Show new navigation
On
Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
SOW Report
Contract 24727: 200301700 EXP WENATCHEE RM&E PILOT - UNIV OF ALASKA, FAIRBANKS
Project Number:
Title:
Integrated Status and Effectiveness Monitoring Program (ISEMP)
BPA PM:
Stage:
Complete
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Basinwide - 100.00%
Contract Number:
24727
Contract Title:
200301700 EXP WENATCHEE RM&E PILOT - UNIV OF ALASKA, FAIRBANKS
Contract Continuation:
Previous: Next:
n/a
Contract Status:
Closed
Contract Description:
The objectives of the project include:

Objective 1: Develop and test methods for monitoring subcatchment and stream condition of low-order drainages.  
Rationale: The productivity of a stream is a reflection of the health and condition of the watershed it drains.  By measuring detritus and invertebrate transport from headwaters (surrogates of headwater production) at a point along the length of a stream, we can assess the level of productivity, and therefore health and condition of a headwater subcatchment upstream of the sampling site.  We intend to test methods in the Wenatchee River Basin for monitoring headwater subcatchment condition that were developed by Wipfli and Gregovich (2002) for southeastern Alaska streams.  Data suggest this technique holds promise as a surrogate of headwater subcatchment productivity, can serve as a tool for assessing the cumulative impacts of multiple stressors in sub... catchments, and can be used as an indicator of watershed condition and health.

Objective 2: Determine the effects of land-use and vegetation cover on biological productivity of headwater subcatchments.
Rationale: Stream productivity and community structure are tightly linked to riparian zones and surrounding vegetation.  Land-use and watershed condition affect riparian forest conditions and functionality, which in turn affects the biological productivity of associated aquatic ecosystems.  We will show that we can use the methodologies developed under Objective 1 to directly monitor the effects of land-use and vegetation cover on the biological productivity of headwater subcatchments. If we are successful, this monitoring tool will provide a simple and relatively cost-effective technique for long-term monitoring of headwater subcatchments by management agencies.

Objective 3: Link land use, vegetation cover, and watershed condition of fishless subcatchments to fish communities in downstream habitats.
Rationale: Headwater channels can be important sources of nutrients and carbon for fish-bearing habitats in lower parts of drainages (Wipfli and Gregovich 2002).  Transport of food to fish-bearing food webs may therefore have profound effects on fish condition in lower reaches.  We propose to use fish diet, lipid and isotope levels as indicators of fish condition to demonstrate the ecological connectedness between upland fishless habitats and lower fish-bearing habitats (via the food that these subcatchments deliver to fish).  We also propose to use this approach to facilitate the connection between land-use and vegetation cover condition in headwater forests with watershed condition downstream, particularly for anadromous salmonids.

Background

Low-order streams (= 1st order; typically fishless streams) comprise more than 80% of drainage networks, yet very little is known about the role they play in affecting downstream habitats and communities (Benda and Dunne 1997, Gomi et al. 2002).  Wipfli and Gregovich (2002) found that small fishless streams can be important energy sources for downstream food webs in salmonid ecosystems in southeastern Alaska, transporting invertebrates and organic material produced in headwaters environments to habitats lower in the drainage that contain fish.  Further, vegetation cover apparently has a large impact on carbon (food) production in these small drainages, ultimately influencing the amount of prey and organic detritus that gets transported downstream to fish-bearing food webs (Piccolo and Wipfli 2002, Wipfli and Musslewhite 2004).
Understanding the ecological function of these headwater channels and associated subcatchments, and developing monitoring tools for assessing their condition is crucial for a broader understanding of basin-wide watershed condition, and for restoration effectiveness monitoring.  Wipfli and Gregovich (2002) developed a technique in southeastern Alaska that could prove very effective for assessing the biological condition of these small drainages, and therefore the cumulative effects of land use and watershed condition.  We intend to link watershed condition with stream productivity, food resources for fishes, and ultimately fish condition.  Our approach seeks to combine current approaches in aquatic ecology to determine the combined effect of land-use practices and climatic variation on productivity of resources relevant to the condition of fishes in the Interior Columbia River Basin (ICRB) at the whole-watershed scale.  Changes in the biomass and taxonomic composition of the standing crop of macroinvertebrate resources, the presence of headwater-derived resources in the diets of fish and differences in fish condition should demonstrate the contribution of headwater streams to fish assemblages.
This work represents an opportunity to test and develop a novel, innovative approach for watershed assessment by directly monitoring the productivity of food webs, and indirectly all the cumulative processes and factors (e.g., organic matter load and dynamics, inorganic sediment dynamics, flow regime, light, allochthonous inputs, , water temperature, land-use, etc.) that drive it.  It is important to emphasize that this work focuses on food web productivity of low order streams as a means for testing and developing a new tool for monitoring watershed condition and restoration effectiveness.  This approach is novel for three reasons: (i) food web monitoring gets right to the bottom line and integrates the stressors, processes, and conditions that ultimately drive these ecosystems; (ii) it directly links headwater condition and downstream fish condtion; (iii) these low order watersheds comprise over 80% of typical drainage networks, therefore in aggregation have great potential to influence salmonid habitats downstream; and (iv) monitoring in these low order watersheds has been historically ignored.  

Role of the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) Team:
Overview:  UAF is working cooperatively with scientists from the Wenatchee Aquatic and Land Interactions (WALI) team (contract #24725) to complete the goals stated above.  BPA initiated the research program "Integrated Status and Effectiveness Monitoring" in 2003 to assess the status of aquatic resources and fisheries in the Wenatchee sub-basin of the Upper Columbia River Watershed.  Amounts of organic, inorganic, and invertebrate subsidies derived from headwater streams could strongly affect downstream ecosystems in the Wenatchee sub-basin: The close collaboration between the UAF and WALI teams represents a unique opportunity to determine how these subsidies vary from the reach to landscape scale.

Dr. Mark Wipfli is a Co-Principal Investigator on the project and in conjunction with Dr. Chris Binckley (Post doctoral fellow - UAF) and Bruce Medhurst (MS student UAF), are leading the headwater monitoring portions of the study.  These include:  (1) Quantifying productivity of fishless headwater habitats across land-use and climatic gradients.  The methods developed by Wipfli and Gregovich (2002) in southeastern Alaska should be transferrable to the ICRB for assessing the biological condition of these headwater habitats.  Furthermore, these headwater energy and nutrient subsides could affect fish condition, thus (2) specific fish responses (e.g. lipid and isotope levels) resulting from headwater delivery will be quantified.
  
Account Type(s):
Expense
Contract Start Date:
10/01/2005
Contract End Date:
09/30/2006
Current Contract Value:
$110,911
Expenditures:
$110,911

* Expenditures data includes accruals and are based on data through 28-Feb-2025.

BPA CO:
Env. Compliance Lead:
Work Order Task(s):
Contract Type:
Contract (IGC)
Pricing Method:
Cost Reimbursement (CNF)
MarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarkerMarker
20 km
10 mi
Click the map to see this Contract's location details.

No photos have been uploaded yet for this Contract.

Full Name Organization Write Permission Contact Role Email Work Phone
Christopher (UAF) Binckley University of Alaska Fairbanks Yes Technical Contact ffcb@uaf.edu (509) 664-1729
Maren Boyack University of Alaska Fairbanks No Administrative Contact fnmow@uaf.edu (907) 474-6073
Wanda Fields University of Alaska Fairbanks No Administrative Contact fnwmf@uaf.edu (907) 474-7650
Maggie Griscavage University of Alaska Fairbanks No Administrative Contact maggie.griscavage@uaf.edu (907) 474-6446
Chris Jordan National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration No Interested Party chris.jordan@noaa.gov (541) 754-4629
Paul Krueger Bonneville Power Administration Yes F&W Approver pqkrueger@bpa.gov (503) 230-5723
Gerald McClintock Bonneville Power Administration Yes COR gmcclintock@bpa.gov (503) 230-5375
Khanida Mote Bonneville Power Administration Yes Contracting Officer kpmote@bpa.gov (503) 230-4599
Pamela Nelle Terraqua, Inc. No Interested Party pamela@terraqua.biz (509) 885-8143
Karl Polivka US Forest Service (USFS) Yes Technical Contact kpolivka@fs.fed.us (509) 664-1736
Kelly Seekatz University of Alaska Fairbanks No Administrative Contact fnkls@uaf.edu (907) 474-5324
Nancy Weintraub Bonneville Power Administration No Env. Compliance Lead nhweintraub@bpa.gov (503) 230-5373
Mark Wipfli University of Alaska Fairbanks No Contract Manager mark.wipfli@uaf.edu (907) 474-6654


Viewing 8 of 8 Work Statement Elements
Sort Order
WSEV ID
WE ID
Work Element Name
Title
Description
WSE Effective Budget
% of Total WSE Effective Budget
WSE Start
WSE End
A9013156Develop RM&E Methods and DesignsDevelopment of methods for monitoring low order drainagesDevelop and test methods for monitoring subcatchment and stream condition of low-order drainages. Headwater stream sampling We will continue to sample our 60 stream sites located within the Wenatchee subbasin starting in October 2006. Half (30) of these streams are located in Ecological Sub-Region (ESR) 4 (wet ecoregion) with the other 30 in ESR 11 (dry ecoregion). In both ecoregions, 15 low (little past logging and presence of roads) and high impact (recent logging and roads) sites have been chosen. Of the ESR 11 sites, 10 occur in the Mission Creek and 20 occur in the Peshastin Creek drainages. In ESR4, six occur in the Icicle, nine in Nason Creek, 10 in Little Wenatchee, and five in the White River drainages. Invertebrates (aquatic and terrestrial) and organic detritus (i.e., particulate organic matter =250-µm) will be collected with a 250-µm net attached to one end of a 75-cm long, 10-cm diameter plastic pipe frame, which will rest on the stream bottom. One frame per stream with attached net will be secured with sandbags in the middle of each stream. Because the sampler will be placed on the stream bottom, seston will be captured (suspended particulate organic matter) as well as bedload particulate organic matter, which will be collectively labeled detritus, and macroinvertebrates in the drift as well as those moving downstream along the streambed. Facilitated by high stream gradient, the downstream end of each horizontal pipe will rest above the stream surface; discharge through the sampler will be determined by recording the time taken to fill a container of known volume. Discharge will be measured during each sampling period, a mean calculated, and this value used to determine the density of invertebrates (individuals m-3) and detritus (= 250-µm diameter, g m-3). Most of the streams are expected to be sufficiently small to allow for the entire stream flow to pass through the pipes. If not, the percentage relative to the total stream flow will be estimated. This fraction will be used to extrapolate the transport measured through the net for the whole stream. Replicates will be streams within each land-use and ecoregion (n = 15). Streams will be sampled continuously for invertebrates and detritus over a 24-h period once every two months, October through August, for all sites. Invertebrates will be sorted from detritus after being placed in 70% EtOH in the field. They will be identified to the lowest reliable taxon, their body lengths measured, and dry mass determined using taxon-specific length-mass regression equations (Rogers et al. 1977; Smock 1980; Meyer 1989; Sample et al. 1993; Burgherr and Meyer 1997). Invertebrates will be categorized as either aquatic or terrestrial if they were a product of aquatic or terrestrial secondary production, respectively (Wipfli 1997). The remainder of the sample (detritus component) will be oven-dried, weighed, ashed (at 500º C for 5 h), and reweighed to determine ash-free dry mass (AFDM). Additionally, we will measure several other physical and biological variables in the streams to link the productivity measures with causal factors in the subcatchments, including periphyton development on rock surfaces, and stream temperature, pH, and conductivity at all sites.$80,00063.24%10/01/200510/06/2006
B9014157Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab DataSampling in fish-bearing habitatSampling in Fish-Bearing Habitat Fish sampling will start in May 2006 corresponding to increased water temperatures and fish activity, and continue thoughout the summer (water levels permitting). Fish will be captured with baited Gee minnow traps, electrofishing when necessary, and by seining in pools within 50-m downstream of the zone of contact between the fishless and fish-bearing habitats (headwater ‘treatment'), and in pools within 50-m upstream of this zone (control), for determining fish responses (including diet) resulting from prey delivery from the headwater tributaries. Because we will likely encounter ESA-listed anadromous salmonids, we will use the most passive methods possible to estimate fish population size after obtaining the necessary permissions. Removal methods using minnow traps are much less harmful than electrofishing and impart less mechanical stress to fish than seining. With a careful sampling protocol, removal sampling with minnow traps can estimate fish density in a short (~ 1 d) time period (Bryant 2000). All captured fish will be placed in buckets of fresh stream water and monitored constantly until being returned alive to the stream. In order to link the relative contribution of invertebrate-based food webs found in the headwater streams and that of the fish-bearing streams to the condition of relevant fish populations, we must use some direct measures of fish responses to differences in food availability. Analysis of fish diet, condition and behavior will enable us to establish how strongly connected the energetic inputs of headwater streams are to the persistence of resident and anadromous species. During regular sampling of fish at our study sites we will anesthetize individuals of all species with MS-222® and use gastric lavage techniques (Meehan and Miller 1978) to obtain a sample of consumed prey. Although somewhat invasive, Meehan and Miller (1978) obtained high survival rates and pilot studies on hatchery-derived juvenile coho salmon (O. kisutch) in our study system resulted in full recovery with no immediate mortality (Polivka unpubl. data). Following sample collection and preservation, gut contents will be analyzed in the laboratory to determine whether the assemblage of taxa consumed by fish can be linked to either headwater or mainstem production. Finally, we will sacrifice a maximum of 5-10 individuals of each species not listed under the ESA as permitting stipulations and local densities allow at each site for whole-body lipid and isotope analysis, a reliable indicator of fish condition (Simpkins et al. 2003).$40,00031.62%10/01/200509/30/2006
C9015162Analyze/Interpret DataStatistical analysis of all data collectedData analysis will begin in FY 06 after the first year (Sep 2004 - to Sep 2005) of sampling. Final analysis and interpretation will occur after the Aug 2006 sampling. Statistical Procedures A two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) (SAS 1990) will be used to test for significant effects of land-use and ecoregion, and for land-use × ecoregion interaction (a = 0.05). Fifteen replicates of both land-use types and ecoregions will be selected for study (2 land-use × 2 ecoregions × 15 reps = 60 total study sites). This number of replicates appears to be adequate for measuring land-use and veg. cover effects on headwater subcatchments (Piccolo and Wipfli 2002). Multiple regression will also be used and compared to test effects of riparian and upslope vegetation type and PAR on dependent responses to see if there are additional factors responsible for variance among means. Response variables (dependent variables) will be nutrient concentrations, total invertebrate count density (number of macroinvertebrates/m-3 water), total biomass density (mg dry mass of macroinvertebrates /m-3 water), macroinvertebrate species richness and diversity, functional feeding group composition, detritus density (mg AFDM/m-3 water), PAR and periphyton AFDM, and fish lipid levels. All response variables will be logarithmic transformed (ln (x + 0.1)) to meet ANOVA assumptions of normally distributed residuals and equal variances among groups if needed. We will further compare invertebrate community similarity among headwater streams, among ecoregion and land-use category, and between headwater streams and fish-bearing regions using multivariate ordination methods.$4,0003.16%01/01/200609/30/2006
D9016141Produce Other ReportsSubmit quarterly reports to NOAAPrepare and submit status report to NOAA covering the previous 3 months efforts, that identifies proposed actions, accomplishments, and lessons learned.$5000.40%01/01/200609/30/2006
E9018119Manage and Administer ProjectsOverall Project ManagementManage on-the-ground efforts. Also covers administrative work in support of on-the-ground efforts and in support of BPA's programmatic requirements such as metric reporting, financial reporting (e.g., accruals), and development of an SOW package (includes draft SOW, budget, spending plan, and property inventory).$1,5001.19%12/31/200509/30/2006
F9017132Produce Progress (Annual) ReportSubmit annual report to NOAAProduce a report covering the previous 12 months efforts. Identifying proposed actions, accomplishments, and lessons learned. Additionally, for the previous 3 months, a similar format will be expected. The fourth 3-month report will be replaced by the Annual Report.$5000.40%10/01/200512/01/2005
G9019165Produce Environmental Compliance DocumentationPrepare documentation for the FY07 contractBecause of the nature of this work, permits are required. In the event additional / supplemental permitting is required beyond those already received, prepare necessary documentation for BPA's preparation of a compliance document. Environmental compliance shall be in the possession of UAF/USFS prior to the commencement of any work that may involve ESA-listed species.$00.00%07/01/200609/30/2006
H9012185Produce CBFish Status ReportQuarterly milestone status reports online via Pisces (G/Y/R) $00.00%01/01/200609/30/2006
      
$126,500
   

Deliverable Title WSE Sort Letter, Number, Title Start End Concluded
Produce draft watershed scale monitoring protocols for the Wenatchee subbasin A: 156. Development of methods for monitoring low order drainages 09/30/2006 09/29/2006
Table of Lipid/Isotope Data B: 157. Sampling in fish-bearing habitat 09/30/2006 09/29/2006
Draft of publications to be submitted to Peer review C: 162. Statistical analysis of all data collected 09/30/2006 09/15/2006
Quarterly report - Developing monitoring protocols for headwater streams in the Wenatchee Basin D: 141. Submit quarterly reports to NOAA 09/30/2006 08/28/2006
All BPA Contract Documents E: 119. Overall Project Management 09/30/2006 09/30/2006
Final Approved Annual Report submitted to NOAA and a copy sent to BPA COTR F: 132. Submit annual report to NOAA 11/30/2005 10/01/2005

Viewing of Implementation Metrics
Loading...
Sort Order
WE ID
Work Element Name
Title
Description
Metric ID
Metric
End Fiscal Year
Planned
Actual
Contractor Comments
All Measures
Annual Progress Report Measures
Populations
Viewing of Environmental Metrics Customize
Loading...
WSE ID
WSE Start
WSE End
WE ID
Title
WSE Progress
Study Plan
Protocol
Category
Subcategory
Focus 1
Focus 2
Specific Metric Title

Primary Focal Species Work Statement Elements
Cutthroat Trout, Westslope (O. c. lewisi)
  • 1 instance of WE 157 Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data
  • 1 instance of WE 162 Analyze/Interpret Data
Trout, Rainbow (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
  • 1 instance of WE 157 Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab Data
  • 1 instance of WE 162 Analyze/Interpret Data

Sort WE ID WE Title NEPA NOAA USFWS NHPA Has Provisions Inadvertent Discovery Completed
A 156 Development of methods for monitoring low order drainages
B 157 Sampling in fish-bearing habitat
C 162 Statistical analysis of all data collected
D 141 Submit quarterly reports to NOAA
E 119 Overall Project Management
F 132 Submit annual report to NOAA
G 165 Prepare documentation for the FY07 contract
H 185 Quarterly milestone status reports online via Pisces (G/Y/R)