Mary Alida Young | USGS Science

USGS2021

Estimating blue carbon sequestration under coastal management scenarios

Restoring and protecting “blue carbon” ecosystems - mangrove forests, tidal marshes, and seagrass meadows - are actions considered for increasing global carbon sequestration. To improve understanding of which management actions produce the greatest gains in sequestration, we used a spatially explicit model to compare carbon sequestration and its economic value over a broad spatial scale (2500 km of coastline in southeastern Australia) for four management scenarios: (1) Managed Retreat, (2) Managed Retreat Plus Levee Removal, (3) Erosion of High Risk Areas, (4) Erosion of Moderate to High Risk Areas. We found that carbon sequestration from avoiding erosion-related emissions (abatement) would far exceed sequestration from coastal restoration. If erosion were limited only to the areas with highest erosion risk, sequestration in the non-eroded area exceeded emissions by 4.2 million Mg CO 2 by 2100. However, losing blue carbon ecosystems in both moderate and high erosion risk areas would result in net emissions of 23.0 million Mg CO 2 by 2100. The removal of levees combined with managed retreat was the strategy that sequestered the most carbon. Across all time points, removal of levees increased sequestration by only an additional 1 to 3% compared to managed retreat alone. Compared to the baseline erosion scenario, the managed retreat scenario increased sequestration by 7.40 million Mg CO 2 by 2030, 8.69 million Mg CO 2 by 2050, and 16.6 million Mg CO 2 by 2100. Associated economic value followed the same patterns, with large potential value loss from erosion greater than potential gains from conserving or restoring ecosystems. This study quantifies the potential benefits of managed retreat and preventing erosion in existing blue carbon ecosystems to help meet climate change mitigation goals by reducing carbon emissions.

Victoria↗

USGS2016

Environmental controls on spatial patterns in the long-term persistence of giant kelp in central California

As marine management is moving towards the practice of protecting static areas, it is 44 important to make sure protected areas capture and protect persistent populations. Rocky reefs in 45 many temperate areas worldwide serve as habitat for canopy forming macroalgae and these 46 structure forming species of kelps (order Laminariales) often serve as important habitat for a great 47 diversity of species. Macrocystis pyrifera is the most common canopy forming kelp species found 48 along the coast of California but the distribution and abundance of M. pyrifera varies in space and 49 time. The purpose of this study is to determine what environmental parameters are correlated with 50 the spatial and temporal persistence of M. pyrifera along the central coast of California and how 51 well those environmental parameters can be used to predict areas where M. pyrifera is more likely 52 to persist. Nine environmental variables considered in this study included depth of the seafloor, 53 structure of the rocky reef, proportion of rocky reef, size of kelp patch, biomass of kelp within a 54 patch, distance from the edge of a kelp patch, sea surface temperature, wave orbital velocities, and 55 population connectivity of individual kelp patches. Using a generalized linear mixed effects model 56 (GLMM), the persistence of M. pyrifera was significantly associated with seven of the nine 57 variables considered: depth, complexity of the rocky reef, proportion of rock, patch biomass, 58 distance from the edge of a patch, population connectivity, and wave-orbital velocities. These 59 seven environmental variables were then used to predict the persistence of kelp across the central 60 coast and these predictions were compared to a reserved dataset of M. pyrifera persistence, which 61 was not used in the creation of the GLMM. The environmental variables were shown to accurately 62 predict the persistence of M. pyrifera within the central coast of California (r = 0.71, P<0.001). 63 Because persistence of giant kelp is important to the community structure of kelp forests, 64 understanding those factors that support persistent populations of M. pyrifera will enable more 65 effective management of these ecosystems.

California↗