sonomawater.ca.gov

Dry Creek Habitat EnhancementEFFECTIVENESS MONITORING AND EVALUATION

Neil Lassettre, PhD1

Mark GoinCeleste Melosh

1Principal Environmental Specialistneil.lassettre@scwa.ca.gov

Dry Creek Habitat Enhancement Project Summary

• 2010

• 2012

• 2013

• 2014

• 2016

• 2017

• 2018

15,171

150,657

232,711

232,711

426,427

565,189

762,529

-

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

900,000

1,000,000

1,100,000

Quivera ArmyCorps

FarrowWallace

Rued Van Alyea None GeyserPeak

Meyer TruettHurst

City ofHealdsburg

CarlsonLonestar

Ferrari,CaranoOlson

ArmyCorps 14

Weinstock

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Squa

re fe

et (f

t2 ) o

f hab

itat e

nhan

ced

Annual and cumulative area (ft2) of habitat enhnanced in Dry Creek

Annual total by enhancement reach (ft2) Cumulative total (ft2)

Quivira

How do we evaluate habitat?• Dry Creek Adaptive Management Plan

– Primary metrics• Depth: 0.5 – 2.0 ft; 2.0 – 4 ft• Velocity: <0.5 ft/s• Habitat shelter value

– Habitat checklist• Features• Sites• Reaches

• Geomorphic change

• Aerial photographs

Optimal depth and velocity

Optimal depth and velocity

12%

11%

77%

Optimal depth and velocity

28%

24%

48%

Optimal depth and velocity

23% 62%

Main channel Side channel

Habitat data

Shelter value

Main channel Side channel

204

45 75 54 - 20 40 60 80

100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300

Alcove Flatwater Pool Riffle

225 162 133 136

- 20 40 60 80

100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300

Alcove Flatwater Pool Riffle

Shelter score Shelter score

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Geyser Peak City of Healdsburg Truett Hurst USACE

stee

lhea

d/m

2

2018 Summer Density of Steelhead in Side Channels

constructed side channels

main channel

Beyond primary metrics

Each reach divided into sites

Each site contains features

Site rating

For each site:• Habitat type created: pool,

riffle, backwater, etc.

• Primary metrics: velocity, depth, shelter, pool:riffleratio

Reach #: Project Title:Site ID: Site Name:

Date&Time: Evaluator:

Project Feature NumberFeature Type Code

1.2.3.4.5.

6.7.8.9.

10.

13.14.15.16. / / /

18. / / /

20.

22.

24.25.26. / / /27.28.29.30.31.32.33.34.

N=No, P=Partially, D=Don't know, A=Not Applicable.

Com

-m

ent

s

% area where targeted depth, velocity and shelter criteria overlap:

Feature Effectiveness Rating: Excl, Good, Fair, Poor, Fail

Does this feature need: DEC, ENH, MNT, REP, NON, OTHAre additional restoration treatments recommended at this location?

FINAL SITE LEVEL RATING (feature level rollup): Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor, Fail

Cha

nnel

Feat

ure

Vel

ocity

Oth

er

Length of targeted treatment: (ft)Width of targeted treatment: (ft)Area of offchannel habitat improved: ft2

Structural condition: Excl, Good, Fair, Poor, FailAre problems with the feature visible? Types: ANC, BBB, CRF, MAT, SHF, STR, SWA, UND, UNS, WSH, OTHIs the feature still in its original location, position & orientation?Current level II habitat type: FLT, POO, RIF, DRY, ALC, OTH

Rat

ng

Measure the targeted depth or range fta. Estimate area of feature within targeted depth or range ft 2 :

Dep

th /

Hab

itat

Were there any unintended effects on the water depth? If Y, comment.Instream shelter value in the treatment area: 0, 1, 2, 3

If an objective, did the feature create the targeted instream habitat type?Were there any unintended effects on the habitat type? If Y, comment.Maximum residual water depth in main channel area: ftMaximum residual depth associated with the feature: fta. If an objective, did the feature increase/decrease water depth in the treatment area?

Shel

ter

Percent of habitat unit covered by shelter: %1st/2nd dominant: BED, BOL, BUB, LWD, RTW, SWD, UCB, VEG, OTHIf an objective, did the feature increase instream shelter rating?a. Calculate the shelter rating: 0-300Large woody debris count in treatment area: D >1', L 6-20' / D >1', L >20'If an objective, did the feature increase LWD count in the treatment area?a. LWD recruitment methods: ANC, EXC, EXH, INT, RPR, UNA, OTH

1st/2nd dominant substrate: BED, BOL, COB, GRV, SND, SLC, OTHWere there any unintended effects from velocity change? If Y, comment.

% Canopy Measurement:Photopoint data collected: yes / noTemperature Profile: yes / noDissolved Oxygen Profile: yes / no

Current main channel problems: AGG, BRD, FLO, GRC, HDC, INC, NAR, SCU, STT, WID, NON, OTHDid the feature lead to the targeted off channel conditions?a. Overall Offchannel Condition: AGG, FPD, GRC, INC, NAR, SIN, STB, TOG, WID, OTHb. Outlet Conditions: AGG, FPD, GRC, INC, NAR, SIN, STB, TOG, WID, OTHc. Inlet Conditions: AGG, FPD, GRC, INC, NAR, SIN, STB, TOG, WID, OTHWere there any unintended effects on the main channel? If Y, comment.If an objective, did the feature decrease/increase velocity in the treatment area?a. Targeted velocity/range: ft/secb. Did the feature achieve the targeted velocity/range?c. Measure the velocity/range ft/sec:d. Area of habitat unit within targeted velocity: ft 2

Percent of habitat unit within targeted velocity see above: %

OFFCHANNEL HABITAT ENHANCEMENT

page of

EFFECTIVENESS (post-treatment)

23.

21.

17.

11.

12.

19.

Feature rating

EFFECTIVENESS MONITORING

Dry Creek Adaptive Monitoring Plan

For each feature:ConditionFunction

AMP Checklist

Feature ratingsSite ratings

Reach rating

2016 2017Large storms Warm Springs Dam

releases

2016 2017

2017

2018

2019100 cfs 1000 cfs 2000 cfs 3000 cfs

Truett Hurst side channel Winter 2016-2017

steelhead juvenileChinook adultCoho adult

5-Nov 10-Nov 15-Nov 20-Nov 25-Nov 30-Nov 5-Dec 10-Dec 15-Dec 20-Dec 25-Dec 30-Dec 4-Jan

sonomawater.ca.gov

Neil Lassettre PhDPrincipal Environmental Specialist

neil.lassettre@scwa.ca.gov

sonomawater.ca.gov

2016 2017