Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Public–private partnership wetland restoration programs benefit Species of Greatest Conservation Need and other wetland-associated wildlife

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Wetlands Ecology and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

US federal conservation programs, including the National Resource Conservation Service’s Wetland Reserve Program (WRP) and the US Fish and Wildlife Service’s Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program (PFWP), partner with private landowners to conserve and restore wetland habitats. Despite the success of these programs in terms of wetland area enrolled, uncertainties exist as to whether they are meeting their stated goals, including the restoration of wildlife habitat. In the St. Lawrence Valley of New York State, we investigated two questions related to WRP and PFWP wetland restorations. First, was whether restorations provide habitat for wetland-associated wildlife, including Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) prioritized by the New York State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP). Second, was whether restorations support wildlife assemblages that are comparable to natural reference wetlands. Bird, anuran, turtle, snake, and fish species assemblages were surveyed at 47 WRP and PFWP restorations, and 18 natural reference wetlands. We detected 31 SGCN at restorations, including SGCN from each assemblage surveyed. Assemblage metrics, including species richness and relative abundance, did not differ between restored and reference wetlands for any of the assemblages surveyed. These results indicate that restorations provide habitat for SGCN and other wetland-associated wildlife, and that assemblages at restorations are similar to those at natural reference wetlands. We conclude that WRP and PFWP wetland restorations in this region are meeting federal program-level goals related to the restoration of wildlife habitat, and are contributing to the recovery of SGCN.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  • Alsfeld AJ, Bowman JL, Deller-Jacobs A (2009) Effects of woody debris, microtopography, and organic matter amendments on the biotic community of constructed depressional wetlands. Biol Conserv 142:247–255. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2008.10.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balcombe CK, Anderson JT, Fortney RH, Kordek WS (2005) Wildlife use of mitigation and reference wetlands in West Virginia. Ecol Eng 25:85–99. doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2005.03.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beas BJ, Smith LM (2014) Amphibian community responses to playa restoration in the Rainwater Basin. Wetlands 34:1247–1253. doi:10.1007/s13157-014-0584-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell SM, Herman TB, Wassersug RJ (2007) Ecology of Thamnophis sauritus (Eastern Ribbonsnake) at the northern limit of its range. Northeast Nat 14:279–292. doi:10.1656/1092-6194(2007)14[279:EOTSER]2.0.CO;2

  • Bibby CJ, Burgess ND, Hill DA, Mustoe SH (2000) Bird census techniques, 2nd edn. Academic, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Blouin-Demers G, Weatherhead PJ (2001) Habitat use by Black Rat Snakes (Elaphe obsoleta obsoleta) in fragmented forests. Ecology 82(10):2882–2896. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[2882:HUBBRS]2.0.CO;2

  • Bouvier LD, Cottenie K, Doka SE (2009) Aquatic connectivity and fish metacommunities in wetlands of the lower Great Lakes. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 66:933–948. doi:10.1139/f09-050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brawley AH, Warren RS, Askins RA (1998) Bird use of restoration and reference marshes within the Barn Island Wildlife Management Area, Stonington, Connecticut, USA. Environ Manag 22:625–633. doi:10.1007/s002679900134

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brinson MM, Eckles SD (2011) US Department of Agriculture conservation program and practice effects on wetland ecosystem services: a synthesis. Ecol Appl 21:S116–S127. doi:10.1890/09-0627.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinson MM, Rheinhardt R (1996) The role of reference wetlands in functional assessment and mitigation. Ecol Appl 6:69–76. doi:10.2307/2269553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks RP, Croonquist MJ (1990) Wetland, habitat, and trophic response guilds for wildlife species in Pennsylvania. J Pa Acad Sci 64:93–102

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown SC (1998) Remnant seed banks and vegetation as predictors of restored marsh vegetation. Can J Bot 76(4):620–629. doi:10.1139/b98-038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown SC (1999) Vegetation similarity and avifaunal food value of restored and natural marshes in Northern New York. Restor Ecol 7:56–68. doi:10.1046/j.1526-100X.1999.07107.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown SC, Bedford BL (1997) Restoration of wetland vegetation with transplanted wetland soil. Wetlands 17(3):424–437. doi:10.1007/BF03161432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown SC, Smith CR (1998) Breeding season bird use of recently restored versus natural wetlands in New York. J Wildl Manag 62:1480–1491. doi:10.2307/3802014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown SC, Smith K, Batzer D (1997) Macroinvertebrate responses to wetland restoration in Northern New York. Environ Entomol 26(5):1016–1024. doi:10.1093/ee/26.5.1016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown DJ, Street GM, Nairn RW, Forstner MRJ (2012) A place to call home: amphibian use of created and restored wetlands. Int J Ecol 2012:1–11. doi:10.1057/9781137394354.0013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buehler DA, Roth AM, Vallender R, Will TC, Confer JL, Canterbury RA, Swarthout SA, Rosenberg KV, Bulluck LP (2007) Status and conservation priorities of golden-winged warbler (Vermivora chrysoptera) in North America. Auk 124(4):1439–1445. doi:10.1642/0004-8038(2007)124[1439:SACPOG]2.0.CO;2

  • Conway CJ (2009) Standardized North American marshbird monitoring protocols. US Geological Survey and Arizona Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit Report #2005-04, Arizona, USA

  • Cornell Lab of Ornithology (2009) Golden-winged Warbler Atlas Project. Cornell Lab of Ornithology. http://www.birds.cornell.edu/gowap. Materials received Jan 2009

  • Costanza R, de Groot R, Sutton P, van der Ploeg S, Anderson SJ, Kubiszewski I, Farber S, Turner RK (2014) Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Glob Environ Change 26:152–158. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowardin LM, Carter V, Golet FC, LaRoe ET (1979) Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. US Fish and Wildlife Service Report No. FWS/OBS/-79/31. Washington, DC

  • Dahl TE, Allord GJ (1997) History of wetlands in the conterminous United States. United States Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 2425. US Geological Survey. https://water.usgs.gov/nwsum/WSP2425/history.html. Accessed 9 June 2015

  • Dahl TE, Johnson CE, Frayer WE (1991) Wetlands status and trends in the conterminous United States mid-1970’s to mid-1980’s. US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. Available via US Fish and Wildlife Service. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Documents/Wetlands-Status-and-Trends-in-the-Conterminous-United-States-Mid-1970s-to-Mid-1980s.pdf. Accessed 9 June 2015

  • Duriancik LF, Bucks D, Dobrowolski JP, Drewes T, Eckles SD, Jolley L, Kellogg RL, Lund DL, Makuch JR, O’Neill MP, Rewa CA, Walbridge MR, Parry R, Weltz MA (2008) The first five years of the Conservation Effects Assessment Project. J Soil Water Conserv 63:185a–297a. doi:10.2489/jswc.63.6.185A

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Euliss NH Jr, Smith LM, Shuguang L, Duffy WG, Faulkner SP, Gleason RA, Eckles D (2010) Integrating estimates of ecosystem services from conservation programs and practices into models for decision makers: the vision for CEAP wetlands. Ecol Appl 21:S128–S134. doi:10.1890/09-0285.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairfax SK, Gwin L, King MA, Raymond L, Watt LA (2005) Buying nature: the limits of land acquisition as a conservation strategy, 1780–2004. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferner JW (2007) A review of marking and individual recognition techniques for amphibians and reptiles. Herpetological Circular No. 35. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Salt Lake City

  • Figuerola J, Green AJ (2002) Dispersal of aquatic organisms by waterbirds: a review of past research and priorities for future studies. Freshw Biol 47(3):483–494. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2427.2002.00829.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filsinger M, Milmoe J (2012) Restore and enhance—the 25th anniversary of the Service’s Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program. US Fish and Wildlife Service. http://www.fws.gov/partners/aboutus.html. Accessed 5 May 2015

  • Fleming SK, Kaminski RM, Tietjen TE, Schummer ML, Ervin GN, Nelms KD (2015) Vegetative forage quality and moist-soil management on Wetland Reserve Program Lands in Mississippi. Wetlands 32:919–929. doi:10.2007/s13157-012-0325-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fry J, Xian G, Jin S, Dewitz J, Homer C, Yang L, Barnes C, Herold N, Wickham J (2011) Completion of the 2006 National Land Cover Database for the conterminous US. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 77(9):858–864

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghermandi A, van den Bergh JCJM, Brander LM, de Groot HLF, Nunes PALD (2010) Values of natural and human-made wetlands: a meta-analysis. Water Resour Res 46:w12516. doi:10.1029/2010WR009071

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs JP, Breisch AR, Ducey PK, Johnson G, Behler J, Bothner R (2007) The amphibians and reptiles of New York State: identification, natural history, and conservation. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray RL, Teels BM (2006) Wildlife and fish conservation through the Farm Bill. Wildl Soc Bull 34:906–912. doi:10.2193/0091-7648(2006)34[906:WAFCTT]2.0.CO;2

  • Gray A, Simenstad CA, Bottom DL, Cornwell TJ (2002) Contrasting functional performance of juvenile salmon habitat in recovering wetlands of the Salmon River Estuary, Oregon, USA. Restor Ecol 10:514–526. doi:10.1046/j.1526-100X.2002.01039.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heard L (2000, updated 2008) A comprehensive review of Farm Bill contributions to wildlife conservation, 1985–2000. US Department of Agriculture National Resource Conservation Service Technical Report USDA/NRCS/WHMI-2000, Washington, DC

  • Heyer WR, Donnelly MA, McDiarmid RW, Hayek LC, Foster MS (1994) Measuring and monitoring biological diversity, standard methods for amphibians. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoenig JM, Heisey DM (2001) The abuse of power: the pervasive fallacy of power calculations for data analysis. Am Stat 55:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juni S, Berry CR (2001) A biodiversity assessment of compensatory mitigation wetlands in Eastern South Dakota. Proc S D Acad Sci 80:185–200

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahara SN, Duffy WG, DiGaudio R, Records R (2012) Climate, management and habitat associations of avian fauna in restored wetlands of California’s Central Valley, USA. Diversity 4:396–418. doi:10.3390/d4040396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaminski MR, Baldassarre GA, Pearse AT (2006) Waterbird responses to hydrologic management of Wetlands Reserve Program habitats in New York. Wildl Soc Bull 24:291–296. doi:10.2193/0091-7648(2006)34[921:WRTHMO]2.0.CO;2

  • Kihslinger RI (2008) Success of wetland mitigation projects. Nat Wetl News 30:14–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Larkin D, Vivian-Smith G, Zedler JB (2006) Topographic heterogeneity theory and ecological restoration. In: Falk DA, Palmer MA, Zedler JB (eds) Foundations of restoration ecology. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Larkin DJ, Madon SP, West JM, Zedler JB (2008) Topographic heterogeneity influences fish use of an experimentally restored tidal marsh. Ecol Appl 18(2):483–496. doi:10.1890/06-1984.1View

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maresch W, Walbridge MR, Kugler D (2008) Enhancing conservation on agricultural landscapes: a new direction for the Conservation Effects Assessment Project. J Soil Water Conserv 63:198a–203a. doi:10.2489/jswc.63.6.198A

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDairmid RW, Foster MS, Guyer C, Gibbons JW, Chernoff N (2012) Reptile biodiversity: standard methods for inventory and monitoring. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • McGowan KJ, Corwin K (2008) The second atlas of the breeding birds in New York State. Cornell University Press, Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin NA (2005) Rethinking the perpetual natural of conservation easements. Harv Environ Law Rev 29:422–521

    Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch WJ, Gosselink JC (2015) Wetlands, 5th edn. Wiley, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch WJ, Wilson RF (1996) Improving the success of wetland creation and restoration with know-how, time, and self-design. Ecol Appl 6:77–83. doi:10.2307/2269554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch WJ, Wu X, Nairn RW, Weihe PE, Wang N, Deal R, Boucher CE (1998) Creating and restoring wetlands: a whole-ecosystem experiment in self-design. Bioscience 48:1019–1030. doi:10.2307/1313458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monello RJ, Wright GR (1999) Amphibian habitat preferences among artificial ponds in the Palouse Region of Northern Idaho. J Herpetol 33(2):298–303. doi:10.2307/1565727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mushet DM, Euliss NH Jr, Stockwell CA (2012) Mapping anuran habitat suitability to estimate the effects of grassland and wetland conservation programs. Copeia 2:321–330. doi:10.1643/CH-11-119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration National Climatic Data Center, NOAA NCDC (2010) Annual/seasonal normals for Canton, NY, subset used: 1981–2010. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datatools/normals. Accessed 2 July 2017

  • National Research Council, NRC (2001) Compensating for wetland losses under the Clean Water Act. National Academy Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Nedland TS, Wolf A, Reed T (2007) A reexamination of restored wetlands in Manitowoc County, Wisconsin. Wetlands 27(4):99–1015. doi:10.1672/0277-5212(2007)27[999:ARORWI]2.0.CO;2

  • New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, NYSDEC (2005) New York Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/30483.html. Accessed 5 May 2015

  • NYSDEC (2015) New York State Wildlife Action Plan. http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/7179.html. Accessed 28 May 2016

  • O’Neal BJ, Heske EJ, Stafford JD (2008) Waterbird response to wetlands restored through the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program. J Wildl Manag 72(3):654–664. doi:10.2193/2007-165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obbard ME, Brooks RJ (1981) A radio-telemetry and mark-recapture study of activity in the common snapping turtle, Chelydra serpentina. Copeia 3:630–637. doi:10.2307/1444568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palis JG (2007) If you build it, they will come: herpetofaunal colonization of constructed wetlands and adjacent terrestrial habitat in the Cache River drainage of southern Illinois. Trans Ill State Acad Sci 100:177–189

    Google Scholar 

  • Paterson JE, Steinberg BD, Litzgus JD (2012) Generally specialized or especially general? Habitat selection by Snapping Turtles (Chelydra serpentina) in central Ontario. Can J Zool 90(2):139–149. doi:10.1139/z11-118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petranka JW, Holbrook CT (2006) Wetland restoration for amphibians: should local sites be designed to support metapopulations or patchy populations? Restor Ecol 14(3):404–411. doi:10.1111/j.1526-100X.2006.00148.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pulliam HR (1988) Sources, sinks, and population regulation. Am Nat 132:652–661. doi:10.1086/284880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2012) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www.R-project.org. Accessed 9 June 2015

  • Ralph CJ, Droege S, Sauer J (1995) Managing and monitoring birds using point counts: standards and applications. US Department of Agriculture Publication PSW/GTR-149-1995. Washington, DC

  • Ratti JT, Rocklage AM, Giudice JH, Garton EO, Golner DP (2001) Comparison of avian communities on restored and natural wetlands in North and South Dakota. J Wildl Manag 65(4):676–684. doi:10.2307/3803019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rehm EM, Baldassarre GA (2007) Temporal variation in detection of marsh birds during broadcast of conspecific calls. J Field Ornithol 78:56–63. doi:10.1111/j.1557-9263.2006.00085.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reschke C (1990) Ecological communities of New York State. Available via the NY Natural Heritage Program and NY Department of Environmental Conservation. http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/29389.html. Accessed 5 May 2015

  • Rewa C (2005) Wildlife benefits of the Wetlands Reserve Program. In: Haufler JB (ed) Fish and wildlife benefits of the Farm Bill conservation programs, 2002–2005 update. The Wildlife Society Technical Review 05-2, Bethesda

  • Rey Benayas JM, Newton AC, Diaz A, Bullock JM (2009) Enhancement of biodiversity and ecosystem services by ecological restoration: a meta-analysis. Science 325:1121–1124. doi:10.1126/science.1172460

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson JA (2000) Follow-up vegetation and avifauna surveys on wetlands restored through USFWS Partners for Wildlife Program. MS Thesis, State University of New York at Brockport

  • Ryan TJ, Philippi T, Leiden YA, Dorcas ME, Wigley TB, Gibbons JW (2002) Monitoring herpetofauna in a managed forest landscape: effects of habitat types and census techniques. For Ecol Manag 167:83–90. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00692-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlaepfer MA, Runge MC, Sherman PW (2002) Ecological and evolutionary traps. Trends Ecol Evol 17:474–480. doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(02)02580-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scodari PF (1997) Measuring the benefits of federal wetland programs. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Semlitsch RD (2000a) Critical elements for biologically based recovery plans of aquatic-breeding amphibians. Conserv Biol 16:619–629. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00512.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semlitsch RD (2000b) Principles for management of aquatic breeding amphibians. J Wildl Manag 60(3):615–631. doi:10.2307/3802732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semlitsch RD (2008) Differentiating migration and dispersal processes for pond-breeding amphibians. J Wildl Manag 72(1):260–267. doi:10.2193/2007-082

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semlitsch RD, Bodie JR (2003) Biological criteria for buffer zones around wetlands and riparian habitats for amphibians and reptiles. Conserv Biol 17(5):1219–1228. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.02177.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulse CD, Semlitsch RD, Trauth KM, Gardener JE (2012) Testing wetland restore to increase amphibian reproductive success and species richness for mitigation and restoration. Ecol Appl 22:1675–1688. doi:10.1890/1051-0761-22.5.1675

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Snodgrass JW, Bryan AL, Lide RF, Smith GM (1996) Factors affecting the occurrence and structure of fish assemblages in isolated wetlands of the Upper Coastal Plain, USA. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 53:443–454. doi:10.1139/cjfas-53-2-443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steen DA, Gibbs JP (2005) Effects of roads on the structure of freshwater turtle populations. Conserv Biol 18:1143–1148. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00240.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stryszowska KM, Johnson G, Rivera Mendoza L, Langen TA (2016) Species distribution modeling of the threatened Blanding’s Turtle’s (Emydoidea blandingii) range edge as a tool for conservation planning. J Herpetol 50(3):366–373. doi:10.1670/15-089

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuber RJ (1982) Habitat suitability index models: Black Bullhead. Western Energy and Land-use Team, Office of Biological Services, and US Fish and Wildlife Service Report #FWS/OBS-82/10.14. Available via the US Army Corps of Engineers. http://cdm16021.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p16021coll3/id/252. Accessed 9 June 2015

  • Talley DM (2000) Ichthyofaunal utilization of newly-created versus natural salt marsh creeks in Mission Bay, California. Wetl Ecol Manag 8:117–132. doi:10.1023/A:1008436301041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • US Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service, USDA NRCS (2014a) Wetlands Reserve Program. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/programs/easements/wetlands/. Accessed 5 May 2015

  • US Fish and Wildlife Service, USFWS (1990) National Wetland Inventory. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Data-Download.html. Accessed 5 May 2015

  • USDA NRCS (2014b) Farm Bill 2014 Agricultural Conservation Easement Program. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/programs/easements/acep/?cid=stelprdb1242695. Accessed 5 May 2015

  • USFWS (2006) St. Lawrence Wetland and Grassland Management District. http://www.fws.gov/northeast/facts/StLawrence06.pdf. Accessed 9 July 2015

  • USFWS (2015a) Partners in Fish and Wildlife Program. http://www.fws.gov/partners/. Accessed 5 May 2015

  • USFWS (2015b) State Wildlife Grant Program Overview. http://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/Subpages/GrantPrograms/SWG/SWG.htm. Accessed 9 July 2015

  • van Leeuwen CHA, van der Velde G, van Lith B, Klaassen M (2012) Experimental quantification of long distance dispersal potential of aquatic snails in the gut of migratory birds. PLoS ONE 7(3):e32292. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0032292

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Verhoeven JTA, Arheimer B, Chengqing Y, Hefting MM (2006) Regional and global concerns over wetlands and water quality. Trends Ecol Evol 21:96–103. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2005.11.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Walls SC, Waddle JH, Faulkner SP (2014) Wetland Reserve Program enhances site occupancy and species richness in assemblages of anuran amphibians in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley, USA. Wetlands 34:197–207. doi:10.1007/s13157-013-0498-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weatherhead PJ, Charland MB (1985) Habitat selection in an Ontario population of the snake, Elaphe obsoleta. J Herpetol 19(1):12–19. doi:10.2307/1564415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weir LA, Mossman MJ (2005) North American Amphibian Monitoring Program (NAAMP). In: Lannoo MJ (ed) Amphibian declines: conservation status of United States species. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner R (2004) Freshwater fishes of the northeastern United States: a field guide. Syracuse University Press, Syracuse

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson JB, McElfish Jr JM, Kihslinger R, Bendick R, McKenney A (2009) The next generation of mitigation: linking current and future mitigation programs with State Wildlife Action Plans and other state and regional plans. The Nature Conservancy and Environmental Law Institute Report. Available via the Environmental Law Institute. http://www.eli.org/sites/default/files/eli-pubs/d19.08executive_summary.pdf. Accessed 9 June 2015

  • Williams GD, Zedler JB (1999) Fish assemblage composition in constructed and natural tidal marshes of San Diego Bay: relative influence of channel morphology and restoration history. Estuaries 22:702–716. doi:10.2307/1353057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zedler JB (2000) Progress in wetland restoration ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 15:402–407. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(00)01959-5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zedler JB (2003) Wetlands at your service: reducing impacts of agriculture at the watershed scale. Front Ecol Environ 1:65–72. doi:10.1890/1540-9295(2003)001[0065:WAYSRI]2.0.CO;2

  • Zedler JB, Kercher S (2005) Wetland resources: status, trends, ecosystem services, and restorability. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30:39–74. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144248

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funding in support of this Project was provided by New York State Wildlife Grant #T-9-2, Value of Wetland Restoration Incentive Programs on Privately Owned Land for Species of Greatest Conservation Need, and University of Michigan Water Center Grant Environmental and Socioeconomic Factors Associated with Public–Private Partnership Wetland Restoration Projects Benefiting Wildlife in the Great Lakes Watershed. First, we would like to thank all of the landowners that participated in this study. Without your cooperation, patience, and dedication to the stewardship of our natural resources, this work would not have been possible. We would also like to thank our partners including: Angelena Ross (New York Department of Environmental Conservation); Jim Pullano and Kimberley Farrell (USDA NRCS); Gian Dodici, Carl Schwartz, and Tom Jasikoff (USFWS); Glenn Johnson (SUNY Potsdam); and all of the folks that have helped along the way: Kinga Stryszowska, Cody Merrill, Jayson Hajek, Maria Hargis, Robyn Andrusyszyn, Eric Marcy, Kallen Frey, Brittany Guarna, Laura Barlow, Jeremy Ozolins, Nychele Carley, John Sherry, Felix Grimberg, and Matthew Valente. Survey methods were approved by the Clarkson University IACUC and conducted under permit from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, 3700 Willow Creek Rd, Prescott, AZ, 86301, USA

    Catherine E. Benson

  2. Clarkson University, Box 5805, Potsdam, NY, 13699, USA

    Brendan Carberry & Tom A. Langen

Authors
  1. Catherine E. Benson
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Brendan Carberry
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tom A. Langen
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Catherine E. Benson.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (XLSX 30 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Benson, C.E., Carberry, B. & Langen, T.A. Public–private partnership wetland restoration programs benefit Species of Greatest Conservation Need and other wetland-associated wildlife. Wetlands Ecol Manage 26, 195–211 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-017-9565-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-017-9565-8

Keywords