Simulating Streams Through Culverts in Mat-Su, Alaska Project Managers Bill Rice, P.E., USFWS Hydrologist Mary Price, USFWS Fishery Biologist The Team Approach US Fish and Wildlife Service Bill Rice, P.E., Hydrologist Mary Price, Fishery Biologist Matanuska-Susitna Borough Chuck Kaucic, Public Works Project Manager Alaska Fish and Game Steve Albert, Habitat Biologist Alaska DNR OHMP Jeff Davis, Area Manager Matt LaCroix, Habitat Biologist National Marine Fisheries Erika Phillips, Grant Manager 1
The Location Objectives Results of Mat-Su Culvert Survey Present Stream Simulation Methodology Describe the Culvert Replacement Approach in Mat-Su Present a Series of Culvert Replacements Future Efforts and Needs 2
FWS National Fish Passage Program The Problem WA: 33,000 culvert barriers OR: 30,000 culvert barriers 1999/2004 Culvert Surveys 289 culverts surveyed Median OHW width: 7 ft. 30% creeks <3 feet wide 200-300 miles of creek The Problem Constriction 46% Blocked 14% Perched 20% Gradient 20% Tongass Survey 2000 Mat-Su Surveys 1999/2004 Streams Constriction 71% Blocked 1% Perched 27% Gradient 1% 3
Improperly Sized Culverts Barriers to Aquatic/Wildlife Movement Decrease Habitat Change Stream Processes Improperly Sized Culverts Increase Flooding Risk Increase Infrastructure Maintenance Costs 4
Project Objectives What is Success? Stream Simulation Pass Game Fish (hydraulic design) Worse Range of culvert designs Range of ecological functions Better Flood Pass adult Capacity salmon Pass sediment, debris, all aquatic organisms Floodplain Continuity Floodplain Process Permitted (meander migration) Make the Road Crossing Invisible The Current Solution Aquatic Barrier Significant Function Effects CIP Process Culvert Replacement Habitat Value Cost Stream/Floodplain Timing Funding Borough USFWS NRCS NMFS CIP Process Bridge 5
Stream Simulation Simulate adjacent natural channel Premise: channel inside culvert should present no more of an obstacle to movement of organisms than adjacent natural channel. Stream Simulation Culvert bed width = Varies 30-50% of culvert rise. Well-graded native streambed sediment and withstands 50- year event. Rockbands: Based on slope and distance. 6
Alaska DOT/ F&G Simulation Definition Culvert width at OHW = 0.9 x channel OHW width Slope within 1% of natural grade Slope great than 6% requires additional analysis Bed dynamically stable up to Q50 Embed minimum 40% (arch pipes 20%) No further hydraulic analysis needed to support fish passage Flow Isolated from Culvert Walls Good Flood Width Natural Streambed Meadow Creek Width ratio = 1.5 Slope = 0.9% Rockband keeps channel form Note Consolidation 7
Crooked Lake System Culvert 3 Produced by Todd Communications. Culvert 1 Culvert 2 Crooked Lake System Culvert 1: Culvert Design/Construction 48-inch Culvert with 2 Relief Culverts Design Slope 1.2% Fish Passage Event: 10 cfs Streambed with 1.5 foot Gravel/Cobbles Streambed D50= 3 inches/ D100 = 6 inches 100-Year Event: 41 cfs 70 69.8 Design Width - 3.5 ft. 69.6 Height (ft) 69.4 69.2 69 68.8 Survey Water Surface 68.6 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Distance (ft) 8
Crooked Lake System 76 75 74 73 Height (ft) 72 71 70 69 68 67 66 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Distance (ft) Culvert too Steep DS Invert Too Low Shallow Bed US CULVERT 1 Passes Juveniles Better Function Crooked Lake System Culvert Design/Construction Culvert 2 & 3: 48-inch Culverts Design Slope 2.5% and 0.5% Fish Passage Event: 3.6 cfs Streambed D50= 3 inches/ D100 = 6 inches Streambed with 1.6 foot Gravel/Cobbles 100-Year Event: 28 cfs Culvert 2 Culvert 3 9
Crooked Lake System Culvert 2 Culvert 3 100 100 99 99 Relative Elevation (ft) 98 97 96 95 Relative Elevation (ft) 98 97 96 94 95 93 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 Distance (ft) 94 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 Distance (ft) Changed Bed Material Streambed 3.2% not 2.2% Needed Channel in Culvert Changed Bed Material Streambed 3.4% not 0.5% Needed More Fill over Culvert Needed Streambed Shaped Meadow Creek Culvert Little Su Big Lake Big Lake Watershed: ~90 sq. miles Culvert Drainage: ~7 sq. miles 10
Meadow Creek Culvert Design: 7 by 14 foot Arch Design Slope 0.75% Fish Passage Event: 24 cfs Streambed D50= 3 inches/ D100 = 6 inches Streambed 2-foot Gravel/Cobbles 100-Year Event: 150 cfs Meadow Creek Culvert 103 102 101 100 99 Relative Elevation (ft) 98 97 96 95 94 93 92 91 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 Distance (ft) More Bed Material Needed Streambed 0.9% Good Flood Width Meadow Creek Did not Form Main Channel Flow Isolated from Culvert Walls Width ratio = 1.5 Slope = 0.9% Rockbands Natural Streambed Beaver Control Rockband keeps channel form Consolidation 11
Lucy Lake Tributary Old Culverts: 36-inch Culverts Slopes 1.3-5.2% Perch: 0.3-2.4 ft. 225 0 400 Feet 205 Card/Brom Elevation (ft)) 185 165 Homesteader Cardiff Lupine Starflower 145 125 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 Distance (ft) Lucy Lake System Culverts: 54-inch Culverts for Stream Design Slope 1.1-2.0% Fish Passage Event: 3 cfs Streambed with 1 foot Gravel/Cobbles Streambed D50= 0.5 inches/ D100 = 4 inches 100-Year Event: 27 cfs 12
Results Eight Culverts Replaced in 2004 3.5 miles US Habitat Accessed Key Main Stem Culvert Replaced CIP Process Initiated Prioritization Begun Future Challenges Prioritization Education Replacement of Key Culverts Under Pavement Replacement of Culverts With Bridges 13