Andrew C. Rehn

Comparisons of targeted-riffle and reach-wide benthic macroinvertebrate samples: implications for data sharing in stream-condition assessments

Abstract Recent comparisons of benthic macroinvertebrate (BMI) sampling protocols have shown that samples collected from different habitat types generally produce consistent stream classifications and assessments. However, these comparisons usually have not included biological endpoints used by monitoring agencies, such as multimetric indices (e.g., benthic index of biotic integrity [B-IBI]) or observed-to-expected (O/E) indices of taxonomic completeness, as target variables, and estimates of method precision are rarely provided. Targeted-riffle (TR) and reach-wide (RW) benthic samples have been collected at thousands of sites across the western USA, but little guidance is available for understanding: 1) the extent to which raw data sets can be combined in regional or large-scale analyses, 2) the degree of precision afforded by each method, or 3) the efficacy of cross-application of biological indicators derived from one sample type to the other. To address these issues, we used data from 193 sites in California where the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) collected the 2 samples side by side. We also conducted a separate study wherein 3 replicates of each sample type were collected from 15 streams to estimate minimum detectable difference (MDD) as a measure of each methods precision. Metrics calculated from TR and RW samples showed similar dose–response relationships to stressor gradients and similar raw scoring ranges. Biological indices (B-IBI, O/E0, and O/E50) derived from RW samples were more precise than those derived from TR samples, but precision differences were not substantial. On average, pairwise differences in any index between TR and RW sample types were much less than the MDD associated with either sampling method. We observed a weak but consistent bias toward higher O/E50 scores from TR samples than from RW samples at the highest elevations and in the largest watersheds. Broad-scale condition assessments were nearly identical when B-IBI and O/E0 were used as endpoints, and assessments based on O/E50 were only slightly less similar. Our analyses indicate that raw data sets and biological indicators derived from TR and RW samples may be generally interchangeable when used in ambient biomonitoring programs.

Bioassessment in complex environments: designing an index for consistent meaning in different settings

Regions with great natural environmental complexity present a challenge for attaining 2 key properties of an ideal bioassessment index: 1) index scores anchored to a benchmark of biological expectation that is appropriate for the range of natural environmental conditions at each assessment site, and 2) deviation from the reference benchmark measured equivalently in all settings so that a given index score has the same ecological meaning across the entire region of interest. These properties are particularly important for regulatory applications like biological criteria where errors or inconsistency in estimating site-specific reference condition or deviation from it can lead to management actions with significant financial and resource-protection consequences. We developed an index based on benthic macroinvertebrates for California, USA, a region with great environmental heterogeneity. We evaluated index performance (accuracy, precision, responsiveness, and sensitivity) throughout the region to determine if scores provide equivalent ecological meaning in different settings. Consistent performance across environmental settings was improved by 3 key elements of our approach: 1) use of a large reference data set that represents virtually all of the range of natural gradients in the region, 2) development of predictive models that account for the effects of natural gradients on biological assemblages, and 3) combination of 2 indices of biological condition (a ratio of observed-to-expected taxa [O/E] and a predictive multimetric index [pMMI]) into a single index (the California Stream Condition Index [CSCI]). Evaluation of index performance across broad environmental gradients provides essential information when assessing the suitability of the index for regulatory applications in diverse regions.

Evaluating the adequacy of a reference-site pool for ecological assessments in environmentally complex regions

Many advances in the field of bioassessment have focused on approaches for objectively selecting the pool of reference sites used to establish expectations for healthy waterbodies, but little emphasis has been placed on ways to evaluate the suitability of the reference-site pool for its intended applications (e.g., compliance assessment vs ambient monitoring). These evaluations are critical because an inadequately evaluated reference pool may bias assessments in some settings. We present an approach for evaluating the adequacy of a reference-site pool for supporting biotic-index development in environmentally heterogeneous and pervasively altered regions. We followed common approaches for selecting sites with low levels of anthropogenic stress to screen 1985 candidate stream reaches to create a pool of 590 reference sites for assessing the biological integrity of streams in California, USA. We assessed the resulting pool of reference sites against 2 performance criteria. First, we evaluated how well the reference-site pool represented the range of natural gradients present in the entire population of streams as estimated by sites sampled through probabilistic surveys. Second, we evaluated the degree to which we were successful in rejecting sites influenced by anthropogenic stress by comparing biological metric scores at reference sites with the most vs fewest potential sources of stress. Using this approach, we established a reference-site pool with low levels of human-associated stress and broad coverage of environmental heterogeneity. This approach should be widely applicable and customizable to particular regional or programmatic needs.

Patterns of Freshwater Species Richness, Endemism, and Vulnerability in California.

The ranges and abundances of species that depend on freshwater habitats are declining worldwide. Efforts to counteract those trends are often hampered by a lack of information about species distribution and conservation status and are often strongly biased toward a few well-studied groups. We identified the 3,906 vascular plants, macroinvertebrates, and vertebrates native to California, USA, that depend on fresh water for at least one stage of their life history. We evaluated the conservation status for these taxa using existing government and non-governmental organization assessments (e.g., endangered species act, NatureServe), created a spatial database of locality observations or distribution information from ~400 data sources, and mapped patterns of richness, endemism, and vulnerability. Although nearly half of all taxa with conservation status (n = 1,939) are vulnerable to extinction, only 114 (6%) of those vulnerable taxa have a legal mandate for protection in the form of formal inclusion on a state or federal endangered species list. Endemic taxa are at greater risk than non-endemics, with 90% of the 927 endemic taxa vulnerable to extinction. Records with spatial data were available for a total of 2,276 species (61%). The patterns of species richness differ depending on the taxonomic group analyzed, but are similar across taxonomic level. No particular taxonomic group represents an umbrella for all species, but hotspots of high richness for listed species cover 40% of the hotspots for all other species and 58% of the hotspots for vulnerable freshwater species. By mapping freshwater species hotspots we show locations that represent the top priority for conservation action in the state. This study identifies opportunities to fill gaps in the evaluation of conservation status for freshwater taxa in California, to address the lack of occurrence information for nearly 40% of freshwater taxa and nearly 40% of watersheds in the state, and to implement adequate protections for freshwater taxa where they are currently lacking.

A freshwater conservation blueprint for California: prioritizing watersheds for freshwater biodiversity

Conservation scientists have adapted conservation planning principles designed for protection of habitats ranging from terrestrial to freshwater ecosystems. We applied current approaches in conservation planning to prioritize California watersheds for management of biodiversity. For all watersheds, we compiled data on the presence/absence of herpetofauna and fishes; observations of freshwater-dependent mammals, selected invertebrates, and plants; maps of freshwater habitat types; measures of habitat condition and vulnerability; and current management status. We analyzed species-distribution data to identify areas of high freshwater conservation value that optimized representation of target taxa on the landscape and leveraged existing protected areas. The resulting priority network encompasses 34% of the area of California and includes ≥10% of the geographic range for all target taxa. High-value watersheds supported nontarget freshwater taxa and habitats, and focusing on target taxa may provide broad conservation value. Most of the priority conservation network occurs on public lands (69% by area), and 46% overlaps with protected areas already managed for biodiversity. A significant proportion of the network area is on private land and underscores the value of programs that incentivize landowners to manage freshwater species and habitats. The priority conservation areas encompass more freshwater habitats/ha than existing protected areas. Land use (agriculture and urbanization), altered fire regimes, nonnative fish communities, and flow impairment are the most important threats to freshwater habitat in the priority network, whereas factors associated with changing climate are the key drivers of habitat vulnerability. Our study is a guide to a comprehensive approach to freshwater conservation currently lacking in California. Conservation resources are often limited, so prioritization tools are valuable assets to land and water managers.

A Large-Scale, Multiagency Approach to Defining a Reference Network for Pacific Northwest Streams

Aquatic monitoring programs vary widely in objectives and design. However, each program faces the unifying challenge of assessing conditions and quantifying reasonable expectations for measured indicators. A common approach for setting resource expectations is to define reference conditions that represent areas of least human disturbance or most natural state of a resource characterized by the range of natural variability across a region of interest. Identification of reference sites often relies heavily on professional judgment, resulting in varying and unrepeatable methods. Standardized methods for data collection, site characterization, and reference site selection facilitate greater cooperation among assessment programs and development of assessment tools that are readily shareable and comparable. We illustrate an example that can serve the broader global monitoring community on how to create a consistent and transparent reference network for multiple stream resource agencies. We provide a case study that offers a simple example of how reference sites can be used, at the landscape level, to link upslope management practices to a specific in-channel response. We found management practices, particularly areas with high road densities, have more fine sediments than areas with fewer roads. While this example uses data from only one of the partner agencies, if data were collected in a similar manner they can be combined and create a larger, more robust dataset. We hope that this starts a dialog regarding more standardized ways through inter-agency collaborations to evaluate data. Creating more consistency in physical and biological field protocols will increase the ability to share data.