Abstract

Stream restoration for mitigation purposes has grown rapidly since the 1980s. As the science advances, some organizations (Chesapeake Bay Program, North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality) have approved or are considering providing nutrient credits for stream restoration projects. Nutrient treatment on floodplains during overbank events is one of the least understood processes that have been considered as part of the Chesapeake Bay Program’s Stream Restoration Nutrient Crediting program. This study analyzed ten years of streamflow and water quality data from five stations in the Piedmont of North Carolina to evaluate proposed procedures for estimating nitrogen removal on the floodplain during overbank flow events. The volume of floodplain flow, the volume of floodplain flow potentially treated, and the nitrogen load retained on the floodplain were calculated for each overbank event, and a sensitivity analysis was completed. On average, 9% to 15% of the total annual streamflow volume accessed the floodplain. The percentage of the average annual volume of streamflow potentially treated ranged from 1.0% to 5.1%. Annually, this equates to 0.2% to 1.0% of the total N load retained/removed on the floodplain following restoration. The relatively low nitrogen retention/removal rates were due to a majority of floodplain flow occurring during a few large events each year that exceeded the treatment capacity of the floodplain. On an annual basis, 90% of total floodplain flow occurred during half of all overbank events and 50% of total floodplain flow occurred during two to three events each year. Findings suggest that evaluating only overbank events may lead to undervaluing stream restoration because treatment is limited by hydrologic controls that restrict floodplain retention time. Treatment is further governed by floodplain and channel size.

Highlights

  • Stream restoration has expanded rapidly over the last four decades into a billion-dollar industry, with thousands of streams restored annually in the U.S [1]

  • Quantify the uncertainty associated with these parameters, a sensitivity analysis was conducted on nitrogen Table treatment efficiency floodplain and floodplain treatment depth

  • The results of this study indicate that the potential for nitrogen treatment on the floodplain during overbank flow events, as the result of stream restoration, is limited in the urban environment because of hydrologic regimes that limit retention time and route flow though the floodplain with minimal contact time

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Stream restoration has expanded rapidly over the last four decades into a billion-dollar industry, with thousands of streams restored annually in the U.S [1]. Water 2020, 12, 1568 have adopted or are developing nutrient credits for stream restoration to help meet watershed nutrient reduction goals (e.g., the Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) and the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality). The CBP considers three components that contribute to nutrient reduction/removal credits for stream restoration: (Protocol 1) a reduction in sediment loads as a result of bank stabilization, (Protocol 2) treatment in the stream hyporheic zone during baseflow and (Protocol 3) treatment on the floodplain during overbank events resulting from floodplain reconnection. While the benefits of a reduction in sediment loading due to bank stabilization and treatment in the hyporheic zone are well-studied and relatively quantifiable, there is a lack of information on the capacity of stream restoration projects to treat nitrogen on the floodplain during overbank flow events

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call