Restoration Planning Process From general principles to site … › etalweb.joewheaton.org › Courses › WAT… · Restoration Planning Process From general principles to site

Restoration Planning Process

From general principles to site application

14 September 2018

What will you produce at end of the fall term?

If you were the client, what would you be looking for in an excellent, winning, report?

What is adaptive management?

What is the scientific method? Critical thinking?

What are the decision components of coming up with a set of conceptual design alternatives?

How will you balance all those different components?


If you were the client, what would you be looking for in an excellent, winning, report?What is adaptive management?


What are the decision components of coming up with a set of conceptual design alternatives?


Most planning processes share most elements

Broader goals already set

It’s a circleFocuses on ecosystem goalsWhat is adaptive management?

CA Delta Science Plan




What is the scientific method? Critical thinking?What are the decision components of coming up with a set of conceptual design alternatives?


Critical Thinking Scientific method Model Building Adaptive ManagementDefine the issue with clarity and precision Characterize situation from

experience and observation

Define problem Define problemEstablish goals & objectives

Identify, assess, and interpret the necessary information, accounting for assumptions & employing different perspectives

Develop hypothesis: a proposed explanation

Build Model:Define scale and resolutionMake assumptionsIdentify relevant variablesDefine relation among variables

Model linkages between objectives & possible actions

Reach a well‐reasoned conclusion adhering to principles of logic, relevance, and fairness.

Deduction: make a prediction from the hypothesis

Solve modelcan include calibration

Forecast outcomesSelect, design, implement actions

Evaluate consequence of conclusionStay open to new information

Test hypothesis, often with an experiment

Verify modelImplement & maintain model

Monitor, analyze outcomesAdapt

A particular emphasis on Uncertainty &Learning (as an objective)

Adaptive management identifies uncertainties, and then establishes methodologies to test hypotheses concerning those uncertainties. It uses management as a tool not only to change the system, but as a tool to learn about the system.

This approach is very different from a typical management approach of 'informed trial-and-error' which uses the best available knowledge to generate a risk-averse, 'best guess' management strategy, which is then changed as new information modifies the 'best guess'.

The achievement of these objectives requires an open management process which seeks to include past, present and future stakeholders. Adaptive management needs to at least maintain political openness, but usually it needs to create it. Consequently, adaptive management must be a social as well as scientific process. It must focus on the development of new institutions and institutional strategies just as much as it must focus upon scientific hypotheses and experimental frameworks. Adaptive management attempts to use a scientific approach, accompanied by collegial hypotheses testing to build understanding, but this process also aims to enhance institutional flexibility and encourage the formation of the new institutions that are required to use this understanding on a day-to-day basis.

Selected references:Holling, C. S. (1978). Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. Wiley, London. Reprinted by Blackburn Press in 2005.Walters, C. J. (1986). Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources. New York, McGraw Hill.Lee, K. (1993). Compass and gyroscope: integrating science and politics for the environment. Washington, D.C., Island Press.

https://www.resalliance.org/adaptive‐mgmt

10

Galatowitsch 24 FEB 2014

(1) Ecological restoration is the process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed

(2) Restoration actions ≠ ecosystem recovery(3) Establish vegetation GOALS and actions using a

Conceptual Ecological Model that provides context and specifiesdrivers, stressors, effects, attributes

(4) Define SMART GOALS: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Reasonable, Time‐boundArticulate goals up front … Use them to evaluate project alternatives … Base subsequent decision making on progress toward goals

11

(a) Expand the GOALSWe use rivers for many things … engage all interested parties in a structured, constructive conversation

(b) Refine the GOALS: What, specifically, do people want?Geometry? Structure? Function? Appearance? Ecosystem services?

(c) Learn from projectsData must be collected, standardized, archived, and accessed … even thenTo learn, we need clear, testable methods and design hypotheses

Galatowitsch 24 FEB 2014(1) Ecological restoration is the process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that

has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed(2) Actions ≠ ecosystem recovery(3) Establish vegetation GOALS and actions using a

Conceptual Ecological Model that provides context and specifiesdrivers, stressors, effects, attributes

(4) Define SMART GOALS: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Reasonable, Time‐boundArticulate goals up front … Use to evaluate project alternatives … Base subsequent decision making on progress toward goals

Decision Framework Implemented in 18 steps

Implem

entation Path

Adap

tive Man

agem

ent P

ath

Assessment Loop

DesignLoop

Act and Learn Loop

Links and Paths

Organizes stream restoration decision processPromotes appropriate project objectives, predictive design, and transparent decision analysis

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT

Stream restoration project objectives:Appropriate (defined at the project time and space scale)Relevant (achieving the objective correlates to achieving the associated goal)Feasible (capable of being achieved)Measurable (support definition of metrics that demonstrate progress toward goals)

Define SMART GOALS: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Reasonable, Time‐bound

MA

S, R





What are the decision components of coming up with a setof conceptual design alternatives?


Decision Framework Implemented in 18 steps

1 ID interested parties2 ID problems & opportunities3 Develop watershed history4 Are goals feasible?5 Appropriate local objectives6 Define metrics7 Level of design effort8 Develop design actions9 Develop alternatives10 Score alternatives11 Negotiate tradeoffs12 Prepare final design13 Implement design14 Changes during construction15 Implement monitoring16 As‐built compliance17 Adaptive adjustments18 What can we learn?

DECISION STEPSDECISION FRAMEWORK

Goals describe a general condition or outcome. Goals express what people want. No goal is intrinsically wrong. Some goals are unclear, ineffective, or inappropriate. A goal should be sufficiently clear that(1) possible actions to achieve the goals can be clearly defined(2) appropriateness of reach‐scale actions to achieve the goals can be effectively evaluated(3) success can be defined

Assessment is the essential link between GOALS and PROJECT OBJECTIVES. You ask two essential questions:(1) Can this goal be achieved at this site, under present and future watershed conditions?(2) Can this goal be better achieved with actions other than stream restoration?

In assessing stream restoration goals, establish a cause‐and‐effect link between the site and its watershed, ecosystem, and social context. Understanding the history of the site and its watershed is key ‐ you will not be able to forecast restoration outcomes without the spatial and temporal context that explains how conditions came to be the way they are now.

Stream restoration project objectives are ultimately defined at the project scale. Think of them as an excellent, focused set of instructions that a stream design professional can use to develop design alternatives. These objectives should be appropriate (defined at the reach scale)relevant (achieving the objective correlates to achieving the associated goal)feasible (capable of being achieved)measurable (support definition of metrics that that demonstrate progress toward project objectives)

Given appropriate, relevant, feasible, and measurable objectives, develop metrics that demonstrate progress toward objectives

Assessment Loop

Identify & refine problems & opportunities

Evaluate watershed, ecosystem, & social context

Goals

Project Objectives

Assessment LoopExplanation

Do project objectives address problems, opportunities, and constraints in a way consistent with watershed, ecosystem, and social conditions?

Assessment LoopDecision Steps

GETTING STARTED

1 Who has an interest in the stream? How do you get them involved?

2 What problems and opportunities might be addressed by a stream project? What do people want? What physical, legal, financial, or regulatory constraints influence what is possible? EVALUATE CONTEXT

3 Identify key assessment questions and the watershed, ecosystem, and social information needed to address them. What is the physical, ecological, and social history of the watershed?

4 Is it feasible to address problems and opportunities at this site under present and future watershed conditions? Is a stream project the best way to address problems and opportunities?PROJECT OBJECTIVES

5 Select appropriate local objectives that address problems, opportunities, and constraints

6 Define metrics (measurable system properties ) that demonstrate progress toward project objectives

Assessment Loop

Identify & refine problems & opportunities

Evaluate watershed, ecosystem, & social context

Goals

Project Objectives

GOALS ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS WATERSHED, ECOSYSTEM, & SOCIAL FACTORS EXAMPLE APPROPRIATE LOCAL OBJECTIVESEcosystem lift What are the existing and desired ecosystem functions? How are

they linked with other stream restoration goals?Flow regime, sediment supplyEnergy types and sourcesCWA, NEPA requirements

Establish specific habitat and ecosystem functions needed for desired plants, fish, wildlife and to provide desired ecosystem services.

Mitigation What are the essential ecosystem structures and functions that will be lost? Can they be reestablished at the project site? How are they linked to other stream restoration goals?

Flow regime, sediment supplyEnergy types and sourcesCWA, NEPA, state/local regulation

Replace specific habitat and ecosystem functions

Recover or support endangered aquatic population

Limiting factors: are reach scale factors limiting or sufficient? Are the necessary conditions achievable at the project site?

Migration, predation, competition, nonlocal life stagesFlow regime, habitat and energy requirementsESA requirements

Provide specific habitat and ecosystem functionse.g. necessary food & cover, fish passage

Recover or support endangered riparian population

Limiting factors: are reach scale factors limiting or sufficient? Are the necessary conditions achievable?

Migration, predation, competition, nonlocal life stagesFlow regime, habitat and energy requirementsESA requirements

Provide specific habitat and ecosystem functionse.g. necessary food & cover, migration routes

Viable sport fisheryHunting opportunitiesDiverse songbird/raptor population

Limiting factors: are reach scale actions limiting, necessary, sufficient to support desired fish and wildlife?

Migration, predation, competition, nonlocal life stagesFlow regime, habitat and energy requirementsFisherman, hunter, birdwatcher access

Provide specific habitat and ecosystem functionsProvide fish passage, migration routes, necessary food and cover; Improve access

Active use: parks & trails Is access available? How will the site be used?Is there sufficient public interest?Are there public safety concerns?

Water quality (visual, odor, public health). Can desired plants, fish, and wildlife be established? User demographics and location; alternative rec.

Improve access, sightlinesProvide signage, amenities, trailsShade

Nonuse: appearance Define natural or desirable conditionCan native plants compete with nonnative?

Flow regime and seed sources for maintenance of desired riparian community. Nonnative competing plants.

Specific self‐sustaining assemblage of native plants

Ecosystem education & community opportunities

Is access available, convenient, and safe? Is there sufficient public interest in education/community opportunities?

Water quality (visual, odor, public health). Native plants, fish, and wildlifeProximity to other opportunities of similar focus

Improve access, sightlinesProvide signage, amenities, trails, shade

Contact water recreation Is water quality limiting? Can WQ problems be solved locally?Is there safe public access? Is there sufficient interest in water recreation?

Economic base for supporting recreation.Flow regime

Improve accessProvide signage, amenitiesRemove hazards

Reduce nutrient/sediment/pollutant loading

Is pollutant removal or load reduction most effectively achieved at reach scale?

Flow regime, sediment supply, sediment balanceNutrient/sediment/pollutant sources and sinksWatershed development plans that will alter supply

Increase removal (e.g. N)Reduce loading (e.g. sediment, P from bank erosion)

Protect roads, bridges, utilities, structures, property

Is infrastructure relocation possible?What are the causes of past and current channel dynamics?

Flow regime, sediment supply, sediment balanceWatershed development that will alter future runoff.

Specify acceptable locations and rates of bankline migration and channel incision.

Minimize project cost What are construction and maintenance costs? What are funding sources? What are the tradeoffs between cost and effectiveness?

Federal, state, local, private funding sources.Alternative implementation. Maintenance plans.

Assessment Loop – Typical stream restoration goals

19

Experts + stakeholders: define Appropriate Local Objectives & MetricsDesigners: develop alternativesExperts: score alternatives for each ALOStakeholders: Assign values to each objectives

Presto: weighted scores, cost frontier, …

Appropriate project objectives and metrics enable a predictive approach to design

Potential risks and benefits – and their uncertainty – determine the appropriate level of effort.

Develop a range of restoration actions that may achieve local objectivesestimate the range of objective performance for different costsestimate uncertainty in objective performance

Always evaluate do‐nothing and passive restoration alternatives

Multi‐criteria decision analysis provides a robust, transparent basis for evaluating alternatives. It will not solve the design problem, but with effective supporting science, it provides the most favorable basis for evaluating tradeoffs and making good decisions.

Watershed, ecosystem, and social factors define the boundary conditions and constraints used to design restoration actions. These include the supply of water, sediment, nutrients, and organisms to the project reach, food webs and life histories of key organisms, and the social interests, pressures, and regulations that can define or constrain actions.

Design LoopExplanation

Project Objectives

Final Design

Design Loop

Develop alternatives

Evaluate tradeoffs

DEVELOP ALTERNATIVES

7 What level of design effort is needed, considering risk, cost, potential benefits?

8 Develop possible design actions, including performance hypotheses and predictions, and identify opportunities for adaptive management

9 Combine design actions into rational groups of alternatives

EVALUATE TRADEOFFS

10 Score performance of alternatives for each objective, incorporating uncertainty.

11 Negotiate tradeoffs among alternatives

FINAL DESIGN

12 Prepare final design, including plan for permitting and monitoring

Have decision and design analyses indicated a need to revise project objectives to better address problems and opportunities?

Design LoopDecision Steps

Project Objectives

Final Design

Design Loop

Develop alternatives

Evaluate tradeoffs

Package actions into project alternatives. Alternatives are judged independently in their ability to achieve objectives.

Performance levels and objective weights are used to evaluate alternatives. MCDA allows alternatives to be evaluated in a transparent and flexible manner. Value of additional research to reduce uncertainty can be evaluated. Poorly defined objectives are exposed.

Design Loop – Illustration

Performance Levels Table Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C

Appropriate Local Objective Metric Do nothing

Local bank protection, replanting

Rebuild channel, replanting

Stakeholder Preference

Protect utility pipes crossing channel P(no breach) in 25 yrs 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3Support brown trout population Number of fish 10 10 40 0.1

Support songbird population Number of breeding pairs 10 80 80 0.2Reduce sediment loading from reach Annual TSS load (Mg) 4 2 2 0.2

Cost $0,000 0 10 16 0.2

Stakeholders assign weights to each objective.

Performance levels for each alternative, with

uncertainty

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Alt A Alt B Alt C

Weighted Scores

90% CI

Min

Max

Final Design

Act and Learn Loop

Implement

Monitor

Learning

Act & Learn LoopExplanation

If the action did not produce desired result, predictive design provides a basis for making corrections.

How do you do that with an approach based on narrative, or untestable hypotheses, or vague assertions that the project will make things better?

The key elements for learning:appropriate project objectives and metrics, allowingpredictive design, which leads tohypothesis‐based monitoring, the data for which must be botharchived, and analyzed

IMPLEMENT

13 Implement project design

14 What information is learned during construction that may require modification of design or metrics?MONITOR

15 Establish monitoring program to track metrics

16 Has the project been built to the design plans?

LEARNING

17 Evaluate opportunities to alter implemented plan based on monitoring observations18 Close loop on learning: evaluate hypotheses and predictions in light of project

performance; develop and report general lessons

Can restoration actions or objectives be revised to better address problems and opportunities? Do project expectations need to be revised?

Act & Learn LoopDecision Steps

Final Design

Act and Learn Loop

Implement

Monitor

Learning

IMPLEMENT

13 Implement project design

14 What information is learned during construction that may require modification of design or metrics?MONITOR

15 Establish monitoring program to track metrics

16 Has the project been built to the design plans?

LEARNING

17 Evaluate opportunities to alter implemented plan based on monitoring observations18 Close loop on learning: evaluate hypotheses and predictions in light of project

performance; develop and report general lessons

Can restoration actions or objectives be revised to better address problems and opportunities? Do project expectations need to be revised?

Act & Learn LoopDecision Steps

Final Design

Act and Learn Loop

Implement

Monitor

Learning

Urban DrainageFully built out pre SWM

2200 ft reachDrainage Area: 1 sq. mileStream channel large for drainage areaSteep 1.2% – 1.5%

Road crossing u/s & d/sSewer main parallel to streamTwo interceptors cross streamSewer main leak requires repair & protection

Legal constraint to reduce loadings from stormwater discharges

TMDL allocation for reducing N, P, sediment

An urban example – from last spring

26

27



Road crossing u/s & d/sSewer main parallel to streamTwo interceptors cross streamSewer main leak requires repair & protection

Legal constraint to reduce loadings from stormwaterdischarges




Good access –Active walking, biking High level of awarenessActive watershed association

Road crossing u/s & d/sSewer main parallel to streamTwo interceptors cross stream

Sewer main leak :requires repair and protection

Legal constraint to reduce loadings from stormwater discharges


Aesthetic & Recreational Goals –Improve access and condition for walking, jogging

Ecosystem Goal –Restore functioning aquatic and riparian ecosystem

Infrastructure Goal –Protect against sewer main breaches

Water Quality Goal –Reduce sediment and nutrient discharge from watershed

28

Category Broad Goal Watershed and Ecosystem Context

Appropriate Local Objective

Metric

Infrastructure Protect against sewer main breaches

Flow magnitude/frequency; historic channel shifting

Protect against sewer main breaches (no change)

Probability of zero breaches of sewer main in 25 years

Water Quality Reduce sediment and nutrient discharge from watershed

Watershed sources, flux, storagewater and N supply; potential denitrification at site; alternative BMPs

Maximize nitrogen removal

Annual mass nitrogen removal


Supply of water, P, and sediment; P content of streambanks; Flow magnitude/frequency; historic channel shifting; alternative BMPs

Minimize sediment & phosphorus loading

Annual mass sediment and phosphorus loading

Ecosystem Restore functioning aquatic and riparian ecosystem

Appropriate local objective?Limiting factors analysis local requirements & feasibility

Restore songbird population

Number of breeding pairs of desired birds


Appropriate local objective?Soil type & moisture; hydrologic regime; competing species;

