Promoting fluvial geomorphology to “live with rivers” in the Anthropocene Era

García, Jesús Horacio García; Ojeda, Alfredo Ollero; Ibisate, Askoa; Fuller, Ian C.; Death, Russell G.; Piégay, Hervé

doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2021.107649

Cited by 36 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The typical approach to parameterization involves the modification of channel morphology to obtain a stable state as perceived for a reference system that serves as a guiding target in terms of channel dimensions, planform, and gradient [7,[44][45][46]. The use of such morphologically targeted approaches has become the topic of considerable debate [47][48][49][50][51], in part because it fails to adequately create a dynamic, continually changing river system that is required for many ecosystem functions and services [52]. Rather, the primary goal in many cases is to produce a geomorphically stable channel.…”

Section: Channel Evolution In Response To Historic Land-use Changesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Historical Land-Use Change on Contemporary Channel Processes, Form, and Restoration

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Big Harris Creek, North Carolina, possesses a geomorphic history similar to many drainages in the southern Appalachian piedmont, and was used herein as a representative example of the influence of European settlement on contemporary channel form and processes. The integrated use of historical, dendrogeomorphic, stratigraphic, and cartographic data shows that the conversion of land-cover from a mix of natural conditions and small farms to commercial cotton production in the late 1800s and early 1900s led to significant upland soil erosion, gully formation, and the deposition of legacy sediments on the valley floor. Aggradation was followed by catchment-wide channel incision in the mid-1900s in response to reforestation and the implementation of soil conservation measures. Collectively, the responses form an aggradational-degradational episode (ADE) that produced the geomorphic framework for the contemporary processes operating along the drainage network. Defined, characterized, and mapped process zones (stream reaches of similar form and process) show that the type, intensity, and evolutionary sequence of geomorphic responses varied within the catchment as a function of the position along the drainage network, the erosional resistance of the underlying bedrock, and the valley characteristics (particularly width). Understanding the spatially variable influences of the ADE on contemporary, reach-scale geomorphic processes provides valuable insights for restoration as it helps inform practitioners of the sensitivity and ways in which the reach is likely to respond to future disturbances, the potential impacts of processes on proposed manipulations intended to achieve the project’s restoration goals, and the potential risk(s) involved with channel reconstruction. The latter is strongly controlled by geotechnical differences between erosionally resistant precolonial deposits and easily eroded legacy sediments that locally form the channel banks following the ADE.

show abstract

Section: Channel Evolution In Response To Historic Land-use Changesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Historical Land-Use Change on Contemporary Channel Processes, Form, and Restoration

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Uptake of such principles embraces a living river ethos (Everard & Powell, 2002;Higgs, 2003), respecting a rivers' inherent diversity and capacity to adjust and evolve from source to sink (Brierley et al, 2019;Gregory & Walling, 1973). As such, geomorphology (or hydromorphology) is now used more widely in practice García et al, 2021;Gregory, 1979). Much broader consideration is now given to river forms, function and change over time, and how the geomorphic template interacts with ecological, hydrological, social and cultural considerations to create riverscapes (Castro & Thorne, 2019;Fausch et al, 2002;Gregory, 2004;Hawley, 2018;Johnson et al, 2020;Polvi et al, 2020).…”

Section: How Far Has the Concept Of ' Working With The River' Come In Philosophy And Practice?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Much broader consideration is now given to river forms, function and change over time, and how the geomorphic template interacts with ecological, hydrological, social and cultural considerations to create riverscapes (Castro & Thorne, 2019;Fausch et al, 2002;Gregory, 2004;Hawley, 2018;Johnson et al, 2020;Polvi et al, 2020). Examples include uptake of Freedom Space, Space to Move and Erodible Corridor principles (Biron et al, 2014;Piégay et al, 2005) that allow rivers to 'do their thing'adjust, erode, flood, function, change and evolve as riverscapes (Albert et al, 2021;Brierley, Hikuroa, et al, 2021;García et al, 2021;Lane, 2017a;Williams et al, 2020;Zeedyk & Clothier, 2014). Uptake of initiatives that 'work with the river' to achieve a broad range of environmental, social, cultural and economic benefits is patchy but increasingly prominent.…”

