&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Research
Laboratory
CorvallisOR 97330
EPA 6
Research and Development
A Stream Systems
Evaluation—
An Emphasis on
Spawning
Habitat for
Salmonids
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH series. This series
describes research on the effects of pollution on humans, plant and animal spe-
cies, and materials. Problems are assessed for their long- and short-term influ-
ences. Investigations include formation, transport, and pathway studies to deter-
mine the fate of pollutants and their effects. This work provides the technical basis
for setting standards to minimize undesirable changes in living organisms in the
aquatic, terrestrial, and atmospheric environments.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/3-79-109
October 1979
A STREAM SYSTEMS EVALUATION—
AN EMPHASIS ON SPAWNING HABITAT FOR SALMONIDS
by
Mostafa A0 Shirazi
Freshwater Division
Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory
Corvallis, Oregon 97330
and
Wayne K. Seim
Department of Fisheries and Wildlife
Oregon State University
Corvallis, Oregon 97331
Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Corvallis, Oregon 97330
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Corvallis Environmental
Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved
for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does
not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
11
-------
FOREWORD
Effective regulatory and enforcement actions by the Environmental
Protection Agency would be virtually impossible without sound scientific
data on pollutants and their impact on environmental stability and
human health,, Responsibility for building this data base has been
assigned to EPA's Office of Research and Development and its 15 major
field installations, one of which is the Corvallis Environmental
Research Laboratory (CERL).
The primary mission of the Corvallis Laboratory is research on
the effects of environmental pollutants on terrestrial, freshwater,
and marine ecosystems; the behavior, effects and control of pollutants
in lakes and streams; and the development of predictive models on the
movement of pollutants in the biosphere.
This report is the product of a special conference at Gleneden,
Oregon, June 4-6, 1979, to discuss and rewrite a white paper originally
prepared by Shirazi and Seim on development of a united approach for
evaluation of spawning habitat. Invited participants are listed below.
This report was shaped as the outcome of intensive work sessions directed
towards crystalizing a consensus. The senior authors are, of course,
indebted to these scientists for their contributions, but they derive
greatest satisfaction from the support their work has received.
Peter Bisson
Weyerhauser Company
505 North Pearl St.
Centralia, WA 98531
Robert L. Beschta
Department of Forst Science
Oregon State University
Corvallis, OR 97331
Kenneth Bovee
Cooperative Instream Flow
Service Group
U.S. Fish f, Wildlife Service
Drake Creekside Building
2625 Redwing Road
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Mason Bryant
Forest Sciences Laboratory
Pacific Northwest Forest and
Range Experiment Station
P.O. Box 909
Juneau, AK 99801
C.J, Cederholm
Fisheries Research Institute
University of Washington
c/o Department of Natural Resources
RR. 1, Box 1375
Forks, WA 98331
iii
-------
Tom C. Chamberlin
Ministry of Environment
Resource Analysis Branch
Victoria, BC
Canada V8V 1X4
Donald Corley
Boise National Forest
1075 Park Blvd.
Boise, ID 83704
Jack Gakstatter
Freshwater Division
Environmental Protection Agency
Corvallis, OR 97330
James D. Hall
Dept. of Fisheries and Wildlife
Oregon State University
Corvallis, OR 97331
Peter Klingeman
Water Resources Research Institute
Oregon State University
Corvallis, OR 97331
K. Koski
National Marine Fisheries Service
Auke Bay Laboratory
P.Oo Box 155
Auke Bay, AK 99821
Richard Lantz
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
Regional Office
Rt, 5, Box 325
Corvallis, OR 97330
Fred Lotspeich
Freshwater Division
Environmental Protection Agency
Corvallis, OR 97330
Thomas E. Maloney
Freshwater Division
Environmental Protection Agency
Corvallis, OR 97330
Milton E. Parsons
Siuslaw National Forest
545 SW 2nd Street
Corvallis, OR 97330
William Platts
U.So Dept. of Agriculture--
Intermountain Forest and Range
Experiment Station
316 E. Myrtle St.
Boise, ID 83706
Robert Rulifson
U.S0 EPA, Region X
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Thomas A. Murphy
Director, CERL
iv
-------
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
A UNIFYING SUBSTRATE STATISTIC 2
VISUAL ESTIMATION OF SUBSTRATE COMPOSITION AND NUMBER OF SAMPLES .. 6
THE ADEQUACY OF SAMPLE WEIGHT 10
METHODS OF OBTAINING GRAVEL SAMPLES 16
ANALYSIS OF GRAVEL—WET SIEVING 21
CALCULATION OF SUBSTRATE STATISTICS 24
LEAST SQUARES GRAPHICAL METHOD 24
QUANTILE GRAPHICAL METHOD 26
METHOD OF MOMENTS 26
CHOICE OF METHODS 26
ESTIMATING LOCALIZED AND STREAMWIDE IMPACTS 28
EVALUATION OF STREAM SYSTEMS 29
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 32
REFERENCES 34
-------
ABSTRACT
As a result of silvicultural activities in the Pacific Northwest,
various levels of sediments and debris enter the streams, often degrading
spawning substrate of salmonid fishes. Simple but reliable procedures
are needed to monitor spawning gravels to assess the level of these
impacts. This paper presents a preliminary rationale for conducting
a monitoring program with the objective of assessing the level of
sedimentation impact both locally in a given stream spawning site as
well as more generally for the entire stream that might be impacted
by watershed management activities.
vi
-------
INTRODUCTION
Nonpoint source pollution (NFS) is recognized as a serious problem
in the United States and throughout the world. Water quality management
programs conducted under state and federal legislation have identified
nonpoint sources of pollution as a significant obstacle to attaining the
1983 goal of water quality adequate for fish, wildlife and recreation.
Stream sedimentation is one of the greatest NFS pollution problems,
primarily because widespread activities such as agriculture, logging,
livestock grazing and road construction are major sources of increased
sediment loading. For example, logging and road construction in the
Pacific Northwest introduces various levels of sediments and debris
into streams and rivers. This can result in the degradation of riffle
habitats critical for salmonid fish reproduction and for the production
of invertebrate food organisms necessary for the rearing of juvenile
fish. In mountain streams spawning takes place in riffles where the
water velocity is usually 45 to 75 cm/sec (1.5-2.5 ft/sec) and the water
depth is 15 to 90 cm (6 to 36 inches). Salmonid reproduction and the
production of invertebrate food organisms respond adversely to excessive
sedimentation in these areas. A study of spawning habitats could,
therefore, provide a relatively simple, sensitive and meaningful indicator
of watershed management impacts.
For several decades, fishery biologists have known the general
properties of spawning gravels used by salmonids. However, the lack
of a relatively simple, reliable and standardized method of character-
izing the gravels has hindered quantitative descriptions of changes
caused by sedimentation. This paper describes a comprehensive procedure
to assess and monitor the effects of watershed management activity on
stream spawning habitat, applicable both to individual spawning sites
and to an entire stream system. This monitoring program is designed to
minimize costs and work effort. It is anticipated that this procedure
will provide the groundwork for a serious effort in compiling the com-
prehensive data base required to evaluate effects of land use on streams
over large geographical areas in the United States.
