Holly Suchy

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Module 5: Functional Timelines (long-term vs. short-term) #5997

    Howdy all,

    Attached is my updated tailored timeline. From my understanding, this particular project will not require permitting since it is an ephemeral stream. Someone please correct me if I am wrong. I decided to start with this project so I could focus my efforts on building a structurally sound BDA and hone my skills before moving onto other projects that would require permitting. My biggest concern is longevity- the majority of my material is non-living (juniper slash). I am going to incorporate some live material sourced from the adjacent coulee in the hopes that it reinforces the non-living material.

    If it was a more ideal location for beavers, I would look into relocating them from the river bottom where they have wreaked havoc on cottonwoods I have tried so hard to keep alive. Alas, the grade is too steep and there is not enough woody vegetation for them to thrive.

    See you all Wednesday afternoon!

    Holly Suchy

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    in reply to: Module 3: Retaining Water (including Late Summer Flows) #5988

    Howdy all,

    Water scarcity seems to be on everyone’s minds- given our dismal snowpack, water woes have started earlier than usual this year. My job as a consultant is natural resource management (namely in habitat improvement). Water is a finite resource; we can’t make more of it, so  we have to learn how to use it smarter. Many large ranches I work with are multi-faceted in both landscape and also overall objective. Not only do these ranches want to make a profit (from ag or cattle) but most want to be good stewards of the land and make habitat improvements for wildlife. Being toward the top of the watershed, in a time where everyone is calling for more water, if LTPBR can help us store more water for longer, it seems like a win- win for land owners. Increasing water residency, increasing forage availability and diversity for both cattle and wildlife, decreasing sediment load, and increasing water availability for downstream users OR keeping more water in our rivers for our beloved non-native trout 😉

    Apologies for the wide-lens blanket approach to this post. I have several projects I would like to use LTPBR on- got me thinking about how many installs it would take to see a larger scale, rather than localized, impact.

    in reply to: Module 2: Mitigating Erosion #5827

    Beautiful Zuni bowl ladies! I am uncertain you will want to haul as many rocks for the larger dryland area… I am wondering if you perhaps could try just a mix of rock and debris (i.e. felled conifers) to slow down that water movement when present, and capture more moving sediment.

     

    Holly- I am having a similar issue with a rocky bottom. I am unsure I will be able to manually drive any stakes without the use of equipment (which is virtually impossible to mob to my particular location). If there is rock available, I am wondering if you could build the base of your BDA with rocks (more akin to a rock weir) and weave some conifer debris throughout.

     

    I am unsure how to place an exact dollar amount on the economic impact of my incised coulee. However, it does feed into a canal which is used for lower elevation pivot operation so reducing sediment loading into that system might be extrapolated to labor work for having to dredge ditches (and benefit from just keeping more water in the system for longer). Additionally, this area is prime winter habitat for elk, mule deer, and antelope so there is an intrinsic benefit for improving habitat (increase water residency, increase plant production).

     

    Attached are some photos of the large head-cut I would like to fix, and also pictures of some smaller downstream head-cuts that have been mitigated with a rock rundown. Some of the previously built rock rockdowns have been blown out by particularly flashy precip events, which just goes to show that the non- living structures do take more maintenance over time.

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.

    I work for a natural resource consulting (ranch management) company so the scope of my projects are spread out across different properties which each have their own unique approach. Typically we are looking at degraded and incised stream channels due to over-grazing and poor management practices. Overall, my goal with this course is to offer a different approach to heavy dirt work/completely restructuring stream channels for a cost effective way to use materials on site and store water for improved wildlife habitat and increase native vegetation.
    For now, I will focus on one particular project located east of Sheridan, MT. The area is quality habitat for elk, deer, and antelope. It is a coulee that flows ephemerally during spring runoff, and it’s voracity depends on snowpack levels. The channel is mild to moderately incised the entire length, with scattered areas of moderate to severe head-cuts. Many of the smaller head cuts have already been reinforced with non-living rock structures, but there is one particularly large head cut (think sedan-sized) near the top of the coulee that we cannot manually haul enough rocks in to reinforce. The slope is too great for me to have high hopes of creating a wetland oasis, rather my goal is to build BDA to withstand the spring runoff so we can reduce further erosion, and store some modicum of water for the critters and plants. This area was treated extensively for conifer encroachment and although we are seeing a higher number of native plants repopulate, there are still the ever-present noxious weeds. So, if we could store enough water to drown the weeds along the channel or give the native plants enough water to compete, that would be a bonus!

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)