4.3 Article

Sediment storage and shallow groundwater response to beaver dam analogues in the Colorado Front Range, USA

期刊

RIVER RESEARCH AND APPLICATIONS
卷 36, 期 3, 页码 398-409

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/rra.3592

关键词

beaver; beaver dam analogues; Front Range; pool sedimentation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Enthusiasm for using beaver dam analogues (BDAs) to restore incised channels and riparian corridors has been increasing. BDAs are expected to create a similar channel response to natural beaver dams by causing channel bed aggradation and overbank flow, which subsequently raise water tables and support vegetation growth. However, lack of funding for monitoring projects post-restoration has limited research on whether BDAs actually cause expected channel change in the Front Range and elsewhere. Geomorphic and hydrologic response to BDAs was monitored in two watersheds 1 year post-restoration. BDAs were studied at Fish Creek, a steep mountainous catchment, and Campbell Creek, a lower gradient piedmont catchment from May to October 2018. At each restoration site, the upstream- and downstream-most BDAs were chosen for intensive study in comparison with unrestored reference reaches. Monitoring focused on quantifying sediment volumes in BDA ponds and recording changes to stream stage and riparian groundwater. Despite differences in physical basin characteristics, BDA pools at both sites stored similar volumes of sediment and stored more sediment than reference pools. Sediment storage is positively correlated to BDA height and pool surface area. However, BDAs did not have a significant influence on shallow groundwater. The lack of groundwater response proximal to BDAs could indicate that local watershed factors have a stronger influence on groundwater response than restoration design 1 year post-restoration. Systematic, long-term studies of channel and floodplain response to BDAs are needed to better understand how BDAs will influence geomorphology and hydrology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据