Clear Creek Fish Passage and Instream Flow Enhancement Phase II

Transcription

1 Upper Columbia Regional Application 2017 Clear Creek Fish Passage and Instream Flow Enhancement Phase II Trout Unlimited 103 Palouse Street # PRISM # HWS # 04-CHW Anticipated Request - SRFB: $ 28, Anticipated Request - Tributary Committee: $ 0 Anticipated Request for Proposal: $ 28, Anticipated Other Funding/Contributions/Matches: $ 19, (Name Source, if applicable) Anticipated TOTAL Project Budget: $ 47,173.90

2 Questions Answers Information Resource REGIONAL INFORMATION 1 What Upper Columbia subbasin is the project in? 2 What project category is your project? 3 What Assessment Unit is the project in? 4 What rank restoration and/or protection priority is the assessment unit the project is located in? 5 What is the primary species the project will target? 6 What secondary species will the project will target? 7 What regional PCSRF Metrics will be implemented with this project? 8 What Primary Ecological Concern does the Project Address? (not required for protection projects) 9 What other Ecological Concerns does the Project Address (not required for protection projects? 10 What is the rank priority of the primary ecological concern this project addresses in the assessment unit it occurs (not required for protection projects) Wenatchee Restoration Wenatchee River 04: Chiwawa (CHW) Wenatchee Entiat Methow Okanogan Restoration Design Only Restoration/Protection Protection Assessment Monitoring Click Here for Assessment Unit names 0 Click Here for table of Assessment Unit ranks Steelhead Cutthroat, Spring Chinook, Bull Trout, Rainbow Trout 1 large barrier and 1 small impediment removed; over 5 miles potential upstream habitat made accessible Habitat Quantity Anthropogenic Barriers N/A 11 Where is the project? , Steelhead Spring Chinook Bull trout Steelhead Spring Chinook Bull trout Other (please name) Click Here for regional PCSRF Metric definitions Click here for Ecological Concern definitions See above 2 Click here for table of Ecological Concern ranks by assessment unit

3 Regional Technical Team - Summary Information Click here for complete RTT scoring criteria QUESTION 1 In one sentence, what is the purpose of your project? 2 Location of the Restoration Project SUMMARY INFORMATION The purpose of the project is to increase accessible habitat for steelhead and other salmonids. Project will occur in Clear Creek at approximate RM Project is located in Chiwawa River Assessment Unit (MaSA for steelhead and spring Chinook; SR and FMO for bull trout). Project will provide access to several miles of high quality habitat on undeveloped forest lands. 3 In one sentence, identify what you are going to do Project will remove one significant passage barrier and one small passage impediment. 4 How long will it take for the benefits of the project to be realized and how long are they estimated to persist? Channel development through reservoir above diversion dam location will occur during high flow season within several months following removal of the barrier. Benefits are permanent. 5 Benefits to Freshwater Survival or Capacity Habitat increases as a result of this barrier removal project provide an opportunity for increased salmonid production in Clear Creek.

4 Citizens Advisory Committee Ranking Criteria and Summary Information For complete CAC ranking criteria click here CRITERIA SUMMARY INFORMATION Criterion 1: Benefits to Fish and Certainty of Success (60 pts. as a weighted percentage based upon RTT score) Is the project consistent with Yes the Recovery Plan Implementation Strategy? Is the project/assessment based Yes on proven scientific methods that will meet objectives? Are there any obstacles that could delay the implementation of this project or study (e.g. permitting, design)? Criterion 2: Project Longevity (30 points) Permitting is the only possible delay. Trout Unlimited has already facilitated site consultations with permitting representatives from WDFW, Ecology, and US Army Corps of Engineers and an appropriate permitting pathway is being fleshed out. Who has the responsibility to manage and maintain the project? What is the responsibility of current or future landowners? Has the sponsor successfully implemented projects in the past? Are the benefits associated with the project in perpetuity? *Will the project last only a few years? Is there a high risk of failure associated with this project? Trout Unlimited will observe physical changes following barrier removal. This water diversion site will be decommissioned and the project requires no long term maintenance. Yes in particular, this project aims to follow the model of a diversion dam removal completed by Trout Unlimited on Beaver Creek just a few miles south of the subject project location. Yes, this is a permanent barrier removal. No Criterion 3: Project Scope (15 points) How much habitat is being protected or gained? Over 5 miles of potential habitat will be made accessible, at least 3 miles of which has perennial flow. Are threats imminent? Is the scale of the proposed action appropriate? Criterion 4: Community Support (25 points) Threats are present and ongoing fish rarely pass the barrier moving upstream. Yes *Has there been public outreach about this project to assess the level of community support? *Does the project build community support for salmon recovery efforts? *Is there any community outreach planned during and/or after implementation? Trout Unlimited engages in ongoing outreach with the project landowner and neighboring property owners to discuss project activities. Outreach activities to date include: regular meetings with project landowner, site walks with facilities manager, project meeting with neighbors, well monitoring study with neighbors, periodic phone calls and updates with neighbors. The project landowner is a stakeholder in decision-making related to engineering, contractor selection, site plans, permitting, and regulatory communications.

5 Has the project sponsor secured landowner participation or acceptance? Will there be public access? Yes, a formal agreement is in place and the landowner is an active partner in project planning and decision-making. No, the barrier is on private land. However, most land upstream of the barrier is managed by the US Forest Service and is open to the public. Will the project create benefits or raise concerns for particular groups or the community at large? What is the breadth and strength of the partnership supporting the project (technical support, financial, and in-kind contributions, labor)? Criterion 5: Economics (20 points) Yes. The subject project will enhance fisheries and restore natural geomorphology to a stream reach. Furthermore, the subject project is a component of a larger flow enhancement effort that increases late season flows in Clear Creek by up to 20% and facilitates water supply system upgrades for a large campground resort. USFWS is providing technical support. The landowner is a cooperative, engaged project partner and is contributing approximately 30% of project costs. Neighboring landowners have provided feedback and been cooperative and engaged through project planning and groundwater analysis. WDFW facilitated screening of a small irrigation diversion on site and supports TU s efforts to remove the barrier and decommission the larger potable diversion. Does the project represent an opportunity for economic benefit? Will this project help the region move closer to delisting or reduce regulatory intervention? Is the project budget clearly defined and reasonable? How much benefit does the project create for the dollars invested? Yes. Local contractors will be hired for the diversion removal and eventually for whole project construction (new water system implementation not part of this funding request). Most likely. The project will provide access to several miles of high quality habitat and expand fish population/production capacity in Clear Creek. Yes. The budget is based on prior permitting efforts and a contractor consultation. Removal of the barrier should be straightforward. Miles of habitat access achieved is high for the cost.

6

7 Appendix C-3: Restoration, Acquisition, and Combination Project Proposal Appendix C-3: Restoration, Acquisition, and Combination Project Proposal Project Number Project Name Clear Creek Fish Passage and Instream Flow Enhancement Phase II Sponsor Trout Unlimited List all related projects previously funded or reviewed by RCO: Project # or Name Status Choose a status Choose a status Choose a status Status of Prior Phase Deliverables and Relationship to Current Proposal? If previous project was not funded, describe how the current proposal differs from the original. N/A Submit this proposal as a PRISM attachment titled Project Proposal Project brief. The purpose of the project is to restore local reach geomorphology and access to quality habitat by removing passage barriers on Clear Creek. Project location. The project site is located at approximate RM 0.65 on Clear Creek, Chelan County, WA. Problem statement. Clear Creek is the first perennial tributary of the Chiwawa River upstream of the confluence of the Chiwawa River with the Wenatchee River and located in a major spawning area for steelhead and spring Chinook. The area offers spawning/rearing and foraging/overwintering habitat for bull trout. Resident rainbow and cutthroat trout also inhabit the assessment unit. Access to a majority of habitat in Clear Creek is impeded by a 10-ft tall rock-concrete- Page 1 Manual 18, Salmon Recovery Grants March 2017

8 Appendix C-3: Restoration, Acquisition, and Combination Project Proposal sandbag potable water diversion dam located at approximate RM Trout Unlimited (TU) has been working with the landowner to replace the surface diversion with a groundwater well (Clear Creek Fish Passage and Instream Flow Enhancement Phase I), which will enable removal of the diversion dam (Phase I is scheduled for construction in summer 2017). Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife redd surveys conducted from suggest the dam prevents a majority of adult upstream steelhead migration as 48 of 50 surveyed redds were located downstream of the impoundment despite several miles of quality habitat on undeveloped forest lands upstream of the dam. Since the barrier blocks upstream passage of most adult steelhead, other adult and juvenile salmonids are also unlikely to move upstream of the diversion. The dam was installed circa 1970 and no consideration was given to fish passage. Today, the passage barrier is well documented and efforts to remedy the problem are supported by regional fisheries restoration strategies and guidance documents. 4. List the fish resources present at the site and targeted by this project. Species Life History Present (egg, juvenile, adult) Current Population Trend (decline, stable, rising) Endangered Species Act Coverage (Y/N) Steelhead E, J, A stable Y Bull Trout E, J, A stable Y Spring unknown stable Y Chinook Summer Chinook unknown stable N Describe the limiting factors, and limiting life stages (by fish species) that your project expects to address. The limiting factor (ecological concern) addressed by this project is reduced habitat quantity resulting from anthropogenic barriers. The barriers primarily impact adult upstream migration, which reduces the capacity for fish production within the Clear Creek watershed. Project goals and objectives. When answering the questions below please refer to Chapter 4 of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife s Stream Habitat Restoration Guidelines for more information on goals and objectives. A. What are the project s goals? The project goal is to enhance salmonid production capacity in the Clear Creek watershed by removing anthropogenic barriers that severely limit upstream passage to over 5 miles of habitat located primarily on US Forest Service lands. Target species include ESA-listed Steelhead and Bull Trout along with resident cutthroat and rainbow trout, with potential benefits for Spring and Summer Chinook. Biological benefits for these species will be realized year round and for all life stages for both anadromous and resident salmonids. Page 2 Manual 18, Salmon Recovery Grants March 2017

9 Appendix C-3: Restoration, Acquisition, and Combination Project Proposal B. What are the project s objectives? i. Remove a diversion dam that is a significant barrier to fish passage and an unused weir that is a minor impediment to fish passage. ii. Restore access to over 5 miles of high quality potential habitat located primarily on US Forest Service lands. iii. Complete barrier removals during the 2018 in-water work window. C. What are the assumptions and constraints that could impact whether you achieve your objectives? The project will proceed provided funding and permitting are secured. Landowner agreement is already secured. 7. Project details. A. Provide a narrative description of the proposed project. Describe the specific project elements and explain how they will lead to the project s objectives. Include relevant existing project documentation (if any) as attachments in PRISM. B. Provide a scope of work and detailed list of project deliverables. Provide a detailed description of the proposed project tasks, who will be responsible for each, what the project deliverables will be, and a schedule for accomplishing them. C. Explain how the sponsor determined cost estimates. Costs were determined based on prior permitting for and completion of similar projects by Trout Unlimited as well as a contractor consultation in March D. Describe the design or acquisition alternatives considered to achieve the project s objectives. Three alternatives were considered: i. Do nothing: Leave the passage barrier in place. This alternative does not solve the problem and is the least preferred alternative. ii. Engineer and construct a step-pool passage corridor: Although passage could be achieved through an engineered approach, this alternative is expensive. Trout Unlimited was concerned the price would reduce the project value. Furthermore, Trout Unlimited prefers approaches that restore natural process and conditions prior to human impact. iii. Remove the physical barrier and allow the stream to return to its natural geomorphology: This is the least expensive of the two dosomething alternatives considered. WDFW and USFWS Page 3 Manual 18, Salmon Recovery Grants March 2017

