Fine-GrainedSoil/

Sediment

Fine Bed

Coarse Bed

Water Column

Estuaries

Mudflats

Coastal Floodplain

UplandFloodplain

Wetlands

River and NavChannel/Bank

Lakes, Ponds, Reservoirs

Salmonids/cyprinids

Column Feeding Fish

BottomFeeding Fish

InvertebratesCoarse Bed

InvertebratesFine Bed

DiatomsCoarse Bed

DiatomsFine Bed

MacrophytesCoarse Bed

MacrophytesFine Bed

Waterfowl

Fisheries

Supporting/Regulating

1˚ Production

Stabilization/Habitat maintenance

Provisioning/game

Cultural/ Recreation

WaterQuality

WaterConveyanceand Storage

In Water/Bank

Structures

Navigation

Flood Defence/Coastal Defence

BuriedContaminants,

Artefacts,Stratigraphy,

Fossils

Fine Bed

Coarse Bed

Water Column

Estuaries

Mudflats

Coastal Floodplain

UplandFloodplain

Wetlands

River and NavChannel/Bank

Lakes, Ponds, Reservoirs

Fine-GrainedSoil/

Sediment

Provisioning/Water

Regulating/ floodControl; stabilization

Resource access/ Transport

Regulating/Waste Control

Cultural/ Archival

MANAGING THE ROLE OF SOILS AND SEDIMENTS  IN SUSTAINING LANDSCAPE  AND AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM SERVICES:  TOOLS AND EXAMPLES

Sabine E. Apitz1,2 and Samantha Deacon21SEA Environmental Decisions Ltd; 2Environ UK, Ltd

Underlying processes and tools Integration Synthesis Decision Context

Site-specific models evaluate how landscape management and intrinsic conditions affect status

Wat

er F

ram

ewor

k D

irect

ive

Prog

ram

s of

Act

ion

Systematic regional risk model ”maps” risk pathways from sites to catchments as a function of region, industry, endpoint, an habitat

To protect endpoints within regions and river

basins, we must understand and

manage sediment inputs and transport at

the field scale

Catchment/Basin Scale

Risk RegionScale

Pixel/Field Scale

Catchment/Basin Scale

Risk RegionScale

Pixel/Field Scale

hierarchical patch dynamics paradigm

(HPDP)* approach was used to address multi-

scale interactions

Crop management options

Risk Reduction

Marginal Abatement Cost (£/unit risk reduced)

-ve

+ve

Livestock management options

Changing tillage method

Exclude cropping activities

Retrofit urban drainage

Tertiary treatment at SWT

0

Desired risk reduction

Marginal Abatement Cost Curve

Integrated in situ studies examine the responses of

benthic ecosystem

structure and function to natural and simulated

perturbations

Int egr at ed Sed imen t Dist u r berIn t eg r at ed Sed imen t Dist u r ber

Biogeochemical lander (MPIMM)

(AWI)

Lander with microprofilerand conceptual drawing

(LCSE)

In situ image of organism effects

on oxygen dynamics (U-

COP)

Fish

erie

s an

d IC

ZM P

olic

y

1°W

1°W

0°E

0°E

1°E

1°E

2°E

2°E

3°E

3°E

4°E

4°E

5°E

5°E

6°E

6°E

7°E

7°E

51°N

52°N 52°N

53°N 53°N

54°N 54°N

55°N 55°N

Vesse l D ensityHigh Low

Driver – regional effort 2001

Response: impact assessment of•Inter-annual variability•Zero trawling scenario•Management changes – fleet and effortredistribution

Pressure 2001

Pressure 2002

y = 36.248e-1.866x

R2 = 0.7523

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0 0.5 1 1.5 2Trawling pressure (satellite)

Cou

pled

den

itrifi

catio

n D

n (µ

mol

N/m

2/hr

)

Impact model

State 2001

State 2002Impact – difference 2001-2002

GIS impact scenario testing on regional carbon budgets - trawling

Service impacts of policy scenarios are modelled and mapped regionally using GIS tools

Mapping and zoning for Marine Spatial Planning

Costs and benefits of various landscape and catchment management policies and scenarios can be compared

