1. Hancock Springs A natural lab for studying the roles of physical habitat, nutrient availability, and non-native species to inform river restoration John Jorgensen Yakama Nation Fisheries

2. Today’s talk will cover: - The regional problem: Reduced natural production - Factors limiting natural production - An integrated restoration approach - Discussion of Hancock Springs - Summary and Conclusions - Q&A/Discussion

3. Hancock Springs (RM 59)

4. The Problem

5. Salmon production and population declines

6. Salmon population declines are often due to cumulative effects of many factors

7. Biomass Reductions Gresch et al. 2000

8. Factors limiting natural production “The Big 3”: 1. Habitat loss and degradation 2. Loss of marine derived nutrients (MDN) 3. Deleterious presence of non-native fishes

9. Upper Columbia Natural Production Restoration Program Goal: To identify, test, evaluate, and implement measures to increase natural production of anadromous salmonids in the Upper Columbia River Basin.

10. Upper Columbia Natural Production Restoration Program Current Projects: Upper Columbia Nutrient Enhancement Project (Twisp River) Hancock Springs Project (Today’s talk)

11. Hancock Springs Project Goal: Use Hancock Springs to quantify separate and combined effects of habitat restoration, nutrient addition, and non-native fish removal on natural production of anadromous salmonids.

12. Hancock Springs Project Obj. 1: Evaluate fine scale responses to a series of restorative treatments

13. Hancock Springs Project Obj. 2: Understand the contributions of spring creeks in Upper Columbia tributaries

14. Hancock Springs Project Obj. 3 Use results to guide larger restoration actions

15. Project Area

16. Physical Conditions

17. Biological Conditions

18. First Phase (Hand Work)

19. Natural Production in HS Natural Production

20. Second Phase

21. Channel Reconfiguration

22. Channel Excavation

23. Re-building stream banks

24. Vegetation/Stabilizing Banks

25. Supplementing Riffles

26. Adding LWD

27. Changes BeforeAfter

28. Reach 1 (control); Reach 2 (Treatment )

29. 2012 Spawning Steelhead Redds (treatment 7) (control 0) Chinook Redds (treatment 12) (control 1)

30. Reach 1(treatment ) Reach 2 (Control) DEM CHaMP Digital Elevation Model

31. Steelhead Spawning 2012

32. Benefits/Opportunities HS provides a thermally and hydrologically stable stream-scale system for evaluating restoration treatments that address the “Big 3” limiting factors, not feasible at larger river scales: Physical habitat restoration Nutrient addition Removal of non-natives (brook trout)

33. Benefits/Opportunities HS provides the opportunity to quantify effects of various restoration treatments within and between treatment and control reaches in ways not feasible at larger river scales. HS serves as a communal stream scale research facility to help researchers collect data to asses ecological functions associated with restoration measures and to validate ecological models.

34. Project history/Treatment structure 2005: Habitat in HS was determined to be prohibiting natural production; restoration potential identified 2006-2011: Initial and engineered habitat restoration in Reach 1 completed in 2011.

35. Treatment structure 2012-2014: Physical and biological monitoring in Reach 1 (treatment) and Reach 2 (control) implemented to evaluate responses to habitat restoration. 1.Do nutrient concentrations appear to substantially limit natural production? 2.Does the presence of brook trout substantially restrict natural production?

36. Adaptive Management

37. Treatment structure Option 1Option 2 2011Habitat restoration2011Habitat restoration 2014Nutrient addition2014 Brook trout removal 2016Brook trout removal

38. Treatment structure Option 1Option 2 2011Habitat restoration2011Habitat restoration 2014Nutrient addition2014 Brook trout removal 2016Brook trout removal Subsequent restoration treatments depend on outcomes of 2012 - 2014 nutrient and brook trout assessments Consistent physical habitat and biological monitoring occurs annually in both reaches

39. Biological monitoring IsotopesFish samplingBMI/Drift sampling Primary productionWater Chemistry

40. Habitat monitoring Bank stability, undercut banks LWD, pebble counts, pool tail fines Habitat type (pool, riffle) shading Stage, discharge, temperature

41. Summary and Conclusions Mitigating multiple ecological limitations in altered habitats often requires an integrated approach of multiple treatments Hancock Springs provides a unique and valuable opportunity to study the separate and combined effects of habitat restoration, nutrient addition, and removal of non-natives. Initial results have been encouraging We look forward to collaborating with others to collectively contribute to the science of river restoration and increased natural production.

42. Questions?

44. Habitat Metrics Habitat type (pools, riffles) Large woody debris Pebble counts Pool tail fines Channel cross section Bankfull stage Stream bank stability Undercut banks Stream shading