Natural Channel Systems Initiative
ONTARIO RIVERS ALLIANCE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING
North Bay, OntarioOctober 17, 2015
Presented By:
Mariëtte Pushkar, M.Sc., P.Geo
NCS Committee Members Frequency of meeting Conferences Longer term view
OVERVIEW Natural Channel Systems Initiative Adaptive Management of Stream Corridors Regulatory Agency Roles and Challenges Natural Channel Design Watercourse Restoration and Dam removals
Where did it begin?
We have had great ideas for how to manage our watercourses.
Until there were unanticipated consequences…..
Our ‘GREAT’ Ideas… Reservoirs:
Dilute pollutants – improve water quality! Increase flow in river – bring back the big trout!
Road/Rail Crossings What is the smallest
pipe that we can use to get the flow through?
Route flood waters out of here! Straighten creek Line creek with concrete, armourstone
Put it into pipes and discharge into the rivers
Drainage density:1956 = 1.00 km/km2
2003 = 0.71 km/km2
Stormwater runoff into outfalls
Increased magnitude of peak flows
Increased volume of runoff
UhOh….
Stormwater Management Ponds
Exposed Infrastructure
We learned:
Loss of channel length has implications Altered hydrology
Creek and habitat implications Erosion control is not only answer Channel functions impaired
Loss of morphology (habitat) Incision Channel type is out of balance
We Learned: Aquatic
Impediment to fish passage
Water depth Flow velocity Habitat diversity
Impaired ecological functions Disconnected floodplain
Loss of vegetation
It wasn’t working….
Traditional Stream System Management
Uniform solutions cannot be applied to all stream systems (scale and type of disturbance)
Single objective planning driven by statutory requirements
Lack of integration Dynamic systems
“WE CANNOT SOLVE TODAY’S PROBLEMS
WITH THE SAME LEVEL OF THINKING
THAT CREATED THEM.”
Albert Einstein
We needed a new direction !!
Natural Channel Systems (NCS) Initiative
NATURAL CHANNEL SYSTEMS
DEFINITION“An approach by which existing stable
channels, or new and rehabilitated stream channels and their associated floodplain riparian systems, are managed and designed to be naturally functional, stable, healthy, productive and sustainable.”
Future Management Philosophy And Direction Emphasis on low maintenance and natural systems to maximum extent possible
These represent the lowest long‐term life cycle cost Implementation of range and multiplicity of solutions, management activities to limit landuse impacts on streams
Realization that the approach will include a range of solutions depending on constraints
Natural Channel Systems Not a new concept:
1964 – Fluvial Processes in Geomorphology by Leopold, Wolman and Miller
1967 – Introduction to Fluvial Geomorphology in White and Bryndilson
1990 – 6th North American Trout Stream Improvement workshop
1991-1993 – Rosgen Introduction Course to River Dynamics
1995 – Newbury Courses established
Context 1970’s – late 1980’s –biologists and engineers often at odds using very different, unrelated approaches
1988 Floodplain Management Policy Watershed Management ‐ Ecosystem Approach Strategic Plan for Ontario Fisheries (SPOF) and SPOF II ‐Protect/rehabilitate
MNR role in FA s. 35 Lakes Rivers and Improvement Act (LRIA) and CA Act applications
Need to integrate the disciplines, engineering, geomorphology and biology in the management of rivers and their corridors
Evolution of NCS Initiative 1992- MNR creation of public/private
Professional committee to develop initiative
1994 – Publication of “Blue Book” FEEDBACK:
Good conceptual basis for integration, BUT!! How process could be applied to engineered solutions
lacks technical direction does not facilitate meaningful inter-
disciplinary interaction
Evolution of Phase 1 1994 – Phase II initiated 1994 - 1st International Natural
Channel Systems Conference 1996 – Phase II Status Report 1999 – 2nd International Natural
Channel Systems Conference 2002 – Stream Corridor Manual 2004 – 3rd International NCS Conf. 2010 – 4th International NCS Conf. 2016…..
THE NCS INITIATIVE OBJECTIVES?OBJECTIVES1. Incorporate principles of natural form and function in
stream corridor management2. Promote rigorous interdisciplinary and integrative
planning and design3. Apply an Adaptive Environmental Management
approach
OVERALL GOAL: To achieve stream corridors with maximum natural function and minimum maintenance
The NCS Stream Corridor Approach The NCS Stream Corridor Approach
The Watershed approach ensures an understanding of Cause:Response at three controlling biophysical:biochemical scales within Watersheds
This approach helps to provide an integrative interpretation of the responses observed within the watershed and stream corridor
Works within two contextual frameworks: the Watershed Hierarchy and the Interdisciplinary/Integrative Interaction
SYSTEMSYSTEM
PLAN FORM
PROFILE
FEATURE
WATERSHEDWATERSHED
REACHREACH
SITESITE
BROADBROAD
NARROW
Proactive Science/Management Tools
General Watershed wide tools – Watershed Resource Planning
Community‐based Fisheries Planning on a Watershed Basis;
Subwatershed Planning and Analysis;
Valley Segment Classification/ Stream Corridor Management;
Riparian Corridor Management;
Reach Level Community‐based Management;
Subdivision Level – (e.g. OMOE BMP for stormwater)
Local restoration and awareness;
Natural Channel Systems Initiative
Stream corridors are the backbone of our Natural Heritage System in Ontario in general, and specifically in the settled landscapes of southern Ontario. These systems are in many cases being altered, changed and damaged by ongoing landuses and new developments. If we wish to protect and restore the biodiversity of our landscape systems, stream corridor management and restoration will be critical.
(NCS, 2005 discussion paper)
Focus Areas in the Industry: Storm water management
Reducing impact to receiving watercourse Hydrograph replication
Replicating surface drainage network functions Fish habitat recovery for Species‐at‐Risk (SAR) Span of bridges/culverts
Adaptive Management of Stream Corridors
Creating A Tool For Practitioners
Re-establishment of functional stream corridors Guide application and practice Discuss complexity of issues Legal framework Integration of disciplines Emerging trends Research needs
Check resource link at:www.naturalchannels.cawww.conservation‐ontario.on.ca
• Ministry of Natural Resources
• 2002 release
• For anyone involved in stream corridor work:• Proponents
(municipal etc.)• Practitioner• Reviewer
But seldom explicitly required!
OVERVIEW 7 Planning Stages
o Stages 1 – 3: 9 Steps of Analyses/Evaluations
4 Analytical Phases (assess, explore, confirm, choose)
Method formalizes what practitioners should do
Nine Steps in Four Phases through Three Stages!
Detailed step by step process is articulated to provide a framework of:
WHO DOES WHAT
And
WHO PROVIDES INFO TO WHOM
Each step in the design and planning process provides information to aid in integration.
Development of a clearly defined interactive process for analyzing stream ecosystems and determining their relative biophysical health
Is it Useful? Benefits of the 9 Step Process:
o Cause common way of thinking amongst practitionerso The stages, phases and steps present a logical process to follow that ensures that nothing is missed or glossed over: forces getting all evidence together and doing a thorough "gap analysis"
forces collecting the right information, suited to the nature of the problem
forces the data collection, field work and assessment to look upstream and downstream (offsite) and appropriately consider offsite implications
Limitationso Proper study requires time and financial resources City/agency data
o Refer to the process explicitly in RFP
The NCS Initiative objectives?OBJECTIVES1. Incorporate principles of natural form and function in
stream corridor management2. Promote rigorous interdisciplinary and integrative
planning and design3. Apply an Adaptive Environmental Management
approach
OVERALL GOAL: To achieve stream corridors with maximum natural function and minimum maintenance
Objective 1: Incorporate principles of natural form and function in stream corridor management✔Now incorporated into most river
engineering and restoration projects
✔Encouraged and/or required by federal, provincial and local regulatory agencies
✔Applied fluvial geomorphology is an active consulting sector
✔No longer need to argue benefits of NCS vs. historic approaches
Objective 2: Rigorous interdisciplinary and integrative planning and design✔Geomorphic and ecological
considerations are included in most designs
✔Project teams are often multidisciplinary
✖Practitioners and teams have inconsistent qualifications
✖Design rationale and process are poorly documented
✖Many process steps are omitted or incomplete
Objective 3: Apply an Adaptive Environmental Management (AEM) approach✖Projects and pre-construction
condition are poorly documented
✖Substantive long-term monitoring is non-existent
✖Project performance is not assessed beyond 1-3 years
✖No responsibility for long-term maintenance and repair
✖Project results are not reported to the community of practice
ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT:A REMINDER
Adaptive Management:A Reminder
“Stream projects are designed with prior knowledge that they are experimental, risky, or may require modification later. Monitoring is the only means by which such adaptive projects can be implemented with confidence and accountability.”
-Adaptive Management of Stream Corridors in Ontario, 2001
Regulatory Agenciesinvolved with NCD and NCS
Regulatory Agencies /Process/Mandates DFO – Federal MOE – Provincial MNRF – Provincial – SAR, dam removal Conservation Authorities – Provincial/Municipal MTO – navigable waters First Nations Minister of Culture and Heritage – Archaeology Phase 1 and/or 2 assessments.
Fisheries and Oceans Canada Fisheries Act (Section 35)
35. (1) No person shall carry on any work, undertaking or activity that results in serious harm to fish that are part of a commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fishery, or to fish that support such a fishery.
Serious Harm: “the death of fish or any permanent alteration to, or destruction of, fish habitat”.
Fisheries and Oceans Canada Emergency Authorization (national security, national emergency, risk to public health or safety or to the environment or property)
Self Assessment process – Pathway of Effects Authorization (Paragraph 35(2)(b) Fisheries Act Authorization from the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans) to ensure compliance with the Act
Ministry of Natural Resources and Forests Endangered Species Act, 2007, S.O. 2007, c. 6 The purposes of this Act are:
1. To identify species at risk based on the best available scientific information, including information obtained from community knowledge and aboriginal traditional knowledge.
2. To protect species that are at risk and their habitats, and to promote the recovery of species that are at risk.
3. To promote stewardship activities to assist in the protection and recovery of species that are at risk. 2007, c. 6, s. 1.
9) No person shall, (a) kill, harm, harass, capture or take a living member of a species that is listed on the Species at Risk in Ontario List as an extirpated, endangered or threatened species;
10. (1) No person shall damage or destroy the habitat of, (a) a species that is listed on the Species at Risk in Ontario List as an endangered or threatened species; or
(b) a species that is listed on the Species at Risk in Ontario List as an extirpated species, if the species is prescribed by the regulations for the purpose of this clause. 2007, c. 6, s. 10 (1).
Avoid Authorization Timing of work, location of work, method
Authorizations (permit, agreement, exemption) required when there is potential to:
harm or harass a species at risk, or damage or destroy its habitat Assist in protection or recovery of the species Overall benefit will b e achieved Best management practices to reduce impact have been used
Reasonable alternatives have been developed and best one is implemented
Protection of human health and safety http://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/07e06#BK2 http://www.ontario.ca/page/how‐get‐endangered‐species‐act‐permit‐or‐authorization
Conservation Authorities Watershed based Participating municipalities 20. (1) The objects of an authority are to establish and undertake, in the area over which it has jurisdiction, a program designed to further the conservation, restoration, development and management of natural resources other than gas, oil, coal and minerals. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.27, s. 20.
21. (1) For the purposes of accomplishing its objects, an authority has power,(a) to study and investigate the watershed and to determine a program whereby the natural resources of the watershed may be conserved, restored, developed and managed;(i) to erect works and structures and create reservoirs by the construction of dams or otherwise;(j) to control the flow of surface waters in order to prevent floods or pollution or to reduce the adverse effects thereof;(k) to alter the course of any river, canal, brook, stream or watercourse, and divert or alter, as well temporarily as permanently, the course of any river, stream, road, street or way, or raise or sink its level in order to carry it over or under, on the level of or by the side of any work built or to be built by the authority, and to divert or alter the position of any water-pipe, gas-pipe, sewer, drain or any telegraph, telephone or electric wire or pole;
Natural Channel Design (NCD)
Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function-Based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects.
US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843-K-12-006.
Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function-Based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects.
US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843-K-12-006.
Practitioners and Role
Regulatory Bodies for Practitioners Engineer
P.Eng – Professional Engineers of Ontario (PEO) Geomorphologist
P.Geo – Association of Professional Geoscientists of Ontario (APGO)
P.GEO – what does professionalism mean (D. Hunt, APGO president) Minister of Northern Development and Mines ‐ has deemed that geoscientist will be a regulated profession in order to protect the public and the environment.The Professional Geoscientist’s Act, 2000, defines the Practice of Professional Geoscience as such: “An individual practices professional geoscience when he or she performs an activity that requires the knowledge, understanding and application of the principles of geoscience and that concerns the safeguarding of the welfare of the public or the safeguarding of life, health or property including the natural environment.”
The intent of this definition is quite clear: professionalism begins where our science intersects with its effect on the public and the environment. The commercial actualization of what we do as scientists is where our professionalism comes into play.
Many geoscientists feel that being a professional is an inconvenient and unnecessary imposition on their work. But much of what we do in the course of our business is not the pure, or even applied science of dealing with geology; it involves advising our employers and clients about the regulatory and social licence environment, and then steering them through it successfully.
NCD Applications Erosion Mitigation – protect private property Development – Urban, Mining Dam Removal Opportunities
Restore geomorphic function (length, morphology) Remove impediments to fish passage Enhance aquatic habitat – deeper pools, vegetation planting
Constraints Tie‐in points Corridor width
Overview of Channel Restoration Meander Belt
Lateral expression of planform configuration on the floodplain
Channel Configuration Planform Profile Section Substrate
Floodplain Connectivity
Dam Mitigation
Decommissioning of the Wards Pond dam, while maintaining the structure and offline wetlands, enabled the surrounding community to maintain their recreation, historic and aesthetic objectives, while water quality and fish habitat along Strasburg Creek will also improve.
The trout came back !
Brigadoon Pond
Final Thoughts
Top Related