AUBURN RAVINE 2012 INSTREAM FLOW STUDY · down to East Side Canal. During the Drum-Spaulding...

AUBURN RAVINE

2012 INSTREAM FLOW STUDY

State of California

California Department of Fish and Wildlife

North Central Region, Water Program

Elizabeth Lawson and Lauren Mulloy

December 2015

Auburn Ravine Instream Flow Study CDFW Page 1

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ 1

List of Tables ..........................................................................................................................2

List of Figures .........................................................................................................................3

List of Appendices ..................................................................................................................4

Goals and Objectives ..............................................................................................................5

History ....................................................................................................................................5

Reach Characteristics .............................................................................................................6

Habitat Data Collection ..........................................................................................................8

Modeled Habitat Types .................................................................................................10

Non-Modeled Habitat Types .........................................................................................10

Data Collection for Hydraulic Model .....................................................................................11

Calibration Flows...........................................................................................................12

Hydraulic Model Calibration ..................................................................................................13

Water Surface Elevation Calibration .............................................................................13

Stage/Discharge Calibration Notes ...............................................................................14

Water Velocity Calibration ............................................................................................18

Habitat Suitability Curves .......................................................................................................20

Results ....................................................................................................................................26

Conclusions ............................................................................................................................27

Acknowledgments..................................................................................................................28

References .............................................................................................................................30


List of Tables

Table 1a. Raw Field Data Breakdown from Habitat Mapping, Reach 2 ................................9

Table 1b. Raw Field Data Breakdown from Habitat Mapping, Reach 3 ................................9

Table 2a. Reach 2 Consolidated Groups, and Transects Modeled for Each Group ...............11

Table 2b. Reach 3 Consolidated Groups, and Transects Modeled for Each Group ...............11

Table 3a. Summary of Discharge Measurements Collected for Calibration of Reach 2 ........12

Table 3b. Summary of Discharge Measurements Collected for Calibration of Reach 3 .......13

Table 4a. Reach 2 Water Surface Elevation Stage/Discharge Calibration Summary .............16

Table 4b. Reach 3 Water Surface Elevation Stage/Discharge Calibration Summary ............17

Table 5a. Selected Flow for Each Transect Compared to RHABSIM Modeled Flow at Each

Transect for Reach 2 ..............................................................................................................19

Table 5b. Selected Flow for Each Transect Compared to RHABSIM Modeled Flow at Each

Transect for Reach 3 ..............................................................................................................20


List of Figures

Figure 1. Reach 2, Goldhill Dam to Hemphill Dam Location and Transects. ........................7

Figure 2. Reach 3, Hemphill Dam to McBean Park Location and Transects. ........................8

Figure 3: Chinook Spawning 2012 Reach 3 Velocity Data Compared to the Lower Yuba and

Tuolumne Chinook Spawning HSCs……. .................................................................................21

Figure 4: Chinook Spawning 2012 Reach 3 Depth Data Compared to the Lower Yuba and

Tuolumne Chinook Spawning HSCs. ......................................................................................22

Figure 5: Example Use:availability Plot from SEFA. ............................................................23

Figure 6: Comparison of Velocity Selectivity (use: availability) Plots from SEFA Analysis, as

Compared to Lower Yuba and Tuolomne HSCs for Spawning Chinook.................................24

Figure 7: Comparison of Depth Selectivity (use: availability) Plots from SEFA Analysis, as

Compared to Lower Yuba and Tuolomne HSCs for Spawning Chinook.................................25

Figure 8. Weighted Usable Area Plots for Reach 2 (Goldhill to Hemphill) Results. ..............26

Figure 9. Weighted Usable Area Plots for Reach 3 (Hemphill to McBean) Results. .............27


List of Appendices

Appendix A. List of Velocity Calibration Changes ..................................................................31

Appendix B. Calibration Graphs and Photos ..........................................................................34

Appendix C. Habitat Suitability Curves ..................................................................................110

Appendix D. Tabular WUA Results by Reach and Life Stage .................................................117


Goals and Objectives:

The goal of this study was to assess the relationship between flow and habitat for resident and

anadromous fish in Auburn Ravine. As trustee for California’s fish and wildlife resources, The California

Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and

management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable

populations of those species. Certain fish and wildlife rely upon stream-related ecosystems, which in

turn are reliant on adequate instream flows. Minimum flow thresholds are established to assure that

stream flows are sufficient to keep fish in good condition. CDFW staff plan to use flow/habitat

relationships to make recommendations within the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E’s) Drum-

Spaulding FERC relicensing process, and within the Nevada Irrigation District’s (NID) water rights

process. Additionally CDFW may submit recommendations pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC)

section 10000-10005.

History:

On March 19, 1998, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) listed the Central Valley steelhead

distinct population segment (DPS) as a threatened species (63 FR 13347 (1998)). On September 8, 2000,

pursuant to a July 10, 2000 rule issued by NMFS under Section 4(d) of the ESA (16 USC § 1533(d)), the

take restrictions that apply statutorily to endangered species began to apply to Central Valley steelhead

(65 FR 42421 (2000)). On January 5, 2006, NMFS reaffirmed the threatened status of the Central Valley

steelhead DPS (71 FR 834 (2006)). NMFS designated critical habitat for Central Valley steelhead on

September 2, 2005 (70 FR 52488 (September 2, 2005)). The critical habitat designation includes the

Auburn Hydrologic Sub-area of American River Hydrologic Unit 5514, which encompasses Auburn Ravine

(70 FR 52488 (September 2, 2005)).

Central Valley FRCS is classified as a California State Species of Special Concern. At the federal level, it is

considered a Species of Concern under ESA (69 FR 19975 (April 15, 2004)). Auburn Ravine is considered

to be essential fish habitat (EFH) for Central Valley FRCS (October 15, 2008 73 FR 60987).

Although there are more recent accounts of Chinook (O. tshawytscha) in Auburn Ravine, there were well

documented runs in the west Placer streams area - including Auburn Ravine – during the 1960s.

According to California Department of Fish and Game Marine Resources Administrative Report No. 65-2

(DFG 1965), there was an estimated run of 1,000 fall-run Chinook salmon (FRCS) in the west Placer

creeks area, including: Secret Ravine, Miners Ravine, Antelope Creek, Auburn Ravine, Doty Ravine, and

Coon Creek. The report states that “The run in Secret Ravine and Auburn Ravine was greater than in

1963; the other streams were about the same” indicating that previous runs occurred in these creeks.

CDFW conducted fish surveys in Auburn Ravine in 2004 and 2005. Steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus

mykiss) dominated the catch in both years. Relative steelhead trout abundance estimates averaged

2,163 individuals per river mile (RM). At the uppermost survey site, located near Wise Road at

approximately RM) 27.5, steelhead trout relative abundance was 337 individuals per RM. Later surveys

also documented another anadromous species - Pacific lamprey (Lampetra tridentata) – in Auburn


Ravine up to at least Bridge Lane (~RM 21) (CDFG 2008). More recently, CDFW staff observed and

documented distribution of FRCS during their 2012 surveys (Hoobler and Mulloy 2012).

Reach Characteristics:

The reach of Auburn Ravine below the Wise Powerhouse is approximately 27 miles long and extends

down to East Side Canal. During the Drum-Spaulding Hydroelectric Project relicensing, PG&E designated

the 1.2 mile long segment that extends from the Wise powerhouse at RM 27.6 to Placer County Water

Agency’s (PCWA) Auburn Tunnel inflow at RM 26.4 as the “upper section” of Auburn Ravine. The 26.4

miles section that extends from the Auburn Tunnel to South Sutter Water District’s East Side Canal at

RM 0 was designated as the “lower section”. While there are currently no minimum instream flow

requirements for Auburn Ravine in PG&E’s existing Federal Energy Regulatory (FERC ) license, Auburn

Ravine is used by NID, PCWA, PG&E as a conduit to convey about 80 cfs (and at times up to 180 cfs)

between April and October for consumptive water deliveries. Additionally, between November and

April, PG&E intermittently releases up to 80 cfs into Auburn Ravine from the South Canal due to a

mismatch in capacities between the upstream powerhouses and the canal (Drum-Spaulding FLA).

For this study, the upper 11 miles of the 26.4 mile “lower section” was divided into 3 segments based on

existing water diversion structures. Reach 1 (The Cataract Reach) is an approximately 2.5 mile segment

of Auburn Ravine from the Cataract at RM 26.5 to the Goldhill/AR 1 Diversion Dam at RM 24. Reach 2

(Goldhill Reach) is an approximately 6.4 mile section from the Goldhill/AR 1 Diversion Dam at RM 24 to

Hemphill Diversion Dam at RM 17.6. Reach 3 (Hemphill Reach) is an approximately 2.1 mile section

from Hemphill Diversion Dam at RM 17.6 to McBean Park at RM 15.5. A global positioning system (GPS)

waypoint was taken at the downstream boundary of each habitat type. Flows averaged 18.95 cubic feet

per second over the length of the survey. This study focused on the 6.4 mile reach between Goldhill

Dam and Hemphill Dam (Reach 2), and the 2.1 mile reach between Hemphill Dam and McBean Park in

the City of Lincoln (Reach 3). These were the reaches where staff observed FRCS during their 2012

surveys.


Figure 1. Reach 2, Goldhill Dam to Hemphill Dam Location and Transects.


Figure 2. Reach 3, Hemphill Dam to McBean Park Location and Transects.

Habitat Data Collection:

The habitat classification system outlined in the California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual

(HRM) (CDFG 2010) was used to delineate aquatic habitat types within the study reach during surveys

conducted in early 2012.

CDFW staff surveyed the approximately 11 mile study reach between January 13th and March 22nd of

2012 to identify habitat types. Habitat classification was based on distinguishing attributes including

over-all channel gradient, velocity, depth, substrate, and channel features responsible for the unit’s

formation. After habitat mapping was completed on each reach, the percentage of each mesohabitat

type (pools, riffles, runs, glides, chutes, pocket water, cascades, or falls) by length was computed for

each reach. The percentage breakdown for each habitat type mapped is summarized in Tables 1a and

1b below.


Table 1a. Raw Field Data Breakdown from Habitat Mapping, Reach 2.

Habitat Type

Feet Count Frequency by Length

LGR 4851 78 19%

HGR 896 12 3%

GLD 2339 23 6%

RUN 4464 68 17%

STEP 3782.6 26 6%

MCP 3553.3 43 11%

LAP 11914 108 27%

PLP 522 8 2%

SHT 154 4 1%

CAS 1028.8 11 3%

FALL 103 6 1%

POW 586 12 3%

CHU 71 2 0%

TRP 102 1 0%

TOTAL 34366 402

Table 1b. Raw Field Data Breakdown from Habitat Mapping, Reach 3.

Habitat Type

Feet Count Frequency by Length

LGR 1658.7 30 23%

HGR 0 0 0%

GLD 1502.1 12 9%

RUN 3260.7 34 27%

STEP 582.3 4 3%

MCP 1889.8 15 12%

LAP 2964.1 30 23%

PLP 195.6 3 2%

SHT 0 0 0%

CAS 0 0 0%

FALL 0 0 0%

POW 0 0 0%

CHU 0 0 0%

TRP 0 0 0%

The mesohabitat types were then further divided into two categories – those with laminar flow void of

hydraulic jumps that could be modeled using standard predictive equations for steady state channel

flow (i.e. 1-dimensional, or 1D, modeling) and those where the habitat types produce overly turbulent

flow or where the habitat stream bed gradients were too steep to allow flows to obey the boundary

conditions of traditional steady state flow equations. Here the two categories are simply referred to as

modeled and non-modeled, respectively. Transects would only be placed in habitat types/units that

were determined in the field by a CDFW hydraulic engineer to be capable of being modeled with

standard 1-dimensional modeling tools. These are listed below:


Modeled Habitat Types:

High Gradient Riffle (HGR, where channel hydraulics permit 1D modeling – identified in the field during transect selection)

Low Gradient Riffle (LGR)

Run/Step-run (RUN/STEP)

Glide (GLD)

Pocket Water (POW, where channel hydraulics permit – identified in the field)

Pools (Mid-Channel, Trench, Lateral, Plunge) (MCP,TRP,LAP,PLP)

Non-Modeled Habitat Types Include:

Falls (FALL)

Cascade (CAS)

Chute (CHU)

Sheet Flow (SHT)

High Gradient Riffle (HGR, where channel hydraulics preclude 1D modeling – identified in the field during transect selection)

Only habitat types that could be modeled and that represented five percent or more of each reach were considered. From the representative habitat types, transects were selected using the least common selection methodology (Payne 1992) - a stratified random sampling technique. In each reach, a starting habitat unit is chosen at random from the list of units of the least common selectable habitat type. A transect was placed in this habitat unit through consensus of the on-site team. Starting at this least common selector location, additional transects of the more common habitat types are selected while moving up or downstream, choosing transects within each habitat unit. Selected habitat units were disqualified if field inspection indicated the unit would perform poorly in hydraulic modeling. Once a unit has been disqualified, the selection process continued in the same direction upstream or downstream to the next unit of the same type and the process is repeated until transects had been selected at the target number of units and habitat types. This process was consistent with the methodology used to select transect locations in the upstream instream flow study report (PG&E 2011a) for the Drum-Spaulding FERC licensing. The final results of the randomly stratified sampling are summarized in Tables 2a and 2b.


Table 2a. Reach 2 Consolidated Groups, and Transects Modeled for Each Group.

Consolidated Groups

Feet % Modeled # Transects

% by Each Transect

LGR 4851 16.94 4 4.23

HGR 896 3.13 2 1.56

GLD 2339 8.17 3 2.72

RUN 4464 15.59 4 3.90

POOLS 16091.3 56.18 7 8.03

TOTAL 28641 18

Table 2b. Reach 3 Consolidated Groups, and Transects Modeled for Each Group.

Consolidated Groups

Feet % Modeled # Transects % by Each Transect

LGR 1658.7 13.76 4 3.44

GLD 1502.1 12.46 2 6.23

RUN 3260.7 27.05 3 9.02

POOLS 5049.5 41.89 5 8.38

STEP 582.3 4.83 3 1.61

Total 12053 17

Data Collection for Hydraulic Model:

Hydraulic model data collection including transect elevation profile surveys, velocity profile surveys,

water surface elevation (WSEL) measurements, stream gradient, and stage of zero flow were completed

between September of 2012 and April of 2013. Controlled releases were not possible during the study;

however, CDFW staff coordinated closely with NID, PCWA, and PG&E staff to determine when flows

would likely be within the correct ranges for sampling. The target calibration flows were 10-15 cfs for

low flows, 18-25 for mid flows, and 30-40 for high flows. Flows were selected to characterize the range

of variability observed in Auburn Ravine during non-delivery seasons. Using these calibration flows, it

was also possibly to use the hydraulic model to simulate flows up to about 100 cfs. Temporary staff

gages were installed to monitor for fluctuations in stage while discharge measurements were recorded.

Unplanned stage fluctuations occurred during the study period due to PCWA testing of the American

River Pump Station (increased flows between 0 and 50 cfs), releases by PG&E from Wise Powerhouse

due to a restriction in capacity of South Canal (40 to 50 cfs), an unplanned outage by PG&E on

Boardman Canal (exact flow increase was unknown), and other unknown smaller increases in flow,

which were possibly caused by releases from the Auburn Wastewater Treatment plant. During these

events, when unexpected increases and decreases in flow occurred field staff were forces to abandon

measurements and return to retake measurements at later dates. Measurements taken under the

aberrant conditions were excluded from this study results. Flow measurements were thus collected on

an opportunistic basis.


Calibration Flows:

Development of the hydraulic portion of Physical Habitat Simulation System (PHABSIM) models requires

accurate calibration of the stage/discharge relationships for each transect. WSEL and depth and velocity

data were measured and recorded at each transect during each survey flow event. Transect specific

discharge values were then calculated from the depth and velocity data for each WSEL measurement.

Typically, several units were surveyed each day resulting in multiple estimates of discharge each day. In

determining which discharge estimate was most representative of the day and particular stream area

(i.e. which discharge would be designated as the “calibration flow” for a given transect and WSEL),

preference was given to transects located in glide units. Where glide units were not within reasonable

proximity to the surveys area, discharge from run units was used. In units with multiple transects, depth

and velocity profiles were compared to select the transect with the most uniform profile characteristics

to estimate discharge.

The discharges computed in Reaches 2 and 3 over the course of sampling are presented below in Table

3a and 3b.

Table 3a. Summary of Discharge Measurements Collected for Calibration of Reach 2.

Reach 2

Trans

#

Unit

Type

Selected

Calibration

Flow

(cfs)

Meas

Flow at

Transect

(cfs)

Location

of Rep.

Meas.

Date of

Transect

Flow

Meas.

Selected

Calibration

Flow

(cfs)

Meas

Flow at

Transect

(cfs)

Location

of Rep.

Meas.

Date of

Transect

Flow

Meas.

Selected

Calibration

Flow

(cfs)

Meas

Flow at

Transect

(cfs)

Location

of Rep.

Meas.

Date of

Transect

Flow

Meas.

2A GLD 10.6 10.6 A 10/10/12 20.3 20.3 A 3/13/13 33.9 33.9 A 10/3/12

2B RUN 8.4 8.4 B 11/8/12 20.3 19.0 A 3/13/13 33.9 A 10/3/12

2C LGR 10.6 11.8 B 11/8/12 20.3 21.2 A 3/13/13 33.9 A 10/3/12

2D LAP 10.6 11.8 A 10/10/12 20.3 20.4 A 3/13/13 33.9 A 10/3/12

2E LAP 7.6 below A 2/27/13 20.3 20.4 A 3/13/13 27.7 Below F 1/7/13

2F PLP 7.6 below A 2/27/13 20.3 19.9 A 3/13/13 27.7 Below F 1/7/13

2G MCP 7.6 below A 2/27/13 20.3 18.9 A 3/13/13 33.9 A 10/3/12

2H GLD 10.6 11.3 A 10/10/12 20.3 20.1 A 3/13/13 33.9 A 10/3/12

2J HGR 7.6 below A 2/27/13 20.3 15.1 A 3/13/13 33.9 A 10/3/12

2K HGR 7.6 below A 2/27/13 20.3 19.0 A 3/13/13 33.9 A 10/3/12

2L GLD 12.1 12.1 L 1/28/13 14.9 14.9 L 4/10/13 34.7 34.7 L 12/10/12

2M MCP 12.1 10.7 L 1/28/13 14.9 17.0 L 10/9/12 34.7 L 12/10/12

2N LGR 12.1 L 1/28/13 14.9 18.6 L 10/9/12 34.7 L 12/10/12

2O RUN 12.1 L 1/28/13 14.9 17.3 L 10/9/12 34.7 L 12/10/12

2P RUN 12.1 L 1/28/13 14.9 15.1 L 10/9/12 34.7 L 12/10/12

2Q LGR 12.1 L 1/28/13 14.9 17.1 L 10/9/12 34.7 L 12/10/12

2R LAP 12.1 L 1/28/13 14.2 14.2 R 11/2/12 34.7 L 12/10/12

2S COP 12.9 12.0 SZF2S 1/28/13 14.9 L 4/10/13 34.7 L 12/10/12

2T RUN 12.9 SZF2S 1/28/13 15.6 15.6 T 10/10/12 34.7 36.5 L 12/10/12

2U LGR 12.9 SZF2S 1/28/13 14.9 16.0 L 10/9/12 34.7 L 12/10/12

Below A = Independent transect for flow measurement created on 2/27/13 downstream of transect A

Below F = Independent transect for flow measurement created on 1/7/13 downstream of transect F

Low Flow Mid Flow High Flow


Table 3b. Summary of Discharge Measurements Collected for Calibration of Reach 3.

Hydraulic Model Calibration:

Water Surface Elevation Calibration:

The PHABSIM User’s Manual (Waddle 2001) and the User’s Manual RHABSIM 3.0 (Payne 1994-1998)

provide the following guidance when evaluating the performance of stage/discharge relationships

developed from field data collected at each transect. The various methods available in RHABSIM to

predict stage/discharge relationships were applied and compared to the calibration data entered. The

following bullets apply to all the methods available:

The mean error of predicted versus measured discharge should not exceed 10%;

The maximum variance of any one predicted discharge compared to a measured discharge should not exceed 25%; and

The difference between measured and predicted WSELs should not exceed 0.1 foot at a given calibration flow.

