Florida Bay Science Program: a synthesis of research on Florida Bay

This report documents the progress made toward the objectives established in the Strategic Plan revised in 1997 for the agencies cooperating in the program. These objectives are expressed as five questions that organized the research on the Florida Bay ecosystem: Ecosystem History What was the Florida Bay ecosystem like 50, 100, and 150 years ago? Question 1—Physical Processes How and at what rates do storms, changing freshwater flows, sea level rise, and local evaporation and precipitation influence circulation and salinity patterns within Florida Bay and exchange between the bay and adjacent waters? Question 2—Nutrient Dynamics What is the relative importance of the influx of external nutrients and of internal nutrient cycling in determining the nutrient budget for Florida Bay? What mechanisms control the sources and sinks of the bay’s nutrients? Question 3—Plankton Blooms What regulates the onset, persistence, and fate of planktonic algal blooms in Florida Bay? Question 4—Seagrass Ecology What are the causes and mechanisms for the observed changes in the seagrass community of Florida Bay? What is the effect of changing salinity, light, and nutrient regimes on these communities? Question 5—Higher Trophic Levels What is the relationship between environmental and habitat change and the recruitment, growth, and survivorship of animals in Florida Bay? Each question examines different characteristics of the Florida Bay ecosystem and the relation of these to the geomorphological setting of the bay and to processes linking the bay with adjacent systems and driving change.This report also examines the additional question of what changes have occurred in Florida Bay over the past 150 years

Variation and Uncertainty in Evaporation from a Subtropical Estuary: Florida Bay

Variation and uncertainty in estimated evaporation was determined over time and between two locations in Florida Bay, a subtropical estuary. Meteorological data were collected from September 2001 to August 2002 at Rabbit Key and Butternut Key within the Bay. Evaporation was estimated using both vapor flux and energy budget methods. The results were placed into a long-term context using 33 years of temperature and rainfall data collected in south Florida. Evaporation also was estimated from this long-term data using an empirical formula relating evaporation to clear sky solar radiation and air temperature. Evaporation estimates for the 12-mo period ranged from 144 to 175 cm yr21, depending on location and method, with an average of 163 cm yr21 (6 9%). Monthly values ranged from 9.2 to 18.5 cm, with the highest value observed in May, corresponding with the maximum in measured net radiation. Uncertainty estimates derived from measurement errors in the data were as much as 10%, and were large enough to obscure differences in evaporation between the two sites. Differences among all estimates for any month indicate the overall uncertainty in monthly evaporation, and ranged from 9% to 26%. Over a 33-yr period (1970–2002), estimated annual evaporation from Florida Bay ranged from 148 to 181 cm yr21, with an average of 166 cm yr21. Rainfall was consistently lower in Florida Bay than evaporation, with a long-term average of 106 cm yr21. Rainfall considered alone was uncorrelated with evaporation at both monthly and annual time scales; when the seasonal variation in clear sky radiation was also taken into account both net radiation and evaporation were significantly suppressed in months with high rainfall

Integrated Conceptual Ecosystem Model Development for the Southeast Florida Coastal Marine Ecosystem

The overall goal of the MARES (MARine and Estuarine goal Setting) project for South Florida is “to reach a science-based consensus about the defining characteristics and fundamental regulating processes of a South Florida coastal marine ecosystem that is both sustainable and capable of providing the diverse ecosystem services upon which our society depends.” Through participation in a systematic process of reaching such a consensus, science can contribute more directly and effectively to the critical decisions being made both by policy makers and by natural resource and environmental management agencies. The document that follows briefly describes MARES overall and this systematic process. It then describes in considerable detail the resulting output from the first step in the process, the development of an Integrated Conceptual Ecosystem Model (ICEM) for the third subregion to be addressed by MARES, the Southeast Florida Coast (SEFC). What follows with regard to the SEFC relies upon the input received from more than 60 scientists, agency resource managers, and representatives of environmental organizations during workshops held throughout 2009–2012 in South Florida

Conserving Coastal Wetlands Despite Sea Level Rise

Coastal wetlands provide valuable services such as flood protection and fisheries production to a global population that is increasingly concentrated near the coast and dependent on its resources. Many of the world\u27s coastal wetlands suffered significant losses during this century, and the creation of new wetland areas is not keeping pace with recent losses. Some destruction of wetland areas can be expected as a consequence of the continual reworking of the coastal zone by dynamic geologic processes. Yet human activities also play a role, both directly by encroaching on coastal wetlands and indirectly by influencing the hydrologic and geologic processes in the coastal zone

The EBM-DPSER conceptual model: integrating ecosystem services into the DPSIR framework

