U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service FINAL DRAFT Function FINAL .

2y ago
22 Views
2 Downloads
6.94 MB
149 Pages
Last View : 18d ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Mollie Blount
Transcription

U.S. Fish & Wildlife ServiceFINAL DRAFT FunctionBased Rapid StreamAssessment MethodologyCBFO-S15-06May 2015

FINAL DRAFTFUNCTION-BASED RAPID STREAM ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGYBy: Richard Starr, Will Harman and Sandra DavisHabitat Restoration DivisionChesapeake Bay Field OfficeU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceCAFE – S15 - 06Annapolis, MDMay 2015

FINAL DRAFT Function-Based Rapid Stream Assessment MethodologyTABLE OF CONTENTSI.INTRODUCTION.1II.PURPOSE OF FUNCTION-BASED RAPID STREAM ASSESSMENTMETHODOLOGY .1III. ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW .1A. Overview .1B. Mwthodology Sequence.2IV. OFFICE PRE SITE VISIT TASKS .3V.WATERSHED ASSESSMENT .4A.B.C.D.E.F.G.H.I.J.Watershed Impoundments .4Concentrated Flow .5Existing and Change in Land Use .6Distance to Roads .6Flashiness .7Riparian Vegetation .8Sediment Supply .8Water Quality .10Landscape Connectivity .11Overall Watershed Condition Rating .11VI. EXISTING AND PROPOSED FUNCTION-BASED RAPID REACH LEVELSTREAM ASSESSMENT .12A. Field Equipment .14B. Bankfull Determination and Rosgen Classification .151.Bankfull Determination .152.Rosgen Classification.17C. Function-based Rapid Reach Level Stream Assessment .181.Level 1 – Hydrology .18a) Runoff . 18b) Level 1 - Hydrology Overall Function-based Rating . 192.Level 2 - Hydraulics.19a) Floodplain Connectivity. 19b) Level 2 - Hydraulic Overall Function-based Rating . 263.Level 3 - Geomorphology .26a) Riparian Vegetation . 26b) Lateral Stability. 29c) Bedform Diversity . 38d) Geomorphology Overall Function-based Rating . 504.Level 4 - Physicochemical .50a) Water Appearance and Nutrient Enrichment . 51b) Detritus . 52U. S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceChesapeake Bay Field OfficeMay 2015Page i

FINAL DRAFT Function-Based Rapid Field Stream Assessment Methodologyc) Physicochemical Overall Function-based Rating . 535.Level 5 - Biology .54a) Macroinvertebrate . 55b) Fish. 58c) Biology Overall Function-based Rating . 60D. Rapid Assessment Summary.621.Rapid Watershed Assessment .622.Overall Existing Reach Level Stream Condition .623.Channel Evolution Trend .63a) Channel Evolution . 654.Reach Area Restoration Potential .695.Overall Proposed Assessment Reach Function-based Condition .69E. Overall project evaluation .701.Proposed Project Goals and Objectives .702.Watershed Condition Influence .703.Restoration Potential .704.Proposed Project Description.715.Potential Function-based Uplift and/or Loss .716.Project Effectiveness .717.Design Completeness .718.Project Potential Success .729.Alternatives Analysis .7210. Are all other regulatory considerations satisfied .72U. S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceChesapeake Bay Field OfficeMay 2015Page ii

FINAL DRAFT Function-Based Rapid Field Stream Assessment MethodologyTitle: FINAL DRAFT Function-Based Rapid Field Stream Assessment MethodologyDate: May 2015Prepared by: Richard Starr, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Annapolis MDWill Harman, Stream Mechanics, Raleigh, NCSandy Davis, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Annapolis MDAppropriate Citation:Starr, R., W. Harman, S. Davis. 2015. FINAL DRAFT Function-Based Rapid Field StreamAssessment Methodology. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Chesapeake Bay Field Office,Annapolis, MD. CAFE S15-06.U. S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceChesapeake Bay Field OfficeMay 2015Page iii

FINAL DRAFT Function-Based Rapid Field Stream Assessment MethodologyLIST OF FIGURESFigure 1.Figure 2.Figure 3.Figure 4.Figure 5.Figure 6.Differing Performance Standards based on Rosgen Stream TypeRating Hierarchy.Potential Bankfull Indicators.Rosgen Stream Types based on Landscape Position (Rosgen 2006)Bank Height Ratio, after Rosgen, 1996.Measurement of Bank Height Ratio from a Longitudinal Profile (Source MichaelBaker International).Figure 7. Measurement of Entrenchment Ratio.Figure 8. Vegetation LayersFigure 9. BEHI Variables (Rosgen 2006).Figure 10. Example Bank Erosion Rate Curve (USFWS 2005)Figure 11. NBS Condition (Rosgen 2006).Figure 12. Depositional Patterns (Rosgen 2006).Figure 13. Typical Pool-to-Pool Spacing Measurements.Figure 14. Pool depth variability.Figure 15. Selection of intolerant stream macroinvertebrates (MD DNR, 2004).Figure 16. Lane’s Diagram.Figure 17. Simon Channel Evolution Model.Figure 18. Rosgen Evolution Model by Stream Type (Rosgen 2006).LIST OF TABLESTable 1. Rosgen (1994).Table 2. BEHI Variables (Rosgen, 2006).LIST OF PHOTOSPhoto 1.Photo 2.Photo 3.Photo 4.Photo 5.Photo 6.Photo 7.Photo 8.Photo 9.Example of AggradationExample of AggradationExample of DegradationExample of a HeadcutExample of Riffle Macroinvertebrate HabitatExample of Woody Debris Macroinvertebrate HabitatDetritus.Macroinvertebrates.Brook Trout.U. S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceChesapeake Bay Field OfficeMay 2015Page iv

FINAL DRAFT Function-Based Rapid Field Stream Assessment MethodologyAPPENDICESAppendix A. Draft Function-based Rapid Stream Assessment FormsAppendix B. Regional CurvesAppendix C. Rosgen Stream Classification System and Valley TypesAppendix D. BEHI and NBS ConditionsAppendix E. Stream MacroinvertebratesAppendix F. Examples of Channel Evolution PhotosU. S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceChesapeake Bay Field OfficeMay 2015Page v

FINAL DRAFT Function-Based Rapid Stream Assessment MethodologyI.INTRODUCTIONThe Maryland Department of Environment (MDE), Maryland State Highway Administration(SHA) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) - Chesapeake Bay Field Office (CBFO)have entered into a partnership to assist MDE in meeting its goals for restoring and enhancingthe quality of Maryland’s water and floodplain resources. As part of this partnership, the Servicehas developed a rapid function-based stream assessment methodology. While this methodologyis based on several existing proven rapid assessment methods, it does include some newmeasurement methods and performance standards. Therefore, this methodology is beingreleased as a final draft. The Service requests feedback from users for one year. The Servicewill then revisit and potentially revise the methodology based on feedback. This documentcontains guidelines and standard forms on the use of this methodology.II.PURPOSE OF FUNCTION-BASED RAPID STREAM ASSESSMENTMETHODOLOGYThe primary purpose of this methodology is to provide MDE regulators with a function-basedrapid stream assessment methodology to verify existing and proposed stream function-basedconditions submitted by stream restoration permit applicants. However, it can be used for avariety of other purposes. For example, it can be a very useful tool to rapidly determine existingfunction-based stream conditions and if a particular site would be a good restoration site basedon potential function-based uplift. It could be used as part of a pre-permit application meeting todemonstrate the need for restoration. It can also be used to prioritize potential restoration sites aspart of a watershed-level assessment.III.ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY OVERVIEWA.OVERVIEWThe methodology was developed based on the Stream Functions Pyramid Framework (SFPF)(Harman et al, 2012). The SFPF focuses on the hierarchical relationship of stream functions todetermine the overall functional condition of a stream reach. It consists of three components: 1)watershed assessment, 2) existing and proposed function-based rapid stream assessment, and 3)overall project evaluation (Appendix A). The watershed assessment focuses on identifyingpotential constraints and stressors that influence the condition of the project area. The existingand proposed function-based rapid stream assessments have the same assessment parameters;therefore, they are combined into one assessment form. However, each assessment parameterhas a space to evaluate existing function-based conditions and to predict the potential functionbased uplift and/or loss of the proposed project. The overall project evaluation focuses onquestions that will assist in determining the final permit decision.Since this is a rapid methodology, it is not intended to address all stream functions but ratherthose critical to understanding stream processes. However, the formatting of the methodologydoes allow for the addition or removal of assessment parameters and measurement methodsU. S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceChesapeake Bay Field OfficeMay 2015Page 1

FINAL DRAFT - Function-Based Rapid Field Stream Assessment Methodologybased on user goals and objectives. The assessment parameters are function-based. The termfunction-based is used instead of functional because the measurement methods include acombination of functions and structural measures. A functional measurement measures afunction as a rate over time, whereas a structural measurement measures a function at one pointin time. However, this combination is considered function-based because the parameters andmeasurement methods are used to quantify or qualitatively describe the overall functionalcondition for a given assessment parameter.The results of the assessment only represent the function-based condition at the time of theassessment, although it does predict the direction of stability trend. Furthermore, the results ofthe assessment are a qualitative function-based rating rather than a quantitative function-basedrating (i.e., no numerical scoring). However, the methodology can have scoring added, if sodesired.As stated above, under Purposes of Function-based Rapid Stream Assessment Methodology, theprimary use of this methodology is for regulators to review stream restoration permitapplications. Therefore, the guidelines provided in this document describe how to complete theassessment forms using information from the permit application package as well as data from asite visit. However, there are some guidelines provided that describe how an assessmentparameter can be assessed if relevant data was not provided in the permit application or if theforms are being completed prior to the submittal of a permit application, possibly as part of apre-permit application meeting.The use of the rapid assessment methodology, as with most rapid methods, requires wellexperienced practitioners. While reducing subjectivity was a goal during the development of theassessment methodology, many of the assessment parameters require skilled practitioners toassess correctly. Assessors must be knowledgeable in fluvial geomorphic and watershedprocesses and be well trained and experienced in assessing stream processes.B.METHODOLOGY SEQUENCEThe methodology report is written based on the sequence of how the assessment should beconducted, as much as possible. However, some sections in the report are out of sequence basedon where information is recorded on the data sheets. Therefore, this section lists the order ofhow the assessment methodology should be conducted. Detailed descriptions of how each stepshould be conducted are provided within the report.Assessment Sequence:1.2.3.4.5.Office Pre Site Visit TasksRapid Watershed Assessment FormRapid Assessment Summary Form – Bankfull DeterminationRapid Assessment Summary Form – Rosgen ClassificationExisting and Proposed Function-based Rapid Reach Level Stream Assessment Form –Only the existing conditionsU. S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceChesapeake Bay Field OfficeMay 2015Page 2

FINAL DRAFT - Function-Based Rapid Field Stream Assessment Methodology6. Rapid Assessment Summary Form - Overall Existing Function-based Rapid StreamAssessment7. Rapid Assessment Summary Form – Channel Evolution Trend8. Rapid Assessment Summary Form - Restoration Potential9. Existing and Proposed Function-based Rapid Reach Level Stream Assessment Form proposed conditions10. Rapid Assessment Summary Form – Overall Proposed Function-based Rapid StreamAssessment11. Overall Project EvaluationIV.OFFICE PRE SITE VISIT TASKSOffice tasks should be completed prior to a site visit in order to gather background informationneeded to complete the assessment forms and to have a thorough understanding of the proposedproject, existing conditions, and potential conditions, as documented by the permit applicant.The assessor will record the results of the office assessment on the Watershed Assessment,Reach Level Assessment and Overall Project Review forms. Additionally, the reviewer shouldidentify critical information in the permit application needed to conduct the site assessment. Suchinformation could include reference reach data, design criteria, constraints (e.g., bridges, utilities,property lines, etc.), proposed restoration activities, critical areas (e.g., wetlands, rare andthreatened species, etc.) and bankfull determination. The results of the assessment forms andapplication review are used for two primary purposes during the site assessment. First, to verifyexisting and proposed stream function-based conditions submitted by a stream restoration permitapplicant and second, to provide the assessors with the necessary information to conduct the siteassessment. The following is a list of tasks to perform:1. Review applicant assessment and design report and design plan set.2. Complete the Function-based Stream Assessment Checklist (Starr et al, 2015).3. Complete appropriate design review checklist (Starr et al, 2015), if the design is 60%complete or greater.4. Complete Rapid Watershed Assessment form. Refer to Section V - WatershedAssessment for directions.5. Complete, as much as possible, the Rapid Watershed and Reach Level (existing andproposed conditions) Assessment forms based on the design report. This rapidassessment will be verified as part of the site visit and any parameters not addressed inthe report will be addressed in the field. Note that more than one Rapid Reach LevelAssessment form may need to be completed for the project area. Refer to Section VI –Existing and Proposed Function-based Rapid Reach Level Assessment for specificguidance on how to determine if more than one rapid assessment form needs to becompleted.6. Complete questions 1, 4, 6 and 7 of the Overall Project Review form. These questionsrelate mostly to the watershed assessment, proposed project description and proposedproject design plan set. The remaining questions on the Overall Project Review form willbe completed during the site visit.U. S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceChesapeake Bay Field OfficeMay 2015Page 3

FINAL DRAFT - Function-Based Rapid Field Stream Assessment MethodologyV.WATERSHED ASSESSMENTThe watershed assessment focuses on identifying potential constraints and stressors thatinfluence the condition and restoration potential of the proposed project site. The focus of theassessment is on how the watershed specifically influences flow regimes, water quality, sedimentsupply, connectivity and land uses. Most of watershed assessment occurs in the office, but someparameters require field verification. Each assessment parameter will be rated as Good (G), Fair(F) or Poor (P) depending upon existing conditions. Guidance is provided below on how to rateeach parameter.A.WATERSHED IMPOUNDMENTSWAT

FINAL DRAFT Function-Based Rapid Field Stream Assessment Methodology U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service May 2015 Chesapeake Bay Field Office Page iii Title: FINAL DRAFT Function-Based Rapid Field Stream Assessment Methodology Date: May 2015

Related Documents:

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines 1 Chapter 1 - General Overview The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is working with others to conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. As part of this, the Service implements

When I found One Fish Two Fish Red Fish Blue Fish I was sure I’d found the best learn-to-count book and that it would explain how to count without a grown-up to get you started.7 Here’s how it begins: One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish. Black fish, blue fish old fish, new fish. This one has a litt

r. Seuss's One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish is a clas-sic children's story, a simple rhyming book for beginning readers. We need a similar rhyme to help people grasp the problems afflicting Alberta's native fish species. It might read like this: Two fish, one fish, dead fish, no fish, No grayling or goldeye, something's amiss .

Fish noun Fish noun Examples Freshwater fish live in rivers and lakes. Freshwater fish live in rivers and lakes. Saltwater fish live in oceans and seas. Saltwater fish live in oceans and seas. The fish is swimming in the water. The fish is swimming in the water. The fish is looking at the bait. The fish is looking at the bait. freshwater fish .

of wildlife management, the program has grown from the original 9 wildlife-only units and today includes 40 Coopera-tive Fish and Wildlife Research Units located on university campuses in 38 States. Signatory cooperators forming the individual units include 41 universities and 44 State fish and wildlife agencies.

regarding fish, wildlife, and habitat WAC 365-190-130 We are purveyors of BAS for fish, wildlife and habitat Under state law, WDFW has an obligation on behalf of the public to perpetuate fish and wildlife—which are considered property of the state. RCW 77.04.

Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks Fish and Wildlife Division Senate Bill 3, State Agency Biennial Report, 2010-2011 . three are within R-4 /Great Falls, two are within R-5/Billings, and two are located within R-7/Miles City. Within the last two-year period, F&W added no new NRHP-eligible sites and no sites were . Madison-Wall Creek WMA .

Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge 2145 Key Wallace Drive Cambridge, MD 21613 410/228 2677