Respectively, Advisor, Watershed Program, White Mountain Apache Tribe, P.O. Box 700, Whiteriver, Arizona 85941; Professor of Hydrology, Northern Arizona University, School of Forestry, P.O. Box 15018, Flagstaff, Arizona 86011–5018; and Projects Supervisor, Watershed Program, White Mountain Apache Tribe, P.O. Box 700, Whiteriver, Arizona 85941 (E-Mai/Tecle: Aregai.Tecle@nau.edu).
MARSH DEVELOPMENT AT RESTORATION SITES ON THE WHITE MOUNTAIN APACHE RESERVATION, ARIZONA1
Article first published online: 8 JUN 2007
JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association
Volume 39, Issue 6, pages 1345–1359, December 2003
How to Cite
Long, J. W., Tecle, A. and Burnette, B. M. (2003), MARSH DEVELOPMENT AT RESTORATION SITES ON THE WHITE MOUNTAIN APACHE RESERVATION, ARIZONA. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 39: 1345–1359. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2003.tb04422.x
Paper No. 02115 of the Journal of the American Water Resources Association.
- Issue published online: 8 JUN 2007
- Article first published online: 8 JUN 2007
- watershed/riparian linkages;
- flood disturbance
ABSTRACT: To prioritize sites for riparian restoration, resource managers need to understand how recovery processes vary within landscapes. Complex relationships between watershed conditions and riparian development make it difficult to predict the outcomes of restoration treatments in the semiarid Southwest. Large floods in 1993 scoured riparian areas in the Carrizo watershed on the White Mountain Apache Reservation in east-central Arizona. We evaluated recovery at three of these sites using repeated photographs and measurements of channel cross sections and stream-side vegetation along permanent transects. The sites were mapped as lying on the same soil type, had similar streamside vegetative communities, and were similarly treated through livestock exclusion and supplemental seeding. However, the sites and individual reaches within the sites followed strikingly different development paths. Dramatic recovery occurred at a perennial reach where cover of emergent wetland plants increased from 4.7 percent (standard error = 0.8 percent) in October 1995 to 55.5 percent (standard error = 2.7 percent) in September 2001. At several other reaches, geologic and hydro geomorphic characteristics of the sites limited inputs of fine sediment or surface water, resulting in modest or negligible increases in emergent cover. Recovery efforts for highly valued marshlands in this region should prioritize perennial reaches in low gradient valleys where salty sediments are abundant.