Building a bridge over a stream ...

[gumtree]

[QUOTE=Stonewall;8985930]
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act which regulates wetlands and the placing of fill in the waters of the United States is NOT something that was ramped up in the Obama administration. This law was passed by Congress during the Nixon administration.

As a wildlife biologist, I have reviewed project after project and most were FONSI. (Findings of No Significant Impact) but even so, so much has been destroyed. If you don’t know the value of wetlands, then I suppose it doesn’t matter to you.[/QUOTE]

I completely understand that the actions of a person upstream can have a very negative impact on those downstream. Falls under; “always drink upstream from where the cows drink”

Our farm is in the Chesapeake water shed area. The Chesapeake bay is at least 50 miles away and has been devastated by run-off contamination. By development and unintentional farming practices. A lot of these things have been addressed in the Chesapeake is in far better shape than it was 20 years ago but has a long way to go.

I have been an “outdoors man” since childhood. I have done a lot of canoeing since childhood in the 60s. Mainly in the upper NE. Long before the word “ecology, environment” became mainstream. I saw first hand what had been done to our water ways and wetlands. But we have come a long way since then. The same rivers I canoed as a child are in a LOT better shape now. The EPA had a lot to do with this and public education.

But the EPA has gotten a bit to big for it britches. The Obama (I am not anti Obama) administration has contributed to this. Good intentions don’t always end up being good. Good for the great good.

I am an old tree hugging hippy. But I have learned which trees need hugging and which ones society as a whole has to be realistic about.

IMO this tread is a perfect example of the pendulum swinging way too far to in the other direction. I bet the OP had no idea that such a simple question about wanting to build a SIMPLE 4 foot wide bridge that will be used on the odd times for the OPs own PERSONAL use would spark so much controversy.

As I said in my first comment, making a mountain out of a mole hill. Though in some cases there is a reason for this. IMO based on the information supplied this is a mole hill. I chose to treat it that way.

A number of the suggested ways are a bit of overkill for something that can be accomplished with a bit of effort and a few dollars. Most of the other suggestions would require a major effort and money.

As I said in my first comment IF some regulatory agency happened to take exception the worst that could happen is it would have to be removed. If the OP ended up in an “Alice’s Restaurant” scenario I will be the first to contribute to their defense fund.

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=gumtree;8986303]
I completely understand that the actions of a person upstream can have a very negative impact on those downstream. Falls under; “always drink upstream from where the cows drink”

I my farm is in the Chesapeake water shed area. The Chesapeake bay is at least 50 miles away and has been devastated by run-off contamination. By development and unintentional farming practices. A lot of these things have been addressed in the Chesapeake is in far better shape than it was 20 years ago but has a long way to go.

I have been an “outdoors man” since childhood. I have done a lot of canoeing since childhood in the 60s. Mainly in the upper NE. Long before the word “ecology, environment” became mainstream. I saw first hand what had been done to our water ways and wetlands. But we have come a long way since then. The same rivers I canoed as a child are in a LOT better shape now. The EPA had a lot to do with this and public education.

I am an old tree hugging hippy. But I have learned which trees need hugging and which ones society as a whole has to be realistic about.

IMO this tread is a perfect example of the pendulum swinging way too far to in the other direction. I bet the OP had no idea that such a simple question about wanting to build a SIMPLE 4 foot wide bridge that will be used on the odd times for the OPs own PERSONAL use would spark so much controversy.

As I said in my first comment, making a mountain out of a mole hill. Though in some cases there is a reason for this. IMO based on the information supplied this is a mole hill. I chose to treat it that way.

A number of the suggested ways are a bit of overkill for something that can be accomplished with a bit of effort and a few dollars. Most of the other suggestions would require a major effort and money.

As I said in my first comment IF some regulatory agency happened to take exception the worst that could happen is it would have to be removed. If the OP ended up in an “Alice’s Restaurant” scenario I will be the first to contribute to their defense fund.[/QUOTE]

As I tried to explain in my previous post, there is a good reason we should not let those not cognizant with our area determine what we should do and how.

As you so well say, common sense should rule the rule makers, common sense that escapes some, in their zeal for some utopian world, that in reality doesn’t exist out there.

Managing land is not a one size fits all, not at all.

[gumtree]

“water is amazingly powerful”

Yes it is. It only takes a couple of inches of fast moving water over a road to sweep a car off. This is completely lost on the majority of people.

Which is why I asked the OP to post some pictures. The creek/stream bed and surrounding area will give one a pretty good idea of its flow pattern and high water marks. As I said in my comment, this maybe a very simple and inexpensive project. Or it may take a lot more money and effort than what meets an inexperienced eye. Other wise it may end up down the creek within a couple of months. Or be a constant maintenance hassle.

[gumtree]

[QUOTE=Bluey;8986307]
As I tried to explain in my previous post, there is a good reason we should not let those not cognizant with our area determine what we should do and how.

As you so well say, common sense should rule the rule makers, common sense that escapes some, in their zeal for some utopian world, that in reality doesn’t exist out there.

Managing land is not a one size fits all, not at all.[/QUOTE]

Thanks, you are a lot better at being concise.

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=gumtree;8986323]
Thanks, you are a lot better at being concise.[/QUOTE]

You can explain concepts way better than I can, plus have more in depth knowledge.

Thank you for the information you give us here.

[poltroon]

Even though the responses may make this feel overly complicated, in some ways this kind of thread is exactly what I love about COTH, getting so many different perspectives on a problem that create a fuller view, enough at least to ask better questions.

In my area, our waterways tend to be reliably seasonal - that is, they are small and cheerful and calf-deep in summer and potentially powerful and life-threatening after winter rains. So here, you could do something like a simple flat span that laid across from bank to bank for the summer and that could lift out for the winter, if you can lift it with available resources.

[Minuet]

Even though the responses may make this feel overly complicated, in some ways this kind of thread is exactly what I love about COTH, getting so many different perspectives on a problem that create a fuller view, enough at least to ask better questions.

You are so right, I always enjoy these threads, I learn so much. I have a stream through our yard we are thinking about fencing in, and this thread is bookmarked for the future

[snowrider]

[QUOTE=BarnField;8984066]
What about a corrugated metal/pvc pipe sized large enough to accommodate the stream. You can even set several pipes next to each other in a row. Then, dump lots of gravel and fill on top of the pipe. I’ve seen that done nicely and you can drive a truck over it… its a whole lot LESS scary looking for a horse than crossing a wooden foot bridge… and there’s no lumber to rot/fail.

http://www.danieldean.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/small-creek-crossing-culverts.jpg

http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/wxpr/files/201610/Culvert.jpg

https://www.treefarmsystem.org/stuff/contentmgr/files/2/4ccd7b509178101845511b8e2eb60234/files/culvert_image.jpg[/QUOTE]

You WILL AND DO need a permit from the Army Corps and probably a local one to install a culvert. If you are just putting a spanning bridge and nothing in the stream itself you may or may not.

The reason is because a bridge that spans the stream does not affect the stream but a culvert does. A 6’ wide channel with a 10-20 flood plain (the slope-y part you describe) is quite big in terms of potential flood flows, believe it or not, and likely has fish etc living in it. When looking at a channel you can assume that water will get up into the flood plain every 2 years on average. That’s a 2 year return flow. So a 50-100 year return flow is commiserately larger. How important is this crossing to get across in an emergency? What is downstream that could be impacted by the debris from your culverts/ crossing washing out? That’s the main issue. Well that and poorly installed culverts blocking fish, frogs etc from moving through.

btw, never put a series of small culverts in unless you enjoy crawling around in muddy pipes pulling sticks out and cursing, it’s a maintenance nightmare. Bridge all the way.

And despite gumtree’s advice, all it takes is one angry neighbor or a savvy realtor when you go to sell and you have to rip out what you did and do it again. The permits are there for a reason, most people cannot estimate flood flows or safety by eyeballing a creek or asking people online. I’ve built literally hundreds of these things, and re-built a ton where people just eye balled it or let their contractor come up with a plan.

[starsandsun]

Hi Snowrider - thanks for the input and comments. To clarify, this is a small stream that comes into our property through two separate ‘forks’. One is for all purposes a drain path for a spring and it goes dry a good 50% of the year. The other is a meandering stream that flows across our neighbors; on the other side of them, it is culvert-ed under a road. It’s not a body of water that supports fish … unless there are small bowls in bends of the stream, it’s really shallow - like an inch or two at most.

There is no need to cross this stream in an emergency; it feeds into our pond and we can easily reach the other side of the stream by going around the farm. The downstream impact of anything we would do would be borne by us … we’re the ones that clean out trees, etc. from the stream itself, and we remove the sediment in the capture pond that the stream flows into before it reaches our large pond.

To your point, the flood event we had a short time ago was beyond awe-inspiring. I can appreciate the power of water but would say (but forgot to mention earlier) we have two pedestrian-safe bridges that are not concreted in, and they did not move in the whitewater the stream became in that weather event. After watching that, I am very respectful of water and flooding.

[snowrider]

Sorry ok, my comments were more to correct the idea that requiring a (fairly minimal) approval process for culverts/ bridges is a communist plot. It affects your property value and protects your interest if you’re hiring out. If it’s in the middle of nowhere and you have your own heavy equipment you probably don’t care about having to replace an undersized structure every few years or pulling a seasonal bridge for the winter, but if you’re paying market rate for a contractor best to do it so it lasts the first time.

I’ve seen so many landowners get ripped off like this: contractor tells them permits are nothing but red tape so no one checks on their shoddy work. I’ve seen culverts 25’ up in trees more than once. Or the work is adequate but the property cannot be sold until it’s redone for code reasons. Or, and this is key at a commercial facility, it’s uninsured because it’s not up to code.

The channel you describe may only have a few inches of water or be dry now but it’s a good size (10-20’ wide total) and channels form at a certain size because they regularly convey that amount of flow. If you have bridges that function well I’d just assume that’s the minimum size for a new structure.

[snowrider]

We have a crappy homemade plywood bridge over a ditch, it’s not like I think every little trickle needs a big solution. But your describe quite a big awake, no matter how litttlw water is in it today.

[SharonA1]

Post removed because original thread was so old. Thank you, Christa!

[Christa_P]

This is an 8 year old thread