Upload
alexis
View
36
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Wabash River Consortium, November 4, 2011. Special considerations for monitoring in support of the Fishers and Farmers Partnership. Ken Lubinski USGS, Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center La Crosse, WI. The Upper Mississippi River near La Crosse, Wisconsin. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Special considerationsfor monitoring in support of the Fishers and FarmersPartnership
Ken Lubinski
USGS, Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences CenterLa Crosse, WI
Wabash River Consortium, November 4, 2011
The Upper Mississippi River near La Crosse, Wisconsin
River/stream monitoring –
never boring
The goal is a choice we make, limited by our mutual commitment and how permanent the degradation is.(Figure modified from Cairns (1993).
A common river/stream situation – the need to turn things around
OUTLINE
• The Fishers and Farmers Partnershipfor the Upper Mississippi River Basin
• 4 monitoring issues related to:
• Midwestern agricultural streams
• the Fishers and Farmers approach to conservation
What does the Fishers and Farmers Partnership intend to do?
- Support stream restoration projects while maintaining or increasing farm profitability
- Eventually improve stream health and farmer quality of life at the basin scale
Partnership principles
• Actions that sustain agriculture and fishes
• Local leadership and flexible assistance
• Collaboration and learning across spatial scales
Too idealistic?
Considering the numbers,engaging others is practical and necessary!
Midwest stream practitioners? ~ 5,000
UMRB farms ~ 200,000
UMRB fishers ~ 5,000,000
Initial Projects Targets:
Stop gulley erosion to restore naturallyreproducing troutpopulations andstream functions
Oxbow reconnection for Topeka shiners
Protect mussel/fish habitat by gettingcows out of stream
4 issues
Issue #1: It’s the ecosystem!
Terrestrial Environment/
Land Use Weather/Climate
Flow Regime
Habitat Structure
Water Quality
Biotic Interactions
Energy Source
Native Species
Figure 1. Basic model of a stream ecosystem and its elements (Karr 1991).
Riparian Zone
Conservation Target: Widely distributed native stream fish assemblages
Basin level -
Pre-
Post-
Issue #2: Accepting two set of goals
Respect
Independence
Prosperity
Fairness
Life connected to the natural
world
Attention to the unique aspects of
their region
Organization of local
landowner groups
Data to help make farm decisions
and changes
Flexible, coordinated
technical assistance
Small cushion of financial support
Issue #3: Influencing future actions
Project Site
B
C If success is to be measured at Reach level(in addition to the above)
- Compare A, B, and C (pre-) to A, B, and C (post-project)
D
E
If success is to be measured at System Level(in addition to the above)
- Compare D-E (pre-) to D-E (post-project)
“ConservationTargetArea”
A
- Compare A (pre-) to A (post-project)
If success is to be measured at Project LevelMEASURE OVER 1-3 YEARS?
MEASURE OVER 1-5 YEARS?
MEASURE OVER 10-12 YEARS?
Addressing the need to get beyond site benefits:
Tell me and I forget,
teach me and I remember,
involve me and I learn.
Issiaka Kante, Burkina Faso
Engaging farmers:
Issue #4: Accountability
FFP needs a functional monitoring program,one that adds accountability and adaptabilityto the Partnership.
Reasonable cost Highly relevant information
Max. use of existing resources (DNR’s, EPA, NRCS, volunteers, students, farmers, fishers, “Friends”)
What works, what doesn’t?How project(s) contribute to “system” condition?
Highly relevant information?
ForFishers(conservationists)
ForFarmers(landowners)
Practices Outcomes
Technical Assistance
Help with paperwork
Flexibility
Profitability
Quality of Life
StreamEcosystemHealth
Buffers
Connectivity
Fences/wells
*****
Next Steps
In 5 years: - establish Partnership identity- support projects in 10 target areas?
In 100 years: - improved stream health across 50% of basin?
In 200 years:- rest