DOCSLIB.ORG

Hydrologic and Trophic Controls of Seasonal Algal Blooms in Northern California Rivers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hydrologic and Trophic Controls of Seasonal Algal Blooms in Northern California Rivers Arch. Hydrobiol. 125 I 4 385-410 I 1 Smrrgm, Okrober 1992 Hydrologic and trophic controls of seasonal algal blooms in northern California rivers By MARYE. Po-, University of California at Berkeley’ With 15 figures and 1 table in the text Abstract Ckzdophoru glomeruta L., a dominant macroalga in lakes and rivers worldwide, undergoes a marked bloom-detachment-senescencecycle in unregulated rivers of north- ern California with natural winter flood, summer drought flow regimes. In two re- gulated channels which probably did not experience scouring floods, however, low standing crops of attached Cladopboru turf persisted throughout the year. The contrast between Ckzdophora phenology in regulated and unregulated rivers suggests that Cla- dophoru cycles may be extrinsically driven by factors related to the hydrograph. Pre- liminary data on seasonal patterns of animal abundance in regulated and unregulated channels suggest that winter flooding promotes Cladophoru blooms in rivers by reducing consumer densities. A working hypothesis relating hydrologic regime, food chain length, and algal phenology in rivers is advanced. This hypothesis predicts that pro- nounced algal bloomdetachment-senescence cycles will occur in unregulated rivers in Mediterranean climates following winter flooding, and that blooms will not occur in the absence of flooding in regulated channels, or in natural rivers during prolonged drought. Introduction In rivers which are sunlit, rock-bedded, and clear at low flow, attached algae are often dominant components of ecological communities. Cludophoru gfomerutaL., a filamentous green, may be the most common and cosmopolitan macroalga in temperate rivers throughout the world (BLIJM,1956; WHITTON, 1970; WHAFSEet al., 1984). In sunlit rivers of the western United States, Cla- dophoru provides much of the physical structure in the habitat during the low flow season, and plays a driving role in food web dynamics (LAMBERTI& RF.SH, 1983; Gw,1987; FEMINELUet al., 1989; POWER,1990 a, b). In these rivers and elsewhere (notably in the Laurentian Great Lakes), Cludophoru blooms create severe management problems (BLUM,1956, 1982; BELLIS, 1967; AUERet al., 1982; MILLNER& SWEENEY, 1982; GOLDMAN& HORNE, 1983). Despite their ecological and economic importance, factors regulating growth, detachment, and senescence cycles of Ckzdophoru are still not well understood (WHI-ITON, 1970; NEIL&JACKSON, 1982). ’ Author’s address: Dept. of Integrative Biology, University of California at Ber- keley, Berkeley, CA. 94707, USA. 25 jrchiv f. Hydrobiologie, Bd. 125 0003-9136/92/0125-0385$6.50 0 1992 E. Schwcizerbm’scbe Vcrlagsbuchhmdlung.DJDXI Stuttgm 1 386 Mary E. Power Hydrologic and trophic controls of seasonal algal blooms 387 This study addresses three questions about Ckdopbora in northern Cali- fornia rivers: 1. What is the seasonal cycle of Ckzdqhora in rivers with natural summer drought, winter flood hydrographs? 2. How does this cycle compare with Cladophoru phenology in regulated rivers with artificially stabilized flow? m Eureka 3. How do abundance patterns of invertebrates and smallvertebrates asso- ciated with Cladophoru change seasonally in regulated and unregulated chan- 2 nels? To develop hypotheses about factors governing timing, magnitude, and duration of algal blooms and mat detachment, I monitored Cludophora, physical factors, nutrients, and associated biota in four unregulated and two re- gulated rivers in northern California. Results from this survey complement ex- perimental studies on smaller spatial scales of controls on this dominant river dga (LAMBEXTI& ~SH, 1983; LIGON,1986; FEMINELLAet d., 1989; POWER,1990 a, b). \ Study Sites I monitored six rivers near sites gaged by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) (Fig. 1). These rivers differed in discharge, exposure to sun, and land use in their watersheds. Two rivers were regulated upstream of the monitored sites, either by a dam (Dry Creek) or by a water diversion (from the Eel River to the East Fork of the Russian River) and had artificially sustained summer baseflow (Fig. 2 e, f, Fig. 3). Dry Creek ex- perienced stable low flow throughout the year. Dividing discharge by channel drainage area indicates that releases from the Warm Springs Dam above Dry Creek were consid- erably less than natura winter flows in channels of similar drainage area in this region (Fig. 4). Consequently, the bed of Dry Creek was stable throughout the period of study. To compare the relative intensity of bed movement for the remaining five rivers, I used two empirical generalizations about gravel bedded riven. First, bankfull discharge typically has a recurrence interval of about 1.5 years (e.g. DUNNE& LEOPOLD,1978). Sec- Fig. 1. Location of the six study reaches (numbers 1,2,4-7) and of a diversion from the ond, significant gravel bed mobility often does not occur until the flow is close to bank- Eel River to the Russian River (3) that stabilizes flow in the East Fork Russian River discharge (Pmmn, 1978). In the East Fork Russian River, elevated winter flows oc- full (site 2). Drainage areas above the six monitored sites are, for the two regulated channels: curred, but peak discharge in 1989 remained below bankfull discharge as estimated from (1) Dry Creek (USGS 11465000): 562km', and (2) East Fork Russian River (USGS flood frequency analyses (Fig. 5). Hence, it is likely that little bed movement occurred. 11461500): 239 km2. For the four unregulated channels, drainage areas are (4) Outlet This inference is consistent with visual observations that the bed of the East Fork Creek (USGS 11472200): 417kmz; (5) Middle Fork Eel (USGS 11473900): 1929 km2; (6) Russian River showed no evidence of scour over the period of study. In contrast, the South Fork Eel (USGS 11475500): 114km' and (7) Elder Creek (USGS 11475560): other four monitored rivers, which were unregulated (the South Fork Eel River, Elder 17km'. Creek, Outlet Creek, and the Middle Fork Eel River), experienced the natural summer drought, winter flood hydrograph typical of streams in regions with Mediterranean climates (Fig. 2 a-d). Each unregulated river experienced flows equal or greater than bankfull discharge during the 1988- 1989 study period (Fig. 5). Visual observations over the summer (Fig. 3). During October, the month of minimum discharge in natural chan- the winter confirmed that beds in these four rivers moved, and were subject to consid- nels, most monitored sites had current velocities slower than 5cms-'. In the two re- erable scour. gulated rivers, current velocities during October ranged from 0 to > 50cms-', and During the summer low flow season, from June through September, the four unre- were fairly evenly represented among the monitored sites (Fig. 6). Despite the large gulated rivers experienced low or no discharge (Fig. 3). In contrast, flows in Dry Creek variation in drainage areas and discharges of the six rivers (Fig. 1, legend), in summer and the East Fork Russian River were maintained at levels ranging from 2-4 m's-' over months they were all easily waded. Hydrologic and trophic controls of seasonal algal blooms 389 388 Mary E. Power Low Flow Discharge S. Fk. Eel, 1988-1989 m -mwl P -0- SouthFkEel - ElderCreek - OutletCreek - Middle Fk. Eel East Fk. Russian May Jun Jul Aug Sep outlet Creek. 1988-1989 Fig.3. Mean monthly discharge during the summer low flow season in the four unre- gulated (solid lines) and two regulated (dashed lines) channels. Note that in August and September, when there was little or not flow even in the large unregulated rivers, flow continued in the two regulated channels. salmon hatchery just below Warm Springs Dam, upstream from monitored sites. Both sources contribute nutrients to the stream, and probably account for its relatively XpBi91Pp3~so elevated levels of nitrate (Fig. 8). The East Fork Russian River near Ukiah receives water diverted from the Eel River through the Potter Valley Diversion (Fig. 1). The East Fork Dry Creak, 1988-1989 E. Fk. Russlan RIver, 1988-1989 Russian does not receive agricultural runoff, but human habitations occur very close to the river just upstream from the monitored