Ecological Archives A019-009-A3

A. H. Fullerton, E. A. Steel, Y. Caras, M. Sheer, P. Olson, and J. Kaje. 2009. Putting watershed restoration in context: alternative future scenarios influence management outcomes. Ecological Applications 19:218–235.

Appendix C. Methods for identifying where to locate restoration projects used in hypothetical watershed management strategies, and cost estimates for each type of action. These rules were used to develop the original six strategies (Steel et al., in press) and the Aquatics Fund strategy (this study). C = cost per project.

Restoration Action

Method for Choosing Project Location

Cost Estimate

Riparian protection

Riparian areas estimated to be in good condition and that bordered stream segments estimated to be of high spawning suitability qualified for protection, and were prioritized from upstream to downstream. Riparian protection was limited to lands that did not already have a protection ordinance.

C = Forest Lands + Non-forest Lands

Forest Lands: $10,000 per acre ($2.47 per m2) for lost riparian timber harvest

Non-forest Lands: cost of land acquisition; depended on parcel size and current land-use designation; ranged from $2,856 to $40,344 per acre ($0.71 to $9.97 per m2)

Riparian restoration

Riparian areas estimated to be in fair or poor conditions qualified for restoration, and were prioritized from upstream to downstream. These included reaches for which >= 35% of the area within 20 m of the channel was < 5% hillslope and >= 50% of the area within 20m of the channel was capable of tree growth (i.e., not bare, shrub, or grass).

C = $15,000 per acre ($3.71 per m2); estimated from existing project costs

Decommiss-ion roads

Roads to be decommissioned were located based on how much sediment they were predicted to contribute (those with higher amounts were chosen first). Occurred on public lands.

C = $12,427 per road km; estimated by forester, personal communication

Repair roads

Road improvements were located based on how much sediment they were predicted to contribute (those with higher amounts were chosen first). Occurred on private lands.

C = $6,214 per road km; half of above estimate

Instream restoration

Instream restoration was located in reaches with high potential for spawning success (good riparian conditions, suitable bankfull width and stream gradient).

C = $78,593 per stream km); estimated from existing project costs

Floodplain restoration

Floodplain restoration occurred for reaches within historical floodplain boundaries. Upstream-most reaches were prioritized.

C = $155,507 per stream km); estimated from existing project costs

Barrier removal

Barriers blocking the lowest cost per km of historically accessible stream were removed first, beginning with downstream-most barriers.

C = $178,430*ln(1.2W+0.61)-34,773
where W = bankfull width); estimated from existing project costs

LITERATURE CITED

Steel, A., A. Fullerton, Y. Caras, M. Sheer, P. Olson, D. Jensen, J. Burke, M. Maher, and P. McElhany. In Press. A spatially explicit decision support system for managing wide ranging species. Ecology and Society.



[Back to A019-009]