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 |
X |
X |
|
|
X |
*
Data taken at weather stations includes: rainfall, temperature, relative
humidity, wind speed, wind direction, atmospheric pressure.
Monitoring
is conducted continuously for data collected by data loggers, and on 60-day
intervals for manually collected data.
Parameters are listed below:
·
Continuously
monitor water temperature and stage at eleven permanent sampling
stations with a Campbell 500 data logger system;
·
Conduct
continuous turbidity monitoring during high flow seasons at two stations
with a laser sensor;
·
Collect
conductivity,
pH, and isotopic samples manually at all stations during routine
maintenance of data loggers;
·
Collect
bedload
and suspended sediment data in various flow regimes at two stations;
·
Collect
flow
data at various stages to produce stage/discharge rating curves for each
station, and
·
Collect
climatic
data at two installed meteorological stations that are linked via
satellite to the CDEC database. Data
includes relative humidity, temperature, wind speed, wind direction,
atmospheric pressure, evapo-transpiration, solar radiation and precipitation.
Following an evaluation of available monitoring
equipment, the study team chose the CR10X datalogger and associated equipment
manufactured by Campbell Scientific to instrument each site. Table 4 and Table
5 provide details regarding the instrumentation deployed at each permanent
station. This Campbell equipment was
chosen largely based on the long-standing presence of the manufacturer in the
remote monitoring market place and the reputation of product reliability. The CR10X was selected because of its ease
of programming, flexibility and expandability.
Stream stage is measured using standard pressure
transducer technology. Pressure
transducers were selected because they provide acceptable accuracy while
allowing rapid low cost deployment. The
selected Druck 5-psi pressure transducers are accurate to ± 0.01 ft. over
a range of 11.53 ft. These units have a
typical life span of approximately 5 years.
Pressure transducers measure the depth of water over the sensor probe,
which is converted to the reference gage height using a site-specific
mathematical formula. The reference gage
heights are then used in conjunction flow measurements to develop a
stage/discharge rating table that can be applied to the collected data from the
instrument
The primary problem associated with transducers
is a drift in relative accuracy. This
drift can be due to age, changes in barometric pressure, and extreme ambient
temperatures. The inaccuracies
associated with changes in barometric pressure are minimized through the use of
a vent tube from the sensor to the atmosphere.
Fluctuations related to changes in temperature are calculated to be less
than the accuracy resolution that is required of the instrument. Accuracy drift related to age can be
accounted for with a strict QA/QC policy that evaluates change in transducer
readings compared with reference gage heights.
Table 4:Permanent Station Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment Description |
Deployment Location |
|
Datalogger (Campbell CR10X) |
All stations |
|
Air temperature sensor |
All stations |
|
Gill radiation shield |
All stations |
|
Druck 5 psi transducer |
All stations |
|
Turbidity (Analite 195) |
Taylorsville, Doyle Crossing |
|
Water temperature sensor |
All stations |
|
Battery (33 amp/hr gell cell) |
All stations |
|
Solar Panel |
Doyle Crossing, Notson Bridge |
|
Lockable enclosure (sealed) |
All stations |
|
Protective enclosure (metal) |
All stations |
|
Stilling well /probe attachment |
All stations |
Table 5: Permanent Station Installation Information
|
Station |
Stream |
Installation Date |
Station Configuration |
|
Notson Bridge |
Red Clover Creek |
10/22/1999 |
Full station installation |
|
Taylorsville Bridge |
Indian Creek |
10/29/1999 |
Full station installation |
|
DWR Weir |
Indian Creek |
11/04/1999 |
Full station installation |
|
Flournoy Bridge |
Indian Creek |
11/05/1999 |
Full station installation |
|
Doyle Crossing Bridge |
Last Chance Crk |
11/19/1999 |
Up-graded existing |
|
Wolf Creek Main Street |
Wolf Creek |
12/21/1999 |
Full station installation |
|
Deadfall Bridge |
Lights Creek |
12/28/1999 |
Full station installation |
|
Moccasin Reef at Hwy. 89 |
Indian Creek |
01/06/2000 |
Staff gage only |
|
Spanish Creek at Quincy |
Spanish Creek |
Pending |
Full Station Installation Spring, 2001 |
The specific method of equipment installation at
each site was determined during scoping surveys conducted in April 1999. The location of each station is associated
with a road bridge or flow control structure to help facilitate
installation. Installation methods
consisted of installing a permanent probe-mount housing in the stream below the
minimum expected water level. The
probe-mount housing was typically mounted to the bridge pier or bedrock. The primary objective of this type of
installation is to prevent any movement in the probe-mount housing during high
flow events.
A protective metal enclosure was then installed
on the bridge or other suitable structure above the anticipated high water level. A sealed instrument enclosure was mounted
inside the protective metal enclosure.
Flexible and/or rigid conduit was then buried and/or attached to the
bridge structure to provide a protected channel for the probe cables between
the metal enclosure and the in-water probe-mount housing.
The probes were mounted inside the probe-mount
housing using an aluminum pinch block.
This method of attachment allows for a secure immovable attachment with
ease of maintenance and repair of the equipment.
The CR10X data loggers were then installed and
data collection initiated. The data
loggers were programmed to sample stream stage and temperature every 15-minutes
and using this data calculate and record an hourly average. The loggers were also programmed to roll-up
the 15-minute information on daily basis, calculating the daily maximum,
minimum, and average stream stage, and average daily stream and air
temperature. Other parameters
(instrument operation) were also included in the daily roll-up.
In addition to the pressure transducers a
reference staff gage was installed at each station. This provided a permanent reference to facilitate checking
transducer drift and providing a cross-reference to previous data when the transducer
needs to be repaired or replaced.
Installation of the monitoring stations was
begun in October 1999. Specific
installation information for each station is included in Table 3. Seven of the eight permanent stations were
installed by January 2000. The station
at Spanish Creek was not installed as a result of logistical delays and the
onset of high flows which prevented the attachment of the probe-mount housing
below the minimum water level.
Installation of the Spanish Creek station is scheduled for spring
2001. The existing station on Last
Chance Creek at Doyle Crossing was upgraded with the installation of a CR10X to
conform to the other stations in the monitoring network.
Discharge
measurements at differing stages have been taken at eight locations. These
measurements are taken on a measured cross-section with a Price 622 velocimeter
mounted on a rod for wading or suspended by cable from a bridge crane, bridge
board or truck mounted boom as needed.
The protocol for these measurements is detailed in the QAPP. This data will be used to develop flow
rating curves once enough points have been established.
Suspended
sediment data will also be collected at two permanent station sites (see Table
3). Data will be collected using either
a rod or cable system as per flow measurements above. The protocol for this sampling program is detailed in the
QA/QC. Minimal turbidity and suspended
sediment measurements have been collected due to relatively low flows and
equipment delivery delays for the year 2000 winter period. No bedload sampling has been undertaken for
the reasons stated above.
FRCRM staff manually
collects water quality data when data loggers at permanent stations are
downloaded, usually on 60-day intervals.
This is an ancillary monitoring component conducted at the request of
Plumas Geo-Hydrology and Desert Research Institute (DRI). The purpose is to analyze the naturally
occurring chemical and isotopic characteristics in order to determine the
origin of the water (surface, shallow meadow, deep aquifer, etc.) by
season. DRI has offered to conduct the
analysis so samples are labeled and sent to their facilities in Reno,
Nevada.
The
data will be used to provide a baseline from which to monitor long-term trends
in the condition of the Upper Feather River watershed. It will also be used to
document trends in watershed condition cumulatively resulting from restoration
activities and natural events. To facilitate this comparative analysis, a
series of Excel spreadsheets have been developed by Ken Cawley (Feather River
College) for reference reach data and by Mike Kossow and Tim Sagraves
(consulting watershed specialists) for permanent station data. (Water chemistry data is being analyzed
separately by Desert Research Institute so is not discussed here). The
spreadsheets are formatted to store the data as it is collected (in the case of
data loggers) and to facilitate trend analysis. They are linked to a spatially referenced data management system
or Geographic Information System (GIS) that was developed by the CDWR and
California State University Chico scientists. Data layers will be set up for
each parameter consistent with layers already developed by the Plumas National
Forest to encourage data sharing. The data will be distributed via the FRCRM
website and through the data “clearinghouse” on the California State University
Chico website.
These
data will provide critical input to the restoration program conducted by the
FRCRM. Identification of conditions
throughout the watershed will allow prioritization of restoration projects in
terms of location and goals. This data
may also be useful in quantifying the benefits of past restoration efforts.
Information on watershed condition will serve as baseline data for future
projects.
The
data and analyses will be available to a wide resource management audience,
including local land management agencies, academics and private
landowners. These data will hopefully
inform land management decisions made by many organizations and individuals,
which have the potential of affecting the Feather River watershed. In addition,
this information will be useful to the public to gain insight on the overall
condition of the Feather River watershed, and the connections between land use,
restoration, and watershed condition.
The data will be made available to a broad audience through the FRCRM
website and through the CSU Chico website as previously mentioned.
Reference reach data
was collected in four passes along the stream, as detailed in the QAPP
(Appendix B). The tables in Appendix D
summarize all data for the Greenhorn Creek acw Spanish Creek Reference Reach is
included as an example of the data output and how the spreadsheets are
formatted. The raw data for all passes is currently stored at Plumas
Corporation and is available to FRCRM members upon request. Due to the vast amount of raw data, data
made available via the Internet for broader distribution will generally be in
the summary table format.
Macroinvertebrate
samples were collected, labeled and stored as described in the QAPP. The National Aquatic Monitoring Center, Utah
Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, Ogden, Utah, which was recommended by Plumas
National Forest staff, will process the samples. Samples will be sent out for identification once the Ambient
Water Quality Monitoring contract is in place.
Water and ambient air
temperature is monitored at each reference reach site with HOBO Temp data
loggers. The temperature loggers are
installed at the lower end of each reach in early June and collected in early
September. Temperatures will be
recorded to determine mean maximum temperature for the period July1- August
31. The full temperature range for this
period will also be recorded through hourly measurements for a minimum of 1468
data points (1 hr./62+ days). Software will be provided by the Lassen National
Forest to manage and analyze the data.
Channel substrate
samples are processed using nested sieves for <4mm particles and a
millimetric ruler for >4mm particles.
The purpose is to quantify the bed characteristics by weight/particle
size class. This information will
provide baseline information with which to compare future bed composition
changes relative to watershed restoration projects, management changes and
natural processes. This sampling methodology is more
sensitive to changes in finer sediment classes (<2mm) than the standard
Wolman pebble counts.
The
Campbell data loggers record stream stage, along with ambient air and water
temperature data, in fifteen-minute intervals, year-round. The data loggers are capable of storing up
to six (6) months of data. FRCRM staff
and contract technicians download data on a bi-monthly interval. This more frequent operation is undertaken
to ensure reliable station continuity and detect potential problems that would
compromise data reliability. The data
from the logger is entered into a laptop computer, station diagnostics are performed,
then data is transported to Plumas Corporation and electronically entered into
the data archive.
Automated
turbidity measurements are being recorded at two (2) stations, Doyle Crossing
and Indian Creek- Taylorsville Bridge, using Analite 195 laser sensors, a
nephelometric (n.t.u.) probe. This is
new technology that the FRCRM considered worthy of demonstration and critique
for effectiveness and maintainability.
Figure
4a. is an example of data output that plots the average water temperature for
Wolf Creek at Main St. Bridge, one of the instrumented permanent stations. Figure 4b. characterizes output for stream
flow at the same location.
Rating
Tables are being developed for each permanent station. In order to correlate stage
records to stream flow volume, direct flow measurements are conducted at a
variety of stages to develop a station-specific rating table. Table 6 is the preliminary rating table for
Spanish Creek @ Gansner Bridge. These
tables then allow for the assignment of discharge values to the recorded stages
in the absence of direct measurement. It is anticipated that an initial minimum
of seven readings will be necessary to develop an accurate rating curve,
depending on the measurement site characteristics. The opportunity to conduct direct measurement at stages above
bankfull (1.5 year return interval) are dependent on infrequent weather events
and may require several years to accomplish.
Due to instability, some stations may also require rating curves to be
periodically re-calculated.
There were no major problems with the monitoring equipment or with the monitoring crew. Crew training took a week in the field during the monitoring of the first two reaches. Data collection oversight and additional training continued to insure that protocols and procedures were followed on each reach. Monitoring of each of the 21 reach took between 16-17 hours once the crew was trained.
The monitoring crew consisted of one Crew Leader (the contractor) and 3 Feather River College students and one crewmember supplied by DWR. It was necessary for the college students to return to college prior to completing all 21 reaches. The last two reaches were completed by the Crew leader and one crewmember.
The collection of maximum sediment lens depth (S*) proved to be unworkable in most of the field conditions encountered and was dropped from data collection. The collection of aquatic fauna data was taken during the last of the four pass taken on each reach. This may have resulted in limited observations of fauna due to the disturbance caused by the first three passes. The installation of temperature data loggers on each reach proved to be difficult for the first monitoring season because the exact location of the reach to be monitored was not determined until a site visit took place. The temperature loggers need to remain at the reach for 60 to 90 days. Reaches monitored later in the field season have no temperature data because loggers could not be installed for the amount of time necessary to follow protocols.
All of the operating stations functioned without
failure during the 1999-2000 high runoff period. No loss of data occurred as a result of monitoring equipment
failure. On July 2, 2000, the Red
Clover Creek at Notson Bridge station was vandalized and the transducer cable
was damaged. Replacement was completed
on August 11, 2000.
Installation of air temperature sensors was
delayed when it was determined that the probes where fabricated incorrectly and
had to be returned. A test of the new
air temperature probes at Notson indicated that they required special
programming which was successfully completed in August 2000. The remaining air temperature probes were
installed in the fall of 2000. The data
loggers are programmed to record internal temperature that can be used as an
indicator of ambient air temperature during the period when the air sensors are
not deployed.
During the final phase of discussions regarding
station configuration it was determined that an attempt to measure turbidity
should be made at two stations. These
stations (Taylorsville and Last Chance Creek) were selected primarily do to
their ease of installation and the general thinking that they would provide the
most useful information. The probe
selected to monitor turbidity was the Analite Model 195 nephelometric
probe. These units have a built in
wiping mechanism that helps to eliminate biofouling caused by long term
immersion. The deployment of these
probes was delayed by the onset of high flows.
These units will be deployed in summer 2001.
In addition to the completion of station
installations and special probe deployment, other activities scheduled for 2001
include: compiling and developing the stream stage versus flow relationship to
allow conversion of transducer readings to discharge, and a routine maintenance
effort at each station to prepare for the high flow period.
Water
quality data collected manually by FRCRM staff has not been received from
DRI. This is due to the limited amount
of samples collected to date. DRI is committed to carrying out this analysis in
the upcoming field season when more samples are collected and analyzed.
Reference
Reach Monitoring:
For
the purpose of the Watershed Monitoring Program, two of the original SCI
protocols have been dropped or replaced by other protocols and three additional
protocols have been added. Large woody
debris (LWD) counts and pebble counts have been dropped from the protocol.
Pebble counts have been replaced by the sieve analysis of channel substrate
material collected from point bars as well as riffle pavement and sub-pavement.
