- a.c. field surveys vegetation cover and to assess the species and introduce adapted each species, number of species per b.d. field reports percentage of the vegetation cover. unit area and percent cover). 3. Soil disturbance to harvest flow 2. A- survival rates every year and resources (water, organic matters every five years. B- development of the plant (height, 4. Management and control (diseases death percentage every year and and insect protection) every five years) C- occurrence of native tree species (numbers/unit). D- understory vegetation species diversity, numbers, production and cover). 3. A- percentage of unit measures (affected) B- death percentage (numbers of incidences) Site Problem Identification and Study Design: Hydrology

Site: Hebron district- Southern Palestine
Problem(s): low rainfall but high peaks through short period and low recharge resulting in high runoff
Recommended Treatment Parameters or metric to be measured
Tools available for taking measurements
1. terraces and contouring 1) two weather station 1- weather station on the upper part of to decrease loss of runoff Two- rainfall and other climatological data 2) raingage network 2. increase vegetation cover relatives 2- two raingage networks will to increase water Three- infiltration distributed on the upper and the infiltration and available lowest part of the site 3- flood records to cover the catchment 3. water harvesting wells 4- automatic water sampler to determine total suspended solids Site Problem Identification and Study Design: Soil Erosion and Sedimentation
Site: Hebron district- Southern Palestine
Problem(s): high peaks rainfall cause bank and soil erosion, gullies, which leads to channel, sedimentation and unstable vegetation cover
Recommended Treatment
Parameters or metric to be measured
Tools available for taking
1. contour terraces and stone walls sedimenation on terraces 1) Field survey in treated and non- 1. surveys to determine affected and 2. increasing vegetation cover suspended solids (mainly organic non-affected areas 2. transects covering the study area to Three- soil erosion on treated and non-treated measure the soil erosion in the treated and non treated areas 3. measurements will be taken before the beginning of the rainy season (usually winter) and after the end of that season (usually may) d. Turkey Study Site: Kizhoz Micro Catchment Kizhoz Micro-catchment is located in between Hekimhan and Kuluncak Counties of Malatya Province. The geographical location of the subject micro-catchment is in between 38 degrees 54' 54" and 38 degrees 49' 26" North latitudes, and 37 degrees 41' 00" and 37 degrees 47' 33" East longitudes. The micro-catchment is 100 Km from the Malatya central town of Malatya Province and connected to this town with a hard surfaced two lane highway, meaning that is is possible to reach the micro-catchment all year around. The total surface area of the micro-catchment is 6,450 hectares and various villages are located in the micro-catchment. Topography The micro-catchment is surrounded by mountains in three sides with Kizhoz Stream on one side. The average elevation of the micro-catchment is 1,450 meters, with a peak level of 2,082 meters at Leylek Hills and lowest level of 1,200 meters at the junction point of Kizhoz and Tohma Streams. That means there is 852 meters of elevation difference within the micro-catchment. Climate The nearest meterological measurements station is the Malatya Meteorological Station, which is 100 Km away from the micro-catchment . This station is located 998 meters high from the sea level and accepted as the best measuring station that reflects the climatic conditions of the micro-catchment. Malatya Province has a continental climate with hard and cold winters and hot and dry summers. Winter and spring precipitation is almost very near to each other in percentage values. 32% of the total annual precipitaton falls in winter whereas 39% falls in spring. The driest months are July, August and September. Average Annual Precipitation is 387.3 mm. This precipitation is received during October and May with almost equal monthly quantities. Annual average relative humidity is 54.6%. This relative humidity increases up to 70 - 80% in winters whereas decreases 30 - 40% in summers. Also, annual average temperature is 13.5 degrees C with the coldest months of December, January and February whereas the monthly average temperatures are in between -0.6 and 2.0 degrees C. As it is stated above, the hottest months are July and August. Soil Soil of the watershed is generally formed in three main groups, namely brown, colluvial and reddish-brown. Brown soil is A B C profile having generally different main species. Calcification is the main parameter in the formation of these soils. As a result of this process, there is an abundance of Calcium in these profiles. In summer these soils are generally dry for long periods and chemical and biological processes are relatively lower. Colluvial soils are relatively young soils accumulated on the sediments carried by side-streams, gravity, land slides and surface flow. Reddish-brown soils are generally formed on various main materials. (A) Horizon is a typical reddish-brown and reddish. Calcium carbonate deposition takes place under (B) horizon. Natural vegetation is long grass and shrubs. Natural drainage structure is good. Erosion Soil loss in the region is of prime importance due to the climate, low rainfall and geological structure of the land. Erosion fields of the micro-catchment are in active stage and there has been potential erosion in ever village of the micro-catchment. In this micro-catchment there is totally 1,744 Ha of erosion field and there is an urgent need of implementing erosion control activities in this micro-catchment. Population and Local Structure In this micro-catchment there are essentially three villages. Part of lands of the other two villages is also in this micro-catchment. These two villages will not be taken into consideration but main emphasis will be given on three villages, namely Karacayir, Ciritbelen and Karincalik Villages. Present Status of Forests There has been very little forest cover in the catchment. No erosion control and reforestation activity has been carried out in the catchment before the project implementation. In the catchment where no productive forest land has been exist, there has been 74 hectares of degraded oak coppice. There has been 1744 hectares of land where reforestation activities can be carried out. Agricultural Lands There has been a very little irrigation, but there have been economically an additional land of 50.5 hectares, which can be opened to irrigation. The different types used in the agricultural lands have been given in Table 5. Income and expenditure tables related with these various types are being prepared. Range Lands As the range lands are used commonly and as a result of unawareness, no range management has been carried out and overgrazing have been going on. Sedimentation There is a very close relationship between the sedimentation and degradation within the catchment. So, sedimentation and degradation should be considered together. In this project it will be tried to have a relation between degradation and sedimentation and the measurements will be carried out both on-site and at the catchment level. First of all, a limnograph will be installed in the exit point of the catchment so that the amount of sediment going out from the catchment and the degradation can be measured. But of course this figure will represent the whole catchment and it won't state how much of this sediment has been carried out from the forest lands, from range lands, from agricultural lands and from stream channels. To prevent sedimentation, we should know the source of it. That's why answers should be found for the questions stated above. For this reason, beside of the measures taken from the exit point of the catchment, field trials will be defined to have an idea also for the sedimentation from the forest lands. For example, there has been soil preparation by machinery and manual terrace construction has been carried out. Same implementations will be carried out in field trials to measure the effect of each implementation on erosion. Similar trials can also be done in the agriculture and range lands. On the other hand by comparing the results received from field trials with general measurement results of the catchment, the relationship between degradation and catchment sediment production can be studied. In this study the degradation in channels can also be measured with a very simple method. There has been triangulation within the catchment. By using the existing triangulation, new triangulation points can be defined and very sensitive three dimension map of the channel can be prepared by computer and as a result, differences as years in the densely degraded places can be monitored as centimeters. Infiltration As in sedimentation measurements, in infiltration measurements, the activities have been carried out both in a point within the catchment and also in a point, which has been decided to be set for sediment measurement. For infiltration measurements, rainfall and surface runoff of the catchment should be measured accurately. For this reason by setting automatic rainfall measurement units in various parts of the catchment, rainfall can be measured during the year. The results of these measurements will be compared with the existing data of the meteorology station in Malaya, which is being the closest station to the catchment, and correlation between these data will be found. So, rainfall figures for the previous years can be examined. By using the total rainfall amount and the measured surface runoff at the exit point of the catchment, infiltration value for the whole catchment can be calculated. Also, separate infiltration measurements will be done for different points of the field trials and by this way the values for total infiltration and infiltration in the local fields can be compared and a relation can be defined. Water Quality and Quantity The quality and the quantity of the surface runoff will be measured at the exit point of the catchment. Vegetation Cover We can list the methods that can be used for monitoring the change in vegetation cover as followings: To put the information related with the annual change into the numerical map every year. As it is mentioned earlier, the numerical maps of the catchment have been kept in the computer. When the information regarding the annual change in vegetation cover as coordinates can be received from the field, it will be possible to follow the changes by computer. As it is known, there are various ways to get coordinates of the field. 1) After putting all the borders of the vegetation cover into a 1/5000 scaled map in a very sensitive way, these borders can be converted into numbers and can be put into computer program. 2) We can read the coordinates by using equipments such as total station and then transfer these data in computer program. Air Photos: by getting annual air photos, the change in vegetation cover can also be monitored as coordinates. Remote Sensing Methods: By using these methods the change can be monitored in numbers. Terrestrial Methods: Change in the vegetation cover can be monitored by the photos, slights and video records, which are taken from the same points each time. Also, range management component should be monitored. Questionnaires will be prepared for this purpose.
Site Problem Identification and Study Design and Vegetation
Site: Malatya Plain, Turkey
Problem(s): Vegetation density and cover is too low, and the vegetation structure and composition is not desirable.
Recommended Treatment
Parameter(s) or metric to be measured
Tools available for taking
Range/Forestry Lands: 1a. Percentage of ground covered & disturbed 1-3 (all): 1) Plots 1.-3. Random plots on treated 1. Soil disturbances to harvest flow 4a. Total area ground and untreated areas. 2a. Weight of biomass by kilo/unit measure 2. Planning of grazing and 2b. Percentage of ground cover/unit measure 4. at beginning and end of protection from over-grazing 2c. Species composition 3. Plant trees and/or seed. 3a. Survival rate of trees/unit area 4. Protection from fire, disease, & 3b. Number of seeds germinated. 3c. Numbers of native vegetation species 4a. Numbers of unit hectares affected/year. Agricultural Lands: 1a. Total hectares of land, 1a-c: 1) Aerial photos 1. Land used within 1. Appropriate land use (protective 2a-b: 1) Digital map and capability before and after 1c. Distribution 2. Appropriate irrigation 2a. Hectares of new land open to irrigation 2b. Hectares of land converted to new technologies Site Problem Identification and Study Design Hydrology
Site: Malatya Plain, Turkey
Problem(s): Early fall and late spring rain fall with high intensity producing floods; inadequate recharge of ground water.
PI, Co-PI, and their institutions:
(One researcher, one forestry/resource manager)
Recommended Treatment
Parameter(s) or metric to be
Tools available for taking
measured
Range/Forestry Lands: 1) Stream flow (quantity and timing) 1) Stream gage with continuous 1. Stream flow (quantity and 2. Model stream flow (quantity and recorder (depend on currently timing) – continuous recorder. 2. Increasing vegetation cover timing) with assistance of research collected information on rainfall): 2. Explore applicability of existing 3. Gully rehabilitation and construction of 2) recording raingage Turkish and U.S. models for 3) hygrothermograph runoff from small watersheds. 4) solarimeter 5) anemometer 6) evaporation pan Site Problem Identification and Study Design Soil Erosion and Sedimentation
Site: Malatya Plain, Turkey
Problem(s): Intense and high peek rainfall causes productive top soil to be carried away and leads to unproductive agricultural conditions. This sediment fills and
degrades dams, ponds, and irrigation channels. Coarse sediment deposited on agricultural lands render them unproductive.
Recommended Treatment
Parameter(s) or
Tools available for taking
metric to be measured measurements
1.Contour terraces (bench and gratiné) a. sediment rate in 1) field survey in treated and 1. Erosion and sedimentation rate on the treated sites, 2. Increasing vegetation cover (see vegetation section) ponds, gullies, terraces, non treated sites. gullies, terraces. 3. Gully rehabilitation (stone check dams, gabions, 2) runoff and erosion plots 2. A) Sediment ponds, gully each year one or two appropriate vegetation cover. b. erosion on treated 4. Range management (see vegetation section) 3) water samples in streams B) On the treated sites and terraces before the 5. Promote appropriate agriculture (see vegetation section) implementation will be measured and after the 6. Rehabilitate river channels with vegetation, gabions, and treatment will be measured one or two times per year. These measurements to be compared with adjacent untreated areas. C) On the pilot areas which include different treatment activities (such as terraces, seeding, protection, and untreated area) will be measured after each rainfall. D) On the gully formation will be prepared three dimension map and followed annual degradation – if there is a measure storm event then we will measure sites. 3. Water samples during high runoff in streams. e. United States Study Site: Upper South Platte River Watershed This watershed is a large area of over one million acres and is significant to the state of Colorado as it furnishes water to over two million people along Colorado's Front Range. The elevations range from 6000 feet in the foothills and valleys to 14,000 feet in the high mountain regions. As the South Platte River flows north and east toward the City of Denver, it provides water for agricultural irrigation, recreation, and municipal and industrial uses. The river provides important habitat for fish and wildlife, and high quality drinking water for the watershed and Front Range communities. The watershed has also been classified as Category One watershed in need of restoration. Sources of water include seasonal runoff, underground aquifers, ground streams and man made reservoirs. Numerous wells in the valley floor yield water for agriculture and domestic uses; water impondments provide water for domestic use for the Denver Metropolitan area. The watershed has numerous smaller watersheds that feed into the main South Platte River. Highly erosive granitic soils cover most of the watershed. The watershed experienced a catastrophic fire in 1996, which burned 12,000 acres destroying several homes. Since the fire several 100-year rain events in the fire area have caused flooding and major sediment transport into streams, the South Platte River and of Denver Water's main water distribution reservoirs. The flooding coming off the fire area also caused several deaths as well as destroying roads, bridges, and other properties. Description of Project Area The Upper South Platte Watershed Restoration and Protection Project is a collaborative effort of Federal, State, and Private partners to affect change on a landscape scale. The project is located southwest of the Denver, Colorado metropolitan area. The Waterton/Deckers Composite and Horse Creek Watersheds are where the restoration work will begin for the Upper South Platte Watershed. Sources of water include seasonal runoff, underground aquifers, ground streams, and man-made reservoirs. Numerous wells in valley floors yield water for agricultural and domestic uses; water impoundments provide water for domestic use for the Denver Metropolitan Area. The watershed of Buffalo Creek flows into the north fork of the South Platte River, as do smaller streams in this area. The South Platte River and the north fork of the South Platte River join near the town of South Platte, Colorado. The mean annual precipitation is 12-20 inches (30-50 centimeters). Rainfall occurs April through September and accounts for approximately 50-60 percent of the precipitation. Snowfall occurs September through May and accumulations range from 200-300 inches (508-760 centimeters). The vegetation in the project area falls into the Foothills and Montane, plant zones. Foothills-Elevations in this zone generally are 6,000-7,000 feet (1828-2134 meters), depending on slope exposure. The zone has Gambel oak, mountain mahogany, or pioñon/juniper woodlands at low elevations; forest of ponderosa pine at moderate or high elevation; forests of Douglas-fir on steep, cool, shades slopes; and riparian, broad-leaved forests of cottonwood and boxelder along large streams and rivers. Montane-Elevations in this zone generally are 7,500-9,000 feet (2586-2743 meters), depending on slope exposure. The zone dominantly has forests of ponderosa pine, commonly intermingled with meadows of Arizona fescue and other bunch grasses, at the lower elevations; forests of Douglas-fir at the higher elevations and on north aspects; and some lodgepole pine, aspen, or spruce/fir forests at the upper edge of the higher elevations. Groves of narrow leaf cottonwood are along low elevation waterways. As the altitude increases, forests of blue spruce gradually replace the groves. The ponderosa pine forests are successionally at a stage where the understory is becoming dominated by shade tolerant species such as Douglas-fir and spruce. Consequently, the stand density as measured by basal area/acre is, in many cases, above the threshold for insect and disease infestations. Also problematic is the risk of catastrophic wildfire associated with the closed tree canopies and a fire ladder created by multiple stories of treed vegetation. However, shrub and fire occurrence is not at high levels in the understory. Description of the Project The project area will begin with 1,000 to 5,000 acres of National Forest in the Waterton/Deckers Composite watershed. Wigwam Creek watershed will be dropped from the Waterton/Deckers project area because its marked difference from the remainder of the watershed. The slopes on the eastern side of the South Platte River appear to be a good location to begin the treatments. There are three streams on the State's Monitoring and Evaluation List in this area due to sediment. The streams are: Russell Gulch, Pine Creek and Sugar Creek. Pine Creek was observed to be overwhelmed with fine sediment near its mouth. Stream restoration projects will be completed in these streams to restore fish habitat and reduce sediment yield to the South Platte River where fish habitat is very important. The vegetation treatments will be focused on restoring vegetation conditions to a sustainable condition. Stocking density will be implemented on this large, contiguous area to reduce its susceptibility to insects, disease and wildfire, which will reduce the potential for large-scale catastrophic events. Prescription/Treatments A silvicultural prescription will be used to replicate stand conditions that closely resembles forest conditions that existed prior to 1870 along the Front Range. The desired condition is one where tree density has been reduced, a range of tree sizes exist, and the risk of catastrophic insect outbreaks and wildfires is significantly reduced. This will be accomplished by: Saving the largest diameter trees Trees will be retained which pre-date grazing and fire exclusion; trees approximately 120 years or more in age. (To ensure diversity of size classes, some larger trees may need to be harvested to save smaller diameter trees.) Retain most trees of species other than ponderosa pine for diversity. However, on moist sites where encroachment of shade tolerant trees create ladder fuels, (such as Douglas-fir), these trees will be removed. Reducing stocking levels The completed stands should closely resemble pre-1870 conditions by thinning from below all post-settlement trees, except those needed to emulate or ultimately develop pre-settlement densities and diameter distributions. Based on research, estimated pre-European settlement trees per acre numbers ranged from 25-50+. This would convert to saving 40-50 square feet of basal area per acre in today's second growth stands. For mountain pine beetle control and restoration activities in general, 80 square feet per acre of basal area is the maximum average stocking level recommended, except as may be necessary for wildlife habitat. Controlling noxious weeds Prior to treating the residual slash the area will be treated to reduce their potential spread of exotic and invasive plants. The Pike-San Isabel Noxious Weed Management Plan will be followed when planning for thinning, creating any openings or building any new roads into uninfested area or when crossing infested areas. Roads Planning will be for a low-density road system. Stands will be treated that are near existing roads to avoid new roads. For decommissioning roads, the first one-quarter mile of road will be recontoured to minimize unauthorized use. There are existing roads in this area that could be used during the restoration work and they will be inventoried, evaluated and a plan developed for each road segment that will help maintain the health and function of the South Platte drainage. Where new roads are proposed, they will be designed to minimize the amount of new roads. Temporary roads will be used where it is possible and they will then be decommissioned following use. A plan will be developed to storm proof existing roads and any new roads not planed for decommissioning. Slash Disposal Slash will be piled for burning. These piles will be burned when dry during fall, winter or spring when weather conditions allow. Within the forest restoration unit, slash will be lopped and scattered to a height not to exceed 18". This will add organic material to the soil and aid future broadcast bums. Wildlife Aspen stands will be maintained for sapsuckers and other resource values. Snags and trees with cavities will be designated during the design of the vegetation treatments. The specific habitats for threatened, endangered and sensitive species will be researched and incorporated into the project design. Monitoring Introduction A strategy has been developed to guide monitoring for the Upper South Platte Watershed Protection and Restoration Project. This strategy will guide monitoring at the watershed level to determine if overall project objectives have been met. Activity level monitoring will be determined during NEPA analysis and will incorporate, at a minimum, elements within this strategy. The monitoring strategy was developed in cooperation with the partners involved with this project. Existing partners include Colorado State Forest Service, Colorado Water Quality Control Division, Denver Water Board, National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the United States Forest Service (FS). The objective was to develop a strategy designed to monitor watershed response to restoration activities implemented in the Upper South Platte Watershed. In essence, we want to determine if our management activities meet our objective of reducing fuel hazards and associated catastrophic fire risk while maintaining soil productivity, reducing sediment sources and improving water quality. Plan Overview The monitoring strategy is designed to be dynamic and may change as new information becomes saleable and management activities are identified. It utilizes the "above and below" method of monitoring. Monitoring stations will be established in the upper portion of the watershed as well as in the lower portion of the watershed for some parameters. Other parameters, such as vegetation diversity, will be monitored at the watershed level. Monitoring will be conducted on each 6th level watershed that is treated. The Forest Service, Pike and San Isabel National Forest, will provide for data storage. Information will be shared with the partners on a regular basis. Data collection and analysis will follow established scientific procedures. Where possible, the Denver Water Board water lab will be utilized for water analysis. The Forest Service will work with the partners to obtain information on existing monitoring efforts within the project area. This information will be utilized as appropriate to aid in establishing baseline measurements and assisting in determining overall effects of proposed activities. Oversight will be provided by the International Study Team established for this project. All decisions related to monitoring efforts will be approved by the International Study Team. A Monitoring report will be done annually and presented to the Steering Committee. It will contain at a minimum an evaluation of the data collected, description of project activities and interpretation of effects as they pertain to each 6th level watershed. The monitoring report will become part of the project record and filed with the Pike and San Isabel National Forest.
Site Problem Identification and Study Design: Vegetation

Site: Upper South Platte Watershed
Problem(s): Vegetation density is too thick, and the vegetation structure and composition is not desirable.
PI, Co-PI, and their institutions:
(One researcher, one forestry/resource manager)
Recommended Treatment
Parameter(s) or metric to be
Tools available for taking
measured
1. Tree thinning (mechanical & 1a. Trees per unit area 1a-c: 1) plot or transect Sampling frequency. A) pre and fire) reduce standing density of 1b. Cover frequency (circular or rectangular) for post-treatment; B) 1st, 3rd, 5th year; tree species to a level which 1c.Sq.Feet of ba/ac species (standard stand c) sample overstory and understory lowers risk of crow susceptibility 1d. Quadratic mean diameter of residual examination protocol), 1st and 5th year; sample understory while not increasing surface 2) aerial photos erosion to an unacceptable level. 3) integrated resource inventory Timetable. Site selection, stand 2 (see soil erosion/sedimentation examination, fall 1999/winter 2000. Treatment fall 2000/ winter-spring 2001. Site Problem Indication and Study Design: Soil Erosion and Sedimentation
Site: Upper South Platte Watershed, Buffalo
Problem(s): Catastrophic fire and floods have produced high levels of sediment transport into the drainage system, resulting in impacts to water
quality, aquatic habitat, and valuable water supply systems. Sediments in unmaintained roads .
Recommended Treatment
Parameter(s) or metric to be Tools available for taking
measured
1. Establish appropriate vegetation cover a. total suspended sediments 1) water samples Sampling frequency. Two on disturbed areas (planting, seeding, b. pebble counts in stream 2) stream samples times per week May-August; 1 mulching, matting). time per week August-October. 2. Close, obliterate, and/or stabilize c. miles of roads closed and/or 4) field surveys of treated 3.5 after major storms. stabilized; acres of treated Implementation. Site 3. Maintain drainage systems on existing lands selection/gaging station (fall d. soil loss on site 1999); baseline information e. dissolved oxygen and pH collection (spring 2000); initiate treatment (fall 2000) Site Problem Identification and Study Design: Hydrology
Site: Upper South Platte Watershed
Problem(s): Vegetation keeps too much flow from getting to streams; sedimentation on non-maintained roads excessive; secondary effect from catastrophic fire (loss
of vegetation & resulting loss of soil stability)
Recommended Treatment
Parameter(s) or metric to be measured
Tools available for taking
1. Tree thinning (mechanical & fire) a. Stream flow (quantity and timing) 1) Stream gage with continuous Two streams will be monitored, one b. Model stream flow (quantity and timing) recording (depending on currently from impacted watershed. collected information on rainfall): Suspended sediment/bedload will be d. Total sediment measured 2 times per week from May to 3) Hygrothermograph Silt fence will be used to monitor sediment below road water diversions. f. Summary There is a lot of similarity between all 5 countries with respect to treatments applied, parameters (metrics) to be measured and to proposed tools to be used. The consistency or similarity is also implied in the overlap expressed in Tables 1-3. The discrepancies (where all countries are proposing the same treatment, Table 1, metric, Table 2 or monitoring tool, Table 3) represent specific practices or response interest that do not necessarily need to be accepted by all countries and they can be addressed by the Local Study Team. 3. Objective 2 Evaluate biophysical measurements for assessing the effectiveness of watershed treatments in arid and semi-arid regions. The central hypothesis is that there are some monitoring tools that are better than others for use in evaluating applied watershed projects. The key question is, what are the criteria for determining what are the best tools. Five criteria have been selected for testing: a) e) Appropriateness to metric under the conditions of the study Three of these criteria are quantitative and two are qualitative. Precision, accuracy, and cost data will be obtained in the approach outlined for Objective #1 although accuracy implies that the "real" answer is known and thus must assume either that one tool is the most accurate or that additional more intense measurements are made to establish the base for accuracy. Ease of use and appropriateness to metric under the conditions of the study area require a professional judgment. These latter two criteria can be made somewhat quantitative by using either a ranking or rating scheme. The tools to be evaluated are those listed in Table 3. The International Study Team will develop the analysis scheme, measurement protocols, and necessary forms for use when visiting each study site during the early part of Year 1 of the study. Monitoring will not begin until the International Study Team meets with the Local Study Team. The International Team will have given written instructions and the Local Team will have prepared a detailed study plan in accordance thereto for implementing the monitoring protocols for each tool. The International Team will maintain continuous contact with the Local Teams via a restricted web site. In Year 3 a workshop will be held in Jordan to discuss field results and to visit field sites in Israel, Jordan, and Palestine. In Year 5 a final workshop will be held in Israel to accomplish the final project syntheses. If necessary, small task groups may visit one or more study sites during the 5 year period if specific problems arise. The time chart for activities of the International Study Team is presented in Figure 1. There are three classes of metrics for which the monitoring tools will be evaluated: (1) vegetation, (2) hydrology, and (3) erosion and sedimentation. In terms of response to the suite of treatments being used, vegetation will give the fastest response and is perhaps the easiest to monitor. All study sites will use various combinations of field transects and study plots. Also, all study sites will include photo coverage. Thus it will be possible to use total measurements on photos as a control measure against which transect and plot data on treated and untreated areas can be compared. The single most important measure common to all sites is ground cover. The single most important hydrology measure for all sites is runoff. This is a more difficult measurement to get on specific slopes requiring runoff plots. Turkey and Palestine plan to use runoff plots, they are expensive and require replication on both treated and untreated slopes. The "control" runoff measurement will be by using stream gages on small (20 - 50 ha) paired subcatchments of treated and untreated areas. The events to be compared are runoff events resulting from high intensity rainfall, thus an accompanying measure of rainfall by recording rain gages is critical. The major limitation of this technique will be a lack of pre-treatment calibration of the paired catchments; selection of paired units as similar as possible is highly important. A second and very important hydrologic measurement in the semi-arid region is spring flow. These measurements can be obtained by either flowmeters where pipes are used to capture and deliver spring water or by small flumes with water level recorders where springs appear in natural channels. Erosion measurements are made on site by surveys along transects. It is difficult to get total erosion from slopes. Usually this is estimated from runoff/erosion plots such as planned in Turkey. One technique for getting total measurement of erosion from a slope is to use a trap such as a silt fence at the base of the slope. The "control" measure for total erosion from an area is to measure suspended and bedload sediment at the catchment level by sampling runoff during peaks and trapping bedload in a stilling basin or sediment pond. Both Turkey and Israel sites involve measurement of gully advancement by field surveys. The "control" for these measurements would be photo analysis. At least 3 of the study sites plan to use GIS as a tool in analyzing data. The International Team will need to look at the possibility of evaluating this "secondary tool" in the monitoring system. 4. Objective 3 Demonstrate effective treatments for soil and water conservation and the efficient monitoring thereof using pilot watersheds. This is not a research objective of this study but a "fallout" or added benefit if objectives 1 and 2 are carried out successfully. It is part of the technology transfer effort important to the MERC program. Pilot watershed demonstration areas are valuable learning areas for both professionals and land users. The principal requirements with regard to this proposed study is: (1) The areas selected and the treatments applied are relevant to the region, (2) The metrics used in evaluation are relevant to the treatments being evaluated, (3) The monitoring results are clear and conclusive. A fourth requirement is not a scientific one but an important logistical one; the site should be relatively accessible. The first and fourth requirements have been addressed; it is up to the joint efforts of the local study teams with the International Study Team to insure that requirements 2 and 3 are met. One important study design consideration that is relevant to both the research and demonstration objectives is that, wherever possible, monitoring be "nested" on the same area. An example would be that in comparing a treatment such as grazing control, vegetation, hydrology, and erosion measurements be made at the same sites and the various tools used for each also be applied at the same sites. 5. Selected References USGS. 1997. National Handbook of Recommended Methods for Water-Data Acquisition. USDI Geological Survey. Reston, VA Two Volumes, 10 Chapters. Harrelson, Cheryl C., C. L. Rawlins, and John P. Poyondy. Stream Channel Reference Sites: an illustrated guide to field technique. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, GTR RM-245. 61p. Shachak, Moshe, Menachem Sachs, and Itshak Moshe. 1998 Ecosystem Management of Desertified Shrublands in Israel Ecosystems 1:475-483 Pierson, F.B., W.H. Blackburn, S.S. Van Vactor, and J.C. Wood. Partitioning Small Scale Spatial Variability of Runoff and Erosion on Sagebrush Rangeland. Water Resources Bulletin 30(6): 1081-1089. Yair, A. (1999). Spatial Variability in the Runoff Generated in Small Arid Watersheds. Arid Lands Management by Hoekstra and Shachak. University of Illinois Press Morin, Joseph, Daniel Rosenfeld, and Eyal Amitai. 1999. Radar Rainfield Evaluation and Use. In Arid Lands Management Hoekstra, Thomas W. and Moshe Shachak. (1999) Arid Lands Management Toward Ecological Sustainability University of Illinois Press 279 p. Dunne, Thomas. 1977. Evaluation of Erosion Conditions and Trend. In FAO Conservation Guide #1, Rome 293 p. Renard, K.G., G.R. Foster, G.A. Wiesies, D.K. McCool, and D/C/ Upder/ 1997. Predicting Soil Erosion by Water. USDA Agricultural Handbook #703. U.S. Govt. Printing Office. 384 p. Toy, T.J., G.R. Foster, and K.G. Rendard (1999). RUSLE for Mining, Construction, and Reclamation Lands. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 54(2):462-467. U.S. Department of Agricultre. 1979. Field Manual for Research in Agricultural Hydrology. USDA Agr. Handbook #274. U.S. Govt. Printing Office 47p. VII. Technical Antecedents
A. GRANTS HISTORY This proposal has not been submitted to any other sponsors for funding. The principal investigators do not have relevant research project grants to report. B. PREVIOUS USAID FUNDED WORK The principal investigators have not been funded through any of the Middle East programs. VIII. Management Analysis
A. MANAGEMENT APPROACH The USDA Forest Service, Inventory and Monitoring Institute (IMI), Fort Collins, Colorado is proposing the monitoring evaluation project "Monitoring and Evaluation of Watersheds in the Middle East Region" on behalf of the five participating countries. The mission of the Inventory and Monitoring Institute is to facilitate and support the development and application of social, economic and ecological inventory and monitoring protocols within the Forest Service and its international partners. As such, Dr. Thomas Hoekstra, Director of the IMI is best suited to provide Administrative and Financial direction to the study. Programmatic and Technical oversight for the study will be self-directed by the International Study Team. (Please see attached letter from Dr. Uriel Safriel, PI concurring with this recommendation for the administrative format for the study in Appendix B.) Administrative and Financial Oversight Administrative and financial management of the project is the responsibility of the Inventory and Monitoring Institute Director, Dr.
Thomas W. Hoekstra. Dr. Hoekstra's CV is presented in Appendix A. Besides the Director, the Inventory and Monitoring Institute has
an administrative staff of two persons. The administrative staff consists of an Administrative Officer who has budget, contract, grants,
and agreements, responsibility and a Secretary who shares authority and responsibility for procurement of supplies and equipment
with the administrative officer and has travel and time regulation responsibility. The Institute will administer and distribute the budget
as indicated in the proposal and as recommended by the International Study Team.
The Inventory and Monitoring Institute has a World -Wide Web site () that contains the
documents for this proposal and project. All of the collaborators have accessed this web site during the development of the proposal.
The web site will continue to be used as a means of real time communication between collaborators in the Middle East and the United
States. It is anticipated that data and progress will be updated and shared, on the web site, on an annual basis, as close to the end of the
field season as possible. Each participating country has made a commitment to have data during and after the study (see
correspondence regarding their commitment in Appendix B). The data will be part of the information available on the website. There
is no budget requested for web site maintenance/email communications. However, as presented in the proposal budget, funding is
being requested for travel by the Principal Collaborators, or International Study Team Members, over the life of the project to
facilitate their active participation in the research program at all five countries. It is anticipated that the International Study Team will
visit the five study sites at the beginning of the project to finalize treatment design and to jointly develop common monitoring
protocols. During the second year, travel by the group will be minimal and most contact will be electronic. It may be necessary for
some travel by members of the Local Study Teams in the Middle East to facilitate implementation. A second International Study
Team meeting, to evaluate progress, will be held the third year. Holding the meeting in Israel, Jordan, or Palestine to minimize travel
will minimize cost. A third meeting will be held in year five to analyze the data and report results. Interim reports will be developed
annually by each Local Study team and collated/summarized by the International Study Team via electronic communication.
Funding, provided by the USDA Forest Service, has already been shared between the collaborators over the past year to permit all
parties to meet in Israel, Jordan and Turkey to both review proposed study sites and to jointly define project objectives. Fund transfers
from the USDA Forest Service are accomplished through an agreement with the USDA Foreign Agriculture Service, who has the
financial authority for sending funds to other countries.
The Inventory and Monitoring Institute Director, Dr Thomas W. Hoekstra is the Lead Contact and Administrator for the project and is
responsible for insuring the necessary timelines and deadlines are met. In addition, Dr. James Meiman, Professor Emeritus at Colorado
State University is assisting the Institute by functioning as a Technical Advisor on the project. Dr. Hoekstra can lend continuity to the project administration since the International Study Team technical supervisor will change on an annual basis. Programmatic and Technical Oversight
The technical and programmatic oversight for the project will reside with the International Study Team comprised of two members
from each country. It can be expected that Dr. Hoekstra and Dr. Meiman will participate in IST meetings in a supportive or advisory
capacity. The Chair of the IST will be the Principal Investigator from Israel, Jordan, or Palestine. Dr. Uriel Safriel, Israel will Chair
the IST for the first year. The IST will determine the subsequent rotation cycle between Israel, Jordan, and Palestine. The IST will
review the proposal from each participating country and collectively assist in insuring continuity and communality in overall goals.
The IST will play an authoritative role in defining a common set of metrics and protocols for each country. The intent of this oversight
is not to alter the specificity that each country brings to designing watershed practices specific to their problems. The intent is to create
a common platform that insures substantive Israeli-Arab interaction will occur throughout the study. Although somewhat
constraining, that objective can be best met if some degree of metric and protocol consistency, between countries, is insured in the
design phase.
Each collaborating country has identified Co-investigators capable of representing both resource management and research whom are
capable of assisting in the programmatic and technical oversight of the project. One or both of the co-investigators also participates on
the Local Study, or implementation, Team (LST) within country as a means of insuring strong coordination between the direction that
comes from the (IST) and implementation and follow through on the ground. In addition to the commitment of the individuals
involved in the project, each country has identified one or more official institutions that are strongly committed to the project and will
insure the work is accomplished with the funds provided from the various sources.
B. STAFF AND TECHNICAL COLLABORATION The timeline for activity (Table 5), team responsibility (section IV.C) and participants (Table 4) have been defined to the degree
possible at this point. Coordination of activity will be the responsibility of Dr. Thomas Hoekstra and the IST chair with the assistance
of Dr. James Meiman and Dr. Charles Troendle. All three will attempt to facilitate the activity of the International Study Team rather
than direct the activity.
The proposed projects, in all 5 countries, will be implemented whether or not the MERC proposal is funded implying a major
investment in technical and financial resources by all participants. MERC funding is critical to the cusses of the study since the
MERC Funds will be used to facilitate and insure the international collaboration and provide the opportunity to improve Arab-Israeli
relations.
C. TRAINING
As described in the individual site descriptions, a major by product of the MERC related activity would be training. Several graduate
research programs are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. In addition, objective 3 of this proposal specifically addresses
the use of the project sites as future research and demonstration (technology transfer) areas.

D. FACILITIES
The proposed project will be undertaken by well-established government and university organizations. The USDA Forest Service, the
Turkish Ministry of Forestry, the Karen Kayemeth Leisrael, Israel, the Badia Research and Development Program, Jordan, the
Blaustein Institute for Desert Research, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, the University of Jordan, the Al-Balqa Applied
University, Faculty of Agriculture and Hebron University are all outstanding organizations and each is well equipped to manage and
carry out the proposed project. As described in the proposal, the Israeli, Jordanian and United States collaborators will be supporting
and assisting the Palestinian collaborators to assure their full involvement.
In the United States, Israel, Jordan and Turkey, the study sites are owned and managed by the collaborating organization.
Considerable infrastructure is already in place at those sites, with primary support coming from the host country and augmented by
funds from the U.S. State Department and the USDA Forest Service. The proposal submitted to MERC will have complete access to
the existing sites and facilities, thereby leveraging the primary use of MERC funds to acquire data and insure collaboration rather than
fund facilities infrastructure or implement treatments. In the case of the Palestinians, the MERC funds will have a dual role, focusing on capacity building primarily for training people not only on the Palestinian study site but also by working with collaborators and through a graduate degree program at Ben-Gurion University, Israel. The USDA Forest Service, Inventory and Monitoring Institute, has on staff or on call, a significant cadre of brometricians/statisticians who will be able to lend support, as conferees, to the design and analysis phases of the effort. However, MERC limits the US portion of the grant to 15 percent of the total, therefore, the need for the significant U.S. Forest Service contribution. Expenditure of the U.S. State Department funding is restricted to Israel, Jordan, and the Palestinian Authority as well. In deriving the budget, the requests from each participating country were weighed against the availability of funds from differing sources. For example, State Department funds are only guaranteed in the first year so they were used to offset start up costs while the majority of the MERC request is distributed through subsequent years. Six spreadsheets are presented; the first represents the 5-year summary of project needs by country. Spreadsheets 2-6 present the requested budget, by individual country, for each of the 5 years. In addition, one can note the "in-country" matching contribution to the overall project. IX. Special Concerns Analysis
It is not anticipated that the proposed project will create any special concerns. Proposal title: Monitoring and Evaluation of Watersheds in the Middle East Region Proposal number: M20-022 Principal Investigator: Dr. Thomas W. Hoekstra, Lead Contact Special Concerns Checklist Are human volunteers/subjects involved in this research? A. X No – Please proceed to item II. Has the required protocol been provided in the proposal? a. No. Explain why not. Has the required informed consent form been provided with the proposal? a. No. Explain why not. Have the required statements of approval from ethical review committees been attached? a. No. Explain why not. Does this research involve biologicals, reagents, or procedures, which may present a hazard to laboratory personnel? A. X No – Please proceed to item III. Yes – hazardous material used is: _Radioisotopes _Toxic Has the required protocol describing the safe handling/disposal of this material been included in the proposal? a. No. Explain why not. Have the regulatory committee approval forms or license numbers been attached to the proposal? a. No. Explain why not. Does this research involve animal or plant pathogens or pests, which must be contained? A. X No – Please proceed to item IV. Yes – description _ Has a protocol describing proper containment and disposal facilities been X No. Explain why not. Have certifications of institutional approval of the protocol been attached to the No. Explain why not. Does this research involve international shipment of organisms or biological or controlled materials? X No – Please proceed to item V. Yes description Have permits showing compliance with international import/export regulations been attached to the proposal? a. No. Explain why not. Does this research involve recombinant DNA? X No – Please proceed to item VI. Has a protocol following established guidelines (e.g., NIH) been included in the No. Explain why not Yes – guidelines used _ Have certifications of institutional review committee approvals been included No. Explain why not Yes – committee Is field release of these organisms planned? a. Before release, a detailed protocol in conformance with established US and collaborating country guidelines must be approved by an institutional review committee and AID/SCI. Does this research involve vertebrate animals? X No – Please proceed to item VII. non-human primates laboratory animals Has a protocol following established guidelines which describes the humane treatment of animals been included in the proposal? a. No. Explain why not Yes – guidelines used _ Have certifications of animal welfare review committee approvals been included with the proposal? a. No. Explain why not. Yes – committee Are field collections of any plants or animals involved in this research? X No – Please proceed to item VIII. Yes – species? Has a protocol describing the field collection been provided in the proposal? a. No. Explain why not Have collection permits been included with the proposal? a. No. Explain why not Will any threatened or endangered species be involved? Has a protocol describing steps taken to mitigate the impact on this species been provided in the proposal? a. No. Explain why not Have certifications of governmental approvals been attached to the proposal? a. No. Explain why not Will any environmental concerns be raised by this research? X No – Please proceed to item VIII C Yes – hazard type: pesticides – specify other chemical hazard – specify _ physical hazard – specify biological hazard – specify _ Have they been addressed in the proposal, including a protocol to reduce the No. Explain why not Has assurance been given in the proposal that AID's pesticide guidelines will be No. Explain why not Have the approvals of appropriate institutional review committees been attached No. Explain why not Will an environmental impact statement be needed? a. Would the widespread application of the results of this research raise environmental X No – Please proceed to item IX Yes. This issue must be addressed in the proposal. Are the results of this work likely to result in a product or process for which intellectual property rights (IPR) are applicable (patents, plant breeders' rights, copyrights, etc.)? process – type product – type Is the sharing among the collaborators of the revenues and control of IPR addressed in the proposal? a. X No. Explain why not. Not Applicable Does the proposal discuss the institutional responsibilities to protect rights if a patentable product/process is developed? a. X No. Explain why not. Not Applicable Does the proposed research involve any pre-existing IPR? Yes. The restrictions on the research proposed must be addressed in the proposal. Identify any further special concerns, which you wish to be considered. X. Budget Analysis
A. BUDGET AND BUDGET SUMMARY If this grant request is successful, it is expected that total funding available for the project will be derived from three sources and total $1,305,150. Of that amount, $649,150 is being sought from MERC, $300,000 is available from the U.S. State Department for FY 1999 (the letter of confirmation appears in Appendix B), and the U.S. Forest Service is providing $356,000 to fund Turkey and to assist in funding the United States component (the letter of confirmation appears in Appendix B). Turkey is not eligible for MERC funding and the United States is limited to 15 percent of the total MERC grant, therefore, the need for the U.S. Forest Service contribution. Expenditure of the U.S. State Department funding is restricted to Israel, Jordan, and the Palestinian Authority as well. However, the determination was made that a small portion of the State Department funding could be used to fund a portion of the US IST travel. In deriving the budget, the requests from each participating country were weighed against the availability of funds from differing sources. For example, State Department funds are available only in the first year 1999 (2000), so they were used to offset start up costs while the majority of the MERC request is distributed through subsequent years. Budget spreadsheets are presented; the first represents the 5-year summary of project needs by country. Spreadsheets 2-6 present the requested budget, by individual country, for each of the 5 years. In addition, one can note the "in-country" matching contribution to the overall project from sheets 2-6. B. BUDGET JUSTIFICATION For the most part the need for the requested funding is identified and documented in the Technical Analysis section via the list of activities and monitoring techniques proposed. As noted, the participating countries are implementing the projects themselves at their own cost. The request to MERC is intended to supplement the budget in order to allow adequate monitoring and evaluation of treatment effect which is the focus of the MERC aspect of the demonstrations. Funding is also requested to facilitate the International Collaboration, via the International Study Team, between the study partners in design and analysis, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. This aspect of the project(s) is not feasible without the requested financial support. At the same time, the money being leveraged as a result of this proposal is many times the magnitude of the request. Depending on the country, the MERC budget requests may involve salary for technician support, but only in those instances where an additional person is required but not available to collect data specific to the MERC aspects of the study. In other instances, such as for the US, a minimal amount of specific equipment is required that could not be funded, except through the study budget, as its only purpose is to meet the needs of the study. Graduate students, a critical component in both capacity building within country and in Arab-Israeli collaboration are budgeted at $12,000 - $15,000 per year. This includes $4,000 - $5,000 for tuition, approximately $2,000 for housing, $500 for health insurance and $6,000 for living expenses. For Jordan, the cost of graduate students is reduced because living expenses are not included. Each budget has a significant component for remote sensing that includes both aerial and satellite imagery. We expect this to be one of the universal monitoring techniques. Equipment needs vary by country, some of which reflect the fact that some countries do not currently have the capacity to measure what the group collectively feels should be a common metric (e.g. flow). A significant portion of the budget request is for travel and collaboration of the International Study Team and the Local Study Teams, particularly Israel, Jordan and Palestine. None of the requested funding will be used to support participation by Dr.'s Troendle, Meiman and Hoekstra.
5 Year Budget Summary
FUNDING SOURCE
US STATE DEPARTMENT
Palestinian Authority 2,000 100,000 201,000 $300,000
$1,816,600
GRAND TOTAL
$3,121,750
Year Budget Request, Israel
10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Technician (200%) (*) 16,000 10,000 16,000 10,000 16,000 10,000 22,000 10,000 Grad Student (100%) Equipment
Computer/Software Expendable 4,550 750 1,250 Services
International Study Team Overhead
4,875 9,450 4,875 9,450 4,875 $74,500 $14,450 $31,300 $48,650 $31,075
* The technicians required to collect the monitoring data are not currently available using in-country funding 5 Year Budget Request, Palestinian Authority

Matching MERC Matching MERC Matching Technician (100%%) (*) Direct Cost
Other Travel
Equipment
Meterological (2) Miscellaneous (***) Computer/Software Services
6,000 2,000 6,000 International Study Team TOTALS $114,500
$10,500 $33,200 $10,500 $43,350 $10,500
* Technician is currently not available, will be hired to assist two graduate students in data collection *** Miscellaneous equipment includes piezometric ** Consultant is needed to assist in study design & implementation and remote sensing application and interpretation (yr.1) & in the final analysis period (yr.5) 5 Year Budget Request, Jordan
Scientist (200%) Professional (300%) 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 Grad Student (300%) 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Direct Cost
Equipment
Meterological (6) Computer/Software (*) Services
Terraces 100,000 International Study Team TOTALS $109,000
$347,000
$207,000 $43,000 $207,000 $39,000 $207,000 $43,000 $207,000
* GIS Software and Hardware 5 Year Budget Request, Turkey
Professional (10%) 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Grad Student (100%) Consultant (50%) (*) Direct Cost
1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Equipment
Meterological (2) Computer/Software 1,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 Services
Satellite Imagery & Photos Soil Preparation International Study Team $67,000 $52,000 $30,000
$48,000 $19,000 $57,000 $19,000 $54,000 $19,000
* Assist in analysis of imagery data, study 5 Year Budget Request, United States
ITEM YEAR
Matching MERC USFS Matching MERC USFS Matching MERC USFS Matching Professional (150%) Direct Cost
Equipment
Meterological (1) Computer/Software Services
Data Reduction & Analysis International Study Team $2,000 $23,050 $55,200 $60,000 $15,750 $11,200 $60,000 $18,250 $11,200 $60,000 $15,750 $11,200 $60,000 $22,250 $11,200 $60,000
* A summer technician will be hired to collect the data associated with project, do pebble counts and habitat assessment, currently not available ** Instruments included Gerlach Tronghs (sediment) Current meters (2), S.H Fencing for sediment trapping, data loggers and downloading software *** An aerial Appendices

A. BIOGRAPHICAL DATA


THOMAS W. HOEKSTRA

Dr. Thomas W. (Tom) Hoekstra is the Director of the Inventory and Monitoring Institute located in Fort
Collins, Colorado. Prior to this assignment, Tom was a member of the Ecosystem Management Staff, National
Forest Systems, Washington Office, as Chief Ecologist for National Monitoring and Evaluation. Tom is also
the Program Manager for the International Forestry Relations with the Jewish National Fund, New York/Keren
Kayemeth Leisrael, Israel (JNF/KKL), Ministry of Forestry of Turkey (MOF), and the International Arid Lands
Consortium (LALC).
Before moving to National Forest Systems, he served four and one half years as the Assistant Director for
Research and two years as the Assistant Director for Planning and Applications at the Rocky Mountain Forest
and Range Experiment Station in Fort Collins, Colorado. Prior to that, he served as Assistant Director for
Research at the North Central Station in St. Paul, Minnesota; Project Leader and Research Wildlife Biologist,
Rocky Mountain Station, Fort Collins, Colorado; Research Wildlife Biologist, Policy Analysis Staff,
Washington, DC; Assistant/Associate Professor of Wildlife Ecology, The University of Vermont, Burlington,
Vermont.
Tom is the co-author, with Dr. T.F.H. Allen, of a book titled Towards a Unified Ecology, Columbia University
Press, and is currently writing a sequel book on Sustainability of Ecological Systems with Allen and Dr. Joseph
Tainter. Tom is also co-technical editor of the book titled, Arid Lands Management - Toward Ecological
Sustainability, an IALC sponsored project. In addition, Tom has authored or co-authored over 80 scientific
papers during his 25 year career.
Tom holds BSA and PhD degrees in Wildlife Management and Wildlife Ecology, respectively from Purdue
University. He was given the distinguished Agriculture Alumni award in 1997.
Education:

1964
Bachelor of Science in Agriculture, Purdue University Doctor of Philosophy, Purdue University
Research Experience, including current assignment:
1970 – 1978 Assistant/Associate Professor of Wildlife, School of Natural Resources, The University of
1978 – 1988 Research Scientist, Project Leader, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station 1988 – 1989 Assistant Station Director for Research, North Central Forest Experiment Station 1989 – 1990 Assistant Station Director for Planning and Applications, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station 1990 – 1995 Assistant Station Director for Research, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station
1995 - Pres. Chief Ecologist, Ecosystem Management, National Forest Systems, Washington, DC
Awards:

Year
Type of Award/Citation Received From RPA Assessment Group - for developing the Dept of Agriculture 1980 Assessment of the Forest and Range Land Situation in the United States. Outstanding Research Leadership of a highly Rocky Mountain Sta. productive new Forest Service Research Work Unit, RM-4101, Land and Resource Management Planning Employee Suggestion - Use method to Rocky Mountain Sta. readily identify CPR trained personnel Certificate of Merit - Leadership and innovative Dep. Chief, Research research in developing projections of changes in wildlife, fish and water resources for "The South's Fourth Forest: Alternatives for the Future" For Leadership in Coordinating the FORPLAN Dep. Chief, Research Symposium Certificate of Appreciation - For outstanding leadership as Research Project Leader of the 1989 RPA Range Forage, Resource Interactions, and Wildlife and Fish Assessments, and Co-Resource Specialist In Recognition of Exemplary Contributions to Critique of Land Management Planning For Serving as Acting Assistant Director Rocky Mountain Sta. for Continuing Research-North October 1990 – April 1991 Certificate of Appreciation – For significant contributions to and participation in the amendment of the Rocky Mountain Regional Guide and Environmental Impact Statement. The Regional Guide provides strategic goals and objectives for managing Region 2 as well as the planning guidance necessary to revise Forest Plans. Merit Performance Awards 87,88, 89,
90, 91,92
During his 25 year career in science, Dr. Hoekstra published over 80 papers, made many invited presentations
and lectures and served as an ecological and land management-planning expert to resource management
organizations. His publications have spanned many topics within the overall field of ecology ranging from
forest wildlife management to documents such as the National Assessment of the status condition and trends of
wildlife and fish resources for the Resources Planning Act. His leadership in ecology has been affirmed with
his book: Toward a Unified Ecology co-authored with Dr. T.F.H. Allen of the University of Wisconsin. A
follow up book on Sustainability in Ecology using the framework in the first book will be published in 1996.
Much of this output was done while serving in a research administrative role rather than as a bench scientist.
Contributions of Major Impact on Science or Technology:

Synthesis of Ecological Thought. Toward a Unified Ecology describes two key demands that are being
asked of ecology: 1) that the discipline increasingly be a predictive one and 2) that ecologists be
prepared to consider large-scale systems. These systems become simple or complex based on the level
and type of explanation required, and a strict and consistent epistemology is needed in light of new
insights into the nature of complexity. Allen and Hoekstra argue that complex systems analysis requires
ecologists to distinguish models and to recognize that models must evoke a scale and point of view.
Toward a Unified Ecology offers a strategy to attain a unity that brings basic ecology to bear on
ecological management. This unique monograph emphasizes what ecologists do and why they do it, as
well as specific research strategies.

National Assessment of Wildlife and Fish. The USDA Forest Service received a legal responsibility
to determine the status condition and trend of several renewable natural resources in the passage of the
1974 RPA law. Dr. Hoekstra led the team that developed the data, analyses, and interpreted the
information for the 1989 RPA Assessment of Wildlife and Fish. An important basis for this work was
the published theoretical framework for the analyses and information needed. Data collection involved
all 50 states and several other federal agencies such as the USDI Bureau of Land Management and the
Fish and Wildlife Service. The over all effort was coordinated with the USDA Soil Conservation
Service that had a similar responsibility to conduct an Appraisal of Wildlife and Fish resources. The
information contained in the document was the basis for development of alternative management
programs in both the Forest Service 1990 RPA Program and the SCS Program. Subsequent RPA
Assessments of Wildlife and Fish have built upon the framework developed by Dr. Hoekstra in adding
data and analyses to this ongoing effort.

