Limits...
Trends in developed land cover adjacent to habitat for threatened salmon in Puget Sound, Washington, USA.

Bartz KK, Ford MJ, Beechie TJ, Fresh KL, Pess GR, Kennedy RE, Rowse ML, Sheer M - PLoS ONE (2015)

Bottom Line: For the region as a whole, we found significant increases in developed land cover adjacent to each of the habitat types evaluated (nearshore, estuary, mainstem channel, tributary channel, and floodplain), but the increases were small (<1% total increase from 1986 to 2008).Watersheds that were already highly developed in 1986 tended to have higher rates of development than initially less developed watersheds.Overall, our results suggest that developed land cover in areas adjacent to Puget Sound salmon habitat has increased only slightly since 1986 and that the rate of change has slowed near some key habitat types, although this has occurred within the context of a degraded baseline condition.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Conservation Biology Division, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.

ABSTRACT
For widely distributed species at risk, such as Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.), habitat monitoring is both essential and challenging. Only recently have widespread monitoring programs been implemented for salmon habitat in the Pacific Northwest. Remote sensing data, such as Landsat images, are therefore a useful way to evaluate trends prior to the advent of species-specific habitat monitoring programs. We used annual (1986-2008) land cover maps created from Landsat images via automated algorithms (LandTrendr) to evaluate trends in developed (50-100% impervious) land cover in areas adjacent to five types of habitat utilized by Chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha) in the Puget Sound region of Washington State, U.S.A. For the region as a whole, we found significant increases in developed land cover adjacent to each of the habitat types evaluated (nearshore, estuary, mainstem channel, tributary channel, and floodplain), but the increases were small (<1% total increase from 1986 to 2008). For each habitat type, the increasing trend changed during the time series. In nearshore, mainstem, and floodplain areas, the rate of increase in developed land cover slowed in the latter portion of the time series, while the opposite occurred in estuary and tributary areas. Watersheds that were already highly developed in 1986 tended to have higher rates of development than initially less developed watersheds. Overall, our results suggest that developed land cover in areas adjacent to Puget Sound salmon habitat has increased only slightly since 1986 and that the rate of change has slowed near some key habitat types, although this has occurred within the context of a degraded baseline condition.

No MeSH data available.


Percentage of Developed Land Cover in 1986: Watershed Scale.Percentage of developed land cover at the start of the time series in 1986, summarized at the watershed scale for six habitat areas. Format is identical to that in Fig 3.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4414273&req=5

pone.0124415.g004: Percentage of Developed Land Cover in 1986: Watershed Scale.Percentage of developed land cover at the start of the time series in 1986, summarized at the watershed scale for six habitat areas. Format is identical to that in Fig 3.

Mentions: In evaluating trends at the watershed scale, it should be noted that each watershed had a different baseline level of developed land cover in 1986 (Fig 4). These differences were particularly pronounced in estuary habitat areas. For example, some watersheds had >50% developed land cover in estuary areas in 1986, while others had <5%. In contrast, nearly all watersheds started the time series with 11–30% developed land cover in nearshore and mainstem habitat areas, and relatively little (<5%) in tributary habitat areas. For three of the six habitat areas ― tributaries, floodplains, and basins as a whole ― there was a strong positive relationship between the simple regression slope (b0) and the percentage of developed land cover at the start of the time series in 1986 (Fig 5; R2 = 0.81, 0.90, and 0.94, respectively; all p-values < 0.01).


Trends in developed land cover adjacent to habitat for threatened salmon in Puget Sound, Washington, USA.

Bartz KK, Ford MJ, Beechie TJ, Fresh KL, Pess GR, Kennedy RE, Rowse ML, Sheer M - PLoS ONE (2015)

Percentage of Developed Land Cover in 1986: Watershed Scale.Percentage of developed land cover at the start of the time series in 1986, summarized at the watershed scale for six habitat areas. Format is identical to that in Fig 3.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4414273&req=5

pone.0124415.g004: Percentage of Developed Land Cover in 1986: Watershed Scale.Percentage of developed land cover at the start of the time series in 1986, summarized at the watershed scale for six habitat areas. Format is identical to that in Fig 3.
Mentions: In evaluating trends at the watershed scale, it should be noted that each watershed had a different baseline level of developed land cover in 1986 (Fig 4). These differences were particularly pronounced in estuary habitat areas. For example, some watersheds had >50% developed land cover in estuary areas in 1986, while others had <5%. In contrast, nearly all watersheds started the time series with 11–30% developed land cover in nearshore and mainstem habitat areas, and relatively little (<5%) in tributary habitat areas. For three of the six habitat areas ― tributaries, floodplains, and basins as a whole ― there was a strong positive relationship between the simple regression slope (b0) and the percentage of developed land cover at the start of the time series in 1986 (Fig 5; R2 = 0.81, 0.90, and 0.94, respectively; all p-values < 0.01).

Bottom Line: For the region as a whole, we found significant increases in developed land cover adjacent to each of the habitat types evaluated (nearshore, estuary, mainstem channel, tributary channel, and floodplain), but the increases were small (<1% total increase from 1986 to 2008).Watersheds that were already highly developed in 1986 tended to have higher rates of development than initially less developed watersheds.Overall, our results suggest that developed land cover in areas adjacent to Puget Sound salmon habitat has increased only slightly since 1986 and that the rate of change has slowed near some key habitat types, although this has occurred within the context of a degraded baseline condition.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Conservation Biology Division, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.

ABSTRACT
For widely distributed species at risk, such as Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.), habitat monitoring is both essential and challenging. Only recently have widespread monitoring programs been implemented for salmon habitat in the Pacific Northwest. Remote sensing data, such as Landsat images, are therefore a useful way to evaluate trends prior to the advent of species-specific habitat monitoring programs. We used annual (1986-2008) land cover maps created from Landsat images via automated algorithms (LandTrendr) to evaluate trends in developed (50-100% impervious) land cover in areas adjacent to five types of habitat utilized by Chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha) in the Puget Sound region of Washington State, U.S.A. For the region as a whole, we found significant increases in developed land cover adjacent to each of the habitat types evaluated (nearshore, estuary, mainstem channel, tributary channel, and floodplain), but the increases were small (<1% total increase from 1986 to 2008). For each habitat type, the increasing trend changed during the time series. In nearshore, mainstem, and floodplain areas, the rate of increase in developed land cover slowed in the latter portion of the time series, while the opposite occurred in estuary and tributary areas. Watersheds that were already highly developed in 1986 tended to have higher rates of development than initially less developed watersheds. Overall, our results suggest that developed land cover in areas adjacent to Puget Sound salmon habitat has increased only slightly since 1986 and that the rate of change has slowed near some key habitat types, although this has occurred within the context of a degraded baseline condition.

No MeSH data available.