Stream Restoration Article

[troutbert]

Here's an interesting article on stream restoration.

https://edgeeffects.net/desire-to-manage/

He's discussing streams in Wisconsin's Driftless Area, but the same ideas apply in other regions, including PA.

 

[lycoflyfisher]

Thanks for the article troutbert. I think we are beginning to come to a fork in the road so to speak, there is a big push towards large scale floodplain restoration projects and more process based restoration. I still think there is and will continue to be a time and a place for rosgen type rock and log structures, I really think many streams would be better off if we just would establish 50-100' buffers and let nature run its course. Some watersheds would benefit greatly from some bank grading to improve access to the floodplain.

 

[Mike]

From the article: Within some limits a system can and will heal. We have seen it heal and you have helped to achieve it. We do not know the exact point of destruction...

The “point of destruction,” through stormwater runoff, has been achieved in many urban and suburban streams around the country. Likewise for many low-gradient agricultural streams where legacy sediments from present and former mill dams, built in close proximity to each other, destroyed the naturally marshy flood plains and deposited multiple feet of sediment upon them. Lycoflyfisher is technically correct above about the need to restore flood plains, particularly in areas with heavy accumulations of legacy sediments, such as most of our historically agricultural areas in SE and SC Pa, but in reality that is almost always cost prohibitive.

 

[Mike]

Note: In the past two decades there have not been a lot of modern, man-made, in-stream structures that I have seen in SE Pa that could not survive the ravages of urban and suburban stormwater runoff. I would estimate the destruction rate after five years to have been 50% or greater largely because the materials selected for the jobs were undersized to survive the forces generated in these streams, the materials were not properly toed in, or bank erosion eventually got behind the toed in structures anyway and blew them out.

 

[larkmark]

Buffer zones and planting trees and not cutting down trees are probably the best thing. I could name quite a few places where in stream log or rock structures caused more harm than good over time. The fact that little or no follow up is done to determine the real effects of the so called stream improvements by state and different organizations tells me they are just for show. Feel good projects I always call them. I recall one place that used to have quite a few large fish and they came in with improvements which funnled the silt down into the holding water of the big fish. They destroyed the habitat rather than improved it and the big fish are gone now. I'm sure it was all well intentioned but the end result was a fiasco.

 

[larkmark]

Very interesting article by the way.
It mentions someone named Leopold. Any relation to famous advocate of nature, Aldo Leopold?

 

[troutbert]

larkmark wrote:
Very interesting article by the way.
It mentions someone named Leopold. Any relation to famous advocate of nature, Aldo Leopold?

I just Googled it. Starker Leopold was Aldo Leopold's son.

 

[Tups]

Aldo Leopold also had a son named Luna, who was a hydrogeologic engineer. Luna wrote several excellent books on fluviogeomorphology. Much of Rosgens methodology is based upon the studies and writings Of Luna Leopold.

 

[bearfisherman]

Interesting topic, as I have been actively involved in habitat projects for over a decade. Our log and stone projects have withstood the test of time, as we have yet to lose a device (knock on wood), and all are performing very well. We have had to complete some maintenance due to storm / ice damage, but this part of the requirements when dealing with a dynamic system.

For the first time this year, we completed a LWD project on a small tributary in an urban park setting. The intent is to reconnect the stream to the floodplain during high water events, while providing overhead cover and areas for Riparian Buffer regeneration. This area will studied for several years to see the long term effects on the stream, as well to the downstream urban areas.

 

[Tups]

Anyone involved in habitat improvement projects, or who has an interest in trout stream habitat, should google “channel evolution model” (CEM) and spend some time reading the numerous studies related to CEM. This model will help you better understand the ways in which land disturbance influences stream morphology and habitat. CEM allows you to better predict how your stream is likely to respond to your stream improvement structures. Our projects generally begin with a vision of how we would like our channel to look after construction, rather than how it is likely to respond to our work, and this is why they so often fail to live up to the vision.

 

[Chaz]

Makes me glad Perkiomen Valley T U has taken a mostly holistic approach for improving habitat.

 

[Mike]

Yes, Chaz, and you have a downstream extension of a wild brown trout population for a mile or so to show for it. I refer to Pachwechan Ck. Perhaps there has also been an extension on the Perkiomen of the stretch that permanently rather than seasonally holds wild trout. I don’t know. Likewise, there has been a substantial downstream extension on the W Br Perkiomen for miles, but I don’t know that habitat work alone was the cause. Could have been natural veg growth along with habitat work in key areas that warmed the stream in the past. With respect to instream work in comparison, I have only ever seen something similar happen at Big Spring, Cumberland Co and Falling Springs Branch in Franklin Co. In both cases it required narrowing the stream considerably to enhance the population ...not your typical instream habitat projects.

 

[Chaz]

Thanks Mike, we’ve planted thousands of trees, live stakes, and other plants over 25 years on the two branches alone. The are other projects over the year that were on tributaries where it was mostly fencing, livestock access, and planting. The rock cycling is something done as a stopgap measure to “fix things. temporarily until the trees established.
I’ve always followed up on all our projects.

 

[troutbert]

Mike wrote:
Yes, Chaz, and you have a downstream extension of a wild brown trout population for a mile or so to show for it. I refer to Pachwechan Ck. Perhaps there has also been an extension on the Perkiomen of the stretch that permanently rather than seasonally holds wild trout. I don’t know. Likewise, there has been a substantial downstream extension on the W Br Perkiomen for miles, but I don’t know that habitat work alone was the cause. Could have been natural veg growth along with habitat work in key areas that warmed the stream in the past. With respect to instream work in comparison, I have only ever seen something similar happen at Big Spring, Cumberland Co and Falling Springs Branch in Franklin Co. In both cases it required narrowing the stream considerably to enhance the population ...not your typical instream habitat projects.

I took "holistic approach" to mean things like improving riparian vegetation. Isn't that the usual meaning of "holistic" when referring to stream management?

I have never heard the term "holistic" to refer to typical instream habitat projects.

 

[Mike]

My first 10 lines in the paragraph that you copied above were in reference to tree plantings and stakes...what Chaz called holistic.

 

[lycoflyfisher]

IMO a holistic approach has to include improving floodplain access. This can look very different depending on incision, how tight the valley is, presence of roads and other infrastructure, etc.

 

[Oregon_OwlII]

troutbert wrote:

Mike wrote:
Yes, Chaz, and you have a downstream extension of a wild brown trout population for a mile or so to show for it. I refer to Pachwechan Ck. Perhaps there has also been an extension on the Perkiomen of the stretch that permanently rather than seasonally holds wild trout. I don’t know. Likewise, there has been a substantial downstream extension on the W Br Perkiomen for miles, but I don’t know that habitat work alone was the cause. Could have been natural veg growth along with habitat work in key areas that warmed the stream in the past. With respect to instream work in comparison, I have only ever seen something similar happen at Big Spring, Cumberland Co and Falling Springs Branch in Franklin Co. In both cases it required narrowing the stream considerably to enhance the population ...not your typical instream habitat projects.

I took "holistic approach" to mean things like improving riparian vegetation. Isn't that the usual meaning of "holistic" when referring to stream management?

I have never heard the term "holistic" to refer to typical instream habitat projects.

Yes, planting the riparian buffer and letting nature take over. Streams can figure it out for themselves most times. In my mind there is nothing 'holistic' about stream structures. Some of them do what they are designed for, but as stated above measuring the effects of one structure and measuring the effects of a lengthy riparian planting are two different worlds.