ASSESSING NEARSHORE ECOSYSTEM CHANGE IN ......ASSESSING NEARSHORE ECOSYSTEM CHANGE IN PUGET SOUND Charles (“Si”) Simenstad 1 & Curtis D. Tanner 2 1School of Aquatic and Fishery

ASSESSING NEARSHORE ECOSYSTEM CHANGE

IN PUGET SOUND

ASSESSING NEARSHORE ECOSYSTEM CHANGE

IN PUGET SOUNDCharles (“Si”) Simenstad1 & Curtis D. Tanner2

1School of Aquatic and Fishery SciencesUniversity of Washington2Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife

For the Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project (PSNERP), Nearshore Science Team (NST)

33rdrd National Conference on Ecosystem RestorationNational Conference on Ecosystem Restoration

23 July 200923 July 2009

33rdrd National Conference on Ecosystem RestorationNational Conference on Ecosystem Restoration

23 July 200923 July 20091907 Ashel Curtis photograph of Everett, Washington from Rucker Hill

Janus is an ancient Roman, composite, obscure

god who is associated with doorways (ecosystem

structure that affects flows), beginnings

(disturbance; release), and transitions (change;

resilience). A usually two-faced god he looks to

the future and the past.

Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project (PSNERP)…

• …is a large-scale initiative to protect and restore natural processes and functions of nearshore ecosystems

• …is a General Investigation, jointly sponsored by Army COE and WDFWby Army COE and WDFW– Began in 2001, completion in 2011

• …is the nearshore component of the Puget Sound Partnership’s strategy to restore Puget Sound

• …may result in USACE construction authority and funding

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSIS

Objective: Detect and describe differences between the physical structure of Puget Sound nearshore environment in the past and the physical structure of the present, that is consistent with our conceptual model of the relationships among nearshore ecosystem processes, structure and function.

Approach: Assess change in types and magnitude of changes that have altered the historic functions, changes that have altered the historic functions, goods and services of natural nearshore ecosystems of Puget Sound over last ~125 yr

Scope and Focus:• nearshore ecosystem processes related to

hydrogeomorphic structure

• spatially explicit

• comprehensive, Sound-wide

• landscape/ecosystem organization

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISProcess and Products

Change Analysis Strategic

Needs

Future Risk

AssessmentHow might future growth and

development affect the

integrity of the nearshore?

Restoration &

Protection Feasibility

What has changed in the

nearshore? What ecosystem

functions, goods and services

are impaired?

Needs

AssessmentWhich of these

changes are

problematic and why?

Management

MeasuresWhat actions can we

take to protect and

restore the nearshore?

Protection

PortfolioIn what ways will we

improve the

nearshore?

Feasibility

ReportResults packaged for

Congressional approval

The shallow water of estuarine deltas & marine shorelines, from the top of the

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISDefinition of Nearshore Ecosystems

the top of the coastal bank to water depths where light supports plant growth and up rivers to the end of tidal influence

Berm/Backshore

Beachface

Low-tide terrace

BARRIERBEACH

Embayments

Stream delta

Vegetated flat

Channels

Tidal flat

Tidal delta

BARRIERESTUARY

BedrockUpland

CoastalWatersheds

Alluvial RiverValley

Vegetated Flats

Tidal flat

Tidal delta

Channels

BARRIERLAGOON

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISApproach: Inventory Change by Geomorphic Organization

Delta Beaches Rocky Coast

RIVERDELTA

POCKET BEACH

Bluff face

Berm/Backshore

Beachface

Low tide terrace

Berm/Backshore

Beachface

Low tide terraceAlluvial Floodplain

(surge plain)

High tide flat

Low tide flat BLUFF

BARRIERBEACH

Berm/Backshore

Beachface

Low tide terrace

ROCKYPLATFORM

Cliff

Platform

Typical coastal shoreforms in Puget Sound (from Shipman et al. 2008)

PSNERP NEARSHORE ECOSYSTEMSNomenclature and Architecture of

Hierarchical Geospatial Assessment Units

• Shoreforms – shoreline geomorphology classification (Shipman 2008)

• Drainage Units – natural watersheds constrained by drift cells

component boundaries

• Accounting Units – aggregation of all Drainage Units conforming to

drift cell components

• Process Units – summation of Accounting Units conforming to the • Process Units – summation of Accounting Units conforming to the

scale of dominant nearshore process regimes

– Shoreline Process Units (SPU) = drift cells (components: no

appreciable drift, drift to right, drift to left, convergence zone,

divergence zone), indicative of sediment delivery, transport, erosion

and deposition)

– Delta Process Units (DPU) = deltas (components: euryhaline

unvegetated; estuarine mixing; oligohaline; tidal freshwater) indicative

of fresh water-salt water mixing

[ Summarizing Units: (1) Sound-wide; (2) Sub-basin; (3) Sub-basin segments]

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISGeospatial Units

Shoreline Process Units Delta Process Units

Example of hierarchical organization of PSNERP geographic scale

units (GSU) for shoreline process units (SPU; left) and delta process

unit (DPU) in the Whidbey Basin, indicating components of littoral

drift cells (Drift Cell Type). Note that SPUs overlap (cross-hatching)

in the Divergence Zone and where there is No Appreciable Drift, and

where SPU and DPU overlap (stippling).

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSIS

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSIS

Example of transitions in shoreform type to Artificial shoreform in the Whidbey Sub-basin (top) and from historic (left) to current (right) of different natural shoreforms (bottom).

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISWetland Class Change (Tier 2)

HISTORIC CURRENT

Examples of changes in wetland classes from historic to current conditions, from Nooksack River delta (top) and Snohomish River delta (bottom).

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISShoreline Alterations (Tier 2)

Examples of shoreline alterations (Tier 2) changes mapped for a segment of the Whidbey Sub-Basin; other features analyzed in this category of the Change Analysis included nearshore fill, nearshore railroads (active and abandoned), and percent change in wetland classes.

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISAdjacent Upland (Tier 3) and Watershed Area (Tier 4) Change

a. Adjacent Upland (Tier 3) b. Watershed Area (Tier 4)

Examples of land cover/land use and anthropomorphic features/stressors in the adjacent upland area (a) and the watershed area (b) for a region of the Whidbey Sub-basin. Features analyzed in the Change Analysis but now shown here include: categories of impervious surface, railroads (active and abandoned), dam locations (Tier 4 only), impounded drainage area (Tier 4 only), and percent of historic drainage area (Tier 4 only).

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISEcosystem Functions Goods and Services Ranking

Plunging Platform

Pocket

Beaches Bluffs Barriers

Open

Coastal

Inlets

Barrier

Estuaries

Barrier

Lagoons

Closed

Lagoons and

Marshes

River-

dominated

Wave-

dominated

Tide-

dominated Fan

Crops 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 14 12 13 11 8 52 29

Livestock 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 14 12 13 11 10 53 28Captured fisheries 6 4 5 2 8 12 9 7 3 14 10 13 11 1 140 13

Aquaculture 1 3 4 2 13 9 11 10 14 8 5 6 7 12 159 1

Wild foods 3 4 7 2 6 11 9 8 5 14 10 12 13 1 157 2

Timber and wood 1 2 5 13 12 7 10 4 8 14 11 9 6 3 137 14

Other fibers 1 2 3 11 5 6 8 7 9 14 12 13 10 4 132 19Biomass Fuel 1 2 8 13 11 4 9 5 7 14 10 12 6 3 148 5

2 3 5 6 4 7 10 8 9 14 13 11 12 1 130 21

5 8 9 13 6 4 2 7 11 14 12 10 3 1 124 24

2 3 5 7 4 8 6 10 9 14 13 12 11 1 145 7

1 2 3 11 6 7 10 9 8 14 12 13 5 4 142 9

2 3 5 13 4 12 8 7 9 14 10 11 6 1 145 7

2 3 4 8 6 10 11 9 7 14 12 13 5 1 133 17

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 14 13 12 9 1 133 17

1 5 3 13 10 9 7 4 2 11 12 6 8 14 154 4

2 3 4 6 5 7 11 8 10 14 12 13 9 1 137 14

2 3 5 7 6 10 8 4 9 14 12 13 11 1 128 22

2 3 4 6 5 7 10 9 8 14 12 13 11 1 124 24

2 3 5 4 6 9 8 7 12 14 13 11 10 1 120 27

EFG&S

Pro

vis

ion

ing

Food

Reg

ula

tin

g

Pollination

Erosion

Water purification and wate

Disease

Pests

Air quality regulation

Global Climate

Regional and local Climate

Water (quality)

Fiber

Fresh Water (quanitity)

Genetic resources

Biochemicals, natural medicienes

Sum of

"Range"

