The Experts below are selected from a list of 85032 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Rachel K. Gittman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Coming to Terms With Living Shorelines: A Scoping Review of Novel Restoration Strategies for Shoreline Protection
Frontiers in Marine Science, 2020Co-Authors: Carter S Smith, Rachel K. Gittman, Morgan E. Rudd, Emily C. Melvin, Virginia S. Patterson, Julianna J. Renzi, Emory H. Wellman, Brian R SillimanAbstract:In an era of rapid coastal population expansion and habitat degradation, restoration is becoming an increasingly important strategy for combating coastal habitat loss and maintaining ecosystem services. In particular, techniques that use habitat restoration alone or restoration in combination with built infrastructure to provide coastal protective services are growing in popularity. These novel approaches, often called living Shorelines, have the potential to expand the reach and applicability of coastal restoration projects. To understand how living Shorelines research has expanded over time, we conducted a scoping review of English-language peer-reviewed articles. We included papers that self-identified as living Shorelines research, as well as studies that used other related terminology, to investigate trends in publication rates, geography, site characteristics, and outcomes measured. Using a systematic search protocol, we compiled a database of 46 papers; the earliest study was published in 1981, and the earliest study to use the term living Shoreline was published in 2008. Eighty-three percent of studies were conducted in North America, followed by 11% in Asia, and 7% in Europe, but the use of the term living Shoreline was almost exclusively restricted to North America. Saltmarshes, oyster reefs, mangroves, and freshwater vegetation were used in living Shoreline designs, but 91% of studies also incorporated structural materials like oyster shell and rock. Most living Shorelines research was conducted at sites that were less than five years old. The vast majority of studies exclusively reported on ecological outcomes (89%), and of those, ecological processes were measured in 74% of studies. Processes related to coastal protection were measured most frequently (52% of ecological studies), followed by biological interactions, water filtration, nutrient cycling, and carbon sequestration. All together, our data suggest that living Shorelines research is on the rise, but there is a need for more long-term data, socio-economic research, further consensus on the terminology used to describe different types of projects, and research on the types of living Shorelines that are most effective in different environmental contexts. Future long-term and interdisciplinary research will help to elucidate the full effects of living Shorelines.
-
hurricane damage along natural and hardened estuarine Shorelines using homeowner experiences to promote nature based coastal protection
Marine Policy, 2017Co-Authors: Carter S Smith, Joseph P Morton, Joel F Fodrie, Steven B. Scyphers, Jonathan H. Grabowski, Rachel K. Gittman, Isabelle P. Neylan, Charles H PetersonAbstract:Abstract Growing coastal populations, rising sea levels, and likely increases in the frequency of major storm events will intensify coastal vulnerability in coming decades. Decisions regarding how and when to fortify estuarine Shorelines against coastal hazards, such as erosion, flooding, and attendant property damages, rest largely in the hands of waterfront-property owners. Traditionally, hard engineered structures (e.g. bulkheads, revetments, seawalls) have been used to protect coastal properties, based on the assumption that these structures are durable and effective at preventing erosion. This study evaluates the validity of these assumptions by merging results from 689 surveys of waterfront-property owners in NC with empirical Shoreline damage data collected along estuarine Shorelines after Hurricanes Irene (2011) and Arthur (2014). The data show: 1) homeowners perceive bulkheads to be the most durable and effective at preventing erosion, but also the most costly; 2) compared to residents with revetments and natural Shorelines, property owners with bulkheads reported double the price to repair hurricane damage to their property and four times the cost for annual Shoreline maintenance; 3) 93% of evident post-hurricane Shoreline damage was attributable to bulkheads or bulkhead hybrids and a higher proportion of surveyed homeowners with bulkheads reported having property damage from hurricanes; and, 4) Shoreline hardening increased by 3.5% from 2011 to 2016 along 39 km of the Outer Banks. These results suggest that bulkheads are not meeting waterfront property-owner expectations despite continued use, and that nature-based coastal protection schemes may be able to more effectively align with homeowner needs.
-
ecological consequences of Shoreline hardening a meta analysis
BioScience, 2016Co-Authors: Rachel K. Gittman, Carter S Smith, Steven B. Scyphers, Isabelle P. Neylan, Jonathan H. GrabowskiAbstract:: Protecting coastal communities has become increasingly important as their populations grow, resulting in increased demand for engineered shore protection and hardening of over 50% of many urban Shorelines. Shoreline hardening is recognized to reduce ecosystem services that coastal populations rely on, but the amount of hardened coastline continues to grow in many ecologically important coastal regions. Therefore, to inform future management decisions, we conducted a meta-analysis of studies comparing the ecosystem services of biodiversity (richness or diversity) and habitat provisioning (organism abundance) along Shorelines with versus without engineered-shore structures. Seawalls supported 23% lower biodiversity and 45% fewer organisms than natural Shorelines. In contrast, biodiversity and abundance supported by riprap or breakwater Shorelines were not different from natural Shorelines; however, effect sizes were highly heterogeneous across organism groups and studies. As coastal development increases, the type and location of Shoreline hardening could greatly affect the habitat value and functioning of nearshore ecosystems.
-
living Shorelines can enhance the nursery role of threatened estuarine habitats
Ecological Applications, 2015Co-Authors: Rachel K. Gittman, Joel F Fodrie, Carolyn A Currin, Michael F. Piehler, Charles H Peterson, John Francis BrunoAbstract:Coastal ecosystems provide numerous services, such as nutrient cycling, climate change amelioration, and habitat provision for commercially valuable organisms. Ecosystem functions and processes are modified by human activities locally and globally, with degradation of coastal ecosystems by development and climate change occurring at unprecedented rates. The demand for coastal defense strategies against storms and sea-level rise has increased with human population growth and development along coastlines worldwide, even while that population growth has reduced natural buffering of Shorelines. Shoreline hardening, a common coastal defense strategy that includes the use of seawalls and bulkheads (vertical walls constructed of concrete, wood, vinyl, or steel), is resulting in a “coastal squeeze” on estuarine habitats. In contrast to hardening, living Shorelines, which range from vegetation plantings to a combination of hard structures and plantings, can be deployed to restore or enhance multiple ecosystem services normally delivered by naturally vegetated shores. Although hundreds of living Shoreline projects have been implemented in the United States alone, few studies have evaluated their effectiveness in sustaining or enhancing ecosystem services relative to naturally vegetated Shorelines and hardened Shorelines. We quantified the effectiveness of (1) sills with landward marsh (a type of living Shoreline that combines marsh plantings with an offshore low-profile breakwater), (2) natural salt marsh Shorelines (control marshes), and (3) unvegetated bulkheaded shores in providing habitat for fish and crustaceans (nekton). Sills supported higher abundances and species diversity of fishes than unvegetated habitat adjacent to bulkheads, and even control marshes. Sills also supported higher cover of filter-feeding bivalves (a food resource and refuge habitat for nekton) than bulkheads or control marshes. These ecosystem-service enhancements were detected on shores with sills three or more years after construction, but not before. Sills provide added structure and may provide better refuges from predation and greater opportunity to use available food resources for nekton than unvegetated bulkheaded shores or control marshes. Our study shows that unlike Shoreline hardening, living Shorelines can enhance some ecosystem services provided by marshes, such as provision of nursery habitat.
