Fish Habitat Restoration and Monitoring in Southeast Washington. Andy Hill Eco Logical Research, Inc.

Transcription

1 Fish Habitat Restoration and Monitoring in Southeast Washington Andy Hill Eco Logical Research, Inc.

2 Fish Habitat Restoration and Monitoring in Southeast Washington Talk overview: Restoration projects in SE Washington Working With Beaver Pataha Creek Large Wood Projects Tucannon River Post Assisted Log Structures Asotin Creek Monitoring taking place in SE Washington Tucannon River Asotin Creek

3 4 H s Hatcheries Harvest Decline in Fisheries Resources Hydro Can we help mitigate for losses through hydro system by improving habitat? Habitat Changes in land use Habitat protection Stream Restoration Monitoring

4 Why Restore Habitat? Management actions have led to a simplification of stream channels and a decrease in habitat quality. Alterations to Riparian Removal of Wood Levees/Dikes Can we increase fish productivity by improving habitat? Can we restore/kick start natural processes to sustain aquatic resources?

5 Why Monitor Habitat? To understand status and trend of habitat and whether restoration is effective

6 Washington State Salmon Recovery Regions Snake River Region Watersheds Include: Asotin Cr. Tucannon River Walla Walla River Lower Palouse River (below Palouse Falls) Lower Grande Ronde

7 Overview of Restoration Projects in SE Washington Working With Beaver in Pataha Creek Tucannon River Large Wood Asotin Creek Large Wood

8 Pataha Creek Working With Beaver to Restore Steelhead Habitat Pataha Creek is an incised stream lacking: Floodplain Connectivity Habitat Diversity Tucannon River Pataha Creek

9 Pataha Creek Working With Beaver to Restore Steelhead Habitat Pataha Creek Is An Incised Stream

10 Pataha Creek Working With Beaver to Restore Steelhead Habitat Typical phases of incision and length of time for recovery (Pollock et al. 2014).

11 Pataha Creek Working With Beaver to Restore Steelhead Habitat Can we use beaver dams to aggrade the channel and access inset floodplain to induce riparian growth? Beaver dams: Back up/push water onto floodplain Store sediment upstream Create scour downstream Increase hyphoreic exchange

12 Pataha Creek Working With Beaver to Restore Steelhead Habitat In 2015 & 2016, ~100 Beaver Dam Analogs (BDAs) were constructed. Willows will be planted this spring

13 Pataha Creek Working With Beaver to Restore Steelhead Habitat Beaver Dam Analogs

14 Watersheds Where Beaver or Dam Analogs Are Being Used As A Restoration Strategy Methow River, WA Pine Cr., OR Pataha Cr., WA Potlatch River, ID Bridge Cr., OR Crooked River, OR Birch Cr., UT Additional projects in OR, CA, CO, UT, AZ

15 Trout Magazine Winter 2016

16 Focus on Spring Chinook Tucannon River Large Wood Projects Pataha Creek Tucannon River

17 Tucannon River has limited: Large Wood Habitat Complexity Floodplain Connectivity Tucannon River Large Wood Projects Tucannon River Pataha Creek

18 Tucannon River Large Wood Projects 2005 School Fire burned 15% of watershed 2006 Columbia Complex Fire burned 62% of watershed Restoration includes adding large wood and reconnecting/creating side channels

19 Tucannon River Large Wood Projects So far ~14 miles of river have been restored

20 Tucannon River Large Wood Projects

21 Asotin Creek Post Assisted Log Structures (PALS) wild steelhead Tributaries include: N.F. Asotin Cr. S.F. Asotin Cr. Charley Cr.

22 Asotin Creek Post Assisted Log Structures (PALS) Asotin Cr. has limited: Large Wood Habitat Complexity/Diversity

23 Asotin Creek Post Assisted Log Structures (PALS) Restoration involves construction of Post Assisted Log Structures (PALS). Configurations include: Bank Attached, Mid-Channel, and Debris Jams. Video

24 Asotin Creek Post Assisted Log Structures (PALS) Since 2012, over 8 miles of stream have been treated with > 500 structures.

25 Asotin Creek Post Assisted Log Structures (PALS) Since 2012, over 8 miles of stream have been treated with > 500 structures. Pre-Treatment Post Treatment

26 Streams Where PALS Are Being Used As A Restoration Strategy Penawawa Cr. Pataha Cr. Alpowa Cr. Little Tucannon River Asotin Cr. tributaries

27 Fish and Habitat Monitoring Does all this restoration improve habitat? i.e., create habitat suitable for rearing and spawning Does it ultimately increase productivity? i.e., create more fish Monitoring is necessary to answer these questions and to determine the status and trends of habitat and fish populations. Tucannon River Monitoring (habitat only) Asotin Cr. Monitoring (fish and habitat)

28 Fish Habitat Monitoring We want to measure attributes important for adults and juveniles. Habitat Units (pools, riffles, runs) Substrate Fish Cover Wood Fish Food Discharge Riparian Vegetation Water Chemistry Temperature

29 Columbia Habitat Monitoring Program (CHaMP) Funded by Bonneville Power Administration Initiated in 2011 Standardized methods Status and trends of habitat Watersheds Include: Asotin Creek Tucannon S.F. Salmon (Secesh) Lemhi Yankee Fork Upper Grande Ronde John Day Entiat Methow Wenatchee

30 Topographic Data Collection

31 Topographic Data Collection

32 Topographic Data Collection Metrics derived from topographic data include: Channel Dimensions (gradient, sinuosity, widths, depths) Habitat Unit Dimensions (area, volume, depths) Geomorphic Change Detection Hydraulic Models (velocity) Habitat Suitability Indices

33 SiteID: CBW ; Tucannon River Tucannon River Monitoring Results 2011 Levee Removal/Setback 2013 Wood Structures

34 SiteID: CBW ; Tucannon River Tucannon River Pre Levee Removal/Setback 2011 Levee Disconnected Floodplain Low Low Water Depth Elevation High High Meters

35 SiteID: CBW ; Tucannon River Tucannon River Post Levee Removal/Setback 2012 Levee Removed Levee Setback Reconnected Floodplain Low Low Water Depth Elevation High High Meters

36 SiteID: CBW ; Tucannon River 2013 Tucannon River Pre Wood Structure Placement Wood Structures Low Low Water Depth Elevation High High Meters

37 Tucannon River Post Wood Structure Placement 2014 Pools Scoured Low Low Water Depth Elevation High High Meters

38 SiteID: CBW ; Tucannon River Tucannon River Geomorphic Change Levee Removed Levee Setback Reconnected Floodplain Pools Scoured Erosion Geomorphic Change Deposition Meters

39 SiteID: CBW ; Tucannon River Tucannon River Geomorphic Change Pools Scoured Erosion Geomorphic Change Deposition Meters

40 Tucannon River Monitoring Results Wood Site Type Year Control Sites (n) Treatment Sites (n) Pools

41 Tucannon River Monitoring Summary At the site scale: Increase in wood Increase in pools at some restored sites At the watershed scale: Increase in wood No detectable change in pools or other measurements of complexity when compared with control sites 500 cfs We need high flows to see restoration succeed!

42 Asotin Creek Monitoring Results Where: S.F. Asotin Creek, Southeast Washington S.F. Asotin Cr. site as example What and When: Pre-Treatment survey in 2012 Post Assisted Log Structures (PALS) installed in 2012 (after sampling occurred) Post Treatment survey in 2015 Elevation (m) Water Depth (m)

43 Asotin Creek Hydraulic Model Outputs

44 Suitability Curves Water Depth Flow Direction Meters Maret et al 2006 Water Depth (m) Water Depth HS Value (0-1) Shallow Deeper Low High

45 Suitability Curves Water Depth Flow Direction Meters Flow Direction Meters Water Depth (m) Water Depth HS Value (0-1) Shallow Deeper Low High

46 Suitability Curves Water Velocity Flow Direction Meters Maret et al 2006 Velocity (m/s) Velocity HS Value (0-1) Slow Fast Low High

47 Suitability Curves Water Velocity Flow Direction Meters Flow Direction Meters Velocity (m/s) Velocity HS Value (0-1) Slow Fast Low High

48 Habitat Suitability Model Outputs Depth HS Velocity HS Overall HS Score Low Habitat Suitability High

49 PALS just after construction (2012) S.F. Asotin Creek Habitat Suitability Same PALS 3 years later (2015) PALS

50 Pre-Treatment (2012) S.F. Asotin Creek Habitat Suitability Post Treatment (2015) PALS Habitat Suitability Index Low High

51 S.F. Asotin Creek Habitat Suitability Pre-Treatment (2012) Post Treatment (2015) + PALS Post Locations Habitat Suitability Index Low High

52 NWUA (m) S.F. Asotin Creek Habitat Suitability Normalized Weighted Usable Area (based on velocity and depth) NWUA = σ i=1 n 0.44 Suitability i Area i Total Area Pre- Treatment YearPost Treatment

53 S.F. Asotin Creek Pools Pre-Treatment (2012) Post Treatment (2015) PALS Pools Elevation (m)

54 LWD/100 m Asotin Creek Habitat Monitoring Results % increase Wood Control Treatment Pools

55 IMW WDFW Asotin Creek Fish Monitoring Mark-recapture Mobile PIT tag PIT tag Arrays Adult weir Smolt trap Redd surveys

56 Asotin Creek Fish Monitoring

57 Asotin Creek Monitoring Results Juvenile Steelhead Abundance Difference between average density of juvenile steelhead for treatments vs controls (blue line), all streams combined. Average difference pre- and post-restoration (red lines; p = 0.052).

58 Asotin Creek Monitoring Summary At the site scale: Increase in wood Increase in pools at restored sites Increase in juvenile steelhead at restored sites At the watershed scale: Increase in wood Increase in pools No detectable increase in juvenile steelhead population

59 Asotin Creek Trout Unlimited Steelhead Blog