File:Maudlin & Coe 2011 SF Nooksack ELJ effectiveness.pdf

Document

A document is a written record related to an effort or topic

Last Ten Documents

• Kilmer et al 2023 federal grants news.pdf
• Speybroeck et al 2006 beach nourishment coastal defense
• Kindeberg et al 2022 multifunctional nature-based coastal defense
• Shipman 2001 beach nourishment puget sound.pdf
• Johannessen & Waggoner 2008 lummi shore road monitoring.pdf
• Baker et al 2020 restoration scaling HaBREM
• WSE 2021 snohomish hydrologic and hydraulic modelling.pdf
• Booth et al 2021 lower skykomish geomorphic assessment.pdf
• RCO et al 2023 Align grant coordination MOU.pdf
• Skidmore & Wheaton 2022 riverscapes as adaptation infrastructure

• Google scholar search

Wiki Rules

• Wiki text does not reflect the policy or opinion of any agency or organization
• Please adhere to our social contract
• Complain here, and be nice.

What Links To This Page?

• Documents ‎ (← links)
• Floodplains ‎ (← links)
• Maudlin & Coe 2011 (redirect page; file link) ‎ (← links)
  • South Fork Nooksack Floodplain ‎ (← links)
  • Engineered Log Jams ‎ (← links)

Maudlin, M., and T. Coe. 2011. Effectiveness monitoring of South Fork Nooksack Instream Habitat Projects, Summer 2011. July 11, 2012. Nooksack Tribe, Natural Resources Department. Deming, WA. 63 pages.

Notes

• This report describes observations of pool formation and woody cover effectiveness at over 80 ELJs constructed on the Nooksack South Fork. In general, reach scale geomorphic functions (channel splitting, side channel activation) were less effective than jam-scale functions (pool formation). ELJs were generally stable, and causing an increase in pool structure, particularly where ELJs intrude into the active channel. Different ELJs tended to provide either pool formation or woody cover functions, and most structures provided bank protection. Pcereghino 09:52, 11 September 2012 (PDT)