Effects of Local Shoreline and Subestuary Watershed Condition on Waterbird Community Integrity: Influences of Geospatial Scale and Season in the Chesapeake Bay

  • Diann J. Prosser
  • Jessica L. Nagel
  • Shay Howlin
  • Paul R. Marbán
  • Daniel D. Day
  • R. Michael Erwin
Article

Abstract

In many coastal regions throughout the world, there is increasing pressure to harden shorelines to protect human infrastructures against sea level rise, storm surge, and erosion. This study examines waterbird community integrity in relation to shoreline hardening and land use characteristics at three geospatial scales: (1) the shoreline scale characterized by seven shoreline types: bulkhead, riprap, developed, natural marsh, Phragmites-dominated marsh, sandy beach, and forest; (2) the local subestuary landscape scale including land up to 500 m inland of the shoreline; and (3) the watershed scale >500 m from the shoreline. From 2010 to 2014, we conducted waterbird surveys along the shoreline and open water within 21 subestuaries throughout the Chesapeake Bay during two seasons to encompass post-breeding shorebirds and colonial waterbirds in late summer and migrating and wintering waterfowl in late fall. We employed an Index of Waterbird Community Integrity (IWCI) derived from mean abundance of individual waterbird species and scores of six key species attributes describing each species’ sensitivity to human disturbance, and then used this index to characterize communities in each subestuary and season. IWCI scores ranged from 14.3 to 19.7. Multivariate regression model selection showed that the local shoreline scale had the strongest influence on IWCI scores. At this scale, percent coverage of bulkhead and Phragmites along shorelines were the strongest predictors of IWCI, both with negative relationships. Recursive partitioning revealed that when subestuary shoreline coverage exceeded thresholds of approximately 5% Phragmites or 8% bulkhead, IWCI scores decreased. Our results indicate that development at the shoreline scale has an important effect on waterbird community integrity, and that shoreline hardening and invasive Phragmites each have a negative effect on waterbirds using subestuarine systems.

Keywords

Chesapeake Bay Shoreline hardening Waterbirds Community integrity Land use Nearshore habitat 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Funding for this study was provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research (CSCOR). We thank Shane Heath, Bridget Collins, Peter Osenton, Brian Ho Sung Lee, Lisa Vormwald, and Mary Maxey for assistance with field surveys and Katherine Dale for assistance with graphics. The authors would like to thank Deanna Dawson and three anonymous reviewers for providing helpful comments to strengthen earlier versions of this manuscript. The use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the US Government.

Supplementary material

12237_2017_288_MOESM1_ESM.docx (18 kb)
Supplemental Table 1 (DOCX 17 kb)
12237_2017_288_MOESM2_ESM.docx (19 kb)
Supplemental Table 2 (DOCX 19 kb)

References

  1. Able, Kenneth W., and Stacy M. Hagan. 2003. Impact of common reed, Phragmites australis, on essential fish habitat: influence on reproduction, embryological development, and larval abundance of mummichog (Fundulus heteroclitus). Estuaries 26: 40–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Angradi, Ted R., Stacy M. Hagan, and Kenneth W. Able. 2001. Vegetation type and the intertidal macroinvertebrate fauna of a brackish marsh: Phragmites vs. Spartina. Wetlands 21: 75–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baldassarre, Guy A. 2014. Ducks, geese, and swans of North America. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Balouskus, Richard G., and Timothy E. Targett. 2017. Impact of armored shorelines on shore zone fish in a mid-Atlantic, USA, estuary: modulation by hypoxia and temperature. Estuaries and Coasts.Google Scholar
  5. Benoit, Lori K., and Robert A. Askins. 1999. Impact of the spread of Phragmites on the distribution of birds in Connecticut tidal marshes. Wetlands 19: 194–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bilkovic, Donna M., and Molly M. Mitchell. 2013. Ecological tradeoffs of stabilized salt marshes as a shoreline protection strategy: Effects of artificial structures on macrobenthic assemblages. Ecological Engineering 61. Elsevier B.V.: 469–481. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2013.10.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bilkovic, Donna M., and Molly M. Roggero. 2008. Effects of coastal development on nearshore estuarine nekton communities. Marine Ecology Progress Series 358: 27–39. doi: 10.3354/meps07279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bilkovic, Donna M., Molly Roggero, Carl H. Hershner, and Kirk H. Havens. 2006. Influence of land use on macrobenthic communities in nearshore estuarine habitats. Estuaries and Coasts 29: 1185–1195. doi: 10.1007/BF02781819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blair, Robert B. 1996. Land use and avian species diversity along an urban gradient. Ecological Applications 6: 506–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boere, Gerard C., Colin A. Galbraith, and David A. Stroud. 2006. Waterbirds around the world. Edinburgh, U. K.: The Stationary Office.Google Scholar
  11. Bozek, Catherine M., and David M. Burdick. 2005. Impacts of seawalls on saltmarsh plant communities in the Great Bay Estuary, New Hampshire USA. Wetlands Ecology and Management 13: 553–568. doi: 10.1007/s11273-004-5543-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bryce, Sandra A., Robert M. Hughes, and Philip R. Kaufmann. 2002. Development of a bird integrity index: Using bird assemblages as indicators of riparian condition. Environmental Management 30: 294–310. doi: 10.1007/s00267-002-2702-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bulleri, Fabio, and Maura G. Chapman. 2010. The introduction of coastal infrastructure as a driver of change in marine environments. Journal of Applied Ecology 47: 26–35. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01751.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Burnham, Kenneth P., and David R. Anderson. 2002. Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  15. Chapman, M.G. 2003. Paucity of mobile species on constructed seawalls: effects of urbanization on biodiversity. Marine Ecology Progress Series 264: 21–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Conway, Courtney J., and James P. Gibbs. 2005. Effectiveness of call-broadcast surveys for monitoring marsh birds. The Auk 122: 26–35. doi: 10.1126/science.98.2552.466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Currin, Carolyn A, William S Chappell, and Anne Deaton. 2010. Developing alternative shoreline armoring strategies: the living shoreline approach in North Carolina. Shipman, H., Dethier, M.N., Gelfenbaum, G., Fresh, K.L., and Dinicola, R.S., eds., Puget Sound Shorelines and the Impacts of Armoring—Proceedings of a State of the Science Workshop, May 2009. Google Scholar
  18. DeLuca, William V., Colin E. Studds, Larry L. Rockwood, and Peter P. Marra. 2004. Influence of land use on the integrity of marsh bird communities of Chesapeake Bay, USA. Wetlands 24: 837–847. doi: 10.1672/0277-5212(2004)024[0837:IOLUOT]2.0.CO;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. DeLuca, William V., Colin E. Studds, Ryan S. King, and Peter P. Marra. 2008. Coastal urbanization and the integrity of estuarine waterbird communities: Threshold responses and the importance of scale. Biological Conservation 141. Elsevier ltd: 2669–2678. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.023.
  20. Dethier, Megan N., Wendel W. Raymond, Aundrea N. McBride, Jason D. Toft, Jeffery R. Cordell, Andrea S. Ogston, Sarah M. Heerhartz, et al. 2016. Multiscale impacts of armoring on Salish Sea shorelines: Evidence for cumulative and threshold effects. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 175. Elsevier Ltd: 106–117. doi: 10.1016/j.ecss.2016.03.033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dolbeer, Richard A., John L. Seubert, and Michael J. Begier. 2014. Population trends of resident and migratory Canada geese in relation to strikes with civil aircraft. Human-Wildlife Interactions 8: 88–99.Google Scholar
  22. Doody, J. Patrick. 2013. Coastal squeeze and managed realignment in southeast England, does it tell us anything about the future? Ocean and Coastal Management 79. Elsevier Ltd: 34–41. doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.05.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dugan, Jenifer E., and David M. Hubbard. 2006. Ecological responses to coastal armoring on exposed sandy beaches. Shore and Beach 74: 10–16. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0485.2008.00231.x.Google Scholar
  24. Dugan, Jenifer E., David M. Hubbard, Ivan F. Rodil, David L. Revell, and Stephen Schroeter. 2008. Ecological effects of coastal armoring on sandy beaches. Marine Ecology 29: 160–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dugan, Jenifer E., Laura Airoldi, Maura G. Chapman, S. J. Walker, and Thomas Schlacher. 2011. Estuarine and coastal structures: environmental effects, a focus on shore and nearshore structures. Treatise on Estuarine and Coastal Science. Vol. 8. Elsevier Inc. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-374711-2.00802-0.
  26. Duncan, Richard P., Tim M. Blackburn, and Daniel Sol. 2003. The ecology of bird introductions. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 34: 71–98. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Erwin, R. Michael. 1996. Dependence of waterbirds and shorebirds on shallow-water habitats in the mid-Atlantic coastal region: an ecological profile and management recommendations. Estuaries 19: 213–219. doi: 10.2307/1352226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Erwin, R. Michael, David F. Brinker, Bryan D. Watts, Gary R. Costanzo, and David D. Morton. 2011. Islands at bay: Rising seas, eroding islands, and waterbird habitat loss in Chesapeake Bay (USA). Journal of Coastal Conservation 15: 51–60. doi: 10.1007/s11852-010-0119-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fry, Joyce A., George Xian, Suming Jin, Jon A. Dewitz, Collin G. Homer, Limin Yang, Christopher A. Barnes, Nathaniel D. Herold, and James D. Wickham. 2011. Completion of the 2006 National Land Cover Database for the conterminous United States. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 77: 858–864.Google Scholar
  30. Gedan, Keryn B., Brian R. Silliman, and Mark D. Bertness. 2009. Centuries of human-driven change in salt marsh ecosystems. Annual Review of Marine Science 1: 117–141. doi: 10.1146/annurev.marine.010908.163930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gittman, Rachel K., Alyssa M. Popowich, John F. Bruno, and Charles H. Peterson. 2014. Marshes with and without sills protect estuarine shorelines from erosion better than bulkheads during a Category 1 hurricane. Ocean and Coastal Management 102. Elsevier Ltd: 94–102. doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.09.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gittman, Rachel K., F. Joel Fodrie, Alyssa M. Popowich, Danielle A. Keller, John F. Bruno, Carolyn A. Currin, Charles H. Peterson, and Michael F. Piehler. 2015. Engineering away our natural defenses: An analysis of shoreline hardening in the US. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 13: 301–307. doi: 10.1890/150065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gittman, Rachel K., Charles H. Peterson, Carolyn A. Currin, F. Joel Fodrie, Michael F. Piehler, and John F. Bruno. 2016. Living shorelines can enhance the nursery role of threatened estuarine habitats. Ecological Applications 26: 249–263. doi: 10.1890/14-0716.1/suppinfo.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Griggs, Gary B. 2005. The Impacts of Coastal Armoring. Shore & Beach 73: 13–22.Google Scholar
  35. Hall, Mary Jo, and Orrin H. Pilkey. 1991. Effects of hard stabilization on dry beach width for New Jersey. Journal of Coastal Research 7: 771–785.Google Scholar
  36. Hardaway, C. Scott, and Robert J. Byrne. 1999. Shoreline Management in Chesapeake Bay. Special Report in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering Number 356. Virginia Sea Grant Publication VSG-99-11.Google Scholar
  37. Heerhartz, Sarah M., Jason D. Toft, Jeffery R. Cordell, Megan N. Dethier, and Andrea S. Ogston. 2016. Shoreline Armoring in an Estuary Constrains Wrack-Associated Invertebrate Communities. Estuaries and Coasts 39: 171–188. doi: 10.1007/s12237-015-9983-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Karr, James R. 1996. Ecological integrity and ecological health are not the same. In Engineering within ecological constraints, ed. Peter C. Schulze, 97–109. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  39. Kear, Janet. 2005. Ducks, Geese, and Swans. In General Chapters and Species Accounts (Anhima to Salvadorina), vol. 1. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. King, Ryan S., William V. Deluca, Dennis F. Whigham, and Peter P. Marra. 2007. Threshold effects of coastal urbanization on Phragmites australis (common reed) abundance and foliar nitrogen in Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries and Coasts 30: 469–481. doi: 10.1007/BF02819393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kushlan, James A. 1993. Colonial waterbirds as bioindicators of environmental change. Colonial Waterbirds 16: 223–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Li, Xuyong, Donald E. Weller, Charles L. Gallegos, Thomas E. Jordan, and Hae-Cheol Kim. 2007. Effects of watershed and estuarine characteristics on the abundance of submerged aquatic vegetation in Chesapeake Bay subestuaries. Estuaries and Coasts 30: 840–854. doi: 10.1007/BF02841338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lippson, Alice Jane, and Robert L. Lippson. 2006. Life in the Chesapeake Bay: An Illustrated Guide to the Fishes, Invertebrates, Plants, Birds and Other Animals of Bays and Inlets from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras. 3rd ed. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Long, W. Christopher, Jacob N. Grow, John E. Majoris, and Anson H. Hines. 2011. Effects of anthropogenic shoreline hardening and invasion by Phragmites australis on habitat quality for juvenile blue crabs (Callinectes sapidus). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 409. Elsevier B.V.: 215–222. doi: 10.1016/j.jembe.2011.08.024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ludwig, David F., Jacqueline Iannuzzi, Timothy J. Iannuzzi, and Joseph K. Shisler. 2010. Spatial and Temporal Habitat Use Patterns by Water Birds in an Urban Estuarine Ecosystem: Implications for Ecosystem Management and Restoration. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 16: 163–184. doi: 10.1080/10807030903459106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ma, Zhijun, Yinting Cai, Bo Li, and Jiakuan Chen. 2010. Managing wetland habitats for waterbirds: An international perspective. Wetlands 30: 15–27. doi: 10.1007/s13157-009-0001-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Maindonald, John, and W. John Braun. 2010. Data Analysis and Graphics Using R: An Example-Based Approach. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Malecki, Richard A., Bruce D.J. Batt, and Susan E. Sheaffer. 2001. Spatial and temporal distribution of Atlantic population Canada Geese. Journal of Wildlife Management 65: 242–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Manly, Bryan F.J. 2006. Randomization, Bootstrap and Monte Carlo Methods in Biology. 3rd ed. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  50. Martínez, Fernández Julia, Miguel Angel Esteve Selma, Francisco Robledano Aymerich, María Teresa Pardo Sáez, and María Francisca Carreño Fructuoso. 2005. Aquatic birds as bioindicators of trophic changes and ecosystem deterioration in the Mar Menor lagoon (SE Spain). Hydrobiologia 550: 221–235. doi: 10.1007/s10750-005-4382-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mattheus, Christopher R., Antonio B. Rodriguez, Brent A. McKee, and Carolyn A. Currin. 2010. Impact of land-use change and hard structures on the evolution of fringing marsh shorelines. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 88: 365–376. doi: 10.1016/j.ecss.2010.04.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. McKinney, Richard A., Kenneth B. Raposa, and Rose M. Cournoyer. 2011. Wetlands as habitat in urbanizing landscapes: Patterns of bird abundance and occupancy. Landscape and Urban Planning 100. Elsevier B.V.: 144–152. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.11.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Miles, Jonathon R., Paul E. Russell, and David A. Huntley. 2001. Field Measurements of Sediment Dynamics in Front of a Seawall. Journal of Coastal Research 17: 195–206. doi: 10.2307/4300163.Google Scholar
  54. Minchinton, Todd E., and Mark D. Bertness. 2003. Disturbance–mediated competition and the spread of Phragmites australis in a coastal marsh. Ecological Applications 13: 1400–1416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Morley, Sarah A., Jason D. Toft, and Karrie M. Hanson. 2012. Ecological Effects of Shoreline Armoring on Intertidal Habitats of a Puget Sound Urban Estuary. Estuaries and Coasts 35: 774–784. doi: 10.1007/s12237-012-9481-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Nichols, James D., James E. Hines, John R. Sauer, Frederick W. Fallon, Jane E. Fallon, and Patricia J. Heglund. 2000. A double-observer approach for estimating detection probability and abundance from point counts. The Auk 117: 393–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. O’Connell, Timothy J., Laura E. Jackson, and Robert P. Brooks. 2000. Bird guilds as indicators of ecological condition in the central Appalachians. Ecological Applicationis 10: 1706–1721. doi: 10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[1706:BGAIOE]2.0.CO;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ogden, John C., John D. Baldwin, Oron L. Bass, Joan A. Browder, Mark I. Cook, Peter C. Frederick, Peter E. Frezza, et al. 2014. Waterbirds as indicators of ecosystem health in the coastal marine habitats of southern Florida: 1. Selection and justification for a suite of indicator species. Ecological Indicators 44: 148–163. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.03.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Patrick, Christopher J., Donald E. Weller, Xuyong Li, and Micah Ryder. 2014. Effects of shoreline alteration and other stressors on submerged aquatic vegetation in subestuaries of Chesapeake Bay and the Mid-Atlantic coastal bays. Estuaries and Coasts 37: 1516–1531. doi: 10.1007/s12237-014-9768-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Plant, Nathaniel G., and Gary B. Griggs. 1992. Interactions between Nearshore Processes and Beach Morphology Near a Seawall. Journal of Coastal Research 8: 183–200.Google Scholar
  61. Pontee, Nigel. 2013. Defining coastal squeeze: A discussion. Ocean and Coastal Management 84: 1–4. doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2013.07.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Prosser, Diann J., Jessica L. Nagel, Paul R. Marban, Ze Luo, Daniel D. Day, and R. Michael Erwin. 2017. Standardization and application of an index of community integrity for waterbirds in the Chesapeake Bay, USA. Waterbirds 40.Google Scholar
  63. Qian, Song S., Ryan S. King, and Curtis J. Richardson. 2003. Two statistical methods for the detection of environmental thresholds. Ecological Modelling 166: 87–97. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3800(03)00097-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. R Development Core Team. 2016. R: A language and environment for statistical computing v. 2.15.1. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.r-project.org/, accessed 10 October 2014.
  65. Schlacher, Thomas A., Justin J. Meager, and Tara Nielsen. 2014. Habitat selection in birds feeding on ocean shores: Landscape effects are important in the choice of foraging sites by oystercatchers. Marine Ecology 35: 67–76. doi: 10.1111/maec.12055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sciance, M. Benjamin, Christopher J. Patrick, Donald E. Weller, Meghan N. Williams, Melissa K. McCormick, and Eric L.G. Hazelton. 2016. Local and regional disturbances associated with the invasion of Chesapeake Bay marshes by the common reed Phragmites australis. Biological Invasions 18. Springer International Publishing: 2661–2677. doi: 10.1007/s10530-016-1136-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Seitz, Rochelle D., Romuald N. Lipcius, N.H. Olmstead, Michael S. Seebo, and Debra M. Lambert. 2006. Influence of shallow-water habitats and shoreline development on abundance, biomass, and diversity of benthic prey and predators in Chesapeake Bay. Marine Ecology Progress Series 326: 11–27. doi: 10.3354/meps326011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Seitz, Rochelle D., Kathleen E. Knick, and Theresa M. Davenport. 2017. Upland use and shoreline development affect benthic community structure. Estuaries and Coasts.Google Scholar
  69. Silliman, Brian R., and Mark D. Bertness. 2004. Shoreline development drives invasion of Phragmites australis and the loss of plant diversity on New England salt marshes. Conservation Biology 18: 1424–1434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Smith, Lyndsay A., and Patricia Chow-Fraser. 2010. Impacts of adjacent land use and isolation on marsh bird communities. Environmental Management 45: 1040–1051. doi: 10.1007/s00267-010-9475-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sobocinski, Kathryn L., Jeffery R. Cordell, and Charles A. Simenstad. 2010. Effects of shoreline modifications on supratidal macroinvertebrate fauna on Puget sound, Washington beaches. Estuaries and Coasts 33: 699–711. doi: 10.1007/s12237-009-9262-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Stolen, Eric D., David R. Breininger, and Peter C. Frederick. 2005. Using waterbirds as indicators in estuarine systems: successes and pitfalls. In Estuarine Indicators, ed. S.A. Bortone, 409–422. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  73. Studds, Colin E., William V. DeLuca, Matthew E. Baker, Ryan S. King, and Peter P. Marra. 2012. Land cover and rainfall interact to shape waterbird community composition. PloS One 7: 1–10. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0035969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Takekawa, John Y., A. Keith Miles, David H. Schoellhamer, Nicole D. Athearn, Michael K. Saiki, W.D. Duffy, S. Kleinschmidt, Gregory G. Shellenbarger, and Christopher A. Jannusch. 2006. Trophic structure and avian communities across a salinity gradient in evaporation ponds of the San Francisco Bay estuary. Hydrobiologia 567: 307–327. doi: 10.1007/s10750-006-0061-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Therneau, Terry, Beth Atkinson, and Brian Ripley. 2015. Rpart: Recursive partitioning and regression trees. R package version 4: 1–00 http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rpart.Google Scholar
  76. Titus, James G. 1998. Rising seas, coastal erosion, and the takings clause: how to save wetlands and beaches without hurting property owners. Maryland Law Review 57: 1279–1399.Google Scholar
  77. Titus, James G., Daniel E. Hudgens, Daniel L. Trescott, Michael Craghan, William H. Nuckols, Carl H. Hershner, J.M. Kassakian, et al. 2009. State and local governments plan for development of most land vulnerable to rising sea level along the US Atlantic coast. Environmental Research Letters 4: 044008. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/4/4/044008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Wilson, Michael D., Bryan D. Watts, and David F. Brinker. 2007. Status Review of Chesapeake Bay Marsh Lands and Breeding Marsh Birds. Waterbirds 30: 122–137. doi: 10.1675/1524-4695(2007)030[0122:SROCBM]2.0.CO;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Coastal and Estuarine Research Federation (outside the USA) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.U.S. Geological Survey, Patuxent Wildlife Research CenterBeltsville LabBeltsvilleUSA
  2. 2.Western EcoSystems TechnologyCheyenneUSA
  3. 3.Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark HallUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations