Log Springs Meadow Restoration II

Salmonid Habitat Restoration and Acquisition

Instream Habitat Riparian Habitat
Project ID18-Warm-01
Recovery DomainsInterior Columbia
Start Date05/01/2020
End Date12/31/2022
Last Edited10/21/2021
1 - 1


This proposed project complements the Warm Springs Tribe (WST) PCSRF #16-Warm-03 Log Springs Meadow Restoration I project. With the 2018 PCSRF funds, the WST will use some of the funds towards construction costs that werent covered under the 2016 project to remove or contour berms in the scoured channels (1.4 miles of stream reconfigured) to allow for connectivity with historic channels (2 miles of side channels accessed). The majority of the PCSRF funds will be used for a large native vegetation riparian planting effort within the meadow system which will treat two miles of riparian streambank and treat 100 riparian acres.

Coyote Creek is tributary to lower Beaver Creek (a tributary of the Warm Springs River) and is a significant contributor of stream flow during runoff periods. There are no fish present within the project area, Log Springs Meadow. However, the current environmental conditions within the area have contributed to poor downstream spawning conditions in Beaver Creek for Middle Columbia River ESU spring Chinook salmon and summer steelhead through excessive amounts of fine sediments entering from the Coyote Creek subwatershed, specifically the Log Springs Meadow area. Increases in fine sediment lead to greater substrate embeddedness and a decrease in interstitial spaces in gravel substrate important for salmonid spawning. Successful salmonid egg incubation requires clean gravels with low fine sediment content. The primary purpose of the project is to reduce erosion and delivery of fine sediments to important spawning and rearing habitats downstream in Beaver Creek.

The project area consists of a large open meadow and young, even-aged ponderosa pine trees in the uplands. There are three existing berms within the meadow. Only the “upper berm” and “lower berm” will be removed/contoured as part of this project; work on the “east berm” will be undertaken in the future; all other project elements will occur throughout the entirety of the meadow. The berms were installed about 40 years ago to control flow and sedimentation downstream of Coyote Creek. The berms and associated structures are showing signs of massive flanking and downstream erosion. Stream channels downstream of the berms are overly deepened, widened and disconnected from the floodplain. Stream channels show evidence of livestock damage: destroyed or reduced vegetation and trampled banks. All contributing factors have had adverse effects on the surrounding ecosystem, which is capable of producing food plants important to the Native American culture, such as camas and Lomatium spp.

Primary Project Objectives:

• Retain water within the meadow in order to enhance growing conditions for riparian vegetation and prolong stream discharge

• Elevate the water surface in order to activate a larger area and expand the wet meadow

• Decrease entrained fine sediments within the water column in order to reduce downstream sedimentation within spawning locations

• Reduce stream power

• Minimize streambank erosion

• Increase riparian vegetation abundance

Project Elements:

1. Install beaver dam analogs and vegetated channel swales, locations for these will be determined by using topographic survey and LIDAR

2. Remove or contour berms

3. Grade the floodplain in specific locations as designed

4. Slope vertical streambanks in specific locations as designed

5. Partition stream flows into existing channel scrolls throughout the meadow

6. Fill entrenched channel segments to desired elevations

7. Plant and seed the project area with locally sourced native vegetation

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 3.40
Riparian Habitat
  Stream Miles Treated 2.00
  Acres Treated 100.0

Funding Details

Report Total:$1,286,500

Project Map


Log Springs Meadow    

  • Worksite Identifier: Log Springs Meadow
  • Start Date: 05/01/2020
  • End Date: 11/30/2020
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.4 Instream Habitat ProjectY (Y/N)
      •      . . . . C.4.a Instream Habitat Funding
      •      . . . . C.4.b Total length of instream habitat treated
      •      . . . . 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
        •      . . . . . . C.4.c.4 Miles of off-channel stream created through channel reconfiguration and connectivity
        •      . . . . . . 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.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
      •      . . C.5 Riparian Habitat ProjectY (Y/N)
        •      . . . . C.5.a Riparian Habitat Funding
        •      . . . . C.5.b.1 Total riparian miles streambank treated
        •      . . . . C.5.b.2 Total Riparian Acres Treated
        •      . . . . C.5.c.1 Riparian plantingY (Y/N)
          •      . . . . . . C.5.c.2
            Species of plants planted in riparian
          •      . . . . . . C.5.c.3 Acres planted in riparian