Easygrants ID: 18957 National Fish and Wildlife Foundation NFWF/Legacy Grant Project ID: 0603.09.018957 Chesapeake Bay Small Watershed Grants 2009 - Submit Final Programmatic Report (Activities) Grantee Organization: Savage River Watershed Association, Inc. Project Title: Savage River Fish Barrier Removal (MD)

Project Period 09/01/2009 - 08/31/2011 Award Amount $120,000.00 Matching Contributions $178,568.00 Project Location Description (from Proposal) The project is located just off of Old Beall School Rd. on the north side of the road in Garrett County Maryland.

Project Summary (from Proposal) The Savage River Headwater Brook Trout Barrier Removal Project restored natural stream conditions to a 600 foot reach of the Savage River, improving water quality and aquatic habitat in the Savage River Watershed, the only unfragmented brook trout resource in Maryland. Formerly impounded, a headwater reach along the mainstem of the river now allows fish to access 2.5 stream miles upstream from the existing dam. A 1/2 acre wetland was constructed to enhance the riparian zone, and the area now offers a wide variety of educational, research and recreational opportunities.

Summary of Accomplishments The Savage River Headwater Brook Trout Barrier Removal Project restored natural stream conditions to a 600’ reach of the Savage River, improving water quality and aquatic habitat in the Savage River watershed, the only unfragmented brook trout resource in Maryland. A headwater reach along the mainstem of the Savage River was impounded. The project has improved aquatic habitat by restoring natural stream features, and removing the impoundment which was causing a thermal impact. Restoration allowed fish access to 2.5 stream miles upstream from the dam upon its removal. The final project planting included 150 trees, 800 shrubs, and 1,475 herbaceous plants. The total area planted was 0.27 acres of newly planted riparian zone and 0.41 acres of created wetland. Sediment loading to the Savage River has been minimized by restoring riparian habitat and converting the reservoir into a wetland. The site has begun to serve as an outdoor classroom for stream restoration and brook trout habitat improvement projects. The project also has great research potential and university students have already shown interest in studying the site. Outreach continues and the site will serve as a demonstration project for landowners with headwater reservoirs.

Lessons Learned For a small organization, a restoration project of this size presented a number of challenges and opportunities to learn. These challenges have been overcome by keeping open communication with partners and funders. Ultimately these challenges have helped SRWA to build a stronger organizational foundation to manage future restoration projects. Lessons learned throughout the course of the project are summarized in the following areas; Administrative & Financial, Project Planting, Timing of Construction, and General. In short the following three lessons are of great value: 1) A small organization has to be prepared for the amount of administrative effort needed to manage multiple funding sources. 2) When preparing specifications be specific about the size of trees to be planted. 3) Effective project management is essential to ensure sufficient progress, but there must be flexibility about the timeframe to complete a project that requires permits and can be influenced by weather conditions.

Conservation Activities Wetland Restoration

Page 1 of 30 Progress Measures Acres of wetland habitat improved Value at Grant Completion 0.41 Conservation Activities Riparian Restoration Progress Measures Linear feet of riparian buffer restored with at least a 35-foot buffer Value at Grant Completion 600 Conservation Activities Biological Monitoring Progress Measures # of participants/volunteers in project Value at Grant Completion 2 Conservation Activities Dam Removal Progress Measures Linear feet of upstream channel opened to fish passage Value at Grant Completion 13,200 Conservation Activities Outreach Progress Measures # of landowners targeted by program Value at Grant Completion 4 Conservation Activities Stream Channel Construction Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (In-stream habitat structure built using natural stream design.) Value at Grant Completion 10

Page 2 of 30

Chesapeake Bay Stewardship Fund Final Programmatic Report Narrative

Project: 2009-0054-029.MD, Savage River Headwater Brook Trout Barrier Removal Project Organization: Savage River Watershed Association, Inc. Project Partners: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Maryland Department of the Environment, Chesapeake Bay Trust, FishAmerica Foundation, the American Sportfishing Association, the City of Frostburg, and Canaan Valley Institute. Grant Award: $120,000 Matching Funds: $178,568

1. Project Description. Briefly describe your project, including a description of the problem your project is trying to address, the project’s objectives and strategies, as well as the project location, and a characterization of the watershed and the relevant characteristics of the community’s natural resources, population, and economy.

The Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) listed brook trout as a ―Species in Greatest Need of Conservation‖ in its federally mandated Wildlife Diversity Conservation Plan. Concern for brook trout fisheries in Maryland led to the development of a brook trout Fisheries Management Plan (FMP). One of thirteen management recommendations of the FMP is to "develop a comprehensive brook trout management plan for the upper Savage River watershed, the only large area with intact, connected populations.‖ The upper Savage River watershed comprises over 100 miles of interconnected streams, 25% of all brook trout stream miles statewide. Conservation and restoration of headwater streams is critical to long-term viability and sustainability of the brook trout resource. Headwater impoundments, known to adversely affect temperature and fish passage, are a threat to this sustainability. One impoundment was specifically identified as a priority and is the Savage River Headwater Brook Trout Barrier Removal Project site.

During the 2008 and 2009 summer seasons, Savage River Watershed Association (SRWA) worked with Alan Heft of DNR, Inland Fisheries Management Division, to collect thermal regime data in headwater stream sites where impoundments exist in the upper Savage River watershed. Data collected clearly show thermal impacts below these impoundments. Down-stream temperature variations exceeded the upper optimum temperature range of brook trout (20 ْ C) for extended periods of the summer season. Data recorded at the project site showed peak stream temperatures that exceeded 24 ْ C below the impoundment, yet never exceeded 18 ْ C above the impoundment. Identified as a priority restoration site by SRWA and partners, this impoundment was not only causing a thermal impact, it was also blocking fish passage to a headwater reach along the mainstem of the Savage River. The impoundment was a reservoir constructed to supply the town of Frostburg with drinking water, but it was decommissioned due to high amounts of sediment deposition in the reservoir. A series of wells was installed at the site to supplement water previously supplied by the reservoir. Although the reservoir was no longer needed, the dam remained in place, restricting fish passage and creating a thermal impact in the Savage River.

The project is located on property owned by the City of Frostburg just off of Old Beall School Rd. on the north side of the road in Garrett County Maryland. The watershed is 02141006 – Savage River, and is sparsely

NFWF Project #18957 // 2009-0054-029.MD Savage River Fish Barrier Removal (MD) 1

Page 3 of 30 populated as approximately 73% of the watershed area is State land. Population in the watershed is approximately 0.02 persons per acre. However, the project is located fairly close to Frostburg State University and University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Appalachian Laboratory where the SRWA main office is located. DNR project partners also have office space at the Appalachian Laboratory. This arrangement provides ample opportunity for outreach and education opportunities for demonstration of stream restoration techniques and other educational outreach events. The local economy is primarily driven by Frostburg State University and New Page paper mill.

The objectives of the Savage River Headwater Brook Trout Barrier Removal Project were to restore natural stream conditions to a 1,000 foot reach of the Savage River, thereby improving water quality and aquatic habitat in the Savage River Watershed, the only unfragmented brook trout resource in Maryland. More specifically this project proposed to accomplish the following: 1. Restore a Savage River headwater reach, by bypassing the dam a. Reconnect critical habitat and native brook trout populations in the 2 square mile watershed upstream of the current dam to the downstream Savage River watershed, including access to spawning habitat on 2.5 headwater miles of the Savage River. b. Improve aquatic habitat by restoring natural stream features and designing and constructing in- stream habitat structures c. Decrease water temperature by keeping stream water flowing and under canopy d. Decrease the amount of sediment contributed by streambanks downstream of the dam e. Enhance the riparian zone by planting and restoring the reservoir into a one acre wetland 2. Provide educational, research, and recreational opportunities a. Serve as an outdoor classroom for stream restoration activities and brook trout habitat improvement projects b. Serve as a demonstration project for landowners with headwater reservoirs c. Serve as a research site for sediment/turbidity studies and aquatic species movement/repopulation

The project was planned to restore brook trout passage and habitat in a Chesapeake Bay headwater stream, directly benefiting fisheries, and to enhance the riparian zone by establishing a wetland in place of the reservoir.

2. Summary of Accomplishments In four to five sentences, provide a brief summary of the project’s key accomplishments and outcomes that were observed or measured.

Removing the impoundment immediately eliminated a thermal impact to Savage River and linked critical habitat for brook trout populations. Using natural stream design and creating in-stream habitat, the project restored a 600 foot reach of the Savage River, to improve water quality and aquatic habitat in the Savage River watershed. The project also created a one half acre wetland to enhance habitat while filtering sediment and nutrients from runoff. After construction was complete, three native brook trout were encountered during a DNR fish survey and temperature differences were immediately measureable. Temperature and biological data are being collected by DNR for 2011 and data will continue to be incorporated into planning and restoration efforts. The site acts as a demonstration project for similar headwater impoundments and will be incorporated into the watershed restoration plan being developed.

3. Project Activities & Outcomes

Activities NFWF Project #18957 // 2009-0054-029.MD Savage River Fish Barrier Removal (MD) 2

Page 4 of 30  Describe and quantify (using the approved metrics referenced in your grant agreement) the primary activities conducted during this grant.  Briefly explain discrepancies between the activities conducted during the grant and the activities agreed upon in your grant agreement.

Four primary tasks were included in the proposed methodology and work plan within the project timeline. The following is an account of these tasks and the status of each one. There were some delays in the first two tasks but the project was completed in the proposed timeframe.

