My original message started with some remarks about my eager anticipation for the change in seasons, with spring approaching after a cold winter, but close-tohome events have moved me to make a few comments on the state of environmental protection in the US. I was shocked to hear the administration apparently has plans to close the Northeast Regional Office of the US Fish and Wildlife Service, among other federal offices, in its efforts to improve government efficiency. We don’t know the details at this point or how it will affect employees, but this closure is not a good sign. I spent about 40 years in that regional office, directing the National Wetlands Inventory across 13 states, and during my tenure I experienced a major office relocation from Boston to western Massachusetts. Yet that was a planned move that took place over a number of years ... I never imagined the office being “closed.” Nonetheless, we’re seeing things that were unimaginable just a decade or so ago happen right before our eyes. Besides significant federal workforce reductions (now being addressed by the courts), we’re hearing plans to accelerate the logging of national forests—will this be done with environmental safeguards? Time will tell. We also hear the federal government may withdraw from a lawsuit against an industrial polluter ... another ominous sign. These and other actions, coupled with recent Supreme Court decisions on how much wetlands the federal government can regulate and similar decisions affecting federal agency actions in environmental cases, do not bode well for natural resource conservation.
One wonders: what happened to the environmental movement that began in the 1970s? Seems like we’re moving back to the Resource Utilitarian phase of our society (versus the Resource Conservation phase)— conquer nature for profit in lieu of stewardship of nature (nature has intrinsic value) ... sadly, just as we were making great strides to improve the integrity of US waters, air, and natural lands. Of course, that’s just my view. Change is constant, yes, but some of what we’re seeing today is beyond belief, and it’s not just environmental. Let’s hope that the consolation that my mother offered in dire times, “This too shall pass,” rings true, and the sooner the better. Eric’s President’s Message in this issue offers some suggestions on moving forward. The current events provide interesting
material for discussion at our upcoming annual meeting in Providence, Rhode Island (July 15-18): Navigating the Waters: Wetland Science, Evolving Policy, and the Future of Our Landscape
More sad news ... Bill Mitsch, former SWS President and world-renowned wetland scientist, passed away in February. He was a friend and esteemed colleague; we taught short courses about wetland identification/ delineation at Ohio State and worked on the US National Ramsar Committee, trying to get the US to adopt more sites as “Wetlands of International Importance.” Bill was as passionate about wetlands as anyone I’ve ever known and always extolled the values of wetlands (including public outreach) and emphasized the need for wetland conservation, restoration, and management. Everyone working in wetlands knows Bill through his classic textbook, Wetlands, but what you might not know is that Bill recently published his autobiography Memoirs of an Environmental Science Professor. A short review of the book is in the Wetland Bookshelf section of this issue; for a more personal look at Bill’s career, read this book. We honor Bill with a tribute in this issue and by showing his “baby”—the Olentangy Wetland—on the cover.
This April issue also contains uplifting material: summaries of the work from students supported by the SWS Student Grants Program; abstracts from the Pacific Northwest Chapter’s 2024 annual meeting; two modules that represent the launch of the SWS Education Section’s Foundations of Wetland Science series (designed to provide online education about wetland science for educators, the public and others); and four contributed articles with topics including women scientists as pioneers in wetland science, soil properties of restored versus natural marshes, a chemical test to identify hydric soils, and an approach used by a Kansas wetland center to enhance the experience of visiting youngsters. Special thanks to all our contributors. Also, in this issue, you’ll find a new Notes from the Field based on my November trip to Gulf Coast wetlands.
I also want to welcome Chris Craft, a renowned wetland scientist, to the Wetland Science & Practice team. He has agreed to assume the Editor position later this year and will work with me on producing the July issue. In October, he will take the reins. Special thanks to Chris!
Happy Swamping!
Ralph Tiner WSP Editor
CONTENTS
Vol. 43, No. 2 April 2025
ISSN: 1943-6254
110 / From the Editor's Desk
112 / President's Message
113 / SWS Webinars
114 / Tribute: In Memoriam, Bill Mitsch, Wetland Scientist Extraordinaire, SWS Past President
116 / What's New
116 / SWS News
SWS 2025 Annual Meeting 2024 Student Grant Projects
Pacific NW Chapter Meeting Abstracts - 2024
SWS Mentoring Program - 2025
Foundations of Wetland Science Module 1: An Introduction to Wetlands
• Module 2: An Introduction to Wetland Functions and Values
170 / Notes from the Field
180 / Wetlands in the News
183 / Wetland Bookshelf
185 / WSP Submission Guidelines
186 / Advertising Prospectus
ARTICLES
147 / Women in Wetlands: Antecedent American Female Wetland Scientists
Arnold G. van der Valk, Professor Emeritus
157 / Does Grain Size Matter? - A Survey of Natural and Restored Marsh Soil Characteristics
Marina Howarth and Jacob F. Berkowitz
166 / A Note on the Proper Application of Alpha-Alpha Dipyridyl Test Strips for Hydric Soil Identification
Jacob F. Berkowitz and Richard W. Griffin
169 / A Symphony of Nature:
Kansas Wetlands Education Center Unveils Musical Pollinator Garden Suzi Smith
COVER PHOTO:
Drone image of the Olentangy River Wetland Research Park, Columbus, Ohio, presented here in honor of its creator, Dr. William “Bill” Mitsch, who passed away in February of this year. This created wetland has been an important focal point for wetland research since 1994 and in 2008 was designated as a RAMSAR “Wetland of International Importance” thanks to Bill’s efforts (https://rsis.ramsar.org/RISapp/files/RISrep/US1779RIS.pdf).
See our tribute to Bill in this issue. (Ohio State University image provided by Dr. Chris Tonra)
SOCIETY OF WETLAND SCIENTISTS
1818 PARMENTER ST., STE 300, MIDDLETON, WI 53562
(608) 310-7855
WWW.SWS.ORG
Note to Readers: All State-of-the-Science reports are peer reviewed, with anonymity to reviewers.
Wetland&Science Practice
PRESIDENT / Eric Stein, Ph.D.
PRESIDENT-ELECT / Becky Pierce
IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT / Susan Galatowitsch, Ph.D.
SECRETARY GENERAL / Kai Rains, Ph.D.
TREASURER / Yvonne Vallette, SPWS, SWSPCP
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR / Erin Berggren, CAE
MARKETING MANAGER / Jess Serafini
WETLAND SCIENCE & PRACTICE EDITOR / Ralph Tiner, PWS Emeritus
CHAPTERS
ASIA / Wei-Ta Fang, Ph.D.
CANADA / Susan Glasauer, Ph.D.
CENTRAL / Darren Mitchell
CHINA / Ming Jiang
EUROPE / Matthew Simpson, PWS
INTERNATIONAL / Alanna Rebelo, Ph.D. and Tatiana Lobato de Magalhães, Ph.D., PWS
MID-ATLANTIC / Jillian Olson
NEW ENGLAND / April Doroski
NORTH CENTRAL / Matt Van Grinsven
OCEANIA / Maria Vandergragt
PACIFIC NORTHWEST / Shelby Petro
ROCKY MOUNTAIN / Jeremy Sueltenfuss
SOUTH ATLANTIC / Richard Chinn
SOUTH CENTRAL / Jessica Brumley
WESTERN / Richard Beck, PWS, CPESC, CEP
SECTIONS
BIOGEOCHEMISTRY / Charles Schutte
EDUCATION / Darold Batzer, Ph.D. and Derek Faust
GLOBAL CHANGE ECOLOGY / Melinda Martinez, Ph.D.
PEATLANDS / Bin Xu, Ph.D.
PUBLIC POLICY AND REGULATION / John Lowenthal, PWS
RAMSAR / Nicholas Davidson, Ph.D.
RIGHTS OF WETLANDS / Gillian Davies
STUDENT / Anthony Mirabito
WETLAND RESTORATION / Ingeborg Hegemann
WILDLIFE / Rachel Fern
WOMEN IN WETLANDS / Mo Wise
COMMITTEES
AWARDS / Amanda Nahlik, Ph.D.
EDUCATION AND OUTREACH / Jeffrey Matthews, Ph.D.
GLOBAL REACH / Rebecca Woodward
HUMAN DIVERSITY / Christina Omran
MEETINGS / Yvonne Vallette, PWS
MEMBERSHIP / Kai Rains, Ph.D.
PUBLICATIONS / Keith Edwards
WAYS & MEANS / Yvonne Vallette, SPWS, SWSPCP
WETLAND CONCERNS / Max Finlayson
WETLANDS OF DISTINCTION / Roy Messaros, Ph.D.,
Steffanie Munguia and Jason Smith, PWS
REPRESENTATIVES
PCP / Christine VanZomeren
WETLANDS / Marinus Otte, Ph.D.
WETLAND SCIENCE & PRACTICE / Ralph Tiner, PWS Emeritus
NAWM / Mark Biddle
Dear SWS colleagues:
The winter months can bring cold days and long nights. I know many of us may feel acutely cold and dark as we weather the unprecedented, shortsighted, and misguided attacks from the Trump administration on science, scientists, and scientific establishments; these attacks will ultimately affect programs in all public agencies, universities, and the private sector. I urge you to support our friends and colleagues in US federal service who are particularly vulnerable at this time. However, this moment can also galvanize us to redouble our commitment to understand, manage, protect, and communicate the importance of wetlands globally. Much like the nascent period of environmental protection and regulation of the 1970s, programmatic efforts must be generated through partnerships and constituencies formed at the local level. SWS can and should serve as a critical support network and resource to agencies and organizations working to develop and implement wetland programs. Our society represents a community of scientists, practitioners, and advocates that can work together to define and develop sustainable wetland protection, restoration, and management efforts.
The recent passing of long-time SWS member and wetland pioneer Bill Mitsch (see remembrance in this issue) reinforced for me how much a single individual can affect a community of practice and influence research and action for generations. Our society serves as an important place to connect seasoned wetland experts with students and early career professionals in communities around the world to share our knowledge and passion for wetlands. Now, more than ever, we need to promote what SWS offers in terms of advancing wetland awareness, appreciation, research, and protection.
I am encouraged by recent events that show the commitment among our members to advance and expand our collective mission. At our recent midyear Board of Directors meeting, we took important actions to advance our efforts to recruit and hire our first Executive Director, secure a facilitator to guide our strategic plan update, strengthen the governance structure of our chapters, and approve a slate of candidates for our upcoming elections. We are also enhancing our partnership with the National Association of Wetland Managers and the SWS-Professional Certification Program to promote education and outreach and provide resources for local and state governments and NGOs looking to develop and enhance their wetland-related activities. These actions will include joint webinars, articles in Wetland Science and Practice, workshops, and other outreach efforts. I encourage you to become more active in your local SWS chapters, sections, or committees, to participate in our strategic plan update process (contact your chapter or section officers to learn how to engage), and to attend our upcoming annual meeting in Providence, which will provide a great opportunity to connect with colleagues and form new friendships. Moreover, as spring comes to your area, get outside and enjoy your local wetlands and talk to people in your communities about the importance and value of wetlands in the places we live and globally.
Finally, I would like to extend a huge welcome to Chris Craft, who agreed to take over as the Editor of Wetland Science and Practice as Ralph Tiner’s tenure comes to a close later this year. Thank you, Ralph, for your outstanding work in growing the stature and relevance of WSP, and thank you, Chris, for agreeing to continue Ralph’s work to enhance this important publication over the years to come.
I look forward to seeing you all in Providence.
Warmly,
Eric Stein President, SWS
Eric Stein President, SWS
English:
Thursday, April 17 | 1:00 p.m. ET
Topic: Electric Transmission Line Rebuilt Through
Tidal Waters in Savannah, Georgia
Speaker: Liv Haney
Thursday, May 15 | 1:00 p.m. ET
Topic: TBD
Speaker: TBD
Thursday, June 19 | 1:00 p.m. ET
Topic: TBD
Speaker: TBD
Spanish:
Wednesday, June 18 | 1:00 p.m. ET
Topic: TBD
Speaker: TBD
THANK YOU TO OUR 2025 WEBINAR SERIES SPONSORS
NOTE: Webinar topics and speakers are subject to change. Visit the SWS Event Calendar for the most recent details and for future webinar dates.
IN MEMORIAM
BILLMITsCH
WETLANDSCIENTISTEXTRAORDINAIRE,SWSPastPresident
William J. (Bill) Mitsch, a leading wetland ecologist whose groundbreaking research and advocacy for wetlands shaped the field of wetland science, passed away on February 12 at the age of 77 (see obituary at https://www.egan-ryan.com/obituary/William-Mitsch).
As a visionary scientist and dedicated mentor, Bill’s work advanced our understanding of wetlands as vital ecosystems, influencing environmental policy and conservation efforts worldwide. His legacy lives on through the many students, colleagues, and friends he inspired (who he called “force multipliers”), the landscapes he helped protect and restore, and the books and publications he wrote. Bill was an active member in the Society of Wetland Scientists for decades, serving as SWS President from 1995 to 1996 and receiving the SWS Lifetime Achievement Award in 2007.
Growing up in Wheeling, West Virginia, Bill spent summers playing baseball and roaming local creeks, developing a deep connection with nature and the Ohio River Valley. After receiving his undergraduate degree in engineering from Notre Dame (and meeting and marrying his lifelong partner, Ruthmarie Mitsch), he moved to the University of Florida to work with H. T. Odum, famed systems ecologist, whose holistic, energybased view of ecosystems shaped Bill’s thinking about how wetlands function.
Bill moved to The Ohio State University in 1985, where he was a professor for over two decades. Here, he founded the Olentangy River Wetland Research Park (ORWRP), a groundbreaking ecosystem-level experimental site to demonstrate the role of wetlands as the “kidneys of the landscape.” Bill worked with dozens
of graduate students, documenting how these and other wetlands improve water quality, store carbon, and support biodiversity, and how this design could be scaled to the watershed. His influential research on wetlands and water quality led to much international recognition, including the prestigious Stockholm Water Prize (the Nobel Prize for Water), awarded in 2004 by the King of Sweden, and the designation of the ORWRP as a Ramsar Site of International Importance.
Bill’s textbook Wetlands, co-authored with James Gosselink, is one of the most influential and widely used books in the field of wetland science. First published in 1986 and now in its sixth edition, it is the definitive resource for all who work with wetlands. Bill was also a founder of the field of ecological engineering, launching the internationally known journal of the same name. Bill’s ideas on ecological engineering are an important cornerstone of what we now call nature-based solutions. He led the charge, emphasizing working with nature rather than against it to solve environmental challenges.
After retiring from The Ohio State University, Bill returned to Florida as an Eminent Scholar at Florida Gulf Coast University where he worked for another 10 years, establishing the Everglades Research Park in Naples, and directing research while mentoring new generations of students.
Bill accomplished so many things they are impossible to mention here. He published hundreds of scientific papers, many books (both authored and edited), gave untold talks and plenary speeches, and worked with conservation groups from local to international levels. Ultimately, we’ll remember his boundless energy and
Bill as a budding wetland scientist. (Photo by Ruthmarie Mitsch)
Bill in 2009.
(Photo by Siobhan Fennessy)
ability to connect with people working in all aspects of wetland and environmental science. He had an engaging teaching style and seemingly unlimited good humor, and coined many memorable sayings—called "Mitschisms" by his students and colleagues. These include “in BTUs we trust,” and “don’t just stand there, collect some data!” His unwavering belief in the potential of all of his students, and his support in helping us
get where we are today, is something beyond value. We’ll remember him for building an amazing and vibrant community of “wetlanders.” For all he gave the wetlands world, we are grateful.
Submitted by: M. Siobhan Fennessy, Robert W. Nairn, and Amanda Nahlik with Lauren Griffiths and Kathleen Pietro
Bill’s pride and joy, Olentangy River Wetland Research Park at The Ohio State University, in its early years (2002). In 2008, it was designated as a Ramsar Wetland of International Importance (https://rsis.ramsar.org/ris/1779?language=en). (Source: US Geological Survey)
Latest from the journal - WETLANDS
To find the latest technical articles on wetlands from our companion journal Wetlands, go to https://link.springer.com/journal/13157
Join the Society of Wetland Scientists in Rhode Island for the SWS 2025 Annual Meeting!
The Society of Wetland Scientists (SWS) Annual Meeting is the premier gathering for professionals, researchers, and policymakers dedicated to wetland science, management, and conservation. This year’s theme, “Navigating the Waters: Wetland Science, Evolving Policy, and the Future of Our Landscape,” will guide discussions on critical environmental challenges, policy shifts, and innovative conservation strategies.
Early Bird Registration Deadline: May 1, 2025 Register today: swsannualmeeting.com
Interested in sponsorship opportunities? Support wetland science while gaining exposure for your organization! Contact Meredith Avery (mavery@vhb. com) or Josh Wilson (jwilson@biohabitats.com) for details.
Learn More
Why Attend SWS 2025?
• Gain insights into cutting-edge research – Stay ahead of emerging trends in wetland ecology, restoration, and policy.
• Engage in critical discussions – Participate in thought-provoking conversations on climate change, water resource management, and wetland sustainability.
• Expand your network – Connect with experts, collaborate across disciplines, and engage with professionals from around the world.
• Explore real-world solutions – Learn about innovative strategies for wetland restoration and conservation to ensure a sustainable future.
NATURE-BASED SOLUTIONS
As one of the world’s leading planning, engineering and consulting firms, Michael Baker International believes in the power of naturebased solutions to reduce risk and improve infrastructure for a more resilient and sustainable future.
SOLUTIONS
For more information, contact Richard Beck, PWS, Michael Baker Practice Executive P: 949-855-3687 E: rbeck@mbakerintl.com
Constructed Wetlands
Dune Rehabilitation & Restoration
Ecosystem Restoration
Green Roofs & Rooftop Gardens
Habitat Preservation & Restoration
Hybrid Green-Gray Solutions
Living Shorelines
Mitigation Offsets & Banking
Phytoremediation
Recreational Resources
Regulatory Processing
Riparian Habitat
Creation & Restoration
Shoreline Restoration
Stream & Floodplain Restoration
Watershed Restoration
Wetland Delineation
PROUD SUPPORTER OF THE SOCIETY OF WETLAND SCIENTISTS
Bow Creek Stormwater Park Flood Mitigation Improvements / City of Virginia Beach, Virginia
Boulder County Flood Recovery and Ecosystem Restoration / Boulder, Colorado
Westside Creeks Restoration / San Antonio, Texas
Student Research Supported by SWS
Submitted by Amanda Nahlik, Awards Committee Chair
At the annual meeting in Taiwan in November 2024, the Society announced that twelve students received grant awards for ongoing research as part of their graduate training. Their projects are summarized below. Congratulations to the students. We look forward to hearing more about their investigations in the future.
Spatial Variability of Carbon Fluxes in a Subarctic Wetland
Cheristy Jones, University of New Hampshire, United States
As the climate continues to warm, permafrost thaw is increasing lateral fluxes of carbon (C) into aquatic systems. However, most studies characterize these fluxes from only one point in a catchment; thus, the spatial variability of lateral C fluxes from river networks in heterogenous landscapes is not well quantified. Wetland streams in particular are highly connected to the surrounding landscape and emit a disproportionate amount of CH4 and CO2, making these emissions crucial for climate models. The transformation of this C as it flows throughout the catchment is also not well understood. To investigate how C quality and quantity vary across the terrestrialaquatic interface in a wetland dominated ecosystem, I will sample surface water across a subcatchment that includes three different land-cover types. The study subcatchment is 15 km2 and includes the permafrost peatland Stordalen Mire in Sweden (68°21′ N 18°49′ E). The catchment has four stream branches and the landscape transitions from alpine tundra at the upper elevations, then to birch forest before draining into a discontinuous permafrost peatland. I will sample the catchment at high spatial frequency in July—August 2024 and determine the relative contribution of the varying landcover types to watershed C cycling. I will measure dissolved methane, dissolved carbon dioxide, dissolved organic carbon concentrations and composition (i.e., quality) along each stream branch across varying slopes within each landcover type. To partition sources of carbon from landcover sources, I will perform isotopic analyses of dissolved gases (δ13C-CO2, δ13C-CH4, δ13D-CH3D). This spatially resolute sampling will allow us to identify lateral flux patterns across the terrestrial-aquatic interface within river networks and determine the relative contribution of different landcover types to watershed-scale fluxes.
Understanding how landcover type affects the spatial variability of C cycling across a watershed is crucial for understanding watershed-scale lateral C flux as well as C transformation in these climate sensitive ecosystems.
Linking Carbon Fluxes in Everglades Marshes to Physical and Biogeochemical Phenology
David Yannick, University of Alabama, United States
Coastal wetlands play a vital role in the global carbon cycle but are under pressure from anthropogenic influences. The Florida Coastal Everglades is facing multiple pressures from factors such as altered hydrology and saltwater intrusion. Efforts of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) have increased water flow and reduced nutrient input. This leaves uncertainties in the future trajectory of these ecosystems as their vegetation and periphyton communities respond and the impact on greenhouse gas emissions such as CO2 and CH4 Long-term measurements of these carbon (C) fluxes with eddy covariance techniques have been ongoing since 2008 at two distinct hydroperiod marshes and a transitional mangrove forest (2020). Remote sensing products such as Normalized Difference Vegetation Index have been applied in similar wetland ecosystems but are limited by spatial and temporal resolution. This study aims to address these uncertainties by incorporating low-cost spectral camera systems with the flux tower sites to address these uncertainties. This will yield an understanding of how the influence of hydroperiod, microhabitat, and water stress can impact ecosystem carbon dynamics. Our findings can help elucidate controls on long-term carbon sequestration capacity in coastal regions, such as South Florida, longterm impacts of efforts of the CERP, and demonstrate a low-cost method of obtaining optical fluxes in wetland ecosystems.
Comparative Analysis of the Freshwater Biodiversity and Conservation Values of Ayinkunnugba and Ogan Waterfalls, Oke-Ila, Southwest Nigeria
Waterfalls, with their unique geological and hydrological features, stand out as potential biodiversity hotspots within freshwater systems. Despite limited research on Nigerian waterfalls, recent studies on sites like Oowu, Arinta, Ekor, and Olumirin Waterfalls have revealed rare and threatened invertebrate species, including the vulnerable damselfly Pentaphlebia stahli, reported for the first time in Nigeria. Another study along the NigeriaCameroon border also found rare types of mayflies and damselflies that are in danger of dying out. Numerous freshwater systems, possessing undiscovered biodiversity hotspots and natural abundance, have not yet been documented. The previously mentioned research has prompted the ecological assessment of isolated natural areas in tropical regions. Among these is Ayinkunnugba Waterfall in Oke-Ila, southwest Nigeria, which was identified as a near pristine location following an ecological survey of raptor species and its floristic composition. Despite being recognized as an ecotourism destination for its scenic beauty, its biodiversity potential remains largely unexplored. Adjacent to it is Ogan Waterfall, which adds to the freshwater diversity of the area but has also not been thoroughly explored. Unraveling the biodiversity within these unique ecosystems not only addresses the scarcity of information but also contributes to a broader understanding of the ecological dynamics essential for conservation efforts of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. It is my considered opinion that the attainment of the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goal 15 (life on land) is predicated on healthy freshwater ecosystems. By employing a multifaceted approach, including field surveys, laboratory and data analysis, this study seeks to give more insight to the freshwater biodiversity potentials of these waterfalls. The study is considered very important since lack of identification of freshwater systems of conservation significance is the bane for loss of many rare and threatened freshwater species.
Interdunal Wetland Aquatic Insect Flux to Bird and Bat Species
Jennifer Shamel, Western Michigan University, United States
Wetlands contribute significantly to the terrestrial food web via aquatic insect emergence, which could directly influence provisioning patterns and community structure of predators. The proposed research is part of a wider project working to understand how aquatic insect emergence correlates to the abundance, distribution, and richness of bird and bat species that utilize or have the potential to utilize interdunal wetlands across the dune succession gradient. This study addresses how the community structure of bird, bat, and insect species are influenced by heterogeneity across the dune succession gradient. I will conduct bird surveys via the point count method along transects spanning the dune succession gradient (open dune, scrub/shrub, and woodland) and intersecting with 12 interdunal wetlands in Michigan’s Ludington State Park. Insect emergence traps will be placed in each wetland to characterize the aquatic insect community structure. Audio recorders will be placed in the open dune and woodland areas of the site to determine presence-absence of bat species and better understand how they utilize the interdunal wetlands during the roosting season. This data will be used to determine which species to target for stable isotope analysis in 2025, to quantify energy flow patterns from emergent insects in interdunal wetlands to birds and bats to better understand how insects are influencing the distribution of bird and bat species. This work will provide valuable information regarding interdunal wetland and coastal use during bat migration, provisioning patterns, and community structure along the Lake Michigan coastline. It will also inform predictions of emergence under climate change scenarios and help us to understand how emergence impacts the surrounding bird and bat communities, specifically the predatorprey relationship. This information can then be used to make informed management and conservation decisions to better preserve these habitats and for bird and bat conservation.
Beavers as Landscape Stewards: How Do Ecosystem Engineers Impact the Diversity and Connectivity of the Species that Use Their Engineered Habitats?
Kathryn Davis, University of Wyoming, United States
Ecosystem engineers are species that change the availability of resources for species around them. Although much is known about ecosystem engineers' impacts on species diversity, little is known about how their impacts may extend to genetic diversity and connectivity. Beavers are the quintessential ecosystem engineers; their creation of wetlands makes them a vital resource in the face of wetland loss, climate change, and other landscape impacts. This project aims to understand the impacts of beavers as ecosystem engineers by focusing on their effect on the amphibian community in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Using a combination of visual and molecular surveys, we will assess how beavers change landscapes, and how those changes subsequently affect amphibian occupancy, genetic diversity, and connectivity. Additionally, we aim to identify drivers of gene flow in beavers themselves in order to inform future beaver management.
Investigating Native Plant Introduction in a Restored Marsh Utilizing Invasive Plant-derived Biochar and Typha Harvest
MacKenzie Michaels, Loyola University Chicago, United States
Typha × glauca (hybrid cattail, hereafter Typha) diminishes native biodiversity and ecosystem services in Great Lakes Coastal wetlands (GLCW). The Shiawassee National Wildlife Refuge (SNWR) hosts 10,000 acres of GLCW habitat with resources for migratory birds and native fauna. Currently, the soils present in Maankiiki Marsh, a wetland in SNWR that was hydrologically restored in 2017 after decades of soybean agriculture, have high nutrient concentrations from agricultural inputs and dense Typha stands. Managing Typha with aboveground biomass harvest and flooding reduces dominance, albeit failing to address the nutrient inputs that drive invasion or the seed bank depletion from decades of agricultural tilling. Preliminary research suggests biochar, a carbon byproduct of plant-matter pyrolysis, may reduce plant-available soil nutrients, including nitrogen and
phosphorus, further limiting Typha growth. My research will investigate the establishment of 2 matrix species, Carex stricta (tussock sedge) and Schoenoplectus acutus (hardstem bulrush), in Maankiiki after Typha management and biochar application using paired, fully factorial field and greenhouse experiments. I will apply biochar [0 T/ha or 40 T/ha] to randomized 2m2 plots in a block design after biomass harvest in fall 2024. I will make biochar from the harvested biomass in situ. I will seed S. acutus in the emergent zone and C. stricta in the meadow zone of Maankiiki in spring 2025. Vegetation surveys will take place in June and August of 2025 and 2026. I will analyze plant available nutrient concentrations in soil samples before and after experimental treatment application. In the greenhouse, I will apply Typha-derived biochar to mesocosms with Maankiiki soil at 5 rates [0 T/ha, 10 T/ha, 20 T/ha, 30 T/ha, & 40 T/ha] with 2 native seed applications [S. acutus or C. stricta] to assess native seed tolerance to biochar. This work will provide land managers across the Great Lakes region with an assessment of biochar’s potential to foster native plant establishment in a post-Typha managed GLCW. Producing biochar from biomass harvested in situ will reduce waste and carbon emissions normally required in manufacturing. This research will identify reestablishment methods for two ecologically important obligate species that regularly lose habitat to Typha.
Using Bioacoustics to Assess Impact of Invasive Cattail (Typha × glauca) Harvesting on Waterbird Diversity
Madeline Palmquist, Loyola University Chicago, United States
Intact Great Lakes wetlands host diverse populations of waterbirds, provide food resources, and support breeding and migration. In the Shiawassee National Wildlife Refuge (SNWR; Saginaw County, MI), invasive hybrid cattail (Typha × glauca) has homogenized wetlands by suppressing diverse native plant communities. Responding positively to eutrophication and altered hydrology, Typha dominates throughout the region limiting waterbird food resources and waterbird habitat. However, the response of waterbird usage in response to Typha management remains unknown. In fall of 2024, my lab will be aboveground harvesting Typha in a 100 hectare wetland within the SNWR. My research tests the efficacy of restoration to increase waterbird
utilization after Typha harvesting. This study will take place over three years, one year before Typha harvesting and two years following. At two similar wetland sites (Typha harvesting and Typha invaded), I will remotely collect bird habitat occupancy using autonomous recording units (ARUs) and survey vegetation diversity surrounding each ARU. Each site contains 5 ARUs. I will assess waterbird occupancy at each site from the audio recording with BirdNET technology and analyze species diversity in relation to vegetation. I plan to assess the impact that harvesting cattail has on waterbird occupancy. The conclusions of this study and my future research will outline novel methods for bird surveys and evaluate the impact of restoration techniques for invasive Typha removal on native wildlife.
Will Aridity Affect Avicennia germinans (Black Mangrove) Ability to Offset Sea Level Rise on the Texas Gulf Coast?
Maxwell D. Portmann, Texas A&M University Corpus Christi, United States
Due to rapid global warming, climate patterns and the distribution of vegetation types are shifting across the world. On the Texas Gulf Coast, global warming is increasing rates of sea level rise (SLR) and the expansion of arid and semi-arid zones. Simultaneously, warmer temperatures are facilitating the encroachment of Avicennia germinans (black mangrove) northward into intertidal wetlands dominated by herbaceous forbs and graminoids. Mangrove root volume is much greater than that of the herbaceous salt marsh and is a key factor in reducing subsidence and erosion. However, aridity may increase the root:shoot ratio as plants allocate more biomass to roots, but overall productivity may be reduced. The potential reduction in standing root biomass may increase rates of subsidence and erosion in more arid environments. The effect of aridity on patterns of biomass allocation and its subsequent effect on the ability of Avicennia to offset the effects of SLR and sequester carbon is unknown. Our objective is to quantify above- and belowground biomass to compare patterns of biomass allocation and root structure at 5 established sentinel sites (SO) representing a latitudinal gradient of aridity along the South and Central Texas Coast. From south to north, there is a trend of less arid climate. Root cores used to estimate belowground biomass will be excavated at each SO (n=27). Results
will be compared to a long-term and continuing surface elevation table (SET) device dataset to quantify the effects of root structure and biomass on rates of subsidence and erosion. Weather data will be used in interpretation of the results and predictive models of aridity based on climate projections to estimate the rate of change in SLR buffering ability and carbon stocks. This study will provide valuable insight into how aridity will affect the ability of Avicennia to reduce the effects of SLR along the Texas Gulf Coast and if increasing aridity will result in greater land loss in the Texas intertidal zone.
The Potential Unanticipated, Lasting Effects of Glyphosate Control of Phragmites australis ssp. australis in Calcareous Wetland Ecosystems
Mei-Yu Chen, Brigham Young University, United States
Intense management strategies of Phragmites australis ssp. australis (Phragmites) have been employed to control the spread of Phragmites and restore native wetland ecosystems across the United States. However, potential tradeoffs associated with the management of Phragmites remain unknown. Glyphosate, the commonly used herbicide for Phragmites treatment, acts as a chelating agent that binds with divalent cations in the soil, extending its half-life in the environment longer than normally anticipated. Glyphosate also inhibits the enzyme EPSPS found in plants and microorganisms; therefore, the use of glyphosate will not only decimate non-target plants but can have potential negative impacts on the wetland soil microbial communities. My proposed project aims to advance the knowledge of the impacts of Phragmites control on soil microbial communities related to the health of wetland ecosystems. Through LC-MS/MS analysis of seasonal soil and water samples from the Utah Lake and Great Salt Lake wetlands following glyphosate application, I will assess the persistence of glyphosate in calcareous wetland environments. I will also extract environmental DNA from the wetland soils and compare that to native sites with no glyphosate treatment, to determine if consistent glyphosate application alters the composition of soil microbial communities. The conservation of wetlands cannot be done without knowledge of the benefits and associated tradeoffs with the management strategies. My project will address the tradeoffs of Phragmites control by
revealing the fate of environmental pollutants in the Great Salt Lake basin, and its negative impacts on the local ecosystem. My research results will contribute to the sound science of wetland management and will inform local land managers of the tradeoffs of current management strategies, with the potential of improving control to enhance the integrity of the local wetland ecosystems.
Comparing Plant Rhizosphere Microbiomes in Miningcontaminated and Remediated Ecosystems
Ophelia Pettington, Missouri State University, United States
The Tri-State district is a historic mining district in southwest Missouri, southeast Kansas, and northeast Oklahoma that experienced over 100 years of lead and zinc mining. Mining pollution in southwest Missouri is problematic because the karst topography causes metal pollutants to easily migrate across large areas and contaminate the shallow groundwater. The metals are toxic and have adverse effects on flora and fauna, making these areas uninhabitable or hostile. Specific plants, animals, and microbes are tolerant of high metal concentrations and can inhabit these sites. Plants manipulate the microbiome of their rhizosphere in response to metal pollution and might have relationships with specific bacteria that contribute to their metal tolerance. The rhizosphere is the soil attached to plant roots while the soil not adhered to the roots is the bulk soil. Plantmicrobe interactions have been used to remediate metals, but the microbes capable of this remediation vary based on several physiochemical factors in the soil (e.g., pH and redox potential). My study aims to identify bacteria associated with plants in metalcontaminated wet and dry ecosystems at mining contaminated and remediated sites in Webb City, MO. At each study site, I will remove Andropogon virginicus (broomsedge bluestem) plants with their associated soil and separate the rhizosphere and bulk soils to analyze for bacterial abundance and diversity and metal concentrations (e.g., Zn and Pb, the most prominent metal contaminants in the area). I will test for differences among sites and between rhizosphere and bulk soils and determine relationships between soil metal concentrations and the microbial community structure. I hypothesize that (1) bacterial diversity and abundance will be greater in bulk soil than the
rhizosphere soil and (2) species diversity and abundance will increase in further stages of remediation as metal concentrations decrease. Results of this study will help us to better understand how plants manipulate their microbiomes in response to heavy metals and inform us of the long-term effects of mining pollution in these ecosystems.
The Way of Water: Mapping Hydrological Flows and Water Chemistry Along a Disturbance Gradient in Myristica Swamps of the Central Western Ghats, India
Priya Ranganathan, Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE),
India
Research on wetlands of India is unequally distributed across the country as well as wetland types. While ecosystems such as mangroves, lakes, and tanks receive disproportionate funding, lesser known wetlands are often left out of the bigger picture. The proposed research project will investigate India’s least studied wetland system—the freshwater Myristica swamps of Uttara Kannada district in the South Indian state of Karnataka. Uttara Kannada is the last stronghold for Myristica swamps, with approximately 110 swamps remaining in a highly mosaicked landscape. However, the rapid rise of plantations and paddy fields directly threatens swamps, making it imperative that remaining swamps are protected from draining and pollution from pesticides and other agricultural runoff. Focusing on two key research objectives, the study seeks to monitor the variations in water and soil chemistry between the upstream and downstream reaches of Myristica swamps in the presence of upstream disturbances and to understand the dynamics of the inundated region of the swamp in response to seasonal shifts in inflows and outflows of surface water. Hydrological flows will be measured using Montana flumes—due to low summer stream volume—and dug observation wells at equal distances from the center of the swamp to the edge of the wetland. Water chemistry will be measured in two parts—using field test kits and laboratory tests for soil parameters and organic matter content. Overall, this research project will provide valuable insights into the hydrological and chemical dynamics of Myristica swamps, shedding light on their resilience to environmental changes and informing conservation efforts aimed at preserving these unique and ecologically important wetland ecosystems.
Past restoration initiatives have often overlooked hydrological monitoring, hindering successful seedling growth of swamp obligate trees transplanted from nurseries due to inadequate understanding of growth conditions and baseline swamp conditions. Hence, this proposed research will contribute to scientifically informed restoration practices by collecting baseline hydrological data from intact to degraded swamps and elucidating seasonal water level and chemistry dynamics, which are pivotal factors influencing seedling mortality and regeneration.
Carbon Storage and Carbon Flux Estimation in Forested Wetland (Montreux Site) in a View of Potential Nature-based Solution using Ground-based and Geospatial Approach
Shubham Kumar, Central University of Rajasthan, India
Inland wetlands hold a huge amount of stored carbon as well as play a major contributor to natural greenhouse gas emissions. Inland wetlands are also one of the highly susceptible ecosystems to climate change and anthropogenic activities. Therefore, the estimation of carbon storage and carbon fluxes is essential to know the actual status of the ecosystem that
is already ecologically degraded. Keoladeo National Park is a part of the Monteux record site. The major objective of the study is to know the actual potential of forested wetlands to be Nature-based Solutions (NbS) in semi-arid regions. For this, a systematic study incorporating remote sensing and groundbased measurement approaches would help identify the amount of stored carbon and carbon fluxes under specific semiarid conditions. The findings of the study will focus on addressing the global challenges of natural carbon sinks as well as the potential of forested wetlands to be the holistic NbS towards climate change adaptation. A more accurate estimation of forested wetlands carbon will provide a strong basis for the solution to future climate change.
Pacific Northwest Chapter – Abstracts from October 2024 Annual Meeting
Submitted by Shelby Petro, President – Pacific Northwest Chapter
On October 10-11, 2024, the Pacific Northwest Chapter of the Society of Wetland Scientists gathered in Dayton, Oregon, to hear presentations, network with peers, and explore wetland sites on guided field trips. The event was attended by approximately 75 attendees. Abstracts are presented below and are also available on our chapter website.
Climate-Smart Restoration Plant List for the Pacific Northwest
Sarah Cooke and Mason Bowles, King County, WA
Global climate change is now impacting the Puget Sound region’s native forests and plant communities with changing temperatures and precipitation regimes that are making them vulnerable to disease and die-offs. Hotter and longer droughts are already occurring, and average summer temperatures are projected to increase by +4.7°F to 16.7°F by 2080 (Rogers 2022). Summer temperature highs are also projected to increase, with +8 days of above 90°F, with temperatures increasing +12.03°F (Climate Change in Puget Sound 2015). The Puget Sound region is projected to shift from USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 8 to Zone 9 completely, and from Heat Zone 2 to Heat Zone 6.
Higher temperatures cause native plants to experience more heat-related stress. Heat stress causes higher water demand, a situation made worse by longer droughts. Higher atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) levels promote the growth of invasive plant species, decreasing the space needed to support natural areas. Each native plant species has a natural range. Within that natural range, there are specific habitats that contain the ideal combination of growing conditions for that species. Accordingly, the geographic range over which a native species' original growing conditions occur is moving. Native plant species will go extinct if they do not acclimate, adapt, or move. This potential loss of plant species and communities will cause a cascade of effects to entire ecosystems of soils, insects, fish, birds, animals, and human communities. Identifying native plant species that have a high probability of survival under current and future projected climate change conditions can help ecosystem managers, ecologists, homeowners, and nurseries to select, plant, and propagate climate-adapted species to preserve local ecosystems. The human-assisted movement of species in response to climate change is referred to as assisted
migration. This approach is being used by the US Forest Service, National Park Service, and Bureau of Land Management to conserve tree species and replace plant species with genetic strains or species that are climate adapted. Climate-smart native plants are native species adapted to both current and future hardiness zones and can be used to create climate-smart gardens, habitat restorations, and landscapes.
King County is expanding its historic list of native plants to include plant species that have a high probability of survival under current and future projected climate change conditions—species that are native to warmer and drier northwest regional landscapes. These climate-adapted plants are referred to as climate-smart plants. These are plant species that are presently or prehistorically found within our Puget Trough ecoregion, and neighboring ecoregions, including the Willamette Valley, Georgia Basin, and Columbia Basin. These ecoregions influence and share many aspects of climate, geology, landforms, and native species with each other. The new list also includes common native species that were left off prior versions of our native plant list, and species from the prehistoric, paleo record that could be reintroduced to the region.
Giving a Dam: Designing for Beaver-related Restoration at Sapp Road Park in Tumwater, WA
Dash Paulson, Charles Hastings, and Phil Harris Beaver-related restoration (BRR) is a low-tech, lowcost, process-based strategy that aims to satisfy multiple ecological restoration objectives by encouraging beaver activity in degraded stream systems.
Sapp Road Park is a publicly owned, 11.87-acre, degraded wetland site along Percival Creek, a salmonbearing stream in the City of Tumwater, Washington. City planners want to restore Sapp Road Park in order to increase wetland functions including flood storage, water quality improvement, and wildlife habitat. We
designed and reported on the feasibility of using a BRR strategy to help city planners sustainably accomplish their restoration goals.
Our research involved the development of a GIS workflow designed to identify suitable water bodies for BRR based on vegetation, stream characteristics, 303(d) impaired water body listings, beaver habitat connectivity, and land parcel data. We completed watershed assessments at fine, mid, and broad scales to determine if salmon habitat limiting factors could be addressed by implementing BRR at Sapp Road Park. A hydrologic model was developed to simulate different water capacity scenarios.
We ultimately recommended two common BRR tactics at Sapp Road Park: restore riparian vegetation and install a complex of artificial structures like Beaver Dam Analogs (BDAs) and Post-Assisted Log Structures (PALs). We designed plans for a BDA complex along Percival Creek to increase water storage and improve floodplain connectivity and crafted a beaver-centric planting plan to restore riparian vegetation in order to increase the availability of food and building materials for future beaver families and to suppress invasive plant species on the site.
Based on our research, we determined that BRR, in conjunction with beaver coexistence tools and tactics, can help city planners sustainably achieve wetland restoration goals, including increased water storage, aquifer recharge, growth and recruitment of riparian vegetation, water quality improvement, and habitat for wildlife.
The Pacific Northwest Wetland Condition Assessment
Mary Anne Thiesing
In 2016, the US Environmental Agency (USEPA), in partnership with the states and tribes, performed an intensified study of the condition of wetlands in the Pacific Northwest (PNW), as part of the larger National Wetland Condition Assessment (NWCA). Changes in the sample frame were made for the 2016 NWCA, and additional sites were sampled to provide a more detailed assessment of biological condition within the Xeric and Western Mountains ecoregions of the PNW, as compared to the 2011 NWCA. Conditions within these subpopulations were compared with the corresponding subpopulations in the states within the
West ecoregion, but outside the PNW. Results are also reported by wetland type and within each state, for use by state wetland managers. The results of the 2016 Pacific Northwest Condition Assessment indicate that most of the wetland resource in the PNW (about 84%) is in overall poor condition, as measured by VMMI. The PNW Western Mountains subpopulation had more wetland area in good or fair condition (24%) than did the PNW Xeric subpopulation, where about 97% of the resource was in poor condition. The Pacific Northwest Condition Assessment determined that the poor wetland condition was largely due to the influence of non-native plants. In addition, six physical stressors were evaluated to determine the extent of the stressors across the resource: Vegetation Removal, Vegetation Replacement, Water Addition/Subtraction, Flow Obstruction, Soil Hardening, and Surface Modification. The extent and association with poor condition is reported for these stressors.
Installation of Pre-Planted Pallets via Helicopter to Restore Inaccessible Reed Canarygrassdominated Wetlands
Michelle Bahnik, Tulalip Tribes Natural Resources
Reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), an invasive perennial grass, threatens wetland habitat throughout the Tulalip Tribes’ Usual and Accustomed Areas, especially in wetlands that are difficult or dangerous to access for restoration project implementation and management. This project determined if experimental pre-planted pallets can be installed via helicopter in a reed canarygrass-dominated wetland to increase restoration planting survival and shade out the reed canarygrass. We assembled 120 wood shipping pallets with burlap sheets, wetland-appropriate soil, degradable planting stakes, and Manila rope. On each pallet we installed one native tree and four native shrubs. On October 12, 2023, we successfully installed ~90 pallets across three plots in a reed canarygrass-dominated wetland near Startup, Washington. We also established three routine restoration plots using 350 willow livestakes per plot and three control plots all within the same wetland for comparison. All of the 50-foot by 60foot plots had baseline vegetation cover measurements taken using the line-intercept method before the pallets and live stakes were installed. We will conduct annual monitoring for at least five years to determine if the pre-planted pallets can (1) establish native vegetation
and (2) shade out an established reed canarygrass infestation. If successful, this innovative restoration method could be used in a variety of settings, especially in areas that are difficult or dangerous for restoration crews to access such as tidally influenced floodplains or areas riddled with beaver channels.
Building Tribal Wetland Education and Outreach Programs for the Tulalip Tribes of Washington
Melissa Gobin, Tulalip Tribes Natural Resources
A challenge for wetland programs is building education and outreach components to connect with the people they serve, and tribal wetland programs are no exception. The Tulalip Tribes have a variety of current and in-development education and outreach tools to engage with and inform Tulalip tribal members about the wealth of habitats, ecosystem services, and cultural connections provided by wetlands on and off the Tulalip Reservation. Education and outreach opportunities include organizing field trips to wetland sites, handson activities, and traditional stories to connect place and culture. The wetland program website is another tool for tribal members, addressing frequently asked questions (without the use of excessive jargon) such as why wetlands have buffers that impact development opportunities. Rather than trying to start from scratch, working with existing programs can create more effective education and outreach opportunities. At Tulalip, we work with the Northwest Indian College Tulalip Campus, the Tulalip Heritage High School, the Summer Youth Program (high school interns), and the Youth Council. We also collaborate with other tribal government departments like Tulalip TV, the Cultural Department, the Rediscovery Program, the Tulalip Lushootseed Language Program, the Tulalip Health Clinic, and Tribal Employment Rights Office to reach tribal members of various ages and interests. We have also found it important to build education and outreach opportunities into grants and projects run by the wetland program. When developing wetland program plans or wetland management plans, incorporating community outreach events, interviews with elders (and including a thank you gift such as a stipend), and talking to youth councils can help determine priorities for wetland management, identify current and past uses of wetlands, and create a sense of ownership by tribal
members. Creating opportunities for tribal members to engage in wetland work can also be supported by grants and projects, such as developing volunteer-based monitoring programs and funds for all needed gear for the tasks being asked of them.
Forested Wetlands and Forest Harvest - A Successional Framework for Forested Wetlands of the Olympic Peninsula
Dr. Tanner Williamson, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission
Current Washington State Forest Practices Rules allow for timber harvest within forested wetlands, except for inundated fish habitat and forested peat bogs. There are numerous forested wetlands in western Washington in active timber harvest rotation, with most on their second or third harvest, as rotation length commonly ranges from 30 to 80 years. Due to dense canopy cover, forested wetlands can be particularly difficult to identify and map from remote sensing products. This has contributed to a limited understanding of their structure, function, and broader role in the landscape matrix of other protected waters. Herein, we present a study that seeks to characterize the structure, distribution, and landscape position of forested wetlands on active timber lands in western Washington. Critically, we examine how forested wetlands regenerate following harvest. To this end, we developed a successional framework that conceptualizes and quantifies the nature of forested wetland regeneration following harvest. We found that the successional arc following harvest is dependent on landscape position, hydrogeomorphic class, soils (mineral versus organic), and extent of vertical relief (i.e., hummock and hollow topography). This work is essential to describe the diversity of forested wetland types present in western Washington, and assess how forested wetlands function when in active timber harvest rotation.
Prioritizing Preservation Mitigation Concept in an Urban Environment
Maki Dalzell, HNTB, and Jenny Husby, WSDOT
The Puget Sound Gateway Program combines the SR 509 Completion Project in King County and the SR 167 Completion Project in Pierce County to complete critical missing links in Washington State's highway and freight network. The SR 509/24th Avenue South to South 188th Street – New Expressway (SR 509 Stage 2) Project is the second major stage of the SR 509 Completion Project and follows previous Project Stages 1a and 1b. The SR 509 Stage 2 Project is in the cities of Burien, SeaTac, Des Moines, and Kent, Washington. The SR 509 Stage 2 Project is located within an urbanized, highly developed area containing industrial, commercial, and residential land uses. According to the 2005 WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan, the Duwamish–Green watershed is one of the most populous watersheds in Washington State. The surrounding development has resulted in loss and alteration of wetlands and riparian habitat. Most remaining wetlands are in parks and/or publicly owned properties, and riparian habitat is either narrow and fragmented by roads and surrounding development.
The project team looked for potential mitigation opportunities in the drainage basins and identified that the only viable option in the basins is utilizing WSDOT surplus properties. These surplus properties were purchased in the 1960s for the SR 509 right of way, which extend from Burien to SR 516 within the Des Moines city limits. However, the project team abandoned the original plan to continue with the historical alignment and developed the current route. The project team saw a value of protecting existing riparian habitat along Barnes Creek in the surplus properties and put a proposal together to Corps and Ecology on this concept following the 2021 Joint Guidance and was able to use the properties as a preservation site for the Stage 2 Project. The presentation will be focused on the project history, approach, and challenges that the project team has gone through and will share the importance of prioritizing preservation opportunities in highly urban areas and some lessons-learned moments for the audience.
Seeing the Forest for the Trees: Effects of Emerald Ash Borer (EAB)-mediated Ash Loss and Restoration Planning in an Uncertain Era
Kari Dupler, Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership
Emerald ash borer (EAB; Agrilus planipennis) is an invasive wood-boring beetle that has caused widespread ash tree mortality in the central and eastern United States and Canada and was found in Oregon in 2022. In the Pacific Northwest (PNW) the only native species of ash, the Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia), comprises a significant portion of canopy cover in bottomland wetland and riparian forests. This species is routinely used for revegetation of stream and wetland restoration projects because of its wide range of habitat suitability and ability to thrive in poorly drained areas that may be too wet for other riparian tree species. Studies from areas affected by EAB on the East Coast have quantified various impacts from the loss of ash tree canopy, including canopy gaps and impacts to invertebrate communities. Recent studies in the PNW have focused on the loss of canopy cover and the potential warming effects on small streams and subsequent impacts to salmonids that utilize those habitats. Because of the limited choices for plant species that have similar habitat requirements, especially in bottomland wetlands, loss of Oregon ash trees could have cascading ecological impacts including changes in biogeochemical processes and shifts in wetland habitat types. The objective of this presentation is to provide an overview of literature related to EAB impacts and encourage restoration practitioners to consider future impacts of EAB in restoration project planning.
From Evidence to Action: Integrating Science in Water Policy and Management
Claire Ruffing, The Nature Conservancy
The Sustainable Water Team at The Nature Conservancy in Oregon is leveraging our foundation of existing work, enabling conditions, and strong partner relationships to achieve statewide impact and contribute to the resilience of Oregon’s water security. Our work seeks to fill critical information gaps to directly inform water management in data-scarce basins, support community-based planning processes to test and deploy modern water management tools, and collaborate with partners to develop water-smart policies and practices.
Specific projects include understanding the highestpriority areas for groundwater-dependent ecosystems protection, gaining a better understanding of nonrenewable “paleowater,” and scoping potential solutions for understanding water use and groundwater recharge. This presentation will highlight several current projects and discuss associated outcomes for freshwater ecosystems.
Sphagnum-dominated Peatlands in the Puget Lowlands: Ecology and Response to Adjacent Land Use
Joe Rocchio, Department of Natural Resources
Low elevation, Sphagnum-dominated peatlands in the Puget lowlands of western Washington have significant conservation value, are presumed to be sensitive to anthropogenic stressors, and require long timescales for their development and potential restoration. Past and ongoing adjacent land uses have resulted in direct loss and ongoing degradation of their ecological integrity. Protection, management, and regulatory actions need to be tailored to the specific requirements of these Sphagnum-dominated peatlands to mitigate impacts and help protect these rare wetlands. This research quantified variation in hydrology, water chemistry, and vegetation across gradients of land use intensity, surrounding impervious surface area, precipitation, and watershed size at 17 sites. Five sites were categorized as “reference” (0% impervious surface area within 50 m) and 12 sites were categorized as “developed” (>0% impervious surface area within 50 m). At each site, measurements were taken from the peatland center and the lagg (peatland margin). Adjacent land use appears to have larger effects on the hydrologic regime in laggs than peatland centers, highlighting the important function of laggs as buffering zones. However, increasing land use intensity and impervious surface area were correlated with increased concentrations of porewater ions in both peatland centers and laggs. Vegetation showed a response to hydrological and chemical changes, including changes in species richness and abundance of certain functional groups. Importantly, Sphagnum cover was lower in developed peatland centers and decreased with increasing chloride concentrations. Linear, mixed-effects models indicated that complex interactions among land use variables, watershed size, and precipitation best explained differences between reference and developed sites.
However, a few things were clear: (1) impervious surface area often had effects, regardless of the amount of surrounding buffer; (2) stormwater inflows are conspicuous sources of impact; and (3) stormwater inflows can be detrimental to these peatlands, even if treated before discharging into the peatland. Research results led to recommendations for improving conservation, management, and regulatory actions and watershed planning to better protect Sphagnumdominated peatlands in the lowlands of western Washington.
Community Science and Coexistence with Beavers in Urban Wetlands
Shea Fuller, The Wetlands Conservancy (Oregon)
There are so many reasons to love beavers and a few reasons why they can be some very annoying neighbors. In this presentation, The Wetlands Conservancy will discuss truce-building and coexistence measures that help to support beaver-maintained wetlands while minimizing conflict with human neighbors and damage to infrastructure, much of which was permitted and developed in the 1980s. We will also discuss how The Wetlands Conservancy is using community science to expand knowledge of beaver populations and better inform the stewardship of their lands. We'll cover the value of connecting with partners and neighbors on the ground to increase wetland literacy and advocacy. This talk centers around community education and should be accessible to any listener, not just scientists.
Wetland Impacts: How Temporary is Temporary?
Irina Lapina, Parametrix
Temporary impacts to wetlands are a common outcome of many construction activities, and addressing these impacts is an important component of permitting processes. These impacts are defined by the US Army Corps of Engineers as waters temporarily altered but restored to original conditions after construction and by the Oregon Department of State Lands as adverse impacts rectified within 24 months. Although rectification may seem simple and quick, it does not always go as planned. If only rectification depended solely on human actions, plant species choices, and time—however, both foreseeable and unexpected factors can affect rectification success. Various factors, such as scorching summers, wet winters, flash floods, forest fires, weed invasions, herbivory, and construction
delays, can lead to situations with the likelihood of not meeting expected rectification outcomes. Can we truly restore the area to preconstruction conditions within the given time limit? What stands in the way? This presentation highlights frequent challenges, discoveries, surprises, inconvenient obstacles, and unfortunate consequences that can be considered when planning for rectification activities. Sharing lessons learned aims to make consultants aware of the complexities of rectifying temporary impacts to wetlands, helping them prepare for potential difficulties, minimize temporal loss of functions, and better serve our clients.
Ecology Now! A Brief Account of the Latest in Wetlands at the Agency
Doug Gresham, Washington Department of Ecology
This talk includes details on the latest agency actions and efforts. Ecology is currently working on several projects funded through EPAWetland Program Development Grants. Those include the development of monitoring guidance for wetland compensatory mitigation, guidance for digitizing wetland mapping data collected in the field, and generating a 3-5 m resolution Wetland Intrinsic Potential map for the state. We have recently updated our wetland mitigation banking program interactive map and published Version 2 of the Washington wetland rating system manual for
western Washington and the associated Washington Tool for Online Rating (WATOR, pronounced “water”). Ecology hired a shoreline scientist who is working to adapt Oregon’s Stream Function Assessment Method for use in Washington and on non-wadeable rivers and streams. With recent changes to the definition of Waters of the US (WOTUS), Washington State regulations continue to regulate all waters of the state. Several models of federal jurisdiction have generally agreed that about 50% of wetlands in Washington will not be covered by the Clean Water Act, given the changing definitions of WOTUS in recent years, and our estimates indicate that this is a 50% increase in wetlands no longer covered at the federal level. In response, Ecology is working to fill the gap by developing a transparent and streamlined permit program. Ecology also provides pass-through funding for grant programs that enhance and protect wetlands, including the National Coastal Wetland Conservation Grants, which have conserved 16,000 acres of wetlands in Washington since 1993. A new grant program in development is the Climate Resilient Riparian Systems Lead, which aims to support restoration and protection of riparian areas in Puget Sound using innovative approaches to accelerate recovery of salmonids. The talk will end with an overview of current staff at Ecology who you can talk to about any of these topics and more!
SWS Mentoring Program for Latin American and Caribbean Students 2025
The Society of Wetland Scientists International Chapter and Education Section are pleased to announce that applications are being accepted for the HumMentor program in 2025-2026. HumMentor is a mentoring program sponsored by the Society of Wetland Scientists for senior undergraduate and early graduate students from Latin America and the Caribbean countries conducting research or scientific outreach in wetland science.
Application materials submitted to the HumMentor program must be in English, except for student transcripts. However, the HumMentor selection committee understands that English may not be the first language of applicants, and you can upload materials in your native language (Spanish, Portuguese, or French) on the application form. The deadline to apply is May 30, 2025. Mentorships will be selected by July 2025. For more details on HumMentor and how to apply, please visit https://www.sws.org/hummentor/
¡El Capítulo Internacional y la Sección de Educación se complacen en anunciar que se están aceptando solicitudes para el programa HumMentor ciclo 2025-2026! HumMentor es un programa de mentores patrocinado por la Sociedad de Científicos de Humedales (SWS) para estudiantes de pregrado y postgrado de países de América Latina y el Caribe que estánllevando a cabo investigaciones o divulgación científica enciencias de los humedales.
La solicitud enviada al programa HumMentor debe estar eninglés, excepto las transcripciones de los estudiantes. Sin embargo, el comité de selección de HumMentor comprende que el inglés puede no ser el primer idioma de los solicitantes, por lo tanto se tendrá la opción de cargar materiales adicionales en suidioma nativo (español, portugués o francés) en el formulario de solicitud. La fecha límite para enviar una solicitud es 30 de MAYO, 2025 y los resultados saldrán en julio, 2025. Para obtener más detalles sobre HumMentor y para presentar unasolicitud, visite https://www.sws. org/hummentor/
SWS Announces FOUNDATIONS OF WETLAND SCIENCE: Educational Modules
By Darold Batzer and Steve Pennings (Co-editors)
The Education Section of SWS has developed a program, Foundations of Wetland Science, which is designed to provide the general public, students, instructors, and professionals with freely accessible online educational modules about wetland science for general knowledge or as resources for the classroom and outreach activities. Each electronic module will provide foundational knowledge about a specific topic of wetland science, with the first modules covering basic topics (targeting the general public and high school and undergraduate classes) and later ones addressing more specialized topics (for more advanced users, including graduate classes). The first two modules are 1) An Introduction to Wetlands and 2) An Introduction to Wetland Functions and Values. These are the two most basic modules, with more specialized modules scheduled to follow. Once established, the intent of the program is to enable users to pick and choose, from an extensive set of options, whatever materials will best serve their particular needs. Each module will be first released through Wetland Science and Practice but will also be housed with free online access to all through the SWS website (https://www. sws.org/).
Each module will have been developed by established scientists and educators with expertise in the specific topic. All will have undergone peer and editor review. All will be designed to be accessible to non-specialists but still provide value for people versed in wetland science. We intend that the array of modules will grow over the years, and we encourage people who would like to develop a module on a topic of interest to them to contact the SWS Education Section Chair about their idea. In order to make the modules as broadly accessible as possible, we also intend to have them translated into other languages, with the translations also available on the SWS website. People interested in translating a particular module are encouraged to contact the SWS Education Section Chair.
The first two modules follow this announcement.
Module 1: An Introduction to Wetlands
Contributors: Darold Batzer (University of Georgia), Gary Ervin (Mississippi State University), and Derek Faust (Clover Park Technical College)
OVERVIEW
Wetlands are a unique kind of habitat defined by shallow waters and/or periodic flooded soils, which dictates the environmental conditions (soils, water chemistry) and biota (microbes, plants, and animals) that occur. Like upland habitats, wetlands typically support lush plant growth (herbaceous plants, grasses, trees and shrubs), but these plants must be able to tolerate both flooding and drought. Like aquatic and marine habitats (oceans, lakes, rivers, streams), wetlands support aquatic invertebrates, amphibians, and fishes, but these organisms must cope with periodic drying and low oxygen conditions. Many birds, and a few mammals, are wetland specialists. Wetlands can be freshwater or saltwater, with this difference being another important control on the resident organisms.
The term “wetlands” is generic and includes a range of habitat types, including grassy and herbaceous marshes (freshwater or saltwater), swamps (with trees), bogs and fens (peatlands), and mangroves (tidal forests). Wetlands are common on the edges of lakes and rivers (floodplains) and seacoasts (saltmarshes and mangroves); peatlands and small depression wetlands are common in historically glaciated areas or on flat coastal plains. Some iconic wetlands include the Amazon floodplain and Pantanal of South America, the Everglades and Prairie Pothole region of North America, the tundra of Canada, Siberia and Scandinavia, bogs of northern Europe, Canada, and Russia, billabongs of Australia, the Okavango Delta of Africa, and the Sundarbans mangroves of India, among many others. Wetlands have many values to humans including flood control, water purification, coastal protection, and the support of a biodiversity that occurs nowhere else. Wetlands are threatened by human drainage and filling, and a changing climate.
Figure 1. Diagram of different kinds of wetlands along a lake shore. (Courtesy of Doug Wilcox)
WHAT IS A WETLAND?
The term “wetland” is a catch-all term used to label a host of different kinds of habitat, such as marshes, swamps, fens, bogs, and many others (see below). The Oxford English Dictionary defines wetland as: an area of land that is usually saturated with water.
A more detailed international definition has been provided by the RAMSAR convention (an international conference held in 1979): Wetlands are areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six metres.
A legal definition used in the United States (US) is: “The term “wetlands” means those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.” (Environmental Laboratory 1987).
All of these definitions emphasize that the presence of water is important to wetlands, although it does not necessarily have to be on the surface. The legal definition in the US also notes that water affects the soils by saturating them (becoming hydric soils) and the combination of water and hydric soils results in characteristic plants growing in wetlands. Thus, flooding, hydric soils, and/or wetland vegetation are key elements in most definitions of wetlands. More detail on a range of definitions for wetlands can be found in Sharitz et al. (2014).
Definitions of wetlands have scientific importance, as the biota and biological processes that occur in wetlands are unique from other kinds of habitats (terrestrial uplands, aquatic lakes, streams, rivers, oceans). A peculiarity of working in wetlands is that one may have to define one’s study habitat for others, which is usually not the case for people working in forests, grasslands, streams, rivers, lakes, or oceans. A clear definition of wetland is also required in the legal arena because it may determine whether certain regulations apply (such as the Clean Water Act in the US). Legal definitions tend to draw lines between where a wetland starts or where it stops (called delineation; Environmental Laboratory 1987). As you become familiar with
wetlands, however, you will find this concept arbitrary, as “lines” for wetlands are fuzzy and many wetland organisms do not adhere to these lines.
WETLAND FORMATION
Wetlands often occur in specific geographic landscapes (Jackson et al. 2014), where past and current geologic features tend to determine how prevalent wetlands are, as well as how they function.
Freshwater wetlands are common adjacent to rivers and lakes (floodplains, shallow littoral zones; see figures below and above). In flat coastal plains, floodplain wetlands of rivers can be expansive. In steep terrain, however, floodplains may be narrow. The extent to which water in the rivers or lakes fluctuates will affect floodplain development. Floodplains are especially important to people because they lessen impacts of floods by providing water storage, with the added benefit that water travelling through floodplains is purified (Costanza et al. 1997).
Historically glaciated areas tend to support numerous wetlands, which develop in low lying depressions formed via past glacial action such as scouring and moraine development during ice ages. The prairie pothole region of the northern central plain of North America (below; Galatowitsch 2012) is a prime example of a glacially molded landscape where literally millions of small wetlands occur. Larger “potholes” may be called lakes, and the formative process of both potholes and lakes can be similar. “Lake” districts around the world tend to also support many wetlands.
Figure 2. River floodplain wetlands. (Courtesy of USGS)
The greatest extent of wetlands in the world occur in the tundra regions of Siberia, Canada, Alaska, and Scandinavia (Bridgham et al. 2006). Permafrost in these areas prevents water from percolating down from the surface, and thus surface soils remain saturated, and wetland conditions develop (Gough 2012). Past glacial scouring in the tundra also created a landscape where many wetlands can develop (as was the case in areas south of the tundra). These wetlands are particularly important given a warming climate, as they may dry out in the future, and the organic soils (peat) may start to decompose, exacerbating warming by releasing more greenhouse gases (Bridgham et al. 2006; Gough 2012).
In landscapes with underlying limestone bedrock (called karstic), the dissolution of the limestone over time can cause depressions to develop in areas where the surface slumps or collapses. Many of the cypress dome and limesink wetlands of the Southeastern Coastal Plain of the US (Kirkman 2012), and turloughs of Ireland (Reynolds 2016) are examples of wetlands formed by this process. Freshwater springs are also
common in karstic landscapes, and distinctive wetlands can develop at these groundwater discharge areas (see below).
Oceanic tides create many wetlands along continental coastlines, including saltmarshes in cool high latitudes (see below; Pennings et al. 2012) and mangrove swamps in the warm tropics and subtropics (McKee 2012). Daily tides inundate the soils with saline water, creating conditions where unique wetland plants (such as cordgrasses and mangrove trees) flourish. At the mouths of larger rivers, where water and dissolved nutrients from the ocean and the rivers mix to create rich, moderately-saline (brackish) areas, expansive areas of estuarine wetlands can develop. These estuarine wetlands tend to be among the most productive wetlands on earth for plants and animals. Like freshwater floodplains, tidal wetlands are important buffers to flooding from storm surge.
Figure 3. Prairie pothole wetlands, North Dakota. (Courtesy of USGS Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center)
Figure 4. Tundra peatland, Alaska. (Courtesy of NOAA)
Figure 5. Wetland associated with a freshwater spring, Utah. (Photo by Mary Jane Keleher with permission of University of California Press)
Figure 6. Saltmarsh and egret, Georgia, USA. (Courtesy of Steve Pennings)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY
Because wetlands are created by the presence of water, the source of that water can have important consequences for how the habitats function (what processes and biota occur). Water for wetlands tends to come from three sources. One is from above in the form of direct rainfall or snowfall, i.e., precipitation. A second is from below - from groundwater that discharges to the surface into wetlands. The third is from lateral flow of water which can enter and move through wetlands via overland flow, stream flow, flooding from adjacent rivers or lakes, or flooding from tides. The specific source of lateral flow can be a key factor determining wetland functions.
How the water leaves a wetland is also important. It can leave vertically from evaporation or from transpiration from plants; collectively this water movement is called ET (for evapotranspiration). Water can also move downward from wetlands into the groundwater aquifers below. Wetlands are often touted for their abilities to recharge groundwater. While this is true, it should be recognized that most deep groundwater aquifers are filled by rainfall on uplands, where impervious clay layers (aquitards) may not occur and water moves down through the soil rapidly. Wetlands are more likely to recharge surficial aquifers. Finally, water in wetlands can move laterally back into rivers, lakes or the oceans, or out via streamflow.
Conceptually it is useful to view wetlands in terms of what are the most important sources of water to the wetland (inputs) and what are the important ways that water leaves the wetlands (outputs) (Jackson et al. 2014). This is called a water budget (but be aware that accurately measuring inputs and outputs can in many cases be a very, very difficult endeavor). The below water budget formula encapsulates the major inputs and outputs of water for most wetlands:
Inputs
(Precipitation + groundwater in + lateral flows in)
Outputs
(ET + groundwater out + lateral flows out) + Storage
When inputs are greater than outputs the storage is a positive number (i.e., the wetland is flooding). However, if the reverse is true, the habitat has a water deficit and is drying. As a result, many wetlands are dry during part of the year.
Most of us find a formula to be daunting to comprehend. But for some wetlands the water budgets can be very simple. Rockpools and some depression wetlands are filled almost exclusively by direct rainfall and lose water almost exclusively from evapotranspiration. The groundwater and lateral flow parts of their water budget equation are essentially zero. On the other hand, some wetlands have incredibly complex water budgets (beyond the formula above).
Water volume is not the only consideration of importance of water sources. For example, floodplains and tidal wetlands may receive their greatest volumes of water via lateral inputs from a river or the ocean, with a comparably small contribution from direct rainfall and groundwater discharge. Nevertheless, those precipitation inputs and groundwater discharge can be very important to resident plants and animals, by keeping soils wet between floods, even though they are a small part of the overall water budget.
The following “wetland hydrologic triangle” pictorial visualizes the relative importance of different water inputs (precipitation, groundwater, or surface-lateral sources) to wetland formation (from Sharitz et al. 2014). The lower right corner of the triangle is where lateral sources dominate (such as from tides or river floods) and floodplains, saltmarshes, and mangroves occur in that portion. In the lower left of the triangle, groundwater inputs dominate, and spring-associated wetlands occur. In the upper point of the triangle, precipitation dominates as is characteristic of bogs and some depressional (ephemeral) wetlands. In the middle of the triangle are wetlands where all water sources
Figure 7. Hydrologic triangle showing relative inputs of water from groundwater, precipitation, and lateral flows into different wetland types. (Diagram by Rebecca Sharitz and Mark Brinson, with permission of University of California Press)
are important such as the Florida Everglades. If you are interested in how water in a particular wetland of interest to you affects its ecology, it might be a useful exercise to try to fit it into the triangle.
WETLAND SOILS AND MICROBES
Wetlands tend to retain water for long periods because, over time, deep layers of impervious clay or organic soils develop that impede water movements downward (termed an aquitard) (Jackson et al. 2014). One of the challenges of artificially creating a new wetland is that the unique soil conditions in wetlands require long periods to develop, and newly created wetlands often dry more quickly than natural habitats. One of the virtues of natural wetlands is that their impermeable soils help the habitats store and retain water on the landscape.
Wetlands soils also host unique bacterial communities because decay of organic matter saps the oxygen from the water, creating hypoxic (low oxygen) or anoxic (no oxygen) conditions. Most bacteria in upland soils are aerobic (use oxygen to respire) but in wetland soils the bacteria must use elements other than oxygen to “respire” and are called anaerobes. Common alternatives to oxygen for anaerobic bacteria include nitrate, sulfate, and iron oxide. When these alternative chemicals are exhausted, soil bacteria called methanogens may reduce CO2 to methane. Because methane is such a potent greenhouse gas, some wetlands may be naturally contributing to climate warming. The situation may become concerning if the release of CO2 through decay of organic matter accelerates to the point that more greenhouse gases are released than are absorbed.
Upland soils are often colored orange (from iron oxide, i.e., rust) or yellow (from manganese), but when these soils are flooded and become anoxic, the anaerobic bacteria convert these oxides to reduced forms, and the soils change to a grey or blackish color (see below). This color change in soils is one way that people trying to assess wetland conditions determine if the hydric soil criterion used to define wetlands is met. Thus, besides being a place where important ecosystem processes like decomposition take place, soil conditions also have importance to regulations.
PLANTS IN WETLANDS
Due to flooding and anaerobic conditions in wetlands, plant communities tend to be dominated by a flora adapted to tolerate these harsh conditions. The kinds of plant that inhabit particular wetlands are often used to define the habitats, and many common names for different wetlands reflect these plants.
Marshes are freshwater or saltwater wetlands dominated by emergent plants such as cattails, grasses, sedges, and reeds (freshwater marshes) or cordgrasses, rushes, and pickleweed (salt marshes; see photo above).
Deep water areas of freshwater marshes may support floating or submersed plants such as water lilies or pond weeds. For germination, the seeds of marsh plants usually require exposure to the air, and thus following a drying and reflooding episode, a flush of emergent plant growth often occurs. In the absence of proper germination conditions, these seeds can remain on the bottom of flooded wetlands for long periods and accumulate in what is called the “seed bank.”
Swamps are wetlands dominated by woody vegetation (trees and shrubs; see photo below). In Europe, there are wetlands called “reedswamps” but they would be referred to as a type of marsh, more broadly. As you can see, the use of local common names can cause confusion. The kinds of trees or shrubs that dominate swamps varies geographically and locally. Cypress (Taxodium spp.) swamps are an important wetland in the Southeast and Southcentral US, often on the floodplains of rivers (King et al. 2012) or in depressional wetlands (Carolina bays, Cypress domes) (Kirkman et al. 2012). Bottomland hardwood
Figure 8. Oxidized (rust colored) and reduced (grey colored) wetland soils. (Courtesy of Derek Faust)
forests (often dominated by oaks) also occur on river floodplains (King et al. 2012). Much of the Amazon floodplain is swamp forest. Mangroves, a group of salt-tolerant tree species, occur as coastal tidal swamps in the warm tropics and subtropics across the globe. Other trees that can create swamp forests include Atlantic white cedar, red maple, red gum, black ash, and cottonwoods. Many peatlands support trees, but generally the term “swamp” is not applied to forested peatlands.
Peatlands are wetlands defined by dead plants and occur where plant growth rates exceed decay rates and organic materials slowly accumulate over years or centuries as peat. Sphagnum mosses tend to be the most important source of peat development in bogs and tundra wetlands. But emergent plants like sedges (in fens) and sawgrass (in the Everglades) or dead tree trunks (in the Okefenokee Swamp) can also form into peat.
ANIMALS IN WETLANDS
Because wetlands have both aquatic and terrestrial characteristics, a diverse array of animals exploit the habitats, but they must deal with the unique environmental conditions that prevail. For the aquatic fauna (invertebrates, fishes), the organisms must tolerate low oxygen conditions as well as periodic drying. For the terrestrial fauna (invertebrates, birds, mammals), organisms must tolerate periodic flooding and be adapted to live and feed around water. Perhaps it is not surprising that amphibians (frogs, toads, salamanders), which live both aquatically and terrestrially, are particularly well represented in freshwater wetlands.
The fauna that occurs in wetlands that dry frequently is unique from the fauna that lives in wetlands that rarely dry (Wellborn et al. 1996). In tidal wetlands, salinity becomes an important regulator of animals, with compositional changes occurring along salinity gradients (saltwater to brackish-water to freshwater).
Compared to most uplands, aquatic habitats, and marine habitats, the animal fauna of most wetlands is comprised of relatively few species. Most of that diversity, in terms of numbers of species, can be found in the invertebrate fauna (insects, crustaceans, mollusks). However, because the animals that live in wetlands are unique from those that live elsewhere, wetland animals can contribute substantially to the overall biodiversity of a region. Wetlands support many animals that are endangered, with amphibians and birds being noteworthy examples of threatened species. Some of the best-known wetland animals include crocodiles and alligators, snakes, and beavers.
Figure 9. Wetland swamp, Georgia USA. (Courtesy of Darold Batzer)
Figure 10. Sandhill cranes (Courtesy of Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge)
Figure 11. Dragonfly (Courtesy of Clesson Higashi)
Figure 12. Chorus frogs (Courtesy of Kevin Enge)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank Beth Middleton and Greg Noe for reviews of this module.
REFERENCES CITED
Bridgham, S. D., J. P. Megonigal, J. K. Keller, N. B. Bliss, and C. Trettin. 2006. The carbon balance of North American wetlands. Wetlands 26: 889-916.
Costanza, R., R. d'Arge, R. De Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon, and M. Van Den Belt. 1997. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387(6630): 253-260.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Wetland Research Program Tech. Rep. Y–87–1.
Galatowitsch, S. 2012. Northern Great Plains wetlands. In Batzer, D.P. and A. Baldwin (eds.). Wetlands Habitats of North America. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Gough, L. 2012. Freshwater arctic tundra wetlands. In Batzer, D.P. and A. Baldwin (eds.). Wetlands Habitats of North America. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Jackson, R., J. Thompson, and R. Kolka. 2014. Wetland soils, hydrology, and geomorphology. In Batzer, D. P., and R.R. Sharitz (eds.) Ecology of Freshwater and Estuarine Wetlands. University of California Press, Berkeley.
King, S. L., L. L. Battaglia, C. R. Hupp, R. F. Keim, and B. G. Lockaby. 2012. Floodplain wetlands of the Southeastern Coastal Plain. In Batzer, D. P. and A. Baldwin (eds.). Wetlands Habitats of North America University of California Press, Berkeley.
Kirkman, L. K., L. L. Smith, and S. W. Golladay. 2012. Southeastern depressional wetlands. In Batzer, D.P. and A. Baldwin (eds.). Wetlands Habitats of North America. University of California Press, Berkeley.
McKee, K. L. 2012. Neotropical coastal wetlands. In Batzer, D.P. and A. Baldwin (eds.). Wetlands Habitats of North America. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Pennings, S. C., M. Alber, C. R. Alexander, M. Booth, A. Burd, W. Cai, and J. P. Wares. South Atlantic tidal wetlands. In Batzer, D.P. and A. Baldwin (eds.). Wetlands Habitats of North America. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Reynolds, J. D. 2016. Invertebrates of Irish Turloughs. In Batzer, D.P. and D. Boix (eds.). Invertebrates in Freshwater Wetlands. Springer, Switzerland.
Sharitz, R. R., D. P. Batzer, and S. C. Pennings. 2014. Ecology of Freshwater and Estuarine Wetlands: An Introduction. In Batzer, D. P., and R.R. Sharitz (eds.) Ecology of Freshwater and Estuarine Wetlands University of California Press, Berkeley.
Wellborn, G. A., D. K. Skelly, and E. E. Werner. 1996. Mechanisms creating community structure across a freshwater habitat gradient. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 27: 337-363.
OTHER SUGGESTED READINGS:
Barendregt, A. D. Whigham, and A. Baldwin (eds). 2009. Tidal Freshwater Wetlands. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden.
Batzer, D. P. and A. H. Baldwin (eds.). 2012. Wetland Habitats of North America: Ecology and Conservation Concerns. Univ of California Press, Berkeley.
Batzer, D. P. and R. R. Sharitz (eds.). 2014. Ecology of Freshwater and Estuarine Wetlands. Univ of California Press, Berkeley.
Ervin, G. N. 2023. The Biology of Aquatic and Wetland Plants. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Finlayson, C., M. Everard, K. Irvine, R. J. McInnes, B. A. Middleton, A. van Dam, and N. Davidson. 2018. The Wetland Book I: Structure and Function, Management and Methods. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands.
Finlayson, C., G. R. Milton, R. C. Prentice, and N. Davidson. 2018. The Wetland Book II: Distribution, Description and Conservation. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands.
FitzGerald, D. M. and Z. J. Hughes (eds.). 2021. Salt Marshes: Function, Dynamics, and Stresses. Cambridge University Press.
Keddy, P.A. 2010. Wetland Ecology: Principles and Conservation. Cambridge University Press.
Middleton, B.A. (ed.). 2002. Flood Pulsing in Wetlands: Restoring the Natural Hydrological Balance. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY.
Mitsch, W.J. and J.G. Gosselink. 2015. Wetlands. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
van der Valk, A. 2012. The Biology of Freshwater Wetlands. Oxford University Press.
National Research Council, Committee on Characterization of Wetlands. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and Boundaries. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Tiner, R. W. 2013. Tidal Wetlands Primer: An Introduction to Their Ecology, Natural History, Status, and Conservation. University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst, MA.
Tiner, R. W. 2017. Wetland Indicators: A Guide to Wetland Formation, Identification, Delineation, Classification, and Mapping. 2nd Edition. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Vepraskas, M. J. and C. B. Craft (eds). 2016. Wetland Soils: Genesis, Hydrology, Landscapes, and Classification. 2nd Edition. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Module 2: An Introduction to Wetland Functions and Values
Contributors: Darold Batzer (University of Georgia), Steven Pennings (University of Houston), Derek Faust (Clover Park Technical College)
OVERVIEW
Wetlands provide many ecosystem services that benefit people economically. Improvements in water quality and protection from flood damage are the most valuable services provided, and tidal coastal wetlands, estuaries and floodplains are types of wetlands that are particularly important to contributing those services. The biodiversity in wetlands provides many values to people, including recreation, food supplies, and cultural values. Historical wetland losses have been extensive in many parts of the world, both from agricultural and urban development. Climate change will likely exacerbate wetland destruction as hotter and drier conditions and rising sea levels threaten wetlands. Increased decomposition rates in tundra peatlands from increasing temperatures is a major concern as a positive feedback to global warming because it will release more of the greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change.
ECONOMIC VALUATION OF WETLANDS
Wetlands are among the most valuable habitats on earth. Costanza et al. (1997, 2014) quantified the values of the ecosystem services that the world’s different habitats provide. Ecosystem services are attributes of natural habitats that provide humans with things of economic value, that otherwise people would have to pay for. For example, some wetlands are locations for ecotourism, where visitors contribute money to the local economy, while other wetlands help purify water, reducing costs of making water potable for human consumption. For an individual, one might consider the costs and benefits of developing a wetland (e.g., turning it into a cornfield) versus how much they would save or accrue by conserving it. The analyses by Costanza et al. found that, after coral reefs, the four most valuable natural habitats on the globe (on a per hectare basis) were wetlands, specifically tidal saltmarsh/mangrove wetlands, estuarine wetlands, coastal sea-grass/algae beds, and swamp/floodplain wetlands.
Source: Costanza et al. 2014
These wetland habitats benefit humans by providing substantial services that otherwise would be very costly to implement. Below we outline the most important ecosystem services that wetlands provide.
WETLANDS REGULATE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY
Wetlands are low spots on the landscape and water tends to flow towards them, often laden with sediments and pollutants. Deep waterbodies like rivers, lakes, and oceans often have margins of wetland habitat on their peripheries that mitigate the impacts of pollutants. Wetlands possess several characteristics that naturally enable them to purify water. When wetlands are inundated, the water tends to be shallow and thus the water column interacts extensively with the substrate. Plants and debris on the substrate will physically filter sediments from the water, cleaning it.
Additionally, flooded wetland soils frequently become anoxic (i.e., no oxygen present) due to microbial activity using up available oxygen. The microbial communities must then turn to alternative ways to “respire,” and many wetland microbes use molecules other than oxygen to survive. Nitrate is a preferred option for microbial respiration in anoxic conditions.
Table 1. Ten most valuable natural habitat types on earth, on a per hectare basis
Nitrate is a common pollutant from fertilizer use and is also a major pollutant in wastewater (Bijay-Singh & Craswell 2021). Nitrate is problematic in rivers, lakes, and oceans because it causes eutrophication, sometimes leading to algal blooms. For example, a “dead zone” exists in the Gulf of Mexico where most marine life cannot live. It is caused by nitrates flowing into the ocean from the Mississippi River (Rabalais et al. 2002), which induce algal blooms. The decomposition of the algae uses up much of the oxygen in the water, leading to the dead zone. When nitrate laden water flows into wetlands, however, the nitrate is rapidly converted by microbes to harmless nitrogen gas (which naturally makes up most of the atmosphere) through a process called denitrification (see diagram below; Keddy 2000). In this way, wetlands purify the water and protect connected deep-water bodies.
Natural wetlands provide an enormous value towards cleaning water at no cost. Sometimes, municipalities intentionally create wetlands as a low-cost way to treat wastewater to take advantage of their ability to filter out solids and to eliminate nitrate from water. Costanza et al. (1997) placed a value of >$20,000/hectare/ year (ha/yr) for estuaries and almost $10,000/ha/yr for floodplains in terms of services associated with improving water quality. More generally, cycling of multiple nutrients (especially nitrogen, phosphorus, and carbon) is a valuable function of most wetlands. These processes are explained in more detail in a supplemental PowerPoint presentation available at https://www.sws. org/.
Another major service provided by wetlands is flood protection. Many wetlands function like “sponges” on the landscape, absorbing excessive water from flood events and then slowly releasing the water to rivers and streams, oceans, or groundwater aquifers. Efforts to break the connection between rivers and their adjacent floodplain wetlands by channelization (cutting a straight path through a winding river), or constructing levees
to prevent flooding of fields or houses that have been built on the floodplain, greatly reduce the capacity of the floodplains to absorb water. Ultimately, these river modifications have disastrous consequences for people living downstream, because the river floodplains can no longer absorb rising waters after a heavy rain event, leading to massive flooding downstream. With extreme rain events becoming more common (https://www. ipcc.ch/ar6-syr/), conserving or restoring wetlands could provide a useful mechanism to make landscapes more resistant to floods, thereby protecting humans. Moreover, allowing floodplain habitats converted into agricultural use to be periodically flooded may enhance their productivity, reducing the need for costly artificial fertilization. In a similar way, coastal wetlands such as mangroves and salt marshes provide developed seashore areas with protection from storm surges and tsunami waves. Coastlines are often highly developed, such that the flood protection service provided by coastal wetlands is very valuable; this is the main reason coastal tidal wetlands have extremely high values (see Table 1; Costanza et al. 2014).
WETLANDS SUPPORT SUBSTANTIAL BIODIVERSITY (MICROBES, PLANTS AND ANIMALS)
A host of organisms are adapted specifically to live in wetlands and occur nowhere else. Because of these wetland “specialists,” wetlands contribute greatly to the overall biodiversity of many regions. The
Pathways of nitrogen in wetlands. (Courtesy of Iowa State University Extension Service)
biodiversity of wetlands is of significant non-monetary value. But much of this biodiversity also enhances human life. Wetlands are favorite locations for people to view birds, other wildlife, and unique plants, and ecotourism to prominent wetlands can be important to the local economy. For example, over 1 million people per year visit Everglades National Park, and all expect to see alligators. The Okavango Delta in Botswana and the Amazon basin are major birding and wildlife ecotourism destinations. In China, cranes are important birds to the national culture, and many wetlands there have been specifically preserved as habitat for these iconic birds. Wetlands associated with oceans, estuaries, river floodplains, and lake margins can be valuable nursery habitats for fish and shellfish, and in this way support many fisheries, both commercial and recreational (Schultz et al. 2020). Hunters and trappers harvest ducks and select mammals from wetlands, and in some areas, such as the Prairie Pothole Region of North America, this activity is of major economic importance. Wetland forests can be sustainably harvested to provide wood and fiber for human use. Many animals in adjacent uplands and rivers/lakes/oceans benefit from wetlands by using them as refugia or foraging areas, so the benefits of wetlands to biodiversity extends beyond their boundaries. As mentioned above, the anaerobic microbes that prevail in wetlands are important to water purification. Overall, the plants, animals, and microbes of wetlands provide a range of economic benefits to people. Costanza et al. (1997) placed a value of up to $1000/ha/yr for wetland services associated with recreation and food supplies, which mostly revolve around biodiversity. Because of the ongoing loss of wetland habitats, wetland plants and animals are at risk and are prominent components of many threatened and endangered species lists.
WETLANDS PROVIDE RECREATIONAL AND CULTURAL VALUES TO PEOPLE
We have already mentioned that ecotourism, fishing, and hunting result in some wetlands being major sources of economic activity. Boating and canoeing are additional important recreational activities associated with wetlands.
The benefits of wetlands to human societies are not new. Many “cradles of civilization” are associated with wetlands, such as the marshes of the Fertile Crescent along the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers (https:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh_Arabs) and the Nile River
A wide range of birds, such as these Florida sandhill cranes in the Okefenokee Swamp, use wetlands as habitats. (Photo: Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge)
Wetlands are homes for a diversity of frog and salamander species such as these ornate chorus frogs. (Photo: Kevin M. Enge, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission)
Wetlands support plants found nowhere else such as these cypress and tupelo trees.
(Photo: Darold Batzer)
Delta and floodplain. In these areas, wetlands provided fish as protein, and annual flooding produced fertile agricultural fields. In North America, certain wetlands such as the Okefenokee Swamp, the Florida Everglades, many saltmarshes, and wildrice lakes have long had special importance to native peoples. Today, nature centers occur in many urban areas, where residents can go to experience natural environments; many are located in association with wetlands, especially river corridors. Costanza et al. (1997) placed a value of up to $2000/ha/yr for the cultural values of some wetlands.
WETLANDS ARE IMPORTANT TO REGULATING CLIMATE CHANGE
Climate change is caused primarily by increasing levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. One service that wetlands provide to humanity is slowing the rate of global warming, as well as ocean acidification, by taking carbon out of
circulation. Plants take CO2 out of the atmosphere by photosynthesis and use it to build their own tissues. The physical structure of plants also traps particles of organic matter that otherwise would decompose into CO2. To the extent that this carbon is stored for a long time, either as wood or buried in sediments, it no longer contributes to global warming and ocean acidification.
In some wetlands, more carbon is fixed or trapped each year than is decomposed, and peat can develop (peat is partially decomposed plant matter). This is a unique feature of wetlands because the anaerobic nature of their soils slows decomposition, allowing organic matter to accumulate. Over long periods of time, vast deposits of peat have developed in some wetlands (Bridgham et al. 2006), especially in the northern peatlands of Canada, Russia, and other Arctic countries. At the same time, peatlands also release significant amounts of methane each year (Bridgham et al. 2006). Methane, produced by anaerobic decomposition, is a potent greenhouse gas. Thus, in terms of climate change, peatlands provide a benefit by sequestering carbon dioxide but that benefit is counteracted by the release of methane (although fortunately methane breaks down quickly in the atmosphere). This example illustrates that assessing how wetlands affect concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is complicated. However, should temperatures rise in regions where peat is abundant (such as the tundra), and decomposition rates there increase, peatlands may become an important source of new greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, exacerbating climate warming (Bridgham et al. 2006). Thus, the fate of peatlands is a major concern in terms of future climate change.
Many aquatic insects, such as this dragonfly, inhabit wetlands. (Photo: Clesson Higashi, University of Georgia, Graduate Student)
Reed houses, Iraq marshes. (Photo by Paul Dober, WikiCommons)
Northern peatland, Alaska. (Photo courtesy of NOAA)
Almost all natural communities trap carbon to some extent, but coastal wetlands are particularly good at it. Plant productivity in coastal wetlands is often high, due to abundant water and nutrients. At the same time, because sea level is rising several millimeters per year, large amounts of sediment tend to accumulate on the surface of coastal wetlands each year. This sediment is a combination of dead plant material produced within the wetland and particulate material settling out of the tidal water. In either case, the result is that large amounts of carbon are buried in anoxic sediments where it is slow to decompose. At the same time, coastal wetlands produce little methane compared to freshwater wetlands. For all these reasons, coastal wetlands can store carbon (called “blue carbon,” because it is marine) at much higher rates per hectare than freshwater wetlands or terrestrial habitats. This ability of coastal wetlands to store carbon at high rates suggests that coastal wetlands should be an important part of the portfolio of nature-based solutions to climate change and provides an important argument for their protection and wise management.
WETLAND LOSSES THREATEN THE BENEFITS WETLANDS PROVIDE TO PEOPLE
Many wetlands occur, or previously occurred, in places desirable for human development. For example, humans tend to live near water bodies, such as rivers and oceans, and wetlands naturally occur there. Due to development pressures, many coastal wetlands have been converted to ports, marinas, and housing developments (see photos below). Other coastal wetlands have been converted into aquaculture ponds for raising shrimp and crabs. Further inland, people discovered that drained freshwater wetlands can be converted to productive croplands. The shallow nature
of wetlands makes them relatively easy for humans to develop (although difficult to maintain due to flooding and subsidence). Historically, agricultural development was the primary reason for wetland destruction. For example, the plains of Iowa and the Central Valley of California, USA, both major agricultural regions, have lost over 90% of their wetlands (Dahl 2000). In northeast China, vast areas of wetland have been converted to rice agriculture (Song et al. 2014). In recent decades, losses of wetlands due to agriculture have slowed, but losses due to urban development have increased (Brinson and Malvárez 2002). Intact wetlands tend to remain in places that are not desirable cropland (e.g., tundra) or in places difficult to drain such as deep-water wetlands. Despite the knowledge that wetlands are valuable, threats to wetlands persist to this day. Isolated wetlands—those not directly associated with rivers, lakes, or oceans—have recently lost some of the legal protections in the US that formerly existed, and those kinds of wetlands are particularly vulnerable to draining or filling for agricultural or urban development. The global area of floodplain wetlands has been dramatically reduced even in this century (https://eos.org/articles/natural-floodplains-are-quicklyvanishing).
Top: A natural estuarine wetland of coastal Washington State, USA. Bottom: A similar nearby estuarine wetland area that was drained and filled for commercial proposes. (Photos by Michelle Ryder [top] and Ashley Christensen [bottom])
Coastal saltmarsh in Georgia, USA. (Photo by Steven Pennings)
Most wetlands that have already been destroyed are in areas considered valuable to humans, and thus restoring them back to a natural condition would come at a high economic cost. This is why it is so important to realize that wetlands have economic values in and of themselves. Wetland restoration can provide useful economic benefits to society, even when expensive (e.g., Schultz et al. 2020). Conserving wetlands that still exist also provides economic value.
Wetlands and the services that they provide are considered particularly vulnerable to climate change compared to other habitat types (Poff et al. 2002). Because they are shallow, many freshwater wetlands may dry up and disappear should temperatures increase or rainfall decrease. Coastal wetlands may become inundated by rising sea levels, and because terrestrial habitat adjacent to many coastal wetlands is developed, many coastal wetlands cannot expand inland as water levels rise—a phenomenon termed “coastal squeeze.” Even where wetlands persist, climate change may reduce many of the valuable ecosystem services that wetlands provide (e.g., wetlands that dry or are flooded briefly may no longer effectively process nitrate pollutants or provide habitat for valuable wetland plants or animals). Because wetlands are valuable, but also at high risk of loss, there is considerable interest in managing the wetlands that remain, restoring degraded wetlands, and creating new wetlands to replace those that have been lost.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank Beth Middleton and Greg Noe for reviews of this module.
REFERENCES CITED
Bijay-Singh and E. Craswell. 2021. Fertilizers and nitrate pollution of surface and ground water: an increasingly pervasive global problem. SN Applied Sciences 3(4), 518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-02104521-8
Bridgham, S. D., J. P. Megonigal, J. K. Keller, N. B. Bliss, and C. Trettin. 2006. The carbon balance of North American wetlands. Wetlands 26: 889-916.
Brinson, M. M. and A. I. Malvárez. 2002. Temperate freshwater wetlands: types, status, and threats. Environmental Conservation 29: 115-133.
Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., De Groot, R., Farber, S., et al. 1997. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387(6630): 253-260.
Costanza, R., R. De Groot, P. Sutton, S. Van der Ploeg, et al. 2014. Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change 26: 152-158.
Dahl, T. E. 2000. Status and trends of wetlands in the conterminous United States 1986 to 1997. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
Keddy, P. A. 2010. Wetland Ecology: Principles and Conservation. Cambridge University Press.
Poff, N. L., M. M. Brinson, and J. W. Day. 2002. Aquatic Ecosystems and Global Climate Change. Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington, VA, 44:136.
Rabalais, N. N., R. E. Turner, and W. J. Wiseman Jr. 2002. Gulf of Mexico hypoxia, aka “The dead zone.” Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 33: 235263.
Schulz, K., P. W. Stevens, J. E. Hill, A. A. Trotter, et al. 2020. Coastal wetland restoration improves habitat for juvenile sportfish in Tampa Bay, Florida, USA. Restoration Ecology 28: 1283-1295.
Song, K., Z. Wang, J. Du, L. Liu, L. Zeng, and C. Ren. 2014. Wetland degradation: its driving forces and environmental impacts in the Sanjiang Plain, China. Environmental Management 54: 255-271.
OTHER SUGGESTED READINGS
Batzer, D.P. and A.H. Baldwin (eds.). 2012. Wetland Habitats of North America: Ecology and Conservation Concerns. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Mitsch, W.J., B. Bernal, and M.E. Hernandez. 2015. Ecosystem services of wetlands. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management 11: 1-4.
Mitsch, W.J. and J.G. Gosselink. 2015. Wetlands. 5th Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
National Research Council, Committee on Characterization of Wetlands. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and Boundaries. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Tiner, R.W. 2005. In Search of Swampland: A Wetland Sourcebook and Field Guide. 2nd Edition. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ.
Tiner, R.W. 2013. Tidal Wetlands Primer: An Introduction to Their Ecology, Natural History, Status, and Conservation. University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst, MA.
Xu, X., M. Chen, G. Yang, B. Jiang, and J. Zhang. 2020. Wetland ecosystem services research: A critical review. Global Ecology and Conservation 22, e01027.
Zedler, J. B. and S. Kercher. 2005. Wetland resources: status, trends, ecosystem services, and restorability. Annual Review of Environmental Resources 30: 39-74.
Women in Wetlands: Antecedent American Female Wetland Scientists
Arnold G. van der Valk, Professor Emeritus
Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Organismal Biology
Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011
Email: valk@iastate.edu
ABSTRACT
The careers of seven women who obtained Ph.D. or Master’s degrees between 1900 and 1920 and who published at least one paper on some topic related to wetland science are examined: Freda Detmers, Louise Dosdall, Minna Jewell, Emmeline Moore, Ann Haven Morgan, Gertrude Norton, and Laetitia Snow. Dosdall, Detmers, Norton, and Snow collectively published few papers, and they had little impact on the development of wetland science. However, Jewell, Moore, and Morgan all published important papers or books that significantly contributed to the development of wetland science. Minna Jewell wrote papers on the effects of acidity on freshwater biotas, the ecology of prairie wetlands, the impacts of groundwater inputs into lakes, and the freshwater sponges of Wisconsin. Emmeline Moore was an important fisheries biologist who worked most of her career in the Department of Conservation of New York State. Her pioneering work inspired many women to become fisheries biologists. Ann Haven Morgan, an expert on mayflies, wrote an influential book, Field Book of Ponds and Streams: An Introduction to the Life of Fresh Water, which enabled several generations of amateur naturalists to explore the biota of wetlands.
INTRODUCTION
While researching the history of wetland science, I encountered only a few papers or books written by women, with the notable exceptions being those by the English antecedent wetland scientist Agnes Arber (van der Valk 2023a). I became familiar with her work in graduate school in the late 1960s. Bronstein and Bolnick (2018) report that only 76 out of 2,889 papers, or 2.6%, published in The American Naturalist from 1867 to 1916 were authored by women, which is no surprise given the state of society at the time. They
noted that their results were typical of natural history journals of the period. Nevertheless, Langenheim (1996), in her history of female ecologists in the United States, demonstrated that there were female antecedent wetland scientists in the early decades of the twentieth century. Surprisingly, she pointed out that a high percentage (50% or higher, depending on the institution) of doctoral degrees at midwestern universities from 1900 to 1920 had been granted to women. Two American women highlighted by Langenheim who worked on aquatic systems were Emmeline Moore and Minna Jewell. Were they the only ones?
I used three ways to identify other female American scientists who published scientific papers on any aspect of wetland science between 1890 and 1920. First, I examined the areas of specialization of the founding members of the Ecological Society of America. Then, I examined all papers published in the era's two most important scientific journals, Plant World (the forerunner of Ecology) and the Botanical Gazette, in which antecedent male wetland scientists published. Finally, I consulted three histories of women biologists: Bonta (1991), Bierman et al. (1997), and Creese (2000). My searches focused on identifying women who received their doctoral or highest degree before 1920 and published at least one paper on some aspect of wetland science.
Of the 307 founding members (284 charter members and 23 more elected in December 1916) of the Ecological Society of America (ESA Bulletin 1(3) 1917), about 7% of its founding members were women. Of those, only a few indicated an interest in some aspect of wetland science. These included Freda Detmers, assistant professor of botany at Ohio State University, who studies lake vegetation and bogs, and Laetitia Morris Snow, Associate Professor at Wellesley College, who is interested in water plants and aquatic insects. Some other women indicated an interest in wetlands, aquatic plants, insects, or animals but never published a scientific paper on any wetland topic. My examination of papers published in Plant World and the Botanical Gazette turned up only a small number of papers on wetland topics by other female authors: Frederica Marie Detmers, Louise Therese Dosdall, Emmeline Moore,
and Gertrude Parmelee Norton. The only person who was also a founding member of the Ecological Society was Frederica Marie Detmers. Ann Haven Morgan was the only person added from examining the three histories of female scientists consulted.
This paper briefly examines the professional careers of seven women and their contributions to wetland science: Freda Detmers, Louise Dosdall, Minna Jewell, Ann Haven Morgan, Emmeline Moore, Gertrude Norton, and Laetitia Snow. For each of them, I attempt to answer five questions. What is known about their early lives? Where did they do their undergraduate and graduate work? Who were their major professors? Where did they find jobs after leaving graduate school? What did they contribute to the development of wetland science?
FREDERICA MARIE DETMERS (1869-1934)
Freda Detmers was born in Dixon, Illinois in 1867. Her father, Henry Detmers, founded the Veterinary College at Ohio State University (OSU). She received all her degrees from OSU including a BS in 1887 and an MS in 1891. Her MS thesis was on the rust fungi of Ohio. Her PhD dissertation in 1912 was entitled An Ecological Study of Buckeye Lake: A Contribution to the Phytogeography of Ohio and was supervised by Alfred Dachnowski, a leading early American wetland ecologist (van der Valk 2023b).
Detmers worked as a researcher for the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station from 1880 to 1892. From 1893 to 1906, she taught high school in Columbus, Ohio, but returned to OSU in 1906 as an instructor in the Botany Department. In 1914, she was appointed an assistant professor and in 1918, she rejoined the Experiment Station as its assistant botanist specializing in plant taxonomy and systematics. However, much of her research was on plant diseases and weed science. Detmers moved to the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, in 1927 to curate its herbarium. In March 1930, she was seriously injured in
a fall during a plant collecting trip. Freda Detmers died in 1934 in Los Angeles at the age of 67.
Although Detmers had a productive career as a botanist, her contributions to wetland science are limited and mostly of regional interest. After completing her PhD research on Buckeye Lake, she never again worked on wetlands. She published several papers based on her doctoral research, the most important of which is her study of the vegetation of Buckeye Lake (Detmers 1912). What distinguishes her study from most other studies of lake vegetation and its development is that Buckeye Lake is not a natural lake. It started as a reservoir created about 80 years earlier as part of a canal system. When the state took over the reservoir, it was renamed Buckeye Lake. However, before the construction of the reservoir, the low areas that flooded seasonally were wetlands. Buckeye Lake gave Detmers a unique opportunity to study succession over a known time interval.
Her 1912 paper describes the species composition of the vegetation types found in and around the lake and those of various islands, including a relict cranberry bog. The geographic origin of the lake's flora is discussed in some detail, but its successional patterns are not. In short, Detmers's study emphasized floristics and the distribution of plant species. This makes it like most other comparable studies of wetland vegetation at that time. Her paper has been cited 23 times (Google Scholar). But many of these citations are in papers dealing with the flora of Ohio or surrounding states.
LOUISE THERESE DOSDALL (1893-1958)
Louise Dosdall obtained her PhD in plant pathology at the University of Minnesota in 1922. After receiving her PhD, she joined the Minnesota Plant Pathology Department as its mycologist. Despite many decades of service to her department and the university, Dosdall was never advanced above the rank of instructor. Using money from her estate, Minnesota belatedly recognized her contributions to science and the university by establishing the Louise Dosdall Fellowship for “women with promise in scientific careers.”
Frederica Marie Detmers.
(Courtesy of The Ohio State University Archives)
Louise Therese Dosdall. (Courtesy of Department of Plant Pathology, University of Minnesota)
Before switching to plant pathology, Ms. Dosdall obtained a Master of Arts degree in botany at Minnesota. Her MA thesis (1917) was entitled “Water requirement and adaptation in Equisetum.” Her major professor was the renowned plant ecologist Frederic E. Clements, while William S. Cooper, another important early plant ecologist, was also on her thesis committee. Why she did not pursue a career in plant ecology is unknown. It may be because Clements left Minnesota in 1917 to take a research position with the Carnegie Institution of Washington. Dosdall published her MA thesis in two parts in Plant World in 1919 in its last volume.
The stated goal of her research was to “throw light upon the nature of bog xerophytes and successional relations of Equisetum.” More specifically, it was to determine if Equisetums are xerophytes or not. “In the group of plants known as bog xerophytes many members, while superficially exhibiting xerophytic structures, also show characteristics of hydrophytes, namely, large air spaces and diaphragms. Moreover, these plants grow in the same habitat with true hydrophytes such as Sagittaria, Ranunculus, and Caltha… While the nature of the habitat has been subjected to much investigation, very little inquiry has been made as to the nature of the plants themselves. The purpose of this experimental study of Equisetum's water requirements and adaptations was to determine whether this plant is a xerophyte as has been supposed, or whether it is truly a hydrophyte as its habitat suggests” (Dosdall 1919a). For more information about bog xerophytes and physiological drought, important topics in wetland ecology at the time, see van der Valk (2023b).
Her experimental approach compared Equisetum species' water use to that of other plants ranging from xerophytes to hydrophytes. These comparative experiments measured plant characteristics like time to wilting, transpiration rates, and growth under different soil moisture regimes. The results indicated that Equisetum fluviatile is a true hydrophyte, while Equisetum arvense and Equisetum hyemale are mesophytes. These results were consistent with the occurrence of these Equisetum species in seral stages.
According to Google Scholar, Dosdall (1919a) has been cited 11 times, starting in 1921 and most recently in 2014. However, Dosdall (1919b) has only been cited twice, in 2013 and 2014. This is hard to explain because
Dosdall (1919b) contains most of her results and conclusions.
Although far from an ecological classic, Dosdall’s papers did make a minor contribution to the debates about bog xerophytism/physiological drought that preoccupied many wetland ecologists in the early decades of the twentieth century. However, the impacts of her papers were minor because Equisetums were at the time not widely regarded as bog xerophytes, most of which were members of the Ericaceae.
MINNA ERNESTINE JEWELL (1892-1985)
(Source: The Pike’s Peak Nugget Vol. 14. 1913. Colorado College, Colorado Springs, CO)
Minna Jewell was born in 1892 on a farm near Irving, Kansas. She graduated from Irving High School in 1910 and then attended Colorado College, where she studied biology. After Jewell graduated from Colorado College in 1914 with an AB, she did graduate work at the University of Illinois. Jewell earned an AM in 1915 and her PhD in 1918. Victor E. Shelford, a pioneer animal ecologist, directed her doctoral research. Her dissertation was on the “Effects of the hydrogen ion concentration and oxygen content of water upon regeneration and metabolism in tadpoles.”
Jewell’s first job after completing her doctorate was with the Illinois Water Survey (1918-1920), but she quickly moved on to Milwaukee-Downer College, a women's college in Wisconsin, where she taught zoology. In 1923 and 1924, she was an assistant professor of zoology at Milwaukee-Downer and a zoology instructor at Kansas State Agricultural College (now Kansas State University). During the summers in the early 1920s, she was an instructor and researcher at the University of Michigan Biological Station. In late 1924, Jewell was promoted to assistant professor of zoology at Kansas State. She resigned from Kansas State in 1930 and moved to Thornton Junior College (now South Suburban College) in Harvey, Illinois. There she taught zoology and botany courses until her retirement in 1961. Over her fourdecade-long career, Jewell studied aquatic systems in
Minna Ernestine Jewell.
Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, and Wisconsin, as well as tapeworms, amphibians, fishes, and sponges. She was a leading expert on freshwater sponges at the end of her career. Jewell conducted some of the first studies of groundwater inputs to lakes (Jewel 1927a), prairie aquatic systems (Jewell 1927b), and the biota of acidic aquatic systems (Jewell 1922; Jewell and Brown 1924).
Minna Jewell’s most cited work (116 times according to Google Scholar) is “An ecological study of the fresh-water sponges of northeastern Wisconsin (Jewell 1935).” Beginning in 1931, she sampled 127 lakes and 17 streams and collected 1,389 sponge samples, including ten species not previously recorded in Wisconsin. This monograph is among the most influential papers on freshwater sponges ever published.
Her “Aquatic biology of the prairie” (Jewell 1927b) describes how extreme environmental fluctuations from floods to droughts influence the hydrology and chemical characteristics and, consequently, the biota of prairie streams, rivers, and lakes. This paper is a classic—it demonstrated how different prairie aquatic systems differed from the better-studied systems of the eastern United States and Europe. Jewell (1927b) ends her paper with a summary of the characteristics of the aquatic systems in the prairies of central and western Kansas. “The streams of the prairie differ from those of savannah and woodland in their swifter currents, greater fluctuations in water level, greater turbidity, and absence of humus or organic detritus from the bottom, which is usually of sand, gravel or clay. These factors give a sparse fauna because of the necessity of migration of many forms during the dry season, the uprooting of aquatic vegetation, the washing out of depositing organic matter, and the constant shifting of sand bottoms. Small permanent streams are few because springs are few, and only the larger streams have cut down to ground water level. Where they do occur, the ponds of spring fed streams are the most productive waters of the prairie. Of the bodies of standing water, the larger so called ‘lakes’ are subject to much greater wind action than the lakes of hilly or wooded areas. Since they are usually shallow the resulting wave action stirs up the bottom, resulting in increased turbidity, and may be a factor in preventing the growth of bottom vegetation. Of the smaller bodies of water, the prairie ponds or ‘buffalo wallows’ are usually temporary. In spring and fall these may teem with crustaceans especially phyllopods and ostracods, and with amphibious insects, although, in some localities,
they are almost barren, due, apparently, to high salt content and alkalinity.” For more information about Minna Jewell and her publications, see www.zotero.org/ groups/4942703/minna_ernestine_jewell_bibliography
EMMELINE MOORE (1872-1963)
Emmeline Moore was born in 1872 and grew up on a farm in Batavia, NY. She graduated from Geneseo Normal School (now SUNY Geneseo) in 1895 and then taught there. Moore earned a BA from Cornell University in 1905 and an MA from Wellesley College in 1906. After her MA, she taught biology in normal schools in the United States for four years and botany for one year (1911) at Huguenot College in South Africa. After returning to the USA, Moore did her PhD at Cornell (1916). Her major professor was James G. Needham, an influential limnologist in the early years of the twentieth century. From 1914 to 1919, she taught biology at Vassar College during the academic year and worked at the Bureau of Fisheries during the summer.
In 1920, Moore was the first woman hired as a research biologist by the New York State Conservation Department. She became its chief aquatic biologist and then director of the New York State Biological Survey in 1932. While working for the Conservation Department, she studied rivers, lake pollution, and fish diseases and assessed watersheds with her staff. Moore conducted surveys of aquatic biota in relation to water chemistry, hydrology, and the presence of pollutants in New York waters. Moore was the first woman to be elected President of the American Fisheries Society (1927-1928). After her retirement, she continued research at the Laboratory of Oceanography at Yale University. The American Fisheries Society established the Emmeline Moore Prize to recognize members committed to promoting diversity and greater involvement of underrepresented groups in fisheries education, research, and management. For a more complete account of Ms. Moore’s life and scientific career, see Zatkos et al. (2020).
Moore’s most important early work (1915) was "The Potamogetons in relation to pond culture.” Based on her PhD dissertation, it describes "the natural and
Emmeline Moore. (Courtesy of the American Fisheries Society)
artificial propagation of the Potamogetons as will render cultural methods economical and practical.” Besides describing their reproduction and spread by tubers, winter buds, rhizomes, plant fragments, and seeds, it also has sections on the propagation of seeds, vegetative propagules, and animals associated with Potamogetons. Moore (1915) has been cited 49 times (Google Scholar); it is her most cited publication.
ANN HAVEN MORGAN (1882-1966)
Ann Haven Morgan was born in Waterford, Connecticut. She started undergraduate work in 1902 at Wellesley College but transferred to Cornell University where she received a BA in 1906.
After graduation, she worked until 1909 as an instructor at Mount Holyoke College in its Zoology Department.
Morgan then returned to Cornell University and obtained her PhD in 1912. Her dissertation is titled "A Contribution to the Biology of the May-flies.” Her major professor was James G. Needham, who was also Emmeline Moore’s major professor. Morgan returned to the Zoology Department at Mount Holyoke College and was promoted to associate professor in 1914 and full professor in 1918. From 1916 until her retirement in 1947, she served as the chair of the department. During summers, she also taught marine zoology at the Woods Hole Marine Biological Laboratory. For additional information about Ann Haven Morgan, see Alexander (1967) and Wurtzburg (1997).
that offers abundant opportunity to all explorers, both beginners and seasoned investigators.” The book contains 19 chapters. The first two introduce aquatic organisms and the environments in which they are found. The third deals with collecting and preserving aquatic animals. The remaining 16 chapters describe all major groups of plants and animals found in streams, lakes, and wetlands. There are numerous illustrations, mostly line drawings and some photographs. Her book did much to acquaint Americans with aquatic systems for a couple of generations and to turn many of them into avid naturalists and conservationists. In short, Morgan’s goal for the book was realized.
NOTE: Kathleen Carpenter’s (1928) Life in Inland Waters was published two years before Morgan’s book. Carpenter (1891–1970) was a British aquatic ecologist best known for her studies of heavy metal contamination of British streams. Her book is widely regarded as the first limnology textbook. Consequently, Carpenter has been called the “mother” of limnology. Carpenter worked in the United States during the 1930s.
GERTRUDE PARMELEE NORTON (1875-1920)
Morgan was an expert on mayflies but also wrote papers and books on various other topics including animals in winter and kinship. Her most influential publication was her Field Book of Ponds and Streams: An Introduction to the Life of Fresh Water (Morgan 1930). According to Morgan, "I hope that it may help toward wider enjoyment and further acquaintance in the field of water biology
Very little is known about the life and professional career of Gertrude Norton. She was born in or around Syracuse, New York in 1875 and attended Syracuse University. Around 1900 she moved with her sister to East Helena, Montana, where she taught school. During the summers starting in 1903, she worked as a guide in Glacier National Park. In 1905, she became associated with Flathead Lake Biological Station of the University of Montana, at least during the summers. In the 1905 Bulletin of the Station (Anonymous 1905), Norton is listed as an instructor in charge of nature studies and artist. In the 1917 Bulletin (Anonymous 1917), she is listed as the instructor for Elementary and Field Botany and Systematic Botany. Norton was also a plant collector and botanical illustrator. In her honor, a species of plant was named after her by Marcus Jones (1910) in his Montana Botanical Notes, Hypericum Nortonae (Miss Norton’s St. John’s Wort), and she did the illustrations for his publication. Norton eventually moved to Utah, but nothing is known about her life there. She died in Salt Lake City in 1920. According to a brief notice in Science in 1921, Norton’s plant collection of about 1,000 specimens was acquired by her alma mater, Syracuse University.
Ann Haven Morgan. (Courtesy of Wikipedia: wikipedia.org/wiki/ Ann_Haven_Morgan)
Field Book of Ponds and Stream by Ann Haven Morgan (1930).
In 1919, Gertrude Norton published her only scientific paper, "Shore vegetation of Flathead Lake, Montana.” She died the following year. Her paper appeared in the last issue of Plant World, which became Ecology the following year. The focus of Norton's paper is plant succession. Why did Norton, who had worked as a plant collector, botanical illustrator, and plant taxonomy teacher, become interested in plant ecology? Most of her shoreline succession paper’s fieldwork was done in 1916 when Frederic E. Clements published Plant Succession Plant Succession was one of the most important ecological publications of the first half of the twentieth century. Norton does not cite Clements or any other author in her paper. By 1916, however, succession had become the principle organizing concept in vegetation studies. The concept of succession appeared to explain the relationships between plant assemblages and environmental conditions and how these assemblages changed in composition with time. Many papers dealing with the vegetation of an area used the concept of succession to make sense of patterns observed in the local vegetation, for example, W. S. Cooper’s (1916) paper on succession in the Mount Robson region of British Columbia, which was also published in Plant World.
In her 1919 paper, Norton describes four successional sequences around Flathead Lake: two xerophytic (rock shore and stony beach) and two hydrophytic (swamp meadow and delta swamp). The only data presented are lists of plant species observed at sites around the lake. She claims that "the same kind of climax forest results from either [xerophytic or hydrohytic successions].” She provides no convincing evidence to support this conclusion. This concept of convergent succession is pure Clementsian dogma. Norton’s assumption that all successional sequences around Flathead Lake would end in the same climax formation suggests she was familiar with his Plant Succession.
Norton notes at the beginning of her paper that Flathead Lake undergoes significant seasonal water level fluctuations: "For the entire season the difference between high and low water mark was 160 in." That is over 13 feet! Norton goes on to say, "From the record of this season [1916], it can be seen that the shore plants had no chance to begin growing until midsummer. Some were killed from remaining too long under water. Every high-water year, many acres of low-lying meadow and swamp-thicket are submerged." Surprisingly, the effects of these extraordinary water
level fluctuations on shoreline succession were ignored by Norton. The importance of large annual and interannual water level fluctuations on lake shore vegetation was later studied in detail by another early female plant ecologist, Jennifer Walker (1959, 1966), in the Delta Marsh in Manitoba, Canada.
Norton’s 1919 paper has been completely ignored. In the more than 100 years since its publication, according to Google Scholar, it has been cited only once in a book on Flathead Lake. Why was it ignored? Norton never published another wetland paper because of her early death at 45. Consequently, she never established herself as a wetland expert, as her male contemporaries like George Rigg and Alfred Dachnowski did (van der Valk 2023b). Norton worked in Montana, far from major American centers of ecological activity in the Midwest and East and West coasts. She had the misfortune to publish in the last issue of a journal. If she had published a year later in the first volume of Ecology, would her paper have become better known? Perhaps most importantly, her paper broke no new ground scientifically and was one of many similarly forgotten papers in the early twentieth century describing local successional sequences in a Clementsian framework.
(1874-1972)
Laetitia Snow received an AB from Goucher College in 1895 and a PhD from the University of Chicago in 1904. Her dissertation examined how various physical, chemical, and other factors affected root hair development. Her major professor was one of the leading plant ecologists of the day, Henry C. Cowles. After receiving her doctorate, Ms. Snow taught at the State Normal School (now Longwood University), Farmville, VA, from 1904 to 1908. She moved to Wellesley College in 1911, beginning as an instructor. She also spent time at the University of Chicago and Woods Hole Marine Biological Laboratory.
Although her best-known work is on the development of root hairs in crop plants (Snow 1905), she also
LAETITIA MORRIS SNOW
Laetitia Morris Snow. From the 1905 edition of The Virginian, Longwood University. (Courtesy of Wikidata: www.wikidata.org/wiki/ Q98822422)
published a significant paper on the anatomy of Scirpus validus (Snow 1914). Her paper deals with the functional significance of diaphragms in aquatic plants. She reviews previously proposed theories about the role of diaphragms and reports on her morphological studies, primarily of Scirpus validus. She concludes that diaphragms are a characteristic feature of aquatic and wetland plants and that “Diaphragms have the following functions: (a) to resist strains and keep the spaces open; (b) to support cross-bundles; (c) to prevent entrance of water by the small size of the perforation; (d) perforations permit air to circulate; (e) while young and green, to manufacture carbohydrates; (f) to store food …; (g) to conduct food materials from the crossbundle to the partition walls of the space.” This paper has been cited 27 times (Google Scholar). In 1920, Snow published a follow-up paper that describes some experiments (water versus air, temperatures, atmospheric pressures) to determine what controls the growth and distance between diaphragms of Scirpus validus. As she admits, her results were sometimes contradictory, and that the experiments needed to be repeated to resolve these uncertainties. Unfortunately, she did not do additional studies on the Scirpus validus or any other aquatic plant. This study has been cited only three times.
Earlier, Snow had published a 1902 study on the ecology of lake drift lines. During the spring of 1902, she collected drift-line samples from the shore of Lake Michigan in the Chicago area. She realized they were "[a] little community of food providers and food obtainers." Her paper focuses on the food obtainers, specifically the invertebrates in these drift lines. Although she could not identify many of them, she recorded 114 species, which included herbivores, predators, and scavengers. The exact composition of the drift-line fauna depended on many factors, including beach conditions, water temperatures, and the amount of live and dead material in the drift line. Snow’s post1920 work is mainly on soil bacteria.
Snow had a successful career as an academic at Wellesley College. Over four decades, like many early biologists, she published on various topics including shorelines, plant morphology, microbiology, and invertebrate zoology. Her impact on the development of wetland science is limited but of interest to plant ecologists studying emergent wetland plants.
DISCUSSION
I was pleasantly surprised to discover that women had begun researching wetlands in the early part of the twentieth century. Why had I been unaware of them? There were two main reasons: (1) disciplinary bias and (2) in most cases, the limited impact of their publications. I was trained as a plant ecologist. My research has focused on wetland plants and plant communities. Consequently, I have paid little attention to wetland papers that did not deal with plants. This bias largely explains why I was unaware of the work of zoologists like Minna Jewell, Emmeline Moore, and Ann Morgan. It is incredibly embarrassing that I was unaware of Minna Jewell’s overview paper on the aquatic systems of the prairies of Kansas. After all, much of my research was in the prairie region. The lack of impact of the publications of the others (Detmers, Dosdall, Norton, and Snow) is due primarily to the limited number and scope of their wetland papers.
When I began graduate school, I was told that to be considered an expert in a field, you had to publish five or more papers. Although this criterion has the apparent problem of favoring quantity over quality, it does have the advantage of simplicity. Three women meet this criterion: Minna Jewell, Emmeline Moore, and Ann Morgan. Detmers and Norton published only one, Dosdall two, and Snow four. These women never established themselves as leaders in the newly developing field of wetland science.
Which of the more prolific women had the most significant effect on the development of wetland science? The two standouts are Ann Morgan and Minna Jewell. Morgan introduced many people to wetlands and other aquatic systems through her 1930 book, Field Book of Ponds and Streams: An Introduction to the Life of Fresh Water. In her 1927 overview paper, “Aquatic Biology of the Prairie,” Minna Jewell demonstrated that aquatic systems existed that differed from those of the more humid Eastern United States and Northern Europe. In other words, she expanded the scope of wetland science. However, neither influenced the development of wetland science as much as some of their male contemporaries like Stephen A. Forbes (van der Valk 2018). According to Google Scholar, his paper “The lake as a Microcosm” (Forbes 1925) has been cited nearly 900 times.
Except for Gertrude Norton about whose graduate education, if any, nothing is known, the other women
all studied in prestigious graduate programs at major universities (Chicago, Cornell, Illinois, Minnesota, and Ohio State). As Langenheim (1996) pointed out, women had access to graduate programs in the ecological sciences, especially at Midwestern universities. These women’s major professors were internationally renowned scientists in their fields: Freda Detmers at Ohio State with Paul Dachnowski, Louise Dosdall at Minnesota with Frederic E. Clements, Minna Jewell at Illinois with Victor E. Shelford, Emmeline Moore and Ann Morgan at Cornell with James G. Needham, and Laetitia Snow at Chicago with Henry C. Cowles. Detmers, Dosdall, Jewell, Moore, Morgan, and Snow held academic positions at prestigious colleges or universities for part or all their careers. However, Dosdall changed fields after her master's degree and became a plant pathologist, and Detmers, Jewell, and Snow stopped publishing on wetland topics shortly after receiving their doctoral degrees. Emmeline Moore, the only one who continued to publish on aquatic systems over her entire career, spent most of it working for the New York State Conservation Department. Her visible and successful career as a fisheries biologist inspired many women to become aquatic biologists. It is unclear how Gertrude Norton made a living, except that she did work during the summers at the Flathead Lake Biological Station. None of these women appear to have graduate students working in wetlands. This also limited their influence on the subsequent development of wetland science. However, two of them have become important role models for beginning female graduate students as borne out by awards in their names: Dosdall at the University of Minnesota and Moore through the American Fisheries Society.
Two types of institutions played an essential role in the education and careers of many of these scientists: women's colleges (Goucher, Mount Holyoke, Wellesley, and Vassar) and biological field stations (University of Michigan Biological Station, University of Montana Flathead Lake Biological Station, Trout Lake Biological Station, and Woods Hole Marine Biological Station). The importance of the former is self-evident. Women’s colleges provided these women a path to higher education and scientific careers. Biological field stations provided them with summer jobs, a safe place to live, a base from which to do fieldwork, and opportunities to interact with like-minded colleagues from other institutions. For example, Minna Jewell, who was teaching at a junior college, did the fieldwork
for her monograph on freshwater sponges (Jewell 1935) at Trout Lake Biological Station. “It is doubtful whether any place in the world could be found better adapted to a study of the ecology of the Spontgillidae than the Wisconsin State Biological Survey headquarters on Trout Lake. In Vilas County alone there are approximately eight hundred lakes and ponds, most of which have been mapped and are readily accessible. As a result of the extensive investigations of Drs. Birge and Juday with their corps of able assistants, one or more complete physical and chemical analyses has now been made of the waters of each of the larger and many of the smaller lakes. All of these data, unpublished as well as published, were most generously placed at the author's disposal” (Jewell 1935). She also describes the help the students and staff at Trout Lake provided with boat handling, sampling gear, bringing in specimens, and microphotography.
Like Agnes Arber in England (van der Valk 2023a), these pioneering women undoubtedly had a difficult time in male-dominated science and, for some of them, at male-dominated institutions. We know little about their struggles for acceptance, recognition, and respect except for those of Louise Dosdall whose promotion at Minnesota was repeatedly blocked by her male colleagues. Given the biases and limited opportunities in science for women in the early twentieth century (Bonta 1991; Langenheim 1996; Grinstein et al. 1997), it is not surprising that there were so few female antecedent wetland scientists. I found it surprising that there were so many.
In this paper, I have ignored women and women’s organizations involved in conserving wetlands. However, I have previously described the crucial role of a few women in the struggle to preserve The Everglades and to establish Everglades National Park (van der Valk 2022). Nevertheless, many more such examples need to be better documented. Many women who received postgraduate degrees during the early twentieth century spent their careers teaching in high schools, normal schools, community colleges, or women's colleges (Langenheim 1996). Undoubtedly, they introduced many students to wetlands and other ecosystems in their classrooms and laboratories and increased wetland visibility among the general public. Unfortunately, their contributions to the development of wetland science are impossible to document.
AUTHOR DECLARATION
This is an original work that has not been previously published. Citations are given for quotations from published sources. Sources for all images are also given in figure legends.
LITERATURE CITED
Alexander, C. P. 1967. Ann Haven Morgan: 1882-1966. Eatonia 8: 1-3.
Anonymous. 1905. University of Montana Bulletin: Biological Series: Biological Station Summer Session.
Anonymous. 1917. Biological Station Summer Session, 1917. The University of Montana Bulletin: Biological Series: Biological Station.
Biermann, C. A., L. S. Grinstein, and R. K. Rose. 1997. Women in the Biological Sciences: A Biobibliographic Sourcebook. Greenwood Press.
Bonta, M. M. 1991. Women in the Field: America's Pioneering Women Naturalists. Texas A&M University Press.
Bronstein, J. L. and D. I. Bolnick. 2018. “Her Joyous Enthusiasm for Her Life-Work…”: Early women authors in The American Naturalist. The American Naturalist 192: 655-663. doi.org/10.1086/700119.
Carpenter, K. E. 1928. Life in Inland Waters, with Especial Reference to Animals. William Clowes and Sons Limited.
Clements, F. E. 1916. Plant Succession: An Analysis of the Development of Vegetation. Carnegie Institution of Washington.
Cooper, W. S. 1916. Plant succession in the Mount Robson region, British Columbia. Plant World 19: 211–238. jstor.org/stable/43477770.
Creese, M. R. S. 2000. Ladies in the Laboratory? American and British Women in Science, 1800-1900: A Survey of Their Contributions to Research. Scarecrow Press.
Detmers, F. M. 1912. An Ecological Study of Buckeye Lake. Proceedings of the Ohio Academy of Science Vol. V, Part 10. Special Paper No. 19. https://babel. hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.32044106353360&seq=7
Dosdall, L. 1919a. Water requirement and adaptation in Equisetum. Plant World 22: 1–13. jstor.org/ stable/43477697.
Dosdall, L. 1919b. Water requirement and adaptation in Equisetum (Continued). Plant World 22: 29–44. jstor. org/stable/43477684.
Forbes, S. A. 1925. The lake as a microcosm. Bulletin of the Illinois Natural History Survey 15: 537-550.
Jewell, M. E. 1922. The fauna of an acid stream. Ecology 3: 22-28. jstor.org/stable/1929087
Jewell, M. E. 1927a. Ground water as a possible factor in lowering dissolved oxygen in the deeper water of lakes. Ecology 8: 142–43. jstor.org/stable/1929399
Jewell, M. E. 1927b. Aquatic biology of the prairie. Ecology 8: 289-298. jstor.org/stable/1929331.
Jewell, M. E. 1935. An ecological study of the freshwater sponges of northeastern Wisconsin. Ecological Monographs 5: 461-504. jstor.org/stable/1943036.
Jewell, M. E. and H. Brown. 1924. The fishes of an acid lake. Transactions of the American Microscopical Society 43: 77–84. jstor.org/stable/3221993.
Jones, M. E. 1910. Montana botany notes. Bulletin of the University of Montana, Biological Series 15, Number 61.
Langenheim, J. H. 1996. Early history and progress of women ecologists: Emphasis upon research contributions. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 27: 1-53. doi.org/10.1146/annurev. ecolsys.27.1.1.
Moore, E. 1915. The Potamogetons in Relation to Pond Culture. From Bulletin of the Bureau of Fisheries Vol. XXXIII, 1913. US Department of Commerce, Document No. 815. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
Morgan, A. H. 1930. Field Book of Ponds and Streams: An Introduction to the Life of Fresh Water. G. P. Putnam’s Sons, New York, NY.
Norton G. P. 1919. Shore vegetation of Flathead Lake, Montana. Plant World 22: 355-362. jstor.org/ stable/43477805.
Snow, L. M. 1902. The microcosm of the drift line. The American Naturalist 36: 855-864. jstor.org/ stable/2453901.
Snow, L. M. 1905. The development of root hairs. Botanical Gazette 40: 12-48. jstor.org/stable/2465931.
Snow, L. M. 1914. Contributions to the knowledge of the diaphragms of water plants. I. Scirpus validus. Botanical Gazette 58: 495-517. jstor.org/ stable/2468338.
Snow, L. M. 1920. Diaphragms of water plants. II. Effect of certain factors upon development of air chambers and diaphragms. Botanical Gazette 69: 297317. jstor.org/stable/2470398.
Walker, J. M. 1959. Vegetation studies on the Delta Marsh, Manitoba. Master's thesis, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
van der Valk, A. G. 2018. Stephen A. Forbes, Antecedent Wetland Ecologist? Wetland Science and Practice 35: 18-24. doi.org/10.1672/UCRT083-256.
van der Valk, A. G. 2022. From wasteland to tourist attraction: The creation of Everglades National Park. Wetland Science and Practice 40: 293-301. doi. org/10.1672/UCRT083-57.
van der Valk, A. G. 2023a. Beginnings of wetland science in Britain: Agnes Arber and William H. Pearsall. Wetland Science and Practice 41: 11-19. doi. org/10.1672/UCRT083-55.
van der Valk, A. G. 2023b. Bog Men: Alfred P. Dachnowski and George B. Rigg. Wetland Science and Practice 41: 215-223. doi.org/10.1672/UCRT083-07.
Walker, J. M. 1966. Vegetation changes with falling water levels in the Delta Marsh, Manitoba. PhD Dissertation, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Wurtzburg, S. J. 1997. Ann Haven Morgan (1882–1966). In L. S. Grinstein, C.A. Biermann, and R. K. Rose (eds). Women in the Biological Sciences: A Biobibliographic Sourcebook. Greenwood Press.
Zatkos L, C. A. Murphy, A. Pollock, B. E. Penaluna, J. A. Olivos, E. Mowlds, C. Moffitt, M. Manning, C. Linkem, L. Holst, and A. B. Cárdenas. 2020. AFS roots: Emmeline Moore, All things to all fishes. Fisheries 45: 435-43. doi.org/10.1002/fsh.10501
Does Grain Size Matter? - A Survey of Natural and Restored Marsh Soil Characteristics
Marina Howarth and Jacob F. Berkowitz1
Engineer Research and Development Center, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, Mississippi
ABSTRACT
Coastal marshes are a natural defense that develop on a variety of geomorphic landforms and occur across a wide range of tidal regimes. Marshes evolve over time in response to changing sea level, sediment supply, vegetation community succession, anthropogenic perturbations, and other factors. These ecosystems provide an important natural defense for coastal communities because marshes reduce wave energy which lowers flood risk and increases resilience. However, many marshes display degradation associated with erosion, decreased sediment availability, and storm damage. In response, coastal resource managers seek to restore and expand marshes to improve environmental outcomes while delivering other benefits to coastal communities. In particular, the beneficial use (BU) of dredged sediments provides a source of materials for marsh creation and restoration, while supporting the maintenance of economically essential navigation channels. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) recently introduced an initiative to increase dredged sediment BU from the current rate of 30-40% of the total dredged volume to >70% by 2030, further promoting marsh creation and restoration. Using dredged sediment that would otherwise be removed from the coastal zone protects critical infrastructure, military installations, and other assets from natural threats (e.g., storm surge and flooding). Yet questions persist regarding what types of BU sediments are appropriate for marsh creation and restoration. In response, we review marsh soil characteristics based on a survey of existing literature. While this review is not exhaustive, our findings show no statistically significant difference between BU and natural marsh soil grain sizes, organic matter, and bulk density, and a large range of values across all marshes. These results promote the application of both fine and coarse textured dredged sediment to create and restore marshes. Our findings also suggest the need to match dredged sediments
with naturally occurring marsh soils be deemphasized to further expand beneficial use projects and provide critical support for coastal communities.
INTRODUCTION
Coastal wetland creation and restoration projects protect communities from natural threats, mitigate pollution, increase carbon storage, enhance habitat, and provide other ecosystem functions, goods, and services that benefit society (Shepard et al. 2011; Van Coppenolle and Temmerman 2019). The beneficial use (BU) of dredged sediment can rehabilitate degraded marshes, build elevation capital to improve conditions for plant growth, combat sea-level rise, and provide habitat for species that inhabit the coastal zone (Yozzo et al. 2004; Staver et al. 2024). Recent efforts to increase the number and scale of BU projects (including in marshes) focus on delivering sustainable outcomes by integrating economic, social, and environmental objectives via the use of natural and nature-based features, including the Engineering With Nature® and Working With Nature initiatives (Berkowitz and Hurst 2022; Bridges et al. 2018; Bridges et al. 2021; Runion et al. 2021).
Improving habitat is a common driver of marsh restoration and creation efforts. Plant community successional stage and elevation within the tidal prism represent two factors reported to affect the delivery of marsh habitat functions (e.g., maintenance of avian and nekton species assemblages). Available research suggests that BU marshes can provide more biodiverse habitat for a wide variety of both plant and animal species when compared to nearby natural marshes due to exaggerated elevation gradients within the tidal prism that results in more heterogeneous habitat types (Edwards and Profitt 2003; Faulkner and Poach 1996). Further, older BU marshes more closely resemble natural marshes than newly restored or created areas in terms of habitat structures and functions but remain on unique habitat functional trajectories several decades after project implementation (Berkowitz, Bean, et al. 2022).
BU marshes can also restore and build elevation capital where natural marshes are losing relative elevation due to degradation or sea level rise and create new marshes in open water areas. These activities improve the delivery of the full suite of marsh ecosystem
functions, delivering an array of hydrologic and biogeochemical cycling functions in addition to habitat maintenance (Berkowitz, Bean, et al. 2022; Berkowitz, Hurst, et al. 2022). Natural marshes build elevation through overwash events and sediment capture, which can lead to sandy soil horizons on seaward marshes and the dominance of fine textured silts and clays in many back-barrier marshes (Callaway et al. 1997; De Groot et al. 2011; Lenz et al. 2023). The restoration or creation of BU marshes mimics these natural sediment delivery processes by depositing mineral sediments onto the marsh soil surface, sediment particle size class sorting, and the establishment of plant communities that accrete organic matter and capture additional suspended sediments. Previous studies demonstrate that BU marshes can yield higher rates of accretion and/or lower rates of erosion than natural marshes, however these processes are nuanced in both BU marshes and their natural counterparts (Davis et al. 2022; DeLaune et al. 1990; Graham and Mendelssohn 2013; Poppe and Rybczyk 2021; Widdows et al. 2006). Davis et al. (2022) suggested that higher sand contents observed in many BU marsh soils relative to natural marshes promotes accretion and decreases erosion, but elevation gains and erosion decreases have also been associated with fine texture soils and combinations of fine and sandy substrates (DeLaune et al. 1990; Graham and Mendelssohn 2013; Poppe and Rybczyk 2021; Widdows et al. 2006). Well documented linkages exist between plant productivity in BU marshes constructed using fine sediment contents, contributing to BU marsh accretion (DeLaune et al. 1990; Graham and Mendelssohn 2013; Poppe and Rybczyk 2021), and between soil biotic productivity and observed decreases in marsh erosion (Widdows et al. 2006).
Interest in providing additional carbon storage using BU marshes continues to increase, further promoting wetland restoration and creation efforts. Natural marshes generally contain more carbon than BU sites, because many marshes have been vegetated and accumulating carbon for thousands of years. However, carbon storage rates can be higher in BU marshes due to their rapid accretion rates and the rapid development of marsh vegetation in previously unvegetated areas (Poppe and Rybczyk 2021). Additionally, BU marsh creation provides opportunities to build carbon stocks in open water areas where primary productivity and organic matter accumulation rates are lower than in wetlands (Maglio et al. 2020).
Despite the availability of case-studies investigating marsh creation and restoration utilizing BU, design questions persist regarding the deliberate application of dredged sediments into marshes. In particular, the use of different sediment grain sizes across coastal landforms has been debated, limiting practitioner capacity to successfully execute BU projects (Maglio et al. 2020). It can be difficult to accurately assess dredged sediment grain size prior to project implementation, and guidelines generally recommend matching dredged sediment characteristics with target placement locations to optimize positive outcomes (Piercy et al. 2023). Since previously published studies provide many examples of successful marsh creation and restoration projects that utilized sediments with characteristics that were substantially different from placement locations or nearby natural reference areas, existing literature was surveyed to investigate commonly reported marsh sediment characteristics in natural marshes and in marshes created or restored using dredged sediment BU.
LITERATURE SURVEY
The following presents a targeted literature survey of sediment characteristics in BU and natural marshes to evaluate the observed range of particle sizes, soil organic matter, and bulk density across geographically and ecologically diverse marshes. The survey was based on a Google Scholar keyword search that included the phrases “sediment grain size marsh restoration,” “marsh sediment partitioning,” “created and natural marshes,” “marsh sediment grain size,” “marsh particle sorting,” and “case-studies beneficial use dredged sediment.” These keywords yielded a dataset of 27 peer-reviewed journal papers, with 35 case studies and 32 study sites reporting sediment characteristics for BU and/or natural marshes. All particle size data presented herein are reported as the distribution of sand (particle sizes ≥50 um) and fine substrates (all grain sizes <50 um). When particle size, bulk density, or soil organic matter data was not directly reported in tables or text, data was derived from figures or underwent unit conversions as needed.
FINDINGS
The data were derived from marshes predominantly in the United States, but also included international case-studies in Denmark, Germany, Portugal, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Korea, and China
(Figure 1). The dataset includes a wide variety of tidal regimes, soil parent materials, geomorphic landscape positions, dissolved sediment concentrations, and other marsh physiological features.
As expected, results indicate marshes typically contain more fine textured soils (i.e., silt and clay) than sand in both natural and BU marshes (median fine sediment content = 70%; range = 0.3%-99.7%, Figure 2a) (Stumpf 1983). This finding aligns with the capacity of coastal wetlands to trap fine sediments present within the water column during tidal inundation when: coarse particles are less likely to be mobilized, the deposition of flocculated fine sediments occurs on the marsh surface, and highly transportable individual fine soil particles moves across the marsh surface (Christiansen et al. 2000). However, the extent of fine textured soils varies, with the data exhibiting a large fine textured soil content inner-quartile range of 30% to 85% (Figure 2a). The values are generally within the broad range of particle sizes reported in estuarine environments, where mean particle diameters often occur between 4 um and 250 um (Mudd et al. 2010). The BU marshes in this review tended to contain a higher proportion of coarse soils than natural marshes with a fine textured soil inner-quartile range of 15% to 82%, but both BU and natural marshes most frequently exhibited median fine
sediment contents near 85%. Additionally, some natural marshes were dominated by sandy soils, with as few as 20% fine sediments (Figure 2b). Bradley and Morris (1990) found similar results with marsh sand contents as high as 92% in South Carolina. Additionally, a Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric test of the fine grain sizes between natural and BU marshes yielded no statistical significance, with a p-value of 0.38. The survey data suggest that marshes form and persist on a wide range of soil textures under natural conditions, and that marsh creation and restoration can be accomplished using a wide variety of sediment particle sizes.
Marsh soil organic matter (OM) contents displayed wide variability, with a median value of 15%, and a range that extended from near zero to over 60% (Figure 2c). Wang et al. (2017) reported a similar range of OM contents in a survey of >330 soils collected from multiple marsh types in Louisiana with the lowest OM contents <10%, and some exceeding 60%, although their study did not discuss whether marshes were natural or BU. The OM contents for both natural and restored BU marshes evaluated in our survey displayed median values close to 15% (Figure 2d). However, higher OM contents were observed in some natural marshes (interquartile maximum = 30%; maximum value = 60%) than in BU marshes (interquartile
Figure 1. Study locations in the survey dataset included a wide variety of marshes from different regions. This figure focuses on the United States study sites to demonstrate the geographic distribution along the nation’s coastlines and includes the other countries and study sites in the central table.
Figure 2. Soil characteristics observed in the survey data set, pooled (left panels) and separated into BU marshes and natural marsh groups (right panels). The thickness of the violin plots indicates the frequency of occurrence and n values report the sample size for each parameter. The white circle identifies the median value, and the thick and thin grey bars represent the interquartile and 1.5x interquartile ranges, respectively.
maximum = 23%; maximum value = 50%), although not statistically significant based on a Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric test p-value of 0.85. Higher soil organic matter contents in natural marshes relative to created and restored marshes is well documented in the literature, with many BU marshes continuing to display lower carbon contents than natural systems
several decades after construction (Abbott et al. 2019; Berkowitz, Beane, et al. 2022). The lower soil OM content observed in managed systems is not surprising, as many natural marshes have accumulated soil OM over hundreds or thousands of years (e.g., ~4000 years on the United States eastern coast; Braswell et al. 2020). In contrast, the oldest BU created and restored
marshes were constructed in the 1970s and most BU projects have been implemented after 1990 (Landin et al. 1989). Interestingly, in an evaluation of BU marshes created within the last 32 years in Louisiana, Abbott et al. (2019) demonstrated that some constructed marshes display faster soil carbon accumulation rates that natural marshes, despite lower overall carbon content. This finding emphasizes the complex relationship between marsh age and carbon accumulation, which results from the interplay of elevation, tidal regime, primary productivity, decomposition, and other factors that determine long term soil OM contents. Notably, Berkowitz and others have reported the delivery of many wetland functions by BU marshes, despite the persistence of lower soil OM relative to natural marshes.
Soil bulk density represents the amount of pore space within the soil matrix, provides a proxy to measure soil compaction, and influences water infiltration, rooting, and other factors related to organic matter production and decomposition. In marshes, high bulk densities (e.g., >1.8 g/cm3) can restrict root penetration and hydraulic conductivity, and very low bulk densities (<0.20 g/cm3) can lead to marsh platform collapse and precludes the establishment or productivity of common marsh plants due to poor structural stability (DeLaune et al. 1979). Bulk densities are related to particle size distributions because fine sediments have much higher internal pore space (as micropores) imparting lower bulk densities than macropore dominated sands. While few studies in the literature survey reported both particle size and bulk density, the inverse relationship between the presence of fine particles and bulk densities
corroborates the general trends that more fine texture soil particles and fewer sands were present in the marsh soils evaluated (Figure 2e). The large inner-quartile ranges of 0.25 to 0.95 g/cm3, with a median of 0.6 g/ cm3, in natural marshes and 0.3 to 1.05 g/cm3, with a median of 0.7 g/cm3, in BU marshes further indicates that marshes naturally develop on a variety of substrates and suggests a wide range of sediment particle sizes can be used during construction and restoration activities (Figure 2f). A one-way ANOVA test was performed as well, with a p-value of 0.35, demonstrating the similarity between bulk densities for natural and BU marshes. Also, bulk densities in constructed and restored marshes tend to decrease over time as the result of 1) organic matter accumulation and 2) rooting and bioturbation improve soil structure while increasing soil porosity. For example, Craft et al. (2002) reported a bulk density decline of >10% ten years after a marsh creation project was constructed in North Carolina.
A study spanning the Unites States highlighted soil property differences between BU and natural marshes (Berkowitz, Beane, et al. 2022; Berkowitz, Hurst, et al. 2022). The BU marsh soils were generally sandier than adjacent natural marshes, displayed higher bulk density, and contained less organic matter as indicated by the darker soil colors observed in natural marshes, even >40 years after construction (Figure 3). Despite the persistent differences in soil characteristics, the BU marshes provided similar ecosystem functions as their natural counterparts but remained on unique ecological trajectories despite becoming more similar to their natural counterparts over time (Berkowitz, Beane, et al. 2022; Berkowitz, Hurst, et al. 2022). Importantly, the
Figure 3. Soil profiles from Florida BU marshes display increases in soil organic matter over decadal timescales, denoted by dark surface layers in both (a) fine and (b) sandy sediments. Soil cores from a Texas BU marsh (c) exhibits less organic matter and higher bulk density than an adjacent natural marsh (d). The BU marshes were all constructed in 1976 (adapted from Berkowitz, Beane, et al. 2022).
completed studies and the data presented in this survey of available literature indicate that marshes naturally form, and can be successfully constructed and restored, using a wide variety of sediment types to achieve both environmental and societal objectives (e.g., improve habitat while reducing flood risk).
CONCLUSIONS
The restoration and construction of marshes using dredged sediments provides an important asset to help defend our coasts from natural threats, improve marsh longevity, and provide habitats using sediment that would otherwise be discharged off-shore. There are certain functions that some BU marshes perform even better than natural marshes, including providing diverse habitats and building elevation capital through accretion. As the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) seeks to beneficially use 70% of the ~150 million cubic meters of dredged sediment they manage each year by 2030, the construction of BU marshes will continue to expand in the United States. Similar international efforts are underway to utilize dredged sediments to benefit communities and the environment (PIANC 2009).
Current operating principles for the USACE (Piercy et al. 2023) generally recommend matching grain size and other soil characteristics present within local marshes with the dredged sediments used to conduct BU marsh restoration and creation. However, this approach is often difficult to accomplish in practice because sediment dredged from channels may have different grain sizes than adjacent marshes. Our research found that both natural and BU marshes contain a wide range of soil textures, bulk densities, and organic matter contents that broadly overlap and allow them to provide similar ecosystem functions. Practitioners should deemphasize the need for BU marshes to exhibit soil characteristics that ‘match’ unrealistic concepts of natural reference marshes and focus on the need to beneficially use as much dredged sediment as possible to achieve diverse economic, environmental, and societal benefits. The fact that a range of soil particle sizes supports the applicability of most dredged sediments for marsh restoration and creation empowers stakeholders to broadly expand BU initiatives.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Funding for this research was provided by the Developing Engineering Practices for Ecosystem
Design Solutions (DEEDS) project, under the supervision of Dr. Yoko Slowey and the management of the Technical Director for Military Environmental Engineering and Sciences, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. The authors would like to thank Nia Hurst and Candice Piercy for recommending references and sharing their expertise in biogeochemical cycling and Beneficial Use marshes.
REFERENCES
Abbott, K. M., T. Elsey-Quirk, and R. D. DeLaune. 2019. Factors influencing blue carbon accumulation across a 32-year chronosequence of created coastal marshes. Ecosphere 10 (8): e02828. https://doi. org/10.1002/ecs2.2828.
Arriola, J. M., and J. E. Cable. 2017. Variations in carbon burial and sediment accretion along a tidal creek in a Florida salt marsh. Limnology and Oceanography 62 (S1). https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.10652.
Bartholdy, J. 2011. Salt marsh sedimentation. In R.A. Davis and R.W. Dalrymple (eds). Principles of Tidal Sedimentology, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0123-6_8.
Bartholdy, J., C. Christiansen, and H. Kunzendorf. 2004. Long term variations in backbarrier salt marsh deposition on the Skallingen Peninsula – the Danish Wadden Sea. Marine Geology 203 (1–2): 1–21. https:// doi.org/10.1016/S0025-3227(03)00337-2.
Berkowitz, J. F., N. R. Beane, N. R. Hurst, J. F. Jung, and K. D. Philley. 2022. A multi-decadal assessment of dredged sediment beneficial use projects part 1: ecological outcomes. WEDA Journal of Dredging 20 (1): 50-71.
Berkowitz J. F. and N. R. Hurst. 2022. New initiatives improve wetland restoration outcomes: Engineering with Nature and the use of Natural and Nature-Based Features. Wetland Science and Practice 40 (2):28-32. https://members.sws.org/wetland-science-and-practice.
Berkowitz, J. F., N. R. Hurst, N. R. Beane, K. D. Philley, and J. F. Jung. 2022. A multi-decadal assessment of dredged sediment beneficial use projects part 2: ecosystem functions, goods, and services. WEDA Journal of Dredging 20 (1): 72-89.
Bradley, P. M. and J. T. Morris. 1990. Physical characteristics of salt marsh sediments: ecological implications. Marine Ecology Progress Series 61. pp. 245-252.
Braswell, A. E., J. B. Heffernan, and M. L. Kirwan. 2020. How old are marshes on the East Coast, USA? Complex patterns in wetland age within and among regions. Geophysical Research Letters 47 (19): p.e2020GL089415.
Bridges, T. S., E. M. Bourne, J. K. King, H. K. Kuzmitski, E. B. Moynihan, and B. C. Suedel. 2018. Engineering With Nature: an atlas. ERDC/ EL SR-18-8. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. http://dx.doi. org/10.21079/11681/27929.
Bridges, T. S., E. M. Bourne, B. C. Suedel, E. B. Moynihan, and J. K. King. 2021. Engineering With Nature: an atlas, volume 2. ERDC SR-21-2. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. http://dx.doi.org/10.21079/11681/40124
Byrd, K. B., and M. Kelly. 2006. Salt marsh vegetation response to edaphic and topographic changes from upland sedimentation in a Pacific estuary. Wetlands 26 (3): 813–29. https://doi.org/10.1672/02775212(2006)26[813:SMVRTE]2.0.CO;2
Callaway, J. C., R. D. DeLaune, and W. H. Patrick Jr. 1997. Sediment accretion rates from four coastal wetlands along the Gulf of Mexico. Journal of Coastal Research 13 (1): 181–191. http://www.jstor.org/ stable/4298603.
Christiansen, T., P. L. Wiberg, and T. G. Milligan. 2000. Flow and sediment transport on a tidal salt marsh surface. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 50 (3): 315-331.
Cornwell, J. C., M. S. Owens, L. W. Staver, and J. C. Stevenson. 2020. Tidal marsh restoration at Poplar Island I: transformation of estuarine sediments into marsh soils. Wetlands 40, no. 6 (December 2020): 1673–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-020-01294-5.
Craft, C., S. Broome, and C. Campbell. 2002. Fifteen years of vegetation and soil development after brackishwater marsh creation. Restoration Ecology 10 (2): 248258.
Croft, A. L., L. A. Leonard, T. D. Alphin, L. B. Cahoon, and M. H. Posey. 2006. The effects of thin layer sand renourishment on tidal marsh processes: Masonboro Island, North Carolina.” Estuaries and Coasts 29 (5): 737–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02786525
Davis, J., C. Currin, and N. Mushegian. 2022. Effective use of thin layer sediment application in Spartina alterniflora marshes is guided by elevation-biomass relationship. Ecological Engineering 177: 106566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2022.106566.
De Groot, A. V., R. M. Veeneklaas, and J. P. Bakker. 2011. Sand in the salt marsh: contribution of highenergy conditions to salt-marsh accretion. Marine Geology 282 (3–4): 240–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. margeo.2011.03.002.
DeLaune, R. D., R. J. Buresh, and W. H. Patrick Jr. 1979. Relationship of soil properties to standing crop biomass of Spartina alterniflora in a Louisiana marsh. Estuar. Coast. Marine Sci. 8. pp. 477–487.
DeLaune, R. D., S. R. Pezeshki, J. H. Pardue, J. H. Whitcomb, and W. H. Patrick Jr. 1990. Some influences of sediment addition to a deteriorating salt marsh in the Mississippi River deltaic plain: a pilot study. Journal of Coastal Research 6 (1); 181–188. http://www.jstor.org/ stable/4297655
Edwards, K. R., and C. E. Proffitt. 2003. Comparison of wetland structural characteristics between created and natural salt marshes in southwest Louisiana, USA.” Wetlands 23 (2): 344–56. https://doi.org/10.1672/1020.
Fard, E., L. N. Brown, R. F. Ambrose, C. Whitcraft, K. M. Thorne, N. J. Kemnitz, D. E. Hammond, and G. M. MacDonald. 2023. Increasing salt marsh elevation using sediment augmentation: critical insights from surface sediments and sediment cores. Environmental Management 73 (3): 614–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00267-023-01897-8
Faulkner, S. P., and M. E. Poach. 1996. Functional comparison of created and natural wetlands in the Atchafalaya delta, Louisiana. Wetlands Research Program Technical Report WRP-RE-16, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ ADA317335.pdf.
Graham, S. A., and I. A. Mendelssohn. 2013. Functional assessment of differential sediment slurry applications in a deteriorating brackish marsh. Ecological Engineering 51. pp. 264–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ecoleng.2012.12.031
Koo, B. J., J. G. Je, and H. J. Woo. 2011. Experimental restoration of a salt marsh with some comments on ecological restoration of coastal vegetated ecosystems in Korea. Ocean Science Journal 46. pp. 47–53. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s12601-011-0004-0.
Landin, M. C., J. W. Webb, and P. L. Knutson. 1989. Long-term monitoring of eleven Corps of Engineers habitat development field sites built of dredged material, 1974–1987. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report D-89-1.
Lenz, N., S. Lindhorst, and H. W. Arz. 2023. Determination and quantification of sedimentary processes in salt marshes using end-member modelling of grain-size data.” The Depositional Record 9 (1): 4–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/dep2.213
Maglio, C., H. Das, and F. Fenner. 2020. Modal grain size evolution as it relates to the dredging and placement process – Galveston Island, Texas. Coastal Engineering Proceedings 7. https://doi.org/10.9753/icce. v36v.papers.7.
McAtee, K. J., K. M. Thorne, and C. R. Whitcraft. 2020. Short-term impact of sediment addition on plants and invertebrates in a southern California salt marsh. PLOS ONE 15 (11): e0240597. https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0240597.
McKown, J. G., G. E. Moore, D. M. Burdick, T. P. Ballestero, and N. A. White. 2023. Short-term recovery of pilot living shoreline projects for salt marsh habitat in New Hampshire.” Estuaries and Coasts 47 (2): 315–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12237-023-01284-w
Mudd, S. M., A. D'Alpaos, and J. T. Morris. 2010. How does vegetation affect sedimentation on tidal marshes? Investigating particle capture and hydrodynamic controls on biologically mediated sedimentation. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface 115 (F3).
PIANC (The World Association for Navigation Infrastructure). 2009. Dredged Material as a Resource: Options and Constraints. PIANC report 104-2009. http://www.pianc.org
Piercy, C., T. Welp, and R. Mohan. 2023. Guidelines for how to approach thin-layer placement projects. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
Poppe, K. L., and J. M. Rybczyk. 2021. Tidal marsh restoration enhances sediment accretion and carbon accumulation in the Stillaguamish River estuary, Washington. PLOS ONE 16 (9): e0257244. https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257244.
Renner, F. A., E. C. Farmer, M. Achek, B. Buchbinder, J. Bowen, D. Darnaud, S. Dwyer, A. Epstein, A. Johnson, P. Lopez-Rodriguez, L. Mahoney, M. Maliszka, A. Reardon,, K. Santella, and P. Barbera. 2020. Sediment grain size analysis in Long Island marsh cores. Stonybrook Publishing. https://www. stonybrook.edu/commcms/geosciences/about/_LIGPast-Conference-abstract-pdfs/2020-Abstracts/ Renner%20grain-size%20marsh.pdf.
Runion, K. D., B. M. Boyd, C. D. Piercy, and J. T. Morris. 2021. Beneficial use decision support for wetlands: case study for Mobile Bay, Alabama. Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering 147 (5): 05021010. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE) WW.1943-5460.0000650.
Santos, R., N. Duque-Núñez, C. B. De Los Santos, M. Martins, A. R. Carrasco, and C. Veiga-Pires. 2019. Superficial sedimentary stocks and sources of carbon and nitrogen in coastal vegetated assemblages along a flow gradient. Scientific Reports 9 (1): 610. https://doi. org/10.1038/s41598-018-37031-6
Schrift, A. M., I. A. Mendelssohn, and M. D. Materne. 2008. Salt marsh restoration with sediment-slurry amendments following a drought-induced large-scale disturbance. Wetlands 28 (4): 1071–85. https://doi. org/10.1672/07-78.1.
Shepard, C.C., C.M. Crain, and M.W. Beck. 2011. The protective role of coastal marshes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLOS ONE 6 (11): 27374.
Staver, L.W., J.T. Morris, J.C. Cornwell, J.C. Stevenson, W. Nardin, P. Hensel, M. S. Owens, and A. Schwark. 2024. Elevation changes in restored marshes at Poplar Island, Chesapeake Bay, MD: I. Trends and drivers of spatial variability. Estuaries and Coasts. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12237-023-01319-2.
Stumpf, R. P. 1983. The process of sedimentation on the surface of a salt marsh. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 17 (5): 495-508.
Van Coppenolle, R. and S. Temmerman. 2019. A global exploration of tidal wetland creation for nature-based flood risk mitigation in coastal cities. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 226. pp.106-262.
Wang, H., S. C. Piazza, L. A. Sharp, C. L. Stagg, B. R. Couvillion, G. D. Steyer, and T. E. McGinnis. 2017. Determining the spatial variability of wetland soil bulk density, organic matter, and the conversion factor between organic matter and organic carbon across coastal Louisiana, USA. Journal of Coastal Research 33 (3): 507-517.
Paper Citation Location (state/country)
Abbott et al., 2019 Louisiana
Arriola & Cable, 2017 Florida
Bartholdy et al., 2004 Denmark
Bartholdy, 2011 Denmark
Widdows, J., M. D. Brinsley, N. D. Pope, F. J. Staff, S. G. Bolam, and P. J. Somerfield. 2006. Changes in biota and sediment erodability following the placement of fine dredged material on upper intertidal shores of estuaries. Marine Ecology Progress Series 319. pp. 27–41. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps319027.
Yang, S. L., H. Li, T. Ysebaert, T. J. Bouma, W. X. Zhang, Y. Y. Wang, P. Li, M. Li, and P. X. Ding. 2008. Spatial and temporal variations in sediment grain size in tidal wetlands, Yangtze Delta: On the role of physical and biotic controls. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 77 (4) pp. 657–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ecss.2007.10.024
Yozzo, D. J., P. Wilber, and R. J. Will. 2004. Beneficial use of dredged material for habitat creation, enhancement, and restoration in New York–New Jersey Harbor. Journal of Environmental Management 73 (1): 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2004.05.008
Berkowitz et al., 2022 Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Washington, Texas
Byrd & Kelly, 2006 California
Callaway et al., 1997 Florida, Mississippi, Texas
Cornwell et al., 2020 Maryland
Croft et al., 2006 North Carolina
Davis et al., 2022 North Carolina
Marsh Focus Data Extracted
Natural and BU % fines
Natural % organic matter
Natural % fines, bulk density
Natural % fines, bulk density
Natural and BU bulk density
Natural and BU % fines
Natural bulk density, % organic matter
Natural and BU % fines
Natural and BU
Natural and BU % fines, % organic matter
DeLaune et al., 1990 Louisiana BU bulk density, % organic matter
Edwards & Profitt, 2003 Louisiana
Fard et al., 2023 California
Faulkner and Poach, 1996 Louisiana
Natural and BU bulk density, % organic matter
Natural and BU % fines, bulk density, % organic matter
Natural and BU % fines, bulk density
Graham and Mendelsssohn, 2013 Louisiana Natural and BU % fines, bulk density, % organic matter
Groot et al., 2011 Denmark, Netherlands
Natural
Koo et al., 2011 Korea BU
Lenz et al., 2022 Germany
McAtee et al., 2020 California
Natural and BU % fines
Natural and BU % fines
McKown et al., 2023 New Hampshire BU bulk density
Poppe & Rybczyk, 2021 Washington
Renner et al., 2020 New York
Runion et al., 2021 Alabama
Santos et al., 2019 Portugal
Schrift et al., 2008 Louisiana
Widdows et al., 2006 UK
Yang et al., 2008 China
Supplemental Table 1. Study locations and supporting information
Natural and BU % fines, bulk density, % organic matter
Natural and BU
Natural % organic matter
Natural % organic matter
Natural and BU % fines, bulk density, % organic matter
Natural and BU
Natural % fines
A Note on the Proper Application of AlphaAlpha Dipyridyl Test Strips for Hydric Soil Identification
Jacob F. Berkowitz1*
and
Richard W. Griffin
2
1US Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS, USA. Corresponding author contact: Jacob.F.Berkowitz@usace.army.mil
2Cooperative Agricultural Research Center, Prairie View A&M University, Prairie View, TX, USA
Introduction
The application of α,α’-dipyridyl dye (pronounced alpha, alpha di-peeri-dill) provides a reliable and defensible mechanism for documenting the presence of reduced iron in support of hydric soil identification and wetland delineation. The dye has proven particularly useful for identifying naturally problematic, altered, or disturbed hydric soils. The proper application of paper test strips embedded with α,α’-dipyridyl dye further promotes the use of this technique to improve wetland delineation and management. This note provides practitioner recommendations for applying, documenting, and interpreting α,α’-dipyridyl dye test strips.
In practice the α,α’-dipyridyl dye test strip is applied to naturally moist or wet soil and, if a colorimetric reaction occurs producing a red or pink color, the presence of reduced iron (and anaerobic conditions) is confirmed, and the definition of a hydric soil is met (Figure 1). Notably, application of the dye to a dry soil will not result in a color change and is not indicative of the presence or absence of hydric soils. When reduced
iron is present in soil solution, the α,α’-dipyridyl dye chemically binds with the soluble iron to produce the reddish or pink reaction via chemical complexation. For many years α,α’-dipyridyl dye was applied to the soil as a liquid. More recently, paper test strips impregnated with α,α’-dipyridyl became available, representing an affordable (~$0.25 USD per strip), easy approach to dye application that reduces barriers to practitioner use. These commercial products are most often advertised as ‘dipyridyl paper’ and are available from a variety of online chemical manufacturing and commercial retailers. The paper test strips were developed to test for the presence of Fe2+ in industrial manufacturing context but have proven effective in the wetland sciences.
Berkowitz et al. (2017) demonstrated that α,α’-dipyridyl dye liquid and paper test strip formulations delivered similar results, exhibited similar detection limits, and worked well across a broad range of soils. Wetland practitioners display a preference for the paper test strips over the liquid dye formulation because 1) no laboratory apparatus or preparation is required, 2) no special field equipment (e.g., spray bottle, dropper) is required, and 3) evidence suggests that the paper test strips may be more robust for typical field applications (Berkowitz et al. 2017).
Applying α,α’-dipyridyl Dye Test Strips
In order for α,α’-dipyridyl dye test strips to be used, the soil must be naturally saturated (wet or moist). Users should not apply the dye to dry soil or attempt to wet the soil prior to application. The α,α’-dipyridyl dye test strip should always be applied to the soil sample as soon as it is excavated from the ground. When doing so, a ped of soil should be opened by hand to expose its interior. Care must be taken to avoid placing the dye on surfaces that have come into contact with metal sampling tools including shovels, soil knives, augers, or other implements that may contain iron. Press the paper strip firmly onto the soil surface to ensure maximum contact with the soil solution. Enclosing the test strip between freshly exposed ped faces often provides an effective technique.
Notably, some of the commercially available α,α’dipyridyl dye impregnated test paper kits include instructions to “Apply a drop of weak acid (>pH 2) to the test paper. In the presence of Fe(II)-ions a red spot appears, or in the presence of small quantities of Fe(II)-ions a red ring.” However, application of
Figure 1. Example of α,α’-dipyridyl dye paper test strip. Note that the positive reaction is clearly visible both on the soil surface and on the paper test strip and that the reaction occurs across >60% of the soil layer. (Photo: USACE staff)
acidic compounds should be avoided during wetland evaluations, because the addition of acid has the potential to dissolve oxidized iron compounds in the soil and generate false positive results. Recall that the paper test strips were developed for industrial manufacturing applications unrelated to hydric soil evaluations, thus these instructions should be ignored when using α,α’-dipyridyl dye test strips in wetlands.
To illustrate the problem with applying acid solutions during α,α’-dipyridyl dye application, triplicate benchtop studies were performed using two soils (Table 1). The study utilized α,α’-dipyridyl dye test strips in the absence of acid and following the addition of 0.1N Hydrochloric (HCl) acid. Note that the addition of weak acid induced a false positive dye reaction in both soils. This observation occurs because acid addition decreases pH and increases iron solubility (Hem and Cropper 1962), allowing Fe2+ to enter soil solution and complex with the α,α’-dipyridyl dye to generate a false positive color response. Soil
without
Reaction following Acid Addition
Interpreting α,α’-dipyridyl Dye Test Strip Results
A positive reaction to α,α’-dipyridyl dye test strips is defined in the Hydric Soil Technical Standard as: “A positive reaction must occur within 60% or more of a specific soil layer in at least two of three soil samples. The positive dye reaction must occur within a 10-cmthick (4 in.) layer in the upper 30 cm (12 in.) for most soils, a 6.25-cm-thick (2.5 in.) layer within the upper 12.5 cm (5 in.) in sandy textured soils, or a 5-cm-thick (2 in.) layer within the upper 10 cm (4 in.) in soils that inundate by flooding or ponding” (Berkowitz et al. 2021).
Following application, careful evaluation of the α,α’dipyridyl dye test strip and the exposed soil is required. In soils subject to prolonged periods of saturation that contain ample sources of Fe and organic matter, the dye reaction is often nearly instantaneous and readily
observable upon test strip application. However, soils with low Fe content, low organic matter content, dark soils, or soils experiencing short wetland hydroperiods often display faint responses that require careful examination (Figure 2). Positive reactions to the dye are typically visible within thirty seconds to one minute of application but may take longer in soils with low amounts of ferrous iron, or when cold temperatures are present. Rabenhorst et al. (2021) reported that iron reduction rates may decrease when temperatures fall below ~10 °C (50 °F). This may delay positive α,α’dipyridyl dye reactions by a few minutes, however the authors of this note have observed positive dye reaction during cold temperatures, even in permafrost soils. Development of red or pink color over periods exceeding a few minutes (e.g., >5) should not be relied upon because the potential for photochemical complexation of the dye with organic compounds is possible, representing a potential false positive (Childs 1981). False positives also occur if soils or test strips are contaminated by shovels, augers, etc.
False negative reactions can also result in several scenarios, including application of the test strips to unsaturated soils, and soils saturated for an insufficient time period to reduce iron. Soils with low iron or organic matter content, including many sandy soils, can also fail to form a reaction. As a result, it is important for practitioners to recognize that a negative reaction to α,α’-dipyridyl dye does not indicate that hydric soils (or wetlands) are absent.
Previous studies identified the potential for α,α’dipyridyl dye to degrade with exposure to light or heat (Childs 1981). In response, users are encouraged to store α,α’-dipyridyl dye test strips under dark and
Table 1. Effect of acid addition on α,α’-dipyridyl dye response.
Figure 2. Examples of positive reactions to α,α’-dipyridyl dye exposed to both liquid (left side of peds) and paper test strip (right side of peds) formulations. Note the range of responses from clearly visible reactions in the left image to moderate responses in the center, and faint reaction in the right image. (Photo: USACE staff)
cool conditions to the extent possible. Operationally, practitioners report reliable results after keeping α,α’dipyridyl dye paper test strips in field vests exposed to hot conditions, even across multiple field seasons. If questions arise related to the reliability of available α,α’-dipyridyl dye test strips, applying the strips to soils you know have remained saturated for long periods is recommended, or in areas where iron sheens associated with reduced iron are observed. Solutions of ferrous ammonium sulfate also document the reliability of α,α’dipyridyl dye test strips (Berkowitz et al. 2017).
Summary
Accurate determinations of the presence of hydric soils and wetlands require a comprehensive assessment of site conditions, soil morphology, and other factors. However, the proper use of α,α’-dipyridyl dye test strips provides a valuable tool to improve the management of hydric soil and wetland resources and is recommended for a variety of applications including wetland delineation, restoration, research, and public education and outreach. Additionally, α,α’-dipyridyl dye test strips can inform the management of difficult wetland delineation scenarios, including interpreting areas subject to naturally problematic situations (e.g., red or black parent materials, low levels of organic matter, high pH, and high chroma soils) and anthropogenically disturbed areas (e.g., fill material). When used with care, α,α’-dipyridyl dye test strips provide a valuable tool to quickly identify the presence of reduced iron and promotes the adoption of the dye application to improve the management of wetland resources.
Acknowledgements
This note is the result of deliberations of the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils and reflects the input of several members who reviewed a draft version. Funding for this effort was provided by the USACE Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program under the supervision of Kyle Gordon, Simone Whitecloud, and Megan Spindler.
References
Berkowitz, J. F., C. M. VanZomeren, S. J. Currie, and L. Vasilas. 2017. Application of α, α'-dipyridyl dye for hydric soil identification. Soil Science Society of America Journal 81(3): 654-658.
Berkowitz J. F., M. J. Vepraskas, K. L. Vaughan, and L. M. Vasilas. 2021. Development and application of the Hydric Soil Technical Standard. Soil Science Society of America Journal 85(3): 469-487 doi.org/10.1002/ saj2.20202
Childs, C. W. 1981. Field tests for ferrous iron and ferric-organic complexes (on exchange sites or in water-soluble forms) in soils. Australian Journal of Soil Research 19: 175-180.
Hem, J. D. and W. H. Cropper. 1962. Chemistry of iron in natural water. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1459. United States Geological Survey. pp. 1-31.
Rabenhorst, M. C., P. J. Drohan, J. M. Galbraith, C. Moorberg, L. Spokas, M. H. Stolt, J. A. Thompson, J. Turk, B. L. Vasilas, and K. L. Vaughan. 2021. Manganese-coated IRIS to document reducing soil conditions. Soil Science Society of America Journal 85(6): 2201-2209.
A Symphony of Nature: Kansas Wetlands Education Center Unveils
Musical Pollinator Garden
Suzi Smith
Smith Percussion Play info@percussionplay.com
Introduction
The Kansas Wetlands Education Center (KWEC) has introduced an exciting new feature to its landscape—a musical pollinator garden aptly named Melody Marsh. This interactive installation, nestled within the Center’s existing pollinator garden, is designed to invite visitors of all ages to explore sound and nature in harmony. Opened in September 2024, Melody Marsh combines the beauty of local flora with the magic of outdoor musical instruments, all inspired by the wetland’s surrounding environment.
Located in central Kansas, the KWEC plays an instrumental role in creating awareness about wetland ecosystems and the critical role they serve. Situated near Cheyenne Bottoms and the Quivira National Wildlife Refuge, the KWEC is dedicated to educating the public on wetland biodiversity and the need for conservation and restoration. Curtis Wolf, the Center’s director, spearheaded this innovative project, envisioning it as both an educational tool and an interactive experience for visitors.
Bridging Sound and Nature
The concept of Melody Marsh was inspired by the KWEC’s need to rejuvenate its existing pollinator garden. Wolf and his team sought a way to infuse this natural space with an element of interactivity and creative engagement, all while staying true to the Center’s educational mission. The answer came in the form of musical instruments specially designed for outdoor spaces by Percussion Play, a company renowned for its durable, inclusive outdoor musical instruments that enhance public spaces around the world.
Instruments in Harmony with Nature
Melody Marsh features a selection of Percussion Play’s most iconic outdoor instruments. Each instrument in the garden has been carefully selected to reflect the
surrounding flora and fauna, providing a sense of place and echoing the natural beauty of the Kansas wetlands. At the heart of the installation are the Cattail Chimes—this striking instrument stands tall like its namesake plant (Figure 1). It produces a gentle, resonant sound when played.
Further enhancing the garden’s sense of place are the Sunflower Petal Drum and Harmony Flowers (Figure 2). The Sunflower Petal Drum captures the essence of Kansas’s famed sunflower fields, with each “petal” producing a unique note when struck. The Harmony Flowers, meanwhile, add a vibrant splash of color to the garden while inviting hands-on interaction with petal-like chimes that harmonize with each other. These instruments are designed not only to be accessible and enjoyable but also to reflect the pollinatorfriendly plants that attract butterflies, bees, and other crucial species to the area.
To round out the musical experience, visitors can also enjoy playing the Rainbow Bongos and the Cyclone, instruments that offer a lively and colorful addition to the garden (Figure 3). The Rainbow Bongos, with their bright colors and rhythmic sounds, are especially popular with younger visitors, providing an irresistible invitation to play. These instruments engage the senses and create an immersive experience that celebrates the beauty and biodiversity of the wetland.
For more information about the KWEC, visit www. wetlandscenter.fhsu.edu.
Figure 1. Cattail Chimes. (Courtesy of Kansas Wetlands Education Center)
Figure 2. Sunflower Petal Drum and Harmony Flowers. (Courtesy of Kansas Wetlands Education Center)
Figure 3. Rainbow Bongos.
(Courtesy of Kansas Wetlands Education Center)
A Quick Tour of Gulf State Wetlands
Ralph Tiner
Last fall, I spent a few days exploring wetlands from the Mississippi Delta to the Florida Panhandle. I was hoping to capture some photographs for a book I’m writing on southern marshes and swamps. My main interest was to see examples of southern pitcher plant bogs and wet pine savannas, but I also visited other types in the area. The pitcher plant bogs are curious wetlands, unlike the northern bogs I’m so familiar with. Although they possess similar carnivorous (insectivorous) plants like members of the genera Sarracenia and Drosera, their soils are not boglike in any respect, nor permanently saturated peats characteristic of northern bogs. Instead, they have seasonally saturated mineral soils with high water tables
likely within a foot of the surface for much of the time from January through March and, depending on their location, may be subject to shallow water ponding. A study by Jacob Berkowitz and others found the soils of the Gulf Coast pitcher plant bogs they studied even lacked “clear indicators of hydric soil morphology,” although the sites possessed a “prevalence of obligate wetland plant species and indicators of wetland hydrology.”1 While I didn’t examine their soils, I visited a number of Gulf Coast “bogs” and pine savannas, including those at the Mississippi Sandhill Crane National Wildlife Refuge (Jackson County, MS), The Nature Conservancy’s Splinter Hill bog (Baldwin County, AL), Grand Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve (Jackson County, MS), and The Nature Conservancy’s Abita Creek Flatwoods Preserve (St. Tammany Parish, LA). I also went to a number of other wetlands in the area during my tour. Here are some photographs from that trip.
1 Berkowitz, J., S. Page, and C. V. Noble. 2014. Potential disconnect between
indicators,
hydric soils in unique pitcher plant bog habitats of the southern Gulf Coast.
GULF COAST PITCHER PLANT BOG AND SELECT BOG AND WET SAVANNA PLANTS
Splinter Hill bog (Baldwin County, AL) with the unique leaves of Crimson Pitcherplant (Sarracenia leucophylla) visually dominant
Variableleaf Sunflower (Helianthus heterophyllus)
Orange Milkwort (Polygala lutea)
Fruit capsules of Meadowbeauty (possibly Rhexia mariana)
Low Pinebarren Milkwort (Polygala ramosa)
Savannah Meadowbeauty (Rhexia alifanus)
Pink Sundew (Drosera capillaris)
Yellow Trumpets (Sarracenia alata)
Starrush Whitetop (Rhynchospora colorata)
The red flower of Crimson Pitcherplant (Sarracenia leucophylla) with its white leaf phase
Crimson Pitcherplant (Sarracenia leucophylla) – red leaf phase
LOUISIANA – MISSISSIPPI DELTA COASTAL WETLANDS AND SELECT PLANTS
Stoke’s Aster (Stokesia laevis)
Clustered Bushmint (Hystis alata)
Cypress swamp and freshwater marsh at Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve (Jefferson Parish, LA)
Interior of Cypress Swamp at Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve
Pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata)
Broadleaf Arrowhead (Sagittaria latifolia)
TIDAL SWAMP ALONG LOUISIANA’S LAKE PONCHARTRAIN
Hairypod Cowpea (Vigna luteola)
Trumpet Creeper (Campsis radicans)
Tidal mixed cypress-hardwood swamp at Joyce Wildlife Management Area (Tangipahoa Parish, LA)
Bald Cypress (Taxodium distichum) pneumatophores (“knees”)
Bald Cypress fruits
Smooth Beggartick (Bidens laevis)
Climbing Hempweed (Mikania scandens)
Anglestem Primrose-willow (Ludwigia leptocarpa)
Red Maple (Acer rubrum)
Listed below are some links to some random news articles that may be of interest. Links from past issues can be accessed on the SWS website news page. This section includes links to mostly newspaper articles that may be of interest. Members are encouraged to send links to articles about wetlands in their local area. Please send the links to WSP Editor at ralphtiner83@gmail.com and reference “Wetlands in the News” in the subject box. Thanks for your cooperation.
For another source on the latest news about wetlands and related topics, readers are referred to the National Association of Wetland Managers website (formerly the Association of State Wetland Managers). Their “Wetland News Digest” includes links to government agency public notices and newspaper articles that should be of interest, especially dealing with wetland regulations, court cases, management, and threats: https://www.nawm.org/ publications/wetland-news-digest.
• Sea turtles make a comeback as conservation efforts pay off
• Constructed wetlands’ carbon capture declines with age, study finds
• Scientists Discover Hidden “Highways” That Connect Brazil’s Rainforests
• Wetlands sustain life and our collective future - Wetlands International
• The Interconnected World of Wetlands: How Wetlands Support the Web of Life - Wetlands International
• Water lettuce, native but a nuisance, highlights herbicide tensions
• Wetlands: These ‘in-between’ ecosystems matter more than you might think - CIFOR-ICRAF Forests News
• How to tell if mangrove restoration is working? Listen to the birds
• Researchers stunned by thriving population discovered in the heart of bustling city: ‘Vital to the city’s ... balance’
• Residents sound the alarm as drought threatens water supply for third year in a row: ‘There’s a feeling of almost helplessness’
• Lost Amazon Civilization Built a Revolutionary Farming System – and Archaeologists Have Just Uncovered It
• The 6th great mass extinction: How to protect biodiversity in Wisconsin | Racine County Eye
• Mobile utility permanently closes Big Creek Lake over invasive species concerns - al.com.
• What Snakes Live In The Florida Everglades? | IFLScience
• A Network of Dried Lakes | earthobservatory.nasa.gov
• Colorful Tampa Bay | earthobservatory.nasa.gov
• Legal Agreement Spurs Deadline for U.S. Finding on Hippo Protections - Center for Biological Diversity
• Bird watchers are flocking to Kansas for rare spotting of Ross’s gull
• SCDNR deploys reef balls to improve fish habitat in Lake Murray | wltx.com
• Why are so many dead birds washing up on Lake Michigan’s shore? – NBC Chicago
• Loon-like waterfowl from dinosaur-era Antarctica is oldest ‘modern’ bird
• Missing beavers search continues
• Clean air policies unintentionally drive up wetland methane emissions, study finds
• Deja vu all over again: Tracked eastern willet shot on Guadeloupe
• Chesapeake Bay ospreys continue to experience poor breeding performance due to starvation
• Indonesia targets 2.3m hectares of protected forests for food & biofuel crop production.
• How Everglades National Park came to preserve the great ‘River of Grass’
• Green Bay to restore marsh habitat with EPA grants through DNR.
• A species once on the brink of extinction is thriving once again: ‘They’ve bounced back fairly spectacularly’
• Birdwatches, hunters flock to Arizona for Sandhill crane migration | 12news.com.
• Government Scraps Construction Project After Beavers Finish The Job Themselves - The Dodo.
• Report reveals staggering levels of wildlife trafficking in Hispanic America.
• Endangered Florida Panther Mom Gives Cubs Cutest Growls to Follow Her Across Flooded Creek
• ‘Never in our wildest dreams’: Mass. environmental projects stall amid federal funding confusion | WBUR News
• 20 years on, biodiversity struggles to take root in restored wetlands across Denmark
• These eBird Checklists Document Some of the Last Sightings of Extinct U.S. Species | Audubon
• Yaak Valley Landowner Places Conservation Easement on Homestead in Critical Grizzly Habitat - Flathead Beacon
• Consumption-driven deforestation threatens 7,600 forestdependent species worldwide.
• Clean air policies unintentionally drive up wetland methane emissions, study finds.
• Working Lives: The Herring Fisheries at Plymouth 1939 | Coastal Review.
• New federal water act addresses climate extremes and flooding on the Mississippi River, affects to St. Louis
• Delaware’s Under-The-Radar Island Brimming With Unique Birds Is An Uncrowded Beachy Paradise
• Urban ponds as oases of biodiversity.
• There are Less Than 1,000 of These Birds Left in the Wild.
• The World’s Largest Lithium Deposit Could Transform Energy – But It Might Destroy Ecosystems.
• Randy Borman (1955-2025): An unlikely guardian of the Amazon rainforest.
• How Science Is Helping Florida Win the War Against Invasive Pythons.
• Land Trust Secures Key Wetland Habitat on Ahnapee River - Door County Pulse
• Klamath Tribes push to restore wetlands and wocus in Southern Oregon - OPB
• Does Rocky Mountain National Park have too many moose?
• What happens if Istanbul’s water supplies run dry?
• This 300-acre former farm has undergone a transformation in response to ‘catastrophic’ fears: ‘We need to take what action we can’
• Officials share remarkable before-and-after images of lake after years of drought: ‘Maybe there is some hope now’
• Colorado biologists caught 3 rare Colorado pikeminnows. What does that mean for the future of this critically endangered fish? | SteamboatToday.com
• Scientists issue warning over bizarre phenomenon spotted in Alaskan rivers: ‘Have to be stained a lot...’
• Dormant seeds from Ice Age pond project germinate
• What Did Scientists Learn After Thousands of Penguins Were Slaughtered by Mountain Lions? | Smithsonian
• Thousands gather at the 28th annual Whooping Crane Festival in Port Aransas | kiiitv.com
• Louisiana entrepreneur looks to the Philippines for innovative solution to state’s massive problem: ‘A very serious issue’
• Where’s The Catch? This Mexican Fishing Town Has Run Out Of Fish - Worldcrunch
• The Magic Of Florida Manatees.
• Man hit with $40,000 fine for illegal act with ‘centuries old’ trees on Aussie waterway
• Great Peninsula Conservancy purchases historic Central Kitsap farm
• A Warming Climate Is Shifting Eurasian Drought Conditions
• US Fish and Wildlife is begging you to eat more invasive marsh rodents | Popular Science
• Scientists track an unexpected and aggressive threat to native wildlife: ‘Detecting them early will be key’
• Alaska’s Lakes and Ponds Reveal Effects of Permafrost Thaw - Eos
• Nature: Lake Erie is Ohio’s home for waterfowl.
• Extreme Heat and Rain Turned These Arctic Lakes Brown
• A Proliferation of Lakes on the Tibetan Plateau
• Study unearths sophisticated year-round corn-growing system in ancient Bolivian Amazon
• Officials: 90 dead birds removed from pond, deaths possibly caused by bird flu
• Every Winter, Over Five Hundred Endangered Whooping Cranes Settle Down in Coastal Texas – Garden & Gun.
• Great Barrier Reef Corals Hit Hard by Marine Heat Wave - Eos.
• Saltwater crocodiles’ feral pig diet may be changing NT waterways: study - ABC News.
• Northern Territory’s growing saltwater crocodile population gorging on nine times more prey than 50 years ago | Crocodiles | The Guardian.
• Crews use new tool to help fight nutria in California’s Delta.
• EPA likely to move to further limit federal protections for wetlands
• Florida Everglades National Park Among Hardest Hit By DOGE Cuts | Miami New Times.
• Ducks were once a conservation bright spot. Now they’re declining in the US, new report shows - ABC News.
• Lake Chad isn’t shrinking — but climate change is causing other problems.
• In a seasonally flooded Amazon forest, jaguars take to the trees.
• Zeldin: Trump administration to rewrite WOTUS rule | TheFencePost.com.
• Louisiana’s Wetlands Store Massive Amounts of Carbon. But When Destroyed, They Release It - Eos.
• EPA could eliminate science research arm
• Animals succeed in solving major problem where scientists had failed: ‘It’s just incredible’
• California bill would restore water protections for wetlands - Los Angeles Times
• Bill to open more Tennessee wetlands to development advances with legislative amendment | WPLN News
• ‘Puddles and ditches’: California considers protecting wetlands from Trump order - Stocktonia News
• CLPOA To Challenge Wetlands Regulations | News, Sports, Jobs - Post Journal.
• Mitchell’s newly created wetland area officially named Firesteel Nature Preserve - Mitchell Republic | News, weather, sports from Mitchell South Dakota
• Conservation news on Wetlands.
• Why are the British flooding parts of their coast?
• Turkey Point: A fight is brewing over freshwater pollution | WLRN
• Interior secretary announces plans to advance new Arctic National Wildlife Refuge oil leasing • Alaska Beacon
• Ducks were once a conservation bright spot. Now they’re declining in the US, new report shows - ABC News
• World Water Day: 3 stories of resistance and restoration from around the globe
• Baby Animals Are ‘Raining’ On This Town — So People Made A Plan To Help - The Dodo
• The First Birds of Spring: Which Species Arrive First and Why - BirdWatching
• Predator once on brink of extinction makes remarkable comeback in unlikely location: ‘Amazing things happen’
• The ecological benefits of more room for rivers | Nature Water
• Wetlands: the foundation of water security - Wetlands International
Please help us add new books and government wetland reports to this listing. If your agency, organization, or institution has published new information on wetlands, please send the information to the Editor of Wetland Science and Practice. Your cooperation is appreciated.
Recent Books of Interest
Books from two of our members—Bill Mitsch and Tatiana Lobato-de Magalhães—have been recently published. Bill’s book is an autobiography, Memoirs of an Environmental Science Professor, published by CRC Press and Tatiana’s book on Mexican aquatic plants used in remediation is for Spanish readers, Plantas Acuáticas Mexicanas para la Remediación: Aplicaciones en la Sociedad e Industria Minera, published by Fondo Editorial UAQ (Universidad Autónoma de Querétaro).
Everyone knows Professor Mitsch from his classic textbook, Wetlands, which has been used to educate thousands. Bill’s latest book, Memoirs of an Environmental Science Professor, is quite different from the other books he has written as it provides insight into the issues he faced while making enormous contributions to wetland science, education, and water resource conservation and management. Perhaps the theme of his book is how “persistence to do the right thing” guided his lifetime of work. The 130-page book contains chapters that highlight aspects of his illustrious career spanning more than 50 years—educating future wetland scientists and university professors, conducting vital wetland and ecological engineering research, creating and restoring wetlands, promoting wetland conservation, and providing environmental solutions to water resource management issues. Chapters address topics such as the creation of an interdisciplinary environmental science program at Ohio State, restoration of the Kankakee wetlands of Indiana and Illinois, collaborative ecological engineering and water management in China, his efforts to protect US wetlands from exploitation, floodplain management in Ohio and southern Illinois, creation of the Olentangy River Wetland Research Park, and restoration of the Everglades. While we have learned much wetland science from Professor Mitsch, this book should provide readers with inspiration on how to deal with adversity and may help them navigate the future. The
book is available from Routledge Publishers (https:// www.routledge.com/Memoirs-of-an-EnvironmentalScience-Professor/Mitsch/p/book/9781032449357) and can also be found on Amazon.
Tatiana’s book (co-authored with Melanie BecerrilBartolo and Paula Montoya-Lopera; illustrated by Lilian Tendilla Núñez), Plantas Acuáticas Mexicanas para la Remediación: Aplicaciones en la Sociedad e Industria Minera, is the first volume of a collection of books, Colección Humedales, dedicated to exploring the ecological, scientific, and social importance of wetlands. Written for Spanish readers, this collection aims to bring attention to wetlands and their role in preserving biodiversity, supporting local communities, and addressing environmental challenges.
This first volume provides a comprehensive study of aquatic plants native and introduced to Mexico and their application in environmental remediation. The book examines how wetland plants can be utilized to mitigate the environmental impact of industrial activities (e.g., mining) and contribute to sustainable eco-friendly practices. The book presents the distribution of both native and introduced species in the country including 43 families, 87 genera, and 171 species of Mexican aquatic macrophytes and addresses their potential for remediation and provides information covering a variety of topics from karyotype to phytotechnologies with aquatic plants along with discussion of the biology and ecology of these species. The book also includes illustrations of 30 key species. This book is designed for environmentalists, academics, and professionals in the mining and ecological sectors. It offers valuable insights into practical solutions for pressing environmental issues. The e-version of the book is available free at https://fondoeditorial.uaq.mx/plantas-acuaticasmexicanas-para-la-remediacion-tskb0.html. Tatiana
says, “Stay tuned for more volumes from Colección Humedales that will continue to explore innovative and interdisciplinary approaches to understanding and preserving the world’s wetlands.”
BOOKS
• Memoirs of an Environmental Science Professor
• Plantas Acuáticas Mexicanas para la Remediación: Aplicaciones en la Sociedad e Industria Minera
• The Atchafalaya River Basin: History and Ecology of an American Wetland
• Bayou-Diversity: Nature and People in the Louisiana Bayou Country
• Bayou D’Arbonne Swamp: A Naturalist’s Memoir of Place
• Black Swan Lake – Life of a Wetland
• Coastal Wetlands of the World: Geology, Ecology, Distribution and Applications
• Constructed Wetlands and Sustainable Development
• Creating and Restoring Wetlands: From Theory to Practice
• Eager: The Surprising Secret Life of Beavers and Why They Matter
• Florida’s Wetlands
• History of Wetland Science: A Perspective from Wetland Leaders
• An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America (5th Edition)
• Mid-Atlantic Freshwater Wetlands: Science, Management, Policy, and Practice
• Remote Sensing of Wetlands: Applications and Advances
• Salt Marsh Secrets. Who uncovered them and how?
• Sedges of Maine
• Sedges and Rushes of Minnesota
• Tidal Wetlands Primer: An Introduction to their Ecology, Natural History, Status and Conservation
• Tussock Sedge: A Wetland Superplant
• Wading Right In: Discovering the Nature of Wetlands
• Waubesa Wetlands: New Look at an Old Gem
• Wetland Ecosystems
• Wetland Indicators – A Guide to Wetland Formation, Identification, Delineation, Classification, and Mapping
• Wetland Landscape Characterization: Practical Tools, Methods, and Approaches for Landscape Ecology
• Wetlands (5th Edition)
• Wetland Restoration: A Handbook for New Zealand Freshwater Systems
• Wetland Soils: Genesis, Hydrology, Landscapes, and Classification
• Wetland & Stream Rapid Assessments: Development, Validation, and Application
• Wetland Techniques (3 volumes)
• Wildflowers and Other Plants of Iowa Wetlands
About Wetland Science & Practice (WSP)
Wetland Science & Practice (WSP) is the SWS quarterly publication aimed at providing information on select SWS activities (technical committee summaries, chapter workshop overview/abstracts, and SWS-funded student activities), articles on ongoing or recently completed wetland research, restoration, or management projects, freelance articles on the general ecology and natural history of wetlands, and highlights of current events. The July issue is typically dedicated to publishing the proceedings of our annual conference. WSP also serves as an outlet for commentaries, perspectives, and opinions on important developments in wetland science, theory, management and policy. Both invited and unsolicited manuscripts are reviewed by the WSP editor for suitability for publication. When deemed necessary or upon request, some articles are subject to scientific peer review. Student papers are welcomed. Please see publication guidelines herein. Electronic access to WSP is included in your SWS membership. All issues published, except the current issue, are available via the internet to the general public. The current issue is only available to SWS members; it will be available to the public four months after its publication when the next issue is released (e.g., the January 2025 issue will be an open access issue in April 2025). WSP is an excellent choice to convey the results of your projects or interest in wetlands to others. Also note that WSP will publish advertisements; contact info@sws.org for details.
HOW YOU CAN HELP
If you read something you like in WSP, or that you think someone else would find interesting, be sure to share. Share links to your Facebook, X, Instagram, and LinkedIn accounts. Make sure that all your SWS colleagues are checking out our recent issues, and help spread the word about SWS to non-members! Questions? Contact editor Ralph Tiner, PWS Emeritus (ralphtiner83@gmail.com).
WSP Manuscript – General Guidelines
AUTHOR
ETHICS AND DECLARATION:
The work is original and has not been published elsewhere. Data reported in submission must be author’s own and/or data that the author has permission to use. Inclusion of results from previously published studies must be appropriately credited. It is vital that all contributing authors review the initial submission and subsequent versions. Upon submission of the final manuscript, the lead author must submit a declaration stating that all contributing authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript. Failure to do this will lead to rejection of the manuscript.
LENGTH:
Approximately 5,000 words; can be longer if necessary.
STYLE:
See existing articles from 2014 to more recent years available online at: https://members.sws.org/wetland-science-and-practice. Standard format/outline for articles: Title, authors (include
affiliations and correspondence author email in footnotes), followed by Abstract, then Text (e.g., Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion), and ending with References. All articles must have an abstract. Keywords are optional.
TEXT:
Word document, 12 font, Times New Roman, single-spaced; keep tables and figures separate, although captions can be included in text. For reference citations in text use this format: (Smith 2016; Jones and Whithead 2014; Peterson et al. 2010). Do not perform formatting (e.g., capitalization of headings and subheadings). For example, do not indent paragraphs… just separate paragraphs by lines.
FIGURES:
Please include color images and photos of subject wetland(s) as WSP is a full-color e-publication. Image size should be less than 1MB; 500KB may work best for this e-publication. Figures should be original (not published elsewhere) or in the public domain. If the figure was published elsewhere (copyrighted), it is the responsibility of the author to secure permission for use. Be sure to provide proper credit in the caption.
Reference Citation Examples:
• Clements, F.E. 1916. Plant Succession: An Analysis of the Development of Vegetation. Carnegie Institution of Washington. Washington D.C. Publication 242.
• Colburn, E.A. 2004. Vernal Pools: Natural History and Conservation. McDonald & Woodward Publishing Company, Blacksburg, VA.
• Cole, C.A. and R.P. Brooks. 2000. Patterns of wetland hydrology in the Ridge and Valley Province, Pennsylvania, USA. Wetlands 20: 438-447. https://doi.org/10.1672/02775212(2000)020<0438:POWHIT>2.0.CO;2
• Cook, E.R., R. Seager, M.A. Cane, and D.W. Stahle. 2007. North American drought: reconstructions, causes, and consequences. Earth-Science Reviews 81: 93-134.
• Cooper, D.J. and D.M. Merritt. 2012. Assessing the water needs of riparian and wetland vegetation in the western United States. U.S.D.A., Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ft. Collins, CO. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRSGTR-282.
• van der Valk, A. 2023. The beginnings of wetland science in Britain: Agnes Arber and William H. Pearsall. Wetland Science & Practice 41(1): 10-18. https://doi.org/10.1672/ ucrt083-01
Please be sure to add the DOI link to citations where possible. If you have questions, please contact the editor, Ralph Tiner, at ralphtiner83@gmail.com.
2025 Advertising Prospectus
Monthly Newsletter
The SWS monthly newsletter is sent to approximately 3,000 members around the world, and enjoys an open rate between 40-50%, which is well above industry average. Place your organization in front of leading environmental scientists monthly with an ad that links to your website.
Price (per ad)
• Ad Format: .jpeg or .png
• Ad Due Date: Artwork and link URL due on the first of the month in which the ad is to run.
• Distribution Date: On or around the 15th of each month
The SWS website boasts nearly 200 daily visitors annually and is a user-friendly, engaging, and SEO optimized format. By purchasing ad space on sws.org, you will increase the visibility of your product or service directly to our audience of wetland professionals, academics, and other science-based fields that will benefit the most from what your company has to offer.
Quarter 1 Quarter 2
Quarter 3
Quarter 4
Ad Due Date January 2 March 27 June 24 Sept 25 Ad Begins January 9
• Ad Due Date: Artwork and link URL due one week prior to beginning run date
• Ad Begin Date: Ad uploaded the first day of the first month of the quarter
WSP is the SWS quarterly publication aimed at providing information on select SWS activities (technical committee summaries, chapter and section workshop overview/abstracts, and SWS-funded student activities); brief summary articles on current or recently completed wetland research, restoration, or management projects; information on the general ecology and natural history of wetlands; and highlights of current events. It is distributed digitally, with over 2,000 impressions and more than 300 reads in the first six months after release.
• Ad Format: Press quality .pdf with images rendered at 300 or higher dpi
• Ad Due Date: Artwork is due on the 15th of the month prior to the month of publication
• Distribution Date: WSP is published on or around the middle of the month of publication
Coastal Wetlands of the Wilderness Lakes System, South Africa, Photographed by Douglas Macfarlane.
