 |
| Squaw Creek Water Quality Improvement Project |
Archived |
Fremont County, Wyoming |
Primary Project Type: Instream Restoration
Secondary Type: |
 |
| |
Prior to restoration, Squaw Creek was a wide and shallow stream with severe eros... |
|
|
 |
Primary Problem: Bank Instability
Secondary Problem: |
| Main Restoration Action(s): |
| Native Fish Focus: N/A |
Is this project part of a watershed scale restoration? No
|
| Project Dates: 1990 to 1998 |
| |
Initial Monitoring:
Restoration Implementation:
Follow-up Monitoring: |
|
Lead Agency:
Popo Agie Conservation District
|
| Project Partners: |
|
| Project Location:
Squaw Creek originates in the Shoshone National Forest and drains an eastern portion of the Wind River Mountains. It flows through many ranches, farms, and subdivisions before passing through Lander, Wyoming, where it merges with Baldwin Creek. The project area included approximately six miles of stream within the City of Lander and through property of upstream land owners.
|
| |
| Project Description:
After the Squaw Creek drainage was first settled in the late 1800s, natural vegetation along the creek was steadily modified due to heavy grazing, poor farming practices, road construction, herbicide use, and subdivision development. Although the headwaters of Squaw Creek remained largely undisturbed, lower reaches were severely impacted by human disturbances. Trout abundance and water quality generally decreased with increasing distance from the mountains. The upper reaches of the stream primarily contained wild brook trout, whereas wild brown trout were dominant through the project area. Prior to restoration activities, bank erosion was severe and widespread, generating large amounts of sediment and degrading fish habitat. The stream often remained muddy throughout the summer. Nickpoints, headcuts, and oxbow cuts were identified at several sites prior to restoration activities, indicating poor channel stability. Overgrazing by cattle and sheep depleted riparian vegetation and weakened stream banks. Overwatering of pastures also created water-logged soils and led to sloughing of banks into the stream. |
| Project Goals: The primary goal of the project was to reduce nonpoint source pollution in Squaw Creek while correcting erosion problems in the riparian area. Silt from widespread bank erosion was the primary target pollutant. |
| Project Methods:
To reduce erosion and stabilize banks in the Squaw Creek project area, problem stream banks were riprapped with rocks, rock weirs were built to stop headcuts, irrigation control structures were installed, some areas were fenced to exclude livestock, and landowners were encouraged to develop better land use practices. An information and education program was started for high school students, featuring a hands-on, outdoor classroom experience where Squaw Creek flows through the high school grounds.
|
 |
| |
This photograph depicts a log weir installed at the control site in 1957. Sever... |
|
|
|
|
 |
| |
Agriculture is the primary land use in the Squaw Creek watershed. Implementatio... |
|
|
|
|
Monitoring Data and Collection
Methods: To gauge the effectiveness of restoration activities, the Lander Regional fish management crew of the Wyoming Game and Fish Department monitored fish response at four locations: three treated sites and one control site. The treated sites, in order from downstream to upstream, included Northside Park within the Lander city limits, the high school site on school district property, and the Bauman site upstream of Lander on private property. Treated sites were compared with an ungrazed control site upstream of the project area and with pre-treatment records. The control site was restored using similar techniques 25 years prior to restoration of the downstream reaches. Because of earlier restoration activities, the control site provided plentiful trout cover, including overhanging brush, debris jams, rock and log step dams, and undercut banks.
Several population variables were selected for use in determining fish response to the habitat improvement projects. These standard variables, or indices, were: total trout/mile, number of trout/mile that were 6 inches or greater in total length, total pounds/acre, and pounds/acre of trout 6 inches or greater. Percent change was a benchmark to measure gain or loss in these indices. Criteria used to arbitrarily measure success of fish response to habitat improvement were evaluated at two levels: Level 1 success required greater than 25% post-treatment increase in one of the trout population indices listed above; Level 2 success required a change of 50% or more.
|
| Was this project effective
and how was this determined? Riparian vegetation and stream bank conditions were better by 1998 than prior to restoration activities. Upstream from town, trout abundance improved 83% and biomass 300%, but sample sites within the city limits showed serious deterioration of the trout population. Trout numbers at the control site increased 16% from 1991 to 1998, suggesting a slow adjustment of the trout population as the once degraded habitat continued to heal, even though banks were stabilized 25 years prior to recent restoration activities.
Click here for more information.
|
 |
| |
(Before) Annual spring floods degraded stream banks and caused oxbow cutoffs and... |
|
|
|
|
 |
| |
(After) Although sheep and cattle grazing are still common in the Squaw Creek dr... |
|
|
|
|
Confounding Effects/Additional
Information: Although many eroding stream banks were restored and sediment loads in Squaw Creek were reduced, sediment was still a problem at the two urban sites in 1998 and may have been impacting fish populations. Fishery response was poor at these two sites; this may result from problems not addressed during restoration, i.e. chemical pollution, or it may result from the lack of time necessary for the entire system to heal. Although initial riparian response was good, information gained at the control site suggests full recovery of all vegetative components will be a slow process over many years.
Additional funding information: 60% Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality and US Environmental Protection Agency; 25% Popo Agie Conservation District; 15% Landowner contribution. |
| Project
Specs (all specs are estimates): |
|
|
| For more information on this project
contact: |
| |
Allen Binns, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Email: Allen.Binns@wgf.state.wy.us
|
| This information
was collected by: Michelle White |
|
|
 |
|
