Groundwater-dependent ecosystems in Oregon: An assessment of their distribution and associated threats

Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 97-102

  Brown, Jenny ^a   Bach, Leslie ^a   Aldous, Allison ^a   Wyers, Abby ^a   DeGagné, Julia ^a  

^a THE NATURE CONSERVANCY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA SET; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; GROUNDWATER POLLUTION; GROUNDWATER RESOURCE; IRRIGATION; PESTICIDE; SPRING WATER; WATER AVAILABILITY; WATER MANAGEMENT; WATER PLANNING; WATER QUALITY; WATER SUPPLY; WATER TABLE; WETLAND;

OREGON; UNITED STATES;

EID: 77955284611     PISSN: 15409295     EISSN: 15409309     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/090108     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Boxall ABA, Sinclair CJ, and Kolpin DW. 2006. Potential risk of pesticide degradates to aquatic life. In: Gilliom RJ, Barbash JE, Crawford CG, et al. (Eds). Reston, VA: US Geological Survey. Circular 1291.
2. Brauman KA, Daily GC, Duarte TK, and Mooney HA. 2007. The nature and value of ecosystem services: an overview highlighting hydrologic services. Annu Rev Env Resour 32: 67-98. (Pubitemid 350247525)
3. Brown J, Wyers A, Bach L, and Aldous A. 2009. Groundwaterdependent biodiversity and associated threats: a statewide screening methodology and spatial assessment of Oregon. Portland, OR: The Nature Conservancy. www.conserveonline. org/library/groundwater-dependent-biodiversity-associated/ view.html. Viewed 1 Dec 2009.
4. Carpenter S, Caraco NF, Correll DL, et al. 1998. Nonpoint pollution of surface waters with phosphorus and nitrogen. Iss Ecol 3: 1-12.
5. Clifton C, Cossens B, McAuley C, et al. 2007. Project REM-1: a framework for assessing the environmental water requirements of groundwater-dependent ecosystems. Report 1: Assessment toolbox. Prepared for Land and Water Australia, Braddon, Australia. Kent Town, Australia: Resource and Environmental Management Pty Ltd.
6. Colvin C, LeMaitre D, Saayman I, and Hughes S. 2007. An introduction to the aquifer-dependent ecosystems of South Africa: aquifer-dependent ecosystems in key hydrogeological typesettings in South Africa. Pretoria, South Africa: South Africa Water Research Commission. Report TT 301/07. www.wrc.org.za/Pages/ DisplayItem.aspx?ItemID=3687&From URL=%2FPages%2FKH-DocumentsList. aspx%3Fdt%3D1%2 6su%3D4%26ct%3D1%26ms%3D4%253b5%253b. Viewed 10 Dec 2009.
7. Deacon JE, Williams AE, Williams CD, and Williams JE. 2007. Fueling population growth in Las Vegas: how large-scale groundwater withdrawal could burn regional biodiversity. BioScience 57: 688-98. (Pubitemid 47417770)
8. DWAF (Department of Water Affairs and Forestry). 1997. White paper on a national water policy for South Africa. Pretoria, South Africa: Department of Water Affairs and Forestry. www.dwaf. gov.za/Documents/Policies/nwpwp.pdf. Viewed 1 Dec 2009.
9. Eamus D and Froend R. 2006. Groundwater-dependent ecosystems: the where, what and why of GDEs. Aust J Bot 54: 91-96.
10. Environment Australia. 1994. The council of Australian governments' Water Reform Framework. Canberra, Australia: Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. www.environment.gov.au/water/publications/action/ pubs/policyframework.pdf. Viewed 1 Dec 2009.
11. Gannett M. 1984. Groundwater assessment of the John Day basin. Salem, OR: Oregon Water Resources Department. www1.wrd. state.or.us/pdfs/GWStudies/ OWRDMiscellaneousReports/GW -John-Day-Basin.pdf. Viewed 1 Dec 2009.
12. Gilliom RJ, Barbash JE, Crawford CG, et al. 2006. The quality of our nation's waters: pesticides in the nation's streams and ground water 1992-2001. Reston, VA: US Geological Survey. Circular 1291.
13. GWPC (Groundwater Protection Council). 2003. Oregon ground water conditions. State factsheet. Oklahoma City, OK: Groundwater Protection Council. www.gwpc.org/e-library/documents/ state-fact-sheets/oregon.pdf. Viewed 1 Dec 2009.
14. Laetz CA, Baldwin DH, Collier TK, et al. 2009. The synergistic toxicity of pesticide mixtures: implications for risk assessment and the conservation of endangered Pacific salmon. Environ Health Persp 117: 348-53.
15. MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: biodiversity synthesis. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
16. Morris BL, Lawrence ARL, Chilton PJC, et al. 2003. Groundwater and its susceptibility to degradation: a global assessment of the problem and options for management. Early warning and assessment report series, RS 03-3.
17. Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Environment Programme. www.unep.org/DEWA/ water/groundwater/pdfs/Groundwater-INC-cover.pdf. Viewed 1 Dec 2009.
18. Murray BR, Hose GC, Eamus D, and Licari D. 2006. Valuation of groundwater-dependent ecosystems: a functional methodology incorporating ecosystem services. Aust J Bot 54: 221-29.
19. Richards JB, Hoffbuhr JA, Akins HC, et al. 1986. John Day River basin. Salem, OR: Water Resources Department
20. TNC (The Nature Conservancy) and NatureServe. 2007. Rare species occurrences, compiled by The Nature Conservancy of Oregon with contributions from NatureServe, their member programs and partners. Portland, OR: The Nature Conservancy.
21. USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). 2002. CFR Title 40 Part 141 National Primary Drinking Water Regulations. Washington, DC: National Archives and Records Administration. Code of Federal Regulations. www.access.gpo.gov/ nara/cfr/waisidx-02/40cfr141-02.html. Viewed 1 Dec 2009.
22. USFS (US Forest Service). 2007. Technical guide to managing ground water resources. Washington, DC: US Forest Service. Report # FS-881. www.fs.fed.us/r2/resources/mgr/geology/ground water/index.shtml. Viewed 1 Dec 2009.
23. WISE (Water Information System for Europe). 2008. http://ec.europa.eu/ environment/water/water-framework/ groundwater/policy/current-framework/index- en.htm. Viewed 16 Sep 2008.
24. Winter TC. 2007. The role of groundwater in generating streamflow in headwater areas and in maintaining base flow. J Am Water Resour As 43: 15-25.