Why Restore Coastal Habitats?
David M. Burdick
Associate Research Professor Jackson Estuarine Laboratory
Department of Natural Resources & the Environment University of New Hampshire
Durham, NH 03824 [email protected]
Why Restore Coastal Habitats? Outline
1) Habitats, Values and Threats, including Climate Change
2) Impacts, Perception and Action 3) Benefits, Ecosystem Services Case
Study: Little River Marsh 4) Take home messages
Southeastern Masschusetts is endowed with a rich mosaic of coastal habitats
Photo: Sean Woods
Beaches and Dune Systems
Salt Marshes
Sand and Mudflats
Photo: Sean Woods
Shellfish Beds and Reefs
Photo:NathanJohnson,OrionPhotoProduc3ons
Seagrass Meadows
Photo: Fred Short, UNH
Rivers flowing into bays (estuaries)
Functional values associated with these habitats:
• Plant growth to support grazing and detritus-based food webs
• Secondary production • Plant structure to provide habitat • Support of biodiversity • Protection from flooding • Protection from coastal erosion • Removal of sediments and excess
nutrients • Aesthetic, Recreational & Educational
values • Self-sustaining ecosystems
Courtesy, Bob Ulanowitz
Functional values associated with these habitats:
• Plant growth to support food webs
• Secondary production, including finfish and shellfish
• Plant structure to provide habitat • Support of biodiversity • Protection from flooding • Protection from coastal erosion • Removal of sediments and excess
nutrients • Aesthetic, Recreational & Educational
values • Self-sustaining ecosystems
Photo: Lawrence Taylor
Functional values associated with these habitats:
• Plant growth to support food webs • Secondary production • Plant structure to provide
habitat for nursery, refuge and foraging (dunes, tidal marshes, seagrass meadows, algal beds and artificial habitats)
• Support of biodiversity • Protection from flooding • Protection from coastal erosion • Removal of sediments and excess
nutrients • Aesthetic, Recreational & Educational
values • Self-sustaining ecosystems
Functional values associated with these habitats:
• Plant growth to support food webs • Secondary production • Plant structure to provide habitat
• Support of local and regional biodiversity
• Protection from flooding • Protection from coastal erosion • Removal of sediments and excess
nutrients • Aesthetic, Recreational & Educational
values • Self-sustaining ecosystems
Courtesy Joe Luczkovich
Courtesy Robert Buchsbaum
Functional values associated with these habitats: • Plant growth to support food webs • Secondary production • Plant structure to provide habitat • Support of biodiversity • Protection from flooding
• Protection from coastal erosion • Removal of sediments and excess
nutrients • Aesthetic, Recreational & Educational
values • Self-sustaining ecosystems
Photo: Dick Nicholson
Functional values associated with these habitats: • Plant growth to support food webs • Secondary production • Plant structure to provide habitat • Support of biodiversity • Protection from flooding • Protection from coastal erosion • Removal of sediments and excess
nutrients (marshes, seagrasses) to increase habitat stability and improve water quality
• Aesthetic, Recreational & Educational values
• Self-sustaining ecosystems
Photo: Sean Woods
Functional values associated with these habitats: • Plant growth to support food webs
• Secondary production • Plant structure to provide habitat
• Support of biodiversity • Protection from flooding • Protection from coastal erosion
• Removal of sediments and excess nutrients
• Aesthetic, Recreational & Educational values
• Self-sustaining ecosystems
Photo: Fred Short
Photo: Wellfleet Shellfish Dep’t.
Functional values associated with these habitats: • Plant growth to support food webs • Secondary production • Plant structure to provide habitat • Support of biodiversity
Photo: Sean Woods
• Protection from flooding • Protection from coastal erosion • Removal of sediments and excess nutrients • Aesthetic, Recreational & Educational
values
• Self-sustaining ecosystems
Processes that contribute to the Habitats:
Coastal Features Coastal Processes
Gulf of Maine
Eelgrass bed Inlet
Fan Salt Marsh
Cusp
Barrier Beach Spit
Rivers
Step
Storms US
ACoE
Succession Evolution
Plate Tectonics Glaciers
Oceanic Currents
soils
Gulf of Maine
Processes that contribute to the Habitats:
• Primary Production
• Growth
• Herbivory
• Predation
• Decomposition
• Secondary Production
• Migrations of fish (herring, eel, bass) and birds (terns)
Photo: Don DesJardin
Processes that contribute to the Habitats: • Complex Food Webs - a characteristic of a healthy
diverse ecosystem - some have already lost complexity as a result of: – Over-fishing and over-harvesting specific species – Introductions of invasive non-native species – Human alterations to the landscape – Eutrophication
P. Erickson, MIT SeaGrant
Wellfleet Shellfish Dep’t. Fred Short, UNH
Michael Moore
Joe Luczkovich
Threats to Ocean Resources: • Overfishing • Invasive species • Pollution, especially runoff • Habitat alteration • Coastal development • Aquaculture • Climate change
• Pew Oceans Commission
Restoration is about reversing the effects of all of these impacts
• Over- Fishing / Harvesting: examples Northern Right Whale; cod declines; bird and turtle eggs; scallops
Photo: Michael Moore
Photo: Lawrence Taylor
Threats to Coastal Processes and Habitats
Threats to Coastal Processes and Habitats • Introductions of non-native, invasive species: codium,
green crab, Japanese shore crab, others Photo: P. Erickson, MIT SeaGrant
Photo: Ch. Schubart
• Pollution: • Contaminants (metals, organic pesticides) • Bacterial Pathogens • Nutrient over enrichment and the
cascading effects of eutrophication
Photo: Fred Short
Photo: Vincent DeWitt
Threats to Coastal Processes and Habitats
• Human alteration of Habitat • Restricting or blocking tidal exchange • Interruption of sediment supply and transport • Artificial Habitats
Courtesy Robert Buschbaum, MAS
Town of Wellfleet Web Site
Threats to Coastal Processes and Habitats
• Human alteration of Habitat • Restricting or blocking tidal exchange • Interruption of sediment supply and transport
(dredging, erosion control) • Artificial Habitats - from development, aquaculture
Photo: Sean Woods
Threats to Coastal Processes and Habitats
Climate Change Impacts (Tidal Marshes) • Increased sea level – retreat of high marsh? • Increased storm activity - Seaward edges will retreat • Temperature increases - Vegetation Changes:
• Range expansions, loss of forb pannes? • Increased rainfall
• Vegetation change due to Decreased salinity?
Threats to Coastal Processes and Habitats
Our Climate is Changing: Global:
Surface temperatures +0.74°C Arctic temperatures 2X
Snow and Ice: Snow cover decreasing Glaciers shrinking Arctic sea-ice decreasing Ice shelf losses
Thermal expansion of the oceans: SLR has increased from 1.7 to 3.0 mm/yr
Our Climate Continues to Change:
Our LOCAL Climate is Changing: Seasons changing (shorter, warmer winters, ice-out sooner)
More info at: http:/
/CarbonSolutionsNE.org
Our LOCAL Climate is Changing: Local precipitation increased 20% since ’30s (42 in/year) Precipitation events larger Tomas (19th named storm in 2010)
Mean Decadal Trend 1” Precipitation Events
1948-2007
Adapting to Climate Change • Increasing SLR threatens tidal wetlands
– Allow tidal marshes to grow with SLR in elevation – Allow marshes to migrate landward (no barriers)
fromSmith2006
What did we have?�What are we left with?
• Depauperate system – 70% of tidal marshes, almost if not all with
varying degrees of recurring human impacts – Tiny bits of seagrass – Shellfish beds overfished and predated by
invasive species (green crab) – Most rivers dammed, fish ladders have declining
anadromous runs
from: Portnoy, J. and M. Reynolds. 1997. Wellfleet’s Herring River: the case for �habitat restoration. Environment Cape Cod 1:35-43.
Impacts from tidal restrictions: • Loss of fisheries (esp. anadromous spp.) • Vegetation change • Subsidence • Exotic invaders • Mosquito problems • Loss of self-maintenance • Fish passage & trophic export
Nekton Production and Export: �the Trophic Relay
Ethan Nedeau, Biodrawversity
Fish caught in minnow traps marked and released upstream and downstream of culverts
Vegetated marsh Intertidal
channels Subtidal channels
Open estuary
Ocean
young resident nekton
adult resident nekton
young transient nekton
adult transient nekton
Alyson Eberhardt et al.
Recapture results of fish marking study:
Water velocity (m s-1) 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Pass
ag
e ra
te
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
y=-0.1558x+0.2478 r2=0.8517 p<0.0001
Restricted Restored Reference
Fish Passage Rate
Alyson Eberhardt et al. 2011
NEED: New functional indicators: Nekton Production and Export
Vegetated marsh Intertidal
channels Subtidal channels
Open estuary
Ocean
young resident nekton
adult resident nekton
young transient nekton
adult transient nekton
Alyson Eberhardt et al. 2011
Why can’t we see the difference? • Loss of connection to coastal resources
– Out of sight – Don’t care
• Acceptance of environmental degradation • Shifting Baselines http://www.shiftingbaselines.org/lenticulars/index.html
– ‘better than New Jersey’ – We have more important things to deal with – its not broken . . . yet
• Change is cryptic & removed from fundamental causes - increased runoff from impervious surfaces
Why don’t we act?
• Multiple Stable States: change to alternative state is sudden and difficult to reverse
• Loss of connection to coastal resources • Acceptance of environmental degradation • Shifting Baselines • Change is cryptic and removed from
fundamental causes
Why bother?
