Generalized instream habitat models

Conventional instream habitat models (e.g., the physical habitat simulation system) predict the impact of regulation on the habitats of freshwater taxa. They link a hydraulic model with microhabitat-suitability models for taxa to predict habitat values at various discharge rates. Their use requires considerable field effort and experience. Recent analyses performed in France suggested that comparable results could be achieved using simplified hydraulic data. We tested this approach for 99 stream reaches and nine aquatic taxa in New Zealand. The resulting generalized habitat models predict habitat values similar to those predicted by conventional models from simplified hydraulic data (depth–discharge and width–discharge relationships, average particle size, and mean annual discharge). As in France, within-reach changes in habitat values were linked to the specific discharge of reaches, while between-reach changes depended mainly on the Froude number at mean annual discharge. The generalized models perform ...

[1]  T. Wesche,et al.  Status of Instream Flow Legislation and Practices in North America , 1989 .

[2]  K. Singh,et al.  Hydraulic Geometry of Streams and Stream Habitat Assessment , 1989 .

[3]  M. Gordon Wolman,et al.  Fluvial Processes in Geomorphology , 1965 .

[4]  J. Richardson,et al.  Habitat preferences of common, riverine New Zealand native fishes and implications for flow management , 1995 .

[5]  N. Lamouroux,et al.  Fish assemblages and stream hydraulics: consistent relations across spatial scales and regions , 2006 .

[6]  I. Jowett.  Hydraulic geometry of New Zealand rivers and its use as a preliminary method of habitat assessment , 1998 .

[7]  I. Jowett,et al.  A method for objectively identifying pool, run, and riffle habitats from physical measurements , 1993 .

[8]  I. Jowett.  RHYHABSIM: river hydraulic and habitat simulation. A computer manual. , 1989 .

[9]  Ken D. Bovee,et al.  A guide to stream habitat analysis using the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology. IFIP No. 12 , 1982 .

[10]  N. Lamouroux,et al.  Fish community changes after minimum flow increase: testing quantitative predictions in the Rhone River at Pierre-Benite, France , 2006 .

[11]  D. Bates,et al.  Nonlinear mixed effects models for repeated measures data. , 1990, Biometrics.

[12]  Pierre Legendre,et al.  Development and validation of numerical habitat models for juveniles of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) , 2000 .

[13]  B. Waters.  A Methodology for Evaluating the Effects of Different Streamflows on Salmonid Habitat , 1976 .

[14]  I. Jowett.  In‐stream habitat suitability criteria for feeding inanga (Galaxias maculatus) , 2002 .

[15]  Stephen P. Rice,et al.  Tributary control of physical heterogeneity and biological diversity at river confluences , 2006 .

[16]  A. Rao,et al.  Estimation of Instream Flow Requirements for Fish , 1992 .

[17]  Yves Souchon,et al.  Simple predictions of instream habitat model outputs for fish habitat guilds in large streams , 2002 .

[18]  J. Hayes,et al.  Microhabitat Models of Large Drift‐Feeding Brown Trout in Three New Zealand Rivers , 1994 .

[19]  M. Duncan,et al.  Potential Effects of Reduced Flows on Fish Habitats in a Large Braided River, New Zealand , 1985 .

[20]  Hervé Capra,et al.  Predicting habitat suitability for lotic fish: linking statistical hydraulic models with multivariate habitat use models , 1998 .

[21]  M. Gard,et al.  Relationship between chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) redd densities and PHABSIM-predicted habitat in the Merced and Lower American rivers, California , 1999 .

[22]  Predicting Salmonid Habitat–Flow Relationships for Streams from Western North America , 2000 .

[23]  Hervé Capra,et al.  Simple predictions of instream habitat model outputs for target fish populations , 2002 .