ASWM Annual Meeting March 30, 2016 NCTC, Shepherdstown, WV. Andrew Robertson, Director

Transcription

1 ASWM Annual Meeting March 30, 2016 NCTC, Shepherdstown, WV Andrew Robertson, Director

2 Location Within Northern Wisconsin

3 Watershed Characteristics Approximately 139,000 acres or 220 square miles Headwaters in the Penokee Hills within CNNF Drains northeast to confluence with the Bad River and then into Lake Superior Flows through a variety of landscapes including the Lake Superior Coastal Plain

4 Pre-settlement, primarily forest covered mixed decid and confier and wetlands Forests and wetlands regulated water volume and velocity reaching streams Deforestation through logging late 1800 s early 1900 s Conversion to agriculture 1895 to 1930 with extensive field leveling and drainage. Watershed History

5

6 Key Watershed Issues Unstable hydrologic system peak flows, velocity, interception Excess sediment due to erosion and deposition Excess nutrients non-point source pollution High bacteria count Loss of historic aquatic habitat Fragmentation of terrestrial habitat

7

8 So, What Is Landscape Level Wetland Functional Assessment? A wetland mapping approach that allows us to: Inventory current and historic wetland resources within a watershed using traditional and evolving technologies Characterize those wetlands with a suite of descriptive metrics Correlate wetland characteristics to ecological functions they provide Support informed decisions about prioritization of wetland preservation, enhancement and restoration opportunities Incorporate watershed planning objectives, partnerships and stakeholder engagement

9 Marengo Watershed Objectives Slow the Flow Stakeholder Engagement Regulatory Context Mitigation Restore, Preserve, Enhance Comprehensive Planning

10 Wetland Inventory to Wetland Functional Assessment work with existing landscape level wetland inventory techniques extend mapping to include additional descriptive metrics (e.g. soils, elevation surfaces, hydrogeomorphic, adjacent landcover/landuse, water quality, and others) incorporate applied science, best professional judgment, local input, stakeholder concerns

11 Main Steps in the WFA Process WFA is an adaptive environmental management process : 1. Inventory Present-Day Wetlands (WWI) 2. Convert and refine to NWI FGDC standard 3. Interpret additional hydrogeomorphic metrics 4. Correlate wetland functions to wetland data Adaptive management is a decision process that promotes flexible decision making that can be adjusted in the face of uncertainties as outcomes from management actions and other events become better understood Williams, et al Identify Historic and Potential Restorable Wetlands (PRWs) 6. Prioritize wetland preservation, enhancement and restoration

12 Wetland Functional Correlation Potential Wetland Functions for Assessment Water Quality Functions Surface Water Detention Streamflow Maintenance Energy Dissipation Groundwater Recharge Shoreline Stabilization Nutrient Transformation Carbon Sequestration Sediment or Particulate Retention Habitat Functions Fish Habitat Aquatic Invertebrate Habitat Waterfowl Habitat Water Bird Habitat Amphibian Habitat Other Wildlife Habitat Conservation of Biodiversity

13 Potentially Restorable Wetlands Start with WI DNR PRW Layer Model potentially historic wetlands based on extended SSURGO soil queries and image interpretation Add derived flow networks, basins and additional derivative elevation datasets (e.g. CTI, curvature, surface roughness), additional PI layers Review with existing hydrology and imagery to identify sites with high potential for preservation, enhancement or restoration based on preponderance of evidence approach To quantify historic loss, utilize various techniques including: Historic inventories (e.g. Bordner Survey in WI) Historic aerial imagery Land surveyor notes/maps

14 Prioritization Criteria Example Criteria: Need a method for prioritization of restoration opportunities Criteria include: ecological, societal and economic Ecologic: proximity to existing wetlands, proximity to a waterway, isolation from roads, connectivity to other natural areas, impact on surface hydrology Societal: Landowner engagement, proximity to development, location within a headwaters Economic: role in managing peak flows and flooding; proximity to previous flood damage sites importance for water management; proximity to timber harvest; agricultural designation; zoning

15 Multi-Criteria Decision Matrix

16 Matrix Draft

17 Multi-Criteria Decision Matrix Function performance based on specific habitat elements Quantify change in functional performance from incremental changes Enhancement Restoration Preservation Development Minimization Avoidance

18 Guiding Principles Must generate results of high ecological value straightforward and transparent definable, defensible, and practicable Simple and cost-effective to implement yet robust enough to defensibly measure performance Must encourage proper impact minimization and avoidance by weighting incentives and disincentives Must be adaptable to reflect varied resource recovery and ecosystem restoration goals Only functional features that can be measured or assessed are evaluated Must evaluate impacts from a development project and the benefits from a restoration project need with the same methodology

19 Methods Development Identify functions performed by the ecosystem Warm/cold water fish habitat Water bird habitat Songbird habitat Nitrogen removal Phosphorous retention Erosion control Thermoregulation Water storage and delay

20 Methods Development Identify the key functions that will be assessed to address specific watershed issues. Slow the Flow = surface water detention, sediment retention, and natural hydrography Collect or develop data to support assessment of multiple criteria Emergent vegetation Number of strata present Litter/duff Open water

21 Methods Development For each functional component identified determine an approach for measuring the structure or component (e.g., density, volume, quantity, percent cover, etc.) determine the benefit or detriment from adding or subtracting incremental units Score 6 4 Score Not present < 20% 20-40% 40-60% 60-80% % Unit of measure 0 Not present < 1 ft 1-3 ft 3-4 ft 4-6 ft > 6 ft Unit of measure

22 Methods Development Functional scoring is evaluated at a map unit scale Functions provided by map unit Functions provided to surrounding habitats Functions provided to map unit by surrounding habitat

23 Map Unit Function Algorithm F mm = MM a W f W ht a 1 HH 1 + a 2 HH 2 + a 3 HH 3 + a i HH i n Where F mm = Function score for map unit MM a = Area of map unit W f = Weighting factor placeholder for function W ht = Weighting factor placeholder for map unit habitat type a 1 = Weighting factor placeholder for habitat element HH 1 = Habitat element score n = Number of habitat elements used in function

24 Site Function Algorithm Where S f = W l F mm S f = Function score for site W l = Weighting factor placeholder for function F mm = Function scores for each map unit

25 Map Unit Examples

26 Map Unit Examples Dominant Strata What is the dominant vegetation stratum within the map unit (If shrubs and trees appear to be equal, trees would be the dominant structure, as shrubs would be the dominant structure over herbs)? No vegetation present Low shrub (<1.8 ) Small tree (10-14 dbh) Only aquatic vegetation present Medium shrub ( ) Medium tree (15-19 dbh) Moss/lichen Tall shrub (>6.5 ) Large tree Grass Seedling (<1 dbh) dbh Forb Sapling/pole (1-9 dbh) dbh >48 dbh

27 Map Unit Examples Wetland Map Unit Relationships Is the map unit adjacent to a wetland habitat feature with permanent water present? If Yes, complete the following. What percent of the map unit edge provides overhanging vegetation up to 4 above the adjacent wetland habitat feature? Not present <10% 10-30% 30-60% 60-90% >90% What percent of the map unit edge provides overhanging vegetation > 4 above the adjacent wetland habitat feature? Not present <10% 10-30% 30-60% 60-90% >90% No Yes Proximal Wetland Map Unit Relationships Is the map unit within 200 ft of a wetland habitat feature with permanent water present? If Yes complete the following. No Yes What percent of the permanent water in the wetland is shaded by vegetation from this map unit? Not present <10% 10-30% 30-60% 60-90% >90% What direction is the center of the map unit from this wetland habitat feature? North East South West

28 Map Unit Examples Performance Hectares ABIOTIC FUNCTIONS AVERAGE 28% Carbon cycle support 30% Carbon respiration 31% Carbon sequestration 32% Erosion control 26% Evaporation 31% Filtration 45% Groundwater Recharge 25% Habitat formation 16% Infiltration 22% Interception 40% Landscape connectivity 42% Natural flood regime 6% 5.56 Nitrogen removal 20% Organic matter export 33% Organic matter production 24% Phosphorus retention 28% Pollinator support 19% Sediment transport 20% Soil / substrate stability 43% Soil quality 41% Soil retention 38% Temperature regulation 14% Transpiration 14% 12.88

29 Map Unit Examples Performance Hectares BIOTIC FUNCTIONS AVERAGE 21% Amphibian / turtle support 21% Bat support 10% 7.82 Fish support 42% Insect / invertebrate support 14% Large mammal support 32% Raptor support 7% 5.59 Reptile support 12% 9.31 Resident fish support 19% 7.14 Small mammal support 15% Songbird support 5% 4.98 Water bird support 5% 1.65 Vegetation support 30% Natural plant succession 43% Plant growth 19% Plant reproduction 23% Plant dispersal 29% 27.38

30 Simple Application 100 Δ from Baseline and Proposed Project = Debit Δ from Baseline and Restoration Activity = Credit 50 0 Credit Debit

31 Other Factors Several additional factors need to be addressed or developed that are outside the development of a multi-criteria functional assessment, but are necessary in order to implement it. Watershed or other landscape-scale priorities (conservation, restoration, or lost/degraded ecological functions or ecosystem services) Weighting factors based on legislation, societal values and/or regional priorities Mitigation banking rules when used in regulatory context

32 Questions? Andy Robertson Associate Director GeoSpatial Services Saint Mary's University of Minnesota