Pebble
counts, while a relatively inexpensive method of characterizing bed surface
composition, do not accurately represent all sediment size fractions being
transported by the channel in bankfull or greater events. The smaller particle sizes, which will be
most affected by changes in watershed condition, are often winnowed out of the
surface component by the more frequent, longer duration sub-bankfull
flows. Bar and riffle subpavement
samples, which are collected below the bed surface and not subject to
winnowing, more accurately represent the full range of sediment load. The drawback to this type of sampling is
that the processing of these multiple samples is labor-intensive and
expensive.
Recommendation: Significant changes in channel substrate composition are likely
to be relatively slow due to in-channel storage and the infrequent interval of
bed mobilizing flows. Therefore,
collection and processing of substrate samples should be conducted at every
second or third biennial visit, or, the next visit after the watershed has been
subjected to a to-be-defined threshold hydrologic event (i.e. 10-year flood).
Water
surface longitudinal channel profile survey and macroinvertebrate sampling have
been added to the monitoring protocols for this project. Channel profiles are important in helping to
determine the changes in the channel configuration, slope and geometry over
time. Macroinvertebrate sampling is
important in adding a biological element to the monitoring and provides a
useful index to assess changes in biological integrity.
Temperature
data loggers need to be installed on all reaches prior to the start of the
monitoring season and retrieved as soon as the last reach is completed. This
will provide the same number of monitored days for each reach. Data loggers
need to be cabled into streams and riparian areas to limit loss or theft of the
equipment in areas that have high public visitation for recreation.
Recommendation: Maximum sediment lens depth
(S*) measurements were originally designed to measure sediment in shallow pools
in small wading streams. This proved to be unworkable for most of reaches due
to deep pools and low water visibility. The protocol dropped.
Recommendation: Aquatic Fauna data needs to be collected as the first pass before
any channel disturbance takes place.
Recommendation: Originally a 5 person crew was used to conduct the monitoring. A
crew of 4 would work just as well, especially if some of the measurements may
be dropped from the procedure.
All
other standard SCI protocols were implemented without undue difficulty and
appear to provide useful baseline information.
Streamflow
monitoring has been conducted, and continuing at each of the stations. To date, this has been accomplished with the
primary objective of developing a discharge rating table for each station. Since station installation there have been
only modest changes in streamflow at any of the stations. This condition has resulted in very few
(average of 3/station) streamflow measurements being conducted. Each direct measurement has an average cost
of approximately $200.00. In order to
maximize the utility of these initial measurements, stage change thresholds to
be measured were identified and prioritized that would provide reliable data
points for rating table development. At
most stations streamflows have not yet reached many of these threshold
points. In general, the intent was to
conduct several measurements at/near summer baseflow, then conduct measurements
a .5’ increments and, whenever a significant change in channel form occurred
(bankfull stage, full-wetted gully, etc.).
Most of the monitored streams have not achieved even a bankfull
stage since station operations began.
More
intensive streamflow monitoring will be conducted at those stations where
sediment monitoring is being undertaken.
Each time sediment sampling is conducted a flow measurement will be
performed, regardless of the above described stage thresholds. These activities will generally be conducted
and funded under the scope of other watershed projects, such as Proposition 204
and will augment the trend monitoring program.
For the same reasons cited above, lack of streamflow, minimal sediment
monitoring has been accomplished to date.
Recommendation: No changes are recommended
at this time.
References:
"Stream
Condition Inventory Guidebook" version 4.0, United Stated Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, 1998.
“East
Branch, North Fork Feather River Erosion Control Strategy”, Clifton, 1994
“Management
of Baseflow Augmentation: A Review”, Ponce and Lindquist, 1990
“New
Concepts for Meadow Restoration in the Northern Sierra Nevada”,
Lindquist
and Wilcox, 2000
“Feather
River Coordinated Resource Management Monitoring Plan- 319(h) Program”, 1997