Evaluation ... of any habitat manipulation program ... is needed to determine whether enhancement projects achieve their intended objective and whether or not projects are working. Unfortunately, project expenditures are far ahead of our knowledge of the effectiveness of these 'improvements'. Without evaluation, we cannot recognize our mistakes, innovate appropriate new techniques, or determine if funds have been wisely spent.
Several researchers have suggested that because salmonid populations fluctuate so much naturally, several years of study of fish populations is needed, both before and after changing habitat (Fontaine 1988, Hall and Knight 1981, Platts and Nelson 1988). Without such studies, it is difficult to determine whether changes in fish populations have occurred in response to treatments or are simply the result of natural variations. Everest and Sedell (1984) point out that evaluating stream reaches, as opposed to taking a basin wide approach, can be misleading. Increased use of habitat structures by juveniles at a certain time of year, or increased spawning activity in a reach after treatment, may actually reflect a shift from adjacent areas.
The accepted standard of judging restoration success is smolt output, determined by the use of downstream migrant traps (Everest and Sedell 1984). Except in smaller streams, however, sampling smolt output may not be possible due to trapping limitations. The use of paired samples of streams, one treated and one unaltered, can help determine whether structures are being used, but cannot provide the actual numbers of fish produced (Johnson et al. 1986).
Studies conducted on the effectiveness of habitat manipulation produce results that vary considerably (Fontaine 1988). Everest studied Fish Creek in Oregon from 1984 to 1987. When five percent of the total stream habitat had been altered, no increase in steelhead or coho salmon juveniles was observed. When more intensive structural treatment was implemented, using rootwads to create backwater pools, coho salmon numbers increased, while juvenile steelhead numbers remained unchanged.
Fontaine (1987) found that instream structures on Steamboat Creek, a tributary to the Umpqua River in Oregon, were used by juvenile steelhead but that no net increase in their population occurred. She postulated that competition with redside shiners was limiting the number of steelhead juveniles and that structures could not, therefore, increase their production.
Binns (1986) described changes in native trout population in three reaches of Huff Creek in Wyoming, one where grazing had been reduced, a second without grazing, and a third not only free of grazing, but having instream structures as well. He found that trout had increased in all three areas, but that the most dramatic increase was in the no-grazing section with the structures. Before the improvements, trout numbered fewer than 36 per mile, while afterward there were over 600 per mile. The dramatic change in fish numbers clearly demonstrated the benefit of the structures (Fontaine 1988).
West (1984) noted that spawning and rearing chinook salmon used areas treated with boulder clusters and weirs more than adjacent, untreated reaches on the South Fork of the Salmon River in the Klamath Basin. The Salmon River is so large it precludes accurate enumeration of smolt output, so the best test for increased production was not possible. On Red Cap Creek in the middle Klamath region, Brock (1987) compared reaches that were treated with boulders to untreated reaches and found greater densities of juvenile steelhead associated with the structures. However, a determination of whether smolt output was increased by the stream treatments was beyond the scope of his study.
Olson and West (1990) have recently completed an evaluation of fish habitat improvement structures on several Klamath tributaries. The study compares the use of areas altered by structures with control areas similar to the habitat before alteration. Structure life was gauged by the amount of deterioration since construction. Estimated structure life ranged from 18 to 57 years. The researchers found low cost structural treatments, such as digger logs and boulder deflectors, to be the most cost-effective. Those with the poorest cost-benefit performance were the cabled cover logs and boulder root wad deflectors, the result of the cables wearing out, and small boulder weirs on Beaver Creek that had been filled with imported gravel.
Given that the structures studied were all 3 to 5 years old and that no major floods have occurred in the Klamath Basin during the last five years, a reassessment of these results may be needed if flood events show the longevity of structures to be different than projected. While Olson and West (1990) provided some interesting and useful information regarding the use by fish of the habitat created by instream structures, it was, again, beyond the scope of their work to assess whether there was a net increase in salmon and steelhead production in any of the streams studied.
The net increase in smolt production is necessary information for calculating precise cost-benefit ratios for projects. Economic benefits can be estimated using values that include commercial fishing and processing, tourism revenues, sporting goods sales, guiding fees, license sales, access fees, and other factors (Meyer 1980). At this point, however, Klamath Basin projects lack smolt production figures to determine cost-to-benefit ratios.
Habitat degradation is strongly indicated as the cause for the low number of anadromous fish currently returning to the Klamath River compared to historical levels. Many Klamath Basin tributaries have problems so serious that treatment with instream structures may be inappropriate at this time. Problems in the tributaries contribute to large scale ecological problems in the main river and the estuary. Mass wasting, triggered by flood events, but associated with timber clear-cutting and road failure, have caused substantial increases in sediment to stream systems (MacCleery 1974, Coats and Miller 1981). Decreased streamflow and poor water quality are major factors that depress fish populations in some upper basin streams. The effects of logging on fish habitat and problems related to water quality and diversion are discussed fully in Chapter 2. These problems are briefly reviewed here so that the main limiting factors in each subbasin can be more readily recognized and effectively addressed.
The watersheds of many of the tributary streams of the lower Klamath basin have been extensively logged since 1950. Coats and Miller (1981) found that erosion hazards and the potential for unacceptable cumulative effects were greatly increased if logged areas exceeded 38 percent in these steep, unstable watersheds. Since that time, some watersheds on private land have been logged at rates approaching 80 percent, including the removal of old growth trees from the riparian zones. The loss of large conifers in the riparian zone can greatly increase streamside slope failure rates (Kelsey 1980, Ziemer 1981a). Streamside slides are particularly bad since the sediment from such failures is introduced directly into the stream (Frissell and Liss 1987).
Although sediment enters the tributaries during discrete storm events, the negative impacts from these events persist over time (Lisle 1982, Hagans et al. 1986, Kelsey 1980). The effects of the 1964 flood are still impacting fish populations in the lower Klamath tributaries, especially those crossing the Yurok Reservation below Weitchpec. Channel aggradation in these disturbed watersheds has caused the streams to flow underground in late summer. This prevents the outmigration of juvenile chinook, coho, steelhead and cutthroat trout and even adult spawning migrations in some years.
Figure 3-7 -- Turwar Creek runs underground at its confluence with the Klamath River because of its tremendous sediment load. The Klamath has also been filled in by sediment transported from throughout the watershed.
Payne and Associates (1989) found that stream-mouth deltas, almost nonexistent prior to 1955, have grown to 500 and 700 feet in width since 1964. Delta widths changed dramatically after the 1964 flood, but increased even more after the high water of 1972. The initial incursion of sediment came with the 1964 flood but is still being delivered to the lower reaches of the streams. Streambed conditions near the mouths were found by Payne and Associates (1989) to be so unstable that no fishways could be installed and the study concluded that no lasting solution, other than natural recovery, was possible. Logging in many of these drainages continues today. This delays their recovery and, according to Coats and Miller (1981), could lead to substantial new sediment loads in the event of a major flood.
The Payne and Associates findings concerning bedload mobility also suggests that the spawning gravels found in these highly aggraded reaches would be highly unstable. Frissell and Liss (1987) found that similar conditions in southern Oregon streams caused extremely low survival of eggs due to scour and fill in the stream. Chinook populations spawning in the main stem of Euchre Creek dropped from 2,000 adults to between 20 and 200 as a result of high bedload mobility. Chinook and coho salmon can only reach the flat, lower reaches of these lower Klamath tributaries, the reaches where these massive sediment build-ups have occurred.
Lisle (1982) noted that persistent high bedload movement can hinder the regeneration of riparian vegetation. Riparian areas have not recovered well in the tributaries below Weitchpec and elevated water temperatures result from the lack of shade. Downstream migrant traps demonstrate that suckers and dace far outnumber salmonids in most of these lower Klamath streams (USFWS 1990). Reeves (1984) found that elevated temperatures conferred a competitive advantage on redside shiners over steelhead. Habitat changes in the lower Klamath tributaries seem to be strongly favoring warm water tolerant species, such as suckers and dace.
The low number of anadromous salmonids in the lower Klamath tributaries is directly related to sediment problems. Because every watershed below Weitchpec has been degraded, major floods have the potential to devastate this region's entire stock group of chinook and coho salmon. The effects on steelhead and cutthroat trout may be serious but these fish have the ability to migrate farther upstream into high gradient areas of streams that recover more quickly after floods. The use of instream structures as a primary tool for improving fish habitat and anadromous fish populations in this area is inappropriate due to the high sediment loads that might bury structures during a flood. Investments in instream structures in most lower Klamath tributaries should be considered high risk. Only changes in land use management and large scale watershed stabilization efforts can effectively address these problems and begin the process of recovery of the lower Klamath tributaries.
Large areas of the middle Klamath watershed were burned by wildfires in 1987, including portions of the Elk, Clear, Indian, Grider, King Titus, and Seiad creek drainages. Salvage logging has followed in several of the drainages. Other middle Klamath tributaries, such as Beaver Creek, have been widely disturbed by logging and associated road construction. Efforts to increase fish production using structural treatments have been largely ineffective in Beaver Creek as a result of ongoing sediment inputs. Similar problems with decomposed granite sands are found in Cottonwood Creek. Despite post-fire erosion control efforts by the USFS, erosion hazards in these drainages remains very high. A major flood could trigger massive contributions of sediment to the area's streams. The risk of major loss of salmon and steelhead resources in this area can be reduced through widespread implementation of erosion control measures and changes in land use practices.
