August 2005 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Leaflet Number 30

Warmwater Streams

Introduction

Streams and the corridors through which they flow 

are valued resources across the United States. 

Streams and stream corridors also support many 

recreational opportunities including fishing, canoeing, kayaking, swimming, and hiking. Stream corridors have tremendous economic value as agricultural 

and forest lands and provide some of the most desirable sites for real estate development, highways, and 

railroads. Less well understood, but equally important, are the ecological values stream corridors provide including water quality protection, water supply, 

flood pulses, nutrient cycling, and biological diversity. 

Warmwater streams provide habitat not only for popular game fish such as bass and catfish, but also for 

non-game fish such as darters and minnows, amphibians, aquatic insects, some reptiles, and many species 

of mussels, clams, and crayfish.

This leaflet focuses on small warmwater streams. The 

average water temperature of a warmwater stream 

during the summer is usually greater than 75o F. This 

temperature generally excludes trout and other coldwater species that require cooler temperatures and 

higher oxygen levels. Readers of this leaflet will become more familiar with the physical, biological, 

and chemical processes that characterize warmwater stream systems and how these processes influence 

habitat conditions both within the stream and the adjacent riparian zone. In addition, methods, resources, 

and funding sources available to landowners wishing 

to conserve, improve, or restore warmwater stream 

habitats are identified.

Warmwater stream systems

A stream corridor consists of a stream, its adjacent 

riparian zone, and its floodplain. The riparian zone 

is the portion of the terrestrial landscape from the 

high water mark towards the uplands, where vegetation may be influenced by elevated soil moisture. 

The floodplain is the land alongside the stream that 

is susceptible to flooding. Intact stream corridors are 

among the most diverse, dynamic, and complex habitats and ecosystems in North America. Their riparian 

zones account for less than 2 percent of the land area 

of the U.S., yet more vertebrates depend on these areas during some part of their life cycle than any other 

habitat type. Streams and their floodplains have historically served as town sites and have been used for 

irrigation, transportation, water supply, hydroelectric 

power, industrial development, and even waste disposal sites. These human activities cause increased 

surface erosion, excessive sedimentation, water pollution and altered hydrologic conditions, which significantly degrade or eliminate stream and riparian habitats.

A warmwater stream and its riparian zone is an integrated ecosystem, such that the effective functioning 

of one component affects the health of the others. For 

example, the seasonal flooding of streams enriches 

the soil of riparian areas with nutrient-rich alluvium. 

Alluvium is material (sand, gravel, silt, topsoil) that is 

deposited in the floodplain of a river or stream during 

flood events. Alluvium is created as a result of erosion. Alluvium can significantly alter floodplains, as is 

the case in the Mississippi River Delta, which began 

forming from alluvium millions of years ago. Alluvium 

from the Mississippi River has created rich, agriculNRCS

Clear Creek in California is an example of a warmwater stream. © 1988 WHC

WILDLIFE HABITAT COUNCILSM
Warmwater Streams

2

tural land in the lower Mississippi Delta. These deposits, along with increased soil-moisture from flooding, increase plant productivity in riparian zones and 

floodplains. Likewise, the stream benefits from the riparian plant community—overhanging vegetation provides shade and important cover for fish; tree roots 

stabilize banks; the input of leaf litter and other organic material feeds microbes and invertebrates that 

are at the base of the food chain; large wood provides 

instream cover and habitat complexity for aquatic species; and dense understory vegetation helps filter surface water that runs off the land during storms. 

Due to the interdependence of warmwater streams 

and their riparian zones, the degradation of either of 

these components adversely affects the flora and fauna of the others.

Warmwater stream fauna

Fish

There are hundreds of different species of fish found 

in warmwater streams in the U.S. The most complete 

guide available on freshwater fishes is The Atlas of 

North American Freshwater Fishes (Lee et al. 1980), 

which documents some 775 species. Table 1 lists 

some common native warmwater fishes.

To learn which fish species are likely to occur in a 

particular watershed, contact the local state fish 

and wildlife agency, or visit http://www.fishbase.org/

search.cfm to search for the information on the internet. The distribution of fish throughout the U.S. depends on their particular habitat needs and their ability to colonize a given stream. Barriers to the dispersal 

of fish can be as large as a mountain range and can be 

as small as a road culvert or a 10-foot waterfall. While 

some barriers to migration can easily be identified, 

others are difficult to detect. For example, a stream 

may be too steep for a fish to swim up, or a short segment of stream may have such poor water quality that 

a fish will avoid it.

Factors affecting fish distribution

The distribution of fish within a stream is affected by 

physical factors including water temperature, gradient 

or steepness, substrate, and flow. Temperature variations occur both seasonally and longitudinally (in an 

upstream and downstream direction), and different 

fish species tolerate or prefer different temperature 

ranges. Some species seek different temperatures at 

different stages of their life cycles. The gradient of the 

stream channel influences not only fish distribution, 

but also water velocity, substrate size, and pool formation.

