Successfully reported this slideshow.

Upper quinault river restoration tribal habitat conference november 2010

1,883 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Sports
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Upper quinault river restoration tribal habitat conference november 2010

  1. 1. Upper Quinault River Restoration Bill Armstrong, Salmon Resources Scientist Quinault Department of Fisheries
  2. 2. Presentation Outline  Scientific Background  Threats  Fundamental Elements  Alder Creek Demonstration Pilot Project  Questions?
  3. 3. SCIENTIFIC BACKGROUND
  4. 4. >25,000 years ago
  5. 5. Upper Quinault River Floodplain 1850
  6. 6. Mature timber along the riverbanks…
  7. 7. E. F. Quinault River 2009
  8. 8. E. F. Quinault River 2009
  9. 9. (Abbe & Montgomery 1996) Initiation and evolution of a natural logjam A “Big” Guy Scientific Foundation
  10. 10. Large wood is a structural component of forest rivers that directly influences river morphology, channel dynamics and forest structure: Large snags in river Large trees in floodplain = stability Small snags in river Small trees in floodplain = instability Scientific Foundation (Fetherston 2005)
  11. 11. THE QUINAULT RIVER TODAY
  12. 12. Upper Quinault River Floodplain
  13. 13. The Problem 1850 Today Mature conifer floodplain, anabranching river channel and extensive lateral side channel network = stability and abundant functional salmon habitat Immature red alder floodplain, shallow braided river channel and few lateral side channels remain = unstable, limited functional salmon habitat
  14. 14. Current pattern of floodplain forest development Restore the natural pattern of floodplain forest development Scientific Foundation
  15. 15. WHY DOES IT MATTER?
  16. 16. - 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Salmon population response Quinault Blueback Runsize 1910-2010
  17. 17. Why it matters…. • Blueback are genetically distinct from other sockeye populations • Run timing and spawning period are unique compared to other sockeye populations • Evolutionary Significant Unit - a unique population under federal ESA designation • In danger of “virtual extinction
  18. 18. THREATS
  19. 19. Side Channel Habitat - Only 5 miles remain
  20. 20. Private Property and Public Safety
  21. 21. NPS and the Counties have chronic maintenance issues with roads, bridges, and campgrounds from river erosion, flooding, and sediment deposition. Graves Creek Road Roads located in the floodplain and resulting emergency repairs have harmful cumulative impacts. Environmentally sensitive alternatives for access are needed to not only prevent further habitat degradation but to restore riverine-forest functions.
  22. 22. Floodplain Inundation (100 year flood)
  23. 23. Hopeless? CHANGE INTERVENTION FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION A CALL TO ACTION!
  24. 24. FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTS OF THE RESTORATION PLAN
  25. 25. Upper Quinault River Watershed
  26. 26. The Upper Quinault River Valley Restoration Reach
  27. 27. Restoration will require… Change from the Status Quo: "It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something.” — Franklin D. Roosevelt Perseverance: "It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.” — Robert Strauss Resolve to “stay the course”: "Always bear in mind that your own resolution to succeed, is more important than any other one thing.” — Abraham Lincoln
  28. 28. General Restoration Approach • Natural processes based, landscape-scale ecosystem restoration • Incremental actions over the next 20 years in order to achieve desired long term goals • Cumulative benefits rather than cumulative impacts The Plan provides the alternative for 1) activities that continue to impact habitat and 2) the current regulatory framework overseeing land use and infrastructure protection in the valley
  29. 29. Purpose of The Plan is to Provide Direction and Guidance for Restoration 1. Provide the scientific foundation for habitat restoration in the Quinault River Valley 2. Provide the general approach for restoration 3. Provide methods and procedures for restoration 4. Provide the framework for prioritizing, developing, and implementing projects
  30. 30. Restoration Strategy “Promotes the preservation of natural resources and remaining habitat in the short- term while implementing a science based foundation that will support sustainable recovery of salmon and ecosystem function over the long-term.”
  31. 31. PROCESS AND PROCEDURE
  32. 32. Typical Site Plan
  33. 33. Typical ELJ Design
  34. 34. ELJs mimic natural logjams
  35. 35. Opportunistic use of wood debris
  36. 36. Created by Herrera Environmental Consultants Current condition
  37. 37. Short term Future Condition 100 years Protective buffer Mature forest patches develop on ELJ hard-points Infrastructure
  38. 38. Long term Future Condition 200 years
  39. 39. ALDER CREEK SIDE CHANNEL PILOT PROJECT
  40. 40. ELJ 6 (natural logjam) ELJ 7 ELJ 12 ELJ 11ELJ 10 ELJ 9 ELJ 8
  41. 41. ELJ 1 ELJ 2 Lattice tipped into river Alder Creek Side Channel
  42. 42. Restoration Planting
  43. 43. QDNR Habitat Restoration Program Quinault Department of Habitat Restoration consisting of a multi-disciplined team: - Fisheries Scientists - Forest ecologist - Fluvial geomorphologist - Hydrologist - Professional engineer - Project coordinator - GIS specialist - Restoration technicians
  44. 44. ELJ Construction Only = $31,500 to $50,000 each ELJ Cost (all elements included) = $137,000 each ELJs Total (400) = $54,800,000 Floodplain Restoration Planting = $ 980,000 ELJ and Restoration Planting = $57 million Infrastructure and land acquisition = $63 million GRAND TOTAL = $120 MILLION Restoration Costs
  45. 45. "There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things.” — Niccolo Machiavelli The Prince (1532)
  46. 46. “SUCCESS DOESN’T COME TO YOU…YOU GO TO IT!”
  47. 47. Quinault Climate Change –> End of century • Similar climate to 5,000-6,000 years ago • Surface air temperature 2 degrees warmer by end of century • Winter precipitation as rain increases 4-35% • Increases in winter flooding to ratio and frequency of 20 year floods • Reduced snowpack • Olympic glaciers will be gone • Summer base flows projected to decline 3 to 35% • Stressors to salmon and forests (Littell & Mantua 2009)
  48. 48. Quinault River Restoration Coalition Government – Congressman Norm Dicks, Senator Patty Murray, Senator Maria Cantwell Federal Partners – Olympic National Forest, Olympic National Park, Army Corp of Engineers, US Geological Survey, US Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service State Partners – Governor’s Salmon Recovery Office, Department of Natural Resources, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Ecology, Historical Preservation Office Local Partners - Jefferson County, Grays Harbor County, Quinault Valley River Committee NGOs – Wild Salmon Center, The Nature Conservancy, Mitsubishi Corporation, Olympic National Park Associates, Washington Coast Sustainable Salmon Partnership, The Bullet Foundation, Pacific Coast Salmon Coalition
  49. 49. Federal Lead Agency Designation • QIN soliciting the BIA, Army Corp or NRCS to act as lead federal agency for restoration • Satisfies federal requirements for project sponsor and serves as a liaison between QIN and federal government • “Streamlines” the bureaucratic federal process to increase efficiency • QIN achieves additional priority for restoration in the valley since a federal action
  50. 50. Federal Lead Agency / Quinault Indian Nation Regulatory Agencies (Federal, State, County) Landowners (Private, Federal, State, County) Quinault Valley River Committee Quinault Valley Community
  51. 51. Federal and State Designations • Wild and Scenic River Designation (pending) • Wild Salmon Stronghold Designation (Congressional 2010)
  52. 52. PROCESS & PROCEDURES
  53. 53. Project Prioritization Flexibility: Other factors also influence timing of projects such as local community interests and opportunity to implement restoration plan elements during “emergency declarations”.
  54. 54. Project Development Project Identification -> Landowner Agreement Project Development -> Geomorphic Site Assessment -> Conceptual Design -> Hydraulic Modeling -> Risk Assessment and Benefit Analysis -> Landowner Agreement Engineering Plans and Specifications -> Landowner Approval -> Federal, State, County Permitting ESA Consultation & Permitting -> Corp-USFWS Programmatic BO/SPIF -> Corp Nationwide Permit -> Section 106 Cultural Resources -> State Historical Preservation Act -> Streamlined State HPA -> County Shoreline Exemption -> NMFS Essential Fish Habitat -> Section 404 CWA Materials Procurement -> Permitting -> Project Management -> Monitoring Materials Storage and Staging -> Landowner Agreement -> Project Management -> Permitting Construction -> Project Management -> Construction Oversight -> Final Inspection Project Monitoring -> Landowner Agreement -> Project Management
  55. 55. Project Schedule (1 – 3 years) 10/31
  56. 56. Emergency Action Flow Chart
  57. 57. Post construction river velocity 2-D output (ELJs are red)
  58. 58. NEXT STEPS
  59. 59. Short term: The next 5 years • Educate the local community and other stakeholders • Formalize the QIN led coalition of restoration partners • Review and provide recommendations to existing management plans, land-use, and emergency infrastructure repair/protection methods • Develop the restoration program framework and program budget • Secure funding to implement the restoration program • Develop alternative land-use, access and infrastructure management plans • Initiate restoration actions directed to protect existing side channel habitat and reduce HCMZ expansion • Begin the reforestation process
  60. 60. • 35 project areas have been identified and preliminary budgets developed • 2 of these project areas are at the permit level design and ready for final design, permitting and implementation as funding is secured • We are also working with Jefferson County and Federal Highways on a road re-route for a segment of the South Shore Road • Nature conservancy on large land purchase in JeffCo Next Steps
  61. 61. Option 1: Continuous ELJ crib revetment = treats approximately 250-300’ feet Option 2: 5 flow deflector ELJs no less than 30’ x 30’ = treats approximately 700’ depending on required spacing and design needs Both options: 200’ of riverbank width in treatment zone would be restored as riparian area using conifer and other plantings.
  62. 62. Economic Benefits Restoration of the Quinault River can lead to the recovery of sustainable natural resources and expansion of a tourism based economy • Restoration related jobs • Improved fisheries opportunity • Tourism • Restoration science monitoring and research • “Trickle thru dollars” for the local economy
  63. 63. DISCUSSION
  64. 64. NEPA, ESA Consultation and Permitting Strategy • Programmatic EA for restoration reach (10 year) • Programmatic Biological Opinion (Corp-USFWS) for ESA consultation • Expedited Nationwide Permit (Army Corp) • Essential Fish Habitat (Salmon) Consultation • Streamlined HPA permitting and county shoreline exemptions • Expedited Section 404 Consultation (Clean Water Act)
  65. 65. Public Relations and Outreach Strategy • Quinault Indian Nation • Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission • Wild Salmon Center • Washington Coast Sustainable Salmon Partnership • Quinault Valley River Committee
  66. 66. Land Management & Conservation Strategy • QIN and The Nature Conservancy working to develop a Land Conservation Strategy • Conservation Areas and Easements • Private forest owner conversion (DNR program) • Riparian buffer zone reestablishment • Monetary compensation for conversion of private lands for conservation purposes • Stewardship  natural resource use protected
  67. 67. Wood Procurement Strategy • Material source identification • Timber sales (BIA, QIN, state, county) • USFS “free use” program • Materials storage and staging • Materials inventory management
  68. 68. Restoration Monitoring Strategy • Baseline ecological monitoring • Project effectiveness monitoring • Scientific and engineering design monitoring • Required to satisfy land access agreement with State of Washington and funding sources • QIN and USGS investigating options for monitoring program development
  69. 69. Funding Strategy • QIN pursuing congressional appropriation • Requires General Investigation Study by Army Corp (Land Resources Development Act) • A 3-5 year process culminating in the Army Corp recommending congressional support for the QIN restoration program • Estimated costs (current) for all restoration plan elements = $120 million
  70. 70. Economics How do we “market restoration” of the Quinault River Valley?
  71. 71. THREATS
  72. 72. FISHERIES RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
  73. 73. Quinault River Fisheries
  74. 74. Conservation Area and Road Relocation Concept Road Relocation
  75. 75. OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK BRIDGE
  76. 76. Conclusions (BOR 2005; UQRSHP 2005) • Constructed in 1973 • Reduced the river channel (EMZ) width from 550 m to 100 m • Forced the river to lose its meandering tendency over a 20 year period • 200% increased hydraulic radius, 8x greater sediment transport capacity, and river bed incision and scour • 300% increase in channel slope in the bridge reach • May have resulted in 2.5 miles of side channel habitat loss in the reach • Altered bank erosion and sediment transport processes from the crossing downriver for ~3.3 kilometers. Channel Response
  77. 77. Alder Creek Side Channel 2002 Scientific Foundation
  78. 78. Scientific Foundation
  79. 79. Alder Creek Side Channel Complex 2008
  80. 80. • Protect and preserve natural resources and functions of floodplains • Avoid the long- and short-term environmental effects associated with the occupancy and modification of floodplains • Avoid direct and indirect support of floodplain development and actions that could adversely affect the natural resources and functions of floodplains or increase flood risks • Restore natural floodplain values affected by land use activities within floodplains The Quinault Indian Nation and Government Agencies have a common mandate to Conserve, rotect, and estore natural resources
  81. 81. Project Funding Total project cost = $1.12 million Pacific Coast Salmon Recovery Fund = $466,563 Salmon Recovery Funding Board = $383,000 Washington Department of Natural Resources = $20,000 U.S. Forest Service Title 2 = $14,000 Wild Salmon Center = $15,000 Pacific Coast Salmon Coalition = $10,000 Jefferson County mitigation funds = $14,000 Quinault Indian Nation In-Kind = $ 181,437 Olympic National Forest In-Kind = $16,000 Olympic National Park Logs = $ Donation
  82. 82. Over the next 20 years • Restore stable hardpoints inside and along the HCMZ boundary • Reduce erosion and HCMZ expansion • Convert the wide, braided main channel to a deeper, anabranching channel network separated by stable forested islands • Restore side channel and tributary stability • Reestablish stands of mixed floodplain forests • Restore stable islands and wildlife refugia in the HCMZ • Complete restoration planting • Carry-out land management plans and land acquisition
  83. 83. Erosion of old, large timber (green squares) provides flow deflection and erosion control along the river bank. Queets RM32, 1985
  84. 84. Queets RM32, 1994
  85. 85. 1993 1995 new forest colonizing jam
  86. 86. Restoration defined… Merriam-Webster: 1 : an act of restoring or the condition of being restored: as a : a bringing back to a former position or condition : b : a restoring to an unimpaired or improved condition 2 : something that is restored; especially : a representation or reconstruction of the original form (as of a fossil or a building)
  87. 87. ELJ 7 ELJ 6 ELJ 5 ELJ 3 ELJ 4
  88. 88. ELJ 2 ELJ 5 ELJ 3 ELJ 4
  89. 89. OBJECTIVES MET Alder Creek Side Channel ELJ 1 Log lattice Deflection of river flow at ELJ 1
  90. 90. ELJ 2 January 2009

×