Estuaries and Coasts

, Volume 35, Issue 4, pp 1007–1017 | Cite as

Identifying Major Stressors: The Essential Precursor to Restoring Cultural Ecosystem Services in a Degraded Estuary



Worldwide estuaries have been subject to multiple and escalating anthropogenic impacts which have resulted in the loss of many ecosystem goods and services including: commercial activities, navigation and marine transportation, recreational and landscape values, and flood control and biodiversity support. An example of these losses is provided in an urban-industrial region of an estuary in northern Tasmania, Australia, where excessive silt deposition has resulted in almost complete loss of the channel at low tide. The causes of siltation have long been attributed to poor watershed management and high concentrations of flocculated and suspended sediments transported upstream by asymmetrical tides. However, historical analysis of anthropogenic changes in estuarine and riverine processes revealed different stressors. These included the decrease in the tidal prism and hence regime equilibrium, brought about by channel infilling and draining of tidal wetlands to create dry land for urban and agricultural uses, and the reduction and redirection of freshwater inflows for the generation of hydroelectricity. Watershed sediment loads exerted a relatively minor role in the estuarine equilibrium, which is solely dependent on tidal flows and river discharges for maintenance of stable cross-sectional areas. Sustainable remediation measures include increasing the tidal prism through the restoration of dynamic river flows and reconnection and restoration of tidal wetlands. However, the former will not be achievable without changes in major provisioning services, particularly the use of water to generate hydroelectricity. This study emphasises the importance of identifying stressors as the basis for examining the potential to reduce the trade-offs between the multiple ecosystem services provided by an estuary and its tributaries, particularly between provisioning and cultural ecosystem services, within a rehabilitation context.


Tidal prism Dynamic flow regime Tidal wetlands Hydroelectricity 


  1. Baird, R.C. 2005. On sustainability, estuaries and ecosystem restoration: the art of the practical. Restoration Ecology 13: 154–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bennett, E.M., G.D. Peterson, and L.J. Gordon. 2009. Understanding relationships amongst multiple ecosystem services. Ecology Letters 12: 1394–1404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borja, A., D.M. Dauer, M. Elliott, and C.A. Simenstad. 2010. Medium- and long-term recovery of estuarine and coastal ecosystems: patterns, rates and restoration effectiveness. Estuaries and Coasts 33: 1249–1260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brinson, M.M. 2006. Consequences for wetlands of a changing global environment. In Ecology of freshwater and estuarine wetland, ed. D.P. Batzer and R.R. Sharitz, 436–461. California: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bureau of Meteorology 2011. Accessed 9 October 2011
  6. Edgar, G.J., N.S. Barrett, D.J. Graddon, and P.R. Last. 2000. The conservation significance of estuaries: a classification of Tasmanian estuaries using ecological, physical and demographic attributes as a case study. Biological Conservation 92: 383–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Elliott, M., D. Burdon, K.L. Hemingway, and S.E. Apitz. 2007. Estuarine, coastal and marine ecosystem restoration: confusing management and science—a revision of concepts. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 74: 349–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Engineers Australia 2011. Accessed 9 October 2011.
  9. Eyre, B. 1998. Transport, retention and transformation of material in Australian estuaries. Estuaries 21: 540–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Foster, D.N., Nittim, R. and J. Walker. 1986. Tamar River Siltation Study. Accessed 9 October 2011
  11. FreeMapTools 2011. Accessed 9 October 2011
  12. GHD 2008. Tamar Siltation Project, Stakeholder Engagement and Outcomes Paper. Accessed 9 October 2011
  13. GHD 2009. Upper Tamar River Siltation Study, preliminary options analysis. Accessed 9 October 2011
  14. Gordon, L.J., G.D. Peterson, and E.M. Bennett. 2008. Agricultural modifications of hydrological flows create ecological surprises. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 23: 211–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hobbs, R.J., and D.A. Norton. 1996. Towards a conceptual framework for restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 4: 93–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hood, W.G. 2002. Application of landscape allometry to restoration of tidal channels. Restoration Ecology 10: 213–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hood, W.G. 2004. Indirect environmental effects of dikes on estuarine tidal channels: thinking outside of the dike and monitoring for habitat restoration. Estuaries 27: 273–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jones, B., Cooper, G. and D. Maynard. 2005. Accessed 9 October 2011.
  19. Kremen, C., and R.S. Ostfield. 2005. A call to ecologists: measuring, analyzing and managing ecosystem services. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 3: 540–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Launceston City Council. 2011. Accessed 9 October 2011.
  21. Legislative Council Select Committee. 2009. Accessed 9 October 2011.
  22. Lotze, H.K., H.S. Lenihan, B.J. Bourque, R.H. Bradbury, R.G. Cooke, M.C. Kay, S.M. Kidwell, M.X. Kirby, C.H. Peterson, and J.B.C. Jackson. 2006. Depletion, degradation and recovery potential of estuaries and coastal seas. Science 312: 1806–1809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and human wellbeing: wetlands and water. Washington: World Resources Institute.Google Scholar
  24. NRM North. 2011. Accessed 9 October 2011.
  25. Palmer, M.A. 2009. Reforming watershed restoration: science in need of application and applications in need of science. Estuaries and Coasts 32: 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Peel, M.C., Watson, F.G.R. and Vertessy, R.A. 2003. Modelling impacts of land use change on low flows in the North Esk River using the Macaque model. In MODSIM 2003—International Congress on Modelling and Simulation, 849–854. Townsville.Google Scholar
  27. Pierce, M. 2007. An Australian hydroelectric milestone—the 1895 Duck Reach Power Scheme. Australian Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering 3: 259–272.Google Scholar
  28. Poff, N.L., J.D. Allan, M.B. Bain, J.R. Karr, K.L. Prestegaard, B.D. Richter, R.E. Sparks, and J.C. Stromberg. 1997. The natural flow regime. Bioscience 47: 769–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Poff, N.L., B.D. Richter, A.H. Arthington, S.E. Bunn, R.J. Naiman, E. Kendy, M. Acreman, C. Apse, B.P. Bledsoe, M.C. Freeman, J. Henriksen, R.B. Jacobson, J.G. Kennen, D.M. Merritt, J.H. O’Keeffe, J.D. Olden, K. Rogers, R.E. Tharme, and A. Warner. 2010. The ecological limits of hydrologic alteration (ELOHA): a new framework for developing regional environmental flow standards. Freshwater Biology 55: 147–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Seen, A., A. Townsend, B. Atkinson, J. Ellison, J. Harrison, and H. Heijnis. 2004. Determining the history and sources of contaminants in sediments in the Tamar Estuary, Tasmania, using 210Pb dating and stable Pb isotope analyses. Environmental Chemistry 1: 49–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Strahler, A.N. 1973. Introduction to physical geography, 3rd ed. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  32. Weinstein, M.P. 2007. Linking restoration ecology and ecological restoration in estuarine landscapes. Estuaries and Coasts 30: 365–370.Google Scholar
  33. Zedler, J.B. 2006. Wetland Restoration. In Ecology of freshwater and estuarine wetlands, ed. D.P. Batzer and R.R. Sharitz, 348–435. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Coastal and Estuarine Research Federation 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Biological SciencesMonash UniversityClaytonAustralia
  2. 2.Aquatic Ecosystems Research GroupWest LauncestonAustralia

Personalised recommendations