Landscape Ecology

, Volume 20, Issue 6, pp 755–772 | Cite as

Using Large Wood to Restore Streams in Central Europe: Potential use and Likely Effects

Research Article


The potentials for the use of large wood (LW) in stream restoration projects were quantified for streams in Central Europe (total stream length assessed 44,880 km). Two different restoration methods were investigated: recruitment (passively allowing natural LW input) and placement (active introduction of large wood pieces into streams). The feasibility and potential effects of each method were studied for three different scenarios, according to the land-uses to be permitted on the floodplain: (a) only natural-non woody vegetation, forest, and fallow land occur on the floodplain, (b) including pasture and meadow, (c) including pasture, meadow, and cropland. Hydromorphological data were used to identify stream sections where LW recruitment or placement are feasible, and the likely effects of both restoration methods on channel hydromorphology were predicted. Passive recruitment is feasible for only a small percentage of the total channel length in the study area (~1% for all three scenarios). Active placement of LW can be used in much higher extent: 6.5% if only natural non-woody vegetation, forest, and fallow land can occur on the floodplain, 20.2% if stream segments bordered by pasture and meadow are included, and 32% if cropland is included in addition. There are differences between (1) the lower-mountainous area, where a large number of channel segments can be restored yielding an improvement from a moderate/good to a good/excellent morphological status and (2) the lowlands, where only a small number of channel segments can be restored yielding an improvement from a bad to a moderate morphological state. The latter upgrading might be sufficient to reach a ‘good ecological status’ as defined by the EU Water Framework Directive. The results of this study show the suitability of large wood recruitment and placement as appropriate methods to markedly improve the hydromorphological state of a large proportion of the streams in the study area.


Central Europe Large wood Stream restoration Water Framework Directive 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Benke, A.C., Wallace, J.B. 2003

    Influence of wood on invertebrate communities in streams and rivers

    Gregory, S.Boyer, K.L.Gurnell, A.M. eds. The Ecology and Management of Wood in World RiversAmerican Fisheries Society, Symposium 37BethesdaMaryland149177
    Google Scholar
  2. Bilby, R.E. 1981Role of organic debris dams in regulating the export of dissolved and particulate matter from a forested watershedEcology6212341241Google Scholar
  3. Bragg, D.C., Kershner, J.L., Roberts, D.W. 2000Modeling large woody debris recruitment for small streams of the central Rocky MountainsUnited States Department of AgricultureRocky Mountains Research StationFort Collins, ColoradoUSAGeneral Technical Report RMRS-GTR-55.Google Scholar
  4. Briem, E. 2003Gewässerlandschaften der Bundesrepublik Deutschland – Morphologische Merkmale der Fließgewässer und ihrer AuenATV-DVWK-Arbeitsbericht GB-1Hennef, Germany176Google Scholar
  5. Brookes, A. 1987The distribution and management of channelized streams in DenmarkRegul. Rivers Res. Manag.18316Google Scholar
  6. Brooks, A.P., Gehrke, P.C., Jansen, J.D., Abbe, T.B. 2004Experimental reintroduction of woody debris on the Williams RiverNSW: Geomorphic and ecological responsesRiver Res. Appl.20513536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brunke, M., Hoffmann, A., Pusch, M. 2001Use of mesohabitat-specific relationships between flow velocity and river discharge to assess invertebrate minimum flow requirementsRegul. Rivers Res. Manag.17667676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buffagni, A., Kemp, J.L., Erba, S., Belfiore, C., Hering, D., Moogo,  2001A Europe-wide system for assessing the quality of rivers using macroinvertebrates: the AQEM project and its importance for southern Europe (with special emphasis on Italy)J. Limnol.603948Google Scholar
  9. Cederholm, C.J., Bilby, R.E., Bisson, P.A., Bumstead, T.W., Fransen, B.R., Scarlett, W.J., Ward, J.W. 1997Response of juvenile coho salmon and steelhead to placement of large wood in a coastal Washington streamN. Am. J. Fish. Manag.17947963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Collins, B.D., Montgomery, D.R. 2002Forest developmentwood jams, and restoration of floodplain rivers in the Pudget LowlandWashingtonRestor. Ecol.10237247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crispin, V., House, R., Roberts, D. 1993Changes in instream habitatlarge woodand salmon habitat after the restructuring of a coastal Oregon streamN. Am. J. Fish. Manag.1396102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Crook, D.A., Robertson, A.I. 1999Relationship between riverine fish and woody debris: implications for lowland riversMar. Freshwater Res.50941953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dolloff, C.A., Warren, M.L. 2003

    Fish relationship with large wood in small streams

    Gregory, S.Boyer, K.L.Gurnell, A.M. eds. The Ecology and Management of Wood in World RiversAmerican Fisheries Society, Symposium 37BethesdaMaryland179193
    Google Scholar
  14. Dudley, T., Anderson, N.H. 1982A survey of invertebrates associated with wood debris in aquatic habitatsMelanderia39121Google Scholar
  15. Ehrman, T.P., Lamberti, G.A. 1992Hydraulic and particulate matter retention in a 3rd-order Indiana streamJ. N. Am. Benthol. Soc.11341349Google Scholar
  16. Ellenberg, H. 1996Vegetation Mitteleuropas mit den AlpenUlmerStuttgartGermany1095Google Scholar
  17. Fore, L.S., Karr, J.R., Wisseman, R.W. 1996Assessing invertebrate responses to human activities: Evaluating alternative approachesJ. N. Am. Benthol. Soc.15212231Google Scholar
  18. Gerhard, M., Reich, M. 2001Totholz in Fließgewässern – Empfehlungen zur GewässerentwicklungWerum GmbHMainz, Germany84Google Scholar
  19. Gippel, C.J., O’Neill, I.C., Finlayson, B.L., Schnatz, I. 1996Hydraulic guidelines for the re-introduction and management of large wood in lowland riversRegul. Rivers Res. Manag.12223236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gregory, S.V.Boyer, K.L.Gurnell, A.M. eds. 2003aThe Ecology and Management of Wood in World RiversAmerican Fisheries Society, Symposium 37BethesdaMaryland431Google Scholar
  21. Gregory, S.V., Meleason, M.A., Sobota, D.J. 2003b

    Modeling the dynamics of wood in streams and rivers

    Gregory, S.Boyer, K.L.Gurnell, A.M. eds. The Ecology and Management of Wood in World RiversAmerican Fisheries Society, Symposium 37BethesdaMaryland315335
    Google Scholar
  22. Gurnell, A.M. 2003

    Wood storage and mobility

    Gregory, S.Boyer, K.L.Gurnell, A.M. eds. The Ecology and Management of Wood in World RiversAmerican Fisheries Society, Symposium 37BethesdaMaryland7591
    Google Scholar
  23. Gurnell, A.M., Gregory, K.J., Petts, G.E. 1995Case studies and reviews: The role of coarse woody debris in forest aquatic habitats: implications for managementAqua. Conser. Marine Freshwater Ecosys.5143166Google Scholar
  24. Harmon, M.E., Franklin, J.F., Swanson, F.J., Sollins, P., Gregory, S.V., Lattin, J.D., Anderson, N.H., Cline, S.P., Aumen, N.G., Sedell, J.R., Lienkaemper, G.W., Cromack, K., Cummins, K.W. 1986Ecology of coarse woody debris in temperate ecosystemsAdv. Ecol. Res.15133302Google Scholar
  25. Hering, D., Kail, J., Eckert, S., Gerhard, M., Meyer, E.I., Mutz, M., Reich, M., Weiss, I. 2000Coarse woody debris quantity and distribution in Central European streamsIntl. Rev. Hydrobiol.85523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hering, D., Moog, O., Sandin, L., Verdonschot, P.F.M. 2004Overview and application of the AQEM assessment systemHydrobiologia516120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hilderbrand, R.H., Lemly, A.D., Dolloff, C.A., Harpster, K.H. 1998Design considerations for large wood placement in stream enhancement projectsN. Am. J. Fish. Manag.18161167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hoffmann, A., Hering, D. 2000Wood-associated macroinvertebrate fauna in Central European streamsIntl. Rev. Hydrobiol.852548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Illies, J. 1978Limnofauna EuropaeaGustav Fischer VerlagStuttgartGermany532Google Scholar
  30. Kail, J. 2003Influence of large wood on the morphology of six Central European streamsGeomorphology51207223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kail, J. 2004Geomorphic effects of large wood in streams and rivers and its use in stream restoration: a Central European perspective. Ph.D. ThesisUniversität Duisburg-EssenEssen, Germany153Google Scholar
  32. Kondolf, G.M. 2000Some suggested guidelines for geomorphic aspects of anadromous salmonid habitat restoration proposalsRestor. Ecol.84856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lassettre N. and Kondolf G.M. 2000. Process-based management of in-channel large woody material at the basin scale. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Wood in World Rivers at the Oregon State University. Corvallis, Oregon, USApp. 38–38, October 2000.Google Scholar
  34. Lorenz, A., Hering, D., Feld, C., Rolauffs, P. 2004A new method for assessing the impact of morphological degradation on the benthic invertebrate fauna for streams in GermanyHydrobiologia516107127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Marchant, R., Hehir, G. 2002The use of AUSRIVAS predictive models to assess the response of lotic macroinvertebrates to dams in south-east AustraliaFreshwater Biol.4710331050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Maser, C., Sedell, J.R. 1994From the Forest to the Sea – The Ecology of Wood in Streams, Rivers, Estuaries, and OceansSt. Lucie PressDelray BeachUSA196Google Scholar
  37. McMahon, T.E., Hartman, G.F. 1989Influence of cover complexity and current velocity on winter habitat use by juvenil Coho Salmon (Oncorynchus kisutch)Can. J. Fish. Aqua. Sci.4615511557Google Scholar
  38. Mebane, C.A. 1999Testing bioassessment metrics: Macroinvertebratesculpin and salmonid responses to stream habitatsediment and metalsEnviron. Monitor. Assess.67293322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Murphy, M.L., Koski, K.V. 1989Input and depletion of woody debris in Alaska streams and implications for streamside managementN. Am. J. Fish. Manag.9427436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mutz, M. 2000Influences of woody debris on flow patterns and channel morphology in a low energy, sand-bed stream reachIntl. Rev. Hydrobiol.85107121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Piégay, H., Gurnell, A.M. 1997Large wood and river geomorphological patter: examples from S.E. France and S. EnglandGeomorphology1999116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pottgiesser, T., Sommerhäuser, M. 2004