Many natural factors cause variations in the chemical 

make-up of streams that in turn affect the distribution 

of fish. Hardness of the water (level of dissolved mineral concentration), dissolved oxygen, pH, salinity, 

and the concentrations of heavy metals and chlorine 

all affect the distribution and abundance of fish and 

other aquatic species.

Billy Teels, NRCS

Riparian buffers protect and improve stream 

habitat.

Billy Teels, NRCS

The satinfin shiner (Notropis analostanus) is one 

of a number of species of shiner found in warmwater 

streams across North America.

Blly Teels, NRCS

The largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) prefers clear, quiet waters with lots of vegetation and 

can be found in warmwater streams in most regions of 

the United States.
Warmwater Streams

3

Common name(s) Genus Range in North America

rock bass, shadow bass, Roanoke bass Ambloplites eastern U.S., Great Lakes Region

central stoneroller, largescale stoneroller, Mexican 

stoneroller, bluefin stoneroller

Campostoma eastern and central U.S., northern 

Mexico

suckers (many different species) Catostomus most of continental U.S. and 

Canada, northern Mexico

redside dace, rosyside dace Clinostomus Great Lakes Region, eastern U.S.

banded pygmy sunfish, Okefenokee pygmy sunfish, 

everglades pygmy sunfish 

Elassoma souteastern U.S.

blackbanded sunfish, bluespotted sunfish, banded 

sunfish

Enneacanthus eastern U.S.

chain pickerel, grass pickerel, redfin pickerel, 

muskellunge 

Esox eastern U.S., Mississippi Valley, 

Great Lakes Region

smoothbelly darters (many different species) Etheostoma central and eastern U.S.

topminnows (many different species) Fundulus eastern U.S., Mississippi Valley

bigeye chub, highback chub, lined chub, rosyface 

chub, clear chub

Hybopsis eastern U.S., Mississippi Valley, 

Great Lakes Region

channel catfish, blue catfish Ictalurus central U.S., southern Canada

redbreast sunfish, green sunfish, orangespotted 

sunfish, bluegill, dollar sunfish, longear sunfish, 

redear sunfish, spotted sunfish

Lepomis most of continental U.S.

white shiner, crecent shiner, striped shiner, warpaint 

shiner, common shiner, duskystripe shiner, bleeding 

shiner, bandfin shiner

Luxilus eastern U.S. and Great Lakes 

Region

largemouth bass, redeyebass, smallmouth bass, 

Suwannee bass, spotted bass, Guadaloupe bass 

Micropterus continental U.S.

striped bass, yellow bass, white bass, white perch Morone most of continental U.S.

redhorse suckers, redhorses (many different 

species)

Moxostoma central U.S., Mississippi Valley, 

central Canada

bull chub, bigmouth chub, river chub, bluehead 

chub, redtail chub, hornyhead chub, redspot chub

Nocomis eastern U.S., Mississippi Valley, 

Great Lakes Region

shiners (many different species), redeye chub, 

silverjaw minnows, Ozark minnows

Notropis most of continental U.S., central 

Canada

madtoms (many different species) Noturus eastern U.S., Mississippi Valley, 

Great Lakes Region

roughbelly darters (many different species) Percina eastern and central U.S., central 

Canada

creek chub, fallfish, Sandhills chub Semotilus eastern and central U.S.

1

For specific habitat information about these fish, visit www.fishbase.org/search.cfm.

Table 1 Common native warmwater fishes1
Warmwater Streams

4

Several biological factors also affect fish distribution, 

not only longitudinally, but also vertically in the water column, and according to specific habitats within 

a reach of steam. Biological factors affecting fish distributions include predation, competition, and behavioral differences. For a given species to exist in the 

presence of one of its predators, it must have access 

to hiding cover in the form of large bottom substrate, 

woody material, or overhanging banks and vegetation.

Behavioral differences among fish include choice of 

substrate for spawning (laying eggs) and feeding behavior. Some fish use sandy stream bottoms to spawn, 

some spawn on vegetation or in the water column, 

some require gravel or crevices to build their nests, 

and others bear live young. Feeding behaviors differ 

greatly among species and vary according to where 

in the water column a fish finds food, the time of day 

it feeds, the type of food eaten, and the size of food 

items selected. Many species can be found in close 

proximity due to only slight differences in feeding behavior. For example, it is not uncommon for more than 

20 species of fish to occupy a relatively short reach of 

many southern streams (approximately 100 meters).