1
-------
A UNIFYING SUBSTRATE STATISTIC
Fisheries researchers generally agree that excess fine sediments
in the spawning gravel of salmonids are a cause for embryo and larval
mortality (Iwamoto et^ a^. 1978). Several measures of substrate fines
have been advocated, namely, fractions less than .83 mm, 3,3 mm, or
6.5 mm. Even if there is no consensus on a unified definition of fines,
the causal factor of mortality is generally believed to be the filling
of spaces within the gravel. This causes substantial reduction in the
replacement of metabolite-laden water with oxygen-laden water during
the incubation of embryos and alevins and the trapping of alevins during
emergence from the gravel.
Since natural spawning substrates contain a wide range of particle
sizes including silt, sand, gravel and cobble, permeability to flow
and thus embryo survival depends not only on fine materials in the sand
range, but also on the presence of gravel and cobble. Permeability is
a strong function of pore size distribution, which in turn is affected
by the size composition of the particles and by their shapes and packing
arrangement. Shape angularity of the particles directly influences the
packing arrangement. There exists no convenient measure of natural
packing of substrate in a stream bottom. Lotspiech (1978) presented
convincing arguments that combined measures of central tendency (i.e.,
the mean) and the sorting coefficient (i.e., the standard deviation)
should provide an indirect but adequate measure of potential change in
permeability.
In an extensive analysis of the relationship between permeability
and gravel composition, and in an attempt to arrive at a logical alter-
native measure of spawning gravel, Platts et_ al_. (1979) demonstrated
that information on the entire textural composition of the gravel is
necessary. They proposed the geometric mean particle diameter (d ) as
an appropriate statistic because
(1) d is a conventional statistical measure used in sedimentary
o
petrology and engineering to represent sediment composition.
2
-------
(2) d is a convenient standard measure that enables comparison of
&
sediment sample results between two studies.
(3) d may be calculated from d<,. and d.,, two parameters
that may also be used to calculate the standard deviation.
(4) d relates to the permeability and porosity of channel
&
sediments and to embryo survival, at least as well as "percent fines."
(5) d is a more complete description of total sediment composi-
&
tion than "percent fines" and sediment composition evaluations in many
cases involve less sampling error using d .
6
(6) d relates to porosity and permeability, and thus it is
o
potentially a suitable unifying measure of channel substrate condition
as it impacts embryo survival.
In a comprehensive review paper of embryonic survival, Shirazi
(unpublished) showed an empirical relationship of survival during
different embryo to alevin emergence stages with geometric mean diameter
of the spawning substrate (Figure 1). Percent embryo survival is plotted
against the geometric mean diameter of the substrate within the redd.
The positive trend relating these two variables is unmistakable. To
account for minor egg size differences among species, d was divided by
&
a value for egg diameter (d ) for that species in order to produce a more
6
strongly correlated relationship with survival (Figure 2). The utility
and the adequacy of a generalized scalar (d ) are indicated in the
&
figures by the strong correlation it exhibits with embryo survival from
diverse sources of data.
There may be justification for further research to obtain a more
complete description of the substrate than d . Vigorous research will
o
hopefully continue, but for it to be successful and to provide the data
base, the full substrate composition must accompany all survival test
results. Having this information, d , percent fines, or other convenient
&
measures may be readily estimated and correlated with embryo survival
studies.
-------
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
n
A
Species
O Coho
• Coho
O Coho
O Coho
O Cutthroat
D Sockeye
A Steelhead
A Steelhead
Source
Koski, 1966
Phillips, etal., 1975
Tagart, 1976
Cederholm, Unpublished
Cederholm et al., 1974
Cooper, 1975
Phillips, et al., 1975
Cederholm, etal., 1974
Place
Drift Creek, OR
Laboratory
Clearwater Creek,WA
Laboratory
Stequaleho Creek, WA
Laboratory
Laboratory
Stequaleho Creek, WA
I
I
0
10 15 20 25 30
GEOMETRIC MEAN DIAMETER, dg (mm)
35
Figure 1. Relationship between percent embryo survival and substrate composition expressed in geometric
mean diameter.
-------
Ui
100
90
80
70
< 60
| 50
^ 40
30
20
10
0
0
n
1.0
2.0
Species
O Coho
• Coho
Coho
Coho
O Cutthroat
D Sockeye
A Steelhead
A Steelhead
Source
Place
9
€
Koski, 1966 Drift Creek, OR ~
Phillips, et al., 1975 Laboratory
Tagart, 1976 Clearwater Creek, WA
Cederholm, Unpublished Laboratory —
Cederholm et al., 1974 Stequaleho Creek, WA
Cooper, 1975 Laboratory
Phillips, et al., 1975 Laboratory ~~
Cederholm, et al., 1974 Stequaleho Creek, WA
3.0
4.0
dg/de
5.0
6.0
7.0
Figure 2. Relationship between percent embryo survival and substrate composition in multiples of
egg diameter.
-------
VISUAL ESTIMATION OF SUBSTRATE COMPOSITION AND NUMBER OF SAMPLES
To accomplish the objective of monitoring and assessing stream
gravel composition, the following facts must be considered:
(a) Substrate composition varies both horizontally and vertically
at a given time and location.
(b) Substrate composition changes through time because of bed form
movement (e.g., bar progression) and the entrainment and deposition of
fine material.
(c) Within a given stream reach, bed forms and channel patterns
tend to repeat as similar geomorphic conditions are encountered (e.g.,
a sequence of pool-riffle complexes)0
Because of the natural variability of stream gravel composition
in time and space, a rapid stratification of the gravel environment
would be desirable to reduce the overall sampling effort. It must be
remembered that site assessment (gravel composition) must be coupled
with area determination to establish net gravel quality and quantity
within a stream reach or system. The experiment described here
addresses gravel composition differences at typical spawning sites
within an area, each site on the order of ten to several hundred
square meters. This experiment tested the ability to estimate visually
relative differences in the composition of two neighboring gravel patches.
No attempt was made to delineate the boundaries of these patches even
though the composition at times appears to change continually between
these patches. A variety of spawning substrates was sampled, including
streams in the Siuslaw National Forest in Oregon, a segment of the Rogue
River in Oregon and a small salmon stream in southeast Alaska. The
sampling team initially had no experience in matching visual composition
with the results of sieve analysis.
At each location, the areal extent of the spawning gravels was
visually stratified into three groupings (based on apparent composition
of the surface gravels): A for coarse, C for fine, and B for intermediate.
Channel form was indirectly included by associating the relative coarseness
of gravels with flow velocities; coarse gravels are typically found under
6
-------
relatively faster waters. A single 12" core sample was collected within
each area and field-sieved.
Subsequent analysis of the field data indicated that when mean
particle diameter in bed material differed by about 10% for any two
samples at a site, the visual procedure was capable of correctly
identifying the coarser material 87% of the time (Table 1). When
differences were about 20%, the visual estimation of relatively
coarser material was correct 93% of the time. To get an idea of the
differences in the compositions of A, B, and C, the reader should refer
to the analysis of a typical site sample collected in Indian Creek
(Figure 3a)„
These results indicate that visual estimation procedures may be
useful for characterizing the relative composition of the underlying
bed material at a particular site. Canadian experience (Chamberlin,
pers. comm.) suggests that trained observers can estimate percentage
of fine (< 2mm), gravel (2-64 mm) and larger material to ± 10% in test
gravels. Such a capability would allow a relatively rapid assessment of
quality and quantity of potential spawning gravels along a particular
stream reach. However, detailed gravel measurements would be necessary
at specific sites for evaluating composition changes along the stream
or through time. It may be useful to speculate on how accurately observers
can visually assess gravel characteristics in comparison to the variability
in the area determinations which are necessary for overall reach or
system assessment. If precise area measurements are difficult (as
in mobile bed rivers) then rapid visual estimates of bed composition
referenced to a few quantitative samples may provide useful monitoring
information.
As a consequence of visual stratification of gravels, sample
sizes may be adjusted to reflect the degree of variability within the
sites of interest. The presence of broad zones of homogenous material
suggest fewer sample points than would a mosaic of widely different
bed material compositions.
-------
Table 1. GEOMETRIC MEAN DIAMETER d (mm) OF SUBSTRATE CATEGORIES
O
(A, B, AND C) SHOWING SCORES FOR 10% AND 20% DIFFERENCE
IN RELATIVE COARSENESS ESTIMATION,
1
2
3
4
5
6A
6B
7
8A
8B
9A
9B
10
11
12
13A
13B
14B
14C
14D
15
16A
16B
17
18
19
Coarse
A
46.4
22.5
31.0
24.7
23.1
27o6
23.9
20.2
24.4
12.5
31o4
26.5
25.8
35.1
83.1
39.0
41.9
59.0
21.8
58.7
22.2
6.5
8.7
28.3
16.0
33.8
Possible Score
Rating
Success %
Intermediate
B
14.5
16.7
27.5
22.1
14.4
13.9
23.3
23.7
16.9
11.8
13.2
22.4
19.0
38.9
62.9
39,7
2005
30,9
1806
58.8
22.6
6.4
23.1
10.3
22.5
76
Fine
C
14.2
18.9
22.6
9.6
13.3
8.5
16.9
14.9
14.4
6.2
6.8
26.4
26.1
18.8
25.1
15.2
17.4
17.3
48.4
65.3
19.5
807
7.9
19.4
4.3
32.7
Score
10%
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
3
1
2
3
3
2
66
87
20%
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
1
3
3
1
2
3
3
2
71
93
«
A full score of 3 was assigned if A was coarser than B and C, and B
coarser than C. 8
-------
To determine the number of samples to be taken in an area consisting
of tens of hundreds of sites, one must combine the visual information
on variability of the composition in the site with the desire to attain
a certain level of resolution. This procedure allows enough flexibility
to assess either as small an area as that occupied by a redd or an entire
riffle of several hundred square meters. In both instances taking only
three samples may be adequate, with obvious implications on the accuracy
attained in each case. To assess reaches of an entire stream system
stretching several kilometers, the level of resolution need not be too
demanding. For example, the authors surveyed a two-kilometer reach of
Canal Creek in nearly four hours. They combined results of this visual
survey with two site estimates of gravel composition (Items 8A and 8B in
Table 1) to obtain the results shown in Table 2.
Table 2. STREAM REACH EVALUATION OF SPAWNING GRAVEL COMPOSITION IN
IN CANAL CREEK, JUNE 29, 1975.
Relative
coarseness
Cl
C
B
A
Al
Total:
Approx. mean
diameter (mm)
6
9
12
18
26
Approx. gravel
area in m
24
672
1191
768
137
2792
Percent of
total
1
24
43
27
5
100
Total stream length surveyed: 2130 m
Total stream reach covered as a result of beaverdam: 400 m
Approximate stream width: 2,5 m
Approximate spawning area: 50% of the reach
It appears that this level of effort may be entirely adequate in
many cases and should provide a general assessment of quality of
substrate with attached areal extent for the stream reach.
-------
THE ADEQUACY OF A SAMPLE WEIGHT
The question of sample weight must be addressed in terms of its
adequacy to assess a spawning site for the effects of sediments on success
of reproduction and development of salmonid fishes. It is evident that
there is considerable variability in data relating survival to geometric
mean. For example, at 50% survival (Figure 1), the mean geometric diameter
is 10 mm, but, due to the scatter in the data, a range of diameters from
7.5 mm to 12.5 mm could also lead to the same result. The level of
variation is more pronounced in the midrange of d . The true source
o
of variation can only partially be related to the procedural difficulties
in assessing the gravel composition. Natural variability within bed
material at spawning sites and within egg packets has been documented
by Koski (1966), Tagart (1976), Platts (1974, 1979), and Corely and
Burmeister (1978). Two-fold variation in the geometric mean even within
a single redd is not unusual. That alone can cause the scatter under
natural conditions. Difficulties in accurately estimating the number
of eggs deposited and enumerating emergent fry further contribute to
possible sources of errors. Consequently, the margin of error attributed
to d is probably rather small.
o
The problem of adequate sample weight may now be evaluated as
follows. If a gravel patch has a true mean geometric diameter equal to
d , how large a sample weight should we analyze to estimate d with
gt gt
reasonable accuracy, say to within ±10%? An experiment was conducted
in Oak Creek using a frame sampler 30x30x30 cm. Gravel was extracted
and placed randomly in five different containers marked 1 through 5.
The contents of each container were dried, sieved and analyzed. Results
were compiled for sample 1, samples 1 and 2, samples 1, 2 and 3, etc.,
each time increasing the sample weight, with the idea of attaining a
limit as the weight increased. Unfortunately, we did not take a sample
too small to be totally inadequate. Nevertheless, in this experiment,
d fluctuated mildly and tended to approach a limit, hopefully approxi-
o
mating the true value of d , as the sample weight became very large.
More specifically, these values were 14.4, 14.9, 14.7, 15.3, and 15.1 mm.
10
-------
100
90
80
cr 70
UJ
? 60
u_
H 50
a:
u
Q_
20
10
0
o A
A B
D C
dg(mm)
25
14
9
I 10
PARTICLE DIAMETER, d (mm)
100
Figure 3a. Particle size distribution for spawning gravels in Indian Creek, Siuslaw National Forest,
Oregon.
-------
99.99
99.9
99.8
99
98
95
90
o:
LU
H-
z
LU
o
IT
LU
QL
50
10
5
I
.5
.1
.05
.01
O A
B
C
I I I
Particle Characteristics (mm)
'16
'50
'84
'95
1.34 4.30 25.5 151.2 484.6 .958
.95 2.36 9.48 38.2 95.0 .804
.67 1.76 7.67 33.4 87.6 .950
o
o
o
o
o
CL
O
I I I I I I I I
I I I
I I I I I I I I I
.03 .05
.51 5 10
SIEVE OPENING (mm)
50 100
300
Figure 3b. Gravel composition in Indian Creek showing three textures,
-------
The results suggest that a sample size of 5 to 10 kg produced the
desired accuracy. Other important observations are (a) the patch
was indeed fairly homogenous as evidenced from analysis of individual
samples, (b) the size fraction between 50 to 76 mm was on the order of
5 to 10% of the total sample weight, and (c) an equivalent sample size
can be obtained with 6" core FRI (McNeil) sampler.
Because of these observations and the widespread use of FRI samplers,
one can generalize the experimental results as follows: (a) core diameter
should be two to three times the size of largest particles sampled, and
(b) the weight fraction of the largest particles (or the content of the
coarsest sieve when appropriate) should be on the order of 5 to 10% of
the total weight.
The adequacy of the sample weight obtained with a freezecore method
is discussed in the next sections. In general, it is determined by the
radial extent of the frozen core relative to the size of the largest
particles attached and by the ability to extract the core without losing
excessive amount of particles.
For application to a coarser substrate, a large core diameter must
be used. Gravel patches are seldom homogenous. There are pockets of
fine and coarse particles appearing randomly with depth and areal
directions. Therefore, the above rule must be applied in combination
with the visual estimation procedure discussed earlier.
The following experiments will demonstrate the heterogenous nature
of gravel patches in the Poverty spawning area in the South Fork Salmon
River, Idaho, and will also give an idea of adequate sample weight. The
Poverty area has been monitored for more than a decade using various
methods. Corley's data for 1976 show that the mean diameter is 13.3 mm
(corrected for the effects of wet sieving) and the range for mean
diameter is 7 mm to 23„7 mm. We compared 1978 measurements taken by
Corley in the Poverty area with the largest gravel sample ever taken in
that area or elsewhere by Platts (Figure 4). Platts1 sample size of
620 kg, which consisted of a typical redd, gives d ^23.3 mm. Corley's
o
13
-------
tr
UJ
100
90
80
70
E 60
LJ_
H- 50
o 40
or
£ 30
20
10
0
Platt's Freeze Core 620 kg (1978)
— Cor ley's 12" Core 25 kg (1978)
o Site 2-1
A Site 2-2
a Site 2-5
O Site 3-2
• Site 1-2
9mm < dg < 25 mm
.04 .1
I 10
SIEVE OPENING (mm)
100
Figure 4. Comparison between compositions of an entire redd and 12 inch core samples near redd,
-------
data taken near that sample give a range 9 mm < d < 24.5 mm.
o
Corley's samples were on the order of 25 to 45 kg taken with a 12" core.
Detailed vertical analyses of Platts1 sample demonstrate that the patch
was coarse throughout and, thus, perhaps an upper limit of gravel compo-
sition in Poverty area. Unfortunately, Corley did not use a sieve
greater than 25 mm opening and thus his data were extrapolated to obtain
d in Figure 2.
o
Now, according to Platts, particles were all smaller than 203 mm,
and less than 7% were greater than 127 mm. Corley's sampler, therefore,
satisfies the size selection rule stated above even if it captures the
stated proportion of large particles. On the other hand, the use of a 6"
core would be only marginally adequate, if not actually inadequate.
15
-------
METHODS OF OBTAINING GRAVEL SAMPLES
The primary purpose of developing these procedures is to obtain a
representative sample of the substrate to a depth used by spawning salmonids.
Theoretically, we wish to extract an undisturbed core of gravel. The two
most common methods are frozen core samples developed separately by Ryan
(1970) and Walkotton (1976) and grab (or manual) sampling techniques designed
by McNeil and Ahnell (I960),
In the freezecore method a metallic tube about one inch in diameter
is driven into the gravel. Liquid carbon dioxide (C02) is throttled
into the tube through a bank of small nozzles. The expansion of the
gas rapidly freezes interstitial water outside the tube, thereby attach-
ing a solid core of substrate materials to the tube, which is then
extracted for analysis. The dimensions of the core and the total
size of the sample can be varied by a combination of (a) depth of tube
penetration into the gravel, (b) length of time C02 is applied and
(c) use of more than one tube in a given area. Freezing efficiency is
inversely related to gravel density. Efficiency declines rapidly beyond
about 4 minutes of application of CO,,.
The manual sampling method consists of inserting a large diameter
tube (4 to 12 inches) into the gravel bed to a depth of 4 to 12 inches
and extracting by hand or scoop the gravel and sand inside the pipe.
An estimate of the suspended material that escapes the gravel sample
is obtained by retaining, for subsequent analysis, a subsample of the
water column in the pipe, once the contained water is thoroughly mixed.
A photographic method analyzing surface (or armor) material visible
through clear water was developed by Ritter and Helley (1969). Photo-
graphic prints of a stream bottom segment are analyzed with specialized
scanning equipment. These devices incorporate computation facilities
that enable counting, sizing, and even particle size distribution. Once
the system is set up and calibrated, photographic records of hundreds
of particles can be analyzed in a matter of minutes. This method is good
16
-------
for extremely large quantities of work but is restricted to the analysis
of the surface layer of gravel, hence the utility of this method is
limited.
The main advantages of the freezecore method are (a) the ability
to sample in deep water or under ice on frozen streams, (b) the routine
application of uniform procedures, i.e., duration of CCL application
and depth of core, and (c) the ability to analyze samples from different
depths within the substrate. Disadvantages are (a) the equipment weight
and field transport problems, (b} the cost of CCL recharge, (c) the
difficulty of sampling in gravel coarser than 32 to 64 mm in diameter
with a single probe, and (d) inability to sample from dry gravel patches,
and (e) disturbance during probe insertion and loss of particles during
probe removal.
Advantages of manual sampling are (a) simplicity of equipment and
procedure, (b) flexibility in modifying sample diameter with respect to
gravel characteristics, and (c) possibility of combining with benthic
invertebrate sampling., Disadvantages are (a) bias associated with different
operators who might extract the gravel selectively, including the suspended
fines segment, (b) difficulty in sampling in deep water, and (c) diffi-
culty of inserting the core into a coarse gravel bed»
The disadvantages of freezecore and manual sampling may be reduced
to acceptable levels. For example, Lotspiech and Reid (1979) used
steel tubes instead of copper to reduce problems of tube bending during
insertion and extraction of the frozen core. They also used aluminum
C02 tanks to minimize carrying weight while increasing refrigerant
capacity. To minimize operator bias with manual sampling all substrate
components must be removed to a pre-determined depth,, A scoop should
be used when possible.
This discussion relates primarily to the mechanical advantages and
disadvantages of various sampling methods. Some sampling bias can be
reduced by taking a very large sample,, Obviously all attempts to
minimize bias should be made before increasing sample size. Increasing
17
-------
sample size should not be used to disguise problems inherent in the
sampler itself.
The following case studies are presented to enable comparison of results
from freezecore with FRI samplers:
1) Berry Creek near Corvallis, Oregon has a very coarse substrate.
Five samples were taken in the following manner. After a spot was chosen
in the stream, a 12" diameter sampler was placed on the spot and a single
freezecore sample was extracted from within the 12" core sample, then
the remaining material was extracted. The data were analyzed separately
for the freezecore sample and in combination with the remaining parts of
the 12" core sample. Theoretically, the freezecore represented a subsample
of the 12" core sample. The experiment should demonstrate a direct
comparison of the two methods (Table 3).
Table 3. COMPARISON OF RESULTS FROM FREEZING FRI (McNEIL) SAMPLES.
Sample #
1
2
3
4
5
Mean
d mm
g
Freezecore
9.7
42
42
33.9
37
32.9
12" core
32.7
43.5
43.0
27.0
66
42.4
On the average, samples taken by the two methods are within 25% of
one another; individually they may differ by a factor greater than 3.
The 12" core samples averaged 25 kg each, the freezecore samples were
about 5 kg.
2) In a second experiment with a coarse substrate in the Rogue
River, 12" diameter core samples and tri-tube freeze samples (Lotspeich
18
-------
and Reid 1979) were obtained side by side. Eleven such samples were
collected and analyzed,, The average weights of the tri-tube samples and
12" cores were 13.3 and 25.4 kg with a standard deviation of 6.9 and
3.2 kg, respectively (Table 4).
Table 4. COMPARISON OF TRI-TUBE FREEZECORE AND 12" MANUAL CORE SAMPLES
TAKEN FROM ROGUE RIVER, OREGON,
Sample ID
Bridge Hole
Hatchery Site
Sand Hole
Big Butte
Mean
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
C
d mm
g
Tri-core
30,4
24.0
42.1
18.0
69.6
34.2
22.6
46.0
15.6
19_.3_
32.1
12" core
30.9
17.3
21.8
18.6
48.4
58.7
58.8
65.3
22.9
19. 5
35.0
On the average samples differed only about 10%. The tri-tube presents
a significant improvement over single tube freezecore, even though the
Rogue River presented a severe test of the system. Note that the
difference in the results of the methods is not always in the same
direction. Calculations presented by Lotspeich and Reid (1979) differ
slightly from those given here due to different estimation procedures.
The same 10% difference appears using their method as well.
3) Platts (1979) obtained 15 single freezecore samples in South
Fork Salmon River, Poverty area during 1977. There were considerable
variations in the sample weights as well as the geometric means. The
average sample weight was 5.1 kg with a standard deviation of 3.7 kg.
The average of the 15 geometric mean diameters was 34.6 mm with a 20.6 mm
19
-------
deviation from this mean. We attribute this difficulty to the incon-
sistency of sampling with a freezecore in a relatively coarse substrate.
Because of this scatter, the size fractions from all samples were combined
to obtain an average geometric mean equal to 20.4 mm. This is within the
range of results (7 < d < 23 „ 7 mm and average = 13.3 mm) obtained by
o
Corley using 12" core samples in 1976. Platts1 freezecore samples were
obtained in egg pockets and this may explain the difference between the
two means. The aggregates of Platts1 single freezecore samples in egg
pockets during 1977 agree well with the entire redd sample taken in 1978.
4) There have been many attempts to directly compare freezecore
samples with 6" core samples. Among these are the unpublished work of
Cederholm and yet to be published work of Koski. Both works were restricted
to relatively fine artificial gravel mixes. Both indicate single freeze-
cores produced satisfactory results under these conditions.
Ringler (1970) in his Master's thesis compared freezecore samples
with 6" core samples both obtained from redds in Drift Creek. He found
that the freezecore nearly always underestimated the fines smaller than
083 mm and 3,3 mm.
We will conclude, based on the analysis of the foregoing case studies,
that: (a) by combining the analysis of many freezecore samples taken from
a spawning site, a reasonable estimate of the mean composition of that
site is obtainable, (b) single freezecore samples, particularly if taken
in a coarse substrate with a single tube may not be a good representation
of a. gravel patch, and (c) it is expected that a good representation
of the patch over the range of grain size up to 100 mm substrate is
obtained by a tri-core method.
20
-------
ANALYSIS OF GRAVEL—WET SIEVING
Access to spawning areas with motorized vehicles is not always
possible and transporting large gravel samples from the stream bank
to the vehicle often presents a problem. Therefore, serious consideration
should be given to on-site analysis by wet sieving the gravel„
Equipment required for wet sieving includes a set of sieves, a
bucket with an overflow nozzle and a graduated cylinder. In general,
it is desirable that the sieve sizes should represent a geometric
progression (e.g. 128, 64, 32, 16, 8, 0... 0.064 nun). However, the
specific sizes chosen will depend upon the actual stream being sampled
and the need to maintain consistency of sizes with past sampling or
other comparative work. If, for the selected sieve series, a large
proportion of the material collects on one sieve, an additional,
coarser sieve may be added to facilitate the sieving process.
The content of the 4-mm and coarser sieves can be wet sieved and
analyzed volumetrically in the field using the bucket and graduated
cylinder. Particles retained on all sieves on will also contain some
interstitial and surface water,, The amount will vary with particle size
and become quite significant at sizes below 4 mm. To avoid introducing
excessive errors in the volumetric determination, the sieved samples should
be allowed to drain before the volumetric measurements are made (draining
with sieves inclined and the material periodically turned over will
expedite this process). The contents of the fine sieves, i.e. size ranges
less than 4 mm, may be either processed in the field or taken to the
laboratory for dry weight analysis. This also applies to particles passing
the smallest sieve used. The error introduced by wet sieving, because of
the water present, can be corrected by using data in Table 50
If dry sieving is used for particles smaller than 4 mm, the two sets
of data must be combined. Combining the volumetric and gravimetric
analysis requires knowledge of average gravel density. For this purpose,
the dry contents of the 2 mm sieve should be used for rock density
21
-------
Table 5. WATER GAINED IN A WET SIEVING PROCESS AND CORRECTION FACTOR
FOR VOLUMETRIC DATA.*
Sieve
inches
3
2
1
1/2
1/4
1/8
1/16
1/32
1/64
1/128
1/512
size
nun
76,2
64
50,8
32
25,4
16
12.7
8
6.35
4
3.18
2.0
1.59
1.0
,79
.5
.40
.25
,20
.125
,10
.063
Gram
Gram
P=2.2
.02
.02
.02
.02
.03
.03
.04
.05
.05
.07
.08
.10
oil
.13
.15
.19
.21
.27
.30
038
o43
.54
water
dry
P=2.
.01
.02
.02
.02
.02
.03
.03
.04
.05
,06
.07
.09
.10
.12
.14
.18
.20
025
.28
.35
.39
.49
gained
gravel
6 p=2.9
.01
.01
.02
.02
.02
.03
.03
.04
.05
,06
.07
.08
,09
.12
.13
.17
.19
.23
.26
.33
.37
.47
Correction
to wet
P=2.2
.97
.96
.96
.95
.94
.93
.92
.91
.89
.87
.86
.83
.81
.77
.75
.70
.68
.63
.60
.54
.52
.46
factor
sieved
P=2.6
.96
.96
.96
.95
.94
.93
.92
.90
.88
.86
.85
.81
.80
.76
.73
.69
.66
.61
.58
.52
.50
.44
applied
gravel
P=2.9
.96
.96
.95
,94
.94
o92
.91
.89
.88
.85
.84
.81
.79
.75
.72
.67
.65
.59
.57
.51
.48
.42
* The values in this table have been obtained from detailed analysis of
substrate ranging from 0.63 mm to large gravel based on unpublished
work of Thompkins, Shirazi, and Klingeman. Example: The volumetric
displacement of a 2-mm sieve is 300 cm3. From prior analysis, the
estimate of the gravel density is known to be 2.69 g/cm3. The dry
weight of the gravel according to the table is 300 x .81 = 243 g.
22
-------
determination by simply dividing the dry weight of the material in grams
by its displaced volume of water in cubic centimeters. This requires
bringing a sample of such material to the laboratory for analysis.
Unpublished data from Klingeman show that the choice of 2 mm for density
determination is reasonable, although there is a slight change of density
with particle sizes used. The error is on the order of one percent of the
mean for a range of 14 sieve sizes. Correspondence of the density of 2 mm
and larger particles should be confirmed where likelihood of difference
is apparent.
23
-------
CALCULATION OF SUBSTRATE STATISTICS
Examples of three procedures for calculting the geometric mean
diameter and the geometric variance of two samples of gravel are given
in this section for the purpose of demonstrating the relative effort
needed and the relative accuracy obtainable with each procedure. The
gravel samples A, B, and C were obtained from Indian Creek. They are
plotted on semi-logarithmic scales in Figure 3a.
LEAST SQUARES GRAPHICAL METHOD
The graph of sample A is shown replotted in Figure 3b on a log-
probability paper. The straight line passing through the data is the
2
least squares fit with a coefficient of determination r equal to
0.958 which can be interpreted as the test of lognormality. The
2
average r for 100 samples was 93 which is very good indication
that spawning gravel is lognormally distributed. The data for sample
B are not shown on the plot to avoid crowding. The coefficient of
determination for the least squares linear fit to that set of data is
0.804.
The details of this procedure are listed in Table 6. Columns one
and two are the original data listed in terms of weight percentiles.
Column three (designated X) is the log transform of column one. Column
four (designated Y) is the inverse probability transform of column two.
The latter can be obtained from tabulated standardized normal distribution
function available in textbooks of statistics. They also can be calculated
with small programmable calculators. Next, Y is regressed over X. The
linear equation now can be used to obtain all statistics as listed. Note
that the percent fines, for example, less than 3.3 mm can be calculated
from the equation, thereby relating that point statistically to the entire
distribution. The procedure reduces the variability, otherwise unavoidable,
if the data were used directly. This method yields the following:
d=25.5mm a =5.93
gA gA
d = 9.48 mm a = 4.02
% gB
24
-------
Table 6. ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE OF LEAST SQUARE/GRAPHICAL PROCEDURE FOR
SAMPLE A IN INDIAN CREEK, OREGON.
Sieve opening
d mm
(D
127
102
64
32
16
8
4
2
1
.5
.25
.125
.063
Percent finer
F(d)
(2)
100
82.6
80.6
44.0
26.6
16.8
10.3
7.53
5.60
3.01
.67
.17
0
X = 1.407 + .777 Y
logio d
X
(3)
2.009
1.806
1.505
1.204
.909
.602
.301
0
-.301
-.602
-.902
r2 = .958
Y
(4)
.938
.863
-.151
-.625
-.962
-1.265
-1.458
-1.590
-1.880
-2.473
-2.929
d5 = 1.34 mm
d,,. = 4.30 mm
16
d-- = 25.50 mm
dg4 = 151.21 mm
d = 484.33 mm
d = d..,. = 25.5 m
g 50
v — j — »j. y+j
8 d50
% Fines
-------
QUANTILE GRAPHICAL METHOD
A common, simple graphical procedure consists of estimating directly
from the data the diameters at the 84th percentile (i.e. d0.) and at
84
the 16th percentile (i.e. d.. ,) of the distribution. The geometric mean
and the geometric variance is then:
v
ag = / d84/d!6
For the two samples given above, we have
d = 104 x 7.4 = 27.7 a = 104/7.4 = 3.8
SA SA
d = 50 x 3.8 = 13.8 a = 50/3.8 = 3.6
8B
METHODS OF MOMENTS
The details of this method are described in Table 7. It consists
of taking the n root of the product of n numbers as required by
definition of the geometric mean. The procedure for calculating the
geometric variance is also given. For the two samples
d = 25.5 mm a 4.0
*A §A
d = 14.7 mm a = 4.1
gB SB
CHOICE OF METHODS
Considering both the adequacy of the theoretical basis as well as
the simplicity in procedure, the quantile graphical method should be
favored over the others. The least squares method is more precise in
calculating the geometric variance than the second method, however, it
is difficult to assess the theoretical adequacy of the third method
from this aspect„ At times it might be necessary to obtain a systematic
estimation of the geometric variance so that the entire distribution,
including back-calculation of percent fine becomes possible. In that
case the first procedure is recommended. For monitoring and assessment
objectives the quantile graphical method of calculation is quite adequate
(if d is needed) and is the suggested procedure.
6
26
-------
Table 7. CALCULATION OF GEOMETRIC MEANS AND GEOMETRIC VARIANCE BY THE METHOD OF MOMENTS.
N3
••J
Sieve
Range
(D
d
mm
127
102-127
64-102
32-64
16-32
8.0-16
4.0-8.0
2.0-4.0
1.0-2.0
.5-1.0
.25-. 5
.125-. 25
.063-. 125
Size
Midpoint
(2)
dm
mm
114.5
83.0
48.0
24.0
12.0
6.0
3.0
1.50
.750
.375
.188
.094
d
Sample A
(3)
f
.1737
.0201
.3660
.1744
.0983
.0650
.0272
.0194
.0258
.0235
.0050
.0017
1.000
= ec =
5
=
(4)
P
% finer
100.0
82.63
80.63
44.02
26.59
16.76
10.26
7.53
5.60
3.01
0.67
0.17
-
3.239
e
25.508 mm
(5)
f(ln dm)
.823
.089
1.417
.554
.244
.116
.030
.008
-.007
-.023
-.008
-.004
£5=3.239,
(6) ?
f(ln dmr
3.904
.392
5.485
1.761
.607
.209
.033
.003
.002
.023
.014
.010
£5^12.442
d = er
gB £
(7)
f
.0540
.3010
.2260
.1490
.1070
.0480
.0360
.0349
.0335
.0083
.0023
1.000
2.689
= e
= 14.720
Sample
(8)
P
% finer
100.0
94.60
64.50
41.90
27.0
16.30
11.50
7.90
4.41
1.06
.23
-
mm
B
(9)
f(ln dm)
.239
1.165
.718
.370
.192
.053
.015
-.010
-.033
-.014
-.005
£9=2.689,
(10)
f(ln dm)2
1.054
4.511
2.283
.920
.344
.058
.006
.003
.032
.023
.013
£lO=9. 246
= exp
= exp
1.951 . „.-
= e = 4.042
2.016 . --,
= e = 4.136
-------
ESTIMATING LOCALIZED AND STREAMWIDE IMPACTS
The ultimate goals of substrate monitoring are to relate watershed
processes and land use to substrate conditions and to assess the possible
impact of accelerated erosion on spawning habitat, both locally in one
or more riffles as well as more extensively for an entire stream system.
