A Summary of Recommendations and Strategies for Trout Conservation on the Lower Boise River, Idaho.

A Summary of Recommendations and Strategies for Trout Conservation on the Lower Boise River, Idaho. Completed for Ted Trueblood Chapter of Trout Unlimited By Candy Weast (Hammond) Albertson College of Idaho, Caldwell, Idaho December 15, 2004 Abstract The Lower Boise River in Boise, Idaho has experienced declines in river system health and habitat quality. The resulting impact in the fishery of the Boise River is a source of concern for many agencies, environmental groups, and local anglers. This focus of this paper is on a project completed for the Ted Trueblood Chapter of Trout Unlimited, a local organization dedicated to restoring trout habitat within Southwestern Idaho. The purpose of this project is to locate aquatic habitat related information on the Lower Boise River, create a single source for the fish and habitat recommendations for this portion of the river, and organize the information for future use. From this project, comparisons and contrasts can be made to aid in prioritizing future restoration and mitigation projects. The compiled information found that there are common recommendations among documents that recommended the restoration of riparian habitat, fish and wildlife habitat, and the river system in and along the Lower Boise River. Differences between documents were found in the recommendations for point source and nonpoint source pollution, agriculture, educational programs, and community involvement. Many of the identified projects are still in the planning stages and specific projects should be carried out in the near future to benefit aquatic habitats. The data also suggests that there is a significant amount of interest over the conservation of trout. There are many strategies recommended that are useful and could be applied to restore the Lower Boise River. This information will help Trout Unlimited in the future by identifying new project opportunities, establishing cooperative partners, and aiding in pursuing and securing funding for projects. 1

Introduction There has been increasing research on the biological integrity of the Boise River, which is located in Southwestern Idaho (Ashbridge and Bjornn 1988, Mullins 1999, MacCoy 2004). This is due to the increasing urban development and population growth in southwestern Idaho. Much of this growth has occurred in the city of Boise, which is the state capitol and the largest city in Idaho. Between 1990 and 2000, the Boise metropolitan area was the seventh fastest growing metropolitan area in the country (Community Planning, et al. 2002). The city of Boise is headquarters to many large companies, such as Simplot Corporation and Micron Technology, as well as the state s largest university, Boise State. The Lower Boise River is a section of the Boise River that runs through the city of Boise, which had a population of 181, 711 as of 2000 (City of Boise 2004). The Lower Boise River, a 64 mile stretch of river that flows from Lucky Peak Dam to the Snake River below Parma, Idaho, is the general area of interest for this paper. The development in and along the Boise River and the increasing use of the river, associated with the growth, has created a concern about the impacts to the fishery by city, state, federal agencies, as well as conservation organizations. The Ted Trueblood Chapter of Trout Unlimited is a conservation organization made up of fisherman, biologists, and others that are dedicated to restoring degraded trout habitat and conserving coldwater species for the future. The Chapter was founded in 1991and there are currently nearly 700 members. The Chapter covers eight counties in southwestern Idaho from Weiser to Glenns Ferry (Trout Unlimited 2004). The Chapter has been involved in numerous restoration projects, some of which include the Boise River. The Boise River Subbasin encompasses 1290 square-miles of rangeland, forests, agricultural lands, and urban areas (IDWR 2004).Agriculture is an important part of the economy in the Treasure Valley and dams were constructed and operated to provide irrigation water as well as flood control. The Lucky Peak Dam is the lowermost dam of the three dams located in the Boise River Basin, along with Anderson Ranch and Arrowrock dams. Both agriculture and urban population growth have had negative 2

impacts on the biological components of the Boise River. The construction and operation of the dams lead to changes in the natural river system. For example, the channel has lost sinuosity, there are decreased winter stream flows, and there is limited cover for salmonids in the Boise River (ACOE 1995). The changes in the Boise River have also impacted on the ecosystem as well. The Boise River is home to many terrestrial and aquatic species of birds, mammals, fish, insects, and plants. The focus of this paper is on coldwater fish, specifically trout. Trout within the Boise River include rainbow trout, steelhead trout, and brown trout. One of the largest impacts to trout has been the construction of barriers, which have blocked fish passage and movement. Also, inadequate spawning habitat and angler harvest have been limiting trout recruitment and abundances in the Boise River (Ashbridge and Bjornn 1988). Many government agencies are trying to restore habitats that have been degraded by impacting activities. This is due to the fact that the Boise River runs through the middle of the city, there is easy access to most of the river, many of the city parks are adjacent to the river, and people enjoy using the river for variety of activities such as fishing, swimming, and boating. Thus, the public also has a vested interest in restoring the river and its habitats and this has spawned the establishment of environmental organizations to take part in conservation efforts. A recent U.S. Geological Survey (MacCoy 2004) indicated that water quality of the Lower Boise River has been affected by elevated nutrient, suspended sediment, and bacteria concentrations. Further, the Idaho River Macroinvertebrate Index (MacCoy 2004) indicated that water quality of the entire Lower Boise River was poor. Thus, restoration projects are needed to eliminate or reduce the impacts associated with development in and along the Lower Boise River. The purpose of this project was to locate aquatic habitat related information on the Lower Boise River, create a single source for the fish and habitat recommendations for this portion of the river, and organize the information for future use. From this project, comparisons and contrasts can be made to aid in prioritizing future restoration and mitigation projects. Specifically, Trout Unlimited will rely on the results of this project as a means to 1) rank and prioritize the 3

coldwater fishery needs within this portion of the Boise River, 2) aid in developing cooperative relationships for future projects, and 3) provide background support in securing funds to implement projects. Methods Research was conducted in the fall of 2004 from Caldwell, Canyon County, Idaho. Information was obtained from the archives of the Chapter and from websites on American Online. Some information was provided by Chapter members, as well as state agencies. The documents were examined for content and recommendations that focused on the aquatic habitats within the Lower Boise River. The information was compiled and recommendations were sorted to focus on those that will provide the greatest benefit to the local coldwater fishery. Specific recommendations were then placed in a spreadsheet under the appropriate column header that it corresponded to. Microsoft Excel was the program used to create a spreadsheet. The document name, agencies involved, the date of document completion, and contact information were used for general information. Applicable document recommendations were sorted in to categories: point source pollution, non-point pollution, erosion/sedimentation prevention, agriculture pollution, riparian habitat, changes to the river system, fish and wildlife habitat restoration, education programs, and community involvement. Results Fourteen documents and project plans were located and put into two tables (Appendix A). There were various agencies involved from the regional, state, local, and company level. These are as follows: State: Idaho Department of Water Resources, Idaho Water Resources Research Institute, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Idaho Council on Industry and the Environment, Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Local: City of Boise Parks and Recreation, The Friends of Barber Pool Conservation Area, Lower Boise River Water Quality Plan and Recreation Department, Community Planning Council of Southwest Idaho Companies: Recreation Engineering and Planning, Enviroissues, inc., Ecovista 4

Regional: Walla Walla District of Army Corps of Engineers, Columbia Fish and Wildlife Authority, Northwest Power Planning Council, Shoshone-Paiute Indians of Duck Valley Indian Reservation Most of the documents found that addressed the Lower Boise River had recommendations or strategies to help restore and conserve fish populations. The only document that did not reference fish was document 11 (Appendix, Table 1). At least five documents were created for fish conservation (See Documents 8, 9, 12, 13, and 14). Most documents are recent and were completed in the years 2002 to 2004. Thirteen of the fourteen documents contained strategies to prevent erosion and or sedimentation into the Boise River. Streambank stabilization for erosion control was referenced in four documents. Three documents discussed the impacts of roads. Six documents contained solutions for point source pollution. Six documents contained solutions for non-point pollution as well. Six of the documents made references to ways to prevent the impact of agriculture on river systems. Twelve of the documents contained solutions and strategies to restore the riparian habitat of the Boise River. Revegetation and limiting public access were two popular recommendations, where seven documents had either one or both recommendations. Eleven documents provided solutions that would impact the river in some way. Improving stream flows and revegetation were two common solutions or objectives. As mentioned earlier, all documents but one had solutions that would benefit fish. Side channels, limiting access, improved spawning grounds, and more data collection were all common recommendations. Also, at least three documents made references to Bull trout and restoring their depressed population numbers. Six documents had recommendations for educational programs that were very general. Angler education was recommended in at least three documents. Seven documents had recommendations to get the community more involved in conservation. 5

Discussion The results showed that most of the documents found on the Boise River also contained recommendations to help restore and conserve fish populations. This suggests that agencies and environmental groups see fish as being an important part of the Lower Boise River ecosystem and are aware of the negative impacts that development has had on the aquatic biota. Typically, documents that were created specifically for fish were created to reduce or mitigate for the negative impacts of development, such as dams. For example, the Boise-Payette-Weiser Subbasin Summary (Stovall and Gunder 2002) was created in accordance with the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980. This act gives the Bonneville Power Administration the authority and responsibility to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife to the extent affected by the development and operation of any hydroelectric project of the Columbia River and it s tributaries in a manner consistent with the program adopted by the Northwest Power Planning Council (Stovall and Gunder 2002). Other documents might not have been created solely to benefit fish, but they do contain recommendations that will improve the river and all the species in it. As mentioned earlier, most of the documents were created in the past few years. This indicates that programs for the Boise River are still in the planning stage. In the next few years, strategies and programs should probably start to be implemented. This data also indicates that the Lower Boise River is starting to be a priority for conservation in the state of Idaho. Most documents had recommendations for erosion/sedimentation prevention. This shows that there is a large concern and awareness in the potential and observed impacts and that it is recognized that erosion can have a large negative impact on fish. Erosion causes the stream banks to erode and as a result, excess sediments and other pollutants are released into water systems that can degrade fish habitats. Most documents had recommendations for erosion/sedimentation prevention. Erosion can be caused by construction, human access, and other factors. The Urban/Suburban Source Implementation Plan (IDEQ 2003) focused on erosion and sedimentation. The authors discuss the impacts of sediment and 6

say suspended sedimentation and water temperature in the river regularly exceeds conditions that adversely affect early life stages of all fish (DEQ 2003). They determine that Fifteen Mile Creek, Mason Creek, and Dixie Slough are high priority areas for reducing sediment. At least three documents looked at roads as a source of erosion. The Boise, Payette, and Weiser Subbasins Management Plan (Ecovista 2004) recommended road closures and decommissioning programs. They recommend these strategies because, Roads and trails have altered the size, quality and distribution of habitats for native species in the Subbasins Roads and trails allow for the spread of human activities and increase intensity of human impacts year round (Ecovista 2004). Humans specifically impact the habitat because, they compact soils, disturb organic layers, and cause higher rates of erosion resulting in increased sediment delivery to aquatic systems (Ecovista 2004). Other strategies to combat erosion and increased sediment input are: bank treatments, revegetation, shoreline protection, barb installation, and the protection of trees in the riparian area. Few documents targeted point and nonpoint source pollution in their recommendations. This is probably due to the fact the government is in control of water quality regulations, so smaller local groups can only restore the impacts of point source and non point source pollution on rivers. The Idaho Department of Water Resources and the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality are in the position of regulating water quality and making sure that industries follow these regulations. The Lower Boise River Effluent Trading Demonstration Project (Ross and Associates 2000) was created by the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality to, create a proposed trading system that is environmentally and legally sound (Ross and Associates 2000). Effluent trading is the process, when a party faces relatively high pollution reduction costs compensates to another party to achieve an equivalent, thought less costly, pollution reduction (Ross and Associates 2000). So, it is a system of trading between parties that is supposed to protect water quality and minimize further degradation. But, there are also other strategies to stop point source and non point source pollution that the community and local governments can participate in. To stop point source pollution, 7

the TMDL Urban/Suburban Source Implementation Plan (IDEQ 2003) recommends repairing leaky sewer lines and prohibiting illegal dumping. These strategies address a type of pollution at its source which can be any discernable confined and discrete conveyance (Ross and Associates 2000). A non point source is a source of pollution that is not as definable. A non-point source is when pollutants are generally carried off the land by storm water and common non-point sources are: agriculture, urban, mining, construction, dams, channels, land disposal, saltwater intrusion, and city streets (Ross and Associates 2000). Specific strategies recommended are: non-point source trading, no mow zones for filtering, integrated pest management, replacement of sewer lines, parking lot cleaning, and better enforcement of non-point source pollution violators. Only six documents had recommendations to prevent the negative impacts of agriculture, and this is because agriculture is a privately owned business and it is up to the government and farming organizations to regulate it. But, some recommendations to farmers and farm owners are to use best management practices. These BMP s are discussed in the The Lower Boise River Effluent Trading Demonstration Project (Ross and Associates 2000) and include: buffer strips, filter strips, mulching, and residue management (mulch till, no-till, and strip till). Other recommendations included are exclusion fences, off site watering sites, and prescribed grazing. These strategies are important because some agriculture activities can negatively impact rivers. For example, animal feedlots and dairies near and adjacent to riparian areas deliver excess sediment, nutrients, and pathogens (DEQ 2003). Further, livestock can further damage the riparian area next to rivers by causing, functional changes in riparian areas resulting from livestock grazing and trampling, and vegetation removal (DEQ 2003). When there is destruction to the riparian habitat, some documents provided recommended measures to restore or mitigate for the destruction. Most documents recommended revegetation as an important strategy. Replanting trees and other vegetation is important for stabilizing the streambank, reducing erosion, and providing shade and habitat for many species. The Boise Parks and Recreation Department Stewardship Plan for the Riparian Corridor from Barber Park to Glenwood Bridge (ACOE 2002) also recommends 8

installing barbs, which provide streambank stabilization, provide maximum value to fish and wildlife habitat, and provides secure footing to river users. Limiting access by humans was another commonly recommended strategy because the increased human access to river can lead to the destruction of vegetation and erosion. Large scale, and more costly, recommendations include: deepening the channel, meander realignment, and establishing minimum stream flows. Stream flows need to be changed in order to suit the needs of fish and other species in the presence of dams. For example, Lower water velocities in all habitat types and greater abundance of pool habitat would benefit trout in the Boise River in winter (Ashbridge and Bjornn 1988). Small scale improvements recommended are barbs, u-structures, and large boulder placement. These improvements can be less costly and simple to do. For example, The Boise Parks and Recreation Department Stewardship Plan for the Riparian Corridor from Barber Park to Glenwood Bridge (ACOE 2002) document recommends placing large boulders in the channel to enhance low-valve channel reaches. Specifically, they recommend that boulders should be placed in pods so that each pod will provide fisheries cover for 5-20 trout as well as other native species (ACOE 2002). As mentioned in the results section, all documents but one made references to restoring and benefiting fish populations. Limiting access, revegetation, barbs, and large boulder placement were common strategies in the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Restoration or Degradation Prevention category that were mentioned in other categories as well. A new strategy not mentioned so far is to improve spawning grounds for fish. The Boise Parks and Recreation Department Stewardship Plan for the Riparian Corridor from Barber Park to Glenwood Bridge (ACOE 2002) document suggests a gravel maintenance plan to provide new spawning gravels for fish. The Survey of Potential and Available Salmonid Habitat in the Boise River (Ashbridge and Bjornn 1988) document recommends beginning a habitat improvement program to increase the amount of summer and rearing habitat, and to concentrate spawning habitat improvements in Loggins Creek and side channels. The Treasure Valley Water Summit suggested evaluating diversions for 9

impacts to fishery spawning. Thus, many agencies are aware of the degradation to spawning grounds and how it has affected the growth of fish. The impact of barriers on fish is another topic that many documents addressed. The Boise-Payette-Weiser Subbasin Summary (Stovall and Gunder 2002) document recommends new culvert installations. Culverts are structure in roads to allow streams to flow through them, but poorly designed and installed culverts can be a barrier to fish movement and migration. They can specifically impact the connectivity of trout populations. Some documents addressed the impacts barriers have had on bull trout, which have interconnected populations. The Boise, Payette, and Weiser Subbasins Management Plan (Ecovista 2004) recommended removing specific barriers to bull trout migration in the Southwestern Idaho Recovery Unit, as mentioned in the data. Other species of fish that were mentioned in the plan were redband trout. They recommend developing a population monitoring plan that integrates and includes existing information and interpretation of the natural interaction between resident and migratory redband trout (Ecovista 2004). However, both bull trout and redband trout do not seem to appear in the Lower Boise River. The Idaho Fish and Game Fisheries Management Plan note that: Rainbow trout, Brown Trout, and Mountain Whitefish are the dominant species in the Lower Boise River (IDFG 198). The lack of discussion on restoring species in most documents suggests that the common goal of these documents is not to increase a specific species population, but to increase the quality of habitat for all fish in general. And since different species of fish require different stream flows and temperatures, then it is more difficult to design a restoration program around one species that won t impact other species. Only about half of the documents had recommendations about educational programs. Four documents addressed angler education programs. For example, The Boise-Payette- Weiser Subbasin Summary (Stovall and Gunder 2002) document recommended replacing and increasing the number of fishing regulation and bull trout signs. Signs and other informative materials can be used to inform the public about other conservational issues as well. Many of the documents recommended using informational materials to teach the 10

pubic about conservation issues, such as trout habitat restoration and conservation. This is important because the public and the community can play an important part in conservation. If they are aware of the environmental issues surrounding their local habitat, the Lower Boise River, then they can give their support and also help out doing restoration activities. Community involvement is an important component of conservation. Unfortunately, only about half of the documents contained strategies to get the community involved. However, most of these documents are in the planning process so hopefully the community can be involved in the future. Some important recommendations that were mentioned within the documents included: working with local groups to improve fish habitat, supporting cooperative efforts, supporting land owners, involving communities in finer scale efforts in subbasin planning and project planning, and encouraging watershed advisory groups. A useful strategy recommended by the Treasure Valley Water Summit (Community Planning 2002) is to start a larger Friends of the Boise River Group. It was not specified in the spreadsheet, but a difference between documents is that some focused on specific sites on the Lower Boise River and other documents had recommendations for the entire subbasin. The Barber Pool Conservation Area Master Plan (ACOE 2002) focuses on one specific site, the Barber Pool conservation area, which is located approximately 6 miles east of downtown Boise, on the Boise River. The Boise Parks and Recreation Department Stewardship Plan for the Riparian Corridor from Barber Park to Glenwood Bridge (ACOE 2002) document study area includes Boise Parks and Recreation Department s greenbelt, as well as a 70-foot setback from the 6, 500 cubic feet per second high water line of the Boise River. Other documents focused on many sites, such as the Site Evaluation and Design Report for the Boise River Whitewater Park (Recreation Engineering and Planning). The document focused on Ann Morrison Park, Consolidated Site, Thurman Mill Diversion, and Farmer s Union Diversion. And the Boise River Resource Management and Master 11

Plan (Boise Parks and Recreation 1999) focused on 33 plan sites, including: Barber Dam, Harris Ranch, Boise City Canal Diversion, Julia Davis Park, and Wood Duck Island. Conclusion What all these documents have in common is strategies to conserve and restore the habitat of the Lower Boise River. Although not mentioned in this paper, the documents also had numerous other strategies to conserve bald eagles, cottonwood trees, and native species of plants. So, conserving the Lower Boise River habitat includes not only fish, but the rest of the species in the ecosystem. Thus, the common goal of all these documents is the improvement of the Lower Boise River habitat. Other similarities between documents are the focus on restoration of riparian habitat, fish and wildlife habitat, and the river system. But, there was a lack of recommendations for point source and nonpoint source pollution, agriculture, educational programs, and community involvement. The implications are that most conservation projects deals with the aftermath of pollution, through restoration. Dealing with the source of the problem entails a more costly and large scale project. Fortunately, these documents show that there are many things that can be done to restore trout habitat that are less costly and easier to accomplish. This information will aid Trout Unlimited in prioritizing the recommendations for future implementation. Also, the collected information will aid Trout Unlimited in determining what recommendations are missing and help them in proposing new recommendations for trout conservation. Further, Trout Unlimited can use the information to see what agencies are involved, what they are doing, and if the community is involved. By getting support from the community, Trout Unlimited will be able to better secure funds to help carry out restoration activities needed to restore or enhance cold-water fisheries in the Lower Boise River. Acknowledgements I would like to express my gratitude to the Ted Trueblood Chapter for giving me this valuable internship experience. I am especially grateful to Doug Bradley for taking the 12

time to help me on this project and for supervising my internship. I would also like to thank Andy Brunelle and James Piotrowski, as well as Dr. Chris Walser for being my faculty supervisor. Literature Cited ACOE.1995. Lower Boise River and Tributaries, Idaho Reconnaissance Study. Walla Walla District. ACOE (US Army Corps of Engineers). 2002a. Barber Pool Conservation Area Master Plan. Walla Walla District. 12 Dec. 2004. < http://www.nww.usace.army.mil/bpca/masterplan.htm> ACOE. 2002b. Boise Parks and Recreation Department Stewardship Plan For the Riparian Corridor from Barber Park to Glenwood Bridge. Walla Walla District. Aqua Terra Environmental Consulting, Inc. 1999. Boise River Channel Assessment: City of Boise, Ada County, Idaho. City of Boise Parks and Recreation Department. Ashbridge, G. and T.C. Bjornn. 1988. Survey of Potential and Available Salmonid Habitat in the Boise River. Job Completion Report: Idaho Fish and Game. Boise Parks and Recreation Department. 1999. Boise River Resource Management and Master Plan. City of Boise. About Boise. 15 Dec. 2004. <http://www.cityofboise.org/public_information/> Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority. 2002. Draft FY 2003 Middle Snake River Province Plan. Northwest Power Planning Council. Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho, Idaho Department of Water Resources, Idaho Water Resources Research Institute, Enviroissues, Inc. 2002. Treasure Valley Water Future: Summary of the Treasure Valley Water Summit, January 14-15, 2002. Treasure Valley Summit, 2002. Ecovista. 2004. Boise, Payette, and Weiser Subbasins Management Plan. Northwest Power and Conservation Council. IDEQ (Idaho Department of Environmental Quality). 2003. Public Draft Lower Boise River TMDL Implementation Plan. IDEQ 2003. Lower Boise River Total Maximum Daily Load Urban/Suburban Source Implementation Plan. Idaho Department of Environmental Quality. Jan. 2003. 13

IDFG (Idaho Department of Fish and Game). 2001. Fisheries Management Plan 2001-2006. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise. IDWR (Idaho Department of Water Resources). 2004. Treasure Valley Hydrology. Idaho Department of Water Resources. 15 Dec. 2004 <http://www.idwr.state.id.us/tvalley/.> MacCoy, Dorene E. 2004.Water-Quality and Biological Conditions in the Lower Boise River, Ada and Canyon Counties, Idaho, 1994-2002: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2004-5128, 80 p. Mullins, William H. 1999. Biological Assessment of the Lower Boise River, October 1995 Through January 1998, Ada and Canyon Counties, Idaho: Water-Resources Investigation Report. 99-4178. Recreation Engineering and Planning. Site Evaluation and Design Report for the Boise River Whitewater Park. City of Boise. Ross and Associates Environmental Counseling, Ltd. 2000.Lower Boise River Effluent Trading Demonstration Project: Summary of Participant Recommendations for a Trading Frame work. Idaho Division of Environmental Quality. Stovall, Stacey H. and Scott Grunder. (2002). Draft of the Boise-Payette-Weiser Subbasin Summary. Northwest Power Planning Council. May 17 2002. http://www.cbfwa.org/files/province/midsnake/subsum/020517boisepayetteweiser.pdf Trout Unlimited. 2004. About Trout Unlimited. 15 Dec. 2004. <http://www.tedtruebloodtu.org/tuinfo.htm> 14