Mindy SimmonsMindy Simmons

US Army Corps of EngineersUS Army Corps of Engineers

Dorie Welch, Daniel SpearDorie Welch, Daniel Spear

Bonneville Power AdministrationBonneville Power Administration

Stephanie BurchfieldStephanie Burchfield

NOAA FisheriesNOAA Fisheries

Chris AllenChris Allen

US Fish and Wildlife ServiceUS Fish and Wildlife Service

Willamette Project Biological Willamette Project Biological OpinionsOpinions

Presentation to the NW Power CouncilPresentation to the NW Power CouncilDecember 2008December 2008

PORTLAND DISTRICT

42 miles of bank protection/revetments

Downstream habitat effectsOperation of 13 multi-purpose dams and reservoirs

The Willamette Project

Hatchery Mitigation Program

– Area: 11,476 mi2

– Rain-driven hydrology

– Population ~2.5M– Most populated

sub-basin in Columbia River Basin

Willamette Basin

Willamette Basin

1890 Willamette Flood Oregon State Archives, Marion Co Historical Society, MJON0209

1943 Willamette Flood

Oregon State Archives, Oregon Water Resources Department, OWR0085

Lookout Point Dam 1950Middle Fork Willamette RiverOregon State Archives, Oregon Water Resources Department, OWR0072

Detroit Dam 1952North Santiam RiverOregon State Archives, Oregon Water Resources Department, OWR0041 Willamette Project

Dam Construction

Detroit

Blue RiverCougar

Hills Creek

Lookout Point

Foster

Fall Creek

Dexter

Big Cliff

Green Peter

13 Multi-purpose Dams and 13 Multi-purpose Dams and ReservoirsReservoirs

Willamette Project:Willamette Project:

13 Multi-Purpose Dams and Reservoirs

•Located in tributaries, not on mainstem Willamette River

•Most are large, high-head dams

Authorized Purposes

• Flood Damage Flood Damage ReductionReduction

• Hydropower• Navigation• Irrigation• Fish & Wildlife• Recreation• Water Quality• Municipal &

Industrial

PORTLAND DISTRICT

Willamette Project Hydropower Overview

• Eight projects with generation

• Projects produce 182.8 aMW

• Annual market value of $90 million

• Three projects with 300 MWs of capacity- scheduled for heavy load hours

• Total of 400 MWs of capacity for all projects

• Projects can deliver additional energy in a shortage

• Projects are close to major west side load centers

Willamette Basin Project

System Benefits

• Hydropower– more than $90 million

annually

• Flood Damage Reduction– $18.6 billion to date– $920 million annual

average damage reduction

• Navigation – Flows support water

quality

• Irrigation – minor use but supports

high value crops

PORTLAND DISTRICT

Corvallis 1996

Total = 1.6 Million Acre-feet

PORTLAND DISTRICT

1.2 MAF total

Willamette Basin Dams

•Operated primarily for flood damage reduction (storage)

•most are high-head

• located in tributaries

Mainstem Columbia Dams

•Operated primarily for hydropower, run-of-river; in series on mainstem

DIFFERENT EFFECTS ON FISH

Willamette Project Biological Opinions

• Completed July 11, 2008 after 8 years of consultation• Proposed Action Includes:

– Continued operation of 13-dam complex– Continued maintenance of 42 miles of revetments– Operation of hatchery program

• View the Supplemental BA at:https://www.nwp.usace.army.mil/pm/e/en _plan_ ba.asp

• View the NMFS Biological Opinion at:http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Hydropower/Willamette-Basin/Willamette-BO.cfm

• View the USFWS Biological Opinion at: https://www.nwp.usace.army.mil/pm/e/willametteBO-final_071108.pdf

Willamette ESA ConsultationAction Agencies

• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)• Owns and operates projects• Congressional appropriations

• Bonneville Power Administration (BPA)• Markets power from the 8 power projects• Funds power share of USACE budgets

• U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR)• Markets stored water through irrigation contracts

PORTLAND DISTRICT

Upper Willamette River Spring Chinook salmon

Upper Willamette River winter steelhead

Anadromous Fish in the Upper Willamette Basin (NMFS BiOp)

JEOPARDY

Upper Willamette River Chinook

0

1

2

3

4

Clac

kamas

Molalla

N San

tiam

S Sa

ntiam

Calapo

oia

McK

enzie

Mid Fk W

ill

<------------------------------ Viable ------------------------------->

UWR Chinook Salmon Population Status

High extinction risk

Moderate extinction risk

Chinook Spawning habitat loss due to no passage at dams

0102030405060708090

100

Per

cen

t sp

awn

ing

h

abit

at b

lock

ed

Clackamas

Molalla

N. Santiam

S. Santiam

Calapooia

McKenzie

Middle Fork

Population

High extinction risk

Moderate extinction risk

All Chinook populations affected by Corps dams are populations important for long-term recovery

