Zachary M. Smith | Search USGS

USGS2020

Disentangling the potential effects of land-use and climate change on stream conditions

Land‐use and climate change are significantly affecting stream ecosystems, yet understanding of their long‐term impacts is hindered by the few studies that have simultaneously investigated their interaction and high variability among future projections. We modeled possible effects of a suite of 2030, 2060, and 2090 land‐use and climate scenarios on the condition of 70,772 small streams in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, United States. The Chesapeake Basin‐wide Index of Biotic Integrity, a benthic macroinvertebrate multimetric index, was used to represent stream condition. Land‐use scenarios included four Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (A1B, A2, B1, and B2) representing a range of potential landscape futures. Future climate scenarios included quartiles of future climate changes from downscaled Coupled Model Intercomparison Project ‐ Phase 5 (CMIP5) and a watershed‐wide uniform scenario (Lynch2016). We employed random forests analysis to model individual and combined effects of land‐use and climate change on stream conditions. Individual scenarios suggest that by 2090, watershed‐wide conditions may exhibit anywhere from large degradations (e.g., scenarios A1B, A2, and the CMIP5 25th percentile) to small degradations (e.g., scenarios B1, B2, and Lynch2016). Combined land‐use and climate change scenarios highlighted their interaction and predicted, by 2090, watershed‐wide degradation in 16.2% (A2 CMIP5 25th percentile) to 1.0% (B2 Lynch2016) of stream kilometers. A goal for the Chesapeake Bay watershed is to restore 10% of stream kilometers over a 2008 baseline; our results suggest meeting and sustaining this goal until 2090 may require improvement in 11.0%–26.2% of stream kilometers, dependent on land‐use and climate scenario. These results highlight inherent variability among scenarios and the resultant uncertainty of predicted conditions, which reinforces the need to incorporate multiple scenarios of both land‐use (e.g., development, agriculture, etc.) and climate change in future studies to encapsulate the range of potential future conditions.

Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virgin↗

USGS2018

Predicting biological conditions for small headwater streams in the Chesapeake Bay watershed

A primary goal for Chesapeake Bay watershed restoration is to improve stream health and function in 10% of stream miles by 2025. Predictive spatial modeling of stream conditions, when accurate, is one method to fill gaps in monitoring coverage and estimate baseline conditions for restoration goals. Predictive modeling can also monitor progress as additional data become available. We developed a random forests model to predict biological condition of small streams (<200 km 2 in drainage) in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Biological condition was measured with the Chesapeake Bay Basin-wide Index of Biotic Integrity (Chessie BIBI), a stream macroinvertebrate index. Our goal was to predict biological condition in all unsurveyed small streams present in a 1:24,000 scale catchment layer as a 2004–2008 baseline. We reclassified the 5-category Chessie BIBI ratings into two categories, poor and fair/good, to align with management goals of the Chesapeake Bay Program. The model included 12 geospatial predictor variables including measures on spatial location, bioregion, land cover, soil, precipitation, and number of dams in local catchments. We trained the model with a random 75% subset of Chessie BIBI data ( n = 1449), and used the remaining 25% of Chessie BIBI data ( n = 484) as test data. The model performed well, correctly predicting 72% of samples in training data and 73% of samples in test data, but model accuracy varied among bioregions. We performed uncertainty analyses by adding bands of either ±0.05 or ±0.10 BIBI units to the cutoff between poor and fair/good. These uncertainty analyses resulted in 14.5% (±0.05 band) and 24.8% (±0.10 band) of samples in test data being classified as in uncertain condition. For 95,877 small stream reaches in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, the model predicted 64% in fair/good condition, the ±0.05 uncertainty analyses predicted 57% in fair/good condition, and the ±0.10 uncertainty analysis predicted 50% in fair/good condition. These reported values have different implications for the number of improved stream miles required to meet the goal of improving 10%. Incorporating uncertainty provides an assessment of model strength as well as confidence in predictions. We, therefore, suggest increased reporting of uncertainty in studies that spatially predict stream conditions.

Chesapeake Bay watershed↗