DOCSLIB.ORG

Mangrove Heart Attack

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mangrove Heart Attack Identifying and Diagnosing Locations of Ongoing and Future Saltwater Wetland Loss: Mangrove Heart Attack Credit: Whitney Gray, 2011, Little Panther Key, Pine Island Sound Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program Technical Report 16-3 Draft: 9/30/2016 326 West Marion Avenue Punta Gorda, Florida 33950 (941) 575-5090 www.CHNEP.org The Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program is a partnership of citizens, elected officials, resource managers and commercial and recreational resource users working to improve the water quality and ecological integrity of the greater Charlotte Harbor watershed. A cooperative decision-making process is used within the Program to address diverse resource management concerns in the 4,700-square-mile study area. Many of these partners also financially support the Program, which, in turn, affords the Program opportunities to fund projects. The entities that have financially supported the Program include the following: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Southwest Florida Water Management District South Florida Water Management District Florida Department of Environmental Protection Peace River/Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority Polk, Sarasota, Manatee, Lee, Charlotte, DeSoto, and Hardee Counties Cities and Towns of Sanibel, Cape Coral, Fort Myers, Punta Gorda, North Port, Venice, Fort Myers Beach, Winter Haven, and Bonita Springs. This publication was authored by: Lisa B. Beever, Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program James W. Beever III, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Roy R. “Robin” Lewis III, Coastal Resources Group, Inc. Laura Flynn, Coastal Resources Group, Inc. Terry Tattar, University of Massachusetts Liz Donley, Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program E.J. Neafsey, Sanibel-Captiva Conservation Foundation Acknowledgement: The Charlotte Harbor Aquatic Preserves provided boat access, captains and expertise. Melynda Brown was the captain on July 27, October 8 and November 5, 2015. Mary McMurray was the captain on July 20, August 25, 2015 and February 18, 2016. Arielle Taylor-Manges was the captain on September 9 and September 25, 2015. Estero Bay Aquatic Preserve manager Cheryl Clark captained the boat on November 17, 2015. The Charlotte Harbor Preserve State Park provided off-road access and assistance from Jay Garner on April 18, 2016. James Beever conceived of the project, was persistent for most of a decade in obtaining the grant funding. Robin Lewis coined the term “Mangrove Heart Attack.” Lisa Beever was the GIS Analyst and primary author. Suggested citation: Beever, L., J. Beever, R. Lewis, L. Flynn, T. Tattar, E. Donley, E. Neafsey. 2016. Identifying and Diagnosing Locations of Ongoing and Future Saltwater Wetland Loss: Mangrove Heart Attack. Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program. Punta Gorda, Florida. Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program Policy Committee Mr. Doug Mundrick, Co-Chair Mr. Jon Iglehart, Co-Chair Water Protection Division South District Director U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 Florida Department of Environmental Protection Cities Counties Agencies Hon. S. Delshay Turner Hon. Bill Truex Ms. Patricia M. Steed City of Arcadia Charlotte County Central Florida Regional Planning Council Hon. Adrian Jackson Dr. Philip Stevens City of Bartow Vacant Desoto County Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission Hon. Fred Forbes City of Bonita Springs Vacant Mr. Phil Flood Ms. Connie Jarvis Hardee County South Florida Water Management District City of Cape Coral Hon. Larry Kiker Mr. Don McCormick Vacant Lee County Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council City of Fort Myers Hon. Anita Cereceda Hon. Robin DiSabatino Mr. John Heslick Town of Fort Myers Beach Manatee County Southwest Florida Water Management District Hon. Cheryl Cook Mr. Jeff Spence City of North Port Polk County Hon. Gary Wein City of Punta Gorda Hon. Charles Hines Sarasota County Hon. Mick Denham City of Sanibel Hon. Fred Fraize City of Venice Mr. M.J. Carnevale City of Winter Haven Management Committee Co-Chairs Mr. Mike Kirby Ms. Jennette Seachrist Ms. Shelley Thornton City of Bonita Springs Southwest Florida Water Management District TAC Co-Chair Technical Advisory Committee Co-Chairs Mr. Keith Kibbey Ms. Elizabeth Staugler Ms. Shelley Thornton Citizens Advisory Committee Co-Chairs Mr. Roger DeBruler Mr. Kayton Nedza Ms. Debi Osborne Staff Lisa B. Beever, PhD, Director Elizabeth S. Donley, JD, Deputy Director Maran Brainard Hilgendorf, Communications Manager Judy Ott, MS, Program Scientist Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 1 Purpose ....................................................................................................................... 2 Background ................................................................................................................ 3 Emergent Habitats and Saltwater Wetlands of the CHNEP Study Area .................................... 3 Distribution and Types of Mangroves in the CHNEP Study Area ............................................. 6 Mangrove Community Types ................................................................................................... 11 Mangrove Productivity and Ecosystem Functions ................................................................... 16 Mangrove Forest Death and Mangrove Forest Heart Attacks .................................................. 22 Salt Marshes of the CHNEP Study Area .................................................................................. 