This form does not yet contain any fields.

    John and David Teaching Course in Portland 


    Hey Stream People and Potomologists

    David Derrick and John McCullah are teaching a course  in Portland on August 4th at StormCon.  This will be a great chance to catch John and Dave "together again”, teaching a new course entitled “Repairing Entrenched, Incised, and Degraded Urban Streams - Techniques and Case Studies”.  

    Go to for more information.


    Portland is August!, what could be better?  And attending the StormCon Conference should be a wonderful educational and networking opportunity.  How better to catchup on the new NPDES and General Permit requirements AND solutions. 
    Dave and I are hoping to get a Stream Restoration Track as a regular part of the StormCon Conference.  Please help us by attending if you can.

    Repairing Entrenched, Incised and Degraded Urban Streams – Techniques and Case Studies


    Urbanization, with its associated decrease in overall infiltration and increases in impermeable surfaces, along with a proliferation of hydrologic and hydraulic sciences that “get the water off the site”, frequently result in incision of the associated urban streams.  Not just urbanization but also other anthropogenic factors such as dams, heavy long-term grazing, highly roaded timber areas, and instream gravel mining.

    Urban stream entrenchment, incision, and degradation are a high-priority, national issue leading to poor water quality, loss of riparian function, loss of aquatic habitat and costly threats to infrastructure. The new provisions of the Clean Water Act are an attempt to deal with these issues.  Post-construction BMPs and revegetation requirements, along with LID and other reductions of hydromodification during development and construction are now required as part of the NPDES program.

    Urban streams which are “properly functioning”, are often mimicking pre-development conditions - with healthy stream buffers, riparian zones, and instream function that can often ameliorate the effects of urbanization and other anthropogenic land use problems.

    This course will deal with some of the tools needed to design and build naturally-functioning stream, river, and creek reaches.  The material will be presented with the extensive use of Case Studies.  John McCullah will present projects utilizing Bioengineering and Environmentally-Sensitive techniques from US, and Canada, to New Zealand, some spanning over 15 years. John will also use some Dirt Time Video Clips to present projects. You can almost smell the diesel and dust!

    David Derrick will present many projects from his extensive collection of stream projects.  David promises a new Case Study from a Urban Steam project in the Cleveland area.  He says, “this project has it all - all the urban area concerns from stormwater to Riparian Buffers to Parks …"

    In 2005, the Transportation Research Board and National Cooperative Highway Research Board published NCHRP Report 544 – Environmentally Sensitive Channel and Bank Protection Methods Report 544- Environmentally Sensitive Channel and Bank Protection Methods.  This report, authored by J. McCullah, D. Gray, and D.F. Shields was published on CD and includes over 50 Techniques, from re-directive Rock Vanes and Bendway Weirs to Vegetated Rip Rap and Longitudinal Stone Toe with Live Siltation. It incorporates design considerations, construction specifications and detailed drawings.  An Educational Version of this design guidance document will be provided free to all StormCon class attendees. $100 value





    Tip Of The Week: Brushlayering with Soil Wrap

    This technique consists of live cut branches (brushlayers) interspersed between layers of soil wrapped in natural or synthetic geotextile materials. The brush is placed in a crisscross or overlapping pattern so that the tips of the branches protrude just beyond the face of the fill, where they act as horizontal drains and improve slope stability by redirecting the flow direction. Natural geofabrics, such as coir netting, are typically wrapped around the soil layer to provide additional soil surface protection and reinforcement. Refer to Manufacturer Directory - Geotextiles/Geosynthetics.

    Conditions Where Practice Applies

    Brushlayering with geotextile soil wraps can be used to stabilize very steep slopes.  They provide an alternative to vertical retaining structures for grade separation purposes and in situations that require avoiding right-of-way encroachment at the base or top of slopes.  Geotextile soil wraps can also be used to protect slopes that are subject to periodic scour or tractive stresses, such as drainage channels or upper portions of streambanks.


    Brushlayering with soil wrap was used to stabilize and revegetate eroding banks
    at Whiskeytown Lake, Whiskeytown National Recreation Area, CA.


    Long branches of trees and brush which are capable of vegetative propagation, usually willows.  The length of the branches will vary with the type of application (embankment or buttress fill) and desired depth of reinforcement; ideally they should be long enough to reach the back of a buttress fill.  The inert construction material consists of natural geofabrics such as coir netting, or synthetic, polymeric geogrids.  Natural geofabrics or geogrids are then wrapped around the soil layers to protect the slope face and provide a stable planting surface.  Refer to Manufacturer Directory - Geotextiles/Geosynthetics.


    Once the live cuttings become established, their root systems become entangled with the soil wrap and/or geogrid, binding the entire system together in a unitary, coherent mass.  When used along streams, vegetated soil wraps provide habitat for fish and wildlife. 

    Brushlayering with soil wrap was used to stabilize this streambank in Sulphur Creek
    (Redding, CA), and provide riparian cover at the same time.



    Must be implemented during the dormancy period of vegetation.  Will not be suitable for the stabilization of very thick organic soil horizons. 


    Begin at the base of the slope and proceed upward.  See typical drawing below for the step by step procedures of brushlayering with soil wrap.  The vegetated soil wrap structure should be supported on a rock toe or base and be battered or inclined at an angle of at least 10 to 20 degrees to minimize lateral earth forces.  A trench should be excavated to a competent horizon as well as below the likely depth of scour.

    The fabric is installed by placing it on top of the soil so that at least 0.5 m (3 feet) can be anchored by wooden stakes to the soil-gravel layer.  Allow 2 m (6 feet) of fabric to extend beyond the brushlayer so that it will lap over and cover the soil-gravel mix , then stake into place.  Crisscross layers of dormant cuttings and/or transplants on top of the soil wrap, placing the cut ends into the slope with the tips extending beyond the edge of the bench (no more than ¼ of the total branch length).  Care should be taken to place the branches at random with regard to size and age and species composition.  Deposit a layer of topsoil over the cuttings and tamp into place. 

    Repeat the branch, topsoil, and wrapped soil-gravel mix layering sequence until the desired bank height is achieved.  Fill slopes can be created at the same time a brushlayer is installed.  On a cut slope and existing streambanks, each layer is excavated at the time the brush layer is installed.  



    Material acquisition costs depend on the type of fabric material selected, i.e., whether natural fabric, synthetic geotextile, or polymeric geogrid. Installed unit cost ranges for different fabric materials are shown in Table 2.

    Table 1. Installed unit costs for different fabric materials
    (adapted from Washington State, 2003) 






    An order-of-magnitude cost estimate for brushlayers with soil wrap can be made from relative cost comparisons for different biotechnical bank protection techniques, as shown in Table 3. Costs are shown for soil reinforcement and brushlayers, respectively. These cost comparisons are based on various bank treatments installed primarily in Washington State between 1995 and 2000. Costs are for materials and construction and do not include design or post-construction components of the project. Brushlayering with Soil Wraps will cost more than live brushlayering used alone because of the presence of geotextile or geogrid reinforcements, and their material acquisition costs. Note that soil reinforcement costs differ significantly, most likely because of varying material costs for different types of fabric or geogrid reinforcing materials. 


    Table 2. Installed unit costs for biotechnical bank protection techniques
    (adapted from Washington State, 2003) 


    The brushlayering with soil wrap technique was used in this excavated stream crossing to stabilize streambanks and provide habitat.  (Whiskeytown Logging Road Removal Project, Whiskeytown NRA, CA.)



    Washington Dept of Fish & Wildlife (2003). Integrated Streambank Protection Guidelines, published in co-operation with Washington Dept. of Transportation and Washington Dept. of Ecology, April 2003. 


    Project # 20 - Lower Sulphur Creek ( A Chapter from Bioengineering Case Studies)



    PROJECT TYPE:  Salmonid Stream Restoration

    PROJECT SCALE:  Moderate, approx 1 mile of stream realignment and habitat restoration.

    CLIENT/OWNER: Sacramento Watershed Action Group (SWAG) and Co-ord Resource Management Group 


    -- Willow & Cottonwood Pole Planting
    -- LWD & Rock Habitat Structures
    -- Newbury Rock Riffle
    -- Rock Vanes
    -- Stream Realignment 

    GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: Turtle Bay / Redding Arboretum, North Redding, CA

    GEOMORPHIC SETTING: Sulphur Creek is a small, seasonal tributary stream to the Sacramento River. The watershed comprises approximately 3,000-ac with 7-mile stream length. The Sulphur Creek Watershed Analysis and Action Plan (SCWAAP), 1996, documented that the lower 2 miles of Creek can provide valuable salmonid spawning and rearing habitat if stream form and function can be restored.

    SITE CONDITIONS PROBLEMS: The entire watershed, especially the in-stream sections, has been AND severely impacted by hydraulic mining and dredger mining in circa 1800’s and gravel mining and road/highway building in the early-mid 1900s (see Figure 20.1) Lower Sulphur Creek (approximately 1 mile) runs through the Redding Arboretum.  This section had been dredged for gold (circa 1850s and 1920s) and some of the dredger piles had been subsequently mined for gravel (circa 1930-1950) thereby removing the gravel-sized substrate from the stream system and leaving cobble- and small boulder-sized piles of rock in the stream and flood plain.  A very significant land use impact occurred in 1934 when Highway 273 was build.  The new box culvert diverted the stream out of its’ historic channel and into the adjoining oak/savannah woodland.

    Figure 20.1 - Site Conditions in the Lower Sulfur Creek Watershed



    Prior to restoration the stream in this reach is severely aggraded.  The stream gradient in this lower reach is very low – an ancient alluvial fan – therefore the streams ability to transport sediment and bedload is low.  The historic land uses have exacerbated this problem because the stream has been diverted out of its original channel by the upstream highway box culvert and it has been diverted around and through the gravel mining tailings.  Early gold mining “turned the channel upside-down” then gravel mining in the mid 1900s removed the gravel-sized alluvium.  Subsequently, the creek was diverted into  modified dredger areas.  In summary, the pre-restoration condition was characterized by a channel with a convex-up stream bottom, choked with large cobble, severe bank erosion, and little to no bank vegetation.  One 1000-ft section of the stream was nicknamed “the dead reach” for all the young escaping salmonid frye that died as the stream dried up (went subsurface) episodically (see Figure 20.2). 

    The primary objective for improving stream function was to re-align and mimic it’s historic plan form while excavating the excess bedload material.  The secondary goal was to increase instream and riparian habitat.  The plan for fisheries improvement was threefold:

    1. remove obstacles to anadramous fish migration and improve spawning habitat,
    2. provide rearing habitat,
    3. improve late Spring flows to allow ‘fish escapement’.

    Simultaneously, the SWAAP designated and prioritized watershed-wide projects intended to reduce erosion and sedimentation.  The entire Sulphur Creek Restoration effort implemented by Sacramento Watersheds Action Group (SWAG) was conducted over an 11-year period, 1996 – 2007.

    Figure 20.2 - The "Dead Reach" in Lower Sulphur Creek


    •  Stream Realignment and Floodplain Restoration: In 2002 SWAG and the Sulphur Creek CCRMP received a $160,000 grant from Cantara Council to design, permit, and re-align approximately 2,000 feet of stream. A new low flow channel was excavated to divert Sulphur Creek back into it's historic channel. The historic stream dimensions, e.g., Bank Full width, slope, and sinuosity, as determined from a 'reference reach,' were used to guide design and implementation. The inner bend(s) of the re-aligned reach were excavated to allow floodwaters to access the floodplain.
    •  Newbury Rock Riffle: In order to reduce the risk of flooding in the re-aligned reach, and ensure the stream had a sustained low flow for fish escapement, a split-flow was desired at the upstream diversion.  Flood stage was determined at about 3000 cfs and at approximately 500 cfs the stream was designed to flow into both the degraded reach and the new re-aligned reach.  The split flow was achieved with a rock weir designed as a Newbury Rock Riffle. The riffle crest was built one-foot higher than the bottom of the low flow re-aligned channel (see Figure 20.3).

    Figure 20.3 - Schematic diagram of Newbury Rock Riffle 

    • Large Woody Debris (LWD) and Rock Structures: The re-aligned reach had LWD structures constructed at strategic places along the outer bends – primarily locations anticipated to receive impinging flows – thus fostering the development of scour / resting pools.  The structures were constructed of large wood (rootwads), large rock, and anchored with deeply planted willow and cottonwood poles (see Figure 20.4).

    Figure 20.4 - LWD structured constructed from logs/rootwads, boulders,
    and pole plantings for vegetative anchoring.


    •  Rock Vane: A Rock Vane was built approximately 300 ft upstream of the re-alignment project.  The vane was intended to protect a mature oak tree and begin to “re-direct” the stream flow into the re-aligned reach.  This vane, built in 2003, was the first rock vane designed and built by the author.  It has been thoroughly monitored and photographed over the last 10 years.  The oak tree subsequently burned down during a wildfire, however the rock vane continues re-direct flows away from the exposed bank while promoting instream habitat (see Fig. 20.5). 
    • Longitudinal Peaked Stone Toe with Live Siltation: Longitudinal Peaked Stone Toe (LPSTP) are generally built low.  The willow branches of Live Siltationare arrayed in such a way to provide local roughness.  LPSTP with Live Siltation can not only arrest outer bank erosion, but often lead to deposition in those areas.  By September 23, 2003, the restoration effort had run out of grant money and time (the NPDES/CaDFG Permits allowed work until October only). Since there were insufficient funds or time to “layback” the tailings along the outer bend, an alternative construction technique was employed.  The outer bend material was excavated nearly vertical. Then a rock toe about 3-ft high (designed to a height near average annual or bankfull elevation) was built longitudinally along the bend (see Figure 20.6).  Before the vertical cut could collapse, willow branches (Live Siltation) were quickly and carefully placed behind the rock.  The branches were 6-9 ft long to insure they were placed as deep as possible for establishment.  Earthen debris and tailings from the vertical cut were then raked down to backfill behind the LPSTP and around the willow (see Figure 20.7).

    Figure 20.5 - Rock Vane built at beginning of project reach - to protect
    Oak tree on left decending bank and to direct flows toward Newbury riffle
    and restored reach.

    Figure 20.6 - Dogleg excavation looking downstream. Outer bend
    is nearly vertical; rock and log toe are being placed in preparation
    for "Live Siltation."

    Figure 20.7 - Dogleg rock toe and "Live Siltation" seven years after construction.



    The biggest obstacle to this project was the permitting process. The CEQA rules and guidelines were applied to this project as if it was a development instead of a self-mitigating restoration.  All parties, the City of Redding and SWAG were inexperienced, therefore it took about 2 years and almost ½ of the restoration / implementation budget to permit the project.  Eventually SWAG had to complete City / FEMA Flood Map revisions even though the restoration involved removing tons of gravel tailings from the floodplain.

    Urban stream restoration activities seem to make regional flood planners nervous – unfortunately many commonly-used tools such as HEC-RAS do not accurately reflect the impacts of localized activities such as willow planting, rootwad / large woody material placement, or redirective methods such as rock vanes.  HEC-RAS assumes that the channel bottom is essentially “fixed” while the restorationist wants scour pools, riffles etc.  The localized scour and low flow incisions quite often compensate for placing some material in the floodplain.

    Secondarily, State and Federal laws, which are interpreted and enforced by inexperienced regulators, is extremely problematic.  For example, at one time a State Water Quality regulator advised the project supervisor to put silt fences in the stream and to line the channel bottom with erosion control mats.  The regulator apparently failed to understand the nature of restoring aquatic and salmonid habitat.  Future stream restoration projects which were regulated by State and Federal Agency staff familiar with, and supportive of, restoration activities went much smoother and resulted in maximum ecosystem benefits.



    The Lower Sulfur Creek project is relatively complex and required careful co-ordination among its different elements and components.  The system performed well during and after intense rainstorms and high velocity stream flows following construction.  In spite of several instances of high water the protective structures and vegetation stayed in place and displaced erosive, high velocity flows away from the stream bank while preventing further erosion of the stream bank.  Low flows are now diverted to the restored channel by a Newbury Rock Riffle on left diverts low flows to restored channel (see Figure 20.8)..  Vegetation established well both atop the flood terrace and near the water’s edge.  Channel degradation appears to have been arrested and sediment is being flushed through the creek to the Sacramento River.  The salmonid fish habitat has been restored and frye are no longer trapped during low flows which are now diverted to the restored channel.



    The restoration of lower Sulfur Creek required the use of heavy equip-ment for restoration. The idea that heavy equipment could be used in or near seasonally dry or flowing streams, by skilled operators and careful planning was a paradigm shift that was achieved by tactful communication, frequent demonstrations, and performance monitoring.  The fact that the Salmonid species returned was definitely beneficial.

    One very important method (BMP) was developed and demonstrated for working in seasonally dry gravel-bedded streams, namely “Washing of Fines.”  Running heavy equip-ment in a stream channel during the dry season will ultimately bring the finer sand and silt particles to the surface.  These ‘fines” can cause water quality exceedance when the first winter storms come.

    Figure 20.8 - Newbury Riffle on left diverts low flows to restored channel on right
    6 years after project completion.

    Washing fines is an “in-channel” sediment control method which uses water, either from a water truck or hydrant, to wash any stream fines, brought to the surface of the channel bed during restoration, back into the deep interstitial spaces of the gravel and cobbles, leaving clean cobble and gravel on the bed surface (see Figure 20.9).

    Fig. 20.9 – Washing fines using high pressure hose from a water truck.


    SWAG monitored the stream turbidity during the first precipitation events resulting in stream flow.  The results were astonishing because the practice of “washing fines” most often resulted in reduced turbidity when comparing upstream and downstream values.  Sulphur Creek, being an urban stream with extensive upstream disturbances, could actually be “cleaned up” by Washing Fines in the restored construction reaches.



    Maslin, P.E., W.R. McKinney, T.L. Moo (????). Intermittent Streams asRearing Habitat for Sacramento River Chinook Salmon,  Publication source????

    NCHRP Report 544 – Environmentally Sensitive Channel and Bank Protection Methods, 2005, J. McCullah, D. Gray

    E-SenSS - Environmentally Sensitive Streambank Stabilization Techniques, 2005, Salix Applied Earthcare, Redding, CA

    For more projects like this, please visit to order our E-Book today! Want something to scribble notes in? Don't worry - we have a hard cover copy available as well!


    Case Study: Buckhorn Summit

    PROJECT TYPE:   Steep highway cutslope construction,revegetation field trials



    CLIENT/OWNER: Calif. Dept of Transportation


    EMPLOYED:  Stepped Slopes, Compost / Soil Admixtures, Tree and shrub planting, Brushlayers, and Live staking (slope pinning)

    GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: Hwy. 299W, just below Buckhorn Summit, Shasta County, Calif.

    GEOMORPHIC SETTING: Buckhorn Mountain is an exposed decomposed granite batholith, which separates Shasta and Trinity Counties in NW California.  Highway 299 W traverses Buckhorn Mountain for almost 15 miles over steep mountainous terrain, elevations of 1000 ft to 3000ft at the summit.  The Shasta Bally Batholith granitics have a high percentage of biotite and mica- type minerals that weather easily. Weathering is extensive because the batholith is deeply fractured, thus allowing the intrusion of water.  

    SITE CONDITIONS AND PROBLEMS: Hwy 299 is the main east/west route from Redding in the northern Central Valley to the Eureka in the North Coast, yet the terrain, erosivity, and environmental concerns make highway construction (straightening and widening) extremely challenging.  As of 2010 the CA Construction General Permit (in compliance with the Clean Water Act) became very stringent requiring all new construction to be “stabilized” before construction and permit coverage is considered “completed”.  Historically, steep cutslopes in these decomposed granites (DG) have been extremely difficult to vegetate and the bare reveling cutslopes can be a chronic source sediment.  The challenges to establishing vegetation are many -

    The region can experience 50 inches of rain in the winter followed by six months of no precipitation at all and summer temperatures can often exceed 100 degrees for weeks on end.

    Soil texture and composition are other impediments to stabilization. The decomposed granite parent material weathers rapidly to a sandy-silt textured soil that is extremely erosive. The soils derived from the Shasta Bally Batholith are within the Hydrologic Soil Group A, based on high permeability, and have been determined to be some of the most erosive in the nation.

    On exposed cut slopes competent appearing bedrock quickly decomposes and ravels when exposed to moisture and freeze-thaw cycles. The soils resulting from these weathering processes are droughty. The water holding capacity and organic content are also very low, therefore these soils are difficult to re-vegetate. 

    These decomposed granite (DG) soils in upslope, undisturbed areas have extremely high infiltration rates and permeability. Therefore. the mountain has significant amounts of groundwater within. This presents another erosion mechanism that is especially problematic on steep highway cuts and fills, namely, exfiltration or “seepage erosion.” This often occurs when the slope face intercepts the groundwater table.

    TREATMENT OBJECTIVES AND CONSIDERATIONS: The main goal was to test the viability of constructing a stepped highway cut and to conduct field trials for revegetation strategies.  Stepped slopes control erosion by breaking up the slope length – reducing the volume and velocity of stormwater runoff. It was hoped that the steps would also promote vegetative cover by providing a stable substrate while capturing and retaining loose soil and moisture.

    Figure 1 - As-built plans for Post Mile 1.0 show curve correction and stepped slope project.



    •  Stepped Slope:  
    •  Back filling Steps:
    •  Willow Brushlayering:
    •  Landscape Treatments:  Several different treatments were tried and monitored including:
      • All the steps had native grass seeds, covered by straw mulch, planted on the horizontal surfaces.  
      •  Native pine trees and shrubs were planted on the steps by drilling planting holes in the bench with power augers. 
      •  Drip irrigation versus polymer (Dry Water).  The eastern half of the slope had the plants drip irrigated by gravity from a water tank installed at the top of the slope.  
    • Live Willow Stakes /Slope Pins:  In late December and early January of the first winter the area experienced a snowstorm followed by a large rain event.  The upper center of the slope failed by a saturated slump.  The small landslide got caught on the mid-slope drainage bench but the saturated material threatened to initiate a larger failure.  In hopes of stabilizing the material until the summer when the slope could be re-constructed temporary measures were considered.  Plastic covers were rejected in favor Slope Pinning with live willow stakes.

      Live Willow Stakes, 30” to 36” long X ¾” diameter were driven into the slumping material at 3’OC.  The geotechnical principles of buttressing and arching were immediately manifested in stability of the mass and toe material.  


    Obstacles to Implementation:

    There were no extraordinary obstacles.  There was a common false belief that mountainous, high elevations were not good locations for willow.  We had to point out that Salix sps. often play the role of pioneering species, coming into an area naturally after fires and landslides.  Then naturally-occurring plants in the general vicinity were discovered and pointed out.


    Performance Evaluation: 

    This stepped cut slope is currently well vegetated and has remained stable for 10 years, since the first winter failure which was stabilized permanently with willow stakes.  These techniques may prove to be the only feasible way to comply with the new California General Construction Permit.  The site has required little to no maintenance since the first winter.


    Stepped slopes should be considered when steep, highly erosive cutslopes are difficult to stabilize.  The new Clean Water Act regulations will make it extremely difficult for Highway or County Road Department to construct slopes that are chronic sources of sedimentation.  Therefore these steep slopes with adverse soils will require extra engineering and earthwork techniques to ensure vegetation establishment. 

    Caltrans Division of Landscape Architecture conducted extensive research and developed Sustainable Erosion Control techniques for steep adverse soils.  Stepped Slopes, RECP Flaps, and RECP Wraps ,and Wire Mesh Confinement (VMSE) are a few engineering-approved techniques that have Standard Special Provisions. 

    Backfilling the steps resulted in less erosion and much better plant establishment.  Another important lesson learned was adding Certified Compost and Mycorrhizae to the steps and planting basins.  It was discovered that the steps could be cost-effectively constructed, then backfilled with compost/soil/mycorrhizae admixture as the slope was being built.  It was expensive to cut the benches then go back and fill in the steps.  Better to let the heavy equipment complete both tasks simultaneously.

    The use of live stakes to buttress landslide material was also an important lesson.



    California Department of Transportation Landscape Architecture Program, Erosion Control Toolbox,

     ***For More Case Studies like the one referenced above please check out our E-Book at for purchasing today! A great tool in visualizing which techniques work best for certain contiditons!***

    Any other questions, please feel free to write us at - !


    Thanks for reading - 

    The Dirt Time Team


    Another UC Davis Extension Class taught by Your's Truly


    John McCullah, host of Dirt Time will be teaching a course at the UC Davis Extension Wednesday, November 12, 2014, along with fellow collegues! This workshop will cover the basic concepts of natural channel form and function in streambanks, and how to determine which restoration methods are most suitable for different types of sites.

    Students will learn how to evaluate channel conditions and assess restoration potential. The second half of the course will focus on Biotechnical techniques used for streambank stabilization. The design guidance manual, NCHRP Report 544 - Environmentally-Sensitive Channel and Bank Protection Measures (2005), featuring over 40 Biotechnical Channel Bank and Instream Methods, will be covered in theory and by showing practical applications! John will explain these principles and more, using video clips of our Dirt Time Videos!

    Please join John McCullah, Chris Hammersmark, and Chris Bowles for this once a year course at UC Davis Extension! You can visit their site at . Registration is not currently open but request a notification for when the time comes. Visit the listed link above and click on the "Notify Me" button on the top right of the page! Course again is set for Wednesday, November 12, 2014 from 9AM - 4:30PM in Sacramento, CA.

    (John McCullah on the Malaysia-Thailand border in February 2014)

     For more information on the course offered, please contact us by email at!

    Biographies for Trainers listed as Course Instructors:

    Chris Bowles is a civil engineer specializing in hydraulics, hydrology, geomorphology, water resources, water quality and environmental restoration for CBEC, INC, Eco Engineering. He has more than 18 years of project management experience on a wide variety of large multi-disciplinary, multi-stakeholder projects such as floodplain restoration, sediment studies, watershed hydrology, water quality and river and wetland restoration in California, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, Florida and overseas. His technical expertise spans the range of hydraulic and hydrologic modeling, GIS and field data collection.

    Dr. Chris Hammersmark is a registered civil engineer in California specializing in hydraulics, hydrology, geomorphology, forestry, ecology, and ecosystem rehabilitation/restoration.  He has over 13 years of experience on a diverse array of projects including tidal marsh, stream, meadow and floodplain restoration, sediment and water quality studies, flood inundation and water supply investigations.  The environmental settings for these projects range from natural to urban, from the tidally influenced Bay-Delta through lowland alluvial rivers to headwater streams and adjacent meadows and forests.   Dr. Hammersmark’s technical experience includes numerical hydraulic and hydrologic modeling, habitat suitability modeling, terrain modeling, and a variety of types of field investigations including geomorphic assessments, habitat characterization and mapping, vegetation sampling, topographic and bathymetric surveys, water quality sampling, flow gauging, groundwater sampling, water table measurement, soil infiltration and compaction monitoring, sediment characterization and sediment transport measurements.  

     John McCullah has degrees from HSU (BS Watershed Geology) and Shasta Community College (AA Biology). He has been a CPESC since 1986 and a Licensed CA Contractor since 1988. John has been a practicioner in erosion and sediment control, watershed restoration, stream restoration, biotechnical erosion control (bioengineering), road and trail inventories, reconstruction and restoration for over 23 years! He has been teaching Watershed Restoration at Shasta Community College (Redding, CA) for 16 years and has produced the training video series you all love, DIRT TIME!