ABSTRACTS [Continued] [Abstracts, Page 1; Abstracts Page 3] Please note, not all speakers have submitted abstracts. (This page last updated on 8/13/07) Return to Main Conference Site

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HEADWATER STREAMS IN NORTH CAROLINA
Presenter/Author: Larry Eaton Biologist Program Development Unit North Carolina Department of Water Quality 2321 Crabtree Boulevard Raleigh, NC 27604 (919) 715-3471; larry.eaton@ncmail.net
Biological sampling has been underway in headwater streams in the North Carolina Piedmont for two years, in Mountain headwater streams for one and are just getting underway in the Coastal Plain. Streams in the mountains usually started at springs, whereas most piedmont streams are fed by surface water runoff and unditched streams in the coastal plain usually begin as wetlands.  While taxa richness at perennial mountain headwater sites was similar (mean 38 taxa/sample) to piedmont perennial sites (mean 35), macroinvertebrate abundance in the mountains (mean 540 organisms/sample) was nearly double the sample abundance in the piedmont (mean 295). In both ecoregions winter/spring peaks in taxa richness and abundance were observed. Intermittent segments in the mountains were rare, but occurred as wet weather springs, while in the piedmont, intermittent segments were stream channels above perennial reaches.  In both types, taxa richness and abundance were very low when the channel was dry, but were only slightly below levels found in perennial segments when wet.  There were few species confined to intermittent reaches. Most taxa collected in intermittent reaches were also found downstream in perennial reaches, however some groups (e.g. mayflies, caddisflies, odonates, megaloptera) were rarely found in intermittent segments.  Examples of these indicator taxa will be discussed.  In contrast, ephemeral channels had little aquatic life.  From these data, it is clear that intermittent and perennial headwater streams provide important aquatic life functions in North Carolina.
THE WORLD OUTSIDE: ISSUES AND TRENDS IN PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR WETLANDS CONSERVATION
Presenter*/Authors: Eric Eckl Water Words That Work P.O. Box 2182 Falls Church, VA 22042-2182 (703) 822-4265 Eric.eckl@waterwordsthatwork.com
Everyday citizens consistently tell pollsters they favor nature protection and pollution control efforts  -- but where are those supportive attitudes when you need them most? There’s no surplus of responsible voices raised at our public hearings.  Corporate developers skirt the law and the politicians they underwrite pull the rug out from under state wetland managers seemingly without fear the voters will hold them accountable.
Noted conservation communications expert and blogger Eric Eckl has dived deep into social research, exploring this discrepancy between what citizens tell pollsters and what they actually do. At this plenary session, he’ll share the answers he’s uncovered to three simple, but profound, questions:
How much of what wetlands conservationists say and write do everyday citizens understand?
How often do they actually hear from us, anyway?
What does the future hold for public opinion about wetlands conservation?
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS FROM TWO USDA CEAP-WETLANDS REGIONAL INVESTIGATIONS QUANTIFYING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES PROVIDED BY DEPRESSIONAL AND RIVERINE WETLANDS IN AGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPES
Presenter/Author: S. Diane Eckles USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, 1-1278B Beltsville, MD 20705-5410 Diane.Eckles@wdc.usda.gov
The USDA Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) is a collaborative effort to quantify the environmental benefits of conservation practices implemented on private lands by landowners participating in Farm Bill conservation programs.  The wetlands component of CEAP (CEAP-Wetlands) is comprised of five inter-related activities to develop and implement a national wetlands adaptive management approach to enhance the strategic conservation of wetlands on agricultural landscapes.  Ten geographic regions have been initially identified to focus CEAP-Wetlands activities, including collaborative regional investigations.  The regional investigations produce quantitative estimates of ecosystem services provided by wetlands and associated lands and waters across an alteration gradient in agricultural landscapes.  Predictive wetland condition indicator models are also developed as part of the regional investigation to identify multiple-scale factors that influence the variables used to calculate an ecosystem service estimate.  This presentation will provide an overview of each regional sampling design and methods used to gather data, and report preliminary findings for several ecosystem services measured for depressional wetlands in the Prairie Pothole Region of the U. S. and for riverine wetlands in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley.  Findings will be placed in context of landscape drivers, conservation practices and Farm Bill conservation programs.
THE ONTARIO HEADWATERS RESTORATION INITIATIVE; LANDSCAPE LEVEL WETLAND AND RIPARIAN RESTORATION IN SOUTHERN ONTARIO, CANADA
Presenters*/Authors: Kevin Erwin* Kevin L. Erwin Consulting Ecologist, Inc. 2077 Bayside Parkway Fort Myers, FL 33901 klerwin@environment.com Angus Norman* Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources 659 Exeter Road London, Ontario N6E1L3 CANADA angus.norman@mnr.gov.on.ca and Dan Mansell asiOtus@sympatico.ca
Several private, government and non-government organizations are working together as the Ontario Headwaters Restoration Initiative to address the loss and degradation of wetlands and riparian zones in headwaters of a portion of southern Ontario. Work commenced in and around the Oak Ridges Moraine north of Lake Ontario during the fall of 2005, evaluating landscape conditions and identifying potential wetland and riparian zone restoration opportunities. We have examined a broad landscape covering almost 1500 square kilometers in 2 study areas.  The study areas include highly urbanized and rapidly developing locations and low density rural landscapes.
We completed an exhaustive synthesis of existing information using 21 different parameters, assessed the ecological history, reviewed social political issues and performed a preliminary field reconnaissance of potential sites in February 2007. We estimate there are over 2,000 potential restoration sites within the two study areas.  Restoration of these ecosystems will result in significant benefits to the treatment and storage of surface and groundwater (source water protection) and wildlife including Atlantic salmon recovery.
We are currently working with landowners to conduct assessment and monitoring of selected headwater stream and wetland restoration sites. Conceptual and detailed restoration plans will be generated for selected projects with restoration anticipated to begin in 2008.
SOILS, HYDROLOGY, AND GRAZED VEGETATION OF VIRGINIA BOG TURTLE HABITAT
Presenter/Author: Jeffrey B. Feaga*, Carola A. Haas, and James A. Burger Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences Department of Forestry Virginia Tech 100 Cheatham Hall Blacksburg, VA 24061-0321 feaga05@vt.edu
The Southern Blue Ridge Province in Virginia contains numerous headwater fens that provide habitat for the federally threatened and Virginia endangered bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii). Virginia Tech and the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries are cooperating to characterize the hydrology, soils, and vegetation of bog turtle habitat in the state. The goal of this research is to better understand how to identify and manage bog turtle wetlands under threat of land use changes while considering important issues for species living in a metapopulation framework.
The summer of 2007 was the first season of field work, but built on approximately twenty years of bog turtle capture data and a 7 year livestock exclosure study. From these records two groups have been established: wetlands that contain populations of bog turtles and wetlands that are available to turtles by migration but do not have bog turtles present based on capture effort. Preliminary data from groundwater wells and soil samples has been analyzed from both groups. Bog turtles from a subset of wetlands have been captured by hand and trap, and net-movements were monitored and described using radio-telemetry. Following 7 years of livestock exclusion to investigate the process of vegetative succession, percent bare soil and percent of open water were significantly higher in grazed than in ungrazed plots (2.3% vs. 0.7% and 4.4% vs. 0.6%). Percent litter was significantly higher in ungrazed plots (76.4%) than in grazed plots (55.5%). No significant differences in the percent of woody vegetation have been measured.
A LOCAL ORDINANCE TO PROTECT WETLAND FUNCTION
Presenters*/Authors: Lisa Fraley-McNeal*, Karen Cappiella, David Hirschman, and Julie Tasillo Center for Watershed Protection 8390 Main Street, 2nd Floor Ellicott City, MD 21043 (410) 461-8323; lfm@cwp.org and Beth Strommen Environmental Planner City of Baltimore Department of Planning 417 East Fayette Street, 8th Floor Baltimore, MD 21202 (410) 396-8360
Protecting wetland resources is vital to maintaining the health of our watersheds because of the important functions that wetlands provide. The Clean Water Act’s Section 404 permit program addresses direct impacts to wetlands, such as filling, but is not designed to regulate inputs of stormwater or other pollutants.  Local development regulations can be used to fill this gap since local governments, such as cities, counties, towns, and boroughs, typically have control over local land use regulations and decisions.  Furthermore, local regulations can address not just where development takes place, but how it occurs. The Center for Watershed Protection introduces a new type of model ordinance for local protection of wetlands and their functions that uses the following constructs and principles:
·			Prioritize and identify sensitive wetlands: A local government will likely want to prioritize which wetlands the ordinance applies to.  For example, sensitive wetlands, such as bogs and fens, which have a low tolerance for disturbance and/or provide a vital community or ecological function (e.g., flood control, protected species habitat).
