Environmental Management

, Volume 60, Issue 6, pp 1116–1126 | Cite as

Hurricane Recovery and Ecological Resilience: Measuring the Impacts of Wetland Alteration Post Hurricane Ike on the Upper TX Coast

  • Md Y. Reja
  • Samuel D. Brody
  • Wesley E. Highfield
  • Galen D. Newman
Article
  • 370 Downloads

Abstract

Recovery after hurricane events encourages new development activities and allows reconstruction through the conversion of naturally occurring wetlands to other land uses. This research investigates the degree to which hurricane recovery activities in coastal communities are undermining the ability of these places to attenuate the impacts of future storm events. Specifically, it explores how and to what extent wetlands are being affected by the CWA Section 404 permitting program in the context of post-Hurricane Ike 2008 recovery. Wetland alteration patterns are examined by selecting a control group (Aransas and Brazoria counties with no hurricane impact) vs. study group (Chambers and Galveston counties with hurricane impact) research design with a pretest-posttest measurement analyzing the variables such as permit types, pre-post Ike permits, land cover classes, and within-outside the 100-year floodplain. Results show that permitting activities in study group have increased within the 100-year floodplain and palustrine wetlands continue to be lost compare to the control group. Simultaneously, post-Ike individual and nationwide permits increased in the Hurricane Ike impacted area. A binomial logistic regression model indicated that permits within the study group, undeveloped land cover class, and individual and nationwide permit type have a substantial effect on post-Ike permits, suggesting that post-Ike permits have significant impact on wetland losses. These findings indicate that recovery after the hurricane is compromising ecological resiliency in coastal communities. The study outcome may be applied to policy decisions in managing wetlands during a long-term recovery process to maintain natural function for future flood mitigation.

Keywords

CWA wetland permitting Landscape management Coastal resiliency Coastal flooding 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This article is based on the research project jointly funded by the Hazard Reduction Recovery Center, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, and the Center for Texas Beaches and Shores, Texas A&M University, Galveston, Texas.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. Acreman M, Holden J (2013) How wetlands affect floods. Wetlands 33(5):773–786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbier EB, Enchelmeyer BS (2014) Valuing the storm surge protection service of US Gulf coast wetlands. J Environ Econ Policy 3(2):167–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barbier EB, Georgiou IY, Enchelmeyer B, Reed DJ (2013) The value of wetlands in protecting southeast Louisiana from hurricane storm surges. PloS ONE 8(3):e58715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berke P, Newman G, Lee J, Combs T, Kolosna C, Salvensen D (2015) Assessing networks of plans and vulnerability to coastal hazards and climate change. J Am Plan Assoc. 81(4):287–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brody SD, Highfield WE, Ryu HC, Spanel-Weber L (2007a) Examining the relationship between wetland alteration and watershed flooding in Texas and Florida. Nat Hazard 40(2):413–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brody SD, Zahran S, Highfield WE, Grover H, Vedlitz. A (2007b) Identifying the impact of the built environment on flood damage in Texas. Disasters 32(1):1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brody SD, Zahran S, Maghelal P, Grover H, Highfield WE (2007c) The rising costs of floods: Examining the impact of planning and development decisions on property damage in Florida. J Am Plan Assoc 73(3):330–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brody SD, Davis SE, Highfield WE, Bernhardt SP (2008) A spatial-temporal analysis of section 404 wetland permitting in Texas and Florida: Thirteen years of impact along the coast. Wetlands 28(1):107–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brody SD, Highfield WE, Blessing R (2015) An analysis of the effects of land use and land cover on flood losses along the gulf of Mexico coast from 1999 to 2009. J Am Water Resour Assoc 51(6):1556–1567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bruland GL (2008) Coastal wetlands: function and role in reducing impact of land-based management. Coast Watershed Manag 13:40Google Scholar
  11. Bullock A, Acreman M (2003) The role of wetlands in the hydrological cycle. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss 7(3):358–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carter V (1996) Wetland hydrology, water quality, and associated functions. National Water Summary on Wetland Resources, United States Geological Survey Water-Supply paper 2425:35–48Google Scholar
  13. Conservation, L. C. W., Force, R. T., Conservation, W., & Authority, R. (1998). Coast 2050: Toward a sustainable coastal Louisiana. Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Baton Rouge, LouisianaGoogle Scholar
  14. Costanza R, Pe´rez-Maqueo O, Martinez ML, Sutton P, Anderson SJ, Mulder K (2008) The value of coastal wetlands for hurricane protection. Ambio 37(4):241–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Engle VD (2011) Estimating the provision of ecosystem services by Gulf of Mexico coastal wetlands. Wetlands, 31(1): 179–193Google Scholar
  16. Dick JA, Hunt GH (2012) Status and trends of wetlands for Galveston County, Texas 2004-2009. Fisheries and Habitat Conservation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, NM, p 27Google Scholar
  17. Downing DM, Winer C, Wood LD (2003) Navigating through clean water act jurisdiction: a legal review. Wetlands. 23(3):475–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dunne T, Leopold LB (1978) Water Environmental  Planning. Macmillan, p 818Google Scholar
  19. Farber S (1987) The value of coastal wetlands for protection of property against hurricane wind damage. J Environ Econ Manag14(2):143–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. GonzalezLA, Jacob JS, Kinney EA, Neish BS, Davanon RM (2014) Galveston Bay Wetland Mitigation Assessment and Local Government Capacity Building. Texas Land Office, Land Management ProgramGoogle Scholar
  21. Hejnowicz AP, Rudd MA (2017) The value landscape in ecosystem services: value, value wherefore art thou value? Sustainability 9(5):850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Highfield WE, Brody SD (2006) Price of permits: measuring the economic impacts of wetland development on flood damages in Florida. Nat Hazard Rev 7(3):123–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Highfield WE (2012) Section 404 permitting in coastal texas: a longitudinal analysis of the relationship between peak streamflow and wetland alteration. Environ Manag49(4):892–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kates RW, Colten CE, Laska S, Leatherman SP (2006) Reconstruction of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina: a research perspective. Proc Nat Acad Sci, 103(40), 14653-14660Google Scholar
  25. Kentula ME, Sifneos JC, Good JW, Rylko M, Kunz K (1992) Trends and patterns in Section 404 permitting requiring compensatory mitigation in Oregon and Washington, USA. Environ Manag 16(1):109–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kelly NM (2001) Changes to the landscape pattern of coastal North Carolina wetlands under the clean water act, 1984–1992. Landscape Ecol 16(1):3–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Larson L, Plasencia D (2001) No adverse impact: New direction in floodplain management policy. Nat Hazard Rev 2(4):1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lester LJ, Gonzalez LA (eds) (2011) The State of the Bay: A Characterization of the Galveston Bay Ecosystem, Third Edition. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Galveston Bay Estuary Program, Houston, TexasGoogle Scholar
  29. Newman G, Kim JH, Berke P, Merrill J, Wang Y, Li Q (2016) From idle grounds to ecological infrastructure: the resilient design of manchester neighborhood in Houston. Landscape Architect Front 4(5):68–84Google Scholar
  30. Newman G, Sohn WM, Li MH (2014) Performance evaluation of low impact development: groundwater infiltration in a drought prone landscape in Conroe, Texas. Landscape Architect Front 2(4):122–133Google Scholar
  31. Owen CR, Jacobs HM (1992) Wetland protection as land-use planning: the impact of section 404 in Wisconsin, USA. Environ Manag 16(3):345–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Parker DJ (2000) Introduction to floods and flood management. Floods 1:3–39Google Scholar
  33. Paul MJ, Meyer JL (2001) Streams in the Urban Landscape. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32:333–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Reja MY, Brody SD, Highfield WE, Newman GD (2017) Understanding the notion between resiliency and recovery through a spatial-temporal analysis of section 404 wetland alteration permits before and after hurricane Ike. World Acad Sci Eng Technol Int J Environ Chem Ecol Geo Geophys Eng 11(4):348–355Google Scholar
  35. Renaud FG, Sudmeier-Rieux K, Estrella M (eds) (2013) The role of ecosystems in disaster risk reduction. New York, NY: United Nations University PressGoogle Scholar
  36. Resio DT, Westerink JJ (2008) Modeling the physics of storm surge. Phys Today 61(9):33–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Shepard CC, Crain CM, Beck MW (2011) The protective role of coastal marshes: systematic review and meta-analysijs. PLoS ONE6(11):e27374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sifneos JC, Kentula ME, Price P (1993) Impacts of Section 404 permits requiring compensatory mitigation of freshwater wetlands in Texas and Arkansas (No. PB-93-212462/XAB). ManTech Environmental Technology, Inc., Corvallis, OR (United States)Google Scholar
  39. Sifneos JC, Cake EW, Kentula ME (1992) Effects of Section 404 permitting on freshwater wetlands in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi. Wetlands 12(1):28–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Smolders S, Plancke Y, Ides S, Meire P, Temmerman S (2015) Role of intertidal wetlands for tidal and storm tide attenuation along a confined estuary: a model study. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 15(7):1659–1675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stein ED, Ambrose RF (1998) Cumulative impacts of section 404 clean water act permitting on the riparian habitat of the Santa Margarita, California watershed. Wetlands 18(3):393–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Steiner F, Pieart S, Cook E, Rich J, Coltman V (1994) State Wetlands and Riparian Area Protection Programs. Environ Manag 18(2):183–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sutton-Grier AE, Wowk K, Bamford H (2015) Future of our coasts: the potential for natural and hybrid infrastructure to enhance the resilience of our coastal communities, economies and ecosystems. Environ Sci Policy 51:137–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. USACE (2001) Annual regulatory statistical data. Retrieved 6 May 2016, http://www.usace.army.mil/cw/cecwo/reg/execsem01.pdf
  45. US Corps of Engineers (1972) An overview of major wetland functions and values. US Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-84/18Google Scholar
  46. USGS (United States Geological Survey) (1996) National Water Summary on Wetland Resources. USGS Water-Supply Paper 2425. Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  47. Wilder TC, Ford WM, Perkins MM (2011) A Bibliography of Selected Literature on Indirect Impacts Associated with Clean Water Act Section 404 Permits (No. ERDC/EL-TR-11-6). Vicksburg, MS: Engineer Research and Development Center  Environmental LabGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Post-Graduate Research Assistant, Hazard Reduction and Recovery CenterTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  2. 2.Department of Marine Sciences, Professor and Director of the Center for Texas Beaches and ShoresTexas A&M UniversityGalvestonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Marine SciencesTexas A&M UniversityGalvestonUSA
  4. 4.Department of Landscape Architecture and Urban PlanningTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA

Personalised recommendations