O SlideShare utiliza cookies para otimizar a funcionalidade e o desempenho do site, assim como para apresentar publicidade mais relevante aos nossos usuários. Se você continuar a navegar o site, você aceita o uso de cookies. Leia nosso Contrato do Usuário e nossa Política de Privacidade.
O SlideShare utiliza cookies para otimizar a funcionalidade e o desempenho do site, assim como para apresentar publicidade mais relevante aos nossos usuários. Se você continuar a utilizar o site, você aceita o uso de cookies. Leia nossa Política de Privacidade e nosso Contrato do Usuário para obter mais detalhes.
Restoration and Enhancement of Aquatic Habitats in Alaska: Case Study Reports, Policy Guidance, and Recommendations. Parry and Seaman, 1994
Juneau has 5 impaired water bodies 55 projects on Duck, Mendenhall, and Jordan
With goals/objectives: 73 projects in 9 categories Evaluated: 27 Sample sizes for most project types not sufficient to make generalizations
Bay Creek culvert was perched
Rip-rap revetments (15) Log cribs or revetments (3) Biostabilization (3)
Calculate acreage of potential riparian lost. 15 other revetments sites on the river. This revetment was a continuation/repair of a 1984 revetment. The 1994 work failed in 1995 after high Mendenhall flows and was again repaired in 1996. DGC (1994): required revegetation of a 50 ft. wide buffer from the rip-rap landward for the entire length of project for shade and future source of LWD ADFG (1995): required planting 4-6 ’ Sitka Spruce 10 feet from river edge spaced every 100 feet.
Add orange line to small photo too
Reconfig: plan form and channel x-sections
Goal: improve spawning habitat by increasing water velocity and streambed D.O. levels in 1300 feet of channel Urbanization Channelized Poor water quality Poor habitat quality Historical spawning habitat
Borrow pit to wetland conversion (4) Upland to wetland conversion (4)
Continue water quality and fish population monitoring, think alder, eradicate reed canarygrass
Pond designed with stream passing through it, not along the side. Lost stream habitat – less net benefit as a mitigation project Lack of riparian veg and cover will lead to higher temps, less productivity, and less habitat Recommend: irregular, shallow shoreline; no gravel; plant native trees and shrubs
Objective: “ reclaim” 22,625 s.f. of wetlands by replacing existing road fill with muskeg soil
Future and existing project can benefit from the following. Train reviewers, permitters, and practitioners Planning: e.g restoration as wetland mitigation
Project Need: The lower reaches of Duck Creek experience seasonal loss of surface flow to groundwater due to isostatic rebound and channelization resulting in fish mortality and stranding. The channel in this area was poorly defined, wide, and shallow with low water velocity. Due to the close proximity of the channel to a major highway, the stream was vulnerable to polluted storm water runoff. DOT&PF Glacier Highway Improvements (State Project #69755) required storm water treatment at Egan Drive and provided an opportunity to improve fish habitat. Multiple objectives – channel setback, swale, stormwater Goal(s): Improve storm water treatment, improve fish habitat. 500 feet of Duck Creek downstream of Egan Drive was relocated to allow for installation of a vegetated storm water treatment swale and to provide for a 35- to 50-foot buffer between the road and stream The channel was redesigned with meanders, lined with an impermeable bed liner, and narrowed to increase water depth Riparian vegetation re-established with grasses and willow cuttings A 230-foot storm water treatment swale was constructed between highway and channel to intercept and treat runoff Relocated channel stabilized with coir reinforced earth wraps and willow plantings. Slope on downstream right stabilized with coir wraps of about one foot height from one foot to about four feet above the stream bottom elevation. Willow bundles were placed between each coir wrap and willow cuttings and/or transplants were placed on the slope above the coir wraps. On the shorter left bank (designed to allow overflow of floods larger than mean annual), one coir wrap was planted with willow cuttings. Exposed areas were seeded with Wetland Grass Seed Mix.
Restoration Project Analysis in Juneau Alaska by John Hudson
Duck Creek Created Wetland20012009 An assessment of habitat restoration practices in Juneau John Hudson Shannon Seifert Juneau Fish and Wildlife Juneau Watershed Partnership Field Office
RecommendationsFuture and existing projects will benefit from:•Site specific project designs•Performance-based permit conditions and criteria•Technical oversight from concept development throughconstruction•Post-implementation maintenance•Compliance monitoring
Stormwater ManagementGoal: Improve quality of urban runoffflowing into streams 2010 cha nn el 2010Duck Creek stormwater swale (2001) Jordan Creek basin (2007)
RevegetationDuck Creek Channel Relocate (1998) 20102010 2010
Factors influencing revegetationsuccess: • Soil quality • Species suitability for the site • Invasive plants • Lack of maintenance and follow-up • Revegetation goals (short-term erosion control or long-term riparian health) • Coir products – prevent erosion AND revegetation