Stephen Sempier, Chris Boyd, Meg Goecker and LaDon Swann Alabama Water Resources Conference Orange Beach, Alabama September 6, 2012

Defining Hydrological Restoration Photo credit: Meg Goecker- IMSG “remove or modify anthropogenic barriers to restore historic tidal estuarine and freshwater exchange to benefit coastal and marine fisheries habitat”

Goals  Partnership  Components Inventorying Restoring Monitoring Photo credit: Meg Goecker- IMSG

Basic Criteria for Inventory  Gulf of Mexico  Match definition  5 acres or more  Less than $5 million  20-year life span

Collect Basic Information  Collect uniform information about potential projects  Meeting with Sea Grant Agent  One hour per project  Sea Grant Agent uploads project

Inventory Form: Background and Project Submission  Location  Acres restored  Type of habitat(s)  Historical information  Description of barrier  Cost Photo credit: NPS.gov

Inventory Form: Ownership, Benefits and Partners  Private versus Public  Adjacent to conservation area(s)  Species benefited  Ecosystem services  Volunteer opportunities  Funding partners Photo credit: NOAA 2010, Returning the Tide

Map Barrier and Impact Area

Projects in Inventory

Use of Inventory: Restoration Sponsors  NOAA  State Agencies  Sea Grant  NRDA  Non-Governmental Organizations Environmental Religious  Others Photo credit: NOAA 2010, Returning the Tide

Request For Proposals  Guidelines Match definition of hydrological restoration Up to $100,000 1:1 match Gulf of Mexico  Competitive Review Process  2013 RFP closed August 17 th Two projects may be selected

Bayou St. John

Upper Apalachicola Bay

Tampa Bay

Monitoring Plan Development  Panel of experts  Four categories Hydrology/Structure Nekton Vegetation Soil  Core parameters  To be released soon

Core Parameters Hydrology/StructureBiotic  Assessment of Barrier Removal  Water Salinity  Inundation Area  Open Water Benefit  Nekton (presence/absence)  Vegetation (coverage by species)

Acknowledgements  NOAA Restoration Center  Criteria Panel  Gulf-wide Sea Grant Extension Network  Monitoring Panel

Chris Boyd: Meg Goecker: Steve Sempier: This presentation was supported by the U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Restoration Center under NOAA Grant NA10NMF , Mississippi ‐ Alabama Sea Grant Consortium, Florida Sea Grant College Program, Louisiana Sea Grant College Program and Texas Sea Grant College Program. The statements, findings, conclusions and recommendations do not necessarily reflect the views of these organizations.