By Valerie Perini

Coastal habitats provide a variety of ecosystem services including water filtration, shoreline buffering and nursery grounds for commercially valuable organisms. Unfortunately, these habitats continue to be developed and degraded by human activities, including armoring of shorelines via construction of seawalls and bulkheads. While a large body of research has illustrated the importance of coastal habitats and many living shoreline projects have sought to offset the negative impacts of shoreline armoring, few studies have assessed methods of shoreline protection from an ecosystem health perspective. To fill this gap, a new study led by MSC postdoctoral researcher Rachel Gittman investigates the effectiveness of three different types of shore protection strategies in improving habitat quality and ecosystem functioning. 

 

In the study, appearing in the journal Ecological Applications, Gittman and colleagues quantified the effectiveness of three different types of shore protection strategies in providing habitat for fish and crustaceans. The researchers compared natural fringing marsh shorelines, unvegetated bulkheads and marsh/offshore breakwater combinations, surveying the habitats supported by each type of shoreline over several years. Results indicate that the the marsh/breakwater shoreline supported more fish than bulkheads or fringing marsh shorelines alone, while also increasing the abundance of filter feeding bivalves. The habitat benefits of these living shorelines that did not emerge until three years after the marsh/offshore breakwaters were established. These results emphasize the potential of living shorelines to meet coastal protection demands, while also maintaining valuable ecosystem services provided by coastal habitats.