1. Resource roads in British Columbia: Environmental challenges at the site level: Use of the FREP Water Quality Effectiveness Evaluation By Dave Maloney and Brian Carson Cranbrook, B.C. November 7 and 8, 2012

2. Acknowledgments Brian Carson Les Swain Steve Chatwin, Martin Carver Pierre Beaudry FLNRO/MoE regional and district stewardship staff FLNRO Resource Practices Branch staff For more information on the: FREP program - http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/frep/ http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/frep/ WQEE protocol - http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/frep/values/water.htm http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/frep/values/water.htm

3. Background: FREP context – FRPA construct 3 Policy Realm FRPA Professional Reliance Effectiveness Evaluation Objectives Compliance and Enforcement Plan & Practice Requirements

4. What are Effectiveness Evaluations / FREP? A program to;  Determine if forest and range policies and practices are achieving government’s objectives  Assess the effectiveness of legislation  Identify continuous improvement opportunities 4

5. How does it work? Protocols guide the collection of data Ministry staff collect and analyze the field data Results are reported out Guidance is provided if necessary Policy changed if required 5

6. Question: Are forest and range practices effective in protecting water quality for fish habitat and drinking water purposes Evaluate: Effects of forestry and range - score Identify: Mitigation strategies Water Quality Effectiveness Evaluation

7. Characteristics of the Water Quality Methodology Simple Fast (20-30 minutes per site) Repeatable (two different evaluators working independently will come up with same answer) Able to address a wide range of terrain characteristics that occur throughout most Forest Regions of B.C Provide recommendations for better management

8. While geoscientists and regulators have been quick to recognize and study landslides as a source of turbidity, there has been less attention paid to surface erosion, which can have a substantial effect on water quality. In community watersheds, with ever more stringent levels of sediment tolerance, all sediment sources must be considered. 100 m 3 fine sediment over one storm 5 m 3 over one hauling season

9. The WQ protocol answers 4 simple questions associated with a “disturbed” site. 1.Does the road/site generate sediment? 2.How much sediment? 3.Does the road/site generated sediment reach the stream? 4.How would you prioritize road/site management activities to reduce water quality impacts from sediment?

10. Most sediment is generated where industrial roads are located over or in proximity to natural drainage ways

11. Stream Crossings Concentrated road drainage adjacent to creek Blowdown in riparian zone Range activities upstream of domestic water intakes Mass wasting associated with forest and range activities The following sites are assessed

12. Once a sample sites has been selected, the evaluator determines its drainage contributing area and the individual components that would contribute runoff and sediment

13. WQEE Form #2

14. Left cutbank Right road surface, Left road surface Ditch

15. ? OR The Evaluator estimates the connectivity or portion of drainage produced on the site that will reach a natural drainage. This will depend on area of catchment and potential for re- absorption of storm flow.

16. The Evaluator then estimates the portion of fine sand, silt and clay in eroded/ erodible material 0.5 1.0 0.2 Glaciofluvial terrace Ablation Till Lacustrine

17. When observed within the sampling area, volumes of newly failed slopes (or recently incised gullys) are estimated along with the portion reaching a stream Width Depth Length Estimated 20 % of slide material reaches Creek

18. Estimating the depth of surface erosion expected on road surfaces considers degree of use, slope and quality of surfacing material (units in meters) Road Use 2-10% slope Road Surfacing Quality Paved or Coarse Ballast only GoodAveragePoor Heavy use, all season road 00.0020.0050.01 Moderate use, all season road 00.0010.0020.005 Light seasonal use (4 x4 and occasional logging truck) 00.00050.0010.002 Deactivated (and unused) 00.00020.00050.001

19. 0.25 m 3 /year 0 m 3 /year 0.50 m 3 /year 0 m 3 /year Left Road ditch Stream Crossing site (left bank) Total estimated annual sediment contribution to stream from this site = 0.75 m 3 per year

20. Volume of Fine Sediment (m3) ScoreDescription of Site Associated Level of Management <0.2 m 3 Very Low Site does not generate significant amounts of sediment. Site reflects best management practices. Good Poor 0.2-1 m 3 Low Site generating some sediment but would still be within the range that would be considered normal for background levels of stream turbidity. Site reflects good management practices 1-5 m 3 Moderate Site generating levels of sedimentation that would be measurable and, under special situations, of interest to watershed managers. Improvements could be considered but are not mandatory. 5-20 m 3 High Site generating unacceptable levels of fine sediment and have a significant impact on water quality in a watershed. Action mandatory. >20 m 3 Very HighSite very high levels of sediment with major consequences for water quality within a watershed. Action Mandatory. [1][1] Note that an increase in discharge of receiving waters will result in a decrease in the magnitude of the turbidity effect. Scoring

21. Management option to reduce sediment generation

22. Results2008-2011 785 cutblocks785 cutblocks 3423 assessments3423 assessments

26. Roads paralleling stream (usually old alignments)

27. Too large an area drained by culvert

28. Long grade approach to bridge with rutted road surface carrying surface water onto bridge

29. Road surface generated discharge is concentrated rather than diffused from road alignment Permitting large grader berms that concentrate water generated on road towards natural drainages

30. Designing swale in road before bridge so surface water diverted before reaching stream

31. Building bridge slightly above road grade and armour disturbed soils subject to concentrated flow

32. Using coarse material for road surfacing

33. Armouring culvert outlet and areas where concentrated surface flow is expected

34. Ensure windfirm trees within riparian reserve zone

35. Minimizing disturbance of S5 and S6 stream

36. Reseeding reclamation mix on areas with disturbed soils

37. Using temporary and permanent water bars Surface water is deflected off road before it has a chance to concentrate

38. Staying off roads when wet

39. Using signage to indicate sensitive stretches of road

40. Introduce stream discharge: Receiving waters have different rates of discharge, and the dilution effect will vary proportionally 0.1 m 3 /sec 10 m 3 / sec 1 m 3 of fine sediment delivered to this stream will raise the turbidity by 10 NTU. 1 m 3 of fine sediment delivered to this stream will raise the turbidity by 0.1NTU.

41. Severity of ill effects

42. Thank you