April 2022 Wetland Science & Practice

&

Wetland Science Practice published by the Society of Wetland Scientists

Vol. 40, No. 2 April 2022 ISSN: 1943-6254

FROM XXXXXXTHE EDITOR’S DESK Spring has just arrived for us New Englanders and for our more southern kin, has been underway for a few weeks. Sugar maples are tapped and silver maples are blooming.

Just heard the wood frogs on my vernal pools (March 25). About a week ago, I saw some frogs crossing a road in the valley below on a rainy night so I knew it wouldn’t be long until I heard their ducklike quacks in my backwoods.

Migratory waterfowl have returned to local ponds and lakes.

This issue provides plenty Ralph Tiner of information for readers. First WSP Editor we have the proceedings of our Oceania Chapter’s virtual Fire in Wetlands Forum - 14 abstracts of the presentations delivered on September 8-9, 2021. In addition, this issue contains five articles starting with Arnold van der Valk’s latest contribution on scientists whose works form the foundation of wetland science – this one on W.T. Penfound and associates. It is followed by a summary of a symposium Methods for Sharing Wetland Knowledge and Exploring Future Needs and Solutions that was held at the INTECOL International Wetland Conference in Christchurch, New Zealand in October 2021. This summary includes an overview of a few key topics covered during the presentations – 1) engaging local people in conservation initiatives, 2) bringing traditional knowledge into contemporary conservation in China, 3) teacher training and research in the Mekong Region of SE Asia, and 4) using indigenous and traditional knowledge as the foundation for wise use of wetlands. The remaining three articles deal with: 1) the Corps’ initiatives to use nature-based approaches for wetland restoration, 2) the results of a small-scale salt marsh restoration effort in southern New England, and 3) a profile of Volo Bog, a designated SWS Wetland of Distinction in Illinois. This issue also includes a Notes from the Field contribution from Jim Getter who has provided images of wetlands and wildlife taken at a local park in Maryland. Thanks to all our contributors!

It’s also time to register for our annual meeting in Grand Rapids, Michigan…hope to see you there.

CONTENTS Vol. 40, No. 2 April 2022 ISSN: 1943-6254 119 / President's Address 120 / Webinars 121 / JASM Updates 121 / Wetland Practice 122 / Proceedings of the Fire in Wetlands Forum - A Burning Success ARTICLES 128 / Naturalistic Control: W. T. Penfound, T. F. Hall, and A. D. Hess and Malaria Control in Tennessee Valley Authority Reservoirs Arnold G. van der Valk 135 / Exploring Methods for Sharing Wetland Knowledge and Identifying Future Needs and Solutions Swapan Paul and others 144 / New Initiatives Improve Wetland Restoration Outcomes: Engineering with Nature and the Use of Natural and Nature-Based Features Jacob F. Berkowitz and Nia R. Hurst 149 / Restoring Tidal Flow to a New England Salt Marsh Ralph W. Tiner and Michael O’Reilly 157 / Volo Bog State Natural Area (Ingleside, Illinois) – Exemplar of Bog Succession Julie Nieset 163 / Notes from the Field 165 / Wetlands in the News 166 / Wetlands Bookshelf 167 / About WSP/Submission Guidelines 168 / Sponsorship Prospectus COVER PHOTO: Cover Photo: Tricolored Heron (Egretta tricolor) searching for food in Florida pond.

(Photo by Ralph Tiner)

SOCIETY OF WETLAND SCIENTISTS 7918 Jones Branch Dr #300, McLean, VA 22102 (703) 506-3260 www.sws.org Social icon

Rounded square Only use blue and/or white.

For more details check out our Brand Guidelines.

Meanwhile, Happy Swamping! n Note to Readers: All State-of-the-Science reports are peer reviewed, with anonymity to reviewers.

118 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS Fellow Wetlanders, As I write I’m buoyed by the spring flowers and the distinct odor made by warming wetland mud in my region of the Northern Hemisphere. But I’m also saddened and worried about the tragedy befalling the people of Ukraine. Although currently not the most pressing concern given the human suffering, I also am Gregory B. Noe, Ph.D. concerned for the health of the Florence Bascom wetlands of Ukraine. Tragically, Geoscience Center, human conflict is all too comU.S. Geological Survey mon around the world and not SWS President restricted to one place. We’ve seen this before, and I expect we’ll see it again. How can SWS respond? We’re discussing what is appropriate given our mission, strategic plan, and interests of our membership. One way the Executive Board believes that SWS can respond is through what we do best: identifying and communicating best practices in wetland science and practice.

To that end, we will be encouraging that our Sections and Committees and Chapters hold meetings and symposia dedicated to synthesizing and communicating the science and practice of how to heal wetlands that are harmed by human conflicts around the world. It is perhaps a small contribution but we think valuable.

I’m proud to let you know that the Board of Directors has approved new SWS Awards. These fill critical gaps in our portfolio of awards and address our Strategic Plan.

These new awards are: 1) the Wetland Practitioner Award; 2) the Human Diversity Award; and 3) the SWaMMP Champion Award. These new awards will first be offered in 2023, joining the recently created Outstanding Educator Award as well as our other prestigious awards to recognize the best in our Society.

I’m very excited to be attending the 2022 Joint Aquatic Sciences Meeting (JASM) in May. In addition to serving as SWS’ Annual Meeting this year, the scientific content should be fabulous as we gain exposure to related disciplines from partner aquatic societies. Of course, we’re also holding most of the key events that occur at our typical annual meetings – I look forward to seeing you there!

Afterwards, let us know your thoughts on how the hybrid meeting format went, as that feedback will help us plan future styles of SWS meetings.

As I approach the end of my year as President of SWS, I would like to take the opportunity to thank all of you who volunteer to serve the Society. It has been tremendously rewarding to work with you (continued on page 120)

&

Wetland Science Practice PRESIDENT / Gregory Noe, Ph.D. PRESIDENT-ELECT / William Kleindl, Ph.D. IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT / Loretta Battaglia, Ph.D. SECRETARY GENERAL / Leandra Cleveland, PWS TREASURER / Lori Sutter, Ph.D. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR / Erin Berggren, CAE DIGITAL MARKETING SPECIALIST / Moriah Meeks WETLAND SCIENCE & PRACTICE EDITOR / Ralph Tiner, PWS Emeritus CHAPTERS ASIA / Wei-Ta Fang, Ph.D. CANADA / Susan Glasauer, Ph.D. CENTRAL / Tim Fobes, PWS CHINA / Xianguo Lyu EUROPE / Matthew Simpson, PWS INTERNATIONAL / Ian Bredlin, Msc; Pr.Sci.Nat and Tatiana Lobato de Magalhães, Ph.D., PWS MID-ATLANTIC / Jason Traband, PWS NEW ENGLAND / Dwight Dunk, PWS NORTH CENTRAL / Casey Judge, WPIT OCEANIA / Phil Papas PACIFIC NORTHWEST / Josh Wozniak, PWS ROCKY MOUNTAIN / Rebecca Pierce SOUTH ATLANTIC / Brian Benscoter, Ph.D. SOUTH CENTRAL / Jodie Murray Burns, PWS, MEd, MS WESTERN / Richard Beck, PWS, CPESC, CEP SECTIONS BIOGEOCHEMISTRY / Beth Lawrence, Ph.D. EDUCATION / Darold Batzer, Ph.D. GLOBAL CHANGE ECOLOGY / Wei Wu, Ph.D. PEATLANDS / Bin Xu, Ph.D. PUBLIC POLICY AND REGULATION / John Lowenthal, PWS RAMSAR / Nicholas Davidson, Ph.D. STUDENT / Steffanie Munguia WETLAND RESTORATION / Andy Herb WILDLIFE / Andy Nyman, Ph.D. WOMEN IN WETLANDS / Jennifer Karberg, Ph.D. COMMITTEES AWARDS / Siobhan Fennessy, Ph.D. EDUCATION AND OUTREACH / Jeffrey Matthews, Ph.D. HUMAN DIVERSITY / Kwanza Johnson and Jacoby Carter, Ph.D. MEETINGS / Yvonne Vallette, PWS MEMBERSHIP / Leandra Cleveland, PWS PUBLICATIONS / Keith Edwards WAYS & MEANS / Lori Sutter, Ph.D. WETLANDS OF DISTINCTION / Roy Messaros, Ph.D. Bill Morgante, Steffanie Munguia and Jason Smith, PWS REPRESENTATIVES PCP / Scott Jecker, PWS WETLANDS / Marinus Otte, Ph.D. WETLAND SCIENCE & PRACTICE / Ralph Tiner, PWS Emeritus ASWM / Jill Aspinwall AIBS / Dennis Whigham, Ph.D. SOCIETY OF WETLAND SCIENTISTS 7918 Jones Branch Dr #300, McLean, VA 22102 (703) 506-3260 www.sws.org

SOCIETY WETLAND SCIENTISTS

ENGLISH:

SPANISH:

April 21 | 1:00 PM ET

June 22 | 1:00 PM ET

Constructed wetlands for (waste)water treatment: types and use for various wastewaters Jan Vymazal

Wetland Connectivity & Podcast series HumMentor Mentees (Flor, Cynthia, Adad)

June 16 | 1:00 PM ET

Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning of coral reefs: a holistic study for their conservation from microorganisms to ecosystem Dr. Fabián Alejandro Rodríguez Zaragoza

American Burying Beetles Dr. Wyatt Hoback July 21 | 1:00 PM ET

Karst wetlands in the Yucatan Peninsula Eduardo Cejudo August 18 | 1:00 PM ET

Ramsar Sites in Cameroon Kongnso Edith

September 21 | 1:00 PM ET

December 12 | 1:00 PM ET

The Central American Waterbird Count: the first ten years / El Censo Centroamericano de Aves Acuáticas: los primeros diez años Dr. John van Dort and Arne Lesterhuis President's address continued:

September 15 | 1:00 PM ET

WOW! The Wonders of Wetlands, K-12 Wetland Curriculum John Etgen & Julia Beck October 20 | 1:00 PM ET

An Overview of the History of Wetland Management Practices Dr. Andy Nyman November 17 | 1:00 PM ET

Student Section Juried Student Presentation December 15 | 1:00 PM ET

Retrospective of Research Lifetime Achievement Recipient

all to keep SWS vibrant, sustaining, and responsive.

For those of you who wonder if it is worth it, wonder if the time commitment is too much, wonder if this is the right organization to invest your time towards: I unequivocally say “yes!”. You’ll be joining a group of dedicated volunteers that are supported by our SWS Business Office to make a difference. It is also an effective way to grow your professional network as you advance your career. So please take the plunge and become more active.

With appreciation, Greg Noe SWS President (2021-2022); gnoe@usgs.gov

THANK YOU TO OUR 2022 WEBINAR SERIES SPONSORS

120 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

JASM UPDATES

Register for JASM 2022!

JASM Registration Gives you Access to: •

Register for the Joint Aquatic Sciences Meeting (JASM) at the DeVos Place Convention Center in Grand Rapids, Michigan from May 15-20, 2022.

Make sure to indicate that you are an SWS member when registering!

•

Child care will be provided by Plus One Childcare. The fee per child is $200.00 for the week and $50.00 additional for evening networking events. Costs are being supplemented

by JASM. Plus, there will be an onsite mother's room. Find out more information here.

• •

Networking across all 9 CASS societies. Connect with aquatic scientists and students; federal, tribal, state, and local administrators, directors, and elected officials; educators; consultants; nonprofits focused on aquatic conservation, and many, many more!

Educational opportunities at the daily plenaries and keynotes, poster sessions, tradeshow, workshops, and symposia Special events for students and early career professionals highlighting career opportunities as well as tips and techniques to help you land your dream job On-demand access to recorded presentations (access to all recordings for 180 days!)

Can’t make it to Grand Rapids? Join us virtually!

We will also have a virtual option for registration to accommodate all comfort levels.

For more information about our registration, please visit our JASM Registration page or email jasm-registrationhelp@fisheries.org

WETLAND PRACTICE

National Technical Committee Looking for Volunteer Soil Science Professors The National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS) is a group of scientists who address issues related to wetland soils that are of interest to state and federal regulatory agencies. The Committee defines hydric soils, develops testing procedures to identify hydric soils, and also develops and refines the Field Indicators of Hydric Soils that are used to identify wetland boundaries. Members of the committee include university professors researching hydric soils, as well as scientists with the USDA-NRCS, US Army Corps of Engineers, EPA, Forest Service, and Fish and Wildlife Service, among others, who deal with wetland issues. Information about the NTCHS, including the current membership, functions, and operating procedures is available at https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/soils/use/hydric/?cid=nrcs142p2_053963.

The NTCHS is looking for two or more new members from the university community to fill specific roles. A wetland hydrologist is sought to help interpret water-related issues with hydric soils and wetlands. The person should have both field experience with wetlands and expertise in hydrologic modeling.

A second university member is sought who has field experience with wetland soils and whose research has dealt with some aspect of wetland soil processes. Most current university members have a strong background in soil morphology which is helpful for understanding the issues relevant to this committee.

Because wetland types vary geographically, potential university members with experience with wetlands in the Northwestern U.S., Alaska, or the Northeastern U.S. are needed to complement the expertise currently on the committee.

Service on the committee is voluntary and unfunded.

The major time commitment consists of attending an annual meeting over a one to two day period, which may be followed by a field trip. Virtual attendance is also acceptable if travel is inconvenient. In addition, teleconferences may be scheduled occasionally when needed to discuss critical issues.

Persons interested in serving on the committee for at least five years are invited to send a curriculum vitae to: Michael_Vepraskas@ncsu.edu. CVs will be accepted until May 31, 2022.

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 121

FIRE IN WETLANDS FORUM

Proceedings of the Fire in Wetlands Forum - A Burning Success INTRODUCTION TO THE PROCEEDINGS

The abstracts are published here and can also be found along with all forum presentations.

Fire is increasing in frequency, intensity and geographic and temporal extents in many already dry areas of the world. In some Australian regions, wetlands and surrounding ecosystems are becoming much more prone to burning, while in other regions fire is an essential but missing element from wetland landscapes. Trying to manage, prevent or control fire to mitigate short- and long-term effects on wetlands presents significant challenges. How do wetland and fire managers address these challenges? What can we learn from the latest research and through reflection on recent on-the-ground experience?

The consequences of fire mismanagement (both too much and too little fire) can be catastrophic for people and the environment. The devastation following the 2019/2020 ‘black summer’ bushfires in Australia – where there was widespread evidence of fire impact to many wetland types - was the catalyst for the “Fire in Wetlands Forum” organized and hosted by the Oceania Chapter of the SWS. This virtual Forum brought together scientists and managers to share knowledge on the effects of fire on wetlands, management challenges, cultural burning and the implications of current research for improved mitigation of impacts, as well as identify knowledge gaps for future research.

Across two days in September 2021, 15 speakers presented topics covering climate change and fire, First Nations people’s fire knowledge, fire impacts on vegetation and peat substrates in freshwater and estuarine wetlands, the effects of fire on wetland biodiversity and palaeoecological fire histories. Participation during the audience Q&A panel discussions was lively, highlighting the burning desire for a deeper understanding and sharing of knowledge amongst participants.

The Forum identified a range of management approaches already underway throughout Australia. These range from fine scale monitoring of wetland recovery from fire, to national-scale modelling to help predict wetland fire risk and duration; from pioneering new approaches to management such as using leaky weirs to restore fire-impacted peatlands, to incorporating traditional knowledge into management frameworks. While steady gains are being made in our understanding of how wetland systems respond to fire regimes, there remain significant knowledge gaps as to how we can support these systems to continue to thrive into the future under changing climate scenarios.

A detailed description of the Forum’s outputs and outcomes will be available in the near future. SWS Oceania will continue to bring together wetlands scientists and professionals who share common interests in the ongoing and developing science and knowledge of fire and wetlands into the future.

We thank all speakers and participants for sharing their time, knowledge and contributing to discussions on the current state and future direction of this field. The Fire in Wetlands Forum was made possible by a development grant from SWS to the Oceania Chapter. Technical support (Adobe Connect) was provided by the New South Wales Department of Primary Industry and Environment, and the Sydney Wetland Institute of the Sydney Olympic Park Authority.

Jayne Hanford: The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. (Corresponding author) Phil Papas: Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, Victoria, Australia.

Swapan Paul: Sydney Wetland Institute, Sydney Olympic Park Authority, New South Wales, Australia.

Adrian Pinder: Western Australian Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, Australia.

Maria VanderGragt: Queensland Department of Environment and Science, Queensland, Australia Jeff Kelleway: School of Earth, Atmospheric and Life Science and GeoQuEST Research Centre, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.

122 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

CLIMATE CHANGE AND BUSHFIRES: WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW Hamish Clarke, University of Wollongong Bushfire Risk Management Research Hub Repeated fire disasters have reinforced risk’s pivotal role in fire management. Current research supports fire managers to understand and track risk’s drivers – from micro to macro, split-second to century scale – and to close the loop by understanding how fire management itself affects risk. However, a major knowledge gap remains: the future trajectory of fire risk, with early efforts limited by unrealistic assumptions, coarse temporal and spatial resolution, and poor representation of variability and uncertainty. Further-

more, history shows that the only way out of the “Valley of Death” between research and impact is meaningful engagement with decision makers and the public. In this talk, I discuss the key drivers of bushfire risk and how they might respond to climate change, with the Black Summer fires of 2019-20 as a case study.

MONITORING POST-FIRE RECOVERY AND REGENERATION IN MANGROVE AND SALTMARSH WETLANDS Mark Quoyle, Jeff Kelleway, Kerrily Rogers, Norm Lenehan, and Shamaram Eichmann, University of Wollongong The Currowan and Clyde fires of the 2019/2020 fire season burnt extensive areas of native forest resulting in considerable damage to property and the environment. An unusual feature of this event was the spread of fire through mangrove forests, saltmarsh and Casuarina/ Swamp Oak communities on the Clyde River and nearby estuaries.

There is little information available to determine how these vegetation communities will respond to such a fire event in the short term and what mechanisms may promote post-fire recovery in the short, medium, and longer term. There is a unique opportunity to quantify the extent of fire damage and to examine recovery response characteristics. A combination of field-based vegetation survey, drone imagery, and Geographical Information Systems were employed to produce a multi-perspective analysis. Preliminary analysis shows that rush-dominated saltmarsh communities demonstrate a rapid recovery to near pre-fire biomass in the first 12-18 months following fire. This is contrasted by the response of mangrove forests. Mangrove responses were spatially varied, ranging from tree mortality to partial or full defoliation following fire. Post-fire re-growth – where observed – was minimal within the first 12 months and dominated by epicormic growth after 18 months. These results suggest that saltmarsh ecosystems have a stronger recovery than mangrove forests following fire disturbance. Further monitoring is required to understand vegetation recovery over longer timeframes. Coastal management practices will need to incorporate restoration projects that protect regrowing habitats, whilst restoring severely degraded habitats using a range of methods suitable to the region’s intertidal characteristics. It is too early to anticipate the timescale until full recovery; however, these results prove promising for mangrove species fire response which could be adapted to Australian and global fire-prone locations.

FIRE IN THE ORGANIC DEPOSITS OF TASMANIAN NEAR COASTAL WETLANDS Kathryn Storey and Jenny Styger, Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment To the knowledge of the authors, since 2001, there have been 19 fires in the organic deposits (peat) of Tasmanian wetlands close to sea level, with 12 of them in the last six years. This count excludes soil fires in our other classes of organic soil, chiefly blanket peats and alpine soils. Soil fires in wetlands have immediate and long term ecological consequences, caused by both the combustion of soil and the fire suppression activities. At the most extreme, soil fire causes effectively permanent ecosystem change, as well as converting significant volumes of stored carbon to greenhouse gases. Wetland soil fires in Tasmania are caused by both bushfires and planned burning. Reasons for the recent high frequency of wetland soil fires are not well understood, but are likely to be multifaceted. They may include climate change, other changes to catchment hydrology, changed fuel loads and cumulative impacts on organic soils altering vulnerability to fire. Recently DPIPWE and the University of Tasmania have invested significant effort into improving fire management guidelines for organic soils in Tasmania. This includes mapping the likelihood of encountering organic soils, improved understanding of how soil combustibility is controlled by soil moisture, translating university based research into fire management guidelines embedded in fire planning procedures, and converting the BoM models of soil moisture into assessments of soil fire risk. Opportunities are also being sought to research methods that will improve the efficiency of soil fire suppression.

THE CHALLENGES OF INTRODUCING PRESCRIBED FIRE INTO AREAS CONTAINING ORGANIC SOILS WITH THE INFLUENCE OF AN INCREASINGLY DRYING CLIMATE: TWO CASE STUDIES FROM WESTERN AUSTRALIA Janine Liddelow, Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and attractions, Western Australia Organic soils represented as peat swamps or peat lakes in the southwest Western Australia are poorly mapped and understood. It is known that ignition of peat substrate can be detrimental to hydrology and soil properties and result in loss of organic material important as habitat and the formation of acid sulphate soils. Peat swamps and peat lakes in southwest Western Australia have traditionally relied on wet winters to recharge to a level of saturation to provide protection against ignition from fire. Due to a drying cliWetland Science & Practice April 2022 123

mate with less winter rainfall this is becoming increasingly inconsistent in the landscape. As a result of this the practice of prescribed burning in the southwest Western Australia has become increasing complex when trying to meet the objectives of fuel reduction to protect life and property and prevent large uncontrolled wildfires whilst minimizing impact on organic soils. In this presentation I present some of the problems and strategies being used to balance these issues.

RESTORATION OF SPHAGNUM BOGS AFTER FIRE Nina McLean, Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate (EPSDD) | ACT Government “Alpine Sphagnum Bogs and Associated Fens” is a listed endangered community in Australia and is highly vulnerable to human impacts, notably climate change and associated increases in bushfires. In January and February 2020, fire impacted almost all bog and fen complexes across the Australian Capital Territory, with many bogs losing near 100% of vegetation cover. Arguably, the most common management technique to promote resilience and restore bogs after fire are leaky weirs (commonly coir logs, strawbales or rock). In fire-impacted peatlands leaky weirs have three specific objectives; (1) prevent or reduce erosion and incision of the peat, (2) spread water throughout the peat, and (3) promote rapid recovery of vegetation. However, our understanding of how effectively they meet these objectives or whether some might be more successful than others (e.g. due to slope, fire severity, number of weirs) is lacking. Following the installation of coir logs across multiple bogs by ACT Parks and Conservation Service staff, we investigate the coir logs’ effect on the degree of erosion, peat moisture and vegetation re-growth after fire. We present some initial findings on the success of the coir logs in meeting their objectives and detail the ongoing monitoring to understand long-term effects. Using an adaptive management framework, this ongoing monitoring will not only provide annual feedback to land managers on the success of individual coir logs, but also answer important questions about their longterm effectiveness to improve our evidence-based decision making around postfire recovery in bogs in the future WATER CHEMISTRY, MACROINVERTEBRATES AND OTHER POST-FIRE EFFECTS FOR WETLANDS AT YANCHEP, SOUTHWESTERN AUSTRALIA Pierre Horwitz, Dave Blake and Karl Zwickl, Centre for People, Place & Planet, Edith Cowan University

124 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

This presentation reports on the findings of an opportunistic study conducted during 2020 following an intense bush fire in the summer of 2019/2020 on the Swan Coastal Plain north of Perth in southwestern Australia. We investigated the post-fire effects of burnt sediments on water quality and macroinvertebrate assemblages for two groundwater window wetlands (Lake Yonderup and Loch McNess). Surface waters and macroinvertebrate assemblages were compared post-fire against a substantial pre-fire dataset. Deep aquifer and shallower porewater bores were sampled post-fire. This study demonstrates that the most severe post-fire water chemistry response would be found with the first hydration of sediments in winter as water tables rise for the first time since the fire, and that effects will subside in spring as sediments are inundated and flushed for months by higher water tables. This pattern was most evident in porewater; deeper groundwater and surface water also showed a seasonal pattern. However, the generated acidity did not exceed the buffering capacity of the wetlands, unlike that seen in other studies. The response following hydration of the sediments needs to be considered in context with the wetting activities (saturation) carried out post-fire. Further investigation into management of wetland fires via saturation is required to ascertain the leaching potential and oxidation proliferation that may result. Ultimately, maintaining the groundwater hydrological integrity of these systems remains the most effective strategy for preventing wetland sediment fires and the long-term environmental harm that results.

A MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE: IMPLICATIONS OF BUSHFIRES FOR MARINE ESTATE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT Norm Lenehan, Batemans Marine Park The 2019/2020 ‘Black Summer’ fires of eastern Australia were unprecedented in terms of their scale and intensity.

These fires burnt numerous ecosystems which are rarely affected by fire, including coastal wetlands (mangrove, saltmarsh, swamp oak forests, paperbark wetlands). This included significant portions of the coastal wetlands managed within the Batemans Bay Marine Park. At present we have little understanding of fire dynamics in such ecosystems, or the likelihood of future fire impacts. These uncertainties have important implications for the planning and management of marine parks and other conservation strategies in the coastal zone.

THE IMPORTANCE OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ KNOWLEDGE OF FIRE IN WETLAND MANAGEMENT Peta-Maria Standley, Firesticks Alliance Indigenous Corporation Wetlands are incredibly important places they support function of the landscape and provide essential ecosystem services. Wetlands hold significant and many values to Indigenous people and Indigenous peoples’ knowledge of wetlands and waterways has been accumulated over millennia. Indigenous people have witnessed and documented significant changes to wetlands through time and have skilfully managed and protected wetlands with fire. The Firesticks Alliance is supporting Indigenous communities in the mentoring, sharing and study of Indigenous cultural fire knowledge to increase its application across the landscape and support healthy land and waters into the future.

Bradley Graves Fire in floodplain wetlands Fire plays an important role in floodplain wetlands, which respond dynamically to flooding, fire and geomorphological processes. A multifaceted approach is required to understand and interpret their fire history. Fire mapping and analysis of sediment and macro-charcoal from contemporary fluvial deposits were used to assess and interpret past fire regimes in the Macquarie Marshes. After accounting for fluvial macrocharcoal flux from upstream sources, local macrocharcoal in ~1 m deep sediment profiles accumulated over the last ~1.7 ka were highly variable and inconsistent between cores in two core wetlands (concentrations 0 to 438 no. cm-3, mean accumulation rates 0 to 3.86 no. cm-2 a-1). A positive correlation existed between the number of recent fires, satellite-observed ignition points, and macrocharcoal concentrations at the surface of the wetlands.

Sedimentology, geochemistry, and carbon stable isotopes varied little with depth and were similar in both wetlands.

Application of macro-charcoal and other environmental proxy techniques is inherently difficult in large, dynamic, and patchy wetland systems due to variations in charcoal sources, sediment and charcoal deposition rates, and the prevalence of taphonomic processes. Future palaeo-fire research could benefit wetland management if sufficient spatial and temporal analysis and assessment of fire, flood and other environmental conditions can be achieved.

FIRE IN FLOODPLAIN WETLANDS Bradley Graves, Macquarie University.

Fire plays an important role in floodplain wetlands, which respond dynamically to flooding, fire and geomorphological processes. A multifaceted approach is required to

understand and interpret their fire history. Fire mapping and analysis of sediment and macro-charcoal from contemporary fluvial deposits were used to assess and interpret past fire regimes in the Macquarie Marshes. After accounting for fluvial microcharcoal flux from upstream sources, local macro-charcoal in ~1 m deep sediment profiles accumulated over the last ~1.7 ka were highly variable and inconsistent between cores in two core wetlands (concentrations 0 to 438 no. cm-3, mean accumulation rates 0 to 3.86 no. cm-2 a-1). A positive correlation existed between the number of recent fires, satellite-observed ignition points, and macro-charcoal concentrations at the surface of the wetlands. Sedimentology, geochemistry, and carbon stable isotopes varied little with depth and were similar in both wetlands. Application of macro-charcoal and other environmental proxy techniques is inherently difficult in large, dynamic, and patchy wetland systems due to variations in charcoal sources, sediment and charcoal deposition rates, and the prevalence of taphonomic processes. Future paleofire research could benefit wetland management if sufficient spatial and temporal analysis and assessment of fire, flood and other environmental conditions can be achieved.

A LANDSCAPE APPROACH TO UNDERSTANDING WETLANDS AND FIRES Tim Ralph, Macquarie University Wetlands experience and cope with fire in different ways.

Biophysical factors that influence the severity and extent of burning in wetlands include their position in the landscape, antecedent conditions (e.g., wet/dry), water source/s, geomorphic processes (e.g., erosion/sedimentation), vegetation types, and fuel loads. The former four factors usually contribute to the latter two factors, which, altogether, prime wetlands for future fire events. Examples from upland swamps in the Blue Mountains of NSW demonstrate the uneven distribution of fire impacts on wetlands after the severe and widespread bushfires of 2019/20. Some upland swamps burned completely and severely, others burned partly and mildly, while others did not burn at all. Floodplain wetlands such as the Macquarie Marshes in inland regions rarely burn completely and have patchy burn patterns at hotspots of fuel loading related to channel and inundation patterns. Isolated wetlands such as Dunphy Lake in the Warrumbungles burn occasionally but may be more resilient to fire impacts due their ephemeral inundation regimes, and inbuilt capacity to cope with extreme drought conditions. Management of wetlands for fire impacts could consider the landscape controls that characterise these systems, as well as their fire history, natural range of variWetland Science & Practice April 2022 125

ability, propensity for change, and inherent resilience (or lack thereof) to extreme events. Ultimately, a landscape approach to understanding wetlands and their fire regimes can benefit both the assessment and management of fire impacts.

FIRE AND THE RECOVERY OF GASTROPODS IN SOUTH-EAST AUSTRALIAN SALT MARSH Pauline Ross, Kerinne Harvey, Egidio M. Vecchio, and Doug Beckers, The University of Sydney Fire has long been recognised as a natural force in structuring northern hemisphere saltmarshes, yet little is known about the impact of fire on molluscs and native and vegetation dynamics of southern hemisphere coastal saltmarshes.

In the summer of 2012, a fire burnt through saltmarsh on Ash Island, NSW. We sampled the recovery rate of gastropod populations and biomass from native saltmarsh vegetation including Juncus kraussii, Sarcocornia quinqueflora, Sporobolus virginicus and the invasive rush Juncus acutus.

After twelve months, the biomass of J. kraussii recovered to similar pre-burn levels. Gastropod assemblages associated with two of the higher elevation native species (J. kraussii and S. virginicus) were impacted the most by fire.

Greater abundance (between 1 and 5 orders of magnitude difference in abundance) and richness of gastropods was found in unburnt compared to burnt J. kraussii and S. virginicus vegetation. In saltmarsh habitats many gastropods have planktonic larval dispersal stages which are dependent on tidal height for transport and the structural complexity provided by vegetation for settlement. Fire appears to negatively affect native saltmarsh gastropod populations within structurally complex vegetation which are refuges for gastropods. Managers need to carefully consider spatial heterogeneity of molluscs and vegetation in saltmarshes which are ecologically endangered in Australia and form an essential role in the blue economy.

WETLAND VEGETATION THICKENING ON THE GIANT SAND ISLANDS OF SUBTROPICAL EASTERN AUSTRALIA Philip Stewart, University Queensland Wire rush (Empodisma minus) is a key wetland and peat forming species in eastern Australia. Within subtropical eastern Australia it forms extensive coastal mires, with some areas developing distinctive wetland systems called patterned fens, which occur on K’Gari (Fraser Island), the Cooloola Sand Mass and Mulgumpin (Moreton Island).

A key aspect of wire rush is that it is fire adapted with the ability to regenerate after the wetland has burnt. This presentation will discuss dramatic alterations in wetland struc126 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

ture at two wire rush mires, Moon Point (patterned fen), K’Gari and Jumping Grass (non-patterned fen), Minjerribah (North Stradbroke Island), which has occurred since European settlement. Combined palynological, charcoal and remote sensing analysis has indicated that the open wire rush mires have been invaded by arboreal taxa, particularly paperbark communities. This change appears to be driven by changes in fire regimes linked to European fire suppression. Projections of future alterations in wetland structure have been made at both sites and unless there is a change in fire management strategies a significant area of wire rush may be replaced by paperbark forest in the next 50 years.

FROM COAST TO UPLANDS – A PALAEOECOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE OF TASMANIAN PEATLANDS Patrick Moss, University Queensland As Australia wettest, most temperate and alpine state, Tasmania has a plethora of wetland environments and in particular large areas of peatlands, with buttongrass moorlands being the most iconic. This presentation will examine three key peatland sites that provide insight into environmental change over the Holocene period (last 10,000 years), as well as having direct implications for fire management.

The first site is Lutregala Marsh, a salt marsh system, owned and managed by the Tasmanian Land Conservancy and located on Bruny Island, eastern Tasmania, provides a high-resolution record of sea level change and environmental alterations associated with European settlement of the island. The second site, Yellow Marsh is situated in the upland Surrey Hills regions, northern Tasmania and provides a 10,000-year record of peatland development and change, as well as insight into the surround region, particularly in terms of testing the Fire Stick Farming Hypothesis, which was partly developed from this area by the archaeologist Rhys Jones. The final site is located at Port Davey, southwest Tasmania and is ongoing research with the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area managers and is focussing on understanding the long-term development of these unique coastal wetland systems that are situated in this region. There is a focus on fire history at this site, particularly in terms of the role of Indigenous people influencing these sites and the surrounding landscape.

WATER QUALITY IMPACTS FOR FIRE-IMPACTED, ORGANIC-RICH WETLANDS ON THE SWAN COASTAL PLAIN, SOUTHWESTERN AUSTRALIA David Blake, Pierre Horwitz, and Mary Boyce, Centre for People, Place & Planet, Edith Cowan University

This presentation focuses on the water quality impacts of fires and fire management practises in organic rich wetlands on the Swan Coastal Plain, southwestern Australia and presents the finding of a study investigating pore- and groundwater responses and the implications of management practises in organic rich wetlands north of Joondalup.

Over the last decade the incidence of smouldering combustion events in organic-rich wetland sediments on the Swan Coastal Plain of southwestern Australia has increased in frequency and/or intensity and duration. The intimate link between wetland sediments and groundwater means that the combustion of wetland sediments has the capacity to influ-

ence water quality. This study investigated wetland water quality responses in wetlands with varying fire histories (recent to +5 years since fire). The results show that fire brought about a substantial increase in oxidation of sulfidic wetland sediments that resulted in the generation of acidic porewaters and the concomitant mobilisation of metal species. The generated acidity was found to be episodic in nature, varying with seasonal fluctuations of groundwater and fire management practises. In the long-term, the magnitude and repeated incidence of such events and there management, could lead to the erosion of the acid buffering capacity of these wetlands.

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 127

WETLAND XXXXXX WATER MANAGEMENT PIONEERS

Naturalistic Control: W. T. Penfound, T. F. Hall, and A. D. Hess and Malaria Control in Tennessee Valley Authority Reservoirs Arnold G. van der Valk1, Ecology, Evolution and Organismic Biology, Ames, IA

ABSTRACT Wetland and aquatic plants in the shallow water in new Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) reservoirs provided food and shelter for the larvae of the anopheline mosquito that spread malaria. The resulting increase in malaria in counties adjacent to these reservoirs triggered TVA studies to determine what could be done to reduce mosquito populations. One of these was their control by reservoir water-level manipulation. William Penfound and his colleagues at the TVA used their studies of the life histories of common wetland species and their habitat requirements to develop a water management schedule for the reservoirs that minimized the area suitable for mosquito larvae. In these reservoirs, it was possible to increase or reduce water depths to limit the spread and growth of common wetland species. By manipulating water levels to control the distribution of wetland vegetation, TVA biologists Penfound, Hall, and Hess in their pioneering papers demonstrated that their “naturalistic” approach to vegetation management was effective in controlling mosquito populations. It demonstrated, for the first time, that the distribution of wetland vegetation at any time is dependent on recent and current hydrology. However, their work, which was published in obscure journals, was unknown to other ecologists of their generation.

INTRODUCTION On May 18, 1933, U. S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Tennessee Valley Authority Act, part of his New Deal. The new Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) was charged with controlling flooding along the Tennessee River and its tributaries, improving navigation, and generating hydroelectric power for the region. Within three months of the TVA Act being signed, the construction of dams began, and by 1939, there were five hydroelectric facilities in operation. The TVA project converted significant sections of the valleys of the Tennessee River and its tributaries into reservoirs (Figure 1). This conversion of flowing water into standing water had serious 1

Author contact: valk@iastate.edu

128 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

unintended consequences: the rapid spread of aquatic and wetland plants along the shallow margins of the new impoundments and a significant increase in malaria in the Tennessee River watershed. These unintended consequences also had their own unintended consequence, contributing to the development of wetland science.

This increase in malaria around TVA impoundments created serious public health problems (Kitchens 2013). The TVA quickly responded by sponsoring numerous studies of aquatic and wetland vegetation, the biology of mosquito species that was the malaria vectors, the interactions between aquatic plant species and mosquito breeding and reproduction, and both mosquito and aquatic plant control. These studies were summarized in a joint U.S. Public Health Service/Tennessee Valley Authority publication, Malaria Control on Impounded Water (1947). Although mostly forgotten today, this report was an important milestone in the development of wetland science.

Historically, mosquito-borne diseases like malaria historically had been the major reason wetlands were feared.

In the United States, malaria had been a public health problem and in the 1860s malaria occurred from the Gulf of Mexico to the Canadian border, but by the early 1930s it was restricted primarily to the southeastern U.S. (Figure 2).

Because they were major breeding grounds for anopheline mosquitoes that spread malaria, the reduction of mosquito populations initially focused on wetlands. Wetland drainage was one of the most important tools in the management of malaria. However, drainage was not an option to reduce mosquitoes produced in TVA reservoirs. The TVA needed to find other ways to reduce mosquito populations in its reservoirs. To this end, it began to conduct studies of the biology of mosquitoes and the ecology of the mosquitoes’ breeding habitat to try to find innovative approaches to mosquito control. In doing so, the TVA sponsored the research of the proto wetland ecologists Dr. William T. Penfound at Tulane University and its own staff biologists (Thomas F. Hall and A. D. Hess) with whom William Penfound collaborated.

PENFOUND, HALL AND HESS William Theodor Penfound was born in Elyria, Ohio, on November 8, 1897, and died on September 31, 1984 in North Carolina. He obtained an A.B. from Oberlin College in 1922 and an A. M. in 1924. His Ph.D. in 1931 was from the University of Illinois where his major professor was W. B. McDougall (Sprugel 1980). Penfound’s dissertation had nothing to do with wetlands and was entitled “Plant anatomy as conditioned by light intensity and soil moisture.” During his professional career, he held three academic positions: Tulane University, 192747; University of Oklahoma, 1947-67; and Warren Wilson

Figure 1. Map of the Tennessee River valley showing the TVA reservoirs. (Source: Tennessee State Library and Archives.)

Figure 2. Malaria in the United States. (Source: U. S. Public Health Service and Tennessee Valley Authority (1947) Malaria Control on Impounded Waters.)

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 129

College, 1967-77. In 1950, he served as treasurer of the Ecological Society of America and in 1957 as its vice president (Burgess 1977).

At Tulane University in New Orleans, Penfound began to work on wetlands. His early wetland papers included: “Comparative structure of the wood in the “knees,” swollen bases, and normal trunks of the Tupelo Gum (Nyssa aquatica L.)” (Penfound 1934); and “Plant communities in the marshlands of southeastern Louisiana” (Penfound and Hathaway 1938). In 1939, he also published three papers with Thomas F. Hall: 1) “A phytosociological study of a Cypress-Gum Swamp in southeastern Louisiana” (Hall and Penfound 1939a), 2) “A phytosociological study of a Nyssa biflora consocies in southeastern Louisiana” (Hall and Penfound 1939b); and 3) “A phytosociological analysis of a tupelo gum forest near Huntsville, Alabama “(Penfound and Hall 1939c). At the time of publication of the first two papers, Hall was a teacher at Lyon High School in Covington, Louisiana, near New Orleans. By the time the third was published, Hall was working for the Tennessee Valley Authority as was Penfound in some capacity. Their affiliations are given as “Botanist [Penfound] and Junior Biological Aid [Hall], respectively, Division of Malaria Studies and Control, Tennessee Valley Authority, Wilson Dam, Alabama.” Penfound had begun his association with the TVA’s malaria control program in the spring of 1937. Presumably, Penfound recommended him to the TVA. According to Hess and Hall (1945), “his [Penfound’s] participation in the [malaria] research program is responsible in a large measure for the progress which has been made.”

During the 1940s, Penfound and Hall published a series of life-history studies on common aquatic and wetland species in Tennessee Valley Authority reservoirs.

These included studies of Saururus cernuus (Hall 1940), Dianthera americana (Penfound 1940a), Achyranthes philoxeroides (Penfound 1940b), and Nelumbo lutea (Hall and Penfound 1944). These studies were initiated because these species had become widespread in the shallow margins of TVA reservoirs. In their studies, Penfound and Hall identified the conditions under which these species became established from seed and spread vegetatively.

In effect, they pioneered the life-history approach to the study of wetland plants. Their studies culminated in Penfound’s 1952 paper, “An outline for ecological life histories of herbaceous vascular hydrophytes.”

When Penfound left Tulane for the University of Oklahoma in 1947, he was the most productive and best-known American ecologist working on wetlands. Although Penfound published a few minor papers on wetlands, e.g., “The Vegetation of Stock Pond Dams in Central Oklahoma” 130 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

(Kelting and Penfound 1950) while at Oklahoma, his research after leaving Tulane was focused mostly on terrestrial vegetation (prairies, woodlands, and old fields).

Archie Davilla Hess (1911-2004) was born in Weatherford, OK, received his Ph.D. from Cornell University in 1939, and died in Fort Collins, CO. His Ph.D. was in entomology, a study of the round-headed apple-tree borer (Hess 1939). Hess worked for the TVA during the 1940s as a biologist in their malaria control program and then moved to the U.S. Public Health Service in the early 1950s.

At the TVA, his research focused on mosquito ecology and control, and it ranged from biological controls using fish (Hess and Tazwell 1941) to the use of DDT (Metcalf et al.

1945) as well as his work with Penfound and Hall on using “naturalistic” control, i.e., water level manipulations, in TVA reservoirs to reduce mosquito larvae populations by limiting their breeding habitat.

MALARIA Malaria is caused by a single-celled parasite of the genus Plasmodium. This parasite is spread only by mosquitoes of the genus Anopheles. Female anopheline mosquitoes acquire the parasite from infected people and transmit it to unaffected people. When the parasite Plasmodium is injected into people by an infected mosquito, the parasite enters a red blood cell and multiplies to produce 16 to 24 new parasites. The parasitized red cell eventually bursts, freeing the parasites which enter other red cells, and anemia results. An infected person typically suffers from chills, fever, and nausea. Sometimes, malaria can result in death. Although several species of Anopheles can carry the malaria parasite, in the American Southeast only one species is involved, Anopheles quadrimaculatus.

Anopheles quadrimaculatus lays its eggs in shallow, still water. Its larvae require plant parts and plant litter in and on the surface of the water on which they feed and in which they shelter. The new TVA reservoirs created large areas of ideal habitat for mosquito larvae. Consequently, TVA biologists began to do research on the biology and ecology of Anopheles quadrimaculatus and on the relationships between the mosquito larvae and wetland and aquatic plants (Hess and Hall 1945), and on ways to reduce the amount of favorable habitat for mosquito larvae (Hall et al. 1946). Field studies and observations on the habitats of mosquito larva had demonstrated repeatedly that larval densities were highest in shallow water that had both aquatic plants and plant litter. The number of larvae varied with the dominant place species as well as the amount of live and dead plant material (Penfound 1942; Hess and Hall 1943, 1945). These findings were summarized in a TVA mantra: a clean water surface does not produce “quads” (Hess and

Hall 1945). Consequently, the main goal of TVA reservoir management was to manipulate water levels to maximize the amount of “clean” water.

NATURALISTIC CONTROL In the early 1940s, William Penfound and his TVA colleagues designed and conducted a pioneering series of studies of how water depth and water-level fluctuations could limit plant growth and “flotage” (plant debris) to reduce mosquito larval populations. Their studies looked at ways to control the abundance of unwanted upland, wetland, and aquatic plant species around the margins and in the shallow waters of TVA impoundments (Penfound 1942; Hess and Kiker 1944; Hess and Hall 1945; Hall et al. 1945; Carter 2014). Over a four-year period, they examined the distribution of all common woody and herbaceous species around and in eleven reservoirs as well as in three natural and two experimental ponds. The goal of their study was to use water-level manipulations to manage the vegetation of the TVA reservoirs to minimize mosquito larval populations. Studies of the relationship of various plant types (flexuous, submerged, carpet, floating mat, etc.) to mosquito larval densities had demonstrated larval densities could range from as few as 1 (in floating leaved vegetation) to 8 (flexuous stemmed) per square foot (Hess and Hal 1945). Thus, by manipulating water levels to promote the abundance of some species or to decrease that of others, it would be possible to minimize mosquito larval production in the reservoirs. The resulting program for controlling malaria through water level manipulations was dubbed “naturalistic” (U.S. Public Health Service and Tennessee Valley Authority 1947).

Hall et al. (1946) identified the key life-history features that could be used to predict the establishment and spread of each species under different water regimes: seed germination conditions (inundated vs dewatered), vegetative growth (sprouting) at different water depths, plant survival at different water depths, and growth form and water depth.

It is the last section of this paper on the “Application of knowledge concerning the water level relationships of plants to a program of malaria control...” that makes this one of the most important papers in the history of wetland science. This paper transformed wetland ecology from a descriptive to a predictive and prescriptive science. They demonstrated that that it was feasible to manage wetlands for specific purposes, in this case, malaria control.

Water level management involves increasing water depth (progression), lowering water depth (regression or recession), or holding water depth constant. Water-level management schedules for TVA reservoirs were developed by combining periods of progression, recession, and constant

water level. For the TVA reservoirs four water management schedules were developed (Figure 3): 1) flood surcharge (progression of water depths above the top summer pool level and into forested areas in winter or early spring), 2) constant pool, 3) cyclical fluctuations, and 4) regression (gradual seasonal drop in water level). Natural cyclical fluctuations during the growing season occur due to precipitation and evaporation. They have an upward and downward phase. The upward phase retards the growth of emergent species and promotes submerged species. The downward phase promotes seed germination and growth of species whose seeds cannot germinate while submerged and is unfavorable for submerged species. Plant zonation patterns and the vertical extent of plant species are heavily influenced by cyclical fluctuations, as is mosquito larval abundance.

“Information on the water level relationships of marginal plants has been used by the [Tennessee Valley] Authority to design more favorable water level management schedules for malaria control. These schedules have a dual function of managing vegetation by planned water levels to prevent the development of favorable habitats for Anopheles quadrimaculatus and to control the larvae of this species” (Hall et al. 1946: 50). Specifically, the TVA developed a Combined Schedule for Main River Reservoirs (Figure 3) with a spring flood surcharge, constant pool, cyclical fluctuations, and seasonal regression phases (Hall et al.

1946). Each phase of the combined schedule had a specific purpose (Hess and Kiker 1944).

The flood surcharge phase (Figure 3) occurs in winter or early spring. During this phase, water levels are raised above the summer maximum pool elevation. This results in floating plant debris (flotage) that accumulated during the winter being deposited in the zone above the summer pool.

This ensures that this debris is not in the reservoir during the mosquito breeding season. Any plants along the shoreline are removed prior to the flood surcharge stage so that they do not trap the debris. The removal of this floating debris from the summer pool of the reservoirs helps to reduce the number of mosquito larva. The flood surcharge phase ends before the start of the mosquito breeding season.

During the constant pool phase (Figure 3) water levels are kept at the maximum summer pool elevation. High water along the margins of the reservoirs during this phase keeps aquatic and wetland species from spreading lower into the reservoir. The result is a narrower vegetated zone around the margin of the reservoir.

Cyclical fluctuations (Figure 3) are used to lower water levels by about one foot. During this phase, mean water levels are reduced gradually (ca. 0.1 feet per week) so that fluctuations move downslope during the summer. Mean Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 131

Figure 3. Combined water management schedule (flood surcharge, constant pool, cyclical fluctuations, and regression) for main river TVA reservoirs and their impacts on plant zonation (three upper panels). (Source: U. S. Public Health Service and Tennessee Valley Authority (1947) Malaria Control on Impounded Waters.)

water levels fluctuate about 1 foot during this phase.

Water level fluctuations reduce the number of mosquito larvae indirectly by making their habitat less suitable and directly by killing mosquito larvae that are stranded during low water.

The last phase of a combined schedule is the seasonal regression phase. As noted, this phase begins during the cyclical fluctuations phase, i.e., in late spring. Mean water levels typically drop two feet during the summer months, and, when the mosquito breeding season is over, are allowed to decline naturally because of a drop in precipitation in the region during the fall.

To examine the effectiveness of their naturalistic control of mosquito populations, Hall et al. (1946) also describe two reservoirs: one with a “favorable” water management schedule and the other an “unfavorable” schedule. In the reservoir with the favorable schedule, the band of marginal vegetation extended down to only 1.3 feet below the top summer pool level while in the reservoir with the unfavorable schedule it extended to a depth of 5.2 feet. The reservoir with the favorable water man-

132 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

agement regime did not require any larvicide treatment to control mosquito populations.

DISCUSSION Penfound and his colleagues advanced the development of wetland ecology in three ways: (1) They demonstrated the importance of the life history features of wetland plant species for understanding their establishment, spread, and growth at different water depths.

(2) They linked the hydrology to the life histories of aquatic and wetland plant species to predict the distribution of these species. Because of their research, wetland ecology became a predictive science.

(3) They demonstrated that wetland ecology had practical applications for solving societal problems.

The most highly visible publication that included a detailed account of the TVA studies of the control of aquatic and wetland plants by water-level manipulation was Chapter V, Water Level Management, in the 422-page report Malaria Control on Impounded Waters published jointly by the U. S. Public Health Service and the Tennessee Valley Authority (1947). It contains detailed summaries of Hess and Hall (1945) and Hall et al. (1946). This publication was reviewed in public health and medical journals. A reviewer (Anonymous 1949) in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) noted that “Methods used to change the natural environment to make it unsuitable for mosquito propagation are given in detail. They include discussions of engineering methods, vegetation control, water level fluctuation methods and maintenance of proper conditions after the more permanent control measures.” It was also reviewed in the American Journal of Public Health (Gray 1949). Gray also pointed out that there was a chapter on the control of aquatic plants by altering the hydrology of TVA reservoirs. I have not been able to find any reviews of this report in an ecological journal. Because of its importance in the history of public health in the United States, the University Press of the Pacific reprinted Malaria Control on Impounded Waters in 2005.

The pioneering studies by TVA biologists linking lifehistories of plant species to the hydrology of the TVA reservoirs that enabled them to alter the distribution of plant species were rarely cited by their ecological contemporaries.

Even today (2022), both classic papers, Hall et al. (1946) and Hess and Hall (1945), are unavailable in digital form, e. g., as a pdf. Publishing their work in a regional journal, the Journal of the Tennessee Academy of Science, and in the narrowly focused and short-lived Journal of the National Malaria Society, may have ensured that very few ecologists would ever see them. According to Google Scholar, Hall et al. (1946) has been cited less than 100 times and Hess and Hall (1945) less than 40 times. However, the small number of citations of these works may only reflect the paucity of ecologists working on wetlands in the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s, not the visibility of the journals in which they were published. For example, L. R. Wilson’s important paper on the aquatic vegetation of the lakes of Vilas County, Wisconsin (Wilson 1935), which was published in Ecological Monographs, has been cited less than 80 times.

What is striking about Hess and Hess (1945) and Hall et al. (1946) is the absence of a theoretical framework for their studies. During the 1930s and 1940s competing models of vegetation dynamics (succession) proposed by F. E. Clements, H. A. Gleason, A. G. Tansley, among others were hotly debated (van der Valk 2014). Penfound was certainly familiar with contemporary discussions of competing theories about the classification and dynamics of vegetation. He had co-authored a paper with Stanley Cain, a leading participant in these discussions (Cain and Penfound 1938), and this paper deals with some of these issues. The TVA papers could have played a significant role in resolving these debates. It would be another 35 years before comparable, but less sophisticated studies (van der Valk 1981) demonstrated again that combining information about life histories of wetland species and water-level changes makes it feasible to predict changes in the composition and distribution of wetland vegetation.

After the end of World War II, the naturalistic control of vegetation in TVA reservoirs for malaria control was replaced by chemical control of both the vegetation and Anopheles quadrimaculatus larvae. As early as 1943, the TVA was experimenting with aerial spraying of DDT as a larvicide (Krusé et al. 1944; Metcalf et al. 1945). A. H. Hess was a co-author of these initial reports on the use of DDT by the TVA. By 1950, Hall and Hess are no longer writing about water-level control of impoundment vegetation, but the use of the herbicide 2,4-D for this purpose.

The integrated approach to the management of the malaria vector, Anopheles quadrimaculatus, in the TVA reservoirs that was inaugurated by the Authority’s biologists would eventually become endorsed by the World Health Organization (WHO) as the best framework for the management of parasitic diseases in aquatic systems (WHO 2004, 2011).

There is a link between the TVA studies of malaria control in the 1940s and the WHO framework, A. D. Hess. Hess, who worked for the U.S. Public Health Service for most of his career, was a WHO consultant. The manipulation of water levels to reduce mosquito larval populations in reservoirs is still being used, e.g., Reis et al. (2011). However, the pioneering work of Penfound and his TVA colleagues remains unappreciated and unacknowledged by wetland ecologists, hence the reason for highlighting their accomplishments in this paper.

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 133

REFERENCES Anonymous. 1949. Malaria Control on Impounded Water. [Book Review] JAMA 139:493 Burgess, R. L. 1977. The Ecological Society of America. In Frank N. Egerton (ed.), History of American Ecology. Arno Press, New York, NY. Cain, S. A. and W. T. Penfound. 1938. Aceretum rubri: The Red Maple Swamp Forest of Central Long Island. The American Midland Naturalist 19: 390-416.

Carter, E. D. 2014. Malaria control in the Tennessee Valley Authority: health, ecology, and metanarratives of development. Journal of Historical Geography 43: 111-127 Gray, H. F. 1949. Malaria Control on Impounded Waters. [Book Review] American Journal of Public Health 39: 393-394.

Hall, T. F. 1940. The Biology of Saururus cernuus L. The American Midland Naturalist 24: 253-260.

Hall, T. F. and A. D. Hess. 1950. Plant control studies in Tennessee Valley reservoirs. Journal of the Malaria Control Society 9: 153-172.

Hall, T. F. and W. T. Penfound. 1939a. A phytosociological study of a Cypress-Gum Swamp in southeastern Louisiana. The American Midland Naturalist 21: 378-395.

Hall, T. F. and W. T. Penfound. 1939b. A phytosociological study of a Nyssa biflora consocies in southeastern Louisiana. The American Midland Naturalist 22: 369-375.

Hall, T. F. and W. T. Penfound. 1939c. A phytosociological analysis of a tupelo gum forest near Huntsville, Alabama. Ecology 20: 358-364.

Hall, T. F. and W. T. Penfound. 1944. The Biology of the American Lotus, Nelumbo lutea (Wild.) Pers. The American Midland Naturalist 31: 744-758.

Hall, T. F., W. T. Penfound, and A. D. Hess. 1946. Water level relationships of plants in the Tennessee Valley with particular reference to malaria control. Journal of the Tennessee Academy of Science 21: 18-59.

Hess, A. D. 1939. The biology of Saperda candida Fabricius. Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Hess, A. D. and T. F. Hall. 1943. The intersection line as a factor in anopheline ecology. Journal of the National Malaria Society 2: 93-98.

Hess, A. D. and T. F. Hall. 1945. The relation of plants to malaria control on impounded waters with a suggested classification. Journal of the National Malaria Society 4: 20-46.

Hess, A. D and C. C. Kiker. 1944. Water level management for malaria control on impounded waters. Journal of the National Malaria Society 3: 181-196.

Hess, A. D. and C. M. Tazwell. 1942. The Feeding Habits of Gambusia Affinis Affinis, with Special Reference to The Malaria Mosquito, Anopheles Quadrimaculatus. American Journal of Epidemiology 35: 142–151.

134 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

Kelting, R. W. and W. T. Penfound. 1950. The Vegetation of Stock Pond Dams in Central Oklahoma. The American Midland Naturalist 44: 6975.

Kitchens, C. 2013. A dam problem: TVA’s fight against malaria, 1926– 1951. Journal of Economic History 73: 694-724.

Krusé, C. W., A. D. Hess, and R. L. Metcalf. 1944. Airplane dusting for the control of Anopheles quadrimaculatus on impounded waters. Journal of the National Malaria Society 3: 197-209 Metcalf, R. L., A. D. Hess, G. E. Smith, M. Jeffery, and G. W. Ludwig.

1945. Observations on the use of DDT for the control of Anopheles quadrimaculatus. Public Health Reports 60:753-774.

Penfound, W. T. 1934. Comparative structure of the wood of the “knees,” swollen bases, and normal trunks of the tupelo gum (Nyssa aquatica L.).

American Journal of Botany 21: 623-631.

Penfound, W. T. 1940a. The Biology of Dianthera americana L. The American Midland Naturalist 24: 242-247.

Penfound, W. T. 1940b. The Biology of Achyranthes philoxeroides (Mart.) Standley. The American Midland Naturalist 24: 248-252.

Penfound, W. T. 1942. The relation of plants to malaria control: With special reference to impounded waters. Public Health Reports (18961970) 57: 261-268.

Penfound, W. T. 1952. An outline for ecological life histories of herbaceous vascular hydrophytes. Ecology 33: 123-128.

Penfound, Wt. and E. S. Hathaway. 1938. Plant Communities in the marshlands of Southeastern Louisiana. Ecological Monographs 8: 1-56.

Reis, Julia, Teresa B. Culver, Matthew McCartney, Jonathan Lautze, and Solomon Kibret. 2011. Water resources implications of integrating malaria control into the operation of an Ethiopian dam. Water Resources Research 47: p.W09530 Sprugel, D. G. 1980. A “Pedagogical Genealogy” of American Plant Ecologists. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 61: 197-200.

U. S. Public Health Service and Tennessee Valley Authority. 1947. Malaria Control on Impounded Waters. Washington, DC. (Reprinted in 2005 by the University Press of the Pacific, Honolulu, Hawaii) van der Valk, A. G. 1981. Succession in wetlands: A Gleasonian approach. Ecology 62: 688-696. van der Valk, A.G. 2014. From formation to ecosystem: Tansley’s response to Clements’ climax. Journal of the History of Biology 47: 293–321.

WHO. 2004. Global Strategic Framework for Integrated Vector Management. WHO Press, Geneva, Switzerland.

WHO. 2011. Handbook for integrated vector management. WHO Press, Geneva, Switzerland.

Wilson, L. R. 1935. Lake Development and Plant Succession in Vilas County, Wisconsin. Ecological Monographs 5: 207–47.

WETLAND XXXXXXX MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION

Exploring Methods for Sharing Wetland Knowledge and Identifying Future Needs and Solutions Swapan Paul1,2, Chris Rostron3, Lijuan Cui2,4, Yinru Lei2,4, Tran Triet5 and C. Max Finlayson2,6,7 INTRODUCTION Successful management of wetlands is increasingly making more use of traditional and contemporary community knowledge of wetlands in addition to the knowledge obtained from scientific investigations (Ens et al. 2012; Pyke et al. 2018). For this to happen, wetland managers need ways to tap into such knowledge, including respecting protocols around ownership of and access to such knowledge, and appreciating its value. However, at the same time the rapid advancement of science and technology and changes in societal values has led to the loss of valuable traditional knowledge, or such knowledge being ignored in favor of an over-reliance on modern scientific techniques.

Mechanisms available through wetland centres (Finlayson 2018; Gevers et al. 2018), education outreach initiatives (Finlayson et al. 2013) and engagement with schools (M. Bartlett 2019, pers. comm.) go some way towards tapping into the value of these knowledge sources. However, much more is needed if the mutual benefits that can come from sharing knowledge are to be realized. This is more the case with the intensification of the threats to wetlands from climate change and sea level rise, invasive non-native species, and pollution. Given the difficulties associated with managing wetlands and ensuring there are sufficient funds to both collect and make use of contemporary scientific information, having access to knowledge provided by local communities may prove invaluable when addressing the harmful outcomes from these phenomena, in addition to assisting with efforts to ensure local communities are effectively engaged in wetland management.

Sydney Wetland Institute and WET Program, Sydney Olympic Park Authority, Australia 2 Institute for Land, Water & Society, Charles Sturt University, Albury, NSW 2640, Australia 3 Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust (WWT), Slimbridge, UK 4 Institute of Wetland Research, China Academy of Forestry, Beijing, China 5 International Crane Foundation, Baraboo, Wisconsin, USA 6 School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia 7 IHE Delft, Institute for Water Education, Delft, Netherlands; correspondence author: mfinlayson@csu.edu.au 1

There have been many successful cases where traditional and community knowledge have been used alongside contemporary scientific practices for managing wetlands (Carbonell et al. 2001; Ens et al. 2012: Pyke et al 2018), but unless these are extended and expanded in time and space we fear that current high rates of wetland loss and degradation (Darrah et al. 2019; McInnes et al. 2020; Simpson et al.

2021) will continue. One way of contributing to the effort to ensure that these approaches are extended and expanded is to explore and develop effective methods for sharing knowledge between local communities, wetland researchers, and managers. This could start with the increasing sources of knowledge about the values and benefits derived from wetlands as well as that about management responses to the pressing problems for wetland management. The latter are well known, and yet, continue, with steps to stop and reverse wetland loss and degradation being acknowledged as insufficient (Ramsar Convention on Wetlands 2018).

As part of ongoing programs run through organizations such as the Sydney Olympic Park Authority in Australia and the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust in the United Kingdom (UK) a symposium on Methods for Sharing Wetland Knowledge and Exploring Future Needs and Solutions was held at the INTECOL International Wetland Conference in Christchurch, New Zealand in October 2021. The symposium had three objectives, namely to: 1) explore the wealth and usefulness of traditional and community knowledge about wetlands; 2) identify gaps in knowledge-sharing tools, techniques and mechanism; and 3) explore ways forward. The symposium was intended to revisit the effectiveness of current approaches and programs in wetland awareness, education and training, and suggest measures for future improvements. It was further expected that in the future there would also be an emphasis on newer communication approaches, such as webinars and twitter conferences, alongside traditional and local community knowledge, which in themselves are based on having participatory approaches to ensure knowledge is shared in an open way.

Provided below is an overview of the key issues that were included in the presentations in the symposium.

WWT – ENGAGING LOCAL PEOPLE FOR SUSTAINABLE WETLAND CONSERVATION The Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust (WWT) is a UK-based non-governmental organization that works globally to deliver conservation outcomes for wetlands, wildlife and people (Spray 2018). Its work focuses on engaging with people (Figure 1) as the primary method to deliver effective outcomes for wetlands, linked to a strong scientific approach to demonstrate what works, share results, and inform future work.

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 135

Figure 1. Engaging with people through a learning session at WWT Slimbridge, UK. ((Photo by Deb Pinniger / WWT)

inquiry-based approach. Online materials are also available for use by schools and individuals (https://www.wwt.org. uk/discover-wetlands/fun-and-learning accessed March 1, 2021).

• Self-guided visits at WWT sites for families and casual visitors with accessible materials and guided walks, talks and events.

• A wide range of internal and external exhibits, which are changed regularly, themed around wetlands and the species that depend on them.

• Work with universities and colleges to give structured lectures and onsite experience, for example our program working with the Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology (https://research.kent.ac.uk/dice/ accessed 1 March 2021) offering students hands-on experience of wildlife health work.

WWT has 10 wetland centres in the UK that now welcome over one million visitors a year (Table 1, Figure 2). As many visitors have little or no knowledge or experience of wetlands formal and informal techniques are used to raise awareness and support learning. Examples include the following.Structured schools program at WWT centres that are linked to the national education curriculum, and is delivered on site by trained learning managers, using an

An example of the way in which WWT works is shown by a major wetland creation project in Steart Marshes, UK (Figure 3) that created nearly 500 ha of salt marsh from existing arable land to mitigate for sea level rise (https:// www.wwt.org.uk/wetland-centres/steart-marshes# accessed March 1, 2021). WWT employed staff with the skills to engage and consult with local people, spending a lot of time contacting relevant people and holding structured events in

Wetland Centre

Location

Special Features

Arundel

Sussex, England

Caerlaverock

Dumfries, Scotland

Castle Espie Llanelli

County Down, Northern Ireland Carmarthernshire,

London

Wales England

Lowland coastal site on the busy south coast with environmentally friendly centre, boat trips and extensive board walks Smaller centre famous for its barnacle goose and pink-footed goose migration On the banks of Strangford Lough, an eco-buildnig, known for light-bellied brent goose 450-acre site on the Burry Estuary, with a mosaic of wetland habitats

Martin Mere

Lancashire, England

Slimbridge

Gloucestershire, England Northumberland, England Norfolk, England

Washington Welney

Opened in 2000, this 45-hectare constructed wetland site provides a wetland sanctuary for Londoners to visit Based on the site of a historic lake, the site welcomes wintering whooper swans WWT’s HQ, and first site, set up in 1946. Famous for whitefronted geese and Bewick’s swans Highly urban site, offering an oasis to built-up communities Modern eco-building, with a winter spectacle of Bewick’s swans as well as abundant year-round waterfowl Total

Table 1. Wetland centres operated by the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust.

136 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

Number of Visitors 2019/20 85,362 14,388 52,343 66,002 163,657 170,674 235,162 73,089 27,154 887,831

Figure 2. Slimbridge Wetland Centre, UK. (Photo by Richard Taylor-Jones)

Figure 3. Steart marsh, UK (Photo by Sacha Dench / WWT) Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 137

Figure 4. Slough Urban Wetlands Project. (Photo by Harley Todd / WWT)

local venues. An initially hostile response was converted into overall support, and the benefits it brings, such as increased tourism and use of local services, better access to wetlands, and increased pride in the local area have been welcomed by local communities.

In urban areas, WWT employs consultative techniques such as training days for teachers, in-school sessions, citizen science, and community planning, to raise awareness of wetlands and SuDS (Sustainable Drainage Systems) as positive elements of the urban environment. Work with schools, community groups, local authorities and park managers has resulted in positive local action and led to the restoration and creation of wetlands in urban areas (Figure 4). These are generally smaller existing wetlands, such as local streams and rivers, or creating of swales, ponds and other wetlands capable of absorbing water during heavy rain events. Activities included a community bioblitz, encouraging a joint running and litter picking group to improve health and well-being,

138 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

and a ‘yellow fish’ system of signage to show where waste water enters wetlands.

WWT has also used Citizen Science for decades, with its members and the public sending in reports of sightings of wetland birds to inform our long-term reporting on numbers and distribution of key species such as the Bewick’s and Whooper swan (https://www.wwt.org.uk/our-work/ projects/swan-champions/ accessed March 1, 2021), and Greenland white-fronted goose (Fox et al. 2019). More details can be found through the web site of the Swan Specialist Group (https://swansg.org/ accessed April 26, 2021).

WWT believes that a wide range of techniques should be used to engage local stakeholder, leading to positive acceptance of change and proactive support for wetland creation and conservation. These efforts are supported by an active conservation program, sound scientific and monitoring approaches and a link to delivery of national and international commitments to wetland conservation.

REVIVAL OF THE THEORY OF “UNITY BETWEEN HEAVEN AND MAN”: FITTING TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE INTO CONTEMPORARY WETLAND CONSERVATION IN CHINA The revival in China of the theory of the “Unity between Heaven and Man” represents an opportunity to integrate ancient wisdom into contemporary wetland conservation activities and policy in China. This provides many challenges in terms of identifying future needs and solutions for wetland management and for sharing wetland knowledge in support of the fundamental principles associated with traditional knowledge and contemporary conservation of wetlands.

In Chinese history the theory of “Unity between Heaven and Man” is the core value in understanding the relationship between humans and nature. “Heaven” literally means sky, while more broadly it means non-human nature or even the ultimate rule of the universe. “Man” refers to humankind or human society. “Unity” comprises meanings of fitness, fusion and harmony. Man is a part of nature and should follow the law of universe. This theory supports the harmony and development of human society through the harmonious coexistence between humans and nature, humans and society, and human beings themselves (Chen 2016).

The famous philosophy work, the “Book of Chang”, documented the early perceptions of wetlands – wetland is the best to amuse all and water is the best to moisten all.

Wetlands were also associated with the stability of the nation and welfare of people in Chinese political thought. For example, it was believed that the demise of the Xia Dynasty was due to the draining of the Yi and Luo Rivers, and the demise of the Shang Dynasty was due to the draining of the Yellow River. According to the ancient book “Guo Main Ideas Use wetland resources according to their seasonal characteristic

Extract wetland resources in moderation Restore wetlands in certain area

Yu”, able and virtuous monarchs do not destroy mountains, do not fill swamps, do not block rivers, and do not excavate lakes. Instead, they should maintain the smooth flow of water and keep the soil moist in order to bring benefit to the people. The importance of wetlands was highlighted as a strategic resource for national survival.

Ancient Chinese generalized, generation by generation, how to utilize and protect precious wetland resources based on their production practice. Table 2 lists some ancient books, government decrees and folk laws that recorded Chinese traditional knowledge of wetlands. It can be seen that our ancestors understood the law of nature, and extracted resources seasonally and abstemiously to balance the short-term and long-term benefits. Their methods are consistent with the modern concepts of “wise use” and “sustainable use” that emphasize the importance of equalizing the benefits to humankind and the natural properties of the ecosystem, as well as the maintenance of intergenerational equity (Finlayson et al. 2011).

Since 2012, China has highlighted ‘ecological civilization’ as a long-term national strategy for promoting sustainable development (Lü et al. 2017). Now ecological civilization has been written into China’s constitution as the ideological framework for the country’s environmental policies, laws and education (Hansen et al. 2018). Its key tenets include “the need to respect, protect and adapt to nature; a commitment to resource conservation; environmental restoration and protection; recycling; low-carbon use; and sustainable development” (Wu et al. 2019). With the renaissance of “Unity between Heaven and Man”, it is a challenge, but also an opportunity to integrate ancient wisdom into contemporary wetland conservation schemes and policy in China.

Detailed Clauses or Practices “do farm work in the right season, so the food is inexhaustible; do not use small hole fishing net, so fish and turtles are inexhaustible” “strictly prohibit fishing in ponds, rivers and lakes during breeding season” “close fishing during at the end of winter and the beginning of spring when the fish lay eggs” “it is wrong to drain the pond to get all the fish or born the wetland for farmland” Use one fish hood rather than many and shoot birds in sky rather than in nest Set apart hills for forestry, set apart rivers for fish, and set apart land for wildlife

Sources The Book of Mencius

Xunzi Tang Code The Spring and Autumn Annals The Analects of Confucius The prohibition policy of Qing dynasty

Table 2. Concepts and practices of ancient Chinese on wetland utilization and protection.

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 139

MEKONG UNIVERSITY NETWORK AS A PREMIERE TRAINING AND RESEARCH NETWORK FOR WETLAND MANAGEMENT IN THE MEKONG REGION The Mekong River is one of the great rivers of the world. Wetlands of the Mekong maintain and support vital ecological functions, as well as provide valuable products and services for human activities, nourishing a population of more than 60 million people in 6 countries: China, Myanmar, Lao PDR, Thailand, Cambodia and Viet Nam. The biodiversity of the Mekong wetlands is of international significance, including many unique ecosystems and a wide range of globally threatened species such as Giant catfish, Siamese crocodile, Eastern Sarus Crane, Giant ibis, and Irrawaddy dolphin.

Conserving wetland ecosystems and their resources through a better understanding of wetland ecology and the application of ecologically-sound management is urgently needed. To implement this task, the riparian countries within the Mekong River basin need a sufficient number

of experts and technical staff who are able to work productively in the field of wetland conservation.

With the primary purpose of advancing wetland ecology and management in the Mekong Region through teacher training and curriculum development, in 2002, eight large public universities from Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Vietnam, with facilitation from the International Crane Foundation-USA, joined to create a network of universities, named the “University Network for Wetland Research and Training in the Mekong Region” (Tran et al. 2003). By 2015 the Network had grown to include 24 major universities from all six Mekong countries and Malaysia (Table 3).

The Network facilitated academic cooperation in wetland education and communication, wetland research, regional wetland conferences and consultations, construction and implementation of regional training courses focusing on field-biology aspects of wetland ecology and conservation (Figure 5). The longer-term goal of the Network is to assist member universities to develop academic MSc and PhD programs in wetland ecology and conservation.

Figure 5. Field training exercise in a wetland training course, U Minh Thuong National Park, Vietnam, 2007. (Photo by Triet Tran / ICF) 140 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

The main objectives of the Network are to: • Build the capacity of university lecturers and researchers of the Mekong region in teaching wetlandrelated courses, conducting scientific research in wetland-related fields, and assisting wetland conservation practices; • Enhance public understandings in wetland values as well as threats to wetland ecosystems of the Mekong river basin; • Enhance the knowledge and understanding in wetland ecology and management for staff of protected areas, grassroots and community-based organizations of the Mekong riparian countries and to improve their capacity in wetland conservation and management.

Organizing training courses is an annual activity of the Network. By end of 2021, the Network has organized 16 regional and 4 country-level training workshops for more than 500 university lecturers and wetland managers in Southeast Asia. The Network’s training activities require minimal expertise from outside. Trainers are selected and drawn from member universities within the region. Training is provided using available expertise, experience, as well as teaching facilities of member universities. The Network operates regional training activities, using key wetland ecosystems of the Mekong region as natural laboratories for the trainings. Course contents are field-orientated and emphasize in-situ training and hands-on exercises.

Trainees have opportunities to gain a holistic view of wetland ecosystems within the Mekong region. They also have opportunities to share their knowledge and experience with colleagues from other riparian countries and learn from each other.

In addition to training, the Network facilitated regional research projects on subjects related to wetland ecology and biodiversity. The largest study—which involved ten Southeast Asian and three US universities and research institutes, with the participation of 120 researchers and technicians— sampled more than 450 wetlands across five countries of the Mekong River basin to evaluate the state of contamination by persistent organic pollutants in natural wetland ecosystems (Tran et al. 2014). The most recent regional research project was on wetlands of dry, deciduous Dipterocarp forests of the Lower Mekong basin (Barzen et al. 2019). Other research projects include: • SUMERNET-funded research project on the roles of natural wetlands in water security in Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Vietnam; • IUCN-funded regional research project on invasive

alien species in wetlands of Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Vietnam; • Bamboos of Cambodia, Lao PDR and Vietnam, involving the Museum of Natural History Paris, France; • Botanical study of the family Zingiberaceae, involving the Royal Botanic Garden-Edinburgh, and Singapore Botanic Garden.

In conclusion, after almost two decades of continuous operation, the University Network for Wetland Research and Training in the Mekong Region has proven a good conduit for connecting wetland research and academic communities of the Mekong region with the world and may provide a model for advancing wetland training in other parts of the world.

INDIGENOUS AND TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE CAN BE THE FOUNDATION FOR THE ‘WISE USE’ OF WETLANDS The points raised in this article are based on information provided in the published literature and from observations about the pattern of engagement of traditional knowledge in wetland conservation. They are not based on a formal academic investigation, but have benefitted from 20 years of interactive wetland training delivered through the Wetland Education and Training (WET) initiative run by the Sydney Olympic Park Authority, Australia (Paul 2015; SOPA 2021).

Despite the Ramsar Convention recognizing in 2015 (through Resolution XII.2) that the wise and customary use of wetlands by indigenous peoples and local communities could play an important role in their conservation and wise use (Ramsar Convention 2015), there is ample evidence and a developing consensus that in recent decades the participation of traditional and indigenous people in wetland management has not been as much as it could be (e.g., Middleton 2016). Similarly, there is a widening realization that there is a large amount of indigenous knowledge pertinent to the wise use of wetlands. With the increasing impacts that global wetlands are set to face under climate change and sea level rise scenarios, modern scientific knowledge is needed to manage wetlands. However, it is also increasingly evident that the effectiveness and efficiency of modern science-based approaches can be improved if combined with traditional knowledge. It is even plausible that some problems may only be overcome with traditional knowledge (Rundle 2019; Davidson 2005).

It is expected that much valuable traditional knowledge would have to be either retrieved from various sources and/ or their origins, and their existence explored in an appropriWetland Science & Practice April 2022 141

University Build Bright University Pannasastra University Royal University of Agriculture Royal University of Phnom Penh Southwest Forestry University Yunnan University National University of Laos Champasak University University Sains Malaysia Mandalay University University of Forestry Yadanabon University Yangon University Yezin Agricultural University Chulalongkorn University Kasetsart University Khon Kaen University

Country Cambodia Cambodia Cambodia Cambodia China China Lao PDR Lao PDR Malaysia Myanmar Myanmar Myanmar Myanmar Myanmar Thailand Thailand Thailand

Mahasarakham University Mahidol University An Giang University Can Tho University Nong Lam University University of Science – Ho Chi Minh City

Thailand Thailand Vietnam Vietnam Vietnam Vietnam

Tay Nguyen University

Vietnam

Table 3. List of member universities of the Mekong University Network

ate manner so that legal and intellectual property rights are respected. It is encouraging to note that there have been global initiatives to document traditional knowledge for the benefit of conserving biodiversity (WIPO 2016; WIPO 2017). Increased and regular participation of traditional knowledge-keepers requires their willingness, but most importantly, a need for creating a favorable environment so that they feel welcome, valued and involved, and have the right to withdraw if they so choose.

There is also the possibility of mismatches between the format of traditional knowledge and that of modern technologies that increasingly rely on “big data” sets and complex analyses, including statistical manipulation and modelling, to inform management scenarios and decision-making, and gain their credibility through peer reviewed publication in journals adorned with impact factors that likely mean next to nothing to the wider public. At the same time, the 142 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

education and training initiative at Sydney Olympic Park Authority (nowadays presented under the banner of the Sydney Wetland Institute) has a demonstrated history of drawing on a mix of knowledge from wetland practitioners, researchers, and urban communities and cooperation with other organizations such as the Society of Wetland Scientists (Oceania Chapter) to present regular webinars (https://www.sydneyolympicpark.com.au/Education/ Sydney-Wetland-Institute/Events, accessed on January 3, 2022) and a virtual symposium addressing the importance of fire in wetland management (https://members.sws.org/ oceania-chapter, accessed on January 3, 2022). In this way they have been able to draw on local knowledge sources and share this with a wider audience directly, and through virtual means, as part of the ongoing processes of identifying future needs and solutions to ensure the sustainability of our wetlands.

REFERENCES Barzen, J., T. Tran, D.V. Ni, B.H. Nguyen, P. Sok, V. Soth, S. Ainsley and S. Ouboundisane. 2019. Small (palustrine) wetlands in the Central Indochina Dry Forest Ecosystem and their conservation impact.

In C.Krittasudthacheewa, N. Hap, T.D. Bui and S. Voladet (eds).

Development and Climate Change in the Mekong Region: Case Studies.

Strategic Information and Research Development Centre, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia. pp. 35-66.

Carbonell M., N. Nathai-Gyan, and C.M. Finlayson. 2001 Science and Local Communities: Strengthening Partnerships for Effective Wetland Management. Ducks Unlimited Inc., Memphis, TN. Chen, Z. 2016. On the core of Chinese traditional values - the “Unitybetween Heaven and Man”. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity 6: 282-287.

Darrah, S.E., Y. Shennan-Farpôn, J. Loh, N.C. Davidson, C.M. Finlayson, R.C. Gardner, and M.J. Walpole. 2019. Improvements to the Wetland Extent Trends (WET) index as a tool for monitoring natural and human-made wetlands. Ecological Indicators 99: 294–298.

Ens E.J., G. Towler and C. Daniels. 2012. Looking back to move forward: collaborative ecological monitoring in remote Arnhem Land.

Ecological Management & Restoration 13: 26–35.

Davidson, S. 2005. Cultural burning revives a Kakadu wetland. ECOS 125:14-16.

Finlayson, C.M. 2018. Education centres in Australia and New Zealand. In C.M. Finlayson, M. Everard, K. Irvine, R.J. McInnes, B.A. Middleton, A.A. van Dam and N.C. Davidson (eds). The Wetland Book I: Structure and Function, Management and Methods. Springer Publishers, Dordrecht. pp. 1375-1378.

Finlayson, M.C., M. Bartlett, N. Davidson, and R. McInnes. 2013. The Ramsar Convention and urban wetlands: an opportunity for wetland education and training. In S. Paul (ed.). Workbook for Managing Urban Wetlands in Australia. Sydney Olympic Park Authority, Sydney. pp.3451.

Finlayson, C.M., N. Davidson, D. Pritchard, G.R. Milton and H. MacKay. 2011. The Ramsar Convention and ecosystem-based approaches to the wise use and sustainable development of wetlands.

Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy 14: 176-198.

Fox, A.D, I. Francis, D. Norriss and A. Walsh. 2019. Report of the 2018/2019 International Census of Greenland White-fronted Geese.

Greenland White-fronted Goose Study/National Parks & Wildlife Service report, Kalo.

Gevers, G.J.M., E.M.J. Koopmanschap, K. Irvine, C.M. Finlayson and A.A. van Dam. 2018. Capacity development for wetland management. In C.M. Finlayson, M. Everard, K. Irvine, R.J. McInnes, B.A. Middleton, A.A. van Dam and N.C. Davidson (eds). The Wetland Book I: Structure and Function, Management and Methods. Springer Publishers, Dordrecht. pp. 1935-1942.

Hansen, M. H., H. Li, and R. Svarverud. 2018. Ecological civilization: Interpreting the Chinese past, projecting the global future. Global Environmental Change 53: 195-203.

Lü, Y., L. Zhang, Y. Zeng, B. Fu, C. Whitham, S. Liu, and B. Wu. 2017.

Representation of critical natural capital in China. Conservation Biology 31: 894-902.

McInnes, R. J., N.C. Davidson, C.P. Rostron, M. Simpson, and C.M. Finlayson. 2020. A citizen science state of the world’s wetlands survey.

Wetlands 40: 1577-1593.

Middleton, B.A. 2016. Broken connections of wetland cultural knowledge. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability 2: 7.

Pyke, M.L., S. Toussaint, P.G. Close, R.J. Dobbs, I. Davey, K. George,D. Oades, D. Sibosado, P. McCarthy, C. Tigan, B. Angus (Jnr), E. Riley, D. Cox, Z. Cox, B. Smith, P. Cox, A. Wiggan and J. Clifton. 2018. Wetlands need people: a framework for understanding and promoting Australian indigenous wetland management. Ecology and Society 23: 43.

Ramsar Convention. 2015. Resolution XII.2 The Ramsar Strategic Plan 2016-2024. The 12th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971). Punta del Este, Uruguay, 1-9 June 2015.

Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. 2018. The Global Wetland Outlook.

Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, Gland.

Rundle, H. 2019. Indigenous knowledge can help solve the biodiversity crisis. Scientific American October 2019. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/indigenous-knowledge-can-help-solve-the-biodiversity-crisis/. Accessed on February 26, 2022.

Simpson, M., R.J. McInnes, N.C. Davidson, C. Walsh, C. Rostron and C.M. Finlayson. 2021. An updated citizen science state of the World’s wetlands survey. Wetland Science and Practice 38: 141-149.

SOPA (Sydney Olympic Park Authority) 2021. https://www.sydneyolympicpark.com.au/Education/Sydney-Wetland-Institute. Accessed on February 26, 2022.

Spray, M. 2018. Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust. In C.M. Finlayson, M. Everard, K. Irvine, R.J. McInnes, B.A. Middleton, A.A. van Dam and N.C. Davidson (eds). The Wetland Book I: Structure and Function, Management and Methods. Springer Publishers, Dordrecht. pp. 717-722.

Tran, T., S. Choowaew, and D. N Ni. 2003. University Network for wetland training in the Mekong region. ASEAN Biodiversity 3: 25-26.

Tran, T., J. Barzen, S. Choowaew, M. Engels, V.N. Duong, A.M. Nguyen, K. Inkhavilay, S. Kim, S. Rath, B. Gomotean, X.T. Le, K. Aung, H.D. Nguyen, R. Nordheim, H.S.T. Lam, D.M. Moore and S. Wilson.

2014. Persistent organic pollutants in wetlands of the Mekong Basin. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5196, Lafayette, LA. WIPO. 2016. Developing a National Strategy on Intellectual Property and Traditional Knowledge, Traditional Cultural Expressions and Genetic Resources. (Background Brief No. 3); available at: www.wipo.int/ publications/en/details.jsp?id=3864&plang=EN. Accessed on February 23, 2021.

WIPO. 2017. Documenting traditional knowledge – a toolkit. Available at: https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_1049.pdf. Accessed on February 17, 2021.

Wu, R., H.P. Possingham, G. Yu, T. Jin, J. Wang, F. Yang, S. Liu, J. Ma, X. Liu, and H. Zhao. 2019. Strengthening China’s national biodiversity strategy to attain an ecological civilization. Conservation Letters 12: e12660.

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 143

IMPROVING WETLAND RESTORATION XXXXXX

New Initiatives Improve Wetland Restoration Outcomes: Engineering with Nature and the Use of Natural and Nature-Based Features Jacob F. Berkowitz*1 and Nia R. Hurst1 For some time, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has supported an initiative called Engineering With Nature® (EWN) and the application of Natural and Nature-Based Features (NNBF), both of which promote the incorporation of natural processes and structures into the design and operation of ecological restoration and flood risk reduction projects. Each approach is introduced below, with an emphasis on potential applications in a wetland restoration context. Additionally, examples of recent and ongoing case studies that align with these initiatives are discussed.

Historically, practitioners designed wetland restoration projects and assessed their outcomes based upon observations made in unaltered reference areas (Brinson and Reinhardt 1996). However, many restoration projects failed to: follow anticipated trajectories, achieve project milestones, and provide wetland functions at magnitudes observed in unaltered locations (Zedler and Callaway 1999). Differences in landform, hydrology, soils, vegetation community dynamics, and landscape-level ecological processes between restored and reference locations were identified as factors limiting the success of restoration efforts (Zedler 2000). Also, many areas lack appropriate reference areas to determine pre-disturbance conditions which poses a challenge to achieving restoration success (Otte et al. 2021).

Recently, researchers and practitioners have increasingly emphasized the integration of natural and nature-based structures and processes into interdisciplinary frameworks to improve restoration project outcomes (Kurth et al. 2020).

These concepts build upon previous research recognizing that restoration projects mimicking natural processes and structures provide higher levels of ecological functions than those constructed using traditional techniques (Streever 2000; Foran et al. 2018).

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS, USA; *Corresponding author: Jacob.F.Berkowitz@usace. army.mil

1

144 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

ENGINEERING WITH NATURE During the past decade, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has cultivated the EWN initiative (Figure 1), which promotes the intentional alignment of naturaland engineering processes to deliver economic, environmental, and social benefits efficiently and sustainably through collaboration (King et al. 2020; https://ewn.erdc.dren.mil/).

Internationally, similar initiatives such as Working with Nature (WwN) have been introduced (Aiken et al. 2021).

The integration of nature-based processes and features into project design is an essential component of the EWN and WwN approaches, which has shown utility in a variety of wetland restoration contexts. The following sections describe three recent EWN projects that used dredged materials in conjunction with natural processes to increase wetland functions in both riverine and coastal settings.

Social Acceptable

Equitable

Sustainable

Environmental

Economic

Viable

Figure 1: Key elements of EWN, which highlight the intersection of social, environmental, and economic interests. (Source: https://ewn.erdc.dren. mil/?page_id=7.)

KEY ELEMENTS OF ENGINEERING WITH NATURE®: • Using science and engineering to support sustainable delivery of project benefits.

• Utilizing natural processes to maximum benefit, thereby reducing demands on limited resources, minimizing the environmental footprint of projects, and enhancing the quality of project benefits.

• Broadening and extending the base of benefits provided by projects to include substantiated economic, social, and environmental benefits.

• Applying science-based collaboration to organize and focus interests, stakeholders, and partners to reduce social friction, resistance, and project delays while producing more broadly acceptable projects.

Figure 2: Horseshoe Bend Island in the Atchafalaya River, LA., with examples of island development in 2010 (a), 2011 (b) and 2012 (c). (Source: USACE New Orleans District.)

ATCHAFALAYA RIVER – HORSESHOE BEND ISLAND

CHESAPEAKE BAY – SWAN ISLAND

In Louisiana’s Atchafalaya River, a 35-ha wetland island was created using dredged sediments that were strategically released into the water column upstream from a submerged shoal, allowing the river to sort and transport the sediments using natural processes (Figure 2; Berkowitz et al. 2016).

While the release of dredged sediments into the water column may seem counter-intuitive to USACE navigation protocols, the creation of the island adjacent to the navigation channel decreased the cross-sectional area of the river, which increased flow velocities, decreased shoaling, and reduced maintenance dredging requirements. Notably, the wetland island now provides a wide array of habitat, water quality, and hydrologic functions, highlighting how EWN projects can promote better environmental outcomes while achieving engineering objectives through naturebased processes (Foran et al. 2018).

In the Chesapeake Bay, continued subsidence, shoreline erosion, and sea level rise have resulted in degraded and fragmented conditions in an offshore marsh, threatening total island submergence. The Swan Island Project (Figure 4) is currently utilizing EWN principles to restore ecosystem functions via dredged material deposition while protecting the Town of Ewell, MD from erosion and storm surge impacts (Davis et al. 2021; https://en.erdc. dren.mil/?p=2841). Dredged material placement restored the islands spatial footprint, increased surface elevation, improved conditions for plant growth, and increased the capacity of the site capacity to protect coastal communities.

This project demonstrates how EWN principles can deliver both ecological and engineering benefit, including flood risk reduction (Aiken et al. 2021).

These projects collectively highlight the benefits of deliberately integrating natural features and processes into wetland restoration design to improve environmental outcomes while increasing resiliency and the protection of both natural and built infrastructure.

NEW JERSEY SALT MARSH - AVALON The application of thin sediment layers shows substantial promise to help coastal wetlands offset impacts from sea-level rise by supplementing marsh elevations while maintaining established vegetation communities (Raposa et al. 2020). In a coastal setting near Avalon, New Jersey fragmentation degraded a marsh system, stressing vegetation and reducing marsh resiliency to sea level rise (Berkowitz et al. 2017). Thin layers of dredged sediments were intentionally deposited onto the degraded marsh, mimicking storm driven sediment transport processes (Figure 3). Sediment placement reduced areas of pooling, increased marsh elevation, and improved conditions for salt marsh vegetation. This approach helped maintain the adjacent navigation channel while improving the physical stability in marsh platform and promoting rapid revegetation (VanZomeren et al. 2018).

NATURAL AND NATURE-BASED FEATURES Concurrent with the EWN initiative gaining momentum, a group of international collaborators from academia, agencies, non-governmental organizations, and the private sector worked to develop technical guidance promoting the use of Natural and Nature-Based Features (NNBF) to address flood risk management challenges and identify ecological restoration opportunities across a variety of landforms and landscapes (Figure 5; Bridges et al. 2021).

The comprehensive guide, released in September 2021, includes >1000 pages that reflect the growing body of knowledge and experience from around the world to inform the process of conceptualizing, planning, designing, engineering, constructing, and operating NNBF (https:// ewn.erdc.dren.mil/?page_id=4351). Within the NNBF framework, natural features (e.g., wetlands and reefs) Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 145

A

B

C

Figure 3: Avalon, NJ tidal marsh restoration. Dredged sediment thin layer placement application (a) and site conditions before (b) and one year (c) after restoration where the areas of sediment deposit are visible. (Source: Berkowitz et al. 2017; Google Earth, 2022.)

A

B

C

Figure 4: Swan Island in Chesapeake Bay, Maryland before dredged sediment placement (a), two months (b), and 1 year after placement. Note the observable increases in vegetation and reduced marsh fragmentation from (c). (Source: USFWS; NOAA.)

develop through the action of natural physical, biological, and chemical processes over time, whereas, naturebased features are created using design, engineering, and construction approaches to mimic natural features and provide similar, if not identical, ecological services. As a result, the EWN initiative and NNBF guidelines are complementary and can be applied in concert to improve project outcomes.

NATURAL AND NATURE-BASED FEATURES PRINCIPLES: • Uses a systems approach to leverage existing components and projects through interconnectivity.

• Engages communities, stakeholders, partners, and multidisciplinary team members to develop innovative solutions.

• Identifies sustainable and resilient solutions to produce multiple benefits.

• Anticipates, evaluates, and manages risks to project or system performance.

• Expects change and manages adaptively

146 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

The incorporation of nature-based features and processes into wetland restoration science is not new, and practitioners have recognized the utility of incorporating these elements into project design for several decades, especially with regards to improving the delivery of habitat functions (e.g., Soots and Landin 1978). However, the current emphasis and commitment to applying EWN and NNBF principles at enterprise scales is notable and Figure 5: Key elements of NNBF, which uses natural processes to address flood risk and identify ecological restoration opportunities across a variety of landforms and landscapes.

(Source: King et al.

2021.)

institutionalizing these approaches across public, private, and non-profit organizations will result in wider application of these concepts. Recent hearings at the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works and endorsement from the Commander of USACE, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Administrator, and leaders from the Netherlands Rijkswaterstaat, the World Bank, the United Kingdom Environment Agency, and the World Wildlife Fund communicate the degree of support EWN and NNBF are currently experiencing (https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2021/6/ oversight-hearing-on-water-resources-projects).

WETLAND RESTORATION IN THE UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN To further highlight these initiatives, the following describes examples of how EWN and NNBF is currently being integrated into a regional wetland restoration program. Wetlands and other aquatic resources in the Upper Mississippi River basin were altered by the historic construction of navigation dams and levees prior to 1940 and the intensification of agriculture in the catchment (Sparks et al. 2010). To address these challenges, the Upper Mississippi River Restoration (UMRR) program was authorized in 1986 to design and construct ecosystem restoration projects including the development of floodplain islands, backwater areas, and other wetland and aquatic ecosystem components to increase habitat functions, reestablish forested wetlands, and improve water quality while maintaining opportunities for commercial and recreational navigation (Theiling et al. 2014). Early restoration efforts, constructed using sandy dredged sediments, displayed poor vegetation establishment and growth. In response, recent floodplain and island restoration designs place nutrient-rich, fine-grained sediments dredged from backwater areas on top of the sandy dredged sediments removed from the navigation channel to improve soil health and promote vegetation

A

B

establishment. This approach mimics natural patterns of floodplain evolution, in which coarse sediments are deposited in natural levee and point bar positions near the channel, and fine-textured sediments are transported into highly productive backswamps and abandoned oxbows.

Recent projects employing this approach include the Conway Lake Habitat Rehabilitation and Enhancement Project (HREP) near Lansing, IA, at which experimental plots have been established to evaluate vegetation responses to varying depths of fine-grained sediment placement (Figure 5). Similarly, the McGregor Lake HREP near Prairie du Chien, WI is utilizing experimental blends of coarse and fine soils to mimic natural patterns of floodplain sediment deposition to improve wetland establishment and function. These projects adhere to EWN and NNBF principles by creating ecosystem features that imitate natural soil characteristics, deliver habitat and biogeochemical functions, and provide opportunities for recreation while aligning with navigation, ecological restoration, and flood risk reduction objectives.

Ongoing research at the Conway and McGregor Lakes HREPs will assess the relationships between construction designs that incorporate EWN and NNBF features with conventional construction techniques by monitoring vegetation response, changes in soil biogeochemistry, and the delivery of wetland functions. Established forested wetlands will also be evaluated, allowing for comparisons between natural areas and those created using a variety of techniques. Assessing habitat, hydrology, and biogeochemical functions in restored and natural sites in the UMRR will inform future restoration site selection considerations and promote the use of EWN and NNBF into wetland restoration initiatives throughout the region.

CONCLUDING REMARKS We believe the deliberate expansion of EWN and NNBF into wetland restoration projects has multiple benefits for natural resources and society. We, therefore, encourage

C

Figure 6: Post construction conditions (a,b) at the Conway Lake HREP, where fine grained soils (c) were incorporated into the wetland project design.

(Source: USACE St. Paul District.)

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 147

practitioners across the wetland science community to adopt these frameworks to improve restoration outcomes, communications across stakeholder groups, and the transdisciplinary integration of engineering approaches with ecological and social sciences. These initiatives are applicable in all wetland landscape settings (e.g., riverine, coastal, and geographically isolated wetlands) and spatial scales ranging from small footprints in urban areas to regional efforts to improve the functions of large river systems or coastal zones. As a result, EWN and NNBF can positively influence how we work and increase the capacity of our restoration efforts to deliver the wetland functions required to address the challenges of sea level rise, increased storm frequency and intensity, loss of biodiversity, and associated impacts to cultural resources, natural infrastructure, and the built environment.

Foran, C.M., K.A. Burks Copes, J. Berkowitz, J. Corbino, and B.C. Suedel. 2018. Quantifying wildlife and navigation benefits of a dredging beneficial use project in the Lower Atchafalaya River: a demonstration of Engineering with Nature®. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 14: 759-768.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Raposa, K., K. Wasson, J. Nelson, M. Fountain, J. West, C. Endris, and A. Woolfolk. 2020. Guidance for Thin-Layer Sediment Placement as a Strategy to Enhance Tidal Marsh Resilience to Sea-Level Rise. Published in collaboration with the National Estuarine Research Reserve System Science Collaborative.

The authors would like to thank the USACE Engineering With Nature and Dredging Operations Technical Support programs for supporting this effort as well as Aaron Mcfarlane, Charles Theiling, Burton Suedel, and Matt Blanchard who provided feedback on this paper.

REFERENCES Aiken, C.M., R. Mulloy, G. Dwane, and E.L. Jackson. 2021. Working with Nature approaches for the creation of soft intertidal habitats. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution https://doi.org/10.3389/ fevo.2021.682349.

Berkowitz, J.F., L. Green, C.M. VanZomeren, and J.R. White. 2016.

Evaluating soil properties and potential nitrate removal in wetlands created using an engineering with Nature-Based dredged material placement technique. Ecological Engineering 97: 381-388.

Berkowitz, J., C. VanZomeren, and C.D. Piercy. 2017. Marsh restoration using thin layer sediment addition: initial soil evaluation. Wetland Science & Practice 34: 13–17.

Bridges, T.S., J.K. King, J.D. Simm, M.W. Beck, G. Collins, Q. Lodder, and R.K. Mohan (eds.). 2021. International Guidelines on Natural and Nature-Based Features for Flood Risk Management. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. Brinson, M.M. and R. Rheinhardt. 1996. The role of reference wetlands in functional assessment and mitigation. Ecological Applications 6: 6976.

Davis, J., P. Whitfield, D. Szimanski, B.R. Golden, M. Whitbeck, J. Gailani, B. Herman, A. Tritinger, S.C. Dillon, and J. King. 2022. A framework for evaluating island restoration performance: A case study from the Chesapeake Bay. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 18(1): 42-48.

148 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

King, J.K., B.C. Suedel, and T.S. Bridges. 2020. Achieving sustainable outcomes using Engineering with Nature principles and practices. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 16: 546-548.

King, J. K., J.D. Simm, and T.S. Bridges. 2021. Chapter 2: Principles, Frameworks, and Outcomes. In T. S. Bridges, J. K. King, J. D. Simm, M. W. Beck, G. Collins, Q. Lodder, and R. K. Mohan (eds.). International Guidelines on Natural and Nature-Based Features for Flood Risk Management. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. Kurth, M.H, R. Ali, T.S. Bridges, B.C. Suedel, and I. Linkov. 2020. Evaluating resilience co-benefits of Engineering With Nature® projects. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 8:149.

Otte, M.L., W.T. Fang, and M. Jiang. 2021. A framework for identifying reference wetland conditions in highly altered landscapes. Wetlands 4: 1-12.

Sparks, R.E. 2010. Forty years of science and management on the Upper Mississippi River: an analysis of the past and a view of the future.

Hydrobiologia 640: 3-15.

Streever, W.J. 2000. Spartina alterniflora marshes on dredged material: a critical review of the ongoing debate over success. Wetlands Ecology and Management 8: 295-316.

Soots, R.F. and M.C. Landin. 1978. Development and management of avian habitat on dredged material islands. Technical Report DS-78-18.

Office of the Chief of Engineers, Washington, DC. Theiling, C.H., J.A Janvrin, and J. Hendrickson. 2014. Upper Mississippi River restoration: implementation, monitoring, and learning since 1986.

Restoration Ecology 23: 157-166.

VanZomeren, C.M., J.F. Berkowitz, C.D. Piercy, C.D., and J.R. White.

2018. Restoring a degraded marsh using thin layer sediment placement: short term effects on soil physical and biogeochemical properties. Ecological Engineering 120: 61-67.

Zedler, J.B. and J.C. Callaway. 1999. Tracking wetland restoration: do mitigation sites follow desired trajectories? Restoration Ecology 7: 6973.

Zedler, J.B. 2000. Progress in wetland restoration ecology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 15: 402-407.

WETLAND XXXXXXX RESTORATION

Restoring Tidal Flow to a New England Salt Marsh Ralph W. Tiner1 and Michael O’Reilly INTRODUCTION Salt marshes have experienced the brunt of human civilization for eons as they were diked for pasture or producing salt hay and less saltwater-dependent crops, filled for port, commercial, and residential development, used as landfills and to dispose of dredged material, ditched in efforts to reduce mosquito populations in coastal communities, or have had their connection to estuaries simply reduced or severed by roads and railroads. This was largely done because they were viewed as unproductive wastelands, public health hazards, or because their location was important for accessing deep water or connecting two points of land, or simply providing a desirable location for homes.

In the 1960s scientists studying coastal habitats started writing about the ecological significance of these wetlands in the United States in terms the public could understand (e.g., Goodwin 1961, Odum 1961, and Teal and Teal 1969).

Consequently the public was becoming more informed of the importance of these wetlands to coastal fisheries as well as to migratory birds as they witnessed accelerating destruction of salt marshes for residential and other development. In the 1960s, state legislatures began passing laws to restrict development of these wetlands, first in New England states then elsewhere (see Tiner 2013 for a comprehensive review of the history of tidal wetlands).

Today salt marshes are among America’s most valued natural resources and government agencies and non-government organizations (NGOs) are both actively involved in restoring these wetlands. Most cases of this restoration involve bringing back tidal flow and more saline conditions in one way or another. Where the marshes have been crossed by a road or railroad, tidal flow has either been eliminated or restricted to varying degrees that has greatly affected soil salinities and promoted growth of brackish and freshwater species. In many cases in the northeastern U.S., these crossings have led to a drastic change in plant composition and vegetation structure – from a diverse salt marsh community dominated by low-growing halophytic plants to a virtual monoculture of common reed (Phragmites australis) – a non-native2 that favors less saline habitats and grows to 3.7 m (12 feet) or more in height under the best circumstances. Some options for restoring tidal flow in these situations include: 1) reconnecting the marsh to Corresponding author: ralphtiner83@gmail.com There is a native species called American common reed (Phragmites australis ssp. americanus), but its distribution is limited in the Northeast.

the adjacent estuary (where tidal flow was eliminated), 2) removing tidal gates, and 3) expanding the size of the existing culverts. These may be some of the simplest restoration projects from a construction standpoint, although concerns about increased flooding on private property surrounding the marsh is often the major hurdle to overcome.

A small restoration project in Massachusetts serves as one example of the effectiveness of simply restoring tidal flow can bring about a return of salt marsh vegetation to an area that had been colonized by common reed. While some restoration projects are initiated as mitigation for destruction of wetland elsewhere, this project was a “pro-active project” – simply done for the benefit of the environment - to restore native halophytic vegetation and reduce the extent of non-native common reed.

STUDY AREA Cow Yard Marsh is located along the Little River in the town of Dartmouth, Bristol County, Massachusetts. The 6.7 hectare (16.6acre) marsh occurs in two sections: the lower marsh (connected directly to the river) and the upper marsh (crossed by a private access road, dividing the marsh into two units) (Figure 1). Historically the area served as pasture for livestock and a holding area for cattle that would be transported from a nearby dock to markets (Anne Eades, pers. comm. September 2021).

Connection to the Estuary

A 15-inch 3 round culvert connected the lower marsh to the river (yellow dot in Figure 1), while two 24-inch pipes (blue dots) connected the upper marsh with the lower marsh. By the 1990s, the 15-inch culvert had been damaged and was in need of repair. Over time, a significant portion of the lower marsh unit had become infested with common reed which appeared to be advancing into marsh interior. Since a stream also supplies significant freshwater to the marsh and Teal Pond to the east supplies groundwater, the restricted tidal flow also likely retained more fresh water than prior to private road construction which would have further promoted the expansion of common reed.

Many salt marshes in the southern New England have a fringe of common reed due to freshwater runoff or groundwater discharge.

Adjacent landowners were concerned about the broken culvert, the stagnant water conditions and frequent foul odors likely a result of stagnant water conditions. They also wanted to improve utility access to their properties which would require approval from the Dartmouth Conser-

1

2

English measures are used in some of the text for culvert sizes and where data came from other sources (e.g., Figure 1).

3

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 149

Figure 1. Aerial view of Cow Yard Marsh and relative elevations. Elevations above the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 give a perspective of the elevation differences within the Cow Yard Marsh. Higher elevations along the creek in the lower marsh likely resulted from mosquito ditch work. The dark blue areas represent salt pannes or pools in the marsh. The round yellow dot along the private road (Beach Lane) on the upper left shows the location of the main culvert connecting the marsh with Little River. Another road (Cow Yard Lane) divides the marsh into two units – lower marsh on the left and upper marsh on the right. (Note: The lower marsh is the subject of this paper.) The two blue dots on Cow Yard Lane represent culverts connecting the two units.

Teal Pond is on lower right. (Source: Massachusetts Division of Ecological Restoration)

vation Commission, so the Commission became involved with the work and added its perspective – salt marsh restoration to the project. While residents were mostly worried about odors, the Commission was concerned about marsh health and reducing the spread of common reed and restoring native salt marsh vegetation as much as possible.

INITIAL ACTION TAKEN – FIRST PHASE OF RESTORATION In 1992, the broken culvert for the lower marsh was replaced with a 19” x 30” elliptical pipe while the culverts for the upper unit were replaced by two 24” x 36” elliptical pipes. This was done without any serious analysis of the restriction. Simply expanding the connection should have a beneficial effect. Sometime later, co-author Mike O’Reilly (the Conservation Commission agent at the time) recognized that the Phragmites was beginning to show signs of dieback as evidenced by a “gray haze” produced by the stems of dead reeds and decided it might be useful to document the process.

Baseline Vegetation

In 1995, we established 15 study areas in the lower marsh to document the baseline conditions for informal monitoring of future changes. Sampling locations were chosen to represent areas with varying amounts of common reed, ranging from sparse cover to virtual monocultures (Figures 2-5). No sampling was done in areas solely represented by native species. At each site 2-4 nested plots (0.46m x 0.46m or 1.5ft x 1.5ft each) were evaluated for plant species, cover, and number and average height of Phragmites stems. Four plots were examined at the first two locations 150 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

but due to time considerations sampling was reduced to two plots per site. Results are shown in Tables 1 and 2.

Six species were recorded in the plots: Phragmites australis, salt hay grass (Spartina patens), salt grass (Distichlis spicata), smooth cordgrass-short form (Spartina alterniflora), common three-square (Schoenoplectus pungens), and Olney’s three-square (Schoenoplectus americanus).

Phragmites cover varied from 5 to 100%, while the other species occurred in significant amounts depending on location with Schoenoplectus more abundant in areas of strong freshwater influence (Table 1). Phragmites density ranged from 8 to 348 stems/m2 (Table 2; Figures 2-4). In addition to the plots, a few photographs were taken to document the 1995 conditions (Figures 2-5). Informal monitoring over the next few years revealed some dieback of common reed and the return of some salt marsh but it was not considered as significant a response as the Commission had hoped for.

Further work would be required.

NEXT STEPS – SECOND PHASE OF RESTORATION The Commission then worked with the Dartmouth Natural Resources Trust (DNRT) and others to better evaluate the degree of tidal restriction and determine what additional measures needed to be taken.

A preliminary site inspection was conducted by the Commission on February 15, 2001 and determined that the initial assessment would focus on the culvert that linked the marsh to the Little River. On that day the predicted tide should have flooded the marsh, but no flooding was observed. Further observations and measurements on April 9, 2001 showed that the flow into the marsh failed to attain

XXXXXXX

Figure 2. Plot 2A on October 31, 1995: mostly Spartina patens with some Phragmites. (R. Tiner photo)

Figure 3. Mike at Plot 9B (a virtual monoculture of Phragmites) on October 31, 1995. (R. Tiner photo)

Figure 4. General location of Plot 15B in late summer of 1995 (just before initiating study), looking west from Cow Yard Lane – a robust stand of Phragmites (R. Tiner photo)

Figure 5. View of eastern section of Cow Yard Marsh on October 31, 1995, looking toward Plots 9 through 12. (R. Tiner photo) Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 151

Plot #

Pa

Sp

Ds

SaS

Schp

Scha

April 2018 Observations

1A

10

100

No Pa; SaS and Sp

1B

25

100

No Pa; SaS and Sp

1C

50

100

No Pa; SaS and Sp

1D

10

100

No Pa; SaS and Sp

2Aa

25

95

No Pa; SaS and Sp

2Ab

25

95

No Pa; SaS and Sp

2Ac

10

100

No Pa; SaS and Sp

2Ad

25

100

No Pa; SaS and Sp

2Ba

75

30

No Pa; SaS and Sp

2Bb

75

30

3A

20

2

90 80

No Pa; SaS and Sp Sp, SaS, and Ds

3B

25

10

4A

15

100

1

No Pa; SaS and Sp and Geukensia

Sp, SaS, and Ds 20

No Pa and Sphp; SaS and Sp and Geukensia

4B

25

85

5A

30

100

No Pa; SaS and Sp

5B

30

95

No Pa; SaS and Sp

6A

30

6B

60

30

80

No Pa; SaS and Sp

30

No Pa; SaS and Sp

7A

25

60

25

7B

5

100

40

1

No Pa or Ds; SaS and Sp

8A

10

100

-----

8B

80

100

-----

9Aa

10

40

40

No Pa, Ds and Schp; SaS and Sp

9Ab

25

20

60

No Pa, Ds and Schp; SaS and Sp

9Ba

25

5

9Bb

100

t

10Aa

5

t

10Ab

20

10Ba

50

t

10Bb

50

5

50

No Pa and Scha; SaS and Sp

10Ca

40

80

No Pa and Scha; SaS and Sp

10Cb

70

70

No Pa and Scha; SaS and Sp

11A

20

75

11B

40

50

t

No Pa, Ds and Schp; SaS and Sp

50 20 90

5

70

20

No Pa; Scha – 60% Sp – 20% No Pa; Scha – 90% Sp = 5% No Pa, Ds and Schp; SaS and Sp No Pa, Ds and Schp; SaS and Sp

60

40 50

No Pa and Scha; SaS and Sp

No Pa and Scha; SaS and Sp No Pa and Scha; SaS and Sp

12Aa

15

100

5

No Pa; SaS and Sp

12Ab

5

100

5

No Pa; SaS and Sp

12Ba

100

t

No Pa; SaS and Sp

12Bb

100

5

No Pa; SaS and Sp

13A

90

13B

100

14Aa

50

t

5

-----

15

-----

100

No Pa; SaS and Sp

14Ab

30

100

14Ba

60

25

t

No Pa; SaS and Sp

14Bb

90

25

15Aa

75

50

20

No Pa; SaS and Sp

25

No Pa; SaS and Sp

60 40

No Pa; SaS and Sp No Pa; SaS and Sp

15Ab

75

20

15Ba

100

40

No Pa; SaS and Sp

15Bb

100

25

No Pa; SaS and Sp

Table 1. Percent cover for study plots in October 1995 and general observations in April 2018. Each plot was 0.46m x 0.46m. Pa – Phragmites australis, Sp – Spartina patens, Ds – Distichlis spicata, SaS – Spartina alterniflora (short form), Schp – Schoenoplectus pungens, and Scha – Schoenoplectus americanus.

152 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

Plot #

# of Stems per plot Density per m2 Average Height (m)

1A

6

29

1.04

1B

15

71

0.91

1C*

18

86

0.97

1D

10

48

0.66

2Aa

19

90

0.76

2Ab

11

52

0.97

2Ac

7

33

0.83

2Ad

9

43

0.91

2Ba*

59

281

0.84

2Bb*

73

348

1.14

3A

12

57

0.84

3B

12

57

1.19

4A

1

8

1.63

4B

7

33

1.37

5A

9

43

1.35

5B

17

81

0.84

6A

13

62

1.37

6B*

16

76

1.35

7A

20

95

0.81

7B

2

10

1.22

8A

4

19

1.04

8B*

14

67

1.98

9Aa

1

8

1.35

9Ab

6

29

1.32

9Ba

4

19

2.01

9Bb*

23

110

2.03

10Aa

4

19

1.45

10Ab

9

43

1.27

10Ba*

18

86

1.12

10Bb*

24

114

1.22

10Ca

7

33

1.63

10Cb*

27

129

1.75

11A

12

57

0.91

11B

17

81

1.07

12Aa

21

100

1.63

12Ab

11

52

0.99

12Ba*

68

324

1.17

12Bb*

60

286

1.37

13A*

18

62

2.08

13B*

24

114

2.64

14Aa*

22

105

1.27

14Ab

13

62

1.45

14Ba*

21

100

2.36

14Bb*

19

90

2.36

15Aa*

39

186

1.12

15Ab*

55

262

1.55

15Ba*

62

295

2.31

15Bb*

67

319

1.27

the expected height and that the outflow was also restricted producing a damming effect that failed to allow sufficient drawdown at low tide (Figure 6). Scouring at the culvert was also observed, providing further evidence of restriction – a 4.6 m (15-ft) wide scour depression on the marsh side of the culvert demonstrated restricted outflow. This reduced flushing would continue the retention of freshwater and maintain common reed, thereby limiting the re-establishment of salt marsh vegetation. There were minimal effects at the other culverts, so the focus of the restoration project would be on restoring full tidal flow via the marsh’s connection to Little River.

REVISITING THE SITE – VEGETATION RESPONSE On April 24, 2018, we revisited the site. While we were able to locate a few of the wooden stakes most were gone.

Nonetheless when we walked through the marsh, virtually all of the Phragmites was gone (Table 1). Almost all of the study plots are now occupied by a combination of Spartina alterniflora–short form and Spartina patens. In addition, the presence of the Atlantic ribbed mussel (Geukensia demissa) was conspicuous at Plot 4. All this provides evidence of more frequently flooded and more saline conditions.

This restoration has allowed the marsh to follow vegetation patterns similar to other southern New England salt marshes where smooth cordgrass is becoming more abundant in former upper high marsh zones in response to rising sea-levels (e.g., Warren and Niering 1993; Donnelly and Bertness 2001). Figures 7 and 8 show what the marsh looks like today. Without question, the project was successful at bringing back salt marsh vegetation to portions of the lower unit that were invaded by common reed and pushing common reed back to the marsh fringes and where the stream empties into the marsh (Figure 9).

LESSONS LEARNED The monitoring we considered was not part of a permit requirement so follow-up was delayed until we decided to take time to revisit the site. Having witnessed the beforeafter scenes, upon reflection, it would have been better if we had established a formal plan for monitoring that would have directed us to track the changes in vegetation at some frequency. Annual visits, for example, would have allowed us to ensure that the stakes were still in place. It would have been worthwhile to re-evaluate the plots in 2001 Table 2. Density and height of Phragmites at sampling locations in October 1995. Density is rounded off to nearest whole number. Plots marked by asterisk (*) had 50% cover or more by Phragmites. Plot size was 0.46m x 0.46m.

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 153

Figure 6. Tidal hydrograph showing water levels on both sides of the culvert connecting the lower marsh to Little River. (Source: Earth Tech 2001) At this point, the Dartmouth Conservation Commission secured cooperation and support from a number of public and NGO entities: Bristol County Mosquito Control, Dartmouth Natural Resources Trust, Buzzards Bay Coalition, Massachusetts Division of Ecological Restoration, and the Buzzards Bay National Estuary Program. With funding from the Fish America Program (NOAA Restoration Center) and DNRT, permitting was done to replace the 19” x 30”” pipe with a 3’ x 4’ box culvert to increase tidal flow to the marsh complex. In March 2004, the box culvert was installed.

when the second phase of restoration was being planned.

We should have also GPSed the stake locations. (Note: Subsequent studies for other projects that were designed to monitor long-term changes in coastal vegetation in response to rising sea level have included GPS locations; see Tiner and Veneman 2014.) With today’s technology, a time series of aerial images captured by drones could visually capture gross vegetation changes at the site (e.g., Madden et al. 2015). Also on-the-ground photos should have been captured at plot locations and other key locations to document visual changes in the marsh landscape over time. All this takes time and commitment, so plan accordingly.

THE FUTURE – NEED FOR MONITORING? Restoring tidal flow to the Cow Yard Marsh has eliminated much of the Phragmites from the high marsh zone of the lower marsh unit and has allowed the marsh to function more like a typical New England salt marsh. Native salt marsh vegetation has replaced Phragmites in much of the high marsh within two decades. Common reed, however,

154 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

is still present along the fringes and also in the easternmost portion of the lower marsh unit but this was expected due to strong freshwater influence from an entering stream, local groundwater discharge, and runoff from higher ground.

While the restoration project has been a success, it will be interesting to see what happens to this marsh in the future. With rising sea-level, many questions arise. Will smooth cordgrass replace the existing salt hay grass? Will “high marsh” become “low marsh”? If so, how long will it take? Will the high marsh migrate into areas dominated by the Phragmites on the eastern end of the lower marsh unit and eventually into any lowland forest? Will pannes and pools continue to increase, creating more open water in the marsh interior? Will the lower marsh unit eventually be converted to mud flat? What is happening in the upper unit of Cow Yard Marsh? And finally will there be a call for action to reverse the process initiated by the restoration to maintain a salt marsh community?

Ironically, the persistence of this salt marsh like oth-

Figure 7. Panoramic view of same scene shown in Figure 5 as of October 2021. Phragmites has been pushed back to the east but remains where fresh water enters the marsh. (M. O’Reilly photo)

Figure 8. View of Plots 15A and B (stakes visible) looking northwest from Cow Yard Lane, in September 2021 – no Phragmites. (Note: This is the same area shown in Figure 4 but view is to northwest rather than to west.) (M. O’Reilly photo)

Figure 9. Aerial view of Cow Yard Marsh in the fall of 2021. A few scattered patches of Phragmites (coarsetextured whitish areas) remain in the eastern marsh unit with the most extensive reed marsh occurring along the woodland border (lower right). It also appears that there is some dieback of woody vegetation along the northern edge of the marsh (on middle right of image) plus an increase in the number of pannes dominated by glassworts (Salicornia; red areas) and pools (open water) when compared to a 2001 aerial photograph (Figure 10). (Source: Dartmouth Natural Resources Trust)

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 155

REFERENCES Crosby, S., D.F. Sax, M.E. Palmer, H.S. Booth, L.A. Deegan, M.D. Bertness, and H.M. Leslie. 2016. Salt marsh persistence is threatened by predicted sea level rise. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 181: 93-99.

DOI:10.1016/j.ecss.2016.08.018 Donnelly, J.P. and M.D. Bertness. 2001. Rapid shoreward encroachment of salt marsh cordgrass in response to accelerated sea-level rise. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA: 98(25): 14218-14223.

Goodwin, R.H. (ed.) 1961. Connecticut’s coastal marshes: a vanishing resource. Connecticut Arboretum Bulletin No. 12. 35 pp.

Madden, M. T. Jordan, S. Bernardes, D.L. Cotton, N. O‘Hare, and A. Pasqua. 2015. Unmanned aerial systems and structure from motion revolutionize wetlands mapping. Chapter 10. In: R.W. Tiner, M.W. Lang, and V.V. Klemas (eds.). Remote Sensing of Wetlands: Applications and Advances. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. pp. 195-219.

Odum, E.P. 1961. The role of tidal marshes in estuarine production. New York State Conservationist 15: 12-15.

Teal, J. and M. Teal. 1969. Life and Death of the Salt Marsh. Ballantine Books, 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. and P.L.M. Veneman. 2014. An approach to monitoring coastal marsh migration in the Northeast. Wetland Science and Practice 31(3): 10-12.

Warren, R.S. and W.A. Niering. 1993. Vegetation change on a Northeast tidal marsh: interaction of sea-level rise and marsh accretion. Ecology 74(1): 96-103.

Figure 10. April 2001 image of the lower unit of Cow Yard Marsh. (Source: Mass GIS OLIVER)

ers may be in jeopardy due to rising sea-level (e.g., Crosby et al. 2016). This presents an interesting situation for the Dartmouth Conservation Commission and others – one that should require close attention. Perhaps a more formal monitoring program should be established to track future changes in the plant communities in both units of Cow Yard Marsh.

156 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

WETLAND XXXXXXX OF DISTINCTION

Volo Bog State Natural Area (Ingleside, Illinois, United States) – Exemplar of Bog Succession Julie Nieset1 Volo Bog State Natural Area (SNA) is located in northern Illinois in the town of Ingleside (Figure 1). It was nominated and accepted by Society of Wetland Scientists as a Wetland of Distinction for its unique and exceptional qualities discussed below. Perhaps, most importantly, it is the southernmost open-water quaking bog in North America to exhibit all stages of bog succession and Illinois’ only remaining open-water quaking bog; hence meeting the WoD metric of rare/unique wetland type within its own biogeographical region. Volo Bog provides habitat for biologically diverse wetland flora and fauna. It is recognized locally as an Illinois Nature Preserve and nationally as National Natural Landmark. Interpretive staff and volunteers organize and provide a plethora of educational outreach and management opportunities for the public. While largely now protected due to state protection, ecological threats include non-native species and an adjacent concrete recycling facility that impacts the site with noise and particulate pollution.

Surrounding neighborhoods currently are low density.

The story of how Volo Bog State Natural Area (SNA) came to be preserved and protected is a familiar story to those of us in this profession during this general juncture in history: A place of unique diversity threatened with development that is saved through the grit and ingenuity of groups of determined people. As we wade a bit into this story and sip the depths and breadth of this 12,000+ year-old open-water quaking bog, gleaning the beauty and richness it holds, we begin to sense the largely absent pre-colonial stories of those who co-existed with this bog. The Kiilaapoi (Kickapoo), Peoria, Bodéwadmiké (Potawatomi), Myaamia, Hoocąk (Ho-Chunk), Očhéthi Šakówiŋ territories encompassed the lands of Volo Bog. As the traditional territory of these Native Nations, these lands continue to carry the stories of these Nations, their struggles for survival and identity prior to their forced removal. This statement is a hope that there may be movement of our culture, toward true reconciliation that invites and acknowledges these voices, past and present.

The landscape of the Volo Bog SNA was shaped 12,000 years ago as part of the Woodfordian Stage of the Wisconsinan Glaciation which created the Valparaiso Moraine of the Northeastern Morainal Natural Division (McCommas et al. 1972). Ice blocks broke off the receding glacier and over time were buried by glacial outwash. As the glaciers melted, depressions were created that became lakes. Those lakes that exhibited poor drainage were primed to become today’s bogs. They filled up with vegetation like Sphagnum

Illinois Natural History Survey, University of Illinois, Champaign, IL; author contact: jenieset@illinois.edu

1

A

B

Figure 1. Volo Bog State Natural Area: a) location in northern Illinois and b) aerial view. (Sources: Google Maps and Google Earth, respectively)

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 157

mosses. Over time these mosses and other vegetation died.

As they decomposed, very slowly and incompletely, they formed a peat mat that helped to create acidic bog conditions. Pollen grains found in stratigraphically contiguous cores of bog sediment at Volo Bog SNA and carbon dated indicate trees such as spruce (Picea), fir (Abies), birch (Betula), alder (Alnus), ash (Fraxinus), and others grew there between 10,000-11,000 years ago, with subsequent shifting of tree species to present times (King 1981).

This Wetland of Distinction in northeastern Illinois is the only open-water quaking bog in the state and North America’s southernmost open-water quaking bog, which hosts all stages of bog succession (Figure 2). There are concentric zones of vegetation that grade into one another, around the open water – frequently referred to as the Eye of Volo Bog. Surrounding the open water is a floating herb mat of sedges and ferns over 50 feet of water and muck too thin to support shrubs or trees. As the mat thickens shrubs are supported in what is called the low or inner shrub zone where Leatherleaf (Chamaedaphne calyculata), Dwarf Birch (Betula pumila), Bog Willow (Salix pedicellaris), young Tamarack (Larix laricina) trees and other shrubs are growing; the next zone, the older tamarack tree zone is also where the Sphagnum mosses abound. These deciduous tamaracks shower the eye with spectacular golds in autumn. The tall or outer shrub zone holds Poison Sumac (Toxicodendron vernix), Winterberry (Ilex verticillata), and other shrubs. The marsh zone is the furthest from the center which is more of a sedge meadow when water levels are lower.

Figure 2. Overlooking the ‘Eye’ of Volo Bog. (Photo by Stacy Iwanicki)

158 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

The Tamarack View Trail is a loop trail around the bog that includes a floating boardwalk through the marsh. The Volo Bog Interpretive Trail is a boardwalk that ventures into the eye of the bog where visitors can directly view the five different plant zones, enjoying the uncommon flora of each, with a chance to spy some of the related fauna (Figure 3).

Approximately 160 plant species abound in Volo Bog, with 21 that are state endangered or threatened (Curtis 2010). Some of the herbaceous plants found here are Pitcher Plant (Sarracenia purpurea), Bog Buckbean (Menyanthes trifoliata), Gray Bog Sedge (Carex canescens), Wild Calla (Calla palustris) and Cotton Sedge (Eriophorum virginicum). Some notable tree and shrub species are present that have high (9-10) rating for Coefficient of Conservatism: Tamarack, Dwarf Birch, Bog Willow, and Highbush Cranberry (Viburnum opulus var. americanum).

There is an abundance of wildlife at Volo Bog SNA. The Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), along with the McHenry County Audubon Society lead regular public bird hikes. 212 species of birds have been recorded at Volo Bog SNA of which 68 species are known or highly probable to nest at the site. Wood ducks (Aix sponsa), Red-winged Blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus), Song Sparrows (Melospiza melodia), Yellow Warblers (Setophaga petechia), Great-blue Herons (Ardea herodias), Green Herons (Butorides virescens), Great Egrets (Ardea alba), and Yellow-rumped Warblers (Setophaga coronata) are some common birds seen seasonally. Some rarer to the region bird species include the Virginia Rail (Rallus

limicola), Sora (Porzana Carolina), Marsh Wren (Cistothorus palustris), Swamp Sparrow (Melospiza georgiana), Black-crowned Night Heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) (state endangered), and Sandhill Crane (Antigone canadensis).

Recently, the state-endangered King Rail (Rallus elegans) was found at Volo Bog SNA (Rahlin 2020).

There are 30 species of mammals listed as being at Volo Bog SNA. Bat species such as the Little Brown (Myotis lucifugus) and Big Brown Bat (Eptesicus fuscus), are confirmed during the interpretive center bat programs.

Other species of mammals are those common to wet areas like Beaver (Castor canadensis), Mink (Mustela vison), Masked Shrew (Sorex cinereus), Meadow Jumping Mouse (Zapus hudsonius), Meadow Vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus), and Muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus). Lists for reptiles, amphibians, diverse insects, e.g. damselfly and dragonfly species at Volo Bog SNA are in progress, as well as those for freshwater snails (Tiemann 2014).

There are areas on the property surrounding the wetlands (woodlands, savanna, marsh, shrub, old field, and prairie) being restored. Volunteers through the Illinois Department of Natural Resources engage in habitat restoration around the bog, including invasive upland buckthorn and honeysuckle removal. Bluebird houses have been erected along a trail for regular monitoring.

Figure 3. Volo Bog Interpretive Trail boardwalk during autumn.

(Photo by Stacy Iwanicki)

Although there is a healthy population of Tree Swallows (Tachycineta bicolor) that claim the bird boxes, Eastern Bluebird (Sialia sialis) populations have increased here (Chicago Tribune 2020). Data is sent to the East Central Illinois Bluebird Society for increasing knowledge about local bluebird population dynamics. This state natural area also hosts ongoing field research studies on Sandhill Cranes and Wood Duck populations.

At the Volo Bog Visitors Center there is a butterfly garden with an outdoor display created with artwork by members of Girl Scout Troop 264 (Figure 4). 27 butterfly species have been noted at Volo Bog SNA, including the Spicebush Swallowtail (Papilio Troilus), Red Spotted Purple (Limenitis Astyanax), Baltimore Checkerspot (Euplydryas phaeton), Painted Lady (Vanessa cordui), Comma (Polygonia comma), Mourning cloak (Nymphalis antiopa), Eastern tailed Blue (Everes comyntas) and the Eyed Brown (Satyrodes eurydice). The state endangered Swamp Metalmark (Calepeilis muticum) is found here.

A core value of the staff at Volo Bog SNA throughout the decades, is engaging with local citizens. From the early 1970s when seasonal naturalists utilized a 4’ x 8’ plywood hut (with a lawn chair) to the renovated circa-1900 dairy barn turned sportsman clubhouse now known as the Volo Bog Visitors Center (Figure 5), numerous outreach activities occur throughout the year. Visitors regularly join in a plethora of seasonal nature hikes and bog tours as part of the interpretive programming. A snapshot of the current happenings at Volo Bog SNA includes habitat restoration and stewardship days, outdoor and environmental literature, bird walks, a photography group meet called “ShutterBugs of Volo Bog”, “Walk with a Naturalist” programs, and an Annual Nature Photo Contest on display at the visitor center with a subsequent award ceremony. Notably the “Of Bogs and Books” book discussions of classic to contemporary natural history have been ongoing since 1994 with close to 300 environmental books read and discussed.

Locals enjoy music, crafts, snow sculpting, and bog tours seasonally at Winterfest. Activity guides are available for students to learn about the bog (Iwanicki 1995a,b). The Volo Bog teaching herbarium contains at least 147 vascular plants from the bog basin (Curtis 2010). Friends of Volo Bog (FOVB) is a non-profit organization started in 1983 “dedicated to the preservation of Volo Bog through education and citizen awareness” (Friends of Volo Bog 2022).

The FOVB newsletter - “The Bog Log” - was also started at this time and continues to be published quarterly. This group organizes a shop and other fundraising efforts to support Volo Bog SNA activities.

Stacy Iwanicki has been at Volo Bog SNA for 34 years and is the current Natural Resources Coordinator. When Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 159

Figure 4. Butterfly garden outdoor display at Volo Bog SNA. (Photo by Julie Nieset)

Figure 5. View overlooking Volo Bog SNA Visitors Center. (Photo by Julie Nieset)

she leads hikes through the bog, she says “Sometimes I conclude with the story of Billy on a bicycle”.

The Billy she refers to is Dr. William J. Beecher, past Director of the Chicago Academy of Sciences who wrote an article for the Chicago Tribune Magazine about saving Volo Bog from development, with the apt title “A quaking remnant of the Ice Age, Volo Bog has recorded changes in our climate for 12,000 years. Anybody care to try for 13,000?” In the article he writes about himself as a young boy on his bicycle pedaling across the landscape.

When he encounters the bog, “…I stood stunned. There… springing out of a flat, round sedge marsh, were green spires of conifers…I knew this must be a tamarack bog… a secret place, a wilderness of rare birds and orchids. I could not have imagined…one day I would be fighting for its life in a court battle.” His treasured time exploring in the bog during childhood led him to be part of citizen resistance to its proposed development and subsequent protection as an adult.

During the 1940s and 1950s locals were noticing natural areas being destroyed and realized that Volo Bog needed protection. Through the then-forming Illinois Chapter of The Nature Conservatory volunteers started a fundraising campaign that led to the purchase of a portion of the area - 47.5 acres of bog, which was donated to the University of Illinois in 1958 (Iwanicki 2007-2008).

Then in the 1960s the wetlands and meadows surrounding the bog were threatened with development that would adversely affect the bog. The harrowing story is described in the Beecher article originally in Chicago Tribune and re-told in Winter 2007-8 issue of The Bog Log (Iwanicki 2008). In brief, there was a hasty move by a developer to appeal to the local planning commission

to install a 94-million-dollar complex of homes, condominiums, shopping center, and golf course to surround Volo Bog. The commission voted down the re-zoning for development by one vote. This was followed by a rezoning decision made in a courtroom, with subsequent underhanded actions by the developer who dug a trench that threatened to impact the existence of the bog that resulted in more dramatic courtroom hearings. In the end there was enough public support and pressure for the Illinois Nature Preserves Commission to utilize the state’s right of eminent domain to take the land.

Thus, what started out as grassroots efforts by citizens, led to state agency intervention that prevented the development around Volo Bog. The bog was then transferred to the Illinois Department of Natural Resources and dedicated as an Illinois Nature Preserve. Since this time nearly 1200 additional acres have been acquired as buffer, adding two other bogs (Pistakee and Brandenburg Bogs), marshes, woodlands, shrubland and other open-land to the original protected parcel. In 1974 Volo Bog SNA became officially recognized as a National Natural Landmark (Illinois Nature Preserves Commission 2010).

Iwanicki remarks further during her hike “…12 years old…think about a 12-year-old that you know. You never know what great things they will do, how the experiences you share with them will lead them to what they will love…”

Indeed as Dr. Beecher’s childhood adventures in the bog formed a foundation for him to help protect and preserve the bog there is much potential in sharing knowledge of and enthusiasm for the wetlands in our care with others.

Truly the staff at Volo Bog SNA are an inspiration implementing educational initiatives. All their outreach activities undoubtably have led to citizens cherishing

160 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

Figure 7. Rose Pogonia Orchid (Pogonia ophioglossoides) in Volo Bog SNA. (Photo

by Steve Savocchi)

Figure 6. In 2021 Volo Bog SNA celebrated International Bog Day with an art show, live music, bog tours, bog crafts, and bog frog cookies and cake.

International Bog Day (celebrated the 4th Sunday of July) was established in Scotland in 1991 and was first celebrated in the United States at Volo Bog SNA in 2008. Other areas in the U.S. started celebrating starting 2012. (Photo by Stacy Iwanicki and cake artwork by Chuck Keller)

this significant body of life. If you find yourself in the Chicago Illinois area take the time to check Volo Bog out in person! In the meantime current events are listed https://www.friendsofvolobog.org/ as well as through this Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/Friendsof-Volo-Bog-330866217005358. They invite other bogs to celebrate International Bog Day (celebrated the 4th Sunday of July) (Figure 6).

View their social media page to see photos of critters and plants (like the lovely Rose Pogonia Orchid (Pogonia ophioglossoides) in Figure 7) throughout the season and find opportunities to attend virtual events currently through Zoom. Let’s support this bog and those who care for it by spreading some of their commitment to outreach and delight in wetlands, in turn, to our own wetlands in our respective regions. Here’s to those who care for and protect Volo Bog - may their example and others like them continue to move our culture in the direction of treasuring and nurturing our natural areas, deepening and broadening our stories of place.

Table 1. Links to videos and articles about Volo Bog. Video Volo Bog State Natural Area: Lake County Bing video Eye of Volo Bog June 2021 - Bing video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sCgn0fPTc https://petalspapersimplethymes.wordpress.

Article com/2016/08/16/volo-bog-state-natural-area/ https://skyaboveus.com/climbing-hiking/OffThe-Beaten-Path-Chicago-Volo-Bog https://www2.illinois.gov/dnr/oi/documents/ june08volobog.pdf ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thank you to Stacy Iwanicki and Steve Savocchi for permission to use their photos in this publication.

Additional thanks to Stacy Iwanicki for sharing resources and knowledge that were utilized in the writing of this article and for her long-time commitment and care of Volo Bog SNA. REFERENCES Beecher, W.J. 2008. The battle to save Volo Bog. The Friends of Volo Bog, Ingleside, IL. The Bog Log 25(1 - Spring 2008).

Checklist of Butterflies of Volo Bog https://www.friendsofvolobog.org/ checklists Checklist of Birds at Volo Bog State Natural Area https://939e6bb00cb8-4fc4-ab41-37e96d56f754.filesusr.com/ugd/25b1f6_3ad5f2f6035b4 d22889cd704ff058c11.pdf Curtis, L. 2010. Additions to the Volo Bog Herbarium, Illinois Nature Preserve, Lake County, Illinois. Illinois Native Plant Society. Erigenia 23 (Winter 2010): 34-38. https://illinoisplants.org/images/pub/Erigenia_ No_23_Winter2012.pdf#page=36

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 161

Chicago Tribune. 2020. Volunteers monitor man-made boxes to help native songbirds. Accessed January, 3, 2022. https://www.chicagotribune.com/ suburbs/lake-county-news-sun/ct-lns-bluebird-monitors-st-0608-20200607kmle6zbj4fdtjkwl6weyiigkfi-story.html eBird Checklist – Volo Bog State Natural Area. https://ebird.org/hotspot/ L322146 Friends of Volo Bog. 2022. https://www.friendsofvolobog.org/ Illinois Nature Preserves Commission. Volo Bog. 2010. Accessed November 5, 2021: https://www2.illinois.gov/dnr/INPC/Pages/Area2LakeVoloBog. aspx Iwanicki, S. 2008. Now and Then: The intriguing history of Volo Bog: 50th Anniversary of Volo Bog’s Purchase by The Nature Conservancy. The Bog Log: The Quarterly Newsletter of the Friends of Volo Bog and Volo Bog State Natural Area. Vol. 24 (4).

Iwanicki, S. 1995a. Ecology of Volo Bog, Part 1. Curriculum for 10th – 12th grade students. https://www2.illinois.gov/dnr/Parks/Interpret/Documents/Ecology%20of%20Volo%20Bog%20Part%201.pdf

Checklist of Mammals of Volo Bog https://www.friendsofvolobog.org/ mammals-index-page McComas, M., Kempton, J., and K. Hinkley. 1972. Geology, Soils, and Hydrogeology of Volo Bog and Vicinity, Lake County, Illinois. Illinois State Geological Survey. Environmental Geology Notes Number 57. https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/78971/geologysoilshydr57mcco.pdf?sequence=1 Frankie W., J. Miner, S. Benton, G.E. Pociask, E. Plankell, A. Stumpf, and.R. Jacobson. 2007. Guide to the geology of Moraine Hills, Glacial Park, and Volo Bog areas, McHenry and Lake Counties, Illinois. https:// www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Guide-to-the-geology-of-MoraineHills%2C-Glacial-and-Frankie-Miner/cb90f50ac12296a357e663732e02 ce252908d955 Native Land Digital. 2021. Accessed November 5, 2021. https://nativeland.ca/ Rahlin, A. 2020. Finding one elusive bird. https://news.illinois.edu/ view/6367/1639621107

Iwanicki, S. 1995b. Ecology of Volo Bog, Part 2. Curriculum for 10th – 12th grade students. https://www2.illinois.gov/dnr/Parks/Interpret/Documents/Ecology%20of%20Volo%20Bog%20Part%202.pdf

Sheviak, C., and A. Haney. 1973. Ecological Interpretations of the Vegetation Patterns of Volo Bog, Lake County, Illinois. Transactions Illinois Academy of Science. https://ilacadofsci.com/wp-content/ uploads/2013/10/066-13-print.pdf

Jeffords, M., and S. Post. 2014. Volo Bog State Natural Area. Exploring Nature in Illinois: A Field Guide to the Prairie State. University of Illinois Press, Champaign, IL. pp. 80–83. http://www.jstor.org/ stable/10.5406/j.ctt6wr55m.26.

Tiemann, J. 2014. Freshwater snail survey of wetlands in northern Illinois. Illinois Natural History Technical Report 2014 (07) 20 February 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/2142/47232

King, J. 1981. Late Quaternary Vegetational History of Illinois. Ecological Monographs 51 (1): 43-62. Accessed November 10, 2021: https:// www.jstor.org/stable/2937306?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

162 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

Trees and Shrubs of Volo Bog State Natural Area. 2021. Accessed November 10, 2021. https://www.friendsofvolobog.org/checklists

NOTES FROM THE FIELD

A friend and former co-worker Bill Wilen (former leader of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Wetlands Inventory) shared some photos taken by his friend Jim Getter. After seeing them, I thought that they would make for a visually pleasing contribution to our Notes from the Field. Since Jim retired from Department of the Interior he has taken up wildlife photography as a hobby. He takes daily walks in a County Park, Quiet Waters, four miles from downtown Annapolis, Maryland. The park contains woodlands, open water, and wetlands including vernal ponds and therefore provides opportunities to photograph wildlife at different seasons. We hope you enjoy these images of wetlands and their wildlife. Thanks to Jim for sharing some of his images. Note: While I will continue to write pieces for this section from time to time, I hope that Jim’s contribution will inspire others to submit their photographs of wetlands and wildlife so we can share them with the world.

Bottomland swamp.

Vernal pool in summer.

Vernal pool in winter

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 163

View of Harness Creek (South River in background).

Canada Geese (Branta canadensis) in flight.

Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus).

Pied-billed Grebe (Podilymbus podiceps).

164 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

WETLANDS XXXXXXX IN THE NEWS

L

isted 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 newspaper articles that should 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.

Wetlands: the unsung heroes of the planet Illegal strawberry farms threaten future of Spanish wetlands Green groups warn planned road in central Israel will kill off crucial wetlands Dartmouth residents raise concerns about development next to wetland Conserving the wetlands of Andhra Pradesh Wetlands a hot topic during Coral Lakes hearing Navi Mumbai: Panje officially declared a wetland by Space Application Centre Why India Values Wetland Conservation Fiji Way Gates Open At Ballona Wetlands New Research Says Mosquitoes Are Most Attracted to One Color in Particular A WETLAND UNDER SIEGE: IS THE PANTANAL A PARADISE LOST? The wonder of wetlands: the secret weapon in the battle against climate change The sound of water explored at Nap Nap Swamp as wetlands come alive Explained: What are Ramsar Sites, and what is the significance of the listing?

A New Study Has Found The Year When Sea Level Rise Truly Began Accelerating The mystery of Mexico's vanishing stream oaks How Plants Evolved To Colonize Land Over 500 Million Years Ago Asia's biggest wetland Keshopur chamb on ventilator Venus Fly Trap Care: Watering Tips, Sunlight Needs & More Cranberry Bogs in Massachusetts Yield A Colorful and Delicious Tradition!

How a Massachusetts salt marsh is changing what we know about New England's coast The Next Level in Sustainability: Nature Restoration Failure to elevate freshwater to the same priority as 'land and ocean' would be a fatal flaw in the new global framework for nature We Bet You Didn’t Know That Massachusetts Was Home To The Largest Tidal Flats In North America New Standley Lake live cam replaces the popular Eagle Cam Arizona developer will pay more than $1M after Johns Island wetland destruction Turkey aims to end losses, preserve wetlands to curb water woes This boisterous bird is a true sign of Michigan spring, and it’s not a robin

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 165

WETLAND BOOKSHELF

T

here are no new books to add to this listing. Please help us add new books. If your agency, organization, or institution has a website where wetland information can be accessed, please send the information to the Editor of Wetland Science & Practice at ralphtiner83@gmail.com. Your cooperation is appreciated.

BOOKS • History of Wetland Science: A Perspective from Wetland Leaders • An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America (5th Edition) • Wading Right In: Discovering the Nature of Wetlands • Sedges of Maine • Sedges and Rushes of Minnesota • Wetland & Stream Rapid Assessments: Development,Validation, and Application • Eager: The Surprising Secret Life of Beavers and Why They Matter • Wetland Indicators – A Guide to Wetland Formation, Identification, Delineation, Classification, and Mapping • Wetland Soils: Genesis, Hydrology, Landscapes, and Classification • Creating and Restoring Wetlands: From Theory to Practice • Salt Marsh Secrets. Who uncovered them and how?

• Remote Sensing of Wetlands: Applications and Advances.

166 Wetland Science & Practice April 2022

• Wetlands (5th Edition).

• Black Swan Lake – Life of a Wetland • Coastal Wetlands of the World: Geology, Ecology, Distributionand Applications • Florida’s Wetlands • Mid-Atlantic Freshwater Wetlands: Science, Management,Policy, and Practice • The Atchafalaya River Basin: History and Ecology of an American Wetland • Tidal Wetlands Primer: An Introduction to their Ecology, Natural History, Status and Conservation • Wetland Landscape Characterization: Practical Tools, Methods, and Approaches for Landscape Ecology • Wetland Techniques (3 volumes) • Wildflowers and Other Plants of Iowa Wetlands • Wetland Restoration: A Handbook for New Zealand Freshwater Systems • Wetland Ecosystems • Constructed Wetlands and Sustainable Development

WSP SUBMISSION GUIDELINES XXXXXXX

About Wetland Science & Practice (WSP)

W

etland Science and 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 Wetland Science and Practice 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 2022 issue will be an open access issue in April 2022). WSP is an excellent choice to convey the results of your projects or interest in wetlands to others. Also note that as of January 2021, 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, Twitter, 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 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 TEXT: Word document, 12 font, Times New Roman, singlespaced; 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).

FIGURES: Please include full-color images of subject wetland(s). Image size should be a minimum of 1MB for this e-publication. High resolution images at 150 DPI are preferred.

Figures should be original (not published elsewhere) or in the public domain. If published elsewhere, permission must be granted (author’s responsibility) from that publisher.

Reference Citation Examples • Claus, S., S. Imgraben, K. Brennan, A. Carthey, B. Daly, R. Blakey, E. Turak, and N. Saintilan. 2011.

Assessing the ex-tent and condition of wetlands in NSW: Supporting report A – Conceptual framework, Monitoring, evaluation and re-porting program, Technical report series, Office of Environ-ment and Heritage, Sydney, Australia. OEH 2011/0727.

• Clements, F.E. 1916. Plant Succession: An Analysis of the Development of Vegetation. Carnegie Institution of Wash-ington. 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.

Although not included in the above examples, please be sure to add the doi code to citations where possible.

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 167

2022 Advertising Prospectus Photo Credit: Jason Smith -Penobscot Mountain Perched Bog, Bar Harbor, ME

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)

1x

3x

6x

12x

$100

$90 ($270 total)

$80 ($480 total)

$70 ($840 total)

• 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.

• Size Specifications: 300 pixels wide x 250 pixels tall, 72 dpi • Distribution Date: On or around the 15th of each month

Website The SWS website launched its new design last year, and this far more user-friendly, engaging, and SEO-optimized format has increased the site’s visibility and exposure. Highlight your company on the SWS.org homepage with a display ad that links to your website.

Quarter 1

Quarter 2

Quarter 3

Quarter 4

Ad Due Date

January 3

March 28

June 27

Sept 26

Ad Begins

January 10

April 4

July 1

October 3

• Pricing: $300 quarterly; $1,000 yearly • Ad Format: .jpeg or .png • Size Specification: .300 pixels wide x 250 pixels tall, 72 dpi

• 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

Wetland Science & Practice (WSP) 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 1,000 impressions and more than 250 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

Pricing and Print Specifications

1x

2x

3x

4x

Full page (7.5” x 10” tall)

$275

$250

$225

$200

Half page (7.5” x 4.625” tall)

$175

$160

$145

$130

Quarter page (3.625 ” x 4.625” tall)

$120

$110

$100

$90

January issue

April issue

July issue

October issue

Ad Due Date

December 15

March 15

June 15

September 15

Issue Published

January 3

April 1

July 1

October 1

Interested in targeted exposure to SWS members? Contact info@sws.org | www.sws.org

XXXXXXX

GT5000 Terra

Robust multi-gas FTIR analysis for wetland and in-situ research

 Integrate with manual and automated    

N2O chambers for closed-loop analysis Internal battery Splash-proof and IP54 rated Lightweight and portable: 20.7 lb.

Wireless connectivity: Bluetooth & Wi-Fi

Gasmet Technologies Inc. sales@gasmet.com

CO2

CH4

CO NH3

H2O

Wetland Science & Practice April 2022 249 169 July 2021