T
he Virginia Cooperative Extension has produced a technical note summarising the best options.
Selecting the most appropriate best management practice for closing temporary stream crossings depends on the site and the available resources. Temporary stream crossings are often needed to access timber when there are no roads. The Virginia Cooperative Extension carried our research into a number of different temporary stream crossing techniques. This research examined three different options for closing these crossings:
Each of the above was applied to three different stream crossings. Water samples were collected above and below each crossing, immediately after harvesting (before the closure method was implemented), and then daily for one year. The results showed that the first two options were both effective at reducing sediment and resulted in similar levels of sediment reduction. These two options were more effective than the more expensive option of incorporating a silt fence. Because the silt fence had to be buried in a trench next to the stream channel, it resulted in loose soil being created, which contributed to the sediment. It was therefore clear that the use of logging slash, readily available at logging sites, could effectively reduce sediment to acceptable levels.
The Technical Note is titled “Effectiveness of Temporary Stream Crossing Closure Techniques”, and was compiled by S Barrett, WM Aust and MC Bolding. Access the note at http://pubs.ext.vt.edu/ANR/ANR-110/ANR-110.html
he Virginia Cooperative Extension has produced a technical note summarising the best options.Selecting the most appropriate best management practice for closing temporary stream crossings depends on the site and the available resources. Temporary stream crossings are often needed to access timber when there are no roads. The Virginia Cooperative Extension carried our research into a number of different temporary stream crossing techniques. This research examined three different options for closing these crossings:
- Water bars and logging slash
- Water bars, seed, lime, fertiliser and straw mulch
- Water bars, seed, lime, fertiliser, straw mulch and silt fence
Each of the above was applied to three different stream crossings. Water samples were collected above and below each crossing, immediately after harvesting (before the closure method was implemented), and then daily for one year. The results showed that the first two options were both effective at reducing sediment and resulted in similar levels of sediment reduction. These two options were more effective than the more expensive option of incorporating a silt fence. Because the silt fence had to be buried in a trench next to the stream channel, it resulted in loose soil being created, which contributed to the sediment. It was therefore clear that the use of logging slash, readily available at logging sites, could effectively reduce sediment to acceptable levels.
The Technical Note is titled “Effectiveness of Temporary Stream Crossing Closure Techniques”, and was compiled by S Barrett, WM Aust and MC Bolding. Access the note at http://pubs.ext.vt.edu/ANR/ANR-110/ANR-110.html