EcohydraulicsEcohydraulicsPeter GoodwinPeter Goodwin

EcohydraulicsEcohydraulics Research GroupResearch GroupCollege of EngineeringCollege of Engineering

UIUI-- BoiseBoise

CLEANERCLEANERCollaborative LargeCollaborative Large--Scale Engineering Assessment Network for Scale Engineering Assessment Network for

Environmental ResearchEnvironmental Research

Session V: ModelingSession V: Modeling

October 20October 20--22,2002 22,2002

Presentation OutlinePresentation Outline1. History of Ecohydraulics

2. Definitions

3. Forensic Studies of River and Wetland Restoration

4. ISRP Questions

5. Role of Technology

6. Adaptive Management

7. NSF/NCEAS Initiative

8. Concluding Remarks

EEcohydraulicscohydraulics [[IAHR, 1996]IAHR, 1996]Hydraulics Flows and Ecological ResponseHydraulics Flows and Ecological Response

INTERDISCIPLINAINTERDISCIPLINARYRY•• Computational hydraulicsComputational hydraulics•• Emerging computational Emerging computational

technologies technologies •• Database management/data Database management/data

mining mining •• Information technologyInformation technology•• Sediment transportSediment transport•• Water qualityWater quality•• Geomorphological evolutionGeomorphological evolution•• Ecological responseEcological response

J. J. ImbergerImbergerT. T. CarstensCarstensH.W. H.W. ShenShen et al.et al.International Aquatic Modeling Group and EU InitiativesInternational Aquatic Modeling Group and EU Initiatives

Working GroupsWorking GroupsHydraulic Modeling for Aquatic EcosystemsHydraulic Modeling for Aquatic EcosystemsFish PassageFish PassageEutrophicationEutrophication in Lakes and Reservoirsin Lakes and Reservoirs

Restoration in the Western US Restoration in the Western US Example of Tidal WetlandsExample of Tidal Wetlands

•• The most productive ecosystems on the planet The most productive ecosystems on the planet ((TinerTiner, 1984). 2300g/m, 1984). 2300g/m22/yr (15% > tropical /yr (15% > tropical rain forest)rain forest)

•• Critical habitatCritical habitat

•• Linkages extend 1000s of milesLinkages extend 1000s of miles

Tidal WetlandsTidal Wetlands

•• Loss is significant [80% in California Loss is significant [80% in California --97% in San Francisco Bay]97% in San Francisco Bay]

•• 80% loss in habitat => 50% loss in 80% loss in habitat => 50% loss in speciesspecies

Tidal Wetlands RestorationTidal Wetlands Restoration

First Generation First Generation --1970s1970s

•• Restore Tidal ActionRestore Tidal Action

•• Single discipline Single discipline

Problems with “first and second Problems with “first and second generation” enhancement projects generation” enhancement projects [Forensic studies][Forensic studies]

•• No clear enhancement objectives specified in the No clear enhancement objectives specified in the original design.original design.

•• No performance criteria for project assessment.No performance criteria for project assessment.•• Lack of monitoring data to detect the site evolution and Lack of monitoring data to detect the site evolution and

assess whether the project is performing according to assess whether the project is performing according to design expectations.design expectations.

•• Inadequate or nonInadequate or non--existent funding for maintenance or existent funding for maintenance or implementation of adaptive management strategies.implementation of adaptive management strategies.

•• Failure to account for physical processes necessary to Failure to account for physical processes necessary to establish and sustain target ecological conditions at the establish and sustain target ecological conditions at the site.site.

•• Failure to anticipate physical processes at the Failure to anticipate physical processes at the watershed scale that influence conditions at the local watershed scale that influence conditions at the local enhancement site. enhancement site.

Questions inherent in ISRP Questions inherent in ISRP recommendationsrecommendations

•• When a subWhen a sub--basin is identified as basin is identified as critical, how should restoration critical, how should restoration activities be prioritized?activities be prioritized?

•• How can the ecological benefits be How can the ecological benefits be demonstrated at the watershed scale? demonstrated at the watershed scale?

•• How can the ecological benefit to How can the ecological benefit to various indicator species be quantified various indicator species be quantified in the local region of the restoration?in the local region of the restoration?

Role of TechnologyRole of Technology

•• Integrate Diverse Integrate Diverse Data Types and Data Types and SourcesSources

•• AccessibleAccessible•• TransparentTransparent•• DefensibleDefensible•• Synthesize Local Synthesize Local

InputInput•• Conflict ResolutionConflict Resolution

Watershed Scale AnalysisWatershed Scale Analysis

•• What are the priority actions?What are the priority actions?•• What are the cumulative effects?What are the cumulative effects?•• Are actions sustainable?Are actions sustainable?•• Are the key limiting factors being addressed?Are the key limiting factors being addressed?•• What is the temporal scale of ecological benefits and What is the temporal scale of ecological benefits and

impacts?impacts?

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNN

NNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

N

NNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

N

NNNNN

N

NNNNNN

NNNNN

NN N NN

NN NNNN

NN

NNNNN

N

NN

NNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNN

N

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNN

NNNNNN

NNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNN NNNNNNNNN

N NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNN N

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNN

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

N Redds_2001

Substrate sizes (mm)0 - 21.922 - 50 (suitable)50.1 - 135

Predicting effects of fire and Predicting effects of fire and geomorphic controls on criticalgeomorphic controls on criticallife stages of salmonlife stages of salmonJ. BuffingtonJ. Buffington

Yankee ForkYankee Fork

Linkages in Physical ProcessesLinkages in Physical ProcessesPhysical barriers Physical barriers -- velocity, landslide, etcvelocity, landslide, etc

TemperatureTemperature

Fine SedimentFine Sediment

Twelve Mile ReachTwelve Mile Reach

Challenges of ecological restoration monitoringChallenges of ecological restoration monitoring

•• SpatiallySpatially--sparse, shortsparse, short--duration data setsduration data sets•• Detectable change from restoration is a small percentage of Detectable change from restoration is a small percentage of

diurnal, seasonal, or interdiurnal, seasonal, or inter--annual variabilityannual variability•• Effects occur at multiple spatial and temporal scalesEffects occur at multiple spatial and temporal scales•• Individual restoration actions may have cumulative responses thaIndividual restoration actions may have cumulative responses that t

are less predictableare less predictable

Individual physical responses CumulativeresponsesRestoration

goal

Typicalrestoration

activity Shearstress

Particlesize

Thermalgain Physical Biological

“Restorechannel

geometry”

Reducew/d + + -

“Restorechannel slopeand sinuosity”

Increaselength - - +

? ?

•• Communities Creating ConnectionsCommunities Creating Connections–– KK--1212

•• NSF CAREERNSF CAREER–– High school teachers and studentsHigh school teachers and students

•• University of IdahoUniversity of Idaho–– College of Natural ResourcesCollege of Natural Resources–– College of EngineeringCollege of Engineering

•• Statistical methodology for quantifying the performance of Statistical methodology for quantifying the performance of river restorationriver restoration

•• Prediction of Prediction of hydroperiodhydroperiod and geomorphic changesand geomorphic changes•• Interaction between river discharge and groundwaterInteraction between river discharge and groundwater•• Underwater camera for studying habitat and fry emergenceUnderwater camera for studying habitat and fry emergence•• LowLow--cost telemetry for continuous monitoring in streamscost telemetry for continuous monitoring in streams

Red River Wildlife Management Area:Red River Wildlife Management Area:Educational/Research ActivitiesEducational/Research Activities

Identifying linkages between physical processes, habitat

changes, and biological responses

Monitoring and EvaluationMonitoring and Evaluation

Monitoring FrameworkMonitoring Framework

Independent External Variables

Physical Forcing Variables

Physical Response Variables

Biological Response Variables

FlowSediment InflowOcean ConditionsDams

Channel LengthChannel Section

Hydraulic ParametersGeomorphic ParametersSediment Transport/substrateRoughnessHydroperiodTemperature

Riparian VegetationMacroinvertebratesResident and Anadromous Fish

Performance Assessment: Performance Assessment: (Steve Clayton)(Steve Clayton)Physical Processes, Biological Physical Processes, Biological Observations, LinkagesObservations, Linkages

Density of age 0 chinook at the study reach and two Density of age 0 chinook at the study reach and two control reaches, 1986control reaches, 1986--2001 (IDFG)2001 (IDFG)

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Ch

inoo

k (a

ge 0

) de

nsi

ty (

#/1

00

m^

2)

STUDY (RED) CNTL (RED)CNTL (AMER) DIFF (STUDY-CNTL RED)DIFF (STUDY-CNTL AMER)

1994 2001YEAR

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

BA

SEFL

OW

VEL

OC

ITY

(m/s

)

1994 2001YEAR

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

BA

SEFL

OW

DEP

TH (m

)

