1 / 23

WRIA 43 Phase 3 INSTREAM FLOW RECOMMENDATIONS

WRIA 43 Phase 3 INSTREAM FLOW RECOMMENDATIONS. Building a Watershed Plan with the Functions and Values of the WRIA 43 Planning Unit April 18 th , 2006 Meeting. WRIA 43 Issue Development. Basic Over Riding Principal of the Watershed Plan.

amir-hewitt
Download Presentation

WRIA 43 Phase 3 INSTREAM FLOW RECOMMENDATIONS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WRIA 43Phase 3 INSTREAM FLOWRECOMMENDATIONS Building a Watershed Plan with the Functions and Values of the WRIA 43 Planning Unit April 18th, 2006 Meeting

  2. WRIA 43 Issue Development

  3. Basic Over Riding Principal of the Watershed Plan “The Crab Creek watershed is a unique and poorly understood physical and biological environment that requires local input for management to protect the functions and values of the residents and landowners within the watershed”.

  4. INSTREAM FLOW • Steering Committee determined to provide recommendations for an instream flow • Basic premise was for local citizens to recommend flows before Ecology sets flows • ISF study gave recommendations only for the flows which would maximize habitat area for the different life stages of trout • Importance of setting an ISF may not be that significant due to a 1943 BOR water right certificate that allocates “all the unappropriated public waters of Moses Lake, Crab Creek, Rocky Ford Creek, and Lind Coulee” from November 1 to April 15 annually • Ecology is split on whether to set or not (regional v. Olympia)

  5. Key Findings of Phase 2 • For the results of the instream flow study, the consultant specifically referenced: “it is important to understand that this analysis is an assessment of the flows in Crab Creek necessary to maintain maximum habitat area for native salmonids and is not an instream flow recommendation itself”. • The study was conducted during drought conditions and flows greater than 20 cfs were not available. Thus, the results are based on the stream conditions as they occurred when the flows were relatively low. • The study was conducted on two gauging sites that are located 28 miles apart on short perennial reaches of Crab Creek. However, an estimated 12 miles of main stem channel, between the two study locations, is dry more often than it flows.

  6. Key Findings of Phase 2 (cont) • The output from the PHABSIM model is for rainbow trout. However, since it cannot be sure if rainbow trout in Crab Creek exhibit the same behavior as fish used to establish the modeling curves, the consultant could not be sure that the curve trends precisely match the behavior of rainbow trout that have adapted to the Crab Creek conditions. • The hydraulic continuity analysis was unable to establish a relationship between the flows at the two gauge sites and therefore cannot predict the flow at one gauge based on the flow at the other gauge. • The primary conclusion of the instream flow analysis as dictated in the Phase 2 Technical Assessment was: “given the complex nature of Crab Creek’s hydrology, we believe it (the instream flow analysis) is limited in its ability to represent the actual environment that exists throughout the Crab Creek Watershed, and the results should not be extrapolated beyond these areas.” Therefore it is recommended that the flow recommendations are only applied to the estimated 1.15-mile reach of Crab Creek where each gauging station is located.

  7. Recommended Flows for Protection of Fish Habitat (trout)

  8. Recommended Flows

  9. CONDITIONS • The Planning Unit does not want to recommend a reservation account with the instream rule making process and does not support any such reservation associated with the instream flow rule making process. • Ecology to only condition future surface water diversions to the instream flow that are within the perennial reaches of Crab Creek at the Irby and Rocky Ford Road gauging locations, that section of creek which is no further than 1.15 mile upstream of each gauging station (the reaches that were evaluated in the Phase 2 Technical Assessment). This is recommended as a result of the hydraulic analysis conducted during the instream flow study between the two gauging stations which revealed that there is no correlation of flows between the gauging stations and the creek is flowing under unique hydrologic conditions. And the findings that the instream flow analysis is limited in its ability to represent the actual environment that exists throughout the Crab Creek Watershed.

  10. CONDITIONS (cont) • Ecology to only condition future groundwater withdrawals to the instream flow that are demonstrated to have a direct hydraulic continuity to the creek, such as wells within the unconsolidated sediment aquifers. Also Ecology to exempt groundwater withdrawals from an interruptible status if they meet the following provisions: • Groundwater withdrawal is extracting groundwater from the Grande Ronde basalt aquifers. • Groundwater wells are cased throughout the unconsolidated sediments and a minimum of 200-feet into the basalt bedrock. • Proponent of a groundwater well to be completed in the unconsolidated sediment aquifer and/or Wanapum aquifer that does not meet the previous two criteria demonstrates there is not a direct hydraulic connection from the groundwater withdrawal to the stream reach where the gauging station is located, which is based upon best available science.

  11. CONDITIONS (cont) • Ecology to reopen instream flow rule in 10-years after initial adoption date and reevaluate if flows should be modified if additional data and analysis is available. Ecology and WDFW will work with the WRIA 43 watershed group in a cooperative effort to reach agreement on any future flow modifications, if proposed. • Ecology or other state agencies will not propose any new or modify future existing instream flows within WRIA 43 unless they are negotiated and agreed upon with the local watershed planning group (and any subsequent adaptations to the implementation group).

  12. CONDITIONS (cont) • Ecology is obligated to use the mutually agreed upon flow levels for their draft rule and must start the process over from the beginning with local negotiated input if the public testimony at the hearings is strongly for recommending a different flow level. • Ecology not to condition any domestic exempt wells to the instream flow rule

  13. What’s Next??????? • Process has now been started to develop a mutually agreed upon flow recommendation • Ecology to consult with WDFW with PU recommendations • Ecology & WDFW either accept and agree with recommendations or provide edits to recommendations • Process continues until there is a “Mutually Agreed Upon Recommendation”

  14. Recommended Flows for Protection of Fish Habitat (trout)

  15. Gene St.Godard, P.G., L.HG. Principal Hydrogeologist/Owner Water & Natural Resource Group P.O. Box 28755, Spokane, WA 99228 509-468-4876, stgod1@comcast.net www.wnrgroup.com

  16. Instream Flow & It’s Relationship to Senior/Junior Water Right Holders Off=can’t use due to ISF. Off**=can’t use due to rule of prior appropriation (water law)

  17. Flows-Rocky Ford

  18. Flows at Irby

More Related