Environmental Management

, Volume 42, Issue 2, pp 310–326 | Cite as

Rehabilitating Agricultural Streams in Australia with Wood: A Review

  • Rebecca E. LesterEmail author
  • Andrew J. Boulton


Worldwide, the ecological condition of streams and rivers has been impaired by agricultural practices such as broadscale modification of catchments, high nutrient and sediment inputs, loss of riparian vegetation, and altered hydrology. Typical responses include channel incision, excessive sedimentation, declining water quality, and loss of in-stream habitat complexity and biodiversity. We review these impacts, focusing on the potential benefits and limitations of wood reintroduction as a transitional rehabilitation technique in these agricultural landscapes using Australian examples. In streams, wood plays key roles in shaping velocity and sedimentation profiles, forming pools, and strengthening banks. In the simplified channels typical of many agricultural streams, wood provides habitat for fauna, substrate for biofilms, and refuge from predators and flow extremes, and enhances in-stream diversity of fish and macroinvertebrates.

Most previous restoration studies involving wood reintroduction have been in forested landscapes, but some results might be extrapolated to agricultural streams. In these studies, wood enhanced diversity of fish and macroinvertebrates, increased storage of organic material and sediment, and improved bed and bank stability. Failure to meet restoration objectives appeared most likely where channel incision was severe and in highly degraded environments. Methods for wood reintroduction have logistical advantages over many other restoration techniques, being relatively low cost and low maintenance. Wood reintroduction is a viable transitional restoration technique for agricultural landscapes likely to rapidly improve stream condition if sources of colonists are viable and water quality is suitable.


Large woody debris Coarse woody debris Ecological rehabilitation Stream restoration Agricultural impacts Wood reintroduction 



This review was written as part of the senior author’s Ph.D. studies, supported by a scholarship from the School of Applied Sciences and Engineering, Monash University and in-kind support from the Department of Primary Industries, Ellinbank. We thank Dr. Wendy Wright and Dr. Nick Bond, R. Lester’s thesis examiners, and four anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript.


  1. Abbe TB, Montgomery DR (1996) Large woody debris jams, channel hydraulics and habitat formation in large rivers. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 12:201–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allan JD (2004) Landscapes and riverscapes: the influence of land use on stream ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 35:257–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anbumozhi V, Radhakrishnan J, Yamaji E (2005) Impact of riparian buffer zones on water quality. Ecological Engineering 24:517–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson NH, Sedell JR, Roberts LM, Triska FJ (1978) The role of aquatic invertebrates in processing of wood debris in coniferous forest streams. American Midland Naturalist 100:64–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Angermeier PL, Karr JR (1984) Relationships between woody debris and fish habitat in a small warmwater stream. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:716–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Benke AC, Van TC Arsdall Jr, Gillespie DM, Parrish FK (1984) Invertebrate productivity in a subtropical blackwater river: the importance of habitat and life history. Ecological Monographs 54:25–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Benke AC, Wallace JB (2003) Influence of wood on invertebrate communities in streams and rivers. In: Gregory SV, Boyer KL, Gurnell AM (eds) The ecology and management of wood in world rivers. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD, pp 149–177Google Scholar
  8. Bennett AF, Mac Nally R (2004) Identifying priority areas for conservation in agricultural landscapes. Pacific Conservation Biology 10:106–123Google Scholar
  9. Bilby RE, Likens GE (1980) Importance of organic debris dams in the structure and function of stream ecosystems. Ecology 61:1107–1113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bilby RE, Ward JW (1991) Characteristics and function of large woody debris in streams draining old-growth, clear-cut, and 2nd-growth forests in southwestern Washington. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 48:2499–2508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blinn DW, Halse SA, Pinder AM, Shiel RJ, McRae JM (2004) Diatom and micro-invertebrate communities and environmental determinants in the western Australian wheatbelt: a response to salinization. Hydrobiologia 528:229–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bond NR, Lake PS (2003) Characterizing fish-habitat associations in streams as the first step in ecological restoration. Austral Ecology 28:611–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bond NR, Lake PS (2005) Ecological restoration and large-scale ecological disturbance: the effects of drought on the response by fish to a habitat restoration experiment. Restoration Ecology 13:39–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Boulton AJ (2007) Hyporheic rehabilitation in rivers: restoring vertical connectivity. Freshwater Biology 52:632–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Boulton AJ, Brock MA (1999) Australian freshwater ecology: processes and management. Gleneagles Publishing, Glen Osmond, South AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  16. Boulton AJ, Williams WD (1996) Aquatic biota. In: Twidale CR, Tyler MJ, Davies M (eds) The natural history of the Flinders Ranges. Royal Society of South Australia, Adelaide, pp 102–112Google Scholar
  17. Boutin C, Jobin B, Belanger L (2003) Importance of riparian habitats to flora conservation in farming landscapes of southern Quebec, Canada. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 94:73–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Brock MA, Smith RGB, Jarman PJ (1999) Drain it, dam it: alteration of water regime in shallow wetlands on the New England Tableland of New South Wales, Australia. Wetlands Ecology and Management 7:37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Brooks A (1999) Large woody debris and the geomorphology of a perennial river in southeast Australia. In: Rutherfurd ID, Bartley R (eds) Second Australian stream management conference proceedings: the challenge of rehabilitating Australia’s streams. Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology, Adelaide, pp 129–136Google Scholar
  20. Brooks AP, Abbe TB, Jansen JD, Taylor M, and Gippel CJ (2001) Putting the wood back into our rivers: an experiment in river rehabilitation. In: Rutherfurd ID, Sheldon F, Brierley G, and Kenyon C (eds) Third Australian stream management conference proceedings: the value of healthy streams. Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology, Brisbane, pp 73–80Google Scholar
  21. Brooks AP, Brierley GJ, Millar RG (2003) The long-term control of vegetation and woody debris on channel and flood-plain evolution: insights from a paired catchment study in southeastern Australia. Geomorphology 51:7–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Brooks AP, Gerhrke PC, Jansen JD, Abbe TB (2004) Experimental reintroduction of woody debris on the Williams River, NSW: geomorphic and ecological responses. River Research and Applications 20:513–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Buckley BM, Triska FJ (1978) Presence and ecological role of nitrogen-fixing bacteria associated with wood decay in streams. Verhandlungen Internationale Vereinigung fur Theroetische und Angewandte Limnologie 20:1333–1339Google Scholar
  24. Bunn SE, Davies PM, Winning M (2003) Sources of organic carbon supporting the food web of an arid zone floodplain river. Freshwater Biology 48:619–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Carline RF, Walsh MC (2007) Responses to riparian restoration in the Spring Creek Watershed, Central Pennsylvania. Restoration Ecology 15:731–742Google Scholar
  26. Chapman DW, Knudsen E (1980) Channelization and livestock impacts on salmonid habitat and biomass in western Washington. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 109:357–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Cherry J, Beschta RL (1989) Coarse woody debris and channel morphology: a flume study. Water Resources Bulletin 25:1031–1306Google Scholar
  28. Chin A, Daniels MD, Urban MA et al (2008) Perceptions of wood in rivers and challenges for stream restoration in the United States. Environmental Management 41:893–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Coleman R (2006) Ecological and physical responses to large woody debris reintroduction in the Little Yarra River, Victoria, Australia. MSc thesis, Monash University, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  30. Collares-Pereira MJ, Cowz IG (2004) The role of catchment scale environmental management in freshwater fish conservation. Fisheries Management and Ecology 11:303–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Collier KJ, Halliday JN (2000) Macroinvertebrate-wood associations during decay of plantation pine in New Zealand pumice-bed streams: stable habitat or trophic subsidy? Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19:94–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Comoss EJ, Kelly DA, Leslie HZ (2002) Innovative erosion control involving the beneficial use of dredge material, indigenous vegetation and landscaping along the Lake Erie shoreline. Ecological Engineering 19:203–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Cornish PM (2001) The effects of roading, harvesting and forest regeneration on streamwater turbidity levels in a moist eucalypt forest. Forest Ecology and Management 152:293–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Correll DL (2005) Principles of planning and establishment of buffer zones. Ecological Engineering 24:433–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Coysh J, Nichols S, Ransom G et al (2000) AUStralian RIVer Assessment System (AusRivAS) national river health program predictive model manual. Cooperative Research Centre for Freshwater Ecology, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  36. Crispin V, House R, Roberts D (1993) Changes in instream habitat, large woody debris and salmon habitat after the restructuring of a coastal Oregon stream. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 13:96–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Crook DA, Robertson AI (1999) Relationships between riverine fish and woody debris: implications for lowland rivers. Marine and Freshwater Research 50:941–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Davies NM, Norris RH, Thoms MC (2000) Prediction and assessment of local stream habitat features using large-scale catchment characteristics. Freshwater Biology 45:343–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Donnelly TH, Grace MR, Hart BT (1997) Algal blooms in the Darling-Barwon River, Australia. Water, Air and Soil Pollution 99:487–496Google Scholar
  40. Downes BJ, Lake PS, Glaister A, Bond NR (2006) Effects of sand sedimentation on the macroinvertebrate fauna of lowland streams: are the effects consistent? Freshwater Biology 51:144–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Erskine W (1994) River response to accelerated soil erosion in the Glenelg River catchment, Victoria. Australian Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 7:39–47Google Scholar
  42. Erskine WD, Webb AA (2003) Desnagging to resnagging: new directions in river rehabilitation in southeastern Australia. River Research and Applications 19:233–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Finlayson BL, McMahon TA (1988) Australia v the world: a comparative analysis of streamflow characteristics. In: Warner RF (ed) Fluvial geomorphology of Australia. Academic Press, Marrickville, NSW, pp 17–40Google Scholar
  44. Fisher SG, Likens GE (1973) Energy flow in Bear Brook, New Hampshire: an integrative approach to stream ecosystem metabolism. Ecological Monographs 43:421–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Gerhard M, Reich M (2000) Restoration of streams with large wood: effects of accumulated and built-in wood on channel morphology, habitat diversity and aquatic fauna. International Review of Hydrobiology 85:123–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Gerard PW (1995) Agricultural practices, farm policy and the conservation of biological diversity. USDI Biological Sciences Report No 4, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  47. Gillespie GR (2002) Impacts of sediment loads, tadpole density, and food type on the growth and development of tadpoles of the spotted tree frog Litoria spenceri: an in-stream experiment. Biological Conservation 106:141–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Gippel CJ, Finlayson BL, O’Neill IC (1996) Distribution and hydraulic significance of large woody debris in a lowland Australian river. Hydrobiologia 318:179–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Gippel CJ, O’Neill IC, Finlayson BL (1992) The hydraulic basis of snag management. Centre for Environmental Applied Hydrology, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  50. Growns I, Gerhrke PC, Astles KL, Pollard DA (2003) A comparison of fish assemblages associated with different riparian vegetation types in the Hawkesbury-Nepean River system. Fisheries Management and Ecology 10:209–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Gunderson DR (1968) Floodplain use related to stream morphology and fish populations. Journal of Wildlife Management 32:507–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Gurnell AM (1995) Vegetation along river corridors: hydrogeomorphological interactions. In Gurnell A, Petts G (eds) Changing river channels. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, pp 117–146Google Scholar
  53. Harmon ME, Franklin JF, Swanson FJ et al (1986) Ecology of coarse woody debris in temperate ecosystems. Advances in Ecological Research 15:133–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Harris JH, Rowland SJ (1996) Family Percichthyidae: Australian freshwater cods and basses. In: McDowall RM (ed) Freshwater fishes of south-eastern Australia. Reed Books, Chatswood, NSW, Australia pp 150–163Google Scholar
  55. Hax CL, Golladay SW (1998) Flow disturbance of macroinvertebrates inhabiting sediments and woody debris in a prairie stream. American Midland Naturalist 139:210–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Hazell D, Osborne W, Lindenmayer D (2003) Impact of post-European stream change on frog habitat: Southeastern Australia. Biodiversity and Conservation 12:301–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Hefting MM, Clement J-C, Bienkowski P et al (2005) The role of vegetation and litter in the nitrogen dynamics of riparian buffer zones in Europe. Ecological Engineering 24:465–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Hendry K, Cragg-Hine D, O’Grady M, Sambrook H, Stephen A (2003) Management of habitat for rehabilitation and enhancement of salmonid stocks. Fisheries Research 62:171–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Hester ET, Doyle MW (2008) In-stream geomorphic structures as drivers of hyporheic exchange. Water Resources Research 44:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Hilderbrand RH, Lemly AD, Dolloff CA, Harpster KL (1997) Effects of large woody debris placement on stream channels and benthic macroinvertebrates. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54:931–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Hilderbrand RH, Lemly AD, Dolloff CA, Harpster KL (1998) Design considerations for large woody debris placement in stream enhancement projects. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 18:161–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Hortle KG, Lake PS (1983) Fish of channelized and unchannelized sections of the Bunyip River Victoria Australia. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 34:441–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Hose GC, Lim RP, Hyne RV, Pablo F (2003) Short-term exposure to aqueous endosulfan affects macroinvertebrate assemblages. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 56:282–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Jansson R, Backx H, Boulton AJ et al (2005) Stating mechanisms and refining criteria for ecologically successful river restoration: a comment on Palmer et al (2005). Journal of Applied Ecology 42:218–222Google Scholar
  65. Johnson LB, Breneman DH, Richards C (2003) Macroinvertebrate community structure and function associated with large wood in low gradient streams. River Research and Applications 19:199–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Kail J, Hering D, Muhar S, Gerhard M, Preis S (2007) The use of large wood in stream restoration: experiences from 50 projects in Germany and Austria. Journal of Applied Ecology 44:1145–1155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Kasahara T, Hill AR (2007) Instream restoration: its effects on lateral stream-subsurface water exchange in urban and agricultural streams in southern Ontario. River Research and Applications 23:801–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Keller EA, Tally T (1979) Effects of large organic debris on channel form and fluvial processes in the coastal redwood environment. In: Rhodes DD, Williams GP (eds) Adjustments of the fluvial system. Kendall/Hunt Publishing, Dubuque, IA, pp 169–197Google Scholar
  69. King RD, Tyler PA (1982) Downstream effects of the Gordon River power development, south-west Tasmania. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 33:431–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Koehn J (1987) Artificial habitat increases abundance of two-spined blackfish (Gadopsis bispinosis) in Ovens River, Victoria. Technical Report Series No 56. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  71. Koehn JD, Nicol SJ, Fairbrother PS (2004) Spatial arrangement and physical characteristics of structural woody habitat in a lowland river in south-eastern Australia. Aquatic Conservation 14:457–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Koehn JD, O’Conner WG (1990) Threats to Victorian native freshwater fish. Victorian Naturalist 107:5–12Google Scholar
  73. Lake PS, Marchant R (1990) Australian upland streams: ecological degradation and possible restoration. Proceedings of the Ecological Society of Australia 16:79–91Google Scholar
  74. Land and Water Australia (2001a) Australian agriculture assessment 2001. National Land and Water Resources Audit, BraddonGoogle Scholar
  75. Land and Water Australia (2001b) Australian native vegetation assessment 2001. National Land and Water Resources Audit, BraddonGoogle Scholar
  76. Land and Water Australia (2002) Australian catchment, river and estuary assessment 2002. National Land and Water Resources Audit, BraddonGoogle Scholar
  77. Land and Water Australia (2006) Australian natural resources atlas. National Land and Water Resources Audit, BraddonGoogle Scholar
  78. Larson MG, Booth DB, Morley SA (2001) Effectiveness of large woody debris in stream rehabilitation projects in urban basins. Ecological Engineering 18:211–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Lemly AD, Hilderbrand RH (2000) Influence of large woody debris on stream insect communities and benthic detritus. Hydrobiologia 421:179–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Leonard AW, Hyne RV, Lim RP, Chapman JC (1999) Effect of endosulfan runoff from cotton fields on macroinvertebrates in the Namoi River. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. Environmental Research, Section B 42:125–134Google Scholar
  81. Lepori F, Palm D, Malmqvist B (2005) Effects of stream restoration on ecosystem functioning: detritus retentiveness and decomposition. Journal of Applied Ecology 42:228–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Lester RE, Wright W, Jones-Lennon M (2007) Does adding wood to agricultural streams enhance biodiversity? An experimental approach. Marine and Freshwater Research 58:687–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Maheshwari BL, Walker KF, McMahon TA (1995) Effects of regulation on the flow regime of the River Murray, Australia. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 10:15–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Maser C, Sedell JR (1994) From the forest to the sea: the ecology of wood in streams, rivers, estuaries and oceans. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, FLGoogle Scholar
  85. McKie B, Cranston PS (2001) Colonisation of experimentally immersed wood in south eastern Australia: responses of feeding groups to changes in riparian vegetation. Hydrobiologia 452:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. McKie B, Cranston PS (1998) Keystone coleopterans? Colonization by wood-feeding elmids of experimentally immersed woods in south-eastern Australia. Marine and Freshwater Research 49:79–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Merrick JR, Schmida GE (1984) Australian freshwater fishes: biology and management. Griffin Press, Netley, NSW, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  88. Millington CE, Sear DA (2007) Impacts of river restoration on small-wood dynamics in a low-gradient headwater stream. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 32:1204–1218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Moerke AH, Gerhard KJ, Latimore JA, Hellenthal RA, Lamberti GA (2004) Restoration of an Indiana, USA, stream: bridging the gap between basic and applied lotic ecology. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 23:647–660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Montgomery DR, Buffington JM, Smith RD, Schmidt KM, Pess G (1995) Pool spacing in forest channels. Water Resources Research 31:1097–1105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Mutz M (2000) Influences of woody debris on flow patterns and channel morphology in a low energy, sand-bed stream reach. International Review of Hydrobiology 85:107–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Myers TJ, Swanson S (1991) Aquatic habitat condition index, stream type, and livestock bank damage in northern Nevada. Water Resources Bulletin 27:667–677Google Scholar
  93. Myers TJ, Swanson S (1996) Long-term aquatic habitat restoration: Mahogany Creek, Nevada, as a case study. Water Resources Bulletin 32:241–252Google Scholar
  94. Nakamura F, Yamada H (2005) Effects of pasture development on the ecological functions of riparian forests in Hokkaido in northern Japan. Ecological Engineering 24:539–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Nilsen HC, Larimore RW (1973) Establishment of invertebrate communities on log substrates in the Kaskaskia River, Illinois. Ecology 54:366–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Norris RH, Prosser I, Young B et al (2001) The Assessment of River Condition (ARC). An audit of the ecological condition of Australian rivers. National Land and Water Resources Audit Office, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  97. O’Connor NA (1992) Quantification of submerged wood in a lowland Australian stream system. Freshwater Biology 27:387–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Palmer MA, Bernhardt ES, Allan JD et al (2005) Standards for ecologically successful river restoration. Journal of Applied Ecology 42:208–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Parkyn SM, Davies-Colley RJ, Halliday NJ, Costley KJ, Croker GF (2003) Planted riparian buffer zones in New Zealand: do they live up to expectations? Restoration Ecology 11:436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Piegay H, Mutz M, Gregory KJ et al (2005) Public perception as a barrier to introducing wood in rivers for restoration purposes. Environmental Management 36:665–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Pinder AM, Hasle SA, McRae JM, Shiel RJ (2004) Aquatic invertebrate assemblages of wetlands and rivers in the wheatbelt region of Western Australia. Records of the Western Australian Museum Supplement 67:7–37Google Scholar
  102. Platts WS, Nelson RL (1985) Stream habitat and fisheries response to livestock grazing and instream improvement structures, Big Creek, Utah. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 40:374–379Google Scholar
  103. Poff NL (1997) Landscape filters and species traits: towards mechanistic understanding and prediction in stream ecology. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16:391–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Probst M, Berenzen N, Lentzen-Godding A, Schulz R, Liess M (2005) Linking land use variables and invertebrate taxon richness in small and medium-sized agricultural streams on a landscape level. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 60:140–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Puckridge JT, Sheldon F, Walker KF, Boulton AJ (1998) Flow variability and the ecology of large rivers. Marine and Freshwater Research 49:55–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Quinn JM, Cooper AB, Davies-Colley RJ, Rutherford JC, Williamson RB (1997) Land use effects on habitat, water quality, periphyton, and benthic invertebrates in Waikato, New Zealand, hill-country streams. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 31:579–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Rasiah V, Armour JD, Menzies NW, Heiner DH, Donn MJ, Mahendrarajah S (2003) Nitrate retention under sugarcane in wet tropical Queensland deep soil profiles. Australian Journal of Soil Research 41:1145–1161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Reid N, Boulton A, Nott R, Chilcott C (1997) Ecological sustainability of grazed landscapes on the Northern Tablelands of New South Wales, Australia. In: Klomp N, Lunt I, (eds) Frontiers in ecology: building the links. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 117–130Google Scholar
  109. Reinfelds I, Rutherfurd I, Bishop P (1995) History and effects of channelisation on the Latrobe River, Victoria. Australian Geographical Studies 33:60–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Roberts BJ, Mulholland PJ, Houser JN (2007) Effects of upland disturbance and instream restoration on hydrodynamics and ammonium uptake in headwater streams. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 26:38–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Robertson AI (1997) Land-water linkages in floodplain river systems: the influence of domestic stock. In: Klomp N, Lunt I (eds) Frontiers in ecology: building the links. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 207–218Google Scholar
  112. Robertson AI, Bunn SE, Boon PI, Walker KF (1999) Sources, sinks and transformations of organic carbon in Australian floodplain rivers. Marine and Freshwater Research 50:813–829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Robertson AI, Rowling RW (2000) Effects of livestock on riparian zone vegetation in an Australian dryland river. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 16:527–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Ruprecht JK, Schofield NJ (1991) Effects of partial deforestation on hydrology and salinity in high salt storage landscapes I: Extensive block clearing. Journal of Hydrology 129:19–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Rutherford JC, Marsh NA, Davies PM, Bunn SE (2004) Effects of patchy shade on stream water temperature: how quickly do small streams heat and cool? Marine and Freshwater Research 55:737–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Rutherfurd ID, Jerie K, Marsh N (2000) A rehabilitation manual for Australian streams. CRC Catchment Hydrology and Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  117. Ryder DS, Watts RJ, Nye E, Burns A (2006) Can flow velocity regulate epixylic biofilm structure in a regulated floodplain river. Marine and Freshwater Research 57:29–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Scealy JA, Mika SJ, Boulton AJ (2007) Aquatic macroinvertebrate communities on wood in an Australian lowland river: experimental assessment of the interactions of habitat, substrate complexity and retained organic matter. Marine and Freshwater Research 58:153–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Schofield NJ, Collier KJ, Quinn JM, Sheldon F, Thoms M (2000) River conservation in Australia and New Zealand. In: Boon PJ, Davies BR, Petts GE (eds) Global perspectives on river conservation: science, policy and practice. John Wiley & Sons, London, pp 311–333Google Scholar
  120. Schriever CA, Hansler Ball M, Holmes C, Maund S, Liess M (2007) Agricultural intensity and landscape structure: influences on the macroinvertebrate assemblages of small streams in northern Germany. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 26:346–357Google Scholar
  121. Shields FD Jr, Knight SS, Cooper CM (1994) Effects of channel incision on base flow stream habitats and fishes. Environmental Management 18:43–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Shields FD Jr, Knight SS, Cooper CM (1997) Rehabilitation of warmwater stream ecosystems following channel incision. Ecological Engineering 8:93–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Shields FD Jr, Knight SS, Morin N, Blank J (2003) Response of fishes and aquatic habitats to sand-bed stream restoration using large woody debris. Hydrobiologia 494:251–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Shields FD Jr, Knight SS, Stofleth JM (2006) Large wood addition for aquatic habitat rehabilitation in an incised, sand-bed stream, Little Topashaw Creek, Mississippi. River Research and Applications 22:803–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Shields FD Jr, Morin N, Cooper CM (2004) Large woody debris structures for sand-bed channels. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 130:208–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Smock LA, Metzler GM, Gladden JE (1989) Role of debris dams in the structure and functioning of low-gradient headwater streams. Ecology 70:764–775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Sovell LA, Vondracek B, Frost JA, Mumford KG (2000) Impacts of rotational grazing and riparian buffers on physicochemical and biological characteristics of southeastern Minnesota, USA, streams. Environmental Management 26:629–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Spanhoff B, Riss W, Jakel P, Dakkak N, Meyer EI (2006) Effects of an experimental enrichment of instream habitat heterogeneity on the stream bed morphology and chironomid community of a straightened section in a sandy lowland stream. Environmental Management 37:247–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Stofleth JM, Shields FD Jr, Fox GA (2008) Hyporheic and total transient storage in small, sand-bed streams. Hydrological Processes 22:1885–1894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Stone ML, Whiles MR, Webber JA, Williard JKW, Reeve JD (2005) Macroinvertebrate communities in agriculturally impacted southern Illinois streams: patterns with riparian vegetation, water quality, and in-stream habitat quality. Journal of Environmental Quality 34:907–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Talmage PJ, Perry JA, Goldstein RM (2002) Relation of instream habitat and physical conditions to fish communities of agricultural streams in the northern Midwest. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 22:825–833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Treadwell S (1999) Managing snags and large woody debris. In: Price P, Lovett S (eds) Riparian land management technical guidelines: on-ground management tools and techniques. Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation, Canberra, pp 15–32Google Scholar
  133. Triska FJ (1984) Role of wood debris in modifying channel geomorphology and riparian areas of a large lowland river under pristine conditions: a historical case study. Verhandlungen Internationale Vereinigung für Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie 22:1876–1892Google Scholar
  134. Trotter EH (1990) Woody debris, forest-stream succession, and catchment geomorphology. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 9:141–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Vallett HM, Crenshaw CL, Wagner PF (2002) Stream nutrient uptake, forest succession and biogeochemical theory. Ecology 83:2888–2901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Walker KF (1993) Issues in the riparian ecology of large rivers. In: Bunn SE, Pusey BJ, Price P (eds) Ecology and management of riparian zones in Australia. Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation and Centre for Catchment and In-stream Research, Canberra, pp 31–40Google Scholar
  137. Wallace J, Benke A (1984) Quantification of wood habitat in subtropical coastal plain streams. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 41:1643–1652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Wallace JB, Anderson NH (1996) Habitat, life history, and behavioral adaptations of aquatic insects. In: Merritt RW, Cummins KW (eds) An introduction to the aquatic insects of North America. Kendall/Hunt Publishing, Dubuque, IA, pp 41–73Google Scholar
  139. Wallace JB, Webster JR, Meyer JL (1995) Influence of log additions on physical and biotic characteristics of a mountain stream. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 52:2120–2137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Wallerstein NP, Thorne CR (2004) Influence of large woody debris on morphological evolution of incised, sand-bed channels. Geomorphology 57:53–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Warren DR, Bernhardt ES, Hall RO Jr, Likens G (2007) Forest age, wood and nutrient dynamics in headwater streams of the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest, NH. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 32:1154–1163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Webb AA, Erskine WD (2005) Natural variability in the distribution, loading and induced scour of large wood in sand-bed forest streams. River Research and Applications 21:169–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Wu H-L, Feng Z-Y (2006) Ecological engineering methods for soil and water conservation in Taiwan. Ecological Engineering 28:333–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Zika U, Peter A (2002) The introduction of woody debris into a channelized stream: effect on trout populations and habitat. River Research and Applications 18:355–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Applied Sciences and EngineeringMonash UniversityChurchillAustralia
  2. 2.School of Biological SciencesFlinders UniversityAdelaideAustralia
  3. 3.Ecosystem ManagementUniversity of New EnglandArmidaleAustralia

Personalised recommendations