Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing tiers of a multi-tiered wetland assessment in the Prairie Pothole Region

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
Wetlands Ecology and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Wetland assessment has been shown to be an important tool in understanding the condition and function of the world’s wetlands, and use of muli-tiered assessment strategy has been recommended. In order to evaluate the performance of each tier of a multi-tiered wetland assessment strategy, we sampled 255 seasonally-ponded wetlands in the Missouri Coteau, the most wetland dense ecoregion in the Prairie Pothole Region. We assessed the condition of each study wetland using four sampling methods and models (tiers) of increasing levels of effort and complexity: (1) a level 1 assessment using the geographic information system-based Landscape Wetland Condition Analysis Model (LWCAM); (2) a level 2 assessment using the North Dakota Rapid Assessment Method (NDRAM); (3) a level 3- assessment using the vegetative-based Floristic Quality Index (FQI) and (4) a level 3 assessment consisting of a Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) Model functional assessment. We compared assessment tiers to determine how similar the different levels of assessment ranked sites either by condition or function. Both the NDRAM and FQI assessments, though very different in wetland characteristics assessed, provided similar condition rankings as the more intensive level 3 HGM assessment (89 and 90% similar, respectively). Additionally, the FQI was 86% similar to the level 2 NDRAM, indicating that these two assessment methods have utility in assessing wetlands similar to a HGM assessment. Information from this study can be used as a tool for determining need specific, financial, and time appropriate wetland sampling methods.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  • Bryce SA, Omernik JM, Pater DE, Ulmer M, Schaar J, Freeouf J, Johnson R, Kuck P, Azevedo SH (1998) Ecoregions of North Dakota and South Dakota (two- sided color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs). U.S. Geological Survey (scale 1:1,500,000), Reston

  • Collins JN, Stein ED, Sutula M, Clark R, Fetscher AE, Grenier L, Grosso L, Wiskind A (2008) California rapid assessment method (CRAM) for wetlands. Version 5.0.2, 151 pp

  • DeKeyser ES, Kirby DR, Ell MJ (2003) An index of plant community integrity: development of the methodology for assessing prairie wetland plant communities. Ecol Indic 3:119–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeKeyser ES, Biondini M, Kirby D, Hargiss C (2009) Low prairie communities of wetlands as a function of disturbance: physical parameters. Ecol Indic 9(2):296–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. EPA (2016) National wetland condition assessment: 2011 technical report. U.S. EPA Office of Water and Office of Research and Development. Technical Report EPA 843-R-15-006. 279 pp

  • Gilbert MC, Whited PM, Clairain EJ, Smith RD (2006) A regional guidebook for applying the hydrogeomorphic approach to assessing wetland functions of Prairie Potholes. ERDC/EL TR-06-5, United States Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg

  • Hargiss CLM (2009) Estimating wetland quality for the Missouri Coteau ecoregion in North Dakota. Ph.D. Dissertation, North Dakota State University, Fargo

  • Hargiss CLM, DeKeyser ES, Kirby DR, Ell MJ (2008) Regional assessment of wetland plant communities using the index of plant community integrity. Ecol Indic 8:303–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kantrud HA, Newton WE (1996) A test of vegetation-related indicators of wetland quality in the Prairie Pothole Region. J Aquatic Ecosyst Health 5:177–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kentula M (2007) Monitoring wetlands at the watershed scale. Wetlands 27:412–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King DM, Wainger LA, Bartoldus CC, Wakeley JS (2000) Expanding wetland assessment procedures: linking indices of wetland function with values and services. ERDC/EL TR-11-17, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg

  • Kruskal JB (1964) Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: a numerical method. Psychometrika 29:115–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legendre P (2004) Kendall coefficient of concordance: global test and a posteriori tests of individual judges—Program Kendall_W User’s Guide. Département de sciences biologiques, Université de Montréal. 8 pp

  • Legendre P (2005) Species associations: the Kendall coefficient of concordance revisited. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 10(2):226–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mack JJ (2001) Ohio rapid assessment method for wetlands, manual for using version 5.0. Ohio EPA Technical Bulletin Wetland/2001-1-1. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Surface Water, 401 Wetland Ecology Unit, Columbus

  • Mather PM (1976) Computational methods of multivariate analysis in physical geography. Wiley, London, p 532

    Google Scholar 

  • McCune B, Grace JB, Urban DL (2002) Analysis of ecological communities. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach

    Google Scholar 

  • McCune B, Mefford MJ (1999) PC-ORD: multivariate analysis of ecological data. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller SJ, Wardrop DH (2006) Adapting the floristic quality assessment index to indicate anthropogenic disturbance in central Pennsylvania wetlands. Ecol Indic 6:313–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mita D, Kirby D, DeKeyser ES (2007) Developing a wetland condition prediction model using landscape structure variability. Wetlands 27:1124–1133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch WJ, Gosselink JG (2015) Wetlands, 5th edn. Wiley, New Jersey, p 456

    Google Scholar 

  • Nestlerode JA, Hansen VD, Teague A, Harwell MC (2014) Application of a three-tier framework to assess ecological condition of Gulf of Mexico coastal wetlands. Environ Monit Assess 186:3477–3497

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Paradeis BL, DeKeyser ES, Kirby DR (2010) Evaluation of restored and native Prairie Pothole Region plant communities following an environmental gradient. Nat Areas J 30(3):294–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips RL, Beeri O, DeKeyser ES (2005) Remote wetland assessment for Missouri Coteau prairie glacial basins. Wetlands 25:335–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds RE, Cohan DR, Loesch CR (1997) Wetlands of North and South Dakota. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Home Page, Jamestown. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/othrdata/wetstats/wetstats.htm (Version 01OCT97)

  • Solek CW, Stein ED, Sutula M (2011) Demonstration of an integrated watershed assessment using a three-tiered assessment framework. Wetlands Ecol Manag. doi:10.1007/s11273-011-9230-6

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein ED, Fetscher AE, Clark RP, Wiskind A, Grenier JL, Sutula M, Collins JN, Grosso C (2009) Validation of a wetland rapid assessment method: use of EPA’s level 1-2-3 framework for method testing and refinement. Wetlands 29(2):648–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens DL, Jensen SF (2007) Sample design, execution, and analysis for wetland assessment. Wetlands 27:515–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens DL, Olsen AR (2004) Spatially balanced sampling of natural resources. J Am Stat Assoc 99(465):262–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart RE, Kantrud HE (1971) Classification of natural ponds and lakes in the glaciated prairie region. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Resource Publication 92, Washington D.C. 57 pp

  • The Northern Prairie Great Plains Floristic Quality Assessment Panel (TNGPFQAP) (2001) Coefficients of conservatism for the vascular flora of the Dakotas and adjacent grasslands: U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Information and Technology Report USGS/BRD/ITR-2001-001. 32 pp

  • Wardrop DH, Kentula ME, Jensen SF, Stevens DL Jr, Hychka KC, Brooks RP (2007) Assessment of wetlands in the Upper Juniata watershed in Pennsylvania, USA, using the hydrogeomorphic approach. Wetlands 27:432–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whited DC, Galatowitsch SM, Tester JR, Schik K, Lehtinen R, Husveth J (2000) Importance and influence of landscape characteristics on patterns of biodiversity in depressional wetlands. Land Use Urban Plan 49:49–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigand C, Carlisle B, Smith J, Carullo M, Fillis D, Charpentier M, McKinney R, Johnson R, Heltshe J (2011) Development and validation of rapid assessment indices of condition for coastal tidal wetlands in southern New England, USA. Environ Monit Assess 182:31–46

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Financial support was provided by the North Dakota Department of Health and the US Environmental Protection Agency Region 8 Wetland Development Grant. Breanna Kobeila, Laurie Leibel, Levi Binstock, Dustin Strong, and Beth Beckers contributed in the collection of data and data entry.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Natural Resource Sciences, North Dakota State University, Department 7680, P.O. Box 6050, Fargo, ND, 58108, USA

    Christina L. M. Hargiss, Edward S. DeKeyser & Jack E. Norland

  2. Division of Water Quality, North Dakota Department of Health, 918 East Divide Avenue, Bismarck, ND, 58501, USA

    Michael J. Ell

Authors
  1. Christina L. M. Hargiss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Edward S. DeKeyser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jack E. Norland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael J. Ell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christina L. M. Hargiss.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 21 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hargiss, C.L.M., DeKeyser, E.S., Norland, J.E. et al. Comparing tiers of a multi-tiered wetland assessment in the Prairie Pothole Region. Wetlands Ecol Manage 25, 639–647 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-017-9540-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-017-9540-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation