**Course Title:** **Floodplain Management**

**Module 3:** Biological Landscape: its impact on the floodplain and
floodplain management

**Session 12**: Effects of human disturbance on river and floodplain
ecology

**Author**: Susan Bolton, Ph.D., P.E.

**Time 75 minutes**

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

# Objectives: (PP1 and PP2; Title and Objectives)  {#objectives-pp1-and-pp2-title-and-objectives .unnumbered}

12.1 Identify changes in land cover/land use in watersheds and learn how
to assess these changes as they relate to river and floodplain ecology

12.2 Identify changes of concern in aquatic and floodplain communities
due to changes in land use and land cover.

> 12.3 Identify additional sources of threats to floodplain and river
> ecology

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Scope:**

Large-scale land cover and land use impacts were introduced in Session
5. This session expands on these issues and describes how changes in
land cover and land use can alter watersheds and the streams that drain
them. Students will learn about various watershed assessment techniques.
Students will learn various methods of assessing changes in stream flow
that may have biological as well as physical effects on streams. Changes
in land use and land cover that affect the 4-dimensions of rivers
discussed in Session 10 will be described and discussed. The effects of
land use/land cover changes on water quality (Session 11) will also be
discussed.

As an assignment, students will locate information on land cover/land
use changes in a watershed of their choice and discuss the condition of
the stream as it has changed over time due to changes in land cover and
land use. Students will also have time to discuss their module exercise.

**Readings:**

*Student and Instructor Reading:*

# Forney, William, Lora Richards, Kenneth D. Adams, Timothy B. Minor, Timothy G. Rowe, J. LaRue Smith, and Christian G. Raumann. 2001. **"**Land Use Change and Effects on Water Quality and Ecosystem Health in the Lake Tahoe Basin, Nevada and California." U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report 01-418, Version 1.0. http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/of01-418/ {#forney-william-lora-richards-kenneth-d.-adams-timothy-b.-minor-timothy-g.-rowe-j.-larue-smith-and-christian-g.-raumann.-2001.-land-use-change-and-effects-on-water-quality-and-ecosystem-health-in-the-lake-tahoe-basin-nevada-and-california.-u.s.-geological-survey-open-file-report-01-418-version-1.0.-httppubs.usgs.govofof01-418 .River-I}

# O\'Keefe, T., J. Helfield, and R. Naiman. 2000. "Agents of Watershed Change." <http://www.epa.gov/watertrain/agents/index.html> or http://www.epa.gov/watertrain/pdf/agents.pdf {#okeefe-t.-j.-helfield-and-r.-naiman.-2000.-agents-of-watershed-change.-httpwww.epa.govwatertrainagentsindex.html-or-httpwww.epa.govwatertrainpdfagents.pdf .River-I}

# National Research Council. 1999. "New Strategies for America\'s Watersheds." Pp. 88-111.  {#national-research-council.-1999.-new-strategies-for-americas-watersheds.-pp.-88-111. .River-I}

[Richter, B.D, J.V. Baumgartner, R. Wigington, and D.P. Braun, "How much
water does a river need?\" Freshwater Biology 37:
231-249](http://www.freshwaters.org/pub/pdf/howmuchh2o.pdf). (also
available from TNC at
<http://www.freshwaters.org/pub/pdf/howmuchh2o.pdf>).

# Richter, B.D. 2003. "How much water does a river need?" EPA training module.http://www.epa.gov/watertrain/river/index.html {#richter-b.d.-2003.-how-much-water-does-a-river-need-epa-training-module.httpwww.epa.govwatertrainriverindex.html .River-I}

# Severeiss, V. D. Norton, and S. Norton. 2000. "Watershed Ecological Risk Assessment." <http://www.epa.gov/watertrain/ecorisk/> or http://www.epa.gov/watertrain/pdf/wshedecorisk.pdf {#severeiss-v.-d.-norton-and-s.-norton.-2000.-watershed-ecological-risk-assessment.-httpwww.epa.govwatertrainecorisk-or-httpwww.epa.govwatertrainpdfwshedecorisk.pdf .River-I}

"The Spatial Patterning of Land Use Conversion: Linking Economics,
Hydrology, and Ecology to Evaluate the Effects of Alternative Future
Growth Scenarios on Stream Ecosystems."<http://www.watersheds.umd.edu/>

*Additional Instructor Reading:*

Beechie, T.J., G. Pess, E. Beamer, G. Lucchetti, and R. E. Bilby. 2003.
"Role of watershed assessments in recovery planning for salmon." Pp.
194-225 in D.R. Montgomery, S. Bolton, D.B. Booth and L. Wall, (eds.)
*Restoration of Puget Sound Rivers.* University of Washington Press,
Seattle, WA.

