NATIONAL WATER SUMMARY ON WETLAND RESOURCES United States Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Series 1983 Hydrologic Events and Issues (U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2250) 1984 Hydrologic Events, Selected Water-Quality Trends, and Ground Water Resources (U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2275) 1985 Hydrologic Events and Surface-Water Resources (U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300) 1986 Hydrologic Events and Ground-Water Quality (U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2325) 1987 Hydrologic Events and Water Supply and Use (U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2350) 1988 89 Hydrologic Events and Floods and Droughts (U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2375) 1990-91 Hydrologic Events and Stream Water Quality (U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2400) Suggestions and comments on this or any other U.S. Geological Survey publication are most welcome. Remarks should be addressed to: Chief Hydrologist, U.S. Geologocal Survey, 409 National Center, Reston VA 22092 Front Cover: Wetlands along the Homosassa River, at Homosassa, Florida. (Photograph by Judy D. Fretwell, U.S. Geological Survey.) NATIONAL WATER SUMMARY ON WETLAND RESOURCES By U.S. Geological Survey Judy D. Fretweil, John S. Williams, and Phillip J. Redman, Compilers United States Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director- UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1996 For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office Superintendent of Documents, M.S. SSOR Washington, D.C. 20402-9328 United States Geological Survey National Water Summary ISBN 0-607-85696-3 Foreword National Water Summary on Wetland Resources is the eighth in a series of reports that describes the condi- tions, trends, availability, quality, and use of the water resources of the United States. This volume describes an often-overlooked water resource wetlands. It gives a broad overview of wetland resources and includes discus- sions of the scientific basis for understanding wetland functions and values; legislation that regulates the uses of wetlands; wetland research, inventory, and evaluation; and issues related to the restoration, creation, and recovery of wetlands. In addition, it presents more-specific information types and distribution, hydrologic setting, trends, and conservation on the wetland resources of each State, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and several Pacific islands over which the United States has jurisdiction. Wetlands serve as a transitional environment between water bodies and dry land and represent a significant part of the Nation's natural resources. They contain economically important timber, fuel, and food sources; provide esthetic and recreational opportunities; and influence the quantity, quality, and ecological status of water bodies, which include rivers, aquifers, lakes, reservoirs, and estuaries. Wetlands owe their existence, in part, to precipitation, streams, lakes, ground water, and oceans and, in return, perform important functions that affect the quantity and quality of these water resources. Although wetlands are best known for their function as habitat for birds, fish, and other wildlife, their less well known hydrologic and water-quality functions provide such benefits as reducing the severity of flooding and erosion by modifying the flow of water or improving water quality by filtering out contaminants. Public and scientific views of wetlands have changed greatly over time. Only a few decades ago, wetlands were generally considered to be of little or no value. Those who eliminated wetlands through draining or filling were thought of as performing a public service. The role of the wetlands as a breeding ground for disease (prima- rily malaria) and their inability to be exploited for agricultural production caused them to be viewed as an eco- nomic "bad" rather than as a public "good," as they are viewed today. Because of new scientific knowledge, as well as a change in values (as manifested in our Nation's environmental laws), efforts to eliminate wetlands are viewed in a negative light by many. In fact, government and private citizens are making investments in the preservation, remediation, or creation of wetlands. Although we now understand some of the benefits of wetlands and government agencies have established programs to protect them, wetland-protection policies remain a controversial public issue. In keeping with its mis- sion, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has prepared this report with the intent of informing public officials, scientists, and the general public about wetlands. Our purpose is to increase and help improve the understanding of this valuable resource and to provide the scientific information base upon which wise decisions regarding the clas- sification, use, modification, or restoration of wetlands can be made. The hydrologic, biological, and economic consequences of these decisions are substantial and often politically contentious. The USGS takes no position on these issues but hopes to make a positive contribution to the process whereby these decisions are made. The USGS is an earth science information agency. It collects, manages, and disseminates data; conducts inter- pretive scientific studies and research; and publishes the results of these efforts in many forms. The work of the USGS is organized into four thematic areas resources, hazards, environment, and information management. Wetlands are addressed in each of these areas. For example, some wetlands play an integral role in water-resource availability because they are major discharge areas for some aquifers. Some wetlands relate to the hazards theme through their role in the mitigation of floods. Wetlands are affected by environmental changes, such as changes in the source or distribution of water, and, in turn, cause changes in the environment, such as shifts in vegetation or in habitat for birds, fish, and other animals; studies of these changes tie into the environmental theme. And, finally, with respect to the information management theme, the process of classifying, monitoring, and understanding wetlands is dependent upon the hydrologic, geologic, and topographic data collected by the USGS. The USGS has taken this opportunity to draw on the expertise of the many agencies and organizations that have missions directly or indirectly related to wetlands to provide a broad background for government officials, water-resource managers, and the general public. You will note that many of the chapters of this volume have authors from other agencies with key roles in research, classification, or management of wetlands. Production of this volume was a team effort, just as management of wetlands is a team effort. We thank our colleagues in the many other agencies that helped make this report possible. I would like to pay special tribute to the late Dr. Edward T. LaRoe of the National Biological Service, coauthor of the chapter on research. He was a leading wetland re- searcher and played a pivotal role in the evolution of all biological research in the U.S. Department of the Interior. Though this volume merely touches on the many and varied aspects of wetlands, it provides a starting place for further study and a base upon which to begin to understand the values of wetlands to the Nation. We hope it is useful, and we welcome your comments on this volume, as well as on our other products. DIRECTOR ill Hidden River near Homosassa Springs, Florida. (Photograph by Judy D. Fretwell, U.S. Geological Survey.) There has been a lot said about the sacredness of our land which is our body, and the values of our culture which is our soul. But water is the blood of our tribes, and if its life-giving flow is stopped, or it is polluted, all else will die and the many thousands of years of our communal existence will come to an end. Frank Tenorio, Governor, San Felipe Pueblo, 1978 IV National Water Summary Wetland Resources: CONTENTS V Contents Foreword .................................................................................................... Ill Executive Summary, State Summary Highlights, and Introduction ............... 1 Executive summary ............................................................................................. 3 State summary highlights..................................................................................... 7 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 15 Overview of Wetland Resources ................................................................. 17 Technical aspects of wetlands History of wetlands in the conterminous United States Thomas E. Dahl and Gregory]. Allord............ ............................. 19 Wetland definitions and classifications in the United States Ralph W. Tiner.. .......................................................................... 27 Wetland hydrology, water quality, and associated functions Virginia Carter............................................................................. 35 Wetlands as bird habitat Robert E. Stewart, Jr. .................................................................... 49 Wetland management and research Wetland protection legislation Todd H. Votteler and Thomas A. Muir ........................................ 57 Wetland research by Federal agencies Richard E. Coleman, Edward T. LaRoe, and Russell F. Theriot..... 65 Wetland mapping and inventory Bill O. Wilen, Virginia Carter, and J. Ronald Jones ...................... 73 Wetland functions, values, and assessment Richard P. Novitzki, R. Daniel Smith, and Judy D. Fretwell ......... 79 Restoration, creation, and recovery of wetlands Wetland restoration and creation MaryE. Kentula ........................................................................... 87 Effects of Hurricane Andrew (1992) on wetlands in southern Florida and Louisiana John K. Lovelace and Benjamin J. McPherson ............................. 93 Effects of the Great Midwest Flood of 1993 on wetlands James R. Kolva ............................................................................ 97 State Summaries of Wetland Resources ....................................................... 99 Alabama ......................... 101 Maine ............................. 213 Oklahoma....................... 315 Alaska............................. 107 Maryland and District Oregon ........................... 321 Arizona........................... 115 of Columbia................. 219 Pennsylvania................... 327 Arkansas ......................... 121 Massachusetts ................. 225 Puerto Rico ..................... 333 California........................ 127 Michigan ........................ 231 Rhode Island ................... 339 Colorado......................... 135 Minnesota ....................... 237 South Carolina ................ 345 Connecticut.................... 141 Mississippi ...................... 243 South Dakota .................. 351 Delaware ........................ 147 Missouri.......................... 249 Tennessee ....................... 357 Florida ............................ 153 Montana ......................... 255 Texas .............................. 363 Georgia........................... 161 Nebraska ........................ 261 U.S. Virgin Islands .......... 369 Hawaii............................ 167 Nevada ........................... 267 Utah ............................... 375 Idaho .............................. 173 New Hampshire.............. 273 Vermont.......................... 381 Illinois............................. 179 New Jersey...................... 279 Virginia ........................... 387 Indiana ........................... 185 New Mexico ................... 285 Washington .................... 393 Iowa ............................... 191 New York ....................... 291 West Virginia .................. 399 Kansas ............................ 195 North Carolina ................ 297 Western Pacific Islands ... 405 Kentucky......................... 201 North Dakota .................. 303 Wisconsin ....................... 411 Louisiana ........................ 207 Ohio ............................... 309 Wyoming........................ 417 VI National Water Summary Wetland Resources: CONTENTS Supplemental Information ........................................................................... 423 Conversion factors............................................................................................... 424 Glossary.............................................................................................................. 425 Figures 1-13. Maps showing 1. Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in the United States ......................................................................... 5 2. States with notable wetland loss, 1 780's to mid-1980's............. 19 3. Extent of wetlands in Washington County, N. C., circa 1780 and 1900 .............................................................. 20 4. States with notable wetland loss, early 1600'sto 1800.............. 20 5. Major United States land acquisitions between 1800 and 1860 21 6. States with notable wetland loss, 1800 to 1860 ........................ 21 7. Confederate States of America with wetlands depicted for strategic rather than natural resources value ........................... 22 8. Location, estimated original acreage, and drainage of Ohio's historic wetlands .................................................................... 22 9. Wetlands of the Central Valley of California, circa 1850 and 1990....................................................................................... 23 10. States with notable wetland loss, 1860 to 1900 ........................ 23 11. States with notable wetland loss, 1900 to 1950 ........................ 24 12. States with notable wetland loss, 1950 to 1990 ........................ 24 13. Evolution of Horicon Marsh, Wis., from original marsh, to lake, to swamp, to wildlife refuge ....................................... 25 14. Cross sections of selected wetland landscapes showing typical positions of wetlands relative to topographic features .......................................... 27-28 15. Diagram showing classification hierarchy of wetlands and deepwater habitats showing systems, subsystems, and classes ............................... 30 16. Photographs of some wetlands in the United States and chart showing examples of their classification ............................................................. 33 17. Map showing major wetland areas in the United States........................... 35 18. Diagram showing components of the wetland water budget.................... 36 19. Diagram of water budgets for selected wetlands in the United States and Canada..................................................................... 37 20. Cross section showing percentage of transpiration and evaporation from various wetland components........................................................ 38 21. Graph showing monthly streamflow from two wetlands in northern Minnesota............................................................................................. 39 22. Cross section showing ground-water flow systems................................... 39 23. Diagrams showing seasonal changes in storage capacity and evapotranspiration (ET) in wetlands ...................................................... 40 24. Cross sections showing principal hydrogeologic settings for wetlands ..... 42 25. Map showing continuous, discontinuous, and sporadic permafrost areas of Alaska............................................................................................... 43 26. Simplified diagram of the nitrogen cycle in a wetland ............................. 45 27. Diagram showing movement of the freshwater-saltwater interface in an estuary during periods of high flow and low flow............................. 46 28-33. Photographs showing 28. A wetland that is habitat for migrating snow geese.................... 49 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: CONTENTS VII Figures Continued 29. A petroglyph and a clay pot...................................................... 49 30. A baby heron in a wetland environment................................... 50 31. Raccoons.................................................................................. 50 32. An American alligator............................................................... 50 33. An American bittern hidden in vegetation ................................. 50 34. Map showing major flyway corridors for migrating birds in the Western Hemisphere ............................................................................ 51 35. Photograph showing a prothonotary warbler feeding on insects .............. 54 36. Graph showing the relation of pond density increase to number of ducks ................................................................................................ 54 37. Photograph showing duck stamps ........................................................... 55 38. Map showing the location of National Fish and Wildlife Refuge System reserves and Ramsar sites in the United States........................... 56 39. Schematic diagram showing a typical U.S. Army Corps of Engineers review process for Section 404 dredge-and-fill permit request.............. 60 40-41. Graphs showing 40. Status of 40 wetland mitigation projects in south Florida........... 63 41. Cost of Federal agency wetland research, per State, during fiscal year 1992 ...................................................................... 65 42-43. Graphs and charts showing 42. Summary of Federal agency wetland research expenditures by research category during 1992 ............................................... 66 43. Summary of Federal agency wetland research expenditures by wetland type during 1992 ...................................................... 67 44-46. Maps showing 44. Areas of the United States that have been mapped by the National Wetlands Inventory program, and status of those maps, 1996 ............................................................................ 73 45. Areas of the conterminous United States and Hawaii where wetland data have been digitized by the National Wetlands Inventory program, 1996 ........................................................ 74 46. Wetlands depicted by unbounded symbols............................... 75 47. Aerial photograph and map showing wetland features ............................ 76 48. Photographs and chart detailing the sequence of steps in producing National Wetlands Inventory maps ....................................................... 77 49. Photograph showing flooding in the Upper Mississippi River Basin, summer 1993........................................................................................ 79 50-51. Diagrams showing 50. Wetland functions relative to the location of the wetland within a watershed ................................................................. 80 51. Wetland functions and internal and external values .................. 81 52. Photograph showing a view of a restored salt marsh in the Salmon River Estuary on the Oregon coast ................................................................. 87 53. Diagram showing the relative position of a basin substrate, the water table, and differences in vegetation resulting from the degree of basin slope..................................................................................................... 88 54. Photograph of a scientist checking to see if a soiJ sample has the unique coloration typical of wetland (hydric) soils ................................ 89 55. Graph showing a typical performance curve illustrating the comparison of groups of natural wetlands and restored wetlands of the same type and similar size in the same land-use setting ................................. 90 VIII National Water Summary Wetland Resources: CONTENTS Figures Continued 56. Photograph of a restored wetland in Portland, Oreg. ............................... 91 57-58. Maps showing 57. Storm path and areal extent of tropical-storm- and hurricane- force winds produced by Hurricane Andrew, August 1992..... 93 58. Storm-surge elevations at selected points along the coast of Florida................................................................................ . 94 59. Map and graphs showing storm-surge elevations at selected points along the coast of Louisiana ........................................................................... 94 60-61. Photographs showing 60. Hammock and pine forests in Everglades National Park, Fla., after Hurricane Andrew, September 1992............................... 95 61. Dead fish in the Atchafalaya River Basin, La., September 2, 1992...................................................................................... 96 62. Map showing areal extent of flooding in the Upper Mississippi River Basin during the Great Midwest Flood of 1993 ..................................... 97 In "State Summaries of Wetland Resources" Each State summary has photographs and maps showing 1. A well-known wetland in the State. 2. Wetland distribution and physiography. Some State summaries have other maps, diagrams, or photographs showing related wetland resources information. Tables 1. Acreage granted to the States under the authority of the Swamp Land Acts of 1849, 1850, and 1860 .............................................................. 21 2. Examples of wetland definitions used by Federal and State agencies in the United States................................................................................... 29 3. Classes and subclasses of wetlands and deepwater habitats as defined by Cowardin and others (1979) ................................................................. 31 4. Water regime modifiers as defined by Cowardin and others (1979)......... 32 5. Wetland-dependent breeding birds of the conterminous United States including federally endangered or threatened species and subspecies... 52-53 6. Federal programs that have significant effects on wetlands in the United States......................................................................................... 58-59 7. Methods of altering wetlands................................................................... 61 In "State Summaries of Wetland Resources" Each State summary has a table that lists the wetland-related activities of Federal, State, and local government agencies and private organizations in the State. Executive Summary, State Highlights and Introduction Wetland in Bridgeport Valley, California; Sierra Nevada Mountains in the background. (Photograph by Steve Van Denburgh, U.S. Geological Survey.) This wetland is part of a local park near Madison, Wisconsin. (Photograph by Patricia S. Creene.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 Executive Summary This National Water Summary on Wetland Resources documents wetland resources in the United States. It presents an overview of the status of our knowledge of wetlands at the present time what they are, where they are found, why they are important, and the controversies surrounding them, with an emphasis on their hydrology. The "State Summaries of Wetland Resources" part of this National Water Summary describes wetland resources in each State, the District of Columbia (combined with Maryland), Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Western Pacific Islands. The following discussion is a summary of the two parts of this book "Overview of Wetland Resources" and "State Summaries of Wetland Resources." OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES The Overview of Wetland Resources part of this National Water Summary consists of three sections "Technical Aspects of Wetlands," "Wetland Management and Research," and "Restoration, Creation, and Recovery of Wetlands" that contain 11 articles providing information on many technical and societal as- pects of wetland resources. The following text summarizes the many facts about wetland resources that these articles report. Technical Aspects Of Wetland Resources Wetlands began disappearing soon after permanent European colonization of the United States. More than one-half of the 221 million acres of wetlands that existed at that time have disappeared; only 103 mil- lion acres remain today. Early in this Nation's history, it was believed that wetlands presented obstacles to development and that wetlands should be eliminated. Federal laws provided incentives for "reclaiming" wet- lands. Only recently people have begun to recognize wetland values and attempted to find ways to preserve them, including changing Federal laws. These attempts have slowed the rate of wetland loss, but losses con- tinue today. The history of wetland losses in the conterminous United States from the time of the first perma- nent European settlement and changes in societal attitudes toward wetlands are documented in "History of Wetlands in the Conterminous United States." Although there is controversy over the precise, legal definition of a wetland, wetlands are scientifically defined by their hydrology, vegetation, and soils. The many different types of wetlands, found in many dif- ferent geographic settings, have different functions. Wetlands can be grouped according to these differences using a nationally consistent terminology (Cowardin and others, 1979) to identify mapping units for Federal and State wetland inventories and to determine wetland status and trends that can aid in planning and man- agement of the resource. The different types of wetlands and the classification systems describing them are presented in "Wetland Definitions and Classifications in the United States." An understanding of the basic hydrologic processes that control the formation, persistence, size, and functions of wetlands is necessary for determining appropriate protective measures for particular wetlands and for determining the success of those measures. The source and distribution of water is a major factor in the differences in wetland types and distribution across the country. Both a favorable geologic setting and an adequate and persistent supply of water are necessary for the existence of a wetland. Different wetlands re- ceive water from different sources; ground water, streams, lakes, tides, snow, and rain. The source of water largely determines its quality, which in turn is largely responsible for wetland vegetation. The wetland veg- etation affects the value of the wetland to animals and people. Wetlands provide many beneficial water-re- lated functions. Some wetlands provide flood control, some provide water for aquifers, others feed streams, some modify climate, others improve water quality, some help maintain the salt balance necessary for estua- rine life, and still others control erosion. "Wetland Hydrology, Water Quality, and Associated Functions" describes the different water-related factors that determine what types of wetlands will be established and what functions each will perform. One of the best known functions of wetlands is as habitat for birds. About one-third of the North Ameri- can bird species use wetlands for water, food, shelter, or breeding. About 138 of the 1,900 bird species in the conterminous United States are wetland dependent. For wetland-dependent birds, habitat loss or degrada- tion usually translates to population loss. Some international treaties The Migratory Bird Treaty and the Ramsar Convention are partly responsible for much of the formal wetland protection in this country. "Wet- lands as Bird Habitat" discusses the relation of birds and wetlands and the effects of wetland losses on birds, and describes some efforts to reduce wetland loss. Wetland Management And Research Many of the benefits that wetlands provide accrue primarily to the general public instead of the private landowners. Landowners usually have few incentives to conserve wetlands that fulfill the needs of the gen- eral public. The Government, therefore, provides incentives and regulates and manages some wetland re- sources to protect the resources from degradation and destruction. Despite current recognition of wetland benefits, potentially conflicting interests still exist, and disagreement on how to protect wetlands has led to differences in local, State, and Federal guidelines. Current wetland-protection regulation commonly requires that wetland loss to development be offset by replacing wetlands by means of mitigation. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the "Swampbuster" program are two major Federal vehicles of wetland protection. Coastal National Water Summary Wetland Resources: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY wetlands are provided some protection by the Coastal Zone Management Act and the Coastal Barriers Re- sources Act. Major Federal legislation and initiatives that affect wetlands are discussed in "Wetland Protec- tion Legislation." The recent understanding of wetland values and the benefits that they provide has been broadened by the research efforts. In 1992, wetland research was being done by 18 Federal agencies 12 of which had expen- ditures of $ 1 million or more as part of their mission or responsibilities defined by Congress. In 1992, Fed- eral wetland research expenditures totaled about $63 million. Ecological processes and functions differ with wetland type; therefore, research needs and techniques also differ. Types of Federal wetland research fall into one of the following broad categories: wetland processes, wetland functions, human-induced stresses, delineation and identification, and management. Research needs also differ among agencies; nevertheless, efforts are coordinated to share information and to avoid duplication. Disappearing coastal and bottom-land hardwood wetlands are among the major areas of research. These and other areas of research are discussed in "Wetland Research by Federal Agencies." Wetland mapping is a prerequisite for wetland inventory, regulation, management, protection, and res- toration. Maps are used to analyze wetland trends and the effects of projects, policies, and activities on wet- lands. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has a major responsibility for the mapping and inventory of the Nation's wetlands as mandated by legislation enacted in the past 40 years. This responsibility is satisfied through the agency's National Wetlands Inventory program by producing maps, establishing a wetland data base, publishing and distributing reports on the status and trends of wetlands in this country, and by provid- ing other products related to the identification, mapping, and inventory of wetlands. To date, the National Wetlands Inventory has produced more than 43,300 maps, covering more than 83 percent of the contermi- nous United States, 28 percent of Alaska, and all of Hawaii and the U.S. Territories. Other Federal agencies with wetland mapping and inventory activities, specific to their missions, are the Natural Resources Conser- vation Service (formerly known as the Soil Conservation Service) freshwater wetlands with the potential for agricultural conversion; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration coastal wetlands asso- ciated with marine resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey geographically significant wetlands. More information can be found in "Wetland Mapping and Inventory." Placing a value on wetlands facilitates decisions on which sites should be developed to ensure that the most valuable wetlands are preserved. The value of a wetland lies in the benefits that its habitat, water-qual- ity, and hydrologic functions provide to the environment or to people. Economic value can be placed on some wetland products, but true value goes beyond money. Some wetland values extend beyond the perimeter of the wetland and provide benefits on a local, regional, or global scale. Several systems of wetland evaluation have been or are being developed to assign numerical values to wetland functions in order to allow for the comparison of the worth of one wetland to another. The article "Wetland Functions, Values, and Assessment" discusses three different wetland evaluation methods the Federal Highway Administration's "Wetland Evaluation Technique," the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's "Environmental Monitoring Assessment Program Wetlands," and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' "Hydrogeomorphic Approach." Restoration, Creation, And Recovery For the past few centuries wetlands have been drained or altered to accommodate human needs. This continues to happen, although at a slower rate than in the past. As people have begun to recognize what is lost when wetlands are destroyed, efforts have been made to restore lost wetlands or to create new ones. Restoration and creation of wetlands can help maintain the quality of wetlands and their surrounding eco- systems, and at the same time accommodate the human need for development. Although indications are that some replacement can be successful, full functional replacement has not yet been demonstrated. This is, in part, because of the youth of most restoration and creation projects and, in part, because of the lack of followup on most projects. Scientific knowledge about wetland restoration and creation differs by wetland type, func- tion, and location. We know most about intertidal salt marshes and know much less about replacing forested wetlands because of the time needed for woody vegetation to mature. The more complex the hydrology and ecology of a system, the more difficult it is to restore the system; complete restoration might be impossible in some systems. The ecosystems least likely to be replaced are bogs and fens that have developed over thou- sands of years. "Wetland Restoration and Creation" discusses what is involved in restoring and creating wetlands and chances of being successful. In August 1992, Hurricane Andrew caused massive destruction in southern Florida and in Louisiana two States with some of the largest wetland acreages in the country. The storm passed directly over the Florida Everglades the largest wetland complex in the United States and the Atchafalaya River Basin, La., which contains the largest hardwood swamp in the United States. Although there were some immediate detrimen- tal effects on plants and animals, the long-term effects seem to have been minimal in Florida. In Louisiana, the hurricane may have hastened the coastal erosion and wetland deterioration processes that were already at work. "Effects of Hurricane Andrew (1992) on Wetlands in Southern Florida And Louisiana" describes the effects of this major hurricane on these wetlands. The Great Midwest Flood of 1993, in the Mississippi and Missouri River Basins, was the most devastat- ing flood in United States' history. The areal extent, intensity, and long duration makes this flood unique in the 20th century. Effects of the flood were both detrimental and beneficial to wetlands. Trees were uprooted, islands were eroded, many wetland plants were destroyed, and several bird species fledged few young. Massive sedimentation buried mussels; mammals displaced from the flood plain suffered higher than normal mor- National Water Summary Wetland Resources: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY talities on highways and railroads; the floodwaters transported large amounts of contaminants and nutrients into and down streams; nuisance plants replaced native vegetation; and turbidity made it difficult for some fish to feed. Nevertheless, some fish spawn and feed on inundated flood plains when temperature rise accompanies flooding which was the case in this flooding. Also, some fish habitat was improved by the creation of deep scour holes and massive underwater debris piles that provide cover. Effects of the flooding are discussed in "Effects of the Great Midwest Flood of 1993 on Wetlands." STATE SUMMARIES OF WETLAND RESOURCES State Summaries of Wetland Resources in this National Water Summary provides an overview of the wetland resources of the 50 States, the District of Columbia (combined with Maryland), Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and several Pacific islands over whose wetlands the United States has some form of jurisdiction. (The term "State" is used in the following discussion for all these geographic areas.) The State summaries contain the following sections: Types and Distribution Wetlands in the United States are of many types. Some of the more familiar names for different kinds of wetlands are swamp, marsh, bog, playa, tideflat, prairie pothole, and pond. Examples of lesser known, local names for different wetland types are cienega, pocosin, muskeg, wet pine flatwoods, and willow carrs. The "Types and Distribution" section of each State summary contains a brief discussion of the wetland types in the State and relates the common, locally known wetland names to the classification system used by Federal agencies to identify and delineate wetlands (see the article "Wetland Definitions and Classifications in the United States" in mis volume for an extensive discussion of wetland types and classification). frv-'x * -'>T -Sx.'f ^r-^-_ K/- -:>-»-\-#»V *X V" ^ l rJ- ; 'V \ >. ' ^ ^;..^ r^/ &*. X-V x-^-'7"-1*- tei ^ >/ * z /" rtfc*4- 0____100 MILES 0 100 KILOMETERS WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the Nation. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat y/A Area typified by a high density of small wetlands 6 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The "Types and Distribution" section of each State summary also contains a brief discussion of wetland distribution in the State and a map that shows the general distribution of major wetlands. The State maps were derived from a national map that was compiled by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (fig. 1). Because the data used to compile the map differ in reliability from State to State, the distribution of wetlands shown should be considered approximate. Also, because small areas physically cannot be represented at the scale at which the map was compiled, only relatively large wetlands are shown. Hydrologic Setting Example of table 1 used in each State sumrnary (in this case Wetlands can form almost anywhere that water remains on Maryland and the District of Columbia) showing selected wetland- L i j *> r * j j j c *i ,4 related activities of government agencies and private organiza- or near the land surface for an extende? Pe?°d - Some wetlands tions within the State are ephemeral, containing water tor only a few weeks in spring, whereas others are permanently inundated. In arid regions, [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by , j i- i_ r n u agencies and organizations. .. agency or organization participates in wet some wetlands are wet only in years when rainfall is much land-related activity; ... , agency or organization does not participate in wet- above normal. land-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, restoration and The factors that determine where and when wetlands form ; °&'' ^ include precipitation amount and timing, evaporation and tran- spiration rates, topography, and geologic characteristics (see Agency or organization "Wetland Hydrology, Water Quality, and Associated Functions" in this volume for a discussion of wetland hydrology). The "Hy- drologic Setting" section of the State summaries provides an .. overview of , he factors that determine wetland hydrology in Natural Resources Conservation Service ................. « each State. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Trends Atmospheric Administration ....................................... Department of Defense The area of wetlands in the conterminous United States has Army Corps of Engineers .............................................. decreased by about one-half since the founding of the Nation Der?sah^nTwildt|i eeSterii°r in the late 17°°'S (Dah1' 1"°-)' and the dedine is continuing. Geological Survey - -- - rj^£ '"pren(js" seciion of each State summary contains a brief National Biological Service ....................................... ... .. ... ... accounting of wetland losses and gains and lists the major National Park Service .................................................... ... * causes of wetland loss. (For a national perspective of wetland Environmental Protection Agency .................................. trends, see "History and Trends of Wetlands in the Contermi- STATE nous United States" in this volume.) Department of the Environment Water Management Administration ........................... Department of Natural Resources Conservation Chesapeake Bay and Watershed Programs ............ * , -^ -,,^.i Natural Heritage Program .. . ..__. ......_......... . ..... Wetland- conservation efforts are earned out by Federal, Program Open Space .................................................... State, and local government agencies; many private organiza- Office of State Planning .................................................. tions also work to conserve wetlands. The "Conservation" sec- State Highway Administration......................................... tion Of each State summary provides an account of the wetland-conservation activities on each of those levels. In- i,, T- j i o *. JT i i «- cc *. Department of Consumer and duded are P"mary Federal, State, and local regulations affect- Regulatory Affairs .............................................................. ... ... ing wetlands, as well as a discussion of other aspects of wetland Department of Public Works ............................................ ... conservation, such as management, land acquisition, planning, Metropolitan Council of Governments........................... mitigation, research, restoration and creation, delineation, in- Soil and Water Conservation District ............................ . . . ventory, education, and many more. (For a discussion of regu- ^legislation pertaining to wetlands, see "Wetland Chesapeake Bay Foundation ........................................... . ... ... Protection Legislation" in this volume.) Environmental Concern, Inc............................................. ... ... ... Each State summary contains a table (such as the accom- Maryland Land Trust Alliance.......................................... panying table for Maryland and the District of Columbia) that The Nature Conservancy .................................................. ... ... . ... lists seiected wetland-related activities of Federal, State, and local government agencies and private organizations in the State. The information contained in the table and in the "Con- servation" section was compiled in L993; because of the often dynamic nature of government bureaucracies and agency responsibilities, the names of agencies and the activities listed for them can be considered reli- able as of that date and no later. References Cited Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, EC-, and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 13 p. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: HIGHLIGHTS State Summary Highlights Following are a few notable facts about the wetlands of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and several islands of the Pacific Ocean, as reported in the State summaries: Alabama _____________________________________ Wetlands cover about 10 percent of Alabama and range in size from small areas of less than an acre to the 100,000-acre forested tract in the Mobile-Tensaw River Delta. Most of the State's forested wetlands are bottom-land forests in alluvial flood plains. Coastal waters support extensive salt marshes. Wetland acreage in the area that is now Alabama has been reduced by about one-half in the last two centuries. Major causes of wetland loss or alteration have been agricultural and silvicultural conversions in the interior; dredging on the coast; industrial, commercial, and residential development; erosion; subsidence; and natural succession of vegetation. Alaska ______________________________________ Alaska has more area covered by wetlands about 170 million acres than the other 49 States combined. More than 70,000 swans, 1 million geese, 12 million ducks, and 100 million shorebirds depend on Alaskan wetlands for resting, feeding, or nesting. Freshwater Alaskan wetlands include bogs, fens, tundra, marshes, and meadows; brackish and saltwater wetlands include flats, beaches, rocky shores, and salt marshes. Most of the State's freshwater wetlands are peatlands (wetlands that have organic soils), and cover as many as 110 million acres. Alaska's coastal wetlands are cooperatively protected and managed by local governments, rural regions, and the State. Arizona_______________________________________ Less than 1 percent of Arizona's landscape has wetlands. Since the late 1800's, streams and wetlands through- out Arizona have been modified or drained, resulting in the loss of more than one-third of the State's original wetlands. The most extensive Arizona wetlands are in riparian zones and include oxbow lakes, marshes, cienegas, and bosques. Nonriparian wetlands include tinajas, playas, and caldera lakes. Extreme aridity and seasonally varying precipitation are the climatic characteristics that most significantly influence wetland formation and distribution in Arizona. Recreational use of wetlands provides economic benefits to the State. Arkansas _____________________________________ About 8 percent of Arkansas is wetland. The most extensive areas are forested wetlands (swamps and bottom-land forests) along major rivers. Arkansas wetlands, especially those in the Mississippi River Valley, are a critical component of the series of wetlands along the Mississippi Fly way. Wetlands in the Cache-Lower White River system have been designated as one of nine "Wetlands of International Importance" in the United States. Arkansas has lost more wetland acres than any other inland State; most of the loss has been due to conversion to farmland. Arkansas has adopted a program that applies an antidegradation policy to substan- tial alteration of water bodies, including adjacent wetlands. California____________________________________ California's wetlands have significant economic and environmental value, providing benefits such as water- quality maintenance, flood and erosion attenuation, prevention of saltwater intrusion, and wildlife habitat. The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta regularly harbors as much as 15 percent of the waterfowl on the Pacific Fly way. California has lost as much as 91 percent of its original wetlands, primarily because of conversion to agriculture. Flooded rice fields, which are converted wetlands, covered about 658,600 acres in the mid- 1980's. Rice farmers, State and university researchers, and private organizations are cooperatively studying the feasibility of managing rice fields for migratory waterfowl habitat. Wetland protection is identified as a goal of The California Environmental Quality Act of 1970. Colorado _____________________________________ Wetlands cover about 1 million acres of Colorado 1.5 percent of the State's area. Wetlands occur in all life and climatic zones, from the high mountains to the arid plains and plateaus. Wetland types in Colorado include forested wetlands, willow carrs, fens, marshes, alpine snow glades, and wet and salt meadows. Wet- lands are vital to wildlife in the State, particularly in the arid regions. Colorado's wetland area has decreased by about one-half in the last two centuries, and losses are continuing due to a variety of land-development pressures; however, irrigation and changes in land-use practices have resulted in new wetlands, principally in the San Luis Valley and near Boulder. 8 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: HIGHLIGHTS Connecticut Wetlands cover about 173,000 acres of Connecticut 5 percent of the State's land surface. Connecticut has lost an estimated one-third to three-fourths of its original wetlands over the 200-year period between the 1780's and 1980's. Forested wetlands, primarily red maple swamps, are the predominant wetland type, con- stituting 54 percent of the State's wetlands. Salt marshes, tidal flats, and beaches are the primary coastal wetlands. Wetland protection in Connecticut is carried out at the Federal, State, and (or) local government level, depending on the type and location of the wetland resource. Delaware____________________________________ Wetlands cover about 17 percent of Delaware. Wetlands in Delaware are diverse. Extensive estuarine wet- lands line Delaware Bay and the Atlantic Ocean. Delmarva bays, which are seasonally flooded depressions in the Coastal Plain, contain marsh, shrub, and forest vegetation. More than one-half of Delaware's wetlands have been converted to nonwetland uses or otherwise altered since the 1780's. The State Wetlands Act con- trols development in tidal wetlands, and a proposed statute would establish a State-run nontidal-wetlands regulatory program. Delaware has established its own wetland classification, which has five categories that are based on a wetland's functions and values. District of Columbia______________________________ The District of Columbia has about 250 acres of wetlands; all are palustrine or riverine. Most occur along the tidal reaches of the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers. About 87 percent of the District's wetlands have been drained or filled since the District was established in the 1790's. The National Park Service owns and main- tains most wetlands in the District of Columbia. To alter wetlands, permits must be obtained from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs. Wetland conservation is accomplished on Federal and local levels and through the activities of private organizations. Florida______________________________________ Florida has about 11 million acres of wetlands, more than any of the other 47 conterminous States. The abun- dance of wetlands in Florida is due primarily to the low, flat terrain and plentiful rainfall. Most of Florida's wetlands are forested freshwater habitats on stream flood plains, in small depressions and ponds, and cover- ing wet flatwoods. The Everglades, in southern Florida, is a large freshwater marsh that once received surface- and ground-water flows from the Kissimmee River-Lake Okeechobee Basin but which now depends on water releases from canals and water-retention areas. Florida has lost nearly one-half of its wetlands, primarily to agricultural drainage. The State protects wetlands by regulating development in wetland areas, acquiring wetlands and land adjacent to wetlands, and requiring local governments to produce long-range plans for wetland protection. Georgia_____________________________________ Georgia has more than 7.7 million acres of wetlands. Georgia's wetlands are diverse, ranging from mountain seepage areas to estuarine tidal flats. This diversity is primarily due to the wide variety of landforms present, each of which can have different geologic and hydrologic characteristics. The greatest acreages of wetlands are in the coastal plain, where flood-plain wetlands are most extensive and tidal freshwater swamps and estuarine marshes meet. Most of Georgia's wetlands are forested freshwater habitats associated with streams. The Okefenokee Swamp in Georgia, one of the largest freshwater wetlands in the United States, is a mosaic of emergent marshes, aquatic beds, forested and scrub-shrub wetlands, and forested uplands. Hawaii______________________________________ Wetlands constitute less than 3 percent of the State, but they have had a major economic effect on Hawaiian society both before and after European contact. Wetlands are habitats for several species of birds and plants endemic to the Hawaiian Islands. Wetland formation in Hawaii is influenced by climate, topography, and geology; wetlands form where local hydrologic conditions favor water retention near the land surface. Although rainfall is high in many areas of the islands, steep topography and the high permeability of the volcanic rock that forms the islands result in rapid discharge of storm runoff to the ocean as surface-water and ground-water flow. Coastal wetland losses have been greatest on Oahu, where wetlands have been drained and filled for resort, industrial, and residential development. Idaho Most of Idaho's 386,000 acres of wetlands are in flood plains and riparian areas along streams and other water bodies. Since about 1860, when mining and farming began in the State, wetland acreage has decreased by 56 percent. The Idaho State Water Plan states that, insofar as is possible, the State should assume respon- sibility for wetland management and protection. Policy plans made by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game for 1991 to 2005 focus land-acquisition efforts on wetland areas where habitat protection is critical. Many private organizations and groups have participated in projects involving wetland acquisition and restoration. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: HIGHLIGHTS Illinois______________________________________ Wetlands cover about 3.5 percent of Illinois. The largest acreage of wetlands is in the bottom-land forests and swamps along the State's major rivers. Northeastern Illinois also has a large concentration of wetlands. Illinois has lost as much as 90 percent of its original wetlands over the last 200 years; most of the losses have been due to drainage for conversion to agricultural and other uses. The primary State law governing wetlands is the Interagency Wetland Policy Act of 1989, which sets a goal of no net loss of wetlands due to projects funded by the State. Wetlands can be owned and protected by the public as County Forest Preserve Districts. Indiana_____________________________________ About 85 percent of Indiana's wetlands have been lost since the 1780's, primarily because of conversion to agricultural land. The current rate of wetland loss is about 1 to 3 percent of the remaining wetlands per year. Most of the wetlands remaining in Indiana, about 813,000 acres, are in the northeastern part of the State, including extensive wetlands in and near the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore. The Department of Natural Resources is developing a State wetland conservation plan under a grant from the U.S. Environmental Pro- tection Agency. Several River Basin Commissions are encouraging or pursuing wetland restoration as a flood- control measure with an added benefit of recreation potential. Iowa _______________________________________ Iowa has diverse wetlands that include prairie-pothole marshes, swamps, sloughs, bogs, fens, and ponds. Wetlands cover about 1.2 percent of Iowa, but about 200 years ago more than 11 percent of the State's area was wetland. Conversion of wetlands to agricultural lands, largely in the prairie-pothole region, has been the primary cause of wetland loss. Wetland acreage has been slowly increasing since 1987 as a result of the Prai- rie Pothole Joint Venture, a cooperative Federal, State, county, and private-organization program. The Wet- land Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act has the potential to add a substantial number of additional acres. Kansas ______________________________________ Kansas has about 435,000 acres of wetlands, which include sandhill pools along the Arkansas River, playa lakes in western Kansas, freshwater marshes such as those in Cheyenne Bottoms, and salt marshes such as those in Quivira National Wildlife Refuge. Kansas wetlands are important to migrating waterfowl and shore- birds, which depend on the few remaining wetlands in the Central Fly way. Kansas has lost about one-half its wetlands during the last 200 years, mostly due to conversion to cropland and depletion of surface and ground water due to irrigation withdrawals. Wetland preservation and restoration are being accomplished through cooperation among Federal and State agencies and private organizations. Kentucky______________________________________ Wetlands compose less than 2.5 percent of Kentucky's land area, but they have considerable environmental, socioeconomic, and esthetic value. Most Kentucky wetlands lie shoreward of rivers, lakes, and reservoirs and include cypress swamps, bottom-land hardwood forests, marshes, and ponds. More than one-half of Kentucky's original wetlands have been lost, primarily as a conversion to cropland and pastureland; most conversions have been in western Kentucky. The State fosters protection of wetlands through a system of registry and dedication agreements with private entities. Most of Kentucky's wetlands are privately owned. Louisiana ____________________________________ Wetlands are a major source of income for the people of Louisiana, providing revenues from harvesting of fish and shellfish, trapping, and recreation. Most of the State's wetlands are freshwater swamps, but the area of coastal marsh is substantial: Louisiana's coastal marshes represent as much as 40 percent of the coastal marshes in the United States. Wetlands once covered more than one-half of the area that is now Louisiana, but wetland acreage has declined to less than one-third of the State's land surface over the last 200 years. The Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Program implements specific projects to conserve, enhance, restore, and create coastal wetlands. Maine ______________________________________ Maine's wetlands are diverse, ranging from inland swamps and peatlands to coastal salt marshes and mud flats. One-fourth of the State is wetland, and most wetlands are owned by individuals, timber companies, or other private landowners. Land-use changes have led to wetland losses. Early in Maine's history, expansion of fishing and farming communities along the coast resulted in the filling of many coastal wetlands. Wet- lands along inland waterways were converted to agricultural use. Recent losses have been due to urbaniza- tion and other development. Wetland conservation in Maine is a combined effort by Federal, State, and local governments and private organizations and landowners. 10 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: HIGHLIGHTS Maryland ______________________________________ Maryland has about 591,000 acres of wetlands, one-half of which are tidal and one-half nontidal. Extensive estuarine wetlands exist on both sides of the Chesapeake Bay. The Delmarva Peninsula has many wetlands in Delmarva bays, topographic depressions whose wetness is controlled by the water table. About 64 percent of Maryland's wetlands have been converted to nonwetland uses since the 1780's. To obtain permits for altering wetlands in Maryland, a single State-Federal application is submitted to the Maryland Department of the Environment. Wetland conservation in Maryland is accomplished on the Federal, State, and local level and through the activities of private organizations. Massachusetts __________________________________ Wetlands cover about 590,000 acres of Massachusetts, about 12 percent of the State's area. Massachusetts has lost about 28 percent of its original wetlands since the 1780's. Agricultural and urban expansion have caused most of the losses. Forested wetlands, primarily red maple swamps, comprise more than one-half of the State's wetlands; estuarine and marine wetlands account for about one-fifth. Regulatory functions of wetland conservation in Massachusetts are performed at the Federal, State, and local government level, and private organizations are active in land acquisition and management, research, education, and policy review and planning. Michigan_____________________________________ Wetlands cover about 15 percent of Michigan. They provide many benefits, including flood and erosion attenuation, water-quality maintenance, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Michigan's wetlands are largely associated with surface features that are the result of glaciation. Most Michigan wetlands are vegetated by forest or shrubs, but fresh marsh is abundant in coastal and inland areas. About one-half of the State's wet- lands have been converted to other uses, primarily agriculture. The Goemaere-Anderson Wetland Protection Act of 1980 (Public Law 203) and other State statutes are the basis for Michigan's wetland-conservation program. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has oversight of the State program. M i n nesota ____________________________________ Minnesota has about 9.5 million acres of wetlands, about one-half the wetland acreage present in predevelopment times. Most wetland losses have been due to drainage for agriculture. Minnesota's wetlands are diverse, ranging from extensive northern peatlands to small prairie potholes. Minnesota has about 150,000 to 200,000 acres of wild rice beds. The centerpiece of Minnesota's efforts to protect wetlands is the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991, which sets a goal of no net wetland loss. The law fills the gap in wetland protec- tion between larger, deepwater habitats that are already protected by Minnesota statute and agricultural wet- lands that are addressed by the Federal "Swampbuster" provisions. Mississippi___________________________________ Wetlands occupy more than 13 percent of Mississippi. Bottom-land forests, swamps and freshwater marshes account for most of Mississippi's wetland acreage; coastal marshes also are extensive. Wetlands in Missis- sippi are a key part of the Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture program for the restoration of Mississippi Flyway waterfowl populations. Nearly three-fifths of the State's wetlands have been converted to nonwetland uses, primarily agriculture. Mississippi wetlands have been and continue to be a source of timber, and the cleared, fertile lands have become productive farmland. The Natural Heritage Program identifies and inven- tories priority wetlands. Missouri_____________________________________ Missouri's wetlands occupy 643,000 acres, about 1.4 percent of the State's area. Swamps and other forested wetlands, marshes and fens, and shrub swamps constitute most of the wetland acreage. Missouri's location on the Mississippi Flyway makes the State a favored wintering area for hundreds of thousands of waterfowl and other birds, including bald eagles. Missouri has lost as much as 4.2 million acres (87 percent) of its original wetlands. Most wetland loss has been due to agricultural conversions, urban development, and flood-control measures. The State has developed a wetland-management plan to guide its efforts in the restoration and management of wetlands until the year 2000. Montana _____________________________________ Wetlands cover only a small part of Montana, but their ecological and economic importance far outweighs their relative size. About 27 percent of the wetlands present before 1800 have been converted to other land uses, primarily cropland. Losses to cropland have been particularly great in north-central and eastern Mon- tana, an area that is part of the Nation's most valuable waterfowl production area, the prairie pothole region of the northern Great Plains. Montana has no comprehensive wetland-protection program; however, the Water Quality Bureau of the Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences is developing enforce- able water-quality and biological standards specific to Montana wetlands. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: HIGHLIGHTS 11 Nebraska _____________________________________ Nebraska has three wetland complexes recognized as being of international importance as migrational and breeding habitat for waterfowl and nongame birds: the Rainwater Basin wetlands in south-central and south- eastern Nebraska, the Big Bend reach of the Platte River (directly north of the Rainwater Basin), and the Sandhills wetlands in north-central and northwestern Nebraska. Nebraska has lost about 1 million acres of wetlands in the last 200 years about 35 percent of the State's original wetland acreage. Conversion to agricultural use was the primary cause for most of the losses, but urbanization, reservoir construction, high- way construction, and other activities also contributed. Nevada _____________________________________ Wetlands cover less than 1 percent of Nevada but are some of the most economically and ecologically valu- able lands in the State. Benefits of wetlands include flood attenuation, bank stabilization, water-quality improvement, and fish and wildlife habitat. Desert wetlands include marshes in playa lakes, nonvegetated playas, and riparian wetlands; mountain wetlands include fens and other wetlands that form in small glacial lakes. More than one-half of Nevada's original wetlands have been lost, primarily due to conversion of wet- lands to cropland and diversion of water for agricultural and urban use; many others have been seriously degraded by human activities. Some wetlands have been created by mine dewatering and sewage treatment. New Hampshire_________________________________ Wetlands occupy as much as 10 percent of New Hampshire and are an integral part of its natural resources. Swamps and peatlands comprise most of the State's wetlands. Many wetlands have been converted to nonwetland uses such as crop or pastureland. Others have been altered or degraded by urbanization, peat mining, timber harvesting, road building, all-terrain vehicle use, and other causes. New Hampshire regulates wetlands primarily through State law and the rules of the Wetlands Board; local conservation commissions have an advisory role in local wetland protection. During 1987 to 1993, the State acquired diverse wetlands by purchase and donation or protected wetlands through conservation easements. New Jersey____________________________________ New Jersey has about 916,000 acres of wetlands, most of which are in the coastal plain. Forested wetlands are the most common and widely distributed wetlands in the State. Salt marshes are the most common wet- lands in coastal areas. Wetlands are ecologically and economically valuable to the State. Cranberry growing is a significant industry in New Jersey; more than 3,000 acres of cranberry bog wetlands were under private management in 1992. Between the 1780's and 1980's, New Jersey lost about 39 percent of its wetlands. Wet- lands have been drained primarily for crop production and pasturage and filled for housing, transportation, industrialization, and landfills. New Mexico___________________________________ Wetlands cover about 482,000 acres (0.6 percent) of New Mexico; most are in the eastern and northern areas of the State. New Mexico's wetlands include forested wetlands, bottom-land shrublands, marshes, fens, alpine snow glades, wet and salt meadows, shallow ponds, and playa lakes. Riparian wetlands and playa lakes are especially valuable to migratory waterfowl and wading birds. New Mexico has lost about one-third of its wetlands, mostly due to agricultural conversion, diversion of water to irrigation, overgrazing, and urbanization. Other causes of loss or degradation have been mining, clear cutting, road construction, streamflow regulation, and invasion by normative plants. New York____________________________________ New York has about 2.4 million acres of wetlands. One-half of the 160 species identified as endangered or threatened by the Department of Environmental Conservation are wetland dependent. Counties in the Adirondack Mountains and those south and east of Lake Ontario have the largest percentages of wetland area; counties that make up New "fork City and Long Island, along the border with Pennsylvania, and in the Catskills have the smallest percentages. From the 1780's to 1980's, about 60 percent of New York's wetland area was lost, primarily because of conversion to agriculture and other land uses. Counties may facilitate wetland acquisition through the funding of bond acts. North Carolina_________________________________ About 5.7 million acres of North Carolina 17 percent of the State is wetland. The Coastal Plain contains 95 percent of the State's wetlands. Before colonization by Europeans, North Carolina had about 11 million acres of wetlands. Nearly one-third of the wetland alterations in the Coastal Plain have occurred since the 1950's; most have resulted from conversion to managed forests and agriculture. The Roanoke River flood plain has one of the largest intact and least disturbed bottom-land hardwood forests in the mid-Atlantic region. About 70 percent of the rare and endangered plants and animals in the State are wetland dependent. 12 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: HIGHLIGHTS North Dakota. Wetlands once covered about 4.9 million acres of North Dakota 11 percent of the State. By the 1980's, the acreage had decreased to about 2.7 million acres, a loss of about 45 percent. Most of the losses have been caused by drainage for agricultural development. The rate of agricultural conversions in the future will likely depend on crop prices and other economic factors. Most of North Dakota's wetlands are prairie potholes, which provide nesting and feeding habitat for migratory waterfowl and wading birds. About one-half the Nation's duck population originates in the Prairie Pothole Region of North Dakota and other prairie States. Ohio_______________________________________ Ohio's wetlands cover about 1.8 percent of the State. Swamps, wet prairies, coastal and embayment marshes, peatlands, and wetlands along stream margins and backwaters are the most common Ohio wetlands. Wet- land area in Ohio has declined by 90 percent during the last 200 years, from about 5,000,000 acres to about 483,000 acres. Drainage of wetlands for agriculture has been the primary cause of wetland loss, but recre- ational use, fluctuating water levels, urban development, mining, logging, and fire also have contributed. Ohio designates all wetlands as State Resource Waters. As such, wetland water quality is protected from degradation that may interfere with designated uses. Oklahoma___________________________________ Wetlands cover about 950,000 acres (2 percent) of Oklahoma. Wetlands in Oklahoma include bottom-land hardwood forests and swamps; marshes and wet meadows; aquatic-bed wetlands characterized by submersed or floating plants in ponds, lakes, rivers, and sloughs; and sparsely vegetated wetlands such as intermittently flooded playa lakes. Most forested wetlands are in eastern Oklahoma, where precipitation is highest and evaporation lowest. Riparian wetlands and playa lakes in drier western Oklahoma are especially valuable to wildlife. Nearly two-thirds of Oklahoma's original wetlands have been lost as a result of agricultural conver- sions, channelization, impoundment, streamflow regulation, and other causes. O rego n ______________________________________ Wetlands are economically and ecologically valuable to Oregon and can be found statewide. Oregon had nearly 1.4 million acres of wetlands as of the mid-1980's, a decline of more than one-third over the previous 200 years. Most of the losses were due to conversion to agricultural uses, primarily in the Willamette River Valley and Upper Klamath Basin. To improve the effectiveness and efficiency of Oregon's efforts to con- serve, restore, and protect wetlands, the State has developed the Wetland Conservation Strategy. The strat- egy is based on the recommendations of advisory committees representing Federal, State, and local agencies and interest groups. Pennsylvania About 1.4 percent (404,000 acres) of Pennsylvania is covered by wetlands. Deciduous and forested wetlands are the most common types, followed by open water, marshes, shrub wetlands, and others. Wetlands are most densely distributed in the glaciated northwestern and northeastern parts of the State. Wetland area in Penn- sylvania has decreased by more than one-half in the last 200 years. The primary causes of wetland loss or degradation have been conversion to cropland, channelization, forestry, mining, urban development, and the construction of ponds and impoundments. About 50 private conservancy organizations in the State work to protect and preserve natural lands, including wetlands, on a local level. Puerto Rico Wetlands in Puerto Rico are diverse, ranging from interior montane wetlands of the rain forest to intertidal mangrove swamps along the coast. Puerto Rico's wetlands are valuable natural resources that provide habitat for wildlife and a water supply for several large cities. Nearly all of Puerto Rico's wetlands have been modified by man historically for sugar cane agriculture and more recently for housing development, transportation, tourist facilities, and other types of development. Wetland restoration efforts are underway at several locations throughout Puerto Rico; an example is the freshwater wetlands of Laguna Cartagena, once one of the most important waterfowl habitats on the island. Rhode Island __________________________________ Wetlands cover about 65,000 acres of Rhode Island, about 10 percent of the State's area. Forested wetlands, primarily red maple swamps, are the most abundant wetland type and account for nearly three-quarters of the State's wetlands. Once more common in Rhode Island, Atlantic white cedar wetlands are now found mostly in the southwestern part of the State. Wetlands are regulated primarily at the State-government level in Rhode Island; different agencies regulate coastal and freshwater wetlands. Local land-use controls are an additional wetland-protection measure. Many of Rhode Island's natural resources have been acquired and protected through cooperative efforts of private and public entities. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: HIGHLIGHTS 13 South Carolina__________________________________ Nearly one-quarter of South Carolina is wetland about 4.6 million acres. South Carolina's wetlands provide flood attenuation, erosion control, water-quality maintenance, recreational opportunities, and fish and wildlife habitat. South Carolina wetlands are important wintering areas for migratory waterfowl on the Atlantic Fly way. Wetlands in the State include wet pine flatwoods, pocosins, Carolina bays, beaver ponds, bottom-land forests, swamps, fresh and salt marshes, and tidal flats. About 80 percent of the wetlands are freshwater and forested. Wetland acreage in South Carolina has declined by more than one-quarter since the late 1700's, primarily as a result of human activities. South Dakota __________________________________ Wetlands occupy about 1.8 million acres (3.6 percent) of South Dakota. These wetlands are of great economic and esthetic value because they provide important habitat for wildlife (especially migratory waterfowl), hydrologic benefits that include water retention and flood attenuation, and numerous recreational opportunities. By far the most common wetland type in South Dakota is the prairie pothole, which occurs in glaciated eastern South Dakota. Wetland area in South Dakota has decreased by about 35 percent during the last 200 years from about 2.7 million to about 1.8 million acres. Agricultural conversions, notably in the prairie pothole region, have accounted for most wetland losses. Tennessee____________________________________ Estimates of Tennessee's wetland area range from 640,000 to 1,400,000 acres. Although wetlands constitute a small percentage of Tennessee, they are ecologically and economically valuable to the State. Bottom-land forests are the most common Tennessee wetlands; they are most abundant in the flood plains of rivers in the western part of the State. Nearly three-fifths of Tennessee's original wetlands have been lost; major causes of loss or degradation in Tennessee have included agricultural conversions, logging, reservoir construction, channelization, sedimentation, and urbanization. The Tennessee Wetlands Acquisition Act of 1986 autho- rizes the acquisition of wetlands by use of real estate transfer taxes. Texas_______________________________________ Wetlands cover about 7.6 million acres of Texas, 4.4 percent of the State's area. The most extensive wetlands are the bottom-land hardwood forests and swamps of East Texas; the marshes, swamps, and tidal flats of the coast; and the playa lakes of the High Plains. Wetlands provide flood attenuation, bank stabilization, water- quality maintenance, fish and wildlife habitat, and opportunities for hunting, fishing, and other recreational activities. Commercial fisheries benefit directly from coastal wetlands. Texas has lost about one-half of its original wetlands as a result of agricultural conversions, overgrazing, urbanization, channelization, water- table declines, construction of navigation canals, and other causes. Utah_______________________________________ Wetlands cover only a small part of Utah but provide critical aquatic habitat in an arid environment as well as economic and other benefits. Utah wetlands include the shallows of small lakes, reservoirs, ponds, and streams; riparian wetlands; marshes and wet meadows; mud and salt flats; and playas. The largest wetlands in the State surround Great Salt Lake. Because of the importance of Great Salt Lake and its associated wet- lands to migratory waterfowl and shorebirds, in 1991 the lake was designated a Hemispheric Reserve in the Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network. Streamflow regulation and agricultural, residential, industrial, and ski-area development have resulted in widespread wetland losses. Vermont_____________________________________ Estimates of the area covered by wetlands in Vermont range from 4 to 6 percent of the State's total area. The largest wetlands are in the valleys of the northeast and in river flood plains and deltas in the Lake Champlain Valley. Vermont's wetlands provide flood and erosion control, water-quality maintenance, timber, and recreational opportunities. As much as 35 percent of Vermont's wetlands have been lost; major causes have been conversion to agriculture and residential and recreational development. The State is undertaking the Vermont Wetlands Conservation Strategy, a comprehensive review of current wetland conservation programs that will recommend actions to improve wetland conservation in Vermont. U.S. Virgin Islands_________________________________ Wetlands in the U.S. Virgin Islands comprise about 3 percent of the land surface. Wetlands are habitat for fish, shellfish, and birds, including endangered species such as the peregrine falcon and brown pelican. Fresh- water is scarce in the islands, and wetlands there are mainly estuarine and marine types such as salt ponds, mangrove forests, sea grass beds, and coral reefs. Shoreline wetlands are vulnerable to destruction from construction of tourist facilities and water-dependent developments like marinas and to degradation by sedi- mentation and septic tank leachate. The Territorial Legislature adopted the Indigenous and Endangered Spe- cies Act of 1990, which establishes a policy of "no net loss of wetlands" to the maximum extent possible. 14 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: HIGHLIGHTS Virginia. Virginia has about 1 million acres of wetlands; one-quarter are tidal and three-quarters are nontidal. Forested wetlands (swamps) are the most common wetlands in the State. Both shores of the Chesapeake Bay have extensive estuarine wetlands. Conversion to nonwetland uses (agricultural, urban, industrial, and recreational), channelization and ditching, and other causes have resulted in the loss of about 42 percent of Virginia's wetlands since the 1780's. Development in wetlands is regulated in part by means of the Virginia Water Protection Permit. Local governments may adopt prescribed zoning ordinances and form citizen wetland boards to regulate their own tidal wetlands; the State retains an oversight and appellate role. Washington___________________________________ Wetlands cover only about 2 percent (939,000 acres) of Washington, but they benefit the State both ecologi- cally and economically. Wetlands are nursery and feeding areas for anadromous fish such as salmon and steelhead trout. About 75 percent of the State's wetlands contain freshwater and include forested and shrub swamps, bogs, fens, marshes, wet prairies and meadows, vernal pools, and playas. About 25 percent are estuarine or marine and include marshes, tidal flats, beaches, and rocky shores. Estimates of wetland loss in Washington range from 20 to 50 percent; causes of loss or degradation include agricultural conversion, urban expansion, siting of ports and industries, logging, and invasion of nonnative plants and animals. West Virginia__________________________________ Wetlands constitute less than 1 percent of West Virginia's surface area but contribute significantly to the State's economic development and ecological diversity. Common West Virginia wetlands include swamps, peat bogs, marl wetlands, marshes, wet meadows, and ponds. The Canaan Valley and Meadow River wetlands together contain about 14 percent of the State's wetlands. The Canaan Valley wetland complex is the largest in the central Appalachian Mountains. West Virginia has lost about one-fourth of its original wetlands; primary causes have been agricultural conversions, channelization, pond and reservoir construction, and urbaniza- tion. Some wetlands have been created as a result of beaver activity. Western Pacific Islands_____________________________ Most of the wetlands in the Mariana, Samoan, Caroline, and Marshall Islands (referred to as the Western Pacific Islands in this report) are in coastal areas. Wetlands on the islands include mangrove swamps, marshes, and coral reefs. Wetlands are of economic importance on many islands because the staple food, taro, is grown in converted or constructed wetlands. On the larger islands, wetlands are important wildlife habitat. Avail- able trend information indicates that on many islands there has been wetland loss or degradation due to agricultural conversion, urban expansion, or firewood cutting. Wetland activities on islands under United States jurisdiction are subject to Federal regulation. Wisconsin______________________________________ Wetlands cover more than 5 million acres (15 percent) of Wisconsin. Common wetlands include swamps and marshes in southern Wisconsin and peatlands in northern Wisconsin. Wetlands are most numerous in glaciated parts of the State; the unglaciated "driftless" section of southwestern Wisconsin has few wetlands, except in stream valleys filled with unconsolidated outwash and alluvium. Wetland acreage has decreased by nearly one-half over the last 200 years, primarily owing to agricultural development. In 1991 the State became the first to adopt water-quality standards for wetlands; the standards allow the State to control wet- land development under section 401 of the Clean Water Act. Wyoming______________________________________ Wetlands cover about 1.25 million acres (2 percent) of Wyoming and are the most diverse ecosystems in the State's semiarid environment. The Laramie Plain Lakes wetland complex is home to the Wyoming toad, an endangered species. Trend information indicates that wetland acreage in Wyoming has decreased over time, primarily due to agricultural and urban development. However, agricultural diversions, whose original pur- pose was to flush salts and increase hay-meadow production, have enhanced wetlands along the Bear River; the Bear River wetland is one of the most productive and diverse bird habitats in Wyoming. The Wyoming Wetlands Act is the basis for wetland program development by the State. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: INTRODUCTION 15 Introduction This volume, National Water Summary on Wetland Resources, is organized into two parts, a somewhat different format than the seven previous volumes (see inside front cover for previous volumes) in the National Water Summary series. (The "Hydrologic Conditions and Water-Related Events" included in the previous volumes are published separately, as U.S. Geological Survey Open- File Reports Numbers 96-107 and 96-145.) This volume is the result of a coordinated effort to compile the most up-to-date information available on wetland resources. Although much has been written about the biological aspects of wetlands, much less has been written about the hydrology and the non-habitat functions of wetlands. This volume presents an overview of wetland resources from many different perspectives. The first part of this volume, "Overview of Wetland Resources," discusses wetland resources from a national perspective and provides background information for the State summaries section. This section contains articles on the technical, management and research, and restoration, creation, and recovery aspects of wetland resources. These articles relate the history of wetlands in the United States; the definition of wetlands and a description of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Classification System (Cowardin and others, 1979); hydrologic and water-quality factors that affect the distribution of wetlands and related functions commonly attributed to wetlands; the role of wetlands as habitat for birds; the roles of Federal agencies in wetland protection legislation and research; progress in inventory and mapping of wetlands; techniques for evaluating wetlands; human attempts to restore damaged wetlands and create new ones; and the recovery of wetlands following natural disasters. The second part, "State Summaries of Wetland Resources," describes wetlands of each State, the District of Columbia (combined with Maryland), Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Western Pacific Islands. Each State summary discusses wetlands in terms of value, types and distribution, hydrologic setting, and trends in acreage from predevelopment to modern times. Each State summary also provides an overview of public- and private-sector wetland-conservation efforts in that State and a table showing the wetland-related responsibilities of principal government agencies and private organizations within the State. Illustrations include a map depicting the areal distribution of principal wetlands and selected related features such as ecoregions, physiography, precipitation, runoff, evaporation, or other physical or climatic features that influence the presence or distribution of wetlands in that State. Some of the State summaries include a map or cross section depicting the hydrologic setting of wetlands and (or) a map showing predevelopment wetland distribution. To supplement the information provided in this volume, bibliographic references are listed at the end of each article and State summary. An extensive list of suggested references for more information about topics discussed in the "Overview of Wetland Resources" is available in U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 96-169. This report also is available online at http:// h2o.usgs.gov/public/nwsum/bib/bihhtml. Most technical terms are defined in the glossary at the end of this Horicon Marsh, Wisconsin, provides volume, and a conversion table of water measurements recreational opportunities. (Photograph by precedes the glossary. Philtip}. Redman, U.S. Geological Survey.) 16 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: INTRODUCTION Acknowledgments Preparation of the National Water Summary requires compiling information from many individuals within the U.S. Geological Survey and various Federal and State agencies. The National Water Summary on Wetland Resources is the eighth in this series of U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers and it was prepared under the direction of Robert M. Hirsch, Chief Hydrologist. The report compilers gratefully acknowledge the assistance of water-resources agencies in each State in preparing and reviewing the State summaries of wetland resources. In addition, the following Federal agencies and other organizations contributed articles for this report: ManTech Environmental Technology, Incorporated U.S. Department Of Defense Army Corps Of Engineers U.S. Department Of the Interior Fish And Wildlife Service National Biological Service U.S. Environmental Protection Agency University Of Texas In addition, the following Federal agencies and other organizations provided materials for this report: American Indian Resources Institute National Aeronautics and Space Administration U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Although individual acknowledgment of all reviewers, managers, illustrators, and typists who partici- pated in the preparation of this report is not feasible, their cooperation and many contributions made this report possible. The following persons, however, deserve special mention: The authors of the individual articles and the State summaries, who adhered to strict guidelines and whose names appear on the articles; David W. Moody and Richard W. Paulson, who had the vision for this report, made the contacts, and got it started; Virginia Carter, who provided technical guidance and reviewed every article; Katherine Walton-Day, Martha A. Hayes, Helen M. Light, Melanie R. Darst, and Benjamin F. McPherson, who prepared prototype State summaries, and D. Briane Adams, and Marcus C. Waldron, who helped coordinate the effort; Kenneth J. Lanfear, who provided managerial assistance; Jo Ann Macy, who provided managerial assistance and editorial review; Jack H. Green and Chester Zenone, who provided tech- nical editorial review; Edith B. Chase, Elizabeth A. Ciganovich, and Mary A. Kidd, who provided editorial review and editorial assistance; Hyla Strickland, who provided editorial review and editorial assistance in the preparation of the State summaries; John M. Watson, who provided editorial review of the State summa- ries; and Susan Tufts-Moore, who provided editorial review for several Overview articles; Patricia S. Greene, Robert J. Olmstead, and Gregory J. Allord, who assisted with the design, coordination, and layout of the report and its illustrations; James O. Whitmer, Gina P. Barker, Timothy D. Covington, John M. Watermolen, Joel J. Skalet, and Alan M. Duran, who assisted with the graphics; Jamaica Pettit, who did typesetting and layout for the State summaries; Kimberley L. Fry, who provided general assistance with review and prepa- ration of articles in the front part (Introduction and Overview sections) of the book; Helen F. Ipsaro and vol- unteer Judy G. Fry, who proofread the front-part articles; volunteers Katie Green, Joyce Ipsaro, and Uma Rao, who helped keep us organized. References Cited Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FGWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Fry, K.L., comp., 1996, Supplemental reference list for the National Water Summary on Wetland Resources: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, No. 96-169, 39 p. McCabe, G.J., Crowe, Michael, Brown, W.O., and Fretwell, J.D., 1996, Hydrologic conditions and water-related events Water Year 1992: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report No. 96-107, 1 sheet. McCabe, G.J., Crowe, Michael, Brown, W.O., Fretwell, J.D., and Fry, K.L., 1996, Hydrologic conditions and water-related events Water Year 1993: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, No. 96-145, 1 sheet. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 Overview of Wetland Resources A restored wetland near Blackfoot River, Montana. (Photograph by Kenneth I. Lanfear, U.S. Geological Survey.) 17 Overview of Wetland Resources Technical aspects of wetlands History of wetlands in the conterminous United States Thomas E. Dahl and Gregory]. Allord......................................... 19 Wetland definitions and classifications in the United States Ralph W. Tiner............................................................................ 27 Wetland hydrology, water quality, and associated functions Virginia Carter............................................................................. 35 Wetlands as bird habitat Robert E. Stewart, jr. .................................................................... 49 Wetland management and research Wetland protection legislation Todd H. Votteler and Thomas A. Muir ........................................ 57 Wetland research by Federal agencies Richard E. Coleman, Edward T. LaRoe, and Russell F. Theriot..... 65 Wetland mapping and inventory Bill O. Wilen, Virginia Carter, and}. Ronald Jones...................... 73 Wetland functions, values, and assessment Richard P. Novitzki, R. Daniel Smith, and Judy D. Fretwell......... 79 Restoration, creation, and recovery of wetlands Wetland restoration and creation Mary E. Kentula........................................................................... 87 Effects of Hurricane Andrew (1992) on wetlands in southern Florida and Louisiana John K. Lovelace and Benjamin J. McPherson ............................. 93 Effects of the Great Midwest Flood of 1993 on wetlands James R. Kolva ............................................................................ 97 18 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 19 Technical Aspects of Wetlands History of Wetlands in the Conterminous United States By Thomas E. Dahl 1 and Gregory J. Allord2 At the time of European settlement in the early 1600's, the area that was to become the conterminous United States had approximately 221 million acres of wetlands. About 103 million acres remained as of the mid-1980's (Dahl and Johnson, 1991). Six States lost 85 percent or more of their original wetland acreage twenty-two lost 50 percent or more (Dahl, 1990) (fig. 2). Even today, all of the effects of these losses might not be fully realized. Historical events, technological innovations, and values of society sometimes had destructive effects on wetlands. By examining the historical backdrop of why things happened, when they happened, and the consequences of what happened, society can better appreciate the importance of wetlands in water-re- source issues. Society's views about wetlands have changed considerably especially in the last half century. Interest in the preservation of wetlands has increased as the value of wetlands to society has be- come more fully understood. From a cultural stand- point, it is interesting to understand how changes in opinions and values came about, and what effects these changes had on wetland resources. From an eco- logical perspective, it is important to understand how the loss of wetlands affects fish, wildlife, and the environment as a whole. EARLY 1600'S TO 1800 COLONIAL SETTLEMENT Wetland drainage began with permanent settle- ment of Colonial America. Throughout the 1600's and ]700's, colonization was encouraged by European monarchs to establish footholds in North America. The effects of this colonization on the landscape be- came obvious in the early to mid-1700's. Much of our knowledge of early wetlands comes from maps and other documents that survived over time. The origins of settlers influenced both where people settled and how they mapped and used natu- ral resources. Few records exist because the original English, French, and Spanish settlements were estab- lished before the land was surveyed. Settlements in the North tended to be clustered, whereas communi- ties in the South were more widely scattered because of the predominance of agriculture. Many different land surveying systems resulted in an incomplete patchwork of ownership that ultimately caused many legal problems due to boundary errors and overlap- ping claims (Garrett, 1988). It was not until 1785 that the Land Ordinance Act established the United States Public Land Survey, which required surveying and partitioning of land prior to settlement. Although not Interest in the preservation of wetlands has increased as the value of wetlands has become more fully understood. EXPLANATION Percent of wetlands lost, 1780'sto mid-1980's | | Less than 50 | | 50-85 (16 States) | | More than 85 (6 States) 500 KILOMETERS THE EVERGLADES Figure 2. States with notable wetland loss, 1780's to mid-1980's. (Source: Modified from Dahl, 1990.) 1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2 U.S. Geological Survey. 20 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Great Dismal Swamp 100 MILES __I 100 KILOMETERS The original extent of wetland acreage and the effect of widespread drainage is evident in Washington County, N.C. Originally, wetlands covered over 186,000 acres or about 85 percent of the land area of Washington County. Large-scale drainage began as early as 1788 with the construction of a canal 6 miles long and 20 feet wide to drain the wetlands north and east of Phelps Lake (Washington County Historical Society, 1979). A system of cross ditches leading into the main canal was designed to drain up to 100,000 acres of wetlands so that rice and corn could be grown (Tant, 1981). Today, about 34 percent of Washington County's original wetland acreage remains in scattered tracts. Figure 3. Extent of wetlands in Washington County, N. C, circa 1780 (left) and 1990 (right). (Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Status and Trends, unpub. data, 1994.) Technical advances facilitated wetland conversion. Oil-powered dredge digging a 30-foot-wide ditch to drain wetlands nearCarroll, Iowa. (Photograph courtesy of National Archives, 8-D-2214-2570.) established to provide information on natural re- sources, surveys do provide some information about the distribution and location of wetlands. During the 1700's, wetlands were regarded as swampy lands that bred diseases, restricted overland travel, impeded the production of food and fiber, and generally were not useful for frontier survival. Set- tlers, commercial interests, and governments agreed that wetlands presented obstacles to development, and that wetlands should be eliminated and the land re- claimed for other purposes. Most pioneers viewed natural resources from wetlands as things to be used without limit (Tebeau, 1980). The most productive tracts of land in fertile river valleys in parts of Vir- ginia had been claimed and occupied before 1700. The resulting shortage of choice land stimulated colo- nists to move south to the rich bottom lands along the Chowan River and Albemarle Sound of North Carolina on the flat Atlan- tic coastal plain. Initially, settlements con- sisted primarily of shelters and subsistence farms on small tracts of land. To extend the productive value of available land, wetlands on these small tracts were drained by small hand-dug ditches. During the mid- to late 1700's, as the population grew, land clear- ing and farming for profit began to affect larger tracts of land; many coastal plain wet- lands were converted to farmland (fig. 3). Once drained, these areas provided produc- tive agricultural lands for growing cash crops. Widespread wetland drainage was most prevalent in the southern colonies. In 1754, South Carolina authorized the drainage of Cacaw Swamp for agricultural use (Beau- champ, 1987). Similarly, areas of the Great Dismal Swamp in Virginia and North Caro- lina were surveyed in 1763 so that land could be re- claimed for water transportation routes. Farming on large plantations was common practice in the South and necessitated some drainage or manipulation of wetlands. By the 1780's, immigrants had settled along the fertile river valleys of the Northeast and as far south as present-day Georgia. Wetlands in these river val- leys suffered losses with this settlement (fig. 4). Small towns and farms were established in the valleys along the rivers of Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, and Pennsylvania. Settlement extended to the valleys beyond the Appalachian Mountains in Virginia and followed the major rivers inland through the Caroli- nasby 1800. Figure 4. States with notable wetland loss, early 1600's to 1800. 1800 TO 1860 WESTWARD EXPANSION The period between 1800 and 1860 was a time of growth in the United States. During these decades, numerous land acquisitions the Louisiana Purchase (1803); Florida and eastern Louisiana ceded by Spain (1819); annexation of Texas (1845); the Oregon Com- National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 21 Red River Basin (1818) Claimed area- became part of State of Maine (1842) Gadsden Purchase (1853) Florida Cession (1819) Claimed area- became part of State of Louisiana (1812) Figure 5. Major United States land acquisitions between 1800 and 1860. (Source: U.S. Geological Survey, 1970.) promise (1846); and lands ceded from Mexico (1848) greatly expanded the land area of the United States (Garrett, 1988) (fig. 5). With this land expan- sion, the population grew from 7.2 million in 1810 to 12.8 million in 1830 (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1832). Land speculation increased with this rapid growth and marked a period when land and resources seemed to be available for the taking. It was a time of rapid inland movement of settlers westward into the wetland-rich areas of the Ohio and Mississippi River Valleys (fig. 2). Large-scale conversion of wetlands to farmlands started to have a real effect on the dis- tribution and abundance of wetlands in the United States. Areas where notable wetland loss occurred be- tween 1800 and 1860 are shown in figure 6. Figure 6. States with notable wetland loss, 1800 to 1860. Technical advances throughout the 1800's greatly facilitated wetland conversions. The opening of the Erie Canal in 1825 provided settlers with an alterna- tive mode and route of travel from New York to the Great Lakes States, increasing migration of farmers to the Midwest. The canal also provided low-cost transportation of timber and agricultural products from the Nation's interior to eastern markets and sea- ports (McNall, 1952). Another innovation, the steam- powered dredge, allowed the channelizing or clear- ing of small waterways at the expense of adjacent wet- lands. Between 1810 and 1840, new agricultural implements plows, rakes, and cultivators enabled settlers to break ground previously not considered for farming (McManis, 1964). Mechanical reapers intro- duced in the 1830's stimulated competition in, and furthered refinements of, farm equipment marketed in the Midwest (Ross, 1956). These inno- vations ultimately took a toll on wetlands as more land was drained, cleared, and plowed for farming. Wetland drainage continued. In the Midwest, the drainage of the Lake Erie marshes of Michigan and Ohio probably started about 1836. Cotton and tobacco farming continued to flourish in the South- ern States and precipitated the additional drainage of thousands of acres of wetlands for conversion to cropland. Wetlands also were being modified in other ways. The Horicon Marsh in Wiscon- sin was dammed and flooded in 1846 for a transportation route and to provide com- mercial fishing. Toward the middle of the century, lumbering was an important in- dustry in the Midwest, supplying wood for construction and fuel for stoves and fire- places. Much of the Nation's timber came from the swamp forests of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, which typically contained a mix of birch, ash, elm, oak, cot- tonwood, poplar, maple, basswood, and hickory. In 1849, Congress passed the first of the Swamp Land Acts, which granted all swamp and overflow lands in Louisiana to the State for reclamation. In 1850, the Act was made applicable to 12 other States, and in 1860, it was extended to include lands in two additional States (Shaw and Fredine, 1956) (table 1). Although most States did not begin immediate large- scale reclamation projects, this legislation clearly set the tone that the Federal Government promoted wet- land drainage and reclamation for settlement and de- velopment. This tone pervaded policy and land-use trends for the next century. 1860 TO 1900 AGRICULTURE MOVES WEST The American Civil War (1861-65) affected wet- lands because traversing swamps and marshes with heavy equipment presented major logistical problems for both armies. The design, engineering, and con- struction of transportation and communication net- works were stimulated. Attention became focused on the development of routes around, through, or over water bodies and wetlands, and on production of ac- curate maps (fig. 7). These maps provided an early glimpse of some of the Nation's wetlands. After the war, the Nation's attention focused on westward expansion and settlement. Railroads were important in the initial development of transportation routes. The railroads not only opened new lands, in- cluding wetlands, to development, but the railroad in- dustry also was a direct consumer of wetland forest products. In the 1860's, more than 30,000 miles of railroad track existed in the United States (Stover, 1961). The railroads of Ohio consumed 1 million cords of wood annually just for fuel (Gordon, 1969). The additional quantity of wood used for ties is not known. From 1859 to 1885, intense timber cutting and land clearing eliminated many of Ohio's wetlands, including the Black Swamp (fig. 8). The Black Swamp was in the northwestern cor- ner of Ohio and was a barrier to travel and settlement. Table 1 . Acreage granted to the States under the authority of the Swamp Land Acts of 1849, 1850, and 1860 YEAR 1849 1850 1860 STATE Louisiana Alabama Arkansas California Florida Illinois Indiana Iowa Michigan Mississippi Missouri Ohio Wisconsin Minnesota Oregon ACRES 9,493,456 441,289 7,686,575 2,192,875 20,325,013 1,460,164 1,259,231 1,196,392 5,680,310 3,347,860 3,432,481 26,372 3,360,786 4,706,503 286,108 TOTAL 64,895/415 22 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Figure 7. Confederate States of America map of Southeastern United States with wetlands depicted for strategic rather than natural resources value. (Source: National Archives, Record Croup 94, Civil War Atlas, Plate CXLIV.) This forested wetland was estimated to have been 120 miles long and 40 miles wide, covering an area nearly equal in size to Connecticut (Gordon, 1969; Ohio De- partment of Natural Resources, 1988). The swamp, which was an elm-ash forested wetland typical of the region, contained a variety of commercially valuable trees (Eyre, 1980). Nothing was left of the Black Swamp by the end of the nineteenth century. During the mid- to late 1880's, agriculture ex- panded rapidly westward along the major river sys- tems. Several regions of abundant wetlands lay di- rectly in the path of this expansion (Woolen and Jones, 1955), including: The prairie pothole wetlands of western Minne- sota, northern Iowa, and North and South Dakota The bottom lands of Missouri and Arkansas in the lower Mississippi River alluvial plain The delta wetlands of Mississippi and Louisiana The gulf plains of Texas By the 1860's, settlers started to farm and drain the prairie pothole region. At first, only a modest number of potholes were drained. By the late 1800's, however, the numbers had increased significantly. As new kinds of machinery increased the ability to till more land, the conversion of wetlands to farm- lands increased rapidly. Huge wheat farms, or "Bo- nanza Farms," were operating in the Dakota Territory (present-day North and South Dakota) by 1875. New mechanical seeders, harrowers, binders, and thresh- ers, designed specifically for wheat production, were used to cultivate large tracts of land for these farms (Knue, 1988). Many wetlands were lost as a result of these operations. Improvements in drainage technology greatly affected wetland losses in the East and the Midwest. As the use of steam power expanded, replacing hand labor for digging ditches and manufacturing drainage tiles, the production and installation of drainage tiles increased rapidly. By 1880, 1,140 factories located mainly in Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio manufactured drainage tiles that were used to drain wetlands for farming (Pavelis, 1987). By 1882, more than 30,000 miles of tile drains were operating in Indiana alone. By 1884, Ohio had 20,000 miles of public ditches de- signed to drain 11 million acres of land (Wooten and Jones, 1955). Wetland conversion in the Central Valley of Cali- fornia began in the mid-1800's, when farmers began diking and draining the flood-plain areas of the val- ley for cultivation (fig. 9). Other States had notable losses of wetlands between 1860 and 1900 (fig. 10). 1900 TO 1950 CHANGING TECHNOLOGY The first half of the twentieth century was a time of ambitious engineering and drainage operations. Two World Wars, a rapidly growing population, and industrial growth fueled the demand for land as in- dustry and agriculture propelled the United States to the status of a world leader. Technology was increas- ingly important in manipulation of the Nation's water resources. Two of the most notable projects that affected wetlands were California's Central Valley Project and the lock and dam system on the Missis- sippi River. Although draining had begun one-half century earlier, wetland modification in the Central Valley accelerated early in the 20th century. By the 1920's, about 70 percent of the original wetland acreage had been modified by levees, drainage, and water-diver- sion projects (Frayer and others, 1989). In the 1930's, 0 200 MILES 0 200 KILOMETERS Black Swar *O=r--Cf*fe"V | -yh--Jtardiji Coujitr -i -;U-r 0 50 MILES 0 50 KILOMETERS ', .rH «amp ! I - +, A..J d ta*_,-lrH^ HISTORIC WETLANDS Black Swamp Pickaway Plains 1 1 _ I > Scioto Marsh 1_ r _ L/ Other marshes, Hardin County f / 0 ' / Hog Creek Mareh L> r 1 j Cranberry Marsh A Ji / Lake Erie Marshes -T TV Dougan's Prairie AREA IN ACRES 3,072,000 4,800 16,000 9,000 8,000 1,000 300,000 Unknown TOTAL 3,410,800 DATE DRAINED 1859-1885 1821 1859,1883 1860's 1868-1874 Unknown 1936-1974 1827 SOURCE Ohio Dept. Nat. Res., 1988 Gordon, 1969 Gordon, 1969 Howe, 1900 Gordon, 1969 Gordon, 1969 Bednarik, 1984 Middleton, 1917 Figure 8. Location, estimated original acreage, and drainage date of Ohio's historic wetlands. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 23 AREA OF INTEREST Originally the Central Valley of California was very different than it is now. Tulare Lake held water in a basin with a surface area approximately four times the surface area of Lake Tahoe. Buena Vista and Kern Lakes also held water as runoff accumulated from the Sierra Nevada. The rivers and streams that flowed into the Central Valley were lined with bottom-land forests com- posed of willow, sycamore, oak, elder, poplar, and alder; lush stands of wet- land grasses and tules dominated the valley floors and prairies (Hundley, 1992). Prior to the mid-1800's, about 4 million 7 of the 13 million acres that made up California's Central \_ Valley were estimated to be _-J wetland. 200 KILOMETERS Figure 9. Wetlands of the Central Valley of California, circa 1820 (left) and 1990 (right). (Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Status and Trends, unpub. data, 1994.) large-scale flood-control projects, diversion dams, and water-control structures were being built on the tributary rivers entering the valley. Wetland modification also continued farther east. Before the installation of the lock and dam system in 1924, the bottom lands of the Mississippi River cor- ridor were primarily wooded islands separated by deep sloughs (Green, 1984). Hundreds of small lakes and ponds were scattered throughout extensive wooded areas. The river channel was subject to shift- ing sands and shallows, and changed constantly. Lake and dam structures were built to create a permanent navigable waterway. The water depth increased be- hind each dam to create a pool that extended upstream to the next dam. The first pool was filled in 1935 and the system was completed when the last pool was filled in 1959. The resulting changes to the river sys- tem eliminated large water-level fluctuations and helped stabilize water depth and flooding. Bottom lands no longer dried out in summer, and former hay meadows and wooded areas were converted to marsh- lands surrounding the pools. One type of wetland was PRAIRIE POTHOLE WETLANDS Figure 10. States with notable wetland loss, 1860 to 1900. exchanged for another. Although some pools of the Upper Mississippi River have problems with silt depo- sition and restricted water circulation, these "created" wetland areas provide habitat for fur-bearing animals, waterfowl, and fish. In other parts of the country, this era was marked by urban and agricultural expansion projects that drained both large and small wetlands. Some of the most ambitious projects were attempts to drain and cultivate Horicon Marsh in Wisconsin in 1904; com- mercial timber harvesting in southern Georgia, which began in 1908 as a precursor to attempts to drain the Okefenokee Swamp (Trowell, 1988); and in 1914, the draining of North Carolina's largest natural lake, Lake Mattamuskeet, to create farmland (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, undated). Early in the century, land developers dug drainage ditches in an attempt to drain a huge area for development in the vast peatlands north of Red Lake, Minn. (Glaser, 1987). On July 29, 1917, the Minneapolis Sunday Tribune ran a full page advertisement to attract homesteaders to the Red Lake area "perhaps the last of the unsettled, uncut tim- berland in the middle of the country" (Wright, 1984). By 1930, nearly all of the prairie wetlands in Iowa, the southern counties of Minnesota, and the Red River Valley in North Dakota and Minnesota were drained (Schrader, 1955). Attempts were underway to drain and farm large parts of The Everglades (a huge expanse of wetlands in southern Florida). By the I9301s, more than 400 miles of drainage canals were already in place (Lord, 1993). (See article "Wetland Resources of Florida" in the State Summaries section of this volume.) With the passage of the Sugar Act of 1934, additional wet- lands in southern Florida were drained and put into sugarcane production. Sugarcane yields more than doubled from410,000 to 873,000 tons between 1931 and 1941 (Clarke, 1977), largely at the expense of Drainage tile operation, circa 1940's. Tiles provide a conduit for moving water from a wetland. (Photo- graph courtesy of U.S. Department of Agriculture.) 24 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES The Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act was one of the first pieces of legislation to initiate the process of acquiring and restoring America's wetlands. wetland acreage. Severe flooding in southern Florida in the 1920's and again in the 1940*s prompted the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to build the Central and Southern Florida Project for flood control. This massive undertaking, which required levees, water- storage areas, channel improvements, and large pumps, caused additional large modification to The Everglades' environment (Light and Dineen, 1994). Mechanized farm tractors had replaced horses and mules for farm labor during this half century. The tractors could be used more effectively than animals for drainage operations, and the old pasture land then became available for improvement and production of additional crops. In the Midwest and the North-cen- tral States, the use of tractors probably contributed to the loss of millions of acres of small wetlands and prairie potholes. In the 1930's, the U.S. Government, in essence, provided free engineering services to farmers to drain wetlands; and by the 1940's, the Government shared the cost of drainage projects (Burwell and Sugden, 1964). Organized drainage districts throughout the country coordinated efforts to remove surface water from wetlands (Wooten and Jones, 1955). Figure 11 shows areas of notable wetland losses between 1900 and 1950. Figure 11. States with notable wetland loss, 1900 to 1950. In 1934, in stark contrast to these drainage ac- tivities, Congress passed the Migratory Bird Hunt- ing Stamp Act. This Act was one of the first pieces of legislation to initiate the process of acquiring and re- storing America's wetlands. 1950 TO PRESENT CHANCING PRIORITIES AND VALUES By the 1960's, most political, financial, and in- stitutional incentives to drain or destroy wetlands were in place. The Federal Government encouraged land drainage and wetland destruction through a variety of legislative and policy instruments. For example, the Watershed Protection and Flood Pre- vention Act (1954) directly and indirectly increased the drainage of wetlands near flood-control projects (Erickson and others, 1979). The Federal Government directly subsidized or facilitated wetland losses through its many public-works projects, technical practices, and cost-shared drainage programs admin- istered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (Erickson, 1979). Tile and open-ditch drainage were considered conservation practices under the Agricul- ture Conservation Program whose policies caused wetland losses averaging 550,000 acres each year from the mid-1950's to the mid-1970's (Office of Tech- nology Assessment, 1984). Agriculture was respon- sible for more than 80 percent of these losses (Frayer and others, 1983). Figure 12 shows States with no- table wetland losses between 1950 and 1990. Figure 12. States with notable wetland loss, 1950 to 1990. Since the 1970's, there has been increasing awareness that wetlands are valuable areas that pro- vide important environmental functions. Public awareness of, and education about, wetlands has in- creased dramatically since the early 1950's. Federal policies, such as the "Swampbuster," have eliminated incentives and other mechanisms that have made the destruction of wetlands technically and economically feasible. New laws, such as the Emergency Wetland Resources Act of 1986, also curtail wetland losses. (See article "Wetland Protection Legislation" in this volume for information on legislation affecting wet- lands.) Some of the more ambitious drainage projects of earlier years have been abandoned. Now, places like Lake Mattamuskeet, Horicon Marsh, and the Okefenokee Swamp, which once were targeted for drainage, have become National Wildlife Refuges that provide wetland habitat for a variety of plants and ani- mals. The effects of the Federal policy reversal on the rate of wetland loss are not clear. Estimates indicate that wetland losses in the conterminous United States from the mid-1970's to the mid-1980's were about 290,000 acres per year (Dahl and Johnson, 1991). This is about one-half of the losses that occurred each year in the 1950's and '60's. The preceding numbers do not include degraded or modified wetlands. Al- though the estimate above reflects a declining rate of loss, land development continues to destroy wetlands. From about 1987 to the present, Federal efforts to restore wetlands have increased. Although there is no precise number for all of the wetland acres re- stored, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1991) es- timated that between 1987 and 1990 about 90,000 acres were added to the Nation's wetland inventory. Attempts are underway now to restore some of The Everglades. The remaining Everglades comprise about 2,300 square miles, three-fifths of which is impounded in managed water-conservation areas (Lord, 1993). This wetland system currently is expe- riencing mercury contamination and other water- quality problems, water-supply and diversion contro- versies, declining wildlife populations, increasing pressure from tourism, urban and agricultural expan- sion, and influx of nuisance plants. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 25 The magnitude of environmental alter- ations in Florida, with numerous conflict- ing interests, exemplifies the dilemma of managing water resources and wetlands. What initially seemed to be a matter of water removal turned into an extremely complex and costly issue involving water- use objectives at all levels of government (Tebeau, 1980). Today there are more than 100 dams within the California Central Valley drain- age basins and thousands of miles of water-delivery canals. Water is diverted for irrigation, hydroelectric power, and munici- pal and industrial water supplies. Only 14 percent of the original wetland acreage re- mains. The Tulare Lake Basin has been virtually drained, leaving only remnant wetland areas and a dry lakebed, and Buena Vista and Kern Lakes rarely contain water (fig- 9). Currently (1994), manipulation of water levels in wetlands rather than the complete removal of water as in the past, is a trend that affects wetlands. Partial drainage or lowering of the water levels to allow for certain uses is becoming preva- lent in some parts of the country. Effects of this type of management are uncertain. EXAMPLE OF CHANGING ATTITUDES HORICON MARSH The history of the Horicon Marsh in Wisconsin is an example of how people's at- titudes toward wetlands have changed through time (fig. 13). Horicon Marsh was dammed, flooded, and renamed Lake Horicon in 1846. At that time, it was the largest manmade lake in the world (about 4 miles wide by 14 miles long) (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1990). Lake Horicon was used for commercial transportation and for commercial fishing. In 1869, the dam was removed and the land returned to marsh. In 1883, two sportsmen's clubs, which leased the marsh area, reported that 500,000 ducks hatched an- nually in the marsh. They also reported that 30,000 muskrats and mink were trapped in the southern half of the marsh. Huge flocks of geese also were reported (Freeman, 1948). In 1904, attempts were made to drain the marsh and sell the reclaimed land for truck farms. Lawsuits resulting from inadequate drainage halted the reclamation effort. In 1921, local conservationists began efforts to protect Horicon Marsh as a game refuge, and the State of Wisconsin created the Horicon Marsh Wildlife Ref- uge in July 1927. Later, to avoid legal confrontations with the local farmers, the State bought property and (or) water rights to the southern half of the refuge and the Federal Government purchased rights to the northern half. In 1990, Horicon Marsh was added to the sites recognized by the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat. Horicon Marsh 1846 Horicon Lake 1853 Horicon Swamp 1881 Horicon Wildlife Refuge 1984 Figure 13. Horicon Marsh, Wis., evolved from original marsh (1846), to lake (1853), to swamp (1881), to wildlife refuge (1984). (Source: Sequence is left to right, top to bottom, Historical Society of Wisconsin negative number WHi (X3) 50111, WHi (X3) 50212, WHi (X3) 50113; U.S. Geological Survey, 1984.) Estimates indicate that today slightly more than 100 million acres of wetlands remain in the conter- minous United States. Although the rate of wetland conversion has slowed in recent years, wetland losses continue to outdistance wetland gains. References Cited Beauchamp, K.H., 1987, A history of drainage and drain- age methods, in Pavelis, G.A., ed., Farm drainage in the United States History, status, and prospects: Washington, D.C., Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Miscellaneous Publication no. 1455, p. 13-29. Bednarik, K.E., 1984, Saga of the Lake Erie marshes, in Hawkins, A.S., Hanson, R.C., Nelson, H.K., and Reeves, H.M., eds., Flyways Pioneering waterfowl management in North America: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, p. 423^430. Burwell, R.W., and Sugden, L.G., 1964, Potholes Going, going..., in Linduska, J.P., ed., Waterfowl tomorrow: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, p. 369-380. 26 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Clarke, M.J., 1977, An economic and environmental assess- ment of the Florida Everglades sugarcane industry: Bal- timore, Md., Johns Hopkins University, 140 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Dahl, T.E., and Johnson, C.E., 1991, Wetlands Status and trends in the conterminous United States, mid-1970's to mid-1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service, 22 p. Erickson, R.E., 1979, Federal programs influencing wet- lands, Seventh Annual Michigan Landuse Policy Con- ference: East Lansing, Midi., Michigan State Univer- sity, 246 p. Erickson, R.E., Under, R.L., and Harmon, K.W., 1979, Stream channelization (p.l. 83-566) increased wetland losses in the Dakotas: Wildlife Society Bulletin, v. 7, no. 2, p. 71-78. Eyre, F.H., 1980, Forest cover types of the United States and Canada: Washington, D.C., Society of American For- esters, 148 p. Prayer, WE., Monahan, T.J., Bowden, D.C., and Graybill, F.A., 1983, Status and trends of wetlands and deepwater habitats in the conterminous United States, 1950's to 1970's: Fort Collins, Colo., Colorado State University, 31 p. Prayer, WE., Peters, D.D., and Pywell, H.R., 1989, Wetlands of the California Central Valley Status and Trends 1939 to mid 1980's: Portland, Oreg., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 28 p. Freeman, A.E., and Bussewitz, W.R., 1948, History of Horicon: Horicon, Wis., undated, 126 p. Garrett, WE., ed., 1988, Historical atlas of the United States: Washington, D.C., National Geographic Society, 289 p. Glaser, P.H., 1987, The ecology of patterned boreal peatlands of northern Minnesota A community pro- file: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Report 85 (7.14), 98 p. Gordon, R.B., 1969, The natural vegetation of Ohio in pio- neer days: Columbus, Ohio, Bulletin of the Ohio Biologi- cal Survey, v. Ill, no. 2, Ohio State University, 113 p. Green, W.E., 1984, The great river refuge, in Hawkins, A.S., Hanson, R.C., Nelson, H.K., and Reeves, H.M., eds., Fly ways Pioneering waterfowl management in North America: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, p. 431^439. Howe, Henry, 1900, Historical collections of Ohio: Cincin- nati, Ohio, Ohio centennial edition, Published by the State of Ohio, v. 1, p. 881. Hundley, Norris, Jr., 1992, The great thirst Californians and water, 1700's-1990's: Berkeley, Calif., University of California Press, 551 p. Knue, Joseph, 1988, Of time and prairie 100 years of people and wildlife in North Dakota Observations in change: Bismarck, N. Dak., North Dakota State Game and Fish Department, 106 p. Light, S.S., and Dineen, J.W., 1994, Water control in The Everglades A historical perspective, in Davis, S.M., and Ogden, J.C., eds., Everglades The ecosystem and its restoration: Delray Beach, Fla., St. Lucie Press, p. 47-84. Lord, L.A., 1993, Guide to Florida environmental issues and information: Winter Park, Fla., Florida Conservation Foundation, 364 p. McManis, D.R., 1964, The initial evaluation and utilization of the Illinois prairies, 1815-1840: Chicago, 111., Uni- versity of Chicago, Department of Geography Research Paper no. 94, 109 p. McNall, N.A., 1952, An agricultural history of the Genesee Valley, 1790-1860: Philadelphia, Pa., University of Pennsylvania Press, 276 p. Middleton, E.P., 1917, History of Champaign County, Ohio, its people, industries and institutions: Indianapolis, Ind., B.E. Bowen and Co., Inc., 116 p. Office of Technology Assessment, 1984, Wetlands Their use and regulation: Washington, D.C., U.S. Congress, OTA-0-206, 208 p. Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 1988, Ohio wet- lands priority conservation plan An addendum to the 1986 Ohio statewide comprehensive outdoor recreation plan: Office of Outdoor Recreation Services, 67 p. Pavelis, G.A., ed., 1987, Farm drainage in the United States History, status, and prospects: Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Miscellaneous Pub. No. 1455, 170 p. Ross, E.D., 1956, Retardation in farm technology before the power age: Agricultural History 30, p. 11-18. Schrader, T.A., 1955, Waterfowl and the potholes of the north central states, in The yearbook of agriculture 1955: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Agricul- ture, 84th Congress, 1st Session, House Document no. 32, p. 596-604. Shaw, S.P., and Fredine, C.G., 1956, Wetlands of the United States Their extent and their value to waterfowl and other wildlife: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service Circular 39, 67 p. Stover, J.F., 1961, American railroads: Chicago, 111., Uni- versity of Chicago Press, 310 p. Tant, PL., 1981, Soil survey of Washington County, North Carolina: Washington, D.C., U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 99 p. Tebeau, C.W., 1980, Ahistory of Florida: Coral Gables, Fla., University of Miami Press, 527 p. Trowell, C.T., 1988, Exploring the Okefenokee Roland M. Harper in the Okefenokee Swamp, 1902 and 1919: Douglas, Ga., North Georgia College, Research Paper no. 2, 89 p. U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1832, Return of the whole num- ber of persons within the several districts of the U.S., 1830: Washington, D.C. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1991, United States Depart- ment of the Interior budget justification Fiscal year 1992: Washington, D.C., 121 p. ____Undated, Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge: Swan Quarter, N.C., (Brochure). U.S. Geological Survey, 1984, Wisconsin State base map: U.S. Geological Survey, scale 1:500,000. Washington County Historical Society, 1979, Historic Wash- ington County: Plymouth, N.C., 31 p. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1990, Wet- lands/wonderlands Wisconsin natural resources: Madison, Wis., Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 16 p. Wooten, H.H., and Jones, L.A., 1955, The history of our drainage enterprises, in The yearbook of agriculture, 1955: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Agricul- ture, 84th Congress, 1st Session, House Document no. 32, p. 478^198. Wright, H.E., Jr., 1984, Red Lake peatland Its past and patterns: Minneapolis, Minn., University of Minnesota, James Ford Bell Museum of Natural History, v. 1, 7 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Thomas E. Dahl, National Wetlands Inventory, 9720 Executive Center Drive, Suite 101 - Monroe Building, St. Petersburg, FL 33702; Gregory J. Allord, U.S. Geological Survey, 505 Science Drive, Madison, WI 53711 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 27 Technical Aspects of Wetlands Wetland Definitions and Classifications in the United States By Ralph W. Tiner 1 "Wetland" is a generic term for all the different kinds of wet habitats implying that it is land that is wet for some period of time, but not necessarily permanently wet. Wetlands have numerous definitions and classifications in the United States as a result of their diversity, the need for their inventory, and the regulation of their uses. This article provides an overview of wetland defi- nitions and classification systems of major wetland types in the United States. It also introduces the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) classification sys- tem (Cowardin and others, 1979) that is used throughout this volume. Wetlands typically occur in topographic settings where surface water collects and (or) ground water discharges, making the area wet for extended periods of time. Examples of some of these topographic settings, and some common names for wetland types associated with them are: Depressions (swales, sloughs, prairie potholes, Carolina bays, playas, ver- nal pools, oxbows, and glacial kettles) Relatively flat depositional areas that are subject to flooding (intertidal flats and marshes, coastal lowlands, sheltered embayments, shorelines, deltas, and flood plains) Broad, flat areas that lack drainage outlets (interstream divides and per- mafrost muskegs) Sloping terrain associated with springs, seeps, and drainageways; and rela- tively flat or sloping areas adjacent to bogs and subject to expansion by accumulation of peat Open water bodies (floating mats and submersed beds) Cross sections of some typical wetland landscapes and the position of the wet- land relative to specific topographic features are shown in figure 14. All areas considered to be wetlands must have enough water at some time during the year to stress plants and animals that are not adapted to life in wa- ter or saturated soils. A variety of wetland plant communities and soil types have developed in the United States because of regional differences in hydro- logic regimes, climate, soil-forming processes, and geologic settings. Conse- quently, many terms, such as "marsh," "bog," "fen," "swamp," "pocosin," "pothole," "playa," "salina," "vernal pool," "bottom-land hardwood swamp," "river bottom," "lowland," and others are applied to different types of wet- lands across the country. WETLAND DEFINITIONS Wetlands have been defined for specific purposes, such as research stud- ies, general habitat classification, natural resource inventories, and environ- mental regulations. Before the beginning of wetland-protection laws in the 1960's, wetlands were broadly defined by scientists working in specialized fields (Lefor and Kennard, 1977). A botanist's definition would emphasize plants; a soil scientist would focus on soil properties; and a hydrologist's defi- nition would emphasize fluctuations of the water table. Nonregulatory Definition The FWS developed a nonregulatory, technical definition that could have several uses, ranging from wetland protection to scientific investigations. This definition emphasizes three important attributes of wetlands: (1) hydrology the degree of flooding or soil saturation; (2) vegetation plants adapted to grow in water or in a soil or substrate that is occasionally oxygen deficient due to saturation (hydrophytes); and (3) soils those saturated long enough during the growing season to produce oxygen-deficient conditions in the upper part of the soil, which commonly includes the major part of the root zone of plants (hydric soils) (Cowardin and others, 1979; Tiner, 1991). To supplement this Isolated depressions Sheltered embayments flood plains Relatively flat interstream divides (including pocosins) Figure 14. Cross sections of selected wetland landscapes showing typical positions of wetlands relative to topographic features. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 28 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Seepage areas and springs Basins with streams Blanket bogs in boreal and arctic regions Open water bodies with floating mats and submersed beds Figure 14. Cross sections of selected wetland landscapes showing typical positions of wetlands relative to topographic features. Continued. definition and to help identify wetlands in the United States, the FWS pre- pared a list of wetland plants (Reed, 1988). In addition, the Soil Conserva- tion Service 1 (SCS) developed a list of hydric soils (U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1991). On the basis of plant and soil conditions, wetlands typically fall into one of three categories: (1) areas with hydrophytes and hydric soils (marshes, swamps, and bogs); (2) areas without soils but with hydrophytes (aquatic beds and seaweed-covered rocky shores); and (3) areas without soil and without hydrophytes (gravel beaches and tidal flats) that are periodically flooded. The FWS definition generally does not include permanent deep- water areas as wetlands. However, permanent shallow waters that commonly support aquatic beds and emergent plants (erect, rooted, nonwoody plants that are mostly above water) are classified as wetlands. Regulatory Definitions as Compared to Nonregulatory Definitions In the 1960's and 1970's, State and Federal environmental laws gave some protection to wetlands. On the basis of different interests to be protected, however, each governing body developed a different definition of wetlands. Examples of some of these definitions are given in table 2. Only wet soils vegetated with hydrophytes are considered as wetlands by the three Federal agencies involved with regulation the SCS, the U.S. Environmental Pro- tection Agency (EPA), and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). The FWS uses a nonregulatory definition that is broader and includes aquatic beds in shallow freshwater and naturally nonvegetated areas. In the context of veg- etated wetlands, all four agency definitions are conceptually the same in that they include hydrology, vegetation, and soils. Most States have developed regulatory definitions to protect certain wet- lands from exploitation. Therefore, State definitions are much broader than any of the Federal definitions. The State definitions tend to emphasize the presence of certain plants for identification purposes (table 2). However, the States did not produce a comprehensive list of "wetland plant species," making it difficult to use vegetation consistently to identify the limits of wet- lands (Tiner, 1989 and 1993a). WETLAND CLASSIFICATION "Wetland classification," as used in this article, refers to the designa- tion of different wetland types on the basis of hydrology, vegetation, and soils. The Federal Government's early attempts to classify wetlands were motivated largely by agricultural interests that sought to convert wetlands to cropland. The first classification systems put wetlands into a few general categories on the basis of location river swamps, lake swamps, and upland swamps (Wright, 1907). Other classification systems were related to the degree of inundation permanent swamps, wet grazing land, periodically overflowed land, and periodically swampy land (Dachnowski, 1920). Later wetland classifications developed from a need to differentiate wet- lands from other land-cover types for regional and national planning purposes, or because of ecological interest. Martin and others (1953) developed a "Clas- sification of Wetlands in the United States " to serve as a framework for the 1954 national inventory to assess the amount and types of wetland water- fowl habitat. Although this system is still in use, the inadequate definition of wetland types has led to inconsistencies in application across the country (Cowardin and others, 1979). When the FWS began a review of existing wetland inventories in 1974, they found more than 50 classification schemes (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser- vice, 1976). The only one of these that was nationally based was that of Martin and others (1953). Subsequently, the FWS worked with several prominent wetland scientists and mapping experts to identify necessary elements for a new classification system based on the concept of ecosystems (Sather, 1976). Four key objectives were established: Identify ecologically similar habitat units Classify these units systematically to facilitate resource-management decisions Identify units for inventory and mapping purposes Provide uniformity in concept and terminology throughout the country The SCS became the Natural Resources Conservation Service in 1994, National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 29 Table 2. Examples of wetland definitions used by Federal and State agencies in the United States Organization (reference) Wetland definition FEDERAL U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Cowardin and others, 1979} U.S. Army Corps of Engineers {33 CFR 328.3) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency {40 CFR 230.3) U.S. Soil Conservation Service (National Food Security Act Manual 1988) (The Act is commonly known as the "Swampbuster") STATE Connecticut (CT General Statutes, Sections 22a-36 to 45, inclusive, 1972,1987} Connecticut (CT General Statutes, Sections 22a-28 to 35, inclusive 1969) Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council (Rl Coastal Resources Management Program as amended June 28,1983) Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management {Rl General Law, Sections 2-1-18 etseq.) New Jersey (Pinelands Protection Act, NJ. STAT. ANN. Section 13:18-1 to 13:29.) New Jersey (Coastal Wetland Protection Act - NJ. STAT. ANN. Section 13:18-1 to 13:9A-10) Massachusetts (MA General Law Chapter 131, Section 40) "Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water. For the purposes of this classification wetlands must have one or more of the following three attributes: (1} at least periodically, the land supports predominantly hydrophytes; (2) the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil; and (3) the substrate is nonsoil and is saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing season of each year." "Wetlands are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas." "Wetlands are defined as areas that have a predominance of hydric soils and that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions, except lands in Alaska identified as having high potential for agricultural development and a predominance of permafrost soils." "Wetlands mean land, including submerged land which consists of any of the soil types designated as poorly drained, very poorly drained, alluvial, and floodplain by the National Cooperative Soils Survey, as may be amended from time to time, by the Soil Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture. Watercourses are defined as rivers, streams, brooks, waterways, lakes, ponds, marshes, swamps, bogs, and all other bodies of water, natural or artificial, public or private." "Wetlands are those areas which border on or lie beneath tidal waters, such as, but not limited to banks, bogs, salt marshes, swamps, meadows, flats or other low lands subject to tidal action, including those areas now or formerly connected to tidal waters, and whose surface is at or below an elevation of one foot above local extreme high water." (Also includes a list of plants capable of growing in tidal wetlands.) "Coastal wetlands include salt marshes and freshwater or brackish wetlands contiguous to salt marshes. Areas of open water within coastal wetlands are considered a part of the wetland. Salt marshes are areas regularly inundated by salt water through either natural or artificial water courses and where one or more of the following species predominate:" (8 indicator plants listed}. "Contiguous and associated freshwater or brackish marshes are those where one or more of the following species predominate:" (9 indicator plants listed). Fresh water wetlands are defined to include, "but not be limited to marshes; swamps; bogs; ponds; river and stream flood plains and banks; areas subject to flooding or storm flowage; emergent and submergent plant communities in any body of fresh water including rivers and streams and that area of land within fifty feet (50') of the edge of any bog, marsh, swamp, or pond." Various wetland types are further defined on the basis of hydrology and indicator plants, including bog (15 types of indicator plants), marsh (21 types of indicator plants), and swamp (24 types of indicator plants plus marsh plants). "Wetlands are those lands which are inundated or saturated by water at a magnitude, duration and frequency sufficient to support the growth of hydrophytes. Wetlands include lands with poorly drained or very poorly drained soils as designated by the National Cooperative Soils Survey of the Soil Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture. Wetlands include coastal wetlands and inland wetlands, including submerged lands." "Coastal wetlands are banks, low-lying marshes, meadows, flats, and other lowlands subject to tidal inundation which support or are capable of supporting one or more of the following plants:" (29 plants are listed). "Inland wetlands" are defined as including, but not limited to, Atlantic white cedar swamps (15 plants listed), hardwood swamps (19 plants specified), pitch pine lowlands (10 plants listed), bogs (12 plants identified), inland marshes (6 groups of plants listed), lakes and ponds, and rivers and streams. "Coastal wetlands" are "any bank, marsh, swamp, meadow, flat or other low land subject to tidal action in the Delaware Bay and Delaware River, Raritan Bay, Sandy Hook Bay, Shrewsbury River including Navesink River, Shark River, and the coastal inland waterways extending southerly from Manasquan Inlet to Cape May Harbor, or at any inlet, estuary, or those areas now or formerly connected to tidal areas whose surface is at or below an elevation of 1 foot above local extreme high water, and upon which may grow or is capable of growing some, but not necessarily all, of the following:" (19 plants are listed.) Coastal wetlands exclude "any land or real property subject to the jurisdiction of the Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission...." "The term 'freshwater wetlands' shall mean wet meadows, marshes, swamps, bogs, areas where groundwater, flowing or standing surface water or ice provides a significant part of the supporting substrate for a plant community for at least five months of the year; emergent and submergent plant communities in inland waters; that portion of any bank which touches any inland waters." Various wetland types are further defined on the basis of hydrology and indicator plants and include bogs {19 types of indicator plants), swamps (22 types of plants), wet meadows (12 types of plants), and marshes (22 types of indicator plants). 30 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES System Marine Subsystem -Subtidal Intertidal -Estuarine- -Subtidal Intertidal -Riverine -Tidal Lower Perennial -Upper Perennial -Intermittent -Lacustrine -Limnetic (deepwater habitat only] -Littoral -Palustrine (wetlands only) Class Rock bottom Unconsolidated bottom Aquatic bed Reef Aquatic bed Reef Rocky shore Unconsolidated shore Rock bottom Unconsolidated bottom Aquatic bed Reef Aquatic bed Reef Streambed Rocky shore Unconsolidated shore Emergent wetland Scrub-shrub wetland Forested wetland Rock bottom Unconsolidated bottom Aquatic bed Streambed Rocky shore Unconsolidated shore Emergent wetland Rock bottom Unconsolidated bottom Aquatic bed Rocky shore Unconsolidated shore Emergent wetland Rock bottom Unconsolidated bottom Aquatic bed Rocky shore Unconsolidated shore Streambed Rock bottom Unconsolidated bottom Aquatic bed Rock bottom Unconsolidated bottom Aquatic bed Rocky shore Unconsolidated shore Emergent wetland Rock bottom Unconsolidated bottom Aquatic bed Unconsolidated shore Moss-lichen wetland Emergent wetland Scrub-shrub wetland Forested wetland Figure 15. Classification hierarchy of wetlands and deepwater habitats showing systems, subsystems, and classes. (Source: Coward!n and others, 1979). On the basis of these objectives, the FWS devel- oped a new wetland classification system. The sys- tem was extensively field tested and reviewed by pub- lic and private sectors before being published as "Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States" (Cowardin and others, 1979). Since its publication, the system has become the na- tional and international standard for identifying and classifying wetlands (Mader, 1991; Gopal and others, 1982). THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE WETLAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM A synopsis of the FWS wetland classification system is presented here. Each of the State summa- ries in this volume gives a general summary of the system, and a more comprehensive discussion can be found in Cowardin and others (1979). The system de- scribed here proceeds from general to specific, as shown in figure 15. System. Each system represents "a complex of wetlands and deepwater habitats, that share the influ- ence of similar hydrologic, geomorphologic, chemi- cal, or biological factors" (Cowardin and others, 1979, p. 4). Five systems are defined: Marine open ocean and its associated coastline Estuarine tidal waters of coastal rivers and empayments, salty tidal marshes, mangrove swamps, and tidal flats Riverine rivers and streams Lacustrine lakes, reservoirs, and large ponds Palustrine marshes, wet meadows, fens, playas, potholes, pocosins, bogs, swamps, and small shallow ponds The overwhelming majority of the Nation's wet- lands fall within the Palustrine System; most of the remaining wetlands are in the Estuarine System. Subsystem. Each system, except the Palustrine, is divided into subsystems (fig. 15). The Marine and Estuarine Systems have two subsystems that are de- fined by tidal water levels: subtidal continuously submersed areas; and intertidal alternately flooded and exposed to air. The Lacustrine System has two subsystems that are defined by water depth: littoral the shallow-water zone where wetlands extend from the lakeshore to a depth of 6.6 feet below low water or to the extent of nonpersistent emergent plants such as arrowheads, pickerelweed, wild rice, or bulrush, if they grow beyond that depth; and limnetic the deepwater zone where low water is deeper than 6,6 feet (deepwater habitat). The Riverine System has four subsystems that represent different reaches of a flowing freshwater system: tidal water levels sub- ject to tidal fluctuations; lower perennial perma- nent, slow-flowing waters having a well-developed flood plain; upper perennial permanent, fast-flow- ing waters having very little or no flood plain; and in- termittent streambeds with flowing water for only part of the year. Classes. Each subsystem is divided into classes, which describe the general appearance of the wetland or deepwater habitat in terms of the domi- nant vegetative form, or composition of the substrate (table 3). For areas where vegetation covers 30 per- cent or more of the surface, five vegetative classes are National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 31 Table 3. Classes and subclasses of wetlands and deepwater habitats as defined by Cowardin and others (1979) Class Brief description Subclasses Rock bottom Generally permanently flooded areas with bottom sub- Bedrock; rubble strates consisting of at least 75 percent stones and boulders and less than 30 percent vegetative cover. Unconsolidated bottom Generally permanently flooded areas with bottom sub- Cobble-gravel; sand; strates consisting of at least 25 percent particles smaller mud; organic than stones and less than 30 percent vegetative cover. Aquatic bed Generally permanently flooded areas that are veg- etated by plants growing principally on or below the water surface. Algal; aquatic; rooted vascular; floating vascular Reef Characterized by elevations above the surrounding substrate and interference with normal wave flow; they are primarily subtidal. Coral; mollusk; worm Stream bed Channel whose bottom is completely dewatered at low water periods. Bedrock; rubble; cobble-gravel; sand; mud; organic; vegetated Rocky shore Wetlands characterized by bedrock stones or boulder with areal coverage of 75 percent or more and with less than 30 percent coverage by vegetation. Bedrock; rubble Unconsolidated shore Wetlands having Unconsolidated substrates with less than 75 percent coverage by stones, boulders, and bed- rock and less than 30 percent native vegetative cover. Cobble-gravel; sand; mud; organic; vegetated Moss-lichen wetland Wetlands dominated by mosses or lichens where other plants have less than 30 percent coverage. Moss; lichen Emergent wetland Wetlands dominated by erect rooted, herbaceous hy- drophytes. Persistent; nonpersistent Scrub-shrub wetland Wetlands dominated by woody vegetation less than 20 feet {6 meters) tall. Deciduous; evergreen; dead woody plants Forested wetland Wetlands dominated by woody vegetation 20 feet (6 meters) or taller. Deciduous; evergreen; dead woody plants used aquatic bed, moss-lichen wetland, emergent wetland, scrub-shrub wetland, and forested wetland. Aquatic beds may be either wetlands or deepwater habitats, depending on water depth. Six other classes are used where vegetation gen- erally is absent and where substrate and degree of flooding are distinguishing features rock bottom, Unconsolidated bottom, reef, streambed, rocky shore, and Unconsolidated shore. Areas that are nonvegetated and permanently flooded are classed as either rock bottom or Unconsolidated bottom. Areas that are pe- riodically flooded are classed as streambed, rocky shore, or Unconsolidated shore. Reefs are found in both permanently flooded (deepwater habitats) and periodically flooded tidal areas (wetlands). Subclass. Each class is divided further into subclasses (table 3) to define the substrate in non-veg- etated areas or the dominant vegetation in vegetated areas. In vegetated areas, the subclasses are persis- tent or nonpersistent emergents, mosses and lichens, or broad-leaved deciduous, needle-leaved deciduous, broad-leaved evergreen, needle-leaved evergreen, and dead woody plants. In nonvegetated areas the sub- classes are bedrock, rubble, cobble-gravel, mud, sand, and organic. Dominance Type. Below the subclass, domi- nance type can be applied to specify the dominant plant or animal in the wetland. This level allows one to distinguish between distinct plant communities (red maple forested wetland and pin oak forested wet- land, or a tussock-sedge-dominated emergent wetland and cattail-dominated emergent wetland). In this way, individual wetlands can be grouped in ecologically similar units. Modifiers. The classification system also uses modifiers to describe hydrologic, chemical, and soil characteristics, and the effects of humans on the wet- lands. The four specific modifiers used are water re- gime, water chemistry, soil, and special. These modi- fiers can be applied to classes, subclasses, and domi- nance types. The water-regime modifiers describe flooding or soil saturation and are divided into two main groups tidal and nontidal. Tidal modifiers can be subdivided into two general categories salt- and brackish-water and freshwater. The nontidal modi- fier inland freshwater and saline defines condi- tions where runoff, ground-water discharge or re- charge, evapotranspiration, wind, and lake seiches (oscillation of the water) cause water-level changes. Both tidal and nontidal modifiers are briefly defined in table 4. Water-chemistry modifiers are divided into two categories: salinity and pH. The salinity modifiers have been further divided into two groups: haline for estuarine and marine tidal areas dominated by sodium chloride and saline for nontidal areas dominated by salts other than sodium chloride. The salinity and The FWS classification system has become the national and international standard for identifying and classifying wetlands. 32 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Table 4. Water regime modifiers as defined by Cowardin and others (1979) Group Tidal Water type _ Salt-and brackish- water areas Freshwater Nontidal Inland fresh- water and saline areas Water regime and definition Subtidal Permanently flooded tidal waters Irregularly exposed Exposed less often than daily by tides Regularly flooded Daily tidal flooding and exposure to air Irregularly flooded Flooded less often than daily and typically exposed to air Permanently flooded Permanently flooded by tides and river overflow but with tidal fluctuation in water levels Semipermanently flooded Flooded most of the growing season by river overflow but with tidal fluctuation in water levels Regularly flooded Daily tidal flooding and exposure to air Seasonally flooded Flooded irregularly by tides and river overflow Temporarily flooded Flooded irregularly by tides and for brief periods during growing season by river overflow Permanently flooded Flooded throughout the year in all years Intermittently exposed Flooded year-round except during extreme droughts Semipermanently flooded Flooded throughout the growing season in most years Seasonally flooded Flooded for extended periods in the growing season, but surface water is usually absent by the end of the growing season Saturated Surface water is seldom present, but the substrate is saturated to the surface for most of the growing season Temporarily flooded Flooded for only brief periods during the growing season, with the water table usually well below the soil surface for most of the season Intermittently flooded The substrate is usually exposed and only flooded for variable periods without detectable seasonal periodicity (may be upland in some situations) Artificially flooded Duration and amount of flooding is controlled by pumps or siphons in combination with dikes or dams The FWS wetland classification system has provided a uniformity of wetland terminology. fluctuations in salinity of water in a wetland and the type of salt causing the salinity determines what plant and animal species the wetland can support. The pH modifiers identify waters that are acid (pH less than 5.5), circumneutral (pH 5.5-7.4), and alkaline (pH greater than 7.4). Soil modifiers are divided into two categories organic and mineral. In general, if a soil has 20 per- cent or more organic matter by weight in the upper 16 inches, it is considered an organic soil. If it has less than this amount, it is a mineral soil. Special modifiers are used to describe human or beaver activities. These modifiers are: excavated, im- pounded (obstruct outflow of water), diked (obstruct inflow of water), partly drained, farmed, and artifi- cial (materials deposited by humans to create or modify a wetland). Although an extensive treatment of wetlands is beyond the scope of this article, it would be incom- plete without examples of the classification of some of the different wetland types. In figure 16, some of the major wetland types are listed by their common names and then classified by the FWS system. The variety of wetlands and their locations also are illus- trated. For further information on wetland types, see Mitsch and Gosselink (1986), Niering (1984), Tiner (1984, 1987, 1993b), and Wilen and Tiner (1993). CONCLUSIONS The FWS wetland classification system places ecologically similar habitats into a hierarchal system that permits wetland classification down to domi- nance types, which are based on dominant plants or substrates. The system can be used to identify units for inventory and mapping for Federal and State wet- land inventories. It also has provided a uniformity of wetland terminology. The FWS uses this classifica- tion to determine wetland status and trends infor- mation useful to resource managers and planners at all levels of government. Since the 1954 inventory by the FWS, wetlands have changed because of natural and human-related activities. Wetland characteristics and values have become better defined, more widely known, and more appreciated. As a result, Federal and State leg- islation has been passed to protect wetlands, and some States have completed wetland surveys (Cowardin and others, 1979) to aid in protecting and managing this resource. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 33 EXPLANATION Number General wetland type 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Willow swamp Cattail marsh Inland lakeshore marsh Floating bog Salt marsh Maple-ash swamp Brackish marsh Cypress-gum swamp Pocosin Cottonwood riparian forest Wet meadow Black spruce bog Prairie pothole Location Alaska Range east of Paxon, Alaska Near Brainerd, Minn. Lake Durant, N.Y. Adirondacks, N.Y. Nantucket, Mass. Sussex County, NJ. Cedar Key, Fla. Francis Marion National Forest, S.C. Francis Marion National Forest, S.C. Near Reno, IMev. Nisqually, Wash. Juneau, Alaska Devil's Lake area, N. Dak. System Palustrine Palustrine Lacustrine Palustrine Estuarine Palustrine Estuarine Palustrine Palustrine Palustrine Palustrine Palustrine Palustrine Subsystem Class Scrub-shrub Emergent Littoral Emergent Scrub-shrub Intertidal Emergent Forested Intertidal Emergent Forested Scrub-shrub Forested Emergent Forested Emergent Subclass Broad-leaved deciduous Persistent Nonpersistent Broad-leaved evergreen Persistent Broad-leaved deciduous Persistent Needle/broad-leaved deciduous Broad-leaved evergreen Broad-leaved deciduous Persistent Needle-leaved evergreen Nonpersistent Water regime Seasonally flooded Seasonally flooded Permanently flooded Saturated Tidal, Irregularly flooded Seasonally flooded Tidal, Irregularly flooded Semipermanently flooded Saturated Temporarily flooded Season ally flooded Saturated Semipermanently flooded Figure 16. Examples of the classification for major wetland types in the United States, following Cowardin and others (1979). (Note that there are no subsystems for the Palustrine System. Photograph 1 by David Dahl; 4 by Bill Zinni; 12 by Jon Hail; all others by Ralph W. Tiner. AH photographers are with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.) 34 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES References Cited Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dachnowski, A.P., 1920, Peat deposits in the United States and their classification: Soil Science, v. 10, no. 6, p. 453^56. Gopal, Brij, Turner, R.E., Wetzel, R.G., and Whigham, D.F., 1982, Wetlands Ecology and management, in Pro- ceedings of the First International Wetlands Confer- ence, September 10-17,1980, New Delhi, India: Jaipur, India, National Institute of Ecology and International Scientific Publications, 514 p. Lefor, M.W., and Kennard, W.C., 1977, Inland wetland defi- nitions: Storrs, Conn., University of Connecticut., In- stitute of Resources, Report 28, 63 p. Mader, S.F., 1991, Forested wetlands classification and mapping A literature review: New York, N.Y., Na- tional Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Technical Bulletin no. 606, 99 p. Martin, A.C., Hotchkiss, Neil, Uhler, P.M., and Bourn, W.S., 1953, Classification of wetlands of the United States: Washington D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Spe- cial Scientific Report, Wildlife, no. 20, 14 p. Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G., 1986, Wetlands: New York, N.Y., Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., Inc., 539 p. Niering, W.A., 1984, Wetlands: New York, N.Y., Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 638 p. Reed, P.B., Jr., 1988, National list of plant species that oc- cur in wetlands National summary: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report, v. 88, no. 24, 244 p. Sather, J.H., ed., 1976, National wetland classification and inventory workshop, July 20-23, 1975, College Park, Md., University of Maryland, Proceedings: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report, 358 p. Tiner, R.W., 1984, Wetlands of the United States Current status and recent trends: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report, 59 p. 1987. A field guide to coastal wetland plants of the northeastern United States: Amherst, Mass., University of Massachusetts Press, 285 p. 1989. Wetland boundary delineation, in Majumdar, S.K., Brooks, R.P., Brenner, F.J., and Tiner, R.W., Jr., eds., Wetlands ecology and conservation Emphasis in Pennsylvania: Easton, Pa., Pennsylvania Academy of Sciences, p. 231-248. 1991. The concept of a hydrophyte for wetland iden- tification: BioScience, v. 41, no. 4, p. 236-247. 1993a. Using plants as indicators of wetland: Phila- delphia, Pa., Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadel- phia, Proceedings, v. 144, p. 240-253. _1993b, Field guide to coastal wetland plants of the southeastern United States: Amherst, Mass., University of Massachusetts Press, 328 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1976, Existing state and local wetland surveys (1965-1975), v. II, Narrative: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services Report, 453 p. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1991, Hydric soils of the United States: Washington, D.C., in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Miscellaneous publi- cation 1491. Wilen, B.O., and Tiner, R.W, 1993, Wetlands of the United States, in Whigham, D.F., Dykyjova, Dagmar, and Hejny, Slavomil, eds., Wetlands of the world I: Dordrecht, Netherlands, Kluwer Academic Publishers, p. 515-636. Wright, J.O., 1907, Swamp and overflowed lands in the United States: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of Experiment Stations, Circular 76, 23 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Ralph W Tiner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA 01035 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 35 Technical Aspects of Wetlands Wetland Hydrology, Water Quality, and Associated Functions By Virginia Carter1 The formation, persistence, size, and function of wet- lands are controlled by hydrologic processes. Distribution and differences in wetland type, vegetative composition, and soil type are caused primarily by geology, topogra- phy, and climate. Differences also are the product of the movement of water through or within the wetland, water quality, and the degree of natural or human-induced dis- turbance. In turn, the wetland soils and vegetation alter water velocities, flow paths, and chemistry. The hydrologic and water-quality functions of wetlands, that is, the roles wetlands play in changing the quantity or quality of wa- ter moving through them, are related to the wetland's physi- cal setting. Wetlands are distributed unevenly throughout the United States because of differences in geology, climate, and source of water (fig. 17). They occur in widely diverse settings ranging from coastal margins, where tides and river discharge are the primary sources of water, to high mountain valleys where rain and snowmelt are the primary sources of water. Marine wetlands (those beaches and rocky shores that fringe the open ocean) are found in all coastal States. Estuarine wetlands (where tidal saltwater and inland freshwater meet and mix) are most plentiful in Alaska and along the southeastern Atlantic coast and the gulf coast. Alaska has the largest acreage of estuarine wetlands in the United States, followed by Florida and Louisiana. Inland (nontidal) wetlands are found in all States. Some States, such as West Virginia, have few large wet- lands, but contain many small wetlands associated with streams. Other States, such as Nebraska, the Dakotas, and Texas, contain many small isolated wetlands the lakes of the Nebraska Sandhills, the prairie potholes, and the playa lakes, respectively. Northern States such as Minnesota and Maine contain numerous wetlands with organic soils (peatlands), similar in origin and hydrologic and veg- <^vW $$itv <*?%&& ^"CK" V^SiL '?^' ::>,f ^ "'^s^-""^"'.'.':,. EXPLANATION Approximate distribution of large wetlands and deepwater habitats Predominantly wetland n Predominantly deepwater habitat High density of small wetlands Selected locations Great Dismal Swamp ® Albemarle-Pamlico Sound The Everglades Barataria Basin New Madrid ReelfootLake ® Glacial Lake Agassiz Peatland Nebraska Sandhills Great Salt Lake Copper River Delta Sleetmute Figure 17. Major wetland areas in the United States and location of sites mentioned in the text. (Source: Data from T.E. Dahl, U.S. F/sfc and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991.) 1 U.S. Geological Survey. 36 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Typical prairie pothole wetland in North Dakota. (Photo- graph by Virginia Carter, U.S. Geological Survey.) Glacial Lake Agassiz peatland, Minnesota. (Photograph by Virginia Carter, U.S. Geological Survey.) etative characteristics to the classic bog and fen peat- lands of northern Europe. However, peatlands are by no means limited to Northern States they occur in the Southeastern and Midwestern United States wher- ever the hydrology and chemical environment are conducive to the accumulation of organic material. Wetlands occur on flood plains for example, the broad bottom-land hardwood forests and river swamps (forested wetlands) of southern rivers and many of the narrow riparian zones along streams in the Western United States. Wetlands are commonly associated with lakes or can occur as isolated features of the land- scape. They can form large complexes of open water and vegetation such as The Everglades of Florida, the Okefenokee Swamp of Georgia and Florida, the Copper River Delta of Alaska, and the Glacial Lake Agassiz peatland of Minnesota. HYDROLOCIC PROCESSES IN WETLANDS Hydrologic processes occurring in wetlands are the same processes that occur outside of wetlands and collectively are referred to as the hydrologic cycle. Major components of the hydrologic cycle are pre- cipitation, surface-water flow, ground-water flow, and evapotranspiration (ET). Wetlands and uplands con- tinually receive or lose water through exchange with the atmosphere, streams, and ground water. Both a fa- vorable geologic setting and an adequate and persis- tent supply of water are necessary for the existence of wetlands. The wetland water budget is the total of inflows and outflows of water from a wetland. The compo- nents of a budget are shown in the equation in figures 18 and 19. The relative importance of each compo- nent in maintaining wetlands varies both spatially and High water table sr Figure 18. Components of the wetland water budget. (P + SWI + GWI = ET + SWO + GWO + AS, where P is precipitation, SWI is surface-water inflow, SWO is surface-water outflow, CWI is ground- water inflow, GWO is ground-water outflow, ET is evapotranspiration, and AS is change in storage.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 23 22/\ ETf 37 !cwo;>6 I/ Nevin Wetland, Wisconsin (Photograph by Richard P. Novitzki, ManTech Environmental Technology, Inc.) 100 Heron Pond, Alluvial Cypress Swamp, Illinois (Photograph by William ). Mitsch, Ohio State University) Okefenokee Swamp, Georgia Upland (Photograph by |ohn M. Hefner U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) Swamp (Photograph by Virginia Carter U.S. Geological Survey) 26[GWI \ Arctic Fen, west of Baker Lake, Northwest Territories, Canada (Photograph by Nigel T. Roulet, McGill University, Montreal) >5C Hidden Valley Marsh, Ontario, Canada (Photograph by )tm Gehrels, Ontario Ministry of Environmental Energy) Figure 19. Water budgets for selected wetlands in the United Stales and Canada. (P + SWI + GWI = ET + SWO + CWO + AS, where P is precipitation, SWI is surface-water inflow, SWO is surface-water outflow, CWI is ground-water inflow, CWO is ground-water outflow, ET is evapotran spiral ion, and AS is change in storage. Components are expressed in percentages. Abbreviations used: < - less than; > = greater than.) (Sources from left to right and top to bottom: Novitzki, 1978; Roulet and Woo, 1986; Rykiel, 1984; Rykiel, 1984; Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993; and Gehrels and Muiamoottii, 1990.) 38 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Water budgets provide a basis for understanding hydrologic processes of a wetland. temporally, but all these components interact to cre- ate the hydrology of an individual wetland. The relative importance of each of the compo- nents of the hydrologic cycle differs from wetland to wetland (fig. 19). Isolated basin wetlands, typified by prairie potholes and playa lakes, receive direct pre- cipitation and some runoff from surrounding uplands, and sometimes receive ground-water inflow. They lose water to ET; some lose water that seeps to ground water, and some overflow during periods of excessive precipitation and runoff. These wetlands range from very wet to dry depending on seasonal and long-term climatic cycles. Wetlands on lake or river flood plains also receive direct precipitation and runoff and com- monly receive ground-water inflow. In addition, they can be flooded when lakes or rivers are high. Water drains back to the lake or river as floodwaters recede. Wet and dry cycles in these wetlands commonly are closely related to lake and river water-level fluctua- tions. Coastal wetlands, while also receiving direct precipitation, runoff, and ground-water inflow, are strongly influenced by tidal cycles. Peatlands with raised centers may receive only direct precipitation or may be affected by ground-water inflow also. Surface-water inflows affect only the edges of these wetlands. Determining water budgets for wetlands is impre- cise because as the climate varies from year to year so does the water balance. The accuracy of individual components depends on how well they can be mea- sured and the magnitude of the associated errors (Winter, 1981; Carter, 1986). However, water budgets, in conjunction with information on the local geology, provide a basis for understanding the hydrologic pro- cesses and water chemistry of a wetland, understand- ing its functions, and predicting the effects of natu- ral or human-induced hydrologic alterations. Each of the components is discussed below. Precipitation Precipitation is any form of water, such as rain, snow, sleet, hail, or mist, that falls from the atmo- sphere and reaches the ground. Precipitation provides water for wetlands directly and indirectly. Water is provided for a wetland directly when precipitation falls on the wetland or indirectly when precipitation falls outside the wetland and is transported to the wet- land by surface- or ground-water flow. For example, snow that falls on wetland basins provides surface- Figure 20. Percentage of transpiration and evaporation from various wetland components. (E, evaporation; T, transpiration.) water flow to wetlands during spring snowmelt. Snowmelt may also recharge ground water, sustain- ing ground-water discharge to wetlands during sum- mer, fall, and winter. The distribution of precipitation across the United States is affected by major climatic patterns. In North America, maximum rainfall is found on the western slopes of mountain ranges in the West, along the east coast, and in Hawaii. Tropical areas such as Florida and Puerto Rico also receive large quantities of precipitation. By contrast, precipitation is minimal in the continental interior where the atmosphere is dry; the driest part of North America is the southwest- ern desert. Wetlands are most abundant in areas with ample precipitation. Evapotranspiration The loss of water to the atmosphere is an impor- tant component of the wetland water budget. Water is removed by evaporation from soil or surfaces of water bodies and by transpiration by plants (fig. 20). The combined loss of water by evaporation and tran- spiration is termed evapotranspiration (ET). Solar radiation, windspeed and turbulence, relative humid- ity, available soil moisture, and vegetation type and density affect the rate of ET. Evaporation can be mea- sured fairly easily, but ET measurements, which require measuring how much water is being tran- spired by plants on a daily, weekly, seasonal, or yearly basis, are much more difficult to make. For this rea- son scientists use a variety of formulas to estimate ET and there is some controversy regarding the best for- mula and the accuracy of these estimates (Gehrels and Mulamoottil, 1990; Carter, 1986; Dolan and others, 1984; Idso, 1981). Evapotranspiration is highly variable both sea- sonally and daily (Dolan and others, 1984). ET losses from wetlands vary with plant species, plant density, and plant status (whether the plants are actively grow- ing or are dormant). Seasonal changes in ET also relate to the water-table position (Ingram, 1983) (more water evaporates from the soil or is transpired by plants when the water table is closer to land sur- face) and also to temperature changes (more water evaporates or is transpired in hot weather than in cold). Daily ET rates are controlled chiefly by the energy available to evaporate water there is gener- ally less at night and on cool, cloudy days. Surface Water Surface water may be permanently, seasonally, or temporarily present in a wetland. Surface water is supplied to wetlands through normal streamflow, flooding from lakes and rivers, overland flow, ground- water discharge, and tides. Ground water discharged into wetlands also becomes surface water. Surface- water outflow from wetlands is greatest during the wet season and especially during flooding. Surface water may flow in channels or across the surface of a wet- land. Flow paths and velocity of water over the sur- face of a wetland are affected by the topography and vegetation within the wetland. Streamflow from wetlands that have a large com- ponent of ground-water discharge tends to be more evenly distributed throughout the year than stream- National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 39 flow from wetlands fed primarily by precipitation (fig. 21).This is because ground-water discharge tends to be relatively constant in quantity compared with precipitation and snowmelt. In coastal areas, tides provide a regular and pre- dictable source of surface water for wetlands, affect- ing erosion, deposition, and water chemistry. The magnitude of daily high and low tides is affected by the relative position of the sun and the moon high- est and lowest tides usually occur during full or new moons. Where tidal circulation is impeded by bar- rier islands (for example, in the Albemarle-Pamlico Sound in North Carolina, where tides are primarily wind-driven) or dikes and levees, tidal circulation may be small or highly modified. Strong winds and storms can cause extreme changes in sea level, flood- ing both wetlands and uplands. Ground Water Ground water originates as precipitation or as seepage from surface-water bodies. Precipitation moves slowly downward through unsaturated soils and rocks until it reaches the saturated zone. Water also seeps from lakes, rivers, and wetlands into the saturated zone. This process is known as ground- water recharge and the top of the saturated zone is known as the water table. Ground water in the satu- rated zone flows through aquifers or aquifer systems composed of permeable rocks or other earth materi- als in response to hydraulic heads (pressure). Ground water can flow in shallow local aquifer systems where water is near the land surface or in deeper interme- diate and regional aquifer systems (fig. 22). Differ- ences in hydraulic head cause ground water to move back to the land surface or into surface-water bod- ies; this process is called ground-water discharge. In wetlands that are common discharge areas for differ- ent flow systems, waters from different sources can mix. Ground-water discharge occurs through wells, seepage or springs, and directly through ET where the water table is near the land surface or plant roots reach the water table. Ground-water discharge will influ- ence the water chemistry of the receiving wetland whereas ground-water recharge will influence the chemistry of water in the adjacent aquifer. Wetlands most commonly are ground-water dis- charge areas; however, ground-water recharge also occurs. Ground-water recharge or discharge in wet- lands is affected by topographic position, hydro- geology, sediment and soil characteristics, season, ET, and climate and might not occur uniformly through- out a wetland. Recharge rates in wetlands can be much slower than those in adjacent uplands if the upland soils are more permeable than the slightly permeable clays or peat that usually underlie wetlands. The accumulation and composition of peat in wetlands are important factors influencing hydrology and vegetation. It was long assumed that the dis- charge of ground water through thick layers of well- decomposed peat was negligible because of its low permeability, but recent studies have shown that these layers can transmit ground water more rapidly than previously thought (Chason and Siegel, 1986). Peatland type (fen or bog) and plant communities are affected by the chemistry of water in the surface lay- 30 ^ 20 LL. O 10 A. Perched bog J FMAMJ JASOND B. Ground-water fen m-Th-m n J FMAMJ JASOND Figure 21. Monthly streamflow from two wetlands in northern Minnesota; A, a perched bog whose inflow component is primarily precipitation, and B, a fen whose inflow component is primarily ground water. (Source: Modified from Boelter and Verry, 1977.) ers of the wetland; the source of water (precipitation, surface water, or ground water) controls the water chemistry and determines what nutrients are avail- able for plant growth. Ground-water flow in exten- sive peatlands such as the Glacial Lake Agassiz peatland in Minnesota may be controlled by the de- velopment of ground-water mounds (elevated water tables fed by precipitation) in raised bogs where ground water moves downward through mineral soils before discharging into adjacent fens (Siegel, 1983; Siegel and Glaser, 1987). Movement of the ground water through mineral soils increases the nutrient content of the water. Coastal wetlands and shallow embayments repre- sent the lowest point in regional and local ground- water flow systems; ground water discharges into these areas, sometimes in quantities large enough to affect the chemistry of estuaries (Valiela and Costa, 1988; The hydrology of a wetland is largely responsible for the vegetation of the wetland. Figure 22. Ground-water flow systems. Local ground-water flow systems are recharged at topographic highs and discharged at immediately adjacent lows. Regional ground-water flow systems are recharged at the major regional topographic highs and discharged at the major regional topographic lows. Intermediate flow systems lie between the other two systems. (Source: Modified from Winter, 1976.) 40 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Winter water table Low evapotranspiration Storage capacity limited to surface water Plants, except evergreens, have no leaves Spring water table Summer water table High evapotranspiration Storage capacity increases (surface and subsurface) Plants are actively growing The vegetation affects the value of the wet- land to animals and people. Fall water table Low evapotranspiration Storage capacity decreases Plants lose leaves and become dormant Figure 23. Seasonal changes in storage capacity and evapotranspiration (ET) in wetlands. Valiela and others, 1990). The quantity of ground water discharged varies throughout the tidal cycle, affecting the water chemistry of the wetland soils (Harvey and Odum, 1990; Valiela and others, 1990). Storage Storage in a wetland consists of surface water, soil moisture, and ground water. Storage capacity refers to the space available for water storage the higher the water table, the less the storage capacity of a wetland. Some wetlands have continuously high water tables, but generally, the water table fluctuates seasonally in response to rainfall and ET. Storage capacity of wetlands is lowest when the water table is near or at the surface during the dormant season when plants are not transpiring, following snowmelt, and (or) during the wet season (fig. 23). Storage capacity increases during the growing season as water tables decline and ET increases. When storage capacity is high, infiltration may occur and the wet- land may be effective in retarding runoff. When water tables are high and storage capacity is low, any addi- tional water that enters the wetland runs off the wet- land rapidly. SOME EFFECTS OF HYDROLOGY ON WETLAND VEGETATION The hydrology of a wetland is largely responsible for the vegetation of the wetland, which in turn affects the value of the wetland to animals and people. The duration and seasonality of flooding and (or) soil saturation, ground-water level, soil type, and drainage characteristics exert a strong influence on the number, type, and distribution of plants and plant communities in wetlands. Although much is known about flooding tolerance in plants, the effect of soil saturation in the root zone is less well understood. Golet and Lowry (1987) showed that surface flooding and duration of saturation within the root zone, while not the only factors influencing plant growth, accounted for as much as 50 percent of the variation in growth of some plants. Plant distribution is also closely related to wetland water chemistry; the water may be fresh or saline, acidic or basic, depending on the source(s). HYDROGEOLOGIC SETTSNGS The source and movement of water are very im- portant for assessing wetland function and predicting how changes in wetlands will affect the associated basin. Linkages between wetlands, uplands, and deepwater habitats provide a framework for protec- tion and management of wetland resources. Water moving into wetlands has chemical and physical char- acteristics that reflect its source. Older ground water generally contains chemicals associated with the rocks through which it has moved; younger ground water has fewer minerals because it has had less time in contact with the rocks. Which processes can and will occur within the wetland are determined by the characteristics of the water entering and the charac- teristics of the wetland itself its size, shape, soils, plants, and position in the basin. Because wetlands occur in a variety of geologic and physiographic settings, attempts have been made to group or classify them in such a way as to identify similarities in hydrology. For example, Novitzki (1979,1982) developed a hydrologic classification for Wisconsin wetlands based on topographic position and surface water-ground water interaction; Gosse- link and Turner (1978) grouped freshwater wetlands according to hydrodynamic energy gradients; and Brinson (1993) developed a hydrogeomorphic clas- sification for use in evaluating wetland function. (See the articles "Wetland Definitions and Classifications in the United States" and "Wetland Functions, Values, and Assessment" in this volume.) Wetlands, like lakes, are associated with features where water tends to col- lect. They are commonly found in topographic depres- sions, at slope breaks, in areas of stratigraphic change, and in permafrost areas (fig. 24) (Winter and Woo, 1990). Topographic Depressions Most wetlands occur in or originate in topo- graphic depressions these include lakes, wetland basins, and river valleys (fig. 24A). Depressions may be formed by movement of glaciers and water; action of wind, waves, and tides; and (or) by processes as- sociated with tectonics, subsidence, or collapse. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 41 Glacial movement. Glaciers shaped the land- scape of many of the Northern States and caused wetlands to form in mountainous areas such as the Rocky Mountains and the northern Appalachians. As the glaciers advanced over the Northern United States they gouged and scoured the land surface, making numerous depressions, depositing unsorted glacial materials, and burying large ice masses. As the cli- mate warmed, the glaciers retreated, leaving behind the depressions and the large masses of buried ice. As the temperatures continued to warm, the ice masses melted to form kettle holes. In many cases, water filled the depressions and kettle holes, forming lakes. As the lakes filled with sediments, they were replaced by wetlands. Water movement. Wetlands also are formed by the movement of water as it flows from upland areas toward the coast. The flow characteristics of water are partly determined by the slope of the streambed. On steeply sloping land, water generally flows rapidly through relatively deep, well-defined channels. As the slope decreases, the water spreads out over a wider area and channels usually become shallower and less defined. Shallow channels tend to meander or move back and forth across the flood plain. The changes in flow path sometimes result in oxbow lakes and flood- plain wetlands. When the river floods, the isolated oxbow lakes begin to fill with sediment, providing an excellent place for more wetlands to form. Obstruc- tion to the normal flow of water also can cause the water to change course and leave gouges in front of or channels around the obstruction, or can cause water to be impounded behind the obstruction. Many lakes and wetlands are formed behind dams made by humans or beavers. Wind, wave, and tidal action. Wetlands are com- mon in areas of sand dunes caused by wind, waves, or tides. Wetlands formed in the depressions between sand dunes are found in the Nebraska Sandhills, along the shoreline of the Great Lakes, and on barrier islands and the seaward margins of coastal States. In coastal States, tides, waves, and wind cause the move- ment of sand barriers and the closing of inlets, which often result in the formation of shallow lagoons with abundant associated emergent wetlands. Tectonic activities. Tectonic activity is respon- sible for depression wetlands such as Reelfoot Lake on the Mississippi River flood plain in Tennessee caused by the 1812 New Madrid earthquake. Earth- quakes result when two parts of the Earth's crust move relative to each other, causing displacement of land. When this occurs, depressions may result along the lines of displacement or the flow paths of rivers may be changed, leaving isolated bodies of water. When a source of water coincides with these depressions, wetlands can form. Subsidence and collapse features. Land subsi- dence and collapse also can form depressions in which wetlands and lakes occur. In some areas, es- pecially in the Southwest, pumping of ground water has caused the land above an aquifer to sink, form- ing depressions where water collects and wetlands develop. In karst topography (landscapes resulting from the solution of carbonate rocks such as lime- stone), such as is found in Florida, wetlands form in sinkholes. Collapse of volcanic craters produces ifeir - " Infrared color photograph of oxbow lakes in the drainage area of Hoholitna River near Sleetmute, Alaska. (Photograph courtesy of National Aeronautics and Space Administration.) Lotus in Reelfoot Lake, Tennessee. (Photograph by Virginia Carter, U.S. Geological Survey.) Coastal marsh along San Francisco Bay, California. (Photograph by Virginia Carter, U.S. Geological Survey.) This recently collapsed sinkhole, in central Florida, provides an ideal spot for a wetland to form. (Photograph by Terry H. Thompson, U.S. Geological Survey.) 42 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES A. Depressions and slope breaks Slope break B. Areas of stratigraphic change EXPLANATION ^E General direction of ground-water flow Average water table Forest vegetation Scrub-shrub vegetation Mil//)/ Emergent vegetation Hi Peat [ j Glacial till (low permeability) [" ] Sand and gravel (high permeability) Figure 24. Cross sections showing principal hydrogeologic settings for wetlands; A, slope break and depression, B, area of stratigraphic change, and C, permafrost area. calderas that fill with water and sediment and con- tain lakes or wetlands. Slope Breaks The water table sometimes intersects the land surface in areas where the land is sloping. Where there is an upward break or change in slope, ground water moves toward the water table in the flatter landscape (fig. 24A) (Roulet, 1990; Winter and Woo, 1990). Where ground water discharges to the land surface, wetlands form on the lower parts of the slope. Con- stant ground-water seepage maintains soil saturation and wetland plant communities. The Great Dismal Swamp of Virginia and North Carolina is maintained by seepage of ground water at the slope break at the bottom of an ancient beach ridge that runs along the western edge (Carter and others, 1994). Areas of Stratigraphic Change Where stratigraphic changes occur near land sur- face, the layering of permeable and less-permeable rocks or soils affects the movement of ground water. When water flowing through the more permeable rock encounters the less permeable rock, it is diverted along the surface of the less permeable rock to the land sur- face. The continual seepage that occurs at the surface provides the necessary moisture for a wetland (fig. 246). Fens in Iowa form on valley-wall slopes where a thin permeable horizontal layer of rock is sand- wiched between two less permeable layers and con- tinual seepage from the permeable layer causes the formation of peat (Thompson and others, 1992). Permafrost Areas Permafrost is defined as soil material with a temperature continuously below 32°F (Fahrenheit) for more than 1 year (Brown, 1974); both arctic and subarctic wetlands in Alaska are affected by perma- frost (figs. 24C and 25). Permafrost has low perme- ability and infiltration rates. As a result, recharge through permafrost is extremely slow (Ford and Bedford, 1987). In areas covered by peat, organic silt, or dense vegetation, permafrost is commonly close to the surface. In areas covered by lakes, streams, and ponds, permafrost can be absent or at great depth below the surface-water body. The surface or active layer of permafrost thaws during the growing season. In areas where permafrost is continuous, there is vir- tually no hydraulic connection between ground water in the surface layer and ground water below the per- mafrost zone. The imperviousness of the frozen soil slows drainage and causes water to stand in surface depressions, forming wetlands and shallow lakes. In discontinuous permafrost areas (fig. 25), un- frozen zones on south-facing slopes (in the northern hemisphere) and under lakes, wetlands, and large riv- ers provide hydraulic connections between the surface and the ground water below the permafrost zone. Ground-water discharge to wetlands from deeper aquifers can occur through the unfrozen zone (Will- iams and Waller, 1966; Kane and Slaughter, 1973). In discontinuous permafrost regions, whether a slope faces away from or toward the sun can determine the presence or absence of permafrost and thus influence the location and distribution of wetlands (Dingman and Koutz, 1974). Permafrost is sensitive to factors that upset the thermal equilibrium. Thermokarst fea- tures (depressions in the land surface caused by thaw- ing and subsequent settling of the land) may be caused by regional climatic change or human activities. These depressions formed by local thawing of permafrost are usually filled with wetlands. WATER QUALITY IN WETLANDS The water chemistry of wetlands is primarily a result of geologic setting, water balance (relative pro- portions of inflow, outflow, and storage), quality of inflowing water, type of soils and vegetation, and human activity within or near the wetland. Wetlands National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 43 EXPLANATION | _| Generajly underlain by continuous permafrost | | Underlain by discon- tinuous permafrost | | Underlain by isolated masses of permafrost | | Generally free from permafrost I | Undefined Figure 25. Continuous, discontinuous, and sporadic permafrost areas of Alaska. (Source: Modified from Ford and Bedford, 1987.) dominated by surface-water inflow and outflow re- flect the chemistry of the associated rivers or lakes. Those wetlands that receive surface-water or ground- water inflow, have limited outflow, and lose water primarily to ET have a high concentration of chemi- cals and contain brackish or saline (salty) water. Ex- amples of such wetlands are the saline playas, wet- lands associated with the Great Salt Lake in Utah, and the permanent and semipermanent prairie potholes. In contrast, wetlands that receive water primarily from precipitation and lose water by way of surface- water outflows and (or) seepage to ground water tend to have lower concentrations of chemicals. Wetlands influenced strongly by ground-water discharge have water chemistries similar to ground water. In most cases, wetlands receive water from more than one source, so the resultant water chemistry is a composite chemistry of the various sources. Plants can serve as indicators of wetland chem- istry. In tidal wetlands, the distribution of salty water influences plant communities and species diversity. In freshwater wetlands, pH (a measure of acidity or alkalinity) and mineral and nutrient con- tent influence plant abundance and species diversity. HYDROLOCIC AND WATER-QUALITY FUNCTIONS OF WETLANDS Wetland hydrologic and water-quality functions are the roles that wetlands play in modifying or con- trolling the quantity or quality of water moving through a wetland. An understanding of wetland func- tions and the underlying chemical, physical, and bio- logical processes supporting these functions facili- tates the management and protection of wetlands and their associated basins. The hydrologic and water-quality functions of wetlands are controlled by the following: Landscape position (elevation in the drainage ba- sin relative to other wetlands, lakes, and streams) Topographic location (depressions, flood plains, slopes) Presence or absence of vegetation Type of vegetation type of soil The relative amounts of water flowing in and water flowing out of the wetland Local climate The hydrogeologic framework The geochemistry of surface and ground water Although broad generalizations regarding wetland functions can be made, effectiveness and magnitude of functions differ from wetland to wetland. Natural functions of wetlands can be altered or impaired by human activity. Although slow incremen- tal changes in the natural landscape can lead to small changes in wetlands, the accumulation of these small changes can permanently alter the wetland function (Brinson, 1988). Some of the major hydrologic and water-quality functions of wetlands (1) flood stor- age and stormflow modification, (2) ground-water recharge and discharge, (3) alterations of precipita- tion and evaporation, (4) maintenance of water qual- ity, (5) maintenance of estuarine water balance, and (6) erosion reduction are discussed below. Flood Storage and Stormflow Modification Wetlands associated with lakes and streams store floodwaters by spreading water out over a large flat area. This temporary storage of water decreases run- off velocity, reduces flood peaks, and distributes stormflows over longer time periods, causing tribu- tary and main channels to peak at different times. Wetlands with available storage capacity or those located in depressions with narrow outlets may store and release water over an extended period of time. In drainage basins with flat terrain that contains many depressions (for example, the prairie potholes and playa lake regions), lakes and wetlands store large volumes of snowmelt and (or) runoff. These wetlands have no natural outlets, and therefore this water is retained and does not contribute to local or regional flooding. A strong correlation exists between the size of flood peaks and basin storage (percentage of basin area occupied by lakes and wetlands) in many drain- age basins throughout the United States (Tice, 1968; The effectiveness and magnitude of a function varies from wetland to wetland. 