Bibliography Background About KRIS
KRIS Navarro Info Links
Navarro River Flow and Regional Rainfall Data
Flow data in KRIS Navarro comes from the U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) website records for the lower Navarro River, Rancheria Creek, and Soda Creek (http://water.usgs.gov). The longest period of record is for the mainstem Navarro with data back to 1950. Records of average daily flow are in cubic feet per second. Water years begin on October 1 of the prior calendar year. For example, the 1998 water year started on October 1, 1997. Jackson (1991) calculated runoff for the Navarro River watershed and compared total runoff to minimum flow in the lower river for the Mendocino Water Agency. See the Stream Flow Background page for more information.
Rainfall in KRIS Navarro is available for five gauging sites within the project area but, unfortunately, none are of long duration. Consequently, gauge records from Ft. Bragg and Ft. Ross on the coast to the north and south, and Willits, Ukiah and Healdsburg to the east are provided. These long-term rainfall data allow regional analysis of storm patterns associated with flood flows and also patterns of rainfall during droughts. Data were taken from a National Weather Service database and by James Goodridge, former state climatologist and now consultant to the California Department of Water Resources who provided the records on CD.
Stream Temperature Monitoring by Mendocino County Water Agency
The Mendocino County Water Agency (MCWA) provided stream temperature data for numerous sites in the Navarro River basin for the years 1992 through 2001. Descriptions of monitoring site locations can be viewed as a table. To learn more about the type of instruments used and the quality assurance measures taken see this note. Temperature sensors were placed in pools at a depth of about in the deepest part a (typically 1.5 - 2.5 feet actual depth) and usually tied to a rock and then covered with rocks. If this was not possible, probes were tethered to rebar driven into the streambed or placed close to the bank and hidden beneath vegetation to prevent vandalism. At the time of deployment and retrieval, the stream temperature, air temperature, pool depth and time were measured and recorded. Water temperature thresholds that appear on charts in KRIS Navarro are extensively discussed in the Temperature Background page.
Map Information in KRIS Navarro
Map data can now be viewed within KRIS due to programming advances that have integrated Map Objects Light. The map themes that can be reviewed are from the KRIS Navarro Map project, which contains the full array of spatial data in ArcView, including the detailed information about origin of the data and its intended use (metadata). See the KRIS Maps Background page for more information on how to understand spatial data available for the Navarro River basin. Full ArcView projects often use the Spatial Analyst but are also viewable without that extension with the grid data converted to an image.
Stream Temperature Monitoring by Mendocino Redwood Company
The Mendocino Redwood Company (MRC) provided extensive water temperature data within the Navarro River basin for 1992-2001. Louisiana Pacific Lumber Company data were included for the years 1992-1997, before their acquisition by MRC. Data were collected using Onset StowAway® continuous water temperature monitors. Prior to placement in the stream, each temperature monitor was calibrated with a 0ºC ice bath to ensure proper response to temperature. Data collection intervals varied from 72 to 144 minutes, but the majority of probes were set to collect temperature measurements every 120 minutes. Monitoring occurred during the summer months when the water temperatures are highest, and recorders were typically placed in shallow pools (<2 ft. in depth) directly downstream of riffles. Files from earlier years were converted to daily average and maximum values, and did not contain raw data. MRC also provided an Arc View map coverage of temperature monitoring locations. A table of MRC temperature site locations is available for viewing. All datasets were included in KRIS Navarro, using floating weekly average temperature.
Water temperature thresholds in KRIS Navarro are extensively discussed in the Temperature Background page but are mainly based on Welsh et al. (2001), Hines and Ambrose (1998) and McCullough (1999).
Fisheries Data in KRIS Navarro
Fisheries data in KRIS Navarro comes from several sources including the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), Mendocino Redwood Company (MRC), University of California, Davis (UCD) and Steve Cannata. Types of samples include net sampling, electrofishing, visual estimates, dive observations, downstream migrant trapping, and fish rescue efforts. For more in-depth information see also the Fish Population Background page.
CDFG Historical Net Sampling, Creel Sampling and Visual Estimates: Some of the earliest net samples of the Navarro River and its tributaries were collected by the California Bureau of Fish Conservation (CBFC, 1945a; CBFC, 1945b; CBFC, 1945c). The samples were taken on the mainstem Navarro River, Rancheria Creek and Beebe Creek. The samples did not disclose habitat, types of net used, or effort expended in the survey. A report by Leonard Fisk (CDFG, 1955) shows fish rescue data for Rancheria Creek during the summer months between 1948 and 1952. The data do not reveal specific locations or other details of fish rescue efforts; however, the report provides rare information on historic juvenile salmonid populations. CDFG conducted a limited creel census in the lower Navarro River in 1967-68, which is useful in establishing the presence of adult coho at that time (CDFG, 1968). Dozens of historic CDFG stream surveys are captured in the KRIS Navarro Bibliography with visual estimates of coho (silver salmon) and steelhead juvenile abundance.
CDFG Electrofishing: The Navarro River and its tributaries have been sampled with electrofishing methods by CDFG numerous times since 1952. (See species table for key to names in CDFG electrofishing database). J. B. Kimsey (CDFG, 1953) surveyed the mainstem Navarro River to determine the impact of summer "trout" fishing closures on the juvenile population. During the 1970s, electrofishing was used to assess streams for productivity following chemical spills (W. Jones, 1973) and to measure the success of bank stabilization projects (A. Baracco, 1973). More recently, electrofishing has been carried out in association with habitat typing to assess overall stream health. Surveys followed methods described in the California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual (CDFG, 1998), and included electrofishing of representative habitats without the use of block nets. Electrofishing in the Navarro River watershed has been inconsistent, and sites have not been revisited in subsequent years. Consequently, samples do not allow population estimation, trend monitoring or density calculations. Also, the documentation for amphibians captured varies year to year and should not be used to show presence or absence.
According to CDFG (CDFG, 1998) the purpose of the electrofishing samples is "to provide a general assessment of fish presence, distribution and habitat utilization within a stream. It is essential to know what fish species exist within a stream and particularly the status of ‘target’ species. The upstream range of adult spawners and juveniles is important information for planning habitat enhancement work within a stream. Relative abundance of a species may suggest trends in past or future population numbers. Age classes of juveniles may be indicative of the quality of summer and winter nursery areas." KRIS uses electrofishing data to assess community structure, using the relative abundance of salmonids versus warm water species, and presence and absence of age classes of salmonids, as indices of aquatic health.
CDFG Downstream Migrant Trapping: The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) maintained a downstream migrant trap in the mainstem Navarro River in 1972 (CDFG, 1972) and again in 1995 and 1996. The North Fork Navarro was sampled using a downstream migrant trap by CDFG from 1995-1997. Traps are normally operated as early in the season as possible, but mainstem Navarro River locations could not be trapped before April in either year. The North Fork Navarro River trap was operated beginning in March both in 1996 and 1997. Data were sorted in two forms: 1) to illustrate the various types of vertebrates captured at the trap sites, and 2) to illustrate the timing and magnitude of outmigration for different age classes of coho and steelhead.
UC Davis Dive Observations: UC Davis conducted snorkel surveys in the Navarro Watershed in 2000 and 2001 and performed a genetic analysis as part of a salmonid population status assessment in a watershed-wide study sponsored by the California Department of Transportation (Johnson et al., 2002a). Other volumes of the same study focus on sediment and other factors limiting salmonids (Johnson et al., 2000) and the physiological response of steelhead to these stressors (Johnson et al., 2002b).
Dive surveys in 2000 covered three reaches of Flynn Creek, North Fork Navarro River, Indian Creek, Anderson Creek and Rancheria Creek. In 2001 only Flume, Murray, and Marsh gulches were surveyed. The sites were selected by a stratified random process in which the sub-watersheds were divided into three sections - upper, middle, and lower. In the year 2000, a mix of habitat types was selected, but in the second year (2001), three pools and three riffles were surveyed at each site. Surveys consisted of two people snorkeling back to back looking out towards the banks from the center of the stream. The time length of survey varied with the length of habitat type. A modified Hankin and Reeves methodology (W. L. Thompson, USFS, 2000) was used, and dive surveyors were calibrated using a 3-pass electroshocking procedure. Three width measurements, one length and a maximum depth, were collected at each survey site. KRIS staff summarized the data, calculating fish totals by species and age class across habitat types in all reaches, to chart a total population for each stream in the season of survey.
