Enhancing protection for vulnerable waters

Nature Geoscience

Volumn 10, Issue 11, 2017, Pages 809-815

  Creed, Irena F ^a,c   Lane, Charles R ^b   Serran, Jacqueline N ^a   Alexander, Laurie C ^b   Basu, Nandita B ^d   Calhoun, Aram J K ^e   Christensen, Jay R ^b   Cohen, Matthew J ^f   Craft, Christopher ^g   D'Amico, Ellen ^h   De Keyser, Edward ⁱ   Fowler, Laurie ^j   Golden, Heather E ^b   Jawitz, James W ^k   Kalla, Peter ^b   Katherine Kirkman, L ^l   Lang, Megan ^m   Leibowitz, Scott G ⁿ   Lewis, David B ^o   Marton, John ^p   McLaughlin, Daniel L ^q   Raanan Kiperwas, Hadas ^r   Rains, Mark C ^o   Rains, Kai C ^o   Smith, Lora ^l   more..

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^b U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^c University of Saskatchewan   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF MAINE   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

^g INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^h CSS Dynamac   (United States)

ⁱ NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^j UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^k UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

^l JOSEPH W JONES ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

^m US Fish and Wildlife Service   (United States)

ⁿ U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^o UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

^p CDM SMITH   (United States)

^q VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^r OAK RIDGE INSTITUTE FOR SCIENCE AND EDUCATION   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FEDERAL SYSTEM; FLOODPLAIN; FRESHWATER; GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; POLICY APPROACH; PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION; SUSTAINABILITY; VULNERABILITY;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 85032653993     PISSN: 17520894     EISSN: 17520908     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/NGEO3041     Document Type: Review

References (53)

1. Freeman, M C., Pringle, C M. & Jackson, C R. Hydrologic connectivity and the contribution of stream headwaters to ecological integrity at regional scales. J Am. Wat. Resour. Assoc. 43, 5-14 (2007).
2. Leigh, C. et?al. Ecological research and management of intermittent rivers: an historical review and future directions. Freshwater Biol. 61, 1181-1199 (2016).
3. Cohen, M J. et?al. Do geographically isolated wetlands influence landscape functions? Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA?113, 1978-1986 (2016).
4. Shook, K R. & Pomeroy, J W. Memory effects of depressional storage in Northern Prairie hydrology. Hydrol. Process. 25, 3890-3898 (2011).
5. Kelleher, C., Wagener, T. & McGlynn, B. Model-based analyses of the influence of catchment properties on hydrologic partitioning across five mountain headwater subcatchments. Wat. Resour. Res. 51, 4109-4136 (2015).
6. Tetzlaff, D. et?al. A preliminary assessment of water partitioning and ecohydrological coupling in northern headwaters using stable isotopes and conceptual runoff models Hydrol. Process. 29, 5153-5173 (2015).
7. Alexander, R B. et?al. The role of headwater streams in downstream water quality. J Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 43, 41-59 (2007).
8. Marton, J M. et?al. Geographically isolated wetlands are important biogeochemical reactors on the landscape. Bioscience 65, 408-418 (2015).
9. Rains, M C. et?al. Geographically isolated wetlands are part of the hydrological landscape. Hydrol. Process. 30, 153-160 (2016).
10. Kirkman, L. K, Drew, M B., West, L T. & Blood, E R. Ecotone characterization between upland longleaf pine/wiregrass stands and seasonally-ponded isolated wetlands. Wetlands 18, 346-364 (1998).
11. Semlitsch, R D. & Bodie, J R. Are small, isolated wetlands expendable? Conserv. Biol. 12, 1129-1133 (1998).
12. Snodgrass, J W., Komoroski, M J., Bryan, A L. & Burger, J. Relationships among isolated wetland size, hydroperiod, and amphibian species richness: implications for wetland regulations. Conserv. Biol. 14, 414-419 (2000).
13. Finn, D S., Bonada, N., Múrria, C. & Hughes, J M. Small but mighty: headwaters are vital to stream network biodiversity at two levels of organization. J N Am. Benthol. Soc. 30, 963-980 (2011).
14. Connectivity of Streams and Wetlands to Downstream Waters: A Review and Synthesis of the Scientific Evidence Technical Report, EPA/600/R-14/475F (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2015).
15. Olsen, A R. & Peck, D V. Survey design and extent estimates for the Wadeable Streams Assessment. J North Am. Benthological Soc. 27, 822-836 (2008).
16. Lane, C R. & D'Amico, E. Identification of putative geographically isolated wetlands of the conterminous United States. J Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 52, 705-722 (2016).
17. Creed, I F., Sanford, S E., Beall, F D., Molot, L A. & Dillon, P J. Cryptic wetlands: integrating hidden wetlands in regression models of the export of dissolved organic carbon from forested landscapes. Hydrol. Process. 17, 3629-3648 (2003).
18. Bishop, K. et?al. Aqua Incognita: the unknown headwaters. Hydrol. Process. 22, 1239-1242 (2008).
19. Hill, B H., Kolka, R K., McCormick, F H. & Starry, M A. A synoptic survey of ecosystem services from headwater catchments in the United States. Ecosyst. Serv. 7, 106-115 (2014).
20. Nadeau, T L. & Rains, M C. Hydrological connectivity between headwater streams and downstream waters: how science can inform policy. J Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 43, 118-133 (2007).
21. Adusumulli, N. Valuation of ecosystem services from wetlands mitigation in the US. Land 4, 182-196 (2015).
22. Ghermandi, A., Van Den Bergh, J C., Brander, L. M, de Groot, H L. & Nunes, P A. Values of natural and human-made wetlands: a meta-analysis. Water Resour. Res. 46, W12516 (2010).
23. Beaulieu, J J. et?al. Urban stream burial increases watershed-scale nitrate export. PLoS One 10, e0132256 (2015).
24. Fritz, K M. et?al. Comparing the extent and permanence of headwater streams from two field surveys to values from hydrographic databases and maps. J Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 49, 867-882 (2013).
25. Calhoun, A J. K. et?al. Temporary wetlands: challenges and solutions to conserving a 'disappearing' ecosystem. Biol. Conserv. 211, 3-11 (2017).
26. Millett, B., Johnson, W C., Guntenspergen, G. Climate trends of the North American prairie pothole region 1906-2000. Clim. Change 93, 243-267 (2009).
27. Dixon, M J. R. et?al. Tracking global change in ecosystem area: the Wetland Extent Trends index. Biol. Conserv. 193, 27-35 (2016).
28. Acuña, V. et?al. Why should we care about temporary waterways? Science 343, 1080-1081 (2014).
29. Datry, T., Larned, S T. & Tockner, K. Intermittent rivers: a challenge for freshwater ecology. BioScience 64, 229-235 (2014).
30. Acuña, V., Hunter M. & Ruhl, A. Managing temporary streams and rivers as unique rather than second-class ecosystems. Biol. Conserv. 211, 12-19 (2017).
31. Bedford, B L. Cumulative effects on wetland landscapes: links to wetland restoration in the United States and southern Canada. Wetlands 19, 775-788 (1999).
32. Carpenter, S R. et?al. Early warnings of regime shifts: a whole-ecosystem experiment. Science 332, 1079-1082 (2011).
33. Capon, S J. et?al. Regime shifts, thresholds and multiple stable states in freshwater ecosystems; a critical appraisal of the evidence. Sci. Total Environ. 534, 122-130 (2015).
34. Van Meter, K J. & Basu, N B. Signatures of human impact: size distributions and spatial organization of wetlands in the Prairie Pothole landscape. Ecol. Appl. 25, 451-465 (2015).
35. Golden, H E. et?al. Integrating geographically isolated wetlands into land management decisions. Front. Ecol. Environ. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ fee.1504 (2017).
36. Uden, D R., Hellman, M L., Angeler, D G. & Allen, C R. The role of reserves and anthropogenic habitats for functional connectivity and resilience of ephemeral wetlands. Ecol. Appl. 24, 1569-1582 (2014).
37. Vanderhoof, M K., Alexander, L C., Todd, J M. Temporal and spatial patterns of wetland extent influence variability of surface water connectivity in the Prairie Pothole Region, United States. Landscape Ecol. 31, 805-824 (2016).
38. Evenson, G R., Golden, H E., Lane, C R. & D'Amico, E. An improved representation of geographically isolated wetlands in a watershed-scale hydrologic model Hydrol. Process 30, 4168-4184 (2016).
39. Ameli, A A. & Creed, I F. Quantifying hydrologic connectivity of wetlands to surface water systems. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 21, 1791-1808 (2017).
40. McDonnell, J J. & Beven, K. Debates-the future of hydrological sciences: a (common) path forward? A call to action aimed at understanding velocities, celerities and residence time distributions of the headwater hydrograph. Wat. Resour. Res. 50, 5342-5350 (2014).
41. Smith, R D., Ammann, A., Bartoldus, C. & Brinson, M M. An Approach for Assessing Wetland Functions Using Hydrogeomorphic Classification, Reference Wetlands, and Functional Indices (US Army Corps of Engineers, 1995).
42. Alberta Wetland Policy (Edmonton, Alberta) (Government of Alberta, 2013).
43. Creed, I F., Aldred, D A., Serran, J N. & Accatino, F. in Wetland and Stream Rapid Assessments: Development, Validation, and Application (eds Dorney, J., Savage, R., Tiner, R. & Adamus, P.) (Elsevier, in the press).
44. Moreno-Mateos, D., Power, M E., Comín, F A. & Yockteng, R. Structural and functional loss in restored wetland ecosystems. PLoS Biol. https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001247 (2012).
45. Ehrenfeld, J G. Defining the limits of restoration: the need for realistic goals. Restoration Ecol. 8, 2-9 (2000).
46. Groot, R S. et?al. Benefits of investing in ecosystem restoration. Conserv. Biol. 27, 1286-1293 (2013).
47. Wang, X. et?al. Simulated wetland conservation-restoration effects on water quantity and quality at watershed scale. J Environ. Manage. 91, 1511-1525 (2010).
48. Darwiche-Criado, N. et?al. Effects of wetland restoration on nitrate removal in an irrigated agricultural area: the role of in-stream and off-stream wetlands. Ecol. Eng. 103, 426-435 (2017).
49. Junk, W J. et?al. Current state of knowledge regarding the world's wetlands and their future under global climate change: a synthesis. Aquat. Sci. 75, 151-167 (2013).
50. Davidson, N C. How much wetland has the world lost? Long-term and recent trends in global wetland area. Mar. Freshwater Res. 65, 934-941 (2014).
51. Dahl, T E. Wetland losses in the United States 1780s to 1980s (US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 1990).
52. Environmental Dataset Gateway (US Environmental Protection Agency, accessed 28 June 2017); ftp://newftp.epa.gov/epadatacommons/ORD/EnviroAtlas/PRWAg.zip
53. Homer, C. et?al. Completion of the 2011 national land cover database for the conterminous United States - representing a decade of land cover change information. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 81, 345-354 (2015).