Roni, P., T.J. Beechie, R.E. Bilby, F. E. Leonetti, M.M. Pollock, and G.
R. Pess. 2002. "A review of stream restoration techniques and a
hierarchical strategy for prioritizing restoration in Pacific Northwest
watersheds." North American Journal of Fisheries Management 22:1-20.

**General Requirements:**

There is a homework assignment at the end of the session. The Instructor
should review it with students.

**Objective 12.1 Identify changes in land cover, land use in the local
watershed**

**Requirements:** Instructor should give the students 5 or 10 minutes to
think about and list the main types of change occurring in their
watershed. Which changes mostly involve natural components of the
watershed ecosystem? What changes in the human community are occurring
in your watershed? Are these changes or their magnitude new or
unprecedented? Their responses will be used later in an in-class
exercise.

**Remarks**

I. A suite of landscape level controls affect the physical and
biological conditions in streams and floodplains. Some of these
landscape level controls are strongly affected by human activities and
others are less so. (PP3; Landscape Controls)

> A. Landscape controls
>
> 1\. Land cover/use and vegetation -- this is the condition most
> affected by human activities.
>
> 2\. Physiography, climate and gross reach morphology are less affected
> by human activities

B. Habitat forming process- discussed in previous sessions

C. Stream morphology and conditions - discussed in previous sessions.

D. Biodiversity -- discussed in previous sessions.

**II. Technically, *land use* is the way in which, and the purposes for
which, human beings employ the land and its resources. *Land cover*
describes the physical state of the land surface and originally referred
to the kind and state of vegetation (such as forest or grass cover), but
it has broadened in subsequent usage to include human structures such as
buildings or pavement and other aspects of the natural environment, such
as soil type, biodiversity, and surface and ground water. (PP4; Land use
and land cover)**

A.. Land use/land cover are frequently combined to describe the physical
condition of the landscape. **(PP5; Land cover/use information)**

1\. The Natural Resources Conservation Service branch of the USDA
conducts The National Resources Inventory (NRI) every year.

2\. The NRI places all non-federal land into 8 categories: Cropland,
pastureland, grassland, forest land, other rural land, developed land
water bodies, and land in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) which
is converting erodible cropland to vegetated land.

3\. Other land use/land cover categories can also be found such as bare
ground, strip mines, and wetlands. Various agencies and entities use
different classification systems. **(PP6; Land cover/use information)**

4\. Sometimes the major categories mentioned above are subdivided when
available data have a higher level of detail. For an example of more
subcategories see Ohio definitions at
<http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/htdocs/realm/resanalysis/lumain.html#definitions>

> 5\. Most locations have land use/land cover information available from
> a variety of websites. Examples of such websites are included in the
> references to this session and in previous sessions.

B. There are various methods that are commonly used to assess the
condition of a watershed including land use/land cover properties that
affect stream ecosystems. **(PP7; Watershed Assessment)**

1\. One role of watershed assessment is to identify historic and current
stream/floodplain habitat potential **(PP8;Watershed Assessment )**

a\. One needs to know the current and former extent of the full range of
habitat types in the stream and along the floodplain

b\. Current and former extents of habitat types then need to be related
to the existence, distribution, and size of various stream and
floodplain organisms

2\. From an ecological perspective, identifying alterations in
habitat-forming processes in a stream has three basic steps.

a\. Identify the rates of the natural or historically-potential
habitat-forming processes in the watershed. **(PP9; Watershed Assessment
Habitat forming processes)**

b\. Identify which processes have been altered by changes in the
watershed condition and the origin of the alterations. **(PP
10-14;Watershed assessment methods\
Habitat forming processes )**

c\. Identify the effects of the changes on stream ecology and decide
whether to try and correct the changes.

