Lecture 9: Marine Restoration and Marine Protected Areas

1. Lecture 9: Marine Restoration and Marine Protected Areas

2. Restoration of Marine Habitats • Restoration = “returning a system to a close approximation of its condition prior to disturbance, with both the structure and the function of the system recreated” (NRC 1992) • Represents one end of a continuum of conservation biology (Hobbs and Norton 1996) and can be thought of as a strategy to conserve biodiversity (Jordan et al. 1988) and ecosystem integrity (Cairns and Heckman 1996) • Should not include fisheries enhancement as restoration activities • Landscape-based approaches could benefit fisheries indirectly

3. Restoration of Marine Habitats • Scope of restoration intervention necessary varies depending on: • The bottleneck that is currently limiting the population or habitat • Ultimate goal of the restoration activity • Societal value placed on the resource to be restored

4. Role of Marine Ecologists • Work to identify and address the bottlenecks • Identify positive effects that promote reestablishment of species • Communicate the benefits of restoration to the public

5. Use of Historical Benchmarks • Historical data is useful in setting goals for restoration projects but should be used with caution • Problem with historical data is that it does not acknowledge: • Uncertainty of reconstruction of historical population size • Dynamic nature of ecosystems • Losses of keystone species • Establishment of invasive species • Effects of climate change • Logistical and financial difficultly associated with some of these goals

6. Long-term Sustainability • Is the project sustainable under current and future environmental conditions • Does restoration plan take climate change and sea-level rise into account? al.com seaturtlecamp.com

7. Habitat-Level Restoration • Bottleneck of many fish and inverts is habitat loss and degradation • Focuses on target species that are habitat formers (foundation species) • Have the potential to benefit multiple species and trophic levels, as well as energy flows and ecosystem function

8. Lessons Learned…. • Species diversity and genetic variation is important when restoring vegetation-based habitats (salt marsh, mangroves, seagrass) • Positive species interactions can be beneficial to restoration of target species (particularly in salt marshes) • Topographic complexity is important when restoring salt marshes

9. More Lessons Learned… • Conservation and rehabilitation of existing habitats is most cost-effective approach to ensure ecosystem functions are preserved • Engineering for persistence has often neglected the needed biological aspects of a project • Projects should have historical justification but plan for the future as well • Few projects have established specific goals and measureable criteria for determining success and few are adequately monitored Powers and Boyer (2013)

10. Developing metrics and criteria for judging the performance of oyster restoration projects Lesley P. Baggett1; Sean P. Powers1; Robert Brumbaugh2; Loren Coen3; Bryan DeAngelis2; Jennifer Greene2; Boze Hancock2; Summer Morlock4 1The University of South Alabama/Dauphin Island Sea Lab; 2The Nature Conservancy; 3 Florida Atlantic University; 4NOAA Restoration Center

11. Shellfish habitat a national restoration priority

12. Goals 1) Build on 2004 guidance (www.oyster-restoration.org), as well as other efforts 2) Develop monitoring guidance that would enable: • basic assessment of oyster restoration projects • comparison of projects within and across regions, tidal elevations, and construction types • estimation of ecosystem services / achievement of ecological goals • adaptive management and improvement in project design over time

13. ComprehensiveGuidance Credit: L. Coen Credit: Natural History Museum- Rotterdam Brian Kingzett, PSRF Credit: L. Coen Credit: DISL Credit: DISL Credit: Jeff DeQuattro, TNC Credit: Bo Lusk, TNC

14. Process • Steering committee of restoration scientists and restoration program managers • Workshop with experts from the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific coasts • 6+ week public review and comment period (over 300 downloads)

15. 2011 Silver Spring, MD Workshop Participants • Lesley Baggett, Sean Powers (USA/DISL) • Rob Brumbaugh, Jenn Greene, Boze Hancock (TNC) • Bryan De Angelis, Kay McGraw, Summer Morlock, Stephanie Westby (NOAA) • Loren Coen (FAU) • Brian Allen (Puget Sound Restoration Fund) • Denise Breitburg (SERC) • Dave Bushek (Rutgers University) • Jon Grabowski (Northeastern University) • Ray Grizzle (UNH) • Ted Grosholz (UC – Davis) • Megan La Peyre (USGS) • Mark Luckenbach (VIMS) • Mike Piehler (UNC – Chapel Hill) • Philine zu Ermgassen (University of Cambridge)

16. Metrics and Variables • Universal metrics and environmental variables • Metrics and variables that should be sampled for every oyster restoration project • Restoration goal-based metrics • Metrics that are specific to ecosystem service-based restoration goals and should be sampled for projects citing that particular restoration goal • Ancillary metrics • Secondary level of metrics that can provide supplemental or more detailed information concerning project performance. Are optional.

17. Defining Restoration • “The process of establishing or reestablishing a habitat that in time can come to closely resemble a natural condition in terms of structure and function” (modified from Turner and Streever 2002) • Includes: • Activities aimed at returning degraded oyster habitat (natural or constructed) to its prior condition • Construction of new oyster habitats of various forms and foundation materials (natural and man-made)

18. The Universal Metrics • Reef areal dimension • Reef height • Live oyster density • Live oyster size-frequency distribution

19. Performance Criteria for Ecosystem Service-Based Metrics • Goals and criteria should be developed with regard to data gained from pre-construction baseline data or data obtained from sampling at control or natural reference sites • Goals should be framed in a way that allows statistical analysis • Criteria should consider how the project is anticipated to perform over both short- and long-term time frames

20. Reef Areal Dimension • Consists of two component metrics: • Project footprint – the maximum areal extent of the footprint of the reef • Reef area – the actual area (summed) of patches of living and non-living oyster shell (or reef substrate with and without live oysters) within the project footprint

21. Reef Areal Dimension The edge of the reef is defined as a continuous line where the percent coverage of surficial living or non-living shell substrate is equal to or greater than 25%

22. Reef Areal Dimension • Units: m2 • Preferred Methodology: Differential GPS/GIS (side-scan sonar, multi-beam sonar, or depth-finder for sub-tidal) • Performance criteria: None • Gains in project footprint and reef area may be due to spreading of original cultch and not accretion of the reef

23. Reef Height • Average height of a reef off the bottom substrate • Units: m (cm for low relief reefs) • Preferred Methodology: geo-referenced laser-based elevation scanner, rod and transit/laser-level, RTK GPS (subtidal: sonar, depth finder) • Performance criteria: Positive or neutral change in reef height from original structure Credit: L. Coen Credit: DISL

24. Oyster Density • The number of live oysters per m2; includes the number of live adult oysters and live spat • For C. virginica: • Spat: Shell height < 25mm • Adults: Shell height ≥ 25mm • For O. lurida • Spat: Shell height < 18mm • Adults: Shell height ≥ 18mm

25. Oyster Density • Units: Mean density of live spat and live adult oysters (individuals m-2) • Density performance criteria: Target densities(stated as individuals m-2) based on available density data for natural and restored reefs in similar settings as well as historical data. • Recruitment performance criteria: Evidence of successful recruitment during at least two years of a five year period.

26. Oyster Density: Intertidal or Subtidal, Unconsolidated Material • Random quadrat samples along reef • Excavate to depth necessary to obtain all live oysters • Stratified random sampling if needed • If comprised of multiple patch reefs, take samples at subset of patches of low, medium, and high densities

27. Oyster Density: Metal Structures or Bagged Shell • Early Development Stage • Random samples along reef • Remove bag of shell and count all live oysters (including spat) within • Measure areal coverage of bag and convert density to m2 • Late Development Stage • Random samples along reef near base, middle, and crest using quadrat Credit: DISL Credit: TNC

28. Oyster Density: Cement Structures • Select units at random points along the reef • Quadrat samples at base, middle, and crest Credit: DISL

29. Oyster Density: Seeded Oysters • Unit = seed oysters/m2 • Determine initial average density post deployment • Quadrat sampling • Calculating seed oysters over total area • Will lose ability to track surviving seed oysters of specific cohort over time • Genetic markers • Size class segregation Credit: J. Greene

30. Oyster Size-Frequency Distribution • Measure of the distribution of the population across various size classes. • Units: Mean shell height of adult oysters (in mm); mean percentage of measured oysters per size class (%) an/or number of oysters per size class • Perform in conjunction with oyster density sampling • Performance criteria: None

31. Universal Environmental Variables • Should be monitored for every oyster restoration project, regardless of the restoration goal of that project. • Aid in the interpretation of data collected during pre- and post-construction monitoring • Water temperature (°C) • Salinity (ppt or psu) • Dissolved oxygen – subtidal reefs only (mg L-1)

32. Ecosystem Service-Based Goals • Brood stock and oyster population enhancement • Habitat enhancement for resident and transient species • Enhancement of adjacent habitats • Water quality improvement

33. Performance Criteria for Ecosystem Service-Based Metrics • Example: “As monitoring progresses, there should be a trend of increasing density of the target species, with an ultimate goal of having statistically greater densities of target species than those present pre-construction or at the control site, or a density that is roughly equal to that of the natural reference site.”

34. Brood Stock and Oyster Population Enhancement • Metrics • Nearby reef oyster density and associated size-frequency distributions • Nearby reef large oyster abundance

35. Habitat Enhancement for Resident and Transient Species • Metric • Density of selected target species or groups • Epifaunal sessile invertebrates • Infaunal invertebrates • Non-oyster filter feeders or encrusting species • Small resident mobile fish and invertebrates • Transient crustaceans and juvenile fish • Transient adult fish • Waterbirds Credit: L. Coen Credit: DISL

36. Enhancement of Adjacent Habitats • Metrics • Shoreline loss/gain (change in shoreline position) • Shoreline profile/elevation change • Density of marsh/mangrove plants (if applicable) • Ancillary Metrics • Submerged aquatic vegetation • Wave energy and tidal water flows Credit: L. Coen

37. Water Quality Improvement • Metrics • Seston and/or Chlorophyll a concentration • Light penetration measurements Credit: R. Brumbaugh

38. Ancillary Monitoring Considerations • Presence of Predatory, Pest and/or Competitive Species • Disease Prevalence and Intensity • Oyster Condition Index • Gonad Development Status • Shell Volume for Determination of Shell Budget • Percent Cover of Reef Substrate

39. Marine Protected Areas

40. Marine Protected Areas • MPA is a catch-all term with various definitions and levels of protection • Is basically placed-based ecosystem management • MPAs cover approximately 0.5% of the world’s seas • National Marine Protected Areas Center describes MPAs in U.S. based on 5 characteristics • Conservation Focus • Level of Protection • Permanence of Protection • Constancy of Protection • Scale of Protection

41. Classification: Conservation Focus • Natural Heritage: MPAs or zones established and managed wholly or in part to sustain, conserve, restore, and understand the protected area’s natural biodiversity, populations, communities, habitats, and ecosystems; the ecological and physical processes upon which they depend; and, the ecological services, human uses and values they provide to this and future generations. • Cultural Heritage: MPAs or zones established and managed wholly or in part to protect and understand the legacy of physical evidence and intangible attributes of a group or society which is inherited and maintained in the present and bestowed for the benefit of future generations.

42. Classification: Conservation Focus • Sustainable Production: MPAs or zones established and managed wholly or in part with the explicit purpose of supporting the continued extraction of renewable living resources (such as fish, shellfish, plants, birds, or mammals) that live within the MPA, or that are exploited elsewhere but depend upon the protected area’s habitat for essential aspects of their ecology or life history (feeding, spawning, mating, or nursery grounds).

43. Classification: Level of Protection • Uniform Multiple-Use: MPAs or zones with a consistent level of protection, allowable activities or restrictions throughout the protected area. Extractive uses may be restricted for natural or cultural resources. • Zoned Multiple-Use: MPAs that allow some extractive activities throughout the entire site, but that use marine zoning to allocate specific uses to compatible places or times in order to reduce user conflicts and adverse impacts. • Zoned Multiple-Use With No-Take Area(s): Multiple-use MPAs that contain at least one legally established management zone in which all resource extraction is prohibited.

44. Classification: Level of Protection • No-Take: MPAs or zones that allow human access and even some potentially harmful uses, but that totally prohibit the extraction or significant destruction of natural and cultural resources. • No Impact: MPAs or zones that allow human access, but that prohibit all activities that could harm the site’s resources or disrupt the ecological and cultural services they provide. Examples of activities typically prohibited in no-impact MPAs include resource extraction of any kind (fishing, collecting, or mining); discharge of pollutants; disposal or installation of materials; and alteration or disturbance of submerged cultural resources, biological assemblages, ecological interactions, physiochemical environmental features, protected habitats, or the natural processes that support them.

45. Classification: Level of Protection • No Access: MPAs or zones that restrict all human access to the area in order to prevent potential ecological disturbance, unless specifically permitted for designated special uses such as research, monitoring or restoration.

46. Classification: Permanence Of Protection • Permanent: MPAs or zones whose legal authorities provide some level of protection to the site in perpetuity for future generations, unless reversed by unanticipated future legislation or regulatory actions. • Conditional: MPAs or zones that have the potential, and often the expectation, to persist administratively over time, but whose legal authority has a finite duration and must be actively renewed or ratified based on periodic governmental reviews of performance. • Temporary: MPAs that are designed to address relatively short-term conservation and/or management needs by protecting a specific habitat or species for a finite duration, with no expectation or specific mechanism for renewal.

47. Classification: Constancy of Protection • Year-Round: MPAs or zones that provide constant protection to the site throughout the year. • Seasonal: MPAs or zones that protect specific habitats and resources, but only during fixed seasons or periods when human uses may disrupt ecologically sensitive seasonal processes such as spawning, breeding, or feeding aggregations. • Rotating: MPAs that cycle serially and predictably among a set of fixed geographic areas in order to meet short-term conservation or management goals (such as local stock replenishment followed by renewed exploitation of recovered populations).

48. Classification: Scale of Protection • Ecosystem: MPAs or zones whose legal authorities and management measures are intended to protect all of the components and processes of the ecosystem within its boundaries. • Focal Resource: MPAs or zones whose legal authorities and management measures specifically target a particular habitat, species complex, or single resource (either natural or cultural).

50. MPAs and Conservation of Biodiversity • Very few existing MPAs protect against fishing • Do they still provide a benefit? YES, if they… • prevent further habitat destruction within their boundaries • Help restrict discharge of pollutants from coastal areas