Whereas many natural influences affect the distribution of fish and other aquatic organisms, human disturbances are often equally influential. For example, 

acidic water drainage from mines and roadfills (soil 

material used in road embankments) has reduced 

aquatic fauna and caused water quality problems in 

many streams of the eastern U.S. Hydroelectric dams 

and water supply impoundments can dramatically alter a stream’s flow regime and habitat quality and 

act as physical barriers to fish dispersal, while sewage and industrial wastewater outflows often create 

chemical barriers. In addition, human intervention has 

significantly expanded the range of many fish species, 

both intentionally and unintentionally, to areas where 

they did not naturally occur. The introduction of nonnative species has contributed to the decline and extinction of many native fish that were not able to survive in the face of new competition or predation.

The combined effect of human influences has been 

a dramatic decline in native freshwater fauna. About 

one-fourth of native freshwater fish species, threefourths of native freshwater mussel species, onefourth of native amphibians, and one-third of native crayfish species are considered to be imperiled 

or extinct. In 1998, at least 40 percent (by length) of 

streams of the U.S. were listed as impaired by the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This effect 

is most pronounced in warmwater streams where the 

greatest faunal diversity and most extensive disturbances occur.

Aquatic macroinvertebrates

Aquatic macroinvertebrates including insects, crustaceans, mollusks, and worms are an important part 

of the aquatic food web, feeding on organic material 

(algae or leaves) and other organisms, and serving as 

food for larger animals, such as fish. Aquatic macroinvertebrates can serve as indicators of water quality. 

Because these aquatic animals differ in their sensitivities to water pollution, their presence or absence is 

a good indication of the quality of the water in which 

they are found. Table 2 identifies various macroinvertebrates and their sensitivities to contamination. By 

examining the macroinvertebrates living in a particular stream reach, the water quality and overall stream 

health can be inferred.

Freshwater mussels make up a large group of aquatic macroinvertebrates. Nearly 300 species and subspecies of freshwater mussels are present in the U.S. The 

south-central U.S. has the highest diversity of freshwater mussels in the world. Like many other aquatic macroinvertebrates, freshwater mussels are highly sensitive to habitat disturbances. Of the 297 known 

native mussel species in the U.S., 72 percent are considered endangered, threatened, or of special conBlly Teels, NRCS

Giant stoneflies (Pteronarcys californica, above) and 

leeches (Clitellata, Subclass: Hirudinea, below) are 

aquatic macroinvertebrates found in streams. Giant 

stoneflies are very sensitive to water contaminaton, 

while leeches are tolerant of it.
Warmwater Streams

5

cern. Only 70 species are considered to have stable 

populations, although many of these also have declined in abundance and distribution. Freshwater 

mussels benefit from intact, well-managed stream 

reaches. When stream reaches become degraded as a 

result of human activity, mussel populations suffer.

Amphibians and reptiles

Many amphibians (frogs, toads, salamanders, and 

newts) require access to warmwater streams to complete various stages of their life cycles (breeding), as 

well as to keep their glandular skin moist. Amphibians 

are most frequent and abundant in floodplain wetlands and riparian zones during their breeding seasons. Some species of reptile including turtles, lizards, 

alligators, and snakes also depend on riparian areas 

adjacent to streams for feeding, basking, and egg-laying. Riparian areas can be critical for reptiles and amphibians by providing avenues for dispersion to new 

habitats.

Stream assessment

Landowners wishing to improve stream habitat 

should first evaluate the existing conditions. The 

health of a stream ecosystem depends on the interaction of several physical, chemical, and biological processes that can be relatively easy to evaluate. 

However, many factors such as streamflow, water 

quality, and sediment transport are affected by processes occurring upstream or at other places in the 

watershed and so cannot be adequately addressed by 

the evaluation of a small reach. On the other hand, 

there is much that a landowner can do to protect and/

or improve stream and riparian habitat quality on the 

property. A quick visual assessment will often yield 

clues about the general health of a stream reach. A 

simple evaluation of canopy cover in the riparian 

area, bank stability, water clarity, and other easily recognizable features often suggest actions that can be 

taken to improve stream and riparian habitat.

The Stream Visual Assessment Protocol (SVAP) developed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service 

(NRCS) is a simple tool that requires little specialized 

equipment or experience. Table 3 summarizes some of 

the components and characteristics of streams evaluated by the SVAP. Using SVAP, the landowner can 

evaluate and score each stream habitat component 

separately and then average all the scores together to 

determine an overall rating of stream condition. If the 

landowners do not feel that they have the expertise to 

make this assessment, they can solicit assistance from 

the local NRCS biologist. Individuals interested in obtaining a copy of the SVAP can visit http://www.nrcs.

usda.gov/technical/ECS/aquatic/svapfnl.pdf.

Conserving and restoring instream and 

riparian habitats

Once a reach of stream has been assessed, the landowner may focus on actions that can be taken on the 

property that will benefit the stream and its flora and 

fauna. Techniques to improve instream cover, such as 

placing large wood in the stream, are often successful 

at increasing the diversity and abundance of fish. For 

long-term maintenance of good aquatic habitat, establishment of riparian vegetation that will naturally fall 

into the stream may be all that is required. Other approaches to stream corridor restoration are described 

in the multi-agency Stream Corridor Restoration 

Handbook available online at http://www.nrcs.usda.

gov/technical/stream_restoration/.

Larger-scale stream habitat improvements should 

be planned in partnership with other land users who 

manage lands adjacent to streams. Before designing 

and implementing a stream habitat project, consider the known or expected problems within the watershed such as non-point source water pollution 

land management activities such as logging, farming, 

or development; and other watershed-related concerns. Non-point source pollution comes from many 

diffuse sources. It is caused by rainfall or snowmelt 

moving over and through the ground. As the runoff 

moves, it picks up and carries away natural and human-made pollutants, finally depositing them into 

streams and other bodies of water. The pollutants in 

non-point source pollution include: excess fertilizers, 

herbicides, and insecticides from agricultural lands 

Very sensitive Somewhat 

sensitive

Tolerant

Caddisflies Damselflies Aquatic worms

Mayflies Dragonflies Black fly larvae

Stoneflies Crayfish Midge fly larvae

Riffle beetles Scuds Leeches

Water pennies Sowbugs Pouch snails

Gilled snails Other snails

Hellgrammites

Freshwater 

mussels

Table 2 Aquatic macroinvertebrate sensitivity to 

pollution
Warmwater Streams

6

and residential areas; oil, grease, and toxic chemicals 

from urban runoff and energy production; and sediment from improperly managed construction sites, 

crop and forest lands, and eroding streambanks.

Any stream habitat management project is most effective when applied within the context of overall watershed conditions and with clear objectives for stream 

management goals. There are several options that 

can be used singularly or in combination to improve 

stream habitat:

 • Through watershed planning, establish soil 

conservation, nutrient management, pesticide 

management, and other management practices 

to minimize non-point sources of water 

pollution.

 • Manage excessive surface runoff with grassed 

waterways.

 • Restore or protect riparian and floodplain 

vegetation and associated wetlands.

 • Maintain enough water in the stream to allow 

fish species to swim upstream and downstream.

 • Maintain physical habitat components important 

to aquatic species such as sediment-free 

spawning gravel, boulders, large wood, resting 

pools, overhead cover, and stable banks.

 • Eliminate fish migration barriers such as 

improperly installed stream crossings.

 • Provide barriers/screens to exclude fish 

and other aquatic species from water 

pumps, diversion ditches, or any area where 

unintentional entrapment could occur.

 • Improve floodplain-to-stream channel 

connectivity including off-channel habitats by 

High score Above average score Below average score Low score 

Channel condition natural channel; no 

evidence of erosion

evidence of past 

channel alteration

altered channel channel is actively 

downcutting or 

widening

Hydrologic 

alteration

flooding every 1.5-

2 years

flooding every 3-5 

years

flooding every 6-10 

years

no flooding

Riparian zone natural vegetation 

extends >2 active 

channel widths on 

each side

natural vegetation 

extends 1 active 

channel width on 

each side

natural vegetation 

extends 1/3 of active 

channel width on 

each side

natural vegetation 

extends <1/3 the 

active channel 

width on each side

Bank stability stable moderately stable moderately unstable unstable

Water appearance very clear or clear, 

but tea-colored

occasionally cloudy considerable 

cloudiness

very turbid or 

muddy

Nutrient 

enrichment

clear water slightly greenish 

water

greenish water pea green, gray, or 

brown water

Barriers to fish 

movement

no barriers water withdrawals 

limit fish movement

drop structures <1 

foot

drop strucutres >1 

foot

Instream fish cover >7 cover types 

available

5-6 cover types 

available

2-3 cover types 

available

0-1 cover type 

available

Pools deep and shallow 

pools abundant

pools present but 

not abundant

pools present but 

shallow

pools absent

Riffle 

embeddedness

gravel or cobble 

particles are <20% 

covered with fine 

sediment

gravel or cobble 

particles are 20-40% 

covered with fine 

sediment

gravel or cobble 

particles are >40% 

covered with fine 

sediment

riffle is completely 

covered with fine 

sediment

Table 3 SVAP components of stream health
Warmwater Streams

7

setting back or eliminating berms, levees, and 

dikes.

 • Limit streamside access for recreational use, 

livestock, and equipment.

 • Use irrigation waters as efficiently as possible, 

maximizing the amount of water left in the 

stream for aquatic fauna.

Maintain or restore riparian buffers

By far the most important factor affecting stream conditions and aquatic habitats on a local scale is the 

presence of an ecologically functional riparian buffer. 

Vegetated stream buffers serve numerous functions 

including filtration of sediments, nutrients, and toxins; 

contribution of woody material to the stream channel; 

contribution of organic matter that forms the base of 

the food chain; floodwater storage; bank stabilization 

and erosion reduction; shading and consequent stabilization of water temperatures; and provision of habitat for terrestrial invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, 

birds, and mammals. The benefits of riparian buffers 

on both aquatic and terrestrial wildlife vary dramatically based on the types of vegetation planted and the 

width of the area planted. In general, benefits increase 

with increasing width and complexity, and the wider 

and more ecologically complex the buffer the more 

value it will have for wildlife and other aquatic species in the stream.

In naturally forested landscapes, the ideal riparian 

buffer zone has mature trees spaced sufficiently to allow an understory of grasses, forbs, and shrubs. Trees 

should be close enough to the stream so that exposed 

roots supply cover and allow stable undercut banks 

to develop. This proximity to the channel assures that 

some trees will fall into the stream when they die, 

providing habitat complexity in the channel. Grasses, 

forbs, and shrubs should have deep root systems, 

dense top growth, and an ability to recover and grow 

subsequent to inundation of water and sediments during floods.

Landowners can take an active role in maintaining and restoring riparian buffers by planting native 

woody species as seedlings or saplings. On the other hand, the landowner may choose to take a passive 

approach to restoration, and simply allow natural recruitment of woody species along the streambank. If 

the landowner takes the more active approach, there 

are a number of factors to consider.

Before beginning, a landowner should examine the 

surrounding plant community and learn about native plant species and current and projected flooding of the stream. With this information, the landowner is better equipped to restore native vegetation in 

such a way as to maximize growth based on flooding and/or drought. It is not practical to plant the full 

complement of vegetation desired in the riparian area. 

Rather, a landowner should plant dominant species, 

or those species unlikely to colonize readily, and let 

the others establish themselves over time. Typically, 

vegetation at the outside edge of the stream corridor 

is very different from the vegetation that occurs within the interior of the corridor. The topography, aspect, 

soil, and hydrology of the corridor provide several 

naturally diverse layers and types of vegetation. An 

edge that gradually changes from the stream corridor 

into the adjacent landscape features will soften environmental gradients, minimize any associated disturbances, encourage species diversity, and buffer nutrient and energy flows.

Leave woody material in place

Woody material in the form of fallen trees, limbs, and 

branches plays a major role in both aquatic and terrestrial components of ecosystems and should be 

maintained within the riparian buffer. Woody material helps trap sediment that may otherwise enter the stream. In addition, woody materials create 

seedbeds for additional recruitment of woody species, help retain moisture during droughts, and provide an important habitat component for many invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. 

Along the stream bank, branches and fallen trees can 

help to stabilize streambanks and provide moist cover for amphibians such as salamanders. Within the 

stream channel, large wood provides important cover 

for many fish and other organisms and traps fine sediments. Large logs extending above the water are often used as perch sites for wading birds while reptiles 

such as turtles and snakes often use them to bask in 

the sun.

Kathryn Boyer, NRCS

Vegetated riparian buffers serve valuable ecological 

functions.
Warmwater Streams

8

Allowing fallen tree limbs, branches, and even entire 

trees to stay in-place can significantly improve both 

instream and riparian habitat. To maintain the ecological integrity of the stream and riparian area, it is not 

essential that every piece of woody material be left in 

place, but rather that the landowner takes into consideration the value of woody material to wildlife rather 

than hastily clearing the ground to a manicured and 

unnatural state. Through informed decisions, ecological benefits and personal preferences for aesthetic appearance can be well balanced.

Construct fishways and replace culverts

Instream barriers, such as dams, weirs, and road culverts, can reduce the ability of many fish to move freely upstream and downstream to spawning, rearing, 

and feeding areas. While some barriers are man-made, 

others are natural, such as cascades or waterfalls. If 

possible, man-made fish barriers should be removed 

or modified to allow fish passage. Replacing culverts 

to conform to the gradient of the stream and allow 

free fish passage can be done efficiently by working 

with conservation partners and state agencies. For example, bottomless arch culverts can replace perched 

culverts to make fish passage easy. Fishways can be 

built to allow fish to migrate through or over barriers. Fishways are constructed by creating a series of 

pools and small steps over or around the barrier, usually with rocks. Fish are able to move up or down the 

fishway by swimming into a pool, resting, and then 

swimming up or down the step into the next pool, until they have cleared the barrier. For more information 

on fish passage techniques, see http://wdfw.wa.gov/

hab/engineer/habeng.htm or http://www.stream.

fs.fed.us/fishxing/index.html.

Manage livestock access

Livestock using riparian areas and streams for forage 

or water often trample streambanks and riparian vegetation. Grazing prescriptions that minimize access 

to these vulnerable areas are an effective way to protect stream corridors. Fences can be built to limit livestock access to riparian areas where damage is extensive. If livestock need access to the stream for water, 

a fenced chute can be installed to allow access to 

only a small portion of the stream. Funding for fencing to manage livestock access in streams and riparian areas is available to landowners through the USDA 

Wetland Reserve, Wildlife Habitat Incentive, and 

Environmental Quality Incentive Programs, and the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Partners for Fish and 

Wildlife Program (table 4).

Use pesticides and fertilizers safely

Fertilizers and pesticides (including herbicides and 

insecticides) can have serious detrimental effects on 

stream habitat and water quality. Fertilizers are takBilly Teels, NRCS

Woody material plays a major role in both aquatic and 

terrestrial ecosystems.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife

Bottomless arch culverts (left) can replace perched culverts (right) to make fish passage easy.
Warmwater Streams

9

en up by algae in stream waters, a process that uses 

up valuable oxygen and can produce poisonous methane, ammonia, and sulfur gases, which can kill fish 

and other aquatic animals. Pesticides can be toxic to 

humans, animals, and plants and they are one of many 

factors contributing to the decline of fish and other aquatic organisms. Insecticides are used to kill destructive crop and forest insects, but they can also 

kill beneficial stream insects and fish. Similarly, herbicides used to kill land weeds can also kill oxygen-producing water plants and reduce the food supply for 

aquatic animals.

Homeowners, farmers, ranchers, and land managers 

using fertilizers and pesticides can use these chemicals wisely and minimize their effects on warmwater 

streams.

 • Avoid fertilizing near streams or on steep slopes, 

particularly during rainy weather or when the 

ground is frozen or covered with ice and snow.

 • Apply pesticides only when and where 

necessary, using those that are short-lived, 

avoiding applications near streams or drainage 

ditches, using soil conservation practices to 

limit runoff, and properly disposing of old or 

unused pesticides and their containers.

 • Read and follow the directions on fertilizer or 

pesticide labels.

 • Consider Integrated Pest Management (IPM) 

when managing insects and other pests.

IPM is a system of using a variety of methods, including pesticides, to reduce pest populations to acceptable levels. IPM strategies include agricultural control 

(crop rotation and selected planting dates to avoid 

Billy Teels, NRCS

Fences can be built to keep livestock away from 

streams, protecting streambanks.

pests), host resistance (using plants and livestock that 

are resistant to pests), mechanical control (uprooting, 

weed harvesting, cultivation, and use of insect traps), 

biological control (introducing a pest’s natural predators), and chemical control (using pesticides).

Address streambank conditions

Severely eroding streambanks are often the first sign 

that a stream and its habitat are in poor condition. 

Landowners wishing to stop erosion of streambanks 

should seek technical assistance in evaluating the 

cause of the severe erosion and methods to minimize 

further damage that are compatible with conservation of fish and wildlife habitat. Newer approaches to 

streambank stabilization especially suitable for small 

streams involve using natural materials such as logs, 

boulders, live trees, and/or branches to temporarily 

arrest erosion until riparian vegetation can be reestablished. These approaches, referred to as bioengineering, usually employ live cuttings of readily sprouting species that are set deep into the bank.

Streambank restoration has proven most successful 

in slowing bank erosion when the flow regime is relatively unaltered or controlled to mimic natural conditions. Decisions regarding whether and how to use 

stabilizing techniques should be based on local site 

conditions, as well as watershed conditions, such that 

no standard approach can be outlined in this leaflet. 

Successful implementation of bioengineering techniques requires professional design, installation, and 

long-term monitoring. However, in many cases bioengineering is the most effective solution available to restore streambanks to healthy conditions, so landowners should consider contacting local state agencies for 

assistance with streambanks that have been severeBilly Teels, NRCS

The instability and erosion apparent in this stream 

are signs of an unhealthy streambank.
Warmwater Streams

10

ly eroded. In such cases, professional opinions will be 

invaluable in determining what solutions are likely to 

be most cost effective, if indeed a feasible option does 

exist. For additional information and guidelines for 

implementation, see http://plant-materials.nrcs.usda.

gov/technical/publications/riparian.html.

Assistance programs

Financial and technical assistance for maintaining 

and improving warmwater stream habitat is available 

from an array of government agencies and public and 

private organizations. Table 4 lists organizations that 

can provide technical and/or financial assistance to 

landowners for warmwater stream management and 

other natural resource projects, and describes their 

associated conservation incentive programs.

Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group, 1998

Bioengineering employs live cuttings of readily 

sprouting species that are set deep into the bank to 

increase streambank stability.

