Location
Construction & Engineering Hall, Oregon State University
Start Date
27-6-2013 1:50 PM
End Date
27-6-2013 2:10 PM
Description
Given the significant initial investment and long life span of road-stream crossing structures, interest has grown in developing tools to evaluate their physical and biological effectiveness. In this case, the physical effectiveness monitoring guidelines being developed consist of two protocols; Level 2 is a detailed, statistically-based survey and evaluation of a suite of physical habitat metrics, while Level 1 is a simplified subset of that. Our premise for both monitoring protocols is that if the design channel characteristics through the crossing are similar to a nearby representative reach of the natural channel, then the design channel is considered to be effectively providing geomorphic, hydrologic, and ecological continuity that ultimately benefit fish and other aquatic organism passage. The level 1 physical monitoring protocol was purposefully designed to be simple and quick, so that users could semi-quantitatively evaluate the effectiveness of road-stream crossing channel designs at a large number of sites. Relatively few measurements are required, but they provide a consistent framework for evaluating, documenting, and reporting the degree to which the road-stream crossing design channel, including the inlet and outlet transitions, match the physical characteristics of the adjacent natural channel. Physical channel characteristics of interest include bank full and wetted widths, maximum depths, bed-materials sizes, and stream bank irregularity and continuity. Median values for each physical measurement are compared with the range observed in the adjacent natural channel. The results of the individual metrics are weighted and integrated in a summary rubric to develop an overall rating for physical effectiveness. The Level 1 protocol is intended to provide a quick assessment of effectiveness for a large number of sites, which means that limited information is available to critique the site’s design and construction, compared to the Level 2 protocol.
Concurrent Sessions A: Passage Effectiveness Monitoring in Small Streams II - Physical Effectiveness Monitoring of Channels at Road-Stream Crossing Designs-A Rapid Assessment
Construction & Engineering Hall, Oregon State University
Given the significant initial investment and long life span of road-stream crossing structures, interest has grown in developing tools to evaluate their physical and biological effectiveness. In this case, the physical effectiveness monitoring guidelines being developed consist of two protocols; Level 2 is a detailed, statistically-based survey and evaluation of a suite of physical habitat metrics, while Level 1 is a simplified subset of that. Our premise for both monitoring protocols is that if the design channel characteristics through the crossing are similar to a nearby representative reach of the natural channel, then the design channel is considered to be effectively providing geomorphic, hydrologic, and ecological continuity that ultimately benefit fish and other aquatic organism passage. The level 1 physical monitoring protocol was purposefully designed to be simple and quick, so that users could semi-quantitatively evaluate the effectiveness of road-stream crossing channel designs at a large number of sites. Relatively few measurements are required, but they provide a consistent framework for evaluating, documenting, and reporting the degree to which the road-stream crossing design channel, including the inlet and outlet transitions, match the physical characteristics of the adjacent natural channel. Physical channel characteristics of interest include bank full and wetted widths, maximum depths, bed-materials sizes, and stream bank irregularity and continuity. Median values for each physical measurement are compared with the range observed in the adjacent natural channel. The results of the individual metrics are weighted and integrated in a summary rubric to develop an overall rating for physical effectiveness. The Level 1 protocol is intended to provide a quick assessment of effectiveness for a large number of sites, which means that limited information is available to critique the site’s design and construction, compared to the Level 2 protocol.
Comments
Mark Weinhold is the forest hydrologist and aquatics program leader on the White River National Forest in western Colorado. His bachelor’s degree from Oregon State University is in civil engineering. His master’s degree from Colorado State University is in hydrology and hydraulic engineering. Mark is heavily involved in the Forest Service’s aquatic organism passage (AOP) program as a member of the national teaching cadre, through developing a computer-based e-learning tool for road-stream crossing design, and through development of implementation and effectiveness monitoring protocols for AOP projects.