Large areas of the Clear Creek watershed are scheduled to be salvage logged. Restricting such activity in Clear Creek would be advisable since it sustains stock groups of concern, particularly summer steelhead and spring chinook. Roelofs (1982) indicated that summer steelhead were extremely sensitive to watershed disturbances. If major losses in other tributaries occur due to floods and mass wasting before their watersheds can be stabilized, the Clear Creek populations would provide a source for the rebuilding of locally adapted stocks.
Very large plugs of sediment were deposited at the mouth of the smaller middle Klamath tributaries by the 1964 flood. Old mine tailings from just upstream in the Klamath caused this problem to be particularly severe at the mouth of Humbug Creek. These creeks have not had the ability to move this material since the earlier flooding and fish passage is limited except during very high flows. The USFS has used heavy equipment to improve fish passage into Independence Creek, which was partially blocked by a sediment plug. The feasibility of improving access for upstream migrants in other streams in the middle Klamath region needs to be explored. Fish passage problems on Horse Creek and Seiad Creek related to water diversion structures must also be addressed.
The potential for erosion in the Salmon River drainage was greatly increased by the 1987 fires. The fires caused large-scale denuding of several Salmon River subbasins, some of which had also been burned in the Hog Fire of 1977. The fires in some Salmon River tributaries caused the total loss of ground cover and the prospects for natural regeneration are poor. The soils are primarily granitic in these burned subbasins. The watersheds that suffered the greatest damage were Crapo Creek, Olsen Creek, Big Creek, Kanaka Creek, and the North Fork of the Salmon River.
The USFS has done some erosion control work in the Salmon drainage since the 1987 fires. The erosion hazard remains so extensive, however, a major flood event could still mobilize large quantities of sediment. Most sediment coming off the slopes will go directly into the streams because of the steep, inner gorge configuration of most of these Salmon River tributaries. Decomposed granite sands are found throughout the basin and they can have serious negative impacts on salmon and steelhead spawning and rearing success (Platts and Megahan 1975). The Salmon River spring chinook have reached very low levels and these sediment problems could lessen their chances for recovery. An intensive program of erosion control is needed in the Salmon River. Through the use of a sediment budget approach (Kelsey et al. 1990) or an erosion prevention assessment (Hagans and Weaver 1990), priorities for effective treatment can be established. To protect fisheries resources, timber harvest in the Salmon watershed should be conducted with special care to avoid adding to the area's erosion hazards.
Fish habitat in the Scott River drainage suffers from both current and long-standing effects from sediment and floods. Habitat has also been diminished by livestock grazing and irrigation diversions.
The Kidder Creek drainage was extensively logged and also suffered a major fire prior to the 1955 flood. Sediment and debris, washed from the watershed by the flood, formed a major delta where Kidder Creek canyon emptied into the Scott River Valley. The creek still flows underground for much of the year as a result of massive aggradation. Stream diversions further reduce Kidder Creek's surface flow.
Figure 3-8 -- Kidder Creek's delta resulted from severe erosion triggered by the 1955 flood. The stream flows underground here throughout the summer.
Timber harvest and road building on the 55,000 acres of decomposed granite soils in the basin appear to be causing heavy contributions of granite sands to the Scott River tributaries. Big French, Sugar, Shackleford, Etna and Kidder Creeks all contribute substantial amounts of decomposed granite to the Scott. The poor quality of spawning gravel in the Scott River was found by CH2M Hill (1985) to significantly reduce the survival of chinook and coho salmon eggs. A comprehensive erosion control program, based on a sediment budget approach, is the only long-term solution to the sediment related problems in the main channel of the Scott River.
Livestock grazing is causing bank erosion and the loss of riparian vegetation along the Scott River and some of its tributaries. The loss of vegetative cover, the increased sedimentation caused by bank erosion, and the increased summer water temperatures are all serious habitat problems. Limiting livestock access to streamside areas and restoring riparian vegetation would greatly improve the Scott River's fish habitat.
Flow reductions make temperature problems worse, they limit spawning areas and make access to spawning tributaries difficult. The Task Force should give high priority to finding ways to work cooperatively with the area's irrigators to increase streamflows for fish in the Scott River basin.
The factors found by CH2M Hill (1985) to limit salmon and steelhead production in the Shasta River continue to this day to frustrate restoration efforts. Low flows limit access to the river for returning salmon and they decrease rearing habitat for juvenile coho and steelhead. Summer water temperatures reach 85 degrees F. and dissolved oxygen levels as low as 2.8 parts per million have been measured in the Shasta River (Dennis Maria personal communication). Such low dissolved oxygen and high temperatures are lethal for salmon and steelhead. The same problems caused by livestock along the Scott River are found on the Shasta, as well, in addition to which livestock along the Shasta may also be adding nutrients to the stream, which reduces oxygen levels. Again, low streamflows increase the water quality problems, decrease spawning and rearing habitat, and hinder migration.
Salmon populations in this basin have not rebounded since 1985, despite restricted ocean harvest aimed at increasing escapement. There is a very great potential for restoring native salmon and steelhead returns to the Shasta River if only the livestock impacts on riparian vegetation, water quality, and streamflow could be reduced.
The Main River and Its Estuary
Indian fishermen and resort owners have noted that the pools in the lower Klamath River and its estuary have filled in considerably since the early 1970's. Similar trends have been noted on other northern California coastal streams and are attributed largely to sediment contributed by the 1964 flood (Hagans et al. 1986).
Late summer water temperatures in the lower Klamath have approached 80 degrees F. in recent years. The temperature increases appear to have been caused, in large part, by the loss of vegetation along the tributary streams. Warm water released from Iron Gate Dam also contributes to these high water temperatures. The decreased depth of the lower Klamath River reduces the cold water layer along the river bottom, where migrating salmonids might otherwise find refuge when river temperatures rise.
The decreased depth of the estuary may also effect the fresh and salt water mixing patterns. The salt water "wedge" along the bottom of estuaries can host entire communities of marine organisms (Simenstad 1983) which may be critical food resources for anadromous salmonid juveniles.
The entire Klamath River, and particularly the lowest reach, is suffering from cumulative effects which may be leading to reduced survival of juvenile salmonids (see discussion on density dependent rearing mortality in Chapter 5). The substantial reduction in eulachon (candlefish), described by Indian fishermen, may be related to bedload movement or substrate conditions in the lower river. There are no technological solutions, such as dredging or construction of deflectors, to sediment problems in the estuary and lower river. Only by reducing the sediment supply of the entire Klamath River Basin, and allowing time for natural recovery, can the current problems be fully resolved. Increased releases from the Trinity River Project can increase flushing and could help speed the recovery process.
Temperature conditions need to be evaluated systemwide.
Some of the issues surrounding the analysis of the biological and economic results of habitat restoration projects have been discussed above. The ultimate indicators of the Restoration Program's effectiveness will, of course, be increases in Klamath River salmon and steelhead populations and the harvests that can be made of these fish. In the meantime, the Task Force should support measures to monitor and assess habitat restoration projects, including improvements in water quality and the other factors which appear to be limiting fish production.
Using Fish Abundance to Measure Project Effectiveness
The best way of determining the success of the Restoration Program, theoretically, would be by measuring the increase in the numbers of young salmon and steelhead produced throughout the Basin. Because of the sampling problems discussed earlier, it is very difficult to estimate the number of young fish in large streams with accuracy. Smolt monitoring in key subbasins, like that currently conducted by the California Department of Fish and Game's natural stocks assessment program in Bogus Creek and by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the lower Klamath River tributaries, should be expanded to include index streams for the populations of special concern identified in Chapter 4.
Spawner escapement, estimated by weirs and carcass counts, provides the Task Force a partial indicator of success or failure of the Restoration Program. Habitat recovery might be occurring in-river, but ocean conditions such as El Nino might decrease adult survival. Evaluation programs based solely on fish numbers might be misleading as data on smolts or spawners is often incomplete. More complete suggestions as to needs for monitoring of salmon and steelhead populations and additional studies are offered elsewhere in this plan (see Chapter 4).
Cross-sections and Longitudinal Profiles Reveal Sediment Loads
Changes in sediment supply and storage can be monitored inexpensively using stream cross sections and longitudinal profiles of study streams. Periodic checks of relative bed elevation at various sites will indicate whether the amount of sediment stored in the channel is changing and allow the tracking of sediment pulses as they move downstream. Longitudinal profiles in these same areas will reveal increases or decreases in pool depth and volume. As watershed rehabilitation efforts are undertaken in a subbasin, measuring the changes in sediment transport will help gauge their effectiveness. (Vicki Ozaki and Maryann Madej personal communications.)
Changes in Channel Width Highlight Erosion Problems
The Riparian Aerial Photographic Inventory of Disturbance, or RAPID, is a new, low-cost tool for analyzing the downstream effects of logging, road construction and other soil-disturbing watershed activities. With the help of aerial photographs with a scale of 1:12,000, the RAPID process assesses sediment-related changes in stream channel width over time (Grant 1987). This ability to track the cumulative impacts of logging and other watershed activities will not only improve the scheduling of Task Force habitat improvement investments, but guide improvements in watershed "best management practices" as well.
Sampling Sediments in Gravel Spawning Beds
Fine sediments can reduce the survival of salmon and steelhead eggs and the emergence of fry from the spawning gravels dramatically (McNeil and Ahnell 1964). Gravel quality can be determined by measuring the percentage of fines and the average particle size through bulk gravel sampling (Everest et al. 1982). Chinook salmon appear to be the most seriously effected by increasing amounts of fine particles, followed by coho and steelhead, in that order. There does not appear to be any information at this time, however, on the precise quantitative relationships between percentages of fine material in spawning gravels and the percentage of egg survival or successful emergence that might be expected. Nor would the problems discussed earlier concerning the loss of eggs and emerging fry to shifting bedloads be identified through bulk gravel sampling.
In areas where fine sediments are suspected of decreasing egg-to-fry survival, such as the Scott River, bulk gravel sampling information should be collected so that it may be compared to the conditions which follow watershed stabilization efforts. Watershed stabilization and land management improvements in the South Fork drainage of the Salmon River in Idaho were followed by a dramatic drop in fine sediment in salmon and steelhead spawning areas (Platts and Megahan 1975). Prior to treatment, fine sediment averaged between 45 and 80 percent in South Fork spawning beds, but dropped to 12 to 26 percent afterward. With the land use improvements, gravel size distribution became nearly optimum for spawning chinook salmon.
Measuring Improvements in Water Quality
As discussed earlier, both poor water quality and reduced streamflow limit salmon and steelhead production in many stream reaches of the Klamath Basin. The Task Force should encourage efforts to gather temperature and water quality information. Where livestock are suspected of contributing to water quality degradation, oxygen measurements should be made both when livestock are, and are not, in the stream corridors. Temperature data should be gathered before and following the restoration of riparian vegetation.
Aquatic insects and other aquatic invertebrates, generically termed macro-invertebrates or "macros," are powerful indicators of water quality and general stream health (Winget and Mangum 1979). Intermittent point source discharges, brief periods of anoxic conditions, or other transient but potentially damaging water quality problems, may be difficult to detect with periodic sampling. Short-term conditions can destroy aquatic organisms that require high levels of dissolved oxygen or that are sensitive to other forms of pollution. Sampling aquatic macros above and below a suspected point source can help to detect these impacts. If samples are taken on a regular basis, changes in species diversity and the presence or absence of key species or groups can indicate water quality conditions, including nonpoint source pollution from sediments.
Because macros provide most of the diet for young salmon and steelhead, an understanding of their abundance and diversity is useful for understanding the growth and survival of these fish. While the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has provided substantial support for the identification of macro indicator species in the eastern part of the country, little of such work has been completed in the West. A considerable amount of baseline information has been collected on the insect fauna of the Trinity River tributaries (Lee 1989). The Task Force should encourage EPA, the State Water Resources Control Board and other water quality interested agencies to assist in funding an extension of this Trinity work into the balance of the Klamath Basin.
Instream flow studies can be used to predict the changes in fish habitat and fish production that can be expected with changes in streamflow conditions (Bovee 1982). Such studies are costly, however, and may not be necessary in most cases. If a stream dries up in summer, fish production would clearly benefit from improvement in summertime flows. Formal studies using the instream flow incremental methodology (IFIM) should be performed to determine the streamflow needs of the main Klamath River prior to the relicensing of Iron Gate Dam by the federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
It will be necessary to install and maintain additional stream discharge gauges for the Restoration Program. Measurements of peak flows, in particular, are needed in order to model sediment routing and determine the fate of sediments in the fish habitats of the Klamath River system (Tom Lisle personal communication).
Using Landsat Imagery to Monitor Conditions in the Klamath Basin
The Task Force launched a study in late 1990 to determine the practicality of developing a computer-based geographic information system, or "GIS," for the Klamath Basin, or selected portions of it, using Landsat imagery. The Landsat satellite's orbit high above Earth brings it over the Klamath Basin on a regular basis and transmits multispectral information useful for monitoring physical conditions on a basinwide scope. For example, the California Department of Fish and Game is using infrared Landsat images to follow the post-fire succession of vegetation in the Scott and Salmon river watersheds. Both the U.S. Forest Service and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection are using Landsat imagery of the Klamath Basin for selected purposes.
While Landsat imagery cannot replace the on-the-ground monitoring needs discussed above concerning sediment conditions, water quality or the rest, it can enable broad-scale comparisons over time of Basin conditions of interest to the Restoration Program. It is clearly advisable for the Task Force to follow the use of Landsat imagery and GIS development in the Basin by the other agencies and to remain alert to the contribution this technology can make to the evaluation of the Basin's watershed and stream conditions.
