Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />River-Floodplain Environments <br /> <br />Because of strong economic, political, and social pressures from humans <br />for multiple use of large river-floodplain systems for hydroelectric power, <br />agriculture, industry, and municipal uses, it is doubtful that restoration of <br />rivers (Le., return to a truly original state) (Bradshaw, 1996) is possible. <br />However, it is possible to mitigate (Le., to moderate), to remediate (Le., to <br />rectify), or to enhance (Le., to improve) environmental conditions in a river <br />ecosystem (Stanford et aI., 1996). Any habitat enhancement of structure <br />and function of river-floodplain ecosystems will allow improvement of <br />environmental integrity (Stanford et aI., 1996; Poff et aI., 1997). <br />Although regulated rivers may be hydraulically optimum for human <br />needs, they are poor ecological systems compared with unaltered rivers. <br />Attempts to enhance or restore ecologically degraded river ecosystems <br />are expensive and often cannot entirely restore all natural ecological <br />conditions (Petts, 1994). Human cultural characteristics, values, percep- <br />tions, attitudes, and responses to flooding vary considerably in different <br />parts of the world (White, 1974; Laituri, Chapter 17, this volume) and <br />exclusion of sustainable use of water resources by humans will prob- <br />ably result in failure to maintain or enhance the ecological integrity of <br />aquatic systems (Cairns, 1995). Gore and Shields (1995) provided an ex- <br />ample of constructing setback levees along the Danube River in the Czech <br />Republic that provided human safety while recovering some ecologi- <br />cal function and value of floodplain habitat. In another example, Heiler <br />et aI. (1995) describe how hydrological connectivity and flood pulses will <br />be restored in a free-flowing reach of the Danube River, downstream of <br />Vienna, Austria, as the basis for ecosystem management for a natipnal <br />park. <br />Power et aI. (1995a) pointed out that flooding in the Mississippi River <br />. during 1993 "rekindled the national debate [in the United States] over what <br />is to be gained by increasing the height and extent of levees and what has <br />been lost." Aquatic ecosystem management should focus on guiding nat- <br />ural processes of streamflow, erosion, sedimentation, and seasonal flood <br />pulses when making decisions related to river management (Sparks, 1995; <br />Poff et al., 1997). Sparks (1995) stated that "Ecosystem management could <br />actually save money and increase economic efficiency in the long run, be- <br />cause natural functions are restored (e.g., flood storage, conveyance, and <br />moderation; water purification; production of fish and wildlife; and preser- <br />vation of biodiversity) instead of being maintained by human intervention <br />at great cost and considerable risk of failure." Re-regulation of streamflows <br />and reconnection of floodplains, at least periodically, could reestablish <br />some ecological integrity of river-floodplain ecosystems without signifi- <br />cantly compromising human uses (Stanford et aI., 1996). <br />Management decisions related to river-floodplain management must <br />be made with full consideration of the ecological, economical, political, <br />and sociological factors (Table 9.8) to reduce conflicts' and avoid polariza- <br />tion of issues regarding human use of water resources and preservation <br />of aquatic systems (Brown, 1992). Effective management of multiple-use <br />rivers through more effective communication among the public, planners, <br />politicians, engineers, and ecologists can benefit people as well as the <br />ecological function and integrity of aquatic systems (Brown, 1992; Hey, <br />1994). Although uncertainty exists with every management decision be- <br />cause all information required for optimal management decisions usually <br /> <br />259 <br /> <br />