Identifying, Implementing and Monitoring Tidal Hydrology Restoration Projects

for Alabama and the Gulf of Mexico

Stephen Sempier, Chris Boyd, Meg Goecker and LaDon Swann

Alabama Water Resources ConferenceOrange Beach, Alabama

September 6, 2012

Defining Hydrological Restoration

Photo credit: Meg Goecker- IMSG

“remove or modify anthropogenic barriers to restore historic tidal estuarine and freshwater exchange to benefit coastal and marine fisheries habitat”

Goals Partnership Components

InventoryingRestoringMonitoring

Photo credit: Meg Goecker- IMSG

Inventory of Restoration Projects

Basic Criteria for Inventory Gulf of Mexico Match definition 5 acres or more Less than $5 million 20-year life span

Collect Basic Information Collect uniform information about

potential projects Meeting with Sea Grant Agent One hour per project Sea Grant Agent uploads project

Inventory Form:Background and Project Submission Location Acres restored Type of habitat(s) Historical

information Description of

barrier Cost

Photo credit: NPS.gov

Inventory Form:Ownership, Benefits and Partners

Private versus Public Adjacent to

conservation area(s) Species benefited Ecosystem services Volunteer opportunities Funding partners

Photo credit: NOAA 2010, Returning the Tide

Map Barrier and Impact Area

Projects in Inventory

Use of Inventory:Restoration Sponsors

NOAA State Agencies Sea Grant NRDA Non-Governmental

OrganizationsEnvironmentalReligious

Others

Photo credit: NOAA 2010, Returning the Tide

On-The-Ground Restoration

Request For Proposals Guidelines

Match definition of hydrological restorationUp to $100,0001:1 matchGulf of Mexico

Competitive Review Process

2013 RFP closed August 17th

Two projects may be selected

Bayou St. John

Upper Apalachicola Bay

Tampa Bay

Hydrological Monitoring Plan

Monitoring Plan Development Panel of experts Four categories

Hydrology/StructureNektonVegetationSoil

Core parameters To be released soon

Core ParametersHydrology/Structure Biotic Assessment of Barrier

Removal Water Salinity Inundation Area Open Water Benefit

Nekton (presence/absence)

Vegetation (coverage by species)

Acknowledgements NOAA Restoration Center Criteria Panel Gulf-wide Sea Grant Extension Network Monitoring Panel

ContactsChris Boyd: cboyd@ext.msstate.edu

Meg Goecker: Meg.Goecker@noaa.gov

Steve Sempier: stephen.sempier@usm.edu

This presentation was supported by the U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Restoration Center under NOAA Grant NA10NMF4630080, Mississippi‐Alabama Sea Grant Consortium, Florida Sea Grant College Program, Louisiana Sea Grant College Program and Texas Sea Grant College Program. The statements, findings, conclusions and recommendations do not necessarily reflect the views of these organizations.