Conclusion

Human activity has had a significant impact on warmwater streams and the fish, aquatic invertebrates, 

birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians that live in 

and around them. However, warmwater streams can 

be managed in such a way to protect, improve, or restore stream habitats. A stream assessment, followed 

by habitat management practices such as maintaining 

and restoring riparian buffers, managing woody material, reengineering stream crossings, managing livestock access, limiting and properly using fertilizers 

and pesticides, and addressing streambank conditions 

can greatly benefit the habitats and biota of warmwater streams. The resultant healthier streams provide 

many ecological and economic benefits, including recreational opportunities and increased water quality 

and biodiversity.
Warmwater Streams

11

Program Land eligibility Type of assistance Contact

Conservation 

Reserve 

Program 

Cropland (including 

field margins), riparian 

pastureland, highly 

erodible land.

50% cost-share for establishing permanent cover, 

annual rental payments in return for establishing 

long-term, resource-conserving covers, additional 

financial incentives are available for some practices.

NRCS or 

FSA state 

or local 

office

Environmental 

Quality 

Incentives 

Program 

Cropland, rangeland, 

grazing land, and other 

agricultural land in 

need of treatment.

Up to 75% cost-share and incentive payments to 

implement conservation practices to a maximum 

term of 10 years.

NRCS state 

or local 

office

Partners 

for Fish 

and Wildlife 

Program 

Most degraded fish 

and/or wildlife habitat.

Up to 100% financial and technical assistance to 

restore wildlife habitat under minimum 10-year 

cooperative agreements.

U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife 

Service 

local office

Waterways for 

Wildlife

Private land. Technical and program development assistance to 

coalesce habitat efforts of corporations and private 

landowners to meet common watershed level goals.

Wildlife 

Habitat 

Council

Wetlands 

Reserve 

Program 

Previously degraded 

wetland and adjacent 

upland buffer, with 

limited amount of 

natural wetland and 

existing or restorable 

riparian areas.

75% cost-share for wetland restoration under 10-year 

contracts and 30-year easements, and 100% costshare on restoration under permanent easements. 

Payments for purchase of 30-year or permanent 

conservation easements.

NRCS state 

or local 

office

Wildlife at 

Work

Corporate land. Technical assistance on developing habitat projects 

into a program that will allow companies to involve 

employees and the community.

Wildlife 

Habitat 

Council 

Wildlife Habitat 

Incentives 

Program 

High-priority fish and 

wildlife habitats.

Up to 75% cost-share for conservation practices 

under 5- to 10-year contracts.

NRCS state 

or local 

office

Table 4 Assistance programs
Warmwater Streams

12

References

On-line sources

FishBase: A global information system on fishes. 2005. 

Search FishBase. http://www.fishbase.org/search.

cfm [Accessed 31 March 2005].

National Biological Service. n.d. Freshwater mussels: 

a neglected and declining natural resource. 

http://biology.usgs.gov/s+t/noframe/f076.htm

[Accessed 10 November 2004].

United States Department of Agriculture. 2002. Integrated taxonomic information system. http://

www.itis.usda.gov/ [Accessed 9 November 2004].

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2005. 

Fish passage technical assistance. http://wdfw.

wa.gov/hab/engineer/habeng.htm [Accessed 31 

March 2005].

Printed sources

Bentrup, G. and J.C. Hoag. 1998. The practical streambank bioengineering guide. USDA-NRCS Aberdeen Plant Materials Center, Aberdeen, ID, USA. 

Available at http://plant-materials.nrcs.usda.

gov/pubs/idpmcpustguid.pdf.

Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working 

Group. 1998. Stream corridor restoration: principles, processes, and practices. Available at 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/stream_restoration/.

Firehock, K. and J. Doherty. 1995. A citizen’s streambank restoration handbook. Isaak Walton League 

of America, Inc., Gaithersburg, MD, USA.

Flanagan, S.M., K.W. Nielsen, K.W. Robinson, and J.F. 

Coles. 1999. Water-quality assessment of the New 

England coastal basins in Maine, Massachusetts, 

New Hampshire, and Rhode Island: environmental settings and implications for water quality and 

aquatic biota. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 98-4249.

Glasgow, L.L. and R E. Noble. 1971. The importance of 

bottomland hardwoods to wildlife. Proceedings, 

Symposium on Southeastern Hardwoods. United 

States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.

Helfrich, L.A., D.L. Weigmann, P. Hipkins, and E.R. 

Stinson. 1996. Pesticides and aquatic animals: a 

guide to reducing impacts on aquatic systems. 

Virgnia Cooperative Extension Publication 

Number 420-013. Virginia Polytechnic Institute 

and State University and Virginia State University, 

VA, USA.

Helfrich, L.A., D.L. Weigmann, and R.J. Neves. 1998. 

Landowner’s guide to managing streams in the 

eastern United States. Virginia Cooperative 

Extension Publication Number 420-141. Virginia 

Polytechnic Institute and State University and 

Virginia State University, VA, USA.

