Stream-bank stabilization isn't an easy task when the effort is met by fast-moving water. But it may be regulatory red tape that keeps landowners from trying.

Ron Hardecke has a few ideas about how to slow erosion on his land along the banks of the Bourbeuse River in Gasconade County, Mo. And he thinks other landowners who have spent a life-time along this river probably do, too. He also believes that fear of regulation keeps landowners from pursuing some projects.

The Bourbeuse River runs about 150 miles from its headwaters near Rolla, Mo., to its mouth and confluence with the Meramec River near St. Louis. During heavy rain the Bourbeuse runs hard and mighty.

When high water has run its course, picking up and dropping sediment and gravel, the river can be left with an altered streambed. In many cases, it's a new flow pattern which, if left to its own course, will cause stream-bank erosion.

"Actually, in most cases, the gravel will keep moving. That's the nature of the stream," said Hardecke. "But in a summer like this one, with low water levels, willows sprout on the gravel bars. That vegetation causes gravel to drop out, building those bars during high water and forces more pressure on stream banks.

In some cases that energy is bottled up by limestone-ledged banks. But in deep-soil river bottoms, the energy cuts the bank.

Hardecke said that managing these stream banks is a life-long chore.

"For as long as I can remember, we've been cutting cedar for bank revetment," said Hardecke. But he believes that to control the kinds of cuts the river is making into bottomland fields, landowners need to do more than try to re-vegetate riparian corridors. In fact, some of the bank cuts have devoured the riparian corridor along the stream, which, until its sloughing into the channel, hosted 30-foot-tall trees. In these places, revetment with willow and cedar won't hold unless something is done to reduce the river's pressure on eroding banks.

To Hardecke, that calls for two options: Either removing gravel from the stream to take pressure off banks or moving gravel along with growing willows out of existing stream channels and using that same material to repair eroding banks.

This is where landowner anxiety comes in. When it comes to understanding what kind of work is lawfully allowable in a stream, three immediate sources of information and regulation come to mind: Missouri Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Missouri Department of Conversation (MDC) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Whether landwoner's angst in dealing with these agencies is justified or not, there aren't many farmers who look forward to delving into projects that need approval from these agencies. This, said Hardecke, results in chronic inaction, which is wrecking the banks of the Bourbeuse and other Midwest streams.

Agencies say landowners can remove gravel from streams for private use without a permit.

However, to move material within the stream or to add fill to a stream requires a permit from the corps.

Actually, the corps has standing nationwide permits for some projects, such as building a boat ramp or other common, low-impact projects. These general permits lay out conditions that must be followed during the project. The corps Web site (www.mvs.usace.army.mil) is a good place to find more information. Because there may be additional conditions and restrictions by region, Robert Gramke, project manager for the St. Louis corps district, said that the best bet for landowners considering projects in a stream is to draw up a permit request and send it in.

If a streambed project doesn't fit under a standing general permit, it requires an individual permit--a lengthier process that involves publishing the planned project and accepting public comment. However, for projects in Missouri, even a general permit from the corps requires a "401 certification" from DNR. And, well, you begin to see why landowners are loathe to do any work in a streambed. The 401 certification, by the way, is DNR's way to carry out the federal mandate of the Clean Water Act. Without it, the corps won't issue a permit.

Gramke, the corps project manager, said that landowners shouldn't be afraid to apply for permits. In some cases, the project may fit under a general permit and that process is relatively simple. "We issue a lot of bank stabilization permits," he said. "There is a simple application form, front and back. You send that in with a drawing of the proposed work."

Gramke said the corps takes a neutral view on all submissions and looks at the impact objectively when issuing permits. He added that people who apply ought to be prepared for variations on their original plan.

"You've got to expect the offering of other solutions to the problem," he said. "There are a lot of good systems out there that will promote bank stabilization."

Which brings the story to a complicated issue: hydrology. The people who issue permits have hydrologists and experts on the mechanics of a river at their disposal--and the time, money and regulatory knowledge to draw up plans. The landowner has a front-loader on his tractor and has watched the same stretch of river every year, observing the changes.

Thus, there become diverging opinions on what will work in specific situations.

In Hardecke's case, he believes that if he hits the right circumstances, moving gravel and existing vegetation back to the head of a bank cut can give the results he desires. And he could do it without heavy equipment in the stream. In a dry year, like this one, if he could get willows to sprout, they would form a "hardpoint" of sorts that would allow sediment to fill behind it and host vegetation to strengthen the bank.

Chances are a hydrologist would opt for a more proven solution--true hard points, riprap. A hydrologist would probably say, and perhaps with accuracy, that if the bank is being cut because of high water velocity, gravel a landowner moves from the streambed (which has been dropped there by high velocity water) will move downstream when fast water hits again. The problem with only using time-tested solutions such as riprap, is that they're cost prohibitive.

"What we want to do are the small things along the way and let the water do the work," said Hardecke. Our goal is to maintain the existing channel and save existing riparian corridor."

Hardecke, along with Ray Cunio, a neighbor, have been active in pursuing ways to implement their ideas. In the spring of 2002, they invited a group of DNR, corps and MDC employees to tour the Bourbeuse on Hardecke's farm.

Both Hardecke and Cunio thought the group of agency employees were understanding and supportive. But they suspect it will take more than a field day to affect change on the pillar-like strictures of federal and state environmental regulation.

"I'm really focused on solving the problems we showed during the tour here. That soil erosion and loss of riparian corridor are damaging water quality. That fish habitat suffers from accretion of gravel and that we can make incremental changes that help fix these problems," said Hardecke.

In the meantime, bank stabilization options for landowners are clear: they can remove gravel for private use or they can delve into the paperwork it takes for a corps-issued permit.