Integrating remotely acquired and field data to assess effects of setback levees on riparian and aquatic habitat in glacial-melt water rivers

River Research and Applications

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 355-372

  Konrad, Christopher P ^a   Black, Robert W ^a   Voss, Frank ^a   Neale, Christopher M U ^b  

^a U S GEOLOGICAL SURVEY   (United States)

^b UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Floodplain; Habitat; Levee; Pacific Northwest; Remote sensing; River restoration

Indexed keywords

AIRBORNE SENSING; AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM; EFFICIENCY MEASUREMENT; FIELD SURVEY; FLOODPLAIN; GLACIAL HYDROLOGY; IMAGE CLASSIFICATION; IMAGE RESOLUTION; INFRARED IMAGERY; LEVEE; MULTISPECTRAL IMAGE; REMOTE SENSING; RIPARIAN VEGETATION; SUSPENDED SEDIMENT;

NORTH AMERICA; PUYALLUP RIVER; UNITED STATES; WASHINGTON [UNITED STATES];

CONIFEROPHYTA;

EID: 45149124896     PISSN: 15351459     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/rra.1070     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Anderson PC, Hardy TB, Neale CMU. 1994. Application of multispectral videography for the delineation of riverine depths and mesoscale hydraulic features. In Proceedings of the 14th Biennial Workshop on Color Aerial Photography and Videography for Resource Monitoring. American Society of Photography and Remote Sensing. Bethseda: Maryland; 154-163.
2. Beechie TJ, Liermann M, Beamer EM, Henderson R. 2005. A classification of habitat types in a large river and their use by juvenile salmonids. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 134: 717-729.
3. Belknap W, Naiman RJ. 1998. AGIS and TIR procedure to detect and map wall-base channels in Western Washington. Journal of Environmental Management 52: 147-160.
4. Bernhardt ES, Palmer MA, Allan JD, Alexander G, Barnas K, Brooks S, Carr J, Clayton S, Dahm C, Follstad-Shah J, Galat D, Gloss S, Goodwin P, Hart D, Hassett B, Jenkinson R, Katz S, Kondolf GM, Lake PS, Lave R, Meyer JL, O'Don TK. 2005. U. S. River Restoration Efforts. Science 308: 636-637.
5. Bisson PA, Quinn TP, Reeves GH, Gregory SV. 1992. Best management practices, cumulative effects, and long-term trends in fish abundance in Pacific Northwest river systems. In Watershed Management: Balancing Sustainability and Environmental Change, Naiman RJ (ed.). Springer-Verlag: New York, NY; 154-163.
6. Black RW, Haggland A, Crosby G. 2003. Characterization of instream hydraulic and riparian habitat conditions and stream temperature of the upper White River Basin, Washington, using multispectral imaging systems, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4022: 92.
7. Black RW, Silkey M. 1998. Water-quality assessment of the Puget Sound Basin, Washington - summary of stream biological data through 1995, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-4164: 78.
8. Brookes A. 1996. Floodplain restoration and rehabilitation. In Floodplain Processes, Anderson MG, Walling DE, Bates PD (eds). John Wiley & Sons: Chichester; 553-576.
9. Brosse S, Arbuckle CJ, Townsend CR. 2003. Habitat scale and biodiversity: influence of catchment, stream reach and bedform scales on local invertebrate diversity. Biodiversity and Conservation 12: 2057-2075.
10. Buchman IL. 1936. Lumbering and logging in the Puget Sound Region in territorial days. Pacific Northwest Quarterly 27: 34-53.
11. Cai B, Neale CMU. 1999. A method for constructing 3-dimensional models from airborne imagery, In Color Photography and Videography for Resource Assessment, Proceedings of the 17th Biennial Workshop. American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing: Bethesda, Maryland.
12. Carbonneau PE, Lane SN, Bergeron NE. 2004. Catchment-scale mapping of surface grain size in gravel bed rivers using airborne digital imagery. Water Resources Research 40: WO7202, DOI: 10.1029/ 2003WR002759.
13. ERDAS. 2003. ERDAS Imagine v. 8.7, Leica Geosystems.
14. Fausch KD. 1984. Profitable stream positions for salmonids: relating specific growth rate to net energy gain. Canadian Journal of Zoology 62: 441-451. i Fausch KD, Torgersen CEC, Baxter VH, Li W. 2002. Landscapes to riverscapes: bridging the gap between research and conservation of stream fishes. BioScience 52: 483-498.