44 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Wetlands can influence weather and climate. Hains, 1973; Novitzki, 1979, 1989; Leibowitz and others, 1992). Novitzki (1979, 1989) found that ba- sins with 30 percent or more areal coverage by lakes and wetlands have flood peaks that are 60 to 80 per- cent lower than the peaks in basins with no lake or wetland area. Wetlands can provide cost-effective flood control, and in some instances their protection has been recognized as less costly than flood-control measures such as reservoirs or dikes (Carter and oth- ers, 1979). Loss of wetlands can result in severe and costly flood damage in low-lying areas of a basin. Not all wetlands are able to store floodwaters or modify stormflow; some, in fact, add to runoff. Down- stream wetlands, such as those along the middle and lower reaches of the Mississippi River and its tribu- taries, are more effective at reducing downstream flooding than are headwater wetlands, largely as a result of larger storage capacities (Ogawa and Male, 1986). Runoff from wetlands is strongly influenced by season, available storage capacity, and soil perme- ability. Wetlands in basin headwaters are commonly sources of runoff because they are ground-water dis- charge areas. Wetlands in Alaska that are underlain by permafrost have little or no available storage capac- ity; runoff is rapid and flood peaks are often very high. Ground-Water Recharge and Discharge Ground-water recharge and discharge are hydro- logic processes that occur throughout the landscape and are not unique functions of wetlands. Recharge and discharge in wetlands are strongly influenced by local hydrogeology, topographic position, ET, wetland soils, season, and climate. Ground-water discharge provides water necessary to the survival of the wet- land and also can provide water that leaves the wet- land as streamflow. Most wetlands are primarily dis- charge areas; in these wetlands, however, small amounts of recharge can occur seasonally. Recharge to aquifers can be especially important in areas where ground water is withdrawn for agri- cultural, industrial, and municipal purposes. Wetlands can provide either substantial or limited recharge to aquifers. Much of the recharge to the Ogallala aqui- fer in West Texas and New Mexico is from the 20,000 to 30,000 playa lakes rather than from areas between lakes, ephemeral streams, and areas of sand dunes (Wood and Osterkamp, 1984; Wood and Sanford, 1994). Recharge takes place through the bottoms of some streams, especially in karst topography and in the arid West. Some recharge also takes place when floodwater moves across the flood plain and seeps down into the water-table aquifer. Cypress domes in Florida and prairie potholes in the Dakotas also are thought to contribute to ground-water recharge (Carter and others, 1979). Ground-water recharge from a wetland can be induced when aquifer water levels have been drawn down by nearby pumping. Most estuarine wetlands are discharge areas rather than recharge areas, primarily because they are on the low topographic end of local and regional ground-water flow systems. As the tide rises, water is temporarily stored on the surface of the wetland and in the wetland soils, where it mixes with the discharg- ing freshwater. The water moves back into the estu- ary or tidal river as the tide ebbs. Precipitation fall- ing on nontidal freshwater wetlands on barrier islands may recharge the shallow freshwater aquifer overly- ing the deeper salty water. Alterations of Precipitation and Evaporation Wetlands can influence local or regional weather and climate in several ways. Wetlands tend to moder- ate seasonal temperature fluctuations. During the sum- mer, wetlands maintain lower temperatures because ET from the wetland converts latent heat and releases water vapor to the atmosphere. In the winter, the warmer water of the wetland prevents rapid cooling at night; warm breezes from the wetland surface may prevent freezing in nearby uplands. Wetlands also modify local atmospheric circulation and thus affect moisture convection, cloud formation, thunderstorms, and precipitation patterns. Therefore, when wetlands are drained or replaced by impermeable materials, sig- nificant changes in weather systems can occur. Maintenance of Water Quality Ground water and surface water transport sedi- ments, nutrients, trace metals, and organic materials. Wetlands can trap, precipitate, transform, recycle, and export many of these waterborne constituents, and water leaving the wetland can differ markedly from that entering (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993; Elder, 1987). Wetlands can maintain good quality water and improve degraded water. Water-quality modification can affect an entire drainage basin or it may affect only an individual wetland. Water chemistry in basins that contain a large proportion of wetlands is usually different from that in basins with fewer wetlands. Basins with more wetlands tend to have water with lower specific con- ductance and lower concentrations of chloride, lead, inorganic nitrogen, suspended solids, and total and dissolved phosphorus than basins with fewer wet- lands. Generally, wetlands are more effective at re- moving suspended solids, total phosphorus, and ammonia during high-flow periods and more effec- tive at removing nitrates at low-flow periods (John- ston and others, 1990). Novitzki (1979) reported that streams in a Wisconsin basin, which contained 40 per- cent wetland and lake area, had sediment loads that were 90 percent lower than in a comparable basin with no wetlands. Wetlands may change water chemistry sequentially; that is, upstream wetlands may serve as the source of materials that are transformed in down- stream wetlands. Estuaries and tidal rivers depend on the flow of freshwater, sediments, nutrients, and other constituents from upstream. Wetlands filter out or transform natural and an- thropogenic constituents through a variety of biologi- cal and chemical processes. Wetlands act as sinks (where material is trapped and held) for some mate- rials and sources (from which material is removed) of others. For example, wetlands are a major sink for heavy metals and for sulfur, which combines with metals to form relatively insoluble compounds. Some wetland mineral deposits (bog iron, manganese) are or have been important metal reserves in the past. Or- ganic carbon in the form of plant tissues and peat National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 45 Gaseous Nitrogen Surface- water inflow (NH3 J Ground- Living plant Decaying plant material Detritus / __, Surface- M '> water outflow (NH3> Ground- water outflow EXPLANATION Bacteria change gaseous nitrogen (N 2 ) to ammonia (NH 3 ). Bacteria change ammonia (NH3) to nitrate (NOJ} (another form of nitrogen that the plant can use). Plant roots absorb ammonia and (or) nitrate formed in processes Q and Q and incorporate nitrogen into the plant proteins and nucleic acids that nourish the plant. Nitrogen compounds of decaying plants are broken down by bacteria and release ammonia that can be recycled through steps 0 and 0. Bacteria change nitrate to gaseous nitrogen. Figure 26. Simplified diagram of the nitrogen cycle in a wetland. accumulates in wetlands creating a source of water- borne dissolved and particulate organic materials. Some materials, for example nutrients, are changed from one form to another as they pass through the wetland (fig. 26). Most stored materials in wetlands are immobilized as a result of prevailing water chem- istry and hydrology, but any disturbance can result in release of those materials. The water purification functions of wetlands are dependent upon four principal components of the wet- land substrate, water, vegetation, and microbial popu- lations (Hammer, 1992; Hemond and others, 1987). Substrates. Wetland substrates provide a reac- tive surface for biogeochemical reactions and habi- tat for microbes. Wetland soils are the medium in which many of the wetland chemical transformations occur and the primary storage area of available chemicals for most plants (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993). Organic or peat soils differ from mineral soils in their biogeochemical properties, including their ability to hold water and bind or immobilize mineral constituents. Water. Ground and surface waters transport solid materials and gases to the microbial and plant communities, remove the by-products of chemical and biological reactions from the wetlands, and maintain the environment in which the essential biochemical processes of wetlands occur. Flooding or soil satura- tion causes oxygen-deficient conditions that markedly influence many biological transformations. Vegetation. Wetland vegetation reduces the flow and decreases velocities of water, causing the depo- sition of mineral and organic particles and constitu- ents attached to them, such as phosphorus or trace metals. Plants introduce oxygen to the generally oxy- gen-deficient soil environment through their roots, creating an oxidized root zone where bacterial trans- formations of nitrogenous and other compounds can occur (Good and Patrick, 1987). Plants also provide a surface for microbial colonization. Wetland plants remove small quantities of nutrients, trace metals, and other compounds from the soil water and incorporate them into plant tissue, which may later be recycled in the wetland through decomposition, stored as peat, or transported from the wetland as particulate mat- ter (Boyt and others, 1977; Tilton and Kadlec, 1979; Hammer, 1992). Microbes. The microbial community, which includes bacteria, algae, fungi, and protozoa, is re- sponsible for most of the chemical transformations that occur in wetlands. In order to meet their meta- bolic needs, microbes use up oxygen; transform nu- trients, manganese, and iron; and generate methane, hydrogen sulfide gas, and carbon dioxide. Wetlands serve as short-term or long-term sedi- ment sinks. Floodwater spreading out across a wet- land decreases in velocity, and sediments settle out and are trapped within the wetland. Some of this sedi- ment may be transported out of the wetland during future flooding. Sediment deposition in estuarine wetlands provides a constant input that is of special importance for maintenance of wetlands acreage dur- ing periods of sea-level rise (Bricker-Urso and oth- ers, 1989). The ability of wetlands to filter and transform nutrients and other constituents has resulted in the construction and use of artificial wetlands in the United States and other countries to treat wastewater and acid mine drainage (Hammer, 1989, 1992; Wieder, 1989). However, individual wetlands have a limited capacity to absorb nutrients and differ in their ability to do so (Tiner, 1985). A wetland's effective- ness in improving water quality depends on hydro- logic patterns, amount and type of vegetation, time of year, and the constituent of concern (Zedler and others, 1985). Estuarine Water Balance Estuaries receive freshwater from precipitation, ground-water discharge, streamflow, and overland flow. Ground water discharges through shallow- water sediments of the estuary or through marsh soils and can affect the nutrient balance and salinity of the 46 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Low flow EXPLANATION General direction of surface-water flow [ | Freshwater | | Brackish water Freshwater/brackish-water interface [ | Saltwater Brackish-water/saltwater interface Figure 27. Movement of the freshwater-saltwater interface in an estuary during periods of high flow and during periods of low flow. receiving waters (Valiela and others, 1978; Harvey and Odum, 1990). Estuarine salinity decreases dur- ing periods of high streamflow as the freshwater-salt- water interface moves down the estuary from the stream toward the sea (fig. 27). Estuarine salinity in- creases as streamflow decreases and the interface moves up the estuary. Estuarine plants and animals are well adjusted to these normal seasonal fluctua- tions in salinity. Water temporarily stored in flood- plain wetlands upstream from the estuary deposits sediment and nutrients, and water leaving these wet- lands exports decomposition products and organic de- tritus to the estuary. This temporary storage of water and the concurrent decrease in flow velocity aid in controlling the timing and size of the freshwater in- flux to the estuary. For example, the freshwater wet- lands of the Barataria Basin in Louisiana serve as a major freshwater reservoir for maintenance of favor- able salinities in the brackish zone, and the major pulse of materials to the estuary coincides with the arrival of migrant fish for growth and spawning. Leaves that fall in flood-plain wetlands are broken down and enriched by microbial action and produce high-quality food for detrital based food chains in the estuary. Alterations in the timing and quality of streamflow and associated suspended particulate and dissolved material, caused by dams or artificial drain- age, can alter the chemistry of coastal waters and affect the organisms that inhabit them. Wetlands reduce the erosive forces of wind and waves. Erosion Reduction Wetlands reduce shoreline erosion by stabilizing sediments and absorbing and dissipating wave energy (Hammer, 1992). The ability of wetlands to stabilize and protect shorelines depends on their capacity to reduce the erosive forces of wind and waves. Beaches and shallow vegetated wetlands protect shorelines in moderate and small storms if the water does not carry excessive amounts of abrasive floating debris. Wet- land vegetation decreases water velocities through friction and causes sedimentation in shallow water areas and flood-plain wetlands, thus decreasing the erosive power of the water and building up natural levees. Trees are excellent riverbank stabilizers and have been planted to reduce erosion along United States shorelines. Other wetland plants such as bul- rushes, reeds, cattails, cordgrass, and mangroves can also successfully withstand wave and current action. When vegetation is removed, streambanks col- lapse and channels widen and (or) deepen; removal of wetland vegetation can turn a sediment sink into a sediment source. The dissipation of erosive forces by vegetation differs from wetland to wetland and de- pends upon vegetative composition and root structure, sediment type, and the frequency and intensity of water contact with the bank. SUMMARY Wetlands are complex ecosystems in which ground water and surface water interact, but because ground water cannot be directly observed, its role in the hydrology of wetlands is sometimes more diffi- cult to understand than that of surface water. Many wetlands owe their existence not only to poor drain- age at the site but also to the discharge of ground water at the site. The hydrology of a wetland determines what functions it will perform. Each wetland is unique, but those with similar hydrologic settings generally perform similar functions. References Cited Boelter, D.H., and Verry, E.S., 1977, Peatland and water in the northern Lake States: U.S. Department of Agricul- ture Forest Service General Technical Report NC-31, 22 p. Boyt, F.L., Bayley, S.E., and Zoltek, John, Jr., 1977, Removal of nutrients from treated municipal wastewater by wet- land vegetation: Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation, v. 49, no. 5, p. 789-799. Bricker-Urso, Suzanne, Nixon, S.W., Cochran, J.K., Hirschberg, D.J., and Hunt, C.D., 1989, Accretion rates and sediment accumulation in Rhode Island salt marshes: Estuaries, v. 12, no. 4, p. 300-317. Brinson, M.M., 1988, Strategies for assessing the cumula- tive effects of wetland alteration on water quality: En- vironmental Management, v. 12, no. 5, p. 655-662. ____1993, A hydrogeomorphic classification for wet- lands: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Technical Report WRP-DE-4, 79 p. Brown, R. J. E., 1974, Distribution and environmental re- lationships of permafrost: Canada National Commit- tee for the Hydrologic Decade, p. 1-5. Carter, Virginia, 1986, An overview of the hydrologic con- cerns related to wetlands in the United States: Cana- dian Journal of Botany, v. 64, no. 2, p. 364-374. Carter, Virginia, Bedinger, M.S., Novitzki. R.P., and Wilen, W.O., 1979, Water resources and wetlands, in Greeson, P.E., Clark, J.R. and Clark, J.E., eds., Wetland func- tions and values The state of our understanding: Min- neapolis, Minnesota, Water Resources Association, p. 344-376. Carter, Virginia, Gammon, P.T., and Garrett, M.K.,1994, National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 47 Ecotone dynamics and boundary determination in the Great Dismal Swamp, Virginia and North Carolina: Ecological Applications, v. 4, no. 1, p. 189-203. Chason, D.B., and Siegel, D.I., 1986, Hydraulic conductiv- ity and related physical properties of peat, Lost River Peatland, Northern Minnesota: Soil Science, v. 142, no. 2, p. 91-99. Dingman, S.L., and Koutz, F.R., 1974, Relations among veg- etation, permafrost, and potential insolation in Central Alaska: Arctic and Alpine Research, v. 6, no. 1, p. 37-42. Dolan, T.J., Hermann, A.J., Bayley, Suzanne, and Zoltek, John, 1984, Evapotranspiration of a Florida, U.S.A., freshwater wetland: Journal of Hydrology, v. 74, p. 355-371. Elder, J.F., 1987, Factors affecting wetland retention of nutrients, metals, and organic materials, in Kusler, J.A., and Brooks, Gail, eds., Wetland hydrology: National Wetland Symposium, 1987, Proceedings, p. 178-184. Ford, Jesse, and Bedford, B.L., 1987, The hydrology of Alaskan wetlands, USA A review: Arctic and Alpine Research, v. 19, no. 3, p. 209-229. Gehrels, Jim, and Mulamoottil, George, 1990, Hydrologic processes in a southern Ontario wetland: Hydro- biologia, v. 208, p. 221-234. Golet, F.C. and Lowry, D.J., 1987, Water regimes and tree growth in Rhode Island Atlantic white cedar swamps, in Laderman, A.D, ed., Atlantic white cedar wetlands: Boulder, Colo., Westview Press, p. 91-110. Good, B.J., and Patrick, W.H., Jr., 1987, Root-water-sedi- ment interface processes, in Reddy, K.R., and Smith, W.H., eds., Aquatic plants for water treatment and re- source recovery: Orlando, Fla., Magnolia Publishing Company, p. 359-371. Gosselink, J.G., and Turner, R.E., 1978, The role of hydrol- ogy in freshwater wetland ecosystems, in Good, R.E., Whigham, D.F., and Simpson, R.L., eds., Freshwater wetlands Ecological processes and management po- tential: New \brk. Academic Press, p. 63-78. Hains, C.F., 1973, Floods in Alabama Magnitude and fre- quency, based on data through September 30, 1971: U.S. Geological Survey and Alabama Highway Dept., 38 p. Hammer, D.A., 1989, Constructed wetlands for waste water treatment: Chelsea, Mich., Lewis Publishers, Inc., 831 P- ____1992, Creating freshwater wetlands: Chelsea, Mich., Lewis Publishers, 298 p. Harvey, J.W., and Odum, W.E., 1990, The influence of tidal marshes on upland groundwater discharge to estuaries: Biogeochemistry, v. 10, p. 217-236. Hemond, H.F., Army, T.P., Nuttle, W.K., and Chen, D.G., 1987, Element cycling in wetlands Interactions with physical mass transport, in Kites, R.A., and Eisenreich, S.J., eds., Sources and fates of aquatic pollutants: Wash- ington, D.C., American Chemical Society, Advances in Chemistry Series 216, p. 519-537. Idso, S.B., 1981, Relative rates of evaporative water losses from open and vegetation covered water bodies: Ameri- can Water Resources Bulletin, v. 17, no. 1, p. 46 48. Ingram, H.A.P., 1983, Hydrology, in Gore, A.J.P., ed., Eco- systems of the world, 4A, Mores Swamp, bog, fen and moor: New "York, Elsevier Scientific Publishing Com- pany, p. 67-158. Johnston, C.A., Detenbeck, N.E., and Niemi, G.J., 1990, The cumulative effect of wetlands on stream water quality and quantity A landscape approach: Bio- geochemistry, v. 10, p. 105-141. Kane, D.L., and Slaughter, C.W., 1973, Recharge of a cen- tral Alaska lake by subpermafrost groundwater: Sec- ond International Conference on Permafrost, Siberia, 1973, Proceedings, p. 458^68. Leibowitz, S.G., Abbruzzese, Brooks, Adamus, P.R., Hughes, L.E., Iris, J.T., 1992, A synoptic approach to cumulative impact assessment A proposed method- ology, in McCannell, S.G., and Hairston, A.R., eds.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/R- 92-167, 127 p. Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G., 1993, Wetlands: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 722 p. Novitzki, R.P., 1978, Hydrology of the Nevin Wetland near Madison, Wisconsin: U.S. Geological Survey Water- Resources Investigations 78^8, 25 p. ____1979, Hydrologic characteristics of Wisconsin's wet- lands and their influence on floods, stream flow, and sediment, in Greeson, P.E., and Clark, J.R., eds., Wet- land functions and values The state of our under- standing: Minneapolis, Minn., American Water Re- sources Association, 674 p. ____1982, Hydrology of Wisconsin wetlands: Wisconsin Geological Natural History Survey, Information Circu- lar 40, 22 p. .1989, Wetland hydrology, in Majumdar, S.K., Brooks, R.P., Brenner, F.J., and Tiner, R.W., Jr., eds., Chapter Five, Wetlands ecology and conservation Emphasis in Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania Academy of Science, p. 47-64. Ogawa, Hisashi, and Male, J.W, 1986, Simulating of flood mitigation role of wetlands: Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, v. 112, no. 1, p. 114-127. Roulet, N.T., 1990, Hydrology of a headwater basin wet- land Groundwater discharge and wetland mainte- nance: Hydrological Processes, v. 4, p. 387-400. Roulet, N.T., and Woo, Ming-ko, 1986, Hydrology of a wetland in the continuous permafrost region: Journal of Hydrology, v. 89, p. 73-91. Rykiel, E. J., 1984, General hydrology and mineral budgets for Okefenokee Swamp Ecological significance, in Cohen, A.D., Casagrande, D.J., Andrejko, M.J., and Best, G.R., eds., The Okefenokee Swamp Its natural history, geology, and geochemistry: Los Alamos, N. Mex., Wetland Surveys, p. 212-228. Siegel, D.I., 1983, Ground water and the evolution of pat- terned mires, glacial lake Agassiz peatlands, northern Minnesota: Journal of Ecology, v. 71, p. 913-921. ____1992, Groundwater hydrology, in Wright, H.E., Jr., Coffin, B.A., and Asseng, N.E., eds., The patterned peatlands of Minnesota: Minnesota, University of Min- nesota Press, p. 163-172. Siegel, D.I., and Glaser, P.H., 1987, Groundwater flow in a bog-fen complex, Lost River peatland, Northern Min- nesota: Journal of Ecology, v. 75, p. 743-754. Thompson, C.A., Bettis, E.A., III, and Baker, R.G., 1992, Geology of Iowa Fens: Journal of Iowa Academy of Science, v. 99, no. 2-3, p. 53-59. Tice. R. H., 1968, Magnitude and frequency of floods in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1672, 13 p. Tilton, D. L., and Kadlec, R. H., 1979, The utilization of a fresh-water wetland for nutrient removal from second- arily treated waste water effluent: Journal of Environ- mental Quality, v. 8, no. 3, p. 328-334. Tiner, R.W., Jr., 1985, Wetlands of New Jersey: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, 117 p. Valiela, Ivan, and Costa, J.E., 1988, Eutrophication of But- termilk Bay, a Cape Cod coastal embayment Concen- trations of nutrients and watershed nutrients and wa- tershed nutrient budgets: Environmental Management, v. 12, no. 4, p. 539-553. Valiela, Ivan, Costa, J.E., Foreman, Kenneth, Teal, J.M., Howes, Brian, and Aubrey, David, 1990, Transport of groundwater-borne nutrients from watersheds and their effects on coastal waters: Biogeochemistry, v. 10, p.177-197. Valiela, Ivan, Teal, J.M., Volkmann, Susanne, Shafer, 48 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Deborah, and Carpenter, E.J., 1978, Nutrient and par- ticulate fluxes in a salt marsh ecosystem Tidal ex- changes and inputs by precipitation and groundwater: Limnology and Oceanography, v. 23, no. 4, p. 708-812. Wieder, R.K., 1989, A survey of constructed wetlands for acid coal mine drainage treatment in the eastern United States: Wetlands, v. 9, no. 2, p. 299-315. Williams, J.R., and Waller, R.M., 1966, Ground water oc- currence in permafrost regions of Alaska: National Research Council, p. 159-164. Winter, T.C., 1976, Numerical simulation analysis of the interaction of lakes and ground water: U.S. Geologi- cal Survey Professional Paper 1001, 45 p. ____ 1981, Uncertainties in estimating the water balance of lakes; Water Resources Bulletin, v. 17, no. 1, p. 82-115. Winter, T.C., and Woo, Ming-Ko, 1990, Hydrology of lakes and wetlands: Surface Water Hydrology: The Geologi- cal Society of America, v. O-l, p. 159-187. Wood, W.W., and Osterkamp, W.R., 1984, Recharge to the Ogallala aquifer from Playa Lake Basins on the Llano Estacado: Wetstone, G.A., ed., Ogallala Aquifer Symposium II, Lubbock, Texas, 1984, Proceedings, p. 337-349. Wood, W.W., and Sanford, W.E., 1994, Recharge to the Ogallala: 60 years after C. V. Theis' analysis, in Urban, L.V., and Wyatt, A.W., eds., Playa Basin Symposium: Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, 1994, 324 p. Zedler, J.B., Huffman, Terry, Josselyn, Michael, eds., 1985, Pacific Regional Wetland Functions: Proceedings of a workshop held at Mill Valley, Calif., April 14-16,1985, Amherst, Mass., The Environmental Institute, Univer- sity of Massachusetts, Publication no. 90-3, 162 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Virginia Carter, U.S. Geological Survey, 430 National Center, Reston, VA 22092 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 49 Technical Aspects of Wetlands Wetlands as Bird Habitat By Robert E. Stewart, Jr. 1 Figure 28. This wetland in California is habitat for migrating snow geese. (Photograph by fames R. Nelson, California Department of Fish and Game.) The value of a wet- land to a specific bird species is affected by the presence of surface water and the duration and timing of flooding. One of the best known functions of wetlands is to provide a habitat for birds (fig. 28). Humans have known of the link between birds and wetlands for thousands of years. Prehistoric people drew pictures of birds and wetlands on cave walls, scratched them onto rocks, and used them in the design of artifacts (fig. 29); and Native American lore provides accounts of bird hunts in wetlands. Wetlands are important bird habitats, and birds use them for breeding, nesting, and rearing young (fig. 30). Birds also use wetlands as a source of drinking water and for feeding, resting, shelter, and social interactions. Some waterfowl, such as grebes, have adapted to wetlands to such an extent that their survival as individual species depends on the availability of certain types of wetlands within their geographic range. Other species, such as the northern pintail or the American widgeon, use wetlands only during some parts of their lives. Wetlands occupy only a small part of the land- scape that is now the conterminous United States 11 percent in 1780 and just 5 percent in 1980 (Dahl and others, 1991). Nonetheless, they are important to birds. During the past 20 years, policies and programs that encourage altering, draining, or filling of wet- lands have decreased, and policies that encourage wetland conservation and restoration have increased. (See article "Wetland Protection Legislation" in this volume.) Among the wetland attributes society seeks to protect and conserve are those that benefit wildlife, particularly migratory birds. This article discusses the benefits that wetlands provide for birds and the effects of wetland losses on birds. Figure 29. The importance of wetland birds to ancient people is portrayed in these two artifacts. The petroglyph at the left, created between A.D. 1300 and 1650, is located at Petroglyph National Monument near Albuquerque, N. Mex. The clay "duck pot" at the right, fired between 200 B.C. and A.D. 500, was unearthed at Hopewell Culture National Historical Park, Chillicothe, Ohio. (Photographs courtesy of the National Park Service.) National Biological Service. 50 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES The geographic location of a wet- land may determine how and when birds will use it. Figure 30. This baby heron will be raised in a wetland environment. (Photograph courtesy of National Biological Service.) Figure 31. The raccoon is a wetland predator that eats eggs and preys on birds. (Photo- graph courtesy of National Biological Service.) Figure 32. The American alligator is an effective and voracious predator of wetland birds in the South. (Photo- graph courtesy of National Biological Service.) Figure 33. This American bittern, with its protective coloration, is well hidden in the vegetation. (Photograph by James Leopold, National Biological Service.) WETLAND FACTORS THAT AFFECT BIRDS The relation between wetlands and birds is shaped by many factors. These include the availabil- ity, depth, and quality of water; the availability of food and shelter; and the presence or absence of predators. Birds that use wetlands for breeding de- pend on the physical and biological attributes of the wetland. Birds have daily and seasonal dependencies on wetlands for food and other life-support systems. The value of a wetland to a specific bird species is affected by the presence of surface water or moist soils and the duration and timing of flooding. Water might be present during the entire year, during only one or more seasons, during tidal inundation, or only temporarily during and after rainfall or snowmelt. At times water might not be present at the land surface, but might be close enough to the land surface to main- tain the vegetation and foods that are needed by birds. Birds may use wetlands located in depressions in an otherwise dry landscape, along streams, or in tidally influenced areas near shorelines. The availability or influence of water is a very important wetland feature to birds. It is not, however, the only feature that determines if birds will be present, how birds use the wetland, or how many kinds or numbers of birds may use the wetland. Other determining physical or biological factors include water depth and temperature, presence or absence of vegetation, patchiness or openness of vegetation, type of vegetation, foods, water chemistry, type of soils, and geographic or topographic location. Any varia- tions in any of these wetland features will cause subtle, but distinct, differences in bird use. Wetlands provide food for birds in the form of plants, vertebrates, and invertebrates. Some feeders forage for food in the wetland soils, some find food in the water column, and some feed on the vertebrates and invertebrates that live on submersed and emer- gent plants. Vegetarian birds eat the fruits, tubers, and leaves of wetland plants. Water temperatures influ- ence food production. Invertebrate production in the water column may ultimately depend on water tem- perature and the ability of a wetland to produce al- gae. Cold water might not be a hospitable environ- ment for small animals and plants that some wetland birds eat. However, water that is too warm also might not produce foods that some birds prefer. Wetland vegetation provides shelter from preda- tors and from the weather. The presence or absence of shelter may influence whether birds will inhabit a wetland or a nearby upland area. Predators are likely to abound where birds concentrate, breed, or raise their young. Wetlands form an important buffer or barrier to land-based predators and reduce the risk of predation to nesting or young birds. However, some predators, such as the raccoon (fig. 31), are well adapted to both wetland and upland environments, and take large numbers of both young and nesting birds. Mink forage for nesting or sleeping birds along the edges and interiors of wetlands. Other animals, such as the snapping turtle, the alligator (fig. 32), or the large-mouthed bass, are effective water-based predators of young birds, particularly young water- fowl. Snakes take their toll as well. Many bird spe- cies that are highly adapted to feeding in a wetland National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 51 Figure 34. Major flyway corridors for migrating birds in the Western Hemisphere, (Source: From U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service files.) environment also have genetic adaptations that lower their risk of becoming prey. One such example is the bittern (fig. 33), which has excellent protective col- oration. The same vegetation that hides birds from predators also provides some shelter from severe weather. In spring, during cold and stormy weather, waterfowl such as canvasback ducks protect their young in the shelter of a marsh that is almost impen- etrable to wind. The geographic location of a wetland may deter- mine how and when birds will use it or use adjacent habitat. In the northern latitudes or at high altitudes, some wetlands are covered with ice in the winter and are temporarily "out of service" for birds adapted to a water environment, but emergent vegetation might still offer shelter and food for some species. Birds that eat fish, aquatic invertebrates, or submersed vegeta- tion cannot forage for food because of the ice cover. Some wetlands are on the migration path of water- fowl and other migratory birds and provide stopover locations for traveling birds (fig. 34). These birds might feed in agricultural fields during the day and return to the shelter of wetlands during the night. The "prairie potholes" are a special type of wet- land, found in the north-central part of the United States. These potholes are an example of a wetland type that is important to migrating waterfowl. Here the timing and duration of inundation and the salin- ity of the water are important factors in the produc- tion of plants and invertebrates used by birds. These, and many other wetland characteristics, are influ- enced by a number of things: Water-level fluctuations throughout the year, in re- sponse to rainfall and snowmelt, that maintain wetland zones such as wet meadows and marshes Short-term (years) and long-term (decades) cli- matic trends that cycle wetlands between a wet and dry state Interaction of surface and ground water Interaction of ground water with rocks and soils that influence salinity and other wetland water chemistry THE IMPORTANCE OF WETLANDS TO BIRDS Because of the great variety of wetlands, bird adaptation to and use of wetland environments dif- fers greatly from species to species. Birds' use of wetlands during breeding cycles ranges widely. Some birds depend on wetlands almost totally for breeding, nesting, feeding, or shelter during their breeding cycles. Birds that need functional access to a wetland or wetland products during their life cycle, especially during the breeding season, can be called "wetland dependent" (table 5). Other birds use wetlands only for some of their needs, or they might use both wet- land and upland habitats. Of the more than 1,900 bird species that breed in North America, about 138 spe- cies in the conterminous United States are wetland dependent (American Ornithologists'Union, 1983). Many bird species use forested wetlands as well as forested uplands, feeding on the abundant insects associated with trees (fig. 35). These birds are not de- 52 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Table 5. Wetland-dependent breeding birds of the conterminous United States, including federally endangered or threatened species and subspecies1 - 2 [Source: Data from American Ornithologists' Union, 1983; Niering, 1988; Ehrlich and others, 1992] Roseate spoonbill at a nesting rookery, (Photo- graph by Ronald F. Faille. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.) Snowy egret on the nest. (Photograph by David Hall, " U.S. Fish and Wildlife 1 Service.) * Green-backed heron. (Photograph by Thomas A. Muir, National Biological Service.) Cranes and their allies Yellow rail Black rail 3 California black rail Clapper rail 4 Light-footed clapper rail 4 California clapper rail 4 Yuma clapper rail King rail Virginia rail Sora rail Purple gallinule Common moorhen American coot Limpkin Sandhill crane (facultative) 4 Mississippi sandhill crane 4 Whooping crane Cuckoos Mangrove cuckoo Grebes Least grebe Pied-billed grebe Horned grebe Red-necked grebe Eared grebe Western grebe Herons and their allies American bittern Least bittern Great blue heron 4 Florida great white heron Great egret Snowy egret Little blue heron Tricolored heron Reddish egret Cattle egret Green-backed heron Black-crowned night heron Yellow-crowned night heron White ibis Glossy ibis White-faced ibis Roseate spoonbill 4 Wood stork Kingfishers Belted kingfisher This brown pelican is an endangered species. (Photograph by Thomas A. Muir, National Biological Service.) Loons Common loon Owls Short-eared owl Perching birds Flycatchers Alder flycatcher Willow flycatcher Gray flycatcher Swallows Tree swallow Northern rough-winged swallow Bank swallow Wrens Sedge wren Marsh wren Dippers American dipper Vireos Black-whiskered vireo Warblers 4 Bachman's warbler Prothonotary warbler Swainson's warbler Northern waterthrush Louisiana waterthrush Connecticut warbler Common yellowthroat Sparrows Savannah sparrow 3 Belding's savannah sparrow LeConte's sparrow Sharp-tailed sparrow Seaside sparrow 5 Dusky seaside sparrow 4 Cape sable sparrow Lincoln's sparrow Swamp sparrow Blackbirds Red-winged blackbird Tricolored blackbird Yellow-headed blackbird Great-tailed grackle Boat-tailed grackle Pelicans and their allies American white pelican Brown pelican 4 California brown pelican National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 53 The American avocet. (Photograph courtesy of National Biological Service.) Double-crested cormorant Olivaceous cormorant Anhinga Shorebirds, Gulls, and Alcids Plovers, surfbirds, and turnstones Snowy plover Wilson's plover 4 Piping plover Killdeer {facultative) Oystercatchers American oystercatcher American black oystercatcher Avocets and stilts Black-necked stilt American avocet Sandpipers and allies Willet Spotted sandpiper Marbled godwit Common snipe American woodcock "Eskimo curlew Phalarope Wilson's phalarope Gulls and terns Laughing gull Franklin's gull Little gull Heerman's gull (facultative) Ring-billed gull California gull Herring gull Western gull Great black-backed gull Gull-billed tern Caspian tern Royal tern Elegant tern Sandwich tern 4 Roseate tern Common tern Forster's tern Least tern 4 California least tern Sooty tern Black tern Skimmers Black skimmer Colony of sandwich terns on the Chandeleur Islands, La. (Photograph courtesy of National Biological Service.) Vultures, Hawks, and Falcons Osprey American swallow-tailed kite 4 Everglade snail kite 4 Bald eagle Northern harrier Peregrine falcon 4 American peregrine falcon Waterfowl Swans Trumpeter swan Geese Canada goose Tree ducks Fulvous whistling duck Black-bellied whistling duck Surface feeding ducks Wood duck Green-winged teal American black duck Mottled duck Mallard Northern pintail Blue-winged teal Cinnamon teal Northern shoveler Gadwall American wigeon Bay ducks Canvasback Redhead Ring-necked duck Greater scaup Lesser scaup Sea ducks Harlequin duck White-winged scoter Common goldeneye Barrow's goldeneye Bufflehead Mergansers Hooded merganser Common merganser Red-breasted merganser Stiff-tailed ducks Ruddy duck These American wigeons will spend part of their lives in a wetland habitat and part in an upland environment. (Photograph courtesy of National Biological Service.) Male wood ducks. (Photo- graph by Thomas A. Muir, National Biological Service.) 1 Table arranged by group, species, and subspecies. To facilitate the use of this table, order of presentation differs from that normally used. 2 Does not include oceanic or pelagic birds. 3 Candidate for placement on endan- gered species list. 4 Federally endangered or threatened wetland-dependent bird species or subspecies. 5 Became extinct in 1987. 54 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Figure 35. Prothonotary warblers feed on insects of forested wetlands and uplands alike. (Photo- graph courtesy of National Biological Service.) Widespread draining and altering of wet- lands has affected bird populations. 10 15 20 PONDS PER SQUARE MILE Figure 36. The relation of pond density increase to number of ducks. (Source: After Belirose, 1977.) pendent on wetlands because they use both habitats equally well. Some birds, such as wood ducks, are found primarily in forested wetlands and are depen- dent on this wetland type. Many migratory birds are wetland dependent, using wetlands during their migration and breeding seasons. Migratory birds may spend the winter in wet- lands in the Southern United States, or farther south (fig. 34). Throughout winter, these birds use south- ern wetlands for food and nutrients to sustain them for their return trip north and the breeding season. Not all wetlands are of equal value to waterfowl and other birds. An inventory in the conterminous United States during the early 1950's showed that of 74.4 million acres of wetlands, 8.8 million acres had a high value for waterfowl, 13.6 million acres were of moderate value, 24.1 million acres were of low value, and 27.9 million acres were of negligible value (Shaw and Fredine, 1956, p. 17). These categories were identified on a State-by-state basis and were ranked according to use by waterfowl, with "high" being most used. The primary focus of this inventory was waterfowl; thus these rankings might not reflect wetland values for other birds. Also, the inventory was for only natural wetlands that had been little al- tered by human activities. The three areas of highest value are the Mississippi River corridor southward from Cairo, 111., and westward along the Texas gulf coast; the entire east coast from Maine southward through most of Florida; and the northern Midwest. THE INFLUENCE OF WETLANDS ON WATERFOWL POPULATIONS Considerable research has increased the under- standing of wetlands' influence on the numbers of waterfowl that breed and their breeding success. However, the relation between wetlands and the population and propagation of various waterfowl species is not well understood. This relation depends on: (1) the number of wetlands in the area; (2) the wetlands' size and water depth; (3) whether the wet- lands hold open water in the early spring or through late August; (4) the climate; and (5) the species of bird and the bird's adaptations to wetlands. In the prairie pothole region in the late 1970's, for example, as the number of wetlands in an area in- creased, populations of dabbling ducks increased, but at a ratio of less than 1:1 (fig. 36). In the past 20 years, the duck-pothole ratio has decreased, possibly due to decreases in upland cover and increases in predation. Belirose (1977) also found waterfowl densities and propagation to be related to the number of wet- lands per square mile; gener- ally, waterfowl densities and propagation increased as the number of wetlands increased. However, he found that mallard production decreased when the number of wetlands exceeded 12 per square mile. Different waterfowl spe- cies adapt to different wetland types, inhabit different geo- Prairie pothole region Parklands Mixed prairie Shortgrass prairie 25 30 40 graphic areas, and nest at different times. The rela- tion of many other species of birds to wetlands are undoubtedly just as complex. EFFECTS OF WETLAND LOSS AND DEGRADATION ON BIRDS About one-third of North American bird species use wetlands for food, shelter, and (or) breeding (Kroodsma, 1979). Thus, widespread draining and al- tering of wetlands has affected bird populations. Be- cause most of the wetland drainage and alteration oc- curred between the 1930'sand 1950, before scientific estimates of bird populations began, most estimates of population declines are inferred. Before the pas- sage of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act in 1918, the reduction in waterfowl populations was blamed largely on excessive hunting and wetland drainage (Day, 1959). However, since 1930 most of the reduc- tion has been attributed to the loss or degradation of wetlands (Belirose and Trudeau, 1988) and the loss of suitable upland habitats that surround wetlands. For most wetland-dependent birds, habitat loss in breeding areas translates directly into population losses. As wetlands are destroyed, some birds may move to other less suitable habitats, but reproduction tends to be lower and mortality tends to be higher. Hence, the birds that breed in these poorer quality habitats will not contribute to a sustainable popula- tion through the years (Pulliam and Danielson, 1991). About one-half of the 188 animals that are fed- erally designated as endangered or threatened are wetland dependent (Niering, 1988). Of these, 17 are bird species or subspecies (table 5). These birds are categorized as endangered or threatened because their populations are so low that the risk of their extinc- tion is real and immediate. The circumstances that cause each species or subspecies to be endangered differ greatly. Wetland loss due to draining, filling, or altering of surface-water and ground-water flow is a concern to many people. Wetland degradation also has a sub- stantial effect on birds. Although wetland degradation is a serious problem, it is one that is more subtle and less understood than wetland losses. Degradation can take many forms: Amounts and periodicity of water supplies can be altered The quality of water flowing into and through a wetland can be modified The flows of sediments or freshwater to coastal marshes can be reduced Water levels can be stabilized in wetlands that oth- erwise would undergo beneficial drawdowns or water-table fluctuations Wetland vegetation may be altered by harvesting or by introducing exotic species, making it of little or no value to well and-dependent birds An example of wetland degradation is found in the Chesapeake Bay region. Nutrients and sediments entering the bay from agricultural, urban, and indus- trial areas have caused increased algal blooms, de- creased invertebrate production, and lowered oxygen levels. This degradation has reduced the acreage of seagrasses that form an important link in the food National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TECHNICAL ASPECTS 55 chain for invertebrates, fish, and wetland-dependent birds. The decline in the canvasback duck population in this area is thought to be directly related to the de- cline in seagrasses. Chemicals and sediments that move from agri- cultural areas into wetlands are two of the most per- vasive sources of degradation. The shift in human populations from inland areas to coastal areas of the United States has caused problems in coastal wet- lands through overloaded sewage treatment systems. The large and growing volume of industrial wastes that enter ground- and surface-water supplies also threatens to degrade wetlands. These threats, com- bined with habitat destruction, have a net negative ef- fect on the population of wetland birds. Thus, if the amount and quality of wetland habitat is substantially reduced, populations of wetland-dependent birds in the area also can be expected to decrease. SOME EFFORTS TO PRESERVE WETLAND BIRD HABITATS Many people believe that ownership or manage- ment of wetlands by public conservation agencies, such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and by private organizations, such as the Nature Conser- vancy or the National Audubon Society, offers the best assurance that the highest value wetlands will be maintained for future generations. (A discussion of the agencies and organizations that participate in management and conservation of wetlands in each State can be found in the State Summaries section of this report.) A few early concerns for wetlands important to waterfowl are reflected in the creation of the first national wildlife refuge and in the establishment of the Federal Duck Stamp program. The first national wildlife refuge was created in 1903, by President Theodore Roosevelt, to protect a wetland Pelican Island, Florida (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, [19951). Concern for the loss of waterfowl led to the Federal Duck Stamp program that began in 1934 (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993) and continues today. Duck stamps are sold to waterfowl hunters to pro- vide money for the purchase or preservation of wet- lands (fig. 37). Several international treaties are partly respon- sible for much of the formal wetland protection in this country the Migratory Bird Treaty and the Conven- tion on Wetlands of International Importance espe- cially as Waterfowl Habitat. "In 1918, the U[nited] S [tales] passed into law the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, ratifying a treaty with Great Britain, on behalf of Canada, that recognized the conservation respon- sibilities for more than 800 species of migratory birds shared by the two countries" (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, [1995]). Subsequent to that act, the United States developed the National Wildlife Refuge Sys- tem consisting of 500 reserves many of which are wetlands important to birds comprising more than 90 million acres (fig. 38). The system has the high- est ratio of wetlands to dry land in public ownership. The National Park Service manages the Everglades National Park and several preserves that also have high ratios of wetlands to dry lands. The Convention on Wetlands of International U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BIRD HUNTING AND U VOID AFTER JUNE 30.1995 $15 Figure 37. The purchase of duck stamps provides funds for the acquisition or protection of wetlands important to waterfowl. (Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.) Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat, more commonly known as the "Ramsar Convention" is an intergovernmental treaty for international cooperation for the conservation of wetland habitats. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is responsible for implementa- tion of the convention in the United States. A "List of Wetlands of International Importance" has been de- veloped by the convention. Sites on this list are known as "Ramsar Sites" and are wetlands that convention members have a special obligation to preserve. There are 15 Ramsar sites in this country (fig. 38). SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Human activities have caused shifts in wetland- dependent bird populations since European settle- ment of the United States, especially since the be- ginning of the 20th century. Many acres of wetlands were drained between the 1930's and 1950, well be- fore any of the national bird surveys were begun. As a result, it is not possible to accurately determine the effects of habitat destruction on long-term wetland bird populations. It is apparent that there have been many changes in the distribution and numbers of wetland birds. Wetlands on breeding, migratory, or wintering areas are all important to sustain bird populations. As the wetland habitats in these areas are drained or altered, the ability of these areas to sustain bird populations decreases. Each species of wetland-dependent bird has a unique and complex set of needs for wetland About one-half of the 188 animals that are federally designated as endangered or threatened are wetland dependent. 56 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Izembek Lagoon National Wildlife Refuge and State Game Area, Alaska Forsvthe National Wildlife Refuge, New Jersey Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge, Georgia and Florida Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada Everglades National Park, Florida Chesapeake Bay Estuarine Complex, Maryland and Virginia Cheyenne Bottoms State Game Area, Kansas Cache-Lower White Rivers Joint Venture Area, Arkansas Horicon Marsh, Wisconsin Catahoula Lake, Louisiana Delaware Bay Estuary, Delaware, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania Pelican Island, Florida Caddo Lake, Texas Cache River and Cypress Creek, Illinois Connecticut River Complex, Connecticut Figure 38. Location of National Fish and Wildlife Refuge System reserves and Ramsar sites in the United States. (Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1993, [1995].) habitats that makes it difficult to generalize about how loss or degradation of wetlands affects bird popula- tions. It seems reasonable to expect, however, that as the numbers of wetlands in a region decline, so too will the numbers of wetland-dependent birds. In some parts of the United States, extensive wetland losses have displaced birds from large areas. Continued wetland losses probably will cause con- tinued losses of wetland birds. However, recent rec- ognition of the wetland values, and the effects of their losses, have provided incentives to maintain and re- store wetlands. References Cited American Ornithologists' Union, 1983, Check-list of North American Birds: Lawrence, Kans., Alien Press, Inc., 6th edition, 877 p. Bellrose, F.C., 1977, Species distribution, habitats, and characteristics of breeding dabbling ducks in North America, in Bookhout, T. A., 1977, Waterfowl and wel- lands An integrated review: Proceedings of a sym- posium held al the 39th Midwest Fish and Wildlife Conference, Madison, Wis., La Crosse Printing Co., Inc, 152 p. Bellrose, F. C., and Trudeau, N.M., 1988, Wetlands and their relationship to migrating and winter populations of wa- terfowl, v. I: Portland, Oreg., Timber Press, p. 183-194. Dahl, T.E., and Johnson, C.E., 1991, Wetlands Status and trends in the conterminous United States, mid-1970's to mid-1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service, 22 p. Day, A.M., 1959, North American waterfowl; Harrisburg, Pa., Stackpole Co., 363 p. Ehrlich, PR., Dobkin, D.S., and Wheye, Darryl, 1992, Birds in jeopardy: Stanford, California, Stanford University Press, 260 p. Kroodsma, D. E., 1979, Habitat values for nongame wet- land birds, in Greeson, P.E., Clark, J.R., and Clark, I.E. eds., 1979, Wetland functions and values The state of our understanding: Minneapolis, Minn., American Water Resources Association, p. 320-343. Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G., 1993, Wetlands: New \brk, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 722 p. Niering, W.A., 1988, Endangered, threatened and rare wet- land plants and animals of the continental United States, in Hook, D.D., McKee, W.H., Jr., Smith, H.K., and oth- ers, 1988, The ecology and management of wetlands Volume I The ecology of wetlands: Portland, Oreg., Timber Press, 592 p. Pulliam, H.R., and Danielson, B.J., 1991, Sources, sinks and habitat selection A landscape perspective on popu- lation dynamics: The American Naturalist, v. 137, p. 850-866. Shaw, S.P., and Fredine, C.G., 1956, Wetlands of the United States Their extent and their value to waterfowl and other wildlife: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Circu- lar 39, 67 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1993, Annual report of lands under control of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as of September 30, 1993: Division of Realty, 43 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, [1995J, Wetlands of Inter- national Importance United States Participation in the "Ramsar" Convention, Ramsar. Iran, 1971, 11 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Robert E. Stewart, Jr., National Biological Service, Southern Science Center, 700 Cajundome Boulevard, Lafayette, LA 70506 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 57 Wetland Management and Research Wetland Protection Legislation By Todd H. Votteler1 and Thomas A. Muir2 The people of the United States have begun to recognize that wetlands have numerous and widespread benefits. However, many of the goods and services wetlands provide have little or no market value. Be- cause of this, the benefits produced by wetlands accrue primarily to the general public. Therefore, the Govern- ment provides incentives and regulates and manages wetland resources to protect the resources from deg- radation and destruction. Other mechanisms for wet- land protection include acquisition, planning, mitiga- tion, disincentives for conversion of wetlands to other land uses, technical assistance, education, and research. Although many States have their own wetland regulations, the Federal Government bears a major re- sponsibility for regulating wetlands. The five Federal agencies that share the primary responsibility for pro- tecting wetlands include the Department of Defense, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps); the U.S. En- vironmental Protection Agency (EPA); the Depart- ment of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS); the Department of Commerce, National Oce- anic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); and the Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) (formerly the Soil Con- servation Service). Each of these agencies has a dif- ferent mission that is reflected in the implementation of the agency's authority for wetland protection. The Corps' duties are related to navigation and water sup- ply. The EPA's authorities are related to protecting wetlands primarily for their contributions to the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters. The FWS's authorities are related to managing fish and wildlife game species and threat- ened and endangered species. Wetland authority of NOAA lies in its charge to manage the Nation's coastal resources. The NRCS focuses on wetlands affected by agricultural activities. States are becoming more active in wetland pro- tection. As of 1993, 29 States had some type of wet- land law (Want, 1993). Many of these States have adopted programs to protect wetlands beyond those programs enacted by the Federal Government. As more responsibility is delegated from the Federal Government to the States, State wetland programs are gaining in importance. Thus far, States have devoted more attention to regulating coastal wetlands than in- land wetlands. The most comprehensive State pro- grams include those of Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Massachusetts, Florida, New Jersey, and Minnesota (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993). Many of these States regulate those activities affecting wetlands that are exempt from the Clean Water Act, Section 404 program. (For more information on specific State wet- land protection programs, see the State Summary sec- tion of this volume.) Despite the current recognition of wetland ben- efits, many potentially conflicting interests still exist, such as that between the interests of landowners and the general public and between developers and con- servationists. Belated recognition of wetland benefits and disagreement on how to protect them has led to discrepancies in local, State, and Federal guidelines. Discrepancies in Federal programs are apparent in table 6, which shows programs that encourage con- version of wetlands and those that discourage conver- sion of wetlands. Conflicting interests are the source of much tension and controversy in current wetland protection policy. Although attempts are being made to reconcile some of these differences, many policies will have to be modified to achieve consistency. Despite all the government legislation, policies, and programs, wetlands will not be protected if the regulations are not enforced. Perhaps the best way to protect wetlands is to educate the public of their ben- efits. If the public does not recognize the benefits of wetland preservation, wetlands will not be preserved. Protection can be accomplished only through the co- operative efforts of citizens. FEDERAL WETLAND PROTECTION PROGRAMS AND POLICIES The Federal Government protects wetlands di- rectly and indirectly through regulation, by acquisi- tion, or through incentives and disincentives as de- scribed in table 6. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the primary vehicle for Federal regulation of some of the activities that occur in wetlands. Other pro- grams, such as the "Swampbuster" program and the Coastal Management and Coastal Barriers Resources Acts, provide additional protection. Coastal wetlands generally benefit most from the current network of statutes and regulations. Inland wetlands are more vulnerable than coastal wetlands to degradation or loss because current statutes and policies provide them less comprehensive protection. Several of the major Fed- eral policies and programs affecting wetlands are dis- cussed in the following few pages. Also discussed are some of the States' roles in Federal wetland policies. The Clean Water Act The Federal Government regulates, through Sec- tion 404 of the Clean Water Act, some of the activi- ties that occur in wetlands. The Section 404 program originated in 1972, when Congress substantially amended the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and created a Federal regulatory plan to control the dis- charge of dredged or fill materials into wetlands and other waters of the United States. Discharges are com- monly associated with projects such as channel con- struction and maintenance, port development, fills to create dry land for development sites near the water, and water-control projects such as dams and levees. Other kinds of activities, such as the straightening of river channels to speed the flow of water downstream If the public does not recog- nize the benefits of wetland preservation, wetlands will not be preserved. 1 University of Texas. 2 National Biological Service. 58 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Table 6. Federal programs that have significant effects on wetlands in the United States. A, Regulations encouraging wetland conversion. B, Regulations discouraging or preventing wetland conversion. C, Acquisitions discouraging or preventing wetland conversion. D, Other policies and programs preventing or discouraging wetland conversion. [Abbrevations: AFA, All Federal Agencies; ASCS, Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service; BLM, Bureau of Land Management; Corps, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; CWS,Canadian wild I ife Service; DOD, Department of Defense; DOE, Department of Energy; DOI, Department of the Interior; DOT, Department of Transportation; A, ENCOURAGING WETLAND CONVERSION Program or Act Executive Order 12630, Constitutional Takings AFA Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1968 DOT Effect of program Provides a review process for agencies to protect against unintentional "takings" of private property.____________________________________ Highway construction can affect wetlands at every stage. Wetlands are often prime sites for highways. Federal Crop Insurance USDA Indirectly encourages farmers to place frequently inundated areas, including wetlands, into production. Federal Livestock Grazing USFS, BLM Overgrazing promotes the loss of riparian habitat. Flood Control Act of 1944 f P.L 78-534) Corps Authorized various flood-control projects resulting in wetland destruction. National Flood Insurance Program FEMA Encourages development in flood plains, which contain wetlands, by providing low-cost Federal insurance. Payment-in-Kind (PIK) Program USDA Indirectly encourages farmers to place previously unfarmed areas, including wetlands, into production. ________________________________ Small Reclamation Projects Acts of 1956 (70 Stat. 1044) DOI Encourages State and local participation in small western reclamation projects, which can destroy riparian habitat.________________________________ Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (P.L 95-87), (1977) DOI Establishes a program for regulating surface mining and reclaiming coal-mined lands, including wetlands, under the Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation, and Enforcement. Surface Transportation Revenue Act of 1991 (P.L 102-240) DOT Transportation projects directly and indirectly destroy wetlands. U.S. Tax Code IRS Encourages farmers to drain and clear wetlands through tax deductions and credits for development activities. Water Resources Development Act of 1976,1986,1988, 1990 (P.L.'s 94-587, 99-662,100-676,101-640) Corps Water development projects directly and indirectly destroy wetlands. B, DISCOURAGING OR PREVENTING WETLAND CONVERSION-ffepu/arVons Program or Act Effect of program Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (Superfund) (P.L. 96-510) (1980) * Coastal Barriers Resources Act (P.L. 96-348) (1982) * Coastal Zone Management Act (P.L. 92-583) (1972) Estuary Protection Act (P.L 90-454) (1968) * Federal Water Pollution Control (P.L. 92-500) (Clean Water Act) Section 404 (1972) Federal Water Project Recreation Act (P.L 89-72) (1965) Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1956 Migratory Bird Conservation Act {45 Stat. 1222) (1929) National Wildlife Refuge Acts (numerous Acts) National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-190) Ramsar Convention (Treaty), adopted 1973, enforced from 1975 Rivers and Harbors Act of 1938 (52 Stat. 802) Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899, Section 10 of the (30 Stat. 1151) Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (68 Stat. 666) (1954) Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, (P.L. 90-542) (1968) Wilderness Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 890) AFA NOAA NOAA DOI Corps, EPA FWS, NMFS DOI, Corps DOI FWS FWS AFA FWS Corps Corps FWS, NRCS DOI, USDA DOI, USDA Establishes liability of the U.S. Government for damages to natural resources over which the U.S. has sovereign rights. Requires the President to designate Federal officials to act as trustees for natural resources, and to conduct natural resource damage assessments. Designates various undeveloped coastal barrier islands for inclusion in the Coastal Barrier Resources System. Designated areas are ineligible for Federal financial assistance that may aid development. Provides Federal funding for wetlands programs in most coastal States, including the preparation of coastal zone management plans. Authorized the study and inventory of estuaries, and the Great Lakes, and provided for management of designated estuaries between DOI and the States. Regulates many activities that involve the disposal of dredged and fill materials in waters of the United States, including many wetlands. Recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement must be considered by Federal water projects. Authorizes Federal funds for acquiring land for waterfowl refuges. Authorizes the development and distribution of fish and wildlife information and the development of policies and procedures relating to fish and wildlife. Established a commission to approve the acquisition of migratory bird habitat Numerous statutes establish refuges, many of which contain significant wetland acreage. Requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement of all major Federal actions significantly affecting the environment. Convention maintains a list of wetlands of international importance and encourages the wise use of wetlands. Provides that "due regard" be given to wildlife conservation in planning Federal water projects. Prohibits the unauthorized obstruction or alteration of navigable waters. Authorizes the FWS to investigate wildlife conservation on NRCS small watershed projects. Protects designated river segments from damming and other alterations without a permit. Requires review of Federal lands for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System. Discussed in text. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 59 Table 6 Continued. [Abbrevatiorts Continued. EPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; FEMA, Federal Emergency Management Agency; FERC, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; FmHA, Farmer's Home Administration; FWS, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; GSA, General Services Administration; IRS, Internal Revenue Service; NMFS, National Marine Fisheries Service; NOAA. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; NFS, National Park Service; NRCS, Natural Resources Conservation Service; USCG, U.S. Coast Guard; USDA, U.S. Department of Agriculture; USFS, U.S. Forest Service] C, DISCOURAGING OR PREVENTING WETLAND CONVERSION Acquisitions Program or Act Imp^^tinfl Effect of program Coastal Wetland Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (P.L 101-646) (1990) Corps, FWS EPA, NMFS Provides for interagency wetlands restoration and conservation planning and acquisition in Louisiana, other coastal States, and the Trust Territories. Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-645} FWS Pays debts incurred by FWS for wetlands acquisition, and provides additional revenue sources. Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act (1937) FWS (Ch.899,50Stat.917) Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act FWS (P.L 96-366) (1980) Provides grants to States for acquiring, restoring, and maintaining wildlife areas. Identifies land and water in the Western Hemisphere critical for migratory nongame birds. Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (1964) (P.L 88-578) FWS, NPS Acquires wildlife areas. LeaAct<62Stat.238)(1948) FWS Authorizes the acquiring and developing of various waterfowl management areas in California. Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamps (1934} ___________________(Ch.71.48Stat.452) FWS Acquires wetland easements using revenues from fees paid by hunters for duck stamps._______________________________ North American Waterfowl Management Plan (1986) FWS, CWS Establishes a plan for managing waterfowl resources by various methods, such as acquiring wetlands.___________________________________ North American Wetlands Conservation Act (1989) (P.L 101-233) FWS Encourages public/private partnerships by providing matching grants to organizations for protecting, restoring, or enhancing wetlands._____________________ Surface Transportation Revenue Act of 1991 __________ ___ (P.L 102-240) DOT Authorizes funding for wetland mitigation banks for State departments of transportation._________________________________ Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife Conservation Purposes Act (62 Stat. 240) (1948) GSA, DOI Allows the GSA to transfer property to DOI, or States, for wildlife conservation. U.S. Tax Code Tax Reform Act of 1986 (P.L 99-514) IRS Provides deductions for donors of wetlands and to some nonprofit organizations. Water Bank Act (1970) (P.L 91-559} ASCS Leases wetlands and adjacent uplands from farmers for waterfowl habitat for 10-year periods. Wetlands Loan Act {1961} {P.L 87-383) FWS Provides interest-free loans for wetland acquisition and easements. D, DISCOURAGING OR PREVENTING WETLAND CONVERSION Other Policies and Programs Program or Act ''"9 Effect of program Endangered Species Act of 1973 (P.L 93-205) FWS Provides for the designation and protection of wildlife, fish, and plant species that are in danger of extinction. ____ * Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands (1977) AFA Requires Federal agencies to minimize impacts of Federal activities on wetlands. * Executive Order 11988, Protection of Floodplains (1977) AFA Requires Federal agencies to minimize impacts of Federal activities on flood plains. Executive Order 12580, Superfund Implementation (1987) DOI Directs DOI to develop rules for assessing damages under CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liabilities Act} as a natural resource trustee. Federal Noxious Weed Act (P.L 93-629) (1975) DOI, USDA DOE, DOD Authorizes controlling the spread of noxious weeds on Federal lands. Federal Power Act (41 Stat. 1063) (1920) FERC FERC will cooperate with other Federal agencies in assessing proposed power projects, such as dams. FERC must consider protection of fish and wildlife resources. ____ Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (1965) (P.L. 89-72) FWS Requires Federal agencies to consult with FWS before issuing permits for most water-resource projects. Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-624) NRCS Wetland Reserve Program purchases perpetual nondevelopment easements on farmed wetlands. Subsidizes restoration of croplands to wetlands. Food Security Act of 1985 (Swampbuster] (P.L. 99-198) ASCS, FWS, "Swampbuster" program suspends agricultural subsidies for farmers who convert wet- lands to agriculture. FmHA Conservation Easements program allows FmHA to eliminate some farm debts in exchange for long-term easements that protect wetlands and other areas._______ National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (P.L 89-669) DOI Provides the guidelines for managing National Wildlife Refuges. Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (P.L 101-646) FWS, USCG, EPA, Corps, NOAA Created a Federal program to prevent and control the spread of species that are aquatic nuisances. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-380) DOE, DOI, NOAA Enhanced the response to oil spills and required natural resource damage assessments. Tax Deductions for Conservation Easements (Section 6 of P.L 96-541) IRS Allows taxpayers to take a deduction for a qualified real property interest contributed to a conservation organization for conservation purposes. ______ U.S. Tax Code Reform Act of 1986 {P.L. 99-514} IRS Eliminates incentives for clearing land. Deductible conservation expenditures must be con- sistent with wetlands protection. Capital gains on converted wetlands treated as income. Water Resources Development Act of 1976, 1986, 1988,1990, (P.L's 94-587, 99-662,100-676,101-640) Corps States that future mitigation plans for Federal water projects should include "in kind" mitigation for bottom-land hardwood forests. 60 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES and clearing land, are regulated as Section 404 dis- charges if they involve discharges of more than inci- dental amounts of soil or other materials into wetlands or other waters. The Corps and the EPA share the responsibility for implementing the permitting program under Sec- tion 404 of the Clean Water Act However, Section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act gives the EPA authority to veto the permit if discharge materials at the selected sites would adversely affect such things as municipal water supplies, shellfish beds and fishery areas, wild- life, or recreational resources. By 1991, the EPA had vetoed 11 of several hundred thousand permits since the Act was passed (Schley and Winter, 1992). The review process for a Section 404 permit is shown in figure 39. After notice and opportunity for a public hearing, the Corps' District Engineer may is- sue or deny the permit. The District Engineer must comply with the EPA's Section 404(b)(l) Guidelines and must consider the public interest when evaluat- ing a proposed permit. Four questions related to the guidelines are considered during a review of an ap- plication: 1. Is the proposed discharge the least damaging prac- tical alternative? 2. Does the proposed discharge comply with other en- vironmental standards or regulations? 3. Will the proposed discharge significantly degrade wetlands? 4. Have all the appropriate and practical steps been taken to minimize potential harm to the wetlands? Wetland mitigation is often required, and if required, the permit applicant will need to develop a specific, detailed plan. Through a public interest review, the Corps tries to balance the benefits an activity may provide against the costs it may incur. The criteria applied in this pro- cess are the relative extent of the public and private need for the proposed structure or work and the ex- tent and permanence of the beneficial or detrimental effects on the public and private uses to which the area is suited. Some of the factors considered in the public interest review are listed in figure 39. Cumulative ef- fects of numerous piecemeal changes are considered in addition to the individual effects of the projects. The FWS, NOAA, and State fish and wildlife agencies, as the organizations in possession of most of the country's biological data, have important advi- sory roles in the Section 404 program. The FWS and NOAA (if a coastal area is involved) provide the Corps and the EPA with comments about the potential envi- ronmental effects of pending Section 404 permits. Other government agencies, industry, and the public are invited to participate through public notices of permit applications, hearings, or other information- collecting activities. However, the public interest re- view usually does not involve public comment unless the permit is likely to generate significant public in- terest or if the potential consequences of the permit are expected to be significant. All recommendations must be given full consideration by the Corps, but there is no requirement that they must be acted upon. APPLICANT SUBMITS ENGINEER FORM 4345 TO DISTRICT OFFICE r PERMIT ISSUED APPLICATION RECEIVED, ACKNOWL- EDGED, AND PROCESSED APPLICANT SIGNS AND RETURNS WITH FEE Figure 39. Overiew of a typical U.S. Army Corps of Engineers review process for Section 404 dredge-and-fill permit request. (Source: Modified from I.A. Kusler, Our National Wetland Heritage: A Protection Guide- book. Copyright (c) 1983 by the Environmental Law Institute. Reprinted with permission.) PUBLIC NOTICE ISSUED APPLICATION APPROVED NORMAL 30-DAY COMMENT PERIOD APPLICATION REVIEWED BY U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS APPLICATION EVALUATED REVIEW AND COMMENT BY APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES (EPA, FWS, AND OTHERS) APPLICATION DENIED Esthetics Recreation Fish values Land use Wildlife value Economics- Food production * Flood-damage prevention* Safety Conservation 1 Environmental concerns Historic value- PUBLIC HEARING MAY BE HELD National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 61 If the FWS or NOAA disagree with a permit approved by a District Engineer, they can request that the per- mit be reviewed at a higher level within the Corps. However, the Assistant Secretary of the Army has the unilateral right to refuse all requests for higher level reviews. The Assistant Secretary accepted the addi- tional review of 16 of the 18 requested out of the total 105,000 individual permits issued between 1985 and 1992 (Schley and Winter, 1992). Because many activities may cause the discharge of dredged and fill materials, and the potential effects of these activities differ, the Corps has issued general regulations to deal with a wide range of activities that could require a Section 404 permit. The Corps can forgo individual permit review by issuing general per- mits on a State, regional, or nationwide basis. Gen- eral permits cover specific categories of activities that the Corps determines will have minimal effects on the aquatic environment, including wetlands. General permits are designed to allow activities with minimal effects to begin with little, if any, delay or paperwork. General permits authorize approximately 75,000 ac- tivities annually that might otherwise require a per- mit (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1991); however, most activities in wetlands are not covered by general permits (Morris, 1991). Not all dredge and fill activities require a Section 404 permit. Many activities that cause the discharge of dredged and fill materials are exempt from Section 404. The areas specifically exempted from Section 404 include: normal farming, forestry, and ranching activi- ties; dike, dam, levee, and other navigation and trans- portation structure maintenance; construction of tem- porary sedimentation basins on construction sites; and construction or maintenance of farm roads, forest roads, or temporary roads for moving mining equip- ment (Morris, 1991). In addition, the Corps' flood- control and drainage projects and other Federal projects authorized by Congress and planned, fi- nanced, and constructed by a Federal agency also are exempt from the Section 404 permitting requirements if an adequate environmental impact statement is pre- pared. Not all methods of altering wetlands are regulated by Section 404. Common methods of altering wetlands are listed in table 7. Unregulated methods include: wetland drainage, the lowering of ground-water lev- els in areas adjacent to wetlands, permanent flooding of existing wetlands, deposition of material that is not specifically defined as dredged and fill material by the Clean Water Act, and wetland vegetation removal (Of- fice of Technology Assessment, 1984). State authority over the Federal Section 404 pro- gram is a goal of the Clean Water Act. Assumption of authority from the EPA has been completed only by Michigan and New Jersey. Under this arrangement, the EPA is responsible for approving State assumptions and retains oversight of the State Section 404 program, and the Corps retains the navigable waters permit pro- gram (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993). States cannot is- sue permits over EPA's objection, but EPA has the au- thority to waive its review for selected categories of permit applications. Few States have chosen to assume the program, in part because few Federal resources are available to assist States and assumption does not in- clude navigable waters (World Wildlife Fund, 1992). The Clean Water Act regulates dredge and fill activities that would adversely affect wetlands. Table 7. Methods of altering wetlands [Source: The Conservation Foundation, 1988, p. 15] PHYSICAL Filling adding any material to raise the bottom level of a wetland or to replace the wetland with dry land Draining removing the water from a wetland by ditching, tiling, pumping, and so forth Excavating dredging and removing soil and vegetation from a wetland Diverting water away preventing the flow of water into a wetland by removing water upstream, lowering lake levels, or lowering ground-water tables ^^^ Clearing removing vegetation by burning, digging, application of herbicide, scraping, mowing, or otherwise cutting Flooding raising water levels, either behind dams, by pumping, or otherwise channeling water into a wetland Diverting or withholding sediment trapping sediment by constructing dams, channels, or other types of projects, thereby inhibiting wetland regeneration in natural deposition areas such as deltas Shading placing pile-supported platforms or bridges over wetlands, causing vegetation to die because of a lack of adequate sunlight Conducting activities in adjacent areas disrupting the interactions between wetlands and adjacent land areas, or incidentally affecting wetlands through activities at adjoining sites CHEMICAL Changing nutrient levels increasing or decreasing nutrient levels within the local water and or soil system, ______________forcing wetland plant community changes___________________________ Introducing toxics adding toxic compounds to a wetland either intentionally (for example, herbicide treatment to reduce vegetation) or unintentionally, adversely affecting wetland plants and animals ' '"- " BIOLOGICAL Grazing consumption and compaction of vegetation by domestic or wild animals Disrupting natural populations reducing populations of existing species, introducing exotic species, or otherwise disturbing resident organisms 62 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES "Swampbuster" removes Federal incentives for the agricultural conversion of wetlands. The Coastal Zone Manage- ment Program provides States with some control over wetland resources. "Swampbuster" The program that seeks to remove Federal incen- tives for the agricultural conversion of wetlands is part of the Food Security Act of 1985 and 1990, and is known as "Swampbuster." Swampbuster renders farm- ers who drained or otherwise converted wetlands for the purpose of planting crops after December 23,1985, ineligible for most Federal farm subsidies. Through Swampbuster, Congress directed the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to slow wetland conversion by agricultural activities (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). The government programs that Swampbuster specifically affects are listed in Section 1221 of the Food Security Act. If a farmer loses eligibility for USDA programs under Swampbuster, he or she may regain eligibility during the next year simply by not using wetlands for growing crops. Swampbuster is ad- ministered by USDA's Consolidated Farm Service Agency. The NRCS and the FWS serve as technical consultants (World Wildlife Fund, 1992). The Swampbuster was amended by the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 to create the Wetland Reserve Program. The Wetland Re- serve Program provides financial incentives to farm- ers to restore and protect wetlands through the use of long-term easements (usually 30-year or permanent). The program provides farmers the opportunity to of- fer a property easement for purchase by the USDA and to recieve cost-share assistance (from 50 to 75 percent) to restore converted wetlands. Landowners make bids to participate in the program. The bids represent the payment they are willing to accept for granting an easement to the Federal Government. The Consoli- dated Farm Service Agency ranks the bids according to the environmental benefit per dollar. Easements require that farmers implement conservation plans approved by the NRCS and the FWS. Enrollment in the pilot program was authorized for nine States. The program's goal is to enroll 1 million acres by 1995 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). Funding for this program is appropriated annually by Congress (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1994). Because 74 percent of United States' wetlands are on private land, programs that provide incentives for private landown- ers to preserve their wetlands, such as the Wetland Reserve Program, are critical for protecting wetlands (Council of Environmental Quality, 1989). Coastal Wetlands Protection Programs The 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and the 1982 Coastal Barriers Resources Act protect coastal wetlands. The Coastal Zone Management Act encour- ages States (35 States and territories are eligible, in- cluding the Great Lakes States) to establish voluntary coastal zone management plans under NOAA's Coastal Zone Management Program and provides funds for developing and implementing the plans. The NOAA also provides technical assistance to States for developing and implementing these programs. For Federal approval, the plans must demonstrate enforce- able standards that provide for the conservation and environmentally sound development of coastal re- sources. The program provides States with some con- trol over wetland resources by requiring that Federal activities be consistent with State coastal zone man- agement plans, which can be more stringent than Fed- eral standards (World Wildlife Fund, 1992, p. 87). A State also can require that design changes or mitiga- tion requirements be added to Section 404 permits to be consistent with the State coastal zone management plan. The Coastal Zone Management Act has provided as much as 80 percent of the matching-funds grants to States to develop plans for coastal management that emphasize wetland protection (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993). Some States pass part of the grants on to local governments. The Act's authorities are limited to wet- lands within a State's coastal zone boundary, the defi- nition of which differs among States. As of 1990, 23 States had federally approved plans. The 1982 Coastal Barriers Resources Act denies Federal subsidies for development within undevel- oped, unprotected coastal barrier areas, including wetlands, designated as part of the Coastal Barrier Resources System. Congress designates areas for in- clusion in the Coastal Barriers Resource System on the basis of some of the following criteria (Watzin, 1990): Size Development status Composition Wind, wave, and tidal energies Associated aquatic habitat, including adjacent wetlands In addition, States, local governments, and con- servation organizations owning lands that were "oth- erwise protected" could have their lands added to this system until May 1992. ("Otherwise protected" lands are areas within undeveloped coastal barriers that were already under some form of protection.) Once in the Coastal Barriers Resources System, these areas are rendered ineligible for almost all Federal financial subsidies for programs that might encourage develop- ment. In particular, these lands no longer qualify for Federal flood insurance, which discourages develop- ment because coastal lands are frequently subject to flooding and damage from hurricanes and other storms. The FWS is responsible for mapping these areas and approves lands to be included in the system. The purposes of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act are to minimize the loss of human life, to reduce damage to fish and wildlife habitats and other valuable re- sources, and to reduce wasteful expenditure of Fed- eral revenues (Watzin, 1990). In the future, eligible surplus government land will be included if approved by the FWS. About 95 percent of the 788,000 acres added to the system in 1990 along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts consists of coastal wetlands and near-shore waters (World Wildlife Fund, 1992). Flood-Plain and Wetland Protection Orders Executive Orders 11988, Floodplain Manage- ment, and 11990, Protection of Wetlands, were signed by President Carter in 1977. The purpose of these Executive Orders was to ensure protection and proper management of flood plains and wetlands by Federal agencies. The Executive Orders require Federal agen- cies to consider the direct and indirect adverse effects of their activities on flood plains and wetlands. This requirement extends to any Federal action within a flood plain or a wetland except for routine mainte- National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 63 nance of existing Federal facilities and structures. The Clinton administration has proposed revising Execu- tive Order 11990 to direct Federal agencies to consider wetland protection and restoration planning in the larger scale watershed/ecosystem context. WETLAND DELINEATION STANDARDS The Corps published, in 1987, the Corps of En- gineers Wetland Delineation Manual, a technical manual that provides guidance to Federal agencies about how to use wetland field indicators to identify and delineate wetland boundaries (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1987). In January of 1989, the EPA, Corps, SCS, and FWS adopted a single manual for de- lineating wetlands under the Section 404 and Swampbuster programs The Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurixdictional Wetlands (commonly referred to as the "1989 Manual"). The "1989 Manual" establishes a national standard for identifying and delineating wetlands by specifying the technical criteria used to determine the presence of the three wetland characteristics: wetland hydrology, wa- ter-dependent vegetation, and soils that have devel- oped under anaerobic conditions (U.S. Environmen- tal Protection Agency, 1991). In 1991, the President's Council on Competitive- ness proposed revisions to the 1989 Manual because of some concern that nonwetland areas were regularly being classified as wetlands (Environmental Law Re- porter, 1992a). The proposed 1991 Manual was char- acterized by many wetland scientists as politically based rather than scientifically based. In September of 1992, Congress authorized the National Academy of Science to conduct a $400,000 study of the meth- ods used to identify and delineate wetlands (Environ- mental Law Reporter, 1992b). On August 25, 1993, the Clinton administration's wetland policy, pro- claimed that, "Federal wetlands policy should be based upon the best science available" (White House Office of Environmental Policy, 1993) and the 1987 Corps Manual is the sole delineation manual for the Federal Government until the National Academy of Sciences completes its study (White House Office of Environmental Policy, 1993). MITIGATION Mitigation is the attempt to alleviate some or all of the detrimental effects arising from a given action. Wetland mitigation replaces an existing wetland or its functions by creating a new wetland, restoring a former wetland, or enhancing or preserving an exist- ing wetland. This is done to compensate for the au- thorized destruction of the existing wetland. Mitiga- tion commonly is required as a condition for receiv- ing a permit to develop a wetland. Wetland mitigation can be conducted directly on a case-by-case onsite basis, or through a banking sys- tem, Onsite mitigation requires that a developer cre- ate a wetland as close as possible to the site where a wetland is to be destroyed. This usually involves a one- to-one replacement. A mitigation bank is a designated wetland that is created, restored, or enhanced to compensate for fu- ture wetland loss through development. It may be and usually is located somewhere other than near the site to be destroyed and built by someone other than the developer. The currency of a mitigation bank is the mitigation credit. "Mitigation banks require systems for valuing the compensation credits produced and for determining the type and number of credits needed as compensation for any particular project. ***Mitiga- tion bank credit definitions are an attempt to identify those features [of wetland] which allow reasonable ap- proximations of replacement" (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1994, p. 63). Wetland evaluation methods have been developed or are being developed to address the problem of evaluating two different wetlands so that the degradation of one can be offset by the resto- ration, enhancement, or creation of the other and to assign either a qualitative or quantitative value to each wetland. When buying the credits, developers pay a proportionate cost toward acquiring, restoring, main- taining, enhancing, and monitoring the mitigation bank wetland. Banks cover their costs by selling cred- its to those who develop wetlands, or by receiving a taxpayer subsidy. Several problems are associated with wetland mitigation. The concept of wetland compensation may actually encourage destruction of natural wetlands if people believe that wetlands can be easily replaced. A 1990 Florida Department of Environmental Regula- tion study examined the success of wetland creation projects and found that the success rate of created tidal wetlands was 45 percent, whereas the success rate for created freshwater wetlands was only 12 percent. (Redmond, 1992). Figure 40 shows the relative success of wetland mitigation projects overall in south Florida. The apparent factor controlling the lower success rate for freshwater wetlands was the difficulty in duplicat- ing wetland hydrology, that is, water-table fluctua- tions, frequency and seasonality of flooding, and ground-water/surface-water interactions. A study of wetland mitigation practices in eight States revealed that in most of the States, more wet- land acreage was destroyed than was required to be created or restored, resulting in a net loss of acreage when mitigation was included in a wetlands permit (Kentula and others, 1992). Less than 55 percent of the permits included monitoring of the project by site visit. A limited amount of information exists about the number of acres of wetlands affected by mitigation or the effectiveness of particular mitigation techniques because of the lack of followup. Several studies in Rorida reported that as many as 60 percent of the re- quired mitigation projects were never even started (Lewis, 1992). In addition, the mitigation wetland commonly was not the same type of wetland that was destroyed, which resulted in a net loss of some wet- land types. (See article "Wetland Restoration and Cre- ation" in this volume.) RECENT PRESIDENTIAL WETLAND PROTECTION INITIATIVES In his 1988 Presidential address and in his 1990 budget address to Congress, President Bush echoed the recommendations of the National Wetland Policy Forum. The Forum was convened in 1987 by the Con- servation Foundation at the request of EPA. The short- H Federal wetlands policy should be based upon the best science available." 15 p a3 10 cc Q. li. O CC EXPLANATION EH] All goals met EPl Some goals met r~l Few goals met B Incomplete Figure 40. Status of 40 wetland mitigation projects in south Florida. The average age of the projects was less than 3 years. (Source: Modified from Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993.) 64 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES "No nef loss" of wetlands is a national goal. term recommendation of the forum was to decrease wetland losses and increase wetland restoration and creation the concept of "no net loss" as a national goal. This implied that when wetland loss was un- avoidable, creation and restoration should replace de- stroyed wetlands (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993). On August 25, 1993, President Clinton unveiled his new policy for managing America's wetland re- sources. The program was developed by the Inter- agency Working Group on Federal Wetlands Policy, a group chaired by the White House Office on Environ- mental Policy with participants from the EPA, the Corps, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, In- terior, Justice, and Transportation. The Admin- istration's proposals mix measures that tighten restric- tions on activities affecting wetlands in some cases and relax restrictions in other areas. The Clinton policy en- dorses the goal of "no net loss" of wetlands; however, it clearly refers to "no net loss" of wetland acreage rather than "no net loss" of wetland functions. The President's wetland proposal would expand Federal authority under the Section 404 program to regulate the draining of wetlands in addition to regu- lating dredging and filling of wetlands. Other proposed changes to the Federal permitting program include the requirement that most Section 404 permit applications be approved or disapproved within 90 days, and the addition of an appeal process for applicants whose permits are denied. The EPA and the Corps are di- rected to relax regulatory restrictions that cause only minor adverse effects to wetlands such as activities affecting very small areas. The Clinton policy calls for avoiding future wet- land losses by incorporating wetland protection into State and local government watershed-management planning. This new policy also significantly expands the use of mitigation banks to compensate for feder- ally approved wetland development or loss. Clinton's proposals relaxed some of the current restrictions on agricultural effects on wetlands and in- creased funding for incentives to preserve and restore wetlands on agricultural lands. The administration policy excluded 53 million acres of "prior converted croplands" from regulation as wetlands. Also, author- ity over wetland programs affecting agriculture was shifted from the FWS to the NRCS and proposed in- creased funding for the Wetlands Reserve Program, which pays farmers to preserve and restore wetlands on their property. References Cited Conservation Foundation, 1988, Protecting America's wet- lands An action agenda: Washington, D.C., The Con- servation Foundation, p. 15. Council of Environmental Quality, 1989, Environmental trends: Washington, D.C., Office of the President, Coun- cil of Environmental Quality, p. 152. Environmental Law Reporter, 1992a, Agencies working to resolve controversy, official says: Washington, D.C., Bureau of National Affairs, v. 23, no. 13, p. 924. ____1992b, Reilly favors return to 1987 manual, cites emerging consensus on delineation: Washington, D.C., Bureau of National Affairs, v. 23, no. 17, p. 1,260. Kentula, Mary, Sifneos, Jean, Brooks, Robert, Gwin, Stephanie, Holland, Cindy, and Sherman, Arthur, 1992, An approach to decisionmaking in wetland restoration and creation: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-92/150,151 p. Kusler, J.A., 1983, Our national wetland heritage A pro- tection guidebook: Washington, D.C., Environmental Law Institute, p. 62. Lewis, Roy, 1992, Why Florida needs mitigation banking: National Wetlands Newsletter, v. 14, no. 1, p. 7. Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G., 1993, Wetlands: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 722 p. Morris, Marya, 1991, Wetland protection A local govern- ment handbook: Chicago, 111., American Planning As- sociation, 31 p. Office of Technology Assessment, 1984, Wetlands Their use and regulation: Washington, D.C., OTA-0 206, p. 168-169. Redmond, Ann, 1992, How successful is mitigation?: Wash- ington, D.C., National Wetlands Newsletter, v. 14, no. 1, p. 5-6. Schley, Terry, and Winter, Linda, 1992, New 404(q) MOA diluting EPA's role: Washington, D.C., National Wetlands Newsletter, Environmental Law Institute, v. 14, no. 6, p. 8. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1987, Corps of Engineers wet- lands delineation manual: Vicksburg, Miss., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Technical Report Y-87-1, p. 1. ____1994, National wetland mitigation banking study Wetland mitigation banking: Washington, D.C., Environ- mental Law Institute, IWR Report 94-WMB-6, 178 p. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1991, Proposed re- visions to the Federal manual for delineating wetlands: Washington, D.C., Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Wa- tersheds, p. 1-4. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992, Digest of Federal re- source laws of interest to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser- vice: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Legislative Services, p. 26. Want, William, 1993, Law of wetlands regulation: Deerfield, 111., Clark Boardman Callaghan, p. 13-2. Watzin, M.C., 1990, Coastal Barrier Resources System map- ping process, in Federal coastal wetland mapping pro- gram: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 90 (18), p. 21-26. White House Office of Environmental Policy, 1993, Protect- ing America's wetlands A fair, flexible, and effective approach: the White House, Office of Environmental Policy, p. 15. World Wildlife Fund, 1992, Statewide wetlands strategies A guide to protecting and managing the resource: Wash- ington, D.C., Island Press, 268 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Todd H. Votteler, 4312 Larchmont Avenue, Dallas, TX 75205; Thomas A. Muir, U.S. Geological Survey, 413 National Center, Reston, VA 22092 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 65 Wetland Management and Research Wetland Research by Federal Agencies By Richard E. Coleman 1 , Edward T. LaRoe2, and Russell F. Theriot' Because wetlands were drained and filled for farming and building purposes during the last several hundred years, more than half of the original wetlands in the United States have been lost (Prayer and oth- ers, 1983). Only during the last quarter century has society begun to understand the value of wetlands and the particular benefits that they provide. (See the ar- ticle "History of Wetlands in the Conterminous Uni- ted States" in this volume.) This understanding has been broadened by the concerted efforts of many public and private researchers. This article addresses the research contributions of Federal agencies: which agencies are involved in wetland research, why they are involved, and the nature of their research. In an effort to develop a strategy for preventing the further loss of wetlands, the Committee on Earth and Environmental Sciences established a Wetlands Research Subcommittee to determine the status of wetland research being conducted by Federal agen- cies. These efforts resulted in an unpublished report that presented a national inventory and data base of ongoing research and addressed future research needs (Wetlands Research Subcommittee, unpub. data, 1992). Data presented in the following few pages are drawn largely from these findings. During 1992, Federal wetland research expendi- tures were about $63 million. A total Federal invest- ment of more than $250 million is distributed over the lifetime of the existing projects. The amount of Fed- eral research spending per State is depicted in figure 41. THE REASONS FOR FEDERAL INVOLVEMENT IN WETLAND RESEARCH Scientists from many organizations, including those in the private sector, those from colleges and universities, and those from public institutions, are engaged in wetland research. Typically, each organi- zation has its own reasons for being involved in wet- land research. Federal wetland research may be done because it is part of an agency's mission, is part of an agency's responsibilities as outlined by the Congress, or is otherwise in the national interest. When research is mission oriented, it is part of the basic work of an agency. Mission-oriented Fed- eral agency wetland research generally is done for one of five reasons: 1. Ownership The agency owns and is responsible for managing wetlands. The agency is the stew- ard of its land. 2. Public trust responsibilities An agency may be responsible for ensuring the long-term survival of certain fish and other wildlife resources, which are EXPLANATION il , Contributing research Not directly related to wetlands O S Focused research "2 |_ Directly related to wetlands Figure 41 . Cost of Federal agency wetland research, per State, during fiscal year 1992. (Source: Federal Wetlands Research Inventory and Database, unpub. data, 1992; compiled by the Wetlands Research and Technology Center, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.) 1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2 National Biological Service. 66 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES The understanding of wetlands as a valued resource has been broadened by the concerted efforts of many public and private researchers. held in trust for the public. Wetlands form critical habitat and are part of the ecological system on which many of these species depend. 3. Regulatory responsibilities Because wetlands provide so many benefits to society, activities that adversely affect them may be subject to regula- tion. Some agencies, therefore, have regulatory authority over wetlands. 4. Development activities Federal agencies have an obligation to avoid projects or actions that may adversely affect wetlands, to minimize the nega- tive effects of their activities on wetlands, and to mitigate unavoidable wetland losses. These re- quirements apply to all Federal agencies, but those regularly involved in large-scale develop- ment projects support specific wetland research activities. 5. Science Agencies that have missions directly re- lated to science may conduct or support research on wetlands. Although many different levels of government may have mission-oriented research, Federal agency wetland research activities relate to congressionally mandated responsibilities. Most significant among these are provisions that relate to: Interstate commerce Wetlands are part of the en- tire physical landscape, from river headwaters to the sea. They form parts of water bodies that pro- vide shipping, transportation, and navigation. Some wetlands are used as routes for trade in in- terstate commerce, and wetland products are used in interstate trade. What happens to wet- lands in one State can affect wetland activities, benefits, and uses in another State. International treaties The benefits and uses of wetlands are the subject of international treaties, such as the Ramsar Convention of 1971 and the Migratory Bird Treaty, which are the exclusive domain of the Federal Government. International efforts that result from those treaties, such as ef- forts between Canada, Mexico, and the United States to restore declining wetland-dependent waterfowl populations, have an essential Federal element. (See article "Wetlands as Bird Habitat" in this volume.) There is also an intrinsic national interest in wet- land research. Where wetland questions or issues are widespread or shared by jurisdictions, or affect the national health, safety, or welfare. Congress may de- termine that there is a national interest that justifies Federal agency research. TYPES OF FEDERAL WETLAND RESEARCH The Federal Wetlands Research Inventory and Database reported in 1992 that 18 Federal agencies were conducting some wetland research (Wetlands Research Subcommittee, unpub. data, 1992). Two types of research were included in the inventory focused and contributing. Focused research is spe- cifically designed to investigate wetlands or some component thereof; contributing research provides some information about wetlands but is not directly related to wetlands. Research categories also were identified by the Inventory and Database. These categories were de- fined by the subject of the wetland research being conducted, and were listed in five topical areas: 1. Wetland processes Research to address factors that affect the type, location, size, and functions of wetlands. 2. Wetland functions Research to determine the role wetlands play and the benefits they provide. 3. Human-induced stresses Research to improve ways of detecting or quantifying the effects of Delineation and Identification 5 percent AGENCY Army Corps of Engineers Corps Agricultural Research Service ARS Bureau of Mines BOM Bureau of Reclamation BOR Department of Energy DOE Federal Highway Administration FHA Minerals Management Service MMS National Oceanic and NOAA Atmospheric Administration National Park Service NPS National Science Foundation NSF Office of Surface Mining OSM Smithsonian Institute SMI Soil Conservation Service* SCS Tennessee Valley Authority TVA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS U.S. Forest Service USFS U.S. Geological Survey USGS RESEARCH CATEGORY PROCESSES $ 1,072,000 814,000 316,000 25,000 2,698,000 77,000 500,000 287,000 1,046,000 269,000 0 847,000 32,000 55,000 150,000 2,366,000 213,000 6,534,000 FUNCTIONS $ 438,000 0 49,000 25,000 2,126,000 39,000 0 2,144,000 0 0 0 100,000 0 167,000 586,000 1,027,000 409,000 844,000 HUMAN- INDUCED STRESSES $ 154,000 65,000 0 0 2,195,000 29,000 0 523,000 194,000 0 0 32,000 0 70,000 0 7,039,000 13,000 3,456,000 DELINEATION AND IDENTIFICATION $ 364,000 0 0 0 1,279,000 347,000 0 100,000 0 0 0 88,000 0 0 0 771,000 0 118,000 MANAGEMENT $ 4,818,000 909,000 0 150,000 2,110,000 100,000 0 165,000 531,000 0 147,000 1,000 2,014,000 2,674,000 2,320,000 4,916,000 412,000 1,567,000 * Became the Natural Resources Conservation Service in 1994. Figure 42. Summary of Federal agency wetland research expenditures by research category during 1992. (Source: Federal Wetlands Research Inventory and Database, unpub. data, 1992; compiled by the Wetlands Research and Technology Center, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 67 stress on wetlands, or of determining stress thresh- olds of wetlands. 4. Wetland delineation and identification Research on methods and techniques to identify wetlands and delineate wetland boundaries. 5. Management Research to develop tools and tech- nologies to maintain, restore, and construct wet- lands. Figure 42 depicts the expenditures on Federal re- search in each of these categories in 1992. Individual research studies may span several of these categories; however, these categories represent a convenient way to describe existing research activities. In addition to distinguishing the type of research, it also is useful to distinguish the type of wetland being studied. Because ecological processes and functions differ with the type of wetland, research needs and techniques also differ. Disappearing coastal and bottom-land hardwood wetlands are among the major areas of research. Figure 43 shows Federal ex- penditures forresearch on different types of wetlands. (See article "Wetland Definitions and Classification in the Conterminous United States" for an explana- tion of wetland types.) AGENCY ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Federal wetland research is conducted through- out the Nation. Twelve agencies listed in the Wetland Research Subcommittee's report and discussed below have wetland research expenditures of $1 million or more. Although not discussed below, other agencies with less funding that also contribute to wetland re- search are the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Mines, Bureau of Reclamation, Minerals Manage- ment Service, and Office of Surface Mining; the Fed- eral Highway Administration's Department of Trans- portation: and the National Science Foundation. Department of the Interior Wetland research activities in the Department of the Interior relate to its responsibilities as the primary steward of America's natural resources. The Depart- ment of the Interior performs basic scientific research on wetland processes and functions and applied fo- cused research on human-induced stresses, delinea- tion and identification, and management of wetlands. The Department assumes ownership and management responsibilities for wetlands through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Park Ser- vice, and scientific research responsibilities through the activities of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the National Biological Service (NBS). Research funding for the Department was greater than $30.5 million in 1992 (figs. 42-43). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: The FWS has stewardship responsibilities for fish and other wild- life (such as migratory birds, anadromous fish, and endangered species), their habitats, and for wildlife refuges. As a major Federal landowner, the FWS pro- tects and manages wetlands and associated habitats on more than 90 million acres of national wildlife refuges and provides advice about and technical sup- port for regulatory activities and trust species to other Federal, State, and private landowners. The FWS, through the National Wetlands Inventory program, provides detailed wetland maps for the Nation, and also reports to Congress every 10 years the status and trends of the Nation's wetlands. (See article "Wetland Mapping and Inventory" in this volume.) Research fo- cuses on improved methods and tools for identifying and delineating different wetland types. U.S. Geological Survey: The USGS provides geo- logic, hydrologic, and topographic information to assist Federal, State, and local governments, the pri- vate sector, and individual citizens in making man- agement decisions about the use of land and water What happen* to wetlands in one State can affect wetland activities, benefits, and uses in another State. AGENCY Army Corps of Engineers Corps Agricultural Research Service ARS Bureau of Mines BOM Bureau of Reclamation BOR Department of Energy DOE Federal Highway Administration FHA Minerals Management Service MMS National Oceanic and MOAA Atmospheric Administration NUAA National Park Service NFS National Science Foundation NSF Office of Surface Mining OSM Smithsonian Institute SMI Soil Conservation Service SCS Tennessee Valley Authority TVA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ERA U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS U.S. Forest Service USFS U.S. Geological Survey USGS MARINE S 0 0 0 0 153,000 5,000 250,000 193,000 7,000 0 0 420,000 184,000 0 150,000 428,000 0 1,482,000 W ESTUARINE $ 1,750,000 20,000 0 0 418,000 5,000 250,000 2,925,000 818,000 170,000 0 355,000 806,000 0 225,000 2,949,000 0 3,587,000 ETLAND TYPES RIVERINE $ 1,529,000 1,053,000 0 50,000 1,855,000 2,000 0 66,000 428,000 13,000 0 267,000 323,000 84,000 736,000 5,202,000 102,000 2,606,000 * PALUSTRINE $ 2,036,000 650,000 0 50,000 2,640,000 193,000 0 35,000 480,000 86,000 64,000 26,000 352,000 531,000 1,421,000 4,033,000 945,000 2,880,000 LACUSTRINE $ 824,000 65,000 0 100,000 406,000 0 0 0 58,000 0 0 0 268,000 2,084,000 270,000 3,564,000 0 1,963,000 * Descrepancies in total expenditures occur because some agencies did not include constructed wetlands when reporting these figures. Figure 43. Summary of Federal agency wetland research expenditures by wetland type during 1992. (Sources: Federal Wetlands Research Inventory and Database, unpub. data, 1992; compiled by the Wetlands Research and Technology Center, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.) 68 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Core sample being collected by the U.S. Geological Survey at a fen in Minn., tells the sediment history of this particular wetland. (Photograph by Nancy Rybicki, U.S. Geological Survey.) The National Biological Service collects turtlegrass near Chan- deleur Islands, La., to study the effects of water quality on the plant. (Photograph courtesy of The National Biological Service.) The National Biological Service collects bulltongue in a marsh near Lake Salvador, La., for use in greenhouse experiments in salinity and flooding tolerance. (Photograph courtesy of The National Biological Service.) resources. The USGS's wetland research activities are an important part of the agency's activities. Research focuses on the geology, chemistry, hydrology, and bi- ology of wetlands and their interactions. Studies are conducted in selected wetlands to determine the pro- cesses responsible for the formation and evolution of wetlands and to increase understanding of wetland functions. Some specific topics that hydrologic stud- ies address are ground-water/surface-water interac- tions; the role of wetlands in water-quality improve- ment; the relation between flood-plain wetlands, riv- erine and estuarine hydrology, and water quality; and the relation of light and water chemistry to aquatic plant distribution in tidal waters. National Park Service: Wetland research by the National Park Service is primarily issue driven; it is management-oriented and focuses on protecting re- sources, mitigating the effects of human actions on wetlands, and restoring natural wetland functions where they have been disturbed by past or ongoing human activities. National Biological Service: The NBS was estab- lished in October 1993 and, therefore, was not in- cluded in the report by the Wetland Research Sub- committee and not included in the graphs in figures 42-43. However, it is a large player in research being done on wetlands and, therefore, is included in this discussion. The NBS inventories and monitors wet- lands and conducts biological research on many aspects of wetlands; in fact, most activities of the NBS are wetland related. It provides biological information and research support to management agencies within the Federal Government. Department of Energy The Department of Energy's role in and respon- sibilities toward wetland research are related to its compliance with environmental regulations. The Department does this by assessing the environmen- tal effects of its activities on lands, including wet- lands, under its jurisdiction, and by operating and developing facilities in ways that maintain and en- hance environmental quality while providing efficient energy production, transmission, and use. Research focuses on supporting these activities. Research fund- ing was about $10.3 million in 1992 (figs. 42^3). Department of Defense Wetland research activities of the Department of Defense result primarily from legislation pertaining to the mission of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). The Army, through the Corps, is assigned responsibility for much of the Nation's water-re- source development activities, including efforts to protect, conserve, restore, and establish new wet- lands. In performing its development mission, such as keeping waterways open by dredging or building levees to protect cities from flooding, the Corps di- rectly affects wetlands and must consider the effects of its activities. The Corps has established a formal Wetlands Research Program to support its wetland- related responsibilities. This program is designed to include both basic and applied research that empha- size the Corps strengths in engineering design and National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH construction, stewardship, and management. Re- search funding for the Corps in 1992 was about $6.5 million (figs. 42-43). Department of Agriculture The Department of Agriculture performs wetland research through several of its agencies; the Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly known as the Soil Conservation Service), the Agricultural Re- search Service, and the U.S. Forest Service. Research funding for the Department of Agriculture was about $4.5 million in 1992 (figs. 42^3). Natural Resources Conservation Service: The Natural Resources Conservation Service assists other Federal, State, and local governments in resource conservation activities that include wetland protec- tion. Their authority covers mainly lands with high potential for conversion to agricultural uses. The Natural Resources Conservation Service's plant materials centers develop new varieties of plants and the technology for using plants to solve soil and water-conservation problems. They also provide for the commercial production of these plants. Some of the centers conduct investigations on how to reestab- lish marsh vegetation along eroding tidal shores in the mid-Atlantic States and the Gulf Coast States from Alabama to Mexico. Projects are underway at other centers to develop new varieties of plants and encour- age plant reproduction, to develop techniques for es- tablishing and maintaining restored and created fresh- water wetlands, and to design and construct wetlands that act as biological filters of agricultural runoff. Economic Research Service: Although the Eco- nomic Research Service is not one of the agencies listed in the Wetland Research Subcommittee report, its research is integral to oversight of the Wetland Reserve Program by the Natural Resources Conser- vation Service (see the article "Wetland Protection Legislation" in this volume), and is, therefore, men- tioned in this discussion. The Economic Research Service conducts cost and benefit comparison stud- ies to determine effective economic incentives asso- ciated with wetland conservation or destruction. Because the Wetland Reserve Program is voluntary, research focuses on identifying costs that limit farm- ers' participation. Agricultural Research Service: The Agricultural Research Service's mission includes development of technology needed to ensure maintenance of environ- mental quality and natural resources. Their research supports implementation of Federal agricultural leg- islation and development of new agricultural practices that produce less off-site contamination. Many pro- grams indirectly contribute to national wetland goals by improving management of basins that drain into wetlands. U.S. Forest Service: The U.S. Forest Service con- ducts research to support improved management of Federal, State, and private forests; the research com- prises efforts to describe ecosystem dynamics and to develop improved technology for restoring and reha- bilitating forested wetlands. Research is conducted on the role of flowing water in sustaining chemical, physical, and biological processes integral to the func- tioning of wetland and riparian ecosystems. The For- The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers collects water-level data at a bottom-land hardwood wetland located along the Cache River, Ark. (Photograph courtesy of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.) The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dewatered this freshwater wetland at a restoration site at Kenilworth Marsh in Maryland to facilitate planting. Dewatering was achieved by building temporary dikes made from water-filled tubes designed by the Corps for this purpose. (Photograph courtesy of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.) est Service also conducts studies of technological improvements used for reforesting wetland and ripar- ian sites, which involves understanding how tree spe- cies adapt to flooding. Other areas of study include establishing understory vegetation, restoring wetland hydrology, and rehabilitating fish and other wildlife habitat. Department of Commerce The Department of Commerce conducts its re- search through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. In 1992, funding for research by the Department was about $3 million (figs. 42-43). National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra- tion: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric 70 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES National Marine Fisheries Service scientists study the effects of oyster- shell reefs on sedimentation and use by marine organisms in this created wetland at Swansboro Marsh, N.C. (Photograph by David L. Meyer, National Marine Fisheries Service.) The information derived from broad-scope, individual agency research may complement that of other agencies. Administration's (NOAA) mission is to manage our ocean and coastal resources, describe and predict changes in the Earth's oceans and atmosphere, and promote its global stewardship through scientific re- search and service. Three of NOAA's five organiza- tions are directly involved in wetland research: the National Marine Fisheries Service, the National Ocean Service, and the Office of Oceanic and Atmo- spheric Research. NOAA also has a relevant agency- wide program, the Coastal Ocean Program, which supports management of the coastal ocean environ- ment. The Coastal Ocean Program is intended to pro- vide scientific products that support coastal ocean management through improved understanding and prediction of environmental quality, fishery re- sources, and coastal hazards. One of the Coastal Ocean Program's component programs seeks to un- derstand and quantify the relation between estuarine habitat and coastal ocean productivity. Initial re- National Marine Fisheries Service scientists, using a drop sampler, collect aquatic organisms in a salt marsh on Calveston Island, Tex. This is often done to assess damages following an oil spill. (Photograph by Lawrence P. Rozas, National Marine Fisheries Service.) search has been focused on locating and determin- ing rates of loss of seagrasses, emergent marshes, and adjacent uplands using satellite and aerial photogra- phy. Research is being conducted on the functional attributes of these habitats and their capability of be- ing restored. National Marine Fisheries Service: This or- ganization is the Federal steward of the Nation's living marine resources, from 200 miles offshore (the sea- ward extent of the Nation's assessment of mineral and energy sources) to the freshwater tributaries used by anadromous species for spawning. National Marine Fisheries Service's scientists conduct basic and ap- plied research to advance understanding of wetland habitat functioning in response to natural and human- induced environmental changes, to develop improved techniques for habitat restoration and assessment, and to support the habitat permit review process. The Na- tional Marine Fisheries Service's Restoration Center develops and implements habitat restoration plans that seek to restore, replace, or acquire the equiva- lent of the resources determined to have been injured by releases of oil or hazardous substances to the en- vironment. National Ocean Service: This organization ad- ministers programs that provide support for manag- ing marine environments. It manages a national net- work of marine sanctuaries and estuarine research reserves. The estuarine research reserves, throughout the National Estuarine Research Reserves System, are established, managed, and maintained with the help of State authorities to assure their long-term protec- tion. Research activities are used to facilitate manage- ment of wetlands. Priorities change biennially and have included nonpoint-source pollution (1993-94) and habitat restoration (1994-95). Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research: This organization is responsible for conducting research that improves understanding and prediction of oceanic and atmospheric conditions. This includes investigating processes that regulate wetland ecosys- tem structure and production, the responses of these systems to natural and human-induced conditions, and the effects of global climate and other atmospheric conditions on marine resources and ecosystems. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research needs within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are extensive. The Wetlands Research Program of the EPA is an applied research program that primarily provides technical support to improve the Agency's ability to carry out its regula- tory responsibilities. Three components of the Wet- lands Research Program are the Wetland Function Project, the Characterization and Restoration Project, and the Landscape Function Project. Detailed stud- ies of individual wetlands conducted to understand better the processes within wetlands that contribute to wetland functions and wetland responses to envi- ronmental stressors are carried out through the Wet- land Function Project. Studies of the characteristics of groups of wetlands that compare the functions of natural, restored, and created wetlands within similar geographic settings are carried out through the Char- acterization and Restoration Project. Research is con- National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 71 ducted on the interactions of wetlands with other eco- systems and on the cumulative effects of human ac- tivities on wetland functions through the Landscape Function Project. In 1992, EPA's funding for wetland research was about $3 million (figs. 42^13). Tennessee Valley Authority The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is a re- source management agency created by the Tennessee Valley Authority Act of 1933. Its research focuses on both natural and constructed wetlands. Natural-wet- lands research is directed toward protecting and en- hancing aquatic bed, emergent, and riparian forested wetlands and the wildlife populations dependent on them. Constructed-wetlands research is directed to- ward designing and operating constructed wetlands to solve specific waste-management or environmental problems and examining the basic mechanics and physiology of these systems. Wetland research is con- ducted in the field, in laboratories, and at a unique 32- celled physical model at a constructed-wetland re- search facility in Muscle Shoals, Ala. In 1992, fund- ing for research was about $3 million (figs. 42^3). Smithsonian Institution Smithsonian research on wetlands is focused on the biota, hydrology, and functions of wetlands. Aerial photographs, remote sensing, and Geographic Infor- mation Systems are used to extend research results from specific sites to larger regions and to relate wetlands to their drainage basins. Research support comes directly from Congress, from Smithsonian trust funds, and from extramural grants and contracts. Funding for research in 1992 was about $1 million (figs. 42^3). COORDINATION OF RESEARCH AMONG FEDERAL AGENCIES Federal agencies conduct wetland research to execute their congressionally mandated missions. Generally these research efforts fall within well-de- fined limits. By necessity, some agencies conduct research with a broad range of activities. The infor- mation derived from broad-scope, individual agency research may complement that of other agencies. Federal agencies have special obligations, as stew- ards of public monies, to get the most out of research dollars. Effective coordination is essential to assure that agencies efficiently budget and use research funds, to ensure that research is not duplicated by two or more agencies (and money wasted), and to ensure that the "best science" is achieved. Federal agencies involved in wetland research use formal and informal coordi- nation mechanisms to achieve these goals. Informal coordination takes many forms. It in- cludes scientists from each agency communicating di- rectly with scientists in other agencies about matters of common interest. It also includes many adhoc com- mittees and working groups organized to accomplish general coordination as well as specific research ob- jectives. Among the adhoc committees is the Federal Interagency Coordination Committee on Wetlands Local teachers work in cooperation with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency scientists to measure elevations and create site maps on this restored wetland in Portland, Oreg. (Photograph courtesy of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.) Research and Development, a voluntary group that meets annually in Washington, D.C., to present the status of agency research programs and discuss areas of potential interaction. This Committee developed the first National Summary of Ongoing Wetlands Re- search by Federal Agencies (U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, 1992). All Federal agencies that perform wetland research are invited to these meetings. Another voluntary adhoc committee, the Forested Wetlands Research and Development In- teragency Coordination Committee, formed working groups and developed a multiyear interagency re- search proposal for work in forested wetlands in Southern States. The Corps, the NBS, and the FWS provide funds for this research; and the EPA, Agricul- tural Research Service, and Natural Resources Con- servation Service actually do the research. Federal agencies also use informal scientific re- views of individual projects and entire programs for coordination. The purpose of these reviews is to ex- pose a project or program to external review and com- ment, as well as to provide a forum for exchanging views and ideas about each participating agency's project or program. The wetland research programs operated by the Corps, FWS, and EPA, and projects of the NBS's National Wetland Research Center and Cooperative Research Units Center regularly receive external peer review. Several Federal agencies regu- larly hold interagency planning meetings to discuss new wetland research goals and projects, solicit com- ments, and explore areas for potential partnerships and cooperation. Agencies with responsibilities for regulating and managing Federal lands, which include wetlands, conduct workshops, seminars, and other informal meetings to facilitate effective interaction and coor- dination of their research. Professional societies, sci- entific literature, agency publications, newsletters, bulletins, and topical conferences also offer mecha- nisms for coordination and information exchange. More formal coordination is achieved through exchange agreements, in which scientists may be ex- changed from one agency to another for specific pe- Federal agencies have special obligations, as stewards of public monies, to get the most out of research dollars. 72 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES riods to provide needed expertise. As an example, the Wetlands Classification System developed by the FWS was prepared with full-time assistance of sci- entists from the Corps and the Soil Conservation Service, and the authors of the report defining the system (Cowardin and others, 1979) included repre- sentatives from the FWS, the USGS, and NOAA. Written agreements such as Memorandums of Agree- ment or Memorandums of Understanding also are used to facilitate cooperation between agencies that share mutual objectives. Reimbursable and shared funding may be used to leverage available research dollars and take advantage of specific expertise avail- able in some agencies and lacking in others. Formal coordination may be required by specific legislative or administrative decisions, such as the Clinton administration's decisions relating to imple- mentation of the Breaux Bill, which requires agen- cies to coordinate in assessing damages and imple- menting corrective mechanisms in south Louisiana's coastal wetlands. Mon S. Yee, Natural Resources Conservation Service; Doug Ryan, U.S. Forest Service; David Correll, Smithsonian Institute; Mary E. Kentula, EPA; David A. Seyler, USGS; Clive Jorgensen, Department of Energy; and Joel Wagner, National Park Service. References Cited Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Prayer, WE., Monahan, T.J., Bowden, D.C., and Graybill, F.A., 1983, Status and trends of wetlands and deepwater habitats in the conterminous United States, 1950's to 1970's: Fort Collins, Colorado State University, p. 32. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, 1992, National summary of ongoing wetlands research by Federal agencies: Vicksburg, Miss., Prepared by the Wetlands Research Program, 69 p. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Representatives of Federal agencies listed herein contributed to this report. The authors are particularly grateful to the following: Robert E. Stewart, Jr., NBS; FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Wetlands Research Program (CEWES-EP-W), U.S. Army Engineer Water- ways Experiment Station, 3909 Hall Ferry Rd., Vicksburg, MS 39180 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AMD RESEARCH 73 Wetland Management and Research Wetland Mapping and Inventory By Bill 0. Wilen 1, Virginia Carter2 , and J. Ronald Jones; Wetland maps are a prerequisite for wetland in- ventory and for wetland development planning, man- agement, protection, and restoration. Maps provide information on wetland type, location, and size. De- tailed wetland maps are necessary for analysis of the effect of projects at specific sites and for providing baseline spatial data for the assessment of the effects of national policies and activities. Wetland maps are used by local, State, and Federal agencies, as well as by private industry and organizations. They are used for many purposes, including the development of comprehensive resource management plans, environ- mental impact assessments, natural resource inven- tories, habitat surveys, and the analysis of trends in wetland status. Several Federal agencies map wetlands in sup- port of their Congressional mandate. These include the U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS); the U.S. Department of Ag- riculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS); and the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The FWS has the primary responsibility for mapping and inventory of all the wetlands of the United States. The wetland maps produced by other agencies serve different purposes and generally in- volve cooperation with the FWS. THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE'S MAPPING AND INVENTORY ACTIVITIES The FWS National Wetlands Inventory is respon- sible for the mapping and inventory of wetlands throughout the United States. The Emergency Wet- lands Resources Act of 1986 and amendments to it in 1988 and 1992 define the responsibilities of the National Wetlands Inventory. (See the article "Wetland Protection Legislation" in this volume for more infor- mation on this and other wetland legislation.) History and Status of the National Wetlands Inventory In 1906, and again in 1922, the U.S. Department of Agriculture inventoried the wetlands of the United States to identify those that could be drained and con- verted to other uses (Wilen and Tiner, 1993). In 1954, the first nationwide wetland survey by the FWS cov- ered about 40 percent of the conterminous United States and focused on important waterfowl wetlands. This survey was not comprehensive by today's stan- dards, but it stimulated public interest in the conser- vation of waterfowl wetlands (Shaw and Fredine, 1956). (See the article "Wetlands as Bird Habitat" in this volume.) After the earlier inventories, and in response to passage of the Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and its amendments, the FWS established the Na- tional Wetlands Inventory. The program is designed to (1) produce detailed maps on the characteristics and extent of the Nation's wetlands, (2) construct a national wetlands data base, (3) disseminate wetland maps and digital data, (4) report results of State wet- land inventories, (5) report to Congress every 10 years on the status and trends of the Nation's wetlands, and (6) assemble and distribute related maps, digital data, and reports. The National Wetlands Inventory has produced more than 50,800 maps covering 88 percent of the conterminous United States, 30 percent of Alaska, and all of Hawaii and the U.S. Territories (fig. 44) Priorities for mapping have been based on the needs of the FWS. other Federal agencies, and State agen- Wetland maps are a prerequisite for wetland inventory, planning, management, protection, and restoration. EXPLANATION National Wetland Inventory map availability Final maps ^B Draft maps I I Unavailable Figure 44. Areas of the United States that have been mapped by the National Wetlands Inventory program and status of those maps, 1996. (Source: Data from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory files.) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. U.S. Geological Survey. 74 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES To date, almost 18,800 maps, representing 29 percent of the United States, have been digitized. cies. To date, mapping has been concentrated on the coastal zone (including the Great Lakes), prairie wetlands, playa lakes, flood plains of major rivers, and areas that reflect goals of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1976). As a practical matter, priorities have been based on the availability of funding and the availability of high-quality aerial photographs. The National Wetlands Inventory produced maps at a rate of about 5 percent of the conterminous United States and about 2 percent of Alaska annually through 1995 about 3,200 1:24,000-scale maps in the con- terminous United States and about 60 1:63,360-scale maps in Alaska. The National Wetlands Inventory has published a series of documents on the trends in wetland losses and gains. The first of these reports was "Status and Trends of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats in the Conterminous United States, 1950's to 1970's" (Prayer and others, 1983). In the Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986 and subsequent amendments, Congress directed the National Wetlands Inventory to (1) update and improve the information contained in this report by 1990 and at 10-year intervals there- after and (2) estimate the number of acres of wetland habitat in each State in the 1780's and the 1980's and calculate the percentage of loss in each State. In re- sponse to this directive, the National Wetlands Inven- tory published a 1990 report to Congress titled "Wet- lands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's" (Dahl, 1990). The National Wetlands Inventory also is prepar- ing a geographically referenced digital data base for wetlands so that wetland information can be placed in geographic information systems (CIS) for use with computers. These digital maps and information are easily transmitted over the Internet. To date, almost 18,800 maps, representing 29 percent of the United States, have been digitized (fig. 45). Statewide data bases have been digitized for Delaware, Hawaii, In- diana, Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey, Washington, Iowa, Minnesota, and West Virginia. Digitization is in progress for Florida, North Carolina, South Caro- lina, South Dakota, and Virginia. Wetland digital data are available for parts of 35 other States. In addition to wetland maps and status and trend reports, the National Wetlands Inventory produces special items related to the identification, mapping, and inventory of wetlands. The "National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands" (Reed, 1988) is an important tool for identifying wetlands on the basis of their vegetation. A computerized data base for wet- land plants, developed by the National Wetlands In- ventory, also lists plants found in wetlands and ranks their affinity to the wetland environment. This infor- mation is important for determining whether an area is really a wetland. Additionally, the National Wet- lands Inventory has contributed to a list of hydric soils (soils found in wetlands) (U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1991). Many published State wetland reports, including "Wetlands of Maryland" (Tiner and Burke, 1995), "Wetlands of Connecticut" (Metzler and Tiner, 1992), and "Status of Alaska Wetlands" (Hall, Prayer, and Wilen, 1994), contain wetland inventory results and other important information. Finally, in coopera- tion with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Na- tional Wetlands Inventory has published a map (scale of 1 inch equals 50 miles) showing the locations of major wetland complexes in the conterminous United States, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico (Dahl, 1991) and a map (scale of 1 inch equals 40 miles) of Alaska's wetland resources (Hall, 1991). OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES' MAPPING AND INVENTORY ACTIVITIES Natural Resources Conservation Service. The NRCS (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) con- ducts its wetland inventory under the auspices of the wetland conservation provision (nicknamed "Swampbuster") of the Food Security Act of 1985. This Act provides for the reduction of a farmer's pro- gram benefits if wetlands are converted to agricultural production. In order to implement this act, the map- ping of the NRCS is focused on freshwater wetlands that have a high potential for agricultural conversion, such as those adjacent to or lying within the bound- aries of existing agricultural fields. The NRCS does not produce a standard map product. Many delineations are made on l:660-scale Figure 45. Areas of the conterminous United States and Hawaii where wetland data have been digitized by the National Wetlands Inventory program, 1996. (Source: Data from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory files.) t EXPLANATION National Wetland Inventory map 1 digitization Hi Completed ( U Not completed National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 75 The "Swampbuster" discourages the conversion of wetlands to cropland. This wetland, which was converted to cropland at one time, has been restored. (Photograph courtesy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.) The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration delineates coastal wetland and upland habitats, such as this coastal wetland at Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge on Assateague Island, Va. (Photograph by Judy D. Fretwell, U.S. Geological Survey.) black-and-white aerial photographs; others are made on soil-survey base maps at scales that range from 1:10,000to 1:64,000 (Teels, 1990). Information sources for this program include recent and histori- cal aerial photographs, such as those regularly acquired by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Wetlands Inventory maps from the FWS, U.S. Department of Agriculture crop history records, and field verifications. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra- tion. 1\\t NOAA has developed the Coastal Wet- land Habitat Change Program in order to delineate coastal wetland habitats and adjacent uplands and plains to monitor changes in these habitats on a cycle of 1 to 5 years. The basis for monitoring will be a data base describing the areal extent and distribution of coastal wetlands in the conterminous United States. The program will help to determine the link- ages between estuarine and marine wetlands, as well as the distribution, abundance, and health of living marine resources. U.S. Geological Survey. The USGS compiles, produces, and disseminates topographic, hydrologic, and geologic maps and digital data related to wet- lands. The standard USGS l:24,000-scale topo- graphic map commonly is used as a base for wetland mapping by other Federal, State, and local agencies. However, because USGS maps depict wetlands as un- bounded symbols (fig. 46), the maps cannot be used to establish exact boundaries for wetlands. Interme- diate-scale (1:100,000) and large-scale maps (scales of 1:24,000 or greater) are used for project planning. Large-scale maps known as orthophoto quadrangles, which are made by manipulation of aerial photo- graphs to achieve a positionally accurate photo- graphic base map, are used as a base for State wet- land mapping. COORDINATION OF FEDERAL WETLAND MAPPING EFFORTS Differing needs of various Federal agencies can require different types of maps or different map scales. However, many needs can be satisfied by com- mon products, and efforts are being made to standard- ize maps and map products whenever possible or practical. Federal digital wetland mapping is coordi- nated by the Wetlands Subcommittee of the Federal Geographic Data Coordination group in an effort to meet requirements established by the Office of Man- agement and Budget. The Office of Management and Budget requires agencies to develop a national digi- tal spatial information resource in collaboration with State and local governments and the private sector. This requirement is for the purposes of (1) promot- ing the development, maintenance, and management of a national digital wetland data base; (2) encour- aging the development and implementation of stan- dards, exchange formats, specifications, procedures, and guidelines; (3) promoting interaction among other Federal, State, and local government agencies that have interests in the generation, collection, use, and transfer of wetland spatial data; (4) maintaining and disseminating information on the type and avail- ability of wetland spatial data; and (5) promoting the concept of effective wetland management. Efforts are made to standardize maps and map products when- ever possible or practical. 34 Figure 46. Unbounded symbols on a U.S. Geological Survey topographic map show the general location of wetlands. EXPLANATION Orchard Woods £L; Intermittent pond -^ Marsh or swamp J^ Wooded marsh or swamp 76 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES The National Wetlands Inventory uses the best and most appropriate aerial photographs available for mapping wetlands. PRODUCING NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY MAPS Most natural-resource inventories make use of aerial photographs or satellite images combined with field verification. The National Wetlands Inventory uses the best and most appropriate aerial photographs available for mapping wetlands. The principal data source in the early 1980's was the l:80,000-scale, high-altitude, black-and-white aerial photography ac- quired by the USGS for topographic mapping and production of orthophoto quadrangles. After the USGS began its National High-Altitude Photography Program, 1:58,000-scale color-infrared photographs for the entire country became available; the National Wetlands Inventory uses these photographs exten- sively. In 1987, the USGS replaced the National High- Altitude Photography Program with the National Aerial Photography Program, which produces 1:40,000-scale color-infrared photographs; the Na- tional Wetlands Inventory uses these photographs as well. In some cases, the National Wetlands Inventory uses supplementary photography, such as some 1:60,000-scale color-infrared photographs of the prai- rie pothole region of the northern Great Plains, which were acquired from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Stereoscopic color-infrared photographs are best for identifying and delineating wetlands. Color, tex- ture, and pattern are important features of wetland vegetation and background soils. A combination of vegetation factors produce a specific response or sig- nature on the photograph (Wilen and Pywell, 1992). These vegetation factors include leaf size, shape, Figure 47. Wetland features such as water, vegetation, and soil are identified on an aerial photograph by their signatures (left), and these signatures are used to produce wetland maps (right). ('Source: U.S. Geological Survey, 1995 (left); T.E. Dahi, U.S. Fish and Wildlfie Service, unpub. data, 1992 (right).) structure, and arrangement; branching pattern; height; growth habit; and color. Determining the boundary of a wetland is the most difficult part of mapping. Normally, transitions are found at the boundary from upland vegetation to wetland vegetation, from nonhydric to hydric (wetland) soils, and from land that is not flooded to areas that are subject to flood- ing or saturation. On color-infrared photographs, water generally shows as a distinctive black and blue- black color because of its lack of reflectance. Wet- lands that have canopy openings and contain stand- ing water exhibit this signature along with assorted well and-vegetation signatures. Saturated soils show darker tones because of the nonreflectance of the soil- water component. Even when wetland basins are dry, the silt, clay, and other fine-grained materials hold more water than the upland soils hold, which results in a distinctive dark color because of the lack of in- frared reflectance. Vegetation characteristics help to identify wet- lands. Wetland vegetation generally is more dense, more crowded, and more concentrated than upland vegetation. Wetland vegetation normally exhibits a higher degree of lushness, vigor, and intensity than does upland vegetation. Even wheat grown in a dry wetland basin has a distinctive signature; it is more vigorous because of extra moisture in the basin. Dead and dying vegetation in flooded wetland basins also has distinctive signatures. When physiographic po- sitions are associated with the vegetative character- istics described above, wetland locations become more obvious on an aerial photograph (fig. 47). Patterns, or the repetition of the spatial arrange- ment, of vegetative types also provide important clues in the identification of wetlands. Basins that have a semipermanently flooded center may have a season- ally flooded band around the center and a temporarily flooded outer band. Patterns are not restricted to veg- etation they can include drainage patterns and land- use patterns. Unplanted basins in farm fields might indicate wetlands; land-cover patterns such as ridges and swales help separate uplands and wetlands. When wetlands are being mapped, the photointerpreter closely checks areas indicated by swamp symbols as wetlands on USGS topographic maps and NRCS soil survey maps to ensure their possible inclusion as wet- lands; such areas are considered wetlands unless strong evidence indicates otherwise. A typical National Wetlands Inventory map con- sists of wetland boundaries added to a black-and- white version of a 1:24,000-scale USGS topographic base map. Wetlands are classified according to guide- lines developed by Cowardin and others (1979). (See article "Wetland Definitions and Classifications in the United States" in this volume.) These wetland clas- sifications are shown on the map as alpha-numeric codes that are identified in a map explanation at the bottom of the map. Many steps are involved in the production of a wetland map from selecting the sites for field verification to delineation, quality control, and production of the final map product (fig. 48). All National Wetlands Inventory photointerpreters are trained extensively in wetland identification, the FWS wetland classification system, and the field identifi- cation of wetland plants and soils in order to ensure the best quality, most accurate maps. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 77 STEPS IN PRODUCING NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY MAPS 1. Determine project area. 2. Obtain source materials. 3. Prepare source materials {photo A}. 4. Review photo interpretation and plan field trip (photo B). 5. Conduct a field reconnaissance of study area. 6. Make photo interpretation (photo O. 7. Check photointerpretation (quality control) (photo D). 8. Transfer photointerpreted data to base map (photo E). 9. Check transferred information (quality control). 10. Prepare copy of draft map for review. 11. Conduct review of draft maps. 12. Make changes to draft map manuscript (photo f). 13. Conduct final quality- control checks. 14. Produce final map for distribution (photo G). 15. Digitize the final map (photo H). Figure 48. The sequence of steps in producing National Wetlands Inventory maps. (Photographs A and E by Judy D. Fretwell, U.S. Ceological Survey; all other photographs by Donald W. Woodard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.) 78 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES HOW AND WHERE TO GET NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY MAPS Maps of the National Wetlands Inventory can be acquired from 33 State-run distribution centers, 6 USGS Earth Science Information Center regional offices, or by calling the USGS national toll-free number: 1-800-USA-MAPS. Maps can also be viewed at the Library of Congress and the Federal Depository Library System and downloaded cost-free through the National Wetlands Inventory Home Page on the Internet at http://www.nwi.fws.gov. The six re- gional USGS Earth Science Information Centers pro- vide online computer links to the National Wetlands Inventory map data base, which contains current in- formation about the availability and production his- tory of National Wetlands Inventory maps and digi- tal data. Digital data are available in Digital Line Graph 3 (DLG3) optional or Geographic Resources Analysis Support System (GRASS) formats; latitude and longitude, State Plane Coordinates, or Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate systems; and 9-track, 8-mm, or 1/4-inch cassettes in UNIX-TAR or ASCII tape formats. Other products available at cost include acreage statistics by quadrangle, county, or study area and color-coded wetland maps. References Cited Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Services Program Report FWS/ OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands-Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Report to Congress, 21 p. ____1991, Wetland resources of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory map, scale 1:3,168,000. Prayer, WE., Monahan, T.J., Bowden, D.C., and Graybill, F.A., 1983, Status and trends of wetlands and deepwater habitats in the conterminous United States, 1950's to 1970's: Fort Collins, Colo., Colorado State University, 32 p. Hall, J.V., 1991, Wetland resources of Alaska: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory map, scale 1:2,500,000. Hall, J.V., Prayer, WE., and Wilen, B.O., 1994, Status of Alaska wetlands: Anchorage, Alaska, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 33 p. Metzler, K.J., andTiner, R.W, 1992, Wetlands of Connecti- cut: State Geological and Natural History Survey of Connecticut in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory, Report of Investigations no. 13, 115 p. Reed, P.B., Jr., 1988, National list of plant species that oc- cur in wetlands 1988 national summary: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88 (24), 244 p. Shaw, S.P., andFredine, C.G., 1956, Wetlands of the United States Their extent and their value to waterfowl and other wildlife: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circu- lar 39, 67 p. Teels, B.M., 1990, Soil Conservation Service's wetland inventory, in Kiraly, S.J., Cross, FA., and Buffington, J.D., eds., Federal coastal wetland mapping programs; a report by the National Ocean Pollution Policy Board: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bio- logical Report 90 (18), p. 93-103. Tiner, R.W, and Burke, D.G., 1995, Wetlands of Maryland: Annapolis, Md., Maryland Department of Natural Re- sources, Water Resource Administration, in coopera- tion with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, 193 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1976, Existing state and local wetland surveys (1965-1975), v. II, Narrative: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services Report, 453 p. U.S. Geological Survey, 1995, South Florida Satellite Im- age Map, 1993: Reston, Va., U.S. Geological Survey, 1 sheet, scale 1:500,000. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1991, Hydric soils of the United States: U.S. Soil Conservation Service in co- operation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, Miscellaneous Publication No. 1491, 3d ed., unnumbered pages. Wilen, B.O., and Pywell, H.R., 1992, Remote sensing of the Nation's wetlands, National Wetlands Inventory, in Proceedings: Forest Service Remote Sensing Applica- tions Conference, 4th biennial, Orlando, Fla., unnum- bered pages. Wilen, B.O., and Tiner, R.W, 1993, Wetlands of the United States, in Whignam, D.F., Dykyjova, Dagmar, and Hejny, Slavomil, eds., Wetlands of the world I Inven- tory, ecology, and management: Dordrecht, The Neth- erlands, Kluwer Academic Publishers, p. 515-636. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Bill O. Wilen, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room 400 Arlington, VA 22203; Virginia Carter, U.S. Geological Survey, 430 National Cen- ter, Reston, VA 22092 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 79 Wetland Management and Research Wetland Functions, Values, and Assessment By Richard P. Novitzki 1 , R. Daniel Smith,2 and Judy D. Fretwell3 Wetlands, or the lack thereof, were a significant factor in the severe flooding in the Upper Mississippi and Missouri River Basins in the summer of 1993 (Parrett and others, 1993) (fig. 49). Damages asso- ciated with the flooding were undoubtedly worse than they would have been if flood-plain wetlands had still been in place. Human modification of the original wetlands (a common practice in the early part of this century) had destroyed the ability of the wetlands to modify flooding. (See the article "Effects of the Great Midwest Flood of 1993 on Wetlands" in this volume.) Flood control, however, is only one of the values that wetlands have for society. In order to protect wet- lands, the public first must recognize the values of wetlands. People need to understand what is lost when a wetland is changed into an agricultural field, a parking lot, a dump, or a housing development. Un- derstanding the functions of wetlands will make it easier to evaluate wetlands when other uses are con- sidered. RECOGNITION OF WETLAND FUNCTIONS AND THEIR VALUES In the 1970's, scientists, ecologists, and conser- vationists began to articulate the values of wetlands. At a wetland conference in 1973, wetlands were ac- knowledged to be an important part of the hydrologic cycle (Helfgott and others, 1973). In 1977, participa- tion at the first National Wetland Protection Sympo- sium attended by more than 700 people demon- strated a growing interest in the value of wetlands and the need to protect them (Kusler and Montanari, 1978). At a Wetland Values and Management Confer- ence in 1981, scientists defined the unique qualities of wetlands and developed a list of wetland functions (Richardson, 1981). In addition to the more com- monly recognized habitat functions of wetlands, the scientists described hydrologic and water-quality functions. During the 1980's, participants at many more conferences and symposia expanded the under- standing and appreciation of the values of wetlands (Kusler and Riexinger, 1986). WETLAND FUNCTIONS DEFINED Wetland functions are defined as a process or series of processes that take place within a wetland. These include the storage of water, transformation of nutrients, growth of living matter, and diversity of wetland plants, and they have value for the wetland itself, for surrounding ecosystems, and for people. Functions can be grouped broadly as habitat, hydro- logic, or water quality, although these distinctions are somewhat arbitrary and simplistic. For example, the value of a wetland for recreation (hunting, fishing, bird watching) is a product of all the processes that work together to create and maintain the wetland. Not all wetlands perform all functions nor do they perform all functions equally well. The location and size of a wetland may determine what functions it will perform. For example, the geographic location may determine its habitat functions, and the location of a wetland within a watershed may determine its hydro- logic or water-quality functions (fig. 50). Many fac- tors determine how well a wetland will perform these functions: climatic conditions, quantity and quality of water entering the wetland, and disturbances or al- Not all wetlands perform all functions nor do they perform all functions equally well. Wetlands are among the most productive habitats in the world. Figure 49. Flooding in the Upper Mississippi River Basin, summer 1993. (Photograph ©Cameron Davidson, 1993.) 1 ManTech Environmental Technology, Inc. 2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 3 U.S. Geological Survey. 80 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES ISOLATED WETLANDS ' I . !, '! LAKE MARGIN WETLANDS RIVERINE WETLANDS STUARINE AND COASTAL WETLA BARRIER ISLAND WETLANDS CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONS OF WETLANDS Isolated Wetlands 1. Waterfowl feeding and nesting habitat 2. Habitat for both upland and wetland species of wildlife 3. Floodwater retention area 4. Sediment and nutrient retention area 5. Area of special scenic beauty Lake Margin Wetlands 1. See "isolated wetlands" above 2. Removal of sediment and nutrients from inflowing waters 3. Fish spawning area Riverine Wetlands 1. See "isolated wetlands" above 2. Sediment control, stabilization of river banks 3. Flood conveyance area Estuarine and Coastal Wetlands 1. See "isolated wetlands" above 2. Fish and shellfish habitat and spawning areas 3. Nutrient source for marine fisheries 4. Protection from erosion and storm surges Barrier Island Wetlands 1. Habitat for dune-associated plant and animal species 2. Protection of backlyjng lands from high-energy waves 3. Scenic beauty Figure 50. Wetland functions depend upon the location of the wetland within a watershed. (Source: Modified fromJ.A. Kusler, Our National Heritage: A Protection Guidebook. Copyright (c) 1983 by the Environmental Law Institute. Reprinted by permission.) Timber harvest in a bottom-land forested wetland. (Photograph by R. Daniel Smith, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.) Hay harvest in a prairie wetland. (Photograph by Richard P. Novitzki, ManTech Environmental Technology, Inc.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 81 teration within the wetland or the surrounding eco- system. Wetland disturbances may be the result of natural conditions, such as an extended drought, or human activities, such as land clearing, dredging, or the introduction of nonnative species. Perhaps wetlands are best known for their habi- tat functions, which are the functions that benefit wildlife. Habitat is defined as the part of the physical environment in which plants and animals live (Lapedes, 1976), and wetlands are among the most productive habitats in the world (Tiner, 1989). They provide food, water, and shelter for fish, shellfish, birds, and mammals, and they serve as a breeding ground and nursery for numerous species. Many en- dangered plant and animal species are dependent on wetland habitats for their survival. (See the article "Wetlands as Bird Habitat" in this volume.) Hydro- logic functions are those related to the quantity of water that enters, is stored in, or leaves a wetland. These functions include such factors as the reduction of flow velocity, the role of wetlands as ground-wa- ter recharge or discharge areas, and the influence of wetlands on atmospheric processes. Water-quality functions include the trapping of sediment, pollution control, and the biochemical processes that take place as water enters, is stored in, or leaves a wetland. (See article "Wetland Hydrology, Water Quality, and As- sociated Functions" in this volume for more informa- tion on hydrologic and water-quality functions.) WETLAND VALUES DEFINED If something has "value," then it is worthwhile, beneficial, or desirable. The value of a wetland lies in the benefits that it provides to the environment or to people, something that is not easily measured. Wetlands can have ecological, social, or economic values. Wetland products that have an economic value, such as commercial fish or timber, can be assigned a monetary value. True wetland value, however, goes beyond money. How much value does one place on the beauty of a wetland or its archeological signifi- cance? Wetland values are not absolute. What is valu- able and important to one person may not be valu- able to another person. As an example, the value of a wetland as duck habitat may be important to the hunter or birdwatcher but not to the farmer who owns the land. "While wetland functions are natural processes of wetlands that continue regardless of their perceived value to humans, the value people place on those func- tions in many cases is the primary factor determin- ing whether a wetland remains intact or is converted for some other use" (National Audubon Society, 1993). In addition, values assigned to wetland func- tions may change over time as society's perceptions and priorities change. The values that benefit society as a whole tend to change slowly; however, the val- ues assigned by individuals or small groups are arbi- trary, and most are subject to rapid and frequent change and may even conflict. For example, timber production may be improved by draining a wetland site, whereas waterfowl production may be improved by impounding more water. Society may have to re- solve conflicts regarding the management or preser- vation of wetlands and their functions. Furthermore, Velocity Reduction Atmospheric Processes ^ Ground-water/Surff ace-water & Interaction ^ /- society may have to choose among wetland functions that benefit individuals or small groups, that are of value to most of society, or that are important to the maintenance of the wetland itself. Wetland functions have value on several levels internal, local, regional, and global. All wetland func- tions are internal, but the values or benefits of wet- land functions can be internal or external to the wet- land (fig. 51). Functions that provide internal values are the functions that maintain or sustain the wetland and are essential to the continued existence of the wet- land. Conversely, many functions have external val- ues that extend beyond the wetland itself. On a local scale, wetlands affect adjacent or nearby ecosystems, for example, by reducing flooding in downstream communities or by removing nutrients from waste- water. However, the broadest influence of wetland functions is global. Wetlands are now thought to have a significant effect on air quality, which is influenced by the nitrogen, sulfur, methane, and carbon cycles. In addition, migrating birds are dependent upon wet- lands as they travel. PURPOSE OF WETLAND ASSESSMENT Many times when decisions are made about de- velopment of an area, such as the selection of a site for a large commercial or industrial facility, the choice of sites is not between a wetland or an upland, but be- tween wetlands. In areas that have many wetlands, all alternative sites or routes for roads for a major facil- ity may involve the destruction or alteration of wet- lands. In such cases, legal requirements commonly exist that require the replacement of destroyed wet- lands. Even when a choice must be made between a wetland site and an upland site, the upland site may have great value to the community. Managers, plan- ners, regulators, and even the general public have long J Figure 51. Wetland functions and internal and external values. A system of wetland assessment is necessary to ensure that the most valuable wetlands are protected. 82 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES The WET evaluates functions and values in terms of effectiveness, opportunity, social significance, and habitat suitability. felt the need to have in place a system of assess- ment or evaluation that would make the choices clearer and ensure that the most valuable wetlands are pre- served. Such an evaluation system could be based entirely or partly on wetland function if values could be assigned to individual functions. Wetland assessment methods have been or are be- ing developed that assign numerical values to wetland functions. Some methods assign values on the basis of the benefits to the wetland itself by considering the question: How important is this function in terms of maintaining this particular wetland? Other methods assign values on the basis of the benefits to surround- ing ecosystems or to humans. The types of questions considered in this approach are as follows: How important is this function to environmental quality downstream? How does this function benefit soci- ety? This latter assessment method allows for the comparison of the worth of one wetland to that of another wetland. The development of a single method for assess- ing the functions of wetlands or for assigning values to the functions of wetlands is not a simple task. In- deed, probably no one method will satisfy all needs. However, assessing each function of a wetland and then assigning a value to each function is a step to- ward the protection of sensitive wetlands. Further- more, an evaluation system that provides the basis for comparing wetlands would facilitate mitigation for unavoidable wetland losses, would provide a tool for determining the success (or failure) of programs and policies intended to protect or manage wetland re- sources, and would assist in identifying long-term trends in the condition of wetland resources. WETLAND ASSESSMENT METHODS The three wetland assessment methods described herein are representative of the methods that are avail- able or are being used by wetland managers and plan- ners. The Wetland Evaluation Technique was devel- oped for the Federal Highway Administration and has been used widely. It assigns values to specific func- tions of individual wetlands. The Environmental Monitoring Assessment Program Wetlands was developed by the Environmental Protection Agency. It is presented here as an example of a program that focuses on determining the ecological condition of a population of wetlands in a region. It does this by comparing the function of a statistical sample of wet- lands to reference wetlands in the region. The Hydrogeomorphic approach is being developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for assessing wetland functions. It combines features of the other two meth- ods by measuring the functions of individual wetlands and also by comparing them to functions performed by other wetlands. Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET) The WET is a comprehensive approach for evalu- ating individual wetlands that was developed in 1983 (Adamus, 1983; Adamus and Stockwell, 1983) and revised in 1987 under the auspices of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Adamus and others, 1987). The WET considers wetland functions to be the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of a wetland. It assigns wetland values to the characteristics that are valuable to society. The following functions are as- signed values by WET: Ground-water recharge Ground-water discharge Floodflow alteration Sediment stabilization Sediment/toxicant retention Nutrient removal/transformation Production export Wildlife diversity/abundance Aquatic diversity/abundance Recreation Uniqueness/heritage The recreational pleasures of a wetland are captured in this photo at Horicon Marsh, Wis. (Photograph byPhillip I, Redman, U.S. Geological Survey.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 83 The WET evaluates functions and values in terms of effectiveness, opportunity, social significance, and habitat suitability. Effectiveness assesses the capabil- ity of a wetland to perform a particular function. For example, a wetland that has no outlet is assigned a high value for sediment retention, whereas a wetland just downstream from a dam is assigned a low value. Opportunity assesses the potential for a wetland to perform a specific function; for example, a wetland in a forested area that has no potential sediment sources would be assigned a low opportunity value for sediment retention. Social significance assesses the value of a wetland in terms of special designations (does it have endangered species?), potential eco- nomic value (is it used regularly for recreational ac- tivities?), and strategic location (is it in a State where very few wetlands of its type remain?). The WET uses "predictors" that relate to the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the function being evalu- ated. As an example, the presence or absence of a con- stricted outlet from a wetland could be used to pre- dict whether the wetland might be effective in stor- ing floodwaters. In addition, WET can be used to assess the habitat suitability for waterfowl and wet- land-dependent birds, fish, and invertebrates. The WET approach was designed to provide a balance between costly, site-specific studies and the "best professional judgment" approach, which is less costly but lacks reproducibility. The WET method is intended to be used by any environmental profes- sional, so that an engineer can evaluate biological functions or a biologist can evaluate hydrologic func- tions. First, information resources are obtained for the wetland, the area surrounding the wetland, and the area downstream from the wetland. Then a series of questions is answered about the wetland's watershed, topography, vegetation, and other features. By pro- gressing next through a series of flow charts (or an available computer software package), an evaluation can assign a probability rating of "high," "moderate," or "low" to each of the functions listed above (except for recreation) and a habitat suitability rating for waterfowl, fish, and other wildlife (Adamus, 1988). The probability rating is an estimate of the "likeli- hood" that a wetland will perform a function on the basis of its characteristics. It does not estimate the de- gree or magnitude to which a function is performed. Recreation is not evaluated because no scientific ba- sis exists for making an objective assessment with- out extensive data collection at the site. The WET approach probably has been applied to nearly every type of wetland in every State; however, it has proved to be unwieldy to use. For most users, the need to be able to apply this method to every wetland in every part of the United States makes the system unnecessarily cumbersome. For example, most users are interested in a local area and prefer not to enter data repeatedly for local characteristics that are unlikely to change, as is required in the WET approach. In order to refine the method for specific regions and to refine the thresholds among the low, medium, and high values, Adamus (1988) intended that regional versions and five different levels of WET be developed, neither of which has happened. Despite its shortcomings, however, WET continues to be used by those who are familiar with it. Furthermore, much of the data generated by its application could be used to create data bases that would simplify its use and would improve its regional application. Environmental Monitoring Assessment Program Wetlands (EMAP Wetlands) In 1988, the Environmental Protection Agency initiated the Environmental Monitoring Assessment Program (EMAP) in order to provide improved in- formation on the status and trends in the condition of the Nation's ecological resources. The wetlands part of EMAP was intended to develop an approach for assessing the condition (how well a wetland is per- forming its functions) of different types of wetlands in a region and in the Nation as a whole (Novitzki, EMAP Wetlands identifies "indicators" of condition, standardizes methods of measurement, and establishes a national network. Sheep foraging at a wetland near Bridgeport, Calif. (Photograph by A.S. Van Denburgh, U.S. Geological Survey.) 84 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES The HCM approach represents a combination of the WET and EMAP Wetlands approaches 1994; Novitzki and others, 1994). The near-term ob- jectives of the program were to conduct research in order to identify "indicators" of wetland condition, to standardize methods of measurement, and to es- tablish a national network for monitoring wetlands at regional scales and over long periods (decades). In some places, it is impossible or impractical to mea- sure wetland functions directly; therefore, character- istics or "indicators" are measured, and these indi- cate how well certain functions are being performed by the wetland. For example, the number of water- fowl per acre can be calculated from actual field mea- surements and then can be used as an indicator of how well a wetland is performing its waterfowl habitat function. The EMAP Wetlands program was intended to have three phases. First, pilot studies were to be con- ducted to evaluate the ability of selected indicators to make a distinction between healthy and degraded wetlands. Next, regional demonstrations were to be conducted by using some of the best indicators from the pilot studies. These demonstrations would confirm the ability of the program to assess the condition of a specific type of wetland in a specific region. Finally, the program would be implemented to monitor the condition of a specific wetland type in a region. Only Phase I has been conducted. Data from pilot and demonstration studies in Phase I are being analyzed to develop preliminary indices of signs of the health of a wetland. One index will be for biological integrity, which combines in- dicators of healthy plant and animal communities. Biological characteristics of the sampled wetlands will be compared with those of the most unaltered wetlands of the same type in the region, known as ref- erence wetlands. This comparison is based on the as- sumption that the least altered wetlands have sustain- able biological integrity. Other likely indices will be related to the follow- ing: habitat integrity (how does the population of wa- terfowl, finfish, or shellfish in sampled wetlands com- pare with that in reference wetlands?), hydrologic integrity (how similar is the hydrologic regime in the sampled wetlands to that in reference wetlands?), and water-quality improvement (how do sediment trap- ping and other water-quality processes in sampled wetlands compare with those in reference wetlands?). Wetland health may be evaluated either by similarity (how similar are sampled wetlands to reference wet- lands?) or by biological criteria (are the sampled wetlands above or below a level determined from measurements obtained in the reference wetlands?). The comparison of the condition of sampled wetlands with the condition of reference wetlands provides a means for telling the difference between changes that result from long-term changes in climate (both sampled wetlands and reference wetlands will be af- fected) and changes that happen because of manage- ment actions, regulatory policy, or other human fac- tors that affect wetlands (only the sampled wetlands will be affected). Pilot studies of salt marshes in the Gulf of Mexico and prairie pothole wetlands of the Midwest have been completed. Results of these studies have been evalu- ated to identify the indicators that most effectively reveal the difference between healthy and degraded wetlands. In the salt marshes, the indicators that seem to hold the greatest promise (Turner and Swenson, 1994) are as follows: Ratio of vegetated areas to open water Number of plant species (or the diversity of plant species) Biomass (production of plant material per unit area) Amount of organic matter in soil Salinity Serene beauty is provided by this restored wetland in Montana. (Photograph by Edith B. Chase, U.S. Geological Survey.) National Water Summary-Wetland Resources: MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 85 In prairie pothole wetlands, indicators of the health of a wetland that seem to hold the greatest promise at the local level (L.M. Cowardin, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, oral commun., 1994) are: Amount of developed land in the surrounding up- land Rates of increase and decrease in the number of water-filled basins or in the area of water surface between April (spring thaw) and August (end of summer) Ratio of temporary to seasonal to semipermanent wetlands At the level of the individual wetland ecosystem, other promising indicators (L.M. Cowardin, oral commun., 1994) are: Diversity of plant species Number and types of species of large invertebrates Range of water-level fluctuation Sedimentation rate Hydrogeomorphic Approach (HGM) In 1990, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers be- gan developing the Hydrogeomorphic Approach (HGM) as a way to provide a foundation for assess- ing the physical, chemical, and biological functions of wetlands (Brinson, 1993; Smith and others, 1995). The program, still being developed, is intended to revise and simplify the WET approach described above (Adamus and others, 1987), as well as make it more applicable to specific regions. The WET pro- cedure develops a profile of specific characteristics (predictors) for an individual wetland, and these are used to assess the degree of effectiveness of the dif- ferent functions of the wetland. The HGM approach compares the characteristics of a specific wetland with the characteristics of a group of wetlands (ref- erence wetlands) in the region, and this information is used to assess the degree to which the individual wetland is performing selected functions. Thus, the HGM approach represents a combination of the WET and EMAP Wetlands approaches. Wetland charac- teristics to be evaluated by HGM are limited to those that are important in the specific region and hydro- geomorphic setting. Hence, different characteristics will be identified and evaluated for different hydrogeomorphic settings, such as closed basins in the Midwest (for example, prairie pothole wetlands), river-edge wetlands in the Southeast (for example, bottom-land hardwood wetlands), and coastal wet- lands (for example, salt marshes). In the HGM approach, local wetland scientists or managers identify the functions that are performed by wetlands in a specific hydrogeomorphic setting in that region. Also, they identify wetland characteris- tics (indicators), such as plant communities, plant species, and density of stems, that suggest whether or not a wetland is performing a specific function, such as slowing the flow velocity of floodwater. Next, the value of each function is determined by measur- ing the degree to which that function is likely to be performed. This is based on the characteristics of the indicators. For example, if lines of debris are selected as an indicator that a wetland has been flooded, their altitude may be used to determine how deep the water may have been during flooding and thus how much water may be stored in the wetland. The nature of the debris lines also may suggest the velocity of the water as it moved through the wetland. For ex- ample, small leaves and twigs suggest slow-moving water, small branches suggest somewhat swifter water, and large branches and tree trunks suggest very high velocities. Sediment deposits observed at the site may suggest the depositional characteristics. For ex- ample, no sediment deposits suggest little deposition, thin silt deposits suggest that slow-moving water was sustained for long periods, and gravel and cobble de- posits might suggest that water was flowing rapidly when it entered the site but then slowed significantly at the site. A wetland assessment provided by the HGM ap- proach will likely be a "site profile" that lists the site characteristics that are related to identified wetland functions. This profile then will be compared with characteristics of the reference wetlands (all wetlands in the region in the same geomorphic class) in order to rank the site. A data base that contains profiles of wetland characteristics (indicators of wetland func- tions) for each wetland type (hydrogeomorphic class) will be established for each region. These data will define the range of characteristics found in these wet- lands. At present (1995), the HGM approach is in de- velopment and has not been released to the public. Field tests of this assessment method have been con- ducted in river-edge wetlands in the Pacific North- west, the Northeast, the Rocky Mountains, the South- west, and the Southeast; in coastal wetlands in the Pacific Northwest, the North and South Atlantic States, and the gulf coast States; and in closed-basin wetlands in the Midwest. Data and insights derived from these tests are being compiled and will be evalu- ated in regional workshops. Following those evalua- tions, manuals of draft HGM methods will be pre- pared and presented for comment and review in re- gional workshops. CONCLUSIONS If any hope remains for preserving the Nation's wetland resources, it depends upon obtaining public support. Public support can be won if scientists can explain clearly how wetlands function, how they in- teract with their surroundings, and how their func- tions can benefit society. Wetlands have come under intensive scientific study only during the last two decades. Techniques of wetland evaluation will im- prove as scientists gather more information about the processes that take place in wetlands and about the similarities and differences among the functions of different types of wetlands. In order to develop pub- lic support and to encourage enlightened policy de- cisions and regulations, it is critical to create and maintain a data base of wetland characteristics in which the data are reliable, comparable, and repeat- able at periodic intervals in order to monitor long- term trends. More than one approach to wetland evaluation is possible, as illustrated by the examples discussed above. Wetland functions and their values to humans and other living matter may be assessed for an indi- vidual wetland by using approaches such as WET or It is critical to create and maintain a data base of wetland characteristics in which the data are reliable, comparable, and repeatable. 