Geology topics
Publications and source records attributed to Robert M. Hughes.
Karr (1981), which introduced the index of biotic (or biological) integrity (IBI) has been cited more often (>4,500 times) than any other paper in Fisheries . In this essay, we reflect on the historical context of this seminal publication and its broad, continuing impact on the management of natural resources, especially freshwater ecosystems.
Management and conservation efforts that support the recovery and protection of large rivers are daunting, reflecting the complexity of the challenge and extent of effort (in terms of policy, economic investment, and spatial extent) needed to afford measurable change. These large systems have generally experienced intensive development and regulation, compromising their capacity to respond to disturbances such as climate change or wildfire. Functionally, large river and basin management require insights gained from social, ecological, geophysical, and hydrological sciences. This multi-disciplinary perspective can unveil the integrated relationship between a river network's biotic community and seasonally variable environmental conditions that are often influenced by human activities. Large rivers and their basins are constantly changing due to anthropogenic influences and as climate modifies patterns of temperature and precipitation. Because of these factors, the state of knowledge must advance to address changing conditions. The Willamette River, in western Oregon, USA, is a prime example of a basin that has experienced significant degradation and investment in rehabilitation in recent decades. Innovative science has facilitated development of fine-scale, spatially extensive datasets and models that can generate targeted conservation and rehabilitation actions that are prioritized across the entire river network. This prioritization allows investment decisions to be driven by site-specific conditions while simultaneously considering potentials for ecological improvement. Here, we review hydrologic, geomorphic, ecologic, and social conditions in the Willamette River basin through time—including pre-settlement, river development, and contemporary periods—and offer a future vision for consideration. Currently, detailed information about fish populations and habitat, hydrologic conditions, geomorphology, water quality, and land use can be leveraged to make informed decisions about protection, rehabilitation, and development. The time is ripe for strategic management and goal development for the entire Willamette River, and these efforts can be informed by comprehensive science realized through established institutions (e.g., public agencies, non-profit watershed groups, Tribes, and universities) focused on conservation and management. The approaches to science and social-network creation that were pioneered in the Willamette River basin offer insights into the development of comprehensive conservation-based planning that could be implemented in other large river systems globally.
Hydrologic units provide a convenient but problematic nationwide set of geographic polygons based on subjectively determined subdivisions of land surface areas at several hierarchical levels. The problem is that it is impossible to map watersheds, basins, or catchments of relatively equal size and cover the whole country. The hydrologic unit framework is in fact composed mostly of watersheds and pieces of watersheds. The pieces include units that drain to segments of streams, remnant areas, noncontributing areas, and coastal or frontal units that can include multiple watersheds draining to an ocean or large lake. Hence, half or more of the hydrologic units are not watersheds as the name of the framework “Watershed Boundary Dataset” implies. Nonetheless, hydrologic units and watersheds are commonly treated as synonymous, and this misapplication and misunderstanding can have some serious scientific and management consequences. We discuss some of the strengths and limitations of watersheds and hydrologic units as spatial frameworks. Using examples from the Northwest and Southeast United States, we explain how the misapplication of the hydrologic unit framework has altered the meaning of watersheds and can impair understanding associations between spatial geographic characteristics and surface water conditions.