Volume 46 • Number 4December 2020

CERF’s Up!Oyster Reef Restoration in New JerseyHistory of Salt Marshes and Shellfish Aquaculture in New England

A new wave of information from the Coastal and Estuarine Research Federation

Table of Contents President’s Message 1Using Oysters to Strengthen Urban Shorelines in Raritan Bay, New Jersey 2Following the Shells—Remotely for Now 4Restoring Critical Beach Habitat, One Reef at a Time 6Long-term Vegetation Changes in a Salt Marsh at Barn Island, Connecticut, 1870–2020 7Challenges for Science and Management of Estuarine Marshes Over 50 Years at NEERS 9Shellfish and NEERS: A 50-Year Evolution of Our Relationship 12 In Memorium: Michael Kemp 14Call for Articles: CERF’s 50th Anniversary 16 Riding the Wave to CERF 2021 16CERF’s Up! Survey 17CERF Scientific Awards Nominations 17Nominations for Estuaries and Coasts Editor 17September Coastal & Estuarine Science News 18Call for Nominations for 2021-2023 CERF Governing Board 19Afterthoughts 20

CERF’s Up! Volume 46 • Number 4December 2020

Front cover: Cook Beach, New Jersey Site of American Littoral Society restoration project Photo: L. Niles, Wildlife Restoration Partnerships, 2020

Back cover: Installation of new reef material at Tuckerton New Jersey, June 2020 Photo: S. Allen, Stockton University.

Editors’ Note: This issue contains three articles demonstrating the abundant benefits of oyster reef restoration in New Jersey, the most densely human-populated state in the country. (We’re not sure which is the most densely oyster-populated state.) We also are running three articles from the Saturday session of last spring’s NEERS 50th anniversary symposium: two on the history of salt marshes in New England and one on the history of shellfish aquaculture.Please note that with increased science content in this publication and much of CERF news moved to The Monthly CERFer, we are now referring to CERF’s Up! as the quarterly bulletin of CERF.

Stockton University Researchers and partners plant oysters on the Tuckerton Reef in June 2020 Photo: S. Allen

Soooo looking forward to 2021!

2020 is almost over! This has been a year that none of us would like to repeat but all of us will remember for the rest of our lives. A global pandemic changed every aspect of our lives, a social movement cried out for the fair and equitable treat-ment of Black people in our society, catastrophic hurricanes came ashore on the Gulf Coast, wildfires devas-tated the western US, and a divisive political climate culminated in an important election. These are but the biggest challenges we faced in the past year. Despite these momen-tous, disruptive events, the Federa-

tion remained strong, thanks to the great work by the many volunteers who helped us make progress on our strategic plan.

In 2020, CERF continued action on our commitment to a diverse and inclusive membership. We are proud that our Rising TIDES Conference Program received continued com-mitment from NSF for our CERF 2021 meeting The CERF 2021 team has done a great job planning for our Richmond meeting despite the uncertainties of the pandemic, and they have been learning from the successes the Affiliate Societies have had in pivoting to virtual meet-ings in the past year. Our webinar program has also continued to draw participants in these confusing times. CERF’s publications had great years in 2020: the new editors have expanded content for CERF’s Up! and Estuaries and Coasts saw record numbers of submissions and contin-ued fast action on submissions in the review process.

The Federation helped apply science to wise management of our coastal resources CERF joined forces with our sister scientific societies to pro-vide scientific consensus that helped the Supreme Court of the US come to a momentous decision in April 2020 in in the case of the County of Maui v Hawaii Wildlife Fund The decision held that that the federal Clean Water Act “require[s] a permit if the addition of the pollutants through groundwater is the functional equivalent of a direct discharge from the point source into navigable waters ”

The successes during the turbulence of 2020 augurs well for great things for CERF in 2021 The Federation remains strong and our members remain committed to making it even stronger. Here’s hoping for a quieter, healthier, and even more productive 2021!

Jim Fourqurean

President’s Message

1

Jim Fourqurean

Raritan bay - drone footage from Biohabitats Inc

Using Oysters to Strengthen Urban Shorelines in Raritan Bay, New JerseyMeredith Comi Restoration Director, NY/NJ Baykeeper Hazlet, New Jersey, USAmeredith@nynjbaykeeper.org

2

Baykeeper staff divers (A. Boddy, J. Jacobson) install oyster castles onto the living shoreline, summer 2019. These castles were set with oyster larvae at the NY/NJ Baykeeper aquaculture facil-ity and installed on the living shoreline after approximately six weeks

Oysters once thrived in the New York–New Jersey Harbor Estuary; however, overharvesting, pollution, and sedimentation of reefs have deci-mated the natural population. There is no longer a sustainable population in the estuary, which is why NY/NJ Baykeeper works to restore them. As a bi-state restoration leader, Bay-keeper has planted over 4 million oysters in NJ and NY waters through oyster gardening, oyster reef building, and living shorelines programming.

Oysters are noted keystone species and ecosystem engineers, positively influencing their surrounding eco-systems By building reefs, oysters provide habitat for commercially and recreationally important finfish and crustacean species and increase species richness and biodiversity of the region. As filter feeders, oysters remove suspended sediments, nutri-ents, pollutants, and algae from the water column, resulting in improved water quality and clarity. Perhaps most importantly, oyster reefs act as

living shorelines providing protection for storm-weary coasts

Baykeeper’s Restoration Program focuses efforts in the areas hardest hit by Superstorm Sandy–the Raritan Bayshore In highly urbanized regions, the response to climate change and extreme weather events is often a hard-edge engineering approach with subsequent detrimental effects to near shore habitats and species. The devastation caused by Superstorm Sandy prompted coastal communi-ties to consider resiliency solutions that address sea level rise-induced flooding and shoreline erosion in a “softer” way. Oyster reefs have been shown to enhance marsh shoreline stability, while dampening wave energies that increase beach and sediment erosion Living shorelines provide a natural and cheaper way to protect our shorelines than manmade structures such as bulkheads and sea walls. Baykeeper’s research site at Naval Weapons Station Earle (NWS Earle) in Middletown, New Jersey,

offers a unique opportunity to study the oyster’s role in shoreline resiliency efforts

The US Navy is actively address-ing sea level rise and resiliency with a suite of tools, one being a living shoreline to protect military infra-structure along the coast The US Navy and Baykeeper have been part-ners since 2010, spurred on by the fact that the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection banned all shellfish research, restoration, and education activities in waters deemed too contaminated or waters classi-fied as “Restricted” or “Prohibited” for shellfish harvest. NWS Earle provides property, guidance, and support in Baykeeper’s restoration activities.

Thanks to this partnership, Baykeeper has been able to establish an 11-acre oyster research site, aquaculture facility, shell curing area, and a liv-ing shoreline adjacent to the Ware Creek Marsh. Baykeeper and partners installed an urban living shoreline in 2016, consisting of an artificial reef

Photo: M. Comi

3

Close up of spat on an oyster castle that was deployed on the living shoreline at Naval Weapons Station Earle

Photo: M. Comi

with live oysters and concrete struc-tures (oyster castles), which provide the necessary hard surface that oysters attach to and grow on This climate adaptation project will pro-tect the existing marshes impacted by storm surges, upland runoff, and erosion Installation of an oyster reef will increase sedimentation rates and contribute to dampening winter storm energies, thus increasing shoreline and creek bank stabilization.

Research conducted at NWS Earle shows that oyster castles support

the growth of many types of fouling organ-isms, while adding 3-dimensional habitat increases biodiversity in and around the project area. Set-ting the castles with juvenile oysters further increases habitat and attracts reef-associ-ated species. Monitor-ing shows excellent growth and survivor-ship of oysters and natural recruitment the past few years. Pre-

liminary data shows sedimentation buildup in and around the castles.

Most recently, Baykeeper and partner Biohabitats, Inc. began work on a project funded by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to determine the most suitable design alternatives for a nature-based approach to the protection of coastal communities. The project is focused on the NWS Earle shoreline and adjacent area, including Ware Creek, and builds upon work already being carried out by Baykeeper and partners. By identify-

ing, quantifying, and analyzing the specific factors that influence the success of a nature-based design approach to coastal community pro-tection, Baykeeper can work towards different nature-based solutions in Raritan Bay. The project will deter-mine specific wave energies, flow regimes, and coastal dynamics that influence the effectiveness of the shoreline design and marsh restora-tion resilience strategies, while dem-onstrating how natural infrastructure can be used to protect NWS Earle facilities and resources

The restoration and living shoreline projects at NWS Earle helped inform several studies, including a land use study for NWS Earle and the Raritan/Sandy Hook Bay Coastal Resilience Planning Study conducted for Mon-mouth County Division of Planning in 2019. Baykeeper will continue to work with NWS Earle and Monmouth County on climate resilience endeav-ors along the Raritan Bayshore Bay-keeper and partners are hopeful that if successful, the techniques being tested at NWS Earle will be transfer-able to other urban estuaries

4

Following the Shells—Remotely for NowChristine ThompsonAssistant Professor, Marine SciencesStockton University, Galloway New Jersey, USAChristine.Thompson@stockton.edu

Stockton University researchers and partners plant oysters on the Tuckerton Reef in June 2020 Photo: S. Allen

On June 9, 2020, over 400,000 shells containing 1 7 million baby oysters were blown off a barge in the middle of Barnegat Bay In what should have been a big milestone celebration, it was condensed to a sparsely popu-lated boat and a couple onlookers. However, over 200 people joined in virtually as Stockton scientists and partners hosted an event in real-time on Facebook. During this live event, we were able to bring to life the sci-ence and partnerships that got this project to its fifth planting on the site, which is located between the towns of Tuckerton and Beach Haven in Little Egg Harbor

This July will mark the fourth anniver-sary of the creation of the Tuckerton Oyster Reef. The project started as a partnership with Stockton University, Parsons Seafood, and the Ameri-can Littoral Society, made possible

through a grant from the Barnegat Bay Partnership. The project idea was to create oyster reefs in two areas of Barnegat Bay, using aquaculture techniques to jump-start the oyster population. Oyster spat were planted on the reef sites in 2016 using two shell types (oyster and whelk). We monitored the reef for two years trying to determine the best site and method for future reef building

Two years later we were able to expand the reef with a second round of funding from the Barnegat Bay Partnership with support matched from the Jetty Rock Foundation and a new shell recycling program grow-ing out of Long Beach Island Out-reach programs increased through the Jetty Rock Foundation’s Oyster Recycling Program and the film The Oyster Farmers, inviting people to understand the relationship between

people, the bay, and a small organism that filters water and plays an impor-tant role in coastal ecosystems

An oyster reef, in its natural state, is a densely covered area of shells growing on other shells These shells provide hard substrate for other organisms to attach and grow, such as anemones, sea squirts, barnacles, and sponges. The 3D structure of the reef provides crevices for small fish and crabs to hide in as they feed. Larger predatory fish stake out oyster reefs to hunt The oysters themselves clear the water as they remove sus-pended particles while feeding. They can act as speed bumps slowing down waves that can lead to shore-line erosion in storms

It is hard to imagine what an estuary like Barnegat Bay looked like in the 1800s when reefs covered the bay

5

Was the water crystal clear? Could you see right down to the bottom, covered in oysters and fish swimming among them? Today, no boater thinks twice about possibly scraping their hull on a reef breeching the surface at low tide No swimmer worries about cutting their feet on a jagged shell

Many people don’t understand why oyster reefs are important because no one has seen them in their glory This is a concept ecologists call shifting baselines Farmed oysters have made the animal a staple food in raw bars, associating it with lemon wedges and hot sauce instead of fish and clear waters. No one thinks about

the impacts that the last century has brought and how overfishing, disease, and environmental changes made the wild oyster functionally extinct in New Jersey coastal bays

This project is only a small step in what will likely take a lot of time and effort to establish a self-sustaining population in Barnegat Bay. The 0.2 ha footprint of the oysters on the reef is a tiny fraction of the approxi-mately 89,000 ha of oyster reefs that explorer Henry Hudson had to navigate in 1609 The resurgence of the farmed oyster industry in New Jersey has helped raise awareness of the benefits of oysters to coastal

waters, but much more needs to be done if we are going to bring back the ecosystem-level services on a large scale

Over my past four years at Stockton, I’ve grown my research program just as we’ve built the reef, with students who work with me on projects track-ing oysters from their time as larvae to adults, providing habitat and filter-ing water I try to challenge them to come up with research ideas on their own that can be tested using the data collected from our monitoring events These projects reflect the biologi-cal, chemical, and physical benefits oysters can provide. Although we are now stuck at home, we are still work-ing hard on crunching the numbers and hoping to get back out in the field to follow the shells from the bay

Links to learn more: Stockton Research page: https://stock-ton edu/marine/marine-oyster-restora-tion htmlFollow the Shell Program/The Oyster Farmers film: http://followtheshell.com/Facebook live: https://www.face-book.com/1681884135386433/vid-eos/303071494059952

Oysters growing on the reef site covered in sponges and macroalgae Photo: P. Straub

Share the full text of any Estuaries and Coasts article with SharedIt!

For more information, please visit http://www.springernature.com/sharedit.

Did you know that authors and subscribers can share a view-only, full-text version of any Estuaries and Coasts article using Springer Nature’s new “SharedIt” feature?

Select the “Share article” button on the article webpage for a shareable link.

Help us share the full-text versions of the high-quality, peer-reviewed journal articles in Estuaries and Coasts by using the SharedIt links!

Share the full text of any Estuaries and Coasts article with SharedIt!

For more information, please visit http://www.springernature.com/sharedit.

Did you know that authors and subscribers can share a view-only, full-text version of any Estuaries and Coasts article using Springer Nature’s new “SharedIt” feature?

Select the “Share article” button on the article webpage for a shareable link.

Help us share the full-text versions of the high-quality, peer-reviewed journal articles in Estuaries and Coasts by using the SharedIt links!

For more information, please visit http://www.springernature.com/sharedit.

6

Restoring Critical Beach Habitat, One Reef at a TimeQuinn Whitesall Habitat Restoration Coordinator, American Littoral Society Millville, New Jersey, USA quinn@littoralsociety.org

The Delaware Bay hosts the largest population of the Atlantic horseshoe crab (Limulus polyphemus) in the world 1 During May and June, mil-lions of horseshoe crabs trek to the shallow-sloped beaches to spawn. This ritual results in masses of horse-shoe crab eggs in upturned ribbons along the beaches, which provide a critical food source for migratory shorebirds, including the federally-listed red knot (Calidris canutus rufa). Superstorm Sandy in 2012 decimated the Delaware Bay beaches, threaten-ing future horseshoe crab spawning and those crucial eggs. The Ameri-can Littoral Society and our partners trucked in sand from upland quarries to build back the beaches and cre-ated intertidal reefs using bagged shell to prevent further sand loss on those restored beaches This effort helped avoid a natural catastrophe for the already dwindling numbers of northbound migrating shorebirds

Since then, with grants from the National Fish and Wildlife Founda-tion (NFWF) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Littoral Society and partners have restored eight beaches in the Dela-ware Bay in Cape May County, New Jersey, and installed intertidal reefs at four of them

The reefs are designed to prevent sand loss from wind-driven waves, promote accretion, provide calmer waters to make horseshoe crab spawning more feasible, and pro-vide habitat for marine/estuarine species including eastern oysters (Crassostrea virginica). To create these reefs, we use discarded whelk shell (Channeled whelk Busycotypus canaliculatus and Knobbed whelk Busycan carica), which are commonly fished in the Delaware Bay/offshore New Jersey. Unlike other types of discarded shell, such as oyster and clam which can be repurposed for subtidal oyster farms or crushed for driveways, there is little secondary use for discarded whelk shell. The whorl of the whelk shell makes it difficult to harvest oysters and when crushed the shell is sharp and can pose a threat to tires. The aperture and empty interior of these shells provides interstitial space that is ideal refugia for juvenile fish and crabs. The unique shape of the whelk allows for the shells to interlock during storm events and creates a more uni-fied, resilient, sturdier structure that is able to withstand rough waves and ice in the winter We have been able to repurpose over 300 tons of whelk shell which might otherwise have been discarded in a landfill or crushed and used for fill.

The ecological uplift of each reef has been determined using a variety of sampling methods. During low tide, land-based sampling events, shell bags have been periodically retrieved from reef blocks to monitor diversity and abundance of benthic epifauna. During these assessments, 30 different species of organisms were identified in the shell bags. Striped anemone (Haliplanella luciae), black-fingered mud crab (Panopeus herbstii), mud dog whelk (Nassarius

obsoletus), barnacles (Balanus spp.), and oysters were most commonly found on the reefs Most shell bags at Reeds Beach reef, which was installed in 2015, have become fused together with oysters and we now use quadrat-based sampling to gauge oyster recruitment and species rich-ness

To determine fish use, semi-oval, unbaited fish traps were strategi-cally placed on randomly selected reef blocks as well as at a nearby control site and collected 4 hours after deployment and again 24 hours later. Fourteen species were identi-fied and released alive. Atlantic blue claw crabs (Callinectes sapidus) were most commonly found, followed by silver perch (Bairdiella chrysoura) and oyster toadfish (Opsanus tau). Species richness was far less on the nearby control sandy-bottom sites The reefs have proven to not only create a more resilient shoreline, but also provide habitat for many marine and estuarine species.

Though our primary objective is to build reefs that provide reef habitat and provide a more resilient shoreline, a secondary goal of creating these reefs is to motivate people to invest “sweat equity” into their creation and connect them to the ecology that they are restoring Our restoration outreach includes the annual “Shell-A-Bration” during which we invite members of the community to help build the reefs alongside the restora-tion staff The following November, we hold a monitoring event that hon-ors our US military veterans and invite the community to see what has been growing on the reefs, participate in the identification and collection pro-cess, and help us dedicate the reef to a branch of the military, all followed by barbecue on the beach

Reeds Beach reef shell bags fused together with oysters Photo: Q. Whitesall

(continued)

The Littoral Society completed our most recent reef at Cooks Beach this past August and plan to build addi-tional reefs in 2021. As we plan future reef builds, we will be considering new installation methods to address higher-energy and subtidal environ-ments, looking for an alternative to the polyethylene mesh used to create shell bags, and addressing potential challenges of larger-scale reefs to

provide community resilience. To follow along in our efforts, check out www littoralsociety org

References1. Ecological Research & Development Group. 2009. “Habitat Considerations.” The Horseshoe Crab: Natural History, Anatomy, Conservations and Current Research.Partners: Wildlife Restoration Partnership, Conserve Wildlife of New Jersey, Stockton University Coastal Research Center, US Fish and Wildlife Service

Editors’ Note: The American Littoral Society in Octo-ber 2020 was awarded “Best Restored Beach” by the American Shore and Beach Preservation Association for the Cook’s Beach restoration. This project creatively allowed the shoreline to continue to be a source of sand to nearby beaches while retaining sufficient sediment to provide critical spawning habitat for horseshoe crabs and red knots.

Restoring Critical Beach Habitat… (continued)

Long-term Vegetation Changes in a Salt Marsh at Barn Island, Connecticut, 1870–2020Ron Rozsa1 and Scott Warren2

1Plant Ecologist, Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (retired), Ashford, Connecticut, USA 2Professor Emeritus, Connecticut College, New London, Connecticut, USA saltmarshmd@charter.net

The Barn Island tidal marshes lie on the north shore of the microtidal Little Narragansett Bay in Stonington, Connecticut. Detailed analyses (1947, 1965, 1976), decadal assessments, aerial photos, peat cores, and photo stations allowed near-continuous vegetation monitoring for around 90 years. Sea level rose 1.9 mm per year from 1939 to 1980 and then increased to 4.5 mm per year. Here we reconstruct the history of vegeta-tion change of the non-impounded salt marshes from a long-term but disparate set of data. The system consists of six valley marshes and the marsh lying atop an outwash plain seaward of the valley marsh impoundment dikes. The six valley marshes were grid-ditched (every 25

m) in 1932 and maintenance-ditched in 1979 Five of the valley marshes were impounded, four in 1946–1947 and one in 1968. Tidal flow was restored to the impounded marshes between 1978 and 1989 The levee and basin topography1,2 (Fig. 1) of the unditched marsh is preserved in the ditched marsh although averaged elevations are 10 cm higher in the former 3,4 Plant communities in both marsh types form bands that parallel creeks.

In the unditched marsh the levees are continuous and can be as wide as 55 m Between the levee and the upland is the basin; landward of this is the upland border slope. Spartina patens (Sp) is the dominant grass in

the levee and S. alterniflora stunted (Sas) in the basin. Rhizome analysis of peat cores revealed the vegetation has been stable since 1870 3 Basins in unditched marsh flood when spring high tides exceed the crest of the levee (flooding frequency is 10%) and water and sediment entering the basin are trapped.

In the ditched marsh, ditches connect all basins directly to the creeks which promotes the draining of surface water, providing for the replacement of the basin communities with Sp. Ditches cut through the levees allow tidal water to flood the basin with a flooding frequency of 60%. By 1947, a post-ditching shift from Sp to Juncus gerardii (Jg) on levees was

Fig. 1 Generalized elevation and plant community pattern from intertidal zone to upland.1 In the ditched marsh, the upland border changes from Jg to bare soil to forbs during the metonic cycle. Sat–Spartina alterniflora tall, Sp–S. patens, Ds–Distichlis spicata, Sas–S. alterniflora short, If–Iva frutescens, Jg–Juncus gerardii, Pv–Panicum virgatum

8

confirmed by rhizome analysis of peat cores; this change suggest that levees ceased to flood.1,5 A detailed 1976 plant community map6 clearly showed both the banding of the plant communities and that these bands were continuous, only interrupted at the ditch edge where subsidence has occurred. This pattern may reflect the role of a continuous ground water table. In the basin, Sp had decreased and Sas had increased There was a massive forb community on the levee (Fig. 2). The Jg belt was narrow and this contraction was seen on a time series of aerial photography. By 1987, another major change was recorded in the basin; pure stands of Sas were largely absent and the dominant com-munity was Sas/Sp.7 The increase of these two species may have been the result of a reduction in flooding frequency resulting from tidal flow restoration to the impoundment #1. No salt pannes or pools were present.

By 2017, the dominant vegetation in the ditched marsh was Sas (~45%) and panne/pool complex (~15%) occupying all of the basin and most of the levee. There was a peculiar banding of Sas and salt panne at

the higher elevations, which may be incipient panne formation. The forb belt on the levee had been replaced by Sas The extent of levee Jg had been constant since 1976 and Sp was conspicuously absent until 2018.

In the upland border of the ditched marsh, there have been four diebacks of the brackish Jg belt (product of marsh migration) in the ditched marsh about every 18 years (1947, 1965, 1983, and 2005). Initially, the peat erodes, exposing the underlying glacial soil that is dotted with small mounds of Panicum virgatum (Pv) rhizomes Forbs gradually colonize the upper slope and Distichlis spi-cata the lower slope. At the time of the diebacks the Pv belt contained only freshwater species. Coincident with increasing tidal range, the lower slope of the Pv was replaced by tidal marsh plants. By 2018 as much as 15 m of Pv became tidal marsh and the vegetation was a chaotic mix of tidal marsh species and numerous forbs. In 2019 Sp was dominant and in 2020 Pv moving downslope invaded the marsh migration zone The maximum elevation change since 2008 is +20 cm, likely reflecting an increase in the

spring tide range caused by the metonic cycle This 18 6 cycle causes a predictable increase followed by a decrease

On the ditched marsh, the primary driver of vegetation changes is grid-ditching for mosquito control. Changes are inexorably slow The vegetation of the drained basins was replaced to a large extent by Sp but that change was unsustainable Post-1947, the basin and backslope of the levee became progressively wetter, allowing Sas to become the domi-nant vegetation by 2020 There are signs that Sp has or is returning to the levees and that the new ditch side levees supporting pure Sp are incipi-ent ditch plugs that allow the marsh to revert to the pre-ditching marsh. The data suggest a significant role of the metonic cycle and water table fluctuations in vegetation changes of the marsh community

References:1. Niering, W.A., and R.S. Warren. 1980. Vegetation patterns and processes in New England salt marshes Bioscience 30:301–307.2 Temmerman, S , G Govers, P Meire, et al. 2004. Simulating the long-term develop-ment of levee-basin topography on tidal marshes Geomorphology 63:39–55.3. Warren, R.S., and W.A. Niering. 1993. Vegetation change on a Northeast tidal marsh: Interaction of sea-level rise and marsh accretion Ecology 74:96–103.4 LeMay, L E The impact of drainage ditches on salt marsh patterns, sedimen-tation and geomorphology: Rowley River, Massachusetts School of Marine Science at the College of William and Mary, MS thesis. 230 p.5 Miller, W , and F E Egler 1950 Vegeta-tion of the Wequetequock–Pawcatuck tidal marshes, Stonington, Connecticut Ecologi-cal Monographs 20:143–172.6 Coleman, W B 1978 Vegetation of the Wequetequock-Pawcatuck Marshes Ston-ington, Connecticut—A Comparative Study 1948 and 1976 Smith College, Massachu-setts. 130 p.7. Niering, W.A. 1987. Four new transects at Palmer Neck Marsh, Barn Island. Notes. http://www.sound.uconn.edu/lissm/barn_island/data_catalogue/data/Palmerneck_transects_1987/palmerneck_1987.pdf

Fig. 2 Massive forb panne growing upon the levee in the foreground with Spartina alterniflora (Sas) and S. patens (Sp) in the background

Long-term Vegetation Changes in a Salt Marsh… (continued)

9

Challenges for Science and Management of Estuarine Marshes Over 50 Years at NEERSDavid Burdick1 and Susan C. Adamowicz2

1University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire, USA 2U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Wells, Maine, USA David.Burdick@unh.edu

Salt Marsh Ecosystem Services–A Self-Sustaining Ecosystem

Plant growth to support food webs Flood protection from stormsSecondary production (fish and birds) Protection from coastal erosionPlant structure to provide habitiat Removal of sediments from waterSupport of biodiversity Cycling of nutrientsLong-term carbon storage (Blue Carbon) Aesthetic, educational & recreational value

At the birth of the New England Estuarine Research Society (NEERS), American society slowly embraced ecosystem services of tidal marsh-lands (see box) and these wetlands received protection from direct impacts, such as filling for develop-ment, at state and then national scales (Clean Water Act, 1972; Coastal Zone Management Act, 1972). As critical components of estuaries, tidal marsh processes and biota were studied by scientists, students, and managers who have reported their findings at NEERS meetings since 1970. Advances in our understanding of these sys-tems co-occurred with changes in social values, management policies, advances in computing and informa-tion sharing, and rising atmospheric CO2 levels and global warming Our goal here is a retrospective of tidal marsh science and management regarding restoration and adaptation of these special habitats from the New York Bight to the St. Lawrence Seaway, focusing upon contributions by NEERS members over the past 50 years

When European settlers first arrived in New England, tidal marshes provided grazing lands for their livestock as well as places for hunt-ing and fishing. Soon the marshlands were divided up as private property and farmers managed their plots to produce hay for their livestock, with-

ditches and embankments built to drain and freshen the hayfields. With the ascent of train travel and seaside holidays in the 19th century, wagon and trolley access to summer resorts on barrier beaches further subdivided and restricted tidal flows to marshes. The most degraded sites often were filled for development. At the turn of the 20th century, identification of mos-quitoes as a disease vector promoted draining marshes via systematic ditching This management action became institutionalized and so com-monplace across New England in the 1930s that almost no marshes were left unaltered Following bans on the use of DDT and passage of the Clean Water Act, mosquito control agencies looked to alternative approaches1,2 that used resident marsh fish to prey on mosquito larvae and reduced

marsh drainage compared to previ-ous ditching techniques.

With tidal marshes protected from direct impacts of development, indirect impacts from human actions such as altered hydrology and increased nutrients from point and non-point source pollution began to receive scrutiny Concurrently, sci-entists and managers noticed the rapid spread of Phragmites austra-lis, particularly in marshes that had restricted tidal exchange due to road and railway crossings In Con-necticut, a case was made to restore tidal exchange to marshes 3,4 By the 1990s, other states were working with scientists to identify tidal restric-tions, enumerate their impacts,5,6,7,8 and establish programs to remove or lessen restrictions, aided by a series of workshops.9 This work culminated in a book to share science, manage-ment programs, and case studies of tidal restoration 10

At the turn of the century, genetic research tools became more avail-able. The strong suspicion that the Phragmites australis spreading across our marshes was comprised

10

of invasive genotypes was borne out by excellent investigations of maternally-inherited chloroplast RNA.11,12 Workshops subsequently taught landowners and managers field traits to distinguish between native versus invasive genotypes and have led to a new appreciation for native stands, while control measures for the invasive variety have evolved, albeit slowly 13 A second exotic plant invading our marshes is perennial pepperweed (Lepidum latifolium).

Building on early work,14,15,16 the Plum Island Estuary Long Term Ecological Research station spent many years investigating effects of nutrient addi-tion to salt marsh ecosystem dynam-ics. An unexpected result from this study was marsh bank collapse.17 NEERS researchers continue to exam-ine the combined effects of nutrients, sea level rise, and crab activity18,19 on marsh integrity and ecology

Tidal marsh restoration efforts also made gains through the removal of dredge spoil under the Water Resources Development Act (1986). Efforts to remove previously filled tidal marshes began in the Northeast with Awcomin Marsh (New Hamp-shire) and Galilee Wildlife Manage-ment Area (Rhode Island). Many other sites have since benefitted from this program.20 Ironically, managers are now adding dredged sediments to enhance marsh elevation and plant growth in response to marsh drowning from sea level rise By 2020, sediment placement had been used in a number of sites in Rhode Island (John Chafee National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), Sachuest Point NWR), and Long Island (Jamaica Bay/Gate-way National Recreation Area and Seatuck NWR). These efforts have resulted in thick (> 15 cm) deposits on the marsh which require planting and time for vegetation recovery In contrast, a large-scale natural ice-floe event occurred during winter storm Greyson (January 2018) and covered over 60 ha of the Great Marsh, Mas-sachusetts, with only 2-8 cm of sedi-

ment. Natural vegetation response following this event has taught us that thinner applications will provide an elevation boost without severe impacts to underlying vegetation.

Funding sources often drive the focus and scope of restoration projects. Infrastructure funds are used to address tidal restrictions, dams, and lack of aquatic connectivity. Inva-sive plant control programs support Phragmites and pepperweed removal. It wasn’t until Congressional funding following the destruction wrought by Hurricane Sandy that the focus shifted from restoration to resiliency21 and ushered in an era of innovative techniques.22

Continuing pressure from sea level rise and a new awareness of legacy effects from centuries-old farming embankments and ditches has led to approaches both holistic in scope and adaptative in effect. The vision is to regain self-sustaining processes by correcting internal hydrology while also facilitating migration on upland borders 23 This approach to restore resiliency to salt marshes relies on detailed site mapping of prior altera-tions (legacy farming alterations, mosquito control ditches), correct-ing hydrology through site specific prescriptions for restoring single channel hydrology, and using natural processes such as below-ground bio-mass production and sediment accre-tion to restore high marsh elevation

and habitat. At-risk wildlife species, such as the saltmarsh sparrow and black rail are in steady decline and require healthy high marsh in order to nest and raise their young 24

Fifty years has brought significant change to the salt marshes loved and studied by generations of NEERSians Formerly, threats were specific and easily identified. Now, threats are a case of cumulative site-specific alterations, regional stressors such as nutrients and development, and global stressors from climate change, including accelerated sea level rise With less than a decade until pro-jections of increased tidal ranges in the metonic cycle and critically low populations of saltmarsh spar-rows are reached, the challenges are significant and daunting. Recognizing these threats, NEERSians will try to stay ahead of both curves

References:1. Ferrigno, F., and D.M. Jobbins. 1968. Open marsh water management. Proceed-ings of the New Jersey Mosquito Extermi-nation Association. 55:104–115.2. Wolfe, R. J. 1996. Effects of open marsh water management on selected tidal marsh resources: A review. Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association 12:701–712.3. Roman C.T., W.A. Niering, and R.S. War-ren 1984 Salt marsh vegetation change in response to tidal restriction. Environmental Management 8:141–150.4. Sinicrope, T.L., P.G. Hine, R.S. Warren, and W.A. Niering. 1990. Restoration of an impounded salt marsh in New England.

(continued)

11

Estuaries 13:25–30.5 Portnoy, J W 1991 Summer oxygen depletion in a diked New England estuary. Estuaries 14:122–129.6. Portnoy, J.W. 1999. Salt marsh diking and restoration: Biogeochemical implica-tions of altered wetland hydrology Environ-mental Management 24:111–120.7. Portnoy, J.W., and A.E. Giblin. 1997. Biogeochemical effects of seawater res-toration to diked salt marshes. Ecological Applications 7 (3):1054–1063.8. Burdick, D.M., M. Dionne, R.M. Boumans, et al. 1997. Ecological responses to tidal restorations of northern New England salt marshes Wetlands Ecology and Manage-ment 4:129–144.9. Neckles, H.A., M. Dionne, D.M. Burdick, et al. 2002. A monitoring protocol to assess tidal restoration of salt marshes on local and regional scales Restoration Ecol-ogy 10:556–563. 10. Roman, C.T., and D.M. Burdick (eds.) 2012 Tidal Marsh Restoration: A Synthe-sis of Science and Practice Island Press Washington, DC.11. Saltonstall, K. 2002. Cryptic invasion by a non-native genotype of the common reed, Phragmites australis, into North America. PNAS 99:2445–2449.12. Saltonstall, K., P.M. Peterson, and R.J.

Soreng 2004 Recognition of Phragmites australis subsp. americanus (Poaceae: Arundinoideae) in North America: evidence from morphological and genetic analyses. SIDA 21:683–692.13. Hazelton E.L.G., T.J. Mozdzer, D.M. Burdick, et al. 2014. Phragmites australis management in the United States: 40 years of methods and outcomes AoB PLANTS 6: plu001; doi:10.1093/aobpla/plu00114. Nixon, S.W., and C.A. Oviatt. 1973. Ecol-ogy of a New England salt marsh Ecologi-cal Monographs 43:463-498.15 Valiela, I , J M Teal, and W Sass 1973 Nutrient retention in salt marsh plots experimentally fertilized with sewage sludge Estuarine and Coastal Marine Sci-ence 1:262–269.16. Valiela, I., J.M. Teal, S. Volkmann, et al. 1978. Nutrient and particulate fluxes in a salt marsh ecosystem: Tidal exchanges and inputs by precipitation and ground-water. Limnology and Oceanography 23:798–812.17. Deegan, L.A., D.S. Johnson, R.S. War-ren, et al. 2012. Coastal eutrophication as a driver of salt marsh loss Nature 490:388–392. 18. Raposa, K.T., J.S. Goldstein, K. Wilson Grimes, et al. 2020. A comparative assess-ment of salt marsh crabs (Decapods:

Brachyura) across the National Estuarine Research Reserves in New England, USA. Journal of Crustacean Biology 40:67–75.19. Smith S.M., K.C. Medeiros, and M.C. Tyrrell 2012 Hydrology, herbivory, and the decline of Spartina patens (Aiton) Muhl. in outer Cape Cod salt marshes (Massachu-setts, U.S.A.). Journal of Coast Research 28:602–612.20 https://www.nae.usace.army.mil/Mis-sions/Public-Services/Continuing-Authori-ties-Program/Section-1135/ 21. Babson, A., R.O. Bennett, S. Adamow-icz, et al. 2020. Coastal impacts, recovery, and resilience post-Hurricane Sandy in the northeastern US Estuaries and Coasts 43:1603–1609. 22. Burdick, D.M., G.E. Moore, S.C. Adamo-wicz, et al 2020 Mitigating the legacy effects of ditching in a New England Salt marsh Estuaries and Coasts. doi: 10.1007/s12237-019-00656-523. Adamowicz, S.C., G. Wilson, D.M. Burdick, et al. 2020. Farmers in the marsh: Lessons from history and case studies for the future Wetland Science and Practice, Society of Wetlands Scientists 24 https://www.acjv.org/documents/salt_marsh_bird_plan_final_web.pdf

Challenges for Science and Management… (continued)

Close up of spat settled onto a loose shell at Naval Weapons Station Earle, Raritan Bay New Jersey.

Photo: M. Comi, NY/NJ Baykeeper

12

Shellfish and NEERS: A 50-Year Evolution of Our Relationship to these Succulent Shelled CreaturesSandy MacfarlaneCoastal Resource Specialists, Duxbury, Massachusetts, USAsandymac@capecod.net

Shellfish have been important in the New England Estuarine Research Society (NEERS) region for centu-ries, providing food, income, and a way of life Our interaction with them has evolved over the last 50 years. Diversity is key to explaining their success as a valuable resource and for their role in the estuary The region’s geographic location at the confluence of the cold Labrador cur-rent and the warm Gulf Stream forms

an overlapping boundary between a diverse group of commercially valu-able species: soft shell clams (Mya arenaria), quahaugs/hard shell clams (Mercenaria mercenaria), oysters (Crassostrea virginica), bay scal-lops (Argopecten irradians), mussels (Mytilus edulis), razor clams (Ensis directus), sea scallops (Placopecten magellanicus), and sea clams/surf clams (Spissula solidissimus). The variety is possible because of habi-tats ranging from rocky shores and submerged ledges to salt marshes and sand/mud/silt substrates

Research, anchored by facilities such as the University of Maine Darling Marine Center and the NOAA fisheries lab in Milford, Connecticut, along with other institutions and universities, have built on past pioneering work. David Belding’s monographs on the life history, fisheries, and ecology of clams, quahaugs, bay scallops, and oysters1 became the basis for later work and are as valid today as they

were when they were released at the beginning of the 20th century Victor Loosanoff, the Milford Lab director, led the development of standardized procedures for spawning and rear-ing bivalve mollusks and produced a manual for hatchery techniques.2 Robert Guillard created a collection of algae species begun in Milford, expanded at Woods Hole Oceano-graphic Institution, and ended up at the Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences in Boothbay, Maine He developed the formula known as “f/2” for the culture of algal food for larval and juvenile shellfish.

Once standardized hatchery proce-dures were developed, Herb Hidu, Sam Chapman, and graduate stu-dents at the Darling Center focused on shellfish life history, while com-mercial and municipal hatcheries produced seed shellfish. Municipali-ties in Massachusetts, other state marine resources agencies, and research institutions throughout the

Martha’s Vineyard Shellfish Group facility on Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts Photo: S. Marfarlane

Perry Rasso’s farm in Potter Pond, South Kingstown, Rhode Island Photo: S. Marfarlane

(continued)

13

Monitoring Water Quality for Over35 Years

With a proven history of reliable, accurate data logger performance, customers worldwide trust Onset’s HOBO product line to monitor conductivity, pH, dissolved oxygen, and much more. Check out all of our water quality products at: on.onsetcomp.com/waterloggers.

by OnsetHOBO® Visit on.onsetcomp.com/waterloggers

to learn all about it, or contact us today!

SALES@ONSETCOMP.COM (866) 244-3197

14

In Memorium: Michael Kemp

The estuarine and coastal marine sci-ence community lost a leader, men-tor, educator, thinker and friend with the unfortunate passing of William Michael Kemp, who died on 19 Octo-ber in Charleston, South Carolina Michael was 73 years old and was afflicted with Parkinson’s disease for the last several years of his life He was a long-term CERF member and volunteer, and cherished his experi-ences at the CERF meetings he loved, beginning with the Galveston, Texas meeting in 1975

Michael grew up in Clinton, Con-necticut, on the shore of Long Island Sound where fishing for flounder and bluefish from the town dock and high school basketball competed for his time. He completed a BS Degree in Civil Engineering from Georgia Tech in 1969 He earned a MS in Envi-ronmental Engineering in 1971, also from Georgia Tech, and published his first paper, based on his MS work, concerning Salmonellae in poultry processing. Michael then began his professional career as an environ-mental engineer working for EPA in Boston, Massachusetts (1970-1971). As Michael sought to blend his engi-neering experience with his desire to study natural systems, he was drawn to the field of systems ecology and returned to academic life to com-plete a PhD degree at the University of Florida with H T Odum, where he developed a “whole system” energy budget of a coastal lagoon influenced by a power plant.

Michael completed a post-doc at the Chesapeake Biological Labora-tory (1977–1978) and then began a 40-year career at the Horn Point Laboratory (HPL); both laboratories were members of the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science (UMCES). Michael played a central role in the growth of both organizations, and also developed strong ties with colleagues in Europe and Mexico. Despite his retirement in 2017 and his ongoing battle with Parkinson’s disease, Michael contin-ued to collaborate on research with former students and colleagues, and some of these final papers are now coming to press.

Michael often led interdisciplin-ary studies during his long career focused on the ecology of coastal and estuarine ecosystems, with a special emphasis on Chesapeake Bay He was an ecosystem ecologist and his research covered a multitude of topics ranging from submerged aquatic vegetation and benthic productivity to nutrient cycles, pri-mary productivity, physical-biological coupling, and numerical ecosystem models. He often employed an eco-system scale approach, developing nutrient, oxygen, and organic matter budgets and quantifying spatial and temporal coupling as it pertained to eutrophication. Michael was also keenly interested in physical and bio-logical feedbacks, and these systems engineering concepts were ever-present in both his thinking and study designs. He was passionate about the need for synthesis in science and was particularly proud of the paper he authored in 2012 with his friend and colleague of 50 years, Walter Boyn-ton, entitled “Synthesis in Estuarine and Coastal Ecological Research: What Is It, Why Is It Important, and How Do We Teach It?” Michael published 156 peer-reviewed articles and book chapters and co-edited

four books, including two editions of Estuarine Ecology These writ-ings exemplified his ability to clearly and artfully communicate complex ideas, a skill he worked tirelessly to transfer to his students Michael’s paper “Eutrophication of Chesapeake Bay: Historical trends and ecological interactions,” published in 2005, is an excellent synthesis of what we know about the ecology and biogeochemis-try of Chesapeake Bay, accumulating 832 citations as of October 2020

Advising and mentoring students was a particular delight for Michael. His door was always open, and his students were never deprived of insightful and often philosophical discussions concerning both science and life Michael’s mentoring and edu-cational interests were felt far beyond the group of 24 MS and PhD students he formally advised Many of his students have gone on to prominent careers in academia, government, and business If we had unlimited space in this article we could fill it all with inspiring, and sometimes amus-ing Michael Kemp educational stories that reflect his knack for compelling lectures combined with his prodi-gious, often self-deprecating sense of humor

Michael was often recognized for his achievements and contribution to the research and education community His commitment to science-based environmental restoration led him to receive the Maryland Governor’s citation for work on Submerged Aquatic Vegetation in 1992. He was an external expert member of the appointments board for the University of Stockholm and an invited lecturer for the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Crafoord Award (1996). In 2009 he was awarded the Odum Award for Lifetime Achievement from the Coastal and Estuarine Research Federation (shared with Walt Boyn-

15

Shellfish and NEERS… (continued)

ton) and in 2012 he received the Faculty Award for Research, Schol-arship, and Creative Activity from the University System of Maryland Board of Regents He was awarded the Association for the Sciences of Limnology and Oceanography (ASLO) Fellow Award in 2015, for excellence in contributions to ASLO and the aquatic sciences. Michael seldom, if ever, mentioned his awards to others

As recently as spring 2020, Michael was seeking ways to continue to

“revisit our conceptual models of estuarine ecosystems” in virtual discussions with colleagues We have been awestruck by the number of scientists who have reached out to identify Michael as an inspirational and supportive figure in their careers. For many of us, Michael’s passing has taken away not only a respected colleague, but also a close and endur-ing friend

As a legacy to Michael’s many contributions to graduate students,

his wife Laura Murray (also a retired HPL faculty member) and son Cullen have created a fund to support HPL graduate students in Michael’s name You can contribute to the Michael Kemp Student Fund through the fol-lowing link: https://www.umces.edu/michael-kemp-student-fund

Jeremy M. Testa and Walter R. BoyntonUniversity of Maryland Center for Envi-ronmental Science

region experimented with recruit-ment, growth, and survival questions in the field, leading to the develop-ment of the shellfish aquaculture industry in the region Small hatcher-ies such as the Beals Island Regional Shellfish Hatchery in Maine and the Martha’s Vineyard Shellfish Group (both municipal facilities) flourished and expanded. Shellfish diseases and other problems were investigated at research labs around the country and led to the development of disease resistant stock and polyploidy.

Basic research and practical applica-tion coalesced, while stakeholders formed small neighborhood “Friends of . . .” groups and embayment-wide organizations, recognizing the value of maintaining the water quality necessary for shellfish harvest and consumption. The role of land uses, contaminants, and nutrients flow-ing into estuaries through surface and subsurface drainage became an important line of investigation, aided by mesocosms developed by Scott Nixon and Candace Oviatt at the University of Rhode Island, where environmental conditions could be manipulated and studied intensively Similarly, Fred Short used

mesocosms to research the role of eelgrass, which is a prime setting medium for juvenile bay scallops and is also an indicator species.

Throughout the region, volunteer citizen scientists became a valuable asset performing many tasks, includ-ing water sampling and assisting municipalities in their propagation programs, thus allowing greater moni-toring over broad geographic and temporal scales. Both the US Depart-ment of Agriculture and Sea Grant Extensions have been important conduits between research and the public, and the Milford Lab has held annual seminars for the last 40 years attended by researchers, managers, regulators, and industry, providing a valuable opportunity for information transfer

Shellfish importance has also evolved to include societal ecosystem ben-efits such as filtering capacity that assists in nitrogen reduction, reef-building that attenuates wave energy in storm events, and the increase in biodiversity around culture gear

The vibrant shellfish aquaculture industry today owes its success to cooperative collaboration between

research and management in the NEERS region and beyond The people, places, and events noted here are just a sampling—many others have been just as influential. Some early graduate students transformed their research expertise to practical application in shellfish aquaculture businesses and became industry leaders

References:1. Belding, D.L. 2004. The works of David L. Belding, M.D., Biologist: Early 20th Century Shellfish Research in Massachusetts; Qua-hog and Oyster Fishery, The Scallop Fishery, the Soft Shell Clam Fishery. Republication of the works by Dr. David Belding. Cape Cod Cooperative Extension of Barnstable County, Massachusetts 2. Loosanoff, V. L. and H. C. Davis. 1963. Rearing Bivalve Mollusks U S Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Biological Labora-tory, Milford, Connecticut

Burton Shore, oil on linen, 12in x 20in

CERF 2021: Save the Dates!The 26th Biennial CERF Conference will take place

7–11 November 2021 at the Greater Richmond Convention Center in Richmond, Virginia

CERF at 50: Celebrating Our Past, Charting Our Future

The theme of the 26th Biennial CERF Conference is “CERF at 50: Celebrating Our Past, Charting Our Future.” The 2021 conference will be a momentous occasion in

CERF’s history, as it will be our 50th anniversary meeting. 

As CERF turns golden, we have a unique opportunity to reflect on our rich history as a society, the past 50 years of estuarine and coastal research, and successes in translating that science into

effective management, education, and outreach. More importantly, 2021 offers us the opportunity to pivot from that history by looking

ahead to the next 50 years of coastal science and management, identifying the grand challenges we face in the coming decades,

and looking for solutions to address them.

For over thirty years, Alice’s main focus has been plein air painting of the coastal wetlands of United States from Maine to Florida and west to the California coast. This series is about presenting the fragile ribbon of green that hugs both the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts. The more than 40 paintings to be exhibited at CERF 2021 will include paintings from both the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts, but will focus on marshes of the mid-Atlantic. Some paintings from 2002 will be paired with more recent paint-ings of the same sites to represent the past and the changes that have occurred over nearly two decades

Alice lives in Tuckerton, New Jersey, where she moved because of the connection she forged at the age of 10 with the marshes at the Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge The focus of her paintings in the MFA program of the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts was salt marshes of the New Jersey coast She has devoted the last 40 years to painting salt marshes in all seasons of the year. 

For more information on the artist, visit: http://www.mcenerneycook.com/

CERF 2021 Conference Artist: Alice McEnerney-Cook

Riding the Wave to CERF 2021

Painting: Alice McEnerney-Cook

16

CALL FOR ARTICLES: CERF’s 50th AnniversaryTo celebrate the 50th anniversary of CERF, we are planning to run stories in CERF’s Up! throughout 2021 and in the first issue of 2022 after the November 2021 conference. If you have stories to share about CERF’s history, please send them to bulletin@cerf science Contributions can include a wide variety of articles including short anecdotes, stories about people, detailed historical articles on CERF or estuarine research or management, projections for the next 50 years, opinion pieces, poems, cartoons, and artwork. Please see author guidelines at https://www.cerf.science/cerf-s-up-contribution-information

CERF Scientific Awards Nominations

Seeking your feedback on CERF’s Up!We are conducting a survey of CERF members to see if CERF’s Up! is providing what they want. We’d like to get some idea of readership, what parts people read, how often, and if there is anything we can do to make it better. Your feed-back is appreciated, even if you are not a regular reader of the bulletin. Please send your feedback by completing this short, 11-question survey by 30 Decembery 2020: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/CERFsUp You can always send any ideas or questions to the editors at bulletin@cerf.sci-ence

Deadline: 7 April 2021We are now accepting nominations for our prestigious scientific awards:Odum Award—Lifetime AchievementCronin Award—Early AchievementNiering Award—Outstanding EducatorPritchard Award—Physical Oceanography PaperDavidson Award—Stewardship (individual)Coastal Stewardship Award—Stewardship (organization)Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Justice AwardMore details, including nominations procedures and past recipients, can be found on the CERF website: https://www.cerf.science/scientific-awardsThank you for helping the Federation reward excellence among our colleagues.

Robert Orth (jjorth@vims edu)2021 Awards Committee Chair

Nominations for Estuaries and Coasts EditorCERF is seeking a new Co-Editor-in-Chief for the journal Estuar-ies and Coasts. The primary responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief is to assess and take steps to continuously improve the intel-lectual quality of the journal, and to provide objective and timely editorial decisions to attain CERF’s goal of publishing high-qual-ity research that advances knowledge of estuarine and coastal systems

CERF desires the following attributes for candidates:• Recognized accomplishment as an estuarine or coastal scien-

tist with broad research experience• Rich history of publishing and evaluating peer-reviewed papers

on estuarine and coastal science• Strong connections to the community• Objectivity and integrity• Creative, strategic thinker committed to the continual improve-

ment of the journal• Able to make a three-year commitment

CERF has committed to promote diversity throughout all levels of the organization, including CERF leadership. Candidates for Editor-in-Chief are particularly encouraged who reflect individual differences in social identity such as race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, gender identity and expression, religion, sexual orientation, physical ability, and socioeconomic background, as well as differences in discipline, career path, and life experience.

Interested candidates should contact CERF President Jim Fourqurean at jim.fourqurean@fiu.edu

Estuaries and Coasts Editors’ Choice PapersNovember 2020Bukaveckas, P.A., S. Tassone, W. Lee, et al. 2020. The Influence of Storm Events on Metabolism and Water Quality of Riverine and Estuarine Seg-ments of the James, Mattaponi, and Pamunkey Rivers Estuaries and Coasts 43: 1585-1602. https://rdcu.be/b7FwaDecember 2020Du, J. and P.A. Hesp. 2020. Salt Spray Distribu-tion and Its Impact on Vegetation Zonation on Coastal Dunes: a Review. Estuaries and Coasts 43: 1885-1907. https://rdcu.be/b9h7A

17

18

The Latest Coastal & Estuarine Science News (CESN)

Prior Land Use Affects Wetland Recovery Agricultural history leaves imprint on Tillamook Bay restorationSource: Janousek, C.N., et al. 2020. Early Ecosystem Development Varies With Elevation and Pre-Restoration Land Use/Land Cover in a Pacific North-west Tidal Wetland Restoration Project. Estuaries and Coasts DOI: 10.1007/s12237-020-00782-5https://cerf.memberclicks.net/cesn-september-2020#Article1

Fine-Scale Maps Offer Clearer View of Seagrass Dynamics Uncovering hidden changes in fragmented landscapes Source: Kaufman, K.A., et al. 2020. The Use of Imagery and GIS Techniques to Evaluate and Compare Seagrass Dynamics across Multiple Spatial and Temporal Scales Estuaries and Coasts. DOI: 10.1007/s12237-020-00773-6https://cerf.memberclicks.net/cesn-september-2020#Article2

What Happens When Coastal Farmlands are Flooded for Restoration? Past fertilizer use may cause temporary eutrophicationSource: Kristensen, E., et al. 2020. Nitrogen and Phosphorus Export After Flooding of Agricultural Land by Coastal Managed Realignment Estuaries and Coasts. DOI: 10.1007/s12237-020-00785-2https://cerf.memberclicks.net/cesn-september-2020#Article3

Oil Platforms Can Serve as Artificial Reefs Platforms in the Gulf of Mexico offer shelter for young fishesSource: Munnelly, R.T., et al. 2020. Spatial and Temporal Influences of Near-shore Hydrography on Fish Assemblages Associated with Energy Platforms in the Northern Gulf of Mexico Estuaries and Coasts. DOI: 10.1007/s12237-020-00772-7https://cerf.memberclicks.net/cesn-september-2020#Article4

Merryl Alber, Managing Editor Janet Fang, Science Writer/Coordinating Editor

CESN is an electronic newsletter that is put out on a bimonthly basis (six issues per year) and serves as a companion to the journal Estuaries and Coasts Each issue of CESN provides a summary of four articles from the journal, written for an audience of coastal managers and other interested stakeholders and emphasizing the management applica-tions of scientific findings. Issues are posted online and emailed to subscribers. Go to the CESN website at www cerf science/cesn to read the full summaries and sign up to have future issues delivered to your email inbox.

SEPTEMBER 2020

19

Call for Nominations for 2021–2023 Governing BoardDeadline: 21 December 2020

Hilary Neckles, Nominations Committee Chair

We invite you to submit nominations for the 2021–2023 CERF Governing Board, to be led by current President-Elect Leila Hamdan. CERF is soliciting nominations for our next President-Elect, Secretary, and three Members-at-Large, including an International and Student Member-at-Large In general, the Governing Board carries out all of CERF’s affairs, with legal and fiduciary responsibility for the overall planning, management, and oversight of the Federation. In practice, serving on the Governing Board is a fantastic way to meet other dedicated CERF members, shape the path forward for CERF, develop leadership skills, and have a ton of fun The Governing

Board meets four times yearly (two virtual meetings and two in-person meetings), and Board members typi-cally serve on at least one committee doing the work of CERF. Responsibili-ties of positions up for election can be found at https://cerf.member-clicks.net/call-for-nominations-for-2021-2023-governing-board

Through the Broadening Participation Comprehensive Plan, CERF has com-mitted to promote diversity through-out all levels of the organization, including CERF leadership. Nomina-tions to the Governing Board are particularly encouraged that reflect individual differences in social identity such as race, ethnicity, national origin,

gender, gender identity and expres-sion, religion, sexual orientation, physical ability, and socioeconomic background, as well as differences in discipline, career path, and life experi-ence

Please send your nominations to Past-President Hilary Neckles (hneck-les@usgs gov), copied to Executive Director Susan Park (spark@cerf.science), before the 21 December 2020 deadline Self-nominations are welcome, and nominations of others are assumed to have the consent of the nominee

Photo: M. Comi, NY/NJ Baykeeper Installation of living shoreline at Naval Weapons Station Earle (Raritan Bay, New Jersey) by divers.

20

AFTERTHOUGHTS

CERF or TRF?Stephen S. Hale stephenshale@gmail.com

The Coastal and Estuarine Research Federation, for obvious reasons, adopted the acronym CERF as the informal name of the organization However, does the homophone surf most accurately reflect the mission of the federation, which is to advance “understanding and wise stewardship of estuarine and coastal ecosys-tems worldwide?” Not all CERF work occurs in the pounding surf.

CERF works in the area between limnology and oceanography. The two suffixes are based on Greek words: ology means a branch of study or knowledge and ography means to write or describe something The Association for the Sciences of Limnology and Oceanography didn’t decide to use the name Associa-tion for the Sciences of Lakes and Oceans Shouldn’t we too have a Greek or Latin word to describe our discipline? That might give it more

gravitas. But this gets complicated. The Latin word for estuary is aestu-arium and the word for coast is costa Should our branch of science be called aestuariumology (or aestuari-umography)? Then we’d also have to add costaology (or costaography). Not likely to catch on.

A simpler solution would be to call our discipline thalassography In the late 1800s, when the study of oceans was in its infancy, Alexander Agassiz of the Harvard Museum of Compara-tive Zoology, a prominent American marine scientist of that period, coined the term thalassography for the new discipline. After a research cruise on the U S Coast and Geodetic Survey steamer Blake, he published a report titled “A contribution to American thalassography.” In Greek mythol-ogy, Thalassa was the primordial goddess of the sea However, the term thalassography never caught

on with other ocean researchers But it might be useful to us Collins English Dictionary defines thalas-sography to mean “oceanography, esp. that branch dealing with smaller bodies of water, as bays, sounds, and gulfs”. All near land. That sounds like what we do.

We could, more simply, call our organization the Thalassographic Research Federation, TRF for short Additionally, the homophone turf implies a connection with land and watersheds, which have much to do with the character of estuaries and coasts Further, turf suggests struggles over jurisdiction, a key issue for policy and management. And members who like to highlight the food aspects of ecosystem services provided by marine systems could use the nickname CERF and TRF.

Thalassa the Sea, Greco-Roman mosaic from Antioch C5th A.D., Hatay Archaeology Museum

Alexander Agassiz, Harvard Museum of Comparative Zoology, coiner of the word thalassography

CERF GOVERNING BOARD

President Jim Fourqurean Florida International University

President-Elect Leila Hamdan University of Southern Mississippi

Past President Hilary Neckles U S Geological Survey

Secretary Jamie Vaudrey University of Connecticut

Treasurer Erik Smilth University of South Carolina

Members at Large2017-2021 Christine Whitcraft California State University Long Beach

2019-2023 Jennifer Beseres Pollack Harte Research Institute Texas A&M University Corpus Cristi

2019-2023 Kristin Wilson Grimes University of the Virgin Islands

International Member at Large 2017-2021 J Ernesto Mancera Universidad Nacional de Colombia

Student Member at Large 2019-2021 Johnny Quispe Rutgers University

Affiliate Society RepresentativesACCESS Allen Beck Clean Foundation

AERS Ben Fertig Irvine Nature Center

CAERS Steven Litvin Monterey Bay Aquarium Reasearch Institiute

GERS Megan La Peyre U S Geological Survey and Louisiana State University Agricultural Center

NEERS Brett Branco Brooklyn College

PERS Liz Perotti Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

SEERS Enrique Reyes East Carolina University

Journal OfficialsCo-Editors in Chief Paul Montagna Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi

Charles (Si) Simenstad University of Washington

Managing Editor Taylor Bowen

Reviews Editor Ken HeckDauphin Island Sea Lab

CESN Managing Editor Merryl Alber University of Georgia

CESN Science Writer/Coordinating Editor Janet Fang

Contact InformationCoastal & Estuarine Research Federation 2150 North 107th Street, Suite 205 Seattle, WA 98133-9009 (206) 209-5262 info@cerf science

Executive Director Susan Park (804) 381-6658 spark@cerf.science

Chief Operating Officer Louise S Miller info@cerf science

CERF’s Up! EditorStephen HaleDeputy EditorAllison Fitzgeraldbulletin@cerf science

21

COASTAL & ESTUARINE RESEARCH FEDERATION 2150 N 107th St, Ste 205Seattle, WA 98133Phone: (206) 209-5262Website: www.cerf.scienceEmail: info@cerf.science