Completion Form

2022

During FY21 (March 2021) Hall's Hammer Time Construction was contracted to remove 37.5 acres of tamarisk. This is less than what was planned, however cost of whole tree removal went up a great amount from last contract ($900 per acre to $1,621 per acre). The map has been updated to show 37.5 acre removal.  We constructed 49 restoration structures, including channel-spanning, mid-channel, and bank-attached post-assisted log-structures (PALS) and beaver dam analogues (BDAs) on the lower Price River. Structure locations were primarily driven by a study design by researchers at Utah State University (USU) which is evaluating the importance of structure density. Treatment densities were high (40 structures/km), medium (20 structures/km), and low (10 structures/km) and built in 300 m reaches. Structure locations were field adjusted based on the availability of suitable building material as well as water depth. We were unable to build structures where water depth exceeded 4 ft.
Our restoration effectiveness monitoring approach used both field-based structure-level observations and analysis of drone imagery. The field-based data collection consisted of: 1. Presence-absence -- Is it there? If present -- is it as designed -- for example, structures may have moved to the side of the channel, the material is still in place, but not engaged in the same way, but has the potential to engage with flows. 2. Structure condition - Is the structure blown out, breached, moved or buried (more than three-fourths of crest height sediment accumulation)? Is there additional accumulation of LWD on the structure? Has the structure been taken over by beaver? 3. Geomorphic response -- At each structure we assessed: Erosion and deposition. Distribution of geomorphic features at each structure: pool (scour or dam), cutbank, uniform bed aggradation or degradation; bar deposition (mid or point): range of substrates exposed -- patchiness or not? Evidence of overbank deposition/flow --at each structure. 4. Natural beaver dams and accumulations of LWD. If LWD accumulation occurred, did large wood accumulate on an existing structure, or elsewhere? 5. Total number of structures through time, both restoration and natural structures. 6. Condition of beaver dams -- intact, breached, or blown out -- and active or inactive. Our field-based approach focused on collecting information on restoration structures and natural wood accumulations and assessed the condition, function, and influence (hydrological and geomorphic) of instream structures. Field-based data provided important information on short-term responses and was the mechanistic link to understanding and demonstrating restoration effectiveness. 
The drone-based data collection consisted of an FAA licensed drone pilot collecting full coverage images for each of the restoration sites at low and high flow discharge before and after restoration was implemented. With these sets of images, we assessed the geomorphic and floodplain changes associated with changes in discharge as well as to track changes over time related to restoration actions. Specifically, we assessed: valley bottom extent, changes to the surface water extent and channel width, changes to the number of high flow channels vs. low flow channels. We also assessed inundation extent and type mapping and compare their extents through time. We assessed the nature of flow overbank vs channelized flows. Assessing these changes in flow type through time is important to track changes in lateral connectivity. Active floodplain extent -- pre and post restoration was assessed. Imagery-based surveys captured large-scale changes (e.g. inundation extent and type mapping [free flowing, overflow, and ponded]) and active and inactive floodplain mapping. These are important indicators of riverscape health that are directly modified by LT-PBR structures and beaver dams. The percent and type of valley bottom inundation and/or active floodplain not only are direct measures of the quantity of aquatic habitat present within the stream corridor, but can be viewed as proxies for hydrogeomorphic and ecological characteristics and processes that are essential to riverscape health such as channel floodplain connectivity and water residence time.

Beaver Translocation Study: Beavers were taken from conflict situations, fitted with radio- and PIT-tags, and translocated to the restoration site. Naturally occurring resident beavers in the site were also captured, fitted with tags, and monitored. Beavers were assigned an age class (kit < 1 year, subadult = 1-2 years, adult > 2 years) based on weight and body size. All beavers were monitored 2-7 times per week from May-October 2019 and 2020 via radio tags, and with Passive Integrated Antennae and PIT-tags from May 2019 -- March 2021. We also conducted dam and sign surveys by floating the river, before and after translocations occurred to determine dams built and roughly assess resident beaver occupancy. We compared the site fidelity, survival, space use, and dam building behavior of translocated beavers to resident beavers. To assess site fidelity and survival we used Cormack-Jolly-Seber models to estimate the probability of an individual surviving and staying in the study area for eight weeks post-release (apparent survival). To assess space use we determined the most up- and downstream location an individual was detected, and calculated the total length of river between those locations (river kilometers). Lastly, to assess dam building activity we assigned each observed dam based on its location to the appropriate river reach delineated by the Utah Beaver Restoration Assessment Tool, and performed a Goodness of Fit test to compare the post-translocation sum of river reaches with 1 dam to the pre-translocation sum of river reaches with 1 dam.

The lower Price River is very arid with few springs, seeps, or off channel watering improvements such as stock ponds. The Price River provides the only regular presence of water; therefore, like many other arid riparian areas the river supports a great variety of plant and animal species. Additionally, multi-story layers of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground layer) provide habitat and shelter for a great assortment of species. This diverse structure is often unique to stream corridors in arid lands. Anabranch was contracted to design and build four BDA's complexes on the Price River below Woodside. These structures improve habitat by prolonging water during droughts, maintaining native vegetation, and diversifying in-stream fish habitat. A total of 49 BDA's were constructed in the spring of 2021. Beaver dams also help improve in-stream fish habitat and mitigate drought. The naturally occurring beaver population in the restoration area appeared to be far below carrying capacity based on sign surveys, and so the goal of translocating additional beavers to the site was to supplement the existing resident beaver population and ultimately lead to more beaver dams in the system. We translocated a total of 39 beavers (16 adults, 17 subadults, and 6 kits) in 16 release efforts to the Price River and monitored them post-release, and monitored 21 resident beavers (8 adults, 5 subadults, and 8 kits) already in the river. We excluded kits from analyses due to low detection rates. Translocated adult and subadult beavers initially appeared to have similar behavior as resident subadult beavers during dispersal, experiencing high mortality and emigration rates, moving long distances, and not building dams. Apparent survival rates (i.e. survived and stayed in the study area) for eight weeks post-release of resident subadult (0.24 +/- 0.34; 1 SE), translocated adult (0.37 +/- 0.01), and translocated subadult beavers (0.24 +/- 0.12) were lower than resident adult beavers (0.88 +/- 0.09). Mean maximum distances detected for resident subadult (11.00 +/- 4.24 river km), translocated adult (19.69 +/- 3.76 river km), and translocated subadult (21.09 +/- 5.54 river km) beavers were roughly tenfold greater than for resident adult beavers (0.86 +/- 0.21 river km). We had limited long-term monitoring abilities due to challenges with transmitter loss and failure, but it did appear that some translocated beavers eventually established and built dams in the restoration area, as there were significantly more river reaches with dams (x2(1, n =210) = 16.38, p = 5.2x10-5) after than before beaver translocations (17 dams pre-translocation, 33 dams post-translocation). At least 7 dams were built post-translocation where there were no known resident beaver colonies. When translocating beavers especially to an arid system such as the Price River where resources and mates are patchy and scarce, high mortality, low site-fidelity, and wide-ranging movement patterns should be anticipated. However, it does appear that persistent releases at the restoration site eventually resulted in some establishment and dam-building, with no apparent negative effects to resident beaver behavior. Translocated beavers can be used to augment the existing low population to reach restoration goals more quickly.

Project was carried over info FY22 so a late invoice could be paid.  All on the ground work was completed in FY21.

Plants (N.M. privet, sumac, silver leaf buffalo berry, and cottonwood) have been ordered and funds carried over to plant them this fall (Oct 2021).  Additionally around 20 BDA's will be added to those already constructed so we have a total of four replicates with a high, medium, and low density of BDA's. This will allow for a study to determine what density of BDA's provides the most benefits.

The larger habitat restoration effort (Phases 2-3) will extend successful activities to other sections of the river, to help ensure that habitat is improved throughout the lower Price River corridor and over the longer term. Herbicide treatments will be planned in Phase II in order to address  tamarisk re-sprouting or other secondary weed treatments as needed to maintain Phase I invasive removal sites.

In terms of ensuring the long-term success of the current project, another Phase of our restoration plan for the Price River is coordinating with stakeholders in the watershed to provide ecological flows.  UDWR, TNC and TU are the leads on this component, partners have already secured several hundred thousand dollars to contribute to this effort. Providing both low flows and flood flows (after needs of water users are met) will help maintain habitat and create new habitat through natural river processes.

All beaver monitoring and analyses included in this report occurred before BDAs were installed, and represents the before/control component of the study, while continued monitoring and translocations after BDA installations represent the after/impact component of the study. Translocated beaver releases and monitoring of both resident and translocated beavers will continue through 2022 to determine the relationship between BDA installations and beaver dam-building efficacy.

Phaedra Budy

09/20/2021 10:18:30