Greenversations

About the author: Jeanne Voorhees is an environmental scientist at EPA in Boston, Massachusetts. She began working at EPA (1997) helping to protect and restore water quality in rivers and streams, and continues this with her focus now on doing her Dream Job in wetlands.

I was raised on Long Island (New York) and enjoyed hours playing in woods behind our home, never realizing the muck I tromped through or the hummocks of tussock sedge I hopped upon were considered part of a wetland. I just knew I loved watching waterbugs, catching turtles, frogs, and salamanders, and getting muddy. I even enjoyed peering through a microscope looking at smaller forms of life found in muddy ponds and remember the first Paramicieum I saw. It was that moment, 38 years ago, I dreamed of becoming a “scientist.” Now I’m at EPA doing my Dream Job helping to protect and understand the biology, ecology and health of our wetlands in New England. What better job could I possibly ask for?

As a child I didn’t know the wetlands behind my parent’s house were acting like a sponge to absorb water that would have otherwise flooded our basement. I didn’t know wetlands help clean the ponds and rivers we swam and fished in. Although I didn’t know these and other wetland functions, I did know they were home to unique and beautiful plants and animals worth protecting. I encourage you to discover more about wetlands and the benefits they serve at EPA’s wetlands website.

I am privileged to work with wetland scientists across New England exploring such questions as, “How do we know a wetland is healthy?” We may monitor it using computer models with maps, algae (one celled organisms), soils, water chemistry, and other measures to help answer our questions. We might find a wetland is missing bugs and plants that belong in a healthy wetland, and then begin identifying the potential source(s) of the problem so it can be restored to a healthier system. The source could be a failing septic system, or polluted runoff from a parking lot. This is only one issue that monitoring wetlands can help identify.

I encourage you to visit a wetland this week, maybe it’s in your own backyard, to discover its unique qualities and report your findings here. Ask yourself, “What do I see, hear and smell? Is this wetland healthy and how do I know?”

About the author: Steve Jordan’s environmental career is rooted in a childhood spent in the woods and creeks of suburban Maryland and along the shores of Chesapeake Bay. After graduate school and a couple of decades working in Chesapeake Bay science and management, he joined EPA’s Office of Research and Development as a scientist and manager at the Gulf Ecology Division.

Before the 1970s, intense development of our coastal areas was limited mostly to scattered resort cities separated by large areas of sparsely populated or undeveloped land. As population grew and roads improved, coastal development exploded—and sprawled.

Beach front high-rises are the most obvious result of all that coastal development, but the whole complex of barrier islands, back bays, bayous, and tidal rivers along our Atlantic and Gulf coasts is now arrayed with homes, businesses, roads, golf courses, docks, bulkheads, and everything else that comes with development. Gulf of Mexico coastal watersheds lost over 370,000 acres of wetlands from 1998 to 2004, mostly to development (see: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service).

Except for the occasional hurricane, the coastal zone is wonderful habitat for humans. It is also essential habitat for many kinds of animals and plants, including the fish and shellfish that shore residents cherish.

Do the habitat needs of humans conflict with the habitat needs of other coastal residents? Our research at EPA’s Gulf Ecology Division indicates that they can. With my coauthors, Lisa Smith and Janet Nestlerode, I developed a mathematical model to simulate how loss of seagrasses and salt marshes could affect the important blue crab fishery in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico.

The model used information from many existing small-scale studies of how tiny, young (juvenile) crabs depend on aquatic vegetation until they are large enough to avoid predators. We linked data from these studies to electronic maps of the essential habitats and long-term, Gulf-wide commercial fishery data.

Putting it all together, we were able to predict that minor, local losses of essential habitats, multiplied many times in many places, could have serious negative effects on the future of the crab fishery. The main scientific advance in this work has been to make a connection between small-scale ecological studies and large-scale population modeling as it is used in fishery science.

With colleagues from the Pacific Coast and elsewhere, we are extending this type of research to other species and coastal areas. We hope this research will contribute to better understanding of the cumulative effects of coastal development on ecosystems and valuable ecological resources.

Figure caption: Simulated U. S. Gulf of Mexico hard blue crab landings 2004-2050. The two lower curves show different scenarios of habitat loss: SAV = submersed aquatic vegetation (seagrasses); hardened shore = loss of salt marsh edge to shoreline structures.

