Aquatic GAP in the Tallapoosa River Basin, Alabama and Georgia Elise Irwin, Jim Peterson, Mary Freeman U.S. Geological Survey Bud Freeman and Liz Kramer University of Georgia

Atlanta R&D Aquatic GAP Project Developing and testing standards for aquatic GAP in three basins Building predictive models Combine with terrestrial GAP projects in southeast

Models Logit models –Goodness-of-fit using Hosmer-Lemshow test –ANOVA on residuals to examine spatial dependence Hierarchical models used when dependence occurred –AIC model selection and X-validation Non-parametric models –k-nearest neighbor analysis (CATDAT) –Monte Carlo tests to examine individual predictors

Results Non-parametric tests were better The 98 LU/LC data were better model predictors Spatial interdependence for three species

KNN 98

1993 impoundments in the Upper Tallapoosa

Conserve? Restore? Setting Management Priorities *DSS is our ultimate goal

Reducing Uncertainty: Bayesian Learning Prior EstimatePosterior Estimate New Information

Flint River Basin 341 sites = faunal data Hierarchical models –Detection probabilities Decision support models include –Faunal response –Flow –habitat relations –Basin hydrology, geology, channel type Evaluate effects on biotic under different management scenarios

Spatially Explicit Outputs Streamflow policy AStreamflow policy B Biotic Integrity High Medium Low