United States 

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

August 2016

Hydrology Report

Hotelling Gulch Fish Passage and Channel Restoration 

Project

Salmon/Scott River Ranger District, Klamath National Forest

Siskiyou County, California

For Information Contact: Melissa Van Scoyoc

Salmon River Restoration Council, 25631 Sawyers Bar Road, Sawyers Bar, CA 96027

(530) 462-4665

www.srrc.org
Non-Discrimination Policy

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers, 

employees, and applicants for employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disability, 

sex, gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where applicable, political beliefs, marital status, familial or 

parental status, sexual orientation, or all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public 

assistance program, or protected genetic information in employment or in any program or activity 

conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited bases will apply to all programs and/or 

employment activities.)

To File an Employment Complaint

If you wish to file an employment complaint, you must contact your agency's EEO Counselor (PDF) 

within 45 days of the date of the alleged discriminatory act, event, or in the case of a personnel 

action. Additional information can be found online at www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_file.html.

To File a Program Complaint

If you wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program 

Discrimination Complaint Form (PDF), found online at www.ascr.usda.gov/ complaint_filing_cust.html, 

or at any USDA office, or call (866) 632-9992 to request the form. You may also write a letter 

containing all of the information requested in the form. Send your completed complaint form or letter 

to us by mail at U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, by fax (202) 690-7442 or email at 

program.intake@usda.gov.

Persons with Disabilities

Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing or have speech disabilities and you wish to file either an 

EEO or program complaint please contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-

8339 or (800) 845-6136 (in Spanish).

Persons with disabilities who wish to file a program complaint, please see information above on how 

to contact us by mail directly or by email. If you require alternative means of communication for 

program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) please contact USDA's TARGET 

Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).
i

Table of Contents

Introduction............................................................................................................................... 1

Methodology............................................................................................................................. 1

Analysis Indicators................................................................................................................... 1

Measures................................................................................................................................... 1

Spatial and Temporal Bounding of Analysis Area................................................................... 2

Affected Environment............................................................................................................... 2

Environmental Consequences................................................................................................... 4

Alternative 1 – No Action ........................................................................................................ 4

Direct Effects and Indirect Effects ....................................................................................... 4

Cumulative Effects............................................................................................................... 5

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action .............................................................................................. 6

Direct and Indirect Effects.................................................................................................... 6

Cumulative Effects............................................................................................................... 8

Summary of Effects.................................................................................................................. 9

Compliance with Law, Regulation, Policy, and the Forest Plan .............................................. 9

Literature Cited ....................................................................................................................... 11

List of Tables

Table 1. Estimated peak flows in Hotelling Gulch (MLA, 2016). .............................................................3

Table 2. Watershed existing conditions as assessed by the three CWE models. ........................................4

Table 3. Analysis Indicators and Measures of the No Action Alterative ...................................................5

Table 4. Analysis Indicators and Measures of the Proposed Action ..........................................................7

Table 5. Water Resources Analysis Indicators by Alternative...................................................................9
Hydrology Report Hotelling Gulch Fish Passage and Channel Restoration Project

1

Hydrology Report

Introduction

The purpose of this report is to:

1) Analyze and describe the potential risks to water quality and riparian resources posed 

by this project, 

2) Describe the potential benefits of the project to water resources, and 

3) Ensure this project will comply with all regulations, laws and policies related to water 

resources.

Methodology

Analysis Indicators

The potential direct and indirect effects of each alternative will primarily be assessed 

qualitatively. In addition, four analysis indicators will be used to assess the relative risk to water 

and riparian resources:

- Likelihood of increased temperature loading to the Salmon River. 

- Likelihood of increased sediment loading to the Salmon River. 

- Likelihood of channel stability in Hotelling Gulch.

- Potential for groundwater contribution to in stream flow.

Measures

Measures are used to facilitate the comparison of alternatives. The likelihood of adverse effects 

to water quality will be assessed quantitatively (by proxy) for temperature and sediment and 

qualitatively through discussion for channel stability and groundwater:

- An increase in stream temperature may occur because of a temporary decrease in stream 

shade due to necessary construction activities. The potential for increasing temperature is 

approximated by acres of riparian vegetation removal. 

- A short-term increase in sediment may occur due to construction activities (equipment 

access and storage areas and stream channel construction). The potential for increasing 

sediment delivery is approximated by the total acres of project area resulting in soil 

disturbance.

- The reconstructed (western) channel could avulse back into the current (eastern) channel 

alignment during a high flow event. The potential for channel avulsion was evaluated by 

Michael Love and Associates during project design and will be described in this 

document.

- The contribution of groundwater to the stream flow will be estimated based on the the 

conceptual model described by J. Toth in 1963, in A theoretical analysis of groundwater 

flow in small drainage basins published in the Journal of Geophysical Research. 

Groundwater contribution to in stream flow can reduce stream temperatures at the local 

and reach scales. 
Hydrology Report Hotelling Gulch Fish Passage and Channel Restoration Project

2

Spatial and Temporal Bounding of Analysis Area

The Negro Creek-South Fork Salmon River 7th field watershed (18010210010802), about 10.2 

square miles (6,524 acres), is the spatial bound for this analysis. This boundary is appropriate for 

assessing the project impacts as they might be experienced by an aquatic organism at the 

confluence with the Salmon River. The watershed area (Hotelling Gulch) contributing to the 

upstream end of the project site is about 1.2 square miles (768 acres).

The short-term temporal bound for the analysis is 2 years and is based on the assumption that an 

overbank flow event has a high likelihood of occurring within 2 years of project implementation. 

Sediment scour and mobilization (with direct effects to water quality) are expected to manifest 

by an overbank flow event. 

The long-term temporal bound for the project is 10 years because it is expected that any potential 

reductions to stream shade (and indirect and cumulative adverse effects to water temperature) 

from project activities will recover within 10 years, if not more quickly. This timeframe assumes 

that reduced shade is primarily due to the removal of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), 

poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), and white alder (Alnus rhombifolia) downstream of 

the Cecilville Road crossing. It is expected that blackberry and poison oak will recover and

completely shade the reach within a few years of disturbance; no more than 10 years.

Affected Environment

For detailed channel morphology and hydrology see Michael Love and Associates Technical 

Memorandum and Design Plans (2016) for project details, site plans, and drawings.

Much of the upper and middle Hotelling Gulch watershed is located in steep, mountainous 

terrain with hillslope gradients frequently exceeding 70% along inner gorges, headwalls and 

upper ridge slopes. In contrast, the lower Hotelling Gulch watershed is a topographic low 

gradient strath terrace, where deposition or aggradation of upslope-derived alluvium and 

colluvium has resulted in a broad alluvial fan/river terrace complex. Hotelling Gulch experiences 

high sediment and debris loading including large size boulders and large wood within the stream 

channel and into the South Fork Salmon River (MLA 2016). 

The project area is about 5 acres and flows over the alluvial fan/river terrace, which is prone to 

channel avulsion and shifting alignments. This area has been highly disturbed through hydraulic 

mining; therefore, the pre-mining alignment of the channel is unknown. Cecilville Road (a 

Siskiyou County maintained road) crosses Hotelling Gulch’s eastern channel and forms a fish 

barrier approximately 200 feet upstream from its confluence with the South Fork Salmon River. 

Currently, there are two 36 inch culverts in this crossing which are undersized for this drainage. 

With the undersized crossing design, stream flow frequently diverts west to an inboard ditch 

during storm flows. During large storm events, Hotelling Gulch sediment aggrades at the mouth 

of the culverts and flow overtops the road. As a result, the road crossing has been rebuilt multiple 

times due to storm damage. The eastern channel dries up seasonally in its lower reach, making it 

unsuitable for aquatic species summer access to perennial stream habitat upstream.

Hotelling Gulch flowed along the western channel alignment as recently as 1964. Where the 

western channel crosses Cecilville Road, a 36 inch culvert conveys flow under the county road at 
Hydrology Report Hotelling Gulch Fish Passage and Channel Restoration Project

3

a lower elevation than the current crossing; about 200 feet to the west of the current stream 

crossing. This culvert discharges flow from several sources including an intermittent swale above 

the road, flow from the approaching inboard ditch, and diverted overflow from the eastern 

channel. Subsurface flow creates a perennial stream channel below the road; this cold-seep 

provides a small amount of cooling to the confluence pool in the South Fork Salmon River.

Hotelling Gulch is not gaged, therefore peak flows have been estimated using indirect methods. 

Two methods of analysis were used in order to best fit expected flows. For flow events having 

less than a 5-year return period the USGS (1982) scaled peak flow method was used and for 

flows with a 10-year and greater return period the Siskiyou County Drainage Manual (1974)

method was used.

Table 1. Estimated peak flows in Hotelling Gulch (MLA, 2016).

Return Period of Peak Flow (year)

1.2 2 2.33 5 10 50 100

Estimated Peak Flow (CFS) 13 34 40 67 104 230 281

The Salmon River hydrologic area (as defined by the North Coast Regional Water Quality 

Control Board) is registered on the Clean Water Act 303(d) list as impaired for temperature, as 

part of the Klamath Hydrologic Unit listing (NCRWQCB, 2005).

As part of the listing, the 2005 Salmon River Total Maximum Daily Load for Temperature and

Implementation Plan adopted a temperature “loading capacity” limit for the river (NCRWQCB).

The loading capacity provides a reference for calculating the amount of temperature load 

reduction needed to bring a water body into compliance with standards. In order to interpret this 

load capacity, water quality temperature objectives pertaining to the life stages of anadromous 

salmonids were identified. A 5°F rise in the temperature of cold water above natural receiving 

water temperatures is the effects threshold used to interpret the narrative water quality objectives 

for temperature from the Plan (NCRWQCB, 2005). This threshold applies to the confluence of 

the South Fork Salmon River and Hotelling Gulch, which is within the project area. 

Klamath NF conducted a stream temperature study during low flow conditions in 2010 and 2011. 

In addition to recording stream temperature within 87 watersheds, air temperature, and stream 

shade data were also collected and analyzed. The final report (Laurie, 2012) reveals a significant 

correlation between the watershed average of stream shade, mean July air temperature, drainage 

area, and elevation as predictor variables for the maximum weekly maximum temperature 

(MWMT). Most importantly, the stream shade data showed 53% of the measured watersheds had 

human-caused shade loss, of which, 72% (33 watersheds) were not meeting the Basin Plan 

standard for temperature. Hotelling Gulch was not evaluated, however, Knownothing and 

Methodist Creeks, which bound the project area, were found to have altered shade and MWMTs 

greater than 16°C, the temperature threshold for core juvenile salmonid rearing. Interestingly, the 

study found that 85% of the of all the assessed streams on the Forest are warmer than the 16°C 

standard, including 15 out of the 20 reference, or unmanaged streams, suggesting that the natural 

temperatures of many streams on the Klamath NF are warmer than the threshold standards used 

to assess them. 
Hydrology Report Hotelling Gulch Fish Passage and Channel Restoration Project

4

More sophisticated analyses of historic disturbance are done by the Klamath NF via models. A 

set of three standardized Cumulative Watershed Effects (CWE) models are used to assess the 

influences of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable activities and wildfires on water quality: 

Equivalent Roaded Area (ERA), Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE), and mass-wasting 

(GEO). They compare computed disturbance levels to established thresholds of concern (TOC). 

TOCs are points beyond which there is increasing susceptibility for significant adverse 

cumulative effects within a watershed (Bell 2012). 

These CWE model results are used within this report to compare estimated current conditions for 

project 7th field watersheds. The results, in the form of risk ratios (computed disturbance/TOC), 

are displayed in Table 2.

Table 2. Watershed existing conditions as assessed by the three CWE models. 

Project Site 7th Field Watershed

7th Field 

Area (sq. mi.) ERA USLE

MassWasting

Hotelling 

Gulch

Negro Creek-South Fork Salmon 

River 10.2 0.47 0.71 0.9

Results displayed in Table 2 indicate that the bounding 7th field watershed has computed 

disturbance levels below the TOC. The current risk ratio for the ERA is well below the TOC. 

The watershed is also below the USLE threshold. The watershed is approaching a TOC for masswasting due to the effects of roads within the watershed. However, the project is located on a 

stable alluvial fan with a low risk of landslide potential.

