ECSU GEO SAV's

Project Need: Seawalls and other hard structure methods used tosecure waterfront property cause the loss of intertidal habitatand may increase erosion to nearby shorelines. An alternative to installing a seawall is to plant marsh grass, a natural buffer against wave energy. Marsh planting is sometimes combined with the installation of offshore

breakwaters or stone sills to further protect the shoreline while minimizing the negative effects on coastal habitat. Through marsh restoration projects,NOAA hopes to stabilize shorelines and enhance coastal and marine habitat.

ECSU- Project Leaders:Emma Sawyer, Angela Cohoon, Research Assistants:Matt Woolard, Shanna Chambliss, Heather Allen

Salt marshes serve several important ecological functions in the coastal enviroment. These functions include providing vital habitat for different species. These species include fish, crabs, and shrimp. They also protect the the coastline from erosion, and they help improve water quality by trapping sediment and nutrient run-off. Salt marshes often exist adjacent to prime development and agricultural land.

In the fall of 2001 the marsh restoration project began at the NCMM site in Beaufort, NC. Later in September and October of 2002 the monitoring grew and it included two more sites, the Duke University Marine Lab (DUML), site in Beauford and the Pine Knoll Shores (PKS), site near the North Carolina Aquarium. Information collected at restored and reference sites includes GPS data for surfact elevations, pore water salinity, sediment organic matter content, sediment grain size composition, vegetative composition and faunal utilzation. GIS maps are an important tool in evaluating spatial changes in marsh cover. Data on faunal utilization of the marshes, collected using fyke nets, is an indicator of habitat quality.

Sediment characteristics did not vary widely between restored and natural reference sites, or between locations. Organic matter overall was low. DUML and PKS reference sites had a slightly higher organic matter contents than their restored counterparts, but NCMM had a lower organic matter contents. Sediments were predominately sandy, with sand content ranging between 81.56% at NCMM restored and 96.19% at DUML restored. There was very little difference in grain size between natural and restored sites and between locations. The ability to get information about sediment salinity measures was limited by the minimal amount of porewater remaining in the sandy sediments of the marshes at low tide, when we sampled the marshes. However, it is clear that all the marshes are in the polyhaline portion of the estuary, with sediment salinities ranging between 30 and 37 ppt.

Fundiing provided by NOAA EEP Program and NOAA Citizen-Based Habitat Restoration Program.

ELIZABETH CITY STATE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Return home Research Faculty Dr. Francisco San Juan Dr. Kathleen Fischer Mrs. Elizabeth Noble Research Assistants Jacklyn James Shanna Chambliss Links ECSU Geosciences www.noaa.gov www.ncnerr.org dcm2.ehnr.state.nc.us www.enr.state.nc.us www.usgs.gov www.frf.usace.army.mil www.ncfisheries.net cerser.ecsu.edu www.nia.ecsu.edu	Department of Geological, Environmental and Marine Sciences Remote Sensing Lab NOAA Restored Salt Marsh Monitoring Science-Based Citizen Monitoring of Salt Marsh Restoration Sites in North Carolina Project Need: Seawalls and other hard structure methods used tosecure waterfront property cause the loss of intertidal habitatand may increase erosion to nearby shorelines. An alternative to installing a seawall is to plant marsh grass, a natural buffer against wave energy. Marsh planting is sometimes combined with the installation of offshore breakwaters or stone sills to further protect the shoreline while minimizing the negative effects on coastal habitat. Through marsh restoration projects,NOAA hopes to stabilize shorelines and enhance coastal and marine habitat. Project Objective: Evaluate tidal salt marsh restoration efforts by collecting data on faunal utilization of the marsh as an indicator of habitat quality. To obtain hands on experience with the fisheries sampling techniques and marine fisheries habitat research. To learn how to fish a fyke net; collect, enumerate, identify and measure estuarine finfish, shellfish and decapod crustaceans;complile and summarize fisheries and environmental data. Research Team: *ECSU-* Project Leaders:Emma Sawyer, Angela Cohoon, Research Assistants:Matt Woolard, Shanna Chambliss, Heather Allen NOAA- Dr. Carolyn Curin, Priscilla Delano Timeline: Field sampling of the North Carolina Maritime Museum (NCMM), natural and restored marsh sites in Beaufort, NC September 2003 Lab work-up to identify,enumerate and measure finfish and shellfish September 2003 Data entry, analyses and report December 2003 Background: Salt marshes serve several important ecological functions in the coastal enviroment. These functions include providing vital habitat for different species. These species include fish, crabs, and shrimp. They also protect the the coastline from erosion, and they help improve water quality by trapping sediment and nutrient run-off. Salt marshes often exist adjacent to prime development and agricultural land. Materials and Methods: In the fall of 2001 the marsh restoration project began at the NCMM site in Beaufort, NC. Later in September and October of 2002 the monitoring grew and it included two more sites, the Duke University Marine Lab (DUML), site in Beauford and the Pine Knoll Shores (PKS), site near the North Carolina Aquarium. Information collected at restored and reference sites includes GPS data for surfact elevations, pore water salinity, sediment organic matter content, sediment grain size composition, vegetative composition and faunal utilzation. GIS maps are an important tool in evaluating spatial changes in marsh cover. Data on faunal utilization of the marshes, collected using fyke nets, is an indicator of habitat quality. Results from 2001/2002 monitoring: Sediment characteristics did not vary widely between restored and natural reference sites, or between locations. Organic matter overall was low. DUML and PKS reference sites had a slightly higher organic matter contents than their restored counterparts, but NCMM had a lower organic matter contents. Sediments were predominately sandy, with sand content ranging between 81.56% at NCMM restored and 96.19% at DUML restored. There was very little difference in grain size between natural and restored sites and between locations. The ability to get information about sediment salinity measures was limited by the minimal amount of porewater remaining in the sandy sediments of the marshes at low tide, when we sampled the marshes. However, it is clear that all the marshes are in the polyhaline portion of the estuary, with sediment salinities ranging between 30 and 37 ppt. Fyke net sampling results demonstrate that a greater number of fish entered the natural marshes than the restrored marshes at both sites. The mean fish abundance at the DUML natural marsh was 229.00 fish per net, while at the restored marsh the average was 162.00 fish per net. Fish abundance was much lower at NCMM, where nets at the natural and restored sites caught 32.50 and 20.00 fish, respectively. Shrimp abundances showed little difference between natural and restored sites at both locations. An average of 16.00 shrimpwere caught per net. Fewer crabs were caught at the natural marsh than at the restored DUML marsh, yet more crabs were caught at the NCMM natural marsh. Acknowledgements: Fundiing provided by NOAA EEP Program and NOAA Citizen-Based Habitat Restoration Program. See Photos