DOCSLIB.ORG

Florida's Wetlands: an Update on Status and Trends, 1985 to 1996

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Florida's Wetlands: an Update on Status and Trends, 1985 to 1996 Florida's Wetlands An Update on Status and Trends, 1985 to 1996 Thomas E . Dahl U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Branch of Habitat Assessment Washington, D.C . Atlanta, GA; Dr. Ken Burnham Acknowledgments Cooperative Research Unit, Many people within the U.S. Colorado State University, Ft. Fish and Wildlife Service have Collins, CO; Mr. John Hefner, provided technical, administrative Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and or editorial support for this project. Wildlife Service, Atlanta, GA; Dr. The author would like to thank the Wiley Kitchens, Florida Cooperative following individuals: Dr. Mamie Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Parker, Ms. Kathleen Short and University of Florida, Gainesville, Mr. William Knapp, Mr. Everett FL.; Mr. Andreas Mager, Jr., Wilson, Fisheries and Habitat Assistant Regional Administrator, Conservation ; Dr. Benjamin Tuggle, Habitat Conservation Division, Division of Resource and Habitat NOAA-National Marine Fisheries Conservation ; Mr. John Cooper, of Service, St. Petersburg, FL; and the Branch of Habitat Assessment. Mr. Steve Rockwood Waterfowl Numerous personnel from the Biologist, Florida Fish and Wildlife National Wetlands Inventory Center Conservation Commission, in St. Petersburg, FL. helped with Fellsmere, FL. data preparation, collection and field reconnaissance. All photographs are by the author unless otherwise noted. Publication Technical review of the manuscript layout and final illustration of the was provided by the following report were done by Ms. Elizabeth experts: Mr. William Ainslie, Ciganovich, and photographs were Chief, Wetlands Section, U.S. revised by Ms. Marta Anderson and Environmental Protection Agency, Ms. Erinn Dornaus, U.S. Geological Survey, Cartography and Publishing The author and U.S. Fish Program, Madison, WI. and Wildlife Service wish to acknowledge Richard Young*, This report should be cited as Cartographer, who was follows: responsible for digital data verification and who produced T. E . Dahl. 2005. Florida's wetlands : many of the data tables and an update on status and trends 1985 Geographic Information System to 1996. U.S. Department of the Coverphotograph: graphics in this report. Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Forested wetland, Washington, D .C. 80 pp. Collier County, *Current address U.S. Fish and Wildlife Florida. Service, Portland, OR. Conversion Table U.S. Customary to Metric inches (in.) x 25.40 = millimeters (mm) inches (in.) x 2.54 = centimeters (cm) feet (ft) x 0.3048 = meters (m) miles (mi) x 1.609 = kilometers (km) nautical miles (nmi) x 1.852 = kilometers (km) square feet (ft2) x 0.0929 = square meters (m') square miles (mil) x 2.590 = square kilometers (km') acres (A) x 0.4047 = hectares (ha) gallons (gal) x 3.785 = liters (L) cubic feet (ft') x 0.02831 = cubic meters (m3) acre-feet (A-ft) x 1233 .5 = cubic meters (mi) ounces (oz) x 28.3495 = grams (g) pounds (lb) x 0.4536 = kilograms (kg) short tons (tons) x 0.9072 = metric tons (t) British Thermal Units (BTU) x 0.2520 = kilocalories (kcal) Fahrenheit degrees (F) 0.556 (F - 32) = Celsius degrees (C) Metric to U.S. Customary millimeters (mm) x 0.03937 = inches (in.) centimeters (cm) x 0.3937 = feet (ft) meters (m) x 3.281 = feet (ft) kilometers (km) x 0.6214 = miles (mi) square meters (m2) x 10.764 = square feet (W) square kilometers (km2) x 0.3861 = square miles (miz) hectares (ha) x 2.471 = acres (A) liters (L) x 0.2642 = gallons (gal) cubicmeters (m3) x 35.31 = cubic feet (ft=;' cubicmeters (ms) x 0.0008110 = acre-feet (A-ft) milligrams (mg) x 0.00003527 = ounces (oz) grams (g) x 0.03527 = ounces (oz) kilograms (kg) x 2.2046 = ounces (oz) metric tons (t) x 2204.62 = pounds (lb) metric tons (t) x 1.102 = short tons (tons) kilocalories (kcal) x 3.968 = British Thermal Units (BTU) Celsius degrees (C) --->. 