DOCSLIB.ORG

Michigan Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Division

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Michigan Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Division FISHERIES DIVISION SPECIAL REPORT Number 16 April, 1995 Huron River Assessment E. M. Hay-Chmielewski Paul W. Seelbach Gary E. Whelan Douglas B. Jester Jr. Big Lake (1,018 ft) Huron River Watershed Elevation Distance Distance Lake Erie (572 ft) STATE OF MICHIGAN DNR DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES FISHERIES DIVISION Fisheries Special Report No. 16 April, 1995 HURON RIVER ASSESSMENT E. M. Hay-Chmielewski Paul W. Seelbach Gary E. Whelan Douglas B. Jester Jr. The Michigan Department of Natural Resources, (MDNR) provides equal opportunities for employment and for access to Michigan’s natural resources. State and Federal laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, religion, disability, age, marital status, height and weight. If you believe that you have been discriminated against in any program, activity or facility, please write the MDNR Equal Opportunity Office, P.O. Box 30028, Lansing, MI 48909, or the Michigan Department of Civil Rights, 1200 6th Avenue, Detroit, MI 48226, or the Office of Human Resources, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington D.C. 20204. For more information about this publication or the American Disabilities Act (ADA), contact, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Division, Box 30028, Lansing, MI 48909, or call 517-373-1280. COVER: A three dimensional drawing of the area containing the Huron River watershed. It shows how the water flows from the headwaters down the landscape, gathering the contributions from the tributaries, to Lake Erie. The figure is an adaptation of a drawing provided by the Huron River Watershed Council, Ann Arbor. The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them. Albert Einstein 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................ 5 List of Figures....................................................................................................................................... 7 Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................................. 9 Executive Summary............................................................................................................................. 10 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................... 13 RIVER ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................................................... 16 Geography.............................................................................................................................. 16 History 16 Biological Communities ........................................................................................................ 18 Original Fish Communities...................................................................................... 18 Factors Affecting Fish Communities....................................................................... 20 Present Fish Communities ....................................................................................... 22 Aquatic Invertebrates (except mussels)................................................................... 23 Mussels 23 Amphibians and Reptiles ......................................................................................... 24 Mammals .................................................................................................................. 25 Birds 25 Other Natural Features of Concern.......................................................................... 25 Pest Species .............................................................................................................. 25 Geology and Hydrology ........................................................................................................ 26 Geology .................................................................................................................... 26 Climate 27 Annual stream flows................................................................................................. 27 Seasonal flow stability ............................................................................................. 28 Daily flow stability................................................................................................... 29 Channel Morphology ............................................................................................................. 30 Channel gradient....................................................................................................... 30 Channel cross sections ............................................................................................. 32 Soils and Land Use Patterns .................................................................................................. 36 Special Jurisdictions............................................................................................................... 38 Navigability .............................................................................................................. 38 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission................................................................. 38 County Drain Commissioners.................................................................................. 39 Natural River Designations..................................................................................... 39 State and Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority Parklands .................................. 40 Recreational Use .................................................................................................................... 40 Dams and Barriers.................................................................................................................. 42 Water Quality......................................................................................................................... 46 Fishery Management.............................................................................................................. 48 Citizen Involvement............................................................................................................... 50 3 MANAGEMENT OPTIONS.............................................................................................................. 52 Biological Communities ........................................................................................................ 52 Geology and Hydrology ....................................................................................................... 53 Channel Morphology ............................................................................................................ 54 Soils and Land Use Patterns .................................................................................................. 55 Special Jurisdictions............................................................................................................... 55 Recreational Use ................................................................................................................... 56 Dams and Barriers.................................................................................................................. 57 Water Quality......................................................................................................................... 57 Fishery Management.............................................................................................................. 58 Citizen Involvement............................................................................................................... 59 PUBLIC COMMENT AND RESPONSE.......................................................................................... 60 GLOSSARY ........................................................................................................................................ 64 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................... 67 4 List of Tables Table 1. Huron River gradient (ft/mi) from the headwaters to the mouth of the river (Fisheries Division, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data). Table 2. Archaeological sites in the Huron River watershed, listed by township. Table 3. List of common and scientific names of species referred to in text. Table 4. Non-indigenous fish species in the Huron River (Fisheries Division, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data). Table 5. Fish stocking in the Huron River watershed, 1981-1991 (Fisheries Division, Michigan Department of Natural Resources). Table 6. List of fishes in the Huron River watershed. Table 7. Increases (++) or decreases (d) in range between 1938 and 1977 of vegetation-dependent species (those fish that require vegetation at some point in their life history) on the mainstem of the Huron River and three major tributaries. Table 8. Increases (++) or decreases (d) in range between 1938 and 1977 of gravel-dependent species (those fish that require gravel at some point in their life history) on the mainstem of the Huron River and three major tributaries. Table 9. Increases (++) or decreases (d) in range between 1938 and 1977 of silt-dependent species (those fish that require silt at some point in
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Huron River History Book
    THE HURON RIVER Robert Wittersheim Over 15,000 years ago, the Huron River was born as a small stream draining the late Pleistocene landscape. Its original destination was Lake Maumee at present day Ypsilanti where a large delta was formed. As centuries passed, ceding lake levels allowed the Huron to meander over new land eventually settling into its present valley. Its 125 mile journey today begins at Big Lake near Pontiac and ends in Lake Erie. The Huron’s watershed, which includes 367 miles of tributaries, drains over 900 square miles of land. The total drop in elevation from source to mouth is nearly 300 feet. The Huron’s upper third is clear and fast, even supporting a modest trout fishery. The middle third passes through and around many lakes in Livingston and Washtenaw Counties. Eight dams impede much of the Huron’s lower third as it flows through populous areas it helped create. Over 47 miles of this river winds through publicly owned lands, a legacy from visionaries long since passed. White Lake White Lake Mary Johnson The Great Lakes which surround Michigan and the thousands of smaller lakes, hundreds of rivers, streams and ponds were formed as the glacier ice that covered the land nearly 14,000 years ago was melting. The waters filled the depressions in the earth. The glaciers deposited rock, gravel and soil that had been gathered in their movement. This activity sculpted the land creating our landscape. In section 28 of Springfield Township, Oakland County, a body of water names Big Lake by the area pioneers is the source of the Huron River.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Partnerships Resource Guide
    Community Partnerships Resource Guide As of August 2017 This report contains baseline community engagement information, including: A listing of the 375 partnerships, organized by county A listing of the 122 COMMUNITY community-engaged courses, organized by school ENGAGEMENT as of August 2017 Data source notes: In Feb. 2016, 1647 faculty were asked to document their community work via espace. Various other campus departments have also submitted additional information to supplement that data for this report. This document is a working document and will be updated again, fall 2017. Oakland University works with 375 organizations. 218 in Oakland County 84 in Wayne County 22 in Macomb County 51 are located throughout seven other Michigan COMMUNITY counties and/or in another PARTNERSHIPS state Breakdown by city, according to largest number of partnerships: Oakland County: Auburn Hills (20); Rochester (31); Pontiac (74); Troy (20) Wayne County: Detroit (74) Macomb County: Mt Clemens (9) Note: Categories of affiliation include: faculty research, academic service learning courses; sponsorships and sponsors; partnerships; speakers; outreach programs of any kind; internships; and field placements COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES Partnerships by County EATON COUNTY (1) LIVINGSTON COUNTY (1) Eaton Rapids (1) Brighton (1) VFW National Home for Children Huron - Clinton Metropolitan Student org volunteers Authority Program Presenter for Clinton River Water Festival GENESEE COUNTY (1) Flint (1) MACOMB COUNTY (22) Flint Institute of Arts Internship (AH 399) Clinton Township (2) Henry Ford Health System- Macomb Hospital Clinton Twp INGHAM COUNTY (4) ELP (PT 735) Macomb Community College Lansing (4) MCC Robotics, Engineering and Michigan Department of STEAM Days (AFC) Community Health ELP (NRS 206) Harrison Township (1) Simple Adventures Watersports Michigan Republican Party Program Presenter for Clinton River Student org volunteers Water Festival Michigan United Conservation Clubs Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • Clinton River Remedial Action Plan Update
    The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Biennial Remedial Action Plan Update for the Clinton River Area of Concern Compiled by: Christine Aiello Water Bureau Aquatic Nuisance Control & Remedial Action Unit Michigan Department of Environmental Quality P.O. Box 30273 Lansing, MI 48909-7773 Ph: 517-241-7504 Fax: 517-373-9958 [email protected] March ___, 2009 Purpose of the Biennial Remedial Action Plan Update A Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) Biennial Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Update will be prepared at least every 2 years for each Area of Concern (AOC), and will be the primary tool for documenting and communicating progress to the public and agencies. These documents are meant to be brief, user-friendly updates on recent remedial actions and assessments in the AOC. They are prepared by the MDEQ in consultation with the Public Advisory Council (PAC) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). These biennial RAP updates will also be posted on the MDEQ AOC web site. The biennial RAP update is one component of the MDEQ’s process for tracking AOC restoration, removing Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs), and ultimately delisting AOCs. These processes and relevant restoration criteria are described in more detail in the MDEQ’s Guidance for Delisting Michigan’s Great Lakes Areas of Concern (MDEQ, 2008). The purpose of this Clinton River biennial RAP update is to track progress in the AOC by providing an update on those remedial actions completed in recent years. This update will discuss BUI assessment results that are based on the readiness of a BUI removal and subsequent technical committee review and recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • History of the Lake St. Clair Fisheries Research Station, 1966 - 2003
    DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES History of the Lake St. Clair Fisheries Research Station, 1966 - 2003 Mike Thomas, Research Biologist (retired) and Todd Wills, Area Station Manager Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] The Lake St. Clair Great Lakes Station was constructed on a confined dredge disposal site at the mouth of the Clinton River and opened for business in 1974. In this photo, the Great Lakes Station (red roof) is visible in the background behind the lighter colored Macomb County Sheriff Marine Division Office. Lake St. Clair Fisheries Research Station Website: http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-153-10364_52259_10951_11304---,00.html FISHERIES DIVISION LSCFRS History - 1 History of the Lake St. Clair Fisheries Research Station, 1966-2003 Preface: the other “old” guys at the station. It is my From 1992 to 2016, it was my privilege to hope that this “report” will be updated serve as a fisheries research biologist at the periodically by Station crew members who Lake St. Clair Fisheries Research Station have an interest in making sure that the (LSCFRS). During my time at the station, I past isn’t forgotten. – Mike Thomas learned that there was a rich history of fisheries research and assessment work The Beginning - 1966-1971: that was largely undocumented by the By 1960, Great Lakes fish populations and standard reports or scientific journal the fisheries they supported had been publications. This history, often referred to decimated by degraded habitat, invasive as “institutional memory”, existed mainly in species, and commercial overfishing. The the memories of station employees, in invasive alewife was overabundant and vessel logs, in old 35mm slides and prints, massive die-offs ruined Michigan beaches.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Action Plan: St. Clair
    MICHIGAN 2015 - 2025 St.St. ClairClair -- DetroitDetroit RiverRiver SystemSystem Wildlife Action Plan Today’s Priorities, Tomorrow’s Wildlife What is the St. Clair - Detroit River System? The St. Clair – Detroit River System connects the upper and lower Great Lakes and is the international boundary between the United States and Canada. The St. Clair River is the natural outlet of Lake Huron and flows approximately 40 miles in a southerly direction to Lake St. Clair. Prior to entering Lake St. Clair, the river becomes braided creating an extensive delta known as the St. Clair Flats. The Detroit River is the outlet of Lake St. Clair and flows 32 miles to Lake Erie. The habitats associated with these waters are complex and include Great Lakes Marsh, nearshore Littoral Zones, open lake and Canvasback tributary habitats, and upland communities. The Great Lakes Marshes provide crucial habitat for many species of plants and animals, and represent the most biologically significant habitats for migratory birds in the region. The wetlands of the St. Clair Flats provide habitat for a diverse assemblage of mammals, birds, amphibians, invertebrates, and plants. Nearshore Littoral Zones and tributaries provide fish and amphibians with spawning and nursery areas. The open waters of the Detroit and St. Clair Rivers provide a broad array of habitat types Mooneye and support diverse fish communities. The bays and wetlands along the river shores provide spawning and nursery habitats for multiple species and resting and foraging areas for migratory waterfowl. Tributaries to the St. Clair River include the Black, Pine, and Belle rivers which support several Species of Greatest Conservation Need.
    [Show full text]
  • Huron River Report – Fall 2017
    Huron River Report Published quarterly by the Huron River Watershed Council FALL 2017 feature story Fishing the Home Waters Huron River becomes a destination for anglers The naturally nutrient-rich waters establishment of bait and guide shops of the Huron River and some of its in the watershed (see list, page 5). tributaries offer great habitat for a Here is the angler’s report. wide variety of fish. The prize fish found in these home waters attract The upper Huron anglers from diverse backgrounds, The upper headwaters of the Huron using an array of fishing styles. contain lakes with a variety of sizes Annually, the Huron River attracts and depths, producing a diversity 250,000 visitor-days for fishing, of fish populations. Larger lakes according to a study by Grand Valley like Kent and Pontiac have public State University (see article, page 10). access points that anglers can use So what are all these anglers looking to test the fishing waters. Many of for and how are they doing it? The the smaller lakes are private and answer depends on who you ask and accessible only by those owning where you are on the river system. lakefront property. Typically, anglers HRWC staff talk with many excited in the headwaters region approach anglers about their observations, by boat, floating or anchoring off These big smallmouth beauties can be successes, failures, and ideas shoals, underwater ridges or natural found at many locations along the river. about improving the game fishery. credit: Schultz Outfitters This interest encourages the continued on page 4 Planning Ahead Local governments and residents are key to the health of the Huron The Huron River is currently the supplies the Huron with clear, cool, spaces to the watershed’s health, it is cleanest river in Southeast Michigan.