10 Appendix C-3: Restoration, Acquisition, and Combination Project Proposal representatives who visited the site suggested this natural approach as the most cost-effective. They also indicated this natural approach may require less maintenance over the long term should problems arise from an engineered approach. Both representatives cited the nearby Beaver Creek diversion dam and grade control removal effort as a model for removing barriers and allowing the stream to do the work. E. How have lessons learned from completed projects or monitoring studies informed this project? WDFW redd surveys demonstrated the diversion dam is a passage barrier. A previous barrier removal project in the vicninity informed the preferred restoration alternative. F. Describe the long-term stewardship and maintenance obligations for the project or acquired land. There are no long-term maintenance or stewardship obligations. Trout Unlimited will photo-document stream geomorphological changes following removal Explain why it is important to do this project now instead of later. Trout Unlimited has secured an agreement with the landowner that will allow the diversion dam to be removed following completion of Phase I (new water system implementation). The diversion dam is the most significant barrier remaining in Clear Creek as several culvert barrier issues were addressed in a previous project completed by Chelan County Natural Resources and an undersized culvert at the Chiwawa Loop Road crossing will be replaced by Chelan County Public Works in June If the project is a part of a larger overall project or strategy, describe the goal of the overall strategy, explain individual sequencing steps, and which of these steps is included in this application for funding. Removal of the diversion constitutes Phase II of Trout Unlimited s Clear Creek Fish Passage and Instream Flow Enhancement Project. 10. Describe the sponsors experience managing this type of project. Trout Unlimited has managed dozens of successful instream flow enhancement and passage barrier projects in Washington State, including a very similar project completed in 2014 on Beaver Creek just 3 miles south of the subject project location. 11. List all landowner names. MHC TT, Inc. (Thousand Trails Leavenworth campground resort) is the only landowner. List project partners and their role and contribution to the project. US Fish 12. and Wildlife Service (technical assistance), HCP Tributary Committees (funding), Page 4 Manual 18, Salmon Recovery Grants March 2017

11 Appendix C-3: Restoration, Acquisition, and Combination Project Proposal MHC TT, Inc. (funding and implementation assistance), WDFW (advising and permitting) 13. Stakeholder outreach. Removal of the diversion dam is contingent on a replaced water supply and TU and the landowner successfully found a reliable groundwater supply. In June 2017Chelan County Public Works is replacing an undersized (but passable) culvert downstream of the diversion dam so proposed project activities were scheduled to not conflict with the culvert replacement. Outreach has been conducted with neighboring residential property owners. Supplemental Questions Restoration Project Supplemental Questions Answer the following supplemental questions: A. Will the sponsor complete, or already completed, a preliminary design, final design, and design report (per Appendix D) before construction? No i. Trout Unlimited is working with USFWS restoration biologist Robes Parrish on the diversion removal plan. No formal design is anticipated. The removal may occur as a single effort or in stages. B. Will a licensed professional engineer design the project? No i. N/A C. If this project includes measures to stabilize an eroding stream bank, explain why bank stabilization there is necessary to accomplish habitat recovery. N/A D. Describe the steps the sponsor will take to minimize the introduction and spread of invasive species during construction and restoration. The contractor will thoroughly clean equipment prior to mobilization and demobilization. Site disturbance will most likely be limited to an exisiting access road. Fish Passage Project Supplemental Questions Answer the supplemental questions below. NOTE: For fish passage design and evaluation guidance, applicants should refer to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife s Fish Passage Barrier and Surface Water Page 5 Manual 18, Salmon Recovery Grants March 2017

