Citation:

Jackson, C., T. DeWitt, ConnieL Hernandez, S. Yee, M. Nash, H. Diefenderfer, AND A. Borde. Identifying Priority Ecosystem Services in Tidal Wetland Restoration. Tillamook Estuaries Partnership Coordination Meeting, Newport, OR, September 08, 2022.

Impact/Purpose:

In this presentation, ORD scientists will demonstrate a method to identify and prioritize ecosystem services (ES) that are most relevant to stakeholders involved with restoration projects, including the Tillamook Estuary Partnership. ES are the attributes or process of nature that people use, appreciate, or enjoy. Justification for conducting restoration projects is often framed as the desire to increase the beneficial uses of a site, such as increasing wildlife for recreational enjoyment, hunting or fishing, or protecting property from erosion. The ecological attributes associated with those uses (i.e., wildlife, shoreline vegetation) are ES. Metrics to quantify whether the production of those ES can be used to track the progress of the restoration toward achieving the desired benefits. However, there are no standard methods to determine what ES are relevant for restoration, let alone how to determine which ones are most important to stakeholders (e.g., and of highest priority for metric development). ORD’s method uses the recently developed National Ecosystem Services Classification System Plus tool to identify all of the possible ES associated with a particular environment type. In this study, the researchers focused on tidal wetlands, which include sites that are highly degraded and contaminated, and are frequent targets for restoration. To determine which are the priority ES for tidal wetlands, the ORD team conducted a literature review of mission-statements, management priority documents, and restoration planning documents from stakeholder-oriented organizations that are concerned with the management, conservation, or restoration of tidal wetlands. Those include federally, state-, and locally-managed organizations, land stewards, and wetland conservation organizations located in three regions (northern Gulf of Mexico, Mid-Atlantic, and Pacific Northwest). This method is transferable to inform development of ES metrics for other types of environments (i.e., streams, lakes, grasslands, forests, etc), in other locations, and using different literature sources. 

Description:

The goals for restoration projects are often framed in terms of the benefits that will be derived by restoration practitioners from restorative actions. Often, the restored benefits include the use of nature by people (also known as ecosystem services, or ES). Enhanced recreational viewing of native wildlife, improved fishing for desired species, or increased protection of property due to wave attenuation by native vegetation are all examples of ES. Consideration of the benefits that people could get from a restored site informs the development of monitoring plans that include ES-relevant metrics. These metrics can be used by restoration practitioners for restoration planning, monitoring, and adaptive management design and for communicating restoration progress to stakeholders and the public. We present an approach using EPA’s National Ecosystem Service Classification System Plus (NESCS Plus) to identify the ES that are relevant to restoration of a site. Using a generalized, systematic, approach ensures that a full suite of potential ES is identified. Using NESCS Plus, we identified more than 85 ES that tidal wetlands in our example system may produce. These ES were distributed across 29 classes of beneficiaries—defined as the roles assumed by people as they use, appreciate, or enjoy tidal wetlands—and seven classes of ecological endpoints—defined as the biophysical attributes that beneficiaries use. To determine the ES of greatest interest (i.e., most cited) for tidal wetland restoration, we conducted a data mining exercise using documents from organizations charged with managing, conserving, and/or restoring tidal wetlands. These included federal, state, and local organizations; wetland conservation organizations; land stewards across three different regions (northern Gulf of Mexico, Mid-Atlantic, and Pacific Northwest). Results highlight both differences and similarities in prioritization of ES among regions, organizations, and tidal wetland types. This presentation also examines ES results of relevance to the Tillamook Estuary Partnership to help guide prioritization of ES for metric development in current and future tidal wetlands restoration projects. Ultimately, these materials are intended for use by tidal wetland restoration practitioners and decision makers to measure progress toward a restoration project’s benefit-based goals. We expect this approach to be applicable to restoration of other types of ecosystems, locations, and literature sources. 

Record Details: