Ongoing work of

Ongoing work of
the Reservoir
Fisheries Habitat
Partnership

Presented by

Rebecca M. Krogman

Lake Red Rock, Iowa

Acknowledgments


L. E. (Steve) Miranda

Mississippi Cooperative Fish
and Wildlife Research Unit


W. Reed Green

USGS Arkansas Water
Science Center


Kirk Rodgers

Ph.D. Student, University of
Arkansas
–

Pine Bluff


Funding provided by
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service




Jeff Boxrucker

RFHP Science & Data
Committee Chair, Oklahoma
Department of Wildlife
Conservation


Mike Armstrong

RFHP Executive Committee


Cecilia Lewis

RFHP Coordinator


John Taylor


Karl Hess


Gary Whelan


Many, many others

Goals of RFHP

•
Fish habitat

•
Develop
partnerships

•
Education and
outreach

Top Priority of
RFHP

Establish baseline
data for reservoirs
nationwide

Study Objective

To classify
reservoirs based
on impairment
within a geospatial
framework

Reservoirs are…


Artificial


Nationwide


Highly useful and
widely utilized


Folsom Dam, California

Impaired!

Lack of
macrophytes

Eutrophication

Water
fluctuation

Non
-
native
species

Sedimentation

Physiography

Urbanization

Riparian inputs

Effluents

Contaminants

Goals of RFHP

•
Fish habitat

•
Develop
partnerships

•
Education and
outreach

Top Priority of
RFHP

Establish baseline
data for reservoirs
nationwide

Study Objective

To classify
reservoirs based
on impairment
within a geospatial
framework

Approach

1.
Impairment metrics

2.
Environmental descriptors

Impairment Metrics

L. E. (Steve) Miranda

Rebecca M.
Krogman

Hydrilla

in Lake Conroe, TX

Background


Fish Habitat Degradation in U.S. Reservoirs, Fisheries
(Miranda et al. 2010)


An index of reservoir habitat impairment, Environmental
Monitoring & Assessment (Miranda and Hunt)

Siltation

Structural
habitat

Eutrophication

Water regime

Aquatic plants

Impairment Metrics

Miranda and Krogman

Survey Methods: Design

Siltation

Structural
habitat

Eutrophication

Water
regime

Aquatic
plants

Fish
Community

Fishery

Tailwater

Survey Methods: Design


~100 variables


Scope

◦
Reservoirs >250 acres

◦
Conterminous U.S.


Potentially 4,331 data
points


Sent to reservoir
fishery scientists


Impairment Metrics

Miranda and Krogman

Survey Methods: Distribution

Impairment Metrics

Miranda and Krogman

Survey Methods: Design

Section

# of

Question
s

Scale

Other
Question
Types

Habitat availability

20

6
-
pt

Likert

-

Water quality

16

-

Water

regime

9

-

Processes

7

Open
-
ended

Fish community

11

5
-
pt Likert

-

Fishery

14

6

Tailwater

16

6
-
pt Likert

1

Tailwater

fishery

-

-

3

Scale

0

1

2

3

4

5

5
-
point

-

Low

Below Average

Average

Above Average

High

6
-
point

None

Low

Low

to Moderate

Moderate

Moderate to High

High

Impairment Metrics

Miranda and Krogman

Survey Methods: Design


Qualified scientists
with direct
experience


Exclusion of
unfamiliar reservoirs


Analysis of responses
by experience


Definitions


Other examples


Impairment Metrics

Miranda and Krogman

Iowa DNR hard at work on Pool 13,
Mississippi River

Pilot Survey: Oklahoma


Oklahoma
Department of Wildlife
Conservation


96 reservoirs


ReservoirResearch.org


Impairment Metrics

Miranda and Krogman

Environmental Descriptors

Dr. W. Reed Green

Kirk Rodgers

Major land
use patterns

Data Availability


Eight
-
state Classification/Metrics

◦
Arkansas, California, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky,
North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas


Initial investigation of the appropriate
environmental metrics to gather

◦
Impoundment date

◦
Watershed characteristics

◦
Reservoir dimensions

◦
Water quality measurements


Environmental Descriptors

Green and Rodgers

Datasets


Spatially Referenced
Regression on
Watershed
Attributes
(
SPARROW
)


National Inventory of
Dams (
NID
)



National
Hydrography Dataset
(
NHD+
)


Geographic Names
Information System


Reservoir
Sedimentation
Survey Information
System (
RESIS
)


Environmental Descriptors

Green and Rodgers

Database Fields


State


Dam Name


State Id


NIDID


Longitude


Latitude


Section


Count


River


City


Distance to Nearest City


Owner Name


Owner Type


Dam Design


Private or Public


Core


Foundation


Purpose


Year completed


Year modified


Dam length


Dam height


Structural height


Elevation


Hydraulic head/Maximum
depth


NID Height

Environmental Descriptors

Green and Rodgers

Not all fields will be used in metric analysis

Database Fields (cont.)


Other Structure ID


Condition Assessment Detail


State Regulatory Agency


Federal Agency Involvement
in Funding


Federal Agency Involvement
in Design


Federal Agency Involvement
in Construction


Federal Agency Involvement
in Regulatory


Federal Agency Involvement
in Inspection


Federal Agency Involvement
in Operation



Federal Agency Owner


Federal Agency Involvement
-
Other


Source Agency


Date Submitted


Congressperson Name


Party


Congressional District


Reachcode


Measure


Source Origin


Source Data


GNIS ID


Shoreline Development


Sedimentation (% of original
volume) if available

Environmental Descriptors

Green and Rodgers

Not all fields will be used in metric analysis

Database Fields (cont.)


Normal Discharge


Maximum Discharge


Normal Storage/Volume


NID Storage/Volume


Surface Area


Drainage Area


Relative Depth


Mean Depth


Development of Volume


Index of Basin Permanence


Maximum Length/Fetch


Mean Width


Maximum Width


Residency Time/Flushing Rate


Downstream Hazard
Potential


Emergency Action Plan


Inspection Date


Inspection Frequency


State Regulated Dam


State Regulatory Agency


Spillway Type


Spillway Width


Outlet Gates


Volume of Dam (Cubic Yards)


Number of Locks


Length of Locks (Feet)


Lock width

Environmental Descriptors

Green and Rodgers

Not all fields will be used in metric analysis

New Database for the Southeast

Once satisfied with results, expand to the
entire lower 48 states.

Environmental
Descriptors

Data Analysis


Integration of Green
and Rodgers’ work,
and Miranda and
Krogman’s

work



Techniques

◦
Cluster analysis

◦
Geospatial analysis

◦
Discriminant

analysis

◦
Canonical correlation
analysis


Classification

Assessment of
impairment

Environmental
descriptors

Geospatial
context

Potential Applications


Make quantitative
comparisons among
reservoirs


Understand geospatial
relationships


Guide the decision
-
making process


Fishing below J.T. Meyers Dam

Questions
or
comments?

Hoover Dam