Measuring geomorphology in river assessment procedures 2: Recommendations for supporting river management goals

Papangelakis, Elli; Hassan, Marwan A.; Luzi, David; Burge, Leif M.; Peirce, Sarah

doi:10.1111/1752-1688.13145

Cited by 3 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 199 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this section, we summarize the trends observed and discuss how insights from the review and Figure 4 can be used to guide decisions around the choice of assessment procedure to support watershed management goals. These results inspired a further discussion of approaches to designing an assessment procedure which can be found in the companion paper (Papangelakis et al, 2023).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…The choice of a reference condition is complicated, especially in cases where the altered hydrologic, sedimentary, or vegetative conditions mean that the assumed ideal form or function on a river system is no longer feasible or practical (Dufour & Piégay, 2009; Wohl, Lane, et al, 2015). So while it can be useful to have a condition against which particular assessment results can be compared (Palmer et al, 2005), the reference condition should be chosen with care (for further discussion, see our companion paper Papangelakis et al, 2023). The use of a reference condition is most common in HA assessments, as it is laid out as a step in the WFD (EU, 2000), and is least common in GA assessments (Figure 3).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There remains a need to develop consistent, efficient, and meaningful procedures for incorporating sediment dynamics into river assessment procedures. Recommendations for doing so are presented in our companion paper (Papangelakis et al, 2023).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the assessment of river systems should be an interdisciplinary endeavor (Fryirs, 2015), which adds complexity and difficulty in designing effecting procedures for measuring relevant geomorphic processes. In a companion paper to this one (Papangelakis et al, 2023), we present a set of steps for designing a customized river assessment procedure to support river management goals, as well as specific recommendations around the choice to include geomorphic indicators and measurement techniques. In that paper, we also draw from recent academic studies on river assessment and novel methods for capturing detailed data with considerations of resource (labor and funds) available.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While this paper aims to answer the question “which geomorphic indicators are currently being included in geomorphic assessments and how are they being measured?,” a companion paper (Papangelakis et al, 2023) builds on these results to provide an overview of how these indicators reflect geomorphic processes and presents general recommendations for more effectively including geomorphological concepts and indicators into adaptive river management procedures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Measuring geomorphology in river assessment procedures 1: A global overview of current practices

Papangelakis,

Hassan,

Luzi

et al. 2023

J American Water Resour Assoc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite geomorphic processes being increasingly recognized as a vital component of river management projects, evidence suggests that they may not be adequately captured in common river assessment procedures. We reviewed 91 river assessment procedures from around the world to evaluate their effectiveness in capturing geomorphic processes relevant for river management goals. Our objectives were to summarize which common geomorphic indicators are measured and how in different types of river assessments categorized based on their main focus: geomorphic, physical habitat, mixed geomorphic and habitat, and hydromorphology. Our analysis identified differences in the types of geomorphic indicators included and measurement methodologies between the types of assessment procedures. Some geomorphic processes, such as sediment transport, are nearly completely absent from all assessments, despite their importance for geomorphic processes. The variability among assessment procedures suggests that a single procedure is unlikely to capture all geomorphic components required to support every river management programs. Here, we discuss how the strengths and limitations of different assessment types can be used to guide decisions around how to select assessments and geomorphic indicators to support management project goals. A companion paper expands the discussion of how to plan effective river assessment procedures to support unique management goals.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Measuring geomorphology in river assessment procedures 1: A global overview of current practices

Papangelakis,

Hassan,

Luzi

et al. 2023

J American Water Resour Assoc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Evaluating river morphology change with a geomorphic form variation approach

Dawson,

Ashmore,

Corry

2023

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geomorphic river design strives for natural resilience by encouraging geomorphic form complexity and morphological processes linked to greater habitat diversity. Increasing availability of high‐resolution topographic data and spatial feature mapping methods provide advantages for morphological analysis and river restoration planning. We propose and evaluate an approach to quantifying topographic variability of geomorphic form and pixel‐level surface roughness resulting from channel planform geometry differences using spatially continuous variety computation applied to component metrics including flow direction, aspect and planform curvature. We define this as the geomorphic form variation (GFV) approach and found it scalable, repeatable and a multi‐stage analytical metric for quantifying physical aspects of river‐bed topographic variability. GFV may complement process‐based morphological feature mapping applications, hydraulic assessment indices and spatial habitat heterogeneity metrics commonly used for ecological quality evaluation and river restoration. The GFV was tested on controlled synthetic channels derived from River Builder software and quasi‐controlled sinuous planform flume experiment channels. Component variety metrics respond independently to specific geometric surface changes and are sensitive to multi‐scaled morphology change, including coarser‐grained sediment distributions of pixel‐level surface roughness. GFV showed systematic patterns of change related to the effects of channel geometry, vertical bed feature (pool‐bar) frequency and amplitude, and bar size, shape and orientation. Hotspot analysis found that bar margins were major components of topographic complexity, whereas grain‐scale variety class maps further supported the multi‐stage analytical capability and scalability of the GFV approach. The GFV can provide an overall variety value that may support river restoration decision‐making and planning, particularly when geomorphic complexity enhancement is a design objective. Analysing metric variety values with statistically significant hotspot cluster maps and complementary process‐based software and mapping applications allows variety correspondence to systematic feature changes to be assessed, providing an analytical approach for river morphology change comparison, channel design and geomorphic process restoration.

show abstract

Urbanized stream restoration as designed adaptation: Planning using synthetic digital rivers and form variation assessment

Dawson,

Ashmore

2024

River Research & Apps

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Restoring urbanized streams is challenging because of the absence of natural reference reaches and major changes in discharge and sediment supply as a consequence of catchment urbanization. In many cases the risk to urban infrastructure leads to form‐based restoration with less opportunity for process‐based approaches. Restoration involves designed adaptation to the new catchment state, rather than true restoration, but more‐natural designs are still feasible based in principles of fluvial geomorphology. An important element of this designed adaptation is planform design which is a part of urban channel restoration that is often simplified and which, in turn, simplifies the in‐stream morphology and habitats. More variable in‐stream morphology develops in irregular planforms which are also more common in nature. Tools and methods for designing complex planforms and associated bed morphology have developed, but further innovation is needed to meet interdisciplinary objectives in the planning phase of design. Here, we present a flexible approach for assessing surface‐form complexity of planform and in‐channel morphology as part of a move to geomorphically‐based urban riverscape design to accommodate urbanized channel changes within the overall interdisciplinary framework and to increase overall riverscape amenity. Our approach uses River Builder software for deriving 3D rivers based on hydro‐morphodynamics and applies the Geomorphic Form Variation (GFV) approach as a measure of geomorphic complexity for collaborative urbanized stream planning. Assessment of planform variable inputs showed a strong control on in‐channel morphology, and GFV showed that form complexity increases with higher width variability, stream bank roughness, and meander bend frequencies and curvatures.

show abstract

Measuring geomorphology in river assessment procedures 2: Recommendations for supporting river management goals

Cited by 3 publications

References 199 publications

Measuring geomorphology in river assessment procedures 1: A global overview of current practices

Measuring geomorphology in river assessment procedures 1: A global overview of current practices

Evaluating river morphology change with a geomorphic form variation approach

Urbanized stream restoration as designed adaptation: Planning using synthetic digital rivers and form variation assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About