Geomorphic monitoring and response to two dam removals: rivers Urumea and Leitzaran (Basque Country, Spain)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Dam removal has been demonstrated to be one of the most frequent and effective fluvial restoration actions but at most dam removals, especially of small dams, there has been little geomorphological monitoring. The results of the geomorphological monitoring implemented in two dams in the rivers Urumea and Leitzaran (northern Spain) are presented. The one from the River Urumea, originally 3.5 m high and impounding 500 m of river course, was removed instantaneously whereas that in the River Leitzaran, 12.5 m high, and impounding 1500 m of river course, is in its second phase of a four‐stage removal process. Changes in channel morphology, sediment size and mobility and river bed morphologies were assessed. The monitoring included several different techniques: topographical measurements of the channel, terrestrial laser scanner measurements of river bed and bars, sediment grain size and transport; all of them repeated in four (May, August, November 2011 and May 2012) and five (July and September 2013, April and August 2014 and June 2015) fieldwork campaigns in the River Urumea and River Leitzaran, respectively. Geomorphic responses of both dam removals are presented, and compared. Morphological channel adjustments occurred mainly shortly after dam removals, but with differences among the one removed instantaneously, that was immediate, whereas that conducted by stages took longer. Degradational processes were observed upstream of both dams (up to 1.2 m and 4 m in the River Urumea and River Leitzaran, respectively), but also aggradational processes (pool filling), upstream of Inturia Dam (2.85 m at least). Less evident aggradational processes were observed downstream of the dams (up to 0.37 m and 0.50 m in the River Urumea and River Leitzaran, respectively). Flood events, especially a 100 year flood registered during the monitoring period of Mendaraz Dam removal, reactivated geomorphological processes as incision and bank erosion, whereas longitudinal profile recovery, grain‐size sorting and upstream erosion took longer. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".