Project final report - National Estuarine Research Reserve Association
Transcription
Project final report - National Estuarine Research Reserve Association
Expanding Living Shorelines within the ACE Basin NERR to Protect Habitat and to Reduce Climate Change Vulnerability through the Application of Collaborative Science-Based Habitat Restoration. A Final Report Submitted to the National Estuarine Research Reserve System Science Collaborative August 15th 2015 Project Start Date: September 1st 2012 Project Completion Date: June 30th 2015 Project Coordinator: Dr. John W. Leffler Applied Science Lead: Dr. Peter Kingsley-Smith Collaboration Lead: Blaik Keppler Submitted by: Name: Dr. Peter Kingsley-Smith NERR: ACE Basin NERR, South Carolina, USA Email: [email protected] Phone: 843-953-9840 This project was funded by a grant from NOAA/National Estuarine Research Reserve Science Collaborative, NOAA Grant Number NA09NOS4190153. 1 1. Abstract The overall goal for this project was to address three of the four ACE Basin NERR priority management issues, “Habitat Conservation”, “Water Quality”, and “Community Resilience”, by expanding living shorelines in the ACE Basin through a community-based, intended user-driven collaboration with SCDNR. Specifically, the project sought to achieve the following goals: 1) Create living shorelines that restore and conserve habitat by reducing erosion, improving water quality, and creating ever-growing breakwaters to protect shorelines in an era of climate changedriven sea level rise; 2) Enhance communication and cooperation among local user groups; 3) Establish habitat restoration lay advisors and monitors who will continue their activities beyond the scope and timeframe of this project; and 4) Increase public commitment to stewardship. From the very outset of this project’s development, the engagement of stakeholders was a key component. More conventional oyster reef habitat restoration and enhancement projects are targeted towards very specific locations chosen by research scientists and explicitly identified in the proposal submitted for funding; in this project, this was not the case. While the project boundary area was known at the outset, siting restoration efforts within the ACE Basin NERR in South Carolina, USA, sites were proposed by stakeholders gathered from a diversity of perspectives, evaluated by collaborative field teams of stakeholders and SCDNR staff, and ultimately prioritized and selected by a subset of the stakeholder group as a whole, through the assembly of a Project Advisory Committee. Following these selections of sites in both years of the project, SCDNR researchers coordinated logistics and materials needed for the oyster reef substrate deployments to facilitate volunteer-based activities at sites that addressed priorities for oyster reef restoration efforts identified by the stakeholders, specifically that reefs would: 1) Address erosion of saltmarsh habitat; 2) Lead to water quality improvement; 3) Provide opportunities for public access and have high visibility; 4) Create benefits to wildlife; and 5) Minimally impact viewscape (arising from concerns in year 2 of the impacts of the permit-driven signage on reefs). Between April 2013 and May 2015, this project led to 53 reef-building events at 38 discrete locations through the ACE Basin NERR, through the deployment of four different reef substrates (loose oyster shell, bagged oyster shell, concrete oyster castles, and re-purposed cement crab traps), matched to site characteristics by drawing upon the expertise and previous experience of the SCDNR research team. Through the deployments of these four reef substrates, this project led to the protection of 9,256 linear feet (> 1.7 miles) of shoreline and engaged 840 volunteers that provided 2,218 hours of time. Furthermore, the volunteer labor to bag shell needed for the bagged shell reef, producing 8,099 bags, involved a further 1,082 volunteers, providing an additional 1,438 volunteer hours to the project. Volunteers (n=44) were also engaged in monitoring activities, generating yet more (n=139) volunteer hours for the project. Staff also incorporated salt marsh restoration activities into this project, by engaging elementary to high school children (n=100) in the growing and planting of Spartina seedlings. Staff associated with this project also worked in classrooms to educate K-12 students as to the importance of oysters in our estuaries. This project also generated tremendous opportunities for less formal education by talking to stakeholders about the values of oyster restoration work while they were engaged in many different facets of the project overall. The SCDNR project team hopes to carry the momentum from this project forward into a new NERRS Science Collaborative project aimed at facilitating and empowering private citizens to establish living shorelines in front of their own properties, as viable alternatives to bulkheads and seawalls. 2 1. Management problem and context The local coastal management problem addressed in this project was the ongoing loss of shoreline through erosional processes and exacerbated losses that are anticipated under scenarios of future global climate change-driven sea level rise. Imminent threats from human population growth and development practices, together with impending sea level rise, threaten to reshape the ACE Basin ecosystem. Within the ACE Basin NERR, eroding shorelines include areas impacted by winddriven waves, such as the mouth of the Edisto River where human communities are situated, sites supporting critical habitat for species of special concern, and many Army Corps of Engineerscreated cuts through marsh islands along the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (ICW). Marshes along these cuts lack the hard substrate needed for oyster recruitment and therefore the stabilization effected by subsequent oyster reef growth, and thus are actively eroding, leaving bare shelves of mud and degraded water quality. Rates of erosion in such areas are often further increased by heavy boat traffic (e.g., Kennish 2002). The oyster reef habitat restoration efforts implemented in this project directly related to the “Habitat change and restoration” and the “Nonpoint source pollution” focus areas of this initial RFP. Eastern oysters, Crassostrea virginica, are recognized as ecosystem engineers (Gutiérrez, 2003; ASMFC, 2007) that create complex habitats utilized by numerous finfish, invertebrates, wading birds, and mammals (Peterson et al., 2003; Plunket & Peyre 2005; Luckenbach et al., 2005). More than 83 species of finfish and invertebrates are associated with intertidal oyster reefs in South Carolina, including all 22 species managed by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC, 2007). In terms of habitat value, the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC, 2009) has designated oyster reefs as essential fish habitat. Intertidal oyster reefs reduce sediment erosion, a form of nonpoint source pollution, through their action as natural breakwaters and shoreline stabilizers. They also improve water clarity and quality by filtering large quantities of water, controlling phytoplankton populations, and transferring nutrients from the water column to the benthos (Dame et al., 2001; Porter et al., 2004). The importance of documenting both direct and indirect ecosystem services as a metric of the success of restoration efforts, above and beyond the amelioration of losses to a commercially exploited resource, specifically C. virginica, was highlighted by Coen & Luckenbach (2000). Rising sea level is widely predicted by global climate models (Karl et al., 2009), possibly destroying vast expanses of salt marshes as shorelines erode or are inundated. Throughout most of its range, C. virginica occurs subtidally; however, in South Carolina and Georgia more than 95% of oyster reefs are intertidal (Bahr & Lanier, 1981; Burrell, 1986) and consist of threedimensional multi-generational vertical clusters of oysters that generate approximately 50 times the surface area of a non-oyster intertidal mud bottom (Bahr & Lanier, 1981). Unlike subtidal oysters, intertidal populations form natural breakwaters which protect fringing marshes from erosion by storms, boat wakes, wind-driven waves, and long-shore currents (Meyer et al., 1997; Piazza et al., 2005). This habitat restoration project served to reduce these erosion rates and protect shorelines adjacent to sites identified and addressed by project stakeholders. Oyster reefs are formed by one generation of oysters settling on the shells of previous generations, resulting in increased reef height with each subsequent generation. Vertical growth of oyster reefs is limited by immersion time. As sea level rises, reef heights will naturally increase such that reefs persist as natural, growing breakwaters which adjust to tidal elevation, thus offering great potential for shoreline protection in the face of rising sea levels. 3 The ACE Basin staff, particularly Stewardship Coordinator Al Segars and CTP Coordinator Blaik Keppler, frequently engage in on-going discussions with many groups that have vested interests in protecting the natural resources of the ACE Basin. Dr. Segars regularly takes these stakeholders on boat tours of the NERR and explains how even some of the very small-scale existing living shoreline projects have been working to stem erosion and improve water clarity. Stakeholders on such tours began talking about the many other sites in the ACE Basin that were suffering from shoreline erosion, especially along the ICW and inhabited barrier islands. Dr. Segars, as a representative of his stewardship constituency, approached the rest of the project team with a request to ramp up the SCDNR oyster restoration program to make more significant impacts on some of the most severely affected areas within the ACE Basin. Additional local user groups were contacted to gauge their opinions and ideas concerning an expansive, integrated effort, and they expressed enthusiastic support. The recognition that each of these groups has its own perspective regarding priority areas for restoration, led to the idea of using a facilitated collaborative learning approach for promoting communication among all partners and for developing the necessary coordination among the groups that best utilizes their unique resources. A compelling collection of letters of support from some of the representative partners expressing the manner in which this project, if funded, would support the missions of their organizations, was an important component of the submitted proposal. The 2011-2016 NERRS Strategic Plan (2011) lists “Climate Change”, “Habitat Protection”, and “Water Quality” as the three focus areas for the Reserve System. Phrasing from Objectives and Strategies in the Plan include: “Increase…restoration…to improve coastal habitat quantity, quality, and resiliency to climate change impacts”; “Demonstrate best practices in…stewardship and climate change adaptation”; “Identify, prioritize, and implement…habitat restoration projects taking into account climate change impacts”; “Implement…programs to promote…resource stewardship”; and “Lead…collaborative projects that connect scientists with intended users”. The 2011-2016 ACE Basin NERR Management Plan (2011) cites “Habitat Conservation”, “Water Quality”, and “Community Resilience” as three of its four Priority Management Issues, all of which were directly addressed by this project. In the Reserve’s 2006 Needs Assessment, local decision-makers scored “alternatives to bulkheads/marsh shoreline stabilization” as highest priority under Beach and Shoreline Management; Habitat restoration scored highest in the Natural Resource/Habitat Issues category (ACE Basin Management Plan, 2011). Oyster reefs are identified as critical habitats of concern in SCDNR’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy Plan (see Kohlsaat et al., 2005). The Nature Conservancy’s biological assessment of the Carolinian Ecoregion identifies oyster reefs as priority conservation targets (DeBlieu et al., 2005). The ASMFC (2010) explicitly highlights the ecological services of oyster reefs and their role as natural breakwaters. The value of oyster reefs and salt marshes are discussed extensively in the SAFMC Fishery Ecosystem Plan (SAFMC, 2009). Several barriers which this project sought to overcome were identified early on in the project development phase. Although the SCDNR has an established, highly successful community-based restoration program, namely the South Carolina Oyster Restoration and Enhancement (SCORE) Program, its funding is limited. A recent project along the ICW has been especially successful at stemming erosion, improving water quality, and expanding salt marsh habitat behind the reef. This restored reef, however, only protects 250 feet of shoreline out of several miles in that particular waterway in need of protection, and funding only permits 100 feet to be added every two years. Construction of reefs requires volunteer manpower, logistical planning, and infrastructure support. Funding limitations also restrict the time available for volunteer coordination efforts. There is so 4 much area in need of shoreline stabilization that a thoughtful plan needed to be developed, ideally through structured decision-making using collaborative learning methods, to prioritize the allocation of limited coordination and construction resources. Although significant in some quarters, in general levels of community awareness and stewardship needed to be increased in order to facilitate improved protection and restoration of ACE Basin natural resources. 2. Outcomes, methods and data During the first six months of this project (September 2012-March 2013) the project team worked closely with intended users to identify specific locations within the ACE Basin for oyster reef construction and to prepare for spring 2013 reef constructions. The NERR-SCDNR project team contacted a variety of intended users involved with the ACE Basin area and who were leaders of different constituencies. A total of 34 individuals representing NGOs, government agencies, recreational groups, and schools, as well as 10 project staff participated in a six hour workshop held on December 6th 2012 at the Nemours Plantation, South Carolina, USA. Attendees at this workshop are listed below. Expanding the ACE Basin's Living Shorelines Thursday December 6th 2012, Nemours Plantation, SC. Stakeholders Amanda Flake Bess Kellett Bob Sandifer Bruce Doneff Denise Parsick Dick Yetter E.M. "Bud" Skidmore Elizabeth Vernon Bell Frank Gibson Frank Roberts Fred Kinard Helga Crandall Howard Schnabolk James Brailsford III James Rader James Rosen Janie Lackman Jenks Mikell John Fisk Joy Brown Laura Reasonover Mark Purcell Nicole Barnes Patty Kennedy Phil Young Queen Quet Rebekah Crandall Reed Armstrong Taylor Sikes Teri Metalak Tony Mills Tracy Sanders Tripp Boltin Will Doar Affiliation Beaufort County SCDNR Botany Bay Volunteer Coordinator FRESPACE Friends of Hunting Island State Park Beaufort Soil and Water Conservation District SCNRCS Edisto Island Preservation Alliance SC Sea Grant Consortium Beaufort Sportfishing and Diving Club Lady's Island Oyster Company SC Wildlife Federation Beaufort High School CREATE Club NOAA Restoration Center Edisto Island Preservation Alliance Ducks Unlimited Beaufort Sail and Power Squadron Fripp Island Turtle Program EIOLT Marine Advisory Committee Lowcountry Master Naturalists The Nature Conservancy Colleton County Middle School ACE Basin National Wildlife Refuge Colleton Preparatory Academy Beaufort Open Land Trust Sea Island Fly Fishers Gullah-Geechee Sea Island Coalition Beaufort High School CREATE Club Coastal Conservation League OV Associates/St. Jude Farms St Helena Elementary - Beaufort County Schools Lowcountry Institute USACE Regulatory Division US Fish and Wildlife Service SCDNR Coastal Geologist Project Staff Al Segars Benjamin Stone Blaik Keppler John Leffler Kristin Schulte Mark Rasmussen Michael Hodges Nancy Hadley Peter Kingsley-Smith Susan Lovelace Affiliation SCDNR / ACE Basin NERR SCDNR SCDNR SCDNR / ACE Basin NERR SCDNR ACE Basin NERR / College of Charleston SCDNR SCDNR SCDNR NOAA Hollings Marine Laboratory 5 The intended user participants established a set of criteria for selecting living shoreline oyster reef construction sites (erosion control, water quality improvement, public accessibility/visibility, and benefits to wildlife). Participants were then given detailed maps of the ACE Basin (see photo shown left) produced by SCDNR Shellfish Research Section GIS specialists. By working first in teams and then as a whole, they identified 26 potential locations that they felt met their criteria and deserved high priority in terms of evaluation as possible oyster reef habitat restoration and enhancement sites. The workshop concluded with some of the participants volunteering to serve on the Project Advisory Committee (PAC) that would serve to provide advice and guidance to the broader group of stakeholders throughout the remainder of the project. During January 2013 two teams of SCDNR biologists, accompanied each day by volunteers from the workshop (example shown right), visited all of the proposed sites identified in the earlier workshop. Based on a list of parameters, each site was scored for its suitability for living shoreline construction and the viable potential approaches identified. Data collected during these site visits included: Site name; date assessed; county; latitude and longitude; viable restoration strategies (loose oyster shell, bagged oyster shell, oyster castles, or concrete-coated crab traps); creek width (m); slope measurements (average of 3 measurements at each site, being shown measured in the photograph shown above); distance from MLW to edge of marsh; distance from marsh to back edge of future restoration reef; sediment type (e.g., mud, mud/clay, shell, etc.); ‘sinkability’ (cm); shell matrix depth (beneath sediment surface, cm); nearby oyster abundance (1-5, where 1=no oysters nearby); distance to nearest oysters (m); potential length of available substrate (m); potential width of available substrate (m); potential area of available substrate (length x width, m2); creek form (straight vs. curved); shoreline site occurs on when looking downstream (left vs. right); nearby structures (checking all that applied, e.g., docks, houses, boat landing, marina); distance to nearest access point; SCDNR Management Status (e.g., State Shellfish Ground, Undesignated, Culture Permit); and SCDHEC Status (e.g., Prohibited, Restricted). Project staff met with the PAC on February 6th 2013 to report on the recommendations for each site. The PAC members then evaluated the merits of each location and prioritized those sites (using black poker chips) to be addressed during the first year of the project. Members were able to prioritize sites individually but were asked to allocate restoration resources to short-listed sites, using different color chips (i.e., white, blue, red, and green) for each strategy, by working together 6 to reach consensus. The PAC members allocated the habitat restoration and enhancement resources (i.e., loose shell, bagged shell, castle and traps) to the prioritized sites based on finite ceilings for each approach determined by the project staff (see photos below left and right). Following on from this PAC meeting, SCDNR biologists and volunteer coordinators organized the logistics of assembling materials and transportation, and worked with the various intended user groups to organize volunteers that assisted with reef construction, which took place between April and September in 2013 (see Table 1 below and Appendices). A second six hour stakeholder workshop was hosted on September 10th 2013, again at the Nemours Plantation in the ACE Basin, SC. All of the participants from the previous year, as well as others who became involved during the year, were invited. 31 individuals representing NGOs, government agencies, recreational groups, and schools had planned to participate, and 23 attended on the day along with 9 project staff. SCDNR staff reported on the status of reefs that had been constructed during the previous six months. The stakeholder group reviewed and discussed the criteria that they had established the previous year for selecting living shoreline oyster reef construction sites (erosion control, water quality improvement, public access/visibility, and benefits to wildlife). The intended users were again provided with detailed maps of the ACE Basin and followed an equivalent process as for year 1 sites to identify sites to be addressed in year 2. The final part of the workshop involved setting up a lay monitoring program for the reefs already constructed during year 1. Memory sticks that not only contained all the presentations and maps used by the group, but also a fillable monitoring form, were provided to all workshop participants. Volunteers participating in the lay monitoring program would be expected to visit reefs that they had helped to construct, or other newly constructed reefs, make a series of observations at low tide from boat or shore, fill in the form, and email it to the project’s Applied Science Lead for evaluation and archiving. During October and November 2013 two teams of SCDNR biologists, accompanied by volunteers from the workshop, visited all of the sites proposed for consideration during the September 2013 workshop. Based on the agreed-upon criteria, each site was scored for its suitability for living 7 shoreline construction. This again included identifying which of four methods (loose oyster shell, bagged oyster shell, oyster castles, or concrete-coated crab traps) would be suitable for each location. Project staff met with the PAC (9 members present) on December 3rd 2013 to report on the recommendations for proposed site. With the issue of viewscape that had arisen (see section 4 Retrospective below), the survey teams had been instructed to note possible problems with a location in regard to property owners along the waterway. The PAC members discussed the question of viewscape degradation and decided to add it as a fifth criterion to be considered in selecting reef construction sites for year 2. A laptop with Google Earth was provided to the PAC members during this meeting so that aerial views of potential sites could be evaluated for possible viewscape degradation. The PAC members evaluated the merits of each location, prioritized those sites to be addressed during the second year of the project, and allocated the resources to each site. PAC members made suggestions of how reef building sessions might be scheduled to increase volunteer participation. The PAC also discussed the fourth project goal, to increase public commitment to stewardship. Suggestions were made to integrate stewardship development activities into the next large workshop, at the time planned for the conclusion of the project (although ultimately never convened). Following the December 2013 PAC meeting, SCDNR staff biologists and volunteer coordinators began purchasing materials, organizing the logistics of assembling materials and transportation, and working with the various intended user groups to organize volunteers who will assist with reef construction. Dr. Peter Kingsley-Smith, Benjamin Stone, and Dr. John Leffler met with US Army Corp of Engineers (Charleston District) representatives to discuss their criteria for issuing permits in the hopes of avoiding the rejection of proposed sites by the Corps during their permit review processes. Permit applications were filed and modifications made in consultation with the Corps. Year 2 oyster reef construction occurred between April and September in 2014, with reef site details provided in Table 1 below. The assignment of reef-building methods to each site was based upon the earlier site evaluations (October-November 2013) conducted by SCDNR staff accompanied by volunteers. The locations of all of the reefs created in this project (all years combined) are shown in Figure 1 below. In addition to being involved in the reef substrate deployments (bags, crab traps, and castles) volunteers were also engaged in site selection (n=8, 37 hours total), to assist with large-scale plantings (n=4, 12 hours total), and in the collection and processing of biological samples collected from bagged shell reefs (n=1, 10 hours total; n=35, 140 hours total, respectively for collection and processing). In association with two of the bagged shell reef sites, although not directly funded by this project, the SCDNR project team coordinated the planting of cordgrass, Spartina alterniflora seedlings. At the Ashepoo-Coosaw Cutoff site (#21), students from Ashley Hall School (n=23, 57.5 hours total) and Colleton Middle School (n=17, 8.5 hours total) restored saltmarsh measuring 22.8 m2 and 12.5 m2, respectively. In addition, students from Coosaw Elementary School (n=63, 126 hours total) conducted S. alterniflora restoration over 5.7 m2 at the Port Royal Sound Maritime Center. In addition to these engagements, SCDNR staff led a Problem Solving Workshop at the Ashley Hall School (n=15 students) and led an oyster reef dissection lesson at Beaufort Academy (n=20 students) and at the Lowcountry Montessori School (n=71 students). 8 Table 1. Summary table of all reef builds; sites are numbered in the sequential order in which they were first constructed. If a site was re-visited for the expansion of its reef footprint(s) in a subsequent event, this site retained its initial site number allocation (e.g., Harbor River site #9 first had a reef constructed there on 5/23/2013, and then again on 6/24/2013). This convention is adopted here in part to simplify the labelling for the build summary shown in Figure 1. YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 Site # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 9 12 3 11 6 13 14 15 16 15 17 18 17 19 20 21 22 23 5 24 25 26 27 28 6 6 29 30 31 32 33 1 34 35 17 36 37 21 38 38 38 Completion date 4/26/2013 5/7/2013 5/8/2013 5/14/2013 5/17/2013 5/21/2013 5/22/2013 5/23/2013 5/23/2013 5/31/2013 6/4/2013 6/19/2013 6/24/2013 7/18/2013 8/22/2013 9/17/2013 9/18/2013 9/19/2013 3/26/2014 3/28/2014 3/28/2014 4/14/2014 4/25/2014 4/26/2014 4/26/2014 5/5/2014 5/7/2014 5/12/2014 5/13/2014 5/14/2014 5/20/2014 5/20/2014 5/20/2014 5/21/2014 5/22/2014 5/23/2014 5/28/2014 6/9/2014 6/10/2014 6/10/2014 6/12/2014 6/13/2014 7/10/2014 7/10/2014 7/10/2014 7/22/2014 7/23/2014 7/24/2014 9/10/2014 9/11/2014 5/16/2015 5/16/2015 5/16/2015 Site Name Factory Creek Fenwick Cut Beaufort River Beaufort River Whale Branch Big Bay Creek Beaufort River Ocella Creek Harbor River Morgan River Scott Creek Lucy Point Creek Harbor River Lucy Point Creek Beaufort River Scott Creek Big Bay Creek Russell Creek Fishing Creek Dawho Cut South Edisto River Dawho Cut Coosaw River Spanish Moss Trail Coosaw River South Edisto River South Edisto River Ashepoo-Coosaw Cutoff Fenwick Cut South Edisto River Whale Branch Barnwell Creek St. Pierre Creek Coosaw River Dawho River Dawho River Big Bay Creek Big Bay Creek Jenkins Creek Steamboat Creek Jenkins Creek Hunting Island Beaufort River Factory Creek Beaufort River Lucy Point Creek Coosaw River Morgan River Fishing Creek Ashepoo-Coosaw Cutoff Chechessee River Chechessee River Chechessee River Strategy Bagged shell Bagged shell Bagged shell Loose shell Bagged shell Bagged shell Loose shell Bagged shell Loose shell Loose shell Bagged shell Bagged shell Bagged shell Oyster castles Oyster castles Crab traps Crab traps Crab traps Bagged shell Bagged shell Bagged shell Bagged shell Bagged shell Bagged shell Bagged shell Loose shell Loose shell Bagged shell Bagged shell Loose shell Bagged shell Bagged shell Loose shell Loose shell Loose shell Loose shell Bagged shell Bagged shell Bagged shell Crab traps Crab traps Bagged shell Bagged shell Bagged shell Crab traps Oyster castles Oyster castles Oyster castles Oyster castles Oyster castles Bagged shell Oyster castles Crab traps TOTAL 9 Shoreline (ft) 100 87 54 419 35 52 1208 56 240 1104 58 70 48 60 160 120 114 114 64 65 21 65 59 42 59 552 310 59 56 520 24 40 775 268 178 254 72 86 57 100 100 68 71 43 150 150 200 200 100 200 50 50 50 9256 # volunteers 58 16 29 2 54 54 2 22 0 0 8 4 12 4 24 1 0 5 4 # volunteer hrs 153 40 58 6 108 162 6 66 0 0 24 8 70 8 60 4 0 20 12 15 53 45 26 18 19 0 0 34 34 0 75 26 0 0 0 0 20 11 20 1 1 24 10 3 0 2 0 5 1 1 65 65 20 840 116 91 27 67 0 0 119 119 0 150 39 0 0 0 0 50 28 70 4 20 42 30 6 8 4 0 4 4 4 130 130 10 2128 10 YEAR 3 YEAR 2 YEAR 1 Enactus (NGO), East Carolina University, College of Charleston Biology Club Volunteer Group Wild Dunes Resort (w/ Eli Lilly and Co.) MUSC, Hanahan High School Ecology Club Stahl High School Christ Our King - Stella Maris School Porter Gaud School Stahl High School DePaul University JHM Hotels Boy Scout Association Troop 44 Enactus (NGO), College of Charleston Volunteer Corps, Lake Marion High School Colleton Preparatory Academy Whale Branch Middle School North Greenville University College of Charleston Volunteer Corps, Fort Dorchester High School, Students for Social Innovation Discovery Week w/ Hilton Head Preparatory School James Island Charter High School Citadel Leadership Day (Krause Center for Leadership and Ethics) Citadel Rod and Gun Club Lowcountry Master Naturalists DePaul University DePaul University Friends of Hunting Island, Sea Island Fly Fishers, Beaufort High School CREATE Club, Beaufort High School Animal Welfare Club, Whale Branch High School, Whale Branch Middle School, Lowcountry Institute, Habersham Green, Beaufort 2/22/2014 County School District Wando High School, Bishop England High School, Charleston Soil & Water Conservation District, James Island Charter High School, Coastal Master 3/1/2014 Naturalists Montessori Community School, United States Air Force, Coastal Master 3/3/2014 Naturalists, Pfeiffer University 3/4/2014 East Cooper Montessori School, United States Air Force 4/4/2014 North Greenville University 3/30/2015 Port Royal Sound Maritime Center Foundation 3/31/2015 Port Royal Sound Maritime Center Foundation 4/1/2015 Port Royal Sound Maritime Center Foundation 4/2/2015 Port Royal Sound Maritime Center Foundation 4/8/2015 Port Royal Sound Maritime Center Foundation 4/9/2015 Port Royal Sound Maritime Center Foundation 5/5/2015 Port Royal Sound Maritime Center Foundation 10/5/2013 10/8/2013 10/11/2013 10/23/2013 10/29/2013 11/12/2013 12/4/2013 12/12/2013 9/28/2013 2/23/2013 3/4/2013 3/15/2013 4/5/2013 Date 9/26/2012 10/13/2012 11/2/2012 11/10/2012 11/15/2012 11/30/2012 12/6/2012 1/9/2013 2/16/2013 13 30 12 40 Walterboro Beaufort Bennetts Point Fort Johnson 48 14 16 51 10 11 16 53 20 29 56 13 28 58 60 50 62 65 41 1082 Trask Fort Johnson Fort Johnson Fort Johnson Fort Johnson Bennetts Point Bennetts Point Beaufort County Public Works Fort Johnson Fort Johnson Fort Johnson Bennetts Point Okatie Okatie Okatie Okatie Okatie Okatie Okatie TOTAL 37 27 Fort Johnson Fort Johnson # volunteers 13 24 40 28 16 45 21 18 17 Location Fort Johnson Fort Johnson Fort Johnson Fort Johnson Fort Johnson Fort Johnson Bennetts Point Fort Johnson Bennetts Point 112 13 14 29 30 25 31 33 21 1438 58 50 133 31 18 40 89 8 22 48 65 80 13 45 24 54 # volunteer hrs 26 48 40 56 16 45 53 45 26 320 150 55 55 55 55 55 57 40 8099 132 373 762 114 160 501 1047 73 150 150 541 539 75 125 200 530 # bags produced 284 355 54 200 122 50 200 320 200 Table 2. Summary table of volunteer involvement in oyster shell bagging events that led to future oyster reef building events using these SCORE Program-style bags as substrate. Table 3. Summary list of volunteer groups involved in the project, including the bagging of shell and the building of the oyster reefs. AMI Kids - Beaufort Ashley Hall School Baldwin Wallace University Beaufort Academy Beaufort County Open Land Trust Beaufort County School District Beaufort Greendrinks Beaufort High School Animal Welfare Club Beaufort High School CREATE Club Beaufort Soil and Water Conservation District Beaufort Sportfishing and Diving Club Bishop England High School Botany Bay Volunteers Boy Scout Troop 44 Charleston Day School Charleston Soil and Water Conservation District Christ Our King School Coastal Conservation Association of South Carolina Coastal Master Naturalists Association College of Charleston Biology Club College of Charleston ENACTUS College of Charleston Volunteer Corps Colleton County Middle School Colleton Preparatory Academy DePaul University East Carolina University East Cooper Montessori School Edisto Beach State Park Edisto Island Open Land Trust Edisto Island Preservation Alliance Eli Lilly Fort Dorchester High School Friends of Edisto Beach State Park and ACE Basin Friends of Hunting Island Friends of the Spanish Moss Trail Habersham Green Master list of all project volunteer groups Hanahan High School Eco Club Hilton Head Preparatory School Hunting Island State Park James Island Charter High School JHM Hotel Group Joint Base Charleston Lady's Island Oyster Company Lake Marion High School Lake Norman Charter High School Lions Club Lowcountry Institute Lowcountry Master Gardeners Association Lowcountry Master Naturalists Association Medical University of South Carolina Minorities in Marine and Environmental Sciences REU Program (NSF) Montessori Community School North Greenville University Northwood Academy Pfeiffer University Porter Gaud School Port Royal Sound Maritime Center Foundation SCDOT Sea Island Fly Fishers Stahl High School Students for Social Innovation The Citadel Krause Center for Leadership and Ethics The Citadel Rod and Gun Club Unaffiliated Community Volunteers US Air Force US Fish and Wildlife Service Wando High School West Carrolton High School Whale Branch High School Whale Branch Middle School Wild Dune Resort 11 Figure 1. Summary map of all reef sites across the three years of the project (as detailed in Table 1 above). It should be noted that several sites received oyster reef substrate on multiple occasions, both within years, e.g., site #9 in the Harbor River, and across years, e.g., site #6 at Big Bay Creek. 12 Figures 2-9. ‘Before and After’ photographs of selected sites showing the appearance of the reef immediately following the placement of the settlement substrate on the shoreline and upon return visits for monitoring approximately one year post-installation. Figure 2. Big Bay Creek site immediately following deployment of concrete-coated crab traps on September 18th 2013. Figure 3. Big Bay Creek crab trap reef on September 12th, 2014 approximately one year after construction. Small oysters are clearly visible attached to the traps. A Snowy egret can also be seen foraging in front of the reef. 13 Figure 4. Photograph of Beaufort River oyster castle site taken 5 days after the construction date of August 21st 2013. Sediment can already be shown accreting behind the castles. Figure 5. Beaufort River oyster castle site on September 8th, 2014, a little over a year after construction. Oysters can be seen growing on the castles and sediment can be seen accumulating behind the oyster castles. 14 Figure 6. Coosaw River (site #26) photographed on June 10th 2014 following the planting of loose shell on May 21st 2014. Figure 7. Coosaw River (site #26) photographed approximately 1 year later (April 14th 2015) 15 Figure 8. Lucy Point Creek bagged oyster shell reef (site #12) photographed immediately following the planting of the shell bags on June 19th 2013. Figure 9. Lucy Point Creek bagged oyster shell reef (site #12) photographed less than 1 year later (April 14th 2015) showing the considerable recruitment and growth of new oysters onto the substrate. It is also worth noting the expansion of the Spartina marsh in the middle of the reef. 16 Reef monitoring (one-year post construction) Newly created reefs were monitored approximately one year after the deployment of substrate designed to attract the new recruits of oysters. The methods for monitoring of the reefs varied between the approaches as each is tailored specifically to the substrate in question, although some of the key metrics (oyster size and density) were universal to all reef types. Not all reefs were monitored and as such data for all reefs are not presented here. In part this was due to the timeframe of the grant, which did not allow for complete monitoring of one year postconstruction reefs built in year 2 of the project, but also reflects other limitations in terms of tides, personnel and resources. That said, beyond the scope of this project, many of the newly created reefs will be re-visited in future years to determine their success and ability to protect shorelines from erosion as part of a decade-long meta-analysis of SCDNR restoration efforts. Bagged shell reefs – For the bagged shell-based reefs, in the spring of 2014 and 2015 replicate bag samples (n=3) were collected from 5 reefs constructed in 2013 and from 8 reefs constructed in 2014 for the evaluation of oyster density and size (see Tables A1 and A2 in Appendices). NERR Science Collaborative bagged shell reefs had densities ranging from 848 to 8,436 oysters/m2. Sites constructed in 2013 had slightly below average density (4,206 Figure 10. oysters/m2) compared to the mean (5,044 oysters/m2) for all SCORE reefs constructed in 2013 (Table A1). Sites constructed in 2014 also had below average density (3,169 oysters/m2) when compared to all SCORE Program reefs constructed in 2014 (4,837 oysters/m2) (Table A2). Loose shell reefs – Replicate quadrat samples (1/4 m2, n=3) were collected from the large-scale, loose shell planted reefs built in 2013 and 2014 at approximately one year of age to evaluate recruitment and growth. Figures shown here demonstrate the appearance of the ¼ m2 sampling area immediately before (Figure 10, shown above right) and after (Figure 11, shown below right), the oysters within the sampling area were removed. Figure 11. This reef type had densities ranging from 133 to 4,668 oysters/m2 (Appendix Tables A3 and A4). The large-scale reefs planted in 2013 had an average density of 2,074 oysters/m2, across all sites, which is slightly lower than the statewide average (2,340 oysters/m2) (Table A3). Average density of oysters for sites planted in 2014 had an average density of 3,174 oysters/m2, which again was slightly lower than the statewide average (3,657 oysters/m2) (Table A4). 17 Figure 12. Close up of 1 year old oysters on large-scale reef in the Morgan River (image captured on 2/27/2014). Footprints of all loose shell reefs constructed in 2013 and 2014 were mapped using a Trimble sub-meter GPS to determine initial reef planting footprints and footprint retention one-year post-deployment. Results of those retention monitoring efforts are shown in Table A5. SCDNR monitors recruitment and growth of oysters annually by deploying standardized shell trays at multiple sites along the coast. Recruitment trays were deployed in the spring of 2013 and 2014 and retrieved in the spring of 2014 and 2015 to evaluate recruitment and early growth potential. Trays were not necessarily deployed at the specific project sites but were deployed in the same watershed. Overall recruitment in the ACE Basin NERR (9,584 oysters/m2) was significantly higher than the 2013 recruitment statewide (5,943 oysters/m2) (Figure A2). Overall recruitment in the ACE Basin NERR was slightly higher (8844 oysters/m2) in 2014 than the statewide average (8312 oysters/m2) (Figure A3). Oyster castle reefs – Image analysis was used to monitor oyster density and growth on oyster castles constructed at Beaufort River and Lucy Point Creek sites in the summer of 2013 one year after construction. Images were taken of the top right corner of multiple castle blocks at different orientations (front and back) and elevations (bottom, middle, top) along with a label and ruler for calibration of the image analysis software. Image analysis software ImageJ was used to measure oyster shell height (mm), get a count of the oysters in each image, and measure the area photographed to determine average shell height (mm) and oyster density (oysters/m2) (Figure 13). Figure 13. Example of an image used to determine the density of live oysters on the outside of an oyster castle-based reef. 18 The reef in the Beaufort River (site #3) had an average density of 2,947 oysters/m2 and an average shell height of 17.28 mm after the first year (Table A6, Figure A4). The reef in Lucy Point Creek (site #12) had an average density of 1,724 oysters/m2 and an average shell height of 13.85 mm (Table A6). Crab trap-based reefs – Image analysis was also used to monitor oyster density and growth on cement coated crab trap based reefs constructed at Big Bay Creek and Russell Creek in the summer/fall 2013 and monitored one year later. Scott Creek was also constructed in the summer of 2013, but erosion was too great at this location and all traps were buried under sediment one year later so images could not be taken. Images at the two successful sites (Big Bay Creek and Russell Creek) were taken of the tops of the traps from directly above for multiple traps within a quadrat split up into four sections. A randomly selected quadrant within the quadrat was analyzed using ImageJ image analysis software to measure oyster shell heights (mm) and the numbers of live oysters in the images. The area photographed was also determined to derive oyster density (oysters/m2) (Figure 14). Figure 14. Image of the top of a concrete coated crab trap with quadrat and labels for later image analysis. The reef at the Big Bay Creek site had an average density of 844 oysters/m2 and an average oyster shell height of 17.19 mm (Table A7, Figure A5). The reef at the Russell Creek site had an average density of 459 oysters/m2 and an average oyster shell height of 21.26 mm (Table A7). As a closing event to the project, we had originally planned to hold a final stakeholder workshop in the fall of 2014 in combination with an oyster roast event. The goals of this workshop were to review reefs constructed in both years of the project, but more so to focus on developing increased stewardship collaborations within the ACE Basin that may serve to extend and expand upon the partnerships developed through this project. In the fall of 2014, following the discovery that we would have funds remaining in the budget, project staff pursued and were awarded a 6-month no cost extension that enabled us to achieve two significant accomplishments: 1) Additional reef habitat creation; and 2) A final public awareness and outreach/education event. Both of these occurred in close collaboration with the Port Royal Sound Foundation Maritime Center on Lemon Island, SC on the shores of the Chechessee River. ACE Basin Stewardship Coordinator, Dr Al Segars was approached by staff from the Maritime Center in the fall of 2014 seeking assistance in developing educational living shoreline exhibits at the newly opened center. Since the early response to the planned December 2014 workshop was tepid, staff decided to postpone the event and hold it in conjunction with the festivities planned with the Maritime Center Foundation members. 19 After several months of careful planning, on May 16th 2015 the Port Royal Sound Foundation’s Maritime Center hosted “Living Shorelines” day (see Figures 15 & 16 below). With at least 130 volunteers to help, SCDNR biologists led efforts to construct bagged shell, cement-coated crab trap, and oyster castle reefs in front of the Maritime Center. Volunteers had bagged shell at the Center on an afternoon the previous week. SCDNR staff are continuing to work with the Maritime Center to develop long-term signage explaining each of the oyster reef construction methodologies demonstrated and their ecological benefits to the adjacent waterways and marsh habitats. Volunteers who had helped with the ACE Basin project over the past two years were recognized, and new volunteers, both young and old, were welcomed and encouraged to continue to seek opportunities to become stewards of natural resources and be involved in future volunteering opportunities. Figures 15 & 16. Port Royal Sound Maritime Center Living Shorelines Day reef construction. In the spring of 2016, SCDNR staff will be expanding on the reefs built at the Maritime Center by installing an experimental reef made of a prefabricated substrate designed by Al Segars, the ACE Basin NERR Stewardship Coordinator. These experimental units will be constructed from crab trap material, but will be 4’ long and designed to handle wave energy better than the standard cubicle crab trap designed for recreational and commercial crab fishing in SC. The units will be coated with cement to attract spat. These units are being designed to support interest in devising an inexpensive and easily installed approach that can increase the sizes of the footprints of reefs created over miles of shoreline, protecting marsh and high land from erosion in anticipation of rising sea levels. SCDNR researchers are applying for two grants to provide funding to evaluate these traps in situ and to further refine the design. Al Segars is also raising considerable donations to purchase the materials and fabrication of prototypes of this design for testing. In regards to considerations of further steps that could be taken if additional funds and resources were made available, as is often the case in oyster reef habitat restoration and enhancement research, there would be value in being able to continue to monitor the newly constructed reefs for a longer period. Specifically in regards to this project, we were extremely limited in our ability to monitor the reefs that were constructed in year 2 of the project as the grant was drawing to an end. The performance of oyster reefs in supporting shoreline protection, erosion control and marsh accretion is often only evident multiple years after the supplementation of reef substrate i.e., addition of shell, either bagged or loose, or other alternative materials, such as oyster castles or crab traps. In a continuing effort to secure funding from the latest NERRS Science Collaborative 20 RFP, by working with SCDHEC, staff from the SCDNR are hoping to be able to revisit reefs built as much as a decade ago and gain a better understanding of the longer term performance of oyster reefs in supporting these ecological services. 2. Retrospect It quickly became apparent during the first stakeholder workshop that working with the intended users was going to be extremely productive. They were extremely enthusiastic and invested in the work. Although some of the tasks that they were asked to do were open-ended, they worked very effectively as a group to arrive at a consensus that enabled the project to move forward. Their first-hand knowledge of the issues important to their communities and of the potential project sites in need of attention to address erosion was invaluable. The area of concern for this project was quite large, and the local knowledge of the stakeholders who live, work, and play on the waterways was key to determining priority locations to address with shoreline restoration. This was particularly evident during site visits in which almost all of the sites that they had suggested during the workshops met the criteria that they had agreed upon and were suitable for at least one living shoreline approach that would serve to address current erosion at scales appropriate to the proposed resources to be directed to the sites in question. If the project staff had determined all of the locations without this level of input from the community, they likely would not have reflected the community’s needs to the degree that they did. Project researchers ran into some unforeseen difficulties because the Charleston District office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers revised its approach to issuing permits for oyster reef construction early in 2013. This delayed the start of the loose shell and bagged shell reef construction several weeks and the construction of the crab trap and oyster castle reefs for approximately three months. The proposed construction of oyster castle reefs was denied at three locations based on concerns related to navigational hazards. The delays in review of these permits and other logistical considerations were such that the planned shoreline extent to be protected by oyster castles in year 1 that was not addressed was carried forward to year 2, creating a demanding fieldwork schedule specific to oyster castles in the summer of 2014. As part of our response to this challenge, the fall 2013 workshop was scheduled earlier than the initial workshop (i.e., in September 2013, compared to December 2012) in order to allow for more time for permits to be prepared, submitted and reviewed by the US Army Corps of Engineers, so as to reduce potential delays to the start of reef construction in year 2 of the project, starting in April 2014. A concern arose during the summer of 2014 in the form of a complaint from a local ACE Basin resident who had lived on Russell Creek for many years, directly across from where a crab trapbased oyster reef had been constructed in September of the previous year. As previously mentioned, the local office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) decided to require reflective orange signage on all oyster castle and crab trap reefs. The resident in question was distressed because the signs interfered with her viewscape which she had had a vested interest in as an amateur competitive photographer for the past two decades. One member of the PAC also lived in the community. None of the SCDNR staff nor the PAC members were aware that the ACOE would institute the new local practice of requiring the signage when the site was selected. It is also worth noting that the resident was entirely onboard with the creation of oyster reef habitat using repurposed crab traps at this site; her only objection pertained to the unsightly nature of the signs. Project Lead Dr. John Leffler and Collaboration Lead Blaik Keppler visited the homeowner and discussed the situation with her. SCDNR biologists subsequently replaced the signs with smaller ones, one-fourth the original size. The resident was very pleased with the attention and 21 the effort to respond to her concerns. She and her husband expressed support for the living shoreline program and donated eight crab traps for use in future reef construction. There were other unexpected outcomes during the course of this project. Evaluations of year 2 sites post-construction had been anticipated to include a lay monitoring component; however, despite efforts by project staff to facilitate this, very little activity was directed to this by the stakeholders. Project staff are of the opinion that the stakeholders are most interested in directing reef construction efforts and being directly involved in the construction of habitat, but are, for the most part less interested in the collection of follow-up monitoring data. In addition, as an adaptation between years 1 and 2 in relation to the logistics of the oyster castlebased reef construction activities involving volunteers, in light of the observation that most of the volunteers for those builds were older individuals, staff revisited how the oyster castle blocks would be moved to the sites, in ways to reduce some of the heavy lifting associated with moving the castles in the field. Project staff made the decision to hire a commercial barge to transport pallets of the oyster castles to the locations needed, as well as a forklift operator to load the barge. This was a significant improvement over Year 1 when all blocks were individually loaded by hand onto small boats and then individually unloaded at the build sites. Through other funding sources, the ACE Basin NERR committed to supporting a graduate student for twelve months to evaluate both this project and the Low Impact Development Science Collaborative project. Chris Berg based his Master’s thesis on these evaluations (Berg, C.J. 2015. Evaluating Collaborative Natural Resource Management in the ACE Basin National Estuarine Research Reserve. Master’s Thesis, College of Charleston, in prep.). He is enrolled in the College of Charleston’s Masters of Environmental Studies graduate program. Towards the end of the project, Chris conducted some interviews with PAC members about their experiences. Overall they were very pleased with the project and their participation in it. The stakeholders had a couple of criticisms; the main one being that the stakeholder group did not include enough diversity. There is substantial body of work within the social sciences that explains why projects such as this one encounter such pitfalls. Another critique was a lack of communication towards the end of the project. Essentially, some of the stakeholders expressed a desire for more information about the results, and how they could stay involved. In their defense, project staff were somewhat surprised by the less than enthusiastic response to the idea of a workshop focused on expanding stewardship opportunities that was originally planned for December 2014. There were only a dozen immediate positive responses out of approximately 50 invitations sent out to the individuals and groups that had originally participated in the other workshops. In retrospect, this is probably understandable. In prior years the workshops were designed to gain perspective from all attendees for the purpose of moving the project forward. The final workshop did not have such a clearly defined objective that would make an immediate difference on the ground, so there was less enthusiasm about committing time. As a final unforeseen outcome, since this project was extended longer than originally anticipated, the Project Coordinator and Fiscal Agent, Dr. John Leffler, was not able to see it through to completion. Dr. Leffler retired from service with the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources on March 6th 2015 at which time Dr. Peter Kingsley-Smith, project Applied Science Lead throughout the project, took over as Project Lead for the last four months (March-June 2015) to ensure that both the Living Shorelines Day at the Port Royal Sound Maritime Center and the final project report (presented here) were completed on schedule. The builds at the Port Royal 22 Sound Maritime Center were possible in terms of budget and resources as a result of diligent fiscal responsibility throughout the project, leaving unexpected funds available for additional reefs. 3. Sharing your work with the Reserves and NOAA. January 10th 2013 – A local presentation was made to the Beaufort Sportfishing and Diving Club by Collaboration Lead Blaik Keppler & Project Lead Dr. John Leffler emphasizing the intended user-driven nature of the work. February 1st 2013 – “Edisto Island Preservation Alliance (EIPA) Leads Local Effort in Restoration of Natural Barriers.” The Edisto News (local newspaper). February 13th 2013 – “Involving citizens in community-based restoration activities in the ACE Basin National Estuarine Research Reserve.” Michael Hodges. Beaufort Sail and Power Squadron. February 18th-20th 2013 – “You Can’t Always Get What You Want… Or Can You? A Collaborative Approach to Oyster Reef Habitat Restoration in the ACE Basin NERR, South Carolina, USA.” Peter Kingsley-Smith, Blaik Keppler, Susan Lovelace, Katheryn Madden & John Leffler. Social Coast Forum, Charleston, South Carolina, USA. February 19th 2013 – “Involving citizens in community-based restoration activities in the ACE Basin National Estuarine Research Reserve.” Michael Hodges. Beaufort Greendrinks. February 24th 2013 – “Adopting a community-based, collaborative science-based, intended userdriven approach to implementing oyster reef restoration within the ACE Basin NERR in South Carolina, USA.” Peter Kingsley-Smith, Blaik Keppler & John Leffler. Joint meeting of the World Aquaculture Society and the National Shellfisheries Association in Nashville, Tennessee, USA. March 21st 2013 – “Oyster reef ecology and the value of habitat restoration in South Carolina.” Beaufort Senior Leadership Environmental Stewardship Meeting. April 2nd 2013 – “Oyster reefs: a key to the health of South Carolina’s estuaries.” Peter KingsleySmith. Lowcountry Master Naturalists Association. April 22nd 2013 – “Volunteers Needed to Build Oyster Reefs in Beaufort.” The Island Packet (local newspaper). April 26th 2013 – “Volunteers Build Oyster Reef on Lady’s Island.” The Island Packet (local newspaper). April 28th 2013 – “Volunteers, SCDNR Build Oyster Reef on Lady’s Island.” Eat, Sleep, Play Beaufort (http://eatsleepplaybeaufort.com/) May 17th 2013 – “Whale Branch Middle School Honors Student with Oyster Reef.” WTOC (local news station). December 16th-17th 2013 – “Expanding Living Shorelines through Stakeholder-Driven Site Selections for Intertidal Oyster Reef Building in the ACE Basin NERR, South Carolina.” Benjamin Stone, Peter Kingsley-Smith, Blaik Keppler & John Leffler. 2013 Southeast Tidal Creeks Summit, Wilmington, North Carolina, USA. January 18th 2014 – “Oyster reef ecology and the value of habitat restoration in South Carolina.” Peter Kingsley-Smith. Edisto Island Preservation Alliance. 23 February 22nd 2014 – “First SCORE oyster shell bagging event in Beaufort.” The Island Packet (local newspaper). February 23rd 2014 – “Oysters = Reef Material.” The Island Packet (local newspaper). March 12th 2014 – “Expanding Living Shorelines within the ACE Basin NERR.” Peter KingsleySmith. NOAA USFWS Restoration Webinar Series (broadcast nationally). March 14th 2014 – “Oyster reefs in South Carolina: their importance and how we can help.” Franke at Seaside Life Enrichment retirement community in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, USA. March 19th-22nd 2014 – “Stakeholder-driven oyster reef restoration in the ACE Basin NERR, South Carolina, USA using a variety of substrate supplementation techniques.” Amy Fowler, Benjamin Stone, Blaik Keppler, John Leffler & Peter Kingsley-Smith. International Benthic Ecology Meeting in Jacksonville, Florida, USA. [Poster presentation.] March 29th-April 2nd 2014 – “Expanding living shorelines in the ACE Basin NERR using a variety of oyster reef habitat restoration and enhancement techniques.” Peter Kingsley-Smith, Benjamin Stone, Katherine Luciano, Blaik Keppler & John Leffler. Annual Meeting of the National Shellfisheries Association, on Jacksonville, Florida, USA. [Poster presentation.] March 29th-April 2nd 2014 – “Oyster reef restoration using donated and abandoned crab traps in order to create habitat for finfish and shorebirds in South Carolina, USA.” Benjamin Stone, Chris Simmons & Peter Kingsley-Smith. Annual Meeting of the National Shellfisheries Association, on Jacksonville, Florida, USA. [Poster presentation.] April 22nd 2014 – SCDNR staff prepared a poster for a special briefing session for Senator Sheldon Whitehouse at the Hollings Marine Laboratory in Charleston, South Carolina at which Applied Science Lead Dr. Peter Kingsley-Smith conversed with the Senator as to the value of these restoration efforts to both the ACE Basin and its constituents. May 9th 2014 – “Keep Our Waterways Healthy: Build An Oyster Reef.” Eat, Sleep, Play Beaufort (http://eatsleepplaybeaufort.com/) July 10th 2014 – “Volunteers Help Build Oyster Reef in Beaufort.” Beaufort Gazette (video online of local news station website). July 27th 2014 – An oyster castle construction event involving volunteers was covered by the local Beaufort county media: http://www.islandpacket.com/2014/07/27/3230299/photo-building-anoyster-castle.html?sp= /99/257/266/1482/) August 14th 2014 – Benjamin Stone published an article entitled “Sam’s Point Boat Ramp has a new oyster reef” for the Lady’s Island Business and Professional Association (LIBPA) newsletter (http://www.libpa.org/news/pdf/14aug.pdf). August 2014 – Restoration efforts led by Applied Science Lead Dr. Peter Kingsley-Smith were featured in the August 2014 issue of Charleston Magazine in an article entitled “Turning the Tides” (http://charlestonmag.com/features/turning_the_tides). This article led to a letter of appreciation from US Congressman Mark Sanford; see Appendices) November 17th-21st 2014 – “Expanding living shorelines through stakeholder-driven site selections for intertidal oyster reef building in the ACE Basin NERR, South Carolina.” Peter KingsleySmith, Benjamin Stone, Blaik Keppler & John Leffler. National Estuarine Research Reserve System Annual Meeting, Shepherdstown, West Virginia, USA. 24 December 10th-13th 2014 – “An alternative roadmap for engaging stakeholders in oyster reef restoration in the ACE Basin NERR, South Carolina, USA.” Peter Kingsley-Smith, Blaik Keppler & John Leffler. 16th International Conference on Shellfish Restoration: Restoration in an EverChanging World. Charleston, South Carolina, USA. December 10th-13th 2014 – “Stakeholder-driven oyster (Crassostrea virginica) restoration in the ACE Basin, South Carolina.” Jared Hulteen, Michael Hodges, Stephen Czwartacki & John Leffler. 16th International Conference on Shellfish Restoration: Restoration in an Ever-Changing World. Charleston, South Carolina, USA. December 10th-13th 2014 – “Establishing oyster (Crassostrea virginica) reefs as a method to facilitate the expansion of Spartina alterniflora and combat erosion and habitat loss on dynamic shorelines.” Michael Hodges, Nancy Hadley, Jared Hulteen & Stephen Czwartacki. 16th International Conference on Shellfish Restoration: Restoration in an Ever-Changing World. Charleston, South Carolina, USA. February 3rd 2015 – “Expanding Living Shorelines Through Volunteer-Driven Restoration”. Jared Hulteen. Lady’s Island Middle School, Beaufort, South Carolina, USA February 3rd 2015 – “Expanding Living Shorelines Through Volunteer-Driven Restoration”. Jared Hulteen. Beaufort High School CREATE Club in Beaufort, South Carolina, USA. March 22nd-26th 2015 – “Expanding living shorelines through stakeholder-driven site selections for intertidal oyster reef building in the ACE Basin NERR, South Carolina, USA.” Peter KingsleySmith, Benjamin Stone, Blaik Keppler & John Leffler. 107th National Shellfisheries Association, Monterey, California, USA. [Poster presentation.] 4. Anything else? In order to facilitate an increasing investment in living shorelines in South Carolina, in light of a growing body of literature and research that supports their installation as more beneficial than hardened vertical shoreline management approaches, the SCDNR is collaborating with the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control–Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (SCDHEC-OCRM) on a proposal to secure further funding from the NERRS Science Collaborative. SCDHEC-OCRM is charged with permitting all shoreline construction and alterations. A representative of the office had participated in the earlier workshops that were integral to the success of this NERRS Science Collaborative project. Currently, OCRM can issue permits for bulkheads and revetments fairly easily after the shoreline has eroded away into uplands, but private property owners have a very difficult time getting a permit to construct a living shoreline to protect the marshes in front of their property. In January 2015 OCRM approached the ACE Basin NERR through Bethney Ward, the Reserve’s liaison with the Office of Coastal Management. OCRM requested the principals from this project, through the ACE Basin NERR and the SCDNR, to provide scientific expertise and the necessary research that will give OCRM the scientific foundation necessary to develop new regulations that will encourage living shoreline development long before it becomes necessary to employ hardened structures. It also recognizes that the intertidal oyster reefs of South Carolina will grow higher with rising sea levels and will therefore protect the coastal marshes from some of the anticipated erosional impacts of climate change. The project team for this new NERRS Science Collaborative proposal recently completed the final panel review and wait, optimistically, for the announcement of funding awards in August of this year. If successful, this funding would support a retrospective meta-analysis of living 25 shorelines constructed over the past decade together with gap analysis to identify sites with characteristics not previously investigated, as past projects were focused on optimizing oyster settlement and growth and were not focused on addressing shoreline erosion, particularly at sites where private property owners are likely to have interests in adopting living shorelines as a viable alternative to hardened vertical structures such as bulkheads. 5. Appendices Appendix I. Literature cited Ashepoo-Combahee-Edisto (ACE) Basin National Estuarine Research Reserve Management Plan 2011-2016. (2011): http://www.dnr.sc.gov/marine/NERR/pdf/ACEMP11-16.pdf ASMFC (2007). The importance of habitat created by shellfish and shell beds along the Atlantic Coast of the U.S. Prepared by Coen, L. D. & Grizzle, R., with contributions by Lowery, J. & Paynter, K. T. Jr. 108pp. ASMFC (2010). Living Shorelines: Impacts of erosion control strategies on coastal habitats. Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. Habitat Management Series #10. J.C. ThomasBlate, editor. 62 pp. Bahr, L.M. & Lanier, W.P. (1981). The ecology of intertidal oyster reefs of the South Atlantic Coast: a community profile. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Program FWS/OBS/-81/15. 105pp. Burrell, V.G. Jr. (1986). Species profiles: Life histories and environmental requirements of coastal fishes and invertebrates (South Atlantic) – American oyster. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 82 (11.57), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers TR-EL-82-4, 17 pp. Coen, L.D. & Luckenbach, M.W. (2000). Developing success criteria and goals for evaluating oyster reef restoration: ecological function or resource exploitation? Ecological Engineering 15:323-343. Dame, R., Bushek, D. & Prins, T. (2001). Benthic suspension feeders as determinants of ecosystem structure and function in shallow coastal waters. In: Reise, K., editor. Ecological comparisons of sedimentary shores. Springer-Verlag, Germany. Ecological Studies 151:11-37. DeBlieu, J., Beck, M., Dorfman, D. & Ertel, P. (2005). Conservation in the Carolinian Ecoregion: An Ecoregional Assessment. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA. Gutiérrez, J.L., Jones, C.G., Strayer, D.L. & Iribarne, O.O. (2003). Mollusks as ecosystem engineers: the role of shell production in aquatic habitats. Oikos 101:79-90. Karl, T.R., Melillo, J.M. & Peterson, T.C. (eds.) (2009). Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY. 189 pp. Kennish, M.J. (2002). Impacts of motorized watercraft on shallow estuarine and coastal marine environments. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 37:1-202. Kohlsaat, T., Quattro, L. & Rinehart, J. (2005). South Carolina Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy, 2005-2010. South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, Columbia, South Carolina (http://www.dnr.sc.gov/cwcs). Luckenbach, M.W., Coen, L.D., Ross, P.G. Jr. & Stephen, J.A. (2005). Oyster Reef Habitat Restoration: Relationships between oyster abundance and community development. Journal of Coastal Research 40:64-78. 26 Meyer, D.L., Townsend, E.C. & Thayer, G.W. (1997). Stabilization and erosion control value of oyster cultch for intertidal marsh. Restoration Ecology 5:93-99. National Estuarine Research Reserve System 2001-2016 Strategic http://www.nerrs.noaa.gov/Doc/PDF/Background/StrategicPlan2011.pdf Plan. (2011). Peterson, C.H., Grabowski, J.H. & Powers, S.P. (2003). Estimated enhancement of fish production resulting from restoring oyster reef habitat: quantitative valuation. Marine Ecology Progress Series 264:251-256. Plunket, J.T. & La Peyre, M.K. (2005). Comparison of finfish assemblages at clutched shell bottoms and mud bottoms in Barataria Bay, LA. Bulletin of Marine Science 77:155-164.Piazza et al., 2005 Porter, E.T., Cornwell, J.C., Sanford, L.P. & Newell, R.I.E. (2004). Effect of oysters, Crassostrea virginica and bottom shear velocity on benthic-pelagic coupling and estuarine water quality. Marine Ecology Progress Series 271:61-75. SAFMC (2009). Fishery Ecosystem Plan. Volume II: South Atlantic Habitats and Species. Chapter 3.2. Estuarine / inshore systems. South Atlantic Fishery Management Council. 27 Appendix II. Data, Results and Products. Figure A1. Front cover of a project summary handout distributed to participants in the reefbuilding events at the Port Royal Sound Maritime Center on May 16th 2015. The reverse (not shown here) was of a modified version of Figure 1 to show stakeholders where reefs had been created. 28 Figure A2. Tray Recruitment in Year 1 (2013-2014) Abundance of oysters in recruitment trays deployed statewide, including those in the ACE Basin (red) 20132014 Average Oysters/ m2 + 1SE (n=3 except Horlbeck Creek, Wando River, Morgan River, Trask Landing, Battery Creek, S. Edisto, Coosaw, Winyah Bay and Coast Gaurd Station) 20000 18000 16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Sites Statewide Average Oyster Density (per m2): 5934 + 1223 (SE) ACE Basin NERR Average Oyster Density (per m2): 9584 + 1054 (SE) 29 Figure A3. Tray Recruitment in Year 2 (2014-2015) Abundance of oysters in recruitment trays deployed statewide, including those in the ACE Basin (red) 2014-2015 (n=3 except Coosaw River, Hunting Island, Winyah Bay, Wando River) 18000 Average oysters/m2 + 1SE 16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Sites 2 Statewide Average Oyster Density (per m ): 8312 + 1540 (SE) ACE Basin NERR Average Oyster Density (per m2): 8844 + 2038 (SE) 30 Figure A4. Oyster recruitment to castle reefs built in Year 1. 5,000 4,500 Average Oysters/m2 4,000 3,500 3,000 Beaufort River 2,500 Lucy Point Creek 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Figure A5. Oyster recruitment to crab trap-based reefs built in Year 1 1,600 1,400 Average Oysters/m2 1,200 1,000 Big Bay Creek 800 Russell Creek 600 400 200 0 31 Table A1. One-year post-deployment monitoring data for bagged shell reefs built in Year 1. Site Name (#) Big Bay Creek (6) Fenwick Cut (2) Harbor River (9) Lucy Point (12) Scott Creek (11) 2013 NERR Averages 2013 Statewide Averages AVG Count/m2 8,436 1,352 5,115 3,232 2,896 4,206 AVG Count STDERR/m2 4,442 354 582 118 782 1,256 AVG Size 25.8 25.9 22.9 29.1 27.3 26.2 Size STDERR 4.05 1.72 0.42 1.22 2.17 1.92 5,044 1,497 22.5 1.37 Year Constructed 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 Table A2. One-year post-deployment monitoring data for bagged shell reefs built in Year 2. Site Name (#) Factory Creek (1) Beaufort River (33) Big Bay Creek (6) Ashepoo-Coosaw Cutoff (21) Coosaw River (17) Dawhoo Cut (15) Jenkins Creek (29) 2014 NERR Averages 2014 Statewide Averages AVG Count/m2 2,387 1,472 4,987 AVG Count STDERR/m2 831 447 1,131 AVG Size 16.7 28.6 22.0 Size STDERR 0.69 2.25 1.51 Year Constructed 2014 2014 2014 4,237 994 17.7 1.07 2014 9,085 848 1,677 3,169 2,241 409 60 769 22.4 23.3 29.1 23.9 1.07 1.49 1.80 1.61 2014 2014 2014 4,837 768 21.1 1.32 Table A3. One-year post-deployment monitoring data for loose shell reefs built in Year 1. Site Name (#) Beaufort River (4) Beaufort River (7) Harbor River (9) Morgan River (10) 2013 NERR Averages 2013 Statewide Averages AVG AVG Count 2 Count/m STDERR/m2 948 261 133 80 3,556 1,323 3,659 306 2,074 493 2,340 443 32 AVG Size 35.0 34.3 27.0 28.2 31.1 Size STDERR 0.77 1.58 0.47 3.04 1.47 22.3 0.96 Year Constructed 2013 2013 2013 2013 Table A4. One-year post-deployment monitoring data for loose shell reefs built in Year 2. Site Name (#) South Edisto (19) South Edisto (20) St. Pierre Creek (25) Coosaw River (26) Dawhoo River (27) Dawhoo River (28) 2014 NERR Averages 2014 Statewide Averages AVG Count/m2 4,668 2,807 2,959 3,891 2,153 2,565 3,174 AVG Count STDERR/m2 667 426 517 156 959 405 522 AVG Size 23.5 17.1 25.5 25.8 17.8 22.4 22.0 Size STDERR 2.84 0.11 1.00 2.78 0.49 0.89 1.35 3,657 616 20.6 1.38 Year Constructed 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 Table A5. Summary of acreage retention determinations generated by comparing initial footprints with planting acreage one-year after planting for all loose shell reefs constructed in Year 1 (2013) and Year 2 (2014). All acreages were mapped using a Trimble sub-meter resolution GPS unit. Site name (#) Year Planted Beaufort River (4) Beaufort River (4) Beaufort River (7) Harbor River (9) Morgan River (10) S. Edisto River (19) S. Edisto River (20) S. Edisto River (23) St. Pierre Creek (25) Coosaw River (26) Dawhoo River (27) Dawhoo River (28) 2013 Initial Footprint Acreage 0.35 2013 0.32 0.34 105% 2013 0.16 0.21 131% 2013 2013 0.15 0.49 0.11 0.47 75% 95% 2014 0.34 Not Measured N/A 2014 0.24 0.18 75% 2014 0.16 0.22 138/% 2014 0.36 Not Measured N/A 2014 0.14 Not Measured N/A 2014 0.11 0.08 73% 2014 0.13 0.08 62% 33 1 Year Post Planting Acreage 0.25 Acreage Retention 72% Table A6. One-year post-construction monitoring data for oyster castle reefs built in Year 1. Site Name (#) Beaufort River (3) Lucy Point Creek (12) AVG Count/m2 2,947 1,724 AVG Count STDERR/m2 1,751 686 AVG Size (mm) 17.27 13.85 Size STDERR 8.35 5.19 Table A7. One-year post-construction monitoring data for crab trap-based reefs built in Year 1. Site Name (#) Big Bay Creek (6) Russell Creek (13) AVG Count/m2 844 459 AVG Count STDERR/m2 543 395 34 AVG Size (mm) 17.19 21.26 Size STDERR 2.46 5.2 Appendix III. Letters of recognition from State Congressman Mark Sanford. 35 36