SLIDE 1 Restoration of a Southwestern Wisconsin River
Amanda Lederer Kris Wright
SLIDE 2 Addison Site
Downstream site
400 m from Cty I Bridge
SLIDE 3 Wolenec Site
Restoration site
200 m upstream of Cty. I
Bridge
SLIDE 4 Zoha Site
Upstream site
300 m up from
Zoha/Wolenec property line
SLIDE 5 Brown Trout Habitat
Deep pools Narrow channels Woody debris Undercut banks/coverage Overhanging vegetation Clear, oxygenated water Water temperature: 15-18°C Gravel substrate
SLIDE 6 Restoration Activities
Rip-rap and cattle bridges were used
to slow erosion
Lunkers were added to supply fish
protection
Channel width was decreased Channel depth was increased Riparian zone vegetation was
modified
SLIDE 7
Objectives
Did restoration activities immediately affect
stream habitat, macroinvertebrates and fish?
To what degree did the restoration affect
these aspects within the sampling sites?
SLIDE 8 Sampling Methods
Habitat Surveys
Physical Chemical
Fish Surveys
Electroshocker
Macroinvertebrate
Surveys
Surber sampler
SLIDE 9 Habitat Hypotheses
- 1. We expected significant changes in habitat
characteristics at Addison and Wolenec but not at Zoha
- 2. We expected the greatest changes in
magnitude at Wolenec
SLIDE 10 Habitat Survey
Physical Characteristics
River width and depth Bank erosion Riparian zone coverage Substrate/embeddedness Macrophytes
Chemical Characteristics
D.O. Temperature Conductivity
SLIDE 11
Significant Changes in Habitat
Addison Wolenec Zoha width
depth
substrate composition
substrate depth
erosion
SLIDE 12 Channel Width
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Addison Wolenec Zoha Site Width (m)
Pre Restoration Post Restoration
* *
SLIDE 13 Channel Depth
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Addison Wolenec Zoha Site Depth (cm)
Pre Restoration Post Restoration
*
SLIDE 14 Channel Erosion
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Addison Wolenec Zoha Site Amount of erosion (m)
Pre Restoration Post Restoration
* *
SLIDE 15 Invertebrate Hypotheses
- 1. We expected the abundance and diversity
to increase at Addison, decrease at Wolenec, and not change at Zoha.
- 2. We expected the greatest changes in
abundance and diversity at Wolenec
SLIDE 16 Invertebrate Abundance
500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Addison Wolenec Zoha Site Number of Invertebrates
Pre Restoration Post Restoration
SLIDE 17 Invertebrate Diversity
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Addison Wolenec Zoha Site Number of taxa
Pre Restoration Post Restoration
SLIDE 18 Fish Hypotheses
- 1. We expected the abundance to increase at
Addison, decrease at Wolenec, and no change at Zoha.
- 2. We expected the diversity to increase at Addison
and Wolenec, but no change at Zoha.
- 3. We expected the greatest changes in abundance
and diversity at Wolenec.
SLIDE 19 50 100 150 200 250 300
Addison Wolenec Zoha Site Abundnace of fish
Pre Restoration Post Restoration
Fish Abundance
SLIDE 20 Fish Diversity
Brown Trout Common Shinner White Sucker Lampery Creek Chub Mottled Sculpin Slimy Sculpin Johnny Darter Long nose Dase Hornyhead Creek
Chub
SLIDE 21 Fish Diversity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Addison Wolenec Zoha Site Number of fish species
Pre Restoration Post Restoration
SLIDE 22 Brown Trout Hypotheses
- 1. Brown trout abundance will increase at Addison,
decrease at Wolenec, with no change at Zoha.
- 2. Brown trout size will increase at Addison,
decrease at Wolenec, with no change at Zoha.
- 3. The greatest magnitude of change in trout
abundance and size will occur at Wolenec.
SLIDE 23 Brown Trout Abundance
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Addison Wolenec Zoha Site # of Brown Trout
Pre-Restoration Post-Restoration
SLIDE 24 Brown Trout Lengths
50 100 150 200 250 300 Addison Wolenec Zoha
Site Length of trout (mm)
Pre Restoration Post Restoration
*
SLIDE 25 Addison: Brown Trout Size
2 4 6 8 10 12 14
5
1
5 1 5
2
5 2 5
3
5 3 5
Size (mm) # of trout
Pre Restoration Post Restoration
SLIDE 26 Wolenec: Brown Trout Size
2 4 6 8 10 12
5
1
5 1 5
2
5 2 5
3
5 3 5
4
5
Size (mm) # of trout
Pre Restoration Post Restoration
SLIDE 27 Zoha: Brown Trout Size
1 2 3 4 5 6
0-50 50-100 100-150 150-200 200-250 250-300 300-350 350-400 400-450
Size (mm) # of trout
Pre Restoration Post Restoration
SLIDE 28
In Summary: Habitat
The most changes occurred at Wolenec. The fewest changes occurred at Addison. The greatest changes in magnitude occurred
at Wolenec
SLIDE 29 In Summary: Macroinvertebrates
Abundance decreased at Zoha, increased at
Wolenec, with little change at Addison.
The greatest change in abundance occurred at
Zoha.
There was very little change in diversity at all
three sites.
Community is dominated by tolerant and common
taxa, many of which are not key diet items for trout.
SLIDE 30
In Summary: Fish
The abundance increased at Wolenec,
decreased at Zoha, with little change at Addison.
The diversity increased at Wolenec, but no
change occurred at Addison and Zoha.
The greatest changes in abundance and
diversity occurred at Wolenec.
SLIDE 31
In Summary: Brown Trout
Addison had the highest abundance,
followed closely by Wolenec.
Addison was dominated by smaller trout
while Wolenec was dominated by larger trout.
Brown trout size decreased at Zoha, with
little change at Wolenec and Addison.
SLIDE 32 Conclusions
Restoration did appear to impact habitat
characteristics, fish and macroinvertebrates.
Wolenec was most impacted by immediate restoration
activities, though not necessarily in a negative way
Downstream impacts at Addison were less drastic than
expected
Zoha unexpectedly DID change
Addison is well suited for smaller trout, while
restoration may have increased the suitability of Wolenec to support large trout.
Habitat in Zoha appears to be less than ideal.
SLIDE 33
Conclusions
Immediate changes may not reflect long term
impacts
Additional surveys will have to be done to
understand the long-term effects of restoration.
SLIDE 34
Special Thanks
Trout Unlimited- Harry and Laura Nohr
Chapter
Dodgeville Department of Natural
Resources
University of Wisconsin-Platteville Kristopher Wright