Cumulative impacts of dock shading on Spartina alterniflora in South Carolina estuaries

Environmental Management

Volumn 33, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 741-748

  Sanger, Denise M ^a   Holland, A Frederick ^a,c   Gainey, Christopher ^b  

^a MARINE RESOURCES RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b Timberland High School   (United States)

^c CENTER FOR COASTAL ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND BIOMOLECULAR RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COASTAL ZONES; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; ESTUARIES; HOUSING; OCEAN HABITATS; PORTS AND HARBORS; TIDES; URBAN PLANNING;

DOCK SHADING; NURSERY HABITAT AREAS; TIDAL CREEKS;

DOCKS;

ESTUARINE ENVIRONMENT; HARBOR; SALTMARSH; SHADING;

ARTICLE; COASTAL WATERS; ESTUARY; EVALUATION; GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION; HABITAT STRUCTURE; LAND DRAINAGE; NONHUMAN; NURSERY; PLANT; PLANT ECOLOGY; PUBLIC HEALTH; SALT MARSH; SPARTINA ALTERNIFLORA;

COASTS; ESTUARIES; HARBORS; HOUSES; OCEANS; PLANNING; POLLUTION CONTROL; TIDES;

NORTH AMERICA; SOUTH CAROLINA; UNITED STATES;

RUMEX; SPARTINA; SPARTINA ALTERNIFLORA;

EID: 3543063563     PISSN: 0364152X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00267-004-0018-9     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Allen, J., and K. S. Lu. 2000. Modeling and predicting future urban growth in the Charleston area. Strom Thurmond Institute, Clemson University, Clemson, SC.
2. Cofer-Shabica, S., J. Hackett, F. Phillips, G. Phipps, W. Reynolds, and H. Robinson. 1999. The citizen's guide to the Charleston Harbor Project. Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, Charleston, South Carolina, 76 pp.
3. Cohen, J. E., C. Small, A. Mellinger, J. Gallup, and J. Sachs. 1997. Estimates of coastal populations. Science 278:1211-1212.
4. Colligan, M., and C. Collins. 1995. The effect of open-pile structures on salt marsh vegetation NOAA/NMFS Pre-publication Draft Report. 15 pp.
5. Constanza, R., R. D'Arge, R de Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, R. O'Naill, J. Parueol, R. Raskin, P. Sutton, and M van den Belt. 1997. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253-260.
6. Field, D. W., A. J. Reyer, P. V. Genovese, and B. D. Shearer. 1991. Coastal wetlands of the United States: An accounting of a valuable national resource. NOAA Anniversary Report, US. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington DC, 59 pp.
7. Hackney, C. T., W. D. Burbanck, and O. P. Hackney. 1976. Biological and physical dynamics of a Georgia tidal creek. Chesapeake Science 17:271-280.
8. Hoffman, W. F. II. 1991. Temporal and spatial distribution of ichthyofauna inhabiting the shallow marsh habitat of the Charleston Harbor Estuary. Master's Thesis. College of Charleston, Charleston, South Carolina, 137 pp.
9. Kearney, V. F., Y. Segal, and M. W. Lefor. 1983. The effects of docks on salt marsh vegetation. Connecticut State Department of Environmental Protection, Hartford, Connecticut. 22 pp.
10. Kneib, R. T. 1993. Growth and mortality in successive cohorts of fish larvae within an estuarine nursery. Marine Ecology Progress Series 94:115-127.
11. Lerberg, S. B., A. F. Holland, and D. M. Sanger. 2000. Responses of tidal creek macrobenthic communities to the effects of watershed development. Estuaries 23:838-853.
12. McGuire, H. L. 1990. The effects of shading by open-pile structures on the density of Spartina alterniflora. Master's Thesis, College of William and Mary, Virginia Institute of Marine Science. Gloucester Point, Virginia, 112pp.
13. McIvor, C. C., and W. E. Odum. 1988. Food, predation risk, and microhabitat selection in a marsh fish assemblage. Ecology 69:1341-1351.
14. Miller, M. 1993. The rise of coastal and marine tourism. Ocean and Coastal Management 21:183-199.
15. NOAA 2001. Private docks: Fighting for the public's rights in New York. Coastal Services Linking People, Information, and Technology 4:4-6.
16. Osgood, D. T., and J. C. Zieman. 1998. The influence of subsurface hydrology on nutrient supply and smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) production in a developing barrier island marsh. Estuaries 21:767-783.
17. Pederson, C. H., and J. Lubchenco. 1997. Marine ecosystem services. Pages 177-194. in C. G. Daily ed, Nature's services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
18. Sanger, D. M., A. F. Holland, and G. I. Scott. 1999a. Tidal creek and salt marsh sediments in South Carolina coastal estuaries. I. Distribution of trace metals. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 37:445-457.
19. Sanger, D. M., A. F. Holland, and G. I. Scott. 1999b. Tidal creek and salt marsh sediments in South Carolina coastal estuaries. II. Distribution of organic contaminants. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 37:458-471.
20. Sanger, D. M., A. F. Holland, and D. L. Hernandez. In press. Evaluation of the impacts of dock structures and land use on tidal creek ecosystems in South Carolina estuarine environments. Environmental Management.
21. SCDHEC. 1999. OCRM Regulations: Rules and regulations for permitting in the critical areas of the coastal zone. SCDHEC/OCRM, Charleston, South Carolina, 68 pp.
22. Shenker, J. M., and J. M. Dean. 1979. The utilization of an intertidal salt marsh creek by larval and juvenile fishes: abundance, diversity, and temporal variation. Estuaries 2:154-163.
23. Teal, J. M. 1962. Energy flow in the salt marsh ecosystem of Georgia. Ecology 43:614-624.
24. Tiner, R. W. Jr. 1977. An inventory of South Carolina's coastal marshes. South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department, Technical report no. 23. Charleston, SC, 33p.
25. Weinstein, M. P. 1979. Shallow marsh habitats as primary nurseries for fishes and shellfish, Cape Fear, NC. Fishery Bulletin 77:339-357.
26. Wenner, E. L., and H. R. Beatty. 1993. Utilization of shallow estuarine habitats in South Carolina, U.S.A., by postlarval and juvenile stages of Penaeus spp. (Decapoda: Penaeidae). Journal of Crustacean Biology 13:280-295.
27. Wiegert, R. G., and B. J. Freeman. 1990. Tidal salt marshes of the southeast Atlantic Coast: A community profile. United States Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85:1-67.