Riparian forest structure and bottom-up drivers of fish production in headwater streams Michael Nelson (FES) Dana Warren (F&W) Ivan Arismendi (F&W)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Resident Fish Stock Status in the Palouse River and upper Crab Creek watersheds, Washington. Jason McLellan Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Advertisements

Riparian Thinning: Logic Paths for Silvicultural Prescriptions
Factors limiting benthic algal abundance in Virginia streams of the Coastal Plain Michael Brandt Paul A. Bukaveckas Virginia Commonwealth University Center.
David McCormick & Simon Harrison
1st of 3 Part Training Series Christopher Woodall INTRODUCTION TO THE P2+ DOWN WOODY MATERIALS INDICATOR.
Riparian Zone Habitat Assessment Vegetation and More.
Clearwater River Habitat/Bioassessment
Grand Ridge – Canyon Creek Acquisition RCO # – Urban Wildlife July 2008.
Riparian Management and Fish Productivity Peggy Wilzbach and Ken Cummins USGS CA Cooperative Fish Research Unit Humboldt State University.
Lec 12: Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (RBP’s)
Riparian Buffers for Water and Stream Protection Hal O. Liechty Arkansas Forest Resources Center School of Forest Resources, UAM Hal.
The central theme of this project is to attempt to quantify the effect of riparian cover on stream water temperature at small spatial scales, with a view.
Do installed steam logjams increase macroinvertebrate richness and abundance? Seyeon Kim and Ong Xiong with faculty mentor Dr. Todd Wellnitz Biology Department.
Managing forests for carbon storage Bill Keeton Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources University of Vermont.
A landscape perspective of stream food webs: Exploring cumulative effects and defining biotic thresholds.
US EPA National Rivers and Streams Assessment (NRSA) LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER (Louisiana) Dugan Sabins, Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality Gary.
Rapid Bioassessment Protocol (RBP). Background to RBP changes in community/assemblage composition used to evaluate existence and degree of impact.
Fall River Long-term Productivity Study : Predictions of Pre-harvest Biomass and Nutrient Pools K. Petersen, B. Strahm, C. Licata, B. Flaming, E. Sucre,
Analyzing Stream Condition Using EMAP Algae Data By Nick Paretti ARIZONA PHYCOLOGY ECOL 475.
Restoration of Chamberlain Creek Amy Clinefelter Riparian Wetland Research Program Restoration of Chamberlain Creek Amy Clinefelter Riparian Wetland Research.
FOR 272 Forested Watershed Management: Water and aquatic resources as the wave of the future for forest management.
Methods for Estimating Distributions Static Distributions –Polygon –Grid –Habitat Mapping.
Watershed Assessment and River Restoration Strategies
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® 2012 Changes to Stream Mitigation Procedures and Guidelines Mike Moxey USACE, Mobile District IRT Chair May.
Opportunities for Restoring Second Growth Ecosystems in Staney Creek: Scientific Principles.
Name of presenter Date of presentation.  To help preserve and protect Wisconsin’s over 15,000 lakes and 86,000 miles of rivers.
Hancock Springs A natural lab for studying the roles of physical habitat, nutrient availability, and non-native species to inform river restoration John.
Habitat Presentation 1 Phil Kaufmann --- USEPA, Corvallis, OR
STREAM ECOSYSTEMS.
Materials Transport & NSCD Material Classes Velocity to Transport Relationships York NSCD Restoration PSY CCREP.
The Ecological Engineering Group Biological and Agricultural Engineering University of Arkansas Algal Growth with Nutrient Limitation Compared to Light-Limiting.
John L. Willis, Forestry, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan Michael B. Walters, Forestry, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.
Growth Trajectories of Wild California Steelhead Parr David Swank 1,2, Will Satterthwaite 1, Michael Beakes 1, Susan Sogard 2, Marc Mangel 1, Rob Titus.
Printed by My results indicate that:  Periphyton and macroinvertebrate abundance had a positive relationship to light intensity.
