Literature DB >> 24390081

Riverine threat indices to assess watershed condition and identify primary management capacity of agriculture natural resource management agencies.

Jeffrey D Fore1, Scott P Sowa, David L Galat, Gust M Annis, David D Diamond, Charles Rewa.   

Abstract

Managers can improve conservation of lotic systems over large geographies if they have tools to assess total watershed conditions for individual stream segments and can identify segments where conservation practices are most likely to be successful (i.e., primary management capacity). The goal of this research was to develop a suite of threat indices to help agriculture resource management agencies select and prioritize watersheds across Missouri River basin in which to implement agriculture conservation practices. We quantified watershed percentages or densities of 17 threat metrics that represent major sources of ecological stress to stream communities into five threat indices: agriculture, urban, point-source pollution, infrastructure, and all non-agriculture threats. We identified stream segments where agriculture management agencies had primary management capacity. Agriculture watershed condition differed by ecoregion and considerable local variation was observed among stream segments in ecoregions of high agriculture threats. Stream segments with high non-agriculture threats were most concentrated near urban areas, but showed high local variability. 60 % of stream segments in the basin were classified as under U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) primary management capacity and most segments were in regions of high agricultural threats. NRCS primary management capacity was locally variable which highlights the importance of assessing total watershed condition for multiple threats. Our threat indices can be used by agriculture resource management agencies to prioritize conservation actions and investments based on: (a) relative severity of all threats, (b) relative severity of agricultural threats, and (c) and degree of primary management capacity.

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24390081     DOI: 10.1007/s00267-013-0222-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Manage        ISSN: 0364-152X            Impact factor:   3.266


  6 in total

1.  Impacts of urbanization on stream habitat and fish across multiple spatial scales.

Authors:  L Wang; J Lyons; P Kanehl; R Bannerman
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Integrating human impacts and ecological integrity into a risk-based protocol for conservation planning.

Authors:  Kimberly M Mattson; Paul L Angermeier
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2006-11-22       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  Integrated measures of anthropogenic stress in the U.S. Great lakes basin.

Authors:  Nicholas P Danz; Gerald J Niemi; Ronald R Regal; Tom Hollenhorst; Lucinda B Johnson; JoAnn M Hanowski; Richard P Axler; Jan J H Ciborowski; Thomas Hrabik; Valerie J Brady; John R Kelly; John A Morrice; John C Brazner; Robert W Howe; Carol A Johnston; George E Host
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2007-03-23       Impact factor: 3.266

4.  Homogenization of regional river dynamics by dams and global biodiversity implications.

Authors:  N Leroy Poff; Julian D Olden; David M Merritt; David M Pepin
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2007-03-12       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  PROFILE: Hungry Water: Effects of Dams and Gravel Mining on River Channels

Authors: 
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 3.266

6.  The influence of urban density and drainage infrastructure on the concentrations and loads of pollutants in small streams.

Authors:  Belinda E Hatt; Tim D Fletcher; Christopher J Walsh; Sally L Taylor
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2004-05-28       Impact factor: 3.266

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.