Shoreline alterationBy: Kristen Woodling
www.pwconserve.org/.../graphics/january2004.jpg www.seattlepi.com/mediaManager/?controllerNam...
Outline
• Background- why alter the shoreline?• Shoreline alteration on the global scale• Shoreline alteration in Lake Erie• Problems• Possible solutions• Research paper• My research• Conclusion
J.Ross
Background • Shoreline alteration: any anthropogenic activity that adds to or removes
parts of a shoreline
• Shorelines are altered/hardened in order to reduce erosion
• Shorelines have been anthropocentrically altered since the first human settlements
http://www.climate.gov.ki/Climate_change_effects_in_Kiribati.html
farm1.static.flickr.com/56/152644051_7ea7510a somd.com/news/headlines/2008/9000.shtml
http://ian.umces.edu/imagelibrary/displayimage-lastupby-0-2471-1062.html www.boatnerd.com/.../Breakwall-12-06-04LR.jpg
Shoreline Alteration on the Global Scale
• Shoreline alteration is a global issue
• Little is known about exact relationship between alteration and aquatic food webs
• U.S. Atlantic coast:
– Less then 10% of shoreline set aside for conservation
– Estimated 60% of remaining shoreline is in process of development
Shoreline alteration in Lake Erie
http://photography-plus.com/fullPic.asp?picID=1639
• ~98% of shorelines in the western basin have been armored with stone, iron or concrete
• Lake Erie is the most developed and structurally protected of the Great Lakes
TO
LE
DO
Problems
• Degrades natural environment
• Severs aquatic-terrestrial linkages
• Reduces shallow water habitat
• Decreases economic/aesthetic/recreational integrity of area
• Allows for greater amounts of runoff
www.sciencedaily.com/.../09/090917161736.htm cristinabump.wordpress.com/.../australia/sydney/
www.pwconserve.org/.../graphics/january2004.jpg
Possible SolutionsRiparian Buffer
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riparian_buffer
Living Shoreline
Bill Bartodziej (DNR)
landscape.zoology.wisc.edu/
.../Logs2.jpg
Woody Debris
www.adepttech.com/images/Shoreline2012.jpg
Permit
Solutions• STOP BUILDING ON SHORELINES!
www.pwconserve.org/.../graphics/january2004.jpg
Research Paper
• “Effects of coastal development on near shore estuarine nekton communities” D.M. Bilkovic, M.M. Roggero
• Effects of landscape features and coastal development on near shore habitats and near shore nekton community (James River, Virginia)
• Nekton assemblages at sites with low development (<23%) and natural or riprap shorelines were different from all other combinations of altered conditions
Summary
• Both upland development and the placement of erosion control structures on the shoreline were associated with reduced fish community integrity, and shoreline alterations were linked with the amount of sub-tidal structural habitat in the near shore.
minnesota.publicradio.org/.../14/shorelineregs/ian.umces.edu/imagelibrary/displayimage-6755.html
Methods and Materials
• Bow-mounted Marine Sonic Sea Scan used to
classify bottom conditions.
• Bottom classifications: – featureless (soft)
– structural habitat (hard)
• River was divided into three 20km sections segmented into near shore reaches based on adjacent shoreline condition (riprap revetment, bulkhead, natural [unmodified]) and surveyed bottom type [hard or soft]).
http://www.keoghsmarine.com.au/product_list.php?g_CategoryID=242
Methods Cont.• Two replicate seining halls were done at each site to assess
fish and benthic community (July-August 2005).
cassisaari.com/j/tag/potamogeton/
National Land Cover Database
Fig. 1. Fish community survey locations and land use on the James River, 2005
Fig. 3. Mean ± SE fish community index by shoreline condition: bulkhead, riprap revetment or natural. Values associated with bulkhead shorelines were significantly lower than for riprap revetment or natural conditions(1-wayANOVA, p = 0.04)
Fig. 2. Mean ± SE structural sub-tidal habitat by shoreline condition: bulkhead, riprap revetment or natural, for fish survey sites on the James River. Structural habitat, such as oyster reefs, clam beds or woody debris was reduced adjacent to hardened shorelines (1-way ANOVA, p = 0.009)
PC
1
PC2Fig. 5. Multidimensional scaling ordination of James River near shore nekton assemblages adjacent to sites categorized into 5 arrangements of upland land use and shoreline condition
Results
• Nekton assemblages at sites with low development (<23%) and natural or riprap shorelines were different from all other combinations of altered conditions
• Shoreline alteration and land use are affecting nekton communities
My Research• Identified and categorized Lake Erie shoreline based on
anthropogenic influences and amount of recovery.
• Identified relationships of these shoreline types with fish community.
J.Ross J.Ross
Methods• Electrofished 21 sites along southern shoreline of Lake Erie
• Categorization of shoreline:
Altered Recovering (< 50% developed)
Recovered Unaltered
-Metal wall-Riprap (no veg)-Managed beach
-Riprap (with veg)-Unmanaged beach
-Lots of veg-Logs and debris-No armoring
-Natural shoreline-No anthropogenic interference
J.Ross J.Ross J.Ross dreamstime.com
Results
• Study is still in progress
• The results from a single factor ANOVA showed no significant difference (p=0.37) between the four categories.
• We determined that categories were too broad and did not separate the sites based on factors that affect the fish community.
• Assess land use and benthic data?
Conclusions• Why? To reduce erosion
• Shoreline alteration is a world-wide issue
• Lake Erie is the most developed of the Great Lakes
• Problems: degrades environment, destroys habitat, increases runoff
• Research Paper: shoreline alteration and land use are affecting nekton communities
• Solutions: permits, buffers, living shoreline, stop building on shorelines
References• D.M. Bilkovic, M.M. Roggero. 2008. Effects of coastal development on near shore
estuarine nekton communities. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 358: 27-39
• Department of Natural Resources:• http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/publications/waters/
shoreline_alterations_lakescaping.pdf
• Greg G. Sass, James F. Kitchell, Stephen R. Carpenter, Thomas R. Hrabik, Anna E. Marburg, & Monica G. Yurner. 2006. Fish Community and Food Web Responses to a Whole-lake Removal of Coarse Woody Habitat. Fisheries. 31:7 321-33
• J G Titus, D E Hudgens, D L Trescott, M Craghan, W H Nuckols, C H Hershner, J M Kassakian, C J Linn, P G Merritt, T M McCue, J F O'Connell, J Tanski and J Wang. 2009. State and local governments plan for development of most land vulnerable to rising sea level along the US Atlantic coast. Environmental Research Letters. 4:4 1-8
• http://www.epa.gov/medatwrk/grosseile_site/indicators/sos/shoreline.pdf
Questions?