1. IERM Overview Goals: 1. Development of an integrated, whole-system model for ecological response to water level/flow scenarios 2. Blend ecological research from LOSL study with existing data and knowledge base for system Five main benefits to incorporating data collection into the IERM  Scale integration  Process representation  Extending available data  Spatial extrapolation  Evaluation of competing responses

2. Benefit #1: Scale Integration IERM will provide means for integrating a range of spatial and temporal scales Includes H&H inputs as well as ecosystem interactions Example: H&H Inputs (weekly) Muskrat Response (annual) Plant Community Response (long-term) Fish Response (seasonal) Algal Response (weekly)

3. Benefit #2: Process Representation Representation of processes that explain community/population dynamics Process-based model provides predictive capability Connects indicator to stressors Potentially connects indicator species to entire community

4. Process Representation – Sport Fish Example Temperature Water Level & Flow Nutrient Sources Phytoplankton Zooplankton Planktivorous Fish YOY Abundance Growth Predation Natural Mortality Juvenile Abundance Growth Predation Natural Mortality Habitat Quantity & Quality Adult Abundance Growth Natural Mortality Reproduction (Graduation) Stocking Harvest Species or Guild

5. Benefit #3: Extending Available Data Model can account for time lag in cause- effect relationships Measured fish guild response depends on initial community abundance/structure prior to field experiment Consider feedbacks between ecosystem components (e.g. muskrat cattails)

6. Benefit #4: Spatial Extrapolation IERM provides avenue for extending results for a localized area to other parts of the system Need to include all important governing factors to make extrapolation work Examples:  Extend results for 32 Lake Ontario wetlands to other wetland areas  Extend dabbling duck nesting success for Lake St. Pierre to Lake Ontario

7. Benefit #5: Evaluate Competing Responses Data collection efforts address responses for individual species IERM provides “big picture” evaluation of all species responses Example:  Regulation “Scenario X” impacts:  Wetland diversity  Northern pike population  Dabbling duck population  Muskrat population

8. Evaluate Competing Responses - Example St. Lawrence Flow Variations Lake Ontario WL Variations Wetland Plant Diversity Wetland Plant Diversity Cattail Abundance Northern Pike Habitat Quality Northern Pike Habitat Quality Muskrat Habitat Quality Muskrat Habitat Quality Regulation Cattail Abundance