Pilot Watershed Monitoring Program
319(h) Clean Water Act Grant
Final Report
Prepared by Plumas Corporation
Quincy, CA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
Summary 3
Background and Setting 4
Project Work Plan 5
Sampling Design and Protocols 6
Data Management and Analysis 12
Results and Discussion 14
Recommendations 15
References 16
FIGURES PAGE
Fig. 1- Watershed Map between pp. 3-4
Fig. 2- Reference Reach Locations “ “ 7-8
Fig. 3- Permanent Station Locations “ “ 9-10
Fig. 4a- Wolf Water Temperature Graph “ “ 13-14
Fig. 4b- Wolf Water Stage Graph “ “ 13-14
TABLES PAGE
Table 1- FRCRM Agencies 4
Table 2- Enumerated Reference Reaches 7
Table 3- Permanent Station Measurements 9
Table 4- Permanent Station Equipment 10
Table 5- Permanent Station Installation 11
Table 6- Spanish Creek Rating Table between pp. 14-15
APPENDICES
Appendix A- Watershed Monitoring Pilot Plan
Appendix B- Quality Assurance Protection Plan
Appendix C- Stream Condition Inventory, Ver. 4, 1998
Appendix D- Reference Reach Data Tables
Pilot Watershed Monitoring Program
319(h) Clean Water Act Grant
Final Report
In 1997, a Clean Water Act 319(h) granted was awarded
to the Feather River Coordinated Resource Management (FRCRM) group to develop a
Pilot Program for regional watershed monitoring in the upper Feather River
basin. The specific purpose was to
develop, field test, and evaluate protocols of a watershed monitoring network
to obtain baseline and/or continuing data from which could be measured
trends-through-time of watershed health.
The general purpose was to begin a program of trend analysis with which
to evaluate changes as they relate to land management and restoration efforts
in the watershed.
The Pilot Program established twenty-one (21)
permanent reference reaches (from which field data was collected on nine (9)
physical, and two (2) biological parameters), two (2) sediment sampling sites,
and eleven (11) continuous recording stations (which track stream-flow, water
temperature and several water quality parameters). These are located in the North Fork (1100 mi2), East Branch (1000 mi2), and Middle Fork (1200 mi2) watersheds as follows:
Watershed Reference
Reaches Continuous
Recording Sediment
North Fork Feather 5 0 0
East Branch Feather 12 10 2
Middle Fork Feather 4 1 0
The field methods used in the reference reaches follow closely those described in the US Forest Service “Stream Condition Inventory Guidebook”, version 4, 1998.
The
Pilot Program was planned and developed in 1997- 98. The field data was collected from the reference reaches in
1999. The installation of equipment at
the continuous recording sites was
accomplished in 1999- 2000. The
selection of sediment sites was made in 1999, with data collection initiated in
2000- 01.
As
a special contribution to this system, Ca. Department of Water Resources
purchased and installed a satellite-accessible weather station at Doyle
Crossing in the Last Chance Creek watershed (upper east Branch).
The Feather River Coordinated Resource Management
(FRCRM) group, a proactive consortium of 21 public agencies, private sector
groups, and local landowners (Table 1), was formed in 1985 in response to
widespread erosion and channel degradation in the Feather River watershed. The FRCRM has collectively completed over 50
watershed projects in the Feather River basin since 1985 including studies and
assessments, resource management plans, stream restoration projects, community
outreach and educational efforts. Over 15 miles of stream and 4,000 riparian
acres have been treated at a cost of over five million dollars, which was contributed
largely by FRCRM partners. The goal of the FRCRM program is to improve
watershed condition over time, reduce erosion, restore meadow function, improve
water quality and enhance habitat for fish and wildlife.
