2013 Uplift Report: Quantifying Ecological Uplift

1 — The Freshwater Trust Uplift Report 2013
Uplift Report 2013

Using LiDAR data
and GIS technology
to determine a site’s
potential ecological uplift,
prior to committing
significant resources to
a restoration project,
allows us to best focus and
prioritize our restoration
assets in order to achieve
the most ecological gain
on the ground.
Table of Contents
Shade-a-lator......................................................................................................................................................................4
Nutrient Tracking Tool.......................................................................................................................................................5
Water Temperature Tracking Tool ....................................................................................................................................6
Stream Function Assessment Methodology................................................................................................................... 7
Salmon Calculator.............................................................................................................................................................8
Case Study: Rudio Creek ..................................................................................................................................................9
Uplift from 2013 Projects ...............................................................................................................................................10
Using recently developed — and in some cases, still
developing — tools for calculating the ecological
uplift of restoration projects, we are advancing a new
framework for communicating the value of our work.
Using this new framework, we quantified most of
our work in 2012 with regard to ecological uplift
and issued our first Uplift Report. In 2013 we
quantified new projects with the calculators, and
evaluated a new method to determine river health.
The process of calculating the uplift benefit of our
actions helps hone our organization’s focus on
delivering the best ecosystem outcomes for our
invested dollars and provides collaboration with
the restoration community to evaluate and test
chosen quantification tools. We understand that
for these uplift measurements to be used on a
S
ince the passage of the Endangered Species
and Clean Water Acts, there have been
many successful river restoration projects
along with great leaps in the engineering
and design of river restoration solutions — all driving
toward improving water quality and aquatic habitat.
Over the last decade, the restoration community has
been working to develop and implement methods
for economically and physically quantifying the
effects of long-term restoration actions within a more
accountable framework.
The Freshwater Trust has traditionally evaluated
and reported on projects in terms of dollars spent,
trees planted, gallons of water restored instream
or acres of floodplain reconnected. In 2012, our
approach evolved to measuring ecological benefit.
Quantifying Ecological Uplift: Why it is Important
Front Cover Images
Clockwise From Top Left:
Skyris Imaging;
Sean O’Connor,
Freesolo Collective;
NarrativeLab Communications;
Hanmi Meyer;
Sean O’Connor
Back Cover Images
Clockwise From Top Left:
Levi Schmidt;
Sean O’Connor;
Levi Schmidt
John Doe Sand & Gravel
Company
Owner: John Doe
ADDRESS: 1234 A Street
Acres: 1.12
KCAL: 10,600,000
KCAL/ACRE: 9,500,000
John Doe Sand & Gravel
Company
Key: Uplift Potential
High
Medium
Low

Why quantify?: The application of new tools and methods to
accurately quantify the ecological benefits of conservation actions
provides numerous benefits to practitioners, landowners, regulators,
conservation grant makers and policy makers charged with
managing our natural resources and environment.
Grants and other investments can be targeted based on modeled
ecological benefits (outcome-based) – potentially a more precise
method than the traditional evaluation of proposed actions
(process-based).
Landowners, particularly farmers, ranchers and foresters, can
better determine current (pre-project) conditions and accurately
track uplift (post-project) from conservation on their lands.
Practitioners can improve project design and associated
monitoring efforts.
Regulators could better track performance towards water quality
or species targets within a watershed, by accumulating quantified
results from projects over time.
Lawmakers and other policy leaders could use quantified
results from projects on the ground to better guide public
investment in conservation.
national scale to predict the effects of our actions
on true river restoration, we require the buy-in and
support of the regulatory, restoration and regulated
communities. Sometimes this involves automation
of the calculations we use regularly for efficiencies of
scale, and sometimes this involves evaluation of new
methods of measuring impact in a holistic manner.
What do we mean by ecological uplift? Simply put,
“uplift”refers to the environmental gain of a project
— the quantifiable environmental benefit of the
restoration actions we take. For example, consider
planting trees next to a stream. In the past, we have
focused on restoration inputs —trees planted or
habitat structures created. But not all parts of a
stream are created equal in the amount of ecosystem
services they provide. Using new tools and science,
we now employ an outcome-based process for our
actions (focusing on where the planting of trees has
the most benefit and the value of this benefit). For
example, we can now model the solar radiation that
will be blocked by mature trees, preventing river
waters from heating up to the detriment of cold
water species like salmon and steelhead.
Quantifying the benefits of restoration projects
in this way can provide a more robust picture
of a project’s ecological value. In fact, we are
now doing these calculations on projects before
implementation to determine potential ecological
uplift prior to committing significant resources
to a project. We do this to ensure we implement
restoration actions that achieve the most benefit for
the freshwater ecosystem.
Skyris Imaging
Sean O’Connor, Freesolo Collective
Acknowledgements
The Freshwater Trust would like to thank the following partners who developed the
tools & calculators to measure the ecological uplift in this report.
Counting on the Environment
ESA Vigil-Agrimis, Inc.
National Fish & Wildlife
Foundation
Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality
Oregon Department of
Transportation
Oregon State University
Parametrix, Inc.
Skidmore Restoration
Consulting, LLC
Texas Institute for Applied
Environmental Research
United States Department
of Agriculture
Watercourse Engineering, Inc.
Willamette Partnership
The Freshwater Trust is a non-profit
organization with a mission to preserve and
restore freshwater ecosystems.
With nearly 30 years of on-the-ground experience,
we continue to look for innovative ways to fix
imperiled rivers and streams. With the latest
tools and methods, we can attain efficiencies
that facilitate real environmental gains with less
cost, in less time.

Field staff maintain
a freshly planted riparian
site in the Rogue Basin of
southern Oregon.
Shade-a-lator
Quantifying solar load avoided through riparian restoration
MODEL INPUTS
Upstream & downstream
boundaries of the
stream reach
Stream aspect (azimuth)
Wetted width of the
stream
Bank slope
Distribution of existing
riparian trees & plants
Modeling time period,
including the time of
year the model is run &
the number of days the
model is run
Surrounding topography
R
iparian shade provided by streamside
vegetation blocks the sun’s rays from
reaching the surface of the water, reducing
the amount of thermal energy entering
the river. In effect, this shade prevents the water
from heating up. Anadromous fish, such as salmon
and steelhead, are extremely sensitive to water
temperature; therefore, healthy riparian buffers help
ensure healthy fish habitat.
Shade-a-lator is a module of Heat Source, a stream
assessment tool used by Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality (ODEQ). It was developed in
1996 at Oregon State University in the Departments
of Bioresource Engineering and Civil Engineering.
ODEQ currently maintains the Heat Source
methodology and software development.
Using pre-project data (see sidebar for model
inputs), Shade-a-lator calculates the current load
of solar radiation reaching the surface of a stream.
Once vegetation is planted, Shade-a-lator predicts
the new load of solar radiation reaching the stream
based on the new vegetation’s shading capacity at
maturity. The difference between pre-
project and post-project solar loading
represents a project’s uplift in terms of
solar radiation avoided by streamside
riparian vegetation. Shade-a-lator
expresses this uplift in energy units of
kilocalories per day. Once we have this
calculation, we can determine which
restoration sites will most benefit from
riparian restoration.
Shade-a-lator has been in use and
ongoing development for more than a
decade. With The Freshwater Trust’s
projects, its refinement will continue.
Projections
based
on tree
maturity
BEFORE Restoration AFTER Restoration
HOW IT WORKS: Calculating Uplift for Solar Load Avoided
Uplift = Change in kilocalories per day (a measurement of energy)
Solar Load Avoided
Tool used Shade-a-lator
Units of measure kilocalories per day (kcals/day)
Before (pre-project) 10,000,000
After (post-project) 4,500,000
UPLIFT 5,500,000 kcals/day
Sample restoration
actions
• Plant streamside vegetation
Solar Load Solar Load Avoided
Don Jacobson

of conservation actions — from riparian actions like
fence building to exclude livestock, to changed farm
practices like improving irrigation methods.
major water quality concern across the
United States is the abundance of nutrients
such as nitrogen and phosphorus in our
freshwater systems. Too much nitrogen
and phosphorus promotes excessive plant and
algae growth, choking out other aquatic species.
Large sediment loads that carry these nutrients
can also harm aquatic systems. They can settle
into streambeds and fill in the spaces between the
rocks and gravel — spaces that are essential for
salmonid spawning.
Nationwide, runoff from farming and ranching
operations contribute large loads of nitrogen and
phosphorus. The Freshwater Trust is working to
measure the benefit of conservation actions that
limit these inputs while maintaining productive
agricultural lands.
The Nutrient Tracking Tool (NTT) is a sophisticated
modeling tool that allows the user to create a
detailed scenario of on-field agricultural practices
(see sidebar for model inputs). NTT models the
agricultural practices and then estimates the annual
nutrient and sediment loads that occur as a result
of these actions. NTT can model a wide assortment
Nutrient Tracking Tool (NTT)
Quantifying reduced nitrogen, phosphorus and sediments from riparian
improvements and changes to agricultural practices
MODEL INPUTS
Crop type & livestock type
Crop rotations
Fertilizer application rates
Irrigation practices
Livestock access to
streams
Pesticide application rates
Tillage practices
Field size & slope
Geographic location
Local weather data
Soil type
Soil phosphorus
concentration
HOW IT WORKS: Calculating Uplift for Decreased Nutrient & Sediment Loads
Uplift = Change in pounds per year of phosphorus, nitrogen and/or sediment load
Agricultural runoff
drains into stream
Vegetation
ﬁlters runoff
Nutrient & Sediment Reduction
Tool used Nutrient Tracking Tool (NTT)
Units of measure Pounds per year (lbs/year)
Phosphorus Nitrogen Sediments
Before (pre-project) 10 100 2,000
After (post-project) 5 25 100
UPLIFT 5 lbs/year 75 1,900
Sample conservation
actions
• Implement cover crops
• Livestock exclusion
NTT calculates uplift in terms of nitrogen, phosphorus
and sediment load reductions by comparing pre-
project conditions of a field to modeled conditions after
restoration or changed farm practices.The difference
represents the uplift from conservation actions. Once
we have this calculation, we can assess the impact of
site-level restoration as a component of a basin-scale
water quality problem.
NTT was designed and developed by the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural
Resources Conservation Service, the USDA
Agricultural Research Service and Texas Institute for
Applied Environmental Research.
The Freshwater Trust
uses elevation data and
geoprocessing to delineate
micro-drainage areas of
riparian planting sites, as
shown in this image.
Key:
Riparian
Planting Area
Drainage Basins
Project Area
Drainage Basins
Flow Accumulation:
High
Low

Field staff take
a flow measurement
to help determine the
temperature benefit for
restored flow.
ncreasing river flow can buffer water
temperature and increase velocity through
a stream reach. Higher velocity can limit the
water’s exposure to local solar impact, keeping
the water from warming. Additional temperature
benefits can be achieved if the increased flow is
cooler than the water in the existing stream reach.
The Water Temperature Transaction Tool (W3T)
uses river and landscape characteristics to estimate
hourly solar radiation and overall heat loss or
gain from a water body. W3T also incorporates
temperature and flow inputs provided by tributaries
MODEL INPUTS
River length, width &
depth
Stream bed roughness
Topographical &
vegetation features:
surrounding zones of
vegetation that provide
shade & inhibit solar
radiation
Inflow water
temperatures
Flow volumes
Atmospheric heat
exchange, air-water
interface & bed-water
interface
Tributary inputs
River velocity
Water Temperature Transaction Tool (W3T)
Quantifying decreased water temperature through flow restoration
Terry Stroh
and meteorological information. From these inputs,
W3T calculates temperature changes in a river reach.
W3T is based on a steady flow approach requiring
pre-project data (see sidebar for model inputs). W3T
models water temperature based on energy transfer
to and from the water across the air-water interface
and bed-water interface. W3T also accounts for
transport of heat energy in the downstream direction.
Water temperature reduction from increased flow can
be determined by subtracting pre-project conditions
from modeled conditions after flow has been
restored. The difference in water temperature
represents the temperature improvement
(uplift) from restoring flow to that reach. Once
the temperature impacts of flow are quantified,
flow restoration can be used as a tool to directly
address and account for water temperature
as a limiting factor that affects the survival of
threatened and endangered fish species.
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
contracted with Watercourse Engineering to
develop the W3T model, with funding from
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.
HOW IT WORKS: Calculating Uplift for Decreased Water Temperature
Water Temperature Decreased (Daily Max)
Tool used
Water Temperature
Transaction Tool (W3T)
Units of measure
Cubic feet per
second (cfs)
Degrees
Celsius (o
C)
Before (baseline) 1 20
After (post-project) 2 18
UPLIFT 1 cfs 2 o
C
Sample restoration
actions
• Introduce cooler water
• Increase stream velocity
• Deepen channel
BEFORE
Restoration
AFTER
Restoration
Uplift = Change in cubic feet per second/degrees Celsius
1,000 feet stream reach
2 cfs
(cubic feet per second)
18o
C
(stream temperature)
1 cfs
(cubic feet per second)
20o
C
(stream temperature)
–1 cfs
–2 cfs

after restoration actions,
users are able to quantify
uplift from restoration
actions. Once we have this
calculation, we can track
the progress of our habitat
restoration projects against
restoration goals, over time.
The Stream Function
Assessment Methodology
is being developed for Oregon by ESAVigil-Agrimis
and Skidmore Restoration Consulting, LLC with
funding from US Environmental Protection Agency.
The tool is designed for use in Oregon’s stream
compensatory mitigation program being developed
by Oregon Department of State Lands, US Army
Corps of Engineers, US Environmental Protection
Agency and Willamette Partnership.
The Stream Function Assessment Methodology
is undergoing beta testing, including extensive
field testing throughout Oregon in 2014. While
the tool is still under development, early adoption
enables The Freshwater Trust to calculate the 2013
level of function for our stream restoration sites.
T
he Stream Function Assessment
Methodology was designed as a rapid
assessment that evaluates stream
functions and values. Stream functions
are the processes that create and support healthy
stream ecosystems; functions include flow
variation, sediment mobility and nutrient cycling.
The Stream Function Assessment Methodology
defines stream values as the ecological and
societal benefits that the stream functions provide.
The Excel-based calculator generates scores for
hydrologic, geomorphic, biologic and water quality
(chemical, nutrient and thermal) functions as well
as the importance of each of those functions.
Inputs for the tool are collected both in the field and
using online resources (see sidebar for model inputs).
The methodology considers stream and riparian
area characteristics along with the ecological and
societal benefits of that stream in generating the
functional assessment.The output of the tool is a
score between 0% and 100%, rating the function and
the value of the stream.This score is multiplied by the
linear feet of stream affected to generate functioning
linear feet of stream. By calculating the difference
between functioning linear feet of stream before and
A Chinook helicopter
places large wood
instream to build large
wood habitat structure,
a restoration action that
supports healthy habitat
for wild fish and other
aquatic species.
Sean O’Connor,
Freesolo Collective
Stream Function Assessment Methodology
Quantifying improvements in stream function through instream and riparian restoration
MODEL INPUTS
Aquatic species structure
and composition
Distribution of ESA-listed
fish species
Distribution of rare
species
Riparian structure and
composition
Flow characteristics and
depth
Floodplain connectivity
Water quality information
Sediment characteristics
and mobility
Stream order, gradient
and permeability
Geomorphic stability
Presence of off-channel
habitat
Aquatic features such as
riffles, runs and pools
Presence of rare plants
and animals
Proximity to intact
ecosystems
Presence of irrigation
withdrawals
HOW IT WORKS: Calculating Uplift for Increased Stream Function
BEFORE
Restoration
AFTER
Restoration
Uplift = Change in functional linear feet of stream
Scott Wright
Increased Stream Function
Tool used
Stream Functional
Assessment Methodology
Units of measure Functional linear feet (FLF) of stream
Before (pre-project) 100
After (post-project) 400
UPLIFT 300 FLF
Sample restoration
actions
• Large wood habitat placement
• Create off-channel habitat
Stream function disrupted
Stream function restored

T
he Salmon Calculator is designed to
quantify ecological changes that directly
impact salmon habitat through modeling,
on average, how well a given stream reach
supports salmon. Based on the inputs of physical
characteristics of the stream and terrestrial
areas (see sidebar for model inputs), the Salmon
Calculator measures the ecological functions of
a stream with regard to its ability to create and
maintain salmon habitat. The Salmon Calculator
then consolidates those ecological functions into
one salmon habitat score. The score is a percentage
of functional habitat per linear foot of stream, which
is recorded as weighted linear feet. Once we have
this calculation, we can
understand the impact
of our projects on the
habitat needs of listed
salmonids.
The Salmon
Calculator was
developed as part
of Counting on the
Environment, a USDA
Natural Resources
Field staff
collect hydrologic,
geomorphologic,
biological and water
quality data on Rudio
Creek for stream habitat
assessments.
Sean O’Connor,
Freesolo Collective
Salmon Calculator
Quantifying increased salmon habitat through stream restoration
Conservation Service grant project managed by
Willamette Partnership. The development of the
Salmon Calculator began as part of the Oregon
Department of Transportation bridges project and
was further refined by Parametrix, Inc.
The Salmon Calculator has been valuable in
helping us improve our understanding of how
instream actions affect species health, but a more
robust stream assessment tool is being developed
that will further improve our ability to estimate
stream function for salmon. (See Stream Function
Assessment Methodology, previous page.) To
enable ongoing evaluation of the uplift of our prior
actions, however, we continue to use the Salmon
Calculator into 2013.As demonstrated by the shift
from the Salmon Calculator to the Stream Function
Assessment, the restoration community is still
determining the best measure of stream ecosystem
health for salmon. In Oregon right now, three
standards of measurement are used: NOAA’s Habitat
Equivalency Analysis, the Columbia River Basin
Federal Caucus’Survival Benefit Unit and the Stream
Function Assessment. In 2014,The Trust is engaging
with this community to evaluate and adopt the most
practical measure of stream health for salmon.
MODEL INPUTS
Distribution & abundance
of aquatic & riparian
native & nonnative
vegetation
Stream width & depth
Substrate characteristics
Flow & depth
characteristics
Aquatic features such as
log jams, pools, riffles,
glides, alcoves, gravel
bars & cascades
Floodplain connectivity
Barriers to fish movement
Land use
Floodplain slope, width
& soil type
Amount of large wood
Historical frequency &
duration of flooding
HOW IT WORKS: Calculating Uplift for Increased Salmon Habitat
Increased Salmon Habitat
Tool used Salmon Calculator
Units of measure
Weighted linear feet (WLF)
of salmon habitat
Before (pre-project) 100
After (post-project) 400
UPLIFT 300 WLF
Sample restoration
actions
• Construct large wood
habitat structures
• Reconnect floodplains
• Increase pools & riffles
BEFORE
Restoration
AFTER
Restoration
Uplift = Change in weighted linear feet of salmon habitat
functional habitat
150+ 50= 400 WLF (40%) of50+ 150+
functional habitat
50+25+ 25= 100 WLF (10%) of
Mary Edwards Photography

1
2
The newly re-
meandered channel of
Rudio Creek in central
Oregon restores this
stream to its historical
floodplain.
Returning a Stream to its Natural State: Historic land use practices
moved Rudio Creek to the edge of its floodplain to facilitate agriculture.The
shorter, straightened channel increased stream energy which disconnected the
channel from its floodplain, increased substrate size and reduced the number and
complexity of pools. Returning Rudio Creek to its 1946 historical alignment will, over
time, restore self sustaining habitat conditions that benefit salmon and steelhead.
fish during high winter flows or cold water refugia
during warm summer periods.These features were
designed to emulate the beaver dam ponds that were
historically present at the project area. 2013 activities
consisted of constructing four off-channel ponds
with associated side channel complexes.
Increase instream flow. The Freshwater Trust
entered an agreement with the landowners on Rudio
Creek that requires their diversions from Rudio
Creek to stop when flows at the mouth drop below 2
cubic feet per second or on July 1, whichever occurs
first. This contractual obligation protects late-
summer flows to the mouth of Rudio Creek, which
historically ran dry.
n 2012,The Freshwater Trust reconstructed
the historic channel of Rudio Creek to
restore its natural flow and habitat. In 2013,
The Freshwater Trust implemented several
additional restoration elements complementary to
the major restoration activities completed in 2012.
These elements are designed to ensure the site
continues on its restoration trajectory and increases
habitat for juvenile spring Chinook and summer
steelhead. 2013 work included construction of
off-channel ponds with side channel connections
to Rudio Creek, and livestock exclusion fencing and
hardwood plantings to promote riparian recovery.
Promote riparian vegetation via hardwood
planting and livestock exclusion fencing. Riparian
vegetation is intended to provide channel stability,
shade, cover and dam building material for beaver.
2013 activities consisted of planting native, rooted
cottonwoods along the banks of Rudio Creek.
Construct side channels and ponds. Side
channels and ponds provide a diversity of habitats
for juvenile spring Chinook salmon and summer
steelhead.These floodplain habitats often derive a
major portion of their flow from either groundwater
or seepage from the adjacent stream. Side channel
and pond features can provide velocity refugia for
Case Study: Rudio Creek
3
1946
1965
1984
2001
Base Image 1946 Aerial Photo, Prepared by River Design Group

Upliftfrom2013Projects
SolarLoad
Avoided
Phosphorus
Reduced
Nitrogen
Reduced
Sediments
Reduced
Increased
StreamFunction
WaterTemperature
Decreased
(DailyMax)
Increased
SalmonHabitat
ToolusedShade-a-latorNutrientTrackingTool(NTT)
StreamFunction
Assessment
Methodology
WaterTemperature
TransactionTool
(W3T)
SalmonCalculator
Unitsofmeasure
Kilocaloriesperday
(kcals/day)
Poundsperyear
(lbs/year)
Poundsperyear
(lbs/year)
Poundsperyear
(lbs/year)
Functionallinear
feet(FLF)
DegreesCelsius
(°C)
Weightedlinearfeet
(WLF)
Before(pre-project)16,748,2600.06.65762,1491,489
After(post-project)7,040,4690.05.42042,3761,511
Uplift9,707,7910.01.237222722
RestorationActions7,599feetofstreamprotected,70.2acresofriparianareaprotected,500nativetreesinstalled,17,164squarefeetofoffchannelhabitatcreated
Before(pre-project)77,626,4670.00.41
After(post-project)36,187,7300.00.30
Uplift41,438,737*0.0*0.1*1*
RestorationActions4,525nativetreesandshrubsinstalled
Before(pre-project)3,120,6055.044.54,918
After(post-project)667,9874.330.53,130
Uplift2,452,6180.714.01,788
After(post-project)45,356,10066.3418.233,544
Uplift18,529,2513.129.4756
Before(pre-project)15,477,5630.31.4163
After(post-project)6,550,6940.00.875
Uplift8,926,8690.30.688
Uplift41,809,60024.4121.140,117
Uplift23,572,1000.43.81,249
Uplift56,921,9250.43.7808
Inadditiontotheprojects
listedinthisUpliftReport,
TheFreshwaterTrustalso
protected15.62billiongallons
(113milliongallonsofwaterper
day)instreamacrossthestate.
RogueRiver
Mile128
Phase2
RogueBasin
RudioRanch
JohnDayBasin
MillRaceRiver
Mile2
WillametteBasin
Lewis&Clark
RiverMile9
NorthCoastBasin
MiddleFork
JohnDayRiver
Mile50
JohnDayBasin
Applegate
RiverMile28.5
RogueBasin
Applegate
RiverMile29.5
RogueBasin
Applegate
RiverMile30
RogueBasin

Before(pre-project)0.00.0960
After(post-project)0.00.0540
Uplift0.00.0420
RestorationActions8,448feetofstreamprotected,150.5acresofriparianareaprotected
Before(pre-project)15.192.314,84221.6
After(post-project)5.717.16,73421.5
Uplift9.475.28,1080.1
RestorationActions0.52cfsrestoredinstream(10%oftotalflow)
Before(pre-project)11.439.510,78619.8
After(post-project)0.46.179819.7
Uplift11.033.49,9880.1
Before(pre-project)1,288
After(post-project)2,000
Uplift712
RestorationActions629feetofsidechannelhabitatrestored,5largewoodhabitatstructures,2,746feetofstreamrestored
Before(pre-project)1,130
Uplift4,062
RestorationActions5,067feetofsidechannelhabitatrestored,16largewoodhabitatstructures,2,640feetofstreamrestored
Before(pre-project)600
Uplift948
RestorationActions1,005feetofsidechannelhabitatrestored,3largewoodhabitatstructures,763feetofstreamrestored
Before(pre-project)901
Uplift585
RestorationActions631feetofsidechannelhabitatrestored,1largewoodhabitatstructure,1,404feetofstreamrestored
Before(pre-project)28.8
After(post-project)26.9
Uplift1.9
QuantifiedUpliftfor2013Projects203,358,891kcals/day49.7lbs/year282.5lbs/year63,695lbs/year6,534FLF2.1°C22WLF
QuantifiedUpliftfor2012Projects80,422,822kcals/day5.5lbs/year82.6lbs/year1,579lbs/yearn/a**1.0°C7,170WLF
CumulativeQuantifiedUplift
(2012+2013)
283,781,713kcals/day
(solarloadavoided)
55.2lbs/year
(reducedphosphorus)
365.1lbs/year
(reducednitrogen)
65,274lbs/year
(reducedsediments)
6,534FLF
(increased
streamfunction)
3.1°C
(reducedmaxdaily
watertemperature)
7,192WLF
(increased
salmonhabitat)
*ThesenumbersarefromthePhase2plantingofRogueRiver.The2013plantingaugmentedtheplantingin2012.
**TheStreamFunctionalAssessmentMethodologywasnotavailablein2012.
NOTESTOTABLE
The Freshwater Trust Uplift Report 2013 — 11
MiddleFork
JohnDayRiver
Reach1
JohnDayBasin
Catherine
Creek
GrandeRondeBasin
Fifteenmile
Creek
HoodBasin
SalmonRiver
Mile0.91–1.43
SandyBasin
StillCreek
Reach1
(PumpkinPatch)
SandyBasin
StillCreek
Reach2
(Straights)
SandyBasin
StillCreek
Reach3
(Compression)
SandyBasin
RudioCreek
JohnDayBasin

NON-PROFIT
ORGANIZATION
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID
PORTLAND, OR
PERMIT No. 4313
65 SWYamhill Street, Suite 200
Portland, OR 97204
ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED

2013 Uplift Report: Quantifying Ecological Uplift

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to 2013 Uplift Report: Quantifying Ecological Uplift

Similar to 2013 Uplift Report: Quantifying Ecological Uplift (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

2013 Uplift Report: Quantifying Ecological Uplift