cross sections. This river had the second I\ -m :a highest measured level of nitrate of the six studied here (Fig. 8). Insolation of the E. Fk. Russian, however, was much less than at Dry Creek due to shading during mornings and afternoons by tall alder trees and narrow valley walls. Outlet Creek is not regulated, but is otherwise heavily impacted by humans. Many human dwellings occur along the creek, which also receives sewage effluent from the town of Willits (Fig. 1). Of the unregulated streams, Outlet Creek has the highest meas- ured nitrate levels (Fig. 8). Outlet Creek is extremely open and sunlit, as the active, boulder-strewn channel kept open by winter floods is much wider than the wetted chan- nel during the summer low flow period. This is also the case along the monitored Fig.2. Monthly discharge records (from the USGS) for the four natural (a-d) and two reaches of the Middle Fork Eel. The land around the Middle Fork Eel is sparsely settled regulated (e, f) channels. Records for the South Fork Eel are from a currently monitored by humans, and subject to light cattle grazing. Crystal-clear water and low nutrient station near Leggett, CA, where the drainage area is 642 km', 5.6 times larger than at the levels (Fig. 8) suggest little human impact on this river at the monitored site. The South study site near Branscomb, where USGS monitoring was discontinued. During Fork Eel River flows for 5 km through a 3200 hectare forest preserve (the Northern 1968 - 1970 when Branscomb and Leggett stations were both monitored by the USGS, California Coast Range Preserve) and is also relatively undisturbed by humans, al- discharges were highly correlated (0.93 < r < 1.00 for 18 of 24 consecutive months, though sparse settlements and a sawmill occur upstream from the monitored site. As in 0.27 < r < 0.78 during four transitional spring or fall months (May, June, August, and Outlet Creek and the Middle Fk., winter floods open a wider channel in the S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FINAL Little Lake Valley Groundwater Management Plan
    LITTLE LAKE VALLEY GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Final Draft PREPARED FOR CITY OF WILLITS August 18, 2020 City of Willits Contact: Andrea Trincado, Project Manager City of Willits Engineering Department Prepared by: LACO Associates 776 S. State St., Suite 103 Ukiah, California 95482 (707) 462-0222 LACO Project No. 8509.07 Little Lake Valley Groundwater Management Plan FINAL DRAFT Prepared for City of Willits TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 5 1.1 Purpose of the Plan ......................................... 5 1.2 Background and Legal Authority for Local Groundwater Management ................................. 5 1.3 Plan Components .............................................. 7 1.4 Plan Development Process ................................. 7 1.5 Previous Studies .............................................. 9 2.0 Public Outreach and Involvement ............................ 10 2.1 Public Workshops ........................................... 11 2.2 Issues of Concern to the Public ........................ 12 3.0 Study Area 12 3.1 Location and Description ................................. 12 3.2 Physical Geography and Geology ..................... 13 3.2.1 Geologic Formations ............................. 15 3.3 Climate 15 3.4 Land Use and Population ................................. 18 3.5 Water Use 21 3.5.1 Municipal Water Use ............................ 21 3.5.2 Rural Water Use .................................. 23 3.5.3 Tribal Water Use ................................. 23 3.5.4 Environmental Water Use ....................... 23 4.0 Hydrogeology 23 4.1 Principal Aquifers ......................................... 23 4.1.1 Aquifer I – Holocene Alluvium ................ 24 August 18, 2020 Page 1 of 49 Little Lake Valley Groundwater Management Plan FINAL DRAFT Prepared for City of Willits 4.1.2 Aquifer II – Pliocene to Pleistocene Continental Basin Deposits ..................... 25 4.1.3 Jurassic-Cretaceous Franciscan Complex .. 26 4.2 Recharge Sources ........................................... 27 4.3 Historic Variations in Groundwater Levels ........
