Middle Snake Watershed (WRIA 35) Tucannon River Temperature - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Middle Snake Watershed (WRIA 35) Tucannon River Temperature Investigation April 13, 2006

Presentation Outline • Part 1 - Study Purpose – Why are we doing this project? • Part 2 - Temperature Analysis – What we did • Part 3 - Model Scenario – Full shade • Part 4 - Update of Temperature Standards • Part 5 - Next Steps

Why are we doing this project? Part 1

Purpose of Tucannon River Temperature Study • River temperatures exceed standards • Is this a natural condition? • What are the sources of heat to the river? • What is the “worst case” condition during low- flow • What temperatures can be attained, and where, under full shade conditions?

Long-term Monitoring Stations Study Area = Above Sheep Creek to mouth 26 WDFW temperature stations 3 Ecology stations 4 USFS USFS temperature Boundary stations

Daily maximum temperature criteria exceeded for most of river 80 78 USFS Boundary 76 74 72 70 Temperature (oF) 68 66 64 62 60 58 Class AA Class A Water 56 Water Quality Quality Criteria 54 Criteria 52 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 River Mile

Temperature (deg C) Lower Tucannon River Water Temperatures 10 15 20 25 30 5 5/12/2004 5/19/2004 5/26/2004 6/2/2004 2004 Max Daily Temperature on Tucannon River Class A Waters 6/9/2004 6/16/2004 6/23/2004 6/30/2004 7/7/2004 7/14/2004 7/21/2004 7/28/2004 8/4/2004 8/11/2004 8/18/2004 8/25/2004 9/1/2004 9/8/2004 9/15/2004 9/22/2004 9/29/2004 Class A 7-day Class A Max RM 21 RM 12 RM 2 10/6/2004 10/13/2004 10/20/2004 10/27/2004

Why are river temperatures cooler upstream and warmer downstream? Lower Watershed Middle Watershed Upper Watershed Cooler Water Temperature: Warmer Water Temperature: Narrower channel (less surface area) Wider channel (more surface area) Higher elevation (3,000 ft) Low elevation (500 ft msl) Faster flow (less heating time) Slower flow (more heating time) Denser riparian veg. (more shading) Less riparian veg. (less shading)

Part 2 Temperature Analysis- Field Work and Modeling

Field Work Field work during summer 2005 • Install flow, temp. & humidity meters and collect data • Stream geometry data (width, depth) • Calculate ground water inflow/outflow • Tree shading measurements

Seepage Study Flow and Temperature Measurement Stations Measure: flows temperatures channel geometry Estimate withdrawals Calculate ground water inflow/outflow

Measure Tree Shading Measured each stream edge to 150 feet out Tree height Classify general tree type Canopy density Overhang at 170 locations (transects) Effective shade from trees

We also found snakes! j10

Modeling steps . . . • GIS analysis for shading and stream geometry • Input weather and temperature data • Flow budget • Model development and calibration – Based on July 13 field data – Flow is constant – Weather and temperature data are diurnal

Tributary Inflows 80 River Flow 70 River Flow 60 Flow (cfs) 50 40 Cumulative Measured Tributary Flow Measured Tributary Flows 30 20 10 0 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 River KM

River Diversions 80 River Flow 70 60 50 Flow (cfs) 40 30 Estimated Cumulative Diversions 20 10 0 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 River KM

Riparian GIS Analysis Lower Watershed - Low Shade Upper Watershed - More Shade Shade transects Shading data every 100 meters within 150 feet of the river- ~900 data points

Model represents near worst-case conditions . . . Model period High water temperatures Lady Bug Flat 30 300 Temperature Smolt Trap Temperature 25 250 20 200 Temp (C) Flow (cfs) 15 150 10 100 5 50 Low flow conditions 0 0 Apr-05 May-05 Jun-05 Jul-05 Aug-05 Sep-05 Oct-05

Model solves heat budget to calculate temperature . . . Heat Transfer Processes Solar Solar (Direct) (Diffuse) Longwave Convection Evaporation Solar (wind) (Shade) Stream Cross Section Bed Groundwater flow Conduction Heat Budget Eq. Total heat = solar + longwave + convection + evaporation + streambed + groundwater

Model Results!! 30 Model Prediction Measured Data 25 temperature (deg C) 20 15 10 5 Error (RMSE) about 1 °C 0 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 distance upstream (Km) Temp(C) Average Mean Temp-data Temp(C) Minimum Temp(C) Maximum Minimum Temp-data Maximum Temp-data

Tucannon River Heat Budget – Solar heating main factor in heating 1000 800 600 heat fluxes (W/m^2) 400 200 0 -200 -400 -600 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 time of day (hours) solar shortwave longwave atmosphere longwave water air convection/conduction evaporation sediment conduction hyporheic

Shade is less in lower watershed 100% 90% 80% Hourly Effective Shade (%) 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% Lady Bug Flat (RM 52) 10% Marengo Bridge (RM 27) Smolt Trap (RM 2) 0% 12 AM 2 AM 4 AM 6 AM 8 AM 10 AM 12 PM 2 PM 4 PM 6 PM 8 PM 10 PM

Model Scenario - Full Shade Part 3

Full shading for watershed vegetation example cover types . . . Mixed Shading 72 feet tall Shrub Shading 80% density 23 to 31 feet tall 100% trees 80% density 25 to 50% trees Mixed Shading 82 feet tall 80% density 100% trees Conifer Shading 80 feet tall 80% density 100% trees

Example model run with system potential vegetation 30 25 temperature (deg C) 20 15 10 5 0 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 distance upstream (Km) Temp(C) Average Temp(C) Minimum Temp(C) Maximum Temp(C) Average Shade 100 Temp(C) Minimum Shade 100 Temp(C) Maximum Shade 100

School House Fire (Aug 5-19) http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/uma/fire/school.shtml

Temperature results after School House Fire 110 100 90 80 Temperature (F) 70 60 50 Panjab Creek Bridge 40 Bridge 14 Air Temperature Marengo 30 1-Aug 8-Aug 15-Aug 22-Aug 29-Aug

Part 4 Updated on Ecology/EPA Temperatures Standards

Update of Temperature Standards • Ecology submitted temp. standards for EPA review – July 2003 • March 23, 2006 – EPA denied Ecology standards • New EPA standards: – Fish-specific – More stringent in many areas – More exceedences for Tucannon River • Ecology will revise standards • TMDL scoping for Tucannon/Pataha next year

Ecology’s Temperature Standards Existing (1997) Location Classification Criteria Mouth to Umatilla National Forest Class A 18 C (64.4 F) boundary (RM 38.1): Umatilla National Forest boundary Class AA 16 C (60.8 F) (RM 38.1) to Panjab Creek Proposed (2003) Location Classification Criteria Mouth to Umatilla National Forest 17.5 C (63.5 Noncore Salmon/Trout boundary (RM 38.1): F) Umatilla National Forest boundary Core Salmon/Trout 16 C (60.8 F) (RM 38.1) to Panjab Creek Upstream of Panjab confluence: Char 12 C (53.6 F)

EPA’s March 2006 Proposed Temperature Standards Location Classification Criteria 17.5 o C Mouth to RM 20 Non Core/Salmon 16 o C RM 20 – 38.1 Core 12 o C Above RM 38.1 Char

EPA’s March 2006 Recommended Seasonal Temperature Standards , Location Time period Criteria To protect spawning and 13 o C Mouth to RM 20 Feb 15 – Jun 1 incubation To protect spawning and 13 o C RM 20 – RM 38.1 Sept 1 – Jun 15 incubation Upper Tucannon To protect Bull Trout 9 o C above Panjab Sept 1 – May 15 Spawning and Incubation Creek

EPA’s Proposed Temp. Standards

EPA’s Seasonal Temp Standards for Fish Use

Next steps . . . Part 5

Next Steps • HDR - run natural conditions (system potential vegetation) scenario and prepare technical memo on methods and results • HDR - present results of natural conditions modeling and discuss with Planning Unit the options for future steps