LOWER LAKE CREEK FI SH LOWER LAKE CREEK FI SH PASSAGE ASSESSMENT - - PDF document

1

LOWER LAKE CREEK FI SH LOWER LAKE CREEK FI SH PASSAGE ASSESSMENT PASSAGE ASSESSMENT

Presented to Presented to Packwood Lake Aquatics Subcommittee Packwood Lake Aquatics Subcommittee January 10 January 10-

• 11, 2008

11, 2008

Objectives Objectives

• Determine if Lower Lake Creek (below the

Determine if Lower Lake Creek (below the Highway 12 Bridge) meets passage criteria Highway 12 Bridge) meets passage criteria for: for:

• Chinook Salmon

Chinook Salmon

• Coho Salmon

Coho Salmon

• Steelhead Trout

Steelhead Trout

• Sea

Sea-

• run Cutthroat Trout

run Cutthroat Trout

• Rainbow Trout

Rainbow Trout

2

Objectives (cont Objectives (cont’ ’d) d)

• Analysis of flows, as measured at Study

Analysis of flows, as measured at Study Site 1, from: Site 1, from:

• 19

19 – – 57 cfs 57 cfs

• As measured at:

As measured at:

• Transects 1

Transects 1 – – 4, Study Site 1 (RM 0.0 4, Study Site 1 (RM 0.0 – – 0.3) 0.3)

Methods Methods

• Energy Northwest Used the

Energy Northwest Used the “ “Oregon Oregon Method Method” ” as per Thompson (1972) as per Thompson (1972)

• Used to determine passage for salmon and

Used to determine passage for salmon and trout trout

• Used throughout the Northwest

Used throughout the Northwest

• Used to determine passage at

Used to determine passage at Peshastin Peshastin Creek Creek (Wenatchee River tributary) in 2007. (Wenatchee River tributary) in 2007.

3

Oregon Method Oregon Method

• Thompson

Thompson’ ’s Minimum Depth s Minimum Depth Recommendations: Recommendations:

• Salmon

Salmon – – 0.8 ft 0.8 ft

• Large Trout

Large Trout – – 0.6 ft 0.6 ft

• Width Criteria:

Width Criteria:

• 25% of the Wetted Width

25% of the Wetted Width

• 10% Contiguous Width

10% Contiguous Width

Field Measurements Field Measurements

• Taken from the Instream Flow Study conducted

Taken from the Instream Flow Study conducted for Lake Creek for Lake Creek

• 4 stage/discharge measurements taken

4 stage/discharge measurements taken

• Bed profile developed from surveying

Bed profile developed from surveying

• Data derived from RHABSIM program

Data derived from RHABSIM program

• MEASUREMENTS ARE FOR NON

MEASUREMENTS ARE FOR NON-

• TRANSORMED

TRANSORMED TRANSECTS FROM IFIM STUDY; ARE NOT TRANSECTS FROM IFIM STUDY; ARE NOT ENHANCED ENHANCED

4

Plunge Pool Tailout Plunge Pool Tailout 4 4 Low Gradient Cascade/Run Low Gradient Cascade/Run 3 3 Run Run 2 2 Glide Glide 1 1 Transect Description Transect Description Transect Transect Final Transect Weighting for Study Site 1 Final Transect Weighting for Study Site 1 (from EES Consulting 2007) (from EES Consulting 2007)

5

RESULTS RESULTS

• Trout (0.6 ft):

Trout (0.6 ft):

• Criteria of 25% of total width was met at all

Criteria of 25% of total width was met at all flows analyzed flows analyzed

• 51% at Transect 3 (19 cfs) to 93% at Transect 2

51% at Transect 3 (19 cfs) to 93% at Transect 2 (57 cfs) (57 cfs)

• Criteria of 10% contiguous width was also

Criteria of 10% contiguous width was also met on all transects at all flows examined. met on all transects at all flows examined.

• 36% at Transect 3 (38

36% at Transect 3 (38 -

• 43 cfs) to 93% at

43 cfs) to 93% at Transect 2 (57 cfs). Transect 2 (57 cfs).

RESULTS, cont RESULTS, cont’ ’d d

• Salmon (0.8 ft):

Salmon (0.8 ft):

• Criteria of 25% of total width was met at all

Criteria of 25% of total width was met at all flows analyzed flows analyzed

• 31% at Transect 3 (19 cfs) to 88% at Transect 2

31% at Transect 3 (19 cfs) to 88% at Transect 2 (36 (36 -

• 42 cfs)

42 cfs)

• Criteria of 10% contiguous width was also

Criteria of 10% contiguous width was also met on all transects at all flows examined. met on all transects at all flows examined.

• 19% at Transect 3 (19 cfs) to 78% at Transect 1

19% at Transect 3 (19 cfs) to 78% at Transect 1 (36 (36 – – 38 cfs), Transect 2 (36 38 cfs), Transect 2 (36 – – 43 cfs) and 43 cfs) and Transect 4 (28 Transect 4 (28 -

• 29 cfs)

29 cfs)

6

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Flow (cfs) Percentage T1-Width T1-Con T2-Width T2-Con T3-Width T3-Con T4-Width T4-Con % of Width Min. Threshold % Contiguous Width

• Min. Threshold

Lower Lake Creek Trout Depth (0.6 ft) Lower Lake Creek Trout Depth (0.6 ft) Passage Criteria % of Wetted Width Passage Criteria % of Wetted Width Lower Lake Creek Salmon Depth (0.8 Lower Lake Creek Salmon Depth (0.8 ft) Passage Criteria % of Wetted Width ft) Passage Criteria % of Wetted Width

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Flow (cfs) Percentage T1-Width T1-Con T2-Width T2-Con T3-Width T3-Con T4-Width T4-Con % of Width Min. Threshold % Contiguous Width

• Min. Threshold

7

Contiguous width using 1 ft depth Contiguous width using 1 ft depth criteria criteria

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 19 cf s 25 c f s 28 c f s 29 cf s 31 c f s 36 c f s 38 cf s 39 c f s 42 c f s 43 cf s 57 c f s C

• ntiguous ft

Trans 1 Trans 2 Trans 3 Trans 4

Conclusions Conclusions

• Using Thompson

Using Thompson’ ’s methods, all transects s methods, all transects meet depth and wetted width criteria for meet depth and wetted width criteria for all flows analyzed for existing transects all flows analyzed for existing transects

• Using agency recommendation of 1.0 ft

Using agency recommendation of 1.0 ft depth and 3 ft contiguous, all flows and depth and 3 ft contiguous, all flows and transects meet criteria with the exception transects meet criteria with the exception

• f Transect 3, 19 cfs.
• f Transect 3, 19 cfs.

8

Conclusions, cont Conclusions, cont’ ’d d

• The

The current condition

current condition was modeled for

was modeled for Transects 1 Transects 1 – – 4, Study Site 1. 4, Study Site 1.

• Enhanced transects could reflect residual

Enhanced transects could reflect residual depths to meet agency criteria. depths to meet agency criteria.