Placer County Water Agency
Middle Fork American River Project
(FERC No. 2079)
DRAFT
AQ 1 – INSTREAM FLOW
TECHNICAL STUDY REPORT (HABITAT SUITABILITY
AND SPATIAL NICHE SECTION)
Placer County Water Agency
P.O. Box 6570
Auburn, CA 95604
XXXX XX, 2009
Copyright 2009 by Placer County Water Agency
116100207
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables
Table AQ 1-1.
Table AQ 1-2.
Table AQ 1-3.
Instream Flow study Reaches and Modeling Methods (not included
in this subset of text).
Habitat Suitability Criteria for Aquatic Species in the Middle Fork
Project.
Depth and Velocity Guilds for the Aquatic Species in the Middle
Fork Project for use in the Spatial Niche Analysis.
List of Figures
Figure AQ 1-1.
Figure AQ 1-2.
Figure AQ 1-3.
Technical Study Plan Objectives and Study Elements (not included
in this subset of text).
Depth and Velocity Guilds for the Aquatic Species in the Middle
Fork Project for use in the Spatial Niche Analysis.
Periodicity Chart for Aquatic Species and Life stages in the Middle
Fork Project.
List of Maps
Map AQ 1-1.
Instream Flow Study Sites.
List of Appendices
Appendix A.
Appendix B.
Appendix C.
Juvenile and Adult Rainbow Trout Habitat Suitability Criteria.
Habitat Suitability Criteria for Rainbow Trout Fry and Spawning,
and for Juvenile and Adult Hardhead, Sacramento Pikeminnow,
and Sacramento Sucker.
Foothill-yellow Legged Frog Habitat Suitability Criteria.
Copyright 2009 by Placer County Water Agency
116100207
1.0
STUDY APPROACH
The following describes the general instream flow modeling approach for all MFP
streams, including specific methods for the peaking reach, including: (1) selection of
target species and/or guilds; (2) development of habitat suitability criteria (HSC); (3)
identification of life stage periodicity for target species; (4) stratification and study site
selection; (5) coordination of study site selection; (6) study site modeling; (7)
hydrodynamics modeling; (8) habitat modeling; and (9) methods specific to the peaking
reach (portions highlighted in yellow are not included in this subset of the text).
1.1.
SELECTION OF TARGET SPECIES AND/OR GUILDS
Species distributions of fish, special-status amphibians and reptiles, and riparian
resources within the bypass and peaking reaches of the Middle Fork Project (MFP)
were generated as part of the results of the AQ 2 – Fish Population Technical Study
Report (AQ 2 – TSR) (PCWA 2009), AQ 12 – Special-Status Amphibian and Aquatic
Reptile Technical Study Report (AQ 12 – TSR) (PCWA 2008), and AQ 10 – Riparian
Resources Technical Study Report (AQ 10 – TSR) (PCWA 2009). The species
distributions (e.g., distribution maps) developed using survey results from the
aforementioned technical studies were used to determine the target species for
instream flow habitat modeling in the MFP.
The aquatic species, life stages, and guilds for instream flow habitat modeling were
selected in collaboration with the Aquatic TWG based on management status and/or
potential sensitivity to Project operations. The primary species and life stages selected
for instream flow modeling included rainbow trout (juvenile rearing, adult rearing, and
spawning), hardhead (juvenile and adult rearing), and foothill yellow-legged frogs
(FYLF) (breeding and tadpoles). Also, a guild (or spatial niche) approach (see Section
1.2 below) was selected to model habitat for all aquatic species in the MFP (primary and
secondary priority species/life stages), including the species and life stages listed
above, as well as juvenile and adult Sacramento pikeminnow, Sacramento sucker,
California roach, sculpin species, speckled dace, fry of all species, and
macroinvertebrates.
Note that brown trout habitat use was assumed to be
approximately similar to that of rainbow trout habitat in the guild approach, and brown
trout were not evaluated as a species.
1.2.
DEVELOPMENT OF HABITAT SUITABILITY CRITERIA
HSC for each selected aquatic species / life stage were developed in collaboration with
the Aquatic TWG. Table AQ 1–2 shows the type of HSC developed for each species
and life stage. The table also shows the priority status (primary or secondary) of the
species/life stage for instream flow modeling and the source of the HSC. Univariate
HSC (separate suitability developed for depth, velocity, and/or substrate) were created
for each of the primary target species and life stages, and for some of the secondary
priority species (note: for the secondary priority species, the univariate HSC were used
Copyright 2009 by Placer County Water Agency
116100207
to help develop the guilds for the spatial niche analysis). The information used to
develop the HSC and guilds for each species/life stage is described below.
A database of existing HSC that had been used in recent instream flow projects in
Sierra Nevada streams was compiled. The database was reviewed by the Aquatic
TWG for applicability to MFP species and river reaches. The data that were determined
to be most applicable were used to develop HSC for the MFP.
For rainbow trout juvenile and adult rearing, the raw habitat use data from six streams
that generally contained a wide range of available habitat were compiled and used to
generate univariate HSC for depth, velocity, and/or substrate (see Appendix A). HSC
were generated from this data for the sizes of rainbow trout that were present (based on
fish population survey results) in the medium to large size bypass and peaking reaches
(juvenile 5 – 15 cm, adult 15 – 40 cm) and for the sizes of rainbow trout that were
present in the small streams (juvenile 5 – 12 cm, adult 12 – 30 cm). The small streams
included Duncan Creek and Long Canyon Creek (including North and South Fork Long
Canyon creeks).
Univariate HSC for the other selected aquatic species and life stages (hardhead juvenile
and adult, Sacramento Pikeminnow juvenile and adult, rainbow trout spawning, rainbow
trout fry) were generated by plotting the most applicable HSC from other streams. From
these plotted curves, a single envelope univariate HSC curve for velocity, depth, and/or
substrate was created for each species/life stage (Appendix B).
HSC for FYLF breeding and larval development (tadpoles) were developed as part of
the AQ 12 – TSR (PCWA 2008). The HSC were based on site specific use data
collected in spring – fall 2007 in the MFP study area and other recently collected use
data collected from other streams primarily located in or near the Sierra Nevada. A
summary of the FYLF HSC is provided in Appendix C.
For all aquatic species and life stages (fish, amphibians, benthic macroinvertebrates) in
the study area, including the ones listed above, a guild approach was developed in
collaboration with the Aquatic TWG to provide binary depth and velocity habitat criteria.
Where univariate HSC were available for species/life stages, a relatively high value of
suitability (80%) was plotted on a depth and velocity plot. A high value of suitability was
used to clearly show the potential separation between species / life stages. For the
other species/life stages, depth and velocity suitability was obtained from the literature
(see below). The depth and velocity plot was then divided into different categories (e.g.,
slow-shallow, fast-shallow, deep-slow) that approximately correspond to the depths and
velocities utilized by different species/life stage guilds (e.g., fry). Because some of the
species / life stages overlapped in habitat use it was not possible to select categories of
depth and velocity that exclusively separated species / life stage guilds. The categories
were selected at evenly spaced depth and velocity increments that provided as much
separation as possible. Each species/life stage was then assigned to one or more of
the depth and velocity guilds (Table AQ 1–3 and Figure AQ 1–2).
Copyright 2009 by Placer County Water Agency
116100207
Information on depth and velocity use were obtained from the literature for speckled
dace, riffle sculpin, California roach, and macroinvertebrates. Speckled dace, riffle
sculpin, and California roach data were obtained from Moyle and Baltz (1985). The
depth and velocity range where the largest percentages of fish were observed in the
study was used for the depth and velocity plot and guild assignments.
Macroinvertebrates were assigned to all of the guild categories except the shallowest
(<0.25 feet) and the deepest categories (> 4 feet) based on combining the habitat use
information for macroinvertebrates from Waters (1976), Gore (2001), and USFWS
(2006).
Riparian vegetation habitat requirements, such as flow recession rates and inundation
frequencies and durations, were developed in the AQ 10 – Riparian Resources TSP.
1.3.
SPECIES AND LIFE STAGE PERIODICITY
A life stage periodicity chart (i.e., season of occurrence) for the aquatic species in the
Project area (Figure AQ 1 - 3) was developed from existing information (Meehan and
Bjornn 1992; Benke 1992, Moyle 2002), biologist observations, and study results, AQ 2
– TSR (PCWA 2009), AQ 12 – TSR (PCWA 2008). The periodicity chart was
developed and presented in the AQ 2 – TSR (PCWA 2009; Table AQ 2 – 14). Riparian
vegetation species periodicities are discussed in the AQ 10 – TSR (PCWA 2009).
2.0
REFERENCES
Benke, R. J. 1992. Native Trout of Western North America. American Fisheries Society
Monograph 6: American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland, 275 p.
Moyle, P. B. 2002. Inland Fishes of California. Berkeley: University of California Press
502 p.
Meehan, W. R. and T. C. Bjorn. 1991. Salmonid distributions and life histories. Pp. 47–
82 in W. R. Meehan, ed. Influences of forest and rangeland on salmonid fishes
and their habitats. Special Publ. no. 19. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda,
MD.
PCWA. 2009. AQ 2 – Fish Population Technical Study Report. PCWA Middle Fork
American River Project (FERC Project No. 2079). June 2009.
PCWA. 2008. AQ 12 – Special-Status Amphibian and Aquatic Reptile Technical Study
Report. PCWA Middle Fork American River Project (FERC Project No. 2079).
June 2008.
PCWA. 2009. AQ 10 – Riparian Resources Technical Study Report. PCWA Middle Fork
American River Project (FERC Project No. 2079). XXXX 2009.
Gore, J.A., J.B. Layzer, and J. Mead. 2001. Macroinvertebrate instream flow studies
after 20 years: a role in stream and river restoration. Regulated Rivers 17: 527-542.
Copyright 2009 by Placer County Water Agency
116100207
USFWS. 2006. Flow-habitat relationships for macroinvertebrates in the Sacramento
River between Keswick Dam and Battle Creek. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Energy Planning and Instream Flow Branch, Sacramento, CA.
Waters, B.F. 1976. A methodology for evaluating the effects of different steamflows on
salmonid habitat. In J.F. Osborn and C.H. Allman (Ed). Instream Flow Needs,
volume 2. American Fisheries Society, Western Div. Bethesda, Maryland.
Copyright 2009 by Placer County Water Agency
116100207
TABLES
Copyright 2009 by Placer County Water Agency
116100207
FIGURES
Copyright 2009 by Placer County Water Agency
116100207
MAPS
Copyright 2009 by Placer County Water Agency
116100207
APPENDIX A
Juvenile and Adult Rainbow Trout Habitat Suitability Criteria
Copyright 2009 by Placer County Water Agency
116100207
APPENDIX B
Habitat Suitability Criteria for Rainbow Trout Fry and Spawning, and for Juvenile
and Adult Hardhead, Sacramento Pikeminnow, and Sacramento Sucker
Copyright 2009 by Placer County Water Agency
116100207
APPENDIX C
Foothill-yellow Legged Frog Habitat Suitability Criteria
Copyright 2009 by Placer County Water Agency
116100207
Copyright 2009 by Placer County Water Agency
116100207