1.8 (C) + 32) = Fahrenheit degrees (F) Contents Executive Summary..... ... ... ....... .... ... .... ... .... ... .. ... .... ... .... ... .... ....... ... ... ... ... .... ...... .... .... ... .... ... ....... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... .7 Introduction . ... ... ... .... ....... ... ....... .... ... ... ... .... .... ... ... ... ... .... ... .... ....... .... ... .... ... .... .... .. ... .... ... .... ... .... ....... ... ... ... .... .... ..10 Study Area and Procedures ... ... .... ... ... .. .... .... ... .... ... ........... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... ....... ... .... ....... .... ... .... ... .... ..12 Results : Status, Distribution and Trends.. .... ... .... ... .... ....... .... ... .... ... .... .... ... ... ... ... .... ... .... ....... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... .... ..33 Discussion .. ... .... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... ... .... .... ... ... ... .......... .... ....... .... ... ... ... .... .... ... .... ... ....... ... ... ....... .... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... .46 Summary ... ... ... ....... .... ... ... ... ... ... .. .... .... ... .... ... .... ....... ... ... ... .... .... ... ... .... .... ... .... ... .... ....... ... ... ... .... ... .... ... .... .... ... .... 67 Literature Cited ..... .... ... ... ... ... ... .. ... ... ... .... ... .... ....... ... ... ... ... .... ... .. ... .... ....... ... .... ....... .... ... ... .... ... ... .. .... .... ... .... 69 Appendix A: Definitions of Habitat Categories Used in the Florida Status and Trends Study. .. ... .... ... .... 74 Appendix B : Changes in Florida's wetland classifications, 1985 and 1996 . ... ... ...... .... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... ... ....... 78 List of Figures Figure 1. General locator map of Florida names and places referenced in the text . ... ....... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. ..12 Figure 2. Map of the physiographic sampling strata used in this study ... .... ... .... ... ... ... ...... .... ... .... ... .... ... ... ..13 Figure 3. Exposed tidal flats of an intertidal estuarine wetland in Wakulla County, Florida, 1993 .... .... ... ..14 Fig-tire 4. Florida's barrier islands, 1996 .. .... ... .... ...... ... ... ... ... .... ... .. ... ... ....... ... .... ....... ... ... ... .... ... ... .. ... .... ... ..15 Figure 5. High altitude, color infrared photograph of a portion of Shark Valley, Florida Everglades, 1996 . .. ... .... ... .. ... .... ... .... ... ... ....... .... ... ... ... .... ... .. ... ... .... ... ... .... ....... .... ... ... .... ... ... .. ... .... ... ..16 Figure 6. Mangrove islands (red) as shown on color infrared photography of Florida Bay, 1996 . .. ... .... ... ..17 Figure 7. Florida's major water bodies, 1996 . ... ...... .... ... ... ... ... .... ... .... ... .... ... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... .... .... ... ... ... .... .18 Figure 8. Freshwater springs near Ocala, Florida, 1993 . ... .. ... .... ... .... ... .... ...... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... .... .... ... ... ... .... .19 Figure 9. Florida counties, 1996 ... ... .... ... .... ....... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. ... .... ... .... ... ... ...... ... ... ... ... ... .. ... .... .... ... ... ... .... .19 Figure 10. Sample plot distribution within Florida, 1996 . ... .. ... .... ... .... ... ... ....... ... ... ... ... ... .... .. .... .... ... ... ... .... .22 Figure 11 . Sample of 1996 color infrared aerial photography used to identify and classify wetlands.. ... .... 23 Figure 12. Original wetland area in Florida and estimated remaining portion .... ... .... ... ... ... .. ... ... ... .... ... ... 33 Figure 13. Average annual net wetland loss in Florida (Sources: Hefner 1986, Frayer and Hefner 1991, this study) ... ... .... ... ... .... ....... .... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... .... ... .... ... ... ....... .... ... ... ... ... ... .. ... .... ... .... ... .... ....... .... 34 Figure 14. Net loss of wetlands to uplands, 1985 to 1996.. .... ... .... ... .... ... .... ... ... ... .... ... .... ... .... .... ... ... ... .... ....... ... .34 Figure 15. Distribution of estuarine emergent wetland in Florida, 1996 ... ....... .... ... ... ... .... .... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... 37 Figure 16. Distribution of estuarine shrub wetland in Florida, 1996... ... .... ....... .... ... ... ... .... ... .. ... .... ... .... ... ... 38 Figure 17. Proximity of urban areas to Florida's wetlands, 1996 .. ... ... ... .... ... ... ... ...... .... ... ... ... .... .... .. .... ... .... 39 Figure 18. Long term trends of intertidal wetland types in Florida, 1950s to 1996 .. ... ... ... ... ... ... .. ... ... .... 41 Figure 19. Long term trends of freshwater wetland types in Florida, 1950s to 1996 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... .... ... .. 45 Figure 20 . Net losses and gains of wetlands to various land use types, 1985 to 1996 ... ... ... ... ... .... ... .... .... ... ..45 Figure 21 . Example of intertidal wetlands along Florida's coastline in close proximity to development ... .... ... .... ....... ... ... ... .... ... ... .. ... .... ... .... ... ... ...... .... ... ... ... .... ... .. ... ... ... .... ... ... ....... .... ... ... ... .... .... ... ..46 Figure 22. Florida's sand beaches offer recreational, commercial and aesthetic benefits to people .. ... .. .. 46 Figure 23. Loss and gain of Florida's estuarine nonvegetated wetlands, 1985 to 1996... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... .. ..48 Figure 24. Estuarine salt marsh of north Florida dominated by black needlerush (Juncus roemerianus), 1994 . ...... ... ... ... ... .... ... .. ... ... .... ... ... ... ....... .... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... .... ... .... ... ... ...... .... ... ... ... ...49 Figure 25. Mangroves and surrounding waters of Florida Bay, 1991 ... ... .... ... .. ... .... ... .... ... ... ....... .... ... .... ... ... 50 Figure 26. Mangroves
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Shrub Swamp State Rank: S5 - Secure
    Shrub Swamp State Rank: S5 - Secure cover of tall shrubs with Shrub Swamp Communities are a well decomposed organic common and variable type of wetlands soils. If highbush occurring on seasonally or temporarily blueberries are dominant flooded soils; They are often found in the transition zone between emergent the community is likely to marshes and swamp forests; be a Highbush Blueberry Thicket, often occurring on stunted trees. The herbaceous layer of peat. Acidic Shrub Fens are shrub swamps is often sparse and species- peatlands, dominated by poor. A mixture of species might typically low growing shrubs, along include cinnamon, sensitive, royal, or with sphagnum moss and marsh fern, common arrowhead, skunk herbaceous species of Shrub Swamp along shoreline. Photo: Patricia cabbage, sedges, bluejoint grass, bur-reed, varying abundance. Deep Serrentino, Consulting Wildlife Ecologist. swamp candles, clearweed, and Emergent Marshes and Description: Wetland shrubs dominate turtlehead. Invasive species include reed Shallow Emergent Marshes Cottontail, have easy access to the shrubs Shrub Swamps. Shrub height may be from canary grass, glossy alder-buckthorn, are graminoid dominated wetlands with and protection in the dense thickets. The <1m to 5 meters, of uniform height or common buckthorn, and purple <25% cover of tall shrubs. Acidic larvae of many rare and common moth mixed. Shrub density can be variable, loosestrife. Pondshore/Lakeshore Communities are species feed on a variety of shrubs and from dense (>75% cover) to fairly open broadly defined, variable shorelines associated herbaceous plants in shrub (25-75% cover) with graminoid, around open water. Shorelines often swamps throughout Massachusetts. herbaceous, or open water areas between merge into swamps or marshes.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief Introduction to the Shantou Intertidal Wetland, Southern China