28 Salt Marsh Types of the CHNEP .............................................................................................. 30 GIS Library of Mapping Resources ......................................................................... 41 True Color Aerials .................................................................................................................... 41 Historic Aerials ......................................................................................................................... 41 Infrared Aerials ......................................................................................................................... 43 Lidar .......................................................................................................................................... 45 Water Management District 2008-09 Land Use Maps ............................................................. 46 Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 2003 Landsat Interpretation .............................. 47 United State Geological Survey 2015 Landsat Interpretation .................................................. 48 FLUCCS Maps for Charlotte Harbor and Tidal Peace and Myakka Rivers ........... 49 Classification of Mangrove Forest Type................................................................................... 49 Mapping Techniques ................................................................................................................. 53 Mapping Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 57 Mangrove Forest Field Investigation ....................................................................... 69 Site Selection ............................................................................................................................ 69 Field Investigation Methods ..................................................................................................... 71 Pre-Visit Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 80 Mangrove Species Composition by Geomorphology ............................................................... 81 Mangrove Forest Structure by Geomorphology ....................................................................... 88 Mangrove Health by Species and Geomorphology ................................................................ 101 Spectral Modeling to Determine Mangrove Condition .........................................111 Landsat Data Retrieval and Preparation ................................................................................. 111 Top of Atmosphere Conversion .............................................................................................. 123 Mangrove v. Not Mangrove calls using Landsat 8 ................................................................. 124 Final Mangrove Map Series and Analysis .............................................................125 Landsat Interpretation Refinement ......................................................................................... 125 Mangrove Geomorphology and Species using Landsat 8 ....................................................... 126 Mangrove Geomorphology and Species Recalibration .......................................................... 139 Predicted and Observed Species Identification ....................................................................... 140 Landsat Interpretation of Geomorphology and Species .......................................................... 141 Mangrove Condition ............................................................................................................... 146 Comparing Mangrove Condition between Landsat Missions ................................................. 148 Mangrove Condition Trends ..................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The State of Biodiversity in Africa a Mid-Term Review of Progress Towards the Aichi Biodiversity Targets
    THE STATE OF BIODIVERSITY IN AFRICA A MID-TERM REVIEW OF PROGRESS TOWARDS THE AICHI BIODIVERSITY TARGETS 1 3 © Neil Burgess © Neil Preparation Reproduction This study was commissioned by the Division of Environmental This publication may be reproduced for educational or Law and Conventions (DELC) of the United Nations non-profit purposes without special permission, provided Environmental Programme (UNEP) under the leadership acknowledgement to the source is made. Reuse of any figures of Ms. Elizabeth Maruma Mrema, DELC Director, and the is subject to permission from the original rights holders. No direct supervision of Ms. Kamar Yousuf, Regional Biodiversity use of this publication may be made for resale or any other Multilateral Environmental Agreement (MEA) Focal Point commercial purpose without permission in writing from UNEP. for Africa. Additional funding has been provided by the Applications for permission, with a statement of purpose and UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP- extent of reproduction, should be sent to the UNEP-DELC WCMC) and the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Director, United Nations Environment Programme, P.O. Box Diversity (SCBD). The design, printing and distribution of 30552, Nairobi 00100, Kenya. this report was enabled through the financial contribution of the European Union. Disclaimer The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the views Citation or policies of UNEP, contributory organizations or editors. The UNEP-WCMC (2016) The State of Biodiversity in Africa: designations employed and the presentations of material in this A mid-term review of progress towards the Aichi Biodiversity report do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever Targets.
    [Show full text]
  • Snohomish Estuary Wetland Integration Plan
    Snohomish Estuary Wetland Integration Plan April 1997 City of Everett Environmental Protection Agency Puget Sound Water Quality Authority Washington State Department of Ecology Snohomish Estuary Wetlands Integration Plan April 1997 Prepared by: City of Everett Department of Planning and Community Development Paul Roberts, Director Project Team City of Everett Department of Planning and Community Development Stephen Stanley, Project Manager Roland Behee, Geographic Information System Analyst Becky Herbig, Wildlife Biologist Dave Koenig, Manager, Long Range Planning and Community Development Bob Landles, Manager, Land Use Planning Jan Meston, Plan Production Washington State Department of Ecology Tom Hruby, Wetland Ecologist Rick Huey, Environmental Scientist Joanne Polayes-Wien, Environmental Scientist Gail Colburn, Environmental Scientist Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Duane Karna, Fisheries Biologist Linda Storm, Environmental Protection Specialist Funded by EPA Grant Agreement No. G9400112 Between the Washington State Department of Ecology and the City of Everett EPA Grant Agreement No. 05/94/PSEPA Between Department of Ecology and Puget Sound Water Quality Authority Cover Photo: South Spencer Island - Joanne Polayes Wien Acknowledgments The development of the Snohomish Estuary Wetland Integration Plan would not have been possible without an unusual level of support and cooperation between resource agencies and local governments. Due to the foresight of many individuals, this process became a partnership in which jurisdictional politics were set aside so that true land use planning based on the ecosystem rather than political boundaries could take place. We are grateful to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of Ecology (DOE) and Puget Sound Water Quality Authority for funding this planning effort, and to Linda Storm of the EPA and Lynn Beaton (formerly of DOE) for their guidance and encouragement during the grant application process and development of the Wetland Integration Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • BMP #: Constructed Wetlands
    Structural BMP Criteria BMP #: Constructed Wetlands Constructed Wetlands are shallow marsh sys- tems planted with emergent vegetation that are designed to treat stormwater runoff. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2001 Key Design Elements Potential Applications z Adequate drainage area (usually 5 to 10 acres Residential Subdivision: YES minimum) Commercial: YES Ultra Urban: LIMITED Industrial: YES z Maintenance of permanent water surface Retrofit: YES Highway/Road: YES z Multiple vegetative growth zones through vary- ing depths Stormwater Functions z Robust and diverse vegetation Volume Reduction: Low z Relatively impermeable soils or engineered liner Recharge: Low Peak Rate Control: High z Sediment collection and removal Water Quality: High z Adjustable permanent pool and dewatering Pollutant Removal mechanism Total Suspended Solids: x Nutrients: x Metals: x Pathogens: x Pennsylvania Stormwater Management Manual 1 Section 5 - Structural BMPs Figure 1. Demonstration Constructed Wetlands in Arizona (http://ag.arizona.edu/AZWATER/arroyo/094wet.html) Description Constructed Wetlands are shallow marsh systems planted with emergent vegetation that are designed to treat stormwater runoff. While they are one of the best BMPs for pollutant removal, Constructed Wetlands (CWs) can also mitigate peak rates and even reduce runoff volume to a certain degree. They also can provide considerable aesthetic and wildlife benefits. CWs use a relatively large amount of space and require an adequate source of inflow to maintain the perma- nent water surface. Variations Constructed Wetlands can be designed as either an online or offline facilities. They can also be used effectively in series with other flow/sediment reducing BMPs that reduce the sediment load and equalize incoming flows to the CW.
    [Show full text]
  • Elkhorn Slough Estuary
    A RICH NATURAL RESOURCE YOU CAN HELP! Elkhorn Slough Estuary WATER QUALITY REPORT CARD Located on Monterey Bay, Elkhorn Slough and surround- There are several ways we can all help improve water 2015 ing wetlands comprise a network of estuarine habitats that quality in our communities: include salt and brackish marshes, mudflats, and tidal • Limit the use of fertilizers in your garden. channels. • Maintain septic systems to avoid leakages. • Dispose of pharmaceuticals properly, and prevent Estuarine wetlands harsh soaps and other contaminants from running are rare in California, into storm drains. and provide important • Buy produce from local farmers applying habitat for many spe- sustainable management practices. cies. Elkhorn Slough • Vote for the environment by supporting candidates provides special refuge and bills favoring clean water and habitat for a large number of restoration. sea otters, which rest, • Let your elected representatives and district forage and raise pups officials know you care about water quality in in the shallow waters, Elkhorn Slough and support efforts to reduce question: How is the water in Elkhorn Slough? and nap on the salt marshes. Migratory shorebirds by the polluted run-off and to restore wetlands. thousands stop here to rest and feed on tiny creatures in • Attend meetings of the Central Coast Regional answer: It could be a lot better… the mud. Leopard sharks by the hundreds come into the Water Quality Control Board to share your estuary to give birth. concerns and support for action. Elkhorn Slough estuary hosts diverse wetland habitats, wildlife and recreational activities. Such diversity depends Thousands of people come to Elkhorn Slough each year JOIN OUR EFFORT! to a great extent on the quality of the water.
    [Show full text]
  • Tropical Vegetation Response to Heinrich Event 1 As Simulated with the Uvic ESCM Title Page and CCSM3 Abstract Introduction Conclusions References D
    Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Clim. Past Discuss., 8, 5359–5387, 2012 www.clim-past-discuss.net/8/5359/2012/ Climate doi:10.5194/cpd-8-5359-2012 of the Past CPD © Author(s) 2012. CC Attribution 3.0 License. Discussions 8, 5359–5387, 2012 This discussion paper is/has been under review for the journal Climate of the Past (CP). Tropical vegetation Please refer to the corresponding final paper in CP if available. response to Heinrich Event 1 D. Handiani et al. Tropical vegetation response to Heinrich Event 1 as simulated with the UVic ESCM Title Page and CCSM3 Abstract Introduction Conclusions References D. Handiani1, A. Paul1,2, X. Zhang1, M. Prange1,2, U. Merkel1,2, and L. Dupont2 Tables Figures 1Department of Geosciences, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany 2 MARUM – Center for Marine Environmental Sciences, University of Bremen, J I Bremen, Germany J I Received: 12 October 2012 – Accepted: 31 October 2012 – Published: 5 November 2012 Correspondence to: D. Handiani ([email protected]) Back Close Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. Full Screen / Esc Printer-friendly Version Interactive Discussion 5359 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Abstract CPD We investigated changes in tropical climate and vegetation cover associated with abrupt climate change during Heinrich Event 1 (HE1) using two different global cli- 8, 5359–5387, 2012 mate models: the University of Victoria Earth System-Climate Model (UVic ESCM) and 5 the Community Climate System Model version 3 (CCSM3). Tropical South American Tropical vegetation and African pollen records suggest that the cooling of the North Atlantic Ocean during response to Heinrich HE1 influenced the tropics through a southward shift of the rainbelt.
    [Show full text]
  • Meadow Pond Final Report 1-28-10
    Comparison of Restoration Techniques to Reduce Dominance of Phragmites australis at Meadow Pond, Hampton New Hampshire FINAL REPORT January 28, 2010 David M. Burdick1,2 Christopher R. Peter1 Gregg E. Moore1,3 Geoff Wilson4 1 - Jackson Estuarine Laboratory, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824 2 – Natural Resources and the Environment, UNH 3 – Department of Biological Sciences, UNH 4 – Northeast Wetland Restoration, Berwick ME 03901 Submitted to: New Hampshire Coastal Program New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services 50 International Drive Pease Tradeport Portsmouth, NH 03801 UNH Burdick et al. 2010 Executive Summary The northern portion of Meadow Pond Marsh remained choked with an invasive exotic variety of Phragmites australis (common reed) in 2002, despite tidal restoration in 1995. Our project goal was to implement several construction techniques to reduce the dominance of Phragmites and then examine the ecological responses of the system (as a whole as well as each experimental treatment) to inform future restoration actions at Meadow Pond. The construction treatments were: creeks, creeks and pools, sediment excavation with a large pool including native marsh plantings. Creek construction increased tides at all treatments so that more tides flooded the marsh and the highest spring tides increased to 30 cm. Soil salinity increased at all treatment areas following restoration, but also increased at control areas, so greater soil salinity could not be attributed to the treatments. Decreases in Phragmites cover were not statistically significant, but treatment areas did show significant increases in native vegetation following restoration. Fish habitat was also increased by creek and pool construction and excavation, so that pool fish density increased from 1 to 40 m-2.
