912 resultados para riparian restoration
Monitoring report: sand dune reconstruction and restoration, at the Moss Landing Marine Laboratories
Resumo:
The Plan for Sand Dune Reconstruction and Restoration (and Biological Assessment) at Moss Landing Marine Laboratories (ABA Consultants, April 1, 1992) described reconstruction of dune contours and biological restoration with native dune plants to be carried out over the 8 acre site formerly occupied by the marine labs (prior to the Loma Prieta earthquake of October 1989). The plan called for annual reports in letter form which would present data on plant abundance, a short narrative description of changes on the site, progress towards recovery of the plant community, and assessment of progress based on restoration goals and further steps to be taken. This monitoring report [dated April 25, 1994] addresses those points and also contains a summary of other activities integral in dune restoration -- education, public participation, school and conservation organization field trips, as well as the associated activities of restoration, plant collecting, propagation, and weed control.
Resumo:
In this report we analyze the Topic 5 report’s recommendations for reducing nitrogen losses to the Gulf of Mexico (Mitsch et al. 1999). We indicate the relative costs and cost-effectiveness of different control measures, and potential benefits within the Mississippi River Basin. For major nonpoint sources, such as agriculture, we examine both national and basin costs and benefits. Based on the Topic 2 economic analysis (Diaz and Solow 1999), the direct measurable dollar benefits to Gulf fisheries of reducing nitrogen loads from the Mississippi River Basin are very limited at best. Although restoring the ecological communities in the Gulf may be significant over the long term, we do not currently have information available to estimate the benefits of such measures to restore the Gulf’s long-term health. For these reasons, we assume that measures to reduce nitrogen losses to the Gulf will ultimately prove beneficial, and we concentrate on analyzing the cost-effectiveness of alternative reduction strategies. We recognize that important public decisions are seldom made on the basis of strict benefit–cost analysis, especially when complete benefits cannot be estimated. We look at different approaches and different levels of these approaches to identify those that are cost-effective and those that have limited undesirable secondary effects, such as reduced exports, which may result in lost market share. We concentrate on the measures highlighted in the Topic 5 report, and also are guided by the source identification information in the Topic 3 report (Goolsby et al. 1999). Nonpoint sources that are responsible for the bulk of the nitrogen receive most of our attention. We consider restrictions on nitrogen fertilizer levels, and restoration of wetlands and riparian buffers for denitrification. We also examine giving more emphasis to nitrogen control in regions contributing a greater share of the nitrogen load.
Resumo:
Seagrass ecosystems are protected under the federal "no-net-loss" policy for wetlands and form one of the most productive plant communities on the planet, performing important ecological functions. Seagrass beds have been recognized as a valuable resource critical to the health and function of coastal waters. Greater awareness and public education, however, is essential for conservation of this resource. Tremendous losses of this habitat have occurred as a result of development within the coastal zone. Disturbances usually kill seagrasses rapidly, and recovery is often comparatively slow. Mitigation to compensate for destruction of existing habitat usually follows when the agent of loss and responsible party are known. Compensation assumes that ecosystems can be made to order and, in essence, trades existing functional habitat for the promise of replacement habitat. While ~lant ingse agrass is not technically complex, there is no easy way to meet the goal of maintaining or increasing seagrass acreage. Rather, the entire process of planning, planting and monitoring requires attention to detail and does not lend itself to oversimplification.
Resumo:
There is nothing mysterious about how coastal rivers, their estuaries, and their relationship with the sea all work to satisfy many of our greatest needs, including drinkable water, fish and shellfish, and soils essential for sustaining the production of food and fiber. Nor are the methods that have proved successful in the protection and restoration of watershed health difficult to understand. It is difficult, however, to imagine how we are to survive without healthy watersheds. Each watershed along California’s coast shows signs of increasing abuse from road construction and maintenance, livestock grazing, residential development, timber harvesting, and a dozen other human activities. In some cases whole streams have simply been wiped away. This document has been created to guide and support every person in the community, from homemaker to elected official, who wants her or his watershed to provide clean water, harvestable fish resources and other proof that life in the watershed cannot only be maintained but also enjoyed. It is based on years of experience with watershed protection and restoration in California. If citizen involvement is to be effective, it must draw not only on scientific knowledge but also on an understanding of how to translate individual views into commitments and capable group action. This guide briefly reviews the condition of California’s coastal watersheds, identifies the kinds of concerns that have led citizens to successful watershed protection efforts, explains why citizen, in addition to government, effort is essential for watershed protection and restoration to succeed, and puts in the reader’s hands both the technical and organizational “tools of the trade” in the hope that those who use this guide will be encouraged to join in efforts to make their watershed serve this and future generations better.