 |
| Provo River |
Wasatch County, Utah |
Primary Project Type: Instream Restoration
Secondary Type: Riparian Restoration |
 |
| |
Arial photograph looking downstream on the reconstructed middle Provo River duri... |
|
|
 |
Primary Problem: Berms, Levees, Dikes, Channel Alteration, Flow Alteration
Secondary Problem: Change in Land Use |
| Main Restoration Action(s): Channel reconstruction, Floodplain reconnection, Habitat enhancement, Redirect flow into remnant channel, Streambank recontouring |
| Native Fish Focus: N/A |
Is this project part of a watershed scale restoration? No
|
| Project Dates: 1988 to Fall 2006 |
| |
Initial Monitoring: 1988 (pre-project studies)
Restoration Implementation: 1997
Follow-up Monitoring: ongoing |
|
Lead Agency:
Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission
|
| Project Partners: |
|
| Project Location:
In 1999 the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission began construction of the Provo River Restoration Project on the middle Provo River between Jordanelle Dam and Deer Creek Reservoir.
For a map of the project area click here.
|
| |
Project Description:
Prior to the 1940s, the middle Provo River meandered freely through the Heber Valley, offering outstanding fish and wildlife habitat. In the 1940s, the Provo River Project began, which has diverted, stored, and delivered large quantities of water from numerous Utah watersheds to help meet the needs of central Utah's citizens. As part of the Provo River Project, the middle Provo has received additional water from trans-mountain diversions from the Weber and Duchesne Rivers on the south slope of the Uinta mountains (Figure 1). To accommodate the high flows resulting from this diverted water, the middle Provo River was channelized and confined between dikes. As a result of this channel alteration, the complex middle Provo River ecosystem, in which fish and wildlife thrived, was lost.
In the early 1990s, the Jordanelle Dam was constructed on the Provo River for storage as a feature of the Central Utah Project. In 1994, Congress created the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission (Mitigation Commission). The Mitigation Commission’s primary responsibility has been to design, fund, and implement projects —using an ecological approach — to offset the impacts to fish, wildlife, and related recreation resources caused by the Central Utah Project and other federal reclamation projects in Utah. Planning was initiated in 1988 and intensified from 1991 to 1997, when the Final EIS for the project was completed. In 1999, the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission began the Provo River Restoration Project (PRRP) between Jordanelle Dam and Deer Creek Reservoir. The project was funded to offset the impacts to the river from Central Utah Project and the Jordanelle Dam and from several other Central Utah Project dams and facilities by restoring the middle Provo River’s pattern and ecological function to a more natural condition. |
| Project Goals: The goal of the Provo River Restoration Project was to restore the diversity and productivity of fish and wildlife habitat along the middle Provo River between Jordanelle Dam and Deer Creek Reservoir. To do so, river designers took an ecosystem restoration approach in designing a river system that would: (1) provide a wide variety of hydraulic habitats, (2) migrate slowly within a defined corridor, (3) promote natural revegetation of the floodplain though the processes of sediment erosion and deposition, (4) have reasonable rates of sediment transport, (5) be well-connected to its floodplain, and (6) have a channel that is self-sustaining over time. By meeting these goals, the river would sustain a viable ecosystem that would provide much-needed habitat for the aquatic and terrestrial organisms that live in and along the river. It would also provide a place where people could go to enjoy the beauty of nature. |
Project Methods:
One of the biggest challenges faced in the restoration design of the middle Provo River was the altered hydrologic regime placed on the river by the Jordanelle Dam and prior imported water patterns. Because the dam placed artificial demands and controls on the middle Provo River ecosystem, it could not be restored to its pre-disturbance condition. Therefore, the restoration design approach focused on the goal of reestablishing the important physical and biological processes that would sustain the ecosystem under this new hydrologic regime.
Restoration actions on the middle Provo River included: 1) removing most existing dikes to reestablish the river’s access to its floodplain; 2) restoring the straightened river channel into a meandering channel appropriate for the hydrologic regime controlled by the Jordanelle Dam; 3) restoring fish habitat; 4) protecting an 800- to 2,200-foot-wide corridor for angler access and wildlife habitat; 5) restoring wetlands and riparian woodlands to increase the amount, diversity and quality of wildlife habitat. For more information on channel restoration methods used on the Provo River, click here (12 MB pdf).
For more information on riparian vegetation restoration, click here
|
 |
| |
During new channel construction, substantial volumes of topsoil were excavated. ... |
|
|
|
|
 |
| |
Construction sequence 2... |
|
|
|
|
| Monitoring Data and Collection
Methods: In keeping with the ecological approach to the Provo River Restoration Project, an interdisciplinary team of scientists have been contributing their expertise to the project by designing and implementing several studies. These biological and physical studies have provided three essential components for restoration. They have: 1) thoroughly described the baseline physical and biological condition of the river; 2) provided a basis for restoration design; and 3) initiated monitoring that will enable planners to detect measurable change due to restoration activities and to make informed management decisions. Because the final phases of Provo River Restoration Project have just been completed, monitoring for effectiveness of the restoration efforts is just underway, and some ecological responses to the restoration efforts may not be measurable for several years.
For more information on these studies, click here.
|
Was this project effective
and how was this determined? In the fall of 2006, the final reaches of the middle Provo River Restoration Project were completed. The restored channel has a natural design with channel features that provide the habitat variability and structure that would be expected to occur in a natural channel with the physical setting of the middle Provo River. The main channel thread, designed with some irregularity, is free to meander on an 800- to 2,200-foot floodplain. Extending off the main channel is a network of cutoff channels and side channels which skip meanders to convey water primarily during runoff.
Habitat improvements and implementation of a minimum instream flow have also significantly improved aquatic life in the middle Provo River. Restored reaches have been recolonized by macroinvertebrates, through both the drift of insects from upstream areas and egg deposition by flying adult insects. An increase in aquatic habitat diversity, such as side channels, undercut banks, and increased cover from stream bank vegetation, has benefited survival of both game and non-game fishes. The density and biomass of brown trout have increased significantly. However, the average size and condition of trout have been decreasing since 1997. This decrease has been attributed to fishing regulations, which have since been altered. Studies have shown that native fish, particularly leatherside chub, have been vulnerable to predation by brown trout in simplified habitats; however, they have been found in refuge habitats in channels other than the main stem of the Provo River. Off-channel habitats such as backwater areas, side channels, ponds, and old channel cutoffs have been suitable habitats where small native fish have escaped predation. One exception has been the leatherside chub, which have not been observed in the side channels, created as part of the restoration project. The few leatherside chub that have been observed have all been on the mainstem river.
Early research studies have shown that the greater geomorphic complexity introduced by channel restoration has increased hyporheic exchange. The hyporheic zone is the area next to the stream channel where there is a mixing (exchange) of surface water and ground water. This interface is important to stream ecosystem function because of biogeochemical processes that occur. Hyporheic exchange can dictate patterns in stream flora and fauna due to focused exchanges of surface water and groundwater.
|
 |
| |
Before: An upstream reach of the middle Provo River, which was straightened and ... |
|
|
|
|
 |
| |
After: The same upstream reach of the middle Provo River. The main channel thr... |
|
|
|
|
| Confounding Effects/Additional
Information: |
| Project
Specs (all specs are estimates): |
| |
Overall Estimated Cost:
$45 million: around $35 million for land acquisition and around $10 million for reconstruction
|
|
| For more information on this project
contact: |
| |
Utah Reclamation, Mitigation, and Conservation Commission, , Email:
|
| This information
was collected by: Kristin Keith |
| Project last updated on: 4/19/2007 |
|
 |
|
