Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Stream Corridor Restoration PDF
Stream Corridor Restoration PDF
Stream Corridor Restoration PDF
Preface
We intend for the contents of this document to both entice
and challenge the reader by what they suggest - not only work
to be studied and expanded, but work to be initiated.
The dedication of those who contributed to its production
will emerge on the landscape as restored, productive stream cor-
ridors, if the document provokes further interest, thought, and
continued cooperative action.
ii Stream Corridor
Contents
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ I - 1
PART I: BACKGROUND
Contents iii
Chapter 2: Stream Corridor Processes, Characteristics, and Functions............ 2 - 1
iv Stream Corridor
Chemica l Constituents .. .................. ..... ... ... .. ..... ..... ... ... .................. .... ......... 2 - 28
ph, Alkalinity, and Acidity ... ... . .. . .. . .. .. . . .. . .. .. . .. .. . . .. .. . ... . .. . . . .. . . .. ... . .. . .. . . .. .. 2 - 30
ph, Alkalinity, and Acidity Across the Stream Corridor ... .... .. ....... .... 2 - 30
ph, Alkalinity, and Acidity Along the Stream Corridor .... ........ .. ... .. . 2 - 31
Dissolved Oxygen . .. .. . .. .. .. . .. ... . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. ... . . .. . . . .. .. .. . . . .. . . . ... . . 2 - 31
Dissolved Oxygen Across the Stream Corridor .. .... ....... ......... ...... ... . 2 - 32
Dissolved Oxygen Along the Stream Corridor ....... ......... ........ .. ...... 2 - 32
Nutrients .. . .. .. .. ..... .. .. . .. .. .. .. .... . . .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . . . . .. . ... . .. . .. . .. . . ... . . 2 - 34
Nutrients Across the Stream Corridor .... .. ..... .. ..... .... .. ............... .... . 2 - 36
Nutrients Along the Stream Corridor ...... ........ .. ...... .... .. .. .... .. .. ..... ... 2 - 37
Toxic Organic Chemicals .. .. . ... . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . ... . .. . . .. . .. . . .. ... . .. . . . ... . . 2 - 38
Toxic Organic Chemicals Across the Stream Corridor ........... ..... ...... 2 - 38
Toxic Organic Chemicals Along the Stream Corridor . . .. . .. . .. ..... .. .. ... 2 - 38
Solubility ............ ...... ........... ... .. ..... ... .... ...... .... ..... .. .... ...... ... ..... ....... 2 - 38
Sorption . ... .. ...... .. .. .. ... .. .... . .. .. . ... . ... . .. .. . .. . ... .. . .. . .. . ... . . . .. . .. . .. . ... . .. . . ... . 2 - 40
Volatilization .. ...... .... .... .. .... .... ... .... ..... .......... .... .... ... ... ... .... .... .. .... ... 2 - 42
Degradation . .. . .. . ... . .. . .. ... . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . ... .. . ... . .. . ..... . .. .. . .. .... . ... . . 2 - 43
Toxic Concentrations of Bioavailable Metals . . . . . .. . ... .. . . .. . . . .. . .. . .... . . .. . .. . . 2 - 44
Toxic Concentrations of Bioavailable Metals Across
the Stream Corridor . .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. . .. . .. .. . . .. .. . . .. .. . ... . . . . . . .. . .. .. . ... ... . . .. .. 2 - 44
Toxic Concentrations of Bioava ilable Metals Along
the Stream Corridor .. . .. ... . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . ... . .. . .. . .. . .... . .. . . 2 - 45
Ecologica l Functions of Soi ls ....... ...... ............. ... .. ... .... ...... ..... ... .. ...... ... .. ... .... 2 - 45
Soil Microbiology .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .... . . .. .. .. .. . . .. .. . .. . .. .... . .. .. ... . ..... . .. . .. . .. . . ... . .. .. . . 2 - 46
Landscape and Topographic Position .. ........ ......... ........... .... .... ......... ... 2 - 47
Soil Temperature and Moisture Relationships . . .. . .. . .. . . .. . . . .. . . .. .. . . .. . ... . .. . . 2 - 47
Wetland Soils . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. ... . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . .. . . 2 - 48
2.D Biological Community Characteristics ........ .... ............. ....... .. ....... ........... 2 - 51
Terrestrial Ecosystems.............. .................. ... ....... ......... ....... ........................ 2 - 51
Ecological Role of Soil . . .. .. .. . ... ... . .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . . ... . .. . .. . . . ... .. . .. 2 - 51
Terrestrial Vegetation . .. . .. ... . .. . .. ... . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. ... . .. . .. . . . . .. . ... .. . . .. . .. . . .. .. 2 - 51
Landscape Scale . ... . .. .. .. . .. . ..... .... .... ... .... .. .. . ... .... ...... ... .. ........... ... .. . . 2 - 53
Stream Corridor Scale ............ ... ... . ........ ... .... ... ... . ... . . ... .. ..... ... .. . ... ... 2 - 53
Plant Commu nities ..... ..... .. ... ........ ..... .. ....... ..... .... ... .............. .. .. .. .. . 2 - 54
Terrestrial Fauna . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. ... . .. ... . .. . .. ... . ... . . .. .. . .. . ... .. . . . .. . . . .. ... . .. . . .. . . .. .. . . 2 - 56
Reptiles and Amphibians .... ........... ........ ... .... ........ .... .. ........... ... ...... 2 - 57
Birds ..... .......... ... ................. ...... ..... .... .. ....... .... .... ......... .... ... .... .. ..... 2 - 57
Mammals .. .. .. . ... ... .. . .. .. ... . . .. .... . .. . . .. .. . ... . .. .. . . .. .... .. . . . . . .. . .. ... . . .. .. . . . . . 2 - 58
Aquatic Ecosyst ems . .. .. ..... ... ...... ... . . ... . . .. ... .. . ..... .. . . .. . . .. ... . .. . . .. .. . .. ... . . .. . .. . . ... . . 2 - 59
Aquatic Habitat . .. ... . .. .. . .. . .. ... . .. .... .. . . . .. .. . .... .. .. . . . ..... .. . . .. . . . .. . ... . .. . .. . . .. .. . . 2 - 59
Wetlands . . .. .. .. . ..... .. .. .. . .. .. . .. ... .. .. . . .. . .. . .. . ... . .. . .. . .. . ... .. . . . .. . . . .. ... . .. . . .. . . .. .. . . 2 - 60
Aquatic Vegetation and Fauna . .. .... . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . . .. . . . .. . .... . . .. . . . .. . .. . . 2 - 63
Contents v
Abiotic and Biotic Interrelations in the Aquatic System .... .. ........ .......... 2 - 67
Flow Condition ... .... .. ... ....... ...... ..... .............. .......... .... .... ............... 2 - 68
Water Temperature .. ..... .... .............. ....... ..... ............. ..... .. ....... .. ...... 2 - 68
Effects of Cover .... .... .... .. ... .......... ...... ... ......... ......... .............. .... .. .... 2 - 68
Dissolved Oxygen . . .... .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. ..... .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . ... .... .. .. . . . .. .. . .. ... .. .. . 2 - 70
pH ...... ... .... ... ...... ...... .... ..... ... ... .............. .... ..... ... .. .... .. ......... .... ..... ... 2 - 71
Substrate.. .......... ... .... ..... .. ....... ... ...... ....... ......... ........ .. ... .. ...... ......... 2 - 71
Organic Material .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. ... .. . .. .. .. .. . . .. . . .. ......... .. . . . .. . . .. . ... . .. . 2 - 73
Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecosystem Components for
Stream Corridor Restoration . . .. . .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. . . .. . .. ... . . . . ... . . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . 2 - 75
vi Stream Corridor
Altered Hydrology ............... ... .......... .... ... ............ ... ......... ...... .. ..... .. 3 - 20
Contaminants ... ..... .... ........... ... .... ... .. ....... ......... ............ .. .... ... ..... ... 3 - 21
Recreation . .. .. . .. .. . ... .. .. .... .. ..... . .. . .... . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . . . . .. .. .. . . .. . . . .. . .... .. . . .. . . .. .. . .. 3 - 21
Urbanization . .. . .. .. .. ... . ... .. .. . ... . . .. . .. .. . .. . . .. . .. . . . .. . . . .. .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. ... . .. . .. . . . .. .. .. . 3 - 22
Altered Hydrology . .. .... .... . .. . . .. .. . ... .. . . .. . .. .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . . . .. . . .... . .. .. . . . .. . ... . . 3 - 23
Altered Channels .. ...... .... ... ... ........... ...... ........ .......... .... .. .. ... .. ... ... ... . 3 - 24
Sedimentation and Contaminants .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...... ... .. ...... .. .. .... .. .. .... 3 - 24
Habitat and Aquatic Life ... .. ... ... ...... ......... .... ..... ......... ...... ........ ...... 3 - 25
Summary of Potential Effects of Land Use Activities ... ....... ....... .......... ......... 3 - 26
Contents vii
Chapter 5: Developing Goals, Objectives, and Restoration Alternatives ........ 5 - 1
5.B Alternative Selection and Design ........ .... .......... ... ............. ............... ..... 5- 17
Important Factors to Consider in Designi ng Restoration Alternatives .. .... .... 5- 17
Managing Causes vs. Treating Symptoms ... . . .. . ... . . .. . . .. .. .. . ... ... .. .. .. . . .. . .. . 5- 17
Landscape/Watershed vs. Corridor/Reach .. .. .. . . .. . . . .... ... .. .. .. .. . . .. . ... .. ... . .. 5- 19
Other Time and Space Considerations .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. . ... .. .. . . . .. . . .. .... ... . ... . .. 5- 20
Supporting Analysis for Selecting Restoration Alternatives . ... . . ... . ..... .. ... . . .... 5- 21
Cost-Effectiveness and Incremental Cost Analysis . . . .. .. ... . .. .. .. .. .. . . ... .. ... . 5- 21
Data Requi rements: Solutions, Costs, and Outputs .. .. . .. . .... ........ ... 5- 21
Cost -Effectiveness Analysis . .. .. .......... .. .. .... .. ... . .. .... . ... . . .. .. .. ..... .. .. .... 5- 26
Incrementa l Cost Analysis .. . .. .. .......... .. .... ... . ... ........ ..... .. .. ............ .. . 5- 27
Decision Ma king- " ls It Worth It?" ....... ..... .. .... .. ............... ......... .. .. 5- 28
Evaluation of Benefits ... . .. ...... .... . ... .. ...... .... . ... . ...... ... .. .. . . ....... .. ... .. . 5- 29
Risk Assessm ent ... ......... .... ...... .... ...... .... ... ....... .. .. ... .... .... ... .... ...... ..... .. 5- 29
Environmental Impact Analysis . . ... ... ... .. ... .. .. ... . . ... ... .. . .. .. . . .. .. ... .. . .. ... . .. . 5 - 30
6.A Restoration Implementation ....... .... ... ...... ............... ........... ........ .... .... .... 6 - 2
Securing Funding for Restoration Implementation .... .... ... ............ ..... ... ....... 6- 2
Identifying Tools to Facilitate Restoration Implementation .................... ........ 6- 3
Dividing Implementation Responsibilities . . .. .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... . . .. . .. . .. .. ... . . . .. .. .. . . . 6- 4
Identifying the Players . .. .. . . . .. . . . .. . ... . .. .. . .. . .. . . .. . . .. .. .... .. . . . .. . . .. .. .. . .. . . .. . .. .. . 6- 4
Assigning Responsibilities . .. ... .. . . .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .... . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . . . .. . .. .. . .. 6- 6
Interdisciplinary Technical Team ........ ....... ....... .. .... .. ........ ... .... ......... 6 - 8
Volunteers ....... ....... .... .. ...... .. ......... ... ....... ... .... ...... ..... ... ...... ... ...... ... 6 - 8
Contractors.. ..... ......... ... ... ... .......... .. .. ......... .. ....... ........ ........ ..... .. ... . 6 - 10
Securing Commitments . .. . .. .... . .. . . ... .. . . .. . .. .. . .. . . .. . .. . ... .. . . . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . . . .. . ... . . 6 - 10
Installing Restoration Measures ....... .. ....... ......... .... .... ...... ........................... 6 - 11
Determining the Schedule . ... .. . . .. ... . .. . . .. . .. .. . .. . . .. .. . ... . . ... . .. . .. .. . . .. . .. . . ... . . . 6 - 12
Obtaining the Necessary Permits . . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . . .. .. . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . .. .. . 6 - 13
Holding Pre-installation Conferences . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . ... . .. . . . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . . . ... . .. 6 - 14
Involving Property Owners .... .. . . . ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .... . . . .. . . .. . . . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . . . 6 - 15
Securing Site Access .. . .. .. .. . .... . . .. . ... ... . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . ... .... .. . . . .. . . .. . . ... . .. .. .. . 6 - 15
Locate Existing Utilities . .. . .. .... . . .. . . .. . .. . . .. .. . . .. . .. . . .. . .. .. .. . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. .. . ... ... . .. 6 - 16
Confirming Sources and Ensuring Materials Standards .. . . .. . . .. . .. . . . ... ... . . 6 - 17
Characteristics of Successfu l Implementation ...... .. ...... ..... ... .......... .. .. .. ... ... .. 6 - 17
Central Responsibility in One Person .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. ... . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . .. .. ... . .. . .. 6 - 17
Thorough Understanding of Planning and Design Materials . . . . .. . .... ... . . 6 - 20
Familiarity with the Reach ........ ..................... ........... .. ...... ;.: . . . .. . . .. . . .. .. . .. 6 - 20
Knowledge of Laws and Regulations . .. .. . . .. . .. . . .. .. . ... . . ... . .. . . .. . . ... . .... . .. . . . 6 - 21
Understanding of Environmental Control Plans .. . . ... .. . . . .. . .. . . .. . . . ... . . .. .. .. . 6 - 21
Communication Among All Parties Involved in the Action . .. . . .. . . .. . . ... . . .. 6 - 21
Contents ix
Conduct Sociological Surveys . ..... . .. .. .. . ... . .. .. . . .. .. .. .. . . .. .. . .. .. . . . .. . .. . .... 6 - 28
Rely on lnstream Organisms for Evidence of Project Success .. ..... .. . 6 - 28
Minimize the Necessary Measurements of Performance ................ 6 - 29
Incorporate Supplemental Parameters .... .. ..... .... ...... ... ....... ...... ..... .. 6 - 29
Step 5: Estimate Cost ........ ..... ... ............ .... ..... .. ........... .. ... ........ .. .... ... 6- 29
Step 6: Categorize The Types Of Data . .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . . .. . . .. ... . . .. . .. . . .. . ... . . . . .... 6- 31
Step 7: Determine The Level Of Effort And Duration . . .. . . . .. . .. ... .. ......... 6- 31
Incorporate Landscape Ecology .. .. . .. .. . ... .. . .. .. . . . .. . .. .. . . . .. . .. . . .. ... . . .. .. ... 6 - 31
Determine Timing, Frequency, and Duration of Sampling . .. ... . . .. . ... 6 - 32
Develop a Statistical Framework . .. . ... . .. ... . .. . .. . . . .. .. . .. . . . .. .. .. .. . . .. . . . . .... 6 - 33
Choose the Sampling Level .. .. ............. .... .. ............. .. ........ ............ .. 6 - 33
Implementing and Managing the Monitoring Plan .. ..... .. ....... .. ...... ..... ......... 6 - 33
Envisioning the Plan . .. . . ... . .. ... . .. . .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . . ... . ... . . . . .. . .. . .... . .. . . . .. ... 6- 34
Determining Roles . .. . .. . .... .. . .. ... .. .. ..... . .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. . .. . . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . . . . . .. . 6- 34
Ensuring Quality .. ... . . .. . . ....... .. . . .. .. .. ..... .. .. .. .... . .. .. . . . ... .. .. . . . .. . .. . . ... . .. . . . . .... 6- 34
Interpreting Results . .. . . .. ... ... . .. ... ............ ... ... .. ... . . ..... ... .... .. ..... .. .. . . . . . .. . ... 6- 34
Managing Data . . .. ... . .. . . . ... . .. . .. .. ... . .. .... . .. .. ... . . .. .. .. . . .. .. ... .. . . .. . .. . . ... . . .. . . . . ... 6- 34
Managing Contracts .. . ... ... . .. ... .. .. . ... .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. . .. .. . ... . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . .. . ... 6- 34
Restoration Evaluation ... . .. . . . ... . .. .. . .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. ... ... ........... ..... ..... ..... .. . .. . . . . . ... 6- 34
Reasons to Evaluate Restoration Efforts .. ... .. .. .. . ..... ...... .... .... ........ ....... 6 - 35
Protecting the Restoration Investment ..... ..... ......... ...... ........ ...... ......... 6 - 35
Helping to Advance Restoration Knowledge for Future Applications . ... 6 - 36
Maintaining Accountability to Restoration Supporters . .. . . .. . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . . .. . 6 - 36
Acting on the Results .... .............. .. ........... .... ... .............. ........ .. .... .. .... .......... 6 - 36
Alternative Actions . . .. . . . . ... .. . ... .. . .. . .... .. . ... .. . .. .. .. . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . . ... .. . . . . .. . . .. . 6 - 37
Adaptive Management . ..... . .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. . .. .... .. .. .. . ... .. . . . .. .. . .. .. .... . .. . . . .. . . . .... 6 - 37
Documenting and Reporting .. .. . .. .... .. .. . .... . .. ... ... . .. . . . ... . .. . . . ... . .. . .. . . . . .. . . ... 6 - 38
Dissemination of the Results . . ... . .. .. ... .. .. .. . . .. .. .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . . .. . . ... .. . . . . .. . . . .. . 6 - 39
Planning for Feedback During Restoration Implementation . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. ... 6 - 39
Making a Commitment to the Time Frame Needed to Judge Success .. 6 - 39
Evaluating Changes in the Sources of Stress
as Well as in the System Itself . . .. .... .. . .. .. . ... .. .. . . .. . . . ... . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . . ... 6 - 41
x Stream Corridor
Determining Channel Forming Discharge from Recurrence Interval 7 - 12
Effective Discharge ........ ...... ................... .... ... .... .. ........... ..... .. ..... . .. 7 - 13
Determining Channel-Forming Discharge from
Other Watershed Variables .... ....... .. .... .. .... ..... ..... ..... .. ...... ....... .. ... .. 7- 15
Mean Annual Flow .............. .................... .. .. .... .. ..................... .... . .. 7- 15
Stage-Discharge Relationships .. ... ...... .. ...... ... ........... .... ... ... ... .. .. ...... ...... ..... . 7- 17
Continuity Equation ........ ..... ...... ....... ..... ... ..... ... ............ ......... ... ..... .... . 7- 17
Manning 's Equation ........................... .. ........ .... ... .. .. ............. .. ........... .. 7- 17
Direct Solution for Manning's n .......... .. .. .... ...... .... ..... .... ........ ... .. .. .. 7- 18
Using Manning's n Measured at Other Channels .. .. ......... ...... .. .. .... . 7- 19
Energy Equation ....... .. .. ... ...... .. .... .. ... .... .. ... .. ..... ...... .. ..... ...... ..... ..... .. ... . 7- 21
Analyzing Composite and Compound Cross Sections ................ ... ........ . 7- 23
Reach Selection ......... .... ... ...... ............. ..... ... ............................. ......... . 7- 23
Field Procedures ..... ..... ... ......... .... ........ .... ..... ..... .. .... ...... .... ... .... .... .. .... . 7- 24
Survey of Cross Section and Water Surface Slope .......... .. ........ .... .. 7- 24
Bed Material Particle Size Distribution .......... .. .. .. .. ........ .. ... .. ....... .. .. 7- 25
Discharge Measurement ........ ... .... ..... ..... .. .. ... .. ....... .. .. ... .. ..... ..... ... . 7- 25
Contents xi
Sediment Transport Processes .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. . .. .. .. . . .. ... . .. .. . .. .. . .. . ... . .. .. . . 7 - 57
Numerical Analyses and Models to Predict Aggradation
and Degradation . . .. ... .. .. ... .. . ... . .. .. .. . .... .. . .. . .. .. .. . . .. . .. . . ... . .. . .. . . . . .. . ... .. . .. . . .. 7 - 57
Bank Stability ..... ..... .. .... ...... . .. . .......... .. .. . .. ...... ... .. . ... ...... ... . . .. ... .... . ... .. . 7 - 57
Qualitative Assessment of Bank Stability ..... .............. ................ .. ... 7 - 57
Quantitative A ssessment of Bank Stability. ..... ... .. .... ..... .. .. .... .. ..... . . 7 - 59
Bank Instability and Channel Widening. ............ .. ............... ...... .. .... 7 - 60
Bank Stability Chart s .. ... .... .... ...... .. .. ... .... ..... ...... ... ...... .. .. ..... ....... .. .. 7 - 60
Predictions of Bank Stability and Channel Width .... ........ ........ ..... ... 7 - 62
7.C Chemical Characteristics ... ......... ..... ...... ..... .. ...... ........ .............................. 7 - 63
Data Co llection .. . .. . . . .. . .... . .. . . .... .. ... .. ... .. ... ........... .. .. . . . .. . .. . ... . .. . . . .. . . . .. ... . .. . . . .. 7 - 63
Constituent Selection . .. . . . . .. .. .. ... .. ..... . .. .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. . . ... . .. . . . .. . . .. . .. .. .. . . .. .. 7 - 63
Sampling Frequency .... ... .... .... ......... .... ... ....... ..... ... ...... ..... ... .. ..... ..... .... 7 - 63
Site Selection . . . .. . .. ... .. .. . .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. .. ... . .. . .. .. .. . . .. . .. . . .. . ... . .. . . . .. . . . .. . ... .. . . . .. 7 - 64
Sampling Techniques .... ............ ... ..... ... ........... ..... .... .... .. .... ... .......... ...... ... ... 7 - 64
Sampling Protocols for Water and Sediment .. . . .. . ... . . . ... . . . .. . .. ... . . . .. . .. . .. .. 7 - 65
Manual Sampling and Grab Sampling ............. ................. ... ........... 7 - 65
Automatic Samplin g ..... .... .. ....... ..... ...... .. ... ..... ... ............ .... ........ 7 - 65
Discrete vs . Composite Sampling ......... .... ....... .... ...... ..... .. ..... .... ...... 7 - 66
Field Analyses of Water Quality Samples .. ..... ....... ... ............ .. .... .. .. .. ..... 7 - 67
pH .... .. ..... .. .. .. .... ... ....... .... ... ... .............. ... ............. .. ... ..... .. ...... ... ...... 7 - 68
Temperature . .. ... .. . .. . ... . .. .. ... .. .. . .... ... . .. ... .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. .. .. . . . .. . . .... .. . . .. . .. .. 7 - 68
Dissolved Oxygen .......... .. ...... .. ............. .... .. ... ........ .... ..... .......... ..... 7 - 68
Water Quality Sample Preparation and Handling for
Laboratory Analysis ... . .. .. . . . .. ... . . .. .. .. .... .. .. . .. . .. .. . . .. . .. . . .. .. .. . . . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . . 7 - 69
Sample Preservation, Hand lin g, and Storage .... ... ... ....... .... ........ ..... 7 - 69
Sample Labeli ng .... ..... .. ...... .... ..... ... ..... .... .... .. ... .... ..... .. .. .... ......... ... 7 - 69
Sample Packaging and Shipping ... .. .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .... .. . ... . . . .. . . .... . .. . .. . . .. . . 7 - 70
Chain of Custody ...... ....... ........ .... ..... ... ..... .. ... ...... .... ... ... .. .. ... ..... ... 7 - 70
Collecting and Handling Sediment Quality Samples ............... ..... ... ..... 7 - 70
Collection Techniq ues .... .. . ......... ......... ... .. ... ... .... .. ...... ..... .... .... ..... 7 - 71
Sediment Analysis ..... ........... .. ..... ..... ... . .... ... .... .. ............... ............. 7 - 71
Data Management ... .. . .. .... .. ... . . .. .. .. .... .. . .. . .. .. .. . . .. . .. . . .. ..... .. .. .. ......... .. .... 7 - 72
Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) ............... .. ..... ....... ..... 7 - 73
Sample and Analytica l Qua lity Control. ....... .......... .... .... .... ..... .... ..... 7 - 73
Field Quality A ssurance .. ............... ....... .... ..... ........................ .... .. 7 - 74
8.A Valley Form, Connectivity, and Dimension ........ ............................ ... ... . . 8- 4
Vall ey Form .. ..... ... .... .... ..... .... ... ....... .......... ... .. ... ..... ... ..... ... .. ... ....... .. .. ....... . . 8- 4
Stream Corridor Connectivity and Dimension .. .. .... ....... ..... .. ....... ..... ... ..... ... . 8-4
Cognitive Approach: The Reference Stream Corridor ....... ... .... ....... .... . 8- 7
Analytical Approach: Functional Requirements of a Target Species 8- 7
Designing for Drainage and Topography ........ .. .. ..... .... ........ ...... ... .... ..... .... . 8- 8
8.B Soil Properties ... ............ ....... ........ ........... ....... ... .. ...... .. ........ ... ... .. ...... .. .... . 8- 8
Compaction ... .............. ....... ... ........ ...... .. ... .. ...... ... ......... ..... .. ...................... . 8-9
Soil Microfauna ....... ... ........ ... ...... ............. .. .... .... ..... .. ........ .. .... .. ..... ..... ... .. . . 8- 9
Soil Salinity .. ... ...... .. ....... .. ..... ......... ..... .... ... ... ... ... .. ......... .. ....... .... ........ .. ...... . 8 - 10
Contents xiii
8.C Plant Communities .................................................................................. 8 - 10
Riparian Buffer Strips .............. ........... ..... ... ..... ... ............ ..... .............. ..... .. ... 8 - 11
Existing Vegetation ................... .. .... ................ .. .. .............. ......... .... .. .. ........ 8 - 11
Plant Community Restoration ...... ................. ............ .... .. .... ...... ...... ............ . 8 - 14
Horizontal Diversity ............ ........ .............. ................ .. ............................... 8 - 17
Connectivity and Gaps ....... .... ................................................. .. .. ... .. ..... 8 - 17
Boundaries .. ... ................... ... ........... .... ........................... .................. .. . 8 - 20
Vertical Diversity .... ...... ................................ ................................................ 8 - 21
Influence of Hydrology and Stream Dynamics ........ ...... .. ..... ......... .. .. ............ 8 - 22
Soil Bioengineering for Floodplains and Uplands ....... .. .. .............. .... ....... .... 8 - 23
8 .F Streambank Restoration .. .......... .... ..... .. ................. .. ............... .... ..... ....... . 8 - 61
Effectiveness of Technique ........................ ...... .... ........... .... .. ........ ....... ... .... . 8 - 62
Stabilization Techniques ..................... .......... .... ............................... .. ... ... .. .. 8 - 64
Anchored Cutting Systems ... ......... ........... .... .. .. ... .. ......... ......... .... ... .... . 8 - 64
Geo textile Systems ......... .. .. ... ... ...... ....... ...... ....... ... ...... .. ... ........... .. ..... . 8 - 65
Integrated Systems ... ..... ... ..... .... ........... .... ... ............. ..... .. ..... .. ..... ....... ..... ... . 8 - 66
Trees and Logs .......... .. ............ ... .. ...................... .. ... .. ........... ... ... ........ . 8 - 66
8.H Land Use Scenarios .... .................... ................................... ..... ... ........ .. .... . 8 - 76
Design Approaches for Common Effects ................ ..................... .... ... ..... .. . 8 - 77
Dams ... .......... ..... ... ..... .... ...... ........... ....... ....... ... .. .. ....... ........... ... ...... .. . 8 - 77
Channelization and Diversions ... ... .. ......... ........ .... .. .... ... .. ........ ...... ... .. . 8 - 79
Exotic Species ............ .. ..... ...... ....... ... .................. .. .... .... .... ... ....... .. .... . 8 - 79
Agriculture ............... ............... ..... ..... ... .. ... ... .... ....... ... ... .......... .... ... ..... ....... . 8 - 83
Hypothetical Exiting Conditions ............ ....... .. .. .. .. ..... .. ... ... ........ .... ..... . 8 - 83
Hypothetical Restoration Response ....... ... ...... ...... .... .. .......... ..... ..... ... . 8 - 84
Forestry .. ..... .. ................... ............ ........... ....... .. .................................... ..... . 8 - 86
Forest Roads ................ ..... .... ..... ... .... ...... .... .... ............. ........ .. ... ... .. ..... . 8 - 88
Buffer Strips in Forestry ... ..... ... ..... ..... ..... ....... .. ... ... .... ... .... ...... .. ... ... ... . 8 - 89
Grazing ............................ ... .... ............. .... .. ..... .... ......... ............... .... .... ... .... 8 - 90
Mining ....... ......... ... .............................. .... ........ .... ..... ............. ... ....... ..... ... . 8 - 96
Recreation .... .... ................... ...... ..................... ... ...... .. ............ .... .. ... .. ......... . 8 - 97
Urbanization ............. ...... ......... ... ............ ....... .. .. .. ...... ... ..... ..... .... .............. . 8 - 97
Key Tools of Urban Stream Restoration Design ...... ..... .. .... ... .... ... ........ . 8 - 101
Contents xv
Preparing Access and Staging Areas .... . ... ... .. .. . .. .. .. . .. . .... .. . . .. .. . ...... ... . .. 9- 4
Taking Precautions to Minimize Disturbance ... . . . .. . . . . .. ... . .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. . .. .. 9- 4
Protection of Existing Vegetation and Sensit ive Habitat ........ ..... ..... 9 - 4
Erosion .. .. . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . .. ... ... . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. . . .. . . . . .. . ... . .. . .. . .. . ........ ..... 9 - 4
Water Qua lity . . .. . . .. . .. . . ... ... . .. ... .. .. .... .. ... .. .. . .. . . . . . .. . ... . .. . .. . .. . ... . ... . .. . .. 9 - 6
Air Qual ity. ...... .. ........... .. ....... .. ....... .. ......... ... ... .. ... .. ... .... ... .. .. .. ... .. . 9 - 7
Cu ltural Resources .... ........ ...... ..... .. ..... ......... .. ... ... .. ... ... ...... ... .... ...... 9 - 8
No ise ... .. .... ...... .. ... ... ..... .... .... ... ...... ...... ...... .. .. ..... ... ..... ... .. ... .. .. .... .... 9 - 8
Solid Waste Disposal . . .... . ... .. . .. . .. .... .. ..... .. .. . .. . . . .... .. . . .. ... .. .. . .. . . . .. . . .. .. 9 - 9
Worksite Sanitat ion . .. . . . ... .. .. . .. . .. ... .. . ..... .. .. . .. . . . ..... .. . . .. . .. ... .. .. . . . .. .. . .. 9 - 9
Obtaining Appropriate Equipment . . ... .. . ... .. . .. . .. . . . ..... ... . .. . .. ... . . .. . . .. . .. . .. 9- 9
Site Clearing ......... ....... ...... .... ... .... ...... ... .. .... ......... ....... ................ .. .... ... ...... . 9 - 10
Geographic Limits . . ... . . . .... .. . .. ... .. . .. .. ... ... . ..... .. .. . .. . . . .... . .. . . .. . .. ... .. .. . . . .. .. . 9 - 10
Removal of Undesirable Plant Species ... . ..... .. .. . .. . . . ... . . .. . . .. .. . ... . . .. . . .. ... . .. 9 - 10
Drainage . . .. .. .. . . .. .. . . ... . . . .... .. . ... .. ... . .. .... .. . ... .. .. .. . .. . . . . . .. . .. . . .. . .. ... .. .. . . .. . .. . . 9 - 11
Protection and Management of Existing Vegetation .. . . .. . .. .. . . . .. . . . .. .. . .. 9 - 12
Instal lation and Construction .......... ............ ........ .... ... ... .. ...... .. .... .. .. ...... ...... 9 - 12
Earth Moving .. . .. . . ... . . .. . ... .. . .. . ... . . .. .. ... .. .. ... .. .. . .. . ... .... . .. . . . .. . ... . . .. . . . .. .. . .. 9 - 12
Fi ll Placement and Disposal ... .. ..... .. ... .... ..... ................. ... ..... .... .... .. 9 - 12
Contouring .... .. .... ..... .... .... ..... ...... .... ... .. .. ... .. .. .. .. ... ... ... ... .... .. ......... . 9 - 13
Final Gradi ng ..... ..... ... ...... ........... ... ....... .. .. ... ....... .... ....... .. .... .. .. ... .... 9 - 14
Diversion of Flow . . .. .. .. . . . ... .. ... . .. .. . .. .. .. .. . ... . . ... . . . ... .. . . ... . .. . .. ... . . .. . . . .. ... .. . 9 - 14
Installation of Plant Materials .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . ... .. . .... . . ... .. . .. .. . ... .. ... . . ... . . .. . .. .. . 9 - 15
Timin g .................... ..... .... .. .... ..... .... ............. .......... ... ... .... ... .... ........ 9 - 16
Acqu isit ion .. ... . .... . ..... .. ..... ... .. ... .. .. .. .... ...... . ... ... . .... .. . ..... .... ... ... ..... 9 - 16
Transportation and Storage ... ............. ....... .... ... .............. ........ .... ... 9 - 16
Planting Principles . ....... ... ... ...... ..... ..... ......... .... ... .... ...... ... .... .......... 9 - 17
Competing Plants ..... .. ...... ... ....... ........... ..... .. ....... ... .. ...... .... .. ...... . . 9 - 18
Use of Chemica ls ..... .. ........ ... .... ........... .. .. ... .... ... ............ .. .. .... ...... 9 - 18
Mu lches .......................... ... .... ..... ..... ... ....... ........ ....... ..... ..... .... ... ... 9 - 19
Irrigation ... ............ ... ..... ..... .... ... ......... ................. .. .... .. .. .... .. .. ...... ... 9 - 20
Fencin g .............. ... ...... ... .. ... ... ... .. ....... ......... ..... .... .. .. .... ..... ... .......... 9 - 20
Inspection . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . .. . .. .. . . .. . ... .. . .. . .. ... . .. .. ... .. . ... .. .. .. . ...... . . .. .. . .. .. . ... .. .. . . . .. .. . . .. 9 - 21
On-Site Inspection Following Installation ... .. ..... .... .. .... .............. ... .. ....... 9 - 22
Follow-up Inspections .. . ... .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. . ... .. .. . .. .. .. . .. . ... . . .. . . . .. . .. . .. 9 - 22
General Inspection ..... .... ......................... ...... ... ...... .... .... ... ... .. .... ... 9 - 23
Bank and Channel Structures ...... .... ... .... ... ... ... .. .... .. .. ... .. ..... ... ...... 9 - 23
Vegetation .. . .. . ... . . . . ... .. ... ... . .. . .. .. .... . ..... .. ..... .. ... .... ......... .... ............. 9 - 24
Urban Features ..... .. .... .... ... ... ... ....... .... ... .. ....... .. .. ........... ..... .......... 9 - 25
M aintenance ... .. ..... ..... .. .... .. ........ ... ...... ...... ...... ........ .... .... ... ....... ...... ... ... .. .. 9 - 26
Channels and Floodplains ... ... .. . .. . .. .... .... .. .. ... .. .. . . ... . . ... . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . .. .. . . .. 9 - 27
Protection/Enhancement Measures .. .. .. . ..... .. . ..... .. . . . . . ... . . .. . ... .. . . . . . . .. . . 9 - 27
Vegetation . . .. .. . .. . . . .. . . . .. ... . . ... .. . .. .. . .. .. .. . .. .. .. . ...... .. . . .. . ... . . .. . .. .. . . . . . .. .... . .. 9 - 28
Other Fea tures . ... . ... . . ...... .... .. ... .. . ... ... ......... ..... .. ... ... . .... . .. .... . .. . . . .. . 9 - 28
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Techniques...................................................................................... A - 1
ADDENDUM
References B- 1
Index B - 33
Contents xvii
xviii Stream Corridor
Acknowledgments
Machines printed this document, but people translated their collective knowledge
and experience into the printed word. The following agencies, people, and
affiliates cooperated and worked together to produce the interagency document,
"Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes, and Practices." Numerous
other people also worked in support or consultative roles within and outside of
the agencies, and their contribution is acknowledged and very much appreciated.
Federal Agencies
The following federal agencies collaborated to produce this document:
Acknowledgements xix
Production Team
The Production Team developed much of the material for this document.
Some individuals on this team led the development of individual chapters and
wrote specific parts of the document. Contributing authors include recognized
experts from universities and consulting firms.
Name Affiliation Location
Allen, Hollis U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station Vicksburg, MS
Booth, Derek Center for Urban Water Resources Management, U. of Washington Seattle, WA
Landin, Mary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station Vicksburg, M S
Shields, Jr., F. Douglas USDA-Agricu lt ural Research Service, ARS National Sedimentation Lab. Oxford, M S
Wi llard, Daniel E. School of Public & Environmental Affairs, Indiana University Bloomington, IN
xx Stream Corridor
Communications Team
The Communications Team developed the plan for promoting the creation of
this document, both in process and product. Members designed and produced
a variety of information materials for people interested in the document.
Name Affiliation Location
Acknowledgements xxi
Steering Team
The Steering Team organized, led, and coordinated the production of this docu-
ment. Steering Team members not only represented the interests of their agen-
cies but also served as contact pivots for information to and from their agencies
and also wrote parts of the document. The Steering Team also secured
nonfederal peer review of this document and facilitated the signing of the
Memorandum of Understanding.
*Editor
** Layout, Design, and Printing
Nongovernmental Organizations
The World Wildlife Fund coordinated input and reviews from other
nongovernmental organizations.
Name Affiliation Location
Acknowledgements xxiii
Peer Review
In addition to internal agency reviews, an independent peer review panel coor-
dinated external reviews.
xx iv Stream Corridor
Other Contributors
Other invaluable support and assistance was rendered by
numerous individuals, including:
Name Affiliation Location
Acknowledgements xxv
Over-view of
Stream
Corridors
Stream
Corridor
Introduction
There is a phenomenal resiliency
Restoration: in the mechanisms of the earth.
A river or lake is almost never
dead. If you give it the slightest
Principles, chance... then nature usually
comes back.
Processes, - Rene Dubos 1981
and Practices
Why Is Stream Corridor Restoration diversity, species densities, and rates of biologi-
Important? cal productivity than most other landscape
elements.
The United States has more than 3.5 million
miles of rivers and streams that, along with Streams and stream corridors evolve in concert
closely associated floodplain and upland areas, with and in response to surrounding ecosystems.
comprise corridors of great economic, social, Changes within a surrounding ecosystem (e.g.,
cultural, and environmental value. These corri- watershed) will impact the physical, chemical,
dors are complex ecosystems that include the and biological processes occurring within a
land, plants, animals, and network of streams stream corridor. Stream systems normally func-
within them. They perform a number of eco- tion within natural ranges of flow, sediment
logical functions such as modulating stream- movement, temperature, and other variables, in
flow, storing water, removing harmful materials what is termed "dynamic equilibrium." When
from water, and providing habitat for aquatic changes in these variables go beyond their nat-
and terrestrial plants and animals. Stream corri- ural ranges, dynamic equilibrium may be lost,
dors also have vegetation and soil characteris- often resulting in adjustments in the ecosystem
tics distinctly different from surrounding that might conflict with societal needs. In some
uplands and support higher levels of species circumstances, a new dynamic equilibrium may
1- 2 Introduction
Restoration. Rehabilitation. and Reclamation
1-4 Introduction
based on experiences and basic scien-
tific knowledge.
It is axiomatic that no restora- As a general goal, this document pro-
tion can ever be perfect; it is motes the use of ecological processes
impossible to replicate the bio- (physical, chemical, and biological) and
geochemical and climatological minimally intrusive solutions to restore
self-sustaining stream corridor func-
sequence of events over geolog-
ical time that led to the creation
and placement of even one par-
ticle of soil, much less to exactly
reproduce an entire ecosystem.
Therefore, all restorations are
exercises in approximation and
in the reconstruction of natural-
istic rather than natural assem-
blages of plants and animals
with their physical environ-
ments.
- Berger 1990
1-6 Introduction
The d ocument has been divided into
three principal parts. Part I provides
backgrou nd on the fundamental con-
cepts of stream corridor structure,
Agencies Contributing to This
processes, functions, and the effects of
Document
disturbance. Part II focuses on a gen-
eral restoration plan development • United States Department of Agriculture:
process comprised of several fundamen-
- Agricultural Research Service
tal steps. Part III exam ines the informa-
tion presented in Parts I and II to - Cooperative State Research, Education, and
consider how it can be applied in a Extension Service
restoration initiative. - Forest Service
Because of the size and complexity of - Natural Resources Conservation Service
the document, two features are used to
assist the reader to maintain a clear ori- • United States Department of Commerce:
entation within the document. These - National Oceanic and Atmospheric
features will allow the reader to more Administration
easily apply the information to specific
- National Marine Fisheries Service
aspects of a stream corridor restoration
initiative. These features are: • United States Department of Defense:
- Army Corps of Engineers
• Chapter dividers that include major
chapter sections and reader preview
and review questions for each chap- • United States Department of Housing and Urban
fill. The document audience will in- • Federal Emergency Management Agency
Feedback
Readers are encouraged to share their restoration experi-
ences and provide feedback. They can do so by access-
ing the Stream Corridor Restoration home page on the
Internet address printed in the Preface. Other sources
of information may also be found by exploring the coop-
erating agencies' home pages on the Internet.
1-8 Introduction
Table 1.1
Chapter 1: Overview of Stream Corridors
1.A Physical Structure and Time at Multiple Scales
• What are the structural components of a stream corridor?
• Why are stream corridors of special significance, and why should they be
the focus of restoration efforts?
• What is the relationship between stream corridors and other landscape
units at broader and more local scales?
• What scales should be considered for a stream corridor restoration?
1- 10 Introduction
Table 1.1 (continued)
4.B Problem and Opportunity Identification
• Why is it important to spend resources on the problem ("When everyone
already knows what the problem is")?
• How can the anthropogenic changes that caused the need for the restora-
tion initiative be altered or removed?
• How are data collection and analysis procedures organized?
• How are problems affecting the stream corridor identified?
• How are reference conditions for the stream corridor determined?
• Why are reference conditions needed?
• How are existing management activities influencing the stream corridor?
• How are problems affecting the stream corridor described?
7 .B Geomorphic Processes
• How do I inventory geomorphic information on streams and use it to
understand and develop physically appropriate restoration plans?
• How do I interpret the dominant channel adjustment processes active at
the site?
• How deep and wide should a stream be?
• Is the stream stable?
• Are basin-wide adjustments occurring, or is this a local problem?
• Are channel banks stable, at-risk, or unstable?
• What measurements are necessary?
7 .C Chemical Characteristics
• How do you measure the condition of the physical and chemical condi-
tions within a stream corridor?
• Why is quality assurance an important component of stream corridor
analysis activities?
• What are some of the water quality models that can be used to evaluate
water chemistry data?
7 .D Biological Characteristics
• What are some important considerations in using biological indicators for
analyzing stream corridor conditions?
• Which indicators have been used successfully?
• What role do habitat surveys play in analyzing the biological condition of
the stream corridor?
• How do you measure biological diversity in a stream corridor?
• What is the role of stream classification systems in analyzing stream corri-
dor conditions?
• How can models be used to evaluate the biological condition of a stream
corridor?
• What are the characteristics of models that have been used to evaluate
stream corridor conditions?
1- 12 Introduction
Table 1.1 (continued)
Chapter 8: Restoration Design
8.A Valley Form, Connectivity, and Dimension
• How do you incorporate all the spatial dimensions of the landscape into
stream corridor restoration design?
• What criteria can be applied to facilitate good design decisions for stream
corridor restoration?
8.B Soil Properties
• How do soil properties impact the design of restoration activities?
• What are the major functions of soils in the stream corridor?
• How are important soil characteristics, such as soil microfauna and soil
salinity, accounted for in the design process?
8.C Plant Communities
• What is the role of vegetative communities in stream corridor restoration?
• What functions do vegetative communities fulfill in a stream corridor?
• What are some considerations in designing plant community restoration
to ensure that all landscape functions are addressed?
• What is soil bioengineering and what is its role in stream corridor restora -
tion?
8.D Habitat Measures
• What are some specific tools and techniques that can be used to ensure
recovery of riparian and terrestrial habitat recovery?
8.E Stream Channel Restoration
• When is stream channel reconstruction an appropriate restoration option?
• How do you delineate the stream reach to be reconstructed?
• How is a stream channel designed and reconstructed?
• What are important factors to consider in the design of channel recon-
struction (e.g., alignment and average slope, channel dimensions)?
• Are there computer models that can assist with the design of channel
reconstruction?
8.F Streambank Restoration
• When should stream bank stabilization be included in a restoration?
• How do you determine the performance criteria for streambank treat-
ment, including the methods and materials to be used?
• What are some streambank stabilization techniques that can be consid-
ered for use?
8.G lnstream Habitat Recovery
• What are the principal factors controlling the quality of instream habitat?
• How do you determine if an inst ream habitat structure is needed, and
what type of structure is most appropriate?
• What procedures can be used to restore instream habitat?
• What are some examples of instream habitat structures?
• What are some important questions to address before designing, select-
ing, or installing an instream habitat structure?
1- 14 Introduction
recession
/limb
2
time Time (days)
of rise
Background
Chapter 1: Overview of Stream Corridors
Chapter 2: Stream Corridor Processes,
Characteristics, and Functions
Chapter 3: Disturbance Affecting Stream
Corridors
stream corridor is an ecosystem that (Figure 1.1). Water and other materials,
A usually consists of three major ele-
ments:
energy, and organisms meet and interact
within the stream corridor over space and
time. This movement provides critical func-
• Stream channel
tions essential for maintaining life such as
• Floodplain cycling nutrients, filtering contaminants
• Transitional upland fringe from runoff, absorbing and gradually re-
leasing floodwaters, maintaining fish and
Together they function as dynamic and
wildlife habitats, recharging ground water,
valued crossroads in the landscape.
and maintaining stream flows.
Landscape Scale
Patuxent River Watershed
/
mixed landscape
•suburban
• agricultural
• forest cover
Washington, DC
--- ' I
•
Damascus
} " /
...
/ I
I
I
I
I
I Montgomery Co.
'<9
I
I
--- I
I
1 I
c____
~---_,
Reach Scale
At the other extreme, the coarsest of the Structure at Scales Broader Than
imaging satellites that monitor the earth's the Stream Corridor Scale
surface might detect only patches or cor-
ridors of tens of square miles in area, The landscape scale encompasses the
and matrices that seem to dominate a stream corridor scale. In tum, the land-
whole region. At all levels, the matrix- scape scale is encompassed by the larger
patch-corridor-mosaic model provides a regional scale. Each scale within the hier-
useful common denominator for de- archy has its own characteristic structure.
Landscape
scribing structure in the environment. The "watershed scale" is another form of
ecologists use
Figure 1.5 displays examples of the ma- spatial scale that can also encompass the four basic
trices, patches, and corridors at broad stream corridor. Although watersheds terms to define
and local scales. Practitioners should occur at all scales, the term "watershed spatial struc-
always consider multiple scales when scale" is commonly used by many practi- ture at a par-
planning and designing restoration. tioners because many functions of the ticular scale-
stream corridor are closely tied to drain- matrix, patch,
age patterns. For this reason, the "water- corridor, and
shed scale" is included in this discussion. mosaic.
\ New
England
Region
New
York
Region
• spruce-fir
• northern hardwood
agricultural
• oak forest
pitch pine-oak
•urban
• suburban
• salt marsh
• rivers and lakes
• barrens
• industrial
Temporal Scale
The final scale concept critical for the
planning and design of stream corridor
restoration is time.
In a sense, temporal hierarchy parallels
spatial hierarchy. Just as global or re- Figure 1.9: Structural elements at a stream
gional spatial scales are usually too scale. Patches, corridors, and matrix are visible
large to be relevant for most restoration within the stream.
initiatives, planning and designing
restoration for broad scales of time is planned for in restoration designs.
not usually practical. Geomorphic or Flood specialists rank the extent of
climatic changes, for example, usually floods in temporal terms such as 10-
occur over centuries to millions of year, 100-year, and 500-year events
years. The goals of restoration efforts, (10%, 1%, 0.2% chance of recurrence.
by comparison, are usually described in See Chapter 7 Flow Frequency Analysis
time frames of years to decades. for more details.). These can serve as
Land use change in the watershed, for guidance for planning and designing
example, is one of many factors that restoration when flooding is an issue.
can cause disturbances in the stream Practitioners of stream corridor restora-
corridor. It occurs on many time scales, tion may need to simultaneously plan
however, from a single year (e.g., crop Stream corri-
in multiple time scales. If an instream dor restoration
rotation), to decades (e.g., urbaniza- structure is planned, for example, care that works
tion), to centuries (e.g., long-term forest might be taken that ( 1) installation with the dy-
management) . Thus, it is critical for the does not occur during a critical spawn- namic behavior
practitioner to consider a relevant range ing period (a short-term consideration) of the stream
of time scales when involving land use and (2) the structure can withstand a ecosystem will
issues in restoration planning and de- 100-year flood (a long-term considera- more likely
sign. tion). The practitioner should never try survive the
Flooding is another natural process that to freeze conditions as they are, at the test of time.
varies both in space and through time. completion of the restoration. Stream
Spring runoff is cyclical and therefore corridor restoration that works with the
fairly predictable. Large, hurricane-in- dynamic behavior of the stream ecosys-
duced floods that inundate lands far be- tem will more likely survive the test of
yond the channel are neither cyclical time.
nor predictable, but still should be
The previous section described how the • Stream channel, a channel with flow-
matrix-patch-corridor-mosaic model ing water at least part of the year.
can be applied at multiple scales to ex- • Floodplain, a highly variable area on
amine the relationships between the one or both sides of the stream chan-
stream corridor and its external envi- nel that is inundated by floodwaters
ronments. This section takes a closer at some interval, from frequent to
look at physical structure in the stream rare.
corridor itself. In particular, this section
focuses on the lateral dimension. In • Transitional upland fringe, a portion of
cross section, most stream corridors the upland on one or both sides of
have three major components the floodplain that serves as a transi-
(Figure 1.10): tional zone or edge between the
floodplain and the surrounding land-
scape.
Some common features found in the
river corridor are displayed in Figure
1.11. In this example the floodplain is
seasonally inundated and includes fea-
tures such as floodplain forest, emer-
gent marshes and wet meadows. The
transitional upland fringe includes an
upland forest and a hill prairie. Land-
forms such as natural levees, are created
by processes of erosion and sedimenta-
tion, primarily during floods. The vari-
ous plant communities possess unique
(a)
moisture tolerances and requirements
and consequently occupy distinct land-
forms.
Each of the three main lateral compo-
nents is described in the following
subsections.
Stream Channel
Channels are formed, maintained, and
altered by the water and sediment they
carry. Usually they are gently rounded
in shape and roughly parabolic, but
form can vary greatly.
Figure 1.12 presents a cross section of a
(b) typical stream channel. The sloped
Figure 1.10: The three major components of a bank is called a scarp. The deepest part
stream corridor in different settings (a) and of the channel is called the thalweg. The
(b). Even though specific features might differ dimensions of a channel cross section
by region, most stream corridors have a chan-
define the amount of water that can
nel, floodplain, and transitional upland fringe.
3
"'
:T
~
0
"'
:T
2
CT
-
0
0
0..
"O
"'
:T
~
0
0..
11>
11>
"O
3
~
....
11>
c
"O
QI
:::J
0..
~ 11> ~ n
QI -~
,,
OJ
- ~
OJ
OJ
, 0.. 3 :::J 0
iii" 0 ,OJ "O :T
~ 0 11>
"':T :::J
~.... ~
....
OJ
high
river
stage
corridor - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -- •
Figure 1.11: A cross section of a river corridor. The three main components of the river corridor
can be subdivided by structural features and plant communities. (Vertical scale and channel width
are greatly exaggerated.)
Source: Sparks, Bioscience, vol. 45, p. 170, March 1995. ©1995 American Institute of Biological Science.
pass through without spilling over the other variables must increase or de-
banks. Two attributes of the channel are crease proportionally if equilibrium is
of particular interest to practitioners, to be maintained. For example, if slope
channel size and streamflow. is decreased and streamflow remains
the same, either the sediment load or
Channel Size the size of the particles must also de-
Channel size is determined by four crease. Likewise, if flow is increased and
basic factors: the slope stays the same, sediment load
or sediment particle size has to increase
• Sediment discharge ( Q,) to maintain channel equilibrium.
• Sediment particle size (D 50 ) If a change occurs, the balance will tem-
• Streamflow ( QJ porarily be tipped and equilibrium lost.
The stream will then change its level ei-
• Stream slope (S)
ther upward (aggradation) or down-
Lane ( 1955) showed this relationship ward (degradation or incising),
qualitatively as:
Q•D
s 50
oc Q w • S
- stream channel -
This equation can be envisioned as a
balance with sediment load on one
weighing pan and streamflow on the
other (Figure 1.13). The hook holding
the sediment pan can slide along the
horizontal arm according to sediment
size. The hook holding the streamflow
side slides according to stream slope. thalwegJ
Channel equilibrium occurs when all
Figure 1.12: Cross section of a stream channel.
four variables are in balance. If one
The scarp is the sloped bank and the thalweg is
variable changes, one or more of the the lowest part of the channel.
Os • Dso ex Ow • S
Figure 1.13: Factors affecting channel degradation and aggradation. The "size" of the channel is
determined by the stream's energy, the slope, and the flow of water in balance with the size and
quantity of the sediment particles the stream moves.
Source: Rosgen (1996), from Lane, Proceedings, 1955. Published with the permission of American Society of
Civil Engineers.
•I
~
I
lag time after
"""";,.,;oo
and natural vegetation is replaced by impervious cover such
as rooftops, roadways, parking lots, sidewalks, and driveways.
One of the consequences is that more of a stream's annual
Q after
flow is delivered as storm water runoff rather than baseflow.
Depending on the degree of watershed impervious cover, the
- Qbefore annual volume of storm water runoff can increase by up to
16 times that for natural areas (Schueler 1995). In addition,
since impervious cover prevents rainfall from infiltrating into
the soil, less flow is available to recharge ground water.
Therefore, during extended periods without rainfall, baseflow
levels are often reduced in urban streams (Simmons and
Reynolds 1982).
Storm runoff moves more rapidly over smooth, hard pave-
Time (hours) ment than over natural vegetation. As a result, the rising
limbs of storm hydrographs become steeper and higher in
Figure 1. 15: A comparison of hydrographs
before and after urbanization. The discharge
urbanizing areas (Figure 1.15). Recession limbs also decline
curve is higher and steep er for urban streams more steeply in urban streams.
than for natural streams.
water table
water table -- -- -- -+... -- _..
... ...
--- ......
Figure 1. 16: Cross sections of (a) influent and (b) effluent stream reaches. Influent or " losing "
reaches lose stream water to the aquifer. Effluent or "gaining" reaches receive discharges from
the aquifer.
Channel-Forming Discharge
To envision the concept of channel-
forming discharge, imagine placing a
water hose discharging at constant rate
in a freshly tilled garden. Eventually, a
small channel will form and reach an
equilibrium geometry
At a larger scale, consider a newly
constructed floodwater- retarding
reservoir that slowly releases stored
floodwater at a constant flow rate.
This flow becomes the new channel-
forming discharge and will alter chan-
nel morphology until the channel
reaches equilibrium.
Figure 1. 19: Bankfull discharge. This is the flow
at w hich w ater begins to leave t he channel
and move onto the f loodplain.
topographic floodplain
hydro logic
floodp lain
Figure 1.20: Hydrologic and topographic floodplains. The hydrologic floodplain is defined by
bankfull elevation. The topographic floodplain includes the hydrologic floodplain and other lands
up to a defined elevation.
Figure 1.21: Landforms and deposits of a floodplain. Topographic features on the floodplain
caused by meandering streams.
Figure 1.22: Transitional upland fringe. This Figure 1.23: Terraces formed by an incising
component of the stream corridor is a transi- stream. Terraces are formed in response to
tion zone between the floodplain and the new patterns of streamflow or sediment load
surrounding landscape. in the watershed.
annual
terrestrial Most river-
grasses spawning fish
start to breed.
consolidation of
runoff of sediments;
nutrients moist soi l plant
resulting from germination Many fish
decomposition decomposition respond to
of stranded drawdown by
aquatic vegetation, finding deeper
mineralization of water.
nutrients
regrowth of
terrestrial
grasses and shru
runoff and
concentration Fish migrate to
of nutrients main channel,
resulting from decomposition of most permanent lakes
decomposition remaining vegetation or tributaries.
Figure 1.26: Schematic of the flood-pulse concept. A vertica lly exaggerated section of a
floodplain in five snapshots of an annual hydrological cycle. The left column describes the
movement of nutrients. The right column describes typical life history traits of fish.
Source: Bayley, Bioscience, vol. 45, p.154, March 1995. © 1995 American Institute of Biologica l Science.
Figure 1.27: Three longitudinal profile zones. Channel and floodplain characteristics change as
rivers travel from headwaters to mouth.
Source: Miller (1990). © 1990 Wadsworth Publishing Co.
Q)
VI
Ill
Q)
....
u
c
channel width
channel depth
mean flow velocit
Figure 1.28: Changes in the channel in the three zones. Flow, channel size, and sediment
characteristics change throughout the longitudinal profile.
- ....
still a fourth-order stream below the in-
,.
tersection) .
-~
J? Within a given drainage basin, stream
order correlates well with other basin
Figure 1.29: Watershed drainage patterns. parameters, such as drainage area or
Patterns are determined by topography and
channel length. Consequently, knowing
geologic structure.
Source: A.D. Howard, AAPG © 1967, reprinted by what order a stream is can provide clues
permission of the American Association of Petroleum concerning other characteristics such as
Geologists. which longitudinal zone it resides in
and relative channel size and depth.
original single-thread stream breaks up Figure 1.31: (a) Single-thread and (b) braided
into multiple channels. Streams entering streams. Single-thread streams are most
common. Braided streams are uncommon and
deltas in a lake or b ay are often anasto-
usually formed in response to erodible banks,
mosed. Streams on alluvial fans, in con- an abundance of coarse sediment, and rapid
trast, can be braided or anastomosed. and frequent variations in discharge.
small mouth
bass ~redders
3
~
..... 4
(lJ
"2
.9.
(lJ
N
V'I
E 5
C1l
(lJ
.....
+'
V'I
course
6 particulat e
matter
10
11
12
Figure 1.34: The River Continuum Concept. The concept proposes a relationship between
stream size and the progressive shift in structural and functional attributes.
Source: Vannote et al. (1980). Published with the permission of NRC Research Press.
hapter 7 provided an overview of stream corridor look and function the way
C stream corridors and the many per-
spectives from which they should be
it does. While Chapter 7 presented still
images, this chapter provides "film
viewed in terms of scale, equilibrium, and footage" to describe the processes, char-
space. Each of these views can be seen as acteristics, and functions of stream corri-
a "snapshot" of different aspects of a dors through time.
stream corridor Section 2.A: Hydrologic and Hydraulic
Chapter 2 presents the stream corridor in Processes
motion, providing a basic understanding Understanding how water flows into and
of the different processes that make the through stream corridors is critical to
restorations. How fast, how much, how
deep, how often, and when water
flows are important
basic questions that
must be answered to
The quality of water in the stream The six major functions of stream
corridor is normally a primary ob- corridors are: habitat, conduit,
jective of restoration, either to im- barrier, filter, source, and sink.
prove it to a desired condition, or The integrity of a stream corridor
to sustain it. Restoration should ecosystem depends on how well
consider the physical and chemical these functions operate. This
characteristics that may not be section discusses these functions
readily apparent but that are and how they relate to dynamic
equilibrium.