Research Leadership:

In his leadership role as a research administrator, Dr. Hoekstra developed a strong ecological perspective within
Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station research work units, which provides the research basis
for ecological management of Rocky Mountain and Southwestern natural resources. Over half of the Rocky
Mountain Station research projects have been re-chartered under Dr. Hoekstra's leadership with a central
technical focus of ecological sustainability. His work has provided a very close working relationship between
the Station and Regions 2 and 3 of the Forest Service.
Technology Transfer:

Dr. Hoekstra is a recognized national and international expert on ecological principles who is sought out
continually for technical advice and counsel. Because his expertise is recognized both among his scientific peer
community and natural resource land managers, Dr. Hoekstra is frequently requested to provide advice and to
take leadership on ecological issues by groups ranging from the National Forest Service's regional offices and
national forests to the Board of Directors of the International Arid Lands Consortium. He serves as chairman of
the Research Advisory Committee to the Consortium, which involves researchers from five universities. He is
also consulted by the Jewish National Fund on the scientific merit of ecological research and developmental
activities supported by the Fund. He also has a steady stream of invitations to lecture on university campuses in
the U.S. and foreign countries.
Resource Management:

Dr. Hoekstra has the responsibility to assure, through review and recommended revision with the Regional
Leadership Teams, that national and regional effectiveness monitoring policies and procedures needed by Forest
Supervisors and District Rangers are a scientifically sound basis for implementing current programs and plans
of work.
His duties of the National Monitoring and Evaluation Chief Ecologist include: (1) provide national leadership
in the development, review, revision, and recommendation of effectiveness monitoring and evaluation policies
for naturally disturbed ecological systems, specifically affected by fire, insects, disease, etc.; (2) work with
Regional Leadership Teams to evaluate current policies and procedures used to develop restoration
management program activities needed and used in ecological systems impacted by fire, insect, disease, etc.; (3)
work with the National Monitoring and Evaluation Coordinator in facilitating his/her development of long-term
monitoring and evaluation capacity and strategy for the Forest Service; (4) represent the Forest Service on
interagency monitoring and evaluation policy issues as requested by the National Leadership Team and
Regional Leadership Teams.
International Activities:

Dr. Hoekstra is National Program Manager for Forest Service programs with the Jewish National Fund (JNF)
and the International Arid Land Consortium (IALC). He is responsible for managing the research,
development, and technical assistance programs of the Forest Service that are carried out in cooperation with
the JNF and IALC.
His duties include: (1) developing and recommending a strategic plan for the Forest Service International
Forestry program that is associated with the JNF and IALC; (2) enhancing, monitoring, and evaluating the
collaborative research studies of the Forest Service and the JNF in the United States and Israel; (3) develop
technical assistance programs with the JNF that jointly meet the needs of the Forest Service and the JNF in
Israel and the United States; (4) represent the Forest Service at the Board of Directors of the IALC to assure that
the policies of the Forest Service are represented in the IALC decision process and that USDA Forest Service
appropriated funds provided to IALC are used consistent with congressional intent and Forest Service laws and
regulations; (5) represent the Forest Service at the IALC Research and Demonstration Advisory Committee to
assure that the technical and administrative responsibilities of the Forest Service are incorporated in the research
and demonstration activities of IALC; (6) assure that the Forest Service is properly represented at IALC
sponsored events with other federal and state government entities.
Dr. Hoekstra is the immediate past chairman of the Research Advisory Committee to the International Arid
Lands Consortium. The Consortium encourages collaborative research between US and Israeli scientists for the
purpose of developing knowledge and technology to sustain arid and semi-arid ecological systems in the United
States, Israel and other countries around the world.
Dr. Hoekstra also provides technical support to the Deputy Chief for International Forestry and the Deputy
Chief for Research in the implementation of the Letter of Intent (LOI) between USDA-Forest Service and its
counterpart in Mexico, INIFAP. Dr. Hoekstra provides technical review for seven working groups chartered by
the LOI in advising the Deputy Chiefs on research proposals submitted for funding. Dr. Hoekstra also provides
backup to the Deputy Chiefs for policy matters that arise in the implementation of the LOI.
Development of Other Scientists:

Development of other scientists has been a long-standing objective of Dr. Hoekstra. He has assisted several
existing research scientists in the graduate programs and early research careers. These scientists have been
promoted based on their productivity to mid- and high-level scientist positions. Several are now research
Project Leaders who are directing their own research teams. Three examples include Dr. John Hof, Dr. Linda
Joyce, and Dr. Curtis Flather. Others that have been part of his program and moved to other research stations or
into management programs include Dr. Cynthia Swanson, Dr. Gregory Alward, Dr. Patricia Flebbe, and Dr.
Ralph Alig.
Work Force Diversity:

Dr. Hoekstra has been a long-term supporter of workforce diversity in the hiring and training of women and
minorities. As the list above attests to, Dr. Hoekstra has sought out and brought women into the teams of
research scientists that he has been responsible for. As an Assistant Director for Research, he has encouraged
research Project Leaders to increase the hiring of minority employees in both temporary and permanent
positions. He has worked to make the living and working conditions of minorities moving into a predominately
while workforce more commensurate with their cultural heritage rather than requiring the traditional while male
operating procedures is applied uniformly. For example, several American Indian employees prefer to remain
within driving distance of their pueblos, African American employees desire to be in a work/living environment
with other African Americans. Dr. Hoekstra has worked to accommodate their minority needs.
Selected List of Publications:

Synthesis of Ecological Thought
(1)
Allen, T.F.H. and T.W. Hoekstra. 1985. The instability of primitives and unpredictable complexity in Systems Inquiring Vol. 1. Proceedings of the 25th annual meeting of the S.G.S.R. May 27-31, Los Angeles. Intersystems, Seaside, CA. Allen, T.F.H. and T.W. Hoekstra. 1986. Description of complexity in prairies. Proceedings of 9th North American Prairie Conference. Pp. 71-73. (ed. G.K. Clambey). Moorhead, MN. Allen, T.F.H. and T.W. Hoekstra. 1986. Instability in over connected and under connected systems: a matter of relative lag at different hierarchical levels. Pp. D-78 to D-85. In: (ed. J. Dillon) Proc. internat. conf. on mental images, values, and reality. Vol. 1. SGSR 30th Annual Meeting. Inter-systems, Salinas, CA. Allen, T.F.H., R.V. O'Neill and T.W. Hoekstra. 1987. Inter-level relations in ecological research management: some working principles from hierarchy theory. J. Applied Systems Analysis 14:63-79 (1987). Allen, T.F.H. and T.W. Hoekstra. 1987. Problems of scaling in restoration ecology: a practical application of hierarchy theory, 289-300. In: (eds. W. Jordan, M. Gilpin and J. Aber) Restoration Ecology, pp 342. Cambridge. Allen, T.F.H. and T.W. Hoekstra. 1988. The Critical Role of Scaling in Land Modeling. In: Perspectives on Land Modeling. Proceedings of a Workshop, November 17-20, 1986, Toronto, Ontario. (eds. R. Gelinas, D. Bond and B. Smit) Occasional Papers in Geography Series (No. 13), University of Guelph, Ontario. Allen, T.F.H. and T.W. Hoekstra. 1989. Further comment on H.J. Carney -'Competition and the integration of population, community and ecosystem studies.' Functional Ecology 3:342-3. Allen, T.F.H. and T.W. Hoekstra. 1990. The confusion between scale-defined levels and conventional levels of organization in ecology. Journal of Vegetation Science 1:5-12. Hoekstra, T.W., T.F.H. Allen, and C.H. Flather. 1991. The implicit scaling in ecological research: on when to make studies of Mice and Men. Bioscience 41: 148-154. (10) Allen, T.F.H. and T.W. Hoekstra. 1991. The role of heterogeneity in scaling of ecological systems under analysis. Chapter 3 in J. Kolasa and S. Pickett eds. Springer-Verlag, pp. 47-68. (11) Allen, T.F.H. and T.W. Hoekstra. 1992. Toward a Unified Ecology, Columbia Univ. Press. (12) Allen, T.F.H., T.W. Hoekstra and G. Mitman. 1992. Physiology to ecosystem; not as easy as you think. 50-61 In: S. Colombo, G. Hogan and V. Wearn (eds.) Aug 17th-20th. Proc. 12th Forest Biol. Workshop. Ontario Forest Research Inst. Sault Ste. Marie. (13) Allen, T.F.H., G. Mitman, and T.W. Hoekstra. 1993. Synthesis Mid-Century: J.T. Curtis and the Community Concept In: J. Fralish (ed.) Curtis Memorial Volume. Proc. Wisconsin Acad. Sci. Arts Letters. (14) Allen, T.F.H. and Thomas W. Hoekstra. 1994. Toward a Definition of Sustainability. pp. 98- 107. In: W.W. Covington and L.F. DeBano (eds.) Sustainable Ecological Systems: Implementing an Ecological Approach to Land Management, July 12-15, 1993, Flagstaff, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-247. 363 p. (15) Allen, T.F.H. and Thomas W. Hoekstra. 1995. Sustainability: A Matter of Human Values in a Material Setting. pp. 5-10. In: C. Aguirre-Bravo et al. (eds.), Partnerships for sustainable Forest Ecosystem Management: Fifth Mexico/U.S. Biennial Symposium, October 17-20, 1994, Guadalajara, Mexico. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-266. pp. 5-10.
National Assessment of Wildlife and Fish

Schweitzer, D.L., C.T. Cushwa and T.W. Hoekstra. 1978. The 1979 National Assessment of Wildlife and Fish: A Progress Report Transactions of the 43rd North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conf. pp. 226-237. Hoekstra, T.W. and C.T. Cushwa. 1979. Compilation of Avian Information in Computerized Data Storage and Retrieval Systems of the North-Central and North Eastern United States in Management of North Central and North Eastern Forests for Non-Game Birds. Hoekstra, T.W., D.L. Schweitzer, C.T. Cushwa, S.H. Anderson, R.B. Barnes. 1979. Preliminary Evaluation of a National Wildlife and Fish Data Base. Trans. 44th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference. Toronto, Canada, March 1979. pp. 380-391. Schweitzer, D.L., C.T. Cushwa, and T.W. Hoekstra. 1980. Wildlife and Fish situation in the United States. USDA Forest Service. Schweitzer, D.L., T.W. Hoekstra, and C.T. Cushwa. 1981. Lessons from past national assessments of wildlife and fish: information and coordination needs for the future. Trans. 46th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, Washington, D.C., March 1981. pp. 147-155. Hawkes, C.L., D.E. Chalk, T.W. Hoekstra, C.H. Flather. 1983. Prediction of wildlife and fish resources for national assessments and appraisals. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. GTR-100, Fort Collins, Colorado 30 p. Hoekstra, T.W., D.E. Chalk, C.L. Hawkes, S.A. Miller. 1983. Monitoring regional wildlife and fish habitat and populations for national assessments and appraisals: Trans. of the 48th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference. Kansas City, MO., March 1983. pp. 308-314. Hoekstra, T.W., M.P. Farrell, C.H. Flather, C.L. Hawkes. 1983. Wildlife and fish database for the 1989 National RPA Assessment. In: National Workshop on Computer Uses in Fish and Wildlife Programs - A state-of-the-art review. Blacksburg, Virginia. Hof, J.G., L.A. Joyce, G.S. Alward, and T.W. Hoekstra. 1983. Multilevel analysis of forest and rangeland resources. Proceedings – Range Economics Symposium and Workshop, GTR INT- 149. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, August 31 - September 2, 1982, Salt Lake City, Utah. (10) Joyce, L.A., B. McKinnon, J.G. Hof, T.W. Hoekstra. 1983. "An analysis of multi-resource production for national assessments and appraisals." USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station GTR RM- 101, 20 p. (11) Hoekstra, T.W. and J.G. Hof. 1985. National assessments of wildlife and fish: technical specifications. GTR RM-122. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO, 6 p. (12) Flather, C.H. and T.W. Hoekstra. 1985. Evaluating population-habitat models using ecological theory. Wildlife Society Bulletin 13: 121-130. (13) Hoekstra, T.W. and C.H. Flather. 1986. Theoretical basis for integrating wildlife in renewable resource inventories. Journal of Environmental Management 24: 95-101. (14) Hoekstra, T.W., C.H. Flather, and P.A. Flebbe. 1987. Regional fish and wildlife habitat models: application for national multiple resource planning. pages 404-409. In: Lund, H.G., M. Caballero-Deloya, and R. Villarreal-Canton, eds. Land and resource evaluation for national planning in the tropics. GTR WO-39. Washington, DC: USDA Forest Service. (15) Flather, C.H., T.W. Hoekstra, D.E. Chalk, N.D. Cost, and V.A. Rudis. 1989. Recent historical and projected trends in white-tailed deer and wild turkey in the southern United States. GTR RM-172. Fort Collins, CO, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 22 p. (16) Flather, C.H. and T.W. Hoekstra. 1989. An analysis of the wildlife and fish situation in the United States: 1989 - 2040. GTR RM-178. Fort Collins, CO: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 146 p. (17) Hoekstra, et al. 1990. Critique of Land Management Planning: Volume 4, Analytical Tools and Information. USDA Forest Service Publication FS-455, Washington, D.C. [This was a large team effort involving ten authors.] Name: Uriel N. Safriel
Current Position/Title: Professor, Director of the Blaustein Institute for Desert Research
Organization: Blaustein Institute for Desert Research, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
Address: Sede Boqer Campus, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel 84990
Telephone - 972-7-6596700
Fax - 972-7-596703
Email -
Education: M.Sc. in Zoology from Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Ph.D. in Ecology from Oxford University, Post-doctoral
fellowship in Ecology at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Former Positions and Organizations: Director of the Mitrani Center for Desert Ecology of the Blaustein Institute for Desert
Research; Full professor at the Department of Ecology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Head of the Department of Zoology, Hebrew
University of Jerusalem; Chief Scientist and Head of Science and Management Division, the Israeli Nature Reserves Authority; Head
of the Government-appointed Commission on the Carmel Forest Fire, Israel; Regional Expert for Israel, the Desertification Initiative,
World Bank; Head of the Israeli Delegation to the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on the Convention to Combat
Desertificaiton.
Research Interests/Expertise:
Managemnt of circum-Mediterranean protected areas; Survey of desertification risks at the Jordan Rift Valley; Conservation of biogenetic resources in the desert/non-desert climatic transition zone; Development of biological indicators for monitoring desertification and climate change in the Middle East.
Selected Professional Organization Memberships: Ecological Society of America; British Ecological Society; Israeli Society of
Ecology and Environment.
Honors/Awards/Special Achievements: Honorary membership of British Ornithologists Union and of German Society of
Ornithology; Member of the research team of the IBP program "Structure and Function of Tundra Ecosystems" at Point Barrow, Alas

Recent Publications, a complete list of over 80 refereed articles and numerous book chapters is available upon request

Safriel, U.N. The role of ecology in desert development. Journal of Arid land Studies, 5s,351-354 (1995).
Safriel, U.N. The evolution of Palearctic migration - the case for southern ancestry.Israel Journal of Zoology 41,417-431 (1995).

Safriel, U.N., Anikster, Y. & Valdman, M. Management of nature reserves for conservation of wild relatives and the significance of
marginal populations. Bocconea 7,233-239 (1997).

Safriel, U.N. The Carmel fire and its conservation repercussions. International Journal of Wildland Fire 7,277-284 (1997).
Carmel, Y. & Safriel, U. Habitat use by bats in a Mediterranean ecosystem in Israel – conservation implications. Biological
Conservation 3,245-250 (1998).

Safriel, U.N. Water and the Environment. pp. 66-99 in: Water for the Future: The West Bank and Gaza Strip, Israel, and
Jordan. Committee on Sustainable Water Supplies for the Middle East, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. (1999)

Charles A. Troendle

Education

BS Forestry 1964, from the New York State College of Forestry at Syracuse University
MS Forestry (Watershed Management) 1966, from the New York State College of Forestry at Syracuse University
Ph.D. Forest Hydrology 1979, University of Georgia, School of Forest Resources
Professional Experience

2/66-9/77 - Research Forester, Timber and Watershed Laboratory, Parsons,West Virginia
9/77-6/88 - Principal Hydrologist, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado
6/88-7/99 - Project Leader and Supervisory Hydrologist, RMWU-4352 Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, and
Laramie, Wyoming.
7/99-Present- Hydrologist and Project Manager for International Watershed Assessments, Management Assistance Corporation of
America, Fort Collins, Colorado
Professional Activities

Troendle's research activity has followed several paths. His continuous evaluation of watershed response has strengthened our
understanding of forest influences and the impact of vegetation manipulation on water yield. The "causal relationships" between flow,
change in flow, and precipitation defined at the watershed level have provided insight into plot and process oriented studies further
defining the specific interaction between vegetation and components of the water balance. This includes defining flow path, and more
recently, chemical transport. Troendle's most recent personal research has addressed instream flow questions relating to the
interactions between stream flow dynamics and sediment transport process. This research led to a better understanding of watershed
function and represents the foundation for hydrologic evaluation and watershed assessment. Although retired from Forest Service
Research, this work is still ongoing.
In 1980, Troendle had the lead responsibility for developing the hydrology component in WRENSS (Water Resources Evaluation of
Non-Point Sources in Silviculture); a nomographic watershed assessment tool. Since then, Troendle has been involved in the
application or transport of watershed assessment strategies to Israel and, more recently, Mexico. Currently, Troendle is actively
involved in a multi-agency effort to update the WRENSS Watershed Model with specific application to watershed assessment
problems including evaluation of stream stability.
Troendle recently retired from the US Forest Service as project leader of a work unit co-located in Fort Collins, Colorado, and
Laramie, Wyoming, that was concerned with research on sustaining viability and productivity in aquatic and riparian ecosystems in
the Central Rocky Mountains and Northern Great Plains. Troendle was also the Administrator for the Fraser Experimental Forest,
Fraser, Colorado.
Troendle has affiliate faculty status and serves on graduate student committees at the University of Colorado, Colorado State
University, and the University of Wyoming. Frequently invited to give guest lectures at all three institutions. Involved in research
collaboration with faculty at these institutions as well as others with EPA, ORNL, other Forest Service installations, and universities.
Troendle is currently associated with Management Assistance Corporation of America (MACA) as a Project Manager responsible for
several International Watershed Assessment Efforts. The assessment efforts are done for, and in cooperation with, representatives of
the US Forest Service, US Department of State, USAID, and the World Bank, primarily in the Middle East and Eastern Europe.
Troendle is currently the General Chair of the Western Snow Conference and Editor of the Proceedings of the Western Snow
Conference.
Publications
A complete list of more than 80 publications can be provided upon request. The following highlights a few papers addressing
watershed monitoring.
Troendle, Charles A. and Charles F. Leaf. 1980. Hydrology. Chapter III. In: An Approach to Water Resources Evaluation of Non-
Point Silvicultural Sources. US Environmental Protection Agency. August 1980. EPA-600/8-80-012 Athens, GA. III.1-III.173.
Troendle, C.A. and R.M. King. 1987. The effect of partial cutting and clearcutting on the Deadhorse Creek watershed. Journal of
Hydrology 90: 145-157.
Troendle, C.A. and W.K. Olsen. 1994. Potential Effects of Timber Harvest and Water Management of Streamflow Dynamics and
Sediment Transport. In: Covington, W.W.; DeBano, L. eds. Sustainable ecological systems; 1993 July 12-15; Flagstaff, AZ/USA.
Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-247. Fort Collins, CO/USA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and
Range Experimental Station: 34-41.
Troendle, C.A. and R.A. LaFayette. 1996. Watershed condition assessment and improvement in Israel. 1996 February 2-16. Jewish
National Fund. 24 p.
Troendle, C.A. and J.O. Reuss. 1997. Effect of clear cutting on snow accumulation and water outflow at Fraser, Colorado.
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. I(2), 325-332.
Troendle, C.A. and J.D. Stednick. 1998. A discussion of Effects of basin scale timber harvest on water yield and peak streamflow.
In Press. Journal of the American Water Resources Association.
Troendle, C. A. and W. Zeedyk. 1999. The Rio Laja Watershed Restoration Effort. A report submitted to the USDA Forest Service
and the Sociedad Audubon de Mexico. on file with the Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO. 35 p plus appendices.
Troendle, Charles A., Marc S.Wilcox, Greg S. Bevenger, and Laurie S.Porth. 2000. The Coon Creek water yield augmentation
project:implementation of timber harvesting technology to increase streamflow. Jour. Forest Ecology and Management. In Press.

MOSHE ITSHACK – CURRICULUM VITAE

1955: Born in Ashkelon. Israel.
Education:
1983: The Hebrew University. Jerusalem, Institute of Earth Sciences, M.Sc. Major Subject: Soil and Water Conservation.
Employment:
1980-1983:
Research Assistant and Research Associate. Institute of Earth Sciences, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and, Soil Erosion Research Station, Ministry of Agriculture.
1984 to date:
Senior planner soil and water conservation and water harvesting. southern Region. Keren Kayemeth Leisrael, Land Develoment Authority. Responsible in the Southern Region on projects of: 1. Water harvesting and plantation in arid and semi arid ad zones. 2. Water conservation in forest lands of the Medirerranean Regions. 3. Soil Conservation: Gully control, reclamation of deteriorated habitats, mines reclanation, and dunes stabilization, reduction of dust, etc. 4. Forest Roads – Planning and construction. 5. Research and development projects of soil and water conservation in arid and semi arid zones. 1992 to date:
Deputy Director Southern Region, Forest Department, Land Development Authority. 1996 to date:
Soil and water conservation coordinator for the Forest Department, Land Development Authority.
Professional and Society Activities, Consulting Activities:
1987 to date:
Member of soil and water Evaluation Committee. Land Development Authority.
1992 to date:
Member of soil and water Evaluation Committee, Israeli Ministry of Agriculture. Consulting mission to evaluate and recommend on aspects of soil conservation, water harvesting for afforestation
and watershed improvement in semi arid and arid areas in CHIlE
Consulting mission on aspects of establishing green areas for human and livestock use, based on soil and water
management in semi arid and arid areas – Chaco PARAGUAY.

1995 to date:
Member of board of directors, Desertification and Restoration Ecology Research Center. Consulting mission on aspects of watershed management and rehabilitation of degraded sites in the forested area of
Lion City, Guanajuato, Mexico.
Study tour on soil and water conservation N.S.W. Australia.
Consulting misssion for management of degraded watersheds, Easern Anatolia, Turkey.

1998 to date:
Chairman of 2 Agricultural Research and Development Regional Stations.
1999 to date:
Member of the Israeli Forum for Combating Desertification. Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Consulting mission on environment management and the improvement of the standard of living of villagers around the city of Bobo Dioulasso – Burkina Faso.
1999 to date:
Member of research and demonstration committee, of the IALC – International Arid Lands Comsortiun. (AZ. USA).
Award:
1983:
Recipient of the "Pioneers of Meteorology in Israel Award". Recipient of the "Excellent Worker Award" from the President of the country.
Married:
Children: Ommer (11). Hadass (9).Stavv (5).

Address:
21 Ahad ha'am St GANEI BARNEA, ASHKELON, ISRAEL. Tel: 972-7-6739485,
Fax: 972-7-9986120 (Office).
RAM GARTI
CURRICULUM VITAE

Present Position: Senior research investigator in the Soil Erosion Research Station (SERS), which is the research unit of the Soil Conservatio
Drainage Division (SCDD), Israel Ministry of Agriculture.
Background: Born in Israel in 1938; studied Physical Geography in the University of Tel Aviv and obtained degree in 1975.
Research activities and positions held
1963-1968: Member of the SERS research team studying the subject "Difference in effects of forest and other vegetative covers on water yield".
1968-1972: Research on the subject "The effect of soil levelling on crop growth".
1972-1974: Leader of the research project "Land reclamation in the mountainous region of Israel".
1975-1977: Leader of the project "A survey of the Israeli water reservoirs; embankment stability and water seepage".
1978-1982: Principle investigator (PI) of the research project "Revised criteria for planning, construction and maintenance of surface drainage syste
This research produced the SERS-MODEL for design discharge, which is used for most surface drainage projects, in Israel.
1982-1986: The leader of the applied research project "Development and implementation of maintenance methods and means for surface drai
systems and earth dams".
1986-1992: Director of the SERS, (the SCDD research institute) and a member of the Israel SCDD Board.
1987-1993: PI of the joint SERS - Jewish National Fund research project "Small watershed hydrology in the Israeli arid region - water harvest and sto
for afforestration".
1993-present: Current research program:
- Studies of watershed hydrology which carried out in Israel's arid zone within the framework of the "Water potential of the Arava valley" Program.
- Developing the SERS model type II (for designed peak discharges) and implementing it in Geography Information Systems (GIS).
-
Hydrology of urban areas: Developing a method of minimizing urban runoff water by conservation means.
Specific contribution
a) Development of SERS model Type II. A model for probable designed peak discharge. The model is widely used in Israel mainly for surface drain
systems, highway bridge and culverts construction and water reservoir planning.
b) Development of Israel Arid Region Runoff Model (IARRM). A regional- statistical model for evaluating watershed annual flows in the semiarid
arid zones in Israel.
c) Guide for planning and construction of water harvesting systems, based on the research.
d) Implementation of runoff water conservation methods in urban areas for ground water recharge and minimising the runoff volumes and
peak discharge.
Research reports
The research work is reflected by more than 100 research reports and guides (most of them in Hebrew)
Awards
Twice by Ministry of Agriculture, "for outstanding contribution to Israel soil conservation, drainage and water resources"; and by the Israel
Association for Water Resources for his contribution to the research program of "The Water Potential of the Arava Valley.
Biography: Susan Elizabeth Gray
Date of Birth 5/3/55 Education: 1977 BS Forest Management, Stephen F. Austin State University, Nacogdoches, Texas, USA Employment History: 1977-79 Forestry Technician, US Forest Service various locations 1980-2 Forester, US Forest Service, Taos Ranger District, Carson National Forest 1982-4 Forest Silviculturist, US Forest Service, Carson National Forest 1984-6 Forest Silviculturist, US Forest Service, Cibola National Forest 1986-7 District Resource Staff Officer, US Forest Service, Sandia Ranger District, Cibola National Forest 1987-9 District Ranger, US Forest Service,Mountainair Ranger District, Cibola National Forest 1989-94 Regional Silviculturist, US Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region 1994-98 Group Leader for Silviculture, Inventory, and Ecosystem Management, US Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region 1998-present Branch Chief for Cooperative Forestry Stewardship Programs, State and Private Forestry, US Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region CURRICULUM VITAE
Moshe Getker
I. Personal
Born in Rostov ,USSR, 1938 Marital Status : Married + 2
II. University Education and Additional Training
1955 - 1960 - M.Sc. in Surface Water Hydrology, Department of Hydrology, Faculty of Geography, Central Asian University
Tashkent, USSR. Title of thesis: Computation and geographical distribution of rainstorms in the mountains of the Uzbekistan.
Supervision by prof. Shultz V.
1963 - 1967 - Ph.D. in Geographical Science. Surface Water Hydrology water Resources. Faculty of Geography, Central Asian
University, Tashkent, USSR. Title of thesis -"Computation and Geographical distribution of precipitation in the mountains of Central
Asia." Supervision by prof. Shultz V.
1981 - Senior Researcher, for Surface Water Hydrology and Water Resources. Diploma of Central Attestation Commission under the
USSR Council of Ministers, Moscow, USSR.
1986 - Advanced Degree diploma in Surface water Hydrology and Water Resources by the USSR Academia of Science, Institute of
Geography, Moscow (Post Doctorate Degree in USSR equivalent to Associated Professor).
III. Positions Held and Academic Status
In USSR: 1960-1963
Engineer hydrologist, Hydrometeorological Department of Uzbekistan, Tashkent.
1966-1969 Researcher, Research Institute of Water Problems. Academy of Sciences of Uzbekistan, Tashkent.
1969-1971 Assistant Professor, Central Asian University, Faculty for Geography, Department of Hydrology, Tashkent.
1971-1990 Central Asian Hydrometeorological Research Institute, Hydrological and Glaciological Departments,Tashkent.
1973 Senior Researcher.
1974 Head Laboratory for Snow cover investigations.
1975 Senior Researcher.
1987 Leading Researcher.
In Israel:
1991- Hydrologist. Soil Erosion Research Station, Soil Conservation and Drainage Division, Ministry of Agriculture.
IV. Training Experience (including guidance of students)
1969-1990 Lecturer at the Central Asian University, Faculty of Geography Department for Hydrology. Tashkent. U.S.S.R.
VI. Editorial Responsibilities
1978-1989 Editor Proceedings of Central Asian Research Hydrometeorological Institute.
1989-1990 Editorial Board, The Journal of Data of Glaciologocal Studies.
Academy of Sciences of the U.S.S.R. Soviet Geophysical Committee.
XIII. Awards and Scholarships
1995 Award of Excellency from the Ministry of Agriculture of Israel.
Name: Gursel Kusek
Date and Place of Birth: December 20, 1960, Adana, Turkey
Education:
MS Degree, Cukurova University, Faculty of Agriculture Cultural Technic, 1985
PhD Degree, Cukurova University, Faculty of Agriculture Cultural Technic, 1995
Professional Experience:
1986-1988
Project and Field Engineer, Agricultural Rural Services Provincial Directorate, Eastern Anatolia Watershed Rehabilitation Project, Turkey. Project and Field Engineer, Malatya Rural Services Provincial Directorate, Eastern Anatolia Watershed Rehabilitation Project, Turkey.
Publications:
Economic Effect of Land Consolidation on Land Development (MS Thesis)
Possibility of Using Computer InLand Consolidation Projects (PhD Dissertation)
Designing of Farm Roads
Control Erosion, Environment, and Farmers Participation

Name: Mahmut Temiz
Date and Place of Birth: Janruary 10,1968, Kahramanmara, Turkey
Education:

BS Degree, Black Sea Technical University, Faculty of Forestry
Professional Experience:
Currently, Chief Engineer, Malatya District, Eastern Anatolia Watershed Restoration Project,
Turkey


Curriculum Vita

Name: Ayed Ghaleb Ahed Mohammad.
Date of birth: 10 , Feb., 1963.
Place of birth: Jenin / West Bank.
Citizenship: Palestinian.
Marital status: Married + two child's.
Address: Office:
P. O. Box 40
College of Agriculture/ Hebron University
Hebron / West Bank
Home: Dear Ghazaleh/ Jenin/ West Bank.
Mobil : 052 329 158
Education:

Institution Major Minor Degree
1- Jordan University Plant Production --------------------
B.Sc. 1985.
2- Jordan University Plant Production --------------------
M.Sc. 1988.
3- New Mexico State University (USA) Range Science Animal nutrition
Ph.D.1992.
Professional Experience:
1- Research assistant. Plant Production Department, Faculty of
Agriculture, Jordan University. 1985- 1988.
2- Farm advisor, 1988 - 1990.
3- Assistant Professor , Collage of Agriculture, Hebron University,
1993 - until now.
4- Acting Dean, Faculty of Agriculture, Hebron University, January
1996 - until now.
Memberships in professional associations and societies:
1- Agricultural Engineers association - Jordan.
2- American Society of Animal Science - USA.
3- Society for Range Management - USA.
Conferences and workshops:
1- Workshop Advances in Agriculture through plastic house technology.
Amman/ Jordan. March 16 to 18 , 1987.
2- First Regional Symposium on Horticulture in Jordan and the
neighboring countries. Amman/ Jordan . March 27 to 30, 1989. 3- Society for Range Management meeting. Washington, DC. Jan. 4- The Arabic integration in supporting the rule of Agricultural Education Institutes in developing the sustainable agriculture. Amman, Jordan, Dec. 15-18,1998. 5- Traveling workshop to identify regional action programs for phase II of the combating desertification project. 15-30 Jan. 2000. 6- Sharing in several workshops about - Agricultural higher education. - Biodiversity and Rangeland Strategy. – Environmental issues. Committee membership:
-
National Management committee for the Combating Desertification Project, (Ministry of Environmental Affairs). National Steering Committee for small Grants program (SGP)/GEF/UNDP.
Publications:
1- Mohammad, A. G., R. D. Pieper, J. D. Wallace, J. L. Holechek, and L.
W. Murray. 1995. Comparison of fecal analysis and rumen
evacuation techniques for sampling diet botanical composition of
grazing cattle. J. Range Manage.48: 202 - 205.
2- Mohammad, A. G., C. A. Ferrando, L. W. Murray, R. D. Pieper, and J.
L. Wallace. 1996. Season and sex influences on botanical
composition of cattle diets in southern New Mexico. J. Rnge Manage.
49: 204 - 208.
Technical Skills:
1- Microhistological technique for animal diet analysis.
2- Herbarium collection technique.
LETTERS OF SUPPORT

Source: http://www.cem.gov.tr/erozyon/Files/faaliyetler/dis_iliskiler/diskaynakliprojeler/ortado%C4%9Fu/Projenin%20Ba%C5%9Flang%C4%B1%C3%A7%20Metni%20(Genel).pdf