Restoration Project Analysis in Juneau Alaska by John Hudson
Report
Mar. 15, 2012•0 likes•755 views
Restoration Project Analysis in Juneau Alaska by John Hudson
Mar. 15, 2012•0 likes•755 views
Download to read offline
Report
Technology
Sports
Community-Based Watershed Management Forum, March 2012, Juneau Alaska. Southeast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Recommended
Rainbow Bridge Land Outfall RestorationFairfax County
Tripps Run Stream ImprovementFairfax County
Sneen & Rochotte SFS Poster 2015 FINAL VERSIONMarty Sneen
Babson Court Outfall RestorationFairfax County
Lazy Creek Court Outfall RestorationFairfax County
Ccwf restoration apwaFlorida Public Works Expo - 2016 - Tampa, Florida
More Related Content
What's hot
Dead Run Stream Restoration Public meeting February 18, 2015Fairfax County
Shetland Court Outfall RestorationFairfax County
10. Restoring the River Camac - Mary-Liz Walshe, DCCEnvironmental Protection Agency, Ireland
Future Watershed by Frank M. Piorko , Dir., Div. of Watershed Stewardship, DE...Kim Beidler
Dead Run Stream Restoration Public Meeting June 9, 2015Fairfax County
Kerwin Abinoja - ENVE341 Research Poster November 2015 (Assessing River Recov...Kerwin Abinoja
Viewers also liked
Juneau Wetland Management Plan by Teri Camery and Nicole JonesSoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Restoration: Education and Regulation by Bill LuceySoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Planning for Watershed Restoration by Neil StichertSoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Wetland Ecosystem Service Protocol for Southeast Alaska by Dr. Paul AdamusSoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Municipal Wetland Initiatives by Frankie BarkerSoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Watershed Assessments by John HudsonSoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Similar to Restoration Project Analysis in Juneau Alaska by John Hudson
September 1 - 0939 - Matt Lechtenberg and Shane WulfSoil and Water Conservation Society
Ccwf restoration apwaFlorida Public Works Expo - 2016 - Tampa, Florida
Bullneck Run at Spring Hill Rec Center Stream Restoration Project June 2014Fairfax County
Sandra Manning Jones Trees on the River Uckobjectiveassociates
Piney Run Tributary at Lamplighter WayFairfax County
Pimple dimples eureka2013Greg Gearheart
More from Southeast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Biofuels presentation, Karen Petersen UAF Cooperative Extension ServiceSoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Building strategic partnerships with the Forest Service by Angela ColemanSoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Watershed Condition Frameworks by Angela ColemanSoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Writing a Successful Project Proposal by Kathleen Dowd-GaileySoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Southeast Alaska Watershed Coalition by Jessica KayserSoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Watershed Partnerships and Collaboration by Sue MaugerSoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Recently uploaded
Omada Pitch Decksjcobrien
Manage and Release Changes Easily and Collaboratively with DevOps Center - Sa...Amol Dixit
Need for Speed: Removing speed bumps in API ProjectsŁukasz Chruściel
Cloud Study Jam ppt.pptxPoorabpatel
Salesforce Miami User Group Event - 3rd QuarterSkyPlanner
Mastering Automation Quality: Exploring UiPath's Test Suite for Seamless Test...DianaGray10
Restoration Project Analysis in Juneau Alaska by John Hudson
- 1. Duck Creek Created Wetland 2001 2009 An assessment of habitat restoration practices in Juneau John Hudson Shannon Seifert Juneau Fish and Wildlife Juneau Watershed Partnership Field Office
- 2. Outline • Project Goals • Methods • Summary statistics • Findings • Case studies • Recommendations
- 3. Project Goals • Inventory habitat improvement projects • Evaluate projects to inform future restoration practices • Identify projects that require additional habitat improvement
- 4. Methods 1. Research 2. Determine project goals and objectives 3. Categorize projects 4. Conduct field assessments/evaluations 5. Report findings
- 5. Inventory Statistics Total projects identified 81 Years 1983 to 2010 Number of water bodies 20 Goals and objectives 73 Projects on impaired water bodies 49 (60%) Projects assessed 27
- 7. Findings Successful •Fish passage improvement •Streambank stabilization •Created wetlands (borrow pits) •Stormwater management Mixed Success •Created wetlands (uplands) •Channel rehabilitation/relocation
- 8. Fish Passage Improvement Goals: • Remove barriers to fish movement • Improve flow, debris, and sediment conveyance
- 9. Streambank stabilization Goals: • Protect land, buildings, & bridges • Enhance riparian functions General outcome: Successful* Mendenhall River
- 10. Mendenhall River revetments 2010 1996 Mendenhall River
- 11. Riverbend Vintage Park Revetment Revetment (1996) (1997) 2011 Mendenhall River revetments
- 12. Channel Rehab/Relocation Goals: • Improve riparian & spawning habitat • Increase water quantity • Reduce flood risk Outcome: mixed success
- 13. Duck Cr. Channel Rehabilitation (1997-98) Goal: Improve spawning habitat 1997 (Pre-construction) 1998 (Construction)
- 14. Duck Cr. Channel Rehabilitation (1997-98) 1998 (Construction) 2010
- 15. Created Wetlands Goals: • Improve water quality • Improve or create fish and wildlife habitat • Mitigate wetland loss Outcome: mixed success 2010
- 16. Pre-construction Post construction (2005) Duck Creek borrow pit at Nancy St. Goal: enhance fish and wildlife habitat, improve water quality Nancy Street Wetland, Duck Creek
- 17. 2006 2010 Nancy Street Wetland, Duck Creek
- 18. Pederson Hill Cr. - upland to wetland conversion (2006) 2010
- 19. Auke Rec Bypass Wetland Mitigation (1999) Goal: create 1 acre of emergent wetlands 2000 2006
- 20. Auke Rec Bypass Wetland Mitigation (1999) 2004 2011
- 21. Recommendations Future and existing projects will benefit from: •Site specific project designs •Performance-based permit conditions and criteria •Technical oversight from concept development through construction •Post-implementation maintenance •Compliance monitoring
- 23. Stormwater Management Goal: Improve quality of urban runoff flowing into streams 2010 cha nn el 2010 Duck Creek stormwater swale (2001) Jordan Creek basin (2007)
- 24. Revegetation Duck Creek Channel Relocate (1998) 2010 2010 2010
- 25. Factors influencing revegetation success: • 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
Editor's Notes
- 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.