Aquatic Resource Conservation in the Southeastern United States

179 Pages·2005·11.98 MB·English

Aquatic Resource Conservation in
the Southeastern United States:
A pilot study in local and regional-scale
conservation action planning
Sally Rollins Palmer
Mary M. Davis, Ph.D.
Ryan K. Smith
Paul L. Freeman
Aquatic Resource Conservation in the
Southeastern United States:
A pilot study in local and regional-scale
conservation action planning
Sally Rollins Palmer
Mary M. Davis, Ph.D.
Ryan K. Smith
Paul L. Freeman

Recommended Citation:
Palmer, S.R., M.M. Davis, R.K. Smith, and P.L. Freeman. 2005. Aquatic Resource
Conservation in the Southeastern United States: A pilot study in local and regional-scale
conservation action planning. The Nature Conservancy.
On the cover, clockwise from top left: The Altamaha River, GA; The Duck River, TN; The Pascagoula River, MS; and the
Roanoke River, NC
Aquatic Resource Conservation in the Southeastern United States: 2
A pilot study in local and regional-scale conservation action planning
Acknowledgements
This project was funded by a National Fish and Wildlife Federation grant to the
Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency acting on behalf of the Southeast Aquatic
Resources Partnership (SARP). The Nature Conservancy (TNC) led the execution of this
project as a collaborator with the SARP. TNC would like to recognize all the SARP
members and other experts who actively participated in this pilot planning effort, both at
the regional and at the individual river project levels. The authors would like to
specifically thank the past and current TNC river project directors primarily responsible
for leading workshops and guiding the development of the conservation action plans for
their respective rivers: Christi Lambert, Altamaha; Sam Pearsall, Roanoke; Leslie Colley,
Duck; Becky Stowe and Cynthia Ramseur, Pascagoula. This report is built upon the
expertise of these individuals and many others in successfully developing and executing
conservation plans at various scales and across a variety of aquatic systems in the
Southeastern U.S.
Aquatic Resource Conservation in the Southeastern United States: i
A pilot study in local and regional-scale conservation action planning
Executive Summary
The Southeastern United States harbors a diversity of aquatic habitats and
species unparalleled in the nation. Hundreds of government agencies, private
organizations, businesses, and citizens recognize the significance of Southeastern
aquatic resources and work every day to conserve them. However, no overarching plan
to conserve aquatic habitats in the Southeast, facilitate partnerships, and direct
conservation dollars currently exists. The Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership
(SARP) was formed in 2001 with the acknowledgement that no individual agency or
organization can act alone to meet the conservation challenges in Southeastern
watersheds. One of the SARP’s primary objectives is to address the lack of a focused
regional effort by leading the development of a Southeast Aquatic Habitat Plan. This
pilot project takes the first step towards the design of such a plan.
The challenge for the SARP in beginning the regional planning effort has been a
need for understanding more effective methods of local and regional-scale aquatic
conservation planning and how to integrate these scales in a manner that facilitates the
development of effective strategic partnerships. In December 2004 the Tennessee
Wildlife Resources Agency, a member of the SARP, contracted with The Nature
Conservancy to lead this pilot project to initiate the regional aquatic habitat plan. The
Nature Conservancy has experience conducting both regional and site-level conservation
planning in the Southeastern U.S. This pilot project was designed to conduct
watershed-scale planning in four priority watersheds chosen by the SARP: the Altamaha
River in Georgia, the Duck River in Tennessee, the Pascagoula River in Mississippi, and
the Roanoke River in North Carolina. The overall intent for choosing four pilot rivers
was to develop aquatic resource conservation plans for these priority systems as well as
to utilize the lessons learned from these plans and other resources to inform the
development of a Southeast Aquatic Habitat Plan, including recommendations on new
partnerships to implement the plan.
The general approach to achieving the project objectives has involved facilitating
conservation planning workshops in the pilot watersheds, hosting a regional aquatic
resource expert workshop, conducting research on regional-scale conservation planning
methods, and using the Conservancy’s methodology for classifying aquatic system data
to provide examples of regional habitat condition assessments and prioritizing action
sites and strategies. Executive summaries of the conservation plans for the four pilot
rivers are provided in this document as “case studies,” with the full plans provided as
stand-alone publications. In this document we discuss the primary stresses on aquatic
systems in the Southeast, which include changes to natural hydrologic regimes, water
quality, physical habitat structure, energy regimes, and native biota. The primary
sources contributing to alterations in aquatic systems were found to be dams,
incompatible agricultural practices, incompatible forestry practices, incompatible mining,
and urbanization. We provide examples for how Geographic Information Systems
analyses can assist the development of region-scale conservation strategies using two
explicit examples: riparian buffer protection and addressing perturbations to natural
hydrologic regimes caused by hydropower generation.
Aquatic Resource Conservation in the Southeastern United States: ii
A pilot study in local and regional-scale conservation action planning
The final objective of this pilot was to provide recommendations to the SARP on
steps to be taken in completing the Southeast Aquatic Habitat Plan and the types of
partnerships that will be necessary to support and implement the plan. The SARP has
modeled its partnership structure on that of the North American Waterfowl Management
Plan (NAWMP). Therefore, we looked to the NAWMP along with SARP’s own strategic
plan and budget initiatives to outline a process which may be useful for completing the
regional plan. In addition, we looked to the NAWMP and the genesis of integrated bird
conservation via Joint Ventures to uncover any parallels for developing aquatic resource
partnerships in the Southeast. This pilot project and new emphasis on regional planning
and partnerships is particularly timely given the status of the National Fish Habitat
Initiative (NFHI). As of November 2005, the timing of this report, the NFHI has
recognized the SARP’s work as a potential regional model for implementing regional plan
objectives. By taking the next steps towards a Southeast Aquatic Habitat Plan after this
pilot work, the SARP can provide the leadership necessary to command additional
funding, guide the development of effective new partnerships, and advance aquatic
conservation in the Southeastern U.S. and the nation.
Aquatic Resource Conservation in the Southeastern United States: iii
A pilot study in local and regional-scale conservation action planning
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements…….…………………………………..……………….i
Executive Summary……….………………………………………………..ii
Part 1. Introduction…..………………………………………………….…1
Project Overview………………………..……………………………………………………..….…1
Project Objectives…………………………………………………………………………………….7
Project methodology………………………………………………………….………………..…..8
Part 2. Aquatic Conservation Action Planning..………………………...10
Identification of regional planning resources and methodology………………..…10
Overview of The Nature Conservancy’s conservation planning approach………11
Part 3. Pilot River Case Studies in aquatic
Conservation Action Planning………………...…………………15
Altamaha River, Georgia………………………………………………………………………..16
Roanoke River, North Carolina……………………………………………………………….20
Duck River, Tennessee………………………………………………………………………….25
Pascagoula River, Mississippi………………………………………………………………….30
Part 4. Recommended Framework for the
Southeast Aquatic Habitat Plan……………………………...….33
Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………………33
Recommendations for developing the regional plan …………………………………34
1. Define the current conditions & develop
the plan vision, goals, & objectives ………………………………………….…34
2. Define targets for the plan …………………………………………………………36
3. Identify the threats to aquatic systems in the region…………………….37
4. Identify priorities for implementation ………………………………………….40
5. Develop regional conservation strategies……………………………………..41
6. Develop a monitoring program for tracking
regional plan success…………………………………………………………………43
7. Formalize an adaptive management process for the
regional plan…………………………………………………………………………….45
Aquatic Resource Conservation in the Southeastern United States: iv
A pilot study in local and regional-scale conservation action planning
Part 5. Recommended Components of the
Southeast Aquatic Habitat Plan………………………………….46
The significance of and threats to Southeastern aquatic habitats…………………46
Plan Vision, Goals, & Objectives………………………………………………………………48
Identification of aquatic conservation targets……………………………………………49
Identification of regional threats to aquatic conservation……………………………54
Status of Aquatic Habitats in the Southeastern U.S…………………………………..62
Habitat Condition: Riparian Buffer Vegetated…………………………………...64
Habitat Condition: Fragmentation of River Connectivity……………………..69
Threat: Urban & Suburban Development……………………………………….…74
Threat: Incompatible Agriculture……………………………………………………..79
Threat: Alteration of Surface Flow from Dam Storage………………………84
Prioritization of conservation areas and regional threats……………………………..89
Strategies to reduce threats to Southeast Aquatic Habitats………………………....97
Example data management tools and approaches……………………………………..107
Part 6. Development and Implementation of the
Southeast Aquatic Habitat Plan……………………………….108
Coordinating SARP activities to develop the plan……………………………………..108
Leading partnerships to implement the Southeast Aquatic Habitat Plan…….112
Next Steps and Opportunities…………………………………………...123
Literature Cited…………………………………………………………...124
Appendix 1.
Attendees contact list for the Regional Aquatic Habitat Planning Workshop………………130
Appendix 2.
Relationships between example viability indicators, threats, strategies and
measures for riverine habitats of the Southeastern U.S…………………………………………133
Appendix 3
Freshwater Ecosystem Classification and Analysis of Habitat Conditions
and Threats……………………………………………………………………………………………………….145
Appendix 4
Habitat Condition and Threat Assessments by U.S.G.S. Cataloguing Units………………165
Aquatic Resource Conservation in the Southeastern United States: v
A pilot study in local and regional-scale conservation action planning
FIGURES
Figure 1. Map of the Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership member states
and World Wildife Fund freshwater ecoregions…………………………………………………………………..…2
Figure 2. Hot spots for at-risk fish and mussel species in the
continental United States……………………………..…………………………………………………………………..…3
Figure 3. World Wildlife Fund freshwater ecoregions with
The Nature Conservancy’s aquatic conservation areas and the Pilot Rivers…………………….……….15
Figure 4. A conceptual model for conducting situational analysis…………………………………..……..38
Figure 5. The Nature Conservancy’s aquatic systems classification framework……………………….51
Figure 6. Status of aquatic system mapping in the U.S………………………………………………………...52
Figure 7. Aquatic systems of the South Atlantic Coastal Plain…………………………………………….…53
Figure 8. Percent of 30m riparian buffer in natural vegetation cover shown
by EPA Reach File 3 river/stream segments…………………………………………………………………………65
Figure 9. Percent of channel length of five stream/river size classes
moderately and heavily impacted from riparian clearing……………………………………………………….67
Figure 10. Percent of 30m riparian buffer vegetated for a) Mississippi
Delta creek-sized bayous in the Mississippi Embayment Basin and
b) Highland Rim, Coastal Plain, and Ridge and Valley creeks in the Tennessee
Cumberland Basin………………………………………………………………………………...............................68
Figure 11. Potential for stream/river connectivity breaks shown by
EPA Reach File 3 river/stream segments…………………………………………………………………………….70
Figure 12. Percent of channel length of five stream/river size
classes in moderate to high level of risk for stream/river connectivity breaks……………………….. 72
Figure 13. Percent of channel length for in moderate to high
level of risk for stream/river connectivity breaks in Blue Ridge creeks
and headwaters of the Tennessee-Cumberland Basin………………………………………………………….73
Figure 14. Percent of contributing area watershed in urban land
use shown by EPA Reach File 3 river/stream segments………………………………………………………..75
Figure 15. Percent of channel length of five stream/river size
classes moderately and heavily impacted from urban land use
in four freshwater ecoregions of the Southeastern United States…………………………………………77
Figure 16. Percent of watersheds of Piedmont creeks in the
South Atlantic Basin impacted from urban land use……………………………………………………………..78
Figure 17. Percent of watershed in agricultural land use shown
by EPA Reach File 3 river/stream segments………………………………………………………………………80
Figure 18. Percent of channel length of five stream/river size classes
in moderate to high level of impact from agricultural land use………………………………………….…82
Figure 19. Agricultural land use shown by EPA Reach File 3
river/stream segments for four coastal plain creeks of the South Atlantic Basin………………………83
Figure 20. Upstream dam storage volume density (acre-feet
of dam storage per square kilometer watershed area) shown by
EPA Reach File 3 river/stream segments…………………………………………………………….……………….85
Figure 21. Percent of channel length of five stream/river size classes
in moderate to high level of impact from dam storage volume……………………………………………..87
Figure 22. Dam storage volume shown by EPA Reach File 3
river/stream segments for four different stream/river size classes………………………………………….88
Figure 23. The Nature Conservancy’s priority freshwater
conservation areas (FCAs) in the SARP region. ……………………………………………………………………90
Figure 24. Percent of stream/river length in priority freshwater
conservation areas of the 4 freshwater ecoregions with
riparian buffer completely intact…………………………………………………………………………………………92
Figure 25. Source of impact on priority freshwater conservation
Aquatic Resource Conservation in the Southeastern United States: vi
