Monitoring Program - Home Page | California State Status and trends monitoring program ... rip rap, beaver dams, bridge abutment ... • Wetted width • Bankfull width

CHaMPApplying Twenty-First Century Technology to Solve

Fish Management Questions at Multiple Scales

Columbia HabitatMonitoring Program

Presenter: Steve Fortney

Collaborators: Chris Beasley, Boyd Bouwes, Nick Bouwes, Andrew Hill, Chris Jordan, Mike Ward, Joe Wheaton, Carol Volk, Sarah Walker

Funders and More Collaborators

CHaMP Overview

• Status and trends monitoring program • Purpose: answer management questions

concerning the ESA-listed salmon populations of the 2008 Biological Opinion (NMFS 2008).

• Specific management questions:o Limiting factorso Relationship between habitat actions and fisho Effectiveness of actions on fish populations

Geographic Area

0 500 1,000250 Kilometers

Methow

Entiat

Wenatchee

Lemhi

Yankee Fork

South Fork Salmon

Upper Grande Ronde

John Day

Minam

Tucannon Asotin

Big, Navarro

Battle Creek

IMW

CHaMP watershed

Sampling Design

PanelYear

1Year

2Year

3Year

4Year

5Year

6Year

7Year

8Year

92011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Annual PanelRotating Panel 1Rotating Panel 2Rotating Panel 3

• 25 sites per watershed per year • Total of 45 sites

• Stratified• Spatially Balanced• Flexible• Weighted

GRTS (Generalized Random Tessellation Stratified)

Sample allocation –Rotating panel

Sampling Design: Upper Columbia

0 100 20050 Kilometers

N=53

0 10 205 Kilometers

N=106

0 10 205 Kilometers

Legend!( Annual

!( RP 1

!( RP 2

!( RP 3

Status and Trends Status and Trends +

Effectiveness

Multiscalar Samplng Design

Spat

ial s

cale

Geomorphic Reach Type

Valley Segment

River Reach

TOP DOWN CONTROLSRegional SettingControls on river character and behavior

Watershed

BOTTOM UP CONTROLS

Geomorphic and Hydraulic UnitsFloodplain features and in-channel units

Different Scales For Different Needs4

Watershed / population

Microhabitat (HSI)

Habitat metric e.g., pool frequency

BASIN

Network-Scale Habitat Condition

AREMP

ODFWPIBO

EMAP R1/R4

AEM

Protocol Development

CHaMPCHaMPCHaMP

Topographic Survey

River Bathymetry Toolkit (RBT)

Raw DEM Detrended DEM

Elev

atio

n (m

)

Distance (m)

Elev

atio

n (m

)

Distance (m)

Left edge of water

Right edge of water

Detrended Digital Elevation Model

Thalweg

Thalweg

Left edge of water

Right edge of water

Wetted Centerline

Wetted Centerline

Left edge of water

Right edge of water

Cross SectionsCross Sections

Wetted CenterlineWetted Cross Sections

Left edge of water

Right edge of water

RBT Stage SliderCrews find the best fit for the water extent and bankfull by interactively varying the waterstage depth in the detrended DEM. Any stage can be modeled, not just the observed stage.

© Wheaton (2008)

Geomorphic Change Detection

Geomorphic Change Results

(m)

(m3 )

Shear Zones

Habitat Suitability Model

HSI

Habitat Suitability Curves

Source: http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2004/5173/data/habitat_curves/EA Engineering, Science and Technology Inc., 1991 a, 1991b; Rubin et al.,1991; R2 Resource Consultants, 2004

Maret TR, Hortness JE, and Ott DS. 2006. Instream flow characterization of upper Salmon River Basin streams, central Idaho, 2005: US Geological survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5230, 110 p

Chinook Spawners

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

1

0 2 4 6 8Velocity (fps)

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

1

0 5 10Depth (ft)

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

1

codes below)1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Substrate

Habitat Suitability Model

HSI

2 m

0 40 8020 Meters

Legend1.9.8.7.6.5.4.3.2.10

.2 m

ENT00001-2C1

WUA= ∑퐻푆퐼 × 푎푟푒푎

Capacity = WUA / territory size (4* redd area)

Spatially Explicit Habitat Suitability

Habitat Measurements Carrying Capacity

Bed Roughness

Hydraulic Model & Drift Transport

Net Rate Energy Intake

Carrying Capacity

Topography (DEM)

Total Station

CHaMP Topo Toolbar

ArcGIS

Website Upload

RBT

Auxiliary Data Workflow

Data BrokerData Logger Upload to website

Topographic Data Workflow

Data Management

champmonitoring.org

Automatically Generated Metrics

RBT-generated metrics

Geomorphic Change

Detection Outputs

Habitat Suitability Models

2D-Hydraulic

ModelOutputs

Geomorphic Unit Tool

(GUT)

On champmonitoring.org Desktop-only

Metric Assessment• variance decomposition is conducted

annually to assess metric capability

• Other CHaMP metric assessment tools: o 10% repeat surveyso Crew variability study to quantify biaso Comparison of metrics shared with those

of other regional monitoring programs

Watershed Level

Sub-Watershed

Unmeasured Reaches in

CHaMP Watersheds

Empirical Model(s)

Design-Based Estimation

Non-CHaMP Watersheds

Imputation

Landscape Attributes

From Sites to Populations

CHaMP Metrics

Spatially Continuous Estimates

Upscaling

0 10 205 Kilometers

Bedrock Controlled Discontinuous Floodplain

Fan/Terrace Controlled Discontinuous Floodplain

Low Sinuosity Planform Controlled Anabranching

Low To Moderate Sinuosity Planform Controlled Discontinuous Floodplain

Meandering Planform Controlled Discontinuous Floodplain

Alluvial Fan

Intact Valley Fill

Moderate To High Sinuosity Gravel/Sand Bed

Bedrock Canyon

Confined Valley Boulder Bed

Confined Valley Coarse Plane Bed

Confined Valley Step Cascade

Confined Valley With Floodplain Pockets

Steep Alpine Headwaters

Steep Ephemeral Hillslope

Steep Perennial Headwaters

Partly Confined Valley

Confined

Laterally Unconfined

"

Geomorphic Reach Types

Valley Confinement

(2L + 2R)/2*stream Length

Confined Partly Confined Laterally Unconfined

Capacity for Adjustment

O’Brien, 2014

Confined Valley Setting Laterally Unconfined Valley Setting

Stream Temperature Modeling

July 26, 2001

Proposed Terrain

Hypothesis Testing – Data Driven Project Design

Existing Terrain

PredictedErosion

WoodStructures

PredictedDeposition

Flow

Post-Treatment

Project Design – NREI Modeling

WoodStructures

0 5 10meters

Flow

Pre-LWD Treatment

Jody White, Quantitative Consultants, Inc. Acknowledgements ContributorsPhilip Bailey, North Arrow Research Sara Bangen, Utah State University Chris Beasley, Quantitative Consultants, Inc. Boyd Bouwes, Watershed Solutions, Inc. Nicolaas Bouwes, Eco Logical Research, Inc. Stephen Fortney, Terraqua, Inc. Jeremiah Heitke, Blue Heron Consulting Andrew Hill, Eco Logical Research, Inc. Chris Horn, Oregon Department of Fish and WildlifeMartha Jensen, Utah State University Chris E. Jordan, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, NOAA-FisheriesCasey Justice, Columbia InterTribal Fish CommissionDavid P. Larsen, Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission Kristina McNyset, NOAA-FisheriesMatt Nahorniak, South Fork Research, Inc.

Pamela Nelle, Terraqua, Inc. Gary O’Brian, Utah State University Shubha Pandit, Terraqua Inc. Carl Saunders, Utah State University Edwin R. Sedell, Oregon Department of Fish and WildlifeKevin E. See, Quantitative Consultants, Inc. Keith van den Broek, Terraqua, Inc. Carol Volk, South Fork Research, Inc. Eric Wall, Utah State University Michael B. Ward, Terraqua, Inc.Nicholas Weber, Eco Logical Research, Inc. Seth White, Columbia InterTribal Fish CommissionJoe Wheaton, Utah State University

Thank you!

Questions?

Backup slides

Classification Tree (Partly Confined)

Planform

Instreamgeomorphicunits *

Bed materialTexture

River style

Out-of-channelgeomorphicunits

Presence/extent offloodplain

Structuralelements *

CS & BA woody

wood structures, riprap, beaver dams,bridge abutment

medium-highsinuosity

meandering

cobble, gravelsand, silt, clay

pool, riffle, run,bar(structurally-forced,

BA, MC), cutbank

cobble,gravel, sand

CS & BA woody

wood structure, riprap, beaver dam,bridge abutment

pool, riffle, run,bars(structurally-forced,BA, MC), cutbank

Low-moderatesinuosity

meandering

run, rapid, pool, riffle,bar (structural-

ly-forced, BA, MC),cutbank

CS & BA woodydebris,

beaver dam,colluvium

boulder, cobble,gravel, sand

low sinuosity

run, rapid, pool, riffle,point bar,cutbanks

cobble, gravelsand, boulder

instream wood, talusboulder

low-moderatesinuosity

run, rapid, pool, riffle,point bar, cutbank

CS & BA woodydebris, talus, rip-rap,

bridge abutments

low-moderatesinuosity

cobble, gravelsand, boulder

terrace, fan, hillslope,bedrock, levee,paleochannel

fan, terrace, hillslope,levee, paleochannel

terrace, fan,paleochannel, island

terrace, fan, bench,island,

paleochannel,cutoff

terrace, fan,cutoff, island,paleochannel,

anabranch, bench,crevasse splay, oxbow

LOW-MODERATESINUOSITYPLANFORM

CONTROLLEDDISCONTINUOUS

FLOODPLAIN

LOW SINUOSITYPLANFORM

CONTROLLEDANABRANCHING

FAN/TERRACECONTROLLED

DISCONTINUOUSFLOODPLAIN

BEDROCKCONTROLLED

DISCONTINUOUSFLOODPLAIN

MEANDERINGPLANFORM

CONTROLLEDDISCONTINUOUS

FLOODPLAIN

Partly Confined Valley

planform-controlled bedrock-controlled

(Stage 1)

• Site Length (centerline)• Site Length (Thalweg)• Sinuosity• Wetted width• Bankfull width• Bankfull Channel Capacity• Area Sum• RP100• Pool tail crest depth

average• Pool max depth average• Average Bankfull elevation• Average channel capacity• Average cross section area• Average rectangular cross

section area• Site topographic gradient• Site water surface gradient• Site area wetted• Site area bankfull• Wetted volume• Bankfull volume• Detrended DEM standard

deviation• Water depth standard

deviation

• For Each Channel Unit• Area• Volume• Count• Frequency• Spacing• Percent of site• Average Max Depth• Average Depth at

Thalweg Exit• Average Residual Depth

• For Each Tier 1 and Tier 2 Channel Unit Type

• Area• Volume• Count• Frequency• Spacing• Percent of site• Average Max Depth• Average Depth at

Thalweg Exit• Average Residual Depth

• Raw area of erosion• Thresholded area of erosion• Percent of area of interest

with detectable change• Total net volume of difference• Total net volume of difference

+/- error• Average net thickness of

difference• Average net thickeness of

difference +/- error• Average net thickness of

difference with detectable change

• Average net thickness of difference with detectable change +/- error

RBT metricsGCD metrics

Net Rate of Energy Intake Model

Foraging and Swim Costs

Inputs

NREI calculation

Hughes and Dill (1990)

Hydraulics Drift Temperature Fish Information

GREI – SC = NREI

GrowthGrowth

FoodFood

TemperatureTemperature

ActivityActivity

ProductionProduction

FitnessFitness

GrowthGrowth

SurvivalSurvival

Reproduction Reproduction

Populations(abundance) Populations(abundance)

Reaction distance (RD)

RD

Encounter rate: drift density (f(water velocity, invertebrate abundance) ) foraging volume (f(reaction distance, water velocity, …) )