DOCSLIB.ORG

Assessment of Summer Temperatures and Feasibility and Design of Improved Adult Chinook Salmon Thermal Refuge Habitat in the Sammamish River

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Assessment of Summer Temperatures and Feasibility and Design of Improved Adult Chinook Salmon Thermal Refuge Habitat in the Sammamish River Assessment of Summer Temperatures and Feasibility and Design of Improved Adult Chinook Salmon Thermal Refuge Habitat in the Sammamish River Prepared for: Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Auburn WA Prepared by: R2 Resource Consultants 15250 NE 95th St 1998 Photo by Roger Tabor, USFWS Adult Chinook Holding in Pool Near Marymoor Park Redmond WA 98052 December 30, 2010 Assessment of Summer Temperatures and Feasibility and Design of Improved Adult Chinook Salmon Thermal Refuge Habitat in the Sammamish River Prepared for: Holly Coccoli, Project Manager Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Auburn WA Prepared by: Paul DeVries PhD, PE Clair Yoder PE Chiming Huang PhD, PE Glen Anderson PE Karee Oliver Mike Cooksey R2 Resource Consultants Inc. 15250 NE 95th St Redmond WA 98052 December 30, 2010 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Sammamish River Thermal Refuge Habitat CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ XIII 1. INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................1 1.1 OVERVIEW OF FLOW AND TEMPERATURE CONDITIONS AFFECTING ADULT CHINOOK SALMON IN THE SAMMAMISH RIVER ...................................................................................3 1.1.1 Review of Flow and Temperature Gage Data .........................................................3 1.1.2 Synopsis of Other Relevant Water Quality Studies ..............................................14 1.2 OVERVIEW OF THIS STUDY AND REPORT OUTLINE ............................................................18 2. TEMPERATURE ASSESSMENT METHODS......................................................................21 2.1 TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT ..........................................................................................22 2.1.1 Calibration .............................................................................................................23 2.1.2 Grab Samples/Temperature Profiles ......................................................................24 2.1.3 Continuous Temperature Loggers .........................................................................25 2.2 LONGITUDINAL PROFILE SAMPLING ...................................................................................26 2.3 DETAILED SAMPLE SITE SELECTION ..................................................................................29 2.4 FLOW MEASUREMENT ........................................................................................................31 2.5 DETAILED SITE TEMPERATURE FIELD DATA COLLECTION .................................................32 2.5.1 Field Data Collection .............................................................................................32 2.5.2 Analysis .................................................................................................................35 3. RESULTS OF FIELD ASSESSMENTS .................................................................................38 3.1 LONGITUDINAL PROFILE ....................................................................................................40 3.2 SAMPLE SITE SELECTION....................................................................................................43 3.3 DETAILED SITE TEMPERATURE FIELDS ..............................................................................43 3.3.1 Tributary Sites .......................................................................................................46 3.3.2 Winery Pool Site ....................................................................................................47 4. RANKING/PRIORITIZATION OF SITES FOR HABITAT IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ....................................................................................................................................55 4.1 SWAMP CREEK ...................................................................................................................55 R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. iii December 30, 2010 1819.01/Sammamish Final Report FINAL Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Sammamish River Thermal Refuge Habitat 4.2 HORSE CREEK (TRIBUTARY 0068) .....................................................................................56 4.3 NORTH CREEK ....................................................................................................................56 4.4 LITTLE BEAR CREEK ..........................................................................................................57 4.5 GOLD CREEK (TRIBUTARY 0088) .......................................................................................58 4.6 WINERY POOL AT TOLT PIPELINE .......................................................................................59 4.7 DERBY CREEK AND TRIBUTARY 0090 ................................................................................60 4.8 TRIBUTARY 0091................................................................................................................60 4.9 OUTLET OF CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS AT NE 124TH ST/HOLLYWOOD PUMP STATION .....61 4.10 TRIBUTARY 0101..............................................................................................................62 4.11 TRIBUTARY 0102..............................................................................................................62 4.12 PETERS CREEK (TRIBUTARY 0104) ..................................................................................62 4.13 BEAR CREEK ....................................................................................................................63 4.14 TRIBUTARY 0142..............................................................................................................65 4.15 THE FIVE HIGHEST PRIORITY SITES WITH GREATEST POTENTIAL TO BENEFIT CHINOOK SALMON HABITAT THROUGH INCREASED THERMAL REFUGE HABITAT VOLUME ..............66 5. POSSIBLE STRUCTURAL MEASURES FOR IMPROVING THERMAL REFUGE HABITAT IN THE SAMMAMISH RIVER .................................................................................71 5.1 CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS FOR THE FIVE HIGHEST PRIORITY SITES ........................................71 5.1.1 Gold Creek .............................................................................................................74 5.1.2 Bear Creek .............................................................................................................75 5.1.3 Tributary 0091 .......................................................................................................76 5.1.4 North Creek ...........................................................................................................77 5.1.5 Little Bear Creek ...................................................................................................79 5.1.6 Permitting Requirements .......................................................................................79 5.2 FINAL DESIGN FOR THE GOLD CREEK SITE ........................................................................80 5.2.1 2-Dimensional (2-D) Modeling of Flow and Temperature ...................................80 5.2.2 Design Overview ...................................................................................................85 5.2.3 Assessment of 100-yr Flood Zero-Rise Criterion .................................................87 R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. iv December 30, 2010 1819.01/Sammamish Final Report FINAL Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Sammamish River Thermal Refuge Habitat 6. POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF INCREASING TRIBUTARY SUMMER FLOWS TO IMPROVE THERMAL REFUGE HABITAT IN THE SAMMAMISH RIVER .........................90 6.1 THEORETICAL ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................90 6.2 FIELD DATA ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................................92 6.3 2-D MODELING AT GOLD CREEK SITE ...............................................................................95 7. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................99 7.1 DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................................99 7.2 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..........................................................103 8. REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................106 APPENDIX A: Detailed Sample Site Maps APPENDIX B: Temperature Profile Data Collected in July/August 2010 APPENDIX C: Representative Contour Maps of Water Temperature Fields for Different Depths at Sampled Sites in the Sammamish River APPENDIX D: Conceptual Design Drawings at 5 Sites APPENDIX E: CAD Design Drawings, Gold Creek Site R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. v December 30, 2010 1819.01/Sammamish Final Report FINAL Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Sammamish River Thermal Refuge Habitat FIGURES Figure 1-1. Project Area (source: DeGasperi 2005a). ...............................................................2 Figure 1-2. Locations of continuous stream flow and temperature gages with data describing the summer flow and temperature regime of the Sammamish River and its largest tributaries. ..............................................................................6 Figure 1-3. Sammamish River (Station 51T) monthly
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Monitoring Riverine Thermal Regimes on Stream Networks Insights Into
    Ecological Indicators 84 (2018) 11–26 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Ecological Indicators journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolind Original Articles Monitoring riverine thermal regimes on stream networks: Insights into MARK spatial sampling designs from the Snoqualmie River, WA ⁎ Amy Marshaa,b, , E. Ashley Steelb, Aimee H. Fullertonc, Colin Sowderd,b a School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98195 USA b Statistics, PNW Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 400 N 34th Street, Suite 201, Seattle, WA, 98103, USA c Northwest Fisheries Science Center, NOAA Fisheries Service,2725 Montlake Blvd. East, Seattle, WA, 98112 USA d Department of Statistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98195 USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Understanding, predicting, and managing the spatiotemporal complexity of stream thermal regimes requires Water temperature monitoring strategies designed specifically to make inference about spatiotemporal variability on the whole SSNM stream network. Moreover, monitoring can be tailored to capture particular facets of this complex thermal Streams landscape that may be important indicators for species and life stages of management concern. We applied Rivers spatial stream network models (SSNMs) to an empirical dataset of water temperature from the Snoqualmie River Spatial autocorrelation watershed, WA, and use results to provide guidance with respect to necessary sample size, location of new sites, Monitoring and selection of a modeling approach. As expected, increasing the number of monitoring stations improved both predictive precision and the ability to estimate covariates of stream temperature; however, even relatively small numbers of monitoring stations, n = 20, did an adequate job when well-distributed and when used to build models with only a few covariates.
    [Show full text]
  • A Good Turn for the Tolt
    A GGoodood TurnTurn forfor thethe TTolt:olt: LLeveeevee SSetback/Salmonetback/Salmon HHabitatabitat PProjectroject Frequently Asked Questions Question: Why restore salmon habitat? Answer: Salmon are an enduring symbol of the Pacifi c Northwest, providing direct and indirect benefi ts to our culture, economy, and environment. Healthy salmon populations mean that our region is a healthy place to live and work. Salmon have been integral to Native American culture for centuries, and federal treaties assure the tribes continued access to healthy salmon stocks. The federal government lists Puget Sound Chinook salmon, as well as bull trout, as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This means they are likely to become endangered, or at a high risk of extinction, if steps to protect them are not taken soon. Science indicates that land uses affecting the salmon’s freshwater habitat are among the primary causes for the species’ decline. Although the federal government administers the ESA, everyone shares the responsibility to protect these animals, because everyone depends on healthy land and water resources. Local governments throughout Puget Sound are implementing projects to protect and restore salmon habitat. Question: Can the Tolt River really be restored? Answer: To prevent the river from fl ooding adjacent lands, levees were constructed along the lower Tolt in the 1940s. While partially successful, the levees dramatically changed the river’s behavior and fi sh habitat. In a more natural condition, the river is connected to its fl oodplain, has more room to move back and forth, and creates meander bends and split channels. A natural river also captures large pieces of wood from trees along the bank.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Puget Sound Rivers and Salmon Recovery
    1. Puget Sound Rivers and Salmon Recovery David R. Montgomery, Derek B. Booth, and Susan Bolton A symposium on Restoration of Puget Sound Rivers at the spring 2000 meeting of the Society for Ecological Restoration’s Northwest chapter pre- sented an opportunity to synthesize regional expertise on river and stream restoration into a single volume. Largely drawn from presentations at the conference, the chapters of this book span a wide range of backgrounds and interests, including public policy, riparian forestry, stream ecology, hydrol- ogy, geomorphology, geology, and civil engineering. Chapters of the book proceed from geological and geomorphological controls on river and stream characteristics and dynamics, to the biological aspects of river systems in the region, to chapters that address social constraints and the application of flu- vial geomorphology, civil engineering, riparian ecology, and aquatic ecol- ogy to regional river restoration projects and programs. While we recognize that the material presented herein could not be comprehensive given the broad scope of the subject, these chapters have been selected to provide a com- pilation of state-of-the-art considerations and approaches for developing river restoration programs. The recent listing of various runs and stocks of Pacific salmon under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) has focused national attention on the condi- tion of rivers and streams of the Pacific Northwest (PNW). In the Puget Sound region, recent ESA listings triggered statewide efforts to improve channel habitat involving ongoing expenditure of many millions of dollars annually and resulted in preparation of a “Statewide Strategy to Recover Salmon” by the Governor’s Salmon Recovery Office (GSRO 1999).
    [Show full text]
  • Q4 2018 News Magazine
    w w sdukNewsalbix Magazine Issue #2 Winter Quarter 2018 In This Issue: • 20th Anniversary of Re-Recognition • Celebrating Tribal Heritage With The Snoqualmie Valley YMCA • Snoqualmie Welcomes N8tive Vote • And More! Call For Submissions Tribal Member News Here we present to you, the second issue of the new quarterly news magazine. We hope you are enjoying Northwest Native American Basketweavers Association reading the content and seeing the photos that this new, extended magazine format allows us to publish! Linda Sweet Baxter, Lois Sweet Dorman and McKenna Sweet Dorman traveled But as much as we like to write and enjoy creating content, we want this magazine to belong to all Tribal to Toppenish, WA to attend the Northwest Native American Basketweavers Members. If you have a story to tell or an item of news, art or photography you want to share please contact Association’s (NNABA) 24th annual gathering in October. us. We would be very happy to include your material in an upcoming issue of the magazine. They sat with Laura Wong-Whitebear, who was teaching coil weaving with Our e-mail address and our mailing address can be found in the blue box right below this space. You can hemp cord and waxed linen. contact us using either one. Please Welcome Rémy May! Christopher Castleberry and his wife Audrey Castleberry are honored to present their newest family member, Rémy May. Table of Contents sdukwalbixw News Magazine Staff Born on Nov. 27th she is 8lbs 6oz and 20.5 inches tall. Call For Submissions 2 Michael Brunk Here, dad and daughter are pictured at Snoqualmie Falls.
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of the Geology and Geomorphology of the Snoqualmie River Watershed
    AN OVERVIEW OF THE GEOLOGY AND GEOMORPHOLOGY OF THE SNOQUALMIE RIVER WATERSHED Prepared by: John Bethel, Geologist Ecological Services Unit Prepared for: Fran Solomon, Ph.D., Senior Ecologist Watershed and Ecological Assessment Team April 2004 Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division Capital Projects and Open Space Acquisitions Section 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, Washington 98104-3855 An Overview of the Geology and Geomorphology of the Snoqualmie River Watershed Prepared by John Bethel, Geologist Ecological Services Unit Prepared for King County Water and Land Resources Division Snoqualmie Watershed Team September 2004 Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division Capital Projects and Open Space Acquisitions Section 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, Washington 98104-3855 King County Executive Ron Sims King County Council Carolyn Edmonds, District 1 Bob Ferguson, District 2 Kathy Lambert, District 3 Larry Phillips, District 4 Dwight Pelz, District 5 Rob McKenna, District 6 Pete von Reichbauer, District 7 Dow Constantine, District 8 Steve Hammond, District 9 Larry Gossett, District 10 Jane Hague, District 11 David Irons, District 12 Julia Patterson, District 13 Department of Natural Resources and Parks Pam Bissonnette, Director Water and Land Resources Division Daryl Grigsby, Division Director Contributing Staff John Bethel, Geologist Supporting Staff Fran Solomon, Ph.D., Senior Ecologist Terry Butler, Geologist Gino Lucchetti, Senior Ecologist Wendy Gable Collins, Graphic Designer and Cartographer Bob Gilland, Technical Information Processing Specialist AN OVERVIEW OF THE GEOLOGY AND GEOMORPHOLOGY OF THE SNOQUALMIE RIVER WATERSHED Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction..................................................................................................................1 1.1. Purpose and Scope of this Report .......................................................................1 1.2.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT Tolt River Channel Migration Study
    DRAFT Tolt River Channel Migration Study March 2017 Prepared by Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division River and Floodplain Management Section 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98104 Alternate Formats Available 206-477-4800 TTY Relay: 711 DRAFT Tolt River Channel Migration Study March 2017 Submitted by: Terry Butler, Geologist King County Water and Land Resources Division Department of Natural Resources and Parks Funded by: King County Flood Control District DRAFT Tolt River Channel Migration Study Acknowledgements John Bethel, Sevin Bilir, Fred Lott and Kyle Comanor participated in fieldwork during study preparation. Jennifer Vanderhoof provided technical editing of this report. Snoqualmie River Basin Team members Chase Barton and Sally King provided review and comment on a draft of this report. Jeanne Stypula supervised the study and map preparation. Citation King County. 2017. Tolt River channel migration study. Prepared by Terry Butler and Fred Lott. King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks, Water and Land Resources Division. Seattle, Washington. King County River and Floodplain Management i March 2017 DRAFT Tolt River Channel Migration Study Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... vii 1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Valuing the Puget Sound Basin
    Valuing The Puget Sound Basin Revealing Our Best Investments 2010 Authors: David Batker and Maya Kocian Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank the board of Earth Economics, Josh Reyneveld, Ingrid Rasch, David Cosman and Josh Farley. This report would not be possible without the assistance from Jennifer Harrison‐Cox, Allyson Schrier, Tedi Dickinson, Jenn McFadden, Rowan Schmidt, Jon Roberts, Colin Cornin, Kellen Hawley, Jon Stout, Patrick Miller, Caleb Tomlinson, and Zac Chrisn. The board of Earth Economics provided unwavering and selfless support to help complete these studies. We would also like to thank Jan Kocian for the cover photo. This report was made possible by the generous support of The Russell Family Foundaon and Seale Venture Kids. This page intenonally le blank. Execuve Summary .............................................................................1 Introducon ........................................................................................6 Objecves of the Study and Report Organizaon ...........................................7 Secon 1: Economic Analysis Incenves and Investment .....................8 Accounng for Natural Capital .....................................................................10 Improving Jobs Analysis for Restoraon .......................................................12 Adopng New Industrial Indicators ..............................................................13 Redefining Green Jobs ..................................................................................15 Changing
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Insurance Mapping Study for the Snoqualmie River (Skykomish River Confluence to Snoqualmie Falls) and Skykomish River (Snoqualmie River Confluence to RM 8.95)
    Flood Insurance Mapping Study for the Snoqualmie River (Skykomish River confluence to Snoqualmie Falls) and Skykomish River (Snoqualmie River confluence to RM 8.95) King and Snohomish Counties, WA Prepared for: Federal Emergency Management Agency Prepared by: northwest hydraulic consultants inc. 16300 Christensen Road, Suite 350 Seattle, WA 98188-3418 April 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Purpose of Project ......................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Coordination .................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 AREA STUDIED .................................................................................................................. 2 2.1 Scope of Study ............................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Study Reach Description .............................................................................................. 2 2.3 Principal Flood Problems ............................................................................................. 2 2.3.1 Skykomish River ......................................................................................................... 2 2.3.2 Snoqualmie River........................................................................................................ 3 2.4
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of the Geology and Geomorphology of the Snoqualmie River Watershed
    AN OVERVIEW OF THE GEOLOGY AND GEOMORPHOLOGY OF THE SNOQUALMIE RIVER WATERSHED 7.0 Human Influence on Geomorphic Processes The Snoqualmie watershed has been subject to pervasive, albeit comparatively low-intensity, human modification. Despite this low-intensity land use, it is clear that human activities, taken as a whole, constitute the most substantial geomorphic perturbation in the Snoqualmie watershed since glaciation. The following is a description of some of the most geomorphically significant human activities in this watershed: 7.1. Logging Logging has cumulatively affected more area in the Snoqualmie River watershed than any other land use activity (Photo 22). Logging began in the Snoqualmie watershed in the late 1800s and it has continued without interruption since that time. Many areas of the watershed have been logged twice and are now growing a third rotation of timber. Logging can have a myriad of impacts on the fluvial network. Logging typically increases sediment delivery through a variety of mechanisms. Logging roads have been identified as the largest source of sediment associated with logging (Waters, 1995). Reid and Dunne (1984) demonstrated that fine sediment, forced through the gravel surfacing by truck traffic and washed into roadside drainage, can be the largest source of fine sediment in a watershed undergoing timber harvest. Interception of shallow groundwater by roadside ditches, creation of impervious road surfaces, and concentration of surface flow in roadway cross culverts can all contribute to increased peak flows. In the small steep channels, common to those portions of the watershed in forest production, this increased flow can cause channel erosion or initiate debris flows.
    [Show full text]
  • Tolt River Natural Area Site Management Guidelines March 2006
    Tolt River Natural Area Site Management Guidelines March 2006 Tolt River Natural Area Site Management Guidelines March 2006 Alternate formats available 296-6519 or TTY Relay: 711 Tolt River NA SMG_Final_March 2006.doc Tolt River Natural Area Site Management Guidelines CONTENTS Acknowledgements iii Executive Summary iv Introduction 1 Part 1. General Property Information 1 Part 2. Acquisition, Funding Source and Deed Restrictions 4 Part 3. Ecological Resources 6 Topography and Soils _______________________________________________________________ 6 Hydrology and Morphology in the Lower Tolt River Reach _________________________________ 7 Wetlands _________________________________________________________________________ 7 Vegetation ________________________________________________________________________ 8 Fish and Wildlife___________________________________________________________________ 9 Part 4. Site Use and Infrastructure 10 Public Use _______________________________________________________________________ 10 Access __________________________________________________________________________ 10 Trails and Roads __________________________________________________________________ 10 King County Stewardship Activities___________________________________________________ 11 Flood Reduction and Floodplain Reconnection Activities __________________________________ 11 Part 5. Analysis 12 Information Gaps _________________________________________________________________ 12 Species of Concern ________________________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • South Fork Tolt Municipal Watershed Management Plan
    SOUTH FORK TOLT WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN JUNE 2011 Prepared for: 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 Seattle, Washington 98124 Prepared by: in Association with: Triangle Associates Project #3740039 SOUTH FORK TOLT WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN JUNE 2011 Prepared for: 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 Seattle, Washington 98124 Prepared by: in Association with: Triangle Associates Project #3740039 SOUTH FORK TOLT WATE RSHED MANAGEMENT PLA N TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ............................................................................................... v Acknowledgments .............................................................................................. x Seattle Public Utilities ............................................................................................ x Plan Development Consultants .............................................................................. x Reader’s Guide .................................................................................................. xi Executive Summary ..................................................................................... ES-1 History and General Description ................................................................................... ES-2 Watershed Protection .................................................................................................... ES-3 Key Issues ........................................................................................................ ES-3 Recommended Actions ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Preservation for Washington State
    Historic Preservation for Washington State 24 CFR Part 58 General requirements Legislation Regulation Protect sites, buildings, and objects with national, National Historic Preservation 36 CFR Part 800 state or local historic, cultural and/or archeological Act, 16 U.S.C. 470(f), section 24 CFR Part 58.5(a) significance. Identify effects of project on properties 106 1. Does the project include new construction; demolition; the acquisition of undeveloped land; or any activity that requires ground disturbance (defined as one cubic foot of disturbed soil)? No: PROCEED to #2. Yes: PROCEED to #3 2. Does the project include repair, rehabilitation or conversion of existing properties; involve a structure that is MORE than 45 years old, is not in a historic district and has no ground disturbing activities? No: STOP here. The Section 106 Historic Preservation review is complete. Record your determination that there is no potential to cause effect, including the age of the existing building and information from the National Register to show that the activity is not in a historic district, on the Statutory Worksheet or Environmental Assessment. Yes: PROCEED to #3 3. Consult with SHPO or THPO and any tribes or groups that may have an interest in the project to determine if the project is eligible for the National Historic Register. • You must define and consider the Area of Potential Effect (APE). The APE is the geographic area within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause changes in the character or use of historic properties. The APE is influenced by the scale and nature of an undertaking.
    [Show full text]