·			Address wetland contributing drainage areas: In order to address indirect impacts from land development and stormwater, the ordinance applies to all the land that drains to a wetland through surface flow. This regulated area is referred to as the contributing drainage area.
Apply Wetland Protection Criteria: For development projects located within a wetland contributing drainage area, the ordinance provides performance criteria for aquatic buffers, site design, erosion and sediment control, and stormwater management.
THE USE OF REGRESSION TREES AND ANALYSIS OF ASTER IMAGERY FOR DETECTION OF WETLANDS IN A VIRGINIA COASTAL PLAIN STUDY AREA
Presenter*/Authors: Dr. John M. Galbraith* Associate Professor, Soil Science Department of Crop & Soil Environmental Science Virginia Tech 239 Smyth Hall (0404) Blacksburg, VA 24061 (540) 231-9784; Fax: (540) 231-7630 Eva Pantaleoni Doctoral Candidate Department of Crop & Soil Environmental Science Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061 and Randolph Wynne Associeate Professor, Forestry Department of Forestry Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061
Remote sensing has potential for improving wetland studies. It can be used for establishing wetland gains and losses over short periods of time, defining the boundaries of wetlands, and determining their composition. This study evaluates a non-parametric and a parametric model for generating high accuracy wetland maps. Fall and spring satellite images obtained from the Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer and GIS data layers are used as input variables for a Classification and Regression Tree (CART) and a Multinomial Logistic Regression (MLR) analysis. The overall accuracy of the CART model is 63.5%, with a KHAT equal to 0.49. The overall accuracy of the MLR model is 67% with KHAT equal to 0.52.  At class level, emergent wetlands are better mapped by the CART model (52% accuracy), whereas woody wetlands by the multinomial logit (56% accuracy). The two models have comparable and complementary results, thus the choice of one model over the other is determined by the type of wetland to be mapped. The moderate accuracy results are due to the complex nature of wetlands, which give rise to mix-pixel problems.
ASSESSING WETLAND CONDITION WITHIN A LAND COVER CONTEXT
Presenter*/Authors: Dave Goerman Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection 400 Market Street, 10th Floor RCSOB Harrisburg, PA 17105-8775 dgoerman@state.pa.us
Various wetland condition assessment efforts in the Eastern U.S. and elsewhere, utilize land cover as part of their assessment methodology.  Most wetland condition assessment efforts have focused on comparing existing wetland condition to a reference standard, which in many regions is associated with forested conditions. The forested condition is the historic reference standard in which most biotic communities have evolved to maximize the niches in those environments.  It is completely defensible to develop reference standard conditions based upon this premise; however, this approach can become problematic within the context of programmatic implementation.  In order to integrate condition assessment program methodologies into related regulatory programmatic efforts, and to utilize the methodology for assessing the success or value of voluntary programs, it is critical to categorize wetland condition within the land cover context that the resource exists in today and not the historical reference standard.
Pennsylvania has chosen to assess wetland condition within the land cover context that the wetland exists at the time of assessment.  This approach has many advantages over assessing in comparison to the historic reference condition.  This approach places the resource on a scoring scale that’s potentially attainable by the resource; a wetland that exists in an effectively disturbed environment (i.e. urbanizing setting) will likely never be able to attain the condition of a wetland that exists within an 80% forested environment.  This paper presents the potential benefits of assessing wetland condition within the land cover context that it exists within at the time of assessment.
FLOOD HAZARD MITIGATION - USING MARKET-BASED SOLUTIONS TO ACHIEVE CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES
Presenter/Author: Kevin Halsey Parametrix 700 NE Multnomah, Suite 1000 Portland, OR 97232 (503) 963-7886; khalsey@parametrix.com
This paper demonstrates how ecosystem services can compliment levee management objectives.  In particular, it demonstrates the importance of market-based, financial incentives for achieving public safety and conservation goals.