In class exercise:

Take a short break before beginning Objective 11.2. Ask the students to
work in teams and, based on what they have learned so far about aquatic
ecology, compile a set of physical, biological, and chemical
characteristics of watersheds and streams that are of ecological
importance that may be altered by land-use/land cover changes.

Ask them how they would evaluate whether the characteristics had been
altered and whether they would constitute a change of concern. Ask if
their responses are based on these changes causing losses of things
valued by people, based on losses of key ecosystem features or
functions, or based on both? Given them 5 or 10 minutes to generate a
list and then have each team report to the class and make a master list
of class generated ideas.

These teams may be different from the course case study teams created in
Session 2.

Objective 12.2 Identify changes of concern in streams and floodplains.
(PP16; Objective)

**I. Disturbance (change) is a natural component of all ecosystems and
helps create the mosaic of ecosystem structure and function that
provides habitat. Many human activities alter the course of natural
disturbances. Earlier sessions have described a variety of disturbances
such as fire, flood, drought, and disease. Changes in the frequency,
duration and magnitude of habitat forming processes can alter
biodiversity. (PP17; Characteristics of disturbances)**

A.. ***Frequency*** is the number of times an event or disturbance
happens over some fixed time period. This is the idea behind the concept
of return intervals as discussed for floods, fires, precipitation
events, etc.

B. ***Duration*** is the time span over which an event or disturbance
lasts. This refers to how long events such as floods, fires, or droughts
last.

C. The ***magnitude*** or extent of a disturbance describes how large
the disturbance is. This may refer just to the size of the even, such as
peak flow or precipitation amounts or it may refer to the size of the
area affected by the event, such as acres burned.

**II. Changes in the frequency, duration, and extent of disturbance can
affect stream ecology. Changes of concern can alter ecosystems function,
and their ability to evolve over time, and threaten the abilities of
ecological communities to recover and persist following periodic
disturbance. (PP18)**

> A. Changes of concern may be defined as significant alteration or loss
> of watershed processes or structural component that persists beyond
> normal cyclical change, i.e., changes that are more frequent, longer
> and larger than normal annual, seasonal and daily variations. In other
> words, permanent changes to habitat conditions in space and time
> alters aquatic and floodplain communities. **(PP19-20;Concerns)**

1\. Potential ecological effects of changes of concern include:

-   Changes in the efficiency and pathways of nutrient cycling.

-   Alteration or cessation of vegetation successional sequences.

-   Pronounced changes in species diversity.

-   Increased incidences of disease.

-   Abnormal population fluctuations.

-   Permanent shifts in energy sources.

-   Shifts in stream water temperature, light, nutrients and suspended
    sediment

> B. Examples of common human generated activities that can result in
> changes of concern include: (PP21;Human caused disturbances )
>
> 1\. Agriculture (PP22; Agriculture)
>
> 2\. Timber harvest (PP23; Timber)
>
> 3\. Mining (PP24; Mining)
>
> 4\. Urbanization (PP25; Urbanization)
>
> 5\. Introduction of exotic species (PP26; Exotic species)
>
> 6\. Harvesting of fish and wildlife (PP27; Harvesting)

C.  Interception, evaporation, transpiration, infiltration, storage,
    surface runoff and groundwater storage are all modified by changes
    in land cover such as vegetation removal, increases in impervious
    area, soil compaction or removal, and drainage pipes, ditches and
    roads. This affects the connectivity of the watershed to its
    streams. (PP28; Landuse)

D.  Changes in the pathways and timing of water as it travels to the
    stream and after it reaches the stream channel also affects stream
    temperature, nutrients, sediment, pollutant, and oxygen levels.
    (PP29-30; Effects)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
II. **How can changes in stream flow be identified in ways that are
    meaningful to ecology? (PP31; Stream flow description)**

    A.  Stream flows can be characterized by many characteristics
        including seasonal patterns of flow, timing and size of extreme
        flows, frequency, predictability and duration of floods and
        droughts, daily, seasonal and annual variation in flows, and the
        rate of change of flows. **(PP32;Stream Characterization)**

    B.  Olden and Poff (2003) looked at 171 hydrologic indices and
        looked for redundancy in parameters and applicability to
        ecological issues.

        1.  Indices were lumped into 5 categories: magnitude, frequency,
            duration, timing, and rate of change of stream flow.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
a.  Based on hydrology and links to ecology, streams were classified as
    intermittent or perennial and also looked at as all streams
    combined.

b.  Intermittent streams were divided into 'harsh intermittent' (\>90
    days with zero flow) and 'intermittent flashy or runoff' (\> 10 days
    of zero flow).

c.  Perennial streams were divided into 'snowmelt' (very high
    predictability of timing and duration of high flows), 'snow and
    rain' (very high predictability of timing of low flows),
    'superstable or stable ground water' (low variability in daily flows
    and base flows), and 'perennial flashy or runoff' (low
    predictability of high and low flow timing).

    A.  The IHA (Indicator of Hydrologic Alteration) model
        (<http://www.freshwaters.org/tools/>) developed by The Nature
        Conservancy computes the level of change in a river system that
        has been altered by dams, diversions or other watershed actions
        if a long-term stream flow record is available that precedes the
        alteration and continues beyond the alteration**. (PP33;
        Indicators)**

        1.  Skewness (mean daily flow/median daily flow) **(PP34;
            Importance of indices)**

        2.  Coefficient of variation of mean monthly flow **(PP35;
            Importance of indices)**

            a.  Related to importance of high and low flows for
                distribution and propagation of floodplain vegetation

        3.  Flood duration -- important in snowmelt streams **(PP36;
            Importance of indices)**

        4.  Indicators of flashiness -- important in intermittent
            streams **(PP37; Importance of indices)**

        5.  More details in Olden and Poff (2003) and elsewhere **(PP38;
            Importance of indices)**

**Objective 12.3** **Identify additional sources of threats to
floodplain and river ecology (PP39; Objectives)**

**Scope**

This section presents information on additional sources of threats to
floodplain and river ecology.

**Remarks**

I.  **Proportionally, far more aquatic animals are threatened than
    terrestrial organisms. In the U.S. \< 20% of terrestrial vertebrates
    are classified as vulnerable, imperiled or extinct. The percent of
    freshwater fauna at risk range from 35% to almost 70%. (PP40;**
    **Threats to Aquatic Species)**

    A.  Threats are of 3 major types: habitat destruction and
        fragmentation, pollution, and exotic species. **(PP41;**
        **Sources of major threats)**

        1.  Habitat destruction and fragmentation include land use/land
            cover changes that affect ecological processes and instream
            changes such as dams, diversions, and channelization that
            affect stream processes and structure.

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    a.  All 4 dimensions of streams are affected by in-stream structure
        changes but in particular, lateral and longitudinal connectivity
        are altered. **(PP42;** **River habitat destruction and
        fragmentation)**

    b.  PP slide 43 illustrates the pathways of change that proceed from
        stream channelization to reduced habitat diversity and water
        quality and biological impact. (**PP slide 43; Pathways)**

    c.  Dams and diversions affect flow regimes, sediment regimes,
        temperature regimes, and nutrient status of downstream rivers.
        **(PP44;Effects of dams)**

1.) Cold, clear water released from dams can threaten native fish used
to warmer and siltier water

2.) Riparian vegetation may be enhanced or degraded by dams and dam
release schedules

> 3.) Decreases in the mass transport of materials such as wood, other
> organics, and sediment affect food webs, nutrient cycling and energy
> flows.

1.  Pollution

> a\. In 1994, the EPA identified siltation (sediment) as the leading
> cause of water quality impairment in U.S. rivers. **(PP45;Pollution)**
>
> 1.) Agricultural practices were responsible for 72% of the stream
> miles degraded by siltation.
>
> 2.) Municipal point sources for 15% of river miles
>
> 3.) Urban runoff and sewer discharges for 11%
>
> 4.) Resource extraction for 11%
>
> 5.) Industrial point sources for 7%
>
> 6.) Silviculture for 7%
>
> 7.) Percentages add to over 100% due to cumulative effects
>
> b\. Nutrient enrichment was the second leading cause of water quality
> impairment **(PP46;Pollution)**
>
> 1.) Agriculture accounts for 45% of the nutrient enrichment problem.
>
> 2.) Municipal land use accounts for another 42%.
>
> c\. Other sources of pollution include pathogens, pesticides, and
> organic enrichment that leads to low levels of dissolved oxygen.
>
> 3\. Exotic species can interbreed with or out compete native species
> leading to changes in community structures. **(PP47; Exotic species)**
>
> a\. Changes in floodplain and riparian vegetations species can affect
> evapotranspiration rates, stream bank stability, food and nesting
> sites for animals, stream shade and organic inputs to the stream.
>
> b\. Changes in aquatic species can alter food webs and nutrient and
> energy transfers in the stream.

**Homework (PP48; Homework)**

Instructor should assign the following tasks to the students to be
discussed at the start of the next class period.

1\. What are the major land use/land cover categories in your local
watershed?

2\. Are there any aquatic or riparian species at risk in your watershed?
If so what are the reasons for their imperiled status?

3\. Write a short essay on how sediment, hydrologic, nutrient, organic
and light regimes have changed from the pre-development state of the
watershed. Use your understanding of concepts and theories (review
information in previous sessions) to discuss the changes. You do not
need to find information on measured changes.

**References:**

Beechie, T.J., G. Pess, E. Beamer, G. Lucchetti, and R. E. Bilby. 2003.
"Role of watershed assessments in recovery planning for salmon." Pp.
194-225 in D.R. Montgomery, S. Bolton, D.B. Booth and L. Wall, (eds.)
*Restoration of Puget Sound Rivers.* University of Washington Press,
Seattle, WA.

Bilby, R.E., G.H. Reeves, and C.A. Dolloff. 2003. "Sources of
variability in aquatic ecosystems: Factors controlling biotic production
and diversity." Pp. 129-146 in R.Wissmar and P. Bisson (eds.)
*Strategies for Restoring River Ecosystems: Sources of Variability and
Uncertainty in Natural and Managed Systems.* American Fisheries Society,
Bethesda, MA.

Brookes, A. 1988. *Channelized Rivers: Perspectives for Environmental
Management.* John Wiley and Sons. Chichester, U.K.

Bolton, S.M. and J. Shellberg. "Ecological issues in floodplain and
riparian corridors." White Paper for the state of Washington.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/ahg/floodrip.htm

Booth and Jackson. 1997. "Urbanization of aquatic systems: Degradation
thresholds, stormwater detention and the limits of mitigation." JAWRA
33:1077-1090.

Collier, M., R.H. Webb and J.C. Smith. 1996. "Dams and Rivers: A primer
on the downstream effects of dams." USGS Circular 1126.

<http://onlinepubs.er.usgs.gov/djvu/CIR/circ_1126.djvu>

or

http://onlinepubs.er.usgs.gov/lizardtech/iserv/browse?cat=CIR&item=/circ_1126.djvu&style=simple/view-dhtml.xsl&wid=750&hei=600&props=img(Name,Description)&page=1

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1994. "The quality of our
nation's water: 1992."EPA 841-S-94-002. EPA Office of Water, Washington,
D.C.

Hauer, F.R., C.N. Dahm, G.A. Lamberti and J. A. Stanford. 2003.
"Landscapes and ecological variability of rivers in North America:
Factors affecting restoration strategies." Pp 81-105 in R.Wissmar and P.
Bisson (eds.) *Strategies for Restoring River Ecosystems: Sources of
Variability and Uncertainty in Natural and Managed Systems.*\
American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MA.

Montgomery, D.R. and S. M. Bolton. 2003. "Hydrogeomorphic variability
and river restoration." Pp 39-80 in R.Wissmar and P. Bisson (eds.)
*Strategies for Restoring River Ecosystems: Sources of Variability and
Uncertainty in Natural and Managed Systems.* American Fisheries Society,
Bethesda, MA.

National Research Council. 2000. *New Strategies for America\'s
Watersheds*. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

[Olden,
J.D.](http://web5.silverplatter.com/webspirs/doLS.ws;jsessionid=E552D8690E1AE212429E5FFB37AA33D4c05047a265c?ss=Olden-JD+in+AU)
and N.L. [Poff.
2003.](http://web5.silverplatter.com/webspirs/doLS.ws;jsessionid=E552D8690E1AE212429E5FFB37AA33D4c05047a265c?ss=Poff-NL+in+AU)
"Redundancy and the choice of hydrologic indices for characterizing
stream flow regimes." [River Research and
Applications](http://web5.silverplatter.com/webspirs/doLS.ws;jsessionid=E552D8690E1AE212429E5FFB37AA33D4c05047a265c?ss=River-Research-and-Applications+in+SO).
19 (2):101-121.