Table 1: Feather River
Coordinated Resource Management Signatory Members
California Department
of Forestry & Fire Protection Plumas
County
California Dept. of
Fish & Game Feather
River College
California Dept. of
water Resources Pacific
Gas & Electric
California Regional
Water Quality Control Board Plumas
Corporation
USDA- Natural
Resources Conservation Service USDA-
USFS, Plumas National Forest
U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers Plumas
Unified School District
Feather River
Resource Conservation District USDA-
Farm Services Agency
California Dept. of
Transportation Salmonid
Restoration Federation
California Dept. of
Parks & Recreation U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service
Plumas County
Community Development Commission Univ.
of Calif. Cooperative Extension
North Cal-Neva
Resource Conservation and Development Area
The
Feather River watershed is located in California’s northern Sierra Nevada,
where the North, South and Middle Forks drain 3,222 square miles of variable
terrain from the Great Basin Escarpment westward through the Sierran crest into
the Sacramento River (Figure 1). The
study area includes three (3) USGS Hydrologic Unit Code watersheds: HUC
#18020121, North Fork Feather; HUC #18020122, East Branch, North Fork Feather;
HUC #18020123, Middle Fork Feather.
Elevation ranges from 2,250 to over 10,000 feet, and annual
precipitation varies broadly from more than 70 inches on the wet western slopes
to less that 12 inches on the arid east side. Vegetation is diverse and ranges
from productive mixed conifer and deciduous forests in the west to sparse
sage/yellow pine plant communities in the east. The Plumas National Forest
manages most of the forested uplands while the mid-elevation alluvial valleys
are predominantly in private ownership.
The
Feather River watershed has long been recognized for its recreational and
aesthetic value. An abundance of montane rivers, lakes and reservoirs grace the
landscape, creating both summer and winter recreational opportunities. Water
originating from this area represents a significant component of the State
Water Project, which provides high quality water to meet downstream urban and
agricultural demand. In addition, a series of hydroelectric dams, powerhouses
and reservoirs produce over 4,000 MW of power, while the watershed produces
significant forest and agricultural outputs.
Water is, therefore, a valuable commodity in this resource-dependent
community, and maintaining stable watershed condition is a key element in
promoting economic and environmental stability.
The
Feather River watershed has been impacted by 140 years of intense human use.
Mining, over-grazing, timber harvesting, wildfire, railroad and road
construction effects have all contributed to a watershed-wide stream channel
entrenchment process. This entrenchment
resulted in accelerated erosion, degraded water quality, decreased vegetation
and soil productivity, and degraded terrestrial and aquatic habitats.
Functionally, the disconnection of stream channels from their floodplains and
meadows has led to a dramatic change in hydrology, leading to reduced summer
flow, higher summer water temperature, lower water tables, reduced meadow
storage capacity, and a trend from perennial to intermittent flow. Many downcut
streams no longer sustain late-season flow, causing adverse consequences to
riparian and upland vegetation, aquatic communities, and downstream water users
(Ponce and Lindquist 1990).
The
FRCRM recognized that restoring watershed function was a major priority for
reversing erosional trends. Stable, well-vegetated streams with functioning
meadows, aquifers and uplands are critical in maintaining good watershed
condition. Achieving this stable state
begins with reestablishing water and sediment retention and release functions
in headwater meadows, which is the current focus of the FRCRM (Lindquist and
Wilcox 2000). Restoration activities
play an important role in accelerating improvement in watershed function, the
local economy and downstream uses. The results of this monitoring program will
help the FRCRM assess the long-term trends in watershed condition in response
to projects and may provide useful information in the future to help prioritize
limited restoration funding to areas of greatest need.
The
pilot monitoring program was developed in 1997-1998 under the guidance of FRCRM
Monitoring Technical Advisory Committee (TAC).
The program was implemented over a two-year period, from 1998-2000. The first year focused on developing a
strategy and work plan (Appendix A) that was realistic, feasible and met project
objectives. Data collection took place the second year of the project for both
the reference reach and permanent station components which is described in more
detail in the Sampling Design and
Protocol section of this document.
The overall objectives of this program are to:
·
Develop,
implement and evaluate a monitoring program which documents, at the watershed
scale, long-term trends in watershed condition cumulatively resulting from
restoration activities, land management changes and natural processes in the
Feather River basin.
·
Develop
a spatially referenced data management system to track, organize, and store
monitoring data, facilitate analysis, provide a means for widespread
distribution and education, and support production of reports needed to
evaluate long-term trends. The system
used should be compatible with other data sets managed by Quincy Library Group
(QLG), Department of Water Resources (DWR), USFS, and others.
·
When
possible, use monitoring protocols currently used by resource management
agencies to facilitate data sharing and to improve data analysis.
The
monitoring approach consists of three basic components designed to address
project objectives. They are:
¨
Biennial
monitoring of physical and biological parameters at 21 designated permanent
response reference reaches.
¨
Installation
of 11 permanent recording stations where data loggers continuously record
streamflow and temperature data, and where water chemistry samples are
collected manually.
¨
Regional
physical and climatic data are collected at a newly installed weather station
at Doyle Crossing. This weather station
was purchased and installed by CDWR as a contribution to the project ($25,000).
The Doyle Crossing weather station is satellite-accessed, with real-time data
available through the Ca. Data Exchange Center (CDEC).
Major
tasks carried out in this pilot program include:
§
the
development of a monitoring work plan;
§
purchase
and installation of monitoring equipment;
§
reference
reach initial surveys;
§
direct
measurements of stream flow for rating permanent stations;
§
collection
of turbidity, flow and stream temperature data via data logger;
§
manual
collection of water chemistry samples;
§
development
of a GIS-based data management system and web interface;
§
installation
of one meteorological station;
§
securing
landowner agreements to access equipment and collect data on private land;
§
identify
and secure funding for the monitoring program beyond the two year pilot phase.
Reference reaches were
selected based on several criteria. The
major criteria include channel sensitivity to change, current and future
management activity, accessibility for data collection, position in the
watershed and reach length. From a
monitoring perspective, we are more interested in sensitive or response reaches
since these sites react more quickly to changes in management and natural
events, and therefore, will demonstrate change more readily in a long term
monitoring program. The selected reaches should be representative of the
system. Sites selected for this
program are characterized as low gradient, alluvial and have minimum on-site
disturbance to avoid data “noise”. The
reaches are located at or near the base of each sub-watershed to provide a
cumulative measure, and are at least 20 channel widths in length (which is the
designated minimum length of each reference reach).
The
fieldwork for reference reach data collection is conducted by a team of trained
technicians that are supervised by an experienced crew leader with extensive
field and data collection experience and a technical background in hydrology
and biology. To the extent possible, the fieldwork will follow scientific
procedures and protocols that are well established in the primary literature or
common practices of federal or state resource agencies in the watershed. Data quality control is discussed more fully
in the FRCRM Quality Assurance Protection Plan (Appendix B) prepared as part of
this CWA 319 grant.
The monitoring
approach relies heavily on established procedures developed by resource
management agencies and on collective expertise offered by FRCRM contributors.
It was designed particularly in terms of assessing changes in channel
structure, habitat and water quality factors. Field sampling procedures are
based on protocols described in the "Stream Condition Inventory
Guidebook" (SCI) version 4.0 (1998) (Appendix C). These protocols were developed over a
five-year period (1993-98) by fisheries biologists and hydrologists in the US
Forest Service Region 5, with support for sampling design and statistical
analysis from the USFS Pacific Southwest Research Station. SCI methods were critiqued and in some cases
modified by the FRCRM Monitoring Committee to meet project needs. Parameters included in the sampling design
and the location of reference reaches are listed on Table 2.
The
intent was to provide protocols that can be consistently applied in assessing
and monitoring stream conditions in the Pacific Southwest Region, which
includes the Feather River basin. Attributes were tested that had been
demonstrated through research to be indicative of stream condition, could be
sampled by seasonal field crews, and yet had low enough measurement error to be
useful in describing changes in stream habitat with a moderate to high level of
confidence. The intensity of data
collection meets the objective of comparing data over time, or from other streams
with a reasonable level of statistical confidence.
Biennial
reference reaches were established at the locations listed in Table 2
below. Physical and biological data
collected at each reach is listed.
Location of each site in the watershed is shown on Figure 2.
Table
2: Enumerated Reference Reaches
|
Reach # |
Location |
Reach # |
Location |
|
1.
|
NFFR
above Lake Almanor |
12. |
Indian
Creek at Taylorsville |
|
2.
|
Goodrich
Creek above Mountain Meadows Reservoir |
13. |
Indian
Creek acw Spanish Creek |
|
3.
|
NFFR
below Lake Almanor |
14. |
Spanish
Creek acw Rock Creek |
|
4. |
Butt
Creek above Butt Valley Reservoir |
15. |
Greenhorn
Creek acw Spanish Creek |
|
5. |
NFFR
acw** EBNFFR |
16. |
Spanish
Creek acw Greenhorn Creek |
|
6. |
EBNFFR
acw NFFR |
17. |
Spanish
Creek acw Indian Creek |
|
7. |
Wolf
Creek above confluence with Indian Creek |
18. |
Middle
Fork Feather River (MFFR) at Beckwourth |
|
8. |
Lights
Creek acw Indian Creek |
19. |
Sulphur
Creek acw MFFR |
|
9. |
Last
Chance Creek acw Red Clover Creek |
20. |
Jamison
Creek acw MFFR |
|
10.
|
Red
Clover Creek acw Last Chance Creek |
21. |
MFFR
acw Nelson Creek |
|
11. |
Indian
Creek acw Red Clover Creek |
|
|
**acw
= above confluence with
Reference Reach Data Collection
Monitoring
is conducted on a biennial basis.
Physical and biological parameters are listed below:
·
Channel morphology, including channel cross sections, channel slope,
channel substrate sampling, and pool tail fines. Transect data includes bank stability, shade, width/depth ratio,
stream shore water depth, and bank angle.
Bankfull discharge will be estimated based on these measurements.
·
Water chemistry, including water and air temperature.
·
Habitat, including spatial
distribution of fast and slow water via longitudinal gradient (i.e. pool and
riffle orientation), pools (size, depth and number), pool tail substrate,
shading, and stream bank stability (i.e. vegetation cover).
·
Macro-invertebrates, including analysis of population numbers and
species diversity in comparison to Sierra Nevada reference sites. Not originally part of SCI protocol, but has
been added on with the availability of reference site data.
·
Aquatic fauna, including fish surveys to identify species present and herpeto-fauna.
·
Aerial and ground photographs, to provide visual documentation of instream
and upland changes in vegetation and channel structure, and to support other
monitoring results.
Results
of long-term data analysis will be integrated with other Feather River
watershed monitoring activities underway or contemplated by the USDA Forest
Service, DWR, UCCE, QLG and others. A
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) composed of FRCRM Monitoring Committee
members, agency specialists, and academic reviewers provided technical guidance
and oversight on the implementation of the project. The TAC members were
identified in spring 1999.
Eleven
sites were identified as appropriate permanent sampling stations. The name and respective data collection for
each station are listed in Table 2.
Criteria used to select a site include the existence of a bridge that
equipment could be bolted to (one exception), a relatively stable location to
install sensors, good access and a lower position in the respective
drainage.
For
Permanent Station monitoring, most data is being collected electronically and
downloaded by field personnel on 60-day intervals. The equipment installed, discussed below, is state-of-the-art and
is maintained and downloaded by experts familiar with the geographic area and
the equipment. Technicians working with the FRCRM have extensive experience on
with this equipment and bring that expertise to the FRCRM program.
Samples
collected at permanent stations are listed in Table 3 below. Location of each
site in the watershed is shown on Figure 3.
TABLE
3: Measurements taken at permanent
stations
|
Station # |
Location |
Stream Flow & Temp. |
Staff Gage |
Weather Station* |
Sediment & Turbidity |
Water Quality |
|
1. |
Last
Chance Creek at Doyle Crossing |
X |
X |
X |
|
X |
|
2. |
Red
Clover Creek at Notson Bridge |
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
3. |
Indian
Creek at Taylorsville |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
4. |
Indian
Creek at Flournoy Bridge |
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
5. |
Middle
Fork Feather River at Sloat |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
6. |
Indian
Creek above confluence with Red Clover |
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
7. |
Spanish
Creek at Keddie (existing
USGS) |
X |
X |
|
|
|
|
8. |
Spanish
Creek at Gansner Bridge |
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
9. |
Wolf
Creek at Greenville Main Street Bridge |
X |
X |
|
X |
X |
|
10. |
Lights
Creek at Deadfall Bridge |
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
11. |
Indian
Creek at Crescent Mills |