Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Early Ecosystem Development Varies With Elevation and Pre-Restoration Land Use/Land Cover in a Pacific Northwest Tidal Wetland Restoration Project

  • Published:
Estuaries and Coasts Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Tidal wetland restoration through dike removal can enhance coastal ecosystem services, such as flood attenuation, fish production, and carbon sequestration. However, landscape-level heterogeneity may influence recovery. For a 169-ha restoration project in Tillamook Bay, Oregon, we hypothesized that areas of more intensive pre-restoration land use/land cover (cropping, grazing) would differ more from reference conditions before restoration than less-intensive uses and that initial post-restoration recovery would vary by land-use/land-cover type and wetland elevation. Before the restoration, the project site overall had higher non-native plant cover, lower elevation and groundwater levels, and lower soil pH than reference high marsh, with some differences by land-use/land-cover type. The cropped and grazed areas were strongly dominated by non-native species, such as Phalaris arundinacea, and were 74 and 31 cm lower than reference high marsh. Less intensively managed areas had elevations intermediate to the cropped and grazed areas and a trend towards higher native plant cover. The restoration led to higher dry-season groundwater levels, increased soil salinity to mesohaline conditions, and a 10-fold increase in soil pH at the project site, while reducing total plant cover. The degree of pre- to early post-restoration change for some parameters differed by land-use/land-cover type (total and non-native plant cover) and by wetland elevation (soil salinity, pH, and accretion rate; and total and non-native plant cover). Our results suggest that pre-restoration heterogeneity in elevation and land cover/land use may influence early post-restoration recovery. Restoration planning can incorporate such spatial variability into management targets and interventions for specific outcomes.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data for this study are available at the Knowledge Network for Biodiversity at https://doi.org/10.5063/F1FJ2F5C (Janousek et al. 2020).

References

  • Anderson, M.J., and D.C.I. Walsh. 2013. PERMANOVA, ANOSIM, and the Mantel test in the fact of heterogeneous dispersions: What null hypothesis are you testing? Ecological Monographs 83 (4): 557–574.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballantine, K., and R. Schneider. 2009. Fifty-five years of soil development in restored freshwater depressional wetlands. Ecological Applications 19 (6): 1467–1480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbier, E.B., S.D. Hacker, C. Kennedy, E.W. Koch, A.C. Stier, and B.R. Sillman. 2011. The value of estuarine and coastal ecosystem services. Ecological Monographs 81 (2): 169–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bookout, T., and G.L. Bruland. 2019. Assessment of a restored wetland in west-central Illinois. Northeastern Naturalist 26 (2): 392–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borde, A.B., V.I. Cullinan, H.L. Diefenderfer, R.M. Thom, R.M. Kaufman, S.A. Zimmerman, J. Sagar, K.E. Buenau, and C. Corbett. 2012. Lower Columbia River and estuary ecosystem restoration program reference site study: 2011 restoration analysis. Pacific Northwest National Labs report PNNL-21433 https://www.pnnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-21433.pdf.

  • Bottom, D.L., C.A. Simenstad, J. Burke, A.M. Baptista, D.A. Jay, K.K. Jones, E. Casillas, and M.H. Schiewe. 2005. Salmon at river’s end: The role of the estuary in the decline and recovery of Columbia River salmon. In US Dept Commerce, NOAA Tech, Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-68, 246. https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/3432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bricker-Urso, S., S.W. Nixon, J.K. Cochran, D.J. Hirshberg, and C. Hunt. 1989. Accretion rates and sediment accumulation in Rhode Island salt marshes. Estuaries 12 (4): 300–317.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, L.S. 2009. Effectiveness monitoring at tidal wetland restoration and reference sites in the Siuslaw River Estuary: A tidal swamp focus. Corvallis, Oregon: Green Point Consulting Prepared for Ecotrust, Portland, OR. https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/defaults/1v53k2397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, L.S. 2019. Comparing historical losses of forested, scrub-shrub, and emergent tidal wetlands on the Oregon coast, USA: A paradigm shift for estuary restoration and conservation. Corvallis, Oregon: Estuary Technical Group, Institute for Applied Ecology, Corvallis Prepared for the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission and the Pacific Marine and Estuarine Fish Habitat Partnership. https://appliedeco.org/wp-content/uploads/Brophy_2019_Oregon_tidal_swamp_and_marsh_losses_FINAL_Dec2019.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, L.S., S. van de Wetering, M.J. Ewald, L.A. Brown, and C.N. Janousek. 2014. Ni-les’tun tidal wetland restoration effectiveness monitoring: Year 2 post-restoration (2013). Corvallis, Oregon: Estuary Technical Group, Institute for Applied Ecology https://appliedeco.org/wp-content/uploads/Nilestun_Year2_EM_report_FINAL_20140730-3_bkmks.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, L.S., L.A. Brown, and M.J. Ewald. 2015. Waite Ranch baseline effectiveness monitoring: 2014. Corvallis, Oregon: Estuary Technical Group, Institute for Applied Ecology Prepared for the Siuslaw Watershed Council, Mapleton, OR. https://appliedeco.org/wp-content/uploads/WR_2014_baseline_EM_report_20160601_LSB.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, L.S., E.K. Peck, S.J. Bailey, C.E. Cornu, R.A. Wheatcroft, L.A. Brown, and M.J. Ewald. 2018. Southern flow corridor effectiveness monitoring, 2015–2017: Sediment accretion and blue carbon. Corvallis, Oregon: Estuary Technical Group, Institute for Applied Ecology Prepared for Tillamook County and the Tillamook Estuaries Partnership. https://appliedeco.org/wp-content/uploads/SFC_2015-2017_Effectiveness_Monitoring_FINAL_20181228_rev1.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, L.S., C.M. Greene, V. Hare, B. Holycross, A. Lanier, W. Heady, K. O’Connor, H. Imaki, T. Haddad, and R. Dana. 2019. Insights into estuary habitat loss in the western United States using a new method for mapping maximum extent of tidal wetlands. PLoS One 14 (8): e0218558.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, L.A., M.J. Ewald, L.S. Brophy, and S. van de Wetering. 2016. Southern flow corridor baseline effectiveness monitoring: 2014. Corvallis, Oregon: Estuary Technical Group, Institute for Applied Ecology Prepared for Tillamook County, OR. https://appliedeco.org/wp-content/uploads/SFC_2014_baseline_EM_20160605_rev1_bookmks.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bu, N.-S., J.-F. Qu, G. Li, B. Zhao, R.-J. Zhang, and C.-M. Fang. 2015. Reclamation of coastal salt marshes promoted carbon loss from previously-sequestered soil carbon pool. Ecological Engineering 81: 335–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cahoon, D.R., and R.E. Turner. 1989. Accretion and canal impacts in a rapidly subsiding wetland II. Feldspar marker horizon technique. Estuaries 12: 260–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chevan A., and M. Sutherland. 1991. Hierarchical partitioning. The American Statistician 45:90–96.

  • Cornu, C.E., and S. Sadro. 2002. Physical and functional responses to experimental marsh surface elevation manipulation in Coos Bay’s South Slough. Restoration Ecology 10 (3): 474–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craft, C., J. Reader, J.N. Sacco, and S.W. Broome. 1999. Twenty-five years of ecosystem development of constructed Spartina alterniflora (Loisel) marshes. Ecological Applications 9 (4): 1405–1419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, M.J., C.S. Ellings, I. Woo, S. Hodgson, K. Larsen, and G. Nakai. 2018. Gauging resource exploitation by juvenile Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) in restoring estuarine habitat. Restoration Ecology 26 (5): 976–986.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, S.K., R.T. Kingsford, P. Berney, J.A. Catford, D.A. Keith, J. Stoklosa, and F.A. Hemmings. 2017a. Contrasting influences of inundation and land use on the rate of floodplain restoration. Aquatic Conservation: Marine Freshwater Ecosystems 27 (3): 663–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, S.K., D.I. Warton, R.T. Kingsford, P. Berney, D.A. Keith, and J.A. Catford. 2017b. Plant traits of propagule banks and standing vegetation reveal flooding alleviates impacts of agriculture on wetland restoration. Journal of Applied Ecology 54 (6): 1907–1918.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drexler, J.Z., C.S. de Fointaine, and S.J. Deveral. 2009. The legacy of wetland drainage on the remaining peat in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California, USA. Wetlands 29 (1): 372–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewers Lewis, C.J., J.A. Baldock, B. Hawke, P.S. Gadd, A. Zawadzki, H. Heijnis, G.E. Jacobsen, K. Rogers, and P.I. Macreadie. 2019. Impacts of land reclamation on tidal marsh ‘blue carbon’ stocks. Science of the Total Environment 672: 427–437.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Frenkel, R.E., and J.C. Morlan. 1991. Can we restore our salt marshes? Lessons from the Salmon River, Oregon. The Northwest Environmental Journal 7: 119–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawes, S.M., J.A. Hiebler, E.M. Nielsen, C.W. Alton, J. A. Christy, and P. Benner. 2018. Historical vegetation of the Pacific Coast, Oregon, 1855-1910. ArcMap shapefile, Version 2018_01. Oregon Biodiversity Information Center, Portland State University. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KnHm47Bk4WbfqkQ9v7gPqlfEKLCa29SM/view?usp=sharing

  • Heiri, O., A.F. Lotter, and G. Lemche. 2001. Loss on ignition as a method for estimating organic and carbonate content in sediments: Reproducibility and comparability of results. Journal of Paleolimnology 25 (1): 101–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janousek C., S. Bailey, L. Brophy, L. Brown, and M. Ewald. 2020. Monitoring data at the Southern Flow Corridor tidal wetland restoration project, Tillamook Bay, Oregon, 2013-2018. Knowledge Network for Biocomplexity. https://doi.org/10.5063/F1FJ2F5C

  • Janousek, C.N., and C.F. Folger. 2014. Variation in tidal wetland plant diversity and composition within and among coastal estuaries: Assessing the relative importance of environmental gradients. Journal of Vegetation Science 25 (2): 534–545.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janousek, C.N., C.A. Currin, and L.A. Levin. 2007. Succession of microphytobenthos in a restored coastal wetland. Estuaries and Coasts 30 (2): 265–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaster, T., S.C. Meyers, and S. Sundberg. (eds). 2017. Oregon vascular plant checklist. version 1.7, http://www.oregonflora.org/checklist.php

  • Karberg, J.M., K.C. Beattie, D.I. O’Dell, and K.A. Omand. 2018. Tidal hydrology and salinity drives salt marsh vegetation restoration and Phragmites australis control in New England. Wetlands 38 (5): 993–1003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knaus, R.M., and D.R. Cahoon. 1990. Improved cryogenic coring device for measuring soil accretion and bulk density. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 60 (4): 622–623.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koski, K.V. 2009. The fate of coho salmon nomads: The story of an estuarine-rearing strategy promoting resilience. Ecology and Society 14: 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P.J., G.R. Smith, M.J.P. Sullivan, and H.L. Mossman. 2018. Restored salt marshes lack the topographic diversity found in natural habitat. Ecological Engineering 115: 58–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis, M.J., and C.B. Craft. 2010. Carbon sequestration and nutrient (nitrogen, phosphorus) accumulation in river-dominated tidal marshes, Georgia, USA. Soil Science Society of America Journal 74 (3): 1028–1036.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Marcoe, K., and S. Pilson. 2017. Habitat change in the lower Columbia River estuary, 1870-2009. Journal of Coastal Conservation 21 (4): 505–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mossman, H.L., A.J. Davy, and A. Grant. 2012. Does managed coastal realignment create saltmarshes with ‘equivalent biological characteristics’ to natural reference sites? Journal of Applied Ecology 49 (6): 1446–1456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordström, M.C., C.A. Currin, T.S. Talley, C.R. Whitcraft, and L.A. Levin. 2014. Benthic food-web succession in a developing salt marsh. Marine Ecology Progress Series 500: 43–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oksanen, J. 2015. Multivariate analysis of ecological communities in R: vegan tutorial. http://cc.oulu.fi/~jarioksa/opetus/metodi/vegantutor.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Peck, E.K. 2017. Competing roles of sea level rise and sediment supply on sediment accretion and carbon burial in tidal wetlands; northern Oregon; U.S.A. MS thesis. Oregon State University https://seagrant.oregonstate.edu/sgpubs/competing-roles-sea-level-rise-and-sediment-supply-sediment-accretion-and-carbon-burial-tidal.

  • Piirainen, M., O. Liebisch, and G. Kadereit. 2017. Phylogeny, biogeography, systematics and taxonomy of Salicornioideae (Amaranthaceae/Chenopodiaceae)—A cosmopolitan, highly specialized hygrohalophyte lineage dating back to the Oligocene. Taxon 66 (1): 109–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Portnoy, J.W. 1999. Salt marsh diking and restoration: Biogeochemical implications of altered wetland hydrology. Environmental Management 24 (1): 111–120.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Portnoy, J.W., and A.E. Giblin. 1997. Effects of historic tidal restrictions on salt marsh sediment chemistry. Biogeochemistry 36 (3): 275–303.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team. 2018. R: A language environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing https://www.R-project.org/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed, D., B. van Wesenbeeck, P.M.J. Herman, and E. Meselhe. 2018. Tidal flat-wetland systems as flood defenses: Understanding biogeomorphic controls. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 213: 269–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roman, C.T., W.A. Neiring, and R.S. Warren. 1984. Salt marsh vegetation change in response to tidal restriction. Environmental Management 8 (2): 141–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, K., B. Holycross, V. Hare, and L. Brophy. 2019. U.S. west coast mapping of restored tidal areas: Methodology, results & recommendations. Portland, OR: Pacific Marine and Estuarine Fish Habitat Partnership http://www.pacificfishhabitat.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/RestoredAreasReport_Dec2019.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smokorowski, K.E., and R.G. Randall. 2017. Cautions on using the before-after-control-impacts design in environmental effects monitoring programs. FACETS 2 (1): 212–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sobrinho, M.S., M. Tabarelli, I.C. Machado, J.C. Sfair, E.M. Bruna, and A.V. Lopes. 2016. Land use, fallow period and the recovery of a Caatinga forest. Biotropica 48 (5): 586–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, K.L., S.J. Carr, L.M. Diggens, J.A. Tempest, M.A. Morris, and G.L. Harvey. 2017. The impact of pre-restoration land-use and disturbance on sediment structure, hydrology and the sediment geochemical environment in restored saltmarshes. Science of the Total Environment 587-588: 47–58.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart-Oaten, A., W.W. Murdoch, and K.R. Parker. 1986. Environmental impact assessment: “Pseudoreplication” in time? Ecology 67 (4): 929–940.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, K.M., J.Z. Drexler, D.H. Schoellhamer, K.M. Thorne, M.L. Casazza, C.T. Overton, J.C. Callaway, and J.Y. Takekawa. 2014. Wetland accretion rate model of ecosystem resilience (WARMER) and its application to habitat sustainability for endangered species in the San Francisco Estuary. Estuaries and Coasts 37 (2): 476–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thom, R.M., R. Zeigler, and A.B. Borde. 2002. Floristic development patterns in a restored Elk River estuarine marsh, Grays Harbor, Washington. Restoration Ecology 10 (3): 487–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tillamook County. 2018. Southern flow corridor landowner preferred alternative management plan. 149pp. + appendices.

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, A.J. 1994. On beyond BACI: Sampling designs that might reliably detect environmental disturbances. Ecological Applications 4 (1): 3–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, G.J.C. 1997. Microalgal colonization in a saltmarsh restoration scheme. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 44 (4): 471–481.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. 1981. The practical salinity scale 1978 and the international equation of state of seawater 1980. Tech. Pap. Mar. Sci., 36.

  • USACE 2000. Installing monitoring wells/piezometers in wetlands. Wetlands regulatory assistance program. ERDC TN-WRAP-00-02. https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2017/07/24/Env-Wet-InstallMonWellsPiezometers.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA. 2019. The PLANTS database. Greensboro, NC: National Plant Data Team. https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/java/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace K.J., J.C. Callaway, and J.B. Zedler. 2005. Evolution of tidal creek networks in a high sedimentation environment: A 5-year experiment at Tijuana Estuary, California. Estuaries 28(6):795–811.

  • Woo, I., M.J. Davis, C.S. Ellings, G. Nakai, J.Y. Takekawa, and S. de la Cruz. 2018. Enhanced invertebrate prey production following estuarine restoration supports foraging for multiple species of juvenile salmonids (Onchorhynchus spp.). Restoration Ecology 26 (5): 964–975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zedler, J.B. 2000. Progress in wetland restoration. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 15 (10): 402–407.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration cooperative agreement NA16NMF4630215, United States Fish and Wildlife Service cooperative agreement F14AC00452, and Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board grant 214-1043-11003. We thank Tillamook County and Greg Hublou for permission to access the field sites. Laura Brown, Michael Ewald, Dillon Blacketer, Julie Brown, Issac Kentta, Susanna Pearlstein, Peter Idema, Danielle Aguilar, Rob Russell, Shawn Beeler, Ryan Montgomery, and Chad Allen assisted with field data collection. The US EPA and ODFW kindly provided additional research support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, 97331, USA

    Christopher N. Janousek

  2. Tillamook Estuaries Partnership, Garibaldi, OR, 97118, USA

    Scott J. Bailey

  3. Chelan County Natural Resources Department, Wenatchee, WA, 98801, USA

    Scott J. Bailey

  4. Estuary Technical Group, Institute for Applied Ecology, Corvallis, OR, 97333, USA

    Laura S. Brophy

  5. College of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, 97331, USA

    Laura S. Brophy

Authors
  1. Christopher N. Janousek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Scott J. Bailey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Laura S. Brophy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher N. Janousek.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Communicated by Carolyn A. Currin

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOC 238 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Janousek, C.N., Bailey, S.J. & Brophy, L.S. Early Ecosystem Development Varies With Elevation and Pre-Restoration Land Use/Land Cover in a Pacific Northwest Tidal Wetland Restoration Project. Estuaries and Coasts 44, 13–29 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12237-020-00782-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12237-020-00782-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation