Indicators and assessment methods for measuring the ecological integrity of semi-aquatic terrestrial environments

Hydrobiologia

Volumn 422-423, Issue , 2000, Pages 111-131

  Innis, Stephanie A ^a   Naiman, Robert J ^a   Elliott, Scott R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Assessment; Integrity; Review; Riparian; Wetland

Indexed keywords

BIOINDICATOR; ENVIRONMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FRESHWATER ENVIRONMENT; RIPARIAN ZONE; WETLAND;

ECOSYSTEM HEALTH; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATOR; RIPARIAN ZONE; WETLAND;

RIPARIA;

EID: 0034174233     PISSN: 00188158     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-011-4164-2_9     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (70)

1. Adamus, P. R., 1992. Wetlands data sources and collection methods. In Statewide wetland strategies: a guide to protecting and managing the resource. World Wildlife Fund, Island Press, Washington, D.C.: 171-224.
2. Adamus, P. R. & K. Brandt, 1990. Impacts on quality of inland wetlands of the United States: a survey of indicators, techniques and applications of community-level biomonitoring data. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory. Corvalis, OR, U.S.A.: 406 pp.
3. Adamus, P. R., L. T. Stockwell, E. J. Clairain Jr., M. E. Morrow, L. P. Rozas & R. D. Smith, 1991. Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET) Vol. I: Literature Review and Evaluation Rationale. WRP-DE-2. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS, U.S.A.: 299 pp.
4. Ainslie, W. B., 1994. Rapid wetland functional assessment: its role and utility in the regulatory arena. Wat. Air Soil Pollut. 77: 433-444.
5. Boon, P. J., J. Wilkenson & J. Martin, 1998. The application of SERCON (system for evaluating rivers for conservation) to a selection of rivers in Britain. Aquat. Cons. 8: 597-616.
6. Boon, P. J., N. T. H. Holmes, P. S. Maitland, T. A. Rowell & J. Davies, 1997. A system for evaluating rivers for conservation (SERCON): development, structure and function. In Boon, P. J. & D. L. Howell (eds), Freshwater Quality: Defining the Indefinable. Her Majesty's Stationary Office, Edinburgh: 299-326.
7. Brevin, P. A., S. T. Buckton & S. J. Omerod, 1998. River habitat surveys and biodiversity in acid-sensitive rivers. Aquat. Cons. 8: 501-514.
8. Briggs, M. K., M. K. Schmid & W. L. Halvorson, 1997. Monitoring riparian ecosystems: an inventory of riparian habitat along Rincon Creek near Tucson, AZ. Technical Report No. 58. USGS, Tucson, AZ: 78 pp.
9. Brinson, M. M., 1993. A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands. Wetlands Research Program Technical Report WRP-DE-4. Final Report, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS: 101 pp.
10. Brinson, M. M., 1996. Assessing wetland functions using HGM. National Wetlands Newsletter 18: 10-16.
11. Brinson, M. M. & R. Rhinehardt, 1996. The role of reference wetlands in functional assessment and mitigation. Ecol. Applic. 6: 69-76.
12. Brosofske, K. D., J. Chen, R. J. Naiman & J. F. Franklin, 1997. Harvesting effects on microclimatic gradients from small streams to uplands in western Washington. Ecol. Applic. 7: 1188-1200.
13. Cagney, J., 1993. Riparian area management: Greenline riparian-wetland monitoring. Bureau of Land Management /SC/ST-93/001+1737, Denver, CO: 45 pp.
14. Chen, J., S. Saunders, T. Crow, R. J. Naiman, K. Brosofske, G. Mroz, B. Brookshire, & J. F. Franklin, 1999. Microclimate in forest ecosystem and landscape ecology. BioScience 49: 288-297.
15. Chovanec, A. & R. Raab, 1997. Dragonflies (Insecta, Odonta) and the ecological status of newly created wetlands - examples for long term bioindication programmes. Limnologica 27: 381-392.
16. Commission of the European Communities, 1995. Wise use and conservation of wetlands. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament COM (95) 189 final, 29.05.95, Brussels: 54 pp.
17. Conquest, L. L. & S. C. Ralph, 1998. Statistical Design and Analysis Considerations for Monitoring and Assessment. In Naiman, R. J. & R. E. Bilby (eds), River Ecology and Management: Lessons from the Pacific Coastal Ecoregion. Springer-Verlag, New York: 455-475.
18. Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet & E. T. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats in the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C: 103 pp.
19. Croonquist, M. J. & R. P. Brooks, 1991. Use of avian and mammalian guilds as indicators of cumulative impact in riparian-wetland areas. Envir. Man. 15: 701-714.
20. Dale, V. H., S. Brown, R. Haeuber, N. T. Hobbs, N. Huntley, R. J. Naiman, W. E. Riebsame, M. G. Turner & T. Valone, 2000. Ecological principles and guidelines for managing the use of land. Ecol. Applic.