    AA BriefBrief IntroductionIntroduction toto thethe ShantouShantou IntertidalIntertidal Wetland,Wetland, SouthernSouthern ChinaChina Y.Y. W.W. ZhouaZhoua*.*. G.G. Z.Z. ChenChen SchoolSchool ofof EnvironmentalEnvironmental ScienceScience andand Engineering,Engineering, SunSun YatYat--sensen University,University, Guangzhou,Guangzhou, ChinaChina PR;PR; ** EE--mail:mail: [email protected]@163.com 11 IntroductionIntroduction • Shantou City is one of the most developed cities in southeast coastal area of China. • It had a high population of 4,846,400 . The population density was 2,348 per km2, GDP was 1,700 US $,in 2003. • The current use of the Shantou Intertidal Wetland includes: • briny and limnetic aquaculture, • reclamation for farmland and municipal estate, • transition to the salt field or tourism park, • natural wetland as the habitat of resident and migratory wildlife. 2.2. CharacteristicsCharacteristics ofof ShantouShantou IntertidalIntertidal WetlandWetland 2.1 Environmental characteristics The total area of the Shantou Intertidal Wetland is 1,435.29 ha . The demonstration site’s area is 3,475.2 ha , including 4 parts: Fig. 1 Demonstrated content of sub demonstration sites No Demon site Demonstrated Content Area/ha 1 Hexi biodiversity of water weed 512.4 2 Sanyuwei aquiculture and the biological treatment of waste water 1639.5 3 Suaiwang secondary mangrove for birds habitat 388.7 4 Waisha Eco-tourism 934.6 2.22.2 ClimateClimate • The climate is warm all year round with high temperatures and abundant light, and clearly differentiated dry and wet seasons. • Mean annual duration of sunshine: 954.2 hrs. • Historical average air temperature : 23.1 °C. • Average high temperature :38.8 °C • Average low temperature : 15.8 °C.
    [Show full text]
  • South Acton Swamps Beginning with Focus Areas of Statewide Ecological Significance Habitat South Acton Swamps
    Focus Areas of Statewide Ecological Significance: South Acton Swamps Beginning with Focus Areas of Statewide Ecological Significance Habitat South Acton Swamps Biophysical Region • Sebago-Ossipee Hills and Plain WHY IS THIS AREA SIGNIFICANT? The series of broad basins supporting forested wetlands, Rare Animals peatlands, marshes and open water systems surrounded Blanding’s Turtles by forested hillsides in the South Acton Swamps Focus Wood Turtle Area sustain a wide diversity of plant and animal habitats Ribbon Snake including ecosystems and natural communities of Rare Plants statewide significance, rare plant and rare animal species. Small whorled-pogonia Spotted Wintergreen OPPORTUNITIES FOR CONSERVATION Swamp Saxifrage Work with willing landowners to permanently protect » Rare and Exemplary Natural Communities the significant features in the Focus Area. Grassy Shrub Marsh » Maintain enhanced riparian buffers. Streamshore Ecosystem » Encourage best management practices for forestry Unpatterned Fen Ecosystem activities near wetlands, water bodies and significant features. Significant Wildlife Habitats Maintain the natural hydrology by avoiding drainage Inland Wading Bird and Waterfowl Habitat » Significant Vernal Pool or impoundment of the wetlands, streams or adjacent Deer Wintering Area water bodies. Refer to the Beginning with Habitat Online Toolbox for more conservation opportunities: www.beginningwith- habitat.org/toolbox/about_toolbox.html Beginning with Habitat Online Toolbox: www. beginningwithhabitat.org/toolbox/about_toolbox.html. Photo credits, top to bottom: MNAP, MDIFW, MNAP, MNAP, Jonathan Mays 1 Focus Areas of Statewide Ecological Significance: South Acton Swamps South Acton Swamps Black Pond Fen, Maine Natural Areas Program FOCUS AREA OVERVIEW RARE AND EXEMPLARY NATURAL COMMUNITIES The South Acton Swamps Focus Area covers approximately 3,600 acres and is a series of moderately broad basins sur- Black Pond Fen, located in the southern portions of the Focus rounded by gentle to steep forested hillsides.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20Th Century
