nach oben

Environmental Management

Erschienen in:

05.01.2021

Wetland Compensation and Landscape Change in a Rapidly Urbanizing Context

verfasst von: Morgan Robertson, Susan M. Galatowitsch, Jeffrey W. Matthews

Erschienen in: Environmental Management | Ausgabe 2/2021

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

While there are regulatory requirements that regulators should assess the impact of landscape-scale changes on the success of US Clean Water Act wetland compensatory mitigation sites, these requirements are poorly specified and very little work has been done to characterize how landscape change impacts CWA compensation sites. We created a rapid assessment method with both site-based and landscape-scale components, and used it to assess a population of wetland compensation sites in suburban St. Paul, Minnesota in 1997. We resampled the sites in 2010. The watersheds of these 22 compensation sites are characterized by rapid urbanization, the increase in impervious surfaces, and the loss of agriculture. This has resulted in extreme hydrographs at compensation sites and a fragmenting landscape context of more and smaller undeveloped patches. The ecosystem services provided by these compensation sites in 2010 are not significantly different than in 1997, indicating resilience in the face of landscape change, but not showing a trajectory of improvement. Reference sites were established for each ecosystem service, but two reference sites declined dramatically; results point to the importance of understanding ongoing landscape change even at benchmark sites. Compensation sites are typically located in rapidly changing and fragmenting landscapes, and understanding the relationship between landscape and compensation site will be important to ensuring appropriate compensation for impacts regulated by the Clean Water Act.

Vorheriger Artikel Trends, insights and effects of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (91/271/EEC) implementation in the light of the Polish coastal zone eutrophication

Nächster Artikel Vegetation Type Does not Affect Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Riparian Zones in Agricultural Landscapes

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Population data acquired online with the US Census Bureau on July 25, 2014 at www.census.gov/data.

Authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance provided by Emmons & Olivier Resources in providing access to the XPSWMM watershed model used to estimate storage efficiencies for 1997.

Quotations are taken from interview with hydrologist for City of Woodbury, February 21, 2012.

Hydrologist, City of Woodbury, personal communication, February 21, 2012.

Amezaga JM, Santamaría L, Green AJ (2002) Biotic wetland connectivity—supporting a new approach for wetland policy. Acta Oecologica 23(3):213–222CrossRef

Ammann AP (1991) Method for the comparative evaluation of nontidal wetlands in new hampshire. New Hampshire Department of Natural Resources, Concord, NH

Balcombe CK, Anderson JT, Fortney RJ, Rentsch JS, Grafton WM, Kordek WS (2005) A comparison of plant communities in mitigation and reference wetlands in the mid-Appalachians. Wetlands 25:130–142CrossRef

Barr Engineering (2005) A detailed assessment of phosphorus sources to Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District. Barr Engineering, Inc, Minneapolis, MN

Bedford BL (1996) The need to define hydrologic equivalence at the landscape scale for freshwater wetland mitigation. Ecol Appl 6(1):57–68CrossRef

Bedford BL (1999) Cumulative effects on wetland landscapes: links to wetland restoration in the United States and Southern Canada. Wetlands 19(4):775–788CrossRef

Bell SS et al. (1997) Linking restoration and landscape ecology. Restor Ecol 5(4):318–323CrossRef

BenDor T et al. (2009) Landscape characteristics of a stream and wetland mitigation banking program. Ecol Appl 19(8):2078–2092CrossRef

Brinson MM (1995) The HGM approach explained. Natl Wetl Newsl 17:7–13

Brinson MM, Rheinhardt R (1996) The role of reference wetlands in functional assessment and mitigation. Ecol Appl 6(1):69–76CrossRef

Brody SD et al. (2008) A spatio-temporal analysis of Section 404 wetland permitting in Texas and Florida: thirteen years of impact along the coast. Wetlands 28(1):107–116CrossRef

Brooks RP, Wardrop DH, Cole CA, Campbell DA (2005) Are we purveyors of wetland homogeneity? A model of degradation and restoration to improve wetland mitigation performance. Ecol Eng 24:331–340CrossRef

Brudvig LA (2011) The restoration of biodiversity: where has research been and where does it need to go? Am J Bot 98:549–558CrossRef

Cammen LM (1976) Macroinvertebrate colonization of Spartina marshes artificially established on dredge spoil. Estuar Coast Mar Sci 4:357–372CrossRef

Chapman BR, Howard RJ (1984) Habitat suitability index models: great egret. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.78. 23 pp.

City of Woodbury Community Development Department (1997) City of Woodbury: facts. Pamphlet on file with author. Woodbury CDD, Woodbury, MN

Clewell AF, Aronson J (2013) Ecological restoration: principles, values and structure of an emerging profession, 2nd edn. Island Press, Washington, DCCrossRef

Cornelius S (1997) Staff, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Personal communication. Minneapolis, Minnesota

Corps [US Army Corps of Engineers] (2006) Draft environmental assessment, finding of no significant impact, and regulatory analysis for proposed compensatory mitigation regulation. US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC

Corps [US Army Corps of Engineers], EPA [US Environmental Protection Agency] (2008) Compensatory mitigation for losses of aquatic resources Fed Register 73:19594–19705

Corps [US Army Corps of Engineers], EPA [US Environmental Protection Agency] (2015) Clean water rule: definition of “Waters of the United States”; final rule Fed Register 80(124):37054–37127

Dahl TE (2011) Status and trends of wetlands in the conterminous United States 2004 to 2009. US Department of the Interior, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Fisheries and Habitat Conservation, Washington, DC

Detenbeck NE et al. (1996) Temporal and spatial variability in water quality of wetlands in the Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN metropolitan area: Implications for monitoring strategies and designs. Environ Monit Assess 40:11–40CrossRef

Ehrenfeld JG (2000) Evaluating wetlands within an urban context. Ecol Eng 15:253–265CrossRef

Emmons BH (1997) Professional Engineer. Personal Communication. Lake Elmo, Minnesota

Forman RTT, Godron M (1986) Landscape ecology. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY

Frelich LE, Reich PB (1995) Spatial patterns and succession in a Minnesota Southern-Boreal Forest. Ecol Monogr 65(3):325–346CrossRef

Galatowitsch S, Van Der Valk A (1994) Restoring prairie wetlands: an ecological approach. Iowa State University Press, Ames

Galatowitsch SM, van der Valk AG (1996) Characteristics of recently restored wetlands in the prairie pothole region. Wetlands 16(1):75–83CrossRef

Gardner RC (2000) Money for nothing?: the rise of wetland fee mitigation. Va Environ Law J 19:1–56

Gutrich JJ, Hitzhusen FJ (2004) Assessing the substitutability of mitigation wetlands for natural sites: estimating restoration lag costs of wetland mitigation. Ecol Econ 48:409–424CrossRef

Gwin SE et al. (1999) Evaluating the effects of wetland regulation through hydrogeomorphic classification of landscape profiles. Wetlands 19(3):477–489CrossRef

Highfield WE (2012) Section 404 permitting in coastal texas: a longitudinal analysis of the relationship between peak streamflow and wetland alteration. Environ Manag 49(4):892–901CrossRef

Hill T, Kulz E, Munoz B, Dorney JR (2013) Compensatory stream and wetland mitigation in North Carolina: an evaluation of regulatory success. Environ Manag 51:1077–1091CrossRef

Johnston CA et al. (1990) The cumulative effect of wetlands on stream water quality and quantity. A landscape approach. Biogeochemistry 10:105–141CrossRef

Johnston CA (1993) Material fluxes across wetland ecotones in northern landscapes. Ecol Appl 3(3):424–440CrossRef

Kelly NM (2001) Changes to the landscape pattern of coastal North Carolina wetlands under the Clean Water Act, 1984–1992. Landsc Ecol 16(1):3–16CrossRef

Kentula ME (2000) Perspectives on setting success criteria for wetland restoration. Ecol Eng 15:199–209CrossRef

Kentula ME (2007) Foreword: monitoring wetlands at the watershed scale. Wetlands 27(3):412–415CrossRef

Kentula ME et al. (1992) Trends and patterns in Section 404 permitting requiring compensatory mitigation in Oregon and Washington, USA. Environ Manag 16(1):109–119CrossRef

Kettlewell CI, Bouchard V, Porej D, Micacchion M, Mack JJ, White D, Fay L (2008) An assessment of wetland impacts and compensatory mitigation in the Cuyahoga River Watershed, Ohio, USA. Wetlands 28(1):57–67CrossRef

Kozich AT, Halvorsen KE (2012) Compliance with wetland mitigation standards in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, USA. Environ Manag 50:97–105CrossRef

Kusler JA, Kentula ME (1990) Wetland creation and restoration: the status of the science. Island Press, Washington, DC

Lee LC et al. (1997) Operational draft guidebook for the hydrogeomorphic assessment of temporary and seasonal prairie pothole wetlands. The National Wetland Training Cooperative, Seattle, WA

MBWSR [Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources] (1996) Minnesota routine assessment method for evaluating wetland functions (MinRAM). MBOWSR, St. Paul, MN

Mack JJ, Miccachion M (2006) An ecological assessment of Ohio mitigation banks: vegetation, amphibians, hydrology and soils. Ohio EPA Technical Report WET/2006-1. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Surface Water, Wetland Ecology Group, Columbus

Matthews JW, Endress AG (2010) Rate of succession in restored wetlands and the role of site context. Appl Vegetation Sci 13:346–355

Miller SJ, Pruitt BA, Theiling CH, Fischenich JC, Komlos SB (2012) Reference concepts in ecosystem restoration and environmental benefits analysis (EBA): principles and practices. ERDC Report TN-EMRRP-EBA-12. US Army Corps of Engineers ERDC, Vicksburg, June 2012

Mitsch WJ, Wilson RF (1996) Improving the success of wetland creation and restoration with know-how, time, and self-design. Ecol Appl 6(1):77–83CrossRef

Moorhead KK (2013) A realistic role for reference in wetland restoration. Ecol Restor 31(4):347–352CrossRef

Morgan KL, Roberts TH (2003) Characterization of wetland mitigation projects in Tennessee, USA. Wetlands 23:65–69CrossRef

