Inadequate Monitoring and Inappropriate Project Goals: A Case Study on the Determination of Success for the Forester Creek Improvement Project

References

1. 1. Ambrose R.F

   . 2000. Wetland mitigation in the united states: Assessing the success of mitigation policies. Wetlands 19:1–27.

   OpenUrl
2. 1. Amweg E.L

   . 2005. Use and toxicity of pyrethroid pesticides in the Central Valley, California USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 24:966–972.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 1. Bash S

   . 2002. Stream restoration and enhancement projects: Is anyone monitoring? Environmental Management 29:885–887.

   OpenUrl
4. 1. Bernhardt E.S.,
   2. Palmer M.A.

   2011. River restoration: The fuzzy logic of repairing reaches to reverse catchment scale degradation. Ecological Applications 21:1926–1932.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 1. Bohn B.A.,
   2. Kershner J.L.

   2002. Establishing aquatic restoration priorities using a watershed approach. Journal of Environmental Management 64:335–363.

   OpenUrl
6. 1. California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA)

   . 2009. CASQA Recognizes “Forester Creek Improvement Project” for Improving Water Quality. www.estormwater.com/casqa-recognizes-excellence-storm-water-quality-management
7. 1. City of Santee

   . 2012. Forester Creek Improvement Project Fourth Annual Biological Monitoring Report September 2012.
8. 1. Department of Fish and Game (DFG)

   . 2003. California stream bioassessment procedure ( protocol brief for biological and physical/habitat assessment in wadeable streams). California Department of Fish and Game-Aquatic Bioassessment Laboratory.
9. 1. Galat O.D

   . 2008. Evaluating success criteria and project monitoring in river enhancement within an adaptive management framework. Environmental Management 41:90–105.

   OpenUrlPubMed
10. 1. Hughes R.M.,
    2. Dunham S.D.,
    3. Maas-Hebner K.G.,
    4. Yeakley J.A.,
    5. Schreck C.,
    6. Harte M.,
    7. Molina N.,
    8. Schock C.C.,
    9. Kaczynski V.W.,
    10. Schaeffer J.

    2014. A Review of Urban Water Body Challeneges and Approaches: Rehabilitation and Remediation. Fisheries 39:18–29.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
11. 1. Johnson N

    . 2005. Improving urban stream restoration effort: Identifying critical form and process relationships. Environmental Management 35:579–592.

    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
12. 1. Karr J.R.,
    2. Dudley D.R.

    1981. Ecological perspective on water quality goals. Environmental Management 5:55–68.

    OpenUrlWeb of Science
13. 1. Lake P.S

    . 2001. On the maturing of restoration: Linking ecological research and restoration. Ecological Management and Restoration 2:110–115.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
14. 1. Lüderitz V.,
    2. Gerlach F.,
    3. Jüpner R.,
    4. Calleros J.,
    5. Pitt J.,
    6. Gersberg R.

    2005. Water quality of Tecate Creek (U.S./Mexico) with special regard to self-purification. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 104:1–13.

    OpenUrl
15. 1. Lüderitz V.,
    2. Speierl T.,
    3. Langheinrich U.,
    4. Völkl W.,
    5. Gersberg R.M.

    2011. Restoration of the Upper Main and Rodach rivers— The success and its measurement. Ecological Engineering 37: 2044–2055.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
16. 1. Miller S.J.,
    2. Pruitt B.A.,
    3. Theiling C.H.,
    4. Fischenich J.C.,
    5. Komlos S.B.

    2012. Reference concepts in ecosystem restoration and environmental benefits analysis (EBA): Principles and practices. EMRRP Technical Notes Collection. ERDC TN-EMRRP-EBA-12. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
17. 1. Ode P.,
    2. Rehn A.C.,
    3. May J.T.

    2005. A quantitative tool for assessing the integrity of southern coastal California streams. Environmental Management 35:493–504.

    OpenUrlPubMed
18. 1. Paul M.J.,
    2. Meyer J.L.

    2001. Streams in the urban landscape. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 32:333–365.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
19. 1. Pedroli B.,
    2. De Blust G.,
    3. Van Loo K.,
    4. van Rooij S.

    2002. Setting targets in strategies for river restoration. Landscape Ecology 17:5–18.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
20. 1. Riley S.P.,
    2. Busteed G.T.,
    3. Kats L.B.,
    4. Vandergon T.L.,
    5. Lee L.F.,
    6. Dagit R.G.,
    7. Kerby J.L.,
    8. Fisher R.N.,
    9. Sauvajot R.M.

    2005. Effects of urbanization on the distribution and abundance of amphibians and invasive species in southern California streams. Conservation Biology 19:1894–1907.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
21. 1. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (SDRWQCB)

    . 2011. San Diego Region- The Basin Plan. State of California.
22. 1. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)

    . 2004. Water Quality Control Policy For Developing California’s Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List. State of California, California Environmental Protection Agency. Adopted September 2004.
23. 1. Sudol M.F.,
    2. Ambrose R.F.

    2002. The US Clean Water Act and habitat replacement: Evaluation of mitigation sites in Orange County, California, USA. Environmental Management 30: 727–734.

    OpenUrlPubMed
24. 1. Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP)

    . 2008. Quality Assurance Program Plan. State of California.
25. 1. Swenson D.P.,
    2. Ambrose R.F.

    2007. A spatial analysis of cumulative habitat loss in Southern California under the Clean Water Act Section 404 program. Landscape and Urban Planning 82:41–55.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
26. 1. Walsh C.J.,
    2. Fletcher T.D.,
    3. Ladson A.R.

    2005. Stream restoration in urban catchments through redesigning stormwater systems: Looking to the catchment to save the stream. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 24:690–705.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
27. 1. White P.S.,
    2. Walker J.L.

    1997. Approximating nature’s variation: Selecting and using reference information in restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 5:338–349.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
28. 1. Woodward M.E.,
    2. Slusark J.,
    3. Ode P.

    2012. Standard operating procedures for laboratory processing and identification of benthic macroinvertebrates in California. Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
29. 1. Yoon V.K.,
    2. Stein E.D.

    2008. Natural catchments as sources of background levels of storm water metals, nutrients, and solids. Journal of Environmental Engineering 134:961–973.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
30. 1. Zedler J.B.,
    2. Callaway J.C.

    1999. Tracking wetland restoration: do mitigation sites follow desired trajectories? Restoration Ecology 7:69–73.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science