1. ORSANCO Biological Programs Extra-curricular Updates EMAP-GRE ORBFHP NRSA

2. EMAP-GRE Updates Draft report accepted June 2012 Final Report due December 2012  Series of publishable manuscripts Macroinvertebrate Multimetric Index  Including methods comparison Periphyton Multimetric Index Benthic Trawling Evaluation Water & Sediment Chemistry Gradient Identification MORFIn Development & Application Effects of Environmental Variables at Various Spatial Scales on the Biotic Condition of the Ohio River

3. Ohio River Basin Fish Habitat Partnership: Basin-wide Habitat Assessment

4. National Fish Habitat Action Partnership Mission Protect, restore and enhance the nation's fish and aquatic communities through partnerships that foster fish habitat conservation and improve the quality of life for the American people USFWS-led initiative which began in 2001 Modeled after 1980’s North American Waterfowl Management Plan

5. Ohio River Basin Fauna Fish – 340 species 40% of North American fauna 14 federally listed Mussels – 130 species 38 federally listed Water birds, Reptiles and Amphibians Miles C. Barnhart Marshall University

7. Steering Committee Permanent Seats (20) 11 Basin States  IL, IN, KY, OH, PA, WV, MD,NY, NC, TN, VA Federal Agencies  USDA, USACE, USEPA, USFS, USFWS, USOSM, USGS Regional Agencies  ORSANCO, TNC Rotating Seats (12) Not to exceed 3 from any of the following:  Environmental NGOs  Local Watershed Groups  Universities  Industry  Local Government  Concerned Citizens  Natural Resource Businesses Not to exceed 2 additional from any of the permanent seat agencies

8. The Ohio River Basin Fish Habitat Partnership focuses protection, restoration, and enhancement efforts on priority habitat for fish and mussels in the watersheds of the Ohio River Basin for the benefit of the public. Mission

9. 1. Focused on areas containing fish (game and nongame) and mussels…. 2. Watersheds are treated holistically…. 3.Conservation of the best areas…restoration where positive results can be expected….or both… 4.Sound science and measurement of results…. 5.Public support…. Guiding Principles Photo credit: Chris Barnhart Photo credit: Ohio River Foundation

11. Downstream Strategies & FHPs Create spatially-explicit habitat assessment models for each of the Midwestern FHPs Create an integrated GIS decision support tool Create a regional representation of habitat condition

12. Modeling Approach Landscape Predictor Data o Natural and Anthropogenic o Local vs. US Network vs. DS Network vs. Regional Stream or Lake Response Data o Environmental Data o Fish Data Assemblage Abundance Presence-Absence Index of Biotic Integrity Community Metrics Other Biota Model Results o Response variable predictions @ 1:100K SLW scale o Predictor variable importance weightings o Stressor-Response functions o Estimates of model uncertainty Post-Modeling Results o Cumulative Natural Habitat Quality Index (CHQI) o Cumulative Anthropogenic Stressor Index (CASI) o CHQI and CASI accumulated from 1:100K SLW up to HUC12. INPUTOUTPUT BOOSTED REGRESSION TREES

13. Local vs. Network vs. Regional Network area draining to focal SLW (network variable) Local area draining to focal SLW (local variable ) Dam downstream of SLW (regional variable) Ecoregion (regional variable) Local area draining to focal SLW (local variable)

14. Predictor Variables Anthropogenic Land use/Land cover (’06) Agriculture Census US Census TIGER Roads Surface/Ground Water Use National Inventory of Dams Mines/Mineral Plants Superfund Sites Toxic Release Inventory NPDES Riparian Disturbance Natural Stream Order/Drainage Area Omernik Ecoregions National Wetland Inventory National Geologic Data Soil Data Elevation Climate Data Base Flow Index

15. Landscape map examples Air TemperatureElevation Impervious Surfaces Agriculture

16. Response Variables (models) 1. Intolerant Mussels Presence/Absence 2. Smallmouth Bass P/A 3. Great River Species P/A 4. Small Streams Signature Fish Index 5. River, Smallmouth, & Shorthead Redhorse P/A 6. Percent Intolerant Individuals (Fish) 7. Modified Index of Centers of Diversity (Fish)

18. Smallmouth Bass Streams IndexGreat River Fish Intolerant Fish Intolerant MusselsRedhorse MICD

19. Final Priority Areas

20. Project Selection Criteria

21. Targeting Watershed Groups

22. Next Steps Refine predictor variable dataset Refine fish & mussel databases Develop new response variables  Fish & macroinvertebrate IBI scores? Conduct new assessments at smaller scales  State? HUC 8? HUC 12?