Document klickitatcounty_gov_doc_1ae5326a02

RIPARIAN VEGETATION ASSESSMENT, LITTLE KLICKITAT RIVER AND SWALE CREEK Water Resource Inventory Area 30 Prepared for: WRIA 30 Water Resource Planning and Advisory Committee Project No. 070024-009-01 y June 30, 2009 Project funded through Ecology Grant No. G0800548 Prepared in association with Watershed Professionals Network LLC ---PAGE BREAK--- 401 Second Avenue S, Suite 201 Seattle, WA 98104 Tel: (206) 328-7443 Fax: (206) 838-5853 www.aspectconsulting.com a limited liability company ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 i Contents 1 Introduction 2 Project Background 2.1 Little Klickitat 2.2 Swale 2.3 State Standards for Freshwater Temperature 2.4 Prior Data Collection Efforts and Assessments 2.5 Recent Actions Relevant to Stream Temperature 3 Estimates of Current (2006) Riparian Vegetation 3.1 GIS Methods 3.2 Refinement of GIS 3.3 Best Estimates of 2006 Vegetated Swale Creek 11 Little Klickitat 12 4 Field Data 4.1 Methods Site Selection 14 Field 14 4.2 Data Analysis 4.3 Results 5 Historical Change in Riparian Vegetation 5.1 Methods 5.2 Results Swale Creek 20 Little Klickitat 22 6 Conclusions and Recommendations 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING ii PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 List of Tables 1 Waterbodies in the Little Klickitat Subbasin on the 1998 303(d) List for Water Temperature 2 Estimated Current and Target Effective Shade for Streams in the Little Klickitat Subbasin (from Anderson, 2005) 3 Prior Studies Addressing Stream Temperature and Riparian Condition in the Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek basins 4 Estimated 2006 Vegetative Cover by segment, Swale Creek 5 Estimated 2006 Vegetative Cover by segment, Little Klickitat River 6 Field Measurements of Canopy Cover and Stream Channel 7 Dominant and Subdominant Vegetation Observed during Field Measurements 8 Estimated Historical Change in Vegetative Cover by Segment, Swale Creek 9 Estimated Historical Change in Vegetative Cover by Segment, Little Klickitat River List of Figures 1 Site Vicinity Map 2 Salmonid Distribution and Stream Reaches Subject to Most Stringent Temperature Criteria 3A 2006 Riparian Vegetation Estimates Swale Creek (40-foot Corridor) 3B 2006 Riparian Vegetation Estimates Swale Creek (150-foot Corridor) 4A 2006 Riparian Vegetation Estimates Little Klickitat River (40-foot Corridor, Upstream Half) 4B 2006 Riparian Vegetation Estimates Little Klickitat River (150-foot Corridor, Upstream Half) 5A 2006 Riparian Vegetation Estimates Little Klickitat River (40-foot Corridor, Half) 5B 2006 Riparian Vegetation Estimates Little Klickitat River (150-foot Corridor, Half) 6 Estimated Changes in Riparian Vegetation for Lowermost Swale Creek, 1969-2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 iii 7 Estimated Changes in Riparian Vegetation for Swale Creek near Stacker Canyon, 1969-2006 8 Estimated Changes in Riparian Vegetation for Swale Creek near Warwick, 1969-2006 9 Estimated Changes in Riparian Vegetation for Lowermost Little Klickitat River, 1969-2006 10 Estimated Changes in Riparian Vegetation for Little Klickitat River Near 3 Creeks, 1978-2006 List of Appendices A Tabulations of Raw Field Data, June 2009 B Details Regarding GIS Analysis Model ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 1 1 Introduction Within the Klickitat River Basin (Water Resource Inventory Area [WRIA] 30), major tributaries to the Klickitat River include the Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek (Figure Water temperature has been identified as an issue for both waterbodies. A Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) addressing stream temperature has been developed for portions of the Little Klickitat River. The TMDL sets targets for effective shade. A baseline of streamside vegetation/shade conditions is needed to track progress against the TMDL’s detailed implementation plan (Ecology, 2003A) and is identified as a priority in the WRIA 30 Watershed Management Plan (WPN and Aspect Consulting, 2005). The lower reach of Swale Creek (within Swale Canyon) is on Washington State’s list of impaired water bodies (303(d)) as Category 5 for water temperature. Under the state water quality rules, a TMDL is required for Category 5 waterbodies, but one has not yet been developed for Swale Creek. The WRIA 30 Watershed Management Plan identifies as a priority the preparation of a water quality improvement plan for that subbasin; more comprehensive baseline information regarding existing shade levels along Swale Creek is an important component of such a plan. The baseline information will also help in prioritization of future projects intended to improve water temperature. In support of the WRIA 30 Watershed Management Plan implementation, this assessment includes: 1. Gathering field measurements of riparian canopy cover along Swale Creek (within Swale Canyon) and along Little Klickitat River, in accordance with a project-specific quality assurance project plan (QAPP; WPN, 2008); 2. Developing estimates of current riparian vegetation along both waterbodies using automated geographic information system (GIS) methods calibrated to the available field measurements; and 3. Tracking changes in riparian vegetation extent over time based on analysis of available historical aerial photographic coverage. The riparian canopy data can then be integrated with existing information on fish distribution, water temperature, and other habitat-related factors to identify candidate areas for potentially planting new streamside vegetation to increase shade or implementing measures to protect the existing riparian vegetation. The assessment provides baseline information for monitoring progress against the Little Klickitat River TMDL goals, and assists with the development of a forthcoming water quality improvement plan for Swale Creek identifying priority projects to address water temperature). ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 2 PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 This project was funded under Coastal Protection Grant number G0800548 obtained by the WRIA 30 Water Resource Policy and Advisory Committee (WRPAC) from the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). Because the field data needed to be collected through the first half of June 2009, following a relatively late leaf out, and the project contract needed to be completed by the June 30, 2009, end of state fiscal year, there was not sufficient time for this project report to be reviewed by the WRIA 30 WRPAC. Consequently, it serves as a data report with preliminary conclusions, and further revision may be warranted at a later date following further discussion and coordination with the WRPAC. The major sections of this report are as follows: • Project Background; • Estimates of Current Riparian Vegetation • Field Data Collection; • Historical Change in Riparian Vegetation; and • Conclusions and Recommendations. 2 Project Background Pertinent background information regarding the Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek is provided below. 2.1 Little Klickitat River Six stream segments in the Little Klickitat subbasin were listed as impaired on the 1998 303(d) list due to exceedances of the state temperature criteria in effect that that time (Table The listed segments are located on the West Prong tributary, East Prong tributary, Butler Creek tributary, and the mainstem of the Little Klickitat River near its confluence with the Klickitat River. Some of these segments are located on land regulated under the Forest Practices Act. Based on the 1998 303(d) listings, a Technical Report supporting development of a TMDL for Little Klickitat River temperature was completed in June 2002 (Brock and Stohr, 2002). In this analysis, effective shade was used as a surrogate measure of heat flux affecting temperature. Load allocations for effective shade were developed using modeling techniques. Load allocations were set between 50 and 95 percent effective shade for all perennial streams in the subbasin (Table Effective shade includes shade created by overhanging vegetation and topographic shading (shade provided by adjacent hill slopes). Those stream segments that were not modeled were assigned a load allocation of 73 percent effective shade. The TMDL technical report also noted that additional reductions may be achieved through reductions in stream width in some areas and noted that efforts should be made ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 3 to protect the cool water in Bloodgood Creek. Other recommendations in the TMDL technical report included the promotion of water use efficiency to increase stream flow and the reduction of sediment loads to address channel widening associated with high sediment inputs. A TMDL Detailed Implementation Plan (DIP) was released in March 2005 (Anderson, 2005). The TMDL DIP summarizes the types of actions that could be undertaken to reduce stream temperature in the Little Klickitat River. Actions described in the TMDL DIP are voluntary, although some actions are required by other regulations. Some factors have changed that may have resulted in increases in average streamflow since completion of Ecology’s TMDL technical analysis City of Goldendale’s transfer of their Bloodgood Spring water right to a deep well to the north). The change in flow regime may potentially affect the outcomes of modeling efforts. Additionally, uncertainty exists regarding the attainability of the specified target effective shade levels. Questions have also arisen regarding the effectiveness of some of the actions specified in the TMDL DIP. The WRIA 30 WRPAC received Ecology grants to install two new continuous-reading streamflow gages on the Little Klickitat River, to better document flow conditions in the river and supplement the existing flow gages operated by Ecology (near the mouth) and by City of Goldendale (at Tom Miller Road). The two new gages are installed at Woodland Road (in upper watershed), and at Olsen Road (roughly midway between Goldendale and the mouth) (Aspect Consulting, 2009a). The WRIA 30 Watershed Management Plan identifies a need to conduct additional analysis to address uncertainties regarding attainability of the TMDL goals and overall effectiveness of the TMDL actions. This study provides comprehensive analysis of current vegetative conditions along the river as one step in that process. 2.2 Swale Creek A reach of Swale Creek, roughly 3 miles upstream of the mouth (T4N, R13E, Section 33), is included on the state’s 2004 and 2008 303(d) lists (Category 5 listing) for water temperature, and therefore requires action to meet state water quality standards. This action can be implemented through an Ecology-managed TMDL (becoming a Category 4a listing), or an Ecology-approved, locally managed pollution control project (becoming a Category 4b listing). Ecology’s basis statement for listing Swale Creek as Category 5 for water temperature in the 2004 and 2008 Water Quality Assessments is as follows: “The WRIA 30 Watershed Planning Coordinator provided additional information on Swale Creek for instream flow and temperature, suggesting these impairments were due to natural conditions. However, staff were not able to rule out anthropogenic sources in this area. Because of the uncertainties with respect to the human influences, these listings will remain in the “impaired” status until further study of the watershed can determine the extent of the influence and what might be done to correct or mitigate them. TRS was 04N-14E-19 on 1998 list. -kk ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 4 PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 Continuous temperature measurements were taken, but results reported as single day maximums. Category 5 listing is continued from 1998 assessment based on multiple excursions from continuous monitoring.” The lack of soils and water within Swale Creek Canyon is a primary limiting factor on the development of riparian vegetation to shade the creek. Much of the Swale Canyon, which encompasses the lower 12 miles of the creek, is bedrock dominated and has little shade, particularly in the upper canyon. The lowermost canyon has perennial pools, somewhat better soils, and more vegetation. In most locations where soil is present, the soils are shallow and overlie bedrock. In large flood events, the riparian vegetation is often uprooted and lost in some areas. In the intervening years between flood events, vegetation starts to re-establish in the disturbed areas where sufficient soil and moisture is present. This dynamic situation represents a challenge to establishing a robust vegetative canopy to provide substantial shade across a broad, shallow creek. The Watershed Management Plan identified developing a water quality improvement plan, modeled on Ecology’s 4B approach, to address water temperature in Swale Creek. The water quality improvement plan must meet the following criteria to be considered a 4B plan: • Be waterbody- and problem-specific, and contain enforceable actions stringent enough to attain water quality standards1; • Have reasonable time limits for correcting the specific problem, including interim targets where appropriate; • Have a monitoring component, with adaptive management built in to allow for future changes in approach if warranted based on the monitoring information; • Be feasible and have enforceable legal or financial guarantees that implementation will occur; and • Be actively implemented and show water quality improvement in accordance with the plan. In accordance with the Watershed Management Plan, it is the intent of the WRIA 30 WRPAC to submit a draft water quality improvement plan for Ecology review to ensure it meets the required criteria. Actions to consider in the water quality improvement plan include: • Maintain and/or enhance existing shade; • Evaluate potential to increase shade through modification of the existing railroad bed or placement of instream structures to capture sediment that may support vegetation; and/or • Augment streamflows through pumping of cooler groundwater during critical low-flow periods. 1 When the natural condition exceeds numeric temperature standards, a narrative criterion applies, limiting human sources of warming to cumulatively increase the water temperature by no more than 0.3°C (0.54°F) (WAC 173-201A-200[1][c][i]). ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 5 The water quality improvement plan would include evaluation and prioritization of reaches of the stream where action would be expected to provide the greatest instream temperature reduction benefit for the cost expended. The Watershed Management Plan places strong emphasis on cost-effectiveness for actions taken to address Swale Creek water temperature, because it is considered to likely be improving what is primarily a natural condition, rather than restoration of a pre-existing (pre-development) condition. Grant funding has yet to be received to start preparation of the water quality improvement plan. In addition to this riparian shade assessment, grants have been obtained to date to conduct the following activities related to Swale Creek water temperature: • Siting and installation of three continuous-reading streamflow gauges on Swale Creek, to document seasonal and long-term flow conditions in the creek, in 2009. The three new gages are installed just upstream of Highway 97 (in upper Swale Valley), just of Warwick (at transition from Swale Valley to Swale Canyon), and near the mouth (Aspect Consulting, 2009a). • Siting, installation, and instrumentation of a shallow monitoring well in the alluvium of Swale Valley in 2009. The monitoring well continuously measures water levels to provide improved understanding of the relationship between alluvial aquifer groundwater levels in the Swale Valley and streamflows in Swale Canyon of it (Aspect Consulting, 2009b). • CKCD currently conducts surface water temperature monitoring near the mouth of Swale Creek and upstream at the Harms Road crossing. This study focuses solely on Swale Canyon, the lower 12-13 miles of the creek of Warwick, which includes the fish-bearing waters of Swale Creek. The upper portion of Swale Creek, within Swale Valley upstream (east) of Warwick, is a broad, grassy valley considered to be non-fish bearing, and is not included in this study. 2.3 State Standards for Freshwater Temperature Under the state water quality standards (Chapter 173-201A WAC), all surface waters in the state are protected by narrative criteria, designated uses, and an anti-degradation policy. Designated uses are those uses specified in Chapter 173-201A WAC for each water body, regardless of whether or not the uses currently exist. Based on the use designations, numeric and narrative criteria are assigned to protect existing and designated uses of a water body. Freshwater uses designated by the state include: • Aquatic life uses, which include six categories based on presence of key aquatic species; • Recreation uses, which include the three categories of extraordinary primary contact, primary contact, and secondary contact; • Water supply uses, which include domestic, industrial, agricultural, and stock watering; and ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 6 PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 • Miscellaneous uses, which include wildlife habitat, harvesting, commerce and navigation, boating, and aesthetics. For freshwater water bodies that do not have designated uses specified in WAC 173- 201A-602 (Table 602), the following “default” designated uses apply (per WAC 173- 201A-600): • Salmonid spawning, rearing, and migration; • Primary contact recreation; • Domestic, industrial, agricultural and stock water uses; and • Wildlife habitat, fish harvesting, commerce and navigation, boating, and aesthetic values. Within the Little Klickitat and Swale Creek subbasins, the Little Klickitat River and all its tributaries above the confluence with Cozy Nook Creek are the only waterbodies listed in WAC 173-201A-602 as having specific designated uses. However, the designated uses listed in that section are the default uses listed above. Therefore, the default water uses and associated water quality criteria apply to all surface waters in the two subbasins. The default temperature standard for aquatic life use (salmonid spawning, rearing, and migration) is 17.5°C (63.5°F). The state’s surface water quality standards were revised in November 2006, after completion of the WRIA 30 Watershed Management Plan. In the November 2006 revision to Chapter 173-201A WAC, Ecology designated certain WRIA 30 waterbodies as requiring supplemental protection for salmon and trout spawning and incubation. The designation imposes a more stringent water temperature criterion (a 7-day average of daily maximum temperatures [7-DADmax] of 13°C or 55.8°F) during the salmon and trout spawning and incubation season, which is defined as different durations for different waterbodies in the WRIA. Within the Little Klickitat and Swale Creek subbasins, the following waterbodies are subject to the 13°C spawning/incubation criterion from February 15 to June 1 (see Figure • Lower 12 miles of Swale Creek (to Harms Road); • Lowermost 15.3 miles of the Little Klickitat River (below Goldendale), and the lowermost 3.5 miles of the Canyon Creek/Bowman Creek tributary to it; and • Above Goldendale, a 6-mile stretch of the Little Klickitat River from approximately Jenkins Creek to the “Three Creeks” confluence of East Prong Little Klickitat, West Prong Little Klickitat, and Butler Creek tributaries, in addition to the lowermost reaches of those three tributaries and of Jenkins Creek. These reaches, excluding the upper 10 miles of Swale Canyon, are designated as steelhead-bearing; the lower 2 miles of Swale Creek is also designated as Chinook and Coho salmon-bearing (Figure Because these stream reaches are subject to the most stringent temperature criteria, our evaluation of historical changes to riparian vegetation/shade is focused on portions of them, as described in Section 5. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 7 2.4 Prior Data Collection Efforts and Assessments Previous studies related to the project are listed in Table 3 along with a description of the data collected and reported. Extensive information regarding stream temperature, stream flow, geology, and groundwater is developing for the Little Klickitat and Swale Creek subbasins. Shade information is available for the upper reaches of the Little Klickitat subbasin, and summaries of the stream channel and flow conditions present in the mid to late 1800s, as can be gleaned from the Government Land Survey (GLO) notes, are available for some areas. Published quantitative data regarding canopy cover (shade) characteristics is limited to 9- year old data collected in the upper Little Klickitat basin (Raines et al, 1999), scattered measurements taken during the development of the Little Klickitat TMDL (Brock and Stohr, 2002), and a limited number of measurements taken during the Swale Creek temperature study (WPN, 2004). A comprehensive analysis/estimation of current vegetation/shade conditions along the Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek has not been conducted to date. 2.5 Recent Actions Relevant to Stream Temperature Descriptions of specific projects are provided in the WRIA 30 Watershed Management Plan and in the WRIA 30 Detailed Implementation Plan. Generally recent activities have included the following: • Several stream restoration efforts which stabilized the channel and reduced sediment inputs; • Several projects to fence and/or manage agricultural and grazing activities which reduced sediment inputs to the river; • Several projects to plant trees along the river; • Construction of bioswales in the City of Goldendale to reduce sediment inputs; • An upgrade of the City of Goldendale’s water treatment plant which reduced the temperature of the discharge water; and • Transfer of the City of Goldendale’s surface water right for Bloodgood Spring to a deep groundwater source, which increased flow in Bloodgood Creek and, subsequently, the Little Klickitat River. 3 Estimates of Current (2006) Riparian Vegetation A primary goal of this study was to estimate the current riparian vegetative coverage along the Swale Canyon portion of Swale Creek and the Little Klickitat River, which span greater than 12 and 30 river miles, respectively. This information can be compared against water temperature data and distribution of salmonids and aquatic habitat, to better inform decision making regarding stream reaches in which to potentially take actions to ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 8 PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 reduce water temperature. The current condition is also used as a baseline to compare historical changes in vegetation (described in Section 5) to further inform decision making. This study is similar to that conducted for Rock Creek within WRIA 31, relying on GIS analysis and interpretation of vegetated cover from available aerial photographs (Aspect Consulting, 2005). However, the Rock Creek study evaluated current and historical vegetation across the entire valley bottom, including areas far from the current creek alignment (although the study documented significant channel migration in some reaches). This current study focuses more specifically on stream-adjacent vegetation, which will have a more direct effect on stream shading and thus water temperature. The methods for estimating current riparian vegetative cover along each waterbody, and the results are described below. 