Mendocino Redwood Company Fisheries Data: A large set of fisheries data from Mendocino Redwood Company (MRC, 2002a) comes from single-pass electrofishing and snorkel counts of many sites in the years 1994-1996, and 2000-01. The sites were distributed widely over stream courses on MRC land and surveyed for the purpose of detecting fish presence. These data do not enable the assessment of fish health or abundance. The surveys are useful for fish community structure and show coho and steelhead age classes. MRC also provided downstream migrant trapping data for Elk and Greenwood creeks for 2001 (2002b). The trapping results show the timing, abundance and age class of juvenile steelhead in these streams.
Estuary Seining Data: Steve Cannata (Cannata, 1998) lead a study of the Navarro River estuary in 1996 and 1997, which included extensive sampling with seine nets, basic limnological reconnaissance (temperature, salinity, conductivity and dissolved oxygen), and cross section surveys. Sampling stations in the upper, middle and lower estuary were used to collect data at different times of the year. Beach seining data were sorted by species, and by age class for steelhead and coho. Water quality data were used to discuss the changing conditions before and after the cyclical sand bar closure at the mouth of the estuary.
Hatchery Data: CDFG planted juvenile steelhead in the Navarro River from 1972 to 1981 in part to mitigate for a copper sulfate spill in Soda Creek (W. Jones, 1973). Juvenile steelhead were imported from hatcheries operated on the Mad River, Eel River and San Lorenzo River in various years. Data were taken from the appendix to McEwan and Jackson (1996).
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) conducted habitat typing surveys in the Navarro River watershed between 1994 and 1996. CDFG surveys provide an inventory of stream conditions in both quantitative and qualitative format. Protocols follow the California Salmonid Restoration Manual (CDFG, 1998). Of all data available from these surveys, four habitat attributes are of particular importance: percent habitat type by length, maximum pool depth, embeddedness, and canopy. These features are charted in KRIS for particular streams. The relative proportions of a stream falling under the simple habitat types of flatwater, riffle, and pools can be a useful indicator of fish habitat condition because coho salmon and 1+ steelhead require abundant pool habitat for successful rearing. Maximum pool depth is a useful measurement of habitat quality because deeper pools provide better habitat. Embeddedness measurements from stream surveys is used as a rough estimate of spawning gravel quality, although bulk gravel samples are more effective as a monitoring tool. Canopy measurements are quantitative and give an indication of stream warming potential and prospects for large wood recruitment. In addition, shelter rating and residual pool volume data are collected. Shelter rating describes the complexity of habitat, while residual pool volume is a measure of pool habitat quantity at low flow conditions. To learn more about using fish habitat data, check the Habitat Typing Background page.
Entrix et al.(1998) collected habitat data in the Navarro River basin in 1996 as part of the Navarro Watershed Restoration Plan. They selected 11 representative streams in different geographic areas to assess conditions for coho and steelhead. In addition to standard habitat attributes, Entrix also collected information pool spacing and pool formation characteristics. Pool spacing can be used to identify overall stream habitat quality and may be an indication of large woody debris (LWD) availability (Montgomery et al., 1995). Entrix et al. (1998) found LWD lacking in most of the streams surveyed, and pool spacing was higher (greater distance between pools) than in undisturbed streams similar to the types surveyed in the Navarro River basin. Pool characteristics describe the forces behind pool formation, such as LWD, boulders or bedrock.
Higgins (1994) did a reconnaissance of Indian Creek, which included Level I habitat typing only. The primary objective of the limited study was to determine the percent occurrence by length of flatwater and pool habitats and note the presence, absence and/or abundance of salmonids and other fish species.
Bulk Gravel Sampling by Mendocino Redwood Company: Dry-Sieved McNeil Samples
Mendocino Redwood Company (MRC) studied bed substrate conditions using bulk gravel samples (McNeil and Ahnell,1964) in the lower Navarro, North Fork Navarro, Greenwood Creek and Elk Creek. Gravel permeability samples, three cross sectional surveys and a thalweg longitudinal profile were also measured at the stream segments. Each stream segment was 20-30 bankfull channel widths in length. Substrate samples were taken from four randomly selected pool tail-outs in each segment from all pool tail-outs suitable for spawning (i.e., not dominated by bedrock or covered in substrate too large for a fish to make a redd). For detailed methods, see MRC Sediment Methods.
MRC dried their gravel samples before passing them through seven different size-class screens (45, 22.4, 11.2, 5.6, 4, 2, 0.85). Each size class was then weighed to produce gravimetric results. This dry-sieve/gravimetric method produces different results than the wet-sieve/volumetric methods which are usually referenced in TMDL studies and originally proposed by McNeil and Ahnell (1964). While the dry-sieve/gravimetric method produces results not biased by the retention of different proportions of water by size class ( water is increasingly retained with finer fractions of a bulk sample), results from the method are not directly compatible with TMDL references and other syntheses of wet-sieve based studies. The U.S. EPA and California State Water Resources Control Board do not necessarily endorse the conversions used in KRIS described below.
KRIS Navarro uses reference values for percent fine sediment from dry-sieve sampling that utilize a conservative adjustment to be more compatible with wet-sieve/volumetric results. The Navarro TMDL target of no more than 14% fine sediment less than 0.85 mm comes from a synthesis of studies using wet- sieve bulk gravel sampling. According to Shirazi and Seim (1979), the fraction of fines less than 0.85 mm from wet/volumetric methods can be adjusted by a factor of 0.739 to reflect actual gravimetric results. Applied to 14%, this correction yields a dry- sieve reference for fine sediment less than 0.85 mm of 10.3%. McHenry et al. (1992) found an even higher conversion factor for wet to dry sieve comparison. For the fraction of fines less than 6.4 mm from wet/volumetric methods, Shirazi and Seim (1979) report a correction factor of 0.866. Applied to the TMDL target of 30%, this correction yields a dry- sieve reference for fine sediment less than 6.4 mm of 26%. MRC did not use a 6.4 mm sieve, but their results for fine sediment <5.6 mm are charted in comparison to this reference value and represent a conservative view of percent fine sediment <6.4 mm.
For more information on how sediment effects fish, and the basis for percent fines thresholds used in KRIS Navarro charts, see the Sediment Background page. For more on methodology, be sure to see Measuring Sediment in Streams.
Gravel Permeability Sampling by Mendocino Redwood Company
Gravel permeability in the Navarro River and Greenwood and Elk creeks was measured by Mendocino Redwood Company following the methods of Barnard and McBain (1994). A stand-pipe was driven into the streambed to a depth of 25 centimeters and vacuumed by an electric pump. The units of measurement for gravel permeability are cm/hr and describe an interstitial flow rate. At each measurement location, repetitive measurements were taken until the permeability readings ceased to increase. The results reported here may vary slightly from those published by MRC due to the different treatment of summary statistics. Each segment studied had between four and ten pool tails or “tail-outs” with between two and eight grid locations in each tail-out. A grid location consisted of an evenly spaced 12-point grid with between four and ten separate randomly selected measurement points. Individual measurements from each grid location were averaged and used as independent data points in this analysis. The summary statistics presented in KRIS were derived from averaging the individual measurements from each grid point, then averaging the data collected from each grid, then averaging each tail-out, and finally averaging all the tail-outs to represent the permeability for a stream segment.
The natural log of permeability derived by Tagart (1976), McCuddin (1977), and Stillwater Sciences (2000) equates the permeability data to fry survival (Survival = -0.82530 + 0.14882 * ln permeability). In a few cases, the survival index was a negative number. In these cases, the index was reported as zero. The survival relationship is an index of spawning gravel quality and is currently one of the few approaches that quantitatively links a biological relationship to permeability data, although it needs more northern California field validation before results relative to salmonid survival can be fully understood.For more information on how sediment affects fish, and the basis for percent fines thresholds used in KRIS Navarro, see the Sediment Background page. For more on methodology, be sure to see Measuring Sediment in Streams.
Knopp North Coast Regional Sediment Study
Excessive fine sediment fills pools and causes general instability of stream gravels and channel form. Loss of pool depth and reduction of channel complexity lowers the carrying capacity of streams for aquatic biota. Knopp (1993) sought to determine which physical elements of in-stream habitat were affected by human activity and to measure the range of values for those elements in disturbed and un-disturbed streams at 60 northwestern California sites. Knopp found that sediment in streams is positively correlated to watershed disturbance. Knopp also found that V* (V-star) is suitable for assessing the amount of fine sediment in pools. V-star is the proportion of a pool's residual volume filled by fine sediment (Hilton and Lisle, 1993). V* values from Mendocino County streams, including two in the KRIS Navarro planning area, are presented. Data from Knopp's testing of other indices (large wood, substrate particle counts, pool statistics and pool frequency) are available in the KRIS source table, Knopp.dbf. See the Sediment Background page to learn more. The target for V* from the Navarro TMDL (EPA, 2000) is 0.15 for the basin and is presented for reference shown on the charts.
Turbidity Measurements in KRIS Navarro
Dennis Slota, hydrologist with Mendocino County Water Agency (MCWA), has supervised the collection of turbidity grab samples at high flows throughout the Navarro basin since 1996. In 1996-97 and 1997-1998 MCWA staff worked with the Anderson Valley High School and volunteers to collect data. The first year a small class of biology students and their teacher (Karen Taussic) were trained to use a turbidimeter (Hach Model 16800). The volunteers were observed while samples were being run on several occasions as quality control. The following year, MCWA conducted a similar program with Americorp staff Josh Baritone and Richard Jordan, an instructor in the outdoor education program. Since 1998, volunteers in the Navarro area have collected samples and dropped them off at Anderson Valley Nursery, where MCWA picks them up and analyzes them at the lab in Ukiah. Establishing background turbidity levels is important in understanding grab sample data, but this type of information has not been collected in the Navarro River watershed. Several studies are currently underway in northwestern California to better understand turbidity, its relationship to land use, and its impacts on aquatic life. Turbidity over 25 ntu is recognized as limiting steelhead juvenile growth (Sigler et al. (1984). See discussions in the Sediment Background page for more about this topic.
Redwood Sciences Landslide and Sediment Transport Study
The KRIS Navarro project contains data collected by the U.S. Forest Service Redwood Sciences Lab (Sutherland et al., 2002) regarding the cycling of sediment from a large mainstem Navarro River landslide in March 1995. The slide dammed the river with deposits as deep as nine meters but material. Channel topography was mapped and bed sampling conducted over a 4.5 km reach from 1995 to 1999.
Total Maximum Daily Load Temperature and Sediment Data
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2000) published the Navarro River Total Maximum Daily Loads for Sediment and Temperature report in order to assess stream conditions and to calculate load allocations for the Navarro River basin. The objective was to reduce sediment to "levels which are necessary to implement water quality standards for temperature and sediment for the Navarro River and its tributaries" (US EPA, 2000). The report also notes that "increased sediment and summer temperatures are detrimental to native cold water fish, such as coho salmon and steelhead trout." The report analyzed temperature data and riparian conditions and found that lack of shade was a major factor in stream temperature warming in the Navarro River basin. The temperature data used for the Navarro TMDL comes from Mendocino County Water Agency and is charted in KRIS.
The Navarro TMDL sediment study includes the relative contribution of natural and human-caused sediment sources. Aerial photos were used to quantify sources of erosion (e.g., landslides and gullies) and their associated land uses. In addition, information on roads and lands under cultivation was collected. In response to comments, the Regional Water Quality Board reviewed and revised the acreage of vineyards. An emphasis was placed on sediment contributions from land use over the last twenty years. The report also relied on pre-existing data collected for the Navarro Watershed Restoration Plan (Entrix et al., 1998) and by the Mendocino Redwood Company (MRC).
Historical Photos Courtesy of the Anderson Valley Historical Society
Many priceless historical photos in the KRIS Navarro project were scanned from the collection of the Anderson Museum in Boonville. Volunteer museum staff provided much of the information contained in the photo captions. This museum contains images that give a glimpse into the early development of the Navarro Basin and a chronicle of historical land use activities. The museum had on its shelves "Mills of Mendocino County: a Record of the Lumber Industry 1852 - 1996" published by the Mendocino County Historical Society (1996), which documented the amount of timber harvested in Mendocino County from tax records for the period 1947-1993. Other historical images were provided by Dan Sicular from his private collection.