Section: How Far Has the Concept Of ' Working With The River' Come In Philosophy And Practice?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rivers that are in poor condition with low recovery potential often require the most costly, high risk interventions (Rutherfurd et al, 1999;Wohl et al, 2005). Where adopted, this type of prioritization strategy now drives proactive decision-making on where to work, how much to invest and what to treat (e.g., García et al, 2021). These are entirely contextual considerations, however, as high priority often continues to be given to prominent interventions in highly visible areas, especially degraded urban streams.…”

Section: How Far Has the Concept Of ' Working With The River' Come In Philosophy And Practice?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is much more that the rhetoric of cross-or trans-disciplinary science and adaptive management practice (Smedstad & Gosnell, 2013). It entails genuine commitment to integration, listening and sharingworking openly, inclusively, respectfully and collaboratively to co-produce and grow a community of practice of scholars, practitioners and citizens (Arnott et al, 2020;García et al, 2021;Lane et al, 2021;Mould et al, 2020aMould et al, , 2020bMould et al, , 2021Ruangpan et al, 2021;Tooth & Viles, 2020). Moves towards explicitly conscious conduct and performance of practices is a critical first step (Ashmore, 2015;Blue & Brierley, 2016;Gregory, 2017;Tadaki et al, 2015).…”

Section: Create Diverse Inclusive and Open Access Communities Of Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How far have management practices come in ‘working with the river’?

Fryirs

Brierley

2021

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The philosophy of 'working with nature' and 'working with the river' is increasingly embedded in global management practice. However, what does this mean? Has real progress been made in operationalizing what is known, how scientists and practitioners work and how rivers are conceptualized as integral parts of landscapes, culture and society? The first sections of this commentary outline what this philosophy means to us (the authors) and briefly summarize the evolution of associated concepts and principles in recent decades. In the final section, we comment on what we believe needs to be done to 'work with the river' in practice. We are communicating to both river scientists and practitioners as a collective when we ask: Will we be brave enough to hold the course in the face of many global challenges, be ready to respond when called upon, and commit to creation of diverse, inclusive and open access communities of practice in geoethical programmes that 'work with the river'?

show abstract

‘Fluvial geomorphology and environmental design’: Restitution for damage, rehabilitation, restoration or rewilding?

Newson

2021

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gregory's pioneering work on progressive river channel change, driven in England by both natural and anthropogenic forces, helped to guide major concepts and roles for fluvial geomorphology. It opened the door to a steep rise of applied fluvial geomorphology and a bigger role in public policy and river basin management.The channel change paradigm spans the millennia; by the late 20th century, the extent of Anthropocene harm to rivers justified both a radical label as 'damage' and a professional focus to prescribe remedies. Imitating engineering, then dominant in river management, Gregory favoured the term 'design'. The damage principally impacted river habitat and increasing collaboration with freshwater ecologists in the restitution of damage became part of the international move to 'river science'.European legislation strengthened the legal status of physical habitat in overall river quality.In the 21st century fluvial geomorphology has both strengthened and diversified further within 'river science', but also gaining social, behavioural, even political, insights through 'citizen science' and the 'co-design' of river corridor projects with communities. The professional challenges of the climate and biodiversity emergencies return us to Gregory's question, 'how applied should we become?' The increasingly public profiles of, for example, flood risk policy require river scientists to participate in recommending and co-designing options such as rehabilitation, restoration and rewilding. The separate and joint contributions of these options are discussed through the geomorphological prism. Progressive and episodic channel changes will increase as the drivers and remedies interact; we must play a role in scenario setting and adaptive management, promoting workable collaboration between natural and social sciences, especially in the contested field of design.

show abstract

Promoting fluvial geomorphology to “live with rivers” in the Anthropocene Era

Cited by 36 publications

References 87 publications

Influence of Historical Land-Use Change on Contemporary Channel Processes, Form, and Restoration

Influence of Historical Land-Use Change on Contemporary Channel Processes, Form, and Restoration

How far have management practices come in ‘working with the river’?

‘Fluvial geomorphology and environmental design’: Restitution for damage, rehabilitation, restoration or rewilding?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About