Stream Flow Monitoring Lessons Learned: Idaho Wild and Scenic River Water Rights Quantification

1. Stream Flow Monitoring Lessons Learned: Idaho Wild and Scenic River Water Rights Quantification

2. Presentation Outline Background and History: Snake River Basin Adjudication and Wild and Scenic River Claims Outstandingly Remarkable Values (ORVs) and Need for Stream Flow Monitoring Data Use of Stream Gage data to Quantify the Recreation ORV for Four Rivers Lessons learned If time allows: Monitoring Needed for Water Right Settlement - Salmon River

3. Snake River Basin Adjudication Legal proceeding initiated in 1986 requiring all water users to file claims for existing water uses US filed thousands of instream flow claims under federal law Federal Reserved Rights Quantity based on purposes for which US Congress set aside the federal land US denied rights for wilderness, Sawtooth NRA, and other federal purposes After 10 years of litigation, US awarded decrees to: 6 Wild and Scenic Rivers 14 streams and 18 lakes in Hells Canyon National Recreation Area

4. History, SRBA Wild and Scenic Rivers 1993 - Claims filed for all unappropriated flow as of the date of the reservation. 1993 - Objections filed by State of Idaho and others. 1997 � 1999 - Most data collection 1998 � District Court Decision: Summary Judgment US is entitled to reserved rights US not entitled to all unappropriated flows, US must quantify.

5. History (Continued) 2000 � Idaho Supreme Court affirmed lower court decision with remand back to the District Court for quantification 2001 - Parties ordered into mediation 2002 - US Filed amended claims 11/2004 � District Court order approving the settlement

6. Wild and Scenic Rivers Salmon River Middle Fork Salmon River Rapid River Middle Fork Clearwater River Lochsa River Selway River Snake River in HCNRA Excluded

7. Quantification � Based on Outstandingly Remarkable Values (ORVs) Water right claims must have a quantity in cfs that can be supported in a legal proceeding Quantity based on ORVs � determined through a Resource Assessment for each River ORVs considered for quantification Recreation Range of flows for boating (includes jet boats) and fishing Flows needed for beach maintenance Fisheries habitat Base flows for instantaneous habitat High flows for habitat maintenance Riparian habitat maintenance

8. Desired Stream Gage Characteristics Preferred gage characteristics for use in quantification of instream flows Near end of river or other logical administration point Close to gage referenced by boaters Long concurrent record with reference gage(s) Long record to allow accurate assessment of frequency that flows occur (exceedances)

9. Use of Stream Flow Data to Quantify Instream Flows Needed for the Recreation ORV

10. Recreation Claim Component

11. Recreational boating - primary elements (per work by Shelby and Whittaker) Define recreational opportunities Technical, standard, high challenge boating Jet boating (Salmon River) Select stream flow thresholds for opportunities at user reference gage Stage (feet) Discharge (cfs) Select legal quantification point (for administration) Long record � legal defensibility Protects most of river Transfer stream flow thresholds from reference gage to quantification point Quantification � Recreation

12. Lochsa River Recreation opportunities (boating) Technical, standard, and big water User reference gage � Three Rivers bridge in feet Quantification point � USGS gage at Lowell Technical Issue: Correlation of stage at bridge (foot marks) to discharge at USGS gage 3/4 mile upstream

13. Correlation of Reference Gage to USGS Gage

14. Lochsa River Near perfect from a monitoring standpoint USGS gage essentially at end of Wild and Scenic River User reference data at Three Rivers bridge located very close to USGS gage Daily readings of reference gage at Three Rivers Bridge were available USGS gage had long period of record (1910 � 2000) that overlapped Three Rivers bridge data Correlation of user gage to USGS gage highly defensible

15. Selway River Recreation opportunities (boating) Technical, standard, and big water User reference gage � Paradise staff gage (feet) Quantification point � USGS Selway River gage near Lowell Technical Issues: Correlation of stage at Paradise to discharge at USGS gage 50+ miles downstream

16. Paradise to Lowell Correlation

17. Correlation of Reference Gage to USGS Gage

18. Selway River Mixed results from a monitoring standpoint� Good - USGS gage essentially at end of Wild and Scenic River Good - USGS gage had long period of record (1911 � 2000) that overlapped data from Paradise reference gage Less Favorable � User gage at Paradise located over 50 miles upstream Correlation (legal defensibility) not as good as Lochsa due to distance between USGS gage and Paradise

19. Middle Fork Salmon River Recreation opportunities (boating) Technical, standard, and big water User reference gage - Middle Fork Lodge (stage in feet) Wire weight gage Quantification points � USGS gages at Middle Fork Lodge and at Mouth

20. Middle Fork Salmon River Technical challenges: Relate old �wire-weight gage� readings at Lodge to discharge at discontinued stream gage Questionable wire-weight readings Reinstalled stream gage, developed new rating Lack of stream gages presented problems New gage installed at Mouth in 1993 Difficult to correlate recreation flows at Lodge with flows at Mouth Two claims: Lodge and Mouth Claim at Lodge based on fisheries and recreation (boating) needs Claim at mouth was not based on Recreation ORVs Poor correlation of stage at Lodge with flows at mouth (short overlap) Claim at Mouth based on fisheries ORV only Had fisheries data at Mouth Resulted in lower flows than if claim was based on boating needs

21. Main Salmon River - Recreation Recreation opportunities (boating) Standard, big water, jet boating

22. Main Salmon River Lack of active stream gages within or near the Wild and Scenic River presented problems for developing a water rights claim Nearest active gages, Salmon River at Whitebird, Salmon River at Salmon - too far away to be useful as quantification points Difficulties with correlating stage (ft) at Corn Creek to discharge at Shoup Little data overlap - gage was discontinued in 1981 Middle Fork influence Two Claims: French Creek and Shoup Decided to not base claim at Shoup on Recreation ORVs Claim at Shoup based on water needs for fisheries ORV Historic data could be used to support fisheries claim Claimed more water if based on boating needs

23. Lessons Learned Where litigation is likely, stream flow data are critical to quantification of instream flows Need high quality data to survive legal challenges Need proper location(s) to protect the river Need a long period of record for statistical defensibility In a perfect world at least one user reference gage per river would be: Collocated with an active stream gage Monitored at least daily to provide correlation data Reference recreation boating levels to discharge in cfs

24. Monitoring Required for Administration of Salmon Wild and Scenic River Water Rights

25. Salmon Wild and Scenic River Upstream Development

26. Salmon W&SR Subordinations from Settlement All domestic and de minimus stockwater uses All municipal hookups less than 2 cfs (4 inch hookup) Future use subordination: Stream flow < 1280 cfs at Shoup 150 cfs of diversions Stream Flow > 1280 cfs at Shoup 225 cfs of additional diversions

27. Required Monitoring Stream Flow at Salmon River near Shoup to determine when W&SR water rights are in priority IDWR calculation and administration of new water rights in the basin Administration of water throughout the basin Settlement requires establishment of Upper Salmon Water District (in progress) Requires quarterly reporting to ensure water users are diverting legal right only

28. Other Monitoring � Long-term Trends in Stream Flow

29. Questions?

32. Salmon River  Instream Flow Water Right Quantities

33. Lessons Learned Stream gages need to be installed at critical locations on wild and scenic rivers to ensure that stream flow data are available to quantify past and future river flows. Needed for adjudications � US can obtain permanent federal reserved water rights Needed for monitoring of upstream effects from new and existing water uses Needed for administration of Wild and Scenic River water rights Needed for monitoring of climate change?

34. Fisheries Base Flow and Habitat Maintenance Fisheries habitat base flow component data needs Long-term stream flow record Need to calculate stream flow statistics � monthly exceedances � to evaluate available amounts of water Understanding of the relationship between fish habitat and stream flow Data collected in vicinity if stream gage to Minimize need to correlate flows at two locations

35. Pick Fish Habitat Flows Based on Weighted Usable Area as a Function of Flow

36. Fisheries Claim Component

37. Habitat Maintenance Component Claim objectives: Using a minimum amount of water, transport the volume and size classes of sediment needed to maintain fisheries habitat over the long-term. Determined as the threshold discharge, above which, 90- percent of the coarse sediment delivered to the river (claim site) is transported. Data needed for claim: Sediment transport data Long-term Stream flow record Channel substrate

38. Habitat Maintenance Claim Component

39. Fisheries - Monitoring Data Gaps Three of the six Wild and Scenic Rivers did not have operating stream gages Salmon River Discontinued gages at French Creek (1945 - 1956) and Shoup (1944 - 1981) Middle Fork Salmon Discontinued gage at Middle Fork Lodge (1973 - 1981 ) Middle Fork Clearwater River No historic stream gages or stream flow data All six rivers required sediment and fish habitat data collection

40. Salmon River Salmon Wild and Scenic River is unique because of large amount of private land in the basin above the river Stream flow data gap starting in 1981 resulting in poor understanding of effects on river flows of new water uses after 1981 Creates uncertainty about how much additional use can be tolerated and still protect the ORVs

41. Wild and Scenic River Water Rights Administration Wild and Scenic River settlement requires stream gages to be installed to administer water rights in the basins US must also monitor the granting of future water rights to ensure future use quantities remain within that allowed by the stipulation

42. Recreation � Monitoring Data Gaps Most recreation opportunities referenced a user gage that was in feet not cfs as needed for a water right claim User gages had to be correlated with a stream gage to determine cfs Stream gages were not always located at the downstream end of the Wild and Scenic River Logical place to administer a water right Available stream gages were sometimes inactive and statistically difficult to correlate with user gage

43. Recreation Opportunities

44. Hydrograph � Salmon River near Shoup