There is a pressing need to integrate biophysical and human dimensions science to better inform holistic ecosystem management supporting the transition from single species or single-sector management to multi-sector ecosystem-based management. Ecosystem-based management should focus upon ecosystem services, since they reflect societal goals, values, desires, and benefits. The inclusion of ecosystem services into holistic management strategies improves management by better capturing the diversity of positive and negative human-natural interactions and making explicit the benefits to society. To facilitate this inclusion, we propose a conceptual model that merges the broadly applied Driver, Pressure, State, Impact, and Response (DPSIR) conceptual model with ecosystem services yielding a Driver, Pressure, State, Ecosystem service, and Response (EBM-DPSER) conceptual model. The impact module in traditional DPSIR models focuses attention upon negative anthropomorphic impacts on the ecosystem; by replacing impacts with ecosystem services the EBM-DPSER model incorporates not only negative, but also positive changes in the ecosystem. Responses occur as a result of changes in ecosystem services and include inter alia management actions directed at proactively altering human population or individual behavior and infrastructure to meet societal goals. The EBM-DPSER conceptual model was applied to the Florida Keys and Dry Tortugas marine ecosystem as a case study to illustrate how it can inform management decisions. This case study captures our system-level understanding and results in a more holistic representation of ecosystem and human society interactions, thus improving our ability to identify trade-offs. The EBM-DPSER model should be a useful operational tool for implementing EBM, in that it fully integrates our knowledge of all ecosystem components while focusing management attention upon those aspects of the ecosystem most important to human society and does so within a framework already familiar to resource managers

Elements of salt marsh hydrology

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Civil Engineering, 1986.MICROFICHE COPY AVAILABLE IN ARCHIVES AND ENGINEERINGIncludes bibliographies.by William Kensett Nuttle.Ph.D

The flow of water in salt marsh peat

Thesis (M.S.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Civil Engineering, 1982.MICROFICHE COPY AVAILABLE IN ARCHIVES AND ENGINEERING.Bibliography: leaves 95-96.by William Kensett Nuttle.M.S

The EBM-DPSER Conceptual Model: Integrating Ecosystem Services into the DPSIR Framework

There is a pressing need to integrate biophysical and human dimensions science to better inform holistic ecosystem management supporting the transition from single species or single-sector management to multi-sector ecosystem-based management. Ecosystem-based management should focus upon ecosystem services, since they reflect societal goals, values, desires, and benefits. The inclusion of ecosystem services into holistic management strategies improves management by better capturing the diversity of positive and negative human-natural interactions and making explicit the benefits to society. To facilitate this inclusion, we propose a conceptual model that merges the broadly applied Driver, Pressure, State, Impact, and Response (DPSIR) conceptual model with ecosystem services yielding a Driver, Pressure, State, Ecosystem service, and Response (EBM-DPSER) conceptual model. The impact module in traditional DPSIR models focuses attention upon negative anthropomorphic impacts on the ecosystem; by replacing impacts with ecosystem services the EBM-DPSER model incorporates not only negative, but also positive changes in the ecosystem. Responses occur as a result of changes in ecosystem services and include inter alia management actions directed at proactively altering human population or individual behavior and infrastructure to meet societal goals. The EBM-DPSER conceptual model was applied to the Florida Keys and Dry Tortugas marine ecosystem as a case study to illustrate how it can inform management decisions. This case study captures our system-level understanding and results in a more holistic representation of ecosystem and human society interactions, thus improving our ability to identify trade-offs. The EBM-DPSER model should be a useful operational tool for implementing EBM, in that it fully integrates our knowledge of all ecosystem components while focusing management attention upon those aspects of the ecosystem most important to human society and does so within a framework already familiar to resource managers

Three common definitions of ecosystem services show significant disparity.

<p>The first row shows that the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment applies the broadest definition of ecosystem services with more detailed definitions provided by Boyd and Banzhaf <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0070766#pone.0070766-Boyd1" target="_blank">[53]</a> and Fisher et al <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0070766#pone.0070766-Fisher1" target="_blank">[54]</a>. In our initial EBM-DPSER model development we employed the MEA (2005) definition, because this was the most familiar definiton to the majority of participants and our goal was to build consensus. However, when the EBM-DPSER model is applied to conduct trade-off analyses of management options the other definitions for ecosystem services may be more appropriate. To help facilitate the application of other ecosystem service definitions, the table shows the linkages between the definitions of <i>ecosystem attributes people care about</i>, ecosystem services, and benefits used in this study, the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment, Boyd and Banzhaf 2007, and Fisher et al. 2009.</p