Developing Monitoring Protocols for Aquatic Ecosystems in Forested Regions of Alberta

Authors
Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute
Resource Date:
2002
Page Length
95

This report is part of a larger endeavor to develop a monitoring program capable of detecting changes in the biological diversity of Alberta’s forested region. It describes:  (1) protocols to monitor changes in aspects of the biological diversity of standing water bodies, and 2) a process to integrate standing and flowing water  protocols within the  larger monitoring design. Additional information on the monitoring protocols for flowing water bodies related to the: i) development of a functional stream hydrography layer, ii) use of Indian Remote Sensing Satellite (IRSS) imagery to quantify linear disturbances and iii) statistical analyses of stream monitoring data is provided as an appendix to the report.

We recommend that the Alberta Forest Biodiversity Monitoring Program monitor the abundance and diversity of phytoplankton, zooplankton, benthic invertebrate,  amphibian, aquatic bird and fish communities within standing water bodies in Alberta’s forested region. All six elements perform important ecosystem functions within standing water bodies, are moderately or highly responsive to watershed disturbances and climate change, and the majority comprise diverse assemblages. In order to categorize standing water body types and to develop empirical models that  an explain changes in the abundance and diversity of these communities, we identified a suite of environmental variables that should be measured as part of the monitoring program.

A hierarchical decision process was developed to identify the type of habitat identified by the systematic grid. We recommend that the AFBMP use a single line hydrography layer to determine whether the sampling point is located in flowing water habitats. If the sampling point is located within a stream channel, then as many as possible of the flowing water protocols should be applied. In contrast, if the sampling site does not fall within a stream channel, then the site should be identified as nonstream and as many as possible of the terrestrial and standing water protocols would be applied.

While the protocols to monitor the biodiversity of stream ecosystems was completed in 1999, developments over the last 2 years warranted additional discussions of the: i)  development of a functional stream hydrography layer, ii) utility of the Indian Remote Sensing Satellite (IRSS) data and iii) statistical analyses of monitoring data which are appended. We recommend that the AFBMP recognize additional costs required to develop a functional stream hydrography layer from the Provincial Government’s Base Features Geographical Information System and that these expenditures are included the process of estimating overall program costs. Second, while data obtained from the IRSS is the best and most up to date information available, its 5.8 m spatial resolution will underestimate: i) some types of watershed disturbances and ii) the overall level of industrial development unless the imagery is updated regularly. Lastly, a diversity of statistical approaches are used to detect changes in the abundance, composition and diversity of aquatic organisms. While there is a level of consistency in how data are analyzed, a number of important issues remain unanswered including how results from some analyses compare with alternative statistical approaches. We recommend that the AFBMP consider creating a working group to examine how data collected by the AFBMP will be analyzed.