Literature DB >> 17805923

Evaluating success criteria and project monitoring in river enhancement within an adaptive management framework.

T Kevin O'Donnell1, David L Galat.   

Abstract

Objective setting, performance measures, and accountability are important components of an adaptive-management approach to river-enhancement programs. Few lessons learned by river-enhancement practitioners in the United States have been documented and disseminated relative to the number of projects implemented. We conducted scripted telephone surveys with river-enhancement project managers and practitioners within the Upper Mississippi River Basin (UMRB) to determine the extent of setting project success criteria, monitoring, evaluation of monitoring data, and data dissemination. Investigation of these elements enabled a determination of those that inhibited adaptive management. Seventy river enhancement projects were surveyed. Only 34% of projects surveyed incorporated a quantified measure of project success. Managers most often relied on geophysical attributes of rivers when setting project success criteria, followed by biological communities. Ninety-one percent of projects that performed monitoring included biologic variables, but the lack of data collection before and after project completion and lack of field-based reference or control sites will make future assessments of ecologic success difficult. Twenty percent of projects that performed monitoring evaluated >or=1 variable but did not disseminate their evaluations outside their organization. Results suggest greater incentives may be required to advance the science of river enhancement. Future river-enhancement programs within the UMRB and elsewhere can increase knowledge gained from individual projects by offering better guidance on setting success criteria before project initiation and evaluation through established monitoring protocols.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17805923     DOI: 10.1007/s00267-007-9010-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Manage        ISSN: 0364-152X            Impact factor:   3.266


  8 in total

1.  Adaptive management on public lands in the United States: commitment or rhetoric?

Authors:  W H Moir; W M Block
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Stream restoration and enhancement projects: is anyone monitoring?

Authors:  Jeffrey S Bash; Clare M Ryan
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  Post-project appraisals in adaptive management of river channel restoration.

Authors:  Peter W Downs; G Mathias Kondolf
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.266

4.  Ecology. Synthesizing U.S. river restoration efforts.

Authors:  E S Bernhardt; M A Palmer; J D Allan; G Alexander; K Barnas; S Brooks; J Carr; S Clayton; C Dahm; J Follstad-Shah; D Galat; S Gloss; P Goodwin; D Hart; B Hassett; R Jenkinson; S Katz; G M Kondolf; P S Lake; R Lave; J L Meyer; T K O'donnell; L Pagano; B Powell; E Sudduth
Journal:  Science       Date:  2005-04-29       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Fragmentation and flow regulation of the world's large river systems.

Authors:  Christer Nilsson; Catherine A Reidy; Mats Dynesius; Carmen Revenga
Journal:  Science       Date:  2005-04-15       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  An evaluation of the influence of natural science in regional-scale restoration projects.

Authors:  F Brie Van Cleve; Thomas Leschine; Terrie Klinger; Charles Simenstad
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.266

7.  Deconstructing adaptive management: criteria for applications to environmental management.

Authors:  R Gregory; D Ohlson; J Arvai
Journal:  Ecol Appl       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 4.657

8.  Setting expectations for the ecological condition of streams: the concept of reference condition.

Authors:  John L Stoddard; David P Larsen; Charles P Hawkins; Richard K Johnson; Richard H Norris
Journal:  Ecol Appl       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.657

  8 in total
  2 in total

1.  Flow Restoration in the Columbia River Basin: An Evaluation of a Flow Restoration Accounting Framework.

Authors:  Amy L McCoy; S Rankin Holmes; Brett A Boisjolie
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2017-08-30       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Spatial misallocation of ecological restoration and resulting economic costs in the red soil hilly region of China: a case study of the Zhuxi watershed.

Authors:  Zhiqiang Chen; Zhibiao Chen
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2020-01-20       Impact factor: 2.513

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.