Log Springs Meadow Restoration

Salmonid Habitat Restoration and Acquisition

Instream Habitat
Project ID16-Warm-03
Recovery DomainsInterior Columbia
Start Date10/15/2017
End Date11/30/2021
Last Edited10/21/2021
1 - 1


The CTWSRO has planned an interdisciplinary project to address many of the natural resource concerns in the Coyote Creek watershed on the Warm Springs Indian Reservation. The Fish Habitat Program will be responsible for the restoration and long term protection of the core features of the wet meadow system, commonly known as Log Springs, located in the upper watershed of Coyote Creek. Riparian protection fencing has been constructed under a separate project and funding source. PCSRF funds will be used for meadow restoration. The primary project purpose is to reduce erosion and delivery of fine sediments to important downstream spawning and rearing habitats.

Below are the project elements that he PCSRF will fund, along with BPA funds:

1. Install beaver dam analogs and vegetated channel swales/check structures throughout (water retention structures) to force water onto floodplain, retain, store and infiltrate runoff, and reduce stream power. Additional hydraulic modeling is ongoing and will identify the quantity and exact location of each structure. Beaver dam analogs are meant to act as “live structures” with plantings and cuttings that increase structure’s stability and roughness over time; thus they are more appropriate for locations that will experience enough flow to water vegetation. Check structures and swales will be constructed of earth and will be placed in channels likely to experience infrequent or minimal flow, or very high flows that would blow out an analog.

2. Remove or contour berms – reduce stream energy in existing scoured channels by removing or contouring berms, thus allowing for connectivity with historic channels. Additional hydraulic modeling is ongoing and will determine the amount of removal and contouring that is necessary to attain project objectives. Removal and contouring, in conjunction with structure placements, will be designed to preserve a certain amount of inundation above the existing berm locations.

3. Slope vertical streambanks and grade selected areas of the floodplain – reduce local streambank erosion, provide planting surfaces and native vegetation recruitment by sloping vertical streambanks. Additionally, bank sloping will reduce erosion and subsequent downstream sedimentation. Both sloping and floodplain grading will allow for additional water storage capacity leading to meadow expansion.

4. Partition stream flows – force flow into relic channels and swales through the installation of water retention structures. The flow capacity of each channel/swale and the extent of partitioning will be determined with ongoing modeling and subsequent project designs.

5. Fill entrenched channel segments – in order to attain project objectives, segments of existing stream channels will be filled. Material for the filling of channels will be acquired from berm removals. Not all entrenched channels can, or should, be filled. The appropriate locations and channel fill elevations will be based on modeling, LIDAR and topographical surveys.

6. Channel alignments and sinuosity will be evaluated during the design process. If improved alignments and increased sinuosity are needed to reduce erosion and support revegetation then these elements will be enter consideration.

Worksite #1: Propose to remove or contour sections of constructed berms as designed, and perform floodplain grading, streambank shaping, and channel filling. Water retention and sediment settling structures will be installed.

Project Benefit    

About 25% of the total amount of spring Chinook spawning and 20% of summer steelhead spawning occurs in Beaver Creek downstream of the confluence with Coyote Creek (project area, Log Springs, is in the upper watershed). A significant amount of fine sediment enters Beaver Creek during runoff from Coyote Creek. It is believed that the majority of the sediment is being produced within the project area and above. Thus, the primary expected benefit to target salmonid species in an overall reduction of streambed sedimentation downstream of the confluence, ultimately increasing emergence success and egg to fry survival of target salmonids.


Metric Completed Originally
Instream Habitat
  Stream Miles Treated 1.40 3.40

Funding Details

Report Total:$337,756

Project Map


Log Springs Meadow    

  • Worksite Identifier: Log Springs Meadow
  • Start Date: 09/01/2017
  • End Date: 10/15/2017
Area Description

No Area Description data was found for this worksite.

Location Information

  • Basin: Deschutes
  • Subbasin:
  • Watershed:
  • Subwatershed:
  • State: Oregon
  • Recovery Domain: Interior Columbia
  • Latitude: 45.029
  • Longitude: -121.4152


  • Mid-Columbia River Spring-run Chinook Salmon ESU
  • Middle Columbia River Steelhead DPS




  • C.0 Salmonid Habitat Restoration and AcquisitionY (Y/N)
    •      . . C.0.a Habitat restoration and acquisition funding .00
    •      . . C.0.b Length of stream treated/protected
    •      . . C.0.c
      Project identified in a Plan or Watershed Assessment
    •      . . C.0.d.1 Project Monitoring (LOV)
    •      . . C.0.d.2 Monitoring Location (LOV)
    •      . . C.4 Instream Habitat ProjectY (Y/N)
      •      . . . . C.4.a Instream Habitat Funding
      •      . . . . C.4.b Total length of instream habitat treated 1.40
      •      . . . . C.4.c.1 Channel reconfiguration and connectivityY (Y/N)
        •      . . . . . . C.4.c.2 Type of change to channel configuration and connectivity (LOV)
        •      . . . . . . C.4.c.3 Miles of stream treated for channel reconfiguration and connectivity .00
        •      . . . . . . C.4.c.4 Miles of off-channel stream created through channel reconfiguration and connectivity .00
        •      . . . . . . C.4.c.5 Acres of off-channel or floodplain connected through channel reconfiguration and connectivity
        •      . . . . . . C.4.c.6 Instream pools created/added through channel reconfiguration and connectivity
      •      . . . . C.4.d.1 Channel structure placementY (Y/N)
        •      . . . . . . C.4.d.2 Material used for channel structure (LOV)
        •      . . . . . . C.4.d.3 Miles of stream treated through channel structure placement
        •      . . . . . . C.4.d.4 Acres of streambed treated through channel structure placement
        •      . . . . . . C.4.d.5 Pools expected to be created through channel structure placement
        •      . . . . . . C.4.d.6 Yards of average stream-width at mid-point of channel structure placement project (Yards)
        •      . . . . . . C.4.d.7 Number of structures placed in channel
      •      . . . . C.4.e.1 Streambank stabilization Y (Y/N)
        •      . . . . . . C.4.e.2 Material Used For Streambank Stabilization (LOV)
        •      . . . . . . C.4.e.3 Miles of streambank stabilized