1. Analytical Needs What is Available What is Needed G.P. Patil
Atlantic Slop Consortium: All-Hands Meeting Harpers Ferry, WV September 2004
Analytical Needs
What is Available
What is Needed
G.P. Patil

2. Overall Goals and Objectives Barbara Levinson International Journal of Remote Sensing Special Issue on Remote Sensing and GIS for Ecosystem Analysis
EPA ORD Ecosystem Protection Program
Provide scientific understanding to measure, model, maintain, and/or restore, at multiple scales,
the integrity and sustainability of highly valued ecosystem now and in the future
EPA STAR EaGLe Program
Develop new widely applicable indicators of integrity and sustainability for specific ecological entities and then test their applicability across regions
Incorporation of these indicators into long-term monitoring programs is the desired outcome.

3. Barbara Levinson – Continued
Develop indicators/ procedures useful for evaluating the health/condition for important coastal natural resources, e.g., lakes, streams, coastal wetlands, etc.
Develop indicators, indices, procedures for evaluating the integrated condition of multiple resources/ ecosystem types, e.g., bird community index reflecting the combined terrestrial and aquatic community within a watershed
Develop landscape measures that characterize landscape attributes and serve as quantitative indicators of a range of environmental endpoints, such as, water quality or watershed quality.
Develop nested suites of indicators that can both quantify the health/ condition of a resource and identify its primary stressors across a range of scales

4. Atlantic Slope Consortium: A Vision Statement Robert Brooks And Denice Wardrop
Using a universe of watersheds, covering a range of social choices, we ask two questions:
How “good” can the environment be, given those social choices?
What is the intellectual model of condition within those choices, i.e., what are the causes of condition and what are the steps for improvement?
Accomplish within the group dynamics spirit of : form, storm, reform, norm, perform, and inform (Kent Thornton).

5. The Concept of Nodes
A circle with landscape properties attributable to a point
Where? At stream convergences
Incorporates description of stream complexity
More circles in areas of complex drainage

7. D.H. Wardrop, J.A. Bishop, G.P. Patil, W. Myers, M. Easterling, and
Use of Landscape and Land Use Parameters for Classification and Characterization of Watersheds in the Mid-Atlantic across Five Physiographic Provinces
D.H. Wardrop, J.A. Bishop, G.P. Patil, W. Myers, M. Easterling, and
R.P. Brooks

9. Resulting Process Informative Define Watershed Types Representative
Compile
Frequency
Distributions
Consensus
Designate
Sampling
Design
Individual Judgement
Distribute
Candidate
Watersheds

11. Ternary Plot Description
Require a fuller description of departure from reference than “disturbed”
Describes land use via the three main land cover types
Can be used at any spatial extent (as can land cover %)

13. Nodal Constellations and Variance
Many ways to be a “moderately” disturbed watershed
Addresses disparity of land covers within a watershed; effective distances may be different
Scaling issues can be explored at a future date

14. Median Slope
Rough indicator of connection between land use and aquatic resources
Surrogate for ability to produce stress; e.g., steep slopes have more rapid runoff, minimal contact time for remediation and/or impact
Forested watersheds occur on both steep and low slopes, changing amount of stress produced, as well as susceptibility to regional stressors (e.g., atmospheric deposition)

15. Factors for Classifying Watersheds
% Land use (forested, agricultural, urban) in HUC 14 watershed
% Land use (forested, agricultural, urban) in 1-km radius node
Nodal variance
Median slope

16. Clustering Analysis should follow vision statement
Clustered first on land uses (social choices) and slope (susceptibility of resource to land use)
“Binned” on research question (many ways to be a mixed watershed)
Other “binning” possible

17. High Forest Low Forest, High Ag Moderate Forest Moderate Ag High Urban
High Slope
Low Slope
Low Slope
Moderate Ag
High Urban
Moderate Slope
Low Slope
High Nodal Var
Low Nodal Var

18. Results Six watershed classes identified: Forested, high slope
Forested, low slope
Agricultural
Urban
Mixed, low nodal variance
Mixed, high nodal variance

20. Does it agree with process?
Informative: Six watershed categories were presented “representing a range of social choices”
Representative: Frequency distributions were evaluated
Consensus: Buy-in at meeting
Individual Judgement: Watersheds were double and triple-picked

21. Lessons Learned Be true to the project vision statement!
Future lines of investigation:
How do we articulate historical paths on ternary plots?
Are mixed land cover watersheds with high nodal variance indicative of a lack of planning efforts?

22. Ecohealth Special Issue On Wetland Indicators Guest Editors: Rob Brooks And G P Patil -A Vision For The Special Issue-
Investigators developing and testing ecological indicators on the condition of coastal or inland wetlands are invited to submit original manuscripts. Papers fostering the integration of condition assessments across various types of aquatic habitats or “waters”, and addressing biological, chemical, and physical dimensions, are encouraged. With this issue, we wish to demonstrate the next generation of ecological indicators is ready for use in wetlands and related habitats.
This issue will make a significant contribution to the literature.
Final date for receipt of manuscripts-Sep peer review and editing Oct-Dec 2004, publication in 2005.