Rim Fire Recovery Project 

FISHERIES REPORT 

Stanislaus National Forest 

April2014 

Reviewed by.:_: --=~-;-..:....=----+1-:,1-....-1..; oldeman 

quatic BiologistDate 1'*/, c?tJ/;/ 

Date J4.vv:; It 2 r;-f r 
2

Introduction

The purpose of this document is to describe the fisheries resource within the Rim Fire 

Recovery Project (the project) area and to assess potential effects to the fisheries resource 

during and following project implementation. Disturbance history, recreational use, fish 

stocking, and the existing condition serve to establish a relative quality for each of the 

fish-bearing streams potentially affected by the activities proposed by the project. A 

qualitative description of the physical habitat (instream and riparian) is provided, based 

primarily on field evaluation made during surveys for amphibian resources. A portion of 

the project area has been field reviewed by the investigator and allow for more accurate 

analysis. The analysis for the remainder is based on past fish habitat surveys, amphibian 

surveys, description by other field-going Forest personnel, and aerial photo interpretation. 

The potential for direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to the fish species inhabiting the 

project area is addressed.

A full description of the purpose and need, location, activities, treatments, treatment 

units, and prescriptions is contained in the Environmental Impact Statement for which 

this report serves as a supplement. This document will address the potential project 

related effects to the fishery itself with a cursory discussion of habitat effects, specifically 

in relation to the fishery. A full description of the life history, distribution, and habitat 

requirements for each trout species can be found in Meehan (1991) and for all species in 

Moyle (2002). Information on historic species presence and stream condition were found 

in the Stanislaus National Forest Fisheries Habitat Management Plan (USDA Forest 

Service 1971).

The Species

Six species of fish are known to occur within the project area. They include:

Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum)

Brown trout, Salmo trutta (Linnaeus)

California roach, Lavinia symmetricus (Baird and Girard)

Sacramento sucker, Catostomus occidentalis (Ayres)

Riffle sculpin, Cottus gulosus (Girard)

Sacramento pikeminnow, Ptychocheilus grandis (Ayres)

Rainbow trout

The rainbow trout is the most widely distributed and, debatably, sought-after fish species 

on the Forest. It occurs from elevations below 900 meters to well above 2000 meters. 

Prior to European settlement of the region, rainbow trout and several salmon species were 

the only salmonid fish in the general region. Resident and sea-run populations 

(steelhead) historically occurred in the Merced and Tuolumne Rivers. The extent to 

which indigenous strains of rainbow/steelhead occupied the project area is unknown. 

The development of hatcheries and the proliferation of fish stocks adapted to hatchery 

conditions, combined with the development and alteration of downstream river reaches, 
3

bring about the doubtful existence of the “native” rainbow genetic component (Moyle 

2002). 

Much of the existing rainbow trout fishery throughout the streams in the project area is 

the result of self-sustaining populations arising from stocked fish (holdovers) and/or 

stocked fish released throughout the year by California Department of Fish and Wildlife 

(CDFW). The fishable waters in the project area are relatively low in elevation with 

good access. Recreational opportunities for the species are available during the 

permissive fishing season. Rainbows residing in small streams rarely attain very large 

size, partially limited by productivity of food resources and maximum pool size.

Rainbow trout generally spawn in the spring as streamflow begins to abate from the high 

flow of winter. Successful spawning can occur well into the early summer and is largely 

dependent upon stream temperature and discharge. The pool tail and associated 

downstream riffle are the habitats where spawning occurs. Generally, small to medium 

sized gravel substrates provide for easy redd construction and permits water infiltration

through the constructed redd. As fine-grained sediment supply increases in response to 

terrestrial changes (either suspended in the water column or involved in bedload 

transport), they can be deposited in the redd. If this sediment is supplied in excess, water 

interchange in the streambed is decreased and egg survival and subsequent fry emergence 

may be negatively affected. 

Some of the following discussion of physical habitat is relevant to trout collectively, with 

specific mention made for rainbow trout. Physical instream habitats and water quality 

play important roles in supporting and maintaining trout populations. Physical habitat 

needs vary with the season and life stage of the animal. Three primary habitats are 

broadly defined as pool, run, and riffle. Additional elements contribute “quality” factors 

and include depth, cover, substrate type, and the interval association of habitats. Water 

quality elements include, but are not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, 

and streamflow.

Habitat with deep water is important for providing thermal refuge in winter and summer. 

Undercut banks, woody debris, riparian vegetation, and large substrates provide cover for 

fish. Generally, deep pools harbor the largest fish, which has been noted by personnel 

performing amphibian surveys. As described by Moyle (2002) and Bjornn and Reiser 

(1991), juveniles are most often encountered in run habitats characterized by depths of 

0.5 to 1.0 meters and velocities of 0.1 to 0.3 meters/second; fry show a preference for 

shallow (<0.5 meter), slow (<25 centimeter/second) water, likely an adaptation for 

predation survivability. Runs having clean-swept bottoms comprised of larger substrates 

(4 to >40 centimeters diameter) provide spaces in between stones that afford escape and 

resting refuge. Objects providing cover improve the quality of run habitats and can 

influence fish abundance (Bjornn and Reiser 1991). Riffles are the primary site of 

instream macroinvertebrate food production, with abundance positively correlated to 

substrate sizes dominated by cobble, pebble, and gravel (Merritt and Cummins 1996).
4

Water quality parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and 

streamflow are crucial throughout the year for maintaining the trout fishery. The optimal 

temperatures for growth of rainbow trout are 15 to 18 degrees Celsius (Moyle 2002). A 

critical thermal maximum temperature is approached as stream temperatures exceed 25 

degrees Celsius. Rainbows can tolerate short periods of temperatures exceeding 25 

degrees Celsius, provided the critical maximum exceedence is gained gradually. 

However, there is a physiological (metabolic) cost to the fish when exposed to high 

temperatures.

Brown trout

Brown trout are native to Europe. They were introduced into California to provide an 

additional recreational species, as they are an excellent game fish and table fare. They 

spawn from late fall to late winter, with increasing streamflow and decreasing water 

temperature combining as environmental cues. Like the rainbow trout, brown trout also 

construct a redd at the tail end of pool, but a different strategy is employed by the latter in 

that the reproductive effort of the female is accomplished by the construction of multiple 

redds in which only a fraction of the eggs are deposited in each for fertilization (Moyle 

2002). Embryos typically emerge in 7 to 8 weeks (range of 4-21 weeks), with the alevins 

emerging from the redd 3 to 6 weeks later (Moyle 2002). The high flows associated with 

winter’s passage and the occurrence of rain-on-snow events makes the eggs, alevins, and 

fry particularly vulnerable to mortality. 

Fry seek slow and shallow waters along the margins of the stream. Juveniles tend to 

occupy habitats with increased velocity and depth, with a preference for extensive cover 

provided by rocks, logs, and undercut banks. Fish in the fry and juvenile stages are best 

afforded survival if they avoid the deeper waters occupied by adults, for cannibalism is 

commonplace in the species. Maturity is usually reached in two to three years. Adults 

can attain larger maximum size in stream habitats than rainbows. Deep pools with 

extensive cover will generally produce the largest fish for the angler. Their ability to 

withstand heavy angling pressure, natural wariness, and tendency toward nocturnal 

feeding contribute to the species’ ability to maintain fishable populations (Etnier and 

Starnes 1993). 

The brown trout is more tolerant of higher temperatures and can survive for short periods 

of time in waters approaching 30 degrees Celsius. Optimum growth occurs at 

temperatures near 18 degree Celsius (Moyle 2002). Their metabolic tolerance for high 

temperatures can be partially offset by increased consumption of food, which, for the 

brown trout, can include very large prey items. Smaller browns feed heavily on insects in 

drift, both aquatic and terrestrial. 

California roach

The California roach is a small, native minnow (family Cyprinidae) and is commonly 

found throughout lower and mid-elevation habitats in the Sierra Nevada. Often thought 

of as a warmwater fish, the roach is known to co-occur with rainbow trout in cooler 
5

waters. The roach can occupy a wide variety of stream types, from very warm (30 to 35 

degrees Celsius) intermittent streams with low dissolved oxygen to cold, turbulent trout 

streams (Moyle 2002). The roach also exhibits adaptation to fire-prone environments, as 

its persistence in streams affected by high severity fire is a testament. Given their ability 

to thrive in a wide range of environmental conditions and stream types, their broad 

distribution, and ability to co-exist with other native species; the overall population status 

range wide is considered to be stable (Moyle et al. 1996). 

California roach generally spawn in the crevices of fine gravel from April to June when 

water temperatures reach 16 degrees Celsius (Moyle 2002). Like most cyprinids, 

congregations of many individuals (up to 200) engage en masse in the spawn with the 

females releasing only a few eggs at a time accompanied by attendant males. The general 

commotion of the spawning activity is necessary to clear silt and sand from the interstices 

of gravel prior to egg deposition (Moyle 2002). The eggs hatch in only a few days, the 

fry emerging shortly following egg sac absorption, up to two weeks. Once free from the 

gravel, the young inhabit slow, shallow water feeding on midge larvae and small 

crustaceans. Juvenile and adult fish are opportunistic and omnivorous, taking a wide 

variety of prey items. Roach mature in two to three years, with a lifespan occasionally 

exceeding three years.

Sacramento sucker

Sacramento sucker is a highly variable, native species common and widely distributed in 

central and northern California (Moyle 2002). They are most abundant in clear, cool 

streams and rivers, but are known to occur in warm sloughs (Moyle 2002). Sacramento 

sucker are typically associated with native minnows, such as Sacramento pikeminnow, 

hardhead, and California roach (Moyle 2002). Water temperature can be highly variable 

for this sucker, with the species found in both cold (15 to 16 degrees Celsius maximum) 

and warm water (29 to 30 degrees Celsius); preferred temperatures are 20 to 25 degrees 

Celsius (Moyle 2002).

Adult suckers are found in higher numbers in larger streams, with juveniles more 

numerous in tributaries or shallow reaches of large rivers near spawning areas (Moyle 

2002). Microhabitat selection is related to size with larvae concentrating over detritus 

bottoms or among emergent vegetation in warm, protected stream edges (Moyle 2002). 

Juveniles utilize shallow (20-60 centimeter), slow flowing (<10 centimeters/second) 

water along stream margins were they forage along the stream bottom. Deeper water can 

be used if predators are absent. Adult and sub adult suckers spend the day in deep pools 

or runs, or beneath undercut banks near riffles (Moyle 2002). Sacramento suckers eat 

algae, detritus and small, bottom-dwelling invertebrates (Moyle 2002).

Growth of suckers is variable, with faster growth rates observed in warmer waters. Fish 

mature between 4 and 6 years and can live considerably longer than 10 years (Moyle 

2002). Sucker populations typically have a nonuniform age structure, with reproductive 

success highest in wet years (Moyle 2002). Suckers can move considerable distances to 

tributaries to spawn over gravel riffles between late February and early June (Moyle 
6

2002). Fertilized eggs adhere to gravel or detritus, or bounce along the bottom until they 

are caught in gravel or backwater areas (Moyle 2002). Embryos hatch in 2 to 4 weeks 

and larvae remain in the gravel; post larvae fish emerge from the gravel are washed to 

warm shallows or flooded vegetation where they aggregate (Moyle 2002). Sacramento 

sucker is able to withstand adverse environmental conditions and flood the environment 

with young when conditions improve (Moyle 2002).

Riffle sculpin

Riffle sculpin is a native fish most common in “permanent, cold, headwater streams 

where riffles and rocky substrates predominate” (Moyle 2002). Although they select 

shallow areas with swift water, they spend most of the time sheltered under rocks or logs 

where velocity is lower (8 to 9 centimeters/second) (Moyle 2002). Sculpin are most 

often found in water less than 26 degrees Celsius (Moyle 2002).

In general riffle sculpin are restricted to flowing water because they require oxygen levels 

near saturation (Moyle 2002). Presence of riffle sculpin is a good indicator of water and 

habitat quality, and this fish is usually found in association with rainbow trout (Moyle 

2002). Sculpin eat benthic invertebrates and larger fish may occasionally eat smaller fish 

(Moyle 2002).

Riffle sculpin are thought to seldom live longer than 4 years, with sexual maturity 

reached at the end of their second year (Moyle 2002). They spawn in swift water on the 

underside of rocks or in submerged logs; males guard the nest (Moyle 2002). Depending 

on temperature, embryos hatch in 11 to 24 days and fry begin a benthic existence after 

absorbing the yolk sac (Moyle 2002). Dispersal is limited due to their benthic larvae.

Sculpin are abundant locally and widely distributed, however population isolation is of 

concern (Moyle 2002). This species is particularly vulnerable to changes that reduce 

flows or increase temperatures; hence their presence in relatively undisturbed streams 

(Moyle).

Sacramento pikeminnow

Sacramento pikeminnow is a large, native minnow (family Cyprinidae) that is highly 

mobile and favors large streams. They are found in low- to mid-elevation streams with 

deep pools, slow runs, undercut banks and overhanging vegetation and are most abundant 

in lightly-disturbed tree-lined reaches with other native fish (Moyle 2002). Summer 

water temperatures range from 18 to 28 degrees Celsius with temperatures above 38 

degrees Celsius lethal (Moyle 2002). 

Juvenile pikeminnow school with other native cyprinids, with the smallest fish occupying 

the shallowest water at the stream edges (Moyle 2002). As the fish grow, deeper and 

faster water is used. Large pikeminnow will spend the day in loose groups swimming 

around in large pools and feeding on surface insects or benthos (Moyle 2002). The 

largest fish remain under cover until darkness falls at which time they begin to forage on 

small fish in runs and shallow riffles (Moyle 2002). Pikeminnows are opportunistic 
7

predators, with type of prey taken dependent on size of the fish. Aquatic insects are taken 

by the smallest fish (<10 centimeters), with a switch to other fish and crayfish at 10 to 20 

centimeters in size. Larger fish prey almost exclusively on fish and crayfish, although are 

known to take other types of prey (Moyle 2002). In areas where they co-occur, 

California roach, Sacramento suckers and rainbow trout use shallower or faster water to 

avoid predation by pikeminnow (Moyle 2002).

Pikeminnow are slow growing and long-lived, with records of 16 year old pikeminnow 

from the Russian River (Moyle 2002). Pikeminnow mature in the third or fourth year and 

are able to spawn each year, although when conditions are unfavorable they will forgo 

spawning (Moyle 2002). In April and May fish will move upstream to gravel riffles or 

shallow flowing areas at the base of pools to spawn (Moyle 2002). Water temperature at 

spawning is between 15 and 20 degrees Celsius (Moyle 2002). In large rivers spawning 

will occur in tributary streams Moyle 2002). Eggs hatch in short order (4 to 7 days) 

approximately 2 weeks after spawning fry begin gathering in shallow pool edges or 

backwaters (Moyle 2002).

The Streams

There are thirty-five named fish bearing streams within the project area, totaling

approximately 300 miles of stream reaches bearing fish. Table 1 lists these streams and 

the fish species present. The streams are arranged to show how streams flow into each 

other, from downstream to upstream. For example: Niagara Creek is a tributary to Reed 

Creek, which in turn is a tributary to the Clavey River, which is a tributary to the 

Tuolumne River. 

Table 1: Fish bearing streams in the Rim Fire Recovery Project Area and fish 

species present. Streams marked with an asterisk (*) were surveyed for stream 

condition between 2005 and 2012.

Streams Fish Species Present

 Tuolumne River brown trout, California roach, rainbow trout, 

riffle sculpin, Sacramento sucker

 North Fork Tuolumne River* California roach, pikeminnow, rainbow 

trout, riffle sculpin, Sacramento sucker

 Hunter Creek* California roach, pikeminnow, rainbow 

trout, riffle sculpin, Sacramento sucker

 Duckwall Creek* rainbow trout

 Basin Creek* rainbow trout

 Clavey River* California roach, pikeminnow, rainbow 

trout, riffle sculpin, Sacramento sucker

(brown?)

 Bear Springs Creek rainbow trout

 Reed Creek* rainbow trout

• Niagara Creek* rainbow trout

• Bourland Creek* rainbow trout

• Reynolds Creek* rainbow trout
8

♦ Lost Creek* rainbow trout

♦ Little Reynolds Creek* rainbow trout

 Cottonwood Creek* rainbow trout

• Thirteenmile Creek* rainbow trout

 Hull Creek* rainbow trout (brown?)

• Rush Creek rainbow trout (brown?)

 Twomile Creek* rainbow trout

• Camp Twentyfive Creek* rainbow trout

• Brushy Creek* rainbow trout

 Trout Creek* rainbow trout

 South Fork Tuolumne River* brown trout, rainbow trout

 Middle Fork Tuolumne* rainbow trout

 Big Creek* brown trout , rainbow trout

 Soldier Creek* rainbow trout

 Rush Creek* rainbow trout (brown?)

 Ackerson Creek rainbow trout

 Drew Creek rainbow trout (brook?)

 Corral Creek* rainbow trout

 Jawbone Creek rainbow trout

 Skunk Creek rainbow trout

 Crane Creek rainbow trout

 Cherry Creek California roach, rainbow trout, riffle 

sculpin, Sacramento sucker

 Granite Creek* rainbow trout

 Eleanor Creek* rainbow trout (brook and brown?)

As described in the Rim Fire Recovery Project Watershed Report (Watershed Report), 

stream condition inventories were conducted along portions of 23 streams within the Rim 

Fire area between 2005 and 2012. These streams are marked with an asterisk (*) in Table 

1. Data is found in the Stanislaus StreamScape Inventory Database and can be 

summarized for baseline watershed and stream information prior to management 

activities. The Watershed Report summarizes the information on streams in the Rim Fire 

area prior to the fire and concluded that overall streambank stability was high, 16 out of 

23 streams had very good condition in channel form with the remaining streams showing 

some evidence of accelerated incision or widening, low amounts of pool tail and pool bed

sediments indicated a very stable watershed landscape, and excellent water temperatures 

were observed. 

The Rim Fire of 2013 drastically altered the landscape of the project area. As described 

in the Environmental Impact Statement, the Rim Fire started on August 17, 2013 in a 

remote area of the Stanislaus National Forest near the confluence of the Clavey and 

Tuolumne Rivers about 20 miles east of Sonora, California. Exhibiting high to extreme 

fire behavior with multiple flaming fronts, the fire made runs of 30,000 to 50,000 acres 

on two consecutive days. It quickly spread up the Tuolumne River watershed and its 

main tributaries: Clavey River, North Fork Tuolumne River, Middle Fork Tuolumne 
9

River, South Fork Tuolumne River and Cherry Creek. It also overlapped into the North 

Fork Merced River. Over several weeks it burned 257,314 acres, or 400 square miles 

including 154,530 acres of National Forest System (NFS) lands. The fire also burned 

within Yosemite National Park (78,895 acres), Sierra Pacific Industries private 

timberland (16,035 acres), other private land (7,725 acres) and Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) land (129 acres). 

The effects of the fire are described in the Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation 

Assessment Report, the Rim Fire Recovery Project Soils Report (Soils Report), the 

Watershed Report, and the Rim Fire Recovery Project Sensitive Aquatic Species Report

(Aquatic Species Report). The Watershed Report describes the soil and vegetation burn 

severity spatially across the fire area. Soil burn severity was 7 percent high, 37 percent 

moderate, and 56 percent low and unburned area, with the highest concentration of high 

soil burn severity in Granite Creek, Corral Creek and Reed Creek. The Aquatic Species 

Report describes the post-fire watershed response including erosion, storage and transport 

of stream channel sediment, streamflow, large woody debris (LWD) recruitment, and 

maintenance of cool or cold water temperatures. 

In forested settings, natural hillslope erosion rates are very low (0.1 to 0.5 tons/acre/year). 

Erosion modeling using Disturbed Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP) indicates 

that post-fire erosion rates in the Rim Fires area are predicted to vary between 0.6 and 4.9 

tons per acre (Soils Report Table 3.14-8). The actual amount of erosion from the 

hillslopes and the amount entering streams as sediment depends on several factors, 

including soil type, soil texture, hillslope steepness, ground cover quantity, and rainfall 

intensity. Observations in the Rim Fire area indicate hillslope erosion has increased postfire. In Skunk Creek, observations to date indicate sediment is one to two inches deep. 

As described in the Aquatic Species Report, when “large volumes of sediment are 

delivered to a stream channel, habitat complexity is reduced as pool and run habitats fill 

in and the stream bottom becomes relatively uniform. In larger streams like the Clavey 

River, extensive sedimentation could occur, but major reductions in pool volume are not 

likely because the energy of the streamflow is enough to keep the sediment moving 

downstream. Post-fire erosion rates can return to pre-fire rates within five to ten years.”

Base flow and peak flow are expected to increase post-fire due to loss of vegetation and 

ground cover. Higher peak flows can result in scouring of the stream channel and banks, 

and can be a significant source of post-fire sedimentation. These higher peak flows can 

continue for three to five years after the fire. Base flows can increase several fold 

throughout the year post-fire, and can continue for several decades until vegetation 

recovers. Streamflow plays an important role in providing adequate velocity and water 

depths within each habitat type and in temperature maintenance. In spawning gravels, 

there is adequate streamflow to transport metabolic waste away from the eggs and alevins 

developing in the redd and to provide an ample supply of oxygen. During the summer, 

and especially when temperatures reach or exceed a preferred maximum, streamflow is 

needed to create the turbulence necessary for providing dissolved oxygen. Turbulent 

flow can provide visual cover for feeding and escaping fish, in addition to transporting 
10

food resources. Perennial streamflow indicates the contact of surface water with ground 

water and provides thermal moderation (cooling influence) during the summer.

Streamflow and stream gradient determine the amount of sediment that is transported or 

stored in the channel. The higher the gradient the easier it is to transport fine sediments. 

The higher energy associated with larger streamflows moves larger quantities of 

sediment. Channel conditions should return to pre-fire levels within five to ten years, as 

evidenced by monitoring after the Stanislaus Complex Fire.

Fire-killed trees in the fire area will begin to fall and in the vicinity of the streams will 

become large woody debris (LWD). This recruitment is highest in the 10 to 20 year 

period following the fire. LWD helps to stabilize streambanks, trap sediment, and can 

result in pool creation downstream.

The loss of canopy cover due to the fire decreases stream shading and results in higher 

water temperatures. Stream temperatures can increase 5 or more degrees Fahrenheit (2.5 

degrees Celsius) for several years following a fire. Temperatures will return to pre-fire 

conditions as stream shading returns. Obligate riparian vegetation, such as alder and 

willow, regrow quickly after a fire to re-shade the stream.

Post-fire effects on the fish species present are related to the predicted habitat changes.

Increases in erosion lead to an increase in suspended solids in the stream, which results in 

high water turbidity. This is most likely to occur during and after storms during periods 

of increased flow. Within the Rim Fire area the highest erosion rates are predicted to 

occur in Corral Creek, Lower Jawbone Creek, Bear Springs Creek, Lower Reed Creek, 

Granite Creek, and the Lower South Fork Tuolumne River. Rainbow trout inhabit these 

streams. Brown trout also occurs in the South Fork Tuolumne River. An increase in 

ambient turbidity levels can negatively affect sight-feeding ability and abrade the delicate 

tissue of the gills. This can result in poor physiological condition associated with 

inadequate intake of food, reduced ability to uptake oxygen, and/or a combination of the 

two. Larger trout are sight predators and may have lower success of finding prey in 

highly turbid water. In highly turbid waters large trout will take refuge in deep pools. 

Because turbid waters are correlated with rainstorms, which in this area occur at irregular 

intervals, there will be pulses of turbidity with periods in between when large trout can 

successfully hunt. As flows decrease, turbidity will decrease both because erosion inputs 

to the stream lessen and sediments will settle out of the water column.

Increases in sedimentation can have reproductive and physiological effects on fish and 

can affect breeding success for all six fish species present. Fine sediment can reduce the 

quality of spawning areas by embedding the spawning substrates, reducing the capacity 

for water exchange through the streambed, and can effectively smother eggs. Rainbow 

and brown trout spawn in gravels found in pool tails and their associated riffles. 

Sediment present in the gravel reduces the interstitial spaces (areas between the gravels) 

where eggs are deposited. Trout require a good flow of water through the streambed to 

provide the developing eggs with adequate oxygen and to remove metabolic wastes. 

Excess fine sediment within the spawning gravels can adhere to the exterior of trout eggs, 
11

reduce the exchange of oxygen and metabolic waste through the egg wall, and result in 

egg mortality. Sediment that covers eggs after spawning can reduce egg survival and 

emergence of fry. Brown trout reproduction is more susceptible to this as brown trout are 

fall and early winter spawners, before sediments inputs increase with winter storms. 

California roach may be able to deal with higher levels of sediment, as their spawning 

behavior works to clear the sediment prior to egg deposition. Effects of sedimentation on 

riffle sculpin spawning is expected to be less than other species, as riffles are the areas 

with the swiftest water flow and the areas last to show increased sedimentation. 

Sacramento sucker and pikeminnow are both known to withstand adverse environmental 

conditions and spawn when conditions improve. The sculpin, sucker, pikeminnow, and 

roach are also found in major streams (North Fork Tuolumne River, Clavey River, 

Tuolumne River, and Cherry Creek where sedimentation effects are expected to be less 

both because of less predicted erosion and higher flows moving sediment through the 

system.

Sedimentation can also effect macroinvertebrate production and species composition in a 

stream. As summarized in the Watershed Report, benthic macroivertebrate sampling in 

the Clavey River and its tributaries in 2007 (Clavey River Ecosystem Project 2008) 

indicated macroinvertebrate at or near reference condition for the watershed. Increases in 

sedimentation can result in substrates becoming embedded. Embeddedness reduces the 

interstitial spaces between coarse substrates, which are the principal areas of colonization 

for macroinvertebrates that become available as drift. Sedimentation can result in a 

decrease in macroinvertebrate abundance and diversity as the available habitat is reduced. 

Species tolerant of sedimentation (i.e., oligochaetes, chironomids) would be expected to 

increase during the period of increased sedimentation. The duration of these effects 

would be expected to be relatively short, and would be dependent upon the quantity of 

sediment delivered to channel and the ability of the stream to assimilate and export any 

excess. Macroinvertebrate recolonization of the recovering habitat would be rapid. 

Long-term effects would be in response to changes in the riparian and watershed 

vegetation. As described above, sedimentation is most likely to occur in smaller streams 

in the upper portions of the watersheds in the fire area. Rainbow trout are found in these 

streams. Changes in available prey can affect growth rate of trout in these areas.

LWD recruitment will begin several years post fire and continue up to 20 years. 

Although LWD will help stabilize the streambanks and channel from scouring, most of 

the recruitment will occur after higher peak flows subside. Future pools created by LWD 

will become occupied by trout, sucker and pikeminnow, allowing larger sizes to be 

obtained that in creeks with an absence or limit of large, deep pools. Although this is 

unlikely to affect the population numbers of these species, it may provide for an 

increased recreational trout fishery in the future.

Temperature increases in the fire area can limit the extent of fish populations in the fire 

area. This is most likely with rainbow trout, as they occupy the smaller creeks closer to 

the headwaters of the watershed. Temperature increases in these headwater areas will be 

more pronounced as flows are less than downstream , there are more areas of lower 

gradient stream, and pre-fire these areas had more stream shading by trees (as opposed to 
12

the Tuolumne canyon which was primarily shrub cover). If lethal temperatures (over 25 

degrees Celcius) are reached rainbow trout will contract their range. As stream 

temperatures decrease trout will reoccupy abandoned stream reaches.

Project effects

The implementation of the proposed project will have varying degrees of effect to the 

physical habitat and its relative quality. Generally, the potential for direct effects is 

limited. The potential for indirect effects to individuals and populations are more likely. 

While the indirect effect of each type of treatment may contribute stresses that may 

present a relatively low risk to individuals, when combined, there may be sufficient 

pressure to constrain populations until the project is fully implemented and the influences 

of project-related management are diminished by natural processes. It is expected that 

fish populations within the project area will incur no noticeable long-term change, 

especially outside of the range of what could be “normally” expected. Normal 

expectations primarily include natural events that affect large portions of the landscape 

(as in large wildland fire, flood, or drought), isolated portions of a watershed or 

subwatershed (as in mass failure of the hillslope), or the effects of stocking. 

For all of the potential effects, accurate quantification is not possible. Models developed 

to predict an outcome (such as sediment delivery to channels using the WEPP model) 

often utilize variables that may or may not represent the site-specific conditions. The 

variables do allow for some “tweaking” or manipulation to more closely represent actual 

conditions during implementation. In some cases, the modeled representations utilize a 

worst-case scenario and allow for disclosure in the event of an unplanned event or to 

predict the maximum extent of a potential effect. However, qualification of some of the 

potential effects is possible and descriptors such as low, moderate, and high will be used 

to characterize the potential for an effect to occur or the risk associated with an effect. 

The project consists of treatments designed to remove salvage, reduce hazard trees, 

reduce fuels, and increase ground cover across a portion of the landscape. The purpose 

and need of the project is fully developed in the EIS, but it can be generally summarized 

as capturing economic value through salvage logging, providing worker and public 

safety, reduce fuels for future forest resiliency, improve road infrastructure to enhance 

hydrologic function, and enhance wildlife habitat. Three action alternatives were 

developed to meet the purpose and need of the project. Alternative 1 is the Proposed 

Action and involves the most extensive harvest and fuels reduction in terms of area. 

Alternative 3 was developed to address issues and concerns related to snag forest habitat, 

new road construction, wildlife habitat, and soil and watershed impacts. Alternative 4 is 

similar to Alternative 3 except it replaces new road construction with temporary roads 

and drops 2,500 acres of salvage logging in highly suitable black-backed woodpecker 

habitat. Table 2 summarizes the treatment activities by each action Alternative. In 

addition to the activities listed approximately 11 miles of right-of-way, 7 rock quarry 

sites, and up to 91 water sources are analyzed. A fourth alternative, the No Action 

Alternative, was proposed to fulfill the requirements of the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969.
13

Table 2. Summary of Treatments 

Proposed Treatments Alternative 1 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Ground based salvage 24,127 acres 26,252 acres 24,176 acres

Ground based/skyline swing 

salvage

16 acres 16 acres 16 acres

Aerial based salvage 2,930 acres 3,035 acres 2,568 acres

Cable system salvage 1,253 acres 1,096 acres 1,066 acres

Biomass removal fuels 7,626 acres 8, 379 acres 7,975 acres

Machine piling and burning fuels 24,143 acres 22, 036 acres 20,320 acres

Jackpot burning fuels 4,199 acres 4,147 acres 3.650 acres

Mastication fuels 1,309 acres 1,309 acres

Drop and lop fuels 2,228 acres 1,798 acres

Removal of Hazard Trees- Level 

2 roads

341.0 miles 

(16,315 acres)

314.8 miles 

(15,253 acres)

324.6 miles 

(15,692 acres)

Road management - 

reconstruction

319.9 miles 323.6 miles 315.0 miles

Road management - maintenance 216.1 miles 200.6 miles 209.3 miles

Road management – temporary 

road

21.6 miles 35.5 miles 33.8 miles

Road management - new road 

construction

5.4 miles 1.0 miles 0 miles

No Action Alternative

Under the no action alternative, there would be no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects 

associated with project activities. The existing condition would continue to support the 

fishery in its current state for the short- and mid-term. The recreational trout fisheries

would continue to be augmented periodically through the stocking efforts of CDFW. 

Fish habitat would slowly improve through natural processes affecting stream habitat 

complexity. Additions of large woody debris would occur over time from the fire killed 

trees near streams. 

The native fish assemblage in the project area, as described by Moyle (2002), includes 

California roach, Sacramento sucker, riffle sculpin, and pikeminnow. These species are 

found in North Fork Tuolumne River, Hunter Creek, Clavey River, Cherry Creek, and 

Tuolumne River. Since California roach are well adapted to the stream conditions found 

in the project area, populations would not be likely to increase or decrease noticeably. If 

trout stocking ceases and the trout population is diminished, roach populations could 

increase due to lack of competition for food and habitat resources and to decreased 

predation. 

Sacramento sucker are adapted to withstand adverse environmental conditions, and to 

flood the environment with young when conditions improve. Pikeminnnow are long 
14

lived and will forgo reproduction during poor conditions. Populations are not likely to 

increase or decrease under the no action alternative due to effects of the Rim Fire. 

Riffle sculpin live in fast moving water found in riffles. Sediment is not likely to be 

found in the riffles of the larger Streams where sculpin are found. Effects of the Rim Fire 

will not result in population increases or decreases.

The trout resource in the project area may see impacts under the no action alternative. 

Particularly in the watersheds with high burn severity (Reed Creek, Granite Creek, 

Jawbone Creek) and correspondingly high predicted erosion rates. Sedimentation can 

result in lower reproductive success. Stocking by CDFW would lessen this impact. In 

addition, increased temperature in some areas may result in contracted ranges of rainbow 

trout for a three to five year period. As vegetation regrows temperatures will return to 

pre-fire levels and trout would return to their original extant.

Direct and Indirect Effects Common to All Action Alternatives

There would be some risk of direct effect associated with drafting water from fish bearing 

reaches as needed by project activities. There would be management requirements for 

reducing the potential entrainment and impingement of individuals by installing a lowvelocity intake with one-quarter inch mesh screening. Larvae and juveniles would be at 

risk of entrainment and some individuals could be killed. While individuals could be 

affected, there should be no compromised population viability of the six species. 

The Watershed Report discusses the high variability of reported sediment production due 

to post-fire salvage logging found in the research. Road construction, reconstruction, and 

maintenance can also contribute to erosion and reduce sediment delivery to the stream. 

WEPP modeling of erosion rates by watershed is found in Table 3.14-7 and Table 3.14-

11 of the Watershed Report. The WEPP modeling indicates that predicted erosion would

increase post-implementation in the Granite Creek watershed under Alternative 1, would 

decrease in six watersheds, and would remain the same in the remaining watersheds. 

Under Alternatives 3 and 4 erosion rates would decrease post-implementation in all but 

three watersheds, where rates would remain the same as the post-fire levels. In all cases 

predicted erosion rates would remain above the background level of 0.1 to 0.6 tons per 

acre.

The predicted increase in the Granite Creek watershed is 0.1 ton per acre. The magnitude 

of this increase (2.8 percent) would be difficult to separate from the increase in 

sedimentation post-fire. However, any additional sediment delivery to Granite Creek 

would further decrease spawning area and survival of eggs for rainbow trout, and 

potentially further impact macroinvertebrate diversity and abundance. The potential for 

additional sediment delivery to the stream is minimized by implementation of 

management requirements. Under Alternative 1 reductions in sediment vary from 0.1 to 

0.3 tons per acre. Under Alternatives 3 and 4 reductions in erosion rate are more 

widespread, with higher reductions. The post-implementation erosion rates are reduced 

from 0.1 to 1.2 tons per acre, with the highest reduction in the Corral Creek watershed 
15

due to an increase in ground cover from mastication and lop and scatter of material. The 

reduced erosions rates indicate less sediment entering the streams, and a lessening of the 

effects on spawning, macroinvertebrate production, and turbidity.

Under the action alternatives LWD recruitment would be reduced as dead trees would be 

removed. There are between 40 and 43 miles of stream within harvest units in the action 

alternatives where LWD recruitment would be lessened. Additional areas near streams 

would be treated, also reducing the LWD recruitment in the project area. The action 

alternatives include the following management requirement:

To provide key pieces of wood to the channel, retain a minimum of 20 

pieces of large woody debris (trees of the largest diameters) per mile of 

perennial and intermittent channels in salvage units. These snags should 

be felled into the stream in an upstream direction (greater than 45 degrees 

from perpendicular) to the maximum extent possible in order to actively 

recruit large wood to the channel. If these trees pose an unacceptable fuels 

risk, retain the largest portion of the bole equivalent to three times the 

bankfull width of the stream.

This management requirement offset the loss of LWD recruitment and will add LWD 

immediately, rather than waiting for trees to fall. This action can help to stabilize 

streambanks during the anticipated increase in peak and base flows.

According to the Watershed Report, the proposed action alternatives would not result in 

changes to stream temperatures. Use of the registered borate compound has a minor to 

negligible potential to contaminate surface water.

Cumulative effects

Cumulative Watershed Effects analysis was completed using the Equivalent Roaded Area 

(ERA) model used by the Pacific Southwest Region. Appendix A of the Watershed 

Report describes the Cumulative Watershed Effects Analysis Methodology. ERA 

calculations included past, present and reasonably foreseeable activities on lands of all 

ownerships as shown in the Rim Fire Recovery DEIS. Grazing was not included in ERA 

calculations as grazing effects are more of a site issue than a watershed issue.

Results of the ERA modeling are reported in Tables 3.14-9, 3.14-10, 3.14-13, and 3.14-

14 of the Watershed Report. Under the No Action Alternative one HUC6 watershed 

(Jawbone Creek – Tuolumne River) and three HUC7 watersheds (Corral Creek, Lower 

Reed Creek, and Granite Creek) exceed the threshold of concern (TOC). Under the 

Action Alternatives two HUC6 watersheds (Jawbone Creek – Tuolumne River and 

Lower Middle Fork Tuolumne River) and five HUC7 watersheds (Corral Creek, Lower 

Jawbone Creek, Bear Springs Creek, Lower Reed Creek, and Granite Creek) exceed the 

TOC. The main differences between the action alternatives are the percentage of ERA 

calculated and the length of time the TOC is exceeded. Although there are slight 

differences in ERA values between the action alternatives, the watersheds that exceeded 

the TOC were the same and cumulative effects are anticipated to be the same. The 

Watershed Report discusses the watersheds were the TOC is exceeded in depth.
16

Management Requirements and Best Management Practices are expected to minimize the 

effects of the action alternatives on the streams. Monitoring that identifies problem areas 

and implements corrective actions would also minimize effects. As such, the action 

alternatives are not expected to result in adverse off-site cumulative effects to sedimentrelated water quality parameters or to watershed condition or to water temperature in the 

Jawbone Creek-Tuolumne River, Bear Springs Creek, Lower Reed Creek, Granite Creek, 

or Lower Middle Fork Tuolumne River watersheds. Although grazing has the potential 

to result in streambank disturbance and to slow recovery of riparian vegetation, effects 

will be localized and existing Standards and Guidelines should allow for riparian 

vegetation recovery to progress naturally.

Summary

The potential for effects associated with sedimentation would be most likely to occur in 

Granite Creek, Reed Creek, and Corral Creek. The available spawning habitat could be 

degraded by sediment and could constrain recruitment of trout. Food resources would be 

expected to change in either abundance or diversity where sedimentation is high, 

particularly in smaller streams. Temperatures in streams with high burn severity can 

increase. Sediment, food resource and temperature changes could result in poor 

condition of trout and a reduction in the species range in the project area. California 

roach and Sacramento sucker are adapted to a wide range of environments, including 

those dominated by fine sediments. Roach, sucker, sculpin and pikeminnow populations

would not be affected significantly by increased sediment in the streams in which they 

occur.

Bibliography

Bjornn, T. C. and Reiser, D. W. 1991. Habitat requirements of salmonids in streams. 

American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19:83-138.

Chamberlin, T. W., R. D. Harr, and F. H. Everest. 1991. Timber harvesting, silviculture, 

and watershed processes. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19:181-206.

Etnier, D. A. and W. C. Starnes. 1993. The fishes of Tennessee. The University of 

Tennessee Press. 681pp.

Meehan, W. R., editor. 1991. Influences of forest and rangeland management on 

salmonid fishes and their habitats. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19.

Merritt, R. W. and K. W. Cummins. 1996. An introduction to the aquatic insects of 

North America, 3rd edition. Kendall Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa. 862pp.

Moyle, P. B. 2002. Inland fishes of California. University of California Press. 502pp.
17

Moyle, P. B., R. M. Yoshiyama, and R. A. Knapp. 1996. Status of fish and fisheries. In

Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project, Final Report to Congress, vol. II, Assessments and 

Scientific Basis for Management Options. Davis: University of California, Centers for 

Water and Wildland Resources:953-974.

USDA Forest Service. 1971. Stanislaus National Forest fisheries habitat management 

plan. Sonora, CA. 164pp.