1

CREEKS & COMMUNITIES & CREEKS & COMMUNITIES & RIPARIAN PROPER RIPARIAN PROPER

FUNCTIONING CONDITIONFUNCTIONING CONDITION

IntroductionIntroduction

2

The mediocre teacher tells. The good teacher explains. The superior teacher demonstrates. The great teacher inspires.

William A. Ward

3

Overview

Overview of Creeks & Communities Strategy

What PFC is – What PFC does?

What PFC isn’t – What it does not do?

Inventory & Monitoring/Qualitative & Quantitative

Key Definitions

Site Potential, Pre-Work, Stratification

General Instructions for PFC Assessment

4

The National Riparian Strategy:Background and Original Mission

1996: BLM &USFS agreed to implement interagency strategy to accelerate restoration & management of riparian-wetland areas. NRCS became a principal partner

Mission was to achieve healthy streams by bringing people together using a common vocabulary (still is) – PFC became the foundational tool

5

Background and Original Mission

Interagency/Interdisciplinary team was established in 1996 to direct implementation of this strategy – the National Riparian Service Team (NRST – based in Prineville, Oregon)

Established a Riparian Coordination Network (RCN) across the 11 western states

6

Riparian Coordination Network

NRST

InteragencyTraining Cadres ID Coordinator: Smith

Agency Riparian Coordinators

Smith BLM, IDRick Forsman, Rick Hopson, R4-FS

Ensure Support To State Cadres

Coordination and Integration With Existing Programs

Coordinate To Ensure Participation of:

Individuals From Outside agencies

Conservation and Industry Groups

Affected Communities

Coordinate On Training Activities

7

Strategy Evaluation & Findings (2002)

250 briefings/presentations have reached between 8,000-9,000 people

NRST & State Cadres have conducted over 325 training sessions for over 10,000 people

NRST has made over 125 service trips for technical assistance to over 2,500 people

Strategy revised following evaluation “Creeks & Communities” – refines and improves original 1996 strategy

8

State Cadre Charge:State Cadre Charge:

To conduct training designed to provide people with diverse interests and backgrounds, a shared understanding of riparian-wetland function and the opportunity to build relationships through a reliance on communication and group problem solving

9

Natural Riparian Resources

VegetationSoil, Landscape

Water

10

Riparian Proper Functioning Condition (PFC)

Term “PFC” is used in two ways: Condition Description: An on-the-ground condition of

riparian-wetland areas usually determined by completing the “PFC” assessment process or method (quantitative data can & should be used to validate checklist items & ratings where necessary/available)

How the checklist items were addressed results in a

selected rating category of PFC, FAR, or NF

Qualitative Method for assessing the physical functioning of riparian-wetland areas

11

The PFC concept is:

Based on the fact that systems need to be functional before they can produce any aquatic or riparian values – as such, PFC is a prerequisite for achieving desired conditions

12

The PFC Assessment

Was developed over several years (starting in 1988) by ID Team from BLM, USFWS, and NRCS and peer reviewed

13

As an assessment method, PFC:

Is a first level initial qualitative assessment that is based on quantitative dataIs identified by the FS & BLM as the “starting point – the minimum level of assessment for riparian areas” (TR 1737-15, page 4)

14

As a condition description, PFC describes:

How well the physical processes are workingHow well the riparian-wetland area will withstand the energies of a 25 to 30 year eventThe system’s ability to maintain and produce both physical and biological values

15

Provides a Condition Description

Is a Communication Tool/Common Vocabulary

Provide a general/broad scale assessment of the condition of riparian/wetland areas

“Coarse filter” used to prioritize management, restoration & monitoring efforts

What is the Intent of the PFC Assessment?

16

The PFC Assessment Method is intended to be performed by:

“An interdisciplinary team with local, on-the-ground experience in the kind of quantitative techniques that support the PFC checklist”

(TR-1737-15, page 1)

17

The PFC process helps

Determine potential and capability since checklist items are addressed based on the potential & capability of the reachDefine issues that need to be addressedDetermine appropriate monitoringHelp select appropriate management practicesDetermine where to place Designated Monitoring Areas (DMAs)

18

PFC is Designed for

Riparian-wetland areas which includes intermittent and interrupted systems

Is not appropriate for ephemeral systems since they are not riparian-wetland areas

19

PFC is not

A replacement for biological inventory or monitoring protocols

The only methodology for determining the health of riparian or aquatic components of the riparian-wetland area

20

PFC does not usually equate to:

Potential Natural Community (PNC)Desired Plant Community (DPC)Desired Future Condition (DFC)

21

PFC does not replace existing

Forest Plan Standards or Guidelines

BLM Land Use Plan Decisions

Legal Requirements, e.g., ESA, CWA

22

PFC

Is not the end point for management …remember that Proper Functioning Condition is a precursor to desired conditions. Agencies are obligated to manage for at least a condition of “Proper Functioning.”

In BLM, “the objective is to achieve an advanced ecological status except where resource management objectives… would require an earlier succession stage.”

23

The PFC Assessment Method is not to be used to:

Identify causes of resource problemsIndependently make grazing & other management changesIndependently generate national or regional assessments of riparian condition

24

The PFC Assessment Method is not to be used to:

Monitor Trend – PFC is too coarse of a tool to detect most changes in condition (trend) – UNLESS the change is DRAMATIC enough to be observable in photos

25

Monitoring

“The orderly collection, analysis, and interpretation of resource data to evaluate progress towards meeting resource objectives.” Monitoring can be qualitative or quantitative

26

Monitoring

Qualitative Monitoring: Based on visual observations of attributes to estimate/document progress or change (e.g. photos or possibly PFC)Quantitative Monitoring: Based on direct and/or indirect measurements of attributes to determine condition and progress or change (e.g. Monitoring Stream Channels & Riparian Vegetation). Some methods have attributes of both

Assigning weighted numbers to qualitative estimates of attributes & processes, adding up the numbers, and assigning a condition category is not quantitative monitoring

27

Assessments & Monitoring

Parallels human health assessment The first-level diagnosis – broad scale

Visible indicators Qualitative Subjective Requires high level of professional ability

The second level diagnosis - DMA Measured indicators Quantitative Objective Trained technicians can perform

Monitoring

Inventory

28

Inventory vs Monitoring

Inventory Monitoring

Purpose Locate issues – reaches of importance

Answer key questions about the issues

Methods PFC

R4 Riparian Evaluation

MIM, Winward

PIBO

Scale Whole stream or stream system

Reach

Designated monitoring area (DMA)

Find and document rationale for selection

Sample and document trends towards/away achieving objectives

When Planning Implementation

Precision/accuracy Low High

Who Professionals Technicians or professionals

29

Monitoring

Monitoring should be done to answer a particular question or issue

Tailor the monitoring method to the nature of the question Broad/general/low controversy question/likely dramatic

change = broad/general/coarse monitoring method Detailed/specific/high controversy question/subtle

change = detailed/specific/fine monitoring method

TAILOR THE SIZE OF THE ANSWER TO THE SIZE OF THE QUESTION

30

Quantitative Monitoring & PFC

Monitoring data can help to support a PFC assessment…where quantitative monitoring data is available, it should be used to validate the assessmentWhere the response to one of the PFC items is in question, quantitative monitoring data can help resolve the issue

31

Key Definitions

32

Wetland

Areas inundated or saturated by surface or ground water Supports a prevalence of vegetation suited to saturated soilsIncludes marshes, shallow swamps, sloughs, lakeshores, wet meadows, springs, seeps, and riparian areas

33

Riparian Area

Transition between the aquatic (saturated) and upland areasVegetation and physical (soil) characteristics reflect the influence of permanent surface or ground waterLand along streams, ponds, marshes, springs, and seeps are examples

34

Riparian-Wetland Types

Lotic Flowing water systems

(streams) Defined channel Gradient

Lentic Standing surface water

Lakes, reservoirs, ponds, marshes

Ground Water Seeps and springs Bogs and wet meadows

35

Potential

The highest ecological status an area can attain with little influence by man

36

Capability

The highest ecological status a riparian-wetland area can attain given major influences by man affecting the hydrologic processes, e.g. large dam, diversions, & highways

37

Perennial Stream

A stream that flows continuously. Perennial streams are generally associated with a water table in the localities through which they flow

38

Intermittent or Seasonal Stream

A stream that flows only at certain times of the year when it receives water from springs or from some surface source such as melting snow in mountainous areas

39

Ephemeral Stream

A stream that flows only in direct response to precipitation, and whose channel is above the water table at all times

Meinzer (1923) suggests that “intermittent” streams be arbitrarily restricted to streams that flow continuously for at least 30 days and “ephemeral be restricted to those that do not flow continuously for at least 30 days

40

Interrupted Stream

A stream with discontinuities in space (surfaces and subs at various locations along a length of channel)

41

Flow Regime & PotentialThe flow regime will have a considerable influence on stream or site potential. Therefore, determining potential of intermittent systems is considerably more complex

42

Normal channel dynamics

Adjustments as a part of normal channel/riparian function

Incremental or periodic adjustments under high flow conditions

Involves channel & riparian interaction

Dynamic equilibrium or stable state

43

Rapid channel adjustment

Channel adjustments that occur rapidly in response to sudden changes Water discharge Sediment delivery Channel/floodplain conditions Vegetation changes

Important to manage such that streams are more resistant to rapid channel adjustment (i.e. condition of PFC)

44

Proper Functioning Condition (lotic)

Riparian-wetland areas are functioning properly when adequate vegetation, landform, or large woody debris is present to dissipate stream energy associated with high water flows,

45

Proper Functioning Condition (lotic)

thereby: : reduce erosion filter sediment capture bedload aid floodplain development improve flood-water retention improve ground water recharge stabilize stream banks develop root masses that stabilize streambanks

46

Proper Functioning Condition–PFC (lotic)

Resulting in improved water quality habitat, water depth, duration, and

temperature for fish production waterfowl breeding and other uses greater biodiversity

47

Functional-at-Risk

Riparian-wetland areas that are in functional condition, but an existing soil, water, or vegetation attribute makes them susceptible to degradation

48

Nonfunctional

Riparian-wetland areas that clearly are NOT providing adequate vegetation, landform, or large woody debris to dissipate stream energy associated with high flows, and thus are not reducing erosion, improving water quality, etc.

49

The physical aspects of a riparian-The physical aspects of a riparian-wetland area have to be in working wetland area have to be in working order to sustain the characteristics order to sustain the characteristics that provide riparian/wetland that provide riparian/wetland resource values.resource values.

““If you build it...they will come!”If you build it...they will come!”

Preparing to do a PFC Preparing to do a PFC AssessmentAssessment

51

Preparing to do aRiparian PFC Assessment

Learn all we can about riparian-wetland areaUnderstand site potentialCollect existing information on streamObtain maps, aerial photos, inventories, etc.Complete a preliminary stratification

52

Understanding Site Potential

System does not have to be at its potential for an attribute in order to receive a “Yes” answer

It only has to be evaluated considering its potential

53

Attributes and Process List (lotic)

Hydrogeomorphic Ground water discharge Active floodplain Ground-water recharge Flood storage & release Flood modification Bankfull width Width/depth ratio Sinuosity Gradient Stream power Hydraulic controls Bed elevation

Vegetation Community types Community type distribution Surface Density Canopy Recruitment/reproduction Survival Community dynamics &

succession Sediment

54

Attributes and Process List (lotic)

Erosion/Deposition Bank stability Bed stability (bed transport

rate) Depositional features

Soils Soil type Distribution of

aerobic/anaerobic soils Capillarity Annual pattern of soil

water states

55

Must understand site potential!

Same stream & channel type – different vegetation potential

56

Willow EcologyDifferent willow species have different habitat requirements which can vary across geographic areas

57

Stratification

Purpose To divide into reaches defined by similar

characteristics Involves using aerial photos, maps, GIS, to

delineate into reaches that share common attributes/processes

Defines starting-end points for assessment Rule of Thumb: Don’t break finer than .25

mile reaches

58

Stratification

GeologyStream order or confluence

Valley bottom typeRosgen Channel Type/Riparian Complexes

• Management/Land use (Allotment/pasture)

59

Broad V-shape or narrow u-shaped in colluvial valleysBroad V-shape or narrow u-shaped in colluvial valleys

Narrow V-shaped valleyNarrow V-shaped valley

Two different valley types & two different Two different valley types & two different complexescomplexes

60

Riparian Complex(s)

Riparian complexes are defined by overall geomorphology, substrate characteristics, stream gradient, and vegetation patterns along the stream (Winward 2000).

They develop and function in response to interacting features of valley bottom gradient; substrate or soil characteristics; valley bottom width; elevation; and climate.

61

62

Riparian Proper Functioning Condition Checklist (Lotic)

Write-up area descriptions

17 Questions Hydrology Vegetation Erosion and Deposition

Summary Determination

Contributing Factors

63

General Instructions

This checklist constitutes the Minimum National Standard required to determine proper functioning condition of lotic riparian-wetland areas

As a minimum, an Interdisciplinary (ID) Team will use the checklist to determine the degree of function

The ID team must review existing documents, data, and information, so the team has the information necessary to complete the rating

64

General Instructions

The ID team must determine the attributes and processes important to the riparian-wetland area they are assessing

Mark one box for each element. Items are numbered for reference and does NOT constitute a priority or importance

Document RATIONALE for each element!! Comments are often more important than the yes or no

Name of Riparian-Wetland Area: ____________________ Date ______________ Area/Segment ID: _____________ Location: _____________________________ Aerial Photo: ___________________ ID Team Observers: _________________

Yes No N/A HYDROLOGIC

1) Floodplain above bankfull inundated in “relatively frequent” events

Rationale

2) Where beaver dams are present they are active and stable

Rationale

3) Sinuosity, width/depth ratio, and gradient are in balance with the landscape setting (i.e., landform, geology, and bioclimatic region)

Rationale

4) Riparian-wetland area is widening or has achieved potential extent

Rationale

5) Upland watershed is not contributing to riparian degradation

Rationale

Yes No N/A VEGETATIVE

6) There is diverse age-class distribution of riparian-wetland

vegetation (recruitment for maintenance/recovery) Rationale

7) There is diverse composition of riparian-wetland vegetation (for maintenance/recovery)

Rationale

8) Species present indicate maintenance of riparian soil moisture characteristics

Rationale

9) Streambank vegetation is comprised of those plants or plant communities that have root masses capable of withstanding high streamflow events

Rationale

10) Riparian-wetland plants exhibit high vigor

Rationale

11) Adequate riparian-wetland vegetative cover present to protect banks and dissipate energy during high flows

Rationale

12) Plant Communities are an adequate source of coarse and/or large woody material (for maintenance/recovery)

Rationale

Standard Checklist (Lotic)

Standard Checklist (Lotic)

Yes No N/A EROSION/DEPOSITION

13) Flood plain and channel characteristics (i.e., rocks, overflow channels, coarse and/or large woody material) are adequate to dissipate energy

Rationale

14) Point bars are revegetating with riparian-wetland vegetation

Rationale

15) Lateral stream movement is associated with natural sinuosity

Rationale

16) System is vertically stable

Rationale

17) Stream is in balance with the water and sediment being supplied by the watershed (i.e., no excessive erosion or deposition)

Rationale

Remarks:

S U M M A R Y D E T E R M IN A T IO N F u n c t io n in g R a t in g P r o p e r F u n c t io n in g C o n d i t io n _ _ _ _ _ _ _ F u n c t io n a l- - A t R is k _ _ _ _ _ _ _ N o n f u n c t io n a l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ R a t io n a le : O v e r w id e n e d c h a n n e l , la c k o f r ip a r ia n - w e t la n d v e g e t a t io n in a p p r o p r ia t e a r e a s , p o o r v ig o r in t h e h e r b a c e o u s p la n t a r e a s . A p p a r e n t T r e n d f o r F u n c t io n a l — A t R is k U p w a r d _ _ _ _ _ _ _ D o w n w a r d _ _ _ _ _ _ _ N o t A p p a r e n t _ _ _ _ _ _ _ R a t io n a le : A r e f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t in g t o u n a c c e p t a b le c o n d i t i o n s o u t s id e t h e m a n a g e r ’s c o n t r o l o r m a n a g e m e n t ? Y e s N o I f y e s , w h a t a r e t h o s e fa c t o r s ? F lo w R e g u la t io n M in in g A c t iv i t ie s U p s t re a m c h a n n e l c o n d i t io n s C h a n n e l iz a t io n R o a d e n c r o a c h m e n t A u g m e n t a t io n f lo w s R e c r e a t io n a l A c t iv i t ie s A g r ic u l t u r a l A c t iv i t ie s O th e r ( s p e c i f y ) R e m a r k s :

H ig h

L o w

C on d itio n w ith in th ef u n c tio na l r a tin g