Establish self-sustaining pop. of native riparian plants

Density, percentage, health of desired native plants

Social Benefits

Improve access and condition for walking, jogging

Evaluate success of other projects; Survey for preferences, for willingness to pay

Improve access and condition for walking, jogging (no change)

Public preference;Willingness to pay

Cost ($000) Minimize cost Refine design alternatives Minimize cost (no change)

$

Category Broad Goal Watershed and Ecosystem Context

Appropriate Local Objective

Metric

Infrastructure Protect against sewer main breaches

Flow magnitude/frequency; historic channel shifting

Protect against sewer main breaches (no change)

Probability of zero breaches of sewer main in 25 years


Watershed sources, flux, storagewater and N supply; potential denitrification at site; alternative BMPs

Maximize nitrogen removal

Annual mass nitrogen removal


Supply of water, P, and sediment; P content of streambanks; Flow magnitude/frequency; historic channel shifting; alternative BMPs

Minimize sediment & phosphorus loading

Annual mass sediment and phosphorus loading


Appropriate local objective?Limiting factors analysis local requirements & feasibility

Restore songbird population

Number of breeding pairs of desired birds


Appropriate local objective?Soil type & moisture; hydrologic regime; competing species;

Establish self-sustaining pop. of native riparian plants

Density, percentage, health of desired native plants

Social Benefits

Improve access and condition for walking, jogging

Evaluate success of other projects; Survey for preferences, for willingness to pay

Improve access and condition for walking, jogging (no change)

Public preference;Willingness to pay

Cost ($000) Minimize cost Refine design alternatives Minimize cost (no change)

$ 29

Alternatives: portfolios of actionsactions can repeat,

alternatives are mutually exclusive. 1. Do nothing. (other than repair the sewer main)

2. Riprap banks. Riprap placed to protect sewer infrastructure

3. Reconnect floodplain by lowering floodplaineliminates most riparian trees more frequently wetted overbank areasome bank and floodplain protection may be required.

4. Stepped channel with large rocks channel approximately the same size and position large boulders used to armor the banks and create step structuresoverbank area remains generally dry channel very statictumbling water a desired amenity.

Path Package: walking trails, stream crossings, & improved sight lines can be added to each alternative.primarily changes the social benefit and the project cost

Plants Package: Alternatives 2, 3, 4: increase number & diversity of native plants 30

31

Rocky RunPerformance Levels Table 1.00

Objective (ALO) Metric Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Max Opt WT1Infrastructure P(zero sewer main breaches 25 yrs) 0.15 0.85 0.15 0.2 0.75 0.2 0.1 0.9 0.1 0 1 1 0.40N Removal Anual denitrificaiton (kg) 10 20 10 10 40 10 10 25 10 0 100 100 0.00

Social Degree of satisfaction (0-10) 2 5 2 2 5 2 1 8 1 0 10 10 0.20Cost Cost per year ($1000s/yr) 11 270 11 31 780 31 34 840 34 0 1000 0 0.40

A. RipRap B. Low & wet C. High & dry

I d

Weights will vary with stakeholder preferenceEach set of weights sums to one

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Inf N Social Cost

Dominance Analysis

RipRap Low & Wet Hi & dry

32





I d

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

RipRap Low & wet Hi & dry

Weighted Scores

Min 5% Mean 95% Max

DPW

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Inf N Social Cost

Dominance Analysis






I d

33

DEQ

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0


Weighted Scores

Min 5% Mean 95% Max

34





I d

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Inf N Social Cost

Dominance Analysis


0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0


Weighted Scores

Min 5% Mean 95% Max

DEQ – with better N information

To the CAP and to the site:

Let’s get started on ALO: Appropriate Local ObjectivesPM: Performance MeasuresAP: Alternative Packages

To protect the Logan River from degradation and the growing threats of floodplain development, a Conservation Action Plan (CAP) has been developed for the portions of the Logan River from First Dam (at the mouth of Logan Canyon) through Cache Valley to the confluence with the Little Bear River at Cutler Reservoir (Figure 1). The development of a short‐ and long‐range vision for the river is needed to coordinate and prioritize conservation efforts and ensure a sustainable river system for future generations. Stakeholder groups representing residential, commercial, recreational, and agricultural interests have participated in the development of this CAP. The CAP is a dynamic set of objectives that can be revised as needed when new threats or conservation solutions are identified.

Documents

Restoration Planning Process From general principles to site … › etalweb.joewheaton.org › Courses › WAT… · Restoration Planning Process From general principles to site