Full ecoregional plan - Conservation Gateway
Full ecoregional plan - Conservation Gateway Full ecoregional plan - Conservation Gateway
within each watershed was performed by sampling the Ecological Land Units (ELUs) withinwatersheds. The ELU dataset classifies each 90m cell in the landscape according to its elevationzone, bedrock and surficial geology, and landform. Elevation zones were based on the generaldistribution of dominant forest types in the region, as this climax vegetation provides a proxy forthe climatic variation across the region. The bedrock and surficial geology classes were based onan analysis of the ecological properties of bedrock and soils in terms of chemistry, sedimenttexture, and resistance. 13 The bedrock included acidic sedimentary and metasedimentary rock,acidic granitic, mafic/intermediate granitic, acidic shale, calcareous, moderately calcareous, andultramafic bedrock. The surficial types included coarse or fine surficial sediment. The landformmodel was developed by M. Anderson according to how terrestrial communities were distributedin the landscape. The landform model had 6 primary units (steep slopes and cliffs, upper slopes,side slopes and coves, gently sloping flats, flats, and hydrologic features) that differentiatefurther into 17 total landform units. Landforms control much of the distribution of soils andvegetation types in a landscape as each different landform creates a slightly differentenvironmental setting in terms of the gradient, amount of moisture, available nutrients, andthermal radiation. The results of the statistical cluster analysis (TWINSPAN), was adjusted byhand, to yield a final set of watershed aquatic ecological system types which were used as thecoarse filter aquatic targets. 14Figures 2 and 3 below show an example landscape with superimposed ELUs, watersheds, andderived watershed system types. The Moosup and Pachaug watersheds are imbedded in a verysimilar landscape dominated by acidic granitic bedrock, low elevation flats and gentle hills, largeareas of wet flats and coarse grained sediment flats along the rivers. The Westfield MiddleBranch watershed is located in a very different landscape dominated by acidic sedimentarybedrock, gentle hills and sideslopes ranging from low to mid elevation, fewer areas of wet flats,more confined channels, and higher gradient streams. The Moosup and Pachaug would serve asinterchangeable members of size 2 watershed system type 3, while the Westfield would representa different size 2 watershed system type of 9. We would expect these systems to have differentaquatic habitats and ecological potentials due to their different environmental setting.13 Anderson 199914 For more information on the detailed GIS and statistical methods used to build the stream network, stream reachclassification, and watershed classification, see Olivero 2003.REVISED 7/2003AQUA-5
Figure 2: Watershed Aquatic System Group ComparisonFigure 3: Watershed Aquatic System Component SummaryStream Reach Classification: Macrohabitats A reach is defined as the individual segment of ariver between confluences or as the shoreline of a lake. A stream reach classification wasperformed using physical variables known to structure aquatic communities at this scale and thatREVISED 7/2003AQUA-6
- Page 25 and 26: PLANNING METHODS FOR ECOREGIONAL TA
- Page 27 and 28: sandy outwash and forested swamps a
- Page 29 and 30: and distribution pattern for each e
- Page 31 and 32: disproportionately large percentage
- Page 33 and 34: to that ecoregion alone. Those syst
- Page 35 and 36: Locating examples of patch-forming
- Page 37 and 38: systems. Conversely, high elevation
- Page 39 and 40: The minimum goals based on generic
- Page 41 and 42: Results for Terrestrial Communities
- Page 43 and 44: Table 6. Minimum conservation bench
- Page 45 and 46: • The National Vegetation Classif
- Page 47 and 48: of ecoregions, from the Northern Ap
- Page 49 and 50: How much larger than the severe dam
- Page 51 and 52: Scaling factors for Matrix Forest S
- Page 53 and 54: Roads are also source areas for noi
- Page 55 and 56: ungulates. We simply discussed thes
- Page 57 and 58: conservation plan must be done to r
- Page 59 and 60: position, its geology and its eleva
- Page 61 and 62: this block, miles of streams, dams
- Page 63 and 64: Connecting Area or Ecological Backd
- Page 65 and 66: MATRIX SITE:NAME:STATE/S:SIZE:Total
- Page 67 and 68: Block developmentTwo sets of ecoblo
- Page 69 and 70: Table 12. A description of the elev
- Page 71 and 72: There are 27 ELU types entirely mis
- Page 73 and 74: Freshwater Ecoregions and Ecologica
- Page 75: classes: size 1) headwaters to smal
- Page 79 and 80: targets should also include conside
- Page 81 and 82: have also not been extensively rese
- Page 83 and 84: Table 5: Confidence Code1 High Conf
- Page 85 and 86: TYPECHARACTERISTICSELU signatureSIZ
- Page 87 and 88: Midreach streamentering large lakes
- Page 89 and 90: Major stresses: Using the following
- Page 91 and 92: Aquatic Systems Results for Lower N
- Page 93 and 94: Figure 1: Ecological Drainage Unit
- Page 95 and 96: IV. MiddleConnecticut3450 sq.mi.Riv
- Page 97 and 98: Table 3: Fish and Mussel Distributi
- Page 99 and 100: merrlowctcapeupctmidct3E-03100Nativ
- Page 101 and 102: Figure 2: Size 2 Watershed SystemsR
- Page 103 and 104: TWINSPAN RelationshipsThe hierarchi
- Page 105 and 106: 13 and 14 split from 15-17 primaril
- Page 107 and 108: Table 5: Size 2 Watershed System Su
- Page 109 and 110: Table 6: Size 3 Watershed System Su
- Page 111 and 112: Figure 7: Reach Gradient ClassesREV
- Page 113 and 114: Of these 480 possible combinations,
- Page 115 and 116: Units supported the distinctiveness
- Page 117 and 118: Condition ResultsGIS ScreeningSize
- Page 119 and 120: Size 2 Watershed: Landscape Context
- Page 121 and 122: Table 10: Size 2 Watershed Landscap
- Page 123 and 124: Table 16: Dams on Size 2, 3,4 River
- Page 125 and 126: Most of the dams in the analysis re
Figure 2: Watershed Aquatic System Group ComparisonFigure 3: Watershed Aquatic System Component SummaryStream Reach Classification: Macrohabitats A reach is defined as the individual segment of ariver between confluences or as the shoreline of a lake. A stream reach classification wasperformed using physical variables known to structure aquatic communities at this scale and thatREVISED 7/2003AQUA-6