1 / 23

Welcome!

Welcome!. The Large Wood Workshop a t the Center for Wooden Boats, Lake Union, Seattle, WA. Welcome!. Technical Workshop on Large Wood Applications and Research Needs in River Restoration. Sponsor: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation & Support from : U.S. Army Corps of Engineers & King County, WA.

gil
Download Presentation

Welcome!

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Welcome! The Large Wood Workshop at the Center for Wooden Boats, Lake Union, Seattle, WA

  2. Welcome!

  3. Technical Workshop on Large Wood Applications and ResearchNeeds in River Restoration Sponsor: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation & Support from : U.S. Army Corps of Engineers & King County, WA

  4. Introductions • Lead: Jennifer Bountry (USBR) • Planning and Execution Team: Kendra Russell (USBR) Connie Svoboda (USBR) D J Bandrowski (USBR) Mike Sixta (USBR) Tim Randle (USBR) Jock Conyngham (Corps) ZacCorum (Corps) Catherine Petroff (UW/Corps) Andy Gendaszek (USGS) • Graduate Student Facilitators Jane Atha (UO) Sarah Davidson (UBC) Michael Gallisdorfer (UB) Claire Ruffing (KSU)

  5. Handouts!

  6. Goals • Identify large wood research and monitoring needs to improve reliability and reduce risk for river restoration projects. • What is the current state of science/engineering for large wood restoration projects in rivers? • What are pertinent knowledge gaps in the field of large wood design and implementation? • What opportunities exist for productive collaboration on large wood project activities and research between agencies and practitioners working in this field?

  7. Schedule • Today: • Talk: Liability of Large Wood in Rivers - David Ekberg (Skellenger Bender) • Field Trip! In our 4 vans: • ????? • Cottonwoods • Cedar Stand • Aspen Grove • Log Jammers

  8. Schedule • Tomorrow: • Session 1: System and Reach Scale Issues and Contexts in Planning Wood-based Restoration (Talks, Breakout, Discussion) • Session 2: Designing at Local Scale (Talks, Breakout, Discussion)

  9. Schedule • Wednesday: • Session 3: Implementation and Monitoring (Talks, Breakout, Discussion) • Discussion: Workshop Product Outline and Next Steps

  10. Discussion Outcomes for Each Topic • Identify tools/guidelines currently used to make predictions • Identify science and technology gaps • Identify research priorities and methods to address the gaps • Specify how risk and uncertainty need to be incorporated • Suggest needed field monitoring methods and discuss the temporal and spatial scales of the monitoring • Suggest opportunities for productive collaboration between agencies and practitioners working in this field

  11. Let’s get started

  12. Let’s get finished

  13. Goals • Identify large wood research and monitoring needs to improve reliability and reduce risk for river restoration projects. • What is the current state of science/engineering for large wood restoration projects in rivers? • What are pertinent knowledge gaps in the field of large wood design and implementation? • What opportunities exist for productive collaboration on large wood project activities and research between agencies and practitioners working in this field?

  14. Recommendations • Essential : What – Who – How ($)? • Suggestion; (DJB) • LWD List_Serv hosted by: • Discussion group on link-in • ASCE task committee on river restoration could be used as a platform • Attendee list will be circulated via email • Web site link for workshop: post pdf version on website

  15. Recommendations • Databases? • Reference Site(s)? • Follow up from participants on how group’s recommendation is integrated into programmatic approaches • Guidelines and Protocols? – workshop on east/midwest by ACOE or other • Model Improvements? • Education/Communication/Outreach? • Practitioner Coordination/Data Sharing? • Specific tools (e.g. Risk Assessment tool LWD Spacing research, etc.?

  16. Recommendations • Databases • -links to existing databases/information • -where do grant funders post their information? Is there a database that can be referenced? • -BPA has database • -PNAMP, USFS, USFWS; brianbair will email links

  17. Recommendations • Reference site(s) where pilot projects could be implemented • Include more disturbed location (urban a possibility) (Doug, Jock, Tim Abbe) • Lower Klamath tributaries (high sedimentation environment) (Rocco) • Gravel vs sand bed; warm vs cold water • Quinault River could be an example (Bill Armstrong) • Upper Green River – need hydrology (Zac) • Trinity River (DJ) • Entiat River (Leif) • LTER sites – long-term ecological research sites (NSF); (Frank) • Malcom Forest (Sara)

  18. Recommendations • Guidelines & Protocols • Monitoring protocols in progress (West) – Roger Peters • Stream restoration implementation handbook – Zac • NRCS • Scoping of guidelines for large wood design (DJ) • Design & implementation – Jock • Scaled approach for small river projects • River rat project (NOAA) – Brian Cluer • Peter Wilcock and jock – The Stream Project • Guidelines can force direction of monitoring and limit creativity • Synthesize break-out discussions and see if group can prioritize 1 or 2 suggestions

  19. Recommendations • Model Improvements • Landscape evolution Watershed scale models and 1D to get at reach-scale questions – CHILD and CAESER models; Tucker UC Boulder – Wes did lit review • Geomorphic response predictor - Sara • Working from single process representation to multiple process • Better data to validate model representation • Link between creating habitat and biotic response • Decisions are made based on risk – can we include risk based approach into models; Doug has uncertainty analysis for structure that could be elaborated to accommodate project • USACE has tool – Zac • USACE developing probabilistic method for evaluating • Coastal and hydraulics lab that could be improved to apply to wood – Jock • Better wood anchoring techniques guidelines • NRCS 654, NRCS plant science center • Understanding scour better; Casey has current funding proposal

  20. Recommendations • Education/Outreach/Communication • Better job with social media (video?) • How to engage FEMA to change policy – Casey has contacts at Region 10 that may be a good platform • Wood management and utilization in flood response manual – Jock • Wood sourcing from road right-a-ways – highway departments • Non-profits and tribes; wood debris managers could be engaged to better utilize • Sven Lee – federal highways engineer (Zac) • Public broadcasting spots for wood • Smokey the bear!! • David Suzuki Foundation • Using existing foundations to help promote wood • NGOs • Getting right message out key – what is role of wood in a river; what are expectations • Corridor concept • Navigable river management - ACOE • Pamphlet for Trinity River and postcards – DJ • Share existing materials that have been used at a local scale

  21. Recommendations • Practitioner Coordination / Data Sharing

  22. Recommendations • Specific Tools

  23. Thank You!Corridor statement drafted – can a position statement be generated and endorsed Wood in world rivers American Fisheries Society 2003 – Colin Thorne

More Related