Order of Disimilarity

in EFG&S Ranking

Artificial and/or

Modified

Rocky Coast Beaches Embayments River Deltas

2 3 5 4 6 9 8 7 12 14 13 11 10 1 120 27

1 2 5 10 8 9 7 6 4 14 11 13 12 3 132 19

8 3 6 10 9 7 5 4 2 14 12 13 11 1 134 16

14 4 2 12 13 9 7 10 5 11 6 8 3 1 142 9

7 11 8 13 14 5 4 1 2 10 3 12 6 9 155 3

12 7 10 3 11 5 9 4 2 14 6 8 13 1 121 26

2 3 4 6 5 8 12 7 13 14 10 11 9 1 128 22

1 3 4 5 7 8 10 9 11 13 14 12 6 2 141 11

6 4 3 7 5 10 11 9 2 14 12 13 8 1 141 11

8 7 4 3 2 6 10 9 5 14 12 13 11 1 148 5

99 107 140 219 207 225 244 209 216 389 314 332 254 90

2 3 4 7 6 7 9 8 8 14 12 12 9 1 Lowest in series

1 3 5 13 5 7 10 9 9 14 12 13 11 1 Highest in series

13 9 8 11 12 8 10 9 12 6 11 7 10 13 Under 1 std.

2 3 4 7 5 6 10 8 9 14 12 13 11 1 Over 1 std.

RANK SUM

MODE

MEDIAN

RANGE

RANK

PhotosynthesisSu

pp

ort

ing

Cu

ltu

ral

Educational

Recreation and ecotourism

Nutrient Cycling

Soil Formation

Food Web

Pollination

Natural Hazards

Ethical

Existence

Example of ranking matrix used by PSNERP Nearshore Science Team to assess contributions to provisioning, regulating, cultural and supporting ecosystem functions, goods and services (EFG&S) by respective shoreforms (Tier 1). Ranking of relative impairment of EFG&S by shoreline alterations (Tier 2), adjacent upland change (Tier 3) and watershed area change (Tier 4) follow the same format.

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISGeodatabase

• Geodatabase

structure facilitates

looking at change

at several scales– Puget Sound– Sub-basins– Process units– Within-process – Within-process

unit componentso shoreformo drift cell

• PSNERP uses

this tool to

understand and

analyze nearshore

restoration and

preservation needs

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISResults Categories & Display

For each of the four

categories (tier), we

quantify nearshore

ecosystem change and

rank EFG&S impairment

of nearshore ecosystem

processes at four scales:processes at four scales:

1. Comprehensive, Puget

Sound-wide

2. Puget Sound (PSNERP-

defined) sub-basins

3. Within process units

4. Among attributes of

change within process

units

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISBasic Tabulation: Whidbey Sub-basin Example

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISSound-Wide Tabulation: Current Basin and Process Unit

Hood Canal

Strait of Juan de

Fuca

North Central

South Central

San Juans/

Strait of Georgia

South Puget Sound

WhidbeyPuget Sound

Process Unit

Features

Drainage Area (km2)

2790 3231 502 6459 4176 4610 14687 36080

Nearshore Zone Area

(km2)155 181 113 263 580 287 550 2036

Features Shoreline Length (km)

395 329 249 648 1187 725 634 3969

Stream Confluences

656 259 126 611 356 641 277 2810

Drift Cell Summary

(%)

Convergence Zone

0.6 2.5 3.0 1.0 1.2 0.7 1.0 1.1

Divergence Zone

6.0 5.4 9.6 5.6 2.1 7.4 4.6 5.1

No Appreciable

Drift21.9 30.9 13.2 23.1 61.5 29.0 43.2 39.2

Transport Zone

69.2 61.2 74.2 70.4 35.3 62.9 51.2 54.6

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISSound-Wide Tabulation: Shoreform Change

Hood Canal

Strait of Juan de

Fuca

North Central

South Central

San Juans/

Strait of Georgia

South Puget Sound

WhidbeyPuget Sound

Delta -50.6 -46.5 -100.0 -53.3 -73.6 -37.2 -47.1

Bluff-Backed Beach -2.9 -4.2 -3.6 -16.6 -7.6 -5.7 -8.1 -7.7

Barrier Beach -9.8 -2.4 -14.4 -24.8 -13.8 -11.0 -6.4 -11.9

Barrier Estuary -25.2 -20.7 -88.2 -41.9 -63.6 -30.1 -62.3 -44.4

Barrier Lagoon -21.2 -22.8 -52.8 -78.0 -50.6 -43.3 -50.0 -46.1

Closed Lagoon/Marsh

-36.3 8.4 -22.3 -89.1 -9.5 -74.9 -64.1 -48.4

Open Coastal Inlet -48.9 -44.6 -27.2 -52.1 -57.2 -35.0 -13.2 -45.3

Plunging Rocky -10.5 29.0 2.6 0 -10.3 0 -12.4 -9.3

Rocky Platform -8.3 4.8 -10.0 -16.9 -13.0 0 -4.1 -10.4

Pocket Beach -8.5 -11.9 14.2 -8.5 -9.8 0 -5.8 -9.5

Artificial 491.5 403.1 100 21021.1 5118.5 2574.1 4394.1 3443.0

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISSound-Wide Tabulation: Shoreform Transition

84%

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISHistoric Shoreform Change Sound-Wide

*

*

*

*

*

*

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISSound-Wide Shoreline Alterations: Wetland Classes

Hood Canal

Strait of Juan de

Fuca

North Central

South Central

San Juans/

Strait of Georgia

South Puget Sound

WhidbeyPuget Sound

Euryhaline Unvegetated

Historic Area (km2)

10.3 6.5 0 22.0 39.3 10.6 83.8 166.3

Current Area (km2)

4.9 6.4 0 4.3 29.9 7.5 76.6 125.8

Change (%) -52.3 -1.7 0 -80.4 -23.8 -29.4 -8.6 -24.4

Historic Area (km2)

12.6 3.7 12.3 18.8 45.0 14.1 57.7 157.1

Estuarine Mixing

(km2)157.1

Current Area (km2)

19.3 3.7 5.5 7.7 22.1 17.5 29.5 102.7

Change (%) 54.0 0.8 -54.9 -59.2 -50.9 23.9 -48.9 -34.6

Oligohaline Transition

Historic Area (km2)

0.8 0.3 0.3 0.4 16.2 0.0 46.1 64.0

Current Area (km2)

0.3 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.6 1.4

Change (%) -63.0 -46.2 -86.1 -84.0 -98.8 680.9 -98.7 -97.8

Tidal Freshwater

Historic Area (km2)

0.9 0.7 0.1 4.6 30.1 2.4 88.0 126.8

Current Area (km2)

0.8 0.6 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.4 8.9 11.6

Change (%) -8.9 -18.0 73.9 -99.9 -97.3 -84.4 -89.9 -90.9

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISSound-Wide Shoreline Alterations

Hood Canal

Strait of Juan de

Fuca

North Central

South Central

San Juans/

Strait of Georgia

South Puget Sound

WhidbeyPuget Sound

% of Shoreline

Length

Tidal Barrier 7.7 3.7 3.3 11.7 6.0 3.4 31.3 10.5

Nearshore Road

12.8 6.8 3.2 11.2 6.1 6.5 6.7 7.9

Abandoned RR

0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.4

Active RR 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 1.6 2.6 1.4 1.4

Armoring 21.2 16.1 9.8 62.8 14.0 34.5 22.5 27.0

Breakwater/Jetty (km) 0.87 4.7 1.49 8.83 15.53 0.73 8.97 37.23

Marina (km2) 0.13 0.23 0.2 3.08 2.04 0.33 1.02 6.33

Nearshore Fill (km2) 0.72 1.58 1.34 20.38 7.93 3.98 9.86 39.30

OWS (km2) 0.35 0.2 0.2 3.70 1.22 0.52 0.79 6.45

Parcels (per 10 km) 157 64 171.1 210.9 99.3 166.3 170.9 146.1

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISSound-Wide Shoreform Composition--Transitions

. SHOREFORM TRANSITION (TIER1)

Non-Metric Multi-Dimensional Scaling (NMDS) plot and SIMPER multivariate analysis results for shoreform transitions in the process units (PU) of the Puget Sound Basin.

On

ly O

ne

Sa

mp

le in

Gro

up

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISSound-Wide Shoreform Composition--Transitions

Sub-basin map of Sound-wide distribution of process unit (PU) groups with significant similar historic shoreform composition based on multivariate analysis.

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISSound-Wide Shoreline Alterations: Sequential PU Change

The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted. Restart your computer, and then open the file again. If the red x still appears, you may have to delete the image and then insert it again.

Shoreline alterations along sequential process units (PU) of the Strait of Juan de Fuca Sub-basin.

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISImpairment Due to Shoreline Alteration

Cumulative

stressors can

be identified

as spatially-

explicit “hot

spots” of spots” of

impairment

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISImpairment due to Shoreform Transition

Top right: Potential nearshore ecosystem impairment due to shoreform transitions (Tier 1) among Sound-wide process units (PU) symbolized by Impairment Bin.Top left: Frequency distribution of Impairment Scores.of Impairment Scores.Bottom: Range of Impairment Scores by Sub-basin. Boxplot shows the median, interquartile range (box length), outliers (cases with values between 1.5 and 3 box lengths from the upper or lower edge of the box), and extreme cases of individual variables (cases with values more than 3 box lengths from the upper or lower edge of the box).

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISImpairment due to Shoreline Alteration

Top right: Potential nearshore ecosystem impairment due to shoreline alterations (Tier 2) among Sound-wide process units (PU) symbolized by Impairment Bin.Top left: Frequency distribution of Impairment Scores.Bottom: Range of Impairment Scores by Sub-basin. Boxplot shows the median, interquartile range (box length), outliers (cases with values between 1.5 and 3 box lengths from the upper or lower edge of the box), and extreme cases of individual variables (cases with values more than 3 box lengths from the upper or lower edge of the box).

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISImpairment due to Adjacent Upland Change

Top left: Potential nearshore ecosystem impairment due to adjacent upland change (Tier3) among Sound-wide process units (PU) symbolized by Impairment Bin.Top right: Frequency distribution of Impairment Scores.Bottom: Range of Impairment Bottom: Range of Impairment Scores by Sub-basin. Boxplot shows the median, interquartile range (box length), outliers (cases with values between 1.5 and 3 box lengths from the upper or lower edge of the box), and extreme cases of individual variables (cases with values more than 3 box lengths from the upper or lower edge of the box).

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISImpairment due to Watershed Area Change

Top left: Potential nearshore ecosystem impairment due to watershed area change (Tier3) among Sound-wide process units (PU) symbolized by Impairment Bin.Top right: Frequency distribution of Impairment Scores.of Impairment Scores.Bottom: Range of Impairment Scores by Sub-basin. Boxplot shows the median, interquartile range (box length), outliers (cases with values between 1.5 and 3 box lengths from the upper or lower edge of the box), and extreme cases of individual variables (cases with values more than 3 box lengths from the upper or lower edge of the box).

PSNERP CHANGE ANALYSISSummary

• PSNRP Change Analysis documents historical change in geomorphic structure of deltas, embayments and beaches of Puget Sound

• Geospatial database and analyses facilitate:– selecting and planning restoration and preservation

portfolios– landscape analysis of adjacent and cumulative effects – landscape analysis of adjacent and cumulative effects

among stressors and restoration actions– relationship to nearshore ecosystem processes that

create and sustain shoreline geomorphology and function

– exploration of future change effects on alternative restoration and preservation strategies

• Uncertainties:– historic drivers relative to current and future– natural variability in nearshore geomorphology

Thank You!• Si Simenstad: [email protected]

• Curtis Tanner: [email protected]

• PSNERP Change Analysis document on-line ~late 2009; please site as:

Simenstad, C.A., M. Ramirez, J. Burke, M. Logsdon, H. Shipman, C. Davis, J. Fung, P. Bloch, C. Tanner, K. Fresh, D. Myers, E. Iverson, A. Bailey, C. Liblinter, W. Gerstel, and P. Schlenger. In prep. Historic Change and Impairment of Puget Sound Shorelines: Atlas and Interpretation of Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Project Change Analysis. Puget Sound Nearshore Report No. 2009-XX. Published by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle, Washington.Olympia, Washington, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle, Washington.

• PSNERP website: http://www.pugetsoundnearshore.org/

• PSNERP Change Analysis Geodatabase: (go to link from PSNERP website) http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/PublicMenu/Menu.cfm?sitename=PSNERP&pagename=Change_Analysis

• Thanks to MANY contributors:– PSNERP Nearshore Science Team (NST)/Change Analysis Working Group; C. Simenstad (Chair),

M. Logsdon, K. Fresh, D. Myers, H. Shipman, C. Tanner– UW; J. Burke, M. Ramirez – WDNR; P. Bloch– CommEnSpace; C. Davis, J. Fung– Anchor Environmental; P. Schlenger, E. Iverson, A. Bailey (SoundGIS), C. Kiblinger, W. Gerstel– UW Rivers History Group; B. Collins, A. Sheikh, C. Kiblinger, D. Montgomery, H. Greenberg ++