CREEKS & COMMUNITIES & RIPARIAN PROPER FUNCTIONING CONDITION Introduction

1. CREEKS & COMMUNITIES & RIPARIAN PROPER FUNCTIONING CONDITIONIntroduction

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

3. Overview • Overview of Creeks & Communities Strategy • What PFC is – What PFC does? • What PFC isn’t – What it does not do? • Inventory & Monitoring/Qualitative & Quantitative • Key Definitions • Site Potential, Pre-Work, Stratification • General Instructions for PFC Assessment

4. The National Riparian Strategy:Background and Original Mission • 1996: BLM &USFS agreed to implement interagency strategy to accelerate restoration & management of riparian-wetland areas. NRCS became a principal partner • Mission was to achieve healthy streams by bringing people together using a common vocabulary (still is) – PFC became the foundational tool

5. Background and Original Mission • Interagency/Interdisciplinary team was established in 1996 to direct implementation of this strategy – the National Riparian Service Team (NRST – based in Prineville, Oregon) • Established a Riparian Coordination Network (RCN) across the 11 western states

6. Riparian Coordination Network • Ensure Support To State Cadres • Coordination and Integration With Existing Programs • Coordinate On Training Activities NRST Agency Riparian Coordinators Smith BLM, ID Rick Forsman, Rick Hopson, R4-FS Interagency Training Cadres ID Coordinator: Smith Coordinate To Ensure Participation of: • Individuals From Outside agencies • Conservation and Industry Groups • Affected Communities

7. Strategy Evaluation & Findings (2002) • 250 briefings/presentations have reached between 8,000-9,000 people • NRST & State Cadres have conducted over 325 training sessions for over 10,000 people • NRST has made over 125 service trips for technical assistance to over 2,500 people • Strategy revised following evaluation “Creeks & Communities” – refines and improves original 1996 strategy

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

9. Natural Riparian Resources Water Vegetation Soil, Landscape

10. Riparian Proper Functioning Condition (PFC) • Term “PFC” is used in two ways: • Condition Description: An on-the-ground condition of riparian-wetland areas usually determined by completing the “PFC” assessment process or method (quantitative data can & should be used to validate checklist items & ratings where necessary/available) How the checklist items were addressed results in a selected rating category of PFC, FAR, or NF • Qualitative Method for assessing the physical functioning of riparian-wetland areas

11. The PFC concept is: • Based on the fact that systems need to be functional before they can produce any aquatic or riparian values – as such, PFC is a prerequisitefor achieving desired conditions

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

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

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

15. What is the Intent of the PFC Assessment? • Provides a Condition Description • Is a Communication Tool/Common Vocabulary • Provide a general/broad scale assessment of the condition of riparian/wetland areas • “Coarse filter” used to prioritize management, restoration & monitoring efforts

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

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

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

19. PFC is not • A replacement for biological inventory or monitoring protocols • The only methodology for determining the health of riparian or aquatic components of the riparian-wetland area

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

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

22. PFC • Is not the end point for management …remember that Proper Functioning Condition is a precursor to desired conditions. Agencies are obligated to manage for at least a condition of “Proper Functioning.” • In BLM, “the objective is to achieve an advanced ecological status except where resource management objectives… would require an earlier succession stage.”

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

24. The PFC Assessment Method is not to be used to: • Monitor Trend – PFC is too coarse of a tool to detect most changes in condition (trend) – UNLESS the change is DRAMATIC enough to be observable in photos

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

26. Monitoring • Qualitative Monitoring: Based on visual observations of attributes to estimate/document progress or change (e.g. photos or possibly PFC) • Quantitative Monitoring: Based on direct and/or indirect measurements of attributes to determine condition and progress or change (e.g. Monitoring Stream Channels & Riparian Vegetation). Some methods have attributes of both Assigning weighted numbers to qualitative estimates of attributes & processes, adding up the numbers, and assigning a condition category is not quantitative monitoring

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

28. Inventory vs Monitoring

29. Monitoring • Monitoring should be done to answer a particular question or issue • Tailor the monitoring method to the nature of the question • Broad/general/low controversy question/likely dramatic change = broad/general/coarse monitoring method • Detailed/specific/high controversy question/subtle change = detailed/specific/fine monitoring method • TAILOR THE SIZE OF THE ANSWER TO THE SIZE OF THE QUESTION

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

31. Key Definitions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

39. Ephemeral Stream • A stream that flows only in direct response to precipitation, and whose channel is above the water table at all times • Meinzer (1923) suggests that “intermittent” streams be arbitrarily restricted to streams that flow continuously for at least 30 days and “ephemeral be restricted to those that do not flow continuously for at least 30 days

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

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

42. Normal channel dynamics • Adjustments as a part of normal channel/riparian function • Incremental or periodic adjustments under high flow conditions • Involves channel & riparian interaction • Dynamic equilibrium or stable state

43. Rapid channel adjustment • Channel adjustments that occur rapidly in response to sudden changes • Water discharge • Sediment delivery • Channel/floodplain conditions • Vegetation changes • Important to manage such that streams are more resistant to rapid channel adjustment (i.e. condition of PFC)

44. Proper Functioning Condition (lotic) • Riparian-wetland areas are functioning properly when adequate vegetation, landform, or large woody debris is present to dissipate stream energy associated with high water flows,

45. Proper Functioning Condition (lotic) • thereby: • reduce erosion • filter sediment • capture bedload • aid floodplain development • improve flood-water retention • improve ground water recharge • stabilize stream banks • develop root masses that stabilize streambanks

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

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

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

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

50. Preparing to do a PFC Assessment