Within the 7th field watershed, current activity in addition to this project include 5 active mining 

claims and the Knownothing Fuels Reduction Project. The mining claims are all placer claims 

and do not have Plans of Operations in place. Therefore, the mining is limited to gold panning, 

small test hole excavation for prospecting, and small scale processing of the mined material. The 

Knownothing Fuels Reduction Project began in 2013 and is on-going. It includes the removal of 

ladder fuels, brush re-growth, and hazardous snags through cutting, handpiling, and burning 

piles. 

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 – No Action

Direct Effects and Indirect Effects

If the No Action alternative is selected, there will be no soil or vegetation disturbance by this 

project within the 7th field analysis watershed (Table 3). However, currently, Hotelling Gulch is 

disconnected from groundwater and therefore is not attaining the optimal in-stream flow for 

spatial and temporal connectivity for aquatic organisms during critical summer months. Both of 

these components are essential to meeting the Forest Plan Aquatic Conservation Strategy 

Objectives.

The No Action Alternative would continue to directly and adversely affect water quality by 

maintaining stream flow in the eastern channel alignment, which flows through undersized 

culverts. Frequent sediment aggradation and overtopping of the road results in regular road 
Hydrology Report Hotelling Gulch Fish Passage and Channel Restoration Project

5

crossing failure. Each failure conveys increased sediment and road debris into Hotelling Gulch 

and the South Fork Salmon River.

The current (eastern) alignment is entrenched and relatively stable in its current flow path.

However, lower Hotelling Gulch flows over a broad alluvial fan/river terrace complex that is 

naturally prone to channel avulsion and shifting alignments. As recently as 1964, Hotelling 

Gulch flowed along the western channel alignment. Therefore, there is a possibility that during 

an extreme storm event the channel could avulse back into the western alignment. When taken 

all together the channel has a moderate stability overall. 

The current channel of Hotelling Gulch is not in the thalweg (or lowest part) of the alluvial fan. 

According to Toth’s model, the flow of local groundwater systems are aligned with topography. 

Under this assumption, the groundwater contribution would be low because the groundwater is 

likely flowing toward the thalweg, which will daylight as springs. The current channel goes dry 

in the project area early in the spring and has no evidence of springs or groundwater seeps. So 

the contribution of groundwater to the portion of the current channel in the project area is none. 

The trend will be neutral compared to current conditions. 

There are no beneficial direct or indirect effects from this alternative. 

Table 1. Analysis Indicators and Measures of the No Action Alterative

Analysis Indicator Measure Value

Likelihood of increased temperature loading to the Salmon 

River. 

0 acres of riparian 

vegetation removal

Likelihood of increased sediment loading to the Salmon River. 0 acres of soil disturbance

Likelihood of channel stability. Moderately likely

Potential for groundwater contribution to in stream flow. No potential

Cumulative Effects

The CWE models indicate the current risk ratio for the ERA and USLE are below the TOC

(Table 2). Roads within the watershed have resulted in the watershed being near the TOC for 

mass-wasting. However, the current channel alignment is not adding to the risk of landslide 

potential because the stream flows through a stable alluvial fan. The CWE models were not used 

to analyze the effects of project alternatives because the proposed action would not produce a 

disturbance large enough to be detected by the models. CWE models were used to place the 

project within the context of the current conditions within the 7th field watershed.

The effects of mining activity within the watershed is minimal and limited to small surface 

disturbances. The fuels reduction work is localized and has a small project footprint relative to 

the 7th field watershed. Neither of these activates is expected to affect instream flows, including 

stream temperature, sediment, channel stability, or groundwater systems within the project area, 

Hotelling Gulch, or the 7th field watershed.
Hydrology Report Hotelling Gulch Fish Passage and Channel Restoration Project

6

Therefore, the current condition of the channel in relation to the ongoing activities within the 

watershed (mining and fuels reduction) will not combine to result in adverse cumulative effects 

including reaching the TOC for mass-wasting.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects

The project would reconnect surface flows of Hotelling Gulch into one channel (western 

alignment) within a more natural valley at a lower elevation. Upgrading the undersized crossing 

of Cecilville Road would eliminate the regular failure of the current road crossing, and the 

resulting sediment and debris delivery to the South Fork Salmon River. The new structure will 

fully span the reconstructed channel and allow for uninterrupted passage of watershed products 

(large wood and coarse sediment) during high flows (up to 100-year events), as well as annual 

movement of fish and other aquatic organisms. Reconnecting Hotelling Gulch would meet Forest 

Plan Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives by providing optimal in-stream flow for spatial 

and temporal connectivity for aquatic organisms.

Channel design and construction will be suitable for gradient, substrate, and other conditions of 

the site. The end result will be a channel and floodplain area which will resemble a natural 

stream appropriate to the drainage area, including cascades, steps and pools constructed of native 

material (rock and large wood) salvaged onsite. The constructed channel will be designed to 

evolve in a dynamic manner in response to discharge, substrate movement, wood input, and 

natural events and so that there is no expectation of channel maintenance.

The Salmon River is listed as impaired in the Clean Water Act 303(d) list for temperature. The 

proposed action has the potential to adversely affect stream temperature through a loss of shade 

by riparian vegetation where channel excavation removes canopy cover (Table 4). Both air 

temperature and stream shade were shown in Laurie, 2012 to be significantly correlated to

stream temperature. These potential impacts could be expected to last no more than 10 years; 

however, blackberry and poison oak are expected to recover and fully shade the stream within a 

few years of disturbance. These long-term impacts will be reduced by planting appropriate and 

fast growing riparian vegetation (primarily native willows) immediately following disturbance. 

Additionally, avoiding removal of the white alder trees along the west side of the channel below 

Cecilville Road will maintain shade over the channel. The trees removed along the east side of 

the channel may take up to 20 years to recover.

However, by restoring the western channel, surface water connectivity will be improved, 

substantially increasing the amount of perennial flow, and improving thermal refugia conditions 

at the mouth of Hotelling Gulch. Within and beyond the long-term timeframe, the western 

channel would have a beneficial indirect effect on water temperature by maintaining hyporheic 

flow (groundwater/surface water interaction) longer into the water year, providing cool water 

inputs to the South Fork Salmon River during critical summer months. This means that there is a 

high potential for groundwater contribution to in stream flows in Hotelling Gulch following

stream restoration. 

Within the short-term (2 years) timeframe, the proposed action has the potential to increase 

sediment loads within Hotelling Gulch and the South Fork Salmon River (Table 4). While 

sediment is a natural and necessary part of every fluvial system, it is physically and ecologically 

important to avoid contributing excess sediment by anthropogenic means. Where soil and 
Hydrology Report Hotelling Gulch Fish Passage and Channel Restoration Project

7

vegetation are disturbed by excavation, fill piling, and site access, water is more likely to erode 

and deliver sediment to the stream channel. These short-term impacts will be reduced by 

working during dry conditions and placing erosion controls prior to and during construction, as 

well as permanent stabilization immediately following construction. If water is present in the 

channel during construction, dewatering of the channel will be conducted to minimize 

disturbance to hydrology and in accordance with standard BMPs. The site will also be 

revegetated with appropriate riparian species immediately following the disturbance. Within the 

long-term timeframe, vegetation is expected to fully stabilize any disturbed soil.

Table 2. Analysis Indicators and Measures of the Proposed Action

Analysis Indicator Measure Value

Likelihood of increased temperature loading to the Salmon 

River. 

0.25 acres of riparian 

vegetation removal

Likelihood of increased sediment loading to the Salmon River. 1.5 acres of soil 

disturbance

Likelihood of channel stability. Highly likely

Potential for groundwater contribution to in stream flow. High potential at the site 

and reach scale

The reconstructed (western) channel could avulse back into the current (eastern) channel 

alignment during a high flow event. Potential avulsion was evaluated through the design process, 

Michael Love and Associates developed a project design to mitigate the possibility of avulsion as 

much as possible. The eastern channel will be plugged with materials excavated from the 

restored channel resistant to scour and would have a top elevation 3 feet above predicted 100-

year flow elevation. It will also be planted with live willow cuttings in order to maintain the plug 

in place. Additionally, the eastern channel plug will be monitored for stability annually and 

following extremely high flow events. The stream channel will be more stable than in its current 

condition because of the low topographic location of the western channel and the restoration 

design.

Although adversely affecting water resources within both the short and long terms is possible, 

the potential effects must be put into perspective. When one considers the area of disturbance in 

comparison to the 7th field watershed area, it is clear the overall potential effects on stream 

temperature and sediment regime should be very small (insignificant), if not imperceptible, 

within the short-term and absent during the long-term. The disturbance is expected to be about 

1.5 acres total, which is 0.02% of the 7th field watershed and 0.20% of Hotelling Gulch.

In addition to the small project scale, water quality protections are part of the proposed action:

• If dewatering and rewatering of Hotelling Gulch channels is necessary, it will be done 

in a manner that minimizes sediment mobilization.

• During near and in-channel work, there will be no surface water connection between 

Hotelling Gulch and South Fork Salmon River.
Hydrology Report Hotelling Gulch Fish Passage and Channel Restoration Project

8

• Appropriate sediment retention devices, such as silt fence, hay bales, washed gravel 

berms wrapped in plastic, and/or wattles, will be used during excavation work to 

prevent contaminants and sediment from entering the river.

• In-channel sediment barriers will be removed only after mechanized equipment has 

completed all work at the site and sediment from construction activity has settled. At 

that time, either hand operations or an excavator arm will be used to remove the 

remaining fill between the constructed habitat and the adjacent river.

• Excess excavated fill generated from project activities will be placed to minimize 

erosion and/or to prevent Hotelling Gulch flow from entering the eastern channel 

during subsequent elevated flows.

• Blackberry, shrub, and tree removal to allow equipment access/operation will result in 

the least possible amount of canopy shade loss over the reconstructed Hotelling Gulch 

channel.

• The restored Hotelling Gulch channel corridor will be stabilized and planted with 

riparian trees and shrubs to ensure quick re-establishment of effective canopy shade.

• Larger diameter trees removed during project activities will be retained on-site for use 

as in-channel and floodplain structure complexity elements.

To further reduce the risk of adversely affecting water resources, Project Design Features (PDFs) 

and Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be required during implementation and they are 

described in Chapter 2 of the EA. 

Cumulative Effects

CWE results displayed in Table 2 indicate that the bounding 7th field watershed has computed 

disturbance levels below the TOC. The current risk ratio for the ERA is well below the TOC, 

therefore any additional impacts from this small project would not change the TOC for ERA. 

The watershed is also below the USLE threshold; therefore, the project will not result in any 

chronic sediment delivery. In addition, project design features will mitigate the acute sediment 

delivery. The watershed is approaching a TOC for mass-wasting due to the effects of roads 

within the watershed. However, the project is located on a stable alluvial fan and project 

activities will not affect the landslide potential of the watershed. CWE models were not used to 

assess the effects of project alternatives because the project activities will not result in a 

disturbance large enough to be detected by the models. CWE models were used to place the 

project within the context of the current conditions within the 7th field watershed.

The effects of mining activity within the watershed is minimal and limited to small surface 

disturbances. The fuels reduction work is localized and has a small project footprint relative to 

the 7th field watershed. Neither of these activates is expected to affect instream flows, including 

stream temperature, sediment, channel stability, or groundwater systems within the project area, 

Hotelling Gulch, or the 7th field watershed.

Therefore, the addition of this project to the ongoing activities within the watershed (mining and 

fuels reduction) will not combine to result in adverse cumulative effects including reaching the 

TOC for mass-wasting. Therefore, restoration activities will not produce adverse cumulative 

effects to water quality due to the small size for the project and specified project design features 
Hydrology Report Hotelling Gulch Fish Passage and Channel Restoration Project

9

(PDF) and best management practices (BMP) which will mitigate potential impacts of the 

project.

Summary of Effects

The analysis indicators show the Proposed Action poses some small risk to water resources when 

compared with the No Action Alternative (5). However, because the proposed action is small in 

scale, incorporates protections for water resources through careful planning, project design 

features and best management practices, direct and indirect adverse impacts to water resources 

are not expected. Should any occur, they would be short-lived and insignificant. 

Within and beyond the long-term timeframe, the project is intended to have a beneficial indirect 

effect on water quality by increasing the quantity of cool water inputs at the confluence with the 

South Fork Salmon River, reducing sediment and debris delivery to Hotelling Gulch and 

improving aquatic organism passage in Hotelling Gulch.

Table 5. Water Resources Analysis Indicators by Alternative

Analysis Indicator Alternative 1

(No Action)

Alternative 2

(Proposed Action)

Likelihood of increased water temperature loading 

at the confluence of the project stream and the 

South Fork Salmon River.

0 acres 0.25 acres

Likelihood of increased sediment loading at the 

confluence of the project stream and the South Fork 

Salmon River.

0 acres 1.5 acres

Likelihood of channel stability in the project 

stream. Moderately likely Highly likely

Potential for groundwater contribution to in stream 

flow. None Highly likely

Compliance with Law, Regulation, Policy, and the Forest Plan

Compliance with the Klamath NF Land and Resource Management Plan and the Aquatic 

Conservation Strategy

The Klamath LRMP Record of Decision (ROD) is the guiding document for all Forest projects. 

The Klamath LRMP includes reference to the Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS), which 

incorporates specific standards and guidelines for riparian reserves set within the overarching 

Northwest Forest Plan (ROD to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning 

Documents within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl) (USDA Forest Service and USDI 

Bureau of Land Management 1994). All projects within Riparian Reserves on the Klamath 

National Forest must therefore be consistent with the objectives, standards, and guidelines of the 

ACS. The project is located in the Riparian Reserve Management Area (MA-10). Forest-wide 

standards and guidelines include direction to maintain and restore water quality necessary to 

support healthy riparian, aquatic and wetland ecosystems. These include, but are not exclusive 

to, standards and guidelines: 9-1, 9-4, MA10-13, MA10-17, MA10-18, MA10-19, MA10-20. 
Hydrology Report Hotelling Gulch Fish Passage and Channel Restoration Project

10

The Hotelling Gulch Fish Passage and Channel Restoration Project is consistent with the LRMP 

standards and guidelines, including the ACS objectives (for details please see the Forest Plan 

Consistency Checklist within the project record).

Compliance with the Clean Water Act

The Salmon River hydrologic area is listed on the Section 303(d) List for impairment or threat of 

impairment to water quality associated with temperature. The Salmon River Temperature Total 

Maximum Daily Load and Implementation Plan was prepared to reduce the temperature issues in 

the watershed over the long-term. By meeting the Total Maximum Daily Load the project will 

meet the Basin Plan objective for temperature. The Total Maximum Daily Load will be met 

through the Clean Water Act Section 401 permitting process as described below. 

Compliance with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act

The Salmon River was designated a Recreational and Scenic River within the National Wild & 

Scenic Rivers System in 1981. Designated Recreational Rivers are typically readily accessible by 

road or railroad, may have some development along their shorelines, and may have undergone 

some impoundment or diversion in the past. Designated Scenic Rivers are free of impoundments, 

with shorelines or watersheds still largely primitive and shorelines largely undeveloped, but 

accessible in places by roads. The South Fork Salmon River is located within the designated 

corridor. Project activities will not adversely impact the values for which the Salmon River was 

designated.

Permitting

The project will require issuance of a Clean Water Act section 404 permit from the US Army 

Corps of Engineers, a Water Quality Certification (Clean Water Act section 401 and a 

Construction General Permit) from the State of CA, and a Section 1600 Lake and Streambed 

Alteration Agreement permit from the State of CA. Conditions and additional BMPs beyond 

what is described in this analysis may be required by these permits (e.g., a Stormwater Pollution 

Prevention Plan). Implementation of this project will not begin until all required permits are 

granted.
Hydrology Report Hotelling Gulch Fish Passage and Channel Restoration Project

11

Literature Cited

Bell, A. 2012. Cumulative watershed effects modeling: The abridged version. Klamath National 

Forest, Supervisor’s Office, Yreka, CA.

Laurie, G. 2012. Stream Temperature Monitoring on the Klamath National Forest, 2010 to 2011. 

Klamath National Forest, Supervisor’s Office, Yreka, CA.

Michael Love and Associates (MLA). 2016. Technical Memorandum: Basis of Preliminary 

Design for the Restoration of Hotelling Gulch with a Road-Stream Crossing Replacement 

on Cecilville Road, Siskiyou County, California. Michael Love and Associates. Arcata, 

CA

North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (NCRWQCB). 2005. Total Maximum Daily 

Load for Temperature and Implementation Plan. State of California, North Coast 

Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Toth, J. 1963. A theoretical analysis of groundwater flow in small drainage basins. Journal of 

Geophysical Research 68: 4795-4812.