An examination of the Rosgen classification of natural rivers

Miller, Jerry R.; Ritter, John B.

doi:10.1016/0341-8162(96)00017-3

Cited by 99 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The second and most popular level (Level II) of the Rosgen (1996) methodology provides a framework for categorizing stream reaches based on channel form and dominant substrate. While this classification is useful for describing variations in channel morphology, critics argue that it is less useful and perhaps even misleading for making inferences about channel condition and processes of development (Miller and Ritter 1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthesis of Upper Verde River research and monitoring 1993-2008

Neary¹,

Medina²,

Rinne³

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This volume is a state-of-knowledge synthesis of monitoring and research conducted on the Upper Verde River (UVR) of Arizona. It contains information on the history, hydrology, soils, geomorphology, vegetation, and fish fauna of the area that can help land managers and other scientists in successfully conducting ecosystem management and future monitoring and research in this important Southwest river ecosystem. Chapter 1 provides an introduction to the UVR's location, vegetation, climate, soils, and watersheds. A historical and pictorial perspective of the UVR is presented in Chapter 2. The hydrology of the watershed and its current physical condition are covered in Chapters 3 and 4. Geomorphic relationships of the UVR channels are described in Chapter 5. The woody and herbaceous vegetation of the UVR are presented in Chapters 6 and 7. Water quality status and issues of the river are discussed in Chapter 8. The status of the fish fauna and other aquatic organisms are described in Chapter 9. Chapters 10 through 12 present summaries of information resources, research recommendations, a summary of this volume, and conclusions. You may order additional copies of this publication by sending your mailing information in label form through one of the following media. Please specify the publication title and series number. Publishing Services

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthesis of Upper Verde River research and monitoring 1993-2008

Neary¹,

Medina²,

Rinne³

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reliance on this classification system as a basis for restoration design has been widely criticized by scientifically trained geomorphologists (e.g., Kondolf 1995b, Miller and Ritter 1996, Doyle et al 1999, Juracek and Fitzpatrick 2003. Nevertheless, this approach has proved remarkably popular with managers, decision makers, and biologists, probably because it promises to identify the stable geometry for the given conditions, it is easy to apply, and it makes the discipline of fluvial geomorphology seem comprehensible to those without scientific training in it.…”

Section: The Current Paradigm: Reconstruction To a Stable Single-thrmentioning

confidence: 99%

River Restoration and Meanders

Kondolf¹

2006

E&S

176

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Among the most visually striking river restoration projects are those that involve the creation of a new channel, often in a new alignment and generally with a form and dimensions that are different from those of the preproject channel. These channel reconstruction projects often have the objective of creating a stable, single-thread, meandering channel, even on rivers that were not historically meandering, on rivers whose sediment load and flow regime would not be consistent with such stable channels, or on already sinuous channels whose bends are not symmetrical. Such meandering channels are often specified by the Rosgen classification system, a popular restoration design approach. Although most projects of this type have not been subject to objective evaluation, completed postproject appraisals show that many of these projects failed within months or years of construction. Despite its, at best, mixed results, this classification and form-based approach continues to be popular because it is easy to apply, because it is accessible to those without formal training in fluvial geomorphology, and probably because it satisfies a deep-seated, although unrecognized, cultural preference for single-thread meandering channels. This preference is consistent with 18th-century English landscape theories, which held the serpentine form to be ideal and led to widespread construction of meandering channels on the country estates of the era. The preference for stability in restored channels seems to be widely accepted by practitioners and funders despite the fact that it is antithetical to research showing that dynamically migrating channels have the greatest ecological richness.

show abstract

“…There are, however, crucial differences between Davis' view of geomorphology in the early 20 th century and the classification approach to river restoration today. First, while Davis' approach was scientifically accepted as a valid approach to geomorphology for almost fifty years, the classification approach to restoration design has been criticized since its first introduction to the scientific community, and remains without support in much of the peer-reviewed scientific literature (Kondolf, 1995;Miller and Ritter, 1996;Doyle and Harbor, 2000;Kuhnle and Simon, 2000;Juracek and Fitzpatrick, 2003).…”

Section: Channel Form: Use and Misusementioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, using channel form to quantitatively predict channel adjustments, system disturbances or rates of sediment transport, without rigorous analysis of channel processes is flawed (Miller and Ritter 1996). The ramifications of this can be dramatic as shown in Figure 2, a project using "natural channel design" of a C4 stream type on the Uvas Creek, California (Kondolf et al 2001).…”

Section: Channel Form: Use and Misusementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The bankfull discharge has been ascribed various meanings and levels of importance over the past 50 years since Leopold and Maddock (1953) published their research on hydraulic geometry. Although Dunne and Leopold (1978) described the discharge at the bankfull stage as the most "effective" at forming and maintaining average channel dimensions, given the variation in the recurrence interval of the bankfull discharge (Williams, 1978), others suggest that a more meaningful measure would be one based on flow frequency (Miller and Ritter, 1996;Juracek and Fitzpatrick, 2003;Simon et al, 2004). Nevertheless, considerable resources are being expended by state and federal agencies as well as by academic institutions to determine bankfull channel dimensions and regional curves (based on channel and basin characteristics) to predict the bankfull discharge (eg.…”

Section: Why Not Collect Data That Can Be Used To Analyze Channel Promentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation