Skip to main content

Table 4 Evidence ratings of the success of wet meadow restoration projects

From: Have wet meadow restoration projects in the Southwestern U.S. been effective in restoring geomorphology, hydrology, soils, and plant species composition?

 

Characteristics of a functional wet meadow ecosystem

Article

Suitable stream morphology

Stable streambanks

High water table

Organic matter assimilation

Perennial vegetation

Presence of native fauna

Total evidence rating

Anderson et al. 2003 [28]

4

3

2

N/A

3

N/A

12

Borgmann et al.[29]

1

1

3

N/A

3

3

11

Chambers and Lesh[29]

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

3

3

7

Godwin 2004 [30]

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

3

N/A

3

Hammersmark et al. 2009 [31]

3*

N/A

3*

N/A

4

N/A

10

Herbst and Kane 2009 [32]

3

3

N/A

N/A

3

3

12

Holmquist et al. 2010 [33]

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

3

3

6

Key and Gish 1989 [34]

3

2

2

N/A

3

2

12

Long and Endfield 2000 [35]

2

2

2

N/A

2

1

9

Long et al. 2004a [36]

1

1

1

N/A

1

1

5

Long et al. 2004b [37]

4

3

2

N/A

3

3

15

Medina and Long 2004 [38]

3

3

2

N/A

3

2

13

Medina and Steed 2002 [39]

3

3

2

N/A

3

3

14

Norman and Immeker 2009 [40]

4

4

4

N/A

3

N/A

15

Plumas Corporation 2004 [41]

3

2

2

N/A

2

N/A

9

Plumas Corporation 2011 [42]

3

2

N/A

N/A

2

3

10

Ramstead 2011 [23]

1

3

N/A

4

4

N/A

12

Rosen et al. 1999 [43]

3

3

3

N/A

1

N/A

10

Sierra Valley Resource Conservation District 2004 [44]

2

2

2

N/A

1

3

10

State of California 2005 [45]

1

1

1

N/A

2

4

9

Swanson et al. 1988 [46]

3

3

1

N/A

2

2

11

Szewczak 2004 [47]

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

3

3

Vrooman 2004 [48]

3

3

N/A

N/A

3

N/A

9

Vrooman 2005 [49]

3

2

1

N/A

3

N/A

9

Wilcox 2010 [50]

4

4

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

8

Wildlife Fish Habitat Initiative 2008 [29]

2

3

2

N/A

3

3

13

Wolf and Cooper 2011 [25]

3**

3**

4

1

3

N/A

14

Average Rating

2.7

2.5

2.2

2.5

2.6

2.6

10.0

  1. *These are addressed more completely in a related study.
  2. **The desired floodplain morphology in this case was a stable floodplain surface without a defined stream channel.
  3. The six characteristics assessed are described in Table 1 and the rating system is described in Table 2.
Back to article page

Environmental Evidence

ISSN: 2047-2382