Jump to main content.

Research Project Search
 Enter Search Term:
   
 NCER Advanced Search

2000 Progress Report: Integrating Salmon Habitat Restoration and Flood Hazard Initiatives: Societal/Biophysical Estimators for the Cedar River and Implications for Regional Rivers

EPA Grant Number: R827149
Title: Integrating Salmon Habitat Restoration and Flood Hazard Initiatives: Societal/Biophysical Estimators for the Cedar River and Implications for Regional Rivers
Investigators: Wissmar, Robert C. , Fluharty, David L. , Leschine, Thomas M.
Current Investigators: Wissmar, Robert C. , Fluharty, David L. , Leschine, Thomas M. , Montgomery, Melissa , Timm, Raymond K.
Institution: University of Washington - Seattle
EPA Project Officer: Stelz, Bill
Project Period: February 1, 1999 through January 31, 2002 (Extended to January 31, 2003)
Project Period Covered by this Report: February 1, 2000 through January 31, 2001
Project Amount: $749,991
RFA: Water and Watersheds (1998)
Research Category: Water and Watersheds

Description:

Objective:

Our research is evaluating management efforts that deal with biophysical and societal issues that relate to how human systems respond to and influence river basin planning (e.g., flood reduction facilities, water availability, and urban growth patterns) and recent actions to restore salmon habitats in the lower Cedar River basin near Seattle, WA. The research project objectives include: (1) understanding how retrospective and contemporary societal, policy, and biophysical forces influence the current environment; (2) developing the ability to assess and anticipate biophysical and human systems responses; and (3) formulating and examining the effectiveness of policies for restoring damaged river and floodplain ecosystems.

Framing Ideas for the Research. Ecological restoration is inherently risky. Restoration may not always be possible and the risks of technical failure are influenced by four interrelated ecological and societal variables: (1) ecological circumstances under which restoration is attempted (e.g., risk of failure increases when the initial damage is extreme); (2) how nature is viewed and valued by society (risks increase when economic values are short-term); (3) social commitment to ecological restoration (e.g., success is unlikely when commitment is low); and (4) quality of judgments for accomplishing restoration (e.g., risks increase when decisions are based on poor data and expertise or inadequate understanding of river processes).

Progress Summary:

Our research is being conducted within a hierarchical-landscape perspective. This approach allows use to integrate our biophysical and societal studies across a variety of different landscape scales and to coordinate and communicate with user groups and stakeholders. At the largest spatial scale (>100 km2), our studies address societal and biophysical issues across river drainages and regional policy domains. At smaller scales, our studies focus on river reaches and habitats (e.g., habitat biophysical functions and fish responses), associated restoration-flood management actions, and influences of human developments (e.g., economic issues and governmental policies).

River Drainage and Policy Domains Scales: Research Questions and Results

  1. How do land cover changes influence the spatial hydrology, biophysical, and societal environments, and reflect policy decisions that apply to all the lower Cedar River drainage and surrounding regions?

  2. How do resource demands and political decisions across large policy domains result in tradeoffs that affect potential restoration opportunities throughout the lower Cedar River drainage?

Our research indicates that the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA), King County Urban Growth Area boundaries (UGB), and the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) are proving to be the major forces influencing the capabilities of local governments to develop and implement successful plans for habitat restoration, flood hazard reduction initiatives, and human developments. The emergence of many institutional actors with the power to facilitate or affect salmon habitat protection and restoration in the Cedar Basin raises the question of how well the entire system is coordinated to maximize through collaboration the effectiveness of efforts. Our institutional analysis indicates that a lack of shared vision, driven in part by conflicting agency mandates, is leading to high transaction costs, and impeding interactions that might otherwise produce more progress in salmon recovery. This problem is expressing itself "on the ground" in a piecemeal approach to restoration whose significance to the system as a whole is very difficult to gauge. Transaction costs that impede interactions exist at all institutional levels (e.g., collective-choice," "constitutional," and "operational"). As a result, habitat restoration projects in the Cedar are taking on the look of opportunistic actions despite plans for more systematic approaches (e.g., King County). In general, the lack of shared vision appears to be leading to under provision of investment in habitat protection and restoration within the lower Cedar River drainage.

