1 / 15

Oyster Castles: A New Tool for Site Evaluation and Intertidal Oyster Reef Habitat Restoration and Enhancement in Multi

Oyster Castles: A New Tool for Site Evaluation and Intertidal Oyster Reef Habitat Restoration and Enhancement in Multiple U.S. East Coast States. Benjamin W. Stone 1 Peter Kingsley-Smith 1 , Bowdoin Lusk 2 , Barry Truitt 2 , Joy Brown 3 , Mark Faherty 4 & Gus Lorber 5

shira
Download Presentation

Oyster Castles: A New Tool for Site Evaluation and Intertidal Oyster Reef Habitat Restoration and Enhancement in Multi

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. Oyster Castles: A New Tool for Site Evaluation and Intertidal Oyster Reef Habitat Restoration and Enhancement in Multiple U.S. East Coast States Benjamin W. Stone1 Peter Kingsley-Smith 1, Bowdoin Lusk 2, Barry Truitt 2, Joy Brown 3, Mark Faherty 4 & Gus Lorber 5 1 South Carolina Department of Natural Resources’ Marine Resources Research Institute 2 The Nature Conservancy Virginia Coast Reserve 3 The Nature Conservancy South Carolina Chapter 4 Massachusetts Audubon / Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary 5 Allied Concrete Co.

  2. Background • Increasing pressure on coastal habitats • Multiple drivers of oyster reef habitat loss • Importance of ecological services • Decreasing availability and high price of oyster shell • Use of novel materials as substrate • Suitability and potential success of reef restoration and enhancement sites • Application of site evaluation approaches

  3. Origin of the Oyster Castle

  4. Massachusetts Virginia South Carolina

  5. Massachusetts Audubon and Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary • Deployed June 2009 • ~500 blocks divided among 9 replicate castle arrays • Density: Oysters m-2 • Size: Mean shell height (mm) • Winter oyster mortality • Sites are open to harvesting

  6. Virginia Coastal Reserve • 3 sites established in June-July 2008 • (~500 blocks) – November 2008 shown top right; October 2010 shown bottom right • 2 additional sites established in June 2009 • (~500 blocks) • 1 site established in March-April 2010 on a larger scale (bottom left) and castles added to 2 existing sites (~1488 blocks)

  7. South Carolina Oyster Castles • Deployed at 3 sites on Jeremy Island in July 2009 using volunteers • Eight arrays of 13 oyster castles • Monitored quarterly from Dec 2009 until Nov 2010 • Castles constructed in Winyah Bay

  8. Photographed region Sampling Method Photographic analysis Elevation and Orientation West North Top Middle Bottom South East

  9. Analysis • Data from SC sites sampled in December 2009 • Oyster size data: oyster shell height (mm) • Oyster density data: number of oysters m-2 • Count no. of live oysters in each photograph (sample area) • Determine sample area (m2) to calculate oysters m-2 • Data tested for normality - assumptions of ANOVA models • Investigated main effects of site, elevation and orientation and their interactions • Non-significant terms removed and reduced models re-run • Split analysis into the three sites-Casino, ICW, Skrine

  10. Effect of elevation on oyster survival • One-way ANOVA • Significant at ICW & Skrine sites; not significant at Casino • Tukey’s 95% C.I. post-hoc analysis • ICW: Top > Bottom = Middle • Skrine: Top = Middle > Bottom

  11. Effect of orientation on oyster survival • One-way ANOVA • Skrine only: significant • Tukey’s 95% C.I. • South = West > East • North not significantly different from other orientations

  12. Oyster size analyses ICW Mean=25.7 mm • Significance effects of: • Site • Replicate (castle) • Elevation • Orientation • Elevation*Orientation • Analysis ongoing Skrine Mean=25.47 mm Casino Mean=35.9 mm

  13. Conclusions • Castles have utility as small-scale evaluation tools and larger scale restoration substrate. • Elevation significantly affects early post-settlement oyster survival. • Higher predation rates on lower elevations? • Orientation affected survival only at one site and patterns were not intuitive. • Small-scale differences in oyster growth rates. • Success of restoration sites can be highly site specific.

  14. Acknowledgements • Amanda Fornal1 • Ryan Joyce 2 • Kristin Schulte 1 • Eric Krueger 3 • Kristine Hartvigsen3 • Mary Conley 3 • Melissa Spotts3 • Neil Jordan 3 • Pam Marfizo3 • Robert Newton 3 • Ryan Olson 3 • Sarah Hartman 3 • Shari Wibert3 • Jim Yergin • John Kooper • Carl Kooper • Alec Adams • Ashley Ammons • David Mikell • Jeanna Crockett • Vicki Bullock • Andrew Kazilieras • Caroline Hetchell • Kelly Courtney South Carolina Department of Natural Resources 1 College of Charleston 2 The Nature Conservancy 3

  15. Thank you for your attention. Benjamin W. Stone Wildlife Biologist Shellfish Research Section Marine Resources Research Institute South Carolina Department of Natural Resources stoneb@dnr.sc.gov

More Related