Riparian Forest Restoration Along Large Rivers: Initial Results from the Sacramento River Project

  • Published source details Alpert P., Griggs F.T. & Peterson D.R. (1999) Riparian Forest Restoration Along Large Rivers: Initial Results from the Sacramento River Project. Restoration Ecology, 7, 360-368.


This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Other biodiversity: Restore habitat along watercourses

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland
  1. Other biodiversity: Restore habitat along watercourses

    A replicated site comparison in 1990–1995 in restored riparian forests along the Sacramento River, California, USA, found that some species survived after planting, as part of riparian restoration, but others did not. Plants: Box elder Acer negundo had 75–100% survival after two years (planted in five sites). Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia had 0% survival in two of three sites but had 100% survival in one of three sites. Western sycamore Platanus racemosa had 53–100% survival in four of five sites and 0% in one of five sites. Fremont’s cotton wood Populus fremontii had 14–66% survival in three of four sites and 0% in one of four sites. Valley oak Quercus labata had 18–100% survival (planted in five sites). Californian Rose Rosa californica had 21–100% survival (planted in three sites). Sandbar willow Salix exigua had 5–88% survival (planted in two sites). Goodding’s willow Salix gooddingii had 17–94% survival (planted in two sites). Arroyo willow Salix lasiolepis had 26–100% survival (planted in four sites). Blue elderberry Sambucus mexicana had 8–68% survival (planted in five sites). Methods: Sites were on flood plains and were ≥200 ha. Seven sites were selected, with varying planting dates: Lohman (1994), Princeton (1992), River (1990), Sam (1991), Vista 1 (1992), Vista 2 (1993), and Vista 3 (1994). All sites had previously been cleared of vegetation. All species were collected from natural stands. Plants were protected by sleeves (35 cm height). Sites were irrigated and weeds were controlled through monthly spraying. Survival and height were measured in 405 m2 plots (the number of plots varied to cover 5–10% of each site). Planting rows were sampled in Lohman and Vista 3 plots. Plants were sampled at the end of each growing season.


Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust