douglaspud.orgdouglaspud.org/hcp tc documents/2017_orri_monitoring_report.pdf · okanagan nation...

Okanagan Nation Alliance 101-3535 Old Okanagan Hwy, Westbank, BC, V4T 3L7

Phone: (250) 707-0095 Fax: (250) 707-0166

AQUATIC MONITORING OF THE OKANAGAN RIVER RESTORATION INITIATIVE

POST-CONSTRUCTION 2017

Prepared by:

Camille Rivard-Sirois, B.Sc. Karilyn Alex, M.Sc.

Colette Louie, Cert Technician

Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department

Prepared for:

ORRI Steering Committee HCP Committee

May 2018

2017

ONA Fisheries Department Draft Report ORRI Monitoring 2017 May 2018

i

Disclaimer: Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department reports frequently contain preliminary

data, and conclusions based on these may be subject to change. Reports may be cited in publications but their manuscript status (MS) must be noted.

Citation: Rivard-Sirois., C., K. Alex, C. Louie. 2018. Aquatic Monitoring of the Okanagan River

Restoration Initiative (ORRI) – Post-construction 2017. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.


ii

Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to document the effectiveness the Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (otherwise known as ORRI) near Oliver, BC over the 2017 monitoring year (4 years post ORRI-Phase II, 4 years post VDS 13 modifications and 8 years post ORRI Phase I). The objectives of ORRI, set at the beginning of the project, were to:

• Objective 1: Restore natural river channel shape, meander pattern, and substrate conditions to enhance the quantity and quality of spawning and rearing habitat for Sockeye, Chinook Salmon, Steelhead/Rainbow trout, other native resident fish species and additional aquatic organisms.

• Objective 2: Restore floodplain riparian plant communities to enhance fish and wildlife habitat, stabilize stream-banks, and improve water quality and ecosystem resilience.

ORRI projects in the Oliver area include:

• 2008: Floodplain reconnection and dike setback (Phase I). • 2009: River re-meander (Phase I). • 2013: Side channel connection (Phase II). • 2013: VDS 13 modifications. • 2014: Wetland creation.

Main highlights from 2017 monitoring (year 4 of 5) include:

• This extremely high and prorogued freshet created gravel recruitment to the ORRI site, increasing the spawning areas but also creating a sediment blockage issue in the Phase II side channel at low flows (no flow input into the side channel).

• The diversity of fish habitats is increasing over time (including 4 deeper pools in the mainstem).

• The slope between cross-sections in the river mainstem increased.

• As desired, the SWE in the river at Parkrill Outlet at high flow remained as pre-treatment.

• Phase II side channel acted as temperature refugia for most of the summer (cooler than river mainstem due to groundwater connection and/or vegetation coverage), but the dissolved oxygen concentration was a potential barrier fish to movement and habitat selection. Therefore, it is unlikely that salmonids reared in the side channel during that period.

• Water depths, velocities and Froude measured at Sockeye redds were within desired range.

• At peak spawning, over a third of the Okanagan Sockeye run (in Index section) was enumerated in Phase I restoration reach, which is >7 times more than pre-treatment. This proportion during a very low escapement year indicates that Phase I restored areas are highly attractive.

• Four Chinook spawners and one adult Rainbow Trout were observed in the ORRI restoration reach this year, during the sockeye spawner enumeration surveys.


iii

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ ii Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................... vi List of Acronyms – Organizations & Programs ................................................................................... vii List of Other Acronyms .................................................................................................................... viii List of Okanagan Names .................................................................................................................... ix

1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Description of ORRI .................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Monitoring objectives ................................................................................................................ 8

2.0 Monitoring timeline ................................................................................................................... 11

3.0 Stream channel response & channel morphometry ..................................................................... 11 3.1 Methods ................................................................................................................................... 12 3.2 Results and discussion ............................................................................................................. 16

4.0 Hydrologic response ................................................................................................................... 19 4.1 Methods ................................................................................................................................... 19 4.2 Results and discussion ............................................................................................................. 23

5.0 Fish & fish habitat response ........................................................................................................ 29 5.1 Methods ................................................................................................................................... 29 5.2 Results and discussion ............................................................................................................. 33

6.0 Riparian condition & terrestrial species habitat response ............................................................ 37

7.0 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................ 38 7.1 Monitoring highlights: .............................................................................................................. 38 7.1 Recommendations and next steps:.......................................................................................... 41

8.0 References ................................................................................................................................. 42

Appendix A: Monitoring methods ..................................................................................................... 48 APPENDIX A1: Cross section sampling procedures ........................................................................ 49 APPENDIX A2: Froude Number calculations .................................................................................. 50 APPENDIX A3: Channel morphometry measurements .................................................................. 51 APPENDIX A4: Sinuosity measurements ........................................................................................ 52 APPENDIX A5: Thalweg profile/ reach slope .................................................................................. 52 APPENDIX A6: Surface water elevation (SWE) & Groundwater elevation (GWE) ......................... 54 APPENDIX A7: Groundwater depth ............................................................................................... 56 APPENDIX A8: Hydro-period and floodplain inundation ............................................................... 57 APPENDIX A9: Fish habitat features survey ................................................................................... 58 APPENDIX A10: Macrophytes survey ............................................................................................. 59


iv

APPENDIX A11: Invertebrate monitoring....................................................................................... 60 APPENDIX A12: Water temperature measurements ..................................................................... 62 APPENDIX A13: Snorkeling procedures ......................................................................................... 63 APPENDIX A14: Redd distribution assessments ............................................................................ 64 APPENDIX A15: Salmon spawning enumeration survey ................................................................ 65 APPENDIX A16: Egg incubation assessments ................................................................................. 66 APPENDIX A17: Fine sediment collections and analysis ................................................................ 68 APPENDIX A18: Streambed gravel assessments ............................................................................ 69 APPENDIX A19: Minnow trapping procedures .............................................................................. 70

Appendix B: Monitoring data and analysis ........................................................................................ 71 APPENDIX B1: Yearly river hydrographs since ORRI restoration work .......................................... 72 APPENDIX B2: Cross-sectional data and other survey data ........................................................... 74 APPENDIX B3: River mainstem thawleg bed slope and pool depth calculation ............................ 82 APPENDIX B4: High-water marks observed in Phase II side channel ............................................. 83 APPENDIX B5: Calculation bankfull and low flow distances to the top of bank ............................ 86 APPENDIX B6: Analysis of SWE recorded at various discharges .................................................... 87 APPENDIX B7: Surface water elevations recorded at monitoring stations (water level loggers) .. 88 APPENDIX B8: Groundwater elevations recorded at monitoring stations (groundwater wells) ... 90 APPENDIX B9: Water temperature data ........................................................................................ 92 APPENDIX B10: Dissolved oxygen data (Phase II Side Channel) .................................................... 94 APPENDIX B11: Snorkel data .......................................................................................................... 95 APPENDIX B12: Redd survey data .................................................................................................. 97 APPENDIX B13: Sockeye enumeration data .................................................................................. 99

Appendix C: Summary tables from aquatic monitoring of the Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (ORRI) – Post-construction 2009 - 2012 ........................................................................................... 101

APPENDIX C1: Parameters of stream channel response 2009-2012 ........................................... 102 APPENDIX C2: Parameters of hydrologic response 2009-2012 ................................................... 104 APPENDIX C3: Parameters of fish and fish habitat response 2009-2012 .................................... 106 APPENDIX C4: Parameters of riparian and wildlife response 2009-2012 .................................... 110 APPENDIX C5: Parameters of riparian and wildlife response 2013-2014 .................................... 111


v

List of Figures and Tables

Figure 1: Location of the ORRI projects within the Okanagan Valley, British Columbia .............................. 1 Figure 2: The phases and projects of ORRI near Oliver, BC .......................................................................... 2

Figure 3: Progression of the ORRI Site 2008-2016 ........................................................................................ 3 Figure 4: Floodplain re-connection within ORRI-Phase I .............................................................................. 5 Figure 5: River re-meander within ORRI-Phase I .......................................................................................... 5

Figure 6: Natural side channel re-connection within ORRI-Phase II ............................................................. 6 Figure 7: VDS 13 modifications ..................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 8: Floodplain features creation .......................................................................................................... 7

Figure 9: Mean monthly discharges in the Okanagan River near Oliver .................................................... 12 Figure 10: Real time hydrometric data graph for Okanagan River near Oliver .......................................... 13 Figure 11: Location of the cross-sections within the ORRI Reach .............................................................. 15

Figure 12: Thalweg bed profile in the ORRI reach in 2017 ......................................................................... 18 Figure 13: Location of sampling sites within the ORRI (hydrologic response) ........................................... 21

Figure 14: Photos of ORRI Phase II approach and entrance channels in 2017 at low flows ...................... 24 Figure 15: 2017 Surface water elevations at ORRI Phase II monitoring stations ....................................... 26 Figure 16: Lougheed floodplain inundation at peak flow in 2018 .............................................................. 27

Figure 17: Lougheed floodplain inundation at peak flow in 2016 and 2011 .............................................. 28 Figure 18: Locations of the measurements for the fish and fish habitat response parameters ................ 31 Figure 19: Locations of fish and fish habitat response within ORRI Phase I and II ..................................... 32

Figure 20: Daily average water temperature in the ORRI – Phase II side channel in 2017 ........................ 34 Table 1: ORRI projects near Oliver, BC ......................................................................................................... 2

Table 2: Key features created within the ORRI projects ............................................................................... 4 Table 3: ORRI aquatic monitoring objectives ............................................................................................... 8 Table 4: Timeline of the monitoring completed ......................................................................................... 11

Table 5: Methods of monitoring the parameters of stream channel response & channel morphology ... 14 Table 6: Summary of results for monitoring the parameters of stream channel response ....................... 17 Table 7: Methods of monitoring the parameters of hydrologic response ................................................. 20

Table 8: Description of the water level loggers monitored within ORRI .................................................... 22 Table 9: Summary of results for monitoring the parameters of hydrologic response ............................... 25 Table 10: Methods of monitoring the parameters of fish and fish habitat response ................................ 30

Table 11: Summary of results for monitoring the parameters of fish and fish habitat response .............. 35


vi

Acknowledgements The Okanagan Nation Alliance (ONA) acknowledges the continued support and commitment of the many agencies and project partners that provide both technical expertise and funding to successfully complete such an endeavor. The ONA would like to acknowledge:

• Osoyoos Indian Band (OIB). • Douglas County Public Utility District and Chelan County Public Utility District through the Wells

Habitat Conservation Plan Tributary Committee (HCP). • Environment Canada’s Habitat Stewardship Program (HSP). • Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation. • Bob Newbury, Newbury Hydraulics, ONA Engineering Advisor.

The agencies that have contributed to the planning and the implementation of the ORRI restoration works through the ORRI Steering Committee include:

• Canadian Okanagan Basin Technical Working Group. • BC Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development. • Okanagan Nation Alliance. • Osoyoos Indian Band. • Fisheries and Oceans Canada. • The Nature Trust. • Canadian Wildlife Service of Environment Canada.

ONA would also like to acknowledge the assistance of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development for permitting access to the site via dike. All field data collection related to this project was implemented in accordance with directions received from Traditional Ecological Knowledge keepers. This has included acknowledgments and respect of the siwłkw and tm’xwulaʔx, as well as, the return of gravel to the qawsitkʷ after analysis. Indigenous Peoples of the Okanagan are the exclusive owners of their cultural and intellectual properties.


vii

List of Acronyms – Organizations & Programs

Acronym Organizations and Programs Country

CCT Colville Confederated Tribes USA

COBTWG Canadian Okanagan Basin Technical Working Group Canada

COSEWIC Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada Canada

CWS Canadian Wildlife Service (Environment Canada) Canada

DFO Fisheries and Oceans Canada (federal) Canada

EC Environment Canada (federal) Canada

FWMT Fish-Water Management Tools program Canada

HCP Habitat Compensation Plan USA

HCTF Habitat Conservation Trust Fund Canada

HSP Habitat Stewardship Program (federal) Canada

MoE Ministry of Environment (provincial; now called MoFLNRO) Canada

MoFLNRO Ministry of Forest, Lands and Natural Resource Operations (provincial) (previously called MoE)

Canada

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration USA

NPCC Northwest Power and Conservation Council USA

OBMEP Okanagan Basin Monitoring and Evaluation Program USA

OBWB Okanagan Basin Water Board Canada

OC Okanagan College Canada

OIB Osoyoos Indian Band Canada

OLRS Okanagan Lake Regulation System Canada

ONA Okanagan Nation Alliance Canada

ONAFD Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department (previously ONFC) Canada

ORRI Okanagan River Restoration Initiative Canada

ORWHFS Okanagan Region Wildlife Heritage Fund Society Canada

OSHIP Okanogan Sub-Basin Habitat Improvement Program USA

PRCC Priest Rapids Coordinating Committee USA

PUD Public Utility District USA

SARA Species at Risk Act Canada

SECL Summit Environmental Consultants Ltd. Canada

TNT The Nature Trust of British Columbia Canada

UBC-O University of British Columbia - Okanagan Campus Canada

WSC Water Survey of Canada Canada


viii

List of Other Acronyms

Acronym Terminology

BC British Columbia

cms Cubic meters per second also as (m3/s)

DO Dissolved oxygen

DS Downstream

Fr Froude number

GWE Groundwater elevation

HEC-RAS Hydrologic Engineering Center-River Analysis System

LB Left bank

LWD Large Woody Debris

NA Not available

Q Flow discharge

no. number

RB Right bank

SWE Surface water elevation

TBD To be determined

TEK Traditional Ecological Knowledge

US Upstream

VDS Vertical Drop Structure

XS Cross-section


ix

List of Okanagan Names

Translation provided by Richard Armstrong, Penticton Indian Band. Indigenous Peoples of the Okanagan are the exclusive owners of their cultural and intellectual properties.

Okanagan Place Names (Okanagan-English Translation)

akskʷəkʷant Inkaneep Creek

nx əntkʷitkʷ Columbia River

nˁaylintǝn McIntyre Dam area

kłusxənitkʷ Okanagan Lake

qawsitkʷ Okanagan River

qawst’ik’ʷt, also known as tiwcən Skaha Lake

snʕaxəlqaxʷiyaʔ Vaseux Creek

suwiws Osoyoos Lake

sxwǝxwnikw Okanagan Falls

Okanagan Species Names (Okanagan-English Translation)

kəkni or kəkn i Kokanee

ncʕacʕayna Blotched Tiger Salamander

ntitiyx or ntytyix Chinook

p'əskʷaqs Great Basin Spadefoot

qwəyqwəyʕaćaʔ Steelhead

sćwin Sockeye

snınaʔ Western Screech Owl

spəqʷlic Burbot

xwuminaʔ Rainbow Trout

xʔaʔłqʔılʔm Yellow-breasted Chat


1

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Description of ORRI The Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (ORRI) projects near Oliver are located on the qawsitkʷ (Okanagan River), a tributary of the nx əntkʷitkʷ (Columbia River) system (Fig. 1). The ORRI projects are organized as an initiative that groups together technical expertise and agencies to address restoration needs in the mainstem Okanagan River (qawsitkʷ). The ORRI Steering Committee has overseen four projects in the Oliver area and currently others in Penticton, BC. This report chronicles the effectiveness of the projects near Oliver, labeled in Table 1 and Figure 2.

Figure 1: Location of the ORRI projects within the Okanagan Valley, BC

ORRI worksite – Phases I and II

(Modified from Google Earth, 2009)


2

Table 1: ORRI projects near Oliver, BC

Figure 2: The phases and projects of ORRI near Oliver, BC

Project ORRI Phase Key objectives Treatment timeline

Floodplain reconnection Phase I Floodplain & riparian restoration Completed 2008

River re-meander (isolated oxbows reconnection)

Phase I Fish habitat creation Completed 2009

Side channel reconnection Phase II Fish habitat creation Connected 2013

VDS13 modifications Phase I Fish habitat improvement Completed 2013

Floodplain features creation

Phase I Amphibian ponds creation Completed 2014

Phase I Dike Setback & Reactivated Floodplain (2008)

Wetland (Amphibian Ponds) created (2014)

Modified VDS 13 (2013)

Phase I Reconnected Isolated Oxbows (2009)

Phase II Reconnected Side Channel (2013)

Phase II Mainstem Habitat Features (2013)


3

Figure 3: Progression of the ORRI site 2008-2016 (imagery from Google, 2017)

BEFORE Phase I & Phase II (2008 orthophoto)

Isolated Oxbows Dike along the River

Channelized River

Disconnected Historic Floodplain

7 years AFTER Phase I and 3 years AFTER Phase II & VDS 13 Phase (2016 orthophoto)

Phase II - Riffle & Approach Channel

Phase II - Reconnected Side Channel

Phase I – Naturally Created Features

VDS 13 modified

Phase I - Reactivated Floodplain

Phase I - Dike Setback Phase I – Remeandered River (dual channel)

1 year AFTER Phase I (2010 orthophoto)


4

The qawsitkʷ (Okanagan River) was significantly altered in the 1950’s; only 16% (4.9 km) of the river is remaining in a natural (2.8 km) or semi-natural state (2.1 km). Approximately 84% (30.4 km) of the river has been channelized, straightened, narrowed and dyked (Bull, 1999; NPCC, 2004).As result, the entire river length has been reduced by 50% (Bull et al., 2000). Natural wildlife linked to the qawsitkʷ (Okanagan River) has been negatively impacted. The river has lost 90% of its riparian vegetation and wetland habitat (Bull et al., 2000). Some of the species that stand to benefit from ORRI are: Anadromous salmon species:

• Sockeye (Oncorhynchus nerka). • Steelhead (O. mykiss), listed as threatened in US. • Chinook (O. tshawytscha), listed as threatened by COSEWIC in Canada.

Native resident fish species:

• Rainbow Trout (O. mykiss). • Kokanee (O. nerka).

Several wildlife species listed as special concern, threatened or endangered (COSEWIC, 2012) or at risk under BC blue-red list (MOE, 2012). For example:

• Yellow-breasted Chat (Icteria virens auricollis). • Western Screech Owl (Megascops kennicottii macfarlanei). • Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum). • Great Basin Spadefoot (Spea intermontana). • Rocky Mountain Ridged Mussel (Gonidea angulata).

Habitat features that support the above listed species are itemized in Table 2 by project. Over time progression of the ORRI site is presented in Figure 3.

Table 2: Key features created within the ORRI projects

ORRI Project Key features created

Phase I - Floodplain reconnection (Fig. 4)

• 1,200 m of setback dike • 25,000 m2 of reconnected floodplain • 300 m2 of wood debris for snake habitat

Phase I - River re-meander (Fig. 5) • 500 m of added river length • 11,175 m2 of pool-riffle habitat (replacing glide) • 9,100 m2 of spawning areas

Phase II - Side channel connection (Fig. 6)

• 5,240 m2 of side channel habitat • 1920 m2 pool habitat • 2490 m2 riffle habitat • 1650 m2 spawning areas

VDS 13 modifications (Fig. 7) • 4,575 m2 of improved spawning area

Floodplain features creation (Fig. 8) • 200 m2 of salamander pond habitat (1 pond) • 4 spade foot ponds • 400 m2 of boulder and woody terrestrial features


5

Figure 4: Floodplain re-connection within ORRI-Phase I

Figure 5: River re-meander within ORRI-Phase I

Dike cuts

Setback dike

Lougheed Island

Riffle (created spawning platform)

Habitat features (boulders, LWD)

Nemes Island


6

Figure 6: Natural side channel re-connection within ORRI-Phase II

Side channel

Exit channel

Riffle

Lower pond

Upper pond

Entrance channel

Approach channel


7

Figure 7: VDS 13 modifications

Figure 8: Floodplain features creation

4 V-shape components removed to enhance fish habitat (velocities, substrate, and Froude numbers) upstream of the VDS


8

1.2 Monitoring objectives This report summarizes data cumulated since the start of monitoring in 2008 until 2015 based on the objectives of the project (Table 3).

Table 3: ORRI aquatic monitoring objectives in relation to the performance indicators measured, their associated ecosystem processes and benefits, and the expected response

Objective 1 Restore natural river channel shape, meander pattern, and substrate conditions to enhance the quantity and quality of spawning and rearing habitat for Sockeye, Chinook Salmon, Steelhead/Rainbow trout, native resident fish species

and aquatic organisms.

Performance Indicators Associated ecosystem processes and benefits Expected response

Associated study

Stre

am c

hann

el re

spon

se &

cha

nnel

mor

phom

etry

Cross sectional dimensions

Bankfull width & depth

Reconnecting historic meanders and adjusting the channel dimensions according to estimated equilibrium

conditions in order to maintain quantity, quality and diversity of in-stream habitat.

increase

HCP

Summer flow depth

Narrower deeper channel provides hiding cover and cooler water for summer rearing and migrating salmonids

and aquatic organisms that sustain them. increase

Spawning depth & velocity

Determine the ranges of depths and velocities available to spawning salmon and provide the preferred habitats at

the range of discharges encountered.

within preferred

range

Spawning Froude

number (Fr)

Froude numbers of 0.315 ± 0.1 were found to be preferred by spawning Sockeye (and Chinook) salmon and

the ability to provide these conditions in the variety of flows adds to the resilience of the spawning population.

increase frequency of preferred Fr

Channel morphology

Area of pools Determine the changes, effectiveness, and stability of

created in-stream structures.

increase

HCP

Area of riffles increase Area of glides decrease

Plan-form & slope

Sinuosity Channel structure and hydrology support a self-sustaining system where channel adjusts its form (i.e. local slopes

and channel pattern) in response to natural fluctuations in discharge and sediment resulting in a stable channel.

trend toward stability in sinuosity

Slope overall stable;

localized increase


9

Table 3: ORRI aquatic monitoring objectives in relation to the performance indicators measured, their associated ecosystem processes and benefits, and the expected response - CONTINUED

Objective 1


Associated study

Hydr

olog

ic re

spon

se Surface water

(river)

Bankfull distance to the top of the bank

Channel and floodplain interactions allow shallow groundwater aquifer recharge and maintain diverse floodplain habitats such as

depression wetlands and abandoned oxbows. decrease ONAFD

(in-kind)

Low-flow distance to top

of bank

New channel dimensions and increased sinuosity raise low-flow water surface elevations and re-establish hyporheic linkages,

thereby increasing water availability to native riparian vegetation during the growing season.

decrease ONAFD (in-kind)

Surface water elevation

(SWE)

Monitor the high water conditions & answer any questions about post-project water levels upstream. Information becomes more

important as future phases progress.

no impact at Parkrill HCP

Floodplain activation

Groundwater elevation

(GWE)

Higher groundwater elevation (lower depth below ground) during plant growing season allow for higher floodplain vegetation

survival. increase

ONAFD (in-kind)

Floodplain inundation

Increased floodplain inundation frequency and duration in the restored floodplain (Nemes/Lougheed) allowing shallow groundwater aquifers to recharge, and maintain diverse

floodplain habitats such as depression wetlands.

increase frequency

& area

Fish

hab

itat r

espo

nse

Habitat quality and

diversity

Habitat type and habitat

features

Habitat features are stable and self-sustaining over time providing holding areas, cover and refugia for fish and invertebrates;

increased quantity and quality subsequently increasing density and percent composition of salmonids and other native fish

species.

increase diversity HCP

Invasive macrophytes Reduction of exotic fish species habitat. decrease HCP

Invertebrate monitoring

Determine ecosystem health of the restored reach by the increase in the quantity and diversity of invertebrates. increase HCP

Summer water temperatures

Deepening channel cross sections and re-establishing riparian plant communities reduce high summer water temperatures for

salmonids. cooler ONAFD

(in-kind)

Fish population, densities &

percent composition

Fish holding & rearing habitat

Channel structure and hydrology support increased quantity and quality of salmonid habitat, in terms of:

1. Increasing numbers and density of rearing salmonids. during the summer months (i.e., trout, Chinook). 2. Increasing spawning areas selected. 3. Increasing quality of the incubation environment for eggs.

increasing trend for

salmonids HCP

Redd counts & distribution increase Funded in

part through FWMT &

Skaha projects

Sockeye & Chinook

spawners counts

increase

Egg incubation success increase ONAFD

in-kind

Substrate composition

& quality

Fine sediment accumulation Channel structure & hydrology support a self-sustaining system

where channel adjusts its form maintaining a balance between erosion & deposition resulting in clean & aerated spawning &

rearing substrate within optimal size ranges.

decrease In collaboration

with OC Substrate gravel sizes

within preferred

range


10

Table 3: ORRI aquatic monitoring objectives in relation to the performance indicators measured, their associated ecosystem processes and benefits, and the expected response – CONTINUED

Objective 2: Restore floodplain riparian plant communities to enhance fish and wildlife habitat, stabilize stream banks, and improve water quality and ecosystem resilience.


Associated study

Ripa

rian

cond

ition

resp

onse

Native plant community

and re-vegetation

survival

Re-vegetation of the riparian areas

along river course & associated extending

floodplains

Re-established native riparian vegetation contributes shade, cover and water quality and in-stream nutrients;

increases potential for woody debris recruitment and storage; and provides seed and vegetative sources for

future recruitment.

Dense and deep riparian root systems stabilize banks and reduce erosion rates, support overhanging vegetation,

and maintain deep and narrow channels thereby contributing to overall habitat quality and complexity.

Increase un-funded

Wild

life

habi

tat r

espo

nse

Wildlife habitat value

Avian, reptile, amphibian and small mammal

population/ diversity/usage

measures

Enhanced riparian corridor and floodplain habitat increases the quality, quantity and diversity of forage,

cover and breeding sites thereby increasing the abundance and diversity of terrestrial wetland- and

riparian-dependent species using these habitats.

Increase HSP Un-funded

Note: The detailed results of the Objective 2 aren’t included in this report, only a summary is presented.


11

2.0 Monitoring timeline Table 4 outlines the timeline for pre- and post-treatment monitoring. Pre-treatment for ORRI-Phase I occurred between August 2008 and June 2009. Pre-treatment for ORRI-Phase II occurred between 2008 and 2012. Field work completed as far back as 2001 supplemented some of the pre-treatment information. The performance indicator measurements repeated during post-treatment monitoring vary in regard to when measureable results can be detected. For this reason the intervals at which a number of the parameters are monitored varies. Restoration effects may not be measureable or apparent for 5 – 20 years after construction. For parameters that drive many of the stream channel and hydrologic responses, the goal was to monitor the effects of at least one “two-year flood” return interval.

Table 4: Timeline of the monitoring completed

Performance Indicators

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Stre

am c

hann

el re

spon

se &

ch

anne

l mor

phom

etry

Cross sectional dimensions

Bankfull width & depth x x x x x Summer flow depth x x x x x

Spawning depth x x x x x x x x Spawning velocity x x x x x x x x

Spawning Froude No. x x x x x x x x

Channel morphology Area of pools x x x x x x Area of riffles x x x x x x Area of glides x x x x x x

Plan-form & slope Sinuosity x x x

Slope x x x x x x

Hydr

olog

ic

resp

onse

River surface water elevation (SWE)

Bankfull distance to the top of the bank x x x x x x x x x Low-flow distance to top of bank x x x x x x x x SWE throughout the project area x x x x x x x x x

Floodplain activation Groundwater elevation (GWE) x x x x x x x x

Floodplain inundation x x x

Fish

hab

itat r

espo

nse Habitat quality and

diversity

Habitat types & habitat features x x x x x x Invasive macrophytes x x x

Invertebrate diversity & richness x x x Summer water temperatures x x x x x x x x x x

Fish population, densities & percent

composition

Fish holding & rearing habitat x x x x x x x x x x x x x Redd counts & distribution x x x x x x x x x x x x

Enumeration of spawning SK & CH x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Egg incubation success x x

Substrate composition & quality

Fine sediment accumulation x x x x x Substrate gravel sizes x x x x x x x

Terr

estr

ial

resp

onse

Native plant community & soils

Re-vegetation of the riparian areas along river course & floodplains x x x x x x x x x x

Wildlife habitat value Avian, reptile, amphibian & small

mammal population/ diversity/usage measures x x x x x x x x x x

Note: Construction works for Phase I (river re-meander) occurred in summer 2009 and in summer 2013 for Phase II (side channel).


12

3.0 Stream channel response & channel morphometry

3.1 Methods For cross-sectional dimensions that target summer flows or typical spawning flows it is important to note that the flows are based on data collected by the Water Survey of Canada station number 08NM085 (station named “Okanagan River Near Oliver, BC”). Mean monthly flows for October (spawning flows) are 12.6 m3/s for an all-years average (from 1944-2014; Fig. 9 & 10). This station is representative of the ORRI site and is located downstream 10 km with no substantial tributary inputs between.

Figure 9: Mean monthly discharges in the Okanagan River near Oliver (Source: WSC 2014)


13

Figure 10: Real time hydrometric data graph for Okanagan River near Oliver in 2017 (Source: WSC 2018)

The performance criteria were set based on dynamic equilibrium dimensions outlined in Newbury and Gaboury (1993). The general monitoring method and timing are outlined in Table 5, along with the performance criteria for the parameters measured. Specific monitoring methods are found in their associated appendix. The locations of the measurements for the stream channel response and channel morphometry are found in Figure 11.


14

Table 5: Methods of monitoring the parameters of stream channel response and channel morphology

Performance indicators Expected response Performance criteria General monitoring method

sprin

g su

mm

er

fall

win

ter

Appe

ndix

Cross-sectional

dimensions

Bankfull width increase

Design dimensions Bw= 25-35m from similar sloped anabranch

reference reach Standard XS surveyed to monuments based on RIC

(1998) standards; dimensions compared to HEC RAS model and time series excel XS plots; before

and after at 13 XS including 16+899, 17+026, 17+061, 17+160, 17+289, 17+347, measured during

summer flows 8-20m3/s.

x

A1 Bankfull depth increase

Design dimensions Bd=1.5-2.5m from similar sloped anabranch

reference reach x

Summer flow depth increase Pools exist;

total area of pool is stable x Spawning

depth within preferred

range SK: 0.2-0.6m (Long et al. 2006)

CH: 0.1-0.9m (Wright & Long 2006) Spawning cross sections completed identically to the above cross sections at the flows are within

what is expected for spawning (6-12m3/s).

x x

A2 Spawning velocity

within preferred range

SK: 0.4-0.9m/s (Long et al. 2006) CH: 0.2-1.3m/s (Wright & Long 2006) x x

Spawning Froude number

increase frequency of preferred Fr

Fr = 0.3 ± 0.1 at spawning flows of 10m3/s (Long et al. 2006)

Froude numbers are calculated from cross sectional surveys using velocity and water depth

measurements at flows between 6-12m3/s. x

Channel morphology

Area of pools increase Pools are created and remain

stable over time Identify, map and measure each habitat unit: pools,

riffles, and glides; calculate unit area (m2); photographs taken of each unit.

x

A3 Area of riffles increase Riffles are created and remain

stable over time x Area of glides decrease Glides decrease x

Plan-form & slope

Sinuosity trend toward

stability in sinuosity

Sinuosity = river length/valley length

Channel plan-form maps and photos are taken; channel length & sinuosity surveyed using standard profile measurements (Newbury & Gaboury 1993). x A4

Slope

stable overall in restored reach; localized slopes

increase

Channelized design grade=0.06%; Anabranch reach=0.13%

Historical=0.19%

Channel length & elevations surveyed using standard profile measurements and compared overtime.

Localized slopes calculated between XS. Maximal localized slope determined. Downhill slopes =

positive values; uphill slopes = negative values.

x A5


15

Figure 11: Location of the cross-sections within the ORRI reach (Google Earth 2016)

Phase II

Phase I

Phase VDS 13

Pool us Phase II

XS 1

XS 2

XS 3

XS 4

XS 5

XS 6

XS 7

XS 8

XS 9

XS 10

XS 11

XS 12 XS 13

XS 14


16

3.2 Results and discussion The summary of the results for monitoring the parameters of stream channel response and channel morphology pre- and post-treatment is found in Table 6. Detailed data collected in 2017 are found in the appendices. 2017 Interpretation of findings relative to performance criteria:

• In 2017, the river flow ranged between 9 m3/s and 105 m3/s (Figure 10). The freshet was particularly high in 2017 with river discharges in May higher than the maximum recorded at this river station (1944-2015). Flows were maintained higher than average throughout the summer until September.

• The high freshet created gravel recruitment to the ORRI site as pervious high freshet years (2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 & 2016; Appendix B1), increasing the spawning areas within the ORRI reach. However, sediments also deposited in Phase II approach channel creating a blockage issue at low flows (fall 2017; Figure 14). This year, contrarily to previous years (2014 and 2016) and as recommended by the ORRI Steering Committee, the sediment blockage wasn’t manually removed.

• As previous years, water depths measured at redds were within the preferred range for Sockeye and Chinook throughout the restoration reach.

• As previous years, water velocities measured at redds were within the preferred range for Sockeye and Chinook throughout the restoration reach.

• The Froude Number calculated at redds remain improved (frequency of preferred range for Sockeye increased) since construction.

• Pool and riffle habitat continues to dominate the restoration reach and the diversity of fish habitats is increasing over time.

• Deeper pools were observed in the river mainstem (Figure 12; Appendix B3):

o dowstream Phase II riffle (2.9m deeper); o upstream of the Lougheed Oxbow (0.6m deeper); o upstream of the Nemes Oxbow (1.0m deeper); and o downstream of the Nemes Oxbow (1.5 m deeper).

• The overall slope of the thalweg mainstem bed in the restoration reach remained stable and is similar to slope found in the anabranch reach (semi-natural section), as desired (Appendix B3).

• The localized slope between cross-sections in the river mainstem increased due to the creation of deeper pools and the deposition of gravel throughout the restoration reach (Appendix B3), providing more diversity.


17

Table 6: Summary of results for monitoring the parameters of stream channel response

Performance indicators

Expected response & Performance criteria Location Results

pre-treatment Results

2012 Results

2014 Results

2015 Results

2016 Results

2017 Unit Comments App-endix

Cros

s-se

ctio

nal d

imen

sion

s

Bankfull width no change after 2012

Phase I 52.1 ± 4.3 94.5 ± 17.8 X X X X m -

B4

Phase II 49.8 ± 0.8 92.9 ± 19.6 X X X X Bankfull

depth no change after 2012 Phase I 4.2 ± .0.2 3.8 ± 0.5 X X X X

m - Phase II 3.9 ± 0.1 3.0 ± 0.3 X X X X

Summer flow

depth created pools remain stable

Phase I 0.6 - 0.9 1.20 - 2.06 X X X X m Based on maximum pool

depths at XS Phase II 0.3 - 0.6 0.83 - 1.04 X X X X

Spawn depth

within preferred range: SK: 0.2-6 m (Long et al. 2006)

CH: 0.1-0.9 m (Wright & Long 2006)

VDS 13 X X 0.67 ± 0.32 0.5 (1 data) 0.68 ± 0.04 0.77 (1 data)

m Field surveys: Aug. 8 & 13, 2008* Oct. 30, 2012; Q=11 m3/s Oct. 30, 2014; Q=11 m3/s Oct. 26, 2015; Q=9 m3/s Oct. 28, 2016; Q=15 m3/s Oct. 30, 2017; Q=11 m3/s Note: Q at WSC station 08NM085

** data to be reviewed

B12

Phase I 0.77 ± 0.16** 0.64 ± 0.31 0.47 ± 0.20 0.50 ± 0.24 0.57 ± 0.26 0.47 ± 0.23 Phase II 0.55 ± 0.13** 0.83 ± 0.16 0.67 ± 0.26 X 0.82 ± 0.13 0.74 ± 0.12 US pool X X 1.04 ± 0.05 1.15 (1 data) 1.13 ± 0.12 1.00 (2 data)

Spawn velocity

within preferred range: SK: 0.4-0.9 m/s (Long et al. 2006)

CH: 0.2-1.5 m/s (Wright & Long 2006)

VDS 13 X X 0.71 ± 0.08 0.58 (1 data) 0.68 ± 0.36 0.39 (1 data)

m/s Phase I 0.53 ± 0.15** 0.53 ± 0.17 0.71 ± 0.23 0.60 ± 0.24 0.72 ± 0.23 0.78 ± 0.36 Phase II 0.71 ± 0.20** 0.43 ± 0.08 0.52 ± 0.22 no redd 0.63 ± 0.09 0.54 ± 0.08 US pool X X 0.44 ± 0.01 0.48 (1 data) 0.43 ± 0.06 0.51 (2 data)

Spawn Froude number

(Fr)

increase frequency of preferred Fr for SK: 0.3 ± 0.1 at spawning flows

of 10 m3/s (Long et al. 2006)

VDS 13 X X 0.28 ± 0.04 0.26 (1 data) 0.26 ± 0.13 0.14 (1 data)

Fr Phase I 0.19 ± 0.06** 0.32 ± 0.08 0.34 ± 0.13 0.29 ± 0.12 0.33 ± 0.15 0.38 ± 0.17 Phase II 0.32 ± 0.10** 0.15 ± 0.04 0.20 ± 0.09 X 0.23 ± 0.05 0.20 ± 0.04 US pool X X 0.14 ± 0.01 0.14 (1 data) 0.13 ± 0.02 0.16 (2 data)

Chan

nel

mor

phol

ogy

Area of pools

expect increase; created pools remain stable over time

Phase I 0 7,283 X 8,763 X X

m2

Field surveys: Jul. 15, 2008 Sep. 3, 2009 Sep. 26, 2012 Nov. 9, 2015 * including US pool

-

Phase II* 0 1,482 X 2,610 X X Area of riffles

expect increase; created riffles remain stable over time

Phase I 0 11,002 X 13,443 X X Phase II 0 0 X 702 X X

Area of glides glides decrease

Phase I 9,995 3,354 X 2,904 X X Phase II 11,863 8,006 X 6,384 X X

Plan

-form

&

slop

e

Sinuosity trend toward stability in sinuosity ORRI reach 1.07 1.17 1.18 X X X m - -

Slope (thalweg

bed profile)

stable overall in restored reach; localized slopes increase

(channelized design grade=0.06%; anabranch=0.13%, historical=0.19%)

Parkrill-VDS13

(overall)* 0.1 0.1 X X X 0.1

%

Field surveys: Jul. 2008 Sep. 2012 Nov. 14, 2017 * updated from previous reports

B3 XS14-XS1

(localized)* 0.5 (Max) 1.3 (Max) X X X 3.5 (Max)


18

Note: Gap in data set opposite to Nemes oxbow due to instrument accuracy (low satellite reception).

Figure 12: Thalweg bed profile in the ORRI reach in 2017

Pool ds Phase II riffle

Pool us Lougheed Oxbow

Pool ds Nemes Oxbow

Pool us Nemes Oxbow

Lougheed Oxbow

Nemes Oxbow

thalweg


19

4.0 Hydrologic response Documenting the high-water conditions is important for answering questions about post-project water levels upstream, both for assuaging concerns of local landowners and for guiding future work. The hydrologic response to the Phase I treatment because setting back the dykes and allowing for channel-floodplain interactions were intended to:

• Allow shallow groundwater aquifers to recharge. • Maintain diverse floodplain habitats such as depression wetlands. • Raise low-flow water surface elevations and re-establish hyporheic linkages, thereby increasing

water availability to native riparian vegetation during the growing season. • Aid in restoring floodplain riparian plant communities to enhance fish and wildlife habitat,

stabilizes stream banks, and improve ecosystem resilience. • Filter water thereby contributing to clean, secure water sources. • Provide environmental and societal value by moderating the effects of droughts, floods, climate

change, and erosion. • Decrease silt loads in the main channel. • Reduce upstream water-surface elevations during flood events.

4.1 Methods General methods for the monitoring over the five years are found in Table 7 with specific monitoring methods found in Appendix A. Descriptions of the water level loggers monitored within ORRI are found in Table 8. The locations of the measurements for hydrologic response are found in Figure 13.

http://www.ducks.ca/resource/general/wetland/wetlands.html


20

Table 7: Methods of monitoring the parameters of hydrologic response

Monitor timing

Performance Indicators Expected response Performance Criteria General monitoring method

sprin

g

sum

mer

fall

win

ter

Appe

ndix

River surface water

elevation (SWE)

Bankfull distance to the top of the

bank decrease

Distances from highest water surface to top of West bank and

to floodplain decrease. SWE are calculated from cross-sectional surveys and water levels recorded at

monitoring loggers. Calculation are made at Lougheed entrance (XS11).

x x

A6

Low-flow distance to the top of the

West bank decrease

Distance from lowest water surface to top of West bank < 1m

based on soil moisture requirements of native riparian

communities.

x x x

SWE throughout the ORRI reach no impacts at Parkrill

SWE at Park Rill shows no difference from pre-treatment

SWE 297.82m elevation at 60 m3/s.

Monitoring loggers recording on-going change located throughout the ORRI site in the mainstem river, Phase II side channel,

connected pond (Upper) and adjacent ponds (Parkrill & Lower ponds).

x x x x

Floodplain activation

Groundwater elevation (GWE)

Increase at Lougheed Floodplain

No impacts at Nature Trust Floodplain.

Increasing GWE, decreasing trend in depth to groundwater toward <1m below soil surface during the growing season at

Lougheed Floodplain. No changes noticeable at Nature

Trust Floodplain.

Monitoring wells recording on-going changes in water depths located in the Lougheed

Floodplain (Phase I) and Nature Trust Floodplain (Phase II).

x x x x A7

Floodplain inundation increase

Increasing trend in frequency, depth and areal extent of

floodplain inundation.

Frequency is estimated with HEC RAS using pre-and post-treatment cross sections. Duration, depth and areal extent are

measured on field when inundation occurs.

x


21

Figure 13: Location of sampling sites within the ORRI (hydrologic response) (Google Earth 2016)

Lougheed Floodplain

Nemes Floodplain

Lower Pond

VDS 13 Parkrill Pond

Upper Pond

Phase II side channel

Phase II riffle

Nature Trust Floodplain

Monitoring loggers (river & ponds)

Monitoring well (piezometer)


22

Table 8: Description of the water level loggers monitored within ORRI

Logger Name Location Description Comment

Atmospheric Air - 25m upstream VDS 13

(16+270) Used to calculate water pressure at

the other loggers data since 2009

VDS River- 25m upstream VDS 13

(16+270) Monitors the impact of VDS 13

modifications data since 2009

Lougheed Access River - 17+061 Monitors the changes related to

Phase I interrupted data

since 2009

ParkRill River River- at ParkRill outlet

(17+347) Monitors changes related to Phase I & II (designs modelled for no impact)

interrupted data since 2010

ParkRill Pond ParkRill (West Arm) Pond Monitors drainage issue data since 2012

Phase II Pool River – 15m above riffle

(0+445) Monitors changes related to Phase II data since 2013

Upstream Phase II River – 500m upstream riffle Monitors changes related to Phase II

(design modelled for no impact) data since 2013

Phase II-Side Channel

Side-channel (0+160) Monitors changes related to Phase II data since 2014

Upper Pond Upper Pond Monitors changes related to Phase II data since 2012

Lower Pond Lower Pond Monitors changes related to Phase II

(design modelled for no impact) data since 2011

Lougheed Well Groundwater - Phase I

floodplain

Monitors the relation between river and groundwater changes related to

Phase I

interrupted data since 2009

Nature Trust Well Groundwater - Phase II

adjacent floodplain Monitors the groundwater changes

related to Phase II data since 2013


23

4.2 Results and discussion The summary of the results for monitoring the parameters of hydrologic response pre- and post-treatment is found in Table 9. Detailed data collected in 2017 are found in the appendices. 2017 Interpretation of findings relative to performance criteria:

• SWE in the river mainstem, throughout the ORRI restoration reach, reacted as expected over the 2017 monitoring period and followed closely the river’s discharge fluctuations, as previous years (Appendix B7).

• The bankfull distance to the top of the bank and the low flow distance to the top of the bank remained as modelled (Appendix B5). Peak river flow in 2017 allowed inundation of the floodplain (SWE distance to floodplain peaked at -0.2 m; i.e. up to 0.2 m inundation over average floodplain ground elevation).

• As desired, the SWE recorded in the river at Parkrill Outlet at 60 m3/s remained the same as pre-treatment and as predicted by the HEC-RAS model (Appendix B6).

• SWE in Phase II side channel followed the river’s discharge fluctuations but also responded to the presence/absence of a beaver dam at the exit channel and the presence/absence of sediments blocking the approach channel (Appendix B7). In fall 2017, post high flows, the beaver dam was breached, the sediment blockage was higher than SWE in the approach channel and the berm along the approach channel was breached immediately upstream of the sediment blockage (Figures 14 & 15). Therefore, there was no backwatering effect from the beaver dam, there was no flow input into the side channel, and the entrance channel was dewatered. Basically, SWE in the side channel at low flow (<30 m3/s) retuned to pre-restoration conditions, i.e. the side channel being wetted due to groundwater/seepage.

• The groundwater table in Lougheed & Nature Trust floodplains reacted as expected over the 2017 monitoring period (Appendix B8). As predicted, there is no noticeable high flows impact of the Phase II restoration works on groundwater depth observed at the Nature Trust monitoring well. Groundwater table in both floodplains followed closely the river’s discharge fluctuations. The amplitude of changes in GWE was approximately 1 m, which is typical of the floodplains in the area and similar to previous years. As last year, GWE were higher than in 2014 and 2015 for most of the 2017 growing season (May to Oct.) due to river flows higher than normal during this period (Appendix B8).

• We didn’t have the funds to conduct a field inundation survey at peak freshet flows in 2017, but we expect that the majority of the Lougheed and Nemes floodplains was inundated during spring freshet, based on peak river discharges and readings form water levels (Figures 16 & 17).


24

Figure 14: Photos of ORRI Phase II approach and entrance channels in 2017 at low flows

Sediment blockage in approach channel & berm breached (September 2017)

Entrance channel dewatered (September 2017)

Sediment blockage

Berm breached


25

Table 9: Summary of results for monitoring the parameters of hydrologic response


Expected Response & Performance Criteria Location Results

pre-treatment Results

2012 Results

2014 Results

2015 Results

2016 Results

2017 Unit App.

Surf

ace

wat

er e

leva

tion

(SW

E) Bankfull

distance to the top of the

bank

Distances from yearly highest water surface to top of West bank and to

floodplain decrease

Lougheed entrance – top

West bank* 2.4 (11 m3/s) 0.4 (83 m3/s) 0.5 (76 m3/s) 0.9 (53 m3/s) 0.5 (87 m3/s) 0.3 (105 m3/s) m

B5

Lougheed entrance – floodplain*

3.2 (11 m3/s) -0.1 (83 m3/s)

(floodplain inundated)

0 (76 m3/s) 0.4 (53 m3/s) 0 (87 m3/s) -0.2 (105 m3/s)

(floodplain inundated)

m

Low-flow distance to

the top of the bank

Distance from lowest water surface to top of

West bank < 1m

Lougheed entrance – top

West bank* 2.1 (8 m3/s) 1.6 (6 m3/s) 1.7 (6 m3/s) 1.7 (6 m3/s) 1.7 (6 m3/s) 1.6 (9 m3/s) m

SWE at Parkrill

SWE at ParkRill shows no difference from pre-

treatment SWE 297.82m elevation at Q=60m3/s

River at outlet of Parkrill Creek on

the East bank

297.82 predicted HEC RAS

(Mould 2010)

297.75 (2011), 2012 data loss data loss

297.59 (at Q=54m3/s on May 25, 2015)

297.80 (at Q=63m3/s on May 16, 2016)

297.73 (at Q=61m3/s on April 29, 2017)

m Fig.15 B6 & B7

Floo

dpla

in a

ctiv

atio

n


(GWE)

Increasing trend in GWE, decreasing depth below

ground toward <1m below soil surface during

the growing season (May-Oct)

Lougheed Well*

Ranged: 0.43 (28 m3/s)-0.86 (17 m3/s) below ground

Ranged: 0 (80 m3/s)-1.04 (9 m3/s) below ground (2011-2012)



Ranged: 0.10 (87 m3/s) -1.19 (10 m3/s) below ground

Ranged: +0.07 (105 m3/s) above ground -

1.14 (9 m3/s) below ground

m B8

no impact Nature Trust Well*



(2013)

no data





Ranged: +0.92 (87 m3/s) above ground -0.03 (10 m3/s) below ground




Increasing trend in frequency, duration,

depth and areal extent of floodplain inundation

Lougheed & Nemes Floodplains

0 (no inundation

before 2009) no data no data no data 30%

no data (assume between 2016

and 2018) % Fig.16

& 17

* Note: Data updated from previous reports. 2009 is before the dike set back (elevation of floodplain is elevation of top of West dike); data recorded on portion of year only. 2012 is before VDS 13 modifications which reduced SWE.


26

Figure 15: 2017 Surface water elevations at ORRI Phase II monitoring stations

River Q peaked at 105 m3/s

No sediment blocking approach channel; Beaver dam at exit channel

Sediment blocking approach channel; No flow entry (entrance channel dewatered); Beaver dam at exit channel breached


27

Figure 16: Lougheed floodplain inundation at peak flow in 2018

Areas inundated

Engagement of upper notch Lougheed Floodplain inundation - North part Lougheed Floodplain inundation - South part


28

Areas inundated in 2016 at peak flow (85 m3/s) Areas also inundated in 2011 at 85 m3/s (but with debris at VDS 13)

Figure 17: Lougheed floodplain inundation at peak flow in 2016 and 2011


29

5.0 Fish & fish habitat response Documenting the changes in fish densities, species composition, and the habitat they use is important in this project because it is anticipated that the restored channel structure and hydrology will increase the quantity and quality of salmonid habitat. In particular, the restoration works were designed to:

• Increase the numbers and density of rearing salmonids during the summer months (i.e., Steelhead/Rainbow trout, and Chinook Salmon).

• Increase valuable spawning areas. • Increase the quality of the intra-gravel incubation environment for eggs.

5.1 Methods General methods for the monitoring over the five years are found in Table 10 with specific monitoring methods found in Appendix A. The locations of the measurements for fish habitat response are found in Figures 18 and 19. Water temperature was monitored at the water level monitoring loggers located throughout the ORRI restoration reach (loggers location in Figure 13). Additional water quality loggers were operated in Phase II side channel in the summer 2017 to have a better understanding of the rearing habitat conditions in the side channel during the summer:

• HOBO water temperature (Pro v2) installed in the upper section of the side channel and recorded hourly water temperatures.

• HOBO dissolved oxygen data logger (U26-001) installed in the middle of the side channel (at water pressure logger; Figure 13) and recorded hourly water dissolved oxygen concentration and water temperatures.


30

Table 10: Methods of monitoring the parameters of fish and fish habitat response

Performance Indicators Expected response Performance Criteria General monitoring method

sprin

g

sum

mer

fall

win

ter

Appendix

Habitat quality & diversity

Habitat type & features

increase diversity

Increasing trend in amount & diversity of habitat features (i.e.

LWD, boulders)

Survey habitat diversity: the number, type & dimension of each feature is

determined, mapped & photographed. x A9

Macrophytes decrease Reduction of invasive non-native macrophytes Visual observation survey. x A10

Invertebrate monitoring increase Increasing trend in diversity and

numbers of invertebrates

CABIN protocols; 4 samples taken within the restored reach and 2 samples in the natural reach for reference; 2 replicates. x A11

Summer water temperatures cooler

Reduced number of days & shorter duration per day when water

temperatures exceed adult spawner & juvenile rearing threshold

Monitor on-going temperature changes at water level monitoring loggers;

calculate the mean daily and the number of days that temperature >15.6oC.

x A12

Fish population, densities &

percent composition

Fish holding & rearing habitat increase

Increasing trend of density and percent composition of rearing

salmonids

Numbers of O. mykiss counted in snorkel surveys (5 snorkelers-1 pass) of the ORRI

reach compared to natural reach. x A13

Redd counts & distribution

(SK &CH) increase

Trend of increasing density of salmon and salmon redds and spawning habitat within their

preferred ranges

redd surveys during October spawning - noting Sockeye and Chinook redds; measure water depth, velocity and

Froude numbers at redds. x A14

Enumeration of spawning SK & CH increase Trend of increasing density of

salmon within the restored area

Redd surveys immediately after peak spawning - split reaches to capture

numbers in Phase I and II. x A15

Egg incubation success increase Egg incubation success >18%

Egg baskets with 100 eggs each in the survey reach which is monitored to hatch

and percent survival calculated. x A16

Substrate composition

& quality

Fine sediment accumulation decrease Percent fines (<2mm) are less than

10% or 14% (Kondolf 1997)

Bulk sampling of the surface and sub-surface require 4 samples to be collected (2 replicates of surface and sub-surface samples). Samples sieved and weighted.

x A17

Substrate gravel sizes

within preferred

range

Increase in substrate particle sizes preferred spawning substrate range

Wolman substrate procedures used to determine the D16, D50 and D84; percent of particles 13-128mm. x A18


31

Figure 18: Locations of the measurements for the fish and fish habitat response parameters

ParkRill

Natural Portion

Semi-Natural Portion

Channelized Portion

McIntyre Dam

Hwy 97 Bridge

Bridge at Oliver

ORRI-Phase I

VDS 13

Channelization

ORRI-Phase II

Reach breaks

Snorkel survey reaches

Spawner enumeration reaches

Egg basket sites

Invertebrate sites

Redd survey reaches

Macrophyte survey reaches

Temperature loggers

See inset figure

Channelized Portion


32

Figure 19: Locations of fish and fish habitat response within ORRI Phase I and II Note: 2013 Google imagery (post-construction Phase I; pre-construction Phase II)

Reach breaks

Macrophyte surveys reaches

Invertebrate samples sites

Water temperature sites

Snorkel sampling reaches

Egg incubation sites

Sediment sample sites


33

5.2 Results and discussion The summary of the results for monitoring the parameters of fish habitat response over the five years of study pre- and post-treatment is found in Table 11. Detailed data collected in 2017 are found in the associated appendices. 2017 Interpretation of findings relative to performance criteria:

• Water temperatures in Phase II side channel fluctuated yearly pending weather and flow in side channel (Appendix B9). Daily average water temperatures were slightly lower (0.5-1.5oC cooler) in the side channel (middle) than in the river mainstem, except in late September when river flows were reduced, sediments in approach channel prevented flow from entering the side channel, and the beaver dam was breached (Figure 20). As in previous years (2014, 2015 & 2016), the number of days with mean daily temperature >15.6oC (general salmonid threshold) was slightly lower (3 to 12 days cooler yearly) in the Phase II Side Channel in comparison of the river mainstem, mostly due to connection to groundwater and/or impact of vegetation coverage. Therefore, Phase II Side Channel acted as temperature refugia during the summer before sediments in approach channel prevented flow from entering the side channel. The upper pond provided more important temperature refuge but wasn't always connected to the side channel (pending flows).

• Dissolved oxygen level is not only correlated to water temperature, but also to water discharges in the side channel (Appendix B10). From mid-August to mid-September 2017, dissolved oxygen level dropped even though water temperature remained relatively stable, mostly due, the reduced water flow in side channel. Dissolved oxygen level was a potential barrier to movement and habitat selection and, therefore, it is unlikely that salmonids reared in the side channel during this period. From late September to October, at very shallow water depths (sediments in approach channel preventing flow from entering the side channel and breached beaver dam), dissolved oxygen level could have cause production impairment to any salmonids present in the side channel. Due to earlier conditions, it is very unlikely that salmonids remained strangled in the side channel at the time.

• It was impossible to conduct the annual snorkel survey this year due to high flow conditions in the river in the summer (Figure 10).

• Sockeye spawners return was very low in the qawsitkʷ (Okanagan River) in 2017 (AUC Index = 8,503 spawners; Appendix B13). At peak spawning over a third of the run (in the Index section) was enumerated in the Phase I restoration reach, which is >7 times more than pre-treatment. This very high proportion during a very low escapement year indicates that Phase I restored areas are highly attractive for Sockeye spawning (Sockeye selecting this site in priority over other available areas).

• Four Chinook spawners and one adult Rainbow Trout were observed in the ORRI restoration reach this year, during the sockeye spawner enumeration surveys (ONA, unpublished data).


34

• Even though this year was an very low Sockeye escapement, a total 7,777 m2 (Appendix B12) of effective spawning occurred throughout the ORRI restoration reach (above VDS 13, Phase I, Phase II and pool created above Phase II). Once again, this indicates that the restored areas are highly attractive for Sockeye spawning. Riffles and deep riffles continue to dominate the spawning areas within the ORRI reach.

Figure 20: Daily average water temperature in the ORRI – Phase II side channel in 2017


35

Table 11: Summary of results for monitoring the parameters of fish and fish habitat response

Habitat quality & diversity Indicator, Expected

response & Performance criteria

Comments Location Results pre-treatment Results 2012 Results

2014 Results

2015 Results

2016 Result 2017 Unit App.

Habi

tat f

eatu

res Increasing trend

in functional LWD

Only 2 of the LWD recorded in 2009 were placed during construction the

rest recruited naturally. Field surveys: 15-July-2008., 3-Sept.-

2009, 26-Sept-2012, 9-Nov-2015

Phase I 0 6 (+30m2 log jam) X 26 X X

no.

- Phase II 1 1 X 0 X X

In-stream boulder clusters

present

Some displacement of rip rap boulders with the river bed.

Field surveys: 15-July-2008., 3-Sept.-2009, 26-Sept-2012, 9-Nov-2015

Phase I 0 214 (was 336 in 2009) X 75 X X

no. Phase II 0 0 X 0 X X

Mac

roph

ytes

Reduction of invasive non-

native macrophytes

The total available area in both oxbows is higher in 2012 than in 2008 due to the creation of entrance and exit channels. Exotic invasive species

are M.spicatum & P crispus. Field surveys:15&25-Aug-2008,

03-Oct-2012

Phase I (mainstem) all sp.: 89 exotic sp.: 7

all sp.: 9 exotic sp.: 3

X X X X m2 - Phase II (mainstem) all sp.: 102

exotic sp.: 14 all sp.: 50

exotic sp.: 1

southern oxbow all sp.: 436 exotic sp.:434

all sp.: 460 exotic sp.:195

northern oxbow all sp.: 0 exotic sp.: 0


Inve

rte-

brat

e m

onito

ring Increasing trend

in diversity and richness of

invertebrates

Benthic index of biological integrity developed to assess health of

Okanagan streams (Jensen 2006) also showed improvement post-treatment.

Field surveys: 2-3-Oct-2008; 4-5-Oct-2012

reference in natural section (transect 2)

Div.=1.76 Rich.= 24.5

Div.= 1.77 Rich.= 24.5

X X X X

Div.= Shannon’s H & Rich. =

no. taxa

- semi natural section Div.:=1.19

Rich.= 20.0 Div.= 1.41 Rich.= 20.0

within Phase I (XS6) Div.:=1.40 Rich.:=21.5

Div.= 1.76 Rich.= 24.0

downstream ORRI (300 m ds VDS13)

Div.:=1.79 Rich.= 28.0

Div.= 1.97 Rich.= 25.5

Sum

mer

wat

er

tem

pera

ture

s Reduced number of days

with temp. >15.6oC (general

salmonid threshold)

Measured at the water level loggers installed between 2009 & 2013

(Table 8).

Phase II river X X 139 131 138 116

no. days > temp.

threshold B9

Phase II side channel X X 136 126 134 104

Upper pond (connected) X X 93 102 118 not

available Lower pond

(not connected) X X 139 148 not available 117


36

Table 11: Summary of results for monitoring the parameters of fish and fish habitat response - CONTINUED

Fish population, densities & percent composition Indicator, Expected response &

Performance criteria Status and comments Location Results pre-treatment

Results 2012

Results 2014

Results 2015

Results 2016

Results 2017 Unit Appendix

Fish holding & rearing habitat

Increasing trend of density and percent

composition of rearing

O. mykiss (all ages) & Chinook (juv)

Field surveys: 12-Aug-2008 (pre-treatment),

7-Sept- 2012, 30-Jul-2014, 26-Aug-2015, 24-Aug-2016

No survey in 2017 due to flow conditions.

Natural reach: 3.7 km 63* 28 24* 11 78 X

no./ km B11

Semi-natural reach: 2.3 km 23* 10 11* 4 32 X

Channelized reach: 0.9 km 2* 3 2* 0 3 X

Phase II: 0.45 km 0* 4 4* 0 16 X Phase I: 0.65 km 0* 3 0* 0 3 X

Redd counts & distribution

Trend of increasing density of salmon and salmon redds

and spawning habitat

The effective spawning area was a deep riffle pre-treatment and in

2009 riffles were added. Field surveys: yearly survey post

peak Oct.-Nov. 2008-2017

VDS 13 X X 1,259 306 1,740 150

m2 B12 Phase I 6,053** 6,992 10,791 2,818 10,204 7,128 Phase II 11,928** 4,699 6,645 0 5,454 224 US pool X X 1,650 45 1,618 275

Spawner counts

(SK & CH)

Trend of increasing density of spawning

salmon

Proportion of the peak live count in ORRI reaches over total live in Index section; note the run size is most likely above the capacity of

the typical spawning reaches Field surveys: Sept-Nov 2008-2017

Phase I 5 7 5 18 10 38

% B13

Phase II** 5 7 14 0 10 2


Increase in median (b-axis) substrate

particle sizes within 13-128mm,

preferred spawning substrate size range

(Bjorn & Reiser 1991)

Field surveys: 8 &13-Aug-2008, 11-Sept-2009, 26-Sept-2012, Sept. 3-4, 2015

Phase I – mainstem (XS 7)

D16 : 14* D50 : 25* D84 : 47*

D16 : 26* D50 : 45* D84 : 67*

X D16 : 8*

D50 : 19* D84 : 34*

X X

mm - Phase I – oxbow (XS 7)

D16 : 0.08* D50 : 0.18* D84 : 0.71*

D16 : 2* D50 : 23* D84 : 42*

X D16 : 22* D50 : 34* D84 : 48*

X X

Phase II (XS 11) D16 : 19* D50 : 28* D84 : 46*

D16 : 25* D50 : 40* D84 : 60

X D16 : 14* D50 : 24* D84 : 41*

X X

*Results updated. ** Data to be revised.


37

6.0 Riparian condition & terrestrial species habitat response The second objective of the ORRI restoration was to restore floodplain riparian plant communities to enhance fish and wildlife habitat, stabilize stream banks, and improve water quality and ecosystem resilience. This was to be accomplished by:

• Re-vegetation of the riparian areas along the river course and associated newly connected floodplains, and

• Monitor the response from avian, reptile, amphibian, and small mammal populations in terms of diversity and usage measures.

Re-established native riparian vegetation contributes shade, cover, water quality, and in-stream nutrients. It also increases potential for woody debris recruitment and storage; and provides seed and vegetative sources for future recruitment. Dense and deep riparian root systems stabilize banks and reduce erosion rates, support overhanging vegetation, and maintain deep and narrow channels thereby contributing to overall habitat quality and complexity. Enhanced riparian corridor and floodplain habitat increases the quality, quantity, and diversity of forage, cover and breeding sites thereby increasing the abundance and diversity of terrestrial wetland- and riparian-dependent species using these habitats. No funding was available in 2017 to monitor the riparian condition and the terrestrial species habitat response, therefore no update is provided in this report. A summary of the findings of the previous years is presented in Appendices C4 and C5.


38

7.0 Conclusions

7.1 Monitoring highlights: The highlights from the 2017 monitoring data included:

• The river flow ranged between 9 m3/s and 105 m3/s (extremely high and prorogued freshet).

• High freshet created gravel recruitment to the ORRI site, increasing the spawning areas but also creating a low flows sediment blockage issue in Phase II. As recommended by the ORRI Steering Committee, the sediment blockage wasn’t manually removed this year.

• The diversity of fish habitats is increasing over time. Deep pools are developing in the river mainstem: below Phase II riffle; upstream of the Lougheed Oxbow, upstream of the Nemes Oxbow and downstream of the Nemes Oxbow.

• The overall slope of the thalweg mainstem bed in the restoration reach remained stable and is similar to slope found in the anabranch reach (semi-natural section). The localized slope between cross-sections in the river mainstem increased due to the creation of deeper pools and the deposition of gravel throughout the restoration reach, providing more diversity.

• As previous years, water depths, velocities and Froude measured at redds were within the preferred range for Sockeye and Chinook throughout the ORRI restoration reach.

• SWE in the river mainstem and GWE in adjacent floodplains reacted as expected following closely the river’s discharge fluctuations. As desired, the SWE recorded in the river at Parkrill Outlet at 60 m3/s remained as pre-treatment and as predicted by the HEC-RAS model.

• At low flow (fall 2017), SWE in Phase II side channel was as pre-restoration conditions (i.e. side channel being wetted only due to groundwater/seepage) because there wasn’t no backwatering effect from the beaver dam (dam breached) and there was no flow input into the side channel (sediment blocking the approach channel).

• As in previous years, daily average water temperatures were slightly lower in the side channel than in the river mainstem (except in late September) and the total number of days with mean daily temperature >15.6oC (general salmonid threshold) was slightly lower the side channel in comparison of the river mainstem. Therefore, Phase II side channel acted as temperature refugia for most of the summer, mostly due to connection to groundwater and/or impact of vegetation coverage.

• From mid-August to mid-September, dissolved oxygen (DO) level dropped even though water temperature remained relatively stable, mostly due to reduced water flow in side channel. DO level was a potential barrier to movement and habitat selection and, therefore, it is unlikely that salmonids reared in the side channel during this period. From late September to October, at very shallow water depths, dissolved oxygen level could have cause production impairment to any salmonids present in the side channel. Due to earlier conditions, it is very unlikely that salmonids remained strangled in the side channel at that time.


39

• It was impossible to conduct the annual snorkel survey this year due to high flow conditions in the river in the summer (safety reasons).

• Sockeye spawners return was very low in the qawsitkʷ (Okanagan River) in 2017. At peak spawning over a third of the run (in the Index section) was enumerated in the Phase I restoration reach, which is >7 times more than pre-treatment. This very high proportion of Sockeye spawners in Phase I during a very low escapement year indicates that ORRI Phase I restored areas are highly attractive for Sockeye spawning (Sockeye selecting this site in priority over other available areas).

• Four Chinook spawners and one adult Rainbow Trout were observed in the ORRI restoration reach this year, during the sockeye spawner enumeration surveys.

• A total 7,777 m2 of effective spawning occurred throughout the ORRI restoration reach. Once again, this indicates that the restored areas are highly attractive for Sockeye spawning. Riffles and deep riffles continue to dominate the spawning areas within the ORRI reach.

Highlights from the five years of monitoring data (2008-2012) of Phase I included (Alex et al. 2013):

• Desired spawning-flow Froude numbers achieved during construction in Phase I remained within the range preferred by salmon even after changes in the bed due to natural sediment transport processes during subsequent freshets.

• Pool and riffle habitats continue to dominate the Phase I restoration area, and the channel configuration is self-sustaining for spawning salmon needs even though there has been bedload movement, gravel bar creation, and pool depth changes.

• During the 2011 freshet, the newly connected ORRI floodplain was inundated with water for 3-4 weeks; observed in just over 1/3 of the floodplain area.

• Post-treatment, the number of fish habitat features such as large woody debris (LWD) increased from natural transport and was sustained.

• Total coverage of all macrophyte species was reduced, the proportion of introduced invasive macrophyte species was reduced, and native macrophyte species diversity increased.

• Pre-treatment, no salmonids were documented during snorkel surveys; however, post-treatment snorkel surveys documented O. mykiss in Phase I in all three years from 2010 – 2012.

• The proportion of Sockeye spawners in Phase I increased over upstream unchanged reach (i.e. Phase II reach), and continued increase over pre-treatment conditions for Phase I.

• Low egg-incubation survival was an issue in the pre-treatment ORRI sites, but drastically improved in Phase I post-treatment with survival rates similar to those measured in natural reaches.

• Spawning substrate gravel sizes changed between post-treatment 2009 and 2012 becoming more diverse after the two freshets of 2011 and 2012.


40

The highlights from the 2014 monitoring data included (Machin et al. 2015):

• Natural spawning areas were created in the river mainstem.

• The side channel acted as a water quality refuge during a high turbidity event. The highlights from the 2015 monitoring data included (Rivard-Sirois et al., 2016):

• Channel configuration within the entire reach remained self-sustaining even though natural sediment transport processes occurred since the construction works.

• The diversity of fish habitats and features in the ORRI reach is maintained over time. The total number of large woody debris continued to increase, however the log jam created in 2011-2012 disappeared during the 2014 freshet flows. The number of boulders continued to reduce. These boulders were placed over the entrance and exit channel of both reconnected oxbows and are loss because they become embedded in the gravel overtime.

• As desired, the ORRI restoration works haven’t impacted the Parkrill Outlet (SWE elevation remained as pre-treatment and predicted by the HECRAS model).

• In this very low Sockeye escapement year, the proportion of the entire run using the Phase I for spawning was 3 times more than pre-treatment.

• Effective Sockeye spawning occurred in above VDS 13, within Phase I and the pool created above Phase II. The spawning conditions remained mostly within preferred range for Sockeye.

• Phase II Side Channel and the connected Upper Pond acted as temperature refugia for a few days during the summer.

• O. mykiss have started to colonize the Phase II Side Channel and a few juveniles were captured during minnow trapping efforts in the spring, only 2 years post construction.

The highlights from the 2016 monitoring data included (Rivard-Sirois et al. 2017):

• The high freshet created gravel recruitment to the ORRI site, increasing spawning areas within the ORRI reach, but also creating blockage issue in the approach channel creating at low flows. The sediment blockage was manually removed and berm breach was temporally patched.

• SWE recorded in the river at Parkrill Outlet at 60 m3/s remained as predicted by the HEC-RAS.

• The bankfull distance to the top of the bank and the low flow distance to the top of the bank remained as modelled. River flows of ≈80 m3/s are required to activate the floodplain notches.

• Just under a third of the Lougheed/Nemes floodplain was inundated during 2016 spring freshet which was favorable to the floodplain’s flora and fauna.

• The total number of days with mean daily temperature >15.6oC (general salmonid threshold) remained slightly lower in the side channel than the river mainstem (mostly due to connection to groundwater and partial connection to Upper Pond).


41

• Both juveniles and adults O. mykiss were observed using the restored river features in Phase II. Juveniles O. mykiss were observed in the Phase I reach.

• The restored areas are highly attractive for Sockeye spawning. Approximately 20% of the run (in the Index section) was enumerated in the ORRI restoration reach in 2016, which is 2 times more than pre-treatment. The proportion of the run using the reach upstream of ORRI has also increased since the construction of Phase II riffle.

• Even though this year was an average Sockeye escapement, a total 19,015 m2 of effective spawning occurred throughout the ORRI restoration reach which is typical of high escapement years, such as 2014.

• Since 2008, Sockeye spawning redd area size varied yearly between 0.3 m2 and 2.5 m2 pending the abundance of spawners. Redd superimposition occurs when >50% of the total available spawning area is used.

• The spawning conditions (water depth, water velocity and Froude Number) measured at Sockeye redds remained mostly within the preferred range for this species.

7.1 Recommendations and next steps: 2018 is the last year (year 5) of secured funding for this monitoring program. It will be especially important to monitor all aspects of the program and track site stability and changes. Based on results obtained to date, we recommend:

• Continue to monitor the aquatic and terrestrial responses as the proposed workplan with the following additions:

o Re-survey the offset of the water level loggers to ensure no change occurred over time and adequate calibration.

o Scope other methods to survey salmonids rearing in Phase II side channel, in the spring. o Confirm at what river flows the Upper Pond become connected to the side channel.

• Scope potential improvements of the Phase II side channel, especially for spring rearing habitat.

• Scope option to increase the engagement of the Lougheed floodplain notches during freshet.

• Continue funding research and/or seek collaboration with local University/College for the study of the parameters currently unfunded. Analyse further the sediments transport processes in the restoration reach, as well as, the interactions between river and the reconnected floodplain.

• Continue the funding research for improvements of the Lougheed Floodplain and Lower Pond.

• Continue the funding research for creation of riffles and salmon spawning areas below VDS 13. The ONA looks forward to documenting the successes and challenges of these projects as part of the larger vision of the Okanagan Nation Elders to heal the river by “bringing it back” kł cp’əlk’ stim’.


42

8.0 References

Alex, K. and C. Rivard-Sirois. 2010. Aquatic monitoring of the Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (ORRI) – Post-construction 2009. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department, Westbank, BC.

Alex, K., C. Louie, Z. Masters, C. Rivard-Sirois, A. Stevens and J. Squakin. 2013. Aquatic monitoring of the Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (ORRI) – Post-construction 2012. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Alex, K., C. Rivard-Sirois, and J. Enns. 2014. Okanagan Sub-basin Habitat Improvement Program (OSHIP) Project implementation effectiveness. Prepared for the Colville Confederated Tribes. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Alex, K., C. Louie, N. Lukey, C. Mathieu, H. Sungaila, and J. Squakin. 2015. Okanagan Sub-basin Habitat Improvement Program (OSHIP) Project implementation effectiveness 2014-2015. Prepared for the Colville Confederated Tribes. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Benson, R. and N. Audy. 2012. Okanagan River Sockeye Spawner Enumeration and Biological Sampling 2010. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance – Fisheries Department, Westbank, BC.

Bjorn, T. C. and D. W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat requirements of salmonids in stream, in. Meehan, W. R. (Ed.) Influences of forest and rangeland management on salmonid fishes and their habitats. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19. Bethesda, Maryland.

Bull, C. J. 1999. Fisheries habitat in the Okanagan River Phase I: Options for protection and restoration. Prepared for Public Utility District No. 1 of Douglas County Washington.

Bull, C., M. Gaboury and R. Newbury. 2000. Okanagan River Habitat Restoration Feasibility. Prepared for Public Utility District No. 1 of Douglas County, Washington and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. Kamloops, BC.

Bussanich, R., R. Benson, N. Audy, and A. Warman. 2012. qawsitkʷ [Okanagan River] Sockeye spawner enumeration and biological sampling 2010. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department, Westbank, BC.

COSEWIC (Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada). 2012. Wildlife Species Search. http://www.cosewic.gc.ca/eng/sct1/index_e.cfm

Coulombe-Pontbriand, M. and Lapointe, M. 2004. Geomorphic Controls, riffle Substrate Quality, and Spawning Site Selection in Two Semi-Alluvial Salmon Rivers in the Gaspe Peninsula, Canada. River Res. Applic. 20: 577–590.


43

Cunjak, R.A., D. Guignion, R.B. Angus, and R. MacFarlane. 2002. Survival of eggs and alevins of Atlantic salmon and brook trout in relation to fine sediment deposition. pp. 82-91. In D.K. Cairns (Ed.). Effects of land use practices on fish, shellfish and their habitats on Prince Edward Island. Can. Tech. Rpt. of Fish. and Aquat. Sci. 2408:157p.

Dale, N. and L. Burge. 2013. A Grain size analysis of substrate sediment in a remediated reach of the Okanagan River, British Columbia. Honors thesis. Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences University of British Columbia – Okanagan.

Davis, C., M. Squakin, L. Wiens, and T. Kozlova. 2009. Okanagan River Sockeye Spawner Enumeration and Biological Sampling 2008. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance – Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Emery, J. 2007. Terrestrial Habitat Enhancement Plan Nemes/Lougheed Property Oliver, British Columbia February 2007. Solitudo Environmental Services Inc. Prepared for Okanagan Nation Alliance.

Emery, J. 2008. Terrestrial Habitat Enhancement Plan. Nemes/Lougheed Property. Oliver. British Columbia. Solitudo Environmental Services Inc. Prepared for Okanagan Nation Alliance.

Emery, J. 2009. Okanagan River Restoration Initiative, South Okanagan, British Columbia Biological Monitoring Report 2006-2009. Solitudo Environmental Services Inc. Prepared for Okanagan Nation Alliance.

Emery, J. 2010. Riparian Habitat Restoration of Priority Sites for Yellow-breasted Chat Recovery in the South Okanagan, British Columbia summary report 2009-2010. Solitudo Environmental Services Inc. Prepared for Okanagan Nation Alliance.

Emery, J. 2011. Okanagan River Restoration Initiative, South Okanagan, British Columbia Biological Monitoring Report 2010-2011. Solitudo Environmental Services Inc. Prepared for Okanagan Nation Alliance.

Emery, J. 2012. Riparian Habitat Restoration of Priority Sites for Yellow-breasted Chat Recovery in the South Okanagan, British Columbia summary report 2011-2012 for methods and detailed results. Solitudo Environmental Services Inc. Prepared for Okanagan Nation Alliance.

Emery, J. 2013. Priority Sites for Riparian Restoration – South Okanagan – Avian Point Counts – Data. Summary Report. Solitudo Environmental Services Inc. Prepared for Okanagan Nation Alliance.

Environment Canada. 2010. Laboratory Methods: Processing, Taxonomy, and Quality Control of Benthic Macroinvertebrate Samples. Available at: http://www.ec.gc.ca/Publications/CDC2A655-A527-41F0-9E61-824BD4288B98/CABINLabMethodsManual.pdf

Flanagan, J. 2003. The impacts of fine sediments and variable flow regimes on the habitat and survival of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) eggs. MSc Thesis. University of New Brunswick. Fredericton, NB.

Groot, C. and L. Margolis (Eds). 1991. Pacific Salmon Life Histories. UBC Press. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC.


44

Hyatt, K.D. and D.P. Rankin. 1999. A habitat based evaluation of Okanagan Sockeye Salmon Escapement Objectives. Canadian Stock Assessment Secretariat Research Document 99/191.

Hyatt, K.D., M.M. Stockwell, H. Wright, L. Weins, and P. Askey. 2009. Okanagan Fish and Water Management Tools Project Assessments: Brood Year 2008 Salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) Abundance and Biological Traits. Report to file: JSIDS-SRe05-2009. Salmon in Regional Ecosystems Program, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Nanaimo.

Hyatt, K.D., M.M. Stockwell, H. Wright, L. Weins, and P. Askey. 2010. Okanagan Fish and Water Management Tools Project Assessments: Brood Year 2009 Salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) Abundance and Biological Traits. Report to file: JSIDS-SRe05-2010. Salmon in Regional Ecosystems Program, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Nanaimo, BC.

Hyatt, K.D., M.M. Stockwell, H. Wright, L. Weins, R. Bussanich, and P. Askey. 2011. Okanagan Fish and Water Management Tools Project Assessments: Brood Year 2010 Salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) Abundance and Biological Traits. Report to file: JSIDS-SRexx-20xx. Salmon in Regional Ecosystems Program, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Nanaimo, BC.

Jensen, E.V. 2006. Cumulative Effects Monitoring of Okanagan Streams using Benthic Invertebrates, 1999 to 2004. Prepared by the British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Environmental Protection Division, Penticton, BC.

Kondolf, G.M. 1997. Application of the pebble count: Reflections on purpose, method, and variants. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (formerly Water Resources Bulletin) 33: 79-87.

Lawrence, S. 2003. Okanagan River Sockeye spawning habitat assessment 2002; of the Fish-Water Management Tools Project. Prepared by the Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Long, K. 2005. Okanagan River Sockeye Spawning Habitat Assessment 2004. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Long, K., R. Cunjak, and R. Newbury. 2006. The effects of redd site selection and redd geometry on the survival of incubating Okanagan Sockeye eggs. Masters Thesis, University of New Brunswick.

Long, K. and C. Rivard-Sirois. 2009. Aquatic monitoring the Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (ORRI) - the initial year, 2008. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Lukey, N. 2014. Post-Construction herpetofauna and vegetation monitoring for the Okanagan River Restoration Initiative. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Machin, D., K. Alex, C. Louie, C. Mathieu, and C. Rivard-Sirois. 2015. Aquatic monitoring of the Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (ORRI) – Post-construction 2014. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Mandaville, S.M. 2002. Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Freshwaters – Taxa Tolerance Values, Metrics, and Protocols. Project H-1. Soil and Water Conservation Society of Metro Halifax.


45

Masters, Z. and L. Burge. 2010. Substrate Composition Data report for the Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (ORRI). Prepared for the Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Prepared by the Department of Earth and Environmental Science, University of British Columbia – Okanagan.

Masters, Z. 2010. Substrate Composition of the Restored Northern Section of Okanagan River and its Adjacent Oxbow Lakes. Honours Thesis prepared by the Department of Earth and Environmental Science, University of British Columbia – Okanagan. Prepared for the Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department.

McDaniels, T.R., K.M. Pratt, T.R. Meyers, T.D. Ellison, J.E. Follett, and J.A. Burke. 1994. Alaska Sockeye salmon culture manual. Alaska Department of fish and Game Division of commercial Fisheries Management and Development Special fisheries Report No. 6. Juneau, AK.

McGrath, E., C. Rivard-Sirois, and C. Louie. 2011. Aquatic monitoring of the Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (ORRI) – Post-construction 2010. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC

Merrit, R.W. and K.W. Cummins. 1996. An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America. Kendell/Hunt Publishing Company. Dubuque, Iowa. 3rd Edition.

MOE (Ministry of Environment of British Columbia). 2006. British Columbia Approved Water Quality Guidelines. 2006 Edition. Prepared pursuant to Section 2(e) of the Environment Management Act, 1981. Original signed by Don Fast, Assistant Deputy Minister, Environment and Lands HQ Division, Sept. 1998. Updated Aug. 2006. Available at: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/BCguidelines /approv_wq_guide/approved.html

MOE (Ministry of Environment of British Columbia). 2012. Habitat Atlas for Wildlife at Risk. South Okanagan Species at Risk. Available at: http://wlapwww.gov.bc.ca/sir/fwh/wld/atlas/about/ about_index.html

Mould Engineering. 2010. Design Summary Report Okanagan River Restoration Initiative Phase I Nemes – Lougheed Reach.

National Geographic. 2009. Top Ten Endangered Canadian Rivers Named. Available at: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/07/0707_030707_canadarivers.html

Newbury, R. and M. Gaboury. 1993. Stream analysis and fish habitat design: a field manual. Newbury Hydraulics and the Manitoba Habitat Heritage Corporation.

NPCC (Northwest Power and Conservation Council) 2004. The Okanogan Sub-basin Management Plan.

Overstreet, B.T., C.S. Riebe, J.K. Wooster, L.S. Sklar, and D. Bellugi. 2016. Tools for gauging the capacity of salmon spawning substrates, Earth Surf. Process. Landforms, 41(1), 130–142.

Payne, B. A. & Lapointe, M.F. 1997. Channel Morphology and Lateral Stability: Effects on Distribution of Spawning and Rearing Habitat for Atlantic Salmon in a Wandering Cobble-bed River. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 54: 2627–2636.

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/BCguidelines/approv_wq_guide/approved.html

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/BCguidelines/approv_wq_guide/approved.html

http://wlapwww.gov.bc.ca/sir/fwh/wld/atlas/about/%20about_index.html

http://wlapwww.gov.bc.ca/sir/fwh/wld/atlas/about/%20about_index.html


46

Peterson, R.H. and J.L. Metcalfe. 1981. Emergence of Atlantic salmon fry from gravels of varying compositions: A laboratory study. Publication 1020, Fisheries and Environmental Sciences, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Biological Station: St-Andrews, New Brunswick.

Phillips, B. 2004. Okanagan River Sockeye Spawning Habitat Assessment 2003; Task B3 of the Fish-Water Management Tools (FWMT) Project. Prepared by Summit Environmental Consultants ltd. For the Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Reynoldson, T.B., C. Logan, T. Pascoe, and S.P. Thompson. 2006. CABIN, (Canadian Aquatic Biomonitoring Network) Invertebrate Biomonitoring, Field and Laboratory Manual. National Water Research Institute Environment Canada.

RIC (Resource Information Committee). 1998. Manual of standard operating procedures for hydrometric surveys in British Columbia. Prepared by the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Resources Inventory Branch for the Aquatic Inventory Task force. Version 1.0.

Rivard-Sirois, C. and K. Alex. 2010. Construction report, Okanagan River Restoration Initiative-Phase I. Summer 2009. Prepared by the Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department, Westbank, BC.

Rivard-Sirois, C. 2014. Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (ORRI) Phase II – Construction Works. 2010-2014. Prepared for the ORRI Steering Committee. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Rivard-Sirois, C. 2014. Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (ORRI) Modification of VDS 13 - Construction Report. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Rivard-Sirois., C. 2016. ORRI – Phase II Adaptive Management (year 3 post-construction) Memo. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Rivard-Sirois., C., K. Alex, C. Louie. 2016. Aquatic Monitoring of the Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (ORRI) – Post-construction 2015. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Rivard-Sirois., C., K. Alex, C. Louie. 2017. Aquatic Monitoring of the Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (ORRI) – Post-construction 2016. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Rubin, J.F. 1995. Estimating the success of natural spawning of salmonids in streams. J. of Fish Bio. 43:603-622.

Schubert, B. 1983. Okanagan Flood Control System: plan, profile and cross-sections of Okanagan River 1980 survey sheet 16 of 19. BC Ministry of Environment. Water Management Branch. Okanagan Basin Implementation Program. File no. O.B.-35 SS3 VOL8.

Schuett-Hames, D., A. Pleus, and L. Bullchild. 1994. Habitat unit survey module. Section 4 in Schuett-Hames, D. et al. (eds.), Timber-Fish-Wildlife 1994 Ambient Monitoring Program Manual. Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Olympia, WA. TFW-AM9-94-001.


47

Schuett-Hames, D., and A. Pleus. 1996. Literature review and monitoring recommendations for salmonid spawning habitat availability. Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission.

SECL (Summit Environmental Consultants Ltd.). 2000. Okanagan River Sockeye spawning habitat assessment. Prepared for Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission. Westbank, BC.

SECL (Summit Environmental Consultants Ltd.). 2001. 2000 Okanagan River Sockeye spawning habitat assessment. Prepared for Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission. Westbank, BC.

SECL (Summit Environmental Consultants Ltd.). 2002. 2001 Okanagan River Sockeye Spawning Habitat Assessment. Prepared for the Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission, Westbank, BC

SECL (Summit Environmental Consultants Ltd.). 2003. A review of geomorphic and hydraulic factors controlling the distribution, abundance and quality of Sockeye salmon habitat in the Okanagan Basin from 1900 to present. Prepared for Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission. Westbank, BC.

Squakin, J., C. Rivard-Sirois, and E. McGrath. 2013. Aquatic Monitoring of the Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (ORRI) – Post –construction 2011. Prepared by the Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Stockwell, M.M. and K.D. Hyatt. in prep. A detailed audit and reconstruction of Okanagan Sockeye salmon escapement estimates from 1961 to 2010. Pacific Science Advisory Review Committee Working Paper. in preparation. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Pacific Biological Station, Nanaimo, BC.

Voshnell, J.R. 2002. A Guide to Common Freshwater Invertebrates of North America. The McDonald & Woodward Publishing Company. Blacksburg, Virginia. 442 pp.

Water Survey of Canada (WSC). 2012-2017. Available at: www.wsc.ec.gc.ca

Wolman, M.G., 1954. A method of sampling coarse bed material. Am. Geophysican Union, Transactions, 35: 951-956.

Wright, H. and K. Long. 2006. Okanagan River chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tschawytscha) 2005 brood year summary report. Prepared by Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department. Westbank, BC.

Zar, J.H. 1999. Biostatistical analysis 4th Edition. Prentice Hall, Inc, New Jersey.

http://www.wsc.ec.gc.ca/


48

Appendix A: Monitoring methods


49

APPENDIX A1: Cross section sampling procedures Sampling equipment:

• Surveyors level, total station, or RTK • Stadia rod/ prism pole • Range finder • Gurly velocity meter

Study site locations:

• ORRI Phase I (X sections 1-8) • ORRI Phase II (X sections 9-14)

Sampling methods: Based on the “Manual of Standard Operating Procedures” for Hydrometric Surveys in British Columbia (RIC 1998).

1. Locate and verify your monuments, and complete the lines on your data sheet describing your monuments and any changes to the site.

2. At the cross section monument, place a tagline across the watercourse. Anchor the tagline with the zero referenced to the initial point. The initial point is a permanently marked point at the start of a cross section, normally located above the high water mark on the right bank.

3. Wade across the watercourse, stringing the tagline at a right angle to the direction of the current. Secure the tagline on either shore, and determine the overall width of the metering section. Assess the approximate spacing of the verticals, according to the flow pattern.

4. Record the tagline distance for the edge of the water. If there is a steep drop at the edge of the stream, the first "vertical" depth and velocity observation should be taken close to the edge. Move to the next vertical. Record the distance indicated by the numbered marker on the tagline. Observe and record the depth of the difference and the water depth if applicable.

5. Set the current meter to the correct depth to obtain the velocity. To obtain the velocity, count and record the number of revolutions the bucket wheel makes for a duration of time between 40 and 70 seconds.

• Spacing of Verticals. Obtain 20 - 25 observations of both depth and velocity for one complete measurement. If the cross section is narrow, do not space the verticals closer than 0.15 m or ensure the distance between verticals must be greater than the diameter of the current meter bucket wheel.

• Position of the technician. The technician should stand to the side and downstream from the meter so as not to influence the velocity.

• Position of the current meter. Hold the wading rod in a vertical position and the current meter parallel to the direction of flow while making the velocity observation. Vertical axis meters - if the axis of the meter is not kept vertical, the meter will tend to under-register.

• Observing Velocities. If depths are sufficient, the calculation is based on the range of water depths from the cross sectional measurements that represent >60% of the distribution


50

APPENDIX A2: Froude Number calculations Sampling equipment:

• calculator Study site locations:

• ORRI Phase I reach • ORRI Phase II reach

Sampling methods: Measurements of water depth and velocity at cross sections are needed to calculate the Froude number. The water depth, D, in metres (m) and velocity, V, in metres per second (m/s) are measured and Froude numbers are calculated using D and V measurements. Within the cross sections, water depth is documented at the same point average velocities are recorded. The average velocity of the water depth profile is taken at 60% of the water depth measuring from the water surface, using a velocity meter that records averages over 40 seconds. Velocity meters needed to be calibrated and tested periodically during the study against a Gurley meter. The Froude number is calculated using V, D and g, which is the force of gravity (9.81 m/s2), such that:

Fr = VgD

In past studies (Long et al. 2006), the range of Froude numbers between 0.21 and 0.41 were found to be selected by Sockeye salmon in the Okanagan River. This analysis is the background for future analysis of red site selection at newly restored river reaches.


51

APPENDIX A3: Channel morphometry measurements Sampling equipment:

• 100’ tape, or range finder • camera, photo log


• ORRI Phase I reach • ORRI Phase II reach

Sampling methods:

1. Sketching the reach as laid out in Newbury and Gaboury (1993). 2. Beginning at a baseline (i.e. Park Rill Creek outlet) the reach is walked while recording the length

and width of habitat types such as pools, riffles and glides. 3. The surface area of each feature is then calculated in meters. 4. A photograph of each habitat type is taken.


52

APPENDIX A4: Sinuosity measurements Study site locations:

• Entire ORRI reach (ORRI Phase I & II): XS 1-Parkrill Sampling methods:

• Based on methods set out in Newbury and Gaboury (1993). • Sinuosity = river length/valley length. • The river length is measured as the distance along the thalweg. • The valley length is the measurement of the straight line distance between the start and end of

the project reach. • Google Earth imagery was used to determine river length and valley length.

2008

(Pre-treatment) 2012

(Post Phase I) 2014

(Post Phase II) River length (m): 970 1062 1076 Valley length (m): 910 910 910

Sinuosity 1.07 1.17 1.18

Post Phase I

Post Phase II Valley length


53

APPENDIX A5: Thalweg profile/reach slope Sampling equipment:

• Total station, RTK, or surveyors level (and related equipment)

• range finder or measuring tape • stadia rod • data sheet, clipboard, pencil


• ORRI overall restored reach (Parkrill Outlet to VDS 13) • ORRI cross-sections (XS14-XS1)

Sampling methods:

• The rod-holder puts the stadia rod straight up on level ground next to the end of the sight-level and determines the sigher’s pupil-level height, to the nearest tenth of a foot.

• The sighted stays in place while the rod/prism holder moves downstream between 25m and 100m depending on the variability of the bed and ideally within a habitat unit (i.e. pool, riffle or glide).

• The sighted and rod holder keep moving downstream as long as visibility of each other is good while staying along the thalweg.

• Record at each point the change in elevation along with the distance along the thalweg and the water depth.

Analysis methods:

• The gradient (i.e. the “rise over the run”) is calculated in the office for: o Overall slope: gradient from Parkrill Outlet to VDS 13. o Localized slopes: gradient between each of the cross-sections (XS14 to XS1).

• The maximal slope (i.e. steepest) of all the calculated localized slopes is determined. • Downhill slopes have positive values; uphill slopes (rising bottom) have negative values.


54

APPENDIX A6: Surface water elevation (SWE) & Groundwater elevation (GWE) Sampling Equipment:

• HOBO freshwater data loggers (Model U20-001-01; 30-Foot Depth) • HOBO waterproof data shuttle (Model U-DTW-1) • Field computer with HOBO software • Water tape (for piezometer well) • Surveying equipment (level, stadia rod, tripod) • Repair kit, including pliers, clamps, tie raps, cloths, etc. • Data sheets • GPS • Camera • Waders and safety equipment


• Atmospheric: Air 25m upstream VDS 13 (16+270) • VDS 13: River 25m upstream VDS 13 (16+270) • Lougheed Access: River ORRI phase I (17+061) • ParkRill: River at ParkRill outlet (17+347) • Phase II-Pool: River ORRI Phase II: River – 15m above riffle (0+445) • Upstream Phase II: River – 500m upstream riffle • Phase II-Side Channel -Side-channel (0+160) • Upper Pond • Lower Pond • ParkRill Pond: ParkRill (West Arm) Pond • Lougheed Well: Groundwater- Phase I floodplain • Nature Trust Well: Groundwater-Phase II adjacent floodplain

Sampling methods:

• Based on the “Manual of Standard Operating Procedures for Hydrometric Surveys in British Columbia” (RIC 1998).

• On-going recording using HOBO data loggers. • Download water level logger data 3-4 times/year.

o Download the data using the HOBO software and data shuttle. Re-launch the logger for hourly recordings.

o Survey the offset of each logger to a known elevation benchmark or alternatively note the height of the water level on the gauge to the nearest centimetre. For peizometer wells, measure the distance between the top of the well and the groundwater level using the water tape.

o Record the date and time measurement taken.


55

Data analysis: • Post-construction discharge and water level at Park Rill Creek were plotted against each other in

excel and a linear trend line was fitted to the data. • The function of the trend line was then used to calculate projected flood flows at 119 m3/s. • The predicted value was compared to pre-construction data. • A continuous record of surface water elevations (Appendix A6) over a range of flows is required

to calculate the distance between surface water elevation and the bank at high and low flows. • The bankfull distance between surface water elevation and the floodplain or top of the bank (in

channelized sections) is calculated by subtracting surface water elevation at bankfull flows from floodplain elevation. The low flow distance is calculated in the same manner for surface water elevations during low flows.

• Separate rating curves are then developed between the calculated distances and stream flows (Hydrometric Station on the Okanagan River near Oliver) at high and low flows, pre- and post-construction. Based on the calculated relationships, distances between water surface and bank at various flow volumes are calculated. Due to a limited range of flows encountered during the pre-treatment time period (first half of 2009), predicted distances were calculated at 7.0 m3/s and 10.5 m3/s.


56

APPENDIX A7: Groundwater depth Sampling Equipment:

• Established piezometer wells • HOBO loggers


• Lougheed well (Phase I) • Nature Trust well (Phase II)

Sampling Methods:

• Based on the “Manual of Standard Operating Procedures" for Hydrometric Surveys in British Columbia (RIC 1998).

• Note the height of the water level on the gauge to the nearest centimetre • Measure as below ground level (bgl) • Record the date measurement taken


57

APPENDIX A8: Hydro-period and floodplain inundation Sampling Equipment:

• 100’ tape, and range finder • camera, photo log • kayak & paddle • field notes


• ORRI Phase I • ORRI Phase II • Lougheed floodplain • Nemes Floodplain

Sampling Methods:

1. Map the location of immerged areas with Lougheed and Nemes floodplain 2. Measure the dimensions of each mapped inundated polygon to the meter 3. Measure water depth in each immerged areas (to the cm) 4. Take photos of all the flooded sites 5. Summarize data in the office by calculated the areas of each inundated polygon 6. Record the time and date of the survey and review this with the discharge data from Water

Survey of Canada station 08NM085 real-time data 7. Repeat the survey if significant changes in water discharges and therefore inundation area

changes.


58

APPENDIX A9: Fish habitat features survey Sampling equipment:

• 100’ tape • range finder • camera, photo log


• ORRI Phase I reaches • ORRI Phase II reaches

Sampling methods: 1. For each Large woody debris (LWD) piece

a. tally on your data sheet the number of pieces within each cross section reach b. for each LWD note the diameter and length c. note its location either on the right bank, left bank or on the islands d. If there are any pieces that don’t meet the criteria above but nevertheless seem to be serving

channel-forming or habitat-creating functions, note them on your data sheet. e. For log jams, note the area covered by the jam in (m2) f. Take photos of the LWD features

2. For Pipes that extend into the river a. Note its location either on the right bank, left bank or on the islands b. for each pipe note the diameter and length c. take photos of the feature

3. For in-stream boulders present a. Note its location either on the right bank, left bank or on the islands b. for each cross section reach the total number of boulders and their average diameter c. take photos of the feature

4. For areas of the bank covered with rip rap a. Note its location either on the right bank, left bank or on the islands b. Measure the length of the bank with significant rip rap present c. Calculate the length of bank covered in rip rap in m

5. For gravel bars a. Note its location either on the right bank, left bank, along the islands or in-stream b. Note its location within the cross section reaches c. Measure the length and width of the bar d. Calculate the area of the gravel bar in m2


59

APPENDIX A10: Macrophytes survey Sampling Equipment:

• GPS • Zodiac • Range finder and measuring tape • Data sheets • Camera • Plastic bags and waterproof labels • Snorkel equipment • Waders and safety equipment


• Southern oxbow, including created entrance and exit channels (within ORRI-Phase I) • Northern oxbow, including created entrance and exit channels (within ORRI-Phase I) • Mainstem channel of ORRI-Phase I • Mainstem channel of ORRI-Phase II

Sampling methods

A. Divide the river (or oxbow) in 2 portions: Right side and Left side B. Walk, or snorkel pending on visibility, in along the right portion of the riverand record

information on each herbarium (area covered by macrophytes): • Note the shape of the herbarium: rectangle or triangle. • Take the measurements of the herbarium with measuring tape or the range finder

depending on the size of the herbarium: length (m), width (m). • Take the GPS coordinates of the herbarium, in the middle of the herbarium. For

herbarium that are 10m or more long, take a GPS point at each extremity of the herbarium.

• Note the density of the herbarium (i.e. the percentage of coverage by macrophytes) along the following choices: 1%, 5%, 10%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%.

• Note each species present in the herbarium and it relative abundance (i.e. the percentage of the herbarium cover by each species).

• Take pictures and note other observations. Collect a specimen of any unknown species for further identification

C. Walk in along the left portion of the river and record the same information on each herbarium. Methods for data analysis:

• Group similar species due to common hybridization and morphological similarity


60

APPENDIX A11: Invertebrate monitoring Field sampling was conducted according to CABIN (Canadian Aquatic Biomonitoring Network) protocol. Documents such as field manuals with detailed methods, equipment list, and data sheets can be accessed at: http://www.ec.gc.ca/rcba-cabin/default.asp?lang=En&n=74876ADD- Sampling equipment:

• D-frame kicknet w/ 500 um mesh • Velocity meter or tennis ball • Wide mouth sample jars (250ml) • Ethanol or Formalin • Forceps • GPS • Wash bottle and swirl bucket • Thermometer • Tape measure • Stop watch • Waterproof labels • Data sheets • Camera • Waders and safety equipment

List of Reaches (2008 and 2012):

• Reference site (Natural section) • Above ORRI site (Semi-natural) • Within ORRI site • Below ORRI site (Channelized)

Sampling methods: A. In 2012, GPS coordinate data from 2008 were used to ensure sampling was conducted in the same

location for all sites. B. Two replicate samples were collected at each site. C. Get invertebrate sample by walking and scuffing stream bed in a zigzag, starting downstream and

going upstream – net needs to be downstream and close to feet. D. Zigzag up riffle for 3 minutes. E. Rinse sample into 250ml wide mouth jars – sample jar should have 2/3 sample and 1/3 preservative. F. Do random walk (100 pebble count) to determine substrate size. G. Take channel measurements, which include velocity, bankfull width, and wetted width for 3 XS H. Send to invertebrate identification lab (Cordillera Consulting, Summerland, BC). Note: Invertebrates should be collected at the end of September, beginning of October.


61

Data analysis: Benthic invertebrate samples were processed by Sue Salter (Cordillera Consulting), a North American Benthological Society certified taxonomist based out of Summerland, British Columbia. Samples were processed following Canadian Aquatic Biomonitoring Network (CABIN) protocol (Environment Canada 2010). Several metrics were calculated for each of the eight (4 sites x 2 replicate samples) benthic invertebrate samples collected in 2008 (pre-treatment) and 2012 (post-treatment). Individuals not identified to the family or genus level were excluded from the data set prior to analysis, with the exception of the ‘total number of benthic invertebrates in sample’ metric. Benthic invertebrate diversity was calculated at the family level using the Shannon Index:

𝐻𝐻′ = −�(𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖)𝑆𝑆

𝑖𝑖=1

where H’ is the diversity index, S equals the total number of families, and pi is the frequency of the ith family. Diversity was not calculated at the genus/species level because too few individuals were able to be identified to this level of taxonomic resolution. A benthic index of biological integrity (B-IBI) developed by Jensen (2006) to assess the health of the Okanagan’s lowland streams was calculated for each sample. The Okanagan B-IBI is based on the following five metrics, which were all selected for their predictable and measurable response along a gradient of human impact.

• Total number of taxa • Number of Plecoptera (stonefly) taxa • Number of Ephemeroptera (mayfly) taxa • Number of intolerant taxa (tolerance values of 0-2) • Number of clinger taxa

To compare pre-treatment and post-treatment metrics, average values from each of the two replicate samples from each site were used.


62

APPENDIX A12: Water temperature measurements NOTE: these methods are for the collection of water temperature from 2009 to 2012. Since 2013 water temperatures were recorded with the HOBO water level loggers (see Appendix A6) Sampling equipment:

• 4 temperature loggers (e.g., Onset Computer Corporation Optic StowAway®, Instrumentation northwest Inc. AquiStar® PT2X, Global Water Instrumentation WL16U®)

• Software (e.g., Onset Computer Corporation BoxCar Pro 4.0, Aqua4Plus®)

• 4 aluminum pipes the size of the temperature logger

• Aircraft carrier cable • Cable sleeves • Cutter • GPS • Data sheets • Camera • Waders and safety equipment

Installation methods:

• Launch each logger using appropriate software. Set the data-recording interval to one hour. • House each logger in aluminum piping to protect the logger from damage. • Place each logger within the active channel representative of each site. • Secured each logger to a tree with aircraft cable. • Record information on the installation and a site description. • Retrieve the logger and download the data.

Data analysis:

• Where complete data series existed, daily maximum temperatures were calculated from hourly data

• Days with temperatures exceeding salmonid temperature thresholds of 15.6°C and 18.3°C were counted.


63

APPENDIX A13: Snorkeling procedures Sampling equipment:

• Snorkel equipment • wetsuit • Kayak • GPS • Data sheets • Camera • Safety equipment

List of reaches:

• McIntyre Dam to the Bridge at Highway 97 (natural reach)

• Bridge at Highway 97 to the channelized portion of the river (semi natural reach)

• Channelized portion of the river to Park Rill Creek outlet (channelized reach)

• Park Rill to Cross section 8 (ORRI-Phase II reach)

• Cross section 8 to VDS 13 (ORRI-Phase I reach ) Survey Methods:

Snorkeling survey was conducted to identify, enumerate, and classify salmonids and non-salmonids into length categories. Data collection was recorded per reach and included the start and end times, species (for salmonids), family (for non-salmonids), the number of fish of each species or family, and the length category (<100mm, 100-300mm, or >300mm) (Table). The underwater visual distance, average wetted width, stream temperature and environmental conditions at the time of the survey were also recorded. The number of crew members needed for the snorkel survey is dependent upon the underwater visual distance. In 2008, five snorkelers as well as one person in charge of recording the note were required. Each snorkeler snorkeled downstream in a straight line across the wetted width of the stream and spaced in intervals determined by the underwater visual distance. Snorkel survey commenced at the upstream end of the study site and ended at the downstream end of the site.

Table: Description of the biological measurements collected.

Measurement General Description Units

Fish species Salmonids and non-salmonids are identified to species

where possible. Species or family

Number of fish The number of fish of each species and family are counted. Number

Length category Counted fish are measured and classified into one of three

fish length groups (<100mm, 100-300mm, or >300mm). Millimetres


64

APPENDIX A14: Redd distribution assessments Sampling equipment:

• GPS • Depth stick • Velocity meter • Range finder

List of reaches:

• McIntyre Dam to VDS12 – Index reach • VDS12 to Osoyoos Lake – VDS reach

Survey methods: The Okanagan River was surveyed between 2000 and 2004 just after spawning had occurred (SECL 2000, 2001, 2002; Lawrence 2003; Long 2005). Within the index section a transect was surveyed across the river at 200m intervals. Both a hip chain and a handheld Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver was used to locate each transect. The entire surveyed area was sketched in detail (McIntyre Dam to Osoyoos Lake). All patches of redds were mapped and measured and spawner density within each redd patch was estimated to the nearest 25%. The highest observed redd densities were taken to represent 100% density with medium low and very low observed redd densities representing 75%, 50% and 25%, respectively. Single redds were not included as redd patches. In addition to clearly defined single redds, any patches smaller than 6 m2 were assumed to be single redds based on our experience observing Sockeye redds in the Okanagan River over the past four spawning seasons. Patterns in spawning habitat location within the channel were also identified, namely the distribution of individual measured redds (i.e., those near transects) and redd patches by spawning habitat type. The six spawning habitat types are:

1. Deep riffle: deep turbulent flow found throughout the site length, with depths greater than 0.3m; 2. Run-end: shallow to deep runs found immediately upstream of islands or mid-channel bars; 3. Riffle: shallow turbulent flow found throughout the site length, with depths less than 0.3m; 4. Margin: found along the steep sides of islands, bars, and banks especially on the downstream side

of inside bends; 5. Side-channel: characterized as having much shallower water than the main channel but not

including areas where the main channel split into nearly equal halves; and 6. Bar-end: a sub-class of margin habitat found on the low gradient downstream tails of bars.

In each redd patch water depth and water velocity are measured using a Gurley current meter. Descriptive statistics (mean, range, standard deviation) are calculated for each of the habitat variables, using data from all of the redd patches measured.


65

APPENDIX A15: Salmon spawning enumeration survey Sampling equipment:

• Zodiac boat • Paddles • Personal safety gear • Tally counters • Thermometer • Polarized glasses for crew • Brimmed hats for crew

List of reaches:

• Index reach o McIntyre Dam to Highway 97 Bridge o Highway 97 Bridge to Channel section o Channel to Park Rill Creek o Phase II ORRI o Phase I ORRI o VDS13 – VDS12

• VDS reach o VDS12 to Osoyoos Lake

Survey Methods:

• Zodiac floats are completed every 5 days from Sept 15th to Nov 1st • The floats consisted of a single sweep of the index section with one boat and a crew of three. • All floats include walks of the side channels. • DFO ground level Stream Inspection Logs (SIL’s or BC16 forms) are used throughout the float

surveys. • All salmon species are counted • Spawning and holding are ascertained • Count quality is documented (visibility, brightness and weather etc.) • In the VDS reach, bank walks are conducted by a single observer walking along both banks and

over the drop structure. • The bank walks are confined to the fenced area upstream of each structure.


66

APPENDIX A16: Egg incubation assessments Sampling equipment:

• GPS • Depth stick • Velocity meter • Egg baskets • Temperature loggers • 3cm sieve

List of reaches:

• Natural reach • ORRI Phase I • ORRI Phase II Figure: Incubation basket (Flanagan 2003)

Survey methods:

To determine egg survival, survival rates are measured from incubation baskets in artificial redds placed within study reaches. Sockeye eggs are collected from wild fish caught as part of the Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department’s (ONAFD) broodstock program in accordance with the Alaska Protocol (McDaniels et al 1994). The time elapsed between extracting the eggs and having them set in artificial redds was ≤4 hours. Control baskets are also prepared the same way, seeded with the same batch of eggs, and kept on site under similar conditions as the incubation baskets. Control baskets are retrieved and the eggs are checked for notochord development after 150 Accumulated Thermal Units, which is usually 10 to 15 days after fertilization using the vinegar technique1. The results of on-site controls are used to correct for the survival of eggs in baskets by accounting for egg viability and the success of fertilization. Seeded incubation baskets are placed in artificial redds. To prevent the risk of density dependent mortality, only densities of 100 eggs per 2860 cm3 were use. This density is well below recommended densities of 30 eggs per 108 cm3 (Rubin 1995). The baskets are covered from the upstream side with clean sieved gravel to avoid the chance of fines being introduced into the basket. Only a portion of the basket lid was left exposed.

1 Seimens, M. Manager, Summerland Trout Hatchery Summerland, BC. personal communication, October 5, 2002). The vinegar

technique: by soaking salmon eggs in vinegar only days after fertilization is suspected, the notochord becomes opaque in the translucent egg and a present notochord verifies that the egg has been fertilized and is beginning to develop.


67

Incubation baskets are removed from their artificial redds simply by pulling them out. A bucket is placed below the basket as soon as it is retrieved from the redd in order to collect all the sediment that accumulates within the basket. Once the basket is retrieved, the contents are separated to count live and dead eggs; gravel is sieved from the accumulated fines. The displacement volume of gravel placed inside the basket (> 2 mm) is measured along with the measurement of each piece’s b-axis. The b-axis is neither the largest or smallest diameter of the gravel and therefore it represents the average substrate diameter. Fine sediment (<2 mm) is bagged on site for drying and sieving in the lab. The median size of the diameter of the gravel both within the incubation baskets and those in hummocks built by Sockeye are measured to determine if the gravel matrix inside the incubation baskets is representative of the matrix in hummocks built by wild Sockeye salmon. All of the gravel placed in the incubation baskets is measured. In a portion of the natural redd hummocks measured, 24 particles of gravel are collected from the top of the hummock. Substrate sizes are measured using calipers along the b-axis (i.e. neither the longest nor the shortest). In order to determine if the gravel sizes in artificial and Sockeye built redds are similar, the D50 (or median of the 24 samples from each basket or hummock) is compared using a Mann-Whitney test statistic. This non-parametric test is typically chosen because of the non-normal distribution substrate sizes found in past work. The percent survival for each basket is recorded as survival (S, as a %) to pre-hatch and is calculated as:

where n is the number of live eggs (or emergent fry for 2002) enumerated upon retrieval of basket; i equals the initial number of eggs placed in basket (e.g. i = 100); and m is the number of dead eggs in hatchery/control group (Cunjak et al. 2002). The survival values (S%) were tested for statistical difference between the two reaches using a two sample t-test (α = 0.05; Zar 1999). The data was assumed to be normal and homogeneous.


68

APPENDIX A17: Fine sediment collections and analysis Sampling equipment:

• Flow isolation chamber • Weights • Buckets, shovel • Tarp • Scale • Tripod • Granulometer • Field Sieves • Sample bag, permanent marker • Data sheets • Camera • Waders and safety equipment

Sites location:

• Within ORRI-Phase I site - 6 sample sites as well as 3 grab samples of fines • Within ORRI-Phase II site - 2 sample sites

Sampling methods: The methods that we will be used for the sediment are described in Payne & Lapointe (1997) and Coulombe-Pontbriand & Lapointe (2004). Bulk sampling of the surface and sub-surface bed material requires four samples to be collected (2 replicates of surface and sub-surface samples at each site). Sample holes will be 20 to 30 cm deep. The coarser particles will be wet sieved directly in the field at single phi-intervals ranging from 256mm to 16 mm. Representative sub-samples of particles smaller than 16mm will be brought to the laboratory to be dry sieved down into 4 partitions (2mm; 0.85mm; 0.025mm; remaining). Each sieve partition will be weight. To minimize the loss of fine particles during the sampling, a flow-isolation will be used. The device is composed of a pentagonal enclosure, measuring approximately 1m X 1m X 1m, with an open top and bottom, driven 5–10 cm into the substrate. After insertion, the perimeter is held down with weights. Percentages of fine material in the samples will be then compared to the Sand Index (SI) as described in Peterson & Metcalfe (1981). The Sand Index is defined as:

SI = Sc/16 + Sf/8 Sc is the percentage by weight of the coarse sand fraction (between 0.5 and 2 mm) and Sf is the percentage by weight of the fine and medium sand fraction (smaller than 0.5 mm). A Sand Index value is considered excellent if smaller than 1, mediocre if between 1 and 1.5 and poor if larger than 1.5 (Peterson & Metcalfe, 1981).


69

APPENDIX A18: Streambed gravel assessments Sampling equipment:

• Calipers • Data sheets • Camera • Waders and safety equipment • Buckets

Site locations:

• at each of the cross section (13) in Phase I and 2 of ORRI

Sampling methods: (From Kondolf 1997, Wolman 1954, and Schuett-Hames et al. 1994)

1. The counter(s) walk back and forth within a riffle/run across the entire channel bottom where the stream runs during normal flows, Don’t sample at pools or “glides” (places of deep, uniform-depth, slow-moving water).

2. Walk heel-to-toe straight across this channel. 3. Straight down to the stream-bottom along the line drawn at the tip of your boots. 4. Don’t count bedrock, garbage, construction debris, or organic materials. Otherwise, measure whatever

you first touch with the welding rod, be it silt, gravel, or a boulder. 5. If you hit fine sediment that covers a rock completely (not sporadically), count the fines, not the rock. 6. If you’ve hit fine sediment, you don’t need to pick it up. Just call out “fines,” and the recorder will enter a

tally in the “<4 mm” row. 7. Otherwise, pick up the first piece you hit and measure its diameter along its intermediate axis, which is

perpendicular to the other two. To find this, first find the longest axis; then find the smallest axis that is perpendicular to the longest axis. There is now one more axis that is perpendicular to both the longest and shortest axes—that is the intermediate axis (Schuett-Hames et al., 1994)

8. If you can’t easily remove the rock from the bed, excavate around it and measure it in place. (You may have to “let the dust clear” for a few seconds.) The intermediate axis will be the smaller of the two exposed axes.

9. For each piece of sediment measured, make two tallies on your data sheet: a. one in the appropriate row for the piece’s size class, in either the “Loose” or “Embedded” column

(not both!). The classes are: < 4 mm; 4-5.7 mm; 5.7-8 mm; 8-11.3 mm; 11.3-16 mm; 16-22.6 mm; 22.6-32 mm; 32-45.3 mm; 45.3-64 mm; 64-90.5 mm; 90.5-128 mm; 128- 181 mm; 181-256 mm; 256-362 mm; 362-512 mm; >512 mm. (These increments are called “half-phi” classes; they increase by the square root of two and mimic data collected by putting sediment through successively finer sieves.)

b. one in the “Total tally” row, to keep track of how many pieces you’ve counted. The recorder should verbally repeat each measurement back to the caller for error checking before placing the tally mark.

10. Repeat this procedure, walking heel-to-toe and crossing back and forth across the riffle.


70

APPENDIX A19: Minnow trapping procedures Sampling equipment:

• 10 minnow traps (mesh size: 6mm; circular opening diameter: 2cm) • Baits contained in nylon bags • Twine, knife • Data sheets • GPS • Camera • Waders and safety equipment


• ORRI Phase II side channel (from end of the Entrance channel to beginning of the Exit channel). Installation methods:

• Place 10 minnow traps throughout the side channel, distributing them ≅25m apart from each other. • Bait each trap with salmon row, cat food, and/or commercial bait. • Secure each trap to the surrounding vegetation with twine. Flag and identify each trap. • Completely submerge each trap orienting the trap opening in the direction of the stream flow or expected

fish movement. • Leave traps over 24-hour fishing period; then check for fish presence; re-bait and install traps for another

24-hour fishing period (total 48 hour). • Identify and count all species of fish caught.

Data analysis:

• Catch per unit effort is calculated by number fish caught/per day (24h).


71

Appendix B: Monitoring data and analysis


72

APPENDIX B1: Yearly river hydrographs since ORRI restoration work (Source: WSC 2018)

2009: Construction Phase II – DROUGHT YEAR 2010: NORMAL YEAR

2011: VERY HIGH FRESHET YEAR (gravel recruited) 2012: VERY HIGH FRESHET YEAR (gravel recruited)

2013: Construction Phase II & VDS 13 VERY HIGH FRESHET YEAR (gravel recruited) 2014: HIGH FRESHET YEAR (gravel recruited)


73

2017: EXCEPTIONALLY HIGH FRESHET (gravel recruited)

2015: MEDIAN FRESHET YEAR

2016: HIGH FRESHET YEAR (gravel recruited)


74

APPENDIX B2: Cross-sectional data and other survey data Survey info: Acronyms: Date: Nov. 7, 2017 W water/wetted Crew: CRS, CL R River Wx: partly cloudy I Ice Analysis: CRS BR Bridge Units: m WE Water edge Base: at Phase II side channel BE Berm (along approach channel) Reference elevation:

US bridge=299.78m BLK Blockage (sediment in approach channel; dewatered) DS bridge=299.54m US Upstream

Q (08NM085): 11 m3/s DS Downstream

P Pipe

PT_ID North East Description Known elevation Surveyed elevation 301 5453292 314332 WE 297.3 302 5453292 314331 W-T 296.87 303 5453292 314329 WE 297.28 304 5453292 314328 BE 297.46 305 5453292 314328 WE-R 297.28 306 5453294 314327 W-R 296.62 307 5453293 314326 W-R 296.84 308 5453294 314324 W-R 296.73 309 5453295 314324 W-R 297.01 310 5453297 314322 W-R 296.68 311 5453299 314321 W-R 296.53 312 5453300 314322 W-R 296.41 313 5453289 314321 W-R 296.62 314 5453289 314321 W-R 296.98 315 5453288 314322 W-R 296.75 316 5453287 314322 WE-R 297.21 317 5453287 314323 BE 297.36 318 5453285 314323 WE 297.25 319 5453284 314324 W-T 296.77 320 5453280 314320 W-T 296.65 321 5453282 314319 WE 297.26 322 5453282 314318 BE 297.28 323 5453283 314318 WE-R 297.05 324 5453285 314317 W-R 296.74 325 5453285 314316 W-R 296.48 326 5453287 314316 W-R 296.55 327 5453286 314316 W-R 297.03 328 5453285 314311 W-R 296.23 329 5453285 314308 W-R 295.78 330 5453283 314310 W-R 296.21 331 5453282 314312 W-R 296.48


75

PT_ID North East Description Known elevation Surveyed elevation 332 5453282 314313 W-R 296.82 333 5453281 314314 WE-R 296.96 334 5453279 314315 BE 297.42 335 5453278 314315 WE 297.27 336 5453277 314316 W-T 296.57 337 5453276 314313 WE 297.26 338 5453277 314312 WE-BE 297.15 339 5453278 314311 WE-R 296.81 340 5453283 314306 W-R 295.53 341 5453280 314309 W-R 295.98 342 5453279 314310 W-R 296.63 343 5453278 314306 W-R 295.48 344 5453279 314306 W-R 295.1 345 5453277 314308 W-R 295.99 346 5453275 314311 BE 297.03 347 5453273 314313 W-T 296.8 348 5453271 314314 WE 297.27 349 5453269 314309 W-T 297.04 350 5453270 314307 WE-BE 297.26 351 5453269 314305 BE 297.01 352 5453266 314307 WE-BLK 297.26 353 5453267 314305 WE-BE 297.08 354 5453268 314302 WE-R 296.8 355 5453270 314300 W-R 295.07 356 5453262 314302 BLK 297.38 357 5453263 314300 BE 297.61 358 5453255 314296 BLK 297.51 359 5453251 314294 BLK 297.22 360 5453250 314293 W-T 296.95 361 5453251 314291 BE 297.46 362 5453252 314289 BE 297.4 363 5453253 314288 WE-R 296.82 364 5453253 314289 WE-R 296.78 365 5453247 314284 WE-R 296.82 366 5453247 314285 BE 297.23 367 5453247 314285 BE 297.23 368 5453244 314287 BE 297.58 369 5453241 314290 W-T 296.91 370 5453220 314291 W-T 296.94 371 5453205 314288 WE 296.88 372 5453189 314281 W-T 296.4 373 5453185 314280 W-T 296.74 374 5453184 314279 WE 296.89 375 5453182 314284 WE 296.87 376 5453171 314276 WE 296.85 377 5453167 314277 HWM 297.45


76

PT_ID North East Description Known elevation Surveyed elevation 378 5453170 314273 W-T 296.57 379 5453172 314271 WE 296.81 380 5453155 314268 HWM 297.38 381 5453156 314265 WE 296.82 382 5453157 314264 W-T 296.72 383 5453157 314263 WE 296.76 384 5453158 314264 WE 296.94 385 5453159 314251 HWM 297.57 386 5453154 314261 W-T 296.62 387 5453141 314259 HWM 297.38 388 5453142 314257 WE 296.78 389 5453144 314253 W-T 296.57 390 5453146 314250 WE 296.71 391 5453150 314246 HWM 297.42 392 5453130 314252 HWM 297.46 393 5453131 314249 WE 296.78 394 5453134 314245 W-T 296.59 395 5453136 314244 WE 296.76 396 5453139 314237 HWM 297.45 397 5453126 314227 HWM 297.43 398 5453123 314235 WE 296.75 399 5453122 314237 W-T 296.65 400 5453121 314238 WE 296.76 401 5453109 314249 HWM 297.32 402 5453104 314232 WE 296.78 403 5453106 314230 W-T 296.57 404 5453108 314226 WE 296.7 405 5453232 314291 US BR 299.78 299.79 406 5453232 314291 US BR 299.78 299.79 407 5453101 314208 HWM 297.76 408 5453097 314214 WE 296.71 409 5453093 314219 W-T 296.64 410 5453090 314224 WE 296.72 411 5453078 314218 WE 296.74 412 5453079 314213 W-T 296.52 413 5453083 314205 WE 296.75 414 5453084 314202 HWM 297.34 415 5453072 314200 WE 296.74 416 5453071 314203 WE 296.39 417 5453063 314203 W-T 296.43 418 5453054 314197 W-T 296.4 419 5453050 314194 W-T 296.33 420 5453053 314189 WE 296.75 421 5453026 314197 WE 296.75 422 5453024 314197 HWM 297.54 423 5453030 314193 W-T 295.82


77

PT_ID North East Description Known elevation Surveyed elevation 424 5453025 314186 WE 296.77 425 5453028 314184 W-T 296.26 426 5453005 314166 WE 296.8 427 5453009 314161 W-T 296.29 428 5453011 314157 WE 296.78 429 5453013 314152 HWM 297.23 430 5452987 314139 HWM 297.63 431 5452989 314147 WE 296.82 432 5452986 314151 WE 297.09 433 5452984 314151 HWM 297.61 434 5452987 314149 W-T 296.43 435 5452980 314147 WE 296.77 436 5452978 314148 BD 297.43 437 5452979 314146 BD 297.37 438 5452977 314147 BD 296.72 439 5452978 314142 BD 296.96 440 5452970 314143 W-T 296.67 441 5452962 314143 W-T 296.65 442 5452963 314138 HWM 297.3 443 5452954 314141 HWM-estimate 297.19 444 5452955 314130 W-T 296.63 445 5452956 314114 W-T 296.57 446 5452957 314114 WE 296.74 447 5452958 314109 WE 296.72 448 5452957 314108 W-T 296.59 449 5452954 314107 WE 296.75 450 5452957 314105 W-R 295.85 451 5452958 314104 W-R 295.52 452 5452957 314101 W-R 295.57 453 5452955 314120 DS BR 299.54 299.54 454 5453202 314291 WE 297.81 455 5453203 314283 HWM-estimate 297.52 456 5453340 314394 WE-R 297.35 457 5453339 314393 top pipe-river 299.36 458 5453312 314414 top pipe-TEN ditch 296.97 459 5453312 314415 WE-TEN-ditch 296.49 460 5453320 314405 WE in pipe 296.51 461 5453320 314405 top pipe 296.72


78

Survey info:

Acronyms: Date: Nov. 14, 2017

WSE Water surface elevation

Crew: CRS, CL

R River mainstem Wx: sunny, partly cloudy

O Oxbow

Analysis: CRS

WT Thalweg Units: m

Base: at XS13 old dike Reference elevation: US bridge deck=299.78m Q (08NM085): 9.8-9.9

PT_ID North East Description Known elevation Surveyed elevation 1 5453290 314294 PP ≈297.3 297.24 2 5453301 314283 BM1(estimate) ≈299.95 299.94 3 5453312 314314 WSE-R 297.32 4 5453311 314316 WT-R 295.99 5 5453309 314310 WSE-R 297.25 6 5453308 314311 W-R 297.17 7 5453308 314312 W-R 296.92 8 5453304 314314 W-R 296.72 9 5453303 314315 W-R 296.78

10 5453301 314316 W-R 296.46 11 5453306 314309 W-R 296.59 12 5453304 314307 W-R 296.65 13 5453302 314308 W-R 296.55 14 5453303 314304 WSE-R 297.05 15 5453303 314304 W-R 296.55 16 5453302 314306 W-R 296.51 17 5453298 314309 W-R 296.54 18 5453298 314311 W-R 296.27 19 5453296 314308 W-R 296.16 20 5453296 314306 W-R 296.42 21 5453296 314304 W-R 296.49 22 5453295 314305 W-R 296.09 23 5453294 314305 W-R 296.91 24 5453298 314302 W-R 296.37 25 5453300 314301 WSE-R 296.95 26 5453297 314300 W-R 296.26 27 5453294 314301 W-R 296.41 28 5453293 314303 W-R 296.22 29 5453292 314304 W-R 296.24 30 5453291 314305 W-R 296.09 31 5453290 314302 W-R 296.00 32 5453287 314301 W-R 295.60 33 5453288 314300 W-R 295.69 34 5453288 314299 W-R 295.39 35 5453290 314296 W-R 295.39 36 5453292 314294 WSE-R 296.76 37 5453288 314297 WSE-R 295.29


79

PT_ID North East Description Known elevation Surveyed elevation 38 5453286 314297 WT-R 294.77 39 5453261 314271 W-R 294.85 40 5453264 314268 WSE-R 296.77 41 5453243 314259 W-R 295.27 42 5453235 314259 W-R 295.63 43 5453229 314253 W-R 295.84 44 5453220 314245 WT-R 295.91 45 5453227 314234 WSE-R 296.78 46 5453210 314235 WT-R 295.79 47 5453211 314235 WT-R 295.77 48 5453196 314226 WT-R 295.74 49 5453169 314206 WT-R 296.00 50 5453151 314193 WT-R 295.96 51 5453139 314185 WT-R 296.02 52 5453144 314172 WSE-R 296.74 53 5453121 314170 WT-R 296.06 54 5453103 314159 WT-R 296.07 55 5453086 314150 WT-R 295.93 56 5453050 314132 WT-R 295.89 57 5453029 314121 WT-R 295.86 58 5453034 314110 WSE-R 296.72 59 5453006 314105 WT-R 295.72 60 5452998 314100 WT-R 295.52 61 5452980 314095 WT-R 295.26 62 5452955 314089 WT-R 295.28 63 5452956 314080 WSE-R 296.70 64 5452936 314078 WSE-R 296.34 65 5452932 314082 WT-R 295.21 66 5452900 314069 WT-R 295.11 67 5452886 314068 WT-R 295.34 68 5452892 314057 WSE-R 296.63 69 5452865 314050 WT-O 296.16 70 5452865 314036 WT-O 296.01 71 5452856 314027 WT-O 295.99 72 5452844 314018 WT-O 295.83 73 5452841 314016 WT-O 295.85 74 5452839 314002 WSE-O 296.44 75 5452836 314004 WT-O 295.79 76 5452820 313995 WT-O 294.75 77 5452813 313990 WT-O 295.11 78 5452800 313980 WT-O 295.21 79 5452789 313979 WT-O 295.54 80 5452789 313977 WT-O 295.38 81 5452789 313975 WSE-O 296.37 82 5452774 313972 W-O 295.83 83 5452763 313971 WT-O 295.22


80

PT_ID North East Description Known elevation Surveyed elevation 84 5452754 313970 WT-O 294.35 85 5452744 313970 WT-O 294.69 86 5452734 313973 WT-O 294.51 87 5452728 313978 WT-O 294.88 88 5452720 313986 WT-O 294.88 89 5452711 313996 WT-O 294.71 90 5452708 313997 WT-O 294.42 91 5452703 313994 WSE-O 296.31 92 5452702 313998 WT-O 295.12 93 5452702 314003 WT-O 295.74 94 5452698 314009 WT-O 295.98 95 5452691 314016 WT-O 295.72 96 5452674 314023 WT-O 295.56 97 5452659 314021 WSE-R 296.17 98 5452620 314032 WSE-R 296.16 99 5452575 314023 WSE-R 296.13

100 5452558 314026 WT-O 295.49 101 5452549 314022 WT-O 295.34 102 5452542 314008 WSE-O 295.89 103 5453232 314291 BM-2 299.78 299.78 104 5452901 314082 WT-R 295.25 105 5452892 314077 WT-R 295.35 106 5452872 314067 WT-R 295.55 107 5452861 314066 WT-R 295.83 108 5452843 314057 WT-R 296.21 109 5452840 314050 WT-R 295.68 110 5452811 314051 WT-R 296.02 111 5452810 314040 WSE-R 296.58 112 5452788 314047 WT-R 296.11 113 5452769 314049 WT-R 296.05 114 5452753 314051 WT-R 295.95 115 5452742 314054 WT-R 295.70 116 5452727 314054 WT-R 295.53 117 5452724 314057 WSE-R 296.32 118 5452708 314050 WT-R 294.46 119 5452691 314046 WT-R 295.82 120 5452672 314038 WT-R 295.87 121 5452671 314036 WT-R 295.14 122 5452655 314037 WT-R 294.91 123 5452582 314039 WT-R 295.29 124 5452567 314044 WT-R 295.15 125 5452544 314039 WT-R 295.89 126 5452540 314036 WT-R 295.08 127 5452540 314033 WSE-R 296.13


81

Survey info: Acronyms: Date: Nov. 18, 2017 WSE Water surface elevation Crew: CRS, CL R River mainstem Wx: sunny, partly cloudy O Oxbow Analysis: CRS WT Thalweg Units: m Base: west dike at Louheed oxbow Reference elevation: VDS 13 monument 297.09m Q (08NM085): 9.7

PT_ID North East Description Known elevation Surveyed elevation 201 5452542 314008 SWE-O 295.9 202 5452542 314013 WT-O 295.52 203 5452539 314006 WT-O 294.2 204 5452542 314005 SWE-O 295.92 205 5452528 314001 WT-O 294.22 206 5452503 313987 WT-O 294.18 207 5452484 313989 SWE-O 295.91 208 5452418 314022 WT-O 294.02 209 5452415 314021 SWE-O 295.91 210 5452416 314026 WT-O 294.39 211 5452417 314030 WT-O 295.13 212 5452419 314055 WT-O 295.04 213 5452421 314083 SWE-O 295.74 214 5452417 314073 WT-R 294.61 215 5452417 314066 WT-R 294.38 216 5452398 314059 SWE-R 295.68 217 5452371 314072 SWE-R 295.69 218 5452352 314087 WT-R 294.37 219 5452325 314096 WT-R 294.67 220 5452325 314103 SWE-R 295.68 221 5452262 314099 WT-R 294.7 222 5452258 314090 SWE-R 295.64 223 5452255 314092 VDS13 297.09 297.09 224 5452136 314129 GD-WT-R 293.45 225 5452070 314141 GD-WT-R 293.79 226 5452070 314140 GD-SWE-R 294.26 227 5452045 314143 GD-WT-R 293.66 228 5452045 314143 GD-SWE-R 294.31 229 5452114 314142 GD-WT-R 293.47 230 5452956 314120 DS BR 299.54 299.56 231 5453233 314291 US BR 299.78 299.78


82

APPENDIX B3: River mainstem thawleg bed slope and pool depth calculation 2017 thalweg slope (river mainstem)

Phase Location XS PT_ID Elevation

(m) Cumulative distance (m)

Distance with ds XS (m)

Elevation change with ds XS (m)

Slope with ds XS

US Phase

II

us pool 4 295.99 0 6 -0.54 -9.00%

riffle crest 311 296.53 6 21 1 4.76%

Phase II

XS14 340 295.53 27 39 1.21 3.10%

XS13 NA 294.32 66 49 -1.59 -3.24%

XS12 44 295.91 115 104 -0.11 -0.11%

XS11 51 296.02 219 127 0.16 0.13%

XS10 57 295.86 346 77 0.58 0.75%

XS9 62 295.28 423 72 -0.06 -0.08%

Phase I

XS8 67 295.34 495 83 -0.68 -0.82%

XS7 110 296.02 578 84 0.49 0.58%

XS6 116 295.53 662 72 0.62 0.86%

XS5 122 294.91 734 114 -0.17 -0.15%

XS4 126 295.08 848 47 0.36 0.77%

XS3 128 294.72 895 80 0.11 0.14%

XS2 214 294.61 975 31 1.07 3.45%

VDS 13 XS1 NA 293.54 1006 127 -1.16 -0.91%

VDS13 221 294.7 1133 NA NA NA Note: Downhill slopes have positive values; uphill slopes (rising bottom) have negative values.

Overall slope (Parkrill Outlet-VDS13) 0.1% Max. localized slope (XS14-XS1) 3.5%

2017 pools depth (at 10 cms)

Pool location 2017 Thalweg elevation (m)

2017 Max depth (m)

2009 As-built max depth (m)*

Depth variation (m)

Below Phase II riffle 293.16 3.6 0.7 -2.9 Upstream Lougheed 295.11 1.5 0.9 -0.6

Lougheed oxbow 294.35 2.0 2.2 0.3 XS5-XS4 294.46 1.8 0.8 -1.0

Nemes oxbow 293.36 2.6 2.2 -0.3 XS2-XS1 293.54 2.2 0.7 -1.5

* Source: Mould Engineering 2010


83

2008- 2012 thalweg slope (river mainstem)- Calculation updated in 2017

Location River chain (m)

Mainstem elevation (m) Local slope with ds XS 2012 2009 2008 2012 2009 2008

XS 14 (17+347) Parkrill 17347 295.8 no data no data -0.34% NA NA XS 13 (17+289) Phase II 17289 296 296.0 296.0 0.08% 0.00% -0.33%

XS12 (17+259) 17259 no data 296.0 296.1 NA 0.20% 0.30% XS 11 (17+160) Phase II 17160 295.9 295.8 295.8 0.20% 0.10% 0.10% XS 10 (17+061) Phase II 17061 295.7 295.7 295.7 0.39% 0.26% 0.26% XS 9 (16+985) Phase II 16985 295.4 295.5 295.5 0.36% -0.36% -0.36%

XS 8 (16+930) Upstream Lougheed Entrance 16930 295.2 295.7 295.7 -0.48% -0.14% 0.28% XS 7 (16+785) Lougheed Oxbow 16785 295.9 295.9 295.3 0.24% 0.84% 0.48% XS 6 (16+702) Lougheed Oxbow 16702 295.7 295.2 294.9 1.34% -0.12% -0.24% XS 5 (16 + 620) between oxbows 16620 294.6 295.3 295.1 -0.47% 0.33% 0.00% XS4 (16+590) between oxbows 16590 no data 295.2 295.1 NA 0.10% 0.00% XS 3 (16 + 493) Nemes Oxbow 16493 295.2 295.1 295.1 0.11% -0.11% -0.21% XS 2 (16 + 398) at Nemes Exit 16398 295.1 295.2 295.3 1.20% -0.20% 0.20%

XS 1 (16 + 348) 16348 294.5 295.3 295.2 NA NA NA Note: Downhill slopes have positive values; uphill slopes (rising bottom) have negative values.

2012 2009 2008 Overall slope (Parkrill Outlet-VDS13) 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% Max. localized slope (XS14-XS1) 1.3% 0.8% 0.5% Note: In 2008 and 2009, elevations at Parkrill Outlet were estimated from XS13, as data not available. Note: In 2008, 2009 and 2012 elevations at VDS 13 were estimated from XS1, as data not available.


84

Figure: Progression of thalweg bed elevation in the river mainstem and reconnected oxbows


85

PT_ID Elevation (m) 377 297.45 380 297.38 385 297.57 387 297.38 391 297.42 392 297.46 396 297.45 397 297.43 401 297.32 407 297.76 414 297.34 422 297.54 429 297.23 430 297.63 433 297.61 442 297.3

Average HWM elevation (m): 297.5 Average HWM width (m): 25

APPENDIX B4: High-water marks observed in Phase II side channel

High-water marks & observed groundwater connection in ORRI Phase II side channel (Nov. 7, 2017) High-water marks surveyed elevations (Nov. 7, 2017)


86

APPENDIX B5: Calculation bankfull and low flow distances to the top of bank Notes: 2009 is before the dike set back (elevation of floodplain is elevation of top of West dike); data recorded on portion of year. 2012 is before VDS 13 modifications which reduced SWE. SWE within the ORRI reach is also influenced by the presence of woody debris at VDS 13. Bankfull and low flow distances to the top of bank at Lougheed access (XS11) 2009-2017

2009* 2012* 2014 2015 2016 2017

Min SWE recorded during year (m) 296.32 296.58 296.54 296.50 296.50 296.63

River Q at Min SWE (m3/s) 7.7 5.5 6.3 6.1 5.8 8.7

Max WSE recorded during year (m) 296.45 297.82 297.66 297.30 297.70 297.91

River Q at Max SWE (m3/s) 10.6 82.6 76.3 53.1 87.3 105.0

Top bank elevation (m) 298.4 298.2 298.2 298.2 298.2 298.2 Floodplain elevation (m) 299.6 297.7 297.7 297.7 297.7 297.7 Lowest flow distance to top of bank (m) 2.1 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.6 Highest flow distance to top bank (m) 1.9 0.4 0.5 0.9 0.5 0.3 Highest flow distance to floodplain (m) 3.2 -0.1 0.0 0.4 0.0 -0.2

* 2009 and 2012 data may need revision.


87

APPENDIX B6: Analysis of SWE recorded at various discharges


88

APPENDIX B7: Surface water elevations recorded at monitoring stations (water level loggers)

2017 Surface water elevations at ORRI monitoring stations (mainstem river) and river discharge


89

2013-2017 Surface water elevations at ORRI monitoring stations (mainstem river)


90

APPENDIX B8: Groundwater elevations recorded at monitoring stations (groundwater wells)

2017 Water elevation at ORRI adjacent floodplains monitoring stations (groundwater wells)


91

Calculation distance groundwater elevation (GWE) with ground at monitoring wells (2014-2017)

May-Oct, 2017 Lougheed Well Nature Trust Well MAX Recorded GWE (m) 298.07 298.43 MIN Recorded GWE (m) 296.86 297.28

Ground elevation at logger (m) 298.0 297.3 MIN GWE distance with ground (m) -0.07 -1.14 MAX GWE distance with ground (m) 1.14 0.01

May-Oct, 2016 Lougheed Well Nature Trust Well MAX Recorded GWE (m) 297.90 298.21 MIN Recorded GWE (m) 296.81 297.26

Ground elevation at logger (m) 298.0 297.29 MIN GWE distance with ground (m) 0.10 -0.92 MAX GWE distance with ground (m) 1.19 0.03

May-Oct, 2015 Lougheed Well Nature Trust Well

MAX Recorded GWE (m) 297.61 297.86 MIN Recorded GWE (m) 296.76 297.14


May-Oct, 2014 Lougheed Well Nature Trust Well

MAX Recorded GWE (m) 297.91 298.15 MIN Recorded GWE (m) 296.74 297.12



92

APPENDIX B9: Water temperature data Average daily and maximum daily water temperatures exceeding salmonid thresholds in 2017

AVERAGE DAILY MAXIMUM DAILY Side Channel Mainstem River

Side Channel Mainstem River

>15.6oC 104 days 116 days >15.6oC 114 days 125 days >18.3oC 72 days 84 days >18.3oC 75 days 87 days >21oC 50 days 69 days >21oC 58 days 73 days >24oC 0 day 0 day >24oC 0 day 1 day

Max. mean daily 22.7oC 23.5oC Max. daily 22.7oC 24.2 oC

Average daily water temperature exceeding salmonid thresholds over time (2014-2017)

Side Channel Mainstem River Upper Pond Comment

2014

>15.6oC 136 days 139 days 93 days * A few days during peak summer heat, sediments blocked the approach channel before being excavated.

>18.3oC 87 days 84 days 34 days >21oC 60 days 60 days 1 day >24oC 17 days* 14 days 0 day

Max mean daily 25.4 oC 25.0 oC 21.1 oC

2015

>15.6oC 126 days 131 days 102 days Average freshet year. No complete flow blockage at river low flows.

>18.3oC 101 days 104 days 47 days >21oC 75 days 77 days 0 day >24oC 19 days 21 days 0 day


2016

>15.6oC 134 days 138 days 118 days * A few days during peak summer heat, sediments blocked the approach channel before being excavated.

>18.3oC 90 days 93 days 62 days >21oC 60 days 60 days 7 days >24oC 7 days 2 days 0 day

Max mean daily 26.4 oC * 24.4 oC 22.1 oC

2017

>15.6oC 104 days 116 days incomplete data set River flows reduced and side channel dewatered later than previous years. Sediment blockage not excavated this year.

>18.3oC 72 days 84 days incomplete data set >21oC 50 days 69 days incomplete data set >24oC 0 day 0 day incomplete data set



93

Daily average water temperatures in the ORRI-Phase II Reach overtime (2014-2017)


94

APPENDIX B10: Dissolved oxygen data (Phase II Side Channel)

Dissolved oxygen in Phase II side channel and salmonid thresholds during summer 2017

DO No. days mean daily below thresholds

No. hours below thresholds Level or effect on salmonids

<3 mg/l 1 65 mortality after 3.5 days (USPA 1986) <4 mg/l 12 315 severe production impairment (USPA 1986) <5 mg/l 24 530 potential barrier to movement & habitat selection (WDOE 2002) <6 mg/l 34 807 slight production impairment (USPA 1986) <8 mg/l 61 1525 no production impairment (USPA 1986)


95

APPENDIX B11: Snorkel data No data in 2017 as river flow were too high to allow survey during summer. 2014-2016 Comparison numbers salmonids, indigenous minnows and exotic fish species between snorkel reaches

2016 Reach length (km)

Total fishes*

No. salmonids*

% samonids*

No. indigenous minnows

% indigenous minnows

No. exotic fishes

% exotic fishes

No. RBT/ST (all stages) +

CH (juv)

No. RBT/ST (all stages) + CH (juv) /km

NATURAL SECTION (McIntyre Dam to Hwy

bridge) 3.7 1134 291 26% 136 12% 707 62% 285 78.1

SEMI-NATURAL SECTION (Hwy bridge to channel) 2.3 379 75 20% 28 7% 276 73% 74 32.2

CHANNELIZED SECTION (channel to Parkrill) 0.9 146 3 2% 7 5% 136 93% 3 3.3

ORRI PHASE II (Parkrill to XS8) 0.5 87 7 8% 3 3% 77 89% 7 15.6

ORRI PHASE I (XS8 to VDS13) 0.7 76 2 3% 1 1% 73 96% 2 3.1

OVERALL (McIntyre Dam- VDS 13) 8.0 1822 378 21% 175 10% 1269 70% 371 46.7

*Note: excluding sockeye and adult chinook


96


Total fishes*

No. salmonids*

% samonids*



No. exotic fishes

% exotic fishes


CH (juv)


NATURAL SECTION (McIntyre Dam to Hwy bridge) 3.7 1952 62 3% 110 6% 1780 91% 39 10.7








Total fishes*

No. salmonids*

% samonids*



No. exotic fishes

% exotic fishes


CH (juv)


NATURAL SECTION (McIntyre Dam to Hwy bridge) 3.7 490 100 20% 140 29% 250 51% 89 24.4








97

Date Oct. 30, 2017 Crew CL/CRS

Q (08MN085) 11.2 m3/s

APPENDIX B12: Redd survey data

2017 Redd survey raw data

Phase Sub-reach Patch #

Redd depth

(m)

Redd velocity @ 40% (# rot)

Redd velocity @ 40% (m/s)

Shape (T/R)

Froude Fr= v/√gD

Patch length

(m)

Patch width

(m)

Patch area (m2)

spawn density 25, 50, 75, 100%

Effective spawning area (m2)

D50 (mm)

D84 (mm)

Spawning habitat

Super imposition

ii us XS 14 1 1.00 25 0.43 R 0.14 10 22 220 75% 165 5 70 DR ii us XS 14 2 1.00 35 0.59 R 0.19 5 22 110 100% 110 10 50 DR ii xs12-11 3 0.86 36 0.61 R 0.21 4 3 12 75% 9 10 50 GL ii xs11-10 4 0.58 35 0.59 R 0.25 30 10 300 25% 75 10 50 M ii xs11-10 5 0.75 32 0.54 R 0.20 3 5 15 100% 15 20 50 M ii xs10-9 6 0.77 25 0.43 R 0.15 50 10 500 25% 125 10 40 M i xs8-7 7 1.22 22 0.38 R 0.11 30 15 450 25% 112.5 5 60 M i xs8-7 8 0.52 57 0.96 R 0.43 30 5 150 75% 112.5 20 40 DR i xs8-7 9 0.32 56 0.95 R 0.53 30 5 150 100% 150 20 40 R i xs8-7 17 0.66 27 0.46 R 0.18 43 30 1290 100% 1290 20 60 DR X i xs8-7 18 0.42 20 0.34 R 0.17 18 20 360 100% 360 10 50 R X i xs7-6 10 0.68 85 1.43 T 0.56 32 11 176 75% 132 20 40 DR i xs7-6 11 0.64 55 0.93 R 0.37 17 5 85 75% 63.75 20 50 R X i xs7-6 19 0.50 27 0.46 R 0.21 70 25 1750 100% 1750 10 50 R i xs7-6 20 0.40 38 0.64 R 0.33 40 12 480 25% 120 10 50 R i xs7-6 21 0.65 70 1.18 R 0.47 40 13 520 50% 260 10 50 R i xs6-5 12 0.30 34 0.58 R 0.34 10 30 300 100% 300 25 50 R i xs6-5 13 0.38 30 0.51 R 0.26 11 30 330 25% 82.5 25 50 R i xs6-5 22 0.30 54 0.91 R 0.53 40 28 1120 25% 280 20 50 R i xs5-4 23 0.39 33 0.56 R 0.29 23 25 575 100% 575 20 50 R i xs4-3 14 0.45 80 1.35 R 0.64 35 20 700 50% 350 10 60 R X i xs4-3 15 0.28 26 0.44 R 0.27 15 10 150 75% 112.5 10 60 R i xs3-2 16 0.48 79 1.33 R 0.61 28 20 560 25% 140 20 50 R i xs3-2 24 0.24 21 0.36 R 0.23 40 25 1000 75% 750 20 50 R i xs3-2 25 0.20 54 0.91 R 0.65 30 5 150 25% 37.5 10 40 R i xs3-2 26 0.43 60 1.01 R 0.49 30 10 300 50% 150 10 40 R

vds13 xs1-VDS13 27 0.77 23 0.39 R 0.14 12 25 300 50% 150 10 40 R


98

2017 Redd survey- SUMMARY

PHASE II + PHASE I (including VDS 13 and

upstream pool)

Redd depth (m)

Redd velocity (m/s)

Froude (Fr= v/√gD)


D50 (mm)

D84 (mm)

Average 0.56 0.71 0.33 NA 14 50 Median 0.50 0.59 0.27 NA 10 50

Min 0.20 0.34 0.11 NA 5 40 Max 1.22 1.43 0.65 NA 25 70 Std 0.26 0.33 0.17 NA 6 8

Total NA NA NA 7777 NA NA

UPSTREAM POOL Redd depth

(m) Redd velocity

(m/s) Froude

(Fr= v/√gD) Effective spawning

area (m2) D50

(mm) D84

(mm) Average 1.00 0.51 0.16 NA 8 60 Median 1.00 0.51 0.16 NA 8 60



PHASE II (excluding upstream pool)

Redd depth (m)

Redd velocity (m/s)

Froude (Fr= v/√gD)


D50 (mm)

D84 (mm)

Average 0.74 0.54 0.20 NA 13 48 Median 0.76 0.57 0.21 NA 10 50



PHASE I Redd depth

(m) Redd velocity

(m/s) Froude


area (m2) D50

(mm) D84

(mm) Average 0.47 0.78 0.38 NA 16 50 Median 0.43 0.78 0.35 NA 20 50



VDS 13 Redd depth

(m) Redd velocity

(m/s) Froude


area (m2) D50

(mm) D84

(mm) Average 0.77 0.39 0.14 NA 10 40 Median NA NA NA NA NA NA

Min NA NA NA NA NA NA Max NA NA NA NA NA NA Std NA NA NA NA NA NA



99

APPENDIX B13: Sockeye enumeration data Details of the reach lengths used in the analysis

Reach details McIntyre Dam to Deer Park

Deer Park to Hwy Bridge

Hwy Br to Channel

Channel to Parkrill

Parkrill to XS8

XS8 to VDS13

VDS13 to VDS12

VDS reach (VDS11-1)

Reach characteristics natural reach setback

dyke reach Channel

reach ORRI

Phase II ORRI

Phase I channelized

reach VDS reach

Reach length (km)

1.13 2.52 2.30 0.90 0.45 0.65 1.30 13.15

3.65 4.30 1.30 Details of the run size at Wells Dam and spawning ground

Year Date peak* Total live Sockeye at peak*

Wells Dam counts**

Mean monthly discharge (m3/s)*** Reference

2008 14-Oct-08 70,618 165,334 10.5 Davis et al. 2009 2009 19-Oct-09 39,618 134,937 10.1 Audy et al. 2011 2010 16-Oct-10 87,190 291,764 12.3 Bussanich et al. 2012 2011 20-Oct-11 20,409 111,508 10.4 Benson & Audy 2012 2012 20-Oct-12 44,849 326,107 10.5 ONAFD unpub. Data 2013 15-Oct-13 21,353 129,993 13.4 ONAFD unpub. Data 2014 19-Oct-14 79,880 490,804 12.8 ONAFD unpub. Data 2015 16-Oct-15 5,589 187,055 8.2 ONAFD unpub. Data 2016 17-Oct-16 41,560 216,036 13.7 ONAFD unpub. Data 2017 11-Oct-17 4,287 42,299 10.5 ONAFD unpub. Data

* in the Index section at peak spawning (Index peak Live + Dead); **www.fpc.org; ***http://www.wsc.ec.gc.ca

Percent of Total Live Sockeye enumerated in each reach at peak spawning date (updated from previous report) Note: Fish Passage was provided at Skaha Dam in 2014. Sockeye counted upstream of Skaha Dam are NOT counted in calculations for consistency.

Section: Above McIntyre Dam Section: Index Section:

VDS

Year Peak date * Skaha Dam to VDS 14

McIntyre Dam to

Deer Park

Deer Park to Hwy Bridge

Hwy Br to Channel

Channel to

Parkrill**

Phase II (Park rill to XS8)

Phase I (XS8 to VDS13)

VDS 13 to VDS 12

VDS 11- VDS 1

2008 14-Oct-08 X 2.5% 14.2% 67.1% 5.1% 5.2% 4.6% 1.3% 2009 19-Oct-09 7.3% 1.1% 16.7% 28.3% 19.1% 9.3% 11.2% 5.7% 1.3% 2010 16-Oct-10 2.9% 1.8% 26.6% 36.9% 13.0% 6.5% 8.9% 2.3% 1.1% 2011 20-Oct-11 4.6% 4.8% 21.0% 35.7% 10.8% 4.3% 11.8% 4.1% 3.0% 2012 20-Oct-12 2.5% 4.2% 29.8% 30.4% 15.9% 6.3% 6.2% 2.7% 2.1% 2013 16-Oct-13 5.3% 2.6% 23.8% 31.5% 7.0% 6.2% 18.2% 2.7% 2.7% 2014 19-Oct-14 1.0% 3.1% 17.7% 30.6% 24.6% 13.8% 5.3% 2.9% 1.0% 2015 16-Oct-15 1.4% 0.9% 14.9% 34.7% 12.4% 0.3% 15.8% 10.8% 8.8% 2016 17-Oct-16 0.8% 0.8% 15.0% 32.2% 27.3% 9.3% 9.8% 2.3% 2.6% 2017 11-Oct-17 0.9% 1.5% 27.0% 14.0% 8.7% 1.4% 33.5% 3.2% 9.7%

* at peak spawning date (peak Live + Dead) in the Index section ; ** includes sockeye spawning in pool upstream Phase II riffle


100

Total Live enumerated in the Index and ORRI sections in 2017

General Info Index L+ D Peak Date 26-Sep-17 2-Oct-17 6-Oct-17 11-Oct-17 14-Oct-17 17-Oct-17 20-Oct-17 23-Oct-17 26-Oct-17 31-Oct-17 4-Nov-17 Crew CL, LG, CT, KA CL, CT, LG CL, LG, CT CL, LG, CT CL, LG, CT CL,LG,CT CL, LG, CT CL, LG, CT CL, LG, CT, TM CL, LG, CT CL, LG, CT Air Temp (oC) NA NA 10.5 13.6 6.8 16.9 15.2 7.5 7.8 4.8 -2.3 Water Temp (oC) NA 14.7 13.2 11.7 10.6 10.5 10.3 9.1 8.6 8.0 6.0 Measurement Quality Sky Brightness full med med bright med med full med full med med Precipitation no no no no no yes no no no no yes % Cloud 0 85% 100% 35% 100% 100% 25% 100% 0% 100% 100% Wind light strong med light med strong light light light light light Water Clarity to bottom to bottom to bottom to bottom to bottom to bottom to bottom to bottom to bottom to bottom to bottom Stream Visibility low low med med med low high med med low med Count Quality low low-med low-med med-high med low high med-high med-high med low-med Sockeye Enumeration - Index sum Total Live 563 726 2,062 4,271 3,851 3,599 3,827 3,289 2,357 845 322 25,712

Sockeye Enumeration Parkrill to X8 (Phase II) Total Live 60 70 93 66 174 65 70 90 35 23 1 747

Sockeye Enumeration X8 to VDS 13 (Phase I) Total Live 63 62 422 1,602 655 883 1,074 992 756 281 89 6,879

Percent of total Live Phase II - Parkrill to X8 10.7% 9.6% 4.5% 1.5% 4.5% 1.8% 1.8% 2.7% 1.5% 2.7% 0.3% 3% Phase I - X8 to VDS 13 11.2% 8.5% 20.5% 37.5% 17.0% 24.5% 28.1% 30.2% 32.1% 33.3% 27.6% 27%


101

Appendix C: Summary tables from aquatic monitoring of the Okanagan River Restoration Initiative (ORRI) – Post-construction

2009 - 2012


102

APPENDIX C1: Parameters of stream channel response 2009-2012 Note: Some errors occurred in this table and the 2015 tables were updated with correction.


Performance Criteria

Status Location Results pre-treatment

Results 2009 Results 2010 Results 2011 Results 2012

Unit Comments

Cross-sectional dimensions

Bankfull width

Design dimensions from similar sloped anabranch reference reach

Field survey Aug 8 & 13, 2008 Sept 11, 2009 Nov, 10, 2010 Oct. 28, 2011 Sept 26 – Oct 3, 2012

Phase I 52.1 ± 4.3 93.0 ± 21.3 x x 94.5 ± 17.8 m 2008 discharge: 10.2 m3/s 2009 discharge: 9.2 m3/s 2010 discharge: 12.9 m3/s 2011 discharge: 10.4m3/s 2012 discharge: 10.4 m3/s WSC station 08NM085

Phase II 49.8 ± 0.8 96.8 ± 18.7 x x 92.9 ± 19.6

Bankfull depth

Design dimensions Td=1.5-2.5m from similar sloped anabranch reference reach

Phase I 4.2 ± .0.2 4.3 ± 0.5 x x 3.8 ± 0.5 m

Phase II 3.9 ± 0.1 4.3 ± 0.7 x x 3.0 ± 0.3

Spawn depth

SK 0.28-0.77m (SECL 2003) CH 0.06-0.88m (Wright & Long 2006)

Phase I 0.77 ± 0.16 0.70 ± 0.44 0.45 ± 0.20 0.47 ± 0.25 0.64 ± 0.31 m

Phase II 0.55 ± 0.13 0.61 ± 0.14 0.48 ± 0.15 0.70 ± 0.16 0.83 ± 0.16

Spawn velocity

SK - 0.45-0.96m/s (SECL 2003) CH- 0.16-1.25m/s (Wright & Long 2006)

Phase I 0.53 ± 0.15 0.59 ± 0.26 0.67 ± 0.23 0.66 ± 0.21 0.53 ± 0.17 m/s

Phase II 0.71 ± 0.20 0.56 ± 0.12 0.48 ± 0.11 0.50 ± 0.23 0.43 ± 0.08

Spawn Froude number

Fr = 0.315 ± 0.1 at spawning flows of 10cms (Long et al. 2006)

Phase I 0.19 ± 0.06 0.27 ± 0.16 0.34 ± 0.14 0.35 ±0.17 0.32 ± 0.08 Fr

Phase II 0.32 ± 0.10 0.23 ± 0.06 0.23 ± 0.05 0.20 ± 0.12 0.15 ± 0.04

Summer flow depth

Average water depths increase in the pools

Phase I 0.6 - 0.9 0.7 - 2.2 x x 1.20 - 2.06 m Based on maximum pool depths at cross sections.

Phase II 0.3 - 0.6 0.7 - 0.8 0.83 - 1.04


103





Unit Comments

Channel morphology

Area of pools

Pools are created and remain stable over time

Field survey July 15, 2008 Sept. 3, 2009 Sept 26, 2012

Phase I 0 6,088 x x 7,283 m2 - Phase II 0 1,612 1,482

Area of riffles

Riffles are created and remain stable over time

Phase I 0 5,574 11,002 Phase II 0 0 0

Area of glides

Amount of glides decrease

Phase I 9,995 8,496 3,354 Phase II 11,863 10,779 8,006

Plan-form and slope

Sinuo-sity 2.3 times bank-full width (Newbury & Gaboury 1993)

No sinuosity Phase I 1 1.21 x x 1.21 m -

Phase II 1 1 1 Slope (thalweg bed profile)

Present slope 0.07-0.09% anabranch reach 0.13% historical slope 0.19%

Field survey July 15, 2008 June 2010 Sept 2012

Phase I 0.07 0.10 x x 0.55 % Calculated as average changes in slope locally between cross sections

Phase II -0.01 -0.01 0.26


104

APPENDIX C2: Parameters of hydrologic response 2009-2012 Note: Some errors occurred in this table and the 2015 tables were updated with correction.




Results 2009

Results 2010

Results 2011

Results 2012

Unit Comments

Surface water elevation

Bankfull distance to the top of the bank

Distance from water surface to top of bank approaches zero

Data analyzed from 2008-2011

Lougheed entrance

floodplain: 1.75

see pre-treatment results

floodplain: 1.69

floodplain: 1.50

x m Predicted from rating curve at high flow of 10.5 m3/s (highest pre-treatment flow value available)

25m upstream of VDS13

berm: 2.01 floodplain: 1.11


no data x

Low-flow distance to top of bank

Distance from water surface to top of bank < 1m based on soil moisture requirements of native riparian communities in the Southern Okanagan

Data analyzed from 2008-2011

Lougheed entrance

floodplain: 1.89

see pre-treatment results

floodplain: 1.76

floodplain: 1.73

x m Calculated from rating curve at low flow of 7.0 m3/s (lowest pre-treatment flow value available)

25m upstream of VDS13




x

Surface water elevation upstream of the project area

SWE upstream of the project area (Park Rill gauge) shows no difference from pre-treatment SWE 297.82m elevation at Q = 60m3/s

2011 &2012 data from gauge installed at Park Rill

location: upstream ORRI (outlet of Parkrill Creek on the east bank)

297.82 predicted from HEC RAS (Mould 2010)

logger stolen

Logger stolen again

297.75 m See Appendix B6


Groundwater depth

Decreasing trend in depth to groundwater

Measurements taken in 2008 to 2012 but only

piezometer located on Lougheed

range 94-137cm bgl

x x 51-155 cm bgl

No new analysis

m bgl = below ground level


105




Results 2009

Results 2010

Results 2011

Results 2012

Unit Comments

toward <1m below soil surface during the growing season

analyzed for 2008 and 2011

property (17-28m3/s)

9-80 m3/s

Hydro-period and floodplain inundation

Hydro-period Increasing trend in frequency and duration of hydro-period

Observations done 2008-2012 – measurements taken in 2011

Lougheed and Nemes properties

no inundation

no inundation

no inundation

inundation 3-4 weeks

No data - Low freshet flows in 2009 and 2010; high flows in May - Aug 2011 (>60m3/s with peak 91 m3/s in 2011)


Increasing trend in depth and areal extent of floodplain inundation

no inundation

no inundation

no inundation

> 33% floodplain inundation

No data %


106

APPENDIX C3: Parameters of fish and fish habitat response 2009-2012 Note: Some errors occurred in this table and the 2015 tables were updated with correction.



Results 2009 Results 2010 Results 2011 Results 2012 Unit Comments

Habitat features

Increasing trend in functional LWD

Field survey 15- July-08 3-Sept.-09 26-Sept-12

Phase I 0 10 x x 6 & 30m2 log jam

no. Only 2 of the LWD recorded in 2009 were placed during construction the rest recruited naturally

Phase II 1 0 1

In-stream boulder clusters present

Phase I 0 336 214 no. Some displacement of rip rap boulders with the river bed

Phase II 0 0 0

Macro-phytes

Reduction of invasive non-native macrophytes

Completed: 15-Aug-08 03-Oct-12

Phase I (mainstem)


x x x all sp.: 9 exotic sp.: 3

m2 The total available area in both oxbows is higher in 2012 than in 2008 due to the creation of entrance and exit channels. Exotic invasive species are Myriophyllum spicatum and Potamogeton crispus.

Phase II (mainstem)



Completed: 25-Aug-08 03-Oct-12

southern oxbow all sp.: 436 exotic sp.:434

all sp.: 460 exotic sp.:195

northern oxbow all sp.: 0 exotic sp.: 0


Inverte-brate monitor

Increasing trend in diversity and richness of invertebrates

Field survey 2-Oct-08; 4-5-Oct-12

reference in natural section (transect 2)

Div.=1.76 Rich.= 24.5

x x x Div.= 1.77 Rich.= 24.5

Div.= Shannon’s H and Rich. = no. taxa

Benthic index of biological integrity developed to assess health of Okanagan streams (Jensen 2006) also showed improvement post-treatment.

semi natural section

Div.:=1.19 Rich.= 20.0

Div.= 1.41 Rich.= 20.0

Field survey: 3-Oct-08; 4-5-Oct-12

within ORRI (xs6) Phase I

Div.:=1.40 Rich.:=21.5

Div.= 1.76 Rich.= 24.0

downstream ORRI (300m ds VDS13)

Div.:=1.79 Rich.= 28.0

Div.= 1.97 Rich.= 25.5


107



Results 2009 Results 2010 Results 2011 Results 2012 Unit Comments

Summer water temperatures

Reduced number of days with water temperatures exceed 15.6oC (general salmonid threshold) and > 18.3 oC (adult spawner threshold

Installed 23 may 2009

downstream of Phase I - channel at VDS13

x 132 (>15.6 oC) 121 (>18.3 oC)

116 (>15.6 oC) 82 (>18.3 oC)

No data 108 (>15.6 oC) 75 (>18.3 oC)

days > temp. threshold

Loggers installed pre-treatment were stolen repeatedly


Phase I - channel at Nemes oxbow entrance

x x 123 (>15.6 oC) 85 (>18.3 oC)

105 (>15.6 oC) 76 (>18.3 oC)

108 (>15.6 oC) 76 (>18.3 oC)

Installed 26 June 2009

Phase I - channel at Lougheed oxbow entrance

x x 115 (>15.6 oC) 77 (>18.3 oC)

104 (>15.6 oC) 83 (>18.3 oC)

No data


Phase II - Park rill x x 118 (>15.6 oC) 80 (>18.3 oC)

102 (>15.6 oC) 78 (>18.3 oC)

115 (>15.6 oC) 90 (>18.3 oC)

Shorter duration per day when water temperatures exceed 15.6oC (general salmonid threshold) and > 18.3oC (adult spawner threshold


downstream of Phase I - channel at VDS13

x 2999 (>15.6 oC) 2405 (>18.3 oC)

2552 (>15.6 oC) 1711 (>18.3 oC)

No data 2610 (>15.6 oC) 1834 (>18.3 oC)

hours > temp. threshold

Loggers installed pre-treatment were stolen repeatedly


Phase I - channel at Nemes oxbow entrance

x x 2544 (>15.6 oC) 1630 (>18.3 oC)

2494 (>15.6 oC) 1890 (>18.3 oC)

2590 (>15.6 oC) 1826 (>18.3 oC)


Phase I - channel at Lougheed oxbow entrance

x x 2536 (>15.6 oC) 1710 (>18.3 oC)

2421 (>15.6 oC) 1840 (>18.3 oC)

No data


Phase II - Park rill x x 2739 (>15.6 oC) 1790 (>18.3 oC)

2421 (>15.6 oC) 1840 (>18.3 oC)

2806 (>15.6 oC) 41 (>18.3 oC)


108




Results 2009

Results 2010

Results 2011

Results 2012

Unit Comments

Fish holding and rearing habitat

Increasing trend of density and percent composition of rearing salmonids

Field survey: August 12, 2008 August 28, 2009 August 17, 2010 August 19, 2011 Sept 7, 2012 2014

Natural reach (Mc Dam to Hwy Br)

17.3 13.2 30.7 109.9 28.1 no./km

Rainbow Trout (all ages) & Chinook (juv) per kilometer

Semi-natural reach (Hwy Br to Channel)

10.0 7.0 14.3 24.3 10.0

Channelized (Trans 6 to Parkrill)

2.2 0 1.1 6.7 3.3

Phase II: 0.45km 0 0 4.4 0.0 4.4 Phase I: 0.65km 0 0 6.2 7.7 3.1

Redd counts and distribution

Trend of increasing density of salmon and salmon redds and spawning habitat

Field surveys: Oct. - Nov. 2008-2014

Phase I 6,053 2,867 3,344 3,825 3784 m2 The effective spawning area was a deep riffle pre-treatment and in 2009 riffles were added

Phase II 11,928 4,984 3,613 3,013 4084

Enumeration of spawning Sockeye and Chinook

Trend of increasing density of spawning salmon

Field surveys: Sept - Nov 2008-2012

Phase I 5.2 12.1 9.1 12.4 6.2 % Proportion of the peak live count in each reach; note the run size is most likely above the capacity of the typical spawning reaches

Phase II 5.1 10.1 6.7 4.6 6.3

Egg incubation success

Increase in egg survival %

Completed in 2003 and 2010, planned for 2013

Natural setback reach (site 4) Natural setback reach (site 3)

89.6 ± 24.5 x 75 ± 17.3 37 ± 25.3

x x % Planned for 2013 as part of the VDS13 modification construction project

Phase II x x 15 ±19.3 Phase I Loug entrance Phase I Loug Spawning Phase I Loug Exit Phase I Nemes Entra Phase I average

30.7 ± 14.4 x 74 ± 20.3 69 ± 27.0 75 ± 21.8 48 ± 14.6 67 ± 23.2

Channel (upstream of VDS13)

x x 51 ± 5.5


109




Results 2009

Results 2010

Results 2011

Results 2012

Unit Comments

Fine sediment accumulation

% fines not to exceed 10% (at salmonid spawning sites)

Field survey: June 2009 Sept 2009 Sept 2012

Phase I 7.45 ± 3.84 7.18 ± 2.71

x x 11.29 ± 3.83

% With OC assistance; criteria based on MOE 2006 guidelines; Masters and Burge 2010; Dale and Burge 2013.

Phase II 9.88 ± 5.41 x x x 10.12 ± 3.37


Increase in median (b-axis) substrate particle sizes within 13-128mm, preferred spawning substrate size range (Bjorn and Reiser 1991)

Field survey Aug. 8 & 13, 2008 Sept 11, 2009 Sept 26, 2012

Phase I 30 + 3 37 + 6 x x 40 ± 17 mm Available 2015. Sampling in progress Phase II 30 + 4 35 + 5 x x 45 ± 5 mm


110

APPENDIX C4: Parameters of riparian and wildlife response 2009-2012 Performance

Indicators Performance Criteria



Native plant community and soils

Re-vegetation of the riparian areas along river course and associated extending floodplains

Increase native riparian vegetation

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

ORRI Phase I and II (both the Nemes and Lougheed floodplains)

Soils were classified as generally a mix of lacustrine silts, fluvial sands, gravels and glacial tills (Emery, 2009)

Seventeen different species were planted, with a total of 1,945 plants. Survivorship ranged from 30%-100%.(Emery, 2010)

Ten different species were planted with a total of 975 plants. Survivorship ranged from 40%-85% (Emery, 2011)

Vegetation planted in 2010 had a survivorship classified as moderate (Emery, 2012)

Ten different species were planted at the ORRI site, with a total of 995 plants. Survivorship ranged from 40%-85% (report in prep.).


Avian, reptile, amphibian and small mammal population/ diversity/usage measures

Increase the abundance and diversity of terrestrial wetland- and riparian-dependent species (particularly Species at Risk)

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012


Yellow-breasted Chat was documented nesting in 2008. A total of 31 avian species were detected in 2006, 28 avian species in 2007 and 32 species in 2008. (Emery, 2009)

No avian SARA species were detected in 2009 or reptiles/amphibians (Emery, 2010)

The wildlife use remains static from previous years although there was an explosion of Great Basin Spadefoot Toad breeding (Emery, 2011)

Generalist avian species were detected, with a total of 8 different species. Great Basin Spadefoot Toad and Carp were observed within the ORRI site. (Emery, 2012)

Twelve different avian species were detected in the ORRI site including Yellow-breasted chat. Spadefoot toad tadpoles were also detected in ORRI during spring conditions. (Report in prep.)


111

APPENDIX C5: Parameters of riparian and wildlife response 2013-2014


Performance Criteria Status Location Results pre-treatment

Results 2013 Results 2014

Native plant community and soils

Re-vegetation of the riparian areas along river course and associated extending floodplains

Increase native riparian vegetation

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014


Soils were classified as generally a mix of lacustrine silts, fluvial sands, gravels and glacial tills (Emery, 2009)

ORRI Phase II -3000 m2 riparian habitat re-vegetated with native bushes and trees (2775 plants) and grass seeds. Survivorship range of Nemes/Lougheed site 40-85%

ORRI Phase I survivorship ranged from 78-100%; Nemes/Lougheed Islands survivorship was 50-100%


Avian, reptile, amphibian and small mammal population/ diversity/usage measures

Increase the abundance and diversity of terrestrial wetland- and riparian-dependent species (particularly Species at Risk)

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014


Yellow-breasted Chat was documented nesting in 2008. A total of 31 avian species were detected in 2006, 28 avian species in 2007 and 32 species in 2008. (Emery, 2009)

Nineteen different avian species were detected in the ORRI site. Four Western Painted Turtle and Spadefoot Toad juveniles were noted.

Amphibian detections: Pacific Treefrog, Great Basin Spadefoot, Western Painted Turtle. Incidental detection of common Garter Snake and Western Yellow-bellied Racer. Avian report not available. Beaver activity.