Listed Resident Fish in the Willamette Basin

Oregon chub

Columbia River bull trout

NO JEOPARDY

USFWS Opinion includes NMFS’ RPA in Proposed Action

Oregon Chub Current Distribution

(35 Populations)

Columbia River

Will

amet

te R

iver Clackamas R. (last observed 1963 –

reintroduction being considered)

North Santiam R. (last observed 1945)

McKenzie R. (approx. 300 adults)

Middle Fork Willamette R.Middle Fork Willamette R. (15 to 20 adults) (15 to 20 adults) rehabilitation program underway since 1998rehabilitation program underway since 1998

Willamette Basin Bull Trout Distribution

CurrentProbable Historic

South Santiam R. (last observed 1953)

Summary of Biological Opinions

• Describe Effects on Fish• Highlight Major Actions from Opinions

Willamette Reservoir System MM Major Milestone / Decision Point Detailed Design Report (DDR) Configuration / Operation Planning (COP)

Conceptual ESA Implementation Strategy AM Annual Milestone / Decision Point Construction Plans & Specification (P&S)IM Interim Mileston / Decision Point Monitoring & Evaluation Site / Concept Study

Flow Actions Authorization & Appropriation

Phase / Activity

Flow Management

Meet Tributary Flows, Mainstem Flows & Ramp Rates

Annual Opearting Plan Updates and Revisions AM1 AM1 AM1 AM1 AM1 AM1 AM1 AM1 AM1 AM1 AM1 AM1 AM1 AM1 AM1 AM1

Near-term Operational changes

Action a (Fall Creek Drawdown?)

Action b (Detroit Temperature?) IM2

Annual Fish Passage Management Plan AM2 AM2 AM2 AM2 AM2 AM2 AM2 AM2 AM2 AM2 AM2 AM2 AM2 AM2 AM2 AM2

Flow-Related M&E AM3 AM3 AM3 AM3 AM3 AM3 AM3 AM3 AM3 AM3 AM3 AM3 AM3 AM3 AM3 AM3

Cougar Adult Trap

Upgrade Existing Fish Collection & Handling Facilities

Minto Adult Fish Collection IM3

Dexter Adult Fish Collection IM7

Foster Adult Fish Collection IM10

Fall Creek Adult Fish Collection IM12

Construct new Fish Release sites IM1

Leaburg Dam Sorting Facility IM4 IM8

Configuration / Operation Planning

COP Research, Monitoring & Evaluation

Reconnaissance Phase Study MM1Comprehensive Study / environmental compliance MM3

Longer Term Operational Changes

Prototype Juvenile Head-of-Reservoir Collector IM5 MM2

COP Focal Study: Cougar Downstream Passage IM9 IM11

COP Focal Study: Detroit Temperature Control MM4Authorization (WRDA 2013?) & Appropriation MM5Preauthorization Engineering & Design IM13

Implementation

COP Focal Study: Lookout Point Downstream Passage MM6Authorization (WRDA 2015?) & Appropriation MM7Preauthorization Engineering & Design IM14

Implementation

COP Focal Study: Detroit Fish Passage MM8Authorization (WRDA 2015?) & Appropriation MM9Preauthorization Engineering & Design IM15

Implementation

2008 20162013 2014 20152009 2010 2011 2012 2021 2022 20232017 2018 2019 2020

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Short term (FY08-15) Long term (FY16-23)

Actions/

Construction

Evaluations/

Config Op Plan

Actions/

Construction

IMPLEMENTATION

15-year Implementation timeframe

Downstream Effects: Altered Seasonal Flow Pattern

• Spring Reservoir Refill (Feb-May)– Inflow > outflow – Lower than natural spring flow– PROBLEM: reduced flows affect winter steelhead

outmigration and adult spring Chinook migration; steelhead spawning/incubation flows

• Summer Flow Augmentation (May-Aug)– Outflow > inflow– Higher than natural summer flow– Water quality benefits, rearing habitat

PROBLEM: Providing adequate water downstream of dams for all life stages

Spawning Egg Incubation Redd and eggs out of

water

Flow Management Actions• Operational changes implemented in 2000

• Minimum mainstem flows

• Tributary flows– Spawning– Incubation– Rearing

• Process for adjusting targets based on water forecasts

• Coordination and in-season management team

• Down-Ramping rates (avoid sudden decreases in flow)

Downstream Effects: Altered Geomorphic Processes

Winter Flood Damage Reduction (Dec/Jan/Feb)– Capture peaks of flood events, slow release– Decreases magnitude of floods

