Use of quantitative habitat models for establishing performance metrics in river restoration planning

Ecohydrology

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 668-678

  Parasiewicz, Piotr ^a,b   Ryan, Kathleen ^a   Vezza, Paolo ^c,d   Comoglio, Claudio ^c   Ballestero, Thomas ^e   Rogers, Joseph N ^a  

^a Rushing Rivers Institute   (United States)

^b S Sakowicz Inland Fisheries Institute   (Poland)

^c POLITECNICO DI TORINO   (Italy)

^d UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE VALÈNCIA   (Spain)

^e UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE   (United States)

Author keywords

Ecological evaluation; Effective planning; Fish habitat; MesoHABSIM; Physical habitat models; Reference conditions; Restoration measures; UCUT

Indexed keywords

ECOLOGICAL EVALUATION; EFFECTIVE PLANNING; FISH HABITAT; MESOHABSIM; PHYSICAL HABITAT; REFERENCE CONDITION; RESTORATION MEASURES; UCUT;

BENCHMARKING; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MODELS; RESTORATION;

ECOSYSTEMS;

AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; HABITAT MANAGEMENT; HABITAT QUALITY; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; PLANNING METHOD; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RESTORATION ECOLOGY;

MASSACHUSETTS; UNITED STATES; WEKEPEKE BROOK;

EID: 84881500400     PISSN: 19360584     EISSN: 19360592     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/eco.1350     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Archfield SA, Vogel RM 2010. Map correlation method: selection of a reference streamgage to estimate daily streamflow at ungaged catchments. Water Resources Research 46: W10513. DOI: 10.1029/2009WR008481.
2. Bain MB, Meixler MS. 2000. Defining a target fish community for planning and evaluating enhancement of Quinebaug River in Massachusetts and Connecticut. New York Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit: Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.
3. Beechie T, Pess G, Roni P, Giannico G. 2008. Setting river restoration priorities: a review of approaches and a general protocol for identifying and prioritizing actions. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 28(3): 891-905.
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'Donnell TK, Pagano L, Powell B, Sudduth E. 2005. Synthesizing US river restoration efforts. Science 308: 636-637.
5. Capra H, Breil P, Souchon Y. 1995. A new tool to interpret magnitude and duration of fish habitat variations. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 10: 281-289.
6. Ebersole JL, Liss WJ, Frissell CA. 1997. Restoration of stream habitats in the western United States: restoration as reexpression of habitat capacity. Environmental Management 21(1):1-14.
7. FAO (Food and Agricultural Commission) - UN. 1998. Rehabilitation of Rivers for Fish: A Study Undertaken by the European Inland Fisheries Advisory Commission of FAO. Fishing News Books: University of California: Berkeley. ISBN: 0852382472
8. Fennessey NM. 1994. A hydro-climatological model of daily streamflow for the northeast United States. Ph.D. dissertation, Tufts University.
9. Fennessey NM, Vogel RM. 1990. Regional flow duration curves for ungaged sites in Massachusetts. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, ASCE 116(4): 530-549.
10. Fischenich CJ. 2008. The Application of Conceptual Models to Ecosystem Restoration. EMRRP-EBA-01: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE): Vicksburg, MS.
11. Hall LS, Krausman PR, Morison ML. 1997. The habitat concept and a plea for standard terminology. Wildlife Society Bulletin 25(1): 173-182.
12. HEC (Hydrologic Engineering Center). 2001. HEC-HMS for the Sacramento and San Joaquin river basins comprehensive study. Technical report, US Army Corp of Engineers.
13. Hirzel AH, Le Lay G, Helfer V, Randin C, Guisan A. 2006. Evaluating the ability of habitat suitability models to predict species presences. Ecological Modeling 166: 142-152.
14. Hobbs RJ, Norton DA. 1996. Towards a conceptual framework for restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 4: p93-110.
15. Hosmer D, Lemeshow S. 2000. Applied Logistic Regression, 2nd ed. Wiley: Chichester, New York.
16. Keddy P. 1999. Wetland restoration: the potential for assembly rules in the service of restoration. Wetlands 19: 716-732.
17. Killgore KJ, Hoover JJ, Murphy CE. 2008. Library of Habitat Models to Evaluate Benefits of Aquatic Restoration Projects on Fishes. EMRRP-ER-10: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE): Vicksburg, MS.
18. Koehn J. 2009. Multi-scale habitat selection by Murray cod Maccullochella peelii peelii in two lowland rivers. Journal of Fish Biology 75: 113-129. DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8649.2009.02270.x
19. Lake PS. 2001. On the maturing of restoration: linking ecological research and restoration. Ecological Management and Restoration 2: 110-115.
20. Bovee KD, Lamb BL, Bartholow JM, Stalnaker CB, Taylor J, Henriksen J. 1998. Stream habitat analysis using the instream flow incremental methodology. U.S. Geological Survey Information and Technology Report 1998-0004. p130.
21. Leavesley GH, Lichty RW, Troutman BM, Saindon LG. 1983. Precipitation-runoff modeling system--Users manual: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 83-4238. p207.
22. Lenzi MA. 2002. Stream bed stabilization using boulder check dams that mimic step-pool morphology features in Northern Italy. Geomorphology 45: p243-260
23. Lubinski K, Barko J. 2003. Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway System Navigation Feasibility Study: Environmental Science Panel Report. Draft. Report. Rock Island, IL, St. Louis, MO, and St. Paul, MN: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
24. Malakoff D. 2004. The river doctor. Science 305: 937-939.
25. McKay SK, Pruitt BA, Harberg M, Covich AP, Kenney MA, Fischenich JC. 2010. Metric development for environmental benefits analysis. Vol. EMRRP-EBA-04: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
26. Nestler JM, Theiling C, Lubinski KS, Smith DL. 2010. Reference condition approach to restoration planning. River Research and Applications 26: 1199-1219.
27. Niemi GJ, Devore P, Detenbeck N, Taylor D, Lima A, Pastor J, Yount JD, Naimar RJ. 1990. Overview of case studies on recovery of aquatic systems from disturbance. Environmental Management 14(5): 571-588.
28. O'Hanley J. 2011. Open rivers: Barrier removal planning and the restoration of free-flowing rivers. Journal of Environmental Management 92(12): 3112-3120. ISSN 0301-4797.
29. Palmer MA, Bernhardt ES, Allan JD, Lake PS, Alexander G, Brooks S, Carr J, Clayton S, Dahm CS, Shah JF, Galat DL, Loss SG, Goodwin P, Hart DD, Hassett B, Jenkinson R, Kondolf GM, Lave R, Meyer JL, O'Donnell TK, Pagano L, Sudduth E. 2005. Standards for ecologically successful river restoration. Journal of Applied Ecology 42: 208-217.
30. Parasiewicz, P. 2001. MesoHABSIM: A concept for application of instream flow models in river restoration planning. Fisheries 26(9): 6-13.
31. Parasiewicz P. 2007a. The MesoHABSIM model revisited. River Research and Application 23(8): 893-903.
32. Parasiewicz P. 2007b. Developing a reference habitat template and ecological management scenarios using the MesoHABSIM model. River Research and Application 23(8): 924-932.
33. Parasiewicz P. 2008. Application of MesoHABSIM and target fish community approaches to restoration of the Quinebaug River, Connecticut and Massachusetts, USA. River Research and Application 24(4): p459-471. DOI: 10.1002/rra.1064
34. Parasiewicz P, Dunbar MJ. 2001. Physical habitat modeling for fish - a developing approach. Archiv für Hydrobiologie Suppl. (Large Rivers Vol.12), 135/2-4: 239-268.
35. Parasiewicz P, Nestler J, Poff NL, Goodwin A. 2011. Virtual reference river: a model for scientific discovery and reconciliation. Environmental Research Journal 5(1): 97-114.
36. Parasiewicz P, Rogers JN, Vezza P, Gortazar J, Seager T, Pegg P, Wiśniewolski W, Comoglio C. In press. Applications of the MesoHABSIM simulation model. In Ecohydraulics: An Integrated Approach, Maddock I, Harby A, Kemp P, Wood P (eds). Wiley & Sons Ltd: Chichester.
37. Pearce J, Ferrier S. 2000. Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed using logistic regression. Ecological Modelling 133(3) 225-245.
38. Pini Prato E, Comoglio C, Calles O. 2011. A simple management tool for planning the restoration of river longitudinal connectivity at watershed level: priority indices for fish passes. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 27(3): 73-79. DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0426.2011.01856.x
39. Poff NL, Ward JV. 1990. The physical habitat template of lotic systems: recovery in the context of historical pattern of spatio-temporal heterogeneity. Environmental Management 14: 629-646.
40. Roni P, Beechie TJ, Bilby RE, Leonetti FE, Pollock MM, Pess GP. 2002. A review of stream restoration techniques and a hierarchical strategy for prioritizing restoration in Pacific Northwest watersheds. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 22: 1-20.
41. Rosgen DL. 1997. A geomorphological approach to restoration of incised rivers. Proceedings of the Conference on Management of Landscapes Disturbed by Channel Incision. ISBN: 0-937099-05-8.
42. Sakamoto Y. 1991. Categorical Data Analysis by AIC. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht.
43. Sillero N. 2011. What does ecological modelling model and how should we treat it? Ecological Modelling 222: 1343-1346.
44. Southwood TRE. 1997. Habitat, the templet for ecological strategies? Journal of Animal Ecology 46: 337-365.
45. Tharme, RE. 2003. A global perspective on environmental flow assessment: emerging trends in the development and application of environmental flow methodologies for rivers. River Research and Applications 19: 397-441. DOI: 10.1002/rra.736
46. Townsend CR, Hildrew AG. 1994. Species traits in relation to a habitat templet for river systems. Freshwater Biology 31: 265-276.
47. Toyne P, Farley R. 2000. The decade of landcare. Looking backward-looking forward. Discussion Paper Number 30, The Australia Institute, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
48. Vezza P, Parasiewicz P, Rosso M, Comoglio C. 2011. Defining minimum environmental flows at regional scale by using meso-scale habitat models and catchments classification. River Research and Applications. DOI:10.1002/rra.1571
49. Weber C, Peter A. 2011. Success or failure? Do indicator selection and reference setting influence river rehabilitation outcome? North American Journal of Fish Management 31(3): 535-547. DOI:10.1080/02755947.2011.595277.
50. Wiley MJ, Hyndman DW, Pijanowski BC, Kendall AD, Riseng C, Rutherford ES, Cheng ST, Carlson ML, Tyler JA, Stevenson RJ, Steen PJ, Richards PL, Seelbach PW, Koches JM, Rediske RR. 2010. A multi-modeling approach to evaluating climate and land use change impacts in a Great Lakes River Basin. Hydrobiologia 657: 243-262. DOI 10.1007/s10750-010-0239-2.
51. Wohl E, Angermeier PL, Bledsoe B, Kondolf GM, MacDonnell L, Merritt DM, Palmer MA, Poff NL, Tarboton D. 2005. River restoration. Water Resources Research 41(10): W10301.
52. Woolsey S, Capelli F, Gonser TO, Hoehn E, Hostmann M, Junker B, Paetzold A, Roulier C, Schweizer S, Tiegs SD, Tockner K, Weber C, Peter A. 2007. A strategy to assess river restoration success. Freshwater Biology 52(4): 752-769.
53. Zhao L, Gao L, Jin H. 2012. Application of gabion slope protection of Nanyang River channel regulation in Tianzhen County. Advanced Materials Research 374-377: 1938-1941.