Environmental Management

, Volume 49, Issue 5, pp 990–1008 | Cite as

Dynamics of Plains Cottonwood (Populus deltoides) Forests and Historical Landscape Change along Unchannelized Segments of the Missouri River, USA

  • Mark D. Dixon
  • W. Carter Johnson
  • Michael L. Scott
  • Daniel E. Bowen
  • Lisa A. Rabbe
Article

Abstract

Construction of six large dams and reservoirs on the Missouri River over the last 50–75 years has resulted in major landscape changes and alterations in flow patterns, with implications for riparian forests dominated by plains cottonwood (Populus deltoides). We quantified changes in land cover from 1892–1950s and the 1950s–2006 and the current extent and age structure of cottonwood forests on seven segments (two reservoir and five remnant floodplain) comprising 1127 km (53 %) of the unchannelized upper two-thirds of the Missouri River. Riparian forest area declined by 49 %; grassland 61 %; shrubland 52 %; and sandbar habitat 96 %; while agricultural cropland increased six-fold and river/reservoir surface area doubled from 1892 to 2006. Net rates of erosion and accretion declined between the 1892–1950s and 1950s–2006 periods. Accretion exceeded erosion on remnant floodplain segments, resulting in declines in active channel width, particularly in 1950s–2006. Across all study segments in 2006, most cottonwood stands (67 %) were >50 years old, 22 % were 25–50 years old, and only 10 % were <25 years old. Among stands <50 years old, the higher proportion of 25–50 year old stands represents recruitment that accompanied initial post-dam channel narrowing; while declines in sandbar and shrubland area and the low proportion of stands <25 years old suggest declines in geomorphic dynamism and limited recruitment under recent river management. Future conservation and restoration efforts should focus both on limiting further loss of remnant cottonwood stands and developing approaches to restore river dynamics and cottonwood recruitment processes.

Keywords

Riparian vegetation Flow regulation Dams Channel change Great Plains 

References

  1. Angradi TR, Schweiger EW, Bologrien DW, Ismert P, Selle T (2004) Bank stabilization, riparian land use and the distribution of large woody debris in a regulated reach of the upper Missouri River, North Dakota, USA. River Research and Applications 20:829–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bertoldi W, Drake NA, Gurnell AM (2011) Interactions between river flows and colonizing vegetation on a braided river: exploring spatial and temporal dynamics in riparian vegetation cover using satellite data. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 36:1474–1486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bovee KD, Scott ML (2002) Effects of flow regulation on the upper Missouri River: implications for flood pulse restoration. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 18:287–298Google Scholar
  4. Bradley CE, Smith DG (1986) Plains cottonwood recruitment and survival on a prairie meandering river floodplain, Milk River, southern Albert and northern Montana. Canadian Journal of Botany 64:1433–1442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bragg T, Tatschl A (1977) Changes in flood-plain vegetation and land use along the Missouri River from 1826 to 1972. Environmental Management 1(4):343–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coker EH, Hotchkiss RH, Johnson DA (2009) Conversion of a Missouri River dam and reservoir to a sustainable system: sediment management (1). Journal of the American Water Resources Association 45:815–827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cooper DJ, Andersen DC, Chimner RA (2003) Multiple pathways for woody plant establishment on floodplains at local to regional scales. Journal of Ecology 91:182–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cordes LD, Hughes FMR, Getty M (1997) Factors affecting the regeneration and distribution of riparian woodlands along a northern prairie river: the Red Deer River, Alberta, Canada. Journal of Biogeography 24:675–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Corenblit D, Steiger J, Gurnell AM, Tabacchi E, Roques L (2009) Control of sediment dynamics by vegetation as a key function driving biogeomorphic succession within fluvial corridors. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 34:1790–1810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dixon MD, Turner MG (2006) Simulated recruitment of riparian trees and shrubs under natural and regulated flow regimes on the Wisconsin River, USA. River Research and Applications 22:1057–1083CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dixon MD, Stromberg JC, Price JT, Galbraith H, Fremier AK, Larsen EW (2009) Potential effects of climate change on the upper San Pedro riparian ecosystem. Chapter 3, In: Stromberg, J C, Tellman B (eds.), Ecology and Conservation of the San Pedro River. University of Arizona Press, TucsonGoogle Scholar
  12. Dynesius M, Nilsson C (1994) Fragmentation and flow regulation of river systems in the northern third of the world. Science 266(5186):753–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Elliott CM, Jacobson RB (2006) Geomorphic Classification and Assessment of Channel Dynamics in the Missouri National Recreational River, South Dakota and Nebraska. U.S. Geological Survey, Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5313, p 66Google Scholar
  14. Fenneman NM, Johnson DW (1946) Physiographic divisions of the conterminous U.S. U.S. Geological Survey special map series, scale 1:7,000,000Google Scholar
  15. Finch DM, Ruggiero LF (1993) Wildlife and biological diversity in the Rocky Mountains and northern Great Plains. Natural Areas Journal 13:191–203Google Scholar
  16. Florsheim JL, Mount JF, Chin A (2008) Bank erosion as a desirable attribute of rivers. Bioscience 58:519–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Friedman JM, Osterkamp WR, Scott ML, Auble GT (1998) Downstream effects of dams on channel geometry and bottomland vegetation: regional patterns in the Great Plains. Wetlands 18:619–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Funk JL, Robinson JW (1974) Changes in the Channel of the Lower Missouri River and Effects on Fish and Wildlife. Missouri Department of Conservation Aquatic Series No. 11. Jefferson City, p 52Google Scholar
  19. Galat DL, Lipkin R (2000) Restoring the ecological integrity of great rivers: historical hydrographs aid in defining reference conditions for the Missouri River hydrosystem. Hydrobiologia 422(423):29–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Galat DL, Berry CR Jr, Peters EJ, White RG (2005) Missouri River Basin. In: Benke AC, Cushing CE (eds) Rivers of North America. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 427–480Google Scholar
  21. Gergel SE, Dixon MD, Turner MG (2002) Consequences of human-altered floods: levees, floods, and floodplain forests along the Wisconsin River. Ecological Applications 12(6):1755–1770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Golet GH, Gardali T, Howell CA, Hunt J, Luster RA, Rainey W, Roberts MD, Silveira J, Swagerty H, Williams N (2008) Wildlife response to riparian restoration on the Sacramento River. San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science 6(2):2–26Google Scholar
  23. Graf WL (1999) Dam nation: A geographic census of American dams and their large-scale hydrologic impacts. Water Resources Research 35:1305–1311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Graf WL (2006) Downstream hydrologic and geomorphic effects of large dams on American rivers. Geomorphology 79:336–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hallberg GR, Harbaugh JM, Witinok PM (1979) Changes in the Channel Area of the Missouri River in Iowa, 1879–1976. Iowa Geological Survey Special Report Series Number 1, p 32 Google Scholar
  26. Hesse LW (1996) Floral and faunal trends in the middle Missouri River. In: Galat DL, Frazier AG (eds.), Science for floodplain management into the 21st century. Vol. 3. Overview of the river-floodplain ecology in the upper Mississippi River Basin, Kelmelis JA (ed.). U.S. Government Printing Office, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  27. Jacobson RB, Blevins DW, Bitner CJ (2009) Sediment regime constraints on river restoration—An example from the Lower Missouri River. In: James, LA, Rathburn, Whittecar GR (eds.), Management and Restoration of Fluvial Systems with Broad Historical Changes and Human Impacts. Geological Society of America Special Paper 451:1–22Google Scholar
  28. Jacobson RB, Elliott CM, Huhmann BL (2010) Development of a Channel Classification to Evaluate Potential for Cottonwood Restoration, Lower Segments of the Middle Missouri River, South Dakota and Nebraska. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2010-5208, p 38Google Scholar
  29. Jacobson RB, Janke TP, Skold J (2011) Hydrologic and geomorphic considerations in restoration of river-floodplain connectivity in a highly altered river system, Lower Missouri River, USA. Wetlands Ecology and Management 19:295–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Johnson WC (1992) Dams and riparian forests: case study from the upper Missouri River. Rivers 3(4):229–242Google Scholar
  31. Johnson WC (1994) Woodland expansion in the Platte River, Nebraska: patterns and causes. Ecological Monographs 64:45–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Johnson WC (1998) Adjustment of riparian vegetation to river regulation in the Great Plains, USA. Wetlands 18:608–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Johnson WC (2002) Riparian vegetation diversity along regulated rivers: contribution of novel and relict habitats. Freshwater Biology 47:749–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Johnson WC, Burgess RL, Keammerer WR (1976) Forest overstory and environment along the Missouri River in North Dakota. Ecological Monographs 46:59–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Johnson WC, Dixon MD, Scott ML, Rabbe L, Larson G, Volke M, Werner B (2012) Forty years of vegetation change on the Missouri River floodplain. BioScience 62(2):123–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Karrenberg S, Edwards PJ, Kollmann (2002) The life history of Salicaceae in the active zone of floodplains. Freshwater Biology 47:733–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kondolf GM (1997) Hungry water: effects of dams and gravel mining on river channels. Environmental Management 21:533–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Michalková M, Piégay H, Kondolf GM, Greco SE (2010) Lateral erosion of the Sacramento River, California (1942–1999), and responses of channel and floodplain lake to human influences. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 36:257–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Missouri River Commission (MRC) (1895) Map of the Missouri River from its mouth to Three-Forks Montana, in eighty four sheets. Missouri River Commission, Washington, 1:63,360 scaleGoogle Scholar
  40. Molles MC Jr, Crawford CS, Ellis LM, Valett HM, Dahm CN (1998) Managed flooding for riparian ecosystem restoration. BioScience 48(9):749–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Murray AB, Knaapen AF, Tal M, Kirwan ML (2008) Biomorphodynamics: physical-biological feedbacks that shape landscapes. Water Resources Research 44(11):W11301. doi:10.1029/2007WR006410 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. National Research Council (NRC) (2002) The Missouri River Ecosystem: Exploring the Prospects for Recovery. National Academy Press, Washington, p 175Google Scholar
  43. National Research Council (NRC) (2011) Missouri River Planning: Recognizing and Incorporating Sediment Management. National Academy Press, Washington, p 152Google Scholar
  44. Nilsson C, Berggren K (2000) Alteration of riparian ecosystems caused by river regulation. BioScience 50(9):783–792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nilsson C, Reidy CA, Dynesius M, Revenga C (2005) Fragmentation and flow regulation of the world’s large river systems. Science 308:405–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ollero AF (2010) Channel changes and floodplain management in the meandering middle Ebro River. Spain. Geomorphology 116(3–4):247–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Poff NL, Allan JD, Bain MB, Karr JR, Prestegaard KL, Richter BD, Sparks RE, Stromberg JC (1997) The natural flow regime: a paradigm for river conservation and restoration. BioScience 47:769–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Poff NL, Olden JD, Merritt DM, Pepin DM (2007) Homogenization of regional river dynamics by dams and global biodiversity implications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 104:5732–5737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Reily PW, Johnson WC (1982) The effects of altered hydrologic regime on tree growth along the Missouri River in North Dakota. Canadian Journal of Botany 60:2410–2423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Revenga C, Murray S, Abramovitz J, Hammond A (1998) Watershed of the World: Ecological Value and Vulnerability. Worldwatch Institute, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  51. Ricketts TH, Dinerstein E, Olson DM, Loucks CJ, Eichbaum W, DellaSalla D, Kavanaugh K, Hedao P, Hurly PT, Carney KM, Abell R, Walters S (1999) Terrestrial ecoregions of North America: A conservation assessment. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  52. Rood SB, Mahoney JM (1990) Collapse of riparian poplar forests downstream from dams in western prairies: probable causes and prospects for mitigation. Environmental Management 14:451–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rood SB, Samuelson GM, Braatne JH, Gourley CR, Hughes FMR, Mahoney JM (2005) Managing river flows to restore floodplain forests. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 3(4):193–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rood SB, Goater LA, McGill KM, Braatne JH (2011) Sand and sandbar willow: a feedback loop amplifies environmental sensitivity at the riparian interface. Oecologia 165:31–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Schmidt JC, Wilcock PR (2008) Metrics for assessing the downstream effects of dams. Water Resources Research 44:W04404. doi:10.1029/2006WR005092 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schneiders RK (1999) Unruly River. Two Centuries of Change along the Missouri. University Press of Kansas, 314Google Scholar
  57. Scott ML, Auble GT, Dixon MD, Johnson WC, Rabbe LA Long-term cottonwood forest dynamics on the upper Missouri River. River Res Appl (in press)Google Scholar
  58. Scott ML, Friedman JM, Auble GT (1996) Fluvial process and the establishment of bottomland trees. Geomorphology 14:327–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Scott ML, Auble GT, Friedman JM (1997) Flood dependency of cottonwood establishment along the Missouri River, Montana, USA. Ecological Applications 7(2):677–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Shields DF, Simon A, Steffen LJ (2000) Reservoir effects on downstream river channel migration. Environmental Conservation 27(1):54–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Thogmartin WE, Gallagher M, Young N, Rohweder JJ, Knutson MG (2009) Factors associated with succession of abandoned agricultural lands along the lower Missouri River, USA. Restoration Ecology 17:290–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (1990) Lake Sakakawea Headwaters Aggradation Study, Sept. 1990Google Scholar
  63. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (1999) Missouri River Oahe Dam to Big Bend Dam Aggradation Assessment. MRD Sediment Memorandum #22Google Scholar
  64. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (2000) Garrison Project - Downstream Channel and Sediment Trend Study Update. MRD Sediment Memorandum #16A, March 2000Google Scholar
  65. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (2002) Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Project, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Northwestern Division: Missouri River Basin. Omaha, NEGoogle Scholar
  66. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (2004) Missouri River Stage Trends. RCC Technical Report A-04. Reservoir Control Center, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Northwestern Division: Missouri River Basin, OmahaGoogle Scholar
  67. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (2011) Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the Mechanical and Artificial Creation and Maintenance of Emergent Sandbar Habitat in the Riverine Segments of the Upper Missouri River. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District, Omaha, NEGoogle Scholar
  68. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (2003) Amendment to the 2000 Biological Opinion on the Operation of the Missouri River Main Stem Reservoir System, Operation and Maintenance of the Missouri River Bank Stabilization and Navigation Project, and Operation of the Kansas River Reservoir System. Denver, CO and Fort Snelling, MNGoogle Scholar
  69. Williams P, Wolman G (1984) Downstream effects of dams on alluvial rivers. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1286. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, p 81Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark D. Dixon
    • 1
  • W. Carter Johnson
    • 2
  • Michael L. Scott
    • 3
  • Daniel E. Bowen
    • 4
  • Lisa A. Rabbe
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of South DakotaVermillionUSA
  2. 2.Department of Natural Resource ManagementSouth Dakota State UniversityBrookingsUSA
  3. 3.U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Science CenterFort CollinsUSA
  4. 4.Department of Biology Benedictine CollegeAtchisonUSA
  5. 5.U.S. Army Corps of EngineersKansas CityUSA

Personalised recommendations