I wonder if other restoration activities would negate some of this loss of wetlands. I do not have any numbers, but floodplain restoration would potentially increase wetland surface area. Additionally, the formation of natural dams created by beavers should also increase wetland habitat. If the stream is in a naturally low topographic area or meanders, I would guess some wetlands would begin to form naturally. I think stream ecologists recognize the importance of wetlands as a filter of pollutants and nutrients within the watershed and when appropriate they will be incorporated into restoration design.
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Dan Tufford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Maybe I misunderstand your point about evaluating habitat quality, but it > seems to me that destroying a wetland as a technique for determining its > value is certainly an option but an unsatisfying one on a couple of > levels. > > I am also a little concerned by the statement that "Wetlands that are > created as a result of roads or other engineered surfaces are not equal to > a > natural wetland as far as habitat value is concerned." This may well be > true > in many or most situations but if the wetland exists only because of the > engineered surface this presents a different question about habitat value. > What if the prior habitat was corn monoculture under heavy fertilizer, > pesticide, and plowing pressure? Even in situations where a natural > wetland > was impacted, I can easily conceive a plausible situation where single > ecosystem restoration within a landscape matrix that is substantially > modified may not produce quantifiable improvement. It will make a lot of > people feel good and will likely be more aesthetically appealing, but > those > are not scientific issues. > > None of which is to say I disagree with restoration as a viable and > valuable > (ecologically and otherwise) activity. I just think that in human > dominated > landscapes the questions are more complicated than just natural v altered. > > Of course none of this is an answer to the original question, which is an > interesting one, and I also have no clue. > > Regards, > Daniel L. Tufford, Ph.D. > University of South Carolina > Department of Biological Sciences > 209A Sumwalt (office) > 701 Sumter St, Room 401 (mail) > Columbia, SC 29208 > Ph. 803-777-3292, Fx: 803-777-3292 > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > web: http://www.biol.sc.edu/~tufford > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sharif Branham > Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 8:53 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] wetland acreage > > Hello Andy, > > I think the question should be about the quality of the wetlands that are > being replaced. Wetlands that are created as a result of roads or other > engineered surfaces are not equal to a natural wetland as far as habitat > value is concerned. One could do an analysis of the wetland that is to be > displaced by breaching the dam to see if the quality of the habitat that > will be lost is equal, less than or greater than the habitat that will be > enhanced by breaching the dam. You could consider the quantity and > diversity of the species that benefit from each habitat type. You could > even > look at ecological services being provided by the wetlands versus what > will > be gained by breaching the dam. I hope that helps you get at the essence > of > the argument. > > Sharif> Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 12:50:53 -0400> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: > [ECOLOG-L] wetland acreage> To: [email protected]> > I have been > discussing the merits of stream restoration with some > colleagues and > I've > been fussing over the potential loss of wetlands > as a result of the > removal of dams. My stream-oriented friends have > been asking why I've > been > worried about the loss of what amounts to > artificial wetlands in the > first > place? Aside from the fact that > they're typically considered > jurisdictional, it got me wondering if > we (collectively) have any idea > whatsoever how many wetlands in the > landscape are artificial? In other > words, how many wetlands exist > because of human activities, such as > roads, > railroads, and the like? > (Let's keep mitigation, stormwater, and > treatment > wetlands out of the > discussion for now.) Anyone have a clue?> > Thanks.> > > > Andy Cole> > > > Charles Andrew Cole, Ph.D.> Associate Director> Center > for > Watershed Stewardship> Penn State University> 301a Forest Resources > Laboratory> University Park, PA 16802> 814-865-5735> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > http://www.larch.psu.edu/watershed/home.html > _________________________________________________________________ > Use video conversation to talk face-to-face with Windows Live Messenger. > > http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/connect_your_way.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL > _Refresh_messenger_video_042008= >
