Effect of sampling density on the measurement of stream condition indicators in two lowland Australian streams

River Research and Applications

Volumn 22, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 853-869

  Ladson, Anthony R ^a   Grayson, Rodger B ^b   Jawecki, Boris ^c   White, Lindsay J ^d  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^c Umweltdata GmbH   (Austria)

^d Murray Darling Basin Commission   (Australia)

Author keywords

Change detection; Environmental assessment; Environmental indicators; Index of stream condition; River health; River management

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATOR; INDEX METHOD; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; RIVER MANAGEMENT; STREAM;

AUSTRALASIA; AUSTRALIA; VICTORIA [AUSTRALIA];

EID: 33750585071     PISSN: 15351459     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/rra.940     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. ANZECC & ARMCANZ (Australia and New Zealand Environment Conservation Council and Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand). 2000. Australian and New Zealand guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality. Environment Australia, Canberra.
2. Cooper JAG, Ramm AEL, Harrison TD. 1994. The estuarine health index: A new approach to scientific information transfer. Ocean and Coastal Management 25: 103-141.
3. Department of Water Resources. 1989. Water Victoria, an Environmental Handbook. State Government of Victoria: Melbourne.
4. Dolloff CA, Jennings HE, Owen MD. 1997. A comparison of basinwide and representative reach habitat survey techniques in three Southern Appalachian watersheds. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 17: 339-347.
5. Efron B, Tibshirani RJ. 1993. An Introduction to the Bootstrap. Chapman & Hall: New York.
6. European Union. 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and the council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework of community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal of the European Communities (22.12.2000) L 327: 1-72.
7. Fairweather PG. 1991. Statistical power and design requirements for environmental monitoring. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 42: 555-567.
8. Fox D. 2001. Environmental power analysis - a new perspective. Environmetrics 21: 437-449.
9. Harper DM, Kemp JL, Vogel B, Newson MD. 2000. Towards the assessment of 'ecological integrity' in running waters of the United Kingdom. Hydrobiologia 422(423): 133-142.
10. Hughes RM, Paulsen SG, Stoddard JL. 2000. EMAP-Surface waters: multiassemblage, probability survey of ecological integrity in the USA. Hydrobiologia 422(423): 429-443.
11. Jawecki B. 2000. A review of the field sampling strategy used in the Index of Stream Condition. Universität für Bodenkultur Wien: Diplomarbeit.
12. Jeffers JNR. 1998. The statistical basis of sampling strategies for rivers: an example using River Habitat Survey. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Research 8: 447-454.
13. Ladson AR. 2000. A multi-component indicator of stream condition for waterway managers: Balancing scientific rigour with the need for utility. PhD thesis. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. University of Melbourne: Melbourne.
14. Ladson AR, White LJ. 1999. Index of Stream Condition: Reference manual. Department of Natural Resources and Environment. Government of Victoria: Melbourne.
15. Ladson AR, White LJ, Doolan JA. 1997. Trialing the Index of Stream Condition in Victoria, Australia. 24th Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium, Auckland, New Zealand, Institution of Engineers Australia. 109-114.
16. Ladson AR, White LJ, Doolan JA. Finlayson BL, Hart BT, Lake PS, Tilleard JW. 1999. Development and testing of an Index of Stream Condition for waterway management in Australia. Freshwater Biology 41: 453-468.
17. Mac Nally R. 1997. Monitoring forest bird communities for impact assessment: the influence of sampling intensity and spatial scale. Biological Conservation 82: 355-367.
18. Manly B. 1997. Randomization, bootstrap and Monte Carlo methods in biology. Chapman and Hall: London.
19. Mapstone BD. 1995. Scalable decision rules for environmental impact studies: Effect size, Type I and Type II errors. Ecological applications 5: 401-410.
20. Mitchell P. 1990. The environmental condition of Victorian streams. Department of Water Resources. Government of Victoria: Melbourne.
21. OCE (Office of the Commissioner for the Environment). 1988. State of the Environment Report 1988: Victoria's Inland Waters. Government of Victoria: Melbourne.
22. Peterman RM. 1990. Statistical power analysis can improve fisheries research and management. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 47: 2-15.
23. Petersen RC. 1992. The RCE: A riparian channel and environmental inventory for small streams in the agricultural landscape. Freshwater Biology 27: 295-306.
24. Power M, Power G, Dixon DG. 1995. Detection and decision-making in environmental effects monitoring. Environmental Management 19: 629-639.
25. Rabeni CF, Wang N, Sarver RJ. 1999. Evaluation of adequacy of the representative stream reach used in invertebrate monitoring programs. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 18(2): 284-291.
26. Raven PJ, Holmes NTH, Naura M, Dawson FH. 2000. Using River Habitat Survey for environmental assessment and catchment planning in the UK. Hydrobiologia 422(423): 359-367.
27. Rowntree K, Wadeson R. 1998. A geomorphological framework for the assessment of instream flow requirements. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management 1: 125-141.
28. Tilleard JW, Department of Water Resources (DWR). 1986. A statewide assessment of physical stream conditions in Victoria. Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium, 25-27 November, Griffith University, Brisbane. The Institution of Engineers, Australia.
29. White LJ, Ladson AR. 1999a. Index of Stream Condition: Catchment managers' manual. Department of Natural Resources and Environment. Government of Victoria: Melbourne.
30. White LJ, Ladson AR. 1999b. Index of Stream Condition: Field manual. Department of Natural Resources and Environment. Government of Victoria: Melbourne.
31. Williams JG 1996. Lost in space: minimum confidence intervals for idealized PHABSIM studies. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 125: 458-465.
32. William LR, Warren ML, Adams SB, Arvai JL, Taylor CM. 2004. Basin visual estimation technique (BVET) and representative reach approaches to wadeable stream surveys: methodological limitations and future directions. Fisheries 29(8): 12-22.