Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Techniques for restoration of disturbed coastal wetlands of the Great Lakes

  • Published:
Wetlands Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A long history of human-induced degradation of Great Lakes wetlands has made restoration a necessity, but the practice of wetland restoration is relatively new, especially in large lake systems. Therefore, we compiled tested methods and developed additional potential methods based on scientific understanding of Great Lakes wetland ecosytems to providc an overview of approaches for restoration. We addressed this challenge by focusing on four general fields of science: hydrology, sedimentology, chemistry, and biology. Hydrologic remediation methods include restoring hydrologic connections between diked and hydrologically altered wetlands and the lakes, restoring water tables lowered by ditching, and restoring natural variation in lake levels of regulated lakes Superior and Ontario. Sedimentological remediation methods include management of sediment input from uplands, removal or proper management of dams on tributary rivers, and restoration of protective barrier beaches and sand spits. Chemical remediation methods include reducing or eliminating inputs of contaminants from point and non-pont sources, natural sediment remediation by biodegradation and chemical degradation, and active sediment remediation by removal or byin situ treatment Biological remediation methods include control of non-target organisms, enhancing populations of target organisms, and enhancing habitat for target organisms. Some of these method were used in three major restoration projects (Metzger Marsh on Lake Erie and Cootes Paradise and Oshawa Second Marsh on Lake Ontario), which are described as case studies to show practical applications of wetland restoration in the Great Lakes. Successful restoration techniques that do not require continued manipulation must be founded in the basic tenets of ecology and should mimic natural processes. Success is demonstrated by the sustainability, productivity, nutrient-retention ability, invasibility, and biotic interactions within a restored wetland.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

  • Anderson, R. C. 1996. The role of research in ecosystem restoration.In Proceedings of the Ecosystem Restoration Workshop. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apfclbaum, S. I. and C. E. Sams. 1987. Ecology and control of reed canary grass (Phalarisarundinacea L.). Natural Areas Journal 7:67–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Averett, D. E., B. D. Perry, E. J. Torrey, and J. A. Miller. 1990. Review of removal, containment, and treatment technologies for remediation of contaminated sediments in the Great Lakes. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, USA. Miscellancous Paper EL-90-25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baedke, S. J. and T. A. Thompson. 1993. Preliminary report of late holocene lake-level variation in northern Lake Michigan: part 1. Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA. Open File Report 93-4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, J. P. 1990. Influence of subsequent flooding depth on cattail control by burning and mowing. Journal of Aquatic Plant Management 28:32–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balogh, G. R. 1986. Ecology, distribution, and control of purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in Ohio’s Lake Erie marshes. M.S. Thesis. Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, T. and E. Machowski. 1996. A preliminary plan for statewide management of northern pike in Connecticut. State of Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Hartford, CT, USA. F-57-R-14 Final Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belusz, L. C. 1978. An evaluation of the muskellunge fishery of Lake Pomme de Terre and efforts to improve stocking success. p. 292–297.In R. L. Kendall (ed.) Selected Coolwater Fishes of North America. American Fisheries Society, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, G. W. 1970. Management of Lakes and Ponds. 2nd edition. Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, FL, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, S., E. Jeppersen, and M. Sendergaard. 1997. Pike (Esox lucius L.) stocking as a biomanipulation tool. 1. Effects on the fish population in Lake Lyng, Denmark. Hydrobiologia 342/343:311–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blokpoel, H. and S. Jarvic. 1995. Use of reefrafts to create habitat for birds and fish. p. 51–54.In J. R. M. Kelso and J. H. Hartig (eds.) Methods of Modifying Habitat to Benefit the Great Lakes Ecosystem. CISTI (Canadian Institute of Science Technical Information) Occasional Paper No. 1.

  • Blossey, B. 1993. Herbivory below ground and biological weed control: life history of a root-boring weevil on purple loosestrife. Occologia 94:380–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blosey, B., D. Schroeder, S. D. Hight, and R. A. Malecki. 1994. Host specificity and environmental impact of two leaf bectles (Galerucella calmariensis andG. pusilla) for biological control of purple loosestrife,Lythrum salicaria. Weed Science 42:134–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bookhout, T. A., K. E. Bednarik, and R. W. Kroll. 1989. The Great Lakes marshes. p. 131–156.In L. M. Smith, R. L. Pederson, and R. M. Kaminski (eds.) Habitat Management for Migrating and Wintering Waterfowl in North America. Texas Tech University Press, Lubbock, TX, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, K. 1998. Marsh vegetation in Cootes Paradise. Royal Botanical Gardens. Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Vegetation Monitoring Fact Sheet 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, K. and T. Theijsmeijer. 1998. The Cootes Paradise fishway. Royal Botanical Gardens, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Fishway Fact Sheet 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boylen, C. W., L. W. Eichler, and J. W. Sutherland. 1996. Physical control of Eurasian watermilfoil in an oligotrophic lake. Hydrobiologia 340:213–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw, A. D. 1984. Ecological principles and land reclamation practice. Landscape Planning 11:35–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw, A. D. 1987. The reclamation of derelict land and the ecology of ecosystems. p. 53–74.In W. R. Jordan III, M. P. Gilpin, and J. D. Aber (eds.) Restoration Ecology: a Synthetic Approach to Ecological Research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw, A. D. 1993. Restoration ecology as a science. Restoration Ecology 1:71–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady, V. J., B. J. Cardinale, and T. M. Burton. 1995. Zebra mussels in a coastal marsh: the seasonal and spatial limits of colonization. Journal of Great Lakes Research 21:587–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bray, K. 1995. McKellar River habitat creation project. p. 106–111.In J. R. M. Kelso and J. H. Hartig (eds.) Methods of Modifying Habitat to Benefit the Great Lakes Ecosystem. CISTI (Canadian Institute of Science Technical Information) Occasional Paper No. 1.

  • Broussard, L. J. 1988. Report on current marsh management engineering practices. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Alexandria, LA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cairns, J. Jr. 1987. Disturbed ecosystems as opportunities for research in restoration ecology. p. 307–320.In W. R. Jordan III, M. P. Gilpin, and J. D. Aber (eds.) Restoration Ecology: a Synthetic Approach to Ecological Research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, S. R. and D. M. Lodge. 1986. Effects of submersed macrophytes on ecosystem processes. Aquatic Botany 26:341–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cecile, C. P. 1983. Oshawa Second Marsh baseline study. Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • City of Oshawa. 1992. Oshawa Second Marsh management plan. City of Oshawa, Oshawa, Ontario, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clewell, A. F. 1993. Ecology, restoration ecology, and ecological restoration. Restoration Ecology 1:141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connell, J. H. 1978,. Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs. Science 199:1302–1310.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Conservation Foundation. 1988. Protecting America’s wetlands: an action agenda. The Conservation Foundation, Washington, DC. USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, G. D. 1980. Lake-level drawdown as a macrophyte control technique. Water Resources Bulletin 16:317–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross, D. H. and K. L. Fleming. 1989. Control ofPhragmites or common reed. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, USA. Fish and Wildlife Leaflet 13.4.12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denney, B. E. and K. S. Fricbergs. 1979. The use of anchored beach system in Metro Toronto. Proceedings on Coastal Structures, ’79 ASCE 2:838.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, J. 1987. Reflections on goals and on the relationship between theory and practice. p. 329–336.In W. R. Jordan III, M. P. Gilpin, and J. D. Aber (eds.) Restoration Ecology: a Synthetic Approach to Ecological Research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dushenko, W. T., A. Crowder, and B. Cameron. 1990. Revegetation in the Bay of Quinte, Lake Ontario: preliminary lab and field experiments. p. 245–254.In J. Kusler and R. Smardon (eds.) Proceedings: International Wetland Symposium, Wetlands of the Great Lakes. Association of State Wetland Managers, Inc., Berne, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engel, S. 1985. Aquatic community interactions of submerged macrophytes. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI, USA. Technical Bulletin No. 156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engel, S. 1990. Ecological impacts of harvesting macrophytes in Halverson Lake, Wisconsin. Journal of Aquatic Plant Management 28:41–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewel, J. J. 1987. Restoration is the ultimate test of ecological theory. p. 31–33.In W. R. Jordan III, M. P. Gilpin, and J. D. Aber (eds.) Restoration Ecology; a Synthetic Approach to Ecological Research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahnenstiel, G. L., T. B. Bridgeman, G. A. Lang, M. J. McCormick, and T. F. Nalepa. 1995., Phytoplankton productivity in Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron: effects of zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) colonization. Journal of Great Lakes Research 21:465–475.

    Google Scholar 

  • French, J. R. P. III. D. A. Wilcox, and S. J. Nichols. 1999. Passing of northern pike and common carp through experimental barriers designed for use in wetland restoration. Wetlands 19:883–888.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galatowitsch, S. M., N. O. Anderson, and P. D Ascher. 1999. Invasiveness in wetland plants in temperate North America. Wetlands 19:733–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geiling, D. 1995. McVicar Creek mouth island creation. p. 39–44.In J. R. M. Kelso and J. H Hartig (eds.) Methods of Modifying Habitat to Benefit the Great Lakes Ecosystem., CISTI (Canadian Institute of Science Technical Information) Occasional Paper No. 1.

  • Gilbert, O. L. and P. Anderson. 1998. Habitat Creation and Repair. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goeman, T. J. and P. D. Spencer. 1992. Fish community responses to manipulation of northern pike and yellow perch densities in a Minnesota centrarchid lake. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, St. Paul, MN, USA. Investigational Report 416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grillmayer, R. 1995. Transplanting aquatic vegetation in Collingwood Harbour. p. 73–81.In J. R. M. Kclso and J. H. Hartig (eds.) Methods of Modifying Habitat to Benefit the Great Lakes Ecosystem. CISTI (Canadian Institute of Science Technical Information) Occasional Paper No. 1.

  • Grimm, M. P. and J. J. G. M. Backx. 1990. The restoration of shallow eutrophic lakes, and the role of northern pike, aquatic vegetation, and nutrient concentration. Hydrobiologia 200/201:557–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton Region Conservation Authority. 1995. Welcome to the littoral zone-suggestions for natural improvements. Hamilton Region Coservation Authority, Ancaster, Ontario, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, D. A. and T. L. Margenau. 1992. Movement, habitat sclection, behavior and survival of stocked muskellunge. American Journal of Fisheries Management 12:474–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henshaw, B. 1996. Background document to the Second Marsh Workshop. Friends of Second Marsh, Oshaw, Ontario, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hight, S. D., B. Blossey, and R. Declerck-Floate. 1995. Establishment of insect biological control agents from Europe againstLythrum salicaria in North America. Environmental Entomology 24:967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs, R. J. and D. A. Norton. 1996. Towards a conceptual framework for restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 4:93–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchison, M. 1992. Vegetation management guideline: reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.). Natural Areas Journal 12:159.

    Google Scholar 

  • ILERSB. 1981. Lake Erie water-level study. International Lake Erie Regulation Study Board, International, Joint Commission. Windsor, Ontario, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, S. T. and D. K. Singer. 1995. Report on pollen and macrofossil analyses of Metzger Marsh sediment cores. Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvie, S. and H. Blokpoel. 1996. Reefrafts for common terns and fish: guidelines for design, construction, and operation. Environment Canada, Downsview. ON, Canada. Great Lakes 2000 Cleanup Fund Fact Sheet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, I. M. 1986. Plant invasion windows: a time-based classification of invasion potential. Biological Reviews 61:369–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaminski, R. M., H. R. Murkin, and C. E. Smith. 1985. Control of cattail and bulrush by cutting and flooding. p. 253–262.In H. H. Prince and F. M. D’Itri (eds.) Coastal Wetlands. Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, MI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keddy, P. A. 1983. Shreline vegetation in Axe Lake, Ontario: effects of exposure on zonation patterns. Ecology 64:331–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keddy, P. A. and A. A. Reznicek. 1986. Great Lakes vegetation dynamics: the role of fluctuating water levels and buried seeds. Journal of Great Lakes Research 12:25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keough, J. R., T. A. Thompson, G. R. Guntenspergen, and D. A. Wilcox. 1999. Hydrogeomorphic factors and ecosystem responses in coastal wetlands of the Great Lakes. Wetlands 19:821–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, D. R. and G. S. Hunt. 1967. Effect of carp on vegetation in a Lake Erie marsh. Journal of Wildlife Management 31:181–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, L. J. 1966. Weeds of the World: Biology and Control. Interscience Publishers, Inc., New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korschgen, C. E. and W. L. Green. 1988. American wildcelery (Vallisneria americana): ecological considerations for restoration. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, USA. Fish and Wildlife Technical Report 19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowalski, K. P. and D. A. Wilcox. 1999. Use of historical and geospatial data to guide the restoration of a Lake Erie coastal marsh. Wetlands 19:858–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaMarra, V. J., Jr. 1975. Digestive activities of carp as a major contributor to the nutrient loading of lakes. Verhandlungen Internationale Vereinigung fuer Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie 19:2461–2468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leadbeater, D. 1998. Vegetation monitoring, Oshawa Second Marsh 1997. Friends of Second Marsh, Oshawa, Ontario., Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, P. F. 1995. Aquatic macrophyte establishment in McKellar River embayments at Thunder Bay, Ontario. p. 179–183.In J. R. M. Kelso and J. H. Hartig (eds.) Methods of Modifying Habitat to Benefit the Great Lakes Ecosystem. CISTI (Canadian Institute of Science Technical Information) Occasional Paper No. 1.

  • Lougheed, V. L., B. Crosbie, and P. Chow-Fraser. 1998. Predictions on the effect of common carp (Cyprinus carpio) exclusion on water quality, zooplaankton, and submergent macrophytes in a Great Lakes wetland. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55:1189–1197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowe, K. S. 1988. Help for Lake St. Clair’s ducks. Michigan Outof-Doors January:22–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur, R. H. and E. O. Wilson. 1967. The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacMahon, J. A. 1987. Disturbed lands and ecological theory: an essay about a mutualistic association. p. 221–237.In W. R. Jordan III, M. P. Gilpin, and J. D. Aber (eds.) Restoration Ecology: a Synthetic Approach to Ecological Research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, J. D. 1997. Methods for management of nonindigenous aquatic plants. p. 145–171.In J. O. Luken and J. W. Theriot (eds.) Assessment and Management of Plant Invasions. Springer, New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, J. D., L. W. Eichler, and C. W. Boylen. 1988. Vegetative spread of Eurasian watermilfoil in Lake George. Journal of Aquatic Plant Management 26:47–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnuson, J. J., H. A. Regier, W. J. Christien, and W. C. Sonzogi. 1980. To rehabilitate and restore Great Lakes ecosystems. p. 95–112.In J. Cairns (ed.) The Recovery Process in Damaged Ecosystems. Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margenau, T. L. 1992. Survival and cost-effectiveness of stocked fall fingerlings and spring yearling muskellunge in Wisconsin. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 12:484–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marks, M., B. Lapin, and J. Randall. 1994.Phragmites australis (P. communis): threats, management, and monitoring. Natural Areas Journal 14:285–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mather, M. E. and D. H. Wahl. 1989. Comparative mortality of three esocids due to stocking stressors. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 46:214–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathers, A. and K. Hartley. 1995. Sawquini Creek marsh channel creation project. p. 197–199.In J. R. M. Kelso and J. H. Hartig (eds.) Methods of Modifying Habitat to Benefit the Great Lakes Ecosystem CISTI (Canadian Institute of Science Technical Information) Occasional Paper No. 1.

  • Maynard, L. and D. A. Wilcox. 1997. Coastal wetlands of the Great Lakes. State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference ’96. Environment Canada and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA. EPA 905-R-97-015b.

    Google Scholar 

  • McHattic B., M. Taylor, D. Hoysak, C. Seburn, D. Seburn. D. Dennis, C. A. Bishop, P. J. Evans, and D. V. Weseloh. 1995. Habitat rehabilitation in the Great Lakes: techniques for enhancing biodiversity. Great Lakes 2000 Cleanup Fund, Environment Canada, Ontario Region, Burlington, Ontario, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNicoll, D. M. and A. S. Baweja. 1995. Bioremediation of petroleum-contaminated soils: an innovative, environmentally friendly technology. Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meeker, J. E. 1996. Wild-rice and sedimentation processes in a Lake Superior coastal wetlands. Wetlands 16:219–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meeks, R. L. 1969. The effect of drawdown date on wetland plant succession. Journal of Wildlife Management 33:817–821.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, D. S. 1974. Water weeds. p. 13–23.In D. S. Mitchell (ed.) Aquatic Vegetation and Its Use and Control. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, Paris, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naglich, F. G. 1994. Reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) in the Pacific Northwest: growth parameters, economic uses, and control. M.S. Thesis. Evergree State College, Olympia, WA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Navarro, J. E. and D. L. Johnson. 1992. Ecology of stocked northern pike in two Lake Erie controlled wetlands. Wetlands 12:171–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, S. J., M. G. Black, and J. D. Allen. 1999. Use of refugia to protect unionid populations from zebra mussel induced mortality. p. xx–xx.In Proceedings of the Freshwater Mussel Symposium: Conservation, Captive Care, and Propagation. Columbus, OH, USA. (in press).

  • Nichols, S. J. and D. A. Wilcox. 1997. Burrowing saves Lake Erie clams. Nature 389:921.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, M. K., H. R. valverde, A. C. Trembanis, and T. C. Haddad. 1999. Summary of beach nourishment activity along the Greal Lakes’ shoreline, 1955–1996. Journal of Coastal Research 15:206–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Painter, D. S., K. J. Cabe, and L. Simser. 1989. Past and present limnological conditions in Cootes Paradise affecting aquatic vegetation. Royal Botanical Gardens, Hamiton, Ontario, Canada. Technical Bulletin No. 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Passino-Reader, D. M., M. A. Kamrin, and J. P. Hickey. 1999. Natural remediation in the Great Lakes. Chapter 14.In C. M. Swindoll and R. G. Stahl (eds.) Natural Remediation of Environmental Contaminants: Its Role in Ecological Risk Assessment. SETAC Press, Pensacola, FL, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piclou, E. C. 1975. Ecological Diviersity. J. Wiley and Sons, New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawinski, T. J. and R. A. Malecki. 1984. Ecological relationships among purple loosestrife, cattail, and wildlife at Montezuma National Wildlife Refuge. New York Fish and Game Journal 31:83–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeders, H. H., A. bij de Vaate, and R. Noordhuis. 1993. Potential of the zebra mussel (Dreissenapolymorpha) for water quality management. p. 439–451.In T. F. Nalepa and D. W. Schloesser (eds.) Zebra Mussels: Biology, Impacts, and Control. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson Marine Publishing. 1995. Richardson’s Chartbook & Cruising Guide: Lake Michigan Edition. Richardson Marine Publishing, Chicago, IL, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Royal Botanical Garden, 1997. Cootes Paradise Marsh Technical Workshop background document, Royal Botanical Garden. Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sager, E. P. S., T. H. Whillans, and M. G. Fox. 1998. Factors influencing the recovery of submersed macrophytes in four coastal marshes on Lake Ontario. Wetlands 18:256–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schloesser, D. W. 1996. Miltigation of unionid mortality caused by zebra mussel infestation: cleaning of unionids. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 16:942–946.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schloesser, D. W., T. F. Nalepa, and G. L. Mackie. 1996. Zebra mussel infestation of unionid bivalves (Unionidae) in North America. American Zoologist 36:300–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schnick, R. A., J. M. Morton, J. C. Mochalski, and J. T. Beall. 1982. Mitigation and enhancement techniques for the upper Mississippi River system and other large river systems. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, USA. Resource Publication 149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, J., B. Forsberg, V. Lamarra, G. Lindmark, M. Lynch, E. Smeltzer, and G. Zoto. 1982. Experiments and experiences in biomanipulation. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA. Interim Report No. 19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shay, J. M., D. J. Thompson, and C. T. Shay. 1987. Post-fire performance ofPhragmites australis (Cav.) Trin in the Delta Marsh. Manitoba, Canada Archiv fuer Hydrobiologie Beiheft Ergebnisse der Limnologie 27:95–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silvester, R. and J. R. C. Hsu. 1991. New and old ideas in coastal sedimentation. Reviews in Aquatic Sciences 4:375–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skubinna, J. P., T. G. Coon, and T. R. Batterson. 1995. Increased abundance and depth of submersed macrophytes in response to decreased turbidity in Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron. Journal of Great Lakes Research 21:476–488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sojda, R. S. and K. L. Solberg. 1993. Management and control of cattails. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, USA. Fish and Wildlife Leaflet 13.4.13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sondergaard, M., E. Jeppersen, and S. Berg. 1997. Pike (Esox lucius L.) stocking as a biomanipulation tool. 2. Effects on lower trophic levels in Lake Lyng, Denmark. Hydrobiologia 342/343:319–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, D. H. N. 1982. The zonation of plants in freshwater lakes. Advances in Ecological Research 12:37–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strus, R. 1995. Metro Toronto Waterfront: restoration of natural habitat structure. p. 55–58.In J. R. M. Kelso and J. H. Hartig (eds.) Methods of Modifying Habitat to Benefit the Great Lakes Ecosystem. CISTI (Canadian Institute of Science Technical Information) Occasional Paper No. 1.

  • Thompson, D. J. and J. M. Shay. 1985. The effects of fire onPhragmites australis in the Delta Marsh, Manitoba. Candian Journal of Botany 63:1864–1869.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, D. Q., R. L. Stuckey, and E. B. Thompson. 1987. Spread, impact, and control of purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in North American wetlands. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, USA. Fish and Wildlife Research 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, T. A. 1992. Beach-ridge development and lake-level variation in southern Lake Michigan. Sedimentary Geology 80:305–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, T. A., G. S. Fraser, and N. C. Hester. 1991. Lake-level variation in southern Lake Michgan: magnitude and timing of fluctuations over the past 4.000 years. Indiana Geological Survey, Bloomington, IN, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thunhorst, G. A. 1993. Wetland Planting Guide for the Northeastern United States. Environmental Concern, St. Michaels. MD. USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Titus, J. E. and M. D. Stephens. 1983. Neighbor influences and seasonal growth patterns forVallisneria americana in a mesotrophic lake. Oecologia (Berl.) 56:23–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trotter, K. and J. D. Hall. 1998. Cootes Paradise fact sheet. Royal Botanical Gardens, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • USACE. 1999. Monthly bulletin of lake levels for the Great Lakes. Detroit District, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Detroit. MI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • USEPA. 1994a. EPA’s contaminated sediment management strategy. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA. EPA 823-R-94-001.

    Google Scholar 

  • USEPA. 1994b. ARCS remediation guidance document. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office, Chicago, IL, USA., EPA 905-R-94-003.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Toorn, J. and J. H. Mook. 1982. The influence of environmental factors and management of stands ofPhragmites australis. 1. Effects of burning, frost, and insect damage on shoot density and shoot size. Journal of Applied Ecology 19:477–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Valk, A. G. 1981. Succession in wetlands: a Gleasonian approach. Ecology 62:688–696.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Valk, A. G. and C. B. Davis. 1980. The impact of a natural drawdown on the growth of four emergent species in a prairie glacial marsh. Aquatic Botany 9:301–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vincent, J. 1995a. Wetland plantings within the Mimico Creek estuary, Humber Bay park, city of Etobicoke, p. 133–138.In J. R. M. Kelso and J. H. Hartig (eds.) Methods of Modifying Habitat to Benefit the Great Lakes Ecosystem. CISTI (Canadian Institute of Science Technical Information) Occasional Paper No. 1.

  • Vincent, J. 1995b. Toronto Islands northern pike spawning habitat. p. 139–144.In J. R. M. Kelso and J. H. Hartig (eds.) Methods of Modifying Habitat to Benefit the Great Lakes Ecosystem. CISTI (Canadian Institute of Science Technical Information) Occasional Paper No. 1.

  • Vincent, J. 1995c. Col. Samuel Smith waterfront park bass spawning area. p. 128–132.In J. R. M. Kelso and J. H. Hartig (eds.) Methods of Modifying Habitat to Benefit the Great Lakes Ecosystem. CISTI (Canadian Institute of Science Technical Information) Occasional Paper No. 1.

  • Weller, M. W. 1981. Freshwater Marshes. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weller, M. W. and C. S. Spatcher. 1965. Role of habitat in the distribution and abundance of marsh birds. Iowa Agricultural and Home Economics Experiment Station. Ames, IA, USA. Special Report No. 43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westerdahl, H. E. and K. D. Getsinger (eds.). 1988. Aquatic plant identification and herbicide use guide; volume I: aquatic herbicides and application equipment, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS, USA. Technical Report A-88-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wetzel, R. G. 1975. Limnology. W. B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whillans, T. H. 1996. Historic and comparative perspectives on rehabilitation of marshes as habitat for fish in the lower Great Lakes basin. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53 (supplement 1):58–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, D. A. 1995. The role of wetlands as nearshore habitat in Lake Huron. p. 223–245.In M. Munawar, T. Edsall, and J. Leach (eds.) The Lake Huron Ecosystem: Ecology, Fisheries, and Management. SPB Academic Publishing by, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, D. A. and J. E. Meeker. 1991. Disturbance effects on aquatic vegetation in regulated and unregulated lakes in northern Minnesota. Canadian Journal of Botany 69:1542–1551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, D. A. and J. E. Meeker. 1992. Implications for faunal habitat related to altered macrophyte structure in regulated lakes in north ern Minnesota. Wetlands 12:192–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, D. A., J. E. Meeker, and J. Elias. 1993. Impacts of water-level regulation on wetlands of the Great Lakes. Phase 2 Report to Working Committee 2, International Joint Commission Water-Levels Reference Study. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada and Washington, DC, USA.

  • Wilcox, D. A. and G. Ray. 1989. Using living mat transplant to restore a salt-impacted bog (Indiana). Restoration and Management Notes 7(1):39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, D. A., M. K. Seeling, and K. R. Edwards. 1988. Ecology and management potential for purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria). Proceedings of the Conference on Science in the National Parks 5:120–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zedler, J. B., G. D. Williams, and J. S. Desmond. 1997. Wetland mitigation: can fishes distinguish between natural and constructed wetlands? Fisheries 22(3):26–28.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Great Lakes Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, 1451 Green Rd, 48105, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Douglas A. Wilcox

  2. Environmental and Resource Studies, Trent University, K9J 7B8, Ontario, Peterborough, Canada

    Thomas H. Whillans

Authors
  1. Douglas A. Wilcox
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas H. Whillans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wilcox, D.A., Whillans, T.H. Techniques for restoration of disturbed coastal wetlands of the Great Lakes. Wetlands 19, 835–857 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03161787

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03161787

Key Words

Search

Navigation