The Blurred Line between Form and Process: A Comparison of Stream Channel Classification Frameworks

Stream classification provides a means to understand the diversity and distribution of channels and floodplains that occur across a landscape while identifying links between geomorphic form and process. Accordingly, stream classification is frequently employed as a watershed planning, management, and restoration tool. At the same time, there has been intense debate and criticism of particular frameworks, on the grounds that these frameworks classify stream reaches based largely on their physical form, rather than direct measurements of their component hydrogeomorphic processes. Despite this debate surrounding stream classifications, and their ongoing use in watershed management, direct comparisons of channel classification frameworks are rare. Here we implement four stream classification frameworks and explore the degree to which each make inferences about hydrogeomorphic process from channel form within the Middle Fork John Day Basin, a watershed of high conservation interest within the Columbia River Basin, U.S.A. We compare the results of the River Styles Framework, Natural Channel Classification, Rosgen Classification System, and a channel form-based statistical classification at 33 field-monitored sites. We found that the four frameworks consistently classified reach types into similar groups based on each reach or segment’s dominant hydrogeomorphic elements. Where classified channel types diverged, differences could be attributed to the (a) spatial scale of input data used, (b) the requisite metrics and their order in completing a framework’s decision tree and/or, (c) whether the framework attempts to classify current or historic channel form. Divergence in framework agreement was also observed at reaches where channel planform was decoupled from valley setting. Overall, the relative agreement between frameworks indicates that criticism of individual classifications for their use of form in grouping stream channels may be overstated. These form-based criticisms may also ignore the geomorphic tenet that channel form reflects formative hydrogeomorphic processes across a given landscape.

[1]  TWO-WEEK Loan COpy,et al.  University of California , 1886, The American journal of dental science.

[2]  W. Davis.  The Geographical Cycle , 1899 .

[3]  L. B. Leopold,et al.  River channel patterns: Braided, meandering, and straight , 1957 .

[4]  L. Donald,et al.  of the INTERIOR , 1962 .

[5]  S. Schumm,et al.  Time, space, and causality in geomorphology , 1965 .

[6]  P. B. King,et al.  Geologic map of Oregon , 1969 .

[7]  J. Costa.  Paleohydraulic reconstruction of flash-flood peaks from boulder deposits in the Colorado Front Range , 1983 .

[8]  W. Graf.  Variability of sediment removal in a semiarid watershed , 1983 .

[9]  A. Miall.  Architectural-Element Analysis: A New Method of Facies Analysis Applied to Fluvial Deposits , 1985 .

[10]  S. Schumm.  PATTERNS OF ALLUVIAL RIVERS , 1985 .

[11]  W. Dietrich,et al.  Sediment supply and the development of the coarse surface layer in gravel-bedded rivers , 1989, Nature.

[12]  W. Erskine.  Channel response to large-scale river training works: hunter river, Australia , 1992 .

[13]  F. Magilligan.  Thresholds and the spatial variability of flood power during extreme floods , 1992 .

[14]  J. Best,et al.  Braided rivers: perspectives and problems , 1993, Geological Society, London, Special Publications.

[15]  D. Rosgen.  A classification of natural rivers , 1994 .

[16]  A. Miller,et al.  Natural and anthropogenic influences in fluvial geomorphology , 1995 .

[17]  D. Rosgen.  A classification of natural rivers: Reply to the comments by J.R. Miller and J.B. Ritter , 1996 .

[18]  C. Hupp,et al.  Riparian vegetation and fluvial geomorphic processes , 1996 .

[19]  P. Wilcock.  Friction between science and practice: The case of river restoration , 1997 .

[20]  W. Nehlsen.  Prioritizing Watersheds in Oregon for Salmon Restoration , 1997 .

[21]  S. Lecce.  Nonlinear Downstream Changes in Stream Power on Wisconsin's Blue River , 1997 .

[22]  D. Montgomery,et al.  A systematic analysis of eight decades of incipient motion studies, with special reference to gravel‐bedded rivers , 1997 .

[23]  D. Montgomery,et al.  Channel-reach morphology in mountain drainage basins , 1997 .

[24]  T. Lisle.  Applied River Morphology , 1998 .

[25]  R. Naiman,et al.  River Ecology and Management , 1998 .

[26]  D. Knighton.  Fluvial Forms and Processes: A New Perspective , 1998 .

[27]  D. Montgomery.  PROCESS DOMAINS AND THE RIVER CONTINUUM 1 , 1999 .

[28]  H. Piégay,et al.  Input, storage and distribution of large woody debris along a mountain river continuum, the Drôme River, France , 1999 .

[29]  P. F. Kauff.  Group , 2000, Elegant Design.

[30]  D. Montgomery,et al.  Channel Processes, Classification, and Response , 2000 .

[31]  K. Fryirs,et al.  Variability in sediment delivery and storage along river courses in Bega catchment, NSW, Australia: implications for geomorphic river recovery , 2001 .

[32]  Marti J. Anderson,et al.  A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance in ecology , 2001 .

[33]  D. Rosgen,et al.  A STREAM CHANNEL STABILITY ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY BY , 2001 .

[34]  Survey , 2002 .

[35]  K. Tockner,et al.  Riverine landscape diversity , 2002 .

[36]  K. Fryirs,et al.  Application of the River Styles framework as a basis for river management in New South Wales, Australia , 2002 .

[37]  J. Bridge.  Rivers and Floodplains: Forms, Processes, and Sedimentary Record , 2003 .

[38]  W. Southerland.  Stream geomorphology and classification in glacial-fluvial valleys of the North Cascade Mountain Range in Washington State , 2003 .

[39]  G. Brierley,et al.  The long-term control of vegetation and woody debris on channel and flood-plain evolution: insights from a paired catchment study in southeastern Australia , 2003 .

[40]  Daniel R. Miller,et al.  The Network Dynamics Hypothesis: How Channel Networks Structure Riverine Habitats , 2004 .

[41]  G. Brierley,et al.  Are River Styles ecologically meaningful? A test of the ecological significance of a geomorphic river characterization scheme , 2004 .

[42]  C. Zanger.  Modeling the Environmental Protection Agency's level IV ecoregions within the Klamath Mountains of southern Oregon and northern California , 2004 .

[43]  A. Olsen,et al.  Spatially Balanced Sampling of Natural Resources , 2004 .

[44]  J. Meyer,et al.  Standards for ecologically successful river restoration , 2005 .

[45]  E. Wohl.  :Geomorphology and River Management: Applications of the River Styles Framework , 2005 .

[46]  R. Millar.  Theoretical regime equations for mobile gravel-bed rivers with stable banks , 2005 .

[47]  K. Fryirs,et al.  Linking geomorphic character, behaviour and condition to fluvial biodiversity: implications for river management , 2006 .

[48]  M. Liermann,et al.  Channel pattern and river-floodplain dynamics in forested mountain river systems , 2006 .

[49]  R. Hey.  FLUVIAL GEOMORPHOLOGICAL METHODOLOGY FOR NATURAL STABLE CHANNEL DESIGN 1 , 2006 .

[50]  K. Fryirs,et al.  Buffers, barriers and blankets : the (dis)connectivity of catchment-scale sediment cascades , 2007 .

[51]  K. Fryirs,et al.  Catchment-scale (dis)connectivity in sediment flux in the upper Hunter catchment, New South Wales, Australia , 2007 .

[52]  F. D. Shields,et al.  Critical Evaluation of How the Rosgen Classification and Associated “Natural Channel Design” Methods Fail to Integrate and Quantify Fluvial Processes and Channel Response 1 , 2007 .

[53]  S. Darby,et al.  9 Modelling river-bank-erosion processes and mass failure mechanisms: progress towards fully coupled simulations , 2007 .

[54]  Martin P. Ward,et al.  The Role of Observer Variation in Determining Rosgen Stream Types in Northeastern Oregon Mountain Streams 1 , 2008 .

[55]  R. Lave.  The Rosgen Wars and the shifting political economy of expertise , 2008 .

[56]  D. Merritts,et al.  Natural Streams and the Legacy of Water-Powered Mills , 2008, Science.

[57]  P. Wilcock,et al.  Metrics for assessing the downstream effects of dams , 2008 .

[58]  S. Swanson,et al.  Assessment of Changes in Stream and Riparian Conditions of the Marys River Basin, Nevada 1 , 2008 .

[59]  D. Rosgen.  Discussion 1 –“The Role of Observer Variation in Determining Rosgen Stream Types in Northeastern Oregon Mountain Streams” by Brett B. Roper, John M. Buffington, Eric Archer, Chris Moyer, and Mike Ward 2 , 2009 .

[60]  Dave Nagel,et al.  Remote Sensing of Channels and Riparian Zones with a Narrow-Beam Aquatic-Terrestrial LIDAR , 2009, Remote. Sens..

[61]  N. Snyder,et al.  Bedload entrainment in low-gradient paraglacial coastal rivers of Maine, U.S.A.: Implications for habitat restoration , 2009 .

[62]  Rebecca Lave,et al.  The Controversy Over Natural Channel Design: Substantive Explanations and Potential Avenues for Resolution 1 , 2009 .

[63]  K. Fryirs,et al.  Post‐European settlement response gradients of river sensitivity and recovery across the upper Hunter catchment, Australia , 2009 .

[64]  N. Snyder,et al.  A LIDAR‐DERIVED EVALUATION OF WATERSHED‐SCALE LARGE WOODY DEBRIS SOURCES AND RECRUITMENT MECHANISMS: COASTAL MAINE, USA , 2010 .

[65]  B. Cardinale,et al.  Dynamic interactions of life and its landscape: feedbacks at the interface of geomorphology and ecology , 2010 .

[66]  M. Miller.  Agency , 2010 .

[67]  K. Fryirs,et al.  Antecedent controls on river character and behaviour in partly confined valley settings: Upper Hunter catchment, NSW, Australia , 2010 .

[68]  K. Fryirs,et al.  Geomorphology in action: Linking policy with on-the-ground actions through applications of the River Styles framework , 2011 .

[69]  J. Castro,et al.  Stream Restoration in Dynamic Fluvial Systems: Scientific Approaches, Analyses, and Tools , 2011 .

[70]  P. Skidmore,et al.  Watershed Assessments and Identification of Restoration Needs , 2012 .

[71]  T. Beechie,et al.  Stream and watershed restoration : a guide to restoring riverine processes and habitats , 2012 .

[72]  M. Palmer,et al.  Range of variability of channel complexity in urban, restored and forested reference streams , 2012 .

[73]  R. Beschta,et al.  Adapting to Climate Change on Western Public Lands: Addressing the Ecological Effects of Domestic, Wild, and Feral Ungulates , 2013, Environmental Management.

[74]  B. Malamud,et al.  2.2 Nine Considerations for Constructing and Running Geomorphological Models , 2013 .

[75]  D. Montgomery,et al.  Geomorphic classification of rivers , 2013 .

[76]  D. Rosgen.  Natural Channel Design: Fundamental Concepts, Assumptions, and Methods , 2013 .

[77]  N. Snyder,et al.  Differentiating the relative importance of land cover change and geomorphic processes on fine sediment sequestration in a logged watershed , 2013 .

[78]  K. Fryirs,et al.  Reading the landscape , 2013 .

[79]  Introduction to the special issue: The field tradition in geomorphology , 2013 .

[80]  G. Brierley,et al.  The influence of landscape configuration upon patterns of sediment storage in a highly connected river system , 2013 .

[81]  J. Mant.  Stream and Watershed Restoration: A Guide to Restoring Riverine Processes and Habitats , 2013 .

[82]  A. Miller.  Valley Morphology and Boundary Conditions Influencing Spatial Patterns of Flood Flow , 2013 .

[83]  J. Schmidt,et al.  A Geological Framework for Interpreting Downstream Effects of Dams on Rivers , 2013 .

[84]  E. Wohl,et al.  Biotic Drivers of Stream Planform: Implications for Understanding the Past and Restoring the Future , 2013 .

[85]  T. Beechie,et al.  Predicting natural channel patterns based on landscape and geomorphic controls in the Columbia River basin, USA , 2014 .

[86]  B. Minsker,et al.  Patterns of regional hydroclimatic shifts: An analysis of changing hydrologic regimes , 2014 .

[87]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[88]  N. Surian,et al.  Characterizing geomorphological change to support sustainable river restoration and management , 2014 .

[89]  E. Wohl,et al.  A geomorphic classification of ephemeral channels in a mountainous, arid region, southwestern Arizona, USA , 2014 .

[90]  K. Costigan,et al.  Longitudinal variability in hydraulic geometry and substrate characteristics of a Great Plains sand-bed river , 2014 .

[91]  S. Wright,et al.  Physically based method for measuring suspended-sediment concentration and grain size using multi-frequency arrays of acoustic-doppler profilers , 2014 .

[92]  B. Roper,et al.  Direct and indirect drivers of instream wood in the interior Pacific Northwest, USA: decoupling climate, vegetation, disturbance, and geomorphic setting , 2014 .

[93]  J. Wheaton,et al.  Riparian Vegetation Communities of the American Pacific Northwest are Tied to Multi‐Scale Environmental Filters , 2015 .

[94]  M. Hubert,et al.  "Finding Groups in Data": Cluster Analysis Extended Rousseeuw etal. , 2015 .

[95]  H. Piégay,et al.  Tools in Fluvial Geomorphology , 2016 .

[96]  D. Montgomery,et al.  Geomorphic classification of rivers and streams , 2016 .