A pilot study in local and regional-scale conservation action planning
areas moderately or highly impacted by riparian clearing. ………………………………………………..93
Figure 26. Number of hydropower dams in or upstream of
freshwater conservation areas. ………………………………………………………………………………………...94
Figure 27. Number of Army Corps of Engineers owned hydropower
dams in or upstream of freshwater conservation areas……………………………………………………….95
Figure 28. Number of non-federally owned hydropower
dams in or upstream of freshwater conservation areas………………………………………………………..96
Figure 29. Situational analysis of regional and site strategies
to abate threats to aquatic habitats from loss of riparian buffers
due to incompatible agricultural, forestry, and urban development practices………………………..103
Figure 30. Situational analysis of regional and site strategies
to abate threats to aquatic habitat quality and diadromous
fish passage from dam construction and operations…………………………………………………………..105
Figure 31. Boundaries of existing bird Joint Ventures in the
continental United States………………………………………………………………………………………………..113
Figure 32. Bird Conservation Regions identified by the
North American Bird Conservation Initiative……………………………………………………………………….117
Figure 33. Potential geographic distribution of aquatic resource
partnerships based on freshwater ecoregion boundaries…………………………………………………….119
TABLES
Table 1. Threats to the viability of aquatic systems……………………………………………………………..57
Table 2. Percent of channel length of five stream/river size classes
in four levels of impact from riparian clearing
in four freshwater ecoregions……………………………………………………………………………………………66
Table 3. Percent of channel length of five stream/river size
classes in four levels of risk for stream/river connectivity breaks. …………………………………………71
Table 4. Percent of channel length of five stream/river size
classes in five levels of impact from urban land use ……………………………………………………………76
Table 5. Percent of channel length of five stream/river size classes
in four levels of impact from agricultural land use. …………………………………………………………….81
Table 6. Percent of channel length of five stream/river size classes
in four levels of impact from dam storage volume……………………………………………………………….86
Table 7. Percent of stream/river length in priority freshwater
conservation areas in four freshwater ecoregions in four levels
of impact from riparian clearing………………………………………………………………………………………….92
Table 8. Aquatic Habitat Conservation Strategies………………………………………………………………..98
Aquatic Resource Conservation in the Southeastern United States: vii
A pilot study in local and regional-scale conservation action planning
Part 1. Introduction
Project Overview
The significance of Southeastern U.S. aquatic resources
The thirteen states of encompassed by the Southeast Aquatic Resources
Partnership (SARP) include globally significant rivers, streams, lakes, bays, estuaries and
marine habitats (Figure 1). The rivers that course through these states and eventually
join the Atlantic Ocean or Gulf of Mexico include portions of eight of the eleven longest
rivers (Missouri, Mississippi, Rio Grande, Arkansas, Atchafalya, Ohio, Red, Brazos) and
five of eight largest rivers(Mississippi, Ohio, Missouri, Tennessee, Mobile) in the United
States (Kammerer 1990). These Southeastern U.S. states have environmental settings
conducive to a high number of different types of aquatic fauna.
The combination of ample precipitation, a temperate climate and a variety of
geographic habitats have resulted in a disproportionably large percentage of North
American aquatic diversity being found in these waters. Over 1800 species of aquatic
animals, including fishes, freshwater mussels, freshwater snails, turtles and crayfish, can
be found in Southeastern watersheds. The SARP member states harbor over 500 aquatic
animal species that are endemic to these states or individual watersheds within the
states. Included in this rich diversity are numerous rare or imperiled species including
over 141 aquatic species that are listed as threatened or endangered under the U.S.
Endangered Species Act. Both the freshwater and marine systems in the region provide
tremendous economic benefits through recreational and commercial activities, water
supply and waste assimilation.
Aquatic Resource Conservation in the Southeastern United States: 1
A pilot study in local and regional-scale conservation action planning