A multiscale landscape approach for prioritizing river and stream protection and restoration actions

Abstract

AbstractRiver and stream conservation programs have historically focused on a single spatial scale, for example, a watershed or stream site. Recently, the use of landscape information (e.g., land use and land cover) at multiple spatial scales and over large spatial extents has highlighted the importance of incorporating a landscape perspective into stream protection and restoration activities. Previously, we developed a novel framework that links information about watershed‐, catchment‐, and reach‐scale integrity with stream biological condition using scatterplots and a landscape integrity map. Here we examined an application of this approach for streams in urban and other settings in King County, Washington State, United States, where we related stream macroinvertebrate condition to two indices of landscape integrity, the US Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) nationally available Index of Watershed Integrity (IWI) and Index of Catchment Integrity (ICI). We generated a scatterplot of IWI versus ICI for sample sites, where points represented site macroinvertebrate condition from poor to good. The same data were also visualized as a landscape integrity map that displayed catchments of King County according to the level of watershed and catchment integrity (high or low IWI/ICI). Almost three‐quarters of poor‐condition sites were associated with high‐integrity watersheds and catchments (i.e., underperforming sites), which suggested that either one or both national indicators were insufficient for this area, and that sites underperformed because of local‐scale factors. In response, we used a catchment‐scale indicator related to forest condition (PctForestCat) after examining several GIS‐based dispersal indicators from the National Hydrography Dataset and other candidates from the USEPA's StreamCat dataset. We then compared the results of the scatterplots and maps based on the current and original analyses and found that many of the sites previously classified as underperforming now performed as expected, that is, they were poor‐condition sites in poor‐condition catchments. This analysis demonstrates how results based on a national dataset can be improved by developing an alternative that represents regionally important stressors. The methods used to develop an effective landscape indicator based on StreamCat datasets, and the utility of the multiscale approach, could provide important tools for prioritizing, optimizing, and communicating stream conservation actions.