• Climate Change is coming, we must adapt • So many attempts fail – but not all are equal
– Great track records for success: • Tidal Marsh Restoration • Dam Removal (e.g., Wiswall Dam)
– Fair to poor success / Room for improvement and learning:
• Shellfish Beds • Seagrass Meadows
So, keep the pressure on! • New restorations of all kinds • Integrate habitats
So, keep the pressure on! • New restorations of all kinds • Integrate habitats
Habitat Interactions
GulfofMaine
SeagrassMeadows SaltMarshes
ShellfishBedsandReefs
Se>lementsitesPreda3onrefuge
PreventBrown3desReducesuspended
sediments
Reducesuspendedsediments
Absorbexcessnutrients
High3derefuge
ReducesuspendedsedimentsAbsorbexcessnutrients
ReduceplanktonLow3derefugeReducewaves
CalmphysicalstressesImprovewaterqualityProvidealternatehabitatReduceeutrophicaBon
So, keep the pressure on!
• New restorations of all kinds • Integrate habitats • Measure results
– Critical for Adaptive Management (site) – Improve knowledge and future projects (regional) – Share information (international) – Demonstrate value
• Case Study: Little River Marsh
Case Study: Little River Marsh, NH
Case Study: Little River Marsh, NH
Restoration can be costly – is it worth it?
Goals: To restore natural functions To provide benefits or values to people
-a disconnect
Assessment: Structural indices (hydrology, soils, vegetation, nekton)
Functional values associated with tidal marshes: • Plant growth to support food webs
• Secondary production • Plant structure to provide habitat
• Support of biodiversity • Protection from flooding
• Protection from coastal erosion
• Removal of sediments and excess
nutrients • Aesthetic, Recreational &
Educational values • Self-sustaining ecosystems
• Long term carbon storage
Gulf of Maine “GPAC” Protocols
• Hydrology Tidal Signal (WL Recorders), Elevation
• Soils and Sediments Salinity (and Sulfide, Eh, %C, accretion)
• Vegetation Abundance, Composition, Invasive spp, Ht.
• Nekton ID, Density, Length, Biomass, Richness
• Birds Abundance, Richness, Behavior
Neckles et al. 2002. Restoration Ecology. 10(3):556-563.
Konisky et al. 2004.
RPI – An Evaluation Tool
Calculates % Change towards Reference/Project Goal
Normalizes actual data into a relative index score
Restoration Starting Point
Reference Marsh Value
Restoration Trajectory
Value of Tidal Marsh Ecosystem Services per Annum per Hectare
• Costanza et al. 1987: $9,900 • In 2008 $ (Gedan et al. 2009): $14,400 • Carbon sequestration (European market): $135 • Denitrification (Piehler and Smyth 2011): $6,128
Take:EcologicalValua3on‐structuralandfunc3onalindicatorsusedtomeasuremarshresponsetorestora3on
New Valuation Strategy
Reference Marsh 100%
Restored Marsh
89%
Impacted Marsh
39% Time
Net Gain in Ecosystem Services = $7200/ha/yr
100% = $14,400 /yr
39% = $5,600 /yr
89% = $12,800 /yr
Setitequalto:EconomicValua3on–ecosystemservicevaluesofCostanzaetal.1997(2008:$14,400/ha/yr)
RPI Scores for Little River Marsh
Calcula3onofValueofNetBenefitsfromEcosystemServicesRPI=0.91inYear7;ValuelostduetoimpactsfromBdalrestricBon=41%Year7valuerelaBvetoreferencemarsh=0.91%SO..Restoredbenefits=$14,400/ha*0.41*0.91*70ha=$376,000
RPI Calculations for Little River Marsh
OVER first 5 years (2001-2005) = $1.2 million�OVER next 6 years (2006-2011) = $2.2 million�Cost $1.3 million
From: Chapter 15: TidalRestoraBon:aSynthesisofScienceandManagement
CharlesRoman&DavidBurdick,editorsISLANDPRESSSSummer2012
So, Why restore coastal habitat? • Investment in Natural Capital (self maintenance) • Increases Resilience (Climate Change is coming) • Improves functions of adjacent habitats • Reconnects public to local resources • Returns value to economy every year (no
depreciation) • $$ goes to hire more people (30 / $million)
– RAE
Humboldt Field Research Institute PO Box 9, Steuben, ME 04680-0009 207-546-2821, Fax 207-546-3042 [email protected] www.eaglehill.us
Information is available on . . . • other natural history science seminars • graduate and undergrad university credits • continuing education units/recert. credits
A Natural History Field Seminar at Eagle Hill on the Eastern Maine Coast
An Interactive, Intensive Seminar with Susan C. Adamowicz and David Burdick
Quantifying Ecosystem Services of Restored Tidal Marshes July 29-August 4, 2012