DOCSLIB.ORG

Delaware Bay and Coastal Watersheds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Delaware Bay and Coastal Watersheds Coastal Resilience Assessment of the Delaware Bay and Coastal Watersheds Suggested Citation: Crist, P.J., R. White, M. Chesnutt, C. Scott, P. Cutter, E. Linden, and G. Dobson. Coastal Resilience Assessment of the Delaware Bay and Coastal Watersheds. 2019. National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. IMPORTANT INFORMATION/DISCLAIMER: This report represents a Regional Coastal Resilience Assessment that can be used to identify places on the landscape for resilience-building efforts and conservation actions through understanding coastal flood threats, the exposure of populations and infrastructure have to those threats, and the presence of suitable fish and wildlife habitat. As with all remotely sensed or publicly available data, all features should be verified with a site visit, as the locations of suitable landscapes or areas containing flood hazards and community assets are approximate. The data, maps, and analysis provided should be used only as a screening-level resource to support management decisions. This report should be used strictly as a planning reference tool and not for permitting or other legal purposes. The scientific results and conclusions, as well as any views or opinions expressed herein, are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government, or the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s partners. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Government or the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation or its funding sources. NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION DISCLAIMER: The scientific results and conclusions, as well as any views or opinions expressed herein, are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of NOAA or the Department of Commerce. U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DISCLAIMER: NFWF’s assessment methodology focuses on identifying and ranking Resilience Hubs, or undeveloped areas of open space. Actions recommended in these areas seek to improve fish and wildlife habitats through implementation of restoration and conservation projects or installation of natural or nature-based solutions, while at the same time, potentially supporting human community resilience. The assessment may be helpful during planning studies when considering the resilience of ocean and coastal ecosystems. This report is not designed to inform the siting of gray or hardened infrastructure projects. The views, opinions and findings contained in this report are those of the authors(s) and should not be construed as an official Department of the Army position, policy or decision, unless so designated by other official documentation. Cover Image: Cape May Point State Park, New Jersey Table of Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... i Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... ii Delaware Bay and Coastal Watersheds ............................................................................................5 Methods Overview ..........................................................................................................................8 Overall Approach ................................................................................................................................... 8 Stakeholder Participation ...................................................................................................................... 9 Components of the Assessment ............................................................................................................ 9 Resilience Projects ............................................................................................................................... 21 Results .......................................................................................................................................... 23 Flooding Threats .................................................................................................................................. 23 Human Community Assets ................................................................................................................... 25 Fish and Wildlife Value Indices ............................................................................................................ 27 Resilience Hubs .................................................................................................................................... 30 Fish and Wildlife Elements ................................................................................................................... 41 Resilience Projects Portfolio ................................................................................................................ 43 Case Studies ......................................................................................................................................... 47 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................... 69 Key Findings ......................................................................................................................................... 69 Summary of Limitations ....................................................................................................................... 70 Putting this Assessment to Work ................................................................................................... 72 References .................................................................................................................................... 73 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... 75 Appendices ................................................................................................................................... 79 Appendix 1. Watershed Committee and Stakeholder Engagement Mechanisms and Process .......... 79 Appendix 2. Condition and Vulnerability Technical Approach and Modeling Methods ..................... 82 Appendix 3. Structure, Parameters, and Assumptions for Condition and Vulnerability Models ........ 92 Appendix 4. Fish and Wildlife Vulnerability Index ............................................................................. 125 Appendix 5. Fish and Wildlife Element Selection and Inventory of Elements ................................... 131 Appendix 6. Resilience Project Information ...................................................................................... 139 Appendix 7. Summary of Additional Studies and Plans ..................................................................... 153 Glossary and Key to Acronyms and Abbreviations Used in this Report .......................................... 168 Abstract The Delaware Bay and Coastal Watersheds Coastal Resilience Assessment focuses on identifying areas of open space where the implementation of restoration or conservation actions could build human community resilience and fish and wildlife habitat in the face of increasing storms and flooding impacts. The study is important to the coastal areas of Delaware and southern New Jersey since both areas have large expanses of low-lying areas adjacent to coastal rivers, the Delaware Bay, and the Atlantic Ocean. In recent years, the area has experienced extensive damage to human assets from episodic and chronic flooding events. Human assets are also damaged due to land loss as a result of exposure to high wave energy and high levels of erosion around the Maurice River and other river systems in the area. This assessment combines human community assets, threats, stressors, and fish and wildlife habitat spatial data in a unique decision support tool to identify Resilience Hubs, which are defined as large area of contiguous land, that could help protect human communities from storm impacts while also providing important habitat to fish and wildlife if appropriate conservation or restoration actions are taken to preserve them in their current state. The Hubs were scored based on a Community Vulnerability Index that represents the location of human assets and their exposure to flooding events combined with Fish and Wildlife Richness Index that represents the number of fish and wildlife habitats in a given area. Local stakeholders and experts were critical to the assessment process by working with the project team to identify priority fish and wildlife species in the watershed and provide data sets and project ideas that have potential to build human community resilience and fish and wildlife habitat within the Delaware Bay and Coastal Watersheds. As part of the assessment process, 30 resilience-related project ideas were submitted through the stakeholder engagement process, of which two are described in detailed case studies in this report. In addition, a third case study features the mouth of the Maurice River, which represents four of the projects submitted. The case studies illustrate how proposed actions could benefit fish and wildlife habitat and human communities that face coastal resilience challenges such as storm surge during extreme weather events. The products of the assessment process include this report, the Coastal Resilience Evaluation and Siting Tool (CREST) interactive online map viewer, and a Geographic
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THE CLIMATOLOGY of the DELAWARE BAY/SEA BREEZE By
    THE CLIMATOLOGY OF THE DELAWARE BAY/SEA BREEZE by Christopher P. Hughes A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the University of Delaware in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Marine Studies Summer 2011 Copyright 2011 Christopher P. Hughes All Rights Reserved THE CLIMATOLOGY OF THE DELAWARE BAY/SEA BREEZE by Christopher P. Hughes Approved: _____________________________________________________ Dana E. Veron, Ph.D. Professor in charge of thesis on behalf of the Advisory Committee Approved: _____________________________________________________ Charles E. Epifanio, Ph.D. Director of the School of Marine Science and Policy Approved: _____________________________________________________ Nancy M. Targett, Ph.D. Dean of the College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment Approved: _____________________________________________________ Charles G. Riordan, Ph.D. Vice Provost for Graduate and Professional Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Dana Veron, Ph.D. for her guidance through the entire process from designing the proposal to helping me create this finished product. Daniel Leathers, Ph.D. for his continual assistance with data analysis and valued recommendations. My fellow graduate students who have supported and helped me with both my research and coursework. This thesis is dedicated to: My family for their unconditional love and support. My wonderful fiancée Christine Benton, the love of my life, who has always been there for me every step of the way. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Replenishment Versus Retreat: the Cost of Maintaining Delaware's Beaches
    Ocean& Coastal Management ELSEVIER Ocean & Coastal Management 44 (2001) 87-104 www.elsevier.comllocalclocecoaman Replenishment versus retreat: the cost of maintaining Delaware's beaches Heather Daniel* Graduate Colle(Je' of Moril1e SIIlt/ies, University of Delaware, Ncwark, DE /9716. USA Abstract The dynamic nature of Delaware's Atlantic coastline coupled with high shoreline property values and a growing coastal tourism industry combine to create a natural resources management problem that is particularly difllcult to address. The problem of communities threatened with storm damage and loss of recreational beaches is seriolls. Local and slate oflkials are dealing with the connicts that arise from development occurring on coastal barriers. Delaware must decide which erosion control option is the most beneficial and economically sound choice. Dehates over beach management options began with the discussion of a long~term management strategy. Beach nourishment and retreat were the primary approaches discussed during the development of H comprehensive managcment plan, entitled Beaches 2000. This plan was developed to deal with beach erosion through the year 2000. Beaches 2000 recommends a series ofactions that incorporate a variety of issues related to the management and protection of Delaware's Atlantic coastline. The recommendations arc intended to guide state and local policy regarding the statc's benches. The goal of Beaches 2000 is to cnsure that this important natural resource and tourist attraction continues to he available to the citizens of Delaware and out-or-state beach visitors. Since the publication of this document, the state has managed Delaware's shorelines through nourishment activities. Nourishment projccts have successfully maintained beach widths·.
    [Show full text]
  • Delaware Bay Estuary Project Supporting the Conservation and Restoration Of
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – Coastal Program Delaware Bay Estuary Project Supporting the conservation and restoration of the salt marshes of Delaware Bay People have altered the expansive salt marshes of Delaware Bay for centuries to farm salt hay, try to control mosquitoes, create channels for boats, to increase developable land, and other reasons all resulting in restricted tidal flow, disrupted sediment balances, or increasing erosion. Sea level rise and coastal storms threaten to further negatively impact the integrity of these salt marshes. As we alter or lose the marshes we lose the valuable habitats and ecological services they provide. tidal creek - Katherine Whittemore Addressing the all-important sediment balance of salt marshes is critical for preserving their resilience. A healthy resilient marsh may be able to keep pace with erosion and sea level rise through sediment accretion and growth Downe Twsp, NJ - Brian Marsh of vegetation. However, the delicate sediment balance of salt marshes is DBEP works to support efforts to learn more about the techniques often disrupted by barriers to tidal influence and altered drainage onto and to conserve and restore salt marshes and support the populations of fish and wildlife that rely on them. We support new and off the marsh resulting in sediment ongoing coastal resiliency initiatives and coastal planning as they starved systems, excessive mudflats, or pertain to habitat restoration and conservation. We are interested increased erosion. in finding effective tools and mechanisms for conserving and restoring salt marsh integrity on a meaningful scale and support efforts that bring partners together to approach this challenge.
    [Show full text]
  • Diamonds in the Sand
    I was hooked. A real treasure hunt. Following his directions, I made my way to the gift shops at Sunset Beach to learn more about the Cape May diamonds. There, I found faceted and mounted gems and books, including The Legend of the Cape May Diamond, by award- winning writer Trinka Hakes Noble. Just like real diamonds To the naked eye viewing a polished and faceted Cape May diamond, there is no distinguishable difference between it and a real diamond. Until modern gem scanning equipment was developed, they were passed along by unscrupulous vendors as genuine diamonds. As closely as I examined the stones, I could not tell the difference either. They sparkle as brilliantly as any engagement ring, but sadly, unlike true diamonds, have no substantial value. According to legend and local history, Cape May diamonds are pure quartz crystal, and look like clear pebbles along the beach. When wet, they are translucent in hues of white, beige and rose, polished smooth by the ocean waves and sand. Often mistaken for river-smoothed glass from New Jersey’s once-thriving glass manufacturing industry, BY LINDA BARRETT geologists claim the crystals are local in origin, washing out of nearby Pleistocene gravel deposits. They register an eight on the hardness scale. Claims are their source is over 200 miles away, in the upper reaches of the Delaware River. “The Cape May diamonds are the daughters of the river, linking the state’s past and present. These Diamonds in the Sand fragments of quartz rock have hidden in the river, plucked away from the Cape May Diamonds Dazzle Visitors mountains lining its banks,” says author Noble.
    [Show full text]
  • THE CAPE MAY PENINSULA Is Not Like the Rest of New Jersey
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service THE CAPE MAY PENINSULA Is Not Like the Rest of New Jersey Fall migration of monarch butterflies Photographs: USFWS Unique Ecosystems Key Migratory Corridor If you have noticed something The Cape May Peninsula is well-known “different” about the Cape May as a migratory route for raptors such Peninsula, particularly in regard to as the sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter its vegetation types, of course you striatus), osprey (Pandion haliaetus), are right! The Cape May Peninsula and northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), is not like the rest of New Jersey. The as well as owl species in great numbers. primary reason is climatic: nestled at The peninsula’s western beaches within Piping plover chick low elevation between the Atlantic Delaware Bay provide the largest Ocean and the Delaware Bay, the spawning area for horseshoe crabs peninsula enjoys approximately 225 (Limulus polyphemus) in the world frost-free days at its southern tip and, as a result, sustain a remarkable compared to 158 days at its northern portion of the second largest spring end. The vegetation, showing strong concentration of migrating shorebirds characteristics of the Pinelands flora in in North America. The increasingly the northern portion of the peninsula, rare red knot (Calidris canutus; a displays closer affinities to the mixed candidate for federal listing) as well hardwood forest of our country’s as the sanderling (C. alba), least southern Coastal Plain. Southern tree sandpiper (C. minutilla), dowitcher species such as the swamp chestnut oak (Limnodromus spp.), and ruddy (Quercus michauxii) and loblolly pine turnstone (Arenaria interpres) are (Pinus taeda) reach their northernmost some of the many bird species that distribution in Cape May County, while feed on horseshoe crab eggs to gain the common Pinelands trees such as weight for migration to their summer Swamp pink pitch pine (P.
    [Show full text]
  • Distances Between United States Ports 2019 (13Th) Edition
    Distances Between United States Ports 2019 (13th) Edition T OF EN CO M M T M R E A R P C E E D U N A I C T I E R D E S M T A ATES OF U.S. Department of Commerce Wilbur L. Ross, Jr., Secretary of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) RDML Timothy Gallaudet., Ph.D., USN Ret., Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere National Ocean Service Nicole R. LeBoeuf, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Ocean Services and Coastal Zone Management Cover image courtesy of Megan Greenaway—Great Salt Pond, Block Island, RI III Preface Distances Between United States Ports is published by the Office of Coast Survey, National Ocean Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), pursuant to the Act of 6 August 1947 (33 U.S.C. 883a and b), and the Act of 22 October 1968 (44 U.S.C. 1310). Distances Between United States Ports contains distances from a port of the United States to other ports in the United States, and from a port in the Great Lakes in the United States to Canadian ports in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River. Distances Between Ports, Publication 151, is published by National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and distributed by NOS. NGA Pub. 151 is international in scope and lists distances from foreign port to foreign port and from foreign port to major U.S. ports. The two publications, Distances Between United States Ports and Distances Between Ports, complement each other.
    [Show full text]
  • Sussex County Council-Georgetown, Delaware-June 15, 1976
    SUSSEX COUNTY COUNCIL-GEORGETOWN, DELAWARE-JUNE 15, 1976 Call to The regular meeting of the Sussex County Council was held Order on Tuesday, June 15, 1976 at 10:00 A. M. with the following members present: John T. Cannon, Sr. President W. Howard Workman Vice President Ralph E. Benson Member Charles W. Cole Member Oliver E. Hill Member The meeting was opened with the repeating of the Lord's Prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. M 333 76 A Motion was made by Mr. Hill, seconded by Mr. Benson, to Minutes appro~e the minutes of the previous meeting as presented. Approved Motion Adopted by Voice Vote. Corre­ The following correspondence was read by Mr. Betts, County spondence Solicitor: Town of Bethel, Inc. Re: Thanking the Council for their grant from Revenue Sharing funds. Laurel Senior Center, Inc. Re: Presenting the Council with a certificate which makes the Council an honorary shareholder in the new Laurel Senior Center. Department of the Army, Philadelphia District, Corps of En­ gineers. Re: Statements of findings that were prepared on the maintenance dredging of the Mispillion River, manintenance dredging of the Murderkill River and beach fill of the Broad­ kill Beach. Department of the Army, Philadelphia District, Corps of En­ gineers. Re: Application by Lawrence G. and Pearl F. Nygren, Point Farm, Dagsboro, Delaware, for a Department of the Army permit to construct a bulkhead along the existing mean high water line, a pier and to place piling in Vines Creek, Dagsboro, Sussex County, Delaware. Claud L. Tease, Associate Judge of the Superior Court of the State of Delaware.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Proposed Boundary Notice of Availability
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS) Unit DE-01P, Little Creek, Delaware Summary of Proposed Changes Type of Unit: Otherwise Protected Area (OPA) County: Kent Congressional District: At Large Existing Map: The existing CBRS map depicting this unit is: ■ 10-001A dated December 6, 2013 Proposed Boundary Notice of Availability: The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (Service) opened a public comment period on the proposed changes to Unit DE-01P via Federal Register notice. The Federal Register notice and the proposed boundary (accessible through the CBRS Projects Mapper) are available on the Service’s website at www.fws.gov/cbra. Establishment of Unit: The Coastal Barrier Improvement Act (Pub. L. 101-591), enacted on November 16, 1990 (56 FR 26304), originally established Unit DE-01P. Historical Changes: The CBRS map for this unit has been modified by the following legislative and/or administrative actions: ■ Federal Register notice (79 FR 21787) published on April 17, 2014, in accordance with Section 3 of Pub. L. 101-591 For additional information on historical legislative and administrative actions that have affected the CBRS, see: https://www.fws.gov/cbra/Historical-Changes-to-CBRA.html. Proposed Changes: The proposed changes to Unit DE-01P are described below. Proposed Removals: ■ One accessory structure along Bayside Drive ■ One residential structure and adjacent fastland located along Old Bowers Road Proposed Additions: ■ Portions of Little Creek Wildlife Area, Ted Harvey Wildlife Area, and Port Mahon Access and Fishing Area (owned by the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC)) ■ Undeveloped fastland and associated aquatic habitat that are both publicly and privately owned and not held for conservation and/or recreation in the vicinity of Port Mahon, Little Creek, Kitts Hummock, and Bowers Beach ■ Undeveloped portions of the John Dickinson Plantation Historic Site (owned by the Delaware Department of State) ■ Portions of the St.
    [Show full text]
  • Camden, New Jersey
    COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Camden, New Jersey U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Policy Development and Research As of August 1, 2014 Bucks Mercer Montgomery Monmouth Pennsylvania Housing Market Area Chester New Jersey Ocean Delaware Philadelphia The Camden Housing Market Area (HMA) is coter­ minous with the Camden, NJ Metropolitan Division. Burlington Pennsylvania For purposes of this analysis, the three­county HMA Camden is divided into three submarkets: Burlington County; Delaware Gloucester Camden County, which includes the central city of New Castle Camden; and Gloucester County. The HMA includes Salem Atlantic portions of the Joint Base McGuire­Dix­Lakehurst (Joint Base), which contains facilities for the U.S. Great Bay Delaware Bay Cumberland Air Force, U.S. Army, and U.S. Navy. Summary Economy annual rate of 0.6 percent during the for 4,075 new homes in the HMA next 3 years. Table DP­1 at the end (Table 1). The 410 units currently The economy of the Camden HMA, of this report provides employment under construction and a portion of which accounts for approximately data for the HMA. the 13,800 other vacant units in the 12 percent of all jobs in New Jersey, HMA that may reenter the market weakened after expanding during Sales Market will satisfy a portion of the forecast 2012. During the 12 months ending demand. July 2014, nonfarm payrolls declined The sales housing market in the HMA is slightly soft but improving, with an by 1,900 jobs, or 0.4 percent, to an Rental Market average of 505,800 jobs compared estimated vacancy rate of 1.4 percent, with an increase of 6,450 jobs, or down from 1.6 percent in 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Cape May County Voter Registration
    Cape May County A Profile of Cape May County New Jersey Avalon ● Cape May ● Cape May Court House ● Cape May Point ● Dennis Township ● Lower Township ● Middle Township ● North Wildwood ● Ocean City ● Sea Isle City ● Stone Harbor ● Upper Township ● West Cape May ● West Wildwood ● Wildwood ● Wildwood Crest ● Woodbine Table of Contents Overview and Geographical Background ..................................................................................................... 3 Housing Density........................................................................................................................................ 4 Transportation ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Public Transportation ............................................................................................................................ 5 County Road Mileage ........................................................................................................................... 6 Commute: Travel Time to Work ........................................................................................................... 7 Demographics ............................................................................................................................................... 8 Population (2010) ..................................................................................................................................... 8 Race (2010) ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Notice to Bidders 2019 Road Program-Phase 1 for Kechemeche Street, Pakahake Street, Pontaxit Avenue and Mathemek Street
    NOTICE TO BIDDERS 2019 ROAD PROGRAM-PHASE 1 FOR KECHEMECHE STREET, PAKAHAKE STREET, PONTAXIT AVENUE AND MATHEMEK STREET Notice is hereby given that sealed proposals will be received by Margaret Vitelli, Township of Lower Purchasing Agent, Cape May County, New Jersey for the 2019 Road Program-Phase 1 opened and read in public at the Township of Lower Municipal Building, 2600 Bayshore Road, Villas, Cape May County, New Jersey on March 12, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. prevailing time for: 2019 ROAD PROGRAM-PHASE 1 FOR KECHEMECHE STREET, PAKAHAKE STREET, PONTAXIT AVENUE AND MATHEMEK STREET Bid Documents and Drawings for the proposed work, which have been prepared by DeBlasio & Associates, P.C., are available at the office of said Engineer at 4701 New Jersey Avenue, Wildwood, New Jersey 08260, and may be inspected by prospective bidders during business hours. Bidders will be furnished with a copy of the Bid Documents by request upon proper notice and payment of a non-refundable charge of $75.00 payable to DeBlasio & Associates, P.C., for reproduction and processing. Proposals must be made on the standard Proposal Forms in the manner designated in the Bid Documents, must be enclosed in sealed envelopes bearing the name and address of the Bidder, and the name of the work on the outside addressed to Purchasing Agent, Township of Lower; and must be accompanied by a statement of Consent of Surety from a surety company authorized to do business in the State of New Jersey and acceptable to the Township and either a Bid Bond, Certified or Cashier’s Check drawn to the order of the Township of Lower for not less than ten percent (10%) of the amount bid, except that the check need not exceed $20,000.00.
    [Show full text]
  • Cape May County Tourism Conference
    2013 Cape May County Tourism Conference Developing a Game Plan – Lessons Learned from Sandy Presented by Cape May County Board of Chosen Freeholders Gerald M. Thornton, Director Leonard C. Desiderio, Vice Director Kristine Gabor Will Morey Cape May County Department of Tourism E. Marie Hayes Diane F. Wieland, Director [email protected] April 25, 2013 0 Developing a game plan – Lessons learned from Sandy 2012 represents 18 straight years of tourism growth for Cape May County Jersey Strong - For many who were left to clean up the mess left by Superstorm Sandy, the event will become a benchmark for telling time – What happened before Sandy and what happened after Sandy. Reports of changes in the landscape of the Jersey Shore were predicted and as we all move forward we will see some subtle – and many major – differences along the New Jersey coastline. Change for whatever reason is usually good and often unplanned. In the end, the four counties that make up the 127 miles of New Jersey coast and generate $19 Billion in expenditures will be a better place to live and visit. The more noticeable and tangible landscape changes will be north of Atlantic County but new regulations; mandated changes in building codes and revised FEMA flood maps will make a difference in the southern coastal towns as well. The looming changes will have its greatest impact on the real estate market that was beginning to show some positive movement after the recession. Cape May County dodged the bullet, this time. The next storm of the century could be just around the corner.
    [Show full text]