My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD09734
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
FLOOD09734
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 10:10:19 AM
Creation date
10/5/2006 4:36:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Routt
Community
Routt County
Stream Name
Elk River
Basin
Yampa/White
Title
Streambank Erosion Study Elk River
Date
11/1/1988
Prepared For
Routt County
Prepared By
USDA Soil Conservation Service
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.
/
62
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 />.CONCLUSIONS & RECOHij~EJ~DATIONS <br /> <br />Based upon the staffs field inspection of the total <br />river reach and study of four site" the following <br />conclusions have been reached. <br /> <br />1. Dedication of riparian zones along river banks <br />wi I I reduce much of the damage associated with streambank <br />erosion. The root system developed from trees and brush <br />along the streambank provide protection from the cutting <br />action of water flowing against the banks, Protection from <br />bank sloughing wi I I also be obtain.d. <br /> <br />Other benefits, such as increasEld wi Idl ife habitat, <br />incl"eased numbers of all wi Idl ife, and dive,"sity of scenery, <br />wi II also be real ized from riparian >:ones, These zones wi II <br />also move the high value agricultural crops away from the <br />streambanks, therefore, reducing the I ikel ihood of damage to <br />.chese crops, <br /> <br />Where eligible, landowners can r.eceive assistance <br />through the Conservation Reserve Program CCRP) administered <br />by the Agricultural Stabi I ization and Conservation Service <br />CASCS) to develop a 66 to 99 foot wide riparian zone along <br />streams or water bodies. To be eligible, the land I",ould <br />have had to be used to produce agricultural commodities 2 of <br />the 5 years between 1981 and 1985, F~enta I payments for 1.0 <br />years are offered as an incentive to convert the cropland to <br />grass or trees. <br /> <br />Riparian zones wi I I provide <br />frequency flows. However, large <br />erosion which wi I I destroy them, <br />rooted trees can block the channal <br />cutting. <br /> <br />pr.otectiol' from the lower <br />flows can produce bank <br />Wh.n this happens, the up- <br />aid caU5Et add i t i Clna I bank <br /> <br />2. This study recommends the formation of a state <br />coordinator position. The need for 3 person to coordinate <br />activities relating to stream channal improvements was <br />identified. Many examples of work being done without <br />consideration of the effects, both upstream and downstream, <br />were noted during the study. This showed the lack of <br />knowledge about river mechanics and flow patterns by the <br />people doing the work, <br /> <br />The coordinator should be someone that landowners <br />could ask for advice about the effmcts of work in streams <br />before construction is started, Th,. coordirlator could <br />provide the assistance or direct the landowner to an agency <br />that could help. This would not replace the U.S. Army, <br />Corps of Engineers, Section 404 permitting process, but the <br />coordinator could provide assistane., to st,"eamli". the <br />process, <br /> <br />27 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.