In addition, for MANSQ models exclusively:

Transects with MANSQ beta values outside the range of 0 to 0.4 should be evaluated further to ensure the variance in beta was not the result of a temporary obstruction to the flow during one of the calibration flow events or some other systematic error in preparing the data, or other random error that occurred during data collection.

Reach 3

Trans

#

Unit

Type

Selected

Calibration

Flow

(cfs)

Meas

Flow at

Transect

(cfs)

Location

of Rep.

Meas.

Date of

Transect

Flow

Meas.

Selected

Calibration

Flow

(cfs)

Meas

Flow at

Transect

(cfs)

Location

of Rep.

Meas.

Date of

Transect

Flow

Meas.

Selected

Calibration

Flow

(cfs)

Meas

Flow at

Transect

(cfs)

Location

of Rep.

Meas.

Date of

Transect

Flow

Meas.

3A STEP 12.7 G 2/6/13 17.9 15.0 G 10/8/12 39.7 C 12/13/12

3B LAP 12.5 12.9 NID Gage 3/29/13 12.7 G 2/6/13 39.7 C 12/13/12

3C RUN 21.7 21.7 C 10/8/12 31.8 25.6 G 10/2/12 39.7 39.7 C 12/13/12

3D LGR 13.3 16.8 NID Gage 10/29/12 31.8 G 10/2/12 39.7 C 12/13/12

3E STEP 12.7 G 2/6/13 17.9 18.1 G 10/8/12 31.8 G 10/2/12

3F LAP 39.7 C 12/13/12 17.9 19.9 G 10/8/12 5.2 NID Gage 10/18/12

3G GLD 5.2 NID Gage 10/18/12 17.9 17.9 G 10/8/12 31.8 31.8 G 10/2/12

3H LGR 5.2 NID Gage 10/18/12 17.9 18.6 G 10/8/12 31.8 G 10/2/12

3I MCP 5.2 7.5 NID Gage 10/18/12 17.9 17.5 G 10/8/12 31.8 G 10/2/12

3J RUN 5.2 NID Gage 10/18/12 17.9 15.7 G 10/8/12 31.8 G 10/2/12

3L LGR 14.6 Q 2/4/13 25.0 23.4 Q 10/8/12 32.0 K 9/27/12

3Q STEP 14.6 14.6 Q 2/4/13 25.0 25.0 Q 10/8/12 35.0 35.0 Q 9/26/12

3R LAP 15.5 R 4/10/13 25.0 22.7 Q 10/8/15 35.0 Q 9/26/12

3S GLD 14.6 Q 2/6/13 19.1 19.1 S 10/8/12 35.0 Q 9/26/12

3V LAP 10.3 8.9 U 10/9/12 11.6 11.8 U 10/25/12 30.9 U 9/27/12

3W RUN 10.3 10.2 U 10/9/12 11.6 12.9 U 10/25/12 30.9 U 9/27/12

3X LGR 10.3 9.1 U 10/9/12 11.6 13.7 U 10/25/12 21.8 21.6 U 1/24/13



And for Log-log (IFG4) models:

The Log-Log Beta value should be within the range of 2.0 to 4.5. Any transects with beta values outside of this range should be evaluated further to ensure the variance in beta is not the result of a temporary obstruction to the flow one of the calibration flow events or some other systematic error in preparing the data or random error that occurred during data collection.

Preferred ranges of MANSQ beta vary amongst practitioners of instream flow studies. The RHABSIM

user’s manual suggests a suitable range falls between 0 to 0.4. The PHABSIM manual recommends a

somewhat broader range from 0 to 0.6 (Waddle 2001). Transects where MANSQ beta values exceeded

recommended thresholds do not necessarily require omission, but do require in-depth evaluation to

establish the results are consistent with the accurate measurements taken at all calibrations flows and

not the product of poor transect selection, measurement and/or analysis error.

A single velocity set (1-Vel) calibration was used to simulate velocity profiles for each transect. For 1-Vel

velocity calibration, the User’s Manual RHABSIM 3.0 recommends the range of velocity adjustment

factors (VAFs) over the range of velocity profiles simulated to each calibration flow fall between 0.1 and

5.0.

Where the calibration for any individual transect was outside the range of statistics presented above,

staff reviewed unit data to confirm stage/discharge results were not affected by errors in data collection

or method application. Where simulated results for all the methods did not accurately predict

measured values, staff reviewed field notes and digital images to understand potential causes for the

variance. Calibration results for each reach are presented in Tables 4a and 4b. The reach transect

calibration results for the stage/discharge method selected met the guidelines described above,

including: mean error of predicted versus measured discharge, difference in elevation of WSEL, beta

value for either MANSQ or Log-Log, and VAF. These results are presented in Tables 4a and 4b.

Stage/Discharge Calibration Notes:

The general practices below were employed in developing the stage/discharge relationships used in this

PHABSIM study as follows:

Where possible, all pool transects were modeled using Step-Backwater water surface elevation

calibration;

All transects in the study site were calibrated using both Log/Log and MANSQ;

Final selection of Stage/Discharge method was chosen based on which WSE method provided

the lowest error, was most realistic given the cross-section geometry, as well as which curves

“fit” the data best;

In Reach 2, transects 2I and 2V were removed from modeling during the calibration process.

Transect 2I had water surface elevation data from the field that could not be reconciled.

Transect 2V was removed because the transect cross section geometry was altered during

winter high flows and the channel shape changed before the last WSEL measurements could be

collected. These two transects represented the only STEP habitat transects that were selected.


Therefore no STEP habitat is included in this modeling. STEP habitat represents 6% of the total

habitat in Reach 3; and

In Reach 3, transects 3K, 3M, 3N, 3O, 3P, 3T, and 3U were all removed from modeling during

the calibration process. Winter high flows during data collection altered the shape of the

channel cross sections. Consequently reliable stage/discharge relationships could not be

developed. These transects were removed from the modeling study, and are therefore not

included in any tables or figures presented in this study.


Table 4a. Reach 2 Water Surface Elevation Stage/Discharge Calibration Summary.

PHABSIM Transect

# Transect

Name

Habitat Unit

Number Unit Type

MANSQ Beta

Regression Beta

Log/Log Mean Error

Method Chosen VAF

1 2U 355 LGR 0.1331 3.5661 5.5% MSQ 0.9253 2 2T 364 RUN -0.3522 1.861 0.2% Log/Log 1.0629 4 2S 365 COP 0.5297 3.3936 0.4% Log/Log 1.0222 6 2R 367 LAP 0.4211 4.3376 0.6% Log/Log 1.058 7 2Q 368 LGR -0.0406 3.8327 6.8% Log/Log 1.0151 8 2P 369 RUN 0.4455 4.6266 10.3% Log/Log 1.0719 9 2O 371 RUN 0.2261 3.5669 15.7% MSQ 0.8563 10 2N 372 LGR 0.0847 2.5133 5.6% Log/Log 0.7617 12 2M 373 MCP 0.602 2.9148 0.6% Log/Log 0.9985 13 2L 374 GLD 0.15 3.0192 3.5% MSQ 0.9821 14 2A 440 GLD 0.5888 5.4987 1.7% Log/Log 0.9637 15 2B 441 RUN 0.4724 5.1654 3.2% Log/Log 1.0248 16 2C 442 LGR 0.6026 5.826 0.8% Log/Log 0.9334 18 2D 443 LAP 0.5652 5.5043 8.8% Log/Log 0.8495 20 2E 448 LAP 0.8358 6.2834 2.3% Log/Log 0.8195 22 2F 450 PLP 0.803 5.3105 0.6% Log/Log 1.0304 24 2G 453 MCP 0.7298 4.3652 2.7% Log/Log 0.8383 25 2H 456 GLD 0.3064 3.5993 5.1% MSQ 0.9956 26 2J 461 HGR 0.4906 6.0116 6.3% Log/Log 0.85 27 2K 468 HGR -0.3466 0.9865 0.02% Log/Log 0.9258


Table 4b. Reach 3 Water Surface Elevation Stage/Discharge Calibration Summary.

PHABSIM Transect #

Transect Name

Habitat Unit

Number Unit Type

ManSQ Beta

Regression Beta

Log/Log Mean Error

Method Chosen VAF

1 3S 28 GLD -0.2081 2.5523 3.8% Log/Log 1.1218 3 3R 30 LAP 0.5508 4.5916 2.8% Log/Log 1.0858 4 3Q 32 STEP 0.3629 3.5328 1.5% MSQ 1.3137 5 3L 56 LGR -0.6062 1.3681 1.2% Log/Log 1.0478 6 3A 74 STEP 0.1306 3.5187 3.0% MSQ 0.9823 8 3B 75 LAP 0.8076 3.8756 1.6% Log/Log 0.9346 9 3C 76 RUN -6.8922 1.4768 5.5% Log/Log 1.007 10 3D 77 LGR 0.2135 2.4992 9.0% MSQ 0.9269 11 3E 79 STEP 0.6028 5.9833 7.0% Log/Log 1.3887 13 3F 80 LAP 0.4002 3.8847 3.8% Log/Log 0.8758 14 3G 81 GLD 0.3173 3.8606 3.2% MSQ 1.1093 15 3H 82 LGR 0.502 6.9028 3.4% MSQ 0.941 17 3I 83 MCP 0.7109 5.2015 4.5% Log/Log 1.0054 18 3J 84 RUN 0.8521 4.0034 2.4% Log/Log 1.1578 19 3X 105 LGR 0.3127 4.1892 0.9% MSQ 0.9025 22 3V 118 LAP 0.4775 2.468 6.3% Log/Log 0.9749 23 3W 123 RUN 0.3399 4.6264 2.6% MSQ 1.3202


Water Velocity Calibration:

The one velocity (1-Vel) method was used to predict velocities in each transect cell over a range of 30

“Simulation Flows”. Velocity profiles from the mid-flow event were used for the 1-Vel calibration when

possible, but due to the difficulties in collecting velocity measurements, the velocity profiles from the

low or high flows were used for several habitat units.

Using the 1-Vel method, RHABSIM calculates a Manning’s n value (N) to each transect cell. RHABSIM

simulates a velocity for each transect cell at each Calibration Flow. Based on the VelSet selected (High,

Mid, or Low) RHABSIM simulates velocities for each cell at each Simulation Flow. Velocities trend up

and down with flow magnitude in relation to the shape of the velocity profile.

Natural stream bed conditions can cause negative velocities and inordinately fast velocities to be

recorded in the field as follows:

1. Obstructions like boulders create eddies immediately downstream causing water to flow

upstream producing negative velocities along the transect line;

2. At stream margins, bank constrictions upstream can cause eddy like patterns (water flowing

upstream) along the transect line; and

3. Obstructions like boulders in the line of the transect can cause the flow immediately above the

obstruction to be inordinately fast, referred to as “shooting.”

With respect to conditions #1 and #2, upstream survey data was not available to use in accessing when

negative mean column velocities would reverse their increasing negative trend and begin increasing in a

positive trend. For these cells, N factors were overridden with user defined values to minimize

increasingly negative trends. Negative velocities were assumed not to exceed one cfs at the maximum

Simulation Flow of 2.5 times the maximum Calibration Flow. N factors were adjusted to correlate the

cell velocities with the adjoining cells, or based on professional judgment where needed. Transect cell

locations where N factors were adjusted were inventoried and are presented in Appendix A. A

summary of the selected calibration discharge versus model predicted flow for each transect included in

the analysis are given in Table 5a and 5b below.


Table 5a. Selected Calibration Flow for Each Transect Compared to RHABSIM Model Calculated Flow

at Each Transect for Reach 2.

Reach 2

Trans

#

Unit

Type

Selected

Flow

(cfs)

Model

Calculated

Flow (cfs)

Selected

Flow

(cfs)

Model

Calculated

Flow (cfs)

Selected

Flow

(cfs)

Model

Calculated

Flow (cfs)

2A GLD 10.6 10.9 20.3 20.3 33.9

2B RUN 8.4 7.8 20.3 18.7 33.9 27.6

2C LGR 10.6 9.0 20.3 17.2 33.9

2D LAP 10.6 20.3 23.6 33.9

2E LAP 7.6 20.3 20.4 27.7

2F PLP 7.6 11.3 20.3 19.7 27.7

2G MCP 7.6 9.4 20.3 18.2 33.9

2H GLD 10.6 10.8 20.3 20.4 33.9

2J HGR 7.6 11.5 20.3 14.8 33.9

2K HGR 7.6 10.6 11.2 33.9

2L GLD 12.1 8.7 14.9 14.9 34.7 28.7

2M MCP 12.1 14.9 9.2 34.7

2N LGR 12.1 17.3 14.9 34.7

2O RUN 12.1 14.9 17.4 34.7

2P RUN 12.1 14.9 15.1 34.7

2Q LGR 12.1 14.9 12.0 34.7

2R LAP 12.1 14.2 14.1 34.7

2S COP 12.9 11.9 14.9 18.7 34.7

2T RUN 12.9 15.6 14.7 34.7

2U LGR 12.9 14.9 16.0 34.7



Table 5b. Selected Calibration Flow for Each Transect Compared to RHABSIM Model Calculated Flow

at Each Transect for Reach 3.

Habitat Suitability Curves:

CDFW staff conducted a review of existing habitat suitability curves (HSC) for the target species and life

stages from existing curves. CDFW adopted the HSC consensus curves that were used in the upstream

reaches of Auburn Ravine for the FERC #2310 relicensing project PHABSIM study (PG&E 2011a and PG&E

2011b) for all life stages of rainbow trout (medium channel size). However, no steelhead or Chinook

curves were developed for the FERC #2310 PHABSIM study. Recent California relicensing efforts on the

nearby Yuba River (Yuba County Water Agency 2013) and the Tuolumne River (Stillwater 2013) resulted

in HSC curves for steelhead and Chinook. Yuba and Tuolumne HSC were compared with site-specific

data below to aid curve selection.

In December of 2011, passage barrier improvements were completed at the Highway 65 gaging station

by NID. During the next year, CDFW conducted the first FRCS spawning surveys in Auburn Ravine in over

30 years (Hoobler and Mulloy, 2012). Field surveys were conducted to develop an index of fall-run

Chinook salmon redd abundance and subsequent estimation of adult breeding population size.

Between October 26, 2102 and December 17, 2012, CDFW staff conducted weekly surveys to:

Mark new redds;

Recount marked redds to estimate observer efficiency and reduce counting errors;

Count number and sex of fish on redds;

Reach 3

Trans

#

Unit

Type

Selected

Flow

(cfs)

Model

Calculated

Flow (cfs)

Selected

Flow

(cfs)

Model

Calculated

Flow (cfs)

Selected

Flow

(cfs)

Model

Calculated

Flow (cfs)

3A STEP 12.7 13.9 17.9 39.7

3B LAP 12.5 13.7 12.7 39.7

3C RUN 21.7 12.2 31.8 20.8 39.7 40.9

3D LGR 13.3 14.4 31.8 39.7

3E STEP 12.7 17.9 12.2 31.8

3F LAP 39.7 17.9 19.7 5.2

3G GLD 5.2 17.9 17.9 31.8 28.7

3H LGR 5.2 17.9 18.4 31.8

3I MCP 5.2 7.6 17.9 17.5 31.8

3J RUN 5.2 17.9 15.6 31.8

3L LGR 14.6 25 23.1 32

3Q STEP 14.6 11.1 25 24.8 35 33.6

3R LAP 15.5 25 22.6 35

3S GLD 14.6 19.1 18.7 35

3V LAP 10.3 10.2 11.6 22.3 30.9

3W RUN 10.3 7.8 11.6 17.4 30.9

3X LGR 10.3 9.5 11.6 21.8 23.9



Measure redd attributes and record:

Pot length, width, and depth;

Tail spill length and width;

Depth, velocity, and substrate; and

Map locations with GPS and enter into a GIS database.

Using information collected during these surveys, the Auburn Ravine specific FRCS use data was then

compared to existing HSC curves. Surveys of absence or unused habitat were not conducted, however

for this analysis, the data collected during the PHABSIM study was considered to be a reasonable

representation of the available habitat. Field data were consolidated into bins for comparison with

predicted depths and velocities in the habitat simulation module (HYDSIM) of the RHABSIM program.

Depths and velocities were compared for each flow where new Chinook redds were observed. These

observations were compared to existing HSCs in both Microsoft Excel and the System for Environmental

Flow Analysis (SEFA) program’s “Compare Use to Availability” function.

Figure 3: Chinook Spawning 2012 Reach 3 Velocity Data Compared to the Lower Yuba and Tuolumne

Chinook Spawning HSCs. Light green line shows frequency of observations in Auburn Ravine, dark

green line shows the normalized use divided by normalized availability data.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Au

bu

rn R

avin

e R

edd

s (F

req

uen

cy)

Pro

bab

le S

uit

abili

ty

Velocity (ft/sec)

Chinook Spawning

Lower Yuba VelocityHSC

Tuolumne Velocity HSC

Reach 3 Availabilityusing substrate

Auburn RavineNormalized Vel/avail

Auburn RavineObserved Frequency


Figure 4: Chinook Spawning 2012 Reach 3 Depth Data Compared to the Lower Yuba and Tuolumne

Chinook Spawning HSCs. Light green line shows frequency of observations in Auburn Ravine, dark

green line shows the normalized use divided by normalized availability data.

The analysis was repeated using an updated version of the RHABSIM software, the System for

Environmental Flow Assessment, which includes a “Suitability Criteria” module. Similar to the analysis

above, actual use observations were taken from CDFW 2012 field studies, and the availability data were

taken from modeled RHABSIM available depths and velocities. In the SEFA analysis, observations were

not grouped together, but new observations of redds were analyzed separately for each different flow.

Depth and velocity curves were produced for each flow level simulated. An example of the resulting

curve smoothing is given in Figure 5.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Au

bu

rn R

avin

e R

edd

s (F

req

uen

cy)

Pro

bab

le S

uit

abili

ty

Depth (ft)

Chinook Spawning

Lower Yuba Depth HSC

Tuolumne Depth HSC

Auburn Ravine Availability

Auburn RavineNormalized Depth/AvailAuburn Ravine DepthObservation Frequency


Figure 5: Example Use:availability Plot from SEFA.

Sele

ctivity

Flow = 15

Fish #

-1 0 1 2 3 4

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

Kernel smoothed curves

Used

Available

Selection


The data from each of these individual use, availability, and selectivity curves were then overlapped in

Excel:

Figure 6: Comparison of Velocity Selectivity (use: availability) Plots from SEFA Analysis, as Compared

to Lower Yuba and Tuolumne HSCs for Spawning Chinook.


Figure 7: Comparison of Depth Selectivity (use: availability) Plots from SEFA Analysis, as Compared to

Lower Yuba and Tuolumne HSCs for Spawning Chinook.

Using the results of both the Excel analysis and the SEFA analysis, it was determined that both the Lower

Yuba and Tuolumne curves each represented a reasonable fit to the selectivity data. However, given

the shape of the SEFA selectivity curves at the peak for velocity at 53 cfs (see Figure 6), it was

determined that the Lower Yuba curve was a better fit to this data, indicating that selectivity was

peaking or still increasing at the highest values observed in Auburn Ravine. These comparisons gave

CDFW staff confidence that the HSCs were applicable to Auburn Ravine. The Lower Yuba Spawning HSC

was therefore selected for the flow study. For consistency purposes, the Lower Yuba fry and juvenile

Chinook, and steelhead spawning, fry and juvenile curves were also used in this study.

For Chinook substrate codes, CDFW staff applied the binary suitability curves from the Yuba study.

However, the “usable” size of spawning substrate was expanded to include the size classifications where

Chinook Salmon were actually observed to be spawning during the 2012 surveys in Auburn Ravine.

For steelhead and resident rainbow trout substrate, CDFW adapted the suitability ranges to account for

the slightly different size-classification bins used during habitat mapping from the Yuba and Drum-

Spaulding Relicensing curves.

HSCs used in the modeling are shown in Appendix C.


Results:

Using the calibrated hydraulic models and HSC, weighted usable area (WUA) was calculated for each

reach for each species and life stage. WUA is a way to describe the flow versus habitat relationship for

each reach using the RHABSIM hydraulically modeled total wetted area times the combined suitability

for depth, velocity and substrate (where applicable). For this study weighted usable area was calculated

using cell-centered velocities. The flow vs weighted usable area (WUA) results are shown in Figures 8

and 9 below and presented in tabular form in Appendix B.

Figure 8. Weighted Usable Area Plots for Reach 2 (Goldhill to Hemphill) Results.


Figure 9. Weighted Usable Area Plots for Reach 3 (Hemphill to McBean) Results.

Conclusions:

The fish and wildlife resources of the State of California are held in trust for the people of the State by

and through the Department (Fish & G. Code § 711.7). The mission of the Department is to manage

California’s diverse fish, wildlife, and plant resources, and the habitats on which they depend, for their

ecological values and for their use and enjoyment by the public. It is the goal of the Department to

preserve, protect, and as needed, to restore habitat necessary to support native fish, wildlife, and plant

species that are affected by new and ongoing projects. Specifically for Auburn Ravine, the Department

will use the results of this study to identify minimum flows that are sufficient to keep fish in good

condition and inform future water rights, FERC licensing and other local flow threshold-setting

processes.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The data in this report were collected and prepared primarily with assistance of the following CDFW

staff: Don Baldwin, Michelle Coldiron, Bill Cowan, Mike Hancock, Diane Hass, Candice Heinz, and Sean

Hoobler. Bill Cowan, Robert Holmes, and Robert Hughes provided technical assistance in development

of the modeling and habitat suitability curve review.


REFERENCES:

California Department of Fish and Game. 2010. California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual,

Fourth Addition, July 2010. https://www.dfg.ca.gov/fish/resources/habitatmanual.asp

California Department of Fish and Game. 2008. Summary of 2004 and 2005 fish community surveys in

Auburn Ravine and Coon Creek (Placer County). Memorandum - Fisheries Files. 12p.

California Department of Fish and Game Marine Resources Branch, and Regions 1, 2, and 4. 1965. King

(Chinook) salmon spawning stocks in California's Central Valley, 1964. R.S. Menchen (ed.). Mar. Res. Br.

Admin. Rept. 65-2. 17 p

Hoobler S. M and L.F. Mulloy 2012, CalNeva AFS Poster Presentation, Assessment of Fall Run Chinook

Salmon Spawning After Passage Barrier Improvements on Auburn Ravine, Central California.

Milhous, R. T., M. A. Updike, and D. M. Schneider. 1989. Physical habitat simulation system reference

manual: version 2. Instream flow information paper 26. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report

89(16). Washington D.C.Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). 2011a. Technical Memorandum 3-2,

Instream Flow, October 2011.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). 2011a. Technical Memorandum 3-13, Western Placer County

Streams, October 2011.

Payne, T.R. 1992. Stratified random selection process for the placement of Physical Habitat Simulation

(PHABSIM) transects. Paper presented at AFS Western Division Meeting, July 13-16, in Fort Collins, CO.

Payne, T.R. 1994-1998. USER’S MANUAL RHABSIM 2.0 Riverine Habitat Simulation Software For DOS and

Windows. Arcata, CA.

Stillwater Sciences. 2013. Lower Tuolumne River Instream Flow Study. Final Report. Prepared by

Stillwater Sciences, Davis, California for Turlock and Irrigation District and Modesto Irrigation District,

California. April .U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Using the computer based physical habitat

simulation system (PHABSIM). U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fort Collins, CO.

Waddle, T.J. (ed.). 2001. PHABSIM for Windows: User’s Manual and Exercises: Fort Collins, CO, U.S.

Geological Survey, 288 p.

Yuba County Water Agency. 2013. Technical Memorandum 7-10, Instream Flow Downstream of

Englebright Dam. Yuba River Development Project. September 2013.

https://www.dfg.ca.gov/fish/resources/habitatmanual.asp


Appendix A

List of Velocity Calibration Changes


Reach 2

T-1 (2U)

Station 27 – Calculated N was negative because the cell was dry during velocity measurements; selected an N value such that the velocity was midpoint between adjacent cells.

T-4 (2S)

Stations 1 to 9 –Large negative velocities in edge cells at higher flows. Adjusted N values to

dampen an abnormally high velocity spike near water’s edge; based on adjacent cell.

Station 21 –Large negative velocities in edge cell at higher flows. Adjusted N value to dampen

an abnormally high velocity spike near water’s edge; based on adjacent cell.

Station 15 – Adjusted N value to dampen high velocity spike; based on adjacent cell.

T-7 (2Q)

Stations 21, 22, 23, 24, 27-30 – Adjusted N value to dampen abnormally high velocity spikes.

T-9 (2O)

Stations 13 – Adjusted N value to dampen abnormally high velocity spike; based on adjacent

cell.

T-22 (2F)

Used high flow velocity profile for one-velocity set calibration. Velocity pattern in that dataset

was the best mix of the three available and most representative based on review of site photos

and field notes.

T-24 (2G)

Stations 20 – Adjusted N value to dampen abnormally high velocity spike.

T-27 (2K)

Used high flow velocity profile for one-velocity set calibration. Velocity pattern in that dataset

the best mix of the three available and most representative based on review of site photos and

field notes.

Reach 3

T-1 (3S)

Adjusted N values to dampen abnormally high velocities at high flows at Stations 1-10, and 15-

21, Site survey photos confirmed that abnormally high margin velocities were not expected.

T-5 (3L)


Stations 1-19 - Adjusted margin N values to bring down abnormally high flow velocities.

T-9 (3C)

Stations 1-23 - Adjusted margin N values to bring down abnormally high negative flow eddy

velocities.

T-15 (3H)

Stations 12-16 – Adjusted N value to dampen abnormally high velocity spike.

T-23 (3W)

Stations 1- 35– Adjusted N value at edge cells to bring down abnormally high negative velocities.


Appendix B

Calibration Graphs and Photos:


Transect 2U (LGR). View facing upstream. High Flow calibration flow - 34.7 cfs.

Transect 2U (LGR). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow - 12.9 cfs.


Transect 2T (Run). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow – 12.9 cfs.

Transect 2T (Run). View facing upstream. High calibration flow – 34.7 cfs.


Transect 2S (COP). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow – 12.9 cfs.

Transect 2S (COP). High calibration flow, view facing from tailpin to headpin – 34.7 cfs.


Transect 2R (LAP). View facing upstream. Mid calibration flow – 14.9 cfs.

Transect 2R (LAP). View facing upstream. High calibration flow – 34.7 cfs.


Transect 2Q (LGR). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow – 12.1 cfs.

Transect 2Q (LGR). View facing downstream. High calibration flow – 34.7 cfs.


Transect 2P (RUN). View facing from tailpin to headpin. Low calibration flow – 12.1 cfs.

Transect 2P (RUN). View facing upstream. High calibration flow – 34.7 cfs.


Transect 2O (RUN). View facing from tailpin to headpin. Low calibration flow – 12.1 cfs.

Transect 2O (RUN). View facing tailpin to headpin. High calibration flow – 34.7 cfs.


Transect 2N (LGR). View facing from tailpin to headpin. Low calibration flow – 12.1 cfs.

Transect 2N (RUN). View facing tailpin to headpin. High calibration flow – 34.7 cfs.

.


Transect 2M (MCP). View facing from tailpin to headpin. Low calibration flow – 14.9 cfs.

Transect 2M (MCP). View facing from tailpin to headpin. High calibration flow – 34.7 cfs.


Transect 2L (GLD). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow – 12.1 cfs.

Transect 2L (GLD). View facing downstream. High calibration flow – 34.7 cfs.


Transect 2A (GLD). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow – 10.6 cfs.

Transect 2A (GLD). View facing from tailpin to headpin. Medium calibration flow – 20.3 cfs.


Transect 2B (RUN). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow – 8.4 cfs.

Transect 2B (RUN). View facing from tailpin to headpin. Medium calibration flow – 20.3 cfs.


Transect 2C (LGR). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow – 8.4 cfs.

Transect 2C (LGR). View facing from tailpin to headpin. Medium calibration flow – 20.3 cfs.


Transect 2D (LAP). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow – 8.2 cfs.

Transect 2D (LAP). View facing from tailpin to headpin. Medium calibration flow – 20.3 cfs.


Transect 2E (LAP). View facing upstream. Medium calibration flow – 20.3 cfs.

Transect 2E (LAP). View facing from headpin to tailpin. Medium calibration flow – 20.3 cfs.


Transect 2F (PLP). View facing upstream. Medium calibration flow – 20.3 cfs.

Transect 2F (PLP). View facing from headpin to tailpin. Medium calibration flow – 20.3 cfs.


Transect 2G (MCP). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow –10.6 cfs.

Transect 2G (MCP). View facing from headpin to tailpin. Medium calibration flow – 20.3 cfs.


Transect 2H (GLD). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow –10.6 cfs.

Transect 2H (GLD). View facing downstream. Medium calibration flow – 20.3 cfs.


Transect 2J (HGR). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow –10.6 cfs.

Transect 2J (HGR). View facing from headpin to tailpin. Medium calibration flow – 20.3 cfs.


Transect 2K (HGR). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow –10.6 cfs.

Transect 2K (HGR). View facing from tailpin to headpin. Medium calibration flow – 20.3 cfs.


Transect 3S (GLI). View facing from headpin to tailpin. Mid calibration flow – 19.1 cfs.

Transect 3S (GLI). View facing upstream. Mid calibration– 19.1 cfs.n


Transect 3R (LAP). View facing from headpin to tailpin. Low calibration flow – 15.5 cfs.

Transect 3R (LAP). View facing upstream. Mid calibration– 25.0 cfs.


Transect 3Q (STEP). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow – 14.6 cfs.

Transect 3Q (STEP). View facing from headpin to tailpin. Mid calibration flow– 25.0 cfs.


Transect 3L (LGR). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow – 14.6 cfs.

Transect 3L (LGR). View facing from headpin to tailpin. Mid calibration flow – 25.0 cfs.


Transect 3A (STEP). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow – 12.7 cfs.

Transect 3A (STEP). View facing upstream. High calibration flow – 39.7 cfs.


Transect 3B (LAP). View facing from tailpin to headpin. Low flow – 12.7 cfs.

Transect 3B (LAP). View facing from tailpin to headpin. High calibration flow – 39.7 cfs.


Transect 3C (RUN). View facing upstream. Low flow – 12.7 cfs.

Transect 3C (RUN). View facing upstream. High calibration flow – 39.7 cfs.


Transect 3D (LGR). View facing upstream. Low flow – 13.3 cfs.

Transect 3D (LGR). View facing from headpin to tailpin. High calibration flow – 39.7 cfs.


Transect 3E (STEP). View facing upstream. Low flow – 12.7 cfs.

Transect 3E (STEP). View facing upstream. Mid calibration flow – 17.9 cfs.


Transect 3F (LAP). View facing upstream. Low flow – 5.2 cfs.

Transect 3F (LAP). View facing upstream. High calibration flow – 39.7 cfs.


Transect 3G (GLD). View facing upstream. Medium calibration flow – 17.9 cfs.

Transect 3G (GLD). View facing from headpin to tailpin. Mid calibration flow – 17.9 cfs.


Transect 3H (LGR). View facing upstream. Medium calibration flow – 17.9 cfs.

Transect 3H (LGR). View facing the tailpin. Mid calibration flow – 17.9 cfs.


Transect 3I (MCP). View facing downstream. Low calibration flow – 5.2 cfs.

Transect 3I (MCP). View facing the tailpin. High calibration flow – 31.8 cfs.


Transect 3J (RUN). View facing the tailpin. Low calibration flow – 5.2 cfs.

Transect 3J (RUN). View facing the tailpin. Mid calibration flow – 17.9 cfs.


Transect 3X (LGR). View facing upstream. Mid calibration flow – 11.6 cfs.

Transect 3X (LGR View facing the tailpin. High calibration flow – 21.8 cfs.


Transect 3V (LAP). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow – 10.3 cfs.

Transect 3V (LAP). View facing the tailpin. Low calibration flow – 10.3 cfs.


Transect 3W (RUN). View facing upstream. Low calibration flow – 10.3 cfs.

Transect 3W (RUN). View facing the tailpin. Low calibration flow – 10.3 cfs.


Appendix C

Habitat Suitability Curves


Table 1C. Substrate HSC for Auburn Ravine Study.

Field Code

Type Particle

Size (inches)

smallest (mm)

largest (mm)

Chinook1

Suitability Steelhead

2

Suitability

Rainbow Trout

3

Suitability

0 None - -- -- 0.0

21 Clay -

0.0 0.0 0.0

22 Sand or Silt/Sand < 0.1

2.54 0.0 0.0 0.0

23 Coarse Sand/DG 0.1 - 0.2 2.54 5.08 1.0 0.25 0.25

24 Small Gravel 0.2 - 1 5.08 25.40 1.0 1.0 1.0

25 Medium Gravel 1 - 2 25.4 50.8 1.0 1.0 1.0

26 Large Gravel 2 - 3 50.8 76.2 1.0 1.0 1.0

27 Gravel/Cobble 3 - 4 76.2 102 1.0 0.5 0.5

28 Small Cobble 4 - 6 102 152 1.0 0.0 0.0

29 Medium Cobble 6 - 9 152 229 0.0 0.0 0.0

30 Large Cobble 9 - 12 229 304 0.0 0.0 0.0

31 Small Boulder 12 - 24 304 610 0.0 0.0 0.0

32 Medium Boulder 24 - 48 610 1219 0.0 0.0 0.0

33 Large Boulder > 48 1219

0.0 0.0 0.0

34 Bedrock - -- -- 0.0 0.0 0.0

35 Undercut Bank - -- --

1 Chinook suitability adapted from YCWA 2013.

2 Steelhead suitability adapted from YCWA 2013 and PG&E 2011a.

3 Rainbow trout suitability adapted from PG&E 2011a.


Table 2C. Habitat Suitability Criteria.

Life Stage Velocity HSC Depth HSC Substrate HSC

ft/s Suitability ft Suitability Subs Code Suitability

Spawning Chinook

4

0.22 0.00 0.25 0.00 22 0.00

0.85 0.20 0.45 0.10 23 1.00

1.30 0.52 0.65 0.20 24 1.00

1.55 1.00 0.75 0.50 25 1.00

2.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 26 1.00

3.25 0.50 2.00 1.00 27 1.00

5.32 0.00 3.00 0.20 28 1.00

-- -- 4.80 0.02 29 0.00

-- -- 7.80 0.02 -- --

-- -- 7.90 0.00 -- --

Chinook

Fry5

0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 -- --

0.10 0.99 0.10 0.12 -- --

0.20 0.95 0.20 0.31 -- --

0.30 0.89 0.30 0.58 -- --

0.40 0.81 0.40 0.85 -- --

0.60 0.65 0.50 0.99 -- --

0.70 0.56 0.60 1.00 -- --

0.80 0.49 0.80 1.00 -- --

0.90 0.42 0.90 1.00 -- --

1.10 0.30 1.10 1.00 -- --

1.30 0.22 1.20 1.00 -- --

1.40 0.19 1.50 0.92 -- --

1.70 0.13 1.90 0.75 -- --

2.00 0.10 2.00 0.69 -- --

3.62 0.00 2.30 0.55 -- --

-- -- 2.40 0.48 -- --

-- -- 2.50 0.45 -- --

-- -- 2.70 0.38 -- --

-- -- 3.10 0.26 -- --

-- -- 3.30 0.21 -- --

-- -- 3.40 0.18 -- --

-- -- 3.60 0.16 -- --

-- -- 3.70 0.14 -- --

-- -- 3.90 0.11 -- --

-- -- 4.30 0.07 -- --

-- -- 4.50 0.06 -- --

-- -- 4.60 0.05 -- --

-- -- 4.80 0.05 -- --

-- -- 5.10 0.04 -- --

-- -- 5.20 0.03 -- --

-- -- 5.60 0.02 -- --

-- -- 18.40 0.02 -- --

-- -- 18.50 0.00 -- --

4 Chinook spawning velocity and depth suitability from YCWA 2013.

5 Chinook fry velocity and depth suitability from YCWA 2013.


Table 2C. Habitat suitability criteria continued.



Chinook Juvenile

6

0.00 1.00 0.20 0.00 -- --

0.10 1.00 0.55 0.50 -- --

0.20 0.99 1.50 1.00 -- --

0.30 0.98 2.50 1.00 -- --

0.40 0.97 3.50 0.35 -- --

0.50 0.96 5.00 0.35 -- --

0.60 0.94 6.00 0.20 -- --

0.70 0.92 11.90 0.00 -- --

0.80 0.89 -- -- -- --

0.90 0.87 -- -- -- --

1.00 0.84 -- -- -- --

1.10 0.81 -- -- -- --

1.20 0.78 -- -- -- --

1.30 0.74 -- -- -- --

1.40 0.71 -- -- -- --

1.50 0.67 -- -- -- --

1.60 0.63 -- -- -- --

1.70 0.60 -- -- -- --

1.80 0.56 -- -- -- --

1.90 0.52 -- -- -- --

2.00 0.48 -- -- -- --

2.10 0.45 -- -- -- --

2.20 0.41 -- -- -- --

2.30 0.38 -- -- -- --

2.40 0.34 -- -- -- --

2.50 0.31 -- -- -- --

2.55 0.30 -- -- -- --

4.00 0.00 -- -- -- --

6 Chinook Juvenile suitability from YCWA 2013.


Table 8. Habitat suitability criteria continued.



