The project began in 2003 as the Wallowa County Culvert Inventory ($175,517). From 2003-2006 the project’s objective was to inventory, assess and prioritize fish passage in Wallowa County, OR. During the 2007 NPCC Provincial Review solicitation, the NPT submitted four detailed habitat restoration projects for the Wallowa River, Lostine River, Joseph Creek and the Imnaha River in NE Oregon. Due to a constrained provincial budget, the NPT worked with the NPCC and other agencies and agreed on utilizing the GRMW project as the umbrella for BPA funded habitat restoration projects in NE Oregon. As a result, the NPT restructured the proposals into one and limited the budget to staffing, with the primary task of the project leader being to secure funding for implementation from the GRMW and other watershed funding entities. This approach was also employed with the ODFW and CTUIR projects in NE Oregon and currently, with the SRSRB and the WDFW, CTUIR, and Conservation Districts in SE Washington. Since 2007, the project has been called the Protect and Restore Northeast Oregon project.
The NPT DFRM – Watershed Division Protect and Restore Northeast Oregon/Southeast Washington project, with its partners, has accomplished several projects since 2003. They include: replace/remove 2 culverts; reconstruction of 2 irrigation diversions; decommission 10 miles of road (including all associated revegetation); construct fence around 15 acres of aspen; construct 0.5 miles of fence around a wetland meadow; plant approximately 70 miles of riparian area; participation in the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation Project; and complete numerous surveys for future implementation planning. The project also conducted implementation and compliance monitoring on all projects listed above, as well as participating in education and outreach activities.
The project focuses on correcting anthropogenic disruptions to the ecological processes involved in shaping habitat, such that the river-floodplain ecosystem progresses along a recovery trajectory. Examples of processes the project is attempting to restore include sediment transport and budget, storage and routing of water, plant growth and successional processes, input of nutrients and thermal energy, and nutrient cycling in the aquatic food web; all of which will be discussed in more detail within the following sections.
An “important activity” was interpreted to be a deliverable, or a specific type of work that will be completed to address each of the stated objectives. Each deliverable will potentially require the completion of several Pisces work elements. These work elements are discussed in more detail in the Problem Statement/Technical Background Section in general terms. For specific information, such as metrics associated with each specific work element, please refer to Pisces or the appropriate annual report.
The project’s objectives have remained consistent throughout its history. Nomenclature and the methods to implement may have changed over time, but the primary objectives have always been, and remain, the same. Again, this relates to restoring ecological function, rather than focusing on a single discreet project. Changes in methodology will be addressed in the Adaptive Management Section. The accomplishments are organized under headings consistent with the project objectives described in this proposal.
2012 FCRPS Biological Opinion Expert Panel Process
One of the most significant, recent efforts undertaken by the project was to redefine the AU’s, as part of the 2012 FCRPS Biological Opinion Expert Panel process. The Expert Panel was charged with reviewing the previously delineated AU boundaries to determine if they were still valid. In completing this exercise, it was deemed appropriate by all partners to change the boundaries to more clearly reflect the limiting factors, management, disturbance, road densities, fish species distribution and ownership patterns of each AU.
In addition to changing assessment unit boundaries, limiting factors were updated during the 2012 FCPRS BiOp Expert Panel process using NOAA’s newly developed standardized terminology for the analysis area. The expert panel included staff from the NPT DFRM Watershed Division, US Forest Service, Grande Ronde Model Watershed Program, and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Snake River Salmon Recovry Board in Washington. The expert panel used the best data and assessments available, along with the professional opinion when data was not available.
As shown in the Significant to Regional Programs and Technical sections, a substantial quantity of fisheries data has been collected in, and assessments developed for, the area streams. As these data were collected by other agencies for supplementation monitoring, fisheries abundance monitoring, USFS Forest Plans and EA/EIS and TMDL development, they provide useful baseline information but are not response signals to discrete restoration activities. As such, it is not suitable for evaluating efficacy of ongoing implementation actions, and is therefore not displayed herein. Future implementation, compliance and action effectiveness monitoring will be addressed through the programmatic monitoring plan currently under development by the NPT Watershed Division and the programmatic action effectiveness monitoring program currently under development by BPA. Additionally, the CHaMP surveys to be conducted in the Imnaha Subbasin beginning in 2014 will be used to address the relative lack of status and trend data available for the project area.
There are a variety of projects that have been, and will be, developed under this project. For example, NPT has most recently become more active in southeast Washington working in partnership on culvert replacements, large wood placement, and road decommissioning projects. In northeast Oregon the project has worked on barrier replacement/removal, planting, fencing, off-site water developments, road decommissioning, road improvement, watershed education, and the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation projects. A subset of these projects will be discussed in more detail in the following subsections.
Barrier Removal
This is primarily accomplished by replacing or removing culverts that are currently impassible to the juvenile and/or adult life stage for Chinook or steelhead. The goal of this project from 2014-2018 will be to replace as many of the remaining high priority barriers as possible. (defined by recovery documents and barrier surveys (Christian 2007).
Barrier Removal: Physical and Biological Monitoring
A subsample of barrier removal projects are monitored for physical and (some) biological response. One longitudinal profile (Figure 1), three Wolman Pebble Counts (Figure 2 and 3) and three cross section surveys are conducted for every barrier monitored. Longitudinal profiles monitor changes in gradient, pool frequency and aggregation/degradation that may result from a barrier removal while cross sections are evaluated to detect shifts in width-depth ratios, channel geometry and particle sorting. A more complete explanation of the monitoring approach that will be implemented in the future is provided within the Problem Statement/Technical Background section.
Figure 1. Post-implementation longitudinal profiles for Mahogany Creek (2006 and 2007).
An example of the results of the Wolman pebble counts are displayed in Figures 2 and 3. Pebble counts were conducted at each cross section. Figure 2 represents a comparison of the particle sizes at XS1 for pre-, post- and one year post-implementation. Figure 3 represents a comparison of particle sizes for post- and one year post-implementation for XS2. A Woman pebble count was not measured for XS2 in 2004. These figures allow for a comparison of the substrate particle sizes across time both inside and outside the construction zone. The hypothesis is that there will not be a biologically significant[1] difference in particle size distribution at each cross-section at the end of the monitoring period.
Figure 2. XS1 Mahogany Creek Wolman pebble count results in 2004, 2006 and 2007.
Figure 3. XS2 Mahogany Creek Wolman pebble count results in 2006 and 2007.
Biological responses to barrier removal projects have not been extensively monitoring in the analysis area; the majority of previous monitoring efforts attempted by the ODFW utilizing analysis of redd surveys. These data do have significant gaps, however, due to post barrier-removal access limitations imposed by physical and environmental conditions within the analysis area.
Sediment Reduction
One of the primary deliverables that is utilized to address this limiting factor is road decommissioning. In addition, the project has begun implementation of road improvement projects on roads that will remain on the landscape. Other project types are also utilized to address chronic sedimentation, such as dispersed campsite mitigation, noxious weed treatment, native revegetation, and direct sediment/erosion control best management practices that are implemented at all ground-disturbing projects. All of these projects will be discussed in more detail in the following sections.
Road Decommissioning
The project has decommissioned approximately 10 miles of road. The history of the project is discussed in detail elsewhere in this proposal, but suffice it to say that the project has only recently begun coordination in southeast Washington.
Road Improvement Projects
In more recent years the project has begun to coordinate on road improvement projects. Together with the Wallowa Whitman National Forest, the northeast Oregon project developed a list of 35 miles of roads that are stream-adjacent and contribute sediment chronically to area streams. Although extensive monitoring of these projects has not occurred to quantify the reduction in total sediment yield, recent work by others make clear that road improvements alone can reduce the amount of sediment produced from roads by an average of 2.08 tons/year/mi (Nelson et al. 2012).
Sediment Control at Ground Disturbance
The project also implements sediment Best Management Practices (BMP) on all projects that involve ground-disturbing activities. These types of projects include road/trail improvements, road/trail decommissioning, dispersed campsite mitigation and fish passage projects. The types of BMP’s that are utilized include: natural mulch/slash placement on all disturbed areas to provide nutrients to new vegetation and mitigate surface erosion; erosion control mats (degradable coconut fiber mats); and/or plantings conducted at all live water crossings by NPT staff in addition to clump plantings required in contracts.
Figure 4. Estimated sediment yields per stream segment in the Shotgun Creek Subwatershed.
