Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

A Stream–Wetland–Riparian (SWR) index for assessing condition of aquatic ecosystems in small watersheds along the Atlantic slope of the eastern U.S.

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As part of a regional study by the Atlantic Slope Consortium (ASC) to develop ecological and socioeconomic indicators of aquatic ecosystem condition, we developed and tested a protocol for rapidly assessing condition of the stream, wetland, and riparian components of freshwater aquatic ecosystems. Aspects of hydrology, vegetation, in-stream and wetland characteristics, and on-site stressors were measured in the field. The resulting metrics were used to develop an index of overall condition, termed the Stream–Wetland–Riparian (SWR) Index. Values of this Index were compared to existing biotic indices and chemical measures, and to a Landscape Index created using satellite-based land cover data and a geographic information system (GIS). Comparisons were made at several levels of spatial aggregation and resolution, from site to small watershed. The SWR Index and associated Landscape Indices were shown to correlate highly with biological indicators of stream condition at the site level and for small contributing areas. The landscape patterns prevalent throughout the entire watershed do not necessarily match the patterns found adjacent to the stream network. We suggest a top-down approach that managers can use to sequentially apply these methods, to first prioritize watersheds based on a relative condition measure provided by the Landscape Index, and then assess condition and diagnose stressors of aquatic resources at the subwatershed and site level.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barbour, M. T., Gerritsen, J., Snyder, B. D., & Stribling, J. B. (1999). Rapid bioassessment protocols or use in streams and wadeable rivers: Periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrates and fish (2nd ed.). EPA 841-B-99-002. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blocksom, K. A. (2003). A performance comparison of metric scoring methods for a multimetric index for Mid-Atlantic Highlands streams. Environmental Management, 31(5), 670–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boward, D. M., Kazyak, P. F., Stranko, S. A., Hurd, M. K., & Prochaska, T. P. (1999). From the Mountains to the Sea: The State of Maryland’s Freshwater Streams. EPA 903-R-99-023. Annapolis, Maryland: Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Monitoring and Nontidal Assessment Division.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, R. P., O’Connell, T. J., Wardrop, D. H., & Jackson, L. E. (1998). Towards a regional index of biological integrity: The examples of forested riparian ecosystems. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 51, 131–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, R. P., Wardrop, D. H., & Bishop, J. A. (2004). Assessing wetland condition on a watershed basis in the Mid-Atlantic region using synoptic land-cover maps. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 94(1–3), 9–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, R. P., Synder, C., & Brinson, M. M. (2006a). Structure and functioning of tributary watershed ecosystems in the Eastern Rivers and Mountains Network: Conceptual models and vital signs (88pp). Natural Resources Report NPS/NER/NRR-2006/2009. Philadelphia, PA: National Park Service. (http://www.nps.gov/nero/science/).

  • Brooks, R. P., Wardrop, D. H., & Cole, C. A. (2006b). Inventorying and monitoring wetland condition and restoration potential on a watershed basis with examples from Spring Creek watershed, Pennsylvania, USA. Environmental Management, 38, 673–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. T., & Vivas, M. B. (2005). Landscape development intensity index. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 101, 289–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Church, M. (2002). Geomorphic thresholds in riverine landscapes. Freshwater Biology, 47, 541–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, S. P., & Jackson, S. K. (2006). The biological condition gradient: A descriptive model for interpreting change in aquatic ecosystems. Ecological Applications, 16, 1251–1266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forman, R. T. (1995). Land mosaics: The ecology of landscapes and regions (632 pp.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, M. C., Pringle, C. M., & Jackson, C. R. (2007). Hydrologic connectivity and the contribution of stream headwaters to ecological integrity at regional scales. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 43(1), 5–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karr, J. R., & Chu, E. W. (1999). Restoring life in running waters: Better biological monitoring (206 pp.). Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, R. S., Baker, M. E., Whigham, D. F., Weller, D. E., Jordan, T. E., Hurd, M. K., et al. (2005). Spatial considerations for linking watershed land cover to ecological indicators in streams. Ecological Applications, 15, 137–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lake, P. S. (2000). Disturbance, patchiness, and diversity in streams. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 19, 573–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGarigal, K., Cushman, S. A., Neel, M. C., & Ene, E. (2002). FRAGSTATS: Spatial pattern analysis program for categorical maps. Computer software program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Available at the following web site: www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html.

  • Minshall, G. W., Cummins, K. W., Petersen, R. C., Cushing, C. E., Bruns, D. A., Sedell, J. R., et al. (1985). Developments in stream ecosystem theory. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 42, 1045–1055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poole, G. C. (2002). Fluvial landscape ecology: Addressing uniqueness within the river discontinuum. Freshwater Biology, 47, 641–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAS (2003). JMP Statistics and Graphics Guide, Ver. 5.1 (792 pp.). Cary, NC: SAS Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. D., Ammann, A., Bartoldus, C., & Brinson, M. M. (1995). An approach for assessing wetland functions using hydrogeomorphic classification, reference wetlands, and functional indices (88 pp.). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wetlands Research Program Technical Report WRP-DE-9, October 1995.

  • Strahler, A. N. (1952). Hypsometric (area-latitude) analysis of erosional topography. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, 63, 1117–1142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorp, J. H., Thoms, M. C., & Delong, M. D. (2006). The riverine ecosystem synthesis: Biocomplexity in river networks across space and time. River Research and Applications, 22(2), 123–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Townsend, C. R., Scarsbrook, M. R., & Dolédec, S. (1997). The intermediate disturbance hypothesis, refugia, and biodiversity in streams. Limnology and Oceanography, 42, 938–949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2000). Mid-Atlantic highlands streams assessment (64 pp.). EPA/903/ R-00/015. Philadelphia, PA: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1980). Habitat evaluation procedures (HEP). Ecol. Serv. Man. 101. Div. Ecol. Serv., U. S. Dep. Interior Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.

  • U.S. Geological Survey (2000). The national hydrography dataset: Concepts and contents. U.S. Geological Survey, February 2000. Available online at http://nhd.usgs.gov/chapter1/.

  • Vannote, R. L., Minshall, G. W., Cummins, K. W., Sedell, J. R., & Cushing, C. E. (1980). The river continuum concept. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 37, 130–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogelmann, J. E., Howard, S. M., Yang, L., Larson, C. R., Wylie, B. K., & Van Driel, N. (2001). Completion of the 1990s National Land Cover Data Set for the Conterminous United States from Landsat Thematic Mapper data and ancillary data sources. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 67, 650–652.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, J. V. (1989). The four-dimensional nature of lotic ecosystems. Journal of the North Atlantic Benthological Society, 8, 2–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, J. V., Tockner, K., Arscott, D. B., & Claret, C. (2002). Riverine landscape diversity. Freshwater Biology, 46, 807–819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wardrop, D. H., Bishop, J. A., Easterling, M., Hychka, K., Myers, W. L., Patil, G. P., et al. (2005). Use of landscape and land use parameters for classification and characterization of watersheds in the Mid-Atlantic across five physiographic provinces. Environmental and Ecological Statistics, 12(2), 209–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wardrop, D. H., Kentula, M. E., Stevens, D. L. Jr., Jensen, S. F., & Brooks, R. P. (2007) Assessment of wetland condition: An example from the Upper Juniata Watershed in Pennsylvania, U.S.A. Wetlands, 27(3), 416–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiens, J. A. (2002). Riverine landscapes: Taking landscape ecology in the water. Freshwater Biology, 47, 501–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Brooks.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brooks, R., McKenney-Easterling, M., Brinson, M. et al. A Stream–Wetland–Riparian (SWR) index for assessing condition of aquatic ecosystems in small watersheds along the Atlantic slope of the eastern U.S.. Environ Monit Assess 150, 101–117 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0673-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0673-z

Keywords

Navigation