Study

Expect the unexpected: place-based protections can lead to unforeseen benefits

  • Published source details Flitcroft R.L., Bottom D.L., Haberman K.L., Bierly K.F., Jones K.K., Simenstad C.A., Gray A., Ellingson K.S., Baumgartner E., Cornwell T.J. & Campbell L.A. (2016) Expect the unexpected: place-based protections can lead to unforeseen benefits. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 26, 39-59.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Facilitate tidal exchange to restore/create brackish/salt marshes from other land uses

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Facilitate tidal exchange to restore/create brackish/salt marshes from other land uses

    A site comparison study of four brackish marshes in an estuary in Oregon, USA (Flitcroft et al. 2016) reported that after removing levees to restore tidal exchange, the plant community became more similar to that of a nearby natural marsh – but remained significantly different after >30 years. In all three restored marshes, freshwater pasture grasses were gradually replaced by native salt-tolerant species such as pickleweed Salicornia virginica and saltgrass Distichlis spicata (data not reported). However, in a marsh where tidal exchange had been restored for the longest time (>30 years), the overall plant community composition remained significantly different from the natural marsh (data not reported). This restored marsh lacked some “diagnostic” brackish marsh species, such as Baltic rush Juncus balticus and black bent Agrostis alba. Methods: Vegetation was surveyed in four brackish marshes within the Salmon River estuary (years and survey methods not reported; salinity obtained from Gray et al. 2002). In three marshes, tidal influx had been restored. Levees that kept these sites as freshwater pasture were removed in 1978, 1987 or 1996. The other site was a natural marsh, where tidal influx had never been modified.

    Additional Reference: Gray A., Simenstad C.A., Bottom D.L & Cornwell T.J. (2002) Contrasting functional performance of juvenile salmon in recovering wetlands of the Salmon River estuary, Oregon USA. Restoration Ecology, 10, 514–526.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust