EPA600/R-97/125
December, 1997
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests
in the Pacific Northwest
Research Plan
United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Research and Development
National Health and Environmental Effects Laboratory
Western Ecology Division, Corvallis, OR
Principal Investigator for EPA: Paul L. Ringold
541-754-4565
ringold@mail.cor.epa.gov
200 SW 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
Research Staff:
Jerry Barker, Dynamac Corporation
Mike Bollman, Dynamac Corporation
Gay Bradshaw, USDA Forest Service
Ward Carson, Oregon State University
Steve Cline, EPA
Maria Fiorella, Oregon State University
Jennifer Stepp, Dynamac Corporation
Development of this research plan was funded by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. This document has been subject to the Agency's peer and
administrative review and approved for publication. Mention of trade names
or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation
for use.
-------
NOTICE'
This document has been reviewed in accordance with
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy and
approved for publication. Mention of trade names
or commercial products does not constitute endorse-
ment or recommendation for use.
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
1. Preface
This document describes research to define monitoring methods for riparian forests
in the Pacific Northwest. It focuses on a habitat-based approach using fine resolution
remote sensing techniques. Questions regarding this research should be directed to
Paul Ringold, US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, National Health and Ecological Effects Research Laboratory, Western
Ecology Division, 200 SW 35th St., Corvallis, OR 97333. Phone 541-754-4565, Fax 541-
754-4716, email: ringold@mail.cor.epa.gov.
This document is divided into four major components:
• Summary of the research and the background and rationale for pursuing it
(Section 2).
• Approach to achieving the goal, and the research tasks (Sections 3 to 7).
• Administrative information including linkages to other research and potential
users, and personnel (Section 8).
• Appendices (Section 9) provide supporting information including a glossary
which provides the full wording of acronyms and definitions of key terms
(Section 9.7).
The Table of Contents also serves as a project outline; a series of flow charts (Figures
3, 4, 10, and 17) introduce the major sections and show how the parts are related to
one another; Table 7 provides information on the timing of key elements. Quality
assurance documents and detailed field and safety protocols are being developed
separate from this plan.
This project is embedded in a larger research program (Baker and others 1995;
Gregory and others 1996).
Research Plan Page - iii
September 25, 1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Table of Contents
1. Preface.
.111
2. Executive Summary and Introduction 1
2.1. Background and Rationale 1
2.2. Approach to the research 8
2.3. General Project Implementation 12
3. Task 1. Definition of the Ecological Characteristics of Riparian Systems....14
3.1. Research Questions 1A and IB: What are the ecologically important
attributes of a site (A)? What are the spatial dimensions of a site (B)? 16
3.2. Research Question 1C: How can riparian sites be identified across a
region? 30
4. Task 2. Identification of approaches available to monitor a riparian site over
a large extent? 34
4.1. Field Requirements 34
4.2. Remote Requirements 36
4.3. Field Data Collection Methods 40
4.4. Image Selection Strategy 41
5. Task 3. Comparison of Selected Monitoring Methods 44
5.1. Research Question 3A: What are the technological characteristics of each
method? 44
5.2. Research Question 3B: What are the non-technological constraints in
recommending a feasible method? 54
6. Task 4. Site Selection 56
6.1. How should sites be distributed for methods development? 56
6.2. Site Designation — Phase 1 56
6.3. Site Designation — Phase II 57
7. Task 5. Demonstrations and Evaluations 62
7.1. Research Question 5A: What is the value of alternative resolution
riparian characterizations? 62
7.2. Research Question 5B: What is the condition of riparian areas over larger
extents? 65
7.3. Research Question 5C: What are the linkages between riparian condition
and stream habitat over large scales 66
7.4. Sources of Data for Research Question 5B and 5C ..67
8. Project Management 68
8.1. Technical Liaison 68
8.2. User Linkages 69
Research Plan Page - iv
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
8.3. Personnel 69
8.4. Resources 70
9.Appendice s ;. 73
9.1. Preliminary Evaluation of Phase I Field Data 73
9.2. Indicator Literature Review 74
9.3. ADAR Imagery 85
9.4. Conceptual Development of Riparian Indicators of Forested Landscapes
86
9.5. Request to the Civilian Applications Committee for the acquisition of
remote imagery in the Drift Creek Basin (Dated November, 1996) 95
9.6 Personnel 99
9.7 Glossary 100
10. References 105
Research Plan Page - v
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests In the Pacific Northwest
List of Figures
Figure 1 Riparian Structure and Ecological Functions 3
Figure 2 Constraints on Monitoring Design 10
Figure 3 Overall Design of the Research 11
Figure 4 Definition of the Ecological Characteristics of Riparian Systems 13
Figure 5 Development of Ecological Indicators 15
Figure 6 Conceptual Models of Riparian Systems 18
Figure 7 Initial Classification Scheme 22
Figure 8 Conifer crown cover in Drift Creek as a function of distance from the
stream 28
Figure 9 Distribution of observations in Drift Creek Field Data 29
Figure 10 Available Methods 33
Figure 11 Evaluation of Results 43
Figure 12 Example of comparison of methods 49
Figure 13 Use of Phase I Data for Analog and Digital Analyses 50
Figure 14 Use of Phase II data for Digital Analysis 51
Figure 15 Digital analysis of analog imagery 52
Figure 16 Phase II sampling locations 60
Figure 17 Initial Recommendation 61
Research Plan Page - vi
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
List of Tables
Table 1 Forest Plan Objectives for the Aquatic Conservation Strategy and Indicator
Scale 7
Table 2 Field measures to support indicator development 24
Table 3 Sample Dimensions as a function of Pixel Size 35
Table 4 Finer resolution remote imaging instruments, resolution, type, and dates
operational 37
Table 5 Field Methods used in this research 41
Table 6 Sources of information for estimating method quality 54
Table 7 Project Questions Timing and Personnel 71
Table 8 Summary of indicator analysis literature review 76
Research Plan Page - vii
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
2. Executive Summary and Introduction
The goal of this project is to:
Recommend a broadly-acceptable efficient and effective methodology for
characterizing streamside riparian attributes in forested settings at the site
grain for regional monitoring.
We pursue this goal by developing monitoring methods and evaluating their
performance in western Oregon.
2.1. Background and Rationale
Ecosystem management requires monitoring to ensure that long-term goals are
being achieved. Because specific policy uses, ecological requirements and
technologies may not be well specified ecosystem management may require that
monitoring design be an iterative process (Ringold and others 1996; Ringold and
others In Review). The research described in this plan focuses this iterative process
on monitoring design for riparian ecosystems in forested settings.
Streamside forested riparian areas have extraordinary ecological value richly
reflected in management practice (Steiner and others 1994; USDA/FS and
USDI/BLM 1994; Oregon 1996; Gregory 1997). The absence of a methodology to
characterize these systems in a uniform way, presents a major obstacle to improving
or evaluating both regional management decisions and regional understanding
(Mulder and others 1995; Smith and others 1997).
2.1.1. Characteristics of Riparian Areas
Riparian areas are the interface between aquatic and upland ecosystems. Their
structure is important in affecting three major values -- water quality, aquatic
habitat, and terrestrial habitat. Riparian areas are characterized by bands of structures
associated and interacting with aquatic and upland systems. The relationship
between the structure of these bands and their functions is illustrated in Figure 1.
The spatial character of this relationship varies with the specific attribute of interest,
and with the position in the watershed, but is generally important at very fine
grains — on the order of tens of meters in distance away from the stream. Appendix
Section 9.2 elaborates on the relationship between this fine grain spatial pattern and
multiple ecological functions.
Riparian sites are diverse, comprising a range of vegetation types and canopy
structural elements. Banks, terraces, slopes and other geomorphic features associated
with streams create a variety of microsites in riparian areas which are typically less
evident upslope. This range of environmental conditions results in a relatively
high degree of diversity in riparian community structure and composition
Research Plan Page -1
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Figure 1 Riparian Structure and Ecological Functions
Fine-grained detail of riparian systems has an effect on ecological function. For an array of
functions the importance is greatest near the channel edge and drops sharply as distances from
the channel increase. Figure 1A illustrates this for riparian effects on streams; IB for the effects
of riparian structure on stand microclimate. Figure 1C shows that root wads are recruited
within a distance of about 6 m of the channel edge. Root wads greatly effect the stability of
woody debris in streams and may constitute up to 40% of the debris volume in the channel.
Figure ID shows that stream shading (as measured by angular canopy density) approaches old
growth levels within about 20 to 40 meters from the stream. Figure IE shows that woody debris
input from streamside stands comes from trees within 25 m in mature hardwood stands, 50
meters in mature conifer stands, and 55 m in old-growth conifer stands.
Sources: 1A and IB (USDA and others 1993); 1C (Andrus, pers. comm.); ID (Beschta and
others 1987), and IE (McDade and others 1990).
Research Plan Page - 2
September 25, 1997
-------
Riparian Forest Effect on Streams
as Function of Buffer Width
Shading
Root
Strength
100
CD
>
Litter Fall
*-»
ra
3
E
3
o
Coarse Wood Debris
to Stream
2
0
5
Distance from Channel
(tree height)
A Generalized curves indicating percent of
riparian ecological functions and processes occurring
with in varying distances from the edge o( a forest stand
Riparian Buffer Effects on Microclimate
Soil
Air Temp
100 Moisture Radjat|nn Sojl Temp
<1>
>
ro
3
E
3
o
2
3
0
5
1
Distance from Stand Edge Into Forest
(tree heights)
{J Generalized curves indicating percent of
microclimatic attributes occurring within varying
distances of the edge of a riparian forest stand (after
Chen. J 1991)
-------
Conifer
0 -fi ^
K & **
t>-
Distance Id Edge of Strum (ratters)
era
2
lu
o
>
a.
o
«
u
(C
«
-J
D
©
100
80
60
40
Isold growth - -
' u -
#
J^O
oX •
• k*y mw
^*0
o
• / • /
/ © Mr,
0
/ / 8 o
/ X o
/ 0
r i i
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
BUFFER-STRIP WIDTH {m 5
45
W
0J
2 100
I
»
r
zi
u
3
i.
3
?
u
s
c
u
L
J
»
MATURE HARDWOOD
mature conifer
OLD-GROWTH CONIFER
MODEL, fl-40 m
MODEL. 11-50 m
15 20 25 30 35 40 45
DISTANCE FROM STREAM BANK (m)
55 SO
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
(Gregory and others 1991). Riparian vegetation types and structure can vary both
along the aquatic system and upslope. High disturbance rates in riparian areas, and
steep environmental gradients contribute to this unusually complex structural
pattern (Agee 1988; Swanson and others 1988). For some functions, for example
shading or the provision of coarse woody debris, riparian systems may have a role
which is more clearly distinct from the rest of the watershed, while for other
functions, especially for terrestrial habitat, the distinct role of the riparian system
may be more subtle, particularly west of the Cascades where water is in plentiful
supply (Smith, and others 1997).
The interaction between riparian vegetation and streams is influenced by a range of
factors, including stream size and flood plain width, variable disturbance regimes,
and landuse patterns. The variable nature and intensity of riparian-stream
interactions makes it difficult to draw distinct boundaries around riparian sites in a
manner which encompasses all functions at each site. For example, in small
headwater streams where the forest canopy can cover the channel, riparian
vegetation adjacent to the channel influences inputs of matter and energy into the
aquatic system, thereby affecting in-stream nutrient levels and water temperatures.
The nature of the riparian-stream interaction changes in downstream portions of
the system due to increasing flows and wide channels. In these wide valley areas
vegetation adjacent to the channel often exerts less direct influence on nutrient
levels and water temperatures. In contrast, the stream, by virtue of its larger
volume, may exert more influence on the riparian stand than it does in small
headwater streams.
Riparian function is important not only at individual "sites", but also in the
integration of sites. The site is important because it is the scale at which much of our
understanding is based and the scale at which many management actions occur. The
integration of these sites into features of greater extent allows for the consideration
of key ecological functions at larger extents. For example, the forest structure at a site
contributes to the quantity and quality of the coarse woody debris available to a
stream -- see Figure 1. Coarse woody debris is an important in structuring aquatic
habitat. However, aquatic habitat in a stream network as a whole -- the scale of
relevance to fish populations -- is dependent upon the status of the fine grained
structure of the riparian system as a whole. Thus, sites can be viewed as the
individual links of a more extensive chain. Each link has a function; so does the
chain as a whole. Each link is tens of meters wide —the length of the chain (the
length over which a function should be described) is not well defined, but is likely to
be hundreds to thousands of meters long.-,Thus, we are interested in monitoring a
feature narrow in width but quite long, making it particularly challenging to
develop an effective and efficient monitoring design.
This richness in fine-grained pattern and process must be captured in a monitoring
program, if that program is to provide information on the ecological values of the
system. The proposed research focuses on the "site", consistent with the
recommendations of (Mulder and others 1995; Smith and others 1997). The
Research Plan Page - 5
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
dimensions of a site and the aggregation of sites to larger extent are subjects of the
proposed research. Specifically, we need to (1) capture important features at the site
level (i.e. individual links in the chain) before we can aggregate that information to
larger scale indicators; and (2) identify the value of additional detail at the site level.
Later in the research, we begin looking at indicators which have a site grain, but
larger extent, i.e. looking at the status of the chain, in addition to the status of the
individual links.
2.1.2. The Management of Riparian Areas
Considerable policy attention and direction has been developed to improve the
management of riparian systems. For example, the Northwest Forest Plan (hereafter
referred to as the Forest Plan) establishes a number of ecological goals which require
the maintenance and restoration of key functional attributes of riparian areas (See
Table 1). An extensive network of riparian reserves is one approach to providing
these functions. Riparian reserves not only have ecological value, they also have
great economic significance. Management practices for these areas significantly
restrict timber harvests on approximately 1 million hectares; more than one-quarter
of the land which would otherwise be available for harvest on Federally
administered lands operating under the Forest Plan.
Concern for appropriate management and conservation of riparian areas derives
from sources other than the Forest Plan, and extends to other regions. Operating
under their own authorities, and under the Federal Clean Water Act, states have
established a set of protective policies for riparian areas. Steiner and his colleagues
(Steiner and others 1994) note the great degree of general significance which policy
has assigned to riparian areas, and a concomitant lack of quantitative information
underlying the range of state policies. A monitoring methodology which
accommodates a range of concerns will be of great use in supporting
recommendations for effective riparian management programs.
Research Plan Page - 6
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Table 1 Forest Plan Objectives for the Aquatic Conservation Strategy and Indicator
Scale.
Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives
' iial Scale of Indicator
1. Maintain and restore the distribution, diversity, and
complexity of watershed and landscape-scale features to
ensure protection of the aquatic systems to which species,
populations and communities are uniquely adapted.
Reach/
Site
Watershed
Landscape
XXX
XXX
2. Maintain and restore spatial and temporal
connectivity within and between watersheds. Lateral,
longitudinal, and drainage network connections include
floodplains, wetlands, upslope areas, headwater tributaries,
and intact refugia. These network connections must provide
chemically and physically unobstructed routes to areas
critical for fulfilling life history requirements of aquatic and
riparian-dependent species.
XXX
XXX
3. Maintain and restore the physical integrity of the
aquatic system, including shorelines, banks, and bottom
configurations.
XXX
XXX
4. Maintain and restore water quality necessary to
support healthy riparian, aquatic, and wetland ecosystems.
Water quality must remain within the range that maintains
the biological, physical, and chemical integrity of the
system and benefits survival, growth, reproduction, and
migration of individuals composing aquatic and riparian
communities.
XXX
XXX
XXX
5. Maintain and restore the sediment regime under
which aquatic ecosystems evolved. Elements of the sediment
regime include the timing, volume, rate, and character of
sediment input, storage, and transport.
XXX
XXX
6. Maintain and restore in-stream flows sufficient to
create and sustain riparian, aquatic, and wetland habitats
and to retain patterns of sediment, nutrient, and wood routing.
The timing, magnitude, duration, and spatial distribution of
peak, high, and low flows must be protected.
XXX
XXX
7. Maintain and restore the timing, variability, and
duration of floodplain inundation and water table elevation
in meadows and wetlands.
XXX
8. Maintain and restore the species composition and
structural diversity of plant communities in riparian areas
and wetlands to provide adequate summer and winter
thermal regulation, nutrient filtering, appropriate rates of
surface erosion, bank erosion, and channel migration and to
supply amounts and distributions of coarse woody debris
sufficient to sustain physical complexity and stability.
XXX
XXX
9. Maintain and restore habitat to support well-
distributed populations of native plant, invertebrate, and
vertebrate riparian-dependent species.
XXX
XXX
XXX
Research Plan Page - 7
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Forest Plan (USDA/FS and USDI/BLM 1994) objectives for Aquatic Conservation and the
spatial scale of the indicator that must be observed to report on the pursuit.of those objectives.
This research plan focuses initially on site scale objectives for riparian features. It focuses on
constructing fine-grained indicators at this spatial scale to capture ecologically significant
detail. These features are necessary to address the riparian issues included inside the double
lines of this table. The approach in this plan to pursue larger scale indicators is to aggregate site
grain indicators into indicators of larger extent. Thus indicators of watershed or landscape
extent may require a site grain although less detail than when describing site characteristics
2.2. Approach to the research
We consider monitoring design in the context of three interacting constraints
(Figure 2): ecological functions, capabilities of technologies, and user needs. The
design of an operational method must accommodate all three of these constraints.
Notably, each of these constraints is (and always will be) imperfectly known and has
multiple facets - ecosystems have more than one function, users have multiple
needs.
The approach to the research and the organization of the research plan is illustrated
in Figure 3. The research is organized so that ecological characteristics of riparian
systems are generally defined early on. These requirements constrain the choice of
monitoring systems from among the set of systems that are available. The focus is
on fine grained remote methods — aerial photography and ADAR, a fine resolution
aircraft mounted multiband sensor and an extensive set of field plots. Comparison
between candidate selected monitoring systems provides for an initial formulation
of a monitoring design. A series of evaluations of these initial formulations
provides for an initial recommendation.
The three constraints -- ecological, technological and user - are an interacting set. To
enhance the ability to identify these interactions, the research is implemented with
structured consultation with the broader scientific community and with the broader
community of potential users. This allows for interacting needs to be more clearly
identified. Consideration of the interactions between the constraints is important in
developing a broadly acceptable method. The ecological features most clearly related
to function may be the most difficult to monitor. The most tractable management
features may have a less well defined ecological function. The most precise
monitoring methodology may have analytical requirements which are not
realistically achievable. The result of addressing these constraints in an iterative
manner is intended to be a recommendation which accommodates and
acknowledges these interacting constraints.
Research Plan Page - 8
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Figure 2 Constraints on Monitoring Design
We consider monitoring design in the context of three interacting constraints: ecological
functions, capabilities of technologies, and user needs. The design of an operational method
must accommodate all three of these constraints. Notably, each of these constraints is (and
always will be) imperfectly known and has multiple facets — ecosystems have more than one
function, users have multiple needs.
The three constraints — ecological, technological and user — are an interacting set. Consideration
of the interactions between the constraints is important in developing a broadly acceptable
method. The ecological features most clearly related to function may be the most difficult to
monitor. The most tractable management features may have a less well defined ecological
function. The most precise monitoring methodology may have analytical requirements which are
not realistically achievable.
The result of addressing these constraints in an iterative manner is intended to be a
recommendation which accommodates and acknowledges these interacting constraints.
Figure 3 Overall Design of the Research
The research is organized so that ecological characteristics of riparian systems are generally
defined early on. These requirements constrain the choice of monitoring systems from among the
set of systems that are available. Comparison between candidate selected monitoring systems
provides for an initial formulation of a monitoring design. A series of evaluations of these initial
formulations provides for an initial recommendation.
Research Plan Page - 9
September 25,1997
-------
Ecological Functions
Monitoring
Design
Capabilties of
Technologies
User Needs
-------
Ecological
Characteristics of
Riparian Systems
Available
Monitoring Methods
Comparison of
Selected Monitoring
Methods
Intended Users
Initial
Formulations
Site to Landscape
Level
Demonstrations
Initial
Recommendations
Technical Experts
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
2.3. General Project Implementation
Riparian systems have a great deal of variability in their composition and function
throughout the nation and within the Pacific Northwest. Not all this variability can
be evaluated within the scope of this project. Therefore, this project develops
riparian monitoring methods in an area with more limited variability. To
complement the Forest Plan, the state's interest in the status of coastal fishes, and
the programmatic interest of EPA's Western Ecology Division (Baker and others
1995), the areas selected for study are in the Oregon coastal province, and the
Willamette basin. While the design of this research is specific to this area, the
insights gained and procedures developed should be applicable elsewhere.
Finally, and most importantly, this project is being implemented with a high degree
of user consultation (See Section 8.2). Such consultation is essential to achieve our
goals. To facilitate this consultation a standing user committee will be established in
consultation with the Research and Monitoring Committee responsible for
implementing the Northwest Forest Plan, with the states Oregon and Washington,
and with private parties in the region.
More detail on project administration is provided in Section 8.
Research Plan Page -12
September 25,1997
-------
1A
Ecological
Attributes
Ecological
Characteristics of
Riparian Systems
Spatial Dimensions
1C
Geographic
Locations
Figure 4 Definition of the Ecological Characteristics of Riparian Systems
Section 3 defines the ecological characteristics of riparian systems which need to be
accommodated in a monitoring design. They are tied to the ecological functions
constraint in Figure 2.
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
3. Task 1 Definition of the Ecological Characteristics of Riparian Systems
Definition of the ecological characteristics of riparian systems is necessary for two
reasons. First, it provides the information that allows for a general specification of
the requirements for a monitoring system, i.e. what are the attributes that need to be
monitored and what are their spatial dimensions. Second, in concert with the
examination of the specific capabilities of the monitoring systems, we provide a
recommended set of indicators of the functional status of riparian systems. The first
result is developed within this research plan; the second will be developed during
the course of the research described within this plan.
An indicator is defined as "any environmental measure that can be used to
quantitatively estimate the condition of an ecological resource."(Barber 1994). Key
steps in the process of developing indicators from among the broader set of possible
environmental measures are (Barber 1994):
• Identifying environmental values and assessment questions of concern
• Construction of conceptual models which describe the relationship between the
structure and function of ecological resources
• Systematic evaluation of candidate indicators including:
- evaluation of the feasibility of implementing the indicator in a routine
monitoring and assessment program,
- evaluation of the indicator's statistical behavior, and
- evaluation of the indicator's utility in resource assessments
The first of these steps is developed in (Mulder arid others 1995) and successor
documents (Effectiveness Monitoring Team 1997) which identify the need for
research to provide a riparian monitoring methodology and discuss how it will be
used in resource assessments. This section (Section 3) of the research plan discusses .
the construction of conceptual models and outlines the evaluation questions
driving the statistical analysis of candidate indicators. Later parts of the research
(especially Section 5) evaluate the feasibility of implementing candidate indicators
in the context of an overall design. Figure 5 is our representation of this process1.
The discussion of each question describes the rationale for the specific question, the
elements of the approach taken to addressing the question, the current status of the
research, and any significant results to date. Research Question 1A and IB are
presented jointly; although they are distinpt questions, they are developed and
approached in a tightly integrated manner. Under research question 1C this section
also discusses research to consider approaches to identifying the location of the
population of interest.
^"Ecological functions" are defined in the conceptual models; "capabilities of technologies" is
equivalent to the feasiblity and statistical behavior step; "user needs" is equivalent to the first and
last bullets of the EMAP process.
Research Plan Page -14
September 25,1997
-------
1A What are the
ecologically important
attributes of a site?
1B What are the spatial
dimensions that define
a site?
General .Specification
of Monitoring
Requirements
Background
Information
Statistical Evaluation
with Phase I data
Available
Monitoring
Methods
Ecological Expertise
Candidate Sets of
Indicators
Statistical Evaluation
with Phase I and II data
User Views -
Recommended Sets
of Indicators
Figure 5 Development of Ecological Indicators
Research described in section 3.1 goes through a sequence of steps to define initial
indicators of the ecological condition of riparian areas.
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
3.1. Research Questions 1A and IB: What are the ecologically important
attributes of a site (A)? What are the spatial dimensions of a site (B)?
This section outlines an ecological approach to addressing two of the key design
issues for a monitoring program: What features should be monitored? What are the
sample dimensions of a riparian site? The result of addressing these questions will
be an ecological perspective on riparian indicators. Figure 5 illustrates the overall
approach to implementing these two research questions:
1. Development of background information which includes:
• Development of a preliminary conceptual model which relates
riparian values to candidate indicators of those values.
• Specification of the quantitative relationships between candidate
indicators and ecological values.
• Development of a preliminary land cover/vegetation classification
scheme.