    u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service Co l\Ietland Trends In the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century November 2004 A National Wetlands Inventory Cooperative Interagency Report Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century Ralph W. Tiner1, Irene J. Huber2, Todd Nuerminger2, and Aimée L. Mandeville3 1U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory Program Northeast Region 300 Westgate Center Drive Hadley, MA 01035 2Natural Resources Assessment Group Department of Plant and Soil Sciences University of Massachusetts Stockbridge Hall Amherst, MA 01003 3Department of Natural Resources Science Environmental Data Center University of Rhode Island 1 Greenhouse Road, Room 105 Kingston, RI 02881 November 2004 National Wetlands Inventory Cooperative Interagency Report between U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, University of Massachusetts-Amherst, University of Rhode Island, and Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management This report should be cited as: Tiner, R.W., I.J. Huber, T. Nuerminger, and A.L. Mandeville. 2004. Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Region, Hadley, MA. In cooperation with the University of Massachusetts-Amherst and the University of Rhode Island. National Wetlands Inventory Cooperative Interagency Report. 37 pp. plus appendices. Table of Contents Page Introduction 1 Study Area 1 Methods 5 Data Compilation 5 Geospatial Database Construction and GIS Analysis 8 Results 9 Baywide 1996 Status 9 Coastal Wetlands and Waters 9 500-foot Buffer Zone 9 Baywide Trends 1951/2 to 1996 15 Coastal Wetland Trends 15 500-foot Buffer Zone Around Coastal Wetlands 15 Trends for Pilot Study Areas 25 Conclusions 35 Acknowledgments 36 References 37 Appendices A.
    [Show full text]
  • Upside-Down'' Estuaries of the Florida Everglades
    Limnol. Oceanogr., 51(1, part 2), 2006, 602±616 q 2006, by the American Society of Limnology and Oceanography, Inc. Relating precipitation and water management to nutrient concentrations in the oligotrophic ``upside-down'' estuaries of the Florida Everglades Daniel L. Childers1 Department of Biological Sciences and SERC, Florida International University, Miami, Florida 33199 Joseph N. Boyer Southeast Environmental Research Center, Florida International University, Miami, Florida 33199 Stephen E. Davis Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843 Christopher J. Madden and David T. Rudnick Coastal Ecosystems Division, South Florida Water Management District, 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 Fred H. Sklar Everglades Division, South Florida Water Management District, 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 Abstract We present 8 yr of long-term water quality, climatological, and water management data for 17 locations in Everglades National Park, Florida. Total phosphorus (P) concentration data from freshwater sites (typically ,0.25 mmol L21,or8mgL21) indicate the oligotrophic, P-limited nature of this large freshwater±estuarine landscape. Total P concentrations at estuarine sites near the Gulf of Mexico (average ø0.5 m mol L21) demonstrate the marine source for this limiting nutrient. This ``upside down'' phenomenon, with the limiting nutrient supplied by the ocean and not the land, is a de®ning characteristic of the Everglade landscape. We present a conceptual model of how the seasonality of precipitation and the management of canal water inputs control the marine P supply, and we hypothesize that seasonal variability in water residence time controls water quality through internal biogeochemical processing.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecosystem Element Conceptual Model Tidal Marsh
    Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Regional Ecosystem Restoration Implementation Plan Ecosystem Element Conceptual Model Tidal Marsh Prepared by: Ronald T. Kneib, University of Georgia Marine Institute [email protected] and • Charles A. Simenstad, School of Aquatic & Fisheries Sciences, University of Washington • Matt L. Nobriga, CALFED Science Program • Drew M. Talley, San Francisco Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, San Francisco State University, Romberg Tiburon Center Date of Model: October 2008 Status of Peer Review: Completed peer review on October 2008. Model content and format are suitable and model is ready for use in identifying and evaluating restoration actions. Suggested Citation: Kneib R, Simenstad C, Nobriga M, Talley D. 2008. Tidal marsh conceptual model. Sacramento (CA): Delta Regional Ecosystem Restoration Implementation Plan. For further inquiries on the DRERIP conceptual models, please contact Brad Burkholder at [email protected] or Steve Detwiler at [email protected]. PREFACE This Conceptual Model is part of a suite of conceptual models which collectively articulate the current scientific understanding of important aspects of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta ecosystem. The conceptual models are designed to aid in the identification and evaluation of ecosystem restoration actions in the Delta. These models are designed to structure scientific information such that it can be used to inform sound public policy. The Delta Conceptual Models include both ecosystem element models (including process, habitat, and stressor models) and species life history models. The models were prepared by teams of experts using common guidance documents developed to promote consistency in the format and terminology of the models http://www.delta.dfg.ca.gov/erpdeltaplan/science_process.asp .
    [Show full text]
  • Mangroves and Saltmarshes of Moreton Bay
    https://moretonbayfoundation.org/ 1 Moreton Bay Quandamooka & Catchment: Past, present, and future Chapter 5 Habitats, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Function Mangroves and saltmarshes of Moreton Bay Abstract The mangroves and saltmarshes of Moreton Bay comprising 18,400 ha are important habitats for biodiversity and providing ecosystem services. Government policy and legislation largely reflects their importance with protection provided through a range of federal and state laws, including the listing of saltmarsh communities in 2013 under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). Local communities also conserve and manage mangroves and saltmarshes. Recent scientific research on these ecosystems in Moreton Bay has described food webs, habitat use by fauna, carbon sequestration and effects of climate change. The area of saltmarsh has declined by 64% since 1955 due to mangrove encroachment into saltmarsh habitats and past conversion to rural and urban land uses. Mangrove encroachment into saltmarsh habitats, which has been reported in other locations in Australia and across the world, has increased the area of mangrove habitat by 6.4% over the same period. This is consistent with predictions of habitat changes under climate change, and demonstrates the need for management strategies that ensure these ecosystems are maintained. Keywords: coastal wetlands, intertidal, wetland management, EPBC Act, wetland change, drivers of wetland change, South East Queensland, soil carbon stocks Introduction Mangroves and saltmarshes, which are components of the estuarine wetlands of Moreton Bay, are dominated by salt-tolerant vegetation that occurs from approximately mean sea level to the highest astronomical tidal plane. They occur within the river systems and tidal creeks of Moreton Bay as well as on the comparatively open coasts of the Bay where they fringe both islands and the mainland.
    [Show full text]
  • Laurentian-Acadian Wet Meadow-Shrub Swamp
    Laurentian-Acadian Wet Meadow-Shrub Swamp Macrogroup: Wet Meadow / Shrub Marsh yourStateNatural Heritage Ecologist for more information about this habitat. This is modeledmap a distributiononbased current and is data nota substitute for field inventory. based Contact © Maine Natural Areas Program Description: A shrub-dominated swamp or wet meadow on mineral soils characteristic of the glaciated Northeast and scattered areas southward. Examples often occur in association with lakes and ponds or streams, and can be small and solitary pockets or, more often, part of a larger wetland complex. The habitat can have a patchwork of shrub and herb dominance. Typical species include willow, red-osier dogwood, alder, buttonbush, meadowsweet, bluejoint grass, tall sedges, and rushes. Trees are generally absent or thinly scattered. State Distribution: CT, DE, MA, MD, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, RI, VA, VT, WV Total Habitat Acreage: 990,077 Ecological Setting and Natural Processes: Percent Conserved: 25.5% Shrub swamps and wet meadows are associated with lakes State State GAP 1&2 GAP 3 Unsecured and ponds and along headwater and larger streams where State Habitat % Acreage (acres) (acres) (acres) the water level does not fluctuate greatly. They are ME 30% 297,075 11,928 39,478 245,668 commonly flooded for part of the growing season but NY 30% 293,979 59,329 38,332 196,318 generally do not have standing water throughout the season. This is a dynamic system that may return to marsh in beaver- MA 8% 76,718 4,358 17,980 54,380 impounded areas or succeed to wooded swamp with NJ 7% 68,351 16,148 9,221 42,983 sediment accumulation or water subsidence.
    [Show full text]
  • Full Document (Pdf 2154
    White Paper Research Project T1803, Task 35 Overwater Whitepaper OVERWATER STRUCTURES: MARINE ISSUES by Barbara Nightingale Charles A. Simenstad Research Assistant Senior Fisheries Biologist School of Marine Affairs School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC) University of Washington, Box 354802 University District Building 1107 NE 45th Street, Suite 535 Seattle, Washington 98105-4631 Washington State Department of Transportation Technical Monitor Patricia Lynch Regulatory and Compliance Program Manager, Environmental Affairs Prepared for Washington State Transportation Commission Department of Transportation and in cooperation with U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration May 2001 WHITE PAPER Overwater Structures: Marine Issues Submitted to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Washington Department of Ecology Washington Department of Transportation Prepared by Barbara Nightingale and Charles Simenstad University of Washington Wetland Ecosystem Team School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences May 9, 2001 Note: Some pages in this document have been purposefully skipped or blank pages inserted so that this document will copy correctly when duplexed. TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGE 1. REPORT NO. 2. GOVERNMENT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NO. WA-RD 508.1 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. REPORT DATE Overwater Structures: Marine Issues May 2001 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE 7. AUTHOR(S) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO. Barbara Nightingale, Charles Simenstad 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. WORK UNIT NO. Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC) University of Washington, Box 354802 11. CONTRACT OR GRANT NO. University District Building; 1107 NE 45th Street, Suite 535 Agreement T1803, Task 35 Seattle, Washington 98105-4631 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Swamps Include a Broad Range
    PART IV: Wetland Management SWAMPS wamps include a broad range port more woody vegetation. of wetlands that have stand- Occasional flooding or several Sing or slowly moving water years of wet weather can slow this and are dominated by trees or process, and several dry years can shrubs. Swamps differ from speed it up. marshes in that swamps do not contain large amounts of cattails, Swamps provide habitat for sedges, bulrushes, and other non- mink, muskrats, beaver, otter, deer, woody aquatic plants. However, black bear, squirrels, hares, barred these plants may appear around owls, various species of woodpeck- swamp edges or in openings. ers, wood ducks, nuthatches, sev- mink Michigan swamps include conifer eral kinds of warblers, black- swamps, hardwood swamps, mixed capped chickadees, snakes, turtles, prise much of the overall loss-- conifer-hardwood swamps, and frogs, toads, butterflies, dragon- about two-thirds of the original 5.5 shrub swamps. Swamps and low- flies, and many other insects. million acres of conifer swamps land forests are very similar and Uncommon animals such as red- have either been drained or con- are often one in the same. shouldered hawks, cerulean and verted by logging activity to low- However, swamps are often wetter prothonatory warblers, Indiana land hardwood, farmland, marshes for a longer period throughout the bats, smallmouth salamanders, and or shrub swamps. year and have deeper standing Blanchard's cricket frog, all rely on water than lowland forests. These swamps for survival. Types of Swamps lowland forests may be seasonal Northern white cedar and black wetlands. About one-third to one-half of spruce dominate most conifer Michigan's wetland acreage has swamps in northern Michigan, Like most wetlands, swamps been lost since 1800.
    [Show full text]
  • Delaware Estuary & Basin PDE Report No. 12-01
    Techncial Report - Delaware Estuary & Basin 119 PDE Report No. 12-01 5 – Subtidal Aquatic Habitats Introduction While surveys of the benthos have occurred in the Delaware Bay and River since the 1950’s (Table 5.2) the recent Delaware Estuary Benthic Inventory (DEBI) is the most comprehensive and intensive ever conducted. Due to the extent of the data produced in the DEBI project, it is the focus, though not exclusively, of this indicator. The DEBI project was lead by The Partnership for the Delaware Estuary, one of twenty-eight National Estuary Programs. In 2005, The Partnership for the Delaware Estuary recognized a fundamental need for a benthic ecosystem assessment that would inventory the physical and biological conditions of the bottom of the open water tidal system of the Delaware River and Bay. This priority need was articulated in early 2005 when the Partnership convened a science and management conference that brought together more than 250 scientists, managers and science-interested people to summarize the current state of science and to identify and prioritize science and management needs for the Estuary. Consensus views from the conference were summarized in the “White Paper on the Status and Needs of Science in the Delaware Estuary” (Kreeger, et al 2006) that called for a better understanding of benthic conditions. Soon after the white paper, The Partnership and its collaborators around the estuary designed The Delaware Estuary Benthic Inventory (DEBI) program to fill the vital data gap in our understanding of the estuary’s ecosystem by characterizing the biological communities on the bottom. By adding a more spatially comprehensive biological layer to existing maps of physical bottom conditions and historical surveys of benthic communities, findings from DEBI are expected to aid scientists and coastal managers interested in trophic relationships, fisheries, pollutant distributions, water quality, and other topics.
    [Show full text]
  • Carbon Balance in Salt Marsh and Mangrove Ecosystems: a Global Synthesis
    Journal of Marine Science and Engineering Review Carbon Balance in Salt Marsh and Mangrove Ecosystems: A Global Synthesis Daniel M. Alongi Tropical Coastal & Mangrove Consultants, 52 Shearwater Drive, Pakenham, VIC 3810, Australia; [email protected]; Tel.: +61-4744-8687 Received: 5 September 2020; Accepted: 27 September 2020; Published: 30 September 2020 Abstract: Mangroves and salt marshes are among the most productive ecosystems in the global coastal 1 1 ocean. Mangroves store more carbon (739 Mg CORG ha− ) than salt marshes (334 Mg CORG ha− ), but the latter sequester proportionally more (24%) net primary production (NPP) than mangroves (12%). Mangroves exhibit greater rates of gross primary production (GPP), aboveground net primary production (AGNPP) and plant respiration (RC), with higher PGPP/RC ratios, but salt marshes exhibit greater rates of below-ground NPP (BGNPP). Mangroves have greater rates of subsurface DIC production and, unlike salt marshes, exhibit active microbial decomposition to a soil depth of 1 m. Salt marshes release more CH4 from soil and creek waters and export more dissolved CH4, but mangroves release more CO2 from tidal waters and export greater amounts of particulate organic carbon (POC), dissolved organic carbon (DOC) and dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC), to adjacent waters. Both ecosystems contribute only a small proportion of GPP, RE (ecosystem respiration) and NEP (net ecosystem production) to the global coastal ocean due to their small global area, but contribute 72% of air–sea CO2 exchange of the world’s wetlands and estuaries and contribute 34% of DIC export and 17% of DOC + POC export to the world’s coastal ocean.
    [Show full text]