$1 BILLION FLOWS IN U.S. RIVER PROJECTS THIRD OF WATERWAYS POLLUTED OR IMPAIRED.

Byline: Staff and Wire Services

More than $1 billion is being spent on river and stream restoration projects nationwide while the number of projects has increased by six times over the last 10 years, according to a study to be released today.

An interdisciplinary team of scientists has compiled the first-ever comprehensive database of more than 37,000 stream and restoration projects nationwide. The findings were being released today in Science magazine.

More than a third of America's rivers are officially polluted or impaired, according to researchers. But while river restoration has become a booming and profitable business, there is no adequate accounting system for the projects, they say. ``Information as basic as what projects are being done where, who is doing them, and what the outcomes are is not available,'' said Margaret Palmer, the University of Maryland biology professor who co-authored the study.

``River restoration will play an increasingly prominent role in environmental management and policy decision,'' said Palmer, who has studied a number of stream and river projects in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. ``Advancing the field requires rigorous analysis of restoration projects, and that requires basic information on the goals and outcomes.''

Palmer and associate Emily Bernhardt led the team of scientists to work on the National River Restoration Science Synthesis, which includes restoration projects from all 50 states, with special focus on seven geographic regions, including the Chesapeake Bay, the Pacific Northwest and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley.

In California, there are 4,025 restoration projects under way, costing a total of $2 billion. An average $610,000 is being spent on each project, researchers found.

The Santa Clara River, which runs through Santa Clarita, is not included among those researched because it is not in a restoration phase, though another national environmental group named it as one of 10 that is most threatened by development.

Last year, Los Angeles and Ventura counties agreed to conduct an $8.2 million joint study of the Santa Clara River to set regional environment and development guidelines for the rapidly growing area.

The four-year Santa Clara River Watershed Protection Plan Feasibility Study, which is largely funded by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, will analyze flood control, erosion, water quality and natural habitats in the 1,600-square-mile area where the river and its tributaries run.

Researches involved in the restoration study say that it is impossible to determine ``if the desired environmental benefits of river restoration are being achieved,'' Bernhardt said. ``It's time to start monitoring.''

``Monitoring isn't just about determining if a project is a success or failure,'' Palmer said. ``It's about understanding what could be improved, so future projects can be better. River restoration has been an art, but it needs to be a science. To be a science means we must learn from what we do.''

The most common reasons for river and stream restoration are to improve water quality, in-stream habitat, fish passage and bank stabilization. Larger, more expensive projects are more often aimed at reconnecting flood plains, modifying flows, recreation or aesthetic improvement and reconfiguring channels.

``It's time to agree on what constitutes successful river and stream restoration. The best projects help nature do the work by minimizing human intervention,'' Palmer said. ``A project can have negative effects if not carefully designed.''

The five criteria for successful river and stream restoration offered by the Palmer-Bernhardt group are:

--Define a ``guiding image'' of the healthy river that could exist at a given site, so everyone understands what the desired goals are;

--Show measurable changes toward that image - such as larger fish populations or clearer water;

--Create ecological conditions that allow a river to be a more resilient, self-sustaining system - this means that continuing efforts to fix the system are not necessary;

--Do no lasting harm - the efforts to restore the system should not do more damage than good;

--Make the results of the project accessible to others.

``Standards are needed. Progress in the science and practice of river restoration has been hampered by the lack of agreed-upon criteria for judging ecological success,'' Palmer said. ``It is critical that the broad restoration community, including funding agencies, practitioners and citizen groups, adopt criteria for defining and assessing ecological success in restoration.''