My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7746
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
7746
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:31 PM
Creation date
5/22/2009 4:33:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
7746
Author
Stanford, J. A. and J. V. Ward.
Title
Management of Aquatic Resources in Large Catchments
USFW Year
1991.
USFW - Doc Type
Recognizing Interactions Between Ecosystem Connectivity and Environmental Disturbance.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
43
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
streams are tightly coupled with catchment characteristics. Drainage basins or <br />catchments (i.e., the river valley in Hynes' context) may indeed be characterized as <br />ecosystems composed of a mosaic of terrestrial "patches" (Pickett and White 1985) that <br />are connected (drained) by a network of streams. Of course, the lotic environment itself <br />is a smaller scale patchwork or mosaic of habitats in which materials and energy are <br />transferred (connected) through dynamic, biodiverse food webs. In most catchments, <br />on-channel lakes and floodplain aquifers dramatically increase the complexity of the <br />ecosystem in contrast to the contemporary view of rivers as dynamic channels bounded <br />by a riparian corridor (Sedell et al. 1989). <br />In this paper we discuss the catchment in ecosystem terms (Lotspelch 1980, <br />Naiman and Sedell 1981), stressing the ecological coupling that characterizes aquatic <br />components of catchments, and discuss natural and human disturbances that influence <br />biophysical connectivity. We describe how management actions can work at cross <br />purposes when the interactions of natural and human disturbances are not considered <br />from a catchment ecosystem viewpoint and we discuss the difficulties of assessing <br />cumulative effects of human perturbations. We use the Flathead River (British <br />Columbia, Montana) as an example of a large river ecosystem influenced or partially <br />uncoupled by a myriad of anthropogenic effects and competing management <br />bureaucracies and interests. Finally, we propose an alternative general approach to <br />natural resource management, an approach that begins with revised college curricula <br />for training resource managers as conservators of ecological connectivity in river <br />ecosystems. <br />Habitat Dimensions, Ecological Connectivity and Natural Disturbance <br />within River Ecosystems <br />In the USA, the term watershed is often misused in the context of river basin <br />research and management. By proper definition, the watershed is the ridgeline or <br />elevation contour that delimits drainage basins or catchments (McKechnie 1983). The <br />catchment is bounded by the watershed and since water flows downstream from the <br />watershed through the catchment, thereby integrating influences of natural and human <br />disturbances within the catchment, we use the watershed as the natural ecosystem <br />boundary. <br />Obviously, in these terms an ecosystem may be very small, such as a first-order <br />catchment (sensu Strahler 1957), or it may be very large, encompassing entire river <br />systems (e.g., the 671,000 km2 catchment of the Columbia River, USA). Choice of <br />4
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.