The hydrologic cycle describes the contin- gions that experience seasonal cycles of
uum of the transfer of water from pre- snowfall and snowmelt.
cipitation to surface water and ground The type of precipitation that will occur
water, to storage and runoff, and to the is generally a factor of humidity and air
eventual return to the atmosphere by temperature. Topographic relief and ge-
transpiration and evaporation (Figure ographic location relative to large water
2.2).
bodies also affect the frequency and
Precipitation returns water to the earth's type of precipitation. Rainstorms occur
surface. Although most hydrologic more frequently along coastal and low-
processes are described in terms of rain- latitude areas with moderate tempera-
fall events (or storm events), snowmelt tures and low relief. Snowfalls occur
is also an important source of water, es- more frequently at high elevations and
pecially for rivers that originate in high in mid-latitude areas with colder sea-
mountain areas and for continental re- sonal temperatures.
evaporation
"6 ~
"' n>
u
0
E
g
Figure 2.2: The hydrologic cycle. The transfer of water from precipitation to surface water and
ground water, to storage and runoff, and eventually back to the atmosphere is an ongoing cycle.
c
Alfalfa 36
• <20 inches
• 20-30 inches
• 30-40 inches
Q 40-50 inches
D 50-60 inches
D 60- 70 inches
D 70- 80 inches
D >80 inches
Figure 2.4: Mean annual lake evaporation for the period 1946-1955.
Source: Dunne and Leopold (1978) modified fro m Kohler et al. (1959).
infiltration
.75 inches/hr
Figure 2.6: Infiltration and runoff. Surface runoff occurs when ra infa ll intensity exceeds infiltration
capacity
nant force for water moving into soils pacity, the excess water either is de-
with very fine pores. tained in small depressions on the soil
The size and density of these pore surface or travels downslope as surface
openings determine the water's rate of runoff (Figure 2.6).
entry into the soil. Porosity is the term The following factors are important in
used to describe the percentage of the determining a soil's infiltration rate:
total soil volume taken up by spaces be- • Ease of entry through the soil surface.
tween soil particles. When all those
spaces are filled with water, the soil is • Storage capacity within the soil.
said to be saturated. • Transmission rate through the soil.
Soil characteristics such as texture and Areas with natural vegetative cover and
tilth (looseness) are key factors in deter- leaf litter usually have high infiltration
mining porosity. Coarse-textured, sandy rates. These features protect the surface
soils and soils with loose aggregates soil pore spaces from being plugged by
held together by organic matter or small fine soil particles created by raindrop
amounts of clay have large pores and, splash. They also provide habitat for
thus, high porosity. Soils that are tightly worms and other burrowing organisms
packed or clayey have low porosity. and provide organic matter that helps
Infiltration is the term used to describe bind fine soil particles together. Both of
the movement of water into soil pores. these processes increase porosity and
The infiltration rate is the amount of the infiltration rate.
water that soaks into soil over a given The rate of infiltration is not constant
length of time. The maximum rate that throughout the duration of a storm.
water infiltrates a soil is known as the The rate is usually high at the begin-
soil's infiltration capacity. ning of a storm but declines rapidly as
If rainfall intensity is less than infiltra- gravity-fed storage capacity is filled.
tion capacity, water infiltrates the soil at A slower, but stabilized, rate of infiltra-
a rate equal to the rate of rainfall. If the tion is reached typically 1 or 2 hours
rainfall rate exceeds the infiltration ca- into a storm. Several factors are in-
Soil Moisture
Figure 2.7: Water-holding properties of various
After a storm passes, water drains out of soils. Water-holding properties vary by texture.
upper soils due to gravity. The soil re- For a fine sandy loam the approximate differ-
mains moist, however, because some ence between porosity, 0.45, and field capacity,
0.20, is 0.25, meaning that the unfilled pore
amount of water remains tightly held in
space is 0.25 times the soil volume. The differ-
fine pores and around particles by sur- ence between field capacity and wilting point is
face tension. This condition, called field a measure of unfilled pore space.
capacity, varies with soil texture. Like Source: Dunne and Leopold 1978.
porosity, it is expressed as a proportion
by volume. pore water. The moisture content of the
The difference between porosity and soil at this point, which varies depend-
field capacity is a measure of unfilled ing on soil characteristics, is called the
pore space (Figure 2. 7). Field capacity permanent wilting point because plants
is an approximate number, however, be- can no longer withdraw water from the
cause gravitation drainage continues in soil at a rate high enough to keep up
moist soil at a slow rate. with the demands of transpiration, caus-
ing the plants to wilt.
Soil moisture is most important in the
context of evapotranspiration. Terrestrial Deep percolation is the amount of water
plants depend on water stored in soil. that passes below the root zone of
As their roots extract water from pro- crops, less any upward movement of
gressively finer pores, the moisture con- water from below the root zone (Jensen
tent in the soil may fall below the field et al. 1990).
capacity. If soil moisture is not replen- Ground Water
ished, the roots eventually reach a point
where they cannot create enough suc- The size and quantity of pore openings
tion to extract the tightly held interstitial also determines the movement of water
within the soil profile. Gravity causes
!
capillary
stream corridor can
vary significantly over
short distances,
depending on subsur- ---- ------------
_.. va~~,~~~:'t~:- _
face characteristics.
Source: USGS Water water
spring table
Supply Paper #1988,
1972, Definitions of unconfined aquifer zone of
Selected Ground Water saturation
Terms.
ground water
(phreatic water)
bedrock
face detention. Unlike depression stor- tion, the water table before a rainstorm
age, which evaporates to the atmos- has a parabolic surface that slopes to-
phere or enters the soil, surface ward a stream. Water moves downward
detention is only temporarily detained and along this slope and into the
from its journey downslope. It eventu- stream channel. This portion of the
ally runs off into the stream and is still flow is the baseflow. The soil below the
considered part of the total volume of water table is, of course, saturated. As-
overland flow. suming the hill slope has uniform soil
Overland flow typically occurs in urban characteristics, the moisture content of
and suburban settings with paved and surface soils diminishes with distance
impermeable surfaces. Paved areas and from the stream.
soils that have been exposed and com- During a storm, the soil nearest the
pacted by heavy equipment or vehicles stream has two important attributes as
are also prime settings for overland compared to soil upslope-a higher
flow. It is also common in areas of thin moisture content and a shorter distance
soils with sparse vegetative cover such to the water table. These attributes cause
as in mountainous terrain of arid or the water table to rise more rapidly in
semiarid regions. response to rainwater infiltration and
causes the water table to steepen. Thus a
Subsurface Flow
new, storm-generated ground water
Once in the soil, water moves in re- component is added to baseflow. This
sponse to differences in hydraulic head new component, called subsurface flow,
(the potential for flow due to the gradi- mixes with baseflow and increases
ent of hydrostatic pressure at different ground water discharge to the channel.
elevations). Given a simplified situa-
15000
~10000
Cll
~
..,"'
..c:
0"'
~
..c:
....
§ 5000
::2:
c:
"'Cll
::2:
Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. April May June July Aug . Sept.
Month
Figure 2. 12: An example of monthly probability curves. Monthly probability that the m ean
monthly discharge will be less than the values indicated. Yakima River near Parker, Washington.
(Data from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.)
Source: Dunne and Leopold 1978.
Geomorphic Processes 2- 15
Cieomorphic Processes Across No matter the size, all particles in the
the Stream Corridor channel are subject to being trans-
ported downslope or downstream.
The occurrence, magnitude, and distrib-
The size of the largest particle a stream
ution of erosion processes in water-
can move under a given set of hy-
sheds affect the yield of sediment and
draulic conditions is referred to as
associated water quality contaminants
stream competence. Often, only very
to the stream corridor.
high flows are competent to move the
Soil erosion can occur gradually over largest particles.
a long period, or it can be cyclic or
Closely related to stream competence is
episodic, accelerating during certain
the concept of tractive stress, which cre-
seasons or during certain rainstorm
ates lift and drag forces at the stream
events (Figure 2.13). Soil erosion can
boundaries along the bed and banks.
be caused by human actions or by nat-
Tractive stress, also known as shear
ural processes. Erosion is not a simple
stress, varies as a function of flow depth
process because soil conditions are con-
and slope. Assuming constant density,
tinually changing with temperature,
shape, and surface roughness, the larger
moisture content, growth stage and
the particle, the greater the amount of
amount of vegetation, and the human
tractive stress needed to dislodge it and
manipulation of the soil for develop-
move it downstream.
ment or crop production. Tables 2.2
and 2.3 show the basic processes that The energy that sets sediment particles
influence soil erosion and the different into motion is derived from the effect
types of erosion found within the water- of faster water flowing past slower
shed. water. This velocity gradient happens
because the water in the main body of
Cieomorphic Processes Along flow moves faster than water flowing at
the Stream Corridor the boundaries. This is because bound-
The channel, floodplain, terraces, and
other features in the stream corridor are
formed primarily through the erosion,
transport, and deposition of sediment
by streamflow. This subsection de-
scribes the processes involved with
transporting sediment loads down-
stream and how the channel and
floodplain adjust and evolve through
time.
Sediment Transport
stream.
Table 2.3: Erosion types vs. physical processes.
Particle movement on the channel bot-
tom begins as a sliding or rolling mo-
• -
Erosion/Physical Process
tion, which transports particles along Erosion Type Concentrated Combination
the stream bed in the direction of flow Flow I
Direction of
shear due to Tendency of Suggested motion of a
decrease of velocity to roll grain thrown up into
velocity an exposed Diagram of turbulent eddies in the
toward bed. grain. saltating grains. flow.
Figure 2.14: Action of water on particles near the streambed. Processes that transport bed load
sediments are a function of flow velocities, particle size, and principles of hydrodynamics.
Source: Water in Environmental Planning by Dunne and Leopold© 1978 by W.H. Freeman and Company.
Used with permission.
Geomorphic Processes 2- 17
Part of the suspended load may be col-
loidal clays, which can remain in sus-
pension for very long time periods,
Wash Load and Bed-Material Load depending on the type of clay and
One way to differentiate the sediment load of a stream water chemistry.
is to characterize it based on the immediate source of Sediment Transport Terminology
the sediment in transport. The total sediment load in a
Sediment transport terminology can
stream, at any given time and location, is divided into
sometimes be confusing. Because of
two parts-wash load and bed-material load. The prima-
this confusion, it is important to define
ry source of wash load is the watershed, including sheet
some of the more frequently used
and rill erosion, gully erosion, and upstream streambank
terms.
erosion. The source of bed material load is primarily the
streambed itself, but includes other sources in the water- • Sediment load, the quantity of sedi-
shed. ment that is carried past any cross
section of a stream in a specified
Wash load is composed of the finest sediment particles
period of time, usually a day or a
in transport. Turbulence holds the wash load in suspen-
year. Sediment discharge, the mass
sion. The concentration of wash load in suspension is
or volume of sediment passing a
essentially independent of hydraulic conditions in the
stream cross section in a unit of
stream and therefore cannot be calculated using mea-
time. Typical units for sediment load
sured or estimated hydraulic parameters such as velocity
are tons, while sediment discharge
or discharge. Wash load concentration is normally a
units are tons per day.
function of supply; i.e., the stream can carry as much
wash load as the watershed and banks can deliver (for • Bed-material load, part of the total
sediment concentrations below approximately 3000 sediment discharge that is composed
parts per million). of sediment particles that are the
Bed-material load is composed of the sediment of size
same size as streambed sediment.
classes found in the streambed. Bed-material load moves • Wash load, part of the total sediment
along the streambed by rolling, sliding, or jumping, and load that is comprised of particle
may be periodically entrained into the flow by turbu- sizes finer than those found in the
lence, where it becomes a portion of the suspended streambed.
load. Bed-material load is hydraulically controlled and
• Bed load, portion of the total sedi-
can be computed using sediment transport equations
ment load that moves on or near the
discussed in Chapter 8.
streambed by saltation, rolling, or
sliding in the bed layer.
• Suspended bed material load, portion
of the bed material load that is trans-
Finer-grained particles are more easily ported in suspension in the water
carried into suspension by turbulent ed- column. The suspended bed material
dies. These particles are transported load and the bed load comprise the
within the water column and are there- total bed material load.
fore called the suspended load. Although
• Suspended sediment discharge (or sus-
there may be continuous exchange of
pended load), portion of the total sed-
sediment between the bed load and
iment load that is transported in sus-
suspended load of the river, as long as
pension by turbulent fluctuations
sufficient turbulence is present.
within the body of flowing water.
Geomorphic Processes 2- 19
First Order Stream Second to Fourth Order Stream Fifth to Tenth Order Stream
typical
flow rate
average
0
0
particle size
on stream
bottom
Figure 2.15: Particle transport. A stream's total sediment load in the total of all sediment particles
moving past a defined cross section over a specified time period. Transport rates vary according to
the mechanism of transport.
occurs in a watershed and the increased is, the distribution of particle sizes in
load of sand exceeds the transport ca- each section of the stream remains in
pacity of the stream during events that equilibrium (i.e., new particles de-
move the sand into the channel. posited are the same size and shape as
particles displaced by tractive stress).
Stream and Floodplain Stability
Yang ( 1971) adapted the basic theories
A question that normally arises when described by Leopold to explain the
considering any stream restoration ac- longitudinal profile of rivers, the forma-
tion is "Is it stable now and will it be tion of stream networks, riffles, and
stable after changes are made?" The an- pools, and river meandering. All these
swer may be likened to asking an opin- river characteristics and sediment trans-
ion on a movie based on only a few port are closely related. Yang ( 1971) de-
frames from the reel. Although we often veloped the theory of average stream
view streams based on a limited refer- fall and the theory of least rate of en-
ence with respect to time, it is impor- ergy expenditure, based on the entropy
tant that we consider the long-term concept. These theories state that during
changes and trends in channel cross the evolution toward an equilibrium
section, longitudinal profile, and plan- condition, a natural stream chooses its
form morphology to characterize chan- course of flow in such a manner that
nel stability. the rate of potential energy expenditure
Achieving channel stability requires that per unit mass of flow along its course is
the average tractive stress maintains a a minimum.
stable streambed and streambanks. That
Geomorphic Processes 2- 21
Combining the four equations above energy dissipation rate (Yang and Song
yields additional predictive relation- 1979), the following equation must be
ships for concurrent increases or de- satisfied:
creases in streamflow and/ or sediment
discharge: dP dS dQ
yQ - +S =O
Q w +Q s+ - b+, d+f-, L+, s+f-, p- dx dx dx
Q -Q - - b - d+f- L- s+/- p+
W S I I I I
Where:
p QS = Stream power
x Longitudinal distance
Q Water discharge
S Water surface or energy slope
Channel Slope
y Specific weight of water
Channel slope, a stream's longitudinal
profile, is measured as the difference in Stream power has been defined as the
elevation between two points in the product of discharge and slope. Since
stream divided by the stream length be- stream discharge typically increases in
tween the two points. Slope is one of a downstream direction, slope must
the most critical pieces of design infor- decrease in order to minimize stream
mation required when channel modifi- power. The decrease in slope in a down-
cations are considered. Channel slope stream direction results in the concave-
directly impacts flow velocity, stream up longitudinal profile.
competence, and stream power. Since Sinuosity is not a profile feature, but it
these attributes drive the geomorphic does affect stream slope. Sinuosity is
processes of erosion, sediment trans- the stream length between two points
port, and sediment deposition, channel on a stream divided by the valley
slope becomes a controlling factor in length between the two points. For
channel shape and pattern. example, if a stream is 2,200 feet long
Most longitudinal profiles of streams from point A to point B, and if a valley
are concave upward. As described previ- length distance between those two
ously in the discussion of dynamic points is 1,000 feet, that stream has a
equilibrium, streams adjust their pro- sinuosity of 2.2. A stream can increase
file and pattern to try to minimize the its length by increasing its sinuosity,
time rate of expenditure of potential resulting in a decrease in slope. This
energy, or stream power, present in impact of sinuosity on channel slope
flowing water. The concave upward must always be considered if channel
shape of a stream's profile appears to reconstruction is part of a proposed
be due to adjustments a river makes restoration.
to help minimize stream power in a Pools and Riffles
downstream direction. Yang (1983)
applied the theory of minimum stream The longitudinal profile is seldom
power to explain why most longitudinal constant, even over a short reach. Dif-
streambed profiles are concave upward. ferences in geology, vegetation pat-
In order to satisfy the theory of mini- terns, or human disturbances can
mum stream power, which is a special result in flatter and steeper reaches
case of the general theory of minimum within an overall profile. Riffles occur
Geomorphic Processes 2- 23
Roughness plays an important r ole in fore, depends on the bedforms present
streams. It helps determine the depth or when that discharge occurs.
stage of flow in a stream reach. As flow Vegetation can also contribute to rough-
velocity slows in a stream reach due to ness. In streams with boundaries con-
roughness, the depth of flow has to in- sisting of cohesive soils, vegetation is
crease to maintain the volume of flow usually the principal component of
that entered the upstream end of the roughness. The type and distribution of
reach (a concept known as flow conti- vegetation in a stream corridor depends
nuity). Typical roughness along the on hydrologic and geomorphic
boundaries of the stream includes the processes, but by creating roughness,
following: vegetation can alter these processes and
• Sediment particles of different sizes. cause changes in a stream's form and
pattern.
• Bedforms.
Meandering streams offer some resis-
• Bank irregularities.
tance to flow relative to straight
• The type, amount, and distribution streams. Straight and meandering
of living and dead vegetation. streams also have different distributions
• Other obstructions. of flow velocity that are affected by the
alignment of the stream, as shown in
Roughness generally increases with in-
Figure 2.17. In straight reaches of a
creasing particle size. The shape and
stream, the fastest flow occurs just
size of instream sediment deposits, or
below the surface near the center of the
bedforms, also contribute to roughness.
channel where flow resistance is lowest
Sand-bottom streams are good exam- (see Figure 2.17 (a) Section G). In me-
ples of how bedform roughness anders, velocities are highest at the out-
changes with discharge. At very low dis- side edge due to angular momentum
charges, the bed of a sand stream may (see Figure 2 .1 7 (b) Section 3). The dif-
be dominated by ripple bedforms. As ferences in flow velocity distribution in
flow increases even more, sand dunes meandering streams result in both ero-
may begin to appear on the bed. Each sion and deposition at the meander
of these bedforms increases the rough- bend. Erosion occurs at the outside of
ness of the stream bottom, which tends bends (cutbanks) from high velocity
to slow velocity. flows, while the slower velocities at the
The depth of flow also increases due to insides of bends cause deposition on
increasing roughness. If discharge con- the point bar (which also has been
tinues to increase, a point is reached called the slip-off slope).
when the flow velocity mobilizes the The angular momentum of flow
sand on the streambed and the entire through a meander bend increases the
bed converts again to a planar form. height or super elevation at the outside
The depth of flow may actually decrease of the bend and sets up a secondary
at this point due to the decreased current of flow down the face of the
roughness of the bed. If discharge in- cut bank and across the bottom of the
creases further still, antidunes may pool toward the inside of the bend. This
form. These bedforms create enough rotating flow is called helical flow and
friction to again cause the flow depth to the direction of rotation is illustrated
increase. The depth of flow for a given on the diagram on the previous page by
discharge in sand-bed streams, there- the arrows at the top and bottom of
cross sections 3 and 4 in the figure.
Section C
~1
CLl
~2
...g. 3
..r:. Section E
2
Section G
3
I I I I I I I I I I
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Horizontal Distance (feet)
high low
velocity velocity
Geomorphic Processes 2- 25
habitat than occurs in the depositional sediment from the watershed. Vertical
environment of the slip-off slope. accretion is the deposition of sediment
on flooded surfaces. This sediment
Active Channels and generally is finer textured than point
Floodplains bar sediments and is considered to be
Floodplains are built by two stream an overbank deposit. Vertical accretion
processes, lateral and vertical accretion. occurs on top of the lateral accretion
Lateral accretion is the deposition of deposits in the point bars; however,
sediment on point bars on the insides lateral accretion is the dominant
of bends of the stream. The stream lat- process. It typically makes up 60 to 80
erally migrates across the floodplain as percent of the total sediment deposits
the outside of the meander bend in floodplains (Leopold et al. 19 64).
erodes and the point bar builds with It is apparent that lateral migration of
coarse-textured sediment. This naturally meanders is an important natural
occurring process maintains the cross process since it plays a critical role in
section needed to convey water and reshaping floodplains.
N03 ::I
N2 biota ;::;:
..,
assimilation ::;;
cyanobacteria N02 ;:;·
NH 3 and microbial Ill
..+
decomposition
populations i5'
::I
NH3
N03 benthic algae
excretion
assimilation
c: N2
0
·.;:::; nitrogen particulate
rg
u fixation organic matter
'+::::
·.:::: N02 and associat ed decomposition NH 3
:t: microbes accum-
c: ulation
QI excretion
-0 NH3
--.........~..___/
ground water dissolved organic nitrogen N03
Figure 2.21: Dynamics and transformations of nitrogen in a stream ecosystem. Nutrient cycling
from one form to another occurs w ith changes in nutrien t inputs, as w ell as tempera ture and
oxygen available.
Table 2.6: Sources and concentrations of pollutants from common point and nonpoint sources.
Figure 2.22: Relative aqueous solubility of different functional groups. The solubility of a
contaminant in water largely determines the extent to which it will impact water quality
C-0-C
ether
~o
ester C-0-R
~o
carbonyl -C-
carboxyl
-OH
hydroxyl
amine
ca rboxyl at e
I I K = concentration in octanol /
OW
H H concentration in water
matic increase in solubility (to 82,000 acids and small organic solvents like
mg/L). Adding a chloride atom to the TCE are relatively soluble and have low
benzene ring diminishes its aromatic Kow values.
character (chloride inhibits the dancing The octanol-water partition coefficient
electrons), and thus the solubility of has been determined for many com-
chlorobenzene ( 448 mg/L) is less than pounds and can be useful in under-
benzene. standing the distribution of SOC
Sorption
between water and biota, and between
water and sediments. Compounds with
In the 1940s, a young pharmaceutical high K w tend to accumulate in fish
0
industry sought to develop medicines tissue (Figure 2.25). The sediment-water
that could be transported in digestive distribution coefficient, often expressed
fluids and blood (both of which are as Kd, is defined in a sediment-water
essentially aqueous solutions) and mixture at equilibrium as the ratio of
could also diffuse across cell mem- the concentration in the sediment to
branes (which have, in part, a rather the concentration in the water:
nonpolar character). The industry devel-
oped a parameter to quantify the polar Kd = concentration in sediment /
versus non polar character of potential concentration in water
drugs, and they called that parameter One might ask whether this coefficient
the octanol-water partition coefficient. is constant for a given SOC. Values of Kd
Basically they put water and octanol for two polyaromatic hydrocarbons in
(an eight-carbon alcohol) into a vessel, various soils are shown in Figure 2.26.
added the organic compound of inter- For pyrene (which consists of four ben-
est, and shook the combination up. zene rings stuck together), the Kd ratios
After a period of rest, the water and oc- vary from about 300 to 1500. For
phenanthrene (which consists of three
Table 2.7: Solubility of six-carbon compounds.
benzene rings stuck together), Kd varies
Compound Solubility
from about 10 to 300. Clearly Kd is not a
Hexane
constant value for either compound.
10 mg/L
But, Kd does appear to bear a relation to
Hexanol 5,900 mg/L
the fraction of organic carbon in the var-
Cyclohexane SS mg/L
ious sediments. What appears to be con-
Benzene 1,780 mg/L
stant is not Kd itself, but the ratio of Kd
Phenol 82,000 mg/L
to the fraction of organic carbon in the
Chlorobenzene 448 mg/L
sediment. This ratio is referred to as K :
QC
~ f .t th . e e e
p-dichlorobenzene
eni ro ion e
iodobenzene
0 103 . e
bromobenzene
c: I h
ma at ion ee ·~hlorobenzene
....
l1l
IJ
phosmel 2 4-D ' toluene
' carbon tetrachloride
0 tetrachloroethylene esalicylic acid
c: 102 e benzene
flourobenzene I•
•chloroform
nitrobenzene be zoic acid
phenylacetic acid
phenoxyzcetic acid e
o..____...____...____...____.._____..____.._____._____.____ ~
5 1800 600
Q)
v 2,4,2', 4'- PCB e 1500
slope= Koc
500
"'
::J
:E
...
4
•
hexachloro-
benzene QI
::J
0 1200 400 c:
.= 3 bi phenyl
QI
c:
QI
....
..s::.
....
·=u
u..
• QI
>. 900
0..
c:
300 IO
c:
CCI • diphenylether '"O QI
Cl 2 ::..:: ..s::.
0 0..
....I 600 200 '"O
::..::
1 300 100
2 3 4 5 6 7
Log Poet
0 '"""''---'----'---'----'----LI
0.0 .005 .01 0 .015 .020 .025
Figure 2.25: Relationship between octanol/
Fraction Organic Carbon
water partition (P0 ) coefficient and bioaccu-
mulation factor (BCF) in trout muscle. Water
Figure 2.26: Relationship between pyrene,
quality can be inferred by the accumulation
phenanthrene, and fraction organic carbon.
of contaminants in fish tissue.
Contaminant concentrations in sediment vs.
water (K) are related to the amount of organ-
ic carbon available.
.....
Table 2.8: Regression equations for sediment adsorption coefficients (K 0
) for various
contaminants.
log Koc = 0.544 log K0 w + 1.377 45 0.74 Wide variety, mostly pesticides
log K0 c = 0.937 log K0 w - 0.006 19 0.95 Aromatics, polynuclear aromatics, triazines, and
dinitroaniline herbicides
log Koc= 0.681 log SCF(f) + 1.963 13 0.76 Wide variety, mostly pesticides
log Koc = 0.681 log 8CF(t) + 1.886 22 0.83 Wide variety, mostly pesticides
a Koc= soil (or sediment) ad sorption coefficient; S :;;; water solubility; Kow = octanolMwater partition coefficient; BCF(f) = b ioconcentration factor
from flowing-water t ests; BCF(t ) = bioconcentration factor from model ecosystems; P = parachor; N = number of sites in mo lecule w hich can
participate in t he formation of a hydrogen bond.
b No. = number of chemicals used to obtain regression equation.
c r 2 = correlatio n coefficient for regressio n equation.
d Equation originally given in terms of Korn· The relationship Korn :;;; K0 cf1.724 w as used to rewrite t he equation in t erms of Koc·
e Not available.
f Specific chemica ls used to obtain regression equation not specified.
¢ ¢
l/YCfro1ySis¢
O
bioavailable dissolved forms of the ~~=.-::..-:..h-:..-
d=--
1
y ro ysis ::::::,,.
I -?
==
.d==
. ===:
ox1 at1on
metal. '.1--o;,
oj,
N02 s,_;. OH
Non point sources of metals first reflect
¢
parathion paraoxon
¢ ¢
OtE- P-OEt OtE- P-OEt
trial practices. Movement of metals from I I
0 0
soil to watershed is largely a function of
the erosion and delivery of sediment.
In certain watersheds, a major source of
metals loading is provided by acid mine
+
0
¢ NHi
Ii.Yet,
ro~
'.Ys1s ¢OH
¢
:r ~
II
drainage. High acidity increases the sol- OtE- P-OEt ~ :::,. I
ubility of many metals, and mines tend I ,;;:-
0 v;·
¢
to be in mineral-rich areas. Abandoned s p - aminophenol 0
mines are therefore a continuing source II II
OtE - P-OEt OtE- P-OEt
of toxic metals loading in many streams. I I
OH
Table 2.9: Potential water quality impacts of selected stream restoration and watershed management practices.
• •
Restoration Water
Activities Temperature
•
Reduction of Decrease Decrease Decrease Increase/ Increase Decrease Decrease
land-disturbing decrease
activities
Figure 2.30: Canyon effect. Cool moist air settles in canyons and creates microhabitat that occurs
on surrounding slopes.
Q sand-silt
~ over cobbles
moss on
boulder
debris dam
Stream Segment Segment System Reach System "Pool/Riffle" System Microhabitat System
Figure 2.32: Hierarchical organization of a stream system and its habitat subsystems.
Approximate linear spatial sca le, appropriate to second- or third-order mountain stream.
microorganisms £.
r epilithic
algae
(e.g .. hyphomycete
fungi)
flocculation
dissolved
organic
matter
.......•
microorganisms
'
~
fine
particulate
organic ~ -
matter .,.....
scrapers
Bourassa and Morin 1995). Further- effect on the abundance and taxonomic
more, the larger species often play im- composition of algae and periphyton in
portant roles in determining community streams. Likewise, macroinvertebrate
composition of other components of predators, such as stoneflies, can influ-
the ecosystem. For example, herbivo- ence the abundance of other species
rous feeding activities of caddisfly lar- within the invertebrate community
vae (Lamberti and Resh 1983), snails (Peckarsky 1985).
(Steinman et al. 1987), and crayfish Collectively, microorganisms (fungi
(Lodge 19 91) can have a significant and bacteria) and benthic invertebrates
Table 2.12: Ranges of densities commonly
facilitate the breakdown of organic ma-
observed for selected groups of stream biota. terial, such as leaf litter, that enters the
stream from external sources. Some
Biotic Density invertebrates (insect larvae and am-
Component (Individuals/Square Mile)
phipods) act as shredders whose feed-
Algae 109-1010
ing activities break down larger organic
Bacteria 1012 - 1013
leaf litter to smaller particles. Other in-
Protists 108 - 109
vertebrates filter smaller organic mater-
Microinvertebrates 103- 10s ial from the water (blackfly larvae,
Macroinvertebrates 104 - 10s some mayfly nymphs, and some caddis-
Vertebrates 100- 102 fly larvae), scrape material off surfaces
Species Max. Weekly Max. Temp. for Max. Weekly Max. Temp.
Average Temp. for Survival of Short Average Temp. for Embryo
Growth (Juveniles) Exposure (Juveniles) for Spawninga Spawningb
cover or decrease baseflows can increase order meadow stream than in a compa-
instream temperatures to levels that ex- rable wooded reach from April through
ceed critical thermal maxima for fishes October, the reverse was true from No-
(Feminella and Matthews 1984). Thus, vember through March. In a review of
maintenance or restoration of normal temperature effects on stream macroin-
temperature regimes can be an impor- vertebrates common to the Pennsylva-
tant endpoint for stream managers. nia Piedmont, Sweeney (1992) found
Riparian vegetation is an important fac- that temperature changes of 2 to 6 °C
tor in the attenuation of light and tem- usually altered key life-history charac-
perature in streams (Cole 1994). Direct teristics of the study species. Riparian
sunlight can significantly warm streams, forest buffers have been shown to pre-
particularly during summer periods of vent the disruption of natural tempera-
low flow. Under such conditions, ture patterns as well as to mitigate the
streams flowing through forests warm increases in temperature following de-
rapidly as they enter deforested areas, forestation (Brown and Krygier 1970,
but may also cool somewhat when Brazier and Brown 1973).
streams reenter the forest. In Pennsylva- The exact buffer width needed for tem-
nia (Lynch et al. 1980), average daily perature control will vary from site to
stream temperatures that increased site depending on such factors as
12°C through a clearcut area were sub- stream orientation, vegetation, and
stantially moderated after flow through width. Along a smaller, narrow headwa-
1,640 feet of forest below the clearcut. ter stream, the reestablishment of
They attributed the temperature reduc- shrubs, e.g., willows and alders, may
tion primarily to inflows of cooler provide adequate shade and detritus to
ground water. restore both the riparian and aquatic
A lack of cover also affects stream tem - ecosystems. The planting and/ or
perature during the winter. Sweeney reestablishment of large trees, e.g., cot-
(1993) found that, while average daily tonwoods, willows, sycamores, ash, and
temperatures were higher in a second- walnuts (Lowe 1964), along larger,
higher order rivers can improve the seg-
Table 2.14: Summary of dissolved oxygen concentrations (mg!L) generally associated with effects
on fish in salmonid and nonsalmonid waters.
Source: USEPA 1987.
Figure 2.34: Effects of acid rain on some aquatic species. As acidity increases (and pH decreases) in
lakes and streams, some species are lost.
Rainbow trout 6i 6 6
(Oncorhyncus mykiss) ) $) ) $) ) P., *embryonic life stage
**selected species
Brown trout
(Sa/mo trutta)
- ,, 1._ 1102
••
a. 1192 illli.
~--------:
Brook troutfontinalus)
(Salvelinus • r Ai J • £' J
£ J • £$ • Ai J
£$ • st2
Smallmouthbass ~~ ~
(Micropterus dolomieu) ~~ ~
Flathead minnow I
(Pimephalus promelas) ~
---
Pumpkinseed sunfish
(Lepomis gibbosus)
~-------~
Yellow perch
1.
I b ,,
(Perea flavescens) •
---------:
Bullfrog* I
(Rana catesbeiana)
..
,.._
W- o-od_ f_ro-g*- - - -1: -
(R. sylvatica)
~--,
American toad*
-
----~------
,.--
(Bufo americanus)
Spotted salamander*
(Ambystoma maculatum)
I l,/(
c
Clam**
-
Cra-
yfi-
sh*-
* ~~-, . . - .
--~.
. ---
Snail** I ..
- -- ---
, ~~
Mayf ly**
'
I
nutrients (Minshall et al. 1985). Au- I
Figure 2.38: Landscapes with (A) high and (B) low degrees of connectivity. A connected landscape
structure generally has higher levels of functions than a fragmented landscape.
Natural Disturbances 2- 81
much interior habitat for larger verte- Pools may be formed downstream from
brates such as forest interior bird a log that has fallen across a stream and
species. For this reason, increasing inte- both upstream and downstream flow
rior habitat is sometimes a watershed characteristics are altered. The structure
scale restoration objective. formed by large woody debris in a
Habitat functions at the corridor scale stream improves aquatic habitat for
are strongly influenced by connectivity most fish and invertebrate species.
and width. Greater connectivity and in- Riparian forests, in addition to their
creased width along and across a stream edge and interior habitats, may offer
corridor generally increases its value as vertical habitat diversity in their canopy,
habitat. Stream valley morphology and subcanopy, shrub and herb layers. And
environmental gradients (such as grad- within the channel itself, riffles, pools,
ual changes in soil wetness, solar radia- glides, rapids and backwaters all pro-
tion, and precipitation) can cause vide different habitat conditions in
changes in plant and animal communi- both the water column and the
ties. More species generally find suitable streambed. These examples, all de-
habitat conditions in a wide, contigu- scribed in terms of physical structure,
ous, and diverse assortment of native illustrate once again the strong linkage
plant communities within the stream between structure and habitat function.
corridor than in a narrow, homoge-
neous or highly fragmented corridor. Conduit Function
When applied strictly to stream chan-
nels, however, this might not be true.
Some narrow and deeply incised
streams, for example, provide thermal
conditions that are critical for endan-
gered salmonids.
Habitat conditions within a corridor
vary according to factors such as climate The conduit function is the ability to
and microclimate, elevation, topogra- serve as a flow pathway for energy, ma-
phy, soils, hydrology, vegetation, and terials, and organisms. A stream corri-
human uses. In terms of planning dor is above all a conduit that was
restoration measures, corridor width is formed by and for collecting and trans-
especially important for wildlife. When porting water and sediment. In addi-
planning for maintenance of a given tion, many other types of materials and
wildlife species, for example, the dimen- biota move throughout the system.
sion and shape of the corridor must be
wide enough to include enough suit- The stream corridor can function as a
able habitat that this species can popu- conduit laterally, as well as longitudi-
late the stream corridor. Corridors that nally, with movement by organisms and
are too narrow may provide as much of materials in any number of directions.
a barrier to some species' movement as Materials or animals may further move
would a complete gap in the corridor. across the stream corridor, from one
side to another. Birds or small mam-
On local scales, large woody debris that mals, for example, may cross a stream
becomes lodged in the stream channel
with a closed canopy by moving
can create morphological changes to through its vegetation. Organic debris
the stream and adjacent streambanks. and nutrients may fall from higher to
wide
vegetative
buffer
Figure 2.40: The width of the vegetation buffer influences filter and barrier functions.
Dissolved substances, such as nitrogen, phosphorus, and other nutrients, entering a vegetated
stream corridor are restricted from entering the channel by friction, root absorption, clay, and
soil organic matter.
Adapted from Ecology of Greenways: Design and Function of linear Conservation Areas.
Edited by Smith and Hellmund. ©University of Minnesota Press 1993.
gullying, and the free flow of sediments the conditions of the corridor may ger-
and nutrients into the stream . minate and establish a population. The
Edges at the boundaries of stream corri- lobes have acted as a selective filter col-
dors begin the process of filtering. lecting some seeds at the edge and al-
Abrupt edges concentrate initial filter- lowing other species to interact at the
ing functions into a narrow area. A boundary (Forman 1995).
gradual edge increases filtering and
spreads it across a wider ecological
gradient (Figure 2.41).
Movement parallel to the corridor is
affected by coves and lobes of an un-
even corridor's edge. These act as barri-
ers or filters for materials flowing into
the corridor. Individual plants may
selectively capture materials such as
wind-borne sediment, carbon, or pro-
pagules as they pass through a convo- Figure 2.41: Edges can be (a) abrupt or
1uted edge. Herbivores traveling along (b) gradual. Abrupt edges, usually caused
by disturbances, tend to discourage movement
a boundary edge, for example, may stop
between ecosystems and promote movement
to rest and selectively feed in a shel- along the boundary. Gradual edges usually
tered nook The wind blows a few seeds occur in natural settings, are more diverse,
into the corridor, and those suited to and encourage movement between ecosystems.
Natural Disturbances 3- 3
Ecosystem Resilience in Eastern
Upland Forests
Eastern upland forest systems, dominated by Resilience of the Eastern Upland Forest can be dis-
stands of beech/maple, have adapted to many rupted, however, by widespread effects such as
types of natural disturbances by evolving attributes acid rain and indiscriminate logging and associated
such as high biomass and deep, established root road building. These and other disturbances have
systems (Figure 3.4). Consequently, they are rela- the potential to severely alter lighting conditions,
tively unperturbed by drought or other natural dis- soil moisture, soil nutrients, soil temperature,
turbances that occur at regular intervals. Even and other factors critical for persistence of the
when unexpected severe stress such as fire or beech/maple forest. Recovery of an eastern
insect damage occurs, the impact is usually only "climax" system after a widespread disturbance
on a local scale and therefore insignificant in the might take more than 150 years.
persistence of the community as a whole.
Figure 3.4: Eastern upland forest system. The beech/maple-dominated system is resistent to many natural forms of
stress due to high biomass; deep, established root systems; and other adaptations.
Common Disturbances
Dams, channelization, and the intro-
duction of exotic species represent
forms of disturbance found in many
if not all of the land uses discussed
later in this chapter. Therefore, they
are presented as separate discussions
in advance of more specific land use
activities that potentially introduce
disturbance. Many societal benefits are
derived from these land use changes.
This document, however, focuses on Figure 3.7: An impoundment dam. Dams range
their potential for disturbance and sub- widely in size and purp~se, and in their effects
sequent restoration of stream corridors. on stream corridors.
Dams
communities, and habitat or can aug-
Ranging from small temporary struc- ment flows, which also results in alter-
tures constructed of stream sediment to ations to the stream corridor.
huge multipurpose structures, dams
Dams affect resident and migratory
can have profound and varying impacts
organisms in stream channels. The
on stream corridors (Figure 3.7). The
disruption of flow blocks or slows the
extent and impact largely depend on
passage and migration of aquatic or-
the purposes of the dam and its size in
ganisms, which in turn affects food
relation to stream flow.
chains associated with stream corridor
Changes in discharges from dams can functions (Figure 3.8). Without high
cause downstream effects. Hydropower flows, silt is not washed from the gravel
dam discharges may vary widely on a beds on which many aquatic species
hourly and daily basis in response to rely for spawning. Upstream fish move-
peaking power needs and affect the ment may be blocked by relatively
downstream morphology. The rate of small structures. Downstream move-
change in the discharge can be a signif- ment may be slowed or stopped by the
icant factor increasing streambank ero- dam or its reservoir. As a stream current
sion and subsequent loss of riparian dissipates in a reservoir, smolts of
habitat. Dams release water that differs anadromous fish may lose a sense of
from that received. Flowing streams can downstream direction or might be sub-
slow and change into slack water pools, ject to more predation, altered water
sometimes becoming lacustrine envi- chemistry, and other effects.
ronments. A water supply dam can de-
Dams also affect species by altering
crease instream flows, which alters the
water quality. Relatively constant flows
stream corridor morphology, plant
can create constant temperatures,
Human-Induced Disturbances 3- 7
which affect those species dependent streambed and banks may occur until
on temperature variations for reproduc- the equilibrium bed load is reestab-
tion or maturation. In places where ir- lished. Scouring lowers the streambed
rigation water is stored, unnaturally and erodes streambanks and riparian
low flows can occur and warm more zones, vital habitat for many species.
easily and hold less oxygen, which can Without new sources of sediment,
cause stress or death in aquatic organ- sandbars alongside and within streams
isms. Likewise, large storage pools keep are eventually lost, along with the
water cool, and released water can re- habitats and species they support.
sult in significantly cooler temperatures Additionally, as the stream channel
downstream to which native fish might becomes incised, the water table under-
not be adapted. lying the riparian zone also lowers.
Dams also disrupt the flow of sediment Thus, channel incision can lead to ad-
and organic materials (Ward and verse changes in the composition of
Standford 1979). This is particularly vegetative communities within the
evident with the largest dams, whereas stream corridor.
dams which are typically low in eleva- Conversely, when dams are constructed
tion and have small pools modify nat- and operated to reduce flood damages,
ural flood and transport cycles only the lack of large flood events can result
slightly. As stream flow slackens, the in channel aggradation and the narrow-
load of suspended sediment decreases ing and infilling of secondary channels
and sediment drops out of the stream (Collier et al. 1996).
to the reservoir bottom. Organic mater-
ial suspended in the sediment, which Channelization and Diversions
provides vital nutrients for downstream Like dams, channelization and diver-
food webs, also drops out and is lost to sions cause changes to stream corri-
the stream ecosystem. dors. Stream channelization and
When suspended sediment load is de- diversions can disrupt riffle and pool
creased, scouring of the downstream complexes needed at different times in
the life cycle of certain aquatic organ-
isms. The flood conveyance benefits of
channelization and diversions are often
offset by ecological losses resulting
from increased stream velocities and re-
duced habitat diversity. Instream modi-
fications such as uniform cross section
and armoring result in less habitat for
organisms living in or on stream sedi-
ments (Figure 3.10). Habitat is also
lost when large woody debris, which
frequently supports a high density of
aquatic macroinvertebrates, is removed
(Bisson et al. 1987, Sweeney 1992).
The impacts of diversions on the
stream corridor depend on the timing
Figure 3.8: Biological effects of dams. Dams and amount of water diverted, as well
can prevent the migration of anadromous fish as the location, design, and operation
and other aquatic organisms.
Human-Induced Disturbances 3- 9
of the diversion structure or its pumps the natural functions of the floodplain,
(Figure 3.11 ). The effects of diversions including temporary flood storage.
on stream flows are similar to those ad- Levees juxtaposed to streams tend to
dressed for darns. The effects of levees replace riparian vegetation. The loss or
depend on siting considerations, de- diminishrnent of the tree overstory and
sign, and maintenance practices. other riparian vegetation results in the
Flood damage
reduction mea- Earthen diversion channels leak, and changes in shading, temperature, and
sures encom- the water lost for irrigation may create nutrients discussed earlier.
pass a wide wetlands. Leakage may support a vege-
variety of tative corridor approaching that of a Introduction of Exotic Species
strategies, simple riparian community, or it can Stream corridors naturally evolve in an
some of which facilitate spread of exotic species, such environment of fluctuating flows and
might not be as tarnarisk (Tamarisk chinensis). Diver- seasonal rhythms. Native species
compatible sions can also trap fish, resulting in di-
with goals of adapted to such conditions might not
minished spawning, lowered health of survive without them. For stream corri-
stream corridor
species, and death of fish. dors that have naturally evolved in an
restoration.
Flood damage reduction measures en- environment of spring floods and low
compass a wide variety of strategies, winter and summer flows, the diminu-
some of which might not be compati- tion of such patterns can result in the
ble with goals of stream corridor creation of a new succession of plants
restoration. Floodwalls and levees can and animals and the decline of native
increase the velocity of the stream and species. In the West, nonnative species
elevate flood heights by constraining like tamarisk can invade altered stream
high flows of the river to a narrow corridors and result in creation of a
band. When floodwalls are set farther habitat with lower stability. The native
back from streams, they can define the fauna might not secure the same sur-
stream corridor and for some or all of vival benefits from this altered condi-
tion because they did not evolve with
tamarisk and are not adapted to using it.
The introduction of exotic species,
whether intentional or not, can cause
disruptions such as predation, hy-
bridization, and the introduction of
diseases. Nonnative species compete
with native species for moisture, nutri-
ents, sunlight, and space and can ad-
versely influence establishment rates
for new plantings, foods, and habitat.
In some cases, exotic plant species can
even detract from the recreational value
of streams by creating a dense, impene-
trable thicket along the strearnbank.
Well-known examples of the effects of
exotic species introduction include the
Figure 3. 10: Stream channelization. Jnstream planned introduction of kudzu and the
modifications, such as uniform cross section inadvertent introduction of the zebra
and armoring, result in ecological decline. mussel. Both species have imposed
Human-Induced Disturbances 3- 11
Salt Cedar Control at Bosque del
Apache National Wildlife Refuge,
New Mexico
burn indicated the herbicide might not have had
T he exotic salt cedar (Tamarix chinensis) has
become the predominant woody species
along many of the stream corridors in the
time to kill the plant prior to the burning.
Mechanical control using heavy equipment was
Southwest. The wide distribution of this species another option. Root plowing and raking have
can be attributed to its ability to tolerate a wide long been used as a technique for salt cedar con-
range of environmental factors and its adaptabili- trol. A plow is pulled by a bulldozer; severing salt
ty to new stream conditions accelerated by cedar root crowns from the remaining root mass
human activities (e.g., summer flooding or no about 12 to 18 inches below the ground surface,
flooding, reduced or altered water tables, high followed by root raking, which pulls the root
salinity from agricultural tail water; and high levels crowns from the ground for later stacking.
of sediment downstream from grazed water-
sheds). Salt cedar is particularly abundant on reg-
ulated rivers. Its ability to rapidly dominate ripari-
an habitat results in exclusion of cottonwood, wil-
low, and many other native riparian species.
Salt cedar control is an integral part of riparian
restoration and enhancement at Bosque de/
Apache National Wildlife Refuge on the Rio
Grande in central New Mexico. Diverse mosaics
of native cottonwood/black willow (Populus fre-
montii/Salix nigra) forests, screw bean mesquite
(Prosobis pubescens) brush/ands, and saltgrass
(Distichlis sp.) meadows have been affected by
this invasive exotic. The degree of infestation
(b)
varies widely throughout the refuge, ranging
from isolated plants to extensive monocu/tures
totaling thousands of acres. For the past 10
years, the refuge has experimented with me-
chanical and herbicide programs for feasible
control of salt cedar.
The refuge has experimented with several tech-
niques in controlling large salt cedar monocul-
tures prior to native plant establishment.
Herbicide/broadcast burn and mechanical tech-
niques have been employed on three 150-acre
units on the refuge (Figure 3.13). Initially, the
strategy for control was aerial application of a Figure 3.13: Salt cedar site (a) before and (b) after
low-toxicity herbicide, at 2 quarts/acre in the late treatment. Combinations of burning, chemical treat-
summer; followed by a broadcast prescribed burn ment, and mechanical control techniques can be used
a year later. This control method appeared effec- to control salt cedar, giving native vegetation an
opportunity to colonize and establish.
tive; however; extensive resprouting following the
x
x
. .
x
x
. ..
x
.. :
x
..
88%
90%
30 x x x 99%
like a root plow For areas of less than 1 acre,
H uman-lnduced Disturbances 3- 13
Land Use Activities Vegetative Clearing
One of the most obvious disturbances
Agriculture
from agriculture involves the removal
According to the 1992 Natural Re- of native, riparian, and upland vegeta-
sources Inventory (USDA-NRCS 1992), tion. Producers often crop as much
cultivated and noncultivated cropland productive land as possible to enhance
make up approximately 382 million economic returns; therefore, vegetation
acres of the roughly 1.9 billion acres is sacrificed to increase arable acres.
existing in the contiguous United As the composition and distribution of
States, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the vegetation are altered, the interactions
U.S. Virgin Islands (excludes Alaska). between structure and function become
The conversion of undisturbed land to fragmented. Vegetative removal from
agricultural production has often dis- streambanks, floodplains, and uplands
rupted the previously existing state of often conflicts with the hydrologic and
dynamic equilibrium. Introduced at the geomorphic functions of stream corri-
landscape, watershed, stream corridor, dors. These disturbances can result in
stream, and reach scales, agricultural sheet and rill as well as gully erosion,
activities have generally resulted in en- reduced infiltration, increased upland
croachment on stream corridors with surface runoff and transport of contam-
significant changes to the structure and inants, increased streambank erosion,
mix of functions usually found in sta- unstable stream channels, and im-
ble systems (Figure 3.14). paired habitat.
lnstream Modifications
Flood-control structures and channel
modifications implemented to protect
agricultural systems further disrupt the
geomorphic and hydrologic characteris-
tics of stream corridors and associated
uplands. For agricultural purposes,
streams are often straightened or
moved to "square-up" fields for more
efficient production and reconstructed
to a new profile and geometric cross
section to accommodate increased
runoff. Stream corridors are also often
modified to enhance conditions for
single purposes such as fish habitat, or
to manage conditions such as localized
streambank erosion. Some of the po-
tential effects caused by these changes
are impaired upland or floodplain sur-
face and subsurface flow; increased
Figure 3. 14: Agriculture fragments natural
ecosystems. Cultivated and noncultivated crop-
water temperature, turbidity, and pH;
land make up approximately 382 million acres incised channels; lower ground water
of the roughly 1.9 billion acres existing in the elevations; streambank failure; and loss
contiguous United States, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, of habitat for aquatic and terrestrial
and the U.S. Virgin Islands (excludes Alaska). speoes.
Human-Induced Disturbances 3- 15
Soil salinity is a naturally occurring Forestry
phenomenon found most often in
floodplains and other low-lying areas Three general activities associated with
of wet soils, lakes, or shallow water ta- forestry operations can affect stream
bles. Dissolved salts in surface and corridors-tree removal, activities nec-
ground water entering these areas be- essary to transport the harvested tim-
come concentrated in the shallow ber, and preparation of the harvest site
ground water and the soils as evapo- for regeneration.
transpiration removes water. Agricul- Removal of Trees
tural activities in such landscapes can Forest thinning includes the removal of
increase the rate of soil salinization by either mature trees or immature trees
changing vegetation patterns or by ap- to provide more growth capability for
plying irrigation water without ade- the remaining trees. Final harvest re-
quate drainage. In the arid and moves mature trees, either singularly or
semiarid areas of the West, irrigation in groups. Both activities reduce vegeta-
can import salts into a drainage basin. tive cover.
Since crops do not use up the salts,
they accumulate in the soil. Salinity Tree removal decreases the quantity of
levels greater than 4 millimhos/cm can nutrients in the watershed since ap-
alter soil structure, promote waterlog- proximately one-half of the nutrients
ging, cause salt toxicity in plants, and in trees are in the trunks. Instream nu-
decrease the ability of plants to take up trient levels can increase if large limbs
water. fall into streams during harvesting and
decompose. Conversely, when tree
cover is removed, there is a short-term
increase in nutrient release followed by
long-term reduction in nutrient levels.
Drainage and Streambank Erosion
Removal of trees can affect the quality,
Many wetlands have been drained to increase the acres
quantity, and timing of stream flows
of arable land. The drainage area of the Blue Earth River
for the same reasons that vegetative
in the glaciated areas of west-central Minnesota, for
clearing for agriculture does. If trees are
example, has almost doubled due to extensive tile
removed from a large portion of a wa-
drainage of depressional areas that formerly stored sur-
tershed, flow quantity can increase ac-
face runoff. Studies to identify sources of sediment in
cordingly. The overall effect depends
this watershed have been made, and as a result, farmers
on the quantity of trees removed and
ha~e complied with reduced tillage and increased crop
their proximity to the stream corridor
residue recommendations to help decrease the suspend-
(Figure 3.16). Increases in flood peaks
ed sediment load in the river. Testing, however, indicates
can occur if vegetation in the area clos-
the sediment problem has not been solved. Some indi-
est to the stream is removed. Long-term
viduals have suggested that streambank erosion, not
loss of riparian vegetation can result in
erosion on agricultural lands, might be the source of the
bank erosion and channel widening,
sediment. Streambank erosion is more likely to be the
increasing the width/depth ratio (Hart-
result of drainage and subsequent changes to runoff
man et al. 1987, Oliver and Hinckley
patterns in the watershed.
1987, Shields et al. 1994). Water tem-
perature can increase during summer
and decrease in winter by removal of
shade trees in riparian areas. Allowing
large limbs to fall into a stream and di-
Human-Induced Disturbances 3- 17
sion and sedimentation. Conversely, lowing discussion, cattle grazing pro-
less disruptive mechanical means can vides the focus, although sheep, goats,
increase organic matter in the soil sur- and other less common species also
face and increase infiltration. Each can have particular effects that might
method has advantages and disadvan- be different from those discussed. It is
tages. important to note that the effects dis-
Direct harm can occur to wildlife by cussed result from poorly managed
mechanical means or fire. Loss of habi- grazing systems.
tat can occur if site preparation physi- The primary impacts that result from
cally removes most competing grazing of domestic livestock are the
vegetation. Loss of diversity can result loss of vegetative cover due to its con-
from efforts to strongly limit competi- sumption or trampling and streambank
tion with desired timber species. Care- erosion from the presence of livestock
less use of mechanical equipment can (Table 3.2).
directly damage streambanks and cause
Loss of Vegetative Cover
erosion.
Reduced vegetative cover can increase
Domestic Livestock Grazing soil compaction and decrease the depth
of and productivity of topsoil. Reduced
Grazing of domestic livestock, primar-
cover of mid-story and overstory plants
ily cattle and sheep, is commonplace
decreases shade and increases water
across the nation. Stream corridors are
temperatures, although this effect di-
particularly attractive to livestock for minishes as stream width increases.
many reasons. They are generally
Sediment from upland or streambank
highly productive, providing ample for-
erosion can reduce water quality
age. Water is close at hand, shade is
through increases in turbidity and at-
available to cool the area, and slopes
tached chemicals. Where animal con-
are gentle, generally less than 35 per-
centrations are large, fecal material can
cent in most areas. Unless carefully
increase nutrient loads above standards
managed, livestock can overuse these
and introduce bacteria and pathogens,
areas and cause significant disturbance
although this is uncommon. Dissolved
(Figure 3.17). For purposes of the fol-
oxygen reductions can result from high
temperature and nutrient-rich waters.
Extensive loss of ground cover in the
watershed and stream corridor can de-
crease infiltration and increase runoff,
leading to higher flood peaks and addi-
tional runoff volume. Where reduced
cover increases overland flow and pre-
vents infiltration, additional water may
flow more rapidly into stream channels
so that flow peaks come earlier rather
than later in the runoff cycle, produc-
ing a more "flashy" stream system. Re-
ductions in baseflow and increases in
Figure 3.17: livestock in stream. Use of stream stormflow can result in a formerly
corridors by domestic livestock can result in perennial stream becoming intermit-
extensive physical disturbance and bacteriolog- tent or ephemeral.
ical contamination.
Human-Induced Disturbances 3- 19
stream corridors. Surface mining meth- Vegetative Clearing
ods include strip mining, open-pit op- Mining can often remove large areas of
erations, dredging, placer mining, and vegetation at the mine site, transporta-
hydraulic mining. Although several of tion facilities, processing plant, tailings
these methods are no longer com- piles, and related activities. Reduced
monly practiced today, many streams shade can increase water temperatures
throughout the United States remain in enough to harm aquatic species.
a degraded condition as a result of
mining activities that, in some cases, Loss of cover vegetation, poor-quality
occurred more than a century ago. water, changes in food availability, dis-
Such mining activity frequently re- ruption of migration patterns, and sim-
sulted in total destruction of the stream ilar difficulties can have serious effects
corridor. In some cases today, mining on terrestrial wildlife. Species composi-
operations still disturb most or all of tion may change significantly with a
entire watersheds. shift to more tolerant species. Numbers
will likely drop as well. Mining holds
few positive benefits for most wildlife
species.
Soil Disturbance
Transportation, staging, loading, pro-
cessing, and similar activities cause ex-
tensive changes to soils including loss
of topsoils and soil compaction. Direct
displacement for construction of facili-
ties reduces the number of productive
soil acres in the watershed. Covering of
soil by materials such as tailings piles
further reduces the acreage of produc-
tive soils. These activities decrease infil-
tration, increase runoff, accelerate
erosion, and increase sedimentation.
Altered Hydrology
Changes to hydrologic conditions due
to mining activity are extensive. Surface
mining is, perhaps, the only land use
with a greater capacity to change the
hydrologic regime of a stream than ur-
banization. Increased runoff and de-
creased surface roughness will cause
peaks earlier in the hydrograph with
steeper rising and falling limbs. Once-
perennial streams may become inter-
mittent or eph emeral as baseflow
decreases.
Changes in the quantity of water leav-
Figure 3.18: Results of surface mining. Many
ing a watershed are directly propor-
streams remain in a degraded condition as a
result of mining activities.
tional to the amount of impervious
Human-Induced Disturbances 3- 21
far more damage to vegetation and
trails than do pedestrians.
YOU can make a difference!
\:
.:7- Urbanization
:
,. ~-"-~·'f'
I •
l" Urbanization in watersheds poses spe-
.f"
i L /
v' cial challenges to the stream restoration
. •' practitioner. Recent research has shown
Please help us restore that streams in urban watersheds have
South Boulder Creek!
' a character fundamentally different
REMAIN ON THE
from that of streams in forested, rural,
DESIGNATED TRAIL
or even agricultural watersheds. The
Using small paths and creating
new trails causes unnecessary amount of impervious cover in the wa-
impacts to the sensitive plants tershed can be used as an indicator to
and animals of the area.
predict how severe these differences
can be. In many regions of the country,
as little as 10 percent watershed imper-
vious cover has been linked to stream
Figure 3. 19: Trail sign. Recreational hiking can
degradation, with the degradation be-
cause soil compaction and increased surface coming more severe as impervious
runoff. cover increases (Schueler 1995).
Impervious cover directly influences
3.20). Propeller wash and water dis- urban streams by dramatically increas-
placement can disrupt and resuspend ing surface runoff during storm events
bottom sediments, increase bank ero- (Figure 3.21). Depending on the de-
sion, and disorient or injure sensitive gree of watershed impervious cover, the
aquatic species. In addition, waste dis-
charges or accidental spills from boats
or loading facilities can contribute pol-
lutants to the system (NRC 1992).
Both concentrated and dispersed recre-
ational use of stream corridors can
cause disturbance and ecological
change. Camping, hunting, fishing,
boating, and other forms of recreation
can cause serious disturbances to bird
colonies. Ecological damage primarily
results from the need for access for the
recreational user. A pool in the stream
might be the attraction for a swimmer
or fisherman, whereas a low stream-
bank might provide an access point for
boaters. In either case, a trail often de-
velops along the shortest or easiest
route to the point of access on the
stream. Additional impact may be a
function of the mode of access to the Figure 3.20: Recreational boating. Propeller
stream: motorcycles and horses cause wash and accidental spills can degrade stream
conditions.
