Towards a decision support system for stream restoration in the Netherlands: an overview of restoration projects and future needs

Stream restoration is one of the answers to the lowland stream deterioration. For making proper choices in stream restoration; one firstly needs to understand the complex spatial and temporal interactions between physical, chemical and biological components in the stream ecosystem. Several ecological concepts on the four dimensions, scale and hierarchy in a stream ecosystem are integrated into the 5-S-model. This model provides the theoretical backbone of the first outline of a decision support system for stream restoration. Stream restoration is developing fast in the Netherlands. In 1991, 70 projects were counted, in 1993 there were 170, and this number increased in 1998 to 206. Positive signs in this increase in the number of stream restoration projects are the increase in the amount of money, in background studies, in improvement of the selection process of stretches to be tackled, and the broadening of the objectives and measures. Negative signs are amongst others that measures often deal only with stream hydrology and structures in-stream. The catchment takes no part. Furthermore, bottlenecks often relate to finances and agreement between people and/or organisations. Finally, the first steps towards a decision support system for stream restoration are made. The system presented provides only information based on which measures should be taken. `Where and how' these measures need to be taken remains a challenge for the future.

[1]  G. Mathias Kondolf,et al.  Historical channel analysis and its application to riparian and aquatic habitat restoration , 1995 .

[2]  W. Junk.  The flood pulse concept in river-floodplain systems , 1989 .

[3]  Michael K. Young,et al.  A hierarchical approach to classifying stream habitat features , 1993 .

[4]  J. Webster,et al.  The Role of Filter Feeders in Flowing Waters , 1977 .

[5]  J. A. Schot,et al.  The 5-S-Model, an integrated approach for stream rehabilitation , 1998 .

[6]  P. Calow,et al.  Essential elements in the case for river conservation , 1992 .

[7]  Hans Ole Hansen,et al.  European rivers and lakes : assessment of their environmental state , 1994 .

[8]  J. Stanford,et al.  The serial discontinuity concept of lotic ecosystems , 1983 .

[9]  Mark E. Jensen,et al.  ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT: A LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY PERSPECTWE1 , 1996 .

[10]  L. Botosanéanu,et al.  Problèmes et méthodes de la classification et de la zonation écologique des eaux courantes, considerées surtout du point de vue faunistique: Avec 18 figures dans le texte et en supplément , 1963 .

[11]  Charles P. Hawkins,et al.  Role of refugia in recovery from disturbances: Modern fragmented and disconnected river systems , 1990 .

[12]  T. R. E. Southwood,et al.  HABITAT, THE TEMPLET FOR ECOLOGICAL STRATEGIES? , 1977 .

[13]  P. Verdonschot,et al.  Typology of macrofaunal assemblages applied to water and nature management: a Dutch approach. , 2000 .

[14]  P. Verdonschot,et al.  Ecological characterization of surface waters in the province of Overijssel, The Netherlands , 1990 .

[15]  Piet H. Nienhuis,et al.  Ecological rehabilitation of the lowland basin of the river Rhine (NW Europe) , 2002 .

[16]  R. L. Costanz,et al.  Modeling complex ecological economic systems , 1993 .

[17]  S. Schumm.  The Fluvial System , 1977 .

[18]  Colin R. Townsend,et al.  The Patch Dynamics Concept of Stream Community Ecology , 1989, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[19]  J. Ward,et al.  The Four-Dimensional Nature of Lotic Ecosystems , 1989, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[20]  M. Brunke,et al.  The ecological significance of exchange processes between rivers and groundwater , 1997 .

[21]  M. Huston.  A General Hypothesis of Species Diversity , 1979, The American Naturalist.

[22]  H. B. N. Hynes,et al.  The stream and its valley , 1975 .