• Development of a theory and approach to defining the spatial
dimensions of a site.
2. Initial construction and statistical evaluation of candidate indicators from Phase I
remote and field data.
3. Refinement of the candidate indicators in an expert workshop
4. Refined statistical evaluation of the indicators based on phase I and phase II
remote and field data.
Timing of the steps is provided in Section 8.3
3.1.1. Background Information
The development of background information has been completed. Its components
are summarized below. Its value is in providing a context for subsequent research
and for the specification of the requirements of a monitoring methodology. This
specification is provided in Sections 4.1 and 4.2.
3.1.1-1- Conceptual Model Development
The conceptual model identifies three values of riparian ecosystems — terrestrial
and aquatic habitat, and water quality. The attributes of riparian systems which
support these values are identified, and the structures which support these
attributes are then identified and formulated as the initial set of indicators. In this
way riparian structures can be identified and characterized in a monitoring program
and related to the values,, or goods and services, that riparian systems provide.
Initial conceptual model development was completed in 1996, and is provided as
Appendix 9.4 and in Figure 6.
Research Plan Page -16
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Figure 6 Conceptual Models of Riparian Systems
These conceptual models describe the way in which site level indicators are linked to functional
attributes are linked to three different ecological values. These models are developed in section
9.4 and are used to identify the features to be measured in a monitoring program. Figure 6 has
three parts, one for each ecological value affected by riparian systems — aquatic habitat, water
quality, and terrestrial habitat.
Research Plan Page -17
September 25,1997
-------
Values
Functional Attributes
Aquatic
Habitat
Within the range that
supports well-distributed
populations of native plant,
invertebrate, and vertebrate
riparian-dependent species;
and maintains the species
composition and structural
diversity of plant communities
fl.6rCA)ie U>(\
Structure of Bed/Banks
\
Bank stability
¦Retention of sediment/organic matter
• Flood refugja.
Coarse/Fine Organic
Matter Inputs
i
Nutrient cycling
Microhabitats
Channel stability
Light and Temperature
\
Community structure
Primary production
Microclimate
Site-Level Indicators
Tree Position, Bankfuil Channel Width, Channel
Gradient, Forest Stand Age, Streamside surface
Tree Position Channel, Dominant Cover Type, Tree
Species Mix, Tree Height, Forest Stand Age Forest
Canopy Closure
Forest Canopy Closure, Channel Canopy Closure,
Wetted Channel Width, Channel Gradient
-------
Values
Functional Attributes
Terrestrial
Habitat
Nithin the range that
Denefits the survival, growth,
eproduction, and migration
Df riparian-dependent species;
supports well-distributed
Dopulations of native plant,
nvertebrate, and vertebrate
-iparian-dependent species;
and maintains the species
composition and structural
diversity of plant communities
(o r
Vegetation Structure
Habitat Diversity
Type/Extent of
Vegetation
Breeding sites
Protection
Streamside Topography
Habitat extent and diversity
Accessibility
Site-Level Indicators
Forest Canopy Structure, Snags, Forest Canopy
Closure'
Dominant Cover Type, Forest Stand Age, Snags
Streamside Surface, Hiilslope Gradient
-------
Values
Water
Quality
Within the range that
maintains biological,
physical integrity of the
system
Functional Attributes
Physical Structure
i
Bank stability
Retention of sediment
Retention of organic matter
Type/Extent of
Vegetation
i
Hillslope erosion
Nutrient inputs
F x6oi£S Uc.
Site-Level Indicators
Streamside Surface, Tree Position, Channel
Gradient, Forest Stand Age, Hillslope gradient
Tree Position, Dominate Cover Type, Tree Height,
Tree Species Mix, Forest Stand Age
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
The conceptual model suggests a focus on positional indicators (channel size, tree
and snag position) topographic indicators (channel and hillslope gradient), and
thematic indicators (canopy closure, type and structure, and geomorphic structure of
the plot). Some of these indicators describe the context of the site (e.g. stream size,
gradient and geomorphic structure of the plot), while others describe the way in
which the riparian system effects terrestrial and aquatic habitat, and water quality.
The initial set of measures which are derived from this review are listed in Table 2.
Subsequent steps will evaluate formulations of these measures in the form of
candidate indicators of ecological function.
3.1.1.2. Land cover and vegetation classification
Land cover and vegetation classification is important because thematic indicators
require that land cover types be described. Figure 7 presents the results of that
analysis as developed in the initial research plan. The classification scheme
proposed is a hierarchical one commonly used in the analysis of digital imagery
(Maus 1995). This classification scheme is organized along the lines of forest
structure. While it might be more desirable to develop a classification scheme based
on function (e.g. Frissell and others 1986; Gebhardt and others 1989; Gregory and
others 1991) the multiple functions, and our changing understanding of them is
considered to be more effectively served by using a scheme which is more
universally in use (Federal Geographic Data Committee 1996) and which is clearly
achievable with existing technology. The structural features which organize this
hierarchy are: % vegetation cover, tree or not tree dominant, canopy openness,
deciduous/conifer mix, stand age, canopy complexity (Figure 7). In fact, while this
classification scheme is organized along structural lines, it makes a great deal of
sense for describing riparian vegetation cover given our conceptual model. This
classification scheme, however is a vegetative one, and does not include
consideration of geomorphic or stream features which also control the function of
riparian systems.
3.1.1.3. Quantitative Literature Review
A second component of the literature review was conducted in 1997 to identify
quantitative values for candidate indicators identified in the conceptual model, and
to further define the relationships among the candidate indicators. A summary of
the conclusions of the literature review is included as Appendix section 9.2.
One significant refinement to the conceptual model is to account for the network or
landscape character of streams (e.g. Vannote and others 1980; Gregory and others
1991; Bradshaw and Fortin In Review). This is important because features that
would function in a particular way in one location within the network, e.g. stream
shading in low order streams, could have an entirely different function elsewhere
in the network.
Research Plan Page - 21
September 25, 1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Figure 7 Initial Classification Scheme
A classification scheme is used for structuring information on thematic or categorical indicators
listed in Table 2. See section 3.1.1.2.
Research Plan Page - 22
September 25,1997
-------
Riparian Thematic
Element
Definition
Forest Canopy Closure
Closed
Greater than 85 percent canopy closure
Semi-Open
30 percent to 85 percent canopy closure
Open
L**u than 30 percent
Tret Species Mix
Conifer
Greater than 70 percent conifer canopy cover
Mixed
At 'east 31 percent of the canopy cover is comprised of deciduous species
Deciduous
Greater than 70 pervent deciduous canopy cover
Contfer Stand Age
Old
Greater than 180 years
Mature
60 to 180 years
Pole
30 to 60 years
Young
15 to 30 years
Regeneration
Up to 15 yean
Deciduous Stand Age
Mature
Greater than 30 yean
Young
15 to 30 yean
Regeneration
Up to 15 yean
Forest Canopy Structure
Multiple/Complex
Multiple canopy layers, numerous canopy gaps
Simple
Single canopy layer, few canopy gaps •
Trees
>11 Percent
Flood Plain
treamside
Low Terrace
High Terrace
Surface
Slope
Land
Cover
Crown Closure
Shrubs / Grass
0-10 Percent Crown Closure
Complex
Old
Mature
Simple
Conifer
Pole
Younq
etc.
Regeneration
Closed
Mixed
etc.
Mature
etc.
Canopy
Deciduous
Young
etc.
Regeneration
Complex
Old
Mature
Simple
Conifer
Pole
Young
etc.
Regeneration
Semi-Open
Mixed
etc.
etc.
Canopy
Mature
Deciduous
Young
etc.
Regeneration
Complex
Old
Mature
Simple
Conifer
Pole
Young
etc.
Reaeneration
Open
Mixed
etc.
etc.
Canopy
Mature
Deciduous
Young
etc.
Regeneration
Shrubs / Grass
Bare Grounr "ock, Water
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Table 2. Field measures to support indicator development.
Site-level Indicator
Metric for Measurement at Riparian Sites
Positional
In-Channel
Bankfull channel
width
Wetted channel
width
Streamside
Tree position
Tree/stand height
Snags
Average width of channel to edge defined by yearly average high
flow point
Average wetted channel width during the measurement period
Distance of all tree(s) from the edge of the bankfull channel, placed
into 5m x 5m cells
Height of top of tree crown above the ground; average height of tree
crowns above the ground.
Distance of all snags from the edge of the bankfull channel
Total number of snags at site
Topographic
In-Channel
Channel gradient
Streamside
Hillslope gradient
Average gradient of the channel bottom
Average gradient of hillslopes greater than 30%, measured in 10m
intervals
Thematic
In-Channel
Channel canopy
closure
Streamside
Streamside surface
Dominant cover
type
Average canopy closure over the channel: 0-100%
Mapped flood plain, low terrace, high terrace and slope break onto
plot map, using cell flagging as a guide to distance
Cover type covering the surface area: Non- vegetated .(<11% canopy
closure); Vegetated (>11% canopy closure): Shrubs/grass; or Trees
Forest canopy
closure
Average canopy closure over area: 0-100%
Tree species mix
Dominate canopy cover by deciduous (broadleaf) species group or
conifer species group over area: Conifer: >70% conifer; Deciduous
>70% deciduous; mixed; 31%-70% deciduous cover (this was
derived from the data, not from measurement)
Forest stand age
Canopy structure
Average overstory conifer stand age from initiation date over area:
calculated for plots where cores were taken
Average forest canopy structure over area: Simple: Single canopy
layer, few canopy gaps; complex: Multiple canopy layers, numerous
canopy gaps (this was derived from the data, not from
measurement)
Research Plan Page - 24
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
List of all indicators presented in conceptual models for describing functional attributes of
riparian areas in Oregon's Coast Range and the field metric that will be measured to quantify
each indicator. These indicators are preliminary; the indicators and spatial relationships will be
clarified through the course of the research. See more detail in the field protocols.
Our literature review specifically explored the issue of spatial dimension in riparian
function. We consider riparian areas in two dimensions, width and length. Key
components to the function of riparian systems have a width of tens of meters and a
length whose conceptual foundation is not well developed and whose empirical
foundation is weak.
3.1.1.4. Spatial Dimensions
A monitoring method must include a description of the spatial dimensions of the
sampling and reporting units. This must include issues of grain, and extent; where
grain is the size of an individual observation and extent is the area over which an
observation is applicable. When a measurement is taken should it be taken from a 1
m plot, or a 10 m plot? Should information be integrated over the plot or should an
index be developed which describes the spatial arrangement of individual features
within the plot. The overriding factor in addressing this question should be to
identify the spatial scale of influence of each of the functions.
There has been little or no work on how the spatial structure of forest stands and
streams interact in a way that is useful for sampling design. This is in marked
contrast to the development of such approaches for streams and forests. The
structure and spatial hierarchy of stream systems is relatively well developed (e.g.
Leopold and others 1964; Frissell and others 1986) and the implications of this
structure have been considered for sampling design (e.g. Kaufmann 1987; Kaufman
1993; Reynolds and others 1993; Herlihy and others 1997). Similarly, there is a rich
literature on forest stand structure and sampling design (e.g. Hazard and Law 1989).
Within this region, there are excellent descriptions of riparian forest types (e.g.
Kovalchik 1987; Diaz and Mellen 1996) and developing work by the Oregon Natural
Heritage Program (Kagan 1995) but no parallel work on sampling dimensions. The
approach taken in considering sampling design for forests and streams has been to
identify the scale of various patterns in streams and forests in a way that is sensibly
related to the ecological functions of streams or forests. The purpose of this task is to
begin to develop the theory and practice of this issue for riparian areas; we will
follow the example established in stream and forest sampling.
Our approach provides support for descriptions of the reach by subdividing a reach
into "sites", characterizing those sites and then aggregating site descriptions (or
simplifications of site descriptions) up to a description of a larger extent, e.g., a reach.
Therefore, to quantify and reduce sample variability, criteria need to be developed
that can be used to select sub-units of the reach that are meaningful with regards to
Research Plan Page - 25
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
ecological processes. Many times these sub-units will be relatively homogenous
with respect to geomorphology (which is reflected in the development of stream
classification and sampling approaches) and vegetation (which is reflected in the
development of stand classification and sampling approaches). Identification of the
scale of homogeneity in the intersection between geomorphology and vegetation
will contribute to an ecological definition of the site. The ability to define a site is
important not only in the need to monitor or characterize sites, but also to develop
the ability to describe the units which could be aggregated to meaningful
descriptions of larger areas such as reaches or watersheds.
3.1.2. Construction and evaluation of potential indicators from Phase I
remote and field data.
A key step in indicator development is the statistical evaluation of candidate
indicators. This supports not only the evaluation of indicators, but also analyses of
spatial dimensions. The statistical analysis in this step is nested within the more
mechanistic analysis that was undertaken as part of the conceptual model
development noted above, the expert workshop on indicator select described below,
and the evaluations that are described in Section 5.
3.1.2.1. Questions for indicator development
• What are the values for each measurement for each sampled site? How do these
values vary over space within a site?
• How do variable values vary as a function of site characteristics (stream size,
management class, soil type, plot slope gradient, land cover class, and so on)?
• What are the associations between variables? Can a subset of the of variables
serve as an effective surrogate for a larger set of variables?
This analysis is proceeding using standard parametric and non-parametric statistical
techniques. Results at this point are necessarily preliminary because the range of
sites sampled in the first phase of this research in Drift Creek, Oregon (See Section
6.2 and Figure 16) is not representative of the full range of sites over which the
methodology is intended to be applicable, and because data continue to be analyzed..
Also, the data are available only from one mode of sampling, field observation, and
not yet from remote observations.
3.1.2.2. Preliminary Results
Analysis of the field data from Phase I provides two important results to date. First,
important features, such as conifer crown cover, vary as a function of distance from
the stream as shown in Figure 8, even when the data for all 25 plots are pooled. This
is important, because it provides insight into the spatial structure of variability in
riparian systems which may have a functional consequence. Monitoring methods
Research Plan Page - 26
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Figure 8 Conifer crown cover in Drift Creek as a function of distance from the
stream
This figure shows the crown cover derived from field measurements for 25 plots in Drift Creek.
Box plots are provided for the crown cover in each of 4 10 m zones. The zone or band closest to
the stream has significantly less conifer crown cover than the other bands. This suggests a level
of fine-grained variability that should be considered for capture in a monitoring program.
Figure 9 Distribution of observations in Drift Creek Field Data
The distribution of observations for average plot gradient and number of stems per plot. The
observations are from the 25 Drift Creek sites visited in the summer of 1996. The observations
are widely distributed; such a distribution is the goal in a methods development program. It
means that methods are being developed and tested for a wide variety of conditions.
Research Plan Page - 27
September 25, 1997
-------
Conifer Crown Cover
Drift Creek Plots
<1)
03
=3
cr
CO
c/>
CD
•4—'
CD
1000
500-
'm
n =
25
25
25
25
0 to 10 10 to 20 20 to 30 30 to 40
Distance From Stream (m)
-------
Histogram
5
4
5
3
.5
2
5
1
5
0
90
80
40
60
70
50
20
1 0
30
avg_pl_grd
Histogram
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
140
160
100
120
80
60
40
20
num stem
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
should be able to describe patterns which have a functional significance. Second,
Figure 9 illustrates that the values for the variables at the plots are well distributed,
an important consideration in the collection of data for methods development. In
methods development, one wants to ensure that one has a method that has been
tested against a broad range of conditions. Figure 9 shows several measures for
which the range of observations is an order of magnitude or more.
3.1.3. Expert Workshop
We will organize a workshop of riparian experts for the purpose of extending the
development of the conceptual models and applying it to indicator development.
Indicator development requires that indicators be developed which are well
embedded in conceptual mechanistic models. A literature review has provided a
conceptual model, but scientists currently working in the field are likely to be able to
extend these conceptual models on the basis of their experiences, interactions with
one another and with the rich data set developed in this project or from their own
research. The workshop will draw on experts within the region in considering the
formulation of sets of candidate indicators, and the spatial dimensions of riparian
systems. This workshop will be structured by using the existing and developing
work as a starting point and asking experts to identify reasonable sets of indicators
based on their experience. Their views will serve to refine the research on indicators
within this project. As appropriate, experts from this workshop will be consulted
during the refinement of the indicators. This workshop will be developed in
collaboration with parallel research on Agricultural Riparian areas supported by this
program -- the PNW Ecosystem Management Research Program (Baker and others
1995). The workshop will be held in January, 1998.
3.1.4. Refined evaluation of indicators
After the expert workshop, we will reiterate and expand upon the analytical phases
of earlier steps to continue to refine the development of indicators. This expansion
will include data from a broader set of sites and additional focused consultations
with potential users as a prelude to coming to conclusions about recommendations
on which indicators are appropriate for use. In addition, this step will also
accommodate results from our analyses at larger scales as it develops under research
questions listed in Section 7. Experts from the workshop will be consulted as
appropriate.
3.1.5. Recommendation on indicators for operational use
Recommendations on indicators to be used will be made in conjunction with
recommendations on methods to be used in describing those indicators. These
recommendations will reflect the balance of constraints illustrated in Figure 2.
3.2. Research Question 1C: How can riparian sites be identified across
a region?
Research Plan Page - 30
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
The goal of this research is to recommend a methodology that could be used for
reporting on site-scale characteristics of stream-side riparian areas over larger areas,
e.g. a watershed, a province, or a region. Sites selected on the basis of tradition, or
expert knowledge may result in serious errors in evaluating the status of a
population of sites within a larger area (Paulsen and others In Review). The purpose
of this task is to summarize methods of site selection that allow for statistically valid
extrapolation from a set of sites to a larger extent. This requires definition of the
population to be sampled and geographic information on the locations where that
population occurs.
This question will be pursued by two approaches. First, summarizing existing
approaches for identifying sample sites within a region and empirically evaluating
them in the context of existing data. The second approach will consider efficient
approaches to the development of databases which contain a finer level of detail.
More detail in databases is important because small and intermittent streams play
an important role in landscape function. As a result, the Forest Plan establishment
of a riparian reserve system includes reserves around these features. Despite their
significance, their distribution is not well described by existing data.
3.2.1. Existing Data
The first approach to conducting this task will be to review the existing literature
and summarize it in a manner to address this objective. Issues such as probability
based approaches (e.g. Stehman and Overton 1994; Stevens 1994; Landers and others
1995) and model based approaches to site selection will be considered. These
approaches to site selection are constructed around the notion that there is
consistently available data on the distribution of a feature of the population of
interest, and that feature can be sampled in a statistically meaningful manner. For
example, for riparian areas around streams, probability sampling can be constructed
around widely available information on stream location (or hydrolayers) such as
Reach Files 3 or USGS hydrolayers. The existing literature on designing surveys to
achieve specified levels of precision and accuracy in an estimate of a population of
interest will be summarized (e.g. Larsen and others 1995). Wherever possible data
from this and similar projects will be used to illustrate and quantify the approaches
outlined in the existing literature. This effort will result in a summary of usable
approaches for selecting sites to conduct a survey of riparian sites and report on the
status of those sites with known probability over a larger area, e.g. a watershed, a
waterbasin, a region or a province based o,p. existing widely available datasets. The
limitations of the existing datasets will be highlighting by comparing multiple
datasets at least from the Drift Creek Basin.
3.2.2. Development and Evaluation of New Databases
The research approach to addressing this question recognizes the limitations of the
existing information. Given that the headwaters and sources of streams have
Research Plan Page - 31
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
important functions which are influenced by riparian areas and protected in the
Forest Plan, it is reasonable to ask what is our ability to detect smaller or
intermittent streams in an efficient and reliable manner. Digital photogrammetry
(Greve 1997) is a newly available technique which uses scanned (i.e. digitized) air
photos in a digital setting — a digital photogrammetric workstation or DPW. One of
the most powerful features of this technology is its ability to describe topography
with very fine resolution (e.g. 0.05 m accuracy is expected to be achievable with
1:4,000 air photos. ). A DPW will be used to define fine resolution digital elevation
models (DEMs), calibrated to very fine resolution information (Oregon Department
of Forestry 1994) for half of the eight subbasins for which we have complete
coverage within the Drift Creek basin using 1:24,000 imagery and evaluated on the
other half of the basin. This will result in an analysis of the extent to which fine
resolution digital elevation models developed from commonly available airphotos
(e.g. 1:40,000 or 1:12,000) can accurately identify the location of fine hydrologic
features, e.g. intermittent streams and potentially unstable areas.
Research Plan Page - 32
September 2b, 1997
-------
Available
Monitoring Methods
Remote Methods
Field Methods
Analog
-Traditional
- Digital
hotogrammetri
Digital
Combined Methods
Figure 10 Available Methods
Section 4 Defines the sets of methods available to monitor riparian systems on a regional
basis.
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
4. Task 2 Identification of approaches available to monitor a riparian site
over a large extent?
This section casts the information for riparian characteristics Sections 2 and 3 into
specific requirements and identifies sampling technologies that respond to these
specifications. It outlines the requirements for field and remote data collection in
the context of the three recurring issues — ecological attributes, spatial dimensions,
and geographic location. The first two issues, ecological attributes and spatial
dimensions -- how large an area should be sampled and with what resolution — are
considered first for field collection and then for remote imagery. The section
concludes by describing the approaches that will be used to data collection.
This research effort is focused on the application of remote sensing for describing
riparian areas throughout a large extent; it also includes an extensive field
component which secondarily includes the consideration of alternative methods of
collecting data by direct field observation. The utility and merits of various field
methods will be compared and contrasted to that for various methods of remote
imagery in reports from this project. The design of the project allows for the
possibility that the most effective approach for operational regional monitoring may
be to use only field data or to combine both field and remote imagery.
4.1. Field Requirements
Field data serves two purposes in this project. The first and primary purpose is to
provide a benchmark against which to compare remote imagery. The secondary
purpose is to collect information on the fine-grained small-extent ecological and
spatial character of resources within riparian systems to assist in responding to
research question 1A and IB.
Field data come from two sources, first, by design within this project, and secondly
from "found" data in other projects. This section discusses the design of our
collection of field data, the management section (8) discusses the potential for the
development and use of found data.
4.1.1. Criteria for the design of a field sampling program.
4.1.1.1. Ecological Attributes - What to measure?
Measurements from the field data need to be designed to be consistent with the
initial formulation of indicators as presented in Table 2. They, also need to recognize
that this is an initial formulation and subject to change as the research progresses.
The field data also need to describe features that can be compared to an aerial view
so that comparisons between field and remote data can be made. For example, field
crews describe tree size by measuring trunk dimensions (diameter at breast height,
Research Plan Page - 34
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
or basal area) while remote imagery is more likely to describe tree size by describing
canopy diameter. The conclusion to be drawn from this consideration is that field
data collection should include a detailed and precise description of an area that
supports comparisons with high resolution imagery, and that can be reformulated
to provide a range of different interpretations as candidate indicators are evaluated
against the three constraints shown in Figure 2.
4.1.1.2. Sample Dimensions -- How large an area should be described?
4.1.1.2.1. Field Plots
The size of the area described should be large enough to capture the variability in
riparian areas relevant to the way these areas function. Our literature review
suggests that this would result in a description of an area 40 m from a stream as a
minimum. The literature review would suggest that the plot should be as long as
the patch of homogenous forest or as long as a stream reach. Either length definition
would impose an undefined large burden on the field crews when patches are large
or stream reaches are long. From an analytical perspective, the ground truth sites
should contain at least 25 pixels (assuming a square configuration) to ground truth
digital imagery (Mouat 1997). If we assume that one dimension of the sample unit
(the dimension away from the stream) is 40m, then Table 3 shows the width that
would be required to secure 50 pixels2 as a function of pixel size of the remote
sensor. Dimensions larger than those shown are better.
Table 3. Sample Dimensions as a function of Pixel Size.
This table describes the sample dimensions of a rectangular plot or a steam required to provide a 50
pixels, a rule-of-thumb number of pixels to serve as a basis for ground truthing digital imagery of
different pixel sizes when the ground plot is not a square. Key assumptions are that the plot is a
rectangle whose other dimension is 40m, or that the length of channel sampled is 40 channel widths.
Pixel Size
Dimension of Plot Along the Stream to Achieve
50 Pixels fir Minimum Channel Width to Achieve
50 Pixels
Area (m^)
(m)
1
1.25
9
11.25
64
80
4.1.1.2.2. Stream sampling
The length of stream sampled should be 40 channel widths (Kaufmann 1987;
Kaufman 1993; Reynolds, and others 1993; Herlihy and others 1997) to provide a
250 pixels is used as the standard in this table rather than 25 because some of the configurations depart
drastically from a square configuration.
Research Plan Page - 35
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
reasonable ecological characterization. From a remote sensing perspective, we
benefit by sampling a length of stream which is not obscured by forest cover. If we
apply the 50 pixel rule of thumb, Table 3 shows the minimum channel width that
would provide 50 pixels as a function of different pixel sizes.
4.2. Remote Requirements
Remote imagery can provide a way to characterize features which are not easily
observable. There are two barriers to ease of observation, first, a feature (such as
canopy texture or topography) may be inherently difficult to observe, or second, the
feature may be of such extent that the aggregation of individual easy observations is
costly. Remote imagery provides a possible way to overcome these barriers. Remote
imagery also provides a valuable and flexible archive of raw data for future
generations of managers and scientists. This raw archive is supportive of the
requirement for temporal and regional consistency in descriptions. Such
descriptions are of great importance in monitoring for ecosystem management.
(Ringold and others In Review).
Remote imagery is available in a wide range of resolutions, covering a range of
spectra from a variety of sensors and platforms. An extensive literature discusses
these methods (Murtha 1972; Sayn-Wittgenstein 1978; Jensen 1986; NOAA and
NASA 1987; Beier and others 1992; Richards 1993; Hoffer 1994; Kramer 1994;
Lillesand and Kieffer 1994; Maus 1995; Maleki 1997)
For our purposes, there are three key criteria for determining which technology to
choose: First, we need a method whose spatial and spectral resolution can detect
ecological characteristics of riparian areas; second, we need to consider the
operational requirements associated with feasible instruments. Operational status is
important because our goal is to provide a method that can be used by organizations
with minimal ability to develop a major new infrastructure.
Table 4 lists a range of aircraft, space shuttle and satellite mounted sensors. The
resolution, type of instrument and operating status of each method is listed.
Considering each entry of Table 4 in light of the requirements for monitoring
provides the foundation for selecting remote imaging methods of interest. The
requirements are discussed in terms of ecological characteristics, and sample
dimension. In sample dimension the focus is on spatial resolution rather than on
how large an area should be considered (as it is in field sampling), because
resolution is a more limiting factor in the 'use of remote imagery and is linked to the
extent of coverage3.
3 For standard large format aerial photography the coverage of is about 36,000 times the resolution of
an image scanned at 12.5 microns. 1:4,000 imagery covers an area 914 m on a side (>500 times the area of
a 40m field plot); scanned at 12.5 micron resolution, its pixel size is 0.025 m on a side.
Research Plan Page - 36
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Table 4. Finer resolution remote imaging instruments, resolution, type, and dates
operational.
Sensor System
Spatial
Resolution*
Instrument
Class
Dates
Owner
Platform
P/R
MS
Air Photos 1:10,000
0.1
1A
<1950 -
—
Air
ALT
0.1
3A
1975 -
US
Sat
JPROP1-ADALT
0.1
3A
>1998
Japan
Sat
Air Photos 1:100,000
1
1A
<1950 -
—
Air
ADAR
>.7
IB
1991-
Comm
Air
M7 Mapper
1
1C
1998
Comm
Air
Space Imaging
1
4
IB
1998
Comm
Sat
GDE
1
IB
1998
Comm
Sat
Earthwatch
1
4
IB
1997
Comm
Sat
IFSAR
1.3
3B
Comm
Sat
OrbView
1
8
IB
1998
Comm
Sat
RESURS-F
2
IB
1989
Russia
Sat
CTA Clark
3
15
IB
1997
Comm
Sat
MTVIS/Daedalus
2.5
IB
1993-
Comm
Air
CAS1
5
1C
1990-
Comm
Air
Almaz2
5
IB
1997
Russia
Sat
TRW Lewis
5
30
1C
1997
Comm
Air
SPOT 5A
5
10
IB
1999
France
Sat
SPOT 5B
5
IB
2004
France
Sat
Radarsat
9
3B
1996
Canada
Sat
SPOT 4
10
20
IB
1986
France
Sat
Resource 21
10
IB
1998
Comm
Sat
KOMPSAT
10
10
IB
1998
Korea
Sat
LRS-1D
10
20
IB
1999
India
Sat
JPL AirSAR
10
3B
1990-
US
Air
Landsat 7
15
30
IB
1998
US
Sat
EOS AM-1
15
15
IB
1998
US/Japan
Sat
AVNIR
8
16
IB
1996
US
Air
SIR-C
17
3B
1994 "
US/Italy
Shuttle
AVIRIS
20
1C
1989-
US
Air
CBERS
20
20
IB
1997
China-Brazil
Sat
SIR -B
25
3B
1984 **
US .
Shuttle
ATSR-M
21
2
1991-
US
Sat
TM
30
IB
1982-
US
Sat
ATM
30
IB
1976-
US
Air
<
Notes:
Full names are provided for sensor systems in the glossary;
* Spatial resolutions are divided into two groups: P/R = Panchromatic or Radar and MS =
Multispectral
Research Plan Page - 37
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
** SIR-B and C were active only for the week or two period of these two shuttle missions
Instrument Class Codes:
1 Optical Sensors
1A Analog
IB Digital
1C Hyperspectral
2 Passive Microwave Sensors
3 Active Microwave
3A Altimeters
3B Synthetic Aperature Radar
Owners are listed either as nations or as Comm for commercial ownership. Platforms are
aircraft (Air), shuttle (Shuttle) or satellite (Sat)
The internet provides an effective means to access the rapid evolution of sensors. For example:
a complete list of imaging spectrometers is located on the internet at:
http://www.itc.nl:80/~bakker/is_list.html; information about planned high resolution remote
sensing satellites is available at: http://glenn.uwaterloo.ca/~mwulder/hirespres.html
4.2.1. Ecological Attributes— What to Measure
The sensor of interest must be able to describe the candidate indicators. This
capability arises from the spatial resolution of the sensor and the region of the
electromagnetic spectrum within which it operates. Certain regions of the spectrum
are better for obtaining information on biophysical characteristics than others — See
Figure 1.8 in (Lillesand and Kieffer 1994) or Figure 2.5 in (Maus 1995). For example,
the near infrared region is best for discriminating between conifer and deciduous
trees.
Candidate indicators can be described with technologies operating in the visible
spectrum. This includes instruments in class code 1 (optical sensors), although
HRVIR and AVNIR operate only in a single narrow near- infrared band and are
unlikely to provide insight on many of the indicators of interest. Class code 3
(active imagers) includes altimeters (3A), and synthetic aperture radar (3B). Each of
these technologies has the potential to provide insight about the status of riparian
forests, particularly with regard to fine resolution topographic features, vegetation •
structure or moisture (e.g. Waring and others 1995; Means 1996). To the extent that
they penetrate both cloud and forest cover, they have special interest in regard to
this set of features. Class code 2 (passive microwaves) has only one instrument with
the requisite resolution, the ATSR-M. It is designed for marine observations, rather
than for analyses of vegetation or of the terrestrial environment. Merging
information from different technologies also has promise (e.g. NASA 1997).
4.2.2. Sample Dimensions — Spatial Resolution
Research Plan Page - 38
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
At the outset, we do not know the required resolution of the sensor .to best
characterize riparian structure. The appropriate course of action is to be biased in
favor of technologies which can observe finer detail rather than coarser detail. This
strategy is appropriate because the usefulness of coarser resolution technology can be
inferred from finer resolution technology, but not the reverse. The literature review
and field data (See Figure 8) suggest that the appropriate technology must have a
spatial resolution that can lead to the characterization of ecological features of about
ten meters, and so the technology should have a resolution of less than 10 m,
preferably closer to 3 m. Note in Table 3 that 3 m pixels (9 m^) could be ground
truthed with a plot of 40 m x 11 m and a stream channel of 11 m or more.
Table 4 lists pixel sizes i.e. resolution, associated with the imaging approach.
Standard practice in the interpretation of digital remote imagery is to describe or
classify objects on the basis of the characteristics of a single pixel, although some
techniques (e.g. texture analysis) use a neighborhood filter or window which is at
least 3 pixels square (3 pixels by 3 pixels) (Frank 1988; Cohen and Spies 1992). Thus a
method could reasonably be expected to describe features which are three times the
size of its resolution. Thus, Table 4 is limited to sensors with resolution of less than
30; finer resolution sensors are more capable of describing finer grained features.
4.2.3. Status of the Technology
Since our goal is to provide an operational4 methodology, operational methods
should be favored for consideration over emerging technologies; and technologies
which are in more routine use should be favored over operational technologies
which are operating more as research tools. A number of attributes combine to
make an approach more operational these are discussed in general in (Barber 1994)
and are reflected in this research plan under the evaluation criteria (Section 5).
4.2.3.1. Aerial Photography
Aerial photography has been in widespread use for precision purposes for 4 decades
or more (e.g. Dilworth 1956). Aerial photography is often considered to provide the
"ground-truth" against which coarser resolution imagery should be evaluated (e.g.
Maus 1995). Aerial photography also provides a historical record, since archives exist
which provide coverage through the 1950's and in some cases through the 1940's.
Archives provide a foundation for evaluating questions for systems with long or
unknown time lags. A large number of vendors provide access to aerial imagery,
and data collection can be commissioned with ease for any specific time and place.
There are two difficulties with analog imagery. The first difficulty is that the cost of
analyzing each parcel is roughly identical. Thus, while it may be relatively easy to
4"Operational" in the context of this project means operational for routine use organizations
particularly including Federal land management or regulatory agencies, by similar state agencies, by
groups of such agencies or by other organizations with a mandate to protect natural resources.
Research Plan Page - 39
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
interpret a small area with great precision, interpreting a large area would be very
difficult. A second difficulty with aerial imagery is that because it is an analog image,
it does not tie well to GIS systems which are extremely valuable for managing and
analyzing spatially explicit information. The advent of digital photogrammetry in
the 1990's (Heipke 1995; Greve 1997) has begun to eliminate this barrier and
represents a promising new method for using analog imagery and is one that will be
explored in this project.
4.2.3.2. Digital Imagery
Digital imagery is provided by many sensor types and conveys a wider variety of
information than traditional analog image analysis and allows for more tractable
treatment of the data. Most of the sensors on Table 4 provide digital information.
Digital imagery for civilian terrestrial application has been available since the mid
1970's with the launch of the Landsat series of satellites. (See TM sensors in Table 4).
Digital imagery requires the use of training or calibration sites (which may be true
ground observations or air photos) so that digital descriptions of a parcel of land can
be compared to "ground-truth". This supports the creation of a predictive model
which predicts ground characteristics given digital descriptions. Thus, while efforts
must be made to develop a method, once it is developed, it can be applied over large
areas with relative ease. Digital sensors in class 1 are considered to be more
operational than digital sensors in class 3 for our applications.
4.4 Field Data Collection Methods
Riparian characteristics can be described from direct ground observation. This
project provides for the comparison of three methods5:
5It must be noted that these methods can be used in different formulations than used in this project and
so the discussion here refers to our implementation of these methods rather than to the application of
these methods by others.
Research Plan Page - 40
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Table 5 Field Methods used in this research
Method
Description
Time
Required
Area
Covered
Detailed
Description
Plot
Detailed Description
of Vegetation and
Topography; location
of all trees ± 2m
8+ person-
hours
40m x 40
m; 1600 m^
(Barker
and
Bollman
1996)
Point Center
Quarter on
Transects (PCQ)
General Description
of Vegetation and
Topography
<1 person-
hour
20 meter
radius
circle; 1260
m^
(Mueller-
Dombois
and
Ellenberg
1974)
EMAP/REMAP
characterization
General Description
of Vegetation
Structure
<0.25
person-
hour
20m x 10m;
200 m2
(Hayslip
and others
1994)
The plot method provides the high resolution characterization that provides the
best foundation for ground truth. The PCQ method is a much more rapid method
although in our application providing a less finely resolved characterization. The
EMAP/REMAP characterization is a quick description whose value for ground
truthing may be minimal. Its value for this project will be greater in comparing a
coarser to a finer level of description, and for determining the representativeness of
the vegetation of our plots. The value for EMAP will be to provide some insight
into the nature of variability associated with their quicker characterization.
The project will compare and contrast the quality of the information developed by
these three methods.
4.3 Image Selection Strategy
Our image selection strategy has chosen to focus on multiple approaches using
technologies with different characteristics, operational maturities all of which are
capable of the required resolution and detection of ecological characteristics. We
have chosen to focus on:
1. Aerial photography is the standard for accuracy and precision in measurement
and classification. Traditional air photo interpretation has documented its
value in riparian characterization (Mereszczak and others 1990; Clemmer
1994). We intend to analyze it with traditional approaches (e.g. Avery and
Research Plan Page - 41
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Berlin 1992; Lillesand and Kieffer 1994) and with more recently available
digital approaches (e.g. Greve 1997).
2. ADAR (Positive Systems April 10, 1997), a fine resolution (lm and 3 m in our use)
aircraft mounted sensor whose spectra match the 3 visible spectra and one of
the near IR bands of the existing Landsat Thematic Mapper, but whose spatial
resolution is much finer. ADAR is selected not only because of its own
characteristics, but also because it allows for the examination of the value of
fine spatial resolution information of the type that is likely to be
commercially available in satellite sensors in a few years. More detail on this
sensor is provided in Appendix 9.3.
3. Emerging technologies — by placing a request with the US government Civilian
Applications Committee to explore the application of more sophisticated
technology. (See Appendix 9.5) In addition, we are exploring the availability
of existing imagery, particularly SAR datasets for the sites which will be
visited this year6.
These technologies are used differently in different phases of our research.
Specifically, the initial focus is on the first and second technologies — these are ones
that are more likely to provide an operational payoff in the short-term. In contrast,
emerging technologies, such as radar, laser, and fine resolution infrared sensors may
provide more effective or complementary approaches in the longer run.
Our approach is to use both air photos and ADAR at multiple resolutions in one
basin in the first phase of our effort and then to use a single resolution in the more
extensive second phase. In addition, Thematic Mapper data and classifications are
unusually well developed for this region (Cohen and others 1995) and provide a
basis for comparing a broad range of image resolutions.
The use of 3 m (i.e. 9 m^) digital imagery means that field plots whose dimensions
are 40 m by 11 m would presumably provide a sufficient areal basis for terrestrial
ground truth, and that streams wider than 11m would provide a basis for stream
characterization ground truth. 1 m imagery would allow for a smaller field plot and
for smaller streams.
/
6 Neither SL1CER (a laser altimeter) nor Shuttle SAR data are available for our sites in Drift Creek.
Research Plan Page - 42
September 25,1997
-------
User Committee
Remote Image Data
Field Data
3B
Non-Techical
Evaluation Criteria
3A
Technical
Evaluation Criteria,
Initial
Formulations
Figure 11 Evaluation of Results
Section 5 discusses the ways in which results from different methods will be compared.
There are two categories of evaluation criteria - technical and non-technical. The former
can be evaluated solely on the basis of the field and remote data and reflect the
technological constraint illustrated in Figure 2. The latter require user inputs and reflects
the user constraint and its interaction with the other constraints illustrated in Figure 2.
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
5. Task 3. Comparison of Selected Monitoring Methods
The goal of this project is to make a recommendation on a method to be used for
operational monitoring. It is important that the criteria and rationale for such a
method be clearly stated and transparent. This task provides for that information to
be developed. We split the criteria into two categories - technical characteristics are
those which can be more objectively identified and non-technical characteristics.
The general approach to this comparison is provided in Figure 11.
The following text lists the key individual elements in the evaluation. However,
there is no clear procedure for aggregating these evaluations of the quality of
individual indicators and individual methods into an overall evaluation or
recommendation. Given the multiple values supported by riparian systems, any
such evaluation would have strong subjective elements. Thus, our approach to
reporting on the merits of methods will classify and identify the strengths and
weaknesses of different methods in the most transparent possible manner. These
criteria are described with a comparison of field and remote data in mind -- the
primary emphasis of this portion of our research. They will be appropriately adapted
for comparisons of one field method to another and for one remote method to
another.
The technological criteria represent the empirical evaluation of "Capabilities of
Technologies" as shown in Figure 2. The other criteria are representative of the
other two constraints shown in Figure 2. Thus, the application of these criteria are
the means by which the tension between these three constraints will be illuminated
and evaluated.
These sets of criteria will be applied not only to the development of the initial
formulation, but have also been applied to the selection of technologies to compare
(Section 4) and will be applied to the formulation of the initial recommendations --
see Figure 3.
5.1. Research Question 3A What are the technological characteristics of
each method?
Candidate approaches can be objectively evaluated against these "technological
criteria". In terms of Figure 2, these steps link technological capabilities with
monitoring design.
5.1.1. Technical evaluation step 1 Does the imagery accurately locate and
encompass the site?
The first step in the technical evaluation is to match the locations of the field data
and the remote imagery. This step is important not only in methods development
in which one set of spatially explicit data is compared to another set, it is also
Research Plan Page - 44
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
important in an operational monitoring program. If sites are selected on a
probability basis, we must have some level of confidence that the data collected
actually represent the specified site.
This step will be conducted qualitatively and quantitatively. Qualitatively, image
analysts will describe the extent to which they can confidently match image
locations to ground locations using GPS information, prominent features within
the image (not necessarily within the field plot), or lastly reference to finer
resolution or other types of imagery.
Quantitatively we will analyze the magnitude of change in plot or subplot statistics
introduced by displacing the location of interpretation from the estimated best
location. Digital descriptions of the plot will be developed which are the best match
to the site, and compared to descriptions of the plot that are displaced from the
estimated best match by a series of pixels in multiple directions allowing up to 50%
displacement from the best estimate. A similar approach will be applied to air photo
interpretations.
The result of this analysis will be a qualitative and quantitative discussion of the
issues in matching each category of remote imagery or field data to specified field
locations.
5.1.2. Technical evaluation step 2. Can the indicator be observed with the
candidate approach?
A range of indicators could be derived from the measurements taken from the field
and from the remote imagery. The first question in remote image interpretation is
to determine which indicators can and cannot be formulated from the remote
imagery.
Image analysts will view analog images directly to determine if the set of initial
indicators can be identified. The procedure will be more complex for digital imagery
because the approach by which it is determined if indicators can be observed is
inextricably linked with the determination of the nature of the relationship. With
digital imagery, sets of digital descriptions of a location are developed. These are
statistically compared to independent estimates of the character (or characters) of
interest to determine if a relationship exists.
The result of this analysis will be a screening matrix which describes the ability of
indicators to be observed by standard air photo interpretation methods and by digital
imagery. Conclusions will be drawn separately for each technology and for each
major cover type sampled.
5.1.3. Technical evaluation step 3. What is the relationship between ground
and remote image data?
Research Plan Page - 45
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Where estimates of indicators can be developed in common between methods, we
can plot the estimate derived from one method (from remote imagery) against that
for another method (ground data or fine resolution aerial photography) to
determine the relationship and particularly to inspect this relationship to identify
ranges of the values of the indicator for which a method may be more appropriate.
Figure 12 illustrates how scatterplots might vary as a function of the resolution of
the method under consideration. It may be that a fine grained and coarse grained
method perform equally well in describing an indicator over one range, but that the
ability of the coarser resolution method is less discriminating for some values of the
potential indicator.
The implementation of this step will vary according to the source of the imagery
and the analytical technique as described below.
5.1.3.1. Analog imagery
Using standard photointerpretation and photogrammetric methods, (Sayn-
Wittgenstein 1978; Aldrich and others 1984; Avery and Berlin 1992; Lillesand and
Kieffer 1994; Carson 1995) estimates of each indicator that can be observed will be
developed. The procedure for the use of this imagery is shown in Figure 13.
5.1.3.2 Digital imagery
Estimates of indicators will be developed using standard statistical and image
processing routines (Richards 1993; Cohen and others 1996)}. The procedure for the
use of this imagery is shown in Figure 13 and 14. Relationships between field
indicators and digital representations will be examined with scatterplots.
Transformations of the original digital data, such as texture, band rations, and
vegetation indices will also be evaluated to see if it enhances our ability to measure
indicators and if so, under what circumstances, the nature of the relationship,
(linear or non-linear, univariate or multivariate...) between the indicators and
digital descriptions will determine the best classification techniques to use.
Possibilities include regression, discriminant function, and maximum likelihood
analyses. Where indicators are logically continuous, the digital measurements will
be continuous. Where our exploratory analyses show that this is not feasible, or
when the indicator is of a categorical nature (e.g. cover type), the digital
measurements will be categorical.
The result of this step will be a series of plots which relate estimates of indicators
from one method to other methods and a set of qualitative and quantitative
judgments about the range of indicator values which may be more usable from a
particular method.
Research Plan Page - 46
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Figure 12 Example of comparison of methods
This figure is a hypothetical comparison between methods. It suggests that a finer resolution
method may have a broader range of applicability with regard to a measure (in this case tree
density) than a finer resolution method. This type of analysis representative of a broader and
more detailed analysis that will be conducted comparing results from different methods.
Figure 13 Use of Phase I Data for Analog and Digital Analyses
Estimates of indicators from the field data and from the analog imagery using widely available
techniques (Sayn-Wittgenstein 1978; Aldrich and others 1984; Avery and Berlin 1992; Lillesand
and Kieffer 1994; Carson 1995) can be developed (2,4). After coregistration checks (which
support technical evaluation step 1) scatterplots can be developed and inspected and
regressions developed(5) to describe the quality of, and the limits for use of, analog imagery for
each candidate indicator. The result is a set of indicators of defined quality (6). Then, for the
purpose of a more extensive description, and as a foundation for evaluating digital imagery,
analog interpretations can be made a broader set of sites — termed the A sites — see box 7.
Digital image analysis differs from analog analysis in that it does not allow for the direct
interpretation of information from the image. Rather, a range of techniques are available which
allow numerical descriptions of a specified location (or plot) to be developed (9). These
numerical descriptions are compared to estimates of the characteristics of the plot and models
describing the relationship between the "true" estimates and the numerical descriptions are
developed. "Calibration" is the name assigned to this process and the result is a series of
models which relate numerical descriptions of a location to the characteristics of that location
(11). Just as in the case of the analog imagery coregistration and statistical evaluations (10)
need to be made. These models (11) can be applied to the numerical descriptions at the larger
number of sites where field data does not exist and estimates of the status of these locations
can be developed (12). Estimates of these indicators at the A sites (12) will be compared to
estimates of the indicators made by standard photointerpretation techniques whose quality is
known. Once again, coregistration and statistical evaluations will have to be made (13). This
comparison will further document the quality of the estimates made by the digital methods (14).
Once the quality of the numerical estimation procedure is documented estimates of known
quality of the indicators at other sites can be provided (15). As desired and as the methods
allow, fine grained descriptions of riparian areas could be developed for an extensive area.
Figure 14 Use of Phase II data for Digital Analysis
Digital imagery will be treated slightly differently in phase II than in phase I for forest types
sampled in both phases. Treatment of digital data for forest types which are new in phase D
will follow the procedures outlined under the phase I heading. In phase II, we can apply the
estimation procedure developed in phase I to new digital information and compare it to a new
set of field data resulting in a set of comparisons between digital estimation and ground data
independent of the calibration field data.
Numerical descriptions of a specified location (or plot) will be developed (4).. The indicator
estimation procedure developed in phase I will be applied (5), and estimates of indicators at
phase II plots will be made (6). In parallel estimates of indicators from phase II field data will .
be developed (2). Just as in phase I coregistration and statistical evaluations (7) need to be
made. This provides for a more robust estimate of the quality of the indicator estimation
procedure (8). Depending on the outcome of this step, we may choose to modify the digital
Research Plan Page - 47
September 25, 1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
estimation procedure (9). This revised procedure can be used to make more extensive
descriptions.
The use of phasell data for analog imagery will be the same as in phase I.
Figure 15 Digital analysis of analog imagery
Digital photogrammetric workstations (DPW's) offer the opportunity to combine the
advantages of digital imagery with the advantages of analog imagery (Helava Leica 1996; Greve
1997). Their use is shown in Figure 15. As such their use and application requires an approach
which combines aspects of these two technologies. The use of a DPW requires that analog
imagery be scanned with high resolution and precision. Estimates of indicators of riparian
status can be developed using a DPW in two modes. The first mode is equivalent to the
approach used for analog imagery. Here, software routines (see box 5 ) (rather than a human air
photo interpreter) developed for use with a DPW provide estimates of indicators (7). One such
indicator might be the topography of the ground?. The quality of this measure can be compared
directly to easily collectable field data (2). Another indicator that a DPW can easily provide is
a digital description of the topography of a forest canopy (6). This is an indicator which cannot
be verified against easily collected field data within this or similar projects. However, the
accuracy of the estimates can be inferred from similar applications in which field data can be
compared to a DPW estimates.
DPW information can also be treated in the same manner as digital imagery. Specifically, digital
estimates of a plot can be provided and compared to field data to create predictive models
(12). These models are analogous to those described in box 11 of Figure 13. An example might
be that aim horizontal resolution digital elevation model might be a good predictor of forest
type, or canopy complexity. These estimates can be used just as other estimates of digital
imagery as discussed above and as shown in box 15 of Figure 13.
^Yes, this does require that the ground be visible in the image.
Research Plan Page - 48
September 25, 1997
-------
c 600
^ 500
3 400
100
200
[
Tree Density (# Trees/Acre)
< <$ sS < >_> ^ *<$'¦ ;»* I ' 1 ;><<>'
>' > <' « <> !-Vs~1 " < V* -" ' ~ >
< << ' J V*" » . hi Af\J\ -'
> - <> 'A <„ '< J 'il-j '> J<-' ( >
-')," 1
^ V»V*kv.<»'4 »
^ A •»> ~ * \eK t titf 7A. » -w
» w v* '*«. ».r *<> «** * ~ % ** < . 4
. -'-. '-,;.-\\%¦<"¦ ^V<*$?%?.$7"
' '• ;* ¦«:, -r v'/! ¦<*:•; •rv—
-.' -"- - -". ¦'.,. jv i->.. 7 % rlf-W?- ,,,u $ ->/' -
> ¦ -v.
, *' ¦» i , * X1
. v t , vv ,
-------
Use of Phase I Data
Field Data
Phase I
Analogue
Imagery Phase
Digital Imagery
Phase I
Identification
of quality of
indicator
Indicator
Estimation
Procedure 1
Estimates of
Indicators at
Field Plots
Coregistration
and Statistical
Evaluation
Estimates of
indicators off
plots - A
Estimate of
Indicators at
Plots
Numerical
Descriptions of
Field Plots
Estimates of
indicators at
selected sites
off plots - A
Coregistration
& Statistical
Evaluation
Coregistration
& Statistical
Evaluation
Identification
of quality of
indicator
estimate using
Procedure 1
Estimate of
indicators-at
selected sites
off plots - B
using
Procedure 1
-------
Use of Phase II Data and Digital Imagery
Phase II Field Data
Digital Imagery
Phase II
Revised
Procedures?
Numerical
Description of
Phase II Field Plot
Estimates of
Indicators off Phase
II plots using
revised procedures
Estimate of
Indicators at Phase
II Field Plots
Identification of
quality of indicator
Estimate of
Indicators at Phase
II Plots
Coregistration and
Statistical
Evaluation
Procedure 1
-------
Field Data
Analogue Imagery
Estimate of
Indicators at Field
Plots
Numerical
Descriptions of
Field Plots
Estimates of
indicators off plots
Indicator
Estimation
Procedure 2
Coregistration and
Statistical
Evaluation
Coregistration and
Statistical
Evaluation ¦
Vendor Supplied
Prediction
Procedures
Estimate of
Indicators of Known
Quality
High Precision
Scanning
Estimate of
Indicators at Field
Plots
Estimate of
Indicators
Unverifiable
Quality at Field
Plots or Elsewhare
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
5.1.3.3 Digital Treatment of Analog Imagery
Digital photogrammetric workstations (DPW's) offer the opportunity to combine
the advantages of digital imagery and analog imagery (Helava Leica 199Greve
1997). Their use and application requires an approach which combines aspects of
these two technologies -- see Figure 15. The use of a DPW requires that analog
imagery be scanned with high resolution and precision.
If this approach produces reasonable quality estimates, we will be able to utilize the
enormous archive of aerial photography to reconstruct riparian forest condition
over long periods and over large spaces with minimal cost. This will provide a cost
effective approach to addressing components of research question 5 (See Section 7),
especially those having a historical component.
5.1.5. Technical evaluation step 4. What is the quality of each estimate?
Resource management is supported by estimates of known, not necessarily high
quality. The purpose of this step is to define the quality of each estimate.
This procedure will differ as a function of method as shown in Figures 13, 14 and 15
and in the QA plan. Estimates of indicator characteristics can be derived by direct
inspection of photographs and the quality of these estimates can be compared
directly to ground observations. In contrast, the estimation of indicator values from
digital imagery requires a calibration data set — the field plot data. Thus, for analog
imagery the phase I field data can be used as an evaluation dataset. For digital
imagery, the phase I field data will have already been used to calibrate the
estimation procedure. Thus, the phase I digital data will be calibrated against
estimates of the indicators for locations in which the finest resolution imagery exists
and for indicators which are interpreted with high precision and accuracy. Table 6
summarizes the approaches to evaluation.
One option for a third phase of data collection will be to collect a dataset to support
additional evaluation of digital image analysis especially over larger scales. (See
Section 7 and Figures 13,14 and 15)
The key and obvious uncertainty in this scheme is the extent to which reliable
indicator procedures can be developed for two methods which overlap in spatial
scale and in ecological characteristics. If a set of indicators can be identified in
common, then estimates of the status of the riparian areas at a large number of sites
can be developed.
Research Plan Page - 53
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Table 6 Sources of information for estimating method quality8.
Medium
Quality Estimation Approach
1. Air Photos (See Figure 13)
2. Digital Imagery or Digital Analysis
Techniques (See Figures 13,14, and
15)
• Ground Observation
• Finer Resolution Air Photos
• Statistical relationships with
calibration (or training) ground
observation
• Statistical relationships with
calibration (or training) air photos
• New datasets
5.2. Research Question 3B: What are the non-technological constraints
in recommending a feasible method?
The non-technical characteristics to be considered at the outset in a comparison of
methods areas are no less important than the technological ones. Candidate
approaches can be subjectively evaluated against these "non-technological criteria".
The user committee will be asked to assist in the development and implementation
of several of these steps, particularly the second and third. In terms of Figure 2, these
criteria link monitoring design to user needs and to ecological functions.
5.2.1. Non-technical evaluation criterion 1: What is the cost of each method
Our reports will include the acquisition, data management and analytical costs from
our work and from literature sources. We will describe the costs for single and
multiple sites. Discussions on the comparative costs in operational use will also be
provided.
5.2.2. Non-technical evaluation criterion 2: How well would each method fit
within the context of the existing infrastructure?
The requirements for analyzing each data set will be outlined and compared to the
level of capability existing and foreseen within the Federal resource management
agencies.
5.2.3. Non-technical evaluation criterion 3: How well would each method
respond to management needs?
® See the project QA plan for more detail on the treatment of quality assurance and error estimation.
Research Plan Page - 54
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
It is not uncommon for specific management requirements for information to be
subject to refinement, especially as new management approaches, such as ecosystem
management are implemented (Grumbine 1994; Brunner and Clark 1997).
Discussions based on demonstrations of tangible results between information users
and information producers can assist this refinement, (e.g. Ringold and others 1997).
Thus, alternative formulations of indicators will be discussed with land managers to
seek their views on the usefulness of different methods.
5.2.4. Non-technical evaluation criterion 4: How well would each method
respond to change in ecological understanding?
Ecological understanding will improve over time not only as a result of the general
development of science, but also as a result of acquiring and using information from
a monitoring program. This suggests that future generations of scientists and
managers may wish to restructure archived information to respond to this new
understanding. If some methods provide data which is more amenable to
reanalysis, or reformulation, then those methods might be favored.
5.2.5. Non-technical evaluation criterion 5: How likely are the methods to
provide consistent results over large areas and long periods of time?
Ecosystem management places a premium on the development of regionally and
temporally consistent information. We will evaluate the likely consistency of
methods in application over relatively large scales. One approach to this evaluation
will be to consider the results achieved with multiple analysts.
5.2.6. Non-technical evaluation criterion 6: How well does each method lend
itself to cross-scale and cross issue analyses?
The Forest Plan requires monitoring of numerous features at numerous scales
(USDA/FS and USDI/BLM 1994; Mulder and others 1995). This is a general
feature of landscape monitoring, and it reflects the operation of ecological patterns at
multiple spatial scales. To the extent that monitoring or characterization at one scale
can shed light on features at other scales, that method should be favored. Our
analysis will highlight the compatibilities of each method with other methods that
could be used for monitoring or landscape characterization. Initially this issue will
be addressed qualitatively, section 7.1.1 outlines a quantitative approach to
addressing this issue that will be addressed later in the research.
Research Plan Page - 55
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
6. Task 4. Site Selection
Our dominant purpose in selecting sites is to identify the locations where data sets
from remote imagery and field observation will be compared.
6.1. How should sites be distributed for methods development?
In methods development sites should be distributed across space to be
representative of the variety of conditions within the area and population of
interest. A wider variety of test conditions supports broader applicability in the
recommended method, and a more robust statistical foundation for evaluation9.
6.2. Site Designation -- Phase i
Phase I samples (summer '96) provided for a selection of sites across ecosystem types
within one basin. Twenty five sites were selected on a stratified probability basis
within Federally administered land from the Drift Creek Basin in Western Oregon.
This basin is outlined in Figure 16. The Drift Creek Basin was selected because it has
a long and continuing history of research (e.g. Hall and others ; Moring and R.L.
Lantz 1975; Moring and R.L. Lantz 1975; Moring and R.L. Lantz 1975), a variety of
cover types (including never logged wilderness areas and recent clear cuts), and
geographic relevance to the Forest Plan. The Basin is about 140 km^ and has about
260 km of streams (Oregon Department of Forestry 1994). It is one of 520 fifth field
waterbasins within the President's Northwest Forest Plan region.
To ensure that a wide variety of representative cover types were sampled, we
designed a stratification scheme, and took equal numbers of samples from each of
the strata. The stratification scheme was designed around land cover type, and
stream size. Vegetation cover is a major determinant of riparian function. Stream
size is a useful stratification factor for several reasons. It is a reasonable surrogate for
geomorphic setting, an important determinant of riparian function (Gregory and
others 1991). Stream size is also related to local topography with smaller streams
being associated with steeper terrain. Third, the Forest Plan establishes riparian
buffers which are a function of stream size and which extend to intermittent
streams (USDA/FS and USDI/BLM 1994), a class which we wanted to sample.
The data which enabled us to describe the existence of the strata within the Drift
creek basin came from two sources. Stream size was divided into two levels based
on data from the Oregon Department of Forestry /Oregon Department of Forestry
1994). TM classifications (Cohen and others 1995) were grouped into four levels
(Large and Very Large Conifer/Mixed, Medium Conifer/Mixed, Small
^This is in contrast to a design which seeks to describe the status of resources as they exist in an area in
which each type of area would be selected on the basis of its existence in the region (at least if the
objective is to minimize the variance associated with the overall description (Stehman 1997).
Research Plan Page - 56
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Conifer/Mixed, and Broadleaf and other). These cover types were found on 31%, 7%,
19%, and 42% of the study area respectively10. Three sites were selected on a
probability basis from each of the eight cells of this land cover by stream size
stratification. Actual sites visited were modified from this selection when the field
observations did not match the TM classification.
6.3. Site Designation - Phase II
Site designation in the second phase (summer '97) will continue to sample a
diversity of sites from a broader area. This will be accomplished by collaboration
with an EMAP stream sampling program occurring during the summer of 1997. The
second phase will sample sites within two provinces (34,000 km^) rather than sites
within a single watershed as was done in the first phase. The candidate sites are
shown on Figure 16. The provinces will include the Oregon coastal province, and
the Willamette Basin. The Willamette Basin is not only the province immediately
adjacent to the coastal province, it is also one of the case study areas of the PNW
Ecosystem Management Research Program. The design for the second phase of the
field sampling will be integrated with the sampling effort of the EMAP PNW effort
during the summer of 1997. The advantages of this coordination include significant
logistical and scientific synergies.
The EMAP sampling is expected to occur on approximately 17 coast range streams,
32 Willamette Basin Streams (See Figure 16). Eighty percent of the sites are located
on lower order streams. No intermittent streams will be sampled as was done in
phase I -- EMAP sampling does not include intermittent streams.
The exact number of sites to be sampled will be determined by the ability to
coordinate visits with the EMAP field crews, and by the ecological characteristics of
the EMAP sites; the more fully site visits can be coordinated, the larger the number
of sites can be visited by the RIM crews11. The number of plots may be greater than
the number of sites, if multiple plots can be sampled at each EMAP site. Plots with
fewer trees on easier terrain can be sampled in a shorter period of time, and
multiple plots may therefore be sampled in the one day allotted to each EMAP visit.
As in the phase I effort site selection will be aided by examining the TM
classifications of the selected sites. We have identified the TM classification of each
site as one way to determine if the sites are forested or not and to ensure that a
diversity of forest types is covered by the EMAP sample. These classifications are
being verified and refined by examination of existing recent air photos. This
10The "other" category was <5% of the total area. The study area is not the basin as a whole, rather
just the pixels adjacent to the ODFW identified streams.
For safety reasons a field crew must consist of three people, although the plot sample can be
developed by two people. If our field visits are coincident with EMAP visits, then two person field
crews will be able to do the work. If site visits are not coincident, the total number of sites that can be
visited will decrease.
Research Plan Page - 57
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
procedure suggests that the EMAP sample provides for a variety of forest cover
types. Therefore, it would seem that our requirements for representative sites in a
variety of terrain types well dispersed in the area of interest can be met by using the
EMAP sample. Additional effort will be allocated to refine our judgments about
which sites to visit prior to field work. If necessary, additional field sites will be
identified outside of the EMAP sample to ensure adequate coverage of cover types.
As a result of the collection of phase II site data we will be able to develop:
• a more robust evaluation of the estimation procedure developed from the phase
I data (for the forest types covered by phase I and phase II sites),
• improved estimation procedures (for the forest types covered by phase I and II
sites), and
• digital estimation procedures for more forest types (those covered by the phase II
data but not by the phase I data).
Research Plan Page - 58
September 25,1997
-------
Urban
Agriculture
LJ Other
1997 Sampling
Locations
Drift Creek
Figure 16 Phase II sampling locations
-------
Initial
Formulations
f 5A
Value of Alternative
v Characterizations
5B
Larger Extents
5C
Linkages
Initial
Recommendation
Figure 17 Initial Recommendation. Section 7 discusses a series of
evaluations and demonstrations using initial formulations of methods and
indicators to provide an initial recommendation on a monitoring method.
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
7. Task 5: Demonstrations and Evaluations
The research described above would result in an initial formulation of monitoring
methods. From a users' perspective it will have several shortcomings: it will not
have been demonstrated that the method can perform as promised (Brunner, 1992),
that it can be used to effectively and efficiently describe ecologically meaningful
features across a large area; it will contain no evaluation of the value of higher cost
finer resolution imagery, and it will contain no consideration of any approach to
defining the concatenation or chaining together of individual sites to larger extents.
The research described in this section is intended to begin to reduce these
shortcomings and as a result provide revised recommendations for monitoring and
assessment.
This research is divided into 3 parts:
1. What is the value of alternative resolution riparian characterizations?
2. What is the condition of riparian sites over larger extents?
• What are the indicators of riparian sites over larger extents,
• Whait are the reference conditions for these features, and
• What is the status of riparian sites using small and large extent indicators
over a large extent?
3. What are the linkages between current riparian conditions and other ecological
features, i.e. do riparian indicators predict the status of other features of the
environment?
While members of the existing research team (See Sections 8 and 9.6) will play an
active role in addressing these questions, the effort for the second question will be
significantly enhanced and focused by a two year NRC post doctoral fellow. The
research on the second and third questions will be more fully developed and subject
to external peer review as part of the process of selecting the post doctoral fellow.
7.1. Research Question 5A: What is the value of alternative resolution
riparian characterizations?
t
Different methods will inevitably characterize the same area in different ways,
either because methods differ in spatial or ecological resolution, or in the accuracy or
precision of the estimates, which they provide. If maximization of precision or
accuracy were' to be the dominant criterion for evaluation, then generally finer
resolution methods would be the most desirable. Finer resolution methods though
inevitably have higher costs associated with them including higher acquisition and
Research Plan Page - 62
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
handling costs. One is obligated therefore to consider the value associated with this
higher cost.
This research task will be to take two approaches to addressing this question. The
first approach will explore changes in information content as a function of the scale
of the method. The second approach will utilize a range of quantitative models
which relate riparian stand structure to one of the three values described in the
conceptual models. These models cover multiple functions and scales. The
sensitivity of model output to different resolutions input data will be evaluated.
7.1.1. Research Question 5A1: Do different characterizations vary in
information content?
Currently there are many efforts underway among agencies, universities and the
private sector to utilize satellite derived imagery for monitoring and inventory of
forested ecosystems. These programs seek to characterize stream, aquatic, and forest
ecosystems within a watershed or across watersheds. The imagery employed for
these objectives span a range of platforms and resolutions including imagery of
resolution less than one meter (FLIR on helicopters) to three satellite mounted
sensors — 10 m (SPOT) to 30 m (TM) to one kilometer (AVHRR). The challenge
remains to integrate these varying media and how to relate information across
spatial scales. At the interface between stream and forest, the riparian zone reflects
both terrestrial and aquatic elements of the watershed. Subsequently, remotely
sensed information will need to be related and integrated with information
gathered from terrestrial and stream monitoring studies. To this end, we propose to
investigate how to relate high resolution information to the larger-scale (i.e., coarser
grain) imagery such as TM currently employed by federal agencies for forest
inventory and monitoring.
We will undertake a signal processing analysis to examine how information is
translated from high resolution imagery (e.g., scanned aerial photos [1:4000], and
digital imagery [1 m] to lower resolution [30 m]). Several methods of scaling from
high to low resolutions will be employed to examine the interaction between
pattern (e.g., vegetation cover) and change in resolution (e.g., moving from one
meter to 25 m resolution). Methods employed to emulate scaling resolution include
wavelet analysis and standard methods common to image processing software (e.g.
IMAGINE™).
The result of this analysis will be several fold. We will quantify information loss as
a function of decreasing resolution; identify type of information loss or retention as
a function of decreasing resolution; assess comparability of classification across
resolution, and assess efficacy of lower resolution imagery to complement high
resolution imagery and ability to capture riparian-upland patterns. This analysis is
also a quantitative version of non-technical evaluation question 6 (see section 5.2.6)
Research Plan Page - 63
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
7.1.2. Research Question 5A2. Do different characterizations make a
difference in ecological models?
Models embody a defined level of understanding about ecological patterns and
processes. They use this understanding to describe or predict. A number of models
relate riparian structure (i.e. features that can be monitored) and ecological functions
(things we care about — see Figure 6). These models can be adapted to compare the
consequences of using riparian structural characterizations of different resolution
on the features that they predict. Specifically, we intend to use models that relate
riparian structure to ecological values to explore model output as a function of the
resolution in riparian spatial structure. If, for example, models which relate riparian
structure to coarse woody debris input predict the same amount of coarse woody
debris entering streams for finely resolved data as compared to coarse data, then
there would be little value in the finer resolution data from this perspective.
There are several models that allow for this type of exploration. These include:
• Bradshaw and Weaver (Program 1997) have developed a simple temporally
dynamic model of riparian vegetation and a number of measures of aquatic
habitat quality.
• Andrus (pers. comm.) and Van Sickle (VanSickle and Gregory 1990) and Figure
1) have developed estimates of the probability that a falling tree will enter a
stream given information about its size, position from the stream bank, and
membership in the conifer or deciduous categories. .
• David Chen and his colleagues have developed a model (Chen and others
Submitted; Chen and others Submitted) which describes the effect of riparian
shading on stream temperature. The model distilled information every 100 m
along the stream and this effected the accuracy and precision of the calibrated
model. The modelers concluded that they could not more accurately simulate
temperature without better resolution of the riparian shade effects (McCutcheon
1997). We are exploring a collaborative project with them.
• Nathan Schumaker has developed a model which relates habitat to species
viability at the landscape level (Schumaker In Review). This model has been
used to develop landscape indices (Schumaker 1996). We are developing a joint
project to explore its application for riparian species (Regional Interagency
Executive Committee 1997) which will ,also be used to explore the consequences
of finer and coarser grained descriptions of riparian habitat on the viability of
riparian dependent species. It will also be used to contribute to the development
of riparian indicators at larger scales as noted under research question 3.
• Gap models are based on the concepts of plant succession and competition. Gap
models simulate forest succession in an opening (typically O.i ha) of a forest
canopy caused by death of a tree. Succession is based on the relative growth rates
Research Plan Page - 64
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
of competing trees as constrained by a variety of environmental "conditions. Our
use of a gap models such as Zelig (Urban 1990) would be to assess the dynamics of
deciduous and coniferous trees after a gap is created due to tree blowdown of
flooding. We would compare simulations with data of varying levels of spatial
resolution.
• Finally, as the alternative futures assessment for the Pacific Northwest Program
develops (See Section 8 - Program Management and Program 1997), we will
work with our collaborators to identify other models which relate riparian
structure to ecological function to explore this issue.
The data to support these evaluations can be derived from our phase I and phase II
data.
7.2. Research Question 5B: What is the condition of riparian areas over
larger extents?
This research question is divided into three parts. The first provides for the
development of indicators, the second defines reference conditions, or expectations
for those indicators at both sites and larger extents, and the third provides for a
description of the riparian areas within an area using fine grained indicators at both
site extent (as developed under Section 3) and larger extent (as developed under
Section 7.2.1).
7.2.1. Research Question 5B1: Larger extent indicators
The need for larger extent indicators is similar to that for site grained small extent
indicators12 — there are important ecological functions at this scale and there is a
concomitant need to manage, monitor, and assess at this scale.
The approach to developing larger scale indicators of riparian state (and ideally
function) will follow that used for site scale indicators as listed above under research
questions 1A and IB and described in Figure 5. A literature review which includes
the development of a conceptual model will be developed, existing remote and field
data will be evaluated, and experts and potential users will be consulted. In addition,
landscape scale models will be applied that will support the identification and
evaluation of indicators of riparian function at larger scales (as in Schumaker 1996).
This research will be supported by current and historic information developed
during the course of this project (and others) as listed above.
7.2.2. Research Question 5B2: What are the reference conditions of riparian
areas?
12In the metaphor of a chain, larger extent indicators are indicators of the status of multiple links of
the chain, while the site or small extent indicator is an indicator of the status of an individual link of
the chain. See section 2.1.1 for an amplification of this issue.
Research Plan Page - 65
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Reference conditions help to define limits on achievable conditions, and temporal
and spatial patterns of natural variability. The value of reference conditions have
been widely noted (Hunsaker and others 1993; Angermeier and Karr 1994; USDA/FS
and USDI/BLM 1994; Omernik 1995; Christensen and others 1996; Wallin and others
1997). (Gregory 1997) specifically notes the potential value of reference conditions in
managing riparian forests in Oregon. Reference conditions can accommodate the
range of natural variability and, can be viewed as an expected distribution of
conditions over specified time and space. One would not compare a single site to a
single reference condition, but rather the distribution of sample of sites across a
region to a reference distribution. The purpose of this task is to begin to define
reference conditions for riparian forests.
The approach to developing reference conditions will be to describe riparian
conditions in less disturbed watersheds so that fine-grained small and large extent
indicators of riparian condition can be identified and serve as a foundation for this
definition. It is important for this effort that the information be developed from an
entire watershed, so that watershed position can be an explicit part of the
development of riparian reference condition. It is also important that the nature of
disturbance in the watershed whether from fire, insects, or management action be
known.
7.2.3. Research Question 5B3: What is the current condition of riparian areas
within a demonstration area?
Ultimately, a recommended monitoring method is intended to be used to describe
the status of riparian areas over a large extent, e.g. a watershed, a province, or a
region. Research under this heading will develop such a description using candidate
monitoring methodologies for the purpose of evaluating the merits of candidate
methodologies for such use. This description can be developed with or without
using the fine-grained but larger extent indicators developed under research
question 5B1 and evaluated with or without the context of the reference conditions
developed under 5B2, The area(s) in which such descriptions will be developed will
be selected in conjunction with the user committee.
7.3. Research Question 5C: What are the linkages between riparian
condition and stream habitat over large scales.
One of the reasons to monitor riparian areas is that at least in concept, they are early
warning indicators. Riparian condition in one location provides insight into a range
of other ecological values in other places. Similarly, today's riparian condition
provides great insight tomorrow's riparian condition and therefore the ecological
status or constraints on a range of other ecological values/The purpose of these
research tasks is to evaluate this conceptual understanding empirically.
Research Plan Page - 66
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Interest in riparian condition reflects the role they play in controlling aquatic and
terrestrial habitat and water quality. The relationship between riparian condition
and these three values has poorly quantified spatial and temporal linkage. While we
know that the coarse woody debris in streams does not come from today's riparian
or upland forest, we don't know well the temporal or spatial "zone of influence" (in
the sense of (Bradshaw and Fortin In Review). Any improvement in the
quantification of this linkage would be most useful for management of riparian
reserves, for setting expectations about rates of recovery, for formulating restoration
strategies, or for projections of alternative futures.
This research will pursue a correlational approach by identifying predominately
forested watersheds in a range of conditions with known (or knowable) disturbance
histories. The data from the eight sixth field subbasins (~ 20 km^) of Drift Creek fit
this description and additional sixth field watersheds from the Willamette basin
will be selected. If watersheds with a history of biological data can be selected, then
attempts to correlate riparian and watershed condition with biological states can be
pursed. If there are too few basins with biological data, then historic reconstructions
will focus only on the relationship between riparian and watershed condition and
stream habitat as it is visible in air photos. This will limit our analysis to looking
only at the open portions of the streams likely to be only towards the mouth of these
sixth field watersheds when they are in less disturbed conditions.
7.4. Sources of Data for Research Question 5B and 5C
Datasets to support these three analyses will come from:
• Descriptions of known quality of the current riparian areas of the basins within
Drift Creek digital remote imagery,
• Descriptions of known quality of the current and historic riparian areas of the
basins within Drift Creek using analog imagery,
• Data on the status of stream chemistry, aquatic habitat, and biota for specific
portions of Drift Creek being developed by compiling historical records, and by
current sampling from the REMAP and EMAP programs,
• Data on the status of stream chemistry, aquatic habitat, and biota for basins
within the Willamette Valley (see PNW-ERC Project #2 in (Program 1997) with a
historical record and with an archive of aerial photography, and
• TM descriptions of western Oregon (Cohen and others 1995) for 1988 and
underway for earlier periods of time going back to 1974. (This information is
being developed outside of the effort described in this research plan and will
require the development of a collaborative effort.)
Research Plan Page - 67
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
8. Project Management
This section describes the management of this project in terms of the organizational
setting of the research, the personnel participating in it, and the resources available
to the project.
8.1. Technical Liaison
Technical liaison ensures that this research extends rather than duplicates existing
findings and ongoing research. It also ensures the appropriate interpretation of
primary research conducted by others and used in this project, particularly as
described in Section 3. Technical liaison is enhanced by the organizational setting of
the research, the affiliations and backgrounds of the personnel conducting the
research, the establishment of consultative meetings during the development of the
plan, the circulation of draft plans to other research personnel in the region, and the
design of the implementation of the research. Major elements of this linkage are
described below:
8.1.1. Organizational Setting
This research is part of the research program of the U.S Environmental Protection
Agency's Office of Research and Development Regional Ecology Branch. As a result
of the Interagency Memorandum of Understanding which implemented the
Northwest Forest Plan, this Branch developed a research strategy (Baker and others
1995) to address ecosystem management within the region. This research is designed
to develop alternative futures of the Willamette Basin in Oregon, and the Willapa
Basin in southwest Washington. In addition, it is designed to have a component
oriented towards monitoring design (Program 1997). This research originated with
the component oriented towards monitoring design and has increasingly close
linkages with the development of the alternative futures research. Specific linkages
include:
• Development of fine resolution small extent indicators of riparian status in
forested ecosystems.
• Development of fine resolution large extent indicators of riparian status in
forested landscapes.
• Analysis of the responses of models to finer and coarser resolution data.
• Definition of benchmark conditions for riparian forests
• Illustrations of the loss of information in describing the case.study areas with
coarser resolution imagery.
Research Plan Page - 68
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
• Use of other ground data and remote imagery to extend our conclusions about
the applicability of remote imagery for describing riparian areas.
• Correlations between riparian condition and stream condition in predominately
forested basins over large spatial and temporal scales.
This research is designed and implemented through the Pacific Northwest Research
Consortium which is a cooperative program between EPA's Regional Ecology
Branch and three universities within the region -- Oregon State University, the
University of Oregon, and the University of Washington.
8.1.2. Ongoing technical collaboration
Other organizations are collecting field data and remote imagery on riparian
vegetation within the region. Of special interest are other efforts in the coast range,
the richest source of data for this project, and the Willamette Province. Linkage with
these organizations has been initiated in early consultative meetings and will be
continued through the course of the project. Circulation of drafts of the plan has
identified other personnel with an interest in this research and coordination
meetings have been established as appropriate.
8.2. User Linkages
Linkage to user needs are essential for successful monitoring design. This project
has strong linkages with potential users. It's origin lies with multiple needs analyses
(Mulder and others 1995; Smith and others 1997). Consultative meetings with
potential users were held during its development and drafts have been sent to
potential users13 during its development. A user committee will be established in
consultation with the Research and Monitoring Committee implementing the .
Northwest Forest Plan. This committee will help to ensure that the initial linkage to
user needs is sustained throughout the implementation of the project. Finally,
project managers will brief potential users on project progress throughout the
implementation of the project.
8.3. Personnel
Key personnel working on this project and the time the percentage of their time
devoted to it include:
Gay Bradshaw, USDA FS PNW 25%
Jerry Barker, Dynamac Co. 70%
^Potential users are members of regioard Federal and state land management and regulatory agencies,
interagency organizations, and private organizations.
Research Plan Page - 69
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Maria Fiorella, OSU
Mike Bollman, Dynamac Co.
Paul Ringold, EPA REB
Steve Cline, EPA REB
Ward Carson, OSU
90%
90%
50%
30%
25%
The personnel committed to this project are listed in Section 9.6. In addition to these
personnel resources are available within this project for a 4 month assignment
devoted to photointerpretation of phase I imagery, and to a two-year National
Research Council Fellow to focus on key elements of the large scale indicators
development and demonstration. Field personnel are also assigned to this project.
Personnel working on this project meet as necessary to coordinate their efforts.
Table 8 lists major research activities and identifies their timing and personnel
assigned.
8.4. Resources
This plan assumes that $250,000 per year is available from EPA's Office of Research
and Development for Fiscal Years 98 and 99 (Program 1997).
Research Plan Page - 70
September 25,1997
ll
-------
Table '/. Project Questions, Timing and Personnel
1996
1 997
1998
1999 +
Lead
Contributers
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
3
Ecological Characteristics of
Riparian Systems
1 A
What are the key ecologically important
attributes of a riparian site?
1
Conceptual Model
X
McAllister
2
Classification Scheme
X
Runyon
3
Literature Review
X
Bollman
4
Evaluation of Phase I Data
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Field Data -- Barker
Remote Data -- Fiorella
Ringold, Bradshaw,
Carson
5
Expert Workshop
X
X
Barker, Bollman
Ringold
6
Refined Evaluation of Data
X
X
X
X
X
X
Field Data -- Barker
Remote Data -- Fiorella,
Miewald
Ringold, Bradshaw,
Carson
7
Recommendations on Indicators
X
Ringold, Bradshaw
1B
What are the spatial characteristics that define a
site?
1
Literature Review
X
Bollman
2
Evaluation with Phase I Data
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Field Data -- Barker
Remote Data -- Fiorella,
Miewald
Ringold, Bradshaw,
Carson
3
Expert Worshop
X
X
Barker, Bollman
Ringold
4
Refined Evaluation of Data
X
X
X
X
X
X
Field Data -- Barker
Remote Data — Fiorella,
Miewald
Ringold, Bradshaw,
Carson
5
Recommendations on Spatial Scale of Monitoring
X
Ringold, Bradshaw
1C
How can sites be identified, across a region?
1
bases
X
Ringold, Faure
2
Generation and evaluation of new databases
X
X
X
X
Carson, Faure
Bollman
4
Identification of Available
Approaches
What methods are feasible?
X
X
Barker, Bradshaw,
Carson, Ringold
5
Comparison of Selected Methods
1
Technological Comparisons
X
X
X
X'
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Digital - Fiorella; Analog
- Miewald. Field Barker,
Overall - Cline
Bollman. Carson.
Bradshaw, Ringold
-------
Tabi_ /. Project Questions, Timing and Personnel
1996
1997
1998
1999+
Lead
Contributers
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
2
Non-Technological Comparisons
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ringold, Bradshaw
Barker, Bollman,
Cline, Fiorella,
Carson
6
Site Selection
Data Acquisition
X
X
X
X
?
?
Barker, Bollman
Field Crews
7
Demonstratfons and Evaluations
5A
Do different characterizations make a difference?
1
Information Content
X
X
X
X
X
Bradshaw
Fiorella
2
Ecological Modeling
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ringold, NRC, Barker,
Bradshaw
5B
What is the status of riparian forests over larger
scales?
1
Indicators of Larger Scales
X
X
X
X
NFC
Fiorella, Bradshaw,
Barker, Bolfman,
Ringold, Cline
2
Reference conditions
X
X
X
X
NFC
Fiorella, Bradshaw,
Barker, Bollman,
Ringold, Cline
3
Current Conditions
X
X
X
NFC
Fiorella, Bradshaw,
Barker, Bollman,
Ringold, Cline
5C
Linkages between riparian condition and stream
habitat over large scales
X
X
NFC
Fiorella, Bradshaw,
Barker, Bollman,
Ringold, Cline
-------
Project Questions, Timing and Personnel
1 996
1997
1998
1999 +
Lead
Contributers
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
8
Management
Overall
Ringold
Digital Imagery
Fiorella
—
Analog Imagery
Carson
Field Data Management
Bollman
Field Data Analysis
Barker
Field Design
Barker
Field Implementation
Bollman
This table lists key research activities, when they will be performed and who will perform them. In the left
hand colum, large numbers in boldface (e.g. 8) refer tosections of the plan; smaller numbers (e.g. 1A) refer to
research questions or to components of research questions.
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
9. Appendices
9.1. Preliminary Evaluation of Phase I Field Data
Research Question 1A and IB use the field data to explore the statistical
characteristics of potential indicators (Section 3). This includes addressing questions
such as:
1. What are the values for each indicator for each plot, subplot, and transect
station? How do these values vary over space at a site and among sites? For
example, what are the values for each geomorphic surface, subplot, aggregations of
subplots, and each plot?
2. What are the statistical associations between and among variables?
3. How do variables vary as a function of site characteristics
(stream size, management class, soil type, plot slope gradient, land cover class, and
so on)?
4. Can one or two variables serve as an effective surrogate for a larger set of
variables? For example, is stream-side vegetation an effect surrogate for canopy
cover, bank stability, woody debris, etc.?
5. How does one method of characterizing a site, (the plot method) compare to
other ways of characterizing a site (the point center quarter method)?
This analysis is proceeding using standard parametric and non-parametric statistical
techniques. Results at this point are necessarily preliminary because the range of
sites sampled in Drift Creek is not representative of the full range of sites over
which the methodology is intended to be applicable. However, the information
gained thus far is valuable in formulating hypothesis concerning the use of certain
indicators.
Preliminary general conclusions for each question are:
1. The values of the indicators are highly, diverse, plots of their distribution show a
high degree of non-normality, usually due to elongated tails (see, for example Figure
9 which shows the distribution and provides univariate descriptive statistics for
number of stems and plot gradients).
This is consistent with our desire to sample with equal effort a wide array of
systems. If the original site selection had not been stratified by stream size and forest
type then the data may have met the assumptions of a normal distribution.
Research Plan Page - 73
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
However, as pointed out, we felt it important to have equal sampling effort for all
situations.
3. Tree composition is influenced by stream side surfaces such as flood plain and
slope break. Direct ordination shows that tree density, basal area and frequency
change by species with distance from the bankfulJ width. The general characteristics
of the vegetation within 10 m of the baseline differ as a function of standtype for
number of stems and average dbh in most analyses. However, basal area does not
vary with stand type. Measures of canopy cover do not vary as a function of stand
class in any analysis (p > .1 in all cases).
4. Factor analysis and other analyses are underway to explore the statistical ability of
one variable to represent many variables.
5. On the basis of a wide range of standard statistical comparisons it can be concluded
that the point center quarter method and the plot method generally provide the
same information, but the point center quarter method provides estimates with less
precision. This comparison is summarized in the following portion of this
appendix.
9.2. Indicator Literature Review.
by Michael Bollman, Dynamac Corporation March, 1997
9.2.1. Approach
A literature review was conducted to identify quantitative values for the indicators
identified in the conceptual model, and to further define the relationships among
the different identified indicators. The scope of the review included peer-reviewed
literature, as well as methods manuals, agency reports, and other "gray" literature.
(Number of references: 80)
The starting point for the review was the indicator list associated with the initial
conceptual model (see Sections 9.4 and 3.1.1.1). However, an attempt was also made
during the review to identify other indicators or functions provided by riparian
ecosystems. Little additional riparian function in addition to that identified in the
conceptual model was identified in the review, suggesting that the conceptual
model is in general alignment with the bulk of the literature regarding the
functions of riparian stands. ;
9.2.2. Conclusions
The conclusions are provided in two parts, one relating to research question 1A,
(What are the key ecologically important attributes of a riparian site?), and research
question IB (What are the spatial characteristics that define a site)
Research Plan Page - 74
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
9.2.2.1. What are the key ecologically important attributes of riparian areas:
The literature review suggested that indicators can be placed into three categories:
1) functions that can be clearly associated with a discrete, quantifiable spatial distance
from the edge of the channel,
2) functions that cannot be so associated, and may be more easily or appropriately
described at the watershed level, and
3) a third somewhat different category, which is useful for the indicators identified
in the conceptual model which could be termed "environmental modifiers" or
"contextual indicators". This latter group could include indicators which are not
riparian stand attributes or watershed-level characteristics, but are physical
conditions of the stream or site that will affect the function of one or more specific
riparian stand attributes.
These three categories are discussed below and in Table 8 which summarizes this
work.
The functions associated with the initial conceptual model that can be clearly
associated with a discrete distance from the stream channel include stream shading,
litter input, and large woody debris input. Stand attributes and contextual indicators
that have an effect on the quality of these three functions (or how the functions are
"played out") include bankfull (channel) width, tree position, tree size, and tree
species. These three functions, in turn, influence a series of other functions. For
example, woody debris input influences pool formation, water velocity, winter
refugia for juvenile salmonids, sediment movement, etc.; and sediment movement
in turn influences pool formation, spawning bed quality, aquatic productivity, etc.
The primary functions of the riparian stand from which many other functions and
interactions arise, however, are stream shading, litter input, and large woody debris
input. The functions most directly tied to riparian forests stands and that are most
prevalent in the literature revolve around stream shading, which blocks direct solar
radiation keeping water temperatures low for aquatic biota, particularly salmonids;
and input of large woody debris, which performs several functions, the most
important of which are creation of aquatic habitat and flow modification which
controls fine sediment transport (important for maintaining salmonid spawning
beds), among other things. Certain other functions commonly associated with
riparian zones or buffers in agricultural landscapes, such as filtering of excess
nutrients or chemicals, were not discussed in the literature in detail in the context of
forested landscapes. One reason that there'may be few studies on excess nutrients in
forest systems is that forests streams are usually nutrient limited.
Functions which may be associated with entire watershed processes or conditions
rather than processes or conditions in a discretely defined riparian zone include
hillslope sediment movement (and subsequent sediment input to streams) and
terrestrial wildlife habitat. In general, the literature suggests that upslope processes
are very important in sediment input into streams in the mountainous west, and
Research Plan Page - 75
September 2b, 1997
-------
Table 8 Summary of indicator analysis literature review. This review is described in sections 3.1 and 9.2
Indicator
(concep-
tual
model)
Function
Relationship or value
Bankfull
width
Modifier
Describes stream size, which effects size of LWD required for stability, height of
riparian stand for shade, relative expected influence of riparian stand to affect
shade or LWD input (on larger streams, shade is less important in controlling
stream temperature, and direct wood input is less important in habitat creation).
LWD length should be 1.5-2x stream channel width to be stable.
Wetted
width
Modifier
Similar to above. Drainage area and flow are alternative measures of stream size,
and may have advantages because they are not prone to local variation "noise"
(this may also be a disadvantage), but they are not as direct a measure.
Tree
Position
Indicator of
LWD, or-
ganic input;
shade
The closer the tree, the greater the probability it will provide shade, LWD, and
organic matter tp the stream. Tree size (DBH, height) and species are important
"co-indicators" of LWD and organic matter input quality. Probability of LWD in-
. put nears 0 at 1 tree height distance. Maximum shading withiri less than about 40
meters (but tree density and height better indicators — direct measurement is
best). Tree position may also affect bank stability, in that banks with trees growing
on them may be more stable. The relative importance of trees versus other vege-
tation in this regard is not clear. In general, vegetated banks are more stable.
Tree/stand
height .
Indicator of
LWD input,
shade
Similar to tree size. The larger the tree, the more stable the LWD. Also, the taller
the stand, the more shade for the stream. Tree height and stand height may be in-
terchangeable for shade, but not for LWD input -- individual sizes, species, and
locations may be a better alternative in multi-species stands. LWD length should
be 1.5-2x stream channel width to be stable.
-------
Snags
Indicator of
wildlife
habitat —
not riparian
specific
Snags are important for wildlife nesting, roosting, and foraging. Many wildlife
species frequent or prefer riparian areas. Snag sizes or densities specific to ripar-
ian areas were not found in the literature, but recommendations exist for stands
in general, which might be assumed to apply equally to riparian areas. Notable
exception: snags in riparian areas are important roosting and perching locations
for raptors -- no quantities noted.
Channel
gradient
Modifier
Channel gradient is often, but not always, related to stream size and to geomor-
phic surface or soil type, and to stream substrate. Steeper-gradients streams often
are more boulder-dominated, which effects the amount of LWD need for pool
formation and flow modification. Steeper gradient streams are also often sedi-
ment and LWD sources rather than sinks. It is probably a poor surrogate for
stream substrate or stream size, however, as a modifier of stand attribute values
pertinent to those attributes. Channel gradient is directly related to the probability
and travel distance of channelized debris flows in headwater ravines, and thus
might be an important modifier of stand attributes effecting bank stability.
Scouring generally occurs at gradients above 10 degrees and deposition below
gradients of 7-8 degrees.
Hillslope
gradient
Modifier,
non-ripar-
ian specific
The hillslope gradient, coupled with road density and placement, soil type and
geology, precipitation, and land use, effect the frequency and magnitude of sedi-
ment inputs into streams at the watershed level, most importantly in western
Oregon through slides and channelized debris torrents. Most debris slides are ini-
tiated on slopes of 30-36 degrees. It may not be directly related to any riparian-
specific stand function. It is part of some models of stream shading. It may be re-
lated to the probability of a tree falling into the stream, but some sources suggest
it is not.
Channel
canopy clo-
sure
Indicator of
shading
The amount of channel canopy closure is an indicator of the amount of shading
provided by the canopy, and integrates channel width and tree height and den-
sity. Optimal shading is considered to be that which approaches old-growth shade
levels -- about 85% canopy closure.
-------
Streamside
surface
Indicator of
soil type,
plant com-
munity;
modifier of
stand at-
tributes
Hardwoods are associated with floodplains and terraces, conifers with slopes, al-
though management actions probably make this generalization functionally use-
less for stand categorization -- direct measurement of tree species is probably bet-
ter. Geomorphic surface or soil type may be useful in determining optimal or ap-
propriate tree species. Streamside surface is related to stream size — larger streams
are more likely to have floodplains and terraces, but it is probably a poor surro-
gate for stream size. Floodplains are usually depositional areas for LWD and sed-
iment, and could thus be indirectly related to stand valuation (influence of ripar-
ian stand for wood input relatively less). No values of streamside surface related
to any riparian function were observed in the literature.
Dominate
cover type
Indicator of
shade, LWD
input
Too general to be of much use for either shade or LWD input except in most ex-
treme instances -- tree position would cover this.
Forest
Canopy
closure
Indicator of
shade, stand
structure
Forest canopy closure may be an indicator of tree density and thus potential
stream shade, although direct measurement of tree size and position would
probably be better -- direct measurement of closure over the stream probably is
best. Gappy canopy may related to stand complexity, but tree size distributions is
probably better.
Tree
species mix
Indicator of
LWD input
quality, or-
ganic input
quality,
stand com-
plexity
Without a spatial component, (where each species is in relation to the stream) or
a size component (what are the sizes of the different species), the tree species mix
for the stand as a whole may be of little value in identifying LWD or litter input
probability by species, except in single-species stands. Likewise, without density
and size distribution by species, canopy complexity is probably only very loosely
related. Actual tree position, size, and species measurements allows more quan-
titative analysis, or percent mix in spatially explicit bands (e.g. 5 m). Multiple
species stands provide more niches for wildlife.
Forest
Stand Age
Indicator of
LWD input
size
Forest stand age could be a generalized indicator of the probable size of LWD in-
put, but without a tree position component may be of lesser value. Older forests
generally have larger trees, more complex structure, and multiple species. Over a
certain age (180+ years) forests are said to be in a natural condition — generally
considered inherently optimum. Direct measurement of tree size is also probably
more directly related to LWD size. Classifying a mixed age or size class stand
with one stand age is difficult.
-------
Canopy
structure
Indicator or
wildlife
habitat, po-
tential LWD
input
Complex canopy structure is directly related to wildlife habitat, but defining
canopy structure is difficult. Tree size distributions by species may be less subject
to subjective interpretation. Canopy structure can probably be related to LWD
input quality in a general sense but would work best at the extremes.
Indicator —
not from
conceptual
model
Tree
species
Indicator of
LWD and
litter quality
Cedar LWD is more decay resistant than other conifers, which are more decay re-
sistant than hardwoods. Conifer LWD is generally larger and thus more stable in
stream channels (modified by channel width). Hardwoods have higher quality
litter, and input LWD at a younger age than conifers. Recommendations can be
found in the literature for numbers and basal area of conifers per unit stream
length (perpendicular distance of about 1 site-potential tree) that should provide
adequate LWD. Multiple species stands provide more niches for wildlife.
Tree size
Indicator of
LWD stabil-
ity, and
stand com-
plexity
Larger trees make more stable LWD. LWD length should be 1.5-2x stream chan-
nel width. Coupled with tree species and tree position, tree size can be used for
direct evaluation or derivation of individual and stand cumulative LWD persis-
tence (decay rate), LWD size, litter input quality, shade potential, stand structure,
and stand species composition. The location, size, and species of the trees in a
stand are the basic components that can be used to quantitatively describe or clas-
sify the stand in terms of riparian function. Individual tree data is the most di-
rect means of such evaluation, subject to the least error through generalization.
The generalizations required for estimating stand complexity, species mix, stand
age, and canopy closure, although all loosely related to the same basic functions,
allow for sources of error that are not encountered when individual trees are di-
rectly measured.
-------
Pool fre-
quency
Indicator of
aquatic habi-
tat, modifier
of stand at-
tributes
Streams with 50% or greater pool frequency are considered to have good habitat.
NMFS recommends pool frequencies scaled to channel width. Habitat unit classi-
fication could be used to derive this, but pool frequency is more directly related to
riparian stands, in that LWD is the primary cause of pool formation in non-
bedrock- or boulder-dominated, smaller streams. Existing pool frequency can be
used to evaluate existing habitat, and the degree to which LWD recruitment from
streamside stands would be required to achieve acceptable frequency.
Pool-form-
ing ele-
ment
Indicator of
aquatic habi-
tat, modifier
of stand at-
tributes
The literature suggests that pool frequency is primarily related to the amount of
LWD and the number of bedrock- or boulder- formed pools, although other pool-
forming elements, such as beaver dams, can be significant. The number of non-
LWD-formed pools could be used to evaluate the LWD input required to achieve
acceptable pool frequency
Large
woody de-
bris
Indicator of
aquatic habi-
tat
LWD provides several functions, primarily formation of pools and sediment re-
tention in smaller streams. Much of the LWD in streams can be from previous
stands. Measurement of the amount of current LWD, its size, location, species,
and decay class, can be used both to evaluate current conditions, and estimate
stand recruitment needs over time. There is considerable literature on the rela-
tionship of LWD size to stream size, and recommended sizes and amounts.
Downed
terrestrial
wood
Indicator of
wildlife
habitat —
may be non-
riparian
specific
Some amphibians and small mammals are associated with downed logs. Large
downed logs provide nest and den areas. Large downed logs are important in
some forest communities for regeneration of trees (nurse logs). In general,
downed logs are not riparian specific, although there may be some small mam-
mals and amphibians which are found more frequently in riparian areas also
have their frequency correlated with downed wood. There are non-riparian-spe-
cific recommendations for amounts and sizes of downed wood.
Aspect or
Stream az-
imuth
Modifier
Shade from streamside stands is related to the stream azimuth or the aspect of
the slope. Also effects water availability and potential or optimal plant commu-
nity or tree species mix. There are other similar modifiers such as elevation, an-
nual precipitation, temperature extremes, etc.
Soil type
Modifier
The soil type may modify the optimal plant species mix for riparian function.
Certain plant species grow better on certain soils, often associated with moisture
regime and soil productivity.
-------
Shrub and
ground-
cover
Indicator of
wildlife
habitat, lit-
ter input
quality,
bank stabil-
ity, shade
Shrub litter input is very high quality. Shrubs provide nesting habitat for several
species of birds and forage for large mammals; although this may be a non-ripar-
ian-specific function, some shrub communities are more common in riparian
areas. Shrubs can provide stream shade and cover for aquatic organisms, but the
relative importance of this to canopy shade and LWD input in forested systems
may be minor. Shrub and groundcover vegetation may be important for bank
stability, but the relative contribution of this to the contribution of trees (or to
soil disturbances such as roads) is not known, particularly in steep 1st and 2nd
order ravines where debris torrents commonly originate. Distinct shrub, ground-
cover, and tree associations have been related to soil type, landform, elevation,
aspect, and water availability (e.g. precipitation regime). No values of shrub cover
or species mix related to any riparian function were observed in the literature.
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
that riparian stands or buffers may have a limited ameliorating effect, although
overland sediment flows associated with roads and logging may be controlled by
riparian buffers. The reason for this is that the principal sediment producing
processes in the mountainous west are channelized flows and mass wasting
(O'Laughlin and Belt 1994). There are three general groups of mass wasting
processes: slumps/earthflows, debris avalanches, and debris torrents (Swanston
1991). Slumps and earthflows are slow moving processes which develop in deeply
weathered bedrocks with a dominant clay fraction, and usually are not influenced
much by individual storms. Debris avalanches are shallow, rapid landslides which
originate during high runoff events at steep headwalls or road cuts, rather than in
the riparian zone. Debris torrents are large, powerful, fast-moving, channelized
slurries originating from debris avalanches or mobilization of existing debris at high
flows in steep channels. Debris torrents generally terminate at abrupt tributary
junction angles (e.g. 70-90 degrees) or where there is an reduction of channel
gradient to less than 6 degrees. Riparian buffers have little impact in reducing debris
avalanches or channelized flows (Belt and O'Laughlin 1992). In the Alsea
Watershed Study, where stream temperature in a watershed with riparian buffers
was similar to the control watershed, sediment loads in the buffered watershed
increased significantly following road construction (Moring and Lantz 1975),
although not as much as in the clear-cut watershed with no buffers. The integrity of
the vegetation on sites prone to debris avalanches may be an important factor in
reducing sediment delivery to streams. Other researchers (Andrus, pers. com.) note
that debris torrents only occur in limited areas, and that the most common
sediment input processes are continual bank undercutting and soil creeping or
slumping. Bank stability is sometimes related to streamside vegetation, but the
relative influences of trees vs shrubs vs ground cover was less clearly defined in the
literature, although ground cover vegetation directly on the bank itself at a limited
spatial scale may be an important component. Regardless, in forested ecosystems
west of the Cascade Range, sediment input to streams is likely to be as influenced by
watershed-scale conditions or processes as it is by immediate bankside vegetation.
Attributes of the riparian zone that have been identified as being responsible for the
greater wildlife diversity and disproportionately higher wildlife use in these areas
are diverse vegetative structure and species, and the presence of food, cover, and
water (Bull 1978). Other edge habitat within the watershed with similar vegetation
characteristics may also show this trend, however. Because of the diverse ecological
niches occupied by different species of wildlife, it is not possible to identify a single
set of habitat characteristics optimum for all species. Several authors emphasized
the need for between stand vegetation diversity (e.g. Kauffman 1988), although most
studies focused on wildlife abundance related to within-stand vegetation diversity.
Spatial buffer width requirements were generally species specific, and it was unclear
whether such requirements were applicable only in the riparian zone or whether
they were generalized spatial habitat requirements. Many literature sources did not
specifically address wildlife habitat in the riparian zone, but rather in a non-
riparian-specific context (e.g. Ruggiero and others 1991). One notable exception to
this is where a wildlife species may be dependent on riparian zones for habitat, and
Research Plan Page - 82
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
in that case the particular habitat characteristics in the riparian zone may be a
spatially distinct function of the riparian forest stand. Demonstration of dependence
on riparian habitats, rather than simply a preference for those habitats, was not
strongly supported. The literature (e.g. Cross 1988; Raedeke and others 1988) suggests
that some small (e.g. water vole) and large (e.g. beaver, otter) mammals may be
restricted to, or considered dependent on, riparian habitats, but it is unclear whether
it is simply the presence of water that is responsible for the association, or some
specific habitat attributes of the riparian vegetation found only in those areas. There
are also documents which suggest that snags and other perches in the riparian zone
are important for raptors (e.g. Knight 1988). Riparian areas are the preferred habitat
of reptiles and amphibians in the Pacific Northwest, but none appear to be obligatory
riparian species for which breeding and cover requirements are found only in the
riparian zone, although some are dependent upon water (Bury and Corn 1988).
Because of the relative importance of riparian vegetation for litter input and shade
in headwaters and creeks in the Pacific Northwest, the streamside vegetation can be
considered to act as part of the aquatic ecosystem for these smaller waters, and so far
as the herpetofauna is concerned the aquatic and riparian zones are functionally one
unit (Bury and Corn 1988). Species dependent on water in these areas could thus be
considered to be dependent on riparian vegetation. One study (Carey 1988) in the
Oregon coast range showed no pattern of positive or negative upland avian
community response to stands with the presence of water, although several
individual species showed some positive response to stands with water, depending
on the stand condition and time of year.
For both sediment input and wildlife habitat, the riparian zone may not be
functionally distinct from the upslope ecosystem, and the function may be related to
the riparian zone primarily in that the riparian zone is a part of the entire drainage.
Within the riparian zone, as well as upslope, however, the stand attributes which
both help control sediment delivery and provide wildlife habitat are centered on
intact, structurally diverse plant communities, which can be related to tree (and
snag) density and size by species, and associated shrub and ground cover
communities.
Indicators in the conceptual model that could be considered environmental
modifiers or contextual indicators include bankfull channel width, wetted channel
width, channel gradient, and hillslope gradient. There are also a large number of
similar modifiers which were not specifically identified in the conceptual model,
including elevation, soil type (perhaps indirectly identified by streamside surface),
annual precipitation, underlying geology, aspect (perhaps indirectly identified by
stream azimuth), etc. These environmental variables influence site vegetation and
physical processes, and may have a direct or indirect effect on the functions of the
riparian stand, in that in £ different environmental context the stand attributes or
indicators may need to have different values or quantities to be at a specific
functional level. For example, a piece of large woody debris must be a larger size in a
larger stream to be stable enough to modify stream flow, and bankfull width is a
descriptor of stream size, thus bankfull width might best be considered a modifier of
Research Plan Page - 83
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
a stand attribute (tree size) which is an indicator of a function (LWD input). Certain
environmental modifiers were discussed more frequently in the literature than
others, usually, in conjunction with specific functions. Noteworthy in this regard is
the importance of channel width (or more loosely, stream size) relative to the
importance of streamside vegetation for temperature control; and relative to the
importance of LWD (and its size) in creating diverse aquatic habitat and modifying
flow and fine sediment transport. Wildlife species ranges could also be considered
an environmental modifier of sorts, and such a perspective may reflected in the
different riparian buffer requirements by most regulatory agencies for fish-bearing
versus non-fish-bearing streams. It may be appropriate to gather data in the field or
from remote sensing for a limited number of site-specific environmental modifiers
that have a direct linkage to riparian stand attributes, while data for others might be
best acquired from other sources.
Table 8 lists the indicators in the conceptual model, the type or function of the
indicator as described above (riparian-specific, non-riparian-specific, or
environmental modifier), and any qualitative relationships of quantifiable values
associated with the indicator. Selected other indicators, functions, attributes, or
modifiers are also identified.
9.2.2.2. What are the spatial characteristics that define a site?
9.2.2.2.1. Riparian Width
Riparian stand indicators or attributes are functionally important in varying
perpendicular distances from the streambank depending on each specific function
associated with the attribute (attributes may influence multiple functions), although
the importance appears to be greatest nearest the channel edge, and sharply
dropping to a distance equal to about 1 site-potential tree height (See e.g. Figure 1).
Woody debris input (McDade and others 1990) and stream shading (e.g. Brazier and
Brown 1973) models which identify the distance from the stream for these functions
as being about 1 site-potential tree height and about 30-40 meters respectively, are
well represented in the literature. Root wads, which greatly increase the stability of
woody debris and which may constitute up to 40% of the total LWD volume in the
channel, are recruited within a spatial distance of about 6 meters from the channel
(Andrus, pers com.). FEMAT notes that no spatial distance relative to litter input to
streams was found in the literature, but citing studies by (Erman and others 1977)
which report than benthic invertebrate communities in streams with 100 foot
buffers were indistinguishable from those.,with intact forests, conclude that the
spatial distance for litter input is also within about 1 site-potential tree height. Other
literature reviews suggests that most of the functions described in the conceptual
model operate within a distance of about 40 meters from the streambank (e.g.
Johnson and Ryba 1992). As mentioned above, certain riparian functions, such as
terrestrial wildlife habitat, microclimate modification, and sediment input may be
important farther away, perhaps in a manner which does not make it possible to
Research Plan Page - 84
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
distinguish between riparian stand function and upslope stand (or entire watershed)
function.
9.2.2.2.2. Riparian Length
Defining a riparian site spatially along the stream is much more difficult than
defining riparian width. Stream length (parallel) distances for any riparian function
was not found to be addressed often, with the exception of some pool and wood
quantities optimal per mile of stream, and distances for water to cool under a canopy
after passing through a clear-cut {National Marine Fisheries Service 1995; Robison and
others 1995). Researchers have suggested that for stream temperature control and
LWD recruitment, the length of the stream that should have a certain set of stand
attributes should reflect the natural proportion of that set of attributes along the
stream length (Andrus, pers. com.). For example, if the natural, historic condition of
a stream was mature conifer stands along 80% of its length and alder stands along
20%, that proportion should be the target condition. From this perspective, riparian
conditions cannot be evaluated exclusively at the stand level, but each stand must be
considered in the context of the entire stream length. Applying a single set of stand
attributes along the entire length of a stream would result in a riparian zone with
no along-stream spatial heterogeneity (regardless of the within-stand heterogeneity),
which would probably not reflect the natural riparian system because natural •
riparian systems are typically characterized by frequent disturbance resulting in a
mosaic of different stand types. Regardless of the target proportion of a stream's
entire length for a given stand condition, however, it is important to identify, if
possible, a stream length distance which will allow for appropriate measurement of
the stand attribute. For describing riparian areas, some researchers have suggested
that the stand may be the appropriate scale, and each distinct streamside stand
should be characterized. Within a stand, the number and length of plots to describe
it may be related to its heterogeneity; for most stands which were initiated by a
single event, a relatively limited number of measurement sites may be
representative (Andrus, pers. com.).
9.3. ADAR Imagery
by John Runyon, Mantech Corporation from (RIM Research Group 1996)
Digital imaging systems, typically using a two-dimensional detector array of charge-
coupled devices (CCDs) or a scanner technology, provide a means of direct digital
image collection. Currently, though the iniage resolution of digital imaging is quite
good, the images are not as detailed as large scale photographic film (Light 1996). The
resolution of digital sensors is currently limited by the capabilities of the CCD arrays
and scanner configurations. In addition, very little work has been done to assess the
geometric quality of digital images in photogrammetric applications were
photography is the standard medium (Heipke 1995). Planned deployment of 1-meter
resolution satellite imaging systems means that high-resolution digital imagery will
Research Plan Page - 85
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
soon be available for a variety of applications. Both single channel and multi-
spectral satellite sensors are under development, with launches projected for the
end of this century (Corbley 1996).
High resolution digital imagery will be collected to test the current technology and
to explore the implications of detailed satellite sensors. Multispectral sensors will be
used to assess the value of the additional spectral data. The system will employ four
sensors to capture imagery in separate bands selected to mimic the spectral range of
LANDSAT TM imagery. The spectral range of TM was chosen for two reasons. First,
the study area has current TM coverage (e.g. Cohen and others 1995), which will
facilitate examining the issues of scaling from the fine resolution digital to the 30 m
satellite pixels. Secondly, because there is a rich source of historical LANDSAT
imagery available for the region, this spectral range will continue to be an important
source of data. The digital imagery will be selected with the following bands:
Imagery was collected at two pixel resolutions in phase 1: 1 meter and 3meters..
Phase 2 imagery will be restricted to 1 m resolution pixels since preliminary
indications are that this resolution provides a better ability to detect features of
interest. These resolutions will provided a reasonable range for testing. One meter
pixel imagery is a common resolution target for digital imagery capture. This
resolution also closely corresponds with the pixel resolution of 1:24000 aerial
photography scanned at 600 dpi (1.01 m). Digital sensors vary in their configuration,
but a typical system such as Positive System's (Whitefish, Montana) ADAR system
has an array of 1000 by 1500 imaging elements. This system provides an image area
at 1-meter pixels of 1000 m by 1500 m (150 ha).
[See also (Benkelman and others 1990; Benkelman and others 1994; Waring and
others 1995; Hyyppa and Hallikainen 1996; Stille 1996; Positive Systems April 10,
1997)]
9.4. Conceptual Development of Riparian Indicators of Forested
Landscapes
by Lynne McAllister, Mantech Corporation14 from (RIM Research Group 1996)15
9.4.1. Site-Scale Riparian Indicator Identification
*4Now with Dynamac Corporation
15Taken verbatim, except for explanatory footnotes and changes in figure and table numbers to match
the figure numbering in this document.
Band 1: Blue
Band 2: Green
450 - 520 nm
520 - 600 nm
630 - 690 nm
760 - 900 nm
Band 3: Red
Band 4: NIR
Research Plan Page - 86
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
9.4.1.1. Introduction
This task contributes to fulfilling objectives 1 and 3. Riparian sites will be
characterized by quantifying attributes that can be used to evaluate three riparian
values: aquatic habitat support, terrestrial habitat support, and water quality
maintenance. The research project focuses on method development for
characterizing sites with remotely-sensed information. It is not designed to test the
suitability of indicators for evaluating functional attributes or to conduct actual
functional assessments rather it is the intent to evaluate the capabilities of various
data-capture technologies to characterize identified attributes. It is therefore
necessary to carefully design the conceptual framework based on existing
information and use it to provide the ecological foundation and rationale for 1) the
selection of indicators that can be used to evaluate functions and 2) the linkages of
selected indicators with functional performance. This section presents conceptual
models and justification for selection of indicators that can be measured both on the
ground and from the air
The riparian indicators described here are preliminary and are intended to structure
the research process. These indicators are intended to describe a limited but not
complete set of ecological interactions. The indicators were selected based on their
link to ecological function and feasibility for detection with remote imagery. The
spatial nature of the indicators, in relationship to ecological function, is discussed in
more detail in Section 3.1. The indicators will be modified in Phase 2 based on the
analysis of data from Phase 1 of the research.
9.4.1.2. Objectives
The objectives of this task are to:
• Develop a framework for addressing ecologically relevant objectives,
particularly those of FEMAT,
• Develop conceptual models for three functions to describe the linkages
between and rationale for the primary functional attributes and indicators of
functional performance,
• Identify indicators that relate unambiguously to their respective functions,
t'
• Select metrics for quantifying indicators.
The conceptual models represent one possible framework for organizing
information, showing linkages among ecological components, and justifying
proposed indicators. They are a simplified way to describe a complex interaction of
ecological components. Their purpose is not to be the single definitive
representation of all ecological interactions in a riparian system, but to provide
Research Plan Page - 87
September 25, 1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
structure, guidance, and rationale during the assessment. The classification scheme
to be presented in the next task emphasizes structural and compositional features of
vegetation that relate to indicators of ecological function for a range of streamside
sites. The classification scheme is designed to provide sufficient information on
riparian overstory vegetation characteristics and proximity to the channel to help
gauge the type and magnitude of interaction with the stream. This information is
useful in the interpretation of the analysis of function performance. While the
defined classes are intended to emphasize riparian-stream linkages they will also
offer insight into terrestrial features such as near-stream wildlife habitat.
9.4.1.3. Conceptual Design
9.4.1.3.1. Task Objective 1
The FEMAT Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives (Table 1) can be addressed
through the evaluation of three general riparian values: aquatic habitat support,
terrestrial habitat support, and water quality maintenance. The relation of the
FEMAT questions to riparian values is self evident. This is the general framework
that ties monitoring objectives and questions to a quantifiable procedure for
assessing riparian values.
9.4.1.3.2. Task Objectives 2 and 3
The conceptual models provide the framework for quantifying and assessing
riparian functions. Each conceptual model is presented in a subsection below. A
consistent terminology will be used to distinguish different components of the
models (see glossary -- Section 9.7). Attributes are characteristics of the riparian
system that are considered important for providing a specific value. Each value is
described with three major attributes. For example, the major attributes of aquatic
habitat are considered to be structure of bed/banks, coarse/fine organic matter
inputs, and water temperature. The models list the ecological processes and
characteristics under each attribute that influence functional performance.
Indicators are characteristics of the system that can be measured to quantitatively
describe an attribute. For example, vegetation distance from the channel is an
indicator for the amount of organic matter input to a stream. Some indicators can be
used to describe attributes of more than one function, but it is the aggregate of
indicators that is important for evaluating functional performance. Indicators are
not the actual metric for measurement. Selected metrics are presented in Section 3.
Specific field protocols are presented in a field operation manual, which is a separate
document.
The indicators that we propose are those that we have selected from a larger pool of
potential indicators that can be measured to describe a process or attribute. Our
choice of indicators from the larger pool was guided by the following criteria: 1) For
comparison purposes, the indicator must be feasible to measure in the field and
from remote imagery, and 2) The indicator must appear to be more desirable for
Research Plan Page - 88
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
remote monitoring than for field monitoring. These criteria eliminate from
consideration many measurements that are traditionally used in the field. For
example, incident light over the stream and water temperature can be best measured
directly in the stream with light and temperature meters, but this is not possible
with remotely-collected information. Rather, it must be inferred more indirectly by
estimating the extent of canopy that shades the stream. Bank structure and
microhabitat can be described in detail on the ground by measuring bank
morphological characteristics, but it must be inferred from aerial imagery based on
potential bank stability created by associated vegetation. Vegetation structure can be
estimated with various field techniques which consider all layers within a forest,
including understory trees and shrubs and herbaceous ground cover, most of which
are not visible on aerial imagery. Therefore, surrogate measurements that can be
extracted from aerial imagery, such as the number of canopy layers and number of
snags, must be used.
9.4.1.4. Conceptual Model for Aquatic Habitat
The conceptual model for aquatic habitat is shown in Figure 6. The riparian
attributes considered important for defining aquatic habitat in the Coast Range
ecosystem are 1) structure of streambeds and banks, 2) coarse and fine organic matter
input, and 3) water temperature.
9.4.1.4.1. Structure of Beds and Banks.
As depicted in the model, the structure of streambeds and banks influences bank
stability, retention of sediment and organic matter, and the presence and extent of
flood refugia. The following discussion of each of these includes a description of the
indicator(s) that will be used to describe them.
Bank stability influences sediment and organic matter (course and fine debris)
inputs to the stream. Stable banks typically are well-vegetated (Sullivan and others
1987). A complex rooting system helps prevent erosion of the bank and contributes
to the formation of a diversity of aquatic microhabitats. The development of a
complex rooting system is dependent on the succession stage of the bank cover.
Older stands of trees have more developed and complex root systems and are
generally more effective in stabilizing banks. Erosion of unstable banks, caused by
disturbances on the hill slopes, can be detrimental to aquatic habitat by burying fish
spawning sites and aquatic insect substrates. Continuous sedimentation leads to
turbidity, which is detrimental to some species of fish and can affect temperature
and primary productivity in the stream. Bank stability can also contribute to the
formation of microhabitats under banks, which provide protection and shade for
aquatic organisms. Because bank stability is closely related to the proximity of
vegetation and complexity of the rooting system that forms much of the bank
structure, the site-level indicators that will be used to measure bank stability are tree
distance from the channel and forest stand age. Both of these indicators can be
measured on aerial photographs.
Research Plan Page - 89
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Retention of sediment and organic matter that is input to streams is important for
providing nutrients and microhabitats essential for aquatic organisms. Sediment
can transport nutrients to the stream that are cycled and utilized by aquatic
organisms. A certain degree of sediment retention is also important for maintaining
spawning surfaces and other microhabitats on the streambed that are utilized by
insects and fish (Bilby 1988). Large woody debris contributes primarily to
microhabitat formation and channel morphology (Sullivan and others 1987). It can
change flow direction and speed, thus forming pools, contributing to the retention
of sediments, and enhancing aquatic habitat diversity and structure. Pools are
essential to aquatic organisms for refugia and breeding. Habitat structure and
diversity promote abundance and species diversity of aquatic organisms.
Retention is influenced by the amount of stream energy that moves materials
through the system, which depends on the streamside surface. Streamside surface
encompasses valley landform and constraint. Clear delineation of streamside
surfaces, which provides information about position in the riparian area, is
necessary for interpreting riparian vegetation patterns (Hupp 1988), which can
indicate the likelihood that the system is disturbed and might not be maintaining
processes necessary for normal function. There is evidence, for example, that specific
streamside landforms are characterized by distinct zones of riparian vegetation
(Fonda 1974; Hawak and Zobel 1974; Rot 1995). Floodplains, which are more likely to
occur in unconstrained valley segments, are the most disturbance prone and are
often colonized by fast-growing deciduous species such as alder. Conversely,
deciduous species along streams in constrained valley segments may suggest past
harvest practices (Bilby and Ward 1991).
The degree of valley constraint helps determine the freedom of the channel to
adjust its shape and gradient and helps determine the magnitude of interactions
with riparian vegetation and hill slope processes. Streamside surfaces can vary from
broad and flat (unconstrained) or steep and narrow (constrained). Constrained
reaches tend to move wood and sediment through the stream system.
Unconstrained reaches are more retentive and thus become long-term storage sites
for sediments and large wood (Montgomery and Buffington 1993). Unconstrained
stream segments often have wide floodplains and side channels. The bed and banks
of unconstrained channels are usually composed of material transported by the
stream which usually results in more complex streamside surfaces (Sullivan and
others 1987; Montgomery and Buffington 1993). More complex streamside surfaces
result in a greater number of microhabitats for aquatic organisms, which provide
diversity, protection, and spawning habitat. Valley width can determine if hill slope
processes are directly coupled to the stream system. Narrow valleys, for example, can
channel debris flows directly into the channel (Benda 1990; Bradley and Whiting
1992). In situations with wide valley floors debris flows coming off of the slopes can
rest on the valley bottom without directly entering the channel, increasing retention
in the system. A steeper channel gradient results in more energetic flows, which can
dislodge sediments and woody debris and carry it downstream. The indicators
Research Plan Page - 90
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
selected for retention of sediment and organic matter are streamside surface and
channel gradient. Bankfull channel width is an indicator for the degree of valley
constraint, and channel gradient is an indicator of the potential flow energy.
Flood refugia refers here to areas in which floodwaters can dissipate and where fish
can find refuge from flow energy until floodwaters subside so that they are not
forced downstream. As discussed above, water dissipates and flow rates are lower in
wide, unconfined channels and in channels with a lower gradient. The indicators
for flood refugia will thus be streamside surface, which measures the degree to
which water can dissipate outward from the channel during floods, and channel
gradient.
9.4.1.4.2. Coarse and Fine Organic Matter Inputs
Coarse and fine organic matter inputs influence nutrient cycling, microhabitats such
as pools and refugia, and channel stability. Fine woody debris, leaf litter, and cones
contribute food for some species of aquatic insects, which process it for use by other
species of insects. Insects are in turn prey for fish. Nutrients are thus processed and
cycled through the food chain, supporting numerous and diverse aquatic organisms.
Conifer and deciduous trees have different patterns of litter input to the system.
Needle fall occurs throughout the year, while leaf fall occurs primarily in the '
autumn (Murphy and others 1991). The input and stability of large wood entering
streams is influenced by tree type. While conifer species vary in their decay rates,
they generally decay slower than deciduous species, and they are usually longer and
larger in diameter (Harmon and others 1986; Bilby and Ward 1991). Indicators
selected for the likelihood of input at a site are tree distance from channel,
dominant cover type, and forest canopy closure; indicators selected for the amount
and type of organic matter inputs to streams are tree species mix, forest stand age,
and tree height.
Organic matter is input to a greater extent and on a more regular basis by trees that
are closer to the stream. Nutrients are input directly to the stream and are directly
available to aquatic organisms if the organic matter falls there to begin with. The
tree species present influence the type of organic matter input. For example, large
woody debris input is more likely in conifer stands than in hardwood stands,
although leaf litter input in more likely in hardwood stands. The dominant cover
type (i.e., non-vegetated or vegetated by trees, shrubs or grass) affects the relative
amounts of fine litter and wood that can potentially enter the stream and therefore
the nutrient input and degree of cycling in the stream system and potential
microhabitats within the stream. Forest stand age and tree height affect the ability of
the riparian area to contribute large wood to the aquatic system. Older, taller stands
contribute a more volume of wood, which directly affects stream habitat creation
(Bilby and Ward 1991). Large wood decays slower than smaller pieces, promoting a
greater permanency of the habitat created. Canopy closure is an indicator of tree
density, which, when combined with information about tree species mix and forest
Research Plan Page - 91
September 25, 1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
stand age, helps determine potential for large wood loading, root strength, and
nutrient inputs (Vannote and others 1980).
9.4.1.4.3. Light and Water Temperature
Light and water temperature, the third attribute of the aquatic habitat support
function, influences community structure of aquatic organisms, primary
production, and microclimates important for breeding and refugia (Figure 6). Water
temperature influences the metabolism, development, and activity of stream
organisms, which are adapted to live and breed in specific thermal environments.
The regulation of temperature in streams is essential for some aquatic organisms.
Water temperature also affects oxygen availability, which is important for
maintaining the communities that are adapted to live in a particular oxygen regime.
The amount of light reaching the stream surface affects primary productivity ,
which influences water turbidity and the community of aquatic insects. Water
temperature is expected to be lower in smaller and narrower, low-order streams,
which occur at higher elevations. These streams are normally narrower than higher
order streams, and trees along banks form a full canopy over the stream. Small
streams have relatively cool but stable daily temperatures and low rates of primary
productivity (Vannote and others 1980; Beschta and others 1987). In wider, mid-
sized streams, the riparian canopy is less extensive, which allows more radiation to
reach the stream. However, as rivers grow in size, their depths tend to increase,
which restricts the warming of the entire water column. Characteristics of the
adjacent riparian forest also affect evaporation, convection, conduction, and
advection in the riparian system (Naiman and others 1992). For example, openings
created in the forest alter the heat exchange with the atmosphere, which reduces the
stability of the stream temperature. The influence of light and temperature on
aquatic habitat support must be evaluated simultaneously with position in the
stream network, taking into consideration the organisms expected to be present and
their habitat requirements. The indicators that will be used at the site level for water
temperature are forest canopy closure, channel canopy closure, and wetted channel
width.
9.4.1.5. Conceptual Model for Terrestrial Habitat
The conceptual model for terrestrial habitat is shown in Figure 6. The primary
riparian functional attributes that affect terrestrial habitat are vegetation structure,
type and extent of vegetation, and streamside topography. The discussion of each of
these below includes proposed indicators for evaluating the function.
9.4.1.5.1. Vegetation Structure
Vegetation structure influences habitat diversity and edge. Edges typically represent
ecotones, which are rich in wildlife because of their diversity. Wildlife use of a
habitat for nesting and cover is largely dependent on the structure of vegetation
(MacArthur and MacArthur 1961; Wilson 1974; Roth 1976; Swift and others 1984).
Research Plan Page - 92
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Increased horizontal and vertical structure provides a greater diversity of nesting,
feeding, and protective habitats than does a uniform structure, and it allows the
coexistence of more diverse and abundant wildlife populations. A variety of canopy
layers, canopy openings, and vegetation forms help to create edges, ecotones, and
diverse patch types, all of which enhance habitat diversity. The indicators chosen for
vegetation structure are canopy structure and forest canopy closure.
A simple canopy structure has few gaps and only one canopy layer of the overstory
trees. Complex canopies, in contrast, have multiple canopy layers, numerous gaps,
and usually a number of snags and dead crowns in the stand (Spies and Franklin
1991). Complex canopies are associated with old-growth forests (Franklin and Spies
1991). Young stands, however, often have complex canopy composition as well.
Disturbances are important for creating complex stand structures. Stands initiated
through harvest usually have a simplified canopy structure.
The extent and interspersion of different cover types (trees, shrubs, grasses)
influences habitat diversity, interspersion of habitats, and edges or ecotones
available, which are all structural attributes of the vegetation. A greater diversity
and interspersion of habitats vertically and horizontally promotes wildlife
abundance and diversity and ensures that different types of habitat are available, for
example feeding habitat, breeding habitat, wintering habitat, and shelter from
predators. Ecotones are often found where one general habitat type changes to
another, such as the change from forest to a grass/shrub habitat. Forest canopy
closure is the proposed indicator for the interspersion of different cover types. An
intermediate canopy closure is likely to have gaps and openings that are associated
with the presence of younger trees, shrubs, or herbaceous vegetation.
9.4.1.5.2. Type and Extent of Vegetation
The type and extent of different kinds of vegetation influence breeding sites,
protection, and travel corridors, all of which are important components of terrestrial
habitat support. Wildlife needs a diversity and interspersion of these components.
Although this study will not collect species-specific information on vegetation,
some general categorizations of vegetation type can provide information on the
potential for habitat support. Indicators selected for type and extent of vegetation are
dominant cover type, forest stand age, and snag position and number.
Dominant cover type can serve as an indicator of protection and breeding sites. A
site providing minimal cover will not pro,vide either of these habitat components as
well as a more vegetated site, although it 'might still provide enough cover for
travel protection. A site dominated by shrubs might provide excellent dense cover
for protection and breeding habitat for some species. A site dominated by grasses is
less likely to provide a diversity of breeding and protected habitats or travel access,
except for very small wildlife. Forest stand age is an indicator of the successional
stage of the site, which can affect vegetation density and continuity of protective
habitat. Snag position is important for use as breeding sites. Osprey, for example,
Research Plan Page - 93
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
prefer nest sites close to the channel. The number of snags is also an indicator of
potential nesting habitat for other species of birds.
9.4.1.5.3. Streamside Topography
In the conceptual model for terrestrial habitat support (Figure 6), streamside
topography is shown to influence accessibility, and habitat extent and diversity.
Accessibility describes the potential for mammals in particular to use the site as
habitat for breeding, foraging, protection, and travel. For many species of wildlife, a
very steep slope would likely be a less suitable habitat than an area in a broader,
flatter valley. Steep slopes receive more disturbance and are often not vegetatively
diverse. The indicator for accessibility will be hillslope gradient.
Habitat extent and diversity is a function of the width of the valley and its potential
vegetative diversity. Wider valleys provide a greater extent of usable habitat that is
directly associated with a riparian area. It provides easier access for travel by
mammals and is less prone to catastrophic disturbances than steep, narrow valleys.
A greater number of vegetative zones can potentially develop in different levels of a
wider valley, forming a more complex and diverse plant community, which has a
greater potential for providing breeding sites, foraging habitat, and travel routes for
terrestrial wildlife. The streamside surface will serve as the indicator for habitat
extent and diversity.
9.4.1.6. Conceptual Model for Water Quality
The conceptual model for the water quality is shown in Figure 6. The water quality
function is distinguished from the aquatic habitat function by focusing solely on
characteristics and processes in the riparian system that influence sediments and
nutrients in water used as aquatic habitat and for human consumption. The
riparian functional attributes that affect water quality are physical structure and type
and extent of vegetation. The discussion of each of these below includes proposed
indicators for evaluating the function.
9.4.1.6.1. Physical Structure of the Bed and Banks
Physical structure influences bank stability, retention of sediment, and retention of
organic matter. Bank stability affects erosional deposition of sediments into the
stream. A complex rooting system in contact with the channel helps stabilize banks
and affects the amount of sediments that will dislodge during storm events. The
indicators selected for bank stability are tree position and forest stand age.
Retention of sediment and organic matter in the system influences water quality
downstream. Excessive sediment loads are detrimental to aquatic habitat and
drinking water. Organic matter, particularly large woody debris can increase
maintenance costs of small drinking water reservoirs downstream. Retention of
materials in the system keeps nutrients important for aquatic organisms in the
Research Plan Page - 94
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
system and prevents water quality problems for drinking water supplies. The
retention of the leaves near their origin helps prevent water quality problems
downstream. Retention is influenced primarily by the landform and the potential
for materials to be moved out of the system during storm events. Steeper,
constrained valleys allow disturbance events to move materials through the system.
The indicators for retention will be streamside surface, hillslope gradient, and
channel gradient.
9.4.1.6.2. Type and Extent of Vegetation
As shown in Figure 6, the type and extent of vegetation influence hillslope erosion
and nutrient inputs, which in turn affect water quality. Hill slopes with denser,
more well-developed vegetation have a greater capacity to buffer the stream against
sediment and nutrient inputs. They show less erosion than those with less
vegetation or with younger vegetation which has less developed root systems. The
vegetation indicators that will be used to describe the potential for hillslope erosion
are dominant cover type and forest stand age. Both of these indicators describe the
development of the forest vegetational structure and root system and the ability of
the vegetation to attenuate erosion on the hill slopes.
Nutrient inputs are influenced by the type and extent of vegetation and its position
relative to the stream, which affect the kinds and amount of litter that are input to
the stream. The type of vegetation can be described by the extent and type of cover
type (e.g., unvegetated, forested, or shrubs/grass) and the dominant tree type
(coniferous, deciduous). The leaf litter of some hardwoods, such as alder, can cause
excessive tannin and nutrient loads, which can be a problem where water is
impounded for drinking supplies. The indicators that will be used to describe
nutrient inputs at a site are tree species mix, dominant cover type, and tree position.
9.5. Request to the Civilian Applications Committee for the acquisition
of remote imagery in the Drift Creek Basin (Dated November, 1996)
1. Site Name: Drift Creek Basin, Oregon
2. Site Location: Watershed bounded by the coordinates on attachment 1
3. Description of Existing Research at this site:
Research at this site includes intensive fieki work at 24 sites and the collection of
fine resolution unclassified remote imagery (e.g. CIR photography at 1:4,000, ADAR
imagery with 4 bands matching the TM visible spectrum bands with 1 and 3 m pixel
resolution) to compare the ability of different technologies to describe riparian
ecosystems. The methods are compared in terms of their ability to describe the
ecologically important features of the forested riparian system (tree species
composition, ground topography, forest canopy structure) and the adjacent stream
condition (width, depth, bottom texture, large wood in the channel). A high and
Research Plan Page - 95
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
known degree of precision and accuracy in each of these parameters is desired. For
example, we wish to be able to be able to identify the species of each tree and its
position relative to the stream within 2 m. Some of the analyses are done using a
Helava-Leica Digital Photogrammetric Workstation
4. Type of Technology
A. Fine resolution stereo imagery in the visible spectrum or digital imagery
with bands matching TM bands.
B. Fine spatial resolution thermal infra-red to identify the stream boundary,
stream condition, and the influence of stream waters over adjacent land.
C. Fine resolution laser altimetry or other active sensor that can describe the
ground topography and the forest canopy structure
5. Area of Coverage
Maximum
A, and B. Entire Drift Creek Basin as described in attachment 1
C. Transects 1000 m long perpendicular to the stream azimuth at each
of the 24 sites listed in attachment 1.
Minimum
A, and B. A 1000 m radius around the 25 sites listed in attachment 1, or
as many of the 24 sites as possible.
C. Transects perpendicular to the stream azimuth through as many of
the 25 sites as possible.
6. Resolution
Maximum (=finest)
A. 1 m
B. 0.25 m
C. 0.1 m vertical, 0.5 m horizontal
Minimum
A. 3 m
B. 1 m
C. 1 m vertical, 3 m horizontal
7. Frequency
Research Plan Page - 96
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
A. On a sunny day within two hours of solar noon between June 1, and
July, 10; and on a sunny day within an hour of solar noon between December 1 and
April 15. Every year
B. On a sunny day within an hour of solar noon in between June 1, and
July 10, and on a sunny day after leaf off in November within an hour of solar noon
C. Once every three years at each 3 year interval once in mid-summer
and once in mid-winter
Contact:
Name: Paul Ringold
Phone: 541-754-4565
Fax: 541-754-4716
Email: ringold@mail.cor.epa.gov
Attachment 1
The Drift Creek Basin is circumscribed by the following points:
1
-124.015282
44.425362
2
-123.936836
44.426617
3
-123.849464
44.431984
4
-123.773071
44.465324
5
-123.775101
44.495182
6
-123.765678
44.525703
7
-123.792046
44.537827
8
-123.835403
44.535172
9
-123.872581
44.557152
10
-123.910782
44.538109
11
-123.885017
44.513126
12
-123.929047
44.502235
13
-123.973701
44.480778
14
-124.006912
44.461746
UTM Zone 10 Coordinates of 25 field sites in Drift Creek. Datum is NAD 27.
UTM-x
UTM-y
420544
4920864
428337
4931186
427792
4927832
433215
4923114
436786
4931310
428228
4926744
438071
4928020
433283
4929197
436380
4927681
Research Plan Page - 97
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
421927
4922783
437182
4929941
425001
4924962
432399
4931824
435312
4930840
432306
4926169
421393
4923581
424330
4924888
434642
4923296
435216
4930792
427684
4927492
435648
4930744
433421
4929176
424408
4924648
432060
4932336
433421
4929176
Datum is NAD27.
Research Plan Page - 98
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
9.6 Personnel
Jerry Barker, Research Scientist/Supervisor, Dynamac Corporation
Ph.D., Range Ecology, Utah State University
M.S., Range Ecology, Utah State University
B.S., Botany, Brigham Young University
Michael A. Bollman, Research Scientist, Dynamac Corporation
B.S. Botany and Plant Pathology, Oregon State University
Gay A. Bradshaw, Mathematical Ecologist, USDA Forest Service PNW Research
Station
Ph.D., Forest Science, Oregon State University
M.Sc., Geophysics, Stanford University
B.A., Linguistics, University of California, Santa Barbara
Ward W. Carson, Associate Professor, College of Forestry, Oregon State University
Ph.D., Mechanical Engineering, University of Washington
M.S., Mechanical Engineering, University of Illinois
B.S., Mechanical Engineering, Oregon State University
Steve Cline, Biologist/Quality Assurance, US EPA Western Ecology Division
M.S., Forest Science, Oregon State University
B.S., Forestry, University of Illinois
Maria Fiorella, Research Assistant, Forest Science Department, Oregon State
University
M.S., Forest Resources, Oregon State University
B.S., Natural Resources, Cornell University
Paul L. Ringold, Ecologist, US EPA Western Ecology Division
Ph.D., Earth and Planetary Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University
B.A., Biology, University of Pennsylvania
Jennifer Stepp, Ecologist, Dynamac Corporation
B.A., Geology, Ohio State University
~
Research Plan Page - 99
September 25, 1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
9.7 Glossary
ADAR Airborne Data Aquistion and Registration.
Altimeter An active microwave or laser remote sensing system used primarily for
oceanic research. An altimeter provides data by measuring the interval
between an emitted signal and its echo.
Analog Data Remotely sensed data that is captured on film.
ATM Airborne Thematic Mapper.
AVIRIS Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer
AVNIR Advanced Visible and Near Infrared Radiometer.
Band 1) An area adjacent to a stream, and 2) in remote sensing terms, an area
within the electromagnetic spectrum which is used for obtaining spectral
information on a target.
BDR Bi-directional reflectance.
CASI Compact Airborne Spectrographs Imager.
CBERS China-Brazil Earth Resource Satellite.
Classification Scheme A system of grouping land cover units based upon common
attributes. For example, the United States Geological Survey Anderson
system.
Conceptual Model A means for relating riparian characteristics to indicators of
those characteristics.
CWD Coarse woody debris
DBH Diameter at Breast Height.
Digital Data Remotely sensed data that is acquired in digital format.
t
Digital Photogrammetry The technique of obtaining quantitative information and
measurements from photography.
Disturbance Any process which interrupts the existing functioning of-an ecosystem.
EOS AM-1 Earth Observing System Ante Meridian (10:30 AM equator crossing).
Research Plan Page -100
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Ecological Attribute A physical characteristic that plays a role in ecosystem
functioning.
Ecological Process Events in which a significant interaction between biotic and
abiotic components of the ecosystem occur. Examples include disturbance,
nutrient cycling, productivity.
Ecological Values The broad set of goods or services that an ecosystem provides. For
riparian systems, these include: Aquatic Habitat, Water Quality, Terrestrial
Habitat.
Ecoregion A landscape of relatively homogenous character as defined by a balance
between geology, climate, hydrology, and ecology.
Ecosystem Diversity Pertains to number and distribution of ecosystems within a
landscape.
Emerging Technology A technology that has not been implemented, tested, and
verified.
Error Matrix A commonly used method in remote sensing to assess the accuracy of
a classification in which ground data and classified data are compared. Errors
of omission and commission can be obtained from this matrix.
Field Approaches In- situ methods for acquiring information about riparian areas.
As opposed to remote sensing approaches.
Forest Plan The President's Northwest Forest Plan as defined by United States
Department of Agriculture Forest Service and Department of Interior Bureau'
of Land Management (1994).
Functional Attributes Patterns, structures, or processes that support ecological
values.
Geomorphic Feature Physical characteristics of land forms. In riparian systems
geomorphic features include channels, flood plains, slopes, and terraces.
GIS (Geographic Information System) A c6mputer based system for managing,
analyzing, and displaying spatial information.
GPS Global Positioning System
Grain The scale at which a feature is observed.
Ground Truth See Field Approaches
Research Plan Page -101
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
IFSAR Interferometric Synthetic Aperature Radar.
Indicator "Any environmental measure that can be used to quantitatively estimate
the condition of an ecological resource" (Barber, 1994).
Intermittent Stream A stream that does not flow continuously.
IRS-1D Indian Remote Sensing Satellite.
JPL-AirSAR Jet Propulsion Laboratory Airborne Synthetic Aperature Radar.
Landscape A heterogeneous land area composed of interacting ecosystems that is
repeated in similar form throughout, (from Forman and Godron, 1986)
Mature Technology A technology that has wide acceptance and its advantages and
disadvantages are widely recognized.
Measurements Quantitative descriptions of an object.
MIVIS Multi-spectral Infrared and Visible Spectrometer
Operational Technology A technology that is currently used on a regular basis, yet is
still evolving.
NIR Near-Infrared
Non-Technological Criteria Criteria that cannot be obtained objectively.
Northwest Forest Plan See Forest Plan
PCQ Point Center Quarter
Photogrammetry The technique of obtaining information and estimates from
photography.
Pixel The smallest fundamental unit in digital remote sensing analysis. The pixel
size is synonomous with the instantaneous field of view of the sensor in
digital image processing and is related to spatial resolution (c.f. spatial scale).
Plot The unit of spatial coverage for detailed collection of data.
President's Northwest Forest Plan See Forest Plan.
Province a landscape of relatively homogenous character, approximated by
ecoregions.
Research Plan Page -102
September 25, 1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Reach, or Stream Reach A stretch of stream within a geomorphically homogenous
unit; a stretch of stream within one watershed.
Reference Conditions Conditions characterizing ecosystem composition, structure,
and function and their variability (from Kauffman et al, 1994 , "An
Ecological Basis for Ecosystem Management")
Region A geographic area that shares one or more characteristic, for example, a
watershed, c.f. ecoregion.
Regional Monitoring Obtaining synoptic information over a broad geographic area.
Remote Sensing The science and art of obtaining information about a target from a
distance.
Research and Monitoring Committee The Federal interagency committee
responsible for overseeing and coordinating research and monitoring
supporting the implementation of the forest plan.
Riparian Area An area directly associated with a stream, river, or waterway. The
interface between aquatic and upland ecosystems.
Riparian Attributes Abiotic and biotic characteristics of the riparian area.
Riparian Reserve A riparian area that is being managed in order to conserve
ecosystem integrity.
SIR-A,B,C Shuttle Imaging Radar missions A, B, C
Site A stretch of stream smaller than a reach, the scale at which the attributes listed
for sites in Table 1 operate. See plot.
Spatial Hierarchy The quantum steps in the spatial scale continuum related to
function. For aquatic systems, these would include: site, reach, stream,
watershed, landscape, region.
Spatial Scale In remote sensing, this term refers to the resolving power of the
sensor. It can also refer to the relationship between map or photograph
distance to real world distance. For example, 1:12,000 (c.f. pixel). In a broader
sense, it refers to size of an object. It is often used to include either grain, the
size of an individual object, or extent, the size of an area being evaluated
Spatial Structure Relates to the physiognomy of assemblages of plants, with
characteristics such as leaf shape and growth form.
Research Plan Page -103
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
SPOT Systeme Probatoire d'Observation de la Terra
Stressor A process from outside of the ecosystem which causes a change.
Subplot A finer unit of measure (5x5 meters) that is imbedded within the larger 40
x 40 meter plots.
Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) An active remote sensing system which uses
wavelengths in the microwave region.
Technological Criteria Criteria which can be objectively identified.
Temporal Scale The level of resolution in time perceived or considered (Kaufman,
et al, 1994); or extent.
TM Thematic Mapper.
Tree Cover The amount of ground covered by the tree's foliage.
Watershed An area that is characterized by a common drainage basin.
Woody Debris Debris from fallen trees that are ecologically significant, especially
for providing habitat
Vegetation Dynamics The temporal characteristics of vegetation cover, such as
phenology.
Videography Acquiring imagery in video format.
Research Plan Page -104
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
10. References
Agee, J. K. (1988). Successional dynamics in riparian zones. College of Forest
Resources, Univ. of Washington, 31-44 pp.
Aldrich, R. C., R. A. Harding and D. P. Paine. (1984). Remote Sensing. 1117-1163 1117-
1163 in K. F. Wenger (ed.) Forestry Handbook. John Wiley and Sons, New
York.
Angermeier, P. and J. Karr. (1994). Biological integrity versus biological diversity as
policy directives - Protecting biotic resources. Bioscience 44(10): 690-697.
Avery, T. E. and G. L. Berlin. (1992). Fundamentals of Remote Sensing and Airphoto
Interpretation. Macmillian Publishing Co., New York NY,
Baker, J. P., R. Bennet, D. H. Landers, E. Preston, P. L. Ringold, J. Wigington, H. Lee,
G. Chapman, W. Frick, A. Sigleo, D. T. Specht and D. R. Young (1995).
Ecosystem Research in the Pacific Northwest: Five-Year Research Strategy.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory-
Corvallis, Environmental Research Laboratory-Newport.
Barber, M. C. (1994). Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program Indicator
Development Strategy. U.S. EPA, ORD, EMAP.
Barker, J. and M. Bollman (1996). Field Protocol and Standard Operating Procedures.
Dynamac Corporation.
Beier, J., N. Keel, G. Major and R. Pfister (1992). Remote Sensing in the Arctic: An
Inventory of Relevant Remote Sensing Databases. Hughes STX Corporation.
Belt, G. H. and J. O'Laughlin (1992). Design of riparian buffer strips for protection of
water quality: Analysis of scientific literature. University of Idaho Forest,
Wildlife, and Range Experiment Station, Moscow, Idaho.
Benda, L. (1990). The influence of debris flows on channels .and valley floors in the '
Oregon Coast Range. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 15: 457-466.
Benkelman, C., H. Monday, C. Hardy and'B. Burgan (1994). Forest Service Monitors
Wildfire Potential with Satellites and Aircraft. Earth Observation Magazine.
February, 1994: 51-54.
Benkelman, C. A., R. H. Behrendt and D. R. Johnson (1990). The High Resolution
Airborne Data Acquisition and Registration (ADAR) System. GIS/LIS '90,
Anaheim, California,
Research Plan Page -105
September 25, 1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Beschta, R. L., R. E. Bilby, G. B. Holtby and T. D. Hofstra. (1987). Stream temperature
and aquatic habitat: fisheries and forestry interactions. University of
Washington, Seattle, WA,
Bilby, R. E. (1988). Interactions between aquatic and terrestrial systems. College of
Forest Resources, U. of Washington, Seattle WA, 13-29 pp.
Bilby, R. E. and J. W. Ward. (1991). Characteristics and functions of large woody
debris in streams draining old-growth, clear-cut, and second-growth forests.
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 48(12): 2499-2508.
Bradley, J. B. and P. J. Whiting (1992). A Process-Based Stream Classification System
for Small Streams in Washington. Washington State Department of Natural
Resources.
Bradshaw, G. A. and M. J. Fortin. (In Review). Effects of Landscape Anisotropy on
Scaling and Sampling Design in Ecological Monitoring. :
Brazier, J. R. and G. W. Brown (1973). Buffer Strips for stream temperature control.
Oregon State University, Forest Research Laboratory, Corvallis OR.
Brunner, R. D. and T. W. Clark. (1997). A Practice-Based Approach to Ecosystem
Management. Conservation Biology :
Bull, E. L. (1978). Specialized habitat requirements of birds: snag management, old-
growth and riparian habitats. U.S. Forest Service.
Bury, R. B. and P. S. Corn. (1988). Responses of aquatic and streamside amphibians to
timber harvest: A review, in K. J. Raedeke (ed.) Streamside Management:
Riparian Wildlife and Forestry Interactions. College of Forest Resources,
University of Washington, Seattle WA.
Carey, A. B. (1988). The influence of small streams on the composition of upland
bird communities, in K. J. Radeke (ed.) Streamside Management: Riparian
Wildlife and Forestry Interactions. College of Forest Resources, University of
Washington, Seattle WA.
Carson, W. (1995). Mapping from Aerial Photographs.
Chen, D. V., R. F. Carsel, S. C. McCutcheon and W. L. Nutter. (Submitted). Stream
Temperature Simulation of Forest Watersheds: I Shade-HSPF Development
and Enhancement. ASCE Journal of Environmental Engineering :
Research Plan Page -106
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Chen, D. Y., S. C. McCuthcheon, D. J. Norton and W. L. Nutter. (Submitted). Stream
Temperature Simulation of Forest Watersheds: II Model Application. ASCE
Journal of Environmental Engineering :
Christensen, N. L., A. M. Bartuska, J. H. Brown, S. Carpenter, C. D'Antonio, R.
Francis, J. F. Franklin, J. A. MacMahon, R. F. Noss, D. J. Parsons, C. H.
Peterson, M. G. Turner and R. G. Woodmansee. (1996). The Report of the
Ecological Society of America Committee on the Scientific Basis for Ecosystem
Management. Ecological Applications 6(3): 665-691.
Clemmer, P. (1994). Riparian Area Management: The Use of Aerial Photography to
Manage Wetland-Riparian Areas. US Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Land Management.
Cohen, W. B., J. D. Kushla, W. J. Ripple and S. L. Garman. (1996). An Introduction to
Digital Methods in Remote Sensing of Forested Ecosystems: Focus on the
Pacific Northwest, USA. Environmental Management 20(3): 421-435.
Cohen, W. B. and T. A. Spies. (1992). Estimating Structural Attributes of Douglas-
Fir/Western Hemlock Forest Stands form Landsat and SPOT Imagery.
Remote Sensing and the Environment 41: 1-17.
Cohen, W. B., T. A. Spies and M. Fiorella. (1995). Estimating the age and structure of
forests in a multi-ownership landscape of western Oregon, U.S.A.
International Journal of Remote Sensing 16(4): 721-746.
Corbley, K. P. (1996). One-Meter Satellites: Choosing Imagery that Meets GIS
Requirements -- Part Two. Geo Info Systems 1996(April): 34-37.
Cross, S. P. (1988). Riparian systems and small mammals and bats, in K. J. Raedeke •
(ed.) Streamside Management: Riparian Wildlife and Forestry Interactions.
College of Forest Resources, University of Washington, Seattle WA.
Diaz, N. M. and T. K. Mellen (1996). Riparian Ecological Types: Gifford Pinchot and
Mt. Hood National Forests Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area.
USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region.
Dilworth, J. R. (1956). The Use of Aerial Photographs in cruising second-growth
Douglas-Fir Stands. University of Washington.
Effectiveness Monitoring Team (1997). The Program for Effectiveness Monitoring of
the Northwest Forest Plan. Research and Monitoring Committee.
Erman, D. C., J. D. Newbold and K. B. Roby (1977). Evaluation of streamside
bufferstrips for protecting aquatic organisms. California Water Resources
Center, UC Davis.
Research Plan Page -107
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Federal Geographic Data Committee (1996). FGDC Vegetation Classification and
Information Standards.
Fonda, R. W. (1974). Forest succession in relation to river terrace development in
Olympic Nation] Park, Washington. Ecology 55: 927-942.
Frank, T. D. (1988). Mapping Dominant Vegetation Communities in the Colorado
Rocky Mountain Front Range with Landsat Thematic Mapper and Digital
Terrain Data. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 54(12):
1727-1734.
Franklin, J. F. and T. A. Spies (1991). Ecological definitions of old-growth Douglas-fir
forests. In: Wildlife and Vegetation of Unmanaged Douglas -Fir Forests.
U.S.Forest Service, PNW Research Station, Portland OR.
Frissell, C. A., W. J. Liss, C. E. Warren and M. D. Hurley. (1986). A hierachical
framework for stream habitat classifcation: Viewing streams in a watershed
context. Environmental Management 10: 199-214.
Gebhardt, K. A., C. Bohn, S. Jensen and W. S. Platts (eds.) (1989). Use of hydrology in
riparian classification. US Bureau of Land Management, Billings, Montana,
53-59 pp.
Gregory, S. V. (1997). Riparian Management in the 21st Century. 69-85 69-85 in K. A.
Kohm and J. F. Franklin (eds.) Creating a forestry for the 21st century: the
science of ecosystem management. Island Press, Washington, DC.
Gregory, S. V., D. Hulse and R. Edwards (1996). Research Workplan: Year 1. Pacific
Northwest Ecosystem Research Consortium.
Gregory, S. V., F. J. Swanson, W. A. McKee and K. W. Cummins. (1991). An
Ecosystem Perspecive of Riparian Zones: Focus on Links between Land and
Water. Bioscience 41(8): 540-551.
Gregory, S. V., F. J. Swanson, W. A. McKee and K. W. Cummins. (1991). An
Ecosystem perspective of riparian zones. Bioscience 41: 540-551.
Greve, C. W. (ed.) (1997). Digital Photogrammetry: an addendum to the manual of
photogrammetry. American Society of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing,
Grumbine, R. E. (1994). What is Ecosystem Management? Conservation Biology
1994(1): 27-38.
Hall, J. D., G. W. Brown and R. L. Lantz. The Alsea Watershed Study. 399-416 399-416
in
Research Plan Page -108
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Harmon, M. E., J. F. Franklin, F. J. Swanson, P. Sollins, S. V. Gregory, J. D. Lattin, N.
H. Anderson, s. P. Cline, N. G. Aumen, J. R. sedell, G. W. Lienkaemper, K.
Cromack and K. W. Cummins. (1986). Ecology of coarse woody debris in
temperate ecosystems. Advances in Research 15: 133-302.
Hawak, G. M. and D. B. Zobel. (1974). Forest succession on alluvial landforms of the
McKinzie River Valley, Oregon. Northwest Science 48: 245-265.
Hayslip, G., D. Klemm and L. J. (eds.) (1994). Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program Surface Waters and RegionlO Regional Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment Program: 1994 Pilot Field Operations and
Methods Manual for Streams on the Coast Range Ecoregion of Oregon and
Washington and the Yakima River Basin. Office of Research and
Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, 75+
pp.
Hazard, J. W. and B. E. Law (1989). Forest Survey methods used in the USDA Forest
Service. U.S. EPA, ORD.
Heipke, C. (1995). State-of-the-art digital photogrammetric workstations for
topographic applications. Photogrammetric workstations for topographic
applications 61: 49-65.
Helava Leica (1996). Softcopy Exploitation Tool Set. GDE Systems, Inc.
Herlihy, A. T., P. R. Kaufmann, L. Reynolds, J. Li and E. G. Robison. (1997).
Developing Indicators of Ecological Condition in teh Willamette Basin: An
Overview of the Oregon Prepilot study for EPA's EMAP Program. 275-282 275-
282 in A. Laenen and D. A. Dunnette (eds.) River Quality, Dynamics and
Reforestation. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Hoffer, R. M. (1994). Challenges in Developing and Applying Remote Sensing to
Ecosystem Management. 25-42 25-42 in V. A. Sample (ed.) Remote Sensing
and GIS in Ecosystem Management. Island Press, Washington, D.C
Hunsaker, C., R. Graham, R. S. Turner, P. L. Ringold, G. R. Holdren and T. C.
Strickland. (1993). A National Critical Loads Framework for Atmospheric
Deposition Effects Assessments: n. Defining Assessment End Points,
Indicators, and Functional Subregions. Environmental Management 17(3):
335-341.
Hupp, C. R. (ed.) (1988). Plant ecological aspects of flood geomorphology and
paleoflood history. 335-356 pp.
Research Plan Page -109
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Hyypp3/ J- arid M. Hallikainen. (1996). Applicability of airborne Profiling Radar to
Forest Inventory. Remote Sensing of Environment 57(1): 39-57.
Jensen, J. R. (1986). Introductory Digital Image Processing: A Remote Sensing
Perspective. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey,
Johnson, A. W. and D. M. Ryba (1992). A literature review of recommended buffer
widths to maintain various functions of stream riparian areas. King County
surface Water Management Division, Seattle WA.
Kagan, J. S. (1995). Develop Statewide Riparian Vegetation Classification and
Riverine Diversity Map.
Kauffman, J. B. (1988). The status of riparian habitats in Pacific Northwest forests, in
K. J. Raedeke (ed.) Streamside Management: Riparian Wildlife and Forestry
Interactions. University of Washington, College of Forest Recources, Seattle
Wa.
Kaufman, P. R. (1993). Physical Habitat. 59-69 59-69 in R. M. Hughes (ed.) Stream
Indicator and Design Workshop. Environmental Protection Agency,
Corvallis, Oregon.
Kaufmann, P. R. (1987). Channel morphology and hydraulic characteristics of
torrent-impacted forest streams in the Oregon Coast Range. Oregon State
University.
Knight, R. L. (1988). Relationships of birds of prey and riparian habitat in the Pacific
Northwest: An overview, in K. J. Raedeke (ed.) Streamside Management:
Riparian Wildlife and Forestry Interactions. University of Washington,
College of Forest Resources, Seattle WA.
Kovalchik, B. L. (1987). Riparian Zone Associations: Deschutes, Ochoco, Fremont
and Winema National Forests. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service
Region 6.
Kramer, H. J. (1994). Observation of the Earth and Its Environment. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, 580 pp.
Landers, D. H., J. Omernik, S. Paulsen and,R. Hughes (1995). SIL-95. XXVI
International Conference on Theoretical and Applied Limnology, Sao Paolo,
Brazil,
Larsen, D. P., N. S. Urquhart and D. L. Kugler. (1995). Regional Scale Trend
Monitoring of Indicators of Trophic Condition of Lakes. Water Resources
Bulletin 31(1): 1-23.
Research Plan Page -110
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Leopold, L. B., M. G. Wolman and J. P. Miller. (1964). Fluvial Processes in
Geomorphology. W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, 522 pp.
Light, D. L. (1996). Film cameras or digital sensors. The challenge ahead for aerial
imaging. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 62: 285-291.
Lillesand, T. M. and R. W. Kieffer. (1994). Remote sensing and Image Interpretation.
John Wiley and Sons, New York,
MacArthur, R. H. and J. W. MacArthur. (1961). On bird species diversity. Ecology 42:
594-598.
Maleki, S. (1997). Riparian Ecosystem Monitoring in the Pacific Northwest: The
Utility of Remote Sensing Technologies.
Maus, P. (ed.) (1995). Guidelines for the Use of Digital Imagery for Vegetation
Mapping. USDA Forest Service, 125 pp.
McCutcheon, S. (1997).
McDade, M. H., F. J. Swanson, W. A. McKee, J. F. Franklin and J. Van Sickle. (1990).
Source distances for coarse woody debris entering small streams in western
Oregon and Washington. Canadian Journal of Forest Rsearch 20: 326-330.
Means, J. (1996). Personal Communication.
Mereszczak, I., J. Colmer, J. Oden, J. Almy, M. Hoppus, P. J. Ishikawa, H. Lachowski,
J. Ward and A. J. Oslin (1990). Riparian Area Managment: What Can Remote
Sensing Contribute? USDA/Forest Service, Washington DC.
Montgomery, D. R. and J. M. Buffington (1993). Channel Classification, Prediction of
Channel Response, and Assessment of Channel Conditions. Washington
Department of Natural Resources.
Moring, J. R. and R. L. Lantz (1975). The Alsea Watershed Study: Effects of logging
on the aquatic resources of three headwater streams of the Alsea River,
Oregon. Part I: Biological studies. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife,
Portland OR.
f
Moring, J. R. and R. L. R.L. Lantz. (1975). Part I: Biological studies, in J. R. Moring
(ed.) The Alsea Watershed Study: Effects of logging on the aquatic resources of
three headwater streams of the. Alsea River, Oregon. Oregon Department of
Fish and Wildlife, Portland, OR.
Moring, J. R. and R. L. R.L. Lantz. (1975). Part II: Changes in environmental
conditions, in J. R. Moring (ed.) The Alsea Watershed Study: Effects of
Research Plan Page - 111
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
logging on the aquatic resources of three headwater streams of the Alsea
River, Oregon. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, OR.
Moring, J. R. and R. L. R.L. Lantz. (1975). Part III: Discussion and Recommendations.
in J. R. Moring (ed.) The Alsea Watershed Study: Effects of logging on the
aquatic resources of three headwater streams of the Alsea River, Oregon.
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, OR.
Mouat, D. (1997).
Mueller-Dombois, D. and H. Ellenberg. (1974). Aims & methods of vegetation
ecology. John Wiley and Sons, New York,
Mulder, B., J. Alegria, R. Czaplewski, P. Ringold and T. Tolle (1995). Effectiveness
Monitoring: An Interagency Program for the Northwest Forest Plan with an
Emphasis on: Late-Successional Forest, Northern Spotted Owl, Marbled
Murrelet, Survey and Manage, and Riparian and Aquatic. Research and
Monitoring Committeee.
Murphy, B., J. Alegria and e. al. (eds.) (1991). Stream Ecosystems. American Fisheries
Society Special Publication, Bethesda, Maryland, 17-46 pp.
Murtha, P. A. (1972). A Guide to Air Photo Interpretation of Forest Damage in
Canada. Canadian Forest Service, Ottowa.
Naiman, R. T., T. J. Beechie, L. E. Benda, D. R. Berg, P. A. Bisson, L. H. MacDonald,
M. D. O'Conner, P. L. Olson and E. A. Steel (eds.) (1992). Elements of
integrated wateshed management. Springer-Verlag, New York,
NASA (1997). Request for Proposals in Terrestrial Ecology. Data fusion approaches
for improved vegetation classification or characterization.
National Marine Fisheries Service (1995). Making Endangered Species Act
Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Watershed
Scale, Non Federal Version. National Marine Fisheries Service,
Environmental and Technical Services Division, Habitat Conservation
Branch.
NOAA and NASA (1987). Space-Based Re,mote Sensing of the Earth: A Report to
Congress.
O'Laughlin, J. and G. H. Belt. (1994). Functional Approaches to Riparian Buffer Strip
Design .'Western Forester 39(6): 12-14.
Omernik, J. M. (1995). Ecoregions: A Spatial Framework for Environmental
Management, in W. S. Davis and T. P. Simon (eds.) Biological Assessment
Research Plan Page -112
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
and Criteria: Tools for Water Resource Planning and Decision Making. Lewis
Publishers, Boca Raton.
Oregon Department of Forestry (1994). Water Classification and Protection Rules
Reference Guide. Oregon Department of Forestry.
Oregon, S. o. (1996). Oregon Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative: Oregon's Plan
for Conservation and Restoration of Anadromous Salmonid in Coastal River
Basins. Oregon Natural Resources Office, Salem.
Paulsen, S., R. Hughes and P. Larsen. (In Review). A Perspective on the Role of
Probability Surveys for Assessing the Condition of Aquatic Systems. :
Positive Systems (April 10,1997). http://www.possys.com.
Program, Pacific Northwest Research. (1997). Pacific Northwest Research Program --
May 1997 Peer Review. US EPA, Office of Research and Development,
NHEERL, WED, REB.
Raedeke, J. J., R. D. Taber and D. K. Paige. (1988). Ecology of large mammals in
riparian systems of Pacific Northwest forests, in K. J. Raedeke (ed.)
Streamside Management: Riparian Wildlife and Forestry Interactions.
University of Washington, College of Forest Resources, Seattle WA.
Regional Interagency Executive Committee. (1997). Species Information Addendum
to Appendix B - Riparian Reserve Evaluation Techniques and Synthesis
Module, in Ecosystem Analysis at the Watershed Scale: Federal Guide for
Watershed Analysis. Version 2.2. Portland, Oregon.
Reynolds, L., S. V. Gregory, A. T. Herlihy, R. M. Hughes and P. R. Kaufmann (1993).
Evaluating fish species richness adn proportionate abundance in western
Oregon streams — spatial sampling requirements. Annual Meeting of the
American Fisheries Society, Portland, OR,
Richards, J. A. (1993). Remote Sensing Digital Image Analysis. Springer-Verlag, New
York,
RIM Research Group (1996). Remote Image Methods for Monitoring Riparian Sites
on Forested Landscapes in the Pacific Northwest: An Adaptive Approach to
Making a Recommendation.
Ringold, P. L., J. Alegria, R. L. Czaplewski, B. Mulder, T. Tolle and K. Burnett. (1996). „
Adaptive Monitoring for Ecosystem Management. Ecological Applications
6(3): 745-747.
Research Plan Page -113
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Ringold, P. L., J. Barker, M. Bollman, S. Cline, G. Bradshaw, M. Fiorella and W.
Carson (1997). Monitoring Forested Riparian Ecosystems: What is the Wisest
Approach? ESA Annual Meeting, Albuquerque, New Mexico,
Ringold, P. L., B. Mulder, J. Alegria, R. L. Czaplewski, T. Tolle and K. Burnett. (In
Review). Ecosystem Management — Lessons in the Design of an Ecological
Monitoring Strategy for the Forest Plan in the Pacific Northwest.
Environmental Management :
Robison, E. G., J. Runyon and C. Andrus (eds.) (1995). Forest Stream Temperature
Patterns in Western Oregon (Cooperative Stream Temperature Monitoring:
Project Completion Report). Department of Forestry, Salem OR, 27 pp.
Rot, B. W. (1995). The Interaction of Valley Constraint, Riparian Landform, and
Riparian Plant Community Size and Age Upon Channel configuration of
Small Streams of the Western Cascade Mountains, Washington. University
of Washington, Seattle WA.
Roth, R. R. (1976). Spacial heterogeneity and bird species diversity. Ecology 57: 773-
762.
Ruggiero, L. F., K. B. Aubry, A. B. carey and M. H. Huff (eds.) (1991). Wildlife and
Vegetation of Unmanaged Douglas-Fir Forests. USDA-FS, Portland OR,
Sayn-Wittgenstein, L. (1978). Recognition of Tree Species on Aerial Photographs.
Canadian Forestry Service, Forest Management Institute.
Schumaker, N. H. (1996). Using Landscape Indices to Predict Habitat Connectivity.
Ecology 77(4): 1210-1225.
Schumaker, N. H. (In Review). PATCH: A spatially explicit life history simulator for
terrestrial vertebrates, in G. A. Bradshaw and P. Marquet (eds.)
Smith, J. P., R. E. Gresswell and J. P. Hayes (1997). A Research Problem Analysis in
Support of the Cooperative Forest Ecosystem Research Center (CFER)
Program. Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Biological
Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey.
Spies, T. A. and J. F. Franklin (1991). The structure of natural young, mature, and
old-growth Douglas-fir forests in Oregon and Washington. US Forest Service,
PNW Research Station, Portland OR.
Stehman, S. (1997). Sampling Design and Analysis Issues for Thematic Mapper
Accuracy Assessment.
Research Plan Page -114
September 25,1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Stehman, S. V. and W. S. Overton. (1994). Environmental Sampling and
Monitoring, in G. P. Patil and C. R. Rao (eds.) Handbook of Statistics. Elsevier
Science, New York.
Steiner, F., S. Pieart, E. Cook, J. Rich and V. Coltman. (1994). State Wetlands and
Riparian Area Protection Programs. Environmental Management 18(2): 183-
201.
Stevens, D. L. (1994). Implementation of a National Monitoring Program. Journal of
Environmental Management 42: 1-29.
Stille, A. (1996). A Long-Distance Look Into the Past. Washington Post National
Weekly Edition. Washington, 38.
Sullivan, K., T. Lisle, E„ C. A. Dolloff, G. E. Grant and L. M. Reid (eds.) (1987).
Stream Channels: The link between Forests and Fishes. University of
Washington, Seattle WA,
Swanson, F. J., T. K. Kratz, N. Caine and R. G. Woodmansee. (1988). Landform
effects on ecosystem patterns and processes. Bioscience 38: 92-98.
Swanston, D. N. (1991). Natural processes. 139-179 139-179 in Influences of Forest
and Rangeland Management on Salmonid Fisheries and Their Habitat.
American Fisheries Society Special Publication, Bethesda, Maryland.
Swift, B. L., J. S. Larson and R. M. DeGraaf. (1984). Relationship of breeding bird
density and diversity to habitat variables in forested wetlands. Wilson
Bulletin 96: 48-59.
Urban, D. L. (1990). A versatile model to simulate forest pattern: a user's guide to
ZELIG Version 1.0. Department of Environmental Sciences, University of
Virginia, Charlottesville, VA,
USDA/FS and USDI/BLM (1994). Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest
Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents Within the
Range of the Northern Spotted Owl and Standards and Guidelines for
Management of Habitat for Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forest Related
Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl. FS, BLM.
Vannote, R. L., G. W. Minshall, K. W. Cummins, J. R. Sedell and C. E. Cushing.
(1980). The river contiuum concept. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and
Aquatic Science 37: 130-137.
VanSickle, J. and S. V. Gregory. (1990). Modeling inputs of large woody debris to
streams from falling trees. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
40: 452-461.
Research Plan Page -115
September 25, 1997
-------
Monitoring Design for Riparian Forests in the Pacific Northwest
Wallin, D. O., F. J. Swanson, B. Marks, J. H. Cissel and J. Kertis. (1997). Comparison
of managed and pre-settlement landscape dynamics in forests of the Pacific
Northwest, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 85: 291-309.
Waring, R. H., J. Way, E. R. Hunt Jr., L. Morrissey, K. J. Ranson, J. F. Weishampel, R.
Oren and S. E. Franklin. (1995). Imaging Radar for Ecosystem Studies.
Bioscience 45(10): 715-723.
Waring, R. H., J. B. Way, E. R. Hunt Jr., L. Morrisey, K. J. Ranson, J. F. Weishampel,
R. Oren and S. E. Franklin. (1995). Imaging radar for ecosystem studies.
Bioscience 45(10): 715-723.
Wilson, M. F. (1974). Avian Community organization and habitat structure. Ecology
55:1017-1029.
Research Plan Page -116
September 25,1997
-------
NHEERL-COR-874R
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read instructions on the reverse before completir
1. REPORT NO.
600/R-97/125
2.
3
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Monitoring design for riparian forests in the Pacific Northwest
5. REPORT DATE
12/1997
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
CODE
7. AUTHOR(S) 1 P.L. Ringold,2 J. Barker,2 M Bollman,3 G. Bradshaw,4 W. Carson., 1S.
Cline, 4 M. Florella,2 J. Stepp
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT
NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
1 US EPA NHEERL-WED 2 Dynamac Corporation
200 SW 35th Street 200 SW 35th Street
Corvallis, Oregon 97333 Corvallis, Oregon 97333
3 USDA Forest Service 4 Oregon State University
3200 Jefferson Way Corvallis, Oregon 97331
Coarvallis, Oregon 97333
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
US EPA ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
200 SW 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
1 3. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD
COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/02
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES:
16. Abstract: The goal of this project is to recommend a broadly-acceptable efficient and effective methodology for characterizing
streamside riparian attributes in forested settings at the site grain for regional monitoring. Streamside forested riparian areas have
extraordinary ecological value richly reflected in management practice. The absence of a methodology to characterize these
systems in a uniform way, presents a major obstacle to improving or evaluating both regional management decisions and regional
understanding.
We consider monitoring design in the context of three interacting r\constraints: ecological functions, capabilities of technologies, and
user needs. Each of these constraints is imperfectly known and has multiple facets -- ecosystems have more than one function,
users have multiple needs. The three constraints are an interacting set. To enhance the ability to identify these interactions, the
research is implemented with structured consultation with the broader scientific community and with the broader community of
potential users. The research is organized so that ecological characteristics of riparian systems are generally defined early on.
These requirements constrain the choice of monitoring systems from among the set of systems available. The focus is on fine
grained remote methods. Comparison between candidate selected monitoring systems provides for an initial formulation of a
monitoring design. A series of evaluations of these initial formulations provides for an initial recommendation. With the state's
interest in the status of coastal fishes, and the programmatic interest of EPA's Western Ecology Division, the areas selected for
study are in the Oregon coastal province and the Willamette basin. While the design of this research is specific to this area, the
insights and procedures developed should be applicable elsewhere.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. DESCRIPTORS
b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED
TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Landscape ecology, ecological indicators,
monitoring, riparian forests, Western Oregon
-------
4r
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
19. SECURITY CLASS {This Report)
21. NO. OF PAGES: 123
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77) PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE
------- |