Morphology of a Wetland Stream

/ Little attention has been paid to wetland stream morphology in the geomorphological and environmental literature, and in the recently expanding wetland reconstruction field, stream design has been based primarily on stream morphologies typical of nonwetland alluvial environments. Field investigation of a wetland reach of Roaring Brook, Stafford, Connecticut, USA, revealed several significant differences between the morphology of this stream and the typical morphology of nonwetland alluvial streams. Six morphological features of the study reach were examined: bankfull flow, meanders, pools and riffles, thalweg location, straight reaches, and cross-sectional shape. It was found that bankfull flow definitions originating from streams in nonwetland environments did not apply. Unusual features observed in the wetland reach include tight bends and a large axial wavelength to width ratio. A lengthy straight reach exists that exceeds what is typically found in nonwetland alluvial streams. The lack of convex bank point bars in the bends, a greater channel width at riffle locations, an unusual thalweg location, and small form ratios (a deep and narrow channel) were also differences identified. Further study is needed on wetland streams of various regions to determine if differences in morphology between alluvial and wetland environments can be applied in order to improve future designs of wetland channels.KEY WORDS: Stream morphology; Wetland restoration; Wetland creation; Bankfull; Pools and riffles; Meanders; Thalweg     

A morphological comparison of narrow,low-gradient streams traversing wetland environments to alluvial streams

Twelve morphological features from research on alluvial streams are compared in four narrow, low-gradient wetland streams located in different geographic regions (Connecticut, Indiana, and Wisconsin, USA). All four reaches differed in morphological characteristics in five of the features compared (consistent bend width, bend cross-sectional shape, riffle width compared to pool width, greatest width directly downstream of riffles, and thalweg location), while three reaches differed in two comparisons (mean radius of curvature to width ratio and axial wavelength to width ratio). The remaining five features compared had at least one reach where different characteristics existed. This indicates the possibility of varying morphology for streams traversing wetland areas further supporting the concept that the unique qualities of wetland environments might also influence the controls on fluvial dynamics and the development of streams. If certain morphological features found in streams traversing wetland areas differ from current fluvial principles, then these varying features should be incorporated into future wetland stream design and creation projects. The results warrant further research on other streams traversing wetlands to determine if streams in these environments contain unique morphology and further investigation of the impact of low-energy fluvial processes on morphological development. Possible explanations for the morphology deviations in the study streams and some suggestions for stream design in wetland areas based upon the results and field observations are also presented.