Stream restoration that allows for self-adjustment can increase channel-floodplain connectivity
| dc.contributor.author | Christensen, Nicholas D. | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Prior, Elizabeth M. | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Czuba, Jonathan A. | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Hession, W. Cully | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-01-29T18:24:21Z | en |
| dc.date.available | 2025-01-29T18:24:21Z | en |
| dc.date.issued | 2024-02-14 | en |
| dc.description.abstract | Streams are often “restored” to reduce sediment loading using one or a combination of practices such as livestock exclusion, riparian plantings, and/or bank reshaping and stabilization. Direct comparisons of how these methods affect stream processes, including channel-floodplain connectivity, over time are essential to informing restoration design. (Channel-floodplain connectivity is the ability of a stream to exchange water, sediment, and nutrients with its floodplain at high flows.) To investigate the impact these stream restoration practices have had on channel-floodplain connectivity, we developed a 2-D HEC-RAS hydraulic model for 3 restoration treatments along an urban and agriculturally impacted stream in southwest Virginia, United States. All 3 treatments excluded cattle in 2009. The farthest upstream treatment, Treatment 1, had no other intervention while the other two, Treatments 2 and 3, were regraded and stabilized, then replanted with native species (completed May 2010). The overhanging banks of Treatment 2 were regraded to a slope of 3:1, while those of Treatment 3 had a flat inset floodplain cut into the bank before sloping the banks at 3:1. During the 11-year monitoring timeline, prior work showed the streambanks in Treatment 1 migrated through both outer bank erosion and inner bank deposition with the autogenic creation of inset floodplains, while Treatments 2 and 3 had minimal bank adjustment. The adjusted geometry of Treatment 1 provided higher floodplain volume, channel-floodplain exchange flows, and flow moving across the floodplain than Treatments 2 and 3. Treatment 3 showed some metrics of higher connectivity than Treatment 2, but there was not uniform agreement between metrics. While the hydraulic analysis indicates a higher channelfloodplain connectivity in Treatment 1, active management of Treatments 2 and 3 has reduced the bank erosion rate and accelerated the riparian forest regrowth, providing other benefits including increased shading, wood supply, and vegetation diversity. | en |
| dc.description.version | Published version | en |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | en |
| dc.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.21428/f69f093e.e8ffa1a3 | en |
| dc.identifier.orcid | Czuba, Jonathan [0000-0002-9485-2604] | en |
| dc.identifier.orcid | Hession, William [0000-0002-6323-3827] | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10919/124438 | en |
| dc.language.iso | en | en |
| dc.rights | Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International | en |
| dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ | en |
| dc.subject | Bank stabilization | en |
| dc.subject | Cattle exclusion | en |
| dc.subject | Channel evolution | en |
| dc.subject | Ecohydraulics | en |
| dc.subject | Floodplain building | en |
| dc.title | Stream restoration that allows for self-adjustment can increase channel-floodplain connectivity | en |
| dc.title.serial | Journal of Ecological Engineering Design | en |
| dc.type | Article - Refereed | en |
| dc.type.dcmitype | Text | en |
| dc.type.other | Article | en |
| dcterms.dateAccepted | 2023-10-15 | en |
| pubs.organisational-group | Virginia Tech | en |
| pubs.organisational-group | Virginia Tech/Agriculture & Life Sciences | en |
| pubs.organisational-group | Virginia Tech/Agriculture & Life Sciences/Biological Systems Engineering | en |
| pubs.organisational-group | Virginia Tech/All T&R Faculty | en |
| pubs.organisational-group | Virginia Tech/Agriculture & Life Sciences/CALS T&R Faculty | en |