Is Littoral Habitat Affected by Residential Development and Land Use in Watersheds of Wisconsin Lakes?

Jennings, Martin J.; Emmons, Edward E.; Hatzenbeler, Gene R.; Edwards, Clayton J.; Bozek, Michael A.

doi:10.1080/07438140309354092

Cited by 109 publications

(80 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We found significant declines in LWD and significant increases in shoreline armoring and boat docks with increasing levels of development. Our results support smaller-scale studies that have shown losses in woody debris with development (Christensen et al 1996, Jennings et al 2003, Francis and Schindler 2006). Our study is the first to quantify relationships between dwelling density and intensity of littoral zone disturbances such as shoreline armoring and boat dock density.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…In addition, human population growth and urbanization of rural areas have increased development pressure on lakes, and there is growing concern Understanding the consequences of residential development is therefore critical for understanding the ecology of lake ecosystems. A growing number of studies have found negative relationships between lakeshore development and water quality (Moore et al 2003); habitat structure (Christensen et al 1996, Jennings et al 2003, Francis and Schindler 2006; and population dynamics and community structure of primary producers (Radomski and Goeman 2001, Jennings et al 2003, Rosenberger et al 2008, macroinvertebrates (Banziger 1995, Brauns et al 2007, and fishes (Bryan and Scarneccia 1992, Jennings et al 1999, Schindler et al 2000, Radomski and Goeman 2001, Scheuerell and Schindler 2004, Sass et al 2006, Wagner et al 2006. These comparative studies provide much needed information linking shoreline development and key lake characteristics.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing local and landscape patterns of residential shoreline development in Michigan lakes

Wehrly

Breck

Wang

et al. 2012

Lake and Reservoir Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing local and landscape patterns of residential shoreline development in Michigan lakes

Wehrly

Breck

Wang

et al. 2012

Lake and Reservoir Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For a group of Wisconsin lakes, developed shorelines had 92% less floating-leaf cover and 83% less emergent vegetative cover than undeveloped shorelines (Meyer et al 1997). Jennings et al (2003) also found that emergent and floating-leaf vegetation decreased at developed sites and in lakes with greater cumulative shoreland development density. In addition, Elias and Meyer (2003) found that the mean number of plant species and the percentage of native species were greater along undeveloped shorelines than along developed shorelines.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…In an Iowa lake, Byran and Scarnecchia (1992) found significantly lower aquatic macrophyte abundance in developed shorelines than in undeveloped shorelines. Jennings et al (2003) also found that the amounts of littoral wood remains and emergent and floating-leaf vegetation were lower at developed sites and at lakes with greater development density. …”

mentioning

confidence: 78%

Historical Changes in Abundance of Floating‐Leaf and Emergent Vegetation in Minnesota Lakes

Radomski

2006

N American J Fish Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.-To assess the consequences of shoreline development, whole-lake vegetation abundance of dense floating-leaf and emergent vegetation in 100 north-central Minnesota lakes was estimated from aerial photographs for selected years between 1939 and 2003. Lakes were randomly selected from three shoreland development classifications, which define statewide minimum shoreline development standards for Minnesota. The three classes, in order of increasing restrictions for development, are general development, recreational development, and natural environment. Image analysis techniques were used to estimate vegetation abundance (percent cover). Shoreline development varied by shoreland development class. Floating-leaf and emergent vegetative cover (percent of lake surface area) was significantly affected by development. Increases in shoreline development, indexed by dock sites per shoreline kilometer, reduced plant cover. A linear mixed-effects model estimated that in 2003, the mean floating-leaf and emergent vegetation cover loss from development was 6% for natural-environment lakes, 14% for recreationaldevelopment lakes, and 17% for general-development lakes. Total vegetation cover loss for north-central Minnesota lakes was estimated at 15%. Shoreline regulatory policies may need to be changed or riparian owner incentive programs added to address cumulative impacts to fish and wildlife habitat.Increases in shoreland development are changing lake ecosystems. Development pressure is increasing, as evidenced by increases in the number of dwellings per lake each year (Kelly and Stinchfield 1998). Human habitation along the shore has a cumulative effect on fish and wildlife habitat, water quality, and biota of lake ecosystems (Engel and Pederson 1998). Christensen et al. (1996) found a significantly lower amount of coarse woody debris along developed shorelines in Wisconsin and Michigan, predicting that recent losses in developed lakes will affect littoral communities for about two centuries. Meyer et al. (1997) concluded that housing development along shores of northern Wisconsin lakes dramatically altered native vegetation, especially shrubs, and reduced frog populations. Elias and Meyer (2003) found that for upland, shoreline, and shallow-water areas, the mean number of plant species and the percent of native species were both greater at undeveloped sites than along developed Wisconsin lakeshores. Jennings et al. (1996) noted changes in nearshore substrate composition in Wisconsin lakes that they attributed to human activity. In an Iowa lake, Byran and Scarnecchia (1992) found significantly lower aquatic macrophyte abundance in developed shorelines than in undeveloped shorelines. Jennings et al. (2003) also found that the amounts of littoral wood remains and emergent and floating-leaf vegetation were lower at developed sites and at lakes with greater development density.

show abstract

“…In areas with dense buildings in the coastal zone, first of all rushes and plants with floating leaves were eliminated. However, no effect of this kind of transformation was found in the submerged vegetation (Jennings et al 2003). Embankments make enrooting of vascular plants difficult, and thus they reduce their competition and enable the structural algae to occupy newly developed ecological niches.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

The influence of hydromorphological modifications of the littoral zone in lakes on macrophytes

Jusik

Macioł

2014

Oceanological and Hydrobiological Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study aimed at determining the influence of hydromorphological modifications of the littoral zone in lakes on the occurrence and quantitative diversity of macrophytes. The field research was carried out at the peak of the growing season (June -September) between 2006 and 2009. Altogether, 457 transects were studied, located in 5 lakes. Studies on the hydromorphology were performed with the method of Lake Habitat Survey (LHS), and on macrophytes − with the method of transects. The studied sites were divided into 3 groups of different intensity of morphological transformations. The identified groups constituted the starting point for the analysis of influence exerted by transformations on macrophytes. The obtained results indicate that hydromorphological modifications * Corresponding author: szyjus.up@gmail.com of lakes are an important ecological factor affecting the occurrence and quantitative diversity of macrophytes. The transformations recorded in the studied reservoirs resulted mostly from recreational exploitation. They were responsible for mechanical elimination of dominant species, which led to an increased number of taxa, synanthropization and an average level of hemeroby as well as a decrease in the total vegetation cover. Helophytes were the most negatively affected group by the transformations, which reduce their contribution in the vegetation cover, whereas macroscopic filamentous algae and elodeids were positively affected.

show abstract

Is Littoral Habitat Affected by Residential Development and Land Use in Watersheds of Wisconsin Lakes?

Cited by 109 publications

References 19 publications

Assessing local and landscape patterns of residential shoreline development in Michigan lakes

Assessing local and landscape patterns of residential shoreline development in Michigan lakes

Historical Changes in Abundance of Floating‐Leaf and Emergent Vegetation in Minnesota Lakes

The influence of hydromorphological modifications of the littoral zone in lakes on macrophytes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About