|
<br />cles persistence and coexIstence. In
<br />many streams and rivers, particu-
<br />larly in arid areas, flow can change
<br />dramatically over a period of hours
<br />due to heavy stor.ms. Non-native
<br />fishes generally lack the behavioral
<br />adaptations to avoid being displaced
<br />downstream by sudden floods
<br />(Minckley and Deacon. 1991). In'8
<br />dramatic example of how floods can
<br />benefit native species, Meffe (1984)
<br />documented that a native fish, the Gila
<br />topminnow (PoecJliopsis occfdentalis),
<br />was locally extirpated by the intro-
<br />duced predatory mosquitofish (Garn-
<br />busia affinis) in locations where natu-
<br />ral flash floods were regulated by
<br />up~tream d~msJ but the native species
<br />persisted in naturally flashy streams.
<br />Rapid flow increases in streams of
<br />the central and southwestern United
<br />Stat'es often serve as spawning cues
<br />for native min.now species,' whose
<br />rapidly developing eggs are either
<br />broadcast into the water. column or
<br />attached to submerged structures as
<br />floodwaters recede (Fausch and Best-
<br />gen 1997 t Robertson in press) ~ More
<br />gradual, seasonal rates of change in
<br />flow conditions also regulate the per-
<br />sistence of many aquatic and riparian
<br />species. Cottonwoods (Populus SPP4) ,
<br />for example, are disturbance species
<br />that establish after winter-spring
<br />flood flows. during a narrow "win-
<br />dow ofoppottunityU ,when competi-
<br />t.ion-free alluvial substrates .and wet
<br />soils are available for germination.
<br />A certain rate of floodwater reces-
<br />sion is critical to seedling germina-
<br />tion because seedling roots must re-
<br />main cQnnected to a receding water
<br />table as they grow downward (Rood
<br />and Mahoney 1990)~
<br />
<br />Ecological responses to altered
<br />flow regimes
<br />
<br />Modification of the natural flow re-
<br />gime dramatically affects'" both
<br />aq uatic and riparian species in
<br />streams and rivers worldwide. Eco'"
<br />logical responses to altered flow re.-
<br />gimes in a specific stream or river
<br />depend on how the components of
<br />flow have changed relative to the
<br />natural flow regime for that particu-
<br />lar stream or river (Paff and Ward
<br />1990) and how specific geomorphic
<br />and ecol.ogical processes will respond
<br />to this relative change. As a result of
<br />
<br />December 1997
<br />
<br />variation' in flow regime within and
<br />among rivers (Figure 2), the same
<br />human activity in different locations
<br />may cause different degrees of change
<br />relative to unaltered conditions and,
<br />therefore, have different ecological
<br />consequences. ..
<br />Flow alteration commonly changes
<br />the magnitude and frequency of high
<br />a.nd low flows, often reducing vari-
<br />abilIty but sometimes enhancing the
<br />range. For example, the extreme daily
<br />variations below peaking power hy--
<br />droelectric dams have no natural
<br />analogue in freshwater systems and
<br />represent, in an evolutionary sense,
<br />an extremely harsh environment of
<br />frequent, unpredictable.flow distur...
<br />bance~ Many aquatic populations liv-
<br />ing in these environments suffer high
<br />mortality frpm physiological stress~
<br />from wash..out during high flowst
<br />and from stranding during rapid de-
<br />watering. (Cu.shman 1985, Petts
<br />1984). EspecialIy in shallow sQore...
<br />line habitats, frequent atmospheric
<br />exposure for even brief periods can
<br />result in massive ffiQrtality of bot..
<br />tom-dwelling organtstn$ and subse..
<br />quent severe reductions in biological
<br />productivity (Weisberg et at 1990).
<br />Moreover! the reari:qg and refuge
<br />functions of shallow shoreline or .
<br />backwater areas, where many small
<br />fish species and the young of large
<br />species are found, (Greenberg e,t al.
<br />1996, Moore and .Gregory 1988) t
<br />are severely impaired by frequent
<br />flow fluctuations (Bain et at 1988t
<br />Stanford 1994). In these artificially
<br />fl u ctuating environments t speciaUze'd
<br />stream or river species are typically
<br />replaced by generalist species that
<br />tolerate frequent and large varia..
<br />tions'in flow. Furthermore, life cycle's
<br />of many species are often disrupted
<br />and energy flow through.the ecosys-
<br />tem is greatly modified (Table 2).
<br />Short-term flow modifications clearly
<br />lead to a reduction in .both the natu-
<br />ral diversity and abundance of many
<br />, native fish and invertebrates.
<br />At the opposite hydrologic ex-
<br />treme, flow stabilization below cer",:
<br />tain types of dams~ such as water
<br />supply reservoirs, res.ults in artifi-
<br />cially constant environments that
<br />lack natural extremes. Although pro-
<br />duction of a few species may in-
<br />crease greatly. it is usually at the
<br />expense of other native species and
<br />of, systemwide species diversity
<br />
<br />(Ward and Stanford 1979). Many
<br />lake fish species have successfully
<br />invaded (or been intent'ionally estab-
<br />lished in) flow-stabilized river envi-
<br />ronments (Moyle 1986~ Moyle and
<br />Light 1996). Often top predators,
<br />these introduced fish can devastate
<br />native river fish and threaten com-
<br />mercially valuable' stocks (Stanford
<br />et al. 1996). In the southwestern
<br />United States, virtually the. enti're
<br />native river fish fauna is listed as
<br />threa~ened under the Endangered
<br />Species Act, largely as a consequence
<br />of water withdrawal. ,flow stabiliza-
<br />tion. and exotic species prolifera..
<br />tion. The last remaining :Strongholds
<br />of native river fishes are all in dy-
<br />namict free-flowing rivers, where
<br />exotic fishes are periodically reduced
<br />by natural flash floods (Minckley
<br />and Deacon 1991, Minckley and
<br />Meffe 1987).
<br />Flow stabilization also reduces the
<br />magnitude and frequenc;y of overbank
<br />flows, affecting riparian plant species
<br />and communities. In rivers with con..
<br />strained canyon reaches or multiple
<br />shallow channels, loss of high flows
<br />results in increased cover of plant
<br />species that would otherwise be re-
<br />moved by flood scour (Ligon et al.
<br />1995, Williams and Wolman 1984).
<br />Moreover~ due to other related, ef...
<br />fects of flow regulation, including
<br />increased water salinity, non...native
<br />vegetation often domfnates, such as
<br />the salt cedar (Tamarix sp.) in .the
<br />semiarfd western United States
<br />(Busch and Smith 1995). In alluvial
<br />valleys, the loss of overb~k flows
<br />can greatly modify riparian commu-
<br />nities by causing plant desiccation,
<br />reduced. growth, competitive excIu-
<br />sionJ ineffective seed dispersaL or
<br />failure of seedling establishment
<br />(Table 2).
<br />The elimination of flooding may
<br />also affect animal species that de-
<br />pend on terrestrial habitats. For ex",
<br />ample. in the flow-stabilized Platte
<br />River of the United States Great
<br />Plains, the channel has narrowed
<br />dramatically (up to 85%) over a
<br />period of decades (Johnson 1994).
<br />This narrowing has been facilitated
<br />by vegetative colonization of.sand-
<br />bars that formerly provided nest..
<br />lng habitat for the threatened pip-
<br />ing plover (Cha.radius melodius)
<br />and endangered least tern (Sterna
<br />antil1arum; SIdle et al. 1992). Sand-
<br />
<br />777
<br />
|