Environmental Management

, Volume 14, Issue 5, pp 711–724

Role of refugia in recovery from disturbances: Modern fragmented and disconnected river systems

  • James R. Sedell
  • Gordon H. Reeves
  • F. Richard Hauer
  • Jack A. Stanford
  • Charles P. Hawkins
Section 4: Ecosystem And Landscape Constraints On Lotic Community Recovery

Abstract

Habitats or environmental factors that convey spatial and temporal resistance and/or resilience to biotic communities that have been impacted by biophysical disturbances may be called refugia. Most refugia in rivers are characterized by extensive coupling of the main channel with adjacent streamside forests, floodplain features, and groundwater. These habitats operate at different spatial scales, from localized particles, to channel units such as pools and riffles, to reaches and longer sections, and at the basin level. A spatial hierarchy of different physical components of a drainage network is proposed to provide a context for different refugia. Examples of refugia operating at different spatial scales, such as pools, large woody debris, floodplains, below dams, and catchment basins are discussed. We hope that the geomorphic context proposed for examining refugia habitats will assist in the conservation of pristine areas and attributes of river systems and also allow a better understanding of rehabilitation needs in rivers that have been extensively altered.

Key words

River ecosystems Geomorphology Riparian vegetation Woody debris Groundwater Refugia 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Amoros, C., A. L. Roux, J. L. Reygrobellet, J. P. Bravard, and G. Pautou. 1987. A method for applied ecological studies of fluvial hydrosystems.Regulated Rivers 1:17–36.Google Scholar
  2. Arner, D.H., H. R. Robinette, J. E. Frasier, and M. Gray. 1976. Effects of channelization of the Luxapalila river on fish, aquatic invertebrates, water quality, and furbearers. US Fish Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. FWS/OBS-76-08. 58 pp.Google Scholar
  3. Benke, A. C., R. L. Henry, D. M. Gillespie, and R. J. Hunter. 1985. Importance of snag habitat for animal production in Southeastern streams.Fisheries 10:8–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bisson, P. A., R. E. Bilby, M. D. Ryan-Burkett, C. A. Dolloff, G. B. Grette, R. A. House, M. L. Murphy, K. V. Koski, and J. R. Sedell. 1987. Large woody debris in forested streams: past, present, and future. Pages 143–190in E. O. Salo, and T. W. Cundy (eds.), Streamside management: forestry and fishery interactions. University of Washington, Institute of Forest Resources, Contribution Number 57, Seattle.Google Scholar
  5. Bouvet, Y., E. Pattee, and F. Meggouh. 1985. The contribution of backwaters to the ecology of fish populations in large rivers: preliminary results on fish migrations within a side arm and from the side arm to the main channel of the Rhone.Verhandlungen der Internationale Vereinigung für Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie 22:2576–2580.Google Scholar
  6. Congdon, J. C. 1971. Fish populations of channelized and unchannelized sections of the Chariton River, Missouri. Pages 52–62in E. Schneberger and J. L. Funk (eds.), Stream channelization: a symposium. American Fisheries Society, North Central Division, Special Publication.Google Scholar
  7. Craig, J. F., and J. B. Kemper (eds.). 1987. Regulated streams: advances in ecology. Plenum Press, New York. 431 pp.Google Scholar
  8. Cummins, K. W., G. W. Minshall, J. R. Sedell, C. E. Cushing, and R. C. Petersen. 1984. Stream ecosystem theory.Verhandlungen der Internationale Vereinigung für Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie 22:1818–1827.Google Scholar
  9. Davies, B., and K. Walker (eds.), 1986. Ecology of river systems. Dr. W. Junk Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. 793 pp.Google Scholar
  10. De Camps, H., M. Fortune, F. Gazalle, and G. Panton. 1988. Historical influence of man on the riparian dynamics of a fluvial landscape.Landscape Ecology 1:163–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Everest, F. H. 1973. Ecology and management of summer steelhead in the Rogue River. Fish. Rep. Ret. No. 7, Oregon State Commission, Portland. 48 pp.Google Scholar
  12. Frissell, C. A., W. J. Liss, C. E. Warren, and M. D. Hurley. 1986. A hierarchical framework for stream habitat classification: viewing streams in a watershed context.Environmental Management 10:199–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Funk, J. L., and J. W. Robinson. 1974. Changes in the channel of the lower Missouri River and effects on fish and wildlife. Missouri Department of Conservation, Aquatic Series 11, Jefferson City, Missouri.Google Scholar
  14. Grant, G. E., F. J. Swanson, and M. G. Wolman. 1990. Pattern and origin of stepped-bed morphology in high-gradient streams, western Cascades, Oregon.Geological Society of America Bulletin 102:340–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gregory, S. V., F. J. Swanson, and W. A. McKee (1990). An ecosystem perspective of riparian zones.Bioscience.Google Scholar
  16. Griswold, B. L., C. Edwards, L. Woods, and E. Weber. 1978. Some effects of stream channelization on fish populations, macroinvertebrates, and fishing in Ohio and Indiana. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. FWS/OBS-77/46.Google Scholar
  17. Hansen, D. R. 1971. Stream channelization effects on fishes and bottom fauna in the Little Sioux River, Iowa. Pages 29–51in E. Schneberger and J. L. Funk (eds.), Stream channelization: a symposium. American Fisheries Society, North Central Division, Special Publication Number 2.Google Scholar
  18. Harmon, M. E., J. F. Franklin, F. J. Swanson, P. Sollins, S. V. Gregory, J. D. Lattin, N. H. Anderson, S. P. Cline, N. G. Aumen, J. R. Sedell, G. W. Lienkaemper, K. Cromack Jr., and K. W. Cummins. 1986. Ecology of coarse woody debris in temperature ecosystems.Advances in Ecological Research 15:133–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Harrel, R. C., B. J. Davis, and T. C. Doris. 1967. Stream order and species diversity of fishes in an intermittent stream.American Midland Naturalist 78:428–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hauer, F. R., and J. A. Stanford. 1981. Larval specialization and phenotypic variation inArctopsyche grandis (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae).Ecology 62:645–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hauer, F. R., and J. A. Stanford. 1982. Ecological responses of hydropsychid caddisflies to stream regulation.Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 39:1235–1242.Google Scholar
  22. Hauer, F. R., J. A. Stanford, and J. V. Ward. 1989. Serial discontinuities in a Rocky Mountain river. II. Distribution and abundance of Trichoptera.Regulated Rivers 3:177–182.Google Scholar
  23. Hawkins, C. P. 1988. Effects of watershed vegetation and disturbance on invertebrate community structure in western Cascade streams: implications for stream ecosystem theory.Verhandlungen der Internationale Vereinigung für Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie 23:1167–1173.Google Scholar
  24. Hawkins, C. P., L. J. Gottschalk, and S. S. Browth. 1988. Densities of tailed frog tadpoles in small streams near Mt. St. Helens following the 1980 cruption.Journal of the North American Benthological Society 7:246–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hesse, L. W., G. R. Chaffink, and J. Brabender. 1989. Missouri River mitigation: a system approach.Fisheries 14:11–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hughes, R. M. 1895. Use of watershed characteristics to select control streams for estimating effects of metal mining wastes on extensively disturbed streams.Environmental Management 9:253–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hynes, H. B. N. 1968. Further studies on the invertebrate fauna of a Welsh mountain stream.Archiv für Hydrobiologie 65:360–379.Google Scholar
  28. Illies, J., and L. Botosaneanu. 1963. Problemes et methodes de la classification et de la zonation ecologique des eaux courantes, considerees surtout du point de vue faunistique.Mitteilungen der Internationalen Vereinigung für Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie 12:1–57.Google Scholar
  29. Imhof, J. G. A., and A. D. Harrison. 1981. Survival ofDiplectrona modesta Banks (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae) during short periods of desiccation.Hydrobiologia 77:61–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Karr, J. R., and I. J. Schlosser. 1978. Water resources and the land/water interface.Science 210:229–234.Google Scholar
  31. Kellerhals, R., and M. Church. 1989. The morphology of large rivers: characterization and management. Pages 31–48in D. P. Dodge (ed.), Proceedings of the International Large River Symposium. Canadian Special Publication Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 106.Google Scholar
  32. Kralik, N. J., and J. E. Sowerwine. 1977. The role of two northern California intermittent streams in the life history of anadromous salmonids. Master of science thesis. Humboldt State University, Arcata, California. 68 pp.Google Scholar
  33. Krumholz, L. A., and W. L. Minckley. 1964. Changes in the fish population in the upper Ohio River following temporary pollution abatement.Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 93:1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Leopold, L. B., M. G. Wolman, and J. P. Miller. 1964. Fluvial processes in geomorphology. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco. 522 pp.Google Scholar
  35. Lillehammer, A., and S. Saltveit (eds.). 1984. Regulated rivers. University As, Oslo, Norway. 540 pp.Google Scholar
  36. Matthews, W. J. 1986. Fish faunal structure in an Ozark stream: stability persistence, and a catastrophic flood.Copeia 1986:388–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McHugh, M. H. 1986. Landslide occurrence in the Elk and Sixes River basins, southwest Oregon. Master of science thesis. Department of Geology, Oregon State University, Corvallis. 106 pp.Google Scholar
  38. Meyer, J. L., W. H. McDowell, T. L. Bott, J. W. Elwood, C. Ishizaki, J. M. Melack, B. L. Peckarsky, B. J. Peterson, and P. A. Rublee. 1988. Elemental dynamics in streams.Journal of the North American Benthological Society 7:410–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Minshall, G. W. 1988. Stream ecosystem theory: a global perspective.Journal of the North American Benthological Society 7:263–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Moyle, P. B., J. J. Smith, R. A. Daniels, and others. 1982. Distribution and ecology of stream fishes of the Sacramento-San Joaquin drainage system, California. University of California Publications in Zoology 115. University of California Press, Berkeley. 256 pp.Google Scholar
  41. Munn, M. D., and M. A. Brusven. 1987. Discontinuity of trichopteran (caddisfly) communities in regulated waters of the Clearwater River, Idaho, USA.Regulated Rivers 1:61–69.Google Scholar
  42. Northwest Power Planning Council. 1987. Columbia River Basin fish and wildlife program. Portland, Oregon. 138 pp.Google Scholar
  43. Olmsted, L. L., and D. G. Cloutman. 1974. Repopulation after fish kill in Mud Creek, Washington County, Arkansas following pesticide pollution.Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 103:79–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Orghidan, T. 1959. Ein neuer Lebensraum des unterirdischen Wassers: Der hyporheische Biotop.Archiv für Hydrobiologie 55:392–414.Google Scholar
  45. Pauloumpis, A. A. 1958. Responses of some minnows to flood and drought conditions in an intermittent stream.Iowa State Journal of Science 32:547–561.Google Scholar
  46. Pennak, R. W. 1940. Ecology of the microscopic metazoa inhabiting the sandy beaches of some Wisconsin lakes.Ecological Monographs 10:537–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Petersen, N. P. 1982. Immigration of juvenile coho salmon (Onchorhynchus kisutch) into riverine ponds.Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 39:1308–1310.Google Scholar
  48. Petts, G. E. 1984. Impounded rivers: perspectives for ecological management. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Chichester, UK.Google Scholar
  49. Petts, G. E., P. Armitage, and A. Gustad (eds.). 1989. Fourth international symposium on regulated streams.Regulated Rivers 3:1–394.Google Scholar
  50. Poole, W. C., and K. W. Stewart. 1976. The vertical distribution of macrozoobenthos within the substratum of the Brazos River, Texas.Hydrobiologia 50:151–160.Google Scholar
  51. Pringle, C. M., R. J. Naiman, G. Bretschko, J. R. Karr, M. W. Oswood, J. R. Webster, R. L. Welcomme, and M. J. Winterbourn. 1988. Patch dynamics in lotic systems: the stream as a mosaic.Journal of the North American Benthological Society 7:503–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Reeves, G. H. 1979. Population dynamics of juvenile steelhead trout in relation to density and habitat characteristics. Master of science thesis. Humboldt State University, Arcata, California. 68 pp.Google Scholar
  53. Reeves, G. H., R. L. Beschta, F. J. Swanson, M. H. McHugh, and M. D. McSwain. 1987. The Elk River basin: an integrated investigation of forest management impacts of fish habitat.In Managing Oregon's riparian zone for timber, fish, and wildlife. Technical Bulletin No. 154. National Council for Air and Stream Improvement, New York.Google Scholar
  54. Resh, V. H., A. V. Brown, A. P. Covich, M. E. Gurtz, H. W. Li, G. W. Minshall, S. R. Reice, A. L. Sheldon, J. B. Wallace, and R. C. Wissmar. 1988. The role of disturbance in stream ecology.Journal of the North American Benthological Society 7:433–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ross, S. T., and J. A. Baker. 1983. The response of fishes to periodic spring floods in a southeastern stream.American Midland Naturalist 109:1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ryan-Burkett, S. E. 1989. Riparian canopy and channel response to hillslope disturbance in Elk River basin, southwest Oregon. Master of science thesis. Oregon State University, Corvallis. 92 pp.Google Scholar
  57. Sabater, R., J. Armengol, and S. Sabater. 1990. Measuring discontinuities in the Ter River.Regulated Rivers.Google Scholar
  58. Secretary of War. 1915. Index to the reports of the Chief of Engineers, US Army 1866–1912.In House document: 2nd session 63rd Congress, 1913–1914, Vol. 20, Pt. 2. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  59. Sedell, J. R., and J. L. Froggatt. 1984. Importance of streamside vegetation to large rivers: the isolation of the Willamette River, Oregon, USA, from its floodplain.Verhandlungen der Internationale Vereinigung für Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie 22:1828–1834.Google Scholar
  60. Sheldon, A. L. 1988. Conservation of stream fishes: patterns of diversity, rarity and risk.Conservation Biology 2:149–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Stanford, J. A., and A. P. Covich (eds.). 1988. Community structure and function temperate and tropical streams.Journal of the North American Benthological Society 7:261–529.Google Scholar
  62. Stanford, J. A., and A. R. Gaufin. 1974. Hyporheic communities of two Montana rivers.Science 185:700–702.Google Scholar
  63. Stanford, J. A., and J. V. Ward. 1984. The effects of regulation on the limnology of the Gunnison River: a North American case history. Pages 467–480in A. Lillehamer and S. Saltveit (eds.), Regulated Rivers. University As, Oslo, Norway.Google Scholar
  64. Stanford, J. A., and J. V. Ward. 1988. The hyporheic habitat of river ecosystems.Nature 335:64–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Stanford, J. A., and J. V. Ward. 1989. Serial discontinuities in a Rocky Mountain river. I. Distribution and abundance of Plecoptera.Regulated Rivers 3:169–175.Google Scholar
  66. Stanford, J. A., F. R. Hauer, and J. V. Ward. 1988. Serial discontinuity in a large river systems.Verhandlungen der Internationale Vereinigung für Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie 23:1114–1118.Google Scholar
  67. Stocker, Z. S. J., and D. D. Williams. 1972. A freezing core method for describing the vertical distribution of sediments in a stream bed.Limnology and Oceanography 17:136–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Triska, F. J. 1984. Role of woody debris in modifying channel geomorphology and riparian areas of a large lowland river under pristine conditions: a historical case study.Verhandlungen der Internationale Vereinigung für Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie 22:1876–1892.Google Scholar
  69. Tschaplinski, P. J., and G. F. Hartman. 1983. Winter distribution of juvenile coho salmon (Onchorhynchus kisutch) before and after logging in Carnation Creek, British Columbia, and some implications for overwinter survival.Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 40:452–461.Google Scholar
  70. Vannote, R. L., G. W. Minshall, K. W. Cummins, J. R. Sedell, and C. E. Cushing. 1980. The river continum concept.Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 37:130–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wallace, J. B., and A. C. Benke. 1984. Quantification of wood habitat in subtropical coastal plain streams.Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 41:1643–1652.Google Scholar
  72. Wallace, R. R., A. S. West, A. E. R. Downes, and H. B. N. Hynes. 1973. The effects of experimental blackfly (Diptera: Simuliidae) larviciding with abate, dursban and methoxychlor on stream invertebrates.Canadian Entomologist 105:817–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Ward, J. V. 1989. The four-dimensional nature of river ecosystems.Journal of the North American Benthological Society 8:2–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Ward, J. V., and J. A. Stanford (eds.). 1979. Ecology of regulated streams. Plenum Press, New York. 398 pp.Google Scholar
  75. Ward, J. V., and J. A. Stanford. 1983. The serial discontinuity concept of lotic ecosystems. Pages 29–42in T. D. Fontaine and S. M. Bartell (eds.), Dynamics of lotic ecosystems. Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 494 pp.Google Scholar
  76. Welcomme, R. L. 1979. Fisheries ecology of floodplain rivers. Longman, London. 317 pp.Google Scholar
  77. Williams, D. D. 1984. The hyporheic zone as a habitat for aquatic insects and associated arthropods. Pages 430–455in V. H. Resh and D. M. Rosenberg (eds.), The ecology of aquatic insects. Praeger, New York.Google Scholar
  78. Williams, D. D., and H. B. N. Hynes. 1974. The occurrence of benthos deep in the substratum of a stream.Freshwater Biology 4:233–256.Google Scholar
  79. Williams, D. D., and H. B. N. Hynes. 1976. The ecology of temporary streams. I. The faunas of two Canadian streams.Internationale Revue der gesamten Hydrobiologie 62:53–61.Google Scholar
  80. Williams, J. E., J. E. Hohnson, D. A. Hendrickson, and others. 1989. Fishes of North America endangered, threatened, or of special concerns: 1989.Fisheries 14:2–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • James R. Sedell
    • 1
  • Gordon H. Reeves
    • 1
  • F. Richard Hauer
    • 2
  • Jack A. Stanford
    • 2
  • Charles P. Hawkins
    • 3
  1. 1.United States Department of AgricultureForest Service, Pacific Northwest Research StationCorvallisUSA
  2. 2.Flathead Lake Biological StationUniversity of MontanaPolsonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Fisheries and WildlifeUtah State UniversityLoganUSA

Personalised recommendations