Figure 3.21: Relationship between impervious cover and surface runoff. Impervious
cover in a w atersh ed results in increased surface runoff. As lit tle as 10 percent impervi-
ous cover in a watershed can result in stream degradation.
Human-Induced Disturbances 3- 23
intervals (Hollis 1975, Macrae 1996, tion of sanitary sewers underneath or
Booth and Jackson 1997). parallel to the stream channel.
Since impervious cover prevents rain- The wetted perimeter of a stream is th e
fall from infiltrating into the soil, less proportion of the total cross-sectional
flow is available to recharge ground area of the channel that is covered by
water. Consequently, during extended flowing water during dry-weather peri-
periods without rainfall, baseflow lev- ods. It is an important indicator of
els are often reduced in urban streams habitat degradation in urban streams.
(Simmons and Reynolds 1982). Given that urban streams develop a
larger channel cross section at the same
Altered Channels
time that their baseflow rates decline,
The hydrologic regime that had defined it necessarily fo llows that the wetted
the geometry of the predevelopment perimeter will become smaller. Thus,
stream channel irreversibly changes to- for many urban streams, this results in
ward higher flow rates on a more fre- a very shallow, low-flow channel that
quent basis. The higher flow events of wanders across a very wide streambed,
urban streams are capable of perform- often changing its lateral position in
ing more "effective work" in moving response to storms.
sediment than they had done before
(Wolman 1964). Sedimentation and Contaminants
Human-Induced Disturbances 3- 25
density (Schueler 1995, Shaver et al.
1995, Couch 1997, May et al. 1997).
The ability to restore predevelopment
fish assemblages or aquatic diversity is
constrained by a host of factors-irre-
versible changes in carbon supply, tem-
perature, hydrology, lack of instream
habitat structure, and barriers that limit
natural recolonization.
Potential Effects
Homogenization of landscape elements
• Activity has potential for direct impact. • Activity has potentia l for indirect impact.
Human-Induced Disturbances 3- 27
Table 3.3: Potential effects of major Disturbance Act1v1t1es
land use activities (continued)
Potential Effects
• Activity has potential for direct impact . Activity has potential for indirect impact.
we// conceived and developed stream of the restoration effort by achieving sev-
A corridor restoration plan is critical to
any restoration effort. The restoration plan
eral key functions.
high bias
+ high precision
• low accuracy
-3·~elting
Organized
aoEI ldentif¥ing
Problems and
Op~or:tu n iti es
Getting
Organized and
Identifying
Problems and
Opportunities
4.A Getting Organized
4.B Problem and Opportunity
Identification
This section presents the key compo- of drinking water is usually more of a
nents of organizing and initiating the basin-specific or local-scale issue.
development of a stream corridor
In setting boundaries, two other factors
restoration plan and establishing a
are equally as important. One is the na-
planning and management framework
ture of human-induced disturbance, in-
to facilitate communication among all
cluding the magnitude of its impact on
involved and interested parties. Ensur-
stream corridors. The other factor is the
ing the involvement of all partners and
social organization of people, including
beginning to secure their commitment
where opportunities for action are dis-
to the project is a central aspect of
tributed across the landscape.
"getting organized" and undertaking a
restoration initiative. (See Chapter 6 for The challenge of establishing useful
detailed information on securing com- boundaries is met by conceptually su-
mitments.) It is often helpful to identify perimposing the three selection factors. Review Chap-
a common motivation for taking action One effective way of starting this ter 1. Preview
and also to develop a rough outline of process is through the identification, by Chapter S's
restoration goals. In addition, defining public forum or other free and open Identifying
the scale of the corridor restoration ini- means, of a stream reach or aquatic re- Scale Consider-
tiative is important. Often the issues to source area that is particularly valued by ations.
be addressed require that restoration be the community. The scoping process
considered on a watershed or whole- would continue by having resource
reach basis, rather than by an individ- managers or landowners define the geo-
ual jurisdiction or one or two graphical area that contributes to both
landholders. the function and condition of the val-
ued site or sites. Those boundaries
Setting Boundaries
Geographical boundaries provide a spa-
tial context for technical assessment
and a sense of place for organizing
community-based involvement. An es-
Core Components of Getting Organized
tablished set of project boundaries
streamlines the process of gathering, or- • Setting boundaries
ganizing, and depicting information for • Forming an advisory group
decision making. • Establishing technical teams
When boundaries are selected, the area • Identifying funding sources
should reflect relevant ecological • Establishing points of contact and a decision structure
processes. The boundaries may also re- • Facilitating involvement and information sharing among
flect the various scales at which ecologi- participants
cal processes influence stream corridors
(see Chapter 5, Identifying Scale Consid- • Documenting the process
erations). For example, matters affecting
the conservation of biodiversity tend to
play out at broader, more regional
scales. On the other hand, the quality
Figure 4.2: Lower Missouri River. Water released from dams is causing downstream erosion.
Advisory Group
Provides consensus-based Technical Team
recommendations to the Analyzing economic
decision maker based upon issues and concerns
Technical Team information from the relevant to the stream
Analyzing condition technical teams and input corridor restoration
of stream corridor from all participants. initiative.
structure and
functions.
Figure 4.4: Flow of communication. Restoration plan development requires a decision structure
that streamlines communication between the decision maker, the advisory group, and the various
technical teams.
viduals will have some personal interest increasing buffer widths between agri-
in the condition of the stream corridor cultural fields and drainage channels).
and associated ecosystems in their re- Thus, it is in the best interest of the
gion. A failure to provide them the op- restoration initiative to include these
portunity to review and comment on persons as decision makers.
stream corridor restoration plans will A variety of public outreach tools can
often result in objections later in the be useful in soliciting input from partic-
process. ipants. Some of the most common
Private landowners, in particular, often mechanisms include public meetings,
have the greatest personal stake in the workshops, and surveys. Tools for Facili-
restoration work. As part of the restora- tating Participant Involvement and Infor-
tion effort it might be necessary for pri- mation Sharing During the Restoration
vate landowners to place some of their Process, provides a more complete list of
assets at increased risk, make them potential outreach options.
more available for public use, or reduce
the economic return they provide (e.g.,
restricting grazing in riparian areas or
Although a variety of outreach tools can Some additional factors that should be
be used to inform participants and so- taken into account in selecting outreach
licit input, attention should be paid to tools include the following:
selecting the best tool at the most ap- • Strengths and weaknesses of individ-
Preview
propriate time. In making this selection, ual techniques. Chapter G's
it is helpful to consider the stage of the
• Cost, time, and personnel required Developing a
restoration process as well as the out- Monitoring
for implementation.
reach objectives. Plan.
• Receptivity of the community.
For example, if a restoration initiative is
in the early planning stages, providing Again, no matter what tools are se-
community members with background lected, it is important to make an effort
information through a newsletter or to solicit input from participants as well
news release might be effective in bring- as to keep all interested parties in-
ing interested parties to the table and in formed of plan developments. The In-
generating support for the initiative teragency Ecosystem Management Task
(Figures 4.5 and 4.6). Conversely, once Force (1995) provides the following
the planning process is well under way suggestion for a combination of tech-
and restoration alternatives are being niques that can be used to facilitate par-
selected, a public hearing may be a use- ticipant involvement and information
sharing:
• Regular newsletters or information
sheets apprising people of plans and
CBF • NEWS T/1< i'u it 1:,/ett< 1 of rite C hn oprnl.<' H.n Fow1darw11
progress.
• Regularly scheduled meetings of
November 1993
-11fall<(-W1."
11.,.._r'-• · Db/llltc~<dilllriU
Sei*mbcr:U,1!193
• Field trips and workdays on project
sites for volunteers and interested
~
·~betZll,bewinr:. thtV!rpni.IM&rinoltaowus
~m-.lanopponuNcyiocon1tTVCoy1tt:s.
Sd!kd~on1compromiK. ln opl:.C11"J'Olllsd
en1i6caDdpubtk.-ppon,thtc:onomluiorirrjeatdiuown#atrs
~1ocbe lhl publlc!Uht:yfornufl<l1..m.edoy•
parties.
lenin f-oldlhll:lmdhwvutrmrictiail$.
lnCBF'1vi&*,1prCIJll*i111ciioleafllllt:r)'ll1luliuon.
F....... ~invotvel~of-i&luod_.
-.ic11~-~~ How.:w:r, lf1fitJlpQplll~
lfto~Nllseaism1ce l11luHlened. lllc10CIHoocxmk:
In addition, the innovative communica-
bcMks..;utot-e111frel1 i f W . d c - .... rm1tlkm.
For-,.e1n.CBl'111&1pupo1ed ~ofO..filhcrylnd1111
~ptt1111...,,IOl'f:b<iild oy11<Thabl!a1u!hollftSf-ylO
tion possibilities afforded by the Inter-
briQlllt>oul.--Y· Thi:~bdfn!Nmnl)b.
1'111fMroctli•~vamtd"71Cal'~~1<>dtt
""""'"""~of//M..,.Ja... _,.,,.,..mnrd!ci.....
siomlrioda~ lhe m..t?ybylclm,lhcpablkltcd
lishery,lllelNsMlc. IDdlhcpiv11efilhetyOfltl\.~
Olf'~~propcalbecaueh..id=-llhi!~
net and the World Wide Web cannot be
•«OiJJ&t!"fa...,,;k~.....,,.
C
~Bay*-ir.ICdlu~ruililncillhll
~wldl a...c:ud1po.-.ollllripali...(Judfl1h).Thit
......i~-.jlMrilo~ln ""-Yl.Wld a:td
repiamdill.ollm-)haslkdin«lby•1lnillitr ... llwiqlbe
pcriad.~Ullkdoolbl !Nl ft-ieectnbeir.aproduced
bec.-lhtft ... f•WU..tllitalO!p........
Documenting the Process
Viilillla,Mldcd ",....,,....,lhe..,........_Dfl9.6 oncl ll.I SKCIDd.doei~1f'fea\lroQ!j~Yes. TrddaolanJ.
nspa:li"Cly, the ~--lnlbo:llilacryolbolli~ Tblbiu lheJ_Rl_WM&h<dpdmllilyf«letdO)'I~ k11916,
iltt.--.nomb:rolro-JIOdr:filhcau.P1pcr Mul ofa 100.
IOCll~nel. TblpR-.i.oaa:lddn-)0..<linMuylll'ld, !Mm
..tlmod>cr-~clepleled. ~lkdedlOlhe'
-be ... '-"ttlinl-..bll-ibedoysll:rl. Aft.erun:.-lhc The final element of getting organized
ln 1970andlU . . . . lal9rlillVirJ:laia. TblAn'~)'I. llnl)af, itoehorvdtdecineol.....wyio1n.i11iiM1cw11111rew.
lltll.podfoool'OCtfuh.obolOOl<q,ii~nmbmolV!h<r
.,...adwrp1M1llllhe~y'11nllubrieL Stt • od.llollJMtt l
~Jbldbl!&¥C~thlllll<lkdine ia~IMllbcn
i.aw..pi.:iepMwi!y~flilluct S«o,,c..., ,,..rr, involves the documentation of the vari-
ous activities being undertaken as part
of the stream corridor restoration effort.
Figure 4.5: Chesapeake Bay Foundation
Although the restoration plan, when
newsletter. Newsletters can be an effective completed, will ultimately document
way to communicate the status of restoration the results of the restoration process, it
efforts to the community.
FOR IMMElllATF. R~;l,EASE Jhis lmpoflWll progr11111 is a volulll&I)'. iotmtiYC~ program design..t IO assiSI An effective way to identify important
March J0, 19'Jll l2ndowners in ta.ldng enYironme11t&!Jy scnlitive land QUI o( agricultural produc1i<lrl. •
PEORIA. ILL .• Gov. Jim Edgar today ~igned an agtecrMfM with the U. S.
and impovin1 !he Illinois River waMnhed. whldl eo.uairu nurly llalf o( !he
~1;ricultunl land in the Slllt. hu. been a priority for lho f.d&ar .dminiwahon. "Abocu
as keep track of those activities is
lullf of lbecommerdal 1rdfrcon Ille MM$1a!ppi River abo>'C St. Louis uacr the
~p"'111Xnt uf A&ricHll\lre on • ~S9 mil hon inltialive tu rr..o;IOf'e and JlfCJCIVC the
lllmoiJ Rivcrwaler..t.ed, lndudingmea.1ufC!l lon:duce 101lf1\IJioir1nd
scdin1e11111tioo. improve \llalerquahly, ~nd enluncr wildlife hllbll•I.
lllino~ Ri¥CO""." Edi"" !o&id. "Wo m11,11keep!Nil 1ra1T11;: n owing • we improve the
cnviromncnl ol the w11enhcd and intreuc: rcau1ionaJ~i1ieson lhc r!wr.
through the use of a "restoration
This l11l1Wivc tiecognizes lhat we 111! have a part 10 play in u.vmc lhi• riV'el" for rurul'!:
"Re,1orfog llllll pmtl!((il!g thc lllinou River Basm ·~of uom1t1W1 environmenial Md
ocooomic impon•lllX Ill the ~•ate ~nJ the n:uioo." 1hc Governor said. '"This unique
IJCl"lelation>."
checklist" (National Research Council,
panncrship involv« Ille YCl\untary putic1p.:Won of ifldividwil !1ndowneri and targec~ In 1993. Ku51,.. formt>d 1he RiverWllktl neiw Ofk of volunia:n; to moniior the: hulth
up lu 232.00011CTC~o<cnv1ronmentaJ!ysen11i1ive land."
of rivers lll'ld strums atroN the •tall:. J(~a 1ho m.abl.i~ a River Strli!Cgy Team
lwlnging dil'ffSe interuu to the 1amc table 10 discu.s& wlla1 w;q f'CCded to impr<>Ye
lhelllincris River.
1992). The checklist can be maintained
The IS·year iniliativt: ,.;u cnmbi""' rlcmcn\$ of the USDA"• Conservation Reserve
Program. whklt cru:Olll"llKe5 lam;loW11m< to W'I' bm1ing tllcir mosl erodible land.
rrovide.' incentive• tn ·~~tore wetl:tnd5 :t.11d plant trees and Rrl'~ 10 improve the A re- ago !he Strarcgy Team. wilt! tlw help of IMte dwil 100 volunre.:o: lrotn
blni""'IS... CO!lSCrv.1ion and agrlcullun::. JNbhWd Ult Jn:car-ed Mana1emnu Plan
by the advisory group or sponsor and
quali1yofwatC1" . .001tan,Jwilo:llifeh:abiu11..
for rhc: Illinois Rivu. includ!n1 J4 recommendMioN fOf Improving the w8"rshetl.
"Today\ a,.1ee1Mn\ iK a trerMndous ~w:p forw11d in oor dforts to Qvt: tile 111"\d wal"r
rcJOUrcc.<r o f ttie lllinoi~ t<iver V•llcy." >aiJ Lt Gov. Bob Ku.vra. wllo hit'; led lhe t"..tlgu abo signed legislltl.oa crul~ the Ulmois RivaCoon:linllli"I Coonc!I,
used to engage project stakeholders and
c:Qm~ of l.JeTICY heW llld privatt cltizem wbo wm monitor the prc>1n:n of the
&!gar a.dminit1ra11on·~ c«ort~ io improve th! lllinoi~ RiYc::r. ""lly pre~ung m1llu,:11u1
of ton~ 1.r v;duable t~!I from ~llin1 away. landciw""'n; who i»"icipollc in 1h1~
moovillivt: p<ogrum will help keep lhc river open foreommeii:eand m.llke hackwUl:tt
lllinoit Corutf'l11ion h Krve EnhafiurMnl Pqram n recommend otbcr wa}'I
••tegovernrMnl canhelptnhan<:ethe wlknhed..
to inform them of the progress of
ltiok.e.~ and •trearn.< vialllc forwildllfeand l'CCrc::.Mioa.•
To actii.:ve the goal °' ~ing .'ledimcnl•lioo in lhe lllinoi~ Ri11er by 20 pcn:cnt.
"The Illinois Riwa- is in a rc:~OYflY WJC," Klllln. said. "Al lhe blnll Of OOf state in
llllll. lhc w&1emicd wu a prisliu pandi51.'. But ovtt time, polluting lndu.>tries. poor
restoration efforts. The checklist can
ini:cntivl:!>1Uc lari;"let.ltnownreioftltclTI05lerodiblc land in l9cuuntiHwitll higll famting pnctices and urbaniwioa nculy dlotnl a'lcl dc5troyed th"' mighly rha.
.o nluncn1111ionraic...Ane.o;tima1ed l4m11liontorrsofliedimc11tflows1hrouglt1he
Wllt.:nlx:d an11ual\y, wnh more tMn half nf i1dCfll"'it«I in 1he Illinois River. "Even1ually. the pooplc~10 1ht rivdt aid. Today, we llllvcreunction5on
disclwge1 by hctorie1 and citie&. nAlflY rarmm follow sound cOllscrvaiion prai:tiocs,
serve as an effective guide through the
lf!heproje.c1ed 1ntalof-:ZJ2.00011ercsr.iee:nrolled1nthe 1l1innl~Conurv~1ioo
Re."'rv' Enhancement i'rvgram. the fh1ancial obligation would be nearly SA~9
.and comnwnitiea an pb1nnlng brncr. ·Ille putnenltlp ~ment ~ined today i~
MstCllic:." remaining components of restoration
millioo nver 15 yur.. i11dudmg ~361 million m USDA fund~ ind S92 million m
Pamv:o-s and h1ndowncn. ean gel mnte iRfomi.atN>n abolJt lhe prosram from local
sta1efunds.
Data Collection
Data Analysis
(a)
Figure 4.11: Condition continuum. The condition contin-
uum runs from (a) untouched by humans to (b) severely
impaired.
So urce: L. Goldman.
Determination of
Management Influence on
Stream Corridor Conditions
Once the conditions have been identi-
Figure 4.14: Residential development.
Urbanization can severely impair conditions
fied and the causes of those conditions
critical for riparian vegetation by increasing described, the key remaining question is
impervious surfaces. whether the causative factors are a func-
tion of and responsive to management.
Specific management factors that con-
between activities or events potentially
tribute to impairment might or might
disturbing the stream corridor and the
not have been identified with the causes
structure and functions defining the
of impairment previously identified.
corridor. However, there are modes by
which stream corridor activities and
structures can affect ecological condi-
tions that involve both direct and indi-
rect impacts. The box Examples of How
Activities Occurring Within the Corridor
Can Affect Structure and Functions pro-
vides some examples of the modes by
which activities can affect stream corri-
dor structure and functions.
In conducting the problem analysis, it
is important to investigate the various
Preview modes of ecological interaction at the
Chapter 7's reach and system scales. The analysis
Quantitative might need to be subjective and deduc-
Tools section. tive, in which case use of an interdisci-
plinary team is essential. In other cases,
the analysis might be enhanced by ap-
plication of available hydrologic, hy-
draulic, sedimentation, water quality, or Figure 4. 15: Riparian vegetation and structure.
habitat models. The loss of logs in a stream alters f low
hydraulics and channel structure.
Problem or Opportunity
Statements for Stream
the restoration effort but also become
Corridor Restoration
the basis for developing specific restora-
The final step in the process of prob- tion objectives. Moreover, they form
lem/ opportunity identification and the basis for determining success or
analysis is development of concise failure of the restoration initiative.
statements to drive the restoration ef- Problem/opportunity statements are
fort. Problem/opportunity statements therefore critical for design of a relevant
not only serve as a general focus for monitoring approach.
Figure 5.4: Urban stream corridor. Population The Stream Corridor Scale
growth and land use trends, such as urbaniza-
tion, should be considered when developing Each stream corridor targeted for
restoration goals and objectives. restoration is unique. A project goal of
Landscape concerns pertinent to devel- restoring multiple ecological functions
oping goals and objectives for stream might encompass the channel systems,
corridor restoration should also include the active floodplain, and possibly adja-
an assessment of land use and projected cent hill slopes or other buffer areas
development trends in the watershed. that have the potential to directly and
By making an effort to accommodate indirectly influence the stream or pro-
predictable future land use and devel- tect it from surrounding land uses
opment patterns, degradation of stream (Sedell et al. 1990). A wide corridor is
corridor conditions can be prevented or
reduced.
Biodiversity Considerations
The continuity that corridors provide
among different areas and ecosystem
types has often been cited as a major
tool for maintaining regional biodiver-
sity because it facilitates animal move-
ment (particularly for large mammals)
and prevents isolation of plant and ani-
mal populations. However, there has
been some dispute over the effective-
ness of corridors to accomplish these
objectives and over the creation of inap-
propriate corridors having adverse con-
sequences (Knopf 1986, Noss 1987, Figure 5.5: Animal population dynamics.
Simberloff and Cox 1987, Mann and Restoration plans may target species, but biodi-
versity should be the basic goal of restoration.
Plummer 1995).
fish and wildlife habitat, and others) the final configuration of the corridor
that the restoration effort is intended to should balance multiple and often con-
restore. In many cases, however, it will flicting objectives, including optimizing
not be possible to reestablish the origi- ecological structure and function and Preview Chap-
nal corridor width, and restoration will accommodating the diverse needs of ter G's Adaptive
be focused on a narrower strip of land landowners and other participants. Management
directly adjacent to the channel. sect ion.
The Reach Scale
Where narrow corridors are established
through urban or agricultural land- A reach is the fundamental unit for de-
scapes, certain functions might be re- sign and management of the stream
stored (e.g., stream shading), while corridor. In establishing goals and ob-
others might not (e.g., wildlife move- jectives, each reach must be evaluated
ment). In particular, very narrow corri- with regard to its landscape and indi-
dors, such as western riparian areas, vidual characteristics, as well as their in-
may function largely as edge habitat fluence on stream corridor function and
and will favor unique and sometimes integrity. For example, steep slopes adja-
opportunistic plant and animal cent to a channel reach must be consid-
species. In some situations, creating a ered where they contribute potentially
large amount of edge habitat m ight be significant amounts of runoff, subsur-
detrimental to species that require face flow, sediment, woody debris, or
large forested habitat or are highly vul- other inputs. Another reach might be
nerable to predation or nest parasitism particularly active with respect to chan-
and disturbances. nel migration and might warrant ex-
The corridor configuration and restora- panding the corridor relative to other
tion options depend to a large extent reaches to accommodate local stream
on the pattern of land ownership and dynamics.
use at the stream corridor scale. Corri- Identifying Restoration
dors that traverse agricultural land may Constraints and Issues
involve the interests of many individual
landowners with varying levels of com- Once participants have reached consen-
mitment to or interest in the restoration sus on the desired future condition and
initiative. examined scale considerations, atten-
tion should be given to identifying
Often, landowners will not be inclined restoration constraints and issues. This
to remove acreage from production or process is important in that it helps
alter land use practices without incen- identify limitations associated with es-
tive. In urban settings, citizen groups tablishing specific restoration goals and
may have a strong voice in the objec- objectives. Moreover, it provides the in-
tives and layout of the corridor. On formation that will be needed when in-
large public land holdings, manage- tegrating ecological, social, political,
ment agencies might be able to commit and economic values.
to the establishment and managem ent
of stream corridors and their water- Due to the innumerable potential chal-
sheds, but the incorporation of compet- lenges involved in identifying all of the
constraints and issues, it is often help-
Technical Constraints
creased watershed sediment delivery • Detailed site description containing relevant discussion I
will persist (e.g., altered substrate con- of all variables having a bearing on that alternative.
ditions, modified riffle-pool structure, • Identification and quantification of existing stream
and impaired water quality) . corridor conditions.
It is important to note that in treating • Analysis of the various causes of impairment and the
causes, a danger always remains that in effect of management activities on these impaired
treating one symptom of impairment, conditions and causes in the past.
another unwanted change in stream • Statement of specific restoration objectives, expressed
corridor conditions will be triggered. in terms of measurable stream corridor conditions and
To continue with the erosion example, ranked in priority order.
bank hardening in one location might • Preliminary design alternatives and feasibility analysis.
interfere with sedimentation processes
• Cost-effectiveness analysis for each treatmen t or
critical to floodplain and riparian habi-
alternative.
tats, or it might simply transfer lateral
instabilities from one location in a • Assessment of project risks.
stream reach to some other location. • Appropriate cultural and environmental clearances.
• Monitoring plan linked to stream corridor conditions.
Landscape/Watershed vs.
Corridor/Reach • Anticipated maintenance needs and schedule.
• A lternative schedule and budget.
The design and selection of alternatives
• Provision to make adjustments per adaptive
should address the following relation-
management.
ships:
• Reach to stream
• Stream to corridor
• Corridor to landscape
• Landscape to region upstream land uses. Land use activities
Characterizing those relationships re- within a watershed may vary widely
quires a good inventory and analysis of within generalized descriptions of
conditions and functions on all levels urban, agricultural, recreation, etc. For
including stream structure (both vertical example, urban residential land use
could comprise neighborhoods of man-
and horizontal) and human activities
within the watershed. icured lawns, exotic plants, and roof
runoff directed to nearby storm sewers.
The restoration design should include Or residential use might be composed
innovative solutions to prevent or miti- of neighborhoods with native cover
gate, to the extent possible, negative im- types, overhead canopy, and roof runoff
pacts on the stream corridor from flowing to wetland gardens. Restoration
The principal funding for this project was provid- power rate payers in the Northwest. The purpose
ed by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) for funding is to improve the fish habitat compo-
(Table 5.1). The BPA funds are used to help nent of the "Strategy for Salmon," which is one
implement the Asotin Creek Model Watershed of the four elements referred to as the four H's-
Plan, which is part of the Northwest Power harvest management, hatcheries and their prac-
Planning Council's "Strategy for Salmon." The tices, survival at hydroelectric dams, and fish habi-
moneys for funding by BPA are generated from tat improvement.
Table 5. 1: Project costs for J. Bar S. winter feeding area meander reconstruction and upstream revetments.
Projects Costs
Fencing $400
stop
institutional
analysis formulate
model alternatives
micro-
habitat
model total
habitat
model
strategy technical
design scoping
macro-
habitat
model network
habitat
model
Figure 5. 15: Overview of the
instream flow incremental
methodology. IFIM describes
the spatial and t emporal habi-
tat features of a given river.
~
7000
• Continuing with the previous example,
the incremental cost and incremental
.., 6000
output associated with each solution
u"'0 5000 D
0 E are shown in Figure 5.17. Solution A
.., 4000
"'iii
would provide 80 units of output at a
{!.
3000 cost of $2,000, or $25 per unit. Solu-
A
2000 0 tion B would provide an additional 20
0 units of output (100 - 80) at an addi-
0 80 100 120 140 tional cost of $600 ($2,600 - $2,000) .
Units of Out put
The incremental cost per unit (incre-
mental cost divided by incremental out-
Figure 5. 16: Cost effectiveness frontier. This
put) for the additional 20 units B
graph p lots the solutions' t otal cost (vertical
axis) against their output levels (horizontal axis).
provides over A is, therefore, $30. Simi-
lar computations can be made for solu-
tions E and F. Solutions C and D have
been deleted from the analysis because
units when 10 more units could be pro- they were previously identified as ineffi-
duced by E for $900 less cost? cient in production.
Figure 5 .16 shows the "cost-effective- As shown in Figure 5.17, the incremen-
ness frontier" for the solutions listed in tal cost per unit is measured on the ver-
the table. This graph, which plots the tical axis; both total output and
solutions' total cost (vertical axis) incremental output can be measured on
against their output levels (horizontal the horizontal axis. The distance from
axis), graphically depicts the two the origin to the end of each bar indi-
screening rules. The cost-effective solu- cates total output provided by the corre-
tions delineate the cost-effectiveness sponding solution. The width of the bar
frontier. Any solutions lying inside the associated with each solution identifies
frontier (above and to the left), such as the incremental amount of output that
C and D, are not cost-effective and would be provided over the previous,
should not be included in subsequent smaller-scaled solution; for example,
incremental cost analysis. Solution E provides 20 more units of
Incremental Cost Analysis output than Solution B . The height of
the bar illustrates the cost per unit of
Incremental cost analysis is intended to
that additional output; for example,
provide additional information to sup-
those 20 additional units obtainable
port a decision about the desired level
through Solution E cost $50 each.
of investment. The analysis is an inves-
No action 0
Incremental
Output
0 0
w 0
Incremental Cost
Incremental Output
0
A 80 80 2,000 2,000 25
B 100 20 2,600 600 30
E 120 20 3,600 1,000 50
F 140 20 7,000 3,400 170
180
.t:: 160 F
c
::::> 140
...
[ 120
....
u
lS 100
iii 80
....
c
<II 60
E
...!!! 40 E
-= 20 A B
00 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Units of Output
figure 5.17: Incremental cost and output display. This graph plots the cost per unit (vertical axis)
against the total output and incremental output (horizontal axis).
Restoration Implementation 6- 3
stream corridor restoration . Regulatory
programs can be simple, direct, and
Important Components easy to enforce. They can be effectively
of Restoration used to control land use and various
Implementation land use activities.
• Securing Funding for Restoration Deciding which tool, or combination of
Implementation tools, is most appropriate for the
• Identifying Tools to Facilitate restoration initiative is not an easy en-
Implementation deavor. The following is a list of some
• Dividing Implementation important tips that should be kept in
Resp onsibilities mind when selecting among these tools
• Installing Restoration M easures (USEPA 1995a).
• Without targeted and effective educa-
tion programs, technical assistance
in the corridor and in gaining their and cost sharing alone will not
support for the restoration initiative ensure implementation.
(Figure 6.2). Incentive programs in- • Enforcement programs can also be
volving cost shares, tax advantages, or costly because of the necessary
technical assistance can encourage pri- inspections and personnel needed to
vate landowners to implement restora- make them effective.
tion measures on their property, even
if the results of these practices are not • The most successful efforts appear to
directly beneficial to the owner. use a mix of both regulatory and
incentive-based approaches. An effec-
In addition to incentives, regulatory ap- tive combination might include vari-
proaches are an important option for able cost-share rates, market-based
incentives, and regulatory backup
coupled with support services (gov-
ernmental and private) to keep con-
trols maintained and properly
functioning.
Dividing Implementation
Responsibilities
With funding in place and restoration
tools and activities identified, the focus
should shift to dividing the responsibil-
ities of restoration implementation
among the participants. This process
involves identifying all the relevant
players, assigning responsibilities, and
securing commitments.
Education Programs that target the key audience involved with or affected by the
restoration initiative to elicit awareness and support. Programs can
include technical information as well as information on the benefits and
costs of selected measures.
Technical Assistance One-to-one interaction between professionals and the interested citizen
or landowner. Includes provision of recommendations and technical assis-
tance about restoration measures specific to a stream corridor or reach .
Tax Advantages Benefits that can be provided through state and local taxing authorities
or by a change in the federal taxing system that rewards those who
implement certain restoration measures.
Cost-share to Individuals Direct payment to individuals for installation of specific restoration mea-
sures. Most effective where the cost-share rate is high enough to elicit
widespread participation.
Direct Purchase of Stream Direct purchase of special areas for preservation or community-owned
Corridors or of Lands Causing greenbelts in urban areas. Costs of direct purchase are usually high, but
the Greatest Problems the results can be very effective. Sometimes used to obtain access to
critical areas whose owners are unwilling to implement restoration
measures.
Nonregulatory Site Inspections Periodic site visits by staff of local, state, or federal agencies can be a
powerful incentive for voluntary implementation of restoration measures.
Restoration Implementation 6- 5
Tools for Facilitating the Implementation of Stream Corridor
Restoration Measures (continued)
Direct Regulation of Land Use Regulatory programs that are simple, direct, and easy to enforce. Such
and Production Activities programs can regulate land uses in the corridor (through zoning ordi-
nances) or the kind and extent of activities permitted, or they can set per-
formance standards for a land activity (such as retention of the first inch
of runoff from urban property in the corridor).
Easements Conservation easements on private property are excellent tools for imple-
menting parts of a stream corridor restoration plan (see more detailed
discussion in following box). Flowage easements may be a critical compo-
nent in order to design, construct, and maintain structures and flow
conditions.
Team Decision • How will the team make decisions (vote, consensus, advise only)?
Making • What decisions must be deferred to higher authorities?
leadership • What is needed from supervisors and/or managers to ensure project success?
Support
Restoration Implementation 6- 9
costs are still but a fraction of what are completed within the proper specifi-
would otherwise be needed for nonvol- cations.
unteer forces. Although the contract will outline the
Contractors role the contractor is to perform, it
Contractors typically have responsibili- might be helpful for the technical team
ties in the implementation of the (or a member of the technical team) to
restoration design. In fact, many meet with the contractor to establish a
restoration efforts require contracting clear understanding of the respective
due to the staff limitations of participat- roles and responsibilities. This prein-
ing agencies, organizations, and stallation meeting might also be used
landowners. to formally determine the frequency
and mechanisms for reporting the
Contractors can assist in performing progress of any installation activities.
some of the tasks involved in imple- On the next page is a checklist of issues
menting restoration design. Specifically, that are helpful in determining some of
they can be hired to perform various the roles and responsibilities associated
tasks such as channel modification, in- with using contractors to perform
stallation of instream structures, and restoration-related activities.
bank revegetation (Figure 6.6). All tasks
performed by the contractor should be Securing Commitments
specified in the scope of the contract
The final element of the division of re-
and should be subject to frequent and
periodic inspection to ensure that they sponsibilities is securing commitments
from the organizations and individuals
that have agreed to assist in the imple-
mentation process. Two types of com-
mitments are particularly important to
ensuring the success of stream corridor
restoration implementation (USEPA
1995):
• Commitments from public agencies,
private organizations, individuals,
and others who will fund and imple-
ment programs that involve restora-
tion activities.
• Commitments from public agencies,
private organizations, individuals,
and others who will actually install
the restoration measures.
One tool that can be used to help se-
cure a commitment is a Memorandum
Figure 6.6: Contractor team. Contractors can of Understanding (MOU). An MOU is
assist in performing tasks that might be an agreement between two or more par-
involved in restoration such as installing bank ties that is placed in writing. Essentially,
stabilization measures. by documenting what each party specif-
Source: Ro bin Sotir and Associat es.
ically agrees to, defining ambiguous
concepts or terms, and outlining a con-
flict resolution process in the event of
Restoration Implementation 6- 11
ning. Such preinstallation planning is
essential to achieve the desired restora-
tion objectives and to avoid adverse en-
vironmental, social, and economic
impacts that could result. The following
is a discussion of some of the major
steps that should be taken to ensure
successful implementation of restora-
Review
Chapter S's
tion-related installation actions.
permit section .
Determining the Schedule
Local/State
Permits Required Activities Covered Administered By
Table 6. 1:
Varies thresholds and definitions e.g., clearing/grading, sensitive/critical areas, water quality, Local grading,
Examples of per- vary by state aquatic access planning, or building
mit requirements departments; various
state departments
for restoration
activities. Federal
Permits Required Activities Covered Administered By
Section 10, Rivers and Harbors Act Building of any structure in the channel or along the banks U.S. Army Corps
of 1849 of navigable waters of the U.S. that changes the course, of Engineers
condition, location, or capacity
Section 404, Letters of permission Minor or routine work with minimum impacts U.S. Army Corps
Federal Clean of Engineers
Water Act Nationwide 3 Repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of structures destroyed
permits by storms, fire, or floods in past 2 years
13 Bank stabilization less than 500 feet in length solely for erosion
protection
Section 401, Federal Clean Water Act Water quality certification State agencies
Section 402, Federal Clean Water Act Point source discharges, as well as nonpoint pollution State agencies
National Pollutant Discharge discharges
Elimination System (NPDES)
Endangered Species Act Otherwise lawful activities that may take listed species U.S. Fish and Wildl ife
Incidental Take Permit Service
Restoration Implementation 6- 13
Whether or not that local agency claims
1 + - - - - - - B,C,D,E,K------ jurisdiction over the particular activity,
its staff will normally be aware of state
and federal requirements that might be
applicable. Local permit requirements
vary from place to place and change pe-
riodically, so it is best to contact the ap-
propriate agency for the most current
information. In addition, different juris-
wetland
dictions handle the designation of sen-
sitive or critical areas differently. Work
Using this diagram, determine where your activity will occur. The letters refer to the
permits listed below.
that occurs in the vicinity of a stream or
Permit Government Agency
wetland might or might not be subject
A Montana Stream Protection Act (124) . ...... Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks to state or local permit requirements
B Storm Water Discharge General Permits . . .. Department of Environmental Quality
C Streamside Management Zone Law .. . Department of Natural Resources & Conservation unique to aquatic environments. In ad-
D Montana Floodplain and Floodway . .... .... Department of Natural Resources & Conservation
Management Act
dition, state and local agencies might
E Short-term Exemption from Montana's .. . .. Department of Environmental Quality regulate other aspects of a project as
Surface Water Quality Standards (3A)
F Montana Natural Streambed and .......... Montana Association of Conservation Districts and well.
Land Preservation Act (310) Department of Natural Resources & Conservation
G Montana Land-use License or . . ... Department of Natural Resources & Conservation/ The sheer number of permits required
Easement on Navigable Waters Special Uses
H Montana Water Use Act . ........... . .. ..... Department of Natural Resources & Conservation for an aquatic restoration effort might
I Federal Clean Water Act (Section 404) . . ..... U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
J Federal Rivers and Harbors Act (Section 10) . U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
appear daunting, but much of the re-
K Other laws that may apply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... various agencies quired information and many of the re-
depending upon your location & activity
medial measures are the same for all.
Figure 6.9 shows an example of how
Figure 6.9: Example of permits necessary for
Montana's permitting requirements
working in and around streams in Montana.
The number of permits required for an aquatic
mesh with those at the federal level.
restoration effort may appear daunting but
they are all necessary Holding Preinstallation
Source: MDEQ 1996. Reprinted by permission. Conferences
Restoration Implementation 6- 15
• Implementation easement defines the In many cases little or no money may
location, time period, and purpose be exchanged in return for the ease-
for which the property can be used ment because the landowner receives
during implementation. substantial property improvements,
• Access easement provides for perma- such as stabilized streambanks, im-
nent access across and on private proved appearance, better fisheries, and
property for maintenance and moni- permanent stream access and stream
toring of a project. The geographic crossings. In some instances, however,
limits and allowable activities are the proposed implementation is in di-
specified. rect conflict with existing or planned
uses, and the purchase of an easement
• Drainage easement allows for the must be anticipated.
implementation and permanent
maintenance of a drainage facility at Locating Existing Utilities
a particular site. Usually, the property
Since most restoration efforts have a
owner has free use of the property
lower possibility of encountering utili-
for any nonconflicting activities.
ties than other earthwork activities, spe-
• Fee acquisition is the outright pur- cial measures might not be necessary. If
chase of the property. It is the most utilities are present, however, certain
secure, but most expensive, alterna- principles should be remembered (King
tive. Normally, it is unnecessary 1987).
unless the project is so extensive that
First, field location and highly visible
all other potential activities on the
markings are mandatory; utility atlases
property will be precluded.
are notoriously incomplete or inaccu-
Figure 6. 11: Site access. In certain areas, access agreements, such as a right of entry or implemen-
tation easement, might have to be obtained to install restoration measures.
Restoration Implementation 6- 17
Successful Implementation: The
Winooski River Watershed Project,
Vermont
A lthough the Winooski project was experimental in the 1930s, many of its elements were highly
successful:
• Recognition of the importance of landscape relationships and an emphasis on comprehensive
treatment of the entire watershed rather than isolated, individual problem areas.
• Using an interdisciplinary technical team for planning and implementation.
• Strong landowner participation.
• Empowerment of landowners to carry out the restoration measures using low-cost approaches
(often using materials from the farm).
• Fostering the use of experimental methods that are now recognized as viable biotechnical
approaches.
The success of restoration efforts de- anticipate the duration of specific im-
pends more on having a competent plementation tasks, the lead time neces-
project manager than on any other fac- sary to prepare for those tasks, and the
tor. The ideal project manager should consequences of inevitable delays. A
be skilled in leadership, scheduling, manager who has little fam iliarity with
budgeting, technical issues, human rela- the planning and design effort can nei-
tionships, communicating, negotiating, ther execute the implementation plans
and customer relations. Most will find efficiently nor adjust those plans in the
this a daunting list of attributes, but an face of unanticipated conditions. Acer-
honest evaluation of a manager's short- tain amount of flexibility is key. Often
comings before restoration is under way specific techniques are tied to specific
might permit a complementary support building material, for example. Adjust-
team to assist the one who most com- ments are often made according to
monly guides restoration to comple- what is available.
tion.
Familiarity With the Reach
Thorough Understanding of
Planning and Design Materials Existing site conditions are seldom as
they appear on a set of engineering
Orchestrating the implementation of all plans. Variability in landform and vege-
but the simplest restoration efforts re- tation, surface water and ground water
quires the integration of labor, equip- flow, and changing site conditions dur-
ment, and supplies, all within a context ing the interval between initial design
determined by requirements of both and final implementation are all in-
the natural system and the legal system. evitable. Th ere is no substitute for fa-
Designs must be adequate and based miliarity with the site that extends
on a foundation of sound physical and beyond what is shown on the plans, so
biological principles, tempered with the that implementation-period "surprises"
experience of past efforts, both success- are kept to a minimum (Figure 6.14) .
ful and unsuccessful. Schedules must Similarly, when such surprises do occur,
Restoration Implementation 6- 21
6.B Restoration Monitoring, Evaluation, and
Adaptive Managemeni-
Longitudinal profile
on the fewest possible measurements or
Aerial photography interpretation
indicators that most efficiently demon-
Improve Water depths
strate the overall condition of the aquatic
habitat Water velocities
stream corridor system and the success
Percent overhang, cover, shading
of the restoration effort. Costs and the Pool/riffle composition
ability to develop statistically sound Stream temperature
data may quickly get out of hand unless Bed material composition
the evaluation measures chosen are nar- Population assessments for fish,
invertebrates, macrophytes
rowly focused, are limited in number,
Improve Percent vegetative cover
riparian _ _ _ _ ___,
and incorporate existing data and work
habitat Species density
wherever appropriate. Size distribution
Figure 6.22: tnstream modifications. Restoration evaluation may focus on the physical traits of
the channel that were intentionally modified during project implementation such as the riffles
pictured.
lowest I"+• I
average 7-day f low_:_..;
•
A B C D E
September October
00
floodplain
~
Anal sis of
Corridor
Condition
7.A Hydrologic and Hydraulic Processes
• How does the stream flow and why is this understanding important?
• Is streamflow perennial, ephemeral or intermittent?
• What is the discharge, frequency and duration of extreme high and low flows?
• How often does the stream flood?
• How does roughness affect flow levels?
• What is the discharge most effective in maintaining the stream channel under
equilibrium conditions?
• How does one determine if equilibrium conditions exist?
• What field measurements are necessary?
7 .B Geomorphic Processes
• How do I inventory geomorphic information on streams and use it to understand and
develop physically appropriate restoration plans?
• How do I interpret the dominant channel adjustment processes active at the site?
• How deep and wide should a stream be?
• Is the stream stable?
• Are basin-wide adjustments occurring, or is this a local problem?
• Are channel banks stable, at-risk, or unstable?
• What measurements are necessary?
7 .C Chemical Processes
• How do you measure the condition of the physical and chemical conditions within a
stream corridor?
• Why is quality assurance an important component of stream corridor analysis activities?
• What are some of the water quality models that can be used to evaluate water
chemistry data?
7 .D Biological Characteristics
• What are some important considerations in using biological indicators for analyzing
stream corridor conditions?
• Which indicators have been used successfully?
• What role do habitat surveys play in analyzing the biological condition of the
stream corridor?
• How do you measure biological diversity in a stream corridor?
• What is the role of stream classification systems in analyzing stream corridor conditions?
• How can models be used to evaluate the biological condition of a stream corridor?
• What are the characteristics of models that have been used to evaluate stream
corridor conditions?
Applying
Restoration
Principles
Chapter 7: Analysis of Corridor Condition
Chapter 8: Restoration Design
Chapter 9: Restoration Installation,
Monitoring, and Management
tream corridor functions are recogniz- I and developed into a restoration plan in
S able and definable for the smallest
study area as well as for eco-regional lev-
Part II is applied. Part Ill shows how condi-
tion analysis and design can lead to
els. Because a corridor functions at all restoring corridor structure and the habi-
scales, the principles of restoration should tat, conduit, filter/barrier, source, and sink
be applied using those appropriate to the functions.
scale of concern.
• Chapter 7 discusses the measurement
Part Ill of this document is the "how to" and analysis of corridor condition. The
section. The understanding gained in Part analysis is broken down by scale and
process.
• Physical processes, structures, and
functions
• Geomorphic and hydrological cookbook of prescribed solu-
• Water chemistry tions.
Hydrologic Processes 7- 3
curve is the cumulative histogram of the by local convective storm runoff or
set of all daily flows. The construction where land uses vary significantly be-
of flow duration curves is described by tween the gauged and ungauged basins.
Searcy (1959), who recommends defin-
ing the cumulative histogram of stream- Flow Frequency Analysis
flow by using 25 to 35 well-distributed The frequency of floods and low flows
class intervals of streamflow data. for gauged sites is determined by ana-
Figure 7 .1 is a flow duration curve that lyzing an annual time series of maxi-
was defined using 34 class intervals and mum or minimum flow values (a
software documented by Lumb et al. chronological list of the largest or
(1990). The numerical output is pro- smallest flow that occurred each year).
vided in the accompanying table. Although previously described in Chap-
ter 1, flow frequency is redefined here be-
The curve shows that a daily mean flow
cause of its relevance to the sections
of 1, 100 cubic feet per second ( cfs) is
that follow. Flow frequency is defined
exceeded about 20 percent of the time
as the probability or percent chance of
or by about 20 percent of the observed
a given flow's being exceeded or not ex-
daily flows. The long-term mean daily
ceeded in any given year. Flow fre-
flow (the average flow for the period of
quency is often expressed in terms of
record) for this watershed was deter-
recurrence interval or the average number
mined to be 623 cfs. The duration curve
of years between exceeding or not ex-
shows that this flow is exceeded about
ceeding the given flows. For example, a
38 percent of the time.
given flood flow that has a 100-year re-
For over half the states, the USGS has currence interval is expected to be ex-
published reports for estimating flow ceeded, on average, only once in any
duration percentiles and low flows at 100-year period; that is, in any given
ungauged locations. Estimating flow year, the annual flood flow has a 1 per-
duration characteristics at ungauged cent chance or 0.01 probability of ex-
sites usually is attempted by adjusting ceeding the 100-year flood. The
data from a nearby stream gauge in a exceedance probability, p, and the re-
hydrologically similar basin. Flow dura- currence interval, T, are related in that
tion characteristics from the stream one is the reciprocal of the other (i.e.,
gauge record are expressed per unit area T == 1/p ). Statistical procedures for de-
of drainage basin at the gauge (i.e., in termining the frequency of floods and
cfs/mi 2 ) and are multiplied by the low flows at gauged sites follow.
drainage area of the ungauged site to
As mentioned earlier, most stream corri-
estimate flow duration characteristics
dor restoration initiatives are on
there. The accuracy of such a procedure
is directly related to the similarity of the streams or reaches lacking systematic
stream gauge data; therefore, estimates
two sites. Generally, the drainage area at
of flow duration characteristics and the
the stream gauge and ungauged sites
should be fairly similar, and streamflow frequency of extreme high and extreme
low flows must be based on indirect
characteristics should be similar for
methods from regional hydrologic
both sites. Additionally, mean basin ele-
vation and physiography should be analysis.
similar for both sites. Such a procedure Flood Frequency Analysis
does not work well and should not be Guidelines for determining the fre-
attempted in stream systems dominated quency of floods at a particular location
Hydrologic Processes 7- 5
Sources of Daily Mean Discharge and Other Data from USGS Stream
Gauges
Dally Mean Stl'Nmflow are computed by ranking the observed daily mean
Daily mean streamflow data needed for defining flows from %; to q1n . 365; where n is the number of
flow duration curves are published on a water- years of record, q 11; is the largest observation, and
year (October 1 to September 30) basis for each q1365 •nJ is the smallest observation. The ranked list
state by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in the is called a set of ordered observations. The q 11J that
report series Water Resources Data. The data col- are exceeded 10, 50, and 90 percent of the time
lected and published by the USGS are archived in are then determined. Flow duration percentiles
the National Water Information System (NWIS). (quantiles) for gauged sites are also published by
USGS in reports on low flow frequency and other
The USGS currently provides access to streamflow
streamflow statistics (e.g ., Atkins and Pearman
data by means of the Internet. The USGS URL
1994, Zalants 1991, Te/is 1991, and Ries 1994).
address for access to streamflow data is
http://water.usgs.gov. Approximately 400,000 sta- Peak Flow
tion years of historical daily mean flows for about Annual peak flow data needed for flood frequen-
18, 500 stations are available through this source. cy analysis are also published by the USGS,
The USGS data for the entire United States are archived in NWIS, and available through the inter-
also available from commercial vendors on two net at the URL address provided above. Flood fre-
CD-ROMs, one for the eastern and one for the quency estimates at gauged sites are routinely
western half of the country (e.g., CD-ROMs for published by USGS as part of cooperative studies
DOS can be obtained from Earth Info, and CD- with state agencies to develop regional regression
ROMs for Windows can be obtained from equations for ungauged watersheds. Jennings et
Hydrosphere Data Products. Both companies are al. (1994) provide a nationwide summary of the
located in Boulder, Colorado.) current USGS reports that summarize flood fre-
In addition to the daily mean flows, summary sta- quency estimates at gauged sites as well as
tistics are also published for active streamflow sta- regression equations for estimating flood peak
tions in the USGS annual Water Resources Data flows for ungauged watersheds. Annual and
reports. Among the summary statistics are the partial-duration (peaks-above-threshold) peak flow
daily mean flows that are exceeded 10, 50, and data for all USGS gauges can be obtained on one
90 percent of the time of record. These durations CD-ROM from commercial vendors.
Hydrologic Processes 7- 7
(USEPA 1986, Riggs et al. 1980). Low
40 lowest average
........ flows for other durations and frequen-
14-day flow :-\
~ 30 cies are used in some states.
..........._..:..-_.,.
Cl>
e 20 Computer software for performing low-
tO
.c flow analyses using a record of daily
::;( 15
Ci lowest l"+~I mean flows is documented by Hutchi-
average 7-day flow__:_..t son (1975) and Lumb et al. (1990). An
August September October
example of a low-flow frequency curve
for the annual minimum 7-day low
Figure 7.2: Annual hydrograph displaying low flow is given in Figure 7.3 for Scott
flows. The daily mean flows on the lowest part River near Fort Jones, California, for the
of the annual hydrograph are averaged to give same period (1951 to 1980) used in the
the 7-day and 14-day low flows for that year. flood frequency analyses above.
From Figure 7.3, one can determine
USGS and USEPA recommend using that the Q7, 10 is about 20 cfs, which is
the Pearson Type III distribution to the comparable to the 99th percentile
logarithms of annual minimum d-day (daily mean flow exceeded 99 percent
low flows to obtain the flow with a of the time) of the flow duration curve
nonexceedance probability p (or recur- (Figure 7 .1). This comparison is consis-
rence interval T = 1/p). The Pearson tent with findings of Fennessey and
Type III low-flow estimates are com- Vogel (1990), who concluded that the
puted from the following equation: Q7, 10 from 23 rivers in Massachusetts
was approximately equal to the 99th
x d,T =Md - ~sd
flow duration percentile. The USGS rou-
where: tinely publishes low flow estimates at
xd,T = the logarithm of the annual gauged sites (Zalants 1991, Telis 1991,
minimum d-day low flow for Atkins and Pearman 1994).
which the flow is not exceeded Following are discussions of different
in 1 of T years or which has a ways to look at the flows that tend to
probability of p = 1/T of not form and maintain streams. Restora-
being exceeded in any given year tions that include alterations of flows or
M d= the mean of the logarithms of changes in the dimensions of the
annual minimum d-day low stream must include engineering analy-
flows ses as described in Chapter 8.
Sd = the standard deviation of the Channel-forming Flow
logarithms of the annual mini- The channel-forming or dominant dis-
mum d-day low flows charge is a theoretical discharge that if
~= the Pearson Type III frequency constantly maintained in an alluvial
factor stream over a long period of time
would produce the same channel geom-
The desired quantile, Qd,T' can be ob-
etry that is produced by the long-term
tained by taking the antilogarithm of
natural hydrograph. Channel-forming
the equation.
discharge is the most commonly used
The 7-day, 10-year low flow (Q7, 10 ) is single independent variable that is
used by about half of the regulatory found to govern channel shape and
agencies in the United States for man- form. Using a channel-forming dis-
aging water quality in receiving waters charge to design channel geometry is
~ 102
~
•• •••••••••••
..
...
"'
·.;::;
"'
·;:: ••••••••
QI
tIll
...
Ill
.,
..c
u
3:
0 10
Li:
•
95 90 80 70 50 30 20 10 5
Annual Nonexceedance Probability (percent)
not a universally accepted technique, al- Figure 7.3: Annual minimum 7-day low flow
though most river engineers and scien- frequency curve. The Q, .. on this graph is about
tists agree that the concept has merit, at 20 cfs. The annual minimum value of 7-day
running means for this gauge is about 1O
least for perennial (humid and temper- percent.
ate) and perhaps ephemeral (semiarid)
rivers. For arid channels, where runoff is
generated by localized high-intensity as the natural sequence of events (Inglis
storms and the absence of vegetation 1949). Wolman and Miller (1960) de-
ensures that the channel will adjust to fined "moderate frequency" as events
each major flood event, the channel- occurring "at least once each year or
forming discharge concept is generally two and in many cases several or more
not applicable. times per year." They also considered
the sediment load transported by a
Natural alluvial rivers experience a wide
given flow as a percentage of the total
range of discharges and may adjust
amount of sediment carried by the river
their geometry to flow events of differ-
during the period of record. Their re-
ent magnitudes by mobilizing either
sults, for a variety of American rivers lo-
bed or bank sediments. Although Wol-
cated in different climatic and
man and Miller (1960) noted that "it is
physiographic regions, showed that the
logical to assume that the channel
greater part (that is, 50 percent or
shape is affected by a range of flows
more) of the total sediment load was
rather than a single discharge," they
carried by moderate flows rather than
concurred with the view put forward
catastrophic floods. Ninety percent of
earlier by civil engineers working on
"regime theory" that the channel- the load was carried by events with a re-
turn period of less than 5 years. The
forming or dominant discharge is the
precise form of the cumulative curve ac-
steady flow that produces the same
tually depends on factors such as the
gross channel shapes and dimensions
Hydrologic Processes 7- 9
predominant mode of transport (bed Bankfull Discharge
load, suspended load, or mixed load) The bankfull discharge is the discharge
and the flow variability, which is influ- that fills a stable alluvial channel up to
enced by the size and hydrologic char- the elevation of the active floodplain.
acteristics of the watershed. Small In many natural channels, this is the
watersheds generally experience a wider discharge that just fills the cross section
range of flows than large watersheds, without overtopping the banks, hence
and this tends to increase the propor- the term "bankfull." This discharge is
tion of sediment load carried by infre- considered to have morphological sig-
quent events. Thorough reviews of nificance because it represents the
arguments about the conceptual basis breakpoint between the processes of
of channel-forming discharge theory channel formation and floodplain for-
can be found in textbooks by Richards mation. In stable alluvial channels,
(1982), Knighton (1984), and Summer- bankfull discharge corresponds closely
field (1991). with effective discharge and channel-
Researchers have used various discharge forming discharge.
levels to represent the channel-forming The stage vs. discharge or rating curve
discharge. The most common are ( 1) presented in Figure 7.4 was developed
bankfull discharge, (2) a specific dis- for a hypothetical stream by computing
charge recurrence interval from the an- the discharge for different water surface
nual peak or partial duration frequency elevations or stages. Since discharges
curves, and (3) effective discharge. greater than bankfull spread across the
These approaches are frequently used active floodplain, stage increases more
and can produce a good approximation gradually with increasing discharge
of the channel-forming discharge in above bankfull than below bankfull,
many situations; however, as discussed when flows are confined to the channel.
in the following paragraphs, consider- Another method for determining the
able uncertainties are involved in all bankfull stage and discharge is to deter-
three of these approaches. Many practi- mine the minimum value on a plot re-
tioners are using specific approaches to lating water surface elevation to the
determine channel-forming discharge ratio of surface width to area. The fre-
and the response of stream corridors. quency of the bankfull discharge can be
Bibliographic information on these determined from a frequency distribu-
methods is available later in the tion plot like Figure 7.1.
document.
Bankfull stage can also be identified
Because of the spatial variability within from field indicators of the elevation of
a given geographical region, the re- the active floodplain. The correspond-
sponse of any particular stream corridor ing bankfull discharge is then deter-
within the region can differ from that mined from a stage vs. discharge
expected for the region as a whole. This relationship.
is especially critical for streams draining
small, ungauged drainage areas. There- Field Indicators of Bankfull Discharge
fore, the expected channel-forming dis- Various field indicators can be used for
charge of ungauged areas should be estimating the elevation of the stage as-
estimated by more than one alternative sociated with b ankfull flow. Although
method, hopefully leading to consistent the first flat depositional surface is
estimates. often used, the identification of deposi-
tional surfaces in the field can be diffi-
o_uency (i
«'rt; 0
~
ll)
~
·~
~
~ll)
~
.:;,<:;-
o?S
~'
Discharge
Figure 7.5: Effective discharge determination flow duration curve (A) and the sedi-
from sediment rating and flow duration curves. ment transport rating curve (B). A
The peak of curve C marks the discharge that is graphical representation of the relation-
most effective in transporting sediment.
Source: Wolman and Miller (1960).
ship between sediment transport, fre-
quency of the transport, and the
effective discharge is shown in Figure
Although the assumption that the chan-
7.5. The peak of curve C marks the dis-
nel-forming flow has a recurrence inter-
charge that is most effective in trans-
val of 1 to 3 years is sufficient for
porting sediment and, therefore, does
reconnaissance-level studies, it should
the most work in forming the channel.
not be used for design until verified
through inspection of reference reaches, For stable alluvial streams, effective dis-
data collection, and analysis. This is es- charge has been shown to be highly
pecially true in highly modified streams correlated with bankfull discharge. Of
such as in urban or mined areas, as well the various discharges related to chan-
as ephemeral streams in arid and semi- nel morphology (i.e., dominant, bank-
arid areas. full, and effective discharges), effective
discharge is the only one that can be
Effective Discharge
computed directly. The effective dis-
The effective discharge is defined as the charge has morphological significance
increment of discharge that transports since it is the discharge that transports
the largest fraction of the sediment load the bulk of the sediment.
over a period of years (Andrews 1980).