86 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES HGM. After this, they can be compared with other natural wetlands in a region by using the HGM approach. Both WET and HGM can be used to determine the amount of mitigation required to off- set unavoidable wetland loss, as well as to evaluate the degree of success of individual mitigation projects. (See article "Wetland Protection Legisla- tion" in this volume for further discussion of mitiga- tion.) The EMAP Wetlands approach suggests that it might be possible to examine the condition (pris- tine or degraded) of a population of wetlands in a specified area. Periodic reevaluation of this popula- tion of wetlands might be used to determine trends in their condition and to identify the effects of broad policy decisions (such as "no net loss"), programs (such as mitigation banking where wetlands are cre- ated or restored to offset losses of other wetlands), or natural phenomena (such as climate change). References Cited Adamus, P.R, 1983, FHWA Assessment method, v. 2 of Method for wetland functional assessment: Washing- ton, D.C., U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration Report no. FHWA-IP-82-24, 134 p. ___1988, The FHWA/Adamus (WET) method for wet- land functional assessment., in Hook, D.D., McKee, W.H., Jr., Smith, H.K., Gregory, James, Burrell, V.G., Jr., DeVoe, M.R., Sojka, R.E., Gilbert, Stephen, Banks, Roger, Stolzy, L.H., Brooks, Chris, Mathews, T.D., and Shear, T.H., Management, use, and value of wetlands, v. 2 of The ecology and management of wetlands: Port- land, Oreg., Timber Press, p. 128-133. Adamus, P.R., Clairain, E.J., Jr., Smith, R.D., and Young, R.E., 1987, Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET), v. 2 o/Methodology: Vicksburg, Miss., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Opera- tional Draft Technical Report, 206 p. + appendixes. Adamus, PR., and Stockwell, L.T., 1983, Critical review and evaluation concepts, v. 1 of Method for wetland functional assessment: Washington, D.C., U.S. Depart- ment of Transportation, Federal Highway Administra- tion Report no. FHWA-IP-82-23, 176 p. Brinson, M.M., 1993, Hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands: Washington, D.C., U.S. Army Corps of En- gineers, Wetlands Research Program Technical Report WRP-DE-4, 79 p. Helfgott, T.B., Lefor, M.W., and Kennard, W.C., 1973, First Wetland Conference: Storrs, Conn., University of Con- necticut, Institute of Water Resources, Report 21, Pro- ceedings, 199 p. Kusler, J.A., 1983, Our national wetland heritage A pro- tection guidebook: Washington, D. C., Environmental Law Institute, p. 4. Kusler, J.A., and Montanari, J.H., 1978, National Wetland Protection Symposium: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services. FWS/OBS-78-97, Pro- ceedings, 255 p. Kusler, J.A., and Riexinger, Patricia, eds., 1986, National Wetland Assessment Symposium: Albany, N.Y., Asso- ciation of State Wetland Managers, Proceedings, 331 p. Lapedes, D.N., ed., 1976, McGraw-Hill dictionary of sci- entific and technical terms: New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1634 p. National Audubon Society, 1993, Saving wetlands A citizen's guide for action in the Mid-Atlantic region: Camp Hill, Pa., National Audubon Society, 130 p. Novitzki, R.P., 1994, EMAP Wetlands A program for assessing wetland condition, in Mitsch, W.J., ed., Glo- bal wetlands Old World and New: New York, Elsevier Science Publishers, p. 691-709. Novitzki, R.P., Rosen, B.H., McAllister, L.S., Ernst, T.L., Huntley, B.E., and Dwire, K., 1994, EMAP Wet- lands Research strategy for the assessment of wetland condition: Corvallis, Oreg., U.S. Environmental Pro- tection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, 149 p. Parrett, Charles, Melcher, N.B., and James, R.W., Jr., 1993, Flood discharges in the upper Mississippi River basin, 1993: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1120-A, 14 p. Richardson, Brandt, ed., 1981, Selected proceedings of the Midwest Conference on Wetland Values and Manage- ment: Navarre, Minn., Freshwater Society, 660 p. Smith, R.D., Ammann, Alan, Bartoldus, C., and Brinson, M.M., 1995, An approach for assessing wetland func- tions using hydrogeomorphic classification, reference wetlands, and functional indices: Vicksburg, Miss., U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Technical Report TRWRP-DE 10, [100 p.] Tiner, R.W, 1989, Wetlands of Rhode Island: Newton Cor- ner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, 71 p., appendix. Turner, R.E., and Swenson, E.M., 1994, Indicator develop- ment for evaluating estuarine emergent conditions salt marsh pilot technical narrative (draft final re- port): Baton Rouge, La., Louisiana State University, v. 1,65 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Richard P. Novitzki, ManTech Environmental Technology, Inc., 1600 S.W. West- ern Blvd., Corvallis, OR 97333; R. Daniel Smith, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, 3909 Halls Ferry Road, Vicksburg, MS 39180; Judy D. Fretwell, U.S. Geo- logical Survey, 407 National Center, Reston, VA 22092 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: RESTORATION, CREATION, AND RECOVERY 87 Restoration, Creation, and Recovery of Wetlands Wetland Restoration and Creation Mary E. Kentula1 The benefits of restoration of degraded or de- stroyed wetlands and creation of new wetlands has only recently been recognized. As the population has ex- panded across the Nation during the past few centu- ries, wetlands have been drained and altered to accom- modate human needs. These changes to wetlands have directly, or indirectly, brought about changes in the migratory patterns of birds, local climate, and the makeup of plant and animal populations. In the past, people used wetland plants and animals for shelter and food. More recently, people have become more aware of other benefits that wetlands provide water-qual- ity improvement, flood attenuation, esthetics, and rec- reational opportunities. Now, it is recognized that nu- merous losses are incurred when a wetland is damaged or destroyed. Restoration and creation can help main- tain the benefits of wetlands and their surrounding eco- systems, and at the same time accommodate the hu- man need for development. Wetland restoration rehabilitates a degraded wet- land or reestablishes a wetland that has been destroyed. Restoration takes place on land that has been, or still is, a wetland. A term commonly associated with res- toration is "enhanced." An enhanced wetland is an existing wetland that has been altered to improve a particular function, usually at the expense of other functions. For example, enhancing a site to increase its use by a particular species of bird commonly lim- its its use as habitat for other species. (For informa- tion on functions of wetlands see the articles "Wetland Hydrology, Water Quality, and Associated Functions" and "Wetland Functions, Values, and Assessment" in this volume.) Wetland creation is the construction of a wetland on a site that never was a wetland. This can be done only on a site where conditions exist that can produce and sustain a wetland. Consequently, creation is more difficult than restoration. A term commonly associated with wetland creation is "constructed." A constructed wetland is a wetland created specifically for the pur- pose of treating wastewater, stormwater, acid mine drainage, or agricultural runoff (Hammer, 1989). As used in this article, "project wetland" refers to restored or created wetlands. (For a more complete discussion of the meaning of these terms and others associated with restoration and creation, see Lewis, 1990.) CHALLENGES OF RESTORATION AND CREATION Ecological issues and physical limitations are important factors to consider when planning for wet- land restoration or creation. The relative merits of de- stroying the function of an existing wetland, or other ecosystem, in exchange for another wetland function involves the consideration of numerous questions such as: (1) Which is more important, the existing or the 1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). replacement function? (2) Will the proposed wetland increase wildlife diversity? (3) Is the increased diver- sity worth the loss of habitat of any endangered spe- cies? Questions of this type always arise during plan- ning for wetland restoration and creation. A well-documented example of a physical limi- tation associated with restoring a wetland can be seen along the shoreline of the Salmon River Estuary, Oreg. (Frenkel and Morlan, 1990, 1991). In the past, many high marsh wetlands along the Pacific coast were diked to remove them from tidal action. After the area was diked, the wetlands dried up and the land was used for pasture. In 1978, in an effort to restore the Salmon River Estuary to its original condition, two dikes were removed to allow the original wetlands to reestablish themselves. However, after 10 years, the resulting wet- lands (fig. 52) were not typical of other high marshes along the estuary. The land behind the dikes had sub- sided over time, and the restored wetlands were more typical of wetlands at lower elevations nearer the es- tuary (low marsh). Although the wetlands continue to evolve as sediments are trapped and deposited by the vegetation (thus raising the elevation), it might tabs another 50 years for the restored wetlands to become similar again to the original high marsh (Frenkel and Morlan, 1991). The time required and the ability to develop a fully functional soil system in project wet- lands may be major determinants of the eventual ac- ceptance or rejection of restoration and creation as management options. It is difficult to make a definitive statement about the ability to replace wetland functions. Goals for res- toration and creation projects seldom are stated and information on the existing functions of the wetlands seldom are documented. This is due, in part, to the difficulty and expense of quantifying wetland func- tions. Also, responsible monitoring during construc- tion and after completion of the project wetland is uncommon. Most information available on project wetlands is in the form of qualitative case studies. Wetland alter- ations have brought about changes in the migratory patterns of birds, local climate, and make up of plant and animal populations. Restoration and creation can help maintain the benefits of wetlands and accommodate the human need for development. Figure 52. View of a restored salt marsh in the Salmon River Estuary on the Oregon coast. (Photograph courtesy of the EPA Wetlands Research Program.) 88 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Benefits can extend beyond the wetland if care is taken in site selection. Hydrologic conditions probably are the most important determinants of wetland types and processes. DESIGNING FOR SUCCESS Much of the written material on wetland resto- ration and creation deals with "project design." Project design considers a large number of site-specific, in- terdependent factors that determine the structure and function of a wetland. Although there is no "cook- book" for restoring or creating wetlands, documents describing general approaches to restoration and cre- ation and the conditions conducive to project success are available (Garbisch, 1986; Marble, 1990; Pacific Estuarine Research Laboratory, 1990; Hammer, 1992; Maynord and others, 1992). Elements common to wetland project design are site-selection criteria, hy- drologic analysis, water source and quality, substrate augmentation and handling, plant material selection and handling, buffer zones placement, and long-term management. A brief overview of each element is pre- sented here in a sequence similar to that followed in project planning. Site selection. Sites for project wetlands often are selected on the basis of available land, or on poli- cies that require wetlands to be restored or created to compensate for nearby wetland losses (mitigation). A wetland's structure, function, and ability to persist over time are greatly influenced by its location. Wetlands in settings with limited human influence can differ greatly in structure and function from wetlands in set- tings dominated by human activities. Therefore, the present and projected land uses of the surrounding area are a consideration when selecting the site. The char- acteristics of existing wetlands, in the same general area, or in an area with similar land uses, can be used as models for what might be expected of the project wetland. Benefits that extend beyond the wetland itself can be derived from the placement of a wetland if care is taken in site selection. For example, restoration of riverbank wetlands between agricultural land and a stream can improve downstream water quality (Olson, 1992). Hydrologic analysis. Hydrologic conditions probably are the most important determinants of the type of wetland that can be established and what wet- land processes can be maintained (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993). Elements of site hydrology that are important to maintaining a wetland are inflows and outflows of ground water and surface water, the result- ing water levels, and the timing and duration of soil saturation or flooding. One factor influencing hydrology is the configu- ration of the basin (depression) containing the wetland. High water table Low water table The position of the basin surface relative to the water table influences the degree of soil saturation and flood- ing. To ensure that standing water is present year round, many project wetlands are excavated so that the deepest part of the basin is below the lowest antici- pated water level. The slope of the basin banks deter- mines how much of the site will be vegetated and by what kinds of plants (fig. 53). This is because the slope determines how far the substrate (soil or rock mate- rial that forms the surface of the basin) will be from water and how much of the substrate has the neces- sary conditions of wetness for specific plant species (Hollands, 1990). The ability to maintain the desired plant community, therefore, is ultimately dependent on the hydrology of the site. In a properly constructed freshwater marsh, the lowest point of the wetland will be inundated to a depth and for a period long enough that emergent vegetation can persist, but not so long as to destroy the plants. Water source and quality. Although it is com- monly acknowledged that site hydrology is a major determinant of the success or failure of wetland res- toration or creation, the influence of water quality of- ten is ignored. Inputs of chemicals from the surround- ing landscape can overwhelm a wetland's ability to improve water quality and can change the character- istics of the site. For example, deicing salts are used extensively along highways and, if they enter a wet- land, can alter the productivity and composition of its plant community, possibly favoring nuisance species such as purple loosestrife (Niering, 1989). Substrate augmentation and handling. Wet- lands are characterized by hydric soils, which develop as a result of an area being saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic (oxygen-deficient) conditions (U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1991) (fig. 54). Most of the chemical reactions in wetlands take place in the soils, where most chemicals are stored (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993). The soils of project wetlands are re- ceiving increased attention as studies link substrate characteristics to ecological function. Although a cre- ated wetland may be structurally similar to a natural wetland, its hydrology may differ greatly from that of the natural wetland if the permeability of the substrates differ (O'Brien, 1986). In addition to differences in permeability, soils in project wetlands commonly have a smaller amount of organic matter than soils in simi- lar natural wetlands. Because organic matter in soils stores nutrients that are critical to plant growth (Pa- High water table Low water table Figure 53. The relative position of a basin substrate, the water table, and differences in vegetation resulting from the degree of basin slope. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: RESTORATION, CREATION, AND RECOVERY 89 cific Estuarine Research Laboratory, 1990), the smaller amounts of organic matter in soils of project wetlands may limit plant growth (Langis and others, 1991). Augmenting, or mulching, the substrate of project wetlands with materials from a "donor" wet- land can increase soil organic matter and provide a source of needed plant species, microbes, and inver- tebrates. Mulching makes the substrate more condu- cive to rapid revegetation by reducing the evaporation of pore water, runoff, soil loss and erosion, and sur- face compaction and crusting (Thornburg, 1977). Mulching also can cause problems such as the intro- duction of unwanted plant species. Plant material selection and handling. Vegeta- tion is the most striking visual feature of a wetland. Be- cause of the unique and stressful conditions that de- velop in wetlands, varying from long periods of flood- ing to periodic drying, plants and animals found there have developed distinctive mechanisms to deal with these stresses and conditions. It is important to recog- nize the constraints of this unique environment when planning a project wetland. Plant communities estab- lished in project wetlands will fare better if they closely resemble communities in similar, local wetlands. To increase the likelihood of successful colonization, Garbisch (1986) suggests that project managers: Select herbaceous species that rapidly stabilize the substrate and that have potential value for fish and wildlife Select species that are adaptable to a broad range of water depths. A survey of vegetation at wet- lands of the type being created or restored can identify the conditions of "wetness" needed by species Avoid choosing only those species that are foraged by wildlife expected to use the site muskrats and geese have been known to denude sites Avoid committing significant areas of the site to species that have questionable potential for suc- cessful establishment In addition, Stark (1972) suggests the selection of "low maintenance" vegetation. Buffer zone placement. Protective measures are needed for many restored and created wetlands, par- ticularly in urbanized areas. This protection can take the form of an undeveloped, vegetated band around the wetland; a fence or barrier; or a lake or sediment ba- sin. This buffer between the wetland and surrounding land is desirable; however, the characteristics of an appropriate vegetated buffer are not well defined. Al- though composition is important, width is the most frequently cited characteristic of an adequate buffer zone. Requirements for both composition and width are dependent upon the adjacent land uses, their po- tential effect on the functions of the wetland, and the requirements of the animals that will use the wetland and buffer area. Buffers are used to: Deter predators from entering wetlands Trap and prevent undesirable materials from enter- ing the wetland through runoff from the sur- rounding landscape Provide habitat for wildlife that depend on uplands in addition to wetlands for part of their life cycle Long-term management. Careful monitoring of newly established wetlands and the ability to make mid-course corrections are critical to long-term suc- Figure 54. Scientist checking to see if a soil sample has the unique coloration typical of wetland (hydric) soils. (Photograph courtesy of the EPA Wetlands Research Program). cess. However, few project sponsors have been will- ing to assume long-term responsibility for managing these new systems (Kusler and Kentula, 1990b). Be- cause of this, project wetlands that are designed to be self-sustaining or self-managing will have the best chance of survival. The installation of control struc- tures, such as tide gates or pumps, that will require maintenance and are subject to vandalism could be dis- advantageous to the life of the project wetland. EVALUATION OF SUCCESS One of the most vexing aspects of wetland resto- ration and creation projects is defining success, pri- marily because there is no generally accepted defini- tion. This is true for many reasons lack of clearly stated objectives, lack of long-term monitoring (Kusler and Kentula, 1990b), and the subjective point of view of the definer (Roberts, 1993). The vast ma- jority of project wetlands are ecologically young 10 years of age or less. The lack of information on eco- logically mature projects limits the ability to predict whether or not the functions of project wetlands can replace the functions of natural wetlands. Neverthe- less, the results of ongoing research and good profes- sional judgment can be used to provide insight into the selection of projects that have a high probability of success. Various attempts have been made to define suc- cess criteria for wetland projects. The earliest criteria assumed that if conditions were correct for the estab- lishment of wetland vegetation, then other ecological functions would either be present or develop over time. Now, it is known that a site "green" with vegetation does not necessarily mean success, and the standards by which projects are judged are more likely to be tied to wetland functions. The Wetlands Research Program of the U.S. En- vironmental Protection Agency (EPA) is developing an approach to establish quantitative performance crite- Chemicals from the surrounding landscape can overwhelm a wetland's ability to improve water quality. Plants in project wetlands fare better if they closely resemble those in similar, local wetlands. 90 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES It is still uncertain if a full suite of wetland functions can be replaced. ria for project wetlands. In this approach, groups of natural wetlands serve as reference sites against which project wetlands are judged. For example, Zedler (1993) uses reference data from natural marshes be- ing used by clapper rails (an indigenous bird species) to define criteria that can be used to judge the suitabil- ity of restored and created habitat for the birds. Older project wetlands also are used as reference sites against which to judge newer project wetlands, both to verify that development is as expected and to identify devel- opmental patterns that may have resulted from changes in project design (Kentula and others, 1992). This approach is designed to produce results that are region- ally applicable to wetland protection and management. One tool for comparing the characteristics of project wetlands with similar, naturally occurring wet- lands is a performance curve (fig. 55). Functions in a group of restored wetlands can be expected to increase gradual ly with time to a point of maturity at which time the level of function has stabilized. The mean level of function in mature project wetlands is generally less than that for natural wetlands. Rate and time of matu- ration and functional level at maturity will differ from project to project, depending on the type of wetland being restored. The curve provides information on when to monitor, how restored wetlands typically de- velop, and when project goals have been met. Changes in the characteristics of project wetlands can be ex- pected in response to the maturation process, but also in response to changes in the environment. Informa- tion on the development of project wetlands and simi- lar natural wetlands helps managers determine whether an observed change is typical for a particular year or stage of development. Over time, successful project wetlands can be ex- pected to become similar to comparable natural wet- lands. A comparison of plant diversity on project wet- lands and similar natural wetlands in Oregon (Kentula and others, 1992), Connecticut (Confer and Niering, 1o 13 £ ww z *3» pu LL. LL. LU z5 1 9 ------k-r^---*-^---^^--*-- . x"' \ * "*" * x x Maturity - x ^ * x $ s t x f / _^< «. EXPLANATION Mean level of function For natural wetlands at a point in time For restored wetlands at a point in time For natural wetlands over time For immature restored wetlands over time For mature restored wetlands over time 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 INCREASING MONITORING TIME Figure 55. Typical performance curve illustrating the comparison of groups of natural wetlands and restored wetlands of the same type and similar size in the same land-use setting. (Source: Modified from Kentula and others, 1992.) 1992), and Florida (Brown, 1991) showed that, al- though the level of diversity differs with each project, diversity tends to be higher on each project wetland than on its natural counterpart. The type of wetland studied was a pond with a fringe of freshwater marsh (fig. 56). If a project wetland develops as hoped and expected, after 2 to 5 years it probably will have a plant diversity greater than or equal to that of similar natu- ral wetlands. As competition for space and resources increases and the plants more completely cover the site, the diversity usually decreases and the plant com- munity tends to become more like that of a mature site. STATUS OF THE SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE OF RESTORATION AND CREATION Current scientific knowledge about successful wetland restoration and creation has been documented in "Wetland Creation and Restoration: The Status of the Science" (Kusler and Kentula, 1990a). Although the literature on wetland restoration and creation has increased since the publication of that book, the gen- eral assessment presented still applies. Key points from the Executive Summary (Kusler and Kentula, 1990b) are discussed below. (Additional information on res- toration of aquatic systems, including wetlands, can be found in a recent publication by the National Research Council Committee on Restoration of Aquatic Ecosys- tems, 1992.) The status of scientific knowledge about wetland restoration and creation differs by wetland function, type, and location. It is still uncertain if the full suite of functions provided by a particular wetland type can be replaced. Full functional replacement has not yet been demonstrated. In the case of specific functions, the most is known about replacement of flood storage and waterfowl habitat, and the least is known about wa- ter-quality-improvement and ground-water-associated functions. The more complex the hydrology and ecol- ogy of a system, the more difficult it is to restore the system. Complete restoration might be impossible in some systems. With respect to types and locations of wetlands, the most is known about restoration and creation of intertidal salt marshes along the coasts of the United States, in particular, the tall cordgrass marshes of the Atlantic coast. However, these salt marshes comprise only about 5 percent of the total wetland area of the Nation and are only a small part of the marine and estuarine wetlands. Much less is known about restoration and cre- ation of inland freshwater wetlands, such as ponds, forested wetlands, or bogs and fens. Among these wetlands, most is known about restoration and cre- ation of those dominated by open water, such as ponds, and the associated herbaceous vegetation. Much less is known about replacing forested wetlands because of the time needed for woody vegetation to mature. Experts agree, however, that the ecosystems that are least likely to be successfully replaced are bogs and fens. These are the wetlands with deep or- ganic soils that have developed over thousands of years and that have hydrologic conditions that are difficult, if not impossible, to duplicate. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: RESTORATION, CREATION, AND RECOVERY 91 FEDERAL AGENCY RESEARCH ON WETLAND RESTORATION AND CREATION Several Federal agencies have missions, and therefore conduct research activities, that involve wet- lands. This section presents a brief overview of Fed- eral research on wetland restoration and creation. [For more information on wetland research by Federal agencies, see the publications of the Wetlands Research Program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the article "Wetland Research by Federal Agen- cies" in this volume.] The Corps has been leading an effort to provide a reference source on current wetland research being conducted by Federal agencies. The first edition (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wetlands Research Program, 1992) presents information pro- vided by the Corps, the EPA, the Soil Conservation Service (renamed Natural Resources Conservation Service in October 1994), the Forest Service, the Na- tional Marine Fisheries Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the U.S. Geological Survey. The Corps surveyed over 25 agencies in 1993.1b complement the Corps' reference source, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is maintain- ing the Wetland Creation/Restoration data base to pro- vide a current compilation of the published literature. A hard copy of the bibliographic material contained in the digital data base also has been produced (Schneller-McDonald and others, 1989). Federal agencies' research into wetland restora- tion and creation generally falls into two categories design implementation and performance evaluation. Major contributions on project design have been made by agencies involved in large-scale development, like the Corps (Maynord and others, 1992) and the Fed- eral Highway Administration (Marble, 1990). The EPA has focused its research on evaluation to support the agency responsibilities under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Zedler and Kentula, 1986; Leibowitz and others, 1992). Agencies responsible for stewardship of living resources, such as the National Marine Fisher- ies Service, have produced information that will in- crease their effectiveness in management (Thayer, 1992). The Natural Resources Conservation Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service probably will con- tribute the most information on practical, low-cost approaches to wetland restoration under the 1990 Farm Bill (Food, Agriculture Conservation and Trade Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-624) and the Wetland Reserve Program. Under these programs, thousands of wetland acres previously converted to agriculture have been restored to wetlands. To support these efforts, both agencies have produced guidelines for their field per- sonnel who are working with the farmers to restore wetlands (U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1992; Wenzel, 1992). (For more information on legislation affecting wetlands, see the article "Wetland Protection Legislation" in this volume.) CONCLUSIONS Wetland restoration and creation is more an art than a science, and functional replacement of wetlands has not been conclusively demonstrated. At the same time, the growing body of literature and experience is Figure 56. This pond with a fringe of marsh in Portland, Oreg., is a restored wetland and is an example of the type of freshwater project wetland most common in this country. (Photograph courtesy of the EPA Wetlands Research Program.) increasing the ability to discern which projects have a high probability of restoring or replacing damaged or lost ecosystems. Two factors that most limit the effec- tive use of restoration and creation are: (1) lack of information on ecologically mature restored and cre- ated wetlands, and on the maturation process; and (2) the limited number of well designed and well con- structed project wetlands that can be used as models. In general, restoration is likely to be more suc- cessful than creation. Restoration of a damaged or destroyed wetland will have a greater chance of estab- lishing the range of prior wetland functions, includ- ing critical habitat. Also, chances are greater for the long-term persistence of a restored wetland than for one created where none existed before. Ecosystems that are least likely to be successfully replaced are bogs and fens. References Cited Brown, M.T., 1991, Evaluating constructed wetlands through comparisons with natural wetlands: Corvallis, Oreg., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, EPA/600/3-91/058, 37 p. Confer, S.R., and Niering, W.A., 1992, Comparison of cre- ated and natural freshwater emergent wetlands in Con- necticut: Wetlands Ecology and Management, v. 2, no. 3, p. 143-156. Frenkel, R.E., and Morlan, J.C., 1990, Restoration of the Salmon River salt marshes Retrospect and perspec- tive: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, 142 p. ____1991, Can we restore our salt marshes? Lessons from the Salmon River, Oregon: Northwest Environmental Journal, v. 7, p. 119-135. Garbisch, E.W., Jr., 1986, Highways and wetlands Com- pensating wetland losses: McLean, Va., Federal High- way Administration, Office of Implementation, Contract Report DOT-FH-11-9442, 60 p. Hammer, D.A., ed., 1989, Constructed wetlands for waste- water treatment Municipal, industrial, and agricul- tural: Chelsea, Mich., Lewis Publishers, Inc., 831 p. Hammer, D.A., 1992, Creating freshwater wetlands: Chelsea, Mich., Lewis Publishers, Inc., 298 p. Restoration is likely to be more successful than creation. 92 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OVERVIEW OF WETLAND RESOURCES Hollands, G.G., 1990, Regional analysis of creation and res- toration of kettle and pothole wetlands, in Kusler, J.A., and Kentula, M.E., eds., Wetland creation and restora- tion The status of the science: Washington, D.C., Is- land Press, p. 281-298. Kentula, M.E., Brooks, R.P., Gwin, S.E., Holland, C.C., Sherman, A.D., and Sifneos, J.C., 1992, An approach to improving decision making in wetland restoration and creation: Washington, D.C., Island Press, 151 p. Kusler, J.A., and Kentula, M.E., eds., 1990a, Wetland cre- ation and restoration The status of the science: Wash- ington, D.C., Island Press, 591 p. Kusler, J.A., and Kentula, M.E., 1990b, Executive summary, in Kusler, J.A., and Kentula, M.E., eds.. Wetland cre- ation and restoration The status of the science: Wash- ington, D.C., Island Press, p. xvii-xxv. Langis, Rene, Zalejko, M.K., and Zedler, J.B., 1991, Nitro- gen assessments in a constructed and natural salt marsh of San Diego Bay: Ecological Applications v. 1, p. 40- 51. Leibowitz, S.G., Preston, E.M., Arnaut, L.Y., Detenbeck, N.E., Hagley, C.A., Kentula, M.E., Olson, R.K., Sanville, W.D., and Sumner, R.R., 1992, Wetland re- search plan An integrated risk-based approach: Corvallis, Oreg., U.S. Environmental Protection Agen- cy, Environmental Research Laboratory, EPA/600/R-92/ 060, 123 p. Lewis, R.R., Jr., 1990, Wetland restoration/creation/enhance- ment terminology Suggestions for standardization, in Kusler, J.A., and Kentula, M.E., eds., Wetland creation and restoration The status of the science: Washington, D.C., Island Press, p. 417^23. Marble, A.D., 1990, A guide to wetland functional design: McLean, Va., Federal Highway Administration Report Number FHWA-IP-90-010, 222 p. Maynord, S.T., Landin, M.C., McCormick, J.W., Davis, J.E., Evans, R.A., and Hayes, D.F., 1992, Design of habitat restoration using dredged material at Bodkin Island, Chesapeake Bay, Maryland: Vicksburg, Miss., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Sta- tion, Wetlands Research Program Technical Report WRP-RE-3, 33 p. + tables and figures. Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G., 1993, Wetlands (second edition): New York,Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, Inc., 722 p. National Research Council Committee on Restoration of Aquatic Ecosystems Science, Technology, and Public Policy, 1992, Restoration of aquatic ecosystems Sci- ence, technology, and public policy: Washington. D.C., National Academy Press, 552 p. Niering, W.A., 1989, Effects of stormwater runoff on wet- land vegetation: Proceedings of the Stormwater Confer- ence, Southborough, Mass., New England Institute for Environmental Studies, p. 1-38. O'Brien, A.L., 1986, Hydrology and the construction of a mitigating wetland, in Larson, J.S., and Neill, Christo- pher, eds.. Mitigating freshwater wetland alterations in the glaciated northeastern United States An assess- ment of the science base: Amherst, Mass., Environmen- tal Institute, University of Massachusetts, Publication 87-1. p. 83-200. Olson, R.K., ed., 1992, Special Issue The role of created and natural wetlands in controlling nonpoint source pol- lution: Ecological Engineering, v. 1, no. 1/2, p. 1-170. Pacific Estuarine Research Laboratory, 1990, A manual for assessing restored and natural coastal wetlands with examples from southern California: LaJolla, Calif., Cali- fornia Sea Grant Report Number T-CSGCP-021, 105 P- Roberts, L., 1993, Wetlands trading is a losing game, say ecologists: Science, v. 260, no. 5116, p. 1,890-1,892. Schneller-McDonald, Karen, Ischinger, L.S., and Auble, G.T., 1989, Wetland creation and restoration Description and summary of the literature: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 89,66 p. + database records. Stark, Nellie, 1972, Low maintenance vegetation Wildland shrubs, their biology and utilization: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Gen- eral Technical Report INT-1. Thayer, G.W, ed., 1992, Restoring the Nation's marine en- vironment: College Park, Md., Maryland Sea Grant College, 716 p. Thornburg, A., 1977, Use of vegetation for stabilization of shorelines of the Great Lakes, in the Proceedings of the Workshop on the Role of Vegetation in Stabilization of the Great Lakes Shoreline: Ann Arbor, Mich., Great Lakes Basin Commission, p. 39-53. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wetlands Research Program, 1992, National summary of ongoing wetlands research by Federal agencies (1992): Vicksburg, Miss., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Sta- tion, 69 p. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1991, Soils Hydric soils of the United States: Washington, D.C., U.S. Depart- ment of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service Miscel- laneous Publication Number 1491. ____1992, Field handbook, Chapter 13 Wetland resto- ration, enhancement, and creation: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 79 p. Wenzel, T.A., 1992, Minnesota wetland restoration guide: Minneapolis, Minn., Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources. Zedler, J.B., 1993, Canopy architecture of natural and planted cordgrass marshes Selecting habitat evaluation crite- ria: Ecological Applications, v. 3, no. 1, p. 123-138. Zedler, J.B., and Kentula, M.E., 1986, Wetlands research plan: Corvallis, Oreg., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, EPA/600/ 3-86/009, 118 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Mary E. Kentula, Wetlands Research Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR 97333 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: RESTORATION, CREATION, AND RECOVERY 93 Restoration, Creation and Recovery of Wetlands Effects of Hurricane Andrew (1992) on Wetlands in Southern Florida and Louisiana By John K. Lovelace 1 and Benjamin R McPherson 1 Hurricane Andrew was a small but powerful storm that caused massive destruction along a path through southern Florida and south-central Louisi- ana in late August 1992 (fig. 57). Rainfall associated with Andrew was light for a hurricane because of the small size and rapid forward movement of the storm. However, rainfall totals of more than 7 inches were recorded for the storm period in southeastern Florida and Louisiana: a high of 11.9 inches was recorded in Hammond, La. (Rappaport, 1992). Maximum sus- tained windspeeds of 141 mph (miles per hour), with gusts of 169 mph, were recorded on August 24, just before landfall in Florida (Rappaport, 1992). A storm surge of about 17 feet above sea level was recorded at Biscayne Bay, Fla. (fig. 58) and about 9 feet near Terrebonne Bay in south-central Louisiana (fig. 59). Hurricane Andrew originated in the North Atlan- tic Ocean, moved westward over the Bahamas, and made landfall near the southern tip of Florida on the morning of August 24. After passing over the Florida Everglades, the storm proceeded in a northwesterly direction across the Gulf of Mexico and made land- fall in south-central Louisiana at Point Chevreuil on the morning of August 26. Andrew deteriorated rap- idly after landfall in Louisiana and was downgraded to a tropical depression on August 27. The remnants of Andrew proceeded on a northeasterly path, produc- ing severe weather throughout the Southeastern States (Rappaport, 1992). Hurricane Andrew moved across southern Florida at an average forward speed of 18 mph (Na- tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1992). As it crossed southern Florida, Andrew left a path of destruction 25 miles wide and 60 miles long (Gore, 1993). Andrew left a path of destruc- tion 25 miles wide and 60 miles long TEXAS EXPLANATION ^H Tropical-storm-force winds L__j Hurricane-force winds Hurricane passage Storm passage 25 6am Date and time X %/ * <* & V *yy % $ 300 MILES 300 KILOMETERS *- % i;^/^* *' x y Issues, resources, status, and management Proceedings of a seminar held in Washington, D.C., November 17, 1988: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra- tion, Estuary-of-the-Month Seminar Series no. 15, p. 63-88. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1981, Environmental data inventory, State of Alabama: Mobile, Ala., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 325 p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1985, Status and conditions of land and water resources in Alabama, 1982: Auburn, Ala., U.S. Department of Agriculture, 140 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992, Regional wetlands concept plan, Emergency Wetlands Resources Act, Southeast Region: Atlanta, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 259 p. Watzin, M.C., Tucker, Sandy, and South, Celeste, in press, Environmental problems in the Mobile Bay ecosystem The cumulative effects of human activities: Mobile, Ala., Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Con- sortium Publication. Winter, T.C., and Woo, Ming-Ko, 1990, Hydrology of lakes and wetlands, in Wolman, M.G., and Riggs, H.C., eds., Surface water hydrology: Boulder, Colo., Geological Society of America, The Geology of North America, v. O-l, p. 159-187. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 520 19th Avenue, Tuscaloosa, AL 35401; Regional Wetland Coor- dinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Building, Atlanta, GA 30345 Prepared by Benjamin F. McPherson, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 107 Alaska Wetland Resources laska has more area covered by wetlands approximately 170 million of its 367 million acres than the total area of wetlands in the other 49 States combined (Dahl, 1990). Alaska has a wide vari- ety of topographic, geologic, climatic, and hydrologic conditions that contribute to the variety of wetland complexes in the State. Alaska's wetland complexes differ in size, function, and type, and they in- clude types that are rare in other States, such as vast expanses of treeless tundra (fig. I) in northern Alaska and extensive black spruce peatlands, or muskegs, elsewhere in the State. Wetlands are sociologically, ecologically, and economically important to Alaska. Wetlands provide the resources for people in rural Alaskan villages to survive (Ellanna and Wheeler, 1990) almost all subsistence hunting, fishing, trapping, and food gather- ing occurs on or adjacent to wetlands. Many mammals, fish, and birds within the State depend on some type of wetland for breed- ing, nesting, rearing young, or feeding. Alaska's wetlands provide recreational opportunities and support related businesses for people who hunt, observe, and photograph wildlife. Alaska has seven wetland complexes that are important for their water-habitat value (Tiner, 1984): Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Izembek Lagoon, Yukon Flats, Teshekpuk Lake, upper Alaska Pen- insula, Copper River Delta, and upper Cook Inlet. In general, wet- lands in Alaska that have the highest value for waterfowl are coastal salt marshes and wetlands in and adjacent to lakes that have exten- sive periods of drawdown or that fluctuate with river flow (Lensink andDerksen, 1990). During spring and fall migrations, huge flocks of waterfowl (ducks, geese, and swans) and shorebirds (dowitchers, godwits, plovers, turnstones, sandpipers, curlews, snipe, phalaropes, and yellowlegs) stop at wetland areas in Alaska. More than 70,000 swans, 1 million geese, 12 million ducks, and 100 million shorebirds de- pend on Alaskan wetlands for resting, feeding, or nesting (King and Lensink, 1971). During years of drought in prairie States and Prov- inces of Canada, birds displaced from their traditional breeding areas fly northward to wetlands in Alaska. Alaska wetlands provide forage for large mammals such as caribou, moose, and musk oxen. They also provide food and habi- tat for beaver, muskrat, mink, and land otter. Rocky coastal beaches serve as rookeries (areas where breeding and pupping occur) and resting areas for marine mammals such as seal, sea lion, and wal- rus. Alaska wetlands sustain some of the world's richest commer- cial, sport, and subsistence fisheries. Almost 90 percent of wild salmon caught in the United States are caught in Alaskan waters. These fish rely on palustrine and riverine wetlands to provide food, cover, and spawning areas during their life in inland waters, and they pass through riverine, estuarine, and marine wetlands on their mi- gration to and from the ocean. Resident freshwater and estuarine fish also depend on wetland habitat. Wetlands in Alaska have important hydrologic and water-qual- ity functions, including flow regulation, erosion control, sediment retention, nutrient uptake, and contaminant removal. Many wetlands have limited flood-control or water-storage functions during snow- melt because their soils are seasonally or perennially frozen, limit- ing absorption of runoff. However, several characteristics of wet- lands help reduce peak flows, even when soils are frozen (Post, 1990). Water is detained behind hummocks and within depressions, ponds, and lakes, and the velocity of the water is slowed by vegeta- tion. The mosses, peats, and mineral soils of wetlands can become dryer during winter, and during snowmelt these materials are able to absorb some meltwater. Following snowmelt, wetlands have a greater capacity for streamflow regulation because the capacity of the soils to store water increases: higher temperatures increase the thickness of unfrozen soils and increase evaporation and plant tran- spiration, which help lower the water table. Wetland plants help control the erosion of mineral soils by decreasing wind and water velocities near the ground and by hold- ing soil particles together with their roots. In permafrost areas, veg- etation also reduces erosion by preventing the warming and thaw- ing of ice-rich soils. In flood plains, wetland vegetation removes some suspended sediment from floodwaters by slowing water ve- locities. Wetlands in Alaska transform and retain nutrients and toxic compounds. Nutrients and contaminants attach to the organic and fine mineral soils. Plants, phytoplankton, fungi, and bacteria use the nutrients and degrade some of the contaminants. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deepwater habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and others, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Alaska is shown in figure 2A\ only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this sum- mary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Esluarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Alaska are described on page 3. Figure 1. Tundra on the Arctic coastal plain southwest of the Kavik River. Willow thickets are present along the meandering stream. (Photograph by F.C. Golet, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.) 108 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES !60' BFAUFORT SEA WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown Uttffum Suckling Sound Cape Fairweattier Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat Glacier , ^35" vK I QJpredc ^* f ^^i j~:t,^.i,*r i 6°r\ is- 1 1 1 ^* «* i I 1 >*« . *j ^'eutt'an j island 5 \ ^^-" ~~~"^'^--J?° 175-- 170'- 1( 5" t ^ - * . Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Alaska and physical and climatological features that control wetland distribution in the State. A, Distribu- tion of wetlands and deepwater habitats, B, Geographic divisions. C, Climatic zones. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Geographic divisions modified from Lamke, 1986; landforms data from EROS Data Center. C, Hartman and Johnson, 1978.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: ALASKA 109 System Palustrine, Lacustrine Riverine. Estuarine. Wetland description Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees {forested wet- lands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); mosses and lichens (moss- lichen wetland); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to per- manently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand {ppt} and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. Wetlands and deepwater habitats in Alaska are being invento- ried by the FWS. As of December 1992, about 25 percent of the State had been mapped to determine acreage of the wetland types within the classification system of Cowardin and others (1979). Wetlands also have been inventoried in some of Alaska's urban areas by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). Maps showing wetland areas for parts of Anchorage, Fairbanks, Juneau, and the Kenai Peninsula are available. The Natural Resource Conservation Service and Alaska Department of Natural Resources Soil and Water Conser- vation Districts also have mapped wetlands in some parts of south- central and interior Alaska having agricultural and potentially agri- cultural lands. The FWS 170-million-acre estimate for wetland area in Alaska (Dahl, 1990) is based on soil surveys, land-cover maps, National Wetland Inventory maps, and preliminary results of sta- tistical surveys conducted by the National Wetland Inventory. Marine. The Joint Federal-State Land Use Planning Commission for Alaska (1973), Batten and Murray (1982), Lee and Hinckley (1982), Batten (1990), and Viereck and others (1992) describe Alaska's wetland vegetation. Many plants in Alaska grow well in a wide range of climate, soil, and water conditions. Some species dominate plant communities on both wet and dry soils, sometimes making it diffi- cult to differentiate Alaska wetlands from uplands solely on the basis of vascular-plant communities. Palustrine System. Most of Alaska's wetlands are palustrine. Palustrine wetlands in Alaska include both peatlands (wetlands that have organic soils) and nonpeatlands. Peatlands, also known as mires, occur throughout Alaska and cover an estimated 27 to 110 million acres (Northern Technical Services and EKONO, Inc., 1980; Dachnowski-Stokes, 1941), depending on the peatland definition and inventory techniques used. In general, a peatland is a moss-li- chen, emergent, scrub-shrub, or forested wetland containing more than 12 inches of a wet organic soil (peat) consisting of partly to well-decomposed plants. However, definitions of peatland differ in the thickness of peat required. Peat forms when the rate of plant production exceeds the rate of decomposition, usually under wa- ter-saturated conditions. Poor air circulation, low levels of oxygen, and cool ground water within the saturated soil inhibit the activity of soil bacteria and fungi, so dead plant material decomposes slowly. Some peatlands in Alaska are underlain by poorly permeable silt, clay, well-decomposed peat, or bedrock, which contribute to the water-holding capacity of those sites. Throughout Alaska, peat is commonly several feet thick in topographic depressions and in poorly drained lowlands. Bogs and fens are peatlands that generally have a water table near the surface and ground-cover vegetation that is predominantly mosses. Sedges, heath shrubs, and trees commonly grow above the moss layer. In Alaska, sphagnum and feather mosses commonly dominate the ground cover in flat peatlands having rain and snow as the predominant sources of water (bogs), whereas brown mosses, grasses, and sedges are more prevalent on low-gradient slopes hav- ing some internal drainage or ground-water inflow (fens). A moss- floored peatland containing black spruce trees found primarily on cold, wet, poorly drained soils is commonly referred to as muskeg. A muskeg can be either a bog or a fen, depending on the source of water. Bogs and fens underlain by permafrost are extensive in wet, low-relief areas near the Yukon and Kuskokwim Rivers in interior Alaska, where they cover about 9 million acres (Joint Federal- State D PRECIPITATION Line of equal annual precipitation- Interval, In inches, is variable PERMAFROST I 'I Generally underlain by continuous permafrost B Underlain by discontinuous permafrost I ] Underlain by isolated masses of permafrost ^B Generally free from permafrost Figure 2. Continued. D, Average annual precipitation. E, Permafrost distribution. (Sources: D, Lamke, 1986. E, Ferrians, 1965.) 110 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Land Use Planning Commission for Alaska, 1973). In southeastern Alaska, where the terrain is mountainous, fens are more abundant than bogs. Bogs and fens in southeastern Alaska form at the edges of mountain slopes and on adjacent lowlands. There, the wetlands are not underlain by permafrost but are commonly underlain by bedrock at a shallow depth. Tundra, marshes, and meadows form in wet areas over min- eral or organic soils. Tundra is characterized by treeless terrain covered by mosses, lichens, grasses, sedges, and low shrubs (mostly emergent, moss-lichen, or scrub-shrub wetland). Permafrost com- monly is present at a shallow depth. Tundra occurs where summers are not warm enough for tree growth and is most extensive in north- ern Alaska and above treeline in mountains throughout the State. Three general types of tundra communities exist wet, moist, and alpine. The Joint Federal-State Land Use Planning Commission for Alaska (1973) estimated that wet tundra covers about 33 mil- lion acres, moist tundra about 66 million acres, and alpine tundra about 85 million acres. Most lowland tundra remains wet or moist throughout the short thawing season because it is underlain by per- mafrost. However, only a small part of alpine tundra in higher moun- tain regions is considered wetland. Freshwater marshes (emergent wetlands) are periodically in- undated by standing or slowly moving water. Marshes in Alaska contain sedges, rushes, marestail. and other aquatic plants. The vegetation shows a distinct zonation according to water depth and frequency of exposure. Marshes are distinguished from bogs and fens by the general absence of moss, heath-type shrubs, and peat. Marshes are common around the margins of lakes, ponds, and riv- ers, in wet depressions and oxbows, on flood plains, in deltas, and on gently sloping benches receiving water from steeper slopes above. Wet meadows (emergent wetlands) occupy seasonally flooded sites that dry out late in the growing season, although soils typically re- main saturated. Wet meadows are covered predominantly by her- baceous emergent plants, usually sedges, and are present on flood plains, lakeshores, and poorly drained lowlands throughout the State. Palustrine wetlands within braided stream channels are com- monly dominated by woody plants and perennial herbs. Willow and alder are the predominant plants in riparian scrub-shrub wetlands adjacent to Alaska's many rivers. Cottonwood predominates in ri- parian forested wetlands. Ponds commonly contain aquatic beds with water lilies, pondweeds, and submersed aquatic plants. Lacustrine System. Alaska has hundreds of thousands of lakes which together cover more than 5 million acres (Joint Fed- eral-State Land Use Planning Commission for Alaska, 1973), but estimates of the area covered by wetlands within these lakes are not available. Lakes are abundant in lowlands underlain by permafrost, in oxbows along braided and meandering rivers, in depressions in glacial-drift deposits, and in mountain valleys dammed by glacial moraines. Many lakes in Alaska contain aquatic beds in deeper water and emergent aquatic plants in shallower water, commonly grading into surrounding palustrine and riverine wetlands. Lacustrine wetlands used extensively by waterfowl are char- acteristically in lakes having gradually sloping shorelines and ex- tensive shallow areas; profuse growth of submersed aquatic plants; a border of palustrine wetlands vegetated by emergent plants such as sedges, cattails, and bulrush; an extensive band of grassland around the lake; an abundance of aquatic insects; and a lake bot- tom composed of mineral soil (Lensink and Derksen, 1990). Those characteristics are common in lakes that have long periods of gradu- ally receding water levels or that are connected to a river. In the Yukon Flats, such lakes have the highest density of nesting water- fowl in interior Alaska, and they support a breeding population of more than 1 million ducks. Riverine System. Wetlands within river channels include bars and flats of mud, sand, or gravel. Alaska has tens of thousands of rivers, streams, and creeks, but estimates of riverine wetland acre- age are not available. Riverine wetlands provide critical spawning and rearing habitat for resident fish and for fish that migrate from the ocean to spawn. Many riverine wetlands are subject to annual or periodic inundations caused by snowmelt, glacier melt, and sum- mer rainfall. Vegetated wetlands in low-gradient channels include submersed and floating aquatic plants and nonpersistent emergent plants such as buckbean, pendent grass, and cinquefoil. Vegetated wetlands in high-gradient mountain streams are dominated by sub- mersed aquatic mosses. Estuarine System. Estuarine wetlands cover about 2 million acres in Alaska (Hall, 1988). Nonvegetated estuarine wetlands in- clude flats, beaches, and rocky shores, which cover about 1.7 mil- lion acres and are most abundant (about 874,000 acres) in north- western and southwestern Alaska. Tidal flats are mud and sand shores that appear to lack vegetation; however, a rich layer of mi- croscopic plants such as diatoms, blue-green algae, and dinoflagel- lates typically covers the sediments. Intertidal sand and mud flats bordering the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta cover about 130,000 acres and in places are more than 6 miles wide. A series of barrier islands protects large areas of nonvegetated tidal flats in the Copper River Delta. More than 20,000 acres of tidal flats occur on the seaward edge of the Colville River Delta on the Beaufort Sea Coast. Exten- sive tidal flats not associated with major river deltas include Gustavus Flats near the mouth of Glacier Bay, intertidal lagoons of Tugidak and Sitkinak Islands south of Kodiak Island, and vast mudflats in upper Cook Inlet. Vegetated estuarine wetlands cover about 345,000 acres in Alaska (Hall. 1988). The most common type of estuarine vegetated wetland is the salt marsh (emergent wetland). Salt marshes contain- ing sedges and grasses occur in tidally flooded, low-energy areas, such as gently sloping shores close to the mouths of rivers or be- hind barrier islands and beaches. Large salt-marsh complexes oc- cur along the 500-mile shoreline of the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta (about 162.000 acres), on the outer edge of the Copper River Delta, and in the upper Cook Inlet area. Several million migrating shore- birds and waterfowl use these coastal salt marshes for feeding and resting. Vegetated estuarine wetlands also include aquatic beds of al- gae and eelgrass. Rocky materials in tidal flats along the Aleutian Islands, in the western Gulf of Alaska, and in southeastern Alaska provide habitat for algae. During fall, nearly the entire world's popu- lation of Steller's eiders and emperor geese gather in aquatic-bed wetlands in lagoons along the upper Alaska Peninsula. Izembek Lagoon near the tip of the Alaska Peninsula contains one of the largest eelgrass beds in the world, more than 84,000 acres. This lagoon serves as an international crossroad for migratory waterfowl and shorebirds from Asia, the mid-Pacific, and North America. Safety Lagoon on Seward Peninsula and Tugidak Lagoon on Tugidak Island are other large eelgrass beds important to migrating water- fowl. Marine System. Marine wetlands, which border the open ocean and are exposed to high-energy waves, cover about 46,000 acres in Alaska (Hall. 1988). Nonvegetated marine wetlands are generally sand and cobble-gravel shores or rocky shores. Most of the 250-mile coastline between Cape Suckling and Cape Fair- weather in the northern part of the Gulf of Alaska is sand beach, whereas most of the coast along the Aleutian Island chain is bed- rock and boulder rocky shores. Vegetated marine wetlands occur primarily as algal aquatic beds colonizing rocky shores of the Alaska Peninsula and shores adjacent to the Gulf of Alaska. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands are present wherever topographic, climatic, and hy- drologic conditions favor the retention of water. Low relief, perma- frost, a general abundance of precipitation relative to evaporation National Water Summary Wetland Resources: ALASKA 111 and plant transpiration, short cool summers, poorly permeable rocks near the land surface, and large tidal fluctuations help form and maintain extensive wetlands in Alaska. Wetland characteristics con- tinuously change with changes in climate, water supply, soil mois- ture, salinity, maturation of vegetation communities, tectonic activ- ity, fire, ice scour, glacier advance and retreat, and human activi- ties such as draining and filling. Alaska has seven broad, generally recognized geographic re- gions (fig. 26), These regions are Southeast, Aleutian Islands, South- central, Southwest, Northwest, Arctic, and Interior Alaska. Alaska has four climatic zones Maritime, Transition, Continental, and Arctic (fig. 2C). The State's high mountain ranges, extensive coast- line, vast size one-sixth the total area of the United States and long north-to-south distance are the principal causes for the great differences in climate. From the northern part of the Arctic Zone to the southern part of the Maritime Zone, average annual precipita- tion ranges from about 5 to 320 inches (fig. 2D), and average an- nual temperature ranges from 10 to 45 degrees Fahrenheit. Two- thirds of the annual precipitation occurs from September through March in the Maritime Zone and from June through November in the Continental and Arctic Zones. In the Transition Zone, seasonal precipitation patterns are not sharply defined, fluctuate from year to year, and can resemble those of either the Maritime or Continen- tal Zones. Spring snowmelt supplies the most input to the annual water budget in most Alaskan wetlands. Snowmelt is generally confined to a short time period during spring but produces considerable run- off because it can represent the precipitation accumulated for most of the year. During summer, local rain or the melting of snow and glacier ice in upland areas replenishes the water supply of many wetlands. In much of the Southeast and South-central regions of Alaska, precipitation greatly exceeds evaporation. Many wetlands throughout Alaska are underlain by poorly permeable materials, such as decomposed peat, bedrock, silt, clay, seasonally frozen soils, or permafrost, that do not readily allow water from snowmelt or rain to pass through. Permafrost, soil having a temperature below freezing for 2 years or more, helps form and maintain wetlands in the Northwest, Arctic, and Interior regions. The extent and thickness of the permafrost decrease southward from a continuous layer as much as several hundred feet thick in the Arctic region to areas generally free of permafrost in the South-central and Southeast regions (fig. 2E). In the Arctic coastal plain, thawed soils in the summer commonly are no more than about 3-feet thick, lim- iting the rooting depth of plants and the infiltration of water. Long winters, cool summers, and the presence of permafrost maintain vast wet expanses under the same precipitation conditions that would produce only deserts in regions having temperate climates. Alaska has about 34,000 miles of shoreline. Extremely large tidal fluctuations occur daily in southeastern Alaska, Prince Will- iam Sound, Cook Inlet, and Bristol Bay, forming expansive tidal flats and salt marshes. The diurnal fluctuation during spring tides is about 40 feet vertically in upper Cook Inlet near Anchorage. In coastal areas having little topographic relief, such as those in the Southwest, Northwest, and Arctic regions, storm surges push seawater inland several miles and affect the types and growth of plants. Alaska's large rivers form extensive deltas. The Yukon-Kusko- kwim Delta is one of the world's largest and supports more than 10 million acres of wetland. The deltas of the Colville, Copper, and Stikine Rivers also support vast wetlands. Expansive wetlands, such as the Yukon, Minto, Kanuti, and Koyukuk Flats, also occur adja- cent to rivers flowing through large areas of low relief. Tectonic activities affect the hydrology of Alaska's wetlands. During the 1964 earthquake, the Copper River Delta was uplifted 6 to 13 feet, and the Portage area, which is 40 miles southeast of Anchorage, subsided as much as 8 feet. In the Copper River Delta, some wetlands that were salt marshes before the earthquake have become freshwater systems. Also, in some areas, salt marshes have migrated seaward almost a mile. Kodiak Island and parts of south- eastern Alaska are rising because glaciers whose weight had for- merly caused land subsidence are melting. The relative fall in sea level is presumably modifying wetlands above the tidal zone and creating wetlands within the new tidal zone. The productivity of many Alaska wetlands is affected by fires. Fires occur only infrequently in coastal areas, allowing as much as several tens of feet of peat to accumulate in some bogs and fens in southeastern Alaska. Fires, common in interior Alaska, rid marshes of dead grass, sedges, and shrubs and make new shoots available for waterfowl and mammals. Burning of vegetation and peat releases minerals and nutrients from organic litter, usually potassium, cal- cium, phosphorus, magnesium, chloride, and nitrogen. However, where permafrost is present, a severe fire may cause the relative abundance of plant species to change, especially if the fire removes the insulating organic layer, which in turn causes the top of the permafrost to lower. If the burned area remains undisturbed, wet- land conditions will eventually return, but it can take 50 to 100 years to complete the cycle. Sea ice and glaciers also affect Alaska wetlands. Sea ice scours the coast and limits the establishment of vegetation in intertidal and subtidal areas of the Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort Seas. Advanc- ing glaciers can cover wetlands, whereas retreating glaciers provide new areas where wetlands can form. TRENDS Information on historical wetland gains and losses in Alaska is limited. Estimates of wetland losses for the entire State range from about 80,000 to 200,000 acres, or about 0.05 to 0.15 percent of the historic wetland area (Senner, 1989; Dahl, 1990). Senner (1989), using existing quantitative data and aerial photographic interpreta- tion techniques, estimated the following wetland losses through 1986 by activity: petroleum-related development, about 30,000 acres; mining, about 13,000 acres; infrastructure (roads, harbors, airports, and railroads), about 13,000 acres; development (residential, rec- reational, and commercial), about 13,000 acres; agriculture, about 8,500 acres; construction of military facilities (mostly roads and airfields), about 2,400 acres; and timber, less than 2,000 acres. Wetland losses have generally occurred in urban areas (Anchorage, Juneau, Fairbanks), around villages and communities, and in large industrial developments such as oil fields, transportation corridors, and industrial sites. As much as 50 percent of the wetlands in low- lying areas of Anchorage have been filled since 1945 (Alaska De- partment of Natural Resources, 1992). Any additional industrial, commercial, and residential development within areas that are pre- dominantly wetland, such as in the Southwest, Northwest, and Arc- tic regions, might result in further draining or filling of wetlands. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Alaska. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Alaska wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the Corps au- thority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and plac- 112 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- agencies and private organizations in Alaska, 1993 tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided restoration, or creation plans. by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 wetland-related activity; .., agency or organization does not participate in Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, resto- ,, , ~ ,. .. m, r vw «.i j ration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collec- protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland tion; D&l, delineation and inventory] Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their _____________________________________ Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for v Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- Agency or organization_____________^ <^ « /A-i-n-\fc. i Environmental Protection Agency.................................. . . CONatKVAl I(JN TRIBAL Many government agencies and private organizations partici- j^TeElndian tnbes ------------- pate in wetland conservation in Arizona. The most active agencies Department of Environmental Quality ........................... ... and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Department of Water Resources.................................... ... . ... .. . Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Ari- Game and Fish Department.............................................. ...... zona wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibi- Outdoor Coordinating Commission............................. tions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some State parks.............................................................. . . . . ft, . c , . j i. ,o r>- j COUNTY AND LOCAL of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Counties ... Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Municipalities ..................................................................... . . Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Salt River Project................................................................ . Trade Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Desert Fishes Council - - - ^ fi- /-/-> \ ..i -^ *. i *. .. * ,.- Ducks Unlimited....................................................... Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities Johnson Historjca| Museum of the Southwest in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening. National Audubon Society filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 Arizona Riparian Council.................................................. . . of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation Arizona Wildlife Federation ........... protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues The Arizona Nature Conservancy .................................. ... permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into itte rust....................................................................... . . _ wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions restoration, or creation plans. to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act encourages posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. wetland protection through funding incentives. The act requires Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehen- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 State recreational land; the National Park Service provides guidance Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through to States in developing the wetland component of their plans, financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of State wetland activities. The Arizona Game and Fish Depart- wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- ment is responsible for the management of fish and wildlife through- allies in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the out the State except within Indian reservations (Arizona State Parks, altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- 1989). The Department of Environmental Quality is responsible for cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, setting, monitoring, and enforcing water-quality standards for all Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal navigable waters, their major tributaries, and all ground water of the Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners State. The Department of Water Resources has authority for gen- who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm eral control and supervision of the waters in Arizona and the ap- Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- propriation and distribution of such waters, servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Through the actions of the Game and Fish Department, De- Wetlands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation partment of Environmental Quality, Department of Water Resources. Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- and State Parks, the State has taken steps to conserve streams and pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- wetlands and promote their recreational use but has not established National Water Summary Wetland Resources: ARIZONA 119 a comprehensive policy pertaining to these resources. The Ripar- ian Area Advisory Committee, made up of agencies, associations, citizen groups, and academia, currently (1993) is working on a full report to the Governor that will address a statewide policy and rec- ommendations. County and local wetland activities. The framework exists within county and city governments to incorporate wetland areas as assets to the local community. Local governments can establish policies to protect wetlands by restricting nearby development and land uses. Arizona municipalities that have programs or policies to facilitate the protection of wetlands and riparian areas include Scottsdale, Prescott, Tucson. Sierra Vista, Show Low. and Pinetop. The quasi-public Salt River Project's activities have major im- plications for streams and wetlands in Arizona (Arizona State Parks, 1989). The reservoirs and irrigation projects that the Project ad- ministers have inundated or otherwise drastically altered tens of thousands of acres of native riparian areas and hundreds of miles of free-flowing streams (Arizona State Parks, 1989). In recent years, however, the Project has been active in the Arizona Riparian Coun- cil and in work to establish methods of measuring and permitting critical instream flows. Additionally, the Project's environmental policy includes protection of aquatic ecology and cooperation with Federal, State, and local agencies responsible for environmental pro- tection. Private wetland activities. Programs from private groups focus mainly on the acquisition and management of stream and ri- parian areas, education and information exchange, wetland resto- ration, and advocacy for wetland recreation and conservation. The Nature Conservancy, an international nonprofit organization, seeks to protect rare plants and animals by preserving the habitats they need to survive critical lands in the United States and beyond our borders. The Arizona Riparian Council provides an important com- munication channel for professionals working in the area of ripar- ian-habitat management. Through the work of its subcommittees, the Council has begun to address coordination and consistency problems within the existing decentralized statewide riparian-man- agement system. References Cited Arizona State Parks, 1988, Chapter 3 Wetlands resources in Arizona An addendum to 1983 statewide comprehensive outdoor recreation plan: Phoenix, Arizona State Parks, p. 29-60. ____1989, Arizona rivers, streams, and wetlands study, in 1989 State- wide comprehensive outdoor recreation plan: Phoenix, Arizona State Parks, 244 p. Brown, D.E., 1985, Arizona wetlands and waterfowl: Tucson, University of Arizona Press, 169 p. Carter, Virginia, 1986, An overview of the hydrologic concerns related to wetlands in the United States: Canadian Journal of Botany, v. 64, p. 364-374. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, EC., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Platts, W.S., and Jensen, Sherman, 1986, Wetland/riparian ecosystems of the Great Basin/desert and montane region An overview, in Great Basin/Desert and Montane Regional Wetland Functions Proceed- ings of a workshop held at Logan, Utah, February 27-28, 1986: The Environmental Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst Pub- lication 90-4, p. 1-22. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 375 South Euclid Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85719; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 500 Gold Avenue, SW, Room 4012, Albuquerque, NM 87103 Prepared by L.K. Ham, U.S. Geological Survey, and S.K. Bulmer and Tanna Thornburg, Arizona State Parks 120 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 121 Arkansas Wetland Resources We'etlands occupy about 8 percent of the land surface in Arkan- sas (Dahl, 1990) and are an important but threatened resource. Historically, wetlands occupied a much larger area of the State and greatly influenced early economic development. At the time the first Europeans settled in the area, wetlands occupied about 28 percent of what is now Arkansas. These wetlands consisted largely of vast bottom-land forests and swamps bordering the Mississippi River and other rivers and streams. The forested wetlands contained abundant bottom-land trees such as cypress, tupelo gum, sycamore, birch, cottonwood, and several species of oak that provided a source of timber for domestic and economic development. As the forests were cleared and the wetlands were drained, the fertile bottom land was opened up to agriculture, which eventually became the mainstay of the local economy. The loss of wetlands to agriculture and urban- ization and the associated loss of wildlife habitat have slowed but continue to be a major concern (Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology, 1992). Wetlands provide critical habitat for many important plants and animals in Arkansas. Seven endangered species and three threatened species of plants and animals inhabit wetlands in the State (Curtis James, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, written commun., 1993). Some of the endangered or threatened species of animals and plants in Arkansas that rely on wetlands sometime during their lives in- clude the bald eagle, the red-cockaded woodpecker, the grey bat, the pink mucket pearly mussel, the fat pocketbook pearly mussel, and the pondberry. Arkansas bottom-land forested wetlands provide important habitats for many species of fish. Seasonal flooding of river flood plains provides access to new or expanded food supplies during periods of increased energy needs of fish at critical stages in their reproductive and growth cycles (Jack Kilgore, John Baker, and R.D. Smith, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, unpub. data, 1993). Wetlands in Arkansas, especially those in the Mississippi River Valley, are a critical component of the series of wetland habitats along the Mississippi Flyway, which is used by millions of migra- tory birds each year. The management board of the Lower Missis- sippi Valley Joint Venture for the restoration of Mississippi Flyway waterfowl populations considers the protection and preservation of wetlands in Arkansas to be a key to the success of their program (Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture Management Board, 1990), Wetlands in the Cache-Lower White River system (fig. 1) in the Mississippi Flyway have been designated as one of nine "Wetlands of International Importance" in the United States under provisions of the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Espe- cially as Wildlife Habitat (Arkansas Department of Pollution Con- trol and Ecology, 1992), which is known informally as the Ramsar Convention after Ramsar, Iran, where the convention was held in 1971. Wetlands modify the water quality and hydrology of conter- minous water bodies by serving as nutrient, sediment, and sediment- related toxic-materials traps. For example, Kleiss (1993), in a study on the Cache River in eastern Arkansas, found that there was a sub- stantial decrease in suspended sediment and nitrate loads in the river after it passed through a wetland. Wetlands also mitigate the sever- ity of floods and droughts by serving as floodways and reservoirs for surface waters and recharge-discharge areas for ground water (Mitsch and Gosselink. 1993). Wetlands in Arkansas also provide recreational opportunities for hunting, fishing, bird watching, and boating to thousands of people each year. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Arkansas is shown in figure 2/4; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Arkansas are described below. System Palustrine. Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or} floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants {nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Most of the wetlands in Arkansas are palustrine forested, scrub- shrub, and nonvegetated wetlands (Arkansas Department of Pollu- tion Control and Ecology, 1992; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). The most extensive areas of wetlands in the State lie along the major rivers, such as the lower Mississippi, Arkansas, Red, White, and Little Rivers and their principal tributaries in the Mis- Lacustrine Riverine.. Figure 1. Black Swamp, a wetland along the Cache River. The Cache-Lower White River wetlands have been designated "Wet- lands of International Importance" under the provisions of the 1971 Ramsar Convention. (Photograph by Ed Morris, U.S. Geological Survey.) 122 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES sissippi Alluvial Plain, South Central Plains, and Arkansas Valley Ecoregions (fig. 2A and 26). Other wetlands are scattered through- out the State and are associated with springs and seeps in the Ouachita Mountains and Ozark Highlands. Arkansas has 7 National Wildlife Refuges, 1 National Scenic River System, 1 National For- est, 17 State wildlife management areas, and 6 State parks that con- tain significant wetland areas. The larger wetlands in Arkansas generally are forested wetlands associated with the flood plains of rivers such as the Saline, Ouachita, and Little Rivers and Bayou Dorcheat. Mixed forested and scrub-shrub wetlands border the Cache, Black, and St. Francis Riv- ers and Taylor Bay. Little Bayou Meto is lined by an example of a mixed forested and emergent wetland, which is uncommon in Ar- kansas. Smaller wetlands with unique features include Centerville Pondberry and Coffee Prairie. These two wetlands contain plant species of special concern to the State. Coffee Prairie has been iden- tified by The Nature Conservancy and the Natural Heritage Com- mission as deserving of priority protection (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). HYDROLOGIC SETTING The existence of wetlands depends on geologic and hydrologic conditions that favor the retention of water and on hydrologic proc- esses that allow the water to accumulate (Winter and Woo, 1990). Wetland hydrology involves complex water-flow patterns that are affected by regional and local geology, topography, soil character- istics, and climate. Water in small wetlands can be supplied by local shallow ground-water flow systems, surface waters, or precipitation. In the mountainous areas of northern and western Arkansas, wet- lands typically are small and associated with springs. Larger wet- lands in southern and eastern Arkansas commonly receive water from local and regional ground-water flow systems and surface water. Surface water collects in topographic lows, and ground water commonly discharges in these areas. The rate at which water per- colates downward from these wetlands to ground-water systems or upward from ground-water systems to the wetlands is a function of local hydraulic conditions and geologic characteristics. WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^H Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat B ECOREGIONS A. South Central Plains B. Ouachita Mountains C. Arkansas Valley D. Boston Mountains E. Ozark Highlands F. Mississippi Alluvial Plain Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Arkansas and ecoregions of the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Ecoregions. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Ecoregions from Omernik, 1987; landforms data from EROS Data Center.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: ARKANSAS 123 In some parts of the State, seasonal fluctuations in precipita- tion result in seasonal differences in the flooded area of wetlands. However, precipitation in the State is abundant and averages from 40 to 56 inches per year. No season is without at least moderate amounts of precipitation (Freiwald, 1985); therefore, seasonal varia- tions in the water content of most wetlands in the State are small. Major wetlands in Arkansas are closely associated with the State's large river flood plains, and most are influenced by the Mis- sissippi River. In the northeastern and eastern parts of the State, many streams flow through channels cut into alluvium sands, silts, and clays deposited by the Mississippi River. These streams in- clude the Black, White, St. Francis, and Cache Rivers and Bayou Deview (Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology, 1992). The flood plain of the Mississippi River is an area of little to- pographic relief that has been subjected to frequent flooding. This frequent flooding has resulted in the establishment of large stands of water-tolerant bottom-land trees and the development of back- water swamps associated with such hydrologic conditions (fig. 3A, 3,6, and 3C). The continued survival of these forested and scrub- shrub wetlands depends on continued seasonal flooding and dewa- tering cycles. Disruption of the flooding and dewatering cycle can adversely affect plant and animal communities in wetlands and al- ter the size and type of the wetlands. When the flooding cycle is prevented, such as when wetland areas are leveed or ditched and drained, the water-tolerant plant species commonly are replaced by less water-tolerant trees and shrubs. Once the threat of flooding is reduced, these areas often are cleared for agriculture. When wet- lands are drained or cleared, they can no longer trap sediments and sediment-bound contaminants, remove nutrients from flood waters, or provide off-channel storage to lessen the severity of floods. Also, nursery habitat for certain species offish and invertebrates is greatly restricted when wetlands are drained. This can result in lower fish and invertebrate populations. Conversely, in forested wetlands sub- jected to permanent flooding, such as occurs when a river is dammed, the establishment of new trees will cease and the existing trees will die. Eventually, the forested wetland will be replaced by open water. TRENDS The area that is now Arkansas began losing wetlands shortly after the arrival of European settlers and has lost more wetland acres than any inland State in the Nation (Scott Yaich, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, written commun., 1993). Wetland loss in Arkan- sas from the 1780'stothe 1980's was about 72 percent (Dahl, 1990), and many remaining wetlands have been altered from their natural state. Arkansas originally contained about 9,848,600 acres of wet- lands before the arrival of European settlers. By 1937, wetland area in the State had decreased to about 4,900,000 acres (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). The rate of wetland loss increased after World War II owing to the increased availability of mechanized equipment. Wetland loss was about 36 percent of the remaining wetland area from 1957 to 1967 but decreased to about 14 percent from 1977 to 1985 (Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology, 1992). Holder (1969) estimated that 90 percent of the wetland loss in the last 40 years was due to the expansion of soy- bean production. By 1993, more than 90 percent of Arkansas' origi- nal bottom-land forested wetlands had been converted to upland or other types of wetlands (Scott Yaich, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser- vice, written commun., 1993). The 72-percent wetland loss reported by Dahl (1990) represents total wetland loss in the State but does not account for conversion of natural wetlands to some other type of wetland or the creation of artificial wetlands. For example, some of the State's remaining wetland acreage includes small farm ponds, which are not high-quality wetland habitat (Scott Yaich, U.S. Fish A. During flooding PALUSTRINE WETLAND B. During flood recession PALUSTRINE WETLAND PALUSTRINE WETLAND AHuva Alluvium C. During low flow PALUSTRINE WETLAND Figure 3. Surface hydrologic interaction between a river and forested wetlands in the flood plain. A, During flooding. B, During flood recession. C, During low flow; note establishment of new trees. and Wildlife Service, written commun., 1993). Almost all of the cleared lands in the major wetland areas of the State were being farmed in the 1990's, although many of these areas are considered marginal for crop production because of the flooding hazard (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). Some of these marginal farmlands reverted to scrub-shrub wetlands when farming operations were discontinued. Even though the rate of wetland loss has declined in recent years, Arkansas continues to lo.se wetlands. Continuing threats to the remaining, primarily forested wetlands of the State a.s identi- fied by FWS (1992) include (1) drainage and flood protection, (2) dredging and stream channelization, (3) conversion of forested wetland to scrub-shrub, emergent, or open-water wetlands, (4) al- teration of drainage patterns, (5) construction of dikes and levees, and (6) discharge of pollutants. 124 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Much of the historical wetland loss within Arkansas has been a result of Federal legislation. In 1850, the U.S. Congress passed the Swamp Land Act, which granted to Arkansas 7,686,575 acres of swamp and overflow lands considered unfit for cultivation. The objective of the act was to help control floods in the Mississippi River Valley and encourage the drainage and clearing of these "sub marginal" lands for agriculture by allowing sale of these lands to private individuals for development (Shaw and Fredine, 1971). Congress passed the Flood Control Act of 1928 in response to the disastrous 1927 floods in the Mississippi Valley. This act removed the requirement for local interests to pay one-half of the cost of levee construction on the Mississippi River. The passage of this bill re- sulted in the accelerated construction of a vast network of levees along the Mississippi River and its tributaries. The net effect of this and other flood-control acts was the conversion of thousands of acres of wetlands to agriculture due to the removal of the threat of fre- quent flooding (Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology, 1992). CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Arkansas. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Arkan- sas wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Har- bors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act encourages wetland protection through funding incentives. The act requires Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Arkansas, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, resto- ration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collec- tion; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency ............ Forest Service.................................................. Natural Resources Conservation Service . Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers............................... Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service............................... Geological Survey........................................... National Biological Service.......................... National Park Service .................................... Environmental Protection Agency.................................. STATE Department of Pollution Control and Ecology ............. Forestry Commission ......................................................... Game and Fish Commission ............................................. Natural Heritage Commission.......................................... Soil and Water Conservation Commission ................... PRIVATE Ducks Unlimited.................................................................. National Audubon Society ............................................... The Nature Conservancy.................................................. States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehen- sive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Service (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. The FWS administers seven National Wildlife Refuges, includ- ing the 154,000-acre White River National Wildlife Refuge located along the lower White River in Arkansas. The FWS also administers wetland-acquisition programs and advises Federal and State agen- cies responsible for wetland conservation. Other Federal agencies that have management or monitoring responsibilities for wetlands in Arkansas include the NFS, the U.S. Forest Service (FS), and the U.S. Geological Survey (uses). The FS is responsible for the man- agement of wetlands in the State's National Forests. Buffalo National River, a segment of the Buffalo River under the jurisdiction of the NFS, has some small wetland areas associated with the river. The USGS collects information on the quantity and quality of many of the Nation's water resources, including its wetlands. State wetland activities. Arkansas has a Natural and Scenic Rivers program and a Natural Heritage program. These two pro- grams designate extraordinary and ecologically sensitive areas, in- cluding wetlands, within the State. A technical review committee made up of representatives from State agencies makes recommen- dations to the Governor on section 404 permits. The State has adopted a program administered by the Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology that applies an antidegradation policy to substantial alterations of a water body, including associated wet- lands. In addition, the Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation Com- mission and the Arkansas Forestry Commission have extensive re- sponsibilities concerning the management of the State's wetlands. The Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, the State's lead wildlife agency, has a long-standing commitment to protect wetlands National Water Summary Wetland Resources: ARKANSAS 125 within the Mississippi River Valley because of the area's importance to wildlife, particularly to migratory birds. The Arkansas Game and Fish Commission owns or controls more than 174,000 acres in 14 wildlife management areas within the Mississippi River Valley, much of which consists of wetlands. The Arkansas Game and Fish Com- mission and the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission are com- mitted to additional investment in the Mississippi River Valley and have begun developing comprehensive plans for these activities. The Game and Fish Commission has developed the Cache-Lower White Rivers Joint Venture under the North American Waterfowl Manage- ment Plan. The objective of this program is to protect bottom-land habitat in the Cache River and lower White River Basins, which constitute the second-largest area of contiguous bottom-land habi- tat in the Mississippi River Valley, second only to the Atchafalaya River Basin in Louisiana. In 1990, protected Federal and State lands in the Joint Venture were designated "Wetlands of International Significance" under the provisions of the 1971 Ramsar Convention, which produced an international agreement for cooperation in the conservation of wetland habitats. In 1988, the Natural Heritage Commission, in cooperation with the Arkansas Chapter of The Nature Conservancy, began to develop the White River-Lower Arkansas River Megasite plan (Lynch and others, 1992). This plan presents a landscape-level design inven- tory of an ecologically intact, biologically diverse bottom-land sys- tem that includes more than 550,000 acres. More than 280,000 acres in this habitat system are public lands. The boundaries of this habi- tat system differ somewhat from those of the high-priority water- fowl habitat defined by the Cache-Lower White Rivers Joint Ven- ture, although both are in the Mississippi River Valley. Regional and private wetland activities. The Arkansas Chap- ter of The Nature Conservancy is involved in an effort to protect and restore the forested wetlands of the Mississippi River Alluvial Plain in Arkansas as part of a coordinated effort to protect wetlands of that region in seven States. The National Audubon Society and Ducks Unlimited also are involved in the protection and restoration of wetlands and the critical wildlife habitats they contain. More than 50 percent of the remaining bottom-land forests in the Mississippi River Valley are in private ownership and much of these forests are commercial timberlands owned by the forest-prod- ucts industry. Most of these commercial timberlands are a critical part of the Lower White-Lower Arkansas River Megasite plan be- cause they occupy key locations contiguous with and connecting public lands within the system. References Cited Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology, 1992, Wetlands, Chapter 4 of water quality inventory report, 1992: Little Rock, Arkan- sas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology, p. 45-48. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to L980's: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Freiwald, D.A., 1985, Average annual precipitation and runoff for Arkan- sas, 1951 80: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 84-4363, scale 1:1,000,000. Holder, Trusten, 1969, Disappearing wetlands in eastern Arkansas: Little Rock, Arkansas Planning Commission, 71 p. Kleiss, B.A., 1993, An ecosystem study of bottom land hardwood wetlands associated with the Cache River, eastern Arkansas, in Landin, M.C., ed., Wetlands, Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conference Society of Wetland Scientists, New Orleans, La.: Utica, Miss., Society of Wet- land Scientists, South Central Chapter, p. 3137, Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture Management Board, 1990, Conserv- ing waterfowl and wetlands: Vicksburg, Miss., North American Wa- terfowl Management Plan. Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture, 32 p. Lynch, J.M., Baker, W.W., Foti, Tom, and Peacock, Lance, 1992, The White River-lower Arkansas River megasite A landscape conservation design project: Little Rock, Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission and the Arkansas Nature Conservancy, 81 p. Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G., 1993, Wetlands (2d ed.): New York. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 722 p. Omernik, J. M., 1987, Ecoregions of the United States Map supplement: Annals of the Association of American Geographers, v. 77, no. 1, scale 1:2,500,000. Shaw, S.P., and Fredine, C.G., 1971, Wetlands of the United States Their extent and their value to waterfowl and other wildlife: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circular 39, 67 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992, Regional wetlands concept plan Emergency wetlands resources act, southeast region: Atlanta, Ga., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 259 p. Winter, T.C., and Woo, Ming-Ko, 1990, Hydrology of lakes and wetlands: in Wolman, M.G., and Riggs, H.C., eds., Surface water hydrology: Boulder, Colo., Geological Society of America, The geology of North America, v. O-l, chap. 8, p. 159-187. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 401 Hardin Road, Little Rock, AR 72211; Regional Wetland Coor- dinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Building, Suite 200, Atlanta, GA 30345 Prepared by Charles R. Demas and Dennis K. Demcheck, U.S. Geological Survey 126 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 127 California Wetland Resources V-.alifornia has about 454,000 acres of nonagricultural wetlands; more than 90 percent of the State's wetlands have been drained, mostly for agricultural purposes. Before significant agricultural con- version began, about 5 million acres of wetlands supported lush aquatic vegetation and provided habitat for hundreds of species of fish and wildlife as well as food, clothing, protection from preda- tors, and transportation for native Americans. California's wetlands provide stopover, wintering, and breed- ing habitat for vast numbers of waterfowl (fig. 1). The Sacramento- San Joaquin River Delta is the largest remaining wetland area in the State. The delta's wetlands regularly harbor as much as 15 percent of the waterfowl on the Pacific Fly way, the bird-migration corridor extending from the southern tip of South America to Alaska. Al- though significantly reduced in size since predevelopment times, wetlands in the delta are a source of large amounts of plant and algal materials that are the basis of complex food systems in the wetlands themselves and downstream in the estuaries of San Francisco Bay. California's wetlands have significant environmental and eco- nomic value for humans and wildlife. Wetlands provide temporary storage of floodwaters, reducing downstream damage, and serve as buffers against erosion. Marshes in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and many coastal marshes act as freshwater barriers to seawater intrusion of aquifers. Wetlands also trap sediment and ab- sorb many waterborne pollutants and excess nutrients. Wetlands provide fish and wildlife habitat; inland wetlands are excellent habi- tat for bass, catfish, bluegill, sunfish, crappie, geese, ducks, wading birds, and many species of amphibians. Wetlands offer recreational and educational activities, as well as opportunities for scientific studies. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in California is shown in figure 2A\ only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this Figure 1. Suisun Marsh provides habitat to many kinds of water- fowl. Agricultural and urban encroachment has reduced and con- tinues to threaten valuable wetlands. (Photograph courtesy of the Bureau of Reclamation.) summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Califor- nia are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine, Estuarine, Marine, Wetland description Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands}; shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. , Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. The FWS National Wetland Inventory currently (1993) is map- ping California's wetlands and compiling statewide acreage data. However, that inventory is not scheduled to be completed until the late 1990's, and there are no other systematically compiled data concerning statewide wetland acreage. Dahl (1990), on the basis of Central Valley (fig. 25) acreage data in Frayer and others (1989) and approximations by the FWS, estimated that California had 454,000 acres of wetlands in the mid-1980's 0.4 percent of the State's area. Frayer and others (1989) reported the results of a systematic survey of Central Valley and Sacramento San Joaquin River Delta wetlands conducted in the mid-1980's. The study indicated that there were about 378,800 acres of freshwater and estuarine nonagricul- tural wetlands and 658,600 acres of flooded rice fields, most of which are converted wetlands. Field and others (1991) reported that the coastal counties of California had about 198,500 acres of palustrine, estuarine, and marine wetlands on the basis of interpre- tation of aerial photography done from the mid-1970's to the mid- 1980's. Acreage data for the alluvial basins of northern California, montane wetlands in the Sierra Nevada and Cascade Range, and desert wetlands in southern California are not yet available. The 378,800 acres of nonagricultural wetlands in the Central Valley and Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta includes approxi- mately 318,900 acres of palustrine wetlands and 59,900 acres of 128 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES C AREA HAVING ANNUAL WATER DEFICIT Area of water deficit San tttti/o Myx \ ( I '* S "- tlkDorn Slough \ i \ Na{ional Estuarine v. A i n"-- ,h Reserw l ' ^ r '\k Ti| uana Estuary National Esiuanne Research Reserve Tijuana Kivci WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^H Predominantly wetland [ Predominantly deepwater habitat yyyy/\ Area typified by a high density of small wetlands B PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS Figure 2. Wetland distribution in California and physical and climatological features that influence wetland distribution in the State. A, Distri- bution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physiography. C, Moisture balance. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physiographic divisions modified from Fenneman, 1946; landforms from EROS Data Center. C, Modified from Thomas and Phoenix, 1976.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: CALIFORNIA 129 estuarine wetlands (Prayer and others, 1989). The palustrine wet- lands are of three types: (1) Those associated with or adjacent to rivers primarily overflowed lands, sloughs, and bypasses; (2) those associated with grasslands mainly on the alluvial fans of the eastern and western slopes of the valley, which contain numer- ous vernal pools during normal-precipitation years; and (3) marshes mainly in the central lowlands of the Sacramento and San Joaquin River drainage basins and the Tulare Basin. The Central Val- ley's estuarine wetlands are in the Suisun Marsh in the westernmost part of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. On the basis of data from Field and others (1991), most wet- lands in California's coastal counties, which are primarily in the Coast Ranges, are classified as palustrine. Of the 198,500 coastal wetland acres, 46,700 acres are fresh marsh (palustrine emergent wetlands), 77,800 acres are palustrine forested or scrub-shrub wet- lands, 21,700 acres are salt marsh (estuarine emergent wetlands), and 52,200 acres are tidal flats (estuarine unconsolidated-shore wetlands), which are mostly nonvegetated. (The acreages for indi- vidual wetland types do not total 198,500 because of rounding.) The mountains of California contain palustrine, lacustrine, and riverine wetlands. These wetlands have not been inventoried to date (1993) because of their isolated and widely different topographic and ecological settings. Construction of reservoirs on the upland reaches of creeks and major rivers in the Sierra Nevada and Cas- cade Range has created additional wetland acreage. Palustrine wet- lands of the Sierra, Cascades, and parts of the Coast Ranges are emergent wetlands commonly called bogs or meadows and forested or scrub-shrub wetlands called swamps. These wetlands are typi- cally small, sometimes only a few thousand square feet, and exist randomly among coniferous forests at altitudes generally higher than 3,000 to 3,500 feet. The desert basins of southeastern California contain lacustrine and palustrine wetlands referred to as playas, which are lakebeds that are intermittently flooded. Rogers, Soda, Searles, China, and Rosamond Lakes are large playas. The typical playa is nonvegetated except where fissures and sinklike depressions provide intermittent sources of water by pooling rainfall and overland flow. In unusu- ally wet years and for periods following them, plants whose roots reach the water table, such as saltbrush, rabbitbrush, tamarisk, and mesquite, grow in areas of shallow ground water and around dry springs (CJ. Londquist, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1993). Mono Lake, a saline lake remnant of a much larger ice-age lake in the Basin and Range east of the central Sierra Nevada (fig. IB), supports an abundance of brine shrimp and brine flies that are a significant food source for eared grebes, avocets, plovers, sandpip- ers, gulls, ducks, and phalaropes (Bakker, 1984). Because of the high salinity of the lake water, only salt-tolerant plants such as stinkweed, goosefoot, and salt or alkali grass grow around the lake. In the Southern California Desert near the California-Mexico border is a type of palustrine desert wetland known popularly as an "oasis." These emergent, scrub-shrub, and forested wetlands sup- port willow, catclaw, mesquite, cottonwood, tamarisk, reeds, arrow- wood, and in some places, sedges, tules, and cattails. But the most distinctive plants of the oases are the native fan palms (Bakker, 1984). HYDROLOGIC SETTING To understand the existence of once vast natural wetlands in a State that has an average annual precipitation of about 20 inches and is commonly considered to be semiarid to arid, California's hydrog- raphy and topography must be examined. Most of the State has a natural annual water deficit (fig. 2C). However, in the areas having a natural water surplus, precipitation ranges from 40 to as much as 90 inches per year, most of that being snowfall in the Sierra Nevada, Cascade Range, and Klamath Mountains. Annual precipitation amounts can differ widely from year to year because of variability in the Pacific storm track. Mountain ranges induce precipitation at the higher altitudes and create "rain shadows" (dry areas) in the leeward valleys and plains. In California, nearly continuous ranges of coastal mountains extend from the Oregon border to Mexico, and these ranges are paralleled by the southern Cascade Range and the Sierra Nevada about 150 miles farther inland (fig. 2B). Between the two ranges, in the rain shadow of the Coast Ranges, lies the Central Valley, nearly 400 miles long and 70 miles wide. In the rain shadow of the south- ern Cascade Range, the Sierra Nevada, and the coastal mountains of southern California are the Basin and Range and Southern Cali- fornia Desert physiographic provinces. Central Valley wetlands. Streams originating in the Sierra Nevada carry 95 percent of the runoff entering the Central Valley. Before hydrologic modification associated with agriculture, much of the southern Sierra Nevada runoff flowed into the internally drained Tulare Basin, creating several large freshwater lakes that existed for more than 2,000,000 years (Page, 1986). The largest, Tulare Lake, formed a large lacustrine wetland extending over 600 square miles. Streams flowing in the trough of the Central Valley typically have low gradients and almost imperceptible natural levees. Consequently, before the rivers were contained by irrigation and flood-control projects, flood plains were wide, and in many years the entire valley was inundated by floodwater. Overbank flooding created thousands of acres of marshland and tens of thousands of vernal pools. Despite flood-control projects since the mid-1850's, overbank flooding still can occur in wet years. In the years before flood-control and irrigation projects, shal- low water tables supported large areas of wetlands on the valley floor. However, as a result of agricultural drainage, ground-water withdrawal, building of upland diversion dams, and flood-control projects, the original flow paths of water into the Central Valley and most of California's other alluvial basins have been altered, and the valley's hydrology is now generally as shown in figure 3A. Floods no longer regularly cover the valley floors but are diverted to crop- land, stored, or channeled. Ground-water levels under the valley floors have been drawn down to such an extent that recharge is pri- marily from irrigation, and discharge is mainly to large centers of ground-water pumping (Bertoldi and others, 1991). Most of the valley's wetlands are now sustained by controlled application of water (Frayer and others, 1989). Many wildlife refuges in the Central Valley use irrigation drain water either as a part or as the total source of water. Until 1986,1,200 acres of ponds in the Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge (fig. 2A) were partly sustained by agricultural drain water from the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. In 1983, the FWS discovered an unusu- ally high incidence of deformed or dead birds in the refuge. Studies of the drain water entering the ponds and of the water in the ponds showed that the deformities were caused by high concentrations of selenium in the drain water. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) implemented a plan to mitigate the effects of the drain water at the refuge by stemming the flow of agricultural drain water into the refuge and eliminating all aquatic habitat in the areas of the con- taminated ponds. Surface water is now imported into the refuge. Estuarine wetlands. California's estuaries have a high de- gree of variability in their physical and hydrologic environment. For most of the year, coastal estuaries, such as the Suisun Marsh below the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers (and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta wetlands under natural conditions) are sustained by brackish to saline water. In the wet season during winter, they can become completely fresh. In addition, streamflow varies substantially, from none in many years to floods in wet years. There is little emergent wetland acreage remaining in the Sac- ramento-San Joaquin River Delta. After World War I, nearly all 130 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES delta marshland had been transformed to the series of improved channels and leveed islands that exist to the present (fig. 36). The delta soils are predominantly organic peat, and in agricultural use have oxidized extensively, causing land surfaces to subside to more than 15 feet below sea level within the leveed islands (California Department of Water Resources, 1993) so that emergent wetlands can exist only on the margins of the delta. Three of California's estuarine wetlands have attracted national and international attention. The largest of these wetland areas is the complex system of over 1,000 miles of waterways in the Sacra- mento-San Joaquin River Delta and three bays within a 1,200- square-mile area of central California. The bays, beginning with the most landward, are Suisun, San Pablo, and the largest, San Fran- cisco. About 70 percent of California's water supply originates in the Sierras, flows through the Central Valley into the bay-delta sys- tem, then discharges into the Pacific Ocean at San Francisco Bay. Two other, smaller estuarine wetlands, Elkhorn Slough on Monterey Bay and the Tijuana River estuary at San Diego, have been included in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Estuarine Research Reserves. Such reserves are defined as "classes of ecosystems worthy of research and educa- tion, yet different enough to warrant selection as a distinct regional type" (Zedler and others, 1992). The recent geologic factors that shape these estuaries are the forces of slowly rising sea level, which causes inland migrations of the estuaries, and tectonic uplift, which partly offsets the effects of a rising sea level. Deep submarine can- yons and unusual shoreline configurations affect the size and con- dition of both estuaries. Longshore drifting and currents have not been measured, but the effects are well known. Beach erosion has caused landward movement of the estuarine shorelines and subse- quent salinity changes. After decades of study at the Tijuana Na- tional Estuarine Research Reserve, restoration programs are under- way. Montane wetlands. The most common types of montane wetlands in California are meadows, which are palustrine wetlands with persistent emergent vegetation (fig. 3C and 3D}. Meadows in California have been best studied in the Sierras, where they are es- timated to compose about 10 percent of the total area (Ratliff, 1985). At higher altitudes, glacial cirques commonly contain small pools or lakes known as tarns. Meadows can develop when tarns fill with sediment, peat, or both. California's mountains are geomorphologically dynamic be- cause of glaciation, tectonic uplift, and volcanic eruptions in the recent geologic past. Dynamic features include glacially scoured depressions, moraines, and till and outwash deposits resulting from landslides and mudflows and from volcanic debris and lava flows that impede the movement of water from precipitation and snow- melt, leading to the formation of wetlands. Impoundments can form A. Central Valley COAST RANGE RIVERINE WETLAND | PALUSTRINE WETLAND SIERRA NEVADA RIVERINE WETLAND RIVERINE WETLAND S LACUSTRINE WETLAND ^4^^y^ 1L1!£%$ Granite EXPLANATION *- Direction of ground-water flow Average water table Scrub-shrub vegetation - _ Forest vegetation Emergent vegetation Farmed crops ^| Glacial till [ \ Basin-fill sediment and alluvium 1^1 Peat ^ I Confining bed or interbed Note: Vertical scale greatly exaggerated B. Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta RIVERINE WETLAND PALUSTRINE WETLANDS ESTUARINE WETLANDS Figure 3. Generalized hydrologic setting of wetlands in California. A, Central Valley. B, Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: CALIFORNIA 131 C Sierra Nevada LACUSTRINE WETLANDS PALUSTRINE WETLAND Centra Valley E. Southern California Desert/Basin and Range Figure 3. Continued. Generalized hydrologic setting of wetlands in California. C, Sierra Nevada. D, Coast and Coast Ranges, f, Southern California Desert and Basin and Range. as a result of landslides or mining, road construction, and other human activities. Beavers create wetlands as a result of dam building. An example of a landslide- created wetland can be found in Mirror Lake at the base of Half Dome in Yosemite National Park. The lake is filling with sediment, and vegetation is becoming established. Meadows form in several topographic positions: depressions in valley bottoms, on glacially gouged surfaces, in glacial moraines with surface depressions where water is held, and on slight to moderate slopes where ground water discharges into fine-textured soils (commonly glacial or landslide deposits) at a rate greater than il can be released to streams and the at- mosphere. Meadows can have a range of hydrologic charac- teristics, from seasonally wet from snowmelt to satu- rated throughout the year. A single meadow can have several different hydrologic regimes, each supporting different vegetative communities (Ratliff, 1985). Meadows can be hydrologically dependent on both surface and ground water. Recent studies indicate that ground water is more important to meadow wetlands than previously thought (Akers, 1986; Winter and Woo, 1990). The present hydrologic condition of meadows in the Sierras, and likely elsewhere in California, ranges from slightly to highly altered; however, no systematic evaluation has been reported. Grazing of livestock since the mid-1850's disturbed many meadows enough to cause erosion, which in turn affected the hydrologic regime and the vegetative communities. More recently, intensive recreational use has contributed to degraded meadow conditions as well. Restoration of meadow vegetation to support grazing by livestock and wild- life requires that the hydrologic regime first be restored (Ratliff, 1985). Southern California Desert/Basin and Range Wetlands. Southeastern California from the Mexico border to the eastern flank of the Sierra Nevada lies in the rain shadow of the mountain ranges to the west. Precipitation is very low and temperatures are very high. Water for wetlands typically is supplied by moun- tain front creeks, springs, seeps, pools, and in more recent times, irrigation canals (fig. 3£). The largest wetlands in the region are playas, which typically are dry much of the year. Playas receive water from inter- mittent surface flows and from direct precipitation during infrequent storms. Water leaves playas through evaporation and transpiration because there is no sur- face drainage. Elsewhere, isolated springs and seeps support generally small marshes (cienagas) and other wetlands, such as oases. Where the water supply is relatively persistent but drainage is limited, saline wetlands can form. California's population is concentrated and in- creasing in the southern part of the State. The grow- ing demand for water and recreational activities (Bu- reau of Land Management, 1980) affects water re- sources and desert lands, especially wetland and ripar- ian areas. Ground-water pumping in the western Mojave Desert has caused fissures in playas at Edwards Air Force Base, and riparian vegetation has been adversely affected by declining ground-water levels. Increased amounts of water diverted for urban uses decreases the amount supporting wetlands. Rec- 132 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES reational activities and grazing have damaged riparian vegetation, contributing to a general decline in the quantity and quality of ri- parian wetlands. Owens Valley, a closed basin at the base of the Sierra Nevada's eastern escarpment, historically received runoff from the mountains that supported flow in the Owens River. This surface-water flow maintained Owens Lake and a ground-water level close to the ground surface of the valley floor. Diversions of surface water and ground water to Los Angeles since 1970 virtually eliminated wetlands de- pendent on surface water in the river and lake. However, ground- water-dependent vegetation on the valley floor has survived a low- ering of the water table by several feet by extending the root sys- tems (Sorenson and others, 1991). Its longer term survival and re- production have not been studied. TRENDS The earliest estimates of wetland acreage in California are those documented by the California State Engineers Surveys dating be- tween 1868 and 1886 (Hall, 1887). At that time, William H. Hall recorded nearly 5.2 million acres of land as swamps, lakes, bogs, and river overflow areas, most of which were located in the Central Valley. Dahl (1990) estimated that about 5 million acres of wetlands existed before large-scale agricultural conversions began. Of the original 5 million acres, nearly 4 million were palustrine, lacustrine, and riverine wetlands in the Central Valley, 700,000 were estuarine wetlands, 65,000 were palustrine and lacustrine wetlands of the Coast Ranges, 120,000 were palustrine, lacustrine, and riverine wetlands of the Cascade Range and Sierra Nevada, and 15,000 acres were riverine or palustrine wetlands of the interior basins and ranges. Significant wetland loss in California began in about 1850. In that year, the National Swamp and Overflowed Land Act conveyed all swamp and overflowed land, including delta marshes, from Fed- eral ownership to the State of California. In 1866, the California Legislature formed the Board of Swamp and Overflowed Land Commissioners to manage reclamation projects and proceeds from sales of swampland by the State. In 1869, the board relinquished its authority to individual county boards of supervisors. By about 1870, nearly all of California's wetlands were in private ownership, and subsidies were established to aid private developers in reclaim- ing swamplands (California Department of Water Resources, 1993). Between 1850 and 1920, about 70 percent of California's wet- land acreage was modified or converted to upland, largely by levee and drainage projects (Dennis and others, 1984). Nearly all of the reclaimed land was put into agriculture, helping to make California the leading agricultural State in the Nation by 1887. The diversion and redistribution of Sierran runoff water into the valley continued vigorously so that by 1939, 85 percent of the wetlands had been lost. By 1940, Tulare Lake, which had in post-European-settlement his- tory covered as much as 1,000 square miles, had been completely drained. Between 1938 and the early 1970's, construction of large- scale irrigation systems had modified more than 90 percent of the original wetlands. Although losses of wetlands have been large, some changes in land-use practices since about 1980 have caused increases or im- provements in wetland habitats. Since 1939, a switch from pastureland and row-crop farming to flooded rice paddies in the Sacramento Valley and parts of the San Joaquin Valley has increased palustrine wetlands by 41,000 acres (Prayer, 1989). Rice farmers, in conjunction with university and State researchers and private organizations, are developing methods to flood rice paddies during critical periods of occupation by migratory waterfowl. If these methods are perfected, several hundred thousand acres could be returned to seasonal wetland-habitat status while continuing to be used as agricultural lands. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in California. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Cali- fornia wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibi- tions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in California, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. », agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;.., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAM, management; REG, regulation; R&C, restora- tion and creation; LAM, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization ^ <^ <* v <^ ^ FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency........................... ... Forest Service................................................................. Natural Resources Conservation Service................ Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration................................................................. Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers .............................................. Military reservations..................................................... Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management...................................... Bureau of Reclamation ................................................. .. Fish and Wildlife Service.............................................. Geological Survey.......................................................... National Biological Service ......................................... ... National Park Service ................................................... Environmental Protection Agency.................................. STATE Environmental Protection Agency State Water Resources Control Board ...................... Regional Water-Quality Control Board ...................... Resources Agency California Coastal Commission.................................... Department of Conservation ....................................... ... Department of Fish and Game ..................................... Department of Parks and Recreation ........................ Department of Water Resources ................................ San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission ............................................ State Reclamation Board ............................................. ... State Lands Commission............................................... State Coastal Conservancy.......................................... Wildlife Conservation Board........................................ SOME COUNTY AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS Local planning authorities................................................ ... Reclamation districts ........................................................ Resource conservation districts .................................... Water districts .................................................................... PRIVATE California Waterfowl Association .................................. Ducks Unlimited.................................................................. Farmlands and Open-Space Foundation....................... National Audubon Society ............................................... ... Pacific Flyway Project....................................................... Sierra Club ........................................................................... The Nature Conservancy.................................................. Trust for Public Land .......................................................... National Water Summary Wetland Resources: CALIFORNIA 133 Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (CFSA, formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wetlands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS, formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines compliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the identification of wetlands and in the development of wetland pro- tection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetlands Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Service provides guidance to States in developing the wetland com- ponent of their plans. Coastal States that adopt coastal-zone man- agement programs and plans approved by NOAA are eligible for Fed- eral funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. The EPA has authority, through the National Pollution Discharge System, National Pretreatment Program, Ocean Dumping/Dredging and Fill Program, and the Clean Water Act, to certify that permit- ted use of the State's waters is consistent with established water- quality objectives. Under the Clean Water Act, the EPA'S San Fran- cisco Bay-Estuary Project has a 5-year-program objective to develop a comprehensive management plan that would set operational stan- dards for nearly 700,000 acres of estuarine and marine wetlands. The U.S. Department of Agriculture, through local conserva- tion districts and the NRCS, administers the Federal Water Bank program with assistance from the CFSA and the State of California. The major objective of this program is to restore, preserve, enhance, or improve wetland habitat in important migratory waterfowl nest- ing and breeding areas. The NOAA administers the Coastal Zone Management Act, whose purpose is to increase awareness and understanding of the coastal environment and to increase the ability of States' coastal- zone-management programs to address problems. NOAA funding under the act assists California in coastal-plan development, includ- ing wetlands. Grants have been awarded to the California Coastal Plan and San Francisco Bay Plan. NOAA also administers the Na- tional Estuarine Research Reserve program, which provides site ac- quisition for preservation, research, and education. The FWS manages approximately 225,000 acres of land on 34 National Wildlife Refuges, Wildlife Management Areas, National Fish Hatcheries, or other wildlife facilities. Wetlands on these hold- ings are among the most important habitat along the entire Pacific Flyway. Through the American Waterfowl Management Plan, the FWS administers the Central Valley Joint Habitat Venture, which comprises private organizations and other public agencies that have pooled their resources to help meet a target of restoring and main- taining the diversity, distribution, and abundance of waterfowl at 1970s levels. State wetland activities. California has no single agency that implements an integrated plan for management of wetland resources, nor does the State have a wetlands-management policy. The Gover- nor's Office sets broad environmental goals for the State. The Governor's Office of Planning and Research has no regulatory au- thority but has substantial influence in guiding administration policy and is the clearinghouse for all documents promulgated under the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970. This act establishes the basic charter for protection of California's environment. A major policy under the act is the maintenance of fish and wildlife popula- tions, and the protection of wetlands is identified as a significant goal. The California Environmental Protection Agency administers four boards that set standards, control pollution, and improve the quality of the environment throughout the State. The State Water Quality Control Board administers the system of water rights and, through a series of nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards, is responsible for implementing section 108 of the Clean Water Act, which is a mandate to control nonpoint pollution. The boards also implement the provisions of the Porter-Cologne Act of 1969. These provisions provide for assessment reports identifying surface-wa- ter bodies that would not meet water-quality standards without non- point-source controls and allow for the development and implemen- tation of best-management practices for control of nonpoint sources of pollution. Several departments and commissions, operating within the overall administration of the Resources Agency of the State of Cali- fornia, have primary responsibility for the enhancement and pro- tection of wetland habitats. The Fish and Game Commission sets policy for the Department of Fish and Game. The Department has legislative authority to preserve, protect, and manage California's fish, game, and native plants, without respect to their economic value, and administers provisions of the State Endangered Species Act. The Department is responsible for wildlife management, col- lecting and managing data for waterfowl and nongame wildlife, disease research, wetland enhancement, and habitat development and management on 76 State-owned designated wildlife areas, eco- logical reserves, and other public lands. The Department of Fish and Game Stream or Lake Alteration Agreements are required for ac- tivities that result in changes in natural conditions in streams, lakes, channels, or crossings. The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Com- mission is authorized by the McAteer-Petris Act to analyze, plan, and regulate development activities in San Francisco Bay and along its shoreline. The Commission implements the San Francisco Bay Plan and the Suisun Marsh Protection Plan. The Commission also regulates dredging and filling in the bay, and in sloughs, marshes, certain creeks, and tributaries within 100 feet of the bay. The plan is subject to Coastal Zone Management Agency consistency review as a component of California's Coastal Plan, which is administered by the Commission. The Suisun Marsh Preservation Act was en- acted in 1977 to establish policies and programs in the Suisun Marsh Protection Plan. Local governments and districts must prepare lo- cal protection programs to bring their policies and ordinances into conformity with the provisions of the act. The Department of Water Resources is authorized by the Delta 134 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Protection Act of 1988 to approve levee improvement in wetlands of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The Department is respon- sible for the State Water Project pumping facilities in the delta. The Department, as authorized by Delta Flood Protection Act of 1988, is involved in a levee-improvement program for flood protection that overlaps the North Delta Water Management Plans for widening channels, the South Delta Water Management Plans, and the Los Banos Grandes projects. The Department represents the State in Corps and BOR flood-control and water-development projects. County and local wetland activities. Resource Conservation Districts are authorized by Division 9 of the California Public Re- sources Code to assist the State in conserving soil and water re- sources, including wetlands. There are about 400 water, reclama- tion, and drainage districts in California, another 300 park and open- space districts, and 110 public-utility districts governed by Division 9 authority for conservation. In addition to special districts, county and city governments are required to have a general plan that has mandated elements in- cluding open space/conservation, safety, land use, and water circu- lation (Government Code, Section 65000 et seq.). There are no re- gional requirements for plan consistency among the counties and cities. The conservation element of the general plan must address the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, including water and its hydraulic force, forests, soils, rivers, and other waters, harbors, fisheries, wildlife, minerals, and other natu- ral resources. The open-space element defines provisions for open space for the preservation of natural resources, the managed pro- duction of resources, outdoor recreation, and public health and safety. Private wetland activities. Duck hunting clubs own most of the nonagricultural Central Valley and Suisun Bay wetlands and manage these areas for waterfowl. Ducks Unlimited is a major par- ticipant in the Joint Venture program of the FWS, in which public and private organizations cooperate to preserve wetlands. The Na- ture Conservancy, California Waterfowl Association, Pacific Fly- way Project, Trust for Public Land, Solano County Farmlands and Open Space Foundation, Sierra Club, and National Audubon Soci- ety have acquired sensitive lands for preservation and restoration. References Cited Akers, J.P., 1986, Ground water in the Long Meadows area and its relation with that in the General Sherman Tree area, Sequoia National Park, California: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 85-4178, 15 p. Bakker, E.S., 1984, An island called California An ecological introduc- tion to its natural communities: Berkeley, University of California Press, 484 p. Bertoldi, G.L., Johnston, R.H., and Evenson, K.D., 1991, Ground water in the Central Valley, California A summary report: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1401-A, 44 p. Bureau of Land Management, 1980, California Desert Conservation Area Plan: Riverside, Calif., Bureau of Land Management, Desert District, 173 p. California Department of Water Resources, 1993, Sacramento- San Joaquin delta atlas: Sacramento, California Department of Water Resources, 121 p. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report, FWS/OBS-79/31. 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Dennis, N.B., Marcus, M.L., and Hill, H., 1984, Status and trends of Cali- fornia wetlands Report to the California Assembly Resources Sub- committee: Sacramento, The California Assembly, 125 p. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: Washing- ton, D.C., U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Field, D.W., Reyer, A.J., Genovese, P.V., and Shearer, B.D., 1991, Coastal wetlands of the United States: Rockville, Md., National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service co- operative publication, 59 p. Prayer, WE., Peters, D.D., and Pywell, H.R., 1989, Wetlands of the Cali- fornia Central Valley Status and trends, 1939-1980's: Portland, Oreg., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report, 29 p. Hall, W.H., 1887, Topographical and irrigation maps of the Great Central Valley of California, embracing the Sacramento, San Joaquin, Tulare and Kern Valleys and the bordering foothills for California: Sacra- mento, California Department of Engineering, scale about 1:380,160, 2 sheets. Page, R.W., 1986, Geology of the fresh ground-water basin of the Central Valley, California, with textural maps and sections: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1401 -C, 53 p. Ratliff, R.D., 1985, Meadows in the Sierra Nevada of California State of knowledge: U.S. Forest Service General Technical Report PSW-84, 52 p. Sorenson, S.K., Dileanis, P.O., and Branson, F.A., 1991, Soil water and vegetation responses to precipitation and changes in depth to ground water in Owens Valley, California: U.S. Geological Survey Water- Supply Paper 2730-G, 54 p. Thomas, H.E., and Phoenix, D.A., 1976, Summary appraisals of the Nation's ground-water resources, California region: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 813-E, 51 p. Winter, T.C., and Woo, Ming-Ko, 1990, Hydrology of lakes and wetlands, in Wolman, M.G., and Riggs, H.C., eds., Surface water hydrology: Boulder, Colo., Geological Society of America, The Geology of North America, v. O-1, p. 159-187. Zedler, J.B., Nordby, C.S., and Kus, B.E., 1992, The ecology of Tijuana estuary, California A national estuarine research reserve: Washing- ton, D.C., National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Resource Management, 151 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, Room W-2233, Federal Building, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA 95825; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 911 N.E. 11th Avenue, Portland, OR 97232 Prepared by G.L. Bertoldi and Walter C. Swain, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 135 Colorado Wetland Resources Weretlands cover only about 1.5 percent of Colorado but are eco- logically and economically valuable to the State. Wetlands provide important wildlife habitat during some part of their life cycle, as much as 90 percent of the State's fish and wildlife depend on ripar- ian habitats that include wetlands (Redelfs, 1980), and wetlands provide stopover and breeding grounds to migratory waterfowl. Wetlands also provide flood attenuation, bank stabilization, and water-quality improvement (fig. 1). Colorado's tourist industry ben- efits from the scenic beauty of the State's wetlands and deepwater habitats and from the opportunities they afford for recreational ac- tivities that include hunting, fishing, bird watching, nature photog- raphy, camping, hiking, and boating. Because wetland vegetation generally is more lush and productive than that in uplands, some wetlands are considered prime grazing land. Peat is mined from wetlands for use as a garden soil amendment. In the past, much of the State's mineral wealth was mined from placer gold and heavy- mineral deposits in riparian zones. These benefits are provided by diverse wetlands distributed across Colorado's plains, mountains, and deserts. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Colorado is shown in figure 1A\ only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Colorado are described below. ine, 14 percent was mixed lacustrine and paiustrine, and 83 percent was paiustrine (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1955; i960). Palustrine wetlands in Colorado include forested wetlands in ripar- ian areas and near springs and seeps; scrub-shrub wetlands, such as willow carrs (thickets) and bottomland shrublands; emergent wetlands, such as marshes, fens, alpine snow glades, and wet and salt meadows; and aquatic-bed wetlands in ponds and lakes (Colo- rado Department of Natural Resources, 1992). Wetlands occupy about 1 million acres (1.5 percent) of Colo- rado (Dahl, 1990). In the Great Plains (fig. 2B), wetlands occur in the flood plains of the South Platte and Arkansas Rivers and in scat- tered locations throughout the plains. Wetlands generally are sparsely distributed in the Colorado Plateaus and Wyoming Basin. In the Southern and Middle Rocky Mountains, wetlands occur pri- marily in high mountain valleys and intermountain basins. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands form where there is a persistent water supply at or near the land surface. The location and persistence of the supply is a function of interdependent climatic, physiographic, and hydrologic factors such as precipitation and runoff patterns, evaporation, to- pography, and configuration of the water table. Precipitation (fig. 2C) and runoff rates differ annually and with season and location. The average annual precipitation in Colorado ranges from about 7 inches in the San Luis Valley to about 60 inches in some mountainous areas. Most runoff occurs in spring and early summer and is greatest in the mountains. Greater precipitation and runoff in the mountains are the principal reasons for the greater acreage of wetlands in the intermountain basins than in other re- gions of the State. In the mountains, melting snow is the primary source of runoff, whereas in the eastern plains, runoff is mostly from rainfall (Petsch, 1986). The timing and volume of runoff affect the establishment and function of riparian wetlands. High streamflow, which results from snowmelt in the mountains during spring and early summer, is essential for the maintenance of normally func- System Palustrine, Lacustrine Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Wetlands with in a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. There is no current (1993) estimate of statewide wetland acre- age in each of the systems. Inventories of wetland and open-water areas conducted in the 1950's estimated that 3 percent was river- Riverine Figure 1. Wetland in Tennessee Park, about 4 miles northwest of Leadville. This wetland receives acidic mine drainage and was the subject of a study to determine the capacity of wetlands to improve the chemical quality of such drainage. (Photograph by Katherine Walton-Day, U.S. Geological Survey.) 136 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES rfi^l 1 WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat 0 25 50 KILOMETERS PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS PRECIPITATION -11 - Line of equal annual precipitation Interval, in inches, is variable. Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Colorado and physical and cfimatological features that control wetland distribution in the State. A, Dis- tribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physiography. C, Annual precipitation. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center. C, Petsch, 1986.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: COLORADO 137 tioning riparian ecosystems. Water-control projects such as reser- voirs or irrigation canals, which reduce seasonal streamflow varia- tion and eliminate periodic flooding, can adversely affect many stream side-well and functions (Cooper, 1988). Evaporation generally is greatest in eastern Colorado (fig. 2D). Evaporation decreases with altitude and is least in the mountains. Local evaporation patterns can affect wetland development. For example, on the windward side of ridges above timberline, strong winds redistribute snow to the leeward side and increase evapora- tion (Windell and others, 1986). The result is a dry environment on the windward side, whereas on the leeward side, accumulated snow melts slowly and creates a moist environment conducive to devel- opment of alpine wetlands. In most of Colorado, evaporation exceeds precipitation annu- ally, and, except in mountainous areas, there is a net statewide an- nual moisture deficit that inhibits wetland formation. The moisture deficit prevents the formation of bogs, which are emergent wetlands that have organic soils and receive moisture only from precipita- tion. In mountainous areas, where there is sufficient moisture for bog formation, steep topography and shifting stream channels pre- vent their development (Cooper, 1986). Ground-water discharge from springs, shallow water tables, or both maintain wetlands in many areas of Colorado. The results of a study of wetlands in a river basin in the eastern plains indicated that most wetlands were along springfed streams that have perennial How in reaches 1-2 miles in length (Cooper and Cottrell, 1989). In the intermountain basins, ground water is an important determinant of wetland location. Wetlands in the San Luis Valley (fig. 2A ), an in- termountain basin, are hydrologically supported by springs or ground-water mounds that form during spring and summer runoff (Cooper and Severn, 1992). Climatic, topographic, and hydrologic characteristics differ among and sometimes within physiographic provinces. Colorado's diverse physiography results in diverse hydrologic settings for wet- land formation. In the Great Plains, wetlands occur in riparian zones of peren- nial streams, in oxbow lakes (abandoned stream meanders), in iso- lated depressions that have permanent or seasonal water supply, in playa lakes (primarily in the southern part of the region), and in association with reservoirs or channelized streams, rivers, and irri- gation ditches. EVAPORATION 40 Line of equal free-water-surface evaporation Interval, 5 inches In the Colorado Plateaus and Wyoming Basin, wetlands occur along perennial and intermittent streams, in oxbow lakes, around reservoirs, in springs and seeps, and where there is a shallow water table. Because of their semiarid to arid climate, these regions have a lower density and acreage of wetlands than does the rest of the State. As a result, the region's wetlands are disproportionately valu- able to wildlife. In the Rocky Mountains, wetlands form in two physio- graphically and climatically distinct settings: mountain valleys and intermountain basins. Mountain valleys generally are geologically young and, therefore, steep. The valleys have been shaped either by running water over their entire length or by glaciers at higher alti- tude and running water at lower altitude. Wetlands in mountain valleys occur in both glaciated and nonglaciated parts of the val- leys in locations from cliff faces to valley floors. Glaciation (fig. 2E ) in the alpine zone of some mountain valleys formed large cirque basins in which remnant glaciers or late-melting snow maintain spring, seep, and snowbed wetlands. Cirque lakes, or tarns, formed by glacial scouring, collect meltwater and attenuate downhill flow. Also in the alpine zone, ponds form in depressions behind slump- ing saturated soils or in depressions caused by the weight of ac- cumulated snow. Below cirque basins, glaciated, steep-sided, U- shaped valleys have broad, flat floors and relatively low-gradient streams. Wetlands form on saturated cliff faces, at the sloping floor near the sides of the valley, in oxbow lakes, in glacial kettle ponds, in depressions on the surface of glacial moraines, in lakes created by terminal or lateral moraines, in landslide-formed lakes, in or near seeps and springs, and in beaver ponds. In steep, V-shaped, non- glaciated parts of mountain valleys, wetlands occur as narrow ri- parian wetlands, in or near springs and seeps, and in beaver ponds (Windell and others, 1986). Intermountain basins, which were formed by tectonic forces, are filled by sediments derived from erosion of the surrounding mountains. The large, flat valleys are drained by low-gradient me- andering streams and rivers. Wetlands in the intermountain basins form along these streams and rivers, in natural and constructed impoundments, in oxbow lakes, and in areas having a shallow water table maintained by underlying aquifers, annual flooding, or imper- meable substrates (Windell and others, 1986). The San Luis Valley is an intermountain basin in southern Colorado. Throughout much of the valley, the water table is shal- CLACIATION Glacial extent during most recent glacial maximum Figure 2. Continued. Wetland distribution in Colorado and physical and climatological features that control wetland distribution in the State D, Annual free-water-surface evaporation. £, Extent of most recent glaciation. (Sources: D, Farnsworth and others, 1982. E, Mon- tagne, 1972.) 138 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES low or at land surface, creating large areas of wetlands that have diverse vegetation (Cooper and Severn, 1992). Wetlands in the val- ley provide habitat for resident and migratory waterfowl and enhance water quality. The valley hosts endangered whooping cranes dur- ing migration and has the State's largest concentration of wintering bald eagles (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1990). The State's largest National Wildlife Refuges, Alamosa and Monte Vista, are located there. Ground water is used to irrigate the valley and augment sur- face-water flow in the Rio Grande. Recently, developers have sought to export ground water from the valley to urban areas. The State Engineer's office estimated that this project could cause permanent water-table drawdown of several feet over large areas in the north- ern valley (Cooper and Severn, 1992). Such declines could decrease wetland acreage by reducing the area of saturated or inundated soil and the duration of inundation in emergent wetlands (Cooper and Severn, 1992). Redelfs (1980) reported that changes in irrigation practices since the early 1970's already have reduced wetland acre- age in the valley by 40 to 50 percent and have caused loss or drastic alteration of high-quality wetlands. The issue of new ground-water development illustrates the conflicts that occur frequently between development and wetland-conservation interests in the State. Studies of wetland function have been conducted in a few Colorado wetlands. Rovey and others (1986) concluded that veg- etation and water levels of wetlands in the Cross Creek area were dependent on stream hydrology. However, in another study of Cross Creek wetlands, Sundeen and others (1989) determined that the hydrology of those wetlands was largely independent of streams that flowed through them. Ruddy and Williams (1991) reached a simi- lar conclusion about wetlands in the Williams Fork. Cooper (1990), in a study of wetland vegetation in South Park, delineated stands of rare vegetation whose main range is in wetlands of boreal and arc- tic Canada and Alaska. A study of the water-quality function of a subalpine wetland in the upper Arkansas River basin (indicated that the wetland removed iron from a stream affected by acidic mine drainage that flowed through the wetland (Walton-Day, 1991). An upper-montane wetland has been intensively studied to determine the processes that caused elevated uranium concentrations (Owen, 1990), and reconnaissance work has been conducted in many other such wetlands (Owen and others, 1992). Although these investiga- tions of natural processes have added to what is known of Colorado's wetlands, the functions and values of the State's wetlands remain largely unstudied (Cooper and Severn, 1992). TRENDS The FWS has estimated that, from the 1780's to the 1980's, wetland area in Colorado decreased by 50 percent from about 2 million to about 1 million acres (Dahl, 1990). In agricultural areas, conversion to cropland, dewatering for irrigation purposes, and overgrazing by livestock contribute to wetland losses. In urban areas, wetland losses are due to encroachment by residential and commer- cial construction, channelization, dewatering for municipal and industrial purposes, and contamination from inadequately treated sewage and industrial waste. In other areas, losses have been caused by ski-resort development, transmountain water diversions, drain- age, river channelization, burning, clear cutting, mining and related activities that produce toxic acidic or alkaline drainage, peat mining, placer mining, water disposal, mine-tailing deposition, erosion and sedimentation, accidents such as drilling-mud spills or tailing-dam failures, sand and gravel mining, road and railroad construction, dams and reservoirs, and acidic precipitation (U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service, 1990, p. 9; Windell and others, 1986). Some land-use practices have created new wetlands or enlarged existing ones. Leaking ditches, uncapped flowing wells, and seeps and return flows associated with irrigation have increased wetland acreage or improved wetland habitat, notably in the San Luis Val- ley (Windell and others, 1986), but also in other regions of the State (Hopper, 1968; Rector and others, 1979). Gravel-pit construction also has increased wetland acreage, and gravel mining and agricul- tural activities are totally or partially responsible for two-thirds of the wetlands inventoried in the Boulder, Colo., area (Cooper, 1988). Reservoir construction has undoubtedly increased the acreage of lacustrine wetlands. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetlands conservation in Colorado. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Colo- rado wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibi- tions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The National Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act encourages wetland protection through funding incentives. The act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehen- sive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Service provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. State wetland activities. Although Colorado currently (1993) has no comprehensive wetlands-protection program, the State is assessing the need for a wetlands policy. Several State agencies actively participate in aspects of Federal programs, and some wet- lands are protected under State programs. The Water Quality Control Division of the Department of Health reviews section 404 permit applications to ensure compli- National Water Summary Wetland Resources: COLORADO 139 Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government mil applications and some local land-use issues to assess potential agencies and private organizations in Colorado, 1993 adverse effects on wildlife. Also, the Division regulates construc- [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided tion activities that affect streams and riparian areas, acquires wet- by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in lands through sales of Federal duck-hunting permits, and conducts wetland-related activity;.... agency or organization does not participate in habitat-improvement projects on public and private lands. wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- . . . . / ^ Oi * , , . ,. toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- The activities of a few State agencies include restoration of lection; D&l. delineation and inventory] former wetlands or creation of new wetlands. The Department of _______________________________________ Highways uses best management practices to avoid or minimize ^ " Jf 'i V\-- /\J / 4 1* / >*'7 f '«* -» . if.' 'M^ ' / * Vd|T)0f> ~^ Sniar[ B ^^ Fish and Wildlife Area ' f j-* '% f *«ft' ' y- 0 ,*/ i , s i - NWR 5 10 1 «i MM F"5 ° 5 10 ^ KILOMETERS WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are rot shown ^^H Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat WETLAND ACREAGE AND DENSITY, BY COUNTY 28,702 Acres of wetland in county 8.6 Percent of county covered by wetland Riverine and lacustrine wetlands 1 percent (1,929 acres) Estuarine wetlands percent (18,828 acres) Palustrine wetlands 88 percent (151,791 acres) RELATIVE AND ACTUAL ACREAGE OF WETLANDS TYPES IN CONNECTICUT PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS New England Province A. Taconic Section B. Connecticut Valley Lowland C. New England Upland Section D. Seaboard Lowland Section Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Connecticut and physical features that control wetland distribution in the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Wetland acreage and density, by county. C, Relative and actual acreage of wetland types in the early 1980's for Connecticut. D, Physiography. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B and C, Data from Metzler and Tiner, 1992. D, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1938; landforms data from EROS Data Center.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: CONNECTICUT 143 land formation (Winter, 1988). On an annual basis, precipitation exceeds evapotranspiration losses in Connecticut, resulting in an annual moisture surplus. Hydrology, therefore, favors the formation of wetlands throughout the State, and wetland location is determined primarily by geologic and topographic controls. Connecticut's physical features created by geologic forces over millions of years, erosion and deposition from recent glacia- tion, and human activities combined with present-day hydrologic conditions, determine the distribution of wetlands in the State. Con- necticut can be divided into four physiographic divisions based upon general topographic relief: the Taconic, the Connecticut Valley Low- land, the New England Upland, and the Seaboard Lowland Sections of the New England Province (fig. 2D). Topographic relief gener- ally increases from the southeast to northwest corners of the State. Major lowland areas include the Seaboard Lowland, Connecticut Valley Lowland, and, in the New England Upland and Taconic Sec- tions, deep valleys formed of weathered, calcareous bedrock. Con- necticut was completely covered by ice during the last glaciation; the ice margin reached its maximum extent at Long Island, New York. Glaciation did little to change the preglacial, fluvially eroded bedrock topography except for locally deepening bedrock hollows and river valleys (Schafer and Hartshorn, 1965). Large quantities of sediment were produced and deposited over bedrock throughout the State. This sediment either was deposited on upland hilltops and slopes as till or was eroded and reworked by glacial meltwater and deposited as stratified drift (sorted and layered glacial sediments). Stratified drift was deposited in topographically low areas major lowlands such as the Connecticut Valley Lowland and in stream and river valleys throughout the State. Many wetlands in Connecticut occur in the depressions, deepened valleys, and lowlands in which stratified drift was deposited. Inland wetlands. During deglaciation, a series of large gla- cial lakes occupied the Connecticut Valley Lowland, and smaller lakes occurred along many river valleys throughout the State (Schafer and Hartshorn, 1965). Extensive areas of flat, slowly per- meable stratified drift were deposited on the bottom of these lakes. The generally low relief and poorly permeable substrate of these areas retain surface water or slow its drainage, leading to the for- mation and maintenance of wetlands. Owing to the low slope of these areas, small drainage obstructions can form large wetlands. Sources of water can be ground-water discharge, surface runoff, or direct precipitation. Wetlands occur in small and large valleys throughout Connecti- cut. Some wetlands occupy the depressions, or kettles, left by melt- ing ice blocks in stratified drift. Wetlands also have formed in areas modified by the recent erosion and deposition of rivers in aban- doned river channels, behind levees and overbank sediments adja- cent to rivers, and in backswamp areas. In the New England Up- land and Taconic Sections, the hilly topography of upland areas of till or bedrock generally does not retain surface runoff. Wetlands form primarily in isolated depressions where surface runoff and ground-water discharge collect. The depressions may have no out- flow or have drainage controlled by bedrock sills, stratified drift, beaver dams, or manmade structures. Seepage wetlands may form where the water table intersects the land surface, such as on con- cave slopes and at breaks in slope; however, the wetlands are pe- rennial only if ground-water discharge is perennial (Winter, 1988). The position of a wetland in the landscape determines the nutrient status and vegetative characteristics of the wetland (Damman and French, 1987). Water that has moved through soil and subsurface materials carries nutrients that encourage plant growth. Wetlands in upland till and bedrock depressions are primarily areas of discharge from nutrient-poor, local ground-water flow systems, whereas wetlands in lowland stratified-drift valleys receive dis- charge from more nutrient-enriched ground-water flow systems (Winter, 1988). Wetlands in the New England Upland and Taconic Sections, which are underlain by metamorphosed calcareous rocks, are distinct from those in the more widespread acidic bedrock ar- eas of the State. Soils and ground water derived from calcareous rocks are rich in nutrients, resulting in wetlands such as Robbins Swamp that support a lush and diverse flora (Dowhan and Craig, 1976). As vegetation became established after glacial retreat and de- veloped in response to the warming climate, open-water areas filled with sediment or organic matter to become wetlands or remained lakes with wetlands fringing open water. Studies of upland wetlands in northeastern Connecticut have shown that wetlands have devel- oped over many divergent paths in the time since deglaciation (Thorson, 1990, 1992; Thorson and Harris, 1991). Postsettlement agricultural and industrial practices, rather than natural ecological factors, determined the present-day character of all previously existing wetlands. In addition, many wetlands were formed since settlement as a result of the effects of colonial land use and the con- struction of cattle-watering sites, ice ponds, and mill ponds for water-powered industries. Tidal wetlands. Wetlands in coastal areas of Connecticut have water-level fluctuations that are driven largely by ocean tides. Tidal wetlands form a continuum from estuarine to tidal riverine to palustrine wetlands. The effects of wave energy and salinity on the wetlands diminish along this continuum, although not necessarily at the same rate. Tidal effects are present in the Connecticut River as far as Windsor Locks near the Massachusetts border, whereas wetlands have graded from salt and brackish to freshwater before reaching Hartford. Tidal wetlands receive freshwater input from upland areas through ground-water discharge, stream overflow, and hillslope runoff. Regional ground-water discharge is greatest near the break in slope between upland and coastal areas, and interme- diate and local ground-water flow systems increase in importance in low areas (Winter, 1988). Floodwater resulting from high tides or stormflows may be temporarily stored on the wetland surface. The drainage of floodwater and hillslope runoff from the wetland surface is slowed by the low slope of coastal areas. Major areas of tidal wetlands are shown along major portions of the Housatonic, Quinnipiac, and Connecticut Rivers in figure 2A. The major factors affecting the development and persistence of tidal wetlands are the postglacial rise of sea level relative to the land, the tidal regime, the supply of sediments to the wetland, and the ability of plants to survive submergence by saltwater (Redfield, 1972). Unless the submergence of tidal wetlands by rising sea level is counteracted by the vertical accretion of the wetland by sediment deposition and plant accumulation, the wetland will drown and be- come a deepwater habitat. When the glaciers melted, the sea rose and encroached upon land, inundating many stream and river val- leys to form estuaries. Tidal wetlands either have migrated inland along estuaries, river valleys, and coastal slopes or the wetlands have been completely inundated. Salt-marsh peats, as much as 12.5 feet thick, overlie freshwater peats in parts of the Pataguanset River val- ley and indicate the change in wetland type in response to chang- ing sea levels 4,000 years ago (Orson and others, 1987). Presently, tidal wetlands exist in a narrow setting between rising sea level and expanding coastal development. As sea level continues to rise, the migration of these wetlands inland is hindered by historic alteration of coastal-margin wetlands and by present development. TRENDS The FWS has estimated that Connecticut lost 74 percent of its original wetlands over the 200-year period between the 1780's and the 1980's (Dahl, 1990). The FWS estimate is based on the assump- tion that Connecticut originally had about 670,000 acres of wetlands. However, Metzler and Tiner (1992) discuss some of the limitations of the methods used in the FWS inventory to estimate predevelopment 144 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES and recent wetland acreage when applied to Connecticut. They be- lieve that statewide wetland losses of one-third to one-half are more realistic (Metzler and Tiner, 1992). The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection estimates losses of 40 to 50 percent for freshwater wetlands and 65 percent for coastal wetlands. Some tidal wetlands have been created through the effects of human activities. Barske (1988) describes the development of 700 acres of salt marsh at the mouth of the Housatonic River through the accumulation of sediment, the result of upstream deforestation and other activities. Often, however, human activities lead to the degradation of tidal wetlands. The elimination or restriction of tidal flow commonly results in reduced salinity, lowered water tables, subsidence of wetlands peats, and conversion of wetland vegetation to less salt-tolerant species (Roman and others, 1984; Rozsa, 1988). Roman and others (1984) estimate that 10 percent of Connecticut's salt marshes are subject to tidal-flow restriction. Loss of upstream freshwater wetlands, separation of watercourses and remaining up- stream wetlands from downstream areas by a railroad right-of-way, and loss of downstream tidal marshes have all contributed to a re- duction of productivity in Alewife Cove, an estuary on Long Island Sound (Welsh and others, 1976). Several degraded coastal wetlands in Connecticut are the site of restoration projects. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), in cooperation with the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, is working to identify and restore salt marshes that have been degraded as a result of tidal-flow restriction. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Connecticut. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Connecticut, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;.. , agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, resto- ration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collec- tion; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization v FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency......................... Forest Service ............................................................... Natural Resources Conservation Service .............. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ...................................... Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers ............................................ Military reservations................................................... Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service ............................................ National Biological Service ....................................... Environmental Protection Agency................................ STATE Department of Environmental Protection .................. Department of Transportation...................................... University of Connecticut.............................................. TOWN AND CITY CONSERVATION COMMISSIONS PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS Connecticut Audubon Society...................................... Ducks Unlimited............................................................... The Nature Conservancy............................................... Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Con- necticut wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohi- bitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the Corps au- thority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and plac- ing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the dis- charge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are sub- ject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protec- tion Agency, and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a proposed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. Coastal States that adopt coastal-zone management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. Federal agencies are responsible for the proper management of wetlands on public lands under their jurisdiction. The FWS pro- tects and manages wetlands in two National Wildlife Refuges the Stewart B. McKinney National Wildlife Refuge and the Salt Meadow National Wildlife Refuge. The Corps manages and conserves for- ests, water, fish, wildlife, wetlands, and recreation areas for mul- tiple uses at dams, reservoirs, and parks located throughout the State. State wetland activities. Tidal wetlands are protected under the Tidal Wetlands Act of 1969 and the Coastal Management Act of 1979. Activities in tidal wetlands are regulated at the State level with exemptions for mosquito control, conservation, navigation, and emergency activities. Tidal wetlands are defined by the State as areas that border or lie beneath tidal waters and that contain certain plant species. About 15,000 acres of tidal salt marsh and 7,000 acres of National Water Summary Wetland Resources: CONNECTICUT 145 brackish and freshwater tidal wetlands are regulated under this statute (Lefor and Tiner, 1972). Nontidal freshwater wetlands are protected under the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act of 1972. Inland wetlands are regu- lated according to State standards by local inland wetlands and watercourses commissions. Permits are required for all activities within wetlands with exemptions for agricultural activities, construc- tion and maintenance of water-supply systems, certain conserva- tion and recreation uses, and the enjoyment and maintenance of residential property. Inland wetlands are defined by soil type poorly drained, very poorly drained, flood-plain, or alluvial soils as delineated by the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Rivers, streams, waterways, and other natural and artificial water bodies are regulated under this statute as watercourses. On the basis of the State's wetland definition, 15 to 20 percent of Connecticut's land is subject to regulation as inland wetlands (Metzler and Tiner, 1992). Under section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act, any activ- ity that results in a discharge, including that of fill into wetlands or State waters that requires a federal permit, must also obtain a sec- tion 401 water-quality certification stating that the activity will not violate State surface-water-quality standards. Many activities ex- empted under the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act are in the Department of Environmental Protection's jurisdiction under the section 401 certification program; however, normal maintenance and improvement of agricultural lands remain exempt from State and Federal authority. Use of the antidegradation provisions of State surface-water-quality standards on wetlands provides enhanced wetland protection. Antidegradation provisions provide for the protection of existing wetland functions and the level of water quality necessary to maintain and protect those functions. No degradation is allowed in areas designated as "outstanding national resource waters," such as National Wildlife Refuges, National Parks, State parks, wildlife areas, and other areas of ecological significance. The Water Resources Division of the Department of Environmental Pro- tection is responsible for section 401 certifications in Connecticut. The Department of Environmental Protection is the primary environmental and conservation agency in Connecticut. The Depart- ment owns more wetland acreage in Connecticut than does the Fed- eral Government (Metzler and Tiner, 1992). Numerous wetlands are protected in State parks, State forests, and wildlife-management areas throughout the State. Chester Cedar Swamp and Pachaug Great Meadows are partly State-owned wetlands and are designated as National Natural Landmarks by the NFS. The State owns significant portions of wetlands at Robbins Swamp, Durham Meadows, Barn Island Fish and Wildlife Areas, and Hammonasset State Park (Metzler and Tiner, 1992). Wetlands are acquired through the Rec- reation and Natural Heritage Act and sale of the new Connecticut Waterfowl Hunting Stamp. Funds derived from the stamp will be used solely for wetland acquisition or improvements. Development projects that cause unavoidable wetlands degra- dation or loss are required to mitigate or compensate for wetland loss by replacing or providing a substitute wetland resource. The Connecticut State Department of Transportation has been involved in wetlands creation and mitigation projects as a way to offset the long-term effects of highway construction. Wetlands, created and restored as a part of the design, permit, and construction .process, have provided lost wetland functions with varying success (Butts, 1988). The Department of Transportation has acquired about 200 acres of wetlands in compensation for wetlands lost through devel- opment projects; most of this land has remained under the Department's management. The Department provides funds for wetland-related research primarily at the University of Connecti- cut. Local wetland activities. Inland wetland and watercourse commissions and coastal-area zoning and planning commissions are responsible for planning and regulating wetland-related activities at the town or municipal level. Inland wetland and watercourse com- missions regulate activities through permitting under the Inland Wetland and Watercourses Act. Coastal-area zoning and planning commissions balance development and the preservation of environ- mental values in coastal areas under the Coastal Management Act. The act provides commissions with planning, research, and permit- ting authority. Education, training, support, and final authority are provided to commissions by the Department of Environmental Protection's Wetland Program. Private wetland activities. Private organizations in Connecti- cut are active in land acquisition and management, research, edu- cation, and policy review and planning. The Nature Conservancy protects about 1,800 acres of wetlands within the 9,000 acres of land under its ownership. Ducks Unlimited provides technical and finan- cial assistance to Federal and State agencies in order to protect waterfowl habitat in Connecticut. References Cited Barske, Philip, 1988, Man and nature Willing or unwilling partners, in Lefor, M.W., and Kennard, W.C., eds., Proceedings of the 4th Wet- lands Conference, November 15, 1986: University of Connecticut Institute of Water Resources Report 34, p. 91-99. Butts, M.P., 1988, Status of wetland creation/mitigation projects on State highway projects in Connecticut, in Lefor, M.W, and Kennard, W.C., eds., Proceedings of the 4th Wetlands Conference, November 15,1986: University of Connecticut Institute of Water Resources Report 34, p. 13-18. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, V., Golet, EC., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Classifica- tion of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Damman, A.W.H., and French, T.W, 1987, The ecology of peat bogs of the glaciated northeastern United States A community profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.16), 100 p. Dowhan, J.J., and Craig, R.J., 1976, Rare and endangered species of Con- necticut and their habitats: Connecticut Geological and Natural His- tory Survey Report of Investigations no. 6, 137 p. Fenneman, N.M., 1938, Physiography of Eastern United States: New "York, McGraw-Hill, 714 p. Lefor, M.W, and Tiner, R.W, 1972, Tidal wetlands survey of the State of Connecticut Report of the consultant biologists for the period De- cember 22,1969 to June 30,1972: Storrs, Biological Sciences Group, University of Connecticut, 113 p. Messier, S.N., 1980, The plant communities of the acid wetlands of north- western Connecticut: Storrs, University of Connecticut, M.S. thesis, 98 p. Metzler, K.J., and Tiner, R.W., 1992, Wetlands of Connecticut: State Geo- logical and Natural History Survey of Connecticut Report of Investi- gations no. 13, 115 p. Orson, R.A., Warren, R.S., and Niering, W.A., 1987, Development of a tidal marsh in a New England river valley: Estuaries, v. 10, p. 20-27. Redfield, A.C., 1972, Development of a New England salt marsh: Ecologi- cal Monographs, v. 42, p. 201-237. Roman, C.T., Niering, W.A., and Warren, R.S., 1984, Salt marsh vegeta- tion change in response to tidal restriction: Environmental Manage- ment, v. 8, p. 141-150. Rozsa, Ronald, 1988, An overview of wetland restoration projects in Con- necticut, in Lefor, M.W., and Kennard, W.C., eds., Proceedings of the 4th Wetlands Conference, November 15,1986: University of Connecti- cut Institute of Water Resources Report 34, p. 1-11. Schafer, J.P., and Hartshorn, J.H., 1965, The Quaternary of New England, in Wright, H.E., Jr., and Frey, D.G., eds., The Quaternary of the United States: Princeton, N.J., Princeton University Press, p. 113-128. Thorson, R.M., 1990, Development of small upland wetlands A strati- graphic study in northeastern Connecticut: Storrs, University of Con- necticut School of Engineering, Final Report JHR 90-191, 285 p. 146 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES ____1992, Remaking the wetlands in Lebanon, Connecticut Cultural and natural changes in the postglacial epoch: Storrs, University of Con- necticut School of Engineering, Final Report JHR 92-215, 157 p. Thorson, R.M., and Harris, S.L., 1991, How "natural" are inland wet- lands? An example from the Trail Wood Audubon Sanctuary in Connecticut, USA: Environmental Management, v. 15, p. 675-687. Welsh, B.L., Herring, J.P., Bessette, Diane, and Read, Luana, 1976, The importance of an holistic approach to ecosystem management and planning, in Lefor, M.W., Kennard, W.C., and Helfgott, T.B., eds., Proceedings of the 3rd Wetlands Conference, June 14, 1975: Univer- sity of Connecticut Institute of Water Resources Report 2_6, p. 16-33. Winter, T.C., 1988, A conceptual framework for assessing cumulative im- pacts on the hydrology of nontidal wetlands: Environmental Manage- ment, v. 12, p. 605-620. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, Ribicoff Federal Building, 450 Main Street, Room 525, Hartford, CT 06103; Regional Wetlands Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA 01035 Prepared by Sandra L. Harris, U.S. Geological Survey National Water Summary Wetland Resources 147 Delaware Wetland Resources We'etlands cover about 17 percent of Delaware (Tiner and Finn, 1986). These wetlands support rich biotic communities in freshwa- ter, brackish-water, and saltwater settings across the State. Some of the most familiar wetlands in Delaware are the tidal marshes along Delaware Bay (fig. I). Wetlands have many chemical, physical, and biological func- tions. In Delaware, wetlands trap waterborne sediments, nutrients, and toxic chemicals by filtering inflowing water and storing or trans- forming the filtrate. Coastal-zone and flood-plain wetlands mitigate the effects of flooding caused by runoff and tides by reducing flow velocity, storing water temporarily, and releasing it gradually. Veg- etation in riparian wetlands maintains stream channels by stabiliz- ing the land surface, and tidal wetlands act as buffers against storm tides and waves, thus impeding erosion. One of the most important functions of wetlands is habitat for waterfowl, terrestrial and aquatic animals, and a wide variety of plant life. Wetlands provide food, shelter, resting and feeding places on migration routes, breeding areas, and nurseries for many animals including species of particu- lar economic interest in Delaware such as muskrat, fish, ducks, and geese. Many rare and endangered plant species are adapted to hy- drologic conditions present only in wetlands, especially freshwater wetlands. Delaware's wetlands have considerable recreational and eco- nomic value. They provide outdoor educational and recreational opportunities, including activities such as bird watching, hiking, and canoeing. In addition, wetlands in Delaware support the hunting, fur trapping, commercial and sport fishing, lumbering, and tourist industries. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Delaware is shown in figure 2/4; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are Figure 1. Estuarine wetlands on Cedar Creek at Slaughter Beach, Delaware. These are tidal wetlands typical of those found along Delaware Bay. (Photograph by Evelyn M. Maur- meyer, Coastal and Estuarine Research, Inc.) grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Delaware are described below. System Palustrine, Lacustrine Riverine Estuarine. Marine.. Wetland description Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees {forested wet- lands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. Palustrine wetlands are the most abundant wetlands in Dela- ware, comprising 132,000 acres in 1983, or about 59 percent of the wetland area in the State (Tiner, 1985). Palustrine wetlands are dis- tributed throughout the State in topographic depressions and in ri- parian zones along rivers and streams. In 1983, estuarine wetlands covered 89,800 acres in Delaware, or about 40 percent of the wet- land area in the State. Estuarine wetlands occur along the shores of Delaware Bay and the Delaware River and behind the barrier beaches of the Atlantic Coast. Other types of wetland comprise less than 1 percent of Delaware's wetland area. In 1983, the State had about 650 acres of riverine wetland, 140 acres of lacustrine wet- land, and 540 acres of marine wetland (mostly beaches and sand- bars along the Atlantic Coast). Delaware is a small State, but it contains many different types of wetlands. The plant composition of vegetated wetlands is deter- mined by factors such as climate, soil type, ground-water and sur- face-water chemistry, salinity, and the extent and duration of flood- ing. The predominant vegetation or specific location of a Delaware wetland frequently determines its common name. For example, in- land bays are natural coastal features that contain both palustrine and estuarine emergent wetlands, and such wetlands occur in Rehoboth, Indian River, and Little Assawoman Bays. Palustrine and estuarine emergent wetlands can be found in impoundments modi- fied by constructed levees and managed by water-control structures. Salt and brackish marshes are predominantly estuarine emergent wetlands characterized by vegetation tolerant of brackish to salty 148 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES water; small scrub-shrub wetlands commonly are associated with the landward margins of salt marshes. Interdunal swales (dune slacks) are topographic depressions among sand dunes on the At- lantic Coast that contain palustrine emergent or scrub-shrub wet- lands. Palustrine forested wetlands in Delaware include Atlantic white cedar swamps, cypress swamps, and flood-plain forests, both tidal and nontidal. Delmarva bays (small, closed topographic depres- sions) commonly contain seasonally flooded palustrine emergent, scrub-shrub, or forested wetlands. Delmarva bays and associated wetlands also are known as whale wallows; loblollies; flatwoods depressions; and intermittent, temporary, vernal, woodland, or coastal-plain ponds. The Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environ- mental Control has established five wetland categories for the State based on relative functions and values of the State's wetlands. Cat- egory I wetlands provide exceptional value or unique biotic assem- blages and include Delmarva bays, dune slacks, Atlantic white cedar swamps, and cypress swamps. Category II wetlands are those gen- erally considered permanently to seasonally wet or those that pro- vide significant habitat or biotic values. Category III wetlands in- clude temporarily flooded wetlands and all wetlands not included in another category. Category IV wetlands consist of farmed wetlands. Category V wetlands are all wetlands created from nonwetland areas for purposes other than mitigation and include drainage ditches, farm ponds, storm water-retention basins, and borrow pits. PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS COASTAL PLAIN HYDROCEOMORPHIC REGIONS CD Poorly Drained Upland CD Well-Drained Upland HE] Surficial Confined CD Inner Coastal Plain Coastal Wetland and Beach Region CD Piedmont Province WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat 78 « 30' 10 15 MILES 10 15 KILOMETERS Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Delaware and physical features that control wetland distribution in the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physiography. C, Hydrogeomorphic regions in the Coastal Plain of Delaware. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Landforms data from EROS Data Center; divisions from Spoljarik and Jordan, 1966. C, Shedlock and others, 1993.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: DELAWARE 149 HYDROLOGIC SETTING In Delaware, water in small, nontidal wetlands is supplied by direct precipitation, surface runoff from precipitation, and localized, shallow ground-water-flow systems recharged by precipitation. Larger wetlands (tidal and nontidal) also can interact with regional ground-water-flow systems. The primary source of water in tidal wetlands is tidal inundation, although runoff and ground-water dis- charge can be important secondary sources. Water from surface runoff can collect in topographic lows, where ground water com- monly discharges after periods of greater-than-normal precipitation. These hydrologic conditions are conducive to the formation and maintenance of wetlands. Abundant precipitation (an annual average of 43 inches) (Simmons, 1986) and extensive tidal zones in Delaware Bay and the Atlantic Ocean provide ample water for wetlands in Delaware. Fluc- tuations in local precipitation and evapotranspiration rates combine with local differences in geology, topography, soil characteristics, and tides to create transient or seasonal changes in the local inter- actions of ground water and surface water in wetlands (Winter, 1992; Phillips and Shedlock, 1993). In general, mid-October to early April (nongrowing season) is a period of ground-water recharge, with high rates of precipitation and low rates of evapotranspiration. Mid-April to mid-October (growing season) is characterized by high rates of evapotranspiration and declining water levels (Johnston, 1973). Delaware is in two physiographic provinces: the Coastal Plain and the Piedmont Province (fig. IE ). Geology, topography, and soils in the two provinces differ considerably; the types and distribution of wetlands in each province reflect this difference. Figure 3A-3C is a generalization of wetland hydrology in Delaware. Coastal Plain. Ninety-three percent of Delaware, including more than 94 percent of its wetland area, is in the Coastal Plain. All of the estuarine wetlands in the State are in this relatively flat province (Tiner, 1987), which rises from below sea level only to about 100 feet above sea level. The Coastal Plain is underlain by an extensive and locally complex surficial aquifer that has a wide range of depth, porosity, and permeability (Andres, 1987; Talley, 1987). Wetlands in the Coastal Plain generally intersect the surficial aqui- fer. Coastal Plain wetlands are supported by precipitation, surface runoff, flooding from streams, and ground-water discharge. Re- charge of the ground-water system in the Coastal Plain is mainly by infiltration of precipitation in interstream areas (Heath, 1984), and discharge results from evapotranspiration and by seepage to streams, estuaries, wells, ditches, and the ocean. Both local and regional ground-water flow may help sustain wetlands, especially in low-lying areas near the coast, which contain extensive, mainly emergent wetlands. Forested wetlands occur primarily in bottom lands along stream channels, especially in headwater areas. The width of these forested wetlands in streamside and upland areas commonly has been reduced by ditching and the conversion of land to agricultural use. Regional differences in the configuration and geohydrologic properties of sedimentary deposits in the Coastal Plain are reflected by differences in topography, soils, degree of stream incision, the configuration of the water table, and the paths of ground-water flow. These characteristics, which affect the distribution of wetlands in the landscape, have been used to divide the Coastal Plain on the Delmarva Peninsula into hydrogeomorphic regions (Shedlock and others, 1993). In Delaware, there are five hydrogeomorphic regions (fig. 2C): the Poorly Drained Upland, the Well-Drained Upland, the Surficial Confined, the Inner Coastal Plain, and the Coastal Wet- land and Beach. Each of these regions contains wetlands. The Poorly Drained Upland lies along the drainage divide sepa- rating the Chesapeake Bay drainage basin to the west from the drain- age basins of Delaware Bay and the Atlantic Ocean. This region is hummocky, has low relief, and has many seasonally flooded forested wetlands and small, sluggish streams in poorly defined, low-gradi- ent, shallowly incised valleys (fig. 3A) (Shedlock and others, 1993). About 43 percent of the region is forested, including the topographic depressions, which have poorly drained soils and typically contain wetlands. Forests are interspersed with agricultural fields that are in areas of higher elevation than the forests. The water table in this region is shallow and has a relatively large seasonal fluctuation. Local ground-water-flow patterns are directly affected by the depth of the water table and can differ with seasonal precipitation, even to the extent of changing direction, so that wetlands where ground water is discharged in wet periods can become areas of ground-water recharge during dry periods (Phillips and Shedlock, 1993). Typical wetlands in this region are seasonally saturated, forested wetlands. Examples include the wetlands in Redden State Forest, which have poorly defined topographic boundaries (typical of the southern part of this region), and the small wetlands in Blackbird State Forest, which are contained within Delmarva bays (typical of the northern part of this region). The Well-Drained Upland occurs in a north-south trending band in eastern Delaware and in an area in the southern part of the State around the headwaters of the Nanticoke River. This region is flat to gently rolling and has higher relief than the Poorly Drained Upland (fig. 3A). Streams are deeply incised, particularly tidal streams and their tributaries. About 28 percent of the Well-Drained Upland is forested, primarily in riparian (streamside) zones, which include most of the wetlands in the region. The rest of the region is covered by agricultural fields. Typical wetlands in the region include the palustrine forested wetlands along the Nanticoke River. The Coastal Wetland and Beach region extends southward along the coast of Delaware from the Delaware River to the Dela- ware-Maryland border. This region is very flat and has dunes along the Atlantic Coast (fig. 3A ). The surficial aquifer is composed of a variety of sediments that were deposited in several coastal settings, including beach, dune, and tidal marsh. The water table is gener- ally within a few feet of the land surface because of geohydrologic conditions and because the land-surface altitude is near sea level. Wetlands in this region have complex hydrology because of the geologic setting and because of the interactions between tides and ground-water discharge. Extensive wetlands in low-lying areas form as shallow embayments, salt marshes, and tidal and nontidal fresh- water marshes and swamps. Examples of wetlands in the Coastal Wetland and Beach region include the large marshes in Indian River Bay, the Great Marsh (an extensive tidal marsh along Delaware Bay), and the freshwater and brackish tidal marshes along Blackbird Creek. The Surficial Confined region occupies two small areas of southern Delaware. The landscape is flat, except for a number of low, sandy ridges (relict dunes) that rise above their surroundings (fig. 3fi). This region is physiographically similar to the Poorly Drained Upland. Geohydrologic conditions in the upper sand unit of the aquifer are the cause of the poor drainage conditions and widespread presence of wetlands in the Surficial Confined region (Shedlock and others, 1993). Extensively ditched agricultural lands have been converted from former wetland. About 55 percent of the area in this region is still in large tracts of woodlands that occur in uplands between streams and in wetlands in riparian zones. Ex- amples of wetlands in the Surficial Confined region include the remnant of a large cypress swamp located east of Gumboro and the forested wetlands along the Pocomoke River. The Inner Coastal Plain is in northern Delaware. There is con- siderable topographic relief in this region, and streams are well in- cised in their lower reaches (fig. 3C). Land use in this region is heterogeneous. There has been considerable development of the northeastern section, which is mostly urban. The northwestern sec- tion of the region is forested, and the southern section has mixed 150 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES agricultural and residential usage. Wetlands in the Inner Coastal Plain occur in riparian zones, especially in the tidal reaches of the Christina River, in forested areas, and in small, discontinuous ar- eas. Examples of wetlands in the region include Churchman's Marsh, a tidal emergent wetland; Nonesuch Creek Marsh, an emergent wetland whose tidal flow is restricted by tide gates; and the small, nontidal, palustrine wetlands around Noxontown Pond. Piedmont Province. The Piedmont Province occupies the northern 6 percent of the State and contains only 2 percent of Delaware's total wetland area (Tiner and Finn, 1986). The gently rolling hills of this province range in altitude from near sea level to about 450 feet. The Piedmont Province is underlain by folded and faulted igneous and metamorphic bedrock overlain by a regolith of variable thickness. Regolith, which underlies the land surface nearly everywhere in this province, is a layer of unconsolidated, mostly fine-grained material composed of fragmental, weathered bedrock and alluvium overlying unweathered bedrock. Wetlands in the Pied- mont Province occur along riparian valleys and other low areas of the ground surface, which commonly occur over fracture zones in the bedrock. Water is more likely to collect and be discharged in these depressions than in other areas because fracture zones are major pathways of ground-water movement (Heath, 1984). A. Poorly Drained Upland, Well-Drained Upland, and Coastal Wetland and Beach POORLY DRAINED UPLAND PALUSTRINE WETLAND PALUSTRINE WETLANDS WELL DRAINED UPLAND RIVERINE WETLANDS COASTAL WETLAND AND BEACH ESTUARINE WETLAND ESTUARINE WETLAND Confining unit Saltwater Estuarine deposits EXPLANATION ^- Generalized direction of ground-water flow Average water table Water table in Poorly Drained Upland in wet season Water table in Poorly Drained Upland in dry season i=- Direction of ground-water flow in Poorly Drained Upland in wet season t V Scrub-shrub vegetation Forest vegetation Emergent vegetation Farmed crops Submersed aquatic vegetation j Channel-fill sediments Direction of ground-water ___ flow in Poorly Drained |___l Regolith Upland in dry season ----- Contact between fresh- water and saltwater Note: Vertical scale greatly exaggerated C Piedmont Province and Inner Coastal Plain RIVERINEJWETLAND HEDMONT pROV|NCE PALUSTRINE WETLANDS PALUSTRINE WETLANDS ESTUARINE WETLAND "O c J5 INNER COASTAL PLAIN RIVERINE WETLANDS Figure 3. Geohydrologic setting of wetlands in Delaware. A, Poorly Drained Upland, Well-Drained Upland, and Coastal Wetland and Beach. B, Surficial Confined region. C, Piedmont Province and Inner Coastal Plain. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: DELAWARE 151 Recharge of the ground-water system in the Piedmont Prov- ince is by infiltration of precipitation, mostly in the uplands (Heath, 1984); however, most precipitation in this province is transported to surface depressions and streams by overland runoff. In forested areas, water seeps into the soil layer and moves through it laterally to discharge into streams and, by evapotranspiration, into the atmo- sphere. Some water moves below the soil zone to the water table in the regolith. The water seeps from the regolith into the underlying bedrock or discharges to surface-water bodies (fig. 3C). Much of the ground water available to wetlands in this region is stored in the regolith (Metzgar, 1973). Types of wetlands in the Piedmont Province include flood-plain emergent marshes, seeps, and excavated farm ponds. Notable among wetlands in this province are the forested wetlands along Brandy- wine Creek. TRENDS In the 1780's, about 480,000 acres (36 percent) of Delaware was wetland (Dahl, 1990). By the mid-1980's, 223,000 wetland acres remained a loss of about 54 percent since the 1780's. The esti- mated annual loss of all types of wetland between 1955 and 1981 was 1,600 acres (Tiner, 1987). Both human activities that adversely affect water quality and natural phenomena have contributed to widespread wetland loss and degradation. Major causes of vegetated nontidal wetland loss have been channelization and ditching (about 55 percent), direct conversion to agriculture (28 percent), urbanization (12 percent), and pond creation (5 percent) (Tiner, 1987). Major causes of vegetated tidal wetland loss have been urbanization (63 percent), inundation by submersion, dredging, or impoundment (24 percent), and pond cre- ation (6 percent). Small areas of wetland have been formed in re- cent times, especially by inadvertent flooding during road construc- tion, by pond construction and, most recently, by the establishment of compensatory wetland-mitigation sites. Properly managed shal- low ponds and impoundments do not usually result in wetland losses but rather in conversions from drier to wetter types of wetlands; they can even yield net increases in wetland value with the change in function. New wetlands also have formed on washover fans and flood tidal deltas along coastal areas as well as on former upland areas inundated by rising sea levels. Implementation of the 1973 State Wetlands Act and the 1972 Federal Clean Water Act markedly reduced the rate of human-caused tidal wetland loss. The estimated annual tidal wetland loss between 1954 and 1973 was 444 acres (Lesser, 1971); between 1973 and 1979 the estimated annual rate of tidal-wetland loss was 20 acres (Hardisky and Klemas, 1983). Recent rates of nontidal-wetland loss have not been accurately quantified. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Delaware. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Dela- ware wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibi- tions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Ser- vice (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines compli- ance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Delaware, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, resto- ration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collec- tion; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency.............. Natural Resources Conservation Service ... Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ........................... Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers ................................. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service ................................. Geological Survey............................................. National Biological Service ............................ National Park Service ...................................... Environmental Protection Agency...................... STATE Delaware Geological Survey.............................. Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control ........................................... State Highway Administration ............................ University of Delaware College of Marine Studies ............................... SOME COUNTY AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS The Nature Conservancy..................................... Delaware Wild Lands, Inc. .................................. Delaware Nature Society..................................... Ducks Unlimited...................................................... 152 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice provides guidance to States in developing the wetland compo- nent of their plans. Coastal States that adopt coastal-zone manage- ment programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. State wetland activities. Delaware's State Wetlands Act, en- acted in 1973, protects coastal tidal wetlands, including some fresh- water wetlands along tidal rivers, and requires a permit from the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control for many activities in these wetlands. A proposed freshwater (nontidal) wetlands statute would establish a State-run nontidal-wetlands regu- latory program based on five categories of wetlands. This would be part of a comprehensive statewide management program and is in- tended to result in the assumption of authority for the Federal sec- tion 404 program by the State. The Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control also administers section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act, providing regulatory control in wetland areas in terms of effects on surface-water-quality standards. The coastal-zone management program in Delaware bars the develop- ment of heavy manufacturing industry within 2 miles of the State's coastline where wetlands are abundant, while allowing the devel- opment of light industry and the expansion of preexisting industry under a permit system. Permits are also required for substantial changes to the character of beach or open-water areas. The Sub- aqueous Lands Act and the Beach Preservation Act regulate activi- ties in tidal and nontidal subaqueous navigable waters and within the coastal dune systems along the Atlantic Ocean and Delaware Bay. Private wetland activities. Private organizations with inter- ests in wetlands in Delaware are active in the development of regu- lations, policy planning, advocacy, land acquisition and manage- ment, environmental education, and research. A few of the many such organizations in the State are The Nature Conservancy, the Delaware Nature Society, Delaware Wild Lands, Inc., the Sierra Club, Ducks Unlimited, and the Brandy wine Conservancy. References Cited Andres, A.S., 1987, Geohydrology of the northern coastal area, Delaware: Delaware Geological Survey Hydrologic Map Series no. 5, scale 1:24,000. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, I.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Hardisky, M.A., and Klemas, Vytautas, 1983, Tidal wetlands natural and human-made changes from 1973 to 1979 in Delaware Mapping tech- niques and results: Environmental Management, v. 7, no. 4, p. 339- 344. Heath, R.C., 1984, Ground-water regions of the United States: U.S. Geo- logical Survey Water-Supply Paper 2242, 78 p. Johnston, R.H., 1973, Hydrology of the Columbia (Pleistocene) deposits of Delaware: Delaware Geological Survey Bulletin 14, 78 p. Lesser, C.A., 1971, Memorandum to Secretary Austin N. Heller from Charles Lesser RE 1971 wetland inventory (corrected): Dover, Del., Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, 3 p. Metzgar, R.G., 1973, Wetlands in Maryland: Maryland Department of State Planning Publication 157, 80 p. Phillips, P.J., and Shedlock, R.J., 1993, Hydrology and chemistry of ground- water and seasonal ponds in the Atlantic Coastal Plain in Delaware, U.S.A.: Journal of Hydrology, v. 141, p. 157-178. Shedlock, R.J., Hamilton, P.A., Denver, J.M., and Phillips, P.J., 1993, Multiscale approach to regional ground-water quality assessment of the Delmarva Peninsula, in Alley, W.M., ed., Multiscale approach to regional ground-water quality assessment: New \brk, Van Nostrand Reinhold & Co., p. 563-587. Simmons, R.H., 1986, Delaware surface-water resources, in U.S. Geologi- cal Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and surface-water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 181-186. Spoljaric, Nenad, and Jordan. R.R., 1966, Generalized geologic map of Delaware: Newark, Del., Delaware Geological Survey map, scale 1:296,075. Talley, J.H., 1987, Geohydrology of the southern coastal area: Delaware Geological Survey Hydrologic Map Series no. 7, scale 1:24,000. Tiner, R.W., 1985, Wetlands of Delaware: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control cooperative publication, 77 p. ____1987, Mid-Atlantic wetlands A disappearing natural treasure: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. En- vironmental Protection Agency cooperative publication, 28 p. Tiner, R.W., and Finn, J.T., 1986, Status and recent trends of wetlands in five mid-Atlantic states Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Vir- ginia, and West Virginia: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service, National Wetlands Inventory Project technical report, 40 p. Winter, T.C., 1992, A physiographic and climatic framework for hydrologic studies of wetlands, in Robarts, R.D., and Bothwell, M.L., eds., Pro- ceedings of the Symposium on Aquatic Ecosystems in Semi-Arid Regions, 1990: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Environment Canada, The National Hydrology Research Institute Symposium Series no. 7, p. 127-147. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 208 Carroll Building, 8600 LaSalle Road, Towson, MD 21286; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA 01035 Prepared by Martha A. Hayes, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 153 Florida Wetland Resources retlands covered more than one-half of Florida, approximately 20.3 million acres, in predevelopment times. Although only about one-half of the original wetlands remain, Florida still has more wetlands than any of the other 47 conterminous States (Dahl, 1990). Wetlands in Florida are diverse and include types that are rare in other States, such as mangrove swamps and hydric hammocks. As- sociations of warm-temperate and subtropical wetlands not found elsewhere are common in Florida, a prime example being the unique complex of extensive sawgrass marshes and other wetlands known as The Everglades (fig. 1). Florida's wetlands have considerable economic and environ- mental value. In river basins, flood-plain wetlands reduce down- stream flood damages by retaining overflows in backwater ponds and depressions. Organic soils in many wetlands can store large quantities of water and release it slowly to plants during drought. Wetlands can filter out and accumulate pollutants from surface water some cypress depressions in Florida have been used spe- cifically for wastewater treatment (Dierberg and Brezonik, 1984). Many rare or endangered plant and animal species, such as the in- sectivorous white-top pitcherplant and the snail kite, live in Florida wetlands. Wetlands provide breeding and feeding grounds for resi- dent and migratory birds. Coastal wetlands such as salt marshes, mangrove swamps, and seagrass beds are nursery areas for sea tur- tles and economically important species such as shrimp, blue crab, oyster, mullet, spotted seatrout, and red drum (Tiner, 1984; Palik andKunneke, 1984). In the past, wetlands were considered obstacles to the devel- opment of the State. Widespread destruction and degradation of wetlands, however, resulted in drastic losses of wildlife, water short- ages, and water-quality problems (Prayer and Hefner, 1991). Today, Florida's wetlands are considered important resources and are pro- tected by laws that preserve their esthetic and ecological value. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Florida is shown in figure 2A\ only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Florida are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine . Figure 1. Sawgrass marsh and tree islands in the Everglades-Big Cypress region of southern Florida. (Photograph courtesy of Florida State Archives.) Wetland description . Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. .. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. .. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. .. Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. .. Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. Lacustrine and riverine wetlands are not addressed in this re- port. They constitute a relatively small part of Florida's wetlands and were not distinguished from deepwater habitats by the FWS National Wetlands Inventory (Prayer and Hefner, 1991). Palustrine System. Eighty-seven percent of Florida's wetlands are in the Palustrine System. Palustrine forested wetlands cover 5.5 Riverine. Estuarine. Marine. 154 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES million acres, nearly one-half the acreage of all Florida wetlands (Prayer and Hefner, 1991). These wetlands, which are widely dis- tributed throughout the State, fringe rivers and lakes, line small drainages and sloughs, form in small depressions and ponds, and cover wet flatwoods. The predominant trees can be pines, hard- woods, or cypress. Pine flatwoods, the most common ecological community in Florida, are distributed statewide. These communities are on flat land and have poorly drained, acidic, sandy soils that commonly are underlain by a clay or organic hardpan. Pine flatwoods can be a mixture of both wetland and upland communities that are difficult to delineate. Discrepancies between present-day estimates of 8.2 and 11.0 million acres of remaining wetlands in Florida (Prayer and Hefner, 1991; Kautz, 1991) might be due primarily to difficulties inherent in distinguishing wet from dry flatwoods. Wet flatwoods can grade into dry flatwoods with imperceptible changes in eleva- tion. In many areas, numerous seasonal ponds, small streams, and other wetlands are embedded within the larger pine-flatwoods matrix. In wet flatwoods, soils can remain saturated through much of the rainy season, and there can be standing water for 1 to2months every year. During the dry season, however, high evapotranspira- tion from sandy soils and an impermeable hardpan preventing up- ward movement of ground water result in dry conditions that can persist for months (Abrahamson and Hartnett, 1990). Palustrine forested wetlands in which mixed hardwoods pre- dominate cover about 2 million acres of Florida (Kautz, 1991) and comprise many wetland types. Bottom-land hardwood forests on river flood plains are most common in the northern part of the State, reaching their greatest extent in the alluvial flood plains of the pan- handle (Wharton and others, 1977). Tree diversity can be high in alluvial flood plains: a study of the flood-plain forest bordering the Apalachicola River (Leitman and others, 1984) recorded 47 tree WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat WAVE ENERGY Average breaker height In centimeters Low Moderate High 0-10 10-50 Above 50 Figure 2. Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Florida and physical and climatological features that control wetland distribu- tion in the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Wave height along the Florida coast. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Car/ton, 1977.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: FLORIDA 155 species and 5 major tree communities. Blackwater streams, which are common in Florida, are dark colored owing to the presence of organic acids from decaying vegetation. The Suwannee River, which has characteristics of both blackwater and spring-fed streams, has an extensive flood-plain forest in its lower reaches. Bay swamps, black gum swamps, and other mixed-hardwood wetlands that form in depressions are common throughout Florida. These forested wetlands often are mixed with shrub bogs (scrub-shrub wetlands) as in the Apalachicola National Forest and in Pinhook Swamp, the southern extension of the Okefenokee Swamp in Florida (Wharton and others, 1977). Shrub bogs are depressional wetlands that have acidic, organic soils and that typically are dominated by titi, gallberry, fetterbush, and other evergreen shrubs (U.S. Soil Con- servation Service, 1989). Hydric hammocks, which form on poorly drained soils or soils saturated by near-surface water tables and in which evergreen oaks such as live oak and swamp laurel oak pre- dominate, are rare outside Florida (Vince and others, 1989). Ex- otic tree species such as melaleuca have invaded wetlands in south- ern Florida to such an extent that some authors consider wetlands in which they are the predominant vegetation to belong to a distinct forested-wetland type (Wharton and others, 1977; Ewel, 1990). Palustrine forested wetlands in which cypress predominates cover about 1.6 million acres in Florida (Kautz, 1991). Cypress domes are small, isolated, depressional wetlands that have convex silhouettes when viewed from a distance. They are acidic, stillwater swamps thai have standing water at least part of the year, and many have a permanent central pond. The Green Swamp in west-central Florida has a high density of cypress domes in a pine-flatwoods matrix (McPherson, 1979). Large swamps in which cypress pre- dominates commonly ring lakes or line watercourses. Cypress strands are linear cypress swamps along watercourses. Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve in southwestern Florida contains an outstand- ing example of a cypress strand; the wetland harbors rare orchids. palms, and the endangered Florida panther (Grow, 1989). Cypress scrub is a drier community of stunted cypress found primarily in southern Florida on nutrient-poor, calcium-carbonate-rich soils or shallow sand over limestone. Big Cypress National Preserve has large areas of cypress scrub in which mature cypress trees usually are less than 20 feet tall. Palustrine emergent wetlands such as freshwater marshes and wet prairies cover 2.9 million acres of Florida (Prayer and Hefner, 1991). Freshwater marshes are concentrated in southern Florida, where about 1.6 million acres remained in 1973, including 624,000 acres of sawgrass marshes (Odum and Brown, 1977). Other major marsh systems include those in the Kissimmee and St. Johns River flood plains (Kushlan, 1990). Freshwater marshes are inundated most of the year, have thick accumulations of organic materials, and burn infrequently. Wet prairies usually are inundated for less than one-half of the year, have less organic accumulation, and burn more frequently every 1-3 years if fuel is sufficient. Fires maintain both wetland types by limiting the invasion of woody vegetation and retarding the accumulation of organic matter (Kushlan, 1990). Estuarine and Marine Systems. Florida has about 1.4 mil- lion acres of estuarine and marine intertidal wetlands along 1,200 miles of coastline. About 12 percent of Florida's wetlands are es- tuarine, and less than 1 percent are marine. Tides cycle terrestrial sediments, nutrients, and detritus through coastal wetlands, mak- ing them highly productive ecological communities (Florida Natu- ral Areas Inventory and Division of State Lands, 1990). The most common coastal wetlands are salt marshes, mangrove swamps, and seagrass beds. Salt marshes are emergent wetlands that develop along low- wave-energy coastlines and in estuaries. Wave energy (fig. 2B), salinity, frequency of inundation, and tidal range vary along the coasts, resulting in substantial differences in the areal extent and plant-species composition of these marshes. The most extensive D DAYS BELOW FREEZING Line of equal annual number of days in which temperature is 32 F or lower Dashed where approximately located. Interval is variable TOPOGRAPHY AND BATHYMETRY Interval is in feet i 250 200 150 100 50 -- Sea level B Figure 2. Continued. Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Florida and physical and climatological features that control wetland distribution in the State. C, Topography of Florida and bathymetry of adjacent offshore waters. D, Average annual number of days in which temperature is 32°F or lower. (Sources: C, Fernald, 1981. D, Conway and Listen, 1990.) 156 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES development of salt marshes occurs in the Big Bend region of the gulf coast (fig. 2/4). Mangrove swamps replace salt marshes along southern coastal areas that generally are subject to low-energy waves. Mangroves are salt-tolerant trees that colonize shallow, subtropical marine and es- tuarine waters. Tropical storms commonly damage or destroy man- groves before they reach their maximum height (Odum and Mclvor, 1990), and most mangrove swamps are classified as scrub-shrub wetlands because the trees typically are less than 20 feet tall. Seagrass beds are colonies of several species of rooted vascu- lar plants that typically live totally submersed in saltwater. Most of Florida's seagrass beds are in Florida Bay at the southern tip of the State and in the Gulf of Mexico offshore from the Big Bend. In this report, only the shallowest zone of seagrass communities, in which shoal grass predominates, are considered to be wetlands; extensive seagrass beds below the intertidal zone are considered to be in deep- water habitats. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Many factors contribute to the abundance of wetlands in Florida, the most important of which are the low, flat terrain and plentiful rainfall. Most of the State's wetlands are in flat areas be- low 50 feet above sea level that extend from the coast inland for many miles (fig. 2A and 2C). Runoff and drainage in these wetlands are slow as a result of the low relief. The flat landscape and the imper- meable strata underlying wetland soils commonly result in lateral flow of water on or near the land surface. Some wetlands are drained by low-gradient stream systems, as in the upper St. Johns River basin, which has extensive freshwater marshes and where the aver- age velocity of the river is only 0.3 foot per second (Heath and Conover, 1981). Near the coast, water levels in freshwater wetlands along these streams are affected by tidal fluctuations. Close to the mouth of the streams, the transition from freshwater to saltwater causes major changes in the structure and composition of estuarine wetlands (Florida Department of Natural Resources, 1988). Except along the southeastern coast, the land slopes gradually into the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean. The shallow water off- shore diminishes the energy of incoming waves, resulting in small, low-energy breakers onshore. Two areas on the gulf coast receive low-wave energy favorable to the development of tidal marshes, seagrass beds, and mangrove swamps (fig. 2B). The near-zero wave- energy coastline from north of Tampa to St. Marks is a result of the shallow offshore waters and a protected location in Florida's Big Bend. One of few coastal areas in the world subject to so little wave action, this part of the coast has the second-largest area of seagrass beds in the Gulf of Mexico (Zieman and Zieman, 1989), large ar- eas of coastal marsh, and extensive hydric hammocks just landward of coastal salt marshes (Vince and others, 1989). Rainfall in Florida averages 53 inches per year and is greatest during the warm season from June through September. Southern Florida has a subtropical climate characterized by two seasons dry and rainy rather than by the four seasons typical of temperate climates to the north. As a result, wetlands in southern Florida are affected by greater extremes of hydrologic conditions than those in the rest of the State. Wet prairies, wet pine flatwoods, and scrub cypress forests that are saturated or inundated in the rainy season can be severely dehydrated in the dry season in late winter and early spring when rainfall is relatively low and temperatures and evapo- transpiration rates remain relatively high (Jordan, 1984). Opposite conditions exist in northern Florida, where flooding and replenishment of water in swamps and flood plains is greatest in the late winter and early spring. Winter evapotranspiration is substantially lower than that in southern Florida because tempera- tures are near or below freezing on many days and much of the vegetation is dormant. Summer rainfall exceeds winter rainfall in northern Florida, but the difference is not as great as in southern Florida because of a secondary rainfall peak in February and March. In adjacent States to the north, this secondary winter-spring peak is more pronounced and in some areas is the primary peak. Most of the drainage basins of the larger northern Florida rivers such as the Apalachicola, Choctawhatchee, Escambia, and Suwannee are in Georgia and Alabama. Therefore, rainfall patterns in those States have a significant effect on the hydrology of these rivers and their flood-plain wetlands. The broad flood plains of these rivers have topographic features and tree communities that have been shaped by wide fluctuations in river levels. During the annual flooding in late winter and early spring, water depths on the flood plain of 15- 20 feet are not unusual. However, in the rest of the year, these flood plains are mostly dry except for ponds, depressions, and sloughs that retain water year round. Southern Florida has a nearly freeze-free climate (fig. 2D). Wetlands along the southern coasts support plant species that gen- erally do not thrive in the cooler climate of northern Florida coasts (Odum and others, 1982). For example, mangroves are killed back by freezes, which are more common in northern Florida, and some seagrass species are better adapted to the warm waters of the south- ern coasts. Wetlands in southern Florida commonly are invaded by nonnative tropical species that alter native-species associations; two such nonnative species, melaleuca and Brazilian pepper, have be- come predominant in many southern Florida wetlands. The near absence of frost in southern Florida that enables some tropical spe- cies to thrive also limits the distribution of some temperate wetland species. Pond pine, several hollies, titis, some of the tupelos, many bottom-land hardwood tree species, and several species of marsh plants grow only in the central and northern regions of the State. Early travelers to southern Florida encountered a vast fresh- water marsh that covered most of the peninsula from Lake Okeechobee south. This wetland, now known as The Everglades, covered about 2.9 million acres and was predominantly peatland covered by tall sawgrass growing in shallow water. Associated plant communities included pond apple swamps south of the lake, sloughs with aquatic vegetation, wet prairies, tree islands, and mangrove swamps bordering Florida Bay. The Everglades was part of the larger Kissimmee-Lake Okeechobee-Everglades Basin, which extended as a single drainage basin from present-day Orlando to Florida Bay, about two-thirds the length of the Florida peninsula (fig. 3A). The Kissimmee River meandered across a 2-mile-wide flood plain south to Lake Okeechobee, a shallow water body of 470,000 acres. When the lake was full, water sometimes overflowed the southern rim into The Everglades. Water in The Everglades moved slowly to the south by sheet flow in what Douglas (1947) called the River of Grass. Much of the land was inundated during the rainy season in normal years, and, during years of heavy rains, all but the highest tree is- lands were flooded. During floods, water moved with enough force to cause tree islands to develop an alignment pattern parallel to the lines of surface-water flow (Parker, 1974). During the dry season, ground-water levels generally were close to the land surface, but during some years, severe drought lowered water levels well below the land surface and fires swept over the land, burning vegetation and peat. Seasonally varying flows of freshwater from The Ever- glades into Florida Bay had an important influence on the salinity of the bay and contributed to the productivity of coastal wetlands and fisheries. Significant drainage of The Everglades began in the early 1880's and continued through the 1960's. By the late 1920's, five canals connected Lake Okeechobee to the Atlantic Ocean. During the hurricanes of 1926 and 1928, Lake Okeechobee overflowed, killing thousands of people and destroying crops. In response to these disasters, a 38-foot-high dike was constructed around the southern shore of the lake, and canals were enlarged to increase drainage (Blake, 1980). The Central and Southern Florida Flood National Water Summary Wetland Resources: FLORIDA 157 Control Project of 1948 authorized construction of a complex drain- age and water-management system comprising canals, levees, pumps, and control structures. Lake Okeechobee and three water- conservation areas (WCA'S; fig. 35) became reservoirs for flood pro- tection during the wet season and for agricultural irrigation and recharge of ground water in urban wellfields during the dry season (Klein and others, 1975). Most of the 800,000 acres of the Ever- glades Agricultural Area was drained to grow sugar cane and other crops. About 50 percent of the original Everglades was eliminated by the early 1990's. The remaining 50 percent is preserved in WCA- 1 (Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge), WCA-2, wcA-3, and Everglades National Park, which was established in 1947 on 1.4 million acres at the southwestern end of the drainage basin. Alterations of The Everglades by drainage and development have had severe environmental consequences. About 40 percent of the water that originally flowed southward from Lake Okeechobee into The Everglades is now diverted westward to the Gulf of Mexico by the Caloosahatchee Canal and eastward to the Atlantic Ocean by the St. Lucie Canal (fig. 3B). Seawater intrusion into the surficial aquifer has occurred as far as 6 miles inland in some areas (VanArman and others, 1984). Lowered water tables have resulted in oxidation of drained peat and damaging peat fires that have low- 82° 80° 79° 28° 27° 26° 25° Drainage Basin Boundary-. <* «, Lucie R Predevelopment Everglades and associated wetlands 83° FLORIDA BAY 28" - 25 50 MILES 25 50 KILOMETERS 27 C EXPLANATION 2 Water Conservation Area (WCA) number Jf Direction of water flow 26° Figure 3. Drainage patterns and selected geographic features in the Everglades-Lake Okeechobee-Kissimmee River drainage basin before and after development. A, Predevelopment. B, Recent. (Sources: A, Parker, 1974; Davis, 1943. B, South Florida Water Management District, 1992.) 25° ^<0*'* ~7 82° 81 C 79° Drainage Basin Boundary-> \ St Lucie Canal Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) Loxahatchee Wildlife Refuge 158 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES ered the land surface more than 5 feet in some agricultural areas (Davis, 1943; Duplaix, 1990). Using the WCA'S as reservoirs has re- sulted in conditions that are often too dry or too wet to maintain natural communities (McPherson, 1973). South of Lake Okeecho- bee, populations of wood storks and other wading birds decreased by almost 95 percent from 1870 to 1973 as a direct result of hydro- logic alterations (Crowder, 1974; Kushlan and others, 1975). Drain- age and land clearing have increased opportunities for exotic plants such as melaleuca to become established in dense stands that ex- clude native species. Water pumped into canals from agricultural lands can have high levels of phosphorus and other nutrients. As a result, sawgrass, which is adapted to a low-nutrient environment (Davis, 1991), is being replaced by cattails in the northern Ever- glades, particularly in WCA-2, where nutrient loading is a problem (South Florida Water Management District, 1992). The magnitude of environmental alterations of The Everglades has produced public concern and countermeasures to protect this significant wetland. The 570,000-acre Big Cypress National Pre- serve adjacent to Everglades National Park was established in 1974. The Everglades was designated a "Wetland of International Impor- tance" by the Federal Government. State and Federal agencies work- ing cooperatively have developed plans that call for acquisition of parts of Shark River Slough and the remaining Everglades east of Everglades National Park and reestablishment of water flows along historic flow paths. Preliminary plans also have been made to re- store the once-meandering Kissimmee River, which was reduced from 90 to 52 miles in length by channelization in the 1960's. The State, as part of the settlement of a lawsuit filed by the Federal Government, has agreed to enforce a plan to greatly reduce nutri- ent loading from the Everglades Agricultural Area. Federal legisla- tion has assured minimum flows to Everglades National Park, and attempts are being made to distribute water based on historic sea- sonal-flow models. However, as water-demand patterns in southern Florida become more complex, difficulties in providing water of the proper quantity and quality at the proper time to remaining natural areas of The Everglades will increase. Because of the extensive water-control system, water-management decisions have replaced natural events as the driving force controlling the function and evo- lution of The Everglades. TRENDS Wetlands covered more than one-half of Florida before devel- opment began (Hampson, 1984; Dahl, 1990). The Swamp Land Acts of the mid-1800's transferred 20.3 million acres of "swamp and overflowed" lands from Federal to State ownership (Shaw and Fredine, 1956), and that was the acreage assumed by the FWS Na- tional Wetlands Inventory for Florida's predevelopment (1780's) wetlands (Dahl, 1990). In 1906, the U.S. Department of Agricul- ture conducted the first inventory of the Nation's wetlands. The sur- vey reported 19.8 million acres of wetlands in Florida excluding coastal lands overflowed by tidewater, indicating that wetland losses in Florida probably were minimal before the 1900's (Shaw and Fredine, 1956). Wetland losses were greater in the early 1900's than in the period between 1930 and the mid-1950's owing to the lack of funds available for drainage projects during the Great Depression and World War II. By the mid-1950's, 15.3 million acres of wetlands remained (Shaw and Fredine, 1956). Most of the losses were due to agricultural drainage in the St. Johns River valley, on the lower east coast, in the Kissimmee River and Everglades region around Lake Okeechobee, and scattered in the west-central peninsula (Gray and others, 1924; U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1952; Blake, 1980). Be- tween the mid-1950's and mid-1970's, wetland losses were extensive in The Everglades, where 1.5 million acres of primarily wet prai- ries and freshwater marshes were drained for agriculture and real estate development (Odum and Brown, 1977). Moderate drainage was conducted from the mid- to late 1950's in northern Florida to enhance pine timber production. The rate of wetland losses for all of Florida slowed to 26,000 acres annually between the mid-1970's and mid-1980s; losses due to agriculture still were greatest, and losses to urbanization were second in importance (Prayer and Hefner, 1991). Recent estimates of the wetland acreage remaining in Florida differ by almost 3 million acres; most of the difference is in the forested-wetland category. Wetlands delineated in figure 2A and reported by the FWS total 11 million acres (Prayer and Hefner, 1991). The Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, using 1985- 89 Landsat Thematic Mapper imagery, estimated that about 8.2 mil- lion acres of wetlands remain (Kautz, 1991). Hampson (1984) esti- mated that about 8.3 million acres of wetlands existed in Florida in 1973. These two estimates are lower than the FWS estimate prob- ably because they exclude most of Florida's wet pine flatwoods, one of the most common natural communities in the State. The Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission estimate also excluded some mixed-hardwood wetlands in areas where they could not be easily distinguished from upland hardwoods (J.M. Hefner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, written commun., 1993). Wetlands regulations and legislation in effect today generally allow wetlands destruction only when mitigated by wetlands en- hancement, preservation, or creation. The effectiveness of these measures in slowing wetland loss is currently under evaluation (Prayer and Hefner, 1991). A recent report on the success of miti- gation indicated that the ecological success rate for completed projects was low for one-third of all permitted projects, the re- quired mitigation had never been attempted (Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, 1991). CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetlands conservation in Florida. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Florida wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm National Water Summary Wetland Resources: FLORIDA 159 Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Conser- unaffected wetlands, or wetlands creation. Pursuant to section vation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- 305(b) of the Clean Water Act, the Department of Environmental lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Protection submits to the ERA and the U.S. Congress a biennial as- Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- sessment of the State's surface-water quality, including that of wet- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- lands. The Department of Environmental Protection has general tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, oversight authority for the five water-management districts, which restoration, or creation plans. have authority to levy local taxes and regulatory authority over iso- The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 lated wetlands within district boundaries. Authorization to use Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland wetlands that are part of sovereign submerged lands is required from protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland the Department of Environmental Protection. These lands, which Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their lie under navigable waters, are held in trust for all the citizens of Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Florida. The Department of Enviornmental Protection has desig- Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- nated portions of these submerged lands as aquatic preserves, which vice provides guidance to States in developing the wetland compo- are carefully managed. nent of their plans. Coastal States that adopt coastal-zone manage- Since 1963, the State of Florida has administered land-acqui- ment programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and sition programs that have preserved many wetlands and areas adja- Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and cent to water bodies. Much of the land purchased for preservation, technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. as well as parks and other State-owned properties, is managed by State wetland activities. The Department of Environmental the Department of Environmental Protection; however, a substan- Protection is the principal State agency that issues permits for de- tial amount of publicly owned wetlands are managed by the water- velopment activities in wetlands. The Henderson Wetlands Act of management districts, the Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 1984 gave the Department of Environmental Regulation (now called and the Division of Forestry. Historically, land-management pro- the Department of Environmental Protection) expanded jurisdiction grams were designed for recreation, to develop specific resources over the issuance of permits for dredge-and-fill activities affecting such as timber, or to favor a few important game animals or endan- wetlands. The Department of Environmental Protection evaluates gered species. Partly as a result of citizen input and involvement, the potential effects on wetlands before granting permits and seeks ecosystem-management techniques such as prescribed burning are mitigation of unavoidable losses by enhancement, preservation of now widely used to maintain the natural character of wetlands and other ecological communities. Since the early 1970 s, ecosystem Table 1. Selected wetland-related activities of government maintenance as a land-management goal has gained favor in Florida agencies and private organizations in Florida, 1993 as the best strategy to ensure long-term protection of plant and _, . . . , _, animal species as well as sustainable resources for people. [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided n . , ,, , , , ,. . . ^,, ., , ^ by agencies and organizations. ., agency or organization participates in Regional, county, and local wetland activities. Florida s Com- wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in prehensive Planning Act of 1985, administered by the Department wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, restora- of Community Affairs, requires local governments to produce long- tion and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collection; e lans for the development and conservation of resources. D&l, delineation and inventory _.,".,, . . . . , , ,- ., , Policies for wetlands protection are required elements of all plans. T Some city and county governments have strong regulatory or land- ^ <$l? <^ ^ <$& <^ acquisition programs that provide wetlands protection beyond that which is required by the State. Others, particularly in the largely FEDERAL rural northern part of the State, are less able to develop strong lo- Department of Agriculture ca] protection programs owing to funding limitations; thus, the State Consolidated Farm Service Agency........................... . and water.mana ement districts have the largest roles in wetland Forest Service.................................................................. ... Natural Resources Conservation Service ................ . . . . protection in those areas. Department of Commerce Private wetland activities. Private organizations in Florida National Oceanic and have important roles as advocates of wetland conservation and pro- Atmospheric Administration ........................................ tection. Florida has many private-interest groups that keep the public Department of Defense informed on wetland issues, organize citizen networks, and lobby MSrCy0resereatiSnnseerS "" -"--" --" for wetland-protection measures. The National Audubon Society, Department of the |nterj """""""""""'""""""""""""" jne Nature Conservancy, and the Trust for Public Lands have pur- Fish and Wildlife Service.............................................. chased wetlands in Florida for preservation. Some of these lands Geological Survey .......................................................... have been transferred to State or Federal ownership; others are pre- National Biological Service ......................................... served in private ownership, such as Corkscrew Swamp, an Audubon ES±^[pSSn-A-ge;cy:::::::::: ' . ' ' : : sanctuary.Othergroups,suchasrheFloridaWildlifeFederationand STATE the Sierra Club, conduct wetland-protection activities that include Department of Agriculture and Consumer programs to educate the public about wetland issues. Services Division of Forestry ........................................................ Department of Community Affairs.................................. .. .. ... .. ... References Cited Department of Environmental Protection..................... AU u «?/- JTT T-,/^ mnn r>- n * A A A Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission ..................... . . . . Abrahamson, W.G., and Hartnett, D.C., 1990, Pine flatwoods and dry prai- University of Florida Center for Wetlands .................... . ries-'" Myers - R-L" and Ewel- JJ" eds" Ecosystems of Florida: Or- OtherState university programs..................................... lando- University of Central Florida Press, p. 103-149. REGIONAL, COUNTY, AND LOCAL Blake, N.M., 1980, Land into water, water into land A history of water Water Management Districts .......................................... management in Florida: Tallahassee, University Presses of Florida, Regional Planning Councils ............................................. ... 344 p. Some County and City Governments ............................. Carlton, J.M., 1977, A survey of selected coastal vegetation communities PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS of Florida: Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine National Audubon Society ............................................... Research Publication 30, 40 p. The Nature Conservancy.................................................. Conway, McKinley, and Listen, L.L., eds., 1990, The weather handbook: Trust for Public Lands........................................................ ... ... Norcross, Ga., Conway Data, Inc., 548 p. 160 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS -79/31, 131 p. Crowder, J.P., 1974, Some perspectives on the status of aquatic wading birds in South Florida: U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Report PB-231 216, 12 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Davis, J.H., 1943. The natural features of southern Florida: The Florida Geological Survey Bulletin 25, 311 p. Davis, S.M., 1991, Sawgrass and cattail nutrient flux Leaf turnover, de- composition, and nutrient flux of sawgrass and cattail in the Ever- glades: Aquatic Botany, v. 40, p. 203-224. Dierberg, F.E., and Brezonik, P.L., 1984, The effect of wastewater on the surface water and groundwater quality of cypress domes, in Ewel, K.C., and Odum, J.T., eds., Cypress Swamps: Gainesville, University Presses of Florida, p. 83-101. Douglas, M.S., 1947, The Everglades River of grass: New \brk, Rhinehart, 406 p. Duplaix, Nicole, 1990, South Florida water Paying the price: National Geographic, v. 178, no. 1, p. 89-113. Ewel, K.C., 1990, Swamps, in Myers, R.L.. and Ewel, J.J., eds., Ecosys- tems of Florida: Orlando, University of Central Florida Press, p. 281- 322. Fernald, E.A., ed., 1981, Atlas of Florida: Tallahassee, The Florida State University Foundation, Inc., 276 p. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, 1991, Report on the ef- fectiveness of permitted mitigation: Tallahassee. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, 59 p. Florida Department of Natural Resources, 1988, Wetlands in Florida An addendum to Florida's Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan: Tal- lahassee, Florida Department of Natural Resources, 91 p. Florida Natural Areas Inventory and Division of State Lands, 1990, Guide to the natural communities of Florida: Tallahassee, Florida Depart- ment of Natural Resources, 111 p. Prayer. W.E., and Hefner, J.M., 1991, Florida wetlands Status and trends, 1970's to 1980's: Atlanta, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 31 p. Gray, L.C., Baker, O.E., Marschner, F.J., and Weitz, B.O., 1924, The utili- zation of our lands for crops, pasture and forests, in U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture yearbook 1923: Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1,284 p. Grow, Gerald, 1989, Florida parks A guide to camping in nature (4th ed.): Tallahassee, Fla., Longleaf Publications, 260 p. Hampson, P.S., 1984, Wetlands in Florida: Tallahassee, Florida Bureau of Geology Map Series 109, scale 1:2,000,000. Heath, R.C., and Conover, C.S., 1981, Hydrologic almanac of Florida: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 81-1107, 239 p. Jordan, C.L., 1984, Florida's weather and climate Implications for water, in Fernald, E.A., and Patton, D.J., eds.. Water resources atlas of Florida: Tallahassee, Florida State University, p. 18-35. Kautz, R.S., 1991, Space age habitat mapping: Florida Wildlife, v. 45, no. 73, p. 30-33. Klein, Howard, Armbruster, J.T., McPherson, B.F., and Freiberger, J.J., 1975, Water and the south Florida environment: U.S. Geological Sur- vey Water-Resources Investigations 24-75, 165 p. Kushlan, J.A., 1990, Freshwater marshes, in Myers, R.L., and Ewel, J.J., Ecosystems of Florida: Orlando. University of Central Florida Press, p. 324-363. Kushlan, J.A., Ogden, J.C., and Higer, A.L., 1975, Relation of water level and fish availability to wood stork reproduction in southern Ever- glades, Florida: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 75-434, 56 p. Leitman, H.M., Sohm, J.E., and Franklin, M.A., 1984, Wetland hydrology and tree distribution of the Apalachicola River flood plain, Florida: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2196, 52 p. McPherson, B.F., 1973, Vegetation in relation to water depth in Conserva- tion Area 3, Florida: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 73- 0173, 60 p. ____1979, Land cover map of the Green Swamp area, Central Florida: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I- 1134, scale 1:63,360. Odum, H.T., and Brown, Mark, eds., 1977, Carrying capacity for man and nature in South Florida: Gainesville, Fla., National Park Service and University of Florida Center for Wetlands cooperative publication, 886 p. Odum, W.E., and Mclvor, C.C., 1990, Mangroves, in Myers, R.L., and Ewel, J.J., Ecosystems of Florida: Orlando, University of Central Florida Press, p. 517-548. Odum, W.E., Mclvor, C.C., and Smith, T.J., III, 1982, The ecology of the mangroves of South Florida A community profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-81/24. 144 p. Palik, T.F., and Kunneke, J.T., 1984, Northwestern Florida ecological char- acterization An ecological atlas: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-82/47.1, 302 p. Parker, G.G., 1974, Hydrology of the pre-drainage system of the Everglades in South Florida, in Gleason, P.J., ed., Environments of South Florida Present and past: Miami, Fla., Miami Geological Society, Memoir 2. p. 718-727. Shaw, S.P., and Fredine, C.G., 1956, Wetlands of the United States Their extent and their value to waterfowl and other wildlife: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circular 39, 67 p., 1 map. South Florida Water Management District, 1992, Surface water improve- ment and management plan for the Everglades: West Palm Beach, South Florida Water Management District Support Information Docu- ment, 472 p. Tiner, R.W., Jr., 1984, Wetlands of the United States Current status and recent trends: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 59 p. U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1952, United States census of agriculture, 1950, v. 4 Drainage of agricultural lands: Washington, D.C., U.S. Gov- ernment Printing Office, 307 p. U.S. Soil Conservation Service. 1989. Twenty-six ecological communities of Florida (revised ed.): Gainesville, Florida Chapter Soil and Water Conservation Society, 286 p. VanArman, Joel; Nealon, Dennis; Burns, Scott; Jones, Brad; Smith, Lisa; MacVicar, Thomas; Yamsura, Margaret; Federico, Anthony; Bucca, Jane; Knapp, Michael; and Gleason, Patrick, 1984, South Florida Water Management District, in Fernald, E.A., and Patton, D.J., eds., Water resources atlas of Florida: Tallahassee, Florida State University, p. 138-157. Vince, S.W., Humphrey, S.R., and Simons, R.W., 1989, The ecology of hydric hammocks A community profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.26), 81 p. Wharton, C.H.; Odum, H.T.; Ewel, K.C.; Duever, M.J.; Lugo, Ariel; Boyt, Rene; Bartholemew, J.; DeBellevue, E.B.; Brown, S.; Brown, M.; and Duever, L.C., 1977, Forested wetlands of Florida Their management and use: Gainesville, University of Florida, 348 p. Zieman, J.C., and Zieman, R.T., 1989, The ecology of the seagrass mead- ows of the west coast of Florida A community profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.25), 155 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 227 N. Bronough St., Suite 3015, Tallahassee, FL 32301; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Build- ing, Suite 200, Atlanta, GA 30345 Prepared by Melanie R. Darst, Helen M. Light, and Benjamin F. McPherson, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 161 Georgia Wetland Resources VJeorgia has more than 7.7 million acres of wetlands about one- fifth of the surface area of the State (Hefner and others, 1994.) Most wetlands in Georgia have been adversely affected by human activi- ties, but coastal salt marshes and a large area of preserved wilder- ness in the Okefenokee Swamp remain relatively undisturbed. One of the few remaining old-growth cypress-tupelo forests in the South- east is on the lower Altamaha River flood plain (fig. 1). Wetlands provide many economic and ecological benefits. Flood-plain wetlands dissipate the energy of floods, reduce erosion, and stabilize the streamside environment. Wetlands filter water entering rivers and coastal marsh systems, removing sediment and pollutants. Annual flooding moves leaf litter and other terrestrial organic detritus from the flood plain into the main channel, provid- ing a primary source of food for stream and estuarine organisms. Wetlands bordering many streams in Georgia are important habi- tat corridors for wildlife. Amid the pine plantations and farms cov- ering most of the uplands, wetland corridors connect areas that provide food, shelter, and water for many species of animals. During low-water periods, flood-plain ponds and backwaters contribute to biological diversity in stream ecosystems by providing still-water habitats for fish, amphibians, reptiles, and aquatic invertebrates. Biological productivity in estuarine emergent wetlands is higher than on most agricultural lands (Teal and Teal, 1969). Such coastal wetlands are essential to the life cycles of many commercially har- vested species such as clams, shrimp, blue crab, and mullet (Tiner, 1984). In addition to their ability to remove undesirable chemicals and support wildlife, wetlands are valued by tourists and Georgians for their recreational uses and natural beauty. Sidney Lanier, a native of Georgia, described a vista of coastal marshland in his poem "The Marshes of Glynn": A league and a league of marsh-grass, waist-high, broad in the blade, Green, and all of a height, and unflecked with a light or a shade, Stretch leisurely off. in a pleasant plain, To the terminal blue of the main. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Georgia is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Georgia are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine . Figure 1 . Old-growth gum-cypress forest on the Altamaha River flood plain. (Photograph by C.H. Wharton, Clayton, Ca.) Wetland description . Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. . Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. . Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. . Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. . Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. About 95 percent of Georgia's wetlands are palustrine. Estua- rine and marine wetlands comprise approximately 4 percent of the State's wetland acreage. Lacustrine and riverine wetlands are not addressed in this report because they constitute a relatively small part of the State's wetlands and are generally fringe areas between palustrine wetlands and deepwater habitats. Riverine. Estuarine. Marine. 162 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Palustrine System. Forested wetlands constitute about 83 percent of all palustrine wetlands in Georgia (J.M. Hefner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, oral commun., 1993). Large tracts of second- growth bottom-land hardwoods and tupelo-cypress forests exist along many Georgia rivers. Most of these rivers can be character- ized as either alluvial or blackwater streams. Alluvial streams such as the Altamaha, Oconee, Ocmulgee, Savannah, Flint, and Chattahoochee Rivers carry large amounts of sediment. Their flood plains have mineral soils and diverse topo- graphic features such as flats, ridges, backswamps, and oxbow lakes. Flats and ridges support forests of mixed bottom-land hardwood species; backswamps generally have canopies of tupelo and cypress. The alluvial river with the greatest average discharge in Georgia is the Altamaha River, which has a flood plain 3- to 5-miles wide along some reaches. The Altamaha River drainage basin includes about one-fourth of the State and extends from Atlanta to the Atlantic coast. The basin has many small streams and two large rivers, the Oconee and Ocmulgee Rivers, which join to form the Altamaha River. Blackwater streams such as the Ogcechee, Satilla, and St. Marys Rivers generally contain water that is dark or tea colored because of a high content of tannins and other organic acids. Black- water streams usually have low velocities and carry little sediment. Their flood plains have less topographic relief and are usually nar- rower than flood plains of alluvial streams. Blackwater river flood- plain wetlands have canopies of tupelo, cypress, and other tree spe- cies tolerant of wet organic soils. Forested palustrine wetlands in Georgia that are not associated with stream systems include cypress domes, gum swamps, limesinks, Carolina bays, wet pine flatwoods, and hydric hammocks. Isolated cypress swamps and cypress domes occur primarily below the Fall Line (fig. 2B), the area of transition between the higher topographic relief of the piedmont to the north and the flatter to- pography of the coastal plain to the south. Cypress domes are cir- cular depressional wetlands forested by pond cypress trees that grow taller in the center of the wetland and thus create a dome-shaped canopy. Gum swamps are depressional wetlands in which swamp Southern Blue Ridge Section Southern Valley and Ridge Section 50 KILOMETERS WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^H Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat Dams (Storage capacity at least 5,000 acre/feet) Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Georgia and physiography of the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physio- graphy. (Sources: A, If. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physiographic divisions from Clark and Zisa, 1976; landforms data from EROS Data Center.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: GEORGIA 163 tupelo is the predominant tree. The northwestern part of the Okefenokee Swamp contains large tracts of gum swamp. Limesinks are depressional wetlands formed by the dissolution or collapse of underlying limestone. Limesinks differ widely in size, depth, and average length of time they are inundated or have saturated soils. The Swamp of Toa in southwestern Georgia is the most extensive limesink area in Georgia. Many of the limesinks are connected to ground-water aquifers and serve as recharge areas (Kalla and others, 1993). The Swamp of Toa is a mosaic of wetland and upland habi- tats that support rare plant and animal species such as chaffseed and blind cave salamander. Limesink depressions called sagponds are distinctive wetlands because they occur in mountainous north- western Georgia yet contain relict populations of lowland plants (Wharton, 1977). Sagponds differ in wetness from intermittently to permanently flooded. Carolina bays, a wetland type unique to the Southeastern United States coastal plain, are oval depressions that have acidic, commonly peaty soils (Wharton, 1977). The predomi- nant vegetation in these wetlands generally is leathery-leaved, ev- ergreen, or semideciduous shrubs like fetterbush, titi, and zenobia. More than 1,000 Carolina bays, occupying an area of about 250,000 acres, have been mapped in Georgia (Wharton, 1977). Wet pine flatwoods forested by old-growth slash or pond pine grow mostly in southeastern Georgia and have soils that are saturated during part of the growing season. Small patches of wet pine flatwoods can be interspersed among upland pine forests. Hydric hammocks are a rare wetland type that exists in some areas of coastal Georgia. Semi- evergreen bottom-land hardwood species such as swamp laurel oak are the predominant vegetation (Vince and others, 1989). Approximately 17 percent of Georgia's palustrine wetlands are nonforested (J.M. Hefner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, oral commun., 1993). These nonforested wetlands are primarily fresh marshes associated with streams or isolated water bodies. In these wetlands, emergent vegetation such as giant cutgrass, wild rice, pickerelweed, and arrow arum are the predominant plants (Wharton, 1978). More than 20 percent of the Okefenokee Swamp is emergent marshes and aquatic beds. Herb bogs occur on sloping ground or in slight depressions in pine uplands (Wharton, 1978) and have abundant herbaceous plants, including orchids, insectivorous plants (such as pitcher plants), and a variety of wildflowers, but have few or no trees. The absence of a tree canopy in herb bogs might be due to the high frequency of fires and the nutrient-poor, shallow soils and underlying hardpan clays. Estuarine and Marine Systems. Most of Georgia's coastal wetlands are located in estuaries at the mouths of rivers. Salt marshes in which the predominant emergent plant species is smooth cordgrass are the most common estuarine wetlands (Wiegert and Freeman, 1990). Smooth cordgrass marshes are flooded daily by tides and are exposed to mostly low-energy waves. These marshes fringe the sounds that are between the mainland and offshore bar- rier islands. The largest area of estuarine wetlands in Georgia sur- rounds St. Andrews and St. Simons Sounds. This wetland has more than 110,000 acres of salt marshes (Field and others, 1991). Tidal flats are estuarine wetlands that are regularly exposed and flooded by tides. These flats generally are devoid of rooted vegetation but are important foraging areas for shorebirds. Georgia's marine wet- lands comprise the intertidal zone of barrier-island ocean beaches. HYDROLOGIC SETTING The abundance of wetlands in Georgia is primarily due to high rainfall statewide and relatively flat topography in the southern part of the State. Annual rainfall in the State averages about 50 inches (Carter and Hopkins, 1986). The largest streams in Georgia origi- nate in or near the mountainous northeastern part of the State, which has high precipitation and runoff. Flood-plain wetlands develop along stream borders in areas of low topographic relief, where stream velocities are slower. Width of flood plains along rivers and the occurrence of isolated depressional wetlands between rivers in- crease as the land flattens toward the coast. Coastal areas have the greatest acreage of wetlands (fig. 2A). The great diversity of Georgia wetlands is a result of the State's diverse physiography. Clark and Zisa (1976) divided Georgia into six physiographic sections (fig. 2B). Three of the sections, the Cumberland Plateau, Southern Valley and Ridge, and Southern Blue Ridge, are in northern Georgia and are the areas with the greatest topographic relief. Many of the wetlands in these sections are moun- tain seeps and bogs that are too small and scattered to be shown in figure 2A. Narrow wetlands border some streams. Depressional wetlands are rare, except for sagponds, which exist in some areas of the Coosa River Valley of the Southern Valley and Ridge Section and in the Cumberland Plateau Section. The Southern Piedmont Section of Georgia lies between the more mountainous sections and the coastal plain. This section has a broad zone of gently rolling hills that are geologically similar to the Blue Ridge Mountains but have less relief as a result of stream erosion (Wharton, 1978). Flood plains are wider and better devel- oped in the Southern Piedmont Section than in the more mountain- ous Southern Blue Ridge and Southern Valley and Ridge Sections to the north. Some depressional wetlands such as gum swamps ex- ist in the Southern Piedmont Section, but cypress domes are ab- sent. The two physiographic sections that form the coastal plain in southern Georgia are the East Gulf Coastal Plain and Sea Island Sections (fig. 2B). These sections lie southeast of the Fall Line and include more than one-half the land area of Georgia. Topographic relief is lower, runoff is slower, and depressional features are more common in these two sections than in the Southern Piedmont Sec- tion. Streams in the East Gulf Coastal Plain Section in southwest- ern Georgia trend north-south and drain into the Gulf of Mexico. Karst topography, which is created by dissolution of porous lime- stone near the land surface, prevails in parts of this section and is characterized by numerous limesinks and other depressional fea- tures. The Sea Island Section contains the greatest extent of wetlands in Georgia. Flood-plain wetlands along rivers are more extensive in this section than in any other physiographic section. A schematic cross section of an alluvial flood plain in Georgia is shown in fig- ure 3. The topographic features shown in the cross section were formed by deposition and removal of sediments by flowing water. Most areas of an active flood plain are flooded at least annually. The driest part of a flood plain is generally the natural levee adjacent to the river. Levees and flats, which drain rapidly after floods recede, are covered by canopies of bottom-land hardwoods such as live oak, water oak, sweetgum, overcup oak, water hickory, and swamp laurel oak. The wettest part of the flood plain, the backswamp, commonly is farthest from the river and adjacent to the uplands. Backswamps generally hold water after floods recede and are sometimes perma- nently saturated. Tupelo gum and cypress are the dominant trees because of their ability to tolerate long periods of flooding. Rivers in the Sea Island Section flow southeastward toward the Atlantic coast, with the exception of the Suwanee River, which flows into the Gulf of Mexico. In their lower reaches, tidal freshwater swamps are flooded by a combination of tidal fluctuations and high seasonal freshwater flows. Estuaries at the river mouths are fringed by extensive marshes. Georgia's concave coastline, situated between the jutting Florida peninsula to the south and the outward-curving South Carolina coastline to the north, provides coastal wetlands in this area some protection from tropical storms. A series of large barrier islands protects estuaries from high-energy waves and pro- vides shallowly inundated shorelines for the development of salt marshes. Tidal ranges are greater on the Georgia coast than along 164 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES the other Southeastern Atlantic coastal States. This large tidal range (6-9 feet) influences both the inland extent and topography of salt marshes (Wiegert and Freeman, 1990). The Sea Island Section also contains the largest acreages of isolated inland wetlands such as wet pine flatwoods, cypress swamps, gum swamps, and Carolina bays. Land-surface slopes are gentle in many areas within this section, and ground water is com- monly near the land surface. Typically, there is a hardpan layer in the subsurface soil that prevents rapid infiltration during rainy pe- riods, creating seasonally wet soils. During periods of little rain- fall, these same areas can be very dry. Plants adapted to a wide range of moisture conditions, such as gallberry and saw palmetto, are common in these seasonally wet areas. The Okefenokee Swamp, located in the southern part of the Sea Island Section (fig. 2B), covers approximately 440,000 acres in Georgia and is one of the largest freshwater wetlands in the United States. The swamp is a unique area containing a mosaic of emer- gent marshes, aquatic beds, forested and scrub-shrub wetlands, and forested uplands. The Okefenokee Swamp is located on a large ter- race that once might have been a shallow marine lagoon. When sea level declined, the terrace was isolated by a sand ridge along the eastern edge. The swamp ecosystem appears to have developed in the depression within the last 7,000 years (Laerm and Freeman, 1986). The swamp has few inflowing streams and, therefore, pri- marily depends on rainfall for water (Rykiel, 1984). Headwaters of the Suwannee and St. Marys Rivers are in the swamp. Water depths average about 2 feet over an uneven layer of peat composed of plant material that has accumulated over thousands of years. Imperme- able sediments underlying the peat keep most of the water from percolating into the ground. In severe drought, fires can burn the exposed peat, lowering the elevation of the swamp floor. Major fires probably burn large areas of the Okefenokee Swamp every 25 to 30 years (I/lar, 1984a). When normal hydrologic con- ditions return, the swamp floor is again inundated, and those areas where the peat was reduced hold deeper water in which aquatic plants such as water lilies grow. If fires are suppressed, swamp-floor levels can become high enough to support other types of wetlands such as an emergent marsh vegetated by maidencane, sedges, iris, and other plants. Accumulated plant material contributes to the buildup of peat until trees like red maple can grow or until fire again reduces the amount of peat on the floor of the swamp. The Okefenokee Swamp provides habitat for 36 species offish, 37 species of amphibians, 66 species of reptiles, and 48 species of mammals (Laerm and others. 1984). Among the inhabitants of the swamp are rare animal and plant species such as round-tailed musk- rat, sandhill crane, woodstork, and hooded pitcher plants. A reported 232 species of birds inhabit in the swamp during some part of the year; 120 of these species are permanent residents (Sanders, 1987). The Okefenokee Swamp was preserved by its own inhospitable- ness for many years. In the 1890's a canal was dug through the ridge on the eastern border to drain the swamp for logging and develop- ment. Drainage was unsuccessful, but eventually about 90 percent of the marketable cypress was removed (Izlar, 1984b). Some pio- neers managed to establish homesites in the swamp, but it was a place where only a few could make a living. The Okefenokee Na- tional Wildlife Refuge, created in 1937, includes approximately 85 percent of the swamp. After devastating fires in the 1950's, an earthern dam, or sill, was built on the Suwannee River to raise water levels in the swamp. This sill has affected water levels over approxi- mately one-fourth of the swamp area. Since the installation of the sill, scientific studies have clarified the role of natural fire in reju- venating the swamp, and wildlife managers are now considering allowing the sill to degenerate over time (Yin and Brook, 1992). TRENDS The FWS National Wetlands Inventory recently reported that Georgia had about 7.7 million acres of wetlands as of the 1980's (Hefner and others, 1994). This estimate was based on the results of a sampling procedure that used aerial photography. Another es- timate, based on satellite imagery, classified approximately 4.3 mil- lion acres in Georgia as wetland (J.R. Bozeman, Georgia Depart- ment of Natural Resources, written commun., 1992). The largest discrepancy between these surveys was in the estimates of palustrine forested wetlands (J.M. Hefner. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, oral commun., 1993). The discrepancies between estimates of wetland acreages could have resulted from differences in accuracy and reso- lution between aerial photography and satellite imagery and in in- terpretive techniques used for each method (Federal Geographic Data Committee, 1992). Because estimates of current wetland acreages in Georgia do not agree, estimates of losses are difficult to substantiate. Dahl (1990) reported wetland losses of approximately 23 percent for Georgia from the 1780's to I980's, the lowest percentage of loss among the Southeastern States. Wetland losses throughout the Southeast have been caused primarily by drainage for farming and forestry operations (Hefner and Brown, 1985). Palustrine forested wetlands along streams and isolated swamps of the coastal plain probably have been the most affected. Between the mid-1970's and mid-1980's, more than 100,000 acres of freshwater forested wetlands in Georgia were destroyed, mostly because of conversion to land uses such as agriculture (Dahl and others, 1991). Nearly 500,000 acres of palustrine forested wetlands were converted during the same time period to scrub-shrub or emergent freshwater wetlands (Hefner and others, 1994). Loss of estuarine marshes has slowed since 1970 when Georgia began protecting those wetlands from development. EXPLANATION High water Low water | Forest vegetation Figure 3. Schematic cross section of an alluvial river flood plain in Georgia. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: GEORGIA 165 CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Georgia. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Geor- gia wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Har- bors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Georgia, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, resto- ration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collec- tion; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency........... Forest Service ................................................. Natural Resources Conservation Service Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ........................ Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers .............................. Military reservations ..................................... Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service .............................. Geological Survey.......................................... National Biological Service ......................... National Park Service ................................... Environmental Protection Agency.................. STATE Department of Community Affairs.................. Department of Natural Resources Coastal Resources Division ......................... Environmental Protection Division ............. Game and Fish Division ................................. Parks, Recreation, and Historic Sites Division ................................... Department of Transportation......................... Georgia Forestry Commission ......................... REGIONAL, COUNTY, AND LOCAL Regional Development Centers....................... Some county and city governments .............. PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS The Nature Conservancy of Georgia ............. Georgia Wildlife Federation............................. Trust for Public Lands ........................................ posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice provides guidance to States in developing the wetland compo- nent of their plans. Coastal States that adopt coastal-zone manage- ment programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. State wetland activities. The Georgia Department of Natu- ral Resources is the principal State agency reviewing development activities in wetlands. Georgia has a coastal regulatory program and requires a State permit for development activities in coastal marshes. A similar program for regulating activities in freshwater wetlands does not exist. The Georgia Water Quality Control Act and section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act provide indirect protection of freshwater wetlands in some instances. Under these two acts, the Environmental Protection Division of the Department of Natural Resources must certify, for both freshwater and estuarine areas, that wetland activities will not degrade water quality (Wagner and oth- ers, 1989). In 1970, Georgia enacted the Coastal Marshlands Protection Act to protect and conserve estuarine marshlands. Since that time, permits issued by the Department of Natural Resources' Coastal Resources Division have allowed less than 600 acres of jurisdictional marshlands to be filled by nonexempt activities. Total coastal marsh- land losses, however, have been much higher as a result of filling for public works projects, which are exempt. For example, the esti- mated loss of tidal wetlands resulting from the construction of In- terstate 95 through Georgia is approximately 4,000 acres (Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 1992). Nonregulatory programs include acquisition of wetlands as part of wildlife-management areas and public fishing areas by the De- partment of Natural Resources' Game and Fish Division. Total wet- land acreage owned by the State is estimated to exceed 57,000 acres. Wetland acquisitions are a priority of the Preservation 2000 pro- gram of 1991. Recent wetland tracts acquired with Preservation 2000 funds include approximately 7,000 acres of tidal salt marshes on two coastal barrier islands and approximately 6,000 acres of flood-plain swamp on the lower Altamaha River. Small areas of wetlands also have been enhanced, restored, or constructed by the Department of Natural Resources for mitigation, wastewater treat- ment, or waterfowl habitat management (Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 1992). 166 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Regional, county, and local wetland activities. "Growth Strategies Legislation" adopted in 1989 requires county and local governments to formulate planning and land-use control pro- grams that include steps to protect wetlands (Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 1992). Guidelines for these county and local protection plans are being developed by the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Community Affairs, and Regional De- velopment Centers. Private wetland activities. Many private organizations in Georgia such as the Georgia Conservancy, the Sierra Club, and the National Wildlife Federation lobby for wetland-protection measures, participate in litigation involving wetland issues, and comment on State and Federal permits allowing wetland alterations. The Nature Conservancy of Georgia and the Georgia Wildlife Federation are acquiring river flood plains for preservation, primarily along the Altamaha and Alcovy Rivers, respectively. References Cited Carter, R.F., and Hopkins, E.H., 1986, Georgia surface-water resources, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and surface-water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water- Supply Paper 2300, p. 195-200. Clark, W.Z.. Jr., and Zisa, A.C., 1976, Physiographic map of Georgia: At- lanta, Ga., Department of Natural Resources, scale 1:2,000,000. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States. 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C.. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Dahl, T.E., Johnson, C.E., and Frazer, WE., 1991, Wetlands Status and trends in the conterminous United States, mid-1970's to mid-1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 22 p. Federal Geographic Data Committee, 1992, Application of satellite data for mapping and monitoring wetlands: U.S. Geological Survey Federal Geographic Data Committee Technical Report 1, 44 p. Field, D.W., Reyer, A.J., Genovese, P.V., and Shearer, B.D., 1991, Coastal wetlands of the United States: Washington, D.C., National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service co- operative report, 59 p. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 1992, Water quality in Georgia, 1990-1991: Atlanta, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 69 p. Hefner, J.M., and Brown, J.D., 1985, Wetland trends in the southeastern United States: Wetlands, v. 4, p. 1-12. Hefner, J.M., Wilen, B.O., Dahl, T.E., and Prayer, W.E., 1994, Southeast wetlands Status and trends, mid-1970's to mid-1980's: Atlanta, Ga., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 32 p. Izlar, R.L., 1984a, Some comments on fire and climate in the Okefenokee swamp-marsh complex, in Cohen, A.D., Casagrande, D.J., Andrejko, M.J., and Best, G.R., eds., The Okefenokee Swamp Its natural his- tory, geology, and geochemistry: Los Alamos, N. Mex., Wetland Sur- veys, p. 70-85. ____1984b, A history of Okefenokee logging operations A bourbon and branch water success story, in Cohen, A.D., Casagrande, D.J., Andrejko, M.J., and Best, G.R., eds., The Okefenokee Swamp Its natural history, geology, and geochemistry: Los Alamos, N. Mex., Wetland Surveys, p. 5-17. Kalla, P.I., Fasselt, Veronica, Rigdon, T.A., and Bowling, S.M., 1993, Ad- vance identification of wetlands in Georgia, in Hatcher, K.J., ed., Pro- ceedings of the 1993 Georgia Water Resources Conference, Athens, Ga., April 20-21, 1993: Athens, The University of Georgia, Institute of Natural Resources, p. 345-348. Laerm, Joshua, and Freeman, B.J., 1986, Fishes of the Okefenokee Swamp: Athens, The University of Georgia Press, 118 p. Laerm, Joshua, Freeman, B.J., Vitt, L.J., and Logan, L.E., 1984, Checklist of vertebrates of the Okefenokee Swamp, in Cohen, A.D., Casagrande, D.J., Andrejko, M.J., and Best, G.R., eds., The Okefenokee Swamp Its natural history, geology, and geochemistry: Los Alamos, N. Mex., Wetland Surveys, p. 682-691. Rykiel, E.J., Jr., 1984, General hydrology and mineral budgets for Okefe- nokee Swamp Ecological significance, in Cohen, A.D., Casagrande, D.J., Andrejko, M.J., and Best, G.R., eds.. The Okefenokee Swamp Its natural history, geology, and geochemistry: Los Alamos, N. Mex., Wetland Surveys, p. 212-228. Sanders, Sigrid, 1987, Studying the many faces of the Okefenokee Swamp: Athens, The University of Georgia, Research Reporter, v. 15, no. 4, p. 7-11. Teal, John, and Teal, Mildred, 1969, Life and death of the salt marsh: New "York, National Audubon Society and Ballantine Books, Inc., 274 p. Tiner, R.W, Jr., 1984, Wetlands of the United States Current status and recent trends: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 59 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992, Regional wetlands concept plan Emergency Wetlands Resources Act, southeast region: Atlanta, Ga., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 259 p. Vince, S.W., Humphrey, S.R., and Simons, R.W, 1989, The ecology of hydric hammocks A community profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.26), 81 p. Wagner, Wendy, Carr, David, and Kellett, Katie, 1989, A citizen's guide to protecting wetlands in Georgia: Charlottesville, Va., Southern Envi- ronmental Law Center, 90 p. Wharton, C.H., 1977, The natural environments of Georgia: Georgia De- partment of Natural Resources Bulletin 114, 227 p. ____1978. Physiography and biota of Georgia: BioScience, v. 28, no. 5, p. 336-339. Wiegert, R.G., and Freeman, B.J., 1990, Tidal salt marshes of the south- east Atlantic coast A community profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.29), 70 p. Yin, Zhi-\ong, and Brook, G.A., 1992, The impact of the Suwannee River sill on the surface hydrology of Okefenokee Swamp, U.S.A.: Journal of Hydrology, v. 136, no. 1-4, p. 193-217. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, Peachtree Business Center, Suite 130, 3089 Amwiler Road, Atlanta, GA 30360; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Building, Suite 200, Atlanta, GA 30345 Prepared by Melanie R. Darst and Helen M. Light, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 167 Hawaii Wetland Resources We'etlands constitute less than 3 percent of the State of Hawaii but have had a major economic effect on the development of Hawaiian society both before and after European contact. Native Hawaiian communities depended on wetlands for cultivation of taro and other staple food crops and for coastal fisheries. After the arrival of Eu- ropean and Asian immigrants, wetlands were used for rice and wa- tercress cultivation. These agricultural uses of wetlands continue to the present, although their economic importance has declined be- cause of demographic shifts and increased importation of food. Wetlands provide important waterfowl and shorebird habitat. Endemic and endangered species that rely on Hawaiian wetlands include the Hawaiian stilt, Hawaiian coot, Hawaiian gallinule, and Hawaiian duck (Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, 1988). Wetlands also are used by migratory shorebirds such as the Pacific golden plover and waterfowl such as the pintail duck (Ha- waii Department of Land and Natural Resources, 1988). Some en- demic Hawaiian plants are found only in wetlands (Vogl and Henrickson, 1971; Elliot, 1981). In recent years, recreational, educational, and scientific uses of wetlands have increased. The Waimanu Valley on the island of Hawaii (figs. 1 and 2A) is managed as a part of the National Estua- rine Research Reserve system for such purposes. Wetlands can improve water quality (Hemond and Benoit, 1988) and reduce flooding (Carter, 1986). Wetlands in Pearl Har- bor are being considered for use as sediment traps by the U.S. Navy (Stephanie Aschmann, U.S. Navy, oral commun., 1992). The Kawainui Marsh is an example of a wetland managed for flood pro- tection. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deepwater habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and others, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Hawaii is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Hawaii are described below. System Palustrine, Lacustrine Riverine. Figure 1, Estuarine wetland in Waimanu Valley on the island of Hawaii. (Photograph by B.R. Hill, U.S. Geo- logical Survey.) Wetland description Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees {forested wet- lands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands}, or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water isgreaterthan 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. On the basis of mapping by the FWS National Wetland Inven- tory, wetland area in Hawaii has been estimated to be 110,810 acres (Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, 1988). The estimate includes areas of mixed wetlands and upland rain forest (Dennis Peters, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, written commun., 1993). Almost 90 percent of the wetland area is palustrine wetlands (Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, 1988). The FWS survey did not include marine wetlands, which are small and are not considered in this report. About 70 percent of Hawaiian wet- lands are 5 acres or less, 20 percent are between 5 and 25 acres, and the remaining 10 percent are larger than 25 acres (Hawaii De- partment of Land and Natural Resources, 1988). Estuarine. Marine 168 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Palustrine wetlands. The largest wetlands in the State are palustrine wetlands on the windward (northeastern) mountain slopes on the islands of Kauai, Maui, and Hawaii. These are primarily emergent and scrub-shrub wetlands and are known locally as bogs. Palustrine emergent wetlands also are present upstream from some coastal, estuarine wetlands. Lacustrine wetlands. Only a few lacustrine wetlands exist in the Hawaiian Islands. Lake Waiau is a small natural lake near the summit of Mauna Kea on the island of Hawaii. A number of small lakes occupy topographic depressions on Niihau. Several reservoirs are located on Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, and Maui. W '0 B PRECIPITATION -10 - Line of equal annual precipitation- Interval, in inches, is variable. Kauai M/Wlf- Wainteale 150 WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland , Predominantly deepwater habitat Kahoolawe Vallev Nation^ Esiuanre Research Preserve 0 10 20 30 MILES h^ i 0 10 20 30 KILOMETERS Figure 2. Wetland distribution and average annual precipitation in Hawaii. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B. Average annual precipitation. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 7997. B, Lee and \felenciano, 1986.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: HAWAII 169 Riverine wetlands. Riverine wetlands in the State are in all four subsystems of the FWS classification: Tidal, Lower Perennial, Upper Perennial, and Intermittent. A total of 376 perennial streams and more than 100 intermittent streams were identified in Hawaii in a recent survey by the Hawaii Cooperative Park Service Unit (1990). Estuarine wetlands. Estuarine emergent wetlands are present at the mouths of many rivers, usually along the wet, windward shores of the major islands. Forested estuarine wetlands also have formed because of the introduction of mangrove in some coastal areas on Oahu and Molokai. Anchialine pools are a unique type of estuarine wetland. These pools form in collapsed lava tubes and have a subsurface connec- tion to the ocean. Therefore, the pools are affected by tidal action, although they are rarely, if ever, inundated by seawater. These wet- lands pools average about 1 acre in area (Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, 1988) and support populations of endemic shrimp. Anchialine pools were not included in the FWS National Wetlands Inventory maps; the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (1988) estimated that the pools have a total area of about 700 acres. Fishponds constructed by native Hawaiians along the shores of the islands are another type of estuarine wetland. The ponds are formed by walls built of stone. Although artificial, these ponds are economically and culturally important and support several plant and animal species (Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, 1988). Heeia fishpond on Oahu is an example of one such pond that is now preserved because of its cultural importance. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Hydrologic conditions on the Hawaiian islands are largely de- termined by climate and topography. When moisture-laden air masses moving with the trade winds reach the volcanic mountains that form the islands, the air masses are forced up the slopes, where they cool in the higher altitudes and release their moisture. Because of this climatic phenomenon, known as the orographic effect, rain- fall is more plentiful on the windward sides of the islands (fig. 2B) (Blumenstock and Price, 1961). On the highest mountains (Haleakala on Maui, maximum altitude of 10,021 feet; Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa on Hawaii, maximum altitudes of 13,796 and 13,078 feet, respectively), the trade winds move around the peaks, and the maximum rainfall is at altitudes of 2,000 to4.000 feet; on the lower mountain ranges, the trade winds move over the mountains, and the rainfall maximums are at or near the crests (Blumenstock and Price, 1961). Rainfall gradients on the larger islands are high; average annual totals can range from greater than 200 inches to as little as 10 inches within 10 miles (fig. 2B). Geographically, evaporation is inversely proportional to rainfall and is less variable; the maximum annual pan-evaporation rate is about 106 inches, and the minimum is about 17 inches (Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Re- sources, 1973). Runoff averages about 40 percent of rainfall (Takasaki, 1978). Ground water on each island occurs primarily as a basal lens of freshwater floating on denser saltwater (fig. 3) (Valenciano, 1985). These floating freshwater lenses arc known in Hawaii as basal ground water. The upper extent of a lens, the basal water table, is generally less than 100 feet above sea level (Takasaki, 1978; Valenciano, 1985). Despite large amounts of rainfall in some areas, wetlands are not extensive in the Hawaiian islands because of the generally steep topography and the high permeability of bedrock (Elliot, 1981). Most water falling as rain travels rapidly to the ocean as surface- water and ground-water flow (Takasaki. 1978). Wetlands form only where local hydrologic conditions favor retention of water near the land surface (fig. 3). Water is more likely to accumulate where precipitation is high and evaporation is low. In Hawaii, extensive bogs are confined to areas where rainfall exceeds 150 inches annually (fig. 2A and 2B). These areas are at altitudes between 1,500 and 5,000 feet on wind- ward slopes. On the basis of limited pan-evaporation data, evapo- ration in these areas ranges from 50 to 95 inches annually (Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, 1973). Wetlands commonly form only where the water table intersects the land surface. Topography and water-table configuration deter- mine the extent of areas where the land surface and water table in- tersect. Most of the land surface of the islands is many hundreds of feet above the basal water table. Therefore, basal ground water sup- ports only a narrow zone of estuarine and palustrine wetlands near the shore, where the water table and the land surface intersect (fig. 3). Many of Hawaii's estuarine wetlands have developed over geo- logic time as a result of gradual subsidence of the islands and the resulting rise in sea level relative to the land surface (Macdonald and others, 1970). The relative rise in sea level reduced the gradi- EXPLANATION Basal water table Dike-impounded water table lllf/Mf/ Emergent vegetation ^f Ash bed ^H Alluvium Figure 3. Generalized cross section of a Hawaiian island showing hydrologic and geologic features that affect wetland distribution. (Source: Modified from Takasaki, 1978.) 170 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES ent of streams entering the ocean. Sediments carried by the streams the summit of Mount Waialeale. The extensive bogs on Kauai, Maui, were deposited near the stream mouths, and the accumulated de- and Hawaii occupy gently sloping mountainsides where rainfall is posits were colonized by wetland vegetation. Wetlands in Pearl retained at the land surface (Fosberg, 1961, p. 21; van't Woudt and Harbor on Oahu and in Waimanu and Waipio Valleys on the island Nelson, 1963 p. 23; Vogl and Henrickson, 1971, p. 479). of Hawaii are examples of this process. Geologic heterogeneities, including andesitic lava flows, vol- Topography affects the retention of surface runoff during rain- canic dikes, ash beds, soils, and alluvium, can restrict infiltration storms. On the steep, highly eroded slopes of Oahu, runoff is rapid; of rainfall, resulting in surface saturation. The extensive bogs on water does not accumulate at the land surface, and wetlands are rare the islands of Kauai, Maui, and Hawaii have formed on soils, ash (fig. 2A). On the younger islands of Maui and Hawaii, stream ero- layers, or andesitic lava less permeable than the underlying basaltic sion has not progressed to the same extent as on Oahu, and much of lava (Stearns and Macdonald, 1942, 1946; Macdonald and others, the gently sloping surface of the original volcanic domes is still 1960). intact. On Kauai, caldera filling has resulted in nearly flat areas near Low-permeability clay layers underlie many bogs in Hawaii. These clays result from weathering of bedrock in high-rainfall ar- eas that have abundant plant remains on the forest floor. The organic Table 1. Selected wetland-related activities of government adds deriyed from d ing plants cause rapid chemical weather- agenc.es and pr.vate orgamzat.ons m Hawa,,, 1993 ing rf ^^ Although ^ characteristic clay layers have been [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided considered a factor in bog development (Skottsberg, 1940; Fosberg, by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in iri^, VVI T ,. , XT , in/n \r i A u i imi\ wetland-related activity; ... agency? organization does not participate in 1961 5 vant Woudt and Nelson' 1963 > Vo&1 and Henrickson, 1971), wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, restora- the clay might actually be a result rather than a cause ot impeded tion and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collection; drainage (Wentworth and others, 1940). D&l, delineation and inventory] Not mucn js known concerning the hydrologic functions of Hawaiian wetlands. Coastal wetlands are generally in ground-water ^ <$> <& -^ <& <£ discharge zones, and upland bogs are generally in ground-water Agency or organization_____________^ ^ ^ ^ ^ S> recharge zones, but the importance of wetlands in controlling rates FEDERAL of ground-water movement is not known. A study of the Alakai Department of Agriculture Swamp on Kauai indicated that recharge from the swamp to the basal Consolidated Farm Service Agency............................. aquifer was not significant (van't Woudt and Nelson, 1963). Storage Forest Service.................................................................. of surface runoff in bog peat (partially decomposed plant material) Natural Resources Conservation Service.................. . . . { h j streamflow following rains (Skottsberg, 1940; van't Department of Commerce & FF ; , *<^f^ m , , ^ « ^ /^ / National Oceanic and Woudt and Nelson, 1963). The bog in the Ka au Crater on Oahu was Atmospheric Administration.......................................... formerly used as a water-supply reservoir (Elliot, 1981). When bog Department of Defense peat is completely saturated, bogs can act as sources of overland Army Corps of Engineers............................................... . flow during rainstorms and might increase runoff (van't Woudt and Marine Corps ................................................................... . Nelson, 1963). Coastal wetlands can reduce flooding because of Navy................................................................................... ... ., -r Department of the Interior their capacity to store surface runoff. Fish and Wildlife Service ............................................... Geological Survey........................................................... National Biological Survey............................................ .. National Park Service .................................................... .... The Rawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (1988) Environmental Protection Agency................................... . . ji^iij TI i. ^ c STATE estimated that total wetland acreage in Hawaii before European Department of Health contact in 1778 was 110,000 acres. Wetland area was about 114,000 Office of Environmental Quality Control...................... acres in 1900 because of increased wetland agriculture as rice pro- Department of Land and Natural Resources duction became important. Since then, wetland agricultural acre- Commission on Water Resource Management......... . has declined by about 10,000 acres to a remnant of 420 acres Division of Forestry and Wildlife................................... ...... j r ^ j* j..- Division of Water and Land Development................... . .. . used for taro and watercress production. Division of Land Management...................................... . According to a recent FWS report (Dahl, 1990), Hawaii has lost Office of Conservation and about 7,000 acres of wetlands since the 1780's. These losses were Environmental Affairs ..................................................... in coastal estuarine and palustrine wetlands at altitudes less than Office of State Planning ^OQO feet (Andy Yuen, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, written Coastal Zone Management Program........................... . commun., 1992). Estimates of predevelopment wetland area (58,800 University of Hawaii ' ' * 0 ^ j i T^ ui/inr, Environmental Center . acres) and recent wetland area (51,800 acres) used by Dahl (1990) Water Resources Research Center............................. to compute losses are lower than those reported by the Department COUNTY of Land and Natural Resources (1988) because Dahl's (1990) esti- City and County of Honolulu mates do not include some areas of mixed wetland and rain forest """"" "" --- * at altitudes greater than 1,000 feet that were included in the anning Department Department's estimates (Andy Yuen, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, County of Kauai written commun., 1992). On the basis of the Department's estimates Planning Department...................................................... . of 110,000 original wetland acres and Dahl's (1990) estimate of County of Maui 7,000 acres lost, Hawaii has lost about 6 percent of its original Planning Department...................................................... . wetlands PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS wcu). In the Middle and Northern Rockies Ecoregions, mountain ranges are separated by valleys and, in places, broad basins (Pacific Northwest River Basins Commission, 1969; Omernik and Gallant, 1986). The alluvial and outwash deposits in the valleys are porous and permeable and can store and yield large volumes of water. Wetlands appear where less permeable rocks crop out or trap water and establish springs and seeps. The Snake River Basin/High Desert Ecoregion (fig. 2D) is a gently sloping, semiarid plain that contains small wetlands and pla- yas. Most wetlands are along the banks of the Snake River and its tributaries; many are emergent wetlands vegetated by sedges and rushes or are forested and scrub-shrub wetlands dominated by al- der, willow, and cottonwood (Omernik and Gallant, 1986). The Snake River and southern tributaries, such as the Bruneau and Owyhee Rivers, have cut deep canyons into the plain and gen- erally are at a lower altitude than the regional water table; there- fore, the river and its tributaries receive perennial inflow from ground water (Kjelstrom, 1992). Small streams are generally at a higher altitude than the regional water table and flow intermittently in response to surface runoff from precipitation and snowmelt. Shrub and grassland vegetation extends to the banks of intermittent and ephemeral streams. Water held near the surface by low-permeabil- ity rock can maintain small wetlands. Where the Snake River first crosses the Idaho-Oregon border, broad valleys have developed along the Snake, Boise, and Payette Rivers. Wetland acreage has in- creased in the broad river valleys because cropland irrigation re- charges aquifers and ground water maintains summer and fall base flows in streams and drains. In the Columbia Basin and Blue Mountains Ecoregions, wet- lands receive ground water from glacial outwash and alluvial de- posits along streams. However, these types of deposits commonly are higher in altitude than the water table and thus cannot retain sufficient moisture for wetland development. Wetlands also could develop where loess and other windblown deposits are present, but wetland growth is inhibited because the soil is easily eroded. At lower altitudes, wetlands are grazed by livestock; wet meadows on the upper mountain slopes are summer grazing grounds (Pacific Northwest River Basins Commission, 1969). The Northern Basin and Range Ecoregion in southeastern Idaho consists of broad basins between low mountain ranges. Hun- dreds of springs throughout the area provide water for many wet- lands. Large wetland areas along the Bear River and most of its tribu- taries are generally in direct hydraulic connection with ground water (Kjelstrom, 1986). Most of the desert shrubland is grazed or cleared and used for irrigated agriculture, which has decreased wetland vegetation and degraded water quality of nearby wetlands. TRENDS Starting in 1805, explorers, pioneers, and trappers followed the waterways through Idaho. The first effects on wetlands occurred between 1818 and 1827 when beaver were virtually eliminated by trapping (Idaho Department of Fish and Game, 1990). Storage of water behind beaver dams creates wetlands, provides water for veg- etation during dry periods, and decreases downstream bank erosion. Since about 1860, when mining and farming activities began, wet- lands in Idaho have decreased 56 percent from about 877,000 acres to about 386,000 acres (Dahl, 1990). In Idaho, agricultural practices account for most of the human-caused wetland losses; residential and commercial development accounts for most of the remaining losses (Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation, 1987). Of the 19.5 million acres of non-Federal land in Idaho about one- third of the State approximately 33 percent is cropland. Cropland increased by about 400,000 acres from 1967 to 1982. During that time, nearly 10,000 acres of farmland per year were converted to urban uses (Soil Conservation Service, 1984). Many small wetlands within farmlands were filled for urban use. In agricultural areas, conversion to cropland, dewatering for irrigation purposes, contami- nation from nutrients in irrigation-return flow, and overgrazing by livestock contributed to wetland loss or degradation. Livestock graz- ing in wetlands is a complex issue because most of the public land is grazed, and, although much of the riparian area on public lands has been adversely affected, riparian areas are commonly the pri- mary and sometimes the only water supply for livestock that graze on arid rangeland. Results of an inventory of about 250 miles of National Forest riparian areas indicated that no single grazing strat- egy was effective for all areas (Clary and Webster, 1989). In urban areas, wetland losses are attributable to encroachment by residen- tial and commercial construction, channelization for drainage, and dewatering for municipal and industrial purposes. Loss of wetlands also can be attributed to dam and reservoir construction, mining activities, ground-water pumping, river chan- nelization, erosion and sedimentation, and road and railroad con- struction. From 1860 to the 1930's, placer mining along many miles of streambeds damaged adjacent wetlands. Tailings from hard-rock mining and toxic acidic or alkaline drainage have degraded other wetlands. Short-term causes of wetland degradation are wildfires, plant diseases, extremes in weather, and defoliation by cyclic species such as jackrabbits, tent caterpillars, and grasshoppers (Thomas, 1986). Prolonged droughts, such as the one from 1987 to 1992, have tern- 176 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES porarily reduced the area or functions of some wetlands. Some land-use practices have created new wetlands or enlarged existing ones. Leaking irrigation ditches, uncapped flowing wells, seeps, irrigation tailwater, and irrigation-return flows have increased wetland acreage and improved wetland habitat, notably in southern Idaho. Excavation of gravel pits and construction of reservoirs also have increased wetland acreage. However, such increases are small compared to losses. Ratti and Kadlec (1992) estimated that about 91,000 acres of wetlands are protected in the National Wildlife Refuge system or by the State. Federal laws and State and local planning and regula- tory programs are being used to identify and protect the remaining wetlands. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Idaho. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Idaho wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Idaho, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity; ., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, resto- ration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collec- tion; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency.............. Forest Service .................................................... Natural Resources Conservation Service ... Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers ................................. Military reservations........................................ Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management......................... Bureau of Reclamation .................................... Fish and Wildlife Service ................................. Geological Survey............................................. National Biological Service ............................ National Park Service ...................................... Environmental Protection Agency..................... STATE Department of Agriculture .................................. Department of Fish and Game ............................ Department of Health and Welfare Division of Environmental Quality.................. Department of Parks and Recreation ............... Department of Transportation ............................ Department of Water Resources ....................... SOME COUNTY AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS Ducks Unlimited................................................. The Nature Conservancy................................. filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) (NRCS) determines compliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the identification of wetlands and in the development of wetland pro- tection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act encourages wetland protection through funding incentives. The act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehen- sive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Service (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. The U.S. Forest Service manages about 20 million acres of National Forest in Idaho and is assessing a process to evaluate the value and function of each wetland (Bureau of Reclamation, 1992). From 1964 to 1980, forested wetlands were further protected by the designation of about 4 million acres as wilderness areas. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages about 12 million acres, of which about 69,000 acres are riparian wetlands (Bureau of Reclamation, 1992). Waterfowl-habitat management areas have been designated on 68 sites within BLM lands, and habi- tat-improvement projects have been completed on 2,000 acres. In the 1970's, the BLM began protecting riparian areas by fencing stream segments, planting willows and other woody species, build- ing check dams, and introducing beavers (Thomas, 1988). Intensive inventories of conditions, objectives, plans, and restoration will be made on 10,400 acres from 1991 to 1995 (Bureau of Land Manage- ment, 1991). The FWS manages six National Wildlife Refuges and one wa- terfowl-production area. The agency is conducting numerous re- search and education projects involving wetland enhancement and conservation. The NFS manages about 85,000 acres in Idaho. To date (1993), no estimates of wetland acreage on those lands have been made. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) is carrying out cooperative research projects that demonstrate how wetlands and riparian habitat can be preserved and enhanced as part of an overall water-resources management plan. Most BOR wetland-restoration and development projects are multipurpose, but all projects enhance, waterfowl habi- tat in accordance with the North American Waterfowl Management Plan of 1986. Research projects near American Falls Reservoir are designed to determine the effectiveness of small wetland-area im- National Water Summary Wetland Resources: IDAHO 177 poundments on wetland plant communities, to improve quality of irrigation-return flow, and to enhance waterfowl habitat by devel- oping a large wetland area on the north side of the reservoir (Bureau of Reclamation, 1992). The NRCS will provide technical assistance to the BOR in the design and operation of a nutrient and sediment-control system adjacent to Cascade Reservoir (P.H. Calverley, Soil Conservation Service, written commun., 1992). Three shallow, vegetated wetland cells and one deepwater pond will be used to improve the water quality of irrigation-return flow. The NRCS Aberdeen Plant Materi- als Center, in cooperation with several Federal and State agencies, will conduct a long-term project to assemble, evaluate, select, and release for commercial production several improved varieties of ri- parian wetland plant species (P.H. Calverley, Soil Conservation Service, written commun., 1992). The National Water Quality Assessment study of the upper Snake River Basin by the U.S. Geological Survey will address the effects of long-term water use on ground- and surface-water qual- ity. Several wetland areas are within the basin. State wetland activities. The Idaho State Water Plan states that, insofar as is possible, the State should assume responsibility for wetland management and protection (Idaho Water Resource Board, 1992). Policy plans made by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game for 1991-2005 focus land-acquisition efforts on wetland areas where habitat protection is critical. Some activities adminis- tered by the department in the last 5 years include (1) the develop- ment or protection of about 500 blocks of wetland habitat and nearly 1,500 waterfowl nesting structures (Habitat Improvement Program); (2) mitigation for about 11,000 acres of wetland area lost to con- struction of several reservoirs (Wildlife Mitigation Program); (3) acquisition of about 4,300 acres of wetland habitat by use of water- fowl-stamp funds (State Duck Stamp Program); (4) identification of more than 200 valuable wetlands for protection (Idaho National Heritage Program); (5) encouragement of local participation and volunteer efforts to address nonpoint sources of pollution (Antidegradation Program); and (6) the publication and dissemina- tion of several leaflets and guides dealing with waterways, riparian areas, wetlands, and aquatic biota (Aquatic Education Program) (Groen, 1991). The Division of Environmental Quality of the Department of Health and Welfare reviews section 404 permit applications to en- sure compliance with State water-quality laws. A permit is not issued by the Corps without certification of compliance by the division. Pursuant to section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act, the division sub- mits to the EPA and the U.S. Congress a biennial assessment of the State's surface-water quality, including that in wetlands. Idaho's Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan was completed by the Department of Parks and Recreation and adopted by the Governor in January 1988. The Department is responsible for maintaining lists of wetlands and endangered plant species un- der the plan. The Idaho Wetlands Conservation Priority Plan, pre- pared by the Department, calls for the identification of wetlands warranting priority consideration for protection (Howard, 1991). One of the wetlands identified for priority protection is The Tules (fig. 1), which consists of about 160 acres in an abandoned mean- der channel of the Owyhee River. The Department also manages about 580 miles of nationally designated wild and scenic rivers that include riparian wetland. The Idaho Department of Water Resources issues and manages surface- and ground-water rights and administers diverse activities that can affect wetlands. The Idaho Department of Transportation analyzes alternative roadway locations and uses construction tech- niques to lessen the degradation or loss of wetlands. When loss or degradation occurs, mitigation in the form of restoration or other compensation is required. A wetland bank in Idaho (Tiedemann, 1991) may be used when mitigation of unavoidable impacts caused by construction is not possible; compensation may be made by the offsite creation, restoration, or enhancement of wetlands. The Uni- versity of Idaho and the Idaho Water Resources Research Institute are conducting projects to assess the effectiveness of constructed wetlands supplied by irrigation-return flow near Twin Falls and by sewer effluent from an aquaculture facility near Moscow. Also, the institute, in cooperation with the Idaho Bureau of Mines, is con- ducting projects to evaluate wetland design for the reduction of heavy metals in runoff from mine-waste sites. The University of Idaho's Cooperative Extension System is conducting research on pollutant and sediment runoff from several small parcels of land on which different grazing practices are used. County and local wetland activities. Most development in Idaho's wetlands is regulated by Federal and State laws. However, some city and county governments have ordinances and planning and zoning regulations that protect wetland areas and functions. Guidance and assistance to farmers and other landowners for wet- land conservation are provided by the University of Idaho's Coop- erative Extension System. Private wetland activities. The Nature Conservancy and Ducks Unlimited have participated in several projects involving acquisition and restoration of wetlands. Other organizations that participate in wetland-protection activities in the State include The National Wetlands Policy Forum, National Wildlife Federation, Wildlife Council, National Audubon Society, Pheasants Forever, Sierra Club, and Idaho Conservation League. Many other groups have formed to restore and preserve specific wetland areas. For example, the Henrys Lake Foundation was formed by summer homeowners, local ranchers, and business owners to restore the fish- ery in Henrys Lake. Money was raised to exclude livestock from the riparian area along a tributary stream (Chaney and others, 1990). In 1986, a group of ranchers in south-central Idaho formed the Beaver Committee with the aim of restoring riparian wetlands, re- ducing soil erosion, and improving the productivity of land for live- stock grazing. About 100 beavers have been relocated to 25 creeks (High Country News, Paonia, Colo., August 24,1992, p. 1,10-12). In Boise, citizen groups protested the residential development of a riparian area in the Boise foothills. As a result, a land exchange between the city of Boise and the developer will preserve 100 acres of wetlands. References Cited Bureau of Land Management, 1991, Riparian-wetland initiative for the 1990s: Bureau of Land Management Report BLM/WO/GI-91/ 001+4340, 50 p. Bureau of Reclamation, 1992, Idaho river systems management study, wet- lands report: Denver, Bureau of Reclamation, 155 p. Chaney, J.E., Elmore, Wayne, and Platts, W.S., 1990, Livestock grazing on western riparian areas: Eagle, Idaho, Northwest Resource Informa- tion Center, Inc., 45 p. [2d printing.] Clary, W.P., and Webster, B.F., 1989, Managing grazing of riparian areas in the intermountain region: U.S. Forest Service, Intermountain Re- search Station General Technical Report INT-263, 11 p. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Farnsworth, R.K., Thompson, E.S., and Peck, E.L., 1982, Evaporation at- las for the contiguous 48 United States: National Oceanic and Atmo- spheric Administration Technical Report NWS 33, 27 p. Groen, Cal, 1991, A look at the players Federal and State roles, Idaho Department of Fish and Game role in wetlands protection, in Wetlands protection in Idaho Living with "no net loss": Boise, University of Idaho, Idaho Water Resources Research Institute, [about 140] p. Howard, Jake, 1991, The role of the Idaho Department of Parks and Recre- ation in wetlands protection, in Wetlands protection in Idaho Liv- 178 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES ing with "no net loss": Boise, University of Idaho, Idaho Water Re- sources Research Institute, [about 140] p. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, 1990, Between land and water The wetlands of Idaho: Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Nongame Wildlife Leaflet no. 9, 12 p. Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation, 1987, Idaho wetlands conser- vation priority plan An addendum to the 1983 statewide compre- hensive outdoor recreation plan: Boise, Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation, 13 p. Idaho Water Resource Board, 1992, Idaho State water plan: Boise, Idaho Department of Water Resources, 56 p. Kjelstrom, L.C., 1986, Idaho surface-water resources, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydrologic and surface-water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 207- 214. ____1992, Streamflow gains and losses in the Snake River and ground- water budgets for the Snake River Plain, Idaho and eastern Oregon: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 90-172, 71 p. Kjelstrom, L.C., and others, 1991, Idaho floods and droughts, in U.S. Geo- logical Survey, National water summary 1988-89 Hydrologic events and floods and droughts: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Pa- per 2375, p. 255-262. Omernik, J.M., 1987, Ecoregions of the conterminous United States Map supplement: Annals of the Association of American Geographers, v. 77, no. 1, scale 1:7,500,000. Omernik, J.M., and Gallant, A.L., 1986, Ecoregions of the Pacific North- west: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA/600/3 - 86/ 033, 39 p. Pacific Northwest River Basins Commission, 1969, Columbia-North Pa- cific region comprehensive framework study of water and related lands, appendix II The region: Vancouver, Wash., Pacific Northwest River Basins Commission, 147 p. Ratti, J.T., and Kadlec, J.A., 1992, Concept plan for the preservation of wetland habitat of the intermountain west North American Water- fowl Management Plan: Portland, Oreg., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser- vice, 146 p. Soil Conservation Service, 1984, Idaho's soil and water Condition and trends: Boise, Soil Conservation Service, 24 p. Thomas, A.E., 1986, Riparian protection/enhancement in Idaho: Range- lands, v. 8, no. 5, p. 224-227. ____1988, Seen a riparian lately? Good ones are green!: Idaho Wildlife, v. 8, no. 5, p. 6-9. Tiedemann, R.B., 1991, Development and use of a wetland bank as a miti- gation alternative in Idaho, in Wetlands protection in Idaho Living with "no net loss": Boise, University of Idaho, Idaho Water Resources Research Institute, [about 140] p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 230 Collins Road, Boise, ID 83702; Regional Wetland Coordina- tor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 911 NE 11th Avenue, Portland, OR 97232 Prepared by L.C. Kjelstrom, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 179 Illinois Wetland Resources he diverse wetlands of Illinois, which cover about 3.5 percent of the State, have resulted from the interaction of geologic events, human activities, and hydrologic conditions. The State contains several ecologically significant wetlands. Two examples are Beall Woods on the Wabash River in eastern Illinois and the swamps along the Cache River in the southern part of the State. Beall Woods is one of the last near-virgin stands of wet bottom-land forest in the State, and the Cache River swamps (fig. 1) are among the few bald cypress/tupelo gum swamps remaining in southern Illinois. Core samples from some of the larger bald cypress trees indicate ages of more than 1,000 years. The Cache River swamps also are home to a colony of nesting great blue herons (Barickman, 1992). Wetlands have many fish and wildlife, environmental-quality, and socioeconomic values (Tiner, 1984). Illinois wetlands provide feeding, spawning, and nursery grounds for catfish, sunfish, north- ern pike, muskie, and walleye. Common birds, such as ducks, tur- keys, and owls, and threatened or endangered species, such as American bittern, upland sandpiper, Henslow's sparrow, and north- ern harrier, use Illinois wetlands for feeding and nesting sites (Barickman, 1992). Deer, muskrat, rabbits, beaver, and other fur- bearers use wetlands as a source of food and shelter. Numerous reptile and amphibian species also live in the wetlands of Illinois. The environmental quality of aquatic habitats is enhanced by wetlands. Wetlands absorb nutrients and remove heavy metals and other contaminants from waters moving through them. Wetlands reduce turbidity and sediment loading and thereby slow the siltation of harbors and navigable rivers and streams (Tiner, 1984). In addition to the habitat and environmental-quality values of wetlands, they also have socioeconomic benefits such as flood- and storm-damage protection, erosion control, public water supply, and production of economically important natural species (Tiner, 1984). Illinois is one of five States whose combined production of peat accounts for over 75 percent of the peat mined in the United States. Wetlands also are the site for many recreational and educational activities including hunting and fishing, nature study, boating, paint- ing and drawing, and photography. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deepwater habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and others, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Illinois is shown in figure 2A', only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Illinois are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine. Figure 1. bwamp along the Cache River in southern Illinois. (Photograph by Michael R. Jeffords, Illinois Natural History Survey.) Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands}; or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. As of the 1980's, 3.5 percent of Illinois, or about 1.25 million acres, was wetland (Dahl, 1990; Suloway and others, 1992). Most of the State's wetlands are either palustrine emergent wetlands such as marshes and wet prairies or palustrine forested wetlands such as bottom-land hardwood forests and bald cypress swamps. Also, open- water palustrine wetlands primarily farm ponds are present throughout the State (Hubbell, 1987). On the basis of frequency of occurrence, the largest concen- tration of wetlands in Illinois is in the northeast. The largest acre- age of wetlands in Illinois is along the State's major river systems (Hubbell. 1987). Marshes, wet prairies, and bogs (palustrine emer- gent, scrub-shrub, or forested wetlands) are most common in the northeastern part of the State, and bottom-land forests (palustrine forested wetlands) and swamps (palustrine scrub-shrub or forested) are present along Illinois rivers. Dominant plants of marshes are sedges, cattails, and bulrushes. Wet prairie dominants include sedges, cordgrass, and blue flag iris. Silver maple, cottonwood, box elder, red maple, black willow, sy- camore, and bald cypress are characteristic of bottom-land hard- wood forests and swamps in the State. Federally listed endangered species of Illinois wetlands include the eastern prairie white-fringed orchid and decurrent false aster. 180 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Chicago WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown. ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat B SURFICIAL DEPOSITS ^ Sand and gravel Alluvium US Glacial drift l l Surficial deposits absent Ozark Plateaus Interior Low Plateaus Coastal Plain C PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Illinois, physical and climatic features that control wetland distribution in the State, and trends in development of agricultural land. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. 6, Surficial deposits. C, Physiography. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Voelker and Clarke, 1988; C Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: ILLINOIS 181 In addition, bald eagles and least terns use bottom lands for habitat (Jerry Bade, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, oral commun., 1993). The State of Illinois also maintains a list of endangered species. As of February, 1994, the State list contained 415 endangered species (E) and 96 threatened species (T) about 40 percent of which are wetland dependent. Among the State-listed endangered or threat- ened wetland-plant species are white lady's slipper (E), queen-of- the-prairie (T), water elm (E), and marsh speedwell (T). State-listed animal species include the Illinois chorus frog (T), the Illinois mud turtle (E), sandhill crane (E), black tern (E), bluehead shiner (E), and river otter (E) (Susan Lauzon, Illinois Department of Conser- vation, oral commun., 1994). HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands are present where the geohydrology and physiogra- phy favor the retention of water for extended periods. The location of wetlands in Illinois is strongly affected by its geologic history. Aquifers underlying wetlands in the State are composed of sedimen- tary and metamorphic rocks of various ages overlain by glacial drift. Glacial scouring and subsequent glacial melting at the end of the last ice age left depressions in the glacially derived sediments, or drift, deposited by the glaciers. Glacial drift covers a large area of the State (fig. 2B) and ranges in thickness from a few to several hun- dred feet (Sherrill and others, 1984). The geologic history of the State has significantly shaped its physiography. Most of Illinois lies in the Central Lowland physiographic province (fig. 2C), where the relatively flat topography is due to glaciation. The greatest relief is present where surface drainage has cut into the glacial deposits and, in some locations, into the underlying bedrock. In Illinois, average annual precipitation (fig. 2D) ranges from about 34 inches per year in the north to 48 inches per year in the extreme south (Wendland and others, 1992). About three-fourths of the precipitation that reaches the land surface is returned to the at- mosphere by evaporation and plant transpiration (LaTour and D PRECIPITATION Line of equal average annual precipitation Interval, in inches, is variable Ackermann, 1990). The remaining precipitation recharges the ground- and surface-water systems. Recharge to the shallow ground- water system takes place in interstream areas of the surficial-drain- age system. Aquifers overlain by confining units composed of silt and clay are recharged by precipitation entering areas where the aquifers crop out and by slow percolation downward through the 1930 Figure 2. Continued. D, Average annual precipitation, 1961-90. E, Percentage of agricultural land in Illinois counties in 1850, 1870, 1900, and 1930. (Sources: D, Wendland and others, 1992. E, Data from U.S. Census Office, 1853, 1872, 1901; U.S. Census Bureau, 1932.) 182 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES confining units. Water returns to the surface as base flow to streams, ponds, and lakes. Ground water moves through shale and dolomite aquifers in fractures or solution channels. Wetlands develop along streams and near glacially formed lakes where ground water dis- charges. In the Central Lowland, wetlands are associated with ground- water discharge into depressions in the extensive glacial drift. In areas of high precipitation, low surface-water gradients coupled with the low permeability of fine-grained surficial deposits can result in poor drainage of glacial depressions. The resulting accumulation of water contributes to wetland formation. Ground-water discharge to streams in the Central Lowland also provides sites for wetland establishment. In the Ozark Plateaus, Interior Low Plateaus, and Coastal Plain, ground water from drift or underlying bedrock discharges primar- ily to streams, as in the Cache River area and the wetlands along the Mississippi River. Wetlands also can form where clay or other fine sediments form a poorly permeable layer that holds water at or near the land surface, providing a suitable habitat for wetland veg- etation. TRENDS Illinois once had vast expanses of wetlands but has lost as much as 90 percent of them (by area) since the 1780's (Dahl, 1990; S.P. Havera, Illinois Natural History Survey, written commun., 1993) sixth in the Nation in terms of percentage loss. A notable example of this loss is the Great Kankakee Swamp (also known as the Grand Marsh). One of the largest marsh-swamp basins in the United States, in the 1830's, this wetland contained more than 1 million acres of wet prairie and marshes (Mitsch and others, 1979). It is now repre- sented in Illinois by a relatively small tract of wetlands along the Kankakee River near Momence. Wetlands in the State have been drained and filled since settle- ment by Europeans began in the 1600's. Of about 8,212,000 acres of wetlands that were present in the 1780's (Havera, 1992), only about 1,254,500 acres remained in the 1980's (Dahl, 1990; Suloway and others, 1992). About 6,000 acres remain undisturbed (White, 1978). Rates of loss in the State are estimated to be between 4,000 and 6,000 acres per year (Illinois Department of Conservation, undated). In Illinois, the major cause of wetland loss has been artificial drainage primarily to make lands suitable for crop production. The number of drained acres in Illinois increased from about 100,000 in the 1870's to nearly 5 million by 1920. Most of the wet- land loss occurred between 1890 and 1930 (S.P. Havera, Illinois Natural History Survey, written commun., 1993). At the end of that period, about 17 percent of land in the State was in drainage dis- tricts (Illinois Tax Commission, 1941), and 27 percent of agricul- tural land had been drained either through district activities or by private action (U.S. Census Bureau, 1981). The percentages of ag- ricultural land in each Illinois county for the years 1850,1870,1900, and 1930 are shown in figure 2E. The rapid and substantial growth in agriculture and the associated expansion of drainage districts in the State during that period paralleled the decline in wetland acre- age as more and more land was drained for farming. Agricultural expansion was not the sole reason for the decline in wetland acreage. The draining of wetlands for housing, transpor- tation, industry, and landfills; stream channelization and dredging for navigation; and reservoir, harbor, and marina construction have also reduced wetland acreage. In addition to acreage loss caused by these activities, wetlands have been degraded by point and nonpoint discharges to surface waters. These discharges are associated with agricultural, industrial, municipal, and urban runoff, which add contaminants and sediment to surface waters. Some wetland acreage has been added through the construc- tion of ponds and reservoirs and through planned wetland construc- tion. In Wadsworth, 35 miles north of Chicago, Wetlands Research, Inc., a nonprofit corporation, is coordinating the Des Plaines River Wetlands Demonstration Project. Since 1983, 50 acres of wetlands have been constructed (Wetlands Research, Inc., 1993). Also, the Cache River Wetlands Project, a joint effort of the Illinois Depart- ment of Conservation, the FWS, The Nature Conservancy, and Ducks Unlimited, has the primary goal of acquiring and restoring between 55,000 and 60,000 acres of contiguous wetland-upland complexes. The impoundment of streams and farm-pond construction, as well as natural processes, also can result in the creation of wetlands. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Illinois. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Illinois wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Management Act. Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Illinois, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. », agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, resto- ration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collec- tion; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency........................... ... Forest Service ................................................................. ... Natural Resources Conservation Service ................ Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ........................................ Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers .............................................. Military reservations ..................................................... Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service.............................................. Geological Survey .......................................................... National Biological Service ......................................... ... National Park Service ................................................... ... Environmental Protection Agency.................................. STATE Department of Agriculture............................................... . Department of Conservation........................................... Department of Energy and Natural Resources............................................................. ... ... Department of Mines and Minerals ............................... . Department of Transportation......................................... ... Environmental Protection Agency.................................. Pollution Control Board..................................................... SOME COUNTY AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ............. PRIVATE Ducks Unlimited .................................................................. ... The Nature Conservancy.................................................. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: ILLINOIS 183 Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silvicultural activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Ser- vice (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines compli- ance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice provides guidance to States in developing the wetland compo- nent of their plans. Coastal and Great Lakes States that adopt coastal- zone management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Manage- ment Act. Illinois has six National Wildlife Refuges with a combined area of nearly 100,000 acres. Goodwin and Niering (1975) evaluated a number of Illinois wetlands for possible registration as National Natural Landmarks. Their list includes nine additional wetland ar- eas comprising about 7,000 acres. State wetland protection. The primary State law governing wetlands is the Interagency Wetland Policy Act of 1989, which sets a goal of no net loss of wetlands due to projects funded by the State. The act is administered through the Illinois Wetland Management Program of the Illinois Department of Conservation. There is also a Floodplain Management Statute under which the Illinois Depart- ment of Transportation issues permits for developments in the 100- year flood plain and for dredging and filling public water bodies. Most regulation of wetlands on private lands takes place at the lo- cal level. Wetlands can be owned and protected by the public as County Forest Preserve Districts. County and local wetland protection. Counties and munici- palities can protect wetlands and other sensitive natural areas ei- ther by acquiring them or by enacting ordinances for their protec- tion. Protection and acquisition are carried out to protect public health, safety, and welfare. One Illinois county has established two wetland banks. These banks have allowed the county to maintain no net loss of wetlands within its boundaries and to provide addi- tional alternatives to developers for compliance with the mitigation requirements of the section 404 program. Two additional counties are investigating a similar banking concept that requires replace- ment of wetlands lost as a result of filling or dredging with wetlands of like kind and quality. Several municipalities in Illinois have spe- cific ordinances protecting wetlands (M.E. Hubbell, Illinois Depart- ment of Conservation, oral commun., 1993). References Cited Barickman, Gene, 1992, Illinois wetlands: The Illinois Steward, Spring 1992, p. 1-5. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, I.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: U.S. Geo- logical Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Goodwin, R.H., and Niering, W.A., 1975, Inland wetlands of the United States evaluated as potential registered natural landmarks: National Park Service Natural History Theme Studies no. 2, 550 p. Havera, S.P., 1992, Waterfowl of Illinois Status and management, Final Federal aid performance report: Cooperative Waterfowl Research W-88-R, 1,035 p. Hubbell, M.E., 1987, Inventory of Illinois wetlands The Illinois wetland management program, in Singh, K.P., Lee, M.T., and Knapp, H.V., eds., Proceedings of the American Water Resources Association Illi- nois section annual conference, Champaign, 111., April 28-29, 1987: Champaign, 111., American Water Resources Association Illinois sec- tion, p. 199-204. Illinois Department of Conservation, undated. A public guide to Illinois wetlands: Springfield, Illinois Department of Conservation, no pagi- nation. Illinois Tax Commission, 1941, Drainage district organization and finance, 1879-1937: Springfield, Illinois Tax Commission, 213 p. LaTour, J.K., and Ackermann, W.C., 1990, Illinois water supply and use, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1987 Hydrologic events and water supply and use: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Sup- ply Paper 2350, p. 235-242. Mitsch, W.J., Hutchison, M.D., and Paulson, G.A., 1979, The Momence wetlands of the Kankakee River in Illinois An assessment of their value: Illinois Institute of Natural Resources Document 79/17, 55 p. Sherrill, M.G., Lazaro, T.R., and Harbison, L.L., 1985, Illinois ground-water resources, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1984 Hydrologic events, selected water-quality trends, and ground-water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2275, p. 199- 204. Suloway, L.B., Hubbell, M.E., and Erickson, Ronald, 1992, Analysis of the wetland resources of Illinois, v. 1 Overview and general results, Report to the Department of Energy and Natural Resources: Spring- field, 111., Department of Energy and Natural Resources, 35 p. Tiner, R.W., Jr., 1984, Wetlands of the United States Current status and trends: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 59 p. U.S. Census Bureau, 1932, Fifteenth census of the United States: 1930: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Commerce, 1,385 p. ____1981, 1978 Census of Agriculture, v. 1, State and County Data, pt. 13 Illinois: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Commerce, 717 p. U.S. Census Office, 1853, Seventh census of the United States, taken in the year 1850: Washington, D.C., U.S. Census Office, 1,022 p. ____1872, Ninth census of the United States, taken in the year 1870, 3 volumes: Washington, D.C., U.S. Census Office, 2,326 p. ____1901, Twelfth census of the United States, taken in the year 1900: Washington, D.C., U.S. Census Office, 1,006 p. Voelker, D.C., and Clarke, R.P., 1988, Illinois ground-water quality, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1986 Hydrologic events 184 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES and ground-water quality: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Pa- per 2325, p. 237-244. Wendland, W.M., Kunkel, K.E., Conner, Glen, and others, 1992, Mean 1961-1990 temperature and precipitation over the upper midwest: Illinois State Water Survey Research Report 92-01, 27 p. Wetlands Research, Inc., 1993, "Living laboratory" offers unique research opportunities to improve environmental quality: Chicago, 111., Wet- lands Research, Inc., 11 p. White, John, 1978, Illinois Natural Areas Inventory Survey methods and results: Urbana, 111., Illinois Natural Areas Inventory Technical Report v. 1,426 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief. U.S. Geological Survey, 102 East Main Street, 4th Floor. Urbana, IL 61801; Regional Wet- land Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, BHW Federal Building, 1 Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, MN 55112 Prepared by Thomas H. Barringer and Gary O. Balding, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 185 Indiana Wetland Resources We, fetlands cover about 813,000 acres of Indiana (Rolley, 1991) about 3.5 percent of the State. These wetlands support rich biotic communities in freshwater settings across the State, especially in the north and southwest (fig. 1). Wetlands have many chemical, physical, and biological func- tions. Wetlands trap waterborne sediments, nutrients, and toxic chemicals by filtering them out of inflowing water and storing or transforming them. The capacity of wetlands to trap sediment is particularly important in Indiana because surface erosion is a per- sistent, long-term result of intensive agricultural activity. Riparian (streamside) wetlands lessen the severity of floods by storing water temporarily and releasing it gradually, thus reducing flow velocity and delaying and attenuating flood peaks. Vegetation in riparian wetlands helps to maintain stream channels by stabilizing the land surface, and wetlands around lakes act as buffers to erosion from waves. Wetlands provide habitat for waterfowl, fish, other terrestrial and aquatic animals, and a wide variety of plant life. Wetlands pro- vide resting and feeding places on migration routes, as well as food, shelter, breeding areas, and nurseries for many animals, including species of economic interest in Indiana such as muskrat, fish, ducks, and geese. The State has listed 128 wetland-dependent plant spe- cies and over 60 wetland-dependent animal species as endangered, threatened, or of special concern (Indiana Department of Natural Resources, 1989). In Indiana, wetlands have considerable recreational, educa- tional, and economic value. Common activities in and surrounding wetlands are bird-watch ing, hiking, fishing, hunting, swimming, and boating. Wetlands are important to the fur trapping, lumbering, and tourist industries, which benefit the economy of the State. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Indiana is shown in figure 2A\ only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Indiana are described below. System Palustrine, Lacustrine Riverine, Figure 1. Cowles Bog in the Great Marsh, Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore. (Photograph by RJ. Shedlock, U.S. Geo- logical Survey.) Wetland description .Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. , Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. . Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Most Indiana wetlands have been filled or drained. Palustrine wetlands, which are the most abundant wetlands remaining in the State, are distributed throughout Indiana in topographic depressions, between agricultural fields, and in riparian zones along rivers, streams, and lakes. Palustrine forested wetlands are the most com- mon wetlands in Indiana. In the early to mid-1980's, palustrine forested wetlands covered about 504,000 acres, or approximately 62 percent of the wetland area of the State (Rolley, 1991). Palustrine emergent wetlands cov- ered about 143,000 acres (18 percent of total wetland area), and scrub-shrub wetlands covered about 42,000 acres (5 percent). Lacustrine and riverine wetlands covered about 99,000 acres (12 percent). The remaining 3 percent of the wetland area in the State contained mixed or undetermined types of wetland. Most of the wetlands in Indiana are in the north and along river flood plains in the south, particularly the southwest (Rolley, 1991). The northeastern part of the State contains most of Indiana's natu- ral lakes and numerous small, isolated wetlands. The northwestern part of the State includes the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, which is on the southern shore of Lake Michigan. Most streams and rivers in Indiana flow to the southwest, where many wetlands are located in the river flood plains of the largest river systems (Indi- ana Department of Natural Resources, written commun., 1993). Wetlands in the rest of the State consist of small, widely scattered wetlands and narrow wetland bands along rivers and streams and around reservoirs (Indiana Department of Environmental Manage- ment, 1991). Indiana has many types of wetlands, most of which are veg- etated. The plant composition of vegetated wetlands is determined by factors such as climate, soil type, ground- and surface-water chemistry, and the extent and duration of flooding. The predomi- nant vegetation or specific location of a wetland frequently deter- 186 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES mines its common name. Familiar common names for some Indiana wetlands include marsh, wet prairie, swamp, slough, bottom-land hardwood forest, flatwood, bog, fen, kettle, pothole, dune swale, muck flat, and sinkhole pond. Marshes and wet prairies are palus- trine emergent wetlands that contain grasses, sedges, or cattails. Swamps, sloughs, and bottom-land hardwood forests are palustrine forested and scrub-shrub wetlands typically found along rivers. Flatwoods are palustrine forested wetlands that form on level, poorly drained soils where the water table is shallow. Bogs and fens are palustrine wetlands that are generally located in depressions in once- glaciated areas of Indiana; these wetlands generally contain grasses, other soft-stemmed plants, and peat deposits. Kettles and potholes are emergent and scrub-shrub wetlands that formed in depressions left after large blocks of ice that were embedded in glacially depos- ited sediments melted. Dune swales are topographic depressions among sand dunes near Lake Michigan that contain palustrine emergent or scrub-shrub wetlands. Sinkhole ponds are lacustrine wetlands located in plugged sinkholes in areas where limestone bedrock is at or near the surface. HYDROLOGIC SETTING The wetlands of Indiana are formed and maintained by water from precipitation, surface-water runoff, and local and regional ground-water flow systems. Wetlands generally are in topographic lows, where water from surface runoff collects and where ground water commonly discharges after periods of heavy precipitation. Fluctuations in local precipitation and evapotranspiration rates com- bined with local differences in geology, topography, and soil characteristics cause transient or seasonal changes in the way that ground water and surface water interact in a wetland (Meyboom, 1966; Wilcox, 1986; Winter, 1992; Phillips and Shedlock, 1993). Precipitation in Indiana varies seasonally and geographically. Precipitation falls throughout the year but is greatest from March through July (Crompton, 1986). Annual average precipitation ranges from about 36 inches in the northeastern part of the State to about 44 inches in the south-central part. Combined loss from evapora- tion and transpiration is nearly uniform across the State and aver- ages 26 inches annually. Annual surface-water runoff averages about lAXf. M/CHJGrt/V .Indiana Dines National latesticre , Spicer txite Fawn River Fef Marsh take WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat fflfflA Area typified by a high density of small wetlands B PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS Northern Zone A. Calumet Lacustrine Plain B. Valparaiso Morainal Area C. Kankakee Outwash and Lacustrine Plain D. Steuben Morainal Lake Area E. Maumee Lacustrine Plain Central Zone F. Tipton Till Plain Southern Zone G. Wabash Lowland H. Crawford Upland I. Mitchell Plain J. Norman Upland K. Scottsburg Lowland L. Muscatatuck Regional Slope M. Dearborn Upland 0 25 50 KILOMETERS Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Indiana and physiography of the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physiography. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physiographic divisions modified from Schneider, 1966; landforms data from EROS Data Center.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: INDIANA 187 A. Glaciated areas of northern Indiana LACUSTRINE WETLANDS PALUSTRINE WETLANDS PALUSTRINE WETLANDS RIVERINE WETLANDS o. Glacial till Glacial till B. Calumet Lacustrine Plain, northwestern Indiana NORTH PALUSTRINE WETLANDS RIVERINE WETLANDS SOUTH Shale and carbonate bedrock C. Riparian wetlands in southern Indiana PALUSTRINE WETLANDS PALUSTRINE WETLANDS -. Bottom-land hardwood forest ',* -> RIVERINE WETLANDS n r i EXPLANATION Direction of ground-water flow Average water table Scrub-shrub vegetation I! \l Emergent vegetation Farmed crops Y Forest vegetation Organic deposits Note: Vertical scale greatly exaggerated Figure 3. Generalized geohydrologic setting of common wetland types in Indiana. A, Wetlands in glaciated areas of northern Indiana. B, Wetlands in the Calumet Lacustrine Plain of northwestern Indiana. C, Riparian wetlands in bedrock areas of southern Indiana. (Sources; A, Modified from Hartke and others, 1975. B, Modified from Shedlock and others, 1993. C, Modified from Gallaher and Price, 1966.) 9.0 inches, and about 3.5 inches recharges the ground- water system (Clark, 1980). The abundant precipita- tion is conducive to the formation and maintenance of wetlands, which were once extensive in Indiana. However, agricultural tile drains, ditches, and straight- ened drainages have substantially reduced the reten- tion of water and, hence, reduced wetland area in many parts of the State. Indiana can be divided into three broad physi- ographic zones based on surficial and bedrock geol- ogy (fig. 2B). The northern zone consists of glacial moraine and areas reworked by water from ancient and present Lake Michigan. The central zone is a flat depositional plain of low relief. The physiography of the southern zone varies and is largely controlled by underlying bedrock. Wetland hydrology differs among and within these zones. In the northern physiographic zone, different local depositional conditions during glacial advances and retreats have resulted in a complex surficial aqui- fer largely composed of till. Till is a heterogeneous mixture of clay, silt, sand, gravel, and boulders thai is deposited directly by and underneath a glacier. The surficial aquifer in the northern zone is connected to deeper aquifer systems in places where the till is thin or missing (Shedlock and others, 1993). Wetlands in this zone generally are in low, poorly drained areas that have standing water (fig. 3A ). The northern zone has five physiographic units: the Valparaiso Morainal Area, the Steuben Morainal Lake Area, the Calumet Lacustrine Plain, the Kankakee Outwash and Lacustrine Plain, and the Maumee Lacustrine Plain (fig. IB). Most of the wet- lands that remain in Indiana are in the Valparaiso Morainal Area and the Steuben Morainal Lake Area. These physiographic units have irregular topography and as much as 200 feet of relief; numerous small, poorly integrated streams; and many closed depres- sions containing lakes and wetlands, including kettles, fens, and bogs. Water is supplied to these wet areas by precipitation, surface-water runoff and, except in bogs, shallow ground-water flow (fig. 3-4). Notable wetlands in these areas are Spicer Lake, Marsh Lake, Laketon Bog, Pinhook Bog, and Fawn River Fen. The Calumet Lacustrine Plain, Kankakee Outwash and Lacustrine Plain, and Maumee Lacus- trine Plain have flat terrain and once contained ex- tensive wetlands in glacial lakes and outwash plains. Land in these physiographic units has been nearly completely ditched and drained. Remaining wetlands in these units are mainly in riparian areas. The ex- ception is the Calumet Lacustrine Plain, which con- tains extensive wetlands in and around the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore (fig. 3B). In the Calumet Lacustrine Plain, major changes in the level of Lake Michigan occurred as the glaciers receded. Shoreline dune complexes formed sequentially approximately parallel to the modern lakeshore. Each new dune line prevented drainage from the south from reaching the lake directly, resulting in the development of a com- plex wetland system. The wetland system includes Cowles Bog (fig. 1), the largest peatland in Indiana. Peatlands form in depressions where there is poor drainage, standing water, and water chemistry not conducive to plant decay. Plant remains eventually fill the original depression and sometimes rise above the surrounding land surface, forming a peat mound. 188 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Cowles Bog, which is sustained in part by ground water and there- fore is by definition a fen, is an example of this process (Wilcox and others, 1986; Shedlock and others, 1993). The wetlands in the In- diana Dunes are the only wetlands in the State where a detailed long- term study (Shedlock and others, 1993) has been completed. The hydrology of both the riparian and the sand-dune wetlands in the Calumet Lacustrine Plain is controlled by precipitation and ground- water flow, primarily in shallow flow systems. The central physiographic zone (fig. 2B) consists of one unit the Tipton Till Plain, which is a nearly flat to gently rolling glacial plain of sandy and silty outwash sediments. At the extreme western edge of the plain, the Wabash River and its tributaries have cut as deep as 150 feet through the glacial deposits into bedrock. The Tipton Till Plain has been almost entirely drained for agricultural purposes. Remaining wetlands are in stream channels, along the edges of reservoirs, and in small, shallow depressions between ag- ricultural fields. These wetlands are maintained by precipitation and local and regional ground-water flow. The southern physiographic zone (fig. 2B) was partly covered by glaciers. There, the surficial aquifer consists of regolith and sedi- mentary deposits of glacial origin. Regolith is unconsolidated, mostly fine-grained material composed of fragmental, weathered bedrock and alluvium overlying unweathered bedrock. The south- ern zone has seven physiographic units: the Wabash Lowland, the Crawford Upland, the Mitchell Plain, the Norman Upland, the Scottsburg Lowland, the Muscatatuck Regional Slope, and the Dearborn Upland. Topography and soils differ considerably among the units and are primarily controlled by the type of underlying bedrock. Most of the wetlands in the southern physiographic zone are in riparian areas along streams and rivers. These wetlands are main- tained by precipitation and local shallow flow systems (fig. 3C). Some of the largest remaining wetlands in Indiana are in the Wabash and Scottsburg Lowlands and on the Muscatatuck Regional Slope. These wetlands are in the flood plains, confluences, and backwater areas of the Wabash, Patoka, White, and Ohio Rivers and their tribu- taries. Notable among these are the flatwoods in the tributaries of the East Fork of the White River, located in the Jefferson Proving Grounds; Little Pigeon Creek Wetland Conservation Area; Twin Swamps; and the Gray Estate and Goose Pond Cypress Sloughs. Unusual wetlands in this zone include those in the Wabash Low- land that have formed in long, narrow surface depressions between spoil piles in areas mined for coal. Also unusual are the sinkhole wetlands and ponds in the Mitchell Plain, formed where vertical solution zones in the carbonate bedrock have become plugged with soil and other debris, and water from precipitation and surface runoff has collected. Additionally, the Jasper-Pulaski Fish and Wildlife Area is a congregating area and migratory rest stop for eastern greater sandhill cranes. TRENDS In the 1780's, before settlement by Europeans, wetlands cov- ered about 5.6 million acres (24 percent) of Indiana (Indiana De- partment of Natural Resources, 1989). At that time, and continuing to the present in some communities, wetlands were categorized as wastelands that could be made more useful by filling and draining. Federal and State laws encouraged these activities (Read. 1993). By the early 1980's, more than 85 percent of the original wetlands in Indiana had been destroyed, and only about 813,000 acres of wet- lands remained (Rolley, 1991). About 85 percent of vegetated-wet- land losses resulted from conversion of wetlands for agricultural purposes (Indiana Department of Natural Resources, 1989). Agricultural, industrial, and residential-development interests in Indiana still encourage stream channelization and ditching, drain- ing, filling, diking, dredging, and damming of wetlands. In addi- tion to the direct loss of wetlands, the biological value of many natu- ral wetlands has been degraded by contamination by excess nutri- ents, sediments, and toxic chemicals as well as by the spread of nonnative plant species that can eliminate native species. The loss and degradation of wetlands and resulting adverse effects on fish and wildlife populations have reduced recreational opportunities and the economic benefits that outdoor recreation can bring to local communities (Indiana Department of Natural Resources, written commun., 1993). About 1 to 3 percent of Indiana's remaining wetlands are lost each year, primarily because of drainage for agricultural purposes (Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife, written commun., 1993). A survey of wetlands in the northern one-third of Indiana indicated that by 1987, more than 10 percent of the wetlands in aerial photo- graphs taken between 1981 and 19 84 of the nor them physiographic zone and Wabash River watershed had been drained (Indiana De- partment of Natural Resources, 1989). Construction of flood-control reservoirs in the 1960's and 1970's doubled the acreage of open water by permanently flooding riparian zones along rivers. Lacustrine wetlands replaced the natu- rally occurring riverine and palustrine wetlands in the process. In fact, approximately 70 percent of existing lacustrine wetlands and 13 percent of palustrine wetlands in Indiana developed as the re- sult of damming or excavation (Rolley, 1991). In addition, some new wetlands have formed in reclaimed and unreclaimed spoil areas in coal-mining zones. However, wetland losses in Indiana have been far greater than wetland gains. To slow the rate of wetland loss, recent State and Federal laws require or encourage wetland protection or creation. For example, wetlands have been created by the establishment of compensatory wetland mitigation sites, especially for transportation-related projects. Regulations require that 3 acres be created for each acre destroyed, but the actual success rate is probably much lower (In- diana Department of Natural Resources, 1989). The Indiana tax code encourages wetland protection for sites larger than 10 acres. Some farmers have used provisions in Federal wetlands-related leg- islation to consolidate existing wetlands and create new ones (Indi- ana Department of Natural Resources, 1989). Some municipalities are invoking waste- and stormwater-management regulations to encourage the protection and development of wetlands. River Basin Commissions, notably those of the Kankakee, Maumee, and St. Joseph Rivers, are encouraging or pursuing wetland restoration as a flood-control measure that would have the added benefit of recre- ation potential. In addition, the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, FWS, and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS; formerly known as the Soil Conservation Service) have re- stored more than 600 wetlands totaling 3,000 acres and constructed many other wetlands under the Partners for Wildlife program. Wet- land protection efforts are adversely affected by limited public un- derstanding of wetland values, lack of information on wetland dis- tribution and abundance in the State, and insufficient and unen- forced legislation (Indiana Department of Natural Resources, writ- ten commun., 1993). CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Indiana. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Indi- ana wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Har- bors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food National Water Summary Wetland Resources: INDIANA 189 Table 1. Selected wetland-related activities of government cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, agencies and private organizations in Indiana, 1993 Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, resto- ° . , . . . , 0 i j ration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collec- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and tion; D&l, delineation and inventory] Wetlands Reserve Program. The NRCS determines compliance with _______________________________________ Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the identification of ^ A I //, Figure 3. Generalized geohydrologic setting of representative wetlands in Kentucky. A, Western Kentucky Coal Field. B, Fractured bedrock and terrace deposits in the Inner and Outer Bluegrass regions and the Knobs. C, Karst terrane in the Mississippian Plateaus. Generalized direction of ground-water flow Generalized water table Scrub-shrub vegetation Forest vegetation Emergent vegetation jpT" Solution conduit ~j| Fracture Spoil Silt and clay posits (fig. 3A). The associated flood plains contain many riparian wetlands. Soils near the Green, Pond, Tradewater, and Rough Rivers are thick and not well drained. The gentle slope of the Tradewater River and many of its tributaries (less than 1 foot per mile) re- sults in floods that peak and subside slowly, fostering storage in associated alluvial wetlands. Base flow in streams and water in wetlands commonly are sustained by discharge of ground water from permeable lime- stone (Quinones and others, 1983). Many areas within the Western Kentucky Coal Field have been altered by strip mining, which has changed drainage character- istics. Swamp forests are left as stands of dead timber following disruption of the natural hydrology. Many of these areas are in transition to persistent-emergent or aquatic-bed wetlands. Abandoned coal-mine strip benches typically contain topographic depressions in which small wetlands form, and seepage through mine-spoil piles commonly supports wetlands on or below the piles. Far western Kentucky is in the Mississippi Embayment. The region has low relief and is charac- terized by gently rolling uplands and wide, shallow valleys. Extensive bottom-land hardwood forests are found along May field and Obion Creeks and Bayou de Chien. Much of the flood plain of these streams is composed of unconsolidated alluvium underlain by saturated sand and gravel. Other areas within the Mis- sissippi Embayment have extensive deposits of loess or glacially derived outwash. The water table gener- ally is shallow, and the region has some of the most productive aquifers in the State (Davis and others, 1973). Much of western Kentucky is subject to flood- ing by the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers, sometimes for prolonged periods. This periodic inundation is a pri- mary source of water for riparian wetlands. 204 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Wetlands in the central and eastern parts of the State gener- ally are associated with karst terrane or are located on poorly drained flood plain or upland soils. Swamp forests in the Knobs and the Bluegrass region grow along the Green, Licking, Dix, and Ken- tucky Rivers and also occur on high-level terrace deposits at eleva- tions of 600 to 1,000 feet (fig. 3fi). Forested wetlands in the Knobs have formed on alluvium or low-permeability shale, whereas Blue- grass-region forested wetlands typically are in alluvium underlain by limestone and shale. Brodhead Swamp Forest, located in the Mississippian Plateaus, is in a sinkhole basin underlain by limestone and drained in the subsurface. The wetland is fed by several inter- mittent springs as well as by surface runoff (Hannan and Lassetter, 1982) and typically contains surface water for 11 months of the year. At other locations in the Mississippian Plateaus, wetlands form in sinkholes and karst valleys that are subject to flooding (fig. 3C). In the karst area surrounding Mammoth Cave, shallow depressional wetlands are sustained by the surficial aquifer on the tops of sand- stone ridges. An underlying layer of compact, poorly permeable soil holds water in the soil at the surface. Scattered emergent wetlands with organic soils form at the base of gentle to steep slopes in val- leys, ravines, and canyons in the southeastern Cumberland Plateau. These midelevation wetlands are fed by acidic ground-water seep- age from stratified and fractured bedrock aquifers. TRENDS Wetlands are sensitive to changes in normal patterns of water storage and movement (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1986). Changes in hydrologic conditions, such as those associated with resource de- velopment or other human activities, commonly result in wetland loss or degradation. On the basis of the distribution of hydric soils as described by the Kentucky Division of Conservation (1982), Kentucky once had more than 1.6 million acres of wetlands. By 1977, about 929,000 acres (58 percent) of the State's original wet- lands had been lost, primarily through drainage and subsequent conversion to cropland and pastureland. Losses were greatest in western Kentucky, amounting to 52 percent of the State's bottom- land hardwood forests. By 1990, Kentucky's remaining wetland acreage was estimated to be between 387,000 acres (John Hefner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, written commun., 1993) and 650,000 acres (Kentucky Division of Water, 1992), representing a total State loss of about 60 to 76 percent since predevelopment times. Only 20 percent of the remaining naturally occurring wetlands in Kentucky are forested. In addition to losses from logging and conversion to agricultural land, the disproportionate loss of bottom- land hardwoods might have been due to stream channelization. As flood frequency and duration are reduced, long-term changes in species composition occur; typically, riparian species are lost. The FWS estimated that, as of 1983, losses of wetlands in Ken- tucky were continuing at a rate of about 3,600 acres annually (Tiner, 1984). The primary cause of wetland loss in the State has been conversion of bottom-land hardwood forests for agricultural use. Although loss due to agricultural conversion continues, the rate has declined because of changes in government subsidy programs, de- clining agricultural-commodity prices, and the overall scarcity of remaining forested wetlands. Other hydrologic alterations, such as channelization for flood control, highway construction, and modi- fications associated with industrial and commercial development, continue to adversely affect wetland resources in Kentucky. How- ever, the loss due to those causes also is declining in response to expansion and enforcement of regulations. Surface coal mining disturbs as much as 4,000 acres per year of the more than 2.9 million acres of land in the Western Kentucky Coal Field region (Mitsch and others, 1983). More than 114,000 acres of wetlands, principally bottom-land hardwood forests, could eventually be affected. Owing to the economic importance of coal, conflicts of interest arise between advocates of wetland protection and advocates of resource development. In addition to loss, wetlands also can be degraded by water pollution. Acidic mine drainage from coal-mining activities is common in the Western Kentucky Coal Field region, and water having low pH and high sulphur or iron concentrations causes severe damage to plant and animal commu- nities (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). In the Mississippi Embayment, nonpoint-source inputs of nutrients, pesticides, and sediments can exceed the capacity of wetlands to absorb, filter, and transform those pollutants to less harmful forms, resulting in deg- radation or loss of wetlands. Other pollutants such as industrial wastewater and pesticides have deleterious short-term and long-term effects on wetlands. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Kentucky. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Ken- tucky wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibi- tions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Kentucky, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, resto- ration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collec- tion; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency............ Forest Service.................................................. Natural Resources Conservation Service . Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers ............................... Military reservations...................................... Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service ............................... Geological Survey ........................................... National Biological Survey ........................... National Park Service .................................... Office of Surface Mining ............................... Environmental Protection Agency................... Tennessee Valley Authority............................... STATE Geological Survey............................................... Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet Division of Conservation................................ Division of Water............................................. Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement..................................................... State Nature Preserves Commission .......... Tourism Cabinet Fish and Wildlife Resources ......................... Transportation Cabinet................................... Water Resources Research Institute.......... PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS Ducks Unlimited ................................................... Kentucky Resources Council............................ The Nature Conservancy................................... Riverfields............................................................. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: KENTUCKY 205 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourages (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other al- teration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from penalties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to re- store the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agricultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act encourages wetland protection through funding incentives. The act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehen- sive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Service (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. The EPA Wetlands Planning Unit has initiated an Advance Iden- tification project in the Western Kentucky Coal Field. The project is a joint initiative between the EPA, the Corps, and the State and includes wetlands in four counties. The goals of the project are to increase public and industry awareness of wetland values and to generate information on wetland resources for regulatory agencies making permit decisions. The ERA has also awarded the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, Division of Water, a project funded by the EPA State/Tribal Wetland Develop- ment Grant Program. The goal of this project is to collect biologi- cal, chemical, and physical data from minimally degraded wetland sites to develop biological standards for the assessment of wetland health. The FWS Regional Wetlands Concept Plan (U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service, 1992) identified areas of wetlands in Kentucky that warrant protection because of their resource value, vulnerability, and scarcity. Among them are approximately 6,000 acres in the Cypress Creek area of the Western Kentucky Coal Field. This tract is recog- nized as habitat for several State-listed threatened or endangered species, contains five archeological sites, and is recognized as an important wetland area by the Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission. Several other Federal agencies conduct wetland-related activi- ties in the State. The Forest Service (FS) is inventorying wetlands in the Daniel Boone National Forest. The FS manages wetlands for waterfowl and has constructed approximately 100 acres of new wetlands as a part of their nationwide "Taking Wings Initiative." The Department of Defense has asked the FWS to identify all wetlands on Fort Knox and Fort Campbell Military Reservations and to con- duct a survey of threatened and endangered species in wetlands on these properties. The NFS has inventoried wetlands in the four NPS properties in Kentucky. Cumberland Gap National Historic Park is working with the Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission to study midelevation peatlands that are located within park bound- aries. Fed by acidic seeps, these wetlands support a mixed commu- nity of shrub and emergent plants as well as scattered dense mats of sphagnum moss. State wetland activities. Kentucky has not adopted specific wetland regulations (Aldy, 1992). Wetlands are specifically defined in State water-quality standards and regulatory statutes. The State administers the Clean Water Act section 401 water-quality certifi- cation program, and wetlands are included in the definition of sur- face waters. The Kentucky Division of Water is the point of contact for administering the State water-quality certification review proc- ess of section 404 permit applications (Hannan and others, 1986). The Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet has assembled an interagency working group to explore mitigation options to curtail the loss of Kentucky's bottom-land hardwood forests. Although the FWS has not yet completed its inventory of Kentucky's wetlands, under a Memorandum of Agreement, the Ken- tucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources has provided funds to the Kentucky Division of Water to digitize all the FWS National Wetlands Inventory maps for Kentucky. The digitized in- formation will become a part of the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet's geographic information system. In addition to having an active wetlands-acquisition pro- gram, the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources offers technical guidance in wetland identification and restoration to landowners and developers. The Department also participates in the New Madrid Wetlands Project, a four-State initiative to protect important waterfowl habitat in the lower Mississippi River valley. The proposal, developed to further the goals of the North Ameri- can Waterfowl Management Plan, includes acquisition and manage- ment of 39,000 acres of wetlands in Kentucky. The Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission has recom- mended several wetlands for conservation and protection (Hannan and others, 1986). These areas were chosen on the basis of the pres- ence of threatened or endangered species, the presence of critical habitat or an Outstanding Resource Water (as designated by the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabi- net), and the imminence of destruction or alteration. They also manage a number of existing wetland preserves and foster the pro- tection of other wetlands in the State through a system of registry and dedication agreements with private individuals. Private wetland activities. Most of Kentucky's wetlands are privately owned. The Nature Conservancy is active in land acqui- sition and stewardship of wetlands in Kentucky. The group also participates in joint management, along with various State agencies and private individuals, of several wetlands in the Mississippi Embayment as well as the Horse Lick Creek wetland system in the Knobs. The Kentucky Resources Council is an environmental ad- vocacy organization that provides legal and technical support to local government and public interest groups to ensure the full and fair implementation of the Clean Water Act with respect to wetlands in the State. Riverfields is a group of concerned private citizens that owns and manages two wetland areas, including bottom-land hard- wood forest in the alluvial flood plain of the Ohio River near Lou- isville. They strongly emphasize public education in their activities. 206 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES References Cited Aldy, I.E., Jr., 1992, Trends in wetland regulation and the future of Kentucky's wetlands program: Frankfort, Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, 115 p. Beal, E.O., and Thieret, J.W., 1986, Aquatic and wetland plants of Kentucky: Kentucky Nature Preserves Commission, Scientific and Technical Series 5, 314 p. Bryant, W.S., 1978, Unusual forest type, hydro-mesophytic, for the Inner Bluegrass Region of Kentucky: Castanea, v. 43, p. 129-137. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T.. 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Davis, R.W, Lambert, T.W., and Hansen, A.J., Jr., 1973, Subsurface geol- ogy and ground-water resources of the Jackson Purchase region, Ken- tucky: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1987, 66 p. Hannan, R.R., Fisher, W.L., Justis, Catherine, and Cicerello, R.R., 1986, Wetland protection strategies for Kentucky: Frankfort. Technical Re- port of the Kentucky Nature Preserves Commission, 146 p. Hannan, R.R., and Lassetter, J.S., 1982, The vascular flora of the Brodhead Swamp Forest, Rockcastle County, Kentucky: Transactions of the Kentucky Academy of Science, v. 43, p. 43 -49. Harker, D.F., Jr., Warren, M.L., Camburn, K.E., and Cicerello, R.R., 1981, Aquatic biota and water-quality survey of the Western Kentucky Coalfield: Frankfort, Technical Report of the Kentucky Nature Pre- serves Commission, 896 p. Hill, P.L., Jr., 1983, Wetland-stream ecosystems of the Western Kentucky Coalfield Environmental disturbance and the shaping of aquatic community structure: Louisville, Kentucky, University of Louisville, Ph.D. dissertation, 290 p. Hoagland, B.W., and Jones, R.L., 1992, Wetland and riparian flora of the upper Green River basin, south-central Kentucky: Transactions of the Kentucky Academy of Science, v. 53, p. 141-153. Kentucky Division of Water, 1990, 1990 Kentucky report to Congress on water quality: Frankfort, Kentucky Natural Resources and Environ- mental Protection Cabinet, 187 p. ____1992, 1992 Kentucky report to Congress on water quality: Frank- fort, Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabi- net, 187 p. Kentucky Environmental Quality Commission, 1992, State of Kentucky's environment A report of progress and problems: Frankfort, Ken- tucky Environmental Quality Commission, 332 p. Kentucky Division of Conservation, 1982, Kentucky soil and water conser- vation program, Part 1 Overview and appraisal of soil and water re- sources: Frankfort, Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, Division of Conservation, 46 p. McDowell, R.C., 1986, The Geology of Kentucky A text to accompany the geologic map of Kentucky: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1151-H, 76 p. Meijer, Willem, 1976, Notes on the flora of the Sinking Creek system and Elkhorn source areas in the Inner Bluegrass region of Kentucky: Trans- actions of the Kentucky Academy of Science, v. 37, p. 77-84. Meijer, Willem, Campbell, J.J.N., Setser, Howard, and Meade, L.E., 1981, Swamp forests on high terrace deposits in the Bluegrass and Knobs Regions of Kentucky: Castanea, v. 46, p. 122-135. Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink. J.G.. 1986. Wetlands: New York. Van Nostrand Reinhold, 539 p. Mitsch, W.J., Taylor, J.R., Benson, K.B., and Hill, P.L., Jr., 1983, Atlas of wetlands in the principal coal surface mining region of western Ken- tucky: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS - 82/72,134 p. Quinones, Fred, York, K.L., and Plebuch, R.O., 1983, Hydrology of Area 34, Eastern region. Interior Coal Province, Kentucky, Indiana, and Illinois: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Re- port 82-638, 32 p. Taylor, J.R., 1985, Community structure and primary productivity of for- ested wetlands in western Kentucky: Louisville, Kentucky, University of Louisville, Ph.D. dissertation, p. 11-39. Tiner, R.W., Jr., 1984, Wetlands of the United States Current status and recent trends: Washington. D.C.. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 59 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992, Regional wetlands concept plan Emergency Wetlands Resources Act, Southeast Region: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 259 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 2301 Bradley Avenue, Louisville, KY 40217; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Building, Suite 200, Atlanta, GA 80845 Prepared by Kirn H. Haag and Charles J. Taylor, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 207 Louisiana Wetland Resources We,'etlands contribute to the economic, cultural, and ecological diversity of Louisiana. Presently, wetlands cover less than one-third of the State but are estimated to have covered about one-half of the State before the arrival of Europeans (Dahl, 1990). Wetlands have greatly influenced the cultural development of the State's inhabi- tants. American Indians occupied villages along these highly pro- ductive lands, as evidenced by the many shell mounds in these areas. Traditional Indian cultures still exist in Louisiana near the wetlands that influenced the development of their traditions. The Acadian (Cajun) culture developed in the isolation of southern Louisiana wetlands, and the popularity of Cajun cuisine today is directly re- lated to the foods available from those areas. Major cities and towns such as New Orleans, Houma, Morgan City, and Lake Charles de- veloped close to wetlands because of the wealth of natural resources available. Wetlands are a major source of income for the people of Loui- siana. Shellfish and finfish revenues from coastal and inland wa- ters are estimated at $680 million annually (Keithly, 1991). In 1984, Louisiana was ranked first in the Nation in fisheries landings and second in fisheries value. In 1986, 28.6 percent of the commercial fish harvested in the Nation came from Louisiana; in 1991, that number dropped to 10.9 percent (The Advocate, Baton Rouge, April 18, 1993). The decline in Louisiana's commercial landings is be- lieved to be related to coastal-well and losses in the State. All of the commercially valuable fish species spend all or part of their life cycle in wetlands. Further, as recently as 1984,40 percent of the Nation's wild furs and hides came from Louisiana wetlands (Louisiana De- partment of Wildlife and Fisheries, written commun., 1984). Loui- siana wetlands also generate funds from recreational uses such as hunting, fishing, and bird watching. There are 17 National Wildlife Refuges, 28 State Wildlife Management and Refuge Areas, 7 State Parks, 1 National Park, and numerous State commemorative sites located entirely or partly within wetlands. In addition to these ar- eas, The Nature Conservancy has two coastal preserves and five forested preserves in wetland areas (David Pashley, The Nature Conservancy, oral commun., 1993). Ecologically, the rich diversity of plant and animal life in Loui- siana wetlands is a priceless natural heritage for both the State and Figure 1. A freshwater forested wetland on the shore of Lake Pontchartrain near La Branche. This wetland, which is near the New Orleans metropolitan area, is threatened by urban encroachment and runoff. (Photograph by Dennis K. Demcheck, U.S. Geological Survey.) the Nation. State wetlands provide year-round habitat for eight en- dangered species and four threatened species. Many species of neotropical songbirds use Louisiana wetlands for resting and feed- ing habitat during migration. The State's wetlands provide winter habitat for many other species of birds, including the Arctic per- egrine falcon and about one-half of the ducks, geese, and other waterfowl that use the Mississippi Flyway. Large numbers of wa- terfowl from the Central Flyway winter in the southwestern part of the State. Wetlands in Louisiana are important in flood control and re- duce the effects of storm surges associated with hurricanes. Wendell Curole of the Lafourche Parish Levee District has stated that 1 mile of marsh reduces a storm surge by 1 foot (The Advocate, Baton Rouge, April 18, 1993). As coastal wetlands are lost, this natural wetland function commonly is replaced by expensive storm surge projects (levees and gated structures) to protect coastal communi- ties such as New Orleans and Houma. Wetlands also are being used as tertiary wastewater-treatment alternatives for small municipali- ties such as Thibodaux and, in general, serve as filters or traps for sediment, nutrients, and pollutants carried by water passing through them. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deep water habitats in Louisiana is shown in figure 2/4; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Louisi- ana are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine. Wetland description Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands}; shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and {or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. 208 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Estuarine. Marine. Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. Palustrine wetlands, which include swamps, scrub-shrub wet- lands, nontidal and tidal fresh marshes, and ponds, are the most common wetlands in Louisiana. Palustrine wetlands accounted for approximately 78 percent of the wetlands in Louisiana in the 1970's and are distributed statewide. The most common palustrine wetlands are swamps (forested wetlands) which contribute about 59 percent of the State's wetlands. Swamps in Louisiana are mostly cypress- tupelo gum swamps along the major rivers, bayous, and streams. In the 1970's, swamps had an area of between 5.6 and 6.8 million acres statewide, 3.0 million acres of which were in the Mississippi Allu- vial Plain (fig. 2#) (Louisiana Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism, 1988). Palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands are typically associated with natural levees and spoil banks statewide. This type of wetland also has developed on some floating marshes in south- ern Louisiana. Nontidal and tidal fresh marshes are most common in southern Louisiana. Coastal wetlands, mostly salt marshes (estuarine emergent wetlands), include about 2.5 million acres in Louisiana. About 40 percent of the State's coastal marshes are classified as fresh/inter- mediate (salinity 0.5-8.3 ppt, average 3.3 ppt), about 38 percent as brackish (salinity 1.0-18.4 ppt. average 8.0 ppt), and about 22 percent as saline (salinity greater than 18.4 ppt) (Louisiana Depart- ment of Culture, Recreation and Tourism, 1988; S.N. Gagliano, Coastal Environments, Inc., written commun. 1991). In the 1970 s, coastal wetlands accounted for approximately 22 percent of the wetlands in Louisiana. Louisiana coastal marshes represent an es- timated 35 to 40 percent of the coastal marshes and about 25 per- cent of all coastal wetlands in the conterminous United States. Coastal wetlands in Louisiana are in the Western Gulf Coastal Plain, Mississippi Alluvial Plain, and the Southern Coastal Plain ecore- gions. B ECORECIONS A. Western Gulf Coastal Plain B. South Central Plains C. Southeastern Plains D. Mississippi Alluvial Plain E. Mississippi Valley Loess Plains F. Southern Coastal Plain 50 MILES 25 50 KILOMETERS WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^11 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat MEXICO Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Louisiana and ecoregions of the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Ecoregions. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Omernik, 1987.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: LOUISIANA 209 HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetland hydrology is affected by regional and local geology, topography, soil characteristics, and climate. Water in wetlands can come from either surface- or ground-water sources or from both. Wetlands can function as storage reservoirs for streams or sources of recharge for ground-water systems. Water in small nontidal wet- lands is typically supplied by local shallow ground-water flow sys- tems and localized runoff. Larger wetlands can receive discharge from or provide recharge to regional as well as local ground-water systems. Soils that underlie wetlands determine the rate at which water percolates downward to recharge the ground-water system or discharges from it. Precipitation in Louisiana, which averages be- tween 50 to 60 inches per year (Newton, 1972), provides much of the surface-water runoff that maintains the State's wetlands. Most wetlands in Louisiana are closely associated with the State's major rivers, bayous, and streams (fig. 2A). The Mississippi River and its shifting delta have created most of the State's estua- rine and palustrine wetlands. The Mississippi River drains about 40 percent of the conterminous 48 States and parts of Canada (Craig and others, 1979). Large quantities of sediment were deposited annually in the Mississippi River flood plain and along coastal Louisiana before the installation of flood-control levees along the main channel of the river. The deposition of this sediment has re- sulted in the largest deltaic land mass in North America (Louisiana Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism, 1988). Deltaic deposition at the mouth of the Mississippi River has been a dynamic process; several deltas have formed over the last 5,000 years (fig. 3). Older deltas have eroded and deteriorated as the next delta was formed (Coleman and Gagliano, 1964; Frazier, 1967). The hydrology of swamps along rivers, bayous, and streams is characterized by annual cycles of flooding and dewatering. Plant communities in these swamps typically are dominated by cypress and tupelo gum trees. The value of these swamps to fish popula- tions and overall aquatic productivity depends upon the renewal of nutrients and oxygenated water that takes place during these annual cycles. Reduced flooding can result in a conversion of swamps into bottom-land hardwood forests dominated by oak, hickory, and other hardwoods. Conversely, increased flooding or higher water tables can result in the conversion of bottom-land hard wood-forest wet- lands to cypress-tupelo gum swamps. Excessive flooding, either in depth or duration, can result in the conversion of swamp to open- water, emergent, or scrub-shrub wetlands because of the lack of growth of new trees and the drowning of existing trees. The flood plain of the Atchafalaya River, the largest distributary of the Mis- sissippi River, contains the best known example of a forested wet- land in Louisiana. The Atchafalaya River swamp is the largest hard- wood swamp in the country. The delta developing at the mouth of the Atchafalaya River is one of the few areas of the State where the shoreline (and associated marshland) is expanding. The types of coastal wetlands (fresh, intermediate, brackish, and saline) and their distribution are dependent upon the availabil- ity of freshwater, frequency of storm-induced salinity maximums, and alterations to local hydrology caused by construction of oil- and gas-well access canals. All of these variables contribute to a con- tinual advance and retreat of wetlands in the coastal areas of Loui- siana. TRENDS Louisiana has lost about 46 percent of its wetlands (about 7.4 million acres) since the 1700's, when Europeans first began modi- fying the continent's geographic features (Dahl, 1990). Palustrine wetlands, primarily swamps, have decreased from an estimated 11.3 million acres to as little as 5.6 million acres in the 1970's. In the Mississippi Alluvial Plain, there has been a decline in palustrine wetlands from about 4.3 million acres in 1957 to about 3.0 million acres in 1977 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). The decline in palustrine wetlands was due, in large part, to land clearing for agricultural purposes. Other causes of wetland loss include flood- control projects, oil and gas exploration, lignite and gravel mining, construction of catfish and crawfish ponds, dredging and filling for residential and commercial development, solid-waste disposal, and highway construction. The rate of loss of palustrine wetlands is 93 C 92 C 91 29° EXPLANATION CATLrtlXAl l\J\V Mississippi River Delta Complexes I MaringoD C3 Teche ^| St. Bernard ^H Lafourche ^H Plaquemines (most recent) 3"tf of Mexico 0 10 20 30 MILES I H i ' 0 10 20 30 KILOMETERS Figure 3. Prehistoric and present-day Mississippi River Delta complexes. (Source: Kolb and Van Lopik 1966.) 210 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES thought to have been slowed by the "Swampbuster" provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985 and the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act, which provides for the purchase of wetlands from farmers. However, although palustrine wetland loss has slowed, it is still considered to be substantial. Major causes of coastal wetland loss in Louisiana are a decrease in suspended-sediment load in the major streams due to dams and channelization and leveeing of the Mississippi River (Kesel, 1988, 1989); dredging of canals for oil and gas exploration, navigation, and pipeline installation; dredging, filling, and drainage for devel- opment; drainage for conversion to crop production or pasture; subsidence; erosion; marsh "eat-outs" by nutria; and hurricanes. About 8 percent of the State's coastal marshes have been dredged, creating canals and associated spoil banks. About one-half of the State's coastal marsh losses can be attributed to or related to canal construction (Scaife and others, 1983). The overall balance between land gain (shoreline accretion) and land loss (shoreline erosion) in Louisiana has been one of net gain in wetland area over most of the last 5,000 years (Coleman and Gagliano, 1964) because of the abandonment of existing deltas and creation of new deltas by the Mississippi River. In the last 100 years, however, this trend has been reversed because of human alteration of the Mississippi River and the Louisiana coastal ecosystems. Construction of flood-control levees along the Mississippi River and its major tributaries and the dredging of canals in the Mississippi- Atchafalaya River Delta have deprived flood-plain and delta wet- lands of sediment needed to prevent wetland loss caused by erosion or submergence. Levee construction began as early as the 1700's in and near New Orleans; however, construction of levees on a large scale did not begin until after the disastrous flood of 1927. Dams constructed on the Missouri River and its tributaries in the mid-I950's trapped sediment and further reduced the sediment available to wetlands in southern Louisiana. Wetland loss was further accelerated by con- struction of navigation and oil- and gas-well access canals that ex- posed fresh and intermediate wetlands to more saline water and disrupted historic north-south sheet-flow runoff in coastal areas. Use of the Atchafalaya River Basin as a floodway and the ex- tensive construction of access canals (and associated spoil banks) have resulted in the conversion of parts of the cypress-tupelo gum swamp in the basin to other types of wetlands. Wetlands created by these changes in the hydrologic system include bottom-land forests in areas of rapid deposition, scrub-shrub wetlands along spoil banks, and emergent wetlands at the mouth of the Atchafalaya and in open- water areas of the basin that have filled by sediment. Coastal-well and loss in Louisiana is a critical issue within the State. About 4 million acres of coastal wetlands existed in the State at the beginning of the 1900's(Dunbar and others, 1992). Since that time, the FWS estimates that more than 900,000 acres of these coastal wetlands have been lost (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). Seventy-three percent (654,000 acres) of the loss occurred between the I950's and 1970's. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has estimated that since 1930,17.8 percent of the land in the south- ern coastal plain has been lost. (Dunbar and others, 1992). The highest coastal land-loss rates occurred from 1956 to 1974 (fig. 4), and the largest loss occurred along the present-day Mississippi River Delta (Dunbar and others, 1992). Estimated land-loss rates for the Louisiana coast during 1978 to 1987 range from about 40 to 64.5 square miles per year (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992; Tem- plet and Meyer-Arendt, 1986). Recent estimates indicate a slight decrease in erosion rates, which were estimated to be between 25 and 40 square miles per year in 1990. However, this decrease might be a result of the decreased availability of highly erodable organic sediments relative to more erosion-resistant soils that have a higher percentage of clays and silts, rather than to restoration efforts (S.M. Gagliano, Coastal Environments, Inc., oral commun., 1991). Dunbar and others (1992) reached similar conclusions and predicted that natural land-loss rates will continue to decrease slowly until a back- ground rate of approximately 0.17 percent per year is reached. Loss of coastal wetlands is closely associated with the loss of fisheries productivity and revenue. The conversion of wetlands to open water also represents a threat to oil and gas wells now located 93° 92 T 'TT*' i-n*« ' v_ >/ Poi itchortr irn EXPLANATION Rate of land loss in square miles per year I I 0-0 - 1.0 I 1 1.0-2.0 2-0 - 3.0 ^m 3.0 - 4.0 Figure 4. Average coastal land-loss rates in Louisiana, 1956 to 1974. (Source: Dunbar and others, 1992.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: LOUISIANA 211 in the coastal wetlands. The State and Federal governments have recognized the problems associated with the loss of wetlands and have dedicated as much as S30 million annually for the mitigation of coastal wetland loss through the State Coastal Restoration Pro- gram and the Federal Coastal Wetlands, Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act of 1990. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Louisiana. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Loui- siana wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibi- tions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the Corps au- thority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Louisiana, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity; ., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization .^ <* n Mr,-ti, VI \*> v^ ^ Boy National Park 25 50 MILES 25 50 KILOMETERS Research WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat PEATLANDS Fens I 1 Unpatterned forest and open fens I 1 Ribbed fens Bogs m Flat bogs Domed bogs r-'-i Concentric bogs ES3 Eccentric bogs Coastal bogs Figure 2. Wetland distribution, physiography, and distribution of peatland types in Maine. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physiography. C, Distribution of peatland types. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center. C, Davis and Anderson, 1991.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MAINE 215 ear patterns created by ridges of peat and vegetation separated by elongate hollows or shallow pools) occur in northern and northwest- ern Maine (Sorenson, 1986); flat bogs occur in all but southwest- ern and southeastern Maine; and domed bogs (bogs that have raised surface profiles) occur in eastern Maine (Worley, 1981). Domed bogs exhibit different landforms, including concentric bogs (domed bogs that have ringing crescent-shaped pools), eccentric bogs (domed bogs on valley slopes), and coastal-plateau bogs (domed bogs that have flattened raised surfaces and steep margins). Coastal- plateau bogs and eccentric bogs are rare in the United States and reach their southern limit for the Northeastern United States in Maine (Davis and Anderson, 1991). Palustrine emergent wetlands, commonly referred to as fresh- water marshes, cover a small area in Maine relative to forested and scrub-shrub wetlands. In southern and central Maine, marshes are typically associated with lakes or slow streams. In general, cattails are characteristic of deeper water or permanently flooded marshes; grasses predominate in areas that have permanently saturated min- eral soils, such as swales; and sedges typically occur in permanently saturated or seasonally flooded peatlands or areas that have muck soils. Most of Maine's rivers and lakes have some areas that have slow reaches or shallow water where submersed, floating, or emergent aquatic vegetation is established. These wetlands are very impor- tant to the biological productivity of rivers and lakes. As a result of recent increases in beaver populations, many riverine and riparian palustrine wetlands have been flooded behind beaver dams. This flooding can be detrimental to existing wetlands but also can cre- ate wetlands that have high value to some wildlife, such as water- fowl. Along Maine's coast the predominant wetlands are mud flats, rocky shores, beaches and bars, reefs, and aquatic beds (marine and estuarine wetlands). These habitats total about 125,500 acres (Widoff, 1988). Maine also has about 34,000 acres of salt and brack- ish marshes (estuarine emergent wetlands) (Widoff, 1988). Many salt and brackish marshes are small, and fringe creeks and indenta- tions in the rocky coast. Jacobson and others (1987) divided Maine's coast into four physiographic subsections in which salt marshes differ in character and distribution. The southwestern coast is char- acterized by bays having sandy beaches behind which large salt marshes have developed, such as those of the Wells Embayment and Saco Bay. These are generally irregularly flooded marsh commu- nities dominated by saltmeadow cordgrass and black grass. The south-central coast is characterized by fluvial marshes in the upper parts of narrow embayments, such as those of the Damariscotta and Sheepscot Rivers. This area of the coast also contains some tidally influenced freshwater wetlands (palustrine and riverine wetlands), such as those in Merry Meeting Bay at the confluence of the Kennebec and Androscoggin Rivers. The north-central coast, includ- ing Penobscot Bay, is a high-energy environment where marshes exist only as fringes bordering a few protected coves. The north- eastern coast is characterized by narrow marshes that form along the base of coastal bluffs. These are generally regularly flooded marsh communities dominated by saltmarsh cordgrass. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands are hydrologic features that occur wherever climate and physiography favor the retention of water (Winter, 1992). Wet- lands are found along rivers, lakes, and estuaries where flooding is likely to occur; in isolated depressions surrounded by upland where surface water collects; and on slopes and surface drainageways or where ground water discharges to the land surface in spring or seep- age areas. Soil saturation favors the growth of wetland plants and the development of wetland soils. Water can be either present on the surface of wetlands, or it can keep underlying soils saturated near the surface with no surface water present (Tiner, 1991). The timing and duration of the presence of water affects water chemis- try, soil development, and plant communities in wetlands. Although wetness plays a large role in the determination of wetland type, many ecologic functions of wetlands depend upon other characteristics such as size, position of the wetland in a drainage network, or sources of water (Brinson, 1993). The type of wetland that devel- ops in any particular setting is determined by complex interactions between hydrology and other factors such as climate, physiography, geology, biology, and site history. Maine's climate provides moisture necessary for wetland for- mation and cool temperatures that allow peat to accumulate. Pre- cipitation and fog are frequent. Most climatic variables that affect vegetation differ greatly across Maine, largely owing to the south- west-northeast orientation of mountains and coastline. For example, mean annual precipitation, potential evapotranspiration, mean an- nual temperature, and the frost-free period decrease from the coast to northwestern Maine (McMahon, 1990). Climatic conditions play a role in the unusual diversity of peatland types in Maine. For ex- ample, coastal-plateau bogs exist only in areas along Maine's north- ern coast where precipitation is high, fog is frequent, and tempera- ture is moderate. The distribution of wetlands in Maine is partly determined by physiography, glacial deposits, and the underlying bedrock. Areas of steep topography do not retain water long enough for wetlands to develop. Given favorable hydrologic conditions, wetlands form on drainage divides and near mountain tops. For example, several ridge-top subalpine bogs occur in the Mahoosuc Range (Johnson, 1985). Most of Maine's wetlands, however, are in lowlands, valleys, and depressions that have more favorable hydrologic conditions for wetlands. Much of the low-lying area of Maine is covered by stratified clay, silt, sand, and gravel deposited during periods of glaciation by glacial meltwater in streams and lakes (Cameron, 1989). Most up- lands are composed of bedrock mantled by glacial till, an unstrati- fied mixture of clay, silt, sand, gravel, and boulders. Both till and fine-grained sediments (clay and silt) can restrict drainage and re- tain surface water. Thus, wetlands occur over till in central and northern Maine and at higher altitudes; over fine-grained glacial lake deposits in portions of some valleys of central Maine, such as the West Branch of the Penobscot; and over fine-grained marine depos- its in the lowlands of coastal Maine and areas reaching inland along major river valleys. Some Maine valleys contain deposits of coarse-grained strati- fied drift (sand and gravel). These coarse-grained deposits can trans- mit ground water to overlying wetlands. Some glacial landforms, such as ridges (eskers), hills (drumlins, kames, and moraines), de- pressions (kettles), and terraces and plains (outwash) can create conditions favorable for wetlands by disrupting drainage patterns, attenuating runoff, or retaining water. For example, in east-central Maine, numerous wetlands are found in kettles that formed when ice blocks buried by glacial outwash melted (Timson and Pickart, 1992). These kettles either filled with water to form kettle ponds or passed through several successional stages of infilling to become kettle-hole bogs. In other areas, eskers may block drainage and cre- ate areas of swampy terrain. On occasion, roads without adequate culverts can have similar effects. Interactions between hydrology and vegetation can be illus- trated by peatlands and coastal wetlands. In peatlands, vegetation patterns are determined largely by water chemistry and movement (Damman and French, 1987). For instance, bogs receive little in- put from runoff or ground water and rely on precipitation (includ- ing fog) and windblown dust as sources for water, nutrients, and minerals. Vegetation in bogs commonly occurs in concentric zones caused by the scarcity of nutrients and minerals available in the center of the bog and the increased availability of nutrients and minerals along bog margins. Fens also receive water from precipi- tation but rely on ground water and runoff for input of minerals and 216 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Table 1. Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Maine, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization FEDERAL nutrients. Vegetation patterns in coastal wetlands respond to a wide range of physiographic, chemical, and biological processes that are influenced by tidal energy (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1986). For in- stance, the tidal range in Maine doubles from south to north, where it has a range of about 20 feet. In northeastern Maine, tidal flood- ing creates a sharp contrast between subtidal and terrestrial habi- tats and tends to compact and enhance the zonation of vegetation in Maine's salt marshes (Fefer and Shettig, 1980). As a result of high tidal energy, a shortage of sediment, and a steep, rocky coast, many coastal environments that are colonized by vegetation in other States occur as rocky shores and extensive mud flats in Maine. Department of Agriculture TRF\ID^ Consolidated Farm Service Agency........................... .. IIXCIM^ Forest Service ................................................................. ...... Dahl( 1990) estimated that Maine has lost about 20 percent of Natural Resources Conservation Service ................ ... . . its wetlands since about the 1780k. However, this may be an over- ^tSt^ceSTd06 estimate because it was based on hydric soil mapping units (R.W. Atmospheric Administration ........................................ . . Tiner, Fish and Wildlife Service, written commun., 1993). Changes Department of Defense in land use have led to losses of both wetlands and contiguous up- Army Corps of Engineers.............................................. ...... land fringes. The history of wetland loss in Maine is largely a his- MilitarV reservations ..................................................... . ... .. ... tory of the State's urban and agricultural development. Early in DT^ln^-f *?"* , .,,. . _ ° , . , _ . F .J . Fish and Wildlife Service.............................................. ...... Maine s history, expansion or fishing and farming communities Geological Survey along the coast resulted in the filling of many coastal wetlands. Later, National Biological Service ......................................... many flood-plain wetlands were filled or converted to agricultural National Park Service ................................................... .... use as development spread upstate along inland waterways. In the Environmental Protection Agency.................................. . ... past few decades, most losses have been a consequence of develop- ^TATE ,. . , , , , ,. , fj. ,,> , . _ , , Department of Agriculture............................................... . .. ment and urbanization (Widoff, 1988). Other factors that can de- Department of Conservation stroy wetlands or affect wetland functions include road building, Bureau of Parks and Recreation................................. creation of reservoirs, agricultural activities, peat harvesting, tim- Bureau of Public Lands................................................. .. .. ... . ber harvesting, hydropower releases, inadequate bridge and culvert Forest Bureau.................................................................. . sizing, navigation improvements, and air or water pollution. Most Land Use Regulation Commission .............................. . . ... ... .. . cjijctt 1 c 111 Maine Geological Survey............................................. ... ... .. .. . . Federal and State regulations focus on minimizing wetland losses Department of Economics and from these and other sources. The cumulative effect of loss or al- Community Development teration of wetlands in Maine is likely to be an important issue in Natural Areas Program ................................................. ... ... .. .. ... the future. Department of Environmental Protection ..................... Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife ............... ...... State Planning Office ........................................................ ... .. ... CONSERVATION State university programs................................................ ... .. .. ... . LOCAL Many government agencies and private organizations partici- Soil and Water Conservation Districts .......................... ... .. . .. ... pate in wetland conservation in Maine. The most active agencies Some county, town, and city governments .................. and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Maine Maine Coast Heritage Trust............................................. ... ... . .. . , i _,, ir-ji ,-i , The Nature Conservancy.................................................. ... ... wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and Private colleges and universities ................................... ... .. .. .. . . incentives that are intended to slow wetland los ses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade allies in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into lands Reserve Program. The NRCS determines compliance with wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the identification of Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States or creation plans. and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through vice (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of component of their plans. Coastal States that adopt coastal-zone National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MAINE 217 management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Manage- ment Act. Federal agencies manage many wetlands in Maine. The FWS manages wetlands in Waterfowl-Protection Areas, National Fish Hatcheries, and National Wildlife Refuges. Also, the FWS adminis- ters wetland-acquisition programs such as the Partners for Wildlife Program, which helps restore wetlands on private lands, and the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, a cooperative pro- gram that provides funding for purchasing wetlands and contigu- ous uplands. The NFS manages wetlands in Acadia National Park and along the Appalachian Trail and the Allagash River. The NFS has designated 15 sites as National Natural Landmarks in Maine, sev- eral of which are entirely wetland. Some of these are protected by the State, and others are protected voluntarily by individual land- owners. Wetlands also are managed by the U.S. Forest Service in the White Mountain National Forest, and by NOAA at the Wells National Estuarine Research Reserve. Federal agencies provide funding for research and inventory of Maine wetlands. The FWS has funded research on peatland ecol- ogy (Damman and French, 1987) and is funding a study of wetland trends in selected coastal areas in cooperation with the Gulf of Maine Council. The NFS is inventorying wetlands in Acadia National Park. The EPA funds the Casco Bay Estuary Project with the goal of minimizing adverse environmental impacts from the use and devel- opment of land and marine resources. The Wells National Estua- rine Research Reserve is available for Federal, State, public, and private research projects. The U.S. Geological Survey (uses), with cooperative funding from State agencies, has inventoried peatlands in Maine (Cameron, 1989) and studied the hydrology of Denbow Heath and the Great Heath (Nichols, 1983). State wetland activities. Maine protects wetlands primarily through administration of the Natural Resources Protection Act and the Mandatory Shoreland Zoning Act by the Maine Department of Environmental Protection and through activities of the Department of Conservation, Land Use Regulation Commission. The Natural Resources Protection Act protects freshwater and coastal wetlands, great ponds, rivers and streams, and other significant wildlife habi- tats. Any proposed alteration in or within 100 feet of protected ar- eas requires a permit from the Department of Environmental Pro- tection. Regulated wetlands include freshwater wetlands of 10 or more acres and coastal and flood-plain wetlands regardless of size. For regulatory purposes, the act establishes three classes of wetlands (Maine Department of Environmental Protection, 1990). Each class is assigned a value based on the wetland's functions. Class I wet- lands receive the greatest protection owing to their biological func- tions. These are wetlands such as coastal wetlands; great ponds; and wetlands that provide habitat for endangered or threatened plants and animals, unique natural communities, or significant wildlife habitat as defined by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and the Atlantic Sea Run Salmon Commission. Class II wetlands are rated largely by hydrologic functions. These are wet- lands such as large emergent marshes, (nonforested) peatlands, flood-plain wetlands, and wetlands within 250 feet of rivers, streams, lakes, or coastal wetlands. Class III wetlands include forested wet- lands and wet meadows not located near open water. The act does not regulate the cutting of most forested wetlands. The Mandatory Shoreline Zoning Act, administered by the Department of Environmental Protection, requires municipalities in coastal areas to establish land-use controls for all land areas within set distances of rivers, ponds, and wetlands. Land-use controls in the unorganized territories of northern Maine are established by the Land Use Regulation Commission. Zoning maps produced by the commission set buffers around scrub-shrub and emergent wetlands and also around streams and lakes. The Maine Department of Ag- riculture, Bureau of Production and Marketing, assists by setting up best-management practices and reviewing permits for farming activities near great ponds and wetlands. The Department of Environmental Protection also administers sections 305(b) and 401 of the Clean Water Act. Section 305(b) requires States to submit biennial water-quality-assessment reports to Congress and the EPA, a part of which specifically addresses water quality in wetlands. Section 401 requires State water-quality certi- fication before a section 404 permit may be issued. Other laws ad- ministered by the Department that protect wetlands include the Dam Registration, Abandonment and Water Level Act and the Site Loca- tion of Development Law. The Department also works closely with other State and Federal agencies. For example, wetland losses due to road building are minimized through cooperation between the Maine Department of Transportation and the Department of Envi- ronmental Protection. The Corps has issued a Maine State Program- matic General Permit which allows permit work that would have otherwise required a Corps permit to be approved through the De- partment of Environmental Protection's permitting process. Other State agencies manage, research, and inventory wetlands. The Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife may designate buffers around wetlands of high value, such as emergent wetlands, and around features such as deer yards or eagle nests, many of which are in or contiguous to wetland areas. The Department of Environ- mental Conservation, Maine Geological Survey, has inventoried Maine's peatland resources (Cameron and others, 1984) and coastal wetlands, has served as the lead agency for cooperative projects with the uses, investigates surficial geology and coastal processes in wetland areas, and furnishes information such as FWS National Wet- land Inventory maps to the public. The Maine Department of Eco- nomic and Community Development, Natural Areas Program, con- ducts an inventory and information-management program focused on endangered and rare plants and exemplary natural communities and has an official register of Maine Critical Areas and a mandate to effect voluntary conservation of these areas, more than 100 of which are wetlands. The program has published reports describing many of these critical areas. State land acquisition is coordinated for all agencies by the Maine State Planning Office. In the last 5 years, the State Planning Office has purchased about 48,000 acres of land with a $35 million bond from the Land for Maine's Future Program funded by Maine voters in 1987. Several purchases were entirely wetland. Ownership of State lands is divided among three agencies the Bureau of Parks and Recreation, the Bureau of Public Lands, and the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. The Bureau of Public Lands ad- ministers 450,000 acres of Public Reserved Lands, an estimated 5 percent of which are wetlands (Widoff, 1988). The Bureau of Parks and Recreation owns a few thousand acres of wetland within State parks and the Allagash Wilderness Waterway. Inland Fisheries and Wildlife manages about 32 major Wildlife Management Areas, many of which contain wetlands as their primary feature. County and local wetland activities. Municipalities are ac- tive in wetland protection in Maine. Under the Mandatory Shore- line Zoning Act, every municipality is empowered to adopt, admin- ister, and enforce its own shoreland zoning ordinance and map. Some towns have imposed stricter regulations than the act requires. On the local level, town code enforcement officers often have first con- tact with individuals and developers whose activities in wetlands areas are regulated under the Natural Resources Protection Act and Mandatory Shoreline Zoning Act. The Department of Economics and Community Development, Office of Community Development, runs a Code Enforcement, Training, and Certification Program to train local code enforcement officers on State wetland rules and regulations. Private wetland activities. Private organizations perform complementary functions that cannot readily be accomplished by 218 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES governmental agencies. For example, wetlands research is conducted in several academic departments at the University of Maine and at other colleges and universities in the State. Private organizations such as The Nature Conservancy can provide rapid action in pur- chase of property. The Maine Chapter of The Nature Conservancy owns 83 preserves, many which are entirely wetlands. The Maine Coast Heritage Trust is a land-conservation organization that facili- tates donation of easements and land transactions for conservation purposes. Through their activities, some important natural areas that include wetlands have been designated as "forever wild." Other organizations involved with protection of Maine's wetlands or with some wetland holdings include 73 local land trusts, the Maine Audubon Society, the National Audubon Society, the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests, the New England Wildflower Society, Ducks Unlimited, the Izaak Walton League, and many oth- ers. Individuals, timber companies, and other private landowners own most of Maine's wetlands, and many actively pursue wetland conservation. References Cited Brinson, M.M., 1993, Changes in the functioning of wetlands along envi- ronmental gradients: Wetlands, v. 13, no. 2, p. 65-74. Cameron, C.C., 1989, Peat and its occurrence as a resource in Maine, in Tucker, R.D., and Marvinney, R.G., eds., Studies in Maine geology, v. 5: Augusta, Maine Department of Conservation, Maine Geological Survey, p. 125-146. Cameron, C.C., Mullen, M.K., Lepage, C.A., and Anderson, W.A., 1984, Peat resources of Maine: Maine Geological Survey Bulletins 28-32. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, EC., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Damman, A.W.H., and French, T. W, 1987, The ecology of peat bogs of the glaciated northeastern United States Acommunity profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.16), 114 p. Davis, R.B., and Anderson, D.S., 1991, The eccentric bogs of Maine A rare wetland type in the United States: Maine State Planning Office, Critical Areas Program, Planning Report 93, 169 p. Fefer, S.I., and Shettig, P.A. (principal investigators), 1980, An ecological characterization of coastal Maine (north and east of Cape Elizabeth): U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-80/29, v. 1-6. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: Washing- ton D.C., U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Jacobson, H.A., Jacobson, G.L., and Kelley, J.T., 1987, Distribution and abundance of tidal marshes along the coast of Maine: Estuaries, v. 10, no. 2, p. 126-131. Johnson, C.W, 1985, Bogs of the northeast: Hanover, N.H., University Press of New England, 269 p. Maine Department of Environmental Protection, 1990, Natural Resources Protection Act Wetland Protection Rules Chapter 310: Augusta, Maine Department of Environmental Protection, 13 p. Maine Natural Heritage Program, 1991, Natural landscapes of Maine A classification of ecosystems and natural communities: Augusta, De- partment of Economic and Community Development, 77 p. McMahon, J.S., 1990, The biophysical regions of Maine: Orono, Univer- sity of Maine, M.S. thesis, 119 p. Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G., 1986, Wetlands: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 539 p. Nichols, W.J., Jr., 1983, Hydrologic data for the Great and Denbow Heaths in eastern Maine, October 1981-October 1982: U.S. Geological Sur- vey Open-File Report 83-865, 34 p. Sorenson, E.R., 1986, Ecology and distribution of ribbed fens in Maine: Augusta, Maine State Planning Office, Critical Areas Program, Plan- ning Report 81, 171 p. Timson, B.S., and Pickart, G., 1992, Inventory of glacial kettles, kettle-hole ponds, and kettle-hole bogs: Augusta, Maine State Planning Office, Critical Areas Program, 240 p. Tiner, R. W., 1991, Maine wetlands and their boundaries A guide for code enforcement officers: Augusta, Maine Department of Economic and Community Development, Office of Comprehensive Planning, 72 p. Tiner, R.W., and Veneman, PL., 1989, Hydric soils of New England: Amherst, Mass., University of Massachusetts Cooperative Extension, Revised Bulletin C-183R, 27 p. Widoff, Lissa, 1988, Maine Wetlands Conservation Priority Plan: Augusta, Maine State Planning Office, Bureau of Parks and Recreation, 117 p. Winter, T.C., 1992, A physiographic and climatic framework for hydrologic studies of wetlands, in Robarts, R.D., and Bothwell, M.L., eds., Aquatic ecosystems in semi-arid regions Implications for resource manage- ment, 1992: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, The National Hydrology Re- search Institute Symposium Series 7, Environment Canada, p. 127- 148. Worley, I.A., 1981, Maine Peatlands: Augusta, Maine State Planning Of- fice, Critical Areas Program, Planning Report 73, 387 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Sur- vey, 26 Ganneston Drive, Augusta, ME 04330; Regional Wetland Coordi- nator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA 01035 Prepared by David S. Armstrong, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 219 Maryland and the District of Columbia Wetland Resources Weretlands cover about 9.3 percent of Maryland and the District of Columbia. Many of these wetlands harbor unique and endangered species of plants and animals, and life is abundant in all of them. Some the most familiar wetlands in the region are the tidal marshes of the Chesapeake Bay (fig. 1). Wetlands have many physical, chemical, and biological func- tions. For example, wetlands trap waterborne sediments, nutrients, and toxic chemicals by filtering them out of inflowing water and either storing or transforming them. Coastal-zone and flood-plain wetlands mitigate the effects of flooding from runoff and tides by reducing flow velocity, storing water temporarily, and releasing it gradually. Vegetation in riparian wetlands maintains stream chan- nels by stabilizing the banks, and tidal wetlands impede erosion by storm surges and waves. One of the most important functions of wet- lands is as habitat for waterfowl, wildlife, and a wide variety of plant life. Wetlands provide food, shelter, resting places on migration routes, breeding areas, and nurseries for many animals including species of economic importance in Maryland such as ducks, geese, oysters, blue crabs, and several kinds of finfish. Many rare and en- dangered plant species are adapted to conditions present only in wetlands. Maryland's wetlands have considerable historic and economic value. Humans have inhabited Maryland's coastal wetlands for thou- sands of years, and unique cultures have developed there. Wetlands provide outdoor educational, recreational, and financial opportu- nities hunting, commercial and sport fishing, bird watching, and tourism all benefit Maryland's economy. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Maryland and the District of Columbia is shown in figure 2A\ only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed Figure 1. Wetlands on the Eastern Shore of the Chesa- peake Bay. Local variation in topography, soil char- acteristics, and hydrology are reflected in the vegeta- tion patterns. (Photograph by David F. Usher, U.S. Geological Survey.) by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Maryland and the District of Columbia are described below. System Palustrine, Lacustrine Riverine. Estuarine Marine Wetland description , fslontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. .Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. Palustrine wetlands comprise most (57 percent) of the wetlands in Maryland and the District of Columbia, followed by estuarine wetlands (42 percent). Ninety percent of wetlands in Maryland and the District of Columbia are vegetated. The predominant vegetation or specific location of a wetland frequently determines its common name. Dune slacks are topographic depressions among sand dunes on the Eastern Shore (the part of Maryland on the Delmarva Pen- insula) that contain palustrine emergent or scrub-shrub wetlands. Delmarva bays are topographic depressions on the Delmarva Pen- insula that often contain seasonally flooded palustrine emergent, scrub-shrub, or forested wetlands. Swamps or swamp forests are palustrine tidal or nontidal forested wetlands. Seeps are small palustrine wetlands formed around springs; the pH of the water can be neutral, acidic (in sandstone), or alkaline (in carbonate rocks). Peatlands are palustrine emergent, scrub-shrub, or forested wetlands that have organic soils. A type of peatland called a bog in Maryland is permanently saturated by ground water and is, therefore, actu- ally a fen. Seasonal sinkhole wetlands are seasonally wet palustrine emergent wetlands that form in sinkholes in areas underlain by lime- stone. Wet meadows are spring-fed palustrine emergent wetlands. Seagrass beds are estuarine aquatic-bed wetlands in which eelgrass commonly is the predominant vegetation. Riverine and lacustrine aquatic-bed wetlands, in which submersed aquatic vegetation such 220 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES as wild celery and hydrilla predominate, are known locally as SAV wetlands (for "submersed aquatic vegetation")- Salt and brackish marshes are estuarine emergent wetlands in which the predominant vegetation is tolerant of water that ranges from brackish to salty. Small scrub-shrub wetlands commonly are associated with salt marshes. Maryland covers an area that extends from the Atlantic Ocean into the Appalachian Mountains. About 590,800 acres (9.3 percent) of Maryland's land area is wetland (R.W. Tiner, U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service, oral commun., 1992). Tidal and nontidal wetlands each comprise about one-half of the wetland acreage. The size and dis- tribution of tidal wetlands are determined primarily by local topog- raphy and tidal range. The distribution of nontidal wetlands is de- termined by local topography, soil characteristics, and geohydro- logic conditions. Tidal wetlands occur in or near the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries or behind barrier islands on the Atlantic coast, whereas nontidal wetlands occur throughout the State. The most abundant wetland type in Maryland is palustrine forested wetland, which covers about 286,300 acres, nearly one-half the total wetland area in the State. Next most abundant is estuarine emergent wet- land, covering about 203,400 acres. Maryland also has about 2,000 acres of riverine, 1,400 acres of lacustrine, and 700 acres of ma- rine wetlands (mostly beaches and sand bars). The District of Columbia has about 840 acres of wetlands (Guerrero, 1993); most are in the Coastal Plain along the Chesa- peake and Ohio (c&o) Canal and the tidal reaches of the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers. Only a few acres of the District's wetlands are in the Piedmont Province. About 62 percent of the District's wetlands are riverine aquatic beds. Most of those are in the Anacostia River and the c&o Canal. About 34 percent of the District's wetlands are palustrine and are located along the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers and Rock Creek and on Theodore Roosevelt Island. Sixty per- cent of these palustrine wetlands are emergent, 16 percent are scrub- shrub, and 24 percent are forested. About 4 percent of the District's wetlands are lucustrine. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Maryland and the District of Columbia can be divided into three geohydrologic regions for purposes of discussing wetland hydrology: the Coastal Plain; a central region consisting of the Pied- mont, Blue Ridge, and Valley and Ridge physiographic provinces; and the Appalachian Plateaus (fig. 2B). Coastal Plain. The relatively flat Coastal Plain physiographic province rises from below sea level to about 100 feet above sea level on the Delmarva Peninsula east of the Chesapeake Bay and to about 200 feet above sea level in southern Maryland west of the Chesa- peake Bay (James, 1986). The Coastal Plain is underlain by uncon- solidated sediments. More than 90 percent of Maryland's total wet- land area, including all of its estuarine wetlands, is in this province (Tiner, 1987). Recharge of the ground-water system in this region is mainly by infiltration of precipitation and occurs in interstream areas. Dis- charge occurs by seepage to streams, estuaries, and the ocean. Many Coastal Plain wetlands are in discharge areas of coastal and ripar- ian zones. The low-lying areas of the Coastal Plain contain exten- sive wetlands in the form of seagrass beds, salt marshes, and tidal and nontidal freshwater marshes and swamps. These wetlands have complex hydrology; streamflow, ground-water flow, and tidal flow all are components. The many rivers and streams of the Coastal Plain have forested wetlands in the bottom lands along the channels. These wetlands are sustained by local and regional ground-water flow systems and overbank flooding during storms. The width of forested wetlands in streamside areas often is reduced by artificial draining and conversion of the land for agricultural use. The Coastal Plain can be divided into two subregions of dif- fering hydrology: the Eastern Shore and the area of the Coastal Plain west of the Chesapeake Bay. Inland, the Eastern Shore is poorly drained and has small depressional palustrine wetlands (Delmarva bays) and narrow bands of palustrine wetlands along ditches, streams, and rivers that drain areas from inland to the coasts (fig. , Finzel Swamp WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats Because of limitations of scale and source material, the distribution is approximate, and some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS Province A. Appalachian Plateaus B. Valley and Ridge C. Blue Ridge D. Piedmont E. Coastal Plain Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Maryland and the District of Columbia and physiography of the State and District. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physiography. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physi- ographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; land forms data from EROS Data Center.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MARYLAND AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 221 A. Coastal Plain Eastern Shore PALUSTRINE WETLAMDS PALUSTRINE WETLANDS EXPLANATION B. Coastal Plain West of the Chesapeake Bay PALUSTRINE WETLANDS PALUSTRINE WETLANDS Flood-plain swamps RIVERINE WETLANDS ESTUARINE WETLANDS Confined aquifer C Central region PALUSTRINE WETLAND PALUSTRINE WETLAND PALUSTRINE WETLANDS Flood-plain swamps RIVERINE WETLAND D. Appalachian Plateaus PALUSTRINE WETLANDS Direction of ground-water flow Average water table Scrub-shrub vegetation Forest vegetation Water teble near Delmarva bays in wet season Emergent vegetation Water tabla near Delmarva bays in dry season ^Jt** Farmed crops Direction of ground-watar flow near Delmarva bays in wet season Submersed aquatic vegetation Organic deposits - - Direction of ground-water flow near Delmarva bays in dry season Nota: Vertical scale greatly exaggerated Figure 3. Generalized geohydrologic setting of wetlands in three regions of Maryland and the Dis- trict of Columbia. A, Coastal Plain Eastern Shore. B, Coastal Plain west of the Chesapeake Bay. C, Central region. D, Appalachian Plateaus. 3A). Extensive estuarine marshes occur along the western shore of the peninsula and in the inland bays on the eastern shore of the peninsula. Delmarva bays occur in several different settings, most commonly in the poorly drained center of the Delmarva Peninsula. Delmarva bays are connected to local shallow ground-water systems, which differ in areal extent, hydrochemistry, and degree of fluctuation of the water table (Hall and Malcom, 1990). Local flow patterns can vary seasonally because the depth of the water table around and below Delmarva bays is directly related to seasonal rainfall. Areas of ground-water dis- charge during wet seasons can be areas of ground- water recharge during dry seasons (fig. 3,4) (Phillips and Shedlock, 1993). West of the Chesapeake Bay, the geohydrology of the surficial aquifer is complex, and the local pat- terns of ground-water flow are not well understood. Patterns of ground-water flow shown in figure 3B are based on general geohydrologic principles described by Winter (1Q88, 1992). West of the bay, flood-plain swamps are abundant along rivers and streams. These wetlands are maintained by local and regional ground- and surface-water flow systems. In a few areas, peatlands, locally called bogs, occur in topographic lows. These wetlands are hydraulically connected to the local ground-water flow network. Seep wetlands occur along the Fall Line (fig. 2B), which marks the boundary between the sediments of the Coastal Plain and the higher altitude crystalline rocks of the Pied- mont Province. Maryland's Coastal Plain has many notable wet- lands. The Pocomoke River swamp has extensive stands of bald cypress trees. In the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge, brackish marshes grade into tidal freshwater marshes. Zekiah Swamp is a forested wet- land that adjoins a freshwater emergent marsh along the Wicomico River. In the Jug Bay wetlands on the Patuxent River, tidal freshwater marshes grade into tidal and nontidal forested wetlands. Centra! region. The central region has consid- erably more topographic relief than the Coastal Plain. The gently rolling hills of the Piedmont Province are as much as 800 feet above sea level, and the mountains 222 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES of the Blue Ridge Province rise to more than 1,600 feet. Altitudes in the Valley and Ridge Province range from about 400 feet in the valleys to about 1,500 feet on ridges (James, 1986). The central region is underlain by crystalline and consolidated sedimentary bedrock that has been subjected to considerable folding and fault- ing and that is overlain by a regolith of variable thickness. Regolith, which forms the land surface nearly everywhere, is a layer of un- consolidated, mostly fine-grained material composed of fragmen- tal, weathered bedrock and alluvium overlying unweathered bed- rock. Recharge of the ground-water system in the central region is by infiltration of precipitation, mostly in the forested uplands. Most of the precipitation seeps into a thick, permeable soil layer, and most of that water moves laterally through the soil to surface depressions or streams. Water that moves below the soil zone enters the regolith, and much of that water seeps into the underlying bedrock. Ground water discharges from the regolith or bedrock by evapotranspira- tion, as seeps or springs, or directly into streams (fig. 3C). Much of the ground water available to wetlands in the region is held in the regolith (Metzgar, 1973). Most of the wetlands in the central region are in valleys or other surface depressions. These topographic lows often indicate the pres- ence of fracture zones in the bedrock. Fracture zones are more sus- ceptible than unfractured zones to weathering and erosion, which allows the evolution of topographic depressions, and they are the major pathways of ground-water movement through bedrock (Heath, 1984). Water is more likely to be discharged into depressions than into other areas. For example, the source of water in the Germantown Bog is primarily ground water and, although no streams flow into this peatland, a stream flows out of it. Wetlands in the Piedmont Province include peatlands; flood-plain emergent marshes; chemi- cally neutral, acidic, and alkaline seeps; seasonal sinkholes; and farm ponds. Wetlands in the Blue Ridge Province include isolated peatlands and forested wetlands in seepage areas smaller than 1 acre and surrounded by forest. Wetlands are rare in the Valley and Ridge Province, but those that are there include seeps, forested flood-plain wetlands, and wet meadows. Notable wetlands in the Piedmont Province include the Germantown Bog (a fen rather than a true bog) and flood-plain marshes such as those in the McKee Beshers Wildlife Management Area. The isolated wetlands in the Blue Ridge Province, such as the acidic seeps in Catoctin Mountain National Park, are essential habi- tats for rare and endangered plants. Wetlands also provide impor- tant habitat in the Valley and Ridge Province, where the major wet- lands are flood-plain swamps of the Potomac River and its tributar- ies and wet meadows in the area around Hagerstown. Appalachian Plateaus. The valleys and mountains of the Appalachian Plateaus range from 1,500 to 3,000 feet above sea level (James, 1986). The Appalachian Plateaus are characterized by se- verely eroded, flat-lying to gently folded shale, sandstone, coal, and limestone. The landscape consists of mountain crests, ridges, and hilltops that are formed of or capped by sandstone; wide, elongated valleys of intermediate altitude; and narrow, steep-sided valleys (Abbe, 1902). Recharge of the ground-water system in this region is by infil- tration of precipitation. Recharge primarily occurs in outcrop ar- eas of sandstone formations in the uplands between streams (Heath, 1984). Discharge from the ground-water system is through seeps, springs, and streams (fig. 3D). Most of the wetlands in this region are in wide valleys and to- pographic lows in shale beds and along contacts and bedding planes in the bedrock. Small wetlands are isolated from the surface-water system, but large wetlands drain into streams. For example, streams draining from Finzel Swamp (also known as Cranberry Swamp), a large peatland, are the headwaters for the Savage River. Peatlands are the largest wetland complexes in the Appalachian Plateaus; other wetland types in the region include seeps and flood-plain swamps. The peatlands generally are spring fed and have acidic water, al- though some are buffered by limestone. The predominant vegeta- tion in many peatlands is shrubs and grasses, but some have open sphagnum mats. Notable wetlands in the Appalachian Plateaus are large peatlands such as Finzel Swamp, The Glades, and Cranesville Swamp, which is a classic northern peatland. TRENDS In the 1780's, about 1,650,000 acres, or 24 percent, of Mary- land (Dahl, 1990) and about 8,700 acres, or 20 percent, of the Dis- trict of Columbia (Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, 1990) were wetland. At that time, and for 2 centuries thereafter, wetlands were regarded as a public nuisance a source of disease and useful only if they could be turned into dry land (Maryland Conservation Commission, 1909). The influence of agricultural, tourism, recreational, and industrial interests led to the draining, dredging, filling, diking, and damming of wetland areas and to ex- tensive stream channelization. These practices in combination with other human activities such as forestry; mining; crop tillage; increased pesticide, herbicide, nutrient, and sediment loading from upland activities; urban development and pollution; natural impacts such as saltwater intrusion caused by sea-level rise and ground sub- sidence; wave-generated erosion; and hurricanes have contributed to widespread wetland loss or degradation. About 590,800 wetland acres, or about 9.3 percent of the land surface, remain in Maryland (R.W. Tiner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, oral commun., 1992) a loss of about 64 percent since the I780's. When the District of Columbia was established in the I790's, dredging and filling of wetlands to control disease and flooding began immediately. By the 1920's, most of the streams and springs that once drained into the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers were dry or enclosed in pipes (Williams, 1989). Most of the palustrine wet- lands that those springs and streams supported have been covered by monuments, buildings, and parks. By 1992, only about 840 acres of wetlands, or about 10 percent of the wetland area in the 1780's, remained. The Department of Public Works and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) are directing wetland-restoration projects in the Anacostia River basin, where most of the District's remaining tidal wetlands are located. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Maryland and the District of Co- lumbia. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Mary- land and the District of Columbia wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are con- tained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the Corps au- thority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and plac- ing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the dis- charge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MARYLAND AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 223 Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- and private organizations in Maryland, 1993 tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided restoration, or creation plans. by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 wetland-related activity; -.agency or organization does not participate in Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, resto- . . . &r ,. . _ ,w ^, , ration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collec- protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland tion; D&l, delineation and inventory] Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their _______________________________________ Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for ^ Q> ^> ^ ^ \ Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- Agency or organization ^ & & & & <$ vice (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland FEDERAL component of their plans. Coastal States that adopt coastal-zone Department of Agriculture management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic Consolidated Farm Service Agency........................... ... ... ... and Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and Natural Resources Conservation Service ................ technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. Department of Commerce State wetland activities. Maryland's Wetlands and Riparian National Oceanic and Ri hts Act and Non.Tidal Wetlands Protection Act and Chapters 20 Atmospheric Administration........................................ ... jii ru TV * /-< i u-/^j * cv * i i Department of Defense anc^ ^ * °* tne District of Columbia Code contain State-level require- Army Corps of Engineers.............................................. merits for construction activities in wetlands. To obtain permits for Department of the Interior altering wetlands in Maryland, a joint State-Federal application must Fish and Wildlife Service.............................................. be submitted to the Maryland Department of the Environment's Geological Survey.......................................................... Water Resources Administration, which will route it to the appro- National Biological Survey .......................................... ... .......... . . r T-, ^ r ^, T-, . , National Park Service ................................................... ........ pnate regulatory agencies. The Department of the Environment ad- Environmental Protection Agency.................................. ministers the Maryland wetland-protection acts and is responsible STATE for State compliance with section 305 (b) of the Clean Water Act, Department of the Environment which requires States to submit water-quality-assessment reports to Water Management Administration........................... ...... Congress and the EPA biennially. These reports must specifically ad- ............ d^^^inw^^i^^rf.^!^ Natural Heritage Program ment also administers section 401 or the Clean Water Act, which Program Open Space..................................................... ... requires State water-quality certification before a section 404 per- Office of State Planning.................................................... ... mit may be issued. State Highway Administration......................................... . Other regulatory activities are conducted by the Department n^Tecr?TVn°P Mn^a;_d " of Natural Resources, the Office of State Planning, and the State UlolnlLI Ur LULUMblA .,- - . n ... . .., , , Department of Consumer and Highway Administration. All activities in tidal wetlands are con- Regulatory Affairs.............................................................. .. ducted under the Department of Chesapeake Bay and Watershed Department of Public Works............................................ ... Programs; other activities are conducted by the Department's Natu- Metropolitan Council of Governments .......................... ... . ... rai Heritage and Greenways and Resource Planning Programs, by i:: : : ^a^^co^^^^j^^^sn^ PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS ments Mining Program, and by the University ot Maryland. The Chesapeake Bay Foundation........................................... . ... ... Maryland Natural Heritage Program supervises wetland manage- Environmental Concern, Inc............................................ ... ... ment on State-owned lands and administers land-acquisition pro- Maryland Land Trust Alliance.......................................... grams. The Department of Natural Resources' Greenways Program The Nature Conservancy.................................................. . and me Greenways Commission work to maintain the integrity of natural areas and to integrate them with recreational use. The Mining Program has a small wetlands mitigation and restoration program in the Appalachian Plateaus region. Several academic departments and the Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies at the Uni- 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes versity of Maryland conduct wetlands research, the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 Most wetlands in the District of Columbia are owned by the permit applications on the basis of a proposed activity's probable NFS, which maintains them and monitors wetland restoration and effects on the water quality of a wetland. creation efforts along the Anacostia River. Permits for wetland al- Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- teration in the District of Columbia must be obtained from the Corps ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- and the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 County and local wetland activities. County and local gov- Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through ernments have enacted zoning restrictions on development in wet- financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of lands and created many conservation programs. Some counties wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- (Baltimore, Harford, and Anne Arundel) have wetland programs, allies in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the Prince Georges County has received partial authority from the State altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- to implement the State Nontidal Wetland program. Other coopera- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, live programs among State and local government agencies and pri- Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal vate organizations coordinate regional programs and management Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners and protection efforts, particularly around the District of Colum- who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm bia and the Chesapeake Bay. Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- Private wetland activities. Private organizations with inter- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and ests in wetlands in Maryland and the District of Columbia are ac- Wetlands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation tive primarily in regulation and policy planning, land acquisition Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- and management, research, and adult and professional education. 224 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES A few of the many organizations in the region are the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (regulation and policy planning), the Maryland Land Trust Alliance and The Nature Conservancy (land acquisition and management), Environmental Concern, Inc. (research and adult and professional education), and Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay (adult and professional education). References Cited Abbe, Cleveland, Jr., 1902, The physiography of Garrett County, in Mary- land Geological Survey, Garrett County: Baltimore, Maryland Geo- logical Survey, p. 27-54. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, EC., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, 1990, 1990 Report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Congress pursuant to Section 305(b) Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117): Washington, D.C., Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, 123 p. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: Washing- ton, D.C., U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Guerrero, V.C., 1993, Inventory and status of wetlands in the District of Columbia: Washington, D.C., District of Columbia Department of Consumer and Regulatory affairs, 80 p. Hall, Tom, and Malcom, Hope, 1990, Inventory of natural resource areas within the Chesapeake Bay region, v. 1 Maryland: Annapolis. Md.. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 24 p. Heath, R.C., 1984, Ground-water regions of the United States: U.S. Geo- logical Survey Water-Supply Paper 2242, 78 p. James, R.W, Jr., 1986, Maryland and the District of Columbia surface-water resources, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and surface-water resources: U.S. Geological Sur- vey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 265-270. Maryland Conservation Commission, 1909, Reclamation of swamps, in Report for 1908-1909: Baltimore, Maryland Conservation Commis- sion, p. 137-144. Metzgar, R.G., 1973, Wetlands in Maryland: Annapolis, Maryland Depart- ment of State Planning Publication 157, 80 p. Phillips, P.J., and Shedlock, R.J., 1993, Hydrology and chemistry of ground water and seasonal ponds in the Atlantic coastal plain in Delaware, U.S.A.: Journal of Hydrology, v. 141, p. 157-178. Tiner, R.W., 1987, Mid-Atlantic wetlands A disappearing natural trea- sure: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency cooperative publication, 28 p. Williams, G.P., 1989, Washington, D.C.'s vanishing springs and waterways, in Moore, J.E., and Jackson, J.S., eds., Geology, hydrology, and his- tory of the Washington, D.C., area: Alexandria, Va., American Geo- logical Institute, p. 76-94. Winter, T.C., 1988, A conceptual framework for assessing cumulative im- pacts on the hydrology of nontidal wetlands: Environmental Manage- ment, v. 12, no. 5, p. 605-620. ____1992, A physiographic and climatic framework for hydrologic stud- ies of wetlands, in Robarts, R.D., and Bothwell, M.L., eds., Proceed- ings of the Symposium on Aquatic Ecosystems in Semi-Arid Re- gions Implications for resource management, 1990: Saskatoon, Sas- katchewan, Environment Canada, The National Hydrology Research Institute Symposium Series 7, p. 127-147. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 208 Carroll Building, 8600 LaSalle Road, Towson, MD 21204; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA 01035 Prepared by Martha A. Hayes, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 225 Massachusetts Wetland Resources We'etlands cover about 11 percent of Massachusetts (Dahl, 1990) and are an important component of the State's water resources. Wetlands are valued and protected by the State for the environmen- tal and economic benefits they provide, such as flood control, miti- gation of storm damage, water-quality improvement, maintenance of ground-water supplies, wildlife habitat, and spawning and nurs- ery habitat for many of the estuarine and marine fish and shellfish that support the State's sport-fishing and seafood industries (fig. 1). Most wetland functions are tied to the presence, movement, qual- ity, and quantity of water in wetlands (Carter and others, 1979). For example, flood-plain wetlands along the Charles River provide natu- ral storage and a reduction of floodwaters such that the least-cost solution to prevent future flooding was to acquire and protect the wetlands (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1971). Massachusetts wetlands provide not only the functions and values for which they are protected by the State but other benefits such as scenic beauty and recreational opportunities. The benefits that Massachusetts' wetlands provide are a reflection of the diversity of the State's wet- land resources. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Massachusetts is shown in figure Z4; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and Figure 1. Namskaket Marsh on Cape Cod. This wetland is the site of U.S. Geological Survey studies that monitor the development and fate of a wastewater plume moving toward this tidal wetland. (Photograph courtesy of Kelsey-Kennard Photographers, Chatham, Mass.) deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Massa- chusetts are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine Estuarine Marine Wetland description Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands}; shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. The most recent inventory of Massachusetts wetlands, per- formed during 1975-77 by the FWS National Wetlands Inventory Project, mapped about 590,000 acres of wetlands in the State (Tiner, 1992). According to Metzler and Tiner (1992), the maps are at least 95 percent accurate. Palustrine wetlands are the most common wetland type in the State, followed by estuarine and marine wet- lands (fig. 2B); all together, they constitute about 99 percent, by area, of the State's wetlands. The combined area of lacustrine and river- ine wetlands makes up the remaining less than 1 percent of wetland acreage. A description of Massachusetts' most common wetland types follows. Palustrine wetlands. Vegetated palustrine wetlands in Mas- sachusetts include ponds and shallow lakes in which the dominant vegetation is floating or submersed (aquatic-bed wetlands); fresh- water marshes, fens, and bogs dominated by herbaceous plants (emergent wetlands); and bogs and swamps dominated by shrubs or trees (scrub-shrub or forested wetlands). Vernal pools are small, seasonally flooded wetlands that occur throughout Massachusetts. Because most vernal pools dry up, they are devoid offish and thus provide a safe breeding habitat for many amphibian and invertebrate species. Palustrine forested wetlands constitute 56 percent of the State's wetlands (Tiner, 1992) and consist primarily of red maple swamps with some evergreen forested wetlands. Red maple grows in most inland wetlands because it tolerates a wide range of flooding and soil-saturation conditions (Metzler and Tiner, 1992). The vegeta- tion found with red maple, in the understory and intermixed or codominating in the canopy, differs according to nutrient conditions and water regime. Atlantic white cedar wetlands, the most common 226 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Fiver 30 MILES WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat Marine wetlands 6.6 percent (38,700) Estuarine wetlands / 13.4 percent (79,300) Lacustrine and riverine wetlands 0.7 percent (4,270 acres) Cape Cod National Seashore Mnnomoy Island NWR Pa lustrine wetlands 79.3 percent (468.000 acres] .Green Mountain Section u_ B RELATIVE AND ACTUAL ACREAGE OF WETLAND TYPES IN MASSACHUSETTS * i 1I r ./ \ \ ' -t Connecticut i /i ' Valley Lowland \ * t s* 1/ ' 1 1 1 ' 'rf '' VA- / - V r t£ ^ \' New England \ \ Province i Q \t N x* New England I Upland Section PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS C STRATIFIED-DRIFT DEPOSITS | " \ Stratified-drift deposits Figure 2. Wetland distribution and types in Massachusetts and physical features that control wetland distribution in the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Relative area of wetland types in the mid-1970's. C, Area covered by stratified-drift deposits. D, Physiography. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Tiner, 1992. C, B.D. Stone, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1991. D, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MASSACHUSETTS 227 evergreen forested wetlands, are concentrated south of Boston and form isolated wetlands in western and north-central Massachusetts and in the Connecticut River Valley (Sorrie and Woolsey, 1987). Lacustrine and riverine wetlands. Although present through- out the State, lacustrine and riverine wetlands comprise only a small percentage of Massachusetts' wetland area. These freshwater wet- lands generally are restricted to the littoral zone between the shore and deepwater habitat and, if vegetated, have only aquatic-bed or nonpersistent emergent vegetation. The majority of riverine wetlands occur adjacent to the Connecticut River (Tiner, 1992). Wetlands in the shallows of rivers or lakes are classified as palustrine wetlands if there is persistent emergent vegetation present. Estuarine and marine wetlands. Estuarine and marine wet- lands account for 20 percent of the State's total wetland acreage. In Massachusetts, marine wetlands consist of exposed intertidal flats and beaches and minor acreages of rocky shores and aquatic beds. Estuarine wetlands consist of salt and brackish marshes (emergent and scrub-shrub wetlands) that have developed behind coastal dunes and in protected coves and embayments along the coast and estuar- ies. These wetlands are commonly vegetated by grasses and aquatic plants. Sparsely vegetated estuarine flats and beaches, alternately flooded by tide or exposed to air, also are present. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands form in geologic, topographic, and hydrologic set- tings that enhance the accumulation and retention of ground water, surface water, or both for a period of time. Hydrologic processes are the primary factor determining the existence of wetlands; even if the geologic and topographic settings are favorable for wetland formation, unfavorable hydrologic conditions can inhibit wetland formation (Winter, 1988). On an annual basis, precipitation exceeds evapotranspiration losses in Massachusetts, resulting in an annual moisture surplus. Hydrology, therefore, favors the formation and maintenance of wetlands throughout the State, and wetland loca- tion is determined primarily by geologic and topographic controls. Massachusetts was almost completely covered by ice during the last glaciation; the ice margin reached its maximum extent at Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket Island. Large quantities of gla- cial drift were deposited over bedrock throughout the State. This sediment was left in place as deposited from the ice as till or was eroded and reworked by glacial meltwater and deposited as strati- fied drift. Till is exposed at the land surface, primarily on upland hilltops and slopes. Stratified drift was deposited in topographically low areas where glacial meltwater collected major lowlands such as the Coastal Plain Province, the Seaboard Lowland and Connecti- cut Valley Lowland Sections, and in stream and river valleys through- out the New England Upland, Green Mountain, and Taconic Sec- tions (fig. 2C and 2D). Although stratified drift covers only 44 per- cent of Massachusetts, 68 percent of wetlands are underlain by this deposit (Motts and O'Brien, 1981). In general, the percentage of land containing wetlands decreases from east to west in the State; this decrease can be directly attributed to the distribution of strati- fied drift. Inland wetlands. Surficial materials of the Coastal Plain, which encompasses Cape Cod, Martha's Vineyard, and Nantucket Island, consist primarily of permeable stratified drift characterized by low relief. Despite the low relief, surface water does not collect in these areas because of the rapid infiltration of precipitation. Wetlands occur in the numerous kettle holes that intersect the ground-water table and receive water from ground-water discharge and precipitation. Kettle holes, closed topographic depressions, were created by the melting of stagnant ice blocks that were embedded in glacial sediments. Kettle holes pit the surface of stratified drift throughout the State. Because ground water moves relatively rap- idly through the surficial materials of this area, plants in these wet- lands are adapted to low-nutrient conditions. Kettle ponds in the Coastal Plain provide a habitat for plants that grow only on the ex- posed, sandy shores of nutrient-poor, acidic ponds and require sea- sonal water-table fluctuations (Henry Woolsey, Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, written commun., 1993). Glacial lakes occupied the Connecticut Valley Lowland and Seaboard Lowland of Massachusetts, depositing extensive areas of flat, nearly impermeable stratified drift (Schafer and Hartshorn, 1965). Impermeable stratified drift that was deposited in a marine environment underlies areas of the Seaboard Lowland to the north of and surrounding Boston (Stone and Peper, 1982). These coastal areas were depressed by the weight of glacial ice to beneath even the lowered sea level but rose rapidly after deglaciation to expose marine sediments. The low relief and impermeable materials of these areas slow the drainage of surface-water, promoting the formation and maintenance of wetlands. Sources of water for these wetlands include precipitation, ground-water discharge, and river overflow. Slow drainage leads to acidic, low-nutrient conditions through the accumulation of plant metabolic wastes and through the gradual depletion of nutrients as water flows through the wetland. Because of the low slope, small drainage obstructions can form large wet- lands such as the 6,000-acre Hockomock Swamp near Taunton, the 1,500-acre Cedar Swamp near Westborough, and the 1,000-acre Acushnet Cedar Swamp near New Bedford. Within the bedrock and till-covered hills of the New England Upland and Taconic Sections, wetlands occur primarily in depres- sions where surface runoff and ground-water discharge collect. The depressions have no outflow or have drainage controlled by bedrock sills, stratified drift, beaver dams, or manmade structures. Seepage wetlands can form where the ground-water table intersects or is close to the land surface on concave slopes and at breaks in slope. How- ever, these wetlands are permanently saturated only if ground-water discharge is perennial; otherwise, the wetlands are seasonally satu- rated for varying periods of time (Winter, 1988). Wetlands also form in river valleys, where they occupy kettle holes in stratified drift or areas modified by the erosion and deposition of rivers in aban- doned river channels, behind levees and overbank sediments adja- cent to rivers, and in backswamp areas. As water moves through soil and surficial materials, it is enriched in nutrients for plant growth. The longer the flowpath beneath the surface, the more the water is enriched. Wetlands in upland till and bedrock depressions are pri- marily areas of discharge from nutrient-poor, local to intermediate ground-water flow systems, whereas wetlands in lowland valleys receive discharge from nutrient-enriched, intermediate and regional ground-water flow systems. As vegetation became established after ice retreat and devel- oped in response to the warming of climate, open-water areas filled with sediment and organic matter to become wetlands or remained lakes with wetland habitats fringing open water. Studies of upland wetlands in Connecticut have shown that wetlands developed over many divergent paths in the time since glaciation; however, all wet- lands have been strongly affected by postsettlement agricultural and industrial practices (Thorson, 1990; Thorson and Harris, 1991). Many wetlands resulted from colonial agricultural practices and the creation of ice ponds and mill ponds for water-powered industries. Beavers have created many wetlands in Massachusetts by flooding uplands and narrow river valleys. Beaver populations in Massachusetts have been successfully reestablished and now occupy all suitable habitats in the State (Thomas Decker, Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, oral commun., 1993). Beaver- created wetlands have many of the positive aspects associated with wetlands including habitat for waterfowl and other wildlife, flood control, sediment control, fish production, and recreational and esthetic values but the property damage beaver ponds may cause can result in conflict between beavers and humans (Decker and Cooper, 1991). 228 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Massachusetts, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. ., agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory) Agency or organization Tidal wetlands. Tidal wetlands are present along coastal ar- eas of the State in the Coastal Plain and the Seaboard Lowland. Tidal wetlands form a broad continuum from marine to estuarine, river- ine, and palustrine wetlands. The effects of wave energy and salin- ity on the wetlands diminish along this continuum. Tidal wetlands receive freshwater from upland areas through ground-water dis- charge, stream overflow, and hillslope runoff. Regional ground-water discharge is greatest near the break in slope between upland and coastal areas, and intermediate and local ground- water flow systems increase in importance in areas that have less topographic relief (Winter, 1 988). Floodwater resulting from high tides or stormflows FEDERAL may be temporarily stored in the wetland. The drainage of flood- Department of Agriculture water and hillslope runoff from the wetland surface is slowed by Consolidated Farm Service Agency.......... the low slope of coastal areas. Forest Service ....... ......................................... The major factors affecting the development and persistence Natural Resources Conservation Service of tidal wetlands are the rate of sea-level rise, the tidal regime, the supply of sediments to the wetland, and the ability of plants to sur- Atmospheric Administration ........................................ vive submergence by saltwater (Redfield, 1 972). Unless the submer- Department of Defense gence of tidal wetlands by rising sea level is counteracted by the Army Corps of Engineers .............................................. vertical accretion of the wetland by sediment deposition and plant Military reservations ..................................................... accumulation, the wetland will drown and become a deepwater ^^Ti?!^ eteri°r .,..., , . , . . r Fish and Wildlife Service .............................................. habitat. As the last glacial ice melted and water was returned to the Geological Survey sea, sea level rose, encroaching upon land and submerging many National Biological Service ......................................... stream and river valleys to form estuaries. Tidal wetlands either have National Park Service ................................................... migrated inland along estuaries, river valleys, and coastal slopes, Environmental Protection Agency.................................. or the wetlands have been completely submerged. Most existing )?TATE ,_ . l4. , *i j XT T- i j i A « Department of Environmental Management................ saltwater wetlands in New England are younger than 4,000 years Department of Environmental Protection and might have thick freshwater deposits below saltwater peat Division of Water Pollution Control ............................ (Redfield, 1972). Presently, tidal wetlands exist in a narrow setting Division of Water Supply ............................................... between rising sea level and expanding coastal development. The Division of Wetlands and Waterways........................ migration of these wetlands inland, as sea level continues to rise, is Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and . , . j j , . . , . ,, , . . , , Environmental Law Enforcement.................................... hindered by the previous destruction of coastal-margin wetlands and Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act Unit ........... by present development in low-lying uplands. Metropolitan District Commission .................................. University of Massachusetts ........................................... TDCMnc TOWN AND CITY CONSERVATION COMMISSIONS... IKtlMUS PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS The FWS estimates that Massachusetts has lost 28 percent of its original wetlands over the 200-year period between the 1780's The Nature Conservancy .................................................. . ...... and the 1980's (Dahl, 1990). Agricultural and urban expansion in The Trustees of Reservations.......................................... .... the Boston, Cape Cod, and Connecticut River Valley areas have caused many wetland losses (Motts and O'Brien, 1981). There are no statewide estimates of recent wetland losses or alteration; how- ever, wetland losses and alterations continue in Massachusetts de- Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 spite Federal and State regulation. In southeastern Massachusetts, Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1 972 Clean Water Act and amendments; about 1,300 acres of vegetated wetlands were either lost or altered the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conser- from 1 977 to 1 986 through agriculture, development, and conver- vation, and Trade Act; and the 1 986 Emergency Wetlands Resources sion of vegetated wetlands to open water (Tiner and Zinni, 1988). Act. Since 1978 there have been more than 5 1 ,000 permit applica- Section 1 0 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U. S . Army tions submitted to the Department of Environmental Protection for Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities work proposed in or near wetlands in the State. More than 9,000 in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, applications were submitted in 1 99 1 ; about one-third of these ap- filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 plications were from Cape Cod and the southeastern part of the of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation State, one-third were for projects proposed in and around metro- protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues politan Boston, and the remaining one-third were for projects in permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into central and western Massachusetts (Massachusetts Division of wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Wetlands and Waterways, 1991). Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States CONSERVATION anc^ e^§i^e Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- Many government agencies and private organizations partici- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. pate in wetland conservation in Massachusetts. The most active Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- table 1. sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Mas- Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through sachusetts wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory pro- financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of hibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MASSACHUSETTS 229 allies in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. Coastal States that adopt coastal-zone management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Manage- ment Act. Federal agencies are responsible for the proper management of wetlands on public lands under their jurisdiction. The FWS pro- tects and manages wetlands in four National Wildlife Refuges in Massachusetts: approximately 3,300 acres of salt marsh and fresh- water wetlands in the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge, 1,000 acres of flood-plain wetlands along the Nashua River within the Oxbow National Wildlife Refuge, flood-plain wetlands along 12 miles of the Concord and Sudbury Rivers of the Great Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, and 2,750 acres of marine, estuarine, and palustrine wetlands in the Monomoy Island National Wildlife Ref- uge. The NFS protects, manages, and studies many diverse wetlands in the Minuteman National Historic Park and the Cape Cod National Seashore. The Corps manages about 1,000 acres of wetlands at dams and reservoirs located throughout the State and 8,000 acres of wet- lands in the Charles River Natural Valley Storage Project. State wetland activities. All State agencies that have respon- sibilities for wetland protection, management, and planning are managed by the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs chaired by the Secretary of Environmental Affairs. The principal authority of this office is to implement and oversee State policies that pre- serve, protect, and regulate natural resources and the environmen- tal integrity of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The Water Resources Commission establishes statewide water-resources poli- cies for agencies within the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. In 1990, the Water Resources Commission adopted a policy of no net short-term loss of wetlands and a net long-term gain of wetlands; the policy incorporates the principles of avoidance or minimization of adverse impacts on wetlands and full compensa- tory mitigation for unavoidable wetland losses (Massachusetts Di- vision of Wetlands and Waterways, 1991). Primary responsibility to implement this policy was delegated to the Department of Envi- ronmental Protection. The Department of Environmental Protection's Division of Wetlands and Waterways implements two complementary programs for wetland protection the Wetlands Protection Program and the Wetlands Conservancy Program. The Wetlands Protection Program functions primarily through permitting and enforcement by local conservation commissions. The program handles appeals and pro- vides training, technical assistance, and enforcement support to conservation commissions. The Wetlands Conservancy Program is mapping the State's wetlands through aerial photography at a scale of 1:5,000. The wetland maps will provide a detailed inventory of the extent and condition of the State's wetlands to be used to iden- tify illegal wetland alterations and quantify wetland losses. In ad- dition, important wetlands are selected for permanent deed restric- tions prohibiting activities that impair wetland functions. At present (1993), 46,000 acres of coastal wetlands and 8,000 acres of inland wetlands are protected by deed restrictions. The Department of Environmental Protection is integrating the 401 water-quality certification program with wetland permitting under the State's Wetland Protection Act. Under section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act, any activity that results in a discharge, including that of fill into wetlands or State waters, that also requires a Federal permit must obtain a 401 water-quality certification stat- ing that the activity will not result in violation of State surface-water- quality standards. Many activities exempted under the Wetland Pro- tection Act will be in the Department of Environmental Protection's jurisdiction under the 401 certification program. Use of the anti- degradation provisions of State surface-water-quality standards on wetlands defined as "waters of the Commonwealth" provides en- hanced wetland protection. Antidegradation provisions provide for the protection of existing uses in wetlands and the level of water quality necessary to maintain those uses. No degradation is allowed in areas designated as Outstanding National Resource Waters, such as National Wildlife Refuges, National Parks, State parks, wildlife areas, and other areas of ecological significance. Vernal pools that have been certified by the State are designated as Outstanding Re- source Waters and therefore have added protection through section 401 and its antidegradation provisions. The Department of Environmental Management is the primary land-management and natural-resource planning agency in the State. The Department is the largest landholder in Massachusetts, having 270,000 acres of State forests, parks, beaches, and wildlife areas that include wetlands. As a part of its land-stewardship plans, the Department oversees many activities and programs including re- search and data collection, land-resource inventory, coastal-dune restoration, and natural area programs. The Wildlands Program sets aside areas of State forests and parks that contain examples of unique plant communities or geologic formations in the State. The Office of Water Resources, within the Department of Environmental Man- agement, is involved in two significant programs related to wet- lands the river-basin planning program and the watershed-pro- tection and flood-prevention facilities program (Michael Gildes- game, Office of Water Resources, written commun., 1993). The river-basin planning program analyzes the water resources of each basin and develops recommendations for regional and community water-resources management that balance the consumptive needs of municipal, industrial, and commercial water withdrawals with the instream flow needed to maintain natural resources such as wet- lands, wildlife, and fisheries. The 35-year-old cooperative Federal and State watershed-protection and flood-prevention facilities pro- gram maintains and preserves about 5,000 acres of open space as- sociated with 32 flood-prevention facilities across the State. Instal- lation of these structures has promoted the development of new wetlands and has enhanced wildlife habitat, public recreation, and water supply. The Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Research Re- serve, located on the southern coast of Cape Cod, is cooperatively managed by the Department of Environmental Management and NOAA'S Sanctuaries and Reserves Division. The 2,250-acre reserve was created under section 315 of the Federal Coastal Zone Man- agement Act and has barrier beach, salt pond, salt marsh, and open- water habitats. The reserve serves as a natural laboratory and is the site of several interagency research projects. The Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Environmental Law Enforcement protects and manages the State's wild and living natu- ral resources, including rare and endangered plant and animal spe- cies. Wetland protection is part of the overall mission of the De- 230 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES partment the protection of natural ecosystems. Critical wildlife habitats are protected by an aggressive land-acquisition program that emphasizes the natural corridors formed by rivers, streams, and their associated wetlands. The Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, which is funded primarily through voluntary income tax contributions, inventories rare- and endangered-species habitats in the State. Local wetland activities. The local conservation commissions of the 351 cities and towns in Massachusetts implement the State's Wetland Protection Act with jurisdiction over any work in, over, or adjacent to water bodies, wetlands, rivers, and streams within each municipality. No person may dredge, fill, or alter wetlands without notifying the local conservation commission in writing to explain the proposed work. In addition, cities and towns may enact local wetland bylaws, which can provide more stringent wetland and re- source protection than that specified in the State's Wetland Protec- tion Act. Commissions consist of three to seven volunteer members appointed directly by local elected authorities. Private wetland activities. Private organizations in Massa- chusetts are active in land acquisition and management, research, education, and policy review and planning. The Massachusetts Audubon Society owns 22,000 acres of land containing wetlands. The Trustees of Reservations owns and manages 18,000 acres of land in the State with historic, scenic, or ecological value. Ducks Unlim- ited provides technical and financial assistance to Federal and State agencies in order to protect waterfowl habitat in Massachusetts. References Cited Carter, Virginia, Bedinger, M.S., Novitzki, R.P., and Wilen, W.O., 1979, Water resources and wetlands, in Greeson, P.E., Clark, J.R., and Clark, I.E., eds., Wetlands functions and values The state of our under- standing Proceedings of the National Symposium on Wetlands, No- vember 1978: Minneapolis, Minn., American Water Resources Asso- ciation, p. 344-376. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deep water habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980 s: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Decker, Thomas, and Cooper, Jeanne, 1991, Evaluation of damage by bea- vers to highways and the economic costs to cities and towns in Mas- sachusetts: Westboro, Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wild- life Technical Report, 14 p. Fenneman, N.M., 1938, Physiography of Eastern United States: New \brk, McGraw-Hill, 714 p. Massachusetts Division of Wetlands and Waterways, 1991, Wetlands white paper: Boston, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protec- tion, 64 p. Metzler, K.J., and Tiner, R.W., 1992, Wetlands of Connecticut: Connecti- cut State Geological and Natural History Survey Report of Investiga- tions No. 13, 115 p. Motts, W.S., andO'Brien, A.L., 1981, Geology and hydrology of wetlands in Massachusetts: University of Massachusetts, Water Resources Re- search Center Publication 123, 147 p. Redfield, A.C., 1972, Development of a New England salt marsh: Ecologi- cal Monographs, v. 42, p. 201-237. Schafer, J.P., and Hartshorn, J.H., 1965, The Quaternary of New England, in Wright, H.E., Jr., and Frey, D.G., eds., The Quaternary of the United States: Princeton, N.J., Princeton University Press, p. 113-128. Sorrie, B.A., and Woolsey, H.L., 1987, The status and distribution of At- lantic white cedar in Massachusetts, in Laderman, A.D., Atlantic white cedar wetlands: Boulder, Colo., Westview Press, p. 135-137. Stone, B.D., and Peper, J.D., 1982, Topographic control of the deglaciation of eastern Massachusetts Ice lobation and the marine incursion, in Larson, G.J., and Stone, B.D., eds., Late Wisconsinan glaciation of New England: Dubuque, Iowa, Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, p. 145-163. Thorson, R.M., 1990, Development of small upland wetlands A strati- graphic study in northeastern Connecticut: University of Connecti- cut, School of Engineering Final Report JHR 90-191, 285 p. Thorson, R.M., and Harris, S.L., 1991, How "natural" are inland wetlands? An example from the Trail Wood Audubon Sanctuary in Connecticut, USA: Environmental Management, v. 15, p. 675-687. Tiner, R.W., Jr., 1992, Preliminary national wetland inventory report on Massachusetts' wetland acreage: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory Project, 5 p. Tiner, R.W., Jr. and Zinni, William, Jr., 1988, Recent wetlands trends in southeastern Massachusetts: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory Project, 9 p. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1971, Charles River study, appendix H Flood management plan formulation: Waltham, Mass., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 32 p. Winter, T.C., 1988, A conceptual framework for assessing cumulative im- pacts on the hydrology of nontidal wetlands: Environmental Manage- ment, v. 12, p. 605-620. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 28 Lord Rd., Suite 280, Marlborough, MA 01752; Regional Wet- lands Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center, Hadley,MA01035 Prepared by Sandra L. Harris, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 231 Michigan Wetland Resources We'etlands cover about 15 percent of Michigan. They are ecologi- cally and economically valuable to the State. Wetlands provide shore- line protection as well as temporary flood storage. Wetlands pro- tect water quality by removing excess nutrients and sediments from surface and ground water. Michigan's wetlands, such as Tobico Marsh shown in figure 1, provide important wildlife habitat and have a significant role in maintaining a high level of biological diversity. Most freshwater fish depend on wetlands at some stage in their life cycle. Birds use wetlands as migratory resting places, for breeding and feeding grounds, and as cover from predators. Wetlands, such as those in Seney National Wildlife Refuge, are a preferred habitat for muskrat, beaver, otter, mink, and raccoon. Some rare or threat- ened animals rely on wetlands, and 91 of 238 plant species listed as threatened or endangered by the State grow in wetland habitats (Cwikiel, 1992). Wetlands benefit the State's tourist and outdoor recreation industries by providing opportunities for activities such as hunting, fishing, trapping, hiking, canoeing, birdwatching, na- ture photography, and viewing wildflowers. Blueberries and wild rice are produced commercially in Michigan wetlands. In the early 1980's, Michigan was one of five States that together produced 75 percent of the peat mined in the United States. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Michigan is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deep- water habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Michigan are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine. Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs {scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. , Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. There is no current (1993) estimate of statewide wetland acre- age in each of the systems. However, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources has inventoried land cover and land use; the re- sult is the Michigan Resource Inventory System (MIRIS). Wetland classifications were developed specifically for this inventory sys- tem. Classes of wetlands under this scheme are lowland conifers, 1,826,402 acres; lowland hardwoods, 2,484,430 acres; wooded wetland, 263,684 acres (palustrine forested wetlands under the Cowardin and others [ 1979] classification system); shrub/scrub wet- land, 1,186,150 acres (palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands); aquatic- bed wetland, 60,863 acres (rooted and floating vascular aquatic-bed wetlands); emergent wetland, 419,061 acres (persistent- and non- persistent-emergent wetlands; and unvegetated flats, 3,926 acres (unconsolidated-shore wetlands). The results of the MIRIS inventory are similar to the 1953 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service inventory (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1955); wooded and scrub/shrub wetlands are the most common wetland types in Michigan. Emer- gent wetlands make up a relatively small percentage of the State's total wetlands. Wetlands were estimated by Dahl (1990) to occupy about 5.6 million acres of Michigan in the mid-1980's. There are more than 6.2 million acres of wetlands classified under MIRIS. However, under the classification scheme for MIRIS, lowland conifers and lowland hardwoods are primarily wetlands but may also include some areas that would be defined as uplands based on regulatory definitions (Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 1992). In 1972, the Department of Natural Resources conducted a shorelands inventory and identified 105,855 acres of Great Lakes coastal wetlands (Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 1973). It has been estimated that coastal wetland acreage in Michi- gan has been as much as 369,000 acres in the past (Jaworski and Raphael, 1978). Michigan coastal wetlands are distributed among the Great Lakes in the following proportions: 37 percent along Lake Huron; 28 percent along Lake Michigan; 16 percent along the St. Clair River, Lake St. Clair, and the Detroit River area; 13 percent along Lake Superior; and 6 percent along Lake Erie (Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 1992). Figure 1. Tobico Marsh, a coastal wetland along the shore of Saginaw Bay. (Photograph by Erin A. Lynch, U.S. Geo- logical Survey.) 232 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES National Park IsteRoyale Along Lake Michigan from Muskegon north to Empire, wet- lands are associated with wide, low-gradient tributary mouths that extend inland for several miles. Beaver Island has extensive wetlands. The shoreline from Empire to the Straits of Mackinac contains few wetlands. The Upper Peninsula shoreline of Lake Michigan is com- posed of rocky points and headlands with sandy or marshy bay heads (Herdendorf and others, 1981). Along the Lake Superior shoreline of Michigan, wetlands are most common along the Keweenaw Bay waterway and at tributary mouths in Marquette and Chippewa Counties. The Isle Royale shore- line and islands and the mainland shores of the St. Marys River contain wetlands (Herdendorf and others, 1981). The Michigan shoreline of western Lake Erie consists of low- lying marshes (emergent wetland) and sand beaches (unconsoli- Drummond Island WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximale distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^m Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat yyyyyy( Area typified by a high density of small wetlands LAKH ERIE Figure 2. Wetland distribution and climatological features in Michigan. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. (Source: A, T.E. Da/:/, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MICHIGAN 233 dated-shore wetland). The shoreline of Lake Huron from the Straits of Mackinac to Drummond Island generally consists of plains al- ternating with outcrops of limestone and dolomite. These plains are generally composed of clays and contain marshes. The beaches along the northern part of the Saginaw Bay are occasionally inter- rupted by wetlands. Most of the southeastern part of Saginaw Bay is marshy with shallow water inshore. From Sand Point to Port Austin the shore is composed of sand beaches with a bluff of un- even sand ridges. The sand ridges parallel the shoreline and alter- nate with wetlands. The area from Port Hope to the St. Clair River contains few wetlands. Along Lake St. Clair, the St. Clair River, and the Detroit River, the only extensive natural areas that have not been developed are the St. Clair River Delta wetlands and wetlands on islands at the mouth of the Detroit River (Herdendorf and others, 1981). Approximately 18,000 acres of wetlands line Saginaw Bay (15 percent of the drainage basin) and comprise the largest remaining freshwater coastal wetland system in the Nation. Tobico Marsh (fig. 1) is an enclosed lagoon bordered on the east by a narrow coastal barrier at Saginaw Bay and on the west by sand ridges. Emergent wetlands occupy approximately 1.260 acres of Tobico Marsh. They contain many bird species and are attractive to waterfowl during migration. The Tuscola County Wetlands also are a part of the Saginaw Bay shoreline. They lie south of the Tobico Marsh and are confined to a relatively thin coastal and nearshore zone. In contrast to the Tobico Marsh, the Tuscola County Wetlands are open to wave action from Saginaw Bay. The wetlands occupy depressions within the premodern shoreline, clay flats, and lagoons at present lake level, and sandbars in the nearshore zone (Michigan Department of Natu- ral Resources, 1993). HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands form where there is a persistent water supply at or near the land surface. The location and persistence of the supply is a function of climatic, physiographic, and hydrologic factors such as precipitation and runoff patterns, evaporation potential, topog- raphy, and configuration of the water table. In Michigan, a favor- able water budget coupled with impeded drainage promotes ample soil moisture for wetland development in depressions, many of which were formed by glaciation. Precipitation (fig. 2B) in the form of rain and snow averages approximately 31 inches annually. Lake- effect precipitation is prevalent in near-shore areas but also affects areas farther inland. Surface waters, including wetlands, are con- stantly replenished by precipitation. Runoff (fig. 2C) varies geo- graphically and seasonally. It is greatest in areas where snowfall accumulation is heaviest (Miller and Twenter, 1986). The topographic character of Michigan was largely determined by glaciation. Glacial lobes channeled through parts of the Great Lakes and deposited thick layers of drift material. The bulk of this drift accumulation may have been developed before the latest gla- cial period. Areas bordering the Lower Peninsula and in a broad belt extending southwest from the Saginaw River Basin beyond Lansing consist of flat drift deposits. Glacial lake waters covered much of these areas. There are more than 35,000 mapped lakes and ponds, and 36,350 miles of rivers and streams in Michigan (Sweat and Van Til, 1987). Nearly all of the lakes and associated wetlands in the lower peninsula occupy depressions in the surface of the glacial deposits. The Escanaba River Basin, in the center of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, covers an area of 925 square miles. As much as 400 square miles of the southern part of the basin is covered by wetlands (Miller and Twenter, 1986). These wetlands are the rem- nants of an old glacial lake. Kettle lake wetlands are common in upland areas within the Great Lakes Basin. Kettle lakes are formed by the incorporation of ice blocks in material that washed out from a melting glacial ice front. Where the melting ice block left a basin in the drift that pen- etrated the water table, kettle lakes were formed. These lakes differ in shape and size. In general, depth does not exceed 165 feet. The most common wetlands in kettle lakes are bogs. Kettle lakes can B PRECIPITATION Line of equal annual precipitation Interval, in inches, is variable 12 Line of equal annual runoff- Interval, in inches, is variable Figure 2. Continued. Wetland distribution and climatological features in Michigan. 8, Annual precipitation. C, Runoff. (Sources: B and C, Miller and Twenter, 1986; landforms data from EROS Data Center.) 234 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES eventually become bog lakes through a series of steps. First, the lake is fringed by floating mats of sedges that grow inward and encroach upon the open water. Eventually the mat covers the entire lake sur- face, and sphagnum moss and shrubs of the heath family become established. When growth exceeds decomposition, the lake basin begins to fill and peat deposits form. Ultimately, a succession of vegetation types may lead to a climax terrestrial forest (Herdendorf and others, 1981). Freshwater coastal wetlands are extensive in Michigan. The occurrence, distribution, and diversity of coastal wetlands is, in part, determined by the morphology of the Great Lakes shoreline. Most Great Lakes wetlands develop in lagoons or flood ponds that form just landward of the shoreline. Glacial drift generally forms the upland boundaries, whereas barriers are created by water-laid sand, gravel, or cobble. Upland peninsulas formed by bedrock outcrops or resistant soil provide protection for shallow water areas cut into the shoreline. Riparian (streamside) wetlands extend inland along the flood plains and banks of tributary streams entering the lake basin. Their extent is a function of flood-plain width, which is great- est along larger streams with broad flood plains and least where streambanks are steep. It is difficult to distinguish between some riparian wetlands and those of embayed or barrier-lagoon systems because most tributary streams enter the lakes through lagoons and bays (Geis, 1985). Sediments in the lagoon of the Tobico Marsh where emergent and submergent wetlands are present are composed of peats of vari- able consistency or a mixture of peat with fine sand. Tobico Marsh has one outlet a small creek at the southern end of the marsh. During low water levels the lagoon is effectively sealed from Sag- inaw Bay. Because the lagoon becomes sealed and, therefore, lacks the flushing action that occurs in more open coastal wetlands, it could evolve into a peat bog (Herdendorf and others, 1981). Coastal wetlands are, in general, younger than inland wetlands in Michigan because glacial ice receded from most of the Lower Peninsula approximately 12,000 years ago and the Great Lakes reached their present water levels less than 3,000 years ago. There- FEDERAL fore, coastal wetlands are at most 3,000 years old, whereas inland Department of Agriculture wetlands can be as old as 12,000 years. Coastal wetlands do not Consolidated Farm Service Agency.......... mature to the same extent as inland wetlands. Short-term, tempo- Forest Service ................................................ rary water-level fluctuations and long-term, cyclic water-level Natural Resources Conservation Service changes can cause vegetation dieback, wetlands erosion, or lateral Department of Defense ,. , ., c . r , , Army Corps of Engineers ............................. displacements of vegetative zones. These changes result in constant Marine Reserve rejuvenation of coastal wetlands (Herdendorf and others, 1981). National Guard............................................... Department of the Interior TDCivinc F'sl1 ant' Wildlife Service ............................. I KhlNIUj Geological Survey ......................................... r^. i . . , f. . , -,rn-v 5 i mnm National Biological Service........................ The FWS has estimated that, from the 1780s to the 1980s, National Park Service wetland area in Michigan decreased by 50 percent from about Environmental Protection Agency"'""."."".' 11.2 million to about 5.6 million acres (Dahl, 1990, p. 6). Most STATE wetland loss in Michigan has been caused by drainage for agricul- Department of Natural Resources tural purposes. Most drainage occurred before 1930. However, from Fisheries Division .......................................... 1934 through 1940, the Works Progress Administration and Fed- eral Relief Agencies drained parts of Michigan to control malaria- Surface Water Quality Division carrying mosquitoes. Most drainage occurred in the southern one- Wildlife Division................................................ third of the State the area containing most of the important agri- Department of Transportation........................... cultural lands. Notations of bogs of 50 to 100 acres along Elk Creek SOME COUNTY AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS and a swamp as far as the eye could see were in an 1852 diary entry r| . R ... . . r .. of O.H. Perry describing a trip across the "thumb district" of east- Detroit Audubon Society ..............!." !!."!! !!! ern Michigan; most of these bogs have been drained. Industrializa- Dow Chemical Company..................................... tion has damaged wetlands along the Saginaw River and from the Ducks Unlimited.................................................... St. Clair River to Lake Erie. The moraine-till plain area of the cen- Future Farmers of America ................................ tral Lower Peninsula is the only other major area significantly dam- G,eTal M°tors -- -- " - .-; ; - ,, , . /TTO i- t. j iirui-.r o i rvccx Michigan Duck Hunters Association............... aged by drainage (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1955). Michigan WMm Habitat Foundation ............. Approximately 37,000 acres of emergent marsh are thought to The Nature Conservancy.................................... have existed around Saginaw Bay prior to development in the area. Tipp of the Mitt Watershed Council................. More than one-half of the basin's original wetlands have been Waterfowl USA..................................................... drained, filled, altered, or destroyed (Michigan Department of Natu- Wetlands Conservation Association ............... ral Resources, 1993). Since the 1850's, 9,420 acres of wetlands have been lost on the southeast coast of Saginaw Bay (Herdendorf and others, 1981). CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Michigan. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Michi- gan wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Har- bors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Michigan, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, restora- tion and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MICHIGAN 235 permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from penalties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agricultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Conser- vation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetlands Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. Coastal and Great Lakes States that adopt coastal-zone management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. Federal agencies are responsible for the proper management of wetlands on public land under their jurisdiction. The U.S. Forest Service manages as much as 588,000 acres of wetlands in three National Forests in Michigan: Huron-Manistee (65,000 acres), Hiawatha (as much as 423,000 acres), and Ottawa National Forests (as much as 100,000 acres). The NFS manages approximately 3,600 acres of wetlands in Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, as well as wetland acreage in Isle Royale National Park and Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore. State wetland activities. The Michigan Department of Natu- ral Resources assumed administration of the section 404 wetlands program in October 1984. The principal statutory authority for the Michigan wetlands program is Public Act 203, the Goemaere-Ander- son Wetland Protection Act of 1980. This act, in conjunction with several other State statutes and regulations, is the basis for Michigan's wetland conservation program. The act requires persons involved in the following activities to obtain a permit from the Michigan Department of Natural Resources: placing fill in a wetland; dredg- ing or removal of soil or minerals from a wetland: constructing, operating, or maintaining any use or development in a wetland; and draining surface water from a wetland. The act also authorizes regu- lation of wetlands by local governments through wetland ordinances (Warbuch and others, 1990). The EPA maintains Federal oversight of the State program, in- cluding veto authority. The EPA routinely reviews Public Notices for permit applications for "major discharges." Major discharges are defined, in part, as (1) greater than 10,000 cubic yards of fill; (2) discharges that contain toxic materials; and (3) discharges into ar- eas determined to be unique, or where the waterway's commercial value could be significantly reduced. The Corps retains jurisdiction over Rivers and Harbors Act and section 404 permitting in Great Lakes coastal areas, their connecting waterways, and major tribu- taries to the upstream limit of Federal navigability. In these areas, both a Corps and a Michigan Department of Natural Resources permit are required for activities in wetlands (Cwikiel, 1992). Michigan currently (1993) is developing a Wetland Conserva- tion Strategy. The strategy will focus on nonregulatory efforts throughout the State by (1) wetland education and outreach, (2) rec- lamation of wetlands to restore lost public benefits, (3) attention to wetland water-quality concerns, (4) coordination of existing wet- land-management practices (including support of the North Ameri- can Waterfowl Management Plan), and (5) identifical ion and pro- tection of Michigan's rare and unique wetlands. The strategy is due to be completed by January 1995. County and local wetland activities. In addition to their usual planning and zoning responsibilities, several municipalities in the following Michigan counties have adopted ordinances or guidelines to protect wetlands or to mitigate unavoidable wetland losses: Allegan, Antrim, Charlevoix, Cheboygan, Genesee, Grand Traverse, Ingham, Kalamazoo, Livingston, Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Wash- tenaw, and Wayne Counties. Private wetland activities. The Tipp of the Mitt Watershed Council offers a wetland-delineation service and a planning and zoning program to promote water-quality protection. The Wetlands Conservation Association is actively pursuing wetland restoration projects. The Wetlands Foundation of West Michigan assists with the design, funding, and permitting of projects that restore, enhance, or create wetlands primarily for habitat values. Other organizations and industries that participate in wetland- protection activities in the State include Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination, Clean Water Action, Clinton River Watershed Council, Detroit Audubon Society, Dow Chemical Com- pany, East Michigan Environmental Action Council, Environmen- tal Protection Council of Oakland County, Friends of Rose Town- ship, Friends of the Crystal River, Friends of the Rouge, Galien River Watershed Council, General Motors, Grand River Preservation Coalition, Huron River Watershed Council, Lake Michigan Federa- tion, League of Women Voters of Michigan, Leelanau Conservancy Watershed Council, Michigan Audubon Society, Michigan Lake and Stream Associations Inc., Michigan United Conservation Clubs, Northern Michigan Environmental Action Council, Sierra Club Mackinac Chapter, Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition, Water and Air Team for Charlevoix, and West Michigan Environmental Action Council. The activities of these groups are diverse and in- clude participating in the planning and zoning process, serving as information clearinghouses, commenting on or assisting citizens in commenting on dredge and fill applications, engaging in or provid- ing expert witnesses for wetland litigation, restoring wetlands, ob- taining conservation easements, and many others. References Cited Cowardin. L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C.. and LaRoe. FT., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Cwikiel, Wilfred, 1992, Michigan wetlands Yours to protect (2d ed.): Conway, Mich., Tipp of the Mitt Watershed Council, 84 p. Dahl, T.E.. 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780 s to 1980's: Washington D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 13 p. Geis, J.W., 1985. Environmental influences on the distribution and com- position of wetlands in the Great Lakes Basin, in Prince, H.H, and D'ltri, P.M., eds., Coastal wetlands: Chelsea, Mich., Lewis Publish- ers, Inc., p. 15-31. Herdendorf, C.E., Hartley. S.M., and Barnes, M.D.. 1981. Fish and wild- life resources of the Great Lakes coastal wetlands within the United States Volume one, Overview: Washington, D.C., Biological Scr- 236 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES vices Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-81/ 02-v. 1,469 p. Jaworski, Eugene, and Raphael, C.N., 1978, Fish, wildlife, and recreational values of Michigan's coastal wetlands: Lansing, Michigan Department of Natural Resources report, 209 p. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 1973, Shoreland inventory: Lansing, Mich., Division of Land and Resource Programs, 18 p. ____1992, Water quality and pollution control in Michigan, 1992 report: Lansing, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Surface Water Quality Division, Michigan 305(b) Report, v. 12, 307 p. .1993, Saginaw Bay national watershed initiative, Saginaw Bay water- shed wetland facts: Lansing, Michigan Department of Natural Re- sources Communication Fact Sheet. Miller, J.B., and Twenter, F.R., 1986, Michigan surface-water resources, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and surface-water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water- Supply Paper 2300, p. 277-284. Sweat, M.J., and Van Til, R.L., 1987, Michigan water supply and use, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1987 Hydrologic events and water supply and use: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Sup- ply Paper 2350, p. 305-312. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1955, Wetlands inventory of Michigan: Minneapolis, Minn., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 41 p. Warbuch, J.D., Wyckoff, M.A., and Williams, Kristine, 1990, Protecting inland lakes A watershed management guidebook: Lansing, Mich., Planning and Zoning Center, Inc., in cooperation with Clinton River Watershed Council and the Michigan Department of Natural Re- sources, 192 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 6520 Mercantile Way, Suite 5, Lansing, MI 48911; Regional Coor- dinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, BHW Building, 1 Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, MN55111 Prepared by Erin A. Lynch and Marcus C. Waldron, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 237 Minnesota Wetland Resources linnesota is famous for its many lakes; wetlands in the State, however, cover more than three times the area of lakes. About one- fifth of Minnesota is wetland. These wetlands provide numerous benefits to the people and wildlife of the State. Wetlands provide flood control by temporarily retaining stormwater runoff, and they reduce erosion of lakeshores and streambanks. Wetlands improve downstream water quality by capturing suspended particulates, dis- solved nutrients, and contaminants such as heavy metals and agri- cultural pesticides. Wetlands provide essential habitat for waterfowl, furbearers, and other wildlife (Carter and others, 1979). Minnesota's wetlands also are especially valuable for their vegetation. Many of the State's rarest plant species and most distinctive plant communi- ties are found only in wetlands (Coffin and Pfannmuller, 1988). Probably the rarest type of wetland in the State is a type of peatland called a calcareous fen (fig. 1). TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Minnesota is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this sum- mary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Minne- sota are described below. System Palustrine Lacustrine Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent-and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Most Minnesota wetlands are categorized as palustrine because they have vegetation that remains standing all year. Most of these wetlands have an organic soil and are thus peatlands. A simplified definition of organic soil is one with an upper layer of partly de- composed plant material (peat) at least 12 inches (Wright and oth- ers, 1992) to 16 inches (Cowardin and others, 1979) thick. Peatlands cover about 6 million acres in Minnesota (Minnesota Department Riverine, of Natural Resources, 1984), although estimates range from about 5.2 million acres (Anderson and Craig, 1984) to about 7.2 million acres (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1978) and de- pend on the definition chosen for organic soil and on data compila- tion methods. Palustrine wetlands on mineral soil cover about 3.5 million acres (Anderson and Craig, 1984). The total acreage.of palustrine wetlands in Minnesota, both peatlands and mineral-soil wetlands, is thus about 9.5 million acres. Peatlands can be categorized as either fens or bogs. Sometimes the word "bog" is informally applied to peatlands in general, but most peatlands in Minnesota are more properly called fens. Fens are peatlands that receive nutrients from ground water or runoff that has contacted mineral soil. Fens exist statewide but are more com- mon in the north, where conditions are more favorable for peat ac- cumulation. There are many different types of fens, corresponding to the wide range of possible hydrologic, climatic, and nutrient con- ditions. Open fens (persistent-emergent wetlands) in the conifer- hardwood forest zone (fig. 2B) commonly have sedge-dominated communities. Swamp-forest fens (forested or scrub-shrub wetlands) in this zone typically are covered by larch, black spruce, or north- ern white cedar, with an understory of low shrubs, sedges, and mosses (Glaser, 1992; Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1993). Fens in the prairie and deciduous forest-woodland zones typically have a scattered cover of shrubs such as willow and dog- wood and a continuous ground cover of various sedges, grasses, and forbs (scrub-shrub or persistent-emergent wetlands). A rare type of these fens is a calcareous fen (fig. 1), which receives upwelling ground water rich in calcium carbonate. Bogs are peatlands that receive nutrients only from precipita- tion and windblown dust. Consequently, bog water has low nutrient concentrations, and a continuous mat of sphagnum moss acidifies the water (Gorham and others, 1985). Bogs have a low diversity of species because few plants are adapted to these low-nutrient, acid conditions (Glaser and others, 1981; Glaser, 1992). Bogs in Min- nesota typically are peat mounds covered by black spruce with an understory of broad-leaved evergreen shrubs and sphagnum moss (forested wetlands). Some bogs have a stunted tree and shrub com- munity (scrub-scrub wetland) near the center. Nonforested patches of bog dominated by sedge (persistent-emergent wetlands) are less common but can occur where the peat is too wet for black spruce Figure 1. Sioux Nation Fen. This type of wetland, a patterned calcareous fen, is rare in Minnesota. (Photograph by James E. Almendinger, U.S. Geo- logical Survey.) 238 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES VEGETATION ZONES A. Conifer-hardwood forest zone B. Deciduous forest-woodland zone C. Prairie zone A. Flat terrain (glacial-lake plains and outwash plains) B. Rolling to hilly terrain (mostly glacial-till plains and end moraines) C. Dissected terrain (areas not covered by most recent glacial advance) WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat Area typified by a high density of small wetlands 25 50 MILES i i 0 25 50 KILOMETERS Figure 2. Wetland distribution and related biotic and physical features in Minnesota. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Vegetation zones. C, Physiography. (Sources: A, T.E. Dabl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1993. C, Adapted from Wright, 1972.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MINNESOTA 239 to grow, or where fire has removed the black spruce (Glaser, 1992; Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1993). Palustrine wetlands on mineral soil are present statewide. In the western and southern parts of Minnesota, these wetlands com- monly are called prairie potholes. These shallow depressions may have open water near the center surrounded by emergent marsh or wet meadow (persistent emergent wetland) in which broad-leaved sedges, grasses, and bulrushes predominate. In the eastern and northern parts of Minnesota, palustrine wetlands on mineral soil commonly are swamps (forested or scrub-shrub wetlands) in which either hardwood or conifer trees or shrubs predominate (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1993). Lacustrine and riverine wetlands commonly have beds of non- persistent-emergent, submersed, or floating aquatic plants. Most of the 3 million acres of Minnesota lakes are in the central and north- eastern parts of the State. Probably the best known lacustrine wet- lands are wild rice beds (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), which occupy about 150,000 to 200,000 acres of shallow lakes (John Persell, Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, written commun., 1993). UPGRADiENT DOWNGRADIENT PALUSTRINE WETLAND Area of ground-water discharge Area of ground-water recharge VERTICAL SCALE EXAGGERATED 500 FEET I PALUSTRINE WETLANDS VERTICAL SCALE EXAGGERATED EXPLANATION - Ground-water flow ^(f (// Bulrush -Watertable fltUM Grass *\}Jf Cattail flrtr Sedge lW/ Spike Rush Figure 3. Hydrologic interaction between wetlands and ground water. A, Conceptual ground-water discharge and recharge in a wetland. B, Conceptual ground-water flow under a calcareous fen in the Minnesota River Valley. HYDROLOGIC SETTING The hydrology of wetlands is determined by climate, vegeta- tion, physiography, and geology. Climate determines the net mois- ture supply, which is the difference between input of precipitation and loss by evaporation and plant transpiration. Physiography and geology influences not only the movement of water on and below the land surface but also the dissolved mineral content of the water. Differences in climate across Minnesota cause differences in vegetation and moisture supply. Average annual temperature, which influences evaporation and transpiration, ranges from about 36 °F (degrees Fahrenheit) in the north to about 46 °F in the south (Baker and Strub, 1965). Average annual precipitation ranges from about 20 inches in the west to about 30 inches in the east (Baker and oth- ers, 1967). These climatic gradients contribute to a diagonal zona- tion of major vegetation types and effective moisture, from the warm, dry prairie zone in the south and west to the cool, moist conifer-hardwood forest zone in the northeast (fig. 2B). Peatlands are more common in the conifer-hardwood forest zone than else- where in Minnesota, because the relatively cool and wet conditions help preserve the peat. Seasonal and year-to-year changes in climate cause changes in the moisture supply. Some prairie potholes receive different amounts of snowmelt runoff and ground-water inputs from year to year and consequently change from shallow emergent marshes to open-wa- ter ponds persisting for several years (Eisenlohr and others, 1972; LaBaugh and others, 1987). Drought hinders peat accumulation because drying allows rapid microbial decomposition of the peat and makes it susceptible to fire. Peatlands consequently tend to be more common in the northeastern part of the State, which usually escapes severe drought (Borchert and Yaeger, 1968). Physiography (fig. 2C ) influences surface-water drainage and, consequently, wetland type and distribution. The last glacial advance did not cover the extreme southeastern and southwestern corners of the State. Wetlands are less common in these older areas because the naturally dissected terrain has few basins remaining. Most ter- rains in the State, however, were formed during the last glacial ad- vance. Glacial-till plains and end moraines are gently rolling to hilly terrains that cover much of the State. The low infiltration capacity of the clayey soil of these terrains in west-central and southern Minnesota enhances overland runoff, which can collect in prairie potholes. The Alexandria Moraine area (fig. 2C) coincides with the statewide diagonal climate-vegetation zonation and forms the core of a region with a high density of wetlands intermixed with uplands (fig. 2A). Glacial-lake plains and outwash plains are relatively flat terrains where large peatlands can develop if the water table is high and the moisture supply is sufficiently large and constant. The lack of large peatlands on the western part of the Glacial Lake Agassiz area (fig. 2C) may be caused by the moisture supply being insuffi- cient or variable. Geology affects ground-water flow and chemistry. Ground- water discharge occurs where ground water seeps out of an aquifer into the wetland; ground-water recharge occurs where water from the wetland percolates into an aquifer (fig. 3A). Wetlands in the State commonly receive ground-water discharge, the amount and qual- ity of which can affect the vegetation. Some prairie potholes are sites of naturally focused ground-water recharge, where overland runoff from the surrounding upland basin collects in the pothole before percolating into the surficial aquifer (LaBaugh and others, 1987). The influence of hydrology, particularly ground-water hydrol- ogy, on wetlands is demonstrated by two examples. The first example is the Red Lake peatland in northwestern Minnesota. This peatland is a complex of fens and bogs with distinctive shapes and internal patterns related to slight differences in water chemistry and flow (Heinselman, 1963; Glaser and others, 1981; Glaser, 1992). Fens develop where upwelling ground water reaches the peatland surface and flows laterally through the upper layer of fibrous peat. A pat- 240 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES the western boundary of the Red Lake peatland is apparently con- trolled by the climatic moisture supply, the peatland might be di- minished by warmer and drier climates resulting from natural cli- mate cycles or, hypothetically, human-induced global warming. Such drier climates also could desiccate shallow prairie potholes, as in the past. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Minnesota. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Min- nesota wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibi- tions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Table 1. Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Minnesota, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization terned fen sometimes develops in which the vegetation structure forms alternating ridges and troughs oriented at right angles to the direction of this slow surface flow. The ridges and troughs may be 10 to 50 feet wide (Heinselman, 1963), with the ridges occupied by low shrubs and the troughs by sedges or pools. The vast fens of the Red Lake peatland provide the regional setting atop which bogs can develop. Bogs in the Red Lake peatland have formed on peat mounds raised above the influence of upwelling ground water (Siegel and Glaser, 1987; Glaser, 1992; Siegel. 1992). The flow of fen water around the bogs can cause them to have a streamlined shape, rounded on the upgradient margin and extended to a long tail on the downgradient margin. The second example of the influence of ground-water hydrol- ogy on wetlands is calcareous fens (fig. 3fi), which are rare in Min- nesota. Calcareous fens typically have significant amounts of up- welling ground water rich in calcium carbonate and surface slopes that drain excess water (Curtis. 1971; Eggers and Reed, 1987; Thompson and others, 1992). These wetlands can be found in the Minnesota River Valley on terraces at the base of the bluffs that form the valley wall. The high water table in the bluffs provides the nec- essary hydraulic pressure to force ground water to upwell at the fen. The fens generally lie above flood stages of the Minnesota River and slope toward the river, protecting against inundation from the river and providing drainage of excess water from the fen. As much as 25 feet of peat can accumulate over the zone of upwelling ground water. Calcareous fens are sensitive not only to activities such as ditching or filling but also to more subtle causes of degradation. For example, pumping nearby wells could lower the natural hydraulic pressures under the fen and reduce the amount of upwelling ground water, and changing the land use in the ground-water recharge area upgradient from the fen could change both the quantity and quality of the water available to the fen. Calcareous fens demonstrate that FEDERAL simply protecting the area of the wetland itself is not enough to Department of Agriculture ensure that the wetland will remain undamaged. Consolidated Farm Service Agency.......... Forest Service ................................................ Natural Resources Conservation Service TRENDS Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Most changes in Minnesota wetlands during the last 150 years Administration................................................ have been caused by human activities. Estimates of wetland acre- Department of Defense ages before settlement of the area by Europeans in the mid-1800's n Army CorPs of Engineers ............................. r . .,. , .... . , ,- Departmentof the Interior range from about 15 to 18 million acres; as much as one-half (by Fjsh and wildlife Service area) of Minnesota's original wetlands might have been lost since Geological Survey......................................... presettlement times (Anderson and Craig, 1984; Tiner, 1984; Dahl, National Biological Service ........................ 1990). Most of the wetland loss has been the result of drainage for National Park Service .................................. agriculture. By the early 1980's, more than 70 percent of Minnesota's Environmental Protection Agency................. originally poorly drained mineral soils in the prairie zone had been Board of Water and Soj| Resources . drained (Anderson and Craig, 1984). The loss of wetlands in the Departmentof Military Affairs ....................... largely agricultural basin of the Minnesota River may cause in- Departmentof Natural Resources creased flushing of water, nutrients, and soil from the uplands into Division of Fish and Wildlife........................ the river ecosystem. The northern peatlands also have been affected Division of Forestry ....................................... by human activities. During the early 1900's, several northern coun- JJJJIJ! °J waterT - ties went bankrupt as a result of funding the ditching of peatlands office of Planning Z!Z!Z!Z!Z!ZZ on the Glacial Lake Agassiz plain. Because of the flat landscape, Departmentof Transportation........................ the ditches were largely ineffective in draining the peatlands; how- Environmental Quality Board.......................... ever, ditching might have altered peatland vegetation hundreds of Pollution Control Agency................................. feet from the ditches (Glaser and others, 1981; Bradof, 1992). Small co'l!lNTY^NDMLOCAL0ta """"-"""" "" areas of peatland have been mined for horticultural purposes, logged Counties and cities for black spruce, or cultivated for specialty crops. The use of peat Soil and water conservation districts .......... as a fuel, however, has not been economical to date (Keirstead, Townships ........................................................... 1992). Watershed districts........................................... Wetlands are sensitive to climate change also. About 7,000 SOVEREIGN NATIONS , ... - . c , ' Native American tribes.................................... years ago the water table in parts of Minnesota was as much as 20 PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS feet lower than at present, and many prairie potholes were probably Ducks Unlimited................................................. dry (Digerfeldt and others. 1992). The climate then became increas- Izaak Walton League ........................................ ingly moist, and by 4,500 years ago peat began to form in the rem- National Audubon Society .............................. nant Glacial Lake Agassiz plain (Glaser and others, 1981). Because The Nature Conservancy.................................. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MINNESOTA 241 Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wet- lands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. Coastal States that adopt coastal-zone management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. Federal agencies research wetlands and manage those on pub- lic land under their jurisdiction. The U.S. Forest Service (FS) is re- sponsible for more than 2.8 million acres, with an unknown acre- age of wetlands, in the Chippewa and the Superior National For- ests and supports research in peatland ecology and hydrology. The NFS manages over 140,000 acres in Minnesota, with an unknown acreage of wetlands. The FWS manages about 500,000 acres, much of which is wetland, in 12 National Wildlife Refuges and numerous smaller waterfowl production areas in Minnesota. The Corps has wetland-management and restoration programs, especially in the Mississippi River lowlands. The EPA laboratory in Duluth is study- ing effects of sedimentation and agricultural chemicals on prairie potholes. The U.S. Geological Survey, with cooperative funding from State agencies, is studying the hydrology of small agricultural wetlands and calcareous fens. State and local wetland activities. The centerpiece of Minnesota's efforts to protect wetlands is the Wetland Conserva- tion Act of 1991, which works toward a no-net-loss goal. The intent of the law is to avoid or minimize wetland losses; where wetland loss is unavoidable, the loss must be mitigated by replacement with a wetland of equal public value. The law also provides funds for per- manent easements to some privately owned wetlands and for pub- lic education. The law promotes wetland preservation by allowing tax-exempt status for wetlands of high value. The law essentially fills the gap in wetland protection between larger, deepwater habi- tats, which are already protected by Minnesota statute, and agri- cultural wetlands that are already covered by the Federal "Swamp- buster" provisions. The Board of Water and Soil Resources is the State agency responsible for promulgating rules to determine wet- land value and to mitigate wetland losses, and local governmental units are responsible for carrying out the rules (table 1). Also in- cluded in the legislation are provisions to prohibit degradation of calcareous fens and to protect about 150,000 acres of ecologically significant peatlands. The Department of Natural Resources has a variety of respon- sibilities concerning wetlands and administers about 5.3 million acres of State land, almost one-half of which may be wetlands, in addition to about 3 million acres of lakes. The Department's Divi- sion of Waters oversees permit applications for nearly all activities below the ordinary high-water level in the "protected waters and wetlands" of the State, which include virtually all water bodies that have open water or nonwoody vegetation, are deeper than about 6 inches, and are larger than 10 acres (2.5 acres in incorporated areas). The Department's Division of Fish and Wildlife acquires lands and currently (1993) manages over 700,000 acres, a significant portion of which are wetlands (Tom Landwehr, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, oral commun., 1993). Within the Division of Fish and Wildlife, the Natural Heritage program identifies and clas- sifies natural biologic communities, including wetlands; the Scien- tific and Natural Areas program acquires sites of ecological signifi- cance to the State, notably rare wetland types such as patterned fen and calcareous fen; and the Ecological Services section performs environmental reviews and will help develop a Statewide Compre- hensive Wetland Conservation Plan. The Department of Natural Resources' Division of Forestry helps manage most State-owned land and also is chairing a public and private interagency commit- tee to develop nonregulatory best-management practices to protect wetlands from forestry activities. The Department's Division of Minerals is responsible for applying the rules of the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act on lands from which metallic minerals or peats are mined. The Division of Minerals also sponsored a survey of peat deposits in the State, including their type, distribution, and thick- ness (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1981). The Department of Natural Resources' Office of Planning is responsible for the State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan document required by Federal legislation and coordinates the environmental review process within the Department of Natural Resources. Other State agencies also are involved with wetland protection or management. The Environmental Quality Board determines which activities affecting wetlands are subject to the environmen- tal review process. The Water Quality Division of the Pollution Control Agency reviews permit applications for all discharges to wetlands and other waters of the State, pursuant primarily to sec- tions 401 and 402 of the Federal Clean Water Act. The Pollution Control Agency also produces a biennial report monitoring state- wide water quality, pursuant to section 305(b) of the act. The De- partment of Transportation is responsible for applying the Wetland Conservation Act rules to all State transportation projects that af- fect wetlands; this responsibility involves wetland impact assess- ment as well as wetland restoration and creation. The Department of Military Affairs manages the 53,000-acre Camp Ripley military reservation and has an active program of wetland management in cooperation with other State agencies. Sovereign nation wetland activities. Tribal councils of Na- tive American people in Minnesota strive to create, restore, or en- hance wetlands for waterfowl and wild rice production, particularly on reservations or on traditionally harvested lands. The U.S. Bu- 242 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES reau of Indian Affairs helps provide funding for wetland projects through the Circle of Flight and Water Resources program. Private wetland activities. The National Audubon Society manages three wildlife sanctuaries that contain wetlands, conducts a public education program about wetlands, and is performing re- search for the EPA by investigating the effectiveness of past wetland- mitigation efforts. The Nature Conservancy actively seeks to pur- chase and protect ecologically significant wetlands. Ducks Unlim- ited provides funds for wetland restoration and for State or Federal agencies to purchase and manage wetlands for waterfowl produc- tion. The Izaak Walton League also provides funds for wetland res- toration or creation. Private organizations that are involved in the protection of Minnesota wetlands include the Fish and Wildlife Legislative Alliance, Minnesota Conservation Federation, Minne- sota Native Plant Society, Minnesota Waterfowl Association, Pheas- ants Forever, Project Environment Foundation, Sierra Club, Trout Unlimited, and others. References Cited Anderson, J.P., and Craig, W.J., 1984, Growing energy crops on Minnesota's wetlands The land use perspective: Minneapolis, University of Min- nesota Center for Urban and Regional Affairs, 95 p. Baker, D.G., Haines, D.A., and Strub, J.H., Jr., 1967, Climate of Minne- sota, part V Precipitation facts, normals, and extremes: University of Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 254, 43 p. Baker, D.G., and Strub, J.H., Jr., 1965, Climate of Minnesota, part III Temperature and its application: St. Paul, University of Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 248, 63 p. Borchert, J.R., and Yaeger, D.P., 1968, Atlas of Minnesota resources and settlement: St. Paul, Minnesota State Planning Agency, 262 p. Bradof, K.L., 1992, Ditching of Red Lake peatland during the homestead era, in Wright, H.E., Jr., Coffin, B.A., and Aaseng, N.E., eds., The patterned peatlands of Minnesota: Minneapolis, University of Min- nesota Press, p. 263-284. Carter, Virginia, Bedinger, M.S., Novitzki, R.P., and Wilen, W.O., 1979, Water resources and wetlands, in Greeson, P.E., Clark, J.R., and Clark, J.E., eds., Wetland functions and values The state of our understand- ing Proceedings of the National Symposium on Wetlands, Novem- ber 1978: Minneapolis, American Water Resources Association, p. 344-376. Coffin, Barbara, and Pfannmuller, Lee, eds., 1988, Minnesota's endangered flora and fauna: Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 473 p. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, EC., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Curtis, J.T., 1971, The vegetation of Wisconsin: Madison, The University of Wisconsin Press, 657 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Digerfeldt, Gunnar, Almendinger, J.E., and Bjorck, Svante, 1992, Recon- struction of past lake levels and their relation to groundwater hydrol- ogy in the Parkers Prairie sandplain, west-central Minnesota: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 94, p. 99-118. Eggers, S.D., and Reed, D.M., 1987, Wetland plants and plant communi- ties of Minnesota and Wisconsin: St. Paul, U.S. Army Corps of Engi- neers, 201 p. Eisenlohr, W.S., Jr., and others, 1972, Hydrologic investigations of prairie potholes in North Dakota, 1959-68: U.S. Geological Survey Profes- sional Paper 585-A, 102 p., 3 pis. Glaser, P.H., 1992, Vegetation and water chemistry, in Wright, H.E., Jr., Coffin, B.A., and Aaseng, N.E., eds., The patterned peatlands of Minnesota: Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, p. 15-26. Glaser, P.H.. Wheeler. G.A., Gorham, Eville, and Wright, H.E., Jr., 1981, The patterned mires of the Red Lake peatland, northern Minnesota Vegetation, water chemistry and landforms: Journal of Ecology, v. 69, p. 575-599. Gorham, Eville, Eisenreich, S.J., Ford, Jesse, Santelmann, M.V., 1985, The chemistry of bog waters, in Stumm, Werner, ed., Chemical processes in lakes: New York, John Wiley and Sons, p. 339-363. Heinselman, M.L., 1963, Forest sites, bog processes, and peatland types in the Glacial Lake Agassiz region, Minnesota: Ecological Monographs, v. 33, no. 4, p. 327-374. Keirstead, M.E., 1992, Management of Minnesota's peatlands and their economic uses, in Wright, H.E., Jr., Coffin, B.A., and Aaseng, N.E., eds., The patterned peatlands of Minnesota: Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, p. 285-299. LaBaugh, J.W., Winter, T.C., Adomaitis, V.A., and Swanson, G.A., 1987, Hydrology and chemistry of selected prairie wetlands in the Cotton- wood Lake area, Stutsman County, North Dakota, 1979-1982: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1431, 26 p. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1978, Peatlands Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan: St. Paul, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources map, approximate scale 1:1,750,000. ____1981, Minnesota peat program final report: St. Paul, Minnesota De- partment of Natural Resources Division of Minerals, 93 p. ____1984, Recommendations for the protection of ecologically signifi- cant peatlands in Minnesota: St. Paul, Minnesota Department of Natu- ral Resources, 57 p., 16 maps. ____1993, Minnesota's native vegetation A key to natural communi- ties, version 1.5: St. Paul, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program, 110 p. Siegel, D.I., 1992, Groundwater hydrology, in Wright, H.E., Jr., Coffin, B.A., and Aaseng, N.E., eds., The patterned peatlands of Minnesota: Min- neapolis, University of Minnesota Press, p. 163-172. Siegel, D.I., and Glaser, PH., 1987, Groundwater flow in a bog-fen com- plex. Lost River peatland. northern Minnesota: Journal of Ecology, v. 75, p. 743-754. Thompson, C.A., Bettis, E.A., III, and Baker, R.G., 1992, Geology of Iowa fens: Journal of the Iowa Academy of Science, v. 99, no. 2-3, p. 53- 59. Tiner, R.W., Jr., 1984, Wetlands of the United States Current status and recent trends: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 59 p. Wright, H.E., Jr., 1972, Physiography of Minnesota, in Sims, P.K., and Morey. G.B., eds., Geology of Minnesota, a centennial volume: Min- neapolis, Minnesota Geological Survey, p. 561-578. Wright, H.E., Jr., Coffin, B.A., and Aaseng, N.E., eds., 1992, The patterned peatlands of Minnesota: Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 327 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief. U.S. Geological Survey, 2280 Woodale Drive, Mounds View, MN 55112; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, BHW Building, 1 Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, MN 55425 Prepared by James E. Almendinger, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 243 Mississippi Wetland Resources We'etlands occupy more than 13 percent of the surface area in Mississippi (Dahl, 1990) and have greatly influenced the develop- ment of the State. The first European settlers found large tracts of bottom-land forests (forested wetlands) in the swamps bordering the Mississippi River and other river systems (fig. 1) and in the marshes (emergent wetlands) and swamps (forested and scrub-shrub wet- lands) along the Gulf of Mexico. The forested wetlands in the allu- vial plain of the Mississippi River provided timber resources of bald cypress, water oak, and tupelo gum that have been cleared and har- vested continuously for the last 200 years. The cleared land opened up rich, fertile delta soils to agriculture (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). Mississippi wetlands provide important habitat for several endangered and threatened species, including the bald eagle (Curtis James, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, written commun., 1993). Also, 5 National Wildlife Refuges, 6 National Forests, 1 National Seashore, 22 State Wildlife Management Areas, and 20 State parks contain wetland areas within their boundaries. Wetlands in Missis- sippi are a key part of the Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture program for the restoration of Mississippi Flyway waterfowl popu- lations (Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture Management Board, 1990). Wetlands trap suspended sediment, nutrients, and certain classes of pesticides and other organic contaminants (Boto and Patrick, 1979; Deason, 1989; German, 1989). Dissolved nutrients, sediments, and sediment-associated compounds such as trace met- als, pesticides and other organic compounds, and bacteria are trapped or transformed during their passage through wetlands in receiving and outgoing waters (Kadlec and Kadlec, 1979). Inland wetlands provide flood storage, erosion control, outdoor recreation, water-quality improvement for surface water, recharge areas for ground water, and habitat for fish and wildlife. Coastal wetlands provide buffer areas to absorb storm surges and floods, outdoor recreation opportunities, water-quality improvement, and important habitat for nursery and feeding areas for fish and wildlife. Coastal wetlands in Mississippi are important in supporting a $50 million commercial and recreational fishery (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser- vice, 1992). Figure 1. Flood-plain forest and wetlands on the lower Wolf River. (Photograph by Dennis K. Demcheck, U.S. Geological Survey.) TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Mississippi is shown in figure 2A: only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Missis- sippi are described below. System Palustrine, Lacustrine Riverine, Estuarine. Marine Wetland description Montidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants {aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. .Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. In the mid-1980's, wetlands covered about 4,067,000 acres of Mississippi's 30,309,120 total land acres (Dahl, 1990). Palustrine wetlands in Mississippi include bogs, swamps, riverbank pioneer habitat, bottom-land forests, bayheads, coastal flatwoods, and savannahs (Ruple, 1992). Bottom-land forests (forested wetlands), swamps (forested or scrub-shrub wetlands), and fresh marshes (emergent wetlands) account for most of Mississippi's wetland acre- age (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). The Mississippi Allu- vial Plain (fig. 2B ) has the greatest concentration of those wetlands, but significant expanses of wetlands occupy the flood plains of major rivers and their tributaries throughout the State. Estuarine wetlands are the second-most common wetlands in Mississippi. Of about 77,500 acres of coastal marsh, 99 percent is 244 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES estuarine, and 1 percent is fresh. There also are about 343,000 acres of mud flats and 9,000 acres of cypress-tupelo gum swamp (estua- rine forested wetlands) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). HYDROLOGIC SETTING The combination of hydrology, fire frequency, substrate and soil characteristics, and climate produces the characteristics that are unique to Mississippi's wetlands (Ruple, 1992). The existence of wetlands depends on geologic and physiographic conditions that favor the retention of water and on the hydrologic processes that allow the water to persist at a given site (Winter and Woo, 1990). Wetland hydrology involves complex water-flow patterns that are affected by regional and local geology, topography, soil charac- teristics, and climate. Wetlands commonly form in topographic lows where ground-water discharge and runoff collect. Water in small wetlands typically is supplied by local shallow ground-water flow 89° systems. Larger wetlands may interact with both local and regional ground-water flow systems. Fire frequency, the time interval between fires on a wetland, is important in determining the successional state of a wetland (Ruple, 1992). In large part, fire frequency determines the kinds of vegetation present in a wetland and, therefore, the character of the wetland itself. For example, if a marsh or wet slough goes for de- cades without a fire, then the wetland typically develops into a scrub- shrub or hardwood forest. This succession happens because the lack of fire allows woody plants to replace herbaceous plants as the domi- nant vegetation present, changing the appearance of the wetland and the kinds of organisms using it (Ruple, 1992). Soil composition determines the rate at which water percolates downward from a wetland to recharge the ground-water system or discharges from the ground-water system into a wetland. Fluctua- tions in local precipitation can combine with local variations in geology to create transient or seasonal changes in the interactions ECOREGIONS A. Southeastern Plains B. Southwestern Appalachians C. Interior Plateau D. Mississippi Alluvial Plain E. Mississippi Valley Loess Plain F. Southern Coastal Plain WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat Figure 2. Wetland distribution and ecoregions in Mississippi. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Ecoregions. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahi, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Omernik, 1987.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MISSISSIPPI 245 of ground water and surface water. However, in Mississippi, pre- cipitation is abundant, averaging 50 to 68 inches per year across the State (Lamonds and Boswell, 1986). These high annual rainfall averages minimize the transient or seasonal changes in the interac- tions of the ground and surface waters. Most palustrine wetlands in Mississippi are closely associated with the State's major flood plains and are directly and indirectly affected by the Mississippi River. The flood plain of the Mississippi River is an area of relatively flat slope that has been subjected to frequent flooding. Flooding has resulted in the evolution of large areas of backwater swamps vegetated by water-tolerant trees such as cypress, tupelo gum, water oak, and red maple. The existence Mississippi River Alluvial Plain ^ Original forested wetlands (historical reconstruction) 1883 and continued survival of these palustrine forested and palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands depends on whether these areas are able to undergo continued flooding and dewatering cycles. Disruption of the cycle can change the composition of the forest or shrub com- munity or cause the disappearance of woody vegetation altogether, depending on the nature of the disruption. For example, when a forested or scrub-shrub wetland is leveed and drained, resulting in limited access for floodwaters, water-tolerant trees or shrubs are ultimately replaced by upland vegetation. Conversely, when a wet- land is permanently flooded, such as by reservoir construction, re- cruitment of new trees or shrubs ceases, and the aging forest or scrub-shrub community eventually disappears. The lower Yazoo River Basin contains one of the largest nearly contiguous forested wetlands remaining in Mississippi, comprising about 140,000 acres of bottom-land forest. The core of these for- ested wetlands includes the 60,000-acre Delta National Forest and the 27,000-acre Panther Swamp National Wildlife Refuge. The Yazoo River Basin supports threatened and endangered species such as the bald eagle, wood stork, Louisiana black bear, and pondberry. It also serves as a haven for migratory waterfowl and neotropical birds (Creasman and others, 1992). Wetlands, such as those asso- ciated with the Yazoo River Basin, directly affect the quality of the water that passes through them. The Yazoo River Basin wetlands have acted as traps for nutrients, suspended sediments, and pesti- cides in agricultural runoff within this intensively farmed region of the State, thus helping to maintain the water quality of streams and rivers. However, the result has been accelerated sediment deposi- tion within the open-water areas and swamps, subsequent conver- sion of swamps to bottom-land forests, and uptake of pesticides by the wildlife that live in the basin (Mississippi Department of Envi- ronmental Quality, 1992). Current forested wetlands 1991 Figures. Reduction of forested wetlands in the Mississippi River Alluvial Plain, 1883-1991. (Creasman and others, 1992). 246 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES TRENDS Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Mississippi, 1993 The Mississippi Alluvial Plain extends more than 700 miles [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided from southern Illinois to the Gulf of Mexico. Historically, this area by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in supported more than 21 million acres of forested wetlands in seven wetland-related activity;.... agency or organization does not participate in cv * tc TV /-< c ^ r -1^1 i wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- States (fig. 3). Conversion of the forest to agricultural use has re- toration and creation; LAN land acqujsitjon; R&D, research and data col- duced what was a vast wetland system to a scattered patchwork lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] totaling about 4.9 million acres (Creasman and others, 1992). _______________________________________ Mississippi began losing wetlands shortly after the arrival of ^ < > ^ ^ S> \ European settlers. In 1850, the U.S. Congress, with the objective Agency or organization_____________^ ^ ^ ^ of controlling floods in the Mississippi Valley, passed the second FEDERAL of the Swamp Land Acts, which granted to Mississippi 3,347,860 Department of Agriculture acres of swamp and overflow lands considered unfit for cultivation Consolidated Farm Service Agency........................... ... (Shaw and Fredine, 1971). The Flood Control Act of 1928 was Forest Service ................................................................. . . passed by Congress as a result of the disastrous 1927 floods. The Natural Resources Conservation Service ................ ..... . ., b . . , , r , i .* - Department of Commerce act provides comprehensive flood control for the lower Mississippi National Oceanic and Valley downstream from Cairo, 111. The act authorizes the U.S. Army Atmospheric Administration ........................................ ... Corps of Engineers (Corps) to construct and maintain levees, flood- Department of Defense ways, channel modifications, and various control structures. The Armv CorPs of Engineers .............................................. . passage of these and other flood-control acts resulted in the con- Decpakrtm!1n1t'?!*? '?eri.or . r ., j f r , , . , , . , Fish and Wildlife Service ............. version of thousands of acres of wetlands to agriculture (Shaw and Geological Survey Fredine, 1971). National Biological Service ........ In 1937 there were about 1,750,000 acres of palustrine forested National Park Service .................. and palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands in Mississippi. By 1987 the Environmental Protection Agency. area had decreased to about 600,000 acres (U.S. Fish and Wildlife STATE Service, 1992) a 66-percent reduction in those kinds of wetlands. Wetland loss in Mississippi from the 1780's to the 1980's was about Natural Heritage Program 59 percent (Dahl, 1990). In 1992 the FWS reported that almost all COUNTY AND LOCAL of the cleared land in the major wetland areas was being farmed, Diamondhead ....................... although substantial areas were considered marginal for crop pro- Jordan Rivers Shores......... duction because of the flood risks. Some of these marginal farm- lands are reverting back to scrub-shrub wetlands as they remain rjucks unlimited fallow. Further, the rate of loss of bottom-land forests in Mississippi Eco-MS................................................................................. has recently decreased because of a decline in the agricultural Gulf Coast Conservation Association............................ economy and an increase in the recreational value of these forested Gulf lslands Conservancy, Inc......................................... wetlands. Threats to the remaining inland wetlands in Mississippi Mississippi Coast Audubon Society............................... . ,,,- j r-i j i , Mississippi Wildlife Federation ....................................... include drainage and flood-protection projects, dredging and stream Save tne pascagou| a |nc........... channelization, alteration of drainage patterns, construction of dikes Sierra Club, Mississippi Chapter..................................... and levees, discharge of pollutants, erosion (U.S. Fish and Wildlife The Nature Conservancy, Mississippi Field Office..... _______ Service, 1992), and grazing. The introduction of nonnative plant or animal species, such as nutria (an aggressive herbivore), and the disturbance of resident fauna, such as removal of beaver populations. Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and also are threats to Mississippi's remaining inland wetlands (Ruple, Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1992). 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Coastal wetland loss in Mississippi since 1930 exceeds 8,500 Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the Corps au- acres and has been primarily caused by industrial and urban devel- thority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated opment (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). Losses have de- activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and plac- creased since passage of the Coastal Wetlands Protection Act in ing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is 1973. Continued threats to coastal wetlands in Mississippi include the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under erosion from sea-level rise, subsidence, barrier-island migration, section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the dis- dredging and filling, discharge of pollutants, sedimentation, charge of dredged or fill materiaj into wetlands. Permits are subject bulkheading, and alteration of water-exchange patterns between to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection marshes and open water by installation of dikes and weirs (U.S. Fish Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section and Wildlife Service, 1992). 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 CONSFRVATION permit applications on the basis of a proposed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Many government agencies and private organizations partici- Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- pate in wetland conservation in Mississippi. The most active agen- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- des and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 1. Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Mis- financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of sissippi wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohi- wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- bitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some allies in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MISSISSIPPI 247 Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Conser- vation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wetlands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetlands Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. Coastal and Great Lakes States that adopt coastal-zone management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are eli- gible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. Several Federal agencies have wetland-management responsi- bilities. The NFS administers the Mississippi Gulf Islands National Seashore, a series of barrier islands in the Gulf of Mexico off Mississippi's coast that are fringed by estuarine and marine wet- lands. The U.S. Geological Survey collects information on the quan- tity and quality of the Nation's water resources, including wetlands. NOAA'S National Marine Fisheries Service and the Gulf of Mexico Fisheries Management Council prepare and approve plans and implement mechanisms concerning the management of fisheries in Mississippi estuarine and offshore waters including modifications to wetlands that could adversely affect juvenile fish stocks. NOAA'S National Ocean Service, in cooperation with the National Marine Fisheries Service, has compiled an inventory of coastal wetlands. The U.S. Forest Service has an ongoing interest in the reforesta- tion of bottom-land forests in the lower Mississippi River Valley. The EPA directs the Gulf of Mexico Program, which provides a fo- rum for resolving complex environmental problems of the gulf from a regional perspective. The program promotes wetland management and restoration and use of wetlands in the treatment of wastewater by States that border the Gulf of Mexico. State wetland activities. The Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks, which is governed by the Mississippi Commission on Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks, is the primary State management agency for tidally influenced wetlands. As mandated by the Mississippi Coastal Wetlands Protection Law of 1973, the Department's Bureau of Marine Resources reviews and comments on all aspects of wetland protection. The Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality is the primary State management agency for freshwater wetlands. The Department monitors and enforces many water-quality standards and regulations that directly affect wetlands. The Department's Office of Pollution Control requires section 401 water-quality cer- tification of applicants seeking dredge and fill (section 404) per- mits from the Corps. During project review, the Office of Pollution Control attempts to prevent wetland losses by requesting that alter- natives be considered. For unavoidable losses, the agency requests mitigation. The Natural Heritage Program, authorized by the Mississippi Natural Heritage Act of 1978, identifies and inventories priority wetlands. The program requires that areas and species of biologi- cal significance or special concern to the State, including rare or threatened plants, be listed on the Mississippi Natural Registry. County and local wetland activities. Counties and cities re- view permit applications for projects that affect their inland and coastal wetlands. Typically, few comments are received from these agencies; however, some subdivisions have restrictions limiting development in adjacent coastal waters (Ruple, 1992). Private and cooperative wetland activities. Many citizen's groups and private organizations support efforts to protect Missis- sippi wetlands. Eco-MS is a coalition of about 35 environmental groups that support wetland protection efforts. The Gulf Islands Conservancy, Inc., the Gulf Coast Conservation Association, and the Mississippi Coast Audubon Society are dedicated to wetland protection in the Mississippi coastal area. The Mississippi Wildlife Federation and the Mississippi Chapter of the Sierra Club also ac- tively support measures to protect wetlands statewide. The Nature Conservancy acquires and manages wetlands in Mississippi. More than 105,000 acres of wetlands along the Pascagoula River have been acquired by the State with the assistance of private organizations such as The Nature Conservancy and Save the Pascagoula, Inc. The Nature Conservancy, in conjunction with the FWS, is acquiring land to expand the Grand Bay National Wildlife Refuge. The Nature Conservancy also participates in the Mississippi Coastal Preserve Program. In May 1986 an international commitment to conserving North America's waterfowl resources was pledged by signing of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. Canada, the United States, and Mexico are the participants. The plan is a direct response to a continuing decline in waterfowl populations and the habitat upon which waterfowl and other wetland wildlife depend (Lower Missis- sippi Valley Joint Venture Management Board, 1990). Imple- menting the plan depends on the development of joint ventures and partnerships among Federal and State agencies and private organi- zations. The Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture is a coopera- tive effort by the FWS, The Nature Conservancy, Ducks Unlimited, and others to ensure the long-term success of waterfowl and wet- land conservation in a seven-State area, including Mississippi. References Cited Boto, K.G., and Patrick, W.H., Jr., 1979, Role of wetlands in the removal of suspended sediments, in Greeson, P.E., Clark, J.R., and Clark, J.E., eds., Proceedings of the National Symposium on Wetlands, Novem- ber 1978: Minneapolis, Minn., American Water Resources Associa- tion, p. 479-489. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31. 131 p. Creasman, Lisa, Craig, Nancy Jo, and Swan, Mark, 1992, The forested wetlands of the Mississippi River An ecosystem in crisis: Baton Rouge, La., The Nature Conservancy of Louisiana, 23 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Deason, J.P., 1989, Impacts of irrigation drainwater on wetlands, in Fisk, D.W., ed., Wetlands Concerns and successes: Bethesda, Md., American Water Resources Association, p. 127-138. German, E.R., 1989, Removal of nitrogen and phosphorus in an undevel- oped wetland area, central Florida, in Fisk, D.W., ed., Wetlands Concerns and successes: Bethesda, Md., American Water Resources Association, p. 139-147. Kadlec, R.H., and Kadlec, J.A., 1979, Wetlands and water quality, in Greeson, P.E., Clark, J.R., and Clark, J.E., eds., Proceedings of the National Symposium on Wetlands, November 1978: Minneapolis, Minn., American Water Resources Association, p. 436-456. Lamonds, A.G., and Boswell, E.H., 1986, Mississippi surface-water re- sources, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and surface-water resources: U.S. Geological Sur- vey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 295-300. Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture Management Board, 1990, Conserv- ing waterfowl and wetlands The Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Ven- ture: Vicksburg, Miss., North American Waterfowl Management Plan, 32 p. 248 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, 1992, Mississippi 1992 water quality assessment, Federal Clean Water Act Section 305(b) report: Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, Office of Pollution Control, p. 93-104. Omernik, J.M., 1987. Ecorcgions of the conterminous United States Map supplement: Annals of the Association of American Geographers, v. 77, no. 1, scale 1:7,500,000. Ruplc, David, ed., 1992, A citizen's guide for protecting wetlands in Mis- sissippi: Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks, 66 p. Shaw, S.P., and Frcdine, C.G., 1971, Wetlands of the United States, their extent and their value to waterfowl and other wildlife: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circular 39, 67 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992, Regional wetlands concept plan Emergency wetlands resources act, Southeast Region: Atlanta, Ga., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 249 p. Winter, T.C., and Woo, Ming-Ko, 1990, Hydrology of lakes and wetlands, in Wolman, M.G., and Riggs, H.C., cds.. Surface water hydrology: Boulder, Colo., Geological Society of America, The Geology of North America, v. O-l, chap. 8, p. 159-187. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, )00 W. Capitol Street, Suite 120, Jackson, MS 39269; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Build- ing, Suite 200, Atlanta, GA 30345 Prepared by Charles R. Demas and Dennis K. Demcheck, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 249 Missouri Wetland Resources lissouri wetlands occupy 643,000 acres, about 1.4 percent of the State's area (Dahl, 1990). Before the arrival of European set- tlers, wetlands occupied about 4.84 million acres, about 10.8 per- cent of what is now Missouri, and were a significant component of the landscape (Epperson, 1992). Before European settlement, wetlands primarily were associ- ated with the major rivers and streams, especially in the State's "bootheel" (southeastern area), which borders the Mississippi River. This area once contained about 50 percent of the State's wetlands and was nicknamed "swampeast" Missouri. Although they were con- sidered impediments to progress, wetlands provided large economic benefits to the railroad companies that purchased and harvested the vast bottom-land forests of cypress, tupelo gum, and oak for tim- ber (Epperson, 1992). After the commercial timber had been re- moved, these cleared wetlands were drained and converted to agri- cultural use, and they remain in that land-use category today. Wetlands maintain water quality, mitigate flood effects, pro- vide critical habitat for many rare and endangered plants and ani- mals, and are a source of recreational activities such as birding, fish- ing, hunting, and ecotourism in unique areas such as Slaughter Sink and Grasshopper Hollow (fig. 1). Wetlands in Missouri provide critical habitat for 15 animal and 4 plant species that are endangered or threatened (Rick Hansen, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, writ- ten commun., 1993). Also within Missouri, a large number of wet- land species are of special concern. Some of the endangered or threatened plants and animals associated with wetlands in Missouri include the eastern prairie fringed orchid, gray bat, Indiana bat, Ozark big bat, bald eagle, least tern, Neosho madtom, Ozark cavefish, and the Higgins eye pearly mussel. Missouri's location on the Mississippi Fly way makes the State a favored wintering area for waterfowl and raptors. As many as 200,000 ducks, mainly mallard, but also pintail, green-winged teal, widgeon, gadwall, and shoveler, reside in the 21,600-acre Mingo National Wildlife Refuge in southeastern Missouri. As many as 200,000 geese and 300,000 ducks winter in the 6,890-acre Squaw Creek National Wildlife Refuge in northwestern Missouri. This refuge supports one of the largest wintering concentrations of bald eagles in the United States and harbors as many as 200 bird species at any given time. About 100 bald eagles winter in the 10,670-acre Swan Lake National Wildlife Refuge in north-central Missouri (Riley, 1979). Missouri has five National Wildlife Refuges, one National Scenic Riverway, one National Forest system, seven State wetland areas under the jurisdiction of the Missouri Department of Conservation in cooperation with the North American Waterfowl Plan, and four State parks that feature and preserve wetlands within their boundaries (Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture Manage- ment Board, 1990; Epperson, 1992). TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deepwater habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and others, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Missouri is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Missouri are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine. Figure 1. Grasshopper Hollow, a fen in the Ozark Highlands of Missouri. (Photograph by Jane Epperson, Missouri Department of Natural Resources.) Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds}. Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. , Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. , Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Palustrine forested wetlands (swamps and other forested wet- lands), palustrine emergent wetlands (marshes and fens), and palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands (shrub swamps) constitute most of the wetland acreage in Missouri (Epperson, 1992). Most of the State's wetlands are associated with rivers and streams (fig. 2/4). The bootheel region is especially rich in wetlands. Fens are small (0.5 -10 acres), palustrine forested or emergent wetlands unique to areas where ground water, underground streams, and karst topography (resulting from limestone and dolomite rock dissolution) characterize the local hydrology and geology. In con- trast to most other wetlands in Missouri, fens are created by ground water, not surface water (Epperson, 1992). These wetlands are lo- cated primarly along stream terraces and at the base of slopes in the Ozark Highlands (fig. 2B). Vegetation in fens primarily consists of grasses, sedges, and reeds; however, some are forested. Fens provide habitat for several unique plant and animal species, includ- 250 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES ing a disproportionate number of Missouri's rare and endangered plants and invertebrates (Mohlenbrock, 1993). Notable examples of fens include Grasshopper Hollow (fig. 1) and Slaughter Sink. HYDROLOGIC SETTING The existence of wetlands depends on specific topographic and geologic conditions that favor flooding or saturated soils and on the hydrologic processes that allow the water to persist (Winter and Woo, 1990). Wetland hydrology involves complex water-flow patterns that are affected by regional and local geology, topography, soil charac- teristics, and climate. Wetlands in Missouri are a result of diverse surface- and ground-water conditions. Surface water collects in topographic lows, and ground water typically discharges there. Soil characteristics determine the rate at which water percolates downward to recharge the ground-water system or discharges from it. Fluctuations in lo- ECOREGIONS A. Ozark Highlands B. Central Irregular Plains C. Western Corn Belt Plains D. Interior River Lowland E. Mississippi Alluvial Plain WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands arid deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland 1 Predominantly deepwater habitat 25 50 MILES 25 50 KILOMETERS Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Missouri and ecoregions of the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Ecoregions. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Omernik, 1987.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MISSOURI 251 cal precipitation can combine with local geologic differences to create transient or seasonal changes in the interactions of ground water and surface water. Average annual precipitation ranges from 36 to 48 inches per year across Missouri (Waite and Skelton, 1986). The extent of wetland areas located in parts of the State with lower annual precipitation rates, especially those associated with shallow ground-water systems and surface-water runoff, such as fens, de- pends on the timing and amounts of rainfall. Other wetland areas, such as those along major rivers, are less dependent on local rain- fall patterns for their continued existence. The largest wetlands in Missouri are closely associated with and are directly and indirectly affected by the Mississippi and Mis- souri Rivers and their tributaries. The flood plains created by the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers have resulted in an area of rela- tively flat slope that has been flooded frequently. The wetlands of the Missouri bootheel were formed as a result of the New Madrid earthquake (actually a series of earthquakes), which occurred in 1811. Lasting for several months, this catastrophe changed the course of the Mississippi River and greatly changed the topogra- phy of the Mississippi Alluvial Plain (McCaig and Boyce, 1988). All of the land from Cape Girardeau south to Arkansas sank from 10 to 50 feet, converting rich bootheel forests into swamp (Johnson and DeLano, 1990). The subsequent flooding in the subsided for- ested areas following the earthquakes resulted in the formation of large tracts of backwater swamps characterized by water-tolerant trees such as cypress, tupelo gum, water oak, and swamp red maple. Backwater flooding in the major tributaries of the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers has resulted in the formation of similar wet- lands along their flood plains. The existence and continued survival of these forested, scrub-shrub, and emergent wetlands depends on whether these areas are able to undergo continued flooding and dewatering cycles. Disruption of this continual flooding/dewater- ing cycle results in (I) replacement of the existing trees by less water- tolerant trees and shrubs when periodic flooding is prevented (such as occurs when levees are built along a river and the flood plain is drained) or (2) lack of recruitment of new trees in areas that be- come permanently flooded (such as occurs when a river is dammed). Water in fens is supplied by local shallow ground-water flow systems. These wetlands typically are associated with springs or seeps that discharge at the surface. In Missouri, fens occur in the Ozark Highlands ecoregion. The Ozark Highlands ecoregion is underlain by limestone and dolomite overlain by less easily cred- ible rock such as sandstone. If sinkholes (formed by the collapse of limestone and dolomite caves) become plugged, fens develop as the result of retention of ground-water discharge or stormwater runoff. Fens are sustained by water that has passed through highly miner- alized soils (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993). TRENDS Wetland losses and the land-use changes that have altered wetland functions and biota began at the time of settlement by Eu- ropeans. As of the 1980's, Missouri had only 643,000 acres of wet- lands of an estimated 4,844,000 acres of wetlands existing in the 1780's (Dahl, 1990), an 87-percent loss. Large-scale wetland losses began after 1850, when the U.S. Congress passed the Swamp Land Act. The act granted to Missouri 3,432,481 acres of Federal forest- ed wetlands and overflow lands considered unfit for cultivation. The object of the act was to promote flood control in the Mississippi River Valley (Shaw and Fredine, 1971). The remaining 1,410,000 90- EXPLANATION M Wetlands 10 20 30 MILES 0 10 20 30 KILOMETERS 90° Figure 3. Palustrine forested-wetland loss in the Mississippi Alluvial Plain, southeastern Missouri, 1650-1975. (Source: Epperson, 1992.) 252 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES acres were transferred to the State during the next few years. Shortly thereafter, the land was transferred to the counties, which in turn sold large tracts at public auction (Epperson, 1992). By 1912, about 3,500,000 acres of wetlands had been targeted for drainage statewide (Epperson, 1992). Stream channelization and damming also have significantly affected wetlands within Missouri. The primary cause of recent wetland loss, both nationally and state- wide, has been conversion of wetlands to agricultural use. Other causes include urban development, flood control, and timber har- vesting (Prayer and others, 1983). The most severe wetland loss has occurred in the southeast- ern part of the State in the Mississippi Alluvial Plain (fig. 3), where only about 60,000 acres (2.5 percent) of an estimated original 2,400,000 acres of forested wetlands remain intact (Vaught and Bowmaster, 1983). Wetland loss in the southeastern part of the State ranged from 257,000 acres from 1870 to 1890 to 595,000 acres from 1900 to 1920. In the 1930's, fearing that this magnificent wetland forest would be lost, businessmen, residents, and local school chil- dren contributed their nickels and dimes to purchase some of the last remnants of the once vast wetland forest. In 1938, more than 1,000 acres were purchased and became the Big Oak Tree State Park (Johnson and DeLano, 1990). CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Missouri. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Mis- souri wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibi- tions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities Table 1. Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Missouri, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization__________ FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency............ Forest Service.................................................. Natural Resources Conservation Service . Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers ............................... Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service.............................. Geological Survey.......................................... National Biological Service.......................... National Park Service .................................... Environmental Protection Agency................... STATE Department of Conservation ........................... Department of Natural Resources .................. PRIVATE Ducks Unlimited................................................... National Audubon Society............................... The Nature Conservancy.................................. in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Conser- vation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Ser- vice (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) (NRCS) determines compliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the identification of wetlands and in the development of wetland pro- tection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act encourages wetland protection through funding incentives. The act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehen- sive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Service (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 requires a permit for con- struction or excavation in, over, or under "navigable waters" of the United States. The Corps is the lead agency for administration of this Act. The Lake of the Ozarks and the Osage, Mississippi, and Missouri Rivers are the major navigable waters in Missouri. The Flood Control Act of 1928 authorizes the Corps to construct and maintain levees, floodways, channel modifications, and various control structures for the lower Mississippi River Valley downstream from Cairo, 111. The FWS has section 404 responsibilities under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1934, National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and the Endangered Species Act of 1973. The FWS provides advisory comments to the Corps, during section 404 per- mit-application review on the potential effects on fish, wildlife, and related environmental resources. The FWS is mapping the Nation's wetlands under its National Wetlands Inventory project. Missouri has five National Wildlife Refuges that are managed by the FWS primarily for migratory birds and federally listed threatened and endangered species. The NFS manages the Ozark National Scenic Riverways, which includes 134 miles of the Current and Jack Fork Rivers. Natural wetland communities are common in the riparian corridors (the area adjacent to a stream or river that is at least occasionally flooded) of these rivers and their tributaries. State wetland activities. Under section 401 of the Clean Water Act, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources must certify that a proposed federally permitted or licensed activity will not violate State water-quality standards. If section 401 water-quality certification is denied, the Corps must deny the section 404 permit National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MISSOURI 253 application. The Department's Division of State Parks is responsible for preserving, restoring, and managing natural wetland ecosystems through the State park system. The Department of Natural Re- sources, Division of Geology and Land Survey's Water Resources Program, with extensive public participation, has developed short- and long-term wetland goals for the State, as well as specific rec- ommendations for achievement of the goals. Recently, the Missouri Departments of Natural Resources and Conservation, the FWS, and the NRCS have been working toward a common wetland data base for use by these agencies. The Missouri Department of Conservation is the State's pri- mary fish and wildlife agency. The Department's Natural Heritage Database is an inventory of wetlands and other natural features owned or managed by the Department, as well as of other wetlands considered by the State to be valuable. The Department also has developed a wetland-management plan to guide its efforts in the restoration and management of wetlands until the year 2000. The key elements of the plan are to (1) protect, restore, and improve wetland habitat, (2) acquire new wetland areas, (3) identify popu- lation goals and management strategies for waterfowl, wildlife, fur- bearer, and fish species, (4) address human use of wetland resources, and (5) identify future research needs. Private wetland activities. The Nature Conservancy is de- veloping an integrated approach for the conservation and restora- tion of the Mississippi Alluvial Plain. The organization owns six properties containing wetlands, including ponds, fens, flood-plain forest, and wet prairies. Ducks Unlimited participates in wetland- protection efforts through its involvement in the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. The National Audubon Society con- ducts a considerable variety of public-education and wetland-pres- ervation programs and projects. References Cited Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., andLaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington. D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Epperson, J.E., 1992, Missouri wetlands A vanishing resource: Missouri Division of Geology and Land Survey Water Resources Report 39, 67 p. Prayer, WE., Monahan, T.J., Bowden, D.C., and Graybill, F.A., 1983, Sta- tus and trends of wetlands and deepwater habitats in the conterminous United States, 1950's to 1970's: Fort Collins, Colorado State Univer- sity, 31 p. Johnson, Cathy, and DeLano, Patti, 1990, Missouri Off the beaten path: Chester, Conn., The Glope Pequot Press, 166 p. Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture Management Board, 1990, Conserv- ing waterfowl and wetlands The Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Ven- ture: Vicksburg, Miss., North American Waterfowl Management Plan, 32 p. McCaig, Barbara, and Boyce, Chris, 1988, Missouri Parks Guide: Wauwa- tosa, Wis., Affordable Adventures, Inc., 43 p. Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G., 1993, Wetlands (2d ed.): New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 722 p. Mohlenbrock, R.H., 1993, Slaughter Sink, Missouri: Natural History, v. 6, no. 93, p. 25-26. Omernik, J.M., 1987, Ecoregions of the United States Map supplement: Annals of the Association of American Geographers, v. 77, no. 1, scale 1:7,500,000. Riley, Laura, and Riley, William, 1979, Guide to the National Wildlife Ref- uges: Garden City, N.Y., Anchor Press, p. 319-322, 335-341. Shaw, S.P., and Fredine, C.G., 1971, Wetlands of the United States Their extent and their value to waterfowl and other wildlife: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circular 39, 67 p. Vaught, Richard, and Bowmaster, J.T., 1983, Missouri wetlands and their management: Jefferson City, Missouri Department of Conservation, 23 p. Waite, L.A., and Skelton, John, 1986, Missouri surface-water resources, in National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and surface-wa- ter resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 301-308. Winter, T.C., and Woo, Ming-Ko, 1990, Hydrology of lakes and wetlands, in Wolman, M.G., and Riggs, H.C., eds., Surface water hydrology: Boulder, Colo., Geological Society of America, The Geology of North America, v. O-l, chap. 8, p. 159-187. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 1400 Independence Road, Rolla, MO 65401; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, BHW Federal Building, 1 Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, MN 55111 Prepared by Charles R. Demas and Dennis K. Demcheck, U.S. Geological Survey 254 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 255 Montana Wetland Resources Weretlands cover only a small part of Montana, but their ecologi- cal and economic importance far outweighs their relative size. Wetlands provide stopover feeding areas and breeding grounds for migratory waterfowl (fig. 1). The Nation's most valuable waterfowl production area, the prairie pothole region of the northern Great Plains, includes wetlands of north-central and northeastern Mon- tana. Wetlands are highly productive and provide food for both aquatic and terrestrial animals. Several threatened or endangered species depend on Montana wetlands, including the whooping crane, least tern, bald eagle, piping plover, grizzly bear, and peregrine fal- con. Many freshwater fish and upland game birds are wetland de- pendent, as are antelope, white-tailed and mule deer, elk, moose, and bear, as well as other nongame mammals. Wetlands stabilize or improve environmental quality by trap- ping sediments, producing oxygen, recycling nutrients, absorbing chemicals and other pollutants, moderating water temperature, and storing carbon (Tiner, 1984). Many small cities and towns in Mon- tana use sewage lagoons, which are constructed wetlands, for mu- nicipal wastewater treatment. Socioeconomic benefits of Montana wetlands are well docu- mented. Wetland vegetation stabilizes streambanks, reduces erosion and flooding, and provides windbreaks for crops and farmsteads. In some areas, wetlands augment streamflow, whereas in other ar- eas they capture overland runoff and slowly release it to underlying aquifers. Because of their high level of productivity, wetlands are excellent providers of renewable resources, including timber, hay, and livestock water. Montana natives and pioneers highly regarded wetland plants such as cattails, willows, and black cottonwood for food, fuel, insulation, basket-making materials, and construction materials, and their use continues to some extent today (Hansen and others, 1991; R.M. Hazelwood, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, oral commun., 1993). Finally, wetlands are valued for recreation, education, and es- thetics. As Montana's tourism industry becomes increasingly im- portant, so do wetlands for the extensive opportunities they provide for fishing, hunting, camping, and observing wildlife. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Montana is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Montana are described below. System Palustrine Lacustrine Riverine. Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants {aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Figure 1. Freezout Lake Wildlife Management Area in west- central Montana. Wetlands associated with this natural lake receive irrigation return flow, furnish habitat for numerous waterfowl species, and provide a variety of recreational op- portunities. (Photograph by John H. lambing, U.S. Geolog- ical Survey.) Dahl (1990), on the basis of unpublished data from the FWS, estimated that 840,300 acres, or 0.9 percent of the State, contained wetlands. However, the total wetland area of Montana has not yet been systematically inventoried. Since 1974, the FWS has been con- ducting a thorough inventory of the Nation's wetlands. That inven- tory will enable a more accurate estimate of Montana's wetland acre- age. Other investigators have made estimates of wetland acreage for various specific purposes. These estimates did not include all of the State's wetlands. On the basis of an inventory of 15 counties in northern Montana, the FWS (1954) concluded that 187,400 acres of wetlands statewide provide valuable waterfowl breeding habitat. RJ. King (U.S. Fish and and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1975) identified 159,608 wetland acres with significant waterfowl produc- tion capability (exclusive of constructed reservoirs and stock ponds) in 40 of Montana's 56 counties.The Water Quality Bureau of the Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences (1992) estimated that riparian areas comprise about 1,860,000 acres. Ri- parian areas include both wetlands and uplands. Most Montana wetlands are palustrine. These include forested wetlands adjacent to rivers statewide; scrub-shrub wetlands such as willow carrs (thickets) in western Montana and greasewood 256 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES 50 100 KILOMETERS WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat ^^^ Area typified by a high density of small wetlands B 1 Middle Rocky Mountains PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS CLACIATION Glacial extent during most recent glacial maximum Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Montana and physical features that control wetland distribution in the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physiography. C, Extent of most recent glaciation. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, J 946; landforms data from EROS Data Center. C, Alden, 1932, 1953.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MONTANA 257 scrubland adjacent to rivers in eastern and southwestern Montana; persistent-emergent wetlands such as marshes, fens and wet meadows in western Montana, and fresh and saline marshes in east- ern Montana; and aquatic-bed wetlands such as water-lily ponds in northwestern Montana (Tiner, 1984; Hansen and others, 1991; Windell and others, 1986). Palustrine wetlands also are associated with artificial lakes and ponds throughout the State. The distribution of the different types of wetlands in Montana correlates with the States physiography (fig. 2B). In glaciated areas of the Great Plains (fig. 2C), wetlands are primarily in topographic depressions commonly referred to as prairie potholes. In the North- ern and Middle Rocky Mountains, wetlands are primarily in pot- holes of glaciated intermontane basins, in the flood plains of streams in unglaciated intermontane basins, and in high mountain valleys. In unglaciated areas of the Great Plains, wetlands occur in flood plains of streams in the Missouri and Yellowstone River basins and also are commonly associated with constructed livestock ponds. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands form where the soil or substrate is saturated with or covered by water for extended periods. The location and persistence of water are a function of interdependent climatic, topographic, hydrologic, and geologic factors. In Montana, except in the high mountains, annual potential evaporation exceeds precipitation, re- sulting in a moisture deficit that inhibits wetland formation. There- fore, topographic, hydrologic, and geologic factors are as important as climatic factors in creating and maintaining most Montana wet- lands. Glaciation in the northern Great Plains (fig. 2C) blanketed the landscape with dense, clayey glacial till (sediment) (Alden, 1932). As the overlying glacial ice melted, potholes (kettle lakes) remained where ice blocks had previously been embedded in the till. These potholes range in area from less than 1 acre to several square miles. The nearly impermeable till inhibits direct infiltration of snowmelt into the soil. Instead, meltwater flows overland into prairie potholes. Even though potential evaporation exceeds precipitation in this re- gion, the high moisture-retention capacity of the clayey soil allows lush, diverse wetland vegetation to develop wherever water accu- mulates, resulting in highly productive wetlands (Winter, 1989). In terms of waterfowl production, the seven most productive counties in Montana are located in the prairie pothole region (RJ. King, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1975). The hydrology and water quality of prairie pothole wetlands can vary over time. In some areas, ground-water flow reverses di- rection because of changing water levels in adjacent potholes. Prairie pothole wetlands can recharge ground-water aquifers in spring un- til evaporation and water uptake by plants cause the water level in the wetland to drop below the local water table. At that time, ground water begins to flow back into the wetland (Winter, 1989). Wetland salinity commonly increases as evaporation concentrates dissolved minerals in the water through the summer and freezing concentrates them through the winter (LaBaugh, 1989). In spring, snowmelt di- lutes the salinity. ^ Water quality can differ between temporary and permanent prairie pothole wetlands, even within the same area. Some prairie pothole wetlands are sustained by ground-water inflow, which pro- vides a constant, but commonly mineralized or saline, source of water. Other prairie pothole wetlands are sustained only by runoff and receive no ground-water inflow. In wet years, these wetlands generally have freshwater, but during most years the combination of evaporation and infiltration causes them to go dry. Still other prairie pothole wetlands have brackish (slightly to moderately salty) water resulting from a combination of ground-water and surface- water inflow (Winter, 1989). The glaciated areas of the Great Plains typically have a small regional topographic gradient, no integrated drainage system, and soils that have low permeability. Consequently, the region is highly susceptible to flooding. The large storage capacity of prairie pot- holes makes them instrumental in controlling seasonal flooding and thus in protecting productive cropland and rural communities from damage. Furthermore, the slow infiltration afforded by compact, clayey soils allows the potholes to slowly augment ground-water supplies with water that otherwise would leave the area as overland flow. Glaciation in the Northern Rocky Mountains (fig. 2C) also covered some intermontane basins with glacial till, allowing the formation of pothole wetlands such as the complexes near Ovando and the Ninepipe National Wildlife Refuge. Dams formed by gla- cial debris created other productive wetland areas, including those associated with Flathead Lake and Lake McDonald. Geologic char- acteristics play an important role in the water quality of these wet- lands. The mountain ground water that interacts with intermontane wetlands generally is less mineralized than prairie ground water, so the water is fresher in intermontane wetlands than in prairie pothole wetlands. However, some intermontane pothole wetlands near Eureka are biologically sterile because slime deposits from glacial rock flour inhibit growth (Reichmuth, 1986). Intermontane basins are drained by low-gradient, meandering streams and rivers that develop riparian (streamside) wetlands in slackwater deposits behind natural levees, in oxbow lakes formed by meander cutoffs, on islands, below diversions, along shorelines, and on deltas and fans (Reichmuth, 1986). Riparian wetlands are dependent on seasonal flooding for moisture. The frequency and duration of flooding depend on climate, flood-plain elevation, drain- age area, channel slope, and soils. The magnitude of flooding and the resultant ground-water levels in the alluvium affect the type and productivity of vegetation in riparian areas. Floodwaters also de- posit nutrient-rich sediments and promote anaerobic (oxygen-poor) conditions that make the nutrients available to plants. Intermontane basins, particularly those in southwestern Mon- tana, are seismically active. For example, regional northwest tilting elevated the northern Gallatin River above the streambeds of its western tributaries, and wetlands have developed in resulting areas of shallow ground water. Another example is a geologically recent uplift that reversed the direction of flow in the upper Red Rock River. The uplift occurred so rapidly that streams have not had sufficient time to cut and deepen channels in response to the new regional gradient. The lack of an integrated drainage system has created large waterlogged areas (Reichmuth, 1986). These areas receive additional inflow from geologic faults, which allow warm ground water to flow toward the land surface, providing excellent wetland habitat for waterfowl. Fault-controlled ground-water flow also is a primary moisture source for wetlands in other intermontane basins. High-mountain wetlands form in response to geologic, climatic, and even biological forces. In alpine and subalpine zones, where precipitation exceeds evaporation, wetlands persist wherever natu- ral impoundments prevent surface runoff. For example, alpine lakes fill cirques, which are scour holes that glaciers carved below moun- tain peaks. Below the subalpine zone, sinuous, low-velocity streams drain broad, U-shaped glaciated mountain valleys. Seasonal flood- ing and high water tables sustain wetlands behind glacial moraines and beaver dams and within low-lying depressions such as oxbow and kettle lakes. Downstream from glaciated valleys, running wa- ter has eroded steep, V-shaped valleys that have wetlands along streams and springs and within impoundments created by landslides and beaver dams (Windell and others, 1986). A recent study of peat-fen (wetlands that have organic soils) hydrology in the headwaters of the Blackfoot River reveals the com- plexity of water flow through a mountain wetland. Not only does the flow velocity range markedly, from 1.8 to 880 feet per day, but ground water flows both into and out of the wetland. The large range 258 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES of flow velocities was explained by the extreme variability of peat Sciences, 1982, p. 3). The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife permeability (Morton and others, 1989). and Parks (1992, p. 2) concurs, forecasting that "***a continuing Some eastern States have taken advantage of the natural filter- general decline in the wetland base in the State appears most prob- ing capacity of wetlands to mitigate acidic mine drainage. In an able." The acreage of wetlands that have been lost is not precisely attempt to duplicate their success, three artificial wetlands have been known, but one estimate is that only 73 percent of the State's constructed to treat acidic mine drainage from abandoned coal mines predevelopment wetlands remain (Dahl, 1990). near Belt, Mont. The artificial wetlands have decreased the concen- Most losses have been due to conversion of wetlands to crop- trations of toxic metals somewhat, but the concentrations still ex- lands, particularly in the prairie pothole region. As of the mid-1980's, ceed State and Federal water-quality standards, and the discharge about 20,000 acres of prairie in eastern Montana had been artifi- remains acidic. These shortcomings are attributable to mechanical cially drained for agricultural production (Dahl, 1990). Significant problems, freezing in the winter, and, most significantly, extremely losses of wetlands are also attributable to the construction of high- acidic, highly mineralized mine discharge that exceeds the treatment ways, railroads, dams, large reservoirs, and irrigation systems; soil capacity of the wetlands. Therefore, wetlands might not provide a erosion and siltatioh; urbanization; recreational development; viable solution to acidic mine drainage problems in Montana (J.N. channelization; mining; logging; oil and gas production; and inten- Koerth, Montana Department of State Lands, oral commun., 1992.) sive grazing (Hansen and others, 1988; Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, 1992; Windell and others, 1986). Mon- TR FMn <£ ^ <£> <£ 1983). Arecent drought in Montana also has adversely affected both Agency or organization_____________^ » <* \T ^ S> ^ quantity ^ quaiity of the State's wetlands. Many wetlands have FEDERAL dried up, and evaporation has concentrated dissolved minerals in Department of Agriculture others. Consolidated Farm Service Agency........................... Forest Service................................................................. Natural Resources Conservation Service................ . CONSERVATION Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers .............................................. Many government agencies and private organizations partici- Military reservations ..................................................... . . pate in wetland conservation in Montana. The most active agencies Department of the Interior and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Bureau of Land Management...................................... . . . . Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Mon- Bureau of Reclamation ................................................. , ,, , , r , , , Fish and Wildlife Service tana wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions Geological Survey .......................................................... and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the National Biological Service ......................................... . more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Har- National Park Service ................................................... . . . bors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Envh-onmental Protection Agency.................................. Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes..................... ...... Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. STATE Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks......................... ..... Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities Department of Environmental Quality in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, Reclamation Division ..................................................... ..... filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 De^rLto^ ' ' ' ' of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation Forestry Division . protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues Trust Land Management Division................................ . ... permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into Department of Transportation ......................................... . wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the EPA, Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology....................... .... and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Montana Riparian Association .................................... . . . . w A s d ^ Indian Tribes ^ authority Natural Resource Information System.......................... . . . & . ,. . , . . . . r . LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit appli- Conservation Districts....................................................... ..... cations on the basis of a proposed activity's probable effects on the PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS water quality of a wetland. Ducks Unlimited.................................................................. ..... Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- The Nature Conservancy.................................................. .______* ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- National Water Summary Wetland Resources: MONTANA 259 sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (CFSA) (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wetlands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act encourages wetland protection through funding incentives. The act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehen- sive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Service provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. Federal agencies are responsible for the proper management of wetlands on public land under their jurisdiction. The Bureau of Land Management manages about 267,000 acres of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Montana, including 9,000 miles of streams (D.K. Hinckley, Bureau of Land Management, oral commun., 1992). The Corps manages the 408,591-acre Fort Peck Lake project area, which includes deepwater and upland habitats, palustrine and lacus- trine wetlands, and 1,520 miles of shoreline (L.D. Krueger, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, oral commun., 1992). The U.S. Forest Service manages 16,806,039 acres in 11 National Forests in Mon- tana (U.S. Forest Service, 1991). The FWS manages 40,590 acres of waterfowl protection areas and 1,066,559 acres of National Wild- life Refuges in Montana, including major wetland complexes at Medicine Lake, Lake Bowdoin, Benton Lake, Lee Metcalf, Red Rock Lakes, Halfbreed, and Ninepipe National Wildlife Refuges. The FWS also holds perpetual easements on 32,100 acres of Montana wet- lands. Finally, since 1988, the FWS has involved about 300 Montana landowners in the restoration, enhancement, and creation of about 7,500 wetland acres (J.W. Stutzman and P.H. Hartmann, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, oral commun., 1992,1993). The CFSA admin- isters a Water Bank program in which private landowners agree not to destroy wetlands in return for annual payments. In Montana, about 3,200 wetland acres are protected under this program (Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences, 1988). Tribal wetland activities. Indian tribes are becoming increas- ingly involved in wetland programs on reservation lands and ceded territories in Montana. For example, the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Indian Reservation in western Montana have enacted several ordinances directed at protecting and managing wetlands in their 1.2-million-acre reservation. These in- clude a Tribal Water Quality Ordinance and Shoreline Protection and Aquatic Lands Conservation Ordinances, which enforce a "no net loss" policy. The tribes also have applied for treatment as a State under section 404 of the Clean Water Act and are awaiting action by EPA (S.K. Ball, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, writ- ten commun., 1993). State wetland activities. Four State interagency agreements pertain to wetland protection. The Montana Riparian Association is a statewide interagency cooperative that develops riparian eco- logical classifications to assist in the identification, description, and management of riparian communities, including wetlands (Hansen and others, 1991). The Montana Riparian Education Committee, which is composed of agricultural and conservation organizations and State and Federal agencies, informs private landowners of the economic benefits and resource values of riparian areas (J.F. Schumaker, Montana Department of Natural Resources and Con- servation, written commun., 1992). The Montana Interagency Wet- lands Group cooperates to avoid, minimize, or mitigate damage to wetlands that might result from State highway construction. If none of those alternatives is feasible, the group operates a wetland-bank- ing system, which creates new wetlands to replace those that are lost (Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, 1992). The North American Waterfowl Management Plan is an agreement be- tween Canada and the United States to reverse recent declines in waterfowl populations. Under the plan, wetlands can be purchased, leased, or protected by easements. Landowners are offered economic incentives for using farming practices that are beneficial to water- fowl. Another component of the plan is the joint venture a part- nership of public and private organizations working toward the com- mon goal of wetland preservation. The U.S. Prairie Pothole Joint Venture is a coalition of Federal and State agencies and private or- ganizations that researches, protects, and enhances prairie wetland and upland habitat in northeastern Montana and four other States that have prairie potholes. Joint ventures are also being planned for the northern Great Plains and the intermontane basins of Montana (Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, 1992). The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks has a supporting technical role in all four interagency agreements. As a regulatory agency, the Department administers the Montana Stream Protection Act of 1963, which regulates construction by government agencies along streams, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Coordina- tion Act, which regulates Federal activities that might adversely affect wetlands. Also, the Department determines wetland desig- nations for Swampbuster enforcement and assists the FWS with its ongoing wetland inventory. The State Waterfowl Stamp program, with matching funds from Ducks Unlimited, supports the Depart- ment efforts to protect, develop, and enhance wetlands and associ- ated upland areas on public and private land. Forty-five State Wild- life Management Areas, including 19 that contain wetlands, also are administered by the Department (Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences, 1982). The Montana Department of Environmental Quality (a new State agency formed July 1, 1995, and composed of parts of the former Departments of Health and Environmental Sciences, Natu- ral Resources and Conservation, and State Lands), administers and enforces State water-quality standards. Although none of the exist- ing standards apply directly to wetlands, the Department is develop- ing enforceable water-quality and biological standards that will be specific to Montana wetlands. This effort, funded by EPA, also in- cludes the development of a State wetlands data base, water-quality and biological monitoring, education, river-corridor management, support for the Montana Riparian Association and wetland banking, and a wetland-protection coordinator. The coordinator is working with other agencies and organizations to develop a State wetland- protection plan (Montana Department of Health and Environmen- tal Sciences, 1992). Until the new standards are approved, section 404 of the Clean Water Act continues to provide the most explicit protection for Montana wetlands. The Department is the State agency that reviews section 404 permit applications and certifies compliance with State water-quality standards. As the permitting agency for hardrock and coal mines, the Department of Environ- mental Quality enforces compliance with section 404 and requires mitigation of wetland loss in mining areas (S.J. Olsen and B.K. Lovelace, Montana Department of State Lands, oral commun., 1992). The Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conserva- tion (reorganized July 1, 1995, to include parts of the former De- partment of Natural Resources and Conservation and the Depart- ment of State Lands) manages 5.2 million acres statewide in addition 260 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES to all land below the low-water level of navigable lakes and streams. An estimate of wetland acreage under Department management is not available. The Department leases about 80,000 acres to the De- partment of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, the FWS, and The Nature Con- servancy; most of the remaining area is leased to individuals and corporations for logging, grazing, and agricultural activities. The Streamside Management Zone Act, which the Department admin- isters, prohibits certain forestry practices along streams, lakes, other water bodies, and adjacent wetlands. County and local wetland activities. County conservation districts administer the Natural Streambed and Land Preservation Act of 1975. Districts review applications and issue permits to in- dividuals and other private entities planning activities that may physically alter or modify the bed or immediate banks of a peren- nial stream. By educating the public and enforcing permit condi- tions, the Districts minimize impacts to riparian wetlands (J.F. Schumaker, Montana Department of Natural Resources and Con- servation, written commun., 1992). Private wetland activities. Ducks Unlimited provides funds for State agencies to restore, enhance, and create wetlands in Mon- tana and supports university research of waterfowl ecology (P.M. Bultsma, Ducks Unlimited, oral commun., 1992). The Nature Con- servancy manages habitat for the preservation of rare species and ecosystems. Working with private landowners, the Conservancy has established more than 152,000 acres of conservation easements and has acquired more than 15,000 acres of critical habitat statewide. In addition, the Conservancy cooperates with government agencies to assist them in acquiring land. To complement its conservation efforts, the Conservancy coordinates the Natural Heritage Program of the Natural Resource Information System, which maintains a computerized inventory of biological resources (H.S. Zackheim, The Nature Conservancy, oral commun., 1992). References Cited Alden, W.C., 1932, Physiography and glacial geology of eastern Montana and adjacent areas: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 174, 133 p. ____1953, Physiography and glacial geology of western Montana and adjacent areas: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 231, 200 p. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Dahl, T.E., Johnson, C.E., and Prayer, W.E., 1991, Wetlands Status and trends in the conterminous United States, mid-1970s to mid-1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress 22 p. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: Washing- ton, D.C., U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Hansen, P.L., Boggs, K.W., Pfister, R.D., and Joy, John, 1991, Classifica- tion and management of riparian and wetland sites in Montana, draft version 1: Missoula, Montana Riparian Association, Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment Station, School of Forestry, University of Montana, 478 p. Hansen, P.L., Chadde, S.W., and Pfister, R.D., 1988, Riparian dominance types of Montana: University of Montana Miscellaneous Publication 49, p. 9-23. LaBaugh, J.W., 1989, Chemical characteristics of water in northern prairie wetlands, in van der Valk, Arnold, ed., Northern prairie wetlands: Ames, Iowa State University Press, p. 56-91. Miller, M.R., and Bergantino, R.N., 1983, Distribution of saline seeps in Montana: Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Hydrogeologic Map 7, 7 p. Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, 1992,1993 Montana state- wide comprehensive outdoor recreation plan, draft section III, Mon- tana wetlands: Helena, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, 8 p. Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences, 1982, Mon- tana water quality, 1982: Helena, Water Quality Bureau, Montana 305 (b) Report, 116 p. ____1988, Montana water quality, 1988: Helena, Water Quality Bureau, Montana 305 (b) Report, 80 p. _1992, Montana water quality, 1992: Helena, Water Quality Bureau, Montana 305 (b) Report, 42 p. Morton, R.B., Goering, J.D., and Dollhopf, D.J., 1989, Hydrologic charac- teristics of a wetland using a bromide tracer, in Woessner, W.W., and Potts, D.F., eds., Proceedings of the Symposium on Headwaters Hy- drology, Missoula, Mont.: American Water Resources Association Technical Publication Series TPS-89-1, p. 553-562. Reichmuth, D.R., 1986, Fluvial systems in the wetland environment, in Sather, J.H., and Low, Jessop, eds., Proceedings of the Great Basin/ Desert and Montane Regional Wetland Functions Workshop, Logan, Utah, February 27-28,1986: University of Massachusetts at Amherst, The Environmental Institute Publication 90-4, p. 23-59. Reiten, J.C., 1992, Water quality of selected lakes in eastern Sheridan County, Montana: Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Open-File Report MBMG 244, 44 p. Tiner, R.W., Jr., 1984, Wetlands of the United States Current status and recent trends: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, 59 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1954, Wetlands inventory of Montana: Bill- ings, Mont., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of River Basin Studies, p. 20. U.S. Forest Service, 1991, Land areas of the national forest system as of September 30, 1991: U.S. Forest Service Report FS-383, p. 25. Windell, J.T., Willard, B.E., Cooper, D.J., and others, 1986, An ecological characterization of Rocky Mountain montane and subalpine wetlands: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 86(11), 298 p. Winter, T.C., 1989, Hydrologic studies of wetlands in the northern prairie, in van der Valk, Arnold, ed., Northern prairie wetlands: Ames, Iowa State University Press, p. 16-55. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 428 Federal Building, 301 South Park, Drawer 10076, Helena, MT 59626; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fish and Wildlife Enhancement, P.O. Box 25486, Denver Federal Center, Den- ver, CO 80225 Prepared by Eloise Kendy, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 261 Nebraska Wetland Resources A%lthough wetlands occupy only 1.9 million acres in Nebraska, or about 4 percent of the State's area (Dahl, 1990), Nebraska's wetland resources are diverse in form, function, and value. Within the State, wetlands range from freshwater to saline and from acidic to alka- line. Many are sustained by ground water, whereas others depend on precipitation and the resulting runoff as a water source (Gersib, 1991). Wetlands in Nebraska have many functions that are of value to humans. Wetlands control flooding, trap sediment, control erosion, retain nutrients, and sometimes recharge ground water. Wetlands are used recreationally for canoeing, fishing, hunting, and swim- ming. In addition to being of economic and social value to humans, wetlands are critical to the survival of certain wildlife. Nebraska has three major wetland complexes of international importance (Gersib, 1991). The Rainwater Basin wetland complex (fig. 1) in south-central and southeastern Nebraska provides stag- ing and migrational habitat for waterfowl and shore birds in the spring. The basins in this complex are focal points in the Central Flyway spring-migration corridor. The Big Bend Reach of the Platte River is a migrational habitat for sandhill cranes and the endangered whooping crane. This reach also is breeding habitat for the endan- gered least tern and the threatened piping plover. The Sandhills wetland complex in north-central and northwestern Nebraska pro- vides migrational habitat for the whooping crane and bald eagle, as well as migrational and breeding habitat for other nongame birds and waterfowl (Gersib, 1991). TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Nebraska is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed Figure 1. Waterfowl on a wetland in the Rainwater Basin wetland complex in south-central Nebraska at sunrise. This wetland com- plex is used by 5 to 7 million ducks and geese annually and has lost 78 percent of its original wetland acres. (Photograph courtesy of the Nebraska Came and Parks Commission.) by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Nebraska are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs {scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Although the FWS National Wetlands Inventory has wetland acreage statistics for most of the State, there is no statewide esti- mate of the wetland acreage within each of these systems. Gersib (1991) gives the approximate wetland acreage for six major wetland complexes in Nebraska: the Eastern Saline, the Rainwater Basin, the Missouri River, the Platte River Big Bend Reach, the North Platte River Lower Reach, and the Sandhills (fig. 2B). This estimate indicates that of the approximately 1.4 million acres of wetlands inventoried, 85 percent were palustrine, 13 percent were lacustrine, and 2 percent were riverine (Gersib, 1991). Documentation is not adequate for classification of other State wetlands. HYDROLOGIC SETTING The distribution of wetlands is determined by physiographic, climatic, and hydrologic factors. The eastern one-fourth of the State is generally characterized by low hills; the remainder is composed of dissected plains, high plains, and sandhills. Nebraska's climate is semiarid in the western part of the State and subhumid in the eastern part. Average annual precipitation from 1951 to 1980 ranged from less than 16 inches in the western panhandle to more than 32 inches in the southeastern corner of the State (Engel and Steele, 1986). Nebraska's average annual free-water-surf ace evaporation for 1956-70 ranged from about 42 inches in the northeastern part of the State to more than 52 inches in the southwest (Farnsworth and others, 1982). Average annual runoff differs considerably across the State, ranging from less than 1 inch in the west and southwest to about 6 inches in the southeast (Gebert and others, 1985). Saline marshes (emergent wetlands) characterize the eastern saline wetland complex in southeastern Nebraska. These marshes have developed in areas where sandstone bedrock is at or near the land surface, and saline ground water seeps into streams or flood- 262 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES plain depressions (fig. 3-4), Although seeps and springs contribute to the concentrations of dissolved solids in the saline marshes, sur- face runoff from precipitation and flooding along streams provide most of the wetlands* water supply and a substantial part of the dis- solved solids (Farrar and Gersib, 1991). Most water loss is due to evapotranspiration, and this process has concentrated the dissolved minerals in the flood-plain soils and wetlands. In south-central and southeastern Nebraska, overland runoff supplies nearly all water for wetlands within the Rainwater Basin wetland complex (Gilbert, 1989). This part of the State is charac- terized by nearly level to gently rolling loess plains; within these plains are depressions probably formed by wind erosion. Surface drainage is poorly developed, resulting in numerous closed basins in which all drainage is internal (Gersib, 1991). Most accumulated water is lost through evaporation, but some leaches through under- lying materials and may produce chemical precipitates that result in a relatively impermeable layer below the land surface (Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, 1984) (fig. 35). The water table gen- erally is from 60 to 100 feet below the bottoms of most of these basins (Keech and Dreezen, 1968). The amount of water in the wetlands within the Rainwater Basin complex varies greatly and depends upon the rates of precipitation and evapotranspiration. In the Missouri River wetland complex, wetlands form in and along the river (on alluvial islands, deep pools, marshes, and shal- low-water areas), and isolated wetlands form within oxbows and sloughs that have resulted from high flows that have changed the course of the river. Although shallow aquifers are associated with the Missouri River, the river is fed primarily by overland runoff (Kuzelka and others, 1993). Some water loss in the Missouri River wetlands is the result of evapotranspiration and seepage to the ad- jacent aquifers; however, much of the wetland loss is due to channelization and flood control along the river. Along the Platte and North Platte Rivers, wet meadows (emer- gent wetlands) result from a combination of ground-water seepage, runoff from precipitation and snowmelt, and surface-water diver- sions and return flows (Hurr, 1983). During spring and early sum- mer, snowmelt supplies water to the river, raising the river stage and causing a corresponding rise in ground-water levels in the adjacent flood plain (fig. 3C). Because of the high water table and surface soils that generally are saturated, precipitation often pools in the wet meadows in sloughs and swales (Currier, 1989). During sum- mer and early fall, river stage is lower because of decreased runoff. Water loss from the associated wet meadows occurs by evapotrans- piration and as a result of ground-water withdrawals that lower the water table in the river valley and induce infiltration from the river to the aquifer. Concurrently, water levels within the wet meadows associated with the river decline. The Sandhills region of north-central and northwestern Ne- braska contains the largest sand-dune area in the Western Hemi- sphere and one of the largest grass-stabilized dune regions in the WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland [ j Predominantly deepwater habitat V/yyfy Area typified by a high density of small wetlands B MAJOR WETLAND COMPLEXES Figure 2. Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats and major wetland complexes in Nebraska. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Major wetland complexes. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 199J. B, Gersib, 1991.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NEBRASKA 263 A. Eastern Saline wetlands PALUSTRINE WETLAND PALUSTRINE WETLAND PALUSTRINE WETLANDS RIVERINE WETLAND Limestone EXPLANATION i - Overland runoff B. Rainwater Basin PALUSTRINE WETLAND PALUSTPINE WETLAND Clay, silt, and sand day, silt, and sand Bedrock »- Direction of ground-water flow Average water table Water table in spring and early summer Water table in late summer and early fall Direction of ground-water flow in spring and early summer Direction of ground-water flow in late summer and early fall Scrub-shrub vegetation Forest vegetation Emergent vegetation Farmed crops Submersed aquatic vegetation Loess Glacial drift Saturated clay Figure 3. Generalized geohydrology of wetlands within Nebraska. A, Eastern Saline wetlands. B, Rainwater Basin. C, Platte River wetlands. D, Sand- hills. world (Bleed and Flowerday, 1990). Sandhill wetlands include wet meadows, where the water table is at or near the land surface, marshes that are associated with area lakes and often contain standing water, and per- manent lakes. Most of the lakes are 10 acres or less in area, average about 5 feet in depth (McCarraher, 1977), and are considered palustrine wetlands accord- ing to the classification system used by the FWS. In the central and eastern parts of the Sandhills, lakes and marshes typically are slightly alkaline, are in hydrologic connection with the ground water, and commonly have suface outlets (Ginsberg, 1985). Many wetlands in the western Sandhills are strongly alka- line and have little or no surface outflow. LaBaugh (1986) and Winter (1986) have shown that these lakes, in addition to being maintained by overland runoff, also are interconnected with the ground-water system (fig. 3D). Lakes that have high alkalinity are found in areas where the ground water becomes mineralized as it moves through the rock formations. Where water circulation is impeded and the water table intersects the land surface, the concentration of total dissolved solids is increased by the high rate of evaporation in this region (Hem, 1985). The physical, chemical, and biological interactions of the marshes and wet mead- ows are largely unknown (Bleed and Flowerday, 1990). TRENDS From 1780 to 1980, Nebraska lost about 1 mil- lion acres, or about 35 percent of the State's original wetlands (Dahl, 1990). Agricultural conversions that involved draining, clearing, leveling, and ground-water pumping were the principal causes of these losses. Losses also were caused by construction of impound- ments and large reservoirs, urbanization, road con- struction, and other activities. The Rainwater Basin, used by 5 to 7 million ducks and geese annually, has lost an estimated 78 percent of its original acreage (Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, 1984). In the Sandhills, agricul- tural conversions account for the loss of 28,000 acres, or 15 percent, of the original wetlands in that area 264 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Nebraska, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization (Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, 1972). Channelization of the Missouri River has enabled agricultural, urban, and industrial development of its flood plain, including the wetland areas. Wetland losses in the unchannelized reaches of the Missouri River also have been substantial owing to operation of dams on the main stem. Williams (1978) showed that the North Platte and Platte Riv- ers have had channel-width decreases of 80 to 90 percent from the Wyoming-Nebraska State line to Over ton between 1860 and 1965. From Overton to Grand Island, channel-width reductions of 60 to ____________________ 70 percent have occurred. FEDERAL Department of Agriculture CONSFRVATION Consolidated Farm Service Agency.......... Forest Service................................................ Many government agencies and private organizations partici- Natural Resources Conservation Service pate in wetland conservation in Nebraska. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table Department of the Interior 1- Bureau of Land Management...................................... . .. . . Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Ne- Bureau of Reclamation ................................................. . braska wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibi- Fish and Wildlife Service.............................................. . .... tions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some Geological Survey ...................................................... ., . . _ , . National Biological Service......................................... . ot the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and National Park Service Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Environmental Protection Agency.................................. Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and STATE Trade Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. Department of Environmental Quality ........................... . . . Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Departmentof Roads ...................................................... ....... ^ rr- //-. xi- , ... Departmentof Water Resources.................................... . . Corps ot Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities Forest servjce . in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, Game and Parks Commission .......................................... filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 Natural Resources Commission...................................... . . of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation Water Resources Center.................................................. . protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues University of Nebraska , . . .- , r j i i r-i, , Conservation and Survey Division ............................. . . permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into Other State.university prvograms ................................ wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. COUNTY AND LOCAL Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and Some county and local governments ............................ . . advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States Natural Resources Districts............................................. . ... and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- Ne^as^'Son'socie'ty':::::::::::::::: I I I I I posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. p|atte River Whooping Crane Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- Habitat Maintenance Trust, Inc....................................... ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- Preserve Our Water Resources Association ............... .. .... . . sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 The Nature Conservancy.................................................. ........ Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of ventories, and other resource-management tools. Technical assis- wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- tance is available for wetland-delineation training, project consul- allies in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the tation, and public education. The EPA oversees the development and altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- implementaiion of water-quality standards thai apply to surface cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, waters, including wetlands, and a nonpoint-source pollution-con- Agricullure, Conservalion, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal trol program that can include the restoration and maintenance of Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners wetlands. who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Other Federal agencies have active nonregulatory wetland Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- policies. The U.S. Forest Service (FS) is involved primarily in re- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- search of riparian wetlands and in managing wetlands in the national lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation forests in Nebraska. In addition, the FS is developing a program to Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- integrate livestock grazing and wetland maintenance and is work- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- ing with Ducks Unlimited, a private conservation organization, to tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, develop habitat for waterfowl, restoration, or creation plans. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages 6,600 acres The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act encourages of public land in Nebraska. Some of these lands have been invento- wetland protection through funding incentives. The act requires ried, and none have been identified as wetlands. If wetland areas States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehen- are identified on BLM-administered lands, appropriate management sive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for actions and protective requirements for wetland habitats will be State recreational land; the National Park Service (NFS) provides applied (Bureau of Land Management, 1992). guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) mitigates for degraded or plans. destroyed wetlands through restoration of degraded wetlands and In addition to regulatory responsibilities, the ERA provides fi- creation of new wetlands. The BOR, as stated in their wetland initia- nancial assistance for special studies, development of wetland in- live, is responsible for the management of wetland resources that National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NEBRASKA 265 occur on Federal property purchased for project purposes. State wetland activities. Nebraska has no laws specifically for the protection of wetlands. The Nebraska Department of Envi- ronmental Quality is responsible for the Clean Water Act section 401 certification process, which considers the effects of dredge or fill activities on water quality to determine compliance with State water-quality standards. An antidegradation clause within the stan- dards protects present water-quality conditions and has been applied to wetlands. The Nebraska Department of Roads must identify wetlands that might be degraded by road construction. If wetland degradation or destruction is unavoidable, the Department must, through the pro- cess of mitigation, restore former wetlands or create new wetlands. A mitigation bank for use by the Nebraska Department of Roads is being developed with the Corps, the FWS, the EPA, the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, and the Nebraska Department of En- vironmental Quality. The Nebraska Game and Parks Commission's involvement in wetlands includes the acquisition, restoration, and management of State-owned wetlands. The Commission also provides technical as- sistance for wetlands management to private owners and sponsors the Wetland Initiative Program. The Commission acts as an advi- sory agency for the section 404 permit process administered by the Corps. As a nonregulatory agency, the Commission has inventoried wetlands within the State but is not involved with the delineation of wetlands. The Nebraska Natural Heritage data base, now adminis- tered by the Commission, is the only existing comprehensive sys- tem for identifying the ecologically significant components of Nebraska's natural diversity (Clausen and others, 1989). The Nebraska Department of Water Resources regulates con- struction in wetland areas through the flood-plain permit process within counties that do not assert jurisdiction. The Department also conducts wetland research, data collection, and education. Other State agencies that are involved in these activities are the Nebraska Natural Resources Commission, the Nebraska Forest Service, the Nebraska Water Resources Center, and the Conservation and Sur- vey Division of the University of Nebraska. County and local wetland activities. Some county and lo- cal governments regulate construction in wetlands through flood- plain permits. The Nebraska Natural Resources Districts also are involved in conservation at the local level. The roles of the Districts differ with location. Many participate in the Wildlife Habitat Im- provement Program, a cooperative program with the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission. Other Districts are active in wetland acqui- sition, restoration, creation, and management. Private wetland activities. Within Nebraska, numerous pri- vate organizations are involved in wetlands. The Nebraska chapter of The Nature Conservancy has purchased 1,750 acres of land at four different sites in the Platte River Big Bend Reach wetlands complex and about 500 acres within the Rainwater Basin wetlands complex. The Nature Conservancy and the Platte River Whooping Crane Habitat Maintenance Trust, Inc., a private organization, co- operatively manage most of that land. Between 1979 and 1992, the Platte River Whooping Crane Habitat Maintenance Trust, Inc., acquired 8,600 acres of habitat in and along the Platte River; 1.200 acres are under perpetual conser- vation easement. The Trust's principal charge is the acquisition and management of wildlife habitat, but it also has the authority to con- duct research and acquire interests in water and has the responsi- bility to protect the biologic and hydrologic integrity of the habitat. The National Audubon Society owns and manages wetlands in Nebraska, including the 1,200-acre Lillian Annette Rowe Sanctu- ary near Gibbon. Local chapters of the National Audubon Society have diversified involvement in wetlands. Many chapters have wet- land-education and wetland-identification programs but generally do not own or manage wetlands. Ducks Unlimited has cooperative programs with government agencies and private organizations and will provide as much as 50- percent cost-share funding for wetland acquisition and development. Ducks Unlimited also is active in the creation and restoration of wetlands on land owned by the organization. The Preserve Our Water Resources Association promotes the restoration and creation of wetlands and monitors the success of mitigation. Other private organizations participating in wetland activities include the Nebraska Sierra Club, The Nebraska Wildlife Federation, and Pheasants Forever. References Cited Bleed, Ann, and Flowerday, Charles, eds., 1990, An atlas of the Sand Hills: University of Nebraska, Conservation and Survey Division, Resource Atlas No. 5a. 265 p. Bureau of Land Management, 1992, Nebraska record of decision and ap- proved resource management plan: Bureau of Land Management Re- port BLM/WY/ES-92/010+4410, 51 p. Clausen, Mary, Fritz, Mike, and Steinauer, Gerry, 1989, The Nebraska natu- ral heritage program Two-year progress report: Lincoln, Nebraska Natural Heritage Program, 154 p. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T.. 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Currier, P.J., 1989, Plant species composition and groundwater levels in a Platte River wet meadow, in Bragg, T.B. and Stubbendieck, James, eds., Proceedings of the 11th North American Prairie Conference, Lincoln, Nebr., August 7-11, 1988: Lincoln, University of Nebraska, p. 19- 24. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Engel, G.B., and Steele, E.K., Jr., 1986, Nebraska surface-water resources, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydro- logic events and surface-water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 315-322. Farnsworth, R.K., Thompson, E.S., and Peck, E.L., 1982, Evaporation at- las for the contiguous 48 United States: National Oceanic and Atmo- spheric Administration Technical Report NWS 33, 27 p. Farrar, Jon, and Gersib, Richard, 1991, Nebraska salt marshes Last of the least: Lincoln, Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, 23 p. Gebert, W.A., Graczyk, D.J., and Krug, W.R., 1985, Average annual runoff in the United States, 1951-80: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 85-627, scale 1:2,000,000. Gersib, R.A., 1991, Nebraska wetlands priority plan for inclusion in The 1991-1995 Nebraska State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan: Lincoln, Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, 35 p. Gilbert, M.C., 1989, Ordination and mapping of wetland communities in Nebraska's Rainwater Basin region. CEMRO Environmental Report 89-1: Omaha, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 105 p. Ginsberg, Marilyn, 1985, Nebraska's sandhills lakes A hydrogeologic overview: Water Resources Bulletin, v. 21, no. 4, p. 573-578. Hem, J.D., 1985, Study and interpretation of the chemical characteristics of natural water (3d ed.): U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Pa- per 2254, 263 p. Hurr, R.T., 1983, Ground-water hydrology of the Mormon Island Crane Meadows Wildlife Area near Grand Island, Hall County, Nebraska: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1277-H, 12 p. Keech, C.F., and Dreezen, V.H., 1968, Geology and ground-water resources of Fillmore county, Nebraska: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1839-L, 27 p. Kuzelka, R.D., Flowerday, C.A., Manley, R.N., Rundquist, B.C., and Herrin, S.J., 1993, Flat water A history of Nebraska and its water: Univer- sity of Nebraska, Conservation and Survey Division, Resource Report No. 12, 292 p. LaBaugh, J.W., 1986, Limnological characteristics of selected lakes in the Nebraska sandhills, U.S.A., and their relation to chemical character- istics of adjacent ground water: Journal of Hydrology, v. 86, no. 3/4, p. 279-298. McCarraher, D.B., 1977, Nebraska's sandhills lakes: Lincoln, Nebraska 266 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Game and Parks Commission, 67 p. Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, 1972, Survey of habitat: Lincoln, Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, Workplan K-71, 78 p. ____1984, Survey of habitat: Lincoln, Nebraska Game and Parks Com- mission Workplan K-83, 13 p. Williams, G.P., 1978, The case of the shrinking channels The North Platte and Platte Rivers in Nebraska: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 781, 48 p. Winter, T.C., 1986, Effect of ground-water recharge on configuration of the water table beneath sand dunes and on seepage in lakes in the sandhills of Nebraska, U.S.A.: Journal of Hydrology, v. 86, no. 3/4, p. 221-237. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, Room 406, Federal Building, 100 Centennial Mall North, Lincoln, NE 68508; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fish and Wildlife Enhancement, P.O. Box 25486, Denver Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225 Prepared by Jill D. Frankforter, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 267 Nevada Wetland Resources Weretlands cover less than 1 percent of Nevada but are some of the most economically and ecologically valuable lands in the State. Wetlands provide important habitat for the State's fish and wildlife. In Nevada, riparian (streamside) wetlands and large marshes pro- vide stopover and breeding grounds for migratory waterfowl. Many of Nevada's threatened and endangered species inhabit wetlands. Other important functions of wetlands include flood attenuation, bank stabilization, and water-quality improvement (fig. 1). Eco- nomic benefits, such as recreational activities, are abundant in Nevada's wetland areas and include hunting, fishing, boating, bird watching, photography, and camping. Other economic benefits of wetlands and associated lands include grazing and mining. Wetland vegetation generally is more lush than that in surrounding uplands, so it is desirable for grazing of cattle or sheep. Mining of placer gold and silver deposits in riparian wetlands has been a profitable ven- ture in parts of Nevada but not without negative effects on wetland resources. Economic-grade uranium deposits are present in alpine peat bogs and fens in the Sierra Nevada but have not been exploited. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deepwater habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and others, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Nevada is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nations wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine. Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Nevada are described below. System Palustrine. Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants {nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Nevada had about 236,350 acres of wetlands in the mid-1980's, according to an inventory by the FWS (Dahl, 1990). However, wet- land acreage available as bird and fish habitat varies considerably from wet years to dry years, as detailed by Hoffman and others Lacustrine Riverine, (1990) for wetlands in Lahontan Valley. Palustrine and lacustrine wetlands constitute most of the State's wetland acreage. Forested, scrub-shrub, and emergent wetlands are the most common types of palustrine wetlands. Riparian wetlands are mostly forested and scrub-shrub types. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) administers almost 48 million acres of land in Nevada, of which approximately 75,000 acres are riparian-wetland habitat (Bureau of Land Management, 1991). More than 2,100 miles of riparian-stream habitat are present on BLM land in Nevada. Some of the largest areas of riparian wet- lands are along the Humboldt River and the upper part of the White River. Large marshes, such as Stillwater Marsh (33,400 acres) and Humboldt Marsh (58,000 acres) and those on Carson Lake (25,600 acres) and Ruby and Franklin Lakes (20,000 acres combined), are mostly scrub-shrub and emergent wetlands. Many of the basins in Nevada contain playa and wet-meadow wetlands; these are espe- cially common in the northwestern part of the State. Some of the largest playas are in the Black Rock Desert in northwestern Nevada, Spring Valley in eastern Nevada, Railroad Valley in south-central Nevada, Smoke Creek Desert in northwestern Nevada, Carson Sink in west-central Nevada, Winnemucca Lake in northwestern Nevada, and Clayton Valley in southwestern Nevada. Pyramid Lake, Lake Tahoe, Walker Lake, Lake Mead (a reservoir), and many smaller reservoirs contain most of the nonplaya lacustrine wetlands. River- ine wetlands make up only a small percentage of the wetland acre- age in the State. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands in Nevada are limited to areas where there is a per- sistent water supply at or near land surface. The location and per- sistence of water supply is a function of several interrelated factors, including climate, physiography, and hydrology. In Nevada, precipitation (fig. IB) and runoff (fig. 2C) have wide ranges in values annually, seasonally, and areally (Moosburner, 1986). Nevada, the most arid State in the Nation, has average an- nual precipitation values ranging from more than 16 inches in the Sierra Nevada and other high mountain ranges to less than 4 inches Figure 1. Wetland in Carson Valley, about 5 miles south of Carson City. This wetland was constructed to receive treated sewage effluent from Incline Village in the Lake Tahoe Basin and to function as a nutrient-removal system for the effluent before discharge into the Carson River. View looking southwest, with Sierra Nevada in background, 1993. (Photograph by Michael S. Lico, U.S. Geologi- cal Survey.) 268 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES near Fallen and in the Las Vegas area. Runoff in the spring and early summer is mostly a result of snowmelt and is greatest in the moun- tain areas. Occasional summer thunderstorms can create large amounts of runoff, although these storms generally are localized. Evaporation, which removes water that could potentially form wetlands, is greatest in the lower altitudes and southern part of the State (fig. 2D). The lowest yearly evaporation is in the Sierra Ne- vada and other high mountain ranges. Large tracts of land in the basin areas have high evapo- ration rates, as much as 80 inches per year in the lowlands near the Colorado River (Moosburner, 1986). Potential evaporation ex- ceeds precipitation in most of Nevada, the exceptions being in the high mountain areas, creat- ing a water deficit that inhibits wetland development. The exist- ence of fens (emergent wetlands that have organic soil) in high mountain valleys and the pau- city of them in lower altitude basins attests to their depen- dence on abundant water from precipitation. However, steep to- pography and shifting stream channels prevent the formation of fens in many areas where ad- equate water is present. In most of the basins in Nevada, wetlands are associated with discharge areas. Ground water commonly discharges from springs and seeps along the fault-bounded basins and creates wet- lands. Water for the Ruby Lake wetlands (fig. 2A) is mostly from spring discharge. Playa lakes, where wetlands are maintained by water from the typically shallow water table, are another common setting for wetlands. Wetlands also are present at the discharge points of regional ground-water flow systems, where springs commonly 76 B PRECIPITATION Line of average annual precipitation Inter in inches, is variable WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Nevada and physical and climatological features that control wetland distribution in the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Annual precipitation. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991; B, Moosburner, 1986.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NEVADA 269 discharge large volumes of ground water. An example of this hy- drologic setting is the Ash Meadows wetlands (Winograd and Thordarson, 1975). In the high mountain areas of the State, wetlands commonly form in glaciated valleys. Glacially scoured valleys commonly have large cirque basins where remnant glaciers or semipermanent snow fields supply water for wetlands. Many of these cirque basins have lakes (tarns) that provide wetland habitat. Below the cirque basins, the glaciated mountain valleys typically are steep sided, U-shaped, and have relatively flat floors with low-gradient streams. Wetlands form on the valley floors in cut-off meander channels (oxbows), behind glacial moraines, in small kettle holes, and behind beaver dams. Riparian wetlands are present along most of the perennial streams in Nevada. These wetlands occur along natural streambanks and constructed channels. Annual flushing of stream channels and wetlands by spring floods has been attenuated largely by diversion for irrigation, stream channelization, and construction of dams. However, constructed water bodies such as reservoirs, canals, and agricultural drains are common settings for wetland formation. As an example of an artificially maintained wetland system, leakage from a canal near Fernley raised the water table until drainage ditches had to be dug to lower the water table for efficient crop growth. The water in these ditches flows to a State Wildlife Area where wetlands are present near the channels and impoundments. Most wetlands are maintained by a shallow water table. The water-table altitude depends on several factors, among which are geology, topography, soil characteristics, water supply, pumpage, and local hydrology. Irrigation of land for agriculture commonly results in a rise of the water table, which can create wetlands. The Newlands (irrigation) Project near Fallon in western Nevada has caused the water table in parts of Lahontan Valley to rise by as much as 30 to 60 feet (Rush, 1972; R.L. Seiler, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1993); this water-table rise has resulted in the formation of small wetlands throughout the valley. Wetlands can be formed by other human activities. Dewater- ing more than 23,000 acre-feet in 1991 of a large open-pit mine in Desert Valley in northern Nevada has created a lush wetland of 3,500 acres that is being used by increasing numbers of waterfowl. In Carson Valley, about 900 acres of wetlands have been created by constructing cells (diked impoundments) and filling them with treated sewage effluent from the Lake Tahoe Basin (fig. 1). The area has become a popular duck-hunting site. Stillwater Marsh is an important wetland complex in the Pa- cific Flyway. Archeological evidence indicates that as much as 5,000 years ago humans used the marsh for food resources (Hoffman and others, 1990). Because of the importance of Stillwater Marsh and other Lahontan Valley wetlands to migratory birds, the area has been classified as a Hemispheric Reserve within the Western Hemispheric Shorebird Reserve Network (WHSRN) by the WHSRN Council. Lahontan Valley supports about 75 percent of the ducks, 50 per- cent of the Canada geese, and 65 percent of the tundra swans in the State. Between 30 and 50 percent of the Pacific Flyway canvasback ducks stop in Lahontan Valley in the fall. Stillwater Marsh is located at the terminus of the Carson River, which flowed freely to the wetlands until the Newlands Project was constructed in the early 1900's. Annual springtime floods flushed the wetlands and removed accumulated mineral salts, leaving a prime freshwater marsh. Currently, most of the water flowing to Stillwater Marsh is irrigation drainage that has high concentrations of arsenic, boron, selenium, and other toxic constituents (Lico, 1992). Owing to the highly regulated nature of the irrigation sys- tem, springtime floods are uncommon, and no mechanism exists to remove salts from the marsh. Presently, Stillwater Marsh would require large volumes of freshwater to reduce the salinity and con- centrations of several toxic constituents that have been implicated RUNOFF 0.1 Line of average annual runoff Interval, in inches, is variable FAAPORATION 45 Line of equal water-free- surface evaporation Interval, 5 inches Figure 2. Continued. Wetland distribution in Nevada and physical and climatological features that control wetland distribution in the State. C, Annual runoff. D, Annual free-water-surface (lake) evaporation. (Sources: C, Moosburner, 1986; D, Famsworth and others, 1982.) 270 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES in the deaths and low reproduction rates of waterfowl (Hoffman and others, 1990; Lico, 1992). Volumes of irrigation return flow will be further reduced when the Newlands Project implements operat- ing criteria adopted by the Bureau of Reclamation [(BOR) 1987]. Re- cent drought has severely affected Stillwater Marsh, leaving only a few hundred acres of water surface for waterfowl use. In 1990, Public Law 101-618 was passed by Congress, authorizing the FWS to pur- chase water rights from willing sellers within the Newlands Project area and use the water for maintenance of wildlife habitat. The Nevada Department of Wildlife and The Nature Conservancy are assisting FWS in this "water-buyout program." Ash Meadows wetlands, in southern Nevada, are administered by the FWS and are the sole habitat for 33 plant and animal species (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1990). The wetlands are home for three species of endangered pupfish and one species of speckled dace. These unique wetlands are a result of ground water from a regional carbonate-rock aquifer discharging through lake-bed de- posits to a series of springs along a fault contact. More than 17,000 acre-feet of water discharges from these springs annually (Winograd and Thordarson, 1975). Devils Hole National Monument, adminis- tered by the National Park Service (NFS), is included in this group of wetlands but is unique in that it occupies a solution cavern in the carbonate-rock aquifer. The Devils Hole pupfish, an endangered species, is found only within this small pool (U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service, 1990). Carson Valley, in western Nevada, is the setting for wetlands of a different nature. Incline Village, in the Lake Tahoe Basin, ex- ports all of its treated sewage effluent to Carson Valley by way of a pipeline. Before 1984, the effluent was discharged into the Carson River at the northern end of the valley. In 1975, the U.S. Environ- mental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a more stringent discharge permit; as a result, several diked impoundments were constructed to hold the sewage effluent, creating a 900-acre site with 140 acres of permanent wetlands. The area now provides nesting habitat for waterfowl and recreational opportunities for residents of the area. Ruby Lake wetlands are east of the Ruby Mountains in north- eastern Nevada (fig. 2A). The FWS operates and maintains a 37,600- acre National Wildlife Refuge there, which includes the marsh and surrounding area. During a year of average precipitation, more than 13,000 acres of bird and fish habitat are present in the spring, de- clining to about 11,000 acres in the fall. Water for the wetlands is provided mostly by the discharge of many springs at the base of the Ruby Mountains. This discharge is proportional to the amount of snowpack in the mountains (Jeff Mackay, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, written commun., 1992). More than 200 species of birds regularly use the wetlands for nesting, feeding, or stopover during migration periods. In some years, more than 6,000 ducks, mostly redheads and canvasbacks, have hatched at the marsh. TRENDS The FWS has estimated that, from the 1780's to the 1980's, 52 percent of Nevada's wetlands were lost (Dahl, 1990). In terms of area, that represents a loss of about 251,000 acres of wetlands dur- ing settlement of the State. Conversion of wetlands to cropland and diversion of water for agricultural and urban purposes are the pri- mary reasons for this loss of wetlands. A large part of the flow in major rivers within the State (Carson. Humboldt. Truckee, and Walker) has been diverted for irrigation, leaving insufficient quan- tities of water for wetland maintenance. Riparian wetlands have been drastically affected by a variety of human activities. The BLM, which administers approximately 2,100 miles of riparian stream habitat in the State, has reported that more than 80 percent of that habitat is in poor condition (Nevada Department of Conservation and Natu- ral Resources, 1988). In the same report, the U.S. Forest Service (FS) estimated that 53 percent of the riparian wetlands under its jurisdiction are in fair to poor condition. The primary reason for the poor quality of the riparian wetland habitat is overgrazing of cattle on Federal land (Bureau of Land Management, 1992). The BLM has formal plans for improving the condition of wetlands un- der its jurisdiction (Bureau of Land Management, 1991). Urban development, particularly near Reno, has adversely affected wet- lands; detrimental activities include building directly on filled wet- lands, draining of wetlands, channelization of creeks and rivers, and contamination of wetlands by inadequately treated sewage and in- dustrial waste. Las Vegas Wash contains wetlands that are threat- ened by treated municipal sewage effluent, industrial chemicals, and erosion. According to Thompson and Merritt (1988), 82 percent of wetlands have been lost in western Nevada. They document the loss of two National Wildlife Refuges and the decreasing quality of the remaining wetlands. Historical accounts by Captain J.H. Simpson in 1859 of conditions before irrigation read as follows: "Carson Lake beautifully blue; lake margined with rushes; the shores are covered with muscle-shells [sic]; pelicans and other aquatic fowl a charac- teristic.'" According to Simpson, "***the lake is filled with fish***"; he also observed that the local Indians had "***piles of fish lying about drying" (Simpson, 1876). Carson Lake no longer supports fish populations of any consequence. The loss of wetlands was mostly due to diversion of streamflow to irrigate crops in western Nevada and for urban uses in the Reno-Sparks area. The drought of the late 1980's to early 1990's further reduced the acreage of wet- lands in western Nevada. Some human activities have resulted in an increase in wetland acreage. Constructed wetlands in Carson Valley (fig. 1) utilize sew- age effluent to provide habitat for waterfowl. In Desert Valley, a mine-dewatering operation has supplied water for constructed wet- lands that have become important habitat for waterfowl and other wildlife. Wetlands were constructed by the Nevada Department of Transportation in Washoe Valley near Washoe Lake to offset losses from highway construction (John Nelson, Nevada Division of En- vironmental Protection, oral commun., 1993). Leakage from the Truckee Canal near Fernley has been used to create an extensive wetland operated and maintained by the Department of Wildlife. Agriculture-related activities, including construction of ponds, res- ervoirs (such as Lahontan and Rye Patch), drainage ditches, and canals, undoubtedly have added to wetland acreage throughout the State. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Nevada. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Nevada wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act: the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the EPA, and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit appli- cations on the basis of a proposed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NEVADA 271 ....... . . .... Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Nevada, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. ., agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, resto- ration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data collec- tion; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency............ Forest Service .................................................. Natural Resources Conservation Service Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers .............................. Military reservations ..................................... Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management...................... Bureau of Reclamation ................................. Fish and Wildlife Service .............................. Geological Survey.......................................... National Biological Service ......................... National Park Service ................................... Environmental Protection Agency.................. STATE Department of Conservation and Natural Resources: Division of Environmental Protection ........ Division of State Lands.................................. Division of State Parks .................................. Division of Water Planning ........................... Department of Transportation......................... Department of Wildlife...................................... PRIVATE Ducks Unlimited.................................................. Environmental Defense Fund........................... The Nature Conservancy.................................. .... . .. . . .... .... Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" pro- vision of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act encourages wetland protection through funding incentives. The act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehen- sive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the NFS provides guidance to States in de- veloping the wetland component of their plans. Federal agencies are responsible for the proper management of wetlands on public land under their jurisdiction. The BLM, FS, and the Department of Defense administer most of the Federal land in Nevada; BLM land (almost 48 million acres) alone contains about 75,000 acres of riparian wetlands (Bureau of Land Management, 1991). The BLM and FS have riparian-wetland management plans that include educating the public on the benefits and importance of healthy riparian areas; assessing acreage and condition of riparian wetlands; and restoring, maintaining, and protecting riparian wet- lands. The BLM has acquired about 5,000 acres of wetlands in Sol- dier Meadow, Black Rock Desert, through land exchange. Military installations are responsible for preparing resource-management plans for fish and wildlife, recreation, and other natural and cultural resources. The plans provide policy and a framework for address- ing wetland and other natural and cultural resource issues. The FWS manages seven National Wildlife Refuges, two National Wildlife Ranges, and two fish hatcheries in Nevada. National Wildlife Ref- uges total more than 220,000 acres and National Wildlife Ranges total more than 2 million acres. The NFS manages more than 77,000 acres of land (National Park Service, 1991) at two locations Great Basin National Park and Devils Hole National Monument. An esti- mate of wetland acreages within National Parks in Nevada does not exist. The BOR is involved in the restoration and creation of wetlands in conjunction with some of their projects and has been instrumen- tal in the construction of irrigation projects in Nevada. Inherently associated with these projects is the alteration of natural riparian and wet-meadow wetlands. The BOR has attempted either to mini- mize or to mitigate adverse effects on these wetlands. State wetland activities. Several State agencies are involved in wetland activities in Nevada (table 1). Nevada does not currently (1993) have a comprehensive wetlands-protection program but fol- lows Federal policy and cooperates in many Federal programs. Four agencies within the Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources engage in wetland-related activities. The Division of Environmental Protection is the key regulatory agency and enforces provisions of the Clean Water Act within the State. Pursuant to section 305(b) of the act, the Division of Environmen- tal Protection submits to the EPA and the U.S. Congress a biennial assessment of the State's surface-water quality (Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, 1992), including that of wetlands. The Division issues discharge permits, monitors water quality, and sets water-quality standards for Nevada. Reviews for subdivision permits also are under the jurisdiction of the Division of Environmental Protection. The Division of Water Planning is responsible for review of section 404 permit applications, and Di- vision approval is necessary for the Corps to issue a permit. The Division of State Lands has legislative authority for wetlands pro- tection on lands owned or managed by the State of Nevada; the Division issues permits for all activities associated with State lands. The Division of State Parks is responsible for management of State park land and reviews activities that may affect wetlands in parks. The Division of State Parks has been involved in the construction of wetlands on State park land and is responsible for Nevada's State- wide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans, which contain a summary of wetland-related activities within the State. The Nevada Department of Transportation is responsible for assessing and mitigating impacts on wetlands that are a result of highway construction and maintenance. In cooperation with Depart- ment of State Parks, the Department of Transportation has con- structed wetlands near Washoe Lake to mitigate losses of wetlands from construction of nearby highways. The Department of Wildlife is responsible for day-to-day man- agement of the State's 10 Wildlife Management Areas (comprising about 256,000 acres). These areas contain important wetlands and include areas such as Carson Lake in Lahontan Valley and Franklin Lake on the eastern side of the Ruby Mountains. The Department of Wildlife can require a Habitat Modification Permit before dredg- ing in any river, stream, or lake if the Department determines that the activity will be harmful to fish. The Department of Wildlife has been monitoring the condition of wetlands by taking yearly popu- lation counts of waterfowl (Norman Saake, Nevada Department of Wildlife, oral commun., 1992). The Department of Wildlife has the 272 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES authority to implement and manage a program for conserving, pro- tecting, restoring, and propagating selected species of native fishes and other wildlife that are threatened with extinction. Wetlands have been constructed under the auspices of the Department of Wildlife; these wetlands, which are mostly for waterfowl, include most of the State Wildlife Management Areas and those constructed with the cooperation of private entities. County and local wetland activities. Most regulation of de- velopment activities in Nevada's wetlands is accomplished through Federal and State laws. However, some local activities, such as pond construction at local parks or river-enhancement projects, also can be beneficial to wetlands. Private wetland activities. Activities by private entities in- clude purchasing wetlands and water rights, public education on wetland issues, and lobbying for wetland-enhancement legislation. The Nature Conservancy is perhaps the most active private organi- zation involved in wetland protection in Nevada. The Nature Con- servancy has one wetland holding in Condor Canyon, a part of Meadow Valley Wash near Panaca. Purchasing sensitive wetland areas has been a critical function of The Nature Conservancy in Nevada. The Nature Conservancy has purchased land containing wetlands at Franklin Lake and Ash Meadows and sold the proper- ties to State or Federal agencies for management (Livermore, 1988). In Lahontan Valley, The Nature Conservancy has purchased water rights from farmers within the Newlands Project area, taking land out of agricultural production, and is reselling the water rights to the FWS for use at Stillwater Marsh. This action is providing fresh- water to the marsh, which has received irrigation drainage as its only source of water in recent years. This effort by The Nature Conser- vancy will result in an improvement of the habitat in this important wetland on the Pacific Fly way. The Environmental Defense Fund has been actively assisting The Nature Conservancy in acquisition of water rights in Lahontan Valley. Ducks Unlimited also acquires wetlands for purposes of conservation. Private local and national organizations that participate in educational or lobbying activities in the State include gun and hunting clubs, the Sierra Club, the Lahontan Valley Wetlands Coalition, the National Audubon Soci- ety, and the Nevada Waterfowl Association. References Cited Bureau of Land Management, 1991, Riparian-wetland initiative for the 1990's: U.S. Bureau of Land Management Report BLM/WO/GI-91/ 001+4340, 50 p. ____1992, BLM Meeting the challenge in 1991 Recreation 2000, fish and wildlife 2000, riparian-wetland initiative for the 1990's Progress report on the implementation of three initiatives: U.S. Bu- reau of Land Management Report BLM-WO-GI-92-003 -4333, 94 p. Bureau of Reclamation, 1987, Final environmental impact statement for the Newlands Project, proposed operating criteria and procedures: Wash- ington, D.C., U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 332 p. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, EC., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Farnsworth, R.K., Thompson, E.S., and Peck, E.L., 1982, Evaporation at- las for the contiguous 48 United States: National Oceanic and Atmo- spheric Administration Technical Report NWS 33, 27 p. Hoffman, R.J., Hallock, R.J., Rowe, T.G., Lico, M.S., Burge, H.L., and Thompson, S.P., 1990, Reconnaissance investigation of water qual- ity, bottom sediment, and biota associated with irrigation drainage in and near Stillwater Wildlife Management Area, Churchill County, Nevada, 1986-87: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investi- gations Report 89-4105, 150 p. Lico, M.S., 1992, Detailed study of irrigation drainage in and near wildlife management areas, west-central Nevada, 1987-90. Part A Water quality, sediment composition, and hydrogeochemical processes in Stillwater and Fernley Wildlife Management Areas: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 92-.4024A, 65 p. Livermore, David, 1988, Wetlands acquired in the Ruby Valley: The Na- ture Conservancy, Great Basin Newsletter, Spring 1988, unpaginated. Moosburner, Otto, 1986, Nevada surface-water resources, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and sur- face-water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 323-328. National Park Service, 1991, Draft general management plan, development concept plans, and environmental impact statement, Great Basin Na- tional Park, White Pine County, Nevada: Denver, Colo., National Park Service, 274 p. Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, 1988, Nevada's wetlands An element of recreation in Nevada, 1987 Statewide comprehensive outdoor recreation plan: Carson City, Nevada Depart- ment of Conservation and Natural Resources, Division of State Parks, 78 p. ____1992, Nevada water quality assessment (305b) report: Carson City, Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Protection, unpaginated. Rush, F.E., 1972, Hydrologic reconnaissance of Big and Little Soda Lakes, Churchill County, Nevada: Nevada Division of Water Resources, In- formation Report 11,1 sheet. Simpson, J.H., 1876, Report of explorations across the Great Basin of the territory of Utah for a direct wagon-route from Camp Floyd to Genoa, in Carson Valley, in 1859: Reno, University of Nevada Press, 518 p. (Reprinted in 1983.) Thompson, S.P., and Merritt, K.L., 1988, Western Nevada wetlands His- tory and current status, in Blesse, R.E., and Goin, Peter, eds., Nevada public affairs review no. 1: Reno, University of Nevada, p. 40-45. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1990, Recovery plan for the endangered and threatened species of Ash Meadows, Nevada: Portland, Oreg., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 123 p. Winograd, I.J., and Thordarson, William, 1975, Hydrogeologic and hydrochemical framework, south-central Great Basin, Nevada-Cali- fornia, with special reference to the Nevada Test Site: U.S. Geologi- cal Survey Professional Paper 712-C, 126 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 333 W. Nye Lane, Carson City, NV 89706; Regional Wetland Co- ordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Eastside Federal Complex, 911 NE. 11 th Avenue, Portland, OR 97232 Prepared by Michael S. Lico U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 273 New Hampshire Wetland Resources We, retlands are an integral part of New Hampshire's natural re- sources. They provide essential habitat for wildlife and vegetation, including rare and endangered species and natural communities. Wetlands arc a source of timber and provide opportunities for hunt- ing and fishing, education and research, and bird, wildlife, and plant observation, all of which benefit the tourist industry and economy. Other benefits include flood control, bank- and shoreline-erosion control, sediment retention, water filtration, and nutrient uptake. In recognition of the importance of wetlands, many government agen- cies and private organi/ations have worked to preserve wetlands and educate the public about wetland values. For example, Lake Umbagog and its associated wetlands (fig. 1), which constitute one of the most productive wildlife areas in New Hampshire, are pro- tected by the State and by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) as a National Wildlife Refuge. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deep water habitats in New Hampshire is shown in figure 2A\ only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegctated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the FWS to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riverine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and decpwatcr habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in New Hampshire are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine. Estuarine. Marine, Wetland description Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. Rubin and others (1993) used LANDSAT (satellite) imagery to estimate wetland area at 396,246 acres, or about 6.7 percent of the State. That estimate probably underestimates the actual wetland area owing to similarities between evergreen forest in upland and wetland areas. Also, LANDSAT imagery cannot discern wetlands smaller than about 2 acres (Ken Kettenring, New Hampshire Wet- lands Board, oral commun., 1993). Estimates of wetland area based on review of permits by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and field checking during functional assessments by the Audubon Society of New Hampshire place New Hampshire's wet- land area at about 10 percent of the State's total area (Mark Kern, Environmental Protection Agency, oral commun., 1993). The distribution of wetlands in New Hampshire has been in- fluenced by the State's physiography (fig. 2B). In the northern part of the White Mountain Section, glacial erosion and sediment de- posits have created broad valleys in which large wetland complexes have formed. For example, many wetlands are present along tribu- taries to the Connecticut Lakes and Lake Francis near Pittsburg. Small wetlands in the White Mountains have formed mainly along small streams in river valleys or where streams flow over flat benches on hillsides. Wetlands in the New England Upland and Seaboard Lowland Sections are in many settings, such as in topographic de- pressions, around the margins of ponds and lakes, and in river val- leys. In many areas of the State, small wetlands are interrelated and form large wetland complexes. To date (1993) there is no published information concerning acreage of the different wetland types in New Hampshire. However, the similarities of the ecological, hydrologic, and physiographic set- tings of New Hampshire to those in the other New England States makes it likely that the predominant wetland types in the State arc the same as in the remainder of the region palustrine forested and scrub-shrub (Tiner, 1987,1992; Widoff, 1988). Forested and scrub- shrub wetlands that have organic-rich mineral soils are commonly referred to as swamps, whereas wetlands that have organic soils over mineral soils are called peatlands. In southern New Hampshire and in the Connecticut River Valley, forested swamps in poorly drained basins typically are dominated by red maple or have mixtures of red maple, yellow birch, hemlock, and white pine. Swamps in the flood plains of major rivers typically are dominated by silver maple. Peatlands in southern and coastal New Hampshire commonly con- tain pitch pine or Atlantic white cedar (Dan Sperduto, New Hamp- shire Natural Heritage Inventory, written commun., 1993). A few Figure 1. Wetlands along the mouth of Hampshire Brook and Lake Umbagog. (Photograph courtesy of the Society for Protection of New Hampshire Forests.) 274 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES swamps in southern New Hampshire contain black gum, which is a species near the northern extent of its range. In northern New Hamp- shire and at higher altitudes, forested swamps typically contain red spruce and balsam fir, and forested peatlands generally arc domi- nated by black spruce, larch, or northern white cedar. Peatlands are present throughout New Hampshire but are more common in the north. Most are small. The absence of extensive peatlands in New Hampshire is due largely to the State's mountain- ous terrain (Johnson, 1985). The terms bog and fen have been used to differentiate peatlands in some classification systems (Damman and French, 1987). Bogs (palustrine forested and scrub-shrub wet- lands) arc acidic, nutrient poor, and have a low diversity of plant species, whereas fens (palustrine forested, scrub-shrub, and persis- tent-emergent wetlands) are less acidic and have higher nutrient levels and plant diversity. The herbaceous-plant community in bogs generally is dominated by sphagnum moss, whereas in fens it typi- cally is dominated by mosses and sedges. Scrub-shrub vegetation grows in most wetlands, typically as a transitional community between emergent wetlands and forested wetlands or upland, or between open water and forested wetlands or upland. In general, shrub swamps are dominated by broad-leaved deciduous shrubs such as willow and alder; scrub-shrub commu- 0 10 20 30 MILES 0 10 20 rnfmgoq 1 A » T Hampshire \*vM - v^XyV-* "4-A-1/ /£-*' . Y *) ,""",3^. si! r .,>-V^^lLS-^^ 0 PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS A. White Mountain Section B. New England Upland Section C. Seaboard Lowland Section WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat SURFICIAL GEOLOGY I Sand 1 Sand and gravel [~~| Tilt, clay, and silt Figure 2. Wetland distribution and physical features that control wetland distribution in New Hampshire. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physiography. C, Surficial geology. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center; C, Koteff, 1993). National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NEW HAMPSHIRE 275 nities in bogs contain broad-leaved evergreen shrubs such as leath- erleaf and labrador tea and stunted conifers such as black spruce and larch; and fens generally contain broad-leaved evergreen shrubs, broad-leaved deciduous shrubs, and northern white cedar. (Dan Sperduto, written commun., 1993). Palustrine emergent wetlands, commonly referred to as marshes, are more common in southern New Hampshire. Most are small and associated with lacustrine or riverine wetlands. Marshes that have shallow water or saturated soils generally contain sedges, rushes, or grasses, whereas those in deeper water typically contain cattails. Most of New Hampshire's lakes and rivers have areas of shal- low water where aquatic vegetation has become established. These lacustrine and riverine wetlands are essential for the biological pro- ductivity of lakes and rivers. As a result of recent increases in bea- ver populations, many riparian (streamside) wetlands along smaller streams and rivers have been flooded behind beaver dams. Over time, this flooding promotes a cyclical change from riparian shrub swamps to small ponds and marshes to wet meadows and then back to shrub swamps (George Springston, Vermont Wetlands Office, written commun., 1993). Many State wildlife areas contain emer- gent wetlands in impoundments built for the improvement of wa- terfowl habitat. However, although flooding caused by beaver dams or manmade dams can create wetlands, it also can be detrimental to existing riparian wetlands. Estuarine and marine wetlands along New Hampshire's 18-mile coastline are estimated at about 7,500 acres (New Hampshire Of- fice of State Planning, 1989). Most of these wetlands are in or near Hampton Harbor, Great Bay, and Little Bay. Short (1992) deter- mined that Great Bay estuary, which includes Great Bay, Little Bay, and the lower Piscataqua River, contains about 2,600 acres of aquatic beds, 1,200 acres of mud flats, and 1,000 acres of salt marsh. In general, salt marshes that are only occasionally flooded by tides are vegetated predominantly by saltmeadow cordgrass and black grass, whereas those that are regularly flooded are dominated by saltmarsh cordgrass. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands are hydrologic features that form where climate and physiography favor the retention of water. Wetlands are found along rivers, lakes, and estuaries where flooding occurs, in isolated de- pressions surrounded by upland where surface water collects, on slopes and surface drainageways, and where ground water dis- charges to the land surface in spring or seepage areas. Soil satura- tion favors the growth of wetland plants and development of hydric soils. Water either can flood wetlands, be present at the surface of wetlands, or keep underlying soils saturated near the surface with no surface water present (Tiner, 1991). The timing and duration of the presence of water affects water chemistry, soil development, and plant-community structure in wetlands. Although degree of wetness is important in the determi- nation of wetland type, many ecologic functions of wetlands also depend upon wetland size, position of the wetland in a drainage network, and sources of water (Brinson, 1993). Climate, physio- graphy, and geology influence the hydrology and water quality of wetlands. The complex interactions of these variables with biotic factors and site history determine the type of wetland that develops in any particular setting. New Hampshire's climate is conducive to wetland development. Precipitation exceeds potential evapotranspiration on an annual basis, and the excess moisture is available for formation and main- tenance of wetlands. Climate varies with altitude and distance from the Atlantic Ocean. For example, from the coast to the White Moun- tains, average annual precipitation and average annual runoff in- crease, summer temperatures decrease, and the growing season becomes shorter (Hammond and Cotton, 1986). Wetland vegetation is influenced by these climatic differences. Wetlands in southern New Hampshire are dominated by plant communities similar to those of southern New England wetlands, whereas wetlands in northern New Hampshire are dominated by communities similar to those in Canadian wetlands. The distribution of wetlands in New Hampshire also is partly determined by physiography, distribution of glacially derived sedi- ments, and the geologic character of the underlying bedrock. Areas of steep topography do not retain water long enough for wetlands to develop. However, given favorable hydrologic conditions, wetlands can form on drainage divides and near mountaintops. For example, several ridge-top subalpine bogs occur on Mount Washington (Johnson, 1985). Most of New Hampshire's wetlands, however, are in lowlands, valleys, and depressions that have more favorable hy- drologic conditions for wetlands. Many of the low-lying areas of New Hampshire are covered by stratified sand, gravel, clay, and silt deposited by glacial melt- water and by modern streams in the time since glaciation (fig. 2C). Most uplands are underlain by bedrock mantled by glacial till, a mixture of clay, silt, sand, gravel, and boulders. Both till and fine- grained sediments can restrict drainage and retain surface water. Wetlands form over till in many small depressions in New Hamp- shire uplands, over silty, clayey sands in some valleys in northern New Hampshire, over fine-grained glacial-lake deposits in parts of the Merrimack and Connecticut River valleys, and over fine-grained marine deposits along the coast. In seep areas near streams or de- pressions that intersect the water table, coarse-grained glacial de- posits can transmit ground water to overlying wetlands (Motts and O'Brien, 1981). Some glacial landforms, such as ridges, hills, and depressions can create conditions favorable for wetland formation by attenuating runoff or retaining water. For example, kettles, which are depressions that formed when glacial ice that had been buried by outwash melted, have either filled with water to form ponds or passed through several successional stages of infilling to become bogs. Contrasts in the interactions between hydrology and vegeta- tion in different settings can be illustrated by peatlands and coastal pondshore wetlands. In peatlands, vegetation patterns are deter- mined largely by water chemistry and movement (Damman and French, 1987). For example, bogs receive little input from runoff or ground water and rely on precipitation (including fog) and wind- blown dust as sources for water, nutrients, and minerals. Vegetation in bogs commonly grows in a concentric pattern because of the scarcity of nutrients and minerals in the center of the bog and the increased availability of nutrients and minerals along bog margins. Bogs are seldom flooded; even quaking (floating-mat) bogs sur- rounding open water in ponds are rarely flooded because the bog mat fluctuates with changes in water level. Fens also receive inputs from precipitation but rely principally on ground water and over- land flow for inputs of minerals and nutrients; like bogs, fens sel- dom are flooded. In contrast, flooding is the major hydrologic influence in pondshore wetlands. Coastal ponds occur largely in sandy glacial outwash, and pond water levels reflect seasonal and annual fluctua- tions in ground-water levels. Pondshore wetlands can be flooded or saturated for much of the year. Wetland plant communities are con- centrically zoned around the pond along a gradient from the long- est to the shortest duration of flooding (Dan Sperduto, written commun., 1993). TRENDS Wetlands once were much more extensive in New Hampshire. In the 1800's and early 1900's, timber harvesting and clearing and draining of wetlands for crops and grazing resulted in the loss or 276 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in New Hampshire, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity; .., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization degradation of many wetlands, particularly in the major river val- leys and along the coastline. Some of those areas reverted to wet- lands as pasture land was abandoned. In some cases, the character of the wetlands has changed. For example, most of New Hampshire's Atlantic white cedar bogs were altered by logging or flooding, and many have revegetated with red maple. As much as 7,500 acres of tidal marsh have been lost since settlement by Europeans (New Hampshire Office of State Planning, 1989). Although several Fed- eral and State regulations focus on minimizing wetland loss, many wetlands remain vulnerable. _____ Development in and near wetlands due to urbanization is a FEDERAL major cause of wetland loss or degradation. Other factors that can Department of Agriculture destroy wetlands or affect wetland functions include farming, peat Consolidated Farm Service Agency.......... harvesting, timber harvesting, road building, inadequate bridge- Forest Service................................................ support spacing and culvert diameter, all-terrain vehicle use, reser- Natural Resources Conservation Service voir construction, hydropower releases, navigation impoundments, ground-water pumping, and air or water pollution. Atmospheric Administration ........................................ .... Department of Defense CONSERVATION Army Corps of Engineers.............................................. .... ^UIMaCKVAl HJ\\ Military reservations..................................................... . .. ... ... Many government agencies and private organizations partici- ^^^"widrf6 cten-°r pate in wetland conservation in New Hampshire. The most active Geological Survey ............III!!!!"!!!!!!!!!"!!!!"""!!""!! agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in National Biological Service ......................................... table 1. National Park Service ................................................... ...... Federal wetland activities. Development activities in New Environmental Protection Agency.................................. ... Hampshire wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory pro- !FATE , r . ,. . ,.,... ° j j i i j r Department of Environmental Services hibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Waste Management Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Water Resources Division ................... Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; Water Supply and Pollution Control.. the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conser- Department of Resources and vation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; Economic Development ....................... , ., in-7->/~> t i -/ TV* /AX Division of Forests and Lands............. and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Divjsion of Pgrks gnd Recreatjon Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Natural Heritage Inventory ................. Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities Department of Safety ............................... in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, Department of Transportaiton ................ filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 Fish and Game Department..................... of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation ~t 'ce °. at -e anmn -' -- - protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues Wetlands Board .........................IZZIZ""I!IIII . permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into COUNTY AND LOCAL wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the EPA, Conservation Commissions.............................................. ... ... . and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Soil and Water Conservation Districts .......................... . . Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority pR^ATro^GA^ZATJo^^^6"18 '''"''"'"' * * * * to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit appli- Audubon Society of New Hampshire............................. . ... ... . . cations on the basis of a proposed activity's probable effects on the Ducks Unlimited.................................................................. .. .. water quality of a wetland. New England Wildflower Society................................... ... ... Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- Private colle9es and other ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- educational institutions.................................................. . ... ...... ^..u moc T- jo -A j j i ir> Society for the Protection of sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 New Hampshire Forests ................................................... . ... ... . ... . Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through The Nature Conservancy.................................................. . financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners vice (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm component of their plans. Coastal States that adopt coastal-zone Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are eligible for Federal Wetlands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Manage- Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- ment Act. pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- Some of New Hampshire's wetlands are managed by Federal tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, agencies. The FWS manages wetlands in waterfowl-protection areas, restoration, or creation plans. National Fish Hatcheries, and National Wildlife Refuges. Also, the The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 FWS administers wetland-acquisition programs such as the Partners Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland for Wildlife Program, which helps restore wetlands on private lands, National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NEW HAMPSHIRE 277 and the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, a coopera- tive program that provides funding for purchasing wetlands and associated uplands. The FWS also has funded research on peatland ecology (Damman and French, 1987). The NFS has designated 11 sites in New Hampshire as National Natural Landmarks, at least 4 of which contain significant wetlands. Some of these are owned by the State, and others are protected voluntarily by individual land- owners. The U.S. Forest Service manages a small number of wetlands in the White Mountain National Forest. The Great Bay Na- tional Estuarine Research Reserve is supported by NOAA in coop- eration with the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department. The EPA, through a grant program under the Clean Water Act, has pro- vided funding to the New Hampshire Wetlands Board and the New Hampshire Department of Resources and Economic Development's Natural Heritage Inventory Program. The EPA also is providing ad- ditional funds through the Merrimack River Initiative to identify and protect important resources and habitats of the Merrimack River, including wetlands. The Corps is investigating the effectiveness of wetlands on storage and regulation of flood flows along the Con- necticut River and the effect of development within the basin on natural valley storage. The U.S. Geological Survey, together with the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, is mapping marsh and peat deposits in the State. State wetland activities. New Hampshire regulates wetlands primarily through State law and the rules of the Wetlands Board. The Wetlands Board consists of 12 members who represent gov- ernment and industry. Administrative support to the Wetlands Board is provided largely by the Wetlands Bureau of the Department of Environmental Services' Water Resources Division and by the New Hampshire Office of State Planning's Coastal Zone Management Program. In New Hampshire, wetland regulations require permits to dredge, fill, or place structures in tidal or nontidal wetlands and waterways. The highest value has been placed on coastal wetlands, which were first protected by State statute in 1967. To enhance habitat values in adjacent tidal wetlands and to protect tidal envi- ronments from potential sources of pollution, the Board also em- phasizes the preservation of tidal buffer zones. For freshwater wet- lands, emphasis is placed on bogs and marshes, with priority based on the rarity of the habitat type, the difficulty of restoration, and the wetland's functions (New Hampshire Wetlands Board, 1993). Projects that will alter wetlands are categorized as major-, minor-, and minimum-impact projects and projects not requiring a permit. All wetlands are regulated regardless of size. In addition to the size and type of the disturbance allowed in each category, the evaluation criteria include (1) the history of disturbance at the site and related projects elsewhere in the wetland or wetland complex (cumulative impact), (2) whether the wetland has been identified by the Natural Heritage Inventory Program as an exemplary natu- ral community or whether there are documented occurrences of State or federally listed endangered or threatened species, (3) the function and value of the area, and (4) whether the wetland is des- ignated a "Prime Wetland" by the local community under State guidelines. The Wetlands Board may not grant a permit for projects in or adjacent to an area designated as "prime" without a public hearing and without evidence in the record that there will be no significant net loss of values as a result of the project or activity associated with the project. Because the State's regulations are more inclusive than section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the Corps has issued a New Hampshire State Programmatic General Permit that allows as much as 95 percent of the permit applications in New Hampshire that normally would require a Corps permit to be ap- proved through the New Hampshire Wetlands Board permitting process after Corps review (K.N. Kettenring, written commun., 1993). The Department of Environmental Services administers sec- tion 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act, which requires State wa- ter-quality certification before a section 404 permit may be issued. The Department of Environmental Services' Water Resources Di- vision also protects some wetlands through regulations of activities in rivers and lakes. The New Hampshire Department of Resources and Economic Development's Division of Forests and Lands estab- lishes and enforces acceptable management practices for logging and erosion control near surface-water bodies and wetlands. Other legislation designed to protect ecologically sensitive habitats such as wetlands includes the New Hampshire Native Plant Protection Act of 1987, which requires all State agencies and de- partments to cooperate in preserving and protecting endangered and threatened plants. In addition, the New Hampshire Legislature has enacted a Current Use Taxation law to reduce development pressures on recreational, scenic, and ecologically important open spaces. This law uses a property tax abatement program on tracts of land larger than 10 acres to encourage preservation of open space, farm land, forest land, wild land, and recreation land, including wetlands and flood plains (New Hampshire Office of State Planning, 1989). Several State agencies own or manage wetlands or are involved in other aspects of wetland protection. The Department of Fish and Game acquires and protects wetlands through wildlife-management programs. Wetlands are purchased with funds received from the sale of wildlife emblems and migratory-waterfowl stamps, as well as from accounts set up for management of nongame and endangered species (New Hampshire Office of State Planning, 1989). The De- partment owns about 35,000 acres, more than one-half of which is wetland. Most of these wetlands are part of wildlife-management areas. Merrymeeting Marsh is one example. The Natural Heritage Inventory Program has documented New Hampshire's natural com- munities and rare and endangered species and their habitats. The Program also develops plans for the protection of endangered and threatened plant species and reviews State projects and permit ap- plications for activities that could affect wetlands. The Office of State Planning is responsible for producing the wetland component of the New Hampshire Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, which describes the State's wetland-protection plans. Wetland losses due to roadbuilding are minimized through close coopera- tion between the New Hampshire Department of Transportation, the Wetlands Board, and Federal agencies. County and local wetland activities. Local conservation commissions have an advisory role in local wetland protection through oversight of the designation of Prime Wetlands and review of wetland permit applications. Under the Prime Wetlands law, mu- nicipalities may adopt what resembles a zoning overlay district (New Hampshire Office of State Planning, 1989). The adoption of the Prime Wetlands designation allows for protection of wetlands that have high local value even if they are not regionally or nationally significant. Conservation commissions must use inventory and evaluation methods accepted by the Wetlands Board for this proc- ess, such as those of Ammann and Stone (1991) and Cook and oth- ers (1993). As of 1993, Prime Wetlands designations had been adopted and submitted to the Wetlands Board by 20 of New Hampshire's 234 towns, and many others are in process (Marjorie Swope, New Hampshire Association for Conservation Commissions, oral commun., 1993). Private wetland activities. During 1987-83, through a part- nership between the privately funded Trust for New Hampshire Lands and the publicly funded New Hampshire Land Conservation Investment Program, New Hampshire spent $46.4 million to pro- tect 385 parcels of land totaling 100,897 acres, including diverse wetlands. These lands were acquired through purchases and dona- tions or protected through the use of conservation easements. The Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests is compiling an inventory of the wetland acreage acquired by the program, which will be available through the Complex Systems Research Center at the University of New Hampshire. 278 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Private organizations provide complementary functions that cannot readily be accomplished by governmental agencies. For example, private organizations such as The Nature Conservancy can more easily purchase property. The Nature Conservancy manages 14 preserves in New Hampshire, 8 of which include wetlands, and has protected 12 additional wetland sites by easement, management agreement, legal assistance, or purchase and transfer. The Audubon Society of New Hampshire monitors threatened and endangered species that use wetlands and offers educational workshops to pro- mote the use of the New Hampshire Method (Ammann and Stone, 1991; Cook and others, 1993) for the evaluation of wetlands. The New Hampshire chapter of Ducks Unlimited has worked in coop- eration with the State to purchase about 354 acres of wetland and surrounding upland habitat. The Society for Protection of New Hampshire Forests owns 83 properties and holds conservation ease- ments on 309 properties, many of which include wetlands. Other wetlands are owned or protected by local land trusts, The New England Wildflower Society, the Appalachian Mountain Club, and many others. Individuals, timber companies, towns, and other pri- vate landowners own most of New Hampshire's wetlands, and many actively pursue wetland conservation. References Cited Ammann, A.P., and Stone, A.L., 1991, Method for the comparative evalu- ation of nontidal wetlands in New Hampshire: Concord, New Hamp- shire Department of Environmental Services, variously paged. Brinson, M.M., 1993, Changes in the functioning of wetlands along envi- ronmental gradients: Wetlands, v. 13, no. 2, p. 65-74. Cook, R.A., Stone, A.L., and Ammann, A.P., 1993, Method for the evalua- tion and inventory of vegetated tidal marshes in New Hampshire: Concord, Audubon Society of New Hampshire, variously paged. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, EC., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Damman, A.W.H., and French, T.W, 1987, The ecology and peat bogs of the glaciated northeastern United States Acommunity profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.16), 114 p. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: Washing- ton D.C., U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Hammond, R.E., and Cotton, John, 1986, New Hampshire surface-water resources, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and surface-water resources: U.S. Geological Sur- vey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 329-334. Johnson, C.W, 1985, Bogs of the northeast: Hanover, N.H., The Univer- sity Press of New England, 269 p. Koteff, Carl, 1993, New Hampshire sand and gravel resources: Boston, New England Governors' Conference, Inc., 16 p. Motts, W.S., and O'Brien, A.L., 1981, Geology and hydrology of wetlands in Massachusetts: University of Massachusetts Water Resources Re- search Center Publication 123, 147 p. New Hampshire Office of State Planning, 1989, New Hampshire wetlands priority conservation plan: Concord, New Hampshire Office of State Planning, 95 p. New Hampshire Wetlands Board, 1993, New Hampshire Code of Adminis- trative Rules, Chapter Wt 100 through Wt 800: Concord, New Hamp- shire Wetlands Board, 118 p. Rubin, F.A., Justice, D.G., and Vogelmann, J.E., 1993, Final report New Hampshire statewide digital wetlands inventory: Durham, University of New Hampshire, Complex Systems Research Center, 30 p. Short, F.T., ed., 1992, The ecology of the Great Bay estuary, New Hamp- shire and Maine An estuarine profile and bibliography: Durham, University of New Hampshire, Jackson Estuarine Laboratory, 222 p. Tiner, R.W., 1987, Preliminary National Wetlands Inventory report on Vermont's wetland acreage: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 5 p. ____1991, Maine wetlands and their boundaries A guide for code en- forcement officers: Augusta, Maine Department of Economic and Community Development, Office of Comprehensive Planning, 72 p. _1992, Preliminary National Wetland Inventory report on Massachu- setts' wetland acreage: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 5 p. Widoff, Lissa, 1988, Maine wetlands conservation priority plan: Augusta, Maine State Planning Office, Bureau of Parks and Recreation, 117 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 525 Clinton Street, Bow, NH 03304; Regional Wetland Coordina- tor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA 01035 Prepared by David S. Armstrong, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 279 New Jersey Wetland Resources N, I ew Jersey's diverse wetlands are the result of the interaction of geologic events, human activities, and recent hydrologic conditions. The State's location on the East Coast has made it home to plants that include many threatened and endangered species (Tiner, 1985; Reyer and others, 1990). Of 338 rare plants identified in New Jer- sey by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), 249 species grow in wetland or aquatic habitats. Major wetlands in the State include the Great Swamp (fig. 1) in the north and the wetlands of the New Jersey Pinelands and estuaries in the south (fig. 2A). The wetlands of New Jersey are valuable for their fish and wildlife and their contribution to environmental quality, society, and the economy (Tincr, 1985). Wetlands provide spawning and nurs- ery grounds for shellfish such as crabs, clams, oysters, and shrimp and for finfish species such as alcwivcs, blueback herring, bass, white perch, American shad, menhaden, blucfish, sea trout, and mullet. Bird species that include peregrine falcons, snow and Canada geese, and pintail, canvasback, mallard, and black ducks use New Jersey's salt marshes for feeding, migration, and wintering grounds. Beaver and muskrat use wetlands for their homes, and other furbearers such as raccoons, mink, river otter, foxes, mice, and rab- bits use wetlands for food and shelter (Tiner, 1985). Many reptile and amphibian species, including the endangered pine barrens tree frog, the blue-spotted salamander, and the endangered bog turtle, also live in the State's wetlands (Susan Lockwood, New Jersey De- partment of Environmental Protection and Energy, written commun., 1993). The environmental quality of aquatic habitats is enhanced by wetlands. Wetland soils and vegetation filter or absorb nutrients and can remove heavy metals and other contaminants from waters mov- ing through them (Tiner, 1985). Wetlands reduce turbidity and sedi- ment loading, thereby slowing the rate of siltation of downstream harbors and navigable rivers and streams. The aquatic productivity of wetlands is very high. The net vegetative productivity of a salt marsh can exceed that of a tropical rain forest, and salt marshes support a diverse community of animals that inhabit estuarinc wa- ters. Wetlands have socioeconomic as well as habitat and environ- mental-quality value (Tincr, 1985). They provide flood- and storm- damage protection, erosion control, and public water supply and allow for the production of economically important natural species such as blueberries, cranberries, wild rice, salt hay, and timber. Cranberry growing is a significant industry in New Jersey; more Figure 1. The Great Swamp National Wildlife Refuge near Meyersville. (Photograph by Mark Hardy, U.S. Geological Survey). than 3,000 acres of cranberry bog were under private management in 1992. Wetlands also provide many recreational and educational opportunities, including hunting and fishing, nature study, boating, painting and drawing, and photography. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deepwater habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and others, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in New Jersey is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in New Jer- sey are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine... Estuarine.. Marine Wetland description Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants {aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. An FWS study indicated that, as of the mid-1980's, wetlands covered about 916,000 acres (19 percent) of New Jersey (Tiner, 1985). Although wetlands are present throughout the State, most are in New Jersey's coastal plain. Six of the 10 counties in the Coastal Plain are more than 25 percent wetland; 3 of the remaining 4 are between 10 and 25 percent wetland. Nearly 99 percent (by area) of New Jersey's wetlands are palustrine or estuarine (Tiner, 1985). Palustrine wetlands generally 280 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES are swamps and freshwater lowlands, whereas estuarine wetlands arc marshes and associated saltwater wetlands. Two-thirds of the State's wetland acreage is palustrine, and nearly one-third is estua- rine. The remaining 1 percent is divided among the other wetland systems. New Jersey's most common palustrine wetland types are swamps (forested wetland), shrub swamps (scrub-shrub wetland), and freshwater marsh and wel meadow (emergent wetland). Bogs (wetlands that have organic soils) are less common and are found mainly in the northwestern part of the State. Palustrine forested wetlands are more abundant and more widely distributed in New Jersey than any other wetland type. They also have the most diverse vegetation. Of the palustrine category, about three-fifths (by area) is deciduous-forested (hardwood swamps), and about one-fifth is evergreen-forested (cedar swamps and pitch-pine lowlands). Nearly 30 MILES 10 20 30 KILOMETERS WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the Stale. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat three-fourths of New Jersey's estuarine wetlands is salt and brack- ish marsh distributed over four major drainage areas: Hudson Ri ver- Raritan Bay, Barncgat Bay, New Jersey inland bays, and Delaware Bay (Field and others, 1991). The location of New Jersey's wetlands is closely related to the State's ccorcgion distribution (fig. 2B), as defined by Omernik (1987). The ecoregional structure of the State is, in large part, de- fined by its physiography (fig. 2C), which is, in turn, determined primarily by its geology and glacial history. The northern part of the State is mostly in the Northern Piedmont Ecoregion and is un- derlain by sedimentary, igneous, and metamorphic rocks that have been modified in places by glacial action. During the last ice age, glaciation affected the northern one-third of the State, and this was a major factor in the creation of wetlands there. After the glaciers melted, wetlands formed in depressions left by glacial action. Three of the State's physiographic units the Piedmont, New England, and Valley and Ridge Provinces largely correspond to the sedimen- tary and igneous geological units of the northern part of the State and generally coincide with the Northern Piedmont Ecoregion. The State's southern one-half lies in the Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain ecoregion and is in the Coastal Plain physiographic province, which is underlain by layered sedimentary rocks. Water in the well- drained sandy soils and aquifers of the southern part of the State discharges to the barrier-island cmbayments of the Atlantic coast and to the Delaware Bay, forming estuarine wetlands along those coasts. Also, freshwater wetlands have formed where water dis- charges to streams or to depressions in the low-relief landscape. Human and animal activities also have created wetlands. Bea- ver have played an important role, creating impoundments behind their dams. Dam building, farm-pond construction, and construc- B ECORECIONS A. Northeastern Highlands B. Northeastern Coastal Zone C. Northern Appalachian Plateau and Uplands D. North Central Appalachians E. Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain F. Northern Piedmont PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS A. Valley and Ridge Province B. New England Province C. Piedmont Province D. Coastal Plain Province Figure 2. Wetland distribution in New Jersey and ecological and physical features that control wetland distribution in the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Ecoregions. C, Physiography. (Sources: A, T.E. Da/7/, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Omernik, J987. C, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NEW JERSEY 281 tion of artificially engineered wetlands are three of the ways that humans can create wetlands. Wetlands also can be formed by river action (Tiner, 1985). HYDROLOGIC SETTING New Jersey has two geohydrologic regimes one south of the Fall Line in the Coastal Plain, and the other north of the Fall Line, associated with the State's remaining physiographic provinces. The aquifer system of the Coastal Plain in the southern one-half of the State is composed of alternating layers of unconsolidated clay, sand, and gravel. In contrast, north of the Fall Line, ground water flows through fractured rocks and glacial valley-fill deposits. Precipita- tion, which is the source of water to the State's hydrologic system, ranges from about 43 inches on the coast to about 47 inches in the northern part. About one-half of the precipitation that reaches the land surface is returned to the atmosphere by evaporation and plant transpiration. South of the Fall Line. About 95 percent of the State's es- tuarine wetlands and 75 percent of its marshes and swamplands are in the Coastal Plain. Coastal Plain wetlands constitute about 87 per- cent of the State's total wetland area (Tiner, 1985). The layered clay, sand, and gravel that make up New Jersey's Coastal Plain form a wedge that dips and thickens to the southeast. From a feather edge along the Fall Line and the Delaware River, the Coastal Plain sedi- ments thicken to more than 1,000 feet at the Continental Shelf. Recharge to the region's shallow ground-water system occurs in interstream areas. Water entering the system flows toward areas of lower altitude, where it returns to the surface as base flow to streams, ponds, and lakes and as leakage to coastal water bodies. Aquifers that are overlain by relatively impermeable clay layers are recharged by precipitation entering outcrop areas near the Fall Line and by slow percolation downward through the confining clay. Wetlands form where ground water discharges along rivers and streams and in low-lying coastal areas. Farther inland, wetlands form where clay or other impervious materials restrict vertical water movement and provide habitats for hydrophytic vegetation. The forested swamplands in the Coastal Plain are strongly associated with rivers and streams many of them in the New Jersey Pinelands. Most estuarine wetlands in the Coastal Plain are located in the bar- rier-island complex that lies along the Atlantic coast south of Point Pleasant and on the coast of the Delaware Bay south of Salem. North of the Fall Line. Northern New Jersey is underlain by consolidated sedimentary and igneous rocks. In such geohydrologic systems, ground-water storage and flow occur in fractures in the rocks. In the northeastern part of the State, glacial valley-fill sedi- ments also store and transport water. Most of the wetlands in the northern part of the State are palustrine and have formed around water in glacial lakes and depressions that formed at the end of the last ice age. These lakes are gradually filling in with organic matter and becoming emergent, scrub-shrub, or forested wetlands that have organic soils. Water for the wetlands is supplied by precipitation and by ground-water discharge from the surrounding glacial sediments and fractured crystalline rock. Where silt and clay locally confine the aquifers, freshwater wetlands such as the Great Swamp have formed (Vecchioli and others, 1962). The location and composition of plant communities inhabit- ing New Jersey's wetlands both north and south of the Fall Line are affected by depth of water, water-level fluctuations, soil mois- ture, and salinity (Penfound, 1952), as well as by other soil proper- ties, biological factors, and human activities. TRENDS The State's wetlands have been drained and filled since settle- ment by Europeans began in the 1600's. Dahl (1990) estimated that New Jersey lost 39 percent of its wetlands between about 1780 and 1980. Filling increased markedly following World War II. Tiner (1987) estimates median losses of tidal marshes on a county-by- county basis from 1952 to 1973 at about 30 percent but reports losses of up to 100 percent in two counties. During that period, 2 of New Jersey's 15 counties that contain tidal marsh lost 100 per- cent of that marsh; 5 other counties lost about 50 percent of their tidal-marsh area. Ferrigno and others (1973) estimated that the loss in tidal-marsh acreage in New Jersey from 1953 to 1973 exceeded 24 percent. Since the enactment of the Wetlands Act of 1970 and the Freshwater Wetlands Protection Act of 1987 by the State, per- mitted wetland losses have fallen sharply to between 50 and 100 acres per year (Ernest Hahn, New Jersey Department of Environ- mental Protection and Energy, oral commun., 1992). Wetlands have been drained primarily for crop production and pasturage. Wetlands have been filled for housing, transportation, industrialization, and landfills. Stream channelization, dredging for navigation, and reservoir, harbor, and marina construction also have adversely affected New Jersey's wetlands. In addition to quantita- tive changes caused by these activities, qualitative changes have resulted from point and nonpoint discharges to surface waters. The discharges are associated with agriculture, logging, industry, mu- nicipal sewage, and urban runoff, all of which add contaminants and silt to surface waters (Tiner, 1985). Although the trend has been toward a net loss of wetlands, some wetland area has been added through the construction of ponds and reservoirs and through planned wetland construction. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in New Jersey. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in New Jersey wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibi- tions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silvicultural activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners 282 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government tion was held, is an intergovernmental treaty that forms the basis agencies and private organizations in New Jersey, 1993 for international cooperation in conserving wetland habitats.) Also, [Source: Classification of activities is generalizexd from information provided Supawna Meadows on the Delaware Bay, Cape May, and the Great by agencies and organizations. ., agency or organization participates in Swamp are National Wildlife Refuges. Many other New Jersey wet- wetland-related activity; , agency or organization does not participate in lands are in State wildlife Management Areas. The New Jersey wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- _. , , , , r /v . . c ^ XT toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- Pinelands extends across much of the eastern part of southern New lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Jersey. Most of the Pinelands, including its wetlands, is part of the _____________________________________ Atlantic Coastal Plain Biosphere Reserve of the United Nations Man ^ \ anc^ l^e Biosphere program (Good and Good, 1984). In the Agency or organization_____________^ <£" <£* ^~ <£* <$* Pinelands, the Mullica River estuary is part of the Experimental FEDERAL Ecological Reserve network. The Mullica River also is being con- Department of Agriculture sidered as a site for a National Estuarine Research Reserve. Consolidated Farm Service Agency........................... ... ... ... ... ... State Wetland Activities. State laws governing wetlands are Forest Service ................................................................. ... the Hackensack Meadowlands Reclamation and Development Act Natural Resources Conservation Service ................ ....... of 1969, the Wetlands Act of 1970, the Waterfront Development Act °f 1914' the Coastal *«* ^^ RevieW Act °f 1973' the F1°°d Atmospheric Administration Hazard Area Control Act of 1979, the Pinelands Protection Act of Department of Defense 1979, and the Freshwater Wetlands Protection Act of 1987. State Army Corps of Engineers.............................................. ........ agencies that have a role in wetland conservation include the Dela- Military reservations..................................................... . ware River Basin Commission, the New Jersey Department of En- Department of the Interior vironmental Protection and Energy, and the Pinelands Commission. Fish and Wildlife Service.............................................. ...... . _ _ . _ OJ . _ . , , . Geological Survey Tne Department of Environmental Protection and Energy admin- National Biological Service ......................................... ... ... ... ... ... isters the Wetlands Act of 1970, the Coastal Area Facility Review National Park Service ................................................... ..... . Act, the Waterfront Development Act of 1914, the Flood Hazard Environmental Protection Agency.................................. . . Control Act of 1979, and the Freshwater Wetlands Protection Act !?TATE ,_ . ,_ . ._ of 1987. The Pinelands Protection Act of 1979 is administered by Department of Environmental Protection and Energy . . , . . . . c ^ , , r *, Bureau of Coastal Regulation..................................... .......... the Pinelands Commission. A summary of these laws can be found Bureau of Inland Regulation........................................ ... ... ... in a publication by the Department of Environmental Protection and The Natural Lands Trust................................................ ... ... ... ... Energy (1992). Pinelands Commission ...................................................... .... jn addition to its wetland-management activities, New Jersey Rutgers University Center for also i§ actjve jn data collection and public education regarding Coastal and Environmental Studies ............................... ... ... .......... , , , Oi , XT . , TT .. r^. <. A * PR IVATE wetlands. The States Natural Heritage Program maintains a data Ducks Unlimited.................................................................. . ...... base of rare plant, animal, and natural communities, and its Natu- The Nature Conservancy.................................................. ...... ... ral Areas program administers 42 areas that are set aside for public The New Jersey Conservation Foundation.................. . . use and education. New Jersey also runs the Delaware Estuary Re- The Trust for Public Lands................................................ . search Program and the Natural Lands Trust, a land-bank program. Private cranberry growers............................................... . The Natural ^^ ^^ ^ protected between 6,000 and 7,000 acres of New Jersey wetlands, mostly salt marsh, and was active in obtaining designation of the Delaware Bay as a Ramsar site. The Rutgers University Center for Coastal and Environmental Studies who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm performs research and data-collection activities. Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- Private wetland activities. Several private organizations are servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and actrve m NCW jersey wetlands protection. The New Jersey Conser- Wetlands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation vatjon Foundation has a wetland-acquisition program and was in- Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- strumental in obtaining passage of the New Jersey Freshwater Wet- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- lands Protection Act. The Trust for Public Lands also administers a tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, wetland-acquisition program. The Nature Conservancy and Ducks restoration, or creation plans. Unlimited acquire and manage wetlands, conduct research on the The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 preservation of endangered species, and work to create and restore Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland wetland areas. Cranberry growers also manage several thousand protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland acres of wetlands. Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for . Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- References Cited vice provides guidance to States in developing the wetland compo- Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, EC., andLaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- nent of their plans. Coastal and Great Lakes States that adopt coastal- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. zone management programs and plans approved by the National Fish and Wildlife Service Report, FWS/OBS-79/31,131 p. Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Manage- Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, ment Act 13 p. o ' i *i j XT T u u 11 A * A Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: U.S. Geo- Several wetlands in New Jersey have been specially designated . . ', 0 ' . / , i -, nnn nnn - , j i ii ^ «o« logical Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. for research, protection, education, or other purposes. The 13,080- Ferrigno> Fred) widjeskog, Lee, and Toth, Steve, 1973, Marsh destruction: acre Edwin B. Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge has been desig- Trenton, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Divi- nated a wetland of international significance by the FWS under the sion of Fish, Game, and Wildlife, 20 p. Ramsar Convention. (The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of In- Field, D.W, Reyer, A.J., Genovese, P.V., and Shearer, B.D., 1991, Coastal ternational Importance, named for Ramsar, Iran, where the conven- wetlands of the United States An accounting of a valuable natural National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NEW JERSEY 283 resource: Washington, D.C., National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- ministration and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service cooperative report, 59 p. Good, R.E., and Good, N.F., 1984, The Pinelands National Reserve An ecosystem approach to management: BioScience, v. 34, no. 3, p. 169- 173. Hafner, C.L., Moore, C.R., and Day, C.G., 1992, An investigation and veri- fication of draft national wetlands inventory maps for Cape May County, New Jersey: Pleasantville, N.J., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser- vice, 93 p. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy, 1992, The environmental manual for municipal officials: Trenton, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy and The Asso- ciation of New Jersey Environmental Commissions, 177 p. Omernik, J.M., 1987, Ecoregions of the conterminous United States Map supplement: Annals of the Association of American Geographers, v. 77, no. 1, scale 1:7,500,000. Penfound, W.T., 1952, Southern swamps and marshes: Botanical Review, v. 18, p. 413-446. Reyer, A.J., Shearer, B.D., Genovese, P.V., Holland, C.L., Cassells, J.E., Field, D.W, and Alexander, C.E., 1990, The distribution and areal extent of coastal wetlands in estuaries of the mid-Atlantic region: Washington, D.C., National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 23 p. Tiner, R.W, Jr., 1985, Wetlands of New Jersey: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 117 p. ____1987, Mid-Atlantic wetlands A disappearing natural treasure: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 28 p. Vecchioli, John, Gill, H.E., and Lang, S.M., 1962, Hydrologic role of the Great Swamp and other marshland in the upper Passaic River basin: Journal of the American Water Works Association, v. 54, no. 6, p. 695- 701. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 810 Bear Tavern Road, Suite 206, West Trenton, NJ 08628; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA 01035 Prepared by Thomas H. Barringer, U.S. Geological Survey 284 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 285 New Mexico Wetland Resources We'etlands cover about 482,000 acres (0.6 percent) of New Mexico, a reduction of about 33 percent from the wetland acreage that ex- isted about 200 years ago (Dahl, 1990). New Mexico's wetland acre- age places the State 34th in total wetland acreage among the 48 conterminous States. Wetlands are ecologically important and economically valu- able to the State. Wetlands provide important wildlife habitat. For example, in the Rio Grande Valley, wetlands provide habitat for 246 species of birds, 10 species of amphibians, 38 species of reptiles, and 60 species of mammals (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1990). Wetlands also provide stopover, feeding, and breeding grounds for migratory waterfowl (fig. 1). Riparian (streamside) wetlands along perennial streams are important as migration corridors for a variety of waterfowl and other wildlife. The playa lakes in eastern New Mexico are vital links in a chain of wetlands along the Central Flyway, which extends from central Canada to the coast of Texas. Areas of springs and marshes provide essential habitat for many rare and endangered species and for indigenous fish and wildlife in the western part of the State. Wetlands contribute to flood attenuation, bank stabilization, and improved water quality. New Mexico's tourist industry benefits from the beauty of the State's diverse wetlands. These wetlands pro- vide opportunities for recreational activities that include fishing, hunting, bird watching, nature photography, camping, and hiking. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deepwater habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and others, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in New Mexico is shown in figure 2A\ only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in New Mexico are described below. System Palustrine Lacustrine Riverine, Figure 1. Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge. These riparian wetlands provide habitat for migratory and resident waterfowl, fish, and other wildlife. (Photograph by Lisa Carter, U.S. Geological Survey.) Wetland description .Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees {forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. , Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. , Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Although wetlands occur in all areas of New Mexico, they are most numerous in the eastern and northern areas of the State (fig. 2A). In the Southern Rocky Mountains (fig. 25), wetlands are mostly in high mountain valleys and inter mountain basins. In the Great Plains, wetlands occur along the flood plains of the Canadian and Pecos Rivers and in association with playa lakes. In the Colo- rado Plateaus and Basin and Range, wetlands are sparsely distrib- uted, with the exception of wetlands associated with the San Juan, San Francisco, and Gila Rivers. Palustrine wetlands are distributed statewide. In New Mexico, palustrine wetlands include forested wetlands in river flood plains and near springs and seeps; scrub-shrub wetlands such as bottom- land shrubland; emergent wetlands, such as marshes, fens, alpine snow glades, and wet and salt meadows; aquatic bed wetlands in shallow ponds and small lakes; and sparsely or nonvegetated wet- lands such as playa lakes. Palustrine wetlands along rivers, streams, springs, lakes, and ponds are called riparian wetlands. Riparian wetlands along the State's major rivers provide habitat for fish, wild- life, and diverse plant life. They also provide habitat for migrating, overwintering, and nesting waterfowl. One of the more notable ri- parian wetlands in New Mexico is in the Bosque del Apache Na- tional Wildlife Refuge. The 57,191-acre refuge lies along 9 miles of the Rio Grande in south-central New Mexico. Marshes within the refuge are ideal winter habitat for migratory birds, including ducks, geese, sandhill cranes, and whooping cranes. Efforts are being made to maintain and restore native riparian cottonwood habitat in the refuge for a variety of birds and other wildlife. Many western spe- cies of riparian trees and shrubs, such as willows and cottonwoods, have been lost because of nonnatural streamflow regimes (Howe and Knopf, 1991). The nonnatural flows followed the completion of water projects in the first half of the 20th century, resulting in rapid colonization and expansion of the exotic Russian-olive and salt ce- dar. The playa lakes of eastern New Mexico provide habitat for migrating, overwintering, and nesting waterfowl in the Central Fly- way (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1990). The estimated number of playa lakes in the State is 1,700, and they range in area from less than 1 acre to more than 600 acres (Nelson and others, 1983). The 286 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES playa lakes range in wetness from dry lake bed to shallow lake and can be fresh or saline. The freshwater playas are numerous, small to medium in size, and serve as zones of recharge to the underlying aquifer (Osterkamp and Wood, 1987). The saline playas are larger and fewer than the freshwater playas and are areas of discharge from the underlying aquifer. Most playa lakes in New Mexico are palustrine. However, playa lakes larger than 20 acres are classified as lacustrine wetlands, as are the shallow areas of large reservoirs. Riverine wetlands occur in the shallow river channels of pe- rennial streams. There are about 3,500 miles of streams in New Mexico (Ong and others, 1993). HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands form where a persistent water supply is at or near the land surface. The location and persistence of the supply of water is a function of precipitation and runoff patterns, evaporation po- tential, topography, and the presence of a shallow water table. Precipitation and runoff rates differ annually and with loca- tion and season. Average annual precipitation in New Mexico (fig. 2C) ranges from about 8 inches in the northwestern corner of the State and in the southern Rio Grande Valley to 24 inches in the mountains of the northern and southern parts of the State. Runoff (fig. 2O) is greatest in the northern mountains and smallest in the desert areas of the southern and east- ern parts of the State. Much of the run- off from the mountains occurs during concurrent snowmelt and rainfall in the spring and summer. Average annual pan evaporation varies across the State and ranges from about 40 to 112 inches per year (Nelson and others, 1983). Most evaporation occurs from March through September and decreases with increasing altitude. Because annual evaporation exceeds annual rainfall, most of the State has a net annual moisture deficit. The mois- ture deficit is a limiting factor in the formation of wetlands and to the con- tinued existence of some of the more fragile wetlands. Even those areas of the State having the highest precipita- tion and lowest evaporation (high mountain regions) can be unfavorable for development of wetlands because of steep topography, shifting stream chan- nels, and unfavorable soil conditions (Cooper, 1986). Shallow water tables and ground- water discharge into topographic de- pressions, streams, and springs main- tain wetlands in many areas of New Mexico. These wetlands can be along small streams that have perennial flow in only short reaches or along larger, perennial streams. In intermountain basins, wetlands are maintained by a shallow water table and springs whose source is recharge from precipitation and runoff that occur during spring and summer. Climatic, topographic, and hydro- logic characteristics differ among and sometimes within the physiographic provinces. New Mexico's di- verse physiography, climate, and topography result in diverse hy- drologic settings for wetland formation. In the Colorado Plateaus and Basin and Range Provinces (fig. 2B\ wetlands occur in springs and seeps, around oxbow lakes, along streams and rivers, around reservoirs, and in other areas where the water table is near the land surface. The arid climate of this region results in a low density and acreage of wetlands. Wetlands, although few in number, are vital to wildlife of these physiographic provinces. In the Great Plains, wetlands occur in riparian zones along perennial streams, around oxbow lakes, in isolated natural depres- sions with permanent or seasonal water supply, in playa lakes, and in association with other lakes, reservoirs, channelized streams, rivers, and irrigation ditches. Playa lakes make up the largest area of wetlands in this province. The area of playa lakes has topography classified as either smooth plains, irregular plains, or tablelands (Nelson and others, 1983). Smooth plains are largely on upland terrain, and irregular plains and tablelands are mostly on lowland terrain. Because of the flatness of the terrain, there is generally little stream drainage, and playa lakes collect most of the surface runoff. The playa lakes are 50 100 MILES WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland 50 100 KILOMETERS Predominantly deepwater habitat Figure 2. Wetland distribution in New Mexico and physical and climatological features that control wetland distribution in the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NEW MEXICO 287 usually shallow depressions that have large surface area relative to the total volume of water contained in them. Consequently, most playa lakes have small storage capacities. Studies by Osterkamp and Wood (1987) indicate that freshwa- ter playa lakes in the Great Plains of New Mexico originate wher- ever surface depressions collect precipitation runoff. The lakes en- large as a result of dissolution of carbonates by water infiltrating the unsaturated zone above the underlying aquifer and subsequent subsidence of the lake bed. Over time, the older central lake acquires a layer of clay-rich deposits that largely restricts water movement from the playa lake to the underlying aquifer. Water probably is removed from freshwater playa lakes primarily by recharge to the underlying aquifer from the areas around the lake where lake-bed sediments have not yet accumulated (Osterkamp and Wood, 1987) and by evaporation that in some years ranges as high as 96 to 112 inches per year (Nelson and others, 1983). There is no general agree- B PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS ment on the origin of saline playa lakes; however, Wood and Jones (1990) propose that the source of the salinity is from the concen- tration by evaporation of runoff and shallow, fresh ground water that discharges from the underlying aquifer. In the Southern Rocky Mountains, wetlands occur in two physiographically and climatically distinct settings, mountain val- leys and intermountain basins. Generally, mountain valleys are geo- logically young and therefore steep. The valleys have been shaped over time either by running water throughout their entire length or by glaciers at higher altitudes and running water at lower altitudes. At high altitudes in some mountain valleys, glaciation formed large cirque basins in which remnant glaciers or late-melting snow main- tains spring, seep, and snow-bed wetlands. Also, at these high alti- tudes, ponds form in depressions behind slumping saturated soils or in depressions caused by the weight of accumulated snow. Be- low the cirque basins, wetlands occur in the glaciated, U-shaped valleys, on saturated cliff faces, at the sloping floor near the sides of the valley, in glacial kettle ponds, in oxbow lakes, in depressions on glacial moraines, in lakes created by terminal or lateral moraines, in landslide-formed lakes, in seeps and springs, and in beaver ponds. In steep, V-shaped, nonglaciated areas of mountain valleys, wetlands occur as narrow riparian wetlands, near seeps and springs, and in beaver ponds (Windell and others, 1986). Intermountain basins were filled by sediments derived from erosion of the surrounding mountains. The large, flat valleys are drained by low-gradient meandering streams and rivers. Intermoun- tain-basin wetlands occur along these streams and rivers, in con- structed and natural impoundments, around oxbow lakes, and in other areas where the water table is near the land surface. The shal- low water table is maintained by underlying aquifers, impermeable substrates, or annual floods (Windell and others, 1986). TRENDS The FWS has estimated that from the 1780's to the 1980's, wet- land acreage in New Mexico decreased by 33 percent from about 720,000 to 482,000 acres (Dahl, 1990). Much of the decrease is attributable to the loss of native vegetation along streams because PRECIPITATION Line of equal annual precipitation- Interval, in inches, is variable RUNOFF 2 Line of equal annual runoff Interval, in inches, is variable Figure 2. Continued. Wetland distribution in New Mexico and physical and climatological features that control wetland distribution in the State. B, Physiography. C, Average annual precipitation. D, Average annual runoff. (Sources: B, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center. C and D, Cold and Denis, 1986.) 288 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Table 1. Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in New Mexico, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. », agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;.... agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization of a change in streamflow resulting from reservoir construction or agricultural water diversions. The loss of native vegetation along streams alters riparian-wetland functions and allows the prolifera- tion of nonnative vegetation (Howe and Knopf, 1991). Wetland losses in rural areas can be attributed to conversion to cropland, dewatering or diverting water for irrigation, and over- grazing by livestock. Development of urban areas has caused wet- land loss or degradation owing to encroachment of residential and commercial construction, dewatering for municipal and industrial water supply, channelization, and contamination from inadequately treated sewage and industrial waste. Other causes of wetland loss FEDERAL or degradation are clear cutting, burning, hard-rock mining and Department of Agriculture related activities that produce toxic acidic or alkaline runoff, placer Consolidated Farm Service Agency........................... ... mining, erosion and sedimentation, sand and gravel mining, road Forest Service ................................................................. ... and railroad construction, and dam and reservoir construction in _ Natu/al Rte8f0"rc.es Conservation Service ---- *i j /vir j 11 j <.u ir>o^ Department of Defense wetland areas (Wmdell and others, 1986). Army Corps of Engineers ............................................... . . Some human activities have helped to form wetlands or enlarge Military reservations ..................................................... existing ones. The construction of reservoirs between 1916 and Department of the Interior 1985, which provided for storage of more than 5.9 million acre-feet Bureauof Land Management...................................... . . . of surface water (Garrabrant and Gar n, 1990), resulted in the for- Bureau trf Reclamation ................................................. . ...... f ., \ i ., , c , . , j- TT Fish and Wildlife Service.............................................. . mation of wetlands along the edge of those water bodies. However, Geological Survey such gains are at the expense of the original, natural riparian wet- National Biological Service ......................................... ... ... ... lands. Farm-pond construction also contributes to the formation of National Park Service ................................................... ... wetlands around the edge of the pond. More than one-half of the Environmental Protection Agency.................................. State's cropland is irrigated (Garrabrant and Garn, 1990), and leak- ^TATE tr, ,.,. j , rn .,.,..., Department of Game and Fish......................................... ing ditches and seeps and return flow associated with irrigation have En£rgy_ Minera |( and Natura , contributed to the formation of wetlands. Resources Department Environment Department.................................................. ...» /~r»viCCD\/ATir»lvi State Engineer Office........................................................ eUlMStKVAl IUIM University of New Mexico Many government agencies and private organizations partici- co^^AN^l^ pate in wetland conservation in New Mexico. The most active agen- Albuquerque Open Space Division................................. . .... cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table Santa Fe County.................................................................. 1. PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS Federal wetland activities. Development activities in New National Audubon Society ............................................... Mexico wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohi- Th^Na^u"^ Conservancy IIIIII'I'IIIII * . * bitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Conser- Trade Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. vation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Wetlands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines corn- in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation restoration, or creation plans. protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act encourages permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetland protection through funding incentives. The act requires wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehen- Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- sive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States State recreational land; the National Park Service provides guidance and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to States in developing the wetland component of their plans, to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- The U.S. Forest Service (FS) manages five National Forests in posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. New Mexico that contain diverse wetlands and riparian ecosystems. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- The FS also coordinates with State agencies and private landown- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- ers on wetland-conservation activities. sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 The FWS manages six National Wildlife Refuges in New Mexico Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through that provide habitat for migrating birds, endangered species, and financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of other wildlife and wildlife-oriented public recreation. Under the wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act, the FWS evaluated eight allies in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the priority wetland sites in the State for acquisition (U.S. Fish and altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- Wildlife Service, 1990). cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, A goal of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is to restore, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal maintain, and improve riparian wetland area conditions on public Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners land in New Mexico. The BLM is responsible for the management of who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm 12.8 million acres of public land in the tristate area of New Mexico, National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NEW MEXICO 289 Oklahoma, and Kansas, which includes 27,600 acres of riparian wetland (Bureau of Land Management, 1990). State wetland activities. The principal State agencies in New Mexico that regulate or manage wetlands are the Department of Game and Fish, Environment Department, and the State Engineer Office. Also involved is the State Park and Recreation Division of the Energy, Mineral, and Natural Resources Department, which developed the New Mexico Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan (New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department, 1988). This plan is a component of the 1986 Statewide Compre- hensive Outdoor Recreation Plan. The goals of agencies managing wetlands in New Mexico are to provide habitat for fish and wildlife and for diverse plant species, to maintain wetlands for erosion and flood control, and to enhance wetlands as agricultural, recreational, and scenic resources. State management of wetlands in New Mexico began with an assessment of State wetlands by the State Park and Recreation Di- vision (New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources De- partment, 1988). The steps in the assessment were to locate wet- lands, determine their types, assess their quality, prioritize them according to their value and benefit, and rate the probable effect on them of each of the major causes of wetland losses. The Division considers the seven major causes of loss or degradation of wetlands in New Mexico to be (1) municipal water development, (2) natural water-table fluctuation, (3) development of land surfaces, (4) pol- lution, (5) erosion, tree cutting, or siltation, (6) invasion by nonna- tive plant species, and (7) poor management. The assessment of the quality of wetlands is based on habitat conditions, the dominance of native or rare species, the presence of terrestrial animals, and the uniqueness of the wetland in New Mexico. State government acqui- sition of wetlands will be based on whether the public values and benefits of wetlands can be maintained or realized under present ownership (New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department, 1988). County and local wetland activities. The Open Space Divi- sion of the city of Albuquerque acquires, manages, and restores wetlands. The Division also conducts feasibility studies and inven- tories wetlands in areas under its jurisdiction. The county of Santa Fe is involved in research and inventory of wetlands in the county. Private wetland activities. Private organizations involved in wetland management and conservation in New Mexico include the National Audubon Society, the Sierra Club, and The Nature Con- servancy. A principal activity of the National Audubon Society and the Sierra Club is the restoration and creation of wetlands. The Si- erra Club also conducts research in wetlands. The Nature Conser- vancy acquires wetlands and other ecologically valuable habitats for conservation. A major goal of these private organizations is to in- form the public about the value of wetlands. References Cited Bureau of Land Management, 1990, New Mexico riparian-wetland 2000 A management strategy: Santa Fe, N. Mex., Bureau of Land Manage- ment, 25 p. Cooper, D.J., 1986, Ecological studies in wetland vegetation, Cross Creek Valley, Holy Cross Wilderness, Sawatch Range, Colorado: Boulder, Colo., Holy Cross Wilderness Defense Fund Technical Report 2,25 p. (Available from Holy Cross Wilderness Defense Fund, 1130 Alpine, Boulder, Colo. 80304.) Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: Washing- ton, D.C., U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Garrabrant, L.A., and Garn, H.S., 1990, New Mexico water supply and use, in National water summary 1987 Hydrologic events and water sup- ply and use: U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 2350, p. 375 - 382. Gold, R.L., and Denis, L.P., Jr., 1986, New Mexico surface-water resources, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydro- logic events and surface-water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 341-346. Howe, W.H., and Knopf, F.L., 1991, On the imminent decline of Rio Grande cottonwoods in central New Mexico: The Southwestern Naturalist, v. 36, no. 2, p. 218-224. Nelson, R.W., Logan, W.J., and Weller, E.G., 1983, Playa wetlands and wildlife on the southern great plains A characterization of habitat: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-83128, 163 p. New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department, 1988, New Mexico wetlands priority conservation plan: Albuquerque, N. Mex., New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Depart- ment, State Park and Recreation Division, 78 p. Ong, Kim, Lepp, R.L., and Piatt, Jim, 1993, New Mexico stream water quality, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1990- 91 Hydrologic events and stream water quality: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2400, p. 403-412. Osterkamp, W.R., and Wood, W.W., 1987, Playa lake basins on the South- ern High Plains of Texas and New Mexico Part 1, Hydrologic, geo- morphic, and geologic evidence for their development: Geologic So- ciety of America Bulletin, v. 99, no. 2, p. 215-223. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1990, Regional wetlands concept plan New Mexico wetlands: Albuquerque, N. Mex., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 185 p. Windell, J.T., Willard, B.E., Cooper, D.J., and others, 1986, An ecological characterization of Rocky Mountain montane and subalpine wetlands: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 86 (11), 298 p. Wood, W.W, and Jones, B.F., 1990, Origin of saline lakes and springs on the southern High Plains of Texas and New Mexico, in Gustavson, T.C., ed., Geological framework and regional hydrology Upper Cenozoic Blackwater Draw and Ogallala Formation, Great Plains: Austin, Tex., Bureau of Economic Geology, p. 193-208. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 4501 Indian School Rd., NE, Suite 200, Albuquerque, NM 87110; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Fish and Wildlife Enhancement, 500 Gold Ave., SW, Albuquerque, NM 87103 Prepared by B.D. Jones, U.S. Geological Survey 290 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 291 New York Wetland Resources Ihe diverse wetlands of New York have formed from the interac- tion of geologic events, climate, and hydrology. New York's fresh- water and saltwater wetlands are important for fish and wildlife, environmental quality, human society, and the economy. Estuarine wetlands provide habitat for clams and oysters, and they provide spawning and nursery grounds for commercially important fish species, including alewife, blueback herring, bass, white perch, American shad, menhaden, bluefish, sea trout, and mullet. Many bird species, including osprey, peregrine falcons, snow and Canada geese, and pintail, canvasback, mallard, and black ducks, use New "York's salt marshes for feeding, migration, and wintering grounds. Nesting bald eagles and the largest colony of great blue herons in New York live in the Iroquois National Wildlife Refuge. Beavers, muskrat, raccoons, river otters, foxes, and rabbits use wetlands as a source of food and shelter. Many reptile and amphibian species also live in the State's wetlands. New York's wetlands are home to many threatened and endan- gered plants and animals. Of the 160 threatened or endangered ptant species identified by the State's Department of Environmental Con- servation, 50 percent are wetland species, as are 10 species of ver- tebrates (Alvin Breisch, New York State Department of Environ- mental Conservation, oral commun., 1993). The environmental quality of aquatic habitats is enhanced by wetlands. Wetlands filter or absorb nutrients, and they also remove heavy metals and other contaminants from waters moving through them. Wetlands reduce turbidity and sediment loading, thereby slow- ing the siltation of harbors and navigable rivers and streams. The aquatic productivity of wetlands is very high -the amount of plant material produced per acre annually by an estuarine wetland (gross primary productivity) has been estimated to be about the same as that of a tropical rain forest (Odum, 1971). Salt marshes support a diverse community of animals that inhabit estuarine waters. In addition to the habitat and environmental benefits of wet- lands, they also provide socioeconomic benefits, including flood and storm-damage protection, erosion control, and the production of plants such as blueberries, cranberries, wild rice, salt hay, and tim- ber. Wetlands also provide many recreational and educational op- portunities, including hunting and fishing, nature study, boating, painting and drawing, and photography. The Hudson River National Estuarine Research Reserve (fig. 1) is a wetland-upland complex of national significance that provides outstanding opportunities for research and education. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deepwater habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and others, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats if New "Vbrk is shown in figure 2,4; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in New \brk are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Wetland description Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands); shrubs {scrub-shrub wetlands}; persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands}; or submersed and (or} floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt} and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. Dahl (1990) has estimated that wetlands cover about 1.0 mil- lion acres of New York. Another estimate places the present-day acreage at 2.2 to 2.4 million acres (Patricia Riexinger, New York Department of Environmental Conservation, oral commun., 1993). Such estimates of wetland area are typically based on surveys that Riverine Estuarine. Marine ... Figure 1. Tivoli Bays, Hudson River National Estuarine Research Reserve. The reserve is managed cooperatively by the State of New York and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Sanctuaries and Reserves Division. (Photograph by E.A. Blair, Hudson River National Estuarine Research Reserve.) 292 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES . /f^Sjf Af . .**: .- T £*f 'V- %*1 ,iTjr^xT^^' r- /.-^^ WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland r " Predominantly deepwater habitat B PERCENT WETLANDS IN COUNTY H Greater than 6.0 3.5 to 6.0 1.8 to 3.5 1.0 to 1.8 Less than 1.0 Figure 2. Wetland distribution in New York and physical and climatological features that affect wetland distribution in the State. A, Dis- tribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Percentage area of New York counties that is wetland. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, O'Connor and Cole, 1989.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NEW YORK 293 have different minimum unit sizes, which could account, in part, for the disparity of these estimates. About 75 percent of New York's wetlands occupy areas of less than 6 acres. O'Connor and Cole (1989) classified New York's fresh- water wetlands of at least one-half acre into 14 cover types by use of aerial-photographic methods. Their study did not consider salt- water wetlands, which compose only a small percentage of the State's wetland acreage and are confined to the Long Island coast and the lower 30 miles of the Hudson River (Karl Schwartz, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, oral commun., 1993), but covers all other wetlands in the State. The five most common fresh water-wetland cover types in New York, in order of area, are flooded deciduous trees (palustrine forested wetland); flooded shrubs (palustrine scrub-shrub wetland); flooded coniferous trees (palustrine forested wetland); drained muckland, which is not considered wetland under the Cowardin and others (1979) classification system; and emergents (palustrine emer- gent wetlands or lacustrine or riverine nonpersistent-emergent wetlands). Together, these types constitute almost 88 percent of New York's freshwater wetland area. The counties of upstate New York, including those in the Adirondack Mountains and the counties south and east of Lake Ontario, have the largest percentages of freshwater wetland area (fig. 25). Among New York's counties, St. Lawrence County, which has about 21,000 acres of wetlands, has the largest area of freshwater wetland, and Wayne County, which contains 12 percent of the State's wetland acreage, has the highest percentage of wetland area. The urban counties of New \brk City and Long Island and the south- ern-tier counties along the State's border with Pennsylvania have the smallest percentage of wetland area. Counties in the Catskill Moun- tains also have relatively low areal percentages of wetlands. Wetlands provide habitat for many threatened or endangered species. In New \brk, a species can be classified as threatened or endangered either by the State or by the Federal Government. Wet- land plant species that are considered to be threatened or endan- gered in New York include heartleaf plantain, spreading globeflower, fringed gentian, and curlygrass fern. In addition to plants, a num- ber of animal species are listed, including the red-shouldered hawk, osprey, bog turtle, and tiger salamander (Alvin Breisch, New York Department of Environmental Conservation, written commun., 1993). HYDROLOGIC SETTING New York's wetlands have formed primarily as the result of the interaction of geologic, physiographic, climatic, and hydrologic fac- tors. Geologic history and climatic regime have influenced the State's physiography and hydrology, which largely determine the location and types of those wetlands. During the last ice age, which ended about 18,000 years ago, glaciers covered most of New York. Erosion caused by movement of the glaciers and subsequent erosion and deposition by glacial meltwater and precipitation runoff shaped the present-day, topo- graphically diverse landscape. The State's physiography (fig. 2C) ranges from lowlands to mountains, some having elevations higher than 5,000 feet in the Adirondack Mountains. Glacial drift (clay, sand, gravel, and boulders deposited by glaciers or transported by glacial meltwater) of varying thickness mantles the bedrock of most of the State and forms the floor of stream valleys and most other areas of low relief. Long Island is composed largely of glacial drift that was deposited at the edge of the glacier's farthest advance. New York has 13.5 million acres of lakes (Zembrzuski and Cannon, 1986), which are most abundant in the St. Lawrence Val- ley, Adirondack, and Central Lowland physiographic provinces. These lakes were formed in three stages by glacial activity. First, the glaciers advanced, scouring the State's landscape. Then, as the glaciers retreated, large ice blocks were left behind and buried by glacial drift. These blocks subsequently melted, releasing their meltwater to form lakes. Other lakes, such as the Finger Lakes of west-central New York, are river valleys that have been deeply scoured by glaciers. Glacial lakes are most common in northern New York, especially in the Adirondack Mountains. Natural lakes of any kind are scarce in the Appalachian Plateaus of southwestern New York. There, rivers have cut deeply into the region's shale to form steep-sided valleys. Noncoastal wetlands. Most of New York's noncoastal wet- lands have formed in and around glacial lakes. Some wetlands also occur along river and stream corridors and in other lowlands where deposits of fine-grained sediments provide an underlying imperme- able layer that prevents water from percolating below the surface. Ground water and overland precipitation runoff are the principal sources of water for glacial-lake wetlands, and river flooding is an PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS A. St. Lawrence Valley 8. Adirondack Province C. Appalachian Plateaus D. Central Lowland E. Valley and Ridge Province F. New England Province G. Piedmont Province H. Coastal Plain 40 Line of equal annual precipitation Interval, in Inches, is variable Figure 2. Continued. Wetland distribution in New York and physical and climatological features that affect wetland distribution in the State. C, Physiography. D, Precipitation. (Sources: C, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center. D, Zembrzuski and Cannon, 1986.) 