American Geophysical Union Become an AGU Member
Subscribe to AGU Journals		 AGU Home AGU Publications

Read Full Article (file size: 287743 bytes)    Cited by

WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, VOL. 41, W10301, doi:10.1029/2005WR003985, 2005

River restoration

Ellen Wohl

Department of Geosciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA


Paul L. Angermeier

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA


Brian Bledsoe

Department of Civil Engineering, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA


G. Mathias Kondolf

Department of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA


Larry MacDonnell

Porzak Browning and Bushong, LLP, Boulder, Colorado, USA


David M. Merritt

Stream Systems Technology Center, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA


Margaret A. Palmer

Department of Biology, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA


N. LeRoy Poff

Department of Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA


David Tarboton

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, USA


Abstract

River restoration is at the forefront of applied hydrologic science. However, many river restoration projects are conducted with minimal scientific context. We propose two themes around which a research agenda to advance the scientific basis for river restoration can be built. First, because natural variability is an inherent feature of all river systems, we hypothesize that restoration of process is more likely to succeed than restoration aimed at a fixed end point. Second, because physical, chemical, and biological processes are interconnected in complex ways across watersheds and across timescales, we hypothesize that restoration projects are more likely to be successful in achieving goals if undertaken in the context of entire watersheds. To achieve restoration objectives, the science of river restoration must include (1) an explicit recognition of the known complexities and uncertainties, (2) continued development of a theoretical framework that enables us to identify generalities among river systems and to ask relevant questions, (3) enhancing the science and use of restoration monitoring by measuring the most effective set of variables at the correct scales of measurement, (4) linking science and implementation, and (5) developing methods of restoration that are effective within existing constraints. Key limitations to river restoration include a lack of scientific knowledge of watershed-scale process dynamics, institutional structures that are poorly suited to large-scale adaptive management, and a lack of political support to reestablish delivery of the ecosystem amenities lost through river degradation. This paper outlines an approach for addressing these shortcomings.

Received 24 January 2005; accepted 4 May 2005; published 4 October 2005.

Keywords: fluvial geomorphology; river restoration; stream ecology; United States.

Index Terms: 1834 Hydrology: Human impacts; 1813 Hydrology: Eco-hydrology; 1825 Hydrology: Geomorphology: fluvial (1625); 1848 Hydrology: Monitoring networks.

Read Full Article (file size: 287743 bytes)    Cited by

Citation: Wohl, E., P. L. Angermeier, B. Bledsoe, G. M. Kondolf, L. MacDonnell, D. M. Merritt, M. A. Palmer, N. L. Poff, and D. Tarboton (2005), River restoration, Water Resour. Res., 41, W10301, doi:10.1029/2005WR003985.