About the author: Dale Haroski is the Science Advisor to the Office of Public Affairs. Even with years of field work and a doctorate in Ecology and Evolution, she has endangered her fiancé’s life several times after abandoning the driver’s seat (while moving) to flee from assorted small spiders and insects.

Ask any wetlands ecologist what life is like in the field and, if they’re honest, you be regaled with tales of long days and longer nights, weather, mud, being stuck in the mud, boats breaking down, people breaking down and bugs – lots and lots of bugs.

All of my graduate research took place in east coast estuaries where seemingly serene swaying fields of salt grass hide one of the most ferocious and fearsome predators known to ecologists and beachgoers alike: the greenhead fly. I know what you’re thinking, “It’s a fly! Sure they’re annoying but aren’t we being a little dramatic?” If you’re thinking this then you’ve clearly never experienced Tabanus nigrovittatus. With razor sharp mouth parts and giant green eyes capable of tracking a target with military precision, the greenhead is impressive, intimidating and seemingly indestructible. Smack, swat, slam or smash it and the greenhead pauses (probably chuckles evilly to itself) and swoops in for the next round of attack. Oh and I haven’t even begun to discuss the painful bites nor the resulting huge welts.

At this point you’re probably thinking, “Ok, they sound pretty nasty but one or two flies isn’t the end of the world.” Ah, but we’re not talking about one or two flies! Scientists at Rutgers University have collected over 1000 greenhead flies PER HOUR all seeking a “blood meal.” (shudder) If that number doesn’t give you nightmares then imagine my panic when greenheads even attempted to fly down my snorkel in their quest for blood! This is the stuff of horror movies folks yet wetlands scientists persist, nay even thrive, in such an environment. Perhaps the greenhead has met its match?

I’ve done field work all over this country and have encountered numerous creepy crawlies. Heck, I once even had an alligator try to bite a fish trap out of my hand yet greenhead flies stand out. And yet, when reflecting on my many wetland adventures, do I mostly remember the beauty and complexity of the estuary right down to that unique marshy smell (malodorous to some and perfume to others)? Absolutely. Did I tolerate greenheads because my fascination with wetlands overrode my seemingly genetically programmed response to flail my arms around while screaming and swatting? Absolutely. Would I do it all again? Absolutely!

Wetland field stories…if you’ve got ‘em, I’d love to hear ‘em!

About the author: Michael Scozzafava has been with EPA since 2004 and the Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds since 2006. He is project lead for the 2011 National Wetland Condition Assessment and chair of the National Wetlands Monitoring and Assessment Work Group (NWMAWG).

How healthy are the nation’s wetlands? Existing data sources make it almost impossible to answer this question with any confidence. The most recent Water Quality Report to Congress provided data for only 1.5% of wetlands nationwide. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Wetlands Status and Trends Reports provide invaluable information on the amount of wetlands (quantity), but are not designed to assess overall wetland health (quality).

It is vitally important that we answer this fundamental question to effectively plan wetland protection and restoration efforts. Currently, we don’t know if we’re using resources wisely or focusing work in areas that need the most help. We can’t identify the most common wetland threats and develop strategies to reduce those threats. The U.S. FWS documented that the country is gaining 32,000 wetland acres each year, but the data suggests we may be increasing the number of low quality wetlands that provide only one service (like storing excess rain water) and losing high quality wetlands that provide a range of services. So, although we’re increasing the total number of wetlands, we’re probably losing natural filtration for our drinking water, protection from coastal storm surges, habitat for birds and wildlife, and nursery grounds for fishes. We need to better understand the nature of wetland gains and losses, identify the types of wetlands that are especially at risk, and implement policies to reverse trends of wetland degradation.

EPA will collaborate with states, tribes, and other federal agencies to implement a field-based survey of the nation’s wetlands in 2011. We will sample about 900 randomly-selected sites using standard monitoring protocols that characterize the plants, algae, soils, and relative wetness of each sampling location. We will also test for high concentrations of chemicals and search for evidence of human and natural impacts at each site. In 2013, we will combine all of this information to produce a baseline assessment that reports the overall health of the nation’s wetlands and identifies the most common wetland threats.

It is crucial that the results of this assessment are used by decision makers to improve how wetlands are managed, restored, and protected. EPA has considered many possibilities for how the information might be used, but certainly have not identified every opportunity. So the question to decision-makers, wetland managers, and the general public is: what information can EPA provide to help you protect wetland resources?