Pess, G.R., T.J. Beechie, J.E. Williams, D.R. Whitall, J.I. Lange, and
J.R. Klochak. 2003. "Watershed assessment techniques and the success of
aquatic restoration activities." Pp. 185-202 in R.Wissmar and P. Bisson
(eds.) *Strategies for Restoring River Ecosystems: Sources of
Variability and Uncertainty in Natural and Managed Systems.\
*American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MA.

Poff, N.L. 1996. "A hydrography of unregulated streams in the United
States and an examination of scale-dependence in some hydrological
descriptors." Freshwater Biology 36:71-91.

[Richter,B.D.](http://web5.silverplatter.com/webspirs/doLS.ws;jsessionid=E552D8690E1AE212429E5FFB37AA33D4c05047a265c?ss=Richter-BD+in+AU),
J.V.
[Baumgartner,](http://web5.silverplatter.com/webspirs/doLS.ws;jsessionid=E552D8690E1AE212429E5FFB37AA33D4c05047a265c?ss=Baumgartner-JV+in+AU)
D.P.
[Braun,](http://web5.silverplatter.com/webspirs/doLS.ws;jsessionid=E552D8690E1AE212429E5FFB37AA33D4c05047a265c?ss=Braun-DP+in+AU)
and J.
[Powell.](http://web5.silverplatter.com/webspirs/doLS.ws;jsessionid=E552D8690E1AE212429E5FFB37AA33D4c05047a265c?ss=Powell-J+in+AU)1998.
"A spatial assessment of hydrologic alteration within a river network."
[*Regulated Rivers Research and
Management*](http://web5.silverplatter.com/webspirs/doLS.ws;jsessionid=E552D8690E1AE212429E5FFB37AA33D4c05047a265c?ss=Regulated-Rivers-Research-and-Management+in+SO)
14 (4):329-340. (also available from TNC at
http://www.freshwaters.org/pub/pdf/hydroalt.pdf).

[Richter, B.D., J.V. Baumgartner, J. Powell, and D.P. Braun 1996. "A
method for assessing hydrologic alteration within ecosystems."
*Conservation Biology*
10:1163-1174](http://www.freshwaters.org/tools/pdf/iha_meth.pdf). (also
available from TNC at http://www.freshwaters.org/tools/pdf/iha_meth.pdf)

[Richter, B.D, J.V. Baumgartner, R. Wigington, and D.P. Braun,"How much
water does a river need?\" *Freshwater Biology* 37:
231-249](http://www.freshwaters.org/pub/pdf/howmuchh2o.pdf). (also
available from TNC at
http://www.freshwaters.org/pub/pdf/howmuchh2o.pdf).

Richter, B.D., D.P. Braun, M.A. Mendelson, and L.L. Master. 1996.
"Threats to imperiled freshwater fauna." *Conservation Biology*
11(5):1081-1093.

Roni, P., T.J. Beechie, R.E. Bilby, F. E. Leonetti, M.M. Pollock, and G.
R. Pess. 2002. "A review of stream restoration techniques and a
hierarchical strategy for prioritizing restoration in Pacific Northwest
watersheds." *North American Journal of Fisheries Management* 22:1-20.

Wissmar, R.C., J.H. Braatne, R.L. Beschta and S.B. Rood. 2003.
"Variability of riparian ecosystems: Implications for restoration." Pp
107-127 in J.E. Williams, C.A. Wood and M.P. Dombeck (eds.) *Watershed
Restoration: Principles and Practices.* American Fisheries Society.
Bethesda, MD.

**Example urls for web-based information on land use and land cover.**

<http://gcrio.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/spring95/Land.html-> land cover/use
paper

<http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/land/nri02/nri02lu.html> NRI website
land cover changes

<http://www.al.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/nri/> - Alabama

<http://www.mi.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/NRI/> - Michigan

<http://www.or.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/nri/> Oregon

<http://edcsgs9.cr.usgs.gov/glis/hyper/guide/1_250_lulcfig/states.html> -
usgs 1:250,000 land use/ land cover quadrangles