Erosion Control Inventories of Mill Creek by Pacific Watershed Associates
Pacific Watershed Associates measured potential and existing sediment sources in the Mill Creek watershed under a California Department of Fish and Game grant awarded to the Mendocino County Resource Conservation District (PWA, 1999; PWA, 2002). The inventory included stream crossings, gullies below ditch relief culverts and long sections of uncontrolled road and ditch surface runoff. The volume of potential sediment erosion and percentage delivered to the stream system was estimated for each site and entered into an Access database. A GIS map of the sediment source sites was also created, but not shared with KRIS in electronic format. Some photographs are included in KRIS.
Sediment Studies of Greenwood Creek by Forest, Soil and Water, Inc.
Forest, Soil and Water, Inc. of Healdsburg, CA surveyed 10-15% (16590 meters) of mainstem Greenwood Creek for sediment and published a report entitled Greenwood Creek Stream Survey: Data Analysis and Recommendations (FSW, 1996). Beginning at the Elk County Water District Wells at the 101 bridge, crews surveyed 30 meter reaches every 210 meters, or 80 sample sites. Data on valley and channel morphology, bank stability, large woody debris, pool habitat, fish sightings, and Vwave data were recorded at each sample site. In addition, field crews collected information on sediment transport corridors (STC's) for the entire length of the survey. The reports only contain raw data for Vwave and STC's. The purpose of the study was 1) to evaluate the health of the mainstem of Greenwood Creek, its ability to supply clean drinking water to the citizens of the Elk Community, and its ability to provide spawning and rearing habitat for resident and migratory salmonids; 2) identify sediment source areas, problem erosion sites or areas with degraded salmonid habitat for erosion control projects or fish habitat restoration efforts; and 3) establish a baseline database for Greenwood Creek to be used in further studies or future monitoring programs.
Phase II began in the summer of 1996 to investigate sources of sediment. A road survey was conducted for 25 miles of road, or 25% of the roaded watershed area. The document, Greenwood Creek Watershed Project 1996 Road Survey Summary Report (FSW, 1997), summarizes the findings. FSW recommended that 70% of the roads needed improved drainage, 17% needed improved surfaces, and 13% were recommended for closure. The greatest sources of erosional problems came from stream crossings (34%) and landslides (18%). A third phase for erosion control implementation has also been funded.
Timber Harvest Information in KRIS Navarro
Timber harvest data in KRIS comes from the California Department of Forestry (CDF) Santa Rosa Field Office and covers plans approved between 1990 and 2002. Timber Harvest Permits (THPs) remain open up to three years, so plans approved in recent years may be pending and not yet cut. There was considerable harvest in the period from 1980-1990 in some areas of the Navarro that may pose lingering risk of cumulative effects but the are not available in electronic form. In the KRIS database, timber harvest from 1990-2002 are shown by Calwater Planning watershed for analysis. The reference on charts to 25% disturbance of a watershed from timber harvest is based on Reeves et al. (1993), who found that coastal Oregon basins over this level of harvest had monotypic salmonid communities. Timber harvest data can be viewed spatially by year or by harvest method.
Historical Photos Courtesy of the Held-Poage Library and Mendocino Historical Society
Some historical photos in the KRIS Navarro project were scanned from the collection at the Held-Poage Museum and Library in Ukiah. This treasure trove of historical images provides a glimpse into the channel conditions and into an era before scientific data were collected. The images are for viewing in this project only and further use of these photos requires the express and written permission of the Mendocino Historical Society. Photo negatives were collected by Robert Lee who developed the prints on display at Held-Poage. Photos date back as early as the 1860s. Notes are from Mr. Lee and numbers in his reference system are entered in the captions for the photos.
Historical Photos Courtesy of the Mendocino County Museum
The Mendocino County Museum (MCM) in Willits shared photographs from its historical collection with the KRIS Navarro project. Photos included that came from the MCM are of the building of the Masonite Road. A link to the museum is at http://www.co.mendocino.ca.us/museum/.Restoration Photos from Chris and Stephanie Tebbutt
One of the largest restoration projects in the Navarro River basin is the riparian restoration that has taken place on Anderson Creek at the Tebbutt property just below Boonville. Stephanie and Chris Tebbutt have provided photos of their work which spans 20 years. The earliest photos were taken during the 1983 flood and of the aftermath, which included an 800 foot wide gravel terrace. The Tebbutts won grants from the California Department of Fish and Game and received technical assistance from the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Mendocino County Resource Conservation District, but also dedicated their own resources, including hundreds of hours of volunteer time.
Institute for Fisheries Resources Pictures
The IFR KRIS team visited the field on a number of occasions for scoping purposes and meeting with cooperators. While in the field, IFR staff often took photos of site conditions, aquatic habitats or other points of interest. These photos are copyright free, but credit would be appreciated if they are used in other projects. Photographers included Bryan Flaig, Eli Asarian and Pat Higgins.Aerial and Ground Photos Contributed by Coast Geographics
Rixanne Wehren of Albion shared aerial and ground photos of the Navarro River watershed that appear in KRIS Navarro, as well as providing geographic position system (GPS) locations for some photo points. Rixanne does work related to watersheds and restoration, including work in Arc View, through Coast Geographics, P.O. Box 340, Albion, CA 95410, (707) 937-2709.California Department of Fish and Game Historical Photos
The Institute for Fisheries Resources KRIS team visited Central Coast Region (formerly Region 3) Headquarters of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and copied some historical photos from their files. Yountville is the official archives for the DFG region, and houses historical data and photographs, organized by county and by stream. CDFG historical photos may have also been on file at other locations, such as the E-Center in Ukiah, but are ascribed to the Department.Photographs from the Mendocino Fisheries Program of the E-Center in Ukiah
The Mendocino Fisheries Program focuses on watershed health, training, and employment of displaced commercial fishermen and timber workers, the education of local youth in watershed principals, and has participated in numerous fishery restoration and community education projects in several watersheds throughout Mendocino County for the past 16 years. We operate under the guidance of the Center for Education, Environment, and Employment (E Center) a non-profit organization in Ukiah, California. The E Center specializes in providing infrastructure support for community service projects in the areas of most severe need. It has extensive experience in empowerment-based models of community development, currently assisting endeavors in Mendocino, Yolo, Yuba, and Sutter Counties. Salmon-oriented Stream restoration via the Mendocino Fisheries Project (MFP) is a small part of the E-Center’s service provisions.
Vegetation and Timber Types of Cal Water Watersheds
The tree size and type classifications used in the KRIS Navarro project were derived from Landsat multi-spectral images taken in 1994. The U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region Remote Sensing Lab, in cooperation with the California Department of Forestry, analyzed the Landsat images to formulate a California wide electronic map layer of vegetation as part of the Northwest Forest Plan (Warbington et al., 1998). See Vegetation Types Background page for more information)Stand conditions are accurately represented at the one hectare scale by the USFS vegetation data. Data were quarried for tree size or community type in KRIS Navarro Maps. This allows quantitative assessment of vegetation types for seral stage based on tree size for geographic areas such as CalWater Planning Watersheds in KRIS Navarro. CDF FRAP change scene detection (Fisher, 2001) using 1994 and 1998 Landsat imagery allows assessment of conditions in a more recent time frame. Change scene detection themes are available in the KRIS Map ArcView and ArcExplorer projects.
For use in KRIS, vegetation and timber types were simplified into ten classifications. Vegetation classifications are:
Very Large Trees = 40" in diameter or greater
Large Trees = 30-39.9" in diameter
Medium/Large Trees = 20-29.9" in diameter
Small/Medium Trees = 12-19.9" in diameter
Small Trees = 5-11.9" in diameter
Saplings = 1-4.9" in diameter
Non-Forest = Non-tree species such as shrubs, grasses or bare soil
This simpler classification provides an easy to understand index of watershed disturbance for use in coastal watersheds. Large components of early seral stage conditions (Saplings, Non-Forest) are often associated with recent logging disturbance. The vegetation patterns in interior basins, such as the Eel River and Klamath River watersheds, are much more complicated than in coastal ecosystems and more difficult to use to analyze changes in vegetation brought about by watershed management activities. The KRIS vegetation classification scheme can also be used for a quick analysis of riparian conditions. Ninety meter (292.5 ft.) zones of riparian influence are assigned to the 1:24000 stream layer in Arc View and only the vegetation within this zone is displayed and analyzed.
Road Densities in KRIS Navarro
Roads are a major source of sediment to streams. Surface erosion from roads can produce chronic sources of fine sediment, which can diminish salmon and steelhead spawning success (Cedarholm et al., 1980). Failure of roads during major storm events can lead to large landslides which can overwhelm streams with sediment, thus filling pools and diminishing habitat diversity. Road densities in KRIS Navarro were calculated using queries in Arc Info on road data from the U.S. Geologic Survey's 1:24000 maps, which have been improved and updated by the California Department of Forestry pursuant to timber harvest oversight. An additional road layer was improved by staff at the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 1, as part of the Navarro TMDL (US EPA, 2000), but this layer was not used in analysis because it did not cover the five coastal watersheds of the project area. KRIS staff also determined that the layer differed little from the CDF road layer. Road data may not be accurate or up-to-date in areas not undergoing timber harvest because USGS only updates 1:24000 topographic maps every few decades. KRIS shows thresholds for roads of three miles per square miles based on National Marine Fisheries Service guidelines (NMFS, 1996). See Roads page in the Background pages for more information.Five Counties Road Erosion Inventory
The Trinity County Planning Department coordinated an effort to survey county roads in Mendocino, Humboldt, Del Norte, Trinity, and Siskiyou counties. Pacific Watershed Associates developed a modification of their standard road inventory protocol for the assessment, and trained survey crews. The Mendocino County Department of Transportation conducted the surveys in Mendocino County, which included the Navarro River watershed in the years 2000 and 2001. The purpose of the surveys was to determine the contribution of county roads to sediment production, and to use the information collected to find ways to minimize it. A final report for the Five Counties Road Erosion Inventory was completed by the Trinity County Planning Department and the Mendocino County Water Agency is available in the KRIS bibliography. See the Roads Background page for more information.
California Pesticide Use Reporting Database
The California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) maintains a statewide database called the California Pesticide Use Reporting Database. When pesticide applicators use registered pesticides, they are required to submit data to county agricultural commissioners, who then submit data to DPR. The DPR publishes a CD-ROM of the database for each year. Due to size and budget limitations, only data for the year 2001 were included in KRIS Navarro. The pesticide database is a relational database composed of many linked tables containing information such as the amount and location of product application. The DPR publishes a user's guide that contains detailed information on the structure of the original database. The most important fields were joined into a single database for inclusion in KRIS. A key to the column headings in the pesticide source table included in KRIS is available here as a table. The database was joined to a GIS of Public Land Survey sections (roughly one square mile each) to make a GIS layer, which is viewable using the KRIS Map Viewer.
The impact of pesticides in the Navarro project area has not been thoroughly explored. Johnson et al. (2003) collected water samples in the Navarro River watershed as part of a Caltrans study by UC Davis researchers. Data analysis on organic compounds has not yet released. The only inorganic contaminant that UC Davis found at consistently high levels was zinc, which was attributed to natural geologic sources. Zinc was applied as a pesticide in 2001, but only in very small quantities. See the Water Quality Background page for more information.
Coho Presence and Absence Survey Results
The presence or absence of coho salmon in streams historically inhabited by the species has become one of the main measures of coho status in northwestern California. Data in KRIS Navarro come from the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), which did an exhaustive survey of northwestern California to determine the status of coho (CDFG, 2002). Their data base also includes all previous CDFG samples back to 1988, Brown and Moyle (1991), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) data (Adams et al. (1999)) or presence and absence studies funded by NMFS (Brownell et al., 1999). Most recent surveys used direct dive observation in ten pools to note coho presence or absence. Previously collected electrofishing samples were also used (Jones, 2000). Brown et al. (1994) used presence and absence and other data to characterize the status of coho salmon in California up to 1994. NMFS (2001) also reassessed California coho status based on data collected through the year 2000. NMFS (2001) offers the following caveat for understanding the use of presence/absence data: "It is important to note that a record of 'presence' does not necessarily indicate persistent populations. Nor does a record of 'absence' preclude the possibility of coho salmon within the system, only that they were not detected during sampling." Because the varying returns of different year classes of coho, three consecutive years of survey are needed for definitive presence/absence information. Eli Asarian of IFR KRIS project created the ArcView shape file from this database from CDFG non-spatial data. See the metadata file in the KRIS Map Viewer for more detailed information on the spatial data. For more in-depth information see also Background page on Fish Populations.
Note about documents in KRIS
