CHaMP is designed as a Columbia River basin-wide habitat status and trends monitoring program built around a single protocol with a programmatic approach to data collection and management (RM&E Workgroup 2010). CHaMP will result in the collection and analysis of systematic habitat status and trends information that will be used to assess basin-wide habitat conditions. When coupled with biological response indicators, this status and trends information will be used to evaluate habitat management strategies. This program will be integrated with ongoing Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Program (PNAMP) recovery planning efforts and will be part of the collaborative process across Columbia Basin fish management agencies and tribes and other state and federal agencies that are monitoring anadromous salmonids and/or their habitat. The implementation of CHaMP will characterize stream responses to watershed restoration and/or management actions in at least one population within each steelhead and spring Chinook Major Population Group (MPG) which have, or will have, “fish-in” and “fish-out” monitoring (identified in RPA 50.6), thereby meeting the requirements of RPA 56.3, RPA 57, and RPA 3. CHaMP was designed to deliver trends in habitat indicators and requires that monitoring occurs for three cycles of a sampling panel (see section 1.6), at least 9 years.

CHaMP’s Wenatchee design developed from a 9 year history of GRTS based site selection and habitat monitoring.  The legacy design contained a list of sites sampled annually (some sites with missing years), and a set of once only sites.  Consequently the CHaMP design continues many of the legacy sites carried over into ChaMP’s valley class and public/private stratification.  CHaMP targets the Wenatchee River Steelhead population (Upper Columbia River DPS).

2011 Site selection notes:

The finadd.str.pnl.r function applied to each stratum separately generated a spatially balanced ordered site list with legacy sites at the top. 

Master sample GRTS input file: _1Wenatchee_MS_20110426.txt

Legacy sample GRTS input file:  _1Wenatchee_Legacy_20110426.txt

R code: Wenatchee.Design.4.26.2011.r (contains changes for 2012)

Site allocation Notes:

Base file that was used to allocate sites to panels: Wenatchee_Design_4_27_2011a.csv. 

This file merged the pair of design files for each valley class (e.g., wen.source.csv and wen.mstr.source.csv, the two files that are produced by the stratpanel function).  That file has a sequential order (ID) that reflects the sequential order of sites by stratum by application of the R function, (finadd.str.pnl.r)

Because the sampling histories of legacy sites was not always the same, legacy sites were considered three different ways when sites were allocated to panels. Sites with the most frequent sampling history had the highest value, and therefore were prioritized and allocated to the top of the use order in the annual panel.  The three types of legacy sites were: a)   annual without gaps (sampled every year since 2004, highest priority to resample); b) annual with gaps (not sampled every year since 2004, second priority to resample); and c) rotating (sampled only once since 2004, lowest priority to resample).  Once the minimum  number of sites for the sample was met (see Wenatchee_Design_4_27_2011.csv for 'sample' vs. 'over' counts), the remaining annual legacy sites were assigned to the rotating panels.  Legacy sites were always placed at the top of the Use Order within each block (stratum+panel combination).  Once all of the legacy sites within the GRTS draw were allocated to panels, the remaining sample and oversample sites were allocated by blocks of four to rotating panels.  If a site was ‘private’ then assigned to a rotating private panel. 

Within strata, proportion of public/private was used as a guide in allocating sites to public/private:

Note that in some cases, there were no sites in a particular valley class-ownership stratum. 

Final design file: Wenatchee_Design_4_27_2011.csv​

Stratum notes:

Notes describe legacy site allocation and specific considerations that were made during the design proces for each stratum. See below for notes on each stratum.

Source Valley Class: 

Legacy sites summary:

First, the first five annual legacy sites were assigned to the annual public block.  Assigned the next annual site to public rotating panel 1, and the 1 annual site with gaps to public rotating panel 2. Then filled in the panels with the desired sites coded “rotating” by blocks of 4, except if a private site occurred.  The private site was assigned to the rotating panel in which it occurred, and filled in with additional replacement sites in order from the ordered list.

Transport Valley Class:

Legacy sites summary:

Two public legacy sites were assigned to the annual public block (note sample is missing two of the public legacy sites) and then assigned 6 private legacy sites to annual block.  Assigned 2 public legacy sites to the public annual block (other two unaccounted for…).

Transport CBW sites were then set into public_private and selected in blocks of 4  to fill in panels.  33 public sites  were assigned --8 to each rotating panel and 9 to the annual panel .  17 sites were assigned to the private rotating panels as R1: 6,R2: 6, and R3: 5, and A: 6 sites. 

Depositional ValleyClass:

Legacy site summary:

All Depositional sites were selected from the ordered legacy pool.  Annual or annual with gap legacy sites were assigned across panels to the top use order of each block.

Remaining sites:   32 public (assign 8 to each panel); 16 private (assign 4 to each panel);

​Design Documentation files: