DOCSLIB.ORG

Cumulative Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cumulative Report HFQLG MONITORING STREAM CONDITION INVENTORY (SCI) CUMULATIVE REPORT JANUARY 31, 2013 Chris Mayes Fisheries Biologist, Lassen National Forest Ken Roby Fisheries Biologist, Lassen National Forest (retired) Executive Summary Thirty-one streams in the Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group (HFQLG) program area were monitored to assess effects of ground-disturbing HFQLG project activities. Both physical and biological attributes of stream conditions were monitored from 1997 through 2012. Physical and biological attributes of stream conditions were monitored before and after implementation of sixteen vegetation management projects, five aspen enhancement projects, four road decommissioning watershed improvement projects, and four meadow improvement projects. The sampling strategy also included monitoring of reference streams from largely unmanaged watersheds. Monitoring started in 1997 and was conducted through 2012. Wildfires in two previously sampled watersheds provided an opportunity to assess changes following the fires. Vegetation Management Sixteen streams were selected to monitor the effects of vegetation management activities upon physical and biological stream attributes. Activities which would fall under this category include DFPZ treatments, area thinning, and mastication treatments, among others. Since these actions typically take place beyond 100 feet from stream channels, the primary concern regarding the aforementioned activities is sediment delivery to nearby streams. In general, the vegetation management activities had little to no effect upon stream sedimentation, stream shade or macroinvertebrate communities. This finding is consistent with HFQLG BMP monitoring, which found BMPs implemented to prevent erosion were effective in meeting their on-site objectives (Mitchell-Bruker, 2011). Aspen Enhancement Five streams were selected to monitor the effects of aspen enhancement activities. Attributes measured included channel substrate sediment, stream channel shading, water temperature, and macroinvertebrate assemblages. Since most aspen enhancement activities take place very close to stream channels, reductions in stream channel shade immediately following project implementation are usually expected. Reductions in shade were observed on three of the five streams selected for monitoring, with Lower Pine Creek exhibiting the greatest reduction in shade. Water temperature monitoring on Lower Pine Creek showed an increase of approximately six degrees F in mean water temperature following project activities. However, further analysis of Lower Pine Creek water and air temperatures did not find evidence that the reduction in stream channel shade was the sole cause for increased water temperatures. Sediment metrics did not increase following implementation of aspen enhancement activities, and macroinvertebrate assemblages did not exhibit significant changes from pre-project conditions. Near-Stream Road/Culvert Decommissioning Four streams were monitored to assess effects of near-stream road decommissioning and/or culvert removal upon physical and biological stream attributes. Two of the three streams monitored (Scotts John Creek and Jones Creek) showed significant increases in pool tail sediment following project implementation. Both of these streams had roads decommissioned adjacent to the monitoring reach. Although the significant increase in pool tail sediment ii appeared to adversely affect macroinvertebrate communities immediately following project implementation, these communities appeared to recover two years after project implementation. Stream/Meadow Enhancement Four streams were selected to monitor the effects of in-channel restoration activities. Two of the streams (South Fork Rock Creek and Little Last Chance Creek) were the site of improvement activities that included ground-disturbing activities within the stream channel and along its banks. The other two streams (Red Clover Creek and the Little Truckee River) were selected to monitor the effects of pond-and-plug improvement activities, which involve use of mechanical equipment within riparian areas and manipulation of historic stream channels. South Fork Rock Creek, Little Last Chance Creek, and Red Clover Creek did not exhibit any adverse effects pertaining to sedimentation or stream channel shading. The Little Truckee River saw a significant increase in pool tail sedimentation (from 3 percent pre-project to 38 percent post- project) as a result of failed earthen plugs. Wildfires Two streams (Cub Creek and Moonlight Creek) were used to monitor the effects of large wildfires which burned within their respective watersheds. Significant declines in stream channel shading and increases in pool tail sedimentation were observed immediately following wildfire activity, particularly on Moonlight Creek. Channel shade is recovering on both streams, as deciduous plant species return to riparian areas originally occupied by conifers. Stream temperatures increased by approximately 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit following the Cub Fire. This increase in temperature was statistically significant. No significant changes in stream temperatures were observed in Moonlight Creek following the Moonlight Fire. Sediment levels in Cub Creek remain above pre-fire conditions since the Cub Fire burned in the watershed in 2008. Sediment levels in Moonlight Creek appear to have returned to pre-fire levels two years after the Moonlight Fire burned 99 percent of the watershed. Fire effects in Cub Creek resulted in a significant decline in macroinvertebrate metrics, likely a result of sediment filling in interstitial spaces in the stream bed and altering the habitat in favor of sediment-preferring macroinvertebrate groups. Macroinvertebrate communities in Moonlight Creek were not as affected by sedimentation, likely due to levels of substrate sediment returning to pre-fire conditions two years after the Moonlight Fire. iii Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Methods........................................................................................................................................... 3 Physical Stream Attributes .......................................................................................................... 3 Macroinvertebrates ..................................................................................................................... 5 Stream Temperature .................................................................................................................... 6 Results of Pre- and Post-Project Monitoring .................................................................................. 7 Vegetation Management ............................................................................................................. 7 Louse Creek ............................................................................................................................ 9 Roxie Peconom Creek............................................................................................................. 9 Hat Creek .............................................................................................................................. 10 Domingo Creek ..................................................................................................................... 11 Upper Butte Creek ................................................................................................................ 12 Summit Creek ....................................................................................................................... 12 Willow Creek ........................................................................................................................ 14 Beaver Creek ......................................................................................................................... 15 North Carmen Creek ............................................................................................................. 16 Third Water Creek ................................................................................................................ 17 Pineleaf Creek ....................................................................................................................... 17 Fourth Water Creek............................................................................................................... 20 Bonta Creek .......................................................................................................................... 22 Dark Canyon ......................................................................................................................... 22 Independence Creek .............................................................................................................. 23 Smithneck Creek ................................................................................................................... 25 Aspen Enhancement.................................................................................................................. 25 Lower Pine Creek ................................................................................................................. 27 South Fork Bailey Creek ....................................................................................................... 31 Trosi Creek...........................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 LAHONTAN MOUNTAIN SUCKER Catostomus Lahontan (Rutter
    LAHONTAN MOUNTAIN SUCKER Catostomus lahontan (Rutter) Status: Moderate Concern. The Lahontan mountain sucker does not appear to be at risk of extinction in California in the near future; however, many populations are declining and their range is fragmented. Description: Mountain suckers are small (adults 12-20 cm TL), with subterminal mouths and full lips that are covered by many large papillae (Moyle 2002). Their lips are protrusible, have deep grooves where the upper and lower lips meet, and a cleft on the middle of the lower lip. The lower lip has two semicircular smooth areas along the inner margin next to a conspicuous cartilaginous plate that is used for scraping. The front of the upper lip is smooth. They have 75-92 scales along the lateral line and 23-37 gill rakers on the first gill arch. Fin rays typically number 10 (range 8-13) and nine for the dorsal and pelvic fins, respectively. An axillary process is easily visible at the base of the pelvic fins. Internally, their intestine is long (up to six times TL), and the lining of the abdominal cavity (peritoneum) is black. Their coloration is brown to olive green on the dorsal and lateral surfaces, white to yellow on their bellies, and dark brown in blotches in a lateral row or line. Mature males have two lateral bands, one red-orange on top of another that is black-green. Spawning males have tubercles covering their bodies and fins, with the exception of the dorsal fin. Tubercles on the enlarged anal fin become especially prominent. Spawning females also have tubercles but only on the top and sides of their heads and bodies.
    [Show full text]
  • Watershed Projects—Leading The
    Watershed Projects—Leading the Way The past 10 years have seen the completion of numerous watershed assessments and watershed management plans throughout the Sacramento River Basin. However, the true measure of success of any management program comes from the ability to affect conditions on the ground, i.e., implement actions to protect or improve watershed resources and overall watershed condition. This section briefly describes projects from each subregion area that are examples of watershed improvement work being done by locally directed management groups; by local, state, and federal agencies; and by other public and private entities. The examples presented here include projects to benefit water quality, streamflow and aquatic habitat, fish passage, fire and fuels management, habitat for wildlife and waterfowl, eradication of invasive plant species, flood management, and watershed stewardship education. Support for this work has come from a broad spectrum of public and private sources. Sacramento Subregions Northeast Lakeview Eastside OREGON Sacramento Valley CALIFORNIA Westside 5 Goose Feather 97 Lake Yuba, American & Bear 0 20 Miles Featured Projects: Alturas Lassen Creek Stream and Mt Shasta r Meadow Restoration e v i R 299 395 t i Pit River Channel Erosion P r e er iv iv R R o t RCD Cooperative Sagebrush Steppe n e m a r d c u Iniatitive — Butte Creek Project a o r S l 101 C e v c i R Lake M Burney Shasta Bear Creek Meadow Restoration Pit 299 CA NEVA Iron Mountain Mine LIFORNIA Eagle Superfund Cleanup Lake Redding DA Redding Allied Stream Team d Cr. Cottonwoo Lower Clear Creek Floodway Rehabilitation Honey Lake Red Bluff Lake Almanor Cow Creek— Bassett Diversion Fish Passage Project 395 r.
    [Show full text]
  • The Historical Range of Beaver in the Sierra Nevada: a Review of the Evidence
    Spring 2012 65 California Fish and Game 98(2):65-80; 2012 The historical range of beaver in the Sierra Nevada: a review of the evidence RICHARD B. LANMAN*, HEIDI PERRYMAN, BROCK DOLMAN, AND CHARLES D. JAMES Institute for Historical Ecology, 556 Van Buren Street, Los Altos, CA 94022, USA (RBL) Worth a Dam, 3704 Mt. Diablo Road, Lafayette, CA 94549, USA (HP) OAEC WATER Institute, 15290 Coleman Valley Road, Occidental, CA 95465, USA (BD) Bureau of Indian Affairs, Northwest Region, Branch of Environmental and Cultural Resources Management, Portland, OR 97232, USA (CDJ) *Correspondent: [email protected] The North American beaver (Castor canadensis) has not been considered native to the mid- or high-elevations of the western Sierra Nevada or along its eastern slope, although this mountain range is adjacent to the mammal’s historical range in the Pit, Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers and their tributaries. Current California and Nevada beaver management policies appear to rest on assertions that date from the first half of the twentieth century. This review challenges those long-held assumptions. Novel physical evidence of ancient beaver dams in the north central Sierra (James and Lanman 2012) is here supported by a contemporary and expanded re-evaluation of historical records of occurrence by additional reliable observers, as well as new sources of indirect evidence including newspaper accounts, geographical place names, Native American ethnographic information, and assessments of habitat suitability. Understanding that beaver are native to the Sierra Nevada is important to contemporary management of rapidly expanding beaver populations. These populations were established by translocation, and have been shown to have beneficial effects on fish abundance and diversity in the Sierra Nevada, to stabilize stream incision in montane meadows, and to reduce discharge of nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment loads into fragile water bodies such as Lake Tahoe.
    [Show full text]
  • Plumas National Forest EA EIS CE
    Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 04/01/2008 to 06/30/2008 Plumas National Forest This report contains the best available information at the time of publication. Questions may be directed to the Project Contact. Expected Project Name Project Purpose Planning Status Decision Implementation Project Contact Projects Occurring Nationwide Aerial Application of Fire - Fuels management Completed Actual: 02/18/2008 10/2007 Christopher Wehrli Retardant 10/11/2007 202-205-1332 EA [email protected] Description: The Forest Service proposes to continue the aerial application of fire retardant to fight fires on National Forest System lands. An environmental analysis will be conducted to prepare an Environmental Assessment on the proposed action. Web Link: http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/retardant/index.html Location: UNIT - All Districts-level Units. STATE - All States. COUNTY - All Counties. Nation Wide. National Forest System Land - Regulations, Directives, In Progress: Expected:03/2008 03/2008 Gina Owens Management Planning - Orders FEIS NOA in Federal Register 202-205-1187 Proposed Rule 02/15/2008 [email protected] EIS Description: The Agency proposes to publish a rule at 36 CFR part 219 to finish rulemaking on the land management planning rule issued on January 5, 2005 (2005 rule). The 2005 rule guides development, revision, and amendment of land management plans. Web Link: http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nfma/2008_planning_rule.html Location: UNIT - All Districts-level Units. STATE - All States. COUNTY - All Counties. LEGAL - All units of the National Forest System. Agency-wide. Plumas National Forest, Forestwide (excluding Projects occurring in more than one Forest) R5 - Pacific Southwest Region Backcountry Discovery Trail - Recreation management Completed Actual: 01/24/2008 08/2008 Peggy Gustafson CE 530-283-7620 [email protected] Description: Designation of Backcountry Discovery Trail (BCDT) on existing roads within the Plumas National Forest to tie together statewide motorized trail Location: UNIT - Plumas National Forest All Units.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report
    Deliverable 3.10 Final Report Red Clover/McReynolds Creek Restoration Project Agreement Number 04-116-555-01 Feather River Coordinated Resource Management - Plumas Corporation January 28, 2008 Plumas Corporation SWRCB Grant Agreement No.04-116-555-0 2 Background The Red Clover/McReynolds Creek Restoration Project encompasses a 775-acre area, covering 715 acres of privately owned land and 60 acres of public land on Plumas National Forest (PNF). This portion of Red Clover Creek drains a watershed area of 84 square miles, and is a tributary to Indian Creek and ultimately, the East Branch North Fork Feather River. The watershed has been historically used for grazing and logging with an extensive road and historic logging railroad grade system. The combination of road-like features and historic grazing along with a 1950’s-era beaver eradication effort, initiated moderate to severe incision (downcutting) of the stream channels throughout Red Clover Valley, resulting in extensive gully networks that have lowered the shallow groundwater tables in the valley meadow, concurrently changing the plant communities from mesic species to xeric species such as sage, and increasing the sediment supply. This in turn has resulted in a loss of meadow productivity, diminished summer flows, and severe bank erosion. Due to severe channel incision and bank erosion, the Red Clover Creek Watershed channel system was determined to be the third highest sediment-producing subwatershed in the East Branch North Fork Feather River watershed (EBNFFR Erosion Inventory Report, USDA- Soil Conservation Service, 1989). Prior to project implementation remnants of the original meadow vegetative community occurred only near springs, hill slope sub-flow zones, and in gully bottoms.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3 Region Description
    Region Description CHAPTER 3.0 REGION DESCRIPTION 3.1 Introduction The Upper Feather River watershed encompasses 2.3 million acres in the northern Sierra Nevada, where that range intersects the Cascade Range to the north and the Diamond Mountains of the Great Basin and Range Province to the east. The watershed drains generally southwest to Lake Oroville, the largest reservoir of the California State Water Project (SWP). Water from Lake Oroville enters a comprehensive system of natural and constructed conveyances to provide irrigation and domestic water as well as to supply natural aquatic ecosystems in the Lower Feather River, Sacramento River, and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Lake Oroville is the principal storage facility of the SWP, which delivers water to over two- thirds of California’s population and provides an average of 34.3 million acre-feet (AF)/year of agricultural water to the Central Valley. Lands to the east of the Upper Feather River watershed drain to Eagle and Honey Lakes that are closed drainage basins in the Basin and Range Province, while lands to the north, west, and south drain to the Sacramento River via the Pit River, Yuba River, Battle Creek, Thomas Creek, Big Chico Creek, and Butte Creek. Mount Lassen, the southernmost volcano in the Cascade Range, defines the northern boundary of the region. Sierra Valley, the largest valley in the Sierra Nevada, defines the southern boundary. At the intersection of the Great Basin, the Sierra Nevada Mountains, and the Cascade Range, the Region supports a diversity of habitats including an assemblage of meadows and alluvial valleys interconnected by river gorges and rimmed by granite and volcanic mountains.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the CALIFORNIA RIPARIAN SYSTEMS CONFERENCE September 22-24, 1988 Davis, California Protection, Management, and Re
    WATERSHED RESTORATION IN THE NORTHERN SIERRA NEVADA: A BIOTECHNICAL APPROACH1 Donna S. Lindquist and Linton Y. Bowie2 Abstract: A cooperative erosion control project was ini- Since degraded riparian areas can be major contrib- tiated in 1985 for the North Fork Feather River wa- utors of sediment to streamflow, much of the grow- tershed in California's northern Sierra Nevada due to ing interest in improving water quality has focused on widespread accelerated erosion. Resulting sedimenta- restoration and management of streamside zones. In- tion problems have impacted fish, wildlife and livestock creased demand for recreational resources, aesthetics resources, and have created operational concerns for hy- and good water quality, and the recognition of wide- droelectric facilities located downstream. In response, spread degradation have provided the impetus to de- concerned groups met to develop a restoration plan. A velop and implement techniques to repair degraded ri- Memorandum of Agreement was signed and a Coordi- parian habitats. A wide variety of techniques are avail- nated Resources Management Planning Committee was able which are documented in manuals, symposia pro- formed to facilitate the planning and implementation ceedings, and research papers. process. The watershed restoration program was initi- ated with a small demonstration project that was im- Institutional incentives for riparian restoration lag far plemented in Red Clover Creek. The objective was to behind available technology. The manner in which up- demonstrate structural and nonstructural methods that stream managers and downstream users interact in the reduce erosion, restore riparian vegetation, and improve restoration process has not been reconciled. The re- habitat for fish and wildlife, and to develop a planning sponsibility for implementing restoration measures has process for future projects.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pond-And-Plug Treatment for Stream and Meadow Restoration: Resource Effects and Design Considerations
    THE POND-AND-PLUG TREATMENT FOR STREAM AND MEADOW RESTORATION: RESOURCE EFFECTS AND DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS A Briefing Paper for Plumas National Forest Resource Specialists and Managers The Red Clover – McReynolds Project, the first spring after construction (2008) (Photo: Jim Wilcox) Version 1.0 May 2010 Table of Contents Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... i Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 Description of the Pond-and-Plug Treatment .................................................................. 2 A Brief Aside: The Project Planning Process .................................................................. 4 Treatment Benefits and Impacts, both Theoretical and Demonstrated ........................... 5 Reduced streambank erosion ...................................................................................... 5 Improved forage and riparian vegetation ..................................................................... 7 Timing of stream flow ................................................................................................... 8 Flood Attenuation....................................................................................................... 13 Temperature Effects .................................................................................................. 14 Heritage Resource Effects ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Montane Meadows of the Sierra Nevada
    Mountain Meadows of the Sierra Nevada An integrated means of determining ecological condition in mountain meadows Protocols and Results from 2006 Sabra E. Purdy and Peter B. Moyle Department of Water Resources Contract No. 4600004497 Acknowledgments We would like to acknowledge the Department of Water Resources (Contract No. 4600004497) for their support of this research project under the Integrated Regional Water Management Plans. We would also like to thank our sponsor, the Natural Heritage Institute (Agreement No. 06‐000470), in particular, Elizabeth Soderstrom and Carrie Monohan. In addition, we extend our gratitude to Amy Merrill, David Weixelman, Jeff Brown and Sagehen Field Station, Max Fish, Dan Wilson, Brett Baker, Jon Stead, Erik King, Morgan King, Ken Tate, and the administrative staff at the U.C. Davis Center for Watershed Sciences, Diana Cummings, Tanya Guilfoil, and Ellen Mantallica. 2 Introduction to Sierra Nevada Meadows Montane meadows are a distinctive form of riparian wetland that occur in the elevational belt between 4,000 and 8,000 feet in the Sierra Nevada. Riparian plant communities differ significantly from their corresponding upland communities because of their access to water and because the soil type provides conditions not found elsewhere (Kondolf et al. 1996). Riparian areas are generally limited to a narrow strip along the stream before the increased depth of the water table forces a change to an upland community (Kondolf et al. 1996). Therefore, riparian habitats tend to represent just a small fraction of the land in any given watershed, ranging from approximately 0.1 to 1 percent in the Sierra Nevada (Kattelmann and Embury 1996).
    [Show full text]
  • Gazetteer of Surface Waters of California
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, DIEECTOB WATER- SUPPLY PAPER 295 GAZETTEER OF SURFACE WATERS OF CALIFORNIA PART I. SACRAMENTO RIVER BASIN PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF JOHN C. HOYT BY « B. D. WOOD In cooperation with the State Water Commission and the Conservation Commission of the State of California WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1912 NOTE. A complete list of the gaging stations maintained in the Sacra­ mento River basin from 1888 to July 1, 1912, is presented on page* 98-99. 2 GAZETTEER OF SURFACE WATERS; IN SACRAMENTO RIYER BASIN, CALIFORNIA By B. D. WOOD. INTRODUCTION. This gazetteer is the first of a series of reports on the surface waters of California prepared by the United S tates Geological Survey under cooperative agreement with the Stat( of California as repre­ sented by the State Conservation Commission; George C. Pardee, chairman, Francis Cuttle, and J. P. Baumgartner; and by the State Water Commission, Hiram W. Johnson, governor, Chajles D. Marx, chairman, S. C. Graham, Harold T. Power, and W. F. McClure. Louis K. Glavis is secretary of both commissions. The reports are to be published as Water-Supply Papers 29,5 to 300 and will bear the following titles: 295. Gazetteer of surface waters of California, Part I, Ss .cramento* River basin. 296. Gazetteer of surface waters of California, Part II, San Joaquin River basin. 297. Gazetteer of surface waters of California, Part III, Great Basin and Pacific coast Btreams. 298. Water resources of California, Part I, Stream measurements in the Sacramento River basin. 299.
    [Show full text]
  • UC Davis Previously Published Works
    UC Davis UC Davis Previously Published Works Title The Geology of a Portion of the Quincy 15' Quadrangle, Plumas County, California Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5b96z99q Author Sheeks, Douglas I Publication Date 2016 Supplemental Material https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5b96z99q#supplemental Data Availability The data associated with this publication are within the manuscript. Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California The Geology of a Portion of the Quincy l5’ Quadrangle Plumas County, California By DOUGLAS INGRAM SHEEKS B.A., Geology (California State University, Sonoma) 1974 Thesis Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geology in the OFFICE OF GRADUATE STUDIES of the UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS Approved: Eldridge M. Moores, Chairman Howard W. Day Peter Schiffman Committee in Charge 2016 i. © Copyright by Douglas Ingram Sheeks 2016 All Rights Reserved DEDICATION This thesis is dedicated to the late Professor Cordell Durrell and to all past, present, and future students of geology - Alvarez’s* “noble science” - whether amateur, professional, or academic, without whose dedication, work, and insight our understanding of this awe-inspiring planet and the rocks that we all live on would be impoverished to become myth, or worse. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My thanks go to a number of individuals. Chief among them is Professor Durrell, my thesis advisor at the University of California, Davis, and while I conducted the initial
    [Show full text]
  • Feather River Coordinated Resource Management Watershed Monitoring Program
    Feather River Coordinated Resource Management Watershed Monitoring Program Funded by Plumas Watershed Forum 2006 Report Recording flow using a bridge crane from Deadfall Bridge on Lights Creek, Indian Valley Prepared by Plumas Corporation Quincy, CA Spring 2007 Introduction The Feather River Coordinated Resource Management (FR-CRM) group, a proactive consortium of 21 public agencies, private sector groups, and local landowners, was formed in 1985 in response to widespread erosion and channel degradation in the Feather River watershed. 140 years of intense human use, including mining, grazing, timber harvesting, wildlife, railroad and road construction, have all contributed to a watershed-wide stream channel entrenchment process. FR-CRM has been monitoring the Feather River watershed since 1999 in an effort to establish baseline data for assessing long-term trends in watershed condition, and the potentially significant effects of restoration projects on watershed function. Most of the monitoring effort is concentrated in the Indian Creek watershed because of its highly degraded upper watershed condition, and high potential for benefit from restoration with many square miles of alluvial valleys. Site location follows a nested approach. Program Background Background information such as an overview of the watershed, monitoring program objectives, and protocols can be found in the three previous FR-CRM Watershed Monitoring Reports from 2001, 2004, and 2005. The last two reports (2004 and 2005) can be found on the FR-CRM website at www.feather-river-crm.org. The monitoring stations were installed in 1999 and data has been collected from 2000-2006. Initial funding for FR-CRM’s monitoring program was provided by a federal Clean Water Act grant (Aug 1998 to Dec 2000).
    [Show full text]