Habitat Enhancement Effectiveness – Biological Monitoring & Evaluation III
Salmonid Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation (RM&E)
|
| 14-Umat-03 | | Middle Columbia River | | 10/01/2014 | | 03/31/2019 | | 2014 | | Completed | | 01/25/2024 | | |
| |
Description
The large extent of the Umatilla Tribes habitat restoration projects past and future on Meacham Creek in the Umatilla Basin, OR watershed requires a larger scale monitoring approach than is currently funded under BPA in order to measure a biological response. Three sample sites were selected for monitoring to represent two large restoration efforts in Meacham Creek; a control site, a post-treatment site representative of the 2012 Phase II River Mile 6.0-8.5 Floodplain project, and a pre-treatment site for the proposed 2016-2017 Bonifer Reach Floodplain project. Appendices A and B document all of CTUIR’s monitored restoration projects and their associated monitoring site locations.
This third year project provided a cost share in order to meet the objectives of the CTUIR biomonitoring study. Increased monitoring efforts for Meacham Creek include extensive surveying of juvenile salmonid abundance during the summer and fall, increased PIT tagging of juveniles throughout the system to monitor outmigration and survival, continuation of a long term macroinvertebrate study along with continued habitat monitoring. The ability to detect biological changes in response to habitat restoration is critical for determining habitat quantity and quality, and to understand what particular restoration action or suite of actions yield the greatest fish response. These funds were also used to purchase benthic sampling equipment.
The Umatilla Tribes strategy uses regionally standardized habitat protocols (Columbia Habitat Monitoring Program, CHaMP) to sample project reaches pre and post habitat restoration in contrast to unmodified control reaches. Habitat surveys consist of a simultaneous topographical and auxiliary data survey. CHaMP methods provide standardized metrics that can be used to measure response variables in salmonid habitat. CTUIR is congruently monitoring juvenile fish abundance and species composition at each site using a combination of snorkel methods at most sites and mark-recapture electrofishing where time and water conditions allow. Drift and benthic macroinvertebrate samples are collected yearly at each location as well as adult redd enumerations and carcass counts for focal species.
Project Benefit
The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) is implementing a habitat restoration program with emphasis on reducing the effects of primary limiting factors (i.e water temp, habitat complexity) and resorting natural ecological processes. The biomonitoring sites have been selected for evaluating a biological response to habitat restoration; and the expected benefit is to improve habitat quality for adult holding/spawning and juvenile rearing fish species of interest. We anticipate monitoring habitat in parallel with biomonitoring field surveys can provide valuable information regarding fish/habitat relationships (Bouwes et al. 2011, Stillwater Sciences 2012). Specifically, we’ll study 1) the relationship between juvenile fish density, growth, migration timing, and survival and 2) a population response to habitat restoration at eight sites located among five sub-basins. Accomplishments
| Research and Monitoring |
| Stream Miles Monitored |
19.00 |
10.00 |
Funding Details |
|
| PCSRF | $40,000 |
| Other | $33,400 |
| Report Total: | $73,400 |
|
| |
Worksites
Meacham Creek
- Worksite Identifier: Meacham Creek
- Start Date: 01/01/2014
- End Date: 03/31/2019
Area Description
No Area Description data was found for this worksite.
Location Information
- Basin: Middle Columbia (170701)
- Subbasin:
- Watershed:
- Subwatershed:
- State: Oregon
- Recovery Domain: Middle Columbia River
- Latitude: 45.646544
- Longitude: -118.360628
ESU
- Mid-Columbia River Spring-run Chinook Salmon ESU
- Middle Columbia River Steelhead DPS
Map
Photos
Metrics
Metrics
- E.0
Salmonid Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation (RM&E)Y (Y/N)
- . . E.0.a
RM&E Funding 73,400.00
- . . E.0.b
| Complement habitat restoration project | |
| This monitoring plan will complement the habitat implementation by CTUIR’s Umatilla Anadromous Fish Habitat project (1987-100-01). |
- . . E.0.c
| Project identified in a plan or watershed assessment. | |
| Biological Effectiveness Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for Fisheries Habitat Enhancement in CTUIR Subbasins (Stillwater Sciences 2011b)
Columbia Habitat Monitoring Program (CHaMP)(Bouwes et al. 2011)
Monitoring and methods tool to document and share protocols and methods, in coordination with Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership (PNAMP). More information can be found at http://www.monitoringmethods.org/
|
- . . E.0.d.1
Number of Cooperating Organizations 1
- . . E.0.d.2
| Name Of Cooperating Organizations. | |
| Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) |
- . . E.0.e.1
Number of reports prepared 0
- . . E.0.e.2
- . . E.1
MonitoringY (Y/N)
- . . . . E.1.a
Monitoring funding 73,400.00
- . . . . E.1.b.1
Stream Miles Monitored 19.00
- . . . . E.1.b.2
Acres of Watershed Area Monitored 37.9
- . . . . E.1.c.2
Salmonid smolt or fry monitoringY (Y/N)
- . . . . . . E.1.c.2.a
# miles (to nearest 0.01 mile) monitored for Salmonid smolt or fry 1.20
- . . . . E.1.c.3
Biological instream monitoring (other than salmon)Y (Y/N)
- . . . . . . E.1.c.3.a
# miles (to nearest 0.01 mile) monitored for Biological indicies (other than salmon) 1.20
- . . . . E.1.c.4
Redd countsY (Y/N)
- . . . . . . E.1.c.4.a
# miles (to nearest 0.01 mile) monitored for redds 19.00
- . . . . E.1.c.5
Carcass countsY (Y/N)
- . . . . . . E.1.c.5.a
# miles (to nearest 0.01 mile) monitored for Carcasses 19.00
- . . . . E.1.c.8
Water quality monitoringY (Y/N)
- . . . . . . E.1.c.8.a
# miles (to nearest 0.01 mile) of stream monitored for water quality 1.20
- . . . . E.1.c.13
Restoration effectiveness monitoringY (Y/N)
- . . . . . . E.1.c.13.a
# miles (to nearest 0.01 mile) of stream or streambank monitored 1.20
- . . . . . . E.1.c.13.c
# acres (to nearest 0.1 acre) monitored 37.9
- . . . . E.1.c.14
Restoration validation monitoringY (Y/N)
- . . . . . . E.1.c.14.a
# miles (to nearest 0.01 mile) stream or streambank monitored 1.20
- . . . . . . E.1.c.14.c
# acres (to nearest 0.1 acre) monitored 37.9
- . . . . E.1.d
| Name Of Comprehensive Monitoring Strategy/Program | |
| BPA, Action Effectiveness Monitoring program
CTUIR and ODFW. 1990. Umatilla Hatchery Master Plan.
CTUIR and ODFW. 2004. Umatilla Subbasin Plan,
CTUIR and ODFW. 2006. Comprehensive Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation Plan for the Umatilla sub-basin
|
- . . . . E.1.e
| Description of monitoring | |
| The CTUIR biomonitoring field surveys consists of juvenile and adult sampling.
Juveniles
Juvenile sampling will reflect the long-term viability of salmonid populations as measured by VSP parameters (McElhaney et al. 2000). Juvenile responses to be evaluated include:
• Abundance (fry/km2)
• Freshwater production (fry to smolt, seasonal survival)
• Distribution (change in density)
• Survival
• Growth and size
• Migratory timing
At most sites, the treatment and control reaches were sampled for juvenile fish twice per year in the early summer and fall (see Table 13, proposal). At some sites, the specific timing of early summer sampling were adjusted to avoid problems stemming from high turbidity and variable water levels. A third juvenile sampling event occurred in winter for the mainstem treatment sites (Westland Ramos site and Bird Track Springs/Gun Club). The focus for each site was on priority species (see Section 5); however, all species occurrences were also documented and analyzed if sample sizes were sufficiently large. The treatment and control sites were sampled at two randomly selected locations/site (20 times the average channel width) within the reach and documented by GPS coordinates.
Following protocols established by Terraqua Inc. (2009) sampling consisted of a three-pass, mark-recapture method with low-voltage electrofishing to herd fish into a seine or dip net. Block nets were placed at the upstream and downstream ends of the habitat units to prevent immigration and emigration of fish during the removal events. This approach was selected in an effort to increase capture efficiency, reduce bias commonly associated with one-pass snorkel or traditional electrofishing studies (Rosenberger and Dunham 2005) and reduce stress from traditional electrofishing practices. The protocol is provided in Appendix C.
Sampling occurred on three consecutive days wherein all juvenile fish captured were anesthetized with tricaine methanesulfonate (MS-222) or an equivalent anesthetic, identified to species, and their fork length (FL, to the nearest millimeter) and wet weight (to the nearest 0.01 gram) recorded. Prior to release, each fish was given a unique elastomer mark and PIT tag. For fish previously tagged, the occurrence was documented as a recapture. PIT tag procedures followed recent protocols developed by BPA’s ISEMP program for the Upper Columbia River Basin (Miller et al. 2008) which are consistent with PTAGIS protocols (CBFWA 1999). Sampling treatment and control reaches occurred on consecutive days to minimize the risk of sampling bias due to juvenile movement. Representative digital photos of each species were obtained. Twenty scale samples for each priority species were collected in each reach from a variety of length sizes. All necessary federal and state permits required for fish capture, handling, and tagging operations were obtained.
Following initial marking, recapture events will occurred in one or more methods: (1) repeat electrofish/seine or dip net surveys, (2) PIT tag antenna arrays (Steinke et al. 2011), or (3) smolt traps.
Adults
Adult abundance and distribution was estimated based on redd counts conducted in the treatment and control reaches. The entire length of the treatment and control reaches was assessed with live fish and carcasses documented to corroborate redd identification. Sampling occurred annually commencing at the onset of the spawning season and continue approximately every 10–14 days until spawning is complete. Spawn timing varies between subbasin but broadly occurs in the following months:
• Steelhead: February–mid June if high flows permit
• Bull trout: August–November
• Spring Chinook salmon: August–mid October
Redd Counts:
1. Indexed temporal abundance of spawners & spawning females
2. Determined spatial & temporal spawning distribution |
|
|