The effective discharge represents the
The effective discharge incorporates the
single flow increment that is responsi-
principle prescribed by Wolman and
ble for transporting the most sediment
Miller (1960) that the channel-forming
over some time period. However, there
discharge is a function of both the mag-
is a range of flows on either side of the
nitude of the event and its frequency of
effective discharge that also carry a sig-
occurrence. An advantage of using the
nificant portion of the total annual sed-
effective discharge is that it is a calcu-
iment load.
lated rather than field-determined
value. The effective discharge is calcu- Biedenham and Thome ( 1994) used
lated by numerically integrating the a graphical relationship between the
Hydrologic Processes 7- 13
cum ulative percentage of sediment
transported and the water discharge
to define a range of effective disch arges Design Discharge and
responsible for the majority of the sedi- Ecological Fundion
ment transport on the Lower Mississippi Although a channel-forming or domi-
River. They found that approximately
nant discharge is important for design,
70 percent of the total sediment was
it is often not sufficient for channel
moved in a range of flows between
500,000 cfs and 1,200,000 cfs, which restoration initiatives. An assessment
corresponds to the flow that is equaled of a wider range of discharges might
or exceeded 40 percent of the time and be necessary to ensure that the func-
3 percent of the time, respectively. tional objectives of the project are met
Thorne et al. ( 19 9 6) used a similar ap- For example, a restoration initiative
proach to define the range of effective targeting low-flow habitat conditions
discharges on the Brahmaputra River. must consider the physical conditions
A standard procedure should be used in the channel during low flows.
for the determination of the effective
discharge to ensure that the results for
different sites can be compared. To be
practical, it must either be based on streams, mean daily values can underes-
readily available gauging station data or timate the influence of the high flows,
require only limited additional infor- and, therefore, it might be necessary to
mation and computational procedures. reduce the discharge averaging period
from 24 hours (mean daily) to 1 hour,
The basic components required for cal-
or perhaps 15 minutes.
culation of effective discharge are ( 1)
flow duration data and (2) sediment A sediment rating curve must be devel-
load as a function of water discharge. oped to determine the effective dis-
The method most commonly adopted charge. (See the Sediment Yield and
for determining the effective discharge Delivery section in Chapter 8 for more
is to calculate the total bed material details.) The bed material load should
sediment load (tons) transported by be used in the calculation of the effec-
each flow increment over a period of tive discharge. This sediment load can
time by multiplying the frequency of be determined from measured data or
occurrence for the flow increment computed using an appropriate sedi-
(number of days) by the sediment load ment transport equation. If measured
(tons/day) transported by that flow suspended sediment data are used, the
level. The flow increment with the wash load should be subtracted and
largest product is the effective discharge. only the suspended bed material por-
Although this approach has the merit of tion of the suspended load used. If the
simplicity, the accuracy of the estimate bed load is a significant portion of the
of the effective discharge is clearly de- load, it should be calculated using an
pendent on the calculation procedure appropriate sediment transport func-
adopted. tion and added to the suspended bed
material load to provide an estimate of
Values of mean daily discharges are
the total bed material load. If bed load
usually used to compute the flow dura-
measurements are available, these data
tion curve, as discussed above and pre-
can be used.
sented in Figure 7 .1 . However, on flashy
.....
~
QI
~ 1000
Ill
..c
u
c"'
100
10""'-~~~--'-~~-'-~.L--'---'---'---'-....L.....J'--~~~-'-~~-'-~-'---'---1----1--L-'-'
10 100 1000
Drainage Area (square miles)
Figure 7.6: Regional relationships for bankfull and mean annual discharge as a function of
drainage area. The mean annual flow is normally less than the bankfull flow.
Source: Dunne and Leopold 1978.
Table 7. 1: Functional parameters used in basins. Given that both Qbr and Qmex-
regional estimates of bankfull discharge. hibit a similar functional dependence
In column a are regression coefficients
on A, a consistent proportionality is to
and in column b are exponents that can
be expected between these discharge
...
be used in the bankfull discharge equation.
Source: Dunne and Leopold 1978. measures within the same region. In
fact, Leopold ( 1994) gives the following
River Basin average values of the ratio Qb/Qmfor
61 0.82 three widely separated regions of the
36 0.68 United States: 29.4 for 21 stations in
Upper Green River, WY 28 0.69 the Coast Range of California, 7 .1 for
San Francisco Bay Region, CA 53 0.93 20 stations in the Front Range of Col-
orado, and 8.3 for 13 stations in the
Eastern United States.
Hydrologic Processes 7- 17
Manning's equation for mean velocity,
V (in feet per second or meters per sec-
ond), is given as:
k
V = R 2/3 5 112
n
where:
k = 1.486 for English units (1 for metric
units)
n =Manning's roughness coefficient
Hydrologic Processes 7- 19
Uniform Flow
Under conditions of constant width, depth, area, roughness elements, such as channel bars, large
and velocity, the water surface slope and energy boulders, and woody debris; or other features that
grade line approach the slope of the streambed, cause convergence, divergence, acceleration, or
producing a condition known as "uniform flow" deceleration of flow (Figure 7.8). Resistance equa-
One feature of uniform flow is that the streamlines tions may also be used to evaluate these nonuniform
are parallel and straight (Roberson and Crowe flow conditions (gradually varied flow); however;
1996). Perfectly uniform flow is rarely realized in energy-transition considerations (backwater calcula-
natural channels, but the condition is approached tions) must then be factored into the analysis. This
in some reaches where the geometry of the chan- requires the use of multiple-transect models (e.g.,
nel cross section is relatively constant throughout HEC-2 and WSP2; HEC-2 is a water surface profile
the reach. computer program developed by the U.S. Army
Conditions that tend to disrupt uniform flow include Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center; in
bends in the stream course; changes in cross-section- Davis, California,· WSP2 is a similar program devel-
al geometry; obstructions to flow caused by large oped by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation
Service.)
(c)
Degree of
H1!l1il.llBi·•
Smooth 0.000
Example
Variation in Gradual 0.000 Size and shape of channel cross sections change gradually.
channel cross
section (n2) Alternating 0.001-0.005 Large and small cross sections alternate occasionally, or the main flow
occasionally occasionally shifts from side to side owing to changes in cross-
sectional shape.
Alternating 0.010-0.015 Large and small cross sections alternate frequently, or the main flow
frequently frequently shifts from side to side owing to changes in cross-sectional
shape.
Effect of Negligible 0.000-0.004 A few scattered obstructions, which include debris deposits, stumps,
obstruction (n 3 ) exposed roots, logs, piers, or isolated boulders, that occupy less than
5 percent of the cross-sectional area.
Minor 0.005-0.015 Obstructions occupy less than 15 percent of the cross-sectional area and
the spacing between obstructions is such that the sphere of influence
around one obstruction does not extend to the sphere of influence
around another obstruction. Smaller adjustments are used for curved
smooth-surfaced objects than are used for sharp-edged angular objects.
Severe 0.040-0.050 Obstructions occupy more than 50 percent of the cross-sectional area
or the space between obstructions is small enough to cause turbulence
across most of the cross section.
-
Amount of
vegetation (n 4 )
1small 0.002-0.010 I Dense growths of flexible turf grass, such as Bermuda, or weeds
growing where the average depth of flow is at least two times the
height of the vegetation; supple tree seedlings such as willow,
I Medium 0.010-0.025
I
cottonwood, arrowweed, or saltcedar growing where the average
depth of flow is at least three times the height of the vegetation.
Turf grass growing where the average depth of flow is from one to
two times the height of the vegetation; moderately dense stem my
grass, weeds, or tree seedlings growing where the average depth of
the flow is from two to three times the height of the vegetation;
brushy, moderately dense vegetation, similar to 1- to 2-year-old willow
trees in the dormant season, growing along the banks and no
significant vegetation along the channel bottoms where the hydraulic
radius exceeds 2 feet.
Large 0.025-0.050 Turf grass growing where the average depth of flow is about equal to
the height of vegetation; 8- to 10-year-old willow or cottonwood trees
intergrown with some weeds and brush (none of the vegetation in
foliage) where the hydraulic radius exceeds 2 feet; bushy willows
about 1 year old intergrown with some weeds along side slopes (all
vegetation in full foliage) and no significant vegetation along channel
bottoms where the hydraulic radius is greater than 2 f eet .
Very Large 0.050-0.100 Turf grass growing where the average depth of flow is less than half
the height of the vegetation; bushy willow trees about 1 year old
intergrown with weeds along side slopes (all vegetation in full foliage)
or dense cattails growing along channel bottom; trees intergrown
with weeds and brush (all vegetation in full foliage).
Degree of meandering' Minor 1.00 Ratio of the channel length to valley length is 1.0 to 1.2.
(adjustment values
apply to flow confined Appreciable 1.15 Ratio of the channel length t o valley length is 1.2 t o 1.5.
in the channel and do
Severe 1.30 Ratio of the channel length t o valley length is greater t han 1.5.
not apply where
downvalley flow
crosses meanders) (m)
1
Adjustme nts fo r degree of irregu la rity, variations in cross section, effect of obstructions, a nd vegetation a re added to the base n va lue before multiplying by the
adjustment for meander.
Hydrologic Processes 7- 23
istics change or in a reach that is con-
sidered representative of some larger
area. The reach most sensitive to change Standard Step Backwater
or most likely to meet (or fail to meet) Computation
some important condition may be con- Many computer programs (e.g., HEC-2)
sidered a critical reach. A representative are available to compute water surface
reach typifies a definable extent of the
profiles. The standard step method of
channel system and is used to describe
Chow (1959, p. 265) can be used to
that portion of the system (Parsons and
Hudson 1985). determine the water surface elevation
(depth) at the upstream end of the reach
Once a reach has been selected, the
by iterative approximations. This method
channel cross sections should be mea-
uses trial water surface elevations to
sured at locations considered most
suitable for meeting the uniform flow determine the elevation that satisfies the
requirements of Manning's equation. energy and Manning equations written
The uniform flow requirement is ap- for the end sections of the reach. In
proached by siting cross sections where using this method, cross sections should
channel width, depth, and cross- be selected so that velocities increase or
sectional flow area remain relatively decrease continuously throughout the
constant within the reach, and the reach (USA CE 1991).
water surface slope and energy grade
line approach the slope of the stream-
bed. For this reason, marked changes in
channel geometry and discontinuities
in the flow (steps, falls, and hydraulic
jumps) should be avoided. Generally, Survey of Cross Section and
sections should be located where it Water Surface Slope
appears the streamlines are parallel to
The cross section is established perpen-
the bank and each other within the se-
dicular to the flow line, and the points
lected reach. If uniform flow conditions
across the section are surveyed relative
cannot be met and backwater computa-
to a known or arbitrarily established
tions are required, defining cross sec-
benchmark elevation. The distance/ ele-
tions located at changes in channel
vation paired data associated with each
geometry is essential.
point on the section may be obtained
Field Procedures by sag tape, rod-and-level survey, hydro-
graphic surveys, or other methods.
The basic information to be collected
Water surface slope is also required for
in the reach selected for analysis is a
a cross section analysis. The survey of
survey of the channel cross sections
water surface slope is somewhat more
and water surface slope, a measure-
complicated than the cross section sur-
ment of bed-material particle size
vey in that the slope of the water sur-
distribution, and a discharge measure-
face at the location of the section (e.g.,
ment. The U.S. Forest Service has pro-
pool, run, or riffle) must be distin-
duced an illustrated guide to field
guished from the more constant slope
techniques for stream channel refer-
of the entire reach. (See Grant et al.
ence sites (Harrelson et al. 19 94) that
1990 for a detailed discussion on recog-
is a good reference for conducting field
nition and characteristics of channel
surveys.
Hydrologic Processes 7- 25
The Bureau of Reclamation Water Mea-
surement Manual (USDI-BOR 1997) is
an excellent source of information for
measuring channel and stream dis-
charge (Figure 7.9). Buchanan and
Somers (1969) and Rantz et al. (1982)
also provide in-depth discussions of
discharge measurement techniques.
When equipment is functioning prop-
erly and standard procedures are fol-
lowed correctly, it is possible to
measure streamflow to within 5 percent
of the true value. The USGS considers
a "good" measurement of discharge to
account for plus or minus 5 percent
and an "excellent" discharge measure-
ment to be within plus or minus 3 per-
cent of the true value.
Figure 7.9: Station
measuring discharge.
Permanent stations
provide measure-
ments for a wide 7.B Geomorphic Processes
range of flow, but
the necessary mea-
surements can be In planning a project along a river or Stream Classification
made in other ways. stream, awareness of the fundamentals
Source: C. Zabawa. The use of any stream classification sys-
of fluvial geomorphology and channel
tem is an attempt to simplify what are
processes allows the investigator to see
complex relationships between streams
the relationship between form and
and their watersheds.
process in the landscape. The detailed
study of the fluvial geomorphic Although classification can be used as a
processes in a channel system is often communications tool and as part of the
referred to as a geomorphic assessment. overall restoration planning process, the
The geomorphic assessment provides use of a classification system is not re-
the process-based framework to define quired to assess, analyze, and design
past and present watershed dynamics, stream restoration initiatives. The de-
develop integrated solutions, and assess sign of a restoration does, however, re-
the consequences of restoration activi- quire site-specific engineering analyses
ties. A geomorphic assessment generally and biological criteria, which are cov-
includes data collection, field investiga- ered in more detail in Chapter 8.
tions, and channel stability assessments. Restoration designs range from simple
It forms the foundation for analysis and to complex, depending on whether "no
design and is therefore an essential first action," only management techniques,
step in the design process, whether direct manipulation, or combinations
planning the treatment of a single reach of these approaches are used. Complete
or attempting to develop a comprehen- stream corridor restoration designs re-
sive plan for an entire watershed. quire an interdisciplinary approach as
Geomorphic Processes 7- 27
which to base initial restoration plan- Stream Classification Systems
ning. Standard design techniques
should never be replaced by stream Stream Order
classification alone. Designation of stream order, using the
Some limitations of classification sys- Strahler (1957) method, described in
tems are as follows: Chapter 1, is dependent on the scale of
maps used to identify first-order
• Determination of bankfull or channel- streams. It is difficult to make direct
forming flow depth may be difficult comparisons of the morphological
or inaccurate. Field indicators are characteristics of two river basins ob-
often subtle or missing and are not tained from topographic maps of differ-
valid if the stream is not stable and ent scales. However, the basic
alluvial. morphological relationships defined by
• The dynamic condition of the stream Horton (1945) and Yang (1971) are
is not indicated in most classification valid for a given river basin regardless
systems. The knowledge of whether of maps used, as shown in the case
the stream is stable, aggrading, or study of the Rogue River Basin (Yang
degrading or is approaching a critical and Stall 1971, 1973).
geomorphic threshold is important Horton (1945) developed some basic
for a successful restoration initiative. empirical stream morphology relations,
• River response to a perturbation or i.e., Horton's law of stream order,
restoration action is normally not stream slope, and stream length. These
determined from the classification show that the relationships between
system alone. stream order, average stream length,
and slope are straight lines on semilog
• Biological health of a stream is usual-
paper.
ly not directly determined through a
stream classification system. Yang ( 19 71) derived his theory of aver-
age stream fall based on an analogy
• A classification system alone should
with thermodynamic principles. The
not be used for determining the type,
theory states that the ratio of average fall
location, and purpose of restoration
(change in bed elevation) between any
activities. These are determined
two stream orders in a given river basin
through the planning steps in Part II
is unity. These theoretical results were
and the design process in Chapter 8.
supported by data from 14 river basins
When the results of stream classifica- in the United States with an average fall
tion will be used for planning or de- ratio of 0.995 . The Rogue River basin
sign, the field data collection should be data were used by Yang and Stall
performed or directed by persons with (19 73) to demonstrate the relationships
experience and training in hydrology, between average stream length, slope,
hydraulics, terrestrial and aquatic ecol- fall, and number of streams.
ogy, sediment transport, and river me-
Stream order is used in the River Contin-
chanics. Field data collected by
uum Concept (Vannote et al. 1980),
personnel with only limited formal
described in Chapter l, to distinguish
training may not be reliable, particu-
different levels of biological activity.
larly in the field determination of bank-
However, stream order is of little help
full indicators and the assessment of
to planners and designers looking for
channel instability trends.
clues to restore hydrologic and geomor-
phic functions to stream corridors.
Geomorphic Processes 7- 29
Channel Type
Suspended Load Mixed Load Bed Load
...
..c
- - - channel boundary ..c
Cl O"I
. . . flow
·~ I
...
<II ~ bars
::: :::
_Q _Q
..
c
...
(Sln .~
...
Cll
IU
Cl
c:
·;: 0
·.;;
:.0
...
ro
~ Cll <II
Gi
"tl
c:
ro
~
..c
...c Q)
>
·.;;
c ...
a.·-
Q)
ro
c Q)
Q) "tl
IU :::?: Q)
.c ~ ~ er:::
u ...
..c
"tl
O"I
-~
"tl
QI
"tl
"iii
..c ..c
:::
0
c%i O"I O"I --'
EE
High Relative Stability Low
• I
. . . . . . . .Ill
I I I I I
------
--ifi;fi!!!MlijfUl§:f§+Ji§i+-llllllM!il@Hi
Typical Bed Variable Sand Gravel Gravel, Cobble, Boulder N/A Variable
Material cobble boulder
Reach Type Response Response Response Response Transport Transport Transport Source
Sediment Overbank, Overbank, Overbank, Overbank, Bedforms Lee & stoss • Bed
Storage bedforms bedforms, bedforms, inactive sides of flow
Elements inactive inactive channel obstructions
channel channel
Typical Slope s < 0.03 s < 0.001 0.001 < s 0.01 < s 0.03 < s 0.08 < s Variable s > 0.20
(m/m) and and and and
s < 0.02 s < 0.03 s < 0.08 s < 0.30
Geomorphic Processes 7- 31
Single-Threaded Channels Multiple Channels
0 0 0 0 0 0
Slope
- - - -
slope range
>0. 10
slope range
<0.02 --
slope range
<0.02
slope
- - - - - -
range
<0.02
slope range
<0.02
slope range
<.001
slope
.02-
0.039
- - -
range
.001-
0.02
<.001
slope
<.005
Silt/Clay
Schumm et al. (1984), Harvey and Wat- Figure 7. 12: Rosgen 's stream channel classifica-
son (1986), and Simon (1989) have tion system (Level If). This classification system
proposed similar channel evolution includes a recognition of specific characteristics
models due to bank collapse based on a of channel morphology and the re lationship
between the stream and its floodplain .
"space-for-time" substitution, whereby
Source: Rosgen 1996. Published by permission of
downstream conditions are interpreted Wi ldland Hydrology.
as preceding (in time) the immediate
location of interest and upstream con-
ditions are interpreted as following (in
time) the immediate location of inter- Simon 1989, 1995) have gained wide
est. Thus, a reach in the middle of the acceptance as being generally applicable
watershed that previously looked like for channels with cohesive banks.
the channel upstream will evolve to Both models begin with a pre-
look like the channel downstream. disturbance condition, in which the
Downs (1995) reviews a number of channel is well vegetated and has
classification schemes for interpreting frequent interaction with its flood -
channel processes of lateral and vertical plain. Following a perturbation in the
adjustment (i.e., aggradation, degrada- system (e.g., channelization or change
tion, bend migration, and bar forma- in land use), degradation occurs, usu-
tion) . When these adjustment processes ally as a result of excess stream power
are placed in a specific order of occur- in the disturbed reach. Channel degra-
rence, a channel evolution model dation eventually leads to oversteep-
( CEM) is developed. Although a num- ening of the banks, and when critical
ber of CEMs have been suggested, two bank heights are exceeded, bank fail-
models (Schumm et al. 1984 and ures and mass wasting (the episodic
Party:_ _ _ __ _ _ __ Date:_ _ _ _ _ __ __
State:_ _ _ _ _ __ __ County:_ _ _ _ _ _ __
Stream : _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ __ __
Bankfull M easurements: Lat/Long _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _
Width Depth W/D _ _ _ __ _
Sinuosity (Stream LengthNalley Length) or (Valley Slope/Channel Slope):
Strm. Length Valley Slope _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Valley Length Channel Slope _ _ _ __ __ __
~ Vs
Sinuosity VL Sinuosity Cs _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __
Entrenchment Ratio (Flood prone Width/Bankfull Width):
Floodprone width is water level at 2x maximum depth in bankfull cross-section,
or width of intermediate floodplain (10-50 yr. event)
Bankfull Width Floodprone Width _ _ _ __ _ __
Entrenchment Ratio _ __ _ _ __ _
Slight= 2.2+ Moderate + 1.41 -2.2 Entrenched = 1.0- 1.4
Dominant Channel Soils:
Bed Material Left Bank Right Bank _ _ _ _ __
Description of Soil Profiles (from base of bank to top)
Left: _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Right: _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _
Riparian Vegetation:
Left Bank: Right Bank _ _ __ _ __ _ __
% Total Area (Mass) L R _ _ _ _ __ _
% Total Ht w/Roots L R _ _ _ _ _ __
Ratio of Actu al Bank Height to Bankfull Height _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _
Bank Slope (Horizontal to Vertical ): L R _ _ _ _ _ _ __
STREAM TYPE _ __ _ _ _
Figure 7.13: Example of stream classification worksheet used w ith Rosgen methods.
Source: NRCS 1994 (worksheet ) and Rosgen 1996 (pebble count). Published by permission of Wi ld land Hydrology.
Geomorphic Processes 7- 33
downslope movement of soil and rock) stages of evolution. Both models were
lead to channel widening. As channel developed for landscapes dominated by
widening and mass wasting proceed up- streams with cohesive banks. However,
stream, an aggradation phase follows in the same physical processes of evolu-
which a new low-flow channel begins tion can occur in streams with nonco-
to form in the sediment deposits. hesive banks but not necessarily in the
Upper banks may continue to be unsta- same well-defined stages.
ble at this time. The final stage of evolu- Table 7.4 and Figure 7 .15 show the
tion is the development of a channel processes at work in each of Simon's
within the deposited alluvium with di- stages.
mensions and capacity similar to those
of the predisturbance channel (Downs Advantages of Channel
1995). The new channel is usually Evolution Models
lower than the predisturbance channel,
and the old floodplain now functions CEMs are useful in stream corridor
primarily as a terrace. restoration in the following ways
(Note: Stages are from Simon's 1989
Once streambanks become high, either six-stage CEM):
by downcutting or by sediment deposi-
tion on the floodplain, they begin to • CEMs help to establish the direction
fail due to a combination of erosion at of current trends in disturbed or con-
the base of the banks and mass wasting. structed channels. For example, if a
The channel continues to widen until reach of stream is classified as being
flow depths do not reach the depths re- in Stage IV of evolution (Figure
quired to move the sloughed bank ma- 7.14 ), more stable reaches should
terials. Sloughed materials at the base occur downstream and unstable
of the banks may begin to be colonized reaches should occur upstream.
by vegetation. This added roughness Once downcutting or incision occurs
helps increase deposition at the base of in a stream (Stage III), the headcut
the banks, and a new small-capacity will advance upstream until it reach-
channel begins to form between the sta- es a resistant soil layer, the drainage
bilized sediment deposits. The final area becomes too small to generate
stage of channel evolution results in a erosive runoff, or the slope flattens to
new bankfull channel and active flood- the point that the stream cannot
plain at a new lower elevation. The generate enough energy to downcut.
original floodplain has been aban- Stages IV to VI will follow the h ead-
doned due to channel incision or exces- cut upstream.
sive sediment deposition and is now • CEMs can help to prioritize restora-
termed a terrace. tion activities if modification is
Schumm et al. (1984) applied the basic planned. By stabilizing a reach of
concepts of channel evolution to the stream in early Stage III with grade
problem of unstable channelized control measures, the potential
streams in Mississippi. Simon (1989) degradation of that reach and
built on Schumm's work in a study of upstream reaches can be prevented.
ch annelized streams in Tennessee. It also takes less intensive efforts to
Simon's CEM consisted of six stages successfully restore stream reach es in
(Figure 7.14). Both models use the Stages V and VI than to restore those
cross section, longitudinal profile, and in Stages III and IV.
geomorphic processes to distinguish
Class II. Channelized Class Ill. Degradation Class IV. Degradation and Widening
h<hc h<hc h>hc
floodplain terrace
t
h
i
slumped material
th
i slumped
material
aggraded material aggraded material
Class I
Class Ill
Class V
precursor
nickpoint Class VI
Geomorphic Processes 7- 35
• CEMs can help match solutions to the • CEMs can help provide goals or
problems. Downcutting in Stage III models for restoration. Reaches of
occurs due to the greater capacity of streams in Stages I and VI are graded
the stream created by construction, or streams, and their profile, form, and
earlier incision, in Stage II. The down- pattern can be used as models for
cutting in Stage III requires treat- restoring unstable reaches.
ments such as grade control aimed at
modifying the factors causing the bot- Limitations of Channel Evolution
tom instability. Bank stability prob- Models
lems are dominant in Stages IV and V, The chief limitations in using CEMs for
so the approaches to stabilization stream restoration are as follows:
required are different from those for
Stage III. Stages I and VI typically • Future changes in base level eleva-
require only maintenance activities. tions and watershed water and sedi-
ment yield are not considered when
Table 7.4: Dominant hills/ope and instream
predicting channel response.
processes, characteristic cross section shape • Multiple adjustments by the stream
and bedforms, and condition of vegetation in simultaneously are difficult to pre-
the various stages of channel evolution.
Source: Simon 1989.
dict.
Ill Degradation Degradation; basal Pop-out Heightening and steepening of Riparian vegetation
erosion on banks. failures. banks; alternate bars eroded; high relative to flow
flow line lower relative to top line and may lean
bank. toward channel.
IV Threshold Degradation; basal Slab, Large scallops and bank retreat; Riparian vegetation
erosion on banks. rotational and vertical face and upper-bank high relative to flow
pop-out surfaces; failure blocks on line and may lean
failures. upper bank; some reduction in toward channel.
bank angles; flow line very low
relative to top bank.
v Aggradation Aggradation; Slab, Large scallops and bank retreat; Tilted and fallen
development of rotational and vertical face, upper bank, and riparian vegetation;
meandering thalweg; pop-out slough line; flattening of bank reestablishing
initial deposition of failures; low- angles; flow line low relative to vegetation on slough
alternate bars; reworking angle slides of top bank; development of new line; deposition of
of failed material on previously floodplain . material above root
lower banks. failed collars of slough line
material. vegetation.
VI Restabilization Aggradation; further Low-angle Stable, alternate channel bars; Reestablishing
development of slides; some convex-short vertical face on vegetation extends up
meandering thalweg; pop-out top bank; flattening of bank slough line and upper
further deposition of failures near angles; development of new bank; deposition of
alternate bars; reworking flow line. floodplain ; flow line high material above root
of failed material; some relative to top bank. collars of slough-line
basal erosion on outside and upper-bank
bends deposition of flood- vegetation; some
plain and bank surfaces. vegetation
establishing on bars.
Class I. Premodified Class II. Constructed Class Ill. Degradation Class Illa. Degradation
vertical 1 previous
slab and face 70-90°
rotational \ /profile
failures I
I
upper bank degraded
25-50° channel
pop-out ', bottom
failures
Class V. Aggradation
vertical
face - - - -\ previous
70-90"
\ /profile
upper bank
25-40°
Geomorphic Processes 7- 37
sights as to the type of stabj}jty prob- are already tending toward renewed sta-
lems occurring within the stream corri- bility and establishing riparian vegeta-
dor and potential opportunities for tion can accelerate the process.
restoration. Gullied stream channels are Both the stream classification and the
downcutting, so grade stabilization is re- stage of channel evolution inventories
quired before time and money are spent can serve as the foundation for assess-
on bank stabilization or floodplain ing systemwide stability. Channel
restoration. Similarly, incised channels width/depth ratio (F) at mean annual
with lateral instabilities are in the initial discharge and the percent of silt and
stages of widening, a process that often clay in the channel boundary (M) are
must be accommodated before equilib- useful diagnostics for determining sys-
rium conditions can be attained. Al- temwide adjustments. These variables
though most argue that channel can be plotted on Schumm's (1960)
widening must be accommodated to re- curve of width/depth ratio versus per-
store incised channels, in some cases cent silt-clay (F = 255M- 108 ) to assess
not allowing the stream to widen might stability (Figure 7.16). Schumm's
be preferred, depending on the value width/ depth ratio is the top width of
and priority placed on adjacent land the bankfull channel and the deepest
use and structures within the corridor. depth in the bankfull channel cross
On the other hand, incised streams that section. The term "M" is defined by the
have widened enough for a new inner relationship
channel and floodplain to begin form- M = [(Sc W) +(Sb 2D)] / (W + 2D)
ing are excellent candidates for vegeta-
tion management since these streams where
400.0 s=
c
percentage of silt and clay in the
bed material
• s =
b
percentage of silt and clay in the
bank material
100.0
• ,, F =255M· 1.0B
W= channel width
...
.,..
••
• • •••••• • •
D= channel depth
.0
a:
..c:
..
0.
0
• .., • ••.
••• • •
Data from aggrading streams generally
plot above the line of best fit, whereas
data for degrading streams plot below
•• •
£-0
~
10.0
•• .1. ... • •• •
the line. Schumm's graph could also be
used as a guide in selecting an appro-
priate width/ depth ratio for an incised
• ••
••
, or recently disturbed channel.
Finally, classification systems and evolu-
tion models can help guide the selec-
tion of restoration treatments. As
mentioned above, there is little oppor-
Weighted M ean Percent Silt-Clay (M)
tunity for successfully establishing
streambank vegetation in streams with
Figure 7.16: Schumm's F versus M relationship. Data_for aggrad'.ng
vertical and horizontal instability. The
streams generally plot above or to the right of the /me. Degrading
or incising streams plot below the line.
banks of such streams are subject to
Source: Schumm 1960. deep-seated slope failures that are not
Geomorphic Processes 7- 39
tion, landform, or large woody bility and potential, and comparing
debris is present to: that potential with current conditions.
1. Dissipate stream energy associated Although the PFC procedure defines
with high waterflows, thereby streams without floodplains (when a
reducing erosion and improving floodplain would normally be present)
water quality. as nonfunctional, many streams that
2. Filter sediment, capture bedload, lose their floodplains through incision
and aid floodplain development. or encroachment still retain ecological
functions. The importance of a flood-
3. Improve floodwater retention and plain needs to be assessed in view of
ground water storage. the site-specific aquatic and riparian
4. Develop root masses that stabilize community.
streambanks against cutting When using the PFC technique, it is
action. important not to equate "proper func-
5. Develop diverse ponding and tion" with "desired condition." Proper
channel characteristics to provide function is intended to describe the
the habitat and the water depth, state in which the stream channel and
duration, and temperature neces- associated riparian areas are in a rela-
sary for fish production, waterfowl tively stable and self-sustaining condi-
breeding, and other uses. tion. Properly functioning streams can
be expected to withstand intermediate
6. Support greater biodiversity.
flood events (e.g., 25- to 30-year flood
• Functional-at Risk-Riparian-wetland events) without substantial damage to
areas that are in functional condi- existing values. However, proper func-
tion, but an existing soil, water, or tioning condition will often develop
vegetation attribute makes them sus- well before riparian succession provides
ceptible to degradation. shrub habitat for nesting birds. Put an-
• Nonfunctional-Riparian-wetland other way, proper functioning condition
areas that clearly are not providing is a prerequisite to a variety of desired
adequate vegetation, landform, or conditions.
large debris to dissipate stream ener- Although based on sound science, the
gy associated with high flow and PFC field technique is not quantitative.
thus are not reducing erosion, im- An advantage of this approach is that
proving water quality, or performing it is less time-consuming than other
other functions as listed above under techniques because measurements are
the definition of proper function. not required. The procedure is per-
The absence of certain physical formed by an interdisciplinary team
attributes, such as absence of a and involves completing a checklist
floodplain where one should be, evaluating 17 factors dealing with hy-
is an indicator of nonfunctioning drology, vegetation, and erosional/
conditions. depositional characteristics. Training in
Assessing functionality with the PFC the technique is required, but the tech-
technique involves procedures for deter- nique is not difficult to learn. With
mining a riparian-wetland area's capa- training, the functional determinations
resulting from surveys are reproducible
to a high degree.
500
5
•
200
100 10 11
..c:
....
"'C
6•· •
50
§
•19
· • 14
20 15
5
10
2
. 11
'+::'
Cll
14
~ 1.0
15 • •
..c:
....
Q.
Cll
Q
0.5
....Cll .......
Cll
:t:.
"'C
c:
8
. 11 •19
16
..c:
:'2
s: [
Cll
.... "'....
2
13• •
10 100 1000 10,000
Mean Annual Discharge (cfs)
• '.1 •
Ill
.s::
v
0"'
- •"' =
. •
::I
~
Q8 28.3DA0.69
c
Ill
IXl
100
•
• •
•
10'-~-'----'-----L--L...L...L..L.J....l~~-'--'--'-....L....L--L.L...U....~--''---'--'-'-'-..L..L.l...L-~---'-~-'-.L.....L-'-L..LJ.J
1 10 100 1000 10,000
Drainage Area (DA) (square miles)
•
•• •
••••• ." .. •
•
•• •
W 8 = 8.1DA0.38
..i
' Road Creek
1'--~~~~ ........~~---~....__..__.._..._......._......._~__.....__.__._.......__._._...._~___._~...._.........._.._........_.
1 10 100 1000 10,000
Drainage Area (DA) (square miles)
100
-
~
CIJ
CIJ
~ 50
<ti
:::i
tT
~
<ti
~
<(
~ 10
0
"€
CIJ
Ill '(' 5
c0 "'
"'
·;;; ~
c u
Cll
E
Q
:i
:t=c
ni
a:i 50
~
Cll
QI
::.
.r:.
....
-c
~ 10
Figure 7.20: Regional curves for bankfull channel dimensions versus drainage area. Curves
showing channel dimensions relating to drainage area for a region of the country can be useful
in determining departure from "normal" conditions. The use of such curves must be tempered
with an understanding of the limitations of the specific data that produced the curves.
Source: Dunne and Leopold 1978.
-
Reference Data Source Sediment
. Concentration
(ppm)
Blench 1969 Indian canals 0.1to0.6 Cohesive 1 to 100,000 < 301 Not Ripples to
specified dunes
Simons and U.S. and Indian 0.318 to Sand 100 to 400 < 500 .000135 to Ripples to
Albertson 1963 canals 0.465 .000388 dunes
Kellerhals 1967 U.S., Canadian, and 7 to 265 Noncohesive 1.1 to Negligible .00017 to Plane
Swiss rivers of low 70,600 .0131
sinuousity, an d lab
1 Blench (1969) provides adjustment factors for sediment concentrations between 30 and 100 ppm.
because of the large degree of natural the Lacey, Blench, and Simons and Al-
variation in most data sets. Published bertson formulas in channel restoration
hydraulic geometry relationships usu- work since these curves were developed
ally are based on stable, single-thread using canal data. Additionally, hydraulic
alluvial channels. Channel geometry- geometry relationships developed for
discharge relationships are more com- pristine or largely undeveloped water-
plex for multithread channels. sheds should not be applied to urban
Exponents and coefficients for hydraulic watersheds.
geometry formulas are usually deter- As shown in Table 7.5, hydraulic geom-
mined from data sets for a specific etry relationships for gravel-bed rivers
stream or watershed. The relatively are far more numerous than those for
small range of variation of the expo- sand-bed rivers. Gravel-bed relation-
nents k2 , k5 , and k8 is impressive, con- ships have been adjusted for bank soil
sidering the wide range of situations characteristics and vegetation, whereas
represented. Extremes for the data sets sand-bed formulas have been modified
used to generate the hydraulic geometry to include bank silt-day content
formulas are given in Tables 7.6 and (Schumm 1977). Parker (1982) argues
7.7. Because formula coefficients vary, in favor of regime-type relationships
applying a given set of hydraulic geom- based on dimensionless variables. Ac-
etry relationships should be limited to cordingly, the original form of the
channels similar to the calibration sites. Parker formula was based on dimen-
This principle severely limits applying sionless variables.
~D
Leopold 1964
et al.
Kellerhals 1967 Field (U.S., Gravel-bed 1.8 0.5 0.33 0.4 -o.12a 0 .00062 -0.4 o.92a
Canada, and rivers with
Switzerland) paved beds
and and small bed
laboratory material
concentration
Schumm 1977 U.S. (Great Sand-bed 37k, * 0.38 0.6k4* 0.29 -o.12a 0.01136k7* -0.32
Plains) and rivers with
Australia properties
(Riverine shown in
Plains of Table 6
New South
W a les)
Bray 1982 Canadian Gravel-bed 3.1 0.53 -0.07 0.304 0.33 -0.03 0.00033 -0.33 0.59
rivers rivers
Parker 1982 Single- Gravel-bed 6.06 0.444 -0.11 0.161 0.401 -0.0025 0.00127 -0.394 0.985
channel rivers, banks
Alberta with little
rivers cohesion
1-5% tree/ 1.84 0.5 0.41 0.37 -0.11 0.00296k7** -0 .43 -0.09
shrub cover
Great er than 1.5 1 0.5 0 .41 0.37 -0.11 0 .00296k7** -0.43 -0.09
5-50 % tree/
sh rub cover
Greater than 1.29 0.5 0.4 1 0.37 -0.11 0.00296k7** -0 .43 -0.09
50 % shrub
cover o r
incised fl o od
plain
- 2
3
.
Equation
Lm = 1.25Lb
Lm = 1.638
Applicable Range
18.0 :5 Lb :5 43,600 ft
12. 1 :5 8 :5 44,900 ft
26
27
Equation
Lb= 15A0.65
Applicable Range
0 .43 :5 A :5 225,000 ft
4 Lm = 4 .53Rc 8.5 :5 Rc:51 1,800 ft 28 8 = 13A0.65 0.43 :5 A :5 225,000 ft
5 Lb = 0.8Lm 26 :5 Lm :5 54, 100 ft 29 Re = 4.1A 0.65 0.43 :5 A :5 225,000 ft
where Qmis average discharge (cfs) and M is the percentage of silt-clay in the perimeter
of the channel. These types of relationships are most powerful when developed from
regional data sets with conditions that are typical of the area being restored. Radius of
curvature, (, is generally between 1.5 and 4. 5 times the channel width, w, and more
commonly between 2w and 3w, while meander amplitude is 0.5 to 1. 5 times the
meander wavelength, L (USACE 1994). Empirical (Apmann 1972, Nanson and Hickin
1983 ) and analytical (Begin 1981) results indicate that lateral migration rates are
greatest for bends w ith radii of curvature between 2w and 4w
-·'·
100,000
100,000
...
.-..
Q)
Q)
:t:. • •
..c: 10,000
... .t~._·_ ___.___.!
....
Cl
c:
~"-
Q)
...
-I
Q)
10,000
"C
c: 1000
Ill
Q)
:E
100
Geomorphic Processes 7- 51
Figure 7.24: 270 Specific Gauge Analysis
Changes in bed South Fork Forked Deer River
•••• river mile= 7.9 Perhaps one of the most useful tools
elevations over
available to the river engineer or geo-
time. Plotting river 265
bed elevations at morphologist for assessing the histori-
a point along the cal stability of a river system is the
river over time can 260 specific gauge record. A specific gauge
indicate whether
a major phase of --.
Qi
•••••••••• record is a graph of stage for a specific
discharge at a particular stream gauging
channel incision is > 255 L __ __i__ _..J.__ _ . ._ __ . __ ___.
location plotted against time (Blench
ongoing or has ! 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984
1969). A channel is considered to be in
passed. ~ 292
QI
> Rutherford Fork Obion River equilibrium if the specific gauge record
0
..c .. river mile= 4.9 shows no consistent increasing or de-
! 288 • creasing trends over time, while an in-
QI
QI
:=. • creasing or decreasing trend is
. ....•.-·•
] 284
IXI indicative of an aggradational or degra-
Qi
c:
280
dational condition, respectively. An ex-
~
c:
ra
..c:
u
ample of a specific gauge record is
..... shown in Figure 7.25 .
0 276 1...----1._--1.._-.J.._ _.__..L-_.____.
g
·.;::;
1958 1962 1986 1970 1974 1978 19821986
The first step in a specific gauge analysis
~ 295
.E:! is to establish the stage vs. discharge re-
w South Fork Obion River
290 ••• river mile= 5.9 lationship at the gauge for the period of
record being analyzed. A rating curve is
"'iii
.§. 40,000 cfs
....
.:=
Cl 260
'Qi
:z: 26,000 cfs
Q)
Cl
"'
\!'
6000 cfs
& n f
250L_~~~...L~~~--1..~~~~L-~~~...J...._~~~-'-~~~~'--:--
1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990
Year
Figure 7.25: Specific gauge plot for Red River dation if there are large scour holes,
at Index, Arkansas. Select discharges from the particularly in bendways. The existence
gauge data that represent the range of flows. of very deep local scour holes may
Source: Biedenharn et al. 1997.
completely obscure temporal variations
assess reach conditions or to make pre- in the thalweg. This problem can some-
dictions about the ultimate response on times be overcome by eliminating the
a river. pool sections and focusing only on the
Comparative Surveys and Mapping crossing locations, thereby allowing
aggradational or degradational trends
One of the best methods for directly as- to be more easily observed.
sessing channel changes is to compare
channel surveys (thalweg and cross Although thalweg profiles are a useful
section). tool, it must be recognized that they re-
flect only the behavior of the channel
Thalweg surveys are taken along the bed and do not provide information
channel at the lowest point in the cross about the channel as a whole. For this
section. Comparison of several thalweg reason it is usually advisable to study
surveys taken at different points in time changes in the cross-sectional geometry.
allows the engineer or geomorphologist Cross-sectional geometry refers to
to chart the change in the bed elevation width, depth, area, wetted perimeter,
through time (Figure 7.26). hydraulic radius, and channel con-
Certain limitations should be consid- veyance at a specific cross section.
ered when comparing surveys on a If channel cross sections are surveyed
river system. When comparing thalweg at permanent monumented range
profiles, it is often difficult, especially locations, the cross-sectional geometry
on larger streams, to determine any at different times can be compared
distinct trends of aggradation or degra-
Geomorphic Processes 7- 53
340
- 1977 thalweg
1985 thalweg
320
? 300
QI
QI
:::.
c:
0
.,,
",+:)
>
QI
w 280
260
t= the time since the year prior to The variation of the regression coeffi-
the onset of the adjustment cients a and b with longitudinal dis-
process, in years (t 0 =0) tance along the channel can be used as
an empirical model of bed level adjust-
Future elevations of the channel bed ment providing there are data from
can, therefore, be estimated by fitting enough sites. Examples using both
the equations to bed elevations and by equations are provided for the Obion
solving for the period of interest. Either River system, West Tennessee (Figure
equation provides acceptable results, 7.27). Estimates of bed-level change
depending on the statistical significance with time for unsurveyed sites can be
of the fitted relation. Statistical signifi-
Geomorphic Processes 7- 55
obtained using interpolated coefficient Caution: If one of the above mathemati-
a values and t 0 • For channels down- cal functions is used to predict future
stream from dams without significant bed elevations, the assumption is made
tributary sediment inputs, the shape of that no new disturbances have occurred
the a-value curve would be similar but to trigger a new phase of channel
inverted; maximum amounts of degra- change. Downstream channelization,
dation (minimum a values) occur im- construction of a reservoir, formation of
mediately downstream of the dam and a large woody debris jam that blocks
attenuate nonlinearly with distance far- the channel, or even a major flood are
ther downstream. examples of disturbances that can trig-
ger a new period of rapid change.
Figure 7.27:
Coefficient a and b
values for regression
-0.010
• e 1st adjustment
v
-0.015 b-values from equation
equations.
Source: Simon 1989,
1992.
-0.020
E = atb
• area of maximum
disturbance and
mouth of ob;o"
River forks
-0.025
-0.030 ·'
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Distance Upstream from Mouth (miles)
1.06
e 1st adjustment
e 2nd adjustment
1.04
•
1.02 •===---=•
QI
:i
ro
>
th
1.00
.98
a-values from equation
z/z 0 = a + be(-kt)
•
,.., ...
area of maximum
.... e
disturbance and
.96 • ~ mouth of Obion
.94
• River forks
•
'
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Distance Upstream from Mouth (miles)
Bank Stability
Geomorphic Processes 7- 57
banks with respect to failures due to
gravity depends on the geometry of the A.
bank profile and the physical properties
of the bank materials, dominant failure
mechanisms tend to be closely associ-
ated with characteristic stratigraphy or
succession of layers (Figure 7 .29) .
B.
A steep bank consisting of uniform lay-
ers of cohesive or cemented soils gener- '\arcuate or
ally develops tension cracks at the top rotational
failure surface
of the bank parallel to the bank align-
ment. Slab failures occur when the c.
weight of the soil exceeds the strength overhang incipient failure plane
generated on
of the grain-to-grain contacts within the upper bank
soil. As clay content or cementing agent preferential
decreases, the slope of the bank de- retreat of
erodible
creases; vertical failure planes become basal layer coarse non-cohesive
lower bank
more flat and planar failure surfaces de-
velop. Rotational failures occur when D.
the bank soils are predominantly cohe-
outflow of
sive. Block-type failures occur when a sand and
weak soil layer is eroded away and the
layers above the weak layer lose struc-
water
t: sandy p~rvious
soil layer
tural support. fine-grained
soil layers
The gravity failure processes described
in Figure 7.29 usually occur after the 1. Seepage Outflow Initiates Soil Loss
banks have been saturated due to pre-
cipitation or high stream stages. The
outflow
water adds weight to the soil and re- continues
duces, grain-to-grain contacts and cohe-
sio.n forces while increasing the pore sandy pervious
soil layer
pressure. Pore pressure occurs when soil fine-grained _ --
water in the pore spaces is under pres- soil layers
sure from overlying soil and water. Pore 2. Undermined Upper Layer Falls,
pressure therefore is internal to the soil Blocks Detached
mass. Whe~ a stream is full, the flowing
outflow
continues
Figure 7.29: Relationship of dominant bank
failure mechanisms and associated $tratigraph-
ics. (a) Uniform bank undergoing planar type
failure (b) Uniform shallow bank undergoing fine-grained
soil layers
rotational type failure (c) Cohesive upper bank,
noncohesive lower bank leads to cantilever 3. Failed Blocks Topple or Slide
type failure mechanism (d) Complex bank
stratigraphy may lead to piping or sapping
type failures.
Source: Hagerty 1991. In Journal of Hydraulic
Engineering. Vol. 117 Number 8. Reproduced by
permission of ASCE.
Geomorphic Processes 7- 59
The gravitational force acting on the For fine-grained soils, cohesion and
bank is: friction angle data can be obtained
s = w sine from standard laboratory testing (triax-
a
ial shear or unconfined compression
Factors that decrease the erosional resis- tests) or by in situ testing with a bore-
tance (SJ, such as excess pore pressure hole shear test device (Handy and Fox
from saturation and the development 1967, Luttenegger and Hallberg 1981,
of vertical tension cracks, favor bank in- Thorne et al. 1981, Simon and Hupp
stabilities. Similarly, increases in bank 1992). For coarse-grained, cohesionless
height (due to channel incision) and soils, estimates of friction angles can be
bank angle (due to undercutting) favor obtained from reference manuals. By
bank failure by increasing the gravita- combining these data with estimates of
tional force component. In contrast, future bed elevations, relative bank sta-
vegetated banks generally are drier and bility can be assessed using bank stabil-
provide improved bank drainage, which ity charts.
enhances bank stability. Plant roots
provide tensile strength to the soil re- Bank Stability Charts
sulting in reinforced earth that resists To produce bank stability charts such as
mass failure, at least to the depth of the one following, a stability number
roots (Yang 1996). (N,) representing a simplification of the
bank (slope) stability equations is used.
Bank Instability and Channel
The stability number is a function of
Widening
- the bank-material friction angle (<j>) and
Channel widening is often caused by the bank angle (i) and is obtained from
increases in bank height beyond the a stability chart developed by Chen
critical conditions of the bank material. (1975) (Figure 7.31) or from Lohnes
Simon and Hupp (1992) show that and Handy (1968):
there is a positive correlation between
the amount of bed level lowering by N, = (4 sin i cos <j>) / [ 1 - cos ( i - <j>)]
degradation and amounts of channel The critical bank height He, where dri-
widening. The adjustment of channel ving forces. = resisting force S, for a
width by mass-wasting processes repre- given shear strength and bank geometry
sents an important mechanism of chan- is then calculated (Carson and Kirkby
nel adjustment and energy dissipation in 1972):
alluvial streams, occurring at rates cover-
He= N,(c / Y)
ing several orders of magnitude, up to
hundreds of feet per year (Simon 1994). where c =cohesion, in pounds per
square foot, and y =bulk unit weight of
Present and future bank stability may be soil in pounds per cubic foot.
analyzed using the following procedure:
Equations are solved for a range of
• Measure the current channel geome- bank angles using average or ambient
try and shear strength of the channel soil moisture conditions to produce the
banks. upper line "Ambient field conditions,
• Estimate the future channel geome- unsaturated." Critical bank height for
tries and model worst-case pore pres- worst-case conditions (saturated banks
sure conditions and average shear and rapid decline in river stage) are ob-
strength characteristics. tained by solving the equations, assum-
ing that <j> and the frictional component
of shear strength goes to 0.0 (Lutton
40
<-Iv
...,
::c: 20
II
VI
z
....
QI Figure 7.31: Stability
..c
E 10 number (NJ as a
::3
z function of bank
-~ angle (i) for a failure
:cIll surface passing
....
Ill
5 through the bank
toe. Critical bank
height for worst-case
condition can be
computed.
Source: Chen 1975.
1974) and by using a saturated bulk- with knowledge of the variability in co-
unit weight. These results are repre- hesive strengths. Five categories of
sented by the lower line, "saturated mean cohesive strength of channel
conditions." banks are identified in Figure 7.33.
The frequency of bank failure for the Critical bank heights above the mean
three stability classes (unstable, at-risk, low-water level and saturated condi-
and stable) is subjective and is based tions were used to construct the figure
primarily on empirical field data (Fig- because bank failures typically occur
ure 7.32) . An unstable channel bank during or after the recession of peak
can be expected to fail at least annually flows. The result is a nomograph giving
and possibly after each major storm- critical bank heights for a range of bank
flow in which the channel banks are angles and cohesive strengths that can
saturated, assuming that there is at least be used to estimate stable bank config-
one major stormflow in a given year. urations for worst-case conditions, such
as saturation during rapid decline in
At-risk conditions translate to a bank
failure every 2 to 5 years, again assum- river stage. For example, a saturated
ing that there is a major flow event to bank at an angle of 55 degrees and a
saturate the banks and to erode toe ma-
terial. Stable banks by definition do not
~
....QI 40 Figure 7.32:
QI
fail by mass wasting processes. How- :::. 30 Example of a bank
~
..., unstable
ever, channel banks on the outside of stability chart for
~
.... 20 "'-.ambient field estimating critical
meander bends may experience erosion
of the bank toe, leading to oversteepen-
..c
Cl
·a;
::c:
• at risk
conditions,
unsaturated bank height (H).
Geomorphic Processes
7-61
~
CV
100 • The timing of renewed bank stability
:t;.
c =cohesion, in pounds per square (in the case of aggradation and
~
:i:: inch
...... decreasing bank heights) .
....
..r::.
C'I
"Qi 10 • The bank height and angle needed
:i::
.:it. for a stable bank configuration under
c:
111
al c - 0 - 0.50 a range of moisture conditions.
111
v
+; 1 .___.....__..___...__...___...___...._____. Estimates of future channel widening
·;::
u 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 also can be made using measured
Bank Angle (degrees) channel-width data over a period of
years and then fitting a nonlinear func-
Figure 7.33: Critical bank-slope configurations
tion to the data (Figure 7.34). Williams
for various ranges of cohesive strengths under
saturated conditions. Specific data on the and Wolman (1984) used a dimension-
cohesive strength of bank materials can be less hyperbolic function of the follow-
collected to determine stable configurations. ing form to estimate channel widening
downstream from dams:
Manual sampling has several advan- Automated samplers have been im-
tages. These approaches are generally proved greatly in the last 10 years and
uncomplicated and often inexpensive now have features that are useful for
(particularly when labor is already many sampling purposes. Generally,
available). Manual sampling is required such sampling devices require larger
for sampling some pollutants. For ex- initial capital investments or the pay-
ample, according to Standard Methods ment of rental fees, but they can reduce
(APHA 1995), oil and grease, volatile overall labor costs (especially for long-
compounds, and bacteria must be ana- running sampling programs) and in-
lyzed from samples collected using crease the reliability of flow-weighted
manual methods. (Oil, grease, and bac- compositing.
teria can adhere to hoses and jars used Some automatic samplers include an
in automated sampling equipment, upper part consisting of a microproces-
causing inaccurate results; volatile com- sor-based controller, a pump assembly,
pounds can vaporize during automated and a filling mechanism, and a lower
sampling procedures or can be lost part containing a set of glass or plastic
from poorly sealed sample containers; sample containers and a well that can
and bacteria populations can grow and be filled with ice to cool the collected
Chemical Characteristics 7- 65
samples. More expensive automatic personnel, but they can reduce these
samplers can include refrigeration needs and can produce flow-weighted
equipment in place of the ice well; such composite samples that might be te-
devices, however, require a 120-volt dious or impossible using manual
power supply instead of a battery. Also, methods.
many automatic samplers can accept
Discrete versus Composite Sampling
input signals from a flowmeter to acti-
vate the sampler and to initiate a flow- Flow rates, physical conditions, and
weighting compositing program. Some chemical constituents in surface waters
samplers can accept input from a rain often vary continuously and simultane-
gauge to activate a sampling program. ously. This presents a difficulty when
determining water volumes, pollutant
Most automatic samplers allow collect- concentrations, and masses of pollu-
ing multiple discrete samples or single tants or their loads in the waste dis-
or multiple composited samples. Also, charge flows and in receiving waters.
samples can be split between sample Using automatic or continuously
bottles or can be composited into a sin- recording flowmeters allows obtaining
gle bottle. Samples can be collected on reasonable and continuous flow rate
a predetermined time basis or in pro- measurements for these waters. Pollu-
portion to flow measurement signals tant loads can then be computed by
sent to the sampler. multiplying these flow volumes over the
In spite of the obvious advantages of period of concern by the average pollu-
automated samplers, they have some tant concentration determined from the
disadvantages and limitations. Some discrete or flow-composited samples.
pollutants cannot be sampled by auto- When manual (instantaneous) flow
mated equipment unless only qualita- measurements are used, actual volume
tive results are desired. Although the flows over time can be estimated only
cleaning sequence provided by most for loading calculations, adding addi-
such samplers provide reasonably sepa- tional uncertainty to loading estimates.
rate samples, there is some cross-conta- Analyzing constituents of concern in a
mination of the samples since water single grab sample collection provides
droplets usually remain in the tubing. the minimum information at the mini-
Debris in the sampled receiving water mum cost. Such an approach, however,
can block the sampling line and pre- could be appropriate where conditions
vent sample collection. If the sampling are relatively stable; for example, during
line is located in the vicinity of a periods without rainfall or other poten-
flowmeter, debris caught on the sam- tial causes of significant runoff and
pling line can also lead to erroneous when the stream is well-mixed. Most
flow measurements. often, the usual method is to collect a
While automatic samplers can reduce random or regular series of grab sam-
manpower needs during storm and ples at predefined intervals during
runoff events, these devices must be storm or runoff events.
checked for accuracy during these When samples are collected often
events and must be regularly tested and enough, such that concentration
serviced. If no field checks are made changes between samples are mini-
during a storm event, data for the entire mized, a clear pattern or time series for
event may be lost. Thus, automatic sam- the pollutant's concentration dynamics
plers do not eliminate the need for field can be obtained. When sampling inter-
Chemical Characteristics 7- 67
lyzed in the field, including pH, tem-
perature, and dissolved oxygen (DO) .
pH
Levels of pH can change rapidly in sam-
ples after collection. Consequently, pH
often is measured in the field using a
hand-held pH electrode and meter.
Electrodes are easily damaged and con-
taminated and must be calibrated with
a standard solution before each use.
During calibrations and when site mea-
surements are conducted, field instru-
ments should be at thermal equilibrium
with the solutions being measured.
Temperature
Because water temperature changes
rapidly after collection, it must be mea-
sured either in the field (using in situ
probes) or immediately after collecting
a grab sample. EPA Method 170.1 de-
scribes procedures for thermometric de-
termination of water temperature.
Smaller streams often experience wide
Figure 7.35: Field sampling. Sampling can also diurnal variations in temperature, as
be automated.
well as pH and DO. Many streams also
experience vertical and longitudinal
trient concentrations, can be measured variability in temperature from shading
by both field and laboratory analytical and flow velocity. Because of the effect
methods. For chemical constituents, of temperature on other water quality
field measurements generally should be factors, such as dissolved oxygen con-
considered as qualitative screening val- centration, temperatures always should
ues since rigorous quality control is not be recorded when other field measure-
possible. In addition, samples collected ments are made.
for compliance with Clean Water Act re-
Dissolved Oxygen
quirements must be analyzed by a labo-
ratory certified by the appropriate When multiple DO readings are re-
authority, either the state or the USEPA. quired, a DO electrode and meter (EPA
The laboratories must use analytic tech- method 360.1) are typically used. To
niques listed in the Code of Federal Regu- obtain accurate measurements, the Win-
lations (CFR), Title 40, Part 136, kler titration method should be used to
"Guidelines Establishing Test Proce- calibrate the meter before and after each
dures for Analysis of Pollutants Under day's use. Often it is valuable to recheck
the Clean Water Act." the calibration during days of intensive
use, particularly when the m easure-
The balance of this subsection notes
special considerations regarding those ments are of critical importance.
parameters typically sampled and ana- Oxygen electrodes are fragile and sub-
ject to contamination, and they need
Chemical Characteristics 7- 69
label typically includes the following ing at its collection and ending when it
information: is analyzed. At each transfer of posses-
• Name of project. sion, both the relinquisher and the re-
ceiver of the samples are required to
• Location of monitoring. sign and date the form. The form and
• Specific sample location. the procedure document possession of
the samples and help prevent tamper-
• Date and time of sample collection.
ing. The container holding samples also
• Name or initials of sampler. can be sealed with a signed tape or seal
• Analysis to be performed. to help ensure that samples are not
compromised.
• Sample ID number.
Copies of the chain-of-custody form
• Preservative used. should be retained by the sampler and
• Type of sample (grab, composite). by the laboratory. Contract laboratories
often supply chain-of-custody forms
Sample Packaging and Shipping
with sample containers. The form is
It is sometimes necessary to ship sam- also useful for documenting which
ples to the laboratory. Holding times analyses will be performed on the sam-
should be checked before shipment to ples. These forms typically contain the
ensure that they will not be exceeded. following information:
Although wastewater samples are not
• Name of project and sampling loca-
usually considered hazardous, some
tions.
samples, such as those with extreme
pH, require special procedures. If the • Date and time that each sample is
sample is shipped through a common collected.
carrier or the U.S. Postal Service, it must • Names of sampling personnel.
comply with Department of Transporta-
tion Hazardous Material Regulations • Sample identification names and
( 49 CFR Parts 171 -177). Air shipment numbers.
of samples defined as hazardous may • Types of sample containers.
be covered by the requirements of the
• Analyses performed on each sample.
International Air Transport Association.
• Additional comments on each
Samples should be sealed in leakproof
sample.
bags and padded against breakage.
Many samples must be packed with an • Names of all those transporting the
ice substitute to maintain a temperature samples.
of 4 degrees C during shipment. Plastic
Collecting and Handling
or metal recreational coolers make ideal
Sediment Quality Samples
shipping containers because they pro-
tect and insulate the samples. Accompa- Sediments are sinks for a wide variety
nying paperwork, such as the of materials. Nonpoint source dis-
chain-of-custody documentation, charges typically include large quanti-
should be sealed in a waterproof bag in ties of suspended material that settle
the shipping container. out in sections of receiving waters hav-
Chain of Custody ing low water velocities. Nutrients,
metals, and organic compounds can
Chain-of-custody forms document each bind to suspended solids and settle to
change in possession of a sample, start- the bottom of a water body when flow
Chemical Characteristics 7- 71
attainment of narrative requirements of or the recording of erroneous data. Lost
some water quality standards. Two of or erroneous data can severely damage
these common analyses are introduced the quality of monitoring programs. A
briefly in the following paragraphs. sound and efficient data management
Bulk sediment analyses analyze the program for a monitoring program
total concentration of contaminants should focus on preventing such prob-
that are either bound to sediments or lems. This requires that data be man-
present in pore water. Results are re- aged directly and separately from the
ported in milligrams or micrograms per activities that use them.
kilogram of sediment material. This Data management systems include tech-
type of testing often serves as a screen- nical and managerial components. The
ing analysis to classify dredged material. technical components involve selecting
Results of bulk testing tend to overesti- appropriate computer equipment and
mate the mass of contaminants that software and designing the database, in-
will be available for release or for bio- cluding data definition, data standard-
logical uptake because a portion of the ization, and a data dictionary. The
contaminants are not biologically avail- managerial components include data
able or likely to dissolve. entry, data validation and verification,
Elutriate testing estimates the amount of data access, and methods for users to
contaminants likely to be released from access the data.
sediments when mixed with water. In To ensure the integrity of the database,
an elutriate test, sediment is mixed with it is imperative that data quality be con-
water and then agitated. The standard trolled from the point of collection to
elutriate test for dredge material mixes the time the information is entered into
four parts water from the receiving the database. Field and laboratory per-
water body with one part sediment sonnel must carefully enter data into
(USEPA 1990). After vigorous mixing, proper spaces on data sheets and avoid
the sample is allowed to settle before transposing numbers. To avoid tran-
the supernatant is filtered and analyzed scription errors, entries into a database
for contaminants. This test was de- should be made from original data
signed to estimate the amount of mate- sheets or photocopies. As a preliminary
rial likely to enter the dissolved phase screen for data quality, the database de-
during dredging; however, it is also use- sign should include automatic parame-
ful as a screening test for determining ter range checking. Values outside the
whether further testing should be per- defined ranges should be flagged by the
formed and as a tool for comparing program and immediately corrected or
sediments upstream and downstream of included in a follow-up review of the
potential pollutant sources. entered data. For some parameters, it
might be appropriate to include auto-
Data Management matic checks to disallow duplicate val-
All monitoring data should be orga- ues. Preliminary database files should
nized and stored in a readily accessible be printed and verified against the orig-
form. The potentially voluminous and inal data to identify errors.
diverse nature of the data, and the vari- Additional data validation can include
ety of individuals who can be involved expert review of the verified data to
in collecting, recording, and entering identify possible suspicious values.
data, can easily lead to the loss of data Sometimes, consultation with the indi-
Chemical Characteristics 7- 73
cate samples, when analyzed by the er at the sampling site. Field blanks
same laboratory, provide precision test for contamination in the deion-
information for the entire measure- ized water and contamination intro-
ment system, including sample duced through the sampling proce-
collection, homogeneity, handling, dure. They differ from trip blanks,
shipping, storage, preparation, and which remain unopened in the field.
analysis. • Trip blanks test for cross-contamina-
• Split samples have been divided into tion during transit of volatile con-
two or more portions at some point stituents, such as many synthetic
in the measurement process. Split organic compounds and mercury. For
samples that are divided in the field each shipment of sample containers
yield results relating precision to sent to the analytical laboratory, one
handling, shipping, storage, prepara- container is filled with analyte-free
tion, and analysis. The split samples water at the laboratory and is sealed.
may be sent to different laboratories The blanks are transported to the site
and subjected to the same measure- with the balance of the sample con-
ment process to assess interlaborato- tainers and remain unopened.
ry variation. Split samples serve an Otherwise, they are handled in the
oversight function in assessing the same manner as the other samples.
analytical portion of the measure- The trip blanks are returned to the
ment system, whereas error due to laboratory with the samples and are
sampling technique may be estimat- analyzed for the volatile constituents.
ed by analyzing duplicate versions of
Field Quality Assurance
the same sample.
Errors or a lack of standardization in
• Spiked samples are those to which a field procedures can significantly de-
known quantity of a substance is crease the reliability of environmental
added. The results of spiking a sam- monitoring data. If required, a quality
ple in the field are usually expressed assurance project plan should be fol-
as percent recovery of the added lowed for field measurement proce-
material. Spiked samples provide a dures and equipment. If the QAPP is
check of the accuracy of laboratory not formally required, a plan including
and analytic procedures. similar material should be developed to
Sampling accuracy can be estimated by ensure the quality of data collected.
evaluating the results obtained from Standard operating procedures should
blanks. The most suitable types of be followed when available and should
blanks for this appraisal are equipment, be developed when not.
field, and trip blanks. It is important that quality procedures
• Equipment blanks are samples obtained be followed and regularly examined.
by running analyte-free water through For example, field meters can provide
sample collection equipment, such as erroneous values if they are not regu-
a bailer, pump, or auger, after decon- larly calibrated and maintained.
tamination procedures are complet- Reagent solutions and probe electrolyte
ed. These samples are used to deter- solutions have expiration periods and
mine whether variation is introduced should be refreshed periodically.
by sampling equipment.
• Field blanks are made by transferring
deionized water to a sample contain-
Nearly all analytical procedures for as- for the corridor, a value observed at an
sessing the condition of biological re- "unimpacted" reference site, a range of
sources can be used in stream corridor values observed in other systems, or a
restoration. Such procedures differ, normative value for that class of stream
however, in their scale and focus and in corridors in a stream classification sys-
the assumptions, knowledge, and effort tem. However, the indicator itself and
required to apply them. These proce- the analysis that establishes the value
dures can be grouped into two broad of the indicator provide no direct infor-
classes-synthetic measures of system mation about what has caused the sys-
condition and analyses based on how tem to have a particular value for the
well the system satisfies the life history indicator.
requirements of target species or species Deciding what to change in the system
groups. to improve the value of the indicator
The most important difference between depends on a temporal analysis in
these classes is the logic of how they are which observed changes in the indica-
applied in managing or restoring a tor in one system are correlated with
stream corridor system. This chapter fo- various management actions or on a
cuses on metrics of biological condi- spatial analysis in which values of the
tions and does not describe, for indicator in different systems are corre-
example, actual field methods for lated with different values of likely con-
counting organisms. trolling variables. In both cases, no
more than a general empirical correla-
Synthetic Measures of System tion between specific causal factors and
Condition the indicator variable is attempted.
Synthetic measures of system condition Thus, management or restoration based
summarize some aspect of the struc- on synthetic measures of system condi-
tural or functional status of a system at tion relies heavily on iterative monitor-
a particular point in time. Complete ing of the indicator variable and trial
measurement of the state of a stream and error, or adaptive management, ap-
corridor system, or even a complete proaches. For example, an index of
census of all of the species present, is species composition based on the pres-
not feasible. Thus, good indicators of ence or absence of a set of sensitive
system condition are efficient in the species might be generally correlated
sense that they summarize the health of with water quality, but the index itself
the overall system without having to provides no information on how water
measure everything about the system. quality should be improved. However,
the success of management actions in
Use of indicators of system condition in
improving water quality could be
management or restoration depends
tracked and evaluated through iterative
completely on comparison to values of
measurement of the index.
the indicator observed in other systems
or at other times. Thus, the current Synthetic measures of system condition
value of an indicator for a degraded vary along a number of important di-
stream corridor can be compared to a mensions that determine their applica-
previously measured preimpact value bility. In certain situations, single
for the corridor, a desired future value species might be good indicators of
Biological Characteristics 7- 75
Indicator Species
Landres et al. ( 1988) define an indicator
Stream Visual Assessment Protocol species as an organism whose character-
istics (e.g., presence or absence, popula-
This is another assessment tool that provides a basic
tion density, dispersion, reproductive
level of stream health evaluation. It is intended to be the
success) are used as an index of attrib-
first level in a four-part hierarchy of assessment protocols
utes too difficult, inconvenient, or ex-
that facilitate planning stream restorations. Scores are
pensive to measure for oth er species or
assigned by the planners for the following:
environmental conditions of interest.
• Channel condition Ecologists and management agencies
• Hydrologic alteration have used aquatic and terrestrial indica-
• Riparian zone width tor species for many years as assessment
tools, the late 1970s and early 1980s
• Bank stability
being a peak interest period. During that
• Canopy cover time, Habitat Evaluation Procedures
• Water appearance (HEP) were developed by the U.S. Fish
• Nutrient enrichment and Wildlife Service, and the U.S. Forest
• Manure presence Service's use of management indicator
species was mandated by law with pas-
• Salinity
sage of the National Forest Management
• Barriers to fish movement Act in 1976. Since that time, numerous
• lnstream fish cover authors have expressed concern about
• Pools the ability of indicator species to meet
• Riffle quality the expectations expressed in the above
definition. Most notably, Landres et al.
• Invertebrate habitat
(1988) critically evaluated the use of
• M acroinvertebrates observed vertebrate species as ecological indica-
The p lanning assessment concludes with narratives of tors and suggested that rigorous justifi-
the suspected causes of observed problems, as well as cation and evaluation are needed before
recommendations or further steps in the planning the concept is used. The discussion of
process (USDA-NRCS 1998). indicator species below is largely based
on their paper.
The Good and Bad of Indicator Species
Indicator species have been used to pre-
some aspect of a stream corridor sys- dict environmental contamination,
tem; in others, community metrics, population trends, and habitat quality;
such as diversity, might be more suit- however, their use in evaluating water
able. Some indicators incorporate phys- quality is not covered in this section.
ical variables, and others do not. The assumptions implicit in using indi-
Measurements of processes and rates, cators are that if the habitat is suitable
such as primary productivity and chan- for the indicator it is also suitable for
nel meandering rates, are incorporated other species (usually in a similar eco-
into some and not into others. Each of logical guild) and that wildlife popula-
these dimensions must be evaluated rel- tions reflect habitat conditions.
ative to the objectives of the restoration However, because each species has
effort to determine which, if any, indi- unique life requisites, the relationship
cator is most appropriate. between the indicator and its guild may
Biological Characteristics 7- 77
Riparian Response Guilds document when, during the recovery
Vertebrate response guilds as indicators stage, the more sensitive species out-
of restoration success in riparian ecosys- compete generalists.
tems may be a valuable monitoring tool Aquatic Invertebrates
but should be used with the same cau-
Aquatic invertebrates have been used as
tions presented above. Croonquist and
indicators of stream and riparian health
Brooks (1991) evaluated the effects of
for many years. Perhaps more than
anthropogenic disturbances on small
other taxa, they are closely tied to both
mammals and birds along Pennsylvania
aquatic and riparian habitat. Their life
waterways. They evaluated species in
cycles usually include periods in and
five different response guilds, including
out of the water, with ties to riparian
wetland dependency, trophic level,
vegetation for feeding, pupation, emer-
species status (endangered, recreational,
gence, mating, and egg laying (Erman
native, exotic), habitat specificity, and
1991).
seasonality (birds) .
It is often important to look at the en-
They found that community coefficient
tire assemblage of aquatic invertebrates
indices were better indicators than
as an indicator group. Impacts to a
species richness. The habitat specificity
stream often decrease diversity but
and seasonality response guilds for birds
might increase the abundance of some
were best able to distinguish those
species, with the size of the first species
species sensitive to disturbance from
to be affected often larger (Wallace and
those which were not affected or were
Gurtz 1986). In summary, a good indi-
benefited. Neotropical migrants and
cator species should be low on the food
species with specific habitat require-
chain to respond quickly, should have a
ments were the best predictors of distur-
narrow tolerance to change, and should
bance. Edge and exotic species were
be a native species (Erman 1991 ).
greater in abundance in the disturbed
habitats and might serve as good indica- Diversity and Related Indices
tors there. Seasonality analysis showed
migrant breeders were more common in Biological diversity refers to the number
undisturbed areas, which, as suggested of species in an area or region and in-
by Verner (1984), indicates the ability of cludes a measure of the variety of
guild analysis to distinguish local im- species in a community that takes into
pacts. Mammalian response guilds did account the relative abundance of each
not exhibit any significant sensitivity to species (Ricklefs 1990). When measur-
disturbance and were considered unsuit- ing diversity, it is important to clearly
able as indicators. define the biological objectives, stating
exactly what attributes of the system are
In contrast, Mannan et al. (1984)
of concern and why (Schroeder and
found that in only one of the five avian
Keller 1990). Different measures of di-
guilds tested was the density of birds
versity can be applied at various levels
consistent across managed and undis-
of complexity, to different taxonomic
turbed forests. In other words, popula-
groups, and at distinct spatial scales.
tion response to restoration might not
Several factors should be considered
be consistent across different indicator
in using diversity as a measure of sys-
guilds. Also, periodically monitoring
tem condition for stream corridor
restoration initiatives is necessary to
restoration.
Biological Characteristics 7- 79
where • A measure of habitat diversity.
H= index of species diversity • A measure of local rarity.
S= number of species Other indices used to measure various
pi= proportion of total sample aspects of diversity include vegetation
belonging to the i'11 species measures, such as foliage height diver-
sity (MacArthur and MacArthur 1961 ),
Results of most studies using diversity and landscape measures, such as fractal
indices are relatively insensitive to the dimension, fragmentation indices, and
particular index used (Ricklefs 1979). juxtaposition (Noss 1994).
For example, bird species diversity in-
dices from 267 breeding bird censuses Related Integrity Indices
were highly correlated (r = 0.97) with Karr (1981) developed the Index of Bi-
simple counts of bird species richness otic Integrity to assess the diversity and
(Tramer 1969). At the species level, a health of aquatic communities. This
simple measure of richness is most index is designed to assess the present
often used in conservation biology status of the aquatic community using
studies because the many rare species fish community parameters related to
that characterize most systems are gen- species composition, species richness,
erally of greater interest than the com- and ecological factors. Species composi-
mon species that dominate in diversity tion and richness parameters may in-
indices and because accurate popula- clude the presence of intolerant species,
tion density estimates are often not the richness and composition of spe-
available (Meffe et al. 1994). cific species groups (e.g., darters), or the
Simple measures of species richness, proportion of specific groups (e.g., hy-
however, are not sensitive to the actual brid individuals). Ecological parameters
species composition of an area. Similar may include the proportion of top car-
richness values in two different areas nivores, number of individuals, or pro-
may represent very different sets of portion with disease or other
species. The usefulness of these mea- anomalies. Key parameters are devel-
sures can be increased by considering oped for the stream system of interest,
specific subsets of species of most con- and each parameter is assigned a rating.
cern, as mentioned above. Magurran The overall rating of a stream is used to
(1988) recommends going beyond the evaluate the quality of the aquatic
use of a single diversity measure and ex- biota.
amining the shape of the species abun- Rapid Bioassessment
dance distribution as well. Breeding Rapid bioassessment techniques are
bird census data from an 18-hectare most appropriate when restoration
(ha) riparian deciduous forest habitat goals are nonspecific and broad, such
in Ohio (Tramer 1996) can be used to as improving the overall aquatic com-
illustrate these different methods of munity or establishing a more balanced
presentation (Figure 7.36). Breeding and diverse community in the stream
bird species richness in this riparian corridor. Bioassessment often refers to
habitat was 38. use of biotic indices or composite
Pielou (1 993 ) recommends the use of analyses, such as those used by Ohio
three indices to adequately assess diver- EPA (1990), and rapid bioassessment
sity in terrestrial systems: protocols (RBP), such as those docu-
• A measure of plant species diversity. mented by Plafkin et al. (1989) . Ohio
Although collecting algae in streams re- Figure 7.36: Breeding bird census data. Species
quires little effort, identifying for met- abundance curve in a riparian deciduous forest
rics, such as diversity indices and taxa habitat.
Source: Tramer 1996.
Biological Characteristics 7- 81
Table 7.8: Five tiers of the rapid bioassessment protocols. RBPs are used to conduct cost-effective
biological assessments.
Source: Plafkin et al. 1989.
- II
-
Organism
Group
Benthic
invertebrates
Benthic
invertebrates
Relative Level of Effort
Intermediate; 1.5-2.5 hr
per site (all taxonomy
Level of Taxonomy/
Where Performed
Fam ily/field
Level of Expertise
Required
One highly-trained
biologist
Ill Benthic Most rigorous; 3-5 hr per Genus or One highly-trained biologist
invertebrates site (2-3 hr of total are for species/laboratory and one technician
lab taxonomy)
IV Fish Low; 1-3 hr per site (no Not applicable One highly-trained
fieldwork involved) biologist
v Fish Most rigorous; 2-7 hr per Species/field One highly-trained biologist
site (1-2 hr per site are for and 1-2 technicians
data analysis)
richness, may require considerable ef- As indicated above, the RBP are divided
fort. A great deal of effort may be ex- into three sets of protocols (RBP I to
pended to d ocument diurnal and III) for macroinvertebrates. RBP I is a
seasonal variations in productivity. "screening" or reconnaissance-level
analysis used to discriminate obviously
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
impaired and nonimpaired sites from
The intent of the benthic rapid potentially affected areas requiring fur-
bioassessm ent is to evaluate overall bio- ther investigation . RBP II and III use a
logical condition, optimizing the use of set of metrics based on ta:xon tolerance
the benth ic community's capacity to re- and community structure similar to the
flect integrated environmental effects ICI used by the state of Ohio. Both are
over time. Using benthic macroinverte- more labor-intensive than RBP I and in-
brates is advantageous for the fo llowing corporate field sampling. RBP II uses
reasons: family-level taxonomy to determine the
• They are good indicators of localized following set of metrics used in describ-
conditions. ing the biotic integrity of a stream:
• They integrate the effects of short- • Taxa rich ness.
term environmental variables. • Hilsenhoff biotic index (Hilsenhoff
• Degraded conditions are easily 1988) .
detected. • Ratio of scrapers to filtering collectors.
• Sampling is relatively easy. • Ratio of Ephemeroptera/Plecoptera/
• Th ey provide food for many fish of Trichoptera (EPT) and chironomid
commercial or recreational impor- abundances.
tance. • Percent contribution of dominant
• Macroinvertebrates are generally ta:xa.
abundant. • EPT index.
• Many states already h ave background • Community similarity index.
data.
• Ratio of shred ders to total n umber of
individuals.
Biological Characteristics 7- 83
Historical conditions in the region ence of an invasive species in the com-
should be considered when establishing munity. Knowledge of the important
a standard of comparison. If current factors can be obtained from existing
conditions in a stream corridor are literature and from discussions with
degraded, it may be best to establish local and regional experts.
the standard at a period in the past that Diversity can be measured directly or
represented more natural or desired predicted from other information. Di-
conditions. Knopf (1986) notes that for rect measurement requires an actual in-
certain western streams, historical diver- ventory of the element of diversity, such
sity might have been less than current as counting the amphibian species in
due to changes in hydrology and en- the study area. The IBI requires sam-
croachment of native and exotic ripar- pling fish populations to determine the
ian vegetation in the floodplain. Thus, number and composition of fish
it is important to agree on what condi- species. Measures of the richness of a
tions are desired prior to establishing particular animal group require counts.
the standard of comparison. In addi- Determining the number of species in a
tion, the geographic location and size community is best accomplished with a
of the area should be considered. Pat- long-term effort because there can be
terns of diversity vary with geographic much variation over short periods. Vari-
location, and larger areas are typically ation can arise from observer differ-
more diverse than smaller areas. ences, sampling design, or temporal
The IBI is scaled to a standard of com- variation in the presence of species.
parison determined through either pro- Direct measures of diversity are most
fessional judgment or empirical data, helpful when baseline information is
and such indices have been developed available for comparing different sites.
for a variety of streams (Leonard and It is not possible, however, to directly
Orth 1986, Bramblett and Fausch 1991, measure certain attributes, such as
Lyons et al. 1996). species richness or the population level
Evaluating the Chosen Index of various species, for various future
For a hypothetical stream restoration conditions. For example, the IBI cannot
initiative, the following biological diver- be directly computed for a predicted
sity objective might be developed. As- stream corridor condition, following
sume that a primary concern in the area management action.
is conserving native amphibian species Predictions of diversity for various fu-
and that 30 native species of amphib- ture conditions, such as with restora-
ians have been known to occur histori- tion or management, require the use of
cally in the 386 m 2 watershed. The a predictive model. Assume the diver-
objective could be to manage the sity objective for a stream corridor
stream corridor to provide and main- restoration effort is to maximize native
tain suitable habitat for the 30 native amphibian species richness. Based on
amphibian species. knowledge of the life history of the
Stream corridor restoration efforts must species, including requirements for
be directed toward those factors that habitat, water quality, or landscape
can be managed to increase diversity to configuration, a plan can be developed
the desired level. Those factors might be to restore a stream corridor to meet
the physical and structural features of these needs. The plan could include a
the stream corridor or possibly the pres- set of criteria or a model to describe
the specific features that should b e
Integrated riparian evaluation Hydrology, geomorphology, soils, lntermountain U.S. Forest Service
guide vegetation (1992)
Streamflow cluster analysis Hydrology with correlations to National Pott and Ward
fish and invertebrates (1989)
Hydrogeomorphic wetland Hydrol ogy, geomorph ology, Natio nal Brinson (1 993)
classification vegetation
Biological Characteristics 7- 85
ables of hydrology, geomorphology, Use of Classification Systems in
and aquatic chemistry. Other com- Restoring Biological Conditions
munity classifications are restricted Restoration efforts may apply several
to biotic variables of species compo- national and regional classification sys-
sition and abundance of a limited tems to the riverine site or sites of inter-
number of taxa. Many classifications est because these are efficient ways to
include both abiotic and biotic vari- summarize basic site description and
ables. Even purely abiotic classifica- inventory information and they can fa-
tion systems are relevant to biologi- cilitate the transference of existing in-
cal evaluations because of the impor- formation from other similar systems.
tant correlations (e.g., the whole con-
cept of physical habitat) between abi- Most classification systems are generally
otic structure and community com- weak at identifying causal mechanisms.
position. To varying degrees, classification sys-
tems identify variables that efficiently
• Incorporation of temporal relations. describe existing conditions. Rarely do
Some classifications focus on they provide unequivocal assurance
describing correlations and similari- about how variables actually cause the
ties across sites at one, perhaps ideal- observed conditions. Planning efficient
ized, point in time. Other classifica- and effective restoration actions gener-
tions identify explicit temporal tran- ally requires a much more mechanistic
sitions among classes, for example, analysis of how changes in controllable
succession of biotic communities or variables will cause changes toward de-
evolution of geomorphic landforms. sired values of response variables. A sec-
• Focus on structural variation or func- ond limitation is that application of a
tional behavior. Some classifications classification system does not substitute
emphasize a parsimonious descrip- for goal setting or design. Comparison
tion of observed variation in the clas- of the degraded system to an actual
sification variables. Others use classi- unimpacted reference site, to the ideal
fication variables to identify types type in a classification system, or to a
with different behaviors. For exam- range of similar systems can provide a
ple, a vegetation classification can be framework for articulating the desired
based primarily on patterns of state of the degraded system. However,
species co-occurrence, or it can be the desired state of the system is a
based on similarities in functional management objective that ultimately
effect of vegetation on habitat value. comes from outside the classification of
system variability.
• The extent to which management alter-
natives or human actions are explicitly Analyses of Species
considered as classification variables. Requirements
To the extent that these variables are
part of the classification itself, the Analyses of species requirements in-
classification system can directly volve explicit statements of how vari-
predict the result of a management ables interact to determine habitat or
action. For example, a vegetation how well a system provides for the life
classification based on grazing in- requisites of fish and wildlife species.
tensity would predict a change from Complete specification of relations be-
one class of vegetation to another tween all relevant variables and all
class based on a change in grazing species in a stream corridor system is
management. not possible. Thus, analyses based on
Biological Characteristics 7- 87
The fundamental unit of measure in reservoir, and any areas of secondary
HEP is the Habitat Unit, computed as impact, such as a downstream river
follows: reach that might have an altered flow,
HU = AREA x HSI increased turbidity, or warmer tempera-
ture, or riparian or upland areas subject
where HU is the number of habitat to land use changes as a result of an in-
units (units of area), AREA is the areal creased demand on recreational lands.
extent of the habitat being described Areas such as an upstream spawning
(units of area), and HSI is the index of ground that are not contiguous to the
suitability of the habitat (unitless). primary impact site also might be af-
Conceptually, an HU integrates the fected and therefore should be included
quantity and quality of habitat into a in the study area.
single measure, and one HU is equiva-
lent to one unit of optimal habitat. The team also must establish project
objectives, an often neglected aspect of
Use of HEP to Assess Habitat Changes project planning. Objectives should
HEP provides an assessment of the net state what is to be accomplished in the
change in the number of HUs attribut- project and specify an endpoint to the
able to a proposed future action, such project. An integral aspect of objective
as a stream restoration initiative. A HEP setting is selecting evaluation species,
application is essentially a two-step the specific wildlife resources of con-
process-calculating future HUs for a cern for which HUs will be computed
particular project alternative and calcu- in the HEP analysis. These are often in-
lating the net change as compared to a dividual species, but they do not have
base condition. to be. Depending on project objectives,
species' life stages (e.g., juvenile
The steps involved in using and apply-
salmon), species' life requisites (e.g.,
ing HEP to a management project are
spawning habitat), guilds (e.g., cavity-
outlined in detail in USFWS (1980a).
nesting birds), or communities (e.g.,
However, some early planning decisions
avian richness in riparian forests) can
often are given little attention although
be used.
they may be the most important part of
a HEP study. These initial decisions in- lnstream Flow Incremental
clude forming a study team, defining Methodology
the study boundaries, setting study ob- The Instream Flow Increm ental
jectives, and selecting the evaluation Methodology (IFIM) is an adaptive sys-
species. The study team usually consists tem composed of a library of models
of individuals representing different that are linked to describe the spatial
agencies and viewpoints. One member and temporal habitat features of a given
of the team is generally from the lead river. IFIM is described in Chapter 5
project planning agency and other under Supporting Analysis for Selecting
members are from resources agencies Restoration Alternatives.
with an interest in the resources that
would be affected. Physical Habitat Simulation
One of the first tasks for the team is to The Physical Habitat Simulation
delineate the study area boundaries. (PHABSIM) model was designed by the
The study area boundaries should be U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service primarily
drawn to include any areas of direct im- for instream flow analysis (Bovee
pact, such as a flood basin for a new 1982). It represents the habitat evalua-
measured discharges (e.g., stage vs. dis- values for all cells are summed to pro-
charge relations, Manning's equation, duce the WUA.
step-backwater computations). Habitat There are many variations on the basic
simulation integrates species and life- approach outlined above, with specific Review Chapter
stage-specific habitat suitability curves analyses tailored for different water S's Supporting
for water depth, velocity, and substrate management phenomena (such as hy- A nalysis for
with the hydraulic data. Output is a dropeaking and unique spawning habi- Selecting
plot of weighted usable area (WUA) tat needs), or for special habitat needs Restoration
against discharge for the species and life (such as bottom velocity instead of A lt ernatives
stages of interest. (Figure 7.38) mean column velocity) (Milhous et al.
The stream hydraulic component pre- 1989). However, the fundamentals of
dicts depths and water velocities at un- hydraulic and habitat modeling remain
observed flows at specific locations on a the same, resulting in a WUA versus dis-
cross section of a stream. Field measure- charge function. This function should
ments of depth, velocity, substrate ma- be combined with the appropriate hy-
terial, and cover at specific sampling drologic time series (water availability)
points on a cross section are taken at to develop an idea of what life states
different observable flows. Hydraulic might be affected by a loss or gain of
measurements, such as water surface el- available habitat and at what time of
evations, also are collected during the the year. Time series analysis plays this
field inventory. These data are used to role and also factors in any physical
calibrate the hydraulic simulation mod- and institutional constraints on water
els. The models then are used to predict management so that alternatives can be
depths and velocities at flows different evaluated (Milhous et al. 1990).
from those m easured. Several things must be remembered
The habitat component weights each about PHABSIM. First, it provides an
stream cell using indices that assign a index to microhabitat availability; it is
relative value between 0 and 1 for each not a measure of the habitat actually
habitat attribute (depth, velocity, sub- used by aquatic organisms. It can be
strate material, cover), indicating how used only if the species under consider-
suitable that attribute is for the life ation exhibit documented preferences
stage under consideration. These at- for depth, velocity, substrate material,
tribute indices are usually termed habi- cover, or other predictable microhabitat
tat suitability indices and are developed attributes in a specific environment of
Biological Characteristics 7- 89
1.0
A. Site-Specific Microhabitat Data B. Habitat
Suitability 0.8
cross section B Criteria -Ill 0.6
0.4
0.2
00 1 2 3 4
Velocity (ft/sec)
1.0
0.8
- 0.6
velocity Ill
0.4
depth
cover 0.2
area 00 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Depth (ft) Cover
100,000 . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .
•
•
•
100
Discharge
Figure 7.38: Conceptualization of how PHAB- competition and predation. The typical
SIM calculates habitat values as a function of application of PHABSIM assumes rela-
discharge. A. First, depth (Di), velocity (Vi), tively steady flow conditions such that
cover conditions (Ci), and area (Ai) are mea-
depths and velocities are comparably
sured or simulated for a given discharge. B.
Suitability index (SI) criteria are used to weight stable within the chosen time step.
the area of each cell for the discharge. The PHABSIM does not predict the effects of
habitat values for all cells in the study reach flow on channel change. Fin ally, the
are summed to obtain a single habitat value field data and computer analysis re-
for the discharge. C. The procedure is repeated quirements can be relatively large.
for a range of discharges.
Modified fro m Nestler et al. 1989. Two-dimensional Flow Modeling
Concern about the simplicity of the
one-dimensional hydraulic models used
in PHABSIM h as led to current research
interest in the use of more sophisticated
two-dimensional hydraulic m odels to
Biological Characteristics 7- 91
controlling riverine resources. Use of assess the risk that abundance will fall
PHABSIM is generally limited to river below some threshold requiring mitiga-
systems in which dissolved oxygen, sus- tion. For stream situations, several
pended sediment, nutrient loading, CompMech models have been devel-
other chemical aspects of water quality, oped that couple the hydraulic simula-
and interspecific competition do not tion method of PHABSIM directly with
place the major limits on populations an individual-based model of reproduc-
of interest. These limitations to the use tion and young-of-year dynamics,
of PHABSIM can be abated or removed thereby eliminating reliance on the
with models that simulate response of habitat-based component of PHABSIM
individual fish or fish populations. (Jager et al. 1993). The CompMech
model of smallmouth bass is being
Individual-based Models
used to evaluate the effects of alterna-
The Electric Power Research Institute tive flow regimes on nest success,
(EPRI) program on compensatory growth, mortality, and ultimately year
mechanisms in fish populations class strength in a Virginia stream to
(CompMech) has the objective of im- identify instream flows that protect fish-
proving predictions of fish population eries with minimum impact on hy-
response to increased mortality, loss of dropower production.
habitat, and release of toxicants (EPRI
1996). This technique has been applied A model of coexisting populations of
by utilities and resource management rainbow and brown trout in California
agencies in assessments involving direct is being used to evaluate alternative in-
mortality due to entrainment, impinge- stream flow and temperature scenarios
ment, or fishing; instream flow; habitat (Van Winkle et al. 1996). Model predic-
alteration (e.g., thermal discharge, tions will be compared with long-term
water-level fluctuations, water diver- field observations before and after ex-
sions, exotic species); and ecotoxicity. perimental flow increases; numerous
Compensation is defined as the capac- scientific papers are expected from this
ity of a population to self-mitigate de- intensive study.
creased growth, reproduction, or An individual-based model of smolt
survival of some individuals in the pop- production by Chinook salmon, as part
ulation by increased growth, reproduc- of an environmental impact statement
tion, or survival of the remaining for the Tuolumne River in California,
individuals. The CompMech approach considered the minimum stream flows
over the past decade has been to repre- necessary to ensure continuation and
sent in simulation models the processes maintenance of the anadromous fishery
underlying daily growth, reproduction, (FERC 1996). That model, the Oak
and survival of individual fish (hence Ridge Chinook salmon model (ORCM),
the classification of individual-based predicts annual production of salmon
models) and then to aggregate over in- smolts under specified reservoir mini-
dividuals to the population level. mum releases by evaluating critical fac-
The models can be used to make short- tors, including influences on upstream
term predictions of survival, growth, migration of adults, spawning and incu-
habitat utilization, and consumption bation of eggs, rearing of young, and
for critical life stages. For the longer predation and mortality losses during
term, the models can be used to project the downstream migration of smolts.
population abundance through time to Other physical habitat analyses were
used to supplement the population
Biological Characteristics 7- 93
Vegetation-Hydroperiod predict new site moisture conditions.
Modeling The most useful vegetation-hydroperiod
models have the following three com-
In most cases, the dominant factor that ponents:
makes the riparian zone distinct from
the surrounding uplands, and the most • Characterization of the hydrology or pat-
important gradient in structuring varia- tern of streamfiow. This can take the
tion within the riparian zone, is site form of a specific sequence of flows,
moisture conditions, or hydroperiod a summary of how often different
(Figure 7.39). Hydroperiod is defined flows occur, such as a flow duration
as the depth, duration, and frequency or flood frequency curve, or a repre-
of inundation and is a powerful deter- sentative flow value, such as bankfull
minant of what plants are likely to be discharge or mean annual discharge.
FAST found in various positions in the ripar- • A relation between streamfiow and mois-
FORWARD
ian zone. Formalizing this relation as a ture conditions at sites in the riparian
vegetation-hydroperiod model can pro- zone. This relation can be measured
vide a powerful tool for analyzing exist- as the water surface elevation at a
ing distributions of riparian vegetation, variety of discharges and summarized
Preview casting forward or backward in time to as a stage vs. discharge curve. It can
Chapter B's alternative distributions, and designing also be calculated by a number of
information on new distributions. The suitability of site hydraulic models that relate water
vegetation- conditions for various species of plants surface elevations to discharge, taking
hydroperiod can be described with the same concep-
model.
into account variables of channel
tual approach used to model habitat geometry and roughness or resistance
suitability for animals. The basic logic to flow. In some cases, differences in
of a vegetation-hydroperiod model is simple elevation above the channel
straightforward. How wet a site is has a bottom may serve as a reasonable
lot to do with what plants typically approximation of differences in
grow on the site. It is possible to mea- inundating discharge.
sure how wet a site is and, more impor-
• A relation between site moisture condi-
tantly, to predict how wet a site will be
tions and the actual or potential vegeta-
based on the relation of the site to a
tion distribution. This relation express-
stream. From this, it is possible to esti-
es the suitability of a site for a plant
mate what vegetation is likely to occur
species or cover type based on the
on the site.
moisture conditions at the site. It can
Components of a Vegetation- be determined by sampling the dis-
hydroperiod Model tribution of vegetation at a variety of
The two basic elements of the vegeta- sites with known moisture condi-
tion-hydroperiod relation are the physi- tions and then deriving probability
cal conditions of site moisture at distributions of the likelihood of
various locations and the suitability of finding a plant on a site given the
those sites for various plant species. In moisture conditions at the site.
the simplest case of describing existing General relations are also available
patterns, site moisture and vegetation from the literature for many species.
can be directly measured at a number The nature and complexity of these
of locations. However, to use the vege- components can vary substantially and
tation-hydroperiod model to predict or still provide a useful model. However,
design new situations, it is necessary to the components must all be expressed
• The hydrology of the stream has will correspond in the restored system,
been altered; for example, if stream- is an important element of formulating
flow has diminished by diversion or reasonable restoration objectives and
flood attenuation, sites in the ripari- designing a restoration plan.
an zone may be drier and no longer Vegetation Effects of System
suitable for the historic vegetation or Alterations
for current long-lived vegetation that
was established under a previous In a vegetation-hydroperiod model,
hydrologic regime. vegetation suitability is determined by
streamflow and the inundating dis-
• The inundating discharges of plots in charges of plots in the riparian zone.
the riparian zone have been altered The model can be used to predict ef-
so that streamflow no longer has the fects of alteration in streamflow or the
same relation to site moisture condi- relations of streamflow to plot moisture
tions; for example, levees, channel conditions on the suitability of the ri-
modifications, and bank treatments parian zone for different types of vege-
may have either increased or tation. Thus, the effects of flow
decreased the discharge required to alterations and changes in channel or
inundate plots in the riparian zone. bottomland topography proposed as
• The vegetation of the riparian zone part of a stream restoration plan can be
has been directly altered, for exam- examined in terms of changes in the
ple, by clearing or planting so that suitability of various locations in the ri-
the vegetation on plots no longer parian zone for different plant species.
Biological Characteristics 7- 95
Flooding Tolerances of Various Plant Species
There is a large body of information on the flooding sites for various plant species, e.g., relatively flood-
tolerances of various plant species. Summaries of prone sites will likely have relatively flood-tolerant
this literature include Whitlow and Harris (1979) and plants. Inundating discharge is strongly related to
the multivolume Impact of Water Level Changes on relative elevation within the floodplain. Other things
Woody Riparian and Wetland Communities (Teskey being equal (i.e., within a limited geographic area
and Hinckley 1978, Walters et al. 1978, Lee and and with roughly equivalent hydrologic regimes),
Hinckley 1982, Chapman et al. 1982). This type of elevation relative to a representative water surface
information can be coupled to site moisture condi- line, such as bankfull discharge or the stage at mean
tions predicted by applying discharge estimates or annual flow, can thus provide a reasonable surro-
flood frequency analyses to the inundating dis- gate for site moisture conditions. Locally determined
charges of sites in the riparian zone. The resulting vegetation suitability can then be used to determine
relation can be used to describe the suitability of the likely vegetation in various elevation zones.
Extreme Events and Disturbance ignore because these are so widely per-
Requirements ceived as destructive both of biota and
of constructed river features. In reality,
Temporal variability is a particularly im- however, these extreme events seem to
portant characteristic of many stream be essential to physical ch annel mainte-
ecosystems. Regular seasonal differences nance and to the long-term suitability
in biological requirements are examples of the riverine ecosystem for distur-
of temporal variability that are often bance-dependent species. Cottonwood
incorporated into biological analyses in western riparian systems is one well-
based on habitat suitability and time understood case of a disturbance-de-
series simulations. The need for pendent species. Cottonwood
episodic extreme events is easy to regeneration from seed is generally re-
stricted to bare, moist sites. Creating
these sites depends heavily on channel
movement (meandering, narrowing,
Zonation of Vegetation
avulsion) or new flood deposits at high
There are a number of statistical procedures for estimat- elevations. In some western riparian
ing the frequency and magnitude of extreme events systems, channel movement and depo-
(see flood frequency analysis section of chapter 8) and sition tend to occur infrequently in as-
describing various aspects of hydrologic variation. sociation with floods. The same events
Changing these flow characteristics will likely change are also responsible for destroying
some aspect of the distribution and abundance of organ- stands of trees. Thus maintaining good
isms. Analyzing more specific biological changes generally conditions for existing stands, or fixing
requires defining the requirements of target species; the location of a stream's banks with
defining requirements of their food sources, competitors, structural measures, tends to reduce the
and predators; and considering how those requirements regeneration potential and the long-
are influenced by episodic disturbance events. term importance of this disturbance-
dependent species in the system as a
whole.
Valley Form
In some cases, entire stream valleys
have changed to the point of obscuring
geomorphic boundaries, making stream
corridor restoration difficult. Volcanoes,
earthquakes, and landslides are exam-
ples of natural disturbances that cause
changes in valley form. Encroachment
and filling of floodplains are among the
human-induced disturbances that mod-
ify valley shape.
_s Seepage
1. Sponge effect for hydrologic flows, mimimizing
downstream flooding
2. Control of dissolved-substance inputs from matrix
J
1. Conduit for upland interior species, on both sides
of river so species that rarely can cross the
floodplain have a route on each side
2. Provide interior habitat for species conduit, as
migrating open river intersects hillslopes
causing them to be open habitat
3. Minimize hillslope erosion
4. Shade and logs provide fish habitat where
river is adjacent to hillslope
5. Source of soil organic matter, an important base
of the river food chain
6. Shade and logs provide fish habitat wherever
river is as it migrates across the floodplain
7. Genetic benefit to upland species that can use
habitat continuity to infrequently cross floodplain
8. Sponge effect for hydrologic flows, minimizing
downstream flooding
9. Friction effect minimizing downstream sedimentation
10. Protect high habitat diversity and species
richness of floodplain
11 .Conduit for semiaquatic and other organisms
dependent on river channel resources
matrix
edge portion of corridor in upland
• interior portion of corridor in upland
• hillslope
• floodplain
meander band
• interior of patch of natural floodplain vegetation
• edge of patch of natural floodplain vegetation
other ecologically-compatible land use
Soil Properties 8- 9
topsoils into the substrate prior to riparian species. High soil salinity is
planting is also effective (Allen 1995). not common in healthy riparian eco-
Particular care should be taken to avoid systems where annual spring floods
disturbing large trees or stumps since remove excess salts. Soil salinity can
the soils around and under them are also be altered by leaching salts through
likely source areas for reestablishment the soil profile with irrigation (Ander-
of a wide variety of microorganisms. In- son et al. 1984). Because of agricultural
oculation can be useful in restoring drainage and altered flows due to dam
some soil mycorrhizal fungi for particu- construction, salt accumulation often
lar species when naturally infected contributes to riparian plant commu-
plant stock is unavailable. nity declines.
Plant Communities 8- 11
Designing Urban Stream Buffers
The ability of an urban stream buffer to realize its In most instances, it is a residential backyard. The
many benefits depends to a large degree on how vegetative target for the outer zone is usually turf
well it is planned, designed, and maintained. Ten or lawn, although the property owner is encour-
practical performance criteria are offered to gov- aged to plant trees and shrubs, and thus increase
ern how a buffer is to be sized, managed, and the total width of the buffer. Very few uses are
crossed. The key criteria include: restricted in this zone. Indeed, gardening, compost
piles, yard wastes, and other common residential
Criteria 1: Minimum total buffer width. activities often will occur in the outer zone.
Most local buffer criteria require that development
be set back a fixed and uniform distance from the Criteria 3: Predevelopment vegetative target.
stream channel. Nationally, urban stream buffers The ultimate vegetative target for urban stream
range from 20 to 200 ft. in width from each side buffers should be specified as the predevelopment
of the stream according to a survey of 36 local riparian plant community-usually mature forest.
buffer programs, with a median of 100 ft. Notable exceptions include prairie streams of the
(Schueler 1995). In general, a minimum base Midwest, or arroyos of the arid West, that may
width of at least 100 feet is recommended to pro- have a grass or shrub cover in the riparian zone. In
vide adequate stream protection. general, the vegetative target should be based on
the natural vegetative community present in the
Criteria 2: Three-zone buffer system.
floodplain, as determined from reference riparian
Effective urban stream buffers have three lateral zones. Turfgrass is allowed for the outer zone of
zones-stream side, middle core, and outer zone. the buffer.
Each zone performs a different function, and has a
different width, vegetative target and manage- Criteria 4: Buffer expansion and contraction.
ment scheme. The stream side zone protects the Many communities require that the minimum
physical and ecological integrity of the stream width of the buffer be expanded under certain
ecosystem. The vegetative target is mature riparian conditions. Specifically, the average width of the
forest that can provide shade, leaf litter, woody middle zone can be expanded to include:
debris, and erosion protection to the stream. The • the full extent of the 100-yr floodplain;
middle zone extends from the outward boundary
• all undevelopable steep slopes (greater than
of the stream side zone, and varies in width,
25%);
depending on stream order, the extent of the 100-
yr floodplain, adjacent steep slopes, and protected • steep slopes (5 to 25% slope, at four additional
wetland areas. Its key functions are to provide fur- ft. of slope per one percent increment of slope
ther distance between upland development and above 5%); or
the stream. The vegetative target for this zone is • any adjacent delineated wetlands or critical
also mature forest, but some clearing may be habitats.
allowed for storm water management, access, and
Criteria 5: Buffer delineation.
recreational uses.
Three key decisions must be made when delineat-
The outer zone is the buffer's "buffer," an addi-
ing the boundaries of a buffer. At what mapping
tional 25-ft. setback from the outward edge of the
scale will streams be defined? Where does the
middle zone to the nearest permanent structure.
stream begin and the buffer end? And from what
Plant Communities 8- 15
Low Water Availability
In areas where water levels are low, artificial plantings will not survive if their
roots cannot reach the zone of saturation. Low water availability was associ-
ated with low survival rates in more than 80 percent of unsuccessful revege-
tation work examined in Arizona (Briggs 1992). Planting long poles (20 ft.)
of Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii) and Gooding willow in augered
holes has been successful where the ground water is more than 10 ft. below
the surface (Swenson and Mullins 1985). In combination with an irrigation
system, many planted trees are able to reach ground water 10 ft. below the
surface when irrigated for two seasons after planting (Carothers et al. 1990).
Sites closest to ground water; such as secondary channels, depressions, and
low sites where water collects, are the best candidates for planting, although
low-elevation sites are more prone to flooding and flood damage to the
plantings. Additionally, the roots of many riparian species may become
dormant or begin to die if inundated for extended periods of time (Burrows
and Carr 1969).
Plant Communities 8- 17
Tennessee Valley Authority Floodplain Reforestation Projects-
50 Years Later
The oldest known large-scale restoration of forest- ed, mostly on hydric soils adjacent to tributaries
ed wetlands in the United States was undertaken of the Tennessee River. Detailed records were kept
by the Tennessee Valley Authority in conjunction regarding the species planted and survival rates.
with reservoir construction projects in the South Some of these stands were recently located and
during the 1940s. Roads and railways were relo- studied to evaluate the effectiveness of the origi-
cated outside the influence of maximum pool nal reforestation effort, and to determine the
elevations, but where they were placed on extent to which the planted forests have come to
embankments, TVA was concerned that they resemble natural stands in the area.
would be subject to wave erosion during periods Because the purpose of the plantings was erosion
of extreme high water. To reduce that possibility, control, little thought was given to recreating nat-
agricultural fields between the reservoir and the ural patterns of plant community composition and
embankments were planted with trees (Figure structure. Trees were evenly spaced in rows, and
8.13). At Kentucky Reservoir in Kentucky and planted species were apparently chosen for maxi-
Tennessee, approximately 1,000 acres were plant- mum flood tolerance. As a result, the studied
stands had an initial composition dominated by
Figure 8.13: Kentucky Reservoir watershed, 1943. bald cypress, green ash, red maple, and similarly
Planting abandoned farmland with trees.
interior - - - - - - - g r a d u a l edge
Plant Communities 8- 21
edge. This is typically observed when ial photography may also provide infor-
entering a woodlot: edge vegetation is mation on water diversions, ground
shrubby and difficult to traverse, water depletion, and similar changes in
whereas inner shaded conditions pro- the local hydrology.
duce a more open forest floor that al- A vegetation-hydroperiod model can be
lows for easier movement. Snags and used to forecast riparian vegetation dis-
downed wood may also provide impor- tribution (Malanson 1993). The model
tant habitat functions. When designing identifies the inundating discharges of
to restore interior conditions of stream various locations in the riparian zone
corridor vegetation, a vegetation struc- and the resulting suitability of moisture
ture should be used that is less diverse conditions for desired plants. Grading
than the vegetation structure used at the plans, for example, can be adjusted to
edge. The reference stream corridor will alter the area inundated by a given dis-
yield valuable information for this as- charge and thus increase the area suit-
pect of design. able for vegetation associated with a
Influence of Hydrology and particular frequency and duration of
Stream Dynamics flooding. A focus on the vegetation-
hydroperiod relationship will demon-
Natural floodplain plant communities strate the following:
derive their characteristic horizontal di-
versity primarily from the organizing • The importance of moisture condi-
tions in structuring vegetation of the
influence of stream migration and
flooding (Brinson et al. 19 81). As dis- riparian zone;
cussed earlier, when designing restora- • The existence of reasonably well
tion of stream corridor vegetation, accepted physical models for calcu-
nearby reference conditions are gener- lating inundation from streamflow
ally used as models to identify the ap- and the geometry of the bottomland.
propriate plant species and • The likelihood that streamflow and
communities. However, the original inundating discharges have been
cover and older existing trees might altered in degraded stream systems or
have been established before stream will be modified as part of a restora-
regulation or other changes in the wa- tion effort.
tershed that affect flow and sediment
characteristics. Generally, planting efforts will be easier
when trying to restore vegetation on
A good understanding of current and sites that have suitable moisture condi-
projected flooding is necessary for de- tions for the desired vegetation, such as
sign of appropriately restored plant in replacing historical vegetation on
communities within the floodplain. cleared sites that have unaltered stream-
Water management and planning agen- flow and inundating discharges. Mois-
cies are often the best sources of such ture suitability calculations will support
data. In wildland areas, stream gauge designs. Sometimes the restoration ob-
data may be available, or on-site inter- jective is to restore more of the desired
pretation of landforms and vegetation vegetation than the new flow condi-
may be required to determine whether tions would naturally support. Direct
floodplain hydrology h as been altered manipulation by planting and control-
through channel incision, beaver activ- ling competition can often produce the
ity, or other causes. Discussions with desired results within the physiological
local residents and examination of aer- tolerances of the desired species. How-
Plant Communities 8- 23
8.D Habitat Measures
Other measures may be used to provide reservoirs are shallow, forested flood-
structure and functions. They may be plain impoundments usually created by
implemented as separate actions or as building low levees and installing outlet
an integral part of the restoration plan structures (Figure 8.17). They are usu-
to improve habitat, in general, or for ally flooded in early fall and drained
specific species. Such measures can pro- during late March to mid-April. Drain-
vide short-term habitat until overall ing prevents damage to overstory hard-
restoration results reach the level of woods (Rudolph and Hunter 1964).
maturity needed to provide the desired Most existing greentree reservoirs are in
habitat. These measures can also pro- the Southwest.
vide habitat that is in short supply. The flooding of greentree reservoirs, by
Greentree reservoirs, nest structures, design, differs from the natural flood
and food patches are three examples. regime. Greentree reservoirs are typi-
Beaver are also presented as a restora- cally flooded earlier and at depths
tion measure. greater than would normally occur
Greentree Reservoirs under natural conditions. Over time,
modifications of natural flood condi-
Short-term flooding of bottomland tions can result in vegetation changes,
hardwoods during the dormant period lack of regeneration, decreased mast
of tree growth enhances conditions for production, tree mortality, and disease.
some species (e.g., waterfowl) to feed on Proper management of green tree reser-
mast and other understory food plants, voirs requires knowledge of the local
like wild millet and smartweed. Acorns system-especially the natural flood
are a primary food source in stream cor- regime-and the integration of manage-
ridors for a variety of fauna, including ment goals that are consistent with
ducks, nongame birds and mammals, system requirements. Proper manage-
turkey, squirrel, and deer. Greentree ment of greentree reservoirs can provide
Habitat Measures 8- 27
8.E Stream Channel Restoration
- Approach A
D etermine
meander
geometry
and channel
alignment. 1
Tools
Empirical formulas
for meander
wavelength, and
adaptation of
measurements from
predisturbed
Approach B (Hey 1994)
Task
Determine bed
material
discharge to be
carried by design
channel at design
discharge,
Tools
Analyze measured
data or use
appropriate
sediment transport
function2 and
hydraulic properties
- Approach C (Fogg 1995)
C ompute
mean flow,
width, depth,
and slope at
design
discharge.4
Tools
Regime or hydraulic
geometry formulas
with regional
coefficients.
Table 8. 1: Three
approaches to
achieving final
design. There are
variations of the
final steps to a
conditions or nearly compute bed of reach upstream restoration design,
undisturbed reaches. material sediment from design reach . after the first five
concentration .
steps described in
Compute Channel length = Compute mean Regime or hydraulic Compute or Appropriate
sinuosity, sinuosity X valley flow, width, geometry formulas estimate flow relationship between
the text are done.
channel length. Channel depth, and slope with regional resistance depth, bed sediment
length, and slope= valley slope/ at design coefficients, or coefficient at size, and resistance
slope. sinuosity. discharge.4 analytical methods design coefficient, modified
(e.g. White, et.al., discharge. based on expected
1982, or Copeland, sinuosity and
1994).3 bank/berm vegetation.
Compute Regime or hydraulic Compute Sinuosity= valley Compute Uniform flow equation
mean flow geometry formulas sinuosity and slope/ channel mean channel (e.g. Manning, Chezy)
width and with regional channel length. slope. slope and continuity equation,
depth at coefficients, and Channel length= depth and design channel
design resistance equations sinuosity X valley required to cross-sectional shape;
discharge.4 or analytical length. pass design numerical water
methods (e.g. discharge. surface profile models
tractive stress, Ikeda may be used instead of
and Izumi, 1990, or uniform flow equation.
Chang, 1988).
Compute Empirical formulas, Determine Lay out a piece of Compute Allowable velocity or
riffle spacing observation of meander string scaled to velocity or shear stress criteria
(if gravel similar streams, geometry and channel length on a boundary based on channel
bed), and add habitat criteria. channel map (or equivalent sheer stress at boundary materials.
detail to alignment. procedure) such design
design. that meander arc discharge.
lengths vary from 4
to 9 channel widths.
Check Check stability. Compute riffle Empirical formulas, Compute Sinuosity= valley
channel spacing (if gravel observation of sinuosity and slope/ channel slope.
stability and bed), and add similar streams, channel Channel length=
reiterate as detail to design. habitat criteria. length. sinuosity X valley
needed. length.
1 Assumes meandering planform would be stable. Sinuosity and arc-length are known.
2 Computation of sediment transport without calibration against measured data may give highly unreliable results for a specific channel
(USACE, 1994, Kuhnle, et al., 1989).
3 The two methods list ed assume a straight channel. Adjustments w ould be needed to allow for effects of bends.
4 Mean flow width and depth at design discharge wil l give channel dimensions since design discharge is bankfull. In some situations channel may be increased t o
allow for freeboard. Regime and hydraulic geometry formulas should be examined to determine if they are mean width or top width.
L meander wavelength
ML meander arc length
w average width at bankfull discharge
MA meander amplitude
rc radius of curvature
e arc angle
..
converging data that increase the de- 35,000 cubic feet per second, and sedi- width and depth .
Data Domain
Chang 1988 Meandering or braided sand-bed rivers with:
Equiwidth point-bar 0.00238 < SD 50-0.S Q-0.51 and 3.49k 1* 0.47
streams and stable canals SD50-o.5 Q-0.55 < 0.05
Straight braided streams 0.05 < SD 50-0.5 Q-0.55 and Unknown and
so50-o.s o -o.s1 < 0.047 unusual
Braided point-bar and 0.047 < SD50-o.5 0 -o.s1 < 33 .2k1 ** 0.93 0.45
wide-bend point-bar indefinite upper limit
streams; beyond upper limit
lie steep, braided streams
Thorne 1988 Same as for Thorne and Hey Gravel-bed rivers 1.905 + k1 ***
et al. 1986
'--~~~~~~~~---'
Adjustments for bank Grassy banks with no trees w= 1.46wc- d = 0.8815 de+
vegetation• or shrubs 0.8317 0.2106
Chang equations for determining river width and depth. Coefficients for equations of the form w ; k1QK2; d ; K4QK5; where w is mean bankfull width (ft). Q is the bankfull
or dominant discharge (ftl/5), d is mean bankfull depth {ft), 050 is median bed-material size {mm), and Sis slope {ft/ft).
a w, and d, in these equations are calculated using exponents and coefficients from the row labeled "gravel-bed rivers" ..
k, * ; {S D50--0.5 - 0.002380-o.51)0.02.
k4* ; exp[-0.38 {420.17S o50·0.5o-o.51 -1)0.4J.
k, ** ; {S D50--O.s )0.84_
k4** ; 0.015 - 0.025 In Q - 0.049 In {S 050-05).
k1***; 0.2490[ ln{0.00106470 50 1.15/sQ0.42 )]2.
k4 *** ; 0.2418 1n(0.0004419D, 0 '-' S1soo.42).
Model
Discretization and formulation:
Unsteady flow I stepped hydrograph
One-dimensional I quasi-two-dimensional YIN YIY YIN NIN NIN N YIY Y IY
Two-dimensional I depth-average flow N N N y y YIY N NIY
Deformable bed I banks YIN YIY YIN YIN YIN YIN YIY YIY
Graded sediment load y y y N y
Nonuniform grid y y y y y
Floodplain sedimentation N N y N N
Suspended I total sediment transport YIN YIN NIY YIN NIN NIY NIY NIY
Bed load transport y y y N y N N y
Cohesive sediments N N y y N y N y
Bed armoring y y y N N N y y
Hydraulic sorting of substrate material y y y N N N y y
Fluvial erosion of streambanks N y N N N N y y
Meandering belts N N N y N
Rivers y y y y y
Bridge crossings N N y N N
Reservoirs
User support:
Model documentation
User guide I hot-line support NIN YIN YIY YIN NIN YIN NIN YIN
Note: Y = Yes; N = No.
in the space available, the discussion DOS operating systems. Their concep-
here is limited to a few selected models tual and numerical schemes are robust,
(Table 8.4). In addition, Garcia et al. having been proven in field applica-
(1994) review mathematical models of tions, and the code can b e successfully
meander bend migration. used by persons without detailed
These models are characterized as hav- knowledge of th e core computational
ing general applicability to a particular techniques. Examples of these models
class of problems and are generally and their features are summarized in
available for desktop computers using Table 8.4. The acronyms in the column
Plan
b1 f1
Profile
c:
0
·.;;
Ill
>
~
g9 g1
w a a1
c c1
e e1
Figure 8.26: Example b bl
plan and profile of a d d1
naturally meandering
f f1
stream. Channel cross
sections vary based
on width, depth, and
slope. Station
with the least squares best fit at 6.31 hydrologic events during project life.
channel widths. Riffle spacing tends to Good design practice also requires
be nearer 4 channel widths on steeper checking channel performance at dis-
gradients and 8 to 9 channel widths on charges well above and below the de-
more gradual slopes (RD. Hey, per- sign condition. A number of
sonal communication, 1997). Hey and approaches are available for checking
Thorne (1986) also developed regres- both the vertical (bed) and horizontal
sion formulas for riffle width, mean (bank) stability of a designed stream.
depth, and maximum depth. These stability checks are an important
part of the design process.
Stability Assessment
The risk of a restored channel being Vertical (Bed) Stability
damaged or destroyed by erosion or de- Bed stability is generally a prerequisite
position is an important consideration for bank stability. Aggrading channels
for almost all restoration work. Design- are liable to braid or exhibit accelerated
ers of restored streams are confronted lateral migration in response to middle
with rather high levels of uncertainty. In or point bar growth. Degrading chan-
some cases, it may be wise for designers nels widen explosively when bank
to compute risk of failure by calculating heights and angles exceed a critical
the joint probability of design assump- threshold specific to bank soil type. Bed
tions being false, design equation inac- aggradation can be addressed by stabi-
curacy, and occurrence of extreme
o·
10· 45• 90°
Bank Angle (deg)
Stage I
30°
unstable
unreliable
...........
.... stable
II
;: 20·
..c
Cl
"iii
•
::c:
slope, and channel boundary soil water (y, lb/ft ) times the hydraulic ra-
properties. Use of the allowable velo- dius (R, ft) times the b ed slope S:
city approach is not recommended 't = yRS
for channels transporting a significant Figure 8.32 is an example of allowable
load of material larger than 1 mm. shear stress criteria presented in graphi-
The restoration design, however, cal form. The most famous graphical
should also consider the effects of presentation of allowable shear stress
hydraulic roughness and the protec- criteria is the Shields diagram, which
tion afforded by vegetation. depicts conditions necessary for initial
movement of noncohesive particles on
0
·.o:;
v 0 1.1
tJ
~ 1.1
0 depth of design flow ....ra
u 1.0 c: 1.0
0
'+:'
0.9 ~ 0.9
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 density
20 0
Water Depth (feet) u 0 . 8~-----------
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
Void Ratio (e)
Basic Velocities for Coherent Earth Materials (vb)
7.0
Basic Velocity for Discrete Particles of Earth Materials (vb)
6.5 Fine S Gravel Cobble
13.0
CH
~6 .0 (:/-- 12.0
:::. 11 .0 Enter chart with D75 particle size
.~
v
5.5
(,\,~~ 10.0 to determine basic velocity.
