CREEKS COMMUNITIES RIPARIAN PROPER FUNCTIONING CONDITION Introduction 1

CREEKS & COMMUNITIES & RIPARIAN PROPER FUNCTIONING CONDITION Introduction 1

The mediocre teacher tells. The good teacher explains. The superior teacher demonstrates. The great teacher inspires. William A. Ward 2

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 3

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 4

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 5

Riparian Coordination Network NRST § Coordinate On Training Activities § Ensure Support To State Cadres § Coordination and Integration With Existing Programs Interagency Training Cadres ID Coordinator: Smith Agency Riparian Coordinators Smith BLM, ID Rick Forsman, Rick Hopson, R 4 -FS Coordinate To Ensure Participation of: § Individuals From Outside agencies § Conservation and Industry Groups § Affected Communities 6

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 7

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 8

Natural Riparian Resources Water Soil, Landscape Vegetation 9

Riparian Proper Functioning Condition (PFC) Term “PFC” is used in two ways: n 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 n Qualitative Method for assessing the physical functioning of riparian-wetland areas 10

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 11

The PFC Assessment Was developed over several years (starting in 1988) by ID Team from BLM, USFWS, and NRCS and peer reviewed 12

As an assessment method, PFC: Is a first level initial qualitative assessment that is based on quantitative data Is identified by the FS & BLM as the “starting point – the minimum level of assessment for riparian areas” (TR 1737 -15, page 4) 13

As a condition description, PFC describes: How well the physical processes are working How well the riparianwetland area will withstand the energies of a 25 to 30 year event The system’s ability to maintain and produce both physical and biological values 14

What is the Intent of the PFC Assessment? 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 15

The PFC Assessment Method is intended to be performed by: “An interdisciplinary team with local, on-theground experience in the kind of quantitative techniques that support the PFC checklist” (TR-1737 -15, page 1) 16

The PFC process helps Determine potential and capability since checklist items are addressed based on the potential & capability of the reach Define issues that need to be addressed Determine appropriate monitoring Help select appropriate management practices Determine where to place Designated Monitoring Areas (DMAs) 17

PFC is Designed for Riparian-wetland areas which includes intermittent and interrupted systems Is not appropriate for ephemeral systems since they are not riparianwetland areas 18

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 19

PFC does not usually equate to: Potential Natural Community (PNC) Desired Plant Community (DPC) Desired Future Condition (DFC) 20

PFC does not replace existing Forest Plan Standards or Guidelines BLM Land Use Plan Decisions Legal Requirements, e. g. , ESA, CWA 21

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. ” 22

The PFC Assessment Method is not to be used to: Identify causes of resource problems Independently make grazing & other management changes Independently generate national or regional assessments of riparian condition 23

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 24

Monitoring “The orderly collection, analysis, and interpretation of resource data to evaluate progress towards meeting resource objectives. ” Monitoring can be qualitative or quantitative 25

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 26

Assessments & Monitoring Parallels human health assessment n The first-level diagnosis – broad scale n n n Visible indicators Qualitative Subjective Requires high level of professional ability Inventory The second level diagnosis - DMA n n Measured indicators Quantitative Objective Trained technicians can perform Monitoring 27

Inventory vs Monitoring Inventory Monitoring Purpose Locate issues – reaches of importance Answer key questions about the issues Methods PFC R 4 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 28

Monitoring should be done to answer a particular question or issue Tailor the monitoring method to the nature of the question n n 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 29

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 assessment Where the response to one of the PFC items is in question, quantitative monitoring data can help resolve the issue 30

Key Definitions 31

Wetland Areas inundated or saturated by surface or ground water Supports a prevalence of vegetation suited to saturated soils Includes marshes, shallow swamps, sloughs, lakeshores, wet meadows, springs, seeps, and riparian areas 32

Riparian Area Transition between the aquatic (saturated) and upland areas Vegetation and physical (soil) characteristics reflect the influence of permanent surface or ground water Land along streams, ponds, marshes, springs, and seeps are examples 33

Riparian-Wetland Types Lotic n Flowing water systems (streams) n n Defined channel Gradient Lentic n Standing surface water n n Lakes, reservoirs, ponds, marshes Ground Water n n Seeps and springs Bogs and wet meadows 34

Potential The highest ecological status an area can attain with little influence by man 35

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 36

Perennial Stream A stream that flows continuously. Perennial streams are generally associated with a water table in the localities through which they flow 37

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 38

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 39

Interrupted Stream A stream with discontinuities in space (surfaces and subs at various locations along a length of channel) 40

Flow Regime & Potential The flow regime will have a considerable influence on stream or site potential. Therefore, determining potential of intermittent systems is considerably more complex 41

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 42

Rapid channel adjustment Channel adjustments that occur rapidly in response to sudden changes n n 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) 43

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, 44

Proper Functioning Condition (lotic) thereby: n n n n 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 45

Proper Functioning Condition–PFC (lotic) Resulting in n improved water quality n habitat, water depth, duration, and temperature for fish production n waterfowl breeding and other uses n greater biodiversity 46

Functional-at-Risk Riparian-wetland areas that are in functional condition, but an existing soil, water, or vegetation attribute makes them susceptible to degradation 47

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. 48

The physical aspects of a riparian-wetland area have to be in working order to sustain the characteristics that provide riparian/wetland resource values. “If you build it. . . they will come!” 49

Preparing to do a PFC Assessment

Preparing to do a Riparian PFC Assessment Learn all we can about riparian-wetland area Understand site potential Collect existing information on stream Obtain maps, aerial photos, inventories, etc. Complete a preliminary stratification 51

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 52

Attributes and Process List (lotic) Hydrogeomorphic n n n 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 n n n n Community types Community type distribution Surface Density Canopy Recruitment/reproduction Survival Community dynamics & succession Sediment 53

Attributes and Process List (lotic) Erosion/Deposition n Bank stability Bed stability (bed transport rate) Depositional features Soils n n Soil type Distribution of aerobic/anaerobic soils Capillarity Annual pattern of soil water states 54

Must understand site potential! Same stream & channel type – different vegetation potential 55

Willow Ecology Different willow species have different habitat requirements which can vary across geographic areas 56

Stratification Purpose n To divide into reaches defined by similar characteristics n Involves using aerial photos, maps, GIS, to delineate into reaches that share common attributes/processes n Defines starting-end points for assessment n Rule of Thumb: Don’t break finer than. 25 mile reaches 57

Stratification Geology n Stream n Valley order or confluence bottom type n Rosgen Channel Type/Riparian Complexes • Management/Land use (Allotment/pasture) 58

Narrow V-shaped valley Broad V-shape or narrow u-shaped in colluvial valleys Two different valley types & two different complexes 59

Riparian Complex(s) n Riparian complexes are defined by overall geomorphology, substrate characteristics, stream gradient, and vegetation patterns along the stream (Winward 2000). n They develop and function in response to interacting features of valley bottom gradient; substrate or soil characteristics; valley bottom width; elevation; and climate. 60

61

Riparian Proper Functioning Condition Checklist (Lotic) Write-up area descriptions 17 Questions n n n Hydrology Vegetation Erosion and Deposition Summary Determination Contributing Factors 62

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 63

General Instructions The ID team must determine the attributes and processes important to the riparianwetland 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 64

Standard Checklist (Lotic)

Standard Checklist (Lotic)