Kohler, C.C. and W.A. Hubert, editors. 1999. Inland 

fisheries management in North America, second 

edition. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, 

MD, USA.

Lee, D.S., C.R. Gilbert, C.H. Hocutt, R.E. Jenkins, 

D.E. McAllister, and J. R. Stauffer, Jr. 1980. Atlas 

of North American fresh water fishes. North 

Carolina State Museum of Natural History, NC, 

USA.

Moyle, P.B. and J.J. Cech, Jr. 2000. Fishes: an introduction to ichthyology, fourth edition. Prentice Hall, 

Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA.

Naiman, R.J., H. Decamps, and M. Pollack. 1993. The 

role of riparian corridors in maintaining regional 

diversity. Ecological Applications 3: 209-211.

Natural Resources Conservation Service Aquatic 

Assessment Working Group. 1998. Stream visual 

assessment protocol. National Water and Climate 

Center Technical Note 99-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service. Available at: http://www.nrcs.usda.

gov/technical/ECS/aquatic/svapfnl.pdf.

Popotnik, G.J. and W.M. Giuliano. 2000. Response of 

birds to grazing of riparian zones. Journal of Wildlife Management 64: 976-982.

Schueler, T.R. and H.K. Holland, ed. 2000. The practice 

of watershed protection. Center for Watershed 

Protection, Ellicott City, MD, USA.

Shields, F.D., Jr., S.S. Knight, N. Morin, and J.C. Blank. 

2003. Response of fishes and aquatic habitats to 

sand-bed stream restoration using large woody 

debris. Hydrobiologia 494: 251-257.

Stein, B.A. and S.R. Flack. 1997. 1997 species report 

card: the state of U.S. plants and animals. The 

Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, USA.

Taylor, C.A., M.L. Warren, J.F. Fitzpatrick, H.H. Hobbs, 

R.F. Jezerinac, W.L. Pflieger, and H. W. Robison. 

1996. Conservation status of crayfishes of the 

United States and Canada. Fisheries 21: 25-38.

Verry, E.S., J. Hornbeck, and C.A. Dolloff, eds. 2000. 

Riparian management in forests of the eastern 

continental United States. CRC-Lewis Publishers, 

FL, USA.
Warmwater Streams

13

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2000. 

Water quality conditions in the United States: the 

1998 national water quality inventory report to 

congress. Report No. EPA841-R-00-001, Washington, DC, USA.

United States Department of Agricluture. 2003. Fish 

assemblages as indicators of the biological 

condition of streams and watersheds. Technical 

Note 190-16, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 

Washington, DC, USA.

United States Department of Agriculture. 2001. Fish 

passage. Conservation Practice Standard Number 

396. Natural Resources Conservation Service. 

Available at ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NHQ/

practice-standards/standards/396.pdf.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2000. 

Fish Passage Barrier and Surface Water Diversion 

Screening Assessment and Prioritization Manual.

Williams, J.D., M.L. Warren Jr., K.S. Cummings, J. L. 

Harris, and R. J. Neves. 1993. Conservation status 

of freshwater mussels of the United States and 

Canada. Fisheries 18: 6-22.

Williams, J.E., J.E. Johnson, D.A. Hendrickson, S. 

Contreras-Balderas, J.D. Williams, M. NavarroMendoza, D.E. McAllister, and J. E. Deacon. 1989. 

Fishes of North America endangered, threatened, 

or of special concern. Fisheries 14: 3-20.
Warmwater Streams

14

Primary authors: Bob Batz and Raissa Marks, Wildlife Habitat Council. Drafts reviewed by: Rob Pauline, 

Wildlife Habitat Council; Kathryn Boyer, Natural Resources Conservation Service; Billy Teels, Natural 

Resources Conservation Service; Donald C. Jackson, Mississippi State University; C. Andrew Doloff, Virginia 

Tech University; Paul Angermeier, Virginia Tech University; and Ed Buckner, University of Arkansas at Pine 

Bluff.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities 

on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, 

and marital or familial status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternate means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should 

contact the USDAs TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326W, Whitten Building, 14th 

and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an 

equal opportunity provider and employer.

www.nrcs.usda.gov

Wildlife Habitat Council

8737 Colesville Road, Suite 800

Silver Spring, Maryland 20910

(301) 588-8994

The mission of the Wildlife Habitat Council 

is to increase the amount of quality wildlife 

habitat on corporate, private, and public land. 

WHC engages corporations, public agencies, 

and private, non-profit organizations on a 

voluntary basis as one team for the recovery, 

development, and preservation of wildlife 

habitat worldwide.

www.wildlifehc.org

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Check your local telephone directory 

for a field office near you.

The Natural Resources Conservation Service 

provides leadership in a partnership effort to 

help people conserve, maintain, and improve 

our natural resources and environment.

© 1988 WHC

WILDLIFE HABITAT COUNCILSM