Geomorphology in action: Linking policy with on-the-ground actions through applications of the River Styles framework

Highlighting the Need and Potential for Use of Interdisciplinary Science in Adaptive Environmental Management: The Case of Endangered Upland Swamps in theBlueMountains,NSW,Australia

“…Further, data collected suggest that understanding the physical condition of swamps and the extent to which rehabilitation may be required must be considered within a regional context so that effective prioritisation of conservation and rehabilitation initiatives can be implemented (Brierley et al ., ). This is a formidable challenge as often scientific information and its interpretation is incomplete and often lacks multi‐disciplinary perspectives (Brierley and Fryirs, ; Chessman et al ., ; Bunn et al ., ; Gawne et al ., ).…”

“…This approach is used to measure river condition and fragility across NSW as part of river management planning and policy (Brierley et al ., ). A range of geoindicators (defined as measures of geomorphic structure and signals of processes) were identified that provided a reliable and relevant signal about the condition of swamp and channelised watercourses (Tables and ).…”

“…Baseline information on these systems is needed to understand a river's state (or in this case, that of a swamp) and to outline specific issues that need to be addressed; however, this information is often overlooked (Downs and Kondolf, ; Fryirs et al ., ). In particular, it is crucial that a geomorphological (physical) analysis is included in any baseline river condition assessment as it provides a basis for identifying where serious threats to river/swamp condition occur so that they can be prioritised in community and agency action plans (Brierley et al ., ). This is particularly relevant to the upland swamps of the Blue Mountains that are classified as endangered ecological communities.…”

Assessment Approach for Identifying Compatibility of Restoration Projects with Geomorphic and Flooding Processes in Gravel Bed Rivers

“…We initially considered two alternative, relatively established approach frameworks, consisting of (1) identifying and siting projects based on classification and mimicry of channel morphology where it is assumed function follows form (e.g., Rosgen and Silvey 1996;Brierley et al 2002Brierley et al , 2011, and (2) evaluating landscape and watershed scale attributes to identify reach potential for restoration (e.g., Bartz et al 2006;Burnett et al 2007;Hall et al 2007;Beechie et al 2008). In the former case, we noted that while the approach can work at times, the results are susceptible to failure because they do not account explicitly for larger-scale processes such that the river simply ignored the specific imposed channel form (Kondolf 1998;Kondolf et al 2001;Parker 2004;Simon et al 2007), and the choice of which class a stream belongs to may be equivocal (Roper et al 2008).…”

Riparian proper functioning condition assessment to improve watershed management for water quality

“…Potential, or potential natural condition, is based upon the concept of dynamic equilibrium of the vegetation and of the channel at grade (Leopold et al 1964;Schumm 1979Schumm , 1984 within an ecosystem that corresponds to the physical setting (Rosgen 1994(Rosgen , 1996(Rosgen , 2006Brierley and Fryirs 2000; Kondolf 2003;Brierley et al 2011). The linkage between the channel, soil/landform, and vegetation allows the assessment to focus on stream reaches.…”