The influence of land use on CPOM dynamics was examined at two midwestern stream sites that differed markedly in their riparian cover. Inputs, transport, retention, and breakdown of leaf litter were quantified at two study sites in Fleming Creek in Southeastern Michigan. Site 1 was dominated by pasture with scattered trees while site 2 was covered by secondary forest. Leaf litter measured weekly for 6 weeks during autumn revealed greater inputs at site 2. Leaf accumulation surveys showed a significantly greater amount of large leaf accumulations (> 1m2) associated with overhanging vegetation at site 2. The results of a retention experiment with plastic strips indicated that both sites had similar retention capacities regarding the functioning of vegetation, stream bed, and woody debris at retention devices under low flow conditions. CPOM concentration appeared similar at both sites while CPOM load was high at site 2 at the beginning of the sampling period, which could be related to the higher discharge observed that site. Macroinvertebrates associated with leaf packs collected after 45 days were more abundant at site 2, largely because of the significantly greater numbers of Allocapnia (Plecoptera) nymphs. Chironomidae larvae were the most abundant group and were similarly numerous at both sites. Breakdown rates based on the negative exponential model of elm (Ulmus americana) and dogwood (Cornus sp.) leaves measured over a 97-day period using mesh bags revealed no significant differences between sites or species. Breakdown rates for dogwood (site 1: 0.014 day-1; site 2: 0.011 day -1) were similar to published values, while breakdown rates for elm (site 1: 0.013 day-1; site 2: 0.012 day-1) were slightly higher than found in other studies. In summary, differences in riparian vegetation between sites seemed to influence leaf litter inputs, transport and retention, but not leaf breakdown processes. The greater amount of large leaf accumulations at site 2 may be the result of higher inputs combined with higher retention capacity, which then resulted in greater CPOM availability and thus explains the greater numbers of Allocapnia at site 2. Similar breakdown rates between sites, despite differences in Allocapnia abundance, raise questions about the role of shredders in leaf breakdown.