294 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES additional source for wetlands along rivers and streams. Annual precipitation in the State ranges from 28 inches to the west of Lake Champlain to more than 50 inches in the Adirondack and Catskill Mountains (fig. ID ). Annual precipitation substantially exceeds annual evapotranspiration, resulting in an annual moisture surplus and ample water to maintain wetlands. Ground water flows into wetlands from either glacial drift, fractures in crystalline bedrock, or solution cavities in carbonate bedrock, depending on local geological characteristics. Most re- charge to ground-water systems occurs in upland areas, where pre- cipitation percolates through the surficial sediments and into the underlying aquifers. In stream valleys containing valley-fill aqui- fers that are composed of glacial deposits, precipitation runoff from valley walls also is a common source of recharge. From recharge areas, ground water flows to areas of lower elevation, discharging to streams, ponds, lakes, and wetlands. Vegetated wetlands formed in New "fork's glacial lakes when the lakes filled with sediment and organic material, providing a substrate for rooted plants. Partially decomposed wetland vegeta- tion accumulates in the wetlands, forming a continually thickening layer of organic matter called peat. Such wetlands are known as peatlands (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1986), of which bogs (forested, scrub-shrub, or emergent wetlands) and fens (similar wetland classes to bogs but different vegetation composition) are common types in New York. Bogs receive most or all of their water from precipita- tion and have a characteristic plant community that is composed of peat (sphagnum) moss and other plants tolerant of acidic conditions. Fens receive at least some water from ground water and are less acidic than bogs. Peatlands can evolve into uplands through an eco- logical process called succession, wherein the vegetative composi- tion of the wetland changes over time. The plant community gradu- ally evolves from one in which wetland plants predominate to one having more upland species. Although succession of some kind occurs in most ecosystems, it is possible that a wetland will never reach a steady-state condition. It can instead cycle through forested, open-water, emergent, and shrub phases several times as the com- munity evolves (Virginia Carter, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1994). Lakes undergo a similar process, called eutrophi- cation, in which they fill in with decaying organic matter, which then forms the substrate for plants that make up the next stage in the successional process. Coastal wetlands. Nearly all of New York's coastal wetlands are in the intertidal zone in the bays of Long Island and comprise mostly salt marshes, aquatic beds, and tidal flats. These wetlands receive their water from the ocean, streams, and ground-water seep- age and are subject to hydrologic and salinity regimes that vary daily with the tides and seasonally with precipitation and streamflow. The bottom material of coastal wetlands in the Northeastern United States generally consists of peat and fine sediments derived from the glacial drift that covers upland areas. Salt-marsh plant commu- nities contain species physiologically adapted to dynamic conditions of moisture and salinity. Plant-species composition changes along a gradient that corresponds to frequency of inundation and to sa- linity range. Production of plant material is high in coastal marshes owing to a constant supply of nutrients (mostly nitrogen and phos- phorus). Much of the plant material in estuarine marshes is washed into the estuary during the high tides of winter and becomes part of the detrital food web of the estuary (Virginia Carter, U.S. Geo- logical Survey, written commun., 1994). TRENDS New York's wetlands have been drained and filled since settle- ment by Europeans began in the 1600's. Filling of wetlands in- creased markedly following World War II. Between about the 1780's and the 1980's, New York lost an estimated 60 percent of its wet- lands (Dahl, 1990). Wetlands have been drained for crop production and pastur- age, and they have been filled for transportation, industrialization, housing, and landfills (Tiner, 1984). Dredging for navigation and the construction of reservoirs, harbors, and marinas also have ad- versely affected New York's wetlands. In addition to the acreage losses caused by these activities, wetlands have been degraded by point and nonpoint discharges to surface waters from agriculture, logging, industry, municipal sewerage, and urban runoff, which add contaminants and silt to surface waters. Some wetlands have been created as a result of the activities of beavers and humans. By impounding streams, beavers can cre- ate wetlands in areas that were formerly uplands. In the last cen- tury, beavers were trapped in some parts of the Northeast for their pelts. The reduction of the population led to deterioration of their dams and to subsequent wetland loss. In more recent times, bea- vers have reestablished their population and their impoundments and the associated wetlands. Humans also have created wetlands, inten- tionally through the construction of artificial wetlands and inadvert- ently through dam and farm-pond construction. These additions, however, probably have not compensated for the losses of natural wetlands (Tiner, 1984). CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in New York. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in New York wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibi- Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in New York, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization__________ FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency............ Forest Service.................................................. Natural Resources Conservation Service . Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration .................................................. Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers ............................... Military reservations...................................... Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service............................... Geological Survey........................................... National Biological Service .......................... National Park Service .................................... Environmental Protection Agency ................... STATE Adirondack Park Agency................................... Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Fish and Wildlife.......................... Department of State ........................................... PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS Ducks Unlimited ................................................... Finger Lakes Land Trust..................................... The National Audubon Society ........................ The Nature Conservancy................................... The Open Space Institute .................................. Scenic Hudson..................................................... National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NEW YORK 295 tions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Conser- vation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wetlands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice provides guidance to States in developing the wetland compo- nent of their plans. Coastal States that adopt coastal-zone manage- ment programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are eligible for Federal fund- ing and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. State wetland activities. State laws governing New York's wetlands include the 1973 Tidal Wetlands Act, the 1975 Freshwa- ter Wetlands Act, the Protection of Waters Act, and the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resource Act. Of these, the first three are administered by the New "Vbrk Department of Environmental Conservation, and the fourth is administered by the New "Vbrk De- partment of State. Wetland activities in the Adirondack Park are regulated by the Adirondack Park Agency under the 1975 Freshwater Wetlands Act. The State has extended protection to many wetlands within its borders. By far the largest protected area containing wetlands is the Adirondack Park in northern New "Vbrk. The wetland acreage within the park is not precisely known because the Adirondack Park Agency wetlands inventory is not complete. In addition to park wetlands, the State has protected a number of wetlands of unusual local im- portance (mostly in down-State areas). A major cooperative effort is underway among Federal and State agencies and private organi- zations to acquire more than 20,000 acres of wetlands and associ- ated uplands to the north of the Montezuma National Wildlife Ref- uge. This area will be a major protected wetland resource for the State. Also, many State wildlife-management areas are wetland- upland complexes that are managed for wetland values. The Hudson River National Estuarine Research Reserve is a federally designated wetland system that is managed cooperatively by the New "fork Department of Environmental Conservation and NOAA. The reserve consists of four sites totaling 5,000 acres of mostly wetlands that are distributed along the salinity gradient of the Hudson River. The reserve's purposes are protection, research, and education. County and local wetland activities. Under the Freshwater Wetlands Act, a county, town, village, or municipality can take over responsibility for wetland management with oversight by the De- partment of Environmental Conservation. Under this provision, local governments review and process permit applications. The Depart- ment approves the local procedures and also reserves the right to oversee Class 1 wetlands, which are wetlands considered most in need of protection because they provide benefits that make them particularly valuable. Any municipality is allowed to pass regula- tions that are more restrictive than the Department's guidelines. When such regulations are passed, the Department defers to the local authority. To date, only two towns and one village have taken over wetland-management responsibility, and no county government has opted to preempt the Department's regulations (Russell Cole, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, oral commun., 1993). Counties may facilitate wetland acquisition through the fund- ing of bond acts. Such acts have been used extensively on Long Island for this purpose (Sarah Davidson, The Nature Conservancy, Long Island Chapter, oral commun., 1993). Private wetland activities. Among the private organizations that are active in the conservation of New York's wetlands are Ducks Unlimited, The Nature Conservancy, the National Audubon Soci- ety, Scenic Hudson, the Open Space Institute, and the Finger Lakes Land Trust. Privately organized and funded land trusts exist in many New York counties, and these can enable wetland acquisition and protection (Peggy Olson, The Nature Conservancy, Eastern New "Vbrk Chapter, oral commun., 1993). References Cited Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: Washing- ton, D.C., U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G., 1986, Wetlands: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 539 p. O'Connor, Sharon, and Cole, N.B., 1989, Freshwater wetlands inventory Data analysis: Albany, New \brk State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Fish and Wildlife, 107 p. Odum, E.P., 1971, Fundamentals of ecology: Philadelphia, Saunders, 574 p. Tiner, R.W, Jr., 1984, Wetlands of the United States Current status and recent trends: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 59 p. Zembrzuski, T.J., and Gannon, W.B., 1986, New \brk surface-water re- sources, in U.S. Geological Survey National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and surface-water resources: U.S. Geological Sur- vey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 347-354. 296 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Sur- vey, James T. Foley U.S. Courthouse, P.O. Box 1669, Room 343,445 Broad- way, Albany, NY 12201; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service, Regional Wetland Coordinator, 300 Westgate Center Dr., Hadley, MA 01035 Prepared by Thomas H. Barringer, John S. Williams, and Deborah S. Lumia, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 297 North Carolina Wetland Resources We'etlands of North Carolina are diverse and widely distributed. About 5.7 million acres, or 17 percent, of the State is covered by wetlands (Dahl, 1990). About 95 percent of these wetlands are in the eastern part of the State (fig. 1). Wetlands affect streamflow and water quality and provide criti- cal habitat to a variety of plants and animals. Because of the large size of some eastern North Carolina wetlands and their proximity to coastal waters, these wetlands are important regulators of fresh- water, nutrient, and sediment inputs to North Carolina estuaries. Almost one-half of North Carolina's wetlands are bottom-land hard- wood forests, which are valuable habitats for waterfowl breeding and overwintering and for anadromous fish spawning (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). About 90 percent of the State's commer- cial fish harvest is derived from estuary-dependent species. Tidal and nontidal creeks surrounded by wetlands and vast beds of sub- mersed aquatic vegetation function as nursery areas for larval and juvenile fish and provide critical fmfish and shellfish habitats for adults. Small wetlands throughout the Piedmont and Blue Ridge Provinces of the State harbor at least 80 species of rare or endan- gered plants. Statewide, about 70 percent of the rare and endangered plants and animals depend on wetlands. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deepwater habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and others, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in North Carolina is shown in figure 2A\ only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in North Carolina are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine, Estuarine, Marine Figure 1. Merchants Millpond, a forested wetland in northeastern North Carolina. (Photograph by Virginia Carter, U.S. Geological Survey.) Wetland description Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands); shrubs {scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is predominantly nonpersistent emer- gent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. Palustrine system. Palustrine wetlands account for most of the wetland acreage in North Carolina. Palustrine wetlands in the State include forested wetlands (bottom-land hardwood forests, fringe wooded swamps, wet pine tlatwoods, pine savannas, and hardwood flats), wetlands that are classified as forested or scrub- shrub wetlands, depending on the characteristics of the dominant vegetation (Carolina bays, pocosins, and bogs), and emergent wet- lands (nontidal and tidal fresh marshes). Bottom-land hardwood forests cover about 2.7 million acres (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992) and occur primarily in the Coastal Plain along the Roanoke, Tar, Neuse, and Cape Fear Riv- ers, as well as along other large interior streams (fig. 2A and 26). The Roanoke River flood plain has one of the largest and least dis- turbed bottom-land hardwood forests in the mid-Atlantic region. Cypress, swamp gum, and black gum grow in the wetter areas of the flood plain, whereas temporarily or seasonally flooded bottom- land hardwood-forest wetlands are dominated by red maple, green ash, elm, sycamore, and sweet gum. Fringe wooded swamps are the dominant shoreline type around Albemarle Sound; along the Alligator, Scuppernong, and lower Chowan Rivers; and in some locations along tributaries to Pamlico Sound. These swamps cover an area of about 400.000 acres (North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Re- sources, 1994) and are vegetated primarily by cypress (Environmen- tal Defense Fund, 1989). Wet pine flatwoods possibly occupy more than 2 million acres, and pine savannas cover an area of about 28,000 acres (North Caro- lina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, 1994). Both ecosystems have a canopy of longleaf pine and occa- 298 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES sional loblolly pine with an understory of wiregrass. Pine savannas have a greater density of trees than wet pine flatwoods, and pine savannas support orchids and various small vascular plants, such as pitcher plants, Venus flytrap, and sundews. Wet pine flatwoods are common throughout the western and middle regions of the Coastal Plain, except in the Sand Hills, whereas pine savannas are most common in the southeastern corner of the State (Schafale and Weakley, 1990). Carolina bays are ovate depressions that occur across the Coastal Plain but are most common in the southeastern corner of the State (Sharitz and Gibbons, 1982). Most of the bays contain palustrine wetlands, but a few large Carolina bays, such as Lake Waccamaw, are lacustrine wetlands. The bays range in length from about 150 feet to more than 5 miles. Because of variability in size, depth, location, and substrate, Carolina bays are not characterized by a single vegetation type. These systems are unusual in their geo- graphic orientation (northwest to southeast) and consistent shape (narrower at the southeast end). About 700,000 acres of pocosins remain in North Carolina (Environmental Defense Fund, 1989) about 70 percent of the Nation's pocosin wetlands (Richardson and others, 1981). Pocosins form in poorly drained basins, including interior depressions of Carolina bays (Ash and others, 1983). The typical pocosin is clas- sified as a scrub-shrub wetland. However, a pocosin can be a for- ested wetland, depending on the successional stage of the pocosin, which is commonly determined by hydrology or by fire and other disturbances (Hefner and Moorhead, 1991). Scrub-shrub pocosins are dominated by dense, almost impenetrable, growths of evergreens such as titi and yaupon, thorny vines, and occasional taller pond pines projecting above the thicket. Forested pocosins are generally dominated by red bay, sweet bay, Atlantic white cedar, loblolly bay, and pond pine (Sharitz and Gibbons, 1982; Ash and others, 1983). Vegetation in large pocosins commonly grows in zones with shorter vegetation in the center. Other types of palustrine wetlands include bogs and fresh marshes. Bogs, which occur throughout the Blue Ridge Province, have been subject to draining, impoundment, and clearing at lower elevation sites (Schafale and Weakley, 1990). Nontidal fresh marshes cover about 46,000 acres in the Coastal Plain (Field and others, 1991) and often grade upriver to cypress-gum swamps (forested wetlands). About 2,200 acres of tidal fresh marshes exist in North Carolina (Field and others, 1991). Lacustrine and Riverine Systems. Lacustrine wetlands com- prise the shallows of natural lakes and reservoirs where there is no persistent emergent vegetation or trees. All of the State's natural lakes are located in the Coastal Plain, and many are associated with Caro- lina bays or peatlands. More than 100 water-supply and flood-con- trol reservoirs have been constructed throughout the Piedmont and Blue Ridge Provinces (North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, 1992). Riverine wetlands constitute the entire channel of small, shallow streams and shallow areas near the banks in large, deep streams. The total area of lacustrine and riverine wetlands in the State is not known but is small relative to the area of palustrine wetlands. Estuarine and Marine Systems. North Carolina contains more than 3,000 miles of tidal (estuarine and ocean) shoreline (Clay PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS Great Merchants nianal MilfeonJ r* 77? \ Swamp -1"* Dismal Siuump ^Gino) .JH^ Oregon y -\ \ ^-JiJw. ^-~' WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat 25 50 KILOMETERS Figure 2. Wetland distribution in North Carolina and physiography of the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physiography. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NORTH CAROLINA 299 and others, 1975). Between 183,000 (Cashin and others, 1992) and 236,000 acres (Moorhead, 1992) of salt marsh (emergent wetlands) are present in the State, which constitutes about 11 percent of the tidal salt marshes of the southeastern Atlantic coast (Wiegert and Freeman, 1990). Salt marshes, also known as "low marshes," are generally covered by smooth cordgrass. "High marshes" typically contain mixtures of species, in- cluding needlerush and shrubs such as wax myrtle and marsh elder. About 30,000 acres of high marsh are present in the State (Moorhead, 1992). Most seagrass beds (aquatic beds) are subtidal and. thus, are classified as deepwater habitats. How- ever, some seagrass beds in North Carolina are inter- tidal and are classified as wetlands. The most exten- sive beds, which typically contain eelgrass, shoalgrass, and widgeon grass, are in Bogue Sound, Core Sound, and eastern Pamlico Sound; seagrass beds also grow in the Pamlico River, Neuse River, and Currituck Sound. Ferguson and others (1989) esti- mated that 200,000 acres of seagrass beds are present between Bogue Inlet and Oregon Inlet. Tidal flats usually consist of sand, silt, or clay regularly exposed and flooded by tides. The vegeta- tion on tidal flats is minimal because of the unstable sediments. About 44,000 acres of tidal flats are present in North Carolina (Field and others, 1991), which is about 4 percent of the national total. ground water seldom extends into the root zone. Under these con- ditions, vegetation generally consists of low shrubs and scattered trees (fig. 3B ). Near the outer edges of the pocosin, where the peat layer is thinner, vegetation grades into a mixture of hardwoods and evergreens because of the increased availability of nutrients from HYDROLOGIC SETTING Abundant precipitation and flat terrain in the Coastal Plain are the most important factors that con- tribute to the abundance of wetlands in North Caro- lina. Fifty-nine percent of the State's palustrine wet- lands are headwater wetlands (on streams having an average flow of less than 5 cubic feet per second), and 11 percent of palustrine wetlands are hydrologically isolated (North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, 1991). Bottom-land hardwood forests. Water and sediment carried by rivers are responsible for the origin, character, and maintenance of bottom-land hardwood-forest wetlands. Erosional and depositional processes typically result in a sinuous river channel located within a broad flood plain (fig. 3>A). Sources of water to the wetlands include overbank flow dur- ing seasonal flooding, precipitation, runoff from up- land areas, ground water from regional and local aqui- fers, and tidal flow (Wharton and others, 1982). Sea- sonal flooding is the primary hydrologic factor re- sponsible for the existence of these wetlands. AT times, streamflow can actually decrease in the downstream direction because water spreads through the flood plain providing increased opportunity for evapotrans- piration or loss to the shallow ground-water system. Wet pine flatwoods and pine savannas. Wet pine flatwoods and pine savannas occur on flat or nearly flat, wet organic or sandy soils. The soils are saturated seasonally by a high water table, although some sites are wet most of the year. These wetlands, particularly the savannas, also form on gently slop- ing hillsides where ground-water seepage occurs (Schafale and Weakley, 1990). Pocosins. Because pocosins generally are iso- lated from streams, direct precipitation is the primary moisture source. Pocosins having a thick layer of peat near the center of the wetland are nutrient poor, and A. Bottom-land hardwood forest B. Pocosin PALUSTRINE WETLAND Gum-cypress swamp forest Forested wetland (Tall pocosinl Scrub-shrub wetland (Short pocosin} Mineral or organic soil C. Estuarine wetland ESTUARINE WETLAND Upland High marsh (irregularly flooded) Low marsh (regularly flooded) Estuarine open water \ EXPLANATION Average water table 17 jHj Scrub-shrub vegetation Emergent vegetation Forest vegetation Figure 3. Cross-sectional diagrams of typical North Carolina wetlands. A. Bot- tom-land hardwood forest- B, Pocosin. C, Estuarine wetland. ('Sources; A, Whar- ton and others, 1982;Tiner, 1984. B, Ash and others, 1983, C, Tiner, 1984.) 300 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES ground and surface water. In some cases, however, pocosins are entirely forested without the gradation from scrub-shrub to forested wetland. Vertical water movement through the peat is slight, result- ing in little loss of water to the ground-water system. Lateral water movement also is typically slow, which accounts for the important role of pocosins in preventing rapid surface runoff and, thus, in fil- tering sediment and nutrients from runoff before it enters the estu- ary. Tidal freshwater and salt marshes. With the exception of the Cape Fear River, North Carolina's large coastal rivers drain to sounds rather than to the open ocean. Consequently, tides in these rivers are small in magnitude, resulting in limited tidal flooding and a small area of tidal fresh marsh in comparison to other Southeast- ern States. Salt marshes in areas that have high tidal amplitudes can have natural berms or levees, which are formed by tidal sedimentation and consist of coarse-grained material. Water flows through the berms in small breaks or over the berms during extremely high tides (fig. 3C) to flood the area landward of the berm. Vegetation char- acteristics landward of the berm are determined by the periodicity of flooding, the salinity level in the soil, the frequency of occur- rence of oxygen-poor conditions, and the contribution of ground water. In salt marshes with low tidal amplitudes, such as those in estuaries and sounds protected by barrier islands, berm formation is limited because of low sedimentation rates. TRENDS Before colonization by Europeans, the area that now is North Carolina contained about 11 million acres of wetlands (Dahl, 1990). Dahl estimated that in the mid-1980's, about one-half, or 5.7 mil- lion acres, remained. Because of the absence of reliable historical data, wetland loss can be difficult to assess. Moreover, most surveys consider the al- teration of a wetland from its natural condition to be a "loss," whereas many pine plantations and some agricultural lands on con- verted wetlands retain some of their original wetland functions and support limited wetland uses. North Carolina evaluates wetland re- sources in terms of use support rather than areal coverage (North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Re- sources, 1991). The first major alteration of wetlands in North Carolina was associated with the completion of a canal between Phelps Lake and the Scuppernong River in 1787 (17 years before the Dismal Swamp Canal) that lowered the lake level and permitted farming around the lake (Heath, 1975). The State Literary Board encouraged settlement on swamplands in the 1830's by providing funds for drainage ca- nals around Lake Mattamuskeet, Pungo Lake, and New Lake. Sev- eral other large-scale wetland alteration projects, including the drainage of the 43,000-acre Lake Mattamuskeet, occurred in the late 1800's and early 1900's (Heath, 1975). Wilson (1962) estimated that more than 1 million miles of drainage ditches and canals were con- structed throughout the Coastal Plain to drain wetlands. About one-third of the wetland alteration in the Coastal Plain has occurred since the 1950's (Cashin and others, 1992). Cashin and others (1992) found that in the Coastal Plain, conversion to man- aged forests was responsible for 53 percent of the wetland alteration during that period, and conversion to agriculture was responsible for 42 percent. About 2.5 million acres of pocosins existed before coloniza- tion (Richardson and others, 1981). Wilson (1962) reported that about 2.2 million acres of pocosins existed in the early 1960's and estimated that more than 100,000 acres of pocosins were drained between 1950 and 1960. Between 1962 and 1972, 33 percent of the State's remaining pocosin habitat was converted to agriculture or managed forests. About 700,000 acres of pocosins remain unaltered in North Carolina (Environmental Defense Fund, 1989). Atlantic white cedar was once common in Coastal Plain wet- lands, particularly in pocosins. However, as much as 200,000 acres of white cedar forest has been harvested from the Great Dismal Swamp and from the peninsula between Albemarle and Pamlico Sounds. Nonetheless, the area around the Alligator River still con- tains the most extensive white cedar forest in the world, including approximately 10,000 acres of high-quality cedar swamp forest pro- tected as a North Carolina Natural Heritage Area (Laderman, 1989). Estuarine wetlands have been altered less extensively than palustrine wetlands (Cashin and others, 1992). Stockton and Richardson (1987) reported that there was a decrease in the area of coastal wetland (salt marsh) alteration after the State adopted a strong coastal-wetland protection program. Some land-use practices have created new wetlands or enlarged existing ones. Reservoir construction has increased the acreage of lacustrine wetlands, although usually at the expense of palustrine wetlands. Farm ponds constructed on previously upland areas in one Piedmont Province county account for about 1 percent of the total area of the county (Newcomb, 1993). Similar conditions likely ex- ist throughout the Piedmont region of the State. Interest is increas- ing within the State for the use of created wetlands for treating wastewater. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in North Carolina. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in North Carolina wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohi- bitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines compliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NORTH CAROLINA 301 Table 1. Selected wetland-related activities of government About 15,000 acres of cultivated land in North Carolina were en- agencies and private organizations in North Carolina, 1993 rolled in the program in 1992 (Darby, 1993). [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided State wetland activities. The State has adopted a strong by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in coastal-wetlands program as part of a broader coastal zone man- wetland-related activity;.... agency or organization does not participate in agement effort. The North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- ?irv?/i- i j £ i 11 j i i * toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- of 1974 includes Provisions for local land-use planning, regulation lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] for Areas of Environmental Concern (including estuarine waters and _______________________________________ coastal wetlands), and permit coordination within the 20 counties t£" Shellfishi<* Waters' Prim-y Nur-y^ and Division of Marine Fisheries ........................................ . . .... ... Secondary Nursery Areas. Division of Parks and Recreation ............................... «... In 1986, the North Carolina Department of Transportation, in Division of Planning and Assessment........................ ... cooperation with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commis- Division of Soil and Water Conservation .................. . sjon? ^ FWSj an(j ^he Nature Conservancy, purchased Company Division of Water Resources ....................................... . ... §w } ,436-aCre tract of bottom-land hardwood-forest wetland Department of Transportation......................................... , , . , , , , Museum of Natural Science............................................ ... ... .. ... . ... on the Roanoke River. The wetland is being used to mitigate un- Wildlife Resources Commission ..................................... avoidable wetland losses associated with individually permitted SOME COUNTY AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ............. .. section 404 activities that the Department conducts in bottom-land PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS............................................... »..»»».. hardwood forests and that cannot be mitigated on site. This mitiga- tion bank avoids the need to establish numerous small mitigation efforts and protects a valuable wetland resource. County and local wetland activities. Many local govern- identification of wetlands and in the development of wetland pro- ments, particularly in the 20 counties affected by the Coastal Area tection, restoration, or creation plans. Management Act, have wetland-protection policies in their land-use The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 plans. Local governments also use the purchase of greenways Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland through bond issues (for example, Mecklenburg County, which protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland contains Charlotte) or as a required part of the development pro- Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their cess (for example, Raleigh) to protect wetlands. Carteret County Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for (which contains Morehead City) is participating in the Advanced Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- Identification Program, an EPA program which attempts to identify vice (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland wetland parcels inappropriate for disposal of fill material and, in component of their plans. Coastal States that adopt coastal-zone some cases, wetlands that could serve as disposal sites, management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic Private wetland activities. Private organizations in North and Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and Carolina are active in public education, lobbying for wetland pro- technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. tection, land acquisition, and public participation in permit review Large tracts of land, many containing wetlands, are managed and policy development. The Nature Conservancy, North Carolina by the FWS, the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Department of De- chapter, has purchased wetlands in North Carolina for preservation, fense, and the NFS. The management plans for these lands are sub- and ownership of some of these lands has been transferred to Fed- ject to a review process that allows local groups and individuals to eral and State agencies. The North Carolina Coastal Federation, the have input into the planning process. Pamlico-Tar River Foundation, the Neuse River Foundation, the North Carolina is one of nine States participating in the U.S. Sierra Club, the National Wildlife Federation, the Environmental Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Pilot Wetlands Reserve Program. Defense Fund, Ducks Unlimited, and others provide services to The purpose of the program is to restore 1 million acres of culti- educate the public on wetland issues and provide input to State and vated land to wetlands by 1995. Landowners receive easement pay- Federal agencies on wetland issues, ments from USDA, which pays 75 percent of the restoration costs. The NRCS and FWS assist in completion of the restoration plans. 302 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES References Cited Ash, A.N., McDonald, C.B., Kane, E.S., and Pories, C.A., 1983, Natural and modified pocosins Literature synthesis and management op- tions: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-83-04, 156 p. Cashin, G.E., Dorney, J.R., and Richardson, C.J., 1992, Wetland alteration trends on the North Carolina Coastal Plain: Wetlands, v. 12, no. 2, p. 63-71. Clay, J.W, Orr, D.M., Jr., and Stuart, A.W., eds., 1975, North Carolina at- las Portrait of a changing southern state: Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press, 331 p. Cowardin, L.M., Carter. Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Darby, P.V., 1993, Protection and management options for wetlands in the Albemarle-Pamlico study area: Raleigh, N.C., U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service, 46 p. Environmental Defense Fund, 1989, Carolina wetlands Our vanishing resource: Raleigh, N.C., 89 p. and appendix. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: Washing- ton, D.C., U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Ferguson, R.L., Rivera. J.A., and Wood, L.L., 1989, Submerged aquatic vegetation in the Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system: Beaufort, N.C., National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Project No. 88-10, 68 p. Field, D.W., Reyer, A.J., Genovese, P.V., and Shearer, B.D., 1991, Coastal wetlands of the United States An accounting of a valuable national resource: Washington, D.C., National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- ministration and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service cooperative publica- tion, 59 p. Heath, R.C., 1975, Hydrology of the Albemarle-Pamlico region, North Carolina A preliminary report on the impact of agricultural devel- opments: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 9-75, 98 p. Hefner, J.M., and Moorhead, K.K., 1991, Mapping pocosins and associated wetlands in North Carolina: Wetlands, v. 11, p. 377-389. Laderman, A.D., 1989, The ecology of Atlantic white cedar wetlands A community profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.21), 89 p. Moorhead, K.K., 1992, Wetland resources of coastal North Carolina: Wet- lands, v. 12, no. 3, p. 184-191. Newcomb, D.J., 1993, Positive effects on total wetland area by human ac- tivities in Alamance County, North Carolina: Chapel Hill. University of North Carolina, unpublished M.A. thesis, 72 p. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, 1991, Original extent, status, and trends of wetlands in North Caro- lina A report to the N.C. Legislative Study Commission on wetlands protection: North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Management. Water Quality Section, Report 91-01, 33 p. _1992, North Carolina lake assessment report: North Carolina De- partment of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Management, Water Quality Section, Report 92-02, 353 p. _1993, Indicators of freshwater wetland function and value for pro- tection and management: North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Manage- ment, Water Quality Section, 50 p. _1994, Water quality progress in North Carolina 1992-1993 305(b) report: North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natu- ral Resources, Division of Environmental Management, Water Qual- ity Section, 96 p. and appendix. Richardson, C.J., Evans, R., and Carr, D., 1981, Pocosins An ecosystem in transition, in Richardson, C.J., ed., Pocosin wetlands: Stroudsburg, Pa., Hutchinson Ross Publishing Company, p. 3-19. Schafale, M.P., and Weakley, A.S., 1990, Classification of the natural com- munities of North Carolina, third approximation: North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation, 325 p. Sharitz, R.R., and Gibbons, J.W., 1982, The ecology of southeastern shrub bogs (pocosins) and Carolina Bays A community profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-82/04, 93 p. Stockton, M.B., and Richardson, C.J., 1987, Wetland development trends in coastal North Carolina, USA, from 1970 to 1984: Environmental Management, v. 11, no. 5, p. 649-657. Tiner, R.W. Jr., 1984, Wetlands of the United States Current status and recent trends: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 59 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992, Regional wetlands concept plan, Emergency Wetlands Resources Act, Southeast Region: Atlanta, Ga., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 259 p. Wharton, C.H., Kitchens, W.M., Pendleton, E.G., and Sipe, T.W, 1982, The ecology of bottomland hardwood swamps of the southeast A com- munity profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-81/ 37, 126 p. Wiegert, P.G., and Freeman, B.J., 1990, Tidal salt marshes of the south- eastern Atlantic coast A community profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.29), 70 p. Wilson, K.A., 1962, North Carolina wetlands Their distribution and man- agement: Raleigh, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Project W-6-R, 169 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 3916 Sunset Ridge Road, Raleigh, NC 27607; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Building, Suite 200, Atlanta, GA 30345 Prepared by Jerad D. Bales and Douglas J. Newcomb, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 303 North Dakota Wetland Resources We'etlands covered nearly 11 percent of North Dakota, about 4.9 million acres, in predevelopment times (Dahl, 1990). By the 1980's, wetlands covered about 6 percent of the State, or about 2.7 million acres, which represents a 45 percent reduction from the predevel- opment acreage (North Dakota Parks and Recreation Department, 1987). - Wetlands are ecologically and economically valuable to the State. Wetlands trap, remove, and transform waterborne constitu- ents by processes such as sedimentation, plant uptake, microbial transformation, and soil adsorption. Attenuation of runoff from snowmelt and rainfall by wetlands reduces the magnitude of poten- tial flooding downstream. Riparian vegetation along watercourses reduces the potential for bank and channel erosion by stabilizing the banks and channels. In some areas, the water held in a wetland recharges the local ground-water system. Wetlands provide habitat for furbearers, game species, and many nongame-wildlife species. Probably the best known function of wetlands in North Dakota is waterfowl production. The Prairie Pothole Region, which extends across much of the State, contains only 10 percent of the waterfowl breeding area in North America, yet it accounts for 50 percent of the duck crop in an average year (Smith and others, 1964). The hunting industry in States all along the Central Flyway benefit from North Dakota's prairie pothole wetlands. Aside from their value as breeding areas. North Dakota wetlands also provide resting and feeding habitat for migratory waterfowl and wading birds. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deepwater habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and others, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in North Dakota is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in North Dakota are described below. System Palustrine, Lacustrine Riverine Figure 1. Prairie pothole wetlands about 28 miles northwest of Jamestown. (Photograph by T.C. Winter, U.S. Geological Survey.) Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants {nonpersistent-emergent wetlands}, or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds}, or both. Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System Currently (1993), no estimate of statewide wetland acreage in each of these ecological systems is available. Stewart and Kantrud (1973) estimated wetland acreages by using data collected in 1967; however, their classification system differed from that of Cowardin and others (1979). Stewart and Kantrud classified wetlands accord- ing to the following habitat types: natural basin wetlands, streams and oxbows, stock ponds and dugouts, and road ditches and drain- age channels. Under the Cowardin and others (1979) classification system, natural basin wetlands would include wetlands classified mostly as palustrine and a small amount as lacustrine and are esti- mated to constitute about 91 percent, or about 2.5 million acres, of the wetlands in the State. Streams and oxbows would be classified as palustrine or riverine and constitute about 160,000 acres. Stock ponds and dugouts would be classified as palustrine or lacustrine and constitute about 50,000 acres. Road ditches and drainage chan- nels would be classified as palustrine and constitute about 30,000 acres. The total acres of wetlands in Stewart and Kantrud's estimate for the late 1960's is about 2.7 million acres, slightly more than the 2.5 million acres estimated by the FWS using 1980's data (Dahl, 1990). Stewart and Kantrud (1973) divided North Dakota into four biotic regions (fig. 26). They estimated that 2.2 million acres of wetlands, or 81 percent of the wetlands in the State, are in the Prai- rie Pothole Region. Specific estimates were not available for the Agassiz Lake Plain, the Coteau Slope, or the Southwestern Slope Regions. The wetland types in the Prairie Pothole, Agassiz Lake Plain, and Coteau Slope Regions are similar; about 90 percent of the wetlands are in natural basins. The least amount of wetland acreage in the four regions is in the Southwestern Slope Region. About 95 percent of the wetlands in this region are riparian wet- lands along streams and around stock ponds and dugouts. More than 90 percent of the wetlands in the State are classi- fied by Stewart and Kantrud (1973) as natural basin wetlands, com- monly called prairie potholes. The prairie potholes primarily con- tain persistent-emergent wetlands, variously called wet meadows, marshes, and fens. The distinction among these different wetlands is based in part on vegetation. The species of plants found in a 304 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES wetland is a function of water availability in each year. Climatic fluctuations can cause emergent wetlands to change or revert to an open-water phase in some years (Stewart and Kantrud, 1972). Wet meadows are present in the shallow pond basins and around the deeper ponds and lakes. Flooding persists in wet meadows for only a few weeks following spring snowmelt or a few days following heavy rainstorms. Plant species that characterize wet meadows are fine-textured grasses, rushes, and low sedges. Marshes form in pond basins where water either persists throughout the year or persists for long periods and then evaporates or is transpired in late sum- mer and fall. Marsh vegetation consists of grasses or grasslike plants, such as sedges, bulrushes, and cattails, that are coarser and taller than the plants in the wet meadow. Fen wetlands are quagmires that have floating mats of emergent vegetation. Fen wetlands are a re- sult of ground-water seepage on sloping terrain, usually adjacent to a pond or lake. Plant species in fen wetlands can be the same as those in wet meadows and marshes. Fen wetlands are not common in North Dakota. Prairie potholes that contain submerged or floating plants are called aquatic-bed wetlands. Aquatic-bed vegetation commonly grows in ponds and lakes that persist for weeks or longer. Most of the plant species are bottom-rooted plants, but free-floating plants also are common. The types of plant species present are closely correlated with water salinity. The plants that grow in fresh or slightly brackish ponds or lakes are not present in the saline waters of alkali ponds and lakes. Other palustrine classes that exist but are not common in North Dakota are scrub-shrub wetlands and forested wetlands. Scrub- shrub wetlands contain willows, cottonwoods, and aspens. Forested wetlands have formed along rivers and contain mostly cottonwoods. The distribution and abundance of wetlands in North Dakota are the result of the State's glacial history. The Coteau Slope, Prai- rie Pothole, and Agassi/ Lake Plain Regions were glaciated during the most recent glacial period, whereas the Southwest Slope Region was not. Wetlands in the glaciated regions formed in depressions resulting from glacial and postglacial activity. Permanently flooded 0 25 50 MILES n 0 25 50 KILOMETERS WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat Yyyy//\ Area typified by a high density of small wetlands BIOTIC REGIONS Figure 2. Wetland distribution in North Dakota and biotic regions of the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Biotic regions. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Modified from Stewart and Kantrud, 1973.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NORTH DAKOTA 305 to semipermanently flooded wetlands generally are in areas of end moraines and stagnation moraines, which are most common in the Coteau Slope Region. Sea- sonally flooded to intermittently flooded wetlands generally form in areas of ground moraine and lake plains, which are most common in the Prairie Pothole and Agassi/ Lake Plain Regions. Wetlands in the unglaciated Southwestern Slope Region are few and are present as riparian wetlands along watercourses and as artificially flooded wetlands around reservoirs, stock ponds, and dugouts. The FWS National Wetlands Inventory is mapping the Nation's wetlands. Wetlands are identified on U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-minute quadrangle topographic maps, many of which are stored in digital format. Currently (1993), paper maps are available for 79 per- cent of North Dakota, and digital-format maps are available for 31 percent of the State. HYDROLOGIC SETTING FLOWTHROUGH WETLAND FLOW-THROUGH WETLAND FLOWTHROUGH D|SCHARGE WETLAND DISCHARGE WETLAND ^ -^ WETLAND WETLAND EXPLANATION Direction of ground-water Average water table flow Figure 4. Generalized ground-water flow in the Prairie Pothole Region. (Source: Modified from Winter, 1989.) Wetlands form where surface-water and ground-water flow patterns cause water to be near or above the soil surface for a sig- nificant period of time during the growing season. The location and persistence of the wetland is a function of climate, topography, ground-water flow patterns, surface-water flow patterns, and run- off characteristics in a basin. The most common wetlands in North Dakota are prairie pot- holes. These wetlands formed in glacial deposits such as end mo- raines, stagnation moraines, ground moraines, outwash plains, and lake plains. The glacial deposits generally consist of silt and clay through which water moves slowly. Outwash plains, however, mostly consist of sorted sand, which transmits water readily. In the morainal areas, no natural surf ace-drainage network has developed, so many depressions are not connected to an integrated drainage system (fig. 3). Figure 3, Prairie pothole wetlands near Chase Lake National Wildlife Refuge. Note the absence of a surface-drainage system. (Photograph courtesy of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.) The interaction between ground water and a wetland affects the permanence and water quality of the wetland. Studies of the Prairie Pothole Region (Hubbard, 1988; Winter, 1989) indicate that ground-water flow among wetlands is complicated. Wetlands in the same area can discharge to different ground-water systems: one to a regional system, another to an intermediate system, and still an- other to a local system (fig. 4). Generally, wetlands in the Prairie Pothole Region have three types of interaction with the ground-water system (Kantrud and others, 1989). Some wetlands recharge the underlying ground-wa- ter system. These wetlands tend to hold water for only a few months a year, and the water generally has low dissolved-sol ids concentra- tions. Other wetlands are flow-through systems; that is, ground water flows into parts of the wetland while other parts of the wetland re- charge the ground-water system. Flow-through wetlands tend to hold water for longer periods and generally have higher dissolved-solids concentrations. A third type of wetland serves only as a discharge area for ground water. These wetlands are permanently flooded and typically saline. Climate has a major effect on wetland formation and perma- nence. Most of North Dakota is dry; average precipitation ranges from about 13 inches in the western part of the State to about 20 inches along the eastern border. Average annual free-water-surface evaporation ranges from 32 inches in the northeastern part of the State to about 40 inches in the southwestern part (Winter and oth- ers, 1984). Because average annual free-water-surf ace evaporation is greater than average annual precipitation, there is an annual mois- ture deficit that inhibits wetland formation and permanence. North Dakota's harsh winters also affect the hydrology of wet- lands in the State. About 25 percent of the annual precipitation oc- curs as snow, which generally falls between October and March (Winter and others, 1984). Snow is blown off the unsheltered farm- land and accumulates in sheltered areas and depressions, such as wetlands. When the snow begins to melt in the spring, the ground is still frozen, so snowmelt and spring rains do not readily infiltrate into the soil. As a result, snowmelt runoff and spring rains are the major source of water to the prairie potholes (Shjeflo, 1968). Annual variations in climate affect the permanence of wetlands. Siewart and Kantrud (1973) estimated that 67 percent of the wet- lands (by area) in the Prairie Pothole Region are seasonally flooded or temporarily flooded wetlands. Because these wetlands are filled in the spring by snowmelt runoff, the amount of snowpack accu- mulated in the winter determines to what extent a wetland is filled. Temperature and windspeed determine how long the water remains in the wetland. Standing water is present from about a week in the temporarily flooded wetlands to about 2 months in the seasonally flooded wetlands. All of these wetlands go dry before the growing season is complete. Following a winter of little snowfall, many wetlands do not receive any water for that year, and some of them are tilled. About 29 percent of the wetlands in the Prairie Pothole Region have been tilled. Forested and scrub-shrub wetlands are present along creeks and rivers and around most of the dugouts and small reservoirs in the State. During runoff periods, particularly following snowmelt runoff, parts of the creek and river flood plains are inundated for short periods of time. The runoff also fills the dugouts and small 306 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES reservoirs. During drier parts of the year, the existence of forested and scrub-shrub wetlands along the creeks and rivers and around dugouts and small reservoirs depends on ground water. In some wildlife refuges, the FWS has attempted to stabilize the effects that climate has on the permanence of wetlands. An example is J. Clark Salyer National Wildlife Refuge. Five small dams that can maintain about 4 feet of water over parts of the flood plain were built on the Souris River. Water is regulated to sustain the desired emergent wetlands. If emergent vegetation, such as cattails, becomes too thick, the growth can be controlled by increasing the water level in the wetland or draining the wetland. Because the Souris River provides a reliable source of water, the variable climatic conditions will not greatly affect the management of the wetlands. TRENDS Predevelopment wetland acreage in North Dakota has been estimated to be about 4.9 million acres (North Dakota Parks and Recreation Department, 1987; Dahl, 1990). When settlers moved into the State, they noted in their journals many wet meadows, par- ticularly along the Red River of the North. Farmers drained some of these wetlands to grow crops. The most recent and complete published wetland inventory was done in 1982 by the Natural Re- sources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Ser- vice) (NRCS), which estimated that 2.7 million acres of wetlands remained in the State (North Dakota Parks and Recreation Depart- ment, 1987). The most extensive drainage has occurred in the Agassiz Lake Plain Region, where about 1.2 million acres of wet soils have been drained (North Dakota Parks and Recreation De- partment, 1987). To a lesser extent, wetlands have been drained for road construction, urban development, and surface mining. In ad- dition to the loss of many wetlands due to drainage, others have been degraded by siltation and chemical contamination. Agricultural drainage still poses the greatest threat to wetlands in the State. The wetlands that were the easiest and cheapest to drain already have been drained; therefore, economic factors limit cur- rent drainage trends. As small farms are consolidated into large commercial farms, drainage might not be as large a financial bur- den, and additional wetlands might be drained. Economists feel that if free-market prices remain low. Federal farm programs will have made wetland drainage unprofitable (North Dakota Parks and Rec- reation Department, 1987). However, if crop prices increase and Federal programs are eliminated, drainage will be profitable and political pressure could change the State's "no-net-loss" policy. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in aspects of wetland management and conservation in North Dakota. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in North Dakota wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohi- bitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in North Dakota, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity; ..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization__________ FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency............ Forest Service.................................................. Natural Resources Conservation Service . Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers ............................... Military reservations...................................... Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management....................... Bureau of Reclamation .................................. Fish and Wildlife Service ............................... Geological Survey........................................... National Biological Service .......................... National Park Service .................................... Environmental Protection Agency................... STATE Department of Health and Consolidated Laboratories................................ Department of Transportation.......................... Forest Service...................................................... Game and Fish Department............................... Parks and Tourism Department........................ Water Commission .............................................. PRIVATE Ducks Unlimited................................................... The Nature Conservancy................................... Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The NRCS determines compliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the identification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act encourages wetland protection through funding incentives. The act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehen- sive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Service (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: NORTH DAKOTA 307 Federal agencies are responsible for the proper management of wetlands on public land under their jurisdiction. In North Da- kota, the FWS manages about 290,000 acres in 63 National Wildlife Refuges. The (FWS) manages about 240,000 acres in 1,000 Water- fowl Protection Units. In addition, the FWS has conservation ease- ments to 700,000 acres of private wetlands. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages about 6,800 acres of wetlands in 66,000 acres of BLM land. The U.S. Forest Service manages about 1.1 million acres of land in three National Grasslands that have an estimated riparian acreage of 16,000 acres. The NFS manages 71,000 acres in two National Historic Sites and one National Park but cur- rently (1993) has no estimate of wetland acreage under its jurisdic- tion. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) has acquired land owing to mitigation of projects in the State. The BOR has transferred man- agement responsibilities of about 17,000 acres to the FWS. of which 5,000 acres are wetlands. The BOR is still developing about 6,000 acres of mitigated land, of which 1,000 acres are wetlands. The BOR also is developing about 10,000 acres of land encompassed by its projects, of which 6,000 acres are wetlands. Eventually the man- agement responsibilities of all land being developed by the BOR will be transferred to another Federal or State agency. State wetland activities. State programs for wetland protec- tion are 80-acre drainage permits (North Dakota Century Code 61- 01-22), Senate Bill No. 2035, and the State Water Bank Program. Since 1957, North Dakota has required landowners to obtain a per- mit to drain wetlands that have a drainage area larger than 80 acres. Permits are reviewed by the local Water Resources District and by the North Dakota State Water Commission State Engineer. Senate Bill No. 2035, commonly known as the "no-net-loss" bill, was passed in 1987. The bill maintains existing drainage regulations, but the bill also requires that the same acreage of wetlands will exist in the future as existed on January 1, 1987. The Water Commission State Engineer and the Game and Fish Department Director must jointly find that the wetland proposed to be destroyed will be re- placed by an equal acreage of suitable wetland. A wetlands bank was established to keep track of the wetlands drained and restored. The wetlands bank is the responsibility of the Water Commission. Wet- lands drained are reported as debits and wetlands created or restored are reported as credits. The "no-net-loss" bill mandates that the bank cannot carry a net debit greater than 2,500 acres. The State Water Bank Program was created in 1981 to give landowners financial incentive to set aside cropland to preserve the State's wetlands. The program is administered at the State and county levels and uses private donations. The Department of Health and Consolidated Laboratories re- views section 404 permit applications to ensure compliance with water-quality regulations. Also, the Department submits a biennial assessment of the State's surface-water quality, including wetlands, to the EPA and the U.S. Congress, according to Clean Water Act Section 305(b) requirements. State agencies also are responsible for the proper management of wetlands on public land under their jurisdiction. The North Da- kota Game and Fish Department manages 80,000 acres in fee or title ownership, and many of these acres are wetlands. The North Da- kota Department of Transportation manages 195.000 acres of right- of-ways along the highways in the State and uses best-management practices to avoid unnecessary disturbances of wetlands while main- taining or constructing highways. Unavoidable filling of wetlands is mitigated through wetland restoration or creation. The State Parks and Tourism Department manages 16,000 acres of land in State Parks but currently (1993) has no estimate of wetland acreage. The North Dakota Forest Service manages 13,000 acres of land in five State Forests but currently (1993) has no estimate of wetland acre- age. Private wetland activities. Ducks Unlimited works with Fed- eral, State, and private landowners to restore and enhance lands for wildlife production, with emphasis on waterfowl production. The Nature Conservancy manages about 4,000 acres of land on two preserves, and about one-half of the acreage is wetlands. The Na- ture Conservancy's interest is to preserve habitat unique to endan- gered plant and animal species in the State, particularly species unique to alkali wetlands. References Cited Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl. T.E.. 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Hubbard, D.E., 1988, Glaciated prairie wetlands functions and values A synthesis of the literature: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88(43), 50 p. Kantrud, H.A., Krapu, G.L., and Swanson, G.A., 1989, Prairie basin wet- lands of the Dakotas A community profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.28), 111 p. North Dakota Parks and Recreation Department. 1987, North Dakota State comprehensive outdoor recreation plan addendum, wetlands priority plan: North Dakota Parks and Recreation Department, 82 p. Shjeflo, J.B., 1968, Evapotranspiration and the water budget of prairie pot- holes in North Dakota: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 585-B, 49 p. Smith, A.G., Stoudt, J.H., and Gollop, J.B., 1964, Prairie potholes and marshes, in Linduska, J.P., ed., Waterfowl tomorrow: Washington D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, p. 39-50. Stewart, R.E., and Kantrud, H.A., 1972, Vegetation of prairie potholes, North Dakota, in relation to quality of water and other environmental fac- tors: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 585-D, 36 p. ____1973, Ecological distribution of breeding water fowl populations in North Dakota: Journal of Wildlife Management, v. 37, no. 1, p. 39- 50. Winter, T.C., 1989, Hydrologic studies of wetlands in the northern prairie, in Van Der Valk, A., ed., Northern prairie wetlands: Ames, Iowa State University Press, p. 16-54. Winter, T.C., Benson, R.D.. Engberg, R.A., and others, 1984, Synopsis of ground-water and surface-water resources of North Dakota: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 84-732. 127 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 821 East Interstate Avenue, Bismarck, ND 58501; Regional Wet- land Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fish and Wildlife Enhance- ment, P.O. Box 25486, Denver Federal Center, Denver. CO 80225 Prepared by Wayne R. Berkas, U.S. Geological Survey 308 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 309 Ohio Wetland Resources lio's wetlands cover about 1.8 percent of the State (Dahl, 1990). Though greatly reduced in acreage since colonial times, these wet- lands are an important economic and environmental resource. Wet- lands can lessen the effects of floods by storing floodwater and re- leasing it gradually. Wetlands also help regulate water quality, and wetland vegetation can provide bank stabilization and reduce ero- sion. Wetlands provide habitat for migratory birds, waterfowl, and fish and are prominent attractions in a well-developed State system of nature areas, preserves, and parks (fig. 1). Ohio wetlands attract large numbers cf hunters, fishermen, and naturalists. Historically, wetlands have provided timber and peat and have been converted into some of the most fertile farmland in the State. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deepwater habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and others, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Ohio is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Ohio are described below. System Palustrine, Lacustrine Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands}; or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or} floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. There is no published comprehensive inventory of Ohio wet- lands. Dahl (1990) provided the only recent estimate of total area about 483,000 acres. Two inventories are presently (1993) in progress. The National Wetlands Inventory has been completed for northern and eastern Ohio. State and Federal agencies began the Ohio Wetland Inventory in 1991 and have located and classified wetlands in 50 of 88 Ohio counties. This inventory locates wetlands on LANDSAT satellite images and, in some cases, verifies wetland identification and classification by ground reconnaissance (Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 1992; Yi and others, 1994). Riverine, Palustrine wetlands such as swamps (forested wetlands), wet prairies (emergent wetlands), coastal and embayment marshes (emergent wetlands), peatlands (wetlands that have organic soils), and wetlands along stream margins and backwaters collectively are the most important Ohio wetlands. Lacustrine and riverine wetlands constitute only a small percentage of the State's wetland acreage. Many wetlands have formed on poorly drained soils that are of gla- cial origin. Remnants of once extensive forested wetlands and wet prairies are widely distributed across glaciated parts of northern, central, and western Ohio. Wetlands in these areas include the swamps, oak forests, and wet prairies that were part of a large wet- land system known historically as the Great Black Swamp (Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 1988) and the wet prairies and wet mixed-oak forests of south-central Ohio (Forsyth, 1970). Ohio peatlands comprise bogs and fens. Bogs receive mois- ture mostly from precipitation and typically contain large numbers of mosses that are tolerant of acidic conditions. Fens generally re- ceive drainage from surrounding mineral soils and commonly sup- port communities of grasses, sedges, or reeds (Mitsch and Gosse- link, 1986). Bogs and fens are located in glaciated areas of north- ern and western Ohio (Andreas and Knoop, 1992). Bogs are con- centrated in the Southern New York Section of the Appalachian Plateaus of northeastern Ohio, and fens are common in the Till Plains of the Central Lowland of western Ohio (fig. 2B) (Denny, 1979). Large coastal marshes border the southwestern shore and Sandusky Bay of Lake Erie (fig. 2A ). These marshes generally range from 1 to 2 miles in width and are interrupted by points of higher land and developed areas. Undisturbed shores of western Lake Erie have marshes fronted by low barrier beaches and interspaced with river mouths. These wetlands are protected by constructed earthen and rock dikes. Two sand spits separate Sandusky Bay from Lake Erie and protect extensive wetlands in the bay. East of Sandusky Bay, low, marshy backshores grade into low bluffs, and wetlands in this area are restricted to mouths of tributaries such as the Huron River and Old Woman Creek. A large wetland, Mentor Marsh, occupies the former valley and delta of the Grand River. Twelve bedrock is- lands in western Lake Erie have rocky shores, but small embayments on large islands contain wetlands (Herdendorf, 1992). Figure 1. Cedar Run in Cedar Bog Nature Preserve. Cedar Run drains bog meadows and marl meadows of Cedar Bog, a relict alkaline fen. (Photograph by Ralph E. Ramey, Columbus, Ohio). 310 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Numerous riverine and palustrine wetlands are located in the drainages of the Muskingum, Scioto, and Great Miami Rivers (fig. 2A). These wetlands extend from glaciated headwaters into unglaciated sections. To date, the hydrology and ecology of these wetlands have been little studied. HYDROLOCIC SETTING Wetlands form where ground water or surface water saturates poorly drained or impermeable soils. Wetlands typically develop in depressions or other low areas that are intermittently to permanently flooded by runoff, ground-water discharge, or precipitation. Water is removed primarily by runoff, evaporation, and transpiration. In areas that develop into wetlands, moisture is maintained at or near the surface by fine-grained, hydric soils. These water-saturated soils support the growth of specialized plants (hydrophytes) that are adapted to low oxygen concentrations and, in some cases, extreme acidity, alkalinity, or low nitrogen concentrations. Many Ohio wetlands are located on fine-grained soils that were deposited by an extensive system of glacial lakes. These lakes were created as advancing glaciers blocked the flow of preglacial streams or when receding glaciers blocked the flow of meltwater. As the lakes drained, their beds became extensive deposits of fine-grained silts and clays known as till. These deposits cover extensive areas of northwestern Ohio (Spooner, 1982). As ice of the most recent glaciation receded to the southern shore of Lake Erie, it blocked the northward drainage of meltwater and formed a large lake (Lake Maumee) in northwestern Ohio. As ice sheets continued to recede. Lake Maumee drained, and sand deposits from ancient dunes and flat deposits that formed the lakebed were left behind. Lake deposits contained large amounts of silt and clay and formed poorly drained soils that at one time supported extensive swamps (Forsyth, 1970). Sand deposits left by Lake Maumee were inhabited by oak forests and wet prairies. Oak forests developed where precipitation drained through thick sand of ancient dunes and accumulated on underlying clay till. The surfaces of these sand deposits were rela- tively dry and supported only dry-tolerant, oak forests. Where sand deposits were thin, ground water saturated the sandy soil and cre- ated swamps or shallow lakes. These areas developed into wet prai- ries (Forsyth, 1970). Lake deposits from early glaciation and glacial outwash from more recent glaciations have been deposited in valleys of the Kanawha Section of the Appalachian Plateaus of southeastern Ohio (fig. 2B). Following the retreat of the last glacier, wetlands have developed along streams that drain these deposits. These wetlands typically are located on saturated loam soils and include oak-maple associations on clays; elm, sycamore, and birch associations on al- luvial bottoms; and American elm, ash, and maple associations in better drained and aerated soils (Spooner, 1982). Sedges, button- PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS Central Lowland A. Eastern Lake Section B.71II Plains Interior Low Plateaus C. Lexington Plain Appalachian Plateaus D. Southern New York Section E. Kanawha Section WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown 25 50 KILOMETERS r Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Ohio and physiography of the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physiography. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OHIO 311 bush, willow, alder, and maple grow in the wettest areas. Swamp forests consist of swamp white oak, black willow on wetter sites, and American elm, sycamore, and maple stands in less wet areas. Recent beaver activity has killed trees and created wetter and more open wetlands (Spooncr, 1982). In the glaciated part of Ohio, pcatlands are located on lakebed deposits (Dachnowski, 1912) and in areas where glacial deposits formed topographic features that favor the retention of water (Andreas, 1985). These features provided the poorly drained soils and hydrologic setting necessary for the formation and maintenance of peatlands (Andreas, 1985; Andreas and Knoop, 1992). A com- mon glacially derived feature, kettle holes, formed as ice was trapped in glacial deposits and then melted. As these ice pieces slowly thawed, meltwater eroded the surrounding deposits into funnel- shaped depressions (Goldthwait, 1959). Large kettle holes devel- oped into lakes that eventually were filled by peat from accumu- lated and consolidated plant debris (Denny, 1979). The resultant wetlands developed plant communities dominated by mosses and evergreens. Hydrologic and biological differences separate peatlands into acidic (pH 3.5-4.5) bogs and circumneutral (pH 5.5-8.0) fens. In Ohio, fens develop where springs emerge from glacial deposits and produce a continuous flow of cool, mineral-rich water. Primarily sedges and grasses, not sphagnum, are adapted to this environment and in fens form most of the peat. Bogs develop as water-saturated organic materials decay slowly at low pH and temperature to form thick peat deposits (Dcnny, 1979). The relation of glacial geology to wetland hydrology has been thoroughly studied in Cedar Bog, a typical Ohio fen located in the Mad River Valley (figs. 1 and 2,4). Cedar Bog developed in the Mad River Valley Train (fig. 3), an outwash made up of highly perme- able, calcium carbonate gravel (Quinn, 1974). In the Mad River Valley, ground water generally is 10 feet below the land surface. However, Cedar Bog has developed on hydric soils that were pro- duced where ground water discharges on the eastern side of the valley. The water that sustains Cedar Bog is derived mainly from glacial outwashes to the north and cast (Forsyth. 1974). These outwashes consist of coarse calcium carbonate gravel and rise about 100 feet above the fen. Ground water flows through the outwashes until it reaches the base of an escarpment along the eastern border of Cedar Bog. Here, cool, alkaline ground water discharges in springs, saturates soils, and flows across the fen. The continuously seeping ground water produces a perpetually cool, moist microen- vironment that maintains a flora composed of many species nor- mally found much farther north (Frederick, 1974). As surface wa- ter accumulates, it is drained by Cedar Run and the Mad River (HillmanandKcnoycr, 1989). Changing water levels arc important in the formation and maintenance of Lake Erie wetlands. Water levels in Lake Erie and in bordering coastal marshes arc subject to long-term and short- term fluctuations. Long-term fluctuations arc caused by changes in inflow that result from extended periods of wet or dry weather in the upper Great Lakes drainage. Wind action produces short-term changes in water level called seiches. These changes can cause water and chemical exchanges similar to those in salt marshes during tidal flow (Mitsch, 1992). Fluctuating water levels promote wetland for- mation by producing barrier bars, deltas, beaches, spits, lagoons, and natural levees. Water-level fluctuations also rejuvenate existing coastal wetland communities and preclude the conversion of veg- etated marshes into dry fields (Hcrdcndorf, 1992). Water levels at Cleveland have fluctuated almost 5 feet during the past 130 years. TRENDS From the 1780's to the 1980's, wetland area in Ohio declined by 90 percent, from about 5,000,000 acres to about 483,000 acres (Dahl, 1990). For the conterminous 48 States, the percentage of wetland loss in Ohio is second only to that of California. Drainage of wetlands for agriculture has been the primary cause of wetland loss, but recreational use, fluctuating water levels, urban develop- ment, mining, logging, and fire also have contributed (Andreas and Knoop. 1992). The swamps of the Great Black Swamp in northwestern Ohio and the marshes bordering Lake Eric were once the State's two larg- est wetland systems. Before European settlement of the area, the Great Black Swamp occupied nearly 900,000 acres. Beginning in 1859, a series of drainage projects converted the swamp into some of the most productive farmland in Ohio. Today only 5 percent of the original swamp forest remains (Andreas and Knoop, 1992). Coastal wetlands along the Ohio shore of Lake Eric have been destroyed as agriculture, real-estate development, and recreational areas have expanded (Heath, 1992). From 1850 to 1993, about 951,000 of 988,000 acres of coastal wetlands were destroyed along the southwestern coast of Lake Eric (Hcrdcndorf, 1992). Only 10 percent of the original marsh along Lake Eric exists today (Andreas and Knoop, 1992). Since 1988, public agencies and private organi- zations involved in the Lower Great Lakes Joint Venture of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan have purchased and restored about 5,240 acres of Lake Eric wetlands (Ohio Department of Natu- ral Resources, 1992). Before 1780, about 183,000 acres (0.5 percent of Ohio's total area) were covered by pcatlands (Dachnowski, 1912). In 1912, Dachnowski conducted a comprehensive, county-by-county survey of glaciated parts of Ohio and located 206 pcatlands that had a com- MAD RIVER VALLEY TRAIN Cedar bog Bedrock EXPLANATION » Direction of ground-water flow Average water table \l\\\\ti Marl meadow Herbaceous meedow Scrub-shrub vegetation Arborvitae stand Deciduous forest Figure 3. Generalized geohydrologic setting and vegetation of Cedar Bog. (Sources: Forsyth, 1974; Frederick, 1974.) 312 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES bined area of about 150,000 acres. Andreas and Knoop (1992) field- inventoried the flora of 125 peatlands and estimated that between 1900 and 1991,76,500 of 79,500 acres of peatland were destroyed, and only 2 percent of these wetlands today contain plant commu- nities associated with peatlands. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Ohio. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Ohio wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act: the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the Fws has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Ser- vice (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) (NRCS) determines compliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the identification of wetlands and in the development of wetland pro- tection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. Coastal and Great Lakes States that adopt coastal-zone management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. Several Federal agencies have managerial and regulatory re- sponsibilities for specific Ohio wetlands. The FWS is presently (1993) surveying Ohio wetlands located in Ohio River embayments Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Ohio, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization__________ FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency............ Natural Resources Conservation Service . Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers ............................... Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service ............................... Geological Survey........................................... National Biological Service .......................... National Park Service .................................... Environmental Protection Agency................... STATE Department of Highways................................... Department of Natural Resources Division of Natural Areas and Preserves... Division of Parks.............................................. Division of Soil and Water............................. Division of Wildlife .......................................... Environmental Protection Agency................... PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS Ducks Unlimited ................................................... The Nature Conservancy................................... and on Ohio River islands. Wetlands on designated islands and in embayments could become part of the Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge. The FWS also manages wetlands along the Lake Erie shore in the Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge, surveys flora and fauna of Ohio wetlands, and reviews all section 404 permit appli- cations and section 401 water-quality certifications. The U.S. For- est Service (FS) manages wetlands in the Wayne National Forest in cooperation with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources. The FS has obtained three wetlands as part of eight recent land acquisi- tions. In addition, three wetlands recently have been constructed. No specific inventories of wetland plants and animals have been initiated by the FS, but recent inventories of amphibians, reptiles, and fish have included wetland areas. The NFS manages wetlands in the Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area between Cleveland and Akron. The NFS also protects all wetlands on fee-purchased lands, allows wetlands to develop naturally on all acquired lands, and purchases easements that protect wetlands on adjacent proper- ties. The NRCS confirms wetland boundaries for the Ohio Wetland Inventory and notifies farmers when they are not in compliance with the Food Security Act of 1985. State wetland activities. Ohio designates all wetlands as State Resource Waters. As such, wetland water quality is protected from any degradation that may interfere with designated uses. The designation of Ohio wetlands as State Resource Waters protects them from the addition of toxic substances and addition or removal of any earthen material. Any dredging or filling of an Ohio wetland requires a section 404 permit issued by the Corps and a section 401 water- quality certification issued by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 1992). Typical activities that might affect wetlands and, consequently, require a section 404 permit and section 401 water-quality certification are construction of boat ramps, placement of rip-rap for erosion pro- tection, placing fill, construction of dams or dikes, and stream channelization or diversion. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OHIO 313 The Division of Wildlife has worked with conservation groups and government groups such as the FWS and NRCS to purchase, re- store, and construct wetlands for waterfowl and other migratory birds. An important part of this effort has been the Lower Great Lakes Joint Venture of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. This program purchases and manages wetlands in five focus areas. The Division also has initiated an Ohio income tax check- off option that provides monies for a nongame-wildlife management program and the Habitat Restoration Program, which protects wild- life habitat. The Division regulates and manages wetlands in 46 public wildlife areas throughout the State. The Ohio Natural Areas Act of 1970 established a statewide system of natural areas and nature preserves that are managed ei- ther by the Division of Natural Areas and Preserves or by a cooper- ating managing agency. Twenty-five natural areas and preserves in the State contain 4,505 acres of wetlands. Wetlands constitute ap- proximately one-fourth of all natural-area and preserve acreage in Ohio (Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 1988). The Division of Parks and Recreation manages wetlands in 59 State parks. Man- agement responsibilities are coordinated with the Division of Wild- life, the Corps, and other governmental agencies. The Division of Soil and Water Conservation has initiated the Ohio Land Capability Analysis Program. The program provides information on wetlands in the form of computer-generated maps and data relating to soil types, mineral resources, vegetation, and land use to local governments and private landowners. The Department of Highways recently initiated programs that identify wetlands likely to be affected by road construction. These programs provide for the purchase or development of wetlands to mitigate wetland loss. Wetland management in the future will be coordinated by a statewide task force consisting of about 30 individuals from State, county, and municipal governments; environmental and advocacy organizations: and business and industry affiliates. The Commis- sion on Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management will chair the task force. The task force will attempt to reach consensus on the public values of wetlands, wetlands assessment, wetlands regulation, and wetlands creation and restoration. Private wetland activities. The Nature Conservancy has es- tablished the following preserves that contain wetlands: 7 sites (3,240 acres of wetlands) in the Eastern Lakes Section of the Cen- tral Lowland Province; 6 sites (1.000 acres of wetlands) in the Till Plains Section; 11 sites (2,510 acres of wetlands) in the Southern New York Section of the Appalachian Plateaus; and 2 sites (125 acres of wetlands) in the Kanawha Section. Thirteen of these sites are managed by a cooperating public or private agency. Ducks Unlim- ited has been influential in developing and preserving wetlands, particularly coastal marshes along Lake Erie. The organization's activities have included the purchase, restoration, and enhancement of wetlands. The Oak Harbor Conservation Club, Wildlife Legisla- tive Fund of America, Ohio Plan Clubs, Lake Erie Wildflowers, Maumee Valley Audubon Club, Ohio Historical Society, Izaak Walton League, Sierra Club, League of Ohio Sportsmen, and other conservation groups contribute significantly to wetland conserva- tion. References Cited Andreas, B.K., 1985, The relationship between Ohio peatland distribution and buried river valleys: The Ohio Journal of Science, v. 85, no. 3, p. 116-125. Andreas, B.K., and Knoop, J.D., 1992, 100 years of changes in Ohio peatlands: The Ohio Journal of Science, v. 92, no. 5, p. 130-138. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, EC., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dachnowski, Alfred, 1912, Peat deposits of Ohio Their origin, formation and uses: Columbus, Ohio Geological Survey, 4th series, Bulletin 16, 424 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Denny, G.L., 1979, Bogs, in Lafferty, M.B., ed., Ohio's natural heritage: Columbus, The Ohio Academy of Science and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, p. 134-157. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: U.S. Geo- logical Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Forsyth, J.L., 1970, A geologist looks at the natural vegetation map of Ohio: The Ohio Journal of Science, v. 70, no. 3, p. 180-191. ____1974, Geologic conditions essential for the perpetuation of Cedar Bog, Champaign County, Ohio: The Ohio Journal of Science, v. 74, no. 2, p. 116-139. Frederick, C.M., 1974, A natural history of the vascular flora of Cedar Bog, Champaign County, Ohio: The Ohio Journal of Science, v. 74, no. 2, p. 65-115. Goldthwait, R.P., 1959, Scenes in Ohio during the last ice age: The Ohio Journal of Science, v. 59, no. 4, p. 193-216. Heath, R.T., 1992, Nutrient dynamics in Great Lakes coastal wetlands Future directions: Journal of Great Lakes Research, v. 18 no. 4, p. 590- 602. Herdendorf, C.E., 1992, Lake Erie coastal wetlands An overview: Jour- nal of Great Lakes Research, v. 18, no. 4, p. 533-551. Hillman, D.L., and Kenoyer, Galen, 1989, An analysis of the Cedar Bog hydrologic system through the use of a three-dimensional groundwa- ter flow model, in Glotzhober, R.C., Kochman, Anne, and Schultz, W.T., eds., Cedar Bog Symposium II: Columbus, Ohio Historical Society, p. 65-74. Mitsch, W.J., 1992, Combining ecosystem and landscape approaches to Great Lakes wetlands: Journal of Great Lakes Research, v. 18, no. 4, p. 552-570. Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G., 1986, Wetlands: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 539 p. Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 1988, Ohio wetlands priority con- servation plan: Columbus, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Office of Outdoor Recreational Services, 67 p. ____1992. North American Waterfowl Management Plan, Lower Great Lakes Joint Venture, 1988-1991: Columbus, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 27 p. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, Fact sheet Section 401 water quality certification: Columbus, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality Planning and Assessment, 3 p. Quinn, M.J., 1974, The late glacial history of the Cedar Bog area, in King, C.C., and Frederick, C.M., eds.. Cedar Bog Symposium: Columbus, The Ohio State University, p. 7-12. Spooner, D.M., 1982, Wetlands in Teays-stage valleys in extreme southeast- ern Ohio Formation and flora, in McDonald, B.R., ed., Proceed- ings of the Symposium on Wetlands of the Unglaciated Appalachian Region, West Virginia University, Morgantown, May 26-28: Morgantown, West Virginia, p. 89-99. Yi, Gi-Chul, Risley, David, Koneff, Mark, and Davis, Craig, 1994, Devel- opment of Ohio's GIS-based wetlands inventory: Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, v. 49, p. 23-28. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 975 West Third Avenue, Columbus, OH 43212; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, BHW Building, 1 Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, MN 55111 Prepared by Michael Little and Marcus C. Waldron, U.S. Geological Survey 314 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 315 Oklahoma Wetland Resources W'ctlands cover about 950,000 acres (2 percent) of Oklahoma a decrease of about 67 percent over the last 200 years (Dahl, 1990). Oklahoma's wetland acreage places the State twenty-third in total wetland acreage among the 48 conterminous States. Wetlands are environmentally and economically valuable to the State. They reduce flood peaks by dispersing water over a large area and releasing it gradually to downstream areas, thus reducing the severity of floods. Wetlands in flood plains (fig. 1) improve the quality of water in rivers and streams by trapping or absorbing sedi- ment, nutrients, and toxins. Wetland vegetation helps stabilize strcambanks and provides food for wildlife. The vegetation also reduces wind and water erosion. Wetlands provide important wildlife habitat. Most of the State's fish and wildlife, during some part of their life cycle, depend on riparian (strcamsidc) habitats that include wetlands. Wetlands also provide important stopover, feeding, overwintering, and breeding grounds for migratory waterfowl, wading birds, and shore birds. The tourist industry benefits from the scenic beauty of the State's diverse wetlands, which afford opportunities for recreational activities such as hunting, fishing, birdwatching, nature photography, camping, hiking, and boating. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands arc lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and dccpwatcr habitats in Oklahoma is shown in figure 2/4; only wetlands arc discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvcgctated and arc classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrinc, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and decpwatcr habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Oklahoma are described below. System Palustrine Lacustrine Riverine Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees {forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or} floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Palustrinc wetlands constitute most of Oklahoma's wetland acreage. Palustrine wetlands in the State include forested wetlands such as bottom-land hardwood forests and swamps; emergent wet- lands such as marshes and wet meadows; aquatic-bed wetlands characterized by submersed or floating plants in ponds, lakes, riv- ers, and sloughs; and sparsely vegetated wetlands such as small, intermittently flooded playa lakes. Palustrinc forested wetlands arc most common on river flood plains and along some streams in the moist, eastern part of Okla- homa in the Ozark Plateaus, Ouachita, Coastal Plain, and eastern Central Lowland physiographic provinces (fig. 2B ). A survey con- ducted in the early 1980's indicated that forested wetlands covered about 240,000 acres of the eastern one-third of the State at that time (Brabander and others, 1985). The degree and duration of river flooding generally intlucncc which tree species predominate in a forested wetland and what common name is applied to the wetland. Commonly, forested wetlands that are deeply flooded for much of the year are termed "swamps," whereas those that are flooded in- termittently or only during the wettest parts of the year are termed "bottom-land hardwood forests." Riparian wetlands are palustrinc wetlands that form along the banks of streams, rivers, and lakes. These wetlands can be domi- nated by herbaceous emergent plants (emergent wetland), shrubs and saplings (scrub-shrub wetland), or trees (forested wetland). Riparian wetlands are especially important to fish and wildlife in the grasslands of the plains and prairie regions because they pro- vide shelter and moisture in a landscape that is otherwise sparsely vegetated by trees or shrubs and lacks year-round sources of water. In Oklahoma, riparian wetlands range in area from about 10 to 2,000 acres (Oklahoma Tourism and Recreation Department, 1987). The largest expanses of riparian wetland are along the Cimarron, Canadian. Washita, and Red Rivers and their tributaries. Examples of these wetland arc the numerous small marshes on river terraces along the Cimarron River. A recent study of riparian lands in western Oklahoma (Stinnctt and others, 1987) indicated that ri- parian areas that are frequently flooded cover about 621,000 acres along 5,200 miles of streams west of about the longitude of Okla- homa City. Forests cover from 22 to 28 percent of the riparian flood plains. F Figure 1. Stinchcomb Wildlife Refuge above Lake Overholser, Oklahoma. (Photograph courtesy of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.) 316 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES B Central Lowland WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown Predominantly wetland I I Predominantly deepwater habitat PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS -36 Line of equal annual precipitation Interval 4 inches RUNOFF 16 Line of equal annual runoff Interval, in inches, is variable Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Oklahoma and physical and climatological features that control wetland distribution in the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physiography. C, Average annual precipitation. D, Average annual runoff. (Sources: A, I.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center. C and D, Blumer, 1986). National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OKLAHOMA 317 Oklahoma's playa lakes are mostly in the panhandle region. They provide overwintering and resting habitat for waterfowl mi- grating along the Central Flyway (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1990). The number of playa lakes in the State is about 1,200, total- ing about 9,000 acres, and the lakes range in area from less than 1 acre to more than 200 acres (Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, unpub. data, 1990). Playa lakes are sand- or mud- bottomed lakes that receive most of their moisture from precipita- tion runoff and have little external drainage. They range from dry lakebeds to shallow lakes that can be freshwater or saline. Fresh- water playas are numerous, small to medium in size, and serve as zones of recharge to the underlying aquifer (Osterkamp and Wood, 1987). Saline playas are larger in size and fewer in number than the freshwater playas and are areas of discharge from the underlying aquifer. Playa lakes smaller than 20 acres typically are intermittently flooded, whereas larger playa lakes generally are continuously flooded. Small playas are classified as palustrine wetlands; the larger, more permanent playa lakes are lacustrine wetlands and bordered by palustrine emergent wetlands. Flooded playa lakes, especially those containing vegetation, provide optimum wildlife habitat. Most lacustrine wetlands in Oklahoma are in the larger playa lakes and in the shallows of the many reservoirs on rivers statewide. Because of their depth, reservoirs typically contain more deepwater habitat than wetland; however, wetlands in the shallow margins of reservoirs can be extensive in areas of low relief. Siltation (as in Great Salt Plains Lake on the Arkansas River) or declining water levels caused by low streamflow in dry years or reservoir leakage (as in Optima Lake) can create additional wetland acreage in reser- voirs. Lacustrine wetlands in reservoirs and large playa lakes and the adjacent palustrine marshes provide valuable habitat for resi- dent and migratory waterfowl. Both Great Salt Plains Lake and Optima Lake are National Wildlife Refuges. Riverine wetlands include beds of small streams and the shal- lows of rivers. Riverine wetlands are restricted to the channels of streams and undammed rivers and do not include wetlands in their flood plains. Because of the many miles of streams and rivers in Oklahoma, the State has extensive riverine wetlands. However, res- ervoir construction converted many formerly riverine wetlands into lacustrine wetlands or deepwater habitat. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands form where a persistent water supply is at or near the land surface. The location, abundance, and persistence of the water supply is a function of physiographic, climatic, and hydro- logic factors, such as topography, precipitation and runoff patterns, evapotranspiration rate, and configuration of the water table. Precipitation and runoff rates differ annually, with the seasons, and geographically. The average annual precipitation in Oklahoma ranges from about 16 inches in the western panhandle to more than 52 inches in southeastern Oklahoma (fig. 2C). Spring is the wet- test season, and May is the wettest month. Runoff ranges widely across the State. The average annual runoff ranges from about 0.1 inch in the western panhandle to more than 20 inches in the south- eastern corner of the State (fig. 2D). Evaporation is greatest in western Oklahoma and least in the eastern part of the State. The forested wetlands (bottom-land hardwood forests) of east- ern Oklahoma are primarily on flood plains in alluvial river valleys. Flood-plain wetlands generally depend on river flooding in spring for much of their moisture. Annual flooding of the rivers generally is confined to the main channel or lowlands that border a river, but floods of 5- to 100-year recurrence intervals typically overflow the banks, leaving residual water in backswamps, pools, sloughs, ox- bows, and depressions. Rainfall is also a source of moisture to these wetlands. Flood-plain forests and swamps delay runoff and provide surface-water storage. Organic soils in the forested wetlands func- tion somewhat like sponges, increasing water-storage capacity and retarding evapotranspiration (Wilkinson and others, 1987). Riparian wetlands in south-central Oklahoma are in areas clas- sified as rolling to gently rolling prairie and savannah. These wet- lands have formed on flood plains of permanent streams and are maintained by frequent or seasonal flooding or by a high water table. Riparian-wetland vegetation typically consists of emergent herba- ceous plants, shrubs, or trees. Soil types range from sandy loam to clay loam underlain by sandstone and shale. Average annual precipi- tation in the region ranges from 30 to 34 inches. Lake evaporation is about 63 inches annually (Barclay, 1980). Because of the exten- sive channelization of streams, which has lowered the water table, and the many impoundments, which have reduced flooding, a large percentage of the riparian wetlands once present in this part of the State have been lost (Barclay, 1980). A study by Taylor and others (1984) describes the riparian wetlands along the north side of the Cimarron River in north-cen- tral Oklahoma as marshes and ponded water in surface depressions of terrace deposits along the river. The terrace surface is generally level to gently sloping, and sand dunes line the river. The wetlands began to appear in formerly dry depressions in 1975 because of a rise in the water table. The depressions have flat bottoms and are assumed to be formed by wind. The areal extent of these wetlands has increased since 1975, owing to a further rise in ground-water levels. The terrace and associated deposits consist of dune sands and alluvial and wind-blown sediments overlying bedrock. Soils in the nonwetland areas of the terrace are sandy loam or loamy sand, whereas soils in the wetlands are clayey with some characteristics of hydric soils. The riparian wetlands in western Oklahoma are on the flood plains of perennial streams in an area of the State that is transitional between the arid lands of the west and the humid, temperate for- ests of the east (Stinnett and others, 1987). These wetlands are maintained by periodic flooding, ground water, and local precipi- tation. During drought, the wetlands can dry up, causing the ripar- ian vegetation to disappear. Soil types in the area range from loamy fine sand to sandy clay loam. Average annual precipitation in this region ranges from 18 to 34 inches. Annual lake evaporation in west- ern Oklahoma ranges from 56 to 64 inches. Evaporation is greatest in the panhandle (Stinnett and others, 1987). The major perennial streams that have riparian wetlands in west-central Oklahoma are the Canadian and Washita Rivers, which flow southeasterly through rolling hills of mixed-grass and tall-grass prairie. The major perennial stream that has riparian wetlands in the southwestern part of the State is the Red River, which flows east- erly through level to gently rolling topography that supports mixed- grass vegetative cover (Stinnett and others, 1987). Historically, the area of playa lakes in the panhandle was short- grass and mixed-grass prairie. However, much of the area of playa lakes is now under cultivation. The physiography of the playa lake area is characterized by relatively flat terrain. Because of the flat- ness of the terrain, there is generally little stream drainage; conse- quently, playa lakes collect most of the surface runoff. The playa lakes are shallow depressions that have large surface area relative to the total volume of water contained in them. Consequently, most playa lakes have small storage capacities. Osterkamp and Wood (1987) indicate that freshwater playa lakes in the Great Plains origi- nate wherever surface depressions collect precipitation. The lakes enlarge as a result of dissolution of carbonates by water infiltrating the unsaturated zone above the underlying aquifer and subsequent subsidence of the lakebed. Over time, the older, central lakebeds acquire a layer of clay-rich deposits that largely restricts movement of water between the playa lake and the underlying aquifer. Water probably is removed from freshwater playa lakes primarily by re- 318 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES charge to the underlying aquifer from the outer areas of the lake, where lakebed sediments have not yet accumulated (Osterkamp and Wood, 1987) and by evaporation (Nelson and others, 1983). There is no general agreement on the origin of saline playa lakes; how- ever, Wood and Jones (1990) propose that the source of the salinity is the concentration by evaporation of runoff and shallow, fresh ground water that discharges from the underlying aquifer. TRENDS The FWS has estimated that from the 1780's to the 1980's, the wetland area in Oklahoma decreased from about 2,840,000 acres to about 950,000 acres (Dahl, 1990). This decrease represents a change in wetland acreage from 6.4 percent of the State's surface area to 2.1 percent. The major causes of bottom-land hardwood-forest loss in east- ern Oklahoma have been the cutting of virgin timber and the con- version of flood plains to cropland and pasture. These practices have resulted in the loss of about 1,653,000 acres of bottom-land hard- wood forest (Wilkinson and others, 1987), or about 75 percent of the original forested area, much of which contained wetlands. An area in east-central Oklahoma that has had considerable losses of bottom-land hardwood-forest wetlands is the flood plain of the Deep Fork River. In this river basin, the flood plain on the upper one-third of the river lost most of its wetlands because of channelization be- tween 1912 and 1923. The flood plain on the lower two-thirds of the river was altered or degraded in some parts; however, much of the unchannelized area in the lower two-thirds of the river repre- sents one of the few areas in the State where extensive strands of bottom-land hardwood forest remain (Alan Stacey, Oklahoma De- partment of Wildlife Conservation, written commun., 1994). Another major cause of wetland loss in eastern Oklahoma has been reservoir construction. Twenty-eight major reservoirs in east- ern Oklahoma have inundated about 240,000 acres, or about 10 percent of the bottom-land hardwood forests. Nine additional ma- jor reservoirs have been proposed, the construction of which would result in inundation of an additional 50,000 acres of bottom-land hardwood forest (Wilkinson and others, 1987). The Canadian, Washita, and Red Rivers and their tributaries have undergone extensive channelization and impoundment, result- ing in loss of many riparian wetlands. A study by Barclay (1980) of two prairie streams that are tributaries to the Washita River in south- central Oklahoma showed that channelization of these streams re- sulted in an 86-percent reduction in bottom-land forest and the loss of all the wetlands, about 1,800 acres, or 6.2 percent of the flood plain of the two streams. Other losses of wetlands in this area are attributable to reservoir construction and conversion of wetlands to agricultural use. A rise in water levels beginning in 1975 in the terrace depos- its along the Cimarron River (Taylor and others, 1984) resulted in the restoring of some riparian wetlands in north-central Oklahoma. These wetlands have increased in area since 1975 owing to a con- tinuing rise in water levels and surface pooling. Activities that lower the water levels, such as channelization or drainage of land for crop- ping or pasture, could cause the loss of wetlands. Terrace wetlands are at risk from petroleum-production activities, timber harvesting, and farming and grazing (Taylor and others, 1984). However, Tay- lor and others (1984) indicate that with proper management prac- tices, the terrace marshes and other riparian wetlands can be retained as a wildlife habitat and a water resource without significantly af- fecting landowners. From the mid-1950's to the mid-1980's, wetlands associated with the Canadian River in western Oklahoma decreased in area by about 45 percent (Stinnett and others, 1987). Additionally, wet- land types changed substantially. Results of aerial-photograph analy- sis indicate an increase from 1,145 acres to 10,873 acres in forested wetlands, an increase from 12,975 acres to 24,210 acres in shrub wetland, an increase from 199 acres to 520 acres in open-water and mudflat wetlands, a decrease from 12,599 acres to 4,670 acres of emergent wetlands, and a decrease from 68,602 acres to 11,960 acres of river and sandbar wetlands during a 30-year period. Riverine wetlands decreased from 72 percent to 23 percent of the total wet- land acreage and palustrine wetlands increased from 28 percent to 77 percent of the total wetland acreage. The changes probably were caused by lower streamflow resulting from the upstream construc- tion of Lake Meredith Reservoir in the Texas panhandle. The quality and number of playa lakes available to wetland wildlife in the Oklahoma panhandle has declined significantly. The decline has been attributed to cultivation of playa lake areas, field leveling, cattle grazing, and modification for irrigation and livestock watering (Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, unpub. data, 1990). About 61 percent of the playas are cultivated. The ag- ricultural conversions in the playa lake area have resulted in a sub- stantial change in land use from short-grass and mixed-grass prai- rie to cropland. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Oklahoma. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Oklahoma, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. «, agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization_____________ FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency................... Forest Service ......................................................... Natural Resources Conservation Service ........ Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers ...................................... Military reservations ............................................. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management.............................. Bureau of Reclamation ......................................... Fish and Wildlife Service ...................................... Geological Survey.................................................. National Biological Service ................................. National Park Service ........................................... Environmental Protection Agency.......................... STATE Oklahoma Conservation Commission .................... Oklahoma Water Resources Board ........................ Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation. SOME COUNTY AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ..... PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS Ducks Unlimited.......................................................... The Nature Conservancy.......................................... Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Okla- homa wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibi- tions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OKLAHOMA 319 Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourages (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other al- teration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from penalties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to re- store the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agricultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act encourages wetland protection through funding incentives. The act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehen- sive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Service (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. The wetland-related activities of the FWS in Oklahoma include acquiring bottom land along the Deep Fork River and along the Little River for the benefit of wetland-dependent wildlife (Oklahoma Conservation Commission, 1991). The FWS also has prepared an Oklahoma Wetlands Priority Plan that identifies 13 priority wetland areas in the State encompassing nearly 175,000 acres. The FWS, in 1990, enrolled 10 landowners in their program of providing tech- nical and financial assistance for the restoration of wetlands on pri- vate lands in Oklahoma. Seven National Wildlife Refuges in Okla- homa are managed by the FWS. The North American Waterfowl Management Plan is a joint effort by the U.S. and Canadian Governments to slow the rate of waterfowl-habitat loss. Mexico has signed an agreement to aid in the effort, which seeks to protect more then 6 million acres of wet- lands. The FWS coordinates two joint venture projects of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan that includes two areas of Oklahoma. One is the Playa Lakes Joint Venture, which is intended to ensure the continual accommodation of waterfowl overwintering in, migrating through, and breeding in the panhandle region. A sec- ond is the Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture, which has the goal of protecting the bottom-land hardwood forests in eastern Oklahoma (Forsythe and Aldrich, 1989). Other Federal Agencies in Oklahoma, such as the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), the U.S. Forest Service (FS), and the NFS, are charged with the responsible management of public lands, including wetlands, under their juris- diction. The BLM'S wetland-related goals are to protect, maintain, and restore riparian-wetland areas on lands administered by the BLM in Oklahoma. The acreage of riparian wetlands on lands adminis- tered by the BLM in Oklahoma, Kansas, and New Mexico is 27,600 acres (Bureau of Land Management, 1990). The BOR's jurisdiction extends over their project areas. The FS manages lands and resources in the two National Grasslands in western Oklahoma and the Ouachita National Forest in eastern Oklahoma. The NFS manages the Chickasaw National Recreation Area in south-central Oklahoma to preserve the natural and cultural resources of the area. State wetland activities. The State agencies most involved in wetland conservation are the Oklahoma Conservation Commis- sion, the Oklahoma Water Resources Board, and the Oklahoma De- partment of Wildlife Conservation. The Conservation Commission develops the strategy for wetland management. The strategy includes defining wetlands, enumerating the beneficial uses of wetlands, inventorying wetlands, and recommending measures to mitigate losses and protect wetlands. The Water Resources Board prepares the State's water-quality standards, and certifies that permits issued by the Corps to dredge and fill will not violate the State water-qual- ity standards. The Department of Wildlife Conservation protects, enhances, and restores wetlands in wildlife-management areas for the benefit of wildlife. The Department also provides technical assistances to owners of wetlands and works cooperatively with other organizations on wetland programs. Private wetland activities. The Nature Conservancy provides leadership in the acquisition of land for the preservation of wild- life. The Conservancy has established 14 preserves in Oklahoma. The organization also participates in a program that enlists land- owners to voluntarily protect rare species on their property. Ducks Unlimited and many other organizations in Oklahoma advocate the preservation and restoration of wildlife habitats. References Cited Barclay, J.S., 1980, Impact of stream alteration on riparian communities in southcentral Oklahoma: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/ OBS-80/17, 91 p. Blumer, S.P., 1986, Oklahoma surface-water resources, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and sur- face-water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 375-382. Brabander, J.J., Masters, R.E., and Short, R.M., 1985, Bottomland hard- woods of eastern Oklahoma A special study of their status, trends, and values: Tulsa, Okla., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 147 p. Bureau of Land Management, 1990, New Mexico riparian-wetland 2000 A management strategy: Santa Fe, N. Mex., Bureau of Land Manage- ment, 25 p. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl,T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780'sto 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: Washing- ton, D.C., U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Forsythe, S.W., and Aldrich, J.W., 1989, Eastern Oklahoma wetland plan A State implementation plan: Tulsa, Okla., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation coopera- tive publication, 20 p. Nelson, W.R., Logan, W.J., and Weller, L.C., 1983, Playa wetlands and wildlife on the southern Great Plains A characterization of habi- tat: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-83/28, 99 p. Oklahoma Conservation Commission, 1991, Background paper Wetlands management in Oklahoma: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Conservation Commission, 30 p. Oklahoma Tourism and Recreation Department, 1987, Oklahoma statewide comprehensive outdoor recreation plan: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Tourism and Recreation Department, 216 p. 320 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Osterkamp, W.R., and Wood, W.W., 1987, Playa lake basins on the south- ern High Plains of Texas and New Mexico Part 1, Hydrologic, geo- morphic, and geologic evidence for their development: Geologic So- ciety of America Bulletin, v. 99, no. 2, p. 215-223. Stinnett, D.P., Smith, R.W, and Conrady, S.W., 1987, Riparian areas of western Oklahoma A special study of their status, trends, and val- ues: Tulsa, Okla., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 80 p. Taylor, T.J., Erickson, N.E., Tumlison, Renn, Ratzlaff, J.A., and Cunningham, K.D., 1984, Groundwater wetlands of the Cimarron Terrace, north-central Oklahoma: Stillwater, Oklahoma State Univer- sity, 58 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1990, Region II wetlands regional concept plan Oklahoma wetlands: Albuquerque, N. Mex., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 185 p. Wilkinson, D.L., McDonald, K.S., Olson, R.W.. and Auble, G.T., 1987, Synopsis of wetland functions and values Bottomland hardwoods with emphasis on eastern Texas and Oklahoma: U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service Biological Report 87(12), 132 p. Wood, W.W, and Jones, B.F., 1990, Origin of saline lakes and springs on the southern High Plains of Texas and New Mexico, in Gustavson, T.C., ed., Geological framework and regional hydrology Upper Cenozoic Blackwater Draw and Ogallala Formation, Great Plains: Austin, Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology, p. 193-208. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, Building 7, 202 W 66 St., Oklahoma City, OK 73116; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Fish and Wildlife Enhance- ment, 500 Gold Ave., SW, Albuquerque, NM 87102 Prepared by B.C. Jones, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 321 Oregon Wetland Resources O'regon's diverse wetlands are the result of climate and physio- graphy that range from wet and mountainous to dry and flat. Wet- lands can be found statewide, even in the deserts of the central and southeastern parts of the State (fig. 1). Although wetlands cover little more than 2 percent of Oregon, their ecological and economic benefits make them valuable to the State. Among the beneficial hydrologic functions of wetlands are flood attenuation, erosion and storm-damage reduction, water-qual- ity maintenance, and water supply. Coastal and inland wetlands provide stopover, feeding, and breeding habitat to migratory water- fowl and shorebirds; habitat for native fish and wildlife; and out- door recreation. About one-half of commercially harvested Pacific Ocean fish and shellfish species depend on wetlands for food, spawning, or nursery habitat during some stage of life (Oregon Division of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation Division, 1989). TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Oregon is shown in figure 2,4; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Oregon are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine, Estuarine, Marine Wetland description Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds}, or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. Oregon has between 1.2 and 1.5 million acres of wetlands (J.F. Watson, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, written commun., 1993). Palustrine, lacustrine, and estuarine wetlands constitute most of the State's wetland acreage. The area of marine and riverine wetlands is small relative to that in the other systems. Coastal wetlands. The steep slopes of Oregon's Coast Range mountains extend to the Pacific Ocean along much of the coast, leaving little area for wetland formation. Thus, coastal wetlands are confined mainly to areas of accumulated sediment near the mouths of rivers that have cut through the mountains and to the dune re- gions that have formed where the Coast Range front is distant from the ocean. Estuarine wetlands have developed in the shallow, low-gradi- ent reaches near the mouths of Oregon's coastal rivers and in their deltas. Estuarine wetlands cover about 55,600 acres, and there are about 10,000 acres of tidal fresh marsh, mostly in the Columbia River estuary (Oregon Division of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation Division, 1989). Akins and Jefferson (1973) identified three major types of estuarine wetlands in Oregon: tideflats, eelgrass beds, and salt marshes. Tideflats (unconsolidated-shore wetlands) are mostly nonveg- etated and exist where accumulations of sediment (sand, silt, clay, or gravel) are flooded and exposed daily by tides. Eelgrass-bed (aquatic-bed) wetlands are tideflats that have been extensively colo- nized by eelgrass, a plant that can tolerate high salinity and periods of exposure. Salt marshes (emergent wetlands) are regularly to ir- regularly flooded emergent wetlands vegetated by salt-tolerant plants such as rushes, sedges, glasswort, and arrowgrass. Most of Oregon's large estuaries also contain areas of diked marsh, former salt marshes that have been diked and drained. Diked wetlands are com- monly used for cattle grazing. Coastal nontidal fresh marshes, swamps, bogs, and ponds are palustrine wetlands that have formed around and in lakes and wind- scoured depressions among sand dunes (Akins and Jefferson, 1973). The areas containing most of the coastal nontidal wetlands are the Clatsop Plains, which extend from the Columbia River to Gearhart, the broad dune sheet that extends from Haceta Head to Coos Bay, and the low dunes between Bandon and Cape Blanco. Isolated dune areas containing wetlands are present between Tillamook Bay and Waldport. Figure 1. Wetlands in the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. (Photo- graph courtesy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.) 322 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Northern Basin' Snake River Basin/ and R B ECOREC.ONS C PRECIPITATION 80 Line of equal annual precipitation Interval, in inches, is variable j^-KtonnXf; Namam r, \^f 4fw-r(fc >J!k i I -^. %^MJ Mrt^ \. rVl7" JlK"'^;'* ,V §nr^_ A I ^; ^Wt . . i. ' w .^^fi^v^^.^^l jr w, edtofd. § M * * " * Crump ^"'"'rtSf ( Alourd * -v^ ,\ #»v* »^" «M * ' ft * > «V *J .' * tofce\ ~ Y? yswr^\* * -^\ f^n v * ^" A^_: _ V *T-:f i' r\;«L uf _ _.*. __!- - - WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat 25 50 MILES 0I r H ' 0 25 50 KILOMETERS Figure 2. Wetland distribution, ecoregions, and precipitation in Oregon. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Ecoregions. C, Precipitation. (Sources; A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Ecoregions from Omernik, 1987; landforms data from EROS Data Center. C, Hubbard, 1986.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OREGON 323 Coastal nontidal fresh marshes form in dune lake basins and along their tributary streams. Some shallow lakes are completely covered by marsh vegetation. Interdunal marshes form between dunes in wind-scoured depressions. Interdunal marshes are flooded seasonally or perennially and typically contain slough sedge, silver weed, bog St. Johnswort, creeping buttercup, and western lilaeopsis (Akins and Jefferson, 1973). Other coastal-zone freshwater wet- lands swamps, bogs, and ponds constitute a small percentage of the coastal-zone wetland acreage, but they are of value to wild- life and also are of scientific interest. Mountain wetlands. The Coast Range and Klamath Moun- tains have few lakes, and the stream valleys (except near the coast) are steep sided and provide few places for wetlands to form; there- fore, wetlands in the coastal mountains generally are small and scat- tered. However, glacial lakes are common in the Cascade Range and Wallowa Mountains. Such lakes can support marsh vegetation around their shores, and their shallow zones are themselves classi- fied as wetlands. The wider mountain valleys in the Cascade Range also have areas of wetlands predominantly marshes and wet mead- ows (emergent wetlands) vegetated by sedges and other herbaceous plants. Intermountain basins such as those on the Silvies, Powder, and Grande Ronde Rivers all in the Blue Mountains Ecoregion (fig. 2B) have or once had areas of marsh, wet prairie, and wet meadow. Willamette River Valley wetlands. The Willamette River Val- ley is an intermountain basin located between the Coast Range and the Cascade Range (fig. 2B ). The flat valley floor once had vast areas of fresh marsh and wet prairie, and the flood plains of the Willamette River and the lower reaches of its tributaries contained extensive shrub swamps and swamp forests. However, drainage for agricul- tural and urban development and realignment of the river's main stem have eliminated much of the former wetland area. Although greatly reduced in area, valley wetlands provide stopover and overwinter- ing habitat for thousands of migratory waterfowl (Loy, 1976). Desert wetlands. Oregon's desert wetlands are in the Snake River Basin/High Desert Ecoregion (fig. 2B ). Many desert wetlands are valuable to wildlife because of the moisture they provide in an otherwise arid environment. Desert wetlands include saltwood and greasewood flats (scrub-shrub wetlands), shallow lakes (unconsoli- dated-shore wetlands), marshes, and riparian (streamside, typically scrub-shrub or emergent) wetlands. Most of the area shown as wetland in figure 2A comprises shal- low, slightly to very saline lakes that range from typically flooded to typically dry. Among lakes that contain water in many or most years are Malheur Lake (fig. 1), Harney Lake, Goose Lake, Lake Abert, Summer Lake, Crump Lake, and Hart Lake (Loy, 1976). These perennial lakes provide stopover and nesting habitat for mi- gratory waterfowl. Lakes that are dry in most years include Alvord Lake, Christmas Lake, Turnbull Dry Lake, and the lakes north of Hart Lake in the Warner Valley. Vegetated areas of flooded desert lakes typically contain submersed and marsh vegetation. Perennial or seasonal rivers that flow into desert lakes com- monly have areas of riparian wetlands, which are vegetated predomi- nantly by shrubs, trees, or herbaceous emergent vegetation. Ripar- ian wetlands provide habitat for plants and animals that otherwise could not exist in the harsh desert environment. Other wetlands. The upper Klamath River Basin is in the Eastern Cascades Slopes and Foothills Ecoregion (fig. 2B). The basin contains vast areas of marsh notably in Klamath Marsh, along the Sprague River, and in the upper part of Upper Klamath Lake that supply stopover habitat for millions of ducks and geese migrating along the Pacific Fly way (Loy, 1976). Other wetlands important to waterfowl include marsh, scrub-shrub, and open-water wetlands on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. Croplands near those rivers contribute significantly to the birds' food supply. HYDROLOCIC SETTING Wetlands form where water persists at or near the land surface for extended periods. Depending on its hydrologic setting, a wet- land receives moisture from direct precipitation; surface runoff; flooding from streams, rivers, or lakes; inundation by ocean tides; ground-water discharge; or a combination of those sources. The wide variety of hydrologic settings in Oregon has resulted in diverse wetland types statewide, but wetlands in each region have common hydrologic characteristics owing to common climatic, geologic, and topographic conditions. Coastal wetlands. Much of Oregon's coast is rocky, precipi- tous, and exposed to high-energy ocean waves. Wetlands in that environment are in the Marine System, as are ocean beaches. Those wetlands constitute only a small percentage of the State's wetland acreage. The most extensive coastal wetlands are estuarine or palustrine. Estuarine wetlands develop where stream velocity and wave energy are low enough to permit sediment carried in streams to settle out of the water and accumulate to above the low-tide level, result- ing in a tideflat (Akins and Jefferson, 1973). Tideflats are a transi- tional stage between deepwater habitat and salt marsh and thus are located between those areas. Tideflats typically are composed of silt and clay mixed with sand and gravel. Where they are sufficiently stable, tideflats are colonized by submersed vegetation, predomi- nantly eelgrass and arrowgrass, which traps more sediment. As the tideflat becomes higher and more stable, marsh vegetation gradu- ally becomes established, and the tideflat becomes a salt marsh. Salt marshes are subject to a wide range of hydrologic condi- tions. For most of the year, tides alternately expose the marsh and then inundate it with brackish to very salty water. Winter flooding can inundate the marsh with freshwater. As sediment and dead veg- etation accumulate, the substrate gradually rises until the marsh is subject to less frequent inundation by either tides or river flooding. In Oregon, such "high marsh" has commonly been altered by diking and draining to facilitate cattle grazing. Tidal fresh marsh occurs inland from salt marshes in many estuaries. Some fresh marsh is present in coastal rivers upstream from the most upstream extent of saltwater at high tide. Other fresh marshes form in low-lying areas of flood plains that are flooded when rivers are, effectively, dammed by high tides. Oregon's other major coastal wetlands have formed in the sand- dune regions that extend along about one-half the length of the coast. Inland marshes develop in and around dune lake basins and along the small, slow-flowing streams that feed the lakes. The lakes form when shifting sand dams the small coastal streams that are fed by ground water in the dunes. Flow in these streams is insufficient to wash away the sand dams, so most dune lakes are permanent. In shallow lakes, vegetation can extend from shore to shore. Interdunal marshes form between sand dunes where wind has scoured the sand down to the water table. The process of wind scour- ing is known as deflation, and the scoured area is called a deflation plain. Interdunal marshes are sustained almost entirely by ground water. Because the water table declines to below the bottom of some deflation plains in the dry season (midsummer to early fall), some of these marshes are seasonal. Interdunal marshes are prone to fill- ing by windblown sand and typically succeed to shrub swamp or upland habitat. Willamette River Valley wetlands. The physiography and cli- mate of the Willamette River Valley are ideal for wetland forma- tion. The wide valley floor, which is underlain primarily by allu- vial deposits, is nearly flat, and the valley is surrounded by moun- tains that receive large amounts of precipitation (fig. 2C). Water from that precipitation, in the form of rainfall runoff or snowmelt, flows in streams and rivers into the valley, where it enters the ground- 324 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES water system or remains in stream channels. The valley's wetlands are sustained by ground-water discharge, stream flooding, or both. Because there is little elevation change from the valley mar- gins to the Willamette River, the water table is at or near the land surface over large areas. Before widespread drainage for agricul- tural development (fig. 3), the saturated or flooded valley soils from the base of the surrounding mountains to the river flood plain sus- tained extensive marshes and wet prairies. Until the mid-1800's, the prairie landscape was maintained by fires regularly set by Native American inhabitants of the valley for game and food-plant man- agement and for defense (Johannessen and others, 1971). FigureS. Drained agricultural land in the Willamette River Valley near Salem. Formerly a lakebed, this cropland is now farmed for onions. (Photograph by Dennis A. Wentz, U.S. Geological Survey.) Owing to the gentle south-north gradient of the valley, the Willamette River is slow-flowing and meandering and has a wide flood plain. At one time, winter and spring flooding and the water table sustained a nearly continuous expanse of forested and shrub wetlands in the flood plain. However, drainage and flood control to facilitate agricultural and urban development have greatly reduced the extent of those wetlands. Mountain wetlands. Oregon's mountain wetlands are near seeps and springs, in and along rivers, and in lakes and small de- pressions. The State's mountains, especially the Coast and Cascade Ranges, receive large amounts of precipitation (fig. 2C). However, steep mountain slopes are not conducive to the long-term retention of water, so larger wetlands generally are present in river flood plains and lakes, where runoff, mostly from snowmelt, can accumulate as ground or surface water. Flood-plain wetlands form where river flood plains are wide enough to sustain a water table at or near the land surface, gener- ally in wide valleys and intermountain basins. Mountain-lake wet- lands can be found in lakes of several origins. Some mountain lakes were formed when lava flowed across the stream and water ponded behind the lava dam (Phillips and others, 1965). Landslides also have dammed streams with similar results. Beavers impound streams, forming ponds and small lakes behind the dams. Most of the State's mountain lakes that contain wetlands, however, were formed by glaciers. The most common of Oregon's glacial lakes are cirque lakes, small lakes that are also known as tarns, which formed when water filled depressions scoured by a glacier. Desert wetlands. Oregon's desert basins contain large ex- panses of flat terrain from which water does not readily drain. Most desert basins are internally drained; that is, water that enters them can leave only through evaporation, transpiration, or discharge to the ground-water system rather than by way of surface drainage. Deserts receive little direct precipitation because they are in the precipitation shadow of the Cascade Range. Basins collect snow- melt from the surrounding mountains, where precipitation amounts are higher than on the basin floor (fig. 2C). Water reaches the ba- sin floor in streams or springs. The collected water forms shallow lakes, which can range in size from less than 1 acre to tens of thou- sands of acres and in wetness from flooded to nearly always dry, depending on climatic cycles and local hydrologic characteristics. Nonetheless, even a wetland that is temporarily dry probably will contain water at some time in the future unless the hydrologic set- ting is altered by human activities or long-term climate change. Some desert lakes, such as Lake Abert and the Warner Valley lakes, are the result of faulting; others, such as Malheur and Hamey Lakes, are topographic depressions in the basin floor. Evaporation of wa- ter in the shallow lakes leaves mineral deposits in the lakebed sedi- ments. These deposits make the lakebed less permeable, inhibiting infiltration into the subsurface. Desert wetlands form along streams, around springs, and around and in the shallow lakes. The wetness of a desert wetland is controlled by several interrelated factors, including local topogra- phy, the depth to the water table, and the balance between water input and evaporation. In some flats near streams and lakes, the water table is at or near the land surface, but water generally does not pond on the land surface because shallow standing water quickly evaporates during most of the year. Soil in these wetlands commonly is saline because evaporation removes water but not the dissolved salts. The saturated soils of these flats commonly support salt-tolerant emer- gent and scrub vegetation. Most desert lakes that are flooded but that cannot overflow also are saline some more so than seawater because of evaporation. Lakes that can overflow, such as Malheur Lake, are not saline in most years and support extensive marsh veg- etation. Other major wetlands. The upper Klamath River Basin, al- though it receives little precipitation, contains large areas of wet- lands. Wetlands are widespread because the basin floor has little topographic relief and the natural water table is at or near the land surface over wide areas. Basin wetlands receive water from snow- melt, which reaches the basin floor either in streams or as springs. Drainage to facilitate agricultural development has lowered the water table in many areas, resulting in widespread conversion of wetlands to upland (fig. 4). Figure 4. Grazing land, formerly wetland, in the upper Klamath River Basin. Much of the grazing land in the basin was once wet- land. Drainage systems, consisting of ditches, sluice gates, and pumps, keep ground-water levels sufficiently below the land sur- face to allow the development of pasture. (Photograph by Daniel T. Snyder, U.S. Geological Survey.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: OREGON 325 The Columbia and Snake River wetlands developed in the few areas where the flood plains are wide enough for sediment to accu- mulate and support emergent vegetation. The wetlands are sustained by ground-water discharge and river flooding; near the coast, marshes in the Columbia River are regularly flooded by saltwater as well. Flow in the Columbia River is affected by tides as far up- stream as the Bonneville Dam, and wetlands commonly are flooded during high tides. In the Snake River Valley, irrigation recharges aquifers and sustains ground-water discharge to streams and wet- lands during the summer-fall dry season (Kjelstrom, 1992). Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Oregon, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization FEDERAL TRENDS Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency.............. Wetlands covered as much as 2.3 million acres (about 3.6 per- Forest Service .................................................... cent) of what is now Oregon as of the late 1700's(Dahl, 1990). Since Natural Resources Conservation Service ... that time, wetland acreage has decreased by more than one-third, e.par mre0n ° ,^ en^e . ° J ' Army Corps of Engineers.................................. mostly owing to conversion of wetlands to agricultural uses by dik- Military reservations ing, draining, or both. Other causes of wetland loss or degradation Department of the Interior have been urbanization, industrial development, flood-control Bureau of Land Management.......................... projects, surface-water diversion and ground-water pumping for Bureau of Reclamation ..................................... irrigation, stream snagging, land clearing, grazing, and beaver trap- Rsh^and^Wijdlife Service.................................. ping. The greatest losses were of estuarine marshes, eastern Oregon National BiologiSlServicIlIIIIII riparian wetlands, Willamette River Valley wet prairies and ripar- National Park Service ....................................... ian wetlands, and upper Klamath River Basin marshes (Oregon Environmental Protection Agency...................... Division of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation STATE Division 1989) Department of Agriculture ................................... T. ' , i r- , , Department of Environmental Quality............... Recent evidence suggests that losses of estuarine wetlands have Department of Fish and Wildlife ......................... slowed substantially since the mid- 1900's (Oregon Division of State Department of Forestry......................................... Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation Division, 1989). Most Department of Land Conservation continuing losses are due to conversion of tidal land to urban use. and Development.................................................... More than 90 percent of remaining estuarine wetlands are protected, Division of State Lands -------------- , iU ,. .. . , . T,, 0 ,,-, Parks and Recreation Department..................... commonly through local planning and zoning. The State and Fed- Water Resources Department............................. eral governments have identified coastal wetlands, Willamette River SOME COUNTY AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS . Valley wetlands, riparian wetlands in eastern Oregon, desert-lake PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS wetlands, and upper Klamath River Basin wetlands as priority ar- Ducks Unlimited...................................................... eas for conservation. Pacific Coast Joint Venture.................................. The Nature Conservancy...................................... CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Oregon. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Oregon wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wetlands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetlands Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice provides guidance to States in developing the wetland compo- nent of their plans. Coastal States that adopt coastal-zone manage- ment programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. 326 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Federal agencies are responsible for the proper management of wetlands on public land under their jurisdiction. The U.S. Forest Service (FS) manages 13 National Forests in Oregon and is devel- oping a process to evaluate values and functions of wetlands in those forests. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages about 16 million acres of rangeland, of which about 1.2 percent is riparian wetland (Bureau of Land Management, 1991). The BLM is assess- ing the status of riparian wetlands and has ongoing or planned projects to develop or enhance many of those wetlands. The FWS manages nine National Wildlife Refuges in Oregon that have exten- sive wetlands. The FWS funds wetland-restoration projects under the Partners for Wildlife Program. FWS National Wetlands Inventory maps are available for all of Oregon. The Corps manages wetlands within its project areas, researches ways to identify and enhance wetlands, and evaluates losses of wetland area and functions caused by filling and dredging. The Bureau of Reclamation conducts multi- purpose wetland-restoration projects; all enhance waterfowl habi- tat in accordance with the 1986 North American Waterfowl Man- agement Plan. The Environmental Protection Agency has awarded grants to State and local agencies to plan coordinated wetland- protection efforts, inventory wetlands, and conduct a watershed-pro- tection pilot study. The BLM, Corps, FS, and FWS and several State agencies have developed a Memorandum of Understanding concern- ing the management and protection of Oregon's wetland resources on public lands (Oregon Division of State Lands, 1993). State wetland activities. To improve the effectiveness and efficiency of Oregon's efforts to conserve, restore, and protect wet- lands, the State has developed a Wetland Conservation Strategy (Oregon Division of State Lands, 1993). The strategy provides the focus and framework for an integrated State wetland program de- signed to conserve, protect, and manage the State's wetland re- sources. The strategy is based on the recommendations of advisory committees representing Federal, State, and local agencies and in- terest groups. In Oregon, the regulatory programs that are implemented at the State level are the State Removal-Fill Law, the Oregon Wetland Inventory and Wetland Conservation Plans, and the Clean Water Act Section 401 program. The Oregon Removal-Fill Law, administered by the Division of State Lands, is similar to section 404 of the Clean Water Act but in some respects is more comprehensive. Oregon has adopted the FWS National Wetlands Inventory as a basis for a State Wetland Inventory. The statewide inventory is being supplemented by detailed local information that is suitable for planning and regu- latory purposes. The Wetland Conservation Plans program estab- lished a local planning process that provides local governments an opportunity to address wetland-resource decisions in a context with other land-use needs. Pursuant to section 401 of the Clean Water Act, the Department of Environmental Quality reviews Federal permits and licenses affecting wetlands for compliance with Oregon's water-quality standards. A section 404 permit is not issued by the Corps without certification of compliance by the Department. Wetland mitigation is another important State regulatory func- tion. The Division of State Lands has the authority to establish mitigation banks to be used when mitigation of unavoidable impacts caused by construction is not possible onsite; compensation may be made by the offsite creation, restoration, or enhancement of wetlands. County and local wetland activities. Oregon's Comprehen- sive Land Use Planning Act requires local governments to adopt planning and regulatory programs consistent with statewide plan- ning goals. The State Wetland Conservation Plans program allows local governments to balance wetland protection with other land- use needs (Oregon Division of State Lands, 1993). Some county and city governments have regulatory or land-acquisition programs that provide additional wetland protection. Private wetland activities. The Oregon Coastal Wetlands Joint Venture, the State's part of the Pacific Coast Joint Venture of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, is a cooperative effort of local citizens, conservation organizations, private compa- nies, and State and Federal agencies. The primary goal of the joint venture is to reverse the downward trend in waterfowl populations in coastal areas and to address concerns about coastal wetlands. Land acquisition, wetland-habitat improvement, and small wetland- restoration projects are among the organization's activities. A con- cept plan for another joint venture that would include eastern Or- egon has been prepared (Ratti and Kadlec, 1992). The Nature Conservancy and Ducks Unlimited have partici- pated in projects involving land acquisition and restoration of wet- land habitat in Oregon. The Wetlands Conservancy owns and man- ages several small wetlands totaling about 60 acres, mainly in the Portland metropolitan area. These and many other conservation organizations provide information to the public on the values and functions of wetlands or promote wetland protection. References Cited Akins, G.J., and Jefferson, C.A., 1973, Coastal wetlands of Oregon: Flo- rence, Oregon Coastal Conservation and Development Commission, 190 p. Bureau of Land Management, 1991, Riparian wetland initiative for the 1990's: Bureau of Land Management Report BLM/WO/GI-91/ 001+4340, 50 p. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, EC., and LaRoe, T.E., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl.T.E., 1990. Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780'sto 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Report to Congress, 13 p. Hubbard, L.L., Oregon surface-water resources, in National Water Summary 1985 Hydrologic events and surface-water resources: U.S. Geologi- cal Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 383-390. Johannessen, C.L., Davenport, W.A., Millet, Artimus, and McWilliams, Steven, 1971, The vegetation of the Willamette Valley: Annals of the Association of American Geographers, v. 61, p. 286-302. Kjelstrom, L.C., 1992, Streamflow gains and losses in the Snake River and ground-water budgets for the Snake River plain, Idaho and eastern Oregon: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 90-172, 71 p. Loy, W.G., 1976, Atlas of Oregon: Eugene, University of Oregon Books, 215 p. Omernik, J.M, 1987, Ecoregions of the conterminous United States Map supplement: Annals of the Association of American Geographers, v. 77, no. 1, scale 1:7,500,000. Oregon Division of State Lands, 1993, Oregon's wetland conservation strat- egy: Salem, Oregon Division of State Lands, 100 p. Oregon Division of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation Division, 1989, Oregon wetlands priority plan: Salem, Oregon Divi- sion of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation Division, 75 p. Phillips, K.N., Newcomb, R.C., Swenson, H.A., and Laird, L.B., 1965, Water for Oregon: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1649, 150 p. Ratti, J.T., and Kadlec, J.A., 1992, Concept plan for the preservation of wetland habitat of the intermountain west North American Water- fowl Management Plan: Portland, Oreg., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser- vice, 146 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 10615 S.E. Cherry Blossom Drive, Portland, OR 97216; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 911 N.E. 11th Avenue, Portland, OR 97232 Prepared by Luther C. Kjelstrom and John S. Williams, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 327 Pennsylvania Wetland Resources Wefetlands cover about 2 percent of Pennsylvania (Tiner, 1990). Although once regarded as wastelands, wetlands now are recognized as ecologically and economically valuable ecosystems. Fish and wildlife use these highly productive areas for feeding, breeding, nesting, and refuge. More than 80 percent of the animals on Pennsylvania's list of endangered and threatened species depend on wetlands during their life cycle (Brooks, 1990). Wetlands also are home to most of Pennsylvania's rare, threatened, or endangered plants (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, 1988). The Long Pond area of Tunkhannock Creek (fig. 1) has the State's largest known concentration of endangered species (Roger Latham, University of Pennsylvania, written commun., 1993). Wetlands trap suspended sediments and organic and inorganic contaminants in soils and plant tissue, thus enhancing water qual- ity. Wetland vegetation also retards erosion by decreasing water velocity and increasing soil stability. During floods, riparian (streamside) wetlands regulate streamflow by temporarily storing floodwater and then slowly releasing it to the stream or river, greatly reducing flooding downstream. Of particular interest in Pennsyl- vania is the use of constructed wetlands as an effective passive treat- ment of coal-mine drainage, which can be highly acidic and con- tain elevated concentrations of iron, manganese, sulfate, aluminum, and other trace elements (Hedin, 1989). Constructed wetlands also are used to reduce nutrient loads from agricultural drainage. Figure 1. Wetland at Tunkhannock Creek near Long Pond. This wetland contains the State's largest known concentration of endangered plants and animals. (Photograph by Annette C. Heist, U.S. Geological Survey.) Wetlands are productive ecosystems, yielding a large amount of plant material for both wildlife and human consumption. Prod- ucts harvested from wetlands include cranberries, blueberries, and wild rice. Pennsylvania's tourist industry benefits from the recre- ational opportunities that wetlands provide, including hunting, fish- ing, boating, and camping. Many wetland areas throughout the State also provide educational opportunities for schools and the general public. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Pennsylvania is shown in figure 2A', only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Pennsyl- vania are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine. Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. About 1.4 percent (404,000 acres) of Pennsylvania's land sur- face is covered by wetlands. About 97 percent of these wetlands are palustrine, about 2 percent are lacustrine, and 1 percent are river- ine. Pennsylvania's 392,000 acres of palustrine wetlands consist of 178,000 acres of deciduous and evergreen forested wetlands, 62,000 acres of open water, 52,000 acres of emergent wetlands, 49,000 acres of deciduous and evergreen scrub-shrub wetlands, 25,000 acres of mixed deciduous scrub-shrub and emergent wetlands, and 26,000 acres of other types (Tiner, 1990). Pennsylvania wetlands are known by a variety of local names, the most common of which are swamp (forested wetland) and marsh (emergent wetland typically dominated by sedges and grasses). Many of Pennsylvania's palustrine wetlands line major rivers or surround lakes and reservoirs. Peatlands (wet- lands that have organic soils, such as bogs and fens) are common in mountainous or glaciated areas and commonly contain sphag- num moss, tamarack or black spruce trees, a variety of low trees and shrubs, or sedges, grasses, and other herbaceous plants. About 42 percent of Pennsylvania wetlands are in the glaci- ated parts of the northwestern and northeastern corners of the State (Tiner, 1990). Wetlands in the northwest are primarily deciduous forested and scrub-shrub wetlands. Those in the northeast are pri- marily deciduous and evergreen forested wetlands. Most of the cen- tral and southern parts of the State were not glaciated. In the nonglaciated parts of the State, wetlands are most commonly asso- ciated with the headwaters and flood plains of streams (Brooks and others, 1987). The largest area of lacustrine wetlands (5,650 acres) 328 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES is along the Lake Erie shoreline. Minor amounts of tidal riverine wetlands are along the Delaware River in southeastern Pennsylva- nia. HYDROLOCIC SETTING Wetland characteristics are determined by the balance between inflow and outflow of water, surface contours of the land, soil type, and geology (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1986). Topographic depressions caused by glacial or stream-related processes, areas with imperme- able substrates that prevent infiltration of water into the ground, and areas where the water table is near the surface provide ideal condi- tions for wetland formation. Wetlands commonly form at ground- water discharge sites where permeable rocks intersect the land sur- face or at the base of slopes where the water table intersects the land surface (Novitzki, 1989). Wetlands are most densely distributed in the northwestern and northeastern parts of the State, which were glaciated at least twice and possibly three times (fig. 2#). The latest glaciation occurred between 18,000 and 22,000 years ago. Glacial scouring and depo- sition left surface depressions and impermeable soils that are ideal for wetland development (Bushnell,1989). Outside the glaciated '^Friendship WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^H Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat 25 50 MILES 25 50 KILOMETERS CLACIATION Glacial extent during most recent glacial maximum PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS Province A. Central Lowland B. Appalachian Plateaus C. Valley and Ridge D.Blue Ridge E. Piedmont F. New England G. Coastal Plain Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Pennsylvania and physical features that control wetland distribution in the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Extent of most recent glaciation. C, Physiography. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Pennsylvania Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey, 1989. C, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: PENNSYLVANIA 329 areas, wetlands typically are associated with streams and rivers. Some wetlands gain moisture from stream flooding, whereas oth- ers are fed by ground water and drain into streams. Riparian wet- lands develop when lateral erosion and deposition widen a river valley or when accumulated sediment fills and flattens a valley. In riparian areas, a depositional substrate of silt, mud, and clay and the shallow water table near a river combine to create ideal condi- tions for the formation of small lakes and swamps. However, many of the large rivers in Pennsylvania are in deep, narrow valleys and lack extensive riparian areas (Bushnell, 1989). Pennsylvania has abundant precipitation. Average annual pre- cipitation ranges from about 36 inches in the north and west to about 48 inches in the east. Precipitation in eastern Pennsylvania is dis- tributed evenly throughout the year, whereas the western part of the State receives most of the precipitation in the spring and summer. Statewide, an average of about 25 inches of the annual precipita- tion returns to the atmosphere by evaporation or transpiration (Wetzel,1986). Pennsylvania lies in parts of seven physiographic provinces (fig. 2C): the Central Lowland, Appalachian Plateaus, Valley and Ridge, New England, Blue Ridge, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain. Each province has unique characteristics that control the distribu- tion and types of wetlands. Central Lowland. The Central Lowland is underlain mainly by sedimentary rocks, including sandstone, shale, dolomite, and limestone (Krothe and Kempton, 1988). The region includes areas of both thick and thin glacial till, which is a mixture of clay, sand, and boulders deposited by a melting glacier. The low permeability of the glacial till allows the formation of wetlands in depressions and low-lying areas. The region is flat to gently sloping except where cut by streams. Most of the streams in the Central Lowland of Penn- sylvania flow northward to Lake Erie. The streams have steep gra- dients and flow over or have cut deeply into bedrock, resulting in few associated wetlands (Richards and others, 1987). Lacustrine wetlands associated with Lake Erie comprise nearly two-thirds of total wetland acreage in this part of the State (Tiner and Anderson, 1986). Appalachian Plateaus. The Appalachian Plateaus Province is underlain by interbedded shale, sandstone, and some limestone (Bushnell, 1989). The rocks of this province are gently folded to nearly flat-lying. Fracturing and jointing are common (Seaber and others, 1988). The northeastern and northwestern parts of the prov- ince have been glaciated. In the nonglaciated areas, palustrine wetlands have formed in riparian areas along the major rivers and streams. Some wetlands also are present in and around impoundments. Locally, small wet- lands are present on hilltops where clayey soils and shale support shallow water tables. Wetlands also form along the valley sides and heads of streams where erosion has exposed aquifers or where joints break the continuity of confined aquifers (Bushnell, 1989). In the northwestern part of the province, before glaciation, rivers flowed north to Lake Erie (Leggette, 1936). Advancing ice blocked the north-flowing rivers, forming lakes and forcing drain- age southward. Present drainage patterns were created as ice melted and glacial sediments were carried in south- and southeast-sloping channels. The largest wetlands in this area, including Conneaut Marsh and Pymatuning Swamp, developed on the glacial sediments that filled deep, preglacial valleys. Numerous smaller wetlands also formed in the irregular, hummocky topography of the end and ground moraines, which are landscape features formed by glacially formed sediments (Bushnell, 1989). In the glaciated northeast, wetlands are associated mainly with end and ground moraines and have developed as lakes, swamps, and peatlands in glacially scoured depressions (Bushnell, 1989). Many wetlands also were formed by the damming of preglacial valleys by glacial debris. In addition, "kettle-hole" lakes were created where large blocks of ice remained after glacial retreat and melted to form spring-fed lakes that have no surface inlet or outlet. Peatlands in the Pocono Mountains of northeastern Pennsyl- vania are the southernmost peatlands of recent glacial origin and are considered rare habitats in Pennsylvania (Brooks and others, 1987). Peatlands can develop where drainage is slow and where precipitation normally exceeds evapotranspiration. Fens and bogs are two types of peatlands found in Pennsylvania. Fens are fed by mineral-rich ground water. Bogs are fed mostly or entirely by rain- water and, as a result, are mineral poor. The process of peat forma- tion follows a general evolution. Clay from glacial tills accumulates on the bottom of ponds, trapping the organic material. Under the oxygen-poor conditions in the bottom substrate, slow decomposi- tion allows the formation of peat. As peat accumulates, the pond shrinks and a marsh commonly forms. As more peat accumulates, the surface of the peatland rises to such an extent that the substrate is saturated, but there is little standing water. At that stage, trees, shrubs, and sphagnum moss become common. Eventually, as the accumulating peat brings the land surface above the water table, shrubs and trees advance until a scrub-shrub or forested wetland is formed. Flooding of the peatland by natural or artificial changes in drainage will cause the peatland to return to a marsh. If the water table is lowered for any sustained period of time, the soils will un- dergo aeration, and the organic content of the soil will decrease (Cameron, 1970). Valley and Ridge Province. The Valley and Ridge Province is underlain mainly by sedimentary rocks, including sandstone, conglomerate, shale, siltstone, dolomite, and limestone, that are tilted and folded (Seaber and others, 1988). The structure and weath- ering pattern of the rocks combine to yield the characteristic alter- nating valley and ridge topography. Some of the limestone valleys have an extensive karst or underground drainage system that pre- cludes extensive wetland development (Bushnell, 1989). In contrast, limestone outcrops along the western edge of the province are the source of many springs and seeps that supports wetlands. Most wetlands are associated with the Susquehanna River and its tribu- taries (Bushnell, 1989), especially in the upper, glaciated regions of the river. An unexpected wetland lies in a valley between the peaks of Sharp Mountain and Stony Mountain, about 15 miles northeast of Harrisburg. The wetland lies along the axis of a syncline that is underlain by resistant beds of rock that have low permeability (Bushnell, 1989). The wetland consists of forested and emergent wetlands that contain sphagnum moss, swamp azalea, red maple, and black gum. New England Province. The New England Province is an area of high hills and ridges that are composed principally of meta- morphic rocks, and igneous rocks, and limestone (Wood and oth- ers, 1972). Because the province has steep topography and is well drained, few wetlands have formed there. Most wetlands are in ri- parian areas along the Delaware River. Blue Ridge and Piedmont Provinces. The Blue Ridge and Piedmont Provinces are underlain by fractured-rock, water-table aquifers. Deformed igneous and metamorphic rocks, commonly mantled with weathered rock and soil, characterize the bedrock of the region (LeGrand, 1988). The Piedmont Province also has gen- tly dipping beds of sedimentary rock. The region has small ground- water units, each confined to a small basin in which a perennial stream flows. Ground water flows continuously toward streams and discharges as small springs and as channel seepage into the streams (LeGrand, 1988). Most wetlands are in stream valleys where the water table is near the land surface. Others are in upland areas where there are clayey, impermeable soils or local ground-water discharge (Bushnell, 1989). Coastal Plain. The Coastal Plain, limited to the southeast- ern edge of Pennsylvania, is underlain mainly by permeable soils 330 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES composed of sand, silt, and clay (Meissler and others, 1988). Most wetlands in this area are associated with the Delaware River and its riparian areas. Approximately 19 percent of the freshwater tidal marshes and flats in the Delaware River Basin are in this province within Pennsylvania (Tiner and Wilen, 1988), including the largest freshwater tidal marsh in the State, the John Heinz National Wild- life Refuge at Tinicum. TRENDS The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has estimated that, from the 1780's to the 1980's, wetland area in Pennsylvania decreased by more than one-half (Dahl, 1990). Activities such as conversion to cropland, channelization, forestry, mining, urban development, and the construction of impoundments have contributed to widespread wetland loss or degradation. Between 1956 and 1979, Pennsylvania lost about 28,000 acres (nearly 7 percent) of its vegetated wetlands. More than one-half of the vegetated wetland losses took place in the northeastern (9,700 acres) and northwestern (4,600 acres) parts of the State. The lead- ing cause of losses was conversion to ponds, lakes, and reservoirs (46 percent); farmland (17 percent); urban land (14 percent); and other land uses, mostly by channelization and drainage (23 percent) (Tiner, 1990). Peat mining in the Pocono Mountains region also has contributed to the loss of wetlands (Timer, 1987). After peat has been removed from the wetland, the area commonly is converted to a pond or lake. The loss of vegetated wetland by conversion to pond wetland cannot be interpreted as a simple "no net loss" exchange. The im- portance of the gain in pond acreage in terms of fish and wildlife species, as well as the impact on wetland functions such as flood and erosion control, has not been adequately assessed. In contrast, the loss of vegetated wetlands is known to cause the loss of valu- able fish and wildlife species as well as of other ecological and eco- nomical benefits (Tiner and Finn, 1986). The Delaware River estuary and Lake Erie coastal zones con- tain habitats that are rare in Pennsylvania, and small losses of wet- lands there could be significant. In Pennsylvania, the Delaware River estuary coastal zone consists of approximately 50 square miles along the Delaware River south of Philadelphia. Although only 129 acres of emergent wetlands have been lost in the Delaware River estuary coastal zone since the mid-1970's, this represented a 22-percent loss for the area. Major causes were the construction of a sewage-treat- ment plant and highway construction (Tiner, 1990). The Lake Erie coastal zone consists of approximately 63 square miles in the Lake Erie area. There were no significant changes in wetland acreage in the Lake Erie coastal zone between the mid- 1970's and 1986 (Tiner, 1990). However, between 1986 and 1989, approximately 50 acres of wetlands were lost. Most of those losses (91 percent) were due to housing construction (Smith and Tiner, 1992). CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Pennsylvania. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Penn- sylvania wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohi- bitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Pennsylvania, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization____________ FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Federal Consolidated Farm Service Agency................ Forest Service...................................................... Natural Resources Conservation Service ..... Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration...................................................... Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers ................................... Department of the Interior Bureau of Mines .................................................. Fish and Wildlife Service................................... Geological Survey............................................... National Biological Service ............................... National Park Service ......................................... Environmental Protection Agency........................ STATE Department of Environmental Resources Bureau of Dams, Waterways, and Wetlands . Bureau of Forestry ............................................... Bureau of Land and Water (Coastal Zone management).............................. Bureau of State Parks ......................................... Department of Transportation............................... Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission ........... Pennsylvania Game Commission.......................... Pennsylvania State University............................... Other State universities.......................................... COUNTY AND LOCAL Some county and local governments .................. Some county conservation districts.................... PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS The Nature Conservancy ........................................ Pennsylvania Academy of Natural Sciences..... Western Pennsylvania Conservancy................... Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, National Water Summary Wetland Resources: PENNSYLVANIA 331 Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. Coastal and Great Lakes States that adopt coastal-zone management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. Federal agencies are responsible for the management of wet- lands on public land under their jurisdiction. The FWS manages two wildlife refuges in Pennsylvania, the John Heinz National Wildlife Refuge at Tinicum and the Erie National Wildlife Refuge. The U.S. Forest Service manages about one-half million acres of land in the Allegheny National Forest. The NFS manages 11 sites in Pennsyl- vania, including the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. Wetlands are inventoried on these lands as part of resource man- agement plans developed for each park. The U.S. Bureau of Mines has been involved in research into the creation of wetlands for the passive treatment of acid-mine drainage. One such experimental wetland was created by the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the NFS on the Friendship Hill National Historic Site. State wetland activities. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources' Bureau of Dams, Waterways, and Wet- lands, is the principal State agency responsible for wetland regula- tion. Wetlands are regulated as "bodies of water" under the Dam Safety and Encroachments Act of 1978. The wetland regulations are found at 25 Pa. code Chapter 105, Dam Safety and Waterway Man- agement, amended October 31, 1991. Virtually any structure or activity that in any manner changes, expands, or diminishes the course, current, or cross section of any wetland requires a chapter 105 permit in addition to any Federal permits that are required for the project. Pursuant to section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act, the Depart- ment of Environmental Resources submits to the EPA and the U.S. Congress a biennial assessment of the State's surface-water quality, including that of wetlands. The Department's Bureau of Land and Water Division of Coastal Zone Management conducts a yearly wetlands monitoring program in the Delaware River estuary and Lake Erie coastal zones. The Bureau of State Parks and the Bureau of Forestry inven- tory wetlands as part of their resource-management plans. Monies from the Land and Water Conservation Fund are used by the De- partment of Community Affairs, the Department of Environmen- tal Resources, the Fish and Boat Commission, the Game Commis- sion, and the Historical and Museum Commission for planning, acquisition, and development of outdoor recreation areas, includ- ing wetlands. Land acquisition also is made possible through the Recreational Improvement and Rehabilitation Act and the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund. County and local wetland activities. Most regulation of ac- tivities in wetlands is carried out through State and Federal laws. However, some county and local governments are involved in the protection of wetland resources through zoning, regulating, and land acquisition. Some county conservation districts manage public and private lands that contain wetlands. Private wetland activities. Private organizations in Pennsyl- vania are involved in wetland activities that include policy planning, land acquisition and management, research, and public education. Some of the organizations active in Pennsylvania are The Nature Conservancy and the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy (land acquisition and management), the Sierra Club and Chesapeake Bay Foundation (policy planning and education), and the Pennsylvania Academy of Natural Sciences (research). About 50 conservancy organizations throughout the State work to protect and preserve natural lands, including wetlands, on a local level. References Cited Brooks, R.P., 1990, Wetlands and deepwater habitats in Pennsylvania, in Majumdar, S.K., Miller, E.W., and Parizek, R.R., eds., Water resources in Pennsylvania Availability, quality and management: Easton, The Pennsylvania Academy of Science, p. 71-79. Brooks, R.P., Arnold, D.E., and Bellis, E.D., 1987, Wildlife and plant com- munities of selected wetlands Pocono Region of Pennsylvania: Na- tional Wetlands Research Center Open File Report 87-02, 27 p. Bushnell, Kent, 1989, Geology of Pennsylvania wetlands, in Majumdar, S.K., and others, eds., Wetlands ecology and conservation Emphasis in Pennsylvania: Easton, The Pennsylvania Academy of Science, p. 39- 46. Cameron, C.C., 1970, Peat deposits of northeastern Pennsylvania: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1317-A, 90 p. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: Washing- ton, D.C., U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Hedin, R.S., 1989, Treatment of coal mine drainage with constructed wet- lands, in Majumdar, S.K., and others, eds., Wetlands ecology and con- servation Emphasis in Pennsylvania: Easton, The Pennsylvania Academy of Science, p. 349-362. Krothe, N.C., and Kempton, J.P., 1988, Region 14, central glaciated plains, in Back, William, Rosenshein, J.S., and Seaber, PR., eds., The geol- ogy of North America, v. 0-2 Hydrogeology: Boulder, Colo., Geo- logical Society of America, p. 129-132. Leggette, R.M., 1936, Ground water in northwestern Pennsylvania: Penn- sylvania Geological Survey, 4th series, Bulletin W3,215 p. LeGrand, H.E., 1988, Region 21, Piedmont and Blue Ridge, in Back, Wil- liam, Rosenshein, J.S., and Seaber, PR., eds., The geology of North America, v. 0-2 Hydrogeology: Boulder, Colo., Geological Soci- ety of America, p. 201-208. Meissler, Harold, Miller, J.A., Knobel, L.L., and Wait, R.L., 1988, Region 22, Atlantic and eastern Gulf Coastal Plain, in Back, William, Rosenshein, J.S., and Seaber, P.R., eds., The geology of North America, V.-0-2 Hydrogeology: Boulder, Colo., Geological Soci- ety of America, p. 209-218. Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G., 1986, Wetlands: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 539 p. Novitzki, R.P., 1989, Wetland Hydrology, in Majumdar, S.K., and others, eds., Wetlands ecology and conservation Emphasis in Pennsylva- nia: Easton, The Pennsylvania Academy of Science, p. 47-64. Pennsylvania Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey, 1989, Physi- ographic provinces of Pennsylvania: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey, scale 1:2,000,000. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, 1988, Pennsylvania's recreation plan 1986-1990 Wetlands addendum: Harrisburg, Penn- sylvania Department of Environmental Resources, 48 p. Richards, D.B., McCoy, H.J., and Gallaher, J.T., 1987, Groundwater re- sources of Erie County, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania Topographical and Geological Survey Water Resources Report 62, 59 p. 332 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Seaber, P.R., Brahana, J.V., and Hollyday, E.F., 1988, Region 20, Appala- chian Plateaus and Valley and Ridge, in Back, William, Rosenshein, J.S., and Seaber, P.R., eds., The geology of North America, v. 0-2 Hydrogeology: Boulder, Colo., Geological Society of America, p. 189- 200. Smith, G.S., and Tiner, R.W, Jr., 1992, Current status and recent trends in wetlands of the Lake Erie and Delaware Estuary coastal zones of Penn- sylvania (1986-1989): Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service, 7 p. Tiner, R.W, Jr., 1987, Mid-Atlantic wetlands A disappearing natural trea- sure: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency cooperative publication, 28 p. ____1990, Pennsylvania's wetlands Current status and recent trends: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 104 p. Tiner, R.W, Jr., and Anderson, J.C., 1986, Current status and recent trends in wetlands of the Lake Erie coastal zone of Pennsylvania: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Newton Corner, Mass., p. 12. Tiner, R.W, Jr., and Finn, J.T., 1986, Status and recent trends of wetlands in five Mid-Atlantic States Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Vir- ginia, and West Virginia: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service, 40 p. Tiner, R.W., Jr., and Wilen. B.O., 1988, Wetlands of the Delaware River Basin, in Majumdar, S.K., Miller, E.W, and Sage, L.E., eds., Ecol- ogy and restoration of the Delaware River Basin: Easton, Pennsylva- nia Academy of Science, p. 187-201. Wetzel, Kim, 1986, Pennsylvania surface-water resources, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and sur- face-water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 391-398. Wood, C.R., Flippo, H.N., Jr., Lescinsky, J.B., and Barker, J.L., 1972, Wa- ter resources of Lehigh County, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania Geologi- cal Survey, 4th series, Water Resource Report 31, 263 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 840 Market Street, Lemoyne, PA 17043; Regional Wetland Coordi- nator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA 01035 Prepared by Annette C. Heist and Andrew G. Reif, U.S. Geological Survey National Water Summary Wetland Resources 333 Puerto Rico Wetland Resources Ihe island of Puerto Rico, located in the northern Caribbean Sea, and its principal offshore islands of Vieques, Culebra, and Mona have abundant wetland resources. The subtropical climate, abundant rainfall, and complex topographic and geologic features of these islands give rise to wetlands ranging from the rare and unusual cloud forests in the highlands to extensive mangrove forests, seagrasses, and coral reefs along the northern and southern coasts. However, wetland resources of Puerto Rico have declined during the last sev- eral hundred years as a result of an increase in agricultural devel- opment, population, and tourism. Some types of wetlands, such as the bloodwood (Pterocarpus officinalis) forests (fig. 1), have been reduced to only a few remnants. Wetlands are among the most biologically productive areas in the islands. The wetlands associated with the rain forest in the inte- rior highlands of Puerto Rico contain many rare plant and animal species not found in other parts of the island. Runoff from wetlands in the higher elevations of the island provides a source of water used for public supply by several cities. Coastal wetlands, such as man- grove forests, seagrass beds, and coral reefs, provide breeding grounds and nursery areas for a variety of juvenile fish, crustaceans, and other species in the food web (Lopez and others, 1988). In this manner, coastal wetlands contribute to the biological productivity of shallow marine waters around the islands. Wetlands also stabi- lize shorelines by trapping and holding unconsolidated sediments and dampen potentially damaging storm surges and wave action. The value of Puerto Rican wetlands to wildlife is well docu- mented. For example, the salt flats of Cabo Rojo, on the southwest- ern coast, provide resting and feeding areas for thousands of mi- gratory shorebirds en route between North and South America. Before the drainage of coastal wetlands for agricultural purposes, freshwater marshes like those of the Laguna Cartagena, Laguna Guanica, and Cienaga El Anegado provided habitat for more than 100 species of resident and migratory birds. The wetlands of the central highlands are the last stronghold of the endangered Puerto Rican parrot. Even wetlands like those within metropolitan San Juan (Laguna La Torrecilla. Torrecilla Baja, Laguna de Pinones to Punta Vacia Talega) provide excellent wildlife habitat, support economi- cally valuable fisheries, and provide recreation and educational opportunities for an urban populace. Thirty-eight species of finfish and shellfish and 46 bird species, some rare or endangered like the yellow-shouldered blackbird, brown pelican, masked duck, West Indian whistling duck, and white-crowned pigeon, have been ob- served in the area. Also, the beaches associated with these urban wetlands provide nesting sites for the endangered hawksbill and leatherback turtles (del Llano and others, 1986). TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Puerto Rico is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Puerto Rico are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine. Estuarine, Marine Wetland description Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees {forested wet- lands); shrubs {scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. , Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. .Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. , Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. Figure 1. Bloodwood trees at Pterocarpus Forest near Humacao, Puerto Rico. (Photograph courtesy of Conservation Trust of Puerto Rico.) In Puerto Rico, the Lacustrine and Riverine Systems consist largely of deepwater habitats. Lacustrine wetlands are limited to shallow areas of lakes and reservoirs. Riverine wetlands are lim- ited to the shallows of river channels and canals. Where the stream current is swift, these wetland areas typically are nonvegetated. When vegetated, lacustrine and riverine wetlands generally are char- acterized by plants that grow in aquatic beds on or below the surface of the water. Some of the more common plants in these wetlands 334 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES are rooted aquatic plants, such as water lily, fanwort, pondweed, hornwort, and southern naiad, and floating aquatic plants such as duckweed, bladderwort, and water hyacinth. Most of the wetlands in Puerto Rico and its principal offshore islands are palustrine or estuarine. One type of palustrine wetland that is of particular interest in Puerto Rico is the bloodwood forest. Bloodwood forests, which are common in parts of Central and South America, are now rare in Puerto Rico. Bloodwood trees tolerate low salinity and can grow in nearly pure stands at the brackish limits of the Estuarine System or form swamps (forested wetlands) in the interior. Bloodwood forests share numerous characteristics with cypress swamps of the Southeastern United States. Like cypress, bloodwood trees exist in nearly pure stands or mixed with a variety of other species of trees and shrubs. Epiphytes (plants that grow on other plants) are common on the trees, and typically ferns are the prevalent understory species (Alvarez-Lopez, 1990). Growth forms of these two trees are similar; both cypress and bloodwood can develop buttressed trunks and commonly have modified surface roots that form kneelike structures (Bacon, 1990). The largest of the remaining bloodwood forests in Puerto Rico is the Pterocarpus Forest (fig. 1), which has an area of 370 acres and is located near Humacao on the eastern coast. Much smaller stands of bloodwood trees exist in the Sierra de Luquillo Mountains (fig. 2B) and at sites near Dorado, Mayagiiez, and Patillas (fig. 2A). Three other important palustrine wetland types, the cloud for- est, Colorado forest, and palm forest (forested or scrub-shrub wet- lands), exist throughout Puerto Rico on the high mountain slopes. On the highest mountaintops are the cloud forests, in which gnarled evergreen trees 15 to 20 feet tall predominate. The more common trees in these areas include roble de sierra, nemoca, jusillo, oreganil- lo, and guayabota (Ewel and Whitmore, 1973). Trees in the cloud forest stay moist from nearly continuous cloud cover and support an abundance of epiphytic growth. Palo Colorado, called titi in the Southeastern United States, is the dominant tree species in Colorado forests, which are most common at elevations greater than about 2,500 feet and below cloud forests. This species is shrublike in the 18'J3Q' <; « SeTT {jr Cucharillas * "w Cu/ebra Cobo Ho;o Cartagena ° _ Las Cabezas Ctenaga fa gan juan Bajo Nature Preserve oosevelt Roads Naval Res rocarpus Forest,--'~7V "^^^-fc Kl^^'-nr 6530' Vieques 18-'15' . . Cienago O Kl Aneffddo WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland ^^H Predominantly deepwater habitat ^ / 6 B £ A N 0 10 20 MILES I ' 0 10 20 KILOMETERS 18''00' f--~ -» i 68*00' 67"45 - Gulf and land moisture MOISTURE DELIVERY Trade wind moisture PRECIPITATION Line of average annual precipitation Interval, in inches, is variable Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Puerto Rico and physical and climatic factors that affect wetland distribution in the Commonwealth A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Principal sources and patterns of delivery of moisture into Puerto Rico. C, Average annual precipitation in Puerto Rico. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Colon-Dieppa and others, 1991. C, Colon-Dieppa, 1986.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: PUERTO RICO 335 United States, but in Puerto Rico it can grow to a height of more than 30 feet and have a trunk diameter of more than 6 feet (Lugo and Brown, 1988). At elevations between 1,500 and 3,000 feet, mountain slopes generally are covered by palm forests, where nearly pure stands of sierra palms predominate. The sierra palm is also an important component of flood-plain wetlands. Some investigators believe that these montane palm forests are an early successional stage in areas subject to landslides or other forms of severe erosion (Beard, 1955). Although the total acreage of Puerto Rico's montane wetlands is unknown, the Caribbean National Forest in the Cordil- lera Central supports an estimated 933 acres of cloud forest, 8,490 acres of Colorado forest, and 5,088 acres of palm forest. Freshwater marshes (palustrine emergent wetlands) are com- mon throughout the island, especially along the northern coast. In some areas, these freshwater marshes have been drained for sugar cane cultivation and pasture. Among the largest freshwater marshes are Cano Tiburones near Arecibo, Laguna Cartagena at Lajas, Cienaga de San Pedro and Cienaga de las Cucharillas along the northern coast, and Cienaga Baja near Rio Grande. In the deeper marshes, cattail is the most common emergent plant, although sawgrass and giant sedge also are common. The shallower marshes have a more complex species composition and soils that are satu- rated for shorter periods during the year. Common plants in shal- low marshes are swamp fern, sedges, river grass, spike rush, panic grass, joint grass, and beakrush (U.S. Army Engineer Environmental Laboratory, 1978). The large marsh complex at Laguna Tortuguero near Manati is the only documented spring- and seep-fed marsh in Puerto Rico (Quinones-Marquez and Fuste, 1978). Water that en- ters the limestone aquifers in the karstic region of the island's inte- rior discharges upward in the form of springs and seeps and keeps the soil saturated. Nearly 700 plant species, many of which are rare, endangered, or endemic to Puerto Rico, have been identified in this marsh (Lugo and Brown, 1988). The most extensive estuarine wetlands are the mangrove for- ests (forested or scrub-shrub wetlands) in which red, black, and white mangrove and buttonwood predominate. Mangroves stabilize nearshore overwash islands, fringe the coastal shoreline, form ex- tensive forests along estuarine rivers, and grow in basins that trap saltwater (Lugo and Brown, 1988). The largest mangrove stand in Puerto Rico is located just east of metropolitan San Juan in an area that includes about 2,500 acres of wetlands, beaches, and associ- ated open-water habitats. In areas along the southern coast of the island, which are subject to drier climatic conditions, salt flats or salinas wetlands (primarily unconsolidated-shore wetlands) com- monly exist, generally in association with mangrove-dominated habitats. These extremely saline environments develop where tidal saltwater is trapped and evaporated. The high salt content of soils in the flats can be tolerated by only a few plants, and the most sa- line of the flats are nonvegetated. An excellent example of this wet- land type is the wetland at Cabo Rojo, in the extreme southwestern part of Puerto Rico. Estuarine marshes (emergent wetlands) are uncommon in Puerto Rico. They usually form a narrow transition zone between mangrove-dominated wetlands and adjacent freshwater wetlands. Plant species in estuarine marshes typically include sawgrass, cat- tails, and leather ferns. Open-water areas of the Estuarine and Marine Systems con- tain deepwater habitats and wetlands. The substrate and associated plants, rocks, or coral of a permanently flooded area constitute deepwater habitat, whereas areas that are exposed during even the lowest spring tide are classified wetland. In Puerto Rico, open-water estuarine wetlands can be nonvegetated or vegetated. The non-veg- etated estuarine wetlands are primarily beaches, sand bars, and tidal flats (unconsolidated-shore wetlands), and the vegetated wetlands are mostly seagrass beds (aquatic-bed wetlands). Similarly, Puerto Rico's marine wetlands include unconsolidated shore and aquatic- bed wetlands, and in areas where coral reefs are exposed at extreme low tides, they too are considered wetlands. HYDROLOGIC SETTING The hydrologic setting of Puerto Rico is the major factor that controls the diversity and uniqueness of wetlands on the island. Local geohydrologic characteristics differ throughout the island largely because of variations in the geology, topography, and cli- mate. In the mountainous Cordillera Central and Sierra de Luquillo (fig. 2B), which have peak elevations that exceed 4,300 feet above sea level, rainfall and runoff rates are high. The axis of the central mountain range, the Cordillera Central, trends east-west, and the core of the mountains is composed primarily of folded, faulted, intrusive volcanic rocks and sedimentary rocks. Along the north- ern flank of the mountains, a series of northward-dipping limestone formations dissected by streams and collapsed subterranean drain- age features forms a band of mature karst topography that extends nearly to the coastline. These limestone formations constitute some of the most productive aquifers on the island. A flat coastal plain lies near the coast in many parts of the island. The coastal plain is particularly prominent along the southern coast where fan deltas from the southern drainages coalesce. In addition to alluvial fans, there are landslide, marine-terrace, coastal-dune, beach, swamp, and other recent deposits that overlie the older rocks on both the northern and southern coasts (P.O. Olcott, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1993). On the eastern end of the island, the topography is characterized by steep-sided valleys and on the western end by broad, alluvial valleys that overlie volcanic rocks and limestone lenses. The climate is classified as subtropical according to the life zone maps of the Holdridge classification system commonly used in Puerto Rico (Ewell and Whitmore, 1973). Winter is the coolest and driest season. During winter, there generally are at least 2 months of low precipitation when the region is under the influence of a subtropical high-pressure system. Precipitation in winter and spring generally is associated with moisture-laden frontal systems that approach the islands from the northwest (fig. 2B). Summers are hot and humid. During summer, the islands are no longer under the influence of high atmospheric pressure, and there is a steady westward flow of moist air from the Atlantic Ocean (the trade winds) that is the primary source of summer and fall precipitation. Precipitation on Puerto Rico's main island varies geographi- cally as well as seasonally. Average annual precipitation ranges from less than 35 inches in some southwestern coastal valleys to more than 200 inches in parts of the montane rain forests (fig. 2C) and averages about 70 to 72 inches per year islandwide. The geographic variation in precipitation is primarily the result of topography and the predominant weather patterns. The northern and southern parts of Puerto Rico's main island are separated by an east-west-trending mountain range, the Cordillera Central, which joins the southwest- northeast-trending Sierra de Luquillo in the eastern part of the is- land. Precipitation rates are high in the mountains because when atmospheric moisture in the weather systems is forced up the slopes into the cooler air of the higher elevations, the moisture condenses and falls as rain. Along much of the southern coast, annual rainfall totals are low relative to the rest of the island because this area lies in the rain shadow of the surrounding mountains, which intercept the prevailing westward- or southeastward-moving weather systems. The ratio of precipitation to evapotranspiration also is a factor that affects the type and diversity of wetlands in Puerto Rico. As the ratio of precipitation to evaporation increases, the diversity of wetlands also increases. For example, on the leeward (southern) side of the island, where precipitation is low and evapotranspiration is high, estuarine wetlands predominate. On the windward (northern) side of the island, where precipitation is high, palustrine wetlands 336 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES are more common. These freshwater wetlands extend along peren- nial streams from coastal basins inland to some of the mountain slopes and exist in the rain forests at higher elevations (Zack and Roman-Mas, 1988). In the northern pan of Puerto Rico, freshwater wetlands re- ceive nearly continuous precipitation in the montane rain forests, and wetlands on the coastal plain receive overland runoff and ground-water discharge from the limestone aquifer system (fig. 3). Near the coast, estuarine wetlands receive water from both the ocean and inland sources. In the coastal wetlands on the northern side of the island, direct precipitation is insignificant relative to the other moisture sources. However, the farther inland a wetland is and the greater its elevation, the more important direct precipitation be- comes (Lugo and others, 1980). Because the southern part of Puerto Rico receives less precipi- tation and has higher evapotranspiration rates than the northern part of the island, it is considered arid in relation to other parts of the island. Even though precipitation is not abundant in this part of the island, it is important to coastal-plain wetlands. Precipitation pro- duces surface runoff, fills the rivers, and recharges the ground-water system. Overland flow, streamflow, and ground water are major sources of moisture for the southern coast's freshwater wetlands and are important sources for its estuarine wetlands. The ground-water system of southern Puerto Rico is entirely contained in the sedi- mentary aquifers of the coastal plain. Recharge to the aquifers occurs where the coastal plain meets the southern flank of the mountains at river valleys. The southerly flowing rivers arc generally ephem- eral, reaching the Caribbean Sea and the estuarine wetlands only during periods of high flow in summer and fall. At other times of the year, ground water discharges to the sea and is the only major source of moisture for nontidal wetlands. Ground water in the valleys on the eastern and western ends of Puerto Rico generally is limited to local alluvial aquifers and is eventually discharged to the ocean. This ground-water discharge supports narrow, discontinuous wetlands along the coast in these areas. The principal types of wetlands in Puerto Rico and their dis- tribution with icspcct to elevation are shown in figure 3. The almost continuous precipitation and thin soil layers over insoluble rocks in the higher mountain elevations assure water saturation of the root zone, as well as nearly continuous water-vapor saturation of the atmosphere surrounding the canopy of the montane wetlands. This abundance of water also provides high runoff volumes for the suc- cessional wetlands at lower elevations. The water moves downslope into rivers, where it recharges the limestone aquifers. Farther downgradient, the aquifers discharge to rivers and springs, provid- ing water for the lowland and coastal wetlands. TRENDS Reliable estimates of Puerto Rico's original wetland acreage are not available, but the wetlands of the island have been greatly re- duced in number and size as a result of agricultural development and the growth in population. Virtually every wetland, with the exception of those in the highlands, has been damaged to some ex- tent by attempts to drain the land for other uses. The small size of many of the \\etlands increases their susceptibility to destruction (Lugo and Brown, 1988). More than one-half of the original 30,000 acres of mangrove forests in Puerto Rico has been destroyed. Although mangrove for- ests are protected by law (Lugo, 1988), mangrove wetlands continue to be filled for housing developments, transportation facilities, high- ways, and landfills. Some mangrove wetlands are also destroyed by excavation for marinas and canals. A proposed expansion of Luis Munoz Mari'n International Airport at Isla Verde would destroy an additional 160 acres of mangrove forest (Fernando J. Rodriguez and Associates, 1991). Only a few bloodwood forests remain in Puerto Rico. Cintron (1983) estimated that by 1977, only 14 stands of bloodwood trees having a combined area of about 600 acres existed on the island. Although the species probably was, at one time, distributed through- out the highlands of the interior, it is now limited to the Sierra de Figure 3. Generalized geohydrologic setting of wetlands in Puerto Rico. (Source: Wetland types from Lugu dnd Btown, 1988.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: PUERTO RICO 337 Luquillo (Alvarez-Lopez, 1990). A number of coastal stands that were documented earlier this century no longer exist. Although the large bloodwood forest at Humacao was recently brought under public ownership, most wetlands of this type are privately owned. Over a period of several hundred years, large acreages of palustrine wetland were converted to agricultural use in the coastal- plain regions of Puerto Rico. For example, the Carlo Tiburones wetland originally covered more than 6,000 acres but has, since 1917, been drained by pumping for land reclamation (Zack and Class-Cacho, 1984). The remaining mangrove swamp encompasses about 250 acres (A.L. Zack, U.S. Geological Survey, written com- mun., 1994). This trend has been reversed in recent years because of the declining profitability of sugar cane production. Agricultural areas that required intensive water management by draining and pumping are now being allowed to go fallow. Water levels in these areas have risen, and the abandoned farms are reverting to marsh. However, many of these areas are now subject to conversion for commercial development. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Puerto Rico. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Puerto Rico wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibi- tions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetland Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. In the following description of wetland-related Federal legislation, regulations that apply to States also apply to Puerto Rico. Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Puerto Rico, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization__________ FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency............ Forest Service .................................................. Natural Resources Conservation Service . Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.................................................. Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers ............................... Military reservations ...................................... Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service ............................... Geological Survey........................................... National Biological Service .......................... National Park Service .................................... Environmental Protection Agency................... COMMONWEALTH Department of Environmental and Natural Resources............................................. PRIVATE Conservation Trust of Puerto Rico................... Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Ser- vice (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) compliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the identification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetland Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice provides guidance to States in developing the wetland compo- nent of their plans. Coastal and Great Lakes States that adopt coastal- zone management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Manage- ment Act. Federal agencies acquire and manage wetlands at numerous locations in Puerto Rico. The Caribbean National Forest, adminis- trated by the U.S. Forest Service, encompasses the rain forest wet- lands of El Yunque and the surrounding highlands. The FWS also actively manages wetlands as part of the National Wildlife Refuge system and has recently acquired the freshwater wetlands of Laguna Cartagena. Management and restoration plans for the lagoon are being developed cooperatively with the municipality of Lajas. The U.S. Navy manages wetlands on their reservations at Roosevelt Roads and on the island of Vieques. Commonwealth wetland activities. Many of Puerto Rico's wetlands are in public ownership. Theoretically, under the Spanish law still in effect, all mangrove forests are owned by the Common- wealth of Puerto Rico because they are within the maritime (inter- tidal) zone (Lugo, 1988). Large areas of mangrove forests, having been set aside years ago as a future source of fuel, are managed by the Puerto Rico Department of Environmental and Natural Re- sources as part of the Commonwealth forest system. Wetland man- agement by the Department is not limited to estuarine habitats. Freshwater wetlands in the Pterocarpus Forest and Laguna Tortuguero are also under the Department's control. Under the authority of the Coastal Zone Management Act, the 338 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Commonwealth has developed a comprehensive management plan of which wetland protection, particularly of mangrove wetlands, is an integral part. Certification of consistency with the plan is required before any Federal permits or licenses are granted for activities in the coastal zone. The Planning Board of the Commonwealth is the primary agency responsible for administration of the plan. A number of other planning documents have been developed to guide wetland-management activities. The Department of Envi- ronmental and Natural Resources, FWS, and EPA have independently prepared prioritized listings of important wetland-resource areas. The Natural Heritage Program within the Department of Environ- mental and Natural Resources has also developed restoration and management plans for wetlands of exceptional importance such as those at Cano Tiburones and Laguna Guanica. Private wetland activities. The Conservation Trust of Puerto Rico is the principal private organization actively involved in the preservation and management of wetlands in Puerto Rico. The Conservation Trust is a privately funded institution that acquires and manages wetlands and other historical properties of notable and cultural significance in Puerto Rico. For example, the Conserva- tion Trust, in cooperation with the Puerto Rico Department of En- vironmental and Natural Resources, manages the Department's lands at Las Cabezas de San Juan Nature Reserve near Fajardo at the east- ern end of the island. References Cited Alvarez-Lopez, Migdalia, 1990, Ecology of Pterocarpus officinalis forested wetlands of Puerto Rico, in Lugo, A.E., Brinson, Marlo, and Brown, Sandra, eds., Forested wetlands. Ecosystems of the World, v. 15: New York,Elsevier,p.251-265. Bacon, P.R., 1990, Ecology and management of swamp forests in the Guianas and Caribbean region, in Lugo, A.E., Brinson, Marlo, and Brown, Sandra, eds., Forested wetlands Ecosystems of the World, v. 15: New York, Elsevier, p. 213-225. Beard, J.S., 1955, The classification of tropical American vegetation types: Ecology, v. 36, no. 1, p. 89-100. Cintron, B.B., 1983, Coastal freshwater swamp forests Puerto Rico's most endangered ecosystem?, in Lugo, A.E., ed., Los Bosques de Puerto Rico: Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico, U.S. Department of Agriculture For- est Service, Institute of Tropical Forestry, p. 249-282. Colon-Dieppa, Eloy, 1986, Puerto Rico Surface-Water Resources, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and surface water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 399-406. Colon-Dieppa, Eloy, Torres-Sierra, Heriberto, and Colon J.A., 1991, Puerto Rico floods and droughts, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary, 1988-89 Hydrologic events and floods and droughts: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2375, p. 475-481. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS -79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1991, Wetland Resources of the United States: St. Petersburg Fla., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service special map, scale 1:3,168,000. del Llano, Manuel, Colon, J.A., and Chabert, J.L., 1986, A directory of neotropical wetlands, in Scott, D.A., and Carbonell, Montserrat (com- pilers): Cambridge. U.K., International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources and Slimbridge, U.K., International Waterfowl Research Bureau, p. 559-571. Ewel, J.J., and Whitmore, J.L., 1973, The ecological life zones of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands: U.S. Forest Service Research Paper ITF-18, 72 p. Fernando J. Rodriguez and Associates, 1991, Environmental assessment, proposed master plan report improvements Luis Munoz Marin In- ternational Airport (prepared for Puerto Rico Ports Authority): San Juan, Puerto Rico, Fernando J. Rodriguez and Associates, Report No. 81.06 [Revised 1992], [400 p.]. Lopez, J.M., Stoner, A.W., Garcia, J.R., and Garcia-Munfz, Ivan, 1988, Marine food webs associated with Caribbean islands mangrove wet- lands: Acta Cientifica. v. 2, no. 2-3 p. 94-123. Lugo, A.E., 1988, The mangroves of Puerto Rico are in trouble: Acta Cientifica, v. 2, no. 2-3, p. 124. Lugo, A.E., and Brown, Sandra, 1988, The wetlands of the Caribbean Is- lands: Acta Cientifica, v. 2, no. 2-3, p. 48-61. Lugo, A.E., Twilley, R.R., Patterson-Zucca, Carol, 1980, The role of black mangrove forests in the productivity of coastal ecosystems in South Florida Report to the Southern Forest Experiment Station, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Gainesville, University of Florida, Center for Wetlands, 281 p. Quinones-Marquez, Ferdinand, and Fuste, L.A., 1978, Limnology of La- guna Tortuguero, Puerto Rico: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Re- sources Investigations Report 77-122, 84 p. U.S. Army Engineer Environmental Laboratory, 1978, Preliminary guide to wetlands of Puerto Rico: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experi- ment Station Technical Report Y-78-3, 77 p. Zack, A.L., and Class-Cacho, Angel, 1984, Restoration of freshwater in the Cano Tiburones area, Puerto Rico: U.S. Geological Survey Water- Resources Investigations Report 83-4071, 33 p., 1 plate. Zack, Alien, and Roman-Mas, Angel, 1988, Hydrology of the Caribbean Islands Wetlands: Acta Cientifica, v. 2, no. 2-3 p. 65-73. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, P.O. Box 364424, San Juan, PR 00936; Regional Wetland Coordi- nator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Building, Atlanta, GA 30345 Prepared by D. Briane Adams, U.S. Geological Survey, and John M. Hefner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 339 Rhode Island Wetland Resources Weretlands cover about 10 percent of Rhode Island's land surface (Tiner, 1989) and are an important component of the State's natural resources. Rhode Island's wetlands are valued for the environmen- tal and economic benefits they provide, such as wildlife habitat, water-quality improvement, flood and erosion control, recreational activities, and esthetic beauty (fig. 1). Wetlands provide important food, shelter, breeding, and nursery habitats for shellfish, fish, birds and other wildlife. Undeveloped flood-plain wetlands along the riv- ers in the State provide natural storage that helps regulate flood- waters. Wetland vegetation can inhibit flood erosion when streams swell out of their banks. Acquiring flood-plain wetlands to protect them from development was found to be the most cost-effective approach to limit future flood damage along the Pawtuxet River near Warwick (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1991). TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Rhode Island is shown in figure 2A\ only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Rhode Island are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine, Estuarine. Marine, Wetland description Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-ernergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. The most recent inventory of Rhode Island wetlands mapped about 65,000 acres of wetlands statewide (Tiner, 1989). Wetlands were mapped from aerial photographs taken from 1974 through 1977 for the FWS National Wetlands Inventory Project. Most of the State's wetlands were classified as palustrine (fig. 26). Palustrine forested wetlands can be found throughout the State and are the most abundant wetland type, accounting for 73 percent of Rhode Island's wetlands (Tiner, 1989, table 5). Most of these forested wetlands are deciduous, red maple swamps. Red maple grows in most inland wetlands because it tolerates a wide range of flooding and soil satu- ration conditions (Metzler and Tiner, 1992). The vegetation found with red maple, in the understory and intermixed or codominating in the canopy, differs according to nutrient availability and water regime. Atlantic white cedar wetlands, which are palustrine evergreen- forested wetlands, are most abundant in southwestern Rhode Island (Laderman and others, 1987). These freshwater wetlands contain a distinctive plant community that grows under conditions too extreme for most other northeastern trees: standing water for one-half of the growing season or longer, highly acidic waters, and low nutrient availability. Atlantic white cedar swamps were once more common in Rhode Island; many cedar swamps have changed overtime to red maple and other types of swamps (Tiner, 1989). Figure 1. Rhode Island's estuarine wetlands benefit both humans and wildlife. (Photograph courtesy of the Audubon Society of Rhode Island.) Palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands account for 8 percent of the State's wetlands. Highbush blueberry, swamp azalea, sweet pepper- bush, northern arrowwood, alder, willow, and young red maples are common. Bogs are palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands that are char- acterized by nutrient-poor, acidic water, constant saturation, and peaty soils. Organic matter decays slowly in bogs and forms deep peat accumulations that can seal off vegetation from direct contact with mineral soil or mineral-rich ground water (Damman and French, 1987). Bogs generally have a well-developed sphagnum mat that contains shrubs such as leatherleaf, sheep laurel, black huck- leberry, and blueberry. Pitcher plants and sundews commonly are present trapped insects provide an important source of nutrients to these plants. Trees are commonly the dominant plants at the outer borders of bogs, where nutrient-enriched seepage water is dis- charged from the adjacent upland, or they grow as stunted individu- als scattered across the bog mat. Tree species may grade from those requiring high nutrient levels (hemlock, larch, and red maple) near the bog's outer border to those with lower nutrient requirements 340 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES (Atlantic white cedar) near the inner border (Damman and French. 1987). Vernal pools are small, generally temporary palustrine wet- lands that occur throughout Rhode Island. Because these wetlands dry up by late summer or earlier, they are devoid of fish and thus provide a safe breeding habitat for many amphibian and invertebrate species. Lacustrine and riverine wetlands compose only a small per- centage of Rhode Island's wetland acreage. Lacustrine wetlands in the State include aquatic-bed and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands. Riverine wetlands are present in all of the State's freshwater rivers and their tributaries. Most riverine wetlands in Rhode Island are nonvegetated, but nonpersistcnt emergent vegetation is visible in slow-flowing, shallow water in the lower reaches of many of the State's rivers and streams, and aquatic beds are established in the deeper water of some clear rivers and streams. Estuarine wetlands account for 7,000 acres, or about 11 per- cent, of the State's wetland acreage. Estuarine wetlands have devel- oped behind the barrier beaches of the State's southern coast, from the Connecticut border to Narragansett Bay, and in protected coves and embayments of Narragansett Bay and Block Island. Rhode Island's vegetated estuarinc wetlands are primarily salt and brack- ish marshes (emergent wetlands) that are commonly vegetated by grasses, bulrushes, or cattails. Nonvegetated estuarine intertidal flats and beaches, alternately flooded by tide or exposed to air, also are an important wetland type in Rhode Island. Marine wetlands account for only 1 percent of the State's total wetland acreage. Marine wetlands, composed primarily of intertidal '- beaches and rocky shores, are present along the shoreline of the State. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands occur in geologic, topographic, and hydrologic set- tings that enhance the accumulation and retention of ground water and surface water. Hydrologic processes are the primary factor de- termining the existence of wetlands; even if the geologic and topo- graphic settings are favorable for wetland formation, unfavorable hydrologic conditions can inhibit wetland formation (Winter, 1988). On an annual basis, precipitation exceeds evapotranspiration losses in Rhode Island (Johnston, 1986). Hydrologic conditions, therefore, favor the formation and maintenance of wetlands throughout the Estuarine wetlands 10.8 percent (7,020 acres! Marine wetlands 1.4 percent (931 acres) Lacustrine wetlands 0.2 percent (99 acres) B RELATIVE AND ACTUAL ACREAGE OF WETLAND TYPES IN RHODE ISLAND Block Island : MffifA 15 MILES 15 KILOMETERS WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State- Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat SURFACE MATERIALS I I Till/bedrock H Stratified drift ^1 Moraine Figure 2. Wetland distribution and acreage in Rhode Island and distribution of surface materials across the State. A, Distribution of wet- lands and deepwater habitats. B, Relative and actual acreage of the most common wetland types, mid-1970's. (No data are available for riverine wetlands.) C, Distribution of surface materials. (Sources: A, J.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Tiner, 1989. C, Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, Groundwater Division.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: RHODE ISLAND 341 State, and wetland location is determined primarily by geologic and topographic controls. Rhode Island was completely covered by ice during the last glaciation. Large quantities of glacial drift (sediment derived from glacial action) were produced and deposited over bedrock through- out the State (fig. 2C). Drift deposited directly by the ice is called unstratified drift or till. Till is exposed at the land surface in about two-thirds of the State (Johnston and Barlow, 1988), primarily on upland hilltops and slopes. Because till was deposited directly from glacial ice, it is a poorly sorted mixture of boulders, gravel, sand, and silt. Sediment that was eroded and reworked by glacial melt- water is called stratified drift. Because stratified drift was depos- ited by flowing water in either riverine or lake environments, it consists of well-sorted gravel, sand, and silt. Stratified drift is ex- posed at the land surface in the remaining one-third of the State and is commonly 75 to 125 feet thick. These deposits are present in topographically low areas, such as narrow stream and river valleys, or occur as broad, flat plains beyond former ice margin positions. Ice-contact stratified drift was deposited directly against ice by gla- cial-meltwater streams; often these deposits have higher relief due to the control of sedimentation by the ice or valley walls or both. Wetlands occur throughout Rhode Island in topographic de- pressions within glacial drift or bedrock. Closed topographic de- pressions called kettle holes pit the surface of glacial drift. Kettle holes resulted from melting ice blocks that were embedded in gla- cial sediments. Surface runoff and ground-water discharge collect in small hollows, kettle holes, and other topographic depressions, leading to the formation and maintenance of wetlands. Retention of moisture occurs in depressions which have no outflow or have drainage controlled by bedrock sills, glacial drift, beaver dams, or manmade structures. Seepage wetlands commonly form where the ground-water table intersects the land surface on concave slopes and at breaks in slope; however, the wetlands are perennial only if ground-water discharge is also perennial (Winter, 1988). After the glaciers retreated, vegetation colonized the landscape in response to the warming climate; open-water depressions filled in with sediment and organic matter to become freshwater wetlands or remained lakes with wetlands fringing open water. The availabil- ity of nutrients determines the types of plants that grow in wetlands. As water moves through soil and surficial materials, it is enriched in nutrients that enhance plant growth. The longer the flow path beneath the surface, the more the water is enriched. Wetlands in upland till and bedrock depressions are primarily areas of discharge from nutrient-poor, local ground-water flow systems, whereas wet- lands in lowland valleys underlain by stratified drift receive dis- charge from nutrient-enriched, longer ground-water flow systems. Results from a 7-year study of water-table activity in Atlantic white cedar wetlands (Golet and Lowry, 1987) illustrate the effect of geologic setting on wetland hydrology. Water levels fluctuated primarily in response to variations in annual precipitation in all wetlands studied (Golet and Lowry, 1987). However, seasonal wa- ter-level activity differed between wetlands because of different sources and amounts of moisture input. Ell Pond and its associated wetlands overlie a deep bedrock fracture (Laderman and others, 1987). Water levels in this wetland fluctuated significantly in re- sponse to precipitation input and transpiration losses (Golet and Lowry, 1987). Diamond Bog is a deep kettle-hole wetland within permeable stratified drift, and it receives significant ground-water input. In contrast to Ell Pond, water levels within Diamond Bog remained relatively high even during periods of high evapotranspi- ration losses. As the last glacier retreated northward, a succession of till ridges or moraines was deposited at the edge of each ice front. Moraines on Long Island in New York, Block Island in Rhode Is- land, and Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket Island in Massachusetts mark the maximum extent of the last ice front (Sirkin, 1982; Gold- smith, 1982). The high topography of the Charlestown moraine, near Charlestown, roughly paralleling the coast, and the Old Say brook moraine, just north of the Pawcatuck River, mark pauses in the re- treat of the ice sheet (Goldsmith, 1982). Drainage of surface water in many valleys or lowland areas is blocked or slowed by the higher topography of glacial moraines or mounds of ice-contact stratified drift. Some of the largest stands of Atlantic white cedar in Rhode Island and also the State's largest wetlands the 2,150-acre Chapman Swamp, the 960-acre Indian Cedar Swamp, and the 2,970- acre Great Swamp (Laderman, 1989) occur in basins blocked by moraines. Many other large, shallow wetlands are present in val- leys throughout the State owing to drainage blocked by ice-contact stratified drift. Some of Rhode Island's palustrine wetlands are lowland areas modified by the recent erosion and deposition by rivers in aban- doned river channels, in flood-plain areas, behind levees and overbank sediments adjacent to rivers, and in backswamp areas. These wetlands receive moisture from river flooding and ground- water discharge. Tidal wetlands form a narrow fringe along coastal areas of the State. Tidal wetlands receive freshwater from upland areas through ground-water discharge and surface-water runoff. Floodwater re- sulting from high tides or storm flows is temporarily stored on the wetland surface but drains into the tidal river or estuary as the river stage recedes. The drainage of floodwater and surface-water run- off from the wetland surface is slowed by the low slope of coastal areas. As the last ice sheet melted and water stored as glacial ice re- turned to the sea, sea level rose and encroached upon land, flood- ing many stream and river valleys to form estuaries. Narragansett Bay is an estuary formed in such a "drowned" river valley. Tidal wetlands have either migrated inland along estuaries, river valleys, and coastal slopes, or the wetlands have been completely submerged by the rising sea. Some kettle holes were flooded by saltwater, re- sulting in a change from freshwater to tidal wetlands (Boothroyd and others, 1985). The interconnected Point Judith and Potter Ponds, located perpendicular to the State's southern coast, formed when the sea flooded a series of individual kettle holes. The shallow, elon- gate salt ponds paralleling the barrier beaches of the State's south- ern coast Green Hill, Ninigret, Quonochontaug, Trustom, and Winnapaug Ponds have formed through the gradual rise in sea level over low-slope outwash plains. Presently, tidal wetlands exist between rising sea level and expanding coastal development and have little area for future inland migration. TRENDS There are no statewide estimates of recent wetland losses or alteration; however, wetland losses and alterations continue in Rhode Island despite Federal and State regulation. In the first 5 months of 1993, more than 230 preliminary-determination applications were submitted to the Department of Environmental Management for work proposed in or near freshwater wetlands in the State (Chuck Herbert, Department of Environmental Management, oral com- mun., 1993). Of these applications for wetland alteration, 149 were approved because the projects would result in insignificant wetland alterations, 17 required formal applications because the projects would cause significant wetland alterations, and the remaining projects were not near wetlands. Generally, the functions for which wetlands are valued operate at a drainage basin or landscape scale, not at the permit site or single-wetland scale. The contribution of a single wetland to landscape functions can depend not only on the actual size of the wetland but also on its setting within a landscape system (Bedford and Preston, 1988). The cumulative impact of in- dividually insignificant, but collectively significant, wetland losses could lead to serious impairment of beneficial wetland functions. 342 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Studies of the sediments deposited in wetlands show that wet- lands have been strongly affected by activities within their drain- age basins. Postsettlement agricultural and industrial practices in the uplands of northeastern Connecticut were found to be the most important ecological influence on wetlands since glaciation (Thorson, 1990, 1992; Thorson and Harris, 1991). Both the fre- quency of transitions between wetland types and the rate of sedi- ment accumulation increased by at least one order of magnitude after colonial settlement as compared to the thousands of years before settlement. Cores of bottom sediments from Narragansett Bay show a distinct increase in the percentage of organic accumulation 2 to 3 feet below the surface; the increase marks a change in wetland type from intertidal sand flats to salt marshes. This change in wetland type was caused when dams, built across upstream tributaries for power generation, decreased the downstream transport of sediment (Bricker-Urso and others, 1989). Other wetlands have formed as a result of the numerous dams and impoundments built along rivers throughout the State and the subsequent rise in local water tables; flood-plain wetlands along the Pawcatuck River are examples (Schafer, 1968). These studies indicate that even human activities not located directly within a wetland can affect wetlands owing to the response of wetlands to changing geologic and hydrologic con- ditions within the landscape system. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Rhode Island. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Rhode Island wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibi- tions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Conser- vation Service administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Rhode Island, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. », agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity; ..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization -V* FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency........................... Forest Service ................................................................. Natural Resources Conservation Service ................ Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ........................................ Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers .............................................. Military reservations ..................................................... Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service .............................................. Geological Survey .......................................................... National Biological Service ......................................... Environmental Protection Agency .................................. STATE Coastal Resources Management Council .................... Department of Environmental Management Fish, Wildlife, and Estuarine Resources Division .... Freshwater Wetlands Division ..................................... Parks and Recreation Division .................................... Water Resources Division ............................................ University of Rhode Island ............................................... PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS Audubon Society of Rhode Island .................................. Ducks Unlimited .................................................................. The Champlin Foundation ................................................. The Nature Conservancy.................................................. lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice provides guidance to States in developing the wetland compo- nent of their plans. Coastal and Great Lakes States that adopt coastal- zone management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. Federal agencies are responsible for the proper management of wetlands on public lands under their jurisdiction. The FWS pro- tects and manages salt marsh and freshwater wetlands in the Ninigret National Wildlife Refuge. Wetlands are also protected in the Block Island National Wildlife Refuge, the Trustom Pond National Wild- life Refuge, and Sachuest Point National Wildlife Refuge. State wetland activities. Wetlands are regulated primarily at the State level in Rhode Island; separate agencies regulate coastal and freshwater wetlands. The Coastal Resources Management Pro- gram requires that permits be obtained from the Coastal Resources Management Council for any dredging, filling, or other physical National Water Summary Wetland Resources: RHODE ISLAND 343 alteration of coastal wetlands and directly contiguous areas, includ- ing contiguous freshwater wetlands. Coastal wetlands are defined as any salt marsh that borders on tidal waters and contains certain plant species. Activities in coastal ponds and contiguous upland areas, extending no more than 200 feet inland, also are regulated in order to preserve the integrity of tidal wetlands. The Coastal Re- sources Management Council has regulatory, planning, and man- agement powers within these specified coastal areas. Under the Freshwater Wetlands Act, permits must be obtained from the Department of Environmental Management's Division of Freshwater Wetlands for any dredging, filling or other type of al- teration to inland wetlands, including adjacent upland areas. Areas subject to regulation as freshwater wetlands include, but are not lim- ited to, any swamp, marsh, bog, pond, vernal pool, river, stream, riverbank, flood plain (as defined by a 100-year-frequency storm), areas subject to flooding and storm flows, emergent and submerged plant communities in any body of water, and the area of land within 50 feet of any bog, swamp, marsh, or pond. The Department of Environmental Management is the primary land-management agency in Rhode Island. The Department has responsibility for developing and operating some 87,000 acres of State-owned open space, including parks, beaches, water-supply areas, wildlife-habitat reserves, and conservation areas (Rhode Is- land Department of Administration, 1992). About 2,000 acres of land have recently been acquired on six of the islands in Narragansett Bay. This land is part of the State's Bay Island Park System and provides recreation, conservation, environmental education, and research opportunities. More than 2,000 acres offish and wildlife habitat and wetlands along the Wood, Pawcatuck, and Moosup Riv- ers have been acquired by using State and Federal funds. The Department's Fish, Wildlife and Estuarine Resources Division is focusing on anadromous-fish restoration programs on these rivers. The Narragansett Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve is cooperatively managed by the Department of Environmental Man- agement and NOAA'S Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Man- agement. The 4,950-acre reserve was created under section 315 of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act and contains undisturbed salt marshes, tidal flats, and open-water habitats. The reserve serves as a natural laboratory and is the site of several interagency research projects. The Rhode Island Natural Heritage Program compiles and up- dates rare and endangered animal and plant lists within the State. The program comments on State freshwater-wetlands permit appli- cations, Clean Water Act Section 404 permit applications, and lo- cal comprehensive plans. Certain wetland types and rare biological communities are identified by the program for priority protection. The Natural Heritage program, along with nongame research and management projects, is funded by the nongame-wildlife fund, a voluntary contribution on State income tax forms. The Department of Environmental Management's Freshwater Wetlands Division requires water-quality certification from the Department of Environmental Management's Water Resources Di- vision before approval of any significant wetland alterations. Un- der section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act, any activity that results in a discharge, including that of fill into wetlands or State waters, must obtain a section 401 water-quality certification stat- ing that the activity will not result in violation of State surface-water- quality standards. Normal maintenance and improvement of agri- cultural lands are exempt from State and Federal authority under this program. However, any discharge from exempted activities that might convert open-water areas or wetlands to dry land, impede circulation, or reduce the size of a wetland or water body is subject to section 404 regulation. Enforcement of the antidegradation provi- sions of State surface-water-quality standards for wetlands provides enhanced wetland protection. Antidegradation provisions provide for the protection of existing uses in wetlands and the level of water quality necessary to maintain those uses. No degradation is allowed in areas designated as "Outstanding National Resource Waters" such as National Wildlife Refuges, National Parks, State Parks, wildlife areas, and other areas of ecological significance. Private wetland activities. Regulation of wetlands in Rhode Island includes consideration of local concerns and issues. Local land-use controls are an additional wetland-protection measure. Fifteen of Rhode Island's 39 communities have established local land trusts (Rhode Island Department of Administration, 1992). Many of Rhode Island's natural resources have been acquired and protected through cooperative efforts involving private orga- nizations, local land trusts, and State and local governments. The Nature Conservancy, the Champlin Foundation, and State and lo- cal governments together have protected endangered-species habi- tats and unique areas on Block Island. Block Island contains some of the State's rarest ecosystems and most valuable natural habitats; the island has recently been designated as one of 12 bioreserves in the Western Hemisphere by The Nature Conservancy. The Champlin Foundation provides funds for land acquisition to the State, The Nature Conservancy, and The Audubon Society of Rhode Island. The GreenSpace 2000 Project is a statewide plan to protect critical open-space values and functions through a network of tracts and greenways; the plan establishes protection priorities and strategies to reach its goals (Rhode Island Department of Administration, 1992). Save The Bay, the State's largest private, nonprofit environ- mental group, the Conservation Fund, a national nonprofit group that promotes greenways, and State and local officials are cooper- ating to implement the plan's goals. Wetlands are identified as criti- cal geographic-resource areas by the plan, and many are priority protection areas in the GreenSpace 2000 Project. The Audubon Society of Rhode Island owns and manages more than 6,000 acres of land, containing many freshwater and saltwater wetlands, for recreational and educational purposes. Ducks Unlim- ited provides technical and financial assistance to Federal and State agencies to protect waterfowl habitat in Rhode Island. References Cited Bedford, B.L., and Preston, E.M., 1988, Developing the scientific basis for assessing cumulative effects of wetland loss and degradation on land- scape functions Status, perspectives, and prospects: Environmen- tal Management, v. 12, p. 751-771. Boothroyd, J.C., Friedrich, N.E., and McGinn, S.R., 1985, Geology of microtidal coastal lagoons Rhode Island: Marine Geology, v. 63, p. 35-76. Bricker-Urso, Suzanne, Nixon, S.W., Cochran, J.K., Hirschberg, D.J., and Hunt, C.D., 1989, Accretion rates and sediment accumulation in Rhode Island salt marshes: Estuaries, v. 12, p. 300-317. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, EC., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Damman, A.W.H., and French, T.W., 1987, The ecology of peat bogs of the glaciated northeastern United States A community profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.16), 100 p. Goldsmith, Richard, 1982, Recessional moraines and ice retreat in south- eastern Connecticut, in Larson, G.J., and Stone, B.D., eds., Late Wisconsinan glaciation of New England: Dubuque, Iowa, Kendall/ Hunt Publishing Company, p. 61-76. Golet, F.C., and Lowry, D.J., 1987, Water regimes and tree growth in Rhode Island Atlantic white cedar swamps, in Laderman, A.D., ed., Atlantic white cedar wetlands: Boulder, Colo., Westview Press, p. 91 -110. Johnston, H.E., 1986, Rhode Island surface-water resources, in U.S. Geo- logical Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and surface-water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 407-412. Johnston, H.E., and Barlow, P.M., 1988, Rhode Island ground-water qual- ity, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1986 Hy- 344 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES drologic events and ground-water quality: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2325, p. 443-448. Laderman, A.D., 1989, The ecology of Atlantic white cedar wetlands A community profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.21), 114 p. Laderman, A.D., Golet, F.C., Sorrie, B.A., and Woolsey, H.L., 1987, Atlan- tic white cedar in the glaciated northeast, in Laderman, A.D., ed., Atlantic white cedar wetlands: Boulder, Colo., Westview Press, p. 19- 33. Metzler, K.J., and Tiner, R.W., 1992, Wetlands of Connecticut: Connecti- cut Geological and Natural History Survey Report of Investigations 13, 115 p. Rhode Island Department of Administration, 1992, Ocean State outdoors Rhode Island's comprehensive outdoor recreation plan: Rhode Island Department of Administration, Division of Planning Report 76. Schafer, J.P., 1968, Surficial geologic map of the Ashaway quadrangle, Connecticut-Rhode Island: U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Quad- rangle Map GQ-712, scale 1:24,000. Sirkin, Les, 1982, Wisconsinan glaciation of Long Island, New York, to Block Island, Rhode Island, in Larson, G.J, and Stone, B.D., eds., Late Wisconsinan glaciation of New England: Dubuque, Iowa, Kendall/ Hunt Publishing Company, p. 35-57. Thorson, R.M., 1990, Development of small upland wetlands A strati- graphic study in northeastern Connecticut: University of Connecti- cut, School of Engineering, Final Report JHR 90-191, 285 p. ____1992, Remaking the wetlands in Lebanon, Connecticut Cultural and natural changes in the postglacial epoch: University of Connecti- cut, School of Engineering, Final Report JHR 92-215, 157 p. Thorson, R.M., and Harris, S.L., 1991, How "natural" are inland wetlands? An example from the Trail Wood Audubon Sanctuary in Connecticut, USA: Environmental Management, v. 15, p. 675-687. Tiner, R.W., 1989, Wetlands of Rhode Island: Newton Corner, Mass., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, 71 p., 1 app. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1991, Water resources development The work of the U.S Army Corps of Engineers in Rhode Island 1991: Waltham, Mass., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 60 p. Winter, T.C., 1988, A conceptual framework for assessing cumulative im- pacts on the hydrology of nontidal wetlands: Environmental Manage- ment, v. 12, p. 605-620. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Chief, Rhode Island Office, U.S. Geological Survey, 237 Pastore Federal Building, Providence, RI 02903; Regional Wetlands Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center, Hadley, MA 01035 Prepared by Sandra L. Harris, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 345 South Carolina Wetland Resources Carolina has about 4.6 million acres of wetlands, account- ing for about 23.4 percent of the surface area of the State (Dahl, 1990). Only two other States, Florida and Louisiana, have a higher percentage of land area as wetlands. Freshwater forested wetlands (fig. 1) are the most common type of wetland in South Carolina. The benefits of South Carolina's wetlands include enhanced water quality, fish and wildlife productivity, and socioeconomic values. Wetlands enhance water quality by intercepting upland run- off and filtering out nutrients, wastes, and sediment. Fish and wild- life benefit from the abundance of habitat and food that wetlands provide. For example, South Carolina wetlands serve as wintering areas for migrating waterfowl, supporting greater than 30 percent each of American green-winged teal, northern shovelers, mallards, northern pintails, American wigeon, and gadwall that traverse the Atlantic Flyway (Gordon and others. 1989). Socioeconomic values of wetlands include flood protection, erosion control, and ground- water recharge as well as opportunities for hunting, fishing, tour- ism, and other recreational activities that are economically impor- tant to the State. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in South Carolina is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetatcd and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Paluslrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in South Carolina are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine, Estuarine, Marine.. Figure 1 . A freshwater forested wetland at the upper end of Lake Marion in South Carolina. Wetland description Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. . Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. Ninety percent of South Carolina's wetlands are freshwater (palustrine, lacustrine, and riverine) wetlands and occur primarily in the Coastal Plain and the flood plains of rivers and streams in the Blue Ridge and Piedmont Provinces (fig. 2A and 2B ). Palustrine forested wetlands encompass 3.7 million acres in South Carolina and constitute 80 percent of the wetlands in the State. Palustrine wetlands include areas commonly referred to as wet pine flatwoods, pocosins, Carolina bays, beaver ponds, bottom-land hardwood for- ests, swamps, and tidal-fresh water marshes. Wet pine flatwoods (forested wetlands) are extensive flat areas that have a shallow water table and are dominated by pine (longleaf, loblolly, slash, and pond). These wetlands occur primarily in the Coastal Plain. Although acreage estimates are not available, exten- sive tracts of wet pine flatwoods occur in the Francis Marion Na- tional Forest. Pocosins (scrub-shrub wetlands) are wetlands vegetated by evergreen shrubs or low-growing trees, such as sweet bay or pond pine. However, vegetation in severely burned pocosins may be domi- nated by herbaceous plants. The word pocosin is derived from an Indian word meaning low marshy ground or swamp. South Caro- lina pocosins can be found throughout the Coastal Plain. Carolina bay wetlands are isolated freshwater wetlands formed in elliptical depressions. Because of their variability in size, depth, and substrate conditions, Carolina bays support plant communities ranging from grass-sedge prairies (emergent wetlands) to cypress- gum swamps (forested wetlands). Carolina bays are scattered throughout the Coastal Plain. The State Heritage Trust Program has identified 2,651 Carolina bays that are 2 acres or larger (Bennett and Nelson, 1991). Beaver ponds are freshwater forested, scrub-shrub or emergent wetlands typically associated with river flood plains and can be found throughout the State. As beavers impound a stream and flood a bottom-land area, many of the trees are killed, thus opening the 346 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES canopy and allowing for growth of herbaceous vegetation. Plant communities associated with South Carolina beaver-pond wetlands include water oak, sweet gum, red maple, buttonbush, and rice cutgrass. The structure of the plant community is influenced by factors such as the age, topography, and substrate soil characteris- tics of the pond. Arner and Hepp (1989) reported that a 1976 sur- vey revealed that beavers have created an estimated 4,400 acres of wetlands in South Carolina. Bottom-land hardwood forests and swamps are woody com- munities that are found primarily on alluvial flood plains. These wetlands, found along the rivers of South Carolina, occur in the Piedmont Province and Coastal Plain. Bottom-land hardwood for- ests support a variety of tree species including oaks, ashes, maples, blackberries, cypress, and tupelo. The presence of extensive wetlands along a 45-mile segment of the Congaree River has resulted in con- sideration of the Congaree River for the State Scenic Rivers Pro- gram. Within this section of the Congaree River flood plain is the Congaree Swamp National Monument, a 15,000-acre wetland that contains one of the few remaining tracts of old-growth bottom-land hardwoods. The Sumter National Forest in the upper Savannah River Basin contains about 1,500 acres of bottom-land hardwood-forest wetlands, and the U.S. Department of Energy's Savannah River Site contains approximately 34,500 acres of bottom-land hardwood-for- est wetlands (Bebber, 1988). Tidal-fresh water marshes (emergent wetlands) occur along South Carolina's coast, where they arc tidally influenced, but fresh- water input from precipitation and rivers prevents significant salt- water intrusion from the ocean. Dominant plants in tidal-freshwater marshes include yellow pond lily, arrowheads, and sedges. There are an estimated 46,300 acres of tidal-freshwater marshes in South Carolina (Field and others, 1991), mostly occurring along the Santee River and the rivers that form Winyah Bay (the Sampit, Black, Pee Dee, and Waccamaw), Charleston Harbor (the Cooper and Ashley), and Saint Helena Sound (the Ashepoo, Edisto, and Combahee). Eacustrine wetlands include the shallows of permanently flooded lakes and reservoirs and intermittent lakes. Common lacus- trine wetland plants include American lotus, pickerelweed, duckweed, arrowheads, and sedges. Lacustrine wetlands occur throughout the State, most notably along major reservoirs and in as- sociation with ephemeral lakes such as Carolina bays. Along the shores of Eake Marion is the Santee National Wildlife Refuge, a 15,000-acre wetland used by migrating waterfowl. The Riverine and Marine Systems contain mostly deepwater habitat. Riverine wetlands are limited to shallow freshwater river and stream channels or, in the case of deep rivers, to shallow areas near the bank. South Carolina riverine wetlands can contain float- ing aquatic plants, such as water lily and nonpersistent emergent plants such as pickerelweed. The Marine System is limited to the JBlueRidge PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS D-Combahee-EdGio Basin NWfi and i\ National Estuarme Research Reserve St Helena Sound r 0 25 50 KILOMETERS WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat Figure 2. Wetland distribution in South Carolina and physiography of the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physiography. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: SOUTH CAROLINA 347 open ocean overlying the continental shelf and its associated coast- line. Estuarine wetlands include intertidal flats and irregularly and regularly tidally flooded salt marshes dominated by emergent veg- etation such as saltmeadow cordgrass, black needlerush, and smooth cordgrass. Intertidal flats are generally devoid of vegetation as a result of unstable sand or mud sediments that are regularly exposed and flooded by tides. There are about 32,000 acres of intertidal flats and 366,000 acres of salt-marsh wetlands in South Carolina (Field and others, 1991). The Cape Romain National Wildlife Refuge, a 64,000-acre salt-marsh wetland, is located near the mouth of the Santee River. At the mouth of the Coosawhatchie River is Pickney Island National Wildlife Refuge, a 4,053-acre expanse of salt-marsh wetlands. Nearby are the Ashepoo-Combahee-Edisto Basin Na- tional Wildlife Refuge (18,000 acres of salt marsh), and the 144,000- acre Ashepoo-Combahee-Edisto National Estuarine Research Re- serve. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands generally develop where the land surface is relatively flat and the water table is shallow. Most of South Carolina's wet- lands occur in the Coastal Plain where alluvial, marginal-marine, and marine sediments have been deposited and sometimes reworked in lowland flats or upland depressions. Coastal Plain deposits con- sist of consolidated and unconsolidated sediments of continental and marine origin that range in thickness from a few feet at the Fall Line to more than 4,000 feet at the southern tip of the State. The gently rolling hills of the Piedmont Province and the mountains of the Blue Ridge Province are underlain by metamorphosed sedimentary, vol- canic, and igneous rocks. Where hydric soils occur in the Blue Ridge and Piedmont Provinces, they are commonly overlain by 2 to 5 feet of loam and clay as a result of erosion from agricultural areas (Larry Robinson, Natural Resources Conservation Service, oral commun., 1993). Thus, identification of wetlands in the Blue Ridge and Pied- mont Provinces based on the presence of hydric soils has been dif- ficult. The State's moist climate produces ample precipitation, which finds its way to the wetlands by way of overland runoff, periodic flooding by rivers, and ground-water discharge. Average annual precipitation is 80 inches in the Blue Ridge Province, decreasing to approximately 48 inches in the Piedmont Province and most of the Coastal Plain, and then increasing to about 50 inches near the coast (Purvis and others, 1990). Rainfall is greatest during spring and summer and least in fall. Average annual runoff ranges from 10 inches in the Coastal Plain Province to about 50 inches in the Blue Ridge Province. Annual potential evapotranspiration ranges from about 30 inches in the Blue Ridge Province to about 47 inches in the Coastal Plain. Most evaporation occurs during summer (about 3 to 5 inches per month) and the least occurs during winter (about 1 inch per month). Pocosins and Carolina bays are examples of isolated wetlands that characteristically have no tributary streams, are not spring fed, and rely on direct precipitation and overland runoff to maintain water volume (Sharitz and Gibbons, 1982). Ground-water recharge has been suggested as an additional source in some situations (Schalles and Shure, 1989). Pocosins are typically characterized by poorly drained mineral soils and peats. Carolina bays, generally found in sandy terrain but typically having a clay layer, are aligned in a north- west-southeast direction. The structure and function of South Carolina's bottom-land hardwood-forest wetlands are determined primarily by the hydro- logic regime of the State's large rivers (Patterson and others, 1985). The principal river basins in South Carolina the Pee Dee, Santee, Edisto, and Savannah contain rivers that flow eastward through the Coastal Plain to the sea. They have broad flood plains that are flooded for several months during the winter and during storms. Near the coast, daily tides back up freshwater onto these flood plains. Bottom-land hardwood forests dominated by trees that are tolerant of a long dormant season and occasional flooding during the growing season are particularly well developed on these wide flood plains. As the rivers flow into the sea, freshwater riverine flow mixes with daily tidal influxes from the ocean. The hydrology of the mix- ing area is poorly understood. However, a combination of factors including freshwater input, tidal influx, and wind direction and velocity create an environment suitable for tidal-freshwater wet- lands. The flood plains near the mouths of these large rivers and the bays behind the barrier island provide protection from destructive waves and storms. These protected areas allow for the accretion of clay and silt sediments and the establishment of vegetation. The extensive estuarine wetlands of South Carolina are formed and maintained by incursions of brackish water over these sediments. TRENDS Wetland losses in South Carolina have occurred as a result of both natural and human influences. Natural factors have included sea-level rise, natural succession, erosion and accretion, animal activity, droughts, and major storms. Human factors have included draining and clearing wetlands for agriculture, pond and reservoir construction, urban development, coastal impoundment construc- tion, and pollution. Wetland loss in South Carolina from the 1780's to 1980's has been estimated to be 27 percent (Dahl, 1990). During the period from 1974 through 1983 alone, South Carolina had an estimated wetland loss of about 1.3 percent, approximately 61,000 acres of wetlands (John Heftier, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, oral commun., 1993). Freshwater-wetland losses in South Carolina are not well docu- mented but appear to be less extensive than in some other South- eastern States. However, studies conducted by the South Carolina Heritage Trust Program indicated that Carolina bay wetlands have been extensively disturbed and altered. Of the 2,651 Carolina bays that are 2 acres or larger identified by the State Heritage Trust Pro- gram in 1983 (Bennett and Nelson, 1991), more than 80 percent have been significantly altered and degraded. Many of South Carolina's tidal-freshwater marshes were diked, impounded, and converted to rice fields during the 18th and 19th centuries. Esti- mates of changes in wetland areas as a result of Hurricane Hugo are difficult to determine, but as much as 90 percent of the wet pine flatwoods of the Francis Marion National Forest may have been damaged by the wind. Loss of freshwater wetlands has also been caused by changes in the hydrologic regime of South Carolina rivers. Alteration of the normal hydrologic regime by construction of dams on the upper Sa- vannah, Santee, and Pee Dee Rivers has changed the natural pat- tern of annual flooding and has directly affected forested-wetland regeneration in South Carolina wetlands. Conversely, beaver-pond wetlands are thought to be increasing in South Carolina, though information on changes in beaver-pond wetland acreage is limited (Arner and Hepp, 1989). CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in South Carolina. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in South Carolina wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohi- bitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some 348 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice provides guidance to States in developing the wetland compo- nent of their plans. Coastal and Great Lakes States that adopt coastal- zone management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Manage- ment Act. State wetland activities. South Carolina regulates coastal wetlands under the South Carolina Coastal Management Act. The act authorizes the South Carolina Coastal Council to regulate any activities that fill, remove, dredge, drain, construct, or in any way alter any critical area within the eight coastal counties that are un- der its jurisdiction. The State Coastal Management Act provides 10 criteria to guide the Coastal Council in determining whether to issue a permit. Two of the key criteria are (1) a comparison of economic benefits to preservation benefits and (2) the extent to which all fea- sible safeguards to avoid adverse economic impact are considered. Under the Coastal Council regulations, dredging and filling wetlands is undertaken only if the activity is water dependent and no feasible alternatives exist. Applications are denied for purposes other than access, navigation, mining, or drainage unless an overriding public interest can be demonstrated. The Coastal Council regulates fresh- water wetlands indirectly through review of other State or Federal permits required in coastal areas. Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in South Carolina, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. », agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization_________________________ FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency........................... ... Natural Resources Conservation Service ................ ... Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration................................................................. .. Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers .............................................. »... Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service.............................................. ... Geological Survey.......................................................... ... National Biological Service ......................................... ... National Park Service ................................................... ... Environmental Protection Agency.................................. ... STATE Belle W.Baruch Institute ................................................. ... Clemson University ............................................................ ... Coastal Council................................................................... Department of Health and Environmental Control .................................................................................. ... Department of Highways and Public Transportation..................................................................... ... ... Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism .......... .. ... Forestry Commission ......................................................... Land Resources Commission........................................... .. ... ... ... Soil and Water Conservation District............................ ... University of Georgia Savannah River Ecology Lab ....................................... .. ... ... ... University of South Carolina............................................ ... ... ... ... Water Resources Commission ........................................ ... ... ... ... Department of Natural Resources ................................. ... ... Heritage Trust Program ................................................. ... ... PRIVATE Ducks Unlimited.................................................................. »...» South Carolina Waterfowl Association ......................... ... The Nature Conservancy.................................................. ... The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control is active in wetland conservation through the section 401 and 402 requirements of the Clean Water Act. Section 401 requires that a permit applicant provide certification from the State that a discharge will comply with water-quality standards. The certifica- tion from the Department is necessary before a permit from the Corps can be obtained. Section 402 of the Clean Water Act requires that permits be obtained for discharges of treated wastewater to wetlands and other water bodies under the National Pollutant Dis- charge Elimination System program. The Department of Health and Environmental Control is the State agency delegated to administer this program. Another State program that has relevance to wetlands is the South Carolina Navigable Waters Permitting Program administered by the South Carolina Water Resources Commission in association with the State Budget and Control Board. Under this program, a permit is required for any kind of construction or alteration activ- ity in what the State considers navigable waters, similar to the re- quirements of Section 10 of the Federal Rivers and Harbors Act Program. However, most wetlands in the State are outside the juris- diction of the Navigable Waters Permitting Program. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: SOUTH CAROLINA 349 The Heritage Trust Program of the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources has been involved in the study and acquisi- tion of Carolina bay wetlands. The Department manages about 42,000 acres of wetlands contained within Wildlife Management Areas. The Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism manages approximately 15,000 acres of wetlands included in the South Caro- lina State Park system. The South Carolina Forestry Commission and South Carolina Land Resources Commission have developed best-management practices for activities in forested wetlands. Un- der the South Carolina Scenic Rivers Act, the South Carolina Water Resources Commission and the Department of Natural Resources share responsibilities for planning, acquisition, regulation, and en- forcement. Private wetland activities. The Nature Conservancy has acquired more than 35,000 acres of wetlands in South Carolina and currently manages about 9,000 acres of wetlands. Ducks Unlimited and the South Carolina Waterfowl Association are actively involved in wetland acquisition and management of waterfowl. One focus of the Association is to work with landowners who wish to flood former rice fields to increase tidal freshwater marsh acreage. The South Carolina Wildlife Federation promotes education concerning the importance of wetlands and also reviews permit applications. References Cited Arner, D.H, and Hepp, G.R., 1989, Beaver pond wetlands A southern perspective, in Smith, L.M., Pederson, R.L., and Kaminski, R.M., Habitat management for migrating and wintering waterfowl in North America: Lubbock, Texas Tech University Press, p. 130-177. Bebber, T.L., 1988, South Carolina wetlands study A component of the State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan: Columbia, South Carolina Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism, 235 p. Bennett, S.H., and Nelson, J.B., 1991, Distribution and status of Carolina bays in South Carolina: Columbia, South Carolina Wildlife and Ma- rine Resources Department, 88 p. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31,131 p. Dahl.T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780'sto 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: Washing- ton, D.C., U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Field, D.W, Reyer, A.J., Genovese, P.V., and Shearer, B.D., 1991, Coastal wetlands of the United States: Washington, D.C., National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service co- operative report, 59 p. Gordon, D.H., Gray, B.T., Perry, R.D., Prevost, M.B., Strange, T.H., and Williams, R.K., 1989, South Atlantic coastal wetlands, in Smith, L.M., Pederson, R.L., and Kaminski, R.M., Habitat management for migrat- ing and wintering waterfowl in North America: Lubbock, Texas Tech University Press, p. 57-92. Patterson, G.G., Speiran, G.K., and Whetstone, B.H., 1985, Hydrology and its effects on distribution of vegetation in Congaree Swamp National Monument, South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 85-4256, 31 p. Purvis, J.C., Tyler, Wes, and Sidlow, Scott, 1990, General characteristics of South Carolina's climate: Columbia, South Carolina Water Resources Commission, 22 p. Schalles, J.F., and Shure, D.J., 1989, Hydrology, community structure, and productivity patterns of a dystrophic Carolina bay wetland: Ecologi- cal Monographs, v. 59, p. 365-385. Sharitz, R.R., and Gibbons, J.W., 1982, The ecology of southeastern shrub bogs (pocosins) and Carolina bays A community profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report, FWS/OBS-82/04, 93 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 720 Gracern Road, Stephenson Center, Suite 129, Columbia, SC 29210; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Building, Suite 200, Atlanta, GA 30345 Prepared by Michael R. Meador, U.S. Geological Survey 350 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 351 South Dakota Wetland Resources /"Vthough wetlands cover only 3.6 percent of South Dakota (Dahl, 1990), they are of substantial ecological and economic importance to the State and Nation. Depressional wetlands in the glaciated east- ern part of South Dakota, commonly referred to as prairie potholes, and wetlands associated with reservoirs provide important breed- ing and resting habitat for migratory and resident waterfowl (fig. 1). South Dakota wetlands also provide important habitat to many other nongame and game wildlife species, including pheasants (Sather-Blair and Linder, 1980; Soil Conservation Service, 1985) and whitetail deer (Kramlich, 1985), which are economically valu- able to the State. Hydrologic functions of wetlands include water retention and flood attenuation (Hubbard and Linder, 1986) and, on a local basis, ground-water recharge (Hubbard, 1988a). Hunting, trapping, fish- ing, bird watching, nature photography, camping, hiking, and boat- ing are some of the recreational opportunities provided by wetlands, and the South Dakota tourist industry relies heavily on the recre- ational and esthetic value of the State's wetlands. Other important benefits of wetlands in South Dakota include livestock forage (Hubbard, 1988b), bait-fish production (Carlson and Berry, 1990), and mineral mining. These benefits are provided by diverse wet- lands distributed across South Dakota's plains and the Black Hills. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deepwater habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and others, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in South Dakota is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in South Dakota are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine.. Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands}; persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. , Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. There is no current (1993) estimate of statewide wetland acre- age in each of the systems. Final mapping and digitizing for the FWS National Wetlands Inventory has been completed for eastern South Dakota, but only preliminary draft mapping has been completed for the remainder of the State (Chuck Elliot, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, oral commun., 1993). Final mapping and digitizing for the entire State may be completed within a few years. An inventory of wetland and open-water areas conducted in 1973 -74 estimated that 71 percent of South Dakota's wetlands were palustrine (Ruwaldt and others, 1979); 19 percent were mixed lacus- trine and palustrine associated with prairie ponds and lakes and manmade stock ponds and dugouts; and 10 percent were riverine. Stock ponds are impoundments constructed by damming deep draws; dugouts are constructed by excavating a depression and do not have dams (Ruwaldt and others, 1979). Palustrine wetlands in South Dakota primarily include emergent wetlands such as marshes and sloughs, in which coarse, herbaceous vegetation like cattails and bulrushes are predominant; wet meadows, in which low, herbaceous vegetation like grasses and sedges are predominant; and vegetated, shallow-water zones of stock ponds and dugouts (Stewart and Kantrud, 1971). Lacustrine wetland areas occur in the numerous glacial lakes in the eastern part of the State and in artificial impound- ments throughout the State. Submersed vegetation like widgeongrass and pondweed are common in lacustrine wetlands. Prairie potholes (a palustrine emergent wetland) that contain erect, rooted, herba- ceous hydrophytes are by far the most common wetland type in South Dakota (Kantrud, Krapu, and Swanson, 1989). Wetlands occupy about 1.8 million acres (3.6 percent) of South Dakota (Dahl, 1990). In the Great Plains (fig. IB ), the natural drain- age system generally is well developed, and there are few natural wetlands. Wetlands in the Great Plains generally are associated with manmade stock ponds. The Central Lowland is entirely within the glaciated part of South Dakota (fig. 2C), and most wetlands are in depressions among ground moraines deposited by the glaciers. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands form where there is a persistent water supply at or near the land surface. The location and persistence of the supply is a function of interdependent climatic, physiographic, geologic, and Figure 1. Palustrine wetland in the Sand Lake National Wildlife Refuge. This refuge encompasses about 22,000 acres (mostly palustrine and lacustrine wetlands) and is an important nesting and staging area for migratory waterfowl. (Photograph by Bill Schultze, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.) 352 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES hydrologic factors such as precipitation and runoff patterns, evapo- ration, topography, and configuration of the water table. In South Dakota, the dominant factors influencing the distribution of wet- lands are moisture deficit, topography, and composition of surficial materials. Precipitation and runoff rates in South Dakota differ annually and with season and location. The normal annual precipitation in South Dakota ranges from about 16 inches in the northwest to about 24 inches in the Black Hills and the southeast (Benson. 1986). About 70 percent of annual precipitation occurs during the growing sea- WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat f^X^ Area typified by a high density of small wetlands 25 50 MILES 25 50 KILOMETERS Hills Great Plains B PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS CLACIATION Glacial extent during most recent glacial maximum Figure 2. Wetland distribution in South Dakota and physical features that control wetland distribution in the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physiography. C, Extent of most recent glaciation. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahi, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landform data from EROS Data Center. C, South Dakota Geological Survey, 1971). National Water Summary Wetland Resources: SOUTH DAKOTA 353 son (May through October). The average annual runoff ranges from about 0.2 inch in the northwest to about 2 inches in the Black Hills. A large percentage of runoff occurs as a result of snowmelt and rainfall in the spring and early summer. Precipitation and snowmelt runoff are the principal water sources for prairie pothole wetlands (Shjeflo, 1968). Annual lake evaporation in South Dakota ranges from about 38 inches in the northeast to about 48 inches in the southwest (Benson, 1986). About 75 percent of the annual evaporation occurs during the growing season. In South Dakota, evaporation exceeds precipitation in most years, and there is a net statewide annual moisture deficit that ranges from about 20 inches along the eastern border of the State to about 32 inches in the southwest. Evapora- tion is the principal source of water loss from prairie pothole wet- lands (Shjeflo, 1968). Climatic, topographic, and hydrologic characteristics differ among and sometimes within physiographic provinces. The two major physiographic provinces in South Dakota (fig. 26), the Great Plains and the Central Lowland, generally have very different hy- drologic settings for wetland formation. The Great Plains physiographic province generally is unglaciated, and the natural drainage system is well developed. Steeper topography, a better developed drainage system, and a gen- erally more arid climate are factors that result in substantially fewer wetlands in the Great Plains than in the Central Lowland in eastern South Dakota. Wetlands in the Great Plains occur primarily in as- sociation with manmade stock ponds and perennial and ephemeral streams (Brewster and others, 1976; Ruwaldt and others, 1979). Most of the wetland areas associated with perennial streams are classified as riverine, whereas those associated with ephemeral streams generally are palustrine because of the presence of emer- gent plants (Hubbard. 1988a). Wetlands associated with stock ponds and dugouts generally are classified as palustrine or lacustrine. About 60 percent of the wetlands in the unglaciated western part of South Dakota occur in association with stock ponds. Although several studies have indicated that stock ponds do not equal natural wetlands in habitat quality, the stock ponds provide valuable habi- tat for plants and animals, especially during drought (Duebbert, 1972; Flake, 1979). A small part of the Great Plains lies east of the Missouri River in a glaciated region known as the Missouri Coteau. Prairie pothole wetlands are common in this region, In the glaciated Central Lowland, several factors result in re- tention of water on the land surface and the occurrence of numer- ous prairie pothole wetlands: (1) the generally flat topography re- sults in a poorly developed drainage system and low runoff veloci- ties, (2) depressions in the glaciated topography result in retention of water on the surface and extensive ponding, (3) low permeabil- ity of the geologic materials (soils and fine-grained glacial till) re- sults in minimal infiltration of water, and (4) in the spring, when most of the annual precipitation and runoff occurs, frozen soils fur- ther restrict infiltration of water and cause the water to pond (Win- ter, 1989). About 90 percent of the wetland area of the glaciated eastern part of South Dakota is associated with prairie ponds and lakes (primarily palustrine emergent wetlands); the remaining 10 percent is divided between riverine wetlands and those associated with stock ponds or dugouts (Ruwaldt and others, 1979). Ground-water interactions with palustrine wetlands in the prai- rie region can be complex (Winter, 1989). The flat topography pro- vides opportunity for infiltration, but the impermeable substrate inhibits infiltration. Because the glacial till in eastern South Da- kota generally is composed of fine-grained materials and has a high smectite-clay content, it expands greatly on wetting and becomes impermeable (Hubbard and others, 1988). Water can flow through fractures in the till; but even where fractures occur, permeability is low (Winter, 1989; Grisak, 1975). Greater interaction between wet- lands and ground water can exist in areas of glacial outwash where lenses of coarser grained, more permeable materials exist (Lewis Howells, U.S. Geological Survey, oral commun,, 1993). However, interaction between wetlands and ground water in eastern South Dakota generally is small and typically accounts for about 5 to 25 percent of water exchange (Winter and Woo, 1990). Hubbard (1988a) and Winter (1989) have discussed a general model of ground-water flow systems underlying prairie wetlands (fig. 3). A local flow system (of which most shallow ground water is a part) occurs where ground water moves from an adjacent up- land into a wetland or between adjacent wetlands. Intermediate flow systems generally underlie local flow systems, and water flowing in intermediate flow systems may pass under some streams and wetlands. Regional flow systems underlie both local and interme- diate systems and discharge at major topographic lows such as large rivers, lakes, and wetlands. Factors that determine which ground- water flow systems a prairie pothole wetland is interacting with include the topographic setting, position of the water table, thick- ness and hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer material, and the configuration of the underlying bedrock (Hubbard and others, 1988). Depending on their location within the local, intermediate, and regional ground-water flow systems, individual wetlands can serve as discharge areas, recharge areas, or both (flow-through wetlands). In the prairie pothole region, wetland water quality is affected by the interaction between wetlands and ground water: recharge wet- lands tend to have low dissolved-solids concentrations, discharge PALUSTRINE WETLANDS PALUSTRINE WETLANDS PALUSTRINE WETLANDS -c -c RIVERINE WETLAND EXPLANATION Direction of ground-water flow Average water table Scrub-shrub vegetation Trees Emergent vegetation Figure 3. Generalized hydrologic setting of South Dakota wetlands. (Source: Hydrologic concepts from Winter, 1989.) 354 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES wetlands tend to have high dissolved-solids concentrations, and flow-through wetlands tend to have intermediate dissolved-solids concentrations (LaBaugh and others, 1987; Hubbard and others, 1988). There can be seasonal reversals in the direction of water exchange between a wetland and the ground water (Winter, 1989). In spring, water can seep from a wetland to the ground water when wetland water levels are high and can then reverse later in summer as evapotranspiration creates a discharge point for ground water. Although recharge of water from individual wetlands to the inter- mediate and regional ground-water flow system generally is small, on a regional basis the total contribution of recharge from prairie pothole wetlands to deep aquifers might be substantial (Winter, 1989). Wetlands also significantly affect the surface-water hydrology of eastern South Dakota. The glacial depressions retain runoff, ef- fectively reduce the contributing drainage area of a drainage basin, and result in attenuation of flood peaks (Hubbard, 1988a; Hubbard and Linder, 1986). Antecedent moisture conditions affect the ca- pacity of prairie pothole wetlands to retain runoff. TRENDS The FWS has estimated that, from the 1780's to the 1980's, wetland area in South Dakota decreased by about 35 percent from about 2.7 million to about 1.8 million acres (Dahl, 1990). Histori- cally, agricultural conversions have accounted for most wetland losses in South Dakota. Kantrud, Millar, and van der Valk (1989) discussed the effects of agricultural disturbances in wetlands in the prairie pothole region. In cropland areas, wetland losses have re- sulted from tilling for crop production and from draining and fill- ing to increase crop-producing land area and to avoid the inconve- nience of maneuvering farm machinery around wet spots. High erosion rates in agricultural areas due to exposed soils in cropland areas and overgrazed parts of range and pastureland areas also have contributed to wetland degradation and loss. Other practices that have had an adverse effect on South Da- kota wetlands include inundation of wetlands during reservoir fill- ing, timber harvesting, dugout construction (for livestock watering) in existing wetlands, and contamination from inadequately treated sewage and industrial waste. In urban areas, wetlands have been drained and filled for residential and commercial expansion. Stream channelization and road construction have adversely affected wet- lands directly by draining wetlands within construction areas and indirectly by providing convenient drainage outlets that encourage unauthorized wetland drainage by adjacent landowners (Erickson and others, 1979; Smith and others, 1989). Some land-use practices have created new wetlands or enlarged existing ones. Seepage associated with distribution and application of irrigation water has increased wetland acreage, especially on the large Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) irrigation projects in western South Dakota (primarily Belle Fourche and Angostura Reservoirs). In many parts of South Dakota, flowing artesian wells constructed for livestock watering or fish production have increased wetland area. Stock ponds and dugouts constructed for livestock watering constitute an important part of South Dakota wetlands, especially in the unglaciated western part of the State. Reservoir construction has undoubtedly increased the acreage of lacustrine wetlands. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in South Dakota. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in South Dakota wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohi- Table 1. Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in South Dakota, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;..., agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization___________ FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency............ Forest Service .................................................. Natural Resources Conservation Service , Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ......................... Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers ............................... Military reservations..................................... Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management...................... Bureau of Reclamation ................................. Fish and Wildlife Service ............................... Geological Survey........................................... National Biological Service......................... National Park Service ................................... Environmental Protection Agency.................. TRIBAL Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe .............................. Crow Creek Sioux Tribe ...................................... Lower Brule Sioux Tribe .................................... Oglala Sioux Tribe............................................... Rosebud Sioux Tribe .......................................... Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Tribe ..................... Standing Rock Sioux Tribe................................. Yankton Sioux Tribe ............................................ STATE Department of Agriculture ............................... Department of Environment and Natural Resources.............................................. Department of Game, Fish and Parks ............. Department of Transportation.......................... State universities ................................................ PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS Ducks Unlimited .................................................. The National Wildlife Federation.................... The Nature Conservancy.................................. bitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the FWS has review and advisory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourages National Water Summary Wetland Resources: SOUTH DAKOTA 355 (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other al- teration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from penalties in some cases, especially if the fanner agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been con- verted to agricultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from land- owners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet-lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act encourages wetland protection through funding incentives. The act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehen- sive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Service (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. Federal agencies are responsible for the proper management of wetlands on public land under their jurisdiction and also are in- volved in other wetland-enhancement and protection activities. With the mission to conserve, protect, and enhance fish and wildlife popu- lations and their habitats, the FWS is perhaps the most active Fed- eral agency in wetlands management and protection in South Da- kota. The FWS manages about 47,000 acres in six National Wildlife Refuges that are predominantly wetlands, and about 146.000 acres in numerous waterfowl-production areas in the eastern part of the State. The FWS protects wetlands on private lands through its Wet- lands Easement Program, in which private landowners agree not to drain, burn, level, or fill specified wetlands in exchange for mon- etary payment. About 500,000 acres of wetlands are protected by this program. The FWS also is involved in a program to construct 3,000 acres of new wetlands on private and Indian-reservation lands in South Dakota (Carl Madsen, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, written commun., 1993). The U.S. Forest Service (FS) manages about 2.1 million acres in three National Forests and three National Grasslands in South Dakota. The FS is in the process of compiling estimates of wetlands and other riparian areas on their jurisdictional lands in South Da- kota. A preliminary estimate is that about 1 percent of FS lands are wetlands or other riparian areas (Barry Parrish, U.S. Forest Service, oral commun., 1993). The FS also is involved in wetland-creation activities on their land. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages about 273,000 acres in South Dakota, of which about 1,560 acres are in riparian areas (Eric Luse, Bureau of Land Management, oral commun., 1993). The FS and the BLM have riparian-area manage- ment plans whose goals include restoring, maintaining, and protect- ing riparian areas; educating the public concerning the importance of healthy riparian areas; and cooperating with private landown- ers, resource users, and other Federal agencies in the protection of riparian areas (Bureau of Land Management, 1991). The NFS man- ages about 274,000 acres in two National Parks, one National Monu- ment, and one National Memorial in South Dakota, but currently there are no estimates of wetland acreage on those lands. The BOR has jurisdiction over about 63,500 acres in South Dakota, including land in existing irrigation projects and land in proposed, but not yet constructed, projects (Loren Hindbjorgen, Bureau of Reclamation, oral commun., 1993). Currently, there are no estimates of wetland acreage on BOR lands in the State. The BOR does not have a specific wetland-management plan, but a wetland and riparian-habitat element is being included in an initiative be- ing developed by the BOR (Rick Nelson, Bureau of Reclamation, oral commun., 1993). The BOR has been involved in wetlands creation on its jurisdictional land, but there are no estimates of total acres involved. Tribal wetland activities. There are eight Indian reservations in South Dakota, and the different tribes have varying levels of in- volvement in wetland management and enhancement on their lands. Most of the tribes are developing wetland-management plans for their reservations, and four tribes are participating financially with the FWS in wetland-creation programs on tribal lands. State wetland activities. Although South Dakota currently (1993) has no comprehensive wetland-protection program, the State is developing a wetland policy. The State, with the assistance of an EPA grant, has created a wetlands-coordinator position whose re- sponsibility it is to develop a wetland-protection program. The po- sition is within the South Dakota Department of Agriculture under the oversight of a committee that has members from four State agen- cies: the Department of Agriculture; the Department of Game, Fish and Parks; the Department of Environment and Natural Resources; and the Department of Transportation. Several State agencies participate in aspects of Federal pro- grams, and wetlands are enhanced or protected under some State programs. The Department of Game, Fish and Parks has diverse wetland responsibilities under the mission statement of the Divi- sion of Wildlife: to manage South Dakota's wildlife and fisheries resources and their associated habitats for their sustained and eq- uitable use and for the benefit, welfare, and enjoyment of the citi- zens of South Dakota and its visitors. Specific activities of the agency include providing technical advice regarding effects on fish, wild- life, and habitat for section 404 permit applications; providing tech- nical expertise to the Department of Transportation to mitigate wetland impacts from road-construction activities; being actively involved in educational programs to teach landowners and school- age children the importance of wetland habitats; managing State- owned recreational and wildlife-production lands to protect and maintain wetland areas; and acquiring new land for wetland pro- tection. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Di- vision of Environmental Regulation reviews section 404 permit applications to ensure compliance with State water-quality laws. A permit is not issued by the Corps without a Clean Water Act sec- tion 401 certification of such compliance. Pursuant to section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act, the Department's Division of Water Re- sources Management submits to the EPA and the U.S. Congress a biennial assessment of the State's surface-water quality, including that of wetlands. The Department's Division of Geological Survey and Division of Water Resources collects wetland hydrologic and water-quality data. The Department of Transportation attempts to mitigate and minimize impacts to wetlands that result from its road-construction activities. The Department is the most frequent applicant for sec- tion 404 permits and avoids wetland alteration unless there is no feasible alternative. When wetland alteration is considerable, new wetland areas equal to or greater than the size of the losses typi- cally are created within the project area. When onsite mitigation is not possible, a Wetlands Bank program is used to create new wet- lands outside the project area that are equal to or greater than the size of the altered wetland. State universities in South Dakota, including South Dakota State University, Northern State University, and the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, are active in wetlands research. South Dakota State University participates in the National Wetlands Inventory program of the FWS and is coordinating an EPA-funded study of the effects of global climate change on wetlands in the United States (Carter Johnson, South Dakota State University, writ- ten commun., 1993). 356 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Private wetland activities. Ducks Unlimited owns about 2,000 acres and manages those lands for wetlands enhancement (Rick Warhurst, Ducks Unlimited, oral commun., 1993). The organ- ization also has participated in cost-shared purchases of about 2,100 wetland acres with the Department of Game, Fish and Parks and has implemented wetland creation, restoration, and enhancement projects on about 9,500 acres of State or federally owned lands. The National Wildlife Federation is active in educating the public con- cerning wetland issues and has shared costs of land purchases with the Department of Game, Fish and Parks and the FWS (Dan Limmer, National Wildlife Federation, oral commun., 1993). The Nature Conservancy owns about 8,000 acres of wetlands in South Dakota and is active in monitoring and protecting endangered species on those lands (Joe Satrom, The Nature Conservancy, oral commun., 1993). Other organizations that participate in wetland-protection activities in the State include the Izaak Walton League, the National Audubon Society, and the Sierra Club. The South Dakota Associa- tion of Conservation Districts (an organization closely associated with the South Dakota Department of Agriculture) also has been involved in wetlands enhancement, with most of the 69 conserva- tion districts in the State participating financially in wetland-cre- ation programs of the FWS. References Cited Benson, R.D., 1986, South Dakota surface-water resources, in National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and surface-water re- sources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 419- 424. Brewster, W.G., Gates, J.M., Flake, L.D., 1976, Breeding waterfowl popu- lations and their distribution in South Dakota: The Journal of Wild- life Management, v. 40, p. 50-59. Bureau of Land Management, 1991, Riparian-wetland initiative for the 1990's: Bureau of Land Management Report BLM/WO/GI-91/ 001+4340, 50 p. Carlson B.N., and Berry, C.R., 1990, Population size and economic value of aquatic bait species inpalustrine wetlands of eastern South Dakota: Prairie Naturalist, v. 22, p. 119-128. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Duebbert, H.F., 1972, Ducks on stock ponds in north central South Dakota, in Miller, H. W., ed., Wildlife on man-made water areas Reports and discussions at the second seminar, April 15-16, 1970, Jamestown, N. Dak.: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northern Prairie Wildlife Re- search Center, p. 33-35. Erickson, R.E., Linder, R.L., and Harmon, K.W., 1979, Stream channelization (PL. 83-566) increased wetland losses in the Dako- tas: The Wildlife Society Bulletin, v. 7, p. 71-78. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: Washing- ton, D.C., U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Flake, L.D., 1979, Wetland diversity and waterfowl, in Greeson, P.E., Clark, J.R., and Clark, J.E., eds., Proceedings of the National Symposium on Wetlands, November 1978: Minneapolis, Minn., American Water Resources Association, p. 312-319. Grisak, G.E., 1975, The fracture porosity of glacial till: Canadian Journal of Earth Science, v. 12. p. 513-515. Hubbard, D.E., 1988a, Glaciated prairie wetlands functions and values A synthesis of the literature: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biologi- cal Report 88(43), 50 p. ____1988b, Using your wetland for forage: South Dakota State Univer- sity, Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, 4 p. Hubbard, D.E., and Linder, R.L., 1986, Spring runoff retention in prairie pothole wetlands: Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, v. 41, p. 122-125. Hubbard, D.E., Richardson, J.L., and Malo, D.D., 1988, Glaciated prairie wetlands Soils, hydrology, and land-use implications in Kusler, J.A., and Brooks, eds., Proceedings of the National Wetland Hydrology Symposium, September, 1987: Chicago, 111., Association of State Wetland Managers Technical Report 6, p. 137-143. Kantrud, H.A., Krapu, G.L., and Swanson, G.A., 1989, Prairie basin wet- lands of the Dakotas A community profile: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.28). Kantrud, H.A., Millar, J.B., and van der Valk, A.G., 1989, Vegetation of wetlands in the prairie pothole region, in van der Valk, A.G., ed., Northern prairie wetlands: Ames, Iowa State University Press, p. 132- 187. Kramlich, T.J., 1985, Evaluation of seasonal habitat use by white-tailed deer in eastern South Dakota: Brookings, South Dakota State University, Masters thesis. 36 p. LaBaugh, J.W., Winter, T.C., Adomaitis, V.A., and Swanson, G.A., 1987, Hydrology and chemistry of selected prairie wetlands in the Cotton- wood Lake area, Stutsman County, North Dakota: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1431, 26 p. Ruwaldt, J.J., Flake, L.D., and Gates, J.M., 1979, Waterfowl pair use of natural and man-made wetlands in South Dakota: Journal of Wildlife Management, v. 43, p. 375-383. Sather-Blair, Signe, and Linder, R.L., 1980, Pheasant use of South Dakota wetlands during the winter: Proceedings of the South Dakota Acad- emy of Sciences, v. 59, p. 147-155. Shjeflo, J.B., 1968, Evapotranspiration and the water budget of prairie pot- holes in North Dakota: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 585-B,49p. Smith, B.J., Browers, H.W., Dahl, T.E., Nomsen, D.E., and Higgins, K.F., 1989, Indirect wetland drainage in association with Federal highway projects in the prairie pothole region: Wetlands, v. 9, p. 27-39. Soil Conservation Service, 1985, Duck and pheasant use of water bank pro- gram agreement areas in east-central South Dakota: Soil Conserva- tion Service, 67 p. South Dakota Geological Survey, 1971, Generalized glacial map of South Dakota: South Dakota Geological Survey Educational Series, Map 2, 1 sheet. Stewart, R.E., and Kantrud, H. A., 1971, Classification of natural ponds and lakes in the glaciated prairie region: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Resource Publication 92, 57 p. Winter, T.C., 1989, Hydrologic studies of wetlands in the Northern Prairie, in van der Valk, A.G.. ed., Northern prairie wetlands: Ames, Iowa State University Press, p. 16-54. Winter, T.C., and Woo, M.K., 1990, Hydrology of lakes and wetlands, in Wolman M.G., and Riggs, H.C., eds., The Geology of North America, Surface water hydrology: Boulder, Colo., Geological Society of America, v.O-1, p. 159-187. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 1608 Mountain View Road, Rapid City, SD 57702; Regional Wet- land Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fish and Wildlife Enhance- ment, P.O. Box 25486, Denver Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225 Prepared by Steven K. Sando, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 357 Tennessee Wetland Resources Kec;cent surveys have indicated that Tennessee has between 640,000 and 787,000 acres of wetlands (Tennessee Department of Conser- vation, 1988; Dahl, 1990). Another recent, unpublished survey de- termined that the State might have as much as 1.4 million acres of wetlands (D.L. Porter, Tennessee Valley Authority, written commun., 1993). Although wetlands constitute a small percentage of Tenn- essee's total area, wetlands, such as the bottom-land hardwood forest shown in figure 1, are ecologically and economically important to the State. The benefits of Tennessee's wetlands include enhanced water quality, fish and wildlife productivity, and socioeconomic values. Wetlands enhance water quality by filtering nutrients, wastes, and sediment from upland runoff. Fish and wildlife benefit from the abundance of habitat and food that wetlands provide. More than 95 plant, 65 mollusk, and 44 vertebrate species listed by the State as rare are found in Tennessee's wetlands (Tennessee Department of Conservation, 1988). Socioeconomic values of wetlands include flood-damage reduction through temporary storage of floodwaters, erosion control, and, in a few areas, ground-water recharge. Ten- nessee wetlands also provide economically important recreational opportunities, such as hunting, fishing, boating, wildlife photogra- phy, hiking, and bird watching for residents and tourists. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Tennessee is shown in figure 2/4; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine, The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Tennes- see are described below. System Palustrine Lacustrine Riverine Wetland description Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs {scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants {aquatic beds}. Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of lessthan 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants {nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Palustrine System. Palustrine wetlands are the predominant wetlands in Tennessee. Most of these wetlands are in the Coastal Plain in the western part of the State along alluvial flood plains of the Mississippi River and its tributaries (fig. 2A and 2B). Tennessee's palustrine wetlands include bottom-land hardwood forests and up- land swamps (forested wetlands), scrub-shrub wetlands, beaver ponds (unconsolidated-bottom, aquatic-bed, or emergent wetlands), wet meadows and marshes (emergent wetlands), and highland bogs (forested, scrub-shrub, or emergent wetlands that have organic soils). Bottom-land hardwood forests are the most common wetlands in Tennessee. These forests have formed primarily in the flat flood plains along streams that drain into the Mississippi and Tennessee Rivers in western Tennessee. Unaltered bottom-land hardwood-for- est wetlands in western Tennessee typically contain bald cypress, water tupelo, oaks, sweet gum, red and silver maple, river birch, box elder, and green ash (Hupp, 1992). Scrub-shrub wetlands are present along downstream reaches of channelized streams in western Ten- nessee. These areas support dense thickets of buttonbush and alder. Figure 1. Forested wetland along the Hatchie River in western Tennessee. (Photograph by Cliff R. Hupp, U.S. Geological Survey.) Isolated forested wetlands known locally as upland swamps are found in the Highland Rim, Central Basin, Cumberland Plateau, Valley and Ridge, and Blue Ridge Provinces. The predominant trees in upland swamps are sweet gum, sycamore, and species of oak, willow, and maple. Anderson Pond (72 acres), Cedar Hill Swamp (207 acres), and Mingo Swamp (563 acres), located in the High- 358 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES land Rim, are examples of upland swamps. Each represents land- forms that were once commonplace and have been recommended for consideration as National Natural Landmarks (Ellis and Chester, 1989). Beaver ponds, typically associated with flood plains, are present throughout the State. As beavers impound water in a bot- tom-land area, many of the less flood-tolerant trees are killed, thus opening the canopy and allowing for growth of herbaceous vegeta- tion. The vegetation, which is determined by factors such as the age of the pond, topography, and soil characteristics, commonly includes cattails and sedges. The acreage of Tennessee wetlands attributable to beaver activity is unknown (Arner and Hepp, 1989). Wet meadows are most common in the western and central parts of Tennessee. Grasses, sedges, and rushes are the predomi- nant plants. These wetlands typically are covered by shallow water for only short periods during the growing season, typically after heavy rains. In dry years, wet meadows may be grazed by cattle. Such grazing generally alters the vegetation community. Freshwater marshes exist throughout Tennessee. Freshwater marshes, vegetated primarily by smartweed and southern wild rice, can be found along the shores of 15,500-acre Reelfool Lake, a res- ervoir in northwestern Tennessee. Extensive freshwater marshes also are present along the shores of the Tennessee River. Highland bogs have formed in the Valley and Ridge Province of eastern Tennessee. Sedges, ferns, and manna grass are typical examples of emergent vegetation in these bogs. Buttonbush and tag alder (scrub-shrub vegetation) commonly are prevalent, and under some conditions, red maple and river birch also are present. Lacustrine and Riverine Systems. In Tennessee, lakes (mainly reservoirs) and rivers contain mostly deepwater habitat. However, aquatic beds consisting of floating and submersed aquatic plants, such as water lily and coontail, and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands consisting of plants such as pickerelweed and American lotus are associated with Tennessee's rivers, lakes, and reservoirs. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetland hydrology is a complex interaction of local and re- gional factors, including topography, climate, soil characteristics, and geology. Wetlands typically form along the margins of rivers and lakes that are subject to flooding and in depressions where the water table is at or near the land surface. Some wetlands form on highland slopes and are associated with ground-water-discharge points such as springs or seeps. Tennessee has a diverse topography, ranging from rolling hills and broad flood plains in the Coastal Plain in western Tennessee to the mountains and valleys in the east. Annual precipitation averages about 50 inches statewide and ranges from approximately 47 inches in the west to 80 inches in the mountains in the east. About 20 per- cent of the precipitation infiltrates into the ground to recharge the State's aquifers. Average annual runoff ranges from approximately 18 to 40 inches. During winter and spring, when evapotranspira- tion is low, flooding is common. The abundance of water in the State enhances the potential for wetland development and persistence. The structure and function of Tennessee's bottom-land hard- wood-forest wetlands are determined primarily by the hydrologic regime of the State's rivers. Annual flooding for as long as 60 days in winter and early spring is typical of Tennessee's larger river sys- tems such as the Tennessee, Hatchie, and Mississippi (Carter and Burbank, 1978). Rivers of western Tennessee lie almost entirely within the nearly flat Coastal Plain and include the Obion, Forked Deer, Hatchie, Loosahatchie, and Wolf. Low stream gradients, which contribute to the frequency and severity of flooding, and broad flood plains provide a suitable environment for bottom-land hardwood forests dominated by trees tolerant of a long dormant season and occasional growing-season flooding. Many streams in western Tennessee have been channelized to enhance drainage of adjacent wetlands (fig. 3). making cultivation possible. However, these streams flow through unconsolidated and 89" ' ffffl}iid^^^^^'--\ 2*^% "A-J^ & \ \»k ^-^ AC -J^/c-* .in WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland 1 j Predominantly deepwater habitat 50 MILES 25 50 KILOMETERS B PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS A. Coastal Plain Province B. Western Valley C. Highland Rim Section D. Central Basin E. Cumberland Plateau Section F. Sequatchie Valley G. Valley and Ridge Province H. Blue Ridge Province Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Tennessee and physiography of the State. A, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B. Physio- graphy. (Sources: A, T.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991 . B, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946, and Miller, 1974; landforms data from EROS Data Center.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TENNESSEE 359 Figure 3. Channelized creek in western Tennessee. (Photograph by Cliff R. Hupp, U.S. Geological Survey.) erodible alluvial deposits, and channelization causes the streams to erode their channel beds and banks in some reaches, whereas other reaches fill with the material eroded from upstream (Robbins and Simon, 1983; Simon and Hupp, 1992). Thus, channelization has had a direct influence on wetland hydrologic processes in Tennessee by reducing flooding and lowering the water table in upper reaches of streams but increasing downstream deposition of sediment and contributing to downstream flooding (Shankman and Samson, 1991; Hupp, 1992). Isolated wetlands, such as highland bogs and upland swamps, are not associated with streams and typically are formed in lime- stone sinkholes or depressions on stream terraces. These wetlands rely on direct precipitation and runoff, ground-water discharge, or both, to maintain water volume. Whereas water levels associated with these wetlands fluctuate and can be no more than a few inches deep during dry seasons, complete drying rarely occurs. Soils of these wetlands typically are poorly drained, organic, and acidic. TRENDS The FWS National Wetland Inventory has estimated that Ten- nessee lost as much as 59 percent of its wetland area in the 200 years before the 1980's (Dahl, 1990). Although wetland loss can occur as a result of natural ecological succession, human activities such as livestock grazing, draining, and clearing for agriculture, logging, pond and lake construction, and urban development are most often the cause. Losses have been particularly extensive in western Ten- nessee. Logging of western Tennessee bottom lands proceeded rapidly after about 1880, and favorable agricultural prices provided an eco- nomic incentive to cultivate marginal lands in the area. Drainage districts were formed to establish dredging and channelization projects to drain the bottom lands to exploit their agricultural po- tential. By the 1930's, many dredged channels in western Tennes- see were partially or completely filled by sediment from agricul- tural operations. This sedimentation has altered the hydrology of the bottom lands and caused changes in vegetation patterns and wetland types (Wolfe and Diehl, 1993). As much as 83 percent of the original bottom-land hard wood-forest wetlands in the Obion and Forked Deer River Basins alone have been lost (Tennessee Depart- ment of Conservation, 1988). The Hatchie and Wolf Rivers are the remaining major rivers in western Tennessee that have not been channelized along substan- tial parts of their courses. Most other streams, including tributaries to the Hatchie River, have been repeatedly channelized from their mouths nearly to the drainage divides. Following channelization, reestablishment of bottom-land hardwood forests takes at least 65 years (Hupp, 1992). Although agricultural conversions could be decreasing, future losses of wetlands might occur as a result of ur- ban conversion, transportation construction, and channelization. Also, though wetland losses are most notable in the western part of the State, significant losses of upland swamps, freshwater marshes, and bottom-land hardwood forests have occurred and could con- tinue to occur in middle and eastern Tennessee (Tennessee Depart- ment of Conservation, 1988). In 1988, the Governor of Tennessee established the Interagency Wetlands Committee in response to concerns over the significant losses of wetlands. The purpose of this committee is to exchange information and coordinate programs of Federal, State, and local agencies, conservation organizations, and private landowners to manage, conserve, or restore wetlands for beneficial uses. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Tennessee. The most active agen- cies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Tennes- see wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Har- bors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; and the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation Table 1. Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Tennessee, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;.... agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory! Agency or organization____________ FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency ................ Natural Resources Conservation Service ..... Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers ................................... Military reservations.......................................... Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service ................................... Geological Survey............................................... National Biological Service .............................. National Park Service ........................................ Environmental Protection Agency ....................... Tennessee Valley Authority ................................... STATE Department of Environment and Conservation Department of Transportation.............................. Tennessee Technological University ................... University of Tennessee ......................................... Wildlife Resources Agency ................................... PRIVATE The Nature Conservancy ....................................... Ducks Unlimited ....................................................... Farm Bureau Federation........................................ 360 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act encourages wetland protection through funding incentives. The act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehen- sive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Service provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) does not directly regu- late wetland activities but conducts a wetlands review for any action affecting TVA-controlled properties. Through the review process, the TVA attempts to minimize the destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands. In cooperation with the FWS, the TVA operates projects in western Tennessee that provide wetland habitat for migratory waterfowl. In addition, the TVA promotes the use of constructed wet- lands as a means of wastewater treatment. State wetland activities. The Tennessee Department of En- vironment and Conservation was created in 1990 by combining the Department of Conservation and the Department of Health and Environment. The Department of Environment and Conservation regulates development activities in wetlands through sections 401 and 402 of the Clean Water Act. The section 401 program requires that a section 404 permit applicant provide certification from the State that a discharge will comply with State water-quality standards. The section 401 certification from the Department is necessary before a section 404 permit can be obtained from the Corps. Sec- tion 402 of the Clean Water Act requires that permits be obtained for discharges of treated wastewater to wetlands under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program. The Department of Environment and Conservation is the State agency delegated to administer this program. The Tennessee Water Quality Control Act of 1977 requires that a State permit be obtained if changes are pro- posed to an existing aquatic environment; agricultural and forestry activities are exempted. Through the Tennessee Natural Areas Preservation Act of 1971. the Department of Environment and Conservation has assumed the former Department of Conservation's responsibility for acquiring wetlands that represent outstanding examples of the State's natural landscape. The Tennessee Oil and Gas Law enables the Department to regulate oil and gas drilling by placing special conditions on drilling activities near wetlands. As a result of the U.S. Land and Water Conservation Act of 1965, the Department is active in wet- land-program planning by amending and updating the Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to identify wetlands that have high recreation potential. The Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency administers the Wetlands Acquisition Fund. The Tennessee Wetlands Acquisition Act of 1986 sets aside a part of the State real estate transfer tax for ac- quisition of wetlands. The acquisition of wetlands through the Wet- lands Acquisition Fund must be approved by the Director of the Wildlife Resources Agency and the Commissioner of Agriculture. The Tennessee Department of Transportation conducts wetland restorations along its construction projects to mitigate unavoidable wetland destruction. The Department of Transportation also con- structs wetlands as large as 450 acres to compensate for unavoid- able losses. County and local wetland activities. There has been little involvement by county and local governments in wetlands issues in Tennessee. Notable exceptions include Knoxville, Nashville, Chattanooga, and Memphis. These metropolitan areas have devel- oped plans for the construction of green way recreational areas, some of which will contain wetlands. However, as of 1993, the only city that had begun implementing its plan was Chattanooga. Private wetland activities. Several private groups are actively involved in wetlands issues in Tennessee. The Farm Bureau Fed- eration promotes funding and research concerning the use of con- structed wetlands for water-quality improvement. The Nature Con- servancy cooperates with the State in acquiring areas for preserva- tion. The Tennessee Conservation League and the Sierra Club pro- mote public use and conservation of wetlands. Through its national headquarters in Memphis, Ducks Unlimited cooperates with the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency in acquiring and managing wetlands and assists private landowners in constructing wetlands. References Cited Arner, D.H., and Hepp, G.R., 1989, Beaver pond wetlands A southern perspective, in Smith, L.M., Pederson, R.L., and Kaminski, R.M., eds., Habitat management for migrating and wintering waterfowl in North America: Lubbock, Texas Tech University Press, p. 130-177. Carter, Virginia, and Burbank, J.H., 1978, Wetland classification system for the Tennessee Valley Region: Tennessee Valley Authority Technical Note B24, 36 p. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, EC., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl.T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780'sto 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Ellis, W.H., and Chester, E.W., 1989, Upland swamps of the Highland Rim of Tennessee: Journal of the Tennessee Academy of Science, v. 64, no. 3, p. 97-101. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: Washing- ton, D.C., U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 1:700,000. Hupp, C.R., 1992, Riparian vegetation recovery patterns following stream channelization: A geomorphic perspective: Ecology, v. 73, no. 4, p. 1,209-1,226. Miller, R.A., 1974, The geologic history of Tennessee: Tennessee Division of Geology Bulletin 74, 63 p. Robbins, C.H., and Simon, Andrew, 1983, Man-induced channel adjustment in Tennessee streams: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Inves- tigations Report 82-4098, 129 p. Shankman, David, and Samson, S.A., 1991, Channelization effects on Obion River flooding, western Tennessee: Water Resources Bulletin, v. 27, no. 2, p. 247-254. Simon, Andrew, and Hupp, C.R., 1992, Geomorphic and vegetative recov- ery processes along modified stream channels of western Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 91-502, 142 p. Tennessee Department of Conservation, 1988, Tennessee wetlands plan: Nashville, Tennessee Department of Conservation, 118 p. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TENNESSEE 361 Wolfe, W.J., and Diehl, T.H., 1993, Recent sedimentation and surface-wa- ter flow patterns on the flood plain of the North Fork Forked Deer River, Dyer County, Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Re- sources Investigations Report 92-4082, 22 p. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 810 Broadway, Suite 500, Nashville, TN 37203; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Building, Suite 200, Atlanta, GA 30345 Prepared by Michael R. Meador, U.S. Geological Survey 362 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 363 Texas Wetland Resources We'etlands cover about 7.6 million acres of Texas a decrease of about 52 percent from the State's original wetland acreage (Dahl, 1990). Wetlands have considerable environmental and economic value. In river basins, wetlands provide flood attenuation, bank sta- bilization, and water-quality maintenance. The tourist industry ben- efits from the scenic beauty of the State's many and diverse wetlands, which afford opportunities for recreational activities that include hunting, fishing, bird watching, nature photography, camping, and hiking. Coastal wetlands (fig. 1) are essential to maintaining im- portant fish and shellfish population and habitat, which in turn pro- vide an economic benefit from the recreational and commercial harvesting of these resources (Tiner, 1984). Wetlands provide important wildlife habitat. For example, about 90 percent of overwintering waterfowl in the High Plains inhabit playa lake wetlands (Nelson and others, 1983). Statewide riparian and coastal wetlands provide stopover, feeding, and breed- ing grounds to migratory waterfowl and habitat to nonmigrating wildlife. Among me migrants from Canada that stop at riparian wetlands and overwinter in wetlands along the Texas coast are snow geese, Canada geese, and whooping cranes (an endangered species). Some of the migratory ducks that reside on coastal marshes are American widgeon, mallard, green-winged teal, and blue-winged teal. The mottled duck is a common year-round resident on coastal marshes (Britton and Morton, 1989). TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Texas is shown in figure 2A; only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and Figure 1. Wetlands in Welder Flats Coastal Preserve. The preserve was established to manage sensitive and productive estuarine wetlands and protect the endangered whooping cranes that overwinter there. (Photograph by B.D. Jones, U.S. Geological Survey.) deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Texas are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine. Estuarine. Marine. Wetland description , Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir larger than 20 acres and (or) deeper than 6.6 feet. Vegetation, when present, is pre- dominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (non- persistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. .Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. . Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. Most Texas wetlands are palustrine; estuarine wetlands are next in area. Lacustrine, riverine, and marine wetlands are ecologically significant but cover a smaller area. The most extensive wetlands are the bottom-land hardwood forests and swamps (forested and scrub-shrub wetlands) of East Texas (the part of the State east of about 96 degrees longitude); the marshes (emergent wetlands), swamps, and tidal flats (unconsolidated-shore wetlands) of the Gulf of Mexico coast; the playa lakes of the High Plains; and the small, shallow, inland depressional basins called potholes found in coastal areas from Brownsville to Port O'Connor. Most of the State's wetlands are palustrine bottom-land hard- wood forests and swamps, and most of these are in the flood plains of East Texas rivers, A recent inventory estimated that, as of the early 1980's, forested wetlands in the State consisted of about 6,068,000 acres, including 5,973,000 acres of bottom-land hardwood forest and other riparian vegetation and 95,000 acres of swamp (Frye, 1987). East Texas contains about 71 percent of the forested wetlands, and the remaining 29 percent is located along rivers and streams throughout the rest of the State. Data from LANDSAT images taken from 1972 through 1980 provided the basis for the preceding acreage estimates. The use of the LANDSAT images enabled the Texas Parks and Wildlife Depart- ment to determine the distribution and types of forested wetlands. Five principal vegetative groups were determined. They include (1) cot ton wood-hackberry-salt cedar brush/woods, (2) pecan-elm for- est, (3) water oak-elm-hackberry forest, (4) willow oak-water oak- blackgum forest, and (5) bald cypress-water tupelo swamp (McMahan and others, 1984). Texas coastal wetlands wetlands that are either on the coast, in or adjacent to estuaries, or in or near the tidal reaches of the rivers extend the entire length of the coast. Palustrine wetlands, 364 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES such as swamps and fresh marshes, occupy the flood plains and line the shores of tidal freshwater reaches of sluggish coastal rivers. Pot- hole wetlands are small, circular bodies of water fringed by emer- gent vegetation. The pothole wetlands are found inland from the coast and generally contain freshwater. Estuarine wetlands such as salt marshes (emergent wetlands) and tidal flats (mostly unconsoli- dated-shore, uncon soli dated- bottom, and aquatic-bed wetlands) form in tidal reaches of rivers and in sounds and bays, where the salinity of the water can range from slightly more salty than fresh- water to nearly as salty as seawater. A recent inventory of coastal wetlands performed by the Na- tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (Field and others, 1991) estimated the area covered by fresh marsh to be 530,300 acres. Estuarine wetlands comprised most of the coastal acreage 710,300 acres. Of the estuarine wetlands, 432,100 acres B PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat \%/ff\ Area typified by a high density of small wetlands Dams (storage capacity at least 5,000 acre/feet) 50 100 MILES 0 50 100 KILOMETERS Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Texas and physical and climatological features that control wetland distribution in the State. A, Dis- tribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physiography. (Sources: A, T.E. Da/7/, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TEXAS 365 were salt marsh, 275,300 acres were tidal flats, and 2,900 acres were forested or scrub-shrub wetlands. The acreage summaries were produced using a grid-sampling procedure and wetland maps from the National Wetland Inventory project of the FWS (Tiner, 1984). The Welder Flats Coastal Preserve (fig. 1) consists of approxi- mately 1,400 acres of wetlands adjacent to San Antonio Bay (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 1990). These wetlands are a part of a dynamic estuarine system that has developed in response to the physical, chemical, and biological processes of the Guadalupe River San Antonio Bay estuary. The wetlands consist of salt marshes, submersed vegetation known as seagrass beds (aquatic beds), nonvegetated mud and sand flats, and shallow saltwater ponds and lagoons. Welder Flats is near the Aransas National Wildlife Ref- uge, which provides critical shelter and plant food for a large vari- ety of bay waterfowl, estuarine fishes, and bottom-dwelling organ- isms. It is also an overwintering area for endangered whooping cranes, a migration stopover for shorebirds, and a roosting and for- aging area fornonmigrating wildlife. The State's playa lakes are predominantly within the High Plains. The natural landscape is grassland except along the south- eastern border of the area of playa lakes, where it becomes grass- land and forest. The playa lakes, which range from dry lakebeds to shallow lakes, have been estimated to total 296,000 acres, or about 4 percent of Texas' wetland area (Guthery and Bryant, 1982). The estimated 20,000 or more playa lakes range in size from about 1 acre to more than 100 acres and in salinity from freshwater to sa- line. The freshwater playas are numerous, small to medium in size, and serve as zones of recharge to the underlying aquifer (Osterkamp and Wood, 1987). The saline playas are fewer, larger, and are areas of discharge from the underlying aquifer. The density of playa lakes is generally highest in the central part of the High Plains (Nelson and others, 1983). The playas can be dry for extended periods. In wet conditions, the playa wetlands are either shallow lakes having little or no veg- etation or lakes having aquatic vegetation (Nelson and others, 1983). Most of the playas are palustrine wetlands. However, playa lakes that exceed 20 acres are classified as lacustrine wetlands. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands form where there is a persistent water supply at or near the land surface. The location and persistence of the water supply is affected by many factors, such as climate, physiography, and hydrology. Precipitation and runoff rates in Texas vary annually and with location and season. The average annual precipitation in the State ranges from about 8 inches at El Paso in the Basin and Range Prov- ince to about 56 inches in the lower Sabine River valley in the Coastal Plain of extreme eastern Texas (fig. 2B and 2C). The wet- test seasons are spring and late summer (Jones, 1991). Evaporation is highest in West Texas and is lowest in East Texas (fig. 2D ). In West Texas, annual lake evaporation is 4 to 5 times annual precipitation, whereas in East Texas, annual precipitation approaches annual evaporation. The areas with the highest annual precipitation and lowest evaporation are also the areas that have the most wetlands. East Texas contains more than one-half of the wetland acres in the State. Bottom-land hardwood or flood-plain forests in East Texas are diverse wetland ecosystems dominated by woody vegetation (Wilkinson and others, 1987). These wetlands form in alluvial sedi- ments deposited in flood plains when streams overflow their banks. The wetlands are maintained by fluctuating water levels resulting from flooding, by stream meanders that retard flow, and by the ad- aptation of woody vegetation to an environment in which the roots are in organic soils that are inundated or saturated during the grow- ing season. In East Texas, abundant precipitation and annual flooding in the seven major river basins cause fluctuation of water levels in stream channels, bottom lands, flood plains, and backwater areas, which promotes the development and maintenance of forested wet- lands. Other conditions conducive to wetland development and maintenance in East Texas are low evaporation rates, shallow ground water, many springs, and nutrient-rich, clayey bottom-land soils. The estuaries of the Gulf of Mexico coast were formed when water from melting glaciers caused sea level to rise and inundate D PRECIPITATION Line of equal annual precipitation Interval 4 inches LAKE-SURFACE EVAPORATION 80 Line of equal annual evaporation- Interval 10 inches Figure 2. Continued. Wetland distribution in Texas and physical and climatological features that control wetland distribution in the State. C, Average annual precipitation. D, Average annual gross lake-surface evaporation. (Sources: C, Woodward, 1986. D, /Cane, 1967.) 366 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES coastal river valleys. These drowned valleys were separated from the open sea by barrier islands, forming the bays and lagoons of the present shoreline. The bays and lagoons became shallow as they received sediment from rivers and wind to form estuaries. A vari- ety of habitats develop in an estuary. Each habitat's ecological char- acteristics are the result of the stability of the substrate, rates of sedi- ment accumulation or erosion, water depth, current flow, and other variables (Britton and Morion, 1989). The salinity of coastal wet- lands depends upon whether the source of most of the water enter- ing the estuary is from ocean tides or inland streams. The soils that support wetlands on the coast have level to de- pressed relief and low permeability. These soils typically are poorly drained and have a high clay content and a moderate to high water- holding capacity (Barrera and Kelly, 1990). Rainfall along the coast ranges from 56 inches per year in the subhumid east to 26 inches per year in the semiarid south at the Mexico border. Other principal factors in the climate of the coast are windspeed and direction. Wind, in combination with rainfall, evaporation, humidity, and temperature, affects most of the natural coastal processes. Evaporation generally exceeds precipitation in summer owing to high winds and temperatures. During fall and winter, there is generally a water surplus because of lower tempera- tures and increased rainfall from tropical storms. Severe tropical storms cause flooding of tidal flats, streams, and hummocky, wind- blown depressions that have poor drainage. Flooding from these tropical storms also results in widespread ponding and development of a shallow water table in the wind-deposited sand overlying older deposits that have very low permeability. The playa lakes of the High Plains typically are shallow de- pressions that have a large surface area relative to the volume of water contained in them. Consequently, most playa lakes have a small storage capacity. Osterkamp and Wood (1987) stated that playa lakes form in the Great Plains wherever surface depressions col- lect water. The lakes enlarge as a result of dissolution of carbon- ates by water infiltrating the unsaturated zone above the underly- ing aquifer and subsequent subsidence of the lakebed. There is no general agreement on the origin of saline lakes; however, the source of the salinity might be the concentration by evaporation of shal- low ground water that discharges from the underlying aquifer (Wood and Jones, 1990). The playa-lake area has topography classified as either smooth plains, irregular plains, or tablelands (Nelson and others, 1983). Smooth plains are largely on upland terrain, and irregular plains and tablelands are mostly on lowland terrain. Because of the flatness of the terrain, there is generally little stream drainage; consequently, playa lakes collect most of the surface runoff. Water probably is removed from playa lakes by evaporation that can range as high as 96 to 112 inches per year (Nelson and others, 1983) and by slow leakage to the ground-water system (Osterkamp and Wood, 1987). The playa-lake beds generally have a layer of clay that retards move- ment of water from the playa lakes to the underlying aquifer. Annual precipitation in the playa-lake area ranges from 15 inches along the western edge of the High Plains to 21 inches along the eastern edge. On average, more than an inch of rain falls each month between April and October. Windspeeds can range between 40 and 60 miles per hour for as long as a day in March, April, and May. Extreme winter temperatures range from -8°F in the south to -18°F in the north. Extreme summer temperatures range from 109°F to 112°F (Nelson and others, 1983). TRENDS The FWS has estimated that from the 1780's to the 1980's, wet- land acreage in Texas decreased by 52 percent from about 16 million to about 7.6 million acres (Dahl, 1990). Wetlands of every type have been affected. Some of these losses can be attributed to natural causes, but a large percentage were caused by human ac- tivities. In rural agricultural areas, losses can be attributed to con- version to cropland, declining water levels due to pumpage for irri- gation, and overgrazing of wetland vegetation by livestock, which can increase erosion and evaporation. In urban areas, wetland losses occur because of encroachment by residential and commercial con- struction and industrial development. Wetland degradation has re- sulted from the discharge of inadequately treated sewage and indus- trial waste into wetlands. Other activities that can cause wetland losses are filling, water diversion, drainage and river channelization, clearcutting, burning, lowering or disturbing the shallow water table, and the construction of dams, reservoirs, flood-control ditches, levees, irrigation canals, and barge and ship canals. In recent years, several State agencies have begun to develop wetland plans and strat- egies to reduce wetland losses (Texas Parks and Wildlife Depart- ment, 1988). Bottom-land-hardwood-forest acreage has declined from about 16 million acres in early Texas history (Kier and others, 1977) to about 5.9 million acres (Frye, 1987), a 63 percent loss. A study by the Texas A&M University Remote Sensing Center conducted in the early 1980's indicated that some areas of eastern and southeastern Texas had wetland increases, and some areas had decreases (R.G. Frye, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, written commun., 1985). The FWS has reported, on the basis of U.S. Forest Service (FS) statistics, that commercial bottom-land forests decreased by 18 percent between 1935 and 1975 and by 10 percent between 1975 and 1985 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1984). Lake and reser- voir construction, based on the Texas Water Plan to meet projected water needs, would further reduce these wetlands by about 262,000 acres if the 44 reservoirs proposed by the plan were constructed (Texas Department of Water Resources, 1984). Some of the fresh and salt marshes along the Gulf of Mexico coast have been lost because of dredging, agricultural drainage, and industrialization and urbanization. On the basis of estimates of coastal-wetland area (fresh and salt marshes) made in 1956 and 1980 (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 1988), the estimated loss in wetland acreage was about 35 percent during that period. Seagrass beds in the Galveston Bay estuarine system decreased from about 2,500 acres in the 1950's to about 700 acres in 1989 (White and others, 1993). The decrease was attributed to Hurricane Carla, land- surface subsidence, and human activity. A study of six coastal coun- ties found a 41 percent loss in pothole wetlands from 1955 to 1979 (Spiller and French, 1986). Most of the loss was attributed to con- version to agriculture. It also is probable that many of the remain- ing coastal wetlands have been degraded by land subsidence, salt- water intrusion, and pollution from industry, shipping, and urban- ization (D.W. Moulton, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, writ- ten commun., 1990). The playa lakes of the High Plains have been affected by in- tense cultivation and irrigation for the last 50 years. It has been estimated that about 90 percent of the playas have been modified (WW. Wood, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1994), and that more than two-thirds of the larger playas (10 acres or more) have been modified drastically (Guthery and Bryant, 1982). However, no comprehensive estimates of acreage losses exist for the playa-lakes area. Losses of other types of wetlands, such as freshwater springs and riparian wetlands, have occurred throughout the State. Some land-use practices have led to the creation of new wet- lands or the enlargment of existing wetlands. Rice farming near the gulf coast might have contributed to increases in wetland acreage, and construction of lakes and reservoirs undoubtedly has increased the acreage of lacustrine wetlands. However, those gains cannot offset the losses of wetland acreage, function, and value that have occurred in the State. National Water Summary Wetland Resources: TEXAS 367 Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in Texas, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity;.... agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization____________ FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency................... Forest Service......................................................... Natural Resources Conservation Service ........ Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration......................................................... Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers...................................... Military reservations............................................. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service..................................... Geological Survey................................................. National Biological Service................................ National Park Service.......................................... Environmental Protection Agency ......................... STATE Department of Agriculture ...................................... Department of Transportation................................ Forest Service............................................................ General Land Office.................................................. Parks and Wildlife Department.............................. Railroad Commission................................................ Water Development Board...................................... SOME COUNTIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS Ducks Unlimited .......................................................... National Audubon Society...................................... The Conservation Fund............................................ The Nature Conservancy......................................... Trust for Public Land ................................................. CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in Texas. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Federal wetland activities. Development activities in Texas wetlands are regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and incentives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking, deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications on the basis of a pro- posed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation. However, the "Swampbuster" provi- sion of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through financial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorizes the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wet- lands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Ser- vice (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines compli- ance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetland Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to qualify for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice (NFS) provides guidance to States in developing the wetland component of their plans. Coastal and Great Lakes States that adopt coastal-zone management programs and plans approved by NOAA are eligible for Federal funding and technical assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. Federal agencies that have public land under their jurisdiction are responsible for the proper management of any wetlands that exist on these lands. In Texas, the FS manages about 636,000 acres of forested land and riparian habitat and about 148,600 acres of grass- land (Dallas Morning News, 1992). About 8,500 acres of this land is estimated to be wetlands. The FS goal is to provide for healthy, diverse, and productive ecosystems that will sustain a variety of public benefits now and in the future. The FWS manages about 396,000 acres in 14 National Wildlife Refuges in Texas. About 228,000 acres of this land is estimated to be wetlands (D.W. Moulton, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, written commun., 1990). The FWS mission is to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, and their habitats. The NFS manages about 260,000 acres of land in Texas, and more than 99,000 acres of this land is protected waterfowl habitat (D.W. Moulton, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, written commun., 1990). Regional water-resource coordinators are respon- sible for wetlands programs within their respective regions. The mission of the NFS is to conserve, preserve, and manage resources of the lands in the National Park system. State wetland activities. Several State agencies participate in managing natural resources. Agencies whose responsibilities in- clude some aspect of wetland conservation and a brief description of their activities follow: The Texas Railroad Commission is responsible for the regula- tion of surface coal mining and oil and gas production and trans- port. The regulations are oriented toward production stabilization and include prevention of pollution of wetlands. The Texas Department of Transportation is responsible for avoiding damage to wetlands while constructing roads and bridges. They also are responsible for acquiring upland disposal areas for maintenance material from the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. The Texas Forest Service and Texas Department of Agriculture are involved in wetlands primarily in an advisory capacity to land- owners. The agencies assist private owners in the management of 368 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES forested land and use of land in crop production, including land containing wetlands. The Texas Water Development Board prepares the State Water Plan and administers funds for reservoir construction and flood control. The State Water Plan must consider the effect of upstream development on bays and estuaries. The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission regu- lates the allocation of State waters. The effects on fish and wildlife must be considered in permit application for allocations of 5,000 acre-feet or more. The Commission is involved in the process for granting permits for draining, channelizing, levee improvement, construction of wastewater-treatment facilities, and wastewater dis- charge. The degradation of waters and wetlands in the State is con- sidered in all permit applications. The Texas General Land Office has management responsibil- ity for 15 large bays totaling over 1.5 million acres. The Land Of- fice manages State lands and leases and grants easements to these lands under rules and regulations that require protection of natural resources, including fish and wildlife habitats. The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department manages the State Park system, which features many wetland habitats. The Department acquires lands for the preservation, management, and study of wild- life. It also conducts research on management practices for waters and wetlands necessary to promote and sustain fisheries. As the State agency responsible for fish and wildlife, it reviews permit applica- tions submitted to Federal and other State permitting agencies and evaluates their impact on wildlife habitat. Counties and local wetland activities. Counties and cities in Texas differ greatly in their commitment to the protection of wet- land resources. A few municipalities, such as Austin and San Marcos, have implemented watershed-development controls to protect wa- ter quality and riparian wetlands. Some counties and cities have acquired wetlands in order to protect them. Private wetland activities. Private organizations have an important function as advocates of wetland conservation and pro- tection. Texas has many private groups that inform the public, or- ganize citizen groups, and lobby governments for the protection of wetlands. The Conservation Fund, National Audubon Society, The Nature Conservancy, and Trust for Public Land have programs for the purchase of wetlands for preservation. These lands can be trans- ferred to State or Federal ownership or, in some cases, may remain in private ownership. Groups that provide information, education, evaluation, and technical help to both public and private owners of wetlands include Ducks Unlimited, Galveston Bay Foundation, Si- erra Club, and the Texas Committee on Natural Resources. References Cited Barrera, T.A., and Kelly, Nivra, 1990, Wetland creation and enhancement on private lands along the mid to lower gulf coast of Texas under the north American waterfowl management plan: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report CCSU-9002-CCS, 62 p. Britton, J.C., and Morton, Brian, 1989, Shore ecology of the Gulf of Mexico: Austin, University of Texas Press, 289 p. Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, EC., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, 13 p. Dallas Morning News, 1992, 1990-91 Texas Almanac: Dallas, Texas Monthly Press, 607 p. Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United States: Washing- ton, D.C., U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 1:7,000,000. Field, D.W., Reyer, A.J., Genovese, P.V., and Shearer, B.D., 1991, Coastal wetlands of the United States An accounting of a valuable national resource: Washington, D.C., National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- ministration and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service cooperative publica- tion, 59 p. Frye, R.G., 1987, Current supply, status, habitat quality and future impacts from reservoirs, in McMahan, C.A., and Frye, EG., eds., Bottomland hardwoods in Texas Proceedings of an interagency workshop on status and ecology, May 6-7, 1986, Nacogdoches, Tex.: Texas Parks and Wildlife Report PWD-RP-7100-133-3/87, p. 24-28. Guthery, F.S., and Bryant F.C., 1982, Status of playas in the southern Great Plains: Wildlife Society Bulletin, v. 10, no. 4, p. 309-317. Jones, B.D., 1991, Texas floods and droughts, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1988-89 Hydrologic events and floods and droughts: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2375, p. 513- 520. Kane, J.W., 1967, Monthly reservoir evaporation rates for Texas, 1940 through 1965: Texas Water Development Board Report 64, 111 p., 7 pis., scale 1:5,000,000. Kier, R.S., Garner, L.E., and Brown, L.E, Jr., 1977, Land resources of Texas A map of Texas lands classified according to natural suitabil- ity and use considerations: University of Texas at Austin, Bureau of Economic Geology, 42 p., 4 map sheets, scale 1:500,000. McMahan, C.A., Frye, R.G., and Brown, K.L., 1984, The vegetation types of Texas Including cropland: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, PWD Bulletin 7000-120, 40 p., map, scale 1:1,000,000. Nelson, R.W., Logan, W.J., and Weller, B.C., 1983, Playa wetlands and wildlife on the southern Great Plains A characterization of habi- tat: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-83/28, 163 p. Osterkamp, W.R., and Wood, W.W., 1987, Playa lake basins on the south- ern High Plains of Texas and New Mexico Part 1, hydrologic, geo- morphic, and geologic evidence for their development: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 99, p. 215-223. Spiller, S.F., and French, J.D., 1986, The value and status of inland pothole wetlands in the lower Rio Grande Valley, Texas: U.S. Fish and Wild- life Service Special Report, 18 p. Texas Department of Water Resources, 1984, Water for Texas Acompre- hensive plan for the future: Texas Department of Water Resources Report G-P-4-1, 2 volumes, 72 p. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 1988, The Texas wetlands plan Addendum to the 1985 Texas outdoor recreation plan: Austin, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 35 p. ____1990, Welder Flats Coastal Preserve Baseline studies report: Aus- tin, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department [variously paged]. Tiner, R.W., Jr., 1984, Wetlands of the United States Current status and recent trends: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 59 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1984, Texas bottomland hardwood preser- vation program: Albuquerque, N. Mex., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser- vice, 378 p. White, W.A., Tremblay, T.A., Wermund, E.G., Jr., and Handley, L.R., 1993, Trends and status of wetland habitats in the Galveston Bay system, Texas: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Publication GBNEP-31,225 p. Wilkinson, D.L., Schneller-McDonald, Karen, Olson, R.W., and Auble, G.T., 1987, Synopsis of wetlands functions and values Bottomland hard- woods with special emphasis on eastern Texas and Oklahoma: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 87(12), 131 p. Wood, W.W., and Jones, B.F., 1990, Origin of saline lakes and springs on the southern High Plains of Texas and New Mexico, in Gustavson, T.C., ed., Geological framework and regional hydrology Upper Cenozoic Blackwater Draw and Ogallala Formation, Great Plains: Austin, Tex., Bureau of Economic Geology, p. 193-208. Woodward D.G., 1986, Texas surface-water resources, in National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and surface-water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 431-440. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 8011 Cameron Road, Building A, Austin, TX 78754; Regional Wetland Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 500 Gold Avenue, SW, Room 4012, Albuquerque, NM 87103 Prepared by B.D. Jones, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 369 U.S. Virgin Islands Wetland Resources Ihe wetlands of the U.S. Virgin Islands, which comprise St. Croix, St. Thomas, St. John, and about 50 smaller islands, are limited in area but are an important natural resource. The U.S. Virgin Islands are located on the northeastern edge of the Caribbean Sea east of Puerto Rico's Vieques and Culebra islands in the arc of the Lesser Antilles, which curves southward toward South America. The wet- lands of these islands generally are coastal wetlands such as man- grove forests and saltponds (fig. 1). Many of these valuable wetlands are threatened by development. Wetlands on the U.S. Virgin Islands are biologically produc- tive. They support food webs intricately linked to seagrasses and coral reefs of the nearshore waters of the Caribbean Sea by provid- ing nursery and feeding habitat for marine fish and shellfish (Lopez and others, 1988). Seagrass beds provide foraging for the threat- ened green turtle and important nursery grounds for lobster and conch. Ninety percent of the U.S. Virgin Islands' resident and mi- gratory bird species use wetlands (Philibosian and Yntema, 1977). One-hundred twenty-one species of birds have been observed in coastal wetlands (William Knowles, U.S. Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources, written commun., 1994). En- dangered species, such as the peregrine falcon and brown pelican, and other rare species, such as the white-cheeked pintail and white- crowned pigeon, nest and feed within the wetlands. Sandpipers, plovers, snipe, and other shorebirds depend on these areas during migration. The wetlands also maintain water quality by trapping sediments transported in runoff from the island interior, protect the shoreline from wave erosion, and dampen the effects of storm surges. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in the U.S. Virgin Islands is shown in figure 2; only wetlands are dis- cussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or novegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in the U.S. Virgin Islands are described below. System Palustrine. Riverine. Estuarine. Marine Figure 1. Salt Pond near Saltpond Bay in Virgin Islands National Park on St. John, U.S. Virgin Islands. (Photograph by D. Briane Adams, U.S. Geological Survey.) Wetland description . Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wet- lands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands}; persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted herba- ceous plants (persistent- and nonpersistent- emergent wetlands); or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermit- tently to permanently flooded open-water bod- ies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. . Nontidal and tidal-freshwater wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when present, is same as in the Lacustrine System. . Tidal wetlands in low-wave-energy environments where the salinity of the water is greater than 0.5 part per thousand (ppt) and is variable owing to evaporation and the mixing of seawater and freshwater. . Tidal wetlands that are exposed to waves and cur- rents of the open ocean and to water having a salinity greater than 30 ppt. As a result of steep terrain, small drainage basins, and limited rainfall, freshwater wetlands and deepwater habitats are scarce on the U.S. Virgin Islands. St. Thomas, about 28 square miles in area, reaches an altitude of 1,556 feet above sea level and is very steep. St. John, about 19 square miles in area, reaches an altitude of 1,297 feet above sea level and is also steep. St. Croix, about 84 square miles in area, reaches an altitude of 1,165 feet above sea level and is less rugged more than 50 percent of the landscape has a slope of less than 10 percent. No lacustrine habitats (large freshwater bodies) occur in the islands. Because nearly all streams are ephemeral, riv- erine wetlands are limited to channels of intermittent streams. Palustrine wetlands consist of a few small marshes. Constructed catchment basins fill with water during the wet season and may be vegetated by cattails or other wetland plants, depending on the time of year, age of the impoundment, and degree of maintenance. There are three small, natural freshwater marshes on St. Croix. One is a small emergent area at the interior edge of the Sugar Bay wetland complex. The second is a 7-acre, seasonally flooded marsh about 1 mile north of Frederiksted. The third is a small area owned and managed by the University of the Virgin Islands northeast of Krause Lagoon. Most wetlands of the U.S. Virgin Islands are located along the coasts and are classified as estuarine or marine wetlands. The larg- est of the wetlands are on St. Croix, where the terrain is less steep and the drainage basins are larger than on St. Thomas or St. John. Estuarine intertidal vegetated wetlands in the U.S. Virgin Is- lands are dominated by red, white, and black mangroves. Button- wood also is common, particularly in hypersaline (salinity greater than seawater) environments. Mangroves grow in shallow lagoons, 370 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES St Thomas ^ a 18'2V . Bonnc- ResoJuiiOn ^ s> >X*J51 __.-^_ ^s ^ * L, Charlotte AmaK& *J-<.'"> o ^ \$ Turpentir^ J "' -^SdK ' Sv\W-' 1 Manoroue V5^ AJangr Lagoon WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly Wetland [ j Predominantly deepwater habitat StJohn "j Trunk _. Ba fl Gut,/ /Nattonal Park St Croix *4 j/V. Soft Pond Bay 64- 42 , Sandy Point National v Wildlife Refuge 64 50' «* 4 MILES 4 KILOMETERS B \ Gulf and land moisture StJohn Sf Cro/x Trade wind moisture 65° Rico 18 ATLANTIC OCEAN Culebra * " Viectues <**«*£** St Thomas StJohn e St Croix Figure 2. , Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in the U.S. Virgin Islands. B, Principal sources and patterns of delivery of moisture into the U.S. Virgin Islands. (Sources: A, Digitized from USFWS-NWI, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetland Inventory, unpub. data, 1994. B, Data from Douglas Clark andAndrea Lage, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS 371 such as Mangrove Lagoon on St. Thomas; ring "saltponds," such as Great Pond on St. Croix; or fringe bays and coves, such as the Salt River Bay-Sugar Bay estuary on St. Croix. Saltponds are the predominant wetlands in the U.S. Virgin Islands. They are tidal flats or basins that are at least partially sepa- rated from direct contact to the sea by a beach berm. Saltponds range in size from less than 1 acre to more than 125 acres. An example of this wetland type is Salt Pond near Saltpond Bay in Virgin Islands National Park on St. John (fig. 1). Saltwater inputs to the ponds result from tidal or storm-surge overwash of the berm, seepage of seawater through the berm, or from subterranean connections to the sea. Ponds that have sporadic input of seawater go through an an- nual cycle of filling with freshwater runoff and rainfall during the rainy season and drawing down or drying during the remainder of the year. Consequently, saltponds are subject to extreme salinity variations during the annual cycle. Coral reefs ring many of the U.S. Virgin Islands. Though most of the reefs and seagrass beds are submersed, at least some are ex- posed at low tide and thus are classified as wetlands. The most ex- tensive of the reefs surround St. Croix. The reef in Trunk Bay in Virgin Islands National Park on St. John is the site of an underwa- ter trail and has corals typical of those in the Caribbean area. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands form where the local hydrology makes possible a dependable water supply at or near the land surface. In the U.S. Virgin Islands, the type of wetland that exists at a particular loca- tion is determined by the local hydrologic setting. The components of that setting include the duration of inundation or saturation, the salinity of the water, and the nature of the substrate, which in turn are the result of climate, geology, and topography. The climate of the U.S. Virgin Islands is classified as subtropical (Ewell and Whitmore, 1973). Winters are mild and dry, whereas sum- mers are warm and humid. In the winter, precipitation generally comes from frontal systems from the northwest and is greatest during Febru- ary and March, when the regional climate is influenced by a subtropi- cal high pressure area. During summer, the regional climate is no longer influenced by high atmospheric pressure, and there is a steady west- erly flow of moist air from the Atlantic Ocean (the trade winds) that is the primary source of summer and fall precipitation (fig. 2B). Average annual precipitation ranges from about 30 inches in the lowlands of St. Croix to about 55 inches in the mountain peaks of St. John. Precipitation increases with altitude because moist air in the weather systems is forced up the slopes into the cooler air at the higher altitudes, causing the moisture to condense and fall as rain. However, because of the small size of the islands and brief time for passage of these systems over them, these effects are not as pronounced as for larger Caribbean islands with higher moun- tain peaks. Clouds form as they pass over St. Thomas and St. Croix, but most resultant precipitation falls in the Caribbean Sea on the lee side of the islands. The geology and topography of the U.S. Virgin Islands are major factors influencing the hydrology of the islands, which in turn controls the presence or absence of wetlands. The U.S. Virgin Is- lands are composed of volcanic rock that was uplifted by tectonic activity. The islands have steep slopes and irregular coastlines. Both St. Thomas and St. John have steep slopes throughout, but on St. Croix the mountains in the northwest give way to rolling hills that broaden to an expanse of relatively low flatland along the southern two-thirds of the island. Ground water in the U.S. Virgin Islands is scarce. The most extensive ground-water source on the islands is the fractured vol- canic rocks of which the islands are generally composed (Gomez- Gomez and others, 1985). Embayment aquifers occur near guts (stream drainages) along the coasts of the islands. These aquifers are composed principally of weathered rocks overlain by shallow alluvium. They are recharged by seepage from the surrounding vol- canic rocks and by direct infiltration from ephemeral runoff and precipitation. Discharge from these aquifers to the oceans is a source of freshwater for estuarine wetlands, such as mangrove wetlands, in the coastal embayments. On St. Croix, an aquifer composed of limestone interbedded with sand and gravel and covered by allu- vium exists throughout most of the lowlands. This aquifer dis- charges small amounts of ground water to coastal wetlands. On an annual basis, surface runoff, which is a major factor in the formation of streamside and coastal wetlands, is low. There are no perennial streams, and most natural surface-water drainages are dry for long periods of time and flow only during periods of intense rainfall. Because of the impermeable underlying volcanic rocks, floodwaters accumulate and recede rapidly, generally in less than 1 day. During a year of average precipitation, annual runoff ranges from about 2 to 8 percent of the rainfall (Santiago-Rivera and Colon- Dieppa, 1986), which is about 0.5 to 2 inches, depending on con- ditions in a particular basin. Runoff is controlled by topography, soil moisture, local evaporation rates, and vegetation cover. On St. Croix, runoff is stored in ponds for agricultural uses. Commonly, total runoff from individual storms exceeds 10 percent of the rain- fall and can be as high as 30 percent when rainfall is intense and soil moisture demands are low. As these floodwaters reach the coastal areas, they overflow saltponds and provide freshwater in- flow to embayments that support mangrove stands and coral reefs (fig. 3). A few streams are intermittent; that is, they flow year-round in some reaches. For Turpentine Run on St. Thomas, base flow is predominantly from sewage effluent, and about one-half to three- Figure 3. Generalized hydrologic setting of wetlands in the U.S. Virgin Islands. (Source: Wetland types from Lugo and Brown, 1988.) 372 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES fourths of total flow is from storm runoff (Santiago-Rivera and Colon-Dieppa, 1986). Turpentine Run discharges to Mangrove La- goon (fig. 44) on the southeastern side of the island. On St. Tho- mas, the only other intermittent stream is Bonne Resolution Gut. Guinea Gut on St. John, which has base flow from spring discharge, and Jolley Hill Gut on St. Croix, once reported to be perennial, are the only intermittent streams on those islands. TRENDS Wetlands in the U.S. Virgin Islands occupy less than 3 percent of the land area. On the basis of mapping by the FWS National Wet- lands Inventory, there are 960 acres of wetlands on St. Croix, 320 acres of wetlands on St. Thomas, and 425 acres of wetlands on St. John. The wetlands of the U.S. Virgin Islands have been adversely affected by both natural forces and human activities. Hurricane Hugo, which passed directly over St. Croix in September 1989, was the last major storm to significantly alter the wetlands of the islands. Hurricane winds defoliated mangroves to such an extent that many died. In addition, many black and white mangroves were uprooted (Knowles and Amrani, 1991). Although recovery might be slow, the wetland vegetation probably will become reestablished if it is not disturbed. Human-caused wetland alterations have been severe and will likely be long lasting. Wetlands in the islands remained virtually untouched until the 1960's. During the economic growth period of the 1960's and 1970's, numerous wetlands were altered on St. Tho- mas and St. John (J.H. Farrelly, U.S. Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources, written commun., 1992). The most extensive wetland alteration took place in St. Croix at Krause Lagoon, the largest of the U.S. Virgin Island wetlands. By the late 1970's, Krause Lagoon was virtually eliminated by dredging and filling for construction of port facilities for a major oil refinery, an aluminum plant, and a container manufacturer. An important large wetland complex, Mangrove Lagoon-Benner Bay (fig. 44) on St. Thomas, has been similarly affected. Mangrove Lagoon is one of the U.S. Virgin Islands' largest wetland complexes, consisting of saltponds, a barrier reef, and fringe mangroves. Loss of mangroves and associated submersed seagrasses and corals has resulted from construction of marinas, recreation facilities, a wastewater treat- ment facility, and encroachment by a major landfill. Most of the adverse impacts, except for dredging, are the result of alterations that have disrupted the normal patterns of runoff to the bay. Wetlands of the U.S. Virgin Islands remain susceptible to de- velopment. Their location along the shoreline make them particu- larly attractive as sites for tourist facilities and water-dependent developments. It is relatively easy to construct marinas from saltponds, as was done in Southgate Pond on the north shore of St. Croix and saltponds on St. Thomas (fig. 4B). The demand for such facilities is great; more than 4,000 vessels are registered in the U.S. Virgin Islands (J.H. Farrelly, U.S. Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources, written commun., 1992). Wetlands also are susceptible to degradation by sedimenta- tion and septic tank leachate from upland areas. The extent to which this type of impact is occurring is unknown. Figure 4. Selected U.S. Virgin Islands wetlands. A, Mangrove Lagoon-Benner Bay on St. Thomas. B, Saltpond on St. Thomas. C, Trunk Bay on St. John. D, Salt River Bay on St. Croix. (Photographs by D. Briane Adams.) National Water Summary Wetland Resources: U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS 373 CONSERVATION Many government agencies and private organizations partici- pate in wetland conservation in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The most active agencies and organizations and some of their activities are listed in table 1. Table 1 . Selected wetland-related activities of government agencies and private organizations in the U.S. Virgin Islands, 1993 [Source: Classification of activities is generalized from information provided by agencies and organizations. , agency or organization participates in wetland-related activity; .. agency or organization does not participate in wetland-related activity. MAN, management; REG, regulation; R&C, res- toration and creation; LAN, land acquisition; R&D, research and data col- lection; D&l, delineation and inventory] Agency or organization_____________ FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Consolidated Farm Service Agency.................... Forest Service.......................................................... Natural Resources Conservation Service ......... Department of Commerce National Dceanic and Atmospheric Administration.......................................................... Department of Defense Army Corps of Engineers ....................................... Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service ....................................... Geological Survey................................................... National Biological Service .................................. National Park Service ............................................ Environmental Protection Agency ........................... TERRITORY OF THE U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS Department of Planning and Natural Resources Department of Planning and Coastal Zone Management Program ........................................... Division of Fish and Wildlife.................................. PRIVATE Island Resources Foundation.................................. Federal wetland activities. Development within or near wet- lands is regulated by several Federal statutory prohibitions and in- centives that are intended to slow wetland losses. Some of the more important of these are contained in the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act; the 1972 Clean Water Act and amendments; the 1985 Food Security Act; the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act; the 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act; and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act. In the following description of wetland-related Federal legislation, regulations that apply to States also apply to the U.S. Virgin Islands. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act gives the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authority to regulate certain activities in navigable waters. Regulated activities include diking deepening, filling, excavating, and placing of structures. The related section 404 of the Clean Water Act is the most often-used Federal legislation protecting wetlands. Under section 404 provisions, the Corps issues permits regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands. Permits are subject to review and possible veto by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the FWS has review and ad- visory roles. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants to States and eligible Indian Tribes the authority to approve, apply conditions to, or deny section 404 permit applications based on a proposed activity's probable effects on the water quality of a wetland. Most farming, ranching, and silviculture activities are not sub- ject to section 404 regulation, but the "Swampbuster" provision of the 1985 Food Security Act and amendments in the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act discourage (through fi- nancial disincentives) the draining, filling, or other alteration of wetlands for agricultural use. The law allows exemptions from pen- alties in some cases, especially if the farmer agrees to restore the altered wetland or other wetlands that have been converted to agri- cultural use. The Wetlands Reserve Program of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act authorized the Federal Government to purchase conservation easements from landowners who agree to protect or restore wetlands. The Consolidated Farm Service Agency (formerly the Agricultural Stabilization and Con- servation Service) administers the Swampbuster provisions and Wetlands Reserve Program. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) determines com- pliance with Swampbuster provisions and assists farmers in the iden- tification of wetlands and in the development of wetland protection, restoration, or creation plans. The 1986 Emergency Wetlands Resources Act and the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act and amendments encourage wetland protection through funding incentives. The Emergency Wetlands Resources Act requires States to address wetland protection in their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans to quality for Federal funding for State recreational land; the National Park Ser- vice (NFS) provides guidance in developing the wetland component of their plans. Coastal States that adopt coastal-zone management programs and plans approved by the National Oceanic and Atmo- spheric Administration are eligible for Federal funding and techni- cal assistance through the Coastal Zone Management Act. Large tracts of land, many containing wetlands, are managed by the FWS and the NFS. The largest area managed by the FWS is the 326-acre Sandy Point National Wildlife Refuge in southwestern St. Croix. The NFS manages most of the Island of St. John, along with extensive offshore areas, such as the underwater trail at Trunk Bay in Virgin Islands National Park (fig. 4C). The NFS has received au- thorization to acquire lands around Salt River Bay on St. Croix (fig. 4£>). Not only is the area one of the U.S. Virgin Islands' most im- portant wetland complexes, but it is also a valuable historical re- source believed to be the landing site of Christopher Columbus on his second voyage to the Americas in 1493. Territorial wetland activities. The Department of Planning and Natural Resources is the principal agency requiring permit ap- plication for construction activities in the coastal zone, where wet- lands usually form. This responsibility was granted to the Depart- ment by the Coastal Zone Management Act passed in 1978. In ad- dition to evaluating permit requests, the Department comments on Federal permit applications to ensure consistency with the Coastal Zone Management Plan. When wetland losses are unavoidable, the Department requires mitigation actions to ameliorate anticipated losses. The Department also monitors wetlands to ensure that unpermitted activities are not taking place and that authorized ac- tivities are in full compliance with permit requirements. The Terri- torial Legislature adopted the Indigenous and Endangered Species Act of 1990, in which section 104(e) establishes a policy of "no net loss of wetlands" to the maximum extent possible. Private wetland activities. The Island Resources Foundation is headquartered on St. Thomas. The Foundation is an important advocate for conservation of island wetlands and other natural re- sources unique to islands of the Caribbean and elsewhere. Through lobbying, organization of citizen networks, and development of educational materials and research, the Foundation promotes sound management of the area's natural resources. References Cited Cowardin, L.M., Carter, Virginia, Golet, EC., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Clas- sification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p. Ewell, J.J., and Whitmore, J.L., 1973, The ecological life zones of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands: U.S. Forest Service Research Paper ITF-18, 72 p. 374 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES Gomez-Gomez, Fernando, Guinones-Marquez, Ferdinand, and Zack, A.L., 1985, U.S. Virgin Islands ground-water resources, in U.S. Geologi- cal Survey, National water summary 1984 Hydrologic events, se- lected water-quality trends, and ground-water resources: U.S. Geo- logical Survey Water-Supply Paper 2275, p. 409-414. Knowles, W.C., and Amrani, Cheri, 1991, Wildlife use of the Virgin Islands' wetlands: St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, Department of Planning and Natural Resources, Division of Fish and Wildlife, 220 p. Lopez, J.M., Stoner, A.W., Garcia, J.R., and Garcia-Muniz, Ivan, 1988, Marine food webs associated with Caribbean island mangrove wet- lands: Acta Cientifica, v. 2, no. 2 -3, p. 94-123. Lugo, A.E., and Brown, Sandra, 1988, The wetlands of the Caribbean is- lands: Acta Cientifica, v. 2, no. 2-3, p. 48-61. Philibosian, Richard, and Yntema, J.A., 1977, Annotated checklist of the birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians of the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico: St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, Information Services, 48 p. Santiago-Rivera, Luis, and Colon-Dieppa, Eloy, 1986, U.S. Virgin Islands surface-water resources, in U.S. Geological Survey, National water summary 1985 Hydrologic events and surface-water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2300, p. 447-452. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, P.O. Box 364424, San Juan, PR 00936; Regional Wetland Coordi- nator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Building, Suite 200, Atlanta, GA 30345 Prepared by D. Briane Adams, U.S. Geological Survey, and John M. Heftier, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2425 National Water Summary Wetland Resources 375 Utah Wetland Resources We'etlands cover only a small part of Utah but provide critical aquatic habitat in an arid environment (fig. 1) as well as economic and other benefits. Utah's wetlands provide habitat for fish, fur- bearing wildlife, resident waterfowl, shorebirds, songbirds, and nearly 500 species of wetland plants (Reed, 1986). Wetlands also provide stopover and breeding habitat for migratory waterfowl, in- cluding an estimated 1 million ducks and 65,000 swans and geese that pass through the State during fall migration (Redelfs, 1980). Recreational activities associated with wetlands, such as hunting, bird watching, canoeing, fishing, and camping, provide consider- able revenue to the State. Duck and goose hunting on wetlands ad- jacent to Great Salt Lake alone resulted in an estimated expendi- ture of $6.4 million dollars by hunters in 1974 (Rawley, 1974). About 30 percent of the ducks migrating along the Pacific Fly- way stop at marshes around Great Salt Lake (Rawley, 1980), and 74 percent of the waterfowl harvested in the State comes from this area (Rawley, 1974). Because of the importance of Great Salt Lake and its associated wetlands to migratory birds, in 1991 the lake was designated a Hemispheric Reserve in the Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network. At least 33 species of shorebirds use Great Salt Lake and its wetlands at some point in their life cycle; typically, 500,000 Wilson's phalaropes (about 80 percent of the world's population) visit the lake in the summer. From 2 to 5 mil- lion shorebirds use the lake annually (Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, 1992). Wetlands aid in flood control by slowing water velocity and providing ponding areas, which in some places can function as re- charge basins for ground water. Wetland vegetation along streams and rivers stabilizes banks and reduces erosion. Wetlands improve water quality by settling particulates, producing oxygen, recycling nutrients, and degrading many harmful compounds found in water. Mountain wetlands can reduce the concentration of trace metals in mine drainage (Owen and others, 1992), lessening the impact on receiving streams. Because wetlands commonly are associated with rich soils and dependable water sources, Utah's wetlands also are important grazing areas for cattle and sheep. TYPES AND DISTRIBUTION Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and deep- water habitats where the water table usually is at or near the land surface or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin and oth- ers, 1979). The distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats in Utah is shown in figure 2A\ only wetlands are discussed herein. Wetlands can be vegetated or nonvegetated and are classified on the basis of their hydrology, vegetation, and substrate. In this summary, wetlands are classified according to the system proposed by Cowardin and others (1979), which is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to map and inventory the Nation's wetlands. At the most general level of the classification system, wetlands are grouped into five ecological systems: Palustrine, Lacustrine, Riv- erine, Estuarine, and Marine. The Palustrine System includes only wetlands, whereas the other systems comprise wetlands and deepwater habitats. Wetlands of the systems that occur in Utah are described below. System Palustrine. Lacustrine Riverine. Figure 1. Pelicans at Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge, northeast shore of Great Salt Lake. (Photograph courtesy of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.) Wetland description .Wetlands in which vegetation is predominantly trees (forested wetlands); shrubs (scrub-shrub wetlands); persistent or nonpersistent emergent, erect, rooted, herbaceous plants {persistent- and nonpersistent-emergent wetlands); or sub- mersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds). Also, intermittently to permanently flooded open-water bodies of less than 20 acres in which water is less than 6.6 feet deep. . Wetlands within an intermittently to permanently flooded lake or reservoir. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is predominantly nonpersistent emergent plants (nonpersistent-emergent wetlands), or submersed and (or) floating plants (aquatic beds), or both. . Wetlands within a channel. Vegetation, when pres- ent, is same as in the Lacustrine System. Several studies of wetlands in Utah have determined wetland acreages and types throughout the State. An inventory done by the FWS in the 1950's (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1955) identified 1,200,000 acres of wetlands in Utah. Sixty-eight percent were salt flats (nonvegetated lacustrine and palustrine wetlands). In 1974, only 558,000 acres of wetlands were identified by Utah's Division of Wildlife Resources (Jensen, 1974). Wetlands were classified as first-, second-, and third-magnitude marshes, depending on their ability to support waterfowl. Because of the criteria for classifica- tion, many mountain wetlands and areas defined as "incidental waterfowl habitat," such as Sevier Lake, were not included in the total wetland acreage of the State. More recent National Wetlands Inventory data (Bob Freeman and Clark Johnson, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, written commun., 1993) indicate that there are 510,000 acres of emergent marshes and nonvegetated mud flats and salt flats along the eastern shore of Great Salt Lake, within an area that covers less than 2 percent of the State. (The inventory has not been completed for the rest of the State.) Wetland losses, naturally changing boundaries, different classification systems, changing ideas about functions and values of wetlands, and different study objectives are all partly responsible for the discrepancies in total acreage. Wetlands in Utah include the shallows of small lakes, reservoirs, ponds, and streams (emergent and aquatic-bed wetlands); riparian wetlands (forested, scrub-shrub, and emergent wetlands); marshes and wet meadows (emergent wetlands); nonvegetated mudflats and salt flats; and playas (unconsolidated-shore wetlands). In the moun- tains of Utah, wetlands occur as open bodies of water or near them, 376 National Water Summary Wetland Resources: STATE SUMMARIES near springs, and where snowmelt collects. The largest and most notable wetlands in the State, however, occur in western Utah adja- cent to Great Salt Lake, where much of the mountain runoff even- tually discharges. Wetlands in western Utah also occur as playas, near springs in tectonically active areas, and near freshwater bod- ies. In eastern Utah, wetlands are sparse but are present in the flood plains of some streams and rivers. HYDROLOGIC SETTING Wetlands form under conditions of continuous water supply at or near the land surface. The location and persistence of the wa- ter supply depends on physiographic features that control runoff and impoundment of water, climatic conditions such as precipitation and evaporation, and hydrologic factors such as location of the water table and discharge areas. Conditions in Utah differ greatly from one part of the State to another, but three principal physiographic provinces (fig. 2B) define areas with similarities. The Middle Rocky Mountains contain the Uinta Mountains and the Wasatch Range. The Basin and Range Province is characterized by a series of alternat- ing north-south-trending ranges and valleys. The Colorado Plateaus consist of plateaus and mesas interspersed with deep canyons. Middle Rocky Mountains. Some of the highest mountain peaks in the Uinta Mountains and the Wasatch Range reach alti- tudes of 10,000 to 13,000 feet and receive more than 60 inches of precipitation per year (Cruff, 1986), mostly as snow. The large ac- cumulation of snow in the mountains ultimately provides much of the water to wetlands throughout Utah. Mountain wetlands occur as small lakes (such as cirque and moraine lakes), reservoirs, ponds (such as beaver ponds), and streams; as marshes along flood plains; and as wet meadows below snow fields and dams, near springs, and along flood plains (fig. 3,4). Some wetlands receive moisture only during periods of runoff, whereas others are recharged continuously by shallow ground water or by water impounded in lakes, rivers, and streams. One of the few wetland studies conducted in Utah's mountains identified 200 acres of wetlands in Albion Basin (Jensen, 1993). Most of the wetlands are classified as scrub-shrub where willows predominate, but persistent-emergent and forested wetlands are also common where veratrum, sedges, and bluebells occur and where spruce and fir grow. These wetlands provide habitat for a diversity of wildlife including moose, beaver, and abundant nongame birds. Studies in a small part of the wetlands showed that, during runoff, 83 to 85 percent of the suspended solids and two trace metals were B PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS WETLANDS AND DEEPWATER HABITATS Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats This map shows the approximate distribution of large wetlands in the State. Because of limitations of scale and source material, some wetlands are not shown ^^^1 Predominantly wetland Predominantly deepwater habitat K^$$] Area typified by a high density of small wetlands 25 50 MILES 25 50 KILOMETERS Figure 2. Wetland distribution in Utah and physiography of the State. -4, Distribution of wetlands and deepwater habitats. B, Physio- graphy. (Sources: A, I.E. Dahl, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpub. data, 1991. B, Physiographic divisions from Fenneman, 1946; landforms data from EROS Data Center.)