How Will Climate Change Affect Trophic Processes and Productivity in Freshwater-Riparian Ecosystems? Mark S. Wipfli USGS Cooperative Fish and Wildlife.
EBTJV Project Overview  Riparian planting tool  Brook trout habitat patch layer.
Evaluation of sampling alternatives to quantify stand structure in riparian areas of Western Oregon forests Theresa Marquardt Oregon State University Paul.
Coarse Woody Debris Missouri Ozark Forest Ecosystem Project Missouri Ozark Forest Ecosystem Project Randy G. Jensen Stephen R. Shifley Brian L. Brookshire.
The Importance of Healthy Riparian Areas and their Current Status in Wisconsin Tim Asplund, Buzz Sorge (WI DNR) Advanced Lake Leaders – Green Lake Sept.
Stream Fish Dispersal and Growth in Wooded and Meadow Reaches of the White Clay Creek Willy Eldridge with Laura Borecki, Bill Anderson, Mike Broomall,
Headwater Salamanders Photo by Cuyahoga Falls High School, Ohio.
RipStream: Quantifying stream temperature response to Oregon timber harvest practices Jeremy Groom 1, Liz Dent 2, Lisa Madsen 3 1 OSU Dept. of Forest Engineering.
To main objectives: Build a seamless, routed stream network across WAM tiles Apply a process based, riparian zone delineation tool Riparian Processes.
Conceptual Modeling as a Tool for Developing a Watershed Management Plan An aid to understanding linkages Barbara Washburn California Watershed Assessment.
Comparison of Benthic Invertebrate Communities Upstream and Downstream of Proposed Culvert Installations in Alabama Amy C. Gill USGS, Alabama Water Science.
Linking physical habitat characteristics to Chinook spawning distribution in the Yakima River Jeremy Cram 1, Christian Torgersen 2, Ryan Klett 1, George.
What are the effects of deep drawdown at Fall Creek Reservoir? PART 1: Physical conditions and resource availability Christina A. Murphy Sherri Johnson.
Groundwater-Surface Water Interactions Groundwater and surface water are intertwined Different types of interactions of groundwater with: –streams and.
Riparian Areas: Functions and Conditions Authors: Gene Surber, MSU Extension Natural Resources Specialist Bob Ehrhart, Research Specialist, RWRP, Univ.
Steve Cramer Casey Justice Ian Courter Environmental drivers of steelhead abundance in partially anadromous Oncorhynchus mykiss populations.
LOGGING FORESTS. Logging Forests Forests regulate climate by recycling water and carbon dioxide. transpirationOn hot days a large tree may absorb 5.5.
BEAVERS and Watershed Restoration on the Oregon Coast Wayne Hoffman MidCoast Watersheds Council.
Hangman Creek Fisheries Enhancement BPA Project & Hangman Restoration Project: Wildlife BPA Project
Carbon, mushrooms, and timber – what more could you want
The role of woody debris in riparian zones Jon M. Flinders.
Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index Bradley Hansen John Nieber Department of Bioproducts and Biosystems Engineering For BBE 4535/5535 Fall 2011.
Effects of Stream Restoration: A Comparative Study of Pine Run in Felton, Pennsylvania Luke Mummert, Department of Biological Sciences, York College of.
Evaluating Fish Habitat Compensation in the Canadian Arctic: Stream Habitat Attributes and Macroinvertebrate Assemblages Andrea Erwin* 1, Abul Basar Baki.
Piet Verdonschot Freshwater Ecology Group Group of Aquatic Ecology and Ecotoxicology Effects of wooded riparian zones on stream.
Tim Asplund, Buzz Sorge (WI DNR)
Old-Growth Forests and Deforestation
A Review of Stream Restoration Techniques and a Hierarchical Strategy for Prioritizing Restoration in Pacific Northwest Watersheds North American Journal.
Forested Watershed Management:
Old-Growth Forests and Deforestation
Module 10/11 Stream Surveys
Acknowledgements Dr. Peter Tschaplinski, MOE
Trends in Invertebrate Feeding Strategies
Logjams: A Look at Logjams and Emergent Wood Effects on Insect Emergence in a Small Northern Minnesota Stream Zachary Snobl with Faculty Mentors: Todd.
All washed up? The effect of floods on cutthroat trout
Characteristics of Coldwater Streams
Presentation transcript:

Riparian forest structure and bottom-up drivers of fish production in headwater streams Michael Nelson (FES) Dana Warren (F&W) Ivan Arismendi (F&W)

Study Question: How does changing forest structure in the riparian zone influence fish in headwater streams? Why would forest structure matter? Because forest structure controls light, and the light environment of the stream influences stream food webs and stream temperatures

Study Objectives: Understand how riparian forest structure influences bottom-up drivers of fish abundance and growth in headwater streams Set up preliminary data set for experiments exploring whether selective thinning in the riparian zone to create a more complex canopy structure influences fish in headwater streams

H 1 : Light in headwater streams will be high early in stand initiation, light will decline through the stem-exclusion phase and light will increase again late in stand development Premise behind this study: Changes in light with stand development > 200 % open canopy Meta-analysis of % canopy openness versus stand age across the Pacific Northwest Stand Age

Kiffney et al Includes: Cutthroat trout Sculpin salamanders Premise behind this study: Light can influence biomass of stream biota

Fish Biomass Active management Sedell and Swanson (1984) “A strategy for managing streamside areas for long-term fisheries values would be to keep the large woody materials in the stream during harvest, leave large coniferous trees to serve as a future source of instream debris, and selectively thin dense second-growth stands along the stream to provide a mix of food resources, including algae” This is not a new idea...

HJ Andrews Old growth vs Early mature. Green Mountain Early mature – reference vs Early mature for future thinning Study Design – 12 reaches Pre-treatment data for an experimental assessment of thinning effect on fish, their food, and stream temperatures. Evaluate fish, their food, and stream temperatures at established reach pairs Provides more sites for comparative study

HJ Andrews Old growth vs Early mature. In-stream measurements Riparian Forest Green Mountain Early mature – reference vs Early mature for future thinning Study Design – Sampling Basal area (every 20 m)

HJ Andrews Old growth vs Early mature. Periphyton Chl a (scraping rocks every 5 m) Periphyton Chl a (scraping rocks every 5 m) Macroinvertebrate biomass (Hess sampler 5 samples per reach) Macroinvertebrate biomass (Hess sampler 5 samples per reach) Total fish biomass Salmonid biomass All fish batch marked by reach Fish that are big enough get individual tags (electrofishing, fin clips, and PIT tags) Total fish biomass Salmonid biomass All fish batch marked by reach Fish that are big enough get individual tags (electrofishing, fin clips, and PIT tags) Light on the streambed (every 5 m) Light on the streambed (every 5 m) canopy cover (every 20 m) canopy cover (every 20 m) Temperature (data logged every 5 minutes at the upstream and downstream end of each reach Temperature (data logged every 5 minutes at the upstream and downstream end of each reach Basal area (every 20 m) In-stream measurements Riparian Forest Green Mountain Early mature – reference vs Early mature for future thinning Study Design – Sampling 2 x per year – June/July and August/Sept Stream Habitat (LW, pool area, cover, substrate, gradient, etc.) Stream Habitat (LW, pool area, cover, substrate, gradient, etc.)

HJ Andrews Old growth vs Early mature. Periphyton Chl a (tiles) Periphyton Chl a (tiles) Macroinvertebrate biomass (surber sampler - 5 samples per reach) Macroinvertebrate biomass (surber sampler - 5 samples per reach) Total fish biomass Salamander biomass Fish batch marked by reach Total fish biomass Salamander biomass Fish batch marked by reach Light on the streambed (every 5 m) Light on the streambed (every 5 m) canopy cover (every 20 m) canopy cover (every 20 m) Temperature (data logged every 5 minutes at the upstream and downstream end of each reach) Temperature (data logged every 5 minutes at the upstream and downstream end of each reach) Basal area (5 20 m radius plots) In-stream measurements Riparian Forest Green Mountain Early mature – reference vs Early mature for future thinning Study Design – Sampling 2 x per year – June/July and August/Sept Stream Habitat (LW, pool area, cover, substrate, gradient, etc.) Stream Habitat (LW, pool area, cover, substrate, gradient, etc.)

Basal Area (m 2 /ha) Site Basal Area

HJ Andrews Old growth vs Early mature. Periphyton Chl a (tiles) Periphyton Chl a (tiles) Macroinvertebrate biomass (surber sampler - 5 samples per reach) Macroinvertebrate biomass (surber sampler - 5 samples per reach) Total fish biomass Salamander biomass Fish batch marked by reach Total fish biomass Salamander biomass Fish batch marked by reach Light on the streambed (every 5 m) Light on the streambed (every 5 m) canopy cover (every 20 m) canopy cover (every 20 m) Temperature (data logged every 5 minutes at the upstream and downstream end of each reach) Temperature (data logged every 5 minutes at the upstream and downstream end of each reach) Basal area (5 20 m radius plots) In-stream measurements Riparian Forest Green Mountain Early mature – reference vs Early mature for future thinning Study Design – Sampling 2 x per year – June/July and August/Sept Stream Habitat (LW, pool area, cover, substrate, gradient, etc.) Stream Habitat (LW, pool area, cover, substrate, gradient, etc.)

Light exposure on the stream benthos was quantified using vials of photo- degrading dye Dye photodegradation is then used to estimate Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR) base on a strong relationship between decay and measured PAR Measuring stream light Methods details in: Bechtold et al Warren et al Warren et al. in review 24 hour accumulated PAR (umol  m -2 )

McRae Trib – West (4.4 m bankfull)

McRae Creek (STREON) (6.6 m bankfull)

24 hour accumulated PAR x1000 (uE  m -2  s -1 ) Distance (m) (Upstream)(Downstream) Old Growth OG-2G mix Second growth (~60 yrs) McRae Trib – East (3.1 m bankfull)

HJ Andrews Old growth vs Early mature. Periphyton Chl a (tiles) Periphyton Chl a (tiles) Macroinvertebrate biomass (surber sampler - 5 samples per reach) Macroinvertebrate biomass (surber sampler - 5 samples per reach) Total fish biomass Salamander biomass Fish batch marked by reach Total fish biomass Salamander biomass Fish batch marked by reach Light on the streambed (every 5 m) Light on the streambed (every 5 m) canopy cover (every 20 m) canopy cover (every 20 m) Temperature (data logged every 5 minutes at the upstream and downstream end of each reach) Temperature (data logged every 5 minutes at the upstream and downstream end of each reach) Basal area (5 20 m radius plots) In-stream measurements Riparian Forest Green Mountain Early mature – reference vs Early mature for future thinning Study Design – Sampling 2 x per year – June/July and August/Sept Stream Habitat (LW, pool area, cover, substrate, gradient, etc.) Stream Habitat (LW, pool area, cover, substrate, gradient, etc.)

Buffer Is periphyton accrual affect by local light?

Fluorescein decay (ppb) Increased Light > Distance (m) Fluoroscein decay (Δppb) (more loss = more light) μg chl. a/cm 2 Is periphyton accrual affect by local light?

HJ Andrews Old growth vs Early mature. Periphyton Chl a (tiles) Periphyton Chl a (tiles) Macroinvertebrate biomass (surber sampler - 5 samples per reach) Macroinvertebrate biomass (surber sampler - 5 samples per reach) Total fish biomass Salamander biomass Fish batch marked by reach Total fish biomass Salamander biomass Fish batch marked by reach Light on the streambed (every 5 m) Light on the streambed (every 5 m) canopy cover (every 20 m) canopy cover (every 20 m) Temperature (data logged every 5 minutes at the upstream and downstream end of each reach) Temperature (data logged every 5 minutes at the upstream and downstream end of each reach) Basal area (5 20 m radius plots) In-stream measurements Riparian Forest Green Mountain Early mature – reference vs Early mature for future thinning Study Design – Sampling 2 x per year – June/July and August/Sept Stream Habitat (LW, pool area, cover, substrate, gradient, etc.) Stream Habitat (LW, pool area, cover, substrate, gradient, etc.)

upstreamdownstream FL loss X X T1T1 T2T2

upstreamdownstream FL loss X X T1T1 T2T2 Cooling through the reach Difference in stream temperature (C) Warming through the reach

upstreamdownstream FL loss X X T1T1 T2T2 Difference in stream temperature (C) Warming through the reach Cooling through the reach

upstreamdownstream FL loss X X T1T1 T2T2 X X T1T1 T2T2 Difference in stream temperature (C)

X X T1T1 T2T2 (old growth – second growth) Warmer at the end of the old-growth reach Warmer at the end of the second-growth reach

X X T1T1 T2T2 Warmer at the end of the old-growth reach Warmer at the end of the second-growth reach Difference in stream temperature (C) (old growth – second growth)

X X T1T1 T2T2 X X T1T1 T2T2 Difference in stream temperature (C) (old growth – second growth)

HJ Andrews Old growth vs Early mature. Periphyton Chl a (tiles) Periphyton Chl a (tiles) Macroinvertebrate biomass (surber sampler - 5 samples per reach) Macroinvertebrate biomass (surber sampler - 5 samples per reach) Total fish biomass Salamander biomass Fish batch marked by reach Total fish biomass Salamander biomass Fish batch marked by reach Light on the streambed (every 5 m) Light on the streambed (every 5 m) canopy cover (every 20 m) canopy cover (every 20 m) Temperature (data logged every 5 minutes at the upstream and downstream end of each reach) Temperature (data logged every 5 minutes at the upstream and downstream end of each reach) Basal area (5 20 m radius plots) In-stream measurements Riparian Forest Green Mountain Early mature – reference vs Early mature for future thinning Study Design – Sampling 2 x per year – June/July and August/Sept Stream Habitat (LW, pool area, cover, substrate, gradient, etc.) Stream Habitat (LW, pool area, cover, substrate, gradient, etc.)

% of reach area as pools MCT-W Old- growth Second- growth Chucksney Control Manip Loon Control Manip McRae (STREON) Old- growth Second- growth % Pool Area

MCT-W Old- growth Second- growth Chucksney Control Manip Loon Control Manip McRae (STREON) Old- growth Second- growth LW volume (m 3 *100m -1 ) Large Wood (LW) volume

HJ Andrews Old growth vs Early mature. Periphyton Chl a (tiles) Periphyton Chl a (tiles) Macroinvertebrate biomass (surber sampler - 5 samples per reach) Macroinvertebrate biomass (surber sampler - 5 samples per reach) Total fish biomass Salamander biomass Total fish biomass Salamander biomass Light on the streambed (every 5 m) Light on the streambed (every 5 m) canopy cover (every 20 m) canopy cover (every 20 m) Temperature (data logged every 5 minutes at the upstream and downstream end of each reach) Temperature (data logged every 5 minutes at the upstream and downstream end of each reach) Basal area (5 20 m radius plots) In-stream measurements Riparian Forest Green Mountain Early mature – reference vs Early mature for future thinning Study Design – Sampling 2 x per year – June/July and August/Sept Stream Habitat (LW, pool area, cover, substrate, gradient, etc.) Stream Habitat (LW, pool area, cover, substrate, gradient, etc.)

Biomass (g/m 2 ) Vertebrate Biomass Chucksney Control Manip Loon Control Manip MCT-W Old-growth Second- growth McRae (STREON) Old-growth Second- growth

Biomass (g/m 2 ) Vertebrate Biomass MCT-W Old-growth Second- growth Chucksney Control Manip Loon Control Manip McRae (STREON) Old-growth Second- growth

more wood & more vert. biomass more wood but less vert. biomass Less wood and less vert. biomass Less wood and more vert. biomass Relationships between habitat and stream biota Analysis conducted on the DIFFERENCES in each metric between reaches within a stream

Relationships between habitat and stream biota

more wood & more vert. biomass more wood but less vert. biomass Less wood and less vert. biomass Less wood and more vert. biomass Relationships between habitat and stream biota

more wood & more vert. biomass more wood but less vert. biomass Less wood and less vert. biomass Less wood and more vert. biomass

Relationships between habitat and stream biota

* Error bars indicate 2 standard errors of the mean (n=9, 12) (n=11, 14) (n=27, 21) (n=24, 41) P-Value: P-Value: P-Value: P-Value: 0.011

Loss of Fluorescein over 24 hrs Distance (m) (Upstream)(Downstream) Next Steps - Creating Canopy Gaps Loss of Fluorescein over 24 hrs

Next Steps - Creating Canopy Gaps

Next Steps - Filling out data set for paired reach study more wood & more vert. biomass more wood but less vert. biomass Less wood and less vert. biomass Less wood and more vert. biomass Kaylor et al. in Prep.

Next Steps - Filling out data set for paired reach study more wood & more vert. biomass more wood but less vert. biomass Less wood and less vert. biomass Less wood and more vert. biomass Kaylor et al. in Prep.

Thank you Acknowledgements Funding: CoF Forestry’s Fish and Wildlife Habitat in Managed Forests Research Program OSU’s Dept. of Fisheries and Wildlife Fieldwork and data collection: Matt Kaylor Brian VerWay Other intellectual contributions: Lina DeGrigorio Cheryl Friesen Stan Gregory Kathy Keable Julie Pett-Ridge Mark Shultz USFS/BLM fisheries research team Theresa Vallentine Randy Wildman