Ecological responses to tidal restorations of two northern New England salt marshes
- 268 Downloads
Efforts are underway to restore tidal flow in New England salt marshes that were negatively impacted by tidal restrictions. We evaluated a planned tidal restoration at Mill Brook Marsh (New Hampshire) and at Drakes Island Marsh (Maine) where partial tidal restoration inadvertently occurred. Salt marsh functions were evaluated in both marshes to determine the impacts from tidal restriction and the responses following restoration. Physical and biological indicators of salt marsh functions (tidal range, surface elevations, soil water levels and salinities, plant cover, and fish use) were measured and compared to those from nonimpounded reference sites. Common impacts from tidal restrictions at both sites were: loss of tidal flooding, declines in surface elevation, reduced soil salinity, replacement of salt marsh vegetation by fresh and brackish plants, and loss of fish use of the marsh.
Water levels, soil salinities and fish use increased immediately following tidal restoration. Salt-intolerant vegetation was killed within months. After two years, mildly salt-tolerant vegetation had been largely replaced in Mill Brook Marsh by several species characteristic of both high and low salt marshes. Eight years after the unplanned, partial tidal restoration at Drakes Island Marsh, the vegetation was dominated bySpartina alterniflora, a characteristic species of low marsh habitat.
Hydrologic restoration that allowed for unrestricted saltwater exchange at Mill Brook restored salt marsh functions relatively quickly in comparison to the partial tidal restoration at Drakes Island, where full tidal exchange was not achieved. The irregular tidal regime at Drakes Island resulted in vegetation cover and patterns dissimilar to those of the high marsh used as a reference. The proper hydrologic regime (flooding height, duration and frequency) is essential to promote the rapid recovery of salt marsh functions. We predict that functional recovery will be relatively quick at Mill Brook, but believe that the habitat at Drakes Island will not become equivalent to that of the reference marsh unless the hydrology is further modified.
Keywordsfunctional assessment hydrologic restoration New England salt marsh Spartina tidal restriction
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Beeftink, W.G. 1979. The structure of salt marsh communities in relation to environmental disturbances.In: Jefferies, R.I. and Davy, A.J. (eds). Ecological Processes in Coastal Environments. pp 77–93. Blackwell, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
- Bird, E.C.F. 1993. Submerging Coasts: The Effect of Rising Sea Level on Coastal Environments. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
- Burdick, D.M., and Dionne, M. 1994. Comparison of salt marsh restoration and creation techniques in promoting native vegetation and functional values. Office of State Planning. Concord, NH. 65 pp.Google Scholar
- Frenkel R.E., and Morlan, J.C. 1991. Can we restore our salt marshes? Lessons from the Salmon River, Oregon. Northwest Environ. J., 7: 119–135.Google Scholar
- Josselyn, M., Zedler, J. and Griswold, T. 1990. Wetland mitigation along the Pacific Coast of the United States.In: J. Kusler, A. and Kentula, M.E. (eds) Wetland Creation and Restoration. The Status of the Science. pp 3–36. Island Press. Washington D.C.Google Scholar
- Kelley, J.T., Gehrels, W.R. and Belnap, D.F. 1995. Late Holocene relative sea level rise and the geological development of tidal marshes at Wells, Maine, USA. J. Coast. Res., 11: 136–153.Google Scholar
- Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G. 1986. Wetlands. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York. 539 pp.Google Scholar
- Niering, W.A., and Bowers, R.M. 1966. Our disappearing tidal marshes. Conn. Abor. Bull. 12: 1–36.Google Scholar
- Rced, D.J., and Cahoon, D.R. 1992. The relationship between marsh surface topography, hydroperiod, and growth ofSpartina alterniflora in a deteriorating Louisiana salt marsh. J. Coast. Res., 8: 77–87.Google Scholar
- Rozsa, R. 1988. An overview of wetland restoration projects in Connecticut.In: Lefor, M. and Kennard, W. (eds) Proceedings of the IV Wetland Conference, pp 1–11. Connecticut Institute of Water Resources, University of Connecticut. Storrs, CT.Google Scholar
- Shisler, J.K. 1990. Creation and restoration of coastal wetlands of the northeastern United States.In: J. A. Kusler and M. E. Kentula (eds) Wetland creation and restoration. The status of the science. pp 143–170. Island Press, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
- Short, F.T. 1987. Production, Nutrition, and Ecological Health of the Wells Salt Marshes. NOAA Tech. Rep. Contract No. NA86AA-D-CZ032. 59 pp.Google Scholar
- Stevenson, J.C., Ward, L.G. and Kearney, M.S. 1986. Vertical accretion in marshes with varying rates of sea level rise.In: Wolfe, S.A. (ed) Estuarine Variability pp 212–259. Academic, New York.Google Scholar
- Tiner, R.W. 1987. A field guide to coastal plants of the northeastern United States. The University of Massachusetts Press. Amherst, MA. 285 pp.Google Scholar
- USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1994. Evaluation of restorable salt marshes in New Hampshire. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Durham, NH. 32 pp.Google Scholar
- Zedler, J., Josselyn, M. and Onuf, C. 1982. Restoration techniques, research, and monitoring: Vegetation.In: Josselyn. M. (ed) Wetland restoration and enhancement in California. pp 63–72. California Sea Grant. Report No. T-CSGCP-007, La Jolla, CA.Google Scholar
- Zedler, J.B. 1992. Restoring cordgrass marshes in southern California.In: Thayer, G.W.. (ed) Restoring the nation's marine environment. pp 7–52. Maryland Sea Grant College. College Park, MD.Google Scholar