Beyond "Stream Restoration": Clarifying Language for Effective Stream Management
Douglas Stephens
Montgomery Parks
The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission
Wheaton, MD
The term "stream restoration" is ubiquitously applied to a wide range of projects, from small-scale enhancements to large-river engineering, often obscuring project specifics and hindering public understanding. This presentation argues for more precise language in describing stream management activities, moving beyond the catch-all "stream restoration" to promote clarity and improve project outcomes.
We will explore the diverse projects, goals, and outcomes currently labeled as "stream restoration," highlighting the potential for miscommunication. Examples will illustrate the vast differences in scope and intent, from converting a small headwater stream to a wetland system to stabilizing miles of a mainstem river. These variations underscore the need for more nuanced terminology.
A key challenge lies in defining project goals. We propose categorizing these goals into three primary areas: infrastructure protection, ecological improvement, and water quality enhancement. While projects may have overlapping objectives, a primary driver often exists. Clearly articulating this driver, justifying its importance, and establishing post-construction monitoring aligned with the specific goal are crucial for effective communication and project success.
Furthermore, the concept of "restoration" itself requires careful consideration. What is being restored and what techniques are being used? Is it water quality parameters, specific aquatic species, riparian buffer health, floodplain connectivity, or flood control? Defining the targets of restoration and specific techniques is essential for accurately describing the planned interventions. A project focused solely on infrastructure protection, for example, may not genuinely "restore" ecological function, even if it alters the stream channel.
This presentation advocates for de-emphasizing the generic term "restoration" and embracing more specific descriptors. Instead of "stream restoration," we suggest using terms like "in-stream infrastructure protection," "eroding channel stabilization," or "stream and floodplain reconnection," depending on the project's primary objective. This shift towards precise language will foster greater transparency, reduce confusion, and ultimately lead to more effective and targeted stream management strategies.
Critically, true stream "restoration," even when well-defined, often requires a broader watershed perspective. Addressing upstream impacts, particularly stormwater runoff, is essential for long-term success. Integrating stormwater management practices into stream projects and prioritizing watershed-level interventions, such as removing infrastructure from floodplains, can significantly improve water quality, reduce erosion, and enhance ecological function. This holistic approach, focusing on the interconnectedness of the watershed, is crucial for achieving truly resilient and healthy stream ecosystems, that might be considered “restored.”
About Douglas Stephens
Coming Soon