12 Appendix C-3: Restoration, Acquisition, and Combination Project Proposal Diversion Screening Assessment and Prioritization Manual and the Water Crossing Design Guidelines (2013) For engineering design questions or technical assistance, contact Don Ponder, Department of Fish and Wildlife, (360) To schedule fish passage and diversion inventory and assessment training, contact Justin Zweifel, Department of Fish and Wildlife, (360) A. Describe the passage problem (outfall, velocity, slope, etc.) Height/slope of diversion dam B. Describe the current barrier (age, material, shape, and condition). Installed circa 1970, concrete-rock-sandbag construction, fair condition C. Is the current barrier a complete or partial barrier? Near complete barrier D. If a culvert or arch is proposed, does it employ a stream simulation, no slope, hydraulic, or other design? N/A E. Describe the amount and quality of habitat made accessible if the barrier is corrected. Has the project received a Priority Index (PI) number? Over 5 miles of high-quality habitat located almost entirely on US Forest Service lands will be made accessible through barrier removal. It is not known if the barrier has a PI number but it is registered in the WDFW barrier inventory database with Site ID # F. Identify if there are additional fish passage barriers downstream or upstream of this project. No. Chelan County Natural Resources corrected culvert barrier issues on US Forest Service property several years ago with support from SRFB. An undersized (but passable) culvert will be replaced by Chelan County Public Works in June G. Engineering licensing requirement. Will a licensed professional engineer design the project? No i. Robes Parrish, USFWS, has worked with TU on similar barrier removal projects in the past. A licensed engineer is not needed for this work. Page 6 Manual 18, Salmon Recovery Grants March 2017

13 Appendix C-3: Restoration, Acquisition, and Combination Project Proposal Comments Use this section to respond to the comments received after the initial site visits, and then again after submitting the final application. Response to Site Visit Comments Please describe how the sponsor responded to the review panel s initial site visit comments. RCO recommends that the sponsor list each review panel comment and question and identify the response. The sponsor may use this space to respond directly to the comments. Response to Post-Application Comments Please describe how the sponsor responded to the review panel s post-application comments. RCO recommends that the sponsor list each of the review panel s comments and questions and identify the response. The sponsor may use this space to respond directly to the comments. Page 7 Manual 18, Salmon Recovery Grants March 2017

14 Clear Creek Fish Passage and Instream Flow Enhancement Project Responses to RTT and SRP Comments What is the status of the Chiwawa Loop Road and the Wenatchee-Chiwawa Irrigation District ditch? Chiwawa Loop Road: The section of Chiwawa Loop Road that crosses Clear Creek is currently being improved. In addition to roadway widening and repaving, the existing undersized pipe culvert will be replaced with a large box culvert. Wenatchee-Chiwawa Irrigation District ditch: The WCID ditch is not associated with Clear Creek. A review of Ecology s GWIS and Water Resources Explorer as well as conversations with Ecology personnel yielded no water right relationship between WCID and Clear Creek. WCID passes over the top of Clear Creek in a box flume located on the project landowner s property downstream of the diversion. What does the diversion structure look like below ground? Neither TU nor the landowner know what the dam looks like underground. The water right permit application suggests the dam specifications are 10ft high, 15 across the bottom, 8 feet across the top, and constructed of earth/concrete. No exploratory digging has been completed. Recently, TU had a contractor visit the site and it was recommended TU use a metal detector to identify rebar-fortified concrete, which could provide some indication of dam structure/shape below ground. The actual water diversion intake is a cylindrical concrete infiltration chamber. It will be decommissioned when the new well water system is installed. TU may want to consider the geomorphic response following removal of the diversion dam. USFWS and TU completed a topographic survey to gather data useful in estimating the volume of the sediment wedge that has built up behind the dam. We anticipate a head cut. Some sediment will flush downstream and fall from suspension in the landowner s ponds, while some will continue downstream. Are there issues with fish passage below the ponds? Has anyone evaluated passage at this site. Fish spawn below this area at higher densities, which could mean a passage issue. TU has not specifically evaluated fish passage below the ponds and does not perceive any passage barrier at or just below the ponds there are no impeding structures or natural conditions identified that would block fish movement. Several years ago Yakama Nation conducted snorkel surveys in the ponds and found juvenile O. mykiss. WDFW surveyors identified redds above the ponds. There is not much area for fish to spawn between the ponds and the diversion structure, which may explain higher redd densities in the reach below the ponds. Are there plans to monitor passage past the project area? TU has not proposed any monitoring past the project area. Jeremy Cram suggested WDFW may be able to offer a PIT-tag array. TU is in the area frequently and would be happy to help install and maintain the array. TU suggests an array be installed as soon as possible so some pre-project monitoring could be achieved. TU thanks the RTT and SRP for their comments.

