Lake Creek Instream Flow Study Status Update Fish/Aquatics Meeting - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Lake Creek Instream Flow Study Status Update Fish/Aquatics Meeting June 2007

INSTREAM FLOW STUDIES Habitat-Based Model

• Physical Component

– Physical Habitat Surveys – Study Site and Transect Weighting

• Biological Component

– Species Distribution – Barrier Identification – Species Suitability Criteria and Preferences

• Hydraulic Component

– Instream Flow Modeling for Habitat

• Hydrology Component

– Inflow from Drop Structure to Cowlitz River

Instream Flow Study – Physical Component

• Physical Habitat Survey (2004)

– Lake Creek into 5 reaches

• Study Site Selection

– Lake Creek from Drop Structure to Confluence with Cowlitz River – Four Study Sites Selected – 34 Transects Measured

100% 16 8.33% 1.33 Riffle (gravel and cobble) 11 8.33% 1.33 Wide Pool 10 12.50% 2 Pool Tailout 9 8.33% 1.33 Wide Glide 8 12.50% 2 Split Channel w/lateral pool 7 8.33% 1.33 Run (below plunge pool) 6 8.33% 1.33 Split Channel Glide ((boulder/cobble) 5 8.33% 1.33 Pool (bedrock on sides; cobble/boulder on margins 4 8.33% 1.33 Narrow Run (boulder and cobble) 3 8.33% 1.33 Plunge Pool 2 8.33% 1.33 Wide Run 1 Percentage Frequency Transect Description Transect Table 2.4-4 Final Transect Weighting, Study Site 4 (Reach 5)

100.0% 5.4 Total 9.3% 0.5 5.4 4.9 4 25.9% 1.4 4.9 3.5 3 51.9% 2.8 3.5 0.7 2 13.0% 0.7 0.7 0.0 1 Percentage Total End Begin Study Site Table 2.4-5 Lake Creek Study Site Weighting

Instream Flow Study – Biological Component

• Identification of Barriers
• Species Distribution
• Species Periodicity
• Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) Curves

(preference curves)

Identification of Barriers

• Chute/Falls at RM 1.03

– Barrier for

• Chinook Salmon
• Coho Salmon
• Sea-run Cutthroat Trout
• Falls at RM 1.95

– Barrier for

• Steelhead Trout
• Rainbow Trout have access to all of Lake Creek

Lake Creek Study Sites and Reaches and Fish Distribution

1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 RM Elevation (ft) Rainbow Steelhead Chinook Coho Cutthroat Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 4 Reach 5 SS1 SS2 SS3 Drop Structure SS4 Barrier Barrier

John Serl, WDFW Fish Biologist, Cowlitz Falls (May 10, 2007) Based on:

Rearing Incubation Spawning Rainbow Trout Rearing Incubation Spawning Cutthroat Trout Rearing Incubation Spawning Steelhead Rearing Incubation Spawning Coho Rearing Incubation Spawning Spring Chinook

Sept Aug July June May April Mar Feb Jan Dec Nov Oct Lifestage Species Table 2.6-1 Lake Creek Fish Periodicity

Preference Curve Selection

• WDFW/WDOE Habitat Suitability Index

(HSI) Curves used (spawning and rearing)

– Steelhead trout – Chinook salmon – Coho salmon – Rainbow trout – Cutthroat trout – Trout Winter Rearing

Fish Distribution and Preference Curve Utilization

• Below RM 1.03 (Spawning and Rearing)

– Steelhead, Chinook, Coho, Rainbow and Cutthroat Trout

• Between RM 1.03 and 1.95 (Spawning

and Rearing)

– Steelhead (with Cf=1.0) – Rainbow Trout

• RM 1.95 – 5.4

– Rainbow Trout (Spawning and Rearing)

Amphibians

• Species/Life Stages
• Periodicity
• Distribution
• Species Habitat Suitability Criteria

Amphibians

• Species and Life Stages Modeled

– Giant Salamander (Dicamptodon spp.)

• Eggs
• Larvae

– Coastal Tailed Frogs (Ascaphus truei)

• Eggs
• Larvae

– Cascade Torrent Salamander (Rhyacotrin cascadae)

• Eggs
• Larvae

Amphibian Periodicity

• Giant Salamander

– Eggs: March – October – Larvae: Year Round

• Coastal Tailed Frog

– Eggs: May – September – Larvae: Year Round

• Cascade Torrent Salamander

– Eggs: April – December – Larvae: Year Round

Amphibian Distribution

• Tailed Frogs:

– RM 1.03 – 5.4

• Reaches 2 – 5
• Study Sites 2 – 4
• Giant Salamander

– RM 1.03 - 5.4

• Reaches 2 – 5
• Study Sites 2 – 4
• Torrent Salamander

– RM 3.5 – 4.9

• Reach 4
• Study Site 3

Hydraulic Component

• Calibration Flows
• Error checking
• Model Calibration

– 3 Velocity Set Models – 1 Velocity Set Models

• Model Approval
• Input HSI Curves
• Generation of WUA
• Combining Models for Transects/Study Reaches

Calibration Flows

• 2004

– Spill Releases

• 3 cfs base flow at Drop Structure
• 15 – 17 cfs middle flow release
• 33 – 35 cfs high flow release
• 2006

– Overtopping Release – 130 cfs

Lake Creek Study Site 1

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Transect Discharge (cfs) Low Flow Mid Flow High Flow Spill Flow

Lake Creek Study Site 2

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Transect Discharge (cfs) Low Flow Mid Flow High Flow Spill Flow

Lake Creek Study Site 3

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 1 2 3 4 5 6 Transect Discharge (cfs) Low Flow Mid Flow High Flow Spill Flow

Lake Creek Study Site 4

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Transect Discharge (cfs) Low Flow Mid Flow High Flow Spill Flow

Middle Flow Measurements, Study Site 1

Study Sites 1 and 2 – 130 cfs Release

Study Sites 3 and 4 – 130 cfs Release

Model Calibration

• Generally, Use 3 Velocity Set (Regression)

Models to predict velocities and depth ranging from:

– 0.4 X the Low Calibration Measurement – 2.5 X the High Flow Measurement

• Use Velocity Adjustment Factors (VAFs) to

determine how well the model performs

– 0.80 – 1.20 = Good (3 Flow Models)

• Use 1 Velocity Set (1 Flow) Models to model

farther up or down

– VAFs can range from 0.1 to 10

97.68 97.49 97.24 41.00 Calibration details for Lake Creek Study Site 1 Transect 1 96.96 WSE (ft) 25.50 12.50 5.00 Disch (cfs) Rev * Orig Meas * Rev * Orig Meas * Rev * Orig Meas Rev Orig Elev Sta Pt Rv 101.54 0.00 1 99.96 0.10 2 100.67 0.70 3 99.19 1.40 4 98.55 10.00 5 0.00 0.01 97.68 10.50 6 * 0.02 0.09 97.60 11.00 7 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.13 0.13 97.36 12.00 8 0.76 0.77 0.74 0.45 0.43 0.46 0.20 0.17 97.21 13.00 9 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.17 0.16 0.17 0.09 0.08 0.09 97.06 14.00 10 0.39 0.34 0.38 0.12 0.18 0.13 0.02

