RIPARIAN HABITAT FINDINGS

Riparian cover conditions range from poor to excellent in the valley, canyon and upland reaches of the Scott River drainage. As noted in the previous historical discussion, mining, floods, lowering of water tables, changes in the river channel, flood control practices, and some agricultural practices have contributed to lack of riparian cover in many of the valley reaches. This legacy of historic uses and changes is pervasive in the watershed and can forestall recovery of stream habitat without a thorough understanding of their implications.

 
Current Condition: A recent inventory and evaluation of the Scott River riparian zone was performed for the Siskiyou RCD (Lewis, 1992). As a result, the following information is known about the qualitative condition of the 373 sites evaluated along the main stem in Scott Valley below the dredger tailings to the end of the valley just below Meamber Gulch:

Table 3. Inventory Summary of Scott River Riparian Zone (Lewis, 1992) 1/

1/ Additional improvement projects have been completed since 1992 while flood damage in 1995 has also occurred. As a result, conditions have changed in both directions since this survey.

These figures were calculated for both the left and right banks of the main stem Scott River:

 Type // Bank Miles // % of Total

 Fenced banks //26.93 // 45%
Unfenced banks // 32.35 // 55%
Riprapped banks // 24.90 // 42%
Riprap & fenced // 13.37 // 23%
Riprap & unfenced // 11.51 // 19%
Total Bank Miles // 59.28 // 100%

Recommended practices in the report included:
* Livestock exclusion (with fenced drinking access)
* Fencing
* Riparian planting and irrigation (with cottonwood & willow)
* Flood irrigation tailwater filter control (using vegetative filtering)
* Stream bank protection with large rock
* Off-stream livestock watering (well and tank)
* Fire protection

In addition, landowner "willingness" to participate in these practices was surveyed and rated, and a priority list was made based on a rating evaluation of need. Detailed maps of the river's riparian zone indicate property boundaries, landowner names, dates of previous riprap projects, some fences, soil types, land use, and current riparian condition and trend ratings.

This inventory and evaluation needs to be supplemented with riparian forest zone information that addresses fish habitat needs and extended to the major tributaries. Included would be such additional factors as canopy cover over the stream, riparian forest zone trees (to contribute large woody debris), relation to fish spawning and rearing sites, other riparian-instream relationships, and landowner objectives.

Bank Stabilization: Streambank soil losses have been arrested and reversed in some areas through bank stabilization and riparian planting projects undertaken cooperatively by farmers, the USDA Soil Conservation Service (now NRCS), and Siskiyou Resource Conservation District (RCD) efforts. Between 1957 and 1994, over 170 bank stabilization projects were done on the mainstem Scott, at a funding cost of $1.7 million, plus 137 projects on the tributaries for $1.5 million (private cost-share probably contributed 30-50% of costs on the average) (KRBTF, 1991). Of this amount, the USFWS and CDFG have funded $442,258 on 6 projects to specifically benefit fish, with $252,726 spent on Shackleford Creek's lower end and the balance on the main stem Scott.

The use of large rock riprap was recommended as essential in the Scott River to stabilizing sites for the establishment of permanent riparian vegetation (Lewis, 1992). Fish habitat benefits were documented on the older style (more vertical) riprap projects with established riparian vegetation on the Scott. Deeper water, more shade and more cover were found, especially when 5 to 6 foot large rocks had rolled into the stream (Patterson, 1976). Modifications of riprap, including instream fish structures, are presently being tried by CDFG (Harral, 1993). However, using limited fish restoration dollars (instead of agricultural erosion control dollars) to fund this practice has been in contention.

One type of promising "fish friendly" channel work is called geomorphic restoration. In this work, the present and natural hydrological conditions are evaluated by specially trained geologists and compatible channel alterations are designed and constructed (Rosgen, 1994). The intent is to understand and recreate habitat based on the "big picture" by working with the river's forces. Since the state-of-the-art for this method is still quite young, a few "geomorphic-type" bank stabilization projects along the Scott are planned to demonstrate the applicability and viability of this technique.

Grazing Management: While many historic causes have degraded the Scott's riparian zone, concern is expressed over the present effect of livestock on the riparian zone. In a study of Scott Valley's streambank protection projects, unmanaged browsing of established riparian vegetation can inhibit growth while browsing of seedlings and saplings can kill the plants (Patterson, 1976). Lewis (1992) also recommends livestock exclusion to allow for adequate riparian plant survival and growth. Proper grazing management through stream corridor fencing can be used to restore and protect the riparian area and water quality while still intensively grazing adjacent pastures (Chaney et al, 1993).

 Uncontrolled access to the streambed of the Scott and its tributaries can cause problems for fish, particularly during spawning season. Disruption of chinook salmon redds (nests) can dislodge and destroy deposited eggs. Although 45% of the main stem is fenced, no corridor is yet fenced from bridge to bridge, and on both sides of the bank. With access points available, livestock can wander in the stream channel to neighboring fenced properties and still browse riparian plants in supposed "livestock exclusion" sites. Carefully managed seasonal grazing within the fenced riparian zone can be compatible with revegetation once plants are established.

Riparian Revegetation: As part of past fencing and riprap projects, large unrooted cuttings of poplar and willow have been planted (Lewis, 1992). A riparian woodland revegetation project is presently underway at three riparian and floodplain sites along the Scott River, planting rooted cottonwood, willows, and ponderosa pine. Regular summer watering and weeding are found to be essential, along with seedling protectors for deer, rodent, and beaver browse.

Logging: In the upland and canyon riparian zones, some riparian cover has been removed as a result of flooding and logging. Research has indicated that aquatic invertebrate diversity can be affected when too narrow buffers (less than 100 feet) are left along streams during logging (Erman et al, 1977). In addition, the removal of forest canopy eliminates large woody debris from the stream for habitat cover and increases temperature stress in cold winters (Beschta et al, 1987).

 Currently when logging on private land in California the State Board of Forestry rules mandate stream zone management to protect all the beneficial uses of water. This protection includes water temperature control, streambed and flow modification by large woody debris (LWD), filtration of organic and inorganic material, upslope stability, bank and channel stabilization, and vegetation structure diversity for fish and wildlife habitat. Buffer zones varying in size from 25 feet on ephemeral draws up to 150 feet or more on either side of class 1 fish bearing streams are required to protect water quality and beneficial uses. The state regulations require that within these buffer zones no heavy equipment is allowed, at least 75% surface cover and undisturbed area as well as 50% of both overstory and understory vegetation be retained, and at least two living conifers per acre 16" diameter or greater be retained for LWD recruitment. In addition, no new roads can be constructed in these stream zones and any area where bare mineral soil exceeding 800 sq.ft. is exposed will be treated to reduce soil loss. Further, a watershed can be classified as sensitive and even more restrictive measures enacted.

The newly enacted regional forest plan (Option 9) for public lands establishes riparian reserves which in most cases will not be logged (USFS and BLM, 1994).

B. RIPARIAN HABITAT OBJECTIVE: Improve and maintain riparian habitat to provide cover, stream temperature, and food conditions. Landowner approval will always be secured before implementing these tasks on private land. Landowner will be involved in all planning, access, and evaluation.

TASKS

1. Complete the fencing of stream corridors to control livestock access as first priority, with emphasis on:
a. Stream areas with high spawning use;
b. Stream corridors near completion;
c. Significant tributaries: Shackleford, French Creeks

 2. Inventory and evaluate riparian conditions as they affect fish habitat:
a. Expand the scope of the existing mainstem Scott riparian inventory to also assess relationship to fish habitat. Include location and status of existing fencing and livestock watering sources.
b. Conduct riparian inventory on significant tributaries to assess the quality and quantity of riparian conditions and determine priorities for habitat restoration. Include location and status of existing fencing and livestock watering sources.

3. Promote effective riparian revegetation to improve fish habitat:
a. Evaluate riparian planting projects and make recommendations to improve planting program.
b. Conduct riparian restoration projects in fenced sites and with species reflecting the natural vegetative composition.

4. Experiment with alternative fish-friendly methods to stabilize streambanks.
a. Perform geomorphic evaluation of the mainstem Scott River channel to identify potential demonstration projects.
b. Evaluate planned "geomorphic", modified riprap, and other experimental projects before requesting additional projects.
c. Learn more about the geomorphic approach through workshops and field trips.

Continue