0
~ 5.0
v
·;;;
~ 4.5
c.,C
~·
y.. oY..
- ~ 9.0
:::. 8.0
~
·;::; 7.0
0
~ ~ 6.0
4.0 o'-2 sediment laden--...
~\..· v 5.0
sediment laden flow ·;;;
3.5 ra 4.0
ID
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 3.0
Plasticity Index ....__ sediment free
2.0
5.5 1.0
o.o._____ _____ __...._....__.___._....___.__._......_...._
5.0 Ya ~ Yi 1 2 4 6 8101 5
Grain Size (inches)
CH
~4.5 6(,
:::. Allowable Velocities for Unprotected Earth Channels
.~4.0
v
Channel Boundary Materials Allowable Velocity
0 <.,\-?(., Discrete Particles
~ 3.5 0~· oY.. Sediment Laden Flow
~y.. ,
v 0 1s > 0.4mm basic velocity chart value x O x Ax B
·;;;
~ 3.0 0 1s < 0.4mm 2.0 fps
Sediment Free Flow
~
2.5 o'-s 01s > 0.2mm basic velocity chart value x 0 x A x B
~\,· 0 1s < 0.2mm 2.0 fps
sediment free flow
2.0 Coherent Earth Materials
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 Pl > 10 basic velocity chart value x O x A x F x Ce
Plasticity Index Pl < 10 2.0 fps
Figure 8.31: Allowable velocities for unprotected earth channels. Curves reflect practical exp erien ce in
design of stable earth channels.
Source: USDA So il Conservation Service 1977.
0.0001
10 100
Bankfull Discharge per Unit Width, ft 2 s·1
dational, while those with more gradual problem. Sediment transport relation-
slopes tended to be aggradational. ships are heavily dependent on the data
Downs (1995) developed stability crite- used in their development. Inaccuracy
ria for channel reaches in the Thames may be reduced by selecting transport
Basin of the United Kingdom based functions appropriate to the stream type
entirely on slope: channels straightened and bed sediment size in question. Addi-
during the 20th century were deposi- tional confidence can be achieved by ob-
tional if slopes were less than 0.005 and taining calibration data; however,
erosional if slopes were greater. calibration data are not available from a
channel yet to be constructed. If the ex-
Sediment Yield and Delivery isting channel is reasonably stable, de-
Sediment Transport
signers can compute a sediment
discharge versus streamflow relationship
If a channel is designed using an empiri- for the existing and proposed design
cal or a tractive stress approach, compu- channels using the same sediment trans-
tation of sediment-transport capacity port function and try to match the curves
allows a rough check to determine as closely as possible (USACE 1994).
whether deposition is likely to be a
...
Source Erosion Rate ~ - - to Blue Stem Lake
•• ·-
(tons/acre/year -
or tons/bank -
mile/year)
150 tons erosion below C (750 - 900 = -150 tons) load in stream.
areas where sediment is building up or used to help predict the quantity of bed
where the stream is eroding. If these material sediment transported by a
problem areas do not match the predic- stream during a single storm event or
tions from the calculations, the sedi- over a typical runoff year.
ment transport equation may be To calculate the amount of sediment
inappropriate, or the sediment budget, transported by a stream during a single
the hydrology, or the channel surveys storm event, the hydrograph for the
may be inaccurate. event is divided into equal-length seg-
Single Storm versus Average Annual ments of time. The peak flow or the
Sediment Discharge average discharge for each segment is
The preceeding example predicts the determined. A spreadsheet can be devel-
amount of erosion and deposition that oped that lists the discharges for each
can be expected to occur over one day segment of a hydrograph in a column
at one discharge. The bed material (Table 8.6). The transport capacity from
the sediment rating curve for each dis-
transport equation probably used one
grain size of sediment. In reality, a vari- charge is shown in another column
ety of flows over varying lengths of time (Figure 8.36). Since the transport ca-
move a variety of sediment particle pacity is in tons/day, a third column
sizes. Two other approaches should be should include the length of time repre-
sented by each segment of the hydro-
.!1! 200
•
. . . . . . ..
. . ..-. . ·
.· -. .
· .. . 0 100 •
lillml ... - . O A B
0 10 20
C
1000
800
600 • •
400
• ••• •
• • ••• • •
200
• •••••• • •
•• •
100
80
60
. ..
• .: .....
.,
'. ..
• ••
••
• I ••
•
•
•
.. -
:s"'
QI
Cl
40
• • • •
• • •
• •
:;;
..,
.:::
"' 20 • ••
'
Ci
• •
10
8
•
6 •
4 •••• • •
••
2
•
1
.1 .2 .4 .6 .8 1 2 4 6 8 10 20 40 60 80100 200 400 600 1000 5000 10,000
Suspended Sediment (tons/day)
Even where streams retain relatively ployed to help ensure plant establish-
natural patterns of flow and flooding, ment and improve habitat conditions.
stream corridor restoration might re- As discussed earlier in this chapter, inte-
quire that streambanks be temporarily gration of woody vegetative cuttings, in-
(years to decades) stabilized while dependently or in combination with
floodplain vegetation recovers. The ob- other natural materials, in streambank
jective in such instances is to arrest the erosion control projects is generally re-
accelerated erosion often associated ferred to as soil bioengineering. Soil-
with unvegetated banks, and to reduce bioengineered bank stabilization
erosion to rates appropriate for the systems have not been standardized for
stream system and setting. In these situ- general application under particular
ations, the initial bank protection may flow conditions, and the decision as to
be provided primarily with vegetation, whether and how to use them requires
wood, and rock as necessary (refer to careful consideration of a variety of fac-
Appendix A). tors. On larger streams or where erosion
In other cases, land development or is severe, an effective approach involves
modified flows may dictate the use of a team effort that includes expertise in
hard structures to ensure permanent soils, biology, plant sciences, landscape
stream stability, and vegetation is used architecture, geology, engineering, and
primarily to address specific ecological hydrology.
deficiencies such as a lack of channel Soil bioengineering approaches usually
shading. In either case (permanent or employ plant materials in the form of
temporary bank stabilization), stream- live woody cuttings or poles of readily
flow projections are used (as described sprouting species, which are inserted
in Chapter 7) to determine the degree deep into the bank or anchored in vari-
to which vegetation must be supple- ous other ways. This serves the dual
mented with more resistant materials purposes of resisting washout of plants
(natural fabrics, wood, rock, etc.) to during the early establishment period,
achieve adequate stabilization. while providing some immediate ero-
The causes of excessive erosion may be sion protection due to the physical re-
reversible through changes in land use, sistance of the sterns. Plant materials
livestock management, floodplain alone are sufficient on some streams
restoration, or water management. In or some bank zones, but as erosive
some cases, even normal rates of bank forces increase, they can be combined
erosion and channel movement might with other materials such as rocks, logs
be considered unacceptable due to adja- or brush, and natural fabrics (Figure
cent development, and vegetation 8.37) . In some cases, woody debris is
might be used primarily to recover incorporated specifically to improve
some habitat functions in the vicinity habitat characteristics of the bank and
of "hard" bank stabilization measures. near-bank channel zones.
In either case, the considerations dis- Preliminary site investigations (see
cussed above with respect to soils, use Figure 8.38) and engineering analyses
of native plant species, etc., are applica- must be completed, as described in
ble within the bank zone. However, a Chapter 7, to determine the mode of
set of specialized techniques can be em- bank failure and the feasibility of using
Streambank Restoration 8- 61
vegetation as a component of bank sta- be evaluated to determine how vegeta-
bilization work. In addition to the tech- tion can or cannot be used. Soil cohe-
nical analyses of flows and soils, siveness, the presence of gravel lenses,
preliminary investigations must include ice accumulation patterns, the amount
consideration of access, maintenance, of sunlight reaching the bank, and the
urgency, and availability of materials. ability to ensure that grazing will be
Generalizations regarding water levels precluded are all considerations in as-
and flow velocities should be taken sessing the suitability of vegetation to
only as indications of the experiences achieve bank stabilization. In addition,
reported from various bank stabiliza- modified flow patterns may make por-
tion projects. Any particular site must tions of the bank inhospitable to plants
because of inappropriate timing of in-
undation rather than flow velocities
and durations (Klimas 1987). The need
to extend protection well beyond the
immediate focus of erosion and to pro-
tect against flanking is an important
design consideration.
As noted in Section 8.E, streambank sta-
bilization techniques can generally be
classified as armor, indirect methods, or
vegetative methods. The selection of the
appropriate stabilization technique is ex-
tremely important and can be expressed
in terms of the factors discussed below.
Effectiveness of Technique
The inherent factors in the properties
(a)
of a given bank stabilization technique,
and in the physical characteristics of a
proposed work site, influence the suit-
ability of that technique for that site.
Effectiveness refers to the suitability
and adequacy of the technique. Many
techniques can be designed to ade-
quately solve a specific bank stability
problem by resisting erosive forces and
geotechnical failure. The challenge is
to recognize which technique matches
the strength of protection against the
strength of attack and therefore per-
forms most efficiently when tested by
the strongest process of erosion and
most critical mechanism of failure. En-
(b) vironmental and economic factors are
Figure 8.37: A stabilized streambank. Plant integrated into the selection procedure,
materials can be combined with other materi- generally making soil bioengineering
als such as rocks, logs or brush, and natural methods very attractive. The chosen so-
fabrics. [(a) during and (b) after.]
Streambank Restoration 8- 63
flow velocities if planted at high densi-
ties. Often, they can be placed deep
enough to maintain contact with ade-
quate soil moisture levels, thereby elim-
inating the need for irrigation. The
reliable sprouting properties, rapid
growth, and general availability of cut-
tings of willows and other pioneer
species makes them particularly appro-
priate for use in bank revegetation pro-
jects, and they are used in most of the
integrated bank protection approaches
described here (see Figure 8.41).
Streambank Restoration 8- 65
springy branches provide interference to
flow and trap sediment. The principal
objective to these systems is the use of
large amounts of cable and the poten-
tial for trees to be dislodged and cause
downstream damage.
Some projects have successfully used
large trees in conjunction with stone to
provide bank protection as well as im-
proved aquatic habitat (see case study).
Large logs with intact root wads are
placed in trenches cut into the bank,
such that the root wads extend beyond
the bank face at the toe (Figure 8.42).
The logs are overlapped and/or braced
Figure 8.41: Results of live staking along a with stone to ensure stability, and the
streambank. Pioneer species are often most protruding rootwads effectively reduce
appropriate for use in bank revegetation flow velocities at the toe and over a
projects. range of flow elevations (Figure 8.43).
A major advantage of this approach is
Integrated Syste111s that it reestablishes one of the natural
A major concern with the use of struc- roles of large woody debris in streams
tural approaches to streambank stabi- by creating a dynamic near-bank envi-
lization is the lack of vegetation in the ronment that traps organic material and
zone directly adjacent to the water. De- provides colonization substrates for in-
spite a long-standing concern that vege- vertebrates and refuge habitats for fish.
tation destabilizes stone revetments, The logs eventually rot, resulting in a
there has been little supporting evi- more natural bank. The revetment sta-
dence and even some evidence to the bilizes the bank until woody vegetation
contrary (Shields 1991). Assuming that has matured, at which time the channel
loss of conveyance is accounted for, the can return to a more natural pattern.
addition of vegetation to structures In most cases, bank stabilization pro-
should be considered. This can involve jects use combinations of the tech-
placement of cuttings during construc- niques described above in an integrated
tion, or insertion of cuttings and poles approach. Toe protection often requires
between stones on existing structures. the use of stone, but amounts can be
Timber cribwalls may also be con- greatly reduced if large logs can also be
structed with cuttings or rooted plants used. Likewise, stone blankets on the
extending through the timbers from the bank face can be replaced with geogrids
backfill soils. or supplemented with interstitial plant-
ings. Most upper bank areas can usually
Trees and Logs be stabilized using vegetation alone,
Tree revetments are made from whole although anchoring systems might be
tree trunks laid parallel to the bank, required. The Green River bank restor-
and cabled to piles or deadman an- ation case study illustrates one success-
chors. Eastern red cedar (Juniperus vir- ful application of an integrated approach
giniana) and other coniferous trees are on a moderate-sized river in Washing-
used on small streams, where their ton State.
i of rootwad and
boulder technique.
Source: USDA-NRCS
1996a.
8- to 12-foot -
length
baseflow
streambact
thalweg channel
Streambank Restoration 8- 67
Green River Bank Restoration Initiative
King County, Washington
Gt/ST71/Cr
vegetated geogrids were installed above the toe
rDP oP- M NK.
Figure 8.48: /nstream habitat. Suitable water quality, passage routes, and spawning grounds are
some of the characteristics of fish habitat.
Plan Layout
The location of each structure should
be selected. Avoid conflicts with bridges,
riparian structures, and existing habitat
resources (e.g., stands of woody vegeta-
tion). The frequency of structures should design flow
be based on the habitat requirements
previously determined, within the con-
text of the stream morphology and
physical characteristics (see Chapter 7).
Care should be taken to place structures
where they will be in the water during
baseflow. Structures should be spaced
to avoid large areas of uniform condi-
tions. Structures that create pools Front Elevation
not to scale
should be spaced five to seven channel
widths apart. Weirs placed in series
should be spaced and sized carefully to
avoid placing a weir within the backwa-
ter zone of the downstream structure,
since this would create a series of pools
with no intervening riffles or shallows.
•&mlm1fof!.!.1§+-. .p•a1.fii.1§·•-im
A1 N/A N/A N/A N/A Excellent Good Poor Poor
A2 N/A N/A N/A N/A Excellent Excellent Excellent Poor
81-1 Good Good Good Excellent Fair Good Good Fair
81 Good Excellent Excellent Excellent Excellent Excellent Excellent Fair
82 Excellent Excellent Good Excellent Good Good Good Good
83 Poor Fair Fair Fair Poor Poor
84 Poor Fair Fair Fair Poor Poor Poor Poor
BS Poor Poor Poor Poor
C1-1 Good Good Good Excellent Poor Fair Fair Fair
C1 Good Good Good Excellent Poor Fair
C2 Good Excellent Excellent Exce llent Poor Good Excellent Excellent
C3 Fair Good Fair
C4 Poor Good Fair
cs Poor Poor
C6 N/A N/A N/A N/A Poor Poor
01 Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor N/A
02 Po or Poor Poor Poo r Poor N/A Po or
Key:
Excellent - No limitat ion t o location of structure placement or special modif icatio n in design.
Good - Under most conditions, very effective. Minor modification of design o r placement requ ired .
Fa ir - Serious limitation w hich can be overcome by placement location, design modification, or stabilization t echniques.
Generally not recommended d ue to difficulty of offsetting pot ential adverse consequences and hig h probability of reduced effectiveness.
Poor - Not recommended due to morphological character of stream type and very low probability of success.
Not Applicable- Generally not considered since habitat components are not lim it ing.
Note: A3, A3-a, A4, A4-a, AS, AS-a channel types are not evaluated d ue to limited fisheries value.
While the RiMS can effectively intercept and treat Support for this work is from the Leopold Center
nonpoint source pollution from the uplands, it for Sustainable Agriculture, the Iowa Department
should be stressed that a riparian management of Natural Resources through a grant from the
system cannot replace upland conservation prac- USEPA under the Federal Nonpoint Source
tices. In a properly functioning agricultural land- Management Program (Section 319 of the Clean
scape, both upland conservation practices and an Water Act), and the USDA (Cooperative State
integrated riparian system contribute to achieving Research Education and Extension Service),
environmental goals and improved ecosystem National Research Initiative Competitive Grants
functioning. Program, and the Agriculture in Concert with the
Environment Program.
exotics to spread. Again, control of ex- flows created by impoundments are al-
otic species has some common aspects tered to favor native species and when
across land uses, but design approaches exotics such as salt cedar are removed
are different for each land use. before revegetation is attem pted (Briggs
Control of exotics in som e situations et al. 19 94) .
can be extremely difficult and may be Salt cedar is an aggressive, exotic colo-
impractical if large acreages or well- nizer in the West due to its long period
established populations are involved . and high rate of seed production, as well
Use of herbicides may be tightly regu- as its ability to withstand long periods of
lated or precluded in m any wetland and inundation. Salt cedar can be controlled
streamside environments, and for some either by clearing with a bulldozer or by
exotic species there are no effective con- direct application of herbicide (Sudbrock
trol measures that can be easily imple- 1993 ); however, improper treatments
mented over large areas (Rieger and may actually increase the density of salt
Kreager 1990) . Where aggressive exotics cedar (Neill 1990).
are present, every effort sh ould be m ade Controlling exotics and weeds can be
to avoid unnecessary soil disturbance or important because of potential compe-
disruption of intact native vegetation, tition with established native vegeta-
and newly established populations of tion, colonized vegetation, and
exotics should be eradicated. artificially planted vegetation in restora-
Nonnative species such as salt cedar tion work Exotics compete for mois-
(Tamarix spp .) and Russian olive ture, nutrients, sunlight, and space and
(Elaeagnus angustifolia) can outcom- can adversely influence establishment
pete native plantings and negatively rates of new plantings. To improve the
affect their establishment and growth. effectiveness of revegetation work, ex-
The likelihood of successful reestablish- otic vegetation should be cleared prior
ment often increases when artificial to planting; nonnative growth must also
Potential Effects
Decreased landscape diversity
Point source pollution
Nonpoint source pollution
Dense compacted soil
Increased upland surface runoff
Increased sheetflow with surface erosion rill and gully flow
Increased levels of fine sediment and contaminants in stream corridor
Increased soil salinity
Increased peak flood elevation
Increased flood energy
Decreased infiltration of surface runoff
Decreased interflow and subsurface flow to and within the stream corridor
Reduced ground water recharge and aquifer volumes
Increased depth to ground water
Decreased ground water inflow to stream
Increased flow velocities
Reduced stream meander
Increased or decreased stream stability
Increased stream migration
Channel widening and downcutting
Increased stream gradient and reduced energy dissipation
Increased flow frequency
Reduced flow duration
Decreased capacity of floodplain and upland
Increased sediment and contaminants
Decreased capacity of stream
Reduced stream capacity to assimilate nutrients/pesticides
Confined stream channel with little opportunity for habitat development
Increased streambank erosion and channel scour
Increased bank failure
Loss of instream organic matter and related decomposition
Increased instream sediment, salinity, or turbidity
Increased instream nutrient enrichment, sedimentation, and conta minants
leading t o eutrophication
• Activity has pot ential for d irect impact. • Activity has pot ential for indirect impact.
Potential Effects
Highly fragmented stream corridor with reduced linear distribution of habitat
and edge effect
Loss of edge and interior habitat
Decreased connectivity and dimension (width) within corridor and to associated
ecosystems
Decreased movement of flora and fauna species for seasonal migration,
dispersal repopulation
Reduced stream capacity to assimilate nutrients/pesticides
Increase of opportunistic species, predators
Increased exposure to solar radiation, weather, and temperature
Magnified temperature and moisture extremes in corridor
Loss of riparian vegetation
Decreased source of instream shade, detritus, food, and cover
Loss of edge diversity
Increased water temperature
Impaired aquatic habitat
Reduced invertebrate population
Loss of wetland function
Reduced instream oxygen
Invasion of exotic species
Reduced gene pool
Reduced species diversity
• Activity has potential for direct impact. • Activity has potential for indirect impact.
results. Table 8.9 identifies some of tate stream corridor restoration. Forest
the restoration measures hypothetically management may be an on-going land
implemented and their potential use and part of the restoration effort.
effects on restoring conditions within Regardless, accessing and harvesting
the stream corridor and surrounding timber affects streams in many ways
landscape. including:
• M easure contributes directly to resulting effect . M easure contributes little to resulting effect.
• Measure contributes directly to result ing effect . • Measure cont ribut es lit tl e t o resulting effect.
Class Ill**
-
No n eb 50 % u nderstorye No nee
-
O regon Class I** Variable, 3 times 50 % existing canopy, Yes; number per 1000 feet
stream w idt h 75% exist in g sh ade and basa l area per 1000
(25 t o 100 feet) feet by stream width
-
.~
Class II special Nonef 75% existing shade None
protection* *
Warm winds, intense rainfall, and rapid snowmelt remain in place if they are in fourth-order or
during the winter of 7995-96 and again in the smaller streams and are situated in a manner that
winter of 7996-97 caused major flooding, land- maintains a connection between the structure
slides, and related damage throughout the Pacific and the streambank. They will be most durable
Northwest (Figure 8.54). Such flooding had not in watersheds with low landslide/debris torrent
been seen for more than 30 years in hard-hit frequency
areas. Damage to roads, campgrounds, trails,
watersheds, and aquatic resources was wide-
spread on National Forest Service lands. These
events offered a unique opportunity to investi-
gate the effects of severe weather, examine the
influence and effectiveness of various forest man-
agement techniques, and implement a repair
strategy consistent with ecosystem management
principles.
The road network in the National Forests was
heavily damaged during the floods. Decisions
about the need to replace roads are based on
long-term access and travel requirements.
(a)
Relocation of roads to areas outside floodplains is
a measure being taken. Examination of road
crossings at streams concluded with design rec-
ommendations to keep the water moving, align
culverts horizontally and longitudinally with the
stream channel, and minimize changes in stream
channel cross section at inlet basins to prevent
debris plugs.
Many river systems were also damaged. In some
systems, however, stable, well-vegetated slopes
and streambanks combined with fully functioning
floodplains buffered the effects of the floods.
Restoration efforts will focus on aiding natural
(b)
processes in these systems. Streambank stabiliza-
Figure 8.54: 1996 Landslides. (a) April landslide:
tion and riparian plantings will be commonly
debris took out the track into the Greenwater River
used. Examination of instream structure durability and (b) July landslide: debris took out the road and
concluded that structures are more likely to deposited debris into the river.
•• • .. .
Riparian Riparian
Vegetation is .. Rehabilitation
Commonly Used Potential
Note: - =decrease;+= increase; 0 = no change. Stream gradient: 0 to 2% = flat; 2 to 4% = moderate;> 4% =steep. Banks refers to bank stability.
The Natural Resources Conservation Service, for- Control efforts included grading and vegetating
merly known as the Soil Conservation Service the abandoned mine to reduce infiltration
has been working on the Oven Run project ' through acid-bearing layers and reduce erosion
along with the Stonycreek Conemaugh River and sedimentation, surface water controls to
Improvement (SCRIP) to improve water quality in carry water around the sites to safer outlets, and
treating discharge flow with anoxic limestone
a 4-mile reach above the Borough of Hooversville.
drains and chambered passive wetland treatments
SCRIP is a group of local and state government
(Figure 8.55(b)). Additionally, 1,000 feet of trees
as well as hundreds of individuals interested in
improving the water quality in an area on were planted along one of the site streams to
Pennsylvania's Degraded Watersheds list. shade the Stoneycreek River. Average annual
costs for the six sites were estimated to be
The initial goal of improving water quality result- $503, 000 compared to average annual benefits
ed in improving habitat and aesthetic qualities. of $573,000.
The water coming into Hooversville had higher-
The sites are being monitored on a monthly
than-desired levels of iron, manganese, alu-
basis, and 4 years after work was begun the
treatments have had a measurable success. The
acid influent has been neutralized, and the efflu-
ent is now a net alkaline. Iron, aluminum, and
manganese levels have been reduced, with iron
now at average levels of 0. 5 mgIL from average
levels of 35 mg/L.
(b)
Procedures for estimating peak dis- Sauer et al. (1983) provide equations
charges are described in Chapter 7, and like the one above and graphs that re-
effects of urbanization on magnitude of late the ratio of the urban to rural peak
peak flows must be incorporated into discharge (UQx/RQx) for recurrence in-
the analysis. Sauer et al. (1983) investi- tervals x = 2, 10, and 100 years. The 2-
gated the effect of urbanization on peak year peak ratio varies from 1.3 to 4.3,
flows by analyzing 199 urban water- depending on the values of BDF and IA;
sheds in 56 cities and 31 states. The ob- the 10-year ratio varies from 1.2 to 3.1;
jective of the analysis was to determine and the 100-year ratio varies from 1.1
the increase in peak discharges due to to 2.6. These ratios indicate that urban-
urbanization and to develop regression ization generally has a lesser effect on
equations for estimating design floods, higher-recurrence-interval floods be-
such as the 100-year or 1 percent cause watershed soils are more satu-
chance annual flood, for ungauged rated and floodplain storage more fully
urban watersheds. Sauer et al. (1983) depleted in large floods, even in the
developed regression equations based rural condition.
on watershed, climatic, and urban char- More sophisticated hydrologic analyses
acteristics that can be used to estimate than the above are often used, includ-
the 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100, and 500-year ing use of computer models, regional
urban annual peak discharges for un- regression equations, and statistical
gauged urban watersheds. The equation analyses of gauge data. Hydrologic
for the 100-year flood in cubic feet per models, such as HEC-1 orTR-20, are
second (UQlOO) is provided as an ex- often already developed for some urban
ample: watersheds.
126
UQlOO = 2.50 A 29 SL 1' (RI2+3) Once the flood characteristics of the
52 28
(ST+8r (13 - BDFr IA RQ100
06 63 stream are adjusted for urbanization,
new equilibrium channel dimensions
10
•
10....._~___..___.___._.__._
50
..............._._~~_..____..__..__L......L__._............
100 500 1000
recommendations were read once but
never implemented (Schueler 1996) .
Storm Runoff (cfs-days)
Key Tools of Urban Stream
Figure 8.58: Sediment-transport curves for Restoration Design
growing season storms. The effect of urban-
ization on sediment discharge is illustrated Restoration design for streams degraded
from data collected in a 32-square-mile area. by prior urbanization must consider
pre-existing controls and their effects on
restoration objectives. Seven restoration
ment discharge as evidenced by the sig-
tools can be applied to help restore
nificant scatter about each relation.
urban streams. (Schereler, 1996) These
In addition to sediment basins, man- tools are intended to compensate for
agement practices for erosion and sedi- stream functions and processes that
ment control focus on the following have been diminished or degraded by
objectives: prior watershed urbanization. The best
• Stabilizing critical areas along and results are usually obtained when the
on highways, roads, and streets. following tools are applied together.
Restoration Implementation 9- 3
should be the first activity conducted site transport of mud and sediment
on the site. The zones should be by vehicles.
marked by visible stakes and more • In the event of damage to any private
preferably by temporary fencing (usu- or public access roads used to trans-
ally a bright-colored sturdy plastic net- port equipment or heavy materials to
ting) . This delineation should conform and from the site, those responsible
to any special restrictions noted or tem- should be identified and appropriate
porary stakes placed during the precon- repairs should be made.
struction meeting between the project
manager and field inspector. Taking Precautions to Minimize
Disturbance
Preparing Access and Staging
Areas Every effort should be made to mini-
mize and, where possible, avoid site
A site is often accessed from a public disturbance. Emphasis should be placed
road in an upland portion of the site. on addressing protection of existing
Ideally, for convenience, a staging area vegetation and sensitive habitat, erosion
for crew, equipment, and materials can and sediment control, protecting air
be located near an access road close to and water quality, protecting cultural re-
the restoration site but out of the sources, minimizing noise, and provid-
stream corridor and away from wet- ing for solid waste disposal and
lands or areas with highly erodible worksite sanitation.
soils. The staging area should also be
out of view from public thoroughfares, Protection of Existing Vegetation and
if possible, to increase security. Sensitive Habitat
Restoration Implementation 9- 5
Joints in filter fabric shall be spliced
at posts. Use staples, wire rings, or
equivalent to attach fabric to posts. 2"x 2" 14 ga. wire
- - - - - mesh or equivalent, if
standard strength
fabric used
filter fabric
c
E
N
I~
~Minimum ~
4"x 4" trench.
Backfill trench with
Post spacing may be increased
to 8' if wire backing is used. ~ native soil or 3/4"-1/5" /
""washed gravel.
Note: Filter fabric fences shall be installed along contour whenever possible.
Figure 9.3: Silt fence installation guidelines. ing preparations should have been
Erosion control measures must be installed
made:
properly.
Source: King County, Washington. • Additional erosion control materials
should be stockpiled on site, includ-
ing straw bales, filter fabric and wire
~centerline of backing, posts, sand and burlap bags,
¥ swale or ditch
and channel lining materials (rock,
Figure 9.4: Straw
geotextile fabric or grids, jute netting,
bale installation
guidelines. Straw coconut fabric material, etc.).
bales are common • Inspection of the construction site
sediment control
L
should occur during or immediately
measures.
baled hay after a rain storm or other significant
Source: King County, or straw
Washington. -- .....
cQJ runoff event to determine the effec-
N
~u
tiveness of sediment control mea-
sures.
• A telephone number for the site
superintendent or project manager
should be made available to neigh-
boring residents if they witness any
Notes: 2-2"x 2"x 3" pegs problems on or coming from the
Embed bales 4" to 6". each bale
Drive stakes min. 1~."
into ground surfac/i
./JJ site. Residents should be educated on
what to watch for, such as sediment-
laden runoff or failed structures.
(. '/'Y " •
Water Quality
Although sediment is the major source
of water quality impairment on con-
struction sites, it is not the only source.
Motorized vehicles and equipment or
improperly stored containers can leak
Restoration Implementation 9- 7
potential for construction-related dust conducted during the planning process
and debris leaving the site (Hunt in accordance with the State Historic
1993). Where appropriate, use of vol- Preservation Officer (SHPO). If a site is
unteer labor in lieu of diesel-powered uncovered unexpectedly, all activity that
equipment will help to protect air qual- might adversely affect the historic prop-
ity in and surrounding the site. Due to erty must cease, and the responsible
safety concerns, it is recommended that agency official must notify the U.S. De-
volunteers not be used on a site where partment of the Interior (USDI) Na-
heavy equipment will also be used. tional Park Service and the SHPO.
Upon notification, the SHPO deter-
Cultural Resources
mines whether the activity will cause an
Since stream corridors have been a irreparable loss or degradation of signif-
powerful magnet for human settlement icant data. This might require on-site
throughout history, it is not uncommon consultation with a 48-hour response
for historic and prehistoric resources to time for determining significance and
be buried by sediment or obscured by appropriate mitigation actions so as not
vegetation along stream corridors. It is to delay implementation activities inor-
quite possible to discover cultural re- dinately.
sources during restoration implementa-
If the property is determined not to be
tion (particularly during restoration
that requires earth-disturbing activities). significant or the action will not be ad-
(See Figure 9.6.) verse, implementation activities may
continue after documenting consulta-
Prior to implementation, any potential tion findings. If the resource is signifi-
cultural resources should be identified cant and the on-site activity is
in compliance with section 106 of the determined to be an adverse action that
National Historic Preservation Act. An cannot be avoided, implementation ac-
archaeological record search should be tivities are delayed until appropriate ac-
tions can be taken (i.e., detailed survey,
recovery, protection, or preservation of
the cultural resources). Under the His-
torical and Archaeological Data Preser-
vation Act of 1974, USDI may assume
liability for delays in implementation.
Noise
Noise from restoration sites is regulated
at the state or local level. Although cri-
teria can vary widely, most establish
reasonable and fairly consistent stan-
dards.
The U.S. Housing and Urban Develop-
ment (HUD) agency has set a maxi-
mum acceptable construction noise
emission of 65 A-weighted decibels
(dBA) at the property line. Numerous
studies conducted since the late 1960s
Figure 9.6: Archaeological site. Cultural suggest that community complaints rise
resources, such as those at this site in South
dramatically above 55 dBA (Thumann
Dakota, are commonly found near streams.
Restoration Implementation 9- 9
Figure 9.7: Backhoe the ground is extremely wet and soft.
in operation at a Under these circumstances, light-track-
restoration site.
ing equipment with low-pressure tires
Backhoes are
mobile in rough or rubber tracks might work. Seeds
terrain and can planted on restoration sites are com-
move rocks and monly broadcast by hydroseeding, re-
logs with remark- quiring a special tank truck with a
able precision. pump and nozzle for spraying the mix-
Source: M . Landin.
ture of seeds, fertilizer, binder, and
water (Figure 9.8) . A wider range of
seed species can be planted more effec-
tively with a seed drill towed behind a
tractor (e.g., Haferkamp et al. 1985).
Where access is limited, hand planting
or aerial spreading of seeds might be
feasible.
Site Clearing
Once the appropriate construction
equipment has been acquired and site
preparation has been completed, any
placed by a helicopter's cable. Although necessary site clearing can begin. Site
the hourly rate is about that of the daily clearing involves setting the geographic
cost of ground-based equipment, the limits, removing undesirable plant
ability to reach a stream channel with- species, addressing site drainage issues,
out use of an access road is sometimes and protecting and managing desirable
indispensable. existing vegetation.
Where access is good but the riparian Geographic Limits
corridor is intact, instream modifica-
tions can be made with a telescoping Site clearing should not proceed unless
crane. This equipment comes in a vari- the limits of activity have been clearly
ety of sizes. A fairly large, fully mobile marked in the field. Where large trees
unit can extend across a riparian zone are present, each should be marked
100 feet wide to deliver construction with colored and labeled flagging to en-
materials to a waiting crew without dis- sure that the field crew understands
turbing the intervening ground or vege- what is to be cut and what is to remain
tation. Where operational constraints and be protected from damage.
permit their use, bulldozers and scrap-
ers can be very useful, particularly for Removal of Undesirable Plant
earthmoving activities that are ab- Species
solutely necessary to get the job done. Undesirable plant species include non-
In addition, loaders are excellent tools native and invasive species that might
for transporting rocks, transplanting threaten the survival of native species.
large plants, and digging and placing Undesirable plants are normally re-
sod. moved by mechanical means, but the
For planting, standard farm equipment, specific method should be tailored to
such as tractors with mounted disks or the species of concern if possible. For
harrows, are generally suitable unless example, simply cutting the top growth
Restoration Implementation 9- 11
Protection and Management of be specified in the contract documents
Existing Vegetation and discussed at a preimplementation
meeting.
Protecting existing vegetation on a
restoration site requires a certain degree When identifying and marking vegeta-
of attention and advanced planning. An tion protection zones, the rooting ex-
area on a site plan that is far from all tent of the vegetation should be
earthmoving activity might appear to respected. Fencing and flagging of pro-
the site foreman as the ideal location tected vegetation should be sturdy and
for parking idle equipment or stockpil- maintained. Despite the cool shade and
ing excess soil. Only a careless minute fencing, vegetation protection zones are
with heavy equipment, however, can re- neither a picnic area nor a storage/stag-
duce a vegetated area to churned earth ing area. They are zones of no distur-
(Figure 9.9). Vegetation designed for a bance.
protection zone should be clearly When working in riparian corridors
marked in the field . with mature conifers, it is especially im-
Existing vegetation might also require portant to protect them from mechani-
temporary protection if it occupies a cal operations which can cause severe
part of the site that will be worked, but damage.
only late in the implementation se-
Installation and Construction
quence. Before that time, it is best left
undisturbed to improve the level of Following site preparation and clearing,
overall erosion control. To save mobi- restoration installation activities such as
lization costs, most earthmoving con- earthmoving, diversion of flow, and the
tractors normally begin construction by installation of plant materials can pro-
clearing every part of the site that will ceed.
eventually require it. If clearing is to be
phased instead, this requirement must Earthmoving
J plantings/seedings
~orizontal ~
Figure 9.10: Treatment of cuts and fills. Slope be vegetated with species that will be
gradient is an important factor in determining used at the restoration site to protect
appropriate restoration measures.
the soil from erosion and noxious
weeds.
since the stability of noncompacted fills
Contouring
is generally quite low.
To reduce grading expenses, the cut and The erosive power of water flowing
fill should be balanced so no material down a slope should be recognized
needs to be transported to or from the during earthmoving. The steepest direc-
site. If the volume of material resulting tion down a hillside is also the direc-
from cuts exceeds that from fills, some tion of greatest erosion by overland or
of the soil must be disposed of off-site. channelized flow. The overall topogra-
Disposal sites can be difficult to locate phy of the graded surface should be de-
and might require an additional grad- signed to minimize the uncontrolled
ing permit from the local jurisdiction. flow of runoff in this direction. Chan-
These possibilities should be planned nelized flow should be diverted to
for far enough in advance to avoid ditches cut into the soil that more
unanticipated delays during implemen- closely follow the level contours of the
tation. land. Dispersed sheet flow should be
broken up by terraces or benches along
As a general rule, topsoil removed from the slope that also follow topographic
the site should be properly stockpiled contours. On a fine scale, the ground
for reuse during the final stages of im- surface can be roughened by the tracks
plementation. Even if undesirable of a bulldozer driven up and down the
species are present, the topsoil will pro- slope, or by a rake or harrow pulled
vide a growth medium suitable for the perpendicularly to the slope. In either
plant community appropriate to the case, the result is a set of parallel ridges,
site. It will also be a source of native spaced only a few inch es apart, that fol-
species that can reestablish the desired low the contours of the land surface
diversity most rapidly (Liebrand and and greatly reduce on-site erosion.
Sykora 1992). Stockpiled soil also can
Restoration Implementation 9- 13
Final Grading and enhanced plant growth. Com-
Earthmoving should result in a slope paction by excessive reworking from
that is stable, minimizes surface erosion earthmoving equipment can result in a
by virtue of length and gradient, and lower rate of rainfall infiltrating the soil
provides a favorable environment for and, consequently, a higher rate of ero-
plant growth. The first two criteria are sive surface runoff. The result is a loss
generally determined by plans and can of the topsoil needed to support plant
be modified only minimally by varia- growth and less moisture available for
tions in grading techniques. Where the plants that remain.
plans specify a final slope gradient Diversion of Flow
steeper than about 1:1, however, vegeta-
tion reestablishment will be very diffi- Channelized flow (from stream chan-
cult, and a combination of stabilization nels, ditches, ravines, or swales) might
structures, soil bioengineering, and ge- need to be diverted, impounded, or
otechnical methods will probably be otherwise controlled during implemen-
necessary. The shape at the top of the tation of restoration measures. In some
slope is also important: if it forms a cases, this need might be temporary,
straight abrupt edge, plant regrowth will until final grading is complete or plant-
be nearly impossible. A rounded edge ings have become established. In other
that forms a gradual transition between cases, the diversion is a permanent part
upland and slope will be much more of the restoration. Permanent facilities
suitable for growth (Animoto 1978). frequently replace temporary measures
Providing a favorable environment for at the same location but are often con-
plant growth requires attention to the structed of different materials.
small-scale features of the slope. Rough- Temporary dikes, lined or grassed water-
textured slopes, resulting from vehicle ways, or pipes can be used to divert
tracks or serrated blades, provide a channelized flow. Runoff can also be
much better environment for seedlings impounded in ponds or sediment
than do smooth-packed surfaces (Fig- basins to allow sediment to settle out.
ure 9 .11). Small terraces should be cut Most temporary measures are not engi-
into slopes steeper than about 3: 1 to neered and are constructed from mate-
create sites of moisture accumulation rials at hand. Dikes (ridges of soil up to
Figure 9.11: Track- a few feet high) are compacted to
roughened area. achieve some stability and are some-
Rough-textured times armored to resist erosion. They
slopes provide a
are used to keep water from washing
much better environ-
ment for seedlings over a newly graded or planted slope
than do smooth- where erosion is otherwise likely, and
packed surfaces. to divert runoff into a natural or artifi-
cial channel. The loosened soil from
swales can be readily compacted into
an adjacent dike, improving the
efficiency and capacity of the runoff di-
version. Pipes or rock-lined ditches can
carry channelized water down a slope
that is steep enough to otherwise suffer
erosion; they can also be used to halt
erosion that has already occurred from
Restoration Implementation 9- 17
that have no residual chemicals and un- Competing Plants
desirable plant species. Although a well-chosen and established
When using seeds, planting should be plant community should require no
preceded by elimination of competing human assistance to maintain vigor and
plants and by preparation of the function, competition from other plants
seedbed (McGinnies 1984). The most during establishment might be a prob-
common methods of seeding in a lem. Competing plants commonly do
restoration setting are hand broadcast- not provide the same long-term benefits
ing and hydroseeding. Hydroseeding for stability, erosion control, wildlife
and other methods of mechanical seed- habitat, or food supply. The restoration
ing might be limited by vehicular access plan therefore must include some
to the restoration site. means to suppress or eliminate them
during the first year or two after con-
When using either cuttings or rooted
struction.
stock, the soil and the roots must make
good contact. This requires compaction Competing plants may be controlled
of the soil, either by foot or by equip- adequately by mechanical means. Cut-
ment, to avoid air pockets. It also re- ting the top growth of competing plants
quires that the soil be at the right can slow their development long
moisture content. If it is too dry (a rare enough for the desired plants to be-
condition), the soil particles cannot come established. Hand weeding is also
"slip" past each other to fill in voids. If very effective, although it is usually fea-
it is too wet (far more common, espe- sible only for small sites or those with
cially in wetland or riparian environ- an ongoing source of volunteer labor.
ments), the water cannot squeeze out of Unfortunately, some species can survive
the soil rapidly enough to allow com- even the most extreme mechanical
paction to occur. treatment. They will continue to
Another aspect to consider is that quite reemerge until heavily shaded or
frequently after planting, the resulting crowded out by dense competing
soil is too rough and loose to support stands. In such cases the alternatives are
vigorous seed growth. The roughness limited. The soil containing the roots of
promotes rapid drying, and the loose- the undesired vegetation can be exca-
ness yields poor seed-to-soil contact vated and screened or removed from
and also erratic planting depths where the site, relatively mature trees can be
mechanical seed drills are used. As a re- planted to achieve near-instantaneous
sult, some means of compaction should shading, or chemical fertilizers or herbi-
be employed to return the soil to an ac- cides can be applied.
ceptable state for planting. Use of Chemicals
Special problems may be encountered In situations where mechanical controls
in arid or semiarid areas (Anderson et are not enough, the application of fer-
al. 1984 ). The salt content of the soil in tilizers and the use of herbicides to sup-
these settings is critical and should be press undesirable competing species
tested before planting. Deep tillage is may be necessary.
advisable, with holes augured for
saplings extended to the water table if Herbicides can eliminate undesirable
at all possible. First-year irrigation is species more reliably, but they may
mandatory; ongoing fertilization and eliminate desirable species. Their use
weeding will also improve survival. near watercourses may also be severely
Straw or hay Available and inexpensive; may May need anchoring; may include undesirable
add undesirable seeds seeds
Hydraulic Blankets soil rapidly and Provides only shallow-rooted grasses, but may
mulches inexpensively out compete woody vegetation
Fabric mats Relatively (organic) or very (inorganic) High costs; suppresses most plant growth;
durable; works on steep slopes inorganic materials harmful to wildlife
Commercial Excellent soil amendment at Limited erosion-control effectiveness; expensive
compost moderate cost over large areas
Restoration Implementation 9- 19
desirable weed seed and should be in- stallation to dry months, or where a
spected prior to application. wet-weather planting may have to en-
Wood fibers provide the primary me- dure a first-year drought. Initial costs
chanical protection in hydraulic are lowest with a simple overhead
mulches (usually applied during hy- spraying system. Spray systems, how-
droseeding). Rates of 1 to 1.5 tons/acre ever, have inefficient water delivery and
are most effective. They can also be ap- have heightened potential for vandal-
plied as the tackifier over straw at about ism. Drip-irrigation systems are there-
one-third the above rate. Hydraulic fore more suitable at many sites
mulches are adequate, but not as effec- (Goldner 1984). There is also a greater
tive as straw, for controlling erosion in potential for undesirable species with
most settings. However, they can be ap- spray irrigation since the area between
The value of individual plants receives moisture.
an effective plied on slopes steeper than 2:1, at dis-
mulch to the tances of 100 feet or more, and in the Fencing
final success wind.·On typical earthmoving and con- If the plant species chosen for the site
of an initiative struction projects, they are favored be- are suitable, little or no special effort
is generally cause of the speed at which they can be will be necessary for survival and estab-
well in excess applied and the appearance of the re- lishment. During the initial construc-
of its cost, sulting slope-tidy, smooth, and faintly
even when
tion and postconstruction phases,
green. The potential drawbacks-intro- however, plants will commonly need
the most ex- ducing fertilizers and foreign grasses
pensive treat- some measure of physical protection.
that are frequently mixed into hydraulic Construction equipment, work crews,
ment is used.
mulches-should be carefully evalu- onlookers, grazing horses and cattle,
ated. and browsing deer and other herbivores
An appropriate mulch in many restora- can reduce a new plant installation to
tion settings is a combination of straw barren or crushed twigs in very short
and organic netting, such as jute or order. Vandalism is also a potential
coconut fibers (Figure 9.13) . It is the problem in populated areas. Fencing is
most costly of the commonly used sys- an effective, low-cost method to provide
tems, but erosion control and moisture
retention are highly effective, and the
problems with undesirable seeds and
excess fertilizers are reduced. The value
of an effective mulch to the final suc-
cess of an initiative is generally well in
excess of its cost, even when the most
expensive treatment is used.
Irrigation
In any restoration that involves replant-
ing, the need for irrigation should be
carefully evaluated. Irrigation might not
be needed in wetland and near-stream
riparian sites or where rainfall is well
distributed throughout the year. Irriga-
tion may b e essential to ensure success Figure 9.13: A well-mulched site. Mulching is
on upland sites, in riparian zones where an effective method for improving the final
seasonal construction periods limit in- outcome of stream corridor restoration.
Restoration Implementation 9- 21
promptly and should determine
whether all elements of the contract
Inspector's Daily Report have been fulfilled satisfactorily. Before
scheduling this final inspection, the
Date: project manager and inspector, together
Project: with any other necessary members of
Contractor:
the restoration team, inspect the work
and prepare a list of all items requiring
Inspector:
completion by the contractor. This "pre-
Temperature: H_ L_ Precip:_ Hours: Workable_ final" inspection is in fact the most
Nonworkable_
comprehensive review of the work that
Work Done will occur, so it must be conducted with
care and after nearly all of the work has
Contractor Equipment On-Site been completed. The final inspection
should occur with representatives of
Personnel On-Site
both the client and the contractor pre-
sent after completion of all required
work and after site cleanup, but before
Materials Used and Location
equipment is removed from the site to
facilitate additional work if necessary. It
Remarks
must address removal of protection
measures no longer needed, such as silt
Inspection Time _ _ __
fences. These are an eyesore and might
Inspector's Signature _ _ _ _ __ inhibit restoration. A written report
should state the complete or provi-
sional acceptance of the work, the basis
review of the action against the plan on which that judgment has been
Figure 9. 15:
Sample of an and applicable standards should be made, and any additional work that is
inspector's daily conducted. For example, rotational needed prior to final acceptance and
report. Frequent, grazing may be a critical plan element payment.
periodic inspection
to achieve restoration of the stream cor-
is a mandatory Follow-up Inspections
part of restoration
ridor. Inspection of this plan element
implementation. would involve a review of the rotation Planning for successful implementation
scheme, condition of individual pas- should always look beyond the period
tures or ranges, and condition of fenc- of installation to the much longer inter-
ing and related watering devices. val of plant establishment. Twelve or
Keep in mind that although plans and more additional site visits are advisable
specifications should be specific to the over a period of many months or years.
conditions of the site, they might have Such inspections will generally require
been developed from generic sets or a separate budget item that must be an-
from those implemented elsewhere. ticipated during restoration planning. If
they are included in the specifications,
On-Site Inspection Following they may be the responsibility of the
Installation contractor. A sample inspection sched-
ule is shown in Table 9.2. Although this
Th e final inspection after installation level of activity after installation m ight
determines the conditions under which seem beyond the scope of a project, any
the contractor( s) can be paid and the restoration work that depends on the
contract finalized. It must occur
Restoration Implementation 9- 23
lowing installation until the system is Vegetation
well established. Streambanks that have been stabilized
Most routine inspections of bank and using plantings alone or soil bioengi-
channel measures should be conducted neering techniques require inspections,
during low-water conditions to allow especially in the first year or two after
viewing of the measure as well as chan- planting (Figure 9.18). It is important
nel bed changes that might threaten its that the planted material be checked
future integrity. This is particularly true frequently to ensure that the material is
of bank stabilization works where the alive and growing satisfactorily. Any
principal mechanism of bank failure is dead material should be replaced and
undermining at the toe. A low water in- the cause of mortality determined and
spection should involve looking for dis- corrected if possible. If the site requires
placed rock, settling or tilting, watering, rodent control, or other reme-
undermining, and similar problems dial actions, the problem must be de-
(Johnson and Stypula 1993). tected and resolved immediately or the
damage may become severe enough to
In the past, bank stabilization measures
were routinely cleared of vegetation to require extensive or complete replant-
ing. Competition from weeds should be
facilitate inspection and prevent dam-
noted if it is likely to suppress new
age such as displacement of rock by
plantings. If nonnative plants capable
trees uprooted from a revetment during
a flood. However, evidence that vegeta- of invading and outcompeting native
species are known to be present in the
tion compromises revetment integrity
has not been documented (Shields area, both plantings and existing native
vegetation should be inspected. Any
1987, 1988). Leaving vegetation in
newly established nonnative popula-
place or planting vegetation through
tions should be eradicated quickly.
rock blankets has been encouraged to
realize the environmental benefits of After the first growing season, semi-
Figure 9. 17: Fencing. vegetated streambanks. Consequently, annual to annual evaluations should be
The integrity of agencies have modified inspection and sufficient in most cases. At the end of a
fencing should be
maintenance guidelines accordingly in 2-year period, 50 percent or more of the
inspected periodi-
cally.
some areas. originally installed plant material
should be healthy and growing well
(Figure 9 .19). If not, determining the
cause of die-off and subsequent replant-
ing will probably be necessary. If the in-
stallation itself is determined to have
been improper, any warranty or dis-
pute-resolution clauses in the plant in-
stallation contract might need to be
invoked.
The effectiveness of bank protection is
based largely on the development of
the plants and their ability to bind soils
at moderate flow velocities. The bank
protection measures should be in-
spected immediately after high-flow
events in the first few years, particularly
Restoration Implementation 9- 25
whether measures are being damaged, ing the design phase or based on
erosion is being initiated, or project ob- project-specific needs. Such mainte-
jectives are otherwise being impeded. nance activities as clearing culverts or
Inspection should reveal whether signs, regrading roads can be anticipated,
trail closures, and other traffic-control scheduled, and funded well in
measures are in place and effective. advance. In many instances, the
Trash and debris dumping, off-road ve- scheduled maintenance fund can be
Preview Section hicle damage, vandalism, and a wide a tempting source for emergency
9.8, Monitoring variety of other detrimental occurrences funds, but this can result in neglect
Techniques may be noted during routine inspec- of routine maintenance, which may
Appropriate tions. eventually produce a new, more cost-
for Evaluation ly, emergency.
Restoration. Maintenance
• Emergency maintenance requires
Maintenance encompasses those repairs immediate mobilization to repair or
to restoration measures which are based prevent damage. It may include mea-
on problems noted in annual inspec- sures such as replacement of plants
tions, are part of regularly scheduled that fail to establish in a soil bioengi-
upkeep, or arise on an emergency basis. neered bank stabilization, or repair
• Remedial maintenance is triggered by of a failing revetment. Where there is
the results of the annual inspection a reasonable probability that repair
(Figure 9.20). The inspection report or replacement might be required
should identify and prioritize main- (e.g., anything that depends on vege-
tenance needs that are not emergen- tation establishment), sources of
cies, but that are unlikely to be funding, labor, and materials should
addressed through normal scheduled be identified in advance as part of
maintenance. the contingency planning process.
However, there should be some
• Scheduled maintenance is performed at
general strategy for allowing rapid
intervals that are preestablished dur-
response to any emergency.
Figure 9.20:
Remedial mainte-
nance. Soil bio-
engineering used
to repair failing
revetment.
Restoration Implementation 9- 27
full resistance to high-flow velocities or access the stream (for fishing, etc.).
saturation of bank soils. Replanting Plantings can be physically removed or
should be an anticipated potential trampled. Replanting, fencing, posting
maintenance need in this situation. signs, or taking other measures might
In many stream corridor restoration be needed.
areas, the intent of streambank and Other Features
channel measures is to provide tempo-
rary stabilization until riparian vegeta- A wide variety of other restoration fea-
tion develops and assumes those tures will require regular maintenance
functions. In such cases, maintenance of or repair. Rural restoration efforts might
some structures might become less im- require regular maintenance and peri-
portant over time, and they might even- odic major repair or replacement of
tually be allowed to deteriorate. They fences and access roads for manage-
can be wholly or partially removed if ment and fire control. Public use areas
they represent impediments to natural and recreational facilities require up-
patterns of channel migration and con- keep of roads, trails, drainage systems,
figuration, or if some components (ca- signs, and so forth (Figure 9.22). Main-
bles, stone, geofabrics) become hazards. tenance of urban corridors may be in-
tensive, requiring trash removal,
Vegetation lighting, and other steps. An adminis-
Routine maintenance of vegetation in- trative contact should be readily avail-
cludes removal of hazardous trees and able to address problems as they
branches that threaten safety, buildings, develop. As the level of public use in-
fences, and other structures, as well as creases, contracting of maintenance ser-
maintenance of vegetation along road vices might become necessary, and
shoulders, trails, and similar features. administration of maintenance duties
will become an increasingly important
Planted vegetation may require irriga- component of corridor management.
tion, fertilization, pest control, and sim-
ilar measures during the first few years Restoration measures placed to benefit
of establishment. In large-scale planting fish and wildlife (e.g., nest boxes and
efforts, such as floodplain reforestation platforms, waterers) need annual dean-
efforts, maintenance may be precluded. ing and repair. These maintenance ac-
Occasionally, replanting will be needed tivities can be as time-consuming as the
because of theft. original installation, and structures that
are in bad condition might draw public
Maintenance plans should anticipate attention and criticism. The mainte-
the need to replant in case soil- bio- nance commitment should be recog-
engineered bank protection structures nized before such structures are
are subjected to prolonged high water installed. Special wildlife management
or drought before the plants are fully units, such as moist-soil-management
established. Techniques using numer- impoundments and green-tree reser-
ous cuttings establish successfully, it voirs, require close attention to be man-
might be desirable to thin the dense aged effectively.
brush that develops to allow particular
trees to grow more rapidly, especially if Flooding and drawdown schedules
channel shading is a restoration objec- must be fine-tuned based on site-
tive. Often, bank protection measures specific conditions (Fredrickson and
become popular points for people to Taylor 1982). Special equipment might
be needed to maintain levees, to work
Figure 9.23:
Engineered log jams.
Engineered log jams
(ELJs) can restore
riverine habitat and
in some situations
provide effective
bank protection.
Restoration Implementation 9- 31
ate the effectiveness of the restoration cess by determining whether the
and to facilitate adaptive management restoration had the desired effect on the
where needed. Sampling locations, ecosystem. Monitoring variables focus
measurements to be made, techniques on indicators that document achieve-
to be used, and how the results will be ment of desired conditions and are
analyzed are important considerations closely linked with project goals. It is
in monitoring. important that indicators selected for
Review Chapter effectiveness monitoring are sensitive
Adaptive Management enough to show change, are measur-
7D's section on
analytical The implementation, effectiveness, and able, are detectable and have statistical
methods for validation components of performance validity. This level of monitoring is
evaluating monitoring provide a vehicle to deter- more time-consuming than implemen-
biological mine the need for adaptive manage- tation monitoring, making it more
attributes. ment. Adaptive management is the costly. To save time and money, moni-
process of establishing checkpoints to toring at this level is usually performed
determine whether proper actions have on a sample population or portion of a
been taken and are effective in provid- project with results extrapolated to the
ing desired results. Adaptive manage- whole population.
ment provides the opportunity for
Validation Monitoring
course correction through evaluation
and action. Validation monitoring answers the
question "Are the assumptions used in
Implementation Monitoring restoration design and cause-effect rela-
Implementation monitoring answers the tionships correct?" Validation monitor-
question, "Were restoration measures ing considers assumptions made during
done and done correctly?" Evaluating planning and execution of restoration
the effectiveness of restoration through measures. This level of monitoring is
physical, biological, and/ or chemical performed in response to nonachieve-
monitoring can be time-consuming, ment of desired results once proper
expensive, and technically challenging. implementation is confirmed. A res-
Time and partnerships are needed to toration initiative that fails to achieve
build the capability for evaluating pro- intended results could be the result of
Adaptive improper assumptions relative to eco-
ject effectiveness based on changes in
management logical conditions or selection of in-
provides the
ecological condition. Therefore, an
important interim step to this goal is valid monitoring indicators. This level
opportunity
implementation monitoring. This com- of monitoring is always costly and re-
for course cor-
rection through paratively simple process of document- quires scientific expertise.
evaluation and ing what was done and whether or not
Evaluation Parameters
action. it was done properly can yield valuable
information that promotes refinement Physical Parameters
of restoration practices.
A variety of channel measurements are
Effectiveness Monitoring appropriate for performance evaluation
Effective monitoring answers the ques- (Figure 9.24). The parameters pre-
tion "Did restoration measures achieve sented in Table 9.3 should be consid-
the desired results?" or more simply ered for measurement of physical
"Did the restoration initiative work?" performance and stability. Stream pat-
Effectiveness monitoring evaluates sue- tern and morphology are a result of the
restoration goal, for example, is to re- dicators are especially useful when de-
duce the salinity in a stream by 5 per- termining the bioaccumulation of a
cent, it would be much more difficult chemical.
to detect than a goal of reducing salin- Water chemistry samples are typically
ity by 50 percent. easier to replicate, can disclose slow
Chemical monitoring can often be used changes over time, and be used to pre-
in conjunction with biological monitor- vent catastrophic events when ch emical
ing. There are pros and cons for using characteristics are near toxic levels. For
chemical and biological parameters example, water quality monitoring
when monitoring. Biological parame- might detect a slow decrease in pH over
ters are often good integrators of several a period of time. Some aquatic organ-
water quality parameters. Biological in- isms, such as trout, m ight not respond
Figure 9.25: Human interest in the stream corridor. Aesthetics are a highly valued benefit
associated with a healthy stream corridor.
• Human health (disease, toxic/fish Use surveys, which determine the suc-
consumption advisories) cess of the restoration in terms of
• Aesthetics (odor, views, sound, litter) human use, can provide additional bio-
logical data. Angler survey, creel census,
• Non-consumptive recreation (hiking, birding questionnaires, and sign-in trail
birding, whitewater rafting, canoeing, boxes that request observations of spe-
outdoor photography) cific species can also provide biological
• Consumptive recreation (fishing, data. Citizens' groups can participate ef-
hunting) fectively, providing valuable assistance
at minimal cost.
• Research and educational uses
• Protection of property (erosion con-
trol, floodwater retention)
Introduction
The following are presented as examples of the many
The user of techniques that are being used in support of stream
this document corridor restoration. Only a limited number of techniques
is cautioned not to by broad category are shown as examples. Neither the
attempt to replicate number of examples nor their descriptions are intended to
or apply any of be exhaustive. The examples are conceptual and contain lit-
the techniques dis- tle design guidance. All restoration techniques, however,
played without should be designed; often through an interdisciplinary
determining their
approach discussed in Part II of this document. Limited
appropriateness as
guidance is provided on applications, but local standards,
an integral part of
the restoration criteria, and specifications should always be used.
plan.
These and other techniques have specific ranges of
applicability in terms of physical and climate adaptation,
as well as for different physiographic regions of the
country. Techniques that are selected must be components
of a system designed to restore specific functions and
values to the stream corridor. The use of any single tech-
nique, without consideration of system functions and
values, may become a short-lived, ineffective fix laid on a
system-wide problem. All restoration techniques are most
effective when included as an integral part of a restoration
plan. Typically a combination of techniques are prescribed
to address prevailing conditions and desired goals.
Effective restoration will respond to goals and objectives
that are determined locally through the planning process
described in Chapters 4 though 6.
Appendix A A-1
The restoration plan may prescribe a variety of approaches
depending on the condition of the stream corridor and the
restoration goals:
• No action. Simply remove disturbance factors and "let
nature heal itself."
• Management. Modify disturbance factors to allow
continued use of the corridor, while the system recovers.
• Manipulation . Change watershed, corridor, or stream
conditions through land use changes, intervention, and
designed systems ranging from installing practices to
altering flow conditions, to changing stream morpholo-
gy and alignment.
INSTREAM PRACTICES
Boulder Clusters ....................................... ............................................................... A - 5
Weirs or Sills .......................................................... .................................................. A - 5
Fish Passages ..... ......... ...... .... .. ................... ........... .................................... ..... ......... A - 6
Log/Brush/Rock Shelters ......................... ............................................................... A - 6
Lunker Structures ..................................... ............................................................... A - 7
Migration Barriers .................................................................................................. A - 7
Tree Cover ...... ............ .......... .................................... .............................................. A - 8
Wing Deflectors .......................................... ............................................................ A - 8
Grade Control Measures ...................................................... .................................. A - 9
STREAMBANK TREATMENT
Bank Shaping and Planting .................................................................................. A - 10
Branch Packing .......... .. .......................................................................................... A - 10
Brush Mattresses ..................................................................... ............................... A - 11
Coconut Fiber Roll .......................... ......................................... .. ............................. A - 11
Dormant Post Plantings ........................................................................................ A - 12
Vegetated Gabions ................................................................................................ A - 12
Joint Plantings ........................................................................................................ A - 13
Live Cribwalls .......................................................................................................... A - 13
Live Stakes ................................................................................. ............................. A - 14
Live Fasci nes.. .................. .. ................ ... .... ............... ...... ... ................ ............. .......... A - 14
Log, Rootwad, and Boulder Revetments .............................................................. A - 15
Riprap ..... .... ...... ... ......... ........ .. ................................................................................. A - 15
Stone Toe Protection.............................................................................................. A - 16
Tree Revetments ................. .. ............... ............ ...... .................................. .............. A - 16
Vegetated Geogrids ............................................................ .................................... A - 17
WATER MANAGEMENT
Sediment Basins ............. ......................................................................................... A - 18
Water Level Control ............................ ................... ......... ................................ ...... A - 18
CHANNEL RECONSTRUCTION
Maintenance of Hydraulic Connections ................................ ........ ........................ A - 19
Stream Meander Restoration ................................................................................ A - 19
Appendix A A-3
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Best Management Practices: Agriculture .............................................................. A - 22
Best Management Practices: Forestland .......................... .................. ....... ........... A - 22
Best Management Practices: Urban Areas ........................ .................................... A - 23
Flow Regime Enhancement ................................................................................ .. A - 23
Streamflow Temperature Management .... .......................................................... A - 24
Appendix A A-5
INSTREAM PRACTICES
Appendix A A-7
INSTREAM PRACTICES
Appendix A A-9
STREAMBANK TREATMENT
Appendix A A-11
STREAMBANK TREATMENT
Appendix A A-13
STREAMBANK TREATMENT
Appendix A A-15
STREAMBANK TREATMENT
Appendix A A-17
WATER MANAGEMENT
Appendix A A-19
STREAM CORRIDOR MEASURES
Appendix A A-21
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
Appendix A A-23
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
1. Abt, S.R., G.B. Hamilton, C.C. Watson, 8. Flosi, G., and F. Reynolds. 1991.
and J.B. Smith. 1994. Riprap sizing for California salmonid stream habitat and
modified ARS-Type basin. Journal of restoration manual. California Department
Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE 120(2): of Fish and Game.
260-267.
9. Goitom, T.G., and M.E. Zeller. 1989.
2. Biedenharn, D.S., C.M. Elliott, and C.C. Design procedures for soil-cement grade
Watson. 1997. The WES stream investi- control structures. In Proceedings of the
gation and streambank stabilization National Conference of Hydraulic Engineer-
handbook. Prepared for the U.S. Environ- ing, American Society of Civil Engineers,
mental Protection Agency by the U.S. New Orleans, Louisiana.
Army Corps of Engineers Waterways
Experiment Station Vicksburg, Mississippi. 10. Gore, J.A., and FD. Shields. 1995. Can
large rivers be restored? A focus on
3. Blaisdell, F.W. 1948. Development and rehabilitation. Bioscience 45 (3) .
hydraulic design, Saint Anthony Falls
stilling basin. American Society of Civil 11. Gray, D.H., and A.T. Leiser. 1982.
Engineers, Trans. 113:483-561, Paper No. Biotechnical slope protection and erosion
2342. control. Van Nostrand Reinholm, New
York
4. Clay, C.H. 1961. Design of fishways and
other fish facilities. Department of 12. Hammer, D.A. 1992. Creating freshwater
Fisheries and Oceans, Canada, Queen's wetlands. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea,
Printer, Ottawa. Michigan.
5. Cooper, C.M., and S.S. Knight. 1987. 13. Harrelson, C.C., J.P. Potyondy, C.L.
Fisheries in man-made pools below grade Rawlins. 1994. Stream channel reference
control structures and in naturally occur- sites: an illustrated guide to field technique.
ring scour holes of unstable streams. General Technical Report RM-245 . U.S.
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 42: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
370-373. Fort Collins, CO.
6. Darrach, A.G. et al. 1981. Building water 14. Harris, F.C. 1901. Effects of dams and
pollution control into small private forest and like obstructions in silt-bearing streams.
ranchland roads. Publication R6-S&PF- Engineering News 46.
006-1980. U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture, Forest Service, Portland, Oregon . 15. Henderson, J.E. 1986. Environmental
designs for streambank protection
7. DuPoldt, C.A., Jr. 1996. Compilation of projects. Water Resources Bulletin 22 ( 4):
technology transfer information from the 549-558.
XXVII conference of the International Erosion
Control Association. U.S. Department of 16. Iowa State University, University
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conserva- Extension. 1996. Buffer strip design,
tion Service, Somerset, New Jersey. establishment and maintenance. In
Stewards of Our Streams. Ames, Iowa.
Appendix A A-25
17. King County, Washington Department of 25. Maryland Department of Natural Re-
Public Works. 1993. Guidelines for bank sources, Forest Service. 1993. Soil erosion
stabilization projects. Seattle, Washington. and sediment control guidelines for forest
harvest operations in Maryland. Annapolis,
18. Leopold, A. 1949. A Sand County almanac Maryland.
and sketches here and there. Oxford Univer-
sity Press, New York 26. McLaughlin Water Engineers, Ltd. 1986.
Evaluation of and design recommendations for
19. Leopold, L.B., and D.L. Rosgen. 1991. drop structures in the Denver metropolitan
Movement of bed material clasts in gravel area. A Report prepared for the Denver
streams. In Proceedings of the Fifth Federal Urban Drainage and Flood Control
Interagency Sedimentation Conference. Las District.
Vegas, Nevada.
27. McMahon, T.A. 1993. Hydrologic design
20. Leopold, L.B., and M.G. Wolman. 1957. for water use. In Handbook of Hydrology, ed.
River and channel patterns: braided, mean- D.R. Maidment. McGraw-Hill, New York
dering, and straight. Professional Paper
282-B. U.S. Geological Survey, 28. Metropolitan Washington Council of
Washington, DC. Governments. 1992. Watershed restoration
source book. Department of Environmental
21. Linder, W.M. 1963. Stabilization of stream Programs, Anacostia Restoration Team,
beds with sheet piling and rock sills. Pre- Washington, DC.
pared for Federal Interagency Sedimenta-
tion Conference, Subcommittee on 29. Milhous, RT., and R. Dodge. 1995.
Sedimentation, ICWR, Jackson, Flushing flow for habitat restoration. In
Mississippi. Proceedings of the First International Confer-
ence on Water Resources Engineering, ed.
22. Little, W.C., and J.B. Murphy. 1982. W.H. Espey, Jr. and P.G. Combs. American
Model study of low drop grade control Society of Civil Engineers, New York
structures. Journal of the Hydraulic Division,
ASCE, Vol. 108, No. HYlO, October, 1982, 30. Minnesota Department of Natural
pp. 1132- 1146. Resources. 1995. Protecting water quality
and wetlands in forest management. St.
23 . Logan, R., and B. Clinch. 1991. Montana Paul, Minnesota.
forestry BMP's. Montana Department of
State Lands, Service Forestry Bureau. 31. Murphy, TE. 1967. Drop structures for
Missoula, Montana. Gering Valley project, Scottsbluff County,
Nebraska, Hydraulic Model investigation.
24. Maryland Department of the Environ- Technical Report No. 2-760. U.S. Army
ment, Water Management Administration. Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment
1994. 1994 Maryland standards and Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi .
specifications for soil erosion and sediment
control. In association with Soil Conserva- 32. National Research Council. 1992.
tion Service and Maryland State Soil Restoration of aquatic ecosystems: science,
Conservation Committee, Annapolis, technology and public policy. National
Maryland. Academy Press, Washington, DC.
36. New York Department of Environmental 44. Schumm, S.A. 1963. A tentative classifica-
Conservation. 1992. Reducing the impacts tion system of alluvial rivers. Circular 477.
of stormwater runoff from new development. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, DC.
Albany, New York.
45. Schumm, S.A. 1977. The fluvial system.
3 7. Pennsylvania Fish Commission. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
(Undated). Fish habitat improvement for
streams. Pennsylvania Fish Commission, 46. Schumm, S.A., M.D. Harvey, and C.A.
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Watson. 1984. Incised channels: morpholo-
gy, dynamics and control. Water Resources
38. Reid, G.K., and R. D. Wood. 1976. Publications, Littleton, Colorado.
Ecology of inland waters and estuaries.
D. Van Nostrand Co., New York. 47. Seehorn, M.E. 1992. Stream habitat
improvement handbook. Technical Publica-
39. Rosgen, D.L. 1985. A stream classification tion R8-TP 16. U.S. Department of
system-riparian ecosystems and their Agriculture, Forest Service, Atlanta,
management. First North American Georgia.
Riparian Conference, Tucson, Arizona.
48 . Shields, FD., Jr. 1982. Environmental
40. Rosgen, D.L. 1993 . River restoration features for flood control channels. Water
using natural stability concepts. In Resources Bulletin, AWRA 18(5): 779-784.
1
Proceedings of Watershed 93, A National
Conference on Watershed Management. 49 . Shields, FD., Jr. 1983. Design of habitat
Alexandria, Virginia. structures open channels. Journal of Water
Resources Planning and Management, ASCE
109: 4 .
Appendix A A-27
50. Shields, FD., Jr., and N.M. Aziz. 1992. 58 . U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1983.
Knowledge-based system for environmen- Streambank protection guidelines. U.S.
tal design of stream modifications. Applied Army Corps of Engineers, Washington,
Engineering in Agriculture, ASCE 8: 4. DC.
51. Shields, FD., Jr., and RT. Milhous. 1992. 59. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1989.
Sediment and aquatic habitat in river Engineering and design: environmental
systems. Final Report. American Society engineering for local flood control
of Civil Engineers Task Committee on channels. Engineer Manual No. 1110-2-
Sediment Transport and Aquatic Habitat. 1205. Department of the Army, U.S. Army
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 118(5). Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC.
52. Shields, FD., Jr., C.M. Cooper, and S.S. 60. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Knight. 1992. Rehabilitation of aquatic Service. 1989. Managing grazing of
habitats in unstable streams. Fifth Sympo- riparian areas in the Intermountain Region,
sium on River Sedimentation. Karlsruhe. prepared by Warren P. Clary and Bert F
Webster. General Technical Report INT-
53. Shields, FD., Jr., S.S. Knight, and C.M. 263. Intermountain Research Station,
Cooper. 1995. Incised stream physical Ogden, UT.
habitat restoration with stone weirs.
Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 61. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil
10. Conservation Service. 1977. Design of
open channels. Technical Release 25.
54. Tate, C.H., Jr. 1988. Muddy Creek grade
control structures, Muddy Creek, Mississippi 62. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural
and Tennessee. Technical Report HL-88-11 . Resources Conservation Service. (Con-
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways tinuously updated) . National handbook
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, of conservation practices. Washington,
Mississippi. DC.
55. Thompson, J.N., and D.L. Green. 1994. 63. U.S. Departm ent of Agriculture, Soil
Riparian restoration and streamside erosion Conservation Service. (1983). Sediment-
control handbook. Tennessee Department storage design criteria. In National
of Environment and Conservation, Engineering Handbook, Section 3. Sedi-
Nashville, Tennessee. mentation, Chapter 8 . Washington, DC.
56. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1970. 64. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural
Hydraulic Design of Flood Control Channels. Resources Conservation Service. 1992.
EM-1110-1601 , (Revision in press 1990). Wetland restoration, enhancement or
creation. In Engineering Field Handbook.
57. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1981. Ch apter 13. Washington, DC.
Main report, Final report to Congress on
the streambank erosion control evaluation 65 . U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural
and demonstration Act of 1974, Section Resources Conservation Service. 1992 .
32, Public Law 93-251. U.S. Army Corps Soil bioengineering for upland slope
of Engineers, Washington, DC. protection and erosion reduction. In
Engineering field handbook, Part 650,
Chapter 18.
A-28 Stream Corridor
66. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural 72. U.S. Department of Transportation.
Resources Conservation Service. 1995. 1975. Highways in the river environment-
Riparian forest buffer, 391, model state hydraulic and environmental design consider-
standard and general specifications. Water- ations. Training and Design Manual.
shed Science Institute, Agroforesters
and Collaborating Partners, Seattle, 73. Vanoni, VA., and RE. Pollack. 1959.
Washington. Experimental design of low rectangular drops
for alluvial flood channels. Report No. E-82.
67. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural California Institute of Technology,
Resources Conservation Service. c1995. Pasadena, California.
(Unpublished draft). Planning and design
guidelines for streambank protection. South 74. Vitrano, D.M. 1988. Unit construction of
National Technical Center, Fort Worth, trout habitat improvement structures for
Texas. Wisconsin Coulee streams. Administrative
Report No. 27. Wisconsin Department of
68. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Natural Resources, Bureau of Fisheries
Resources Conservation Service. 1996. Management, Madison, Wisconsin.
Streambank and shoreline protection. In
Engineering field handbook, Part 650, 75. Waldo, P. 1991. The geomorphic
Chapter 16. approach to channel investigation. In
Proceedings of the Fifth Federal Interagency
69. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Sedimentation Conference, Las Vegas,
Resources Conservation Service, and Nevada.
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.
1994. Illinois Urban Manual. Champaign, 76. Welsch, D.J. 1991. Riparian forest buffers.
Illinois. Publication NA-PR-07-91. U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture, Forest Service,
70. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Radnor, Pennsylvania.
1993. Guidance specifying management
measures for sources of nonpoint pollution in 77. Welsch, D.J., D.L. Smart et al. (Undated) .
coastal waters. Publication 840-B-92-002. Forested wetlands: functions, benefits and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, use of best management practices. (Coordi-
Office of Water, Washington, DC. nated with U.S. Natural Resources Conser-
vation Service, U.S. Army Corps of
71. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection
1995. Water quality of riparian forest buffer Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
systems in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. U.S. Forest Service). Publication No. NA-
EPA-903-R-95-004. Prepared by the PR-01-95. U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Nutrient Subcommittee of the Chesapeake Forest Service, Radnor, Pennsylvania.
Bay Program.
Appendix A A-29
Additional Information:
Andrews, E.D. 1983. Entrainment of gravel Short, H., and J. Ryan. 1995. The Winooski
from naturally sorted riverbed material. River watershed evaluation project report.
Geological Society of America 94: 1225-1231. Americorps-Corporation for National and
Community Service, and U.S. Department of
Arizona Riparian Council. 1990. Protection Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation
and enhancement of riparian ecosystems (An Service, Williston, Vermont.
Annotated Bibliography). Phoenix, Arizona.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conserva-
Coppin, N.J., and I.G. Richards. 1990. Use of tion Service. (Undated) . Agriculture Informa-
vegetation in civil engineering. Butterworths, tion Bulletin 460. Washington, DC.
London, England.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural
Henderson, J.E., and F.D. Shields. 1984. Resources Conservation Service. 1996.
Environmental features for streambank protection Examining a 1930's case study summary:
projects. Technical Report E-84-11. U.S. Army restoration of the Winooski River watershed,
Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Vermont. Watershed Science Institute,
Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Burlington, Vermont.
Length
Unit of measure Abbreviation mm cm m km in ft mi
Area
Unit of measure Abbreviation m2 ha km2 ft2 acre mi2
Volume
Unit of measure Abbreviation km3 m3 L Mgal acre-ft ft3 gal
cubic kilometer km3 1x109 811000
Flow Rate
Unit of measure Abbreviation km3/yr m3/s Us mgd gpm cfs acre-ftlday
cubic kilometers/year km3/yr 31.7 723 1119 2220
cubic meters/second m3/s (m3/sec) 0.0316 1000 22.8 15800 35.3 70.1
million U.S. ga llons/day mgd (Mgal/d) 0.044 43.8 694 1.547 3.07
Tem~erature
Unit of measure Abbreviation F c
Fahrenheit .56 (after subtracting 32)
Appendix B A-31
Addendum
References
Abbe, TB., D.R. Montgomery, and C. Petroff. Alonso, C.V., F.D. Theurer, and D.W. Zachmann.
1997. Design of stable in-channel wood debris 1996. Sediment Intrusion and Dissolved Oxygen
structures for bank protection and habitat Transport Model-SIDO. Technical Report No. 5.
restoration : an example from the Cowlitz River, USDA-ARS National Sedimentation Laboratory,
WA. In Proceedings of the Conference on Oxford, Mississippi.
Management of Landscape Disturbed by Channel
Incision, May 19-23. American Public Health Association (APHA). 1995.
Standard methods for the examination of water
Abt, S.R. 1995. Settlement and submergence and wastewater. 19th ed. American Public
adjustments for Parshall flume. Journal of Health Association, Washington, DC.
Irrigation Drainage Engineering, ASC E 121 (5):
317-321. American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM).
1991. Standard methods for the examinations
Ackers, P., and Charlton. 1970. Meandering of water and wastewater. 18th ed. American
geometry arising from varying flows. Journal of Public Health Association, Washington, DC.
Hydrology 11 (3): 230-252.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). 1997.
Ackers P., and W.R. White. 1973 . Sediment Guidelines for the retirement of hydroelectric
transport- new approach and analysis. Ameri- facilities.
ca n Society of Civil Engineers Proc. Paper 101 67.
Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE Ames, C.R. 1977. Wildlife conflicts in ripa ria n
99(HY11 ): 2041-2060. management. In Importance, preservation and
management of riparian habitat, pp. 39-51.
Adams, W.J., R.A. Kimerle, and J. W. Barnett, Jr. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report
1992. Sediment quality and aquatic life RM- 43. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range
assessment. Environmental Science and Experiment Station. Fort Collins, Colorado.
Technology 26(1 O): 1864-1875.
Anderson, B.W., J. Dissano, D.L. Brooks, and R.D.
Adam us, P.R. 1993. Irrigated wetlands of the Ohmart. 1984. Mortality and growth of cotton-
Colorado Plateau: information synthesis and wood on dredge-spoil. In California riparian
habitat evaluation method. EPA/600/R-93/071 . systems, eds. R.B. Warner and K.M. Hendrix,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environ- pp. 438-444. University of California Press,
mental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon . Berkeley.
Aldridge, B.N, and J.M. Garrett. 1973. Roughness Anderson, B.W., and S.A. Laymon . 1988. Creating
coefficients for stream channels in Arizona. U.S. habitat for the Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus
Geological Survey Open-File Report. U.S. americana) . In Proceedings of the California
Geological Survey. riparian systems conference: protection,
management, and restoration for the 1990s,
A llan, J.D . 1995. Stream ecology-structure and coord. D.L. Abel, pp. 469-472. USDA Forest
function of running waters. Chapman and Hall, Service General Technica l Report PSW-110.
New York. Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment
Station, Berkeley, California. Pages 469-472.
Allen, E.B. 1995. Mycorrhizal limits to rangeland
restoration: soil phosphorus and fungal species Anderson, B.W., R.D. Ohmart, and J. Disano. 1978.
composition. In Proceedings of the Fifth Revegetating the riparian floodplain for wildlife.
International Rangeland Congress, Salt Lake In Symposium on strategies for protection and
City, Utah. management of floodplain wetlands and other
riparian ecosystems, pp. 3 18-33 1. USDA Forest
A lonso, C .V., and S.T. Combs. 1980. Channel Service General Technical Report W0- 12.
width adjustment in straight alluvial streams.
USDA-ARS 5-31 - 5-40.
References B-1
Andrews, E.D . 1980. Effective and bankfull Aronson, J.G., and S.L. Ellis. 1979. Monitoring,
discharges of streams in the Yampa River Basin, maintenance, rehabilitation and enhancement
Colorado and Wyoming. Journal of Hydrology of critical Whooping Crane habitat, Platte River,
46: 311-330. Nebraska. In The mitigation symposium: a
national workshop on mitigating losses of fish
Andrews, E.D. 1983. Entrainment of gravel from and wildlife habitats, tech. coord. G.A.
natural sorted riverbed material. Geological Swanson, pp. 168- 180. USDA Forest Service
Society of America Bulletin 94: 1225-1231. General Technical Report. RM-65. Rocky
Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station,
Andrews, E.D. 1984. Bed-material entra inment Fort Collins, CO.
and hydraulic geometry of gravel-bed rivers in
Colorado. Geological Society of America Ashmore, P.E., TR. Yuzyk, and R. Herrington. 1988.
Bulletin 97: 1012- 1023. Bed-material sampling in sand-bed streams.
Environment Canada Report IWD-HQ-WRB-SS-
Animoto, P.Y. 1978. Erosion and sediment control 88-4. Environment Canada, Inland Waters
handbook. WPA 440/3-7-003. State of Directorate, Water Resources Branch, Sediment
California Department of Conservation, Survey Section.
Sacramento.
Atkins, J.B., and J.L. Pearman. 1994. Low-flow
Apmann, R.P. 1972. Flow processes in open and flow-duration characteristics of Alabama
channel bends. Journal of the Hydraulics streams. U.S. Geological Survey Water-
Division, ASCE 98(HY5): 795-810. Resources Investigations Report 93-4186.
U.S. Geological Survey.
Apple, L.L. , B.H. Smith, J.D. Dunder, and B.W.
Baker. 1985. The use of beavers for riparian/ Averett, R.C., and L.J. Schroder. 1993. A guide to
aquatic habitat restoration of cold desert, gully- the design of surface-water-quality studies. U.S.
cut stream systems in southwestern Wyoming. Geological Survey Open-File Report 93- 105.
G. Pilleri, ed. In Investigations on beavers, U.S. Geological Survey.
G. Pilleri ed., vol. 4, pp. 123-130. Brain
Anatomy Institute, Berne, Switzerland. Baird, K.J. and J.P. Rieger. 1988. A restoration
design for Least Bell 's Vireo habitat in San Diego
Arcement, G.J., Jr., and V.R. Schneider. 1984. County. In Proceedings of the California riparian
Guide for selecting Manning's roughness systems conference: protection, management,
coefficients for natural channels and flood and restoration the 7990s, coord . D.L. Abell, pp.
plains. Federal Highway Administration 462-467 . USDA Forest Service General Techn ical
Technical Report No. FHWA-TS-4-204. U.S. Report PSW- 110. Pacific Southwest Forest and
Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Range Experiment Station, Berkeley, California.
Adm inistration, Washington, DC.
Baker, B.W., D.L. Hawksworth, and J.G. Graham.
Armour, C.L., and J.G. Taylor. 1991. Evaluation of 1992. Wildlife habitat response to ri parian
t he lnstream Flow Incremental M ethodology by restoration on the Doug las Creek watershed. In
U.S. Fish and Wi ldlife Service f ield users. Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Conference,
Fisheries 16(5). Colorado Riparian Association, Steamboat
Springs, Colorado.
Armour, C.L., and S.C. Williamson. 1988. Guid-
ance for modeling causes and effects in Barinaga, M . 1996. A recipe for river recovery?
environmental problem solving. U.S.. Fish and Science 273: 1648-1650.
Wildlife Service Biological Report 89(4).
Barnes, H. 1967. Roughness characteristics of
Arnold, C., P. Baison, and P. Patton . 1982. Sawmill natural channels. U.S. Geological Survey Water
Brook: an example of rapid geomorphic change Supply paper 1849. U.S. Government Printing
related to urbanizatio n. Journal of Geology 90: Office, Washington, DC.
155- 166.
References B-3
Blench, T. 1957. Regime behavior of canals and Brady, W., D.R. Patton, and J. Paxson. 1985. The
rivers. Butterworths Scientific Publications, development of southwestern riparian gallery
London. forests. In Riparian ecosystems and their
management: reconciling conflicting uses, tech.
Blench, T. 1969. Coordination in mobile-bed coords. R.R. Johnson et al., pp. 39-43. USDA
hydraulics. Journal of the Hydraulics Forest. Service General Technical Report RM-120,
Division,ASCE 95(HY6): 1871-98. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station, Fort Collins, Colorado.
Bond, C.E. 1979. Biology of Fishes. Saunders
College Publishing, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Bramblett, R.G., and K.D. Fausch. 1991 . Variable
fish communities and the Index of Biotic
Booth, D., and C. Jackson. 1997. Urbanization of Integrity in a western Great Plains river. Transac-
aquatic systems: degradation thresholds, tions of the American Fisheries Society 120:
stormwater detection and the lim its of mitiga- 752-769.
tion. Journal AWRA 33(5) 1077-1089.
Brazier, J.R., and G.W Brown. 1973. Buffer strips
Booth, D., D. Montgomery, and J. Bethel. 1996. for stream temperature control. Research Paper
Large woody debris in the urban streams of the 15, Paper 865. Oregon State University, School
Pacific Northwest. In Effects of watershed of Forestry, Forest Research Laboratory, Corvallis.
development and management on aquatic
systems, ed. L. Rosner, pp. 178-197. Proceed- Briggs, J.C. 1986. Introduction to the zoogeogra-
ings of Engineering Foundation Conference, phy of North American fishes. In Zoogeography
Snowbird, Utah, August 4-9. of North American Freshwater Fishes, ed. C.H.
Hocutt and E.O. Wiley, pp. 1-16. Wiley
Bourassa, N., and A. Morin. 1995. Relationships lnterscience, New York.
between size structure of invertebrate assem-
blages and trophy and substrate composition in Briggs, M.K. 1992. An evaluation of riparian
streams. Journal of the North American vegetation efforts in Arizona. Master's thesis,
Benthological Society 14: 393-403. University of Arizona, School of Renewable
Natural Resources.
Bovee, K.D. 1982. A guide to stream habitat
analysis using the instream flow incremental Briggs, M.K., B.A. Roundy, and WW Shaw. 1994.
methodology. lnstream Flow Information Paper Trial and error-assessing the effectiveness of
No. 12 FWS/OBS-82-26. U.S. Fish and Wildlife riparian revegetation in Arizona. Restoration and
Service, Biological Services Program, Fort Collins, Management Notes 12(2): 160- 167.
Colorado.
Brinson, M. 1995. The HGM approach explained.
Bovee, K.D., T.J . Newcomb, and T.J. Coon. 1994. National Wetlands Newsletter, November-
Relations between habitat variability and December 1995 7-13.
population dynamics of bass in the Huron River,
Michigan. National Biological Survey Biological Brinson, M M, F.R. Hauer, L.C. Lee, WL. Nutter,
Report 22. National Biological Survey. R.D . Rheinh ardt, R.D. Smith, and D. Whigham.
1995. A guidebook for application of
Bowie, G. L., WB . Mills, D.B. Poree/la, C.L. hydrogeomorphic assessments to riverine
Campbell, J.R. Pagenkopf, G.L. Rupp, K.M . wetlands. Technical Report WRP-DE-11 . U.S.
Johnson, PW H. Chan, and S.A. Gherini. 1985. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experi-
Rates, constants, and kinetics formulations in ment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
surface water quality modeling, 2d ed. EPA/600/
3-85/040. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Brinson, M.M ., B.L. Swift, R.C. Plantico, and J.S.
Environmental Research Laboratory, Athens, Barclay. 1981 . Riparian ecosystems: their
Georgia. ecology and status. FWS/OBS-81/1 7. U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological
Services, Washington, DC.
Brookes, A. 1995. The importance of high flows for Budd, W.W., P.L. Cohen, P.R. Saunders, and F.R.
riverine environments. In The ecological basis for Steiner. 1987. Stream corridor management in
river management, ed. D.M. Harper and A.J.D. the Pacific Northwest: I. determination of stream
Ferguson . John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., corridor widths. Environmental Management 11:
Chichester, U.K. 587-597 .
Brooks, R.P., E.D. Bellis, C.S. Keener, M .J. Burrows, W.J., and D.J. Carr. 1969. Effects of
Croonquist, and D.E. Arnold. 1991. A method- flooding the root system of sunflower plants on
ology for biological monitoring of cumulative the cytokinin content in the xylem sap.
impacts on wetland, stream, and riparian Physiologia Plantarum 22: 1105-1112.
components of watershed. In Proceedings of an
international symposium: Wetlands and River Call, M.W. 1970. Beaver pond ecology and beaver
Corridor Management, July 5-9, 1989, Charles- trout relationships in southeastern Wyoming.
ton, South Carolina, ed . J.A. Kusler and S. Daly, Ph.D . dissertation, University of Wyoming,
pp. 387-398. Laramie.
Brown, G.W., and J.T. Krygier. 1970. Effects of Carling, P. 1988. The concept of dominant
clear-cutting on stream temperatu re. Water discharge applied to two gravel-bed strea ms in
Resources Research 6: 11 33- 11 39. relation to channel stability thresholds. Earth
Surface Processes and Landforms 13: 355-67.
Brownlie, W.R. 1981 . Prediction of flow depth and
sediment discharge in open channels. Report Carothers, S.W. 1979. Distribution and abundance
No. KH-R-43A. California Institute of Technol- of nongame birds in riparian vegetation in
ogy, WM . Keck Laboratory of Hydraulics and Arizona. Final report to USDA Forest Service,
Water Resources, Pasadena. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experimental
Station, Tempe, Arizona.
Brouha, P. 1997. Good news for U.S. fisheries.
Fisheries 22: 4 . Carothers, S.W., and R.R. Johnson. 197 1. A
summary of the Verde Valley breeding bird
survey, 19 70. Completion report FW 16- 10:
46-64. Arizona Game and Fish Department.
References B-5
Carothers, S.W., R.R. Johnson, and S.W. Aitchison. Chow, VT. 1959. Open channel hydraulics.
1974. Population structure and social McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.
organization of southwestern riparia n birds.
American Zoology 14: 97-108. Chow, Ven-te, 1964. Handbook of Applied
Hydrology, a Comparison of Water-Resources
Carothers, S.W., G.S. Mills, and R.R. Johnson. Technology. McGraw Hill, New York.
1990. The creation and restoration of riparian
habitats in southwestern arid and semi-arid Clary, WP., and B.F. Webster. 1989. Managing
regions. Wetland creation and restoration: the grazing of njJarian areas in the intermountain
status of the science, vol. 1, regional reviews, region. USDA Forest Service General Technical
ed. J. A Kusler and M. E. Kentula, pp. 359-376. Report INT-263. USDA Forest Service, Inter-
Island Press, Covelo, California. mountain Research Station, Ogden, Utah.
Carson, M.A., and M.J. Kirkby. 1972. Hills/ope Colby, B.R. 1964. Practical computations of bed
form and process. Cambridge University Press, material discharge. Journal of the Hydraulics
London. Division, ASCE 90(HY2)
Cavendish, M.G., and M.I. Duncan. 1986. Use of Cole, G .A. 1994. Textbook of limnology, 4th ed.
the instream flow incremental methodology: a Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, Illinois.
tool for negotiation. Environmental Impact
Assessment Review 6: 347-363. Cole, D.N., and JL. Marion. 1988. Recreation
impacts in some riparian forests of the eastern
Center for Watershed Protection . 1995. Water- Un ited States. Environmental Management 12:
shed protection techniques, vol. 1, no. 4. 99-107.
Center for Watershed Protection, Silver Spring,
Maryland. Summer. Collier, R.H Webb, and J.C. Schmidt. 1996. Dams
and rivers: A primer on the downstream effect s
Chaney, E , W. Elmore, and W.S. Platts. 1990. of dams. US. Geological Survey Circular vol.
Livestock grazing on western njJarian areas. U.S. 1126 (June).
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8.
Collins, TC. 1976. Population characteristics and
Chang, H.H. 1988. Fluvial processes in river habitat relationships of beavers, Castor
engineering. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., New canadensis, in northwest Wyoming. Ph.D.
York . dissertation, University of Wyoming, Laramie.
Chang, H.H. 1990. Generalized computer Conroy, S. D, and T. J. Svejcar. 199 1. Willow
program FLUVIAL-12, mathematical model for planting success as influenced by site factors
erodible channels, user's manual. Apri l. and cattle grazing in northeastern Cal ifornia .
Journal of Range Management 44 (1): 59-63.
Chapman, D. W. 1988. Critical review of variables
used to define effects of fines in reeds of large Cooper, A. C. 1965. The effect of transported
sa lmon ids. Transactions American Fisheries stream sediments on survival of sockeye and
Society 11 7 1-21. pink salmon eggs and alevin. Int. Pac. Salmon
Fish. Comm , Bulletin No. 18.
Chapman, R.J., TM. Hinckley, L.C. Lee, and R.O.
Teskey. 1982. Impact of water level changes on Cooper, C.M,. and S.S. Kn ight. 1987. Fisheries in
woody riparian and wetland communities, vol. man-made pools below grade-control structures
X. FWS/OBS-82/23. Fish and Wildlife Service. and in naturally occurrinc; scour holes of
unstable streams. Journal of Soil and Water
Chen, W.F. 1975. Limit analysis and soil plasticity Conservation 42(5) 370-373.
Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co , New York.
Coppin, N.J, and LG. Richards. 1990. Use of Darby, S.E., and C.R. Thorne. 1996. Numerical
vegetation in civil engineering. Construction simu lation of widening and bed deformation of
Industry Research and Information Association straight sand-bed rivers. Journal of Hydraulic
(CIRIA), London. ISBN 0-408-03849-7 . Engineering 122:184-193. ISSN 0733-9429.
Couch, C. 1997. Fish dynamics in urban streams DeBano, L.F., and LJ. Schmidt 1989. Improving
near Atlanta, Georgia. Technical Note 94. southwestern riparian areas through water and
Watershed Protection Techniques 2(4):5 11-514. management. USDA Forest Service, General
Technical Report RM-182. U.S Department of
Covich . 1993. Water and ecosystems. In Water in Ag ricu ltu re, Forest Service.
cnsis.· A guide to the World's Freshwater
resources, ed. PH. Gleick. Oxford University Department of the Interior (DOI), Department of
Press, Oxford, United Kingdom. Commerce, and Lower Elwha S' Klallam Tribe.
1994. The Elwha report: restoration of the
Cowan, J. 1959. 'Pre-fab' w ire mesh cone gives Elwha River ecosystem and native anadromous
doves better nest than they can build them- fisheries. U.S Government Printing Office 1994-
selves. Outdoor California 20: 10-11. 590-269.
Cowardin, L.W, V Carter, F.C. Golet, and ET Dickason, C. 1988. Improved estimates of ground
La Roe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and water mining acreage. Journal of Soil and
deep water habitats of the United States. U.S Water Conservation 43(1988): 239-240 .
Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
Dirr, MA, and C.W Heuser. 1987. The reference
Crawford, J., and D. Lenat 1989. Effects of land manual of woody plant propagation. Varsity
use on water quality and the biota of three Press, Athens, Georgia.
streams in the Piedmont Province of North
Carolina. U.S Geological Survey Water Re- Dissmeyer, G.E. 1994. Evaluating the effectiveness
sources Investigations Report 89-4007. U.S of forestry best management practices in
Geological Survey, Raleigh, North Carolina. meeting water quality goals or standards. USDA
Forest Service Miscellaneous Publication 1520,
Croonquist, M.J, and R.P Brooks. 1991 . Use of Southern Region, Atlanta, Georgia.
avian and mammalian guilds as indicators of
cumulative impacts in riparian-wetland areas. Dolloff, CA, PA Flebbe, and MD. Owen. 1994.
Environmental Management 15: 701-714. Fish habitat and fish populations in a southern
Appalachian watershed before and after
Cross, S.P 1985. Responses of small mammals to Hurricane Hugo . Transactions of the American
forest perturbations. Pages 269-275 in R.R. Fisheries Society 123(4): 668-678.
Herman, R.L. and F.P Meyer. 1990. Fish Kills
Due to Natural Causes. In FP Field Manual for Downs, PW 1995. River channel classification for
the Investigation of F!Sh Kills . F.P Meyer and channel management purposes. In Changing
LA Barcaly (Eds.). United States Department of river channels, ed. A Gurnell and G. Petts. John
the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Arlington, Wiley and Sons, Ltd ., New York.
Virginia.
Dramstad, W E., JD . Olson and RT Gorman.
Cummins, K.W 1974. The st ructu re and function 1996. Landscape ecology principles in land-
of stream ecosystems. Bioscience 24:631-641 . scape architecture and land-use planning. Island
Press, Washington, DC.
References B-7
Dubas, R. 1981. Celebration of life. McGraw-Hill, Engelund, F., and E. Hansen. 1967. A monograph
New York. on sediment transport in alluvial streams. Danish
Technical Press (Teknisk Forlag).
Dunne, T., and L.B. Leopold. 1978. Wa ter in
environmental planning. WH. Freeman Co., Entry, J.A., P.K Donnelly, and WH. Emmingham.
San Francisco. 1995. Atrazine and 2,4-D mineralization in
relation to microbial biomass in soils of young-,
Dunne, T. 1988. Geomorphologic contributions to second-, and old-growth riparian forests.
flood control planning. In Flood geomorphology, Applied Soil Ecology 2: 77-84.
pp. 421-438. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., New
York. Erman, NA 1991. Aquatic invertebrates as
indicators of biodiversity. In Proceedings of a
Dunster, J., and K. Dunster. 1996. Dictionary of Symposium on Biodiversity of Northwestern
natural resource management. University of California, Santa Rosa, California. University of
British Columbia. April. ISBN 077480503X. California, Berkeley.
Dury, G.H. 1973. Magnitude-frequency analysis Fan, S.S., ed. 1988. Twelve selected computer
and channel morphology. In Fluvial Geomor- stream sedimentation models developed in the
phology, ed. M. Morisaua, pp. 91-121. Allen & United States. In Proceedings of the lnteragency
Unwin. Symposium on Computer Stream Sedimentation
Models, Denver, CO, October 1988. Federal
Edminster, F.C., and WS. Atkinson . 1949. Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington,
Streambank erosion control on the Winooski DC.
River, Vermont. USDA Circular No. 837. U.S.
Department of Agri culture, Washin gton, DC. Fan, S.S., and B.C. Yen, eds. 1993. Report on the
Second Bilateral Workshop on Understanding
Einstein, HA 1950. The bed-load function for Sedimentation Processes and Model Evaluation,
sediment transportation in open channel flows. San Francisco, CA, July 1993. Proceedings
U.S. Department of Agriculture Technical published by the Federal Energy Regulatory
Bulletin 1026. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Commission, Washington, DC.
Washington, DC.
Fausch, K.D., J.R. Karr, and P.R. Yant. 1984.
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) 1996. Regional association of an Index of Biotic
EPRl's CompMech suite of modeling tools Integrity based on stream fish communities.
population-level impact assessment. Publication Transactions of the American Fisheries Society
W03221 . Electric Power Research Institute, Palo 113: 39-55.
Alto, California .
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).
Elmore, W, and R.L. Beschta. 1987. Riparian areas: 1996. Reservoir release requirements for fish at
perceptions in management. Rangelands 9: the New Don Pedro Project, California. Final
260-265. Environmental Impact Statement. Office of
Hydropower Licensing, FERC -EIS-008 1F.
Elmore, W, and J.B. Kauffman. 1994. Riparian and
watershed systems: degradation and restora- Federal lnteragency Sedimentation Project. 1986.
tion . In Ecological implications of livestock Catalog of instruments and reports for fluvial
herbivory in the West, ed. M . Vavra, WA. sediment investigations. Federal Inter-Agency
Laycock, and R.D. Piper, pp. 2 11-232. Society Sedimentation Project, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
for Range Management, Denver, CO.
Feminella, J.W, and W J. Matthews. 1984.
Emmett, WM. 1975. The channels and waters of lntraspecific differences in thermal tol erance of
the Upper Salmon River Area, Idaho. USGS Etheostoma spectabile (Agassiz) in constant
Professional Paper 870-A, Washington, D.C. versus fluctuating environments. Journal of
Fisheries Biology 25 : 455-461.
Forman, R.T.T., and M. Godron . 1986. Landscape Garcia, M .H., L. Bittner, and Y. Nino. 1994.
ecology. John Wiley and Sons, New York. Mathematica/ modeling of meandering streams
in Illinois: a tool for stream management and
Fortier, S., and F.C. Scobey. 1926. Permissible canal engineering. Civil Engineering Studies, Hydraulic
velocities. Transactions of the ASCE 89: Engineering Series No. 43, University of Illinois,
940-956. Urbana.
Francfort, J.E., G.F. Cada, D.D. Dauble, R.T. Hunt, Garcia de Jalon, D. 1995. Management of physical
D.W. Jones, B.N. Rinehart, G.L. Sommers, and habitat for fish stocks. In The ecological basis
R.J. Costello. 1994. Environmental mitigation for river management, ed. D.M. Harper and J.D.
at hydroelectric projects. Vol. II. Benefits and Ferguson, pp. 363-374. John Wiley & Sons,
costs of fish passage and protection. DOE/ID- Chichester.
10360(V2). Prepared for U.S. Department of
Energy, Idaho Operations Office by Idaho Gebert, WA., D.J . Graczyk, and W.R. Krug. 1987.
National Engineering Laboratory, EG&G Idaho, Average annual runoff in the United States,
Inc. , Idaho Falls, Idaho. 7957-80. Hydrological Investigations Atlas.
HA-710. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.
References B-9
Glasgow, L. and R. Noble. 1971. The importance of Griffiths, GA 1981 . Stable-channel design in
bottomland hardwoods to wildlife. Pages gravel-bed rivers. Journal of Hydrology 52(3/4):
30-43 in Proceedings of the Symposium on 291-305.
Southeast Hardwoods, Dothan, Alabama, pp.
30-43. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Grissinger, E.H., WC. Little, and J.B. Murphey.
Service. 1981. Erodibility of streambank materials of low
cohesion. Transactions of the American Society
Gilbert, R.O. 1987. Statistical methods for of Agricultural Engineers 24(3): 624-630.
environmental pollution monitoring.
VanNostrand Reinhold, New York . Guy and Norman. 1982. Techniques for water-
resource investigations, field measures for
Goldman, S.J , K. Jackson, and TA. Bursztynsky. measurement of fluvial sediment. U.S.
1986. Erosion and sediment control handbook. Geological Survey.
McGraw Hill Book Company, New York.
Haan, C.T., B.J. Barfield, and J.C. Hayes. 1994.
Goldner, B.H. 1984. Riparian restoration efforts Design hydrology and sedimentation for small
associated with structurally modified flood catchments. Academic Press, San Diego.
control channels. In California riparian systems,
ed. R.B . Warner and K.M. Hendrix, pp. 445-45 1. Hackney, C.T., S.M. Adams, and WH. Martin, eds.
University of California Press, Berkeley. 1992. Biodiversity of the southeastern United
states: aquatic communities. John Wiley and
Gomez, B. and M. Church. 1989. An assessment Sons, New York.
of bedload transport formulae for gravel bed
rivers. Water Resources Research 25(6): Haferkamp, M.R, R.F. Mil ler, and FA Sneva. 1985.
1161-1186. Seeding rangelands with a land imprinter and
rangeland drill in the Palouse Prairie and
Gordon, N.D., TA. McMahon, and B.L. Finlayson sagebrush-bunchgrass zone. In Proceedings of
1992. Stream hydrology: an introduction for Vegetative Rehabilitation and Equipment
ecologists. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, U.K Workshop, U.S. Forest Service, 39th Annual
Report, Salt Lake City, Utah, pp. 19-22.
Gosselink, J.G, G.P. Shaffer, L.L. Lee, D.M. Burdick,
D.L. Childres, N.C. Leibowitz, S.C. Hamilton, R. Hagerty, D.J . 1991. Piping/sapping erosion I: basic
Boumans, D. Cushman, S. Fields, M. Koch, and considerations. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
J.M . Visser. 1990. Landscape conservation in a 117(8): 997-998.
forested watershed: ca n we manage cumulative
impacts? Bioscience 40(8): 588-600 . Hammitt, WE, and D.N. Cole. 1987. Wild/and
recreation.· ecology and management. John
Grant, G.E., F.J. Swanson, and M .G. Wolman. Wiley and Sons, New York.
1990. Pattern and origin of stepped-bed
morphology in high-gradient streams, Western Handy, R.L., and J.S. Fox. 1967. A soil borehole
Cascades, Oregon. Geological Survey of America direct-shear test device. Highway Research
Bulletin 102:340-352. News 27 42-51.
Gregory, K., R. Davis and P. Downs. 1992. Identi- Hansen, P.L., RD. Pfister, K. Boggs, B.J. Cook, J. Joy,
fication of river channel change due to urbaniza- and D.K. Hinckley. 1995. Classification and
tion . Applied Geography 12:299-3 18. management of Montana's riparian and wetland
sites. Montana Forest and Conservation
Gregory, S.V., F.J . Swanson, WA.McKee, and K.W. Experiment Station, School of Forestry, Un iversity
Cummins. 199 1. An ecosystem perspective on of Montana. Miscella neous Publication No. 54.
riparian zones. Bioscience 4 1 :540-55 1. Missoula.
Hasfurther, V.R. 1985. The use of meander Hey, R.D. 1995. River processes and management.
parameters in restoring hydrologic balance to In Environmental science for environmental
reclaimed stream beds. In The restoration of management. ed. T. O'Riordan, pp . 131-150.
rivers and streams: theories and experience, ed. Longman Group Limited, Essex, U.K., and John
J.A. Gore. Butterworth Publishers, Boston. Wiley, New York.
Heiner, B.A. 1991 . Hydraulic analysis and modeling Hey, RD, and C.R. Thorne. 1986. Stable channels
of fish habitat structures. American Fisheries with mobile gravel beds. Journal of Hydraulic
Society Symposium 10 78-87. Engineering 11 2(8): 671-689.
Helwig, P.C. 1987. Canal design by armoring Hey, R.D. 1997. Personal communication.
process. In Sediment transport in gravel-bed
rivers, ed . C.R. Thorne, J.C. Bathurst, and R.D. Higginson, N.N.J., and H.T. Johnston . 1989. Riffle-
Hey. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., New York. pool formations in northern Ireland rivers. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on
Hemphill, R.W., and M .E. Bramley 1989. Protection Channel Flow and Catchment Runoff, pp.
of river and canal banks. Construction Industry 638-647.
Research and Information Association/
Butterworths, London. Hilsenhoff, W.L. 1982. Using a biotic index to
eva luate water quality in streams. Department
Henderson, F.M. 1966. Open channel flow. The of Natural Resources, Madison, Wisconsin.
Macmillan Company, New York.
Hoag, J.C. 1992. Planting techniques from the
Henderson, J.E. 1986. Environmental designs for Aberdeen, ID, plant materials center for
strea mbank protection projects. Water vegetating shorelines and riparian areas. In
Resources Bulletin 22(4) 549-558. Symposium on ecology and management of
riparian shrub communities, pp. 165-166.
USDA Forest Service General Technical Report
INT-289.
References B-11
Hocutt, C.H. 1981. Fish as indicators of biological Howard, A.D. 1967. Drainage analysis in geologic
integrity. Fisheries 6(6): 28-31. interpretation: a summation. Bulletin of the
American Association of Petroleum Geologists
Hoffman, C.H, and B.D. Winter. 1996. Restoring 51: 2246-59.
aquatic environments: a case study of the Elw ha
River. In National parks and protected areas: Hunt, G.T. 1993. Concerns over air pollution
their role in environmental protection, ed. R.G. prompt more controls on construction. Engineer-
Wright, pp. 303- 323. Blackwell Science, ing News-Record, pp. E-57 to E-58.
Cambridge.
Hunt, WA., and R.O. Graham. 1975. Evaluation of
Hollis, F. 1975. The effects of urbanization on channel changes for fish habitat. ASCE National
floods of different recurrence intervals. Water Convention meeting reprint (2535)
Resources Research 11 : 431-43 5.
Hunter, C.J. 1991. Better trout habitat: a guide to
Holly, M.F. Jr, J.C. Yang, P Schwarz, J. Schaefer, stream restoration and management. Island
S.H Su, and R. Einhelling. 1990. CHAR/MA - Press. November ISBN: 0933280777.
Numerical simulation of unsteady water and
sediment movement in multiply connected Huryn, A.D., and J.B. Wallace. 1987. Local geomor-
network of mobile-bed channels . llHR Report phology as a determinant of macrofaunal
No. 343 . Iowa Institute of Hydraulic Research, production in a mountain stream . Ecology 68:
The University of Iowa, Iowa City. 1932-1942.
Holmes, N. 1991 . Post-project appraisal of Hutchison, N.E. 1975. WATSTORE User's Guide -
conservation enhancements of flood defense National Water Data Storage and Retrieval
works. Research and Development Report 285/ System, vol. 1. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File
1/A. National Rivers Authority, Reading, UK Report 75-426. U.S. Geological Survey.
Hoover, R.L., and D.L. Wills, eds. 1984. Managing Hynes, H.B.N. 1970. The ecology of running
forested lands for wildlife. Colorado Division of waters. University of Liverpool Press, Liverpool,
Wildlife, Denver. England.
Horton, R.E. 1933. The role of infiltration in the Ikeda, S., and N. Izumi. 1990. Width and depth of
hydrologic cycle. EOS, American Geophysical self-formed straight gravel rivers with bank
Union Transactions 14: 446-460. vegetation. Water Resources Research 26(10):
2353-2364.
Horton, R.E. 1945. Erosional development of
streams and their drainage basins: hydrophysical Ikeda, S., G. Parker, and Y. Kimura. 1988. Stable
approach to quantitative morphology. Geologi- width and depth of straight gravel rivers with
cal Society of America Bulletin 56 : 275-370. heterogeneous bed materials. Water Resources
Research 24(5): 713-722.
Horwitz, R.J. 1978. Temporal variability patterns
and the distributional patterns of stream fishes. Inglis, C.C. 1949. The behavior and control of
Ecology Monographs 48 301 -321 . rivers and canals. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Horwitz, A.J., Demas, C.R. Fitzgerald, K.K. Miller, Mississippi.
T.L., and Rickert, D.A. 1994. US. Geological
Survey protocol for the collection and process- lnteragency Advisory Committee on Water Data
ing of surface-water samples for the subsequent (IACWD), Hydrology Subcommittee. 1982.
determination of inorganic constituents in Guidelines for determining flood flow frequency.
filtered water. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Bulletin 17B of the Hydrology Subcommittee,
Report 94-539 . Office of Water Data Coordination, U.S.
Geological Survey, Reston, Virgin ia.
Jennings, M.E., WO. Thomas, Jr. , and H.C. Riggs. Johnson, R.R., and J.M. Simpson. 197 1. Important
1994. Nationwide summary of U.S. Geological birds from Blue Point Cottonwoods, Maricopa
Survey regional regression equations for County, Arizona. Condor 73: 379-380.
estimating magnitude and frequency of floods
for ungaged sites 1993. U.S. Geological Survey Johnson, WC. 1994. Woodland expansion in the
Water-Resources Investigations Report 94-4002. Platte River, Nebraska: patterns and causes.
U.S. Geological Survey. Ecological M onographs 64: 45-84.
References B-13
Junk, W.J., P.B. Bayley, and R.E . Sparks. 1989. The Keller, E.A., and W.N. Melhorn. 1978. Rhythmic
floodpulse concept in river-floodp lain systems. spacing and origin of pools and riffles. Geologi-
In Proceedings of the International Large River cal Society of America Bulletin (89): 723-730.
Symposium, ed. D.P. Dodge, pp. 110-127. Can.
Spec. Publ. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 106. Kentula, M.E., R.E. Brooks, S.E. Gwin, C.C. Holland,
A.D. Sherman, and J.C. Sinfeos. 1992. An
Kalmbach, E.R., W.L. McAtee, F.R. Courtsal, and approach to improving decision making in
R.E. Ivers. 1969. Home for birds. U.S. Depart- wetland restoration and creation. Island Press,
ment of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC .
Conservation Bulletin 14.
Kerchner, J.L. 1997. Setting riparian/aquatic
Karle, K.F., and R.V. Densmore. 1994. Stream and restoration objectives within a watershed
riparian floodplain restoration in a ripa rian context. Restoration Ecology 5(45).
ecosystem disturbed by placer mining. Ecologi-
cal Engineering 3: 121-133. Kern, K. 1992. Restoration of lowland rivers: the
German experience. In Lowland floodplain
Karr, J. R. 1981 . Assessment of biotic integrity rivers: geomorphological perspectives, ed . P.A.
using fish communities. Fisheries 6(6): 21-27. Carling and G.E. Petts, pp. 279-297. John W iley
and Sons, Ltd ., Chichester, U.K.
Karr, J.R., and W. Chu. 1997. Biological monitoring
and assessment: using multimetric indexes King, R. 1987. Designing plans for constructibility.
effectively EPA 235-R97-001. University of Journal of Construction and Management
Washington, Seattle . 1131-5.
Karr, J.R., K.D. Fausch, P.L. Angermeier, P.R. Yant, Klemm, D. J., P.A. Lewis, F. Fulk, and J. M.
and /.J. Schlosser. 1986. Assessing biological Lazorchak. 1990. Macroinvertebrate field and
integrity in running waters: a method and its laboratory methods for evaluating the biological
rationale. Illinois Natural History Survey Special integrity of surface waters. EPA/600/4-90-030.
Publication No. 5. Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio.
Kasvinsky, J.R. 1968. Evaluation of erosion control
measures on the Lower Winooski River, Vermont. Klimas, C.V. 1987. River regu lation effects on
Master's thesis, Graduate College, University of floodplain hydrology and ecology. Chapter IV in
Vermont, Burlington, Vermont. The ecology and management of wetlands, ed.
D. Hook et al. Croom Helm, London .
Kauffman, J.B , R.L. Beschta, and W.S. Platts. 1993.
Fish habitat improvement projects in the Klimas, C. V. 1991 . Limitations on ecosystem
Fifteenmile Creek and Trout Creek basins of function in the forested corridor along t he lower
Central Oregon: field review and management M ississippi River. In Proceedings of the Interna-
recommendations. U.S. Department of Energy, tional Symposium on Wetlands and River
Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Corridor Management, Association of State
Oregon . Wetland Managers, Berne, New York,
pp . 61-66.
Kauffman, J.B., and W.D. Krueger. 1984. Livestock
impacts on riparian ecosystems and streamside Knighton, David. 1984. Fluvial forms and process.
management implications: a review. Journal of Edward Arnold, London .
Range Management 37: 430-438.
Knopf, F. L. 1986. Changing landscapes and the
Keller, E.A. 1978. Pools, riffles, and chan nelization. cosmopo litanism of the eastern Colorado
Environmental Geology 2(2): 11 9- 127. avifauna. Wildlife Society Bulletin 14: 132-142.
Kohler, C.C, and WA Hubert. 1993. Inland Leclerc, M., A Boudreault, J.A. Bechara, and G.
Fisheries M anagement in North America . Corfa. 1995. Two-dimensional hydrodynamic
American Fisheries Society, Bethesda. Maryland. modeling: a neglected tool in the lnstream Flow
Incremental Methodology. Transactions of the
Kohler, M.A., T.J. Nordenson, and D.R. Baker. America Fisheries Society 124: 645-662 .
1959. Evaporation maps for the United States.
U.S. Weather Bureau Technical Paper 37. Lee, L.C., and T.M . Hinckley. 1982. Impact of
water level changes on woody riparian and
Kondolf, G.M. 1995. Five elements for effective w etland communities, vol . IX. FWS/OBS-82/22.
evaluation of stream restoration . Restoration Fish and Wildlife Service.
Ecology 3(2): 133-136.
Lee, L.C., T.A Muir, and R.R. Johnson. 1989.
Kondolf, G.M , and E.R. Micheli. 1995. Evaluating Riparian ecosystems as essential habitat for
stream restoration projects. Environmental raptors in the American West. In Proceedings of
Management 19(1 ): 1- 1 5. the Western Raptor Management Symposium
and Workshop, ed. B.G. Pendleton, pp. 15-26.
Krebs, C.J. 1978. Ecology: the experimental Institute for Wildlife Resea rch, National Wildlife
analysis of distribution and abundance, 2d ed . Federation. Sci . and Tech . Ser. No. 12.
Harper and Row, New York.
Leonard, P.M ., and D.J. Orth. 1986. Application
Lamb, B.L. 1984. Negotiating a FERC license for and testing of an Index of Biotic Integrity in
the Terror River Project. Water for Resource small, coolwater streams. Transactions of the
Development, Proceedings of the Conference, American Fisheries Society 11 5: 401-14.
American Society of Civil Engineeers, August 14-
17, 1984, ed. D.L. Schreiber, pp. 729-734. Leopold, A 1933. The conservation ethic. Journal
of Forestry 31 .
References B-15
Leopold, A. 1953. Round river. From the journals Lowe, C.H., and F.A. Shannon. 1954. A new lizard
of Aldo Leopold, ed . Luna Leopold . Oxford (genus Eumeces) from Arizona. Herpetologica
University Press, New York. 10 185-187.
Leopold, L.B., 1994. A view of the river. Harvard Lowrance, R.R , R.L. Todd, and L.E . Asmussen.
University Press, Cambridge, M assachusetts. 1984b. Nutrient cycling in an agricultural
watershed: I. Phreatic movement. Journal of
Leopold, L.B., and T. Maddock, Jr. 1953. The Environmental Quality 13: 22-27.
hydraulic geometry of stream channels and
some physiographic implications. Geological Low rance, R.R., R. Todd, J. Fail, Jr., 0 . Hendrickson,
Survey Professiona l Paper 252 . U.S. Geological Jr., R. Leonard, and L. Asmussen. 1984a.
Survey, Washington, DC. Riparian forests as nutrient filters in agricultu ral
watersheds. BioScience 34: 374-377 .
Leopold, L.B., H.L. Silvey, and D.L. Rosgen. 1997.
The reference reach field book. Wildland Lumb, A.M., J.L. Kittle, Jr., and K.M. Flynn. 1990.
Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, Colorado. Users manual for ANNIE, a computer program
for interactive hydrologic analyses and data
Leopold, L.B., M .G. Wolman, and J.P. Miller. 1964. management. U.S. Geological Survey Water-
Fluvial processes in geomorphology. W.H. Resources Investigations Report 89-4080. U.S.
Freeman and Company, San Francisco. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia .
Liebrand, C.I., and KV Sykora. 1992. Restoration Luttenegger, J.A., and B.R. Hallberg. 1981.
of the vegetation of river embankments after Borehole shear test in geotechnical investiga-
reconstruction . Aspects of Applied Biology 29: tions. American Society of Testing Materia ls
249-256. Special Publication No. 740.
Livingstone, A.C., and C.F. Rabeni. 1991. Food- Lutton, R.J . 1974. Use of loess soil for modeling
habit relations that determine the success of rock mechanics. Report S-74-28. U.S. Army
young-of-year smallmouth bass in Ozark Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment
streams. In Proceedings of the First International Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Symposium on Smallmouth Bass, ed . D.C.
Jackson. Mississippi Agriculture and Forest Lynch, J.A., E.S. Corbett, and WE. Sapper. 1980.
Experiment Station, Mississippi State University. Evaluation of management practices on the
biological and chemical characteristics of
Lodge, D.M . 1991. Herbivory on freshwater streamflow from forested watersheds. Technical
macrophytes. Aquatic Botany 41 : 195-224. Completion Report A-04 1-PA. Institute for
Research on Land and Water Resources, The
Loeb, S.L., and A. Spacie. 1994. Biological Pennsylvania State University, State College.
monitoring of aquatic systems. Papers pre-
sented at a symposium held Nov. 29- Dec. 1, Lyons, J., L. Wang, and T.D . Simonson . 1996.
1990, at Purdue University. Lewis Publishers, Development and validation of an index of biotic
Boca Raton, Florida. integrity for coldwater streams in Wisconsin.
North American Journal of Fisheries Manage-
Lohnes, R.A. , and R.L. Handy. 1968. Slope angles ment 16: 241-56.
in friable loess. Journal of Geology 76(3):
247-258 . MacArthur, R.H., and J.W. MacArthur. 1961. On
bird species diversity. Ecology 42 : 594-598.
Lohoefener, R.R. 1997. Personal commun ication.
Deputy Chief, Division of Endangered Species, MacBroom, J. G. 198 1. Open channel design
U.S. Fish and W ildlife Service, Arlington, VA. based on fluvial geomorphology. In Water
Forum '8 7, American Society of Civil Engineers,
Lowe, C. H., ed. 1964. The vertebrates of Arizona . New York, pp. 844-851 .
University of Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona.
Maciej, M.A. 1982. Sediment transport and May, C., R. Horner, J. Karr, B. Mar, and E. Welch.
channel changes in an aggrading stream in the 1997. Effects of urbanization on small streams
Puget Lowland, Washington . U.S. Forest Service in the Puget Sound ecoregion. Watershed
General Technical Report PNW-141 . U.S. Protection Technique 2(4): 483-494.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.
McAnally, W.H ., and W.A. Thomas. 1985. User 's
Magnuson, J.J., L.B. Crowder, and P.A. Medvick. manual for the generalized computer program
1979. Temperature as an ecological resource. system, open-channel flow and sedimenta tion,
American Zoology 19: 331-343 . TABS-2, main text. U.S. Army Corps of Engi-
neers, Waterways Experiment Station, Hydraulics
Magurran, A E. 1988. Ecological diversity and its Lab, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
measurem ent. Princeton University Press,
Princeton, New Jersey. Mcc lendon, D.D. , and C.F. Rabeni. 1987. Physica l
and biological variables useful for predicting
Malanson, G.P. 1993. Riparian landscapes. population characteristics of smallmouth bass
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. and rock bass in an Ozark stream. North Am. J.
Fish. Manag. 7: 46-56.
Manley, P.A. , et al. 1995. Sustaining ecosystems: a
conceptual framew ork. USDA Forest Service, McDonald, L.H. , et al. 1991 . Monitoring guidelines
Pacific Southwest Region, San Francisco, to evaluate effects of forestry activities on
California. streams in the Pacific Northwest and A laska.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
Mann, C.C., and M.L. Plummer. 1995 . Are wildlife 10, Seattle, Washi ngt on.
corridors the right path? Science 270:
1428- 1430. McG innies, W.J. 1984. Seeding and planting. In
Vegetative rehabilitation and equipment
Mannan, R.W., M.L. M orrison, and E.C. M eslow. w orkshop, 38th Annual Report, pp. 23-25 . U.S.
1984. The use of guilds in forest bird manage- Forest Service, Rapid City, Sout h Dakota.
ment. Wildlife Society Bulletin 12: 426-430 .
McKeown, B.A. 1984. Fish migration. Timber
Maret, T.J . 1985. The effect of beaver ponds in Press, Beaverton, Oregon.
the w at er quality of Currant Creek, Wyoming.
M .S. t hesis, University of Wyoming, Laramie.
References B- 17
Mclaughlin Water Engineers, Ltd . 1986 . Evaluation Miller, A.C., R.H. King, and J.E. Glover . 1983.
of and design recommendations for drop Design of a gravel bar ha bitat for the Tombigbee
structures in the Denver Metropolitan Area. A River near Columbus, Mississippi. Miscellaneous
report prepared for t he Denver Urban Drainage Paper EL-83-1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
and Flood Control District by Mclaughlin Water Waterways Experiment Station, Environmental
Engineers, Ltd . Laboratory, Vicksburg, M ississippi.
Medin, D.E., and WP. Clary. 1990. Bird popula- M ills, WB., D.B. Porcella, M.J. Ungs, S.B. Gherini,
tions in and adjacent to a beaver pond ecosys- K.V. Summers, L. Mok, G.L. Rupp, G.L. Bow ie
tem and adjacent riparian habitat in Idaho. and D.A. Haith. 1985. Water quality assess-
USDA Forest Service, lntermountain Forest and ment: a screening procedure for toxic and
Range Experiment Station, Ogden, Utah. conventional pollutants in surface and ground
water. EPA/600/6-85/002a-b. U.S. Environmen-
Mette, G.K., C.R. Carroll, and contributors. 1994. tal Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Principles of conservation biology. Sina uer Development, Athens, Georgia.
Associates, Inc., Sunderland, Massachusetts.
Minckley, WL., and M.E. Douglas. 1991. Discov-
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments ery and extinction of western fishes : a blink of
(MWCOG). 1997. An existing source assess- the eye in geologic time. In Battle against
ment of pollutants to the Anacostis watershed, extinction: native fish management in the
ed. A. Warner, D. Shepp, K. Corish, and J. Galli . American West, ed. W L. Minckley and J.E.
Washington, DC. Deacon, pp. 7- 18. University of Arizona Press,
Tucson.
Meyer-Peter, E., and R. Muller. 1948. Formu las for
bed-load transport. In International Association Minshall, G.W 1978. Autotrophy in stream
for Hydraulic Structures Research, 2nd Meeting, ecosystems. Bioscience 28: 767-77 1.
Stockholm, Sweden, pp. 39-64.
Minshall, G.W 1984. Aquatic insect-substratum
Milhous, R.T., J.M. Bartholow, M.A. Updike, and relationships. In The ecology of aquatic insects,
A.R. M oos. 1990. Reference manual for ed. V.H. Resh and D.M. Rosenberg, pp. 358-400.
generation and analysis of habitat time series- Praeger, New York.
Version II. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Biological Report 90(16) U.S. Fish and Wi ldlife Minshall, G.W, K.W Cumm ins, R.C. Petersen, C.E.
Servi ce. Cushing, D.A. Bruns, J.R. Sedell, and R.L.
Vannote. 1985. Developments in stream
Milhous, R.T., M.A. Updike, and D.M. Schneider. ecosystem theory. Canadian Journal of Fisheries
1989. Physical Habitat Simulation System and Aquatic Sciences 42: 1045-1055.
Reference Manual- Version II. lnstream Flow
Information Paper No. 26. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Minshall, G.W, R.C. Petersen, K.W Cummins, TL.
Service Biological Report 89(16). U.S. Fish and Bott, J.R. Sedell, C.E. Cushing, and R.L. Vannot e.
Wildlife Service. 1983. lnterbiome comparison of st ream
ecosystem dynamics. Ecological Monographs
Miller, J.E. 1983 . Beavers. In Prevention and 53 : 1-25.
control of wildlife damage, ed . R.M . Timm, pp.
B1-B 11 . Great Plains Agricultural Council and Molinas, A. , and C.T. Yang. 1986. Computer
Nebraska Cooperative Ext ension Service, program user's manual for GSTA RS (Generalized
University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Stream Tube model for Alluvial River Simulation).
US. Bureau of Reclamation Engineering and
Miller, G.T. 1990. Living in the environment: an Research Center, Denver, Colorado.
introduction to environmental science . 6th ed.
Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, Montana Department of Environmental Quality
California. (MDEQ) 1996. Montana Streams Management
Guide. ed. C. Duckworth and C. M assman.
Myers, WR , and J.F. Lyness. 1994 . Hydraulic Nehlsen, W, J.E . Will iams, & J.A. Lichat owich.
study of a two-stage river channel. Regulated 1991 . Pacific salmon at the crossroads: stocks
Rivers.· Research and M anagement 9(4): at risk fro m Californ ia, Oregon, Idaho, and
225-236. Washingt on. Fisheries (Bethesda) 16(2): 4-2 1.
Naiman, R.J., T.J . Beechie, L.E. Benda, D.R. Berg, Nehring, R.B ., and R.M. Anderson . 1993. Determi-
P.A. Bisson, L. H. MacDonald, M.D. O'Connor, nation of population-limiting critical salmonid
P.L. Olson, and E.A. Steel. 1994. Fundamental habitats in Colorado streams using the Physical
elements of ecologically healthy w atersheds in Habitat Simulation System . Rivers 4(1 ): 1-1 9.
th e Pacif ic northwest coastal ecoregion. In
Watershed management, ed . R. Naiman, pp. Neill, WM . 1990. Control of tamarisk by cut-
127- 188. Springer-Verlag, New York. stum p herbicide t reatments. In Tamarisk control
in southwestern United States, pp. 91-98.
Naiman, R.J ., J. M. M elillo, and J. E. Hobbie. 1986. Cooperative National Park Research Studies
Ecosystem alteration of boreal forest streams by Unit, Special Report Number 9. School of
streams by beaver (Castor canadensis). Ecology Renewable Nat ural Resources, University of
67(5): 1254- 1269. A rizona, Tucson .
Nanson, G.C., and E.J. Hickin. 1983 . Channel Neilson, F. M ., T N. Waller, and K.M . Kennedy. 199 1.
migration and incisio n on t he Beatton River. A nnotated bibliography on grade control
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 109(3): structures. M iscellaneous Paper HL-9 1-4. U.S.
327-337. Army Corps of Engineers, Wat erways Experiment
Station, CE, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
References B- 19
Nelson, JM, and J.D. Smith. 1989. Evolution and Nunnally, N.R, and F.D. Shields. 1985. Incorpora-
stability of erodible channel beds. In River tion of environmental features in flood control
Meandering, ed. S. Ikeda and G. Parker. Water channel projects. Techn ical Report E-85-3. U.S.
Resources Monograph 12, American Geophysi- Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experi-
cal Union, Washington, DC. ment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Nestler, J.M., R.T. Milhouse, and J.B. Layzer. 1989. Odgaard, J. 1987. Streambank erosion along two
lnstream habitat modeling techniques. Chapter rivers in Iowa. Water Resources Research 23(7):
12 in Alternatives in regulated river manage- 1225-1236.
ment, ed. J.A. Gore and G.E. Petts, Chapter 12.
CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, Florida . Odgaard, J. 1989. River-meander model I:
development. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
Nestler, J., T. Schneider, and D. Latka. 1993. 115(11): 1433- 1450.
RCHARC: A new method for physical habitat
analysis. Engineering Hydrology :294-99. Odum, E.P. 1959. Fundamentals of ecology.
Saunders, Philadelphia.
Newbury, R.W., and M.N. Gaboury. 1993. Stream
analysis and fish habitat design. a field manual. Odum, E P. 1971 . Fundamentals of ecology, 3d
Newbury Hydraulics Ltd ., Gibsons, British ed. W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, PA.
Columbia. 574 pp.
Nixon, M. 1959. A Study of bankfull discharges of Odum, E.P. 1989. Ecology and our endangered
rivers in England and Wales. In Proceedings of life-support systems. Sinauer Associates, Inc.,
the Institution of Civil Engineers, vol. 12, pp. Sunderland, Massachusetts.
157-175.
Ohio EPA. 1990. Use of biocriteria in the Ohio EPA
Noss, R.F. 1983. A regional landscape approach to surface water monitoring and assessment
maintain diversity. BioScience 33: 700-706. program. Ohio Environmental Protection
Agency, Division of Water Quality Planning and
Noss, R.F. 1987. Corridors in real landscapes: a Assessment, Columbus, Ohio.
reply to Simberloff and Cox. Conservation
Biology 1: 159-164. Ohmart, R.D., and B.W. Anderson. 1986. Riparian
habitat. In Inventory and monitoring of wildlife
Noss, R.F. 1991. Wilderness recovery thinkin g big habitat, ed. A.Y Cooperrider, R.J . Boyd, and
in restoration ecology. Environmental Profes- H.R. Stuart, pp. 169-201. U.S. Department of
sional 13(3): 225-234. Corvallis, Oregon. the Interior, Bureau of Land M anagement
Service Center, Denver, Colorado.
Noss, R.F. 1994. Hierarchical indicators for
monittlring changes in biodiversity. In Principles Olive, S.W., and B.L. Lamb. 1984. Conducting a
of conservation biology, G.K. Meffe, C. R. FERC environmental assessment: a case study
Ca rroll, et al., pp. 79-80. Sinauer Associates, and recommendations from the Terror Lake
Inc. , Sunderland, Massachusetts. Project. FWS/OBS-84/08. U.S. Fish and W ildlife
Service.
Noss, R.F., and L.D . Harris. 1986. Nodes, net-
works, and MUMs: preserving diversity at all Oliver, C.D., and T.M . Hinckley. 1987. Species,
sca les. Environmental Management 10(3): stand structures and silvicultural manipulation
299-309. patterns for the streamside zone. In Streamside
management: forestry and fishery interactions,
Novotny and Olem. 1994. Water quality, preven- ed. E.O. Salo and T.W. Cu ndy, pp. 259-276.
tion, identification, and management of diffuse Institute of Forest Resources, University of
pollution . Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York. Washington, Seattle.
Orsborn, J.F., Jr., R.T. Cullen, BA Heiner, C.M. Payne, N.F., and F.C. Brya nt. 1994. Techniques for
Garric, and M. Rashid. 1992. A handbook for wild//fe habitat management of Uplands, New
the planning and analysis of fisheries habitat York. McGraw-H ill.
modification projects. Department of Civil and
Environ menta l Engineering, Washington State Pearlstine, L., H. McKellar, and W Kitchens. 1985.
University, Pullman. Modelling the impacts of a river diversion on
bottomland forest communities in the Santee
Orth, D.J., and R.J. White. 1993. Stream habitat River floodplain, South Carolina. Ecological
management. Chapter 9 in Inland fisheries Modelling 7 283-302.
management in North America, ed. C.C. Kohler
and WA. Hubert. American Fisheries Society, Peckarsky, B.L. 1985. Do predaceous stoneflies and
Bethesda, Maryland. siltation affect the structure of stream insect
communities colonizing enclosures? Canadian
Osman, A.M., and C.R. Thorne. 1988. Riverba nk Journal of Zoology 63 : 1 519-1 530.
stability analysis; I: Theory. Journal of Hydraulic
Engineering, ASCE 114(2): 134-150. Petersen, M .S. 1986. River engineering. Prentice-
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Pacific Rivers Counci l. 1996. A guide to the
restoration of watersheds and native fish in the Pickup, G., and R.F. Warner. 1976. Effects of
pacific northwest, Workbook II, Healing t he hydrologic regime on the magnitude and
Watershed series. frequency of dominant discharge. Journal of
Hydrology 29: 51-75.
Parker, G. 1978. Self-formed straight rivers with
equilibrium banks and mobile bed, 2, the gravel Pielou, E.C. 1993. Measuring biodiversity
river. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 9(1) 127-146. quantitative measu res of quality. In Our living
legacy: Proceedings of a symposium on biologi-
Parker, G. 1982. Discussion of Chapter 19: cal diversity, ed . M.A. Fenger, E.H . Miller, J.A.
Regime equations for gravel-bed rivers. In Johnson, and E.J.R. W illiams, pp. 85-95. Royal
Gravel-bed rivers: fluvial processes, engineering British Columbia Museum, Victoria, British
and management, ed. R.D. Hey, J.C. Bathurst, Columbia.
and C.R. Thorne, pp. 542-552. John Wiley and
Sons, Chichester, U.K. Plafkin, J.L. , M.T. Barbou r, K.D. Porter, S.K. Gross,
and R.M. Hughes. 1989. Rapid bioassessment
Parker, G. 1990. Surface bedload transport protocols for use in streams and rivers. EPA444/
relation for gravel rivers. Journal of Hydraulic 4-89-001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research 28(4): 417-4 36. Washington, DC.
References B-21
Platts, W.S . 1987. Methods for evaluating riparian Rechard, R.P., and R.G. Schaefer. 1984. Stripmine
habitats with applications to management. streambed restoration using meander param-
General Technical Report INT-2 1. U.S. Depart- eters. In River meandering, Proceedings of the
ment of Agriculture, Forest Service, lntermountain Conference Rivers '83, ed. C.M. Elliot, pp. 306-
Research Station, Ogden, Utah. 317. American Society of Civil Engineers, New
York.
Platts, W.S. 1989. Compatibility of livestock
grazing strateg ies w ith fisheries. In Proceedings Reiser, D.W., M.P. Ramey, and T.A. Wesche. 1989.
of an educational workshop on practical Flushing flows. In Alternatives in regulated river
approaches to riparian resource management, management, ed. M.A. Fenger, E.H. Miller, J.A.
pp. 103- 110. BLM-MT-PT-89-001-4351. U.S. Johnson, and E.J. R. Williams, pp. 9 1-1 35. CRC
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Press, Boca Raton, Florida.
Management, Billings, Montana.
Resh, V. H., AV Brown, A.P. Covich, M.E. Gurtz,
Platts, W.S., and Rinne. 1985. Riparian and stream H.W. Li, G.W. Minshall, S.R. Reise, A.L. Sheldon,
enhancement management and research in the JB. Wallace, and R.C. Wissmar. 1988. The role
Rocky Mountains. North American Journal of of disturbance in stream ecology. Journal of the
Fishery Management 5: 115-1 25 . North American Benthological Society 7:
433-455.
Poff, N., J.D. Allan, M.B. Bain, J.R. Karr, K.L.
Prestegaard, B.D. Richter, R.E. Sparks, and J. C. Reynolds, C.S. 1992. Algae. In The rivers hand-
Stromberg . 1997. The natural flow regime: a book, vol. 1, ed. P. Calow and G.E. Petts, pp.
paradigm for river conservation and restoration. 195-215. Blackwell Scientific Publications,
Bioscience (in press). Oxford .
Ponce, V.M. 1989. Engineering hydrology Richards, K.S. 1982. Rivers: form and process in
principles and practices. Prentice-Hall, alluvial channels. Methuen, London .
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Ricklefs, R.E. 1979. Ecology. 2d ed. Chiron Press,
Prichard et al. 1993. rev. 1995. Process for New York.
assessing proper conditions. Techn ical Refer-
ence 1737-9. U.S. Department of the Interior, Ricklefs, R.E. 1990. Ecology. W.H. Freeman, New
Bureau of Land Management Service Center, York.
Denver, Colorado.
Rieger, JP., and D.A. Kreager. 1990. Giant reed
Rabeni, C.F., and RB. Jacobson. 1993. The impor- (Arundodonax): a climax community of the
tance of fluvial hydraulics for fish-hab itat riparian zone. In California riparian systems:
restoration in low-gradient alluvial streams. protection, management, and restoration for
Freshwater Biology 29: 2 11 -220. the 1990's, tech. coord. D. L. Abel, pp. 222-225.
Pac. SW For. and Range Exper. St at., Berkeley,
Rantz, S.E , et al., 1982. Measurement and California.
computation of streamflow USGS Water Supply
Paper 2 175, 2 vols. U.S. Geological Survey, Ries, K.G. Ill. 1994. Estimation of Low-flow
Washington, DC duration discharges in Massachusetts. U.S.
Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2418.
Raudkivi, A.J., and S.K. Tan. 1984. Erosion of U.S. Geological Survey.
cohesive soi ls. Journal of Hydraulic Research
22(4): 2 17-233. Riggs, H.C., et al., 1980. Cha racteristics of low
flows. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE
106(5): 7 17-73 1.
Rodgers, Jr., J. H., K.L Dickson, and J. Cairns, Jr. Schamberger, M., A.H. Farmer, and J.W. Terrell.
1979. A review and analysis of some methods 1982. Habitat Suitability Index models intro-
used to measure functional aspects of periphy- duction. FWS/OBS-82/10 . U.S Department of
ton . In M ethods and measurements of periphy- the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
ton communities: a review, ed. R.L. Weitzel. Washington, DC.
Special publication 690. American Society for
Testing and Materials. Schopmeyer, C.S., ed. 1974. Seeds of woody
plants in the United States. U.S. Department of
Rood, S.B., and J.M. Mahoney. 1990. Collapse of Agriculture Agronomy Handbook 450. U.S.
riparian poplar forests downstream from dams Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
in western prairies: probable causes and Washington, DC.
prospects for mitigation. Environmental
Management 14: 451-464. Schreiber, K. 1995. Acidic deposition ("acid rain").
In Our living resources: a report to the nation
Rosgen, D.L 1996. Applied river morphology. on the distribution, abundance, and health of
Wildland Hydrology, Colorado. U.S. plants, animals, and ecosystems, ed. T.
LaRoe, G.S. Ferris, C.E. Puckett, P.D. Dora n, and
Roy, A.G., and A.D. Abrahams. 1980. Discussion M .J. Mac. U.S. Department of the Interior,
of rhythm ic spacing and origin of pools and National Biological Service, Washington, DC.
riffles. Geological Society of America Bulletin
91: 248-250. Schroeder, R.L., and A.W. A llen. 1992. Assessment
of habitat of wildlife communities on the Snake
Rudolph, R.R., and C.G. Hunter. 1964. Green trees River, Jackson, Wyoming. U.S. Department of
and greenheads. In Waterfowl tomorrow, ed. the Interior, Fish and W ildlife Service.
J.P. Linduska, pp. 6 11 -6 18. U.S. Department
of t he Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Schroeder, R.L., and S.L. Haire. 1993. Guidelines
Washington, DC. for the development of community-level habitat
evaluation models. Biological Report 8. U.S.
Ruttner, F. 1963. Fundamentals of limnology. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wi ldlife
Transl. D.G. Frey and F.E.J . Fry. University of Service, Washington, DC.
Toronto Press, Toronto.
Schroeder, R.L., and M.E. Keller. 1990. Setting
Ryan, J, and H. Short. 1995. The Winooski River objectives: a prerequisite of ecosystem manage-
Watershed evaluation project report. USDA- ment. New York State Museum Bulletin 4 71 : 1-4.
Natural Resources Conservation Service/
Americorps Program, Williston, Vermont.
References B-23
Schueler, T. 1987. Controlling urban runoff: a Severson, K.E. 1990. Summary: livestock grazing
practical manual for planning and designing as a wildlife habitat management tool. In Can
urban best management practices. Metropolitan livestock be used as a tool to enhance wildlife
Washington Council of Governments, habitat"? t ech coord. K.E. Severson, pp. 3-6.
Washington, DC. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service,
Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Schueler, T. 1995. The importance of impervious- Station General Technical Report RM-194.
ness. Watershed Protection Techniques 1(3):
100-111 . Shampine, W.J, L.M. Pope, and M.T Koterba.
1992. Integrating quality assurance in project
Schueler, T. 1996. Controlling cumulative impacts work plans of the United States Geological
with sub-watershed plans. In Assessing the Survey. United States Geological Survey Open-
cumulative impacts of watershed development File Report 92- 162.
on aquatic ecosystems and water quality,
proceedings of 1996 symposium. Shaver, E., J. Maxted, G. Curtis and D. Carter.
1995. Wat ershed protection using an inte-
Schuett-Hames, D., A. Pleus, L. Bullchild, and S. grated approach. In Proceedings from
Hall, eds. 1993. Timber-Fish-Wildlife ambient Stormwater NPDES-related Monitoring Needs,
monitoring program manual. TFW-AM-93-001 . ed. B. Urbonas and L. Roesner, pp. 168-178.
Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Engineering Foundation Conference, Crested
Olympia, Washington. Butte, Colorado, August 7- 12, 1994.
Schumm, SA 1960. The shape of alluvial Shear, TH. , T.J. Lent, and S. Fraver. 1996. Com-
channels in relation to sediment type. U.S parison of restored and mature bottomland
Geological Survey Professional Paper 352-B. hardwood forests of Southwestern Kentucky.
U.S. Geological Survey. Restoration Ecology 4(2): 111-123.
Schumm, SA 1977. The fluvial system. John Shelton, L. R. 1994. Field guide for collecting and
Wiley and Sons, New York. processing stream-water samples for the
National Water Quality Assessment Program.
Schumm, SA, M .D. Harvey, and C.C. Watson. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94-455.
1984. Incised channels: morphology, dynamics
and control. Water Resources Publications, Shelton, L.R., and P.D. Capel. 1994. Field guide for
Littleton, Colorado. collecting and processing samples of stream bed
sediment for the analysis of trace elements and
Searcy, J.K. 1959. Manual of hydrology; part 2, organic contaminants for the National Water
Low-flow techniques. U.S. Geological Survey Quality Assessment Program . U.S. Geological
Supply Paper W 1542-A. Survey Open-File Report 94-458.
Sedell J.S., G.H. Reeves, F.R. Hauer, J.A. Stanford, Shields, F.D., Jr. 1983. Design of habitat structures
and C.P Hawkins. 1990. Rol e of refugia in for open channels. Journal of Water Resources
recovery from disturbances: modern fragmented Planning and Management 109(4) 33 1-344.
and disconnected river systems. Environmental
Management 14: 711-724. Shields, F.D ., Jr. 1987. Management of environ-
mental resources of cutoff bends along the
Sedgwick, JA, and F.L. Knopf. 1986. Cavity- Tennessee- Tombigbee Waterway. Final report.
nesting birds and the cavity-tree resource in Miscellaneous Paper EL-87- 12 . U.S. Army Corps
plains cottonwood bottomlands. Journal of of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station,
Wildlife Management 50 : 247-252. Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Shields, F.D., Jr. 1991. Woody vegetation and Simon, A. 1994. Gradation processes and channel
riprap stability along the Sacramento River Mile evolution in modified west Tennessee streams:
84. 5-119. Water Resources Bulletin 27: process, response, form. U.S. Government
527-536. Printing Office, Denver, Colorado. U.S. Geologi-
cal Survey Professional Paper 1470.
Shields, F.D, Jr., and N.M. Aziz. 1992. Knowledge-
based system for environmental design of stream Simon, A., and P.W. Downs. 1995. An interdiscipli-
modifications. Applied Engineering Agriculture, nary approach to evaluation of potentia l
ASCE 8(4): 553-562. instability in alluvial channels. Geomorphology
12:2 15-32.
Shields, F.D, Jr., A.J. Bowie, and C.M. Cooper.
1995. Control of streambank erosion due to Simon, A., and C.R. Hupp. 1992. Geomorphic and
bed degradation with vegetation and structure. vegetative recovery processes along modified
Water Resources Bulletin 31(3): 475-489. stream channels of West Tennessee. U.S.
Geological Survey Open-File Report 91-502.
Shields, F.D., Jr., and J.J. Hoover. 1991. Effects of
channel restabilization on habitat diversity, Simons, D.B., and M .L. Albertson. 1963. Uniform
Twentym ile Creek, Mississippi. Regulated Rivers: water conveyance channels in alluvial material.
Research and Management (6): 163-181 . Transactions of t he American Society of Civil
Engineers (ASCE) 128(1) 65-167 .
Shields, F.D., Jr, S.S. Knight, and C.M. Cooper.
1994. Effects of channel incision on base flow Simons, D.B., and F. Senturk. 1977. Sediment
stream habitats and fishes. Environmental transport technology. Water Resources Publica-
Management 18: 43-57. tions, Fort Collins, Colorado.
I
Short, H.L. 1983. Wildlife guilds in Arizona desert Skagen. Unpublished data, U.S. Geological Survey,
habitats. U.S. Bureau of Land Management Biological Resources Division, Fort Collins,
Technical Note 362. U.S. Department of the Colorado.
Interior, Bureau of Land Management.
Skinner, Q.D ., J.E. Speck, Jr, M . Smith, and J.C.
Simberloff, D., and J. Cox. 1987. Consequences Adams. 1984. Stream quality as influenced by
and costs of conservation corridors. Conserva- beavers within grazing systems in Wyoming.
tion Biology 1: 63-71 . Journal of Range Management 37 : 142-146.
Simmons, D., and R. Reynolds. 1982. Effects of Smith, D.S , and PC. Hellmund. 1993. Ecology of
urbanization on baseflow of select ed south greenways: design and function of linear
shore streams, Long Island, NY. Water Re- conservation areas. University of Minnesota
sources Bulletin 18(5): 797-805 . Press, Minnesota .
Simon, A. 1989a. A model of channel response in Smith, B.S., and D. Prichard . 1992. Management
distributed alluvial channels. Earth Surface techniques in riparian areas. BLM Technical
Processes and Landforms 14(1): 11 -26. Reference 1737-6. U.S. Department of the
Interior, Bureau of Land M anagement.
Simon, A. 1989b. The discharge of sediment in
channelized alluvial streams. Water Resources Smock, L.A., E. Gilinsky, and D.L. Stoneburner.
Bulletin, American Water Resources Association 1985. Macroinvertebrate production in a
25 (6): 11 77- 1188. December. southeastern United St ates blackwater stream .
Ecology66: 1491-1503.
References B-25
Sparks, R. 1995. Need for ecosystem management Stevens, L.E., B.T. Brown, J.M. Simpson, and R.R.
of large rivers and their flooodplains. Bioscience Johnson. 1977. The importance of riparian
45(3): 170. habitat to migrating birds. In Proceedings of the
Symposium on Importance, Preservation and
Spence, B.C.. GA Lomnscky, R.M. Hughes, and Management of Riparian Habitat, tech coord.
R.P Novitski . 1996. An ecosystem approach to R.R. Johnson and D.A. Jones, pp. 154-156. U.S.
salmon id conservation. TR-4501-96-6057. Department of Agriculture Forest Service
ManTech Environmental Research Services Corp., General Technical Report RM-43, Rocky Mountain
Corvallis, Oregon. (Available from the National Forest and Range Experimental Station, Ft.
Marine Fisheries Service, Portland, Oregon.) Collins, Colorado.
Stamp, N, and R.D. Ohmart. 1979. Rodents of Stoner, R., and T. McFall. 1991. Woods roads: a
desert shrub and riparian woodland habitats in guide to planning and constructing a forest
the Sonoran Desert. Southwestern Naturalist roads system. U.S. Department of Agriculture,
24: 279. Soi l Conservation Service, South National
Technical Center, Fort Worth, Texas.
Stalnaker, C.B., K.D. Bovee, and T.J Waddle. 1996.
Importance of the temporal aspects of habitat Strahler, A.N. 1957. Quantitative analysis of
hydraulics to fish population studies. Regulated watershed geomorphology. American Geophysi-
Rivers: Research and Management 12: 145- 153. cal Union Transactions 38: 913-920.
Stanford JA, and J.V. Ward. 1988. The hyporheic Strange, T.H., E.R. Cunningham, and J.W. Goertz.
habitat of river ecosystems. Nature 335: 64-66. 1971. Use of nest boxes by wood ducks in
Mississippi. Journal of Wi ldlife Management 35:
Stanley, E.H.. S.G. Fisher, and N.B. Grimm. 1997. 786-793.
Ecosytem expansion and contraction in streams.
Bioscience 47(7): 427-435 . Sudbrock, A. 1993. Tamarisk control 1: fighting
back- an overview of the invasion, and a low-
Stanley, S.J .. and D.W. Smith. 1992. Lagoons and impact way of fighting it. Restoration and
ponds. Water Environment Research 64(4): Management Notes 11: 31-34.
367-371, June.
Summerfield, M., 1991. Global geomorphology
Statzner, B., and B. Higler. 1985. Questions and Longman, Harlow.
comments on the river continuum concept.
Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 42 : 1038-1 044. Svejcar, T.J., G.M. Riegel, S.D. Conroy, and J.D.
Trent. 1992. Establish ment and growth
Stauffer, D.F, and L.B. Best. 1980. Habitat potential of riparian shrubs in the northern
selection by birds of riparian communities: Sierra Nevada. In Symposium on Ecology and
evaluating effects of habitat alterations. Journal Management of Riparian Shrub Communities.
of Wildlife Management 44(1 ): 1- 15. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report
INT-289. U.S. Depa rtment of Agriculture, Forest
Stednick, J.D. 199 1. Wild/and w ater quality Service.
sampling and analysis. Academic Press, San
Diego. Swanson, S. 1989. Using stream classification to
prioritize riparian rehabilitation after extreme
Steinman, A.D., C.D. Mcintire, S.V. Gregory, G.A. events. In Proceedings of the California Riparian
Lamberti, and L.R. Ashkenas. 1987. Effects of Systems Conference, pp. 96-101. U.S. Depart-
herbivore type and density on t axonomic ment of Agriculture, Forest Service General
structure and physiognomy of algal assemblages Technical Report PSW-1 10.
in laboratory streams. Journal of the North
American Benthology Society 6: 175-188.
Sweeney, B.W. 1993 . Effects of streamside Th omas, J.W. ed. 1979. Wildlife habitat in
vegetation on macroinvertebrate communities managed forests: the Blue Mountain of Oregon
of White Clay Creek in eastern North America. and Washington . Ag . Handbook 553. U.S.
Stroud Water Resources Center, Academy of Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
Natural Sciences. Proceedings of the Academy of
Natural Sciences, Philadelphia 144 291-340. Thomas and Bovee. 1993. Application and testing
of a procedure to eva luate transferability of
Swenson, E.A., and C. L. Mullins. 1985. Revegeta- habitat suitabil ity criteria . Regulated Rivers
tion riparian trees in southwestern floodplains. Research and Management 8(3): 285-294,
In Riparian ecosystems and their management: A ugust 1993.
reconciling conflicting uses, coord. R.R. Johnson,
C.D. Ziebell, D.R. Patton, P.F Ffolliot, and R.H Thomas, W.A., R.R. Copeland, N.K. Raph elt, and
Hamre, pp. 135-139. First North American D.N. Mccomas. 1993. User's manual for the
Riparian Conference, USDA Forest Service hydraulic design package for channels (SAM)
General Technical Report RM-120. Rocky Draft report. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
M ountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Fort Collins, Colorado. Mississippi.
Tarquin, P.A., and L.D. Baeder. 1983. Stream Thorne, C.R. 1992. Bend scour and bank erosion
channel reconstruction: the problem of designing on the meandering Red River, Louisiana . In
lower order streams. In Proceedings of Lowland floodplain rivers: geopmorphological
Symposium on Surface Mining, Hydrology, perspectives, ed. P.A. Carling and G.E. Petts, pp.
Sedimentology and Reclamation, pp. 4 1-46. 95- 11 5. John Wi ley and Sons, Ltd .. Chichester,
U.K.
Telis, P.A. 1991. Low-flow and flow-duration
characteristics of Mississippi streams. U.S. Th orne, C.R., S.R. Abt, FB .J. Barends, S.T. Maynord,
Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations and K.W. Pilarczyk. 1995. River, coastal and
Report 90-4087. shoreline protection: erosion control using riprap
and armourstone. John W iley and Sons, Ltd ..
Temple, D.M., and J.S. Moore. 1997. Headcut Chichester, UK.
advance prediction for earth spillways. Transac-
tions ASAE 40(3): 557-562. Thorne, C.R .. R.G. Allen, and A. Simon. 1996.
Geomorphological river channel reconnaissance
Terrell, J.W., and J. Carpenter, eds. In press. for river analysis, engineering and management.
Selected Habitat Suitability Index model evalua- Transactions of the Institute for British Geography
tions. Information and Technology Report, U.S 21: 469-483 .
Department of the Interior, Washington, DC.
Thorne, C.R .. H.H. Chang, and R.D . Hey. 1988.
Teskey, R.O., and TM. Hinckley. 1978. Impact of Prediction of hydraulic geometry of gravel-bed
water level changes on woody riparian and streams using the minimum stream power
wetland communities, vols. I, II, and Ill. FWS/ concept. In Proceedings of the International
OBS-77/58, -77/59, and -77/60. U.S. Department Conference on River Regime, ed . W.R . White.
of Agricultu re, Fish and Wildlife Service. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
References B-27
Thorne, C.R, J.B. Murphey, and WC. Little. 1981. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
Bank stability and bank material properties in 1989a. Engineering and design: environmental
the bluffline streams of North-west Mississippi. engineering for local flood control channels.
Appendix D, Report to the Corps of Engineers Engineer Manual No. 1110-2-1205. Depart-
Vicksburg District under Section 32 Program, ment of the Army, United States Army Corps of
Work unit 7, USDA-ARS Sedimentation Labora- Engineers, Washington, DC.
tory, Oxford, Mississippi.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
Thorne, C.R., and A.M. Osman. 1988. River bank 1989b. Sedimentation investigations of rivers
stability analysis II: applications. Journal of and reservoirs. Engineer Manual No. 1110-2-
Hydraulic Engineering 114(2): 151-172. 4000. Department of the Army, United States
Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC.
Thorne, C.R., and L.W. Zevenbergen. 1985.
Estimating mean velocity in mountain rivers. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE 111 (4): 1989c. Demonstration erosion control project.
612-624. General Design Memorandum No. 54 (Reduced
Scope), Appendix A. Vicksburg District,
Thumann, A., and R.K. Miller. 1986. Fundamentals Vicksburg, Mississippi.
of noise control engineering. The Fairmont Press,
Atlanta. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
1990. Vicksburg District systems approach to
Tiner, R. 1997. Keys to landscape position and watershed analysis for demonstration erosion
landform descriptors for United States wetlands control project, Appendix A. Demonstration
(operational draft). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Erosion Control Project Design Memorandum
Northwest Region, Hadley, Massachusetts. No. 54. Vicksburg District, Vicksburg, M ississippi .
Tiner, R., and Veneman. 1989. Hydric soils of New United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
England. Revised Bulletin C-183 R. University of 1991 . Hydraulic design of flood control
Massachusetts Cooperative Extension, Amherst, channels. USACE Headquarters, EM 1110-2-
Massachusetts. 1601, Washington, DC.
Toffaleti, F.B. 1968. A procedure for computation Un ited States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) .
of the total river sand discharge and detailed 1993. Demonstration erosion control project
distribution, bed to surface. U.S. Army Engineers Coldwater River watershed. Supplement I to
Waterways Experiment St ation Technical Report General Design M emorandum No. 54.
No. 5. Committee on Channel Stabilization. Vicksburg District, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Tramer, E.J . 1969. Bird species diversity: compo- United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
nents of Shannon's formu la. Ecology 50(5) 927- 1994. Analyzing employment effects of stream
929. restoration investments. Report CPD-13 .
Prepared by Apogee Research, Inc.; U.S.
Tramer, E.J. 1996. Riparian deciduous forest. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
Journal of Field Ornithology 67(4)(Supplement) DC; US Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for
44. Water Resources, Alexandria, Virginia.
Trimble, S. 1997. Contribution of stream channel United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of
erosion to sediment yield from an urban izing Reclamation (USDl-BOR). 1997. Water measure-
watershed. Science 278: 1442- 1444 . ment manual. A Water Resources Technical
Publication . U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, DC.
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil United States Environmental Protection Agency
Conservation Service. (USDA-SCS). 1977. (USEPA). 1979. Handbook for analytic quality
Adapted from Figure 6-14 on page 6-26 in U.S. control in water and wastewater laboratories.
Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation EPA-600/4-79-019. U.S. Environmental Protec-
Service 1977. Technical Release No. 2 5 Design tion Agency, Environmental Monitoring and
of open flow channels. 247 pp. Figure 6-14 on Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio.
page 6-26 was adapted from Lane, E.W. 1952,
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. Progress report on United States Environmental Protection Agency
results of studies on design of stable channels. (USEPA). 1983a. Interim guidelines and
Hydrauic Laboratory Report No. HYD-352. specifications for preparing quality assurance
plans. QAMS-004/80, EPA-600/8-83-024. U.S.
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
Conservation Service. (USDA-SCS). 1983. DC.
Selected statistical methods. In National
engineering handbook, Section 4. Hydrology, United States Environmental Protection Agency
Chapter 18. (USEPA). 1983b. Interim guidelines and
specifications for preparing quality assurance
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural project plans. QAMS-005/80, EPA-600/4-83-004.
Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Field office technical guide. (Available at NRCS Washington, DC.
county field office locations.)
United States Environmental Protection Agency
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural (USEPA). 1986a. Ambient water quality criteria
Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS). for dissolved oxygen. EPA 440/5-86/003.
1992. Soil bioengineering for upland slope Miscellaneous Report Series. U.S. Environmental
protection and erosion reduction. In Engineering Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
field handbook, Part 650, Chapter 18.
United States Environmental Protection Agency
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural (USEPA). 1986b. Quality criteria for water
Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS). 1986. EPA 440/5/86-001. U.S. Environmental
1994. Unpublished worksheet by Lyle Steffen, Protection Agency, Office of Water Regulations
NRCS, Lincoln, NE. and Standards, Washington, DC.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural United States Environmental Protection Agency
Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS). (USEPA). 1989. Sediment classification methods
1996a. Streambank and shoreline protection. compendium. Draft final report. U.S.
In Engineering field handbook, Part 650, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Chapter 16. Water, Washington, DC.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural United States Environmental Protection Agency
Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS). (USEPA). 1992. Storm water sampling guidance
1996b. America 's private land- A geography of document. U.S. Environmental Protection
hope. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agency, Washington, DC.
Washington, DC. Program Aid 1548.
United States Environmental Protection Agency
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural (USEPA). 1993. Watershed protection: catalog
Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS). of federal programs. EPA841-B-93-002. U.S.
1998. Stream visual assessment protocol (draft). Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
National Water and Climate Data Center, W etlands, Oceans and Watersheds, Washington,
Portland, Oregon. DC.
References B-29
United States Environmental Protection Agency Vannote, R.L., G.W. Minshall, K.W. Cummins, J.R.
(USEPA). 1995a. Ecological restoration: a tool Sedell, and C. E. Cushing. 1980. The River
to manage stream quality. U.S. Environmental Continuum Concept. Canadian Journal of
Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 37(1): 130-137.
United States Environmental Protection Agency Vanoni, VE., ed. 1975. Sedimentation engineering.
(USEPA). 1995b. Volunteer stream monitoring: American Society of Civi l Engineers, New York.
a method manual. EPA841 -D-95-001 . U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, Verner, J. 1984. The guild concept applied to
DC. management of bird populations. Environmental
Management 8: 1-14.
United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA). 1997. The quality of our nation's Verner, J. 1986. Future trends in management of
water: 1994. EPA841 R95006. U.S. Environ- nongame wildlife: A researcher's viewpoint. In
mental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Management of nongame wildlife in the
Midwest: a developing art, ed. J.B. Hale, L.B.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Best, and R.I. Clawson, pp. 149-171. Proceed-
1997. A system for mapping riparian areas in ings of the 47th Midwest Fish and Wildlife
the Western United States. National Wetlands Conference, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Inventory. Washington, DC. December.
Vogel, R.M. and C.N. Kroll . 1989. Low-flow
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) frequency analysis using probability-plot
1980. Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) (ESM correlation coefficients. Journal of Water
102). U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Resources Planning and Management, ASCE
Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. 115 (3): 338-357.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). von Haartman, L. 1957. Adaptations in hole
1981 . Standards for the development of nesting birds. Evolution 11: 339-347 .
Habitat Suitability Index models (ESM 103). U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Walburg, C. H. 1971. Zip code H20. In Sport
Service, Washington, DC. Fishing USA, ed. D. Saults, M. Walker, B. Hines,
and R.G. Schmidt. U.S. Department of the
United States Forest Service. 1965. Range seeding Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,
equipment handbook. U.S. Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service. U.S. Government
Washington, DC. Printing Office, Washington, DC.
van Der Valk, A.G. 1981. Succession in wetlands: Wallace, J.B., and M.E. Gurtz. 1986. Response of
a Gleasonian approach. Ecology 62 : 688-696. Baetis mayflies (Ephemeroptera) to catchment
logging. American Midland Naturalist 115:
Van Haveren, B.P. 1986. Management of instream 25-4 1.
flows through runoff detention and retention.
Water Resources Bulletin WARBAQ 22(3): Walters, M.A., R.O. Teskey, and T.M . Hinckley.
399-404. 1978. Impact of water level changes on woody
riparian and wetland communities, vols. VII and
Van Horne, B. 1983. Density as a misleading VIII. FWS/OBS-78/93, and -78/94. Fish and
indicator of habitat quality. Journal of Wildlife Wildlife Service.
Management 47: 893-901.
Ward, J.V. 1985. Thermal characteristics of
Van Winkle, W. , H.I. Jager, and B.D. Holcomb. running waters. Hydrobiologia 125: 3 1-46.
1996. An individual-based instream flow model
for coexisting populations of brown and Ward, J.V. 1989. The four-dimensional nature of
rainbow trout. Electric Power Research Institute lotic ecosystems. Journal of the Northern
Interim Report TR- 106258. Electric Power American Benthological Society 8: 2-8.
Research Institute.
Wesche, TA. 1985. Stream channel modifications Williams, G.W. 1978. Bankfull discharge of rivers.
and reclamation structures to enhance fish Water Resources Research 14: 11 41 - 11 54.
habitat . Chapter 5 in The restoration of rivers
and streams, ed. J.A. Gore. Butterworth, Bost on. Williams, G.W. 1986. River meanders and channel
size. Journal of Hydrology 88: 147-1 64.
Wetzel, R.G. 1975. Limnology W.B . Saunders Co.,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Williams, and M .G. Wolman. 1984. Downstream
effects of dams on alluvial rivers. U.S. Geological
Wharton, C. H., WM . Kitchens, E.C. Pendleton, and Survey Professional Paper 1286.
TW. Sipe. 1982 . The ecology of bottom/and
hardwood swamps of the Southeast: a commu- Williamson, S.C., J.M. Bartholow, and C.B
nity profile. FWS/OBS-8 1/37. U.S. Fish and Stalnaker. 1993. Conceptual model for quanti-
Wildlife Service, Biological Services Program, fying pre-smolt production from flow-dependent
Washington, DC. physical habitat and w ater temperat ure.
Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 8:
Wharton, G. 1995. The channel-geometry 15-28 .
methods: guideli nes and applications. Earth
Surface Processes and Landforms 20(7): W ilson, K.V., and D.P. Turnipseed. 1994. Geomor-
649-660 . phic response to channel modifications of Skuna
River at the State Highway 9 crossing at Bruce,
Calhoun County, M ississippi. U.S. Geological
Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report
94-4000.
References B-31
Wilson, M.F., and S.W. Carothers. 1979. Avifauna Yang, C.T. 1996. Sediment transport theory and
of habitat islands in the Grand Canyon. SW Nat. practice. The McGraw-H ill Companies, Inc. New
24:563-576. York.
Wolman, M.G. 1954. A method of sampling Yang, C.T., and C.S. Song. 1979. Theory of
coarse river-bed material. Transactions of the minimum rate of energy dissipation. Proc. Am.
American Geophysical Union 35(6): 951-956. Soc. Civ. Engrs, J. Hydaul. Div., 105(HY7):
769-784.
Wolman, M.G. 1955. The natural channel of
Brandywine Creek, Pennsylvania. U.S Geological Yang, C.T., and J.B. Stall. 1971. Note on the map
Survey Professional Paper No. 271. scale effect in the study of stream morphology.
Water Resources Research 7(3): 709-712 .
Wolman, M.G. 1964. Problems posed by sedi-
ments derived from construction activities in Yang, C.T., and J.B. Stall. 1973. Unit Stream
Maryland. Maryland Water Pollution Control Power in Dynamic Stream Systems, Chapter 12
Commission. January. in Fluvial Geomorphology, ed. M. Morisawa. A
proceeding volume of the Fourth Annual
Wolman, M.G. and L.B. Leopold . 1957. River Geomorophology Symposia Series, State
flood plains: some observations on their Un iversity of New York, Binghamton .
formation. USGS Professional Paper 282C.
Yang, C.T., M.A. Trevino, and F. J.M. Simoes. 1998.
Wolman, M.G. and J. P. Miller. 1960. Magnitude Users Manual for GSTARS 2.0 (Generalized
and frequency of forces in geomorphic process. Stream Tube Model for Alluvial River Simulation
Journal of Geology 68: 54-74. version 2.0). U.S. Bureau, Technical Service
Center, Denver, Colorado.
Woodyer, K.D. 1968. Bankfull frequency in rivers.
Journal of Hydrology 6: 114-142. Yoakum, J., WP. Dasmann, H.R. Sanderson, C.M.
Nixon, and H.S. Crawford. 1980. Habitat
Yalin, M .S. 1971 . Theory of hydraulic models. improvement techniques. In Wildlife manage-
MacMillan. London. ment techniques manual, 4th ed., rev., ed. S.D .
Schemnitz, pp. 329- 403 . The Wildlife Society,
Yang, C .T. 1971 . Potential energy and stream Washington, DC.
morphology. Water Resources Research 7(2):
3 11 -322. Yorke, T. H., and W.J. Herb. 1978. Effects of
urbanization on streamflow and sediment
Yang, C .T. 1973. Incipient motion and sediment transport in the Rock Creek and Anacostia River
transport. Proceedings of the American Society Basins, Montgomery County, Maryland 7962-74.
of Civil Engineers, Journal of Hydraulic Division U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1003.
99 (HY1 0, Proc. Paper 10067 .): 1679-1704. U.S. Geological Survey.
Yang, C.T. 1983. Minimum rate of energy Yuzyk, T.R. 1986. Bed material sampling in grave/-
dissipation and river morphology. In proceedings bed streams. Report IWD-HQ-WRB-SS-86-8.
of D.B. Simons Symposium on Erosion and Environment Canada, Inland Waters Directorate,
Sedimentation, Colorado State University, Fort Water Resources Branch, Sediment Survey
Collins, Colorado, 3.2- 3.19. Section.
Yang, C.T. 1984. Unit stream power equation for Zalants, M.G. 1991 . Low-flow frequency and flow
gravel. Proc. Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs, J. Hydaul. Div. duration of selected South Carolina streams
110(HY1 2): 1783-1797. through 7987. U.S. Geological Survey Water-
Resources Investigations Report 91 -4 170. U.S.
Geological Survey.
Index B-33
Evaluation, 6-34, 6-41 Flow Ground water
baseline characterization, 9-29 allowable velocity check, 8-48, 8-51 aquifer, 2-10
effectiveness monitoring, 9-32 allowable stress check, 8-48, 8-5 1 aquitards, 2-10
fish barrier modifications, 9-36 baseflow, 1-14. 2-13 capillary fri nge, 2-10
human interest, 9-38, 9-46 daily mean streamflow, 7-6 confined aquifer, 2-11
implementation monitoring, 9-32 ecological impacts, 2-15 pellicular water, 2-10
parameters, 9-32 ephemeral streams, 1-16 phreatic zone, 2-11
performance evaluation, 9-29 effluent or gaining reaches, 1-16 recharge area, 2-11
reference sites, 9-35 impact on fauna, 2-68 springs, seeps, 2-11
risk assessment, 9-29 influent or " losing " reaches, 1-16 unconfined aquifer, 2-11
trend assessment, 9-29 intermittent streams, 1-16 vadose zone, 2-10
validation monitoring, 9-32 mean annual flow, 7-15
Evaporation, 2-6
Evapotranspiration, 2-7
peak flow, 7-6
perennial streams, 1-16
H
Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP),
Exotic species, 3-1 O stormflow, 1-14 7-87
control, 8-79 sources of data, 7-6 Habitat functions, 2-78
sa lt cedar, 3- 12 uniform flow, 7-20 edge and interior, 2-81, 8-21
Western U.S., 3-11 Flow duration, 2-14 Habitat Recovery (instream), 8-70
flow duration curve, 7-3 procedures, 8-71
F Flow frequency, 2-14, 7-4 Hydraulic geometry
Fauna flood frequency analysis, 7-4, 7-7 channel planform, 7-47
aquatic fauna, 2-63 low-flow frequency analysis, 7-7 hydraulic geometry curves Salmon
beaver (see Beaver above) Food patches, 8-25 River, 7-43
benthic invertebrates, 2-63 Forests and forestry hydraulic geometry theory, 7-41 ,
birds, 2-57 buffer strips, 8-89 8-36
fish, 2-65 managing restoration, 9-42 meander geometry, 7-47, 7-48,
habitat features, 2-56 site preparation, 3-17 7-49
mammals, 2-58 transportation, 3-17, 8-88 regime formulas, 7-49
mussels, 2-67 tree removal, 3-16 regime theory, 7-44
reptiles and amphibians, 2-57 Functions, 2-78 regional curves, 7-44
Fencing, 9-20 barrier, 2-78 relations based on mean annual
Filter and barrier functions, 2-84 condu it, 1-8, 2-78 discharge, 7-41
edges, 2-85 filter, 2-78 stability assessment, 7-44
Fish, 2-65 habitat, 2-78 Hydrologic cycle, 2-3
barriers, 8-75, 9-36 sink, 2-78 Hydrologic unit cataloging, 1-9
bioindicators, 7-83 source, 2-78
feeding and reproduction Funding,
strategies, 2-66 organization, 4-9
restoration implementation, 6-2 Indicator species, 7-76
managing restoration, 9-46 aquatic invertebrates
species richness, 2-65 habitat evaluation procedures,
Floodplain, 1-12 G 7-78
hydrologic floodplain , 1-18 Geomorphic assessment, 7-26 riparian response guilds, 7-78
topographic f loodplain, 1-18 Geomorphology, 2-15 selecting indicators, 7-77
flood storage, 1-18 Goals and Objectives, 5-12, 5-14 Infiltration, 2-8
lag time, 1-18 desired future conditions, 5-3, infiltration capacity, 2-8
lateral accretion, 2-26 5-12 infiltration rate, 2-8
stability, 2-24 responsiveness, 5-14 porosity, 2-8
vertical accretion, 2-26 restoration constraints and issues, Implementing restoration, 6-2
Floodplain landforms and deposits, 5-7 construction, 9-12
1-19 restoration goals, 5-12 emergency maintenance, 9-26
backswamps, 1-19 restoration objectives, 5-13 flow diversion, 9-14
chute, 1-19 scale considerations, 5-3 minimizing disturbance, 9-4
clay plug, 1-19 self-sustainability, 5- 14 plant establishment, 9-15
meander scroll, 1-19 tolerance, 5-14 remedial maintenance, 9-26
natural levees, 1-19 value, 5-14 scheduled maintenance, 9-26
oxbow, 1-19 vulnerability, 5- 14 site preparation, 9-3, 9-10
oxbow lake, 1-19 Grazi ng staging areas, 9-4
restoration of microrelief, 8-8 loss of vegetative cover, 3-18 work zone, 9-3
splays, 1-19 physical impacts, 3- 19 Inspection, 9-2 1
Flood-pulse concept, 1-2 1 restoration, 8-90, 9-43 lnstream Flow Incremental Methodol-
Greentree reservoirs, 8-24 ogy (IFIM), 5-24, 7-88,
Index B-35
Sediment transport, 2-15, 8-53
bed load, 2-18
Stability (in stream and floodplain),
2-20, 2-87
u
Urbanization, 3-22
bed-material load, 2-18, 2-19 assessment, 8-44 altered chan nels, 3-24. 8-97
budget , 8-56 allowable stress check, 8-48 altered hydrology, 3-23, 8-97
discharge functions, 8-55 allowable velocity check, 8-48 design tools, 8-101
HEC-6, 8-54 controls, 8-64 habitat and aquatic life, 3-25
impact on habitat, 2-26 horizontal stability, 8-45 inspection program, 9-25
impact on water quality, 2-26 vertical stability, 8-44 runoff controls, 8-99
measured load, 2-19 Storm hydrograph, 1-15 sediment controls, 8-100
particle movement, 2-17 after urbanization, 1-15 sed imentation and contaminants,
processes, 7-57 recession limb, 1-15 3-24
saltation, 2-17 rising limb, 1-15
sediment load, 2-18 Stream classification, 7-26, 7-85
sediment rating curve, 7-13, 8-29 applications of geomorphic v
stream competence, 2-16 analysis, 7-37 Valley form, 8-4
stream power, 2-19, 8-52 advantages, 7-27 Vegetation
suspended bed material load, 2-18 alluvial vs. non-alluvial, 7-27 across the stream corridor, 1-21
suspended load, 2-18, 2-19 limitations, 7-27 along the stream corridor, 1-29
suspended sediment discharge, use in restoring biological canyon effect, 2-54
2-18 conditions, 7-86 distribution and characteristics,
tractive (shear) stress, 2-16, 8-38, Stream corridor, 1-1 2-51
8-48, 8-51 adjustments, 2-21 flood ing tolerances, 7-96, 8-22
unmeasured load, 2-19 common features, 1-1 2 horizontal complexity, 2-52, 8-17
wash load, 2-18, 2-19 Stream corridor scale, 1-10 internal complexity (diversity),
Single-thread streams, 1-26 in developing goals and objectives, 2-51
Sinuosity, 1-27 5-6 landscape scale, 2-53
affecting slope, 2-22 Stream health structure, 2-55
meander design, 8-34, 8-36 visual assessment, 7-76 stream corridor scale, 2-53
Site access, 6-15, 9-4 Stream instability, 7-50 vertical complexity (diversity),
access easement, 6-16 bed stability, 7-51 2-55, 8-21
drainage easement, 6-16 local, 7-51 zonation, 7-96
fee acquisition, 6-16 systemwide, 7-5 1 Vegetation-hydroperiod modeling,
implementation easement, 6-16 Stream order, 1-25 7-94
right of entry, 6-15 as a classification system, 7-28 use in restoration, 8-23
Site clearing, 9-10 stream continuum concept, 1-30 Vegetation restoration, 8-14
Species requirements, 7-86, 8-7 Stream scale, 1-10 existing vegetation, 8-11
Specific gauge analysis, 7-52 Stream stability (balance), 1-14, 2-20 inspection, 9-24
Soil Stream system dynamics, 7-48 maintenance, 9-28
compaction, 8-9 Substrate, 2-71 restoration species, 8-1 O
ecological role of, 2-5 1 bed material particle size revegetation, 8-14, 9-15
depleted matrix, 2-49 distribution, 7-25, 8-28
functions, 2-45 hyphorheic zone, 2-72 w
hydric soils, 2-48 pebble count, 7-25 Waste disposal, sanitation, 9-9
microbiology, 2-46, 2-5 1, 8-9 vertical (bed) stability Water surface
salinity, 8-10 Subsurface flow, 2-12 energy equation, 7-21
soil surveys, 8-9 profile, 7-18
topographic position, 2-47 T slope survey, 7-2 4
type, 2-46 Temporal sca le, 1- 11 Water temperature, 2-28
wetland, 2-48 Terrace, 1-20 effects of cover, 2-68
Soil bioengineering, 8-23, 8-61 formation, 1-20 impacts of surface versus ground
geotechnical engineering, 9-13 numbering, 1-2 1 water pathways, 2-28
Soil moisture, 2-9 Thalweg, 1-12 impacts on fauna, 2-68
evaporation, 2-6 profiles, 7-53 sampling, 7-68
deep percolation, 2-9 surveys, 7-53 thermal loading, 2-28
field capacity, 2-9 Transitional upland fringe, 1-12, 1-20
permanent wilting point, 2-9 Transpiration, 2-5
relationship with temperature, Two-dimensional flow modeling,
2-47 7-90
Source and sink functions, 2-86
Spatial scale, 1-3
landscapes, 1-7
region, 1-6
reach, 1-10
watershed, 1-8
Index
B-37