River Renewal Restoring the Dynamic Balance of Water, Wood, and SedimentSalmon River Restoration Council 2019 NewsletterThe diverse group of people who call this place home are bonded by a deep love for the Salmon River and a respect for the land that it flows through. We show our devotion in different ways, but our connection to this place – the steep, rocky drainages dropping into the rushing waters of the inner gorge, the serpentine outcroppings strewn with gray pine and redbud, the deep pools holding salmon as the summer heat comes on – this is why we stay. Nearly 30 years ago this small, eclectic community put aside our differences to help protect our river’s namesake, spring Chinook salmon. When we realized the salmon were disappearing we catalyzed to both acquire a better understanding of what was happening and stop the decline. The Salmon River Restoration Council (SRRC) was born out of this effort some 27 years ago. It has been a long journey from the salmon education, theater, and outreach of our early years to the full floodplain restoration of the present day. Years of monitoring, observation, and small-scale habitat improvement projects have taught us a lot along the way. Through the years, we’ve collected water temperature data at ~50 sites, conducted annual census dives and spawning surveys, addressed almost every salmon barrier in the watershed, assisted managing agencies in surveying and repairing road related sediment sources, improved habitat in and access to our cold water tributaries for fish rearing, and perhaps most importantly engaged the public - from local schools to regional managers - in the story of our salmon and the need to protect them. And while it seemed that these efforts were stemming the decline and stabilizing the population, it has been clear for some time that we weren’t getting to the heart of the problem, and that bigger and more dramatic restoration was needed if we were going to restore spring Chinook to an abundance necessary for long-term recovery. Though our high-return years seemed to be gradually increasing and our bad years were slightly less bad, we weren’t seeing any dramatic improvements, and we worried that we were one compounding stressor away from a downward path to extirpation. The unprecedented drought of 2014-2016 that desiccated the West proved to be the compounding event that we had feared for our imperiled spring Chinook, causing the largest fish kill we have witnessed on the Salmon River and leading to four exceptionally low return years when we should have been seeing strong salmon runs. Our beloved spring Chinook are barely holding on in their native waterways. It was this startling demonstration of the knife’s edge upon which our spring Chinook are existing that spurred us to partner with the Karuk Tribe in petitioning the state and federal governments to list Klamath River spring Chinook as an endangered species. It was not a decision that any of us made lightly, but the additional protections offered by an Endangered Species Act (ESA) listing seemed like the last, best hope of preserving this fragile remnant of what was once a run of fish that nourished humans, animals, rivers, and forests alike with its lavish abundance. Until Klamath dam removal and large-scale restoration can repair some of the damage that history has wrought upon this river system, and allow its life to thrive once more, we need to take whatever actions we can to protect the handful of wild spring Chinook that still find refuge in the Salmon River.While an ESA listing would certainly help mitigate some of the impacts that are driving spring Chinook towards extinction, it is only by restoring their habitat and the natural processes that create them, that we can address the root causes of their decline. If you’ve spent much time along the Salmon River, you come to realize that what on the surface appears Bonded By the RiverSalmon River Restoration Councilsrrc.org(530) 462-4665 srrc@srrc.orgBoard of DirectorsStaff and CrewKaruna Greenberg, Restoration DirectorLyra Cressey, Associate DirectorKathy McBroom, Office ManagerMelissa Van Scoyoc, Habitat Restoration Program CoordinatorAmy Fingerle, Fisheries Program Coordinator Bonnie Bennett, Monitoring Program CoordinatorScott Harding, Fire, Fuels, and Forestry Program Coordinator Stefan Dosch, Watershed Program CoordinatorDeja Malone-Persha, Noxious Weeds Program CoordinatorSarah Hugdahl, Program Staff and OutreachBrenda Hurlimann, BookkeeperSteve Adams, Watershed Center MaintenanceField Crews - Bonnie Bennett, Carol Cook, Deja Malone-Persha, Fabien Kaissaris, Eric Fieberg, Irie Swift, Jordan Lambert, Sarah Hugdahl, and Todd Whitmore Funding comes from CA Coastal Commission, CA Coastal Conservancy, CA Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, CA Dept. of Food and Agriculture, Cereus Fund of the Trees Foundation, Clif Bar Family Foundation, US Fish & Wildlife Service, US Forest Service, Karuk Tribe, Firedoll Foundation, Ford Family Foundation, Mid Klamath Watershed Council, National Fish & Wildlife Foundation, National Forest Foundation, Sidney Stern Memorial Trust, and our valued donors. SRRC does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, gender expression, age, national origin, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, or military status in any of its activities or operations. SRRC is an equal opportunity provider and employer. You can contact SRRC for citations related to articles contained within this publication. Creek Hanauer Jennifer Silveira Crystal RobinsonErica TerenceToz Soto, President Joshua Saxon, Vice PresidentKathy McBroom, Secretary/Treasurer Petey Brucker Will HarlingPage 1, North Fork Salmon River by Red Bank project site and page 2, historic tailing piles next to the river near Forks of Salmon by Karuna Greenberg. Cover photo, Salmon River below Morehouse Creek by Scott Harding.2Spring Chinook salmon and the Salmon River hold cultural and spiritual significance beyond what many non-indigenous Americans can understand. According to the Karuk Tribe, to be a pristine river corridor has in fact been turned upside down by historic mining. The intensive hydraulic and dredge mining of the 1870s – 1930s targeted floodplains and terraces, the areas where the narrow canyon widens and the river traditionally meandered, braided, and created complex riparian and instream habitat necessary for salmon to flourish. In its wake, these practices left river bars and terraces covered in tailings - stacks of barren cobbles and boulders that are resistant to natural regeneration. According to assessments conducted by Stillwater Sciences as part of a broad floodplain assessment that we have been conducting, these devastating mining practices eroded thousands of acres of land adjacent to the main channels of the Salmon River, delivering more than 20.3 million cubic yards of sediment to the river! These practices led to profound and lasting changes that will not be restored by nature in a timeframe that is significant to the recovery and survival of salmon, nor the survival of us human inhabitants.Addressing these impacts is a massive and daunting undertaking, and perhaps that is why it has taken us so long to fully embrace it. It’s not an easy decision to put bulldozers and excavators on our river bars, but the enormity of the damage to our rivers were man-made by immense machinery and human ingenuity, and it will take a comparable effort to return the river to a state where the natural processes of water, wood, and sediment can work to find a dynamic balance and restore habitat on their own. - Karuna Greenberg2“The spring-run Chinook salmon is a native species that represents the health of the river, underpins the health of the whole landscape… (and) has traditionally provided a primary food source for their people, whose villages are in the middle Klamath River and Salmon River regions. Karuk people still practice dip-netting, from rocks or platforms. This method traditionally employs natural barriers or weirs to concentrate the fish for harvesting. In line with key beliefs, the barrier would be made only part way, and for a short time, to allow the fish to pass through. This practice represents two cardinal principles of native land management: reciprocity and moderation. The health of the fish is closely connected with the health of the overall landscape and the people’s duty to care for the world.Karuk knowledge about management for fish is founded on thousands of years of interactions with fish populations and observing their life-cycle through time. This includes the fact that the spring-run Chinook life-cycle is distinctly different from the fall run life-cycle. This is knowledge that has been possessed by the Karuk people for generations. Likewise, traditional knowledge, passed down the generations, includes the need to preserve the spawning grounds as a crucial piece of the intergenerational-life-cycle of the species. Industrial tree harvest and mining operations not only destroyed many of the native villages on the Salmon River, but also destroyed this crucial element in the salmon life-cycle: the natural rearing pools at the side channels, which were replenished with cold creek water and with a relatively easy gradient to the waters above. These pools used to be up to 30 feet deep, but because of historic disruption by mining and sedimentation are now only three feet deep in places. Traditional ideas about how to preserve the species overall include considering the whole life-cycle of the fish and its reproductive cycle in order to ensure the health and survival of the species.”Junie Donahue circa 1970 fishing with a dip net on the Klamath River, courtesy of the Donahue family. This publication contains content contributed by the Karuk Tribe.At 4:45 in the afternoon on July 24th, 2018, a water temperature logger deployed by SRRC’s Water Quality Monitoring Program recorded 80°F in the North Fork Salmon River upstream of Forks of Salmon. The next day, at our annual Spring Chinook and Summer Steelhead Dive, the 188 spring Chinook salmon counted by SRRC staff, volunteers, and cooperators in the Salmon River watershed made 2018 the fourth year in a row of critically low runs. Spring Chinook were once the most prolific fish in the Klamath Basin, with annual runs estimated as large as one million fish. Similarly, other salmonid populations that rely on the Salmon River watershed during various stages of their life cycle have experienced precipitous declines. The Salmon River is thought to have historically supported a population of several thousand coho salmon, which has been listed as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act since 1997. Annual adult returns to the river are now likely less than 50 individuals. The Salmon River population of winter steelhead appears stable, but the summer steelhead population has declined precipitously over the last 30-40 years. Why have these populations experienced such a decline, and is there anything we can do about it? Anadromous salmon – those fish migrating to sea to grow and returning to fresh water to spawn – make use of a diversity of habitats throughout their life cycle. Fisheries scientist W.F. Thompson wrote that salmon “must pass through a long succession of environments, geographically and seasonally contiguous; and the survivals must be favorable in all of them, not just in one, to allow return of the next generation.” If any link of this “chain of favorable environments,” as Thompson described it, is impaired, the ability of salmon to complete their life cycle can be reduced or eliminated, potentially leading to population declines. Salmon face threats and challenges as varied as the habitats they occupy. Marine conditions can dramatically affect survival. Fishery management also plays a role. Global climate change is increasingly affecting each link of the chain of environments, and despite the demonstrated resilience of wild salmon, their potential to persist in such a rapidly changing climate is uncertain. The efforts of the SRRC are focused on strengthening the link of the chain in which the lives of one generation of salmon end and those of another subsequently begin: the freshwater environment.With its Wild and Scenic designation and location far from any major population center, the Salmon River can, at first glance, appear to be largely unspoiled by the human hands that have severely and more obviously degraded many of our urban watersheds. A closer look reveals that historical land management and utilization practices have left wounds that are not naturally healing on timescales relevant to the recovery of imperiled salmonids – and, in fact, still actively cause harm. Rock and sediment mobilized from hydraulic mining filled pool habitat, widened and shallowed river reaches, and created a streambed dominated by large cobbles rather than the smaller gravels that salmon need to spawn. Shadeless piles of mine tailings along the river corridor still prevent the establishment of riparian vegetation and trap heat, which contributes to increased water temperatures. Extensive logging reduced the amount of dead trees in stream channels and living trees on streambanks, thereby curtailing the formation of complex channel features important for salmon. As a result of these and other impacts, the Salmon 3Yes, We Can Do Something About Declining Salmon PopulationsRiver link in the chain of environments suffers from three primary impairments: (1) high water temperatures, (2) lack of connectivity between the river channel and its floodplain, and (3) insufficient quantity and quality of habitat for spawning and rearing. One consequence of these impairments is that salmon have difficulty fulfilling their needs during life stages spent in the Salmon River. Although salmon have specific habitat requirements at each life stage, their needs in fresh water are united under broad themes: suitable water temperatures and flows, enough food to eat and oxygen to breathe, places to shelter from predators and fast-moving water, migration routes free from obstruction, and suitable physical habitat in which to spawn and grow. To improve the potential for long-term persistence of salmon in the watershed, it is clear that there is a need to reduce the gap between what salmon require and the conditions that the Salmon River, in its relatively impaired state, currently offers. The habitat restoration undertaken by the SRRC and our partners attempts to do just that. Page 3 top left, Chinook salmon juvenile in Methodist Creek near a large woody