Steelhead Spawning

7

0.06 0.00 0.30 0.00 22 0

0.77 0.10 0.59 0.10 23 0.25

1.00 0.20 0.98 0.50 24 1.0

1.20 1.00 1.25 1.00 25 1.0

1.50 1.00 2.50 1.00 26 1.0

3.08 1.00 4.00 1.00 27 0.5

3.83 0.25 7.30 0.35 -- --

4.72 0.20 11.30 0.20 -- --

5.82 0.10 14.60 0.10 -- --

6.93 0.00 20.00 0.00 -- --

Steelhead Fry

8

0.00 1.00 0.10 0.00 -- --

0.10 1.00 0.20 0.47 -- --

0.20 0.99 0.50 1.00 -- --

0.30 0.98 1.30 1.00 -- --

0.40 0.97 2.70 0.20 -- --

0.50 0.96 6.40 0.00 -- --

0.60 0.94 -- -- -- --

0.70 0.92 -- -- -- --

0.80 0.89 -- -- -- --

0.90 0.87 -- -- -- --

1.00 0.84 -- -- -- --

1.10 0.81 -- -- -- --

1.20 0.78 -- -- -- --

1.80 0.20 -- -- -- --

2.60 0.07 -- -- -- --

3.66 0.07 -- -- -- --

3.67 0.00 -- -- -- --

7 Steelhead spawning velocity and depth suitability from YCWA 2013.

8 Steelhead fry velocity and depth suitability from YCWA 2013.



9 Steelhead juvenile velocity and depth criteria from YCWA 2013.



Steelhead Juvenile

9

0.00 1.00 0.40 0.00 -- --

0.10 1.00 0.50 0.45 -- --

0.20 0.99 1.60 0.90 -- --

0.30 0.98 2.00 0.98 -- --

0.40 0.97 2.20 1.00 -- --

0.50 0.96 2.50 1.00 -- --

0.60 0.94 3.00 0.94 -- --

0.70 0.92 3.50 0.84 -- --

0.80 0.89 5.50 0.32 -- --

0.90 0.87 6.50 0.17 -- --

1.00 0.84 8.00 0.07 -- --

1.10 0.81 9.50 0.04 -- --

1.20 0.78 10.50 0.03 -- --

1.30 0.74 13.50 0.03 -- --

1.40 0.71 15.00 0.04 -- --

1.50 0.67 15.10 0.00 -- --

1.60 0.63 -- -- -- --

1.70 0.60 -- -- -- --

1.80 0.56 -- -- -- --

1.90 0.52 -- -- -- --

2.00 0.48 -- -- -- --

2.10 0.45 -- -- -- --

2.20 0.41 -- -- -- --

2.30 0.38 -- -- -- --

2.40 0.34 -- -- -- --

2.50 0.31 -- -- -- --

2.55 0.30 -- -- -- --

4.00 0.00 -- -- -- --



Life Stage Channel Size Velocity HSC Depth HSC Substrate HSC


Resident Rainbow

Trout Spawning

10

all 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 22 0

all 0.60 1.00 0.60 1.00 23 0.25

all 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 24 1

all 4.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 25 1

-- -- -- -- 26 1

-- -- -- -- 27 0.5

-- -- -- -- -- --

-- -- -- -- -- --

-- -- -- -- -- --

-- -- -- -- -- --

Resident Rainbow

Trout Fry 11

all 0.02 0.00 0.24 0.00 -- --

all 0.03 1.00 0.25 1.00 -- --

all 0.54 1.00 1.60 1.00 -- --

all 0.55 0.00 1.61 0.00 -- --

Resident Rainbow

Trout Juvenile

12

YBDS medium 0.00 0.50 0.20 0.00 -- --

YBDS medium 0.30 1.00 1.20 1.00 -- --

YBDS medium 0.60 1.00 2.20 1.00 -- --

YBDS medium 1.00 0.50 2.60 0.50 -- --

YBDS medium 1.60 0.20 3.75 0.10 -- --

YBDS medium 2.25 0.10 30.00 0.10 -- --

YBDS medium 3.00 0.00 -- -- -- --

Resident Rainbow

Trout Adult

13

YBDS medium 0.00 0.30 0.50 0.00 -- --

YBDS medium 0.30 1.00 2.00 1.00 -- --

YBDS medium 0.60 1.00 3.10 1.00 -- --

YBDS medium 0.80 0.80 4.20 0.30 -- --

YBDS medium 1.20 0.50 30.00 0.30 -- --

YBDS medium 1.60 0.20 -- -- -- --

YBDS medium 3.50 0.00 -- -- -- --

10

Resident rainbow trout spawning velocity and depth suitability criteria from PG&E 2011a. 11

Resident rainbow trout fry velocity and depth suitability criteria from PG&E 2011a. 12

Resident rainbow trout juvenile velocity and depth suitability criteria from PG&E 2011a. 13

Resident rainbow trout adult velocity and depth suitability criteria from PG&E 2011a. The “medium” channel size curve was used here in keeping with the stream size classifications set forth in that study.


Appendix D

Tabular WUA Results by Reach and Life Stage


Table C1. Chinook Juvenile WUA, Reach 2

(80-100% max WUA highlighted in yellow, max WUA highlighted in green)

SIMULATED WEIGHTED PERCENT

DISCHARGE USABLE

AREA OF TOTAL %of max

3.04 11692 47.68 70.0

5.5 13048 48.23 78.1

7.6 13873 49.14 83.0

8.2 14066 49.23 84.2

8.4 14126 49.25 84.5

10 14559 49.74 87.1

10.6 14700 49.84 88.0

12.1 15028 50.21 89.9

12.9 15184 50.24 90.9

14.2 15406 50.53 92.2

14.9 15516 50.66 92.9

15.6 15618 50.7 93.5

17 15802 50.86 94.6

20.3 16138 51.15 96.6

24 16399 51.22 98.2

26.6 16538 51.11 99.0

27.7 16581 51.04 99.2

30 16645 50.82 99.6

33.9 16703 50.24 100.0

34.7 16707 50.12 100.0

40 16695 49.22 99.9

45 16642 48.36 99.6

50 16574 47.41 99.2

55 16455 46.51 98.5

60 16319 45.89 97.7

70 16024 44.62 95.9

80 15713 43.34 94.0

86.74 15507 42.58 92.8

90 15402 42.21 92.2

100 15083 41.06 90.3


Table C2. Chinook Spawning WUA, Reach 2



DISCHARGE USABLE


3.04 121 0.49 1.3

5.5 381 1.41 3.9

7.6 708 2.51 7.3

8.2 814 2.85 8.4

8.4 849 2.96 8.8

10 1109 3.79 11.5

10.6 1221 4.14 12.6

12.1 1504 5.03 15.6

12.9 1643 5.44 17.0

14.2 1848 6.06 19.1

14.9 1956 6.39 20.3

15.6 2059 6.68 21.3

17 2285 7.35 23.7

20.3 2833 8.98 29.3

24 3410 10.65 35.3

26.6 3825 11.82 39.6

27.7 3988 12.28 41.3

30 4343 13.26 45.0

33.9 4930 14.83 51.1

34.7 5055 15.16 52.4

40 5886 17.35 61.0

45 6629 19.26 68.7

50 7362 21.06 76.3

55 8046 22.74 83.4

60 8579 24.13 88.9

70 9262 25.79 96.0

80 9528 26.28 98.7

86.74 9592 26.34 99.4

90 9605 26.32 99.5

100 9653 26.28 100.0


Table B3. Rainbow Trout Juvenile WUA, Reach 2



DISCHARGE USABLE


3.04 7435 30.32 66.5

5.5 8989 33.23 80.4

7.6 9826 34.8 87.9

8.2 10001 35.01 89.5

8.4 10057 35.06 90.0

10 10430 35.63 93.3

10.6 10547 35.76 94.4

12.1 10785 36.03 96.5

12.9 10882 36.01 97.4

14.2 11019 36.14 98.6

14.9 11080 36.17 99.2

15.6 11124 36.11 99.6

17 11174 35.97 100.0

20.3 11165 35.39 99.9

24 11090 34.64 99.2

26.6 11007 34.02 98.5

27.7 10970 33.77 98.2

30 10872 33.19 97.3

33.9 10694 32.17 95.7

34.7 10659 31.98 95.4

40 10430 30.75 93.3

45 10224 29.71 91.5

50 10026 28.68 89.7

55 9826 27.77 87.9

60 9653 27.15 86.4

70 9352 26.04 83.7

80 9125 25.17 81.7

86.74 8990 24.69 80.5

90 8930 24.47 79.9

100 8775 23.89 78.5


Table C4. Rainbow Trout Fry WUA, Reach 2



DISCHARGE USABLE


3.04 11047 45.05 92.7

5.5 11472 42.41 96.2

7.6 11737 41.57 98.5

8.2 11920 41.72 100.0

8.4 11895 41.47 99.8

10 11453 39.12 96.1

10.6 11316 38.37 94.9

12.1 11158 37.28 93.6

12.9 10922 36.14 91.6

14.2 10174 33.37 85.4

14.9 10068 32.87 84.5

15.6 9732 31.59 81.6

17 9543 30.72 80.1

20.3 9210 29.19 77.3

24 8302 25.93 69.6

26.6 8021 24.79 67.3

27.7 7840 24.13 65.8

30 7468 22.8 62.7

33.9 6998 21.05 58.7

34.7 6915 20.75 58.0

40 6675 19.68 56.0

45 6498 18.88 54.5

50 6232 17.82 52.3

55 6047 17.09 50.7

60 5816 16.36 48.8

70 6011 16.74 50.4

80 5985 16.51 50.2

86.74 6262 17.2 52.5

90 6026 16.51 50.6

100 5788 15.76 48.6


Table C5. Rainbow Trout Adult WUA, Reach 2



DISCHARGE USABLE


3.04 3568 14.55 49.0

5.5 4746 17.54 65.2

7.6 5453 19.31 74.9

8.2 5605 19.62 77.0

8.4 5653 19.71 77.6

10 5994 20.48 82.3

10.6 6105 20.7 83.9

12.1 6341 21.18 87.1

12.9 6450 21.34 88.6

14.2 6617 21.7 90.9

14.9 6699 21.87 92.0

15.6 6768 21.97 93.0

17 6883 22.15 94.5

20.3 7066 22.39 97.1

24 7194 22.47 98.8

26.6 7243 22.38 99.5

27.7 7260 22.35 99.7

30 7281 22.23 100.0

33.9 7279 21.89 100.0

34.7 7278 21.83 100.0

40 7261 21.41 99.7

45 7234 21.02 99.4

50 7222 20.66 99.2

55 7206 20.37 99.0

60 7182 20.2 98.6

70 7153 19.92 98.3

80 7155 19.74 98.3

86.74 7156 19.65 98.3

90 7153 19.6 98.2

100 7164 19.5 98.4


Table C6. Steelhead Spawning WUA, Reach 2



DISCHARGE USABLE


3.04 2987 12.18 26.5

5.5 4793 17.71 42.4

7.6 6025 21.34 53.4

8.2 6336 22.18 56.1

8.4 6439 22.45 57.0

10 7207 24.62 63.8

10.6 7475 25.34 66.2

12.1 8090 27.03 71.6

12.9 8381 27.73 74.2

14.2 8819 28.93 78.1

14.9 9038 29.51 80.0

15.6 9243 30 81.9

17 9589 30.86 84.9

20.3 10190 32.29 90.2

24 10657 33.29 94.4

26.6 10892 33.66 96.5

27.7 10972 33.78 97.2

30 11102 33.89 98.3

33.9 11242 33.81 99.6

34.7 11257 33.77 99.7

40 11291 33.29 100.0

45 11291 32.81 100.0

50 11253 32.19 99.7

55 11170 31.57 98.9

60 11057 31.1 97.9

70 10741 29.91 95.1

80 10383 28.64 92.0

86.74 10142 27.85 89.8

90 10026 27.47 88.8

100 9681 26.35 85.7


Table C7. Steelhead Juvenile WUA, Reach 2



DISCHARGE USABLE


3.04 104 0.43 1.1

5.5 268 0.99 2.9

7.6 589 2.09 6.4

8.2 702 2.46 7.6

8.4 738 2.57 8.0

10 991 3.38 10.7

10.6 1059 3.59 11.4

12.1 1232 4.11 13.3

12.9 1332 4.41 14.4

14.2 1496 4.91 16.2

14.9 1583 5.17 17.1

15.6 1673 5.43 18.1

17 1899 6.11 20.5

20.3 2457 7.79 26.5

24 3107 9.7 33.6

26.6 3535 10.92 38.2

27.7 3725 11.47 40.2

30 4091 12.49 44.2

33.9 4662 14.02 50.3

34.7 4773 14.32 51.6

40 5591 16.48 60.4

45 6314 18.35 68.2

50 6908 19.76 74.6

55 7334 20.73 79.2

60 7749 21.79 83.7

70 8429 23.47 91.0

80 8872 24.47 95.8

86.74 9049 24.85 97.7

90 9129 25.01 98.6

100 9259 25.21 100.0


Table C8. Steelhead Fry WUA, Reach 2



DISCHARGE USABLE


3.04 10298 42 64.2

5.5 11722 43.33 73.1

7.6 12532 44.39 78.2

8.2 12726 44.55 79.4

8.4 12787 44.58 79.8

10 13215 45.14 82.4

10.6 13355 45.28 83.3

12.1 13679 45.7 85.3

12.9 13842 45.8 86.3

14.2 14077 46.17 87.8

14.9 14193 46.33 88.5

15.6 14302 46.42 89.2

17 14527 46.76 90.6

20.3 14960 47.41 93.3

24 15308 47.81 95.5

26.6 15499 47.9 96.7

27.7 15565 47.91 97.1

30 15683 47.88 97.8

33.9 15835 47.63 98.8

34.7 15862 47.59 98.9

40 15991 47.15 99.8

45 16031 46.58 100.0

50 16024 45.83 100.0

55 15971 45.14 99.6

60 15879 44.66 99.1

70 15712 43.75 98.0

80 15505 42.77 96.7

86.74 15311 42.05 95.5

90 15231 41.74 95.0

100 14999 40.83 93.6


Table C9. Chinook Juvenile WUA, Reach 3



DISCHARGE USABLE


2 5780 44.39 61.6

3 6297 45.95 67.1

5.2 7081 48.19 75.5

10.3 8103 50.23 86.3

11.6 8269 50.36 88.1

12.5 8372 50.13 89.2

12.7 8395 50.15 89.5

13.3 8461 50.2 90.2

13.8 8517 50.26 90.7

14.6 8602 50.43 91.7

15.5 8691 50.58 92.6

16.3 8763 50.62 93.4

17.9 8888 50.68 94.7

19.1 8973 50.58 95.6

21.7 9125 50.17 97.2

21.8 9131 50.16 97.3

25 9256 48.81 98.6

30.9 9342 46.93 99.5

31.8 9350 46.82 99.6

32 9352 46.8 99.7

35 9373 46.2 99.9

39.7 9385 45.33 100.0

45 9360 44.73 99.7

50 9327 44.34 99.4

55 9327 44.12 99.4

60 9321 43.91 99.3

70 9212 43.02 98.2

80 9039 41.82 96.3

90 8839 40.55 94.2

99.25 8690 39.47 92.6


Table C10. Chinook Spawning WUA, Reach 3



DISCHARGE USABLE


2 24 0.18 0.3

3 76 0.56 0.9

5.2 313 2.13 3.9

10.3 1031 6.39 12.8

11.6 1252 7.62 15.5

12.5 1425 8.54 17.7

12.7 1464 8.75 18.2

13.3 1585 9.41 19.7

13.8 1687 9.96 21.0

14.6 1849 10.84 23.0

15.5 2032 11.83 25.2

16.3 2192 12.66 27.2

17.9 2511 14.32 31.2

19.1 2754 15.53 34.2

21.7 3306 18.17 41.1

21.8 3329 18.29 41.4

25 4129 21.78 51.3

30.9 5638 28.32 70.0

31.8 5837 29.23 72.5

32 5881 29.43 73.1

35 6374 31.42 79.2

39.7 6881 33.23 85.5

45 7286 34.82 90.5

50 7585 36.05 94.2

55 7862 37.19 97.7

60 8049 37.91 100.0

70 7956 37.15 98.8

80 7764 35.92 96.5

90 7608 34.9 94.5

99.25 7300 33.15 90.7


Table C11. Rainbow Trout Juvenile WUA, Reach 3



DISCHARGE USABLE


2 3819 29.33 56.0

3 4610 33.64 67.5

5.2 5804 39.5 85.0

10.3 6825 42.31 100.0

11.6 6809 41.47 99.8

12.5 6748 40.41 98.9

12.7 6732 40.22 98.7

13.3 6682 39.64 97.9

13.8 6633 39.14 97.2

14.6 6549 38.39 96.0

15.5 6448 37.53 94.5

16.3 6365 36.77 93.3

17.9 6208 35.4 91.0

19.1 6117 34.48 89.6

21.7 5987 32.91 87.7

21.8 5982 32.86 87.7

25 5819 30.69 85.3

30.9 5549 27.88 81.3

31.8 5517 27.63 80.8

32 5511 27.58 80.8

35 5429 26.76 79.5

39.7 5370 25.94 78.7

45 5307 25.36 77.8

50 5261 25.01 77.1

55 5216 24.67 76.4

60 5164 24.32 75.7

70 5080 23.72 74.4

80 5026 23.25 73.6

90 4975 22.82 72.9

99.25 4919 22.34 72.1


Table C12. Rainbow Trout Fry WUA, Reach 3



DISCHARGE USABLE


2 8257 63.41 100.0

3 8083 58.99 97.9

5.2 7818 53.2 94.7

10.3 4892 30.33 59.2

11.6 4717 28.73 57.1

12.5 4625 27.69 56.0

12.7 4558 27.23 55.2

13.3 4535 26.91 54.9

13.8 4578 27.02 55.4

14.6 4519 26.49 54.7

15.5 4520 26.31 54.7

16.3 4314 24.92 52.2

17.9 4350 24.8 52.7

19.1 3847 21.68 46.6

21.7 3650 20.07 44.2

21.8 3661 20.11 44.3

25 4103 21.64 49.7

30.9 3986 20.02 48.3

31.8 3687 18.46 44.7

32 3659 18.31 44.3

35 3902 19.24 47.3

39.7 3586 17.32 43.4

45 3717 17.76 45.0

50 3860 18.35 46.8

55 3721 17.6 45.1

60 3792 17.86 45.9

70 3716 17.35 45.0

80 3957 18.31 47.9

90 3926 18.01 47.5

99.25 3800 17.26 46.0


Table C13. Rainbow Trout Adult WUA, Reach 3



DISCHARGE USABLE


2 1477 11.35 37.9

3 1946 14.2 49.9

5.2 2755 18.75 70.6

10.3 3668 22.74 94.1

11.6 3752 22.85 96.2

12.5 3786 22.67 97.1

12.7 3793 22.66 97.3

13.3 3811 22.61 97.7

13.8 3822 22.55 98.0

14.6 3841 22.52 98.5

15.5 3858 22.45 98.9

16.3 3872 22.37 99.3

17.9 3889 22.17 99.7

19.1 3900 21.98 100.0

21.7 3899 21.44 100.0

21.8 3898 21.41 100.0

25 3848 20.3 98.7

30.9 3699 18.58 94.8

31.8 3682 18.44 94.4

32 3678 18.41 94.3

35 3638 17.93 93.3

39.7 3627 17.52 93.0

45 3630 17.35 93.1

50 3637 17.29 93.3

55 3644 17.24 93.4

60 3645 17.17 93.5

70 3648 17.04 93.5

80 3652 16.89 93.6

90 3683 16.9 94.4

99.25 3699 16.8 94.8


Table C14. Steelhead Spawning WUA, Reach 3



DISCHARGE USABLE


2 1064 8.17 19.1

3 1530 11.17 27.4

5.2 2383 16.22 42.8

10.3 3908 24.23 70.1

11.6 4121 25.1 73.9

12.5 4241 25.39 76.1

12.7 4266 25.49 76.5

13.3 4335 25.72 77.8

13.8 4390 25.91 78.8

14.6 4467 26.18 80.1

15.5 4548 26.47 81.6

16.3 4622 26.7 82.9

17.9 4754 27.1 85.3

19.1 4849 27.33 87.0

21.7 5021 27.6 90.1

21.8 5027 27.62 90.2

25 5180 27.32 92.9

30.9 5368 26.96 96.3

31.8 5391 27 96.7

32 5396 27 96.8

35 5471 26.96 98.1

39.7 5555 26.83 99.7

45 5574 26.64 100.0

50 5570 26.48 99.9

55 5534 26.18 99.3

60 5468 25.76 98.1

70 5192 24.24 93.1

80 4712 21.8 84.5

90 4260 19.54 76.4

99.25 3915 17.78 70.2


Table C15. Steelhead Juvenile WUA, Reach 3



DISCHARGE USABLE


2 18 0.14 0.4

3 37 0.27 0.8

5.2 94 0.64 2.0

10.3 348 2.16 7.4

11.6 425 2.59 9.1

12.5 473 2.83 10.1

12.7 484 2.89 10.3

13.3 519 3.08 11.1

13.8 550 3.25 11.7

14.6 608 3.56 12.9

15.5 680 3.96 14.5

16.3 761 4.4 16.2

17.9 976 5.57 20.8

19.1 1225 6.91 26.1

21.7 1824 10.03 38.9

21.8 1846 10.14 39.3

25 2328 12.28 49.6

30.9 2929 14.71 62.4

31.8 3013 15.09 64.2

32 3031 15.17 64.6

35 3264 16.09 69.5

39.7 3582 17.3 76.3

45 3922 18.74 83.5

50 4219 20.06 89.9

55 4460 21.1 95.0

60 4609 21.71 98.2

70 4694 21.92 100.0

80 4574 21.16 97.5

90 4480 20.55 95.4

99.25 4386 19.92 93.4


Table C16. Steelhead Fry WUA, Reach 3



DISCHARGE USABLE


2 4830 37.09 56.5

3 5255 38.35 61.5

5.2 6044 41.13 70.7

10.3 7119 44.13 83.2

11.6 7302 44.48 85.4

12.5 7407 44.35 86.6

12.7 7429 44.38 86.9

13.3 7493 44.45 87.6

13.8 7543 44.51 88.2

14.6 7613 44.63 89.0

15.5 7688 44.74 89.9

16.3 7743 44.73 90.5

17.9 7854 44.78 91.8

19.1 7944 44.78 92.9

21.7 8098 44.52 94.7

21.8 8104 44.51 94.8

25 8280 43.67 96.8

30.9 8394 42.16 98.1

31.8 8419 42.16 98.4

32 8425 42.16 98.5

35 8469 41.74 99.0

39.7 8435 40.74 98.6

45 8450 40.38 98.8

50 8460 40.21 98.9

55 8481 40.12 99.2

60 8552 40.28 100.0

70 8516 39.77 99.6

80 8395 38.84 98.2

90 8219 37.71 96.1

99.25 8140 36.97 95.2

AUBURN RAVINE 2012 INSTREAM FLOW STUDY · down to East Side Canal. During the Drum-Spaulding...

Documents

Transcript of AUBURN RAVINE 2012 INSTREAM FLOW STUDY · down to East Side Canal. During the Drum-Spaulding...