Clear and Foster Creek Fish Passage Clear and Foster Creek Fish Passage Assessment and Prioritization Project – – Final Final Assessment and Prioritization Project Report Report Clear and Clear and Foster Creek Foster Creek Fish Passage Fish Passage Assessment Assessment and and Prioritization Prioritization Project Project
Work Progression: Work Progression: Clear and Foster Clear and Foster � Determining fish bearing streams and potential crossings Clear and Clear and � Landowner permission process for Foster Creek Foster Creek field measurements Fish Passage Fish Passage Assessment Assessment � Field measurements and and � Data Entry Prioritization Prioritization Project Project � Hydraulic and cost analysis � Prioritization Prioritization � � Final report generation Final report generation �
Artificial Barrier Tally Artificial Barrier Tally • 223 potential artificial barriers were discovered in total Clear and Clear and Foster Creek Foster Creek • 159 were on Fish Bearing Streams Fish Passage Fish Passage Assessment Assessment • 69 had profile data taken for them and and county had similar data for about 60 Prioritization Prioritization Project Project more (~129) • 81 were deemed problem crossings or other type of artificial barrier based on hydraulic analysis and 77 of these were prioritized
Artificial Barrier Tally Artificial Barrier Tally • There were a total of 16 potential artificial barriers on fish streams that were not Clear and Clear and surveyed mainly because of access issues Foster Creek Foster Creek two were • Of these non-surveyed barriers two Fish Passage Fish Passage Assessment Assessment potentially important barriers that would and and have a moderate or high priority of repair Prioritization Prioritization • There were other un-surveyed crossings on Project Project fish bearing streams that were bridges, open arches, or successfully installed streambed simulation culverts that were not surveyed as well.
Fish Bearing Status and Crossings Fish Bearing Status and Crossings Natural Barrier Stream Dries all summer Non-fish bearing? Field determination ODF Determination Barriers along mainstem tributaries common
Landowner Permission Landowner Permission Process Process • Objectives Objectives • Clear and Clear and • Establish contact and Foster Creek Foster Creek Fish Passage Fish Passage introduce the project Assessment Assessment • Gain permission to examine and and Prioritization Prioritization potential fish passage Project Project barriers on the ownership • Educate and exchange information • Communicate results
Tax Lot Codes Tax Lot Codes ACCOUNTKEY OWNER SITUS_CITY SITUS Clear and Clear and 1905 WOLFARD KEITH B & DAPHNE OREGON CITY 20253 S REDLAND RD 1906 KELL ALTERMAN & RUNSTEIN LLP ESTACADA 21977 CIRCLE DIAMOND LN Foster Creek Foster Creek 1907 KELL ALTERMAN & RUNSTEIN LLP ESTACADA 21954 CIRCLE DIAMOND LN Fish Passage Fish Passage 1908 TOMMAS NELLIE C ADDRESS NO SITUS Assessment Assessment 1909 TOMMAS NELLIE C ADDRESS NO SITUS and and 1910 KIMMA KEVIN & YUKO ADDRESS NO SITUS Prioritization Prioritization 1911 STAATS LEONARD TRUSTEE OREGON CITY 20052 S REDLAND RD Project Project 1912 HUMBYRD OPAL TRUSTEE OREGON CITY 20071 S RIDGE RD 1913 ALLEN VICTOR LLC ADDRESS NO SITUS 1914 TURENNE CHARLES A TRUSTEE OREGON CITY 20188 S REDLAND RD 1915 KLIMA JEROME R JR OREGON CITY 20131 S REDLAND RD 1916 KIMMA KEVIN & YUKO ADDRESS NO SITUS 1917 GRAHAM BYRON H ESTACADA 21800 S MIJA LN
Clear and Clear and Foster Creek Foster Creek Fish Passage Fish Passage Assessment Assessment and and Prioritization Prioritization Project Project
Tools for Outreach Tools for Outreach • Mailings • Flyers Clear and Clear and • Press releases Foster Creek Foster Creek Fish Passage Fish Passage • CRBC Newsletter Assessment Assessment • CRBC Website and and Prioritization Prioritization • Public meetings – CRBC Project Project meetings, small community outreach meetings, open house, final report presentation. • Personal Contact Phone and House visits
Field Protocol Components • Field measurements must be tied to specific objectives and needs for cost analysis and prioritization. They include: Clear and Clear and • Fish use status at crossing (from updated ODF maps with interim classification for Foster Creek Foster Creek unknown streams along with field verification Fish Passage Fish Passage of presence used for crossing status and Assessment Assessment habitat use above blockage) and and • Stream slope/profile (critical in determining Prioritization Prioritization which design options are viable for cost Project Project information) • Presence of bedrock or shallow fill to bedrock (critical in determining design options) • Degree of drop at outlet or inlet of culvert (essential in determining fish passage status)
Field Protocol Components • Field measurements continued: • Length and slope of culvert (essential in determining fish passage status) Clear and Clear and Foster Creek Foster Creek • Size of existing culvert (useful in pointing Fish Passage Fish Passage to inlet drop at higher flows or in determining Assessment Assessment risk of catastrophic failure in relation to and and streamflow) Prioritization Prioritization • Height of fill and width of road (critical to Project Project know in determining needed replacement culvert length for cost information) • Stream width (necessary to size replacement culvert options and in determining replacement bridge span for cost estimates)
Fish Passage Status • Fish Passage Status Calculations Focused on: Clear and Clear and – Culvert slope (0.5% and 4% Foster Creek Foster Creek were key values) Fish Passage Fish Passage Assessment Assessment – Drop at outlet (6 inches and 4 and and feet were key values Prioritization Prioritization – Evidence of backwatering Project Project (downstream riffle elevation in relation to culvert outlet and inlet elevation) – Inlet width and drop compared to stream width
Hydraulic Analysis • Fish Passage Status based on Clear and Clear and slopes and drops Foster Creek Foster Creek Fish Passage Fish Passage • Needed size and design type of Assessment Assessment and and new crossing Prioritization Prioritization Project Project
Stream width greater than 20 feet? Criteria for No Yes crossing Stream width between 15-20 feet? Decision for cost No Yes Analysis Yes Stream gradient between 0-8% for Steep dynamic crossing Yes stream (>4% gradient) with that are Bedrock within high scour potential? three feet of stream surface or barriers Yes No within expected elevation of No culvert invert? Yes No Bedrock close to (within two feet) of surface and uniform bedding expected? No Yes Open metal Streambed Long-span Slab bridge Arch with footings Simulation bridge Or open box CBS
Cost Information Total Number of Fixes = 81 Cost of Fixes on Anadromous = $3,601,532 Cost of Fixes on Resident only = $3,658,054 Clear and Clear and Foster Creek Foster Creek Total $7,259,586 Fish Passage Fish Passage Assessment Assessment and and County Culverts 43 Prioritization Prioritization Anadromous $2,986,717 Project Project Resident Only $2,506,547 Total $5,493,264 Max Fix $732,000 Min Fix $5,460 Average Cost $92,733
Prioritization Equation [RISE] = {B * S * [(H*Q) + C)]} Where: •Rise = Replacement Index Score Ecological Clear and Clear and •B = Degree of barrier Foster Creek Foster Creek •S = Species immediately downstream of Fish Passage Fish Passage Assessment Assessment crossing and and •H = Habitat available upstream (ft) Prioritization Prioritization •Q = Habitat Quality index Project Project •C = Connectivity Another equation will divide total by cost of structure to factor in cost •Cost = The cost of the replacement in dollars
Degree of Barrier • From field data and other sources – Criteria in detail in DMR Clear and Clear and • 1.0 Full Barrier; 0.5 Juvenile/Weak swimming Foster Creek Foster Creek fish only; 0 No barrier Fish Passage Fish Passage • Based on Drops, Slope of Culvert and Assessment Assessment channel constriction at inlet for juvenile and and • Backwatered culverts may require additional Prioritization Prioritization calculations using a backwatering program Project Project like FishXing • Sources • Base field data detailed protocol • County field data with additional info • Anecdotal information for some crossings due to access issues including written plans and observations
Species Present Downstream • Classed on the following Clear and Clear and Foster Creek Foster Creek – Steelhead or Coho - 1.0 Fish Passage Fish Passage – Native resident fish - 0.2 Assessment Assessment and and – Non-native or no fish - 0 (not Prioritization Prioritization prioritized) Project Project
Habitat available upstream • From the crossing to the upstream end of fish use Clear and Clear and Foster Creek Foster Creek Length from CL078 to Fish Passage Fish Passage green is stream habitat Assessment Assessment available and and Prioritization Prioritization Project Project
Recommend
More recommend