    [Show full text]
  • Maritime Swamp Forest (Typic Subtype)
    MARITIME SWAMP FOREST (TYPIC SUBTYPE) Concept: Maritime Swamp Forests are wetland forests of barrier islands and comparable coastal spits and back-barrier islands, dominated by tall trees of various species. The Typic Subtype includes most examples, which are not dominated by Acer, Nyssa, or Fraxinus, not by Taxodium distichum. Canopy dominants are quite variable among the few examples. Distinguishing Features: Maritime Shrub Swamps are distinguished from other barrier island wetlands by dominance by tree species of (at least potentially) large stature. The Typic Subtype is dominated by combinations of Nyssa, Fraxinus, Liquidambar, Acer, or Quercus nigra, rather than by Taxodium or Salix. Maritime Shrub Swamps are dominated by tall shrubs or small trees, particularly Salix, Persea, or wetland Cornus. Some portions of Maritime Evergreen Forest are marginally wet, but such areas are distinguished by the characteristic canopy dominants of that type, such as Quercus virginiana, Quercus hemisphaerica, or Pinus taeda. The lower strata also are distinctive, with wetland species occurring in Maritime Swamp Forest; however, some species, such as Morella cerifera, may occur in both. Synonyms: Acer rubrum - Nyssa biflora - (Liquidambar styraciflua, Fraxinus sp.) Maritime Swamp Forest (CEGL004082). Ecological Systems: Central Atlantic Coastal Plain Maritime Forest (CES203.261). Sites: Maritime Swamp Forests occur on barrier islands and comparable spits, in well-protected dune swales, edges of dune ridges, and on flats adjacent to freshwater sounds. Soils: Soils are wet sands or mucky sands, most often mapped as Duckston (Typic Psammaquent) or Conaby (Histic Humaquept). Hydrology: Most Maritime Swamp Forests have shallow seasonal standing water and nearly permanently saturated soils. Some may rarely be flooded by salt water during severe storms, but areas that are severely or repeatedly flooded do not recover to swamp forest.
    [Show full text]
  • NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY and the NATIONAL WETLANDS RESEARCH CENTER PROJECT REPORT FOR: GALVESTON BAY INTRODUCTION the U.S. Fi
    NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY AND THE NATIONAL WETLANDS RESEARCH CENTER PROJECT REPORT FOR: GALVESTON BAY INTRODUCTION The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's National Wetlands Inventory is producing maps showing the location and classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. The Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States by Cowardin et al. is the classification system used to define and classify wetlands. Upland classification will utilize the system put forth in., A Land Use and Land Cover Classification System For Use With Remote Sensor Data. by James R. Anderson, Ernest E. Hardy, John T. Roach, and Richard E. Witmer. Photo interpretation conventions, hydric soils-lists and wetland plants lists are also available to enhance the use and application of the classification system. The purpose of the report to users is threefold: (1) to provide localized information regarding the production of NWI maps, including field reconnaissance with a discussion of imagery and interpretation; (2) to provide a descriptive crosswalk from wetland codes on the map to common names and representative plant species; and (3) to explain local geography, climate, and wetland communities. II. FIELD RECONNAISSANCE Field reconnaissance of the work area is an integral part for the accurate interpretation of aerial photography. Photographic signatures are compared to the wetland's appearance in the field by observing vegetation, soil and topography. Thus information is weighted for seasonality and conditions existing at the time of photography and at ground truthing. Project Area The project area is located in the southeastern portion of Texas along the coast. Ground truthing covered specific quadrangles of each 1:100,000 including Houston NE, Houston SE, Houston NW, and Houston SW (See Appendix A, Locator Map).
    [Show full text]
  • PESHTIGO RIVER DELTA Property Owner
    NORTHEAST - 10 PESHTIGO RIVER DELTA WETLAND TYPES Drew Feldkirchner Floodplain forest, lowland hardwood, swamp, sedge meadow, marsh, shrub carr ECOLOGY & SIGNIFICANCE supports cordgrass, marsh fern, sensitive fern, northern tickseed sunflower, spotted joe-pye weed, orange This Wetland Gem site comprises a very large coastal • jewelweed, turtlehead, marsh cinquefoil, blue skullcap wetland complex along the northwest shore of Green Bay and marsh bellflower. Shrub carr habitat is dominated three miles southeast of the city of Peshtigo. The wetland by slender willow; other shrub species include alder, complex extends upstream along the Peshtigo River for MARINETTE COUNTY red osier dogwood and white meadowsweet. Floodplain two miles from its mouth. This site is significant because forest habitats are dominated by silver maple and green of its size, the diversity of wetland community types ash. Wetlands of the Peshtigo River Delta support several present, and the overall good condition of the vegetation. - rare plant species including few-flowered spikerush, The complexity of the site – including abandoned oxbow variegated horsetail and northern wild raisin. lakes and a series of sloughs and lagoons within the river delta – offers excellent habitat for waterfowl. A number This Wetland Gem provides extensive, diverse and high of rare animals and plants have been documented using quality wetland habitat for many species of waterfowl, these wetlands. The area supports a variety of recreational herons, gulls, terns and shorebirds and is an important uses, such as hunting, fishing, trapping and boating. The staging, nesting and stopover site for many migratory Peshtigo River Delta has been described as the most birds. Rare and interesting bird species documented at diverse and least disturbed wetland complex on the west the site include red-shouldered hawk, black tern, yellow shore of Green Bay.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Forcing of Tree Growth in Dry Afromontane Forest Fragments of Northern Ethiopia: Evidence from Multi-Species Responses Zenebe Girmay Siyum1,2* , J
    Siyum et al. Forest Ecosystems (2019) 6:15 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-019-0178-y RESEARCH Open Access Climate forcing of tree growth in dry Afromontane forest fragments of Northern Ethiopia: evidence from multi-species responses Zenebe Girmay Siyum1,2* , J. O. Ayoade3, M. A. Onilude4 and Motuma Tolera Feyissa2 Abstract Background: Climate-induced challenge remains a growing concern in the dry tropics, threatening carbon sink potential of tropical dry forests. Hence, understanding their responses to the changing climate is of high priority to facilitate sustainable management of the remnant dry forests. In this study, we examined the long-term climate- growth relations of main tree species in the remnant dry Afromontane forests in northern Ethiopia. The aim of this study was to assess the dendrochronological potential of selected dry Afromontane tree species and to study the influence of climatic variables (temperature and rainfall) on radial growth. It was hypothesized that there are potential tree species with discernible annual growth rings owing to the uni-modality of rainfall in the region. Ring width measurements were based on increment core samples and stem discs collected from a total of 106 trees belonging to three tree species (Juniperus procera, Olea europaea subsp. cuspidate and Podocarpus falcatus). The collected samples were prepared, crossdated, and analyzed using standard dendrochronological methods. The formation of annual growth rings of the study species was verified based on successful crossdatability and by correlating tree-ring widths with rainfall. Results: The results showed that all the sampled tree species form distinct growth boundaries though differences in the distinctiveness were observed among the species.
    [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]
  • Tidal Wetland Gross Primary Production Across the Continental
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Tidal Wetland Gross Primary Production Across 10.1029/2019GB006349 the Continental United States, 2000–2019 Special Section: R. A. Feagin1 , I. Forbrich2 , T. P. Huff1, J. G. Barr3, J. Ruiz‐Plancarte4 , J. D. Fuentes4 , Carbon cycling in tidal wet- 4 5 5 6 7 R. G. Najjar , R. Vargas , A. Vázquez‐Lule , L. Windham‐Myers , K. D. Kroeger , lands and estuaries of the con- 8 1 9 8 8 2 tiguous United States E. J. Ward , G. W. Moore , M. Leclerc , K. W. Krauss , C. L. Stagg , M. Alber , S. H. Knox10 , K. V. R. Schäfer11, T. S. Bianchi12 , J. A. Hutchings13 , H. Nahrawi9,14 , 1 1 1 1,15 6 16 Key Points: A. Noormets , B. Mitra , A. Jaimes , A. L. Hinson , B. Bergamaschi , J. S. King , and 17 • We created the Blue Carbon (BC) G. Miao model, which mapped the Gross Primary Production (GPP) of all 1Department of Ecology and Conservation Biology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA, 2Marine Biological tidal wetlands within the Laboratory, Woods Hole, MA, USA, 3Elder Research, Charlottesville, VA, USA, 4Department of Meteorology and continental United States 5 • Atmospheric Science, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, The BC model provides maps of tidal 6 7 wetland GPP at sub‐250 m scales University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA, United States Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA, USA, United States 8 and at 16‐day intervals for the years Geological Survey, Woods Hole, MA, USA, United States Geological Survey, Wetland and Aquatic Research Center, 2000‐2019 Lafayette, LA, USA, 9Atmospheric Biogeosciences, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA, 10Department of Geography, • 2 The average daily GPP per m was University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, USA, 11Department of Biological Sciences, Rutgers University, Newark, 4.32 ± 2.45 g C/m2/day, and the total NJ, USA, 12Departmet of Geological Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA, 13Department of Earth and annual GPP for the continental 14 United States was 39.65 ± 0.89 Tg Planetary Sciences, Washington University, St.
    [Show full text]