3.1 GIS Methods The extent of current riparian vegetative cover along Swale Creek and the Little Klickitat River was estimated using geographic information system (GIS) methods on 2006 digital aerial orthophotography available from the National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP). The NAIP, administered by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Farm Service Agency (FSA), acquires aerial imagery during the agricultural growing seasons in the continental U.S., and makes the imagery available to governmental agencies and the public within a year of acquisition. We initially defined the assumed stream channel location, starting with Washington Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) 1:24,000-scale watercourse data (vector, polyline coverage – converted to shapefile format), and adjusting it based on professional judgment during review of the aerial imagery. We then divided each stream corridor into segments with arbitrary length of 200 feet, and a pair of widths centered on the inferred stream centerline. The chosen segment widths were 40 feet (20 feet on each side of stream centerline) and 150 feet (75 feet on each side of stream centerline). The 40-foot-wide segment represents streamside vegetation expected to have the greatest effect on stream shade. However, some researchers contend that riparian canopy at farther distances, 75 feet or more from the stream edge, can provide shade, so both widths were analyzed for comparative purposes. Further, because of unavoidable spatial uncertainty in the georectification of the historic aerial photographs, the possible variation and deviation of the actual stream location from the polyline GIS shapefile centerline across much of the streams length, and the uncertainty in vegetated extent this lack of resolution creates, the analysis of historical change in vegetative cover was limited to the 150-foot-wide segments, as described in Section 5. Each segment was assigned a unique identification number, ordered from the stream mouth upstream (1 through 363 for Swale Creek, and 1 through 737 for Little Klickitat). Forty-foot corridor and 150-foot corridor stream segments have same center line and length for both watercourses and thus share segment numbers. Estimates of current vegetative cover were initially developed to guide the field data collection effort, allowing field measurements of canopy cover to be collected within segments representing a range of estimated canopy cover conditions (stratified sampling ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 9 scheme; see Section The initial estimates of vegetative cover, by segment, for both segment widths were provided for the field effort, along with coordinates for the inferred stream channel in the middle of the segment. The initial estimates of vegetative cover were derived by analyzing the red band of the aerial photograph for dark pixels. Since vegetation in the study area is reliably green in hue and because much of the surrounding land cover is lighter brown or grey, one is able to isolate green pixels (assumed vegetation) by treating the red band of the aerial photo as a color filter where dark pixels are those for which the red spectrum is not a strong part. As such, by honing in on a range of values from 0 - 255 that reliably discriminate against non-green pixels, a straightforward estimate of likely-vegetated pixels was produced and then used to calculate the estimated vegetation coverage, segment-by-segment.2 With some first-cut adjustments, this methodology achieved acceptable vegetation classification estimates that were summarized and communicated to field technicians on a series of field maps, as mentioned above. 3.2 Refinement of GIS Estimates The automated GIS analysis was calibrated based on the field measurements of canopy cover collected for this study in early- to mid-June 2009. In many cases, the location of the stream channel observed during the field effort deviated from the channel location as inferred from the aerial imagery. By itself, this spatial difference created substantial discrepancies between measured canopy cover and the initial GIS estimates for many segments. Therefore, for the purposes of calibrating the GIS analysis to the field measurements, “field segments” were defined. The field segments were defined between the upstream and limits of the field measurements (based on coordinates collected by GPS), with width equal to the measured wetted width of the stream channel at the time of measurement3. The field segments therefore represent as closely as possible the area in which the field measurements were collected. Upon review of field data and trial-and-error GIS classification adjustments, it was determined that a more refined GIS methodology would be needed to appropriately classify vegetation extent from the 2006 photographs. Replacing the red band color analysis discussed previously, supervised max likelihood GIS classification techniques were employed (using ESRI Spatial Analyst multivariate toolbox) that essentially took manually classified areas that each defined a group of related pixels in the aerial photo and used those manual classifications to derive “signatures” of pixels that fall into various classes (such as vegetation, bare ground, and open water). These signatures were then fed into the GIS system in performing the max likelihood classification – the results of which appeared to have a stronger (yet still tenuous) relationship with field data, as well as better discrimination of vegetation in visual ground-truthing of the aerial photo. Once the field measurements of canopy cover were collected in June 2009, we further refined the GIS analysis to incorporate that information; however, in general, there was 2 See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RGB_color_model for more information on the RGB color model 3 For each segment in which field measurements were collected, five transects were measured between upstream and limits, and the transect were approximately equal to the wetted channel width observed at the time of measurement. Refer to Section 4. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 10 PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 poor correlation between GIS estimates of vegetated cover and field measurements of vegetation canopy cover. Probable reasons for the relatively poor correlation, and for general uncertainty in these GIS estimates of riparian vegetative cover, include: • The individual pixels in the NAIP imagery are 1 meter square, relative to measured channel widths commonly only 8 meters (25 feet) or less. • Inaccuracies in field GPS coordinates that, particularly within canyons or heavily vegetated areas, commonly exceed 10 feet. This imprecision may approach the width of the field segments analyzed (length of field measurement transects), resulting in differences between areas actually measured in the field versus those indicated by the GPS coordinates (and thus compared against GIS estimates). • Areas of low-lying vegetation (shrubs, grasses) counted by the GIS as vegetative cover which is below the field of view measured in the field by the densiometer. Conversely, open water can have a very dark color, similar to some dense vegetative stands, on the photos, potentially overestimating vegetative cover by GIS analysis. • Potential differences in vegetation on the ground at the time of June 2009 measurements (following a reportedly late spring), compared to when the 2006 NAIP photos were taken. The NAIP imagery is taken during the growing season, but there is no information on specific dates in 2006 when the photos of Swale Creek and Little Klickitat were taken. There therefore be seasonal differences in leaf out June vs. August), and/or emergence or disappearance of vegetation between 2006 and 2009. Consequently, several iterations of analysis were conducted to provide what appeared, based on combination of analyst professional judgment and the field information, the best overall inclusion of apparent vegetation and exclusion of apparent non-vegetation on the 2006 photoimagery. As expected, when applying an automated analysis to a complex physical situation over a very broad area, the GIS analysis adjustments ultimately involved considerable “push and pull”, whereby some apparent vegetation got excluded from one area when attempting to include vegetation in others, and vice versa. Optimization of the classification involved some compromise as no single classification scheme could manage the details of variation across the entire study area. This compromise was more pronounced for the Little Klickitat River corridor, as it had much more variation in photographic coloration, shadows and general feature/vegetation type disparity. Ultimately, the chosen analysis that appeared visually to provide the best overall fit involved two different methods: supervised max likelihood classification for all of Swale Creek and the approximately lower 23 miles of Little Klickitat, and red band classification (pixel values 26-95) for the upper 4.5 miles of Little Klickitat, where Ponderosa pine becomes a dominant vegetation type. Appendix B describes in greater detail these refinements to estimate vegetative cover for the project, including graphics depicting selected results from the different analysis methods. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 11 3.3 Best Estimates of 2006 Vegetated Cover Based on the final chosen GIS analysis, Figures 3A and 3B show the inferred best estimates of riparian vegetative cover percentage for 40- and 150-foot corridors, by segment, along Swale Creek. Because the Little Klickitat River is more than twice as long as the portion of Swale Creek analyzed, its estimates are illustrated on figures for the upstream half (Figures 4A and 4B for 40- and 150-foot corridors, respectively) and half (Figures 5A and 5B). For display purposes at this scale, the vegetated cover estimates on the two figures are color coded into ten categories (0-10%, 10-20%, 20-30%, etc.). On the figures, the segment numbers are listed for every fifth segment on Swale Creek and every tenth segment on Little Klickitat. Tables 4 and 5 provide, for Swale Creek and Little Klickitat respectively, the canopy estimates for both 40-foot and 150-foot corridor widths and the difference between the two widths, by segment. Not unexpectedly, the analysis indicates somewhat greater vegetative cover within the 40-foot corridor about the stream centerline than within the broader 150-foot corridor, for both waterbodies vegetation generally more prevalent in closer proximity to the stream). On average for all segments combined, the 40-foot riparian corridor has 15% greater vegetative cover along Swale Creek, and 18% greater along the Little Klickitat River, than the corresponding 150-foot corridor4. However, there is considerable segment-by-segment variability in this statistic along the courses of each stream, as can be seen by comparing data for both segment widths on Tables 4 and 5. In total, 72% (263 of 363) of the individual segments along Swale Creek and 54% (395 of 737) of those along Little Klickitat River had greater estimated vegetated cover in the 40-foot riparian corridor than in the 150-foot corridor. The estimated distribution of vegetative cover in 2006 for Swale Creek and the Little Klickitat River is described below. Swale Creek Vegetation presence, type, and density vary considerably along the 12 miles of Swale Creek Canyon, as indicated by the GIS. Table 4 tabulates and Figures 3A and 3B illustrate the segment-by-segment vegetative cover estimates. of Warwick, the upper reaches of the canyon, trending generally east to west, consists primarily of bare bedrock with minor alluvium and scattered willow and shrubs in and around pools. In the 2006 photo, the GIS analysis classifies portions of the uppermost canyon (segments approximately 355 through 335, upstream to as highly vegetated when, in fact, much of it is likely shade cast from the south canyon bank. Differentiating open water, dense vegetation, and shade cast by vegetation or topography can be very difficult from the available photos for some areas. Nevertheless, it is an area where the stream appears fairly well shaded. between segments approximately 295 and 285, there is negligible cover indicated, for either corridor width. Where Swale Canyon bends from west to north, Stacker Canyon contributes minor spring-fed discharge into Swale Creek (0.5 cfs or less; Aspect Consulting, 2003). Based 4 Because there are positive and negative differences for individual segments, these average differences are calculated from the absolute values of the segment differences. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 12 PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 on the GIS analysis, vegetated cover on the order of 40 to 70% occurs fairly uniformly in the 40-foot corridor from approximately segment 270 to segment 185; however, the vegetated cover further from the stream, as represented by the 150-foot corridor data, is uniformly less in this reach (typically 10 to 30%). Vegetation in this reach includes willows, alder, and serviceberry. Further is a nearly 2.5-mile reach with little vegetative cover (averaging about 15% between segments approximately 185 and 122). Water typically occurs in isolated pools separated by areas of dry cobble, with sparse areas of vegetation. Long stretches of stream have little if any vegetative cover in either the 40- or 150-foot corridors segments 160 through 137). The stream channel in this reach has shifted over time, likely contributing to the lack of vegetation (WPN, 204). Where present, vegetation in this reach includes willows, alder, and serviceberry, with occasional big leaf maple. from where the Warwick Fault5 crosses Swale Creek (near segment 110) to the alluvial fan near the mouth, limited groundwater discharge sustains year-round pools and some minor late-season flow. Because of the greater year-round moisture and greater abundance of unconsolidated alluvium covering the bedrock, more robust vegetation is established in this reach. Between segments approximately 10 and 100, estimated vegetative cover for the 40-foot corridor typically ranges from 40 to nearly 90%, with isolated segments containing less than 10% cover. Decent vegetative cover also exists across the 150-foot corridor, with estimated segment values typically 10 to 20% less than for the corresponding 40-foot corridor. Alder and willow are dominant vegetation types, with serviceberry, big leaf maple, and generally greater vegetative diversity than observed elsewhere in the canyon (WPN, 2004). Swale Creek’s broad, cobbly alluvial fan begins near where Horseshoe Bend Road crosses the creek (near segment In this area, the creek infiltrates and flows subsurface for extended distances, creating a dry channel, during drier months. The reach has very little vegetative cover, with estimated values ranging from about 0 to 15% for both the 40- and 150-foot corridors. Little Klickitat River The Little Klickitat subbasin has markedly different hydrology from the Swale Creek subbasin because of the Simcoe Mountains, which typically accumulate snowpack at high elevation. Release of snowmelt water during relatively warm winter storms dominates early-season flows in the Little Klickitat. Several large tributaries of the Little Klickitat drain the Simcoe Mountains, and are fed year-round by groundwater discharge from the prolific Simcoe Volcanics aquifer system beneath the mountains. Consequently, the Little Klickitat River has perennial flow through most of its length, excluding in the broad alluvial reaches upstream of Goldendale and Three Creeks where flow commonly goes subsurface in drier months. Springs discharging from the Wanapum Basalt also 5 The trace of the Warwick Fault is shown as a thick, dashed black line on Figures 3A and 3B. The hydrogeologic weight of evidence indicates it acts as a hydraulic barrier to groundwater flow in the basalt aquifers, thus limiting groundwater discharge to Swale Creek downgradient (west) of it – i.e. upstream of its intersection with the creek. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 13 contribute flow to the lower reaches of the Little Klickitat River, but it is a small percentage compared to that supplied from the Simcoe Volcanics. Because of the greater year-round water, and more substantial areas of alluvium lining the channel, the Little Klickitat River has a greater abundance of vegetative cover than does Swale Creek on average. Based on the GIS analysis, the cumulative average vegetative covers within the 40-foot and 150-foot corridors are 56% and 54% for the Little Klickitat, compared to 48% and 35% for Swale Creek. Table 5 tabulates and Figures 4A/4B (upstream half) and 5A/5B half) illustrate the segment-by- segment vegetative cover estimates along the Little Klickitat River. Note that the (upstream) Figures 4A and 4B are oriented off due north to better fit the page. Within uppermost 1/3-mile reach of the Little Klickitat analyzed, down to about segment 665, the estimated vegetative cover within the 40-foot corridor ranges widely for individual segments (less than 10% to nearly 100%) but averages approximately 57%, essentially equal to the 56% average estimated for the entire river. Estimated values for the 150-foot corridor are less variable, lower, but comparable. Ponderosa pine and cottonwood are the dominant vegetation in this area. Moving the vegetated cover increases on average and stays relatively uniform for the 1.7-mile reach between segments approximately 664 and 620. Throughout this reach, vegetated cover within the 40-foot corridor ranges between about 50 and 90% (averaging about 74%), and between about 20 and 80% for the 150-foot corridor. Dominant vegetation observed in this area during the June 2009 field measurements includes cottonwood, Ponderosa pine, and alder. At approximately segment 620, the river transitions from a bedrock-dominated channel to one dominated by an alluvial veneer, which persists until approximately segment 515 (based on DNR’s 1:100,000 geologic mapping). The estimated vegetated cover within this 4-mile reach is lower, averaging about 45% in the 40-foot corridor (somewhat higher, 53%, in the 150-foot corridor). Alder with lesser Ponderosa pine are dominant species observed in this reach during the June 2009 measurements. Where the river veers more southerly and flows into Goldendale, the estimated vegetated cover within the 40-foot corridor is again somewhat higher, ranging from 35% to more than 90% and averaging 70%, between approximately segments 513 and 439. The estimated vegetative cover within the broader 150-foot corridor is about the same as in the 40-foot corridor, but with greater variability in individual segments. Alder, transitioning to cottonwood in segments, are dominant vegetative species in the reach. Somewhat lower average riparian vegetation is indicated as the river flows through the western half of Goldendale, to approximately the City’s wastewater treatment plant. The estimated vegetative cover in the 40-foot corridor in this reach (segments 438 to 380) averages about 50%, with individual segments ranging widely from about 10 to 90%. The 150-foot corridor has similar values estimated. Cottonwood and alder are dominant vegetation reported in the reach. As the river flows to the west, in the area of Esteb and Olsen Roads, the estimated vegetated cover in the 40-foot corridor transitions from a 3.4-mile reach (segments 380 to ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 14 PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 290) with substantial variability (nearly 10 to 100%) and moderately high 63% average, to alternating 1-mile reaches of relatively lower cover (averaging 40% between segments 289 and 263) and then more typical cover (averaging 53% for segments 262 through 239). The dominant vegetation types are more variable in these reaches, including alder and reed canary grass, with willow and Hawthorne observed in some segments. Immediately of the confluence with Spring Creek (approximately segment 238), the Little Klickitat begins to flow across the Simcoe Volcanics bedrock, incising through it into the underlying Wanapum Basalt, and forming a narrow, deepening canyon extending to the confluence with the mainstem Klickitat River. Within this final 9-mile reach, the river channel flows over the Little Klickitat falls (at river mile 6.1), and then through several small meanders. The GIS analysis estimates highly variable vegetated cover in the 40-foot corridor throughout this reach, with values ranging from about 0 to nearly 100%, and averaging about 51%. The 150-foot-wide corridor about the stream centerline includes canyon walls in places, and shows about the same range of variability and essentially same average cover (54%) as estimated for the 40-foot corridor. Extensive reed canary grass dominates areas of the channel in this long reach. 4 Field Data Collection 4.1 Methods Site Selection The initial vegetation cover estimated in the preliminary GIS analysis was divided into 10 strata, each representing a 10 percent range in percent vegetation. Sample sites were selected from each of the vegetation classes. Site access limited the possible set of sample sites. Within the areas where access was possible, reaches were selected randomly within each category. A minimum of five sites was randomly selected from each of the ten strata identified in the preliminary GIS analysis, to assist with refining the GIS analysis model. Stream canopy cover measurements were taken at each site. Riparian forest condition and stream characteristics were also documented. In all, data were collected at 33 sites along the Little Klickitat River and 32 sites along Swale Creek. Field Measurements Stream canopy closure was measured between June 1 and 15, 2009, using a handheld densiometer and following the guidelines prescribed by OWEB (1999) (provided in Appendix A of the QAPP [WPN, 2008]). This procedure specifies that a sampling reach be a minimum of 150 feet long and that transects be measured within the sampling reach. Measurements are averaged to estimate average shade within the reach. For this study, measurements were collected along five transects spanning the wetted stream width, within reaches ranging from about 100 to 200 feet, and averaging about 160 feet, in length. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 15 Along each transect, six canopy closure measurements were taken. One measurement each was taken on the right and left banks with the densiometer oriented toward the bank. In the center of the stream, four measurements were taken: 1 facing upstream, 1 facing 1 facing the left bank and 1 facing the right bank (see Schematic A below). The densiometer was taped off as depicted in Schematic B (below) and the number of intersections that were shaded was recorded for each measurement. The GPS locations of the upstream and end of each field measurement segment were recorded for each of the sample sites. Date, surveyor initials, reach length, transect interval, right and left bank dominant and subdominant vegetation, and right and left bank vegetation height were recorded for each site. The wetted and bankfull width of the stream, average wetted depth, and stream aspect, were recorded for each of the five transects within the site. Details regarding the data collection procedures are found in the QAPP developed for this project (WPN, 2008). Schematic A. Depicts of the division of the sample segment into equal portions to identify transect locations (lower portion of the figure) and the locations where canopy closure measurements were taken along each transect. Flow Right Bank Left Bank ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 16 PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 4.2 Data Analysis After the data were checked for errors, the bankside, center, and total percent canopy closure were estimated as follows: 1. Percent canopy closure for each densiometer measurement was calculated as: ((measurement)/17)*100. 2. Bankside canopy closure was estimated by averaging all bankside densiometer measurement (5 transects with 2 measurements at each transect, so 10 measurements typically). 3. Center canopy closure was estimated by averaging all densiometer measurements taken at the center of the stream (5 transects with 4 measurements at each transect, so 20 measurements typically). 4. Total canopy closure was estimated by averaging all densiometer measurements taken in each segment (5 transects with 6 measurements at each transect, so 30 measurements typically). Table 6 presents the average bankside, center, and total canopy closure measurements, as well as the average wetted channel width and depth and bankfull width measurements, collected for each segment. The average of the center measurements is generally a better measure of actual stream shading, whereas the average of the bank measurements indicates more about riparian condition than shade. For reference, Table 6 also includes Schematic B. Schematic of modified convex spherical canopy densiometer. In this example, 10 of the 17 intersections show canopy cover, giving a densiometer reading of 10. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 17 the initial GIS estimates of canopy cover, for 40-foot and 150-foot segment widths, that were the basis for selecting segments to collect data within. Appendix A includes more detailed tabulations of the field data collected. Table A-1 includes the individual canopy cover measurements along each transect, along with the average and standard deviation of all measurements by segment (representing total canopy). The table also lists stream channel aspect measured at each transect (channel orientation in degrees; 0° = north, 90° = east, 180° = south, 270° = west). Table A-2 includes, for each segment measured, the field-measured (GPS) upstream and coordinates at approximate channel center, as well as the dominant and subdominant vegetation types observed. 4.3 Results Based on the June 2009 measurements, the average wetted width of the Little Klickitat River was about 30 feet, and the average wetted width of Swale Creek was about 24 feet. Three of the Swale Creek sites were totally dry and four of the sites were partially dry. No bankside densiometer measurements were taken at dry sites. The center measurements were taken at the apparent center of the dry channel. Based on the measurements, the average bankfull widths for the Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek were about 51 and 41 feet, respectively. Transect-averaged water depth in the Little Klickitat ranged from 0.5 feet to 4.5 with a mean of 1.6 feet. These numbers exclude the depths of three transects which were too deep to wade and one transect with very high flow. Transect-averaged water depth in Swale Creek ranged from 0.0 to 5.0 feet, with a mean of 0.4 feet. The canopy cover measurements are described with respect to calibrating the GIS analysis in Section 3.2. In aggregate, an average canopy cover of 54% was measured for the segments measured along Swale Creek, excluding segments 106, 139, and 146 for which bank measurements could not be collected. The standard deviation of the measurements within each segment (measure of variability in individual measurements) averaged 23%, and the ratio of standard deviation to average canopy cover averaged 77%, for all the segments. For the Little Klickitat field measurements, the average canopy cover for all segments measured was 44%, with the ratio of standard deviation to average canopy cover averaging 96%, indicating greater variability in individual measurements. In many segments, there was substantial canopy cover measured on the banks but little in the stream center, contributing to relatively high standard deviation of the individual measurements and as a percentage of the average total canopy for the segment (see raw data in Table A-1 of Appendix In the Little Klickitat subbasin, alder and cottonwood were the most common dominant vegetative species, and alder and pacific ninebark were the most common subdominant species. In the Swale Creek subbasin, alder and willow were the most common dominant species, and willow and serviceberry were the most common subdominant species (Table ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 18 PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 5 Historical Change in Riparian Vegetation An additional objective of this study was to estimate changes in the extent of riparian vegetative cover along the waterbodies over recent time, using the same stream segments as defined in the estimation of current vegetative cover. The historical comparison analysis was conducted primarily for stream reaches that are subject to the most stringent water temperature criteria (13°C February 15 to June 1, for protection of salmon/trout spawning and incubation; see Section 2.3). The historical analysis was conducted for the following five areas: • On Swale Creek: ƒ The lowermost approximately 4 miles of Swale Creek, in which isolated pools of water persist year-round, sustaining the densest vegetative cover in the canyon (“Reach ƒ An approximately 2-mile reach spanning the Stacker Canyon area (“Reach and ƒ An approximately 2-mile reach at the upstream end of Swale Canyon, just of Warwick. This reach is upstream of where the 13°C temperature criterion applies, but is at the transition from Swale Valley to Swale Canyon (“Reach • On Little Klickitat River: ƒ The lowermost 8 miles of the Little Klickitat River, to just above Little Klickitat River falls (RM 6.1) (“Reach and ƒ A 0.4-mile reach of the upper Little Klickitat River at and just below “Three Creeks” - the confluence of East Prong Little Klickitat, West Prong Little Klickitat, and Butler Creek (“Reach This reach extends to the southern limit of the available 1978 photos, which is only part of the approximately 6- mile stretch of the Little Klickitat subject to the 13°C spawning/incubation temperature criterion. The historical evaluation spanned periods of 37 years (1969-2006) for Reaches A through D, and 28 years (1978-2006) for Reach E. Based on streamflow data from the mainstem Klickitat River at Pitt (extending back to 1930s), the two largest-scale floods during the period of record occurred in 1974 and 1996. A somewhat smaller, yet very large, flood event occurred in December 1964, less than 5 years prior to the 1969 photographs. The 1974 and 1964 floods were the two largest flood events documented at the USGS’ gage previously operating near the mouth of the Little Klickitat River; it stopped operation during the 1980s so did not catch the 1996 flood. These periodic large flood events, and more frequent but smaller peak flows, influence the distribution and density of riparian vegetation in the Swale Creek and Little Klickitat River subbasins. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 19 5.1 Methods We obtained permission from Natural Resource Conservation District (NRCS) and the Farm Service Agency (FSA) to borrow historic aerial photographs (paper copies) from their Goldendale office, for the purposes of this project. The intent was to obtain photos covering the longest period of record readily available, recognizing that photos do not exist to document “pre-development” vegetation conditions (prior to European settlement). The years of the photo sets obtained included a combination of 1938, 1940, and 1941 (black and white), 1945 (black and white), and 1978 (color). Only the 1978 set included an index (map) showing the layout of the photos, requiring the other photo sets to be manually aligned to search for coverage of the reaches of interest. The spatial coverage of the available photos turned out to be variable, with limited or no coverage for reaches of interest, depending on the photo set. Many of the 1938 and 1940s-vintage photos also have markings and labels from past work done with them. The NRCS apparently obtained the 1978 set from Boise Cascade, since the set covers only their lands (now Western Timber) in the Simcoe Mountains. To assess availability of historic photos for the reaches of interest, several other potential sources for photos were searched. This included Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Geographic Services Division, who have a fairly complete set of original photographic negatives covering the area for a series of years dating back to 1969. WSDOT produces digital copies of the photos from the original photographic negatives, which proved to be of considerably better resolution than the paper photos obtained; the digital images were not georeferenced however. We purchased from WSDOT a digital set of 1969 (black and white) photos covering all reaches of interest except Reach E (Three Creeks area). Comparison of the digital 1969 photos against the digitially scanned older photos demonstrated the superior resolution of the 1969 photo set. Because the photos were available for the complete reaches of interest, and provided high resolution, it was decided to rely on the 1969 set for the historical analysis. Because good quality color photos from 1978 were available for Reach E, they were used in lieu of the 1969 photos for this analysis. All aerial photographs have spatial distortion away from the photograph center (parallax) that must be corrected for if using the photo to measure distances or areas. Georeferencing refers to the process of adjusting the image (or portions of it, in this case) to match known location control points, and was conducted using ESRI’s ArcGIS georeferencing module. This is not the same as true photogrammetric image correction and georeferencing, but this was unavailable for the archived imagery. We were able to georeference the imagery sufficiently to make meaningful vegetation change analyses for the time period in the study. The georeferencing focused on aligning the immediate area of the stream channel, rather than areas away from it. The 2006 NAIP digital images are georeferenced and were the reference data set for georeferencing the historic photos. Because of the uncertainty in precisely aligning the stream alignment in both the 2006 and historic figures, and the tight tolerance required by a 40-foot-wide riparian corridor, it was decided to limit the analysis of historic change in riparian vegetative cover to the 150-foot-wide corridor. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 20 PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 Like the 2006 aerial photos, the 1969 and 1978 georectified images were classified using supervised max likelihood classification techniques. After georectification, the historic photos were manually examined to define groups of pixels that made up certain classes of interest (varying shades of vegetation, open water, bare ground, etc). These class definitions were used as an input in creating pixel “signatures” of particular classes of interest. These were then used to run the GIS max likelihood classification, separating the photos into pixel groups representing the various classes. Classes in the varying shades of vegetation that were determined to adequately represent the vegetation coverage were re- classified (grouped) to produce a pixel-by-pixel estimate of vegetation for each historic photo. Since the scanned historic photos still had artifacts of the photos themselves (such as printed ID numbers and black borders), stream corridor segments for which the historic photo was adequate for analysis were isolated for each individual photo. Total vegetation coverage as estimated by GIS classification was then summed for each corridor segment and averaged for any segments analyzed on more than one photo (photo overlap). These percent vegetation estimates were then compared to the 2006 analysis on a segment-by- segment basis to estimate change in vegetated cover between the two years. 5.2 Results Results from evaluation of recent historical changes to riparian vegetative cover within the 150-foot riparian corridor are presented below for Swale Creek and Little Klickitat River. Swale Creek The estimated changes to vegetative cover between 1969 and 2006 for the aforementioned three reaches of Swale Creek are described below. Table 8 lists the estimated vegetated cover percentage in 1969 and 2006, and the change between those years, for each segment analyzed in each of the three reaches. Figures 6, 7, and 8 illustrate the estimated % change for the respective three reaches, color coded by the following categories: • Loss exceeding -30%: red • Loss between -10 and -30%: light red • Same (between -10 and +10%6): yellow • Gain between 10 and 30%: light green • Gain exceeding 30%: dark green Lowermost 4 Miles (Reach A) During the 37-year period between 1969 and 2006, the average vegetated cover in the lowermost 4 miles of Swale Creek has increased (from 28 to 38% for the reach as a total). The changes within the 103 individual segments analyzed vary substantially, ranging from nearly -50% to +40%. 6 Changes, either loss or gain, within 10% are considered within the resolution of the GIS analysis. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 21 The lowermost ¾ mile of the creek (segments 1 to 19) is the primary area where vegetation loss is indicated, covering the creek’s alluvial fan and several hundred feet upstream. This is a broad, high energy area in which the channel migrates over time. Further upstream, the area of vegetative cover has been generally stable or increasing in this time period (Figure The 2004 Swale Creek water temperature study (WPN, 2004) evaluated historical changes to stream channel and riparian vegetation conditions in Swale Canyon over the preceding 50 years, based on review of aerial photographs from years 1954, 1969, 1979, 1991, and 1996. Although vegetative cover was not estimated quantitatively as in the 2004 study, it provided focused review of a few specific locations over multiple years. From the photo review, it was concluded that riparian vegetation in Swale Creek is cyclical, likely increasing and decreasing over periods of 10 to 20 years. Whether this is a natural cycling of willows and shrubs, or due to grazing or other human impacts, is uncertain. However, the photo evidence indicated vegetation removal attributable to large-scale floods that occurred within the period of photographic record. The photo review documented that vegetation near the mouth of Swale Creek is highly dynamic, even over time periods as short as five or ten years. Near Stacker Canyon (Reach B) Between 1969 and 2006, the total vegetated cover in this reach is estimated to have increased from about 24% to 41%. The northerly-trending portion of the reach shows consistent increase, whereas the areas of decreased or stable cover occur within the westerly-trending upstream portion (Figure Reportedly, portions of the railroad grade near Stacker Canyon washed out in the 1974 flood, and the railroad owners subsequently removed large boulders from the stream channel, apparently reducing the abundance of larger pools thereafter (WPN, 2004). There is limited human activity currently within this reach of Swale Canyon, so large floods, like those of 1974 and 1996 (both within the time period represented in this change analysis), are probable major factors in vegetation loss. Inter Fluve (2002) concluded that construction and long-term maintenance of the existing railroad grade, built in 1902 and running along the entire length of Swale Canyon, has degraded the stream channel, principally by reducing the width of the channel and thus increasing the stream’s erosive energy, particularly during flood events and particularly in the upper reaches of the canyon Reach Near Warwick (Reach C) The total vegetated cover in this reach is estimated to have increased on average between 1969 and 2006 (24% net gain, from 35% to 59%). Generally stable or declining vegetative cover is estimated to have occurred in isolated segments at the upstream and ends of the reach, with a long stretch of vegetation gain in the center of it (Figure ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 22 PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 Little Klickitat River Lowermost 8 Miles (Reach D) Between 1969 and 2006, a slight increase in total vegetated cover is estimated across the 8-mile canyon reach extending from the mouth of the Little Klickitat to about 2 miles upstream of Little Klickitat falls (11% increase, from 48% to 59% on average). Because of the reach length, it is broken into two segments for illustration on Figure 9. The magnitude of estimated change (loss or gain) is small across most of the reach, with only 16% of the segments having estimated changes exceeding 30%. Three segments, including segment 1 at the mouth, have estimated losses exceeding 30%, while there are 38 segments with estimated gains exceeding 30%. Near Three Creeks (Reach E) Between 1978 and 2006, a small increase in total vegetative cover is estimated for the short reach of the Little Klickitat River around Three Creeks (15% percent increase, from 34% to 49%, on average). Vegetative losses are estimated in the upstream end of the reach, at and above Three Creeks, with three segments (710, 709, 708) adjacent Highway 97 showing losses exceeding 30% (Figure 10). of those three segments, increasing or stable vegetative cover is predicted for all segments in the reach (averaging 27% increase). A 1/3-mile stretch in Section 29 (segments 669 through 661) shows gains on the order of 50%. The headwater tributaries of the Little Klickitat, from West Prong and Butler Creek on the east to Bowman Creek/Canyon Creek on the west, largely run through commercially owned forest lands, which are regulated under the Forest Practices Rules (Chapter 222 WAC). The Forests and Fish Report, prepared for the Forest Practices Board and the state’s Salmon Recovery Office, and the attendant Forest Practices Rules, establish riparian buffers within which logging is prohibited. As such, it is expected that riparian vegetation will continue to increase in most of the headwater tributaries of the river. 6 Conclusions and Recommendations In very general terms, and based on 2006 information, vegetation covers roughly 50% of the streamside (40-foot wide) riparian corridor, on average, for the entire of Swale Creek and the Little Klickitat River. Within an assumed narrow (40-foot-wide) riparian corridor, the Little Klickitat River has somewhat higher average vegetative cover estimated than does Swale Creek. Somewhat lower average vegetative cover is estimated in a wider (150-foot) corridor around each stream. The vegetative cover estimated by the GIS analysis is extremely variable throughout the course of each stream, with only general patterns of higher vs. lower cover apparent along certain reaches. The degree to which the vegetative cover effectively shades the stream varies based on type and height of vegetation and its position relative to the stream and sun. In the Little Klickitat subbasin, alder and cottonwood were the most common dominant vegetative species, and alder and pacific ninebark were the most common subdominant species. In ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 23 the Swale Creek subbasin, alder, and willow were the most common dominant species, and willow and serviceberry were the most common subdominant species. In general, the extent of vegetative cover has increased along the riparian corridors of Swale Creek and Little Klickitat River over the past 30 to 40 years. Both waterbodies, and particularly Swale Creek, are subject to dramatic changes in riparian condition due to periodic flooding. Substantial changes to the stream channel and associated riparian vegetation can occur in a single year, so that the historic analysis results are specific to the year of the historic photo chosen, and can yield different results for different reaches of each stream. Nevertheless, in aggregate for Swale Creek and for Little Klickitat, an overall pattern of gradually increasing vegetative cover is indicated from the analysis. This is consistent with the overall pattern of increasing vegetative cover observed for the Rock Creek drainage in WRIA 31, the next drainage east of Swale Creek and Little Klickitat (Aspect Consulting, 2005). The general increases in vegetation may be attributable to increasingly effective fire suppression, as well as increasingly stringent regulatory restrictions on activities within riparian areas. For Swale Creek, we recommend that evaluation of potential actions to reduce water temperature focus on its lowermost 3 to 4 miles. The reach is designated habitat for Chinook and Coho salmon and steelhead, and is subject to the most stringent water temperature criterion. In this reach, pools of water are sustained throughout the late season by limited groundwater discharge. The availability of year-round water, even if limited, results in the most robust vegetative cover in this area of the creek. As in the rest of the subbasin, the vegetation density in this reach varies over time, largely as a result of recurring flood events that can remove vegetation and change the course of the stream channel. Actions to reduce water temperature in this lowermost reach could include enhancing riparian vegetation and/or other means, including augmenting flow. Better defining the scope and feasibility of such actions would be a primary focus of the planned Swale Creek water quality improvement plan, to be completed in close coordination with the WRIA 30 WRPAC and other stakeholders in accordance with the WRIA 30 Watershed Management Plan. For the Little Klickitat River, actions to reduce water temperature can focus initially on the river’s lowest 6 miles, below Little Klickitat falls, including the major tributaries to that reach (Bowman/Canyon Creek, Mill Creek, and Blockhouse Creek). The reach is designated steelhead habitat and is subject to the most stringent water temperature criterion. The river above the falls is designated the same, but there is uncertainty regarding how passable the falls are. In addition, sources have indicated Coho salmon below but not above the falls (Klickitat Lead Entity, 2003). While much of this lower reach has considerable vegetated cover, there are extensive areas where the banks are inundated with reed canary grass, an invasive species that provides negligible effective shade. The feasibility of removing the grass and establishing a shade-producing dominant vegetative species can be considered. In addition, opportunities to increase shade in the lower reaches of Bowman, Mill, and Blockhouse Creeks can be coordinated with local land owners. If riparian plantings are selected as an action to enhance effective shade and thereby reduce water temperature, we recommend that the Central Klickitat Conservation District participate in the planning and implementation, to take advantage of their direct ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 24 PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 experience to date in this watershed. Plantings have been conducted at various locations throughout these subbasins, and there is an evolving base of local experience to draw upon to provide the best chance for success with new plantings. It is also recommended that the Forests and Fish Report and the attendant Forest Practices Rules serve as the plan for addressing water temperature in forested areas that are subject to the Forest Practices Rules higher elevation tributaries to the Little Klickitat). As stated in Section 1, there was not sufficient time for this project report to be reviewed by the WRIA 30 WRPAC prior to its issuance. Consequently, the data in this report, and implications for potentially reducing water temperatures in Swale Creek and Little Klickitat River, should be discussed in detail with the WRPAC and other stakeholders to define the appropriate path forward. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01 y JUNE 30, 2009 25 7 References Anderson, 2005, Little Klickitat River Watershed Temperature Total Maximum Daily Load (Water Cleanup Plan), Detailed Implementation Plan, Ecology Publication No. 04-10-075, March 2005. Aspect Consulting, 2003, Addendum to Multipurpose Water Storage Report, WRIA 30, November 25, 2003. Aspect Consulting, 2005, Rock Creek Water Quality Report, Water Resource Inventory Area 31, June 22, 2005. Aspect Consulting, 2007, Hydrologic Information Report Supporting Water Availability Assessment, Swale Creek and Little Klickitat Subbasins, WRIA 30, June 29, 2007. Aspect Consulting, 2009a, Installation of Swale Creek and Little Klickitat River Stream Gaging Stations, June 9, 2009. Aspect Consulting, 2009b, Installation of Monitoring Well in Swale Valley, Swale Creek subbasin, WRIA 30, June 9, 2009. Brock, S. and A. Stohr, 2002, Little Klickitat River Watershed Temperature Total Maximum Daily Load. Ecology Publication No. 02-03-031. Inter Fluve Inc., 2002, Swale Creek Channel Assessment Project, Prepared for Yakima Nation Fisheries Program, June 21, 2002. Klickitat Lead Entity, 2003, Klickitat Lead Entity Region Salmon Recovery Strategy, March 2003. Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB). 1999. Water Quality Monitoring Technical Guide Book. OWEB. Salem, OR. http://www.oregon.gov/OWEB/docs/pubs/wq_mon_guide.pdf. Raines, J. Caldwell, K. Doughty, K. Vanderwal Dubé, K. Kuzis, S. Perkins, E. Salminen, and Y. Wold, 1999, Upper Little Klickitat Watershed Analysis, Prepared for Boise Cascade Corporation, July 1999. Watershed Professionals Network (WPN), 2004, WRIA 30 Swale Creek Temperature Study; 2004. Appendix E to WRIA 30 Watershed Assessment. September 2004. Watershed Professionals Network (WPN) and Aspect Consulting, 2005, Klickitat River Watershed Management Plan, May 3, 2005. Watershed Professionals Network (WPN), 2008, Quality Assurance Project Plan for Shade Study for Swale Creek and Little Klickitat River, September 2008. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1 - Waterbodies in the Little Klickitat Subbasin on the 1998 303(d) List for Water Temperature Water Body Stream Segment ID Township, Range, Section AG85MX 05N, 17E, 16 PW77VQ 05N, 17E, 10 PW77VQ 05N, 17E, 03 PW77VQ 05N, 17E, 09 PU81CT 06N, 17E, 35 Little Klickitat River, East Prong Little Klickitat River, West Prong XU61EK 05N, 17E, 18 Butler Creek YU86SG 05N, 17E, 17 Little Klickitat River Mainstem AY21LB 04N, 14E, 09 Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 1 Page 1 of 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2 - Estimated Current and Target Effective Shade for Streams in the Little Klickitat Subbasin (from Anderson, 2005) Tributary Current Effective Shade Target Effective Shade Little Klickitat River (river mile from mouth) Current Effective Shade Target Effective Shade Butler 55.0 95 0 48.1 50 East Prong 62.3 94 0.6 49.7 51 West Prong 77.5 93 1.6 51.1 52 Spring Creek 38.6 73 2.6 48.0 53 Blockhouse Creek 68.1 73 3.6 52.3 54 Mill Creek 59.2 73 4.7 56.0 60 Bowman Creek 50.7 73 5.7 58.0 62 Un-modeled tributaries 73 6.7 55.9 61 7.7 50.7 59 8.7 50.8 62 9.7 30.0 62 10.7 30.0 62 11.7 30.0 63 12.7 30.0 66 13.7 30.0 71 14.7 30.0 74 15.7 30.0 76 16.7 30.0 74 17.7 30.0 72 18.7 30.0 71 19.8 20.4 75 20.8 29.4 77 21.8 24.8 78 22.8 18.9 76 23.8 46.4 82 24.8 66.7 86 25.8 66.6 86 26.8 60.2 82 27.8 42.1 77 28.8 60.0 81 29.8 57.4 79 30.8 51.5 83 31.8 55.1 83 32.8 37.2 82 33.8 17.8 83 34.8 33.5 79 35.9 47.4 80 36.9 43.7 81 37.9 50.0 74 38.9 34.9 76 39.9 59.4 79 40.9 54.4 79 41.9 58.7 78 Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 2 Page 1 of 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3 - Prior Studies Addressing Stream Temperature and Riparian Condition in the Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek Basins Study Citation/Source General Description of Data Multipurpose Water Storage Screening Assessment Report Aspect Consulting. 2003. Multipurpose water storage screening assessment report. WRIA 30. Prepared for WRIA 30 Planning Unit. Project No. 020070-002-05. Bainbridge Island, WA. (www.klickitatcounty.org/planning) Includes discussion of geology affecting flows in the Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek, assessment of groundwater inputs to Swale Creek. Covers upper ½ of the Little Klickitat River basin. Includes: § A quantitative evaluation of sediment inputs from roads, surface erosion, and land slides, § Quantitative data regarding channel conditions and fish habitat conditions in representative reaches (pools, wood, substrate condition), § Estimates of stream flow, including 2-yr, 10-yr- 25-yr and 100-yr flood events § Shade levels along fish bearing waters § Summaries and maps of climate data § Estimates of stream flow including 50-yr and 90-yr flows and flood flows for various subbasins § Summaries of geologic conditions § Descriptions of aquifers § Estimates of water use § Water budgets § Summaries of existing water quality data § Summaries of existing fish distribution and habitat data Swale Creek Temperature Study WRIA 30 Swale Creek Temperature Study; 2004. Appendix E to WRIA 30 Watershed Assessment. Prepared for Klickitat County Planning Department and WRIA 30 Planning Unit. (www.klickitatcounty.org/planning) Swale Creek temperature data, including data collected for the study, summaries of previous Central Klickitat Conservation District temperature data and Yakama Fisheries temperature data. Shade measurement. Stream flow information. Assessment of effect of geology on stream flows and groundwater inputs. Also contains summaries of the GLO notes regarding pre-development conditions of channels, flow, and vegetation in the 1860s. Sampson and Evenson, 2003. Project No. 199506335, \BPA § Sediment data (gravel) collected at 17 sites from 1998 to 2002. (Not all sites monitored in all years). Report DOE/BP-00005934-1 § 2002 temperature data collected throughout the watershed § Results of spot measurements of other water quality parameters at several locations in the watershed § Sediment (gravel) samples at 11 sites 1998-2003 § Summaries of temperature data collected in 2003 Swale Creek Channel Assessment Project Inter-Fluve, 2002. Project No: 199705600 Estimates of flow and encroachment of old railroad bed on floodplain. Some channel cross-section information included. Swale Creek Stream Gages Aspect Consulting, 2009a. Installation of 3 continuous-reading stream gages on Swale Ck. Swale Valley Monitoring Well Aspect Consulting, 2009b. Installation of shallow monitoring well, with continuous water level monitoring, for Alluvium aquifer near east end of Swale Valley. Groundwater distribution and aquifers in the Klickitat basin Klickitat/Yakima Fisheries Project, Klickitat Only Monitoring and Evaluation Klickitat/Yakima Fisheries Project, Klickitat Only Monitoring and Evaluation Klickitat River Watershed Assessment WRIA 30 Watershed Assessment. 2005. Prepared for Klickitat County Planning Department and WRIA 30 Planning Unit. (www.klickitatcounty.org/planning) Ground-Water Occurrence in the Goldendale Area, Klickitat County Luzier, J. 1969. Ground-Water Occurrence in the Goldendale Area, Klickitat County, Washington. Evenson, Zendt and Sampson, 2004. Project No. 199506335, \BPA Report DOE/BP-00014033-1 Temperature and shade data for the Little Klickitat River Little Klickitat River Watershed Temperature Total Maximum Daily Load (Water Cleanup Plan). Detailed Implementation Plan. Anderson, R. 2005. Publ. No. 04-10-075. Washington Dept. Ecology. Olympia, WA. Temperature and shade data for the Little Klickitat River Upper Little Klickitat Watershed Analysis. Raines et al 1999. Upper Little Klickitat Watershed Analysis. Boise Cascade Corporation, Yakima, WA. Available through WDNR geologic library. Little Klickitat River Watershed Temperature total Maximum Daily Load Brock, S. and A. Stohr. 2002. Little Klickitat River Watershed Temperature Total Maximum Daily Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 3 Page 1 of 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 4 - Estimated 2006 Vegetative Cover by Segment, Swale Creek WRIA 30 Riparian Vegetation Study 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference 1 0% 2% 51 67% 48% 19% 2 0% 0% 0% 52 76% 45% 31% 3 1% 3% 53 63% 34% 29% 4 3% 2% 1% 54 53% 20% 33% 5 10% 11% 55 61% 25% 36% 6 12% 12% 0% 56 67% 34% 33% 7 12% 13% 57 74% 41% 33% 8 16% 12% 4% 58 61% 47% 14% 9 12% 10% 2% 59 77% 66% 11% 10 53% 26% 27% 60 63% 41% 22% 11 27% 25% 2% 61 52% 38% 14% 12 39% 19% 20% 62 56% 44% 12% 13 55% 28% 27% 63 64% 47% 17% 14 37% 17% 20% 64 53% 35% 18% 15 66% 49% 17% 65 60% 48% 12% 16 51% 44% 7% 66 65% 52% 13% 17 69% 43% 26% 67 63% 39% 24% 18 67% 48% 19% 68 66% 49% 17% 19 50% 44% 6% 69 69% 42% 27% 20 61% 39% 22% 70 60% 38% 22% 21 70% 48% 22% 71 61% 35% 26% 22 71% 64% 7% 72 44% 39% 5% 23 39% 38% 1% 73 63% 49% 14% 24 64% 56% 8% 74 57% 41% 16% 25 69% 54% 15% 75 66% 46% 20% 26 71% 47% 24% 76 55% 57% 27 73% 54% 19% 77 57% 55% 2% 28 89% 70% 19% 78 31% 34% 29 63% 50% 13% 79 52% 34% 18% 30 69% 67% 2% 80 54% 41% 13% 31 79% 62% 17% 81 29% 27% 2% 32 79% 42% 37% 82 52% 34% 18% 33 67% 33% 34% 83 40% 35% 5% 34 58% 26% 32% 84 40% 22% 18% 35 63% 41% 22% 85 47% 46% 1% 36 53% 34% 19% 86 35% 42% 37 68% 50% 18% 87 37% 42% 38 66% 41% 25% 88 57% 47% 10% 39 38% 19% 19% 89 45% 45% 0% 40 1% 7% 90 38% 46% 41 23% 21% 2% 91 51% 47% 4% 42 65% 25% 40% 92 60% 49% 11% 43 60% 31% 29% 93 53% 43% 10% 44 87% 59% 28% 94 50% 40% 10% 45 77% 60% 17% 95 63% 40% 23% 46 81% 57% 24% 96 63% 41% 22% 47 78% 44% 34% 97 61% 45% 16% 48 38% 26% 12% 98 29% 33% 49 59% 43% 16% 99 33% 38% 50 66% 58% 8% 100 57% 44% 13% Segment No. % Vegetated Cover Segment No. % Vegetated Cover Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 4 Page 1 of 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 4 - Estimated 2006 Vegetative Cover by Segment, Swale Creek WRIA 30 Riparian Vegetation Study 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference Segment No. % Vegetated Cover Segment No. % Vegetated Cover 101 45% 35% 10% 151 7% 8% 102 48% 35% 13% 152 3% 1% 2% 103 54% 27% 27% 153 2% 2% 0% 104 31% 12% 19% 154 0% 1% 105 0% 0% 0% 155 3% 4% 106 27% 13% 14% 156 0% 3% 107 6% 3% 3% 157 0% 4% 108 0% 4% 158 0% 5% 109 7% 7% 0% 159 2% 19% -17% 110 16% 13% 3% 160 3% 6% 111 22% 16% 6% 161 37% 33% 4% 112 25% 32% 162 41% 25% 16% 113 39% 33% 6% 163 57% 35% 22% 114 78% 56% 22% 164 38% 34% 4% 115 70% 45% 25% 165 18% 22% 116 69% 42% 27% 166 24% 32% 117 50% 26% 24% 167 58% 65% 118 49% 46% 3% 168 49% 68% -19% 119 26% 30% 169 4% 16% -12% 120 52% 39% 13% 170 16% 25% 121 47% 26% 21% 171 14% 26% -12% 122 1% 2% 172 14% 20% 123 0% 5% 173 7% 25% -18% 124 3% 1% 2% 174 22% 42% -20% 125 9% 6% 3% 175 31% 49% -18% 126 7% 3% 4% 176 13% 16% 127 31% 12% 19% 177 13% 8% 5% 128 20% 8% 12% 178 0% 4% 129 38% 13% 25% 179 3% 5% 130 12% 12% 0% 180 26% 12% 14% 131 7% 4% 3% 181 15% 11% 4% 132 29% 20% 9% 182 2% 15% -13% 133 19% 22% 183 20% 21% 134 39% 38% 1% 184 61% 34% 27% 135 56% 34% 22% 185 87% 54% 33% 136 29% 25% 4% 186 51% 29% 22% 137 1% 0% 1% 187 75% 46% 29% 138 0% 0% 0% 188 78% 45% 33% 139 0% 1% 189 59% 39% 20% 140 0% 1% 190 64% 47% 17% 141 5% 6% 191 42% 15% 27% 142 0% 3% 192 31% 24% 7% 143 6% 2% 4% 193 64% 63% 1% 144 0% 5% 194 59% 63% 145 0% 0% 0% 195 63% 71% 146 4% 4% 0% 196 53% 52% 1% 147 0% 1% 197 58% 66% 148 0% 0% 0% 198 73% 65% 8% 149 1% 2% 199 69% 52% 17% 150 0% 2% 200 66% 43% 23% Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 4 Page 2 of 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 4 - Estimated 2006 Vegetative Cover by Segment, Swale Creek WRIA 30 Riparian Vegetation Study 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference Segment No. % Vegetated Cover Segment No. % Vegetated Cover 201 48% 33% 15% 251 58% 39% 19% 202 19% 21% 252 70% 41% 29% 203 15% 19% 253 57% 23% 34% 204 57% 42% 15% 254 65% 37% 28% 205 68% 64% 4% 255 93% 57% 36% 206 52% 58% 256 72% 37% 35% 207 53% 59% 257 45% 19% 26% 208 38% 52% -14% 258 51% 22% 29% 209 52% 51% 1% 259 35% 11% 24% 210 50% 60% -10% 260 43% 19% 24% 211 67% 46% 21% 261 7% 4% 3% 212 52% 48% 4% 262 42% 23% 19% 213 67% 48% 19% 263 49% 40% 9% 214 76% 49% 27% 264 59% 43% 16% 215 61% 59% 2% 265 73% 35% 38% 216 71% 71% 0% 266 65% 37% 28% 217 87% 48% 39% 267 71% 32% 39% 218 82% 34% 48% 268 89% 34% 55% 219 65% 39% 26% 269 56% 22% 34% 220 67% 41% 26% 270 41% 20% 21% 221 65% 42% 23% 271 52% 18% 34% 222 67% 47% 20% 272 21% 9% 12% 223 58% 47% 11% 273 36% 13% 23% 224 44% 30% 14% 274 27% 11% 16% 225 61% 36% 25% 275 46% 14% 32% 226 68% 55% 13% 276 23% 9% 14% 227 63% 42% 21% 277 61% 31% 30% 228 50% 28% 22% 278 69% 37% 32% 229 41% 27% 14% 279 56% 50% 6% 230 59% 39% 20% 280 52% 53% 231 54% 30% 24% 281 50% 47% 3% 232 27% 21% 6% 282 75% 50% 25% 233 53% 36% 17% 283 44% 29% 15% 234 63% 42% 21% 284 20% 12% 8% 235 68% 23% 45% 285 4% 5% 236 48% 31% 17% 286 2% 2% 0% 237 57% 27% 30% 287 2% 2% 0% 238 69% 34% 35% 288 2% 1% 1% 239 52% 30% 22% 289 9% 5% 4% 240 60% 37% 23% 290 5% 3% 2% 241 58% 38% 20% 291 0% 0% 0% 242 71% 59% 12% 292 1% 0% 1% 243 74% 76% 293 0% 0% 0% 244 60% 65% 294 0% 0% 0% 245 61% 64% 295 0% 3% 246 51% 49% 2% 296 8% 13% 247 64% 64% 0% 297 18% 26% 248 69% 57% 12% 298 61% 22% 39% 249 92% 59% 33% 299 91% 42% 49% 250 58% 53% 5% 300 56% 30% 26% Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 4 Page 3 of 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 4 - Estimated 2006 Vegetative Cover by Segment, Swale Creek WRIA 30 Riparian Vegetation Study 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference Segment No. % Vegetated Cover Segment No. % Vegetated Cover 301 66% 24% 42% 351 99% 97% 2% 302 28% 9% 19% 352 100% 99% 1% 303 39% 11% 28% 353 100% 96% 4% 304 65% 22% 43% 354 99% 79% 20% 305 75% 22% 53% 355 99% 93% 6% 306 88% 38% 50% 356 100% 95% 5% 307 90% 35% 55% 357 74% 83% 308 75% 31% 44% 358 89% 89% 0% 309 87% 55% 32% 359 41% 53% -12% 310 90% 56% 34% 360 15% 50% -35% 311 83% 42% 41% 361 27% 48% -21% 312 56% 41% 15% 362 12% 42% -30% 313 53% 24% 29% 363 28% 55% -27% 314 37% 26% 11% 315 62% 26% 36% Averages: 48% 35% 15% 316 59% 26% 33% 317 93% 48% 45% 318 81% 45% 36% 263 = 72% of all segments 319 96% 47% 49% 320 95% 48% 47% Notes: 321 87% 38% 49% 322 60% 20% 40% 323 0% 1% 324 0% 0% 0% 325 0% 1% 326 67% 47% 20% 327 60% 47% 13% 328 89% 75% 14% 329 90% 87% 3% 330 96% 89% 7% 331 51% 66% -15% 332 27% 39% -12% 333 6% 20% -14% 334 18% 28% -10% 335 15% 14% 1% 336 69% 36% 33% 337 99% 79% 20% 338 98% 93% 5% 339 94% 73% 21% 340 79% 60% 19% 341 73% 73% 0% 342 81% 65% 16% 343 90% 66% 24% 344 84% 61% 23% 345 99% 90% 9% 346 100% 98% 2% 347 100% 98% 2% 348 99% 97% 2% 349 100% 93% 7% 350 100% 94% 6% # of segments where 40-ft vegetated % > 150-ft vegetated The average for the differences uses the absolute value of the individual differences or Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 4 Page 4 of 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5 - Estimated 2006 Vegetative Cover by Segment, Little Klickitat River WRIA 30 Riparian Vegetation Study 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference 1 3% 8% 51 47% 39% 8% 2 10% 40% -30% 52 57% 60% 3 30% 54% -24% 53 49% 44% 5% 4 41% 36% 5% 54 74% 55% 19% 5 85% 69% 16% 55 44% 60% -16% 6 70% 87% -17% 56 58% 80% -22% 7 76% 69% 7% 57 71% 77% 8 28% 22% 6% 58 60% 72% -12% 9 7% 8% 59 88% 88% 0% 10 27% 36% 60 86% 85% 1% 11 27% 55% -28% 61 62% 87% -25% 12 59% 61% 62 84% 91% 13 50% 73% -23% 63 91% 83% 8% 14 48% 79% -31% 64 76% 69% 7% 15 70% 82% -12% 65 75% 55% 20% 16 30% 59% -29% 66 50% 49% 1% 17 50% 71% -21% 67 29% 21% 8% 18 39% 67% -28% 68 31% 23% 8% 19 45% 69% -24% 69 60% 48% 12% 20 36% 61% -25% 70 59% 39% 20% 21 71% 84% -13% 71 35% 23% 12% 22 76% 79% 72 90% 61% 29% 23 67% 68% 73 63% 38% 25% 24 66% 69% 74 41% 18% 23% 25 76% 65% 11% 75 18% 5% 13% 26 47% 49% 76 56% 29% 27% 27 59% 46% 13% 77 44% 36% 8% 28 39% 28% 11% 78 50% 50% 0% 29 26% 41% -15% 79 28% 23% 5% 30 32% 32% 0% 80 22% 13% 9% 31 77% 61% 16% 81 58% 48% 10% 32 51% 61% -10% 82 30% 34% 33 44% 64% -20% 83 5% 16% -11% 34 54% 65% -11% 84 30% 48% -18% 35 49% 60% -11% 85 73% 51% 22% 36 48% 51% 86 96% 71% 25% 37 36% 37% 87 53% 56% 38 37% 38% 88 65% 54% 11% 39 52% 62% -10% 89 87% 75% 12% 40 63% 72% 90 76% 68% 8% 41 73% 82% 91 66% 57% 9% 42 41% 40% 1% 92 60% 41% 19% 43 65% 43% 22% 93 46% 50% 44 52% 67% -15% 94 73% 49% 24% 45 45% 74% -29% 95 45% 27% 18% 46 42% 61% -19% 96 31% 24% 7% 47 71% 77% 97 21% 33% -12% 48 40% 38% 2% 98 57% 60% 49 27% 21% 6% 99 63% 40% 23% 50 38% 43% 100 40% 29% 11% Segment No. % Vegetated Cover Segment No. % Vegetated Cover Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 5 Page 1 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5 - Estimated 2006 Vegetative Cover by Segment, Little Klickitat River WRIA 30 Riparian Vegetation Study 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference Segment No. % Vegetated Cover Segment No. % Vegetated Cover 101 66% 56% 10% 151 46% 48% 102 84% 67% 17% 152 26% 20% 6% 103 65% 66% 153 60% 28% 32% 104 89% 88% 1% 154 64% 41% 23% 105 94% 79% 15% 155 54% 49% 5% 106 68% 64% 4% 156 62% 41% 21% 107 76% 68% 8% 157 60% 65% 108 44% 40% 4% 158 48% 74% -26% 109 69% 55% 14% 159 47% 28% 19% 110 94% 63% 31% 160 52% 37% 15% 111 74% 88% -14% 161 34% 27% 7% 112 82% 70% 12% 162 48% 25% 23% 113 88% 61% 27% 163 40% 28% 12% 114 59% 56% 3% 164 36% 19% 17% 115 76% 69% 7% 165 42% 22% 20% 116 16% 38% -22% 166 52% 38% 14% 117 46% 47% 167 23% 52% -29% 118 73% 79% 168 43% 50% 119 75% 86% -11% 169 63% 55% 8% 120 62% 63% 170 89% 63% 26% 121 63% 61% 2% 171 84% 65% 19% 122 82% 59% 23% 172 44% 45% 123 85% 68% 17% 173 61% 28% 33% 124 29% 32% 174 69% 49% 20% 125 46% 45% 1% 175 65% 72% 126 52% 54% 176 45% 63% -18% 127 46% 53% 177 43% 60% -17% 128 66% 84% -18% 178 33% 43% -10% 129 60% 58% 2% 179 29% 56% -27% 130 51% 51% 0% 180 35% 66% -31% 131 37% 51% -14% 181 25% 44% -19% 132 29% 53% -24% 182 55% 31% 24% 133 17% 44% -27% 183 69% 61% 8% 134 65% 57% 8% 184 53% 68% -15% 135 53% 59% 185 58% 72% -14% 136 43% 56% -13% 186 42% 63% -21% 137 58% 78% -20% 187 60% 79% -19% 138 45% 45% 0% 188 22% 70% -48% 139 34% 47% -13% 189 35% 60% -25% 140 35% 66% -31% 190 42% 28% 14% 141 61% 57% 4% 191 33% 39% 142 42% 57% -15% 192 36% 54% -18% 143 28% 70% -42% 193 25% 21% 4% 144 57% 70% -13% 194 17% 8% 9% 145 21% 56% -35% 195 43% 26% 17% 146 32% 62% -30% 196 35% 58% -23% 147 35% 61% -26% 197 28% 17% 11% 148 36% 62% -26% 198 53% 68% -15% 149 33% 56% -23% 199 63% 74% -11% 150 48% 61% -13% 200 19% 70% -51% Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 5 Page 2 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5 - Estimated 2006 Vegetative Cover by Segment, Little Klickitat River WRIA 30 Riparian Vegetation Study 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference Segment No. % Vegetated Cover Segment No. % Vegetated Cover 201 25% 58% -33% 251 84% 55% 29% 202 34% 48% -14% 252 79% 58% 21% 203 55% 67% -12% 253 72% 43% 29% 204 55% 67% -12% 254 72% 45% 27% 205 26% 43% -17% 255 80% 48% 32% 206 17% 25% 256 86% 48% 38% 207 59% 32% 27% 257 49% 41% 8% 208 72% 48% 24% 258 44% 44% 0% 209 45% 36% 9% 259 69% 44% 25% 210 29% 28% 1% 260 64% 46% 18% 211 39% 38% 1% 261 62% 31% 31% 212 53% 46% 7% 262 67% 57% 10% 213 66% 69% 263 49% 48% 1% 214 60% 64% 264 45% 36% 9% 215 49% 74% -25% 265 59% 31% 28% 216 54% 72% -18% 266 38% 35% 3% 217 34% 80% -46% 267 24% 44% -20% 218 28% 72% -44% 268 45% 43% 2% 219 28% 66% -38% 269 60% 46% 14% 220 58% 69% -11% 270 69% 57% 12% 221 39% 78% -39% 271 45% 48% 222 84% 93% 272 34% 54% -20% 223 48% 80% -32% 273 42% 53% -11% 224 58% 75% -17% 274 24% 32% 225 63% 77% -14% 275 30% 31% 226 48% 71% -23% 276 48% 61% -13% 227 55% 64% 277 25% 49% -24% 228 59% 66% 278 42% 32% 10% 229 40% 65% -25% 279 44% 34% 10% 230 52% 58% 280 45% 42% 3% 231 75% 52% 23% 281 41% 58% -17% 232 92% 86% 6% 282 34% 33% 1% 233 80% 70% 10% 283 29% 31% 234 70% 63% 7% 284 44% 51% 235 73% 49% 24% 285 32% 41% 236 44% 22% 22% 286 45% 51% 237 40% 20% 20% 287 44% 60% -16% 238 42% 34% 8% 288 29% 43% -14% 239 75% 43% 32% 289 25% 23% 2% 240 67% 45% 22% 290 76% 51% 25% 241 75% 52% 23% 291 89% 54% 35% 242 81% 48% 33% 292 74% 51% 23% 243 70% 40% 30% 293 69% 43% 26% 244 62% 42% 20% 294 75% 50% 25% 245 77% 48% 29% 295 63% 45% 18% 246 52% 47% 5% 296 44% 28% 16% 247 60% 38% 22% 297 50% 66% -16% 248 54% 42% 12% 298 63% 53% 10% 249 66% 42% 24% 299 87% 56% 31% 250 69% 40% 29% 300 47% 55% Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 5 Page 3 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5 - Estimated 2006 Vegetative Cover by Segment, Little Klickitat River WRIA 30 Riparian Vegetation Study 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference Segment No. % Vegetated Cover Segment No. % Vegetated Cover 301 69% 39% 30% 351 52% 52% 0% 302 54% 72% -18% 352 77% 59% 18% 303 79% 59% 20% 353 70% 41% 29% 304 59% 40% 19% 354 80% 45% 35% 305 55% 58% 355 45% 59% -14% 306 67% 83% -16% 356 76% 75% 1% 307 60% 75% -15% 357 53% 59% 308 41% 65% -24% 358 56% 53% 3% 309 63% 72% 359 65% 38% 27% 310 81% 92% -11% 360 35% 42% 311 66% 70% 361 59% 43% 16% 312 81% 85% 362 92% 66% 26% 313 89% 75% 14% 363 78% 52% 26% 314 96% 80% 16% 364 74% 68% 6% 315 68% 35% 33% 365 85% 51% 34% 316 70% 47% 23% 366 68% 38% 30% 317 79% 52% 27% 367 77% 66% 11% 318 84% 60% 24% 368 54% 48% 6% 319 77% 42% 35% 369 66% 49% 17% 320 52% 37% 15% 370 74% 72% 2% 321 42% 29% 13% 371 79% 54% 25% 322 32% 40% 372 68% 34% 34% 323 39% 38% 1% 373 87% 47% 40% 324 68% 42% 26% 374 67% 52% 15% 325 70% 59% 11% 375 74% 48% 26% 326 90% 69% 21% 376 72% 61% 11% 327 49% 63% -14% 377 81% 42% 39% 328 77% 47% 30% 378 63% 31% 32% 329 57% 45% 12% 379 88% 55% 33% 330 52% 49% 3% 380 56% 63% 331 65% 74% 381 40% 62% -22% 332 65% 62% 3% 382 50% 31% 19% 333 48% 61% -13% 383 45% 64% -19% 334 55% 72% -17% 384 46% 60% -14% 335 41% 56% -15% 385 32% 42% -10% 336 54% 34% 20% 386 43% 52% 337 25% 48% -23% 387 25% 30% 338 60% 47% 13% 388 18% 32% -14% 339 74% 50% 24% 389 20% 28% 340 67% 51% 16% 390 44% 31% 13% 341 14% 31% -17% 391 41% 46% 342 64% 40% 24% 392 39% 54% -15% 343 60% 41% 19% 393 36% 36% 0% 344 62% 51% 11% 394 73% 54% 19% 345 50% 65% -15% 395 72% 55% 17% 346 17% 48% -31% 396 94% 60% 34% 347 52% 23% 29% 397 71% 41% 30% 348 27% 53% -26% 398 53% 38% 15% 349 23% 57% -34% 399 42% 31% 11% 350 38% 52% -14% 400 38% 19% 19% Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 5 Page 4 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5 - Estimated 2006 Vegetative Cover by Segment, Little Klickitat River WRIA 30 Riparian Vegetation Study 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference Segment No. % Vegetated Cover Segment No. % Vegetated Cover 401 15% 7% 8% 451 76% 62% 14% 402 11% 29% -18% 452 49% 50% 403 37% 32% 5% 453 90% 85% 5% 404 54% 44% 10% 454 70% 84% -14% 405 37% 28% 9% 455 66% 82% -16% 406 76% 37% 39% 456 87% 90% 407 90% 50% 40% 457 86% 80% 6% 408 46% 58% -12% 458 49% 79% -30% 409 44% 40% 4% 459 65% 74% 410 42% 38% 4% 460 90% 95% 411 47% 49% 461 58% 67% 412 45% 45% 0% 462 82% 72% 10% 413 51% 45% 6% 463 37% 77% -40% 414 77% 68% 9% 464 60% 69% 415 40% 64% -24% 465 61% 81% -20% 416 55% 59% 466 80% 72% 8% 417 51% 73% -22% 467 78% 49% 29% 418 33% 41% 468 63% 44% 19% 419 58% 61% 469 85% 61% 24% 420 50% 66% -16% 470 81% 65% 16% 421 42% 46% 471 79% 75% 4% 422 70% 76% 472 49% 68% -19% 423 56% 71% -15% 473 63% 53% 10% 424 50% 49% 1% 474 74% 69% 5% 425 64% 45% 19% 475 68% 56% 12% 426 39% 56% -17% 476 80% 68% 12% 427 55% 49% 6% 477 54% 46% 8% 428 82% 68% 14% 478 62% 48% 14% 429 55% 59% 479 78% 44% 34% 430 42% 63% -21% 480 64% 36% 28% 431 37% 39% 481 75% 48% 27% 432 80% 72% 8% 482 82% 46% 36% 433 71% 71% 0% 483 89% 51% 38% 434 71% 56% 15% 484 83% 44% 39% 435 74% 71% 3% 485 72% 69% 3% 436 88% 78% 10% 486 70% 60% 10% 437 47% 70% -23% 487 86% 75% 11% 438 42% 61% -19% 488 82% 85% 439 64% 61% 3% 489 83% 78% 5% 440 56% 44% 12% 490 71% 69% 2% 441 61% 54% 7% 491 79% 70% 9% 442 84% 91% 492 63% 54% 9% 443 84% 65% 19% 493 67% 84% -17% 444 66% 68% 494 70% 90% -20% 445 76% 81% 495 79% 90% -11% 446 51% 55% 496 76% 89% -13% 447 51% 47% 4% 497 53% 83% -30% 448 64% 74% -10% 498 47% 85% -38% 449 35% 29% 6% 499 66% 56% 10% 450 88% 76% 12% 500 70% 46% 24% Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 5 Page 5 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5 - Estimated 2006 Vegetative Cover by Segment, Little Klickitat River WRIA 30 Riparian Vegetation Study 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference Segment No. % Vegetated Cover Segment No. % Vegetated Cover 501 85% 49% 36% 551 47% 74% -27% 502 84% 53% 31% 552 41% 35% 6% 503 87% 79% 8% 553 42% 58% -16% 504 64% 77% -13% 554 54% 37% 17% 505 62% 71% 555 50% 28% 22% 506 80% 74% 6% 556 46% 63% -17% 507 75% 78% 557 42% 52% -10% 508 73% 88% -15% 558 49% 54% 509 82% 94% -12% 559 38% 60% -22% 510 93% 98% 560 42% 47% 511 72% 89% -17% 561 36% 28% 8% 512 60% 87% -27% 562 49% 71% -22% 513 64% 81% -17% 563 37% 30% 7% 514 28% 66% -38% 564 34% 51% -17% 515 45% 69% -24% 565 62% 47% 15% 516 51% 45% 6% 566 57% 60% 517 50% 65% -15% 567 62% 77% -15% 518 37% 72% -35% 568 66% 85% -19% 519 53% 67% -14% 569 32% 43% -11% 520 27% 62% -35% 570 21% 33% -12% 521 21% 36% -15% 571 42% 47% 522 40% 78% -38% 572 44% 47% 523 60% 77% -17% 573 32% 28% 4% 524 55% 73% -18% 574 55% 49% 6% 525 51% 85% -34% 575 43% 25% 18% 526 44% 77% -33% 576 34% 32% 2% 527 40% 53% -13% 577 61% 34% 27% 528 19% 16% 3% 578 54% 46% 8% 529 21% 20% 1% 579 51% 46% 5% 530 26% 42% -16% 580 64% 49% 15% 531 28% 56% -28% 581 52% 35% 17% 532 42% 70% -28% 582 57% 40% 17% 533 19% 49% -30% 583 66% 48% 18% 534 46% 67% -21% 584 60% 64% 535 43% 67% -24% 585 37% 47% -10% 536 48% 38% 10% 586 29% 42% -13% 537 38% 35% 3% 587 27% 35% 538 79% 88% 588 20% 45% -25% 539 45% 66% -21% 589 34% 59% -25% 540 56% 45% 11% 590 65% 44% 21% 541 38% 45% 591 36% 38% 542 59% 72% -13% 592 46% 50% 543 63% 77% -14% 593 45% 39% 6% 544 60% 65% 594 72% 68% 4% 545 38% 38% 0% 595 62% 52% 10% 546 58% 51% 7% 596 16% 22% 547 41% 62% -21% 597 68% 61% 7% 548 23% 60% -37% 598 61% 58% 3% 549 56% 42% 14% 599 75% 61% 14% 550 47% 70% -23% 600 78% 72% 6% Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 5 Page 6 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5 - Estimated 2006 Vegetative Cover by Segment, Little Klickitat River WRIA 30 Riparian Vegetation Study 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference Segment No. % Vegetated Cover Segment No. % Vegetated Cover 601 83% 67% 16% 651 64% 38% 26% 602 75% 70% 5% 652 36% 14% 22% 603 46% 45% 1% 653 50% 31% 19% 604 48% 73% -25% 654 55% 29% 26% 605 45% 64% -19% 655 47% 36% 11% 606 42% 39% 3% 656 53% 41% 12% 607 54% 58% 657 57% 34% 23% 608 29% 32% 658 70% 30% 40% 609 61% 74% -13% 659 70% 38% 32% 610 44% 73% -29% 660 65% 45% 20% 611 19% 41% -22% 661 71% 61% 10% 612 44% 38% 6% 662 83% 62% 21% 613 30% 33% 663 98% 75% 23% 614 53% 66% -13% 664 94% 77% 17% 615 34% 62% -28% 665 63% 66% 616 15% 28% -13% 666 26% 42% -16% 617 16% 36% -20% 667 35% 56% -21% 618 32% 50% -18% 668 80% 75% 5% 619 33% 36% 669 43% 63% -20% 620 82% 39% 43% 670 35% 48% -13% 621 86% 55% 31% 671 50% 52% 622 71% 52% 19% 672 70% 59% 11% 623 76% 61% 15% 673 43% 40% 3% 624 74% 56% 18% 674 22% 42% -20% 625 82% 67% 15% 675 56% 69% -13% 626 67% 73% 676 41% 58% -17% 627 70% 61% 9% 677 35% 25% 10% 628 71% 74% 678 70% 45% 25% 629 84% 64% 20% 679 52% 28% 24% 630 80% 71% 9% 680 55% 24% 31% 631 83% 77% 6% 681 48% 27% 21% 632 80% 73% 7% 682 66% 54% 12% 633 66% 72% 683 76% 72% 4% 634 82% 73% 9% 684 98% 76% 22% 635 86% 74% 12% 685 90% 68% 22% 636 74% 59% 15% 686 91% 76% 15% 637 73% 54% 19% 687 91% 78% 13% 638 69% 71% 688 87% 71% 16% 639 78% 66% 12% 689 84% 75% 9% 640 74% 61% 13% 690 42% 45% 641 83% 44% 39% 691 84% 62% 22% 642 80% 42% 38% 692 87% 69% 18% 643 62% 46% 16% 693 94% 78% 16% 644 61% 27% 34% 694 63% 57% 6% 645 54% 50% 4% 695 63% 49% 14% 646 52% 22% 30% 696 56% 49% 7% 647 50% 30% 20% 697 17% 22% 648 51% 20% 31% 698 61% 43% 18% 649 58% 36% 22% 699 35% 25% 10% 650 63% 24% 39% 700 33% 40% Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 5 Page 7 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 5 - Estimated 2006 Vegetative Cover by Segment, Little Klickitat River WRIA 30 Riparian Vegetation Study 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference 40-foot width 150-foot width Difference Segment No. % Vegetated Cover Segment No. % Vegetated Cover 701 65% 64% 1% 702 90% 56% 34% 703 98% 74% 24% 704 91% 68% 23% 705 86% 71% 15% 706 56% 46% 10% 707 62% 56% 6% 708 55% 28% 27% 709 45% 29% 16% 710 31% 23% 8% 711 76% 50% 26% 712 71% 70% 1% 713 51% 59% 714 55% 58% 715 75% 58% 17% 716 39% 46% 717 28% 44% -16% 718 24% 30% 719 16% 26% -10% 720 7% 34% -27% 721 20% 27% 722 66% 71% 723 60% 61% 724 50% 59% 725 41% 54% -13% 726 29% 57% -28% 727 53% 59% 728 61% 51% 10% 729 41% 53% -12% 730 49% 41% 8% 731 42% 27% 15% 732 23% 45% -22% 733 49% 48% 1% 734 64% 48% 16% 735 54% 40% 14% 736 72% 47% 25% 737 83% 40% 43% Averages: 56% 54% 15% 395 = 54% of all segments Notes: The average for the differences uses the absolute value of the individual differences or # of segments where 40-ft vegetated % > 150-ft vegetated Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 5 Page 8 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6 - Field Measurements of Canopy Cover and Stream Channel 150-ft Segment Width 40-ft Segment Width Avg. of Total Canopy Avg. Of Bank Canopy Avg. Of Center Canopy Avg. Bankfull Width (ft) Avg. Wetted Width (ft) Avg. Wetted Depth (ft) Swale Creek 11 23% 0% 78% 95% 70% 55.0 19.5 0.7 16 65% 84% 95% 93% 96% 59.8 21.6 0.4 18 65% 76% 78% 97% 69% 52.5 38.7 0.3 22 59% 16% 90% 96% 88% 47.8 14.6 0.3 25 50% 61% 82% 94% 76% 46.6 20.6 0.4 35 40% 45% 89% 95% 86% 33.1 18.1 0.3 47 21% 17% 82% 100% 73% 53.2 17.1 0.5 57 63% 71% 100% 100% 100% 38.7 16.1 0.4 66 57% 94% 97% 99% 96% 37.8 15.4 0.5 72 75% 97% 94% 98% 91% 39.3 22.3 0.3 95 60% 52% 88% 89% 87% 27.8 290.6 0.4 96 47% 31% 49% 74% 37% 33.6 18.1 0.6 100 46% 50% 56% 66% 51% 30.6 13.4 0.9 106 1% 2% 0% 44.6 0.0 0.0 119 59% 92% 84% 99% 76% 34.0 18.2 1.3 123 3% 0% 0% 0% 1% 28.4 1.1 0.0 128 18% 4% 11% 33% 0% 68.2 45.2 0.7 135 31% 30% 34% 55% 23% 40.6 20.3 0.5 139 1% 0% 0% 29.3 0.0 0.0 146 1% 0% 0% 40.0 0.0 0.0 174 47% 32% 23% 56% 8% 44.1 14.3 0.2 181 9% 2% 14% 27% 8% 27.6 15.6 0.4 182 19% 21% 27% 48% 14% 32.3 6.4 0.1 190 19% 39% 67% 75% 48% 38.9 2.8 0.1 204 77% 92% 66% 88% 56% 50.0 18.0 0.5 236 50% 66% 89% 100% 84% 36.4 6.5 0.6 250 50% 71% 43% 97% 60% 29.9 5.9 0.3 260 24% 26% 9% 25% 1% 27.7 13.6 0.3 291 23% 30% 0% 0% 0% 52.8 22.6 0.3 294 13% 22% 0% 0% 0% 54.3 17.0 0.4 304 39% 96% 22% 24% 21% 19.8 9.1 0.6 323 11% 19% 0% 0% 0% 61.3 18.5 0.2 Initial GIS Estimates of Veg Cover Field Data Segment No. Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 6 Page 1 of 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 6 - Field Measurements of Canopy Cover and Stream Channel 150-ft Segment Width 40-ft Segment Width Avg. of Total Canopy Avg. Of Bank Canopy Avg. Of Center Canopy Avg. Bankfull Width (ft) Avg. Wetted Width (ft) Avg. Wetted Depth (ft) Initial GIS Estimates of Veg Cover Field Data Segment No. Little Klickitat River 2 36% 55% 23% 60% 5% 136.0 74.2 1.6 9 14% 44% 33% 100% 0% 42.4 29.4 2.1 247 48% 47% 30% 69% 10% 58.0 38.6 1.4 248 45% 40% 41% 85% 19% 63.0 27.9 1.3 250 39% 43% 53% 95% 31% 63.0 26.3 1.3 254 47% 47% 20% 45% 7% 102.9 30.4 1.7 256 63% 67% 31% 50% 21% 102.8 36.4 1.0 259 55% 55% 16% 49% 0% 48.4 30.7 2.2 260 47% 40% 22% 58% 3% 79.3 38.3 1.3 350 67% 88% 3% 10% 0% 41.2 35.5 2.0 351 98% 102% 29% 88% 0% 33.8 28.3 4.5 411 81% 98% 47% 99% 21% 37.6 27.0 2.2 435 71% 91% 56% 73% 48% 45.0 26.9 1.8 436 74% 81% 86% 94% 82% 35.2 26.8 1.5 442 96% 98% 83% 96% 76% 56.3 38.2 0.7 444 61% 81% 54% 86% 38% 62.3 31.4 1.6 445 52% 63% 64% 82% 54% 34.4 21.4 1.7 446 66% 48% 59% 83% 48% 41.1 24.9 1.0 447 58% 66% 28% 49% 18% 42.5 24.3 1.5 459 46% 27% 50% 95% 27% 47.3 32.5 0.9 460 44% 37% 67% 95% 53% 43.7 28.1 1.0 462 49% 34% 60% 93% 44% 45.6 35.2 0.9 500 61% 61% 32% 76% 10% 44.4 31.6 1.8 502 56% 76% 47% 88% 27% 31.1 22.7 1.2 506 58% 62% 45% 84% 25% 41.4 28.5 1.2 508 72% 70% 64% 96% 47% 41.5 27.2 1.0 570 79% 76% 18% 38% 17% 34.8 23.9 1.7 571 46% 52% 27% 60% 11% 53.2 28.6 1.8 572 62% 96% 37% 76% 21% 52.9 34.4 2.0 573 61% 88% 43% 76% 26% 33.7 21.3 1.8 578 45% 80% 57% 76% 47% 34.0 23.0 1.3 626 66% 79% 74% 81% 71% 33.9 21.4 1.5 628 61% 69% 50% 87% 31% 36.3 22.5 1.3 Notes: All measurements collected between June 1-15, 2009. Initial estimates of vegetative cover used to develop stratified sampling scheme, collecting measurements within a range of canopy conditions. Only average canopy measurements for each segment are presented. Appendix A provides the raw measurements for each transect, including locational coordinates and stream aspect for segments measured. Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 6 Page 2 of 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 7 - Dominant and Subdominant Riparian Vegetation Observed during Field Measurements Little Klickitat Swale Little Klickitat Swale None 0% 2% None 6% 3% Alder 48% 3% Alder 8% 0% Black Cottonwood 14% 0% Big Leaf Maple 0% 5% Cottonwood 12% 0% Black Cottonwood 5% 0% Grass 2% 3% Cherry 2% 0% Hawthorne 3% 5% Dogwood 3% 2% Ponderosa Pine 5% 0% Grass 0% 3% Pacific Willow 2% 0% Hawthorne 0% 3% Red Alder 0% 41% Meadow Grass 3% 0% Reed Canary Grass 6% 0% Mock Orange 2% 0% Serviceberry 0% 13% N/A 0% 8% White Alder 6% 0% Ninebark 9% 0% Willow 3% 34% Red Alder 2% 6% Salix prolixa 3% 0% Serviceberry 0% 28% Snowberry 3% 0% Spirea 5% 0% White alder 15% 0% Willow 36% 42% Notes: Observations made June 1-15, 2009. Appendix A provides details regarding vegetation observed in each segment. Dominant Vegetation Type Percent of Samples with each dominant vegetation type Subdominant Vegetation Type Percent of samples with each sub- dominant vegetation type Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Report Tables 1-7 Table 7 Page 1 of 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 8 - Estimated Historical Change in Vegetative Cover by Segment, Swale Creek Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek Segment No. 1969 % Vegetated Cover 2006 % Vegetated Cover Change Segment No. 1969 % Vegetated Cover 2006 % Vegetated Cover Change 1 42% 2% -40% 54 19% 20% 1% 2 31% 0% -31% 55 16% 25% 9% 3 43% 3% -40% 56 12% 34% 22% 4 28% 2% -26% 57 23% 41% 18% 5 35% 11% -24% 58 26% 47% 21% 6 53% 12% -41% 59 22% 66% 44% 7 39% 13% -26% 60 16% 41% 25% 8 43% 12% -31% 61 22% 38% 16% 9 34% 10% -24% 62 12% 44% 32% 10 28% 26% 63 9% 47% 38% 11 31% 25% 64 10% 35% 25% 12 8% 19% 11% 65 15% 48% 33% 13 19% 28% 9% 66 15% 52% 37% 14 31% 17% -14% 67 12% 39% 27% 15 64% 49% -15% 68 7% 49% 42% 16 77% 44% -33% 69 3% 42% 39% 17 72% 43% -29% 70 1% 38% 37% 18 61% 48% -13% 71 9% 35% 26% 19 73% 44% -29% 72 9% 39% 30% 20 41% 39% 73 16% 49% 33% 21 40% 48% 8% 74 0% 41% 41% 22 47% 64% 17% 75 2% 46% 44% 23 27% 38% 11% 76 17% 57% 40% 24 27% 56% 29% 77 9% 55% 46% 25 43% 54% 11% 78 30% 34% 4% 26 41% 47% 6% 79 25% 34% 9% 27 59% 54% 80 21% 41% 20% 28 61% 70% 9% 81 16% 27% 11% 29 56% 50% 82 20% 34% 14% 30 41% 67% 26% 83 13% 35% 22% 31 57% 62% 5% 84 20% 22% 2% 32 85 45% 46% 1% 33 38% 33% 86 43% 42% 34 16% 26% 10% 87 41% 42% 1% 35 24% 41% 17% 88 30% 47% 17% 36 25% 34% 9% 89 27% 45% 18% 37 41% 50% 9% 90 38% 46% 8% 38 41% 41% 0% 91 32% 47% 15% 39 20% 19% 92 18% 49% 31% 40 27% 7% -20% 93 26% 43% 17% 41 18% 21% 3% 94 24% 40% 16% 42 19% 25% 6% 95 24% 40% 16% 43 22% 31% 9% 96 17% 41% 24% 44 20% 59% 39% 97 26% 45% 19% 45 20% 60% 40% 98 36% 33% 46 14% 57% 43% 99 34% 38% 4% 47 12% 44% 32% 100 34% 44% 10% 48 6% 26% 20% 101 26% 35% 9% 49 19% 43% 24% 102 24% 35% 11% 50 24% 58% 34% 103 25% 27% 2% 51 32% 48% 16% 52 22% 45% 23% 28% 38% 10% 53 21% 34% 13% Reach A (Lowermost 4 Miles), 1969-2006 not analyzed Reach A Averages: Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Historic Change Tables 8 and 9 Table 8 Page 1 of 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 8 - Estimated Historical Change in Vegetative Cover by Segment, Swale Creek Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek Segment No. 1969 % Vegetated Cover 2006 % Vegetated Cover Change Segment No. 1969 % Vegetated Cover 2006 % Vegetated Cover Change 208 17% 52% 35% 251 18% 39% 21% 209 1% 51% 50% 252 18% 41% 23% 210 2% 60% 58% 253 8% 23% 15% 211 6% 46% 40% 254 13% 37% 24% 212 9% 48% 39% 255 13% 57% 44% 213 6% 48% 42% 256 29% 37% 8% 214 8% 49% 41% 257 20% 19% 215 1% 59% 58% 258 30% 22% 216 4% 71% 67% 259 48% 11% -37% 217 9% 48% 39% 260 51% 19% -32% 218 18% 34% 16% 261 47% 4% -43% 219 13% 39% 26% 262 59% 23% -36% 220 8% 41% 33% 263 59% 40% -19% 221 15% 42% 27% 264 33% 43% 10% 222 11% 47% 36% 265 34% 35% 1% 223 7% 47% 40% 266 36% 37% 1% 224 7% 30% 23% 225 4% 36% 32% 24% 41% 17% 226 11% 55% 44% 227 9% 42% 33% 228 4% 28% 24% 229 8% 27% 19% 230 10% 39% 29% 231 9% 30% 21% 232 12% 21% 9% 233 15% 36% 21% 234 30% 42% 12% 235 7% 23% 16% 236 19% 31% 12% 237 17% 27% 10% 238 17% 34% 17% 239 3% 30% 27% 240 7% 37% 30% 241 18% 38% 20% 242 70% 59% -11% 243 85% 76% 244 87% 65% -22% 245 73% 64% 246 73% 49% -24% 247 67% 64% 248 51% 57% 6% 249 36% 59% 23% 250 17% 53% 36% Reach B (Near Stacker Canyon), 1969-2006 Reach B Averages: Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Historic Change Tables 8 and 9 Table 8 Page 2 of 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 8 - Estimated Historical Change in Vegetative Cover by Segment, Swale Creek Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek Segment No. 1969 % Vegetated Cover 2006 % Vegetated Cover Change Segment No. 1969 % Vegetated Cover 2006 % Vegetated Cover Change 312 55% 41% -14% 355 55% 93% 38% 313 31% 24% 356 62% 95% 33% 314 35% 26% 357 60% 83% 23% 315 23% 26% 3% 358 54% 89% 35% 316 24% 26% 2% 359 72% 53% -19% 317 41% 48% 7% 360 60% 50% -10% 318 36% 45% 9% 361 54% 48% 319 38% 47% 9% 362 51% 42% 320 43% 48% 5% 363 52% 55% 3% 321 41% 38% 322 31% 20% -11% 35% 59% 24% 323 17% 1% -16% 324 9% 0% 325 8% 1% 326 19% 47% 28% 327 17% 47% 30% 328 22% 75% 53% 329 23% 87% 64% 330 23% 89% 66% 331 19% 66% 47% 332 16% 39% 23% 333 11% 20% 9% 334 12% 28% 16% 335 16% 14% 336 12% 36% 24% 337 11% 79% 68% 338 33% 93% 60% 339 30% 73% 43% 340 26% 60% 34% 341 28% 73% 45% 342 31% 65% 34% 343 33% 66% 33% 344 25% 61% 36% 345 19% 90% 71% 346 28% 98% 70% 347 27% 98% 71% 348 28% 97% 69% 349 62% 93% 31% 350 57% 94% 37% 351 55% 97% 42% 352 57% 99% 42% 353 56% 96% 40% 354 47% 79% 32% Note: Estimates are for the 150-foot-wide corridor. Reach C Averages: Reach C (Near Warwick), 1969-2006 Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Historic Change Tables 8 and 9 Table 8 Page 3 of 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 9 - Estimated Historical Change in Vegetative Cover by Segment, Little Klickitat River Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek Segment No. 1969 % Vegetated Cover 2006 % Vegetated Cover Change Segment No. 1969 % Vegetated Cover 2006 % Vegetated Cover Change 1 68% 8% -60% 54 46% 60% 14% 2 65% 43% -22% 55 68% 65% 3 48% 58% 10% 56 75% 85% 10% 4 30% 37% 7% 57 83% 84% 1% 5 49% 71% 22% 58 61% 80% 19% 6 43% 89% 46% 59 65% 90% 25% 7 55% 68% 13% 60 71% 86% 15% 8 49% 22% -27% 61 68% 93% 25% 9 33% 8% -25% 62 45% 95% 50% 10 51% 39% -12% 63 53% 84% 31% 11 48% 59% 11% 64 55% 73% 18% 12 54% 62% 8% 65 42% 57% 15% 13 54% 81% 27% 66 47% 55% 8% 14 70% 85% 15% 67 37% 27% -10% 15 52% 85% 33% 68 23% 26% 3% 16 52% 69% 17% 69 31% 49% 18% 17 53% 73% 20% 70 31% 39% 8% 18 49% 76% 27% 71 35% 25% -10% 19 66% 77% 11% 72 39% 62% 23% 20 59% 72% 13% 73 40% 40% 0% 21 64% 92% 28% 74 32% 20% -12% 22 62% 88% 26% 75 24% 5% -19% 23 66% 79% 13% 76 20% 30% 10% 24 63% 76% 13% 77 40% 47% 7% 25 37% 67% 30% 78 50% 50% 0% 26 37% 52% 15% 79 37% 24% -13% 27 36% 53% 17% 80 36% 16% -20% 28 32% 29% 81 42% 50% 8% 29 26% 40% 14% 82 39% 36% 30 37% 38% 1% 83 52% 18% -34% 31 48% 64% 16% 84 61% 54% 32 51% 63% 12% 85 47% 54% 7% 33 56% 67% 11% 86 51% 73% 22% 34 47% 69% 22% 87 62% 58% 35 37% 68% 31% 88 68% 60% 36 60% 57% 89 47% 76% 29% 37 32% 38% 6% 90 50% 72% 22% 38 55% 41% -14% 91 49% 59% 10% 39 54% 66% 12% 92 36% 48% 12% 40 78% 77% 93 44% 54% 10% 41 82% 86% 4% 94 51% 48% 42 66% 40% -26% 95 43% 27% -16% 43 49% 49% 0% 96 46% 24% -22% 44 85% 77% 97 56% 36% -20% 45 86% 87% 1% 98 56% 61% 5% 46 84% 72% -12% 99 49% 39% -10% 47 74% 84% 10% 100 51% 32% -19% 48 43% 47% 4% 101 66% 62% 49 48% 25% -23% 102 71% 71% 0% 50 72% 48% -24% 103 58% 74% 16% 51 48% 42% 104 43% 90% 47% 52 37% 69% 32% 105 39% 79% 40% 53 49% 54% 5% 106 49% 64% 15% Reach D (Lowermost 8 Miles), 1969-2006 Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Historic Change Tables 8 and 9 Table 9 Page 1 of 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 9 - Estimated Historical Change in Vegetative Cover by Segment, Little Klickitat River Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek Segment No. 1969 % Vegetated Cover 2006 % Vegetated Cover Change Segment No. 1969 % Vegetated Cover 2006 % Vegetated Cover Change 107 43% 73% 30% 150 58% 67% 9% 108 28% 46% 18% 151 58% 57% 109 35% 57% 22% 152 47% 26% -21% 110 52% 64% 12% 153 43% 33% -10% 111 59% 93% 34% 154 45% 49% 4% 112 52% 73% 21% 155 53% 56% 3% 113 55% 65% 10% 156 63% 46% -17% 114 60% 61% 1% 157 72% 73% 1% 115 49% 72% 23% 158 81% 89% 8% 116 31% 39% 8% 159 69% 35% -34% 117 33% 48% 15% 160 11% 42% 31% 118 36% 83% 47% 161 27% 34% 7% 119 20% 91% 71% 162 8% 30% 22% 120 27% 66% 39% 163 17% 32% 15% 121 20% 67% 47% 164 30% 21% 122 27% 63% 36% 165 28% 29% 1% 123 16% 69% 53% 166 39% 43% 4% 124 27% 37% 10% 167 46% 71% 25% 125 48% 50% 2% 168 50% 59% 9% 126 48% 57% 9% 169 36% 60% 24% 127 62% 59% 170 37% 67% 30% 128 64% 92% 28% 171 41% 67% 26% 129 62% 67% 5% 172 19% 51% 32% 130 59% 56% 173 13% 31% 18% 131 65% 62% 174 26% 50% 24% 132 61% 63% 2% 175 52% 81% 29% 133 41% 52% 11% 176 49% 76% 27% 134 28% 64% 36% 177 39% 71% 32% 135 39% 66% 27% 178 53% 52% 136 40% 60% 20% 179 42% 60% 18% 137 60% 87% 27% 180 44% 78% 34% 138 61% 57% 181 41% 57% 16% 139 62% 59% 182 19% 33% 14% 140 49% 82% 33% 183 30% 68% 38% 141 66% 63% 184 59% 82% 23% 142 57% 68% 11% 185 64% 86% 22% 143 54% 82% 28% 186 44% 72% 28% 144 58% 75% 17% 187 51% 83% 32% 145 55% 68% 13% 188 52% 75% 23% 146 59% 75% 16% 189 45% 65% 20% 147 74% 73% 190 33% 31% 148 57% 73% 16% 191 59% 44% -15% 149 58% 68% 10% 192 64% 57% Reach D (Lower 8 Miles), 1969-2006, continued Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Historic Change Tables 8 and 9 Table 9 Page 2 of 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 9 - Estimated Historical Change in Vegetative Cover by Segment, Little Klickitat River Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek Segment No. 1969 % Vegetated Cover 2006 % Vegetated Cover Change Segment No. 1969 % Vegetated Cover 2006 % Vegetated Cover Change 193 45% 25% -20% 236 16% 23% 7% 194 34% 10% -24% 237 19% 22% 3% 195 48% 29% -19% 238 34% 41% 7% 196 70% 65% 239 29% 47% 18% 197 33% 20% -13% 240 52% 48% 198 49% 76% 27% 241 66% 57% 199 70% 83% 13% 242 59% 53% 200 77% 92% 15% 243 47% 46% 201 77% 76% 244 54% 51% 202 72% 64% 245 62% 55% 203 68% 78% 10% 246 70% 59% -11% 204 64% 80% 16% 247 62% 49% -13% 205 56% 58% 2% 248 56% 54% 206 44% 33% -11% 249 57% 51% 207 31% 50% 19% 208 36% 41% 5% 48% 59% 11% 209 32% 32% 0% 210 32% 44% 12% 211 50% 55% 5% 212 28% 74% 46% 213 62% 84% 22% 214 63% 84% 21% 215 62% 91% 29% 216 56% 85% 29% 217 50% 75% 25% 218 47% 79% 32% 219 43% 91% 48% 220 35% 95% 60% 221 40% 90% 50% 222 27% 81% 54% 223 36% 81% 45% 224 30% 76% 46% 225 32% 69% 37% 226 30% 71% 41% 227 32% 70% 38% 228 49% 65% 16% 229 51% 58% 7% 230 35% 86% 51% 231 38% 72% 34% 232 28% 65% 37% 233 19% 49% 30% 234 28% 65% 37% 235 19% 49% 30% Reach D (Lower 8 Miles), 1969-2006, continued Reach D Averages: Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Historic Change Tables 8 and 9 Table 9 Page 3 of 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 9 - Estimated Historical Change in Vegetative Cover by Segment, Little Klickitat River Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek Segment No. 1978 % Vegetated Cover 2006 % Vegetated Cover Change Segment No. 1978 % Vegetated Cover 2006 % Vegetated Cover Change 636 23% 59% 36% 687 66% 78% 12% 637 17% 54% 37% 688 26% 71% 45% 638 43% 71% 28% 689 40% 75% 35% 639 19% 66% 47% 690 30% 45% 15% 640 15% 61% 46% 691 42% 62% 20% 641 18% 44% 26% 692 50% 69% 19% 642 12% 42% 30% 693 60% 78% 18% 643 15% 46% 31% 694 41% 57% 16% 644 10% 27% 17% 695 18% 49% 31% 645 7% 50% 43% 696 20% 49% 29% 646 8% 22% 14% 697 9% 22% 13% 647 6% 30% 24% 698 38% 43% 5% 648 7% 20% 13% 699 17% 25% 8% 649 9% 36% 27% 700 12% 40% 28% 650 8% 24% 16% 701 31% 64% 33% 651 8% 38% 30% 702 15% 56% 41% 652 2% 14% 12% 703 51% 74% 23% 653 7% 31% 24% 704 54% 68% 14% 654 7% 29% 22% 705 48% 71% 23% 655 6% 36% 30% 706 19% 46% 27% 656 4% 41% 37% 707 40% 56% 16% 657 6% 34% 28% 708 66% 28% -38% 658 3% 30% 27% 709 64% 29% -35% 659 6% 38% 32% 710 72% 23% -49% 660 8% 45% 37% 711 77% 50% -27% 661 13% 61% 48% 712 84% 70% -14% 662 10% 62% 52% 713 75% 59% -16% 663 19% 75% 56% 714 68% 58% -10% 664 19% 77% 58% 715 58% 58% 0% 665 6% 66% 60% 716 48% 46% 666 6% 42% 36% 717 25% 44% 19% 667 14% 56% 42% 718 40% 30% -10% 668 15% 75% 60% 719 37% 26% -11% 669 12% 63% 51% 720 29% 34% 5% 670 10% 48% 38% 721 38% 27% -11% 671 42% 52% 10% 722 75% 71% 672 30% 59% 29% 723 71% 61% -10% 673 21% 40% 19% 724 66% 59% 674 37% 42% 5% 725 58% 54% 675 54% 69% 15% 726 68% 57% -11% 676 32% 58% 26% 727 62% 59% 677 30% 25% 728 65% 51% -14% 678 23% 45% 22% 729 79% 53% -26% 679 11% 28% 17% 730 53% 41% -12% 680 20% 24% 4% 731 46% 27% -19% 681 25% 27% 2% 732 51% 45% 682 47% 54% 7% 733 60% 48% -12% 683 59% 72% 13% 734 69% 48% -21% 684 41% 76% 35% 735 62% 40% -22% 685 36% 68% 32% 736 67% 47% -20% 686 77% 76% 737 68% 40% -28% 34% 49% 15% Note: Estimates are for the 150-foot-wide corridor. Reach E Averages: Reach E (Near Three Creeks), 1978-2006 Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Historic Change Tables 8 and 9 Table 9 Page 4 of 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- 84 £ ¤ 97 Little Klickitat Subbasin Swale Creek Subbasin Bickleton 3rd S cott C a nyon 1st U V 142 Hwy 97 Hoctor Centerville State Hwy 14 Bickleton State Hwy 142 Hill No 4 Olson Knight Willis Pipeline Horseshoe Bend Columbus Wood lan d Finn Ridge Miller Pine Forest Woods Wing Enyeart Collins R i m ro c k Dooley Cameron Esteb Van Hoy Dalles Mtn Butts Rogers Clyde Story Crafton No 12 Cedar Valley Simcoe Mtn Cunliff Main Linden Hunter Otis Anderson O r c hard Height s Pothole Austin Oak Hill Fairgrounds High Br oadway Harms Rd G o ld e n Pi n e Foster Hanging Rock Fish Hatchery Mesecher Basse Shiloh T e a l T yl e r Sara Eshelman M aryhill Loop s B rown s John D a y D a m Horseranch Piluk Lipo Roosevelt Calvert Spring Creek Loop Je n k in s C r e e k Larg e nt T o m M i ller Ea gle Palmer Winterstein North Lake Forest Glen Tu c ker H ill Bluff Boss N o bl e F i r H e a r t h s i d e Beebe Tur k ey R anc h Newton Potts Peggy Indian Hill Sunset Big Sky Pumphouse She p p a r d Megann Sunrise Timber Carpool Mill G r one w a ld Darland Piney Woods Hatfield Spur Third Sawyer Vosberg Forest Hill Gregg Cragganmore Pine Indian Basin Lone Cedar