12

3

4

4

6

7

9

8

11

12

12

5

13

Hg

Hg inorg

MMHg

DMHg

Biota

batteri

13

5

13

10

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Bef

ore

1 m

onth

1 ye

ar

Bef

ore

1 m

onth

1 ye

ar

Bef

ore

1 m

onth

1 ye

ar

Bef

ore

1 m

onth

1 ye

ar

Bef

ore

1 m

onth

1 ye

ar

Bef

ore

1 m

onth

1 ye

ar

Bef

ore

1 m

onth

1 ye

ar

Bef

ore

1 m

onth

1 ye

ar

Evid

ence

sco

re

Ben

thic

exp

osur

e

Prim

ary

prod

ucer

effe

cts

Prim

ary

prod

ucer

exp

osur

e

Hum

an h

ealth

expo

sure

Mic

robi

al e

ffect

s

Mic

robi

al e

xpos

ure

Pel

agic

exp

osur

e

Ben

thic

effe

cts

Bent

hic

func

tion

Fish

erie

s

Reg

ulat

ing

-co

ntam

inan

ts

Prim

ary

prod

uctio

n

Such studies are helping inform lagoon-wide sustainability decisions in VeniceD

redg

ed m

ater

ial a

nd h

abita

t res

tora

tion

Aquatic Service Provision

Aquatic Service Provision

Aquatic Service Provision

Aquatic Service Provision

LandscapeBiophysicalConditions

LandscapeManagement

SoilStatus

SedimentStatus

AquaticBiophysicalConditions

AquaticManagement

LandscapeEcosystem

Services

AquaticEcosystem

Services

WaterStatus

Changes in ecosystem service providers over time are put in the context of ecological models- resistance and resilience are evaluated using an ecosystem-based adaptation of a weight of evidence framework

RecommendationsThe impacts of various actions, decisions and policies on ESS are complex; they should be evaluated in the context of relevant objectives, scales and driversThe selection of the appropriate mix to tools for a project should be driven by context, scale and scope of the questions at handStakeholder involvement is essential; this requires consistent and transparent language and clear links between models, objectives and outcomesThere is a need for more rigorous evaluation and communication of uncertainty in such projects; this should drive decision formulation and adaptive management

1SEA Enviromental Decisions Ltd., 1 South Cottages, The Ford; Little Hadham; Hertfordshire; SG11 2ATTel: +44 (0)1279 771890; drsea@cvrl.org2ENVIRON UK Ltd.; www.environcorp.comBox House, Box, Wiltshire, SN13 8AATel: +44 (0)1225 748420; sdeacon@environcorp.com

Coastal management can be considered in terms of overall spatial planning, maximising ESS provision considering

multiple uses

Models (informed by site-specific assessment and in situ research) predict impacts and interactions

Sediment dynamics operate at multiple scales; effective sedimentmodels must address this in layers of information

Integrated studies of ecosystem response over time following habitat restoration using dredged material

Potential impact pathways for suspended and deposited fine-grained, clean sediment on a range of biotic and abiotic endpoints as a function of exposure location, and the resultant links with ecosystem services

(ESS). Arrows between impact location and endpoint in green indicate desirable effects; those in red indicate undesirable effects. These desirable and undesirable impacts on a range of ESS must be

balanced in management decisions and policy

(b)

(a)

(c)

SUMMARYWhile there are still great uncertainties about the links between ecosystem biophysical drivers, biotic community structure and ecosystem functions and services, the concept of ecosystem services (ESS) is being applied in a rapidly expanding number of decision, management and policy frameworks. As emergent properties of ecosystems, ESS are integrators of effects from multiple stressors and biophysical interactions at a range of spatial and temporal scales. ESS thus have the potential to provide a “common coin” between environmental issues, helping us join up various programs for a more integrated and sustainable management of the environment. Landscape management to optimize preferred ESS has a range of impacts on soil/sediment and water status. The dynamic nature of the hydrologic system means that landscape management affects the viability and sustainability of aquatic ecosystem services (ESS) at the watershed scale (a); but management of rivers and other water bodies can also affect both aquatic and landscape biophysical conditions (b). As mobile connecting media between various parts of the ecosystem via the hydrocycle, soils, sediments and water play both positive and negative roles in the viability and sustainability of social, economic, and ecological objectives throughout river corridors, estuaries and coastal systems (c provides examples for clean, fine-grained sediment). How these roles are interpreted depends upon whether biophysical status is appropriate to the needs of a given endpoint; ultimately, trade-offs between endpoints, services and locations must be identified if better decisions are to be made. The complex natural and anthropogenic interactions between landscape management and aquatic ecosystem service viability and sustainability create multi-scale, multi-sectoral and multi-disciplinary problems that will only become more difficult as climate change affects hydrodynamics dynamics, landscape and coastal use. However, a number of tools and approaches are emerging that allow for the systematic consideration of ESS within assessment, management and regulatory frameworks. While approaches vary, the ESS concept provides a conceptual thread between underlying measures and models, cross-scale and model integration, synthesis from complex processes to ESS-linked outcomes, and translation into a decision context. The table below illustrates examples using a range of tools, including adaptations of regional and ecological risk assessment models, being developed in support of river basin and coastal management plans, to help “map” and quantify, often in a spatially explicit manner, the dynamic interactions of landscape and aquatic management options on soil/sediment status and function, and, ultimately, on a diverse range of endpoints and services at various scales.

Examples of the Integration of ESS into Landscape, River and Coastal Decision Frameworks

• A: Starting point • B: Ecological status resistant to biophysical pressure • C: Tipping point • D: Ecological status decrease due to biophysical pressure• E: No recovery when biophysical status improved (irreversible

damage)• F: Partial resilience/recovery when biophysical status

improved• G: Complete resilience/recovery when biophysical status

improved• H: Enhanced structure, function or service• I: Net biophysical status improvement

Heavy Machinery

Score

High DensityAnimal Score

(Other Factor Score)

Low DensityAnimal Score

Heavy Machinery?

High DensityAnimals?

Low DensityAnimals? (Other Factors?)Heavy

Machinery?High Density

Animals?Low Density

Animals? (Other Factors?)Heavy Machinery?

High DensityAnimals?

Low DensityAnimals? (Other Factors?)

Compaction Score lookup table

Sum

CompactionScore

Lookup TableThreshold Compaction-basedRunoff Score

Compaction Vulnerability

(Other Factor Score)

(Other Factor Score)

Polytunnels? (Other Factors?)

Runoff Score lookup table

Sum

RunoffScore

PolytunnelScore

RunoffVulnerability

High DensityAnimalScore

High DensityAnimalScore

(Other Factor Score)

(Other Factor Score)

Low DensityAnimal Score

High DensityAnimals?

Low DensityAnimals? (Other Factors?)High Density

Animals?High Density

Animals?Low Density

Animals?Low Density

Animals? (Other Factors?)(Other Factors?)

Poaching Score lookup table

Sum

PoachingScore

Poaching Vulnerability

Sum

Water ErosionScore

Exposed Soil in Winter?

Exposed Soil in Winter?

Poor Soil Structure?

FieldDrainage?

FieldDrainage?

Crop CoverFactor?

WoodlandHarvest?

CompactionErosionScore

Soil Structure

Score

Field Drainage

Score

Crop CoverScore

WoodlandHarvest

Score

Water Erosion Score lookup table

Process Total Threshold ComparisonProcess Total Threshold Comparison

Exposed Soil Score

RunoffErosion

Score

Poaching Erosion

Score

Erosion Vulnerability

Connectivity factor?

Connectivity factor?

Field Area(hecares?

Multiply

FieldProduction Score

Field Area(hectares?

Buffer?

yes/?no

Source Strength Score

Buffer interception calculation

Wind SpeedScore

Wind SpeedScore

Soil Disturbance

Score

Soil Disturbance

Score

Crop Cover Score

AverageWind Speed?

Crop CoverFactor?

Dry SoilDisturbed?

AverageWind Speed?

AverageWind Speed?

Crop CoverFactor?

Crop CoverFactor?

Dry SoilDisturbed?

Dry SoilDisturbed?

Wind Erosion Score lookup table

Sum

Wind ErosionScore

Wind Erosion Vulnerability

Slope ShapeScore

Slope ShapeScore

Slope Percent? Slope Shape?

Slope risk lookup tableSlope risk lookup table

Average

SlopeScore

Slope percentScore Annual

Rainfall?

RainfallScore

Rainfall risk lookup tableRainfall risk lookup table

Multiply

Water Production Score

Add

Sediment Production Score

Slope ShapeScore

Slope ShapeScore

Slope Percent? Slope Shape?

Slope risk lookup tableSlope risk lookup table

Average

SlopeScore

Slope percentScore Annual

Rainfall?

RainfallScore

Rainfall risk lookup tableRainfall risk lookup table

Multiply

Water Production Score

Add

Sediment Production Score

SCCFF

BF IF IC D M

WF

WQ

NV

CDW

SW

CCMG4 P

CS

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

SCCFF

BF IF IC D M

WF

WQ

NV

CDW

SW

CCMG4 P

CS

Endpoint

RRARRBRRCRRDRRERRF

Ris

ks

Benefits

MatrixCalculations(SedCalc)

Ranked,Summed and/or

GraphedRisk Ranks

(SSR)Source Strength Ranking

Table

(SSE)Source-Stressor

ExposureFilters

(RRC)Risk RegionConnectivity

Filters

(ELR)Endpoint Location

Ranking Table

(EELE)Endpoint-EndpointLocation Exposure

Filters

(SEELE)Stressor-

Endpoint-EndpointLocation Effects

Filters

Risk Region Connectivity

Modules

Impact Type Switch(ITS)

Field-Scale Source RankingModules (including connectivity to river)

Risk Region Source RankAggregation

Upstream Input ModuleRisk Region

Transfer Filter(RRT)

MatrixCalculations(SedCalc)

Ranked,Summed and/or

GraphedRisk Ranks

(SSR)Source Strength Ranking

Table

(SSE)Source-Stressor

ExposureFilters

(RRC)Risk RegionConnectivity

Filters

(ELR)Endpoint Location

Ranking Table

(EELE)Endpoint-EndpointLocation Exposure

Filters

(SEELE)Stressor-

Endpoint-EndpointLocation Effects

Filters

Risk Region Connectivity

Modules

Impact Type Switch(ITS)

Risk Region Connectivity

Modules

Impact Type Switch(ITS)

Field-Scale Source RankingModules (including connectivity to river)

Risk Region Source RankAggregation

Field-Scale Source RankingModules (including connectivity to river)

Risk Region Source RankAggregation

Upstream Input ModuleRisk Region

Transfer Filter(RRT)