My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD06908
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
FLOOD06908
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 7:10:18 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 2:35:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Statewide
Basin
Statewide
Title
State of Colorado Streambank Erosion Study
Date
11/1/1988
Prepared For
State of Colorado
Prepared By
Colorado State Soil Conservation Board
Floodplain - Doc Type
Floodplain Report/Masterplan
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
77
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />~ <br />I <br />.. <br />, <br />I <br />~ <br />~ <br />, <br />~ <br />~ <br />r <br />r <br />~ <br />i <br />r <br />~ <br />~ <br />I <br /> <br />TREATMENT EXAMPLES <br /> <br />A stream should be considered as a del icately balanced <br />mechanism that is gradually maturing. Naturally, landowners <br />and local governments would I ike to find a stream in a wel 1- <br />balanced condition with smooth, gentle bends, well-vegetated <br />banks free from erosion or fai lure, and a channel bed that <br />is neither scouring nor bui lding up with sediment. A <br />stream, I ike the plants and animals that I ive near the <br />stream, must continually adjust to new impacts in order to <br />maintain its balance. These impacts are not only caused by <br />man's activities but are also natural in orgin resulting <br />from the maturing process of the stream. When the balance <br />is upset, the stream wi I I respond by some compensating <br />action to bring the stream system back into balance. The <br />most common compensating actions are streambank erosion and <br />bed scour or bui Idup. <br /> <br />Landowners and local governments must real ize that most <br />streams are in a continuing state of adjustment (although <br />possibly changing very slowly as compared with the human <br />I ifespan as the stream attempts to compensate for an <br />imbalance at one location by making changes at other <br />locations. Further, when some form of bank protection is <br />put into p I ace the stream will respond to th i s change. The <br />response may be insignificant or it could be as serious as <br />transferring the erosion or fai lure problem to a bank <br />downstream. Thus, protection of a bank should be taken <br />seriously, not only in I ight of successfully protecting the <br />bank, but also considering the impact of the bank protection <br />on the entire stream system. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Streambank protection practices are generally used in <br />reaches of a stream which have a stable channel bottom. If <br />the channel bottom is not stable, other types of practices <br />may be more beneficial. streambank protection practices are <br />used to keep a streambank from eroding and causing meanders <br />in a stream. Some of these types of practices can also be <br />used to help heal existing meanders by slowing the velocity <br />and allowing sedimentations to occur in the eroded area. <br /> <br />( <br />~ <br /> <br />The practices described in the following pages [see <br />"Summary of Practices" TABLE 4] are some types of measures <br />which can be used to protect streambanks. Also included are <br />measures that were not considered, in this study, yet may be <br />a possible solution to streambank problems. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />39 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.