National Riparian Monitoring Protocol DevelopmentJohn Day Basin Pilot

1
National Riparian Monitoring Protocol
Development-John Day Basin Pilot

• Mary Manning, Vicente Monleon and Greg Reams

2
Purpose

• Due to the small area and narrow linear features
  of most riparian systems west of the Mississippi
  River, many riparian systems are undersampled or
  unsampled using the FIA grid and the definition
  of forest land use.
• There are boundary problems, definition problems,
  specific problems to riparian area.
•  

3
Objectives

• Develop and test a sample design and two plot
  designs for the purpose of estimating riparian
  attributes. This includes condition and extent.
  Not restricted to forest as defined by FIA.
• 2) Collaborate with other agencies who collect
  instream, hydrologic and vegetative data
  (particularly those federal programs, such as EPA
  EMAP, that use probabilistic sampling).

4
Partners

• EPA Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
  Program (EMAP)
• Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
• USFS Pacfish/Infish Biological Opinion
  Effectiveness Monitoring Team (PIBO).

5
Methods

• Sites were selected from a spatially balanced
  sample from the 1100,000 USGS stream layer (Tony
  Olsen design). Co-located with EPA/OR DEQ
• Two modified P3 plot designs were tested 1)
  circular and 2) rectangular subplots- both types
  placed end to end, and aligned perpendicular to
  the stream.
• All P3 variables were measured in both plot
  designs. (Lichen and soils not collected)

6
Edge of subplot at greenline or bankfull,
whichever is closest to stream
Circular Plot Design
7
Rectangular Plot Design
Edge of subplot at greenline or
bankfull, whichever is closest to the stream
3 ft
16.5ft
16.5ft
8
Methods (cont.)

• The crew sampled 40 EMAP sites. EMAP provided
  stream reach sampling locations and vegetation
  data from the same sites.
• The Oregon DEQ has sampled the sites using EMAP
  Surface Waters Physical Habitat sampling
  protocols, which include coarse vegetation
  characterization in addition to stream and
  floodplain sampling.

9
(No Transcript)
10
(No Transcript)
11
Methods (cont.)

• PIBO crewperson sampled 15 reaches using their
  riparian vegetation protocols
• Greenline and valley cross section transects (to
  augment the P3 plot data to characterize riparian
  extent, composition, structure and function).

12
PIBO design
20 x 50 cm
13
Analysis

• Comparing plot shapes.
• For circular plots, there are two options
• Use the same weights as for the usual FIA
  analysis (i.e., assume that plot center was
  selected from a 2-dimensional continuous
  population)
• Use the real inclusion probabilities obtained
  from selecting the plot location from a linear
  network. For the rectangular design, this choice
  is not meaningful.

14
Analysis (cont.)

• Comparing 1 versus 2 sides.
• We considered that sampling both sides takes
  more time - time that could be used to increase
  the sample size by sampling other sites.

15
Analysis (cont)

• Define population parameters (e.g., species
  richness, diversity, etc)
• Develop algorithms to estimate population
  parameters.
•  
• Meet with statisticians from our agency partners
  in December to collaborate on comparative
  analysis of the 4 data sets.

16
Analysis (cont.)

• Compare the results from the riparian inventory
  with the regular, grid-based FIA and FHM
  inventory.
• The later inventories provide a population
  average, across large river, but since riparian
  populations are not a target smaller riparian
  system are undersampled.

17
Initial Findings

• Very preliminary results suggest
• vascular plant species richness is much greater
  in the riparian plots (gt150 species),
• human impacts (in particular, roads) are more
  severe. This will argue for the need for a
  riparian inventory.

18
Limitations of the data set

• Using the EMAP sample frame, the scope of
  inference federal lands (for pilot) adjacent to
  permanent, wadeable streams.
• Doesnt include large rivers or intermittent and
  ephemeral streams, target population is
  perennial-wadeable streams that are tributaries
  to large rivers.
• Unlike most studies, we use a probabilistic
  sample (cant pool like data from other data
  sets and make inferences).

19
Additional Considerations

• How many existing plots meet the FIA definition
  of forests?
• b) Compare number of species and frequency by the
  two plot designs.
• c) Compare condition class area by plot design.
• d) Repeat (b) and (c) above for only those plots
  that meet the FIA definition of forest.

20
Next Steps

• Meet with partner statisticians (12/03)
• Enter and analyze data (Winter-Spring 04)
• Publish findings in report (Summer 04)