April J. Markiewicz
Western Washington University
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by April J. Markiewicz.
Human and Ecological Risk Assessment | 2004
Wayne G. Landis; P. Bruce Duncan; Emily Hart Hayes; April J. Markiewicz; Jill F. Thomas
ABSTRACT The Pacific herring stock that spawns at Cherry Point, northwest of Bellingham, WA, has undergone a dramatic decline in the last 20 years. The population decline corresponds with a collapse of the age structure. The Cherry Point area contains three deep water shipping piers, two refineries, an aluminum smelter, and urban development. The Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve was formed initially to protect the spawning habitat of the Cherry Point Pacific herring run. We conducted a retrospective assessment using the relative risk model (RRM) to investigate the causes of the current decline of the Cherry Point run. The RRM combines aspects of the weight-of-evidence (WoE) approach and other methods of establishing causality into a framework that deals with multiple stressors, uncertainty, and spatial scale. An analysis of the Cherry Point Pacific herring age structure and population dynamics indicates that the loss of reproductive potential of the older age class fish was the population characteristic that led to the decline of the run. Exploitation, habitat alteration and climate change are the risk factors that contribute to the decline of the Cherry Point Pacific herring. The retrospective assessment identified the cyclic nature of climate change, as expressed by the warmer sea surface temperatures associated with a warm Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), as the primary factor altering the dynamics of the Pacific herring. Other factors are ranked accordingly along with the associated uncertainty. Criteria for selecting alternative endpoints for managing the Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve are also provided. The strengths of the retrospective RRM include its ability to combine a WoE and causality criteria with a multitude of stressors at a regional scale. The difficulties include how to deal with differences in the magnitude of effects, and expressing the uncertainty as distributions.
Ecotoxicology | 1993
Wayne G. Landis; Robin A. Matthews; April J. Markiewicz; Geoffrey B. Matthews
Turbine fuels are often the only aviation fuel available in most of the world. Turbine fuels consist of numerous constituents with varying water solubilities, volatilities and toxicities. This study investigates the toxicity of the water soluble fraction (WSF) of JP-4 using the Standard Aquatic Microcosm (SAM). Multivariate analysis of the complex data, including the relatively new method of nonmetric clustering, was used and compared to more traditional analyses. Particular emphasis is placed on ecosystem dynamics in multivariate space.The WSF is prepared by vigorously mixing the fuel and the SAM microcosm media in a separatory funnel. The water phase, which contains the water-soluble fraction of JP-4 is then collected. The SAM experiment was conducted using concentrations of 0.0, 1.5 and 15% WSF. The WSF is added on day 7 of the experiments by removing 450 ml from each microcosm including the controls, then adding the appropriate amount of toxicant solution and finally bringing the final volume to 3 L with microcosm media. Analysis of the WSF was performed by purge and trap gas chromatography. The organic constituents of the WSF were not recoverable from the water column within several days of the addition of the toxicant. However, the impact of the WSF on the microcosm was apparent. In the highest initial concentration treatment group an algal bloom ensued, generated by the apparent toxicity of the WSF of JP-4 to the daphnids. As the daphnid populations recovered the algal populations decreased to control values. Multivariate methods clearly demonstrated this initial impact along with an additional oscillation seperating the four treatment groups in the latter segment of the experiment. Apparent recovery may be an artifact of the projections used to describe the multivariate data. The variables that were most important in distinguishing the four groups shifted during the course of the 63 day experiment. Even this simple microcosm exhibited a variety of dynamics, with implications for biomonitoring schemes and ecological risk assessments.
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management | 2017
Wayne G. Landis; Kimberley Kolb Ayre; Annie F Johns; Heather M Summers; Jonah Stinson; Meagan J Harris; Carlie E Herring; April J. Markiewicz
We have conducted a regional scale risk assessment using the Bayesian Network Relative Risk Model (BN-RRM) to calculate the ecological risks to the South River and upper Shenandoah River study area. Four biological endpoints (smallmouth bass, white sucker, Belted Kingfisher, and Carolina Wren) and 4 abiotic endpoints (Fishing River Use, Swimming River Use, Boating River Use, and Water Quality Standards) were included in this risk assessment, based on stakeholder input. Although mercury (Hg) contamination was the original impetus for the site being remediated, other chemical and physical stressors were evaluated. There were 3 primary conclusions from the BN-RRM results. First, risk varies according to location, type and quality of habitat, and exposure to stressors within the landscape. The patterns of risk can be evaluated with reasonable certitude. Second, overall risk to abiotic endpoints was greater than overall risk to biotic endpoints. By including both biotic and abiotic endpoints, we are able to compare risk to endpoints that represent a wide range of stakeholder values. Third, whereas Hg reduction is the regulatory priority for the South River, Hg is not the only stressor driving risk to the endpoints. Ecological and habitat stressors contribute risk to the endpoints and should be considered when managing this site. This research provides the foundation for evaluating the risks of multiple stressors of the South River to a variety of endpoints. From this foundation, tools for the evaluation of management options and an adaptive management tools have been forged. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017;13:85-99.
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management | 2017
Wayne G. Landis; April J. Markiewicz; Kim K Ayre; Annie F Johns; Meagan J Harris; Jonah Stinson; Heather M Summers
Adaptive management has been presented as a method for the remediation, restoration, and protection of ecological systems. Recent reviews have found that the implementation of adaptive management has been unsuccessful in many instances. We present a modification of the model first formulated by Wyant and colleagues that puts ecological risk assessment into a central role in the adaptive management process. This construction has 3 overarching segments. Public engagement and governance determine the goals of society by identifying endpoints and specifying constraints such as costs. The research, engineering, risk assessment, and management section contains the decision loop estimating risk, evaluating options, specifying the monitoring program, and incorporating the data to re-evaluate risk. The 3rd component is the recognition that risk and public engagement can be altered by various externalities such as climate change, economics, technological developments, and population growth. We use the South River, Virginia, USA, study area and our previous research to illustrate each of these components. In our example, we use the Bayesian Network Relative Risk Model to estimate risks, evaluate remediation options, and provide lists of monitoring priorities. The research, engineering, risk assessment, and management loop also provides a structure in which data and the records of what worked and what did not, the learning process, can be stored. The learning process is a central part of adaptive management. We conclude that risk assessment can and should become an integral part of the adaptive management process. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017;13:115-126.
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management | 2017
Annie F Johns; Scarlett E Graham; Meagan J Harris; April J. Markiewicz; Jonah Stinson; Wayne G. Landis
We have conducted a series of regional scale risk assessments using the Bayesian Network Relative Risk Model (BN-RRM) to evaluate the efficacy of 2 remediation options in the reduction of risks to the South River and upper Shenandoah River study area. The 2 remediation options were 1) bank stabilization (BST) and 2) the implementation of best management practices for agriculture (AgBMPs) to reduce Hg input in to the river. Eight endpoints were chosen to be part of the risk assessment, based on stakeholder input. Although Hg contamination was the original impetus for the site being remediated, multiple chemical and physical stressors were evaluated in this analysis. Specific models were built that incorporated the changes expected from AgBMP and BST and were based on our previous research. Changes in risk were calculated, and sensitivity and influence analyses were conducted on the models. The assessments indicated that AgBMP would only slightly change risk in the study area but that negative impacts were also unlikely. Bank stabilization would reduce risk to Hg for the smallmouth bass and belted kingfisher and increase risk to abiotic water quality endpoints. However, if care were not taken to prevent loss of nesting habitat to belted kingfisher, an increase in risk to that species would occur. Because Hg was only one of several stressors contributing to risk, the change in risk depended on the specific endpoint. Sensitivity analysis provided a list of variables to be measured as part of a monitoring program. Influence analysis provided the range of maximum and minimum risk values for each endpoint and remediation option. This research demonstrates the applicability of ecological risk assessment and specifically the BN-RRM as part of a long-term adaptive management scheme for managing contaminated sites. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017;13:100-114.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry | 2000
Wayne G. Landis; April J. Markiewicz; Robin A. Matthews; Geoffrey B. Matthews
Archive | 2004
Emily Hart Hayes; April J. Markiewicz; Wayne G. Landis
Archive | 1995
Wayne G. Landis; Robin A. Matthews; April J. Markiewicz; Geoffrey B. Matthews
Archive | 2017
Wayne G. Landis; April J. Markiewicz
Archive | 2007
Laura J. Sellens; April J. Markiewicz; Wayne G. Landis