EVALUATING WATERSHED RESPONSE TO LAND MANAGEMENT AND RESTORATION ACTIONS: INTENSIVELY MONITORED WATERSHEDS (IMW) PROGRESS REPORT Submitted to Washington Salmon Recovery Funding Board July 2004 Prepared by The IMW Scientific Oversight Committee Robert E. Bilby William J. Ehinger Chris Jordan Kirk Krueger Mick McHenry Timothy Quinn George Pess Derek Poon Dave Seiler Greg Volkhardt EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................... 4 INTENSIVELY MONITORED WATERSHEDS (IMW) – GENERAL CONCEPT............ 4 Experimental Design................................................................................................................. 6 Focus on Coho, Steelhead, and Cutthroat .............................................................................. 7 Variables Measured.................................................................................................................. 8 Water Quantity and Quality.................................................................................................... 9 Habitat Conditions .................................................................................................................. 9 Fish Populations.................................................................................................................... 11 OBJECTIVES FOR WATERSHED COMPLEXES .............................................................. 12 Straits of Juan de Fuca........................................................................................................... 12 Hood Canal.............................................................................................................................. 12 Lower Columbia...................................................................................................................... 13 Chinook Salmon........................................................................................................................ 14 IMW WATERSHED COMPLEXES........................................................................................ 15 Strait of Juan de Fuca Complex ............................................................................................ 15 Description............................................................................................................................ 15 Implementation of Restoration and Monitoring ................................................................... 23 Hood Canal Complex.............................................................................................................. 27 Complex Description ............................................................................................................ 27 Implementation of monitoring and restoration ..................................................................... 45 Lower Columbia Complex ..................................................................................................... 48 Complex Description ............................................................................................................ 48 Implementation of monitoring and restoration ..................................................................... 51 Chinook Salmon...................................................................................................................... 53 Wenatchee River................................................................................................................... 53 Skagit River .......................................................................................................................... 54 EXTENSION OF RESULTS TO OTHER WATERSHEDS.................................................. 56 Purpose..................................................................................................................................... 56 Method ..................................................................................................................................... 57 Specific tasks and steps............................................................................................................. 58 Time line .................................................................................................................................. 60 OTHER POTENTIAL IMW SITES......................................................................................... 62 Identifying Candidate IMWs................................................................................................. 62 Ranking Candidate IMWs ..................................................................................................... 62 BUDGET...................................................................................................................................... 67 LITERATURE CITED .............................................................................................................. 69 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Millions of dollars have been dedicated to the restoration of freshwater habitat since the listing of many populations of salmon in the Pacific Northwest in the 1990s. Little is known about the efficacy of these efforts. The most effective means of determining the contribution of restoration projects to salmon recovery is to implement experimental, watershed-scale evaluations. This document describes a series of intensively monitored watersheds (IMW) being established in Washington expressly to measure the effect of habitat restoration on salmon and trout productivity. The IMW effort in western Washington is split between three sets of smaller, paired watersheds (complexes) focusing on coho salmon, and steelhead and cutthroat trout and the Skagit River estuary focused on ocean type chinook. The sole eastern Washington IMW is a BPA-funded effort on the Wenatchee River being coordinated by NOAA Fisheries. Restoration and monitoring objectives vary among the IMWs according to current condition, land use, and restoration potential and are described in the document. The basic premise of the IMW project is that the complex relationships controlling salmon response to habitat conditions can best be understood by concentrating monitoring and research efforts at a few locations. We have begun implementing a monitoring framework that includes water quantity, water quality, habitat, summer juvenile fish abundance, and smolt production and are identifying specific restoration actions for the purpose of better understanding how salmon and trout respond to current approaches to restore habitat. We are developing a landscape classification approach with NOAA Fisheries that will aid in applying the information (regarding fish response to habitat restoration) gained from these IMW complexes to more efficiently directing salmon restoration efforts across the state. We have ranked watersheds statewide according to the potential use as IMWs. Ranking criteria included: the feasibility of obtaining quantitative estimates of smolt production, the record of smolt monitoring, fish species present, and influence of hatchery-produced fish. This list may be used to direct other IMW efforts as needed. 3 INTRODUCTION Intensive, watershed-scale research and monitoring efforts have generated results that have been very influential in the development of environmental management strategies in North America. Some of the earliest intensive monitoring efforts were instituted by the U.S. Forest Service in the 1950s to better understand hydrologic responses to logging. Efforts at these sites expanded over time to encompass chemical and biological responses as well. Changes in land use practices nationwide have been based on studies conducted at experimental watersheds like the H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest in Oregon, the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest in New Hampshire and the Coweeta Experimental Forest in North Carolina. The success of these efforts spawned a number of intensive, watershed-level research efforts in the Pacific Northwest to evaluate the response of salmon to forest practices. The Alsea Watershed Study, which was initiated in the 1960s, evaluated the response of coho salmon and cutthroat trout to various logging methods in a series of small watersheds on the Oregon coast. Results from this study provided much of the technical rationale for the measures to protect aquatic habitat incorporated into the forest practice regulations of Oregon and Washington in the early 1970s. In the 1970s an ambitious watershed-level project was initiated at Carnation Creek on Vancouver Island, British Columbia that evaluated the response of coho and chum salmon to the logging of a previously unlogged watershed. The results of this study led to a revision of the forestry code for B.C. and also influenced revisions to forest practice rules in other areas of the Pacific Northwest. Intensive, watershed-level studies such as these form the foundation of our knowledge about the freshwater habitat requirements of salmonid fishes Millions of dollars have been dedicated to the restoration of freshwater habitat since the listing of many populations of salmon in the Pacific Northwest in the 1990s. Little is known about the efficacy of these efforts. The most effective means of determining the contribution of restoration projects to salmon recovery is to implement experimental, watershed-scale evaluations. Several