Paul Seelbach | USGS Science

USGS2018

Measuring and evaluating ecological flows from streams to regions: Steps towards national coverage

Living aquatic communities are largely determined and maintained by the volume and quality of flowing waters, both within lotic systems and in receiving waters of coastal systems. However, flow is one of the most frequently and extensively altered features of rivers and streams; alteration effects are likely to be exacerbated by climate change. Lotic systems vary and different fish species need different environmental conditions, and distinct problems are evident at various spatial scales. New synoptic flow and biological information now make it possible to evaluate the effects of altered flows throughout the Great Lakes Region at scales from the stream reach to the Region. We used estimates of river and streamflow and observed fish abundances to develop tools that specify the response of fish to alterations in those flows. We fit the logistic model to a cumulative fish abundance curve as a function of yield providing an empirical means to develop models of the response of cumulative fish abundance to flows. Response zones of yield for each species in each system type (based on size and thermal class) illustrate how criteria may be developed that can be used in decision‐making for management of flows. In our example application, we evaluate both the general response of brook trout ( Salvelinus fontinalis ) abundances (and fish diversity) to changes in flows and assess the sensitivity of each stream fish community to flow alteration. Mapping stream sensitivity to flow alteration throughout the US Great Lakes Region with a multiscale spatial framework showed how regional variability in sensitivity for any fish species or assemblage may be evaluated and provides managers with information to help determine where the best opportunities for protection or restoration of streamflows and associated communities exist. These results provide valuable tools and critical information to managers responsible for balancing water uses and maintaining high quality lotic ecosystems. These methods may be applied to any geographic region and can be extended nationally or globally, where flow, temperature, fish and landscape data are available.

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, ↗

USGS2013

Great Lakes rivermouths: a primer for managers

Between the North American Great Lakes and their tributaries are the places where the confluence of river and lake waters creates a distinct ecosystem: the rivermouth ecosystem. Human development has often centered around these rivermouths, in part, because they provide a rich array of ecosystem services. Not surprisingly, centuries of intense human activity have led to substantial pressures on, and alterations to, these ecosystems, often diminishing or degrading their ecological functions and associated ecological services. Many Great Lakes rivermouths are the focus of intense restoration efforts. For example, 36 of the active Great Lakes Areas of Concern (AOCs) are rivermouths or areas that include one or more rivermouths. Historically, research of rivermouth ecosystems has been piecemeal, focused on the Great Lakes proper or on the upper reaches of tributaries, with little direct study of the rivermouth itself. Researchers have been divided among disciplines, agencies and institutions; and they often work independently and use disparate venues to communicate their work. Management has also been fragmented with a focus on smaller, localized, sub-habitat units and socio-political or economic elements, rather than system-level consideration. This Primer presents the case for a more holistic approach to rivermouth science and management that can enable restoration of ecosystem services with multiple benefits to humans and the Great Lakes ecosystem. A conceptual model is presented with supporting text that describes the structures and processes common to all rivermouths, substantiating the case for treating these ecosystems as an identifiable class. 1 Ecological services provided by rivermouths and changes in how humans value those services over time are illustrated through case studies of two Great Lakes rivermouths—the St. Louis River and the Maumee River. Specific ecosystem services are identified in italics throughout this Primer and follow definitions described by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (Table1). Collectively, this primer synthesizes existing information in a new way that aims to support management of rivermouths as distinct and important ecosystems. The development and management decisions made around rivermouths today will shape the future of these ecosystems, and the human communities within them, well into the future. 1 The information presented in this paper was derived from discussions and draft documents of the Great Lakes Rivermouth Collaboratory. The Great Lakes Rivermouth Collaboratory was established by the U.S. Geological Survey's Great Lakes Science Center (USGS-GLSC) in collaboration with the Great Lakes Commission to engage the Great Lakes scientific community in sharing and documenting knowledge about freshwater rivermouth ecosystems. For more information, see http://www.glc.org/habitat/Rivermouth-Collaboratory.html.

Great Lakes↗