On the Quantitative.Invent01·Y of the Riverscape' ,I
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH AUGUST 1968 _ On the Quantitative .Invent01·y of the Riverscape' LPNA B. LEOPOLD AND MAURA O'BRIEN MARCHAND U. S. Geological Survey W""hinglon, D. C.IIO!!42 ,I Ab8tract. In the vicinity of Berkeley. California, 24 minor "alleys were described in terms of factors chosen to represent aspects of the river landscape. A total of 28 factors were evalu ated at eaeh site. Some were directly measurable. others were estimated, but each obsen'atioll was assigned to ODe of five categories for tha.t factor. Each factor for each site was then expressed as a uniqueness ratio, which depended on the number of sites being in Ute same category. The uniqueness ratio is believed to represent one way the scarcity of a given river &CRpe can be ranked quantitatively without bias based 011 notions of good or bad, and without assigning monetary value. GENERAL STATEMENT differently. depending upon individual back ground, interest, desires, and thus one's objec On property we grow pigs or peanulll. On tives. we grow suburbs or sunJlowers. On land The present paper presents a tcntntiye nod pe we grow feelings or frustrations. The modest attempt to record the presence or ab 'ty of a landscape may be an asset to sence of chosen factors that contribute to iety, or it may be a 'scarlet letter' that should aesthetic worth. Observations were made in a . d us of wbat we have thrown away. All restricted range of exnmples in one locality, empts to preserve the environment must ne- Alameda and Contra Costa count.ics near San ily rewesent a compromise between the Francisco Bay. California. 1'10st of the sites are uty of the natural world, minimally infiu located along the channels of small streams ced by man, and the world in which we have draining these foothills. The sites chosen include support ourselves. But we all realize that streams originating in natural unde\-eloped d can he used by man in such a way that areas, in parks, and in suburbnn and urban retains the essential elements of its aesthetic foothill areas. ue, or it can be used in such a way that most these values disappear. THE IXYEXTOHY ncb one of us has a somewhat different idea The factors contributing to the aesthetic or ut which aspeets of the ri\'e~ landscape most emotional reaction to a landscape are presum tribute to its aesthetic worth. E":en among ably capable of being identified. We constructed who are conscious of tbe fact that aesthetic an inventory checklist that included both physi es are worthy of preservation it is possible cal features of size and form and such subjective bave sincere and well meaning persons dis attributes as ecologic diversity and scenic views. mor~, 88 to what areas are or less, vaIu The checklist was filled out nt ench site chosen. , and for what purposes. either measuring or subjectively eynfuating the y thingS are happening in the environ pre...:::ence or le\·el of each factor in the list. Various groups give priority to preserving Listing the qualities of ,-arious cm+ironments erent parts of. it, and as a result we are or sites, one might be able to rank the relative er unsuccessful about preserving anything. uniqueness. of each attribute at various· sites e time bas come when we should be able to in relation to the population as n whole or to a objectively about the factors that con particular part of it. Thus we conccive that in ute to aesthetic ranking and to realize that a planning program the computer read-out for e relative importance of these factors is viewed e3ch alternati\'c for water de\'elopment would .1 A contraction of lriver landscape.' include not only the usual pertinent data on 709 710 LEOPOLD A?-Il> MARCHAND sizes, benefits, and costs, but nlso the number numbers from 1 to 5. Those factors that co of rankings that are violated or consumed. For be measured have the measurement data. c example, onc damsite might involve a river in five ranges. Channel width, for example, W reach that contains several river properties that measured in fee~t. The ranges make up a arc unique and are found only at that site, metric progression of size categories, as can whereas another may consume only usual or seen in the definition of rang¥ in Table 1. common types not at all unique. Those fact"rs that could not he ·measured The field inventory listing the items or param the usual sense were assessed in the field eters is presented in Table 1 with the range of jectively and assigned to a category 1 to 5 categories .assignable to each measured or esti that Bite factor aa defined" in Table l. mated. factor. As shown, each parameter in the factors related to aeathetic impression could list was assigned a category label using the c",-pressed quantitativelYJ such as tlie num TABLE 1. Definition of Class Ciltegories Physical and Chemical Character Width (It) Depth (It) Velocity (ft/sec) Variability index Width/height of valley Bed sediment size (mOl) Bed slope (ft/mi) Basin area (sq mi) Stream order (Horton) Bank height (It) Susceptibility to erosion (estim.) Width of flood plain Turbidity (ppm) Biological Character Algae Filamentous slime (diatoms) Fauna (estim.) Flora Character Exotic Diversity (estim.) General biologic condition Human Use and Interest Trash and litter Metal (no./100 It) Paper, plastic (no./100 ft) Other (no./IOO ft) Artificial controls Accc...c:sibility Individual Mass use Aesthetic impressions (estim.) Local scenery Vistas Degree of change Degradation Recovery potential Urbanization General aesthetic interest Inventory of the Riverscape 7J I cans, paper plates, or other 6. Strawberry Creek, n.djn.cent to Dwinclle An- nex, University, California Campus, Berkeley; i. St.rawberry Creek, at bridge, between Ha\"il FIELD DATA land nnd Giovanni Halls, University of California-, Berkeley; The 24 sites Ii ted below'were cbosen to repre 8. Robbers Creek, at Ash Slreet crossover, "Tesl t a variety of smnU stream ebannels or valle)'s wood, northern California, primarily in the Berkeley 9. Robbers Creek, at. Highway 36 erossonr, l Westwood; , including some that were primarily urban 10. Fealher River, at. Tunnel Rest. Slop; and other basins in relatively natural condi- 11. Feather Rinr, at Highway iO exit north, n. With some changes the field inventory could ncar Oroville Dam; applied to ebannels and valleys of an entirely 12. 'Vildeat Creek, at Indian Camp Picnic nren, erent sort, but it was our intention to take Tilden Regional Park, Berkeley; 13. Knler Creek, tributar~' to Wildc:lt Creek, pIes on basins uf more or less comparable ncar Alvarado Park, Richmond; ysica! types. 14. Kaler Creek, tributary to Wildcat Creek, The survey locations were chosen more or * mile downstream fro~site 13; 15. Horse !.mil crossing of Wildcat Creek, Al G random nnd marked on " topographic varado Park, Richmond; • There was DO formal stratification or ran- 16. Wildcat Creek, picnic area in Ah'arndo • tion; once the field technique is deemed Park, * mile downstream from site 15, Richmond; inry, " more formal method of choosing Ii. Judson Mead area, Strnwberry Creek, west y sites will b" justified. Emphasis was of Botanical Gardens, Uni"ersit~, of California, Berkeley; ted primarily to the inclusion of sites repro 18. Fern Grove area, Strawberry Creek, cast of ting a variety of conditions of urbanization Palm Grove, Botanical Gardens, University of d use rath~r than a variety of stream channel California, Berkeley; . For tlUs reason some streams were chosen 19. Culvert zone of Strawberry Creek, between hw1t-up rban arens, some in .Btate nnd Botanical Gardens and tennis courts, University of CaJifomin., Berkeley; parks, and some in areas not subject to 20. Land Slump Creek, South Highway, Siesta ensive us.!. Valley; arrival at a location a specific site was 21. GuUy Creek, Siesta Va.Ue~'; consisting of Bome 200 feet of channel 22. Swamp Brook, Third Gully, Siesta Valley; within which the observations were meant 23. Cement Slab Creek at Orinda CiLy Limits, Orinda.; pply. it each site the nssignmcnt of numbers 24. Canyon Creek, tributary to San Leandro e factors wan considered froOl" the point of Creek, near San Leandro. of an observer standing near the stream The measurements of physical size and char looking up and down the vnUey. Many of acteristics were representative of the average small streams are incised in minor valleys, condition in the 2oo-foot reach. A pbotograph sides of which stand 20 to 30 fect above taken at each site proved to be useful in the el a:nd 80 the view wan often restricted valJ~y course of later data analysis. e sides. .. Water velocity was measured by timed .aoats. y of the channels were so wooded' that Bed sediment size was taken as the" B-axis was no vist&. out toward the bay or up diameter of the median size particle. To esti adjacent hills. We recorded whether such mate the amount of green algae and filamentous vistas were common or absent. diatoms, ten rocks were picked up from the of the 24 sites indicating location follows: bed and inspected; the average percentage of rock area covered by algae was estimated. The Couple Brook, adjacent to Lake AnZR. Tilden fauna and the diversity of flora were estimated oDai Park, near Berkeley; Family's Path Creek, tributary to Lake ADza, from the general character of the area, in com en Regional Park, near Berkeley; parison with sites known to be generally repre North Stream Picnic Area, Tilden RegionaI sentative of the valleys in the Coast Range.