Hierarchical classification of stream condition: a house–neighborhood framework for establishing conservation priorities in complex riverscapes

Abstract

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThis report was prepared under 3 work assignments of EPA contract #68-C7-0014 to Tetra Tech, Inc. Authors of this report are Jeroen Gerritsen, June Burton, and Michael T. Barbour. We thank Maggie Passmore and Jim Green of EPA Region 3 for helpful guidance, discussions and review. The biological index was made possible by the intensive data collection efforts and discussion of West Virginia DEP; in particular, Janice Smithson, Jeffrey Bailey, Pat Campbell, and John Wirts. This report was prepared with the assistance of Jeffrey White, Erik Leppo, and Brenda Fowler. A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable StreamsTetra Tech, Inc. iv March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable StreamsTetra Tech, Inc. v March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000 Tetra Tech, Inc. vi March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK A Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable StreamsTetra Tech, Inc. vii March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000 LIST OF FIGURES Tech, Inc. viii March 28, 2000 (Revised July 21, 2000 LIST OF TABLES EXECUTIVE SUMMARYOver the past century, land use activities such as mining, agriculture, urbanization, and industrialization have seriously threatened the quality of surface waters by contributing to nonpoint-source pollution. In West Virginia, the investigation of these nonpoint sources of water pollution has become a priority. indicator of ecosystem health and can identify impairment with respect to the reference (or natural) condition. The index includes six biological attributes, called metrics, that represent elements of the structure and function of the bottom-dwelling macroinvertebrate assemblage. Metrics are specific measures of diversity, composition, and tolerance to pollution, that include ecological information.The SCI is to be used as the basis for bioassessment in West Virginia and has been calibrated for a long-term biological index period extending from April through October. A data analysis application has been developed to ensure consistency in data management and analysis throughout the state as DEP biologists conduct biological monitoring.Benefits expected from the implementation of the WV SCI will apply to a broad spectrum of management programs, including:characterizing the existence and severity of point and nonpoint source impairment;targeting and prioritizing watersheds and ecosystem management areas for remedial or preventive programs; evaluating the effectiveness of nonpoint source best management programs; screening ecosystems for use attainability; and developing a basis for establishing biocriteria that relate to regional water quality goals, an EPA priority.The West Virginia SCI was tested with independent data collected in 1998 and was able to correctly identify the majority of the stream sites stressed in some way by human disturbance or pollution. Index scores were divided into 5 proposed rating categories for reporting on the condition...

A multi-scale hierarchical framework for developing understanding of river behaviour to support river management

“…Some frameworks are more quantitative, generating one or more indices or classifications of spatial units that support assessment of river systems (e.g. Rosgen, 1994;González del Tánago and García de Jalón, 2004;Merovich et al, 2013;Rinaldi et al, 2013Rinaldi et al, , 2015a MacDonald, 2002;Brierley and Fryirs, 2005;Beechie et al, 2010; Rinaldi et al, 2013a Rinaldi et al, , 2015.In some cases, theoretical or historical analyses or consideration of specific future scenarios are used to develop space-time understanding that can support management decisionmaking (e.g. Buffington, 1997, 1998;Montgomery and MacDonald, 2002;Benda et al, 2004;Brierley and Fryirs, 2005;McCluney et al, 2014 , 1997, 1998Montgomery and MacDonald, 2002;Benda et al, 2004;Brierley and Fryirs, 2005;Merovich et al, 2013;Rinaldi et al, 2013Rinaldi et al, , 2015a.…”

“…Furthermore, some of the frameworks include indicators of human pressures and their impacts (e.g. Merovich et al, 2013;McCluney et al, 2014;Rinaldi et al, 2013Rinaldi et al, , 2015a.6. Finally, although most frameworks could be described as incorporating processes to some degree, some methods are particularly process-based, even when processes are inferred from forms and associations rather than being quantified by direct measurements.…”

“…Some frameworks are more quantitative, generating one or more indices or classifications of spatial units that support assessment of river systems (e.g. Rosgen, 1994;González del Tánago and García de Jalón, 2004;Merovich et al, 2013;Rinaldi et al, 2013Rinaldi et al, , 2015a MacDonald, 2002;Brierley and Fryirs, 2005;Beechie et al, 2010; Rinaldi et al, 2013a Rinaldi et al, , 2015.…”

“…Buffington, 1997, 1998;Montgomery and MacDonald, 2002;Benda et al, 2004;Brierley and Fryirs, 2005;McCluney et al, 2014 , 1997, 1998Montgomery and MacDonald, 2002;Benda et al, 2004;Brierley and Fryirs, 2005;Merovich et al, 2013;Rinaldi et al, 2013Rinaldi et al, , 2015a. Furthermore, some of the frameworks include indicators of human pressures and their impacts (e.g.…”

“…Although all frameworks incorporate characteristics that are used to delineate spatial units and may indicate how those units function, many provide specific, well-defined indicators of processes, forms or of the condition of spatial units (e.g. Rosgen, 1994;Montgomery et al, 1997Montgomery et al, , 1998Montgomery and MacDonald, 2002;Benda et al, 2004;Brierley and Fryirs, 2005;Merovich et al, 2013;Rinaldi et al, 2013Rinaldi et al, , 2015a. Furthermore, some of the frameworks include indicators of human pressures and their impacts (e.g.…”