Skip to main content
Log in

Resource protection for waterbirds in Chesapeake bay

  • Profile
  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many living resources in the Chesapeake Bay estuary have deteriorated over the past 50 years. As a result, many governmental committees, task forces, and management plans have been established. Most of the recommendations for implementing a bay cleanup focus on reducing sediments and nutrient flow into the watershed. We emphasize that habitat requirements other than water quality are necessary for the recovery of much of the bay's avian wildlife, and we use a waterbird example as illustration. Some of these needs are: (1) protection of fast-eroding islands, or creation of new ones by dredge deposition to improve nesting habitat for American black ducks(Anas rubripes), great blue herons(Ardea herodias), and other associated wading birds; (2) conservation of remaining brackish marshes, especially near riparian areas, for feeding black ducks, wading birds, and wood ducks(Aix sponsa); (3) establishment of sanctuaries in open-water, littoral zones to protect feeding and/or roosting areas for diving ducks such as canvasbacks(Aythya valisineria) and redheads(Aythya americana), and for bald eagles(Haliaeetus leucocephalus); and (4) limitation of disturbance by boaters around nesting islands and open-water feeding areas. Land (or water) protection measures for waterbirds need to include units at several different spatial scales, ranging from “points” (e.g., a colony site) to large-area resources (e.g., a marsh or tributary for feeding). Planning to conserve large areas of both land and water can be achieved following a biosphere reserve model. Existing interagency committees in the Chesapeake Bay Program could be more effective in developing such a model for wildlife and fisheries resources.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Anon. 1988. Population growth and development in the Chesapeake Bay watershed to the year 2020. Report of the year 2020 panel to the Chesapeake Executive Council, Annapolis, Maryland.

  • Chesapeake Bay Executive Council. 1985. Chesapeake Bay restoration and protection plan. Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Environmental Protection Agency, Annapolis, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesapeake Bay Executive Council. 1988. Habitat requirements for Chesapeake Bay living resources. Chesapeake Bay Program, Annapolis, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, J. R. 1991. Management of coastal barrier biosphere reserves.BioScience 41:331–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeMoss, T. B., D. A. Flemer, C. J. Strobel, and D. Wilding. 1981. Trends in water quality for Chesapeake Bay relative to improved management.Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 46:230–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlich, P., and A. Ehrlich. 1981. Extinction. Random House, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erwin, R. M. 1979. Coastal waterbird colonies: Cape Elizabeth, Maine to Virginia. US Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-79/10.

  • Erwin, R. M. 1989. Responses to human intruders by birds nesting colonies: Experimental results and management guidelines.Colonial Waterbirds 12:104–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erwin, R. M., and J. A. Spendelow. 1991. Colonial wading birds: Herons and egrets. Pages 19.1–19.14in S. Funderburk, S. Jordan, J. Mihursky, and D. Riley (eds.), Habitat requirements for Chesapeake Bay living resources, 2nd ed., revised. Chesapeake Research Consortium, Inc., Solomons, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, J. D., G. D. Therres, D. A. Buehler, and J. K. D. Seegar. 1991. Bald eagle. Pages 21.1–21.9in S. Funderburk, S. Jordan, J. Mihursky, and D. Riley (eds.), Habitat requirements for Chesapeake Bay living resources, 2nd ed., revised. Chesapeake Research Consortium, Inc., Solomons, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Funderburk, S., S. Jordan, J. Mihursky, and D. Riley (eds.). 1991. Habitat requirements for Chesapeake Bay living resources, 2nd ed., revised. Chesapeake Research Consortium, Inc., Solomons, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gates, J. E., D. Brinker, and J. McKearnan. in press. Maryland Waterbird Study. Project FW-8-P: Final Report. Maryland Forests, Parks, and Wildlife, Wye Mills, Maryland (in press).