1994 2001YEAR

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

BA

SEFL

OW

FR

OU

DE

NO

1994 2001YEAR

0

100

200

300

400

BA

SEF L

OW

WID

TH/D

EPTH

1994 2001YEAR

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

BA

SEFL

OW

AB

S A

*

Lower Red River Meadow Restoration Project Cross-Section 43

4214

4216

4218

4220

4222

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Distance from Left Bank (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

1997 1998 1999

Typical Before XSLower Red River Meadow Restoration Project

Cross-Section 77 - Camas Bend

4210

4212

4214

4216

4218

4220

4222

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Distance from Left Bank (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Aug 2000

Typical After XS

1 2

3

?Number of Chinook Redds in Lower Red

River Meadow: 1998-2001

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1998 1999 2000 2001

GB (u/s reference) FG (treatment) JH (d/s reference)

Change in Biological Parameters

4

Change in Physical Parameters

HydroperiodHydroperiod AnalysisAnalysis

1994 Channel Geometry1994 Channel Geometry

2000 Channel Geometry2000 Channel Geometry

Comparison of Water Surface Elevations at Cross Section 16

4223

4224

4225

4226

4227

4228

4229

4230

31-M ar-97 20-Apr-97 10-M ay-97 30-M ay-97 19-Jun-97 9-Jul-97 29-Jul-97 18-Aug-97 7-Sep-97 27-Sep-97

1994 Channel Geometry 2001 Channel Geometry Floodplain Inundation Elevation

Detectable impact as a function of years of postDetectable impact as a function of years of post--restoration restoration monitoring for selected parameters with variance calculated frommonitoring for selected parameters with variance calculated frombefore (B) or during and after (D&A)before (B) or during and after (D&A)

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

0 10 20 30 40 50

Years of After restoration monitoring

Det

ecta

ble

impa

ct a

s a

perc

ent o

f B

efor

e re

stor

atio

n m

ean

Age 0 chinook densities (Red Strata 5) (B only) Age 0 chinook densities (Red Strata 5-Strata 1) (B only)Chinook redds (Red River aerial counts) (B only) Percent fines (D&A only)Median particle size (D&A only)

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

CV

(%)

Stream temperature (Study reach, upstream) Stream temperature (Study reach, downstream)Thermal gain (Study reach) Omega parameter (Study reach)D16 (Project reach) D50 (Project reach)D84 (Project reach) Percent fines (Project reach)Spawning substrate (Project reach) Cross section area (Project reach)

Age 0 chinook (Project reach GPM/ISS) Age 0 chinook (Project reach)Rainbow trout (Project reach) Mountain whitefish (Project reach)Chinook redds (Project reach)

Physical parameters Biological parameters

ASSESSMENT MODELASSESSMENT MODEL

SignificanceSignificance Magnitude/TrendMagnitude/Trend

Data To KnowledgeData To Knowledge–– MODEL MODEL -- discipline knowledgediscipline knowledge–– ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT

integrated knowledge across relevant integrated knowledge across relevant disciplines. disciplines. Communication tool. Communication tool. Integrates local community.Integrates local community.

Watershed PlanningWatershed Planning

0

100Bi

olog

ical

Goa

ls M

et

0 3 6 9Years

ExistingCondition

(Assessment)

Desired Condition (Subbasin Plan)

FencingReconnect

RentalWater

Condition with Project Implementation(Subbasin Plan)

Assessment/PlanningAssessment/Planning•• Current conditionsCurrent conditions

(Assessment)(Assessment)

•• Historic/desired Historic/desired conditions conditions (Assessment)(Assessment)

•• Limiting/threatening Limiting/threatening factors (Assessment)factors (Assessment)

•• Plan for reaching Plan for reaching goal (Subbasin Plan)goal (Subbasin Plan)

XX

XOO

XO

OOO

XX

OOO

XO

OOO

XX

XXO

Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3

X - DegradedO - Desirable

Existing GIS/Database

Fish Population: Status and Trends Habitat Assessment: Status and Trends

(coarse scale)

System Scale

MIKE-11 1-d

Pseudo 2-d

DSS - Impact

Site Selection Adaptive Management Performance Evaluation

Reach Scale

2-d

Curvi- Linear

Refined GIS

/ Database

Habitat Quality

Criteria

Fish Population

Model Projects

EDT

USFS FHR

Currents

Hydraulic Model

Sediment Transport

Temperature

Morphological Evolution

Integrated Modeling ApproachIntegrated Modeling Approach

Software SchematicSoftware Schematic

Database Warehouse

SIMULATION MODELS

Environmental Quality IndexMap Display

IMPACT Software

USER

Administrator

EQI1 = EQ1(x) * wt1EQI2 = EQ2(y) * wt2

EQI1 = EQ1(x) * wt1EQI2 = EQ2(y) * wt2

HydrologyHydrology

Water QualityWater Quality

HabitatHabitat

Fish PopulationFish Population

SocialSocial

CostCost

Suitability Curves Needed for HISuitability Curves Needed for HI(for all of the species of interest)(for all of the species of interest)

Spawning/I

ncu

bation

Rearing

(Sum

mer/Sp

ring)

OverW

interi

ng

Migratio

n - IN

Migratio

n - OUT

Staging

Are

a

TemperatureSubstrate

DepthVelocity

Water QualityBed Mobility

UpwellingPool Morphology

CoverChannel ComplexityIce Breakup induced

Rain-on-SnowConcealment

Migration to kinder conditionsConnectivity

Suitability curves are based on our best scientific knowledge

Salmon as an “umbrella” species

Phenotypic and genetic variability

Decision Tree for Habitat IndexDecision Tree for Habitat Index

Habitat Index

Chinook Salmon Bull Trout Steelhead

Spawning Rearing OverWintering Migration IN Migration OUT Staging Area

Temperature Depth Velocity Water Quality

10121416182022242628

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 1810

15

20

25

30

35

40

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 181012141618202224262830

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 10

15

20

25

30

35

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Output: Longitudinal ProfileOutput: Longitudinal Profile

River Chainage

1

0

Migration

Spawning

Rearing

DownstreamUpstream

f(Habitat)

2929

Definition of Adaptive ManagementDefinition of Adaptive Management1.1. Learning by experimentation [Ecologist]Learning by experimentation [Ecologist]2. Continuous integration of regional knowledge, local 2. Continuous integration of regional knowledge, local

monitoring data, analysis tools and management monitoring data, analysis tools and management actions to verify that restoration performance actions to verify that restoration performance expectations are achieved. Refine future design expectations are achieved. Refine future design criteria and intervention thresholds. [Engineering]criteria and intervention thresholds. [Engineering]

3. Facilitates collaborative design, monitoring and 3. Facilitates collaborative design, monitoring and managementmanagement

4. 4. KroneKrone definitiondefinition

A Synthetic Analysis of the Scientific Basis of Ecological A Synthetic Analysis of the Scientific Basis of Ecological Restoration of Stream EcosystemsRestoration of Stream EcosystemsPIs:PIs: Palmer, Margaret and Allan, David Palmer, Margaret and Allan, David

www.nceas.ucsb.eduwww.nceas.ucsb.edu

Further details:Further details: www.ecohydraulics.uidaho.eduwww.ecohydraulics.uidaho.edu

ConclusionsConclusionsAcknowledgements for Acknowledgements for Examples Shown:Examples Shown:

Activities are funded through Bonneville Power Administration, the National Science Foundation (Award BES-9874754), with additional support from:Idaho Department of Fish and GameNez Perce TribeUSFS Rocky Mountain Research StationUSFS - Nez Perce National ForestIdaho Department of

Environmental Quality Idaho Fish and Wildlife FoundationUS Army Corps of EngineersFEMA/Idaho Bureau of Disaster ServicesIdaho Department of Water ResourcesUSDA ARS Northwest Watershed Research CenterDHI Water and Environment

• Greater accountability is being demanded for restoration funds Greater accountability is being demanded for restoration funds ––are objectives being achieved and is it cost effective?are objectives being achieved and is it cost effective?

•• Questions of ecological response are immensely complexQuestions of ecological response are immensely complex

••Technology is a key Technology is a key –– data collection, data mining, simulation and data collection, data mining, simulation and analysis of trends, communication tool.analysis of trends, communication tool.

•• Merging of Ecological and Engineering Interpretation of AdaptivMerging of Ecological and Engineering Interpretation of Adaptive e ManagementManagement

••CLEANER as an independent and stateCLEANER as an independent and state--ofof--thethe--science integration science integration of existing data over large spatial scales. Supplement existingof existing data over large spatial scales. Supplement existingdata where appropriate.data where appropriate.

•• Interdisciplinary simulation tools and analysis techniques Interdisciplinary simulation tools and analysis techniques ––integration and extension of existing modelsintegration and extension of existing models

•• CLEANER as a “valueCLEANER as a “value--added” program to existing large scale added” program to existing large scale studies that do not contain a fundamental research componentstudies that do not contain a fundamental research component

••Opportunistic research Opportunistic research –– capability to take advantage of periodic capability to take advantage of periodic events such as major floodsevents such as major floods