An Innovative Approach to Restoration in the Great Marsh

(1) Holistic and Integrated Restoration to improve the resiliency of the Great Marsh • Beaches and Dunes, High Marsh, Low Marsh, Subtidal, Tidal Creeks and Channels, Rivers and Watersheds, and in Town Hall

(2) Hands-on project management team: the Great Marsh Resiliency Partnership • Partners working together with project leads and many sub-teams

Background: • The Great Marsh is a relatively intact and healthy marsh ecosystem • There are signs of degradation due to anthropogenic activities • Climate Change and Sea Level Rise will exacerbate the decline of the Great Marsh if not addressed Great Marsh Resiliency Partnership Mission: To preserve, protect, restore, and enhance the Great Marsh through actions that create coastal resiliency

Great Marsh’ North Shore

Boston

Great Marsh Salt Marsh

Partners: Massachusetts Bays National Estuary Program, Eight Towns and Great Marsh Committee, Merrimack Valley Planning Commission, Ipswich River Watershed Association, MA Audubon Society, Green Crab R&D, Boston University, University of , the Towns of the Great Marsh, National Wildlife Federation, Massachusetts Environmental State Agencies, federal agencies, and many others

Great Marsh Resiliency

• The Great Marsh is the largest contiguous salt marsh in New England, 25,000 acres of Beaches and Dunes, Salt Marsh, Subtidal Flats, Creeks and Great Marsh Channels NH to • A healthy, resilient Great Marsh provides abundant natural habitat for important wildlife species, including fish and birds

• A healthy, resilient Great Marsh provides protection against sea level rise and storm surge for vulnerable community infrastructure

Value of the Great Marsh

• The Great Marsh is a huge economic engine for the region, providing value as a destination for recreationists (boaters, birdwatchers, sportsmen, artists) as well as commercial endeavors (clamming, fishing, haying)

• 75% of commercially harvested fish spend at least one phase of their life cycle in the marsh

• Migratory shore birds use the area as an important stop-over

• The barrier beach is the first line of defense against storm surge and destructive wave energy

• The marsh platform vegetation and subtidal plant life provide an important carbon sink for greenhouse gas emissions and act as a buffer from storms and sea level rise

• The wetlands absorb and stabilize pollutants from our roads, lawns, rivers, and waste water treatment facilities

Great Marsh Resiliency Projects

• Eelgrass Restoration (S) • Invasive Green Crab Management (S) • Marsh Drainage Restoration • Creek Bank Erosion and Living Shorelines • Invasive Species Management (S) - Phragmites australis - Perennial Pepperweed • Barrier Beach Dune Restoration (S) • Marine Debris and Microplastic Assessment • Watershed Assessment (Barriers to Flow) (S) • Community Resiliency Planning (S)

• Outreach & Education (S) (S) Sandy Project

Great Marsh Eelgrass Restoration (S)

• Eelgrass protect coastlines from storm damage, stabilize sediments, improve water quality, and provide food and habitat to commercial and endangered species

• Eelgrass disappeared from Great Marsh in 1950s

• In 2013 transplanting efforts began using community volunteers and interns

• 1.5 acres have been successfully restored to Essex Bay

• The Partnership is continuing to expand outreach and restoration efforts in other regions of the Great Marsh

Great Marsh Green Crab Monitoring (S)

• Green crabs are an invasive species that have serious impacts on the natural resources of Great Marsh, particularly softshell clams, mussels, and eelgrass meadows

• Twenty-four permanent stations were established in 2014 in Plum Island and Essex Bay to monitor green crab abundance

• Over 275,000 pounds of crabs were trapped and removed from the system in 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017 in an effort to control the population

• The Partnership will investigate habitat parameters conducive to green crab activity and continue monitoring, with a goal of developing a management plan for controlling the invasive green crab throughout the Great Marsh.

Great Marsh Green Crab Culinary Marketing (S)

• The Partnership is developing new, high-end culinary commercial markets for invasive green crabs to: - help restore the ecological balance along coastal areas - generate a new source of revenue for commercial trappers and seafood wholesalers through market-driven incentives.

• Crabs they have an exceptional flavor as a stock or broth for use in seafood stews and many other dishes.

• Experimenting with producing soft-shell green crabs; like smaller versions of the soft-shell blue crabs of the Chesapeake Bay and the American south.

• We are creating a gorment potential for a fall seasonal product, a mix of crabmeat and roe from female crabs.

Great Marsh Drainage Projects

• Ditching to control mosquitos has resulted in two processes that reduce marsh resilience to Sea Level Rise (SLR): - Over draining of the marsh - Impounding water on the marsh

• Initial work has been completed on two techniques to help manage the hydrology of the marsh in ditched areas - Ditch infilling with native materials - Creation of drainage runnels and shallow surface drainage

• The Partnership will further identify and prioritize areas for infilling or runnels as well as investigate the feasibility of adding sediment to the marsh platform (thin-layer deposition) to prevent water from impounding and enable plants to thrive under conditions of Sea Level Rise. Also, priority sites for ditch plug removal are being evaluated and permitted.

Great Marsh Creek Bank Erosion

• The marsh bank is disappearing along many sections of Great Marsh

• Over fifteen feet per year have been lost in some areas of Essex Bay, Plum Island Sound, and the Merrimack River Basin

• 22 monitoring stations were established in 2014 to determine rates and causes of loss, and have been monitored pre and post winter storm months in 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017.

• The Partnership is expanding the network of monitoring stations with a goal of identifying priority sites for implementation of mitigation strategies (living shorelines – TLD, oyster/mussel reefs, natural and nature based buffering) to protect the marsh from future loss Great Marsh Phragmites Management (S)

• Phragmites australis is a highly invasive plant which is destroying habitat through colonization of the open, high marsh by crowding out native vegetation

• Over 600 individual invasive Phragmites stands (over 200 acres) have been mapped and treated on the marsh platform of the Great Marsh in Ipswich, Rowley, Newbury, Newburyport, and Salisbury (nearly 100% of all know open marsh/marsh platform stands)

• Maintenance level treatments are required to keep the Stand Density Phragmites managed until scientific recommendations Low Medium High (underway) aimed at altering the current hydrodynamic conditions that allowed the plant to grow, can be implemented

• Design, permitting and implementation of best management practices is needed to keep Phragmites from re-infesting

• Mapping and managing upland edge Phragmites stands will be required to further improve habitat conditions in the marsh December 1, 2017 – June 30, 2018 Great Marsh Pepperweed Management (S)

• Perennial Pepperweed is an invasive plant that is destroying native habitat as it expands

• 8,000 acres are infested with pepperweed or under imminent threat from it

• 99% of all mapped sites were treated at least once (over 2,000 sites treated in 2017)

• The Partnership will continue to be diligent in treatment activities for pepperweed to maintain a biological diverse and healthy marsh Pepperweed Sites

- 30,000 acres have been surveyed for pepperweed.

- 22,000 acres have been found clear of pepperweed. Great Marsh Hydrodynamic Modeling (S) Alternatives Simulated • Goal: To categorize the impact of the Plum Island Turnpike bridge tidal restriction and channel shoaling on salinities and flows into and out of Plum Island Sound • Alternative 1 - Existing conditions • Alternative 2 - Reasonable full-open • Increasing salinities in Plum Island Sound, both from the north and the south, will increase native vegetation and reduce invasive plants • Modified bridge opening

• Plum Bush Creek connection • Results: Practicable actions to increase salinity will not be substantial • Channel improvements enough to keep invasive vegetation from spreading. • Alternative 3 – Modified conditions • Elevated Plum Island Turnpike Plum Island Sediment Transport and Erosion Model (S) • Channel improvements • Optimal placement of dredge material for storm surge protection Great Marsh Dune Restoration Management (S)

• Coastal Dunes provide important wildlife habitat and protect the marsh against damaging coastal flooding and sea level rise

• Thousands of shoots of native dune species have been planted over six miles of the Great Marsh barrier beaches

• Some sections of beach have also been re-nourished to create dunes.

• The Partnership is continuing restoration and dune re-nourishment activities (Reservation Terrace, Newburyport) as well as to develop outreach and training programs to involve local stakeholders in the process

Great Marsh Estuarine Marine Debris/Microplastics (Proposed)

• Marine Debris introduces harmful microplastics into the Great Marsgh ecology. This plastic breaks down into smaller and smaller particles. It does not go away.

• Microplastics are harmful to humans and wildlife through physical hazards of ingesting plastic, unhealthy additives in plastic, and contamination from accumulation of plastic particles.

• The Partnership is embarking on research to determine the extent and impact of marine debris and microplastics (water and sediment sampling) in the Great Marsh while removing debris from the estuaries. Great Marsh Barriers to Flow (S)

• Inventory, assess, and prioritize man‐made structures collectively called barriers (dams, stream/river crossings, tidal crossings) that may impede flow, fluvial and coastal processes.

• Over 1,000 potential barriers were assessed based on both ecological impact and infrastructure risk.

•The screening tool for hydraulic capacity predicted that roughly one quarter of the crossings analyzed would be unable to pass flows associated with a 2 year storm.

• The project funded development of conceptual design plans for the replacement of 103 of the high priority road crossings to improve storm resilience and ecological connectivity. Great Marsh Community Coastal Resiliency Planning (S)

Salisbury, Newburyport, The Planning Process: Newbury Rowley, 1. Community Planning Task Forces Ipswich, 2. Identified target assets Essex 3. Assessed target vulnerabilities 4. Developed adaptation strategies 5. Categorized & prioritized strategies 6. Initiate implementation strategy

• The Partnership will continue to work with the communities on refining, funding, permitting, and implementing the recommendations in the community Coastal Resiliency Plan Great Marsh Resiliency Partnership Education and Outreach (S)

• Education and outreach promotes stewardship of the Great Marsh by local government, nonprofit organizations, property owners, and other stakeholders in the region

• Public outreach, volunteer opportunities, and stakeholder input have been a mainstay of the restoration efforts

• Additional community engagement will ensure restoration activities are supported and will continue in the Great Marsh

Great Marsh Resiliency Partnership (core team) • Massachusetts Bays National Estuary Program: Coastal Project Design and Implementation, Invasives; Coastal Coordinator, Peter Phippen • Boston University: Eelgrass Restoration, Marsh Erosion, and Green Crab Program; Coastal Ecologist, Dr. Alyssa Novak • University of New Hampshire: Marsh and Dune Vegetation, Coastal Botanist; Dr. Gregg Moore • Town of Newbury: Invasive Species, Policy, and Implementation; Chair, Board of Selectmen, Geoffrey Walker • National Wildlife Federation: Policy, Outreach and Community Engagement; Adaptation Director, • MassAudubon Society: Invasive Species and Education/Outreach; Coastal Educator, Liz Duff • Parker River National Wildlife Refuge: Project Development and Oversight, Marsh Drainage; Coastal Biologist, Nancy Pau • Green Crab R&D: Green Crab Culinary Marketing and Outreach; Science Writer, Roger Warner • Ipswich River Watershed Association : Watershed Activities; Riverine and Coastal Scientist, Wayne Castonguay • Team Partners: US Fish and Wildlife Service, NE Massachusetts Mosquito Control and Wetlands District, Communities of the Great Marsh, MA Department of Fish and Game, MA Coastal Zone Management, and many others

CIAP Grant $700,000 Partners (partial list) Partners $500,000+ Lafourche Parish Government Greater Lafourche Port Commission NOAA LDNR Shell Conoco-Phillips Gulf of Mexico Foundation Gulf of Mexico Program NRCS Plant Materials Center The Nature Conservancy Migratory Bird Action Plan Team Orleans Audubon Society Terrebonne Bird Club

Species Year Planted N Planted Approximate Time Since Planting 6 Months 1.5 Years 2.5 Years 3.5 Years 4.5 Years 5.5 Years Hackberry 2010 335 66 (0.197) 23 (0.069) 19 (0.057) 18 (0.054) 17 (0.051) 14 (0.042) Sand Oak 2010 192 3 (0.016) 3 (0.016) 2 (0.01) 2 (0.01) 1 (0.005) 1 (0.005) Matrimony Vine 2010 241 239 (0.992) 239 (0.992) 239 (0.992) 238 (0.987) 238 (0.987) 238 (0.987) Beautyberry 2011 150 1 (0.007) 1 (0.007) 1 (0.007) 1 (0.007) 1 (0.007) - Hackberry 2011 150 2 (0.013) 2 (0.013) 2 (0.013) 1 (0.007) 1 (0.007) - Live Oak 2011 180 7 (0.039) 7 (0.039) 7 (0.039) 6 (0.033) 6 (0.033) - Hackberry 2012 150 29 (0.193) 24 (0.16) 23 (0.153) 17 (0.113) - - Live Oak 2012 165 33 (0.200) 31 (0.188) 31 (0.188) 31 (0.188) - - Sand Oak 2012 165 17 (0.103) 17 (0.103) 15 (0.091) 12 (0.073) - - Hackberry 2013 165 98 (0.594) 84 (0.509) 43 (0.261) - - - Live Oak 2013 165 92 (0.558) 88 (0.533) 80 (0.485) - - - Sand Oak 2013 150 46 (0.307) 44 (0.293) 24 (0.16) - - - Dogwood 2014 90 3 (0.033) 2 (0.022) - - - - Live Oak 2014 99 71 (0.717) 57 (0.576) - - - - Yaupon 2014 99 14 (0.141) 8 (0.081) - - - - Soil Parameter Exponential Regression Equation Estimated 50% Survival Level EC (dS/m) Surv = 137.31e-0.422(EC) 13.3 Salts (ppm) Surv = 137.32e-0.0007(Salts) 8,022.1 Na (mg/kg) Surv = 97.117e-0.002(Na) 2634.5 SAR Surv = 2903.7e-0.388(SAR) 22.3 CEC (meq/100g) Surv = 82.616e-0.329(CEC) 15.5

2017 Over 60 plantings Over 900 volunteers Over 90,000 plants