Horseshoe Ben d Rd Casey View Glen Affric Amber Oak Sky View Scarola Chard Wooded King Deer Ridge Evergreen Ingraham Marett Hayden Locust Wing Site Vicinity Map Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30, Klickitat County, Washington FIGURE NO. 1 PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 SCC SCC - DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\Projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Working\SCC\Site Vicinity.mxd I 0 1 2 0.5 Miles Swale Creek Goldendale Klickitat County Goldendale Bingen Little Klickitat River ---PAGE BREAK--- Little Klickitat Subbasin Swale Creek Subbasin Hwy 97 Hoctor Centerville State Hwy 14 Bickleton State Hwy 142 Hill No 4 Olson Knight Willis Pipeline Horseshoe Bend Columbus Wood lan d Finn Ridge Miller Pine Forest Woods Wing Enyeart Collins R i m ro c k Dooley Cameron Esteb Van Hoy Dalles Mtn Butts Rogers Clyde Story Crafton No 12 Cedar Valley Simcoe Mtn Cunliff Main Linden Hunter Otis Anderson O r c hard Height s Pothole Austin Oak Hill Fairgrounds High Br oadway Harms Rd G o ld e n Pi n e Foster Hanging Rock Fish Hatchery Mesecher Basse Shiloh T e a l T yl e r Sara Eshelman M aryhill Loop s B rown s John D a y D a m Horseranch Piluk Lipo Roosevelt Calvert Spring Creek Loop Je n k in s C r e e k Larg e nt T o m M i ller Ea gle Palmer Winterstein North Lake Forest Glen Tu c ker H ill Bluff Boss N o bl e F i r H e a r t h s i d e Beebe Tur k ey R anc h Newton Potts Peggy Indian Hill Sunset Big Sky Pumphouse She p p a r d Megann Sunrise Timber Carpool Mill G r one w a ld Darland Piney Woods Hatfield Spur Third Sawyer Vosberg Forest Hill Gregg Cragganmore Pine Indian Basin Lone Cedar Horseshoe Ben d Rd Casey View Glen Affric Amber Oak Sky View Scarola Chard Wooded King Deer Ridge Evergreen Ingraham Marett Hayden Locust Wing Salmonid Distribution and Stream Reaches Subject to Most Stringent Temperature Criteria Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30, Klickitat County, Washington FIGURE NO. 2 PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 SCC SCC - DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\Projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Working\SCC\SalmonidTemp.mxd I 0 1 2 0.5 Miles Goldendale Salmonid Distribution (WDFW and Streamnet, 2005) Steelhead Coho and Chinook Salmon Spawning/Incubation Temperature Criteria 13° C from February 15 to June 1 Canyon Creek Jenkins Creek West Prong Little Klickitat Butler Creek East Prong Little Klickitat Swale Creek Little Klickitat River ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 360 355 350 345 340 335 330 325 320 315 310 305 300 295 290 285 280 275 270 265 260 255 250 245 240 235 230 225 220 215 210 205 200 195 190 185 180 175 170 165 160 155 150 145 140 135 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 T03R14E - 18 T03R14E - 30 T03R14E - 02 T04R14E - 23 T03R14E - 17 T04R14E - 31 T03R14E - 03 T03R14E - 19 T04R14E - 35 T03R14E - 27 T03R14E - 11 T04R14E - 19 T03R14E - 20 T04R14E - 30 T03R14E - 29 T03R14E - 14 T04R14E - 22 T04R14E - 33 T04R14E - 26 T04R14E - 34 T03R14E - 28 T03R14E - 07 T04R14E - 20 T03R14E - 16 T03R14E - 15 T03R14E - 26 T03R14E - 06 T03R14E - 23 T03R14E - 21 T03R14E - 08 T03R14E - 10 T03R14E - 22 T03R14E - 04 T04R14E - 21 T03R14E - 09 T04R14E - 27 T03R14E - 05 T03R14E - 31 T04R14E - 29 T04R14E - 32 T03R14E - 32 T03R14E - 33 T03R14E - 35 T03R14E - 34 T03R14E - 25 T03R14E - 24 T03R14E - 12 T03R14E - 01 T03R14E - 13 T04R14E - 25 T04R14E - 36 T04R14E - 24 T03R14E - 36 T04R14E - 17 T04R14E - 14 T04R14E - 16 T04R14E - 15 T04R14E - 18 T04R14E - 13 2006 Riparian Vegetation Estimates Swale Creek (40-ft Corridor) Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30 - Klickitat County, Washington 0 3,000 6,000 1,500 Feet !I FIGURE NO. 3A PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 PPW PPW - DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Delivered\Final\CurrentConditions_Swale40.mxd GIS Estimated Vegetation Coverage 40-ft corridor 0 - 10% 10 - 20% 20 - 30% 30 - 40% 40 - 50% 50 - 60% 60 -70% 70 -80% 80 -90% 90 - 100% Warwick Fault (WA DNR 1:100,000 Coverage) Sections Segment Number ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 360 355 350 345 340 335 330 325 320 315 310 305 300 295 290 285 280 275 270 265 260 255 250 245 240 235 230 225 220 215 210 205 200 195 190 185 180 175 170 165 160 155 150 145 140 135 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 T03R14E - 18 T03R14E - 30 T03R14E - 02 T04R14E - 23 T03R14E - 17 T04R14E - 31 T03R14E - 03 T03R14E - 19 T04R14E - 35 T03R14E - 27 T03R14E - 11 T04R14E - 19 T03R14E - 20 T04R14E - 30 T03R14E - 29 T03R14E - 14 T04R14E - 22 T04R14E - 33 T04R14E - 26 T04R14E - 34 T03R14E - 28 T03R14E - 07 T04R14E - 20 T03R14E - 16 T03R14E - 15 T03R14E - 26 T03R14E - 06 T03R14E - 23 T03R14E - 21 T03R14E - 08 T03R14E - 10 T03R14E - 22 T03R14E - 04 T04R14E - 21 T03R14E - 09 T04R14E - 27 T03R14E - 05 T03R14E - 31 T04R14E - 29 T04R14E - 32 T03R14E - 32 T03R14E - 33 T03R14E - 35 T03R14E - 34 T03R14E - 25 T03R14E - 24 T03R14E - 12 T03R14E - 01 T03R14E - 13 T04R14E - 25 T04R14E - 36 T04R14E - 24 T03R14E - 36 T04R14E - 17 T04R14E - 14 T04R14E - 16 T04R14E - 15 T04R14E - 18 T04R14E - 13 2006 Riparian Vegetation Estimates Swale Creek (150-ft Corridor) Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30 - Klickitat County, Washington 0 3,000 6,000 1,500 Feet !I FIGURE NO. 3B PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 PPW PPW SCC DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Delivered\Final\CurrentConditions_Swale150.mxd GIS Estimated Vegetation Coverage 150-ft corridor 0 - 10% 10 - 20% 20 - 30% 30 - 40% 40 - 50% 50 - 60% 60 -70% 70 -80% 80 -90% 90 - 100% Warwick Fault Sections Segment Number ---PAGE BREAK--- 730 720 710 700 690 680 670 660 650 640 630 620 610 600 590 580 570 560 550 540 530 520 510 500 490 480 470 460 450 440 430 420 410 400 390 380 370 360 T04R17E - 09 T05R17E - 32 T05R17E - 29 T04R17E - 08 T05R16E - 31 T04R17E - 05 T05R17E - 20 T05R16E - 25 T04R15E - 12 T04R17E - 04 T05R17E - 33 T04R16E - 12 T04R16E - 20 T04R16E - 13 T04R16E - 05 T05R16E - 32 T04R16E - 17 T05R16E - 35 T04R16E - 16 T04R16E - 23 T05R16E - 34 T05R16E - 26 T04R16E - 07 T05R17E - 17 T05R16E - 36 T04R16E - 06 T04R16E - 29 T04R16E - 21 T05R16E - 33 T05R16E - 24 T04R16E - 03 T04R16E - 04 T04R16E - 18 T04R16E - 14 T04R16E - 15 T04R16E - 08 T04R16E - 02 T05R17E - 18 T04R16E - 22 T05R16E - 28 T05R17E - 31 T04R16E - 19 T04R15E - 01 T04R16E - 28 T04R17E - 06 T05R16E - 27 T05R17E - 19 T04R16E - 11 T04R17E - 03 T04R16E - 09 T05R17E - 30 T04R17E - 07 T05R16E - 23 T05R17E - 28 T04R17E - 18 T05R15E - 36 T05R16E - 29 T04R17E - 17 T05R16E - 22 T04R17E - 10 T05R16E - 13 T05R17E - 21 T04R16E - 24 T05R17E - 34 T04R16E - 27 T04R16E - 30 T04R16E - 32 T05R17E - 08 T04R15E - 13 T04R15E - 02 T05R15E - 35 T05R16E - 30 T05R16E - 21 T05R17E - 16 T04R17E - 16 T05R16E - 14 T05R17E - 27 T04R17E - 19 T04R17E - 11 T05R17E - 07 T04R16E - 26 T04R16E - 33 Hwy 97 Bickleton Pipeline Knight Woodland Columbus Collins Rimrock Wing Pine Forest Main No 4 Butts State Hwy 142 Court Austin Fairgrounds High Broadw a y G ol den Pin e Foster Hanging Rock Willis Mesecher Shiloh Teal Crafton Tyler Clyde Story Sara T h omp s o n Trai l H or s er a nc h Piluk Roosevelt Orchard Heights Loop Simcoe Jenkins C ree k T om Mille r Eagle Palmer Bluff Ponderosa Noble Fir Juniper C ha m b ers C h ris tie In dia n H il l Cahill Sunset Big Sky Pumphouse Brooks Megann Sara Vi e w Grant Burgen Mill Schuster Elm Darland P i ne y Woods Powers Dingmon 21st Third Scale House Post Lutz To o L o n g H emlo c k Vosberg Nesbitt B u b b le C r e e k Forest Hill Fish Hatchery Industrial O b s e r v a t o r y Cra g ga n m o re Pine I n dian Basi n Ri l e y Sentinel W il d A pple Easy Chatfield Glen Affric B u rl in g t on Loo p Casey Log Cabin Rogers Potts Oak Sp e n Justanother Aspen Adams Loop De Yoe Cutoff Reimer Sk y View Scarola Chard Deer Ridge Wild h orse Ranch A l l yn H ay d e n Wilbur Bull Pine Glenkinchie Locust Tan O ak Cozy Nook Golden Heights T and L E s tates King White Oak Douglas Fir A co r n M c D ougal Westw i nd Railroad White Spruce Birdie Berry Old American Wellman Golden Ridge Second Steinfeldt Roe Conboy Washington McKinley Allyn Mill Burgen Dingmon Grant Rogers Orchard Heights Oak £ ¤ 97 Bickleton 3rd U V 142 2006 Riparian Vegetation Estimates, Little Klickitat River (40-ft Corridor, Upstream Half) Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30 - Klickitat County, Washington FIGURE NO. 4A PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 PPW PPW SCC DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Delivered\Final\CurrentConditions_LittleKlick_Up_40.mxd 0 3,500 7,000 10,500 14,000 1,750 Feet !I GIS Estimated Vegetation Coverage (40-foot corridor) 0 - 10% 10 - 20% 20 - 30% 30 - 40% 40 - 50% 50 - 60% 60 -70% 70 -80% 80 -90% 90 - 100% Sections Segment Number ---PAGE BREAK--- 730 720 710 700 690 680 670 660 650 640 630 620 610 600 590 580 570 560 550 540 530 520 510 500 490 480 470 460 450 440 430 420 410 400 390 380 370 360 T04R17E - 09 T05R17E - 32 T05R17E - 29 T04R17E - 08 T05R16E - 31 T04R17E - 05 T05R17E - 20 T05R16E - 25 T04R15E - 12 T04R17E - 04 T05R17E - 33 T04R16E - 12 T04R16E - 20 T04R16E - 13 T04R16E - 05 T05R16E - 32 T04R16E - 17 T05R16E - 35 T04R16E - 16 T04R16E - 23 T05R16E - 34 T05R16E - 26 T04R16E - 07 T05R17E - 17 T05R16E - 36 T04R16E - 06 T04R16E - 29 T04R16E - 21 T05R16E - 33 T05R16E - 24 T04R16E - 03 T04R16E - 04 T04R16E - 18 T04R16E - 14 T04R16E - 15 T04R16E - 08 T04R16E - 02 T05R17E - 18 T04R16E - 22 T05R16E - 28 T05R17E - 31 T04R16E - 19 T04R15E - 01 T04R16E - 28 T04R17E - 06 T05R16E - 27 T05R17E - 19 T04R16E - 11 T04R17E - 03 T04R16E - 09 T05R17E - 30 T04R17E - 07 T05R16E - 23 T05R17E - 28 T04R17E - 18 T05R15E - 36 T05R16E - 29 T04R17E - 17 T05R16E - 22 T04R17E - 10 T05R16E - 13 T05R17E - 21 T04R16E - 24 T05R17E - 34 T04R16E - 27 T04R16E - 30 T04R16E - 32 T05R17E - 08 T04R15E - 13 T04R15E - 02 T05R15E - 35 T05R16E - 30 T05R16E - 21 T05R17E - 16 T04R17E - 16 T05R16E - 14 T05R17E - 27 T04R17E - 19 T04R17E - 11 T05R17E - 07 T04R16E - 26 T04R16E - 33 £ ¤ 97 Bickleton 3rd U V 142 Hwy 97 Bickleton Pipeline Knight Woodland Columbus Collins Rimrock Wing Pine Forest Main No 4 Butts State Hwy 142 Court Austin Fairgrounds High Broadw a y G ol den Pin e Foster Hanging Rock Willis Mesecher Shiloh Teal Crafton Tyler Clyde Story Sara T h omp s o n Trai l H or s er a nc h Piluk Roosevelt Orchard Heights Loop Simcoe Jenkins C ree k T om Mille r Eagle Palmer Bluff Ponderosa Noble Fir Juniper C ha m b ers C h ris tie In dia n H il l Cahill Sunset Big Sky Pumphouse Brooks Megann Sara Vi e w Grant Burgen Mill Schuster Elm Darland P i ne y Woods Powers Dingmon 21st Third Scale House Post Lutz To o L o n g H emlo c k Vosberg Nesbitt B u b b le C r e e k Forest Hill Fish Hatchery Industrial O b s e r v a t o r y Cra g ga n m o re Pine I n dian Basi n Ri l e y Sentinel W il d A pple Easy Chatfield Glen Affric B u rl in g t on Loo p Casey Log Cabin Rogers Potts Oak Sp e n Justanother Aspen Adams Loop De Yoe Cutoff Reimer Sk y View Scarola Chard Deer Ridge Wild h orse Ranch A l l yn H ay d e n Wilbur Bull Pine Glenkinchie Locust Tan O ak Cozy Nook Golden Heights T and L E s tates King White Oak Douglas Fir A co r n M c D ougal Westw i nd Railroad White Spruce Birdie Berry Old American Wellman Golden Ridge Second Steinfeldt Roe Commerce Conboy Washington McKinley Allyn Mill Burgen Dingmon Grant Rogers Orchard Heights Oak 2006 Riparian Vegetation Estimates, Little Klickitat River (150-ft Corridor, Upstream Half) Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30 - Klickitat County, Washington FIGURE NO. 4B PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 PPW PPW SCC DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Delivered\Final\CurrentConditions_LittleKlick_Up_150.mxd 0 3,500 7,000 10,500 14,000 1,750 Feet !I GIS Estimated Vegetation Coverage (150-foot corridor) 0 - 10% 10 - 20% 20 - 30% 30 - 40% 40 - 50% 50 - 60% 60 -70% 70 -80% 80 -90% 90 - 100% Sections Segment Number ---PAGE BREAK--- 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 390 380 370 360 350 340 330 320 310 300 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100 T04R15E - 30 T04R15E - 19 T04R14E - 10 T04R15E - 18 T04R15E - 12 T04R14E - 23 T04R15E - 31 T04R15E - 04 T04R14E - 35 T04R15E - 06 T04R15E - 05 T04R15E - 07 T04R14E - 03 T04R15E - 24 T04R15E - 35 T04R15E - 26 T04R14E - 13 T04R15E - 02 T04R15E - 11 T04R15E - 29 T04R15E - 03 T04R15E - 13 T04R15E - 22 T04R15E - 20 T04R14E - 22 T04R14E - 14 T04R15E - 10 T04R15E - 32 T04R15E - 23 T04R14E - 26 T04R14E - 15 T04R14E - 34 T04R14E - 02 T04R14E - 12 T04R14E - 25 T04R15E - 34 T04R15E - 21 T04R14E - 24 T04R15E - 17 T04R15E - 33 T04R14E - 11 T04R15E - 09 T04R15E - 16 T04R15E - 08 T04R15E - 15 T04R14E - 36 T04R15E - 36 T04R15E - 14 T04R15E - 01 T04R16E - 07 T04R15E - 27 T04R16E - 18 T04R15E - 25 T04R16E - 30 T04R16E - 19 T04R15E - 28 T04R14E - 01 T04R16E - 06 T04R16E - 31 T04R14E - 27 T04R14E - 09 T04R14E - 04 T04R14E - 21 T04R14E - 16 T04R14E - 28 T04R14E - 33 T03R14E - 02 T03R15E - 06 T03R14E - 03 T03R14E - 01 T03R15E - 05 T03R15E - 04 T03R15E - 03 T03R15E - 02 T03R15E - 01 T03R16E - 06 T03R14E - 04 T05R15E - 35 T05R15E - 36 T05R16E - 31 T05R15E - 33 T05R15E - 34 T05R15E - 32 T05R15E - 31 T05R14E - 36 T05R14E - 35 T05R14E - 34 T05R14E - 33 U V 142 Hill State Hwy 142 Olson Horseshoe Bend Knight Esteb Butts Wing Crafton Cunliff Van Hoy Enyeart Otis Anderson Fish Hatchery Mesecher Simcoe Mtn Fairgrounds Lipo Calvert Spring Creek Knox Largent Winterstein Beebe Linden Newton Pine Forest Peggy Hunter Hatfield Sawyer Gregg Teal Amber Ihrig Goree Hatchery Russ Cook Princehouse Enyeart Wing Simcoe Mtn 2006 Riparian Vegetation Estimates, Little Klickitat River (40-ft Corridor, Half) Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30 - Klickitat County, Washington FIGURE NO. 5A PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 PPW PPW SCC DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Delivered\Final\CurrentConditions_LittleKlick_Down_40.mxd 0 3,500 7,000 10,500 14,000 1,750 Feet !I GIS Estimated Vegetation Coverage 40-ft corridor 0 - 10% 10 - 20% 20 - 30% 30 - 40% 40 - 50% 50 - 60% 60 -70% 70 -80% 80 -90% 90 - 100% Sections Segment Number Little Klickitat Falls ---PAGE BREAK--- 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 390 380 370 360 350 340 330 320 310 300 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100 T04R15E - 30 T04R15E - 19 T04R14E - 10 T04R15E - 18 T04R15E - 12 T04R14E - 23 T04R15E - 31 T04R15E - 04 T04R14E - 35 T04R15E - 06 T04R15E - 05 T04R15E - 07 T04R14E - 03 T04R15E - 24 T04R15E - 35 T04R15E - 26 T04R14E - 13 T04R15E - 02 T04R15E - 11 T04R15E - 29 T04R15E - 03 T04R15E - 13 T04R15E - 22 T04R15E - 20 T04R14E - 22 T04R14E - 14 T04R15E - 10 T04R15E - 32 T04R15E - 23 T04R14E - 26 T04R14E - 15 T04R14E - 34 T04R14E - 02 T04R14E - 12 T04R14E - 25 T04R15E - 34 T04R15E - 21 T04R14E - 24 T04R15E - 17 T04R15E - 33 T04R14E - 11 T04R15E - 09 T04R15E - 16 T04R15E - 08 T04R15E - 15 T04R14E - 36 T04R15E - 36 T04R15E - 14 T04R15E - 01 T04R16E - 07 T04R15E - 27 T04R16E - 18 T04R15E - 25 T04R16E - 30 T04R16E - 19 T04R15E - 28 T04R14E - 01 T04R16E - 06 T04R16E - 31 T04R14E - 27 T04R14E - 09 T04R14E - 04 T04R14E - 21 T04R14E - 16 T04R14E - 28 T04R14E - 33 T03R14E - 02 T03R15E - 06 T03R14E - 03 T03R14E - 01 T03R15E - 05 T03R15E - 04 T03R15E - 03 T03R15E - 02 T03R15E - 01 T03R16E - 06 T03R14E - 04 T05R15E - 35 T05R15E - 36 T05R16E - 31 T05R15E - 33 T05R15E - 34 T05R15E - 32 T05R15E - 31 T05R14E - 36 T05R14E - 35 T05R14E - 34 T05R14E - 33 U V 142 Hill State Hwy 142 Olson Horseshoe Bend Knight Esteb Butts Wing Crafton Cunliff Van Hoy Enyeart Otis Anderson Fish Hatchery Mesecher Simcoe Mtn Fairgrounds Lipo Calvert Spring Creek Knox Largent Winterstein Beebe Linden Newton Pine Forest Peggy Hunter Hatfield Sawyer Gregg Teal Amber Ihrig Goree Hatchery Russ Cook Princehouse Enyeart Wing Simcoe Mtn 2006 Riparian Vegetation Estimates, Little Klickitat River (150-ft Corridor, Half) Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30 - Klickitat County, Washington FIGURE NO. 5B PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 PPW PPW SCC DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Delivered\Final\CurrentConditions_LittleKlick_Down_150.mxd 0 3,500 7,000 10,500 14,000 1,750 Feet !I GIS Estimated Vegetation Coverage 150-ft corridor 0 - 10% 10 - 20% 20 - 30% 30 - 40% 40 - 50% 50 - 60% 60 -70% 70 -80% 80 -90% 90 - 100% Sections Segment Number Little Klickitat Falls ---PAGE BREAK--- T04R14E - 28 T04R14E - 33 T04R14E - 20 T04R14E - 21 T04R14E - 31 T04R14E - 19 T04R14E - 30 T04R14E - 29 T04R14E - 32 T03R14E - 05 T03R14E - 06 T03R14E - 04 T04R14E - 17 T04R14E - 16 T04R14E - 18 Estimated Changes in Riparian Vegetation for Lowermost Swale Creek, 1969-2006 Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30, Klickitat County, Washington FIGURE NO. 6 PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 SCC SCC PPW DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Delivered\Final\VegChange_69-06_LowerSwale.mxd I T04R14E - 28 T04R14E - 33 T04R14E - 20 T04R14E - 21 T04R14E - 31 T04R14E - 19 T04R14E - 30 T04R14E - 29 T04R14E - 32 T03R14E - 06 T03R14E - 05 T03R14E - 04 T04R14E - 17 T04R14E - 16 T04R14E - 18 5 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 135 130 125 120 115 110 100 105 0 2,000 4,000 1,000 Feet 1969 2006 Loss >30% Loss 10-30% No change (-10 to10%) Gain 10-30% Gain >30% Segment not analyzed GIS-Estimated % Change in Riparian Vegetation 1969-2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- T03R14E - 20 T03R14E - 17 T03R14E - 21 T03R14E - 16 T03R14E - 29 T03R14E - 28 Estimated Changes in Riparian Vegetation for Swale Creek near Stacker Canyon, 1969-2006 Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30, Klickitat County, Washington FIGURE NO. 7 PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 SCC SCC PPW DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Delivered\Final\VegChange_69-06_StackerCanyon.mxd I T03R14E - 20 T03R14E - 17 T03R14E - 21 T03R14E - 16 T03R14E - 29 T03R14E - 28 270 265 260 255 250 245 240 235 230 225 220 215 210 205 200 195 0 1,000 2,000 500 Feet 1969 2006 Loss >30% Loss 10-30% No change (-10 to10%) Gain 10-30% Gain >30% Segment not analyzed GIS-Estimated % Change in Riparian Vegetation 1969-2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- T03R14E - 26 T03R14E - 23 T03R14E - 25 T03R14E - 24 T03R14E - 27 T03R14E - 22 T03R14E - 35 T03R14E - 14 T03R14E - 36 T03R14E - 13 T03R14E - 15 T03R14E - 34 Estimated Changes in Riparian Vegetation for Swale Creek near Warwick, 1969-2006 Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30, Klickitat County, Washington FIGURE NO. 8 PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 SCC SCC PPW DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Delivered\Final\VegChange_69-06_Warwick.mxd I T03R14E - 26 T03R14E - 23 T03R14E - 25 T03R14E - 24 T03R14E - 27 T03R14E - 22 T03R14E - 35 T03R14E - 14 T03R14E - 36 T03R14E - 13 T03R14E - 15 T03R14E - 34 360 355 350 345 340 335 330 325 320 315 310 0 1,500 3,000 750 Feet 1969 2006 Loss >30% Loss 10-30% No change (-10 to10%) Gain 10-30% Gain >30% Segment not analyzed GIS-Estimated % Change in Riparian Vegetation 1969-2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- T04R14E - 13 T04R14E - 14 T04R14E - 15 T04R14E - 10 T04R14E - 11 T04R14E - 12 T04R14E - 16 T04R14E - 09 T04R14E - 23 T04R14E - 22 T04R14E - 24 T04R14E - 21 T04R15E - 19 T04R15E - 20 T04R14E - 24 T04R15E - 30 T04R14E - 25 T04R15E - 29 T04R15E - 21 T04R15E - 28 T04R15E - 17 T04R15E - 18 T04R14E - 13 T04R15E - 16 Estimated Changes in Riparian Vegetation for Lowermost Little Klickitat River, 1969-2006 Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30, Klickitat County, Washington FIGURE NO. 9 PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 SCC SCC PPW DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Delivered\Final\VegChange_69-06_LowerLittleKlick.mxd 5 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 145 140 135 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 T04R14E - 13 T04R14E - 14 T04R14E - 15 T04R14E - 10 T04R14E - 11 T04R14E - 12 T04R14E - 16 T04R14E - 09 T04R14E - 23 T04R14E - 22 T04R14E - 24 T04R14E - 21 0 2,500 5,000 1,250 Feet 1969 2006 Loss >30% Loss 10-30% No change (-10 to 10%) Gain 10 - 30% Gain >30% GIS-Estimated % Change in Riparian Vegetation 1969-2006 255 250 245 240 235 230 225 220 215 210 205 200 195 190 185 180 175 170 165 160 155 150 145 140 135 130 125 120 115 110 T04R15E - 19 T04R15E - 20 T04R14E - 24 T04R15E - 30 T04R14E - 25 T04R15E - 29 T04R15E - 21 T04R15E - 28 T04R15E - 17 T04R15E - 18 T04R14E - 13 T04R15E - 16 !I ---PAGE BREAK--- T05R17E - 29 T05R17E - 20 T05R17E - 28 T05R17E - 21 T05R17E - 16 T05R17E - 17 T05R17E - 32 T05R17E - 33 T05R17E - 19 T05R17E - 30 T05R17E - 18 T05R17E - 31 Estimated Changes in Riparian Vegetation for Little Klickitat River Near 3 Creeks, 1978-2006 Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30, Klickitat County, Washington FIGURE NO. 10 PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 SCC SCC PPW DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Delivered\Final\VegChange_78-06_LittleKlick3Creeks.mxd I 735 730 725 720 715 710 705 700 695 690 685 680 675 670 665 660 655 650 645 640 635 T05R17E - 29 T05R17E - 20 T05R17E - 28 T05R17E - 21 T05R17E - 16 T05R17E - 17 T05R17E - 32 T05R17E - 33 T05R17E - 19 T05R17E - 30 T05R17E - 18 T05R17E - 31 0 1,500 3,000 750 Feet 1978 2006 Loss >30% Loss 10-30% No change (-10 to 10%) Gain 10-30% Gain >30% GIS-Estimated % Change in Riparian Vegetation 1978-2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX A Tabulations of Raw Field Data ---PAGE BREAK--- Table A-1. Raw Field Measurements of Canopy Cover Canopy left bank Canopy center- upstream Canopy center right Canopy Center down- stream Canopy center left Canopy right bank Swale Creek Swale Creek 11 6/11/09 1 112 24 77 0.6 17 3 6 6 7 16 Swale Creek 11 6/11/09 2 112 24 62 0.8 17 5 5 3 14 9 Swale Creek 11 6/11/09 3 101 20 58 1.0 17 17 1 17 17 17 Swale Creek 11 6/11/09 4 110 19 33 0.6 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 11 6/11/09 5 108 12 45 0.8 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 16 6/11/09 1 179 17 62 0.3 17 17 14 16 17 10 Swale Creek 16 6/11/09 2 180 22 62 0.3 17 17 14 14 17 14 Swale Creek 16 6/11/09 3 179 27 60 0.7 17 17 17 17 17 15 Swale Creek 16 6/11/09 4 178 20 62 0.3 17 16 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 16 6/11/09 5 178 23 54 0.3 17 17 17 16 17 17 Swale Creek 18 6/11/09 1 168 25 57 0.4 16 7 17 10 6 17 Swale Creek 18 6/11/09 2 172 35 60 0.2 17 15 4 14 17 15 Swale Creek 18 6/11/09 3 168 53 31 0.3 17 15 11 10 17 15 Swale Creek 18 6/11/09 4 170 38 51 0.3 17 10 14 7 13 17 Swale Creek 18 6/11/09 5 170 43 64 0.3 17 9 11 10 16 17 Swale Creek 22 6/11/09 1 179 10 59 0.4 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 22 6/11/09 2 180 11 41 0.2 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 22 6/11/09 3 179 12 51 0.2 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 22 6/11/09 4 179 16 45 0.4 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 22 6/11/09 5 181 24 43 0.2 17 5 7 7 7 10 Swale Creek 25 6/11/09 1 118 20 42 0.3 17 17 17 16 16 17 Swale Creek 25 6/11/09 2 120 25 38 0.4 17 14 14 13 16 17 Swale Creek 25 6/11/09 3 118 22 48 0.5 16 15 13 12 14 17 Swale Creek 25 6/11/09 4 119 20 57 0.3 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 25 6/11/09 5 128 16 48 0.5 8 4 5 4 2 17 Swale Creek 35 6/12/09 1 80 11 22 0.5 17 14 10 15 17 12 Swale Creek 35 6/12/09 2 76 17 30 0.2 17 17 16 17 17 17 Swale Creek 35 6/12/09 3 70 17 37 0.3 16 14 13 14 17 17 Swale Creek 35 6/12/09 4 78 20 43 0.2 17 14 16 7 