Dfsdfsdfs sdfsdfsdfsdf
Transcription
Dfsdfsdfs sdfsdfsdfsdf
Riparian Thresholds: a product of Water RAPIDS Groundwater Climate and Stakeholder Engagement (GCASE) Milestone Workshop 2 – November 20, 2013 Jacob Prietto Water Resources Research Center jprietto@email.arizona.edu Funded by the Sectoral Applications Research Program (SARP) of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Climate Program Office. wrrc.arizona.edu/GCASE Thresholds: Based on Scientific Data • Critical Thresholds – Limits where response is impossible without dramatic change to system (Lite & Stromberg, 2005) • Thresholds of Probable Concern – Warnings to potentially undesirable changes (Rogers and Biggs, 1999) • Used to help define management goals – Not predictive values for desired conditions (Lite & Stromberg, 2005) 2 Santa Cruz Active Management Area Third Management Plan • Management Goals (1.3.2.2) – safe yield – prevent local water table declines long term – unique hydrologic conditions • Target Water Levels (1.3.2.2) – – – – younger alluvium multiple use objectives sensitive to water levels changes majority of region’s water supply. • Emerging Challenges (1.7) – protection of core aquatic and riparian habitats Santa Cruz Active Management Area 1997-2001 Hydrologic Monitoring Report (ADWR) 3 4 Santa Cruz River near Amado, AZ San Pedro River near Tombstone, AZ 5 Riparian Vegetation www.saguaro-juniper.com • Cottonwood • Willow • Tamarisk • Mesquite www.nasa.gov en.wikipedia.org 6 Hydrologic Variables Depth to Groundwater • Greatest depth measured over year • Spatially averaged over floodplain Groundwater Fluctuation • Dry Season: January to June • Estimate of annual fluctuation Surface Flow Permanence • Percentage of year with surface flow • Strongest indicator of forest composition Hydrologic Index • Index = – (100 – Permanence %) * Maximum Depth * Fluctuation (Lite & Stromberg, 2005) 7 Riparian Health “wet” Seedling Establishment Sapling Survival • Specific & Narrow Conditions Species Dominance “dry” Mature Survival • Tamarisk • Co-Dominant • Cottonwood & Willow Maximum Depth Depth Fluctuation Flow Permanence • Cottonwood • Willow 8 • Watershed management and planning that integrates natural resources, water resources, and community development • Stakeholder engagement process design and facilitation services for communities seeking feedback on water resources issues or in need of assistance to address water-related conflicts • GIS analysis of water and natural resource issues • Innovative approaches and tools for increasing household water conservation, while building awareness of the relationship between natural resources and water use • Contact: Kelly Mott Lacroix (klacroix@cals.arizona.edu) 9 Database Methodology Ecology Hydrology Relationship Biological Element Natural Flow Regime Element Flow need • • • • • • • Abundance Age structure Composition Diversity Health Survivorship Reproduction • • • • Depends upon Does not depend on Uses Associated with Flow response • Influenced • Enhanced • Harmed • • • • • Magnitude Frequency Duration Timing Rate of Change 10 Findings: 111 Studies (July 2013) Study Subject Number of Studies Populous fremonti 27 Salix gooddingii 15 Tamarix ramosissima 14 Prosopis velutina 13 Cottonwood/ Willow Forest 7 11 Database Example • What quantitative information is available on the ecological flow needs or responses of cottonwoods? 12 www.cals.arizona.edu Freemont Cottonwood Age Ecology Relationship Abundance Depth (m)* Rate* Citation # <0.8 to <1.6 < 4.4 cm/day 11 Associated with Survivorship <1.0 2 cm/day 13 < 2 to 3 cm/day, <0.5 m/year 5, 16 Seed Juvenile Abundance/Survivorship Enhanced by 0.5 to < 2.6 Abundance/Survivorship Associated with 0.2 to 2 Abundance/Composition Abundance/Survivorship/ Heath Adult Abundance 1 to 3 *active monitoring necessary < 1m/ year Associated with 4, 7, 8, 14 0.1 to 5.1 2, 13 Enhanced by < 1.5 < 2.6 to 2.7 0.5 to 2.3 Harmed by >2 to 3 6 1, 5 15 2, 12, 15 Health Survivorship/Health 8, 13 abrupt > 1m 13 Goodings Willow Age Ecology Relationship Abundance Associated with Depth (m)* <0.8 to <1.4 <3.1 cm/day 1 to 2 Seed Survivorship Abundance Abundance Citation # 11 12 Associated with < 1m Juvenile Rate* Associated with Associated with Adult 2 cm/day 13 0.1 to 2 13 0.1 to 3.2 13 0.5 to 3.3 14 2.2 to 4.2 16 3.5 to 4.0 2 Associated with <3 Survivorship < 1m/year > 2.5 to 3 4 2, 4 Harmed by abrupt 1 m *active monitoring necessary 12 14 Velvet Mesquite Age Ecology Relationship Depth (m)* Abundance Abundance, Composition Juvenile Abundance, Health Associated with Abundance, Composition, Survivorship Abundance Associated with Rate* Citation # 0.6 m/year 10 2.9 13 3.6 13 0.7 to 6.6 13 > 2.2 16 2.0 to 4.8 14 0.9 to 1.3 m/year Adult Abundance, Composition Abundance, Composition, Survivorship Associated with Abundance, Health Survivorship *active monitoring necessary Harmed by 10 3.4 13 0.9 to 8.0 13 5.2 13 14 3 15 Cottonwood* *active monitoring necessary 16 Kelly Mott Lacroix (2013) GCASE Threshold Considerations Species Age Ecologic Relationship Hydrologic Variable • Adult: Cottonwood, Willow, Mesquite • Survivorship Harmed By • Maximum Groundwater Depth • Rate of Decline 17 Riparian Thresholds: A product of Water RAPIDS Jacob Prietto Water Resources Research Center jprietto@email.arizona.edu Photo by Kelly Mott Lacroix Citation Author(s) # 1 Busch & Smith (1995) 2 Horton et al. (2001) 3 Leake et al. (2008) 4 Leenhouts et al. (2006) 5 Lite & Stromberg (2005) 6 Merritt & Bateman (2012) 7 NPS (2008) 8 Pima County (2009) 9 Shafroth et al. (1998) 10 Springer et al. (1999) 11 Strafroth et al. (1998) 12 Stromberg (2008) 13 Stromberg et al. (1996) 14 Stromberg et al. (2009) 15 Turner & Haney (2008) 16 Williams & Scott (2009) 18
Similar documents
Cancer Survivorship Services 15% Improving outcomes for people living with & beyond cancer
More information
Why do some resource-abundant countries succeed while others do not? Ragnar Torvik ∗
More information