  • Gosselink, J., G. Shaffer, L. Lee, D. Burdick, D. Childers, N. Liebowitz, S. Hamilton, R. Boumans, D. Cushman, S. Fields, M. Koch, and J. Visser. 1990. Landscape conservation in a forested wetland watershed.BioScience 40:533–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haramis, G. M. 1991a. Wood duck. Pages 15.1–15.11in S. Funderburk, S. Jordan, J. Mihursky, and D. Riley (eds.), Habitat requirements for Chesapeake Bay living resources, 2nd ed., revised. Chesapeake Research Consortium, Inc., Solomons, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haramis, G. M. 1991b. Canvasback. Pages 17.1–17.10in S. Funderburk, S. Jordan, J. Mihursky, and D. Riley (eds.), Habitat requirements for Chesapeake Bay living resources, 2nd ed., revised. Chesapeake Research Consortium, Inc., Solomons, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haramis, G. M. 1991c. Redhead. Pages 18.1–18.10in S. Funderburk, S. Jordan, J. Mihursky, and D. Riley (eds.), Habitat requirements for Chesapeake Bay living resources, 2nd ed., revised. Chesapeake Research Consortium, Inc., Solomons, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinz, G., and S. Weimeyer. 1991. Effects of contaminants on birds. Pages 23.1–23.9in S. Funderburk, S. Jordan, J. Mihursky, and D. Riley (eds.), Habitat requirements for Chesapeake Bay living resources, 2nd ed., revised. Chesapeake Research Consortium, Inc., Solomons, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kearney, M., and J. C. Stevenson. 1991. Island land loss and marsh vertical accretion rate: Evidence for historical sealevel changes in Chesapeake Bay.Journal of Coastal Research 7:403–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerwin, J., R. Munro, and W. Peterson. 1976. Distribution and abundance of aquatic vegetation in the upper Chesapeake Bay, 1971–1974. Pages 393–400in J. Davis (ed.), The effects of tropical storm Agnes on the Chesapeake Bay estuarine system. Chesapeake Research Consortium, Inc. CRC Pub. No. 54, 639 pp.

  • Krementz, D. G. 1991. American black duck. Pages 16.1–16.7in S. Funderburk, S. Jordan, J. Mihursky, and D. Riley (eds.), Habitat requirements for Chesapeake Bay living resources, 2nd ed., revised. Chesapeake Research Consortium, Inc., Solomons, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krementz, D. G., V. D. Stotts, D. B. Stotts, J. E. Hines, and S. L. Funderburk. 1991. Historical changes in laying date, clutch size, and nest success of American black ducks.Journal of Wildlife Management 55:462–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Master, L. 1991. Assessing threats and setting priorities for conservation.Conservation Biology 5:559–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, J. P. 1986. Sex and gluttony on Delaware Bay.Natural History 95:69–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Officer, C. B., R. B. Biggs, J. L. Taft, L. E. Cronin, M. A. Tyler, and W. R. Boynton. 1984. Chesapeake Bay anoxia: Origin, development, and significance.Science 223:22–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohlendorf, H. M. 1981. The Chesapeake Bay's birds and organochlorine pollutants.Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 46:259–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orth, R. J. and K. A. Moore. 1983. Chesapeake Bay: An unprecedented decline in submerged aquatic vegetation. Science 223:51–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reese, J. 1991. Osprey. Pages 20.1–20.11in S. Funderburk, S. Jordan, J. Mihursky, and D. Riley (eds.), Habitat requirements for Chesapeake Bay living resources, 2nd ed., revised. Chesapeake Research Consortium, Inc., Solomons, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schubel, J. R. 1986. The life and death of the Chesapeake Bay. University of Maryland Sea Grant Publication, College Park, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Short, H. and R. Cooper. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Great blue heron. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Biol. Rep. 82(10.99), Washington, DC.

  • Tiner, R. W., Jr. 1987. Mid-Atlantic wetlands: A disappearing natural treasure. US Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88.

  • US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1982. Chesapeake Bay Program technical studies: A synthesis. Washington, DC, 635 pp.

  • US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1983a. Chesapeake Bay: A framework for action. Region 3, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 186 pp.

  • US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1983b. Chesapeake Bay Program: Findings and recommendations. Region 3, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 48 pp.

  • US FWS (Fish and Wildlife Service). 1991. Vision for the future. US Department of the Interior, Washington, DC, 12 pp.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Erwin, R.M., Haramis, G.M., Krementz, D.G. et al. Resource protection for waterbirds in Chesapeake bay. Environmental Management 17, 613–619 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02393723

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02393723

Key words

Navigation