Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam

Chapter 2 Tables
Table 1. Design specifications for the upper Libby Creek (Cleveland’s) channel restoration
project. ...............................................................................................................................130
Table 2. Mean bankfull width, depth, width to depth ratio and cross sectional area for 5 cross
sectional surveys in 1999 and 9 different cross sectional surveys in 2002 and 2003.
Variance estimates for annual mean values are presented in parentheses. An analysis of
variance (ANOVA) was preformed for each parameter, and the P value is presented for
each ANOVA. The results of subsequent multiple comparisons (Fisher’s Least Significant
Difference) are also presented (alpha = 0.05)....................................................................133
Table 3. Mean bankfull width, depth, maximum bankfull depth, and length measured from 20
pools in 2002 and 2003. Variance estimates for annual mean values are presented in
parentheses. A statistical comparison of annual mean values was not performed because the
20 pools represented all pools within the project area, and therefore represents a complete
census. The percent change for each parameter from 2002 to 2003 is also presented. ....133
Table 4. Design specifications for the Grave Creek Phase I Restoration Project.....................136
Table 5. Mean bankfull width, depth, width to depth ratio, cross sectional area, and maximum
depth for 6 permanent cross sectional surveys in 1999, 2002 and 2003. Variance estimates
for annual mean values are presented in parentheses. A repeated measures analysis of
variance (RPANOVA) was preformed for each parameter, and the P value is presented for
each RPANOVA. The results of subsequent multiple comparisons are also presented...137
Table 6. Mean bankfull width, maximum bankfull depth, and length measured from 27 pools in
2002 and 2003. Variance estimates for annual mean values are presented in parentheses. A
statistical comparison of annual mean values was not performed because the 27 pools
represented all pools within the project area, and therefore represents a complete census.
The percent change for each parameter from 2002 to 2003 is also presented...................137
Table 7. Mean cross sectional area, bankfull width, depth, maximum bankfull depth, and width
to depth ratio measured for 4 riffles in the existing stream channel and 10 riffles in the
stream channel shortly after construction in the fall of 2003 (as built) for the Young Creek
State Lands Stream Restoration Project. Variance estimates for annual mean values are
presented in parentheses. Mean values between treatments were compared using a t-test,
and the one tailed p-value for each comparison is presented. The percent change for each
parameter between treatments is also presented................................................................142
Table 8. Mean cross sectional area, bankfull width, depth, maximum bankfull depth, and width
to depth ratio measured for 2 pools in the existing stream channel and 8 pools in the stream
channel shortly after construction in the fall of 2003 (as built) for the Young Creek State
Lands Stream Restoration Project. Variance estimates for annual mean values are presented
in parentheses. Mean values between treatments were compared using a t-test, and the one
tailed p-value for each comparison is presented. The percent change for each parameter
between treatments is also presented.................................................................................142
Appendix Tables
Table A1. Therriault Creek depletion population estimates for fish > 75 mm per 1,000 feet using
95 % confidence intervals. Upper confidence intervals are in parenthesis. .....................149
Table A2. Lower Grave Creek Demonstration Project area electrofishing. Numbers are total
catch within the 1,000 foot section. ...................................................................................150
Table A3. Young Creek depletion population estimates for fish > 75 mm per 1,000 feet using 95
% confidence intervals. Upper confidence intervals are in parenthesis. ..........................151
13