The recent evaluation by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers of levee conditions nationwide identified the extent and severity of the levee safety situation in the U.S.  Based on the list of at risk levees released thus far by the Corps, Oregon ranks as the state with the second highest number of at-risk levee systems.  Many of these levees are currently un-owned, un-claimed, or under-managed.  Who will take responsibility for management of these systems and how will management be funded?
Our paper will demonstrate current efforts underway in Oregon to develop hazard mitigation-related market incentives that engage landowners and land managers in furthering the joint objectives of floodplain restoration and levee management.  The goal of the program is to demonstrate how conservation dollars can be used to relieve flood hazard threats by implementing projects focused on ecosystem restoration and recovery.  These incentives include payments to landowners who allow their properties to be used for flood hazard mitigation using conservation –based techniques.  Levee removal, partial removal, or redesign, in addition to wetland and floodplain restoration planning actions, are coordinated in order to restore floodplain function, improve fish and wildlife habitat, and encourage the support and development of wetlands.  This paper details the lessons learned, results, and on-the-ground conservation actions resulting from a feasibility study focused on achieving conservation objectives through levee management.
COASTAL CHANGE ANALYSIS - COMPLETION OF A NATIONAL BASELINE
Presenter/Author: Nate Herold NOAA Coastal Services Center 2234 South Hobson Avenue Charleston, SC 29405 (843) 740-1183; Fax: (843) 740-1289 Nate.Herold@noaa.gov
The NOAA Coastal Services Center (CSC) has recently completed a nationally baseline of land cover and change information, for the coastal zone of the U.S., as part of its Coastal-Change Analysis Program (C-CAP).  C-CAP products inventory coastal intertidal areas, wetlands, and adjacent uplands with the goal of monitoring changes in these habitats, on a one-to-five year repeat cycle.  These maps are developed utilizing remotely sensed imagery, and can be used to track changes in the landscape through time.  The C-CAP effort is conducted in coordination with state coastal management agencies, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and other federal programs in support of the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) effort.  This presentation will review C-CAP’s national baseline; current initiatives and past trends in the Great Lakes region; as well as C-CAP’s vision for future higher-resolution land cover mapping.
MITIGATION IN WATERSHED PLANNING
Presenter*/Authors: Dominic Izzo, P.E., F. ASCE Exponent®, Inc. 10850 Richmond Avenue, Suite 175 Houston, TX 77042 (713) 249-6027; dizzo@exponent.com
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency are revising the regulations governing compensatory mitigation for permitted activities under the Clean Water Act. The proposed regulations establish mitigation performance standards and criteria to improve the quality and success of mitigation projects. They also account for regional variations in aquatic resource types and functions and apply equivalent standards to each type of mitigation. Importantly, the regulations incorporate a watershed approach to improve how mitigation replaces lost aquatic resource functions.
The new regulation supports the goal of ‘‘no net loss’’ of wetlands for both acreage and functions by improving site selection. Locating mitigation where it will provide desirable habitats and functions to offset the adverse impacts of permitted activities allows resource managers to target mitigation to restore important wetlands and other key aquatic resources. Since the new regulation allows non-jurisdictional areas to be used for mitigation, if they compensate for ecosystem functions lost at the impacted site, watershed managers have more flexibility. If they plan and coordinate mitigation within the watershed effectively, the net cumulative effect can be a significant improvement in the watershed’s overall wetland function.
This presentation discusses mitigation planning within watersheds under the new regulation. It will explore how to maintain baseline aquatic resource functions, restore hydro-geomorphologic processes, and improve habitat diversity and connectivity with the goal of achieving ecologically self-sustaining restoration. Key tools in this effort will be Regional Sediment Management, watershed planning, and collaborative decision-making.
CONDITION OF TIDAL WETLANDS IN DELAWARE'S INLAND BAYS AND THE IMPACTS OF SUDDEN WETLAND DIEBACK
Presenter/Author: Amy Jacobs*, Andrew Howard Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control Watershed Assessment Section 820 Silver Lake Boulevard, Suite 220 Dover, DE 19904-2464 amy.jacobs@state.de.us and Chris Bason Delaware Center for the Inland Bays 39375 Inlet Road Rehoboth Beach, DE 19971
The goal of Delaware’s Wetland Monitoring and Assessment Program is to assess the condition or health of wetlands, and the functions and ecosystem services that wetlands provide. The program will then use this information to improve existing education, research, restoration and protection efforts. As part of this effort, the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control has been working in conjunction with the Maryland Department of Natural Resources and the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences to develop protocols to assess the condition of tidal wetlands.  In 2006, we collected vegetation, water quality, macro-invertebrate, and soils data to document condition of marshes that spanned the range of disturbance based on surrounding land use and shoreline features.  During our assessment, sudden wetland dieback (SWD) was documented for the first time in Delaware and through an aerial survey was found to affect approximately 40% of the wetlands in the Inland Bays watershed.  In 2007, we incorporated metrics to specifically evaluate the effect of SWD on marsh condition into our program, and assessed the condition of 14 wetlands spanning a range of dieback severity.  We collected data on vegetation, biomass, hydrology, elevation, and bird use.  Preliminary results of this work are presented, and indicators of restoration necessity to prevent SWD induced marsh loss are discussed.
PROJECT POWER: PROTECTING OUR WETLANDS WITH EDUCATORS & REGULATORS
Presenter/Author: Dr. Merryl Kafka Curator of Education New York Aquarium Wildlife Conservation Society Surf Avenue & W.8th Street Brooklyn, NY 11224 (718) 265-3452; Fax: (718) 265-3451 MKafka@wcs.org
With support from the E.P.A., the New York Aquarium and its partner, The NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, launched a national initiative to work with zoos and aquaria, in concert with their local regulatory agencies, to advance public education about wetlands and the regulations that protect them. Often citizens are unfamiliar with these regulations and unwittingly find themselves in violation of environmental laws. Due to limited resources, regulatory agencies have been unable to provide sufficient educational programming necessary to teach citizens about conservation and regulations. Project POWER unites the unique resources from each partner to make learning about wetlands ecology and regulations an engaging and effective public program. Innovative educational collaborations offer a practical application to reduce the frequency of wetland violations. Participants who attend wetland classes in New York receive a penalty reduction, and in a proactive measure, non-violators learn how to avoid violations. Program logistics and the evaluation highlights from participating teams from 13 states will be addressed.
Key words: Practical application to: Public education, compliance to regulations, penalty reductions/
DEVELOPMENT OF A WETLAND RESTORATION TARGETING STRATEGY FOR THE CORSICA RIVER WATERSHED
Presenter*/Authors: Mitch A. Keiler Restoration Project Manager Ecosystems Restoration Center Maryland Department of Natural Resources Watershed Services Unit Tawes State Office Building 580 Taylor Avenue, E-2 Annapolis, MD 21401 (410) 260-8806 David F. Bleil Environmental Consultant Formerly: Maryland Department of Natural Resources 1444 Defense Highway Gambrills, MD 21054 (410) 721-0375 and Erin N. McLaughlin* Maryland Department of Natural Resources Watershed Services Unit Tawes State Office Building 580 Taylor Avenue, E-2 Annapolis, MD 21401 (410) 260-8806
The Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Watershed Services Unit has developed a GIS wetland restoration targeting protocol for watersheds that have developed Watershed Restoration Action Strategy (WRAS) plans.  The development of this wetland restoration targeting tool is currently being applied to the Corsica River Pilot Project.  The Corsica River is a tributary of the Chester River located in Queen Anne’s County, Maryland.  The Corsica River is approximately 6.5 miles in length and 40 square miles in drainage area.  The predominant land use is agricultural representing 15,600 acres.  The Corsica watershed is estimated to have a historic wetland loss of 4,192 acres (Unified Watershed Assessment 1998) and is listed impaired on the Environmental Protection Agencies 303(d) list of impaired waterways for nutrients and sediments.  To address these impairments a WRAS plan was completed in 2003.  As part of the WRAS a Synoptic Survey was conducted dividing the watershed in to 51 subcatchments that were sampled for nutrient concentrations.  High nitrate (>0.2 kg/h/day) subcatchments were identified for priority restoration.  The wetland restoration targeting strategy utilizes a two-phased approach to locate restoration opportunities.  Phase I: Desktop Evaluation- GIS and synoptic survey mapping data are overlaid to identify areas that have drained hydric soils and high nutrient yields.  The restoration areas identified in this phase represent the best opportunities to restore wetlands that will provide denitrification functions.  Phase II: Field Evaluation – in cooperation with the Soil Conservation District (SCD) priority restoration locations were reviewed on the ground for project feasibility.
PLANT RESPONSE TO ELEVATED CO2 AND NITROGEN DRIVES SOIL ACCRETION IN A HIGH SALT MARSH
Presenter*/Authors: Jason Keller*, J. Adam Langley and J. Patrick Megonigal Smithsonian Environmental Research Center Edgewater, MD 21037 (443) 482-2351
Tidal marsh plants may regulate soil accretion to maintain an optimal soil elevation relative to mean sea level. The ability of these ecosystems to match increasing rates of sea level rise, therefore, may be modified by other anthropogenic perturbations which strongly influence plant performance. The first year of experimentation in a marsh dominated by Scirpus olneyi and Spartina patens revealed strong plant productivity responses to elevated CO2 and nitrogen addition, particularly when the treatments were applied in combination. We have outfitted these plots with soil elevation tables (SETs) to make high-resolution measurements of soil surface elevation. Initial SET measurements indicate that soil elevation follows trends in plant growth, with the most productive treatments yielding the largest gains in rooting-zone soil accretion. In this first growing season, patterns of elevation change likely arose from stimulation of subsurface plant biovolume. Long-term response of accretion in this highly organic marsh will depend on the balance of plant productivity and organic matter decomposition. Elevated CO2 and nitrogen additions will likely continue to stimulate plant productivity, but the response of decomposition remains uncertain.
REMOTE SENSING OF WETLAND CHANGES
Presenter/Author: V. Klemas*, R. Field, and O. Weatherbee College of Marine and Earth Studies University of Delaware Newark, DE 19716 klemas@udel.edu
For several decades, remote sensors on aircraft and satellites have been used successfully to map land cover changes in upland areas.  However, wetlands, due to their patchy distribution and complex composition, present a challenge to change detection.  This is especially true for small, isolated freshwater wetlands which have recently lost federal protection.  Satellite sensors, which have high spatial resolution, usually lack the required spectral bands for detecting wetland changes.  Hyperspectral satellite images lack the required spatial resolution, are expensive, and require advanced remote sensing specialists for their analysis.  Remote sensing from aircraft is cost-effective only for small areas.
A new method for remotely effectively detecting wetland changes uses biomass as an indicator.  To detect biomass changes the Modified Soil Adjusted Vegetation Index (MSAVI) is used with red and near-infrared reflectances derived from Landsat/TM images.  This biomass algorithm is applied to a time series of Landsat/TM images and used with selected thresholds to detect wetland changes.  To minimize natural variations between images in the time series (e.g. atmospheric, annual, seasonal, etc.) it is assumed that the relative distribution of biomass in each sub-basin will remain essentially constant over time.  Wetland pixels whose MSAVI deviation from the sub-basin mean changes from its previous deviation by more than a selected threshold value are considered as having changed.  Threshold selection determines whether many small changes or only the more significant ones are detected.  To minimize costs, only changed sites “flagged” by Landsat/TM are studied in more detail with high-resolutions systems, such as IKONOS or airborne imagers.