-
marshes with and without sills protect estuarine Shorelines from erosion better than bulkheads during a category 1 hurricane
Ocean & Coastal Management, 2014Co-Authors: Rachel K. Gittman, Alyssa M Popowich, John F Bruno, Charles H PetersonAbstract:Acting on the perception that they perform better for longer, most property owners in the United States choose hard engineered structures, such as bulkheads or riprap revetments, to protect estuarine Shorelines from erosion. Less intrusive alternatives, specifically marsh plantings with and without sills, have the potential to better sustain marsh habitat and support its ecosystem services, yet their Shoreline protection capabilities during storms have not been evaluated. In this study, the performances of alternative Shoreline protection approaches during Hurricane Irene (Category 1 storm) were compared by 1) classifying resultant damage to Shorelines with different types of Shoreline protection in three NC coastal regions after Irene; and 2) quantifying Shoreline erosion at marshes with and without sills in one NC region by using repeated measurements of marsh surface elevation and marsh vegetation stem density before and after Irene. In the central Outer Banks, NC, where the strongest sustained winds blew across the longest fetch; Irene damaged 76% of bulkheads surveyed, while no damage to other Shoreline protection options was detected. Across marsh sites within 25 km of its landfall, Hurricane Irene had no effect on marsh surface elevations behind sills or along marsh Shorelines without sills. Although Irene temporarily reduced marsh vegetation density at sites with and without sills, vegetation recovered to pre-hurricane levels within a year. Storm responses suggest that marshes with and without sills are more durable and may protect Shorelines from erosion better than the bulkheads in a Category 1 storm. This study is the first to provide data on the Shoreline protection capabilities of marshes with and without sills relative to bulkheads during a substantial storm event, and to articulate a research framework to assist in the development of comprehensive policies for climate change adaptation and sustainable management of estuarine Shorelines and resources in U.S. and globally.
Jonathan H. Grabowski - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
hurricane damage along natural and hardened estuarine Shorelines using homeowner experiences to promote nature based coastal protection
Marine Policy, 2017Co-Authors: Carter S Smith, Joseph P Morton, Joel F Fodrie, Steven B. Scyphers, Jonathan H. Grabowski, Rachel K. Gittman, Isabelle P. Neylan, Charles H PetersonAbstract:Abstract Growing coastal populations, rising sea levels, and likely increases in the frequency of major storm events will intensify coastal vulnerability in coming decades. Decisions regarding how and when to fortify estuarine Shorelines against coastal hazards, such as erosion, flooding, and attendant property damages, rest largely in the hands of waterfront-property owners. Traditionally, hard engineered structures (e.g. bulkheads, revetments, seawalls) have been used to protect coastal properties, based on the assumption that these structures are durable and effective at preventing erosion. This study evaluates the validity of these assumptions by merging results from 689 surveys of waterfront-property owners in NC with empirical Shoreline damage data collected along estuarine Shorelines after Hurricanes Irene (2011) and Arthur (2014). The data show: 1) homeowners perceive bulkheads to be the most durable and effective at preventing erosion, but also the most costly; 2) compared to residents with revetments and natural Shorelines, property owners with bulkheads reported double the price to repair hurricane damage to their property and four times the cost for annual Shoreline maintenance; 3) 93% of evident post-hurricane Shoreline damage was attributable to bulkheads or bulkhead hybrids and a higher proportion of surveyed homeowners with bulkheads reported having property damage from hurricanes; and, 4) Shoreline hardening increased by 3.5% from 2011 to 2016 along 39 km of the Outer Banks. These results suggest that bulkheads are not meeting waterfront property-owner expectations despite continued use, and that nature-based coastal protection schemes may be able to more effectively align with homeowner needs.
-
ecological consequences of Shoreline hardening a meta analysis
BioScience, 2016Co-Authors: Rachel K. Gittman, Carter S Smith, Steven B. Scyphers, Isabelle P. Neylan, Jonathan H. GrabowskiAbstract:: Protecting coastal communities has become increasingly important as their populations grow, resulting in increased demand for engineered shore protection and hardening of over 50% of many urban Shorelines. Shoreline hardening is recognized to reduce ecosystem services that coastal populations rely on, but the amount of hardened coastline continues to grow in many ecologically important coastal regions. Therefore, to inform future management decisions, we conducted a meta-analysis of studies comparing the ecosystem services of biodiversity (richness or diversity) and habitat provisioning (organism abundance) along Shorelines with versus without engineered-shore structures. Seawalls supported 23% lower biodiversity and 45% fewer organisms than natural Shorelines. In contrast, biodiversity and abundance supported by riprap or breakwater Shorelines were not different from natural Shorelines; however, effect sizes were highly heterogeneous across organism groups and studies. As coastal development increases, the type and location of Shoreline hardening could greatly affect the habitat value and functioning of nearshore ecosystems.
Alain Lamarche - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
extent and degree of Shoreline oiling deepwater horizon oil spill gulf of mexico usa
PLOS ONE, 2013Co-Authors: Jacqueline Michel, Edward H Owens, Scott Zengel, Andrew Graham, Zachary Nixon, Teresa Allard, William Holton, Doug P Reimer, Alain LamarcheAbstract:The oil from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico was documented by Shoreline assessment teams as stranding on 1,773 km of Shoreline. Beaches comprised 50.8%, marshes 44.9%, and other Shoreline types 4.3% of the oiled Shoreline. Shoreline cleanup activities were authorized on 660 km, or 73.3% of oiled beaches and up to 71 km, or 8.9% of oiled marshes and associated habitats. One year after the spill began, oil remained on 847 km; two years later, oil remained on 687 km, though at much lesser degrees of oiling. For example, Shorelines characterized as heavily oiled went from a maximum of 360 km, to 22.4 km one year later, and to 6.4 km two years later. Shoreline cleanup has been conducted to meet habitat-specific cleanup endpoints and will continue until all oiled Shoreline segments meet endpoints. The entire Shoreline cleanup program has been managed under the Shoreline Cleanup Assessment Technique (SCAT) Program, which is a systematic, objective, and inclusive process to collect data on Shoreline oiling conditions and support decision making on appropriate cleanup methods and endpoints. It was a particularly valuable and effective process during such a complex spill.
Carter S Smith - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Coming to Terms With Living Shorelines: A Scoping Review of Novel Restoration Strategies for Shoreline Protection
Frontiers in Marine Science, 2020Co-Authors: Carter S Smith, Rachel K. Gittman, Morgan E. Rudd, Emily C. Melvin, Virginia S. Patterson, Julianna J. Renzi, Emory H. Wellman, Brian R SillimanAbstract:In an era of rapid coastal population expansion and habitat degradation, restoration is becoming an increasingly important strategy for combating coastal habitat loss and maintaining ecosystem services. In particular, techniques that use habitat restoration alone or restoration in combination with built infrastructure to provide coastal protective services are growing in popularity. These novel approaches, often called living Shorelines, have the potential to expand the reach and applicability of coastal restoration projects. To understand how living Shorelines research has expanded over time, we conducted a scoping review of English-language peer-reviewed articles. We included papers that self-identified as living Shorelines research, as well as studies that used other related terminology, to investigate trends in publication rates, geography, site characteristics, and outcomes measured. Using a systematic search protocol, we compiled a database of 46 papers; the earliest study was published in 1981, and the earliest study to use the term living Shoreline was published in 2008. Eighty-three percent of studies were conducted in North America, followed by 11% in Asia, and 7% in Europe, but the use of the term living Shoreline was almost exclusively restricted to North America. Saltmarshes, oyster reefs, mangroves, and freshwater vegetation were used in living Shoreline designs, but 91% of studies also incorporated structural materials like oyster shell and rock. Most living Shorelines research was conducted at sites that were less than five years old. The vast majority of studies exclusively reported on ecological outcomes (89%), and of those, ecological processes were measured in 74% of studies. Processes related to coastal protection were measured most frequently (52% of ecological studies), followed by biological interactions, water filtration, nutrient cycling, and carbon sequestration. All together, our data suggest that living Shorelines research is on the rise, but there is a need for more long-term data, socio-economic research, further consensus on the terminology used to describe different types of projects, and research on the types of living Shorelines that are most effective in different environmental contexts. Future long-term and interdisciplinary research will help to elucidate the full effects of living Shorelines.
-
hurricane damage along natural and hardened estuarine Shorelines using homeowner experiences to promote nature based coastal protection
Marine Policy, 2017Co-Authors: Carter S Smith, Joseph P Morton, Joel F Fodrie, Steven B. Scyphers, Jonathan H. Grabowski, Rachel K. Gittman, Isabelle P. Neylan, Charles H PetersonAbstract:Abstract Growing coastal populations, rising sea levels, and likely increases in the frequency of major storm events will intensify coastal vulnerability in coming decades. Decisions regarding how and when to fortify estuarine Shorelines against coastal hazards, such as erosion, flooding, and attendant property damages, rest largely in the hands of waterfront-property owners. Traditionally, hard engineered structures (e.g. bulkheads, revetments, seawalls) have been used to protect coastal properties, based on the assumption that these structures are durable and effective at preventing erosion. This study evaluates the validity of these assumptions by merging results from 689 surveys of waterfront-property owners in NC with empirical Shoreline damage data collected along estuarine Shorelines after Hurricanes Irene (2011) and Arthur (2014). The data show: 1) homeowners perceive bulkheads to be the most durable and effective at preventing erosion, but also the most costly; 2) compared to residents with revetments and natural Shorelines, property owners with bulkheads reported double the price to repair hurricane damage to their property and four times the cost for annual Shoreline maintenance; 3) 93% of evident post-hurricane Shoreline damage was attributable to bulkheads or bulkhead hybrids and a higher proportion of surveyed homeowners with bulkheads reported having property damage from hurricanes; and, 4) Shoreline hardening increased by 3.5% from 2011 to 2016 along 39 km of the Outer Banks. These results suggest that bulkheads are not meeting waterfront property-owner expectations despite continued use, and that nature-based coastal protection schemes may be able to more effectively align with homeowner needs.
-
ecological consequences of Shoreline hardening a meta analysis
BioScience, 2016Co-Authors: Rachel K. Gittman, Carter S Smith, Steven B. Scyphers, Isabelle P. Neylan, Jonathan H. GrabowskiAbstract:: Protecting coastal communities has become increasingly important as their populations grow, resulting in increased demand for engineered shore protection and hardening of over 50% of many urban Shorelines. Shoreline hardening is recognized to reduce ecosystem services that coastal populations rely on, but the amount of hardened coastline continues to grow in many ecologically important coastal regions. Therefore, to inform future management decisions, we conducted a meta-analysis of studies comparing the ecosystem services of biodiversity (richness or diversity) and habitat provisioning (organism abundance) along Shorelines with versus without engineered-shore structures. Seawalls supported 23% lower biodiversity and 45% fewer organisms than natural Shorelines. In contrast, biodiversity and abundance supported by riprap or breakwater Shorelines were not different from natural Shorelines; however, effect sizes were highly heterogeneous across organism groups and studies. As coastal development increases, the type and location of Shoreline hardening could greatly affect the habitat value and functioning of nearshore ecosystems.
Scott Zengel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
extent and degree of Shoreline oiling deepwater horizon oil spill gulf of mexico usa
PLOS ONE, 2013Co-Authors: Jacqueline Michel, Edward H Owens, Scott Zengel, Andrew Graham, Zachary Nixon, Teresa Allard, William Holton, Doug P Reimer, Alain LamarcheAbstract:The oil from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico was documented by Shoreline assessment teams as stranding on 1,773 km of Shoreline. Beaches comprised 50.8%, marshes 44.9%, and other Shoreline types 4.3% of the oiled Shoreline. Shoreline cleanup activities were authorized on 660 km, or 73.3% of oiled beaches and up to 71 km, or 8.9% of oiled marshes and associated habitats. One year after the spill began, oil remained on 847 km; two years later, oil remained on 687 km, though at much lesser degrees of oiling. For example, Shorelines characterized as heavily oiled went from a maximum of 360 km, to 22.4 km one year later, and to 6.4 km two years later. Shoreline cleanup has been conducted to meet habitat-specific cleanup endpoints and will continue until all oiled Shoreline segments meet endpoints. The entire Shoreline cleanup program has been managed under the Shoreline Cleanup Assessment Technique (SCAT) Program, which is a systematic, objective, and inclusive process to collect data on Shoreline oiling conditions and support decision making on appropriate cleanup methods and endpoints. It was a particularly valuable and effective process during such a complex spill.