debris structure; top right, North Fork spring Chinook redd; bottom, pervasive summer algae growth near Forks of Salmon, by Amy Fingerle. This page top left, adult spring Chinook in a bubble curtain by Peter Bohler; top right, large woody debris installation in Methodist Creek by Mel Van Scoyoc; bottom, juvenile steelhead in Little North Fork by Scott Harding.4Our restoration efforts began with addressing high-priority fish passage barriers and treatable sediment sources. They have since evolved into more complex instream habitat restoration projects at prioritized sites throughout the watershed. Importantly, high water temperatures, lack of floodplain connectivity, and insufficient spawning and rearing habitat are not only large problems themselves but also symptoms of an improperly functioning system. Just as a doctor would treat strep throat with an antibiotic rather than only a lozenge, we ultimately seek to address the root causes of degraded habitat conditions in order to both alleviate impairments to the watershed and prevent their reoccurrence. We can do this by restoring the processes that create and maintain habitat – such as the delivery and transport of sediment, water, and organic matter into and within the river channel – and ultimately returning the river to the state of natural variability to which salmon are specifically adapted. In the words of Engineering Geologist and restoration practitioner Rocco Fiori, the goal is to pursue “sustainable, self-maintaining, process-based restoration so eventually we can walk away from it and…[let] Mother Nature work with the basic products of sediment, wood, and water.” The restoration of natural processes for the benefit of fish will not only require action within the river channel and floodplain, but also in connected environments such as mountain meadows and forest ecosystems. Similarly, increased salmon abundance will provide benefits that extend far beyond the width of the channel. Anadromous salmon, which achieve at least 99% of their final size at sea, are an important link between marine and terrestrial environments. Black bear, mink, Bald Eagle, American Dipper, a variety of insects, and other critters in the Salmon River watershed consume salmon eggs, juveniles, adults, and carcasses. By removing salmon from the water and often only partially consuming carcasses, bears feed themselves but also make the nutrient-rich, decomposing carcasses available to streamside vegetation and smaller terrestrial organisms that are unable to access carcasses in the water. Particularly significant is the relationship between salmon and trees. Trees near salmon-bearing streams have been found to grow faster than trees farther away, at least partially due to the presence of nutrients derived from marine environments. Living and dead trees benefit salmon by maintaining habitat complexity, providing shade and structural cover, retaining gravel and sediment, and housing invertebrates fish like to eat. Thus, carcasses from previous generations of salmon can help create habitat conditions that benefit the next. Despite numerous human-caused impacts, the Salmon River is still one of the most biologically intact river systems in the western United States and has recognized potential to serve as a climate refuge for salmonids. However, active restoration efforts are necessary to preserve the biodiversity that the Salmon River supports, and the clock is ticking. Recent studies have underscored the genetic uniqueness of spring Chinook, an animal of great cultural and spiritual significance to Klamath River tribes, as well as summer steelhead. Both runs are a remnant of what they once were, and spring Chinook are on the brink of extinction. We face the reality that we cannot control natural phenomena or every link of the chain of environments, but by creating habitat for salmon – as well as restoring and strengthening habitat-forming processes – we not only stand a chance of recovering imperiled salmonid populations, but also of maintaining the faunal, floral, and human communities united by these mighty fish. - Amy FingerleRestoring habitat is not only important for our wildland rivers and forests; it can also be very beneficial in our backyards and gardens. So much of the natural landscape has been converted to human uses that unless we find ways to make our lived-in landscapes more hospitable to wildlife, many species will not survive into the future. Habitat loss, fragmentation, and the widespread use of pesticides are leading causes of population declines in insects, birds, and other wildlife. As more and more land is converted to residential use every year, our backyard habitats are becoming ever more important pieces holding together an increasingly fragmented landscape. The process of converting our yards and gardens into spaces that attract and support native birds, bees, butterflies, and other wildlife is known as “habitat gardening” or “backyard restoration.” Since even the most modest yards can provide habitat, that makes each and every one of us a habitat manager. By helping to provide food, shelter, water, and space for the critters we share the earth with, you can help to strengthen and maintain the living communities around us.The things that you can do to create a pollinator-friendly yard include:•Plant native flowering trees, shrubs, and wildflowers that bloom successively throughout the season, along with other flowers and herbs that are attractive to pollinators. Make sure to include the host plants that butterflies and moths need to lay their eggs (such as milkweed for monarchs).•Avoid planting too many highly selected modern flower cultivars, many of which have been bred to no longer produce pollen or nectar and do not have the right scent or shape to attract pollinators.•Avoid using pesticides. If you need to control pests, use non-chemical deterrents and beneficial insects if possible. If you need to use an organic pesticide, make sure to apply it in the evening when pollinators are not active.•Provide a source of water or mud. Pollinators seek shallow water sources, so bowls under dripping faucets, shallow bird baths with stones in them, or moist patches of bare ground are good options.•Create and protect nesting habitat for native bees by building bee houses and leaving dead stumps or trees for wood-nesting species, and leaving bare patches of soil or sand piles for ground-nesting species. •Reduce the size of your lawn. Allow small wildflowers and clover to grow amongst the grass. Pollinator Gardens: Restoration in Your Own Backyard! “When we lose the common wildlife in our immediate surroundings, we run the risk of becoming inured to delight, and eventually, alienated from the land.” - Robert Michael PylePhotos of local pollinators by SRRC Staff.5Simple actions like conserving water, reducing the use of pesticides, leaving areas un-mowed, and planting native species can lead to measurable improvements in habitat quality and the health of the environment. Generally striving for more natural, layered, and diverse landscaping that favors native plant species and communities is a good place to start. Pollinators are a key component of healthy, functioning ecosystems because many flowering plants depend on them for reproduction, including a large percentage of the world’s food crops.Yet pollinator populations are experiencing dramatic declines worldwide. Although the plight of the honey bee is the most well-known example of a pollinator in peril, in California alone there are an estimated 1,200-1,500 native bee species, and over 200 species of butterflies. By increasing the number of pollinator-friendly gardens and landscapes, we can help support the survival of bees, butterflies, birds, bats, and other pollinators. The concept of encouraging people to create pollinator gardens is reminiscent of the effort to help cover food shortages during WWII with Victory Gardens, only this time it’s insects that are short of food. Adult pollinators require nectar as their primary food source, and female bees collect pollen as food for their offspring. Without flower-rich foraging areas from which to gather nectar and pollen, pollinators cannot thrive, and without pollinators our agricultural crops and native plants communities cannot reproduce.As you think about how to utilize your space to create habitat for pollinators, consider the range of possibilities, from small patches of pollinator-friendly flowers in your yard, garden, or curb strip, to the complete conversion of your lawn to a native plant garden. Every step you take will add to the diversity, abundance, and productivity of your land. Although the weed and insect-free lawn is a deeply embedded cultural aesthetic, it is simply not compatible with the continued presence in our lives of milkweeds and monarchs. The 40 million acres of lawn in the United States have virtually no value as wildlife habitat, so we must take seriously the need to allow some of those manicured carpets of green that we love so much to descend into the chaotic beauty of pollinator patches. By moving away from well-kept lawns, sheared shrubs and park-like forests, and approaching our landscaping with the goal of inviting the bugs and the bees into our backyards and gardens rather than excluding or eradicating them, we will enrich both the natural world, and our own lives. On whatever scale that your life and your land allow, your efforts to provide wildlife habitat will benefit the native species that we share the earth with and that we rely on for our continued survival, health and wellbeing. - Lyra CresseyAs summer temperatures rise along the Salmon River, many take to the high country. Whether you have wandered up for an afternoon, planned to stay overnight, or loaded a mule for a multi-day trip, the journey into higher elevations is always memorable. Do you recall the first time you stepped foot in a high mountain meadow? Wildflowers may have caught your eye, ablaze in prismatic colors, or perhaps your feet sunk into the moist soil near a stream.If you have spent time in the Trinity Alps, Marble Mountain, or Russian Wilderness areas you were likely in the headwaters of the Salmon, Scott, or Trinity Rivers, all of which flow into the Klamath. Headwater streams leave the slopes of high peaks and ridgelines and merge as the source of major waterways. Near their origins, headwater streams course through upper montane meadows. These geographic features on the landscape play an important role in the function of our watersheds. Mountain meadows behave like a sponge capturing, storing, and distributing water, most of which comes from accumulated snowpack. As water resources become increasingly tenuous, these ecosystems have come into focus. Hydrologists, ecologists, and land managers have begun to recognize the influence of high mountain meadows on water quantity and quality downstream.Despite their pristine appearance, headwater streams and mountain meadows in the West have long been impacted by post-colonial anthropogenic disturbance such as settlement, grazing, logging, fire suppression, and recreation. While a few of these land uses have lessened thanks to wilderness protections, grazing and fire suppression still affect the landscape to a great extent. In addition, legacy hydrologic effects remain including soil compaction, accelerated erosion, and a reduction in water storage. Stream downcutting, or incision, is frequently documented across impaired mountain meadows. This is a process by which the gradient of a stream steepens, thereby increasing streamflow. Over time, incision results in deep cut channels, disconnecting a stream from its floodplain. Stream incision can degrade riparian and aquatic habitat in all types of meadows. For example, the productivity of native riparian vegetation may decrease or cease entirely due to a receding water table. As the meadows dry out they stop functioning as a sponge for water and nutrients and become vulnerable to conifer encroachment. In addition, aquatic habitat is degraded when an incised stream locks into place, minimizing channel complexity, homogenizing stream velocities, and increasing sediment transport.Increased climatic variability is on the horizon and restoring degraded ecosystems is of utmost importance. The Salmon River is a precipitation-dependent watershed. Though it is uncertain what may occur in this region, rising temperatures, extreme weather, and a diminishing snowpack are all probable scenarios. Threatened aquatic species like Chinook and coho salmon are particularly sensitive to stream temperature fluctuations. As summer base flows decrease water temperatures in the river reach levels inhospitable to fish more often.To promote ecological resilience, the function of mountain meadows must be restored. Momentum in the region is mounting as agencies and organizations shift their attention upslope. Extensive research in the Sierra Nevada mountain range has laid the framework for evaluating the integrity of mountain meadows of varying types. Although meadows within the state of California may share certain characteristics, each is shaped by the unique interplay of geology and the living organisms residing there. The SRRC is in the planning phase of an assessment that will look at several meadow types to determine the extent of habitat degradation and altered hydrologic function in mountain meadows. Prior to doing restoration, it is imperative that we develop a thorough understanding of our meadow systems.Restoration techniques have been developed to effectively reverse stream incision. One method is to mimic debris input from fire by adding wood to headwater streams to form what restorationists call “grade control.” Slowing water and trapping sediment in mountain meadows increases infiltration into underground aquifers. Improving water storage capacity in mountain meadows prolongs cold water residency time in streams and cools water temperatures through hyporheic exchange, the movement of water between the surface and underground. Furthermore, properly functioning meadows sequester or store carbon.Mountain meadow ecosystems appear to be a nexus for climate change resilience in this region. Restoring these ecosystems will have localized effects as well as positive implications downstream. Potential outcomes include the extended duration and volume of base flows. Native aquatic organisms would benefit directly from the resulting thermal refugia in an increasingly warm climate. The next time that you head into the mountains, seek out a meadow. Observe the life that thrives in that place and remember the connectivity of ecosystems throughout our biodiverse watersheds. -Deja Malone-PershaHigh mountain meadow photos by Melissa Van Scoyoc: above, view of Sawtooth Ridge; below, meadow at Cabin Gulch.Looking to the Source6Even though at first glance the Salmon River can look pristine, it has been subject to many ecological impacts over the past century and a half. Large-scale hydraulic and dredge mining in the late 1800s and early 1900s drastically disrupted the natural processes that had governed the watershed’s ecology since the end of the last glacial period. Mining led to a cascade of impacts that are still being discovered today. These impacts include the loss of large riparian forests and the wood they contributed to stream channels, the armoring of stream beds with coarse rocks and boulders not suitable for spawning, the disconnection of streams from their floodplains through stream incision, and the overall reduction of aquatic habitat complexity. Beginning in the early 20th century, fire suppression further reduced the availability of large riparian snags that could create structure in the rivers, and over time led to overcrowding of the forests by young trees that used more water and left less in the streams. And if the legacy of these early impacts did not threaten salmon and their habitat enough, logging in the latter half of the 20th century led to yet another imbalance of natural systems by removing much of the remaining riparian forest and increasing sediment input into streams. Widespread logging resulted in many streams becoming choked with debris, which was thought to impede salmon’s access to their spawning habitat. In order to combat some of the negative impacts of logging, land managers began to remove log jams and other woody debris by hauling it out of creeks with helicopters. This practice of ‘stream clearing’ was a misguided attempt to improve salmon habitat. Although stream clearing was thought to be the best management practice at the time, it led to unintended consequences such as reduced habitat complexity and an imbalance of wood, water, and sediment in the streams. The legacy impacts from historical logging, fire suppression, and mining have left many watersheds in a state of imbalance that has ultimately reduced the Salmon River’s capacity to support salmon populations to this day. Salmon have evolved to navigate the complex habitats of the Salmon River with a certain balance of wood, water, and sediment, which are the fundamental building blocks of a healthy river system. This balance needs to be reinstated in order for them to thrive. These three pillars of watershed process are continually in a dynamic interplay with each other. Since this balance has been upset by the removal of wood, sediment transport rates have increased, leading to more simplified channels and in some instances, the formation of large deltas at the confluence of tributaries. These simplified stream channels have resulted in decreased spawning habitat, loss of winter refugia, impaired sediment sorting, and nutrient cycling issues. SRRC is working to design and implement projects that will restore natural processes, thereby improving salmon habitat and bringing the Salmon River back into balance. The South Fork Tributary Habitat Enhancement Project is our first such project and is being implemented in partnership with Pacific Watershed Associates (PWA), CA Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Travis Carmesin Construction. The goal of the project is to restore natural 1800s-1930s Mining1940s-1980s LoggingSouth Fork Salmon River Tributary Habitat Enhancement ProjectA Stream’s History: from Ruin to RenewalProject Background1980s Stream Clearing1990s Habitat Typing processes and to improve salmon habitat in Knownothing and Methodist creeks by placing a series of large wood structures to restore the balance of wood, water, and sediment in these streams. The project has three phases: (1) pre-project monitoring and existing conditions analysis, (2) construction implementation, and (3) two years of monitoring for geomorphic effects.Knownothing and Methodist creeks are two key tributaries to the South Fork of the Salmon River. Both of these streams have a history of mining, logging, and stream clearing and were therefore chosen as appropriate candidates to undergo a project to replenish their large wood supplies. To evaluate the effectiveness of this wood loading on restoring natural stream process, PWA developed a comprehensive monitoring plan that will evaluate stream response to different wood structure configuration and placement. Monitoring geomorphic (the form of the landscape) response to the structure types and placement can then help to inform and improve outcomes of future restoration projects in the Salmon River watershed. In the fall of 2017, SRRC implemented the construction phase and installed large wood habitat features in both creeks. Structures were built with one or more of three principal goals in mind: (1) geomorphic effects, (2) hydraulic effects, and (3) habitat enhancement. Each of these goals provides a framework upon which to evaluate the results of the monitoring and feedback Legacy of Impact7 - Chris Moore, PWA Riparian Specialist and Watershed Technician Page 8, large woody debris installation in Knownothing Creek. Page 9 above, 2016 pre-project monitoring included drone imagery of the channel and of individual structure locations from Chris Moore. Timeline photos from SRRC: from left, hydraulic mining on the North Fork, 1969 logging into the riparian zone of the Little North Fork, helicopter pulling logs out of the South Fork, 1994 riparian monitoring, 2000 fall Chinook carcass survey, 2014 Methodist Creek large woody debris assessment, 2017 Knownothing Creek large woody debris site.relatively homogenous, with minimal sorting of particle size. This homogeneity results from simplified stream channels that lack hydrologic variability. We have already observed improved sediment sorting associated with the structures that were installed and we’ll find out more during our 2019 monitoring season. SRRC and PWA will be developing a final report of all the data and observations since 2016 when the South Fork Tributary Habitat Enhancement Project was initially funded. This project and report will help to inform and improve future instream restoration projects within the Salmon River Watershed. Monitoring efforts like this provide crucial feedback to demonstrate how large wood structures perform and interact within streams to restore natural process and bring balance to wood, water, and sediment for future generations of salmonids.as to whether a given structure type and placement preformed as desired. We installed a total of 95 logs in 24 structures. We are employing both new and traditional methods to monitor our project. The primary focus of our monitoring efforts is to measure and detect geomorphic changes associated with each structure as well as the stream reaches they are within. Numerous scientific studies have shown that the construction of complex structures leads to increased habitat complexity and geomorphic response in coastal streams. We anticipate a similar response here, but until now a similar study on the stability and efficacy of large wood structures has not been conducted in the Salmon River. Our early monitoring efforts have shown that the project is contributing to an increase in habitat complexity as the large wood structures are slowing down the current and allowing spawning-size gravels to accumulate. In addition, the structures are capturing more wood during high-flow events. Our preliminary data show that sites where we placed a higher number of logs are seeing a higher degree of sediment sorting and deposition. We found that the wood structures did not have a strong effect on the stream channel during the 2017/2018 winter. This is partially due to the lack of a significant high-water event that winter, and also due to structure size and placement. One 2010-2016 Habitat Assessment and Planning1990s-Present Spawner Surveys and Other Monitoring2017- 2019 Restoration Implementation and MonitoringMonitoring our WorkWhere to Next?limitation that we experienced in this project was sizing structures to meet a geomorphic effect while maintaining structural stability. This past winter has had more sustained high-flow events, and initial observations suggest a greater stream response to the structures, resulting in improved high-flow refugia for juvenile salmonids and increased sorting of spawning gravels. This year’s ongoing high-flow conditions have made it more challenging to evaluate effects, but indicators such as bedload sorting and spawning gravel deposition are generally expected to be associated with our more aggressive and complex structures. Preliminary indicators are qualitative at this point and will be examined more fully with monitoring during low-flow conditions this coming summer. The monitoring plan for this project involves a pre- and post-construction site characterization as well as two years of post-construction monitoring. This includes pre- and post-construction stream profiles, channel cross sections at each site, mapping of substrate size, and detailed drone imagery. We are utilizing drone imagery and terrain models of the sites before and after winter flows to detect changes in the topography of the streambed. The topography is highly detailed and provides us with a better understanding of how the log structures are interacting with streamflow and sediment transport. Pre-construction substrate mapping of the project reach indicated that the streambeds in both Methodist and Knownothing are 8Next >