Skip to main content

Ecological Outcomes and Evaluation of Success in Passively Restored Southeastern Depressional Wetlands

Wetlands volume 30, pages 1129–1140 (2010)Cite this article

Abstract

Depressional wetlands may be restored passively by disrupting prior drainage to recover original hydrology and relying on natural revegetation. Restored hydrology selects for wetland vegetation; however, depression geomorphology constrains the achievable hydroperiod, and plant communities are influenced by hydroperiod and available species pools. Such constraints can complicate assessments of restoration success. Sixteen drained depressions in South Carolina, USA, were restored experimentally by forest clearing and ditch plugging for potential crediting to a mitigation bank. Depressions were assigned to alternate revegetation methods representing desired targets of herbaceous and wet-forest communities. After five years, restoration progress and revegetation methods were evaluated. Restored hydroperiods differed among wetlands, but all sites developed diverse vegetation of native wetland species. Vegetation traits were influenced by hydroperiod and the effects of early drought, rather than by revegetation method. For mitigation banking, individual wetlands were assessed for improvement from pre-restoration condition and similarity to assigned reference type. Most wetlands met goals to increase hydroperiod, herb-species dominance, and wetland-plant composition. Fewer wetlands achieved equivalence to reference types because some vegetation targets were incompatible with depression hydroperiods and improbable without intensive management. The results illustrated a paradox in judging success when vegetation goals may be unsuited to system constraints.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  • ACOE [Army Corps of Engineers] Environmental Laboratory (1987) Wetlands delineation manual. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi

  • Aronson MFJ, Galatowitsch SM (2008) Long-term vegetation development of restored prairie pothole wetlands. Wetlands 28:883–895

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barton CD, Singer J (2001) The Carolina bay restoration project: SRS wetland mitigation bank document. DOE Paper ESH-ESS-2002-00028, Westinghouse Savannah River Co., Aiken, South Carolina

  • Barton CD, De Steven D, Kilgo JC (2004) Mitigation bank promotes research on restoring coastal plain depression wetlands. Ecological Restoration 22:291–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Barton CD, De Steven D, Sharitz R, Kilgo J, Kinkead K, Otis D, Hanlin H, Ledvina J, Taylor B, Blake J (2007) The Carolina bay restoration project: final report 2000–2006. Technical Report DE-A109-00SR22188, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC

  • Barton CD, Andrews DM, Kolka RK (2008) Evaluating hydroperiod response in restored Carolina bay wetlands using soil physicochemical properties. Restoration Ecology 16:668–677 (and corrigendum 17:441)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Budelsky RA, Galatowitsch SM (2000) Effects of water regime and competition on the establishment of a native sedge in restored wetlands. Journal of Applied Ecology 37:971–985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casey WP, Ewel KC (2006) Patterns of succession in forested depressional wetlands in North Florida, USA. Wetlands 26:147–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi YD (2007) Restoration ecology to the future: a call for new paradigm. Restoration Ecology 15:351–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Steven D, Lowrance R, (2011). Agricultural conservation practices and wetland ecosystem services in a wetland-rich landscape: the Piedmont–Coastal Plain region. Ecological Applications (Supplement)

  • De Steven D, Sharitz RR (2007) Transplanting native dominant plants to facilitate community development in restored Coastal Plain wetlands. Wetlands 27:972–978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Steven D, Toner MM (2004) Vegetation of Upper Coastal Plain depression wetlands: environmental templates and wetland dynamics within a landscape framework. Wetlands 24:23–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Steven D, Sharitz RR, Singer JH, Barton CD (2006) Testing a passive revegetation approach for restoring Coastal Plain depression wetlands. Restoration Ecology 14:452–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfeld JG (2000) Defining the limits of restoration: the need for realistic goals. Restoration Ecology 8:2–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galatowitsch SM, van der Valk AG (1996a) Characteristics of recently restored wetlands in the prairie pothole region. Wetlands 16:75–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galatowitsch SM, van der Valk AG (1996b) The vegetation of restored and natural prairie wetlands. Ecological Applications 6:102–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey RK, Wooten JW (1981) Aquatic and wetland plants of the southeastern United States. University of Georgia Press, Athens

    Google Scholar 

  • Halle S (2007) Science, art, or application—the “karma” of restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 15:358–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs RJ (2007) Setting effective and realistic restoration goals: key directions for research. Restoration Ecology 15:354–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jongman RHG, ter Braak CJF, van Tongeren LFR (1995) Data analysis in community and landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kentula ME (2000) Perspectives on setting success criteria for wetland restoration. Ecological Engineering 15:199–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilgo JC, Blake JI (2005) Ecology and management of a forested landscape: fifty years on the Savannah River Site. Island, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkman LK (1995) Impacts of fire and hydrological regimes on vegetation in depression wetlands of southeastern USA. In: Cerulean SI, Engstrom RT (eds) Fire in wetlands: a management perspective. Tall Timbers, Tallahassee, pp 10–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkman LK, Lide RF, Wein G, Sharitz RR (1996) Vegetation changes and land-use legacies of depression wetlands of the western coastal plain of South Carolina: 1951–1992. Wetlands 16:564–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkman LK, Goebel PC, West L, Drew MB, Palik BJ (2000) Depressional wetland vegetation types: a question of plant community development. Wetlands 20:373–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolka RK, Nelson EA, Trettin CC (2000) Conceptual assessment framework for forested wetland restoration. Ecological Engineering 15:S17–S21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin WH, Boyce SG (1993) The Southeastern setting. In: Martin WH, Boyce SG, Echternacht AC (eds) Biodiversity of the southeastern United States. Wiley, New York, pp 1–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin KL, Kirkman LK (2009) Management of ecological thresholds to re-establish disturbance-maintained herbaceous wetlands of the southeastern USA. Journal of Applied Ecology 46:906–914

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews JW, Endress AG (2008) Performance criteria, compliance success, and vegetation development in compensatory mitigation wetlands. Environmental Management 41:130–141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McCune B, Grace JB (2002) Analysis of ecological communities. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach

    Google Scholar 

  • Menzel MA, Menzel JM, Kilgo JC, Ford WM, Edwards JW (2005) Bat response to Carolina bays and wetland restoration in the southeastern U.S. Coastal Plain. Wetlands 25:542–550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch WJ, Wilson RF (1996) Improving the success of wetland creation and restoration with know-how, time, and self-design. Ecological Applications 6:77–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch WJ, Wu X, Nairn RW, Weihe PE, Wang N, Deal R, Boucher CE (1998) Creating and restoring wetlands. Bioscience 48:1019–1030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moser LJ (2009) The effects of hardwood re-sprout control in hydrologically restored Carolina bay depression wetlands. Master’s thesis. University of Kentucky, Lexington

  • Mulhouse JM, Galatowitsch SM (2003) Revegetation of prairie pothole wetlands in the mid-continental US: twelve years post-reflooding. Plant Ecology 169:143–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulhouse JM, De Steven D, Lide RF, Sharitz RR (2005) Effects of dominant species on vegetation change in Carolina bay wetlands during a multi-year drought. Journal of Torrey Botanical Society 132:411–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Osteen DV (2003) Revised success criteria and credit release schedule for Carolina bay restoration plan. Letter of November 6, 2003, to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Westinghouse Savannah River Company, Aiken, South Carolina.

  • Otto JS (1994) Southern agriculture during the Civil War Era, 1860–1880. Greenwood, Westport

    Google Scholar 

  • Peet RK, Wentworth TR, White PS (1998) A flexible, multipurpose method for recording vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickett STA, Parker VT (1994) Avoiding the old pitfalls: opportunity in a new discipline. Restoration Ecology 2:75–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed PB Jr (1997) Revision of the national list of plant species that occur in wetlands. U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiss KC, Hernandez E, Brown MT (2009) Evaluation of permit success in wetland mitigation banking: a Florida case study. Wetlands 29:907–918

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seabloom EW, van der Valk AG (2003) Plant diversity, composition, and invasion of restored and natural prairie pothole wetlands: implications for restoration. Wetlands 23:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharitz RR, Barton CD, De Steven D (2006) Tree plantings in depression wetland restorations show mixed success. Ecological Restoration 24:114–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer JH (2001) Effect of overstory removal and fire on wetland vegetation and recruitment from the seed bank in a hydrologically restored Carolina bay wetland. Master’s thesis. University of Georgia, Athens

  • Spieles DJ (2005) Vegetation development in created, restored, and enhanced mitigation wetland banks of the United States. Wetlands 25:51–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart RE, Kantrud HA (1971) Classification of natural ponds and lakes in the glaciated prairie region. Resource Publ. 92, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC

  • Stoddard JL, Larsen DP, Hawkins CP, Johnson RK, Norris RH (2006) Setting expectations for the ecological condition of streams: the concept of reference condition. Ecological Applications 16:1267–1276

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stroh CL, De Steven D, Guntenspergen GR (2008) Effect of climate fluctuation on long-term vegetation dynamics in Carolina bay wetlands. Wetlands 28:17–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suding KN, Gross KL, Houseman GR (2004) Alternative states and positive feedbacks in restoration ecology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 19:46–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szuch RP, White JG, Vepraskas MJ, Doolittle JA (2006) Application of ground penetrating radar to aid restoration planning for a drained Carolina bay. Wetlands 26:205–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor BE, DeBiase AE (2005) Are microcrustaceans useful for assessing success of wetland pond restoration? Ecological Restoration 23:56–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Thom RM (2000) Adaptive management of coastal restoration projects. Ecological Engineering 15:365–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Underwood AJ (1994) On beyond BACI: sampling designs that might reliably detect environmental disturbances. Ecological Applications 4:3–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • US–DOE [Department of Energy] (1997) Memorandum of agreement for the Savannah River Site wetland mitigation bank. DOE Document DE-MA09-96SR18577, SRS Operations, New Ellenton, South Carolina

  • van der Valk AG (1981) Succession in wetlands: a Gleasonian approach. Ecology 62:688–696

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White PS, Walker JL (1997) Approximating nature’s variation: selecting and using reference information in restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 5:338–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zedler JB (2000) Progress in wetland restoration ecology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 15:402–407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zedler JB, Callaway JC (2000) Evaluating the progress of engineered tidal wetlands. Ecological Engineering 15:211–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We sincerely thank John Blake, U.S. Forest Service–Savannah River, for sustained dedication to overall project management, and also Randy Kolka and Don Imm for their early contributions. For field assistance, we especially thank J. Singer, J. Mulhouse, L. Lee, P. Stankus, A. Harrison, and A. Lowrance. T. Dell and R. Souter advised on statistics. Comments by B. Collins, R. Kolka, and several reviewers and editors greatly improved the manuscript. Funding was provided by the DOE–Savannah River Operations Office (Agreements DE-IA09-76SR00056 and DE-IA09-00SR22188 with the USFS–Savannah River), the DOE Office of Biological and Environmental Research (Award DE-FC09-96SR18546 to The Univ. of Georgia Research Foundation), and by Cooperative Agreements with the USFS–Savannah River (01-CA-11083600-011, 03-CS-11083600-002) and the Center for Forested Wetlands Research (01-CA-11330135-457).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. U.S. Forest Service Southern Research Station, Center for Bottomland Hardwoods Research, P. O. Box 227, Stoneville, MS, 38776, USA

    Diane De Steven

  2. Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, University of Georgia, Aiken, SC, 29802, USA

    Rebecca R. Sharitz

  3. Department of Forestry, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, 40546, USA

    Christopher D. Barton

Authors
  1. Diane De Steven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rebecca R. Sharitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christopher D. Barton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diane De Steven.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

De Steven, D., Sharitz, R.R. & Barton, C.D. Ecological Outcomes and Evaluation of Success in Passively Restored Southeastern Depressional Wetlands. Wetlands 30, 1129–1140 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-010-0100-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-010-0100-4

Keywords

  • Carolina bay
  • Mitigation bank
  • Vegetation dynamics
  • Wetland restoration