PFC Standard Checklist

Location

Location Description:                   Reach
Downstream End Point
Township Range Section:  Meridian: Gila & Salt River Base Line
Township: 7N, Range: 30E, Section: 20, 1/4: SE, 1/4 1/4: SW 

UTM:  Zone:12S
Northing:  meters, Easting:   meters

Lat / Long:
North Latitude: Degrees: , Decimal Minutes:
West Longitude: Degrees: , Decimal Minutes:

Upstream End Point
Township Range Section:  Meridian: Gila & Salt River Base Line
Township:7N,  Range:30E, Section: 29, 1/4: NE, 1/4 1/4: NW

UTM: Zone:12S
Northing:  meters, Easting:   meters

Lat / Long:
North Latitude: Degrees: , Decimal Minutes:
West Longitude: Degrees: , Decimal Minutes:

HYDROLOGIC

1) Floodplain inundated in "relatively frequent" events (1-3 years) YES
Remarks: Flood plain well established and adequate for recent runoff / peak flow events (since 1996). No visible damage from high flow events.
2) Active/stable beaver dams YES
Remarks: Few mud dams, little woody debris used in dams. Beaver activity is dependent on sufficient water. Some of these reaches do not have sufficient yearlong flows to keep beaver in place.
3) Sinuosity, width/depth ration, and gradient are in balance with the landscape setting (i.e., landform, geology, and bioclimatic region) YES
Remarks: Width / depth ratio varies, mostly OK, some a bit wide but 100% bank veg cover = good trend towards narrower channel, most high walls are laid back, few still eroding, sinuosity good and getting better, gradient very low.
4) Riparian zone is widening or has achieved potiential extent YES
Remarks: At potential but still slowly improving through deposition, rabbittbrush Chna is starting to drown out. Evidence includes lack of flowering and dead or decadent branch tips. This is a good sign and indicates trend towards higher water tables and conditions conducive to lentic vegetation.
5) Upland watershed not contributin to riparian degradation YES
Remarks: Upland watershed is sufficiently stable not to contribute to riparian degradation. There are undesirable watershed conditions in upper watershed: some private lands in less than desirable condition from grazing or agricultural plowing / tilling that encourages sedimentation, old logging roads in higher than desired density encourage faster runoff, and naturally unstable geologic material that are erosive (Datil formation, volcanic ash).

VEGETATIVE

6) Diverse age-class distribution (recruitment for maintenance/recovery YES
Remarks: Herbaceous community type dominates; few woodies. There appears to be healthy growth of herbaceous vegetation.
7) Diverse composition of vegetation (for maintenance/recovery YES
Remarks: Riparian community is highly diverse, consists of lentic and a few woody lotic species. As expected, a gradual composition change is seen towards dryer areas (terraces and toeslopes of healing terraces).
8) Species present indicate maintenance of riparian soil moisture characteristics YES
Remarks: Obligate and facultative wetland species dominate riparian area.
9) Streambank vegetation is comprised of those plants or plant communities that have root masses capable of withstanding high streamflow events YES
Remarks: Carex, Juncus, 100% cover of flood plain.
10) Riparian plants exhibit high vigor YES
Remarks: Very good growth, 3 foot tall herbaceous community, some taller. No bare soil on floodplain. Planted coyote willows are showing signs of establishment: resprouting from base of plants indicates root system has established and is supporting top growth.
11) Adequate vegetative cover present to protect banks and dissipate energy during high flows YES
Remarks: 100% veg cover with the right species.
12) Plant communities in the riparian area are an adequate source of coarse and/or large woody debris YES
Remarks: Tending towards wet meadow, doesn't need much coarse woody debris. There is some woody debris scattered over floodplain, however flood plain width and its veg cover is more critical to riparian function in this system.

SOILS

13) Floodplain and channel characteristics (i.e., rocks, overflow channels, coarse and/or large woody debris) adequate to dissipate energy YES
Remarks: Vegetated  flood plain is most critical item to this system, tending toward lentic. Under present flood regime (regulated flows, irrigation dams, domestic wells in watershed), available floodplain is adequate. Originally floodplain was wider, and floodplain width is still in widening process.
14) Point bars are revegetating YES
Remarks: 100% vegetation cover on all depositional areas: point bars and (few) mid channel bars.
15) Lateral stream movement is associated with natural sinuosity YES
Remarks: Meanders still forming near vertical banks, evidenced by continuing erosion (1 foot per year) of outside banks in meanders, as well as point bar and flood plain formation on inside bends. This is natural process of healing after period of stream bed incision.
16) System is vertically stable YES
Remarks: No head cuts in system. One very small step of 3-4 inches is stabilizing with dense sedges and is expected to heal and stabilize within year or two. There was no evidence of rapid upstream migration of this feature. Deposition within this system is not excessive and is leading towards wider floodplain development. All depositional areas are 100% vegetated.
17) Stream is in balance with the water and sediment being supplied by the watershed (i.e., no excessive erosion or deposition) YES
Remarks: Excessive deposition is not visible as vegetation can keep up with deposition. No bare soil in areas of deposition.  This system appears to be healing at maximal rates. Over time and given no excessive runoff events or alterations to present conditions, this system could approach what it used to be a century ago: wide floodplains with dominantly lentic vegetation, some scattered patches of woody species.

Vegetation Community Types:

Upland: Pied/Jude2/Jumo
Wetland:

Summary Determination

Functional Rating:  PFC
Trend for Functional -- At Risk: Unanswered 

Are factors contributing to unacceptable conditions outside agency's control or management?  Y
If yes, what are those factors? Flow Regulations, Other,

Problem(s):  Flow regulation for irrigation.
Problems: none major, vertical banks still in process of healing, most have laid back and are vegetated, signs of aggrading still in process.
NOTES: Permanent spring in channel reach 3. Planted Poan, some drowning. White deposits visible on vertical banks (alkali?, salts?).  "Sausage" stream bank protection structures not working, undercutting and rolling over into stream. Hay bale structures work better, keep loose ravel from vertical banks from entering stream, deposits are vegetating.
PHOTOS: TS 30 - 35

Recommendations:  On healthy trend, continue current management.
Acreage: Reach 2A includes about 14 acres of riparian area, Reach 3 includes about 15 acres of riparian area.

Time to fix:  0

Desired Functional Condition:  Reach is near Desired Future Condition.  Improvements might include wider overall floodplain, fully stabilized and vegetated vertical banks, perhaps a few patches of woody riparian vegetation along edges of floodplain.
Photographs:             7

Reach 2A and 3: #30-35

#30 - View of over bank flood evidence. Note very small point bar forming, however its expansion is restricted due to the barrier in form of the old vertical bank on the right. Meandering is still in process of forming as vertical banks on outside of creek bends are accumulating very little slough at their base. This indicates insufficient floodplain width.

#31 - Elk creek crossing via gap in fence. Note width/depth ratio in trodden area (wide and shallow) versus the desired narrow and deep channel configuration on far side of fence. Large ungulates can damage soft creek banks and maintain this condition through excessive use.

#32 - Downstream view of reach. Meanders starting to form, however limiting factor is an inadequate flood plain width. Note most outside bends have no floodplain and are still eroding vertical banks in order to expand floodplain and meander pattern.

#33 - Small spring or seep adjacent to Nutrioso Creek (east side of creek, on a terrace). The light brownish vegetation is a Baltic rush (Juncus balticus), known to inhabit permanently moist areas. Note rabbitbrush is dying out as rush is expanding towards creek. Person in background is Mr. Jim Crosswhite of the EC Bar Ranch in Nutrioso.

#34 - View of channel in lower part of Reach 3. Vigorous growth of bank vegetation and adequate floodplain width has developed. Note vertical banks are sloughing in by themselves, rather than being eroded out by the channel. This is a sign of adequate floodplain width.

#35 - Downstream view of channel showing evidence of overbank flooding. Note flow has impacted into the bank directly beneath the dying rabbitbrush plant up on the terrace, while the bank on either side of this impact area is unaffected. This will be the direction of the future channel and meander formation. Note flows also sheeted over the floodplain towards the right, bending vegetation down and dropping sediment, while the left side was unaffected by flow velocity.