Nassauer JI (1988) The aesthetics of horticulture: Neatness as a form of care. HortScience 23(6):973–977CrossRef

Nassauer JI (1989) Agricultural policy and aesthetic objectives. J Soil Water Conserv 44(5):384–387

Naveh Z (1994) From biodiversity to ecodiversity: a landscape‐ecology approach to conservation and restoration. Restor Ecol 2(3):180–189CrossRef

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

Olivier C (1997) Professional Engineer. Personal Communication. Lake Elmo, Minnesota

Palmer MA, Filoso S (2009) Restoration of ecosystem services for environmental markets. Science 325:575–576CrossRef

Price EP, Spyreas G, Matthews JW (2019) Wetland compensation and its impacts on β‐diversity. Ecol Appl 29(1):e10827

Race MS, Fonseca MS (1996) Fixing compensatory mitigation: what will it take? Ecol Appl 6(1):94–101CrossRef

Reiss KC, Hernandez E, Brown MT (2009) Evaluation of permit success in wetland mitigation banking: a Florida case study. Wetlands 29:907–91CrossRef

Robertson M (1998) “No Net Loss”: The Political Ecology of Wetlands Policy in a Suburban Watershed. M.A. Thesis, Department of Geography. Minneapolis, MN, University of Minnesota

Robertson M (2008) The entrepreneurial wetland banking experience in Chicago and Minnesota. Natl Wetl Newsl 30(4):14–17. 20

Robertson M, Galatowitsch SM, Matthews JW (2018) Longitudinal evaluation of vegetation richness and cover at wetland compensation sites: implications for regulatory monitoring under the Clean Water Act. Wetl Ecol Managment 26(6):1089–1105CrossRef

Seneca ED, Broome SW, Woodhouse WW, Cammen LM, Lyon JT (1976) Establishing Spartina alterniflora marsh in North Carolina. Environ Conserv 3:185–188CrossRef

Sifneos JC et al. (1992) Effects of Section 404 permitting on freshwater wetlands in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi. Wetlands 12(1):28–36CrossRef

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

Stefanik KC, Mitsch WJ (2012) Structural and functional vegetation development in created and restored wetland mitigation banks of different ages. Ecol Eng 39:104–112CrossRef

Stein ED, Ambrose RF (1998) A rapid impact assessment method for use in a regulatory context. Wetlands 18(3):379–392CrossRef

Streever B (1999) An international perspective on wetland rehabilitation. Springer Science & Business Media. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston

Tiner RW (1984) Wetlands of the United States: Current Status and Recent Trends. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Habitat Resources, Newton Corner, MA

Van den Bosch K, Matthews JW (2017) An assessment of long-term compliance with performance standards in compensatory mitigation wetlands. Environ Manag 59:546–556CrossRef

Verboom J, Metz JAJ, Meelis E (1993) Metapopulation models for impact assessment of fragmentation. In:Vos CC, Opdam P eds. Landscape Ecology of a Stressed Environment. Chapman and Hall, London

Walsh R (1997) Carlos avery wildlife refuge staff. Personal Communication. Minneapolis, Minnesota

Weller M (1990) Waterfowl management techniques for wetland enhancement, restoration and creation useful in mitigation procedures. In: Kusler JA, Kentula MEeds Wetland Creation and Restoration: The Status of the Science. Island Press, Washington

White TA, Blair CL, MacDonald KB (1992) Wetland replacement: the art and science of renewing damaged ecosystems. Renew Resour J 9(4):18–24

Wisheu IC, Keddy PA (1992) Competition and centrifugal organization of plant communities: theory and tests. J Vegetation Sci 3(2):147–156CrossRef

Zedler JB (1996) Ecological issues in wetland mitigation: an introduction to the forum. Ecol Appl 6(1):33–37CrossRef

Zedler JB (1999) The ecological restoration spectrum. In: Streever W (ed.) An international perspective on wetland rehabilitation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, p 301–318

Zedler JB, Callaway JC (1999) Tracking wetland restoration: do mitigation sites follow desired trajectories? Restor Ecol 7:69–73CrossRef

Titel: Wetland Compensation and Landscape Change in a Rapidly Urbanizing Context
verfasst von: Morgan Robertson
Susan M. Galatowitsch
Jeffrey W. Matthews
Publikationsdatum: 05.01.2021
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Environmental Management / Ausgabe 2/2021
Print ISSN: 0364-152X
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1009
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-020-01380-8

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2021

When is an Offset Not an Offset? A Framework of Necessary Conditions for Biodiversity Offsets

Potential Movement Corridors and High Road-Kill Likelihood do not Spatially Coincide for Felids in Brazil: Implications for Road Mitigation

Values Matter: The Role of Key Nodes of Social Networks in an Environmental Governance Case from Taiwan

A Review of Biological Monitoring of Aquatic Ecosystems Approaches: with Special Reference to Macroinvertebrates and Pesticide Pollution

Source to Tap Risk Assessment for Intermittent Water Supply Systems in Arid Regions: An Integrated FTA—Fuzzy FMEA Methodology

Process Makes Perfect: Perceptions of Effectiveness in Collaborative Environmental Governance