PROBLEM:

Fewer channel-forming flows

+

loss of floodplain connectivity

+

Loss of large wood and gravel from reservoirs

PROBLEM: Downstream Loss of Channel Complexity and Floodplain Connectivity

• Chinook/Steelhead:– Loss of winter rearing habitat;

reduced spawning gravel– Loss of floodplain refugia

• Oregon Chub:– Loss of population connectivity– Loss of habitat

Willamette River Planning Atlas (PNW Ecosystem Research Consortium)

Habitat Restoration Program• On-site actions for Oregon Chub, other species

• Action Agencies will develop an off-site habitat restoration program

• Recovery Plans, Willamette Subbasin Plan, and other habitat assessments will be synthesized to guide restoration work

• Collaborative Habitat Team representing state, tribes, and federal agencies will recommend projects and assist in the prioritization of actions

• Action agencies will work with other habitat programs in the Willamette to identify opportunities and leverage funding where possible

• Complete 2 habitat projects per year starting in 2010

Warm

Cold

Dam

Too cold

Downstream Effects: Temperature

PROBLEM:

Water is too cold during the summer

SUMMER

Adult salmon stop migrating to spawning grounds

Reservoir drawn down for flood operations

Cold

Dam

Too warm

PROBLEM:

Water is too warm during the fall and winter

FALL/WINTER

Salmon eggs in gravel die or hatch too early

Downstream Effects: Temperature

Dam

Correct temp

Warm

Cold

Correct temperature

MIX

“surface spill”

SOLUTION: Temperature Control Operation

Downstream Effects: Temperature

Detroit Dam 2007 – 8

Detroit Dam 2009?

New Intake Tower

Dam

Correct temp

Warm

Cold

SOLUTION: Temperature Control Structure

Correct temperature

Downstream Effects: Temperature

Cougar Dam 2005

Detroit Dam 2018?

Willamette Project

Hatchery Mitigation Program

Hatchery Mitigation Program

• Mitigation for lost production caused by blocked access to habitat upstream of dams

• Current program produces:

• Spring Chinook salmon (part of ESU; integrated)

• Summer steelhead (non-native, segregated program)

• Catchable trout

• NO winter steelhead program (winter steelhead are ESA-listed)

Willamette Basin Hatchery Facilities

5 major hatcheries

• constructed by USACE

• operated by ODFW

• Funded by USACE and ODFW

Downstream Effects: Summer Steelhead Hatchery Program

• Non-native Skamania stock summer steelhead– Popular sport fishery

• Evaluate site-specific effects on ESA-listed winter steelhead

• Modify program in collaboration with ODFW

Downstream Effects: Spring Chinook Hatchery Program

• Use hatchery fish to evaluate reintroduction of Chinook salmon back into their historic habitat above the impassable dams (e.g., NS, SS, McK, MFW)

• Implement new HGMPs for integrated programs– supported by Hatchery

Scientific Review Group– Increase percentage of natural-

origin fish in brood

• Minimize risks on stronghold wild populations (McKenzie)– Manage hatchery-origin

spawners

Action: Leaburg Fish Sorter• McKenzie Chinook is a stronghold wild population

• Leaburg Dam is located on the McKenzie River and owned and operated by Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB)

• Action Agencies will construct a sorting facility at the dam to prevent hatchery fish from straying above the dam and into wild fish sanctuary above Leaburg

• Action Agencies will work with EWEB, ODFW and NOAA to design, construct and operate the fish sorter

• BPA lead for funding design and construction (USACE and ODFW fund operation and maintenance)

• Complete by 2014

How do the Action Agencies How do the Action Agencies move forward?move forward?

Can we JUST improve habitat downstream of projects?• Flows and operations• Improve temperatures• Habitat improvement and floodplain restoration• Hatchery improvements

Altered Altered downstream downstream habitathabitat

ESA Sec 7 Consultations

Recovery Planning

Dams blocked Dams blocked access to historical access to historical spawning habitatspawning habitat

Quality adult holding habitat

adequate quantities of spawning gravel

most is managed by USFS or BLM

Do we ALSO need access to habitat upstream of dams?

Considerations:

PROBLEM: Inadequate or nonexistent upstream passage facilities

• Upstream passage currently provided only at Foster and Fall Creek dams (trap-and-haul)

• Fish ladders are likely infeasible– High-head dams

– Variable forebay fluctuations

• Existing hatchery facilities designed for broodstock collection

SOLUTION: Use Willamette Basin Hatchery Fish Facilities as “trap-and-haul” for adult fish

Adult Collection

DEXTER DAM

Adult Sorting; load on to truck for transport

SOLUTION: Use hatchery spring Chinook to evaluate potential for reintroduction in upstream habitat

Upstream Fish Passage Actions

• Continue adult “outplanting” program

• Construct Trap at Cougar Dam (McK):2009

• Improve or replace adult fish traps:Minto (N. Santiam): 2012Foster (S. Santiam): 2013Dexter (Middle Fk Willamette):

2014Fall Creek: 2015

• Develop 4 to 6 adult release sites above reservoirs by 2012Outplanting adult spring

Chinook also provides prey base for bull trout

Cougar Fish Trap Plans

PROBLEM: Downstream Passage is Challenging

Regulating Outlets (“spill”)

Power Turbines

Spill gates (rarely used)

• Long reservoirs

• Predators

• Deep intakes to passage routes (very little surface spill)

Cougar Dam and ReservoirSouth Fork McKenzie River

Photo Courtesy of Portland District USACE

PowerhouseRegulating

Outlet

Photograph of the instruments located in the RO channel

Regulating Outlet

Willamette Project “spill”

• Measures to improve passage through reservoirs and dams until permanent facilities are built– Fall Creek drawdown for Chinook outmigration– Test other measures: reservoir drawdown, pulsing flows, spill,

other outlets– Implement feasible alternatives (“simple” by 2009; more

“complex” by 2011)

• Head-of-Reservoir juvenile collection prototype– Evaluate feasibility – complete by end of 2010– Construct prototype by 2014– Biological and physical evaluations 2015 & 2016– If effective, include in design alternatives for downstream

passage at other Project dams

• Evaluate fish passage survival, injury, delay, timing and distribution at 8 Project dams and reservoirs, 2008 - 2015

Biological Opinion Actions: Step-wise Approach to Downstream Passage

Biological Opinion Actions: Step-wise Approach to Downstream Passage

• Downstream fish passage facilities Construction complete by:

• Cougar - 2014

• Lookout Point/Dexter - 2021

• Detroit/Big Cliff - 2023

• Evaluate for use at additional dams

• Analyze feasibility, alternatives, design through the COP study

Configuration Operation Plan“COP”

• Reconnaissance Phase Study due 2009• Feasibility phase to assess alternatives• All major structural modifications will be

evaluated for:– Biological benefit

– Technical feasibility

– Economic viability

– Consistency with overall recovery strategies

Research, Monitoring & Evaluation

• Willamette is data-poor relative to mainstem Columbia– Very little monitoring

infrastructure• Developing comprehensive

program, to feed into COP– Site-specific field studies– Coordinated through WATER

• Currently included in AFEP Annual Review– Expanded outyear efforts in

separate process in Willamette

Implementation Coordination: Willamette Action Team for Ecosystem Restoration

Manager’s Forum

Steering Team

Flow Management

Team

Fish Passage and Hatchery Management

Team

Environmental Coordination for

Construction Projects

HabitatRM&E Oversight

Team

“WATER” Federal and State agencies, Tribes

Charter/guidelines completed by December 2008Adaptive

Management

Funding Strategy• Most large structural modifications will be funded out of the Columbia

River Fish Mitigation Fund (CRFM)

• Authority: Original project authorities, such as 1950 Flood Control Act (as is the original CRFM Project)

• Proposal to use CRFM appropriation made with 2008 budget submittal to Congress (including $800k in funding to initiate actions)

• Future Corps budget proposals will account for most critical needs to meet BiOp commitments in both programs

• The System Configuration Team (SCT) provides input on priorities for Columbia/Snake program – WATER group will perform a similar function for the Willamette

component

Need downstream habitat for rearing

Different effects on fishWillamette dams different than mainstem Columbia dams

The Willamette Project Summary

Need to use hatchery program to evaluate reintroduction into spawning habitat upstream of

dams

Evaluate feasibility of long-term actions

Short-term improvements and actions:

•Habitat

•Temperature

•Flow operations

•Hatcheries

Long-term structural modifications may be critical to

success

The Willamette Project Approach

Improve hatchery collection facilities as trap-and-haul

Questions?

Willamette Hatchery Mitigation Program

Facilities

• North Santiam– Marion Forks Hatchery– Minto Ponds

Collection/acclimation (nr Big Cliff)

• South Santiam– South Santiam Hatchery– Foster Dam (Collection)

• McKenzie– McKenzie Hatchery– Leaburg Hatchery– Leaburg Dam (EWEB) (some

Collection)

• Middle Fork– Willamette Hatchery– Dexter Ponds (Collection,

rearing/acclimation)

Hatchery collection facility Marion Forks

Willamette

McKenzieLeaburg

South Santiam

Minto

Cougar Dam Cross Section