Sheldon designing ehmp
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Sheldon designing ehmp

on

  • 920 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
920
Views on SlideShare
751
Embed Views
169

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0

3 Embeds 169

http://www.watercentre.org 138
http://watercentre.org 30
http://internationalwatercentre.org 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Sheldon designing ehmp Sheldon designing ehmp Document Transcript

  • Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program (EHMP) for streams & rivers in SE Queensland, Australia?Fran SheldonAustralian Rivers Institute, Griffith University Lecture Outline • Background to the region and the Healthy Waterways Partnership • Designing the Monitoring Program – Focus on the process used to develop a cost-effective monitoring program • Linking monitoring and restoration – Echidna Creek • Using the data to explore long-term trends • The Program in 2009 – where to now 2 1
  • Background to the study region 15 major catchments 22,353 km2 3Importance of the region’s waterways:• High conservation signficance (Ramsar)• Major commercial and recreational fisheries• Water supply (urban and rural)• Recreation and transport 4 2
  • The human footprint: • 20% of original vegetation remains - less adjacent to streams • Altered hydrology - dams & weirs • Declining water quality (nutrients & sediment) • Declines in aquatic diversity 1881 1947 1991 <30 5 30-250 250-5,000 Persons km-2 www.healthywaterways.org 6 3
  • Having a common vision:“South-east Queensland’s catchments and waterways will, by 2020, be healthy living ecosystems supporting the livelihoods and lifestyles of people in South-east Queensland and will be managed in collaboration between community, government and industry.” 7Achieving the vision:• Set values that reflect the vision• Measurable water quality objectives that protect the values• Management actions to achieve these objectives 8 4
  • A Staged Approach: Stage 2- Moreton Bay On-going Partnership 1994-1997 1997-1999 1999-2001 2001-2004 2004-2007 2007-2009 Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Water Land to Sustainable Scoping Moreton Catchments Management Sea Regions BayStrategy Developed Water Quality Management StrategyResearch Fate, transport & impacts of sediments nutrients & toxicants in Moreton Bay Designed Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program;Monitoring produced environmental monitoring report cards.Funding Councils, State Government & NHT 9 Stage 3 - Focus on Catchments On-going Partnership 1994-1997 1997-1999 1999-2001 2001-2004 2004-2007 2007-2009 Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Water Land to Sustainable Scoping Moreton Catchments Management Sea Regions Bay Revised Strategy; Riparian rehabilitation methods andStrategy priorities setResearch Source of sediments and nutrients identified; In- stream processes studied, Lyngbya investigations Implemented Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program;Monitoring Designed freshwater monitoring program Councils, State Government & NHT, ARC, CRCsFunding ($17 Million over 3 years) 10 5
  • Aim of DIBM3To develop a cost-effective, coordinated ecosystemhealth monitoring program (EHMP) for freshwaters ofthe region that is able to measure and report on currentand future changes in ecological health. 11 Identify potential DevelopPHASE 1 Conceptual models The indicators Is indicator process proven? Catchment-scale No Yes classification Pilot studies Does Yes Major Review of indicator fieldPHASE 2 work? classification study No No Does Yes Develop water quality Drop indicator indicator guidelines perform? Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program 12 6
  • ECOSYSTEM PROCESSES BIOLOGICAL PATTERNS 1 Amino acids in algae 28 Genetic structure of population 2 Benthic metabolism 29 Structure and function of fish communities Tracking sewage Nitrogen using δ N 15 3 30 Structure and function of in-stream habitat Tracking catchment disturbance using δ N 15 4 31 Structure and function of macrophyte communities 13 5 Tracking Carbon using C 32 Structure and function of riparian vegetation 6 Food web structure 33 Structure and function of invertebrate communities 7 Nitrogen cycling - denitrification 34 Structure of benthic microbial community 8 Filamentous algae – nutrient or shade limitation 35 Structure and function of benthic algal community 9 Filamentous algae – using tiles as substrate 36 Structure and function of diatom community 10 Chlorophyll a - as measure of productivity 37 Structure and function of frog community 11 Measures of resilience 38 Blue-green algae – presence/absence 12 Microbial processing in sediments 39 Macrophyte condition 13 Depth of biological activity in sediments 40 Fish condition / Fish kills 14 Macrophyte biomass measure of productivity 41 Recreational fish catch & extent of fish stocking 42 Health and presence of “megafauna” (eg. platypus) HUMAN HEALTH 43 Presence of exotic species 15 Coliform counts 44 Asymmetry / high rates of deformities 16 Chryptosporidium counts 45 Bio-accumulation 17 Giardia counts WATER PHYSICO-CHEMISTRY DIRECT MEASURES OF DISTURBANCE 46 Nutrient concentrations 18 Riparian canopy – Hemiphot assessment 47 Nutrient flux from sediments 19 Extraction: un/licenced 48 Colour 20 Weirs: presence and effects 49 Salinity/conductivity 21 Hydrological deviation 50 Temperature 22 Extent of flow regulation 51 Dissolved oxygen – snapshot measures 23 Assessments of channel integrity 52 Dissolved oxygen – diel measures 24 Pins for measuring erosion 53 Turbidity 25 Floodplain area 54 Pesticides – snapshot measures 26 Presence of rubbish in urban drains 55 Pesticides – integrative measures 27 Encroachment of terrestrial vegetation 56 Alkalinity - ionic composition 13 Identify potential DevelopPHASE 1 Conceptual models The indicators Is indicator process proven? Catchment-scale No Yes classification Pilot studies Does Yes Major Review of indicator fieldPHASE 2 work? classification study No No Does Yes Develop water quality Drop indicator indicator guidelines perform? Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program 14 7
  • Reduced list of indicators ECOSYSTEM PROCESSES BIOLOGICAL PATTERNS 1 Amino acids in algae 28 Genetic structure of population 2 Benthic metabolism 29 Structure and function of fish communities Tracking sewage Nitrogen using δ N 15 3 30 Structure and function of in-stream habitat Tracking catchment disturbance using δ N 15 4 31 Structure and function of macrophyte communities 13 5 Tracking Carbon using C 32 Structure and function of riparian vegetation 6 Food web structure 33 Structure and function of invertebrate communities 7 Nitrogen cycling - denitrification 34 Structure of benthic microbial community 8 Filamentous algae – nutrient or shade limitation 35 Structure and function of benthic algal community 9 Filamentous algae – using tiles as substrate 36 Structure and function of diatom community 10 Chlorophyll a - as measure of productivity 37 Structure and function of frog community 11 Measures of resilience 38 Blue-green algae – presence/absence 12 Microbial processing in sediments 39 Macrophyte condition 13 Depth of biological activity in sediments 40 Fish condition / Fish kills 14 Macrophyte biomass measure of productivity 41 Recreational fish catch & extent of fish stocking 42 Health and presence of “megafauna” (eg. platypus) HUMAN HEALTH 43 Presence of exotic species 15 Coliform counts 44 Asymmetry / high rates of deformities 16 Chryptosporidium counts 45 Bio-accumulation 17 Giardia counts WATER PHYSICO-CHEMISTRY DIRECT MEASURES OF DISTURBANCE 46 Nutrient concentrations 18 Riparian canopy – Hemiphot assessment 47 Nutrient flux from sediments 19 Extraction: un/licenced 48 Colour 20 Weirs: presence and effects 49 Salinity/conductivity 21 Hydrological deviation 50 Temperature 22 Extent of flow regulation 51 Dissolved oxygen – snapshot measures 23 Assessments of channel integrity 52 Dissolved oxygen – diel measures 24 Pins for measuring erosion 53 Turbidity 25 Floodplain area 54 Pesticides – snapshot measures 26 Presence of rubbish in urban drains 55 Pesticides – integrative measures 27 Encroachment of terrestrial vegetation 56 Alkalinity - ionic composition 15Indicators trialed in pilot studies• Fish as bioindicators• Nutrient flux• Denitrification• Benthic metabolism• Tiles for algal growth• Microbes as bioindicators• Amino acid composition of plants field trial 16 8
  • Identify potential Develop PHASE 1 Conceptual models The indicators Is indicator process proven? Catchment-scale No Yes classification Pilot studies Does Yes Major Review of indicator field PHASE 2 work? classification study No No Does Yes Develop water quality Drop indicator indicator guidelines perform? Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program 17 Ecosystem processes Minimally Impacted Site Task: Conceptual models• Show how healthy ecosystems function Nutrients GPP R24 Sediment• Show how they respond to human SEQRWQMS 2001 disturbance Highly Impacted Site• Indicate critical components in the ecosystem to target for monitoring N and P GPP R 24 Sediment• Highlight appropriate management actions for rehabilitation SEQRWQMS 2001 18 9
  • Identify potential DevelopPHASE 1 Conceptual models The indicators Is indicator process proven? Catchment-scale No Yes classification Pilot studies Does Yes Major Review of indicator fieldPHASE 2 work? classification study No No Does Yes Develop water quality Drop indicator indicator guidelines perform? Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program 19Task: Classification of SEQ rivers To identify classes of freshwaters 1. Ensure comparisons are valid • Compare apples with apples • Develop water quality guidelines 2. Assist in site selection • Stratify sites across region 20 10
  • ClassificationClassification of south eastQueensland streams Based on 4 variables – rainfall – altitude – slope – stream size 4 groups – Upland (red) – Lowland (blue) – South Coastal (green) – North Coastal (light blue) 21 Identify potential DevelopPHASE 1 Conceptual models The indicators Is indicator process proven? Catchment-scale No Yes classification Pilot studies Does Yes Major Review of indicator fieldPHASE 2 work? classification study No No Does Yes Develop water quality Drop indicator indicator guidelines perform? Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program 22 11
  • Major field trial• Disturbance Gradient Approach to detecting impact •Define a disturbance gradient• Objective comparisons - at same sites and times 23 Catchment 1. Ag. Landuse - % Cleared - % Cropping - % Grazing Both 2. Water chemistry 3. Flow variables Reach 4. Riparian condition 5. In-stream habitat 6. Channel condition 24 12
  • Field trialEcological health indicator response to disturbance Reference values Low High Disturbance gradient 25Ecological health indicator Low High Disturbance gradient 26 13
  • Reference TestEach indicatorassessed• same equipment• same operators• same place• same time• same analysis 27 14
  • Results of major field trial 1 Macroinvertebrates 2 Fish 3 Water chemistry 4 Metabolism 5 Nutrients 1Standardised analysis protocol Disturbance category• Allows direct comparison of indicators Riparian conditions % In-stream habitat %• Generalised linear modelling approach Channel condition % Water chemistry % Approximate r2 %• Allows partitioning of variance Flow related % Landuse % % Exotic individuals 87 12 0 14 14 35 12 % Native Species 73 11 13 17 13 17 2N. Armstrong Fish assemblage O/E 50 65 11 12 0 11 31 0 2 1
  • Macroinvertebrates 18 indices assessed Associated primarily with Landuse & Riparian condition 6 indices proposed for inclusion in EHMP Richness (r2 = 58%) PET (r2 = 71%) x 2 habitats SIGNAL (r 2 = 67%) 3Fish9 indices assessed Associated primarily with in-stream habitat 3 indices proposed for inclusion in EHMP % of native species expected (r2 = 73%) Fish assemblage O/E (r2 = 65%) % exotic individuals (r2 = 87%) 4 2
  • Water Quality 10 9 DO (mg/l) 8 27 indices assessed 7 6 MIDNIGHT MIDDAY Associated primarily with Landuse & Channel condition5 indices proposed for inclusion in EHMP Diel ∆ Temperature (includes max/min) (r2 = 60%) Diel ∆ DO (includes max/min) (r2 = 82%) pH (r2 = 46%); Alkalinity (r2 = 52%) Conductivity (r 2 = 60%) 5Metabolism 5 indices assessed Associated primarily with water chemistry & riparian condition 3 indices proposed for inclusion in EHMP GPP (r2 = 89%) R24 (r2 = 91%) δ13C (r2 = 92%) 6 3
  • Nutrient cycling 9 indices assessed Associated primarily with water chemistry 2 indicators proposed for inclusion in EHMP Algal bioassay (mean r2 = 64%) δ15N - plants (r2 = 79%) 7Reducing redundancy • Within indicator types • Between indicator types • Consider level of training required 8 4
  • Redundancy within groups a 10 r2 = 0.59 b 70 r2 = 0.64 9 60 SIGNA L Pool 8 50 pH 7 40 6 5 30 4 20 0 100 200 300 400 500 20 30 40 50 60 70 Alkalinity SIGNAL Edge c 140 r2 = 0.74 d 2000 r2 = 0.47 120 1500 FISH Ric hnes s 100 R24 Cobble 80 1000 60 40 500 20 0 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 0 1000 2000 3000 FISH O/E GPP cobble 9Redundancy between groups INDICATORS Physical/chemical Productivity 1 Temperature change 15 GPP 2 DO change 16 R24 1.7 4 Conductivity 17 del13C 5 pH 11 Nutrients Invertebrates 1 C 18 del15N B 4 8 Edge PET 5 9 Edge Signal 19 Bioassay control 8 20 Bioassay N Vector 2 9 11 Edge richness 2 21 Bioassay P Fish 22 Bioassay NP 0.0 16 15 A 18 12 O/E 19 14 D 13 Exotics 21 17 13 14 Richness 20 12 E F 22 DISTURBANCES A - Chemistry B - Landuse -1.7 C - Flow variables D - Channel condition E - Riparian condition F - Habitat -1.7 0.0 1.7 Vector 1 10 5
  • Reporting ecosystem health 11Disturbed site - Petrie Creek, Nambour Fish InvertebratesNutrients Phys/chem MetabolismUndisturbed site - Back Creek near Canungra 12 6
  • EHMPSites 13 14 7
  • 15 8