taking photos of streamside plants

[troutbert]

crs5942 wrote:
For many impaired streams in our region the native floodplains (and the corresponding vegetation) are buried under many feet of historic sediment deposits. I know of many "restoration" projects where native species were determined by examining the pseudo-floodplain that was being "restored". Some of these species are the same; however, I spent almost two years studying 200-7,000 year old seeds and found that many native species are non-existent following stream "restoration" in this region. It would be interesting to find a way to examine the macroinvertebrate composition over time and see if our streams have native macroinvertebrates.

What were the most common species in the pre-disturbance floodplain, and now, in the streams you studied?

 

[crs5942]

Studying historic seed beds I found lots of sedges and rushes. Also a lot of dogwood and alder shrubs. A few oaks and beech trees here and there. These floodplains were in the SE and SC PA regions. The one floodplain I studied in depth used to be comprised of a dense, shrubby wetland. The stream was "restored" last year. This basically involved cutting the banks at 45 degree angles, throwing down some vegetation mats, and putting up stream bank fencing. Native floodplain=wetland thicket. "Restored floodplain"=glorified cow pasture. The stream bank erosion has been slowed, but the riparian corridor is not comprised of natural vegetation (rather some meadow grasses). The main problem with restored riparian zones is that plants are planted on a psuedo-floodplain that sits 6-8 feet (on average) above the water and thus plants do not receive adequate water supply. Have you ever seen hundreds of tree tubes planted in a "floodplain" and wondered why only a few actually grow? The roots never reach the water. The good news is that there are buried native floodplains with 200+ year old viable seedbeds all across the Piedmont region. The bad news is that it is extremely expensive to remove the millions of tons of sediment that currently bury them.

 

[troutbert]

Re: 'Have you ever seen hundreds of tree tubes planted in a "floodplain" and wondered why only a few actually grow?"

In NC PA I have seen similar "high and dry" sites caused by sediment deposits behind old splash dams and mill dams. Often this sediment is sandy, so retains little moisture. The vegetation is usually grass, goldenrod, and some sparse shrubs. Rather than forest.

The areas that are not behind old mill dams usually have a forested floodplain, though. Do you think that is the normal condition there, or not?

 

[crs5942]

I have not done research in the NC region so I cannot say for sure what it was like. My best guess would be that most floodplains of smaller and medium sized waterways were shrubby wetlands due to the enormous presence of the beavers. I would suspect that streams with steep gradients would have been more likely to have forested floodplains rather than brushy floodplains. This is all speculation but is based on research and personal observation. A good way to check on stream is to look at the gravel bars. If the gravel is smooth and rounded then the system has always had a significant velocity; however, if it is angular than the system never formed gravel bars or transported gravel at all in its natural state. Nearby tributaries can alter this generalization but for the most part its a good indicator.

 

[jaybo41]

I was out taking the fly rod for a walk yesterday, saw some flowers and remembered reading this thread.

I have been reading Meck's Pocketguide to PA Hatches(great book btw) and was studying up on March Browns since they were or had been hatching on the stream I was fishing yesterday. In the book, Meck describes the emergence period and I remembered the description of Dame's Rocket that he referenced. I am by no means an expert on plants, but this sure looks like Dame's Rocket to me.