considering ecosystem services in restoration decisions on the upper mississippi river system
DESCRIPTION
ACES, 2008. Considering Ecosystem Services in Restoration Decisions on the Upper Mississippi River System. K. S. Lubinski K. Barr J. Barko S. Bartell R. Clevenstine M. Davis D. Galat D. Wilcox. Outline I. UMR restoration questions - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Considering Ecosystem Services in Restoration Decisions
on theUpper Mississippi River System
ACES, 2008
K. S. Lubinski K. Barr J. Barko S. Bartell R. Clevenstine M. Davis D. Galat D. Wilcox
Outline I. UMR restoration questions II. Ecosystem services progress on the UMR - workshop results III. Outlook:
- what seems to fit, what doesn’t
I. UMR restoration questions and decisions
Yesterday’s -
- Fish or ducks?- To stock? Set bag limits?
River Management Questions
- Can we fix some pieces of the system without jeopardizing others? (fishes AND ducks AND mussels?)- How much restoration is enough?
Today’s -System level
Project level
- Build project X?- Build project X before project Y?
Problem: Navigation Pool “aging”Symptoms: Altered hydrograph, loss of depth, sediment re-suspensionOne solution: DRAWDOWNSJustification: Good for aquatic vegetation, good for waterfowl
Our multi-objective dilemma
BUT …
Mussel mortality?
II. Ecosystem services progress on the UMR
- workshop results
Conceptual Framework adapted from the National Research Council (2004)
Initial List of UMR Ecological Services
Regulating Services
Biological regulation
Disturbance (Flood) regulation
Nutrient regulation
Soil retention
Waste regulation
Provisioning Services
Food
Genetic resources
Raw materials
Water Supply (including transportation)
Cultural Services
Aesthetics
Recreation
Science/education
Spiritual/historic
Terrestrial Environment/
Land Use
Climate
Drinking Water
Food
Fiber
Flood Mediation
Waste Assimilation
Recreation
Navigation
FloodplainConnectivity
FlowRegime
WaterChemistry
Energy Type& Quantity
HabitatStructure
BioticInteractionsRiver
Plants, AnimalsAnd
EcologicalProcesses
External,Large-Scale
Driving Factors
Essential River EcosystemCharacteristics
SomeEcosystem ServicesFluvial
Dynamics
BASIC FLOODPLAIN ECOSYSTEM COMPONENTS
VegetationSunlight
Water
SedimentPhysical Floodplain Template
Animals
Decomposers
(Source: Lubinski 2007)
Animals
HUMANS
(Source: Lubinski 2007)
The “Horse”
The “Cart”HUMANS
Water SupplyRawMaterialsFood
WasteRegulation
EcosystemServices
Aesthetics
EcosystemStructures & Functions
Without projectsMeasurements/Values
With projectsMeasurements/Values
A Hypothetical but Likely Assessment of Benefits
ES1 ES2 ES3 ES4 ES5
0
+1
+2
-1
-2
0
+1
+2
-1
-2
- To maximize or optimize?- Can we afford to lose any service completely?
?
Good News: Managers are embracingthe concept of ecosystem services. System Goal 5: Viable populations of native species
Limiting Factor – Loss of historical forest plant community
Example Reach Objective – Adjust dam operations to emulate water table regimes
that historically supported floodplain forest native plant communities.
Ecosystem Functions –
Soils dry & oxidize, allowing root systems to expand
Species intolerant of saturated soils survive
and expand range
Exotic grasses and forbs less
competitive with diverse native
species present
Forest plant species
complexity increases;
habitat & food resources for
wildlife enriched
ECOSYSTEM SERVICEImproved wildlife viewing,food foraging,aesthetics
Impounded water tableLowered water table
III. Outlook: - what seems to fit, what doesn’t
Project
System (UMRS)
Policy
Scale ofDecisions
Relative Value of Ecosystem ServicesAs Decision Criteria
?
++
?
Technically measureable?Countable withinframework?
Outside Corpsguidance?
Recap
1. Upper Mississippi River System management “keeping pace” with methodology and concepts
2. Management attraction to ecosystem services
3. Potential value of tool may be greater at larger scales
Movingon …..