• 0.03
• 0.02

0.00

• 0.26

96.66 15.00 11 * 1.25 * 1.57 1.13 * 0.64 * 0.53 0.89 0.22 0.10 0.09 0.06 0.01 96.66 16.00 12 * 0.86 0.70 0.68 0.39 0.54 0.56 0.11 * 0.36 0.00 0.02 0.20 96.66 17.00 13 * 1.03 1.02 1.24 0.41 0.40 0.30 0.10 0.09 0.11 0.01 0.01 96.46 18.00 14 2.16 2.18 2.06 1.61 1.56 1.70 0.97 0.90 0.95 0.48 0.43 96.81 19.00 15 1.53 1.55 1.57 1.29 1.25 1.22 0.94 0.86 0.95 0.59 0.52 96.61 20.00 16 1.18 1.19 1.19 1.06 1.03 1.03 0.86 0.79 0.86 0.62 0.54 96.55 20.50 17 0.74 0.75 0.80 0.73 0.71 0.63 0.68 0.62 0.71 0.59 0.51 96.60 21.00 18 0.78 0.78 0.97 0.65 0.62 0.45 0.46 0.42 0.52 0.28 0.25 96.41 21.50 19 0.83 0.83 0.90 0.57 0.55 0.49 0.30 0.28 0.32 0.13 0.12 96.66 22.00 20 0.79 * 0.79 1.01 0.60 0.58 0.40 0.38 0.35 0.44 0.20 0.18 96.41 22.50 21 0.72 0.72 0.79 0.63 0.61 0.53 0.49 0.45 0.52 0.34 0.30 96.53 23.00 22 0.81 0.82 0.81 0.65 0.63 0.64 0.43 0.40 0.43 0.24 0.21 96.61 23.50 23 0.72 0.73 0.83 0.61 0.59 0.48 0.44 0.41 0.48 0.28 0.25 96.63 24.00 24 0.39 0.39 0.36 0.35 0.34 0.38 0.28 0.26 0.27 0.20 0.18 96.68 24.50 25 1.20 1.21 1.11 0.78 0.76 0.87 0.39 0.36 0.37 0.15 0.13 96.41 25.00 26 1.06 1.08 1.05 0.77 0.74 0.77 * 0.45 * 0.40 0.00 0.22 0.17 96.31 25.50 27 * 1.01 1.03 0.83 * 0.84 * 0.82 1.13 0.60 0.55 0.54 0.37 0.32 96.41 26.00 28

Three Flow Deck Table 1a. Velocity Adjustment Factors, Lake Creek Study Site 1. Trans 3 Trans 2 Trans 1 Rev Orig Rev Orig Rev Orig Flow 0.8746 0.7533 0.8397 0.6972 0.9277 0.7809 5 0.9039 0.7747 0.8881 0.7694 0.9439 0.8053 6 0.9298 0.8054 0.9268 0.8292 0.9577 0.8265 7 0.9527 0.8371 0.9558 0.8862 0.9686 0.8446 8 0.9311 0.8522 0.9806 0.9261 0.9786 0.8613 9 0.9589 0.8790 0.9950 0.9540 0.9872 0.8765 10 1.0020 0.9261 1.0227 1.0009 1.0002 0.9025 12 1.0234 0.9602 1.0381 1.0293 1.0074 0.9224 14 1.0344 0.9830 1.0475 1.0471 1.0139 0.9409 16 1.0466 1.0061 1.0522 1.0567 1.0184 0.9569 18 1.0549 1.0241 1.0534 1.0604 1.0211 0.9708 20 1.0287 0.9735 1.0471 1.0534 1.0225 0.9984 25 1.0187 0.9753 1.0331 1.0337 1.0186 1.0182 30 1.0060 0.9645 1.0156 1.0082 1.0109 1.0319 35 0.9917 0.9442 0.9966 0.9803 1.0006 1.0409 40 0.9778 0.9176 0.9770 0.9518 0.9885 1.0461 45 0.9646 0.8864 0.9575 0.9238 0.9752 1.0482 50 0.9520 0.8517 0.9385 0.8967 0.9610 1.0479 55 0.9401 0.8146 0.9201 0.8708 0.9461 1.0456 60 0.9287 0.7760 0.9025 0.8462 0.9309 1.0414 65 0.9178 0.7367 0.8856 0.8228 0.9154 1.0359 70 0.9073 0.6974 0.8694 0.8007 0.8998 1.0291 75 0.8973 0.6586 0.8540 0.7797 0.8842 1.0213 80 0.8876 0.6208 0.8392 0.7599 0.8686 1.0126 85 0.8783 0.5842 0.8251 0.7411 0.8532 1.0033 90 0.8693 0.5492 0.8115 0.7233 0.8379 0.9933 95 0.8605 0.5159 0.7986 0.7064 0.8228 0.9828 100

0.10 0.00 38.0 0.10 0.00 37.55 Elev 93.03 t 93.35 35.6 Elev 93.13 to 93.32 35.3 Elev 93.03 to 93.30 35.0 1.50 1.35 2.50 2.97 32.0 1.86 2.86 31.3 1.64 2.89 31.0 2.20 3.21 0.30

• 0.10

30.6 Elev 92.88 to 93.3 30.3 Elev 92.93 to 93.3 30.0 Elev 92.98 to 93.3 29.6 1.81 2.76 29.0 1.46 0.27 28.0 0.10 0.00 15.0 0.10 0.00 10.5 0.10 0.00 9.0 1 Other Rev Orig Rev Orig Rev Orig Station Trans High Flow Middle Flow Low Flow Table 2. Changes to original data decks, Lake Creek Study Site 3

2.55 2.70 1.75 2.05 1.80 2.24 2.36 1.42 1.61 1.26 1.82 1.90 1.05 1.10 0.67 Plotting Stage (given) 94.85 94.78 94.58 94.32 94.33 94.54 94.45 94.25 93.88 93.79 94.12 93.98 93.88 93.37 93.20 Stage (given) 34 34 34 34 34 17 17 17 17 17 5 5 5 5 5 Given 37 34 30 38 34 20 17 14 20 16 5 6 5 7 5 Calc. 38 33 31 39 36 18 16 16 18 17 4 5 5 7 5 Meas. DISCHARGE 5 4 3 2 1 Trans No. Table 4. Summary of Calibration Details, Lake Creek Study Site 3

5.871 3.406 3.774 2.646 1.939 B Coefficient log/log Relationship (calculated) 92.30 92.08 92.83 92.27 92.53 SZF= 0.1755 0.2702 0.2650 0.3235 0.5156 B= 1.3704 0.7642 0.6810 0.6508 0.2922 A= Stage/Discharge Relationship (S vs Q) S=A*Q**B+SZF 1.3414 0.2883 3.9724 2.2139 0.0569 Mean Error of Stage/Discharge Relationship 0.9875 1.0015 0.9652 0.9798 1.0005 High 1.0204 0.9957 1.0618 1.0339 0.9991 Middle 0.9924 1.0028 0.9758 0.9871 1.0003 Low Based on Stage-Discharge Relationship Ratio of Modeled vs Predicted Discharge (given) 5 4 3 2 1 Trans No. Table 4. Summary of Calibration Details, Lake Creek Study Site 3

2 cfs – 300 cfs Study Site 4 2 cfs – 300 cfs Study Site 3 4 cfs – 325 cfs Study Site 2 5 cfs – 325 cfs Study Site 1 Table 2.9-2 Modeled Flows, Lake Creek

100.0% 0.0% VAF+20 87.5% 12.5% VAF+15 75.0% 25.0% VAF+10 62.5% 37.5% VAF+5 50.0% 50.0% VAF=<0.80 or >1.20 1/ 37.5% 62.5% VAF-5 25.0% 75.0% VAF-10 12.5% 87.5% VAF-15 0.0% 100.0% VAF-20 1-Velocity Model 3-Velocity Model Flow (cfs)

120-325 5-160 300 (140) 9 100-325 5-140 120 8 60-325 5-100 80 7 90-325 5-130 110 6 120-325 5-160 260 (140) 5 60-325 5-100 80 4 120-325 5-160 140 3 80-325 5-120 100 2 85-325 5-125 105 1 1 Flows (1V) Flows (3V) VAF=0.80

1/

Transect Study Site Table 3.1-1 Flows at Which VAF = 0.80, Range of Flows for the 3-Velocity Set (3V) Models and 1-Velocity Set (1V) Models

Before the WUA Model is Run:

• Transects and study sites approved
• Calibration flows approved
• Calibration models approved
• Method of merging models approved
• Species/life history approved
• Species distribution approved
• HSI curves approved
• Transect weighting approved
• Study site weighting approved
• Hydrology approved

How Does It Work?

• Take Calibrated Hydraulic Model
• Add Transect Weighting
• Add HSI Curves
• Combine the 3 Velocity Set and 1 Velocity

Set Models

• And……

Weighted Usable Area

• Index of Habitat Quantity

– Square feet/ 1000 linear feet of stream

• Does not Indicate the Quality of the

Habitat

– Small amount of very good habitat

• r

– Large amount of marginal habitat

• It doesn’t indicate where on the transect

the habitat is located

WUA, cont’d

• Each transect was modeled independently

– 34 transects – 2 models/transect – 68 Models

• Each transect weighted within the study

site or group of transects

• Each study site or group of transects was

weighted as % overall

Transect and Study Site Weighting

• Transects were aggregated into groupings

for each study site as listed below:

– Study Site 1, Transects 1 – 4 – Study Site 1, Transects 5 – 9 – Study Site 2, Transect 1 – Study Site 2, Transects 2 – 8 – Study Site 3 – Study Site 4

Figure 3.3-1 Lake Creek Study Site 1 (T1-4) Fish Rearing Habitat (WUA) vs. Flow

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 50 100 150 200 250 300

Streamflow in Cubic Feet Per Second (cfs) WUA (Sq. Ft. of Habitat Per 1000 Ft. of Stream) Chinook Rearing Coho Rearing Steelhead Rearing Cutthroat Rearing Rainbow Rearing Winter Rearing

Figure 3.3-2 Lake Creek Study Site 1 (T1-4) Fish Spawning Habitat (WUA) vs. Flow

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 50 100 150 200 250 Streamflow in Cubic Feet Per Second (cfs) W U A ( S q . F t . o f H a b it a t p e r 1 0 0 0 F t . o f S t re a m ) Chinook Spawning Coho Spaw ning Steelhead Spaw ning Cutthroat Spaw ning Rainbow Spaw ning

Figure 3.4-4 Lake Creek IFIM SS4 Amphibian Habitat (WUA) vs. Flow 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 1 51 101 151 201 251 Streamflow in Cubic Feet Per Second (cfs)

WUA (Sq. Ft. of Habitat per 1000 Ft. of stream)

Larvae Eggs Eggs and Larvae

Input Hydrology

• Inflow exists in Lake Creek from the Drop

Structure downstream to confluence with the Cowlitz River

• Each study site or group of transects will

receive differing amounts of inflow

• Inflow varies

– Site to site – Month to month

7.38 1-4 1 7.30 5-9 1 4.76 1 2 4.70 2-8 2 0.84 All 3 0.00 All 4 Square Miles Transects Study Site Table 4.1-3 Lake Creek IFIM Drainage Areas (sq. mi.)