Task 1: Design, Assessment, and Permitting — Design and assessment were funded by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources and were completed by Canaan Valley Institute (CVI). CVI prepared a design for the stream restoration and wetland creation including all necessary drawings and maps, the order of activities, and lists of construction and planting materials. They also applied for necessary permits, which are held by the City of Frostburg. Timeline Originally Proposed: July 2009 – February 2010 Status: Complete

Task 2: Construction and Construction Management – SRWA contracted the services of CVI to provide on-the- ground construction planning, contracting, and construction oversight. CVI hired a sub-contractor, Pine Mountain Coal Company (PMCC) to build the project. Because project construction began in September and ended in mid-November, the final planting took place under a separate contract in the spring of 2011. Timeline Originally Proposed: March 2010 – May 2010 Status: Complete

Task 3: Monitoring, pre-construction – DNR and SRWA have collected thermal regime data and have conducted pre-construction biological monitoring to establish baseline data. Additional data were collected when construction was delayed. Timeline Originally Proposed: June 2009 – August 2009 Status: Complete

Monitoring, post-construction - As part of their contract CVI completed a post construction (as-built) survey of the site required for nationwide 404 permits. This included a longitudinal profile, channel cross sections, and assessment of the data. Post-construction biological monitoring will be provided by DNR and the SRWA volunteers. Post-construction monitoring will include deploying water temperature monitors each summer above and below the restoration area for at least three years. Data loggers will be used to record in-situ water temperature every hour. Deployment will be done in May each year, and loggers will be retrieved in September. Fish sampling will be done for at least three years at the established stations to monitor re-colonization of native fish species. Backpack electroshock sampling will be done during the June – July period following DNR Inland Fisheries standard stream sampling protocols. Benthic macroinvertebrate sampling, using Save Our Streams protocols will be conducted in the restoration area for at least three years to document re-colonization. Timeline Originally Proposed: March 2010 – September 2013 Status: The as-built survey is complete, post-construction monitoring is on-going

Task 4: Dissemination, Outreach, and Education – The site has already begun to provide educational, and research opportunities as site visits continue to be offered to watershed landowners, SRWA members, partners, funders, and other interested persons. Educational opportunities are available to university students studying stream restoration activities and brook trout habitat improvement. The site serves as a demonstration project for nearby watershed landowners with headwater reservoirs, and is available for use as a pilot site to measure sediment and erosion.

NFWF Project #18957 // 2009-0054-029.MD Savage River Fish Barrier Removal (MD) 3

Page 5 of 30 Timeline Originally Proposed: March 2010 – September 2013 Status: Outreach efforts are ongoing.

SRWA partnered with DNR, and the City of Frostburg to hire Canaan Valley Institute (CVI) for design of a natural stream channel to replace the dammed channel. A project design was developed to re-rout the stream around the reservoir and convert the reservoir to a wetland. Construction began with the dam being breeched and drained gradually to not introduce sediment. A new stream channel was constructed and instream habitat structures were built. After the new stream was opened, the previous impoundment site was restored to a wetland. Completion of the project restored a 600’ headwater stream reach on the mainstem Savage River by bypassing then removing the dam. Habitat, critical for native brook trout populations, in the 2 square mile watershed upstream of the previous dam was reconnected to the downstream Savage River watershed. This includes access to spawning habitat in 2.5 headwater miles of the Savage River. Ten in-stream habitat structures, cross veins and J-hooks, were built using a combination of rocks, logs and root wads to restore natural stream features and provide improved aquatic habitat. By keeping stream water flowing, water temperatures below the project area were immediately decreased. Riparian vegetation was planted to decrease the amount of sediment being contributed by streambanks downstream of the previous dam. The riparian zones were further enhanced by converting the reservoir to a one half acre of wetland.

There were only minor discrepancies in planned activities. First the planting was originally proposed to be completed by volunteers. However due to the difficult nature of planting in a wetland, a separate contract was prepared hire a contractor to complete the planting. Secondly, more trees shrubs and plants were used than originally planned.

Outcomes  Describe and quantify progress towards achieving the project outcomes described in your grant agreement. (Quantify using the approved metrics referenced in your grant agreement or by using more relevant metrics not included in the application.)  Briefly explain discrepancies between what actually happened compared to what was anticipated to happen  Provide any further information (such as unexpected outcomes) important for understanding project activities and outcome results.

Table 1 below is the logic framework that was prepared for the project proposal when submitted. A column has been added to show actual project outcomes compared to the proposed outcomes.

NFWF Project #18957 // 2009-0054-029.MD Savage River Fish Barrier Removal (MD) 4

Page 6 of 30 Goals and Outcomes Goals Projected Project Projected Post-Project Actual Project Outcome Output/Outcome Output/Outcome 1) Restore the Savage River Migration through dam site Regular migration through site Migration through dam site headwater reach, bypassing 10% increase in brook trout 50% increase in biomass Only present/absents results. the dam biomass Brook trout and other fishes present. Improved habitat for biological Increased biological monitoring Surveys ongoing recruitment scores for macroinvertebrates and fishes Ambient water temperatures below Brook trout migration and Surveys ongoing though the dam do not reach 70ºF reproduction below the dam temperatures were immediately throughout the summer reduced. 2) Create a wetland and 500 shrubs planted 400 plants established 800 shrubs planted riparian zone in the existing 1 acre of newly created wetland 1 acre of established wetland ½ acre of newly created wetland impoundment and area 0.6 acres of healthy riparian zone 1 acre of healthy riparian zone 0.27 acres riparian zone planted adjacent to stream 3) Provide educational, 50 students and 25 adults using 200 visitors learning about Over 50 visitors to date. Outreach research, and recreational outdoor classroom wetland and stream restoration and Education are on-going. opportunities 20 landowners visit the project site 50 landowners have visited the Four landowners have visited the and understand the objectives and project site and 5 landowners site. methods of the project have signed up for restoration work on their property 2 graduate students studying 2 research projects completed One student has inquired about impacts of the project demonstrating long-term impacts studying the site. to trout populations and habitat Table 1: The originally proposed outcomes as they compare to the actual outcomes when the project was completed.

NFWF Project #18957 // 2009-0054-029.MD Savage River Fish Barrier Removal (MD) 5

Page 7 of 30

The originally proposed length of stream channel to be restored was 1,000’, a projected number based on initial site assessment. However upon completion of the final design the length of stream to be restored was reduced to 600’ based on the length of stream channel necessary to by-pass the impoundment. The remaining 400’ of stream channel is natural stream bed that was not disturbed. While there was a reduction in length of stream construction that would theoretically reduce the budget, a couple of things have prevented a reduction in budget. Though the stream length included in the work was shorter, the number of stream habitat structures to be built did not decrease. Also, water diversion structures needed were not included in the original budget projections. This added an equipment rental expense of $15,700. The total amount of plant material included in the planting plan, and therefore the planting budget, has not been reduced as a result of less feet of stream channel being included in construction. Design of the final planting area included a denser planting pattern than originally projected. The final project planting plan that was followed included the planting of; 150 trees, 800 shrubs, and 1,475 herbaceous plants. The total area planted was 0.27 acres of newly planted riparian zone and 0.41 acres of created wetland.

The project did however, still reconnect habitat for native brook trout populations in the 2 square mile watershed upstream of the previously existing dam to the downstream Savage River watershed. This includes access to spawning habitat on 2.5 headwater miles of the Savage River.

Project signage was not in the original project plan and was included as a requirement of the grant agreement required by FishAmerica Foundation and Chesapeake Bay Trust. Including signs at the project site definitely enhanced the education and outreach component of the project.

4. Challenges and Lessons Learned Describe any specific challenges that have arisen during the course of the project and how they have been addressed. Also describe the key lessons learned from this project, such as the least and most effective conservation practices or notable aspects of the project’s methods, monitoring, or results. How could other conservation organizations adapt their projects to build upon some of these key lessons about what worked best and what did not?

For a small organization, a restoration project of this size presented a number of challenges and opportunities to learn. These challenges have been overcome by keeping open communication with partners and funders. It is important to note that the funders were all understating of the situation and were as accommodating as possible. Ultimately these challenges have helped SRWA to build a stronger organizational foundation to manage future restoration projects. The following summarizes some of the lessons learn throughout the course of the project.

Administrative & Financial: The most challenging aspect of the project was in coordinating four different funding sources. Each grant had conditions to meet prior to dispersing funds (some of which were reimbursable) and this was challenging with a small reserve of funds and only part-time staff. It would be advisable to ensure a reserve of at least 5% of the overall projected budget to cover funds that are reimbursable. The treasurer of SRWA, who is a volunteer, was adamant to stay involved and updated on project activities so that she would understand the billing and grant dynamics and expect invoices before they arrived. She did a fantastic job of keeping up with the varied multiple invoicing that occurred. This was very helpful and made the financial aspect of project management much less hectic than it could have been. Any volunteer financial manager would benefit by staying involved and updated on project activities. While multiple match funding sources are helpful, it’s important to consider that each grant or funding source has separate administrative requirements including financial management and deliverables that have to be met.

Project Planting: The original intent was to have the wetland plating done by volunteers. However we were advised by wetland experts from the Maryland Department of the Environment, Non-tidal Wetlands Division to NFWF Project #18957 // 2009-0054-029.MD Savage River Fish Barrier Removal (MD) 6

Page 8 of 30 not use volunteers due to the challenging nature of planting in a wetland. Also the size of the trees to be planted was not specified in advance and the low bid for a planting contract was reflected in part by the size of trees used. The trees planted are small enough to require tree tubes for protection against predation. It may be worth paying more to start out with larger trees that do not require tree tubes, or at least keep in mind that the use of tree tubes will require monitoring so that the tubes are removed when the trees are large enough. Leaving the tree tubes in place for too long can injure the trees.

Timing of Construction: The timing of construction (November completion) was outside of the planting season, and final planting did not ensue until the following spring. During the winter and spring following construction, there were heavy rains and stream flow exceeded bank full conditions. Seeding and mulching, and temporary stabilization after construction were not enough to ideally protect the stream banks. Consequently minor repairs were required in the spring prior to final planting. It is difficult to say that early season construction would be better because construction in the spring can be difficult due to wet and muddy conditions. Then in the summer it may be too dry to establish plantings without a watering requirement. Ultimately the timing of construction will be dictated, at least to some degree, by the weather and by when the necessary permits are issued. The message is that no matter how the project timeline is planned, there are factors that can affect scheduled activities and is it is important to be able to adjust plans accordingly.

General: The contractor that submitted low bid, Pine Mountain Coal Company (PMCC) had experience in building acid mine drainage remediation projects but did not have previous experience in constructing natural stream features. However, they were local, reputable, and interested in gaining such experience. PMCC received the high score on an evaluation matrix reviewed by partners and was awarded the contract. Selecting this contractor proved to be a good decision. They were great to work with, conscientious about their work, and now they have the experience of building a stream channel from a natural stream design.

The timeframe of two years to complete a project of this size and scope is sufficient to account for delays that are inevitable in a project that requires a lot of coordination effort. To ensure progress adequate to complete the project in two years, however, it is also important that the project be coordinated efficiently.

5. Dissemination Briefly identify any dissemination of lessons learned or other project results to external audiences, such as the public or other conservation organizations.

Project progress and results have been disseminated in a number of ways and lessons learned are being included. SRWA staff has presented project information at conferences and SRWA has sponsored outreach and education events. The following is a list of outreach activities that have taken place thus far.

 In April 2010, volunteers participated in pre-construction monitoring of benthic macroinvertebrates using Save Our Streams protocols. Two persons volunteered a total of 10 hours.  SRWA hosted two guest speakers at regularly scheduled public meetings. Will Postlethwait, design engineer with Canaan Valley Institute, was the guest speaker for the November 2009 SRWA public meeting to discuss the project and design progress. Alan Heft of DNR was the guest speaker at the March 2010 SRWA public meeting. Mr. Heft discussed thermal data collected throughout the watershed, the extent of thermal impact that is of concern, and the importance of the dam removal project as it relates to fisheries resources.  SRWA staff attended two conferences to present the work of the project; the Maryland Water Quality Monitoring conference held on December 3, 2009, and the Trout Unlimited Coldwater Summit held on March 6, 2010, at the National Conservation Training Center in Shepherdstown, WV. NFWF Project #18957 // 2009-0054-029.MD Savage River Fish Barrier Removal (MD) 7

Page 9 of 30  SRWA has conducted three educational site tours. The first was upon request of a group member. Project partners, members, and one local landowner attended this site visit to see how an impoundment is removed and what the benefits are for fish and water quality. The second site tour was an educational event held on March 18, 2010 when a group of students from the Northeast Wildlife Conclave were hosted by the Frostburg State University Wildlife Society. For this Conclave event, SRWA staff led a group of 12 students on a fieldtrip workshop to the project site. The third was held for members of the Mid-Atlantic Council of Trout Unlimited (MAC-TU).  On June 10, 2011 SRWA hosted a ribbon cutting ceremony at the project site to recognize and thank our partners and funders all of whom made this project a reality. Nearly 30 people attended the ceremony.  SRWA staff presented the project to the MAC-TU during their annual meeting on July 9, 2011. The following day (7/10) a project site tour was held for interested MAC-TU members as previous mentioned.  SRWA has also highlighted the project in their newsletter and on their website. Signage was placed at the project site. A project brochure has not been produced.

Educational opportunities are ongoing and being offered upon request. Thus far nearly 50 people have visited the project site including students, landowners, SRWA members, partners and funders. Future volunteer activities will consist of continued biological monitoring, monitoring of plant mortality, and replacement planting as needed.

6. Project Documents Include in your final programmatic report, via the Uploads section of this task, the following:

 2-10 representative photos from the project. Photos need to have a minimum resolution of 300 dpi;  report publications, GIS data, brochures, videos, outreach tools, press releases, media coverage;  any project deliverables per the terms of your grant agreement.

Ten photographs have been included as JEG files to depict the site conditions prior to construction, during construction and upon completion of construction. Three news releases that were produced are included as one attached document. A brief narrative to explain each photo is included as APPENDIX A, page 10. PDF documents uploaded to accompany the report are; the invitations to the ribbon cutting ceremony, the ceremony program, and the narratives for the signs that are posted at the gated project site entrance and next to the wetland. Photos of the signs on site are included however they are not clearly legible at that scale. Therefore the PDF files were included for content.

POSTING OF FINAL REPORT: This report and attached project documents may be shared by the Foundation and any Funding Source for the Project via their respective websites. In the event that the Recipient intends to claim that its final report or project documents contains material that does not have to be posted on such websites because it is protected from disclosure by statutory or regulatory provisions, the Recipient shall clearly mark all such potentially protected materials as “PROTECTED” and provide an explanation and complete citation to the statutory or regulatory source for such protection.

NFWF Project #18957 // 2009-0054-029.MD Savage River Fish Barrier Removal (MD) 8

Page 10 of 30 APPENDIX A: Description for the 10 photographs that have been included as JPEG files uploaded to the NFWF Easygrants system, November 4, 2011.

CBSWG.2009-0054-029.MD.01 Impoundment Pre-construction: Dam and impoundment pre-construction.

CBSWG.2009-0054-029.MD.02 Beginning Construction: The dam was breached and the impoundment was drained prior to channel of the stream channel.

CBSWG.2009-0054-029.MD.03 Stream Channel Construction: The stream channel was graded prior to constructing natural stream features.

CBSWG.2009-0054-029.MD.04 Post Construction High Water: The 2010-2011 fall through spring seasons brought heavy rains and bankfull conditions to test the newly created stream channel before final planting had taken place.

CBSWG.2009-0054-029.MD.05 Establishing Riparian Vegetation: By July 2011, establishing riparian vegetation becomes obvious and the new stream channel works well.

CBSWG.2009-0054-029.MD.06 New Wetland: The newly created wetland, November 17, 2010 post- construction, prior to final project planting.

CBSWG.2009-0054-029.MD.07 Entrance Sign: A project sign was posted just outside of the gated project entrance and includes contact information for DNR so that interested persons may request more information.

CBSWG.2009-0054-029.MD.08 Wetland Sign: An informational sign about the values of a wetland ecosystem was posted next to the newly created wetland.

CBSWG.2009-0054-029.MD.09. Fish Shocking at Ceremony: Following the ribbon cutting ceremony held on June 10, 2011, guests were giving a tour of the site that included a fish survey demonstration using backpack electro-shocking techniques.

CBSWG.2009-0054-029.MD.10.Establishing Wetland: By early July 2011 the created wetland is becoming well established.

NFWF Project #18957 // 2009-0054-029.MD Savage River Fish Barrier Removal (MD) 9

Page 11 of 30

Savage River Watershed Association Awarded Grant Funding

The Savage River Watershed Association has recently been awarded $120,000 by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to fund the removal of an impoundment that is a barrier to fish passage in the Savage River headwaters. The impoundment is one of several reservoirs constructed to supply the town of Frostburg with drinking water but it has been decommissioned and a series of wells has been installed at the site to supplement water previously supplied by the reservoir. Although the reservoir is no longer needed, the dam remains in place, restricting fish passage and providing a source for increased stream temperature in the Savage River headwaters. The dam restricts fish migration from the downstream Savage River watershed to the upper 2.5 miles of the Savage River extending to the Finzel Swamp headwater wetland complex owned by The Nature Conservancy. Restoring the natural stream channel of the Savage River will link critical habitat for brook trout populations. The project will restore a 1,000 foot section of stream channel and create a one acre wetland where the pond currently is.

The Canaan Valley Institute has been contracted to design the project. The plan will reroute the stream around the current reservoir utilizing portions of abandoned stream channel where possible, and converting the reservoir into a wetland. The proposed plan will avoid releasing the accumulated sediment from the reservoir downstream once the dam is breached and provides immediate canopy cover, keeping stream temperatures low. Creation of the one acre wetland will also improve habitat for additional plant and animal species while filtering sediment and nutrients from runoff. The project will demonstrate how an impoundment is removed and what the benefits are for fish and water quality in the Savage River Headwaters. Executive Director Laura Haynes is the project manager for the Savage River Watershed Association. For more information about the project please contact Laura at 301-245-4599 or via email at [email protected].

The Savage River Watershed Association (SRWA) is a group of local landowners and other citizens dedicated to preserving and enhancing the rural nature and natural resources of the Savage River watershed. Members hope to assist interested landowners and public land managers with environmental stewardship efforts and educational outreach. Everyone who is concerned about the Savage River watershed is invited to join.

SRWA monthly meetings are held at Route 40 Elementary School. The school is located at 17764 National Pike a few miles west of Frostburg in Garrett County. For more information contact Laura Haynes at 301-245-4599, or [email protected], or Shannon Philbin at 301-689-7156 or [email protected]

Page 12 of 30 For Immediate Release

Savage River Watershed Association to Host Statewide Fisheries Biologist as Guest Speaker

The Savage River Watershed Association (SRWA) will hold its bi-monthly meeting on January 21, 2010 at 7:00 pm at Route 40 Elementary School. Each meeting brings local citizens and SRWA members together to talk about issues within the watershed. The guest speaker for this meeting will be Alan Heft, a Statewide Fisheries Biologist with the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Inland Fisheries Management Division.

Mr. Heft will discuss results of a 2009 water temperature monitoring project that was conducted throughout the Savage River watershed, and how this relates to the Brook Trout Barrier Removal Project being planned in the Savage River headwaters. His presentation will be followed by a question and answer session about resources of the Savage River watershed. Mr. Heft graduated from Frostburg State University in 1988 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Fisheries and Wildlife Management, and he has been working in the DNR, Fisheries Division for 22 years. His responsibilities with DNR include statewide coldwater fisheries research and management.

Mr. Heft will be accompanied by Matt Sell, a Western Region Biologist and brook trout specialist. Mr. Sell graduated from Frostburg State University in 2004 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Fisheries and Wildlife Management. Mr. Sell has extensive experience sampling stream fishes with the University of Maryland, and the Maryland DNR, Biological Stream Survey. His current responsibilities include conducting Western Region fishery activities and assisting Mr. Heft with brook trout management efforts.

SRWA is a group of local landowners and other citizens dedicated to preserving and enhancing the rural nature and natural resources of the Savage River watershed. Members assist interested landowners and public land managers with environmental stewardship efforts and educational outreach. Anyone who is concerned about the Savage River watershed is invited to join. SRWA meetings are held at Route 40 Elementary School, 17764 National Pike, just west of Frostburg, on the third Thursday of odd numbered months, beginning at 7 p.m. For more information, persons may contact SRWA via email at [email protected], or [email protected], or by phone at 301-689-7156. The SRWA is a nonprofit charitable organization. Donations may be sent to: Savage River Watershed Association, PO Box 355, Frostburg, MD 21532.

Page 13 of 30 June 15, 2011 For Immediate Release

Ribbon Cutting Ceremony for the Savage River Headwater Dam Removal and Stream Restoration Project

On June 10, 2011 the Savage River Watershed Association (SRWA) hosted a ribbon cutting ceremony for the recently completed Savage River Headwater Dam Removal and Stream Restoration Project, constructed on property owned by the City of Frostburg. The ceremony was attended by local representatives, project partners and funders.

The project restored natural stream conditions to a 600’ reach of the Savage River to improve habitat for Brook trout, Salvelinus fontinalis, Maryland’s only native freshwater trout species. In 2006 the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) listed brook trout as a “Species in Greatest Need of Conservation” leading to the development of a brook trout Fisheries Management Plan that includes a focus on the upper Savage River resource. This area comprises over 100 miles of interconnected streams that are 25% of all brook trout stream miles in Maryland. Brook trout require cool stream temperatures that do not exceed 70 ْ F. Headwater ponds and impoundments are known to adversely affect stream temperatures and block fish passage. When a pond is built in-line with a stream, the surface water of the pond warms. As the water re-enters the stream it ْ increases the stream temperature below the pond. When stream temperature exceeds 70 F for extended periods, brook trout cannot survive. This condition is known as a thermal impact.

In the early 1900’s an impoundment was built on the upper Savage River as part of a municipal water supply for the City of Frostburg and surrounding communities. This impoundment was abandoned in 1986 with the upgrade of the Savage groundwater collection system and replacement of Piney Dam and Reservoir. Though the upper Savage River reservoir was no longer needed, the old dam remained in place causing increased water temperatures and acting as a barrier to fish passage. The City of Frostburg provided key support to remove the deteriorating dam in order to improve water quality and fish habitat in the Savage River watershed. During the 2008-2010 summer seasons, biologists with Maryland DNR’s Inland Fisheries Management Division monitored the temperature at this site. Data recorded showed peak stream temperatures that exceeded 75 ْ F below the impoundment, yet never exceeded 65 ْ F above the impoundment. Savage River Watershed Association and partners identified this as a priority restoration site as the impoundment was not only causing a thermal impact, it also blocked fish passage to a headwater reach along the mainstem of the Savage River.

Canaan Valley Institute engineered a natural stream design plan to create a free flowing channel that bypassed the reservoir and converted it to a wetland. Natural stream design methods were used to create in-stream structures that add aquatic habitat and provide streambank stability. Stream restoration allowed fish access to 2.5 stream miles upstream from the preexisting dam; improved aquatic habitat by restoring natural stream features; decreased water temperature; and decreased the amount of sediment contributed by streambanks downstream of the pre-existing dam. The former pond area was converted to

Page 14 of 30 a wetland, providing wildlife habitat, water quality improvement, and flood storage. The site will serve as a demonstration for stream restoration activities and brook trout habitat improvement projects.

Restoration of this site was possible as the result of partnership efforts coordinated by SRWA staff. SRWA would like to thank all partners, and funders for their strong support to complete this important project. We would also like to thank our local representatives for their interest in, and support of SRWA activities. Project partners that provided funding were: Chesapeake Bay Trust (CBT), FishAmerica Foundation (FAF), Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE), Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF). Partners who provided professional support and in-kind services were: Canaan Valley Institute (CVI), the City of Frostburg, DNR, and SRWA. Project construction was completed by Pine Mountain Coal Company, Frostburg, MD. Sign design, construction, and installation, was done by Custom Concepts, Frostburg, MD. Final planting of the project was done by Conservation Services, Verona, VA. NFWF was the major funder of the project which will have a final cost of nearly $300,000.

For more information about this project or to participate in future site tours, please contact Laura Haynes, SRWA Director, at 301-689-7156 or [email protected]. SRWA is a group of local landowners and other citizens dedicated to preserving and enhancing the rural nature and natural resources of the Savage River watershed in Garrett County. Members assist interested landowners and public land managers with environmental stewardship efforts and educational outreach.

Page 15 of 30 Restoratiion of Brook Trout Habiitat iin the Savage Riiver Watershed

SRWA

SRWA SRWA SRWA

Page 16 of 30 Page 17 of 30

Page 18 of 30

Savage River Headwater Dam Removal and Stream Restoration Project

Executive Summary

Brook trout, Salvelinus fontinalis, are Maryland’s only native freshwater trout species and are a popular recreational angling resource. In 2006 the Mary- land Department of Natural Resources (DNR) listed brook trout as a “Species in Greatest Need of Conservation”, leading to the development of a brook trout fisheries management plan that includes a focus on the upper Savage River resource. Brook trout require cool stream temperatures that do not ex- ceed 70º F. Headwater ponds and impoundments are known to adversely affect stream temperatures (a condition known as a thermal impact), and block fish passage. In the early 1900’s an impoundment was built on the up- Savage River Watershed Association Proudly per Savage River as part of a municipal water supply for the City of Frostburg Celebrates Completion of the and surrounding communities. The impoundment was abandoned in 1986 Savage River Headwater Dam Removal with the upgrade of the Savage groundwater collection system and replace- ment of Piney Dam and Reservoir. Though the upper Savage River reservoir and Stream Restoration Project on was no longer needed, the old dam remained in place causing increased Friday, June 10, 2011 at 11:00 am water temperatures and acting as a barrier to fish passage. During the 2008- 2010 summer seasons, biologists with DNR’s Inland Fisheries Management Divi- sion monitored the temperatures at this site. Data recorded showed peak stream temperatures that exceeded 75º F below the impoundment, yet nev- er exceeded 65ºF above the impoundment. Savage River Watershed Associ- ation and partners identified this as a priority restoration site as the impound- ment was not only causing a thermal impact, it also blocked fish passage to a headwater reach along the mainstem of the Savage River. The City of Frostburg provided key partner support to remove the deteriorating dam in order to improve water quality and fish habitat in the Savage River water- shed. Canaan Valley Institute engineered a natural stream design plan to create a free flowing channel that bypassed the reservoir and convert it to a wetland. Natural stream design methods were used to create in-stream structures that add aquatic habitat and provide streambank stability. For demonstration several methods of natural stream design were used to build in -stream structures. These include J-hooks and cross vanes constructed with a combination of rocks, root wads and logs. The former pond area is now a wetland, providing wildlife habitat, water quality improvement, and flood storage. The project restored natural stream conditions to a 600’ reach of the Savage River, improving water quality and aquatic habitat in the Savage Riv- er watershed, the only unfragmented brook trout resource in Maryland. Stream restoration allowed fish access to 2.5 stream miles upstream from the preexisting dam, improved aquatic habitat by restoring natural stream fea- SRWA Board Members: Kenny Braitman, Annie Bristow, John Fritts, tures and habitat structures, decreased water temperature, and decreased Ed Gates, Carol McDaniel, Liz McDowell, Rich Raesly, Tom Wolfe the amount of sediment contributed by streambanks downstream of the pre- existing dam. Executive Director: Laura M. Haynes

Page 19 of 30 Savage River Watershed Association would like to thank the Ceremony Itinerary following partners, funders, and contractors for their role in the successful completion of this project. 10:45 – 11:00 Refreshments begin.

 The City of Frostburg: Landowners who provided 11:00 – 11:05 Laura Haynes, Executive Director, SRWA, extensive administrative support. moderator, recognitions and thank yous

 Canaan Valley Institute (CVI): Provided design, onsite 11:05 – 11:10 John Kirby, Frostburg City Administrator construction management, and in-kind services. 11:10 – 11:15 City of Frostburg Mayor Arthur T. Bond  Department of Natural Resources (DNR): Provided grant funding and in-kind services. 11:15 – 11:20 Joseph Gill , Deputy Secretary, Maryland Department of Natural Resources  FishAmerica Foundation: Provided grant funding in partnership with Chesapeake Bay Trust (CBT). 11:20 – 11:25 Mathew Radcliffe, Natural Resources Planner, Non-Title Wetlands Division, Maryland  Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE): Provided Department of the Environment grant funding and technical support. 11:25 – 11:30 Amanda Bassow, Director of  National Fish and Wildlife Foundation: Provided the Chesapeake Programs, National Fish and major grant funding for the project. Wildlife Foundation

 Savage River Watershed Association (SRWA) Board of Direc- 11:30 – 11:35 Johanna Laderman, Executive Director, tors: Provided fantastic support and guidance, and a FishAmerica Foundation wealth of resource knowledge. 11:35 – 11:40 Kirk Mantay, Professional Wetlands Scientist & Restoration Ecologist, Chesapeake Construction Contractors Bay Trust

 Project Construction: Pine Mountain Coal Company (Rayner 11:40 - 11:45 Jennifer Newland, Interim Executive & Sons) Director, Canaan Valley Institute

 Sign Design, Construction, and Installation: Custom Concepts 11:45 - 11:50 Ribbon Cutting, Photo op with partners, funders, and Mayor Bond to cut the ribbon  Planting Contractors: Conservation Services 11:50 – 12:20 Walking tour of project site with CVI Design Engineer, William O. Postlethwait & DNR Fisheries Biologists, Alan Heft & Alan Klotz

Page 20 of 30

Page 21 of 30

Page 22 of 30

Page 23 of 30

Page 24 of 30

Page 25 of 30

Page 26 of 30

Page 27 of 30

Page 28 of 30

Page 29 of 30

Page 30 of 30