DEVELOPING ALTERNATIVE FORMS OF COMPENSATORY MITIGATION TO ADDRESS WATERSHED NEEDS
Presenter/Author: Suzanne Klimek Director of Operations North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 (919) 715-1835; suzanne.klimek@ncmail.net
Description:  The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program was established in 2003 to restore, enhance, preserve and protect the functions associated with wetlands, streams, and riparian areas, including but not limited to those necessary for the restoration, maintenance and protection of water quality and riparian habitats throughout North Carolina.  Since its inception, EEP has provided of one million linear feet of stream restoration and three thousand acres of wetland restoration.  All of this work has been provided based on accepted regulatory protocols for compensation.  There are some parts of the state where EEP is actively seeking to invest monies and obtain mitigation credit for non-traditional forms of compensation (for example through the implementation of stormwater best management practices).  Some reasons for seeking such flexibilities include a lack of traditional restoration opportunities in a heavily urbanized part of the state and an interest in implementing projects to meet Departmental resource goals in coastal North Carolina.  In developing these alternatives, EEP is taking a watershed approach to identifying and justifying non-traditional projects.  This presentation will describe why it is important to consider non-traditional mitigation in some cases and provide details on how EEP is working to promote these types of projects and the challenges associated with doing so.
A STATEWIDE APPROACH FOR IDENTIFYING POTENTIAL AREAS FOR WETLAND RESTORATION AND MITIGATION BANKING IN GEORGIA: AN ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONAL APPROACH
Presenter*/Authors: Liz Kramer* and Steve Carpenendo Institute of Ecology University of Georgia Athens, GA 30602 (706) 542-3577; Fax: (706) 542-6040 Alice Miller-Keyes and Carol Couch Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division Atlanta, GA
Georgia ranks second among EPA Region 4 states in estimated wetland acreage and has a rich diversity of wetland types.  Georgia is currently the nations 10th most populous state and is projected to double in population within the next 25 years.  A large fraction of this growth is projected for areas proximal to wetlands, such as coastal counties. Currently in Georgia there is no coordinated statewide program for the identification and prioritization of landscape-level wetland areas   used for wetland mitigation banks or other restoration activities.  As a result, current restoration efforts benefit the immediate area and satisfy “no-net-loss”, but may not contribute greatly to the overall health of the watershed.  Developing a prioritization map of potential wetland restoration areas will help natural resource managers focus restoration efforts in areas that will provide the greatest cumulative effect on the health of a watershed and surrounding communities.
The purpose of this project is to provide state, federal and non-governmental natural resource managers with a Georgia-specific GIS database of potential areas for wetland mitigation banks and conservation and restoration projects using a GIS model to prioritize wetland functions and values. The potential wetland restoration areas (PWRA) prioritization model is constructed in two components; component one prioritizes wetland areas based upon ecosystem functions, and component two prioritizes wetland areas based upon threats to these functions. In addition to providing information for the 404 and 401 processes, the output could provide information and coordination for many statewide planning activities.
RADAR MONITORING OF FORESTED WETLAND HYDROPERIOD TO IMPROVE WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT
Presenter/Author: Megan W. Lang*, Jerry C. Ritchie, Greg McCarty S. Diane Eckles and W. Dean Hively USDA-ARS Hydrology and Remote Sensing Lab Beltsville, MD 20705 (301) 504-5138
Wetlands are hydrologically dynamic ecosystems which have the potential to improve water quality. Unfortunately, many of the Chesapeake Bay’s wetlands, especially forested wetlands, have been lost or degraded by anthropogenic impacts. Due to the large effect of agriculture on the ability of wetlands to function, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) serves a vital role in wetland conservation and restoration. In order for the USDA to allocate funds to best manage wetlands, a better understanding of wetland functioning is necessary. Hydroperiod (i.e., temporal fluctuations in flooding and soil moisture) is one of the most important parameters controlling wetland function and extent. Broad-scale forested wetland hydrology is difficult to monitor using ground-based and traditional remote sensing methods (i.e., aerial photography). C-band synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data can improve the ability to monitor forested wetland hydrology. Research has been conducted which supports the use of C-band SAR to monitor hydrology in Mid-Atlantic forested wetlands. A forested wetland hydroperiod time series has been developed for the Choptank Watershed, Maryland to better represent the dynamic nature of this ecosystem variable.  Maps of forested wetland hydroperiod were compared with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Wetlands Inventory, the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Soil Survey Geographic Database, and in situ data. Results are encouraging and opportunities are being explored to include the hydroperiod metric, as well as other biophysical parameters, in a watershed-scale decision support tool to assist USDA managers.
Continued on Page 3
Go to: Abstracts Page 1; Abstracts Page 3
Return to Agenda
Return to top
Return to Main Conference Site