Engineering Design Standards and Liability for Stream Channel Restoration

Slate, Louise O.; Shields, F. Douglas; Schwartz, John S.; Carpenter, Donald D.; Freeman, Gary E.

doi:10.1061/(asce)0733-9429(2007)133:10(1099)

Cited by 17 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While use of the NCD scheme for stream restoration has been very common in the past, current science has documented numerous reasons that use of this scheme for restoration can be extremely problematic 125 , 131–138 . The NCD method in no way takes into account a whole array of biophysical factors that determine the ability of the channel to support all of the living resources in pristine streams in the area.…”

Section: Deficiencies Of Current Mitigation Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The environmental costs of mountaintop mining valley fill operations for aquatic ecosystems of the Central Appalachians

Bernhardt

Palmer

2011

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

158

154

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Southern Appalachian forests are recognized as a biodiversity hot spot of global significance, particularly for endemic aquatic salamanders and mussels. The dominant driver of land-cover and land-use change in this region is surface mining, with an ever-increasing proportion occurring as mountaintop mining with valley fill operations (MTVF). In MTVF, seams of coal are exposed using explosives, and the resulting noncoal overburden is pushed into adjacent valleys to facilitate coal extraction. To date, MTVF throughout the Appalachians have converted 1.1 million hectares of forest to surface mines and buried more than 2,000 km of stream channel beneath mining overburden. The impacts of these lost forests and buried streams are propagated throughout the river networks of the region as the resulting sediment and chemical pollutants are transmitted downstream. There is, to date, no evidence to suggest that the extensive chemical and hydrologic alterations of streams by MTVF can be offset or reversed by currently required reclamation and mitigation practices.

show abstract

Section: Deficiencies Of Current Mitigation Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The environmental costs of mountaintop mining valley fill operations for aquatic ecosystems of the Central Appalachians

Bernhardt

Palmer

2011

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

158

154

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Instream structures such as artificial pools and riffles are commonly used for stream restoration projects due to their perceived benefits for ecology and channel stability [3,4]. However, the practice suffers from a lack of standards and design criteria [5,6]. Project evaluation is needed for adaptive management and progress in engineering practice [7,8], but monitoring is typically ineffective due to relatively short term monitoring projects that miss potential adjustments to relatively rare flood events, a reluctance to include the additional cost, and a tendency to collect qualitative data rather than quantitative data [9][10][11][12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Performance of In-Stream Restoration Projects Using Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Transponders

MacVicar

Chapuis

Buckrell

et al. 2015

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Instream channel restoration is a common practice in river engineering that presents a challenge for research. One research gap is the development of monitoring techniques that allow for testable predictions of sediment transport and supply. Here we use Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) transponders to compare the short-term (1-year) sediment transport response to flood events in a restored and a control reach. The field site is Wilket Creek, an enlarged creek in a fully urbanized catchment without stormwater management control in Toronto, Ontario. The responses to three flooding periods, each of which are at or above the design bankfull discharge, are described. Key results are that (i) particle mobility is lower in the restored reach for all three periods; (ii) full mobility occurs in the control reach during the first two floods while partial mobility occurs in the restored reach; and (iii) the constructed morphology exerted a controlling influence on particle entrainment, with higher mobility in the pools. Log-transformed travel distances exhibit normal distributions when grouped by particle size class, which allows a statistical comparison with power law and other predictive travel-distance relations. Results show that three bedload transport conditions can occur, with partial mobility associated with a OPEN ACCESSWater 2015, 7 5567 mild relation between particle size and travel distance and full mobility associated with either a flat or steep relation depending on the degree of integration of particles in the bed. Recommendations on seeding strategy and sample sizes are made to improve the precision of the results by minimizing confidence intervals for mobility and travel distances. Even in a short term study, the RFID sediment tracking technique allows a process-based assessment of stream restoration outcomes that can be used to justify the instream intervention and plan future attempts to stabilize and enhance the system.

show abstract

“…Despite recent progress, there remains a need for practical tools to evaluate the post-construction performance of modified stream channels. Although engineers sign and seal restoration plan sets, there is a notable deficit of design standards and specific failure criteria compared with other fields of engineering (Slate et al, 2007). In some states, lawsuits have been filed in an attempt to hold contractors or designers accountable for ineffective, damaged, or failed restoration projects; however, the inconsistent and vague definitions of failure make it difficult to assess accountability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Describing Damage to Stream Modification Projects in Constrained Settings

Jones

Johnson

2014

J American Water Resour Assoc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Complex relationships between stream functions and processes make evaluation of stream modification projects difficult. Informed by vague objectives and minimal monitoring data, post-construction project evaluations can often be a subjective attribution of success or failure. This article provides a simple framework to rapidly describe the degree of damage in stream modification projects performed in constrained settings. Based on widely accepted evaluations of physical habitat quality and stream stability, the damage states framework describes a continuum of damage in multiple categories that relate natural stream functions to the often desired state of static equilibrium. Given that channel form is closely related to stream function, it follows that changes to the channel form result in changes in function. The damage states focus on damage to flow hydraulics, sediment transport and channel equilibrium, hydraulic, and geomorphic parameters that describe basic stream functioning and support higher level functions in the modified channel. The damage states can be used in decision making as a systematic method to determine the need for repair and design adjustments.

show abstract

Engineering Design Standards and Liability for Stream Channel Restoration

Cited by 17 publications

References 14 publications

The environmental costs of mountaintop mining valley fill operations for aquatic ecosystems of the Central Appalachians

The environmental costs of mountaintop mining valley fill operations for aquatic ecosystems of the Central Appalachians

Assessing the Performance of In-Stream Restoration Projects Using Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Transponders

Describing Damage to Stream Modification Projects in Constrained Settings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About