Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Cover Sheet
Applicant Information
Lead Applicant Organization or Entity: Trout Unlimited Contact Person Name: Leslie Steen Address: 185 Center Street, Ste. B / PO Box
5002 City, State, Zip: Jackson, WY 83001 Email: [email protected] Telephone: 307-699-1022 Website Address: www.tu.org
Project Information
Project Title: Tincup Creek Stream Restoration Project Location State: Idaho County: Caribou Nearest Town: Freedom , WY Congressional District of Project: 2 Watershed/Stream/Lake: Salt River WNTI native trout and char species/sub-species Benefitted by Project: Yellowstone cutthroat Total Project Budget: $248,900 FY 17 / Phase 1 Total Amount Requested: $40,000 Total Matching Funds or In-Kind Support Secured: $138,900 Project Map Coordinates (decimal degrees) Lat: 42.974762° Long: -111.273127°Project Start Date: 7/15/17 Project Completion Date: 8/30/17 Phase I Is there a monitoring plan following Partnership guidelines? Yes X No If multiyear project, is there a breakdown of tasks, accomplishments, and budget by year in distinct phases? Yes X No Land Ownership (public or private; if public, specify managing agency): Public, US Forest Service Lands Is there a letter of support from the State or Federal fish and wildlife agency or Tribal government? If project is located on private land, please also attach a letter of support from landowner Yes
In which USFWS Region is the project located? (1, 2, 6, 7, 8) __1___ Region 1: Idaho, Oregon, And Washington Region 2: New Mexico, Arizona Region 6: Montana, Colorado, Utah, And Wyoming Region 7: Alaska Region 8: California, Nevada Is your project currently listed in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife FONS system? Yes / No Please indicate FONS Project Number (if applicable):
Application for WNTI Funding Application Deadline: 5 pm Mountain time October 7, 2016
Application not to exceed 10 pages total (including the 3 page cover sheet)
1
2
Project Partners (list all project partners and contact information)
Partner Organization: Agrium Contact Name: Jon Goode Position: Email: [email protected] Telephone: 208-390-0490
Partner Organization: Snake River Cutthroats TU Chapter Contact Name: Rory Cullen Position: President Email: 208-419-8477 Telephone: 208-419-8477
Partner Organization: Jackson Hole TU Chapter Contact Name: Barbara Allen Position: President Email: [email protected] Telephone: 307-413-3510
Partner Organization: Idaho Department Fish and Game Contact Name: David Teuscher Position: Regional Fisheries Manager Email: [email protected] Telephone: 208-232-4703
Partner Organization: Jackson Hole Onefly Contact Name: Krystyna Wolniakowski Position: Grant Administrator Email: [email protected] Telephone: 307-203-2654
Partner Organization: Caribou-Targhee National Forest Contact Name: Lee Mabey Position: Forest Fisheries Biologist Email: [email protected] Telephone: 208-557-5784
Partner Organization: Trout Unlimited Contact Name: Leslie Steen Position: Snake River Headwaters Project
Manager Email: [email protected] Telephone: 307-699-1022
Partner Organization: Desert Fishes Habitat Partnership Contact Name: Jon C. Sjöberg Position: Regional Representative Email: [email protected] Telephone: 775-688-1530
Project Components (select all that apply) Riparian or In-Stream Habitat Restoration Watershed Connectivity Barrier Removal or Construction Monitoring Watershed or Population Assessment Education/outreach In-Stream Flow Acquisition Planning Watershed Planning
Anticipated Outcomes (fill in values applicable to project) _1.25_# Stream Miles Restored or Enhanced ___ # Watersheds or Rivers Assessed ___ # Stream Miles Reconnected or Reopened ___ # Stream Miles Assessed _5_ # Acres of Lake/Wetlands Restored/Enhanced ___ # Populations Assessed ___ # Barriers Removed or Constructed ___ Other: (i.e. number of individuals reached by an educational program, number of presentations given, number of materials produced, etc.)
3
I. Project Summary - The Tincup Creek Stream Restoration project will improve riparian conditions and habitat for Yellowstone cutthroat trout (YCT), northern leatherside chub, boreal toad, western pearl shell mussels and bluehead suckers. These are all native species with special management emphasis. Because of the assemblage of these native species, and the degraded yet recoverable nature of this system, Trout Unlimited (TU) and the Caribou-Targhee National Forest (CTNF) have chosen to focus our efforts here. The primary cause for the degraded state of the stream has been linked to aerial spraying of willows in 1956, which precipitated the subsequent unraveling of the stream system. We believe this stream is poised to be successfully restored to pre-spraying conditions (Photos 2 to 4). We propose to accomplish this long-term vision of restoration for YCT and other native species by focusing on restoring channel and floodplain function and processes. Primary restoration methods will include: restoring eroding meander bends using bioengineering techniques, reconnecting old meanders, and raising riffle elevations. II. Problem the Project Addresses - A review of historical aerial photos and on-the-ground knowledge shows a system that was very much intact in 1953 (Photo 2) as primarily a single-thread channel with a high density of willows. In 1956, aerial spraying conducted in the drainage eliminated a majority of the willows. Remnants of the historic channel indicate historic bank full widths of 15 feet, versus bank full widths of up to 30 feet found currently. The 1976 photos (Photo 3) show a stream that became a braided, over-widened gravel bed system, while willows gradually returned. Currently, the willow community has greatly recovered. However, there are lingering effects to the system that will take decades to recover without restoration or intervention. The evidence of this degradation is the many outside meander bends that are raw, vertical and eroding, rather than being stabilized by willows (Photo 1). Further adding to the impairment is the loss of channel length due to meander cutoffs, the resulting steepening of the gradient, and the 1 to 3 foot downcutting of the channel, leading to an unhealthy, disconnected floodplain and riparian zone. While habitat is slowly recovering since 1956, recovery is intermittent. Eroding outside meander bends, loss of meander bends (Figure 2) due to channel instability, and resultant downcutting are all unlikely to heal within the next 100 years without intervention. At the same time, the system is not so greatly impaired that the native species populations are lost or unrecoverable. Throughout the project area, there are short sections of intact habitat that provide reference reaches and an indication of how the stream formerly functioned (Photo 5). Project partners believe they have identified the reason for the degradation and instability in the system, and are therefore confident that they can be successfully addressed, resulting in restored and improved habitat. The present habitat is extremely lacking in complexity, as it is over-widened and devoid of stabilizing willow cover on many of the outside meanders, which are migrating faster than point bars can develop and vegetate. Multiple-pass electrofishing surveys of 115 meter units averaged 3.7 trout >100mm per unit. Mainly larger trout were sampled, indicating poor rearing habitat and recruitment due to a lack of habitat complexity that likely also affects smaller native non-game fishes. Fine sediment is abundant in the lower reaches of the project. Restoration treatments will address these issues. This project is not being designed to stabilize the stream in place, but rather to re-elevate it to restore the functions and processes that make for healthy habitat, floodplains and riparian zones. By focusing on restoring floodplain connectivity, proper channel dimensions, and old meanders, using native willows and sod as well as imported wood, habitat for native species will be improved. III. Project Objectives/Supporting Documentation - The objectives are to restore floodplain and channel processes and function, so that all parts of this aquatic system will be able to interact with each other. By setting the system up to function properly, habitat complexity will increase through time and will promote all life stages of YCT and a diverse native species assemblage. The primary objective will be to re-elevate the stream so it is reconnected to the floodplain. This will be accomplished by elevating riffles, narrowing the channel, and decreasing slope by reconnecting meander cutoffs. The secondary objective will be to restore eroding banks by re-sloping them and planting whole
4
willow clumps and sod mats. The third objective is to improve habitat complexity. Beyond the two previous objectives, this will be done by incorporating large woody debris into meander cutoff plugs, leaving connected backwater channels as part of meander restoration, creating or connecting off-channel ponds, and encouraging beaver dams to once again cause more frequent overland flow during runoff. Increased complexity will benefit all native fish species found in the project area. The project will focus on Goals 2 and 3 of the WNTI strategic plan as it seeks to enhance or restore habitat that has been impacted by willow spraying in the 1950s. The project also demonstrates a collaborative approach between agencies and NGOs and brings together diverse interests associated with YCT and non-game species. This project is also complementary to the goals of the Conservation Agreement for Yellowstone Cutthroat Trout (2009) as signed off on by state and federal agencies. Mainly, this project will maintain and enhance a population of pure YCT. It will also secure and enhance watershed conditions by restoring aquatic and riparian habitat. IV. Project Methodology - The US Forest Service (USFS) will be primarily responsible for design and implementation, and TU will be primarily responsible for contracting and funding. Restoration Reaches For project planning and design purposes, Tincup Creek has been broken into 4 distinct reaches that coincide with livestock allotment fencing boundaries, beginning downstream as reach 1 and proceeding upstream to reach 4 (see Figure 1, vicinity and location map). The 3 phases of construction will be tied to these units. Table 1. Budget by phases Phase I, 2017 Phase II, 2018 Phase III, 2019 Treatment Length Cost/Foot Cost Treatment Length Cost/Foot Cost TreatmentLength Cost/Foot Cost TOTALSBFB 390 25 $9,750.00 BFB 497 25 $12,425.00 BFB 478 25 $11,950.00 34,125.00BRWWT 3446 15 $51,690.00 BRWWT 3155 15 $47,325.00 BRWWT 2303 15 $34,545.00 133,560.00MDR 2594 25 $64,850.00 MDR 3820 25 $95,500.00 MDR 1606 25 $40,150.00 200,500.00PLG 353 25 $8,825.00 PLG 467 25 $11,675.00 PLG 337 25 $8,425.00 28,925.00Weeds 6783 $5,000.00 Weeds 7939 $5,000.00 Weeds 4724 $10,000.00 20,000.00* Trees $30,000.00 Trees $0.00 Trees $0.00 30,000.00
Fencing $40,000.00 40,000.00TU Volunteers $3,000.00IDFG Monitoring $5,000.0020% misc/buffer $35,623.00 20% misc/buffer $34,385.00 20% misc/buffer $29,014.00 99,022.00TU Overhead $35,159.90 Overhead $33,938.00 Overhead $28,636.82 97,734.71
Total $248,897.90 Total $240,248.00 Total $202,720.82 691,866.71
*trees will be sourced for all phases during the first year to cut costs.
Funding Phases - All phases will be funded in a similar way as Phase I: through grant funding, agency funding and in-kind partner donations. The amount of agency funding may vary year by year. Additional private grant sources and corporate sponsors have been identified and are being sought. It is worth noting that construction will move in an upstream direction, so that phases will be independently stable of on each other. Treatment Types - Four primary treatment types have been identified for use in restoring Tincup Creek. Below is a general description of each type, tied to its restoration purpose:
• Build Floodplain Bench (BFB) 1365’: This treatment is designed for outside meanders where the bank is vertical and eroding, but too tall to slope the bank back and revegetate. With this treatment, a 10-15 foot wide vegetated floodplain will be constructed at the base of the vertical walls. This will give the stream room to flood outside of its banks without further eroding the
5
vertical walls. The floodplain bench will be constructed primarily of sod mats, with whole willow transplants along the water’s edge to provide stability and large wood to provide roughness and habitat complexity.
• Bank Reslope and Whole Willow Transplants (BRWWT) 8904’: This treatment is designed to stabilize vertical banks that are 2-3 feet in height and are recoverable. Under this treatment, the banks will be sloped inward to narrow the stream. Whole willows will be transplanted along the water’s edge using a track-hoe. Sod mats will be taken from the surrounding uplands or inside point bars and placed green side up to form the new banks between the newly transplanted willows. This is the largest treatment type and is designed to decrease sediment input, increase overhead cover and narrow the channel resulting in lower width depth ratios (Figure 3).
• Meander Restoration (MDR) 8020’: This treatment will restore stream length by reconnecting old and recent channel meanders that have been lost since 1953. Techniques used will include BRWWT and channel plugs. In some instances, the cutoffs are recent and involve degraded channels that will need to be narrowed. In other instances, they are closer to historic size dimensions but may require some excavation. This treatment will decrease stream energy by decreasing channel slope, raise water elevations, reconnect the floodplain, and re-water drying riparian areas (Figure 2).
• Plugs (PLG) 1157’: This treatment will be used in association with MDR to fill the existing channel and redirect flow into re-created meanders. Plugs will use imported large woody debris to provide roughness to resist erosion while concurrently creating excellent habitat complexity.
• Other habitat improvement methods that will be incorporated as the above treatments are implemented include accentuating pools through excavation and using excavated materials to elevate riffles for floodplain reconnection. Off-channel ponds may also be created as sod mats and gravels are extracted from the uplands to rebuild the channel. These ponds will provide additional habitat complexity and off-channel water for livestock.
• Weed control will also be completed each year of the project and will continue for at least one year beyond the active channel work.
• Fencing of grazing unit 2/5 that is within Phase III or reach 4 will be done to exclude cattle from the restored portion of this unit. This will exclude cattle from a ½ mile of stream where native western pearl shell mussels are located. Reach 1 receives very limited use from sheep. Reach 2 receives light to moderate cattle use with little impact from grazing expected to affect recovery post-project. Reach 3 is part of the sheep allotment and receives fall use during shipping of the lambs. It will have gravel-hardened point bars and densely planted meander bends.
Figure 1. Vicinity and Location Map: Blue lines indicate existing livestock allotment cross fences that coincide with reach breaks.
Figure 2. Restoration reach showing channel alignment in 1953 (blue) and in 2014 (yellow).
6
Photo 1. Current conditions. Note raw outside vertical meander without willows.
Figure 3. Depiction of streambank stabilization work.
V. Project Monitoring/Evaluation of Success - The monitoring plan contains the following: baseline population surveys for Yellowstone cutthroat trout, 3 sites with multiple-pass depletion (2016); northern leatherside chub mark-recapture study (2015); and western pearl shell mussel surveys (2016). Repetition of these surveys post-project completion will be used to determine species’ response. As part of project design and planning, aerial photography comparisons were used. Aerial photography comparisons will be used to determine post-project changes in stream length and plan. Cross-sectional and longitudinal stream profiles used in design will also be repeated post-project to measure changes. Photo points will be established prior, during, and post-project implementation to show vegetation and channel changes, including comparison of stream recovery in fenced vs. non-fenced areas. The Idaho Fish and Game Department (IDFG) has expressed interest in assisting with the monitoring.
7
Photo 2. 1953. Prior to 1956 willow-spraying. Photo 3. 1978. System degrading after loss of
willows.
Photo 4. 2014. Intermittent recovery, Most outside bends are raw, vertical, with limited signs of recovery.
Photo 5. Short reach that is functioning and in balance on Tincup Creek within the project area. Throughout project area there are small intact reference sections such as this.
VI. Partnerships for this Project - The primary project partners are TU and the USFS. USFS will provide funding, design expertise and implementation oversight. TU’s primary role will be to help with fundraising and contracting. In addition to the above partners, IDFG will be involved with monitoring. Other partners include: financial and volunteer support from the local TU chapters; donated and loaded large trees for large woody debris restoration work from Agrium, a phosphate mining company; and potential funding from the Desert Fishes Habitat Partnership, Jackson Hole One Fly, and other corporate sponsors. In addition, a partnership with Idaho Transportation Department and Caribou County is being explored near the highway side of the project area due to infrastructure needs that could benefit from a more functional channel. VII. Project Timeline - Project NEPA, design, and permitting is scheduled to be completed this winter, with implementation of Phase I to begin in July of 2017. Phases II and III will be completed in 2018 and 2019 as funding allows. Leslie Steen (TU) will be responsible for preparing and submitting plans and reports with assistance from Lee Mabey (USFS).
8
VIII. Supplemental Information Status of Project Design and Environmental Compliance - USFS’s role on the project includes taking the lead on securing permits and complying with NEPA and ESA. The USFS completed an archeological review of the site this past summer and will submit to SHPO for clearance this fall as no significant sites were found. The project has been scoped with the public and NEPA has begun. Comments were in support or raised questions regarding grazing compatibility with the project. This project will be categorically excluded under the wildlife improvement category, with a signed decision expected in February of 2017. At the USFS yearly coordination meeting with Idaho Department of Water Resources, they requested this project be covered under an individual permit, instead of under the interagency MOU, due to its footprint on the landscape. The USFS has permitted several similar projects and expects no delay in receiving the stream alteration and 404 permits once they are submitted this winter. There are no known threatened or endangered species that would be impacted by this project. As part of the NEPA process, the appropriate Biological Assessments and Biological Evaluations will be completed to make effect calls. Species Present - Yellowstone cutthroat, IDFG species of special concern and USFS sensitive species (G4T4, S3); northern leatherside chub, IDFG species of special concern and USFS sensitive species (G1G2, S2); boreal toad, IDFG species of greatest conservation need and USFS sensitive species (G4, S2, Tier 2); Western pearl shell mussel, IDFG 2011 SWAP and USFS(G4,S3). Outreach/Education - The primary outreach component will include interpretive signage or kiosk at the parking area near the highway (the downstream end of the project area) that explains the projects scope and benefits to native species. As this is also a fishing stream and Yellowstone cutthroat trout habitat, two local Trout Unlimited chapters (from Jackson Hole and Idaho Falls) have also donated to the project. They will be provided with project updates that they will be able to share with their members. As restoration work is completed and beaver move into the system, TU chapters will be engaged as volunteers to reinforce naturally-occurring beaver dams using untreated wooden posts driven in at 2-3 foot intervals, which will provide reinforcement in the absence of aspen. During these yearly volunteer projects, time will also be taken to educate volunteers about Tincup Creek’s native species and their preferred habitats. IX. Budget Category WNTI Partner Match Total a. Personnel N/A 28,100 28,100 b. Travel 4,800 4,800 c. Equipment* d. Supplies 26,000 26,000 e. Contractual f. Construction 34,500 129,000 163,500 g. Other TU overhead 5,500 21,000 26,500
TOTAL
40,000 208,900 248,900
*Equipment is any individual item over $5,000. Even if an item is tangible, nonexpendable, and having a useful life of more than one year, items costing less than $5,000 should be placed under the Supplies category. X. Budget Narrative - The above budget is for Phase I only; see Table 1 in section IV for full project budget by phases. Supplies are for large woody debris (trees), weed treatment chemicals, and seed. Large trees for the entire project are to be secured in the first year for cost efficiency. Construction costs include the cost of heavy equipment to implement the project. Other than large woody debris, the plan is to source all
9
materials onsite – for example, willows will be transplanted from the inside of point bars or removed from the floodplain, and gravels will be excavated from pools or sourced from the floodplain. XI. Project Staff - List names and relevant qualifications of project staff.
• Leslie Steen: Upper Snake River Headwaters Project Manager, will manage grants and contracting. Experience with grants and fundraising, project administration, volunteer coordination, outreach, and fisheries biology.
• Louis Wasniewski: Forest Hydrologist(20 Years+), will consult with during design and implementation he has successfully constructed many similar type projects on the Deschutes and Caribou-Targhee NF see link for some of his work on Nearby Jackknife Creek (http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fseprd490200.pdf)
• Brad Higginson: Hydrologist FS (20 years), will be on site during much of the construction, He as restored and reconstructed many streams on Forest during his 10+ years on the forest.
• Lee Mabey: Forest Fisheries Biologist (24 Years), will be responsible for NEPA, permitting, budget, funding, and onsite during implementation. In conjunction with the hydrologists has been involved with many restoration and passage projects.
• Corey Lyman: Fisheries Biologist FS (15 years), will lead the design efforts and implementation in consultation with the hydrologists. Has completed restoration projects on Paris Creek, Georgetown Creek and assisted Wasniewski on several other projects including Jackknife.
XII. Optional Supporting Materials –See attached letters from Idaho Department of Fish and Game, and the Caribou-Targhee National Forest. XIII. Signature of Applicant - An original signature page must be received with the application. I certify that the above information is true and accurate,
Signature: ___ _____________________________ Print Name: ___Leslie Steen________________________________________________ Title: ___Snake River Headwaters Project Manager________________________ Organization: ___Trout Unlimited____________________________________________ Date: ___October 6, 2016_____________________________________________
10
11
12
