This workshop highlights successful large scale, on-the-ground restoration efforts that are re-connecting aquatic habitats fragmented by dams, road crossings, and other man-made alterations in the Upper Great Lakes. Tools and strategies will be shared for planning, financing, and articulating results, including the mutual benefits of restoring streams, improving community infrastructure, and creating local jobs.

1. Great Lakes Aquatic Connectivity
Project
Healing Our Waters
Great Lakes Restoration Conference
Cleveland, Ohio
September 11-13, 2012
Stewart Cogswell
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Page 1

2. Page 2

3. Page 3

4. Stream Restoration/Connectivity –
What watershed?
What stream?
What individual site?
What site first?
HOW Cleveland 2012 Page 4

5. Great Lakes Aquatic Connectivity Project
Road/stream crossing & barrier inventories
- consistent approach
- prioritization models
- cost/benefit analysis
HOW Cleveland 2012 Page 5

6. Page 6

7. Page 7

8. Page 8

9. Page 9

10. Prioritizing Remediation – Pine/Popple River
1001
0.95
95
90
0.9
Percent %
Watershed 0.85
85
Connectivity
Status
0.8
80
(Cmin)
0.75
75
0.7
70
0.65
65
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Total Cost (Millions of Dollars) Page 10

11. Cost estimates are important for prioritizing
projects
• Excavation
• Pipe (bevel and polymer coating)
• Bedding and fill (including raised road elevation)
• Road surfacing
• Haul away old pipe and unusable fill
• Riprap, silt fence
• Dewatering / pumping
• Project administration and surveys
HOW Cleveland 2012 Page 11

12. Key habitat advances:
a) Trimble Yuma
b) Roadsoft
- management system
HOW Cleveland 2012 Page 12

13. Next steps -
a) Model development
- refine current model
- new models (truncated, species)
- decision based (remove vs. remain)
b) Measure biological and habitat response
HOW Cleveland 2012 Page 13

14. Thinking about collecting road/stream
crossing data on your watershed?
http://conserveonline.org/
workspaces/streamconnect
HOW Cleveland 2012 Page 14

15. Questions?
HOW Cleveland 2012 Page 15