In conjunction with our institutional studies, we are using habitat and socio-economic landcover layers (GIS) and spatial models to identify and evaluate how human and landscape factors cause changes in land-uses and hydrological balances throughout drainages, and alter fish and habitat functions. We recently have completed and published our assessment of changes in landcover within the Cedar River drainage between 1991 and 1998 (Wissmar et al, 2000). Significant increases in developed land cover in the more urbanized areas included the widening of a major state highway and conversion of remaining isolated forest patches through infill development. More rural areas demonstrated increases in developed land cover, which correspond with patterns of scattered low-density residential, clustered dense commercial and residential, and development near newly incorporated areas. Changes in land cover point to risks related to implementing local governmental programs mandated by the GMA (e.g., UGB and open spaces). Our findings point to the efficacy of our developed landcover layers for identifying the spatial extent and temporal changes in impervious areas. Specific attributes include the ability to: (1) identify variations in impervious areas; (2) facilitate the assignment of model parameters; (3) facilitate the monitoring and comparison of change over time; (4) facilitate planning and implementation and evaluation of restoration-river management initiatives; and (5) use landcover layers in a spatially explicit hydrology model to simulate flow regimes at different spatial scales (e.g., channel sizes and drainage areas). We have been evaluating the effect of land use change on basin hydrology using the Distributed Hydrology Soil Vegetation Model (DHSVM). To facilitate application to the lower Cedar River drainage, our representations of impervious areas (Wissmar et al, 2000) and overland routing were incorporated into the model. Model calibration and testing have been completed on separate sub-basins of the lower Cedar River drainage. We presently are preparing two publications on these topics: "Landscape classification of impervious areas," and "Effect of land use change on basin hydrology."

Reach and Habitat Scales: Research Questions and Results

Our research at smaller spatial scales (reaches and habitats) during 2000 and 2001 is focusing on the following questions:

  1. How do governance systems respond to the problems and opportunities that exist at the different spatial and temporal scales?

  2. How do different user groups perceive salmon protection and restoration actions in relation to both personal and societal values?

  3. How do different user groups perceive benefits and costs of proposed salmon protection and restoration and do these perceptions change in physical proximity to restoration projects or opportunities?

  4. How do different geomorphic and hydrological characteristics influence river and floodplain habitat functions, connectivity, and restoration opportunities?

  5. For existing functional and newly created floodplain habitats:
    • What are the habitat preferences of spawning and juvenile salmon?
    • What are the growth rates of juvenile salmon?
    • What are residence times of juvenile salmon?
    • How do physical and biotic factors affect spawning and juvenile salmon?

We are documenting the management history and current policy and actions for the Elliott reach and the Rock Creek-Wetland 79 reach. We are identifying forces that have influenced decisions and resulted in management actions that pertain to flood hazard reduction and restoration. Historically, repeated levee failures in the Elliott reach have degraded in-channel and floodplain habitats and spurred numerous coupled flood reduction-restoration efforts by King County in cooperation with the City of Renton, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Several spawning channels within relic channels areas have been restored and connected to the river between 1995 and 2000. Numerous federal, state, and local agencies have participated in reviewing various plans for flood reduction (e.g., set-back levees) and habitat restoration (e.g., spawning channels). Elliot projects prior to 2000 did not come under ESA scrutiny. However, recent rehabilitation of another off-channel systems in 2000 did come under ESA scrutiny and resulted in changes in design, cost, and implementation. The plan of physically connecting this system to the mainstem was found to be a potential "take" of Chinook salmon and necessitated revised design. A similar ESA consideration affected the design of a restoration project at Wetlands 79 (river mile 18). There, the entire project was located outside an oxbow channel that itself provides good spawning and rearing habitat. The Wetlands 79 project was reconfigured from its original design in order to minimize the scrutiny and likely delay that ESA would have engendered.

To further evaluate questions 1, 2, and 3, we are using our landcover layers (Wissmar et al., 2000) and additional information (e.g., habitat and socio-economic) from King County and other agencies. We are assessing how the distribution of human development and conflicts (e.g., land values and zoning; road and flood control facilities) affect intact salmon and riparian habitats along the lower Cedar River channel, and what restoration efforts could make the river ecosystem and habitats more resilient to human influences. We currently are developing a geographic information system (GIS) based model to identify areas where human influences most compromise habitat functions and potential restoration sites. We currently are testing this approach along the Elliott reach by applying our GIS files and research results from our studies at different spatial scales. We intend to publish our GIS approach and answer the following questions: (1) How can contemporary habitat restoration best compensate for the heterogeneity that has been lost? (2) How successful are restoration projects that take advantage of opportunities offered by other management programs? (3) What approaches provide effective ways of resolving conflicts between human development and salmon habitat restoration? We also are conducting studies to address institutional aspects of question 1 and plan a social survey to address questions 2 and 3.

Our habitat restoration research (questions 4 and 5) is assessing how different geomorphic conditions and discharge rates influence channel and floodplain habitat characteristics, their hydrological connectivity with the river channel, and habitat preferences of spawning and juvenile salmon. Our research shows how river discharge and stage height controls surface and subsurface flows between river channels and off-channel floodplain areas, habitat availability, and access and use by adult and juvenile fish (e.g., habitat preferences and reproductive timing) (Hall et al., 2000). We are demonstrating that off-channel habitats are especially attractive in river systems where flow extremes and channel instability make mainstem projects impractical. We are evaluating these findings by our simultaneous study of newly created spawning habitats at both the Elliott and Rock Creek-Wetland 79 reaches. Colonization by spawning salmon and resultant abundances of recently hatched juveniles within these restored reaches and habitats, along with functional hydrologic and structural conditions (e.g., partially breached levees) demonstrates the feasibility of reach-habitat scale restoration projects.

Historical Studies

Our historical studies at the river drainage and regional scales are case-based retrospective analysis of floodplain alterations, responsible institutions, and potential options for restoration. Timelines for the major river-land use activities that have affected the Cedar River have been constructed for the categories of water supply, transportation, land use, levees and revetments, dredging, industry, and natural hazards. Our collection of historic maps that show ownership/settlement patterns approach decadal intervals. Accompanying archives (e.g., newspaper) have been accessed around dates of important natural events (e.g., floods, and institutional decisions). Our narratives intend to illustrate the dynamics of the interplay between private enterprise, public institutions, and development and change in the Cedar River environment. Despite major transformation in the nature of economic activity and social demands in the Cedar River valley, the legacy of prior decisions and actions remains, defines, and limits options for habitat restoration and protection.

Future Activities:

The following future activities are planned:

Research at Large Spatial Scales

  1. Landscape classification of impervious areas
    • Effects of land-use change on basin hydrology: spatial simulations of flows regimes

  2. Landscape classification of impervious areas

Research at Smaller Spatial and Temporal Scales

  1. How governance systems respond to the problems and opportunities that exist at the different spatial and temporal scales

  2. How different user groups perceive salmon protection and restoration actions in relation to both personal and societal values

  3. How different user groups perceive benefits and costs of proposed salmon protection and restoration and how these perceptions change in physical proximity to restoration projects or opportunities

  4. Use of landscape classifications for impervious areas

  5. How land use change influences basin hydrology

  6. Use of off-channel ponds by spawning and juvenile salmon

  7. Use of restored river side-channel by spawning sockeye salmon

  8. Impacts of variable flow regimes on the habitat formation in a stream before and after placement of large logs in channels

  9. Changes in river-land uses and management implications for salmon habitat restoration
    • Evaluating how ecologically functional and socio-economic developed areas influence riverine habitats within the basin
    • Developing procedure for grading habitat and socio-economic scores
    • Testing procedure to identify opportunities and priorities for habitat restoration within the basin

Journal Articles:

No journal articles submitted with this report: View all 38 publications for this project

Supplemental Keywords:

water, watersheds, land, restoration, salmon, scaling, habitat, societal, public policy, decision making, Pacific Northwest, Washington, WA. , Ecosystem Protection/Environmental Exposure & Risk, Water, Geographic Area, Scientific Discipline, RFA, Ecosystem/Assessment/Indicators, Water & Watershed, Restoration, Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, Wet Weather Flows, Hydrology, Watersheds, Ecology and Ecosystems, State, risk assessment, aquatic ecosystem, wildlife habitat, public policy, watershed restoration, Washington (WA), riparian zone conditions, aquatic habitat protection , fish habitat, flood hazard initiatives, ecological recovery, riparian ecosystem integrity, conservation, salmon habitat restoration, suburban watersheds, urban development, fllod hazard initiatives, aquatic ecosystems, flood control, riparian habitat, floodplain ecosystems, floodplain ecosystem, restoration strategies, restoration planning, river ecosystems, urban stream rehabilitation
Relevant Websites:

http://www.fish.washington.edu/people/wissmar Exit EPA icon
http://www.sma.washington.edu/ Exit EPA icon
http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/util/watershed/cedar/hcp/default.htm Exit EPA icon
http://www.metrokc.gov/exec/esa/index.htm Exit EPA icon

Progress and Final Reports:
1999 Progress Report
Original Abstract
2001 Progress Report
Final Report

Top of page

The perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.