In recent years, professionals, politicians, and the public have expressed an increasing interest in improving watershed conditions in California. This trend is reflected in the growing importance of cumulative effects assessments, ecosystem management approaches prescribed by agencies, legislation contained in Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and the Clean Water Act. California is required to develop a nonpoint source pollution control plan, which includes both toxics and sediment, in response to this legislation. These institutional signals may be indicative of the changing political climate regarding water quality control at both the federal and state levels.

Interest in watershed restoration has similarly increased in the last decade. The public’s demand for recreational resources, aesthetics, and good water quality, as well as challenges in complying with new regulatory guidelines and mandates, have provided some incentive to restore declining watershed resources. But the question of who will pay for and promote such work is still unanswered.

Institutional incentives for restoration lag far behind available technology to address the problems. Interaction between upstream managers and downstream users and their respective roles and responsibilities in the restoration process have not been reconciled. The responsibility for implementing restoration measures has largely been left to landowners, making spot treatment of major watershed problems a common short-term remedy. Inadequate consideration of physical, geomorphic, and biological factors from a watershed perspective has led to many failed projects and lost dollars.

Watershed improvement projects tend to be applied in riparian areas, where most of the visible damage is concentrated. Riparian areas are lands adjacent to creeks, streams, and rivers, where vegetation is strongly influenced by the presence of water. They compose about 1% of the land base in the West but are among the most productive and valuable of all lands. By filtering out sediment, healthy riparian vegetation builds streambanks, promotes productive meadows, and can influence the seasonal quantity and quality of flow. Although they are a relatively small percentage of the land base, riparian areas can strongly influence how watersheds function and can have significant and far-reaching economic and environmental effects (Chaney, Elmore, and Platts 1990).

The presence of water and diverse productive vegetation makes riparian areas attractive for wildlife, fish, domestic livestock, and humans. In fact, 75–80% of all wildlife species in the West are dependent on riparian habitats. These desirable features also attract a variety of human activities that have led to overuse and extensive deterioration of riparian vegetation on most western streams. Poor condition riparian areas impact the stability and health of the entire watershed. Many landowners in the Sierra Nevada are struggling to bring back riparian areas and enhance the health of the watersheds they depend upon for sustenance.

Restoration at the watershed level is a complex undertaking due to discontinuous land ownership, the difficulty in assessing cause and effect and identifying acceptable solutions, and the great expense involved. Long-term enhancement can best be attained through the formation of voluntary partnerships of public- and private-sector stakeholders. This report summarizes such a process and the results of a research project carried out by a local consortium at Red Clover Creek, Plumas County, California, to catalyze the development of a watershed enhancement program in the Feather River basin. Detailed study design, data analysis, and other technical details are not included in this report but are available upon request.
 
 

Feather River Watershed

The Feather River watershed is located in the northern Sierra Nevada, where its north (NFFR), south (SFFR), and middle (MFFR) forks drain 3,222 square miles of variable terrain. 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 than 12 inches on the arid high desert in the rain shadow east of the Sierra Nevada crest. Vegetation is consistent with topography and precipitation, ranging from productive mixed conifer and deciduous forests in the wetter areas to sparse sage and other drought-tolerant species in the dryer regions. Average annual runoff from the East Branch North Fork Feather River (EBNFFR) watershed exceeds 800,000 acre-feet and carries a sediment load of approximately 940,000 tons (USDA Soil Conservation Service [SCS] 1989a). The South Fork Feather River, which has more recently been included in the Coordinated Resource Management (CRM) boundaries, is not discussed in this report.

The area has long been recognized for its recreational and aesthetic value. This watershed is also an important component of California’s vast water distribution network, produces a significant amount of hydroelectric power, and provides extensive forest and agricultural products. Most of the timbered areas are managed by Plumas National Forest (PNF); large alluvial valleys are predominantly privately owned and are grazed by livestock. Hydroelectric development along the MFFR has not been permitted due to its wild and scenic river designation, and its waters eventually merge with the NFFR in Lake Oroville, contributing to the California State Water Project.

Land use is largely responsible for the accelerated erosion conditions in this watershed. Extensive mining, grazing, timber harvesting, and railroad and road building have collectively caused disturbance of vegetation and soils that has left uplands and streambanks barren and vulnerable to erosional processes. This has resulted in a network of hydrologically unstable channels that continue to erode both environmental and economic values. Resulting sedimentation and lack of stability have created problems for both residential and off-site water users.

• Livestock producers have less forage to support cattle due to lowered water tables in meadows and loss of vegetation and topsoil.
• Recreationists find fish populations reduced and more dispersed due to the lack of overhanging riparian vegetation, poor water quality, and warm water temperatures.
• Waterfowl and other wildlife species find reduced nesting and rearing habitat due to inadequate vegetation cover.
• Native perennial grasses are replaced by sagebrushes and annual grasses.
• Perennial (year-round) streams are intermittent or dry due to loss of water storage capacity in meadow aquifers.
• Concentrated runoff produces destructive flood flows.
• The local economy suffers by reduced property values and revenues from recreation and fishing.
• Downstream water users, hydroelectric production, and domestic water supply reservoirs are affected by increased sedimentation.

PG&E's hydroelectric system typically supplies 10–20% of the electric energy resources needed to serve more than 13 million customers. It is the largest investor-owned hydro system in the United States, with a normal operating capacity of 3,903 megawatts and an average annual production of 2,755 gigawatthours. The system consists of approximately 70 powerhouses; 175 dams; 130 reservoirs; and 437 miles of canals, flumes, pipes, and tunnels. The Feather River coordinated system supplies electrical power to the PG&E grid and water to the Lake Oroville and the State Water Project system (Figure 2-1; Harrison 1991).

Degradation of the EBNFFR watershed has led to serious operational problems downstream at PG&E’s Rock Creek and Cresta Reservoirs. As a result of natural and accelerated erosion of the upstream watershed over a 45-year period, these reservoirs have accumulated approximately 3 million and 2.4 million cubic yards of sediment, respectively, displacing up to 58% of the original water storage capacity (Harrison 1995). The sediments are being drawn through the turbines, accelerating wear, decreasing efficiency, and increasing maintenance costs. Sediment deposits are obstructing the dams’ low-level outlets, streamflow release systems, and water inlets for operation of the spillway drum gates (Harrison, Lee, and Tu 1995).

PG&E’s hydroelectric generation output and efficiency depend on the health of the watershed in which it operates. Overuse and mismanagement of watershed resources can lead to serious problems throughout the watershed, including problems for PG&E’s hydroelectric facilities located downstream. This concern prompted a survey of the watershed in 1984, in which PG&E geotechnical specialists identified the major causes of erosion in the EBNFFR (Patzkowski 1984).

In 1985, PG&E prepared a comprehensive long-term sediment management plan for Rock Creek Reservoir. The plan proposed a watershed-wide erosion control plan (ECP) for the upstream watershed, in addition to operational changes to deal with sediment issues (Harrison 1991). It was recognized, however, that the process was complex because an effective ECP required a cooperative effort by all stakeholders, including resource agencies, watershed managers, and the local community, and was beyond the control of PG&E alone. To develop a long-lasting solution to the sedimentation problems at Rock Creek and Cresta Reservoirs, PG&E sought to work with stakeholders to implement erosion control measures upstream. Resource agencies have estimated that effective erosion control may reduce future sediment transport by as much as 50%.

Building a Cooperative Process

In conjunction with local government agencies and concerned citizens, PG&E participated in several meetings on watershed issues in 1984 and 1985 to discuss local issues and solutions. Substantial interest in stream restoration and watershed management was found among local, state, and federal resource agencies, leading to a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to jointly pursue an erosion control plan for the EBNFFR watershed. The MOA participants, eventually including twenty other entities, agreed to provide funds and/or services. In 1988, Coordinated Resource Management was adopted by the coalition to formalize the organizational structure (Lindquist and Harrison 1995) at the urging of John Schramel, representing the Plumas County Board of Supervisors. The goal was to develop a watershed ECP that was funded and supported by all stakeholders. In time, the organization became known as the EBNFFR CRM Group. In 1994, the geographic area for the program was expanded to include the MFFR and the SFFR, and the group became known as the Feather River CRM (FRCRM; Figure 2-2).

The CRM process is often used to solve complex resource management problems that extend over large geographic areas and involve multiple landowners and special interest groups (Anderson and Baum 1987). This approach integrates the needs of the participants into an action plan. Since decisions are made by consensus, conflicts are minimized and all stakeholders have an equal voice at the table.

Contributions of participants are leveraged to provide benefits at an affordable cost. It is also widely used to enhance project credibility and visibility, sometimes resulting in additional funding opportunities. Additional discussion on the CRM program is presented in Section 4.

Pre-Project Studies

Several studies spawned by the Red Clover Creek Project were carried out prior to broader implementation of FRCRM enhancement projects. The most notable are discussed briefly below.

• In early 1984, an overview survey of the watershed by PG&E geotechnical specialists identified major factors contributing to accelerated erosion and excessive reservoir sedimentation. Erosion of streambanks, roads, mine tailings, logging operations, and burn areas in the EBNFFR watershed were determined to be the major contributors of sediments flowing to the reservoirs (Patzkowski 1984).
• In 1985, PG&E prepared a comprehensive long-term sediment management plan for Rock Creek Reservoir. The plan proposed a watershed-wide ECP for the upstream watershed, as well as reservoir dredging, dam modifications, and operational changes to deal with sediment issues (Harrison 1991).
• A historical study on watershed degradation was conducted for PG&E and the FRCRM (Mitchell 1986). The study was conducted through literature review, interviews with long-time residents, and examination of historical photographs. It was found that degradation started with the advent of the gold rush and mining operations of the mid-nineteenth century and was exacerbated by subsequent sheep and cattle grazing, farming, logging, and road and railroad building.
• Misguided efforts in the mid-twentieth century to straighten meandering streams in valley meadows led to rapid degradation and erosion of the channels. In addition, suppression of wildfires on forest lands for much of the twentieth century led to fuel buildup and uncontrollable fires that strip the mountainsides bare, causing high erosion rates for many years until vegetation reestablishes.
• An inventory of baseline stream conditions throughout the watershed was conducted under the sponsorship of the FRCRM, with technical guidance from SCS. Plumas Corporation collected and compiled field data. Additional personnel and equipment were provided by PNF and DWR (USDA SCS 1989a).
• The SCS erosion inventory report was followed up by an SCS River Basin study for the Indian Creek watershed (USDA SCS 1989a,b). The purpose of the study was to evaluate and prioritize sources of erosion in the watershed and identify cost-effective restoration measures. The Indian Creek study concluded that significant benefits would be gained from reduction of streambank erosion and improved grazing management in the Indian and Genesee Valleys. The study recommended stream restoration and stabilization through construction of a geomorphic meander design to achieve a stable channel. It also served as the basis for the NFFR erosion control strategy (Clifton 1994). Finally, the River Basin study also identified several sources of possible funding for the project, including Public Law 83-566 funds administered by SCS for the Department of Agriculture.

• To better understand the complex relationships between watershed conditions, hydrology, and sediment delivery to the reservoirs, PG&E sponsored the development of a sediment transport model for the EBNFFR watershed with data from SCS, PNF, and PG&E’s own hydrology records. The computer model (SNOWSED) developed by International Engineering Company (IECO) simulates many hydrologic parameters. The model can be used as a predictive tool in the absence of direct measurements to identify stream reaches producing the greatest amounts of sediment (Lee and Combs 1990).
• In 1993, PG&E’s Research and Development (R&D) Department developed a physically based, continuous simulation model called WTRYLD (wateryield) as a planning tool to help predict the response of the NFFR watershed to changes in forest management (timber harvesting) or natural events (floods or wildfires). The model was calibrated, and several management scenarios were run for validation (Combs and Lindquist 1992). Changes in runoff magnitude and volume and sediment discharge were predicted based on changes in hydrologic cycle parameters. The model was later used by FRCRM to evaluate the effect of forest thinning on water discharge (Cawley, 1994, per. comm.).
Table of Contents