Correction: Wetland elevation change following beneficial use of dredged material nourishment
Year: 2025
Type: erratum
Abstract: 1. Introduction Coastal wetlands are highly productive, dynamic systems that provide diverse ecosystem services like wildlife habitat for migratory bird populations, carbon and nutrient sequestration, and storm protection (Mitsch and Gosselink 1993; Costanza et al. 1998; Day et al. 2008; Reddy et al. 2010; Barbier et al. 2011). They exist at the boundary between land and sea with their distribution limited by inundation and erosion at lower elevations and vegetative competition at the landward boundary (Mendelssohn et al., 1981; Davis et al. 2022). Many of these essential ecosystems are being impacted by the combined effects of hydrologic restrictions, sea level rise, subsidence, and fragmentation that result in reductions in productivity and widespread losses of vast acres as vegetated surfaces transition to open water (Day et al. 2000; Fattet et al. 2011; Harris et al. 2020a; Davis et al. 2022; Cadigan et al. 2023; Harris et al. 2023). For example, wetland loss in the Mississippi River delta continues at an approximate rate of 28 km2 per year due to natural processes such as delta abandonment, subsidence, sea level rise, wave erosion, herbivory, hurricanes, and geologic faults, in addition to anthropogenic activities including levee building, hydrologic isolation, land reclamation for agriculture and industry, canal dredging and associated salt water intrusion, boat-induced shoreline erosion, herbivory by invasive species, and pollution (Boesch et al., 1994; Turner 1997; Day et al., 2000; Day et al. 2020). To rehabilitate these deteriorating environments, hydraulically dredged material (i.e., sediment) can be strategically deposited on degraded wetlands to increase surface elevations and reconnect discontinuous wetlands. This application of uncontaminated dredged material is a form of direct nourishment that could potentially increase the rate of SLR that a marsh can withstand (Davis et al. 2022; Harris et al. 2024). This gain in elevation capital is crucial to long-term wetland stability as it controls the hydroperiod (i.e., flooding frequency and duration) and thereby salinity levels, nutrient availability, plant productivity, and redox potential (Croft et al 2006; Day et al. 2011; Morris et al. 2013; Jafari et al. 2019a; Harris et al. 2020b). Coastal wetlands occupy elevations between mean sea level (MSL) and mean high water (MHW) (McKee and Patrick 1988), with optimum growth occurring near the middle of the range (Morris et al. 2002; Morris et al. 2013) while generally wetlands at lower elevations relative to MHW are in more imminent danger of drowning and converting to open water (Davis et al. 2022). Common sources of dredged materials are waterway and port maintenance events. Historically, this material was taken to upland confined disposal facilities or offshore disposal sites, which permanently removes the sediment from the system. Over the past decades, there has been a shift away from this disposal mindset towards the beneficial use of dredged material (BUDM) to bolster coastal environments. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is currently seeking to beneficially use 70% of dredged material by 2030, equating to 100 to 160 million m3within the continental United States annually. Despite the benefits that BUDM offers for both navigation and flood-protection missions, significant knowledge gaps exist on the constructability of wetland nourishments and long-term resiliency of the environment. Coastal managers are faced with a number of construction challenges for BUDM such as: (1) significant uncertainties in dredged sediment characteristics (e.g., slurry density, fines and organic matter concentrations) (Harris et al. 2024; Harris and Shawler 2024); (2) the placement areas commonly being comprised of easily disturbed, highly heterogeneous deltaic soils (Jafari et al. 2018, 2019ab); (3) dredged material delivery methods and positions (Harris and Shawler 2024); and (4) containment efficacy (Singh and Joffrion 2017). Following dredged material placement, wetland surface elevations and biogeochemistry can be drastically altered due to the compression of highly organic sediment that can lead to a temporal loss in elevation (VanZomeren and Piercy 2020; Harris et al. 2024), while silt and clay-dominated dredged material, particularly acid sulfate soils, may hinder revegetation due to oxidation of iron sulfides (Berkowitz and VanZomeren 2020; Puchkoff and Lawrence 2022; Raposa et al. 2022), all resulting in uncertainty in vegetation response relative to natural reference sites (Raposa et al. 2023) or target restoration goals. These uncertainties can be problematic to the long-term stability of the environment and thus the ability to provide desired ecosystem services. To address these knowledge gaps, a multi-phase wetland BUDM nourishment project was investigated through a combination of in-situ, laboratory, and geo-spatial methods pre-and post-placement. Sediment testing and subsurface investigations were performed to develop consolidation models and predict future wetland surface elevations, which were compared to field data, while orthomosaics were used to monitor vegetation cover change across the site. Lastly, these validated consolidation models were combined with the Coastal Wetland Evolution Model (CWEM) to assess future site resiliency to sea level rise. This study investigates the following four questions: (1) what is the surface elevation gained from dredged material applied on a well-drained marsh island, (2) what is the magnitude of dredged sediment and wetland foundation consolidation, (3) how rapidly did vegetation re-establish, and (4) what are the potential long-term responses of the nourished system to rising sea levels? 2. Methodology 2.1 Study Site Description The study site is a 5.4-hectare island located on the bay side of Avalon, New Jersey, USA within a 17-km2 tidal marsh complex and is adjacent to the New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway (NJIWW), Fig. 1 (Harris et al. 2020). Tides in this back-bay environment are semi-diurnal with a normal tidal range of approximately 1.3-m (NOAA 2024). Sturgeon Island is located nearly 7 kilometers from Townsend Inlet to the north and nearly 8 kilometers from Hereford Inlet to the south, likely sediment the site. The marsh and adjacent to Sturgeon Island and sediment natural sediment to the island et al. et al. 2022). The island, to the BUDM in elevation from to 1.3-m with the elevations at the of the The of the island to a tidal on the side of the The island is vegetated by the and the invasive with between and elevations, between and and at elevations The can be from to Sturgeon Island has high of and is an site in the of New four of currently and the of these are as of by New Fig. 1. of Sturgeon New Jersey, in to the New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway (NJIWW), and and containment The of this BUDM nourishment was to the surface elevation on Sturgeon Island to bird habitat and the of the material was 1 the with a et al. 2024; et al. Harris et al. 2024). was dredged from the from to with the on the of the island and with a that material across areas dredged material was on the island the with a from to The was on the wetland surface the of Sturgeon Lastly, the to dredged material on the of the island from to that was to a for this this nourishment was it was the and impacted a of the nourishment Sediment To dredged material were within the in to the of a Sediment was from the in and to a to be for organic loss on distribution and was with material to predict placement and et al. and a combination of consolidation testing and consolidation testing was used to consolidation from the consolidation the and for use in the long-term consolidation of the dredged To wetland foundation characteristics (i.e., placement were in to the of with and for and were performed across the of Sturgeon Island to site and the was a to the and the a of the and Cadigan et al. 2020; Harris et al. Cadigan et al. 2022). The was for use in deltaic and soils and is of a to subsurface and the of (Jafari et al. 2019a; Harris et al. of the and is in Jafari et al. were to consolidation to the and due to consolidation were performed on on Sturgeon To wetland foundation consolidation from a wetland BUDM site of the site were This was an both sites were within the tidal marsh and within the vegetation and range of following 1 and a was used to and the of dredged material on between the deposited material and wetland of were and for and elevation at was and a elevation of wetland foundation could be by dredged material This surface is compared to surface elevations, it approximate of foundation across the nourishment for Sturgeon Island was by the of in as of the was the Coastal and system in of the United States to assess elevation the The used for was a elevation on to a at the level and a at the level for for Sturgeon Island was by the of in was the with was performed and and and was performed The was a elevation for Sturgeon 1 in the a of and used within this was in four a with a are in 1. were at elevation with an and resulting in a of approximately was used for all were with and to the were with an to increase the of the of the was of was performed a reference and the was used to orthomosaics were land cover in through a for all been to salt marsh plant such as or et al. 2024). was by elevation and The the of with like the of salt marsh across the land cover were a in To predict consolidation within the dredged sediment and foundation material (i.e., models were performed to (1) consolidation of the dredged sediment and (2) consolidation of the wetland due to the applied of the dredged The dredged material was and of that is on are within the dredged et al. et al. Jafari et al. The dredged material was to the by and an lower boundary to the wetland material which was The wetland foundation of a vegetated and and was consolidation which the magnitude of is to be compared to the foundation et al. The wetland foundation was to be (i.e., in and was by an that was to be and sites were for consolidation These sites were to cover a range of elevations to to to and approximate dredged material for both nourishments at Site at Site material are approximate as site was dredging in the a of for site. range of dredged material and foundation surface elevations was to a highly and to the uncertainty in to limited field for the foundation the compression was and the for the dredged material by an or magnitude in both to for uncertainties in et al. Jafari et al. The from a from to a more from and on Sturgeon Island to dredged material The consolidation models were through an of dredged material elevations, which consolidation of the dredged material and to the field and the which the elevation of the for the of the foundation Wetland The Coastal Wetland Model as the Model was used to predict future marsh (Morris et al. 2002; Morris et al. that a dynamic between marsh elevation and sea and that are in the of that et al. a for salt marsh productivity and for of and for the of organic matter to the salt marsh et al. organic (i.e., marsh elevation vegetation and (i.e., water levels, sea level sediment marsh to marsh at elevations (Morris et al. et al. et al. on long-term of sediment and marsh productivity, Morris et al. and the at a marsh at et al. The that plant productivity is by and lower elevation and there is an optimum elevation for growth within the tidal (Morris et al. 2002; et al. was used to future inundation and elevations with Site was to be used within as dredged material and foundation were to an the four sites for consolidation SLR rate of was (NOAA and to for in SLR and high were to and et al. in the a of and used and their for the placement at Site and SLR Sediment The subsurface across the site was a foundation by a and a vegetated of (Harris 2020; Harris et al. 2024). the to from from the of the island The vegetated was by a that at at and to a of This was by a that to a of (i.e., this was a which in of the north at the vegetated to to the the was to from there was a vegetated by a to which was the Fig. 2. Site of and to foundation across the placement site. and from the of the to on the and for dredged and foundation was from testing and The in controls the magnitude of The of the of the is the compression a be for the dredged material the is highly of of in the lower range that with et al. The is by and and a a more For example, a can between to due to of water being within the and The foundation 1 and from the BUDM wetland site of the site of and which is for wetland from and across Sturgeon Island to the nourishment from and which to of and 2.1 and the dredged material consolidation the foundation soils which was due to of water within the of dredged material the dredging which (i.e., The in controls the at which due to the of from within the of the is a of the of the to the of the and the of the which the distribution of the and and this of that are easily The in were from the of consolidation and that can be by as as an of magnitude (Jafari et al. while be due to by in the methods of the on the of consolidation et al. a the of field such as and to the is is to as the change and is an of the of natural and organic soils for et al. the by the dredged material consolidation in in of thus a is in the from the foundation and a of the dredged surface elevations, vegetation and are in the of the elevations are the side of the island at and to on the side Fig. the site from to a tidal is located on the of the the nourishment there were of vegetation The is at the elevations the of the island and to in the lower elevations the The was on was at lower surface elevations adjacent to the tidal This lower and thus inundation in lower of as compared to the to of the elevations four are in the study in the surface elevations to The a from to with the of the island at approximately while the of the island was approximately in following the which as elevation for the wetland surface elevations from to following the placement, and a from to was on the and of the in surface elevations following the and BUDM and the between this surface and the is to the dredged wetland surface elevation for the was which a lower elevation gain following this The is this placement in lower and the (i.e., the wetland surface foundation surface (i.e., wetland from sediment in was compared to the elevation to the of foundation consolidation due to the dredged material and an of of consolidation with as high as on 2. Fig. of and across the placement from and and the of dredged at and the wetland foundation from and wetland foundation and dredged material, of and land cover BUDM are in The the and nourishments and a of the nourishment to be this the of the BUDM nourishment by the was as while the marsh comprised and at the of the nourishment approximately 1 year the placement, the to of the nourishment while the marsh to as dredged material was deposited the the vegetation to The of marsh to while the to a increase in marsh was which the nourishment while the to was a increase in open water on the site from to to and a significant increase nourishment to nearly of the nourishment was within the nourishment a or significant Fig. and land cover from 2020; 2022; and cover of and high marsh with a boundary the approximate nourishment For the the placement dredged material was the vegetation of wetland surface elevations are on of dredged material surface elevations and foundation and their surfaces at four (4) sites across the nourishment in of the wetland surface a increase in elevation following the dredged material by a in This in elevation is by consolidation, a of elevation loss within the to the of the dredged material water within the dredged material and This from the (i.e., consolidation is The of surface and foundation elevation the of highly dredged material and foundation as the lower and a for the the field within this potential For the surface elevations within the more side of the while at were on the which could be to a of and for are in in the Fig. of sites used for consolidation elevation within of 1 on wetland surface and foundation consolidation and surface The of dredged material was the of approximate dredged material and surface elevation gain from field is in The a between approximate dredged material and elevation that nearly of gained elevation placement was due to consolidation of the dredged material and consolidation of the foundation soils BUDM This is on the of the dredged material and site and tidal the are from the dredged material (e.g., 1 and and a thus from the nourishment may of Fig. of approximate dredged to elevation gain from field at The application of BUDM is a for wetlands that are to with sea level et al. Raposa et al. 2020; Davis et al. 2022), and these marsh a of processes and BUDM nourishment on the of Sturgeon Island of dredged material and in an elevation increase of construction for BUDM is placement of dredged material (VanZomeren et al. Davis et al. Raposa et al. 2023). The placement of dredged material result in of sediment in the while sediment in and et al. Piercy et al. 2023). can form as the of dredged material a of away from the resulting in a surface elevation et al. 2023). These were following the placement of dredged material on Sturgeon Island with the material deposited the surface as dredged material in the surface and and material to more this may be a of the and The placement of dredged material can wetlands by in tidal which are essential to the of the ecosystem as tidal These can be as of dredged material within these and Harris et al resulting in of consolidation and of the the tidal within the tidal These at Sturgeon Island that the of to BUDM placement is the can how dredged material and how to the material, through natural or containment For BUDM the dynamic of processes and placement be and For example, to material placement, the of Sturgeon Island from the to the and was by a tidal the This it to dredged material in the Despite containment the dredged slurry a of or the which in the nourishment of a the of the it is to containment of with an of containment and the containment of dredged material is and containment methods and their construction may the marsh surface and vegetation (Berkowitz and VanZomeren 2020; Harris et al. The (i.e., of dredged material from the direct placement be and construction and to provide benefits as this can develop a more natural and transition (i.e., between marsh sediment the system is likely to within the For example, et al. investigated the of dredged material a BUDM nourishment a of tidal and that the of material within adjacent these can provide a of ecosystem services from to wave et al. erosion on to what was on Sturgeon that in of were for erosion et al. tidal an adjacent to Sturgeon Island approximate of et al. the sediment was it is to these storm et al. Wetland Wetland elevation is a of vegetation distribution and as it hydroperiod (i.e., et al. Morris et al. 2013; VanZomeren and Piercy 2020; Jafari et al. 2024). The elevation of a BUDM nourished wetland on surface and controls on consolidation of the dredged material and wetland foundation consolidation a of elevation with and 2013; VanZomeren and Piercy 2020; Harris et al. 2020; Harris et al. 2024). For more the of consolidation is a that highly wetland are highly dynamic systems by and 2006; et al. Harris et al. 2024), and the of these uncertainties a range of potential placement of dredged material in these (Harris and Shawler 2024). the of project (i.e., elevation with is essential to of future BUDM marsh The elevation following the BUDM on Sturgeon Island that of the consolidation within the following This is with consolidation This a a of elevation loss is and as et al. for elevation BUDM placement, it is to more following and the as of dredged to elevation gain that approximately of gained elevation was due to consolidation placement This consolidation is a combination of consolidation of dredged material and consolidation of the wetland and that of elevation following a BUDM nourishment in a marsh in was The between at Sturgeon Island and that of and may be to subsurface as Sturgeon Island has a foundation that is deltaic soils within models can be to field (1) the or (2) the magnitude of consolidation (Jafari et al. These are by within the it is to these commonly easily disturbed, highly heterogeneous deltaic soils (Jafari et al. 2018, that can be an of magnitude from et al. Jafari et al. which is to within the and processes that the can (Jafari et al. To for this a range of potential surface elevations were within the the field within the and more of this range The foundation were the of and testing in the This was as these were compared to to foundation surface wetland was the field the were it was that the foundation an of across the with at as as of This the to for foundation consolidation a BUDM in wetlands with high fines and et al. Davis et al. 2022). the of is methods to the effects of of BUDM Sturgeon dredged material and following 1 and This in an gain of of elevation capital within the placement following consolidation wetland BUDM nourishments within New Jersey, dredged material at Island in at in and at on the marsh and within the at in and 2023). of the to of sediment was deposited at a marsh within the in et al. while a marsh at River in within the direct placement and in the areas and was how placement these were likely the wetland foundation and dredged material to the of dredged material deposited at Sturgeon and BUDM sites, natural of in the New Jersey et al., and storm on and et al., and et al., and et al., 2020; et al., This on by BUDM may to the marsh systems natural the benefits from the gain in elevation capital likely this To the long-term effects these BUDM nourishments could on Sturgeon and high SLR for pre-and at in were the of this did the to a these a wetland at The are for the placement wetland a distribution with elevation (Morris et al. 2013; Davis et al. and the elevation at Site was at a more inundation the that the site the the that the elevation capital relative to sea level for an the a the addition of dredged sediment vegetation and the surface to (Davis et al. Harris et al. 2024), as at Sturgeon This is with the range for on of which plant is likely and BUDM provide elevation to vegetation in nourished wetlands sites for placement and may approximate reference (Raposa et al. 2023). for Raposa et al. that vegetation can following a of dredged compared to a at the that vegetation within BUDM the et al. vegetation within at a BUDM with an of This is with the from Sturgeon Island as significant revegetation did following an elevation increase of at vegetation was to for an placement of 2023). these that dredged material is the plant long-term plant is by the marsh surface elevation 2023). significant site is likely the of material it is more to a dredged material as material is and the target marsh elevation be following This study on on Sturgeon this how elevation gain how loss was to consolidation of the dredged material and foundation soils, how the site and the long-term of wetland nourishment sea level The study BUDM placement, the surface elevation as dredged material in the and was by and of the elevation gain was nourishment due to a combination of the dredged and wetland foundation consolidation and sediment The surface was on by This for dredged material placement with consolidation of and sediment models generally with field a can of for methods such as to assess the site was to as the vegetation was by the dredged of the nourished with revegetation of the marsh occurring annually. material was from the BUDM to SLR by on For wetland BUDM the of target elevations is the of the This is on the of being of dredged material foundation tidal target vegetation and and the desired project is essential for coastal managers to for BUDM nourishments and the site to be for elevations are relative to tidal more revegetation at lower elevations for and more at elevations with lower tidal inundation these elevations long-term resiliency of the site that the to be for the loss of dredged material from the direct placement can benefits to adjacent areas that may Lastly, for the consolidation of the dredged material, the foundation to dredged material placement and surface and be to of The that or that could to the in this was by the Army Corps of Engineers and and the of through and for The like to the Army Corps of Engineers through the and and the of through and for the of The Wetland and the of for of field Lastly, the like to for an within 7 of the that to to this 1. of and on Sturgeon in this study and dredged material placement and the dredged material 2. of to and of dredged material for 1 and for the Sturgeon Island Site to 1 Coastal Wetland Model for Site to dredged material placement for a sea level 100 et al. et al., Davis et al. 100 at Morris et al. SLR Harris et al. et al. Davis et al. (MSL) Site to Morris and et al., Morris and to 1 Morris and rate Morris and Morris and Sediment of Morris and Morris and of and for and compression Site
Authors: Brian D. Harris, Aleksandra Ostojic, Lenore P. Tedesco, Keith VanDerSys, Susan Bailey, Justin L. Shawler, Navid H. Jafari, Monica Chasten
Language: English
Subfield: Ecology
Field: Environmental Science
Domain: Physical Sciences
SDG: Life on land
Open Access status: gold
Estimated APC paid: $3,077
OpenAlex ID: W4415487586
Cites:
Cited by:
Related to: