The State of the Science and Practice of Stream Restoration in the Chesapeake: Lessons Learned to Inform Better Implementation, Assessment and Outcomes

March 21, 2023 - March 23, 2023
Woodbridge, VA

This workshop convened in-person on Tuesday-Thursday, March 21-23, 2023 at GMU’s Potomac Science Center in Woodbridge, VA.

Workshop Save the Date: Stream Restoration Save the Date

The Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC) hosted a three-day workshop to bring together the scientific and management communities to synthesize our understanding of practices, assessment approaches, and ecosystem outcomes in order to inform and improve stream restoration practices.

Workshop Objectives: 

The overall purpose of the workshop was to bring together a diverse cross-section of experts and stakeholders in the field of stream restoration to review and distill lessons learned from past stream corridor restoration projects to improve restoration outcomes. For the purposes of this workshop, stream restoration was broadly defined as an intervention to move a degraded ecosystem to a trajectory of recovery as informed by a reference condition considering local and global environmental change. The scope of the workshop includes the riparian area. The workshop focused on three topics:

  1. Identify the evolution of stream restoration goals, regulations, practices and practice implementation;
  2. Present and discuss science and assessment to document holistic impacts and outcomes; and
  3. Create a synthesis of the best available science, practices and monitoring to enable adaptive management.

Since 2010, jurisdictions throughout the Chesapeake Bay Watershed (CBW) have implemented approximately 266 miles of stream restoration with an additional 84 miles planned as reported in the Phase 3 Watershed Implementation Plans. The extent of project implementation driven by nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment (N/P/sed) load reductions required by the Chesapeake Bay TMDL will result in large-scale effects on aquatic ecosystems. Although Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) expert panels have determined that stream restoration leads to N/P/sed load reductions to improve the health of the Chesapeake Bay, the effects on other local stream ecosystem attributes is less certain. Motivation for restoring streams also extends beyond load reductions and can include functional uplift to improve the status of aquatic biota and riparian corridor habitat as well as geomorphic stabilization to protect infrastructure. The rapid increases in stream restoration implementation throughout the CBW have led to growing concern and controversy about the effects of stream restoration on whole-ecosystem health and services. Although assessment of outcomes of stream restoration projects has been notoriously limited (Bernhardt et al. 2005), over time more studies have documented the results of stream restoration practices that allows the opportunity to summarize these new findings.

Improved understanding of stream restoration outcomes is directly related to the goals of multiple CBP Goal Implementation Teams (GIT), Workgroups (WG), and Outcomes. The proposed workshop will primarily benefit the Stream Health WG, Forest Buffer outcome, and Urban Stormwater WG. The Stream Health Outcome is to continually improve stream health and function throughout the watershed, and their Work Plan (2022-24) includes an action to convene a STAC workshop on stream restoration. The Forest Buffer Outcome is to continually increase the capacity of forest buffers to provide water quality and habitat benefits throughout the watershed. The Urban Stormwater WG has the goal to have all practices and controls installed to achieve the Bay’s dissolved oxygen, water clarity/SAV and chlorophyll a standards as articulated in the Chesapeake Bay TMDL document. The findings of the workshop also are relevant to the scope of the Maintain Healthy Watersheds GIT, Brook Trout Action Team, and Wetlands WG.

In addition, stakeholders throughout the Chesapeake watershed are continuing to implement large numbers of stream restoration projects. A synthesis of the state of the science and practice of stream restoration is essential to support adaptive management given the decade or more of experience with the Chesapeake Bay watershed and nationally. Through this workshop, we can reinforce communication, understanding, and development of prioritized information gaps to improve the practice of stream restoration and to suggest targeted scientific needs to support the implementation of practices that best meet stakeholder needs.

Final STAC Stream Restoration Agenda

Workshop Steering Committee: 

Presentation Slides:

Session 1: Identify the evolution of stream restoration goals, regulations, practices, and practice implementation (after 1972 Clean Water Act) 

Session 2: Present and Discuss Science and Assessment to Document Holistic Impacts and Outcomes (2010-present)

Workshop Recordings:

  • Opening Plenary: Watershed History and Evolution of Stream Degradation Patterns and Restoration
    Presented by Ellen Wohl (CSU)
  • Outcomes from Stream Restoration in the Past (pre-2010 period of Chesapeake Bay Agreement) – facilitated by Tess Thompson (VT)
    • Ecology and Water Quality speakers: Scott Stranko (MD DNR) and Bob Hilderbrand (UMCES)
      • Panelists: Nancy Roth (TetraTech), Dave Penrose (Penrose Environmental Consulting), and Solange Filoso (UMCES)
    • Stream Stabilization speaker: Rich Starr (Ecosystem Planning and Restoration)

  • Lessons Learned from the Past
    Presented by Ben Hayes (Bucknell)
  • Regulatory/Permitting and Policy: Parameters for Showing Success – facilitated by Rich Starr (Ecosystem Planning and Restoration)
    • Maryland – Denise Clearwater (MDE)
    • Virginia – Brock Reggi (VA DEQ)
    • Pennsylvania – Jefferey Hartranft (PA DEP)

  • Detailed Case Studies of Individual Stream Restoration Projects – facilitated by Chris Ruck (Fairfax County) and Joe Berg (Biohabitats)
    • Legacy Sediment – Robert Walter (Franklin & Marshall College)
    • Coastal Plain – Joe Berg (Biohabitats)
    • Urban – Josh Burch (DC DOEE)
    • Suburban – Chris Ruck (Fairfax County)

  • Restoration Outcomes and Uplift – facilitated by Sadie Drescher (Chesapeake Bay Trust)

  • Closing Plenary: The Future of Environmental Recovery is Dependent on a Paradigm Shift that Embraces the Past
    Presented by Erik Michelsen (Anne Arundel County)

For more information, please contact Meg Cole, STAC Coordinator, at colem@chesapeake.org.