Due to the limited restoration completed in the Shotgun Creek subwatershed (one reason it was chosen for GRAIP modeling) and the lack of model validation elsewhere in the drainage, it is not currently useful for determining sediment reductions elsewhere in the northeast Oregon project area. However, when sediment monitoring and model validation for other subwatersheds in the northeast Oregon project area occurs, it will allow for determining predicted sediment reductions and prioritization of future project work.
The following figure depicts a sample analysis of different management options for the road network in the Shotgun subwatershed. Optimization of cost/benefit ratios was determined by removing 20% of the total road length in the watershed and determining which management area yielded the highest ecological impact. This figure demonstrates that the removal of more roads in riparian areas equates to more ecological benefit.
Figure 5. Reduction in percent of road network length per mean percent reduction in environmental impacts (y-axis) and the greatest cost/benefit ratio (reprinted with permission Hagen 2011).
Figure 6, below, depicts comparisons in optimization of road decommissioning and improvement, again removing 20% of the total road length in the subwatershed. Road removal, improvement and maintenance are shown to provide greater reductions in total sediment with a focused effort. That is, combining treatment options and treating more road length in riparian areas yielded the highest sediment reduction of any of the alternatives examined.
This work demonstrated that through analysis and planning with this tool, managers can identify the kind of treatment necessary (road improvement and/or removal) to most efficiently obtain the greatest ecological value.
Figure 6. Comparison of Optimized Sediment & Road Improvement alternative to Optimized Decommissioning and effectiveness in reducing ecological impacts from the road network.
Instream Habitat Complexity
To date, the project has implemented few projects which specifically address instream habitat complexity. Increasing instream habitat complexity requires a multifaceted approach, which includes addressing those issues likely responsible for reductions in habitat complexity. In the analysis area, the root cause of decreased habitat complexity is primarily linked to legacy timber harvest, livestock grazing, agriculture and road construction. Ameliorating actions could include installation of large wood particles and replanting lost or diminished riparian vegetation communities.
Due to delayed responses to removal of stream adjacent roads and riparian planting, large wood supplementation may be one of the fastest ways to increase habitat complexity. Earlier attempts to increase large wood occurred in the 1980’s, when the USFS installed log weirs in streams. The intent of these structures was to provide grade control for culverts, trap fine sediment, increase instream habitat, and improve spawning habitat (Beechie and Sibley 1997).
The northeast Oregon project actively engages in protection of existing high quality habitat through continuous reviews of, and comments on, all pertinent projects proposed by federal land managers (detailed in the following section, Influence of the Project on Resource Management). The NPT Watershed Division feels this is critical as, from the perspective of habitat quality, a primary management and restoration goal is to develop and maintain well functioning riparian-channel interactions that promote a diverse channel environment with high-quality habitat (Beechie and Bolton 1999).
Influence of the Project on Resource Management
The NPT’s Fisheries Watershed NEPA Coordinator monitors all projects proposed on Forest Service managed property within the 1855 treaty area on the NPCNF, Payette, Boise, Wallowa-Whitman, and Umatilla National Forests. This position ensures that tribal interests are met and restoration investments protected for fisheries and watersheds. The NEPA Coordinator provides comments and suggestions on many proposals. NPT Staff meets regularly with Forest Service staff to discuss issues and provide input that helps to shape the Forest’s project design and management. Projects that may have substantial impacts to watersheds, fisheries, treaty resources, or tribal policy are presented to the Nez Perce Tribe Executive Committee, who asserts their influence through formal government-to-government consultation. As a sovereign nation, federal agencies are required by law to consult with the NPT. This is a powerful tool in protecting habitat from potentially adverse management actions that could occur on federal land. Over the life of the project, the NPT has coordinated and commented on approximately 50 projects.
Other Socioeconomic Benefits
The northeast Oregon Project also makes great efforts to participate in multiple educational activities. It is the view of the NPT DFRM Watershed Division that educating the next generation of resource managers is a prudent and essential part in the long-term restoration strategy. In order to be fully successful in restoring any project area it is essential to educate youth in natural resource management and restoration. This allows the next generation to take ownership in their “own” watershed, which will enable them to protect what is functioning before there is a need to restore what is degraded. In the last three years this project has participated in several educational events, reaching approximately 70 students annually. The following picture is representative of one of the educational outreach projects accomplished with the Whitman College, Semester in the West Program.
Help
Mitigation work
Reporting
Funding
Search
Log in
Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?