1.2 1.4 2.1 3.3 3.9 4.4 4.9 5.6 7.6 5.5 2.9 1.3 Mean 1.7 1.2 1.6 2.5 2.7 3.1 3.2 2.2 2.1 1.7 1.6 1.0 1977 1.3 1.8 2.6 3.7 4.9 5.1 4.1 5.0 9.2 12.7 4.2 1.2 1976 1.2 1.6 1.8 3.4 3.7 3.2 5.7 6.5 11.7 6.1 2.1 0.9 1975 1.3 2.0 3.6 7.2 6.1 6.4 5.9 6.8 11.3 7.8 4.7 0.9 1974 0.9 1.0 1.3 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.6 3.3 6.5 7.5 2.2 1.3 1973 1.9 2.0 3.6 5.8 6.6 6.9 13.7 10.9 9.1 5.2 3.0 1.2 1972 1.2 1.5 3.0 4.5 5.7 5.0 4.6 7.6 9.3 4.1 2.6 0.8 1971 0.8 0.9 1.4 2.1 2.5 3.7 4.1 6.5 8.5 3.1 1.6 1.2 1970 1.0 1.2 1.8 3.3 3.6 4.5 4.0 3.1 7.6 6.5 5.3 2.6 1969 1.3 1.1 1.3 2.0 2.2 3.7 4.9 8.5 5.4 5.3 2.9 1.6 1968 0.8 1.1 1.9 2.7 2.5 2.2 3.3 5.9 8.8 5.5 1.4 0.7 1967 0.8 1.2 1.7 2.6 3.4 4.8 5.1 2.8 4.0 1.8 1.2 0.8 1966 0.9 1.2 2.0 3.0 3.6 3.3 3.9 7.2 12.0 10.9 3.0 1.7 1965 1.2 1.8 2.3 3.6 4.2 5.2 4.0 4.8 6.5 3.6 3.7 0.8 1964 0.9 0.7 1.2 1.8 2.8 5.0 3.6 5.5 3.2 4.0 3.5 1.6 1963 1.7 1.4 3.0 3.7 5.7 5.9 5.0 3.4 6.9 2.5 3.0 1.6 1914 Sep Aug Jul Jun May Apr Mar Feb Jan Dec Nov Oct WY Table 4.1-2 Average Monthly Inflow to Lake Creek below Packwood Lake Average Inflow to Lake Creek (cfs) per Square Mile of Drainage Area

27.1 26.8 17.5 17.3 3.1 3.7 Annual 40.6 40.2 26.2 25.8 4.6 5.5 Dec 21.4 21.2 13.8 13.6 2.4 2.9 Nov 9.6 9.5 6.2 6.1 1.1 1.3 Oct 8.9 8.8 5.7 5.6 1.0 1.2 Sept 10.3 10.2 6.7 6.6 1.2 1.4 Aug 15.5 15.3 10.0 9.9 1.8 2.1 July 24.3 24.1 15.7 15.5 2.8 3.3 June 28.8 28.5 18.6 18.3 3.3 3.9 May 32.5 32.1 20.9 20.7 3.7 4.4 Apr 36.1 35.8 23.3 23.0 4.1 4.9 Mar 41.3 40.9 26.7 26.3 4.7 5.6 Feb 56.1 55.5 36.2 35.7 6.4 7.6 Jan Added Flow in cfs per Month at Each Study Site cfs/mile2 Month 7.38 7.30 4.76 4.70 0.84 Added Drainage Area SS1-T1-4 SS1-T5-9 SS2-T1 SS2-T2-8 SS3 SS4 Study Site Table 4.1-4 Lake Creek Inflow at Each Study Site

90.5 90.3 85 84.9 76.8 75 85.5 85.3 80 79.9 71.8 70 80.5 80.3 75 74.9 66.8 65 75.5 75.3 70 69.9 61.8 60 70.5 70.3 65 64.9 56.8 55 65.5 65.3 60 59.9 51.8 50 60.5 60.3 55 54.9 46.8 45 55.5 55.3 50 49.9 41.8 40 50.5 50.3 45 44.9 36.8 35 45.5 45.3 40 39.9 31.8 30 40.5 40.3 35 34.9 26.8 25 35.5 35.3 30 29.9 21.8 20 30.5 30.3 25 24.9 16.8 15 25.5 25.3 20 19.9 11.8 10 24.5 24.3 19 18.9 10.8 9 23.5 23.3 18 17.9 9.8 8 22.5 22.3 17 16.9 8.8 7 21.5 21.3 16 15.9 7.8 6 20.5 20.3 15 14.9 6.8 5 19.5 19.3 14 13.9 5.8 4 18.5 18.3 13 12.9 4.8 3 17.5 17.3 12 11.9 3.8 2 SS1 T1-4 SS1 T5-9 SS2 T1 SS2 T2-8 SS3 SS4 15.5 15.3 10 9.9 1.8 Inflow: July Hydrology

Integration of WUA and Monthly Inflow

• Add monthly inflow to every study site or group
• f transects
• Add fish/amphibian periodicity
• Add fish/amphibian distribution
• Add study site/transect grouping weighting
• Compile WUA from the study sites/ transect

groupings, using appropriate WUA for corresponding flows and WUA

• Lower Lake Creek WUA, as measured from the

Drop Structure

Figure 5.2-1 Lake Creek IFIM January: Fish Rearing Habitat (WUA) vs. Flow

500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 5,500 6,000 6,500 7,000 50 100 150 200 250

Streamflow in Cubic Feet Per Second (cfs)

WUA (Sq. Ft. of Habitat per 1000 Ft. of Stream) Chinook Rearing Coho Rearing Steelhead Rearing Cutthroat Rearing Rainbow Rearing Winter Rearing

Figure 5.2-2 Lake C reek IFIM January: Fish Spawning H abitat (W UA ) vs. Flow

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 50 100 150 200 250

Stream flow in Cubic Feet Per Second (cfs)

WUA (Sq. Ft. of Habitat per 1000 Ft. of Stream) C

• ho Spawning

Cutthroat Spawning

Figure 5.3-1 Lake Creek IFIM January Amphibian Habitat (WUA) vs. Flow

500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 50 100 150 200 250 Streamflow in Cubic Feet Per Second (cfs) WUA (Sq. Ft. of Habitat Per 1,000 Ft. of Stream Giant Salamander Larvae Tailed Frog Larvae Torrent Salamander Larvae

What Does It All Mean?

• Spawning Habitat is Extremely Limited in

Lower Lake Creek

– Of 34 transects:

• 19 have spawning habitat
• 15 do not

– In the Anadromous Zone (Study Sites 1 & 2)

• 4/11 in Study Site 1 have spawning substrate
• 3/8 in Study Site 2 have spawning substrate

Figure 5.2-2 Lake C reek IFIM January: Fish Spawning H abitat (W UA ) vs. Flow

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 50 100 150 200 250

Stream flow in Cubic Feet Per Second (cfs)

WUA (Sq. Ft. of Habitat per 1000 Ft. of Stream) C

• ho Spawning

Cutthroat Spawning

Spawning WUA as % of Total Habitat Available

0.0% 0.2% 0.4% 0.6% 0.8% 1.0% 1.2% 1.4% 1.6% 1.8% 2.0% SS1 T1-4 SS1 T5-9 SS2 T1 SS2 T2-8 SS3 SS4 Study Site and Transects Percent

Chinook Coho Steelhead Cutthroat Rainbow

2.1% N/A N/A N/A N/A Maximum 1.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A Mean 1-11 4 2.9% N/A N/A N/A N/A Maximum 1.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A Mean 1-6 3 0.6% 0.0% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% Maximum 0.4% 0.0% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% Mean 2-8 2 1.2% 0.3% 0.7% 0.3% 0.3% Maximum 0.6% 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% Mean 1 2 0.2% 0.7% 0.9% 4.0% 1.9% Maximum 0.1% 0.4% 0.7% 1.4% 1.4% Mean 5-9 1 1.1% 1.0% 1.9% 1.2% 2.0% Maximum 0.1% 0.0% 0.3% 0.1% 0.3% Mean 1-4 1 Rainbow Cutthroat Steelhead Coho Chinook Statistic Transects Study Site Table 3. Salmon and trout spawning WUA as a percentage of total available habitat per study site and transects.

Rearing WUA as % of Total Habitat

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% SS1 T1-4 SS1 T5-9 SS2 T1 SS2 T2-8 SS3 SS4 Study Sites and Transects Percentage Chinook Coho Steelhead Cutthroat Rainbow W Rearing

N/A N/A N/A Maximum N/A N/A N/A Mean 1-11 4 N/A N/A N/A Maximum N/A N/A N/A Mean 1-6 3 13.6% 3.6% 3.0% Maximum 11.3% 1.1% 2.4% Mean 2-8 2 6.7% 3.6% 2.7% Maximum 3.4% 1.1% 1.0% Mean 1 2 33.1% 31.6% 33.1% Maximum 26.1% 12.5% 27.7% Mean 5-9 1 19.7% 20.7% 18.0% Maximum 15.3% 7.4% 12.0% Mean 1-4 1 Steelhead Coho Chinook Statistic Transects Study Site Table 4. Salmon and trout rearing WUA as a percentage of total available habitat per study site and transects.

SS1, T6 Bed Profile and Spawning Substrate Preference

92.0 92.5 93.0 93.5 94.0 94.5 95.0 95.5 96.0 96.5 97.0 97.5 98.0

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53

Station (ft) Elevation (f 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 C hinook/C

• ho Spaw

ning Substrate Preference Steelhead Spaw ning Substrate Preference C utthroat Spaw ning Substrate Preference R ainbow Spaw ning Substrate Preference T 2 Bed Profile 12.5 C FS WSE 25.5 C FS WSE 41.0 C FS WSE

SS4, T9 Bed Profile and Spawning Substrate Preference

94.0 94.5 95.0 95.5 96.0 96.5 97.0 97.5 98.0 98.5 99.0 99.5 100.0 100.5 101.0 101.5 102.0

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37

Station (ft) Elevation (f 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 Spaw ning Preferen R ainbow Spaw ning Substrate Preference T 9 Bed Profile

6.0 C F S W S E 17.0 C F S W SE 33.5 C F S W SE

SS4, T10 Bed Profile and Spawning Substrate Preference

95.0 95.5 96.0 96.5 97.0 97.5 98.0 98.5 99.0 99.5 100.0 100.5 101.0 101.5 102.0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 Station (ft) Elevation (f 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 Spaw ning Preferen R ainbow Spaw ning Substrate Preference T 10 Bed Profile

6.0 C F S W S E 17.0 C F S W S E 33.5 C F S W S E

Large Wood per Mile in Wetted Channel 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1 2 3 4 5 Reach Wood pieces/mile Small Medium Large

Table 3. Area of spawning-sized gravel inventoried in Lake Creek (2005 Inventory)

3,903 20,550 8,102 42,660 6.3% 0-5.3 Total 132 50 8.4% 4.9-5.3 5 6,538 7,925 9,599 11,635 4.3% 3.5-4.9 4 3,066 7,550 8,946 22,025 8.0% 1.3-3.5 3 4,479 2,375 11,644 6,175 7.3% 0.7-1.3 2 3,960 2,700 4,070 2,775 2.9% 0-0.7 1 Sq ft/mile Area (sq ft) Sq ft/mile Area (sq ft) Gravel in bankfull channel* Gravel in wetted channel Average Gradient River Mile Reach

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 1 2 3 4 5 Distance from Mouth (miles) Area of gravel in sq. ft. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Stream Gradient Gravel Log Jams Gradient Gravel Study Sites Tributaries Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 4 Reach 5 ` 1 2 3-1 3-2 4-1 4-2 4-3

Next Steps

• Complete Analysis of Rearing and

Spawning Habitat

• Investigate means of improving and

increasing habitat, especially spawning habitat

– Reaches 1 and 2 (anadromous) – Placement of Structures – If needed, gravel recruitment stations