15 Clear Creek Fish Passage and Instream Flow Enhancement Phase II Trout Unlimited Project Cost Estimate TASK UNIT NO. OF UNITS NOTES SUBTOTAL Administration Project Management hour 160 includes 16.12% NICRA $ 6, Travel Mileage mile 1200 Consulting Services Permitting Contractor Services Diversion Removal lump sum daily cost 1 3 based on 2017 federal mileage rate based on previous permitting efforts based on contractor consultation $ $ 5, $ 15, TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $ 28,094.27

16 Clear Creek Fish Passage and Instream Flow Enhancement Project Stehekin River Lake Chelan Location of Chelan County in Washington State Little Wenatchee River Chiwawa River Entiat River Clear Creek Project Icicle Creek Leavenworth Wenatchee River C h e l a n C o u n t y Wenatchee Miles This map provided "as is" and without warranty of any kind.

17 Potable water supply diversion dam Unused weir

18 Barrier Evaluation Form - Dam Location Information Project Name: Clear Creek Fish Passage Phase II SRFB Project #: County: Chelan HPA #: unknown Parcel #: GPS Location: Datum NAD83; Decimal Degrees Latitude: Longitude: 47.8 ¼ Section: NENE Section: 31 Township: 27 Range: 18 East West Stream Name: Clear Creek Tributary To: Chiwawa River WRIA #: 45 Driving Directions: North from Plain 3 miles, past Thousand Trails entrance, diversion dam located just east of Chiwawa Loop Rd Landowner Information Landowner: MHC TT, Inc. Mailing Address: City: State: Zip: Telephone: ( ) Cell: ( ) Fax: ( ) Landowner Agent: Cody Gillin Mailing Address: 103 Palouse Street #14 City: Wenatchee State: WA Zip: Telephone: (509) Cell: ( ) Fax: ( ) cgillin@tu.org Evaluator Information Evaluator Name: Cody Gillin Affiliation: Project Manager/Landowner Rep Mailing Address: City: State: Zip: Telephone: Fax: Cell: Barrier Information (measurements in meters) Is There a Road on Top of the Dam? Yes No If No, Stop, the Dam Does Not Qualify for the FFFPP, if Yes Continue. Is the Stream Fish-bearing? Yes No Unknown Species, if Known: Steelhead Date of Visit: Fish-bearing Criteria: Fish Observation Stream Type SalmonScape Physical Criteria Other: Stream flow: Perennial Intermittent Unknown Source of Information: Primary Purpose: Debris Control Flood Control Hydroelectric Irrigation Navigation Stock Pond Water Quality Recreation Water Supply Tailings Other (describe) Type: Concrete Earth Rock Masonry Metal Timber Other Span: Full Partial Outlet Type: Spillway Standpipe Flashboard Riser Culvert Operation Timing: Year-round Seasonal Length: Height: Water Surface Difference: Plunge Pool Depth: Fishway Present? Yes No Description/comments: Is this Dam a Fish Passage Barrier? Yes No Unknown Problem with Dam: WS drop Depth Other Unspecified Percent Passability: 0% 33% 67% 100% Bankfull Width (outside of dam influence): Road Width: Will this Dam be Entered into the WDFW-FPDSI (formerly SSHEAR) Database? Yes No If Yes, Site ID #: Manual 18, Salmon Recovery Grants March 2017