Fish Habitat Restoration and Monitoring in Southeast Washington Andy Hill Eco Logical Research, Inc.
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
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
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?
Why Monitor Habitat? To understand status and trend of habitat and whether restoration is effective
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
Overview of Restoration Projects in SE Washington Working With Beaver in Pataha Creek Tucannon River Large Wood Asotin Creek Large Wood
Pataha Creek Working With Beaver to Restore Steelhead Habitat Pataha Creek is an incised stream lacking: Floodplain Connectivity Habitat Diversity Tucannon River Pataha Creek
Pataha Creek Working With Beaver to Restore Steelhead Habitat Pataha Creek Is An Incised Stream
Pataha Creek Working With Beaver to Restore Steelhead Habitat Typical phases of incision and length of time for recovery (Pollock et al. 2014).
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
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. https://vimeo.com/134 740002
Pataha Creek Working With Beaver to Restore Steelhead Habitat Beaver Dam Analogs
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
Trout Magazine Winter 2016
Focus on Spring Chinook Tucannon River Large Wood Projects Pataha Creek Tucannon River
Tucannon River has limited: Large Wood Habitat Complexity Floodplain Connectivity Tucannon River Large Wood Projects Tucannon River Pataha Creek
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
Tucannon River Large Wood Projects So far ~14 miles of river have been restored
Tucannon River Large Wood Projects
Asotin Creek Post Assisted Log Structures (PALS) wild steelhead Tributaries include: N.F. Asotin Cr. S.F. Asotin Cr. Charley Cr.
Asotin Creek Post Assisted Log Structures (PALS) Asotin Cr. has limited: Large Wood Habitat Complexity/Diversity
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
Asotin Creek Post Assisted Log Structures (PALS) Since 2012, over 8 miles of stream have been treated with > 500 structures.
Asotin Creek Post Assisted Log Structures (PALS) Since 2012, over 8 miles of stream have been treated with > 500 structures. Pre-Treatment Post Treatment
Streams Where PALS Are Being Used As A Restoration Strategy Penawawa Cr. Pataha Cr. Alpowa Cr. Little Tucannon River Asotin Cr. tributaries
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)
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
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
Topographic Data Collection
Topographic Data Collection
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
SiteID: CBW05583-203211; Tucannon River Tucannon River Monitoring Results 2011 Levee Removal/Setback 2013 Wood Structures
SiteID: CBW05583-203211; Tucannon River Tucannon River Pre Levee Removal/Setback 2011 Levee Disconnected Floodplain Low Low Water Depth Elevation High High 0 25 50 100 150 200 250 Meters
SiteID: CBW05583-203211; Tucannon River Tucannon River Post Levee Removal/Setback 2012 Levee Removed Levee Setback Reconnected Floodplain Low Low Water Depth Elevation High High 0 25 50 100 150 200 250 Meters
SiteID: CBW05583-203211; Tucannon River 2013 Tucannon River Pre Wood Structure Placement Wood Structures Low Low Water Depth Elevation High High 0 25 50 100 150 200 250 Meters
Tucannon River Post Wood Structure Placement 2014 Pools Scoured Low Low Water Depth Elevation High High 0 25 50 100 150 200 250 Meters
SiteID: CBW05583-203211; Tucannon River Tucannon River 2011-2014 Geomorphic Change Levee Removed Levee Setback Reconnected Floodplain Pools Scoured Erosion Geomorphic Change Deposition 0 25 50 100 150 200 250 Meters
SiteID: CBW05583-203211; Tucannon River Tucannon River 2013-2014 Geomorphic Change Pools Scoured Erosion Geomorphic Change Deposition 0 25 50 100 150 200 250 Meters
Tucannon River Monitoring Results Wood Site Type Year 2011 2012 2013 2015 Control Sites (n) 14 16 15 13 Treatment Sites (n) 5 7 9 8 Pools
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!
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) 696 703 Water Depth (m) 0.01 0.39
Asotin Creek Hydraulic Model Outputs
Suitability Curves Water Depth Flow Direction Meters 0 25 50 Maret et al 2006 Water Depth (m) Water Depth HS Value (0-1) Shallow Deeper Low High
Suitability Curves Water Depth Flow Direction Meters 0 25 50 Flow Direction Meters 0 25 50 Water Depth (m) Water Depth HS Value (0-1) Shallow Deeper Low High
Suitability Curves Water Velocity Flow Direction Meters 0 25 50 Maret et al 2006 Velocity (m/s) Velocity HS Value (0-1) Slow Fast Low High
Suitability Curves Water Velocity Flow Direction Meters 0 25 50 Flow Direction Meters 0 25 50 Velocity (m/s) Velocity HS Value (0-1) Slow Fast Low High
Habitat Suitability Model Outputs Depth HS Velocity HS Overall HS Score Low Habitat Suitability High
PALS just after construction (2012) S.F. Asotin Creek Habitat Suitability Same PALS 3 years later (2015) PALS
Pre-Treatment (2012) S.F. Asotin Creek Habitat Suitability Post Treatment (2015) PALS Habitat Suitability Index Low High
S.F. Asotin Creek Habitat Suitability Pre-Treatment (2012) Post Treatment (2015) + PALS Post Locations Habitat Suitability Index Low High
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 0.42 0.4 0.38 2012 2013 2014 2015 Pre- Treatment YearPost Treatment
S.F. Asotin Creek Pools Pre-Treatment (2012) Post Treatment (2015) PALS Pools Elevation (m) 696 703
LWD/100 m Asotin Creek Habitat Monitoring Results 25.0 20.0 100% increase Wood 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 Control Treatment 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Pools
IMW WDFW Asotin Creek Fish Monitoring Mark-recapture Mobile PIT tag PIT tag Arrays Adult weir Smolt trap Redd surveys
Asotin Creek Fish Monitoring
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).
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
Asotin Creek Trout Unlimited Steelhead Blog http://www.wildsteelheaders.org/