decrease the viability of restored Earlier germination of and larger episodic land in the adjacent and storm frequency & watershed to minimize SAV beds would likely be storm event. intensity. increases in sediment & Water depths of the SAV beds will positive Along shorelines May need to develop nutrient runoff that is (continue to) increase over time, selected for SAV more information/ otherwise projected to occur reducing optimal habitat replanting, restore research on the potential due to climate change. conditions, including for light natural application of floating Communicate to the penetration. This may be less of a shoreline/marsh wave-attenuation or landowner any priority problem if existing riprap is where hard structures similar devices in SAV issues. Define success by replaced with natural shoreline, (riprap) currently beds as a means of multiple time frames. Tailor but even mixed shoreline may exist, to the extent boosting the resistance of species to salinity regime. inhibit shoreward migration of possible. restored (or existing) beds SAV. to physical damage from Phragmites may become more storms. successful, making replacement Benefits of Phragmites? with native more difficult. Management strategies Having bordering marsh is may differ correlated with successful SAV beds, so removal of Phragmites, or a higher probability of native marsh loss, may threaten SAV success. SAV resilience/potential with sea level rise is high (with open habitat) Less habitat area for 4 SAV and Dredging in historical SAV Guidance to address how Broken into two different SAV. conflicting issues are changing and management actions areas illegal uses of considerations for regulatory between clams and other Dredging will affect nearby potential oyster vs. SAV habitat. aquaculture waterways ability to grow SAV Monitor and data gathering shallow water to inform future Water depth overlap with habitat: management actions habitat use considerations Implement protective
decrease the viability of restored SAV beds Water depths of the SAV beds will (continue to) increase over time, reducing optimal habitat conditions, including for light penetration. This may be less of a problem if existing riprap is replaced with natural shoreline, but even mixed shoreline may inhibit shoreward migration of SAV. Phragmites may become more successful, making replacement with native more difficult. Having bordering marsh is correlated with successful SAV beds, so removal of Phragmites, or a higher probability of native marsh loss, may threaten SAV success. SAV resilience/potential with sea level rise is high (with open habitat) Earlier germination of would likely be positive and larger episodic storm event. Along shorelines selected for SAV replanting, restore natural shoreline/marsh where hard structures (riprap) currently exist, to the extent possible. land in the adjacent watershed to minimize increases in sediment & nutrient runoff that is otherwise projected to occur due to climate change. Communicate to the landowner any priority issues. Define success by multiple time frames. Tailor species to salinity regime. and storm frequency & intensity. May need to develop more information/ research on the potential application of floating wave-attenuation or similar devices in SAV beds as a means of boosting the resistance of restored (or existing) beds to physical damage from storms. Benefits of Phragmites? Management strategies may differ 4 SAV and conflicting uses of potential shallow water habitat: Implement protective Dredging in historical SAV areas illegal Dredging will affect nearby waterways ability to grow SAV Less habitat area for SAV. considerations for oyster vs. SAV habitat. Guidance to address how issues are changing and regulatory Monitor and data gathering to inform future management actions Broken into two different management actions between clams and other aquaculture Water depth overlap with habitat use considerations
cbp_climate_resliency_1st_workshop_summary_2.16.17.docx