    [Show full text]
  • Edison Power Plant Historic District
    Final Report of the Historic District Study Committee for the City of Ypsilanti, Washtenaw County, Michigan This Report has been prepared by the Historic District Study Committee appointed by the City Council, City of Ypsilanti, Michigan, on July 15, 2008, to study and report on the feasibility of providing legal protection to the Edison Power Plant, Dam, and Peninsular Paper Company Sign by creating the three-resource Edison Power Plant Historic District Submitted to Ypsilanti City Council December 15, 2009 Contents Charge of the Study Committee .............................................................................. 1 Composition of the Study Committee ..................................................................... 1 Verbal boundary description (legal property description) .................................. 2 Visual boundary description (maps) ...................................................................... 2 Washtenaw County GIS aerial view of Peninsular Park, location of Edison Power Plant, showing power plant, dam, parking area, park pavilion, & dock City of Ypsilanti zoning map showing Peninsular Park City of Ypsilanti Image/Sketch for Parcel: 11-11-05-100-013 Sanborn Insurance map, 1916 Sanborn Insurance map, 1927 Proposed Boundary Description, Justification, & Context Photos ...................... 8 Criteria for Evaluating Resources .......................................................................... 11 Michigan’s Local Historic Districts Act, 1970 PA 169 U.S. Secretary of the Interior National Register
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Huron River Watershed Report
    The Huron River Data Report The Lower Huron River Creekshed Profile The Huron River flows 125 miles from its headwaters at Big Lake, near Pontiac in Oakland County, to its mouth at Lake Erie in Monroe County. HRWC divides the river into five sections based on its geology, ecology, and hydrology. This re- port is based on the section that runs from French Landing Dam, on the downstream end of Belleville Lake, to the mouth of the Huron River at Lake Erie. The land immediately around the Huron River in this section (yellow area in map below) is the focus of this report. In this section, the Huron River achieves a mature river form; it is very wide and slow-moving. There is an abundance of wetlands along its banks and the entire drainage area is flat. The river’s final large dam (originally created to produce hy- droelectric power) is found at Flat Rock. Below this point, the drainage area narrows rapidly, with land and water merging into marshlands that nurture a rich variety of fish and fowl. Two international migratory flyways intersect over Pointe Mouillee. At the mouth of the Huron, diked and drained land supports productive traditional agriculture. Throughout this section, one can sense the presence of a larger body of water (Lake Erie), a longer history of human habitation, and the influence of the river on the lives of the people who live here. The main branch in this section is 46 miles. It has a gradient of 1.2 feet per mile, which is very flat.
    [Show full text]
  • HURON-CLINTON Metroparks School Program Guide
    TM HURON-CLINTON metroparks school program guide 2017-2018 www.metroparks.com RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 The Huron-Clinton Metroparks consist of 13 beautiful parks, covering 25,000 acres throughout Southeast Michigan, encompassing Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Washtenaw, and Livingston counties, drawing over seven million visitors annually. WHO WE ARE: The Huron-Clinton Metroparks Interpretive Department boasts one of the largest interpretive programs in the nation. It has been recognized for its professional leadership, educational programs, expertise of staff, and commitment to the natural and cultural environment. WHAT WE OFFER: School programs provide environmental, cultural, and natural science literacy. All programs support the Michigan Science Standards curriculum in content, methodology, and technology use. A wide variety of programs offered that support Common Core curriculum, STEM, and Michigan Science Standards. Each of these programs are taught by a professional Interpreter who is knowledgeable in the content and school requirements. WHEN WE OFFER SCHOOL PROGRAMS: School programs and field trips are available year-round. WHERE ARE WE: Our Interpretive Centers are located in 10 Metroparks, along with an extensive mobile learning program for Southeast Michigan. Hudson Mills Metropark Activity Center Indian Springs Metropark Environmental Discovery Center Kensington Metropark Farm and Nature Center Lake Erie Metropark Marshlands Museum Lake St. Clair Metropark Nature Center Oakwoods Metropark Nature Cetner Stony Creek Metropark Nature Center Wolcott Mill Metropark Farm and Historic Center WHY SCHEDULE A SCHOOL PROGRAM: Research shows that children’s social, psychological, academic, and physical health is positively impacted when they have daily contact with nature. Environmental education engages sutdents in learning and raises test scores.
    [Show full text]
  • Millers Creek Watershed Manangment Plan Part 2
    5. EXISTING CONDITIONS This section is a general overview of conditions of Millers Creek and its watershed. Descriptions of individual reaches (sections of the stream) are also summarized in this chapter. Detailed descriptions of individual reaches within the creek, along with detailed site maps and photographs can be found in Appendix D. All the mapping data, in ArcMap format, can be found in Appendix E. A map of the reaches is shown in Figure 5.1. Each reach is referred to by the sampling station name at the downstream end of that reach. For example, the Plymouth reach ends at the Plymouth sampling station and includes all channel upstream of this sampling station. The Baxter reach begins at the Plymouth sampling station and ends at the Baxter sampling station. In some areas, the reaches are broken up into sub-reaches due to the heterogeneity of conditions within that reach. 5.1 General conditions Climate In Ann Arbor on average, 32-35 inches of total annual precipitation falls during roughly 120 days of the year (UM weather station data, See Appendix F). Over half the days with precipitation, the total precipitation amounts to 0.1 inches or less. On any given year, 90% of all daily precipitation events result in a 24-hour total depth of 0.66 inches or less. It is also highly probable in any given year that there are only 3 or 5 events with a 24-hour total of an inch or more of precipitation. During January, typically the coldest month of the year, temperatures average between 16 and 30 degrees Fahrenheit (°F).
    [Show full text]
  • Peninsular Paper Dam: Dam Removal Assessment and Feasibility Report Huron River, Washtenaw County, Michigan
    Silver Brook Watershed Riparian Buffer Restoration Report Great Swamp Watershed Association July 2018 PENINSULAR PAPER DAM: DAM REMOVAL ASSESSMENT AND FEASIBILITY REPORT HURON RIVER, WASHTENAW COUNTY, MICHIGAN SEPTEMBER 2018 PREPARED FOR: PREPARED BY: HURON RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL PRINCETON HYDRO 1100 NORTH MAIN, SUITE 210 931 MAIN STREET, SUITE 2 ANN ARBOR, MI 48104 SOUTH GLASTONBURY, CT 06073 734-769-5123 860-652-8911 Table of Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Three Critical Issues ................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Firm Overview .......................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Site Description .................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Review of Existing Files and Historical Documents ......................................................................................................... 3 Field Investigation, Survey, and Observations ................................................................................................................ 4 Vibracoring and Sediment Sampling ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Huron River and Impoundment Management Plan
    Huron River and Impoundment Management Plan Our vision for the future of the Huron River in Ann Arbor can be summarized as: A healthy Huron River ecosystem that provides a diverse set of ecosystem services. We envision a swimmable, fishable and boatable river, including both free-flowing and impounded segments, which is celebrated as Ann Arbor’s most important natural feature and contributes to the vibrancy of life in the city. The river and its publicly-owned shoreline and riparian areas create a blue and green corridor across the city that contains restored natural areas and adequate, well-sited public trails and access. Ample drinking water, effective wastewater removal and a full range of high quality passive and active recreation and education opportunities are provided to the citizens of Ann Arbor. Ongoing public engagement in the river’s management leads to greater stewardship and reduced conflict among users. Our approach to management creates a model that other communities upstream and downstream emulate. Executive Summary The Huron River and Impoundment Management Plan Committee is pleased to provide the following draft plan, report, and recommendations to the Environmental Commission and City Council for their review and approval. The committee has met for the past two years to better understand the sometimes-complex interrelationships among the Huron river ecology, community recreation preferences, the effect of dams on river processes, and the economic implications of different recommendations. The Committee heard presentations from key user groups (e.g., anglers, paddlers and rowers, among others) and regulatory agencies (e.g., MDEQ Dam Safety, MDNR Fisheries). The committee included representatives from key user groups and community organizations including river residents, rowers, paddlers, anglers, the University of Michigan, Detroit Edison, the Environmental Commission, Park Advisory Commission, Planning Commission, and the Huron River Watershed Council.
    [Show full text]