Healthy Streams Through Bringing People Together

Healthy Streams Through Bringing People Together
Accelerating Cooperative Riparian Restoration Proper Functioning Condition Assessment Focus attention on physical function Not values that are produced Collaborative planning for management Meeting many of the desired resource values Keeping water on the land longer The goal of this program is to bring people together to define issues, develop solutions, and implement practices that will restore and maintain healthy streams at a more rapid pace. What we do here today with this training is a first step in defining the issues. The proper functioning condition assessment is a tool that may be used to focus on the physical attributes and processes of a stream and determine if they are doing the things they should in their landscape setting. Many of the issues that bring us to “stale mate” is the values that society places on the resources such as fish, wildlife, water quality and quantity, recreation, flood protection and livestock forage. Focusing on the physical factors tend to lead to looking for solutions rather than pitting one persons value system against another. This leads to collaborative planning for developing management practices that meet many of the desired resource values. Mostly this is done by keeping water on the land longer and allowing the natural processes to function.

Riparian Proper Functioning Condition (PFC) Assessment
PFC Method developed by BLM, USFWS, and NRCS Running water (lotic) assessment first emphasis 1993 First Technical Reference for lotic riparian/wetland areas The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), formerly the Soil Conservation Service, worked together to develop the PFC method. The methodology for assessing the condition of running water (lotic) systems is presented in BLM Technical Reference (TR) , Process for Assessing Proper Functioning Condition (Prichard et al

1994 Techincal Reference the methodology for standing water (lentic) systems is presented in TR , Process for Assessing Proper Functioning Condition for Lentic Riparian-Wetland Areas (Prichard et al. 1994).

1996 The National Riparian Formed BLM Forest Service NRCS Partner 1998 Technical Reference The PFC method has been implemented by BLM and adopted by several other agencies. In 1996, the BLM and the USDA Forest Service (FS) announced a cooperative riparian-wetland management strategy, which would include the NRCS as a principal partner. A National Riparian Service Team was formed to act as a catalyst for implementing this strategy. Technical Reference , A User Guide to Assessing Proper Functioning Condition and the Supporting Science for Lotic Areas (Prichard et al. 1998) provides the background for how the PFC tool was developed.

1999 Technical Reference In 1999 Technical Reference , A Users Guide to Assessing Proper Functioning Condition and Supporting Science for Lentic Areas was published.

Riparian Proper Functioning Condition Assessment
Introduce and define terms Stratification and stream classification Introduce the assessment process Water and hydrologic attributes and processes The plan for this session is first we will introduce and define some common terms that allow us to speak the same language. Sections we will discuss the need for stratifying a stream for analysis and a short review of the Rosgen Stream Classification System. We will then introduce the Riparian Proper Functioning Condition Assessment process and procedures. We will discuss each of the questions on the checklist and describe some of the functions and attributes associated with these procedures. Water and hydrologic attributes will be first.

Vegetation functions Erosion and depositional processes Summary findings Exercise Instructions for field excercise Then we will discuss vegetation, its functions and conditions. And finally the Erosion and Deposition processes. A summary finding will be discussed. We will divide into groups and view a series of slides and each group will assess the stream. Finally, we will provide instructions for the field exercise tomorrow.

Riparian Proper Functioning Condition
Term is used in two ways Methodology for assessing the physical functioning of riparian-wetland areas An on-the-ground condition of riparian-wetland areas The term Proper Functioning Condition, or PFC, is used in two ways: It is a method for assessing the physical condition of a riparian-wetland areas. We will be describing this method today. It is also used as an on-the-ground physical condition of riparian-wetland areas that will be defined later.

Communication Tool Common Vocabulary Based on Valid Scientific Processes Requires an Interdisciplinary Team It provides a common basis for communications and a base from which to resolve issues. It provides a common vocabulary to help that communications. Each profession uses jargon particular to that discipline. The jargon is descriptive to someone familiar with the activity, but may not be understood by others. Functioning condition assessment is an interdisciplinary process requiring interpretation skills of the soils, vegetation, and hydrology.

Uses Inventory Data Synthesis and Interpretation Tool Time Specific Functioning Condition Assessment is a synthesis of observation and inventory data. Each of the elements in the checklist requires some type of field information. This field data can vary from very detailed measurements of several components of a stream (e.g., bankfull width and depth, sinuosity, gradient, substrate material, bank stability, vegetation cover, vegetation composition, vegetation vigor, vegetation reproduction, canopy cover, soil texture, and soil compaction) on individual stream reaches to visual observations and estimates of stream areas. The better the data and information, the more accurate the determination. It is time specific, meaning that it applies to the condition at the time the data was taken.

PFC helps Determine potential and capability
Define issues that need to be addressed Determine appropriate monitoring Select appropriate management practices PFC helps define issues that need to be addressed, determine potential and capability, define appropriate monitoring parameters, and assists with selecting appropriate management.

PFC Helps Assess How well the physical processes are working
How well the riparian-wetland area will withstand the energies of a 25 to 30 year event The system’s ability to maintain and produce both physical and biological values The procedure helps determine how well physical processes are working. It allows an assessment of how well a system will withstand a years flood event. The process helps to determine a systems ability to sustain the production of both physical and biological values.

PFC isn’t A replacement for biological inventory or monitoring protocols The only methodology for determining the health of riparian or aquatic components of the riparian-wetland area PFC is not a replacement for biological inventories and assessments of the biological part of the ecosystem or monitoring protocols necessary to determine habitat conditions. Nor is it the only method for determining the health of riparian or aquatic components of a riparian-wetland area.

PFC may not equal Potential Natural Community (PNC)
Desired Plant Community (DPC) Desired Future Condition (DFC) Riparian Proper Functioning Condition Assessment (PFC) is NOT an inventory nor is it monitoring. It usually does NOT equate to Potential Natural Community (PNC), Desired Plant Community (DPC), or the Desired Future Condition (DFC). However, in some cases, it may be equivalent. Many riparian/wetland areas can function properly before they reach the potential natural community.

Wetland Areas inundated or saturated by surface or ground water
Supports a prevalence of vegetation suited to saturated soils Includes marshes, shallow swamps, sloughs, lakeshores, wet meadows, springs, seeps, and riparian areas We need to provide some definitions to help us to understand the vocabulary and communicate. Wetland—Wetlands are areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and which, under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Riparian-Wetland management areas includes marshes, shallow swamps, lake shores, bogs, muskegs, wet meadows, estuaries, and riparian areas as wetlands. (TR , p 1)

Riparian Area Transition between the aquatic (saturated) and upland areas Vegetation and physical (soil) characteristics reflect the influence of permanent surface or ground water Land along streams, ponds, marshes, springs, and seeps are examples Riparian Area—A form of wetland transition between permanently saturated wetland and upland areas. These areas exhibit vegetation or physical characteristics reflective of permanent surface or subsurface water influence. Lands along, adjacent to, or contiguous with perennial and intermittently flowing rivers and stream, glacial potholes, and the shores of lakes and reservoirs with stable water levels are typical riparian areas. Excluded are such sites as ephemeral streams or washes that do not exhibit the presence of vegetation dependent upon free water in the soil. (TR , p. 1)

Riparian-Wetland Types
Lotic Flowing water systems (streams) Defined channel Gradient Lentic Standing surface water Lakes, reservoirs, ponds, marshes Ground Water Seeps and springs Bogs and wet meadows We classify riparian-wetland areas into two types: Lotic -- Flowing water, stream, associated riparian-wetland systems have a defined channel and sufficient gradient that results in water flowing. Lentic -- Still water systems including lakes, reservoirs, ponds, marshes, bogs, seeps and springs without channels. In this session, we will focus on the lotic areas because of time. This does not mean that the lentic areas are not important. They are. We will present a short session at the end of the day to discuss the differences between the lotic and lentic systems.

Potential The highest ecological status an area can attain with little influence by man. To understand how riparian-wetland areas operate and to implement proper management practices, thus ensuring an area is functioning properly, the capability and potential of a riparian-wetland area must be understood. Potential - The highest ecological status an area can attain given little influence by man (political, social, or economical); vegetation conditions are often referred to as the "potential natural community" (PNC).

Capability The highest ecological status a riparian-wetland area can attain given major influences by man affecting the hydrologic processes, e.g. large dam, diversions, & highways. Capability - The highest ecological status a riparian-wetland area can attain given major influences by man which affect the hydrologic processes, e.g., large dams, diversions, and highways. These constraints are often referred to as limiting factors. Those factors, such as management, are not considered change the expected processes and attributes. For example, large dams that significantly change the hydrograph of a stream by removing the flood flows will reduce the amount of cottonwood regeneration along the stream because cottonwood need freshly deposited soil that is moist for it’s seed to germinate in.

Proper Functioning Condition (lotic)
Riparian-wetland areas are functioning properly when adequate vegetation, landform, or large woody debris is present to dissipate stream energy associated with high water flows, Proper Functioning Condition is defined in TR and 14 and 11 and 16. Lotic Riparian-Wetlands Areas---Riparian-wetland areas are functioning properly when adequate vegetation, landform, or large woody debris is present to dissipate stream energy associated with high water flows,

thereby: reduce erosion filter sediment capture bedload aid floodplain development improve flood-water retention improve ground water recharge stabilize stream banks develop root masses that stabilize streambanks thereby reduce erosion; filter sediment, capture bedload, and aid floodplain development; improve flood-water retention and ground-water recharge; develop root masses that stabilize streambanks against cutting action; develop diverse ponding and channel characteristics

Resulting in Resource Values such as: improved water quality habitat, water depth, duration, and temperature for fish production waterfowl breeding and other uses greater biodiversity Resulting in improved water quality; provide the habitat and the water depth; duration, and temperature necessary for fish production, waterfowl breeding, and other uses; and support greater biodiversity. The functioning condition of riparian-wetland areas is a result of interaction among geology, soil, water, and vegetation.

Functioning-at-Risk Riparian-wetland areas that are in functional condition, but an existing soil, water, or vegetation attribute makes them susceptible to degradation Functional--At Risk -- Riparian-wetland areas that are in functional condition but an existing soil, water, or vegetation attribute makes them susceptible to degradation. It does not mean that a single event will cause damage, but that the risk of degradation is higher.

Functioning-at-Risk Examples Kentucky bluegrass Streambank damage
Unhealthy woody vegetation Some examples include Kentucky bluegrass, a shallow rooted species, in a area where deep rooted riparian species should be. Streambank damage that provides a point that water can begin to erode the banks at an accelerated rate. Unhealthy woody vegetation that is not providing adequate root systems to protect streambanks and provide roughness on the floodplain.

Nonfunctional Riparian-wetland areas that clearly are NOT providing adequate vegetation, landform, or large woody debris to: Nonfunctional-- Riparian-wetland areas that clearly are not providing adequate vegetation, landform, or large woody debris to dissipate stream energy associated with high flows

Nonfunctional Does not dissipate stream energy associated with high flows Does not reduce erosion and thus are not reducing erosion, improving water quality, etc.,.

Nonfunctional Examples Absence of floodplains were one should be
Actively eroding streambanks Excessive soil compaction Upland vegetation in riparian area The absence of certain physical attributes such as a floodplain where one should be are indicators of non-functioning conditions.

Preparing to do a PFC Assessment
Now we are going to discuss the assessment process.

Natural Riparian Resources
Water We will continually emphasize that the functioning condition of riparian-wetland areas is a result of interaction among geology, soil, water, and vegetation. Some people like thing of this interrelationship as a three legged stool. The stool needs all three legs in the proper length to fully support the load. If one leg is damaged, it can fail and cause a sudden letdown. Similarly, it takes the appropriate vegetation, landform and soils, and water maintain a healthy functioning system. The goal is to keep the water on and in the land longer to allow a safe, prolonged flow. Soil, Landscape Vegetation

Preparing to do a Riparian PFC Assessment
Learn all we can about riparian-wetland area Collect existing information on stream Obtain maps, aerial photos, inventories, etc. Complete a preliminary stratification When preparing to do a PFC assessment, it is absolutely critical that we learn all we can about the riparian wetland area we are going to assess. We need to collect all the existing information we can about the stream. First, we should obtain the appropriate topographic map, aerial photos, soil surveys, geologic information, resource inventories and monitoring data, and information other information to help determine the potential/capability of the site. After this information is gathered together, a preliminary stratification can begin. A general watershed shape, stream gradient can be developed, valley bottom types estimated, geologic changes noted, major soil types, vegetation, land uses, hydrologic controls, and potential can be estimated. This will save much field time and help the team make a good assessment.

Stratification Purpose
To divide into areas with similar characteristics Current condition and production Site potential or capability Limiting factors Reference or comparison sites Monitoring sites Statification (How do we divide a stream in to similar parts?) All streams and riparian areas are not equal. Streams vary in size, velosity, geomorphology, erosion/deposition, vegetation, and other factors according to position on the landscape. It is important to use a strategy to stratify the stream or riparian areas into logical sub-units (polygons, stream reaches, etc.). Features on the landscape provides a practical method of sub-dividing a stream into its parts.

Stratification Soils Vegetation Hydrologic controls Land uses
Geology Stream order or confluence Valley bottom type Stream gradient Stream type (Rosgen) Soils Vegetation Hydrologic controls Land uses Logical breaks can be made by using valley bottom type, geology, soils, stream slope or gradient, major tributary confluence, soil family, sinuosity, stream channel type, substrate type, vegetation communities, land use, ownership, hydrologic controls (e.g., culverts, diversions, and other instream structures). Usually this will result in stream reaches of one quarter to one half mile in length.

Stream Classification
Ordering of streams into sets based on their similarities or relationships Objectives Predict river’s behavior Provides hydraulic and sediment relationships Extrapolate site specific data to similar streams Consistent framework for communications One definition of classification is the ordering of streams into sets based on their similarities or relationships. It enables us to infer attributes and characteristics of a particular stream based on as given set of parameters. The objectives of stream classification is to (Rosgen, 1996 page 3-1): 1. Predict a river’s behavior based on it’s appearance and physical characteristics which help with understanding how the river works. 2. Provide specific hydraulic and sediment relationships for a given stream type and its state. 3. Provide a mechanism to extrapolate site-specific data to stream reaches having similar characteristics 4. Provide a consistent frame of reference for communicating stream morphology and condition among a variety of disciplines and interested parties.

Rosgen Stream Classification
Stream Characterization Channel Pattern Single Thread Multiple Thread Anastomosed (network) Channel Slope Sinuosity We’ve divided the stream characteristics in two general groups. First the channel pattern or what the foot-print looks like. -Single threat streams have a single channel. This is by far the most common channel pattern. -Streams that have high sediment causing several shallow unstable channels are multiple thread channels -Anastomosed channels is a network of stable channels. It is not very common in southern Idaho. -The channel slope is related to the valley slope and sinuosity (how crooked the stream is). The channel slope or gradient is the is one of the determinates of the amount of energy the water exerts in the channel. We will discuss the computation a little later. -Sinuosity or how crooked the stream is, controlled by the width of the valley floor and how deeply incised the channel is.

Sinuosity = Stream Length/ Valley Length 1.9 370’ 195’
Rosgen Stream Classification Sinuosity Sinuosity is the stream channel length divided by the valley length. Here we have Poison Creek with a sinuosity of 1.9. The more crooked the stream the bigger the sinuosity. The sinuosity must be in proportion to the valley bottom type. This is a high sinuosity. The sinuosity along with the floodplain reduce energy. Sinuosity = Stream Length/ Valley Length ’ 195’

Rosgen Stream Classification Sinuosity
The channel length is 100 feet and the valley length is 100 feet. The sinuosity on Pine Creek in Northern Idaho is 1.0 or straight. Straightened streams such as this may actually increase energy and the potential for channel change. Sinuosity = Stream Length / Valley Bottom Length = 100’ / ’

Rosgen Stream Classification Slope or Gradient
Elevation at Elevation at upper end lower end % Mean Slope = Stream channel length * 100 The slope or gradient of the stream is calculated by dividing the elevation at the upper end of the stream reach at bankfull minus the lower end stream reach at bankfull by the stream channel length time 100 (to get percent). The channel length is measured along the deepest part of the channel (thalweg) indicated here by the yellow dashed line.  In this example, the upper elevation is 5031 feet and the lower elevation is 5025’ for a difference of 6 feet. The measure length along the deepest part of the channel is 560 feet. Dividing the elevation difference of 6 feet by the length 560 feet we get .011 or 1.1%. Using the same parameters except straightening the stream channel, the length is now 400 feet. Doing the calculation, the gradient is 1.5% on this segment.

Stream Characterization Channel Characteristics Width to Depth Ratio Entrenchment Ratio Channel Material The classification system includes three addition attributes that are use to characterize the channel. -Width/Depth Ratio is a computed index which indicates the channel cross-section and is derived by dividing the bankfull width by the average bankfull depth. Bankfull the point at which water begins to flow onto the floodplain. We will discuss this in more detail later on. -Entrenchment Ratio is a computed index value that describes the width of the active floodplain or that area that is prone to flooding at about the 50 year flood stage. The entrenchment ratio is computed by dividing the floodprone width (at 2 times the bankfull depth) by the bankfull width. -Channel material is the dominant size of the streambed particles. There are six groups, bedrock, boulder, cobble, gravel, sand, and silt/clay.

Rosgen Stream Classification Width/Depth Ratio
The bankfull stage is defined as the stage (water level) the maintains channel’s size and shape. It has adequate energy to move sediment, forms and removes bars, forms or changes bends and meanders, and occurs every 1 to 2 years. We could say that it occurs 2 out of every 3 years. To measure the bankfull width, we determine to point at which water begins to flow onto the floodplain on each side of the stream. In a riffle/pool stream the measurement is taken at the riffle or the straightest part of the stream. We stretch a tape between these points determine the distance. To get the average bankfull depth, we measure the depth from the tape the the bottom of the channel in a number of locations and determine the average depth. Then the bankfull width is divided by the bankfull depth and an index number is derived.

The determine the entrenchment ratio, first locate the bankfull level on each side of the stream. Stretch a tape measure between these points and determine the width. Find the maximum bankfull depth along the tape. Multiply that depth by 2. At two times the bankfull depth, project a level line to each bank and mark them. Measure the distance between the two point to determine the width of the floodprone area. Divide the floodprone width by the bankfull width to get the entrenchment ratio.

Rosgen Stream Types Rosgen, 1996
The major stream types are designated by letters shown above. This graphic provides an over view of the major types. This includes the slope, cross-section, and a longitudinal view of the the types. -The steepest streams, over 10% slope are designated Aa+. These streams are usually found in the upper portions of the catchment or watershed. -”A” channels are steep gradient, 4 to 10%, confined, and relatively straight. They are usually found in the upper parts of the watershed. -”B” channels are moderate slope, 2 to 4%, moderately confined channels that are still relatively high energy streams. -”C” channels are the riffle/pool streams with a low gradient, less than 2%, moderately sinuous and usually product aquatic habitats. -”D” channels are aggrading with multiple channels. Slopes are less than 4% -”DA” or anastomosed stream types is a network or multiple thread stable channels. They are very low gradient, less than 0.5%. -”E” types are low gradient, less than 2%, very sinuous streams with an low width depth ratio and high entrenchment ratio. -”F” types are low gradient, less than 2%, highly entrenched, relatively straight with a high width/depth ratio. -”G” types are moderate gradient, 2 to 4%, highly entrenched and low to moderate sinuosity. Rosgen, 1996

Type Aa+ Aa+ - very steep (greater than 10% slope), deeply entrenched [confined] (ratio greater than 1.4, almost straight (little sinuosity), debris transport, torrent streams. The landform is mountainous with high relief, erosional, bedrock or depositional features. Subject to debris flows. Usually vertical steps with deep scour pools and waterfalls.

A Type A type channels a very steep, 4 to 10%. These are usually headwater streams. Many of these streams are bedrock and boulder controlled. Vegetation does not play a dominant role in the stability of the stream. These streams are high energy and can move large amounts of sediment through the system. They are considered a transport stream.

B Type B - Moderately entrenched [confined], moderate gradient (2 to 4%), riffle dominated channel, with infrequently spaced pools. Very stable plan and profile. Stable banks. These streams still have a lot of energy and are transport streams.

C Type Low gradient (less than 2%), meandering, point-bar, riffle/pool, alluvial channels with broad, well defined floodplains. The streams are response streams that is they are deposition streams. The energy is low and materials will settle out. These are some of the very productive fisheries streams.

DA Type DA - Anastomosing (multiple channels) narrow and deep with extensive, well vegetated floodplains and associated wetlands. Very gentle relief (usually less than 0.05% gradient) with highly variable sinuosities and width/depth ratios. Very stable streambanks. This is an aerial photograph of the upper Teton River near Driggs, Idaho.

D Type D - Braided channel with longitudinal and transverse bars. Very wide channel with eroding banks. These streams are low gradient and materials settle out causing the stream bed to raise. Big James Creek between Arco and Mackey, ID.

E Type E - Low gradient (less than 2%), meandering riffle/pool stream with low width/depth ratio and little deposition. Very efficient and stable. High meander/width ratio.

F Type F - Entrenched meandering riffle/pool channel with nearly vertical channel walls, low gradients with high width/depth ratios.

G Type G - Entrenched "gully" step/pool and low width/depth ratio on moderate gradients.

Rosgen Stream Classification Channel Material (substrate)
1 – Bedrock 2 – Boulder (10+ inches) 3 – Cobble (2.5 to 10 inches) 4 – Gravel (.08 to 2.5 inches) 5 – Sand (.062 to 2 millimeters) 6 – Silt/Clay (< .062 millimeters) Channel material, sometimes called substrate, is grouped in to six classes. Bedrock – rock attached to the earth Boulder – rocks over 10 inches Cobble – rocks 2.5 to 10 inches Gravel to 2.5 inches Sand – .062 to 2 millimeters Silt/Clay – less than .062 millimeters

This is the type key from Rosgen’s Book on page 5-6.
Lets run through an example, first, we ask is the stream single threat of multiple thread channel, for our example, it is single threat. Next, we need to know the entrenchment ratio. Our example, the ratio is more than This gives us two choices. The width/depth ratio is 10 and the sinuosity is The slope is 1.0% and the substrate is gravel. This give an “E4” channel type.

Management Interpretations
VEGETATION CONTROLLING INFLUENCE SENSITIVITY TO DISTURBANCE STREAMBANK EROSION POTENTIAL RECOVERY POTENTIAL SEDIMENT SUPPLY TYPE A3 very low excellent very low very low negligible negligible A5 extreme very poor very high very high low B3 excellent low low moderate B5 moderate excellent moderate moderate moderate C3 moderate The Rosgen system provides some ways to help understand the how the stream will respond to disturbance, recovery, sediment, streambank erosion, and vegetation. This table shows eight examples of these management interpretations. We can see that a boulder controlled stream is not very sensitive to disturbance, it usually recovers quickly, and vegetation in not a controlling influence. Contrast that with a stream with a fine grained soil that the sensitivity to disturbance is very high, its recovery potential is limited, it supplies a lot of sediment from its sensitive streambanks, and vegetation is a very high controlling influence. good moderate moderate very high C5 very high very high very high fair very high G3 very high poor very high very high high G5 extreme very poor very poor very high high Rosgen, 1996

Stratification (Example) Hardtrigger and Little Hardtrigger Creeks
This the Hardtrigger Creek drainage. It is on the northeast side of the Owyhee Mountains. This is an example of how a stream may be stratified into similar parts. If we state at the upper end, we can see an area that is NF/FAR. The “B” segments are FAR and the “D” segments are NF. At the first division, just below the 1, the stream enters a rather narrow canyon with a dense stand of birch. This portion of the stream segment in is PFC. The segment was divided because of a change in characteristics. The next stratification was at the confluence of the Middle Fork of Hardtrigger Creek. The amount of water increases and changes the hydrologic effects. This area is in PFC. The next segments begins where an ephemeral stream enters. This tributary contributed a rather large flow as a result of a thunder storm. The channel changed to FAR. The next subdivision was at the confluence with Little Hardtrigger Creek. Below that, the stream was in NF condition. Let’s take a look at 4 areas along the stream.

Hardtrigger #1 This is the upper stream segment of Hardtrigger Creek we reviewed. The water source is a spring just out of the picture in the upper left hand part of the picture. It is a low gradient, less than 2%. This area is a concentration areas for livestock and wildhorses. A fence, just below the picture is one of the factors that cause a problem. This area is heavily disturbed with not riparian wetland vegetation. The stream channel has not been allowed to develop.

Hardtrigger #2 The next segment we will describe is down stream and in a very confined canyon that livestock and wildhorses have not grazed in to any extent. It is a dense stand of birch will little herbaceous understory. The lack of understory is typical of these dense stands. Under the canopy, the stream has a well defined channel with a well developed floodplain that is accessed regularly. Coarse wood embedded in the floodplain is an important component to the stability.

Hardtrigger #3 The next segment delineated was at the point the Middle Fork entered Hardtrigger Creek. Because of the size of the perennial drainage, the amount of water will generally be increased, changing the hydrology to some extent. This segment is short because a ways down stream a ephemeral drainage entered Hardtrigger. Earlier in the season, a thunderstorm hit the area resulting in a significant flow event (maybe a 25 year flood event). As a result of this flow, many areas showed damage such as we see here. The vegetation is still in place but a number of knick points that make it susceptible to more damage from another storm if not allowed to recover.

Hardtrigger #4 Finally we get down stream to an area that vegetation was not sufficient to handle the high flow and the channel was degraded and will probably take a long time to recover. This is a result of a high flow and insufficient vegetation to hold the channel. The lack of vegetation allowed accelerated damage to the stream. This is an “F” type channel. We must remember that the assessment is at this point in time.

Attributes and Process List (lotic)
Hydrogeomorphic Ground water discharge Active floodplain Ground-water recharge Flood storage & release Flood modification Bankfull width Width/depth ratio Sinuosity Gradient Stream power Hydraulic controls Bed elevation Vegetation Community types Community type distribution Surface Density Canopy Recruitment/reproduction Survival Community dynamics & succession Sediment As we learn about the watershed and the riparian wetland area, we need to consider the appropriate attributes and processes for the type of riparian-wetland area we are considering. The attributes have been divided into four categories: Hydrogeomorphic, vegetation, (NEXT SLIDE)

Attributes and Process List (lotic)
Erosion/Deposition Bank stability Bed stability (bed transport rate) Depositional features Soils Soil type Distribution of aerobic/anaerobic soils Capillarity Annual pattern of soil water states erosion and deposition, and soils. Not all of the listed attributes apply to each area, but it is important to establish the appropriate list of factors and processes for the riparian area to understand the system.

Determination of Capability and Potential
Hydrology, duration & frequency of flooding or ponding Current vegetation, compare to historic Entire watershed condition and major landforms Limiting factors, both human caused and natural & determine if they can be or need to be modified We also need to establish the capability or potential of the system. This can be done by using a systematic approach of looking at the existing information or developing it by inference. Some of the considerations are included on this list. We need to understand the hydrology and what the effects of upstream factors, including reservoirs, diversions, and others. We need to compare the present vegetation with know past vegetation. What is the watershed condition and how might it effect the current condition. What are the limiting factors? Change in flow, either reduced or augmented, changes in season of flow, channel constraints. Roads, etc.

Determination of Capability and Potential
relict areas (e.g., preserves) Historic photos, survey notes, and/or other documents Species lists (animal & plant) historic and present Species habitat (animal & plant) needs, historic & present Determine if soils were saturated at one time Relict areas and some protected areas provide some idea of changes that may take place. Historic photos, survey notes, and other historic documents may provide information. Some areas have historic plant and animal lists that can be compared to the past. Soils can provide some history as to whether the area was saturated at one time.

Riparian Proper Functioning Condition Assessment (Lotic)
Designed to help interpret data and observations Interdisciplinary team Evaluated against the potential or capability Summary determination Riparian proper functioning condition assessment is a process designed to lead an interdisciplinary team through a series of questions to arrive at a determination as to the present functioning condition of a riparian area. We will take you through the procedure in the next section, step by step.

Types of Channel Adjustment
Channel evolution Normal channel dynamics Rapid channel response Riparian conditions are influenced by three types of channel change: 1) channel evolution, 2) normal channel dynamics, 3) rapid channel adjustment. Channels evolve over time. For example meandering and lateral migration on stream channels may be very important to long term stability.

Normal channel dynamics
Adjustments as a part of normal channel/riparian function Incremental or periodic adjustments under high flow conditions Involves channel & riparian interaction Dynamic equilibrium or stable state Normal channel dynamics refer to the normal periodic channel adjustments that occur during normal high flows. These may include some bank cutting. This is important to maintaining and rejuvenating riparian areas. Excessive change may refer to as excessive down cutting or lateral movement. Many of these conditions are a result of conditions upstream.

Rapid channel response
Channel adjustments that occur rapidly in response to sudden changes Water discharge Sediment delivery Channel/floodplain conditions Vegetation changes Instream structures Rapid channel adjustment is usually a response to sudden changes such as increased water discharge, sediment delivery, channel and floodplain conditions, vegetation changes, and instream structures. Rapid adjustments can be vertically by incisement or laterally by channel aggredation and widening.

Stages of channel incision
Pre-incision Incision Channel widening Dynamic stability Incised channels typically evolve through four stages: pre-incision; initial incision; active widening; dynamic stability. Stage 1 is usually characterized with a change in vegetation that weakens the root mass and streambank, e.g., replacement of Sedges with Kentucky Bluegrass which causes a “nick point.” Stage two likely begins with a “headcut” which leads to the initial incision. Step 3 is active widening and creation of a new floodplain. Step 4 is the establishment of a dynamic stability at the new elevation.

States of Channel Succession
State A PFC Dynamic Stability State B FAR Pre-incision State C NF Incision State D NF Channel Widening For our example, we will discuss an incised stream. Example of an Alluvial/Nongraded Valley-Bottom Type Figure 1 (Tech Ref ,1993, page 8, Tech Ref Page 13). Using the definition for PFC we find that: State A -- Is considered as PFC and shows a high degree of bank stability, floodplain and plant community development. The important attributes and processes present are: Hydrogeomorphic-- Active floodplain, floodplain storage and release, flood modification, bankfull width, width/depth ratio, sinuosity, gradient, stream power and hydraulic controls. Vegetation--Community type (2 of 3), community type distribution (similar in the wet types), root density, canopy , community dynamics, recruitment/reproduction, and survival. Soils--Distribution of anaerobic soil, capillary Water Quality-- No Change State B -- may be properly functioning or functional-at- risk It is functional if bank stabilizing vegetation is dominant along the reach and other factors such as soil disturbance are not evident. It is important to identify the species of vegetation present since they do vary in their ability to stabilize streambanks and filter sediment. State B may be classified at risk if bank stabilizing vegetation is not dominant (even though it may be in an improving trend from prior conditions) non desirable species are present (e.g. Kentucky bluegrass) Soil disturbance is evident (e.g. caved banks from livestock or vehicles use) Hydrologic factors such as degraded watershed conditions exist, increasing the probability of extreme flow events that would damage. The following changes in attributes/processes are likely in State B. Hydrogeomorphic--Bankfull width (increase), width/depth ratio (increase in width, not change in depth), active floodplain frequency (decrease). Vegetation--Community types changed, community type distribution changed, root density, canopy, community dynamics, recruitment/reproduction, and survival. Erosion/Deposition-- Bank stability (decrease). Soil--No change Water Quality-- No significant change. State C and D would be classified as nonfunctional conditions. State C represents incisement of the stream channel to a new base level. There is little or no bank stabilizing vegetation and no floodplain. State D channel widening must occur to restore floodplain development. Vegetation, if present is often only temporary due to the large adjustment process occurring. The following changes in attributes/processes are likely in States C and D. Hydrogeomorphic Bankfull width (increase), width/depth (increase/increase), active floodplain frequency (decrease) Vegetation- Riparian community types lost; community type distribution changes; root density, canopy, community dynamics, recruitment, reproduction, and survival (decrease) Erosion/Deposition- Bank stability (decrease) Water Quality- Temperature (increase), sediment (increase). State E- may again be classified as functional-at risk or functional depending on vegetation, soil, and hydrologic attributes. Establishment of the floodplain and bank stabilizing vegetation indicate reestablishment of functional conditions. However, stream segments in this state are usually at risk for the same reasons described for State B. Attributes and processes would revert back to those that appear in State B. State F is classified as functioning properly even though the riparian area may not have achieved the greatest extent exhibited in State A. a. Banks are stabilized and exhibit channel geometry similar to State A. b. Banks are stabilized and exhibit channel geometry similar to State A. c. The floodplain has widened to the extent that confinement of peak flows is only occasional and aggrading processes are slowed because of the surface area available. d. The largest difference between States A and F occurs in size and extent of hydrologic influence, which regulates size and extent of the riparian area. e. This alluvial/nongraded valley-bottom example is found in the Great Basin and represents only one of many types found on public lands. However, it is important to remember that there are other types and to understand that: example is found in the Great Basin and represents only one of many types found on public lands. However, it is important to remember that there are other types and to understand that: ** Riparian-wetland areas do have fundamental communalities in how they function, but they also have their own unique attributes. ** Riparian-wetland areas can and do function quite differently. As a result, most areas need to be evaluated against their own capability and potential. ** Even for similar areas, human influence may have introduced component(s) that have changed the area's capability and potential. ** Assessments, to be correct, must consider these factors and the uniqueness of each system. Appendix C of TR and 15 contains examples of other kinds of riverine systems (Jensen, 1992). The analogy used for Figure 1 can be applied to most of the example found in Appendix C because differing channel typed do have functional commonality. State E FAR Channel Widening State F PFC Dynamic Stability

State A Sand Creek State A -- Is considered as PFC and shows a high degree of bank stability, floodplain and plant community development. The important attributes and processes present are: Hydrogeomorphic-- Active floodplain, floodplain storage and release, flood modification, bankfull width, width/depth ratio, sinuosity, gradient, stream power and hydraulic controls. Vegetation--Community type (2 of 3), community type distribution (similar in the wet types), root density, canopy , community dynamics, recruitment/reproduction, and survival. Soils--Distribution of anaerobic soil, capillary Water Quality-- No Change

State B Eight Mile Creek
State B -- may be properly functioning or functional-at- risk It is functional if bank stabilizing vegetation is dominant along the reach and other factors such as soil disturbance are not evident. It is important to identify the species of vegetation present since they do vary in their ability to stabilize streambanks and filter sediment. State B may be classified at risk if bank stabilizing vegetation is not dominant (even though it may be in an improving trend from prior conditions) non desirable species are present (e.g. Kentucky bluegrass) Soil disturbance is evident (e.g. caved banks from livestock or vehicles use) Hydrologic factors such as degraded watershed conditions exist, increasing the probability of extreme flow events that would damage. The following changes in attributes/processes are likely in State B. Hydrogeomorphic--Bankfull width (increase), width/depth ratio (increase in width, not change in depth), active floodplain frequency (decrease). Vegetation--Community types changed, community type distribution changed, root density, canopy, community dynamics, recruitment/reproduction, and survival. Erosion/Deposition-- Bank stability (decrease). Soil--No change Water Quality-- No significant change.

State C State C would be classified as nonfunctional conditions.
State C represents incisement of the stream channel to a new base level. There is little or no bank stabilizing vegetation and no floodplain.

State D Mudd Creek State D channel widening must occur to restore floodplain development. Vegetation, if present is often only temporary due to the large adjustment process occurring. The following changes in attributes/processes are likely in States C and D. Hydrogeomorphic Bankfull width (increase), width/depth (increase/increase), active floodplain frequency (decrease) Vegetation- Riparian community types lost; community type distribution changes; root density, canopy, community dynamics, recruitment, reproduction, and survival (decrease) Erosion/Deposition- Bank stability (decrease) Water Quality- Temperature (increase), sediment (increase).

State E Shoshone Creek State E- may again be classified as functional-at risk or functional depending on vegetation, soil, and hydrologic attributes. Establishment of the floodplain and bank stabilizing vegetation indicate reestablishment of functional conditions. However, stream segments in this state are usually at risk for the same reasons described for State B. Attributes and processes would revert back to those that appear in State B.

State F Birch Creek State F is classified as functioning properly even though the riparian area may not have achieved the greatest extent exhibited in State A. a. Banks are stabilized and exhibit channel geometry similar to State A. b. Banks are stabilized and exhibit channel geometry similar to State A. c. The floodplain has widened to the extent that confinement of peak flows is only occasional and aggrading processes are slowed because of the surface area available. d. The largest difference between States A and F occurs in size and extent of hydrologic influence, which regulates size and extent of the riparian area. e. This alluvial/nongraded valley-bottom example is found in the Great Basin and represents only one of many types found on public lands. However, it is important to remember that there are other types and to understand that: example is found in the Great Basin and represents only one of many types found on public lands. However, it is important to remember that there are other types and to understand that: ** Riparian-wetland areas do have fundamental communalities in how they function, but they also have their own unique attributes. ** Riparian-wetland areas can and do function quite differently. As a result, most areas need to be evaluated against their own capability and potential. ** Even for similar areas, human influence may have introduced component(s) that have changed the area's capability and potential. ** Assessments, to be correct, must consider these factors and the uniqueness of each system. Appendix C of TR and 15 contains examples of other kinds of riverine systems (Jensen, 1992). The analogy used for Figure 1 can be applied to most of the example found in Appendix C because differing channel typed do have functional commonality.

General Instructions This checklist constitutes the Minimum National Standard required to determine proper functioning condition of lotic riparian-wetland areas As a minimum, an Interdisciplinary (ID) Team will use the checklist to determine the degree of function The ID team must review existing documents, data, and information, so the team has the information necessary to complete the rating General Instructions for completing a Riparian Proper Functioning Condition Assessment This checklist constitutes the Minimum National Standard required to determine proper functioning condition of lotic riparian-wetland areas As a minimum, an Interdisciplinary (ID) Team will use the checklist to determine the degree of function The ID team must review existing documents, data, and information, so the team has the information necessary to complete the rating The ID team must determine the attributes and processes important to the riparian-wetland area they are assessing. Consider the capability/potential of the site.

General Instructions The ID team must determine the attributes and processes important to the riparian-wetland area they are assessing Mark one box for each element. Elements are numbered for reference and does NOT constitute a priority or importance Mark one box for each element. Elements are numbered for reference and does NOT constitute a priority or importance. Determine and record the finding for each item (“tweeners” are allowed) on the checklist, record the rationale for each finding The ID Team will determine a finding for each item, record the finding on the form, and record the rationale. An interdisciplinary team (ID Team) consisting of the appropriate specialists and others need to determine the degree of function. Determine the functional rating and trend and record the rationale

General Instructions The ID Team will determine a finding for each item, record the finding on the form, and record the rationale Based on the ID Team’s discussion, Functional Rating will be resolved and the checklist summary section completed Establish photo points where possible to document the site The ID Team will determine a finding for each item, record the finding on the form, and record the rationale. An interdisciplinary team (ID Team) consisting of the appropriate specialists and others need to determine the degree of function. Determine the functional rating and trend and record the rationale Establish photo points where possible to document the findings.

Riparian Proper Functioning Condition Checklist (Lotic)
Write-up area descriptions 17 Questions Hydrology Vegetation Erosion and Deposition Summary Determination Contributing Factors The Riparian Proper Functioning Condition Checklist has four parts: Write-up area description, so that we know where the area is, when the assessment was done, and who did it. Questions that require a “yes,” or “no” answer. The questions are specific about factors that influence the way a stream is functioning A summary determination, Proper Functioning Condition, Functioning At Risk, or Non Functional. The apparent trend, based on indicators such as vigor of riparian species, increase in woody vegetation where appropriate, etc. Contributing factors are a recognition that the landowner may not be able to control some of the factors. For example, a dam upstream changes the flows of a stream and the stream is adjusting. We will discuss the Checklist in detail, question by question.

Standard Checklist (Lotic)
This is the front side of the checklist which includes the list location, Hydrology, and Vegetation portion. You have a copy of the checklist in your packet. Note that questions 3 and 5 must be answered on all streams. This form has a space for remarks and the reason for the finding(s). This is probably the most important part of the form.

Standard Checklist (Lotic)
This is the back side of the form showing the Soils and Erosion/Deposition, the Summary Determination and Apparent Trend, and Other Factors. In the Summary Determination the ID team will review the questions, and determine if there is any factor or factors, “no” on the checklist puts the area at-risk of degradation. Or if the area is nonfunctional. The arrow at the right is an option that allows the ID team to provide information as to how strong the rating is. For example, we found the area was functional-at-risk, but it was nearly PFC, we would place a mark on the upper end of the arrow to indicate that it is almost PFC. Trend is a determination of the direction the riparian area is moving toward PFC or toward nonfunctional. NOTE: Trend is used only with FAR. Trend is determined by data or photos that provide a clear direction. This is real trend. Apparent trend is using indicators such a improved vigor of riparian species, increase in number of woody species, to estimate the direction of movement. Again, provide written rationale for the finding. This last part recognizes that in some cases what is happening up stream is a contributor to the undesirable conditions. Up stream dams and diversions, roads, poor management practices, etc should be noted and described.

Natural Riparian Resources
Water Water The first of the legs of the triangle we will be discussing is water.  Water provides a lot of energy to the riparian area. Some people see vegetation and soil as the bowling pins and water as the bowling ball. The goal is to keep the water on and in the land longer to allow a safe, prolonged release through surface flow and ground water. Landscape & Soil Vegetation

Healthy Streams Through Bringing People Together

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Healthy Streams Through Bringing People Together"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Healthy Streams Through Bringing People Together

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Healthy Streams Through Bringing People Together"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback