Floristic Development in Three Oligohaline Tidal Wetlands after Dike Removal

References

1. ↵
   1. Abernethy V.J.,
   2. Willby N.J.

   1999. Changes along a disturbance gradient in the density and composition of propagule banks in floodplain aquatic habitats. Plant Ecology 140:177–190.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
2. ↵
   1. Ahmed A.,
   2. Pelletier G.,
   3. Roberts M.,
   4. Kolosseus A.

   2014. South Puget Sound dissolved oxygen study water quality model calibration and scenarios. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication 14-03-004.
3. ↵
   1. Annen C.A.

   2010. Prospects for disrupting rhizome apical dominance prior to chemical treatment of Phalaris arundinacea. Ecological Restoration 3:291–299.

   OpenUrl
4. ↵
   1. Annen C.A.

   2011. Manipulating internal system feedbacks to accelerate Reed Canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) control: From theory to practice. Ecological Restoration 29:222–224.

   OpenUrlFREE Full Text
5. ↵
   1. Annen C.A.,
   2. Tyser R.W.,
   3. Kirsch E.M.

   2005. Effects of a selective herbicide, sethoxydim, on reed canarygrass. Ecological Restoration 23:99–102.

   OpenUrlFREE Full Text
6. ↵
   1. Beamer E.,
   2. Bernard R.,
   3. Hayman B.,
   4. Hebner B.,
   5. Hinton S.,
   6. Hood W.G,
   7. et al.

   2005. Skagit Chinook recovery plan. Skagit River System Cooperative and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. skagitcoop.org/wp-content/uploads/Skagit-Chinook-Plan-13.pdf.
7. ↵
   1. Belyea L.R.,
   2. Lancaster J.

   1999. Assembly rules within a contingent ecology. Oikos 86:402–416.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
8. ↵
   1. Bertness M.D.,
   2. Leonard G.H.

   1997. The role of positive interactions in communities: Lessons from intertidal habitats. Ecology 78:1976–1989.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
9. ↵
   1. Bishop Y.M.M.,
   2. Fienberg S.E.,
   3. Holland P.W.

   1975. Discrete Multivariate Analysis Theory and Practice. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
10. ↵
    1. Boers A.M.,
    2. Veltman R.L.D.,
    3. Zedler J.B.

    2007. Typha × glauca dominance and extended hydroperiod constrain restoration of wetland diversity. Ecological Engineering 29:232–244.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
11. ↵
    1. Borja A.,
    2. Dauer D.M.,
    3. Elliott M.,
    4. Simenstad C.A.

    2010. Medium- and long-term recovery of estuarine and coastal ecosystems: Patterns, rates and restoration effectiveness. Estuaries and Coasts 33:1249–1260.

    OpenUrl
12. ↵
    1. Boyd J,
    2. Clifton B.C.

    2015. Lessons learned from monitoring estuary restoration projects in the Skagit and Stillaguamish deltas. Paper presented to the Salmon Recovery Conference, Vancouver, Washington, May 27–29.
13. ↵
    1. Bradfield G.E.,
    2. Campbell A.

    1986. Vegetation–elevation correlation in two dyked marshes of northeastern Vancouver Island: A multivariate analysis. Canadian Journal of Botany 64:2487–2492.

    OpenUrl
14. ↵
    1. Bradfield G.E.,
    2. Porter G.L.

    1982. Vegetation structure and diversity components of a Frasier estuary tidal marsh. Canadian Journal of Botany 60:440–451.

    OpenUrl
15. ↵
    1. Burg M.E.,
    2. Tripp D.R.,
    3. Rosenburg E.S.

    1980. Plant associations and primary productivity of the Nisqually salt marsh on southern Puget Sound, Washington. Northwest Science 54:222–236.

    OpenUrl
16. ↵
    1. Burgess T.E.

    1970. Foods and habitat of four anatids wintering on the Fraser Delta tidal marshes. MS dissertation, University of British Columbia.
17. ↵
    1. Callaway J.C.,
    2. Sullivan G.,
    3. Desmond J.S.,
    4. Williams G.D.,
    5. Zedler J.B.

    2000. Assessment and monitoring. Pages 271–336 in Zedler J.B. (ed), Handbook for Restoring Tidal Wetlands (Marine Science Series). New York, NY: CRC Press.
18. ↵
    1. Campbell A.,
    2. Bradfield G.E.

    1988. Short-term vegetation change after dyke breaching at the Kokish Marsh, northeastern Vancouver Island. Northwest Science 62:28–36.

    OpenUrl
19. ↵
    1. Caratti J.F.

    2006. Point intercept (PO) sampling method. U.S. Forest Service General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-164–CD.
20. ↵
    1. Chappell C.B.

    2006. Upland plant associations of the Puget Trough ecoregion, Washington. Washington Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Report 2006–01.
21. ↵
    1. Claxton A.,
    2. Jacobson K.C.,
    3. Bhuthimethee M.,
    4. Teel D.,
    5. Bottom D.

    2013. Parasites in subyearling Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) suggest increased habitat use in wetlands compared to sandy beach habitats in the Columbia River estuary. Hydrobiologia 717:27–39

    OpenUrl
22. ↵
    1. Cohen J.A.

    1960. Coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 20:37–46.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
23. ↵
    1. Collins B.

    2000. Mid-19th century stream channels and wetlands interpreted from archival sources for three north Puget Sound estuaries. Skagit System Cooperative. skagitcoop.org/wp-content/uploads/EB1474_Collins_2000.pdf.
24. ↵
    1. Collins B.D.,
    2. Montgomery D.R.,
    3. Sheikh A.J.

    2003. Reconstructing the historical riverine landscape of the Puget lowland. Pages 79–128 in Montgomery D.R., Bolton S.M., Booth D.B., Wall L. (eds), Restoration of Puget Sound rivers. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.
25. ↵
    1. Congalton R.

    1991. A review of assessing the accuracy of classifications of remotely sensed data. Remote Sensing of Environment 37:35–46.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
26. ↵
    1. Cordell J.R.,
    2. Tear L.M.,
    3. Higgins H.A.

    1999. Duwamish River coastal America restoration and reference sites: Results from 1997 monitoring studies. University of Washington Fisheries Research Institute Technical Report FRI-UW-9903.
27. ↵
    1. Cornu C.E.,
    2. Sadro S.

    2002. Physical and functional responses to experimental marsh surface elevation in Coos Bay’s south slough. Restoration Ecology 10:474–486.

    OpenUrl
28. ↵
    1. Craig B.E.,
    2. Simenstad C.A.,
    3. Bottom D.L.

    2014. Rearing in natural and recovering tidal wetlands enhances growth and life-history diversity of Columbia estuary tributary Coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch Populations. Journal of Fish Biology 85: 31–51.

    OpenUrl
29. ↵
    1. Crain C.M.,
    2. Silliman B.R.,
    3. Bertness S.L.,
    4. Bertness M.D.

    2004. Physical and biotic drivers of plant distribution across estuarine salinity gradients. Ecology 85:2539–2549.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
30. ↵
    1. Daehler C.C.

    2003. Performance comparisons of co-occurring native and alien invasive plants: Implications for conservation and restoration. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 34:183–211.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
31. ↵
    1. Daubenmire R.F.

    1959. Canopy coverage method of vegetation analysis. Northwest Science 33:43–64.

    OpenUrl
32. ↵
    1. Davis M.A.,
    2. Grime J.P.,
    3. Thompson K.

    2000. Fluctuating resources in plant communities: A general theory of invasibility. Journal of Ecology 88:528–534.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
33. ↵
    1. Dawe N.K.,
    2. Bradfield G.E.,
    3. Boyd W.S.,
    4. Trethewey D.E.E.,
    5. Zolbrod A.N.

    2000. Marsh creation in a northern Pacific estuary: Is thirteen years of monitoring vegetation dynamics enough? Conservation Ecology 4:1–22.

    OpenUrl
34. ↵
    1. Deegan L.A.,
    2. Johnson D.S.,
    3. Warren R.S.,
    4. Peterson B.J.,
    5. Fleeger J.W.,
    6. Fagherazzi S.,
    7. et al.

    2012. Coastal eutrophication as a driver of salt marsh loss. Nature 490:388–392.

    OpenUrlCrossRefGeoRefPubMedWeb of Science
35. ↵
    1. Dronova I.

    2015. Object-based image analysis in wetland research: A review. Remote Sensing 7:6380–6413.

    OpenUrl
36. ↵
    1. Eilers H.P.

    1975. Plants, plant communities, net production and tide levels: The ecological biogeography of the Nehalem salt marshes, Tillamook County, Oregon. PhD dissertation, Oregon State University.
37. ↵
    1. Ewing K.

    1983. Environmental controls in Pacific Northwest intertidal marsh plant communities. Canadian Journal of Botany 64:1105–1116.

    OpenUrl
38. ↵
    1. Geber U.

    2002. Cutting frequency and stubble height of reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.): Influence on quality and quantity of biomass for biogas production. Grass and Forage Science 57:389–394.

    OpenUrl
39. ↵
    1. Green E.K.,
    2. Galatowitsch S.M.

    2001. Differences in wetland plant community establishment with additions of Nitrate-N and invasive species (Phalaris arundinacea and Typha × glauca). Canadian Journal of Botany 79:170–178.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
40. ↵
    1. Grossman E.,
    2. Crump cartographers D.

    2012. LiDAR remote sensing Washington estuaries Washington Priority 3—Skagit River (LiDAR Raster Data). Watershed Sciences raster digital data.
41. ↵
    1. Guo M.,
    2. Li J.,
    3. Sheng C.,
    4. Xu J.,
    5. Wu Li

    2017. Review of wetland remote sensing. Sensors 17:777–813.

    OpenUrl
42. ↵
    1. Hall S.J.,
    2. Zedler J.B.

    2010. Constraints on sedge meadow restoration in urban wetlands. Restoration Ecology 18:671–680.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
43. ↵
    1. Hinton S.,
    2. Mickelson E.,
    3. Clifton B.C.,
    4. Beamer E.M.,
    5. Hood W.G.

    2010. Milltown Island restoration project monitoring plan. Skagit River System Cooperative.
44. 1. Hinton S.,
    2. Blank J.,
    3. McKain A.,
    4. Hood W.G.

    2005. Wiley Slough estuarine design report. Skagit River System Cooperative. skagitcoop.org/wp-content/uploads/Wiley-Design-Report_Final-Draft.pdf.
45. ↵
    1. Hood W.G.

    2004. Deepwater Slough monitoring report: 2000–2003. Skagit River System Cooperative. skagitcoop.org/wp-content/uploads/dwmonitor.pdf.
46. ↵
    1. Hood W.G.

    2007a. Large woody debris influences vegetation zonation in an oligohaline tidal marsh. Estuaries and Coasts 30: 44–450.

    OpenUrl
47. ↵
    1. Hood W.G.

    2007b. Scaling tidal channel geometry with marsh island area: A tool for habitat restoration, linked to channel formation process. Water Resources Research 43:W0340.

    OpenUrl
48. 1. Hood W.G.

    2013. Applying and testing a predictive vegetation model to management of the invasive cattail, Typha angustifolia L., in an oligohaline tidal marsh reveals priority effects caused by non-stationarity. Wetlands Ecology Management 21:229–242.

    OpenUrl
49. ↵
    1. Hood W.G.

    2015. Predicting the number, orientation and spacing of dike breaches for tidal marsh restoration. Ecological Engineering 83:319–327.

    OpenUrl
50. ↵
    1. Iannone B.V. III.,
    2. Galatowitsch S.M.

    2008. Altering light and soil N to limit Phalaris arundinacea reinvasion in sedge meadow restorations. Restoration Ecology 16:689–701.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
51. ↵
    1. Ingebritsen S.E.,
    2. Ikehara M.E.,
    3. Galloway D.L.,
    4. Jones D.R.

    2000. Delta subsidence in California: The sinking heart of the state. United States Geological Survey Fact Sheet 005-00.
52. ↵
    1. Janousek C.N.,
    2. Folger C.L.

    2014. Variation in tidal wetland plant diversity and composition within and among coastal estuaries: Assessing the relative importance of environmental gradients. Journal of Vegetation Science 25:534–545.

    OpenUrl
53. ↵
    1. Jefferson C.A.

    1974. Plant communities and succession in Oregon coastal salt marshes. PhD dissertation, Oregon State University.
54. ↵
    1. Kee D.K.,
    2. Ewing K.,
    3. Giblin D.E.

    2006 Controlling Phalaris arundinacea (reed canarygrass) with live willow stakes: A density-dependent response. Ecological Engineering 27:219–227.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
55. ↵
    1. Klemas V.

    2011. Remote sensing of wetlands: Case studies comparing practical techniques. Journal of Coastal Research 27:418–427.

    OpenUrl
56. ↵
    1. Lefstad E.A.,
    2. Fonda R.W.

    1995. Gradient analysis of the vegetation in a lagoonal salt marsh, Whidbey Island, Washington. Northwest Science 69:253–264.

    OpenUrl
57. ↵
    1. Liu D.,
    2. Xia F.

    2010. Assessing object-based classification: Advantages and limitations. Remote Sensing Letters 1:187–194.

    OpenUrl
58. ↵
    1. Mitchell D.L.

    1981. Salt marsh reestablishment following dike breaching in the Salmon River estuary, Oregon. PhD dissertation, Oregon State University.
59. ↵
    1. Mitchell M.E.,
    2. Lishawa S.C.,
    3. Geddes P.,
    4. Larkin D.J.,
    5. Treering D.,
    6. Tuchman N.C.

    2011. Time-dependent impacts of cattail invasion in a Great Lakes coastal wetland complex. Wetlands 31:1143–1149.

    OpenUrl
60. ↵
    1. Pennings S.C.,
    2. Callaway R.M.

    1992. Salt marsh plant zonation: The relative importance of competition and physical factors. Ecology 73:681–690.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
61. ↵
    1. Pidwirny M.J.

    1990. Plant zonation in a brackish tidal marsh: Descriptive verification of resource-based competition and community structure. Canadian Journal of Botany 68:1689–1697.

    OpenUrl
62. ↵
    1. Sanderson E.W.,
    2. Ustin S.L.,
    3. Foin T.C.

    2000. The influence of tidal channels on the distribution of salt marsh plant species in Petaluma Marsh, CA, USA. Plant Ecology 146:29–41.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
63. ↵
    1. Seebacher L.A.

    2008. Phalaris arundinacea control and riparian restoration within agricultural watercourses in King County, Washington. PhD dissertation, University of Washington.
64. ↵
    1. Shannon C.E.,
    2. Weaver W.

    1949. The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, IL: The University of Illinois Press.
65. ↵
    1. Simenstad C.A.,
    2. Cordell J.R.

    2000. Ecological assessment criteria for restoring anadromous salmonid habitat in Pacific Northwest estuaries. Ecological Engineering 15:283–302.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
66. ↵
    1. Simenstad C.A.,
    2. Thom R.M.

    1996. Functional equivalency trajectories of the restored Gog-Le-Hi-Te estuarine wetland. Ecological Applications 6:38–56.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
67. ↵
    1. Simenstad C.A.,
    2. Toft J.,
    3. Higgins H.,
    4. Cordell J.,
    5. Orr M.,
    6. Williams P.,
    7. Grimaldo L.,
    8. Hymanson Z.,
    9. et al.

    1999. Preliminary results from the Sacramento-San Joaquin delta breached levee wetland study (BREACH). California State Water Resources Control Board IEP Newsletter 12:15–21.
68. ↵
    1. Smith S.M.,
    2. Thime A.R.,
    3. Zilla B.,
    4. Lee K.

    2015. Responses of narrowleaf cattail (Typha angustifolia) to combinations of salinity and nutrient additions: Implications for coastal marsh restoration. Ecological Restoration 33:297–302.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
69. ↵
    1. Snow A.A.,
    2. Vince S.W.

    1984. Plant zonation in an Alaskan salt marsh. Journal of Ecology 72:669–684.

    OpenUrl
70. ↵
    1. Stewart-Oaten A,
    2. Murdoch W.W.,
    3. Parker K.R.

    1986. Environmental impact assessment: “Pseudoreplication” in time? Ecology 67:929–940.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
71. ↵
    1. Tanner C.D.,
    2. Cordell J.R.,
    3. Rubey J.,
    4. Tear L.M.

    2002. Restoration of freshwater intertidal habitat functions at Spencer Island, Everett, Washington. Restoration Ecology 10:564–576.

    OpenUrl
72. ↵
    1. Taylor A.H.

    1983. Plant communities and elevation in a diked intertidal marsh in the Coos Bay estuary, Oregon. Northwest Science 57:132–142.

    OpenUrl
73. ↵
    1. Tuxen K.A.,
    2. Schile M.L.,
    3. Kelly M.,
    4. Siegel S.W.

    2008. Vegetation colonization in a restoring tidal marsh: A remote sensing approach. Restoration Ecology 16:313–323.

    OpenUrl
74. ↵
    1. Underwood A.J.

    1992. Beyond BACI: The detection of environmental impacts on populations in the real, but variable, world. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 161:145–178.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
75. ↵
    1. Vermeer K.,
    2. Levings C.D.

    1977. Populations, biomass and food habits of ducks on the Fraser River Delta intertidal area, British Columbia. Wildfowl 28:49–60.

    OpenUrl
76. ↵
    1. Washington Department of Natural Resources (WADNR) cartographers

    2005. Cadastre Jurisdiction, Washington State. Geographic information system data.
77. 1. Washington State Department of Ecology (WADOE)

    2014. Water quality assessment and 303(d) List. ecology.wa.gov/Water-Shorelines/Water-quality/Water-improvement/Assessment-of-state-waters-303d.
78. ↵
    1. Washington State Department of Ecology (WADOE)

    2015. River and stream water quality monitoring. fortress.wa.gov/ecy/eap/riverwq/regions/state.asp.
79. ↵
    1. Washington State Department of Ecology (WADOE) cartographers

    2011. Rivers_n83. Geographic information system data.
80. ↵
    1. Washington Territorial University (WTU) Herbarium

    2017. Herbarium database. University of Washington. www.burkemuseum.org/research-and-collections/botany-and-herbarium/collections/database/.
81. ↵
    1. Wetzel P.R.,
    2. van der Valk A.G.

    1998. Effects of nutrient and soil moisture on competition between shape Carex stricta, shape Phalaris arundinacea, and shape Typha latifolia. Plant Ecology 138:179–190.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
82. ↵
    1. Williams P.B.,
    2. Orr M.K.

    2002. Physical evolution of restored breached levee salt marshes in the San Francisco Bay estuary. Restoration Ecology 10:527–542.

    OpenUrl
83. ↵
    1. Woo I.,
    2. Turner K.L.,
    3. Takekawa J.Y.

    2011. Monitoring and evaluation of the Nisqually delta restoration project. United States Geological Survey. www.tidalmarshmonitoring.org.
84. ↵
    1. Young T.P.,
    2. Chase J.M.,
    3. Huddleston R.T.

    2001. Community succession and assembly. Ecological Restoration 19:5–18.

    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
85. ↵
    1. Yu Q.,
    2. Gong P.,
    3. Clinton N.,
    4. Biging G.,
    5. Kelly M.,
    6. Schirokauer D.

    2006. Object-based detailed vegetation classification with airborne high spatial resolution remote sensing imagery. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 72:799–811.

    OpenUrl
86. ↵
    1. Zedler J.B.

    2000a. Introduction. Pages 1–38 in Zedler J.B. (ed), Handbook for Restoring Tidal Wetlands (Marine Science Series). New York, NY: CRC Press.
87. ↵
    1. Zedler J.B.

    2000b. Progress in wetland restoration ecology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 15:402–407.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
88. ↵
    1. Zedler J.B.,
    2. Callaway J.C.

    1999. Tracking wetland restoration: Do mitigation sites follow desired trajectories? Restoration Ecology 7:69–73.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
89. 1. Zedler J.B.,
    2. Callaway J.C.,
    3. Desmond J.S.,
    4. Vivian-Smith G.,
    5. Williams G.D.,
    6. Sullivan G.,
    7. et al.

    1999. Californian salt-marsh vegetation: An improved model of spatial pattern. Ecosystems 2:19–35.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
90. ↵
    1. Zhang Y.,
    2. Lu D.,
    3. Yang B.,
    4. Sun C.,
    5. Sun M.

    2011. Coastal wetland vegetation classification with a Landsat Thematic Mapper image. International Journal of Remote Sensing 32:545–561.

    OpenUrl