Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project
|Project Type||Non-mitigation||Location||38.93406° N, -119.99480° W Map|
|Project Area (Acres)||612.2||Last Updated||13 April 2022|
|Project Abstract||Restore natural hydrologic processes and functions in the marsh by constructing pilot channels and spreading flow over the marsh. Increase area of SEZ and associated habitat types. Reduce sediment sources and increase sediment deposition and filtering particularly in high flow events. Construct improvements to support and direct public access.|
|Project Groups||CDFW Prop 1 | Sierra Meadows Partnership|
|Administrative Region||Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board - Tiffany Steinert, Jan Zimmerman, Elizabeth van Diepen, LRWQCB|
|6A091911001||SWRCB - 401 Certification Letter (e.g., Site Number or WDID)|
|Site Name||Phase||Activity||SubActivities||Habitat||SubHabitat||Acres||Activity Status||Water Regime|
|Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project||None||Restoration/Rehabilitation||Sediment Management||Riverine Wetland||Riparian area||612.2||Construction in-progress||Riparian|
|Habitat||Acres Lost||Type of Loss|
|Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project||Construction in-progress||612.2|
|2020-06-30||Groundwork start||Installation of the sheetpile turbidity curtain|
|2013-09-01||Project entered||Project entered into database|
|2013-05-20||Project submitted||Project submitted|
|Contact||Scott Carroll||California Tahoe Conservancy||Not applicable/Unknown|
|Contact||Unknown||California Tahoe Conservancy||Not applicable/Unknown|
Funding Need: $550,000
|None||Restoration/Rehabilitation||California Tahoe Conservancy||$8,558,124|
|None||Restoration/Rehabilitation||WCB Wildlife Conservation Board||$2,980,000|
|None||Restoration/Rehabilitation||CDFW Prop 1 - Watershed Restoration Grant Program||$1,700,066|
|None||Restoration/Rehabilitation||U.S. Army Corps of Engineers||$1,600,000|
|None||Restoration/Rehabilitation||USFS Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act||$1,162,000|
|None||Restoration/Rehabilitation||CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife||$895,000|
|None||Restoration/Rehabilitation||USFS U.S. Forest Service||$450,000|
|None||Restoration/Rehabilitation||USBR U.S. Bureau of Reclamation||$450,000|
|None||Restoration/Rehabilitation||U.S. Environmental Protection Agency||$154,900|
|Visit Date||Version||Site Name||Wetland Type||Index Score|
|2018-08-23||6.1||Upper Truckee Marsh - upper||channeled wet meadow||81|
|2018-08-14||6.1||Trout Creek marsh||channeled wet meadow||88|
|2017-10-11||6.1||Tahoe1330. Upper Truckee Marsh||channeled wet meadow||81|
|2017-09-14||6.1||Tahoe1039.Dover Street||non-channeled wet meadow||65|
|2017-08-15||6.1||UTR Corps Yard||riverine non-confined||72|
|2016-08-22||6.1||UTR Michael Street||riverine non-confined||69|
|2016-08-22||6.1||UTR Tahoe Keys||riverine non-confined||75|
|2016-08-22||6.1||UTR Venice Ave||riverine non-confined||61|
|2016-08-22||6.1||UTR Corps Yard||riverine non-confined||67|
|2016-08-03||6.1||Tahoe1309. Upper Truckee Marsh||forested slope||87|
|2011-08-11||5.0.2||UTR Michael Street Reach||riverine non-confined||72|
|2011-08-11||5.0.2||UTR Tahoe Keys||riverine non-confined||77|
|Original criteria||not recorded||2013-05-20|
|Name||File Type||Submitted On||Submitted By|
|CTC Project Link||Other||2016-01-21||Jen Greenberg, California Tahoe Conservancy|
|EIP Reporting Tool Project Link||Other||2016-01-21||Jen Greenberg, California Tahoe Conservancy|
How to Use the Habitat Development Curve
Habitat Development Curves (HDCs) are used to determine the developmental status and trajectory of on-the-ground projects to create, restore, or enhance California wetland and stream habitats. Each HDC is based on assessments of habitat condition for different age areas of one habitat type that in aggregate represent the full spectrum of habitat development. The assessments of condition are provided by expert applications of the California Rapid Assessment Method (CRAM). Visit the CRAM website for more information about CRAM.
For each HDC, reference condition is represented by areas of a habitat that consistently get very high CRAM scores, have not been subject to disruptive management practices, and exist within landscapes that are protected and managed for their natural conditions. The horizontal lines intersecting the top of an HDC represent the mean CRAM score and standard deviation of scores for 25 qualifying reference areas.
The age of a project is estimated as the elapsed time in years between the groundwork end date for the project and the date of the CRAM assessment. To add or update a groundwork end date, use the Project Events form in Project Tracker (ptrack.ecoatlas.org). The minimum age in years of a non-project area, including any natural reference area, is estimated from all available local information, including historical maps and imagery, historical written accounts, and place-specific scientific studies of habitat development.
An HDC can be used to address the following questions:
- At what time in the future will the area of assessed habitat achieve the reference condition or other milestones in habitat development? The HDC can answer this question if the CRAM score for the assessed area is within the confidence interval of the HDC. The answer is the time in years along the HDC between the current age of the assessed area and the future date corresponding to the intersection of the HDC and the reference condition or other milestone.
- Is the area of assessed habitat likely to develop faster, slower, or at the same pace as most other areas of the same habitat type? The habitat area is likely to develop faster, slower, or at the same pace if the CRAM score for the area is above, below, or within the confidence interval of the HDC, respectively.
- What can be done to improve the condition of the habitat area or to increase its rate of development? HDCs by themselves cannot answer this question. Possible answers can be inferred by the following analysis that involves HDCs:
- Examine the HDC for each of the four CRAM Attributes;
- Identify the Attribute(s) scoring below the HDC;
- For any low-scoring Attribute, examine the component Metric Scores (note: the Metric Scores for any public CRAM assessment in the CRAM database can be obtained through EcoAtlas);
- Assume the low score of an Attribute is due to its low-scoring Metric(s);
- Consider modifying the design or management of the habitat area in ways that will sustainably increase its score(s) for the low-scoring Metric(s).
For more information about CRAM Attributes and Metrics, including their scientific rationale, see the CRAM Manual.