Coastal wetland restoration improves habitat for juvenile sportfish in Tampa Bay, Florida, U.S.A.

Abstract

Increasing human populations and urban development have led to losses of estuarine habitats for fish and wildlife. Where resource managers are restoring coastal wetlands, in addition to meeting goals related to hydrologic connectivity, biodiversity, and recreational opportunities, efforts are being made to provide habitat that is suitable for juvenile sportfish. An 18-month study was conducted to compare juvenile sportfish use of natural, restored, and impacted sites along Tampa Bay, Florida, shorelines. Juvenile sportfish densities at restored sites were broadly comparable to natural sites and greater than at impacted sites. However, site-specific differences in sportfish use did occur within site types. For example, one restored site had significantly higher densities of red drum Sciaenops ocellatus than any other site, while black drum Pogonias cromis were found exclusively at another restored site. To evaluate whether the restored sites are providing suitable habitat for juvenile fish, we assessed growth (estimated from counts of daily rings on otoliths) and condition (determined by lipid analyses) of juvenile common snook Centropomus undecimalis, an archetypal coastal wetland-dependent species. Growth (0.43-0.56 mm SL/day) and condition (4.6-6.1% lipid of dry weight) exhibited only site-specific differences and did not vary among natural, restored, and impacted site types. Although mortality rates of juvenile sportfish were not determined, use of a 40-m seine found that densities of potential piscine predators in these coastal wetlands were relatively low compared to published studies of open estuarine shorelines. The restoration and creation of coastal wetlands in Tampa Bay provides improved habitat for juvenile sportfish.

Restored Coastal Habitat Can “Reel In” Juvenile Sportfish: Population and Community Responses in the Indian River Lagoon, Florida, USA

“…Recently, fish abundance, richness and diversity were found to be similar between natural and restored marsh shorelines along the Florida west coast, and higher relative to impacted shorelines [57]. Specifically, sportfish densities at those sites were comparable between natural and restored shorelines and higher than impacted shorelines, which included five of the same species highlighted in the current study (C. nebulosus, C. undecimalis, L. griseus, P. cromis, Sciaenops ocellatus) [14]. Higher abundances and species richness of fishes have also been observed three years post construction of sill living shorelines (i.e., a hybrid technique which incorporates offshore rock material with shoreline marsh plantings), compared to unvegetated shoreline and natural controls, including some juvenile species observed in our study (C. nebulosus, L. griseus, S. ocellatus) [22].…”

“…Many studies have examined the response of resident fishes and invertebrates to restoration, while relatively few have targeted more transient and higher trophic species. Sportfish observations in former studies were generally in low abundances, e.g., [25,26,28], while a recent targeted sportfish study allowed for direct comparisons, which found them to have comparable densities between natural and restored coastal wetlands [14]. Furthermore, restoration benefits impact species to varying degrees and may take time to accrue, as the majority of increased gross fish production does not occur for up to two years at oyster reefs [17] and three years at living shorelines [22], similar to the findings of this study.…”

“…Few coastal habitat restoration studies have focused on the responses of predatory fishes [9,14]. Restoration of wild fishery stocks is of interest to combat global fishing pressure and subsequent declines, particularly in higher trophic levels [15].…”

“…Indeed, restoration has improved habitats for oyster reef dependent fishes [18], enhancing populations and biomass by up to 289 g/m 2 annually [17,19], which results in estimated economic benefits for local commercial fisheries of up to USD 4123/ha annually in the southeast United States [20]. In addition, living shoreline stabilization projects that improve nearshore habitats by stabilizing the shoreline from erosion through native vegetation and often a breakwater to attenuate wave energy, have enhanced fish populations [14] within three years post stabilization [21,22].…”

“…In addition, adjacent habitat can influence their presence at restored reefs based on the proximity of functionally redundant habitats [28]. Shoreline restoration has also improved sportfish densities and species richness, relative to impacted control shorelines [14,29]. Therefore, there is potential to enhance these species through habitat restoration, which is of interest to anglers and natural resource managers.…”