White River Watershed Preliminary Habitat Assessment Richard Rediske Annis Water Resources Institute
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Grand Valley State University ScholarWorks@GVSU Scientific eT chnical Reports Annis Water Resources Institute 2-2003 White River Watershed Preliminary Habitat Assessment Richard Rediske Annis Water Resources Institute Matt oC oper Annis Water Resources Institute Don Uzarski Annis Water Resources Institute Rod Denning Annis Water Resources Institute Dr. Thomas M. Burton Annis Water Resources Institute Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/scitechreports Part of the Environmental Monitoring Commons, and the Natural Resources and Conservation Commons Recommended Citation Rediske, Richard; Cooper, Matt; Uzarski, Don; Denning, Rod; and Burton, Dr. Thomas M., "White River Watershed Preliminary Habitat Assessment" (2003). Scientific eT chnical Reports. Paper 1. http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/scitechreports/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Annis Water Resources Institute at ScholarWorks@GVSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scientific eT chnical Reports by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@GVSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WHITE RIVER WATERSHED PRELIMINARY HABITAT ASSESSMENT MR-2003-18 Prepared for: The Community Foundation for Muskegon County Prepared by: Dr. Richard Rediske, Senior Research Scientist Matt Cooper, Research Assistant Dr. Don Uzarski, Research Scientist Rod Denning, Research Associate Annis Water Resources Institute 740 Shoreline Drive Muskegon, MI 49441 And Dr. Thomas M. Burton Department of Zoology Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48823-5399 February 2003 Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank The Community Foundation for Muskegon County for developing and managing this project with funding assistance from the Alcoa Foundation. This project would not have been possible without the support of Mr. Dennis Albrechtsen, Vice President – Special Projects, Howmet Castings, an Alcoa Company and other key executive staff at Howmet Castings and the Alcoa Corporation, Inc. I also would like to thank Dr. Alan Steinman for his review and comments on this report. In addition, we would like to recognize student research assistants Mike Buth, Eric Andrews, Scott Mueller, John Genet, Rochelle Heyboer, Shawn Wessell, Kelly Martin, and Beau Braymer for the work on data collection and analysis. Finally, we would like to acknowledge the important contributions of the US Department of Agriculture, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, the Lake Michigan Federation, and the Muskegon County Soil Conservation District for their steadfast stewardship efforts to improve the quality of this important resource. Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .....................................................................................1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND TASK ELEMENTS.....................................................................................6 2.0 BACKGROUND 3.0 WATERSHED DESCRIPTION 3.1 GLACIAL HISTORY....................................................................12 3.2 GEOLOGY ....................................................................................16 3.3 SOILS.............................................................................................16 3.4 TOPOGRAPHY.............................................................................20 3.5 HYDROLOGY AND STREAM CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................23 3.6 TERRESTIAL AND AQUATIC HABITATS .................................................................................34 3.7 FISHERIES ....................................................................................48 4.0 WHITE RIVER LAND COVER ANALYSIS 4.1 UPPER SOUTH BRANCH ..........................................................49 4.2 SOUTH BRANCH/ROBINSON LAKE .......................................50 4.3 MARTIN/MENA/HELD CREEKS...............................................54 4.4 SKEEL/CUSHMAN/BRATON CREEKS ....................................55 4.5 UPPER NORTH BRANCH...........................................................59 ii 4.6 NORTH BRANCH........................................................................61 4.7 MIDDLE BRANCH ......................................................................62 4.8 WHITE LAKE CARLTON/MUD CREEKS ................................64 4.9 SAND CREEK/WOLVERINE LAKE..........................................66 4.10 PIERSON DRAIN .........................................................................68 4.11 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ............................................70 5.0 WHITE LAKE SURVEY 5.1 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................75 5.2 METHODS ....................................................................................76 5.3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION....................................................76 6.0 WHITE RIVER WATERSHED WETLANDS ASSESSMENT 6.1 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................81 6.2 METHODS ....................................................................................82 6.3 2001 DROWNED RIVER MOUTH WETLAND RESULTS ......................................................................................86 6.4 2002 WATERSHED STREAM AND WETLAND RESULTS ......................................................................................97 6.5 DISCUSSION..............................................................................102 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................106 8.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................111 11.0 APPENDIX..............................................................................................117 iii List Of Tables TABLE 3.5.1 SUMMARY OF STREAM CHARACTERISTICS IN THE WHITE RIVER WATERSHED BY SUBWATERSHED................................SECTION 3.5, PAGE 23 TABLE 3.6.1 SUMMARY OF PRESETTLEMENT VEGETATION IN THE WHITE RIVER WATERSHED...........................SECTION 3.6, PAGE 34 TABLE 3.6.2 SUMMARY OF CURRENT LAND USE AND COVER IN THE WHITE RIVER WATERSHED...........................SECTION 3.6, PAGE 36 TABLE 3.6.3 MIRIS CLASSIFICATION DEFINITIONS FOR LAND COVER MAPS......................................................SECTION 3.6, PAGE 38 TABLE 4.1.1 LAND COVER ANALYSIS OF THE UPPER SOUTH BRANCH SUBWATERSHED 1978 - 1992/1997/1998 ......................................SECTION 4.1, PAGE 50 TABLE 4.2.1 LAND COVER ANALYSIS OF THE SOUTH BRANCH WHITE RIVER / ROBINSON LAKE SUBWATERSHED 1978 - 1992/1997/1998...........................SECTION 4.2, PAGE 52 TABLE 4.3.1 LAND COVER ANALYSIS OF THE MARTIN/MENA/HELD CREEKS SUBWATERSHED 1978 - 1992/1997/1998 ......................................SECTION 4.3, PAGE 55 TABLE 4.4.1 LAND COVER ANALYSIS OF THE SKEEL/CUSHMAN/BRATON SUBWATERSHED 1978 - 1992/1997/1998 ......................................SECTION 4.4, PAGE 57 iv TABLE 4.5.1 LAND COVER ANALYSIS OF THE UPPER NORTH BRANCH SUBWATERSHED 1978 - 1992/1997/1998 ......................................SECTION 4.5, PAGE 59 TABLE 4.6.1 LAND COVER ANALYSIS OF THE NORTH BRANCH SUBWATERSHED 1978 - 1992/1997/1998...........................SECTION 4.6, PAGE 62 TABLE 4.7.1 LAND COVER ANALYSIS OF THE MIDDLE BRANCH SUBWATERSHED 1978 - 1992/1997/1998 .......................................SECTION 4.7 PAGE 64 TABLE 4.8.1 LAND COVER ANALYSIS OF THE WHITE LAKE /CARLTON/MUD CREEK SUBWATERSHED 1978 - 1992/1997/1998 ......................................SECTION 4.8, PAGE 66 TABLE 4.9.1 LAND COVER ANALYSIS OF SAND CREEK/WOLVERINE LAKE SUBWATERSHED 1978 - 1992/1997/1998 ......................................SECTION 4.9, PAGE 68 TABLE 4.10.1 LAND COVER ANALYSIS OF THE PIERSON DRAIN SUBWATERSHED 1978 - 1992/1997/1998.........................SECTION 4.10, PAGE 70 TABLE 4.1.1 LAND COVER ANALYSIS OF THE WHITE RIVER WATERSHED ..........SECTION 4.11, PAGE 72 TABLE 5.3.1 RESULTS OF NUTRIENT AND CHLOROPHYLL ANAYSES CONDUCTED IN WHITE LAKE.........SECTION 5.3, PAGE 79 TABLE 6.3.1.1 TAXA RICHNESS, SPECIES DIVERSITY (H’), EVENESS (J), MOST ABUNDANT MACROINVERTEBRATE TAXON (T1), AND SECOND MOST ABUNDANT TAXON (T2) FOR 24 WETLAND SITES .................................SECTION 6.3, PAGE 87 TABLE 6.3.1.2 ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS OF 47 INVERTEBRATE TAXA. .....................SECTION 6.3, PAGE 89 v TABLE 6.3.2.1 WATER CHEMISTRY RESULTS FOR THE DROWNED RIVERMOUTH WETLANDS...........................................SECTION 6.3, PAGE 93 TABLE 6.3.2.2 COEFFICIENTS OF VARIATION OF 15 CHEMICAL/PHYSICAL PARAMETERS FOR THE UPPER, MIDDLE, AND LOWER DROWNED RIVERMOUTH WETLAND.................SECTION 6.3, PAGE 94 TABLE 6.3.3 SIGNIFICANT CORRELATIONS BETWEEN LAND-USE/COVER PARAMETERS AT P<0.05 ...................SECTION 6.3, PAGE 96 TABLE 6.4.1 MACROINVERTEBRATES OF 5 WHITE RIVER WATERSHED STREAM SITES.....................................SECTION 6.4, PAGE 99 TABLE 6.4.2 MACROINVERTEBRATES OF 5 WHITE RIVER WATERSHED WETLAND SITES ...............................SECTION 6.4, PAGE 100 TABLE 6.4.3 WATER CHEMISTRY RESULTS FOR THE UPPER WHITE RIVER STREAMS AND WETLANDS...............................SECTION 6.4, PAGE 101 vi List Of Figures FIGURE 1.1 THE WHITE RIVER WATERSHED ......SECTION 1.0, PAGE 4 FIGURE 1.2 FEDERAL AND STATE LAND IN THE WHITE RIVER WATERSHED...............SECTION 1.0, PAGE 5 FIGURE 2.1 DIAGRAM OF RIVER ZONES ..............SECTION 2.0, PAGE 9 FIGURE 3.1.1 SATELLITE IMAGE OF THE WHITE RIVER WATERSHED...........................SECTION 3.1, PAGE 12 FIGURE