An expert panel process to evaluate habitat restoration actions in the Columbia River estuary

Krueger, Kirk L.; Bottom, Daniel L.; Hood, W. Gregory; Johnson, Gary E.; Jones, Kim K.; Thom, Ronald M.

doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.11.028

Cited by 20 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…CEERP managers are responsive to these reviews. For example, a review recommendation to publish the ERTG scoring process, itself an independent scientific peer review at the project level, was fulfilled by Krueger et al ().…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These decisions are informed by results from a prioritization exercise (Thom et al ) that is based on disturbance theory applied at site and landscape scales (Shreffler & Thom ) and project rating criteria involving predicted changes in ecosystem function, likelihood of achieving project goals, size of project, and cost (Evans et al ). Management decisions are also informed by project reviews conducted by the ERTG for estuary ecosystem restoration (Krueger et al ) and the Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership's Project Review Committee. Decisions about restoration projects are documented in the annual CEERP Restoration and Monitoring Plan, a key document in the AM process (e.g.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The need for an AM process for CEERP was evident early in the program's development (Thom et al ). In 2008, the National Marine Fisheries Service () included performance goals for estuary restoration called “survival benefit units (SBU).” (A SBU is an index intended to represent the effect of CEERP restoration on juvenile salmonid survival; the units are assigned on a restoration project‐specific basis [Krueger et al ].) While the goal and objectives of CEERP are intentionally ecosystem based and not species specific, its performance goals are legally binding.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Uncertainty in the goals themselves and how to achieve them necessitated the rigor and structure an AM process can provide to a restoration program. For example, how to quantify SBUs in a standard, repeatable fashion was an uncertainty until an expert panel was established and developed an appropriate method (see Krueger et al ). In addition, programmatic policies based on AM can help managers spend restoration funds wisely in a study area that is large and dynamic (Fig.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Estuary ecosystem restoration: implementing and institutionalizing adaptive management

Ebberts

Zelinsky

Karnezis

et al. 2017

Restoration Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We implemented and institutionalized an adaptive management (AM) process for the Columbia Estuary Ecosystem Restoration Program, which is a large-scale restoration program focused on improving ecosystem conditions in the 234-km lower Columbia River and estuary. For our purpose, "institutionalized" means the AM process and restoration programs are embedded in the work flow of the implementing agencies and affected parties. While plans outlining frameworks, processes, or approaches to AM of ecosystem restoration programs are commonplace, their establishment for the long-term is not. This article presents the basic AM process and explains how AM was implemented and institutionalized. Starting with a common goal, we pursued a well-understood governance and decision-making structure, routine coordination and communication activities, data and information sharing, commitment from partners and upper agency management to the AM process, and meaningful cooperation among program managers and partners. The overall approach and steps to implement and institutionalize AM for ecosystem restoration explained here are applicable to situations in which it has been incomplete or, as in our case, the restoration program is just getting started.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Estuary ecosystem restoration: implementing and institutionalizing adaptive management

Ebberts

Zelinsky

Karnezis

et al. 2017

Restoration Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…; Krueger et al. ; Seifert and Moore ), and in some cases these efforts have been quite successful. For example, restoration efforts focused on floodplain connection in the upper Chilliwack River watershed of British Columbia identified that between 27% and 34% of the overall Coho Salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch smolt migration could be attributed to those restored habitat types (Ogston et al.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Juvenile Salmonid Assemblages at the Mirror Lake Complex in the Lower Columbia River before and after a Culvert Modification

Sol

Hanson

Marcoe

et al. 2018

N American J Fish Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined salmonid assemblages upstream of a culvert connecting the Mirror Lake Complex with the lower Columbia River before and after the culvert was modified to improve habitat connectivity and fish passage. Initially the culvert limited water flow between the Columbia River and the Mirror Lake Complex. The outlet and interior of the culvert were reconfigured to create a more “natural” and suitable passageway for salmonids through the removal of riprap and the strategic placement of boulders, cobbles, gravels, baffles, and weirs. Prior to the culvert modification, three sites were sampled monthly between April and August of 2008, 5.0 and 0.5 km upstream of the culvert and immediately downstream of the culvert. After the culvert modification, the same sites were sampled from 2009 to 2012, with two additional sites added in 2010. Sites near the culvert supported Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha, Coho Salmon O. kisutch, and Chum Salmon O. keta, while sites further from the culvert supported unmarked Coho Salmon and Rainbow Trout O. mykiss, steelhead (anadromous Rainbow Trout), and Cutthroat Trout O. clarkii. Clear trends in salmonid occurrence were not observed, although densities of Chinook Salmon tended to be higher in years postmodification than before modification. Culvert modifications should focus on alleviating site‐specific fish passage conditions to result in substantial changes to habitat connectivity.

show abstract

Changes in Fish Assemblages at the Mirror Lake Complex in the Lower Columbia River Before and After a Culvert Modification

Sol

Hanson

Marcoe

et al. 2019

N American J Fish Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Changes in fish assemblages were examined before and after a culvert was modified to improve the fish passage at the Mirror Lake Complex (MLC), located along the Columbia River Gorge, Oregon. Conditions at the culvert limited water flow between the Columbia River and the MLC during certain portions of the year; thus, the outlet and interior of the culvert were modified to improve fish passage. Prior to the culvert modification, three sites were sampled monthly between April and August 2008, 5.0 km and 0.5 km upstream of the culvert and immediately downstream of the culvert. Following the culvert modification in the late summer of 2008, the same sites were sampled from 2009 to 2012, with two additional sites added in 2010. Prior to the culvert modification, the lower sites (i.e., the sites closest to the Columbia River) supported native and nonnative fish species, while the upper sites were dominated by native species. During the 4 years of monitoring after culvert modification, these distinctions between the upper and lower sites remained. A significant increase in water temperature and species richness was observed at the site just upstream of the culvert, but other changes in fish composition (density, diversity, percent of nonnative species) were not observed. However, at the upper sites, while nonnative species were absent before culvert modification, they were present after modification. Modifications made at the culvert, in combination with seasonal variation in water level and water temperature, may have influenced fish communities in the MLC. Given predicted regional and global climatic changes, our study indicates the importance of long‐term monitoring of restoration sites for the presence of nonnative species and the effects of environmental variables, such as water temperature.

show abstract

An expert panel process to evaluate habitat restoration actions in the Columbia River estuary

Cited by 20 publications

References 50 publications

Estuary ecosystem restoration: implementing and institutionalizing adaptive management

Estuary ecosystem restoration: implementing and institutionalizing adaptive management

Juvenile Salmonid Assemblages at the Mirror Lake Complex in the Lower Columbia River before and after a Culvert Modification

Changes in Fish Assemblages at the Mirror Lake Complex in the Lower Columbia River Before and After a Culvert Modification

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About