    [Show full text]
  • Final Upper Main Eel River and Tributaries (Including
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX FINAL Upper Main Eel River and Tributaries (including Tomki Creek, Outlet Creek and Lake Pillsbury) Total Maximum Daily Loads for Temperature and Sediment Approved by date Original signed December 29, 2004 Alexis Strauss Director, Water Division Note: For further information please contact Palma Risler at 415/972-3451 and [email protected] or Dan Pingaro at 415/977-4275 and [email protected] Table of Contents CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1. Overview - 1 1.2. Watershed Characteristics - 2 1.3. Endangered Species Act Consultation - 4 1.4. Organization - 4 CHAPTER 2: PROBLEM STATEMENT 2.1. Fish Population Problems - 5 2.2. Temperature Problems - 7 2.3. Sediment Problems - 14 2.4. Water Quality Standards - 17 CHAPTER 3: TEMPERATURE TMDL 3.1. Interpreting the Existing Water Quality Standards for Temperature - 18 3.2. Temperature Modeling - 20 3.2.1 Temperature and Solar Radiation Modeling - 21 3.2.2 Selection of Scenario Corresponding to Water Quality Standards - 24 3.3.1 Loading Capacity and TMDL – Solar Radiation for all stream reaches - 26 3.3.2 Shade Allocations - 26 3.3.3 Margin of Safety - 27 3.3.4 Seasonal Variation and Critical Conditions - 27 3.4 Instream Heat TMDL – Van Arsdale to Outlet Creek - 28 3.4.1 Selection of Scenario Corresponding to Water Quality Standards - 34 3.4.2 Water Quality Indicators – Van Arsdale to Outlet Creek - 34 3.4.3 Instream Heat Loading Capacity and TMDL - Van Arsdale to Outlet Creek- 34 3.4.4 Instream Heat Allocations – Van Arsdale to Outlet Creek - 35 3.4.5 Margin of Safety - 35 3.4.6 Seasonal Variation and Critical Conditions - 35 CHAPTER 4: SEDIMENT TMDL 4.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Eel River Cooperative Cyanotoxin Analysis Summary 2013-2017
    Eel River Cooperative Cyanotoxin Analysis Summary 2013-2017 By: Eli Asarian and Patrick Higgins Edited by: Diane Higgins Performed for: The Eel River Recovery Project August 2018 Business Sponsors of ERRP Cyanotoxin Analysis Thanks to Individual Crowdfunding Donors and Those Who Contributed Off-line to Support ERRP Cyanotoxin Work: Barbara & David Sopjes Dr. Andrew Stubblefield Mary Power Ree Slocum Bill Dietrich Ben Middlemiss Dean & Sharon Edell Judy Schriebman Jack Crider Daron Pedroja Tim Talbert Gil Anda Ken Miller Will Parrish Dani Walthall Chris McBride Zane and Amanda Ruddy Christina Tran Brett Lovelace Sarah Ottley Ken Vance-Borland Karen & Scott Welsh Thomas Daugherty Pureum Kim Keith Bouma-Gregson Alex Christie Lee McClellan Matthew Amberg Charlie Liphart Eric Damon Walters April Mason Amy Collette Jason Hartwick Marissa Adams Kristin McDonald John Filce Carl Zichella Robert Leher Thanks also to experiment.com, our crowdfunding host that raises funds for scientific research throughout the World: https://experiment.com/projects/when-does-the-eel-river-turn-toxic- patterns-in-cyanotoxin-occurrence-2013-2016. This study was postponed a year so we could collect 2017 cyanotoxin data. Thanks for your patience. Contents Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 2 Background
    [Show full text]
  • Are California'! Orth Coast River
    1u i A7 .( ARE CALIFORNIA'! I 19 ORTH COAST RIVER: On the Impacts 1 Of River Diversion Published in Arcata, California, 1982 Printing by Neuberg Photography & Printing Hayfork. California Available From: Rivers Paper - Northcoast Environmental Center 1091 H Street ,, Arcata, Calif. 9552 1 (707) 822-69 18 postal orders: $2°0/copy wholesale prices available 0 1982 .*. .. i ;(i,{.,~TVl ..' EASii.4 RESOURCE LIBRARY ARE CALIFORNIA'S NORTH COAST RIVERS REALLY "WASTING AWAY TO SEA?" By: Paul Bodin, Geologist William Brock, Fishery Biologist Phillip Buttolph, Estuarine Biologist Harvey KeIsey, GeoIogi st Thomas Lisle, Hydrologist Bruce Marcot, WlIdlife Biologist $amy Reichard, ~~drologis~ Robert ~Lnner.Plant Ecologist Table of Contents Preface .............................................1 Summary ............................................1 Introduction ..........................................2 The Potter Valley Project .................................3 The Proposed Dos Rios Diversion and the Existing Trinity Diversion: Project Descriptions .................3 Effects of Impoundment and Diversion on Sediment Transport ...........................4 Effects of a Dos Rios Dam on HiIIsIope Stability ................................9 Effects of Impoundment and Diversion on Fishery Resources ............................9 Potential Effects of the Dos Rios Project on the Middle Fork Eel River Fishery ...............10 Economic Evaluation of the Middle Fork Eel Fishery .............................11 Potential Effects of the Dos Rios Project on the
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix L Wild and Scenic River Evaluation
    APPENDIX L WILD AND SCENIC RIVER EVALUATION INTRODUCTION Congress passed the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act in 1968 to preserve riverine systems that contain certain exceptionally outstanding features such as scenery, recreation, geology, fish and wildlife, historic and cultural resources. Selected rivers and their immediate environments are to be preserved in a free flowing condition and are to be managed for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. In October 1979, an Environmental Message from the President directed the Department of the Interior (USDI) to inventory all potential Wild and Scenic rivers and directed agencies to assess the suitability of the inventoried rivers for additions to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. The Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NRI) was conducted by the Heritage, Conservation and Recreation Service, USDI (now the National Park Service). The Middle Fork of the Eel River, which originates on the Mendocino National Forest, was the only river on the Mendocino National Forest included on the preliminary (Phase I) NRI in 1980. In January 1981, the Secretary of the Interior designated five California rivers as components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System under Section 2 (a) (il) of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The lower 23.5 miles of the Middle Fork of the Eel River was included in this designation and is currently managed as a Wild River. The upper 14.5 miles, which includes the headwaters of the Middle Fork of the Eel River, had not been analyzed for designation. This upper segment lies within the Yolla Bolly-Middle Eel Wilderness.
    [Show full text]
  • Redwood Highway/Save the Redwoods Movement Susie Van Kirk
    Humboldt State University Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University Susie Van Kirk Papers Special Collections 12-2015 Redwood Highway/Save the Redwoods Movement Susie Van Kirk Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/svk Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Van Kirk, Susie, "Redwood Highway/Save the Redwoods Movement" (2015). Susie Van Kirk Papers. 25. https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/svk/25 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Special Collections at Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Susie Van Kirk Papers by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. REDWOOD HIGHWAY/SAVE THE REDWOODS MOVEMENT Research for State Parks project August 2013-April 2014 Engbeck, Joseph H., Jr., State Parks of California. 1980. Graphic Arts Center Publishing Co., Portland. Chapter 4. Save the Redwoods! Naturalists had explored the forests of the north coast region and some, including John Mur, were especially impressed by the extraordinary stand of redwoods alongside the South Fork of the Eel River at bull Creek and the nearby Dyerville Flat. These experts agreed that the coast redwood forest was at its magnificent best far to the north of San Francisco. Some authorities went so far as to say that the Bull Creek and Dyerville Flat area supported the most impressive and spectacular forest in the whole world…. In 1916 and 1917 several developments took place that would eventually have a profound impact on the north coast redwood region in general and the Bull Creek-Dyerville Flat area in particular.
    [Show full text]
  • Eric Stockwell, ERRP Fall Chinook Project Coordinator
    Eel River Recovery Project Final Report: Citizen Assisted 2015-2016 Fall Chinook Salmon Monitoring Prepared for: Eel River Recovery Project By: Patrick Higgins, ERRP Managing Director & Eric Stockwell, ERRP Fall Chinook Project Coordinator With Funding From: Patagonia World Trout Initiative & Salmon Restoration Association Eel River Recovery Project: Final Report 2015-2016 Fall Chinook Salmon Monitoring July 2016 i Acknowledgements The Eel River Recovery Project (ERRP) faced challenging conditions in estimating the 2015- 2016 Eel River fall Chinook salmon run due to extremely low flows in early fall and then very high flows starting in December. ERRP wishes to thank the Wiyot Tribe and Humboldt Redwood Company for once again co-sponsoring the project. The project was made possible by grant funding provided by the Patagonia World Trout Initiative and the Salmon Restoration Association, which sponsors the World’s Largest Salmon BBQ in Fort Bragg. ERRP was assisted by dozens of volunteers who participated in lower Eel River dive surveys and in tracking fall Chinook migrations and spawning throughout the watershed. Only three dives were carried out from late October to mid-November in the lower river and only in the 12th Street Pool because of shallow depths, profuse algae and the risk of divers contracting swimmer’s itch. When November rains remained sparse, ERRP deployed kayaks for lower main Eel River spawning surveys. Results from the Van Arsdale Fish Station and aerial and ground surveys of spawning were shared by fisheries biologist Scott Harris of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). Thanks go out to Park Steiner and PG&E (SEC 2016) for sharing spawning data from the upper Eel River and Tomki Creek, although the latter had no fish sightings this year.
    [Show full text]
  • National Marine Fisheries Service/NOAA, Commerce § 226.211
    National Marine Fisheries Service/NOAA, Commerce § 226.211 and the following DOI, USGS, 1:500,000 (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Critical habitat scale hydrologic unit maps: State of is designated to include all river Oregon, 1974 and State of California, reaches accessible to listed coho salm- 1978 which are incorporated by ref- on between Cape Blanco, Oregon, and erence. This incorporation by reference Punta Gorda, California. Critical habi- was approved by the Director of the tat consists of the water, substrate, Federal Register in accordance with 5 and adjacent riparian zone of estuarine U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies and riverine reaches (including off- of the USGS publication and maps may channel habitats) in hydrologic units be obtained from the USGS, Map Sales, and counties identified in Table 6 of Box 25286, Denver, CO 80225. Copies may this part. Accessible reaches are those be inspected at NMFS, Protected Re- within the historical range of the ESU sources Division, 525 NE Oregon that can still be occupied by any life Street—Suite 500, Portland, OR 97232– stage of coho salmon. Inaccessible 2737, or NMFS, Office of Protected Re- sources, 1315 East-West Highway, Sil- reaches are those above specific dams ver Spring, MD 20910, or at the Na- identified in Table 6 of this part or tional Archives and Records Adminis- above longstanding, naturally impass- tration (NARA). For information on able barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in the availability of this material at existence for at least several hundred NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go to: http:// years).
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Planning and Building Services
    COUNTY OF MENDOCINO BRENT SCHULTZ, DIRECTOR TELEPHONE: 707-234-6650 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES FAX: 707-463-5709 FB PHONE: 707-964-5379 860 NORTH BUSH STREET UKIAH CALIFORNIA 95482 FB FAX: 707-961-2427 [email protected] 120 WEST FIR STREET FT. BRAGG CALIFORNIA 95437 www.mendocinocounty.org/pbs April 17, 2020 Department of Transportation CalFire – Resource Management US Natural Resources Conservation Environmental Health - Ukiah Division of Mine Reclamation US Army Corps of Engineers Building Inspection - Ukiah Department of Fish and Wildlife US Fish & Wildlife Service Assessor California Native Plant Society Cloverdale Rancheria Agriculture Commissioner California State Lands Commission Redwood Valley Rancheria Air Quality Management RWQCB Sherwood Valley Band of Pomo Indians Caltrans NOAA Fisheries CASE#: REC_2019-0001 DATE FILED: 4/2/2019 OWNER: RICHARD L & MARGARET A ROWLAND APPLICANT: GRIST CREEK AGGREGATES, LLC AGENT: COMPASS LAND GROUP (JORDAN MAINE) REQUEST: Reclamation Plan Modification to include a secondary gravel bar to the existing riverbed gravel extraction operation. The operation, for which a vested right has been granted for both the existing and secondary gravel bars; includes the extraction of up to 50,000 cubic yards of sand and gravel per year, and a maximum anticipated depth of 20 feet. LOCATION: 14± miles southwest of Covelo town center, lying on the north side of State Highway 162 (SH 162, AKA Covelo Road), 0.2± miles west of its intersection with Laytonville Dos Rios Road (CR 322), located at the confluence of the Middle Fork and Mainstem of the Eel River (APNs: 035-040-36 & -45), AKA Rowland Bar (CA MINE ID# 91-23-0065).
    [Show full text]
  • The Recovery of Aggraded Stream Channels at Gauging Stations in Northern California and Southern Oregon
    189 Erosion and Sediment Transport in Pacific Rim Steeplands. I.A.H.S. Publ. No. 132 (Christchurch, 1981) The recovery of aggraded stream channels at gauging stations in northern California and southern Oregon T.E. Lisle, Forest Service, US Dept. Agric, 1700 Bayview Dr., Arcata, California, 95521, USA. Abstract. Discharge measurements at nine gauging stations in northern California and southern Oregon document episodes of channel bed aggradation lasting 5 to 15 years after the flood of December 1964 to January 1965. Bed elevations rose 1 to 4 m, then gradually declined to a stable level at or above the pre-flood level. Seven gauging sections widened by 7 to 105 per cent during the aggradation episodes. Channels formed within aggraded material narrowed during degradation; in one case, the pre-flood width was attained. Eroded streambanks formed in non-alluvial material rarely advanced because of 1) post-1964 flood flows, 2) the slowness of processes forming non-alluvial streambanks, and 3) the difficulty of establishing riparian vegetation under the conditions of coarse substrate and seasonal rainfall. These results suggest that infrequent large floods are more effective in shaping stream channels in highly erosive terrane with seasonal rainfall than in less erosive humid areas with comparable amounts of annual precipitation. L'retablissement de agradé sur les lits fluviaux à des stations de jaugeage dans l Californie du nord et l'Oregon du sud Résumé. Les rapports des mesures de décharge à neuf stations de jaugeage dans la Californie du nord et l'Oregon du sud documentent des épisodes d'agradation de lit fluvial qui ont duré de cinq à quinze ans suivant l'inondation de décembre 1964 et de janvier 1965.Les élévations de lit 190 191 INTRODUCTION sont montées de 1 à 4 m, et ensuite elles ont baissé et se sont In a definitive paper, Wolman and Gerson (1978) stated that the effect-- stabilisées au niveau d'avant inondation ou audessus.
    [Show full text]
  • THE EEL RIVER ACTION PLAN Beneficial Uses
    Eel River Forum The mission of the Eel River Forum is to coordinate and integrate conservation and recovery efforts in the Eel River watershed to conserve its ecological resilience, restore its native fish populations, and protect other watershed THE EEL RIVER ACTION PLAN beneficial uses. These actions are also intended to enhance the economic vitality and A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION sustainability of human communities in the Eel River AND RECOMMENDED ACTIONS basin. PREPARED FOR Charter Members THE EEL RIVER FORUM California Trout CA Department of Fish and Wildlife PREPARED BY CA State Parks Coastal Conservancy EEL RIVER FORUM MEMBERS Eel River Recovery Project Eel River Watershed Improvement Group FINAL REPORT Environmental Protection Information Center MAY 2016 Friends of the Eel River Friends of the Van Duzen River Humboldt County Resource Conservation District Mendocino County Resource Conservation District National Marine Fisheries Service North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Pacific Gas and Electric Company Potter Valley Irrigation District Round Valley Indian Tribe Salmonid Restoration Federation Sonoma County Water Agency US Bureau of Land Management US Fish and Wildlife Service US Forest Service Wiyot Tribe Some Text Here. EEL RIVER ACTION PLAN FINAL REPORT 2016 2 | P a g e EEL RIVER ACTION PLAN FINAL REPORT 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 6 1: INTRODUCTION: THE EEL RIVER AND THE EEL RIVER
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Review of Eel River Anadromous Salmonids, 2010
    HISTORICAL REVIEW OF EEL RIVER ANADROMOUS SALMONIDS, WITH EMPHASIS ON CHINOOK SALMON, COHO SALMON AND STEELHEAD UC DAVIS, CENTER FOR WATERSHED SCIENCES WORKING PAPER A Report Commissioned by California Trout, 2010 Ronald M. Yoshiyama and Peter B. Moyle Center for Watershed Sciences University of California, Davis Davis, CA 95616 February 1, 2010 Yoshiyama & Moyle Page - 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project was made possible by the many people—past and present—who have held an interest in the Eel River system and its salmonid fishes. We greatly appreciate the support we received from numerous individuals and organizations in conducting our review. Our colleagues in the public agencies, academic institutions and private sector generously gave their time and information that contributed to this report. They are acknowledged in the text as personal communications. We especially thank S. Downie, B. Jong, M. Gilroy, S. Harris, S. Cannata, P. Higgins and B. Kier who collectively provided volumes of data and documents. In addition, we thank Scott Feierabend and the staff of California Trout for their constant support, high enthusiasm and enduring patience in seeing this project to its end. California Trout enabled funding of this project from the Friends of the Eel and anonymous donors. Yoshiyama & Moyle Page - 3 HISTORICAL REVIEW OF EEL RIVER ANADROMOUS SALMONIDS, WITH EMPHASIS ON CHINOOK SALMON, COHO SALMON AND STEELHEAD Ronald M. Yoshiyama and Peter B. Moyle Center for Watershed Sciences, University of California, Davis, CA 95616 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Eel River basin once possessed significant populations of at least five distinct kinds of anadromous salmonids, including fall-run Chinook salmon, coho salmon, winter and summer steelhead, and coastal cutthroat trout.
    [Show full text]