OWEB Grant #200-083 - ODFW Conservation



Albany Fish Survey

Fish Distribution Summary

for Spring 2001 and 2002

City of Albany

Water Resources Programs, Public Works

and

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Aquatic Inventories Project

Natural Production Program

Project Completion Report for

Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board

Grant #200-083

OWEB Grant #200-083

Albany Fish Survey

Project Completion Report - February 28, 2003

Submitted By:

Cheryl Hummon, Water Resources Program Coordinator

City of Albany, P.O. Box 490, Albany, OR 97321

541-917-7629

chummon@ci.albany.or.us

Contents:

Section Page

Project Description and Background p. 2

Materials and Methods p. 3

Project Results p. 5

Volunteers, Other Participants, and In-Kind Contributions p. 8

Appendix 1. Fish Inventories: ODFW Aquatic Inventory Project 11 pages

Appendix 2. State of Oregon Fish Sampling Coverage Metadata 6 pages

Appendix 3. City of Albany Fish Distribution: Summary of 2001 and 38 pages

2002 Surveys

Appendix 4. Map: Albany Fish Distribution Sample Sites, Spring 2001 1 page

Appendix 5. Summary Report: City of Albany Fish Distribution, Spring 2001 20 pages

Appendix 6. Map: Albany Fish Distribution Sample Sites, Spring 2002 1 page

Appendix 7. Summary Report: City of Albany Fish Distribution, Spring 2002 7 pages

Appendix 8. Albany Democrat-Herald article, Spring 2001 2 pages

Appendix 9. Albany City Bridges newsletter article, Spring 2001 1 page

Project Description and Background

Purpose

The Albany Fish Survey was undertakend to fill a data gap regarding fish species and distribution in the Albany area. Most small urban streams have not been a priority for any agency. Before the fish survey, the City could only rely on expert opinion from ODFW fish biologists, including their suspicion that threatened winter steelhead and spring chinook may use Willamette tributaries for juvenile rearing in conditions with higher flows and cooler water. The City of Albany was particularly interested in identifying any use of Albany-area rivers or creeks by steelhead and chinook. The City is trying to gain a greater understanding of urban impacts on our streams and to adjust our policies and practices to minimize the negative impacts to fish and fish habitat within our jurisdiction.

The fish survey provides baseline distribution data for all fish species in the area, including chinook and steelhead. The information from this fish survey serves as a starting point for designing local policies and practices to address the specific conditions in different water bodies in the Albany area. These data will also be important for comparisons when we evaluate the impact of new policies and practices over the long term.

General Approach

ODFW field crews conducted a fish distribution survey of creeks within and adjacent to the Albany urban growth boundary, including: Oak Creek, Cathey Creek, Periwinkle Creek, Cox Creek, Burkhart Creek, Truax Creek, Murder Creek, Thornton Lakes, and Crocker Creek. Special emphasis was placed on identifying any use of Albany area creeks by juvenile steelhead and chinook. ODFW personnel, under the supervision of Kim Jones and Charlie Stein (Aquatic Inventories Project), obtained permits and access to private property, selected sample sites, conducted the surveys (electroshocking, seining, and snorkeling), analyzed the data, and prepared the summary reports. City staff, primarily Cheryl Hummon (Water Resources Program Coordinator), coordinated the City’s involvement, including input on sample sites, communicating survey results, and incorporating the results into the City’s policies and practices.

Presence / Absence

The survey provides two snapshots of fish distribution in Albany. The results should be used as an indication of presence or absence, to develop species lists. Abundance and size data should be considered qualitative. Absence simply means “no data”, and should not be assumed to mean “not present”.

Materials and Methods

Survey Methods

The survey methods are outlined in Appendix 1 (Fish Inventories: ODFW Aquatic Inventory Project, May 2001). ODFW field crews sampled and observed fish with backpack electro-shockers, mask and snorkel, and/or beach seines. They recorded data on fish species, number, and size. The crew also recorded basic stream characteristics including active channel width and depth, stream flow, and water temperature. Sample sites were documented with photographs. Some of the sampling methods are demonstrated in Figures 1 through 3.

Data Analysis and Products

ODFW personnel analyzed all data collected, created GIS files, and developed a final report in three sections (Appendices 3 - 7). The final report includes a summary, raw data for each stream and sample location, and topographic maps of site locations. The GIS files include the sample sites and fish distribution data. The data limitations are outlined in Appendix 2 (State of Oregon Fish Sampling Coverage Metadata, August 2002).

Concurrent Fish Trapping by Volunteers

In the Winter/Spring of 2001 and 2002, volunteers working with Gary Galovich (ODFW fish biologist) constructed, installed, and operated fish traps in lower Periwinkle and Cox Creeks (2001 and 2002) and in lower Truax Creek (2002). In most cases, the hoop traps were in place for several months, and the volunteers visited them every one to two days. Fish were recorded by species and length. The traps were repaired when damaged by debris or vandalism.

[pic]

Figure 1. ODFW field crew sample fish with a backpack electroshocker in Cathey Creek (sample site CAT-1), in Albany. Spring 2001.

[pic]

Figure 2 ODFW field crew identify and record fish information along Periwinkle Creek (sample site PER-2), in Albany. Spring 2002.

[pic]

Figure 3 ODFW field crew identify and record fish information along Periwinkle Creek (sample site PER-2), in Albany. Spring 2002.

Project Results

The project results are reported in Appendices 3 through 9 as follows:

|Appendix |Title |# Pages |

| | | |

|3 |City of Albany Fish Distribution: Summary of 2001 and 2002 Surveys |38 |

|4 |Map: Albany Fish Distribution Sample Sites, Spring 2001 |1 |

|5 |Summary Report: City of Albany Fish Distribution, Spring 2001 |20 |

|6 |Map: Albany Fish Distribution Sample Sites, Spring 2002 |1 |

|7 |Summary Report: City of Albany Fish Distribution, Spring 2002 |7 |

|8 |Albany Democrat-Herald article, Spring 2001 |2 |

|9 |Albany City Bridges newsletter article, Spring 2001 |1 |

Survey Timing

The Albany Fish Survey was originally intended to have Phase I in April-May 2001, when conditions are most favorable for a high diversity of fish (high flow, cool water). For Phase II, selected sites would be resampled in August-September 2001, when conditions are least favorable for fish (low flow, warm water). In reality, 2001 was a drought year, and some streams were already at their low summer flows in Spring 2001. Rather than obtain additional low flow data, in a summer when many streams were dry, ODFW and City staff decided to do a second year of higher flow sampling, in Spring 2002.

Other Interesting Results

• Salmonids were found in the following creeks. Juvenile chinook and steelhead had never been documented in Albany creeks prior to the 2001 and 2002 surveys and trapping. Steelhead were only documented in the traps.

-juvenile chinook (Periwinkle, Cox, and Murder Creeks)

-juvenile steelhead (Periwinkle and Cox Creeks)

-cutthroat trout (Periwinkle, Cathey, Cox Creeks)

-mountain whitefish (Oak Creek)

• Pacific lamprey were found in Periwinkle, Cox, and Burkhart Creeks. Redds were found in Periwinkle Creek above Water Avenue. Water Avenue is a fish barrier for juvenile chinook and steelhead (with a $60,000 OWEB grant to provide passage), but it is clearly not a barrier for lamprey. Lamprey were also found far upstream in Cox Creek, about 400 meters below the Albany-Santiam canal, but these may have come in from canal.

• Sandrollers were more abundant than expected. This species may be on the decline, and prefers in-tact habitats. Sandrollers were found in Periwinkle and Cox Creeks.

• In most cases, where there’s water, there are fish.

• The fish trapping effort was successful overall, but at times individual traps had problems, including: damage from debris in high flows, vandalism (damage and stealing trap components), high flows (trap inaccessible), and low flows (trap doesn’t catch fish).

• Through the survey and fish traps, several issues were brought to the attention of City staff, including: creek signs were found in the creek, pollutants were reported, previously unknown fish passage barriers were identified (lower Cox Creek – old meat packing plant; Crocker Creek – natural barrier that probably controls upstream fish distribution).

• The proportion of native species tends to be higher downstream, with more introduced species upstream. Species diversity also tends to be higher downstream. These trends may be because the lower ends of the creeks are in the Willamette 100-year floodplain where there have been fewer impacts from development. Upstream the creeks tend to be severely channelized and have significant impacts from urban development and agricultural practices.

Use of Fish Distribution Data During OWEB-Funded Project

• Newspaper article in Albany Democrat-Herald (see Appendix 8)

• City newsletter article in City Bridges (see Appendix 9)

• Upon request, provided data to NW Environmental Defense Council (Oak Creek, for their suit against DEQ and OreMet/Wah-Chang for violating the Clean Water Act)

• Upon request, provided data to Diana Sharps (N. Albany creeks, for OWEB-funded fish passage prioritization project in Benton County)

• Provided data to Calapooia Watershed Council (Oak and Cathey Creeks, for Calapooia watershed assessment)

• Data have been used to inform the City of Albany’s policy development related to Goal 5, ESA, and stormwater.

• Data have been used to identify and prioritize potential restoration projects

• ODFW fish biologists (e.g. Gary Galovich) have used the survey results (fish use of small lowland Willamette tributaries) in several ways, including discussing juvenile salmonid use of streams with other jurisdictions and reviewing grant proposals. Ken Kenaston used the Albany results in a talk about chinook rearing, at the winter 2003 AFS meeting.

• The Periwinkle Creek fish trap allowed the City to document fish passage in 202 over the newly-passable sewer line in lower Periwinkle Creek.

Future Use of Data

• Final Species List. The City of Albany plans to integrate several other sources of existing fish data in the Albany area, and add to each creek’s species lists as needed. The other sources of data are isolated in space or time, or collected in mid-summer, when conditions are sub-optimal. There are data from two EMAP sites, a 1-day volunteer fish-sampling event, and several outings to Periwinkle Creek by Gary Galovich.

• Report for Lay Audiences. The fish reports will be summarized into a shorter, user-friendly report, suitable for distribution to lay audiences. This will be distributed to: other City of Albany departments, City Council, landowners who allowed fish sampling on their property, watershed councils, ODFW, City of Millersburg, Linn and Benton Counties, Linn and Benton SWCDs, NRCS, Grand Prairie Water Control District, NOAA Fisheries, NW Steelheaders (Albany Chapter), etc.

• Make Report and Data Available. The City will continue to respond to requests for the raw or detailed data.

• City website. The data will be put on the City website, using a web-based image mapper (a draft version was provided by ODFW). This will allow the user to click on a sample point see what fish were found.

• Policy Development. The City will continue to use the fish distribution data to help understand local impacts and develop policies (stormwater, ESA, Goal 5) to decrease impacts to fish and habitat.

• Restoration Priorities. The City will use the data to develop restoration priorities.

• Watershed Assessment. The City hopes to initiate a watershed assessment for the “Grand Prairie” Watershed (Periwinkle, Cox, Burkhart, Truax, and Murder Creeks) within the next few years. The data will be incorporated into these efforts.

• Follow-up Fish Survey. Hopefully a follow-up fish survey will be conducted after five years see what changes have occurred in fish distribution.

Volunteers, Other Participants, and In-Kind Contributions

ODFW employees paid by grant:

• Charlie Stein (report development, crew supervisor, 2002 field crew

• Andrew Gross (2001 field crew)

• Dave Hering (2001 field crew)

• Peggy Kavanagh (raw data and GIS)

• Paul Jacobson (field 2002, map development)

Total In-Kind Contribution

The total in-kind contribution toward this grant is $11,110. The value of in-kind hours and other contributions are listed below.

In-Kind Hours

|Name |Organization |Task(s) |Hours |Rate |Value |

|Cheryl Hummon |City of Albany |Project coordination and |60 |$30 |$ 1,800 |

| | |administration, compiling data, | | | |

| | |communicating results | | | |

|Kim Jones |ODFW |Project coordination and |80 |$40 |$ 3,200 |

| | |administration | | | |

|Gary Galovich |ODFW |Fish trap coordination, fish |40 |$35 |$ 1,400 |

| | |sampling, communicating results | | | |

|Don Wenzel |ODFW |Fish traps (construction, |160 |$15 |$ 2,400 |

|Marvin Antrim |Volunteers |installation, | | | |

|Fred Briggs | |operation) | | | |

|Dave Enge | | | | | |

|Ivan Gehlsen | | | | | |

|Don Heintzman | | | | | |

|Bill Pye | | | | | |

|TOTAL | | | | |$ 8,800 |

Other In-Kind Contributions

|Item |Organization |Use |Value |

|Backpack electroshocker |ODFW |5 weeks |$ 1,500 |

|Small field equipment (waders, etc.) |ODFW |5 weeks |$ 200 |

|Fish traps (3 traps, $100 each) |ODFW | |$ 300 |

|ODFW over contract amount |ODFW | |$ 70 |

|Newsletter printing and mailing, Periwinkle Creek article |City of Albany |5 % of $4800 per |$ 240 |

| | |newsletter | |

|TOTAL | | |$ 2,310 |

-----------------------

[pic]

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download