    Fließgewässertypologie Deutschlands: Die Gewässertypen und ihre Steckbriefe als Beitrag zur Umsetzung der EU-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie

    Steinberg, C.Calmano, W.Wilken, R.Klapper, H. eds. Handbuch Angewandte LimnologieEcomedLandsberg, Germany316
    Google Scholar
  43. Rabeni, C.F., Jacobson, R.B. 1993The importance of fluvial hydraulics to fish-habitat restoration in low-gradient alluvial streamsFreshwater Biol.29211220Google Scholar
  44. Raven, P.J., Homes, N.T.H., Charrier, P., Dawson, F.H., Naura, M., Boon, P.J. 2002Towards a harmonized approach for hydromorphological assessment of rivers in Europe: a qualitative comparison of three survey methodsAqua. Conser. Marine Freshwater Ecosys.12405424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rolauffs P. 2003. Ökologische Bewertung von Fließgewässern: Integrierende Einflüsse des Einzugsgebietes oder lokale Gewässermorphologie? Was ist entscheidend für die Biozönose? Eine Frage der Skalierung. In: Tagungsbericht Deutsche Gesellschaft für Limnologie (DGL). Braunschweig, Germany, 2002, pp. 98–103.Google Scholar
  46. Roni, P., Beechie, T.J., Bilby, R.E., Leonetti, F.E., Pollock, M.M., Pess, G.R. 2002A review of stream restoration techniques and a hierarchical method for prioritizing restoration in Pacific Northwest watershedsN. Am. J. Fish. Manag.22120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schmedtje U., Sommerhäuser M., Braukmann U., Briem E., Haase P. and Hering D. 2001. `Top down–bottom up’-Konzept einer biozönotisch begründeten Fließgewässertypologie Deutschlands. In: Tagungsbericht Deutsche Gesellschaft für Limnologie (DGL). Magdeburg, Germany, 2000, pp. 147–151.Google Scholar
  48. Smock, L.A., Metzler, G.M., Gladden, J.E. 1989Role of debris dams in the structure and functioning of low-gradient headwater streamsEcology70764775Google Scholar
  49. Smukalla, R., Friedrich, G. 1994

    Ökologische Effizienz von Renaturierungsmaßnahmen an Fließgewässern

    Landesumweltamt, N.R.W. eds. Materialien 7EssenGermany462
    Google Scholar
  50. Sponseller, R.A., Benfield, E.F., Valett, H.M. 2001Relationships between land-usespatial scale and stream macroinvertebrate communitiesFreshwater Biol.4614091424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Verdonschot, P.F.M., Nijboer, R.C. 2004Towards a decision support system for stream restoration in the Netherlands: an overview of restoration projects and future needsHydrobiologia478131148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Weigel, B.M., Wang, L.Z., Rasmussen, P.W., Butcher, J.T., Stewart, P.M., Simon, T.P., Wiley, M.J. 2003Relative influence of variables at multiple spatial scales on stream macroinvertebrates in the Northern Lakes and forest ecoregion, USAFreshwater Biol.4814401461CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Hydrobiology, Institute of EcologyUniversity of EssenEssenGermany

Personalised recommendations