FLOOD00235

• County: Statewide
• Community: State of Colorado
• Stream Name: All
• Title: Stream, Riparian, and Wetland Ecology - Class material, Volume 1 of 2
• Date: 9/1/1987
• Prepared For: Students
• Prepared By: Professor Windell
• Floodplain - Doc Type: Educational/Technical/Reference Information

,

,

,

98

nonforested) show higher rates of gross primBlry productivity, 24 hour
respiration, and above ground net biomass acc:umulation than still wate r
wetlands. Rates of litterfall and of organic: matter export appear to be
higher in flowing water wetlands chan in still water wetlands. The quality
of the detritus exported, however, may vary In proportion to the detention
time in the wetland and amount of action by pl~ocessing groups. Mineral
cycles of both wetland types are open and generally involve the input of
nutrients from external sources. Organic matter decomposition rates are
correlated to lati tude and increase towards t.he lower lati tudes. Wa ter loss
by evapotranspiration from riverine wetlands <lppears to be about 50 to 60
percent of the water loss that occurs from open water.

Still water wetlands show a greacer prob!Lbility of fluctuating water
qualicy related to rapid depletion of dissolved oxygen, accumulation of
toxic substances such as carbon dioxide, redu(:ed organic and inorganic
compounds, etc. Likewise, still water wetlands have less opportunity of
~mporting nutrients and sediment from outside and exporting organic
products. Since still water wetlands do not receive transported materials
from upstream, they tend to accumulate mostly organic matter.

All the above trends for still water wetlands are reversed for flowing
water wetlands. For example, dissolved oxygeIl concentrations remain fairly
constant. Roots and sediments tend to be ventilated, reduced substances,
gases, and toxic substances are all removed much faster, and organic
substances are exported. A greater proportion of sedlments and nutrients
from inorganic materials arrive from upstream providing .0 subsidy th,at lead s
to more vigorous plant growth (Hook et al. 1970).

General Wetland Funcr-i~

(yi~
/

General wetland functions are best descri.bed on the basis of
characteristics summarized in che Clean Water Act and <lccompanying federal
agency guidelines. These functional characteristics enco""ass both 'the
biological and physical attributes of wetland" and provide an analytical
framework for evaluating threatened wetland are!Ls. In their s imples't forms
they are:

I. Food chain (web) production;
2. General and specializ.id 'habitat for land and aquatic species;.

"-,
3. Use ,~sa9uatic study areaa, aanctu~~es. ~nd refuges;

4. 5l!C?relineprotection and erosion conl:rol;

5, fiood Itorageandatorm flow,aodificBltion;

6. Motural ground water recharge;

7. Water quality aodificatioa~