Grantee Research Project Results

2000 Progress Report: Sustainability and Risk of Fragmented Habitats: Development and Regulatory Variables in Shoreline Residential Development Planning in Southwest Michigan

EPA Grant Number: R827584
Title: Sustainability and Risk of Fragmented Habitats: Development and Regulatory Variables in Shoreline Residential Development Planning in Southwest Michigan
Investigators: Lemberg, David , Fraser, Rolland
Institution: Western Michigan University
EPA Project Officer: Chung, Serena
Project Period: July 1, 1999 through June 30, 2000 (Extended to February 28, 2002)
Project Period Covered by this Report: July 1, 1999 through June 30, 2000
Project Amount: $104,042
RFA: Futures: Detecting the Early Signals (1999) RFA Text |  Recipients Lists
Research Category: Aquatic Ecosystems , Ecological Indicators/Assessment/Restoration , Water , Land and Waste Management , Sustainable and Healthy Communities

Objective:

Our combined approach will allow us to answer the following questions: What is the current state of the landscape and habitats of the shorelines in the area? What are the perceptions and desires of the developers, landowners, real estate agents, and residents on shoreline development? What are the local, regional, state, and national regulations on shoreline development, and how do they shape local land use practices? What are the impacts of alternative types of shoreline landscaping on the sustainability of shoreline habitats? How does the combination of physical and landscape attributes, market forces, regulatory background, and development practices result in differential risk levels to shoreline habitats?

Progress Summary:

The major effort in the past year has been in the area of data collection. To address the first question, we have created a geographic information system (GIS) of all of the lakes in Kalamazoo and Barry Counties (Southwestern Michigan) including shoreline and plat boundaries overlaid on aerial photographs. We have base files for 60 lakes in Kalamazoo County and 71 lakes in Barry County. Over the past summer, we did oblique photo surveys for every built lot on 10 of the most densely settled lakes on Barry and Kalamazoo Counties (more than 3,000 digital photographs). We plan more shoreline photosurveys for this spring and summer. We currently are doing a detailed shoreline classification of these lots including vegetation (subsurface, shoreline, and upslope), landscaping style, habitat quality, erosion, setbacks, slope?more than 20 different classification operations for each photograph.
Preliminary findings show a very developed shoreline pattern where natural habitat on the lakeshore has been replaced with open lawns and scattered shrubs, often extending the entire width of the lots and from the shore to the structure. Many of the more naturally landscaped parcels with deeper setbacks, shoreline buffer habitats, and forested backslopes were linked to newer, more expensive enclaves. The most impacted shorelines (eroded and poorly landscaped) tended to be the older "cottage" communities characterized by shallow setbacks and denuded lawns.

To answer the second question, we did a pre-questionnaire?a set of structured interviews of local developers, decision-makers, and landowners. Based on the results of these interviews, we designed a questionnaire that will be delivered to a sample of residents on the shore surveyed lakes that will be distributed in the spring of 2001. The survey will cover why the resident decided to locate on the lakeshore, what the perceived problems on the lake are, their opinion on the adequacy of local regulation on the lakes, their openness to lakeshore management educational programs, and their own perception of the condition and environmental quality of their property.

On the third question, we started by collecting a set of regulations covering lakeshore development in Kalamazoo and Barry Counties. These included federal, state, county, city, village, and township regulations. The preliminary analysis shows a large range of differences from township to township on landscaping, setbacks, septic systems, pumping and irrigation, and lot sizes. There is little or no regulation protecting shoreline habitats, and relatively little protecting water quality in the lakes. While there are strong regulations, mainly on the state and federal levels against filling in wetlands and for protection against point-source toxic runoff, there are few regulations on the books controlling old septic systems, non-point source runoff of fertilizer, pesticides, and herbicides from residential or agricultural lands adjacent to the lakes; or the aesthetics of lakeshore landscapes. There are no regulations or incentives for preserving lakeshore habitat corridors.

For the fourth question, we created 12 field test locations on a lakeshore site (Asylum Lake in Kalamazoo) and on a riverfront site (the Kalamazoo River in Cooper Township, Kalamazoo County). Each experimental site included four controls (no clearing), four footpaths (two 1-meter wide straight shoreline access paths and two 1-meter angled access paths), and four boatpaths (two 3-meter straight access paths and two 3-meter wide angled access paths). We monitored micro-climatic impacts of these paths using HOBO data-loggers in custom-designed and fabricated waterproof cases. Impacts of the limited access paths on the shoreline habitats were observed through monitoring macrofauna at the test sites. After many unsuccessful repetitions using cameras on timers, nightscopes, and livetraps, a successful methodology was developed using "track-traps" of shallow pans of sand and powdered dolomite to record animal track impressions crossing the paths or using the paths for shoreline access themselves. Preliminary results show no barrier effects of the 1 meter and 3 meter gaps (many crossings) and additional use of the paths for shoreline access of some of the macro-fauna (Odocoileus Virginianus - white-tail deer and Procyon Lotor -raccoons). Additional observations will be made this spring and summer.

The fifth question stands on the synthesis and analysis of the data collected to address the previous four questions. The results are dependent on data still to be collected.

Future Activities:

Our future activities will include: (1) a comparison to the information of shoreline residential landscapes vs the oblique sampling method; (2) distribution, receipt and analysis of the resident survey instrument; (3) further sampling of shoreline access path experimental sites; and (4) synthesis and analysis of survey data, shoreline residential assessment, and regulation of shoreline development to determine spatial extent of environmental risk due to shoreline development.

Journal Articles:

No journal articles submitted with this report: View all 9 publications for this project

Supplemental Keywords:

corridor, Great Lakes, habitat fragmentation, risk assessment, urban planning, vertebrates, watershed., RFA, Scientific Discipline, Ecosystem Protection/Environmental Exposure & Risk, Economic, Social, & Behavioral Science Research Program, Economics & Decision Making, Ecological Risk Assessment, Urban and Regional Planning, decision-making, Futures, Exp. Research/future, Habitat, Environmental Monitoring, exploratory research, fragmented habitats, sustainability, urban planning, habitat fragmentation, socio-economic changes, ecosystem valuation, risk assessment, emerging environmental problems, natural resources, public policy, futures research, land use, environmental regulations, environmental policy

Progress and Final Reports:

Original Abstract

2001 Progress Report

Final Report