Kerber Creek Restoration Project

Download Kerber Creek Restoration Project

Post on 14-Feb-2016

39 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

DESCRIPTION

Kerber Creek Restoration Project. Case study employing statistical techniques to analyze effects of restoration activities, Saguache, CO. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

PowerPoint PresentationBy: Trevor Klein (OSM/VISTA, Kerber Creek Restoration Project); Laura Archuleta (Environmental Contaminants Specialist, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service), Jason Willis (Mine Restoration Field Coordinator, Trout Unlimited), Negussie Tedela, Ph.D. (Hydrologist, Bureau of Land Management), Brian Sanchez, Ph.D. (Environmental Contaminants Specialist, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service)Case study employing statistical techniques to analyze effects of restoration activities, Saguache, COKerber Creek Restoration ProjectIntroduction: Site History & Study ObjectivesMethods: Site Description & Study DesignResults: Presentation of DataDiscussion: Results & Study ErrorsConclusionsPresentation Overview2Site LocationNorthernmost end of Saguache County, CO in the northern San Luis ValleyTributary to San Luis Creek in the Rio Grande Closed BasinKerber Creek watershed is approximately 260 km2Includes private and BLM-owned rangeland and Rio Grande National Forest31880s 1970s (largely ceased by 1930s)Dozens of silver, lead, zinc, copper mines (largest: Rawley 12)Tailings originally collected and consolidated in streams and behind damsDams destroyed by flood events that carried tailings downstream and deposited them along the stream bank (mid-20th century)Bonanza Mining District: A HistoryRestoration Efforts, I1991: USFS & CDPHE investigate for Superfund designation1994: Bonanza Group (ASARCO, Inc., USFS, BLM, Local Landowners) approved to pursue Voluntary Cleanup1994-1999: Restoration projects implemented (upper watershed)2002: ASARCO, Inc. declares bankruptcy, halting restoration projectsRawley 12, pre-1996Rawley 12, 2012Squirrel Creek, pre-1992Squirrel Creek, 2012Restoration Efforts, IIKerber Creek Restoration ProjectMission: To sustain the health of the Kerber Creek watershed through collaborative restoration projects and community educationMethodsPhytostabilization: In-situ treatment of mine waste depositsStream Bank Stabilization: Installation of in-stream rock structures, re-gradation of stream banksRestoration Project ObjectivesImprove water qualityIncrease vegetation coverIncrease fish densityIncrease macroinvertebrate densityReduce width/depth ratioIncrease sinuosityCase Study: Problem and ObjectivesProblemObjectivesSystematic, rigorous data analyses rarely conducted for restoration projectsNeeds Comprehensive understanding of project results using easily monitored/derived variablesFurther knowledge of stream restoration processesEvaluate effects of extent of phytostabilization & time on sinuosityIdentify functional relationship between extent of phytostabilization & sinuosityAssess validity & feasibility of statistical techniques employed7Introduction: Site History & Study ObjectivesMethods: Site Description & Study DesignResults: Presentation of DataDiscussion: Results & Study ErrorsConclusionsPresentation Overview8Geology: Dominated by tertiary igneous rock (latite)Precipitation: Low elevation, 25.4 cm; High elevation, 76.2 cmEcologyVegetation: grasses, willows, sedgesFishery: brook trout, some brown trout & longnose daceHydrologyAvg. high flow: 60 cfsAvg. base flow: 4 cfs100-yr flood: 464 cfsGeomorphologyAvg. bankfull width: 4.3 4.9 mAvg. bankfull depth: < 0.3 mAvg. gradient: 3%Medium-to-large cobble substrateSite DescriptionMeasuring Variables, I: SinuosityMeasuring Variables, II: Extent of PhytostabilizationUsed to investigate Objective 1Repeated measures analysis of varianceTime: Effect of natural channel evolutionIndependent Variable: Phytostabilization index treatment levelsInteraction Term: Time BY Phytostabilization indexDependent Variable: SinuosityStatistical Analysis, I: ANOVA12Statistical Analysis, II: Linear RegressionNote differences in graphs of Cooks D statistic vs. observation, studentized residual vs. leverage, sinuosity vs. predicted value, and measures of normalityRegression Diagnostics With and Without OutlierIntroduction: Site History & Study ObjectivesMethods: Site Description & Study DesignResults: Presentation of DataDiscussion: Results & Study ErrorsConclusionsPresentation Overview15Results, I: ANOVANo statistically significant differences; all null hypotheses could not be rejectedRegression coefficient not significantAdjusted correlation coefficient = 0.357No final regression modelResults, II: Linear RegressionPhytostabilization Index (unitless)Sinuosity (unitless)Introduction: Site History & Study ObjectivesMethods: Site Description & Study DesignResults: Presentation of DataDiscussion: Results & Study ErrorsConclusionsPresentation Overview18Discussion, I: ANOVA19Discussion, II: Linear Regression20Discussion, III: Validity & Feasibility of the Study21Variable time periods since completion of restoration at each siteRemote sensing-induced errors at KC08Discussion, IV: Other ConsiderationsIntroduction: Site History & Study ObjectivesMethods: Site Description & Study DesignResults: Presentation of DataDiscussion: Results & Study ErrorsConclusionsPresentation Overview23Findings generally inconclusiveFurther, more rigorous data collection requiredNeed to develop more accurate, quantitative measures of extent of restorationNeed to identify appropriate statistical techniquesConclusionsSquirrel Creek, 1990sSquirrel Creek, 2013Thanks!Trevor Klein, OSM/VISTA CoordinatorE-mail: trevorik276@gmail.comPhone: 757-286-2579

Recommended

View more >