The California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) is responsible for implementing the federal Clean Water Act under a delegation of authority from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The SWRCB, acting through its nine regional water quality control boards (Regional Boards), has prepared plans for the protection of water quality, and the "beneficial uses" made of the waters, of every river basin in the state. The plan for the Klamath River specifically designates the production of coldwater fish resources as a beneficial use of the water of the Basin.
The SWRCB, with the assistance of its North Coast Regional Board, and pursuant to its responsibilities under the federal Clean Water Act, completed the first statewide Water Quality Assessment in April 1990. The Assessment was reviewed and approved, with modifications, by EPA in July 1990. In its Assessment, the SWRCB found that the coldwater fish beneficial use of the Klamath River and its Shasta, Scott and Salmon tributaries, is not being adequately protected. The SWRCB based its findings on "fact sheets" prepared by the Regional Board which describe the nature of the widespread, or "nonpoint," pollution responsible for the decline in the Basin's coldwater fish habitats.
The EPA took the SWRCB findings a step further. The EPA found that because the decline in the Basin's coldwater fish resources is attributable to the deterioration of their habitat, the streams in question are "impaired," as that term is used in Section 304 of the Clean Water Act. The designation of these streams as impaired makes them particular targets for state and federal pollution abatement efforts -- and makes the SWRCB, Regional Board and EPA natural allies in the restoration of the Basin's watersheds, streams and fish resources.
A logical first step for this natural alliance is a merger of information useful to both fish restoration and water quality management interests. The Northwest Power Planning Council uses the Reach File, EPA's national data base of surface water features, as the computerized geographic base for its integrated system plan for salmon and steelhead production in the Columbia River Basin. The Reach File can be easily modified to provide for the management of information for specific stream segments, or "reaches." Each Reach File stream segment has its own catalog number and information can be entered and retrieved through the use of this map-based system with a high degree of geographic specificity.
The hydrologic unit data base that the SWRCB uses now does not have the Reach File's computerized flexibility. The Reach File is used by California's neighboring states and EPA is interested in extending its use into California. The Klamath Basin, representing more than five percent of the state's area, would provide an excellent demonstration of the Reach File's use in water quality management. Such a demonstration could also enable the organization of information essential to the Restoration Program.
The Task Force should seek assistance from the SWRCB and EPA to carry out, in close cooperation with those agencies, the North Coast Regional Board and the Trinity River Task Force, a Reach File demonstration mutually beneficial to all parties.
Community Support and Involvement: The Key To Program Success
While agencies can provide essential technical support to the Restoration Program and bring substantial funds with which to address problems and monitor progress, gaining the support and participation of the citizens of the Klamath basin is absolutely critical to the success of the Program. There are numerous successful models from California's north coast where citizens have directly undertaken fish rearing and stream and watershed restoration projects. These projects tend to hold the volunteers' interest and substantially lower project costs. Direct participation in the Restoration Program tends to keep project funds in the local communities which, in turn, builds good will. Public involvement also encourages landowners to participate in restoration activities on their lands or, where necessary, to modify land use practices that might hinder fisheries restoration. Finally, volunteer participation in fish restoration will likely lessen localized fish poaching problems.
There are already restoration projects in the Klamath Basin that are enjoying substantial volunteer effort, the Orleans Rod and Gun Club's Pearch Creek steelhead rearing ponds, for example, but such efforts need to be expanded. The Mattole Restoration Council has recently completed a study that identifies erosion problems (MRC 1990) throughout the entire Mattole River watershed and the volunteer Council is addressing these problems subbasin by subbasin.
Figure 3-9 -- Sportfishing is important to the economy of the Klamath Basin and the Basin's communities are natural allies for the Restoration Program.
The challenge to the Task Force is to empower local groups by increasing their understanding of the problems that have caused the decline of anadromous fish populations and the techniques can be employed to remedy these problems.
Workshops sponsored by the Humboldt Chapter of the American Fisheries Society (AFS) in 1986-88 provided training to people interested in fisheries and restoration. Topics included spawning counts, stream measurement techniques, basic aquatic invertebrate monitoring, stream processes, barrier analysis, and other subjects that helped develop the understanding and skills needed in restoration. Similar training should be arranged for those interested in restoration in the Klamath basin. To maximize local involvement in the Restoration Program a special session on understanding the contract process is needed.
The Humboldt AFS also hosted a 1988 conference on "Harvesting Trees While Retaining Our Fish: A Challenge We Can Meet" to share information between fisheries scientists and foresters. Both the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and private timber operators have expressed a willingness to participate in and to sponsor workshops on timber harvest and its relationship to fisheries restoration (CDF 1990, FGS 1990). AFS has also held conferences in other western states on protecting and restoring riparian areas. A seminar or workshop in Yreka on this topic would help inform the agricultural community about techniques of restoration and the potential benefits for them and the Restoration Program. Resource Conservation Districts would be natural cosponsors of such educational programs.
There are tremendous and persistent forces in the flow of water down steep channel gradients that move large and abundant material. Forces that can annually transport many tons of cobbles and boulders can make short work of poorly designed and placed structures .... Because fish density in nutrient poor streams is low even under the best habitat conditions, it takes a large number of enduring structures to make a significant difference challenges, some workers contend that habitat enhancement by artificial structures is rarely cost-effective, and people should emphasize protecting stream habitats through better management of hillslopes and riparian areas.
Prior restoration efforts in the Klamath River Basin have had mixed results. The removal or modification of migration barriers and the construction of fish passes have had almost universal success. The screening of diversions is saving hundreds of thousands of juvenile salmon and steelhead from certain death in the fields. Habitat improvement structures in the South Fork of the Salmon River are holding up well and seem to be attracting salmon and steelhead spawners and providing rearing habitat. Structural habitat modifications in watersheds with sediment problems have a very high rate of failure and need for continuous maintenance. Some of these structures may have failed because they were installed in steep, confined channels with tremendous hydraulic force. Many of the structures recently installed have yet to be challenged, however, by major flood flows.
The problems which have led to the deterioration of the Klamath Basin's fish habitat must be dealt with honestly and openly. It is the problems, not the symptoms, which need to be addressed. Sediment must be abated through programs of erosion control and prevention (see Chapter 2). Problems of water quality and streamflow deficiencies caused by agricultural need to be dealt with if the Restoration Program is to succeed.
Stabilizing all the watersheds in the Klamath Basin, funding all the needed riparian restoration or water conservation programs is clearly beyond the capability of the Restoration Program. Help is available from the entities that have interests or responsibilities that overlap with fisheries restoration, particularly those involved with the federal Clean Water Act -- which includes every forest landowner and agricultural operator, in addition to virtually every state, federal and local agency, in the Basin.
Where stream systems are recovering, the factors limiting fish populations may be less obvious than in recently-damaged streams. Habitat typing will help us understand better the relationship between the Klamath Basin's fish species, their age groups and their habitats. By comparing streams in recovery with undisturbed watersheds we can see which habitat elements are limiting fish production and which techniques will contribute most effectively to restoration.
No rigorous scientific studies have been conducted anywhere in the Klamath Basin concerning increases in salmon and steelhead smolt production associated with the use of instream structures. Recent studies give the Task Force a measure of the relative cost effectiveness of instream structures in the Klamath Basin, based largely on their cost and projected life. The life of instream structures can be relatively brief in the high energy of the Klamath tributaries. It would be clearly unwise to become overreliant on instream structures as the primary tool of the Restoration Program. Where channels are recovering, the prudent use of instream structures can speed the recovery process. Finally, the Task Force may invest in risky instream structures where the recovery of priority stocks must be addressed on an emergency basis (see Chapter 4).
As indicated above, the process of monitoring the effectiveness of the Restoration Program should attract a number of cooperating agencies, particularly those interested in the implementation of state and federal clean water laws.
The support and confidence of the local communities is essential to the success of the Restoration Program. Educating residents along the river and its tributaries about fisheries restoration, how it will be achieved and how it will benefit the region, will ensure their participation in the rebuilding process.
Policies for Habitat Restoration
Objective 3: Restore the habitat of anadromous fish of the Klamath River Basin by using appropriate methods that address the factors that limit the production of these species.
3.1 The Klamath River Basin Fisheries Restoration Task Force should solicit the support and cooperation of all the citizens of the Klamath River Basin in its mission to restore anadromous fisheries resources. The communities can be involved by:
a. Holding training sessions on restoration techniques and opportunities.
b. Holding training sessions to increase understanding of the contract and bid process to encourage local firms and groups to get involved.
c. Giving preference to projects that have strong local participation.
d. Encouraging the formation of local restoration groups to "adopt" subbasins and become advocates for fisheries resources and the Restoration Program.
3.2 Because large scale contributions of sediment continue to have substantial negative impacts on the ecosystem of the Klamath River, the Task Force will focus on evaluating areas where erosion continues to be a problem, and will work to solve the problem by:
a. Entering into formal long-term cooperative agreements with the U.S. Forest Service, Resource Conservation Districts, Indian Tribes other agencies.
b. Entering into Cooperative Resource Management Plans (CRMPs), with public and private landowners, with the objective of reducing erosion from their land.
c. Working with resource agencies such as the State Water Resources Control Board, the California Department of Forestry and the Environmental Protection Agency to identify problems, monitor progress on the abatement of sediment problems, and, where necessary, step up enforcement of clean water laws.
d. Exploring the feasibility of using a GIS system and the EPA Reach File to track the fate of sediment basinwide.
3.3 Technically sound habitat restoration measures which benefit depressed stock groups of concern (see Table 4.4) will receive priority consideration for funding.
3.4 The Klamath River Task Force will support the Trinity River Task Force in its efforts to restore adequate streamflow for fisheries resources in the Trinity subbasin.
3.5 The Task Force will work to gain the release of flows of adequate quality and quantity for fishery resources from Iron Gate Dam.
3.6 The Shasta River should be given high priority in the Restoration Program because of its significant potential to produce fall chinook salmon and steelhead. Adequate streamflow for fish are needed here, together with the restoration of riparian areas (see Ch. 2).
3.7 The Scott River and its tributaries are also a high priority for restoration because of their substantial salmon and steelhead production potential. Solutions to the major problems in the basin include:
a. Improving stream flows and restoring riparian zones (see Ch 2).
b. Using the recently completed sediment study to prioritize actions to control erosion of decomposed granite sands and identifying funds for their implementation.
c. Work with private timberland owners and others engaged in road construction and maintenance to insure that future activities do not continue to increase erosion (see Ch 2).
3.8 The Salmon River, a refuge area for spring chinook salmon and summer steelhead, has a greatly elevated erosion risk as a result of recent fires. Therefore, the following actions will be taken:
a. Assess erosion problems in the Salmon River Basin, paying particular attention to areas burned during the 1987 fires.
b. Implement measures to stabilize subbasins as soon as possible using the results of the erosion control study to prioritize actions.
c. Make certain that any continuing timber harvest activities by the USFS in the Salmon River Basin do not contribute further to current high erosion hazard.
3.9 The Task Force will work closely with the Yurok Tribe to improve anadromous fisheries resources on the Reservation and on ancestral territories. Actions on lower Klamath tributaries will include:
a. Seeking cooperative agreements with the major private land owners to evaluate slope stability and take appropriate measures to avoid soil loss and related negative impacts on salmon, steelhead and cutthroat trout.
b. Funding a study using aerial photographs, such as the RAPID method, to speed the evaluation of erosion factors.
c. Seeking further agreements to expand fisheries restoration efforts if erosion hazards are reduced or found to be at lower-than-believed levels.
d. Join with the Hoopa and Yurok Tribes in making Pine Creek a model watershed through implementing erosion control and other fisheries restoration measures and working to minimize impacts from future land use.
3-10 The Task Force will pursue the following actions with regard to the middle Klamath tributaries:
a. Encourage the USFS to expand cooperative efforts in mixed ownership drainages having decomposed granite soils, such as Beaver Creek and Cottonwood Creek, to control erosion and modify future timber harvests and road building to prevent erosion from continuing.
b. Study the feasibility and cost of removing the fish migration barriers at or near the mouth of middle Klamath tributaries such as Humbug Creek.
c. Find a solution to the problem of fish passage over the diversion structure on Horse Creek.
d. Seek cooperation from farmers and ranchers in securing adequate flows for fish in drainages such as Seiad and Cottonwood Creeks.
3.11 Fish screens should be installed wherever needed. Adequate funds for screen maintenance shall be provided. An evaluation of fish rescue efforts will be made to determine how many of the rescued fish survive.
3.12 Proposed projects to structurally increase fisheries habitat in any Klamath tributary will be evaluated as to whether:
a. The erosion potential in the watershed and the expected sediment yield would place the project at risk during moderate storm events (10 year interval or less).
b. The stream channel remains highly aggraded and, thus, likely to threaten the stability of the proposed structure.
c. The project is properly engineered in terms of its setting (gradient and channel type) and expected flows.
d. Habitat assessment has been conducted and the suspected limiting factors identified.
e. The proposed project has a clear goal of remedying the identified limiting factors.
f. The proposal includes methods to evaluate whether the goal of the project has been reached after project implementation (ideally, a demonstration of its positive cost-benefit performance).
g. The project budget includes cost estimates for maintenance.
3.13 The Task Force will undertake an affordable evaluation and monitoring program, one which employs accepted, standardized techniques, in order to acquire the information needed for adaptive management. Specifically, the Task Force will:
a. Fund, or find funding from such cooperators as the USFS, for completion of habitat typing and other quantitative habitat assessment of all basin streams having significant restoration potential.
b. Work with agencies such as the EPA, SWRCB, and USFS, which have water quality protection responsibilities, to monitor stream conditions of interest to the Restoration Program.
3.14 The Task Force will seek to mandate by law,
minimum habitat standards.