15. Goodwin CN. 1999. Fluvial classification: neanderthal necessity or needless normalcy. In Wildland Hydrology, Olson DS, Potyondy JP (eds). American Water Resources Association: Middleburg, Virginia; 229-236.
16. Hardy TB, Anderson PC, Neale CMU, Stevens DK. 1994. Application of multispectral videography for the delineation of riverine depths and mesoscale hydraulic features. In Effects of Human-Induced Change on Hydrologic Systems, Marstron R, Hasfurther V (eds). Annual Proceedings, Water Resources Association: Jackson Hole, Wyoming; 445-454.
17. Hawkins CP, Kershner JL, Bisson PA, Bryant MD, Decker LM, Gregory SV, McCullough DA, Overton CK, Reeves GH, Steedman RJ, Young MK. 1993. A hierarchical approach to classifying stream habitat features. Fisheries 19: 3-12.
18. Inoue M, Nunokawa M. 2002. Effects of longitudinal variations in stream habitat structure on fish abundance: an analysis based on subunit-scale habitat classification. Freshwater Biology 47: 1594-1607.
19. Konrad CP, Booth DB, Burges SJ, Montgomery DR. 2002. Partial entrainment of gravel bars during floods. Water Resources Research 38: 10.1029/2001WR000828.
20. Leckie DG, Cloney E, Jay C, Paradine D. 2005. Automated mapping of stream features with high resolution multispectral imagery: an example of the capabilities. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 71: 145-155.
21. Legleiter CJ. 2003. Spectrally driven classification of high spatial resolution, hyperspectral imagery: a tool for mapping in-stream habitat. Environmental Management 32: 399-411.
22. Legleiter CJ, Goodchild MF. 2005. Alternative representations of in-stream habitat: classification using remote sensing hydraulic modeling and fuzzy logic. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 19: 29-50.
23. Legleiter CJ, Marcus DA, Marcus WA, Fonstand MA. 2004. Passive optical remote sensing of river channel morphology and in-stream habitat: physical basis and feasibility. Remote Sensing of Environment 93: 493-510.
24. Lillesand TM, Kiefer RW, Chipman JW. 2004. Remote Sensing and Image Interpretation. John Wiley & Sons: New York.
25. Lorang MS, Whited DC, Hauer FR, Kimball JS, Stanford JA. 2005. Using alrbourne multispectral imagery to evaluate geomorphic work across floodplains of gravel - bed rivers. Ecological Applications 15: 1209-1222.
26. Marcus WA, Legleiter CJ, Aspinall RJ, Boardman JW, Crabtree RL. 2003. High spatial resolution hyperspectral mapping of in-stream habitats, depths, and woody debris in mountain streams. Geomorphology 55: 363-380.
27. Mertes LAK. 2002. Remote sensing of riveine landscapes. Freshwater Biology 47: 799-816.
28. Montgomery DR, Buffington JM. 1997. Channel-reach morphology in mountain drainage basins. Geological Society of America Bulletin 109: 596-611.
29. Moore KMS, Gregory SV. 1988. Response of young-of-the-year cutthroat trout to manipulation of habitat structure in a small stream. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 117: 162-170.
30. Naiman RJ. 1998. Biotic stream classification. In River Ecology and Management: Lessons From the Pacific Coastal Ecoregion, Naiman RJ, Bilby RE (eds). Springer-Verlag: New York; 97-119.
31. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2005. Endangered and threatened species: final listing determinations for 16 ESUs of West Coast Salmon, and final 4(d) protective regulations for threatened salmonid ESUs. Federal Register 70:37160-37200, June 28, 2005, accessed at http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Publications/FR-Notices/2005/ upload/70FR37160.pdf on September 10, 2005.
32. Neale CMU, Crowther BG. 1994. An airborne multispectral video/radiometer remote sensing system: development and calibration. Remote Sensing of Environment 48: 1-25.
33. Poole GC, Frissell CA, Ralph SC. 1997. In-stream habitat unit classification: Inadequacies for monitoring and some consequences for management. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 33: 879-896.
34. Prych EA. 1988. Flood-carrying capacities aud changes in channels of the lower Puyallup, White, and Carbon Rivers in Western Washington. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 87-4129, 69 p.
35. Puget Sound LIDAR Consortium. 2005. Pierce County Lowlands 2000 - Bare Earth LIDAR DEM, accessed April 2005 at http://rocky2.ess.washington.edu/ data/raster/lidar/lidardata/index.html
36. Ralph SC, Cardoso T, Poole GC, Conquest LL, Naiman RL. 1991. Status and trends of instream habitat in forested lands of Washington: the Timber-Fish-Wildlife ambient monitoring project, 1989-1991 Biennial Progress Report. Center for Stream side Studies, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. TFW-AM9-91-002, 58 p.
37. Ralph SC, Poole GC, Conquest LL, Naiman RJ. 1994. Stream channel morphology and woody debris in logged and unlogged basins of western Washington. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 51: 37-51.
38. Reiser DW, Bjornn TC. 1979. Habitat requirements of anadromous salmonids. In Influence of Forest and Rangeland Management on Anadromous Fish Habitat in the Western United States and Canada, Meehan WR (ed.). U.S. Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-96: Portland, Oregon.
39. Riley P. 1996. Water Yield in Semiarid Environments Under Projected Climate Change. Bureau of Reclamation: Provo, Utah; 59.
40. Roper BB, Kershner JL, Archer E, Henderson R, Bouwes N. 2002. An evaluation of physical stream habitat attributes used to monitor streams. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 38: 1637-1646.
41. Rosgen DL. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22: 169-199.
42. Sedell JR, Duval WS. 1985. Water transportation and storage of logs. In Influence of Forest and Rangeland Management on Anadromous Fish Habitat in Western North America, Meehan WR (ed.). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-186: Portland, Oregon; 1-68.
43. Shelford VE. 1911. Ecological succession. I. Stream fishes and the method of physiographic analysis. Biological Bulletin of the Marine Biological Laboratory 21: 9-35. Woods Hole, Massachusetts.
44. Stanford JA. 1998. Rivers in the landscape: introduction to the special issue on riparian and groundwater ecology. Freshwater Biology 40: 402-406.
45. Stanford JA, Ward JV. 1993. An ecosystem perspective of alluvial rivers: connectivity and the hyporheic corridor. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 12: 48-60.
46. Steinmann P. 1907. Die Tierwelt der Gebirgsbache., Eine Faunistisch-biologische Studie. Annales de Biologie Lacustre. 2: 30-150.
47. Theinemann A. 1912. Der Bergbach des Sauerland. Internationale Revue der gesamten Hydrobiologie Supplement 4: 125.
48. Thompson RM, Townsend CR. 2005. Food web topology varies with spatial scale in a patch environment. Ecology 86: 1916-1925.
49. Turner MG, Gardner RH, O'Neill RV. 2004. Landscape Ecology in Theory and Practice: Pattern and Process. Springer: New York.
50. Ward JV. 1997. An expansive perspective of riverine landscapes: pattern and process across scales. GAIA 6: 52-60.
51. Ward JV, Robinson CT, Tockner K. 2002. Applicability of ecological theory to riverine ecosystems. Internationale Vereinigung fur Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie 28: 443-450.
52. Ward JV, Tockner K. 2001. Biodiversity: towards a unifying theme for tiver ecology. Freshwater Biology 46: 807-819.
53. Ward JV, Tockner K, Schiemer F. 1999. Biodiversity of floodplain river ecosystems: ecotones and connectivity. Regulated Rivers: Research and Application 15: 125-139.
54. Wilzbach MA. 1985. Relative roles of food abundance and cover in determining the habitat distribution of stream-dwelling cutthroat trout (Salmo clarki). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 42: 1668-1672.
55. Wright A, Marcus WA, Aspinall R. 2000. Evaluation of multispectral, fine scale digital imagery as a tool for mapping stream morphology. Geomorphology 33: 107-120.
56. Wydoski RS, Whitney RR. 2003. Inland Fishes of Washington. American Fisheries Society in association with University of Washington Press: Seattle, Washington; 360.