The parameters used as measures of this impact can be classified in the
categories: (a) changes in the area of spawning gravel, i.e. the change
in the available habitat, and (b) changes in the composition of the
gravel, i.e. the quality of the habitat. For the latter measure the
geometric mean diameter d is assumed to be a sufficient indicator.
&
The extent of actual and potential spawning areas for the species
of interest can be obtained through visual inspection and areal measure-
ment in the stream reach. The quality of these spawning areas can then
be determined by using the sampling procedures previously outlined
in this document.
To demonstrate how this information can be used to assess stream-
wide impacts examine Table 8 which contains hypothetical data for
spawning gravel quality and quantity in areas on Dream Creek prior to a
landslide in 1966. Throughout the 4 miles of this creek the spawning
2
gravel, totaling 510 m , had a mean d of 12.5 mm, equivalent to
o
predicted average egg survival of 62%. Table 8 also shows the same
type of information obtained by monitoring after the landslide. Note
that, though the quality of the gravel was reduced (d =8.3 mm), the
§2 2
total available spawning area was increased from 510 m to 540 m and
the overall predicted average survival was reduced to 33%. If the number
of spawning fish and number of eggs deposited in Dream Creek remained
approximately the same after the landslide, the 34% reduction in d
o
corresponds to a 47% reduction in the number of emerging fry produced by
the system.
28
-------
Table 8. SPAWNING GRAVEL AREA AND QUALITY BEFORE AND AFTER LANDSLIDE
OF 1966 IN DREAM CREEK.*
Mile Post
1
2
3
4
Total or
mean
Area
Before
100
300
50
60
510
2
m
After
60
300
100
80
540
d
g
Before
13
10
12
15
12.5
mm
After
6
8
9
10
8.3
% Survival
Before
66
45
58
79
62
After
19
31
38
45
33
hypothetical data.
EVALUATION OF STREAM SYSTEMS
The geology and morphology of watersheds strongly influence sub-
strate composition in the stream systems draining them. For this
reason one would not expect all spawning gravels in streams unaffected
by cultural activities to be of the highest quality. A hypothetical
example is provided by Figure 5, which demonstrates the areal extent of
gravels of different quality as determined by measurements of d . All
&
of these stream systems are relatively undisturbed by man, yet the
total stream area suitable for salmonid spawning (that expected to yield
less than 50% egg survival) varies from approximately 8% in Cascadia
Creek to approximately 77% in Flynn Creek.
Three important qualifications must be introduced in this inter-
pretation to complete the picture. One is that the total area of
spawning gravel of a particular quality in one system could be many
times greater than the second system, even if percentages are alike.
Thus, an additional column supplementing this information must be
provided in the real situation to enable comparison of one system with
another. The second qualification is that the adequacy of the habitat
differs with the species using the habitat. An important aspect of
species differences relating to survival is size. For this reason,
29
-------
100
UJ
or
80
o 60
u.
o
I-
Ld
0
cr
LU
CL
40
Q
Estimated Embryo Survival
0-25%
A—& Flynn Creek
D—a South Fork Salmon River
o—o Cascadia Creek
0
8
12
16
20 24
28
32 36 40 44 48
MEAN GEOMETRIC DIAMETER (dg)
Figure 5. Hypothetical assessment of quality and quantity of spawning habitat in three stream-watershed
sys terns.
-------
interpretation of quality is best made with respect to a transformed
scalar d /d , i.e. in terms of multiples of egg diameter d , such
as in Figure 2. The third, and perhaps the most important qualification
is that any implied adequacy of quality of habitat must relate to a
baseline condition in the absence of accelerated erosion. It is not
unusual to find a natural substrate of small mean diameter producing
low survival. In this case, the baseline that can be used for comparison
is, as expected, rather low as well. In some stream systems the salmonids,
successfully adapting to the existing local environment, may maintain
relatively high population levels in the presence of rather low embryo
survival rates which are the result of the long term existence of marginal
baseline substrate conditions. Additional mortalities caused by
reducing baseline conditions is expected to be deleterious to the
population, however.
31
-------
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
The study of salmonid spawning habitats or habitats potentially
usable for spawning may provide a meaningful indicator of watershed
characteristics because stream substrate conditions integrate many
aspects of climate, vegetation, soil type, land form and human activities.
This paper provides a unifying methodology for sampling stream substrates
and applying that methodology to the monitoring of substrate quality
and quantity. The mean geometric particle diameter (d ) provides a
o
convenient and theoretically sound parameter that expresses the entire
range of the particle distribution and effectively relates particle
size to salmonid embryo survival. Thus d is preferred to percent
o
fines because it is biologically meaningful, sensitive to changes in
distribution and, most important, provides a theoretical basis for
substrate analysis by considering the entire spectrum of size composition.
In this respect particle size distribution is taken as tending toward
log-normality. Either manual core or freezecore samplers may be adequate
when used properly. Sampling recommendations include the following:
(1) The range of coarseness of spawning or potentially adequate
spawning substrates can be identified visually as a basis for selecting
sample locations.
(2) Either manual core or freeze core samples provide adequate
samples when used properly.
(3) The diameter of FRI (McNeil) type samplers should be two to
three times the diameter of the largest particle sampled. The 12-inch
(30 cm) is suitable for a broad range of typical substrate coarseness.
(4) Single freeze cores or manual cores less than 15 cm in diameter
may give inadequate sample size in coarse substrates.
(5) For relatively fine substrates, 5-10 kg sample size is adequate
but this value should be increased when increasing coarseness is encountered,
(6) Sample depth should be 25 cm.
(7) The number of samples taken depends on variability and extent
of area sampled. For many smaller spawning streams a single riffle area
may often be well represented by one sample from each of three categories
of coarseness.
32
-------
(8) Sieve series should follow the series in mm from 64, 32, 16,
8, etc. down to .063. Where finer particles comprise an important fraction
they should be retained and determined by any of the several standard-
ized methods.
(9) Water retention on sieved portions should be reduced by
draining prior to volumetric analysis.
(10) On-site wet sieving is recommended for size groups greater
than 4 mm followed by volume determination using the water displacement technique.
(11) Particle size should be expressed as d and determined by
-
d = y d d1 , or other suitable methods as described in the text.
on the investigator's objectives.
(12) By combining visual estimation and actual sampling the quality
and areal extent of the various categories of coarseness may be estimated
for a single riffle, a stream section, or an entire stream system, depending
(13) For example, assessment of habitat quality and quantity of
spawning gravels could be made on the basis of the d categories of
o
greater than 15.25, 15.25 to 10.75, 10.75 to 7.0 and 7.0 mm, respectively,
rated in terms of embryo survival estimates of 80 or greater, 80-50,
50-25 and 25 percent or less. Comparison between existing and the expected
normal background sediment characteristics will provide the basis to
assess extent and quality of spawning habitats.
In conclusion, it remains to be stated and emphasized that spawning
habitat analysis and assessment is studied here as an avenue to better
understanding of the more general driving elements that cause and maintain
the spawning habitat. These elements have their roots in the watershed
itselfo Fish habitat and therefore fish populations and the assemblage
of other organisms dependent on the gravel environment respond to these
driving forces, but may be adversely influenced by man's activities on
them. Programs to monitor stream gravel conditions can therefore be
a significant aspect in linking the watershed and the stream environments.
33
-------
REFERENCES
Cederholm, C.J. and L.C. Lestelle. 1974. Observations on the effects
of landslide siltation on salmon and trout resources of the Clear
Water River, Jefferson County, Washington, 1972-1973, Final Report,
Part I, FRI-UW-7404, April 1974. Fisheries Research Inst., Univ.
Washington, Seattle. 133 pp.
Cederholm, C.J., W.J. Scarlett, and E.G. Salo. 1977. Salmon spawning
gravel composition data summary from the Clearwater River and
tributaries, Jefferson County, Washington, 1972-1976. Fisheries
Research Inst. Circ. 77-1, Univ. Washington, Seattle. 135 pp.
Cooper, A.C. 1969. The effect of transported stream sediments on
the survival of sockeye and pink salmon eggs and alevin. Internat.
Pace Salmon Fish. Comm. Bull. XVIII, New Westminster, B.C., Canada.
71 pp.
Corley, D0R., and L.A. Burmeister. 1978. Fishery habitat survey of
the South Fork Salmon River, 1977. Boise § Payette National Forests,
U.S. For. Serv., 1075 Park Blvd., Boise, ID 83706. 90 pp.
Iwamoto, R.No, E«0. Salo, M.A. Madej, and R.L. McComas. 1978. Sediment
and water quality: A review of the literature including a suggested
approach for water quality criteria, EPA 910/9-78-048, USEPA
Region X, 1200 Sixth Ave., Seattle, Wash., Feb. 1978. 150 pp.
Koski, K.V. 1966. The survival of coho salmon from egg deposition to
emergence in three Oregon coastal streams. M.S. Thesis, Oregon
State Univ., Corvallis. 84 pp.
Lotspeich, F. 1978. Biological significance of fluvial processes in
the lotic environment. USEPA, Corvallis Environmental Research
Laboratory Working Paper CERL-042. Corvallis, Oregon.
Lotspeich, F., and B. Reid. 1979. A tri-tube freezecore procedure for
sampling stream gravels. Submitted to Prog. Fish-Cult. 12 pp.
McNeil, W.J., and W.R. Ahnell. 1960. Measurement of gravel composition
of salmon stream beds, College of Fisheries Circ. #120, Univ.
Washington, Seattle.
Phillips, R.Wo, R.L. Lantz, E.W. Claire, and J.R. Moring. 1975. Some
effects of gravel mixtures on emergence of coho salmon and steelhead
trout fry. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 104(3):461-466.
35
-------
Platts, W.S. 1974. Geomorphic and aquatic conditions influencing
salmonids and stream classification—with application to ecosystem
classification. USDA, For0 Serv., Surface Environ, and Mining
Proj. R. Billings, Montana. 200 pp.
Platts, W.S0, M.A. Shirazi, and D.H. Lewis. 1979. Sediment particle
sizes used by salmon for spawning, and methods for evaluation.
EPA-600/3-79-043. April 1979. USEPA, Corvallis Environmental
Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon. 32 pp.
Ringler, N.H. 1970. Effects of logging in the spawning bed environment
in two Oregon coastal streams. M.S, Thesis, Oregon State Univ.,
CorvalliSo 96 pp.
Ritter, J.R,, and E.J. Helley, 1969. Optical method for determining
particle size of coarse sediment. Techniques of Water Resources
Investigation, U.S0 Geol. Surv, Book 5,
Ryan, P. 1970. Design and operation of an in situ frozen core gravel
sampler. Dept. Fisheries and Forestry, Pacific Station, Canada.
Shirazi, M»A. 1979. A unified analysis of embryonic survival of
salmonids. Unpublished,
Shirazi, M.A., D.H. Lewis, and W.K. Seim. 1979. Monitoring spawning
gravel in managed forested watersheds, a proposed procedure.
EPA-600/3-79-014. Feb. 1979. USEPA, Corvallis Environmental
Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon. 13 pp.
Tagart, J.V. 1976. The survival from egg deposition to emergence of
coho salmon in the Clear Water River, Jefferson County, Washington.
M.S. Thesis, Univ, Washington, Seattle, 101 pp.
Thompkins, C., M.A, Shirazi, and P, Klingeman. 1979. Correction to
a wet-sieving analysis of gravel. Unpublished.
Walkotten, W.J. 1976, An improved technique for freeze sampling
streambed sediments. USDA For. Serv. kes. Note PNW-281, Pacific
Northwest For. and Range Exp. Stn., Portland. 11 pp.
36
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
REPORT NO.
_EPA-600/3-79-109
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
'4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
A STREAM SYSTEMS EVALUATION--AN EMPHASIS ON SPAWNING
HABITAT FOR SALMONIDS
5. REPORT DATE
October 1979 issuing date
16. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Mostafa A. Shirazi and Wayne K. Seim
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Env.Res.Lab.-Corvallis and Dept. Fisheries S Wildlife
Off.of Res. S Develop. Oregon State University
Envirn. Prot. Agency Corvallis, OR 97331
Corvallis, OR 97330
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Research Laboratory--Corvallis
Office of Research and Development
Environmental Protection Agency
- Corvallis. OR 97330
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
inhouse
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/02
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Contact: Mostafa A. Shirazi, Corvallis,
OR 97330 503-757-4751 (FTS 420-4751)
"^"ABSTRACT '
As a result of silvicultural activities in the Pacific Northwest, various
levels of sediments and debris enter the streams, often degrading spawning
substrate of salmonid fishes. Simple but reliable procedures are needed
to monitor spawning gravels to assess the level of these impacts. This
paper presents a preliminary rationale for conducting a monitoring program
with the objective of assessing the level of sedimentation impact both
locally in a given stream spawning site as well as more generally for the
entire stream that might be impacted by watershed management activities.
|17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
substrate
sediments
salmon
spawning habitat
gravelbed stream
monitoring
spawning habitat
assessment
08/F
08/H
06/F
. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to public
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
44
20. Seci 'RITY CLASS (This page)
unclassified
22. PRICE
Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77) PREVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE
37
------- |