21. Federal Register, 1996. National action plan to develop the hydrogeomorphic approach for assessing wetland functions. Federal Register 61: 42593-42603.
22. Frissell, C. A., W. J. Liss, C. E. Warren & M. D. Hurley, 1986. A hierarchical framework for stream habitat classification: viewing streams in a watershed context. Envir. Man. 10: 199-214.
23. Fry, J., F. R. Steiner & D. M. Green, 1994. Riparian evaluation and site assessment in Arizona. Landscape & urban Planning 28: 179-199.
24. Gebhardt, K., S. Leonard, G. Staidl & D. Prichard, 1990. Riparian area management: riparian and wetland classifiction review. US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, TR-1737-5. Denver, CO: 56 pp.
25. Hansen, P. L., R. D. Pfister, K. Boggs, B. J. Cook, J. Joy & D. K. Hinkley, 1995. Classification and management of Montana's riparian and wetland sites. Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment Station, School of Forestry, University of Montana. Missoula, MT: 646 pp.
26. Karr, J. R., 1991. Biological integrity: A long neglected aspect of water resource management. Ecol. Applic. 1: 66-84.
27. Karr, J. R., 1999. Seeking suitable endpoints: biological monitoring for wetland assessment. Report to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle: 55 pp.
28. Karr, J. R. & D. R. Dudley, 1981. Ecological perspectives on water quality goals. Envir. Man. 5: 55-68.
29. Kleynhans, C. J., 1996. A qualitative procedure for the assessment of the habitat integrity of the Luvuvuhu River (Limpopo System, South Africa). J. Aquat. Ecosystem Health 5: 41-54.
30. Kondolf, G. M., 1995. Geomorphological stream channel classifiction in aquatic habitat restoration: uses and limitations. Aquat. Cons.: mar. & fresh. Ecosystems 5: 127-141.
31. Kusler, J. & W. Niering, 1998. Wetland assessment: Have we lost our way? National Wetlands Newsletter 20: 9-20.
32. Larson, J. S. & D. B. Mazzarese, 1994. Rapid assessment of wetlands: history and application to management. In Mitsch, W J. (ed.), Global Wetlands: Old World and New. Elsevier, Amsterdam: 625-636.
33. Leibowitz, N. C., L. Squires & J. P. Baker, 1991. Research plan for monitoring wetland ecosystems. EPA/600/3-91/010. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory. Corvalis, OR: 168 pp.
34. Leonard, S., G. Staidl, J. Fogg, K. Gebhardt, W. Hagenbuck & D. Pritchard, 1992. Riparian area management: procedures for ecological site inventory-with special reference to riparian-wetland sites. US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management TR-1737-7. Denver: 135 pp.
35. Malanson, G. P., 1994. Riparian Landscapes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 296 pp.
36. Maltby, E., D. V. Hogan, C. P. Immirzi, J. H. Tellam & M. J. Van Der Peijl, 1994. Building a new approach to the investigation and assessment of wetland ecosystem functioning. In Mitsch, W. J. (ed.), Global Wetlands: Old World and New. Elsevier, Amsterdam: 637-658.
37. Medina, A. L., 1996. Native aquatic plants and ecological condition of southwestern wetlands and riparian areas. In Desired Future Conditions for Southwestern Riparian Ecosystems: Bringing Interests and Concerns Together. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. RM-GTR-272. Albuquerque, NM: 359 pp.
38. Myers, L. H., 1989. Riparian area management: Inventory and monitoring riparian areas. US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management TR-1737-7. Denver, CO: 79 pp.
39. Mitsch, W. J., 1992. Combining ecosystem and landscape approaches to Great Lakes wetlands. J. Great Lakes Res. 18: 552-570.
40. Mosley, M. P., 1987. The classification and characterization of rivers. In Richards, K. (ed.), River Channels, Environment and Process. Basil Blackwell, Oxford: 295-320.
41. Murphy, K. J., E. Castella, B. Clément, J. M. Hills, P. Obrdlik, I. D. Pulford, E. Schneider & M. C. D. Speight, 1994. Biotic indicators of riverine wetland ecosystem functioning. In Mitsch, W J. (ed.), Global Wetlands: Old World and New. Elsevier, Amsterdam: 659-682.
42. Naiman, R. J. & H. Décamps, 1997. The ecology of interfaces -riparian zones. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 28: 621-658.
43. Naiman, R. J., D. G. Lonzarich, T. J. Beechie & S. C. Ralph, 1992. General principles of classification and the assessment of conservation potential in rivers. In Boon, P. J., P. Calow & G. E. Petts (eds), River Conservation and Management. John Wiley & Sons, New York: 92-123.
44. Naiman, R. J., J. J. Magnuson, D. A. McKnight & J. A. Stanford, 1995. The Freshwater Imperative: A Research Agenda. Island Press, Washington, D.C: 165 pp.
45. Naiman, R. J., K. L. Fetherston, S. J. McKay & J. Chen, 1998. Riparian Forests. In Naiman, R. J. & R. E. Bilby (eds), River Ecology and Management: Lessons from the Pacific Coastal Ecoregion. Springer-Verlag, New York: 289-323.
46. National Research Council, 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and Boundaries, 10. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.: 307 pp.
47. Naura, M. & M. Robinson, 1998. Principles of using river habitat survey to predict the distribution of aquatic species: an example applied to the native white-clawed crayfish Austropotamobius Pallipes. Aquat. Cons. 8: 515-527.
48. Nelson, S. M. & D. C. Andersen, 1994. An assessment of riparian environmental quality by using butterflies and disturbance susceptibility scores. The Southwestern Naturalist 39: 137-142.
49. Nestler, J. M. & K. S. Long, 1997. Development of hydrological indices to aid cumulative impact analysis of riverine wetlands. Regul. Rivers: Research & Management 13: 317-334.
50. Padgett, W. G., A. P. Youngblood & A. H. Winward, 1989. Riparian community type classification of Utah and southeastern Idaho. R4-Ecol-89-01. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region. Ogden, UT: 191 pp.
51. Petersen, R. C. Jr., 1992. The RCE: a riparian, channel, and environmental inventory for small streams in the agricultural landscape. Freshwat. Biol. 27: 295-306.
52. Platts, W. S., C. Armour, G. D. Booth, M. Bryant, J. L. Bufford, P. Culpin, S. Jensen, G. W. Lienkaemper, G. W. Minshall, S. B. Monsen, R. L. Nelson, J. R. Sedell & J. S. Tuhy, 1987. Methods for evaluating riparian habitats with applications to management. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. General Technical Report INT-221. Ogden, UT: 177 pp.
53. Poff, N. L. & 7 co-authors, 1997. The natural flow regime. BioScience 47: 769-784.
54. Pollock, M. M., 1998. Biodiversity. In Naiman, R. J. & R. E. Bilby (eds), River Ecology and Management: Lessons from the Pacific Coastal Ecoregion. Springer-Verlag, New York: 430-454.
55. Pollock, M. M., R. J. Naiman & T. A. Hanley, 1998. Plant species richness in riparian wetlands - a test of biodiversity theory. Ecology 79: 94-105.
56. Pringle, C. M., R. J. Naiman, G. Bretschko, J. R. Karr, M. W. Oswood, J. R. Webster, R. L. Welcomme & M. J. Winterbourn, 1988. Patch dynamics in lotie systems: The stream as a mosaic. J. N. am. Benthol. Soc. 7: 503-524.
57. Raven, P. J., P. Fox, M. Everard, N. T. H. Holmes & F. H. Dawson, 1997. River habitat survey: a new system for classifying rivers according to their habitat quality. In Boon, P. J. & D. L. Howell (eds), Freshwater Quality: Defining the Indefinable. Her Majesty's Stationary Office, Edinburgh, U.K.: 215-234.
58. Richter, B. D., J. V. Baumgartner, J. Powell & D. P. Braun, 1996. A method for assessing hydrologic alteration within ecosystems. Cons. Biol. 10: 1163-1174.
59. Rosgen, D. L., 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22: 169-199.
60. Schroeder, R. L. & A. W. Allen, 1992. Assessment of habitat of wildlife communities on the Snake River, Jackson, Wyoming. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Resource Publication 190. Washington, D.C.: 21 pp.
61. Soil Conversation Service, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1987. National agricultural land evaluation and site assessment handbook 310:1. Washington, D.C.
62. Stauffer, J. C. & R. M. Goldstein, 1997. Comparison of three qualitative habitat indices and their applicability to prairie streams. N. Am. J. Fish. Manage. 17: 348-361.
63. Swift, B. L., 1984. Status of riparian ecosystems in the United States. Wat. Res. Bull. 20: 223-227.
64. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1992. Integrated riparian evaluation guide: intermountain region. Forest Service. Ogden, UT.
65. U.S. Department of the Interior, 1993. Riparian area management: Process for assessing proper functioning condition. TR-1737-3. Bureau of Land Management. Denver, CO: 51 pp.
66. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1998. Wetland Bioassessment Fact Sheets. EPA 843-F-98-001. Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Office of Water, USEPA, Washington, D.C.
67. Wilcove, D. S., D. Rothstein, J. Dubrow, A. Phillips & E. Losos, 1998. Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. BioScience 48: 607-615.
68. Wilkinson, J., J. Martin, P. J. Boon & N. T. H. Holmes, 1998. Convergence of field survey protocols for SERCON (system for evaluating rivers for conservation) and RHS (river habitat survey). Aquat. Cons. 8: 579-596.
69. Wilson, R. F. & W. J. Mitsch, 1996. Functional assessment of five wetlands constructed to mitigate wetland loss in Ohio, U.S.A. Wetlands 16: 436-451.
70. Youngblood, A. P., W. G. Padgett & A. H. Winward, 1985. Riparian community type classification of eastern Idaho - western Wyoming. R4-Ecol-85-01. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region. Ogden, UT: 78 pp.