Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Conceptual Wetland Condition Gradient

Condition Gradient

Highest Ecological Integrity

Non-SupportingGoals

Human Disturbance Gradient

Minimum

Maximum

HGM/IBIMeasurements

HighLow

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

F9 - Maintain of Native Plant Community

General form of the model is:

FCI = [(VSPPCOMP * 0.66 + VREGEN * 0.33) + VEXOTIC]/2 ,

where;

VSPPCOMP: Floristic Quality Assessment Index (FQAI)

VREGEN: regeneration of native tree species

VEXOTIC: percent exotic species

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Riparian DepressionMaintenance of Native Plant Community Composition

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

0 20 40 60 80 100

Disturbance Score

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Forested - 22%Agriculture - 40%Urban - 38%

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

F12 - Maintenance of Landscape Scale Diversity

General form of the model is (within 1-km radius):

FCI = (VAQCON + VUNDEVEL + VSDI + VMPS)/4

VAQCON: degree of aquatic connectivity

(100-yr floodplain, stream density, nearest NWI wetland)

VUNDEVEL: average of two sub-variables:

VRDDEN - density of roads in 1-km radius circle

VURB - % of 1-km radius circle in urban development

VSDI: natural log of the Shannon diversity index of 8 landscape categories

VMPS: mean forested patch size within a 1-km radius circle

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Riparian DepressionsMaintenance of Landscape Scale Diversity

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Disturbance Score

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Inventory Condition Restoration

Map landuse in watershed; calculate preliminary landscape measures

Synoptic map of restorationpotential (existing wetlands, landuse, roads & streams)

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Utilize existing resources (NWI)

Map of abundance zones with verified inventory

Apply HGM functionalassessment models toprobability based sampling locations

Map depicting abundance zones,verified inventory, and probable condition

Performance criteria matrices provide restoration standards

Develop and apply landscape-based approach to obtain abundance map

Apply stressor checklist

Map depicting overlay ofwetland abundance zones,levels of potential threat,and landuse, roads & streams

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Spring Creek

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Rank Order of Sites by Decreasing % Forest

Level 1 Level 2

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

QuickTime™ and aPhoto - JPEG decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Bushkill Level 1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Rank Order of Sites by Decreasing % Forest

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Comparison of Landscape and Rapid Assessment

Scores

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Upper Juniata Headwater Floodplains

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Rapid Assessment Score F9 Score

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Juniata StressorsAll Sites

Vegetation Alteration

23%

Sedimentation21%

Hydrologic Modifications

38%

Turbidity1%

Eutrophication3%

Contaminant Toxicity

10%

Dissolved Oxygen2%

Acidification2%

Hydrologic Modifications

Vegetation Alteration

Sedimentation

Eutrophication

Dissolved Oxygen

Acidification

Contaminant Toxicity

Turbidity

Thermal Alteration

Salinity

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

F10 - Maintain Characteristic Detrital Biomass

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

0 20 40 60 80 100

Disturbance Score

Fu

nct

ion

Sco

re

HeadwaterFloodplains

MainstemFloodplains

RiparianDepressions

Slopes

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Agricultural Use

Urbanization

Mining

Pollutant Trans.

Eutrophication

Turbidity

Sedimentation

Hydrologic Modif.

Fragmentation

Organic Matter

Hydroperiod

Macroinvertebrates

Bird Community

Amphibian Comm.

Plant Community

Acidification

Soil

Microtopography

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

0 100Disturbance Score

50

Spring Creek

Little Fishing Creek

Juniata

Brandywine

Yellow Breeches

Shavers Creek

Bushkill

White Deer Creek

25 75

DegradedReferenceStandard

Level 1 Watershed ScoresBased on 50 Randomly-Selected Wetlands

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

Products Under Development at the Cooperative Wetlands Center

• Wetland Plant IBI

• Bird Community Index (Landscape)

• Wetland Bird IBI

• Macroinvertebrate IBI

• Amphibian IBI

• Streamside Salamander IBI

• Calibrated HGM Functional Models

Penn State Cooperative Wetlands CenterPenn State Cooperative Wetlands Center

SummaryFuture (2002-2012)

• Definition and delineation will remain unchanged

• Implementation of HGM and IBI for assessing wetland condition

• Development and implementation of WQS for wetlands

• Watershed reporting of wetland condition by states by 2012