Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is catchment imperviousness a good indicator of ecosystem health?

  • Conference paper
Highway and Urban Environment

Part of the book series: Alliance For Global Sustainability Bookseries ((AGSB,volume 12))

Reducing the impervious area (IA) of a watershed is becoming a common practice to mitigate the effects of urban runoff on the health of aquatic ecosystems. Yet, it is often argued that this approach is rather inefficient and it is debatable whether percentage IA targets can be applied to all urban environments, as local factors (e.g., soils, geology, terrain, and rainfall patterns) may influence the effect of imperviousness. Furthermore, different receiving waters may be affected by urban runoff in different ways: the effect of flows is likely to be strongest at the sub-watershed level, whereas quiescent waters are likely to be more affected by pollutants. A more effective approach is to develop an understanding of the effects of urban runoff on all receiving waters. This can be achieved by recognizing all the values in all receiving waters and the threat urban runoff poses to these values.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Dunne T, Leopold LB (1978) Water in environmental planning. W.H. Free-man, San Francisco, CA, 818 pp

    Google Scholar 

  2. Booth DB (1991) Urbanization and the natural drainage system - impacts, solutions, and prognoses. Northwest Environ J 7:93-118

    Google Scholar 

  3. Beach D (2001) Coastal sprawl. The effects of urban design on aquatic organ-isms in the United States. Pews Ocean Commission, Arlington, VI, http://www.pewtrusts.org

  4. Gergel SE, Turner MG, Miller JR, Melack JM, Stanley EH (2002) Landscape indicators of human impacts to riverine systems. Aquac Sci 64:188-128

    Google Scholar 

  5. Centre for Watershed Protection (2003) Impacts of impervious cover on aquatic ecosystems. Watershed Protection Research Monograph No. 1. Centre for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, MD, USA

    Google Scholar 

  6. Scheuler T, Claytor R (1997) Impervious cover as a urban stream indicator and a watershed management tool. In: Roesner LA (ed.), Effects of watershed development and management on aquatic ecosystems: proceedings of an engineering foundation conference. Snowbird, Utah, USA. American Society for Civil Engineers, New York, pp 513-529

    Google Scholar 

  7. Booth DB, Hartley D, Jackson CR (2002) Forest cover, impervious-surface area, and the mitigation of stormwater impacts. J Am Water Resour Assoc 38:835-845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Scheuler T (1994) The importance of imperviousness. Watershed Protect Tech 1:100-111

    Google Scholar 

  9. May CW, Welch EB, Horner RR, Karr JR, Mar BW (1997) Quality indices for urbanization effects in Puget Sound Lowland streams. Water Resources Series Technical Report No. 154. Urban Water Resources Centre, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  10. Booth DB, Jackson CR (1997) Urbanization of aquatic systems: degradation thresholds, stormwater detention, and the limits of mitigation. J Am Water Resour Assoc 33:1077-1090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Tourbier JT (1994) Open space through stormwater management: helping to structure growth on the urban fringe. J Soil Water Conserv 49:14-21

    Google Scholar 

  12. Wang L, Lyons J, Kanehl P, Bannerman R (2001) Impacts of urbanization on stream habitat and fish across multiple scales. Environ Manag 28:255-266

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Sieker H, Klein M (1998) Best management practices for stormwater-runoff with alternative methods in a large urban catchment in Berlin, Germany. Water Sci Technol 38:91-97

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Prince George’s County Department of Environmental Resources (PGC) (2000) Low impact development design manual. Department of Environmental Resources, Prince George’s County, MD, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Zielinski J (2002) Open spaces and impervious surfaces: model development principles and benefits. In: France RL (ed.) Handbook of water sensitive planning and design. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL, pp 49-64

    Google Scholar 

  16. Walsh CJ (2004) Protection of in-stream biota from urban impacts: minimise catchment imperviousness or improve drainage design? Mar Freshwater Res 55:317-326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Walsh CJ, Fletcher TD, Ladson AR (2005) Stream restoration in urban catchments through redesigning stormwater systems: looking to the catchment to save the stream. J N Am Benthol Soc 24:690-705

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ladson AR, Lloyd S, Walsh C, Fletcher TD, Horton P (2006) Scenarios for redesigning an urban drainage system to reduce runoff frequency and restore stream ecological condition. In: Delatic A, Fletcher T (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th international conference on urban drainage modelling and the 4th international conference on water sensitive urban design, Melbourne, Australia, V2.233-240

    Google Scholar 

  19. Coffman LS (2002) Low-impact development: an alternative stormwater management technology. In: France RL (ed.) Handbook of water sensitive planning and design. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL, pp 97-124

    Google Scholar 

  20. Horner RR, Booth DB, Azous A, May CW (1997) Watershed determinants of ecosystem functioning. In: Roesner LA (ed.) Effects of watershed develop-ment and management on aquatic ecosystems: proceedings of an engineering foundation conference. Snowbird, Utah, USA. American Society for Civil Engineers, New York, pp 251-274

    Google Scholar 

  21. Veni G (1999) A geomorphological strategy for conducting environmental impact assessments in karst areas. Geomorphology 31:151-180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Stepenuck KF, Crunkilton RL, Wang L (2002) Impacts of urban landuse on macroinvertebrate communities in southeastern Wisconsin streams. J Am Water Resour Assoc 38:1041-1051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Paul MJ, Meyer JL (2001) Streams in the urban landscape. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32:333-365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Pitt R, Bozeman M (1982) Sources of urban runoff pollution and its effects on an urban creek. EPA-600/52-82-090. US Environment Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, USA, December

    Google Scholar 

  25. Horner RR, May CW (1999) Regional study supports natural land cover pro-tection as leading best management practice for maintaining stream ecological integrity. In: Proceedings of comprehensive stormwater and aquatic ecosys-tem management 1st south Pacific conference, 22-26 February 1999, vol. 1, pp 233-247

    Google Scholar 

  26. Strecker EW (2001) Low impact development (LID): how low impact is it? Water Resour Impact 3:10-15

    Google Scholar 

  27. King RS, Baker ME, Whigham DF, Weller DE, Jordan TE, Kazyak PF, Hurd MK (2005) Spatial considerations for linking watershed land cover to eco-logical indicators in streams. Ecol Appl 15:137-153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Heany JP, Pitt R, Field R (1999) Summary and conclusions. In: Heany JP, Pitt R, Field R (eds.) Innovative urban wet-weather flow management systems. National risk management research laboratory, Office of Research and Devel-opment, US Environment Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-99/029. Chapter 12

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lee JG, Heany JP (2002) Directly connected impervious areas as major sources of urban stormwater quality problems-evidence from south Florida. 7th Biennial stormwater research and watershed management conference, 22-23 May, pp 45-54. http://www.stormwaterauthority.org

  30. Sample DJ, Heaney JP, Wright LT, Fan CY, Lai FH, Field R (2003) Costs of best management practices and associated land for urban stormwater control. J Water Resour Plan Manag Jan/Feb:59-68

    Google Scholar 

  31. Booth DB, Haugerud RA, Troost KG (2003) Geology, watersheds and Puget Lowland Rivers. In: Montgomery DR, Bolton S, Booth DB, Wall L (eds.) Restoration of Puget Sound Rivers. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, DC, pp 14-45

    Google Scholar 

  32. Alberti M, Marzluff J, Shulenberger E, Bradley G, Ryan C, Zumbrunnen. (2003) Integrating humans into ecology: opportunities and challenges for studying urban ecosystems. BioScience 53:1169-1179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Karr JR, Chu EW (2000) Sustaining living rivers. Hydrobiologia 422:1-14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Pitt R (1999) Receiving water and other impacts. In: Heany JP, Pitt R, Field R (eds.), Innovative urban wet-weather flow management systems. National risk management research laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US EPA EPA/600/R-99/029. Chapter 4

    Google Scholar 

  35. Pettigrove V, Hoffmann A (2003) Impact of urbanization on heavy metal con-tamination in urban stream sediments: influence of catchment geology. Aus-tralas J Ecotoxic 9:119-128

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Fletcher TD, Breen PF, Pettigrove VJ (1997) Influences of geology and land-use on surface water turbidity and suspended solids: implications for storm-water management. In: Proceedings of 24th hydrology and water resources symposium, Wai-Whenua, New Zealand, 24-28 November 1997, pp 385-391

    Google Scholar 

  37. MacDonald DD, Ingersoll CG, Berger TA (2000) Development and evalua-tion of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosys-tems. Arch Environ Con Tox 39:20-31

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Herricks EE (2001) Through the pipe: down the creek! Water Resour Impact 3(6):24-27

    Google Scholar 

  39. Klein RD (1979) Urbanization and stream quality impairment. Water Res Bull 15:948-963

    Google Scholar 

  40. Booth DB, Reinelt LE (1993) Consequences of urbanization on aquatic sys-tems - measured effects, degradation thresholds and corrective strategies. In: Proceedings of watersheds ‘93’ conference, sponsored by US EPA, Alexandria, VI, 21-24 March, pp 545-550

    Google Scholar 

  41. Shaver E, Maxted J, Curtis G, Carter D (1995) Watershed protection using an integrated approach. In: Torno HC (ed.), Stormwater NPDES related monitor-ing needs. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, pp 435-459

    Google Scholar 

  42. Finkenbine JK, Atwater JW, Mavinic DS (2000) Stream health after urbaniza-tion. J Am Water Resour Assoc 36:1149-1160

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Heede BH (1986) Designing for dynamic equilibrium in streams. Water Res Bull 22:351-357

    Google Scholar 

  44. Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organisation (1996) Port Phillip Bay environmental study, 1992-1996. Final report. Dickson, ACT, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  45. Melbourne Water (2005) Melbourne Water annual report 2004-05. http://www.melbournewater.com.au

  46. Environment Protection Authority (1996) The Western Port marine environ-ment. Publication 493. April 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Pouder N, France R (2002) Restoring and protecting a small, urban lake (Boston, Massachusetts). In: France RL (ed.), Handbook of water sensitive planning and design. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL, pp 317-339

    Google Scholar 

  48. Crunkilton R, Kleist J, Ramcheck J, DeVita J, Villeneueve W (1997) Assess-ment of the response of aquatic organisms to long-term in situ exposures of urban runoff. In: Roesner LA (ed.) Effects of watershed development and management of aquatic ecosystems. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, pp 95-111

    Google Scholar 

  49. Schiff K, Sutula M (2004) Organophosphorus pesticides in storm-water runoff from southern California (USA). Environ Tox Chem 23:1815-1821

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Pettigrove V, Hoffmann A (2005) A field-based microcosm method to assess the effects of polluted urban stream sediments on aquatic macroinvertebrates. Environ Tox Chem 24:170-180

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Pettigrove V, Hoffmann A (2005). Effects of long-chain hydrocarbon-polluted sediment on freshwater macroinvertebrates. Environ ToxChem 24:2500-2508

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Ellis JB, Hvitved-Jacobsen T (1996) Urban drainage impacts on receiving waters. J Hydrol Res 34:771-783.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Pratt JM, Coler RA, Godfrey PJ (1981) Ecological effects of urban storm- water runoff on benthic macroinvertebrates inhabiting the Green River, Massachusetts. Hydrobiologia 83:29-42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Mederios C, LeBlanc R, Coler RA (1983) An in situ assessment of the acute toxicity of urban runoff to benthic macroinvertebrates. Environ Tox Chem 2:119-126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Mayer T, Marsalek J, Delos Reyes E (1996) Nutrients and metal contaminants status of urban stormwater ponds. J Lake Reserv Manag 12:348-363.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Morrisey DJ, Roper DS, Williamson RB (1997) Biological effects of con-taminants in sediments in urban estuaries. In: Roesner LA (ed.), Effects of watershed development and management on aquatic ecosystems: proceedings of an engineering foundation conference. Snowbird, Utah, USA. American Society for Civil Engineers, New York, pp 228-250

    Google Scholar 

  57. Stark JS (1998) Heavy metal pollution and macrobenthic assemblages in soft sediments in two Sydney estuaries. Aust J Mar Freshwater Res 49:533-540

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Australian and New Zealand Environment & Conservation Council and Agri-culture and Resource Management Council of Australia & New Zealand (2000) National water quality management strategy, Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and marine water quality, vol. 1 - the guidelines

    Google Scholar 

  59. France RL, Craul P (2002) Retaining water: technical support for capturing parking lot runoff (Ithaca, New York). In: France RL (ed.) Handbook of water sensitive planning and design. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL, pp 175-202

    Google Scholar 

  60. Forster J (1993) The influence of atmospheric conditions and storm character-istics on roof runoff pollution with an experimental roof system. In: Proceed-ings of VIth international conference on urban storm drainage, Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada, pp 411-416

    Google Scholar 

  61. Xanthopoulos C, Hahn HH (1990) Pollutants attached to particles from drain-age areas. Sci Tot Environ 93:441-448

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Steuer J, Slebig W, Hornewer N, Prey J (1997) Sources of contamination in an urban basin in Marquette, Michigan and an analysis of concentrations, loads, and data quality. US Geological Survey. Water Resources Investigation Report 97-4242. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and US EPA, Middleton, WI

    Google Scholar 

  63. Ellis JB, Revitt DM (1991) Drainage for roads: control and treatment of highway runoff. Report NRA43804/MID.012. National Rivers Authority, Reading, UK

    Google Scholar 

  64. Pettigrove V, Hoffmann A (2003) Major sources of heavy metal pollution during base flows from sewered urban catchments in the City of Melbourne. Proceedings of third south Pacific conference on stormwater and aquatic re-source protection combined with the 10th annual conference of the Austral-asian chapter of the International Erosion Control Association, Auckland, New Zealand, 14-16 May

    Google Scholar 

  65. Kingett Mitchell Ltd. (2003) A study of roof runoff quality in Auckland, New Zealand implications for stormwater management. Auckland Regional Coun-cil, Auckland, New Zealand

    Google Scholar 

  66. Lee H, Stenstrom MK (2005) Utility of stormwater monitoring. Water Envi-ron Res 77:219-228

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Tov P, Lee B, Tonto F (2006) Comparison of stormwater quality treatment guidelines and critical structural best management performance factors and parameters to consider. www.wateronline.com

  68. Booth DB, Karr JR, Schauman S, Konrad CP, Morley SA, Larson MG, Burges SJ (2004) Reviving urban streams: land use, hydrology, behaviour, and human behaviour. J Am Water Resour Assoc 40:1351-1361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Coleman R, Pettigrove V (1999) Managing Melbourne’s waterways: the Tributary Investigation Program. In: Proceedings of second Australian stream management conference, Adelaide, 1 February, 187-192

    Google Scholar 

  70. Pettigrove V (2000) A future for Melbourne’s platypus. J Aust Water Assoc September 2000:51-54

    Google Scholar 

  71. Serena M, Pettigrove V (2005) Relationship of sediment toxicants and water quality to the distribution of platypus populations in urban streams. J N Am Benthol Soc 24:679-689

    Google Scholar 

  72. Berbee R, Rijs G, de Brouwer R, van Velzin L (1999) Characterization and treatment of runoff from highways in the Netherlands paved with impervious and pervious surfaces. Water Environ Res 71:183-190

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Urbonas BR (2001) Our receiving waters with BMPs. Water Resour Impact 3:3-6

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research and Technology, Melbourne Water, 4342, 3001, Melbourne, VA, Australia

    V Pettigrove

Authors
  1. V Pettigrove
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Chalmers University of Technology, Sven Hultins gata 8, 412 96, Goteborg, Sweden

    Gregory M. Morrison  & Sébastien Rauch  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer

About this paper

Cite this paper

Pettigrove, V. (2007). Is catchment imperviousness a good indicator of ecosystem health?. In: Morrison, G.M., Rauch, S. (eds) Highway and Urban Environment. Alliance For Global Sustainability Bookseries, vol 12. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6010-6_36

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation