Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A reexamination of restored wetlands in Manitowoc County, Wisconsin

  • Published:
Wetlands Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Since the late 1980s, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has helped restore hundreds of wetlands in Manitowoc County, Wisconsin, in an effort to enhance the production of waterfowl and other wetland associated species. During summer 2004, we re-examined 11 restorations to determine how their plant communities had changed since 1992. In addition, we re-evaluated waterfowl and anuran communities at eight restorations. Because 1992 data were compiled from separate studies, all three groups of organisms were simultaneously examined at only two wetlands. Significant decreases in plant diversity and plant species richness were detected between 1992 and 2004, while significant increases were detected for species classified as obligate or facultative wet. These changes suggest that the plant communities at the restorations have matured since 1992. Use of the wetlands by waterfowl and anurans, on the other hand, did not exhibit significant change over this period. Regular monitoring of restorations over even longer periods will provide new insights into the way in which restored communities develop and whether current restoration methods have succeeded in establishing stable, species-rich wetland communities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Adams, L. W., L. E. Dove, and T. M. Franklin. 1985. Mallard pair and brood use of urban stormwater-control impoundments. Wildlife Society Bulletin 13: 46–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J. E. 2002. Response of dabbling ducks to wetland conditions in the Prairie Pothole Region. Waterbirds 25: 465–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker, J. D. and S. D. Wilson. 2004. Using ecological restoration to constrain biological invasion. Journal of Applied Ecology 41: 1058–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batzer, D. P., R. Cooper, and S. A. Wissinger. 2006. Wetland animal ecology. p. 242–84. In D. P. Batzer and R. R. Sharitz (eds.) Ecology of Freshwater and Esturarine Wetlands. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernthal, T. W. 2003. Development of a floristic quality assessment methodology for Wisconsin. final report to the US Environmental Protection Agency, Region V. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Budelsky, R. A. and S. M. Galatowitsch. 2000. Effects of water regime and competition on the establishment of a native sedge in restored wetlands. Journal of Applied Ecology 37: 971–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chadde, S. 1998. A Great Lakes Wetland Flora. PocketFlora Press, Calumet, MI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. US Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, J. T. 1959. The Vegetation of Wisconsin: An Ordination of Plant Communities. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutright, N., B. Harriman, and R. Howe. 2006. The Atlas of Wisconsin Breeding Birds. Wisconsin Society for Ornithology, Waukesha, WI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czarapata, E. J. 2005. Invasive Plants of the Upper Midwest. The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denk, D. D. 1997. Vegetation development and waterfowl use of restored versus natural wetlands. M.S. Thesis. University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, Stevens Point, WI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Detenbeck, N. E., S. M. Galatowitsch, J. Atkinson, and H. Ball. 1999. Evaluating perturbations and developing restoration strategies for inland wetlands in the Great Lakes Basin. Wetlands 19: 789–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfeld, J. G. 2000. Defining the limits of restoration: the need for realistic goals. Restoration Ecology 8: 2–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation. 1989. Federal manual for identifying and delineating jurisdictional wetlands. cooperative technical publication. US Army Corps of Engineers, US Environmental Protection Agency, US Fish and Wildlife Service, and USDA Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galatowitsch, S. M., R. Budelsky, and L. Yetka. 1999. Revegetation strategies for northern temperate glacial marshes and meadows. p. 225–41. In W. Streever (ed.) An International Perspective on Wetland Rehabilitation. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galatowitsch, S. M. and A. G. van der Valk. 1996. The vegetation of restored and natural prairie wetlands. Ecological Applications 6: 102–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Genet, S. K. and L. G. Sargent. 2003. Evaluation of methods and data quality from a volunteer-based amphibian call survey. Wildlife Society Bulletin 31: 703–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hine, R. L., B. L. Les, and B. F. Hellmich. 1981. Leopard frog populations and mortality in Wisconsin, 1974–1976. Technical Bulletin No. 122. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaspen, E. 1996. Biotic and abiotic monitoring and experimental restoration at a wetland mitigation site. M.S. Thesis. University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, Stevens Point, WI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyner, D. E. 1980. Influence of invertebrates on pond selection by ducks in Ontario. Journal of Wildlife Management 44: 700–05.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keddy, P. 2000. Wetland Ecology: Principles and Conservation. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitchens, L. J. 2003. Basic Statistics and Data Analysis. Brooks/ Cole, Pacific Grove, CA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolozsvary, M. B. and R. K. Swihart. 1999. Habitat fragmentation and the distribution of amphibians: patch and landscape correlates in Farmland. Canadian Journal of Zoology 77: 1288–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindig-Cisneros, R. and J. B. Zedler. 2002. Phalaris arundinacea seedling establishment: effects of canopy complexity in fen, mesocosm, and restoration experiments. Canadian Journal of Botany 80: 617–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, J. W., P. A. Tessene, S. M. Wiesbrook, and B. W. Zercher. 2005. Effect of area and isolation on species richness and indices of floristic quality in Illinois, USA wetlands. Wetlands 25: 607–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch, W. J. and J. G. Gosselink. 2000. Wetlands, third edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch, W. J. and R. F. Wilson. 1996. Improving the success of wetland creation and restoration with know-how, time, and self-design. Ecological Applications 6: 77–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulhouse, J. M. and S. M. Galatowitsch. 2003. Revegetation of prairie pothole wetlands in the mid-continental US: twelve years post-reflooding. Plant Ecology 169: 143–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Climatic Data Center. State of WI Rainfall. http:// lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/WI.html. Last accessed 16 February 2005.

  • Nichols, S. A. 1999. Floristic quality assessment of Wisconsin lake plant communities with example applications. Journal of Lake and Reservoir Management 15: 133–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odland, A. and R. del Moral. 2002. Thirteen years of wetland vegetation succession following a permanent drawdown, Myrkdalen Lake, Norway. Plant Ecology 162: 185–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otter, A. J. 1980. Soil Survey of Manitowoc and Calumet Counties, Wisconsin. National Cooperative Soil Survey, USDA, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, L. G., S. M. Galatowitsch, and C. J. Rosen. 2004. Competitive control of invasive vegetation: a native wetland sedge suppresses Phalaris arundinacea in carbon-enriched soil. Journal of Applied Ecology 41: 151–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pough, F. H., R. M. Andrews, J. E. Cadle, M. L. Crump, A. H. Savitzky, and K. D. Wells. 1998. Herpetology. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinartz, J. A. and E. L. Warne. 1993. Development of vegetation in small created wetlands in southeastern Wisconsin. Wetlands 13: 153–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robaidek, C. 1997. Macroinvertebrate and macrophyte communities of wetlands restored in Manitowoc County, WI. M.S. Thesis. University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, Green Bay, WI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuyt, K. and L. Brander. 2004. Living Waters — Conserving the Source of Life. The Economic Values of the World’s Wetlands. World Wide Fund for Nature, Gland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwar, M. T. 2002. Hydrologic restoration of a groundwater-fed sedge meadow wetland in south-central Wisconsin. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skelly, D. K., E. E. Werner, and S. A. Cortwright. 1999. Longterm distibutional dynamics of a Michigan amphibian assemblage. Ecology 80: 2326–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sokal, R. R. and F. J. Rohlf. 1995. Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research, third edition. Freeman, New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stannard, M. and W. Crowder. 2001. Biology, History, and Supression of Reed Canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L). Technical Notes. NRCS, Spokane, WA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trenham, P. C., W. D. Koenig, M. J. Mossman, S. L. Stark, and L. A. Jagger. 2003. Regional dynamics of wetland-breeding frogs and toads: turnover and synchrony. Ecological Applications 13: 1522–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trochlell, P. and T. Bernthal. 1998. Small Wetlands and the Cumulative Impacts of Small Wetland Losses: A Synopsis of the Literature. WDNR, Madison, WI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • USACE. 2006. Historic Great Lake Levels. http://www.lre. usace.army.mil/greatlakes/hh/greatlakeswaterlevels/historicdata/ greatlakeshydrographs. Last accessed 16 September 2006.

  • USDA. 2004. Plants Wetlands Database. http://plants.usda.gov/ cgi_bin/topics.cgi?earl=wetland.html. Last accessed 16 February 2005.

  • USFWS. 1998. Expanding the vision. 1998 update. North American Waterfowl Management Plan. US Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • USFWS. 2000. Partners for Fish and Wildlife. Regional Highlights. Fiscal Year 2000. Great Lakes-Big Rivers Region. Bull. US Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • USGS. 1998. Regional landscape ecosystems of Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/ resource/1998/rlandscp/wiscmap.html. Last accessed 23 May 2005.

  • University of Wisconsin Extension. 2004. Manitowoc County Agriculture: Value and Economic Impact. http://www.uwex. edu/ces/cty/manitowoc/documents/ManitowocAgImpact.pdf. Last accessed 26 October 2005.

  • van der Valk, A. G. 1981. Succession in wetlands: a Gleasonian approach. Ecology 62: 688–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VanRees-Siewert, K. L. and J. J. Dinsmore. 1996. Influence of wetland age on bird use of restored wetlands in Iowa. Wetlands 16: 577–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voss, E. G. 1972. Michigan Flora, Part I. Cranbrook Institute of Science, Bloomfield Hills, MI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voss, E. G. 1985. Michigan Flora, Part II. Cranbrook Institute of Science, Bloomfield Hills, MI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voss, E. G. 1996. Michigan Flora, Part III. Cranbrook Institute of Science, Bloomfield Hills, MI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • WDNR. 2000. Reversing the loss: a strategy for protecting and restoring wetlands in Wisconsin. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilhelm, G. S. and D. Ladd. 1988. Natural area assessment in the Chicago region. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 53: 361–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, B. K., M. D. Koneff, and D. A. Smith. 1999. Evaluation of waterfowl conservation under the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. Journal of Wildlife Management 63: 417–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yencha, A. 1993. Fauna and vegetation of restored wetlands in eastern Wisconsin. M.S. Thesis. University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, Green Bay, WI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zedler, J. B. 2000. Progress in wetland restoration ecology. Ecology and Evolution 15: 402–07.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zedler, J. B. and J. C. Callaway. 1999. Tracking wetland restoration: do mitigation sites follow desired trajectories? Restoration Ecology 7: 69–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Thomas S. Nedland

    Present address: Martenson & Eisele, Inc., 1377 Midway Road, 54952, Menasha, Wisconsin, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Science and Policy, University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, 54311, Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA

    Thomas S. Nedland, Amy Wolf & Tara Reed

Authors
  1. Thomas S. Nedland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amy Wolf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tara Reed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nedland, T.S., Wolf, A. & Reed, T. A reexamination of restored wetlands in Manitowoc County, Wisconsin. Wetlands 27, 999–1015 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1672/0277-5212(2007)27[999:ARORWI]2.0.CO;2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1672/0277-5212(2007)27[999:ARORWI]2.0.CO;2

Key Words

Search

Navigation