Combining biological indicators of watershed condition from multiple sampling programs—a case study from Maryland, USA

Vølstad, Jon Helge; Neerchal, Nagaraj K.; Roth, N.; Southerland, Mark T.

doi:10.1016/s1470-160x(03)00007-4

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When the monitoring and evaluation data is collected, studies show the amount of variance in techniques used [46,48,49]. Monitoring and evaluation was once primarily for academia, however it is slowly being required of less suited groups such as non-governmental or local government agencies [50,51]. As a result, the monitoring component often lacks a framework or the correct methods in which the data should be collected [50,51].…”

Section: Stream Classification Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Monitoring and evaluation was once primarily for academia, however it is slowly being required of less suited groups such as non-governmental or local government agencies [50,51]. As a result, the monitoring component often lacks a framework or the correct methods in which the data should be collected [50,51]. To avoid inconsistencies, there should be a coordinated effort amongst all the groups monitoring the stream's condition [51], this would have the additional benefit of promoting data sharing [52].…”

Section: Stream Classification Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Review of Stream Assessment Methodologies and Restoration: The Case of Virginia, USA

Bender¹,

Ahn²

2011

Environmental Engineering Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapid population growth and land use changes have severely degraded streams across the United States. In response, there has been a surge in the number of stream restoration projects, including stream restoration for mitigation purposes. Currently, most projects do not include evaluation and monitoring, which are critical in the success of stream restoration projects. The goal of this study is to review the current status of assessment methodologies and restoration approaches for streams in Virginia, with the aim of assisting the restoration community in making sound decisions. As part of the study, stream restoration projects data from a project in Fairfax County, Virginia was assessed. This review revealed that the stream assessment methodologies currently applied to restoration are visuallybased and do not include biological data collection and/or a method to incorporate watershed information. It was found from the case study that out of the twenty nine restoration projects that had occurred between 1995 and 2003 in Fairfax County, nineteen projects reported bank stabilization as a goal or the only goal, indicating an emphasis on a single physical component rather than on the overall ecological integrity of streams. It also turned out that only seven projects conducted any level of monitoring as part of the restoration, confirming the lack of evaluation and monitoring. However, Fairfax County has recently improved its stream restoration practices by developing and incorporating watershed management plans. This now provides one of the better cases that might be looked upon by stakeholders when planning future stream restoration projects.

show abstract

Section: Stream Classification Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Stream Classification Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Stream Assessment Methodologies and Restoration: The Case of Virginia, USA

Bender¹,

Ahn²

2011

Environmental Engineering Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Monitoring designs are influenced by differences in philosophies, goals, objectives, and needs, and run the gamut from targeted sampling carried out to monitor compliance with National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits regulating point sources of pollution, to regional probabilistic surveys designed to estimate the fraction of stream miles meeting biological or chemical criteria, with quantified uncertainty (Stevens and Olsen, 2004). Local and regional monitoring designs have also been developed with the goal of estimating the condition of specific watersheds within a region, either through a targeted or probabilistic monitoring approach (Voelstad et al, 2003). The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has established strategic goals with specific targets for the maintenance and improvement of water quality on a watershed basis, tracked at the 12-digit HUC scale (US EPA, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparability of a regional and state survey: effects on fish IBI assessment for West Virginia, U.S.A.

Detenbeck

Cincotta

2008

Hydrobiologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Probability-based survey designs are now being investigated to allow condition to be assessed for a discrete population of watershed management units and to infer probability of impairment to other unsampled watersheds. Results can be used to focus further monitoring and restoration efforts. Fish community data and index of biotic integrity (IBI) development were compared between the 1993 and 1998 Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment (EMAP-MAIA) survey and a West Virginia Regional EMAP (WV REMAP) survey conducted in [2001][2002]. Both designs were based on probability surveys, but the EMAP design treated streams as a continuous linear network comprising an infinite population of points, while the REMAP design used a discrete set of watershed outlets as defined by 12-digit Hydrologic Cataloging Units (HUC12) as the sample population. The comparability of the watershed-based WV REMAP survey design results with the linear network-based EMAP-MAIA survey results for West Virginia was affected by the different size range of watershed areas included in each target population. Once similar watershed area ranges were considered by narrowing the size range included in the West Virginia EMAP-MAIA data set, virtually identical cumulative distribution functions for fish IBI scores were obtained. The reduced variability in reference conditions obtained by applying a restricted range of watershed areas allowed us to detect and correct for ecoregional differences in fish IBI metrics and scores, after excluding the biogeographically distinct Potomac River drainage basin located in the Central Appalachian Ridge and Valley Ecoregion.

show abstract

Improving biological indicators to better assess the condition of streams

Southerland

Rogers

Kline

et al. 2007

Ecological Indicators

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Combining biological indicators of watershed condition from multiple sampling programs—a case study from Maryland, USA

Cited by 5 publications

References 24 publications

A Review of Stream Assessment Methodologies and Restoration: The Case of Virginia, USA

A Review of Stream Assessment Methodologies and Restoration: The Case of Virginia, USA

Comparability of a regional and state survey: effects on fish IBI assessment for West Virginia, U.S.A.

Improving biological indicators to better assess the condition of streams

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About