Fish Passage Case Studies

Sickle Creek
Precast Concrete Arch with Wingwalls

Case Study Contributors

  • Stephanie Ogren, Aquatic Biologist, The Little River Band of Ottawa Indians
  • Marty Holtgren, Fisheries Biologist, The Little River Band of Ottawa Indians
  • Pat Fowler, Forest Hydrologist, Huron-Manistee National Forest
  • Mike Joyce, Fisheries Biologist, Huron-Manistee National Forest

Location
Big Manistee Watershed, Huron-Manistee National Forest, Michigan, USA. MAP

Project Type

  • Precast Concrete Arch
  • Stream Simulation

Pre-Project Conditions

  • Two 3 ft (0.9 m) diameter x 36 ft (11 m) long CMPs at a 1.4% slope
  • Shallow plunge pool did not provide sufficient room for leaping

Pre-Project Barrier

  • Both culverts perched 1 ft (0.3 m) above the downstream pool creating jump barrier
  • Undersized culverts constricted the channel, creating excessive velocities

Watershed Characteristics

  • Drainage Area: 4 mi2 (11 km2)
  • 100-year return flow: 230 cfs (6.5 cms)
  • Channel width: 17 ft (5.2 m)

Ecological Value

  • Provide access to 3.3 miles (5.3 km) of habitat for burbot and potamodromous salmonids
  • EPA’s Rapid Bioassessment Protocols ranked the stream as having moderate habitat values that is steadily improving.
  • Maintain ecological connectivity with upstream channel and provide conveyance of flood flows and associated debris
  • Reduces sediment delivery from road with improved drainage

Project Characteristics

  • Concrete Arch, 32 ft (10 m) long x 16 ft (5 m) wide x 6 ft (2 m) high
  • Precast into four 8 ft (2.4 m) long sections
  • Two 12 ft (3.6 m) long precast wingwalls at inlet;
  • One 12 ft (3.6 m) and one 20 ft (6 m) long precast wingwalls at outlet
  • Arch rests on cast-in-place reinforced concrete footings set on permanent steel sheet pilings
  • Native sandy substrate forms channel bed in culvert

Challenges

  • Heavily used road for recreational fishing limited construction to one week period
  • Modified wingwalls required specialized installation

Project Contributors

  • US Forest Service
  • Little River Band of Ottawa Indians
  • Ziegel Brothers Construction
  • Grand Valley State University

Project Funding

  • US Forest Service
  • Little River Band of Ottawa Indians
  • Conservation Resource Alliance

Completion Date
October 2005

Total Project Cost

Materials $ 39,000
Construction $ 33,000
Planning/Permitting $ 1,000
Total $ 73,000

 


Project Summary

This was a cooperative project between the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians and the U.S. Forest Service. Design work was performed by the arch manufacturer, with the Forest Service providing site survey, geotechnical study and design review.

The crossing had twin culverts that created a jump and velocity barrier, blocking upstream movement of native resident fish and potadromous salmonids. Replacing the undersized twin culverts on Sickle Creek with a precast concrete arch allowed for fish passage, lessened the risk of crossing failure, and improved road drainage to reduce fine sediment delivery to the steam.

The streambed substrate is predominately sand with some gravel and the undersized culverts created a deposit of aggraded sands upstream of the crossing. No grade control was planned for the site but an in-stream sediment trap was constructed downstream of the crossing to catch some of the upstream deposition as it mobilized. The sediment trap was a pool dug 8 ft long and 6 ft deep (2.4 m x 1.8 m) that spanned the channel. It filled up within eight hours, preventing the aggraded sediment from being transported further downstream

The top of the arch is designed to have 3 ft (0.9 m) of freeboard during the 100-year return period flow. Concrete footings were poured in place using sheet pile to form one side and left in place to protect the footings from scour.


Challenges

Because the site was a main access road to a high-use area of the Manistee River, construction had to be completed in one week and during the wet season. This led to a short curing time of three days for the concrete footings, raising concerns about its ability to accommodate the design loading. However no problems have arisen.

A crane was used to lift and place the precast sections onto the footings. Because of the room required to swing the crane, some trees were removed to provide adequate clearance.

Post-project Challenges and Lessons Learned

The Tribe and Grand Valley State University are currently collaborating on post construction monitoring of fish, macroinvertebrates, and sediment. Stream profiles and transects have revealed only minor upstream headcutting and channel adjustment.

Fish sampling as part of the ongoing study indicated increases in salmon parr following replacement of the culvert in the spring of 2006. Additionally, native sculpin, and invasive sea lamprey have increased upstream of the crossing following replacement.

  Spring 2004 Fall 2004 Spring 2005 Fall 2005 Spring 2006 Fall 2006
Chinook Parr 17 6 2 6 107 31
Coho Parr 35 8 12 0 23 0

Initially, there was some resistance to installing a bottomless arch culvert since it was the first use of this structure type on the Manistee Forest. The structure has been in place for a year and a half, and is easily passing the high spring flows. Many people have commented that the appearance of the new crossing is more appealing than the previous culverts.

Published 01/21/07