BIOLOGICAL CONDITION OF STREAMS IN...
Transcript of BIOLOGICAL CONDITION OF STREAMS IN...
BIOLOGICAL CONDITION OF STREAMS IN WEST
• Over half of streams in west are in fair or poor condition
• 3.5 Million miles of streams and rivers
• 700K miles of wadeable, perennial
• 190K are in poor condition
USEPA, 2006. Wadeable Streams Assessment, Office of Research & Development, Office of Water, United States Environmental Protection agency, Washington D.C., pp. 113.
2050 PREDICTED WATER SUPPLY IMPACTS
• Even with out climate change, water supply impacts inevitable… with its worse!
Roy et al. (2010) Tetra Tech http://www.global-warming-forecasts.com/water-supply-shortage-water-scarcity-climate.php
COST…
Bair, B, 2004. Stream Restoration Cost Estimates. In: S. T. Allen, C. Thomson and R. Carlson (Editors), Proceedings of the Salmon Habitat Restoration Cost Workshop. NOAA, Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, Gladstone, OR, pp. 104-113.
• Nationwide (lower 48), Over 281,000 mi are Poor condition
– (i.e. @ $130K/ mile… over $36 Billion)
CAN WE CONTINUE TO AFFORD THIS?
• The over-cited Bernhardt et al. (2005) paper
– 38,000 projects
– At least $15 billion spent since 1990-2003
• Gross Under-Estimate
– 42,000 projects alone in PNW
WHY ALWAYS TONKA TOYS?
• If you do a google search for restoration, the first images that come up are of Tonka toys in streams
• The scope of the problem is enormous
• ‘Cheap and cheerful’ restoration is the only way we’re realistically going to recover
• Beaver as one critical tool
RIPARIAN DEGRADATION
Disturbance
• Alter flow regime
– Impoundments
– Water extraction
– Channel incision
• Landuse
– Grazing
– Timber harvest
– Agriculture
– Mining
– Urban development
• Alien Species
– Planted
– Invasions
• Alter fire regimes
• Climate change
Direct Impacts
• Altered vegetation
• Soil compaction
• Increased sediment transport
• Altered Hydrology
COMMON RIPARIAN RESTORATION APPROACHES
• Channel configuration
– New channel
– Levee removal
• Plantings
• Exotic removal/weed control
• Riparian fencing
• Grazing management
CHANNEL CONFIGURATION
Restoration costs = ?A lot when it goes
wrong
George Creek realignment
CHANNEL CONFIGURATION
REFERENCE REACH TYPE FOR STREAM RESTORATION?Logan River with beaver dam complex
FLOW MANAGEMENT TO RECOVERY RIPARIAN FUNCTION
Stromberg 2001. J. Arid Environ.
RIPARIAN FENCING
Riparian Zone Response:Wetland Indicator Status for Greenline Plant Communities
RIPARIANPLANTING
Hall et al. 2011 Eco Restoration
PLANTINGAPPROACH MATTERS
Hall et al. 2011 Eco Restoration
Hall et al. 2011 Eco Restoration
PLANTINGAPPROACH MATTERS
FENCING AND PLANTING?
• Season-Long Grazing (n = 4)
• Simple Rotational Grazing (n = 4)
• Intensive Rotational Grazing (n = 5)
• Wildlife Only Sites (n = 3)
100 – 120 days of grazing
30 – 40 days of grazing
< 20 days of grazing
Grazed only by wildlife
GRAZING MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESC
Colorado (Saunders & Fausch 2012)Wyoming (Saunders & Fausch 2007)
• Season-Long Grazing (n = 5)
• Intensive Rotational Grazing (n = 5)
> 120 days of grazing
7 - 14 days of grazing
Wyoming
From Saunders AFS 2015
Sta
nd
ing
bio
mass (
g/m
2)
0
50
100
150
200
250
Pe
rcen
t o
verh
ead
co
ver
0
20
40
60
80Standing biomass
Overhead cover
Season Long Simple Rotation
Intensive Rotation
Wildlife Only
CI = 1 SE
From Saunders AFS 2015
GRAZING MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
Rotational Grazing Season-long Grazing
Effects of Grazing Mgmt. on Stream Subsidies
From Saunders AFS 2015
Managing Livestock Grazing on Streams
on the Elko District and the Need to be
Adaptive
Bureau of Land Management, Elko, Nevada
Carol Evans
From Rehydrating Nevada presentation, Carol Evans
From Rehydrating Nevada presentation, Carol Evans
From Rehydrating Nevada presentation, Carol Evans
SUSIE CREEK 1992 SUSIE CREEK 1999
SUSIE CREEK 2012 SUSIE CREEK
OCTOBER 2012
UPSTREAM, 1991 UPSTREAM 1999
UPSTREAM, 2007 UPSTREAM 2012
1991
2011
Annual hot season grazing20 yrs of mostly spring and fall
grazing by cow-calf pairs;
Extensive beaver dam complexes
South Fork Salmon
Falls Creek
Little Quakey Riparian Pasture,
ONeil Allotment. S-42, down.
Since at least 1988: a mixture of use by both cow-calf pairs and yearlings as well as rest, early use, hot season use and fall use.
1979. Use unknown
1999 2012
1980 2010
Recovery is the result of grazing exclusion since about
1993 and colonization of the area by beaver.
Maggie Creek, S-9, upstream, 2012. Adjacent terraces show presence of western aster (Aster occidentalis), a mesic forb important for sage grouse broods, Presence of this species in this setting may indicate an elevated water table in the Maggie Creek valley bottom.
Maggie Creek, April 2012.
Shows how beaver dams are capturing and storing water on a landscape scale
with the effect of rehydrating the valley bottom.
PARTNERING WITH BEAVER FOR RIPARIAN AND STREAM RESTORATION
SOME ECOSYSTEM SERVICES PROVIDED BY BEAVERS
• Water storage
• Reconnecting floodplains
• Incision
• Low flows (bump up surface water)
• Riparian expansion
• Habitat complexity for fish, amphibians, birds
• Increase forage and water for cattle or wild ungulates
RESTORATION STRATEGIES BEAVER
Conservation / Promotion (leave them alone)
Living with beaver
Translocation to areas with suitable capacity
Restore riparian -> Followed by Translocation
Help beaver out – Beaver Dam Analogues
Mimic Beaver
OTHER “CHEAP AND CHEERFUL”STRATEGIES