Research ArticleResearch Article
Open Access

Lessons Learned and Value of Early Post-Construction Monitoring of a Large Tidal Wetland Restoration Project

Henry M. Page, Stephen C. Schroeter, Andres Deza, Russell Johnston, Rachel S. Smith, Kathryn M. Beheshti, Daniel C. Reed and Justin C. Hoesterey
Ecological Restoration, December 2025, 43 (4) 260-275; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3368/er.43.4.260

References

    1. Ambrose R.F.
    , Vance R.R., Diaz N. 2006. Wetland restoration monitoring report for Naval Base Ventura County, Mugu Lagoon: July 2001 to September 2005. Unpublished report.
    1. Beheshti K.
    , Smith R., Page M., Schroeter S., Reed D. 2024. Annual Report of the Status of Condition A: Wetland mitigation. San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) Mitigation Program. Submitted to the California Coastal Commission, July 2024. https://marinemitigation.msi.ucsb.edu/sites/default/files/documents/wetland/2023_annual_report-SONGS_wetland_mitigation.pdf
  3. ↵
    1. Beheshti K.M.
    , Schroeter S.C., Deza A.A., Reed D.C., Smith R.S., Page H.M. 2023. Large-scale field studies inform adaptive management of California wetland restoration. Restoration Ecology 31(5):e13936.
    OpenUrl
    1. Beller E.E.
    , Baumgarten S.A., Grossinger R.M., Longcore T.R., Stein E.D., Dark S.J., Dusterhoff S.R. 2014. Northern San Diego County Lagoons Historical Ecology Investigation: Regional Patterns, Local Diversity, and Landscape Trajectories. Richmond, CA: San Francisco Estuary Institute.
  5. ↵
    1. Bertness M.D.
    , Wise C., Ellison A.M. 1987. Consumer pressure and seed set in a salt marsh perennial plant community. Oecologia 71:190–200.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Brooks K.L.
    , Mossman H.L., Chitty J.L., Grant A. 2015. Limited vegetation development on a created salt marsh associated with over-consolidated sediments and lack of topographic heterogeneity. Estuaries and Coasts 38:325–336.
    OpenUrl
  7. California Coastal Commission (CCC) 1997. Adopted findings and conditions. Permit amendment and condition compliance. San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) coastal development permit 6-81-330-A (formerly 183-73) for Units 2 and 3.
  8. California Wetland Monitoring Workgroup (CWMW) 2023. California Wetland Program Plan 2023–2028.
    1. Callaway J.C.
    2001. Hydrology and substrate. Pages 89–117 in J.B. Zedler (ed.), Handbook for Restoring Tidal Wetlands. New York, NY: CRC Press.
    1. Callaway J.C.
    , Sullivan G., Desmond J.S., Williams G.D., Zedler J.B. 2001. Assessment and monitoring. Pages 271–335 in J.B. Zedler (ed.), Handbook for Restoring Tidal Wetlands. New York, NY: CRC Press.
  11. ↵
    1. Callaway J.C.
    2005. The challenge of restoring functioning salt marsh ecosystems. Journal of Coastal Research SI40:24–36.
    OpenUrl
  12. ↵
    1. Callaway R.M.
    , Jones S., Ferren Jr. W.R., Parikh A. 1990. Ecology of a Mediterranean-climate estuarine wetland at Carpinteria, California: Plant distributions and soil salinity in the upper marsh. Canadian Journal of Botany 68:1139–1146.
    OpenUrl
  13. ↵
    1. Craft C.
    , Reader J., Sacco J.N., Broome S.W. 1999. Twenty-five years of ecosystem development of constructed Spartina alterniflora (Loisel) marshes. Ecological Applications 9:1405–1419.
    OpenUrl
    1. Craft C.B.
    2022. Creating and Restoring Wetlands: From Theory to Practice, 2nd edition. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
  15. ↵
    1. Cribari-Neto F.
    , Zeileis A. 2010. Beta regression in R. Journal of Statistical Software 34(2):1–24.
    OpenUrl
    1. Day J.
    , Burdick D.M., Ibanez C., Mitsch W.J., Elsey-Quirk T., Rivaes S. 2021. Restoration of tidal marshes. Pages 443–475 in D.M. FitzGerald and Z.J. Hughes (eds.), Salt Marshes. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  17. ↵
    1. Desmond J.S.
    , Zedler J.B., Williams G.D. 2000. Fish use of tidal creek habitats in two southern California salt marshes. Ecological Engineering 14:233–252.
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    1. Doty M.S.
    1946. Critical tide factors that are correlated with the verical distribution of marine algae and other organisms along the Pacific coast. Ecology 27:315–328.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  19. ↵
    1. Emery N.C.
    , Ewanchuk P.J., Bertness M.D. 2001. Competition and salt-marsh plant zonation: Stress tolerators may be dominant competitors. Ecology 82:2471–2485.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
    1. Ferren Jr. W.R.
    1985. Carpinteria Salt Marsh: Environment, History, and Botanical Resources of a Southern California Estuary. Santa Barbara, CA: The Herbarium, Department of Biological Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara.
  21. ↵
    1. Geissinger E.A.
    , Khoo C.L.L., Richmond I.C., Faulkner S.J.M., Schneider D.C. 2022. A case for beta regression in the natural sciences. Ecosphere 13(2):e3940.
    OpenUrl
  22. ↵
    1. Haltiner J.
    , Zedler J.B., Boyer K.E., Williams G.D., Callaway J.C. 1996. Influence of physical processes on the design, functioning and evolution of restored tidal wetlands in California (USA). Wetlands Ecology and Management 43:73–91.
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. Janousek C.N.
    , Thorne K.M., Takekawa J.Y. 2019. Vertical zonation and niche breadth of tidal marsh plants along the northeast Pacific Coast. Estuaries and Coasts 42:85–98.
    OpenUrl
  24. ↵
    1. Keer G.H.
    , Zedler J.B. 2002. Salt marsh canopy architecture differs with the number and composition of species. Ecological Applications 12:456–473.
    OpenUrl
  25. ↵
    1. Kennish M.J.
    2002. Environmental threats and environmental future of estuaries. Environmental Conservation 29:78–107.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  26. ↵
    1. Lindig-Cisneros R.
    , Zedler J.B. 2002. Halophyte recruitment in a salt marsh restoration site. Estuaries 25:1174–1183.
    OpenUrl
  27. ↵
    1. Litzba U.
    , Schroeter S., Page H.M., Elwany M.H.S. 2011. Biological importance of small tidal channels in wetland restoration projects. Shore and Beach 79:17–27.
    OpenUrl
  28. ↵
    1. Liu Z.
    , Fagherazzi S., He Q., Gourgue O., Bai J., Liu X. et al. 2024. A global meta-analysis on the drivers of salt marsh planting success and implications for ecosystem services. Nature Communications 15:3643.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Lotze H.K.
    , Lenihan H.S., Bourque B.J., Bradbury R.H., Cooke R.G., Kay M.C. et al. 2006. Depletion, degradation, and recovery potential of estuaries and coastal seas. Science 312:1806–1809.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. MacDonald K.B.
    1988. Coastal salt marsh. Pages 263–294 in M.G. Barbour and J. Major (eds.), Terrestrial Vegetation of California. Special Publication No. 9. Davis, CA: California Native Plant Society.
  31. ↵
    1. Mahall B.E.
    , Park R.B. 1976. The ecotone between Spartina foliosa Trin. and Salicornia virginica L. in salt marshes of northern San Francisco Bay: II. Soil water and salinity. Journal of Ecology 64:793–809.
    OpenUrl
  32. ↵
    1. Mallin M.A.
    , Lewitus A.J. 2004. The importance of tidal creek ecosystems. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 298:145–149.
    OpenUrl
  33. Marathon Construction Corporation (MCC) 2009. Letter from Marathon Construction Corporation, 1008 Riverford Road, Lakeside CA 92040 to Coastal Environments, 2149 Avenida de la Playa, La Jolla CA 92037. Subject: Plant Performance Issues at the W2A, W2B and W3 modules. (March 30, 2009).
  34. MEC Analytical Systems, Inc. (MEC) 1993. San Dieguito Lagoon Restoration Project Biological Baseline Study, March 1992–May 1993. Volumes I and II. Draft.
  35. ↵
    1. Mitsch W.J.
    , Wilson R.F. 1996. Improving the success of wetland creation and restoration with know-how, time, and self-design. Ecological Applications 6(1):77–83.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  36. ↵
    1. Mook D.H.
    , Hoskin C.M. 1982. Organic determinations by ignition: Caution advised. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 15:697–699.
    OpenUrl
  37. ↵
    1. Morzaria-Luna H.N.
    , Zedler J.B. 2007. Does seed availability limit plant establishment during salt marsh restoration?. Estuaries and Coasts 30:12–25.
    OpenUrl
  38. ↵
    1. Noe G.B.
    , Fellows M.Q.N., Parsons L., West J., Callaway J., Trnka S. et al. 2019. Adaptive management assists reintroduction as higher tides threaten an endangered salt marsh plant. Restoration Ecology 27:750–757.
    OpenUrl
  39. ↵
    1. O'Brien E.L.
    , Zedler J.B. 2006. Accelerating the restoration of vegetation in a southern California salt marsh. Wetlands Ecology and Management 14:269–286.
    OpenUrl
    1. Onuf C.P.
    , Quammen M.L., Shaffer G.P., Peterson C.H., Chapman J.W., Cermak J., Holmes R.W. 1979. An analysis of the values of central and southern California coastal wetlands. Pages 186–199 in P.E. Greeson, J.R. Clark and J.E. Clark (eds.), Wetland Functions and Values: The State of Our Understanding. Proceedings of the National Symposium on Wetlands Held in Disneyworld Village, Lake Buena Vista, Florida, November 7–10, 1978. Minneapolis, MN: American Water Resources Association.
    1. Onuf C.P.
    1987. The Ecology of Mugu Lagoon, California: An Estuarine Profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.15).
  42. ↵
    1. Page H.M.
    1995. Variation in the natural abundance of 15N in the halophyte, Salicornia virginica, associated with groundwater subsidies of nitrogen in a southern California salt-marsh. Oecologia 104:181–188.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Page M.
    , Schroeter S., Reed D. 2020. Annual Report of the Status of Condition A: Wetland Mitigation. San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) Mitigation Program. Submitted to the California Coastal Commission, October 2020. https://marinemitigation.msi.ucsb.edu/sites/default/files/documents/wetland/2019_annualreport-SONGS_wetland_mitigation.pdf
  44. ↵
    1. Pennings S.C.
    , Callaway R.M. 1992. Salt marsh plant zonation: The relative importance of competition and physical factors. Ecology 73:681–690.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  45. ↵
    1. Powell A.N.
    , Collier C.L. 1998. Reproductive success of Belding’s Savannah Sparrows in a highly fragmented landscape. The Auk 115:508–513.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  46. ↵
    1. Purer E.A.
    1942. Plant ecology of the coastal salt marshlands of San Diego County, California. Ecological Monographs 12:81–111.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  47. R Core Team 2024. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
  48. ↵
    1. Rand T.A.
    2000. Seed dispersal, habitat suitability and the distribution of halophytes across a salt marsh tidal gradient. Journal of Ecology 88:608–621.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  49. ↵
    1. Raposa K.B.
    , Lerberg S., Cornu C., Fear J., Garfield N., Peter C. et al. 2018. Evaluating tidal wetland restoration performance using National Estuarine Research Reserve System reference sites and the restoration performance index (RPI). Estuaries and Coasts 41:36–51.
    OpenUrl
  50. ↵
    1. Rosencranz J.A.
    , Thorne K.M., Buffington K.J., Takekawa J.Y., Hechinger R.F., Stewart T.E. et al. 2018. Sea-level rise, habitat loss, and potential extirpation of a salt marsh specialist bird in urbanized landscapes. Ecology and Evolution 8:8115–8125.
    OpenUrl
  51. ↵
    1. Sanderson E.W.
    , Ustin S.L., 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.
    OpenUrl
    1. Sheehan L.
    2013. San Dieguito Wetlands Restoration Plan—Third Review. Memorandum to S. Schroeter and M. Page. Environmental Science Associates, 9191 Towne Center Drive, Suite 340, San Diego, CA 92122.
  53. ↵
    1. Schile L.M.
    , Callaway J.C., Parker V.T., Vasey M.C. 2011. Salinity and inundation influence productivity of the halophytic plant Sarcocornia pacifica. Wetlands 31:1165–1174.
    OpenUrl
  54. ↵
    1. Shi W.
    , Shao., Gualtieri C., Purnama A., Cui B. 2020. Modelling long-distance floating seed dispersal in salt marsh tidal channels. Ecohydrology 13(1):e2157.
    OpenUrl
  55. ↵
    1. Shumway S.W.
    , Bertness M.D. 1992. Salt stress limitation of seedling recruitment in a salt marsh plant community. Oecologia 92:490–497.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Smith R.
    , Beheshti K., Page M., Schroeter S., Reed D. 2023. Annual Report of the Status of Condition A: Wetland mitigation. San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) Mitigation Program. 73 pp. https://marinemitigation.msi.ucsb.edu/sites/default/files/documents/wetland/2022_annual_report-SONGS_wetland_mitigation.pdf
    1. Smith S.M.
    , Warren R.S. 2012. Vegetation responses to tidal restoration. Pages 59–80 in C.T. Roman and D.M. Burdick (eds.), Restoring Tidal Wetlands: A Synthesis of Science and Management. Washington, DC: Island Press.
  58. Southern California Edison (SCE) 2005. San Dieguito Wetlands Restoration Project. Final Restoration Plan. Submitted to California Coastal Commission.
  59. Southern California Edison (SCE) 2014. Letter and Figure 1 (Sheets 1 and 2) to Ms. Toni Ross, California Coastal Commission, San Diego District, San Diego, California 92108. San Dieguito Wetlands Restoration Project (Project)—W2/W3, Completion and Response to CCC January 21, 2014, Letter on Grading of W2/W3.
  60. Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project (SCWRP) 2018. Wetlands on the Edge: The Future of Southern California’s Wetlands: Regional Strategy 2018. Prepared by the California State Coastal Conservancy, Oakland, CA. 142 pp.
    1. Stein E.D.
    , Cayce K., Salomon M., Bram D.L., De Mello D., Grossinger R., Dark S. et al. 2014. Wetlands of the Southern California Coast: Historical Extent and Change Over Time. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP) Technical Report 826, SFEI Report 720.
    1. Sullivan G.
    2001. Establishing vegetation in restored and created coastal wetlands. Pages 119–155 in J. Zedler (ed.), Handbook for Restoring Tidal Wetlands. New York, NY: CRC Press.
    1. Sverdrup H.U.
    , Johnson M.W., Fleming R.H. 1962. The Oceans: Their Physics, Chemistry, and General Biology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
  64. ↵
    1. Thom R.M.
    , Williams G., Borde A., Southard H.J., Sargeant S., Woodruff D. et al. 2005. Coastal restoration: Where have we been, where are we now, and where should we be going. Journal of Coastal Research SI 40:94–108.
    OpenUrl
  65. ↵
    1. Twomey A.J.
    , Nunez K., Carr J.A., Crooks S., Friess D.A., Glamore W. et al. 2024. Planning hydrological restoration of coastal wetlands: Key model considerations and solutions. Science of the Total Environment 915:169881.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  66. ↵
    1. Valiela I.
    , Kinney E., Culbertson J., Peacock E., Smith S. 2009. Global losses of mangroves and salt marshes. Pages 107–138 in C.M. Duarte (ed.), Global Loss of Coastal Habitats: Rates, Causes and Consequences. Bilbao, Spain: Fundación BBVA.
  67. ↵
    1. Vivian-Smith G.
    2001. Developing a framework for restoration. Pages 39–88 in J. Zedler (ed.), Handbook for Restoring Tidal Wetlands. New York, NY: CRC Press.
  68. ↵
    1. Wang Q.
    , Xie T., Luo M., Bai J., Chen C., Ning Z., Cui B. 2021. How hydrological connectivity regulates the plant recovery process in salt marshes. Journal of Applied Ecology 58:1314–1324.
    OpenUrl
  69. ↵
    1. Williams P.B.
    , Orr M.K. 2002. Physical evolution of restored breached levee salt marshes in the San Francisco Bay Estuary. Restoration Ecology 10: 527–542.
    OpenUrl
  70. ↵
    1. Wolters M.
    , Garbutt A., Bekker R.M., Bakker J.P., Carey P.D. 2008. Restoration of salt‐marsh vegetation in relation to site suitability, species pool and dispersal traits. Journal of Applied Ecology 45: 904–912.
    OpenUrl
  71. ↵
    1. Xie T.
    , Cui B., Li S., Bai J. 2019. Topography regulates edaphic suitability for seedling establishment associated with tidal elevation in coastal salt marshes. Geoderma 337: 1258–1266.
    OpenUrl
  72. ↵
    1. Zedler J.B.
    , Callaway J.C. 1999. Tracking wetland restoration: Do mitigation sites follow desired trajectories?. Restoration Ecology 7: 69–73.
    OpenUrl
  73. ↵
    1. Zedler J.B.
    , Callaway J.C. 2000. Evaluating the progress of engineered tidal wetlands. Ecological Engineering 15: 211–225.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  74. ↵
    1. Zedler J.B.
    , Callaway J.C. 2001. Tidal wetland functioning. Journal of Coastal Research SI27: 38–64.
    OpenUrl
  75. ↵
    1. Zedler J.B.
    , Kercher S. 2005. Wetland resources: Status, trends, ecosystem services, and restorability. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 30: 39–74.
    OpenUrlCrossRefGeoRefWeb of Science
  76. ↵
    1. Zedler J.B.
    , Nordby C.S., Kus B.E. 1992. The Ecology of Tijuana Estuary: A National Estuarine Research Reserve. Washington, DC: NOAA Office of Coastal Resource Management, Sanctuaries and Reserves Division.
  77. ↵
    1. Zedler J.B.
    , Morzaria-Luna H., Ward K. 2003. The challenge of restoring vegetation on tidal, hypersaline substrates. Plant and Soil 253: 259–273.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  78. ↵
    1. Zedler J.B.
    , Callaway J.C., Desmond J.S., Vivian-Smith G., Williams G.D., Sullivan G. 1999. Californian salt-marsh vegetation: An improved model of spatial pattern. Ecosystems 2: 19–35.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Email Article
Citation Tools
Lessons Learned and Value of Early Post-Construction Monitoring of a Large Tidal Wetland Restoration Project
Henry M. Page, Stephen C. Schroeter, Andres Deza, Russell Johnston, Rachel S. Smith, Kathryn M. Beheshti, Daniel C. Reed, Justin C. Hoesterey
Ecological Restoration Dec 2025, 43 (4) 260-275; DOI: 10.3368/er.43.4.260
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

Keywords