Wetland Monitoring

Wetlands provide numerous ecological services. Wetlands are important sites of biodiversity, providing habitat for nearly half of all endangered species. As natural floodwater storage sites, wetlands store and assimilate nutrients and reduce stream erosion and storm water-caused flooding. Unfortunately, over half of the wetlands in the United States have been destroyed over the past two centuries. Roughly 90% of wetlands in Ohio have been eliminated. 
Human disturbances and invasive plants can alter natural wetland functions. Hydrological changes, such as increased storm water from upstream development or dewatering by drainage ditches and tiles, affect wetland water quality and quantity and often increase pollutant levels. Wetland size, hydrology, and biological composition may change as a result. Disturbances near or within wetlands create susceptibility to the colonization of invasive plant species, which often dominate plant communities. The National Park Service has documented over 1,500 wetlands at Cuyahoga Valley National Park. Non-native invasive plant species and pollution are identified as the major management issues for the park. The monitoring protocol in development will combine well-established Ohio EPA protocols (Mack 2004) with hydrological and chemical monitoring to document the condition of a subset of wetlands and to track changes in their quality over time. The protocol also includes a watershed-level analysis to evaluate how landuse affects wetland condition in specific watersheds. The monitoring data are designed to support park wetland management decisions and restoration efforts.

Reports

Cuyahoga Valley National Park
Wetland Vital Signs Report (NPS Only)

 

Monitoring Objectives and Approach

1. Document the status, trends, and natural variability of plant community composition parameters (i.e. richness, abundance, tolerance) in selected wetland types.
• Wetlands intensively surveyed using the Vegetation Index of Biotic Integrity (Mack 2004) on a 5-year rotating panel.  Panel includes randomly select wetlands, wetlands of management concern and reference wetlands.   
2. Document the status, trends and natural variability of local and watershed-level environmental variables potentially influencing wetland condition such as water depth, temperature, chemistry and land use.
• Chemistry, habitat, and hydrological data will be collected to evaluate relationships with plant composition. Reference sites sampled annually to track natural trends from year to year.
3. Document the status and trends in the relative abundance of invasive species in wetland communities.
• General locations and size of invasive plant populations will be documented in plots and tracked over time.

Protocol

• Wetland Monitoring Protocol for the Cuyahoga Valley National Park, Ohio [Draft].  

Reports

• Go to the Reports page

References

• Brinson, Mark M. 1993. A Hydrogeomorphic Classification for Wetlands. USACE Technical Report WRP-DE-4.
• Conly, M.F., G. Van der Kamp. 2001. Monitoring the hydrology of Canadian prairie wetlands to detect the effects of climate change and land use changes. Environmental Monitoring and Assesment. 67(1/2):195-215.
• Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetland and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish andWildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington, D.C., USA. FWS/OBS-79/31.
• Faber-Langendoen, D., editor. 2001. Plant communities of the Midwest: Classification in an ecological context. Association for Biodiversity Information, Arlington, VA. 61 pp. + appendix (705 pp.).
• Faulkner, S. 2002. Urbanization impacts on the structure and function of forested wetlands. Urban Ecosystems. 7(2):115-133.
• Keddy, P.A. 2000. Wetland Ecology: Principles and Conservation. Cambridge University Press.
• Mack, John J. 2001. Ohio Rapid Assessment method for Wetlands v. 5.0, User’s Manual and Scoring Forms. Ohio EPA Technical Report WET/2001-1. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Surface Water, 401/Wetland Ecology Unit, Columbus, Ohio.
• Mack, John J. 2004. Integrated Wetland Assessment Program. Part 9: Field Manual for the Vegetation Index of Biotic Integrity for Wetlands v. 1.3. Ohio EPA Technical Report WET/2004-9. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Wetland Ecology Group, Division of Surface Water, Columbus, Ohio.
• Peet et al. 1998. A Flexible, Multipurpose Method fro Recording Vegetation Composition and Structure. Castanea 63(3): 262-274
• Reinelt, L., R. Horner, A. Azous. 1998.Impacts of urbanization on palustrine wetlands: Research and Management in the Puget Sound region. Urban Ecosystems. 2:219-236.
• Tiner, R.W. 1999. Wetland indicators: A guide to wetland identification, delineation, classification, and mapping. Lewis Publishers.

Links

• WASO NR GIS Data Store
• http://www.epa.gov/wetlands/
• http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/wetlands/WetlandEcologySection_reports.html

Contact Information

• Craig Young
  HTLN Botanist (417 732-6438 x281)

• Sonia Bingham
  Wetland Biologist, Cuyahoga Valley National Park (330-650-4414 x3)