6 14 Swale Creek 35 6/12/09 5 80 26 33 0.3 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 47 6/12/09 1 94 12 39 0.7 17 6 0 9 16 17 Swale Creek 47 6/12/09 2 84 16 43 1.3 17 14 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 47 6/12/09 3 88 19 44 0.4 17 5 1 15 11 17 Swale Creek 47 6/12/09 4 82 13 64 0.2 17 17 12 5 17 17 Swale Creek 47 6/12/09 5 64 27 77 0.1 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 57 6/12/09 1 144 13 28 0.5 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 57 6/12/09 2 138 13 26 0.3 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 57 6/12/09 3 134 14 31 0.4 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 57 6/12/09 4 132 22 37 0.1 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 57 6/12/09 5 132 18 72 0.5 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 66 6/12/09 1 118 15 48 0.5 17 15 17 17 16 16 Swale Creek 66 6/12/09 2 115 20 43 0.5 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 66 6/12/09 3 105 18 32 0.8 17 15 16 16 12 17 Swale Creek 66 6/12/09 4 112 14 38 0.4 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 66 6/12/09 5 111 12 28 0.1 17 17 17 17 17 17 100% 0% 97% 6% 89% 17% 82% 31% 78% 23% 82% 27% 90% 22% 78% 33% 95% 9% 43% 10% 30% 33% 25% 20% 38% 0% 6% No. Shaded Intersections on Densiometer (max = 17) Comments Std Dev / Average Std. Deviation of % Canopy Cover Data for Segment Avg. % Canopy Cover for Segment Avg. Wetted Depth (ft) Avg. Bankfull Width (ft) Avg. Wetted Width (ft) Stream Aspect (degrees azimuth) Transect Measur ement Date Segment No. Stream Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Appendix A tables - raw field data Table A-1 Page 1 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table A-1. Raw Field Measurements of Canopy Cover Canopy left bank Canopy center- upstream Canopy center right Canopy Center down- stream Canopy center left Canopy right bank No. Shaded Intersections on Densiometer (max = 17) Comments Std Dev / Average Std. Deviation of % Canopy Cover Data for Segment Avg. % Canopy Cover for Segment Avg. Wetted Depth (ft) Avg. Bankfull Width (ft) Avg. Wetted Width (ft) Stream Aspect (degrees azimuth) Transect Measur ement Date Segment No. Stream Swale Creek 72 6/12/09 1 180 23 43 0.2 17 16 16 17 17 17 Swale Creek 72 6/12/09 2 184 27 45 0.3 14 11 14 11 16 17 Swale Creek 72 6/12/09 3 188 22 35 0.2 17 16 16 16 17 17 Swale Creek 72 6/12/09 4 182 16 41 0.3 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 72 6/12/09 5 185 23 33 0.4 17 13 15 16 15 17 Swale Creek 95 6/12/09 1 180 10 34 0.5 7 17 17 17 13 17 Swale Creek 95 6/12/09 2 200 1401 28 0.5 11 12 5 12 17 17 Swale Creek 95 6/12/09 3 212 18 26 0.4 17 15 16 6 17 17 Swale Creek 95 6/12/09 4 206 16 28 0.4 15 16 15 17 17 17 Swale Creek 95 6/12/09 5 202 9 24 0.2 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 96 6/12/09 1 207 29 38 0.2 17 13 17 12 17 17 Swale Creek 96 6/12/09 2 205 12 36 0.2 17 4 4 2 9 17 Swale Creek 96 6/12/09 3 205 15 35 0.2 3 0 14 6 2 12 Swale Creek 96 6/12/09 4 205 20 27 2.0 7 5 3 0 5 12 Swale Creek 96 6/12/09 5 200 15 33 0.6 6 1 4 0 7 17 Swale Creek 100 6/12/09 1 208 15 45 1.5 0 0 0 5 14 0 Swale Creek 100 6/12/09 2 210 13 31 0.2 17 17 17 17 17 16 Swale Creek 100 6/12/09 3 211 19 25 1.4 13 4 13 0 8 17 Swale Creek 100 6/12/09 4 220 10 26 0.5 13 3 5 6 14 14 Swale Creek 100 6/12/09 5 220 10 25 0.9 9 4 11 8 11 14 Swale Creek 106 6/12/09 1 236 0 40 0.0 0 0 0 1 Swale Creek 106 6/12/09 2 234 0 40 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 106 6/12/09 3 246 0 35 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 106 6/12/09 4 244 0 55 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 106 6/12/09 5 244 0 53 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 119 6/14/09 1 208 13 40 0.1 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 119 6/14/09 2 186 9 37 0.5 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 119 6/14/09 3 191 28 40 0.8 17 13 9 12 17 17 Swale Creek 119 6/14/09 4 185 37 38 5.0 17 0 2 0 1 17 Swale Creek 119 6/14/09 5 171 6 17 0.2 17 17 17 17 17 16 Swale Creek 123 6/14/09 1 178 6 27 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 123 6/14/09 2 175 0 29 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 123 6/14/09 3 180 0 34 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 123 6/14/09 4 190 0 29 0.0 0 0 0 2 Swale Creek 123 6/14/09 5 178 0 23 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 128 6/14/09 1 170 23 105 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 128 6/14/09 2 184 54 63 0.2 4 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 128 6/14/09 3 182 49 57 0.9 16 0 0 0 0 17 Swale Creek 128 6/14/09 4 185 52 62 0.9 10 0 0 0 0 3 Swale Creek 128 6/14/09 5 191 48 56 1.4 2 0 0 0 0 4 Swale Creek 135 6/14/09 1 178 19 46 0.2 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 135 6/14/09 2 174 19 47 0.2 17 1 3 3 0 7 Swale Creek 135 6/14/09 3 170 31 43 0.3 17 0 3 0 0 1 Swale Creek 135 6/14/09 4 168 20 34 0.9 0 0 1 0 0 1 Swale Creek 135 6/14/09 5 164 12 34 0.7 17 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 139 6/14/09 1 180 0 23 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 139 6/14/09 2 182 0 32 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 139 6/14/09 3 190 0 32 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 139 6/14/09 4 180 0 32 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 139 6/14/09 5 180 0 27 0.0 0 0 0 0 0% 0% 11% 26% 34% 45% 84% 33% 1% 3% 56% 36% 0% 1% 94% 10% 49% 36% 88% 21% 11% 74% 23% 65% N/A 40% N/A 241% 132% N/A Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Appendix A tables - raw field data Table A-1 Page 2 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table A-1. Raw Field Measurements of Canopy Cover Canopy left bank Canopy center- upstream Canopy center right Canopy Center down- stream Canopy center left Canopy right bank No. Shaded Intersections on Densiometer (max = 17) Comments Std Dev / Average Std. Deviation of % Canopy Cover Data for Segment Avg. % Canopy Cover for Segment Avg. Wetted Depth (ft) Avg. Bankfull Width (ft) Avg. Wetted Width (ft) Stream Aspect (degrees azimuth) Transect Measur ement Date Segment No. Stream Swale Creek 146 6/14/09 1 147 0 43 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 146 6/14/09 2 144 0 41 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 146 6/14/09 3 148 0 34 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 146 6/14/09 4 150 0 29 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 146 6/14/09 5 150 0 53 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 174 6/15/09 1 187 0 43 0.0 2 0 0 7 Swale Creek 174 6/15/09 2 185 18 45 0.1 15 3 1 0 3 4 Swale Creek 174 6/15/09 3 186 20 43 0.1 2 0 0 0 2 4 Swale Creek 174 6/15/09 4 184 17 48 0.6 17 1 0 0 6 17 Swale Creek 174 6/15/09 5 184 17 42 0.2 0 0 0 0 1 17 Swale Creek 181 6/15/09 1 206 23 46 0.2 1 0 0 8 0 17 Swale Creek 181 6/15/09 2 206 23 37 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 4 Swale Creek 181 6/15/09 3 181 14 20 0.6 10 3 0 0 0 5 Swale Creek 181 6/15/09 4 201 12 23 0.8 9 0 0 0 6 0 Swale Creek 181 6/15/09 5 196 6 13 0.2 0 10 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 182 6/15/09 1 210 7 24 0.1 10 2 2 6 11 12 Swale Creek 182 6/15/09 2 230 0 30 0.0 1 5 5 2 Swale Creek 182 6/15/09 3 230 0 30 0.0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 182 6/15/09 4 243 14 39 0.2 10 0 0 1 0 0 Swale Creek 182 6/15/09 5 254 11 40 0.1 0 0 8 0 4 17 Swale Creek 190 6/15/09 1 170 10 22 0.1 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 190 6/15/09 2 186 0 23 0.0 5 15 5 8 Swale Creek 190 6/15/09 3 189 4 24 0.1 0 12 1 2 2 17 Swale Creek 190 6/15/09 4 180 0 66 0.0 1 14 4 14 Swale Creek 190 6/15/09 5 178 0 60 0.0 0 1 1 11 Swale Creek 204 6/15/09 1 240 30 53 0.8 15 0 0 0 0 17 Swale Creek 204 6/15/09 2 250 23 54 0.6 17 7 6 13 16 17 Swale Creek 204 6/15/09 3 133 12 54 0.2 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 204 6/15/09 4 148 17 48 0.9 8 0 0 3 9 13 Swale Creek 204 6/15/09 5 144 9 41 0.1 11 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 236 6/15/09 1 176 9 23 0.7 17 13 10 2 9 17 Swale Creek 236 6/15/09 2 180 7 46 0.2 17 17 17 17 17 17 Estimated values due to intense, thick brush - impenetrable Swale Creek 236 6/15/09 3 179 6 45 0.4 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 236 6/15/09 4 171 2 29 0.2 17 17 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 236 6/15/09 5 170 9 40 1.3 17 3 15 14 15 17 Swale Creek 250 6/15/09 1 75 16 37 1.0 17 0 0 2 1 17 Swale Creek 250 6/15/09 2 69 0 30 0.0 10 12 12 12 Swale Creek 250 6/15/09 3 78 0 33 0.0 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 250 6/15/09 4 81 14 26 0.4 15 0 0 16 2 17 Swale Creek 250 6/15/09 5 80 0 24 0.0 17 17 17 17 Swale Creek 260 6/15/09 1 80 17 37 0.3 2 0 0 0 0 17 Swale Creek 260 6/15/09 2 79 11 36 0.3 1 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 260 6/15/09 3 79 16 22 0.4 0 0 2 0 0 17 Swale Creek 260 6/15/09 4 83 8 16 0.1 0 0 3 0 0 4 Swale Creek 260 6/15/09 5 82 16 28 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 1 Swale Creek 291 6/9/09 1 123 31 50 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 291 6/9/09 2 128 12 60 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 291 6/9/09 3 122 37 49 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 291 6/9/09 4 118 24 49 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 291 6/9/09 5 120 9 56 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 9% 25% 0% 0% 89% 24% 66% 42% 53% 41% 66% 41% 23% 35% 22% 28% 14% 25% 0% 0% N/A 155% 130% 178% 78% 61% 26% 64% 275% N/A Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Appendix A tables - raw field data Table A-1 Page 3 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table A-1. Raw Field Measurements of Canopy Cover Canopy left bank Canopy center- upstream Canopy center right Canopy Center down- stream Canopy center left Canopy right bank No. Shaded Intersections on Densiometer (max = 17) Comments Std Dev / Average Std. Deviation of % Canopy Cover Data for Segment Avg. % Canopy Cover for Segment Avg. Wetted Depth (ft) Avg. Bankfull Width (ft) Avg. Wetted Width (ft) Stream Aspect (degrees azimuth) Transect Measur ement Date Segment No. Stream Swale Creek 294 6/9/09 1 143 20 58 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 294 6/9/09 2 127 24 49 0.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 294 6/9/09 3 125 15 47 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 294 6/9/09 4 117 19 40 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 294 6/9/09 5 122 6 78 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 304 6/9/09 1 77 8 18 0.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 304 6/9/09 2 70 15 17 0.9 4 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 304 6/9/09 3 80 5 19 0.4 0 9 17 17 1 17 Swale Creek 304 6/9/09 4 58 2 14 0.2 4 7 15 3 2 16 Swale Creek 304 6/9/09 5 90 15 31 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 323 6/9/09 1 35 25 82 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 323 6/9/09 2 37 5 93 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 323 6/9/09 3 47 39 55 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 323 6/9/09 4 55 9 41 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swale Creek 323 6/9/09 5 44 15 36 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Average for All Swale Creek Segments Measured: 54% 23% 77% 0% 0% 0% 0% 22% 36% N/A 165% N/A Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Appendix A tables - raw field data Table A-1 Page 4 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table A-1. Raw Field Measurements of Canopy Cover Canopy left bank Canopy center- upstream Canopy center right Canopy Center down- stream Canopy center left Canopy right bank No. Shaded Intersections on Densiometer (max = 17) Comments Std Dev / Average Std. Deviation of % Canopy Cover Data for Segment Avg. % Canopy Cover for Segment Avg. Wetted Depth (ft) Avg. Bankfull Width (ft) Avg. Wetted Width (ft) Stream Aspect (degrees azimuth) Transect Measur ement Date Segment No. Stream Little Klickitat River Little Klickitat 2 6/11/09 1 66 76 155 2.0 17 0 0 0 0 0 Little Klickitat 2 6/11/09 2 70 74 110 2.2 17 0 0 2 0 0 Island in center of channel, close to confluence with Klickitat, LB bankful may overlap Klickitat bankfu Little Klickitat 2 6/11/09 3 74 71 175 1.6 17 0 0 0 0 0 close to confluence with Klickitat, LB bankful may overlap Klickitat bankful Little Klickitat 2 6/11/09 4 72 72 112 1.2 17 0 0 0 5 0 Little Klickitat 2 6/11/09 5 90 78 128 1.2 17 2 5 0 3 17 Little Klickitat 9 6/11/09 1 168 39 49 2.5 17 0 0 0 0 17 Too deep to cross, last measurement on right bank estimated Little Klickitat 9 6/11/09 2 220 40 50 1.6 17 0 0 0 0 17 Little Klickitat 9 6/11/09 3 194 25 30 2.3 17 0 0 0 0 17 Values estimated, too deep and fast to cross Little Klickitat 9 6/11/09 4 186 25 35 2.3 17 0 0 0 0 17 Little Klickitat 9 6/11/09 5 196 18 48 2.0 17 0 0 0 0 17 Little Klickitat 247 6/11/09 1 102 34 73 1.2 15 1 0 0 5 10 Little Klickitat 247 6/11/09 2 106 69 28 1.2 6 1 0 0 4 4 Little Klickitat 247 6/11/09 3 101 29 49 1.7 11 2 0 0 7 9 Little Klickitat 247 6/11/09 4 92 31 70 1.7 17 0 1 0 6 16 Little Klickitat 247 6/11/09 5 100 31 71 1.2 17 1 0 0 6 13 started 40' downs from T1 or 248 Little Klickitat 248 6/11/09 1 110 27 52 1.1 17 6 4 0 14 17 Little Klickitat 248 6/11/09 2 100 23 63 1.3 15 0 2 1 1 17 Little Klickitat 248 6/11/09 3 115 34 60 1.1 3 0 0 0 1 16 Little Klickitat 248 6/11/09 4 108 25 85 1.6 8 6 6 0 9 17 Little Klickitat 248 6/11/09 5 118 31 55 1.4 17 2 0 2 11 17 Little Klickitat 250 6/11/09 1 110 27 62 1.3 17 2 9 6 13 16 Little Klickitat 250 6/11/09 2 111 24 54 1.2 17 1 7 0 6 17 Little Klickitat 250 6/11/09 3 107 31 70 1.2 17 1 0 0 9 17 Little Klickitat 250 6/11/09 4 111 29 58 1.4 16 2 4 2 13 16 Little Klickitat 250 6/11/09 5 111 21 71 1.6 17 3 3 9 17 12 Little Klickitat 254 6/10/09 1 28 30 113 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 16 Little Klickitat 254 6/10/09 2 31 26 94 1.9 0 0 0 0 0 17 Little Klickitat 254 6/10/09 3 29 32 116 2.5 1 0 1 0 0 17 right bank measurement estimated, water too deep the wade Little Klickitat 254 6/10/09 4 29 38 102 2.2 3 0 14 0 0 16 Little Klickitat 254 6/10/09 5 32 27 90 1.3 0 7 2 0 0 7 Little Klickitat 256 6/10/09 1 23 25 70 1.1 1 0 4 0 0 17 Little Klickitat 256 6/10/09 2 11 38 112 0.7 2 3 5 0 0 17 Low island in middle Little Klickitat 256 6/10/09 3 31 39 112 0.8 0 6 11 0 0 17 Little Klickitat 256 6/10/09 4 35 43 109 1.2 0 5 12 9 0 14 Little Klickitat 256 6/10/09 5 43 37 111 1.2 0 0 12 6 0 17 Little Klickitat 259 6/10/09 1 58 30 48 2.6 0 0 0 0 9 too deep to measure right bank Little Klickitat 259 6/10/09 2 68 28 52 2.1 10 0 0 0 0 17 Little Klickitat 259 6/10/09 3 64 20 37 1.8 3 Swift, deep spot, could not get measurements Little Klickitat 259 6/10/09 4 66 26 47 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 6 Little Klickitat 259 6/10/09 5 70 50 58 Located at base of rapids, could not get data; start T5 40 feet of T1 of 260 Little Klickitat 260 6/10/09 1 50 22 35 Too deep and fast to collect data Little Klickitat 260 6/10/09 2 70 47 101 0.9 17 0 3 0 2 17 Little Klickitat 260 6/10/09 3 63 47 87 1.3 0 0 2 0 0 17 Little Klickitat 260 6/10/09 4 67 45 89 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 8 Little Klickitat 260 6/10/09 5 60 31 84 1.7 0 0 0 0 5 Side channel, 5'wetted width, stagnant water 1.4' deep not counted in wetted width Little Klickitat 350 6/1/09 1 80 31 32 3.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 Little Klickitat 350 6/1/09 2 84 40 47 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 17 Little Klickitat 350 6/1/09 3 90 47 57 1.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 Little Klickitat 350 6/1/09 4 93 31 37 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 Little Klickitat 350 6/1/09 5 101 28 33 1.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3% 18% 15% 29% 18% 34% 20% 40% 31% 37% 41% 40% 53% 39% 33% 48% 30% 34% 23% 40% 171% 144% 115% 99% 74% 203% 120% 195% 190% N/A Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Appendix A tables - raw field data Table A-1 Page 5 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table A-1. Raw Field Measurements of Canopy Cover Canopy left bank Canopy center- upstream Canopy center right Canopy Center down- stream Canopy center left Canopy right bank No. Shaded Intersections on Densiometer (max = 17) Comments Std Dev / Average Std. Deviation of % Canopy Cover Data for Segment Avg. % Canopy Cover for Segment Avg. Wetted Depth (ft) Avg. Bankfull Width (ft) Avg. Wetted Width (ft) Stream Aspect (degrees azimuth) Transect Measur ement Date Segment No. Stream Little Klickitat 351 6/1/09 1 98 29 33 4.5 15 0 0 0 0 16 Too deep to collect data in middle of creek; but it was clear that no canopy closure was present Little Klickitat 351 6/1/09 2 78 29 37 4.5 17 0 0 0 0 16 Too deep to collect data in middle of creek; but it was clear that no canopy closure was present Little Klickitat 351 6/1/09 3 65 29 32 4.5 3 0 0 0 0 16 Too deep to collect data in middle of creek; but it was clear that no canopy closure was present Little Klickitat 351 6/1/09 4 88 29 34 4.5 17 0 0 0 0 16 Too deep to collect data in middle of creek; but it was clear that no canopy closure was present Little Klickitat 351 6/1/09 5 82 26 33 4.5 17 0 0 0 0 17 Too deep to collect data in middle of creek; but it was clear that no canopy closure was present Little Klickitat 411 6/10/09 1 70 27 34 2.8 17 0 0 0 0 17 Too deep to wade, values estimated Little Klickitat 411 6/10/09 2 70 35 38 2.0 17 0 0 1 3 17 Little Klickitat 411 6/10/09 3 100 20 41 1.9 16 3 16 15 0 17 Little Klickitat 411 6/10/09 4 110 28 42 1.3 17 0 1 0 2 17 Little Klickitat 411 6/10/09 5 110 25 33 2.8 17 1 9 4 17 17 Little Klickitat 435 6/8/09 1 60 26 44 1.0 11 4 4 4 0 8 Little Klickitat 435 6/8/09 2 80 31 40 1.2 16 11 14 3 13 15 Little Klickitat 435 6/8/09 3 92 24 41 2.9 9 6 12 6 3 17 Little Klickitat 435 6/8/09 4 100 24 58 3.0 13 9 17 8 5 17 Too deep, values estimated for this transect Little Klickitat 435 6/8/09 5 86 31 43 1.1 1 11 16 8 9 17 Little Klickitat 436 6/8/09 1 75 27 32 0.8 17 11 16 5 6 7 Little Klickitat 436 6/8/09 2 75 31 38 1.3 17 17 17 13 14 17 Little Klickitat 436 6/8/09 3 75 31 40 2.2 17 13 17 14 16 17 Little Klickitat 436 6/8/09 4 85 26 32 1.4 17 12 16 13 17 17 Little Klickitat 436 6/8/09 5 65 21 36 1.6 17 15 15 14 17 16 Little Klickitat 442 6/8/09 1 120 33 54 0.7 16 14 11 8 13 16 Little Klickitat 442 6/8/09 2 130 39 53 0.7 17 16 14 14 17 17 Little Klickitat 442 6/8/09 3 140 42 61 0.7 17 14 17 17 17 17 Little Klickitat 442 6/8/09 4 130 43 60 0.7 17 9 11 7 16 13 Little Klickitat 442 6/8/09 5 125 35 54 0.9 17 9 12 7 16 17 Little Klickitat 444 6/9/09 1 150 25 48 1.0 16 8 16 13 16 17 Little Klickitat 444 6/9/09 2 150 29 66 1.3 17 6 16 15 12 17 T2 had an island that was subtracted from wetted width Little Klickitat 444 6/9/09 3 150 40 67 1.1 16 0 6 3 1 17 Little Klickitat 444 6/9/09 4 170 40 55 3.5 15 0 3 1 1 13 Transect was a deep pool, values estimated Little Klickitat 444 6/9/09 5 80 23 76 1.1 17 5 2 2 3 2 Little Klickitat 445 6/9/09 1 80 15 35 2.2 17 12 9 8 17 5 Wetted width to bank, location had an additional 3 feet of undercut bank Little Klickitat 445 6/9/09 2 40 18 23 1.8 17 6 8 10 17 9 Little Klickitat 445 6/9/09 3 40 22 40 1.5 12 2 9 4 7 15 Little Klickitat 445 6/9/09 4 15 26 44 0.8 14 5 10 6 7 17 island and dry channel present; dry channel included in bankfull width but not wetted width Little Klickitat 445 6/9/09 5 15 25 31 2.2 17 6 15 10 16 17 island and dry channel present; dry channel included in bankfull width but not wetted width Little Klickitat 446 6/9/09 1 15 24 29 1.2 16 8 12 4 13 17 T-1 had beaver chewed shrubs Little Klickitat 446 6/9/09 2 15 25 43 0.7 17 7 15 1 7 15 Little Klickitat 446 6/9/09 3 35 21 38 1.3 7 7 16 10 7 17 Little Klickitat 446 6/9/09 4 35 34 42 0.9 17 3 17 13 4 7 Little Klickitat 446 6/9/09 5 35 21 54 0.9 11 1 10 4 3 17 T5 has small dry channel on right bank Little Klickitat 447 6/9/09 1 45 25 54 1.6 7 1 5 9 4 17 Established T1 40 ft upstream of T5 of reach 446 Little Klickitat 447 6/9/09 2 70 20 34 0.9 7 0 9 0 3 13 Little Klickitat 447 6/9/09 3 70 29 31 1.4 7 0 3 2 1 0 Cement blocks and logs cabled together on right bank Little Klickitat 447 6/9/09 4 70 21 33 1.8 10 1 5 0 6 4 Little Klickitat 447 6/9/09 5 100 23 31 1.4 17 5 2 1 5 1 Little Klickitat 459 6/10/09 1 350 35 45 1.0 15 0 5 1 4 17 Little Klickitat 459 6/10/09 2 350 34 50 0.7 15 1 6 1 2 17 Little Klickitat 459 6/10/09 3 350 34 45 0.8 17 2 13 5 7 17 Little Klickitat 459 6/10/09 4 350 34 48 1.0 16 3 14 4 6 17 Little Klickitat 459 6/10/09 5 350 27 48 0.9 16 2 8 0 8 14 29% 45% 50% 38% 59% 32% 28% 28% 54% 40% 64% 28% 86% 20% 83% 20% 47% 47% 56% 31% 98% 54% 23% 24% 73% 44% 54% 98% 76% 151% Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Appendix A tables - raw field data Table A-1 Page 6 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table A-1. Raw Field Measurements of Canopy Cover Canopy left bank Canopy center- upstream Canopy center right Canopy Center down- stream Canopy center left Canopy right bank No. Shaded Intersections on Densiometer (max = 17) Comments Std Dev / Average Std. Deviation of % Canopy Cover Data for Segment Avg. % Canopy Cover for Segment Avg. Wetted Depth (ft) Avg. Bankfull Width (ft) Avg. Wetted Width (ft) Stream Aspect (degrees azimuth) Transect Measur ement Date Segment No. Stream Little Klickitat 460 6/10/09 1 350 26 46 1.4 17 2 12 3 7 17 Established T1 40 feet from T5 in reach 459 Little Klickitat 460 6/10/09 2 350 25 42 1.4 13 5 15 2 0 17 Little Klickitat 460 6/10/09 3 350 31 38 1.0 13 17 17 6 6 17 Little Klickitat 460 6/10/09 4 360 33 44 0.5 17 14 17 4 11 17 Little Klickitat 460 6/10/09 5 360 26 49 0.8 17 15 16 8 4 17 Little Klickitat 462 6/10/09 1 360 24 39 0.7 5 3 15 3 3 17 Little Klickitat 462 6/10/09 2 360 38 46 0.8 17 4 15 5 6 17 Little Klickitat 462 6/10/09 3 360 44 51 0.8 17 4 16 5 2 17 Little Klickitat 462 6/10/09 4 360 35 46 1.1 17 11 12 2 3 17 Little Klickitat 462 6/10/09 5 360 35 46 0.9 17 8 7 12 13 17 Little Klickitat 500 6/8/09 1 343 34 39 1.7 17 0 9 4 0 17 Little Klickitat 500 6/8/09 2 337 36 47 1.6 7 0 5 0 2 17 Little Klickitat 500 6/8/09 3 353 27 46 1.4 5 0 1 0 1 15 Little Klickitat 500 6/8/09 4 357 31 45 2.0 5 0 3 0 2 17 Little Klickitat 500 6/8/09 5 360 30 45 2.5 12 0 6 0 1 17 Right bank canopy measurement approximated, deep hole next to bank Little Klickitat 502 6/8/09 1 8 22 32 1.2 17 4 9 2 9 17 Little Klickitat 502 6/8/09 2 14 24 32 1.3 17 6 3 2 14 10 Little Klickitat 502 6/8/09 3 10 21 31 1.2 17 0 0 0 0 3 Little Klickitat 502 6/8/09 4 12 24 31 1.0 17 5 15 3 10 17 Little Klickitat 502 6/8/09 5 12 23 30 1.3 17 0 3 1 7 17 Little Klickitat 506 6/8/09 1 29 31 42 1.0 17 0 7 0 7 17 Little Klickitat 506 6/8/09 2 29 27 43 1.3 17 0 6 3 3 17 Little Klickitat 506 6/8/09 3 37 28 39 1.6 9 0 13 1 0 16 Little Klickitat 506 6/8/09 4 39 25 42 1.3 10 5 13 1 8 17 Little Klickitat 506 6/8/09 5 41 31 41 0.8 11 2 4 2 9 12 Little Klickitat 508 6/9/09 1 54 26 40 1.0 17 16 16 6 10 17 Little Klickitat 508 6/9/09 2 55 27 39 1.0 17 2 10 8 3 17 Little Klickitat 508 6/9/09 3 52 26 42 1.2 17 2 7 4 5 15 Little Klickitat 508 6/9/09 4 48 27 40 0.7 17 2 6 1 12 17 Little Klickitat 508 6/9/09 5 54 31 47 0.9 15 12 17 14 8 15 Little Klickitat 570 6/9/09 1 56 25 36 1.8 17 1 0 0 8 1 Little Klickitat 570 6/9/09 2 52 25 35 2.9 16 1 1 11 0 Deep pool, left bank, couldn't get canopy closure at that point Little Klickitat 570 6/9/09 3 38 26 36 1.1 2 1 1 0 0 1 deep pool just Little Klickitat 570 6/9/09 4 49 25 37 1.2 13 0 3 0 1 5 0.411764706 Little Klickitat 570 6/9/09 5 44 19 30 1.4 17 0 1 0 12 0.167647059 Little Klickitat 571 6/9/09 1 50 22 25 1.0 11 0 0 0 0 2 40 ft upstream from T5 of 570; within restoration Little Klickitat 571 6/9/09 2 58 15 75 2.2 0 0 11 0 1 17 segment is within and just above a restoration area with a side channel, wide bankfull reflects side ch Little Klickitat 571 6/9/09 3 71 40 65 1.1 5 0 0 0 2 15 Above restoration Little Klickitat 571 6/9/09 4 770 37 55 2.3 5 2 6 1 4 17 Little Klickitat 571 6/9/09 5 68 29 46 2.2 16 1 3 1 6 14 rt bank measurement of canopy estimated Little Klickitat 572 6/9/09 1 71 40 65 1.1 5 0 0 0 2 15 Little Klickitat 572 6/9/09 2 70 37 55 2.3 5 2 6 1 4 17 Little Klickitat 572 6/9/09 3 68 29 46 2.3 16 1 3 1 6 14 rt bank measurement of canopy estimated Little Klickitat 572 6/9/09 4 75 33 53 1.9 14 2 7 0 12 17 Little Klickitat 572 6/9/09 5 76 33 45 2.1 5 7 0 12 12 Little Klickitat 573 6/9/09 1 79 25 33 1.9 6 2 5 0 5 10 T1 of 573 is 40' up from T5 of 572 Little Klickitat 573 6/9/09 2 89 20 35 2.1 13 2 13 2 7 16 Little Klickitat 573 6/9/09 3 82 19 25 2.7 17 1 13 4 9 17 Little Klickitat 573 6/9/09 4 70 19 26 1.6 17 0 7 0 3 8 Little Klickitat 573 6/9/09 5 52 24 50 0.8 0 5 5 6 0 Willow covered gravel bar, right bank, encompassing about 1/2 wetted width, T5 is 15.5 ft upstream o 39% 33% 27% 35% 38% 35% 64% 34% 24% 34% 47% 40% 45% 36% 60% 35% 32% 38% 67% 35% 54% 145% 52% 59% 119% 126% 92% 85% 83% 82% Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Appendix A tables - raw field data Table A-1 Page 7 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table A-1. Raw Field Measurements of Canopy Cover Canopy left bank Canopy center- upstream Canopy center right Canopy Center down- stream Canopy center left Canopy right bank No. Shaded Intersections on Densiometer (max = 17) Comments Std Dev / Average Std. Deviation of % Canopy Cover Data for Segment Avg. % Canopy Cover for Segment Avg. Wetted Depth (ft) Avg. Bankfull Width (ft) Avg. Wetted Width (ft) Stream Aspect (degrees azimuth) Transect Measur ement Date Segment No. Stream Little Klickitat 578 6/10/09 1 32 45 1.0 17 5 3 1 12 17 Little Klickitat 578 6/10/09 2 50 20 26 1.9 17 3 13 3 14 Deep fast hole on right bank filling 1/2 wetted width; depth assumed >2.5' for 1/2 wetted width Little Klickitat 578 6/10/09 3 58 26 33 1.2 9 7 15 6 1 17 Little Klickitat 578 6/10/09 4 53 20 38 1.3 4 17 16 17 12 17 RB canopy estimated, swift current on bank Little Klickitat 578 6/10/09 5 26 18 28 1.3 6 2 11 2 0 17 RB canopy estimated; deep fast pool on right bank Little Klickitat 626 6/10/09 1 26 23 36 1.3 16 6 17 15 6 17 Little Klickitat 626 6/10/09 2 24 21 38 1.8 16 13 17 9 11 17 Little Klickitat 626 6/10/09 3 28 18 33 1.8 13 13 17 16 16 17 Little Klickitat 626 6/10/09 4 38 25 34 1.2 17 10 5 15 15 9 Little Klickitat 626 6/10/09 5 39 21 29 1.4 14 9 13 6 12 2 Little Klickitat 628 6/10/09 1 21 33 37 Too deep to collect data Little Klickitat 628 6/10/09 2 Too deep to collect data Little Klickitat 628 6/10/09 3 212 22 43 1.1 10 1 4 3 0 14 Little Klickitat 628 6/10/09 4 20 21 39 1.4 17 6 14 1 5 17 Little Klickitat 628 6/10/09 5 16 15 27 1.5 15 6 15 4 5 16 Average for All Little Klickitat Segments Measured: 44% 35% 96% Notes: Average for Swale Creek segments excludes segments 106, 139, and 144, for which no bank measurements were collected. 50% 36% 57% 37% 74% 26% 65% 35% 72% Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Appendix A tables - raw field data Table A-1 Page 8 of 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table A-2. Field Measurement Locations and Vegetation Observations Stream Segment No. GPS upstream (NAD27) easting GPS upstream (NAD27), northing GPS (NAD27) easting GPS (NAD27), northing Date Surveyors Field Reach Length (ft) Transect interval Right bank dominant veg Left bank dominant veg Right bank sub-dominant veg Left bank sub- dominant veg Right bank veg height (ft) Left bank veg height (ft) Comments Swale Creek Swale Creek 11 648270 5075728 648226 5075756 6/11/09 DLR/SH 171 40 Red Alder Red Alder Willow Willow 20 20 Overflow channel on right bank creates wide bankdfull in all transects except T4 Swale Creek 16 648459 5075592 648465 5075647 6/11/09 DLR/SH 182 40 Red Alder Red Alder Big Leaf Maple Dogwood 27 25 Swale Creek 18 648483 5075485 648474 5075537 6/11/09 DLR/SH 173 40 Red Alder Red Alder Willow Willow 24 32 Swale Creek 25 648625 5075094 648575 5075131 6/11/09 DLR/SH 169 40 Alder Alder Willow Willow 30 27 Swale Creek 22 648507 5075252 648499 5075303 6/11/09 DLR/SH 204 40 Red Alder Red Alder Willow Willow 20 21 Swale Creek 35 649152 5074928 649111 5074931 6/12/09 DLR/SH 135 40 Red Alder Red Alder Willow Willow 35 25 Swale Creek 47 649839 5074746 649789 5074728 6/12/09 DLR/SH 174 40 Willow Willow Red Alder Red Alder 7 23 Swale Creek 57 650364 5074542 650319 5074579 6/12/09 DLR/SH 191 40 Red Alder Red Alder N/A Willow 30 26 Swale Creek 66 650757 5074178 650726 5074097 6/12/09 DLR/SH 119 40 Red Alder Red Alder N/A N/A 30 27 Swale Creek 72 650991 5073937 650994 5073992 6/12/09 DLR/SH 181 40 Red Alder Red Alder Serviceberry Serviceberry 33 30 Swale Creek 96 650893 5072612 650914 5072674 6/12/09 DLR/SH 200 40 Red Alder Red Alder Willow Willow 28 22 Swale Creek 95 650900 5072962 650913 5072741 6/12/09 DLR/SH 215 40 Red Alder Red Alder Willow Willow 26 33 Trout and dace observed Swale Creek 100 650757 5072430 650785 5072470 6/12/09 DLR/SH 160 40 Red Alder Red Alder Willow Big Leaf Maple 12 25 6" salmonids observed Swale Creek 106 650540 5072149 650587 5072189 6/12/09 DLR/SH 203 40 Willow Willow Serviceberry Serviceberry 5 8 dry channel, estimated channel center for densiometer readings, cic not estimate wetted edge. Held densiometer 0.3 m above channel bottom. Flow resumes immediately of segment Swale Creek 119 650002 5071743 650007 5071796 6/14/09 DLR/SH 175 40 Red Alder Red Alder Serviceberry Serviceberry 25 25 Swale Creek 123 650021 5071512 650015 5071556 6/14/09 DLR/SH 146 40 Serviceberry Serviceberry Willow Willow 4 4 Swale Creek 128 650068 5071208 650052 5071259 6/14/09 DLR/SH 175 40 Serviceberry Serviceberry Willow Willow 6 7 Swale Creek 135 649945 5070806 649941 5070856 6/14/09 DLR/SH 165 40 Willow Willow Red Alder Serviceberry 5 6 Swale Creek 139 649952 5070577 649955 5070627 6/14/19 DLR/SH 164 40 Serviceberry Serviceberry Big Leaf Maple Willow 4 3 Side channel on right bank about 100 feet from main channel, both channels are dry Swale Creek 146 650064 5070178 650045 5070209 6/14/09 DLR/SH 119 40 Serviceberry Serviceberry None Willow 3 3 Swale Creek 174 649963 5068625 649959 5068675 6/15/09 DLR/SH 165 40 Willow Willow Serviceberry Serviceberry 3 3 Swale Creek 182 649922 5068138 649951 5068187 6/15/09 DLR/SH 187 40 Willow Willow Serviceberry Serviceberry 5 4 Swale Creek 181 649955 5068244 6/15/09 DLR/SH 187 40 Willow Willow Serviceberry Serviceberry 4 2 Swale Creek 190 649714 5067808 649722 5067818 6/15/09 DLR/SH 200 40 Willow Willow Serviceberry Serviceberry 5 5 Swale Creek 204 649198 5067180 649234 5067205 6/15/09 DLR/SH 144 40 Red Alder Red Alder Willow Willow 16 14 Swale Creek 236 648874 5065373 648870 5065397 6/15/09 DLR/SH 80 40 Willow Willow Serviceberry Red Alder 7 7 Swale Creek 250 649448 5065248 649408 5065226 6/15/09 DLR/SH 150 40 Willow Willow N/A N/A 6 6 Swale Creek 260 649983 5065118 649934 5065111 6/15/09 DLR/SH 162 40 Willow Willow Serviceberry Serviceberry 6 2 Swale Creek 291 651690 5064851 651660 5064880 6/9/09 DLR/SH 137 40 Hawthorne Hawthorne Willow Willow 5 4.5 Swale Creek 294 651868 5064783 651828 5064812 6/9/09 DLR/SH 162 40 None Hawthorne None Willow 0 15 Riparian trees are sparse, in the distant floodplain o the left bank Swale Creek 304 652338 5065097 652298 5065083 6/9/09 DLR/SH 139 40 Willow Willow Hawthorne Hawthorne 6 6 Swale Creek 323 653432 5065045 653402 5064997 6/9/09 DLR/SH 186 40 Grass Grass Grass Grass 1 1 Little Klickitat River Little Klickitat 2 650551 5078479 650503 5078474 6/11/09 NN/JR 158 40 Grass Alder Alder Mockorange 5 55 Crew indicated an error range of 15 to 21 feet on GPS location Little Klickitat 9 650689 5078283 650720 5078329 6/11/09 NN/JR 182 40 ed Canary Grass ed Canary Grass None None 6 6 Little Klickitat 247 660346 5074682 6/11/09 NN/JR 97 40 Alder Alder Willow Willow 15 25 Little Klickitat 248 660395 5074656 660357 5074680 6/11/09 NN/JR 147 40 Alder Alder Willow Willow 30 25 Little Klickitat 250 660488 5074593 660451 5074620 6/11/09 NN/JR 150 40 Alder Alder Willow Willow 25 25 Little Klickitat 254 660701 5074580 660670 5074541 6/10/09 NN/JR 163 40 Alder Alder Dogwood None 25 5 Grazed on left bank - sparsely vegetated Little Klickitat 256 660776 5074675 660748 5074634 6/10/09 NN/JR 163 40 Willow Willow Alder Alder 20 5 Left bank grazed Little Klickitat 259 660936 5074756 660890 5074744 6/10/09 NN/JR 156 40 Alder Alder Cherry Willow 25 10 Area has loads of reed canary grass on both banks, left bank is grazed Little Klickitat 260 660998 5074774 660947 5074757 6/10/09 NN/JR 176 40 Alder Alder Willow Willow 30 10 Little Klickitat 350 665624 5074989 6/1/09 DG/JC/DLR 90 40 Hawthorne Hawthorne spirea Willow 20 21 Little Klickitat 351 665677 5075000 665631 5074992 6/1/09 DG/JC/DLR 153 40 ed Canary Grass ed Canary Grass Meadow Grass Meadow Grass 2.5 2.5 few scattered hawthornes Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Appendix A tables - raw field data Table A-2 Page 1 of 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table A-2. Field Measurement Locations and Vegetation Observations Stream Segment No. GPS upstream (NAD27) easting GPS upstream (NAD27), northing GPS (NAD27) easting GPS (NAD27), northing Date Surveyors Field Reach Length (ft) Transect interval Right bank dominant veg Left bank dominant veg Right bank sub-dominant veg Left bank sub- dominant veg Right bank veg height (ft) Left bank veg height (ft) Comments Little Klickitat 411 668131 5076606 668088 5076604 6/10/09 BLW/NO 141 40 Alder Alder Willow Willow 20 25 Small stream joins river just upstream of T3. Beaver activity in area, culvert at T2 Little Klickitat 435 669461 5076923 669416 5076922 6/8/09 ALL 148 40 Cottonwood Cottonwood Willow Willow 80 30 Little Klickitat 436 669527 5076931 669481 5076928 6/8/09 BLW/NO 151 40 Cottonwood Cottonwood White alder White Alder 80 65 Little Klickitat 442 669821 5076810 669779 5076845 6/8/09 BLW/NO 179 40 Cottonwood Cottonwood White alder White Alder 100 100 Little Klickitat 444 669914 5076744 669883 5076784 6/9/09 BLW/NO 166 40 White Alder White AlderBlack CottonwoodBlack Cottonwood 15 30 Little Klickitat 445 669954 5076798 669926 5076746 6/9/09 BLW/NO 194 40Black cottonwoodBlack cottonwood Salix prolixa White alder 40 50 Little Klickitat 446 669981 5076843 669966 5076813 6/9/09 BLW/NO 110 40Black cottonwood White Alder White alder Red Alder 50 40 Little Klickitat 447 670040 5076876 669987 5076859 6/9/09 BLW/NO 183 40Black cottonwoodBlack cottonwood Salix prolixa Alder 20 30 Little Klickitat 459 670474 5077194 670494 5077138 6/10/09 BLW/NO 195 40Black cottonwoodBlack cottonwood White alder White Alder 70 50 Beaver sign throughout Little Klickitat 460 670468 5077253 670478 5077209 6/10/09 BLW/NO 148 40Black cottonwoodBlack cottonwood White alder White Alder 45 45 established transect 1 by measureing 40 feet from T5 of reach 459 Little Klickitat 462 670472 5077379 670478 5077331 6/10/09 BLW/NO 159 40 White Alder Pacific WillowBlack Cottonwood Ninebark 40 25 Little Klickitat 500 671428 5079122 671427 5079073 6/8/09 NN/JR 161 40 Alder Alder Willow Snowberry 20 15 Little Klickitat 502 671466 5079240 671447 5079192 6/8/09 NN/JR 169 40 Alder Alder Ninebark Willow 20 20 Little Klickitat 506 671610 5079445 671574 5079410 6/8/09 NN/JR 165 40 Alder Alder Willow Willow 25 35 Little Klickitat 508 671712 5079503 671660 5079475 6/9/09 NN/JR 194 40 Alder Alder Ninebark Ninebark 30 25 Little Klickitat 570 674668 5080636 674627 5080603 6/9/09 NN/JR 173 40 Ponderosa Pine Alder None Willow 0 25 P. pine located far back from stream, recent channel restoration at site. Way points took us to side channel created by beaver dam and 50 ft south of active channel, we measrued active channel Little Klickitat 571 674760 5080657 674676 5080647 6/9/09 NN/JR 180 40 Alder Alder Willow Willow 10 10 Recent restoration completed at site Little Klickitat 572 674756 5080659 674730 5080657 6/9/09 NN/JR 86 40 Alder Alder Willow spirea 50 30 Little Klickitat 573 674823 5080656 674769 5080655 6/9/09 NN/JR 177 40 Ponderosa Pine Alder Willow Willow 150 10 alder 15 ft, p pine within 50 foot of channel Little Klickitat 578 674987 5080884 674952 5080857 6/10/09 NN/JR 145 40 Alder Alder dogwood spirea 45 30 Little Klickitat 626 676920 5082397 676893 5082345 6/10/09 NN/JR 192 40 Ponderosa Pine Cottonwood Alder Snowberry 100 60 Little Klickitat 628 676999 5082488 676970 5082451 6/10/09 NN/JR 154 40 Cottonwood Alder Ninebark Ninebark 35 30 Aspect Consulting 6/30/09 V:\070024 WRIA 30 Phase 4\Deliverables\009 Shade Study\Appendix A tables - raw field data Table A-2 Page 2 of 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX B Details Regarding GIS Analysis ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01y JUNE 30, 2009 B-1 Various methods and method calibrations were used in the course of aerial photo vegetation classification. At the outset of the project, to provide information to the field program, classification using the red color band of the 2006 NAIP orthophoto was utilized as a succinct method for isolating green (dark) pixels that were taken to represent vegetation coverage. This classification scheme relies on the notion that each band (red, green, and blue) of the raster image functions as a “filter” for that constituent color. That is, for pixels that are made up of very little red, the red band of the raster for that given pixel will have a low (dark) value. The figure below illustrates the red/green/blue raster band composite of an aerial photo for illustrative purposes. Figure B1. Color Aerial Photo Raster and Constituent RGB Color Bands To isolate pixels thought to represent the greenest or most vegetated, multiple iterations of raster reclassification were performed on the red band raster, looking for a “sweet spot” that effectively discriminated between vegetation and non-vegetation. Further, the classification had to sufficiently distinguish very dark pixels that were taken to be open water in the stream channel. After a number of trial-and-error iterations an operational classification range of red band pixel values between 26 (high enough to cut out most all dark open water areas) and 95 (low enough to separate out bare ground for light ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01y JUNE 30, 2009 B-2 vegetation) was employed. While somewhat coarse, this methodology functioned effectively enough to provide first-cut estimates of vegetation coverage provided to the project field team. However, because of its reliance on the color bands, it would be a method ill-equipped for use on black and white historical photos. After the field measurements were reported, careful correlations between these measurements and the GIS analysis were made to move towards refinement of the GIS analysis process (see report text for discussion). Since the actual field measured area did not correspond exactly to the prepared 200-ft long, 40- and 150-ft stream corridor analysis segments, polygonal sections representing each of the field-measured areas were created by taking the GPS’d upstream and coordinates of the stream center for each given set of field measurements, drawing a line between the two and buffering that line to match the average measured wetted width for that segment (Figure B2). Figure B2. Field Analysis Segment Diagram Each of these derived polygons segments were analyzed for the percent classified vegetation in each and compared to the field measurements. Initial red band classification schemes showed an average absolute difference of 21% from field measurements for Swale Creek and 29% for Little Klickitat. The following scatter plot figures show the tenuous relationship between field measurements and initial GIS estimates. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01y JUNE 30, 2009 B-3 Swale Creek y = 0.9809x R2 = 0.3027 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Red 26 -95 % Veg Average % Canopy Little Klick y = 0.6155x R2 = -0.4073 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Red 26 -95 % Veg Average % Canopy Figure B3. Field-Measured Average Total Canopy against GIS-Estimated Vegetation Using Red Band Method After review of the GIS/field measurement relationship and a general assessment of the quality of classification provided by the red band color analysis method, it was decided that a more sophisticated, supervised maximum likelihood classification (MLC) scheme should be employed to analyze the aerial photos. Further, since color band classification would be inadequate for black and white historical photos, consistency in methodology between photo years would be beneficial. Taking advantage of available utilities in ESRI’s Spatial Analyst Multivariate toolbox, supervised MLC is a multi-step process that first involves manually categorizing sample swatches of an image to allow the GIS system to analyze the spectral signatures of each. That is, a GIS analyst manually delineates a vector polygon shapefile that represents ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01y JUNE 30, 2009 B-4 examples of the classes (see Figure B4) and uses that shapefile and the image itself to create an ASCII signature file that defines the characteristics of a given class. From ESRI’s MLC online documentation: The Maximum Likelihood Classification tool considers both the variances and covariances of the class signatures when assigning each cell to one of the classes represented in the signature file. With the assumption that the distribution of a class sample is normal, a class can be characterized by the mean vector and the covariance matrix. Given these two characteristics for each cell value, the statistical probability is computed for each class to determine the membership of the cells to the class.1 Figure B4. Example MLC classes After creating a signature file the Spatial Analyst Multivariate Maximum Likelihood Classification tool was then run using the aerial photo and signature file as inputs. The output of this process is a classified raster where each pixel that the system is able to classify has a value corresponding to that class. 1 http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.3/index.cfm?TopicName=How%20Maximum%20Likelihood%20Classification%20works ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01y JUNE 30, 2009 B-5 Figure 5. Max Likelihood Classified Image (green shades are vegetation classes) The MLC-classified raster output was then reclassified into a binary form where only relevant or successful vegetation classes for a given portion of an image were included. In some areas, the ability of the MLC method to delineate open water was limited – without tuning the classification scheme to overly-exclude dark trees. As such, a single classification of only the open water in the stream corridor was produced and subtracted from the binary classified output raster. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01y JUNE 30, 2009 B-6 Figure B6. Final Vegetation Coverage Estimate after Binary Reclassification from MLC Output and Open Water Class Subtraction The aforementioned field analysis segments were checked against this new classification scheme. The results showed an average absolute difference of 20% from field measurements for Swale Creek and 21% for Little Klickitat, some improvement from the initial analysis. The following scatter plot figures show the relationship between field and GIS measurements. Swale Creek y = 1.2891x R2 = 0.5184 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% MLC % Veg Average % Canopy ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01y JUNE 30, 2009 B-7 Little Klickitat y = 0.6957x R2 = 0.1286 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% MLC % Veg Average % Canopy Figure B7. Field-Measured Average Total Canopy against GIS-Estimated Vegetation Using MLC Method Though the relationship between the field data measurements and the GIS-estimated vegetation by MLC was still somewhat tenuous, there was notable improvement in both the linear relationships and the average discrepancy. Section 3.2 of the report text speaks to possible reasons for this discrepancy. Figures B9 and B10 show the field segments for Swale Creek and Little Klickitat River, respectively, that have the best and worst correlation between GIS estimates and field measurements. On the figures, areas estimated as vegetation by the GIS analysis are hatched in yellow, and the field measurements and GIS numerical estimates of vegetative cover are listed with segment number below each map window. Furthermore, visual inspection of the analysis results showed appreciable improvement. This improvement was particularly noticeable and beneficial in regards to the GIS’s ability to distinguish between open water and dark areas of trees. An example of this noticeable improvement is below: ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 070024-009-01y JUNE 30, 2009 B-8 Figure B8-A. Red Band (26-95) Classification Output. (shown in red) Figure B8-B. MLC Classification Output. (shown in green) The only real exception to this improvement seemed to be in the upper 4.5 miles of the Little Klickitat where Ponderosa pine becomes a dominant vegetation type. This was possibly due to the sun angle as photographed on those particular tiles of the aerial photo that produced long shadows and harsh light or the nature of the spectral bands in that region. Regardless, from analysis segment 620 on, the MLC classification was superseded by the 26-95 classification for the purposes of both the historic comparison and current vegetation estimates. Historic aerial photo were also analyzed using the MLC classification method. ---PAGE BREAK--- Segments with Best and Worst GIS Calibration to Field Measurements, Swale Creek Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30 - Klickitat County, Washington FIGURE NO. B9 PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 PPW PPW - DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Delivered\Final\GIS-Field-Calibration_Swale.mxd 0 125 250 62.5 Feet I Segment 96 Field-measured average total canopy = 49% GIS-estimated vegetation = 46% Segment 181 Field-measured average total canopy = 14% GIS-estimated vegetation = 10% Segment 250 Field-measured average total canopy = 43% GIS-estimated vegetation = 42% Segment 119 Field-measured average total canopy = 84% GIS-estimated vegetation = 41% Segment 190 Field-measured average total canopy = 67% GIS-estimated vegetation = 5% Segment 304 Field-measured average total canopy = 22% GIS-estimated vegetation = 85% Field Data Collection Segments GIS-Classified Vegetation Coverage ---PAGE BREAK--- Segments with Best and Worst GIS Calibration to Field Measurements, Little Klickitat River Riparian Vegetation Assessment, Little Klickitat River and Swale Creek WRIA 30 - Klickitat County, Washington FIGURE NO. B10 PROJECT NO. 070024-009 June 2009 PPW PPW - DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: REVISED BY: T:\projects_8\WRIA30\Shade_Study_2008\Delivered\Final\GIS-Field-Calibration_LittleKlick.mxd 0 125 250 62.5 Feet I Segment 442 Field-measured average total canopy = 83% GIS-estimated vegetation = 82% Segment 571 Field-measured average total canopy = 27% GIS-estimated vegetation = 29% Segment 411 Field-measured average total canopy = 47% GIS-estimated vegetation = 45% Segment 256 Field-measured average total canopy = 31% GIS-estimated vegetation = 87% Segment 502 Field-measured average total canopy = 47% GIS-estimated vegetation = 94% Segment 444 Field-measured average total canopy = 54% GIS-estimated vegetation = 88% Field Data Collection Segments GIS-Classified Vegetation Coverage