New Approaches to Stream
Restoration and Preservation
Joe Berg
Biohabitats, Inc.
The Enigma of Changing Baseline
► What
we know is wrong
► What we see is disturbed
► Our spatial reference systems are flawed
► Can’t go back, but can learn from the past
► Temporal reference system offers value
► Green Infrastructure is relevant
► Resource management conflict
The modern, incised, meandering stream is an
artifact of the rise and fall of mid-Atlantic
streams in response to human manipulation of
stream valleys for water power.
(Walter, R., & Merritts, D. (2008). Natural
streams and the legacy of water-powered mills.
Science, vol. 319.)
Our Broken Stream Systems
Function as Major Sources &
Conveyors of Sediment &
Phosphorus
Zone of Erosion/Transport
Zone of Deposition
Adapted from Kondolf, M. (1997). Environmental Management, 21, 533-551.
Not from the watershed, but from stream adjustment
Source: Expert Stream Panel Report, Stack 2013
• Restored streams had lower monthly peak runoff
• 55% of the Nitrate in streams is associated with
leaky sanitary sewers
Source:
Pennino, M.J., S.S. Kaushal, P.M. Mayer, R.M. Utz, and C.A.
Cooper. 2015. Stream restoration and sanitary infrastructure
alter sources and fluxes of water, carbon, and nutrients in
urban watersheds. Hydrol.Earth Syst. Sci Discuss., 12:13149-13196
Source: Center for
Watershed Protection, 2013
On going debate. . . Are stream restoration
projects restoring functions or just form? Do
we need the form to restore the function?
0
SOCIAL – Recreation, community involvement, support, perception, and education
Modified from Harman, 2012
We need to protect the WHOLE watershed,
not just the drainage network, yet this is our
regulatory foundation—streams, wetlands, and
floodplains
Our BMPs have not proven sufficient to protect
the resources of our drainage network, and those
resources are a minority of the resources we need
to protect
Our resource protection strategy should not just
focus on quality of resource, but quantity of resource,
life needs room
Setting Aside Half the World for the Rest of Life -- noted
that just 10 percent of the planet’s land surface was
“protected on paper,” and that this was not enough to save
“more than a modest fraction of wild species.”
http://eowilsonfoundation.org/