SiltSoxx vs straw wattles

[ptmoss]

Has anyone had experience with using these products and how they compare? SiltSoxx shown on plans but contractor wants to use Earth Savers straw wattles due to cost difference. Also SiltSoxx needs a certified installer.

The site is right on the bank of a stream leading directly into a lake & I'm a little leary of using the wattles but wondered if anyone had experiences, good or bad, with either of the products.

 

[cvg]

can't really answer your question without knowing what purpose they will serve and how they are to be used. A plan or sketch might be useful... One problem with the wattles is that they are edible. If you have hungry deer, they may get eaten... Based simply on your statement that they are next to the river, I would question if either product would be adequate. For higher / concentrated flows, wattles or equivalent are not usually recommended. Heavier duty products including riprap or gabions might be better.

 

[ptmoss]

Right, temporary sediment control on the downhill side of the property. I seem to have forgotten that rather salient point. It's a small site, about a half acre, but in a sensitive location. The stream is just that, a 3' wide stream. The product is to be used in lieu of silt fence.

 

[cfj104]

While I have never used the Siltsoxxs, I have looked into them. It is my understanding that these need to be filled onsite by a certified contractor.

Another alternative may be coir logs. These are usually larger then straw wattles, will biodegrade, and will help establish vegetation and provide protection along the stream bank.

cvg - good call about the deer! Never thought about critters eating them!

Good luck.

 

[ctbailey]

I have specified siltsoxx in the past for site erosion control, and I feel very comfortable with them.

As this thread is not a "soxx vs. silt fence" discussion, I will keep my comments around the soxx. They install FAST!!!! Sure, the "certified installer" might sound expensive, but their truck is a specialized blower/hopper truck. I've seen them install the soxx hundreds of feet away from the truck. The soxx need less staking than the wattles, and the labor needed to install the soxx is provided by the installer, so your crew isn't wasted on erosion control.

The wattles need to be placed by hand, and the crew is totally wrecked (read: slow, expensive) by the end of the day. The soxx installer guys are essentially wrangling a huge vaccum hose running in reverse, as they fill the soxx, and progress down the site.

I'd try and talk the contrator out of using wattles - especially if the argument is "It is what we know, and we are scared of something new."

___
Craig T. Bailey, PE

http://www.bailey-associates.com

 

[DrGrass]

I prefer the cocanut logs or the core logs. No evassive seed to worry abuot (not in the mountains), breaks down as the veg is established, dosen't need to be trenched in, and smells good too! We just staked it in back filled up to it seeded and covered with cocanut fiber mat. Creek stayed clean and now after 2years you would never know what we did.