A generalized watershed disturbance-invertebrate relation applicable in a range of environmental settings across the continental United States

Jeffrey J. Steuer

doi:10.1007/s11252-010-0131-x

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70160818

A generalized watershed disturbance-invertebrate relation applicable in a range of environmental settings across the continental United States

Jeffrey J. Steuer

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

It is widely recognized that urbanization can affect ecological conditions in aquatic systems; numerous studies have identified impervious surface cover as an indicator of urban intensity and as an index of development at the watershed, regional, and national scale. Watershed percent imperviousness, a commonly understood urban metric was used as the basis for a generalized watershed disturbance metric that, when applied in conjunction with weighted percent agriculture and percent grassland, predicted stream biotic conditions based on Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) richness across a wide range of environmental settings. Data were collected in streams that encompassed a wide range of watershed area (4.4-1,714 km), precipitation (38-204 cm/yr), and elevation (31-2,024 m) conditions. Nevertheless the simple 3-landcover disturbance metric accounted for 58% of the variability in EPT richness based on the 261 nationwide sites. On the metropolitan area scale, relationship r ranged from 0.04 to 0.74. At disturbance values 15. Future work may incorporate watershed management practices within the disturbance metric, further increasing the management applicability of the relation. Such relations developed on a regional or metropolitan area scale are likely to be stronger than geographically generalized models; as found in these EPT richness relations. However, broad spatial models are able to provide much needed understanding in unmonitored areas and provide initial guidance for stream potential.

Explore related subjects

Urban Ecosystems Article

Source-reported bounding extent: 32.61161640317033° to 45.82114340079471° latitude; -123.34350585937499° to -70.543212890625° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Jeffrey J. Steuer. 2010-07-06. A generalized watershed disturbance-invertebrate relation applicable in a range of environmental settings across the continental United States. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-010-0131-x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Boxed in or branching out? Movement and resource selection of eastern box turtles (Terrapene carolina carolina) in an urban green space

The eastern box turtle ( Terrapene carolina carolina ) is a long-lived terrestrial turtle species distributed throughout the eastern United States that has experienced widespread population decline. Many eastern box turtle populations are persisting as remanent populations in small, fragmented urban green spaces. We investigated the movement and resource selection of eastern box turtles within a mid-Atlantic region urban forest in the eastern United States. We used a combination of turtle occurrence data (via visual encounter surveys) and radio telemetry to create resource selection functions. Additionally, we applied a simulation modeling approach and modeled activity areas via dynamic Brownian Bridge Movement Models to quantify interactions between turtles and roads or trails. We also used these models to determine the propensity for turtles to move outside of the managed urban forest boundary and into surrounding development. We observed that turtles selected for deciduous forest patches and avoided roads and trails despite the urban forest having very little available areas where anthropogenic features could be avoided. We also demonstrated observed (and probable) movements outside of the urban forest boundary. Although eastern box turtles are persisting within the urban green space we examined, our work determined that interactions with roads and trails, and movements outside of protected boundaries into developed areas present challenges to individuals navigating the urban forest.

eastern United States, mid-Atlantic region↗

USGS2025

Emotions and political identity predict public acceptance of urban deer management

Addressing public preferences can enhance wildlife management effectiveness and reduce backlash. We conducted novel research on public acceptance of wildlife management by accounting for the role of underexplored drivers including emotion and political identity across an urban-to-rural gradient. Using data from a 2022 survey about white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) in Durham County, North Carolina, we analyzed drivers of acceptance for three management strategies: passive management, lethal management by hunting, and lethal management by professionals. Support for deer management varied across the urban-to-rural gradient, as rural residents favored hunting but were less supportive of passive management compared to urban and suburban residents. Emotions and general attitudes toward deer were the strongest predictors of management acceptance. Support for passive management was higher among residents with more positive emotions toward deer, whereas support for lethal strategies was higher among those with more negative emotions. Additionally, political identity emerged as a complex yet influential factor in shaping support for lethal management. Conservative respondents exhibited a higher acceptance of hunting, whereas liberal respondents exhibited a higher acceptance of professional sharpshooting. Collectively, our results demonstrate the ways in which emotions, politics, and other socio-demographic factors interact to influence public support for deer management across the urban–rural gradient. When direct experience with wildlife is lacking (e.g., in urban areas), emotions may act as heuristic guides that shape preferences. Managers aiming to increase deer management acceptability could integrate insights about emotional, political, and demographic drivers of public management support in communication efforts, potentially rendering urban deer management more effective.

North Carolina↗

USGS2023

The effects of landscape and yard features on mammal diversity in residential yards within Northwest Arkansas, USA

The human footprint is rapidly expanding, and wildlife habitat is continuously being converted to human residential properties. Surviving wildlife that reside in developing areas are displaced to nearby undeveloped areas. However, some animals can co-exist with humans and acquire the necessary resources (food, water, shelter) within the human environment. This ability to coexist may be particularly true when development is low intensity, as in residential suburban yards. Yards are individually managed “greenspaces” that can provide a range of food (e.g., bird feeders, compost, gardens), water (bird baths and garden ponds), and shelter (e.g., brush-piles, outbuildings) resources and are surrounded by varying landscape cover. To evaluate which residential landscape and yard features influence the richness and diversity of mammalian herbivores and mesopredators; we deployed wildlife game cameras throughout Northwestern Arkansas, USA in 46 residential yards in summer 2021 and 96 yards in summer 2022. We found that mesopredator diversity had a negative relationship with fences and was positively influenced by the number of bird feeders present in a yard. Mesopredator richness increased with the amount of forest within 400 m of the camera. Herbivore diversity and richness were positively correlated to the area of forest within 400 m surrounding yard and by garden area within yards, respectively. Our results suggest that while landscape does play a role in the presence of wildlife in a residential area, homeowners also have agency over the richness and diversity of mammals using their yards based on the features they create or maintain on their properties.

Arkansas↗