Snahapish River Invasive Plant Control (Phase 3)
Salmonid Habitat Restoration and Acquisition
|
| 21-1117 R | | - | | 09/23/2021 | | 11/30/2024 | | 2021 | | Completed | | 05/12/2026 | | |
| |
Description
The Snahapish River Invasive Plant Control (IPC) Project Phase 3 was completed in fall of 2024 with another round of surveys and treatment from1/2 mile of the north of the Clearwater Mainline, to 14.5 miles downriver to the confluence with the Clearwater River. During this project period, the Snahapish River was surveyed and treated each year for invasive plants from the point of Redd Canary Grass (RCG) introduction in a forest road ditch above the Clearwater Mainline downstream 14 miles to the confluence with the Clearwater River. To address seed sources and pathways for invasions, river-adjacent roads were also surveyed and treated each year. In 2022 and 2023, this work was funded under the Pulling Together in Restoration (PTIR) program (WCRRI #20-1416 & #22-1313), and prior to the SRFB #21-1117 funding - in 2017, 2018 and 2021, under WCRRI PTIR Project #18-1217, #18-2136 & #20-1416.
The habitat types surveyed and treated in the river corridor were instream, gravel bars, vegetated islands, side channels, river banks, and riparian terraces within the Ordinary High Water Mark or where animal or human vectors had introduced non-native seeds. Additional components completed in this project included field data collection, GIS and data management, map creation, developing presentations, reporting, and the creation of a StoryMap outlining the process of addressing the RCG invasion in this very special watershed.
We received a year’s extension from 2023 to 2024 but were still unable to spend down the project funding within the allotted time period due to scheduling issues and lack of sufficient crew. Reed canarygrass poses a scheduling challenge on the Olympic coast where the intersection of spring rain and floods with stem growth and seed-head development often occur at the same time – and the species also ripens for treatment at the same time in most watersheds too – spreading the limited gndnumber of crew too thinly to cover all the rivers and sites needing attention. Lacking Washington Conservation Corps (WCC) crew availability in the middle of the west Olympic Coast due to lack of housing and travel time from Elwha (north central Clallam County) and Elma (south central Grays Harbor County) is part of the ongoing problem. 10KYI is the only entity working on RCG in the Clearwater watershed, and there isn’t enough housing to hire more staff, even if there were sufficient funding.
Project Benefit
Goal: To eliminate the presence, sources, and spread of reed canarygrass (RCG) and other invasive plant species that damage the riparian and aquatic habitats in the Snahapish Watershed. RCG control protects aquatic and riparian habitats and successional processes, as well as promoting prey production and cold oxygenated water. RCG control also protects the investments of other restoration projects and has cascading effects downstream in the Clearwater and Queets Rivers.
Accomplishments
| Instream Habitat |
| Stream Miles Treated |
10.80 |
14.00 |
| Riparian Habitat |
| Stream Miles Treated |
10.80 |
20.00 |
| Acres Treated |
1.2 |
1,100.0 |
Funding Details |
| PCSRF | $53,789 |
| In-Kind Other | $15,124 |
| Report Total: | $68,913 |
|
| |
Worksites
1-Snahapish River
- Worksite Identifier: 1-Snahapish River
- Start Date:
- End Date:
Area Description
No Area Description data was found for this worksite.
Location Information
- Basin: Washington Coastal (171001)
- Subbasin:
- Watershed:
- Subwatershed:
- State:
- Recovery Domain:
- Latitude: 47.73588219
- Longitude: -124.14776424
ESU
- Washington Coast Chinook Salmon ESU
- Olympic Peninsula Steelhead DPS
- Olympic Peninsula Coho Salmon ESU
Map
Photos
Metrics
Metrics
- C.0
Salmonid Habitat Restoration and AcquisitionY (Y/N)
- . . C.0.a
Habitat restoration and acquisition funding 68,913.23
- . . C.0.b
Length of stream treated/protected 10.80
- . . 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 39,441.75
- . . . . C.4.b
Total length of instream habitat treated 10.80
- . . . . C.4.g.1
Plant removal/controlY (Y/N)
- . . . . . . C.4.g.2
| Species of plants removed/controlled | |
| Phalaris arundinacea
Cirsium arvense
Gerarium robertianum
Cytisus scoparius
Rumex obtusifolius
|
- . . . . . . C.4.g.3
Miles of stream treated for plant removal/control 10.80
- . . . . . . C.4.g.4
Acres of streambed treated for plant removal/control 11.2
- . . C.5
Riparian Habitat ProjectY (Y/N)
- . . . . C.5.a
Riparian Habitat Funding 29,471.48
- . . . . C.5.b.1
Total riparian miles streambank treated 10.80
- . . . . C.5.b.2
Total Riparian Acres Treated 1.2
- . . . . C.5.h.1
Riparian plant removal/controlY (Y/N)
- . . . . . . C.5.h.2
| Species of plants treated/removed in riparian | |
| Phalaris arundinacea
Cirsium arvense
Gerarium robertianum
Cytisus scoparius
Rumex obtusifolius |
- . . . . . . C.5.h.3
Acres of riparian treated for plant removal/control 1.2
- . . . . . . C.5.h.4
Miles of streambank treated for riparian plant removal/control 10.80
|
|