Riparian Research Projects
Riparian Ecosystem Management Study (REMS)
Riparian zones are recognized as fundamentally important interfaces
between aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems (Agee 1988; Gregory et al.
1991; FEMAT 1993). In addition to mediating the transfer of materials
between land and water, riparian zones provide key habitat elements for
many species of fish and wildlife. Virtually all aquatic species and many
terrestrial plant and animal species closely associated with riparian
zones are sensitive to management-induced changes in riparian condition
(Thomas et al. 1979; Naiman et al. 1995). The way in which these species
respond to anthropogenic disturbance is usually complex and strongly influenced
by successional processes at a particular site (Hayes et al. 1996); therefore,
it is often difficult to predict how a particular aquaticriparian ecosystem
will change following a management activity. Recent studies have demonstrated
a reduction in aquatic and terrestrial biodiversity in watersheds containing
primarily young managed forests (Reeves et al. 1993; Thomas et al. 1993),
and the emerging application of ecosystem-based forestry in the Pacific
Northwest has embraced deliberate attempts to restore riparian areas to
conditions more like those produced by natural processes (FEMAT 1993;
Quigley et al. 1996).
Despite the acknowledged importance of riparian zones to fish and wildlife,
relatively few studies have examined the response of riparian systems
to active management alternatives for commodity production, riparian protection
or restoration. The Coastal Oregon Productivity Enhancement (COPE) program
in Oregon has initiated a number of investigations of riparian rehabilitation,
chiefly involving the re-establishment of conifers in alder- and brush-dominated
riparian zones (e.g. COPE Report, Vol. 9, No. 3, Aug. 1996), but similar
research programs are only now beginning in the coastal areas of Washington
(Berg 1995; and an unpublished Timber, Fish & Wildlife RMZ study).
In addition to the challenge of re-establishing conifers in riparian zones
dominated by deciduous trees or herbaceous vegetation, a number of other
important questions exist pertaining to riparian management, e.g., what
buffer widths and configurations are needed to protect fish and wildlife
habitat along different stream types, what proportion of riparian zones
should remain in different seral stages over larger landscape scales,
whether acceleration of mature forest and old-growth conditions can be
achieved through thinning and other silvicultural treatments in a cost-effective
manner, and whether riparian vegetation can be deliberately managed for
the benefit of certain aquatic or terrestrial wildlife species.
Management of streamside vegetation is a major component of the Northwest
Forest Plan. Conservation objectives for riparian buffer systems include
meeting habitat needs not only of fish but other aquatic and terrestrial
organisms. As a preliminary effort in better understanding the importance
of riparian buffers in supplying habitat of associated organisms, the
team initiated a retrospective study of responses of aquatic and terrestrial
organisms and processes to alternative streamside management options.
The team has lead responsibility for the terrestrial component of this
study and directs research on streamdwelling and streamside amphibians,
small mammals, birds, and vegetation. The retrospective phase of this
work includes existing sites with varying buffer width, varying buffer
condition (old, mature, young forest), and management level within the
buffer (thinned, unthinned). Results of retrospective studies will be
presented through workshops, conferences, presentations at scientific
meetings, and publication in peer-reviewed journals. The longer-term objective
is to move into a more experimental approach with planned treatments to
compare levels of active management within buffers using a before/after
design. The Wildlife Ecology Team, again in cooperation with Pete Bisson
with the Aquatic and Land Interactions program, has begun the pilot phase
of such a study. We are working with the Washington Department of Natural
Resources to determine the possible impacts and consequences of different
management approaches on Type 5 (intermittent or non-fish bearing) streams
in western Washington. During the summer of 2002, we are starting pre-treatment
measurements on approximately 10 sets of Type 5 streams located on State
Lands in western Washington. The study design will test the potential
downstream impacts of different management approaches. The following key
questions define the objectives of the study:
How does timber harvesting effect Type 5 stream functions, i.e.,
sediment delivery, channel morphology, water chemistry, and changes in
plant communities, water levels, and amphibian & invertebrate populations?
What specific Type 5 stream functions should be protected and
how will these be measured?
What are the environmental consequences of options for protecting
Type 5 stream functions within the scope of the WADNR Habitat Conservation
Plan riparian management strategy?
The study design will impose a range of management configurations on
adjacent Type 5 streams. The three buffer configurations that we would
like to compare are, variable buffer widths, fixed widths, no buffers,
and use an unmanaged stream as a control (Figure 2). We Wildlife Ecology
Team Problem Analysis October 10, 2002 Page 8 of 33 will control treatments
within the entire Type 5 stream basin (typically 4 to 12 Ha). Currently,
we are studying the effects these buffer configurations have on discharge/water
levels, sediment storage, invertebrates/amphibians, organic matter transport,
changes in plant community, and water chemistry. Figure 2. Conceptualized
configuration of Type 5 research sites established by Washington Department
of Natural Resources
Team lead: Martin G. Raphael and Randall Wilk
Cooperators: Peter A. Bisson (PNW Research Station, ALI Program);
Richard Bigely, Washington Department of Natural Resources; USGS Biological
Resources Division, Olympic Natural Resources Center, Center for Streamside
Studies, Olympic National Forest, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Simpson
Timber Company, Crown Pacific Industries, Rayonier Timberlands.
|