1. Habitat Restoration Division Coastal Program Partner For Wildlife Program Schoolyard Habitats Chesapeake Bay Field Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Richard Starr
My talk today will cover:
Quick overview of SHARP and the importance of comprehensive stream restoration
Four projects
Rural watershed and stream assessment and restoration
Urban watershed and stream assessment and restoration (I will compare and contrast the difference between rural and urban projects related to problem ID and addressing problems)
Dam removal

2. Stream Restoration Approach
Training and Education
Technical Assistance
Demonstration Projects

3. Training and Education
Promote Fluvial Geomorphology and Natural Channel Design Methods
NCTC River Science Curriculum Advisory
Stream Classification and Assessment Courses (Levels I, II, and III at NCTC)
Natural Channel Design Review Checklist
Stream Function Pyramid
Protocol Development and Training
Since 1994, over 1000 participants representing non-profit, local, state and federal agencies
Training will be used in implementation of 500 projects
Close to 250 miles of stream and riparian habitat restoration in 18 major river basins
Key Accomplishments:
Training of over 500 participants.
Training used by participants in over 500 projects.
Restoration Implementation of 250 Miles of Stream

4. Types of Technical Assistance
Develop Assessment and Design Tools
Develop Protocols
Conduct Watershed and Stream
Monitoring
Conduct Project Review
Publish Findings

5. Demonstration Projects
Natural channel design methodology
Stream restoration
Fish barrier removal

6. Stream Functional Pyramid
Hierarchical framework that categorizes stream functions
Each level builds on the previous level
Based on work Fischenich 2006
Functional based goals
Functional assessments with quantitative thresholds
Functional based monitoring
Mitigation debit and credit protocols
Supporting guidelines document
Training module

7. Natural Channel Design Review Checklist
Checklist of critical questions associated with NCD stream restoration projects
Four categories
Watershed assessment
Geomorphic assessment
Conceptual design
Final design
Supporting guidelines document
Training module

8. Natural Channel Design RFP Protocol
Checklist of critical tasks required for NCD stream restoration projects
Eight categories
SOW
Objectives
Watershed assessment
Geomorphic assessment
Alternative analysis
Conceptual design
Feasibility design
Final design

9. Bank Erosion Rate Curve
Used to estimate rate of bank erosion based on condition of bank stability
Provides a basis for prioritizing restoration
Quantifies sediment supply from bank erosion
Once we selected our group of cross sections to resurvey, we resurveyed them approximately one year after the initial survey. This cross section plot is a sample of surveyed cross sections.
Note that this curve is draft, includes only DC data and we are still QA/QC’ing it.
Show how the curve is used.
We will revise the curve to include reference reach data and Baltimore City data and then release the curve

10. Hydrologic Regional Curves
Bankfull calibration required for fluvial based assessments
Regional curves reduce the need for bankfull gage calibration
Current Curves in Maryland:
Piedmont, Coastal Plain, and Ridge and Valley and Allegheny Plateau Physiographic Regions
Regional Curve Development
USFWS, MD SHA, USGS
Piedmont Q
bkf
= 84.56DA
0.76 R 2
= 0.93
AP/VR
Qbkf = 34.02DA
0.94
= 0.99
W. Coastal Plain
= 31.35DA
0.73
= 0.98
E. Coastal Plain
= 14.65DA
= 0.97 1 10
100
1000
10000
Drainage Area (mi2)
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Points:
Accurate determination of bankfull is a must because all relationships are based on bankfull measurements
The most accurate way to determine bankfull is to use the data from a USGS gage, however and unfortunately, there are not USGS gages at all of our stream projects.
Fortunately however, many researchers like Leopold, Miller, and Dune have shown that there is a statistically strong correlation between drainage area and channel dimensions and stream discharge.
Knowing this, practitioners have been developing hydrologic regional curves to determine which geomorphic feature at their non-gaged streams is associated with bankfull flows.
Much time is saved if regional curves exist for your region because gage calibration is not a necessity to verify bankfull determinations.
FWS has developed regional curves for MD in the piedmont, coastal plain, and RV and AP physiographic regions

11. Reference Reach Database
Dimensionless Ratios - Cross Section. E Streams - Western Coastal Plain
RATIO
RANGE
AVERAGE
Width/Depth
5.73 to
12.83
9.10
Widthpool/Widthbkf
0.74
1.66
1.03
Areapool/Areabkf
0.86
2.11
1.29
Riffle Depthmax/Riffle Depthbkf
1.05
1.98
1.50
Pool Depthmax/Riffle Depthbkf
1.52
3.71
2.25
Run Depthmax/Riffle Depthbkf
1.21
1.60
Glide Depthmax/Riffle Depthbkf
1.08
2.76
1.59
Rosgen Stream Types C, E, and B reference stream database
Developed from western coastal plain streams
Departure from potential analysis
Design criteria
Dimensionless Ratios - Profile. E Streams - Western Coastal Plain
RATIO
RANGE
AVERAGE
Riffle Slope/Average Water Surface Slope
0.17 to
4.96
1.81
Pool Slope/Average Water Surface Slope
0.02
1.01
0.41
Run Slope/Average Water Surface Slope
0.04
6.68
1.19
Glide Slope/Average Water Surface Slope
1.82
0.50

12. Defining River Corridors Widths
Buffer width based on fluvial geomorphic requirements
Meandering streams require, at the minimum, 3.5 times the bankfull width
Avoid meandering floodplains

13. Stream Stability Rapid Assessment Protocol
Rapid stream assessment based on observation of instability indicators
Watershed characteristics
Lateral stability
Vertical stability
Stability Trend
Localized v.s. widespread instability
Potential instability cause(s)

14. Stream Feasibility Assessment Protocol
Rapid stream assessment based on observations
Four evaluations
Existing habitat
Existing stream stability
Restoration feasibility
Proposed habitat
Quantitative score

15. GIS Stream Stability Prediction
GIS-based stream stability prediction model
GIS layers
Percent impervious
Stream slope
Percent forest cover
Forest age stand
Erodible soils
Thresholds set for coastal plain physiographic region
Field validated model accuracy with over 200 sites
Model accuracy 87 percent

16. Stream Monitoring Protocol
Tiered monitoring protocol
Tier 1 – rapid assessment based on observations of instability indicators
Tier 2 – monumented measurements or repair

17. Other Tools and Protocols
Riffle Stability Index (Kappesser 2002, USFS)
RiverRat (NOAA and FWS, 2009)
RiverMorph (Stantec)
STREAM Modules (Ward et al, Ohio State)
Proper Functioning Condition (Prichard et al., 1998, BLM)
Bed Material Composition Method (Potyondy and Bunte 2007, USFS)
GIS-based Streambank Erosion Rate Estimation (Evans et al, 2003, Penn State)
Watershed Assessment of River Stability Sediment Supply (WARSSS) (Rosgen 2006)
Vermont Watershed and Stream Geomorphic Assessment Protocols
Physical Stream Assessment: A review of Select Protocols (COE & EPA 2004)

18. Future Tools and Needs Stream assessment checklist
Stream monitoring checklist
Site selection checklist
Sediment prediction model comparison
Climate change sediment transport

19. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service - Chesapeake Bay Field Office
177 Admiral Cochrane Drive Annapolis, Maryland 21401
Richard Starr
(410)