Improving Ecological Response Monitoring of Environmental Flows

被引:0
作者
Alison J. King
Ben Gawne
Leah Beesley
John D. Koehn
Daryl L. Nielsen
Amina Price
机构
[1] Charles Darwin University,Research Institute for Environment and Livelihoods
[2] Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research,Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management
[3] The Murray-Darling Freshwater Research Centre,undefined
[4] La Trobe University,undefined
[5] University of Western Australia,undefined
来源
Environmental Management | 2015年 / 55卷
关键词
Environmental water; River restoration; Conceptual models; Adaptive management;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Environmental flows are now an important restoration technique in flow-degraded rivers, and with the increasing public scrutiny of their effectiveness and value, the importance of undertaking scientifically robust monitoring is now even more critical. Many existing environmental flow monitoring programs have poorly defined objectives, nonjustified indicator choices, weak experimental designs, poor statistical strength, and often focus on outcomes from a single event. These negative attributes make them difficult to learn from. We provide practical recommendations that aim to improve the performance, scientific robustness, and defensibility of environmental flow monitoring programs. We draw on the literature and knowledge gained from working with stakeholders and managers to design, implement, and monitor a range of environmental flow types. We recommend that (1) environmental flow monitoring programs should be implemented within an adaptive management framework; (2) objectives of environmental flow programs should be well defined, attainable, and based on an agreed conceptual understanding of the system; (3) program and intervention targets should be attainable, measurable, and inform program objectives; (4) intervention monitoring programs should improve our understanding of flow-ecological responses and related conceptual models; (5) indicator selection should be based on conceptual models, objectives, and prioritization approaches; (6) appropriate monitoring designs and statistical tools should be used to measure and determine ecological response; (7) responses should be measured within timeframes that are relevant to the indicator(s); (8) watering events should be treated as replicates of a larger experiment; (9) environmental flow outcomes should be reported using a standard suite of metadata. Incorporating these attributes into future monitoring programs should ensure their outcomes are transferable and measured with high scientific credibility.
引用
收藏
页码:991 / 1005
页数:14
相关论文
共 403 条
[51]  
Nielsen D(2010)Irreversible river water quality and the concept of the reference condition Trends Ecol Evol 25 547-550
[52]  
Amtstaetter F(2012)Monitoring does not always count River Res Appl 28 764-776
[53]  
Meredith SN(2014)Abiotic & biotic responses of the Colorado River to controlled floods at Glen Canyon Dam, Arizona, USA Front Ecol Environ 12 176-185
[54]  
Beesley L(2005)Are large-scale flow experiments informing the science and management of freshwater ecosystems? J Appl Ecol 42 208-217
[55]  
Gwinn DC(2010)Standards for ecologically successful river restoration Freshwater Biol 55 194-205
[56]  
Price A(1997)Ecological responses to altered flow regimes: a literature review to inform the science and management of environmental flows Bioscience 47 769-784
[57]  
King AJ(2003)The natural flow regime: a paradigm for river conservation and restoration Front Ecol Environ 1 298-306
[58]  
Gawne B(2010)River flows and water wars: emerging science for environmental decision making Freshwater Biol 55 147-170
[59]  
Koehn JD(2000)The ecological limits of hydrologic alteration (ELOHA): a new framework for developing regional environmental flow standards Regul Rivers: Res Manage 16 479-496
[60]  
Nielsen DL(1997)Detecting effects of environmental water allocations in wetlands of the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia Freshwater Biol 37 231-249