Hydrogeomorphic Approach to Assessing Wetland Functions: Guidelines for Developing Regional Guidebooks. Chapter 1 - Introduction and Overview of the Hydrogeomorphic Approach

Clairain, Ellis J.

doi:10.21236/ada401048

Cited by 13 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are numerous approaches to identifying and classifying forested wetlands (Brown et al 1979, Wharton et al 1982, Lugo et al 1990; however, Brinson's (1993) synthetic approach using geomorphic and hydrodynamic characteristics provided a system defined by the primary drivers of wetland functions. This classification system has been expanded to the hydrogeomorphic (HGM) functional assessment meth- odology that groups wetlands into similar classes and defines thresholds based on reference wetlands within each class (Smith et al 1995, Clairain 2002.…”

Section: Biological Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of conservation practices on wetland ecosystem services in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley

Faulkner

Barrow

Keeland

et al. 2011

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Restoration of wetland ecosystems is an important priority for many state and federal agencies, as well as nongovernmental conservation organizations. The historic conversion of wetlands in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley (MAV) has resulted in large‐scale implementation of a variety of conservation practices designed to restore and enhance wetland ecosystem services. As a consequence, the effectiveness of multiple approaches in achieving desired conservation goals varies depending on site conditions, practices employed, and specific ecosystem services. We reviewed government agency programs and the scientific literature to evaluate the effects of conservation practices on wetlands in the MAV. There were 68 different conservation practices applied to a combined total of 1.27 million ha in the MAV between 2000 and 2006. These practices fell into two categories: Wetland Conservation Practices and Upland Conservation Practices. Sixteen different practices accounted for nearly 92% of the total area, and only three of these are directly related to wetlands: Wetland Wildlife Habitat Management, Wetland Restoration, and Riparian Forest Buffer. All three of these practices involve reforestation, primarily planting hard‐mast species such as Quercus sp. and Carya sp. These plantings are likely to develop into even‐aged stands of low tree diversity with little structural heterogeneity, which will impact future wildlife habitat. Since hydrology is a critical driver of wetland processes, the ability of a given conservation practice to restore wetland hydrology is a key determinant of how well it can restore ecosystem services. However, there is little to no follow‐up monitoring of projects, so it is difficult to know how much variability exists for any given practice or the efficacy of specific practices. Conservation practices that only plant trees without reconnecting the wetland to the hydrologic and nutrient fluxes in the watershed may restore some wildlife habitat but will do little for regulating services such as nitrogen retention. While conservation practices have overall beneficial effects on many ecosystem services in the MAV, the most effective are those with a direct link between the actions associated with a given practice and controls over ecosystem processes and services.

show abstract

Section: Biological Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of conservation practices on wetland ecosystem services in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley

Faulkner

Barrow

Keeland

et al. 2011

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This included the assignment of the appropriate functions to each wetland type (Table 4). Functions were assigned, and the functional assessment models were built according to the process recommended by the Army Corps of Engineers (Brinson 1993, Smith 2001, Smith and Wakeley 2001, Wakeley and Smith 2001, Clairain 2002. The assignment of functions, the construction and calibration of the functional assessment models, and the models themselves are documented extensively in Brooks et al 2004.…”

Section: Preliminary Determination Of Wetland Functional Types In Agrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wetland ecosystem services and coupled socioeconomic benefits through conservation practices in the Appalachian Region

Wardrop

Glasmeier

Peterson-Smith

et al. 2011

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The adjacency of agriculture and water resources is, perhaps, nowhere more prevalent than it is in Appalachia, USA. Agricultural activities have documented impacts on the ability of wetlands and other aquatic systems to provide ecosystem services; in order to diminish and/or mitigate these impacts, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) carries out resource assessment and place‐based conservation planning on agricultural lands. We contend that a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of restoration of wetland ecosystem services within an agricultural landscape should include both ecological and socioeconomic metrics, as follows: (1) the amount and type of ecosystem services most at risk, and restored by NRCS conservation program investment; (2) a spatially based assessment of the replacement/addition of ecosystem services from both an ecological and a socioeconomic perspective; and (3) consideration of ecosystem service replacement in context with adjacent land use and population dynamics as a preliminary consideration of differential value. We utilize the Appalachian Region as a demonstration of these necessary elements in assessing the effectiveness of the conservation/restoration investments made over the period of 2000–2006. We identified a total of 1.7 million ha (4.2 million acres) of wetland polygons, with ∼17% located in an agricultural setting. We developed a classification crosswalk and utilize Hydrogeomorphic Functional Assessment models to demonstrate the relative investment of the 522 583 ha (1 291 330 acres) of wetland‐relevant practices across a suite of ecosystem services, with a heavy investment in the nutrient‐cycling functions. We examined conservation program implementation in a classification scheme that allocates counties into Urban, Rural, Mixed‐Urban, and Mixed‐Rural categories based on population characteristics, and assessed the relationship between wetland conservation program application and population dynamics. We found Mixed‐Urban and Mixed‐Rural counties to have the most wetland in agricultural settings that could be targeted for conservation measures. However, conservation practices have been applied mostly in the Mixed‐Rural and Rural counties, indicating a potential overinvestment in the latter. When total acres of conservation measures are examined over a gradient of both urban and total population growth rates, we do not see a concomitant increase in the application of wetland conservation practices, and program investment appears relatively random.

show abstract

“…incorporation of local expert knowledge where it is available for example in the description of a wetland site (e.g. for SSSI status) or in conservation reports b. a generic GIS derived classification filter based on the hydro-geomorphic (HGM) approach (Brinson et al 1995, Clairain 2002. Such approach requires topographical, hydrological and geohydrological information, soil type and vegetation data.…”

Section: )mentioning

confidence: 99%

Groundwater-Dependent Wetlands in the UK and Ireland: Controls, Functioning and Assessing the Likelihood of Damage from Human Activities

Krause

Heathwaite

Miller

et al. 2007

Water Resour Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Under the Water Framework Directive (WFD) the requirement for 'good groundwater status' is dependent upon there being no 'significant damage' to groundwater-dependent terrestrial ecosystems, i.e. groundwater-dependent wetlands. An ecohydrogeological framework was developed to assess the risk of significant damage for groundwater-dependent terrestrial ecosystems in the UK and the Republic of Ireland. The framework will be used by the competent authorities implementing the WFD as a decision support system to apply the WFD guidelines on a local to regional basis. The framework considers the variety of groundwater controls and pathways of different wetland types and allows a specific assessment to be made of the vulnerability of different wetland types to groundwater related risks. Seven distinct wetland types were identified and the potential pressures were evaluated. A GIS framework was developed in order to analyse the spatial coincidence of potential risks to each wetland type. The framework was tested for a trial dataset of 10 groundwater controlled wetland ecosystems in England and Wales in order to evaluate their current risk of damage.

show abstract

Hydrogeomorphic Approach to Assessing Wetland Functions: Guidelines for Developing Regional Guidebooks. Chapter 1 - Introduction and Overview of the Hydrogeomorphic Approach

Cited by 13 publications

References 0 publications

Effects of conservation practices on wetland ecosystem services in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley

Effects of conservation practices on wetland ecosystem services in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley

Wetland ecosystem services and coupled socioeconomic benefits through conservation practices in the Appalachian Region

Groundwater-Dependent Wetlands in the UK and Ireland: Controls, Functioning and Assessing the Likelihood of Damage from Human Activities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About