Advertisement

Estuaries and Coasts

, Volume 38, Supplement 1, pp 49–66 | Cite as

Impacts of Coastal Development on the Ecology of Tidal Creek Ecosystems of the US Southeast Including Consequences to Humans

  • D. SangerEmail author
  • A. Blair
  • G. DiDonato
  • T. Washburn
  • S. Jones
  • G. Riekerk
  • E. Wirth
  • J. Stewart
  • D. White
  • L. Vandiver
  • A. F. Holland
Article

Abstract

Upland areas of southeastern United States tidal creek watersheds are popular locations for development, and they form part of the estuarine ecosystem characterized by high economic and ecological value. The primary objective of this work was to define the relationships between coastal development, with its concomitant land use changes and associated increases in nonpoint source pollution loading, and the ecological condition of tidal creek ecosystems including related consequences to human populations and coastal communities. Nineteen tidal creek systems, located along the southeastern US coast from southern North Carolina to southern Georgia, were sampled in the summer, 2005 and 2006. Within each system, creeks were divided into two primary segments based upon tidal zoning—intertidal (i.e., shallow, narrow headwater sections) and subtidal (i.e., deeper and wider sections)—and then watersheds were delineated for each segment. Relationships between coastal development, concomitant land use changes, nonpoint source pollution loading, the ecological condition of tidal creek ecosystems, and the potential impacts to human populations and coastal communities were evaluated. In particular, relationships were identified between the amount of impervious cover (indicator of coastal development) and a range of exposure and response measures including increased chemical contamination of the sediments, increased pathogens in the water, increased nitrate/nitrite levels, increased salinity range, decreased biological productivity of the macrobenthos, alterations to the food web, increased flooding potential, and increased human risk of exposure to pathogens and harmful chemicals. The integrity of tidal creeks, particularly the headwaters or intertidally dominated sections, was impaired by increases in nonpoint source pollution associated with sprawling urbanization (i.e., increases in impervious cover). This finding suggests that these habitats are valuable early warning sentinels of ensuing ecological impacts and potential public health and flooding risk from sprawling coastal development. The results also validate the use of a conceptual model with impervious cover thresholds for tidal creek systems in the southeast region.

Keywords

Sentinel habitat Conceptual model Impervious cover Urbanization 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The breadth of this research project has resulted in a large number of individuals and organizations to thank for their efforts. We are grateful to our National Estuarine Research Reserve partners for field work and support: R. Ellin, J. Fear, P. Murray, and H. Wells (North Carolina) and D. Hurley and B. Sullivan (Sapelo Island). We appreciate the field assistance and laboratory space provided by P. Christian and K. Gates, University of Georgia Marine Extension Office, Brunswick. We wish to thank, for their dedication and hard work, the many individuals who assisted in sample collection: P. Biondo, C. Buzzelli, A. Coghill, A. Colton, C. Cooksey, D. Couillard, S. Drescher, M. Dunlap, J. Felber, R. Garner, A. Hilton, S. Lovelace, E. McDonald, M. Messersmith, S. Mitchell, C. Rathburn, J. Reeves, J. Richardson, A. Rourk, K. Seals, J. Siewicki, and M. Tibbett. We appreciate laboratory work provided by Barry A. Vittor & Associates; the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources–Marine Resources Research Institute (P. Biondo, S. Burns, J. Felber, L. Forbes, A. Rourk); NOAA, NOS, CCEHBR (J. Gregory, C. Johnston, B. Robinson, B. Thompson, L. Webster); NOAA, NOS, Center for Human Health Risk/Hollings Marine Laboratory (D. Liebert, Y. Sapozhnikova, B. Shaddrix, L. Thorsell, M. Beal, A. Mancia, C. Rathburn); and University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science–Chesapeake Biological Laboratory’s Nutrient Analytical Services Lab. We thank the individuals who provided insightful peer reviews of the NOAA Technical Memorandum 82 that this manuscript is modified from: J. Fear, D. Hurley, L. Balthis, G. Lauenstein, R. Van Dolah. And we thank M. Fulton, L. Webster, P. Key, M. DeLorenzo, and two anonymous reviewers for providing comments, enhancing the quality of this manuscript. This project is supported by NOAA’s Oceans and Human Health Initiative and NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science at Hollings Marine Laboratory. Marine Resources Center Contribution No. 698.

Disclaimer

This publication does not constitute an endorsement of any commercial product or intend to be an opinion beyond scientific or other results obtained by the NOAA. No reference shall be made to NOAA, or this publication furnished by NOAA, to any advertising or sales promotion which would indicate or imply that NOAA recommends or endorses any proprietary product mentioned herein, or which has as its purpose an interest to cause the advertised product to be used or purchased because of this publication.

References

  1. Allen, J., and K. Lu. 2003. Modeling and prediction of future urban growth in the Charleston Region of South Carolina: a GIS-based integrated approach. Conservation Ecology 8(2):2. http://www.consecol.org/vol8/iss2/art2/.
  2. Anderson, J.R., E.E. Hardy, J.T. Roach, and R.E. Witmer. 1976. A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data. United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 964.Google Scholar
  3. APHA. 1998. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association.Google Scholar
  4. Arnold, C.L., and C.J. Gibbons. 1996. Impervious surface coverage. Journal of the American Planning Association 62(2): 243–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnthouse, L.W., and J. Brown. 1994. Issue paper on conceptual model development. In: Ecological risk assessment issue papers. Washington, DC: Risk Assessment Forum, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, pp. 3-1 to 3-70. EPA/630/R-94/009.Google Scholar
  6. Bayley, S., V.D. Stotts, P.F. Springer, and J. Steenis. 1978. Changes in submerged aquatic macrophyte populations at the head of the Cheaspeake Bay 1958–1975. Estuaries 1: 74–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beach, D. 2002. Coastal sprawl: the effects of urban design on aquatic ecosystems in the United States. Arlington, VA: Pew Oceans Commission. 32 pp.Google Scholar
  8. Blair A., S. Lovelace, D. Sanger, A.F. Holland, L. Vandiver, and S. White. 2013. Exploring impacts of development and climate change on stormwater runoff. Hydrological Processes. doi: 10.1002/hyp.9840
  9. Bricker, S.B., C.G. Clement, D.E. Pirhalla, S.P. Orlando, and D.R.G. Farrow. 1999. National estuarine eutrophication assessment: effects of nutrient enrichment in the nation’s estuaries. Silver Spring, MD: NOAA, National Ocean Service, Special Projects Office and the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science. 71 pp.Google Scholar
  10. Chapman, W., A. Mancia, M. Beal, A. Veloso, C. Rathburn, A. Blair, D. Sanger, A.F. Holland, G.W. Warr, and G. DiDonato. 2009. A transcriptomic analysis of land use impacts on the oyster, Crassostrea virginica, in the South Atlantic Bight. Molecular Ecology 18(11): 2415–2425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chapman, R., A. Mancia, M. Beal, A. Veloso, C. Rathburn, A. Blair, A.F. Holland, G.W. Warr, G. DiDonato, I.M. Sokolova, E. Wirth, E. Duffy, and D. Sanger. 2011. The transcriptomic responses of the eastern oyster, Crassostrea virginica, to environmental conditions. Molecular Ecology 20(7): 1431–1449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cohen, J.E., C. Small, A. Mellinger, J. Gallup, and J. Sachs. 1997. Estimates of coastal populations. Science 278: 1211–1212.Google Scholar
  13. Colgan, C.S. 2003. The changing ocean and coastal economy of the United States: a briefing paper for conference participants. Presented at Waves of Change: Examining the roles of States in Emerging Ocean Policy, a National Governors Association Center for Best Practices Conference, September 3. 18 pp.Google Scholar
  14. Cooksey, C., J. Hyland, E. Wirth, W.L. Balthis, M. Fulton, D. Whitall, and S. White. 2008. Support for integrated ecosystem assessments of NOAA’s National Estuarine Research Reserves System (NERRS), volume II: assessment of ecological condition and stressor impacts in subtidal waters of the North Carolina NERRS. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 83. Charleston, SC: NOAA Center for Coastal Environmental Health and Biomolecular Research.Google Scholar
  15. Costanza, R., R. D’Arge, R. de Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, R. O’Neill, J. Parueol, R. Raskin, P. Sutton, and M. van den Belt. 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service.Google Scholar
  17. Crossett, K. M., T.J. Culliton, P.C. Wiley, and T.R. Goodspeed. 2004. Population trends along the coastal United States: 1980–2008. Coastal Trends Report Series, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/National Ocean Service. 54 pp.Google Scholar
  18. D’Elia, C.F., P.A. Steudler, and N. Corwin. 1977. Determination of total nitrogen in aqueous samples using persulfate digestion. Limnology and Oceanography 22: 760–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dame, R., D. Childers, and E. Koepfler. 1992. A geohydrologic continuum theory for the spatial and temporal evolution of marsh–estuarine ecosystems. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research 30: 63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. DiDonato, G.T., J.R. Stewart, D.M. Sanger, B.J. Robinson, B.C. Thompson, A.F. Holland, and R. Van Dolah. 2009. Effects of changing land use on the microbial water quality of tidal creeks. Marine Pollution Bulletin 58: 97–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dustan, P., and J.C. Halas. 1987. Changes in the reef-coral community of Carysfort Reef, Key Largo, Florida: 1974 to 1982. Coral Reefs 6: 91–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fortner, A.R., M. Sanders, and S.W. Lemire. 1996. Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons and trace metal burdens in sediment and the oyster, Crassostrea virginica (Gmelin), from two high salinity estuaries in South Carolina. In Sustainable development in the southeast coastal zone, ed. F.J. Vernberg, W.B. Vernberg, and T. Siewicki, 445–477. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  23. Frissell, C.A., W.J. Liss, C.E. Warren, and M.D. Hurley. 1986. A hierarchical framework for stream habitat classification: viewing streams in a watershed context. Environmental Management 10(2): 199–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hoegh-Guldberg, O. 1999. Coral bleaching, climate change and the future of the world’s coral reefs. Review, Marine and Freshwater Research 50: 839–866.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Holland, A.F., D.M. Sanger, C.P. Gawle, S.B. Lerberg, M.S. Santiago, G.H.M. Riekerk, L.E. Zimmerman, and G.I. Scott. 2004. Linkages between tidal creek ecosystems and the landscape and demographic attributes of their watersheds. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 298: 151–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Homer, C., C. Huang, L. Yang, B. Wylie, and M. Coan. 2004. Development of a 2001 national land-cover database for the United States. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 70: 829–840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Horton, R.E. 1945. Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins; hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America 56: 275–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jarnagin, S., J.W. Jones, and S.G. Winters. 2006. Accuracy assessment of the National Land Cover Database 2001 (NLCD 2001) imperviousness data. Washington, DC: EPA Science Forum.Google Scholar
  29. Jones, S. 2008. Effects of urbanization on nekton abundance and food web structures in southeastern tidal creeks. Master’s thesis, The College of Charleston, Charleston, SC. 104 pp.Google Scholar
  30. Karn, S.K., and H. Harada. 2001. Surface water pollution in three urban territories of Nepal, India, and Bangladesh. Journal of Environmental Management 28: 483–496.Google Scholar
  31. Kemp, W.M., R.R. Twilley, J.C. Stevenson, W.R. Boynton, and J.C. Means. 1983. The decline of submerged vascular plants in Upper Chesapeake Bay: summary of results concerning possible causes. Marine Technology Society Journal 17: 78–89.Google Scholar
  32. Kneib, R.T. 1997. The role of tidal marshes in the ecology of estuarine nekton. Oceanography and Marine Biology Annual Review 35: 163–220.Google Scholar
  33. Krahn, M.M., C.A. Wigren, R.W. Pearce, L.K. Moore, R.G. Boger, W.D. McLeod Jr., S.L. Chan, and D.W. Brown. 1988. New HPLC cleanup and revised extraction procedures for organic contaminants. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Technical Memorandum NMFS F/NWC 153: 23–47.Google Scholar
  34. Kucklick, J.R., S. Sivertsen, M. Sanders, and G. Scott. 1997. Factors influencing polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon concentrations and patterns in South Carolina sediments. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 213: 13–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lerberg, S.B., A.F. Holland, and D.M. Sanger. 2000. Responses of tidal creek macrobenthic communities to the effects of watershed development. Estuaries 23: 838–853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Long, E.R., and L.G. Morgan. 1990. The potential for biological effects of sediment-sorbed contaminants tested in the National Status and Trends program. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS OMA 52, Seattle, WA. 175 pp. and appendices.Google Scholar
  37. Long, E.R., and D.D. MacDonald. 1998. Recommended uses of empirically derived, sediment quality guidelines for marine and estuarine ecosystems. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 4: 1019–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Long, E.R., D.D. MacDonald, S.L. Smith, and F.D. Calder. 1995. Incidence of adverse biological effects within ranges of chemical concentrations in marine and estuarine sediments. Journal of Environmental Management 19: 81–97.Google Scholar
  39. Long, E.R., G.I. Scott, J. Kucklick, M. Fulton, B. Thompson, R.S. Carr, K.J. Scott, G.B. Thursby, G.T. Chandler, J.W. Anderson, and G.M. Sloane. 1997. Final Report. Magnitude and extent of sediment toxicity in selected estuaries of South Carolina and Georgia. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA: Technical Summary Report 57, 178 pp.Google Scholar
  40. Maiolo, J., and P. Tschetter. 1981. Relating population growth to shellfish bed closures: a case study from North Carolina. Coastal Zone Management Journal 9(1): 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mallin, M.A. 2006. Wading in waste. Scientific American 294: 52–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mallin, M.A., K.E. Williams, E.C. Esham, and R.P. Lowe. 2000. Effect of human development on bacteriological water quality in coastal watersheds. Ecological Applications 10: 1047–1056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005a. In Ecosystems and human well-being: current state and trends, volume 1, ed. R. Hassan, R. Scholes, and N. Ash. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  44. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005b. Ecosystems and human well-being: health synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  45. NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2002. Toward rebuilding America’s marine fisheries. Annual Report to Congress on the Status of U.S. Fisheries, 2001. U.S. Department of Commerce. Silver Spring, MD: National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration.Google Scholar
  46. NRC (National Research Council). 1990. Managing troubled waters: the role of marine environmental monitoring. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  47. Odum, W.E. 1984. Dual-gradient concept of detritus transport and processing in estuaries. Bulletin of Marine Science 35: 510–521.Google Scholar
  48. Oliver, B.G., and A.J. Niimi. 1988. Trophodynamic analysis of polychlorinated biphenyl congeners and other chlorinated hydrocarbons in the Lake Ontario ecosystem. Environmental Science and Technology 22: 388–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pew Oceans Commission. 2003. America’s living oceans: charting a course for sea change. A Report to the Nation. Arlington, VA.Google Scholar
  50. Porter, J.W., and J.I. Tougas. 2001. Reef ecosystems: threats to their biodiversity. In Encyclopedia of biodiversity, 5th ed, ed. S. Levin, 73–95. San Diego: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Saila, S.B. 1979. Models for marine environmental assessments. Marine Environmental Research 2: 1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sanger, D.M., A.F. Holland, and G.I. Scott. 1999a. Tidal creek and salt marsh sediments in South Carolina coastal estuaries: I. Distribution of trace metals. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 37: 445–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sanger, D.M., A.F. Holland, and G.I. Scott. 1999b. Tidal creek and salt marsh sediments in South Carolina coastal estuaries: II. Distribution of organic contaminants. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 37: 458–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Schantz, M.M., J.J. Nichols, and S.A. Wise. 1997. Evaluation of pressurized fluid extraction for the extraction of environmental matrix reference materials. Analytical Chemistry 69: 4210–4219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Schueler, T. 1994. The importance of imperviousness. Watershed Protection Techniques 1(3): 100–111.Google Scholar
  56. Seabrook, C. 2012. The world of the salt marsh: appreciating and protecting the tidal marshes of the southeastern Atlantic coast. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press. 367 pp.Google Scholar
  57. Stewart, J., J.W. Daugomah, D.E. Chestnut, D.A. Graves, M.D. Sobsey, and G.I. Scott. 2006. F+ RNA coliphage typing for microbial source tracking in surface waters. Journal of Applied Microbiology 101: 1015–1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Strahler, A.N. 1957. Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology. Transactions—American Geophysical Union 38: 913–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Turgeon, D.D., R.G. Asch, B.D. Causey, R.E. Dodge, W. Jaap, K. Banks, J. Delaney, B.D. Keller, R. Speiler, C.A. Matos, J.R. Garcia, E. Diaz, D. Catanzaro, C.S. Rogers, Z. Hillis-Starr, R. Nemeth, M. Taylor, G.P. Schmahl, M.W. Miller, D.A. Gulko, J.E. Maragos, A.M. Friedlander, C.L. Hunter, R.S. Brainard, P. Craig, R.H. Richond, G. Davis, J. Starmer, M. Trianni, P. Houk, C.E. Birkeland, A. Edward, Y. Golbuu, J. Gutierrez, N. Idechong, G. Paulay, A. Tafileichig, and N. Vander Velde. 2002. The state of coral reef ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated States: 2002. Silver Spring, MD: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/National Ocean Service/National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science. 265 pp.Google Scholar
  60. USEPA. 1979. Methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes. Report No. EPA-600/4-79-020, March 1979. Cincinnati, OH: United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. 460 pp.Google Scholar
  61. USEPA. 2000. Guidance for assessing chemical contaminant data for use in fish advisories, volume 2: risk assessment and fish consumption limits. EPA-823-B-00-008. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. 383 pp. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/region6/6pd/qa/qadevtools/mod4references/supplemental/volume2.pdf.
  62. USEPA. 2001a. National Coastal Condition Report. EPA-620/R-01/005. Washington, DC: Office of Research and Development.Google Scholar
  63. USEPA. 2001b. Method 1602. Male-specific (F+) and somatic coliphage in water by single agar layer (SAL) procedure. Vol. 821-R-01-029. Washington, DC: EPA Office of Water.Google Scholar
  64. USFDA. 2011. Fish and fishery products hazards and controls guidance, fourth edition. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Office of Food Safety, April 2011.Google Scholar
  65. Vitousek, P.M., H.A. Mooney, J. Lubchenco, and J.M. Melillo. 1997. Human domination of earth’s ecosystems. Science 25: 494–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Washburn, T., and D. Sanger. 2011. Land use effects on macrobenthic communities in southeastern United States tidal creeks. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 180(1–4): 177–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Washburn, T., and D. Sanger. 2013. Microhabitat variability of macrobenthic organisms within tidal creek systems. Hydrobiologia 702: 15–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Welschmeyer, N.A. 1994. Fluorometric analysis of chlorophyll a in the presence of chlorophyll b and phaeopigments. Limnology and Oceanography 39: 1985–1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Coastal and Estuarine Research Federation 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Sanger
    • 1
    • 2
    • 4
    Email author
  • A. Blair
    • 2
  • G. DiDonato
    • 2
  • T. Washburn
    • 3
  • S. Jones
    • 3
  • G. Riekerk
    • 4
  • E. Wirth
    • 5
  • J. Stewart
    • 5
    • 6
  • D. White
    • 2
  • L. Vandiver
    • 7
  • A. F. Holland
    • 2
  1. 1.South Carolina Sea Grant ConsortiumCharlestonUSA
  2. 2.NOAA, Center of Excellence in Oceans and Human Health, Center for Human Health RiskHollings Marine LaboratoryCharlestonUSA
  3. 3.College of CharlestonCharlestonUSA
  4. 4.South Carolina Department of Natural ResourcesMarine Resources Research Institute, MRRICharlestonUSA
  5. 5.NOAA, Center for Coastal Environmental Health and Biomolecular ResearchCharlestonUSA
  6. 6.University of North Carolina, Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  7. 7.Arnold School of Public HealthUniversity of South CarolinaColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations