1 / 28

Ecological Benchmarking Assessment for an Urbanized Estuarine River

Ecological Benchmarking Assessment for an Urbanized Estuarine River. J.K. Shisler, T.J. Iannuzzi, A.D. Standbridge, J.M. Gonzalez, and D.F. Ludwig. What are Some Impacts to the Lower Passaic River (LPR)?. Shoreline features/impacts – lower 6 miles. Right* Left* Bulkhead 52.5% 51.9%

kasi
Download Presentation

Ecological Benchmarking Assessment for an Urbanized Estuarine River

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ecological Benchmarking Assessment for an Urbanized Estuarine River J.K. Shisler, T.J. Iannuzzi, A.D. Standbridge, J.M. Gonzalez, and D.F. Ludwig

  2. What are Some Impacts to the Lower Passaic River (LPR)? Shoreline features/impacts – lower 6 miles Right*Left* Bulkhead 52.5% 51.9% RipRap 32.3% 28.5% Vegetation with RipRap 9.2% 13.8% Aquatic Vegetation 6.0% 5.8% *Facing Up-River from Newark Bay

  3. Wetlands Loss in the Region Mid-19th Century Today

  4. Loss of Historic Tributaries in Region

  5. Can We Restore This System?

  6. To What? • It won’t look like this again • Many system constraints in an urban river such as the LPR • Goal is to create an ecosystem balanced for biological production, and human and wildlife use • So, restoration requires: • Value judgments • Ecological benchmarking • Creative engineering • Scope for restoration is substantial

  7. Expected Natural Habitats • Mudflat • Salt marsh – low marsh • Salt marsh – high marsh • Estuarine scrub-shrub • Transitional tidal marsh • Freshwater tidal marsh • Transitional and freshwater scrub-shrub • Floodplain forest

  8. Objectives • Examine existing habitats • Characterize and quantify physical and ecological attributes or “benchmarks” • Use benchmarks as foundation for evaluating the likely success of potential restoration projects

  9. What is an ecological benchmark?

  10. LPR Salinity Gradient • Salinity (ppth) River Mile • Polyhaline 18 - 30 0.5 • Mesohaline 5 -18 5.1 • Oligohaline 0.5 - 5 6.8 • Freshwater >0.5 11.1

  11. What Information Do We Need to Get Started? • Know the constraints • Can we modify constraints to meet restoration goals? • Benchmark local reference wetlands

  12. Limitations to Restoration in LPR • Shoreline use/configuration • Geomorphic setting • Tidal zone • Flooding/inundation • Elevation • Salinity • Shade/sun • Substrate • Water velocity

  13. Natural Salt Marsh is an Objective

  14. Where is Spartina? • Upper limit at about river mile 2.7 • Habitat conditions are a factor

  15. Lower (i.e., Polyhaline) Section of LPR

  16. RipRap Shoreline Edge

  17. Old Bulkhead

  18. Urban Tidal River

  19. Can We Restore A Salt Marsh Habitat? • The quick answer is yes, BUT • Location is critical • Will not have high marsh habitat since the area has been lost due to development • Will be narrow bands with riprap as the ecotonal edge • Limited wildlife use • May require breakwater in front of the wetland

  20. Local Wetland Restoration Effort - Why did it Fail? • Located above elevation benchmarks for S. alterniflora in system • Constraints from outside impacts • Geese • Floatables • Ice • Requires extensive engineeringto overcome constraints

  21. Where is the Brackish Water Tidal Wetland? • Very limited locations within the LPR

  22. Urban Impacts

  23. Transitional-Freshwater Section Goal

  24. Observed Habitat Transitional-Freshwater Section of LPR

  25. Existing Transitional-Freshwater Habitat OBSERVED RIPARIAN HABITAT

  26. Urban River RestorationConcepts and Conclusions • Set realistic goals • Use benchmarking of existing habitat attributes • Focus on function • Restoration vs. Creation • Adaptive Management • Stakeholder Commitment

  27. Questions?

More Related