Ecological feasibility studies in restoration decision making

Environmental Management

Volumn 39, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 843-852

  Hopfensperger, Kristine N ^a   Engelhardt, Katharina A M ^a   Seagle, Steven W ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE   (United States)

^b APPALACHIAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision making; Ecological feasibility studies; Restoration planning; Tidal freshwater marsh

Indexed keywords

ECOLOGICAL FEASIBILITY STUDIES; RESTORATION PLANNING; TIDAL FRESHWATER MARSH;

DECISION MAKING; ECOSYSTEMS; ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING; PROJECT MANAGEMENT;

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT;

DECISION MAKING; ECOLOGICAL APPROACH; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEM; MARSH; RESTORATION ECOLOGY; STAKEHOLDER;

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FRESHWATER ENVIRONMENT; INFORMATION CENTER; INFORMATION PROCESSING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; SOCIAL ASPECT; UNITED STATES;

ANIMALS; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; DECISION MAKING; ECOLOGY; ECOSYSTEM; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; HUMANS; RIVERS; VIRGINIA; WATER POLLUTION;

NORTH AMERICA; POTOMAC RIVER; UNITED STATES;

EID: 34248225467     PISSN: 0364152X     EISSN: 14321009     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00267-005-0388-7     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Baker JP, Hulse DW, Gregory SV, White D, Van Sickle J, Berger PA, Dole D, Schumaker NH (2004) Alternative futures for the Willamette River Basin, Oregon. Ecological Applications 14:313-324
2. Bedford BL (1999) Cumulative effects on wetland landscapes: Links to wetlands restoration in the United States and southern Canada. Wetlands 19:775-788
3. Carter V, Rybicki NB, Landwehr JM, Turtora M (1994) Role of weather and water quality in population dynamics of submersed macrophytes in the tidal Potomac River. Estuaries 17:417-426
4. Cartwright L (2004) Breeding Bird Survey for Dyke Marsh Preserve. Unpublished data. Friends of Dyke Marsh, Alexandria, VA
5. Casagrande DG (ed.) (1997) Restoration of an urban salt marsh: An interdisciplinary approach. Number 100, Bulletin Series, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, New Haven, CT
6. Clewell A, Rieger J, Munro J (2000) Guidelines for developing and managing ecological restoration projects. 2nd ed. Society for Ecological Restoration. Available at www.ser.-org/. Accessed: April, 2004
7. Costanza R, Sklar FH, White M (1990) Modeling coastal landscape dynamics. Bioscience 40:91-107
8. Ellison AM (2000) Mangrove restoration: Do we know enough? Restoration Ecology 8:219-229
9. Gaskill K (2000) Updated birds of Dyke Marsh checklist. Original from the National Park Service in 1993, but updated in 2000, Washington, DC
10. Geist C, Galatowitsch SM (1999) Reciprocal model for meeting ecological and human needs in restoration projects. Conservation Biology 13:970-979
11. Hopfensperger KN, Engelhardt KAM, Seagle SW (2004) Should we restore Dyke Marsh? A management dilemma facing George Washington Memorial Parkway. Handbook for National Park Service GWMP Workshop, November 4, 2004, 105 p. Available at http://www.al.umces.edu/DMP/workbook.htm. Accessed: February 2007
12. Hopfensperger KN, Engelhardt KAM, Seagle SW (2006) The use of case studies in establishing feasibility for wetland restoration. Restoration Ecology 14:578-586
13. Inanc B, Kinaci C, Öztürk I, Sevimli MF, Arikan O, Öztürk M (1998) Pollution prevention and restoration in the Golden Horn of Istanbul. Water Science Technology 37:129-136
14. Interagency Workgroup on Wetland Restoration. (2001) An introduction and user's guide to wetland restoration, creation, and enhancement. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Habitat Conservation, Habitat Protection Division and Habitat Restoration Division, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watershed, Wetlands Division, Washington, DC. Available at http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/restore/. Accessed: November 2004
15. Jenkins RE, Burkhead NM (1994) Freshwater fishes of Virginia. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland, 1079 p
16. Johnston RJ, Grigalunas TA, Opaluch JJ, Mazzotta M, Diamantedes J (2002) Valuing estuarine resource services using economic and ecological models: The Peconic Estuary System study. Coastal Management 30:47-65
17. Kangas PC (2004) Ecological engineering principles and practice. Lewis Publishers, Washington, DC, 452 p
18. Kelso D, Xu Z, Marcella G, Thomas LK, Jr. (1993) A historical delineation of the Dyke Marsh vegetation. Report to the National Park Service, 8 p, Washington, DC
19. Kentula ME (2000) Perspectives on setting success criteria for wetland restoration. Ecological Engineering 15:199-209
20. Kentula ME, Brooks RP, Gwin SE, Holland CC, Sherman AD, Sifneos JC (1992) An approach to improving decision making in wetland restoration and creation. Hairston AJ (eds) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon
21. Lindholm DA (1992) 1992 Dyke Marsh herbaceous plant study. George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, 27 p
22. Llewellyn DW, Shaffer GP, Craig NJ, Creasman L, Pashley D, Swan M, Brown C (1996) A decision-support system for prioritizing restoration sites on the Mississippi River alluvial plain. Conservation Biology 10:1446-1455
23. Myrick RM, Leopold LB (1963) Hydraulic geometry of a small tidal estuary. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 442-B. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
24. National Park Service (NPS). (1977) Environmental assessment of Dyke Marsh. National Capital Region, National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior, 53 p, Washington, DC
25. National Research Council (NRC). (1992) Restoring aquatic ecosystems: Science, technology, and public policy. National Research Council Commission on Geosciences, Environment, and Resources. National Academy Press, Washington, DC
26. Pastorok RA, MacDonald A, Sampson JR, Wilber P, Yozzo DJ, Titre JP (1997) An ecological decision framework for environmental restoration projects. Ecological Engineering 9:89-107
27. Sklar FH, Fitz HC, Wu Y, Van Zee R, McVoy C (2001) The design of ecological landscape models for Everglades restoration. Ecological Economics 37:379-401
28. Society for Ecological Restoration Science & Policy Working Group (SER). (2002) The SER primer on ecological restoration. Available at www.ser.org/. Accessed: April 2004
29. Spencer SC (2000) Population abundance and habitat requirements of the marsh wren (Cistothorus palustris) at Dyke Marsh National Wildlife Preserve. M.S. Thesis. George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia
30. Townsend JF (2004) Natural Heritage Resources of Virginia: Rare plants. Natural Heritage Technical Report 04-06. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, Virginia. Unpublished report. April 2004, 56 p
31. Turner SJ, O'Neill RV, Conley W, Conley MR, Humphries HC (1991) Pattern and scale: Statistics for landscape ecology. In: Turner MG, Gardner RH (eds) Quantitative methods in landscape ecology. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY. Pages 17-49
32. Walker WW (1995) Design basis for Everglades stormwater treatment areas. Water Resources Bulletin 31:671-685
33. Westman WE (1991) Ecological restoration projects: Measuring their performance. Environmental Professional 13:207-215
34. Wyant JG, Megnack RA, Ham SH (1995) The need for an environmental restoration decision framework. Ecological Engineering 5:417-420
35. Xu Z (1991) Final report on inventories of plant species and communities in Dyke Marsh, Alexandria, Virginia. George Mason University, Fairfax, VA. 67 p
36. Yozzo D, Titre J, Sexton J (eds). (1996) Planning and evaluating restoration of aquatic habitats from an ecological perspective. IWR Report 96-EL-4, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Vicksburg, MS
37. Zedler J (ed) (2001) Handbook for restoring tidal wetlands. CRC Press, Washington, DC, 439 p