The Wetland Book pp 1555-1562 | Cite as

USA Wetlands: NWI-Plus Classification System

Reference work entry

Abstract

The original classification system used to inventory and map US wetlands was based on the Cowardin system with its descriptors based on soil, vegetation, hydrology, and water chemistry. This system was extended with hydrogeomorphic descriptors (the LLWW descriptors: landscape position, landform, water flow path, and water body type) to enable functional assessment of wetlands. The resulting system, the NWI+ database, is used to classify wetlands according to both Cowardin and LLWW types and can predict function for the wetlands in a watershed. The 11 functions predicted routinely are surface water detention, coastal storm surge detention, streamflow maintenance, nutrient transformation, sediment and other particulate retention, carbon sequestration, bank and shoreline stabilization, provision of fish and aquatic invertebrate habitat, provision of waterfowl and waterbird habitat, provision of habitat for other wildlife, and provision of habitat for unique, uncommon, or highly diverse wetland plant communities. The LLWW descriptors can also help to predict the impact of change on wetland functions. Results of assessments are published in reports, and an online mapping tool is available.

Keywords

Wetland classification Wetland descriptors NWI+ Hydrogeomorphic classification USA wetlands Wetland function 

References

  1. Brinson MM. A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands, Wetlands Research Program, Technical Report WRP-DE-4. . Washington, DC: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; 1993.http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/elpubs/pdf/wrpde4.pdfGoogle Scholar
  2. Cowardin LM, Carter V, Golet FC, LaRoe ET. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 1979. FWS/OBS-79/31. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Documents/Classification-of-Wetlands-and-Deepwater-Habitats-of-the-United-States.pdf
  3. FGDC. Wetlands mapping standard. Washington, DC: Federal Geographic Data Committee, Wetlands Subcommittee; 2009. FGDC-STD-015-2009. http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standards-projects/wetlands-mapping/2009-08%20FGDC%20Wetlands%20Mapping%20Standard_final.pdf
  4. FGDC. Wetlands classification standard. Washington, DC: Federal Geographic Data Committee, Wetlands Subcommittee; 2013. FGDC-STD-004-2013. http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standards-projects/wetlands/nvcs-2013
  5. Georgia DNR. Wetlands of Coastal Georgia: results of the National Wetlands Inventory and Landscape-level Functional Assessment. Brunswick: Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Coastal Resources Division; 2012.Google Scholar
  6. Newlon KR, Burns MD. Wetlands of the Flathead Valley: change and ecological functions. Helena: Montana Natural Heritage Program; 2010 .http://mtnhp.org/Reports/Flathead_Change_Revised.pdfGoogle Scholar
  7. Tiner RW. A landscape and landform classification for Northeast wetlands (operational draft). Hadley: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services; 1995a.Google Scholar
  8. Tiner RW. Piloting a more descriptive NWI. Nat Wetl Newslet. 1995b;19(5):14–6.Google Scholar
  9. Tiner RW. Correlating enhanced National Wetlands Inventory data with wetland functions for watershed assessments: a rationale for Northeastern U.S. wetlands. Hadley: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory Program; 2003.Google Scholar
  10. Tiner RW. Assessing cumulative loss of wetland functions in the Nanticoke River watershed using enhanced National Wetlands Inventory data. Wetlands. 2005;25(2):405–19 .http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Documents/Assessing-Cumulative-Loss-of-Wetland-Functions-in-the-Nanticoke-River-Watershed-Using-Enhanced-NWI-Data.pdfCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Tiner RW (editor). Status report for the National Wetlands Inventory Program: 2009. Arlington: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Habitat and Resource Conservation, Branch of Resource and Mapping Support; 2009. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Documents/Status-Report-for-the-National-Wetlands-Inventory-Program-2009.pdf
  12. Tiner RW. NWIPlus: geospatial database for watershed-level functional assessment. Nat Wetl Newslet. 2010; 32(3): 4–7, 23. http://www.aswm.org/wetlandsonestop/nwiplus_nwn.pdf
  13. Tiner RW. Predicting wetland functions at the landscape level for Coastal Georgia Using NWIPlus Data. Hadley: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Region; 2011 .http://www.fws.gov/northeast/ecologicalservices/pdf/CORRELATIONREPORT_GeorgiaFINAL092011.pdfGoogle Scholar
  14. Tiner RW. Dichotomous keys and mapping codes for wetland landscape position, landform, water flow path, and waterbody type descriptors: version 3.0. Hadley: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Region; 2014.Google Scholar
  15. Tiner RW, McGuckin K, Roghair LD, Weaver S, Christie J. Wetlands one-stop mapping: providing easy online access to geospatial data on wetlands and soils and related information. Wetl Sci Pract. 2013a;30(1):22–30 .http://www.aswm.org/pdf_lib/rtiner_042213_070539.pdfGoogle Scholar
  16. Tiner RW, McGuckin K, Herman J. Changes in Connecticut wetlands: 1990 to 2010. Hadley: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Region; 2013b .http://www.ct.gov/deep/lib/deep/water_inland/wetlands/connecticut_wetld_trends_1990-2010_final_report_2013.pdfGoogle Scholar
  17. Woodroffe CD. Coasts: Form, process and evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2002.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (retired)HadleyUSA
  2. 2.Institute for Wetlands and Environmental Education and Research, Inc. (IWEER)LeverettUSA

Personalised recommendations