1 / 26

Ecological Relationships in Small Streams: Normative Flow Studies in King County

This project aims to analyze the relationships between flow rates and ecological conditions in small streams within King County. Using biology and hydrology data, the study evaluates the effects of management actions on stream ecology, focusing on salmon conservation and habitat structure. Various approaches are utilized, such as indicator-based models, to inform management decisions. Preliminary findings show significant correlations between hydrology metrics and biological indicators, indicating potential for further research on disturbance and resilience. Next steps include validating relationships with additional data and summarizing findings for management guidance.

pinto
Download Presentation

Ecological Relationships in Small Streams: Normative Flow Studies in King County

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Normative Flow Studies Small Streams Biology-Hydrology Analyses King County DNRP/Parametrix

  2. Project Goals • Analytical and decision tools for managers • Understand relationships: flows ecological condition • Evaluate effects: management actions  flows ecology King County DNRP/Parametrix

  3. Issues/Challenges - Science Arrows indicate relationships that are important to the technical questions at hand. The weight of the arrows indicates the degree of this project’s focus on the indicated relationship – not their overall importance or the merit of studying them in a different project. Human Actions Habitat Structure Magnitude Biology e.g., salmon conservation Frequency FlowRegime Duration Seasonality Rate of Change WaterQuality Biological Interactions Energy Flow King County DNRP/Parametrix

  4. Several Possible Approaches…. • Indicator-based approach – inform management Conceptual Model Inform Management Actions Define Metrics to Describe System Condition Test Metrics

  5. Metric Relationships Indicator Response Biology Metric (receptor) Hydrology Metric (Stressor)

  6. Linking Biology and Hydrology • Watersheds with both data types • Urbanization gradient • Pair biology and hydrology • “Subbasins “ • Distinct hydrology • One or more BIBI sites • Small data set King County DNRP/Parametrix

  7. Available Data: Hydrology • Few long term gauge records • Modeled flow data (HSPF) available for some watersheds • Developed flow for 50 years • Original forested land cover - Baseline • Current land cover (1995/1998) - Scenario • Computed metrics for both conditions • M, D, F, T, rates of change King County DNRP/Parametrix

  8. Available Data: Biology • Macroinvertebrate data • Raw data for Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity (BIBI) • BIBI - general indicator of ecosystem integrity • Not designed to assess effects of flow • Only “calibrated” for 2nd and 4th order streams • No long term records (1995-2001 longest period) • Tested BIBI metrics plus other life history/richness metrics King County DNRP/Parametrix

  9. King County DNRP/Parametrix

  10. Issaquah (8/35;34) Bear/Evans (19/63;51) Little Bear (5/18) Swamp (7/12;11) Madsen (2/6;2) Miller (1/0) Thornton (5/15/9) Sample size = 125 Working Biological Data Set King County DNRP/Parametrix

  11. Example Hydrograph King County DNRP/Parametrix

  12. Forested Rise Count vs. Current Rise Count Non-urbanized Watershed Urbanized Watershed King County DNRP/Parametrix

  13. King County DNRP/Parametrix

  14. King County DNRP/Parametrix

  15. BIBI Score vs. Q2:Q10 in sites with similar local land cover (within 100m of BIBI site) King County DNRP/Parametrix

  16. Canonical Discriminant Functions Annual Ratio Hydrology Metrics normalized 3.0 2.0 1.0 Function 2 0.0 BIBI group Group Centroids -1.0 35 - max -2.0 20 - 35 -3.0 min - 20 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 Function 1 35 - max min - 20 20 - 35 King County DNRP/Parametrix

  17. Uni+semi voltine taxa groups Func1: longer LPD, runoff duration, and decreased Q2:Q10, LPC, HPR, Power, FC, & reversals King County DNRP/Parametrix

  18. Func1: increased LPD, later onset fall flows and later date annual min, & lower Q2:Q10, fewer LPC and fewer reversals King County DNRP/Parametrix

  19. Length of High Pulse Period vs. BIBI Groups King County DNRP/Parametrix

  20. Time (in days) Between Low Pulse Events vs. BIBI Groups King County DNRP/Parametrix

  21. Number of Low Pulse Events/Yr vs. BIBI Groups King County DNRP/Parametrix

  22. Ratio of current 2-yr discharge to historic 10-yr discharge vs. BIBI groups King County DNRP/Parametrix

  23. Stream Power Q2:Q10 LP/HP counts, duration, range Onset fall flows % time above 2-yr baseflow Date minimum flow Runoff event counts Runoff event duration Reversals Potential Hydrology Indicators King County DNRP/Parametrix

  24. Conclusions King County DNRP/Parametrix

  25. Relationships between biology and hydrology metrics • ‘Worst’ and ‘best’ biological sites can be separated based on hydrology metrics • Life history and richness metrics significantly correlated with specific hydrology metrics • Measures of hydrologic ‘disturbance’ and biological resistance/resilience to disturbance may be most productive King County DNRP/Parametrix

  26. Next Steps • Document analyses/report • Validate relationships with separate data set(s) • Test relationships with other biological data (e.g., fish) • Summarize findings for managers – what general guidance can be derived from preliminary analyses? King County DNRP/Parametrix

More Related