Forums36
Topics40,963
Posts557,999
Members18,506
|
Most Online3,612 Jan 10th, 2023
|
|
11 members (JoshMI, Bobbss, JabariStokes, teehjaeh57, Rick O, Theeck, BamaBass9, Purplepiggies7, Sunil, Tinylake, Jward87),
1,471
guests, and
330
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 6,080 Likes: 1
|
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 6,080 Likes: 1 |
Thanks for the input! Having never done this, the current "plan" is to dig the swales fairly deep for 100+ feet before the pond then fill them with riprap, etc. on top of mats. A pond friendly herbicide will be used to keep them free of vegetation in these riprap filled sections. The swales farther from the pond will be shallower/wider with grass and mats.
So the concrete would be in the bottom of the filled part of the swales and covered with riprap. I was wondering whether, if the concrete was spaced, it would do a better job of slowing the water velocity than just the riprap alone?
If I use it in the pond, what do you think about putting it on the steepest shore areas? My thought is it might be less likely to "roll down hill" and stay in place better that trying to use riprap in those areas.
Be Brave Enough to Suck at Something New!
|
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|