The Nature Conservancy Research Articles

Optimizing regulatory requirements to aid in the implementation of compensatory mitigation

Optimizing regulatory requirements to aid in the implementation of compensatory mitigation

Restored oxbows reduce nutrient runoff and improve fish habitat

A n oxbow is a remnant meander of a river or stream that has been cut off from present flow as the stream channel has migrated within its floodplain. The remaining depression is often connected to the water table, leaving pools of standing water throughout the year. Regular flooding and land use practices cause sediment and organic material to be deposited in the depression over time. The deposited material reduces the depth of the historic oxbow, limiting its potential for flood storage, nutrient cycling, and off-channel fish habitat. In recognition of the important ecosystem services that they provide, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has been restoring oxbows in the Raccoon River Watershed in Iowa since 2002 (Betts 2014). The USFWS, the Nature Conservancy (TNC), Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), Iowa Soybean Association (ISA), Sand County Foundation (SCF), USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and other partners have contributed to additional oxbow restorations as an innovative fish habitat improvement and tile line nitrate (NO3) treatment practice. Partners have worked with area producers through a voluntary conservation program to restore a series of oxbows that collect water from tile lines. The practice is intriguing to landowners since water quality and…

Dispatches

Dispatches

Making a Difference? Accounting for Nongovernmental Organizations in the Comanagement of Lore Lindu National Park, Indonesia

Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) are often found playing a critical role in facilitating aspects of protected area comanagement in the Global South. In Lore Lindu National Park, Indonesia, three NGOs facilitated comanagement between 1998 and 2006. This article assesses the extent to which the comanagement strategies and approaches of these NGOs were aligned with their policy aims. The Nature Conservancy (TNC) focused on biodiversity conservation, whereas Yayasan Tanah Merdeka (YTM) and Yayasan Jambata (YJ) supported indigenous rights to resource extraction. Their strategies appeared to be consistent with their aims. Both YTM and YJ concentrated their efforts in indigenous communities with fewer customary rights and larger proportions of their territories located inside the park. By contrast, TNC targeted a much larger number of communities with larger territories and forest areas, which were vulnerable to the spread of cocoa cultivation. The evidence for an alignment between aims and approaches is mixed. The NGOs’ approaches were influenced by local actors, particularly indigenous leaders and institutions, who used comanagement as a means of strengthening claims to customary territories. Communities obtained extraction rights, and many negotiated the right to exclude outsiders from their territories, which may have helped contain the spread of cocoa cultivation.

Moro Big Pine: Conservation and Collaboration in the Pine Flatwoods of Arkansas

Established by a conservation easement in 2006, Moro Big Pine Natural Area-Wildlife Management Area (MBP) encompasses 16,000 contiguous acres in the pine flatwoods of southern Arkansas. This large-scale cooperative effort, focused on an ecosystem with high conservation value in a landscape increasingly dominated by planted, intensively managed loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), arose from an initiative by Potlatch Corporation, the State of Arkansas, and The Nature Conservancy (TNC). The MBP is a permanent easement purchased with a combination of public and private funds that seeks to balance the improvement of open pine woodlands with economic interests. Potlatch now manages the MBP under a prescription that ensures both timber production and forests capable of supporting the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis). State agencies, including the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission, the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, and the Arkansas Forestry Commission, have partnered with TNC and Potlatch to achieve a range of objectives, including the improvement of pine flatwoods, greater landscape connectivity, protection and habitat enhancement for species of special concern, and increased public access. Potlatch has also recently offered carbon credits from MBP to the California carbon market. MBP exemplifies some of the opportunities now available to private landowners and public agencies—a melding of conservation and production goals to protect working forests, improve ecosystem services, and provide recreational opportunities.

REVIEW: The evolving linkage between conservation science and practice at The Nature Conservancy.

Summary The Nature Conservancy (TNC) was founded by ecologists as a United States land trust to purchase parcels of habitat for the purpose of scientific study. It has evolved into a global organization working in 35 countries ‘to conserve the lands and waters on which all life depends’. TNC is now the world's largest conservation non‐governmental organization (NGO), an early adopter of advances in ecological theory and a producer of new science as a result of practising conservation.The Nature Conservancy's initial scientific innovation was the use of distributional data for rare species and ecological communities to systematically target lands for conservation. This innovation later evolved into a more rigorous approach known as ‘Conservation by Design’ that contained elements of systematic conservation planning, strategic planning and monitoring and evaluation.The next scientific transition at TNC was a move to landscape‐scale projects, motivated by ideas from landscape ecology. Because the scale at which land could be set aside in areas untouched by humans fell far short of the spatial scale demanded by conservation, TNC became involved with best management practices for forestry, grazing, agriculture, hydropower and other land uses.A third scientific innovation at TNC came with the pursuit of multiobjective planning that accounts for economic and resource needs in the same plans that seek to protect biodiversity.The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment prompted TNC to become increasingly concerned with ecosystem services and the material risk to people posed by ecosystem deterioration.Finally, because conservation depends heavily upon negotiation, TNC has recently recruited social scientists, economists and communication experts. One aspect still missing, however, is a solid scientific understanding of thresholds that should be averted. Synthesis and applications. Over its 60‐plus year history, scientific advances have informed The Nature Conservancy (TNC)'s actions and strategies, and in turn the evolving practice of conservation has altered the type of science sought by TNC in order to maximize its conservation effectiveness.

Also Seeking Common Ground in Conservation

In his response to my recent editorial (Soule 2013), Kareiva (2014) seeks to “correct some misimpressions” while seeking common ground. I am grateful for Kareiva’s collegial response and his agreement that nature (biodiversity) must be protected and conserved for its own sake as well as for utilitarian reasons.1 Kareiva celebrates the achievements of his employer, The Nature Conservancy (TNC), globally the most influential conservation NGO. TNC has been a powerful actor and an effective implementer of habitat protection as well as a key voice for educating the public about the threats to nature. Its scientists, staff, and donors deserve our gratitude. If TNC did not exist, conservationists would need to invent such an organization. Not only do I harbor no hostility to the hundreds of dedicated staff of TNC, I salute their manifold contributions to conservation. Another point of agreement is that protected areas, by themselves, are too limited in size. Combined they constitute only about 13% of Earth (Le Saout et al. 2013), considered far too little to achieve comprehensive biodiversity protection (Noss et al. 2012). The solution is to create more protected areas and to improve their management when possible. We agree, as well, that lands subject to resource extraction, agriculture, grazing, and logging must be managed in ways that minimize damage to biodiversity, in part because diverse ecosystems are more stable and resilient (Tilman 2012). But wishing does not make it so. Not nearly enough sensitively managed wildlife habitat is effectively protected in the Unites States or elsewhere to arrest the extinction crisis. In addition, ecological degradation is exacerbated by some government agencies such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services antipredator program and The U.S. Bureau of Land Management’s aggressive leasing of public lands for fossil fuel exploration and extraction in Wyoming and other states (Beckman et al. 2012).

Collaboration or Contention? Decentralised Marine Governance in Berau

Conservation of marine space is a new frontier in environmentalists’ involvement with resource governance in Indonesia. The coastal and marine area of Berau was established as a District Marine Conservation Area (MCA) based on District Head Regulation No. 31/2005. The total MCA of 1.27 million ha was expected to become part of the wider MCA networks of the East Borneo Seascape and the Sulu Sulawesi Marine Ecoregion, as well as of the Coral Triangle international network of conservation areas in Southeast Asia and the Pacific. The Berau MCA was developed in collaboration between the Berau district government and international environmental non-governmental organisations (NGOs) such as The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). They claimed to use a new concept of partnership with the decentralised district government as the principal institutional partner. However, the governance framework is full of legal disconnects due to decentralisation of resource management, and its implementation faces the real-life challenges of political-economic and historical valuations of the marine environment producing conflicts of interest between the multi-scalar actors involved. Following the very process of establishing the Berau MCA over a five-year period (2005–2010), this paper shows why it is necessary to understand how collaboration and contention are constructed and in turn construct actors' perceptions and perspectives on marine conservation and resource extraction in decentralised coastal governance.

Feral Pig Control in Hawaii: Evolution of Control Methods

Author(s): Wittenmyer, Caleb; Quitazol, Francis | Abstract: The Nature Conservancy (TNC) of Hawaii manages preserves on all of the major Hawaiian Islands, effectively protecting over 36,000 acres. Through the development of partnerships, TNC has fostered and cared for over 200,000 acres of watershed lands throughout the state. Hawaii’s native forests evolved without the presence of large mammals. In Hawaii, there are only 2 native species of mammals: the Hawaiian hoary bat and the Hawaiian monk seal. The historical lack of large native mammals has left Hawaiian native forests vulnerable, unable to evolve defenses and recover from damage caused by feral pigs and other feral ungulates. Feral pig control in Hawaii is challenging because of the remoteness of the rainforest locations with diverse topography and constantly changing weather conditions. These challenges, among others, have forced managers to integrate and utilize many different methods of control in order to maintain zero-tolerance levels within TNC preserves and throughout the managed watershed areas.

A Program to Eradicate Twenty-Four Nonnative Invasive Plant Species from Santa Cruz Island

Abstract. Santa Cruz Island, California, has been free of nonnative vertebrates since 2007, but nonnative invasive plants remain one of the most significant threats to the recovery of the island's native ecosystems. Just over one-fourth of the island's flora is comprised of nonnative, naturalized plant species. In 2007, an island-wide invasive plant survey indicated that several species were candidates for eradication based on factors such as their distribution, abundance, invasiveness, and known or projected harmful impacts on the native biota. In 2008, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and Native Range, Inc., initiated a program to eliminate 15 invasive plant species from TNC's portion (76%) of the 246-km2 island. An additional 9 species were targeted in subsequent years. As of 2012, a total of 882 populations of 24 weed species have been mapped and treated, and 73% of these populations are considered inactive (dead), with no aboveground living biomass. The majority of the remaining active infestations are d...

As RPPNs Como Estratégia Para a Conservação da Biodiversidade: O caso da Chapada dos Veadeiros

As Reservas Particulares do Patrimônio Natural – RPPNs - são unidades de conservação de uso sustentável criadas em propriedades privadas, de forma voluntária. As restrições a que estão sujeitas as tornam semelhantes às unidades de conservação de proteção integral. Desta forma, podem promover a conservação de seus habitats sem grandes intervenções humanas. A Chapada dos Veadeiros, região localizada no nordeste de Goiás, tem 15 RPPNs federais, localizadas em torno do Parque Nacional da Chapada dos Veadeiros, na sua zona de amortecimento. Por ser a Chapada dos Veadeiros habitada há tempos por vários proprietários de terras e fazendeiros, a criação de RPPNs representa uma estratégia viável para a região, considerada área prioritária para projetos de conservação, por ONGs como a Conservation International (CI), a World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) e a The Nature Conservancy (TNC), pelo Ministério do Meio Ambiente (MMA) e pelo Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade (ICMBIO). O artigo demostra que as RPPNs podem e devem ser uma alternativa importante para a implementação de um planejamento territorial desenvolvido em parceria com a comunidade local. Nesta revisão, foi investigada a contribuição das RPPNs na Chapada dos Veadeiros para a conservação da biodiversidade local e o seu processo de implementação.

The Role of an Urban Tallgrass Prairie Remnant in Conservation: A Case Study in Central Iowa (USA)

Although more than 85% of Iowa (USA) was covered by tallgrass prairie at the time of settlement by Europeans in the early 19th century, less than 0.1% remains. The Richard W. Pohl State Preserve at Ames (IA) High School, surrounded on three sides by structures, roads, and other development, protects 4 ha of tallgrass prairie. The preserve, commonly referred to as Ames High Prairie (AHP), was grazed but never plowed under private ownership until its acquisition by the Ames School District in 1959. Although considered for development as a parking lot or football field in the 1960s, the residents of Ames voted in 1970 to award The Nature Conservancy (TNC) a 49-year lease to the property (until 2019). This preserve, almost completely open in the 1930s, has been subject to numerous threats, including encroachment by woody plants, entry of non-native and invasive plant species associated with human activity, and erosion associated with storm water runoff, sewer line repair, foot and bike traffic, and major flood events. Recent management activities at AHP, conducted by volunteer land stewards, high school and college students, TNC summer interns, and private contractors, has consisted of controlled burns, cutting and herbicide treatment of encroaching woody plants, manual removal and herbicide treatment of invasive herbaceous plants, and sowing of seeds (collected on site) into reopened areas. Three vascular plant inventories of the 8.9 ha preserve (1966, 1995, current study) have documented the occurrence of 465 taxa (329 native) at AHP, including 5 Iowa special concern species. This flora includes 147 native prairie plant taxa, which ranks 8th in comparison with the 26 other (and mostly larger) prairies protected as state preserves in Iowa. As a vegetation remnant, AHP protects tallgrass prairie taxa and their gene pools, maintains an example of historically abundant (but now scarce) tallgrass prairie vegetation, and provides citizens an opportunity to experience prairie.

Conservation Action Planning: Lessons learned from the St. Marys River watershed biodiversity conservation planning process

Conservation Action Planning (CAP) is an adaptive management planning process refined by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and embraced worldwide as the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation. The CAP process facilitates open, multi-institutional collaboration on a common conservation agenda through organized actions and quantified results. While specifically designed for conservation efforts, the framework is adaptable and flexible to multiple scales and can be used for any collaborative planning effort. The CAP framework addresses inception; design and development of goals, measures, and strategies; and plan implementation and evaluation. The specific components of the CAP include defining the project scope and conservation targets; assessing the ecological viability; ascertaining threats and surrounding situation; identifying opportunities and designing strategies for action; and implementing actions and monitoring results. In 2007, TNC and a multidisciplinary graduate student team from the University of Michigan's School of Natural Resources and Environment initiated a CAP for the St. Marys River, the connecting channel between Lake Superior and Lake Huron, and its local watershed. The students not only gained experience in conservation planning, but also learned lessons that notably benefited the CAP process and were valuable for any successful collaborative effort—a dedicated core team improved product quality, accelerated the timeline, and provided necessary support for ongoing efforts; an academic approach in preparation for engagement in the planning process brought applicable scientific research to the forefront, enhanced workshop facilitation, and improved stakeholder participation; and early and continuous interactions with regional stakeholders improved cooperation and built a supportive network for collaboration.

Prairie Restorations can Protect Remnant Tallgrass Prairie Plant Communities

Tallgrass prairie is the most endangered ecosystem in North America, with less than one percent of its original extent remaining. The Nature Conservancy (TNC) has restored over 9000 ha of crop and fallow lands adjacent to native prairie with a primary goal of buffering remnant prairies to maintain plant community composition and reduce invasion by nonnative plants. We tested the efficacy of this approach by measuring plant community parameters at four TNC prairie restoration sites in Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, and Indiana. We tested whether restorations protected remnant prairies from nonnative plants by comparing the effect of neighboring land use on community composition along transects running from the prairie edges toward the interior. Nonnative dominance increased from interior to edges by 78% when adjacent to roads/abandoned lands and by 29% when adjacent to crops, but remained even (and low) when adjacent to prairie restorations (nonsignificant increase of 5–11% for high and low diversity restorations). Native plant richness was maintained in prairies adjacent to restorations (nonsignificant losses of 0.03 species/0.25 m2 for low species richness restorations and 1.1 species/0.25 m2 for high species richness restorations from interior to edge), significantly less than the 3.8 species/0.25 m2 lost from interior to edge next to roads/abandoned lands. The change in native richness next to cropland was intermediate, but nonsignificant, with a loss of 1.4 species/0.25 m2. These results suggest that managers may be able to buffer remnant prairies against nonnative species invasion and protect native plant diversity by targeting restorations of roadsides, abandoned lands, and other adjacent areas dominated by non-native plants.

Invasion Status of Terrestrial Mammals on Uninhabited Islands within the San Juan Archipelago, Washington

To assess potential impacts of native and invasive terrestrial mammals on near-shore marine ecosystems on islands within the San Juan archipelago, Washington, we surveyed for the presence or non-detection of predatory mammals on a subset of 14 uninhabited islands: 10 that are part of the San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuge, 3 that are managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and 1 that is owned by The Nature Conservancy (TNC). We were unable to detect invasive terrestrial mammals on any of the 14 islands. We found native mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) and voles (Microtus townsendi) on one island each, and native raccoons (Procyon lotor pacifica) on three islands. We speculate that the nearly ubiquitous presence of native river otters (Lontra canadensis) along with native predatory birds may be preventing immigrant invasive mammals (primarily house mice [Mus musculus] and rats [Rattus spp.]) from gaining a foot-hold on the islands. Inadequate habitat and/or island size and distance from larger islands and their source populations along with insufficient trap nights may also have contributed to the non-detection of small mammals on the islands we surveyed. For the best chance at keeping these islands free of invaders, we recommend future surveys using continuous measurement methods (e.g., track plates and monitoring blocks) for early detection of future invasions.

Changing spatial patterns of conservation investment by a major land trust

While numerous scientific publications have used biological data and sometimes decision theory to identify where conservation funds should be invested, studies that examine where money for conservation actually has been spent and how investment patterns have changed through time are scarce. We analyze changing spatial patterns of spending on land protection, using investments by a major conservation organization, The Nature Conservancy (TNC), in the conterminous United States as a case study. We focus on investments in land protection made by TNC in four decades (1970–2009) using fee simple and easement acquisitions. During this period, TNC expanded and accelerated its investments in land conservation. We compare patterns of conservation investment in different states via two metrics: (1) the amount TNC spent to acquire land for protection, and (2) the overall area protected. The two metrics, while correlated, reveal different information about TNC’s investment patterns. The amount of conservation activity TNC undertook in different states shows pronounced variation when measured either by the overall area protected or the cost of acquiring that area. We used a regression approach to relate variation in investment levels across states in each decade to a suite of biological and socioeconomic factors relevant to the effectiveness of conservation resource allocation decisions. Through time, these variables are able to explain greater spatial variation in the levels of investment into different states. The richness of native species per state showed the strongest association with overall investment levels. However, land costs also influenced investment patterns in recent decades but in ways that differed when measured by the overall area protected and by the money spent to protect it.

A Transactional and Collaborative Approach to Reducing Effects of Bottom Trawling

Private-sector financial and legal transactions have long been used to protect terrestrial habitats and working landscapes, but less commonly to address critical threats in marine environments. Transferrable and marketable fishing privileges, including permits and quotas, make it possible to use private-sector transactions as conservation strategies to address some fishery management issues. Abating the effects of bottom trawling on the seafloor and bycatch and discard associated with the practice has proven challenging. On the Central Coast of California, The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Environmental Defense Fund, local fishers and local, state, and federal authorities worked collaboratively to protect large areas of the seafloor from bottom trawling for groundfish while addressing economic impacts of trawl closures. Contingent on the adoption of trawl-closure areas by a federal regulatory agency, TNC used private funds to purchase federal groundfish trawl permits and vessels from willing sellers. Trawl-closure areas were designed collaboratively by combining regional biological diversity and fisheries data with local fishers' knowledge. The private transactional strategy was designed to remedy some deficiencies in previous federal buyouts, to mitigate economic impacts from trawl closures, and to carefully align with a public regulatory process to protect "essential fish habitat" under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. This collaborative effort protected 1.5 million ha (3.8 million acres) of seafloor, reduced trawl effort in the area by 50%, and set a precedent for collaborative partnerships between conservation and fishing interests. This is the first time a large conservation organization has taken an ownership position in a fishery and demonstrates how nongovernmental organizations can invest in fisheries to improve environmental and economic performance.

Cave Hibernaculum Surveys of a Townsend's Big-Eared Bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) Colony at Mount St. Helens, Washington

The Mount St. Helens (MSH) colony of Townsend’s Big-eared Bats (Corynorhinus townsendii) uses several caves in the Cave Basalt lava flow near Mount St. Helens, Washington State, USA, including hibernacula and a maternity roost. Federal, state, and private land managers currently consider the MSH colony of Townsend’s Big-eared Bats to be 1 group, based upon apparent high-fidelity use of the known maternity roost and hibernacula, and the unique landscape of the Cave Basalt lava flow, which contains a large number of roost sites in a small area. The Cave Basalt is a clearly-definable flow of pahoehoe lava approximately 9 mi in area, containing numerous lava tubes. Though lava fields and tubes exist in other regions of the Pacific Northwest, the Cave Basalt is relatively unique for its high abundance of lava tube caves in a small area. The lava flow has been radiocarbon dated to approximately 1900 BP (Greeley and Hyde 1972), and forest ecology on the flow differs greatly from the surrounding coniferforested landscape common to western Washington State (Halliday 1962; Mullineaux and Crandell 1981; Nieland and Nieland 1994). The MSH colony of Townsend’s Big-eared Bats has been a focus of substantial conservation efforts. Wildlife biologists and personnel from multiple agencies (USDA Forest Service, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife) began implementing conservation measures for the MSH colony in the late 1990s, using public outreach to educate recreational cavers, implementing seasonal closures and signage at known hibernacula, and installing bat-friendly exclosure gates at multiple entrances of the known maternity roost. A parcel of land containing the main entrance of the maternity roost was purchased in 1999 from private timberland ownership by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) of Washington State (WDFW 2002). Previous efforts to assess the size of the MSH colony consisted of intermittent exit counts at the maternity roost, recorded by TNC staff, graduate students from the Vancouver branch campus of Washington State University (Green 2003), and ND Reynolds (NDR) as an ecological consultant to TNC (Reynolds 2005, 2006). Although synthesis of these efforts revealed 25 y of persistent use of the maternity roost, surveys were not systematic. A systematic, repeatable survey that could provide an index to population size was needed. In 2003, JM Wainwright proposed a program of hibernaculum surveys. A shortlist of 6 caves was identified from over 64 caves known from the Cave Basalt (per Nieland and Nieland 1994), which were likely, based on expert knowledge and detailed agency reports (Senger and Crawford 1984), to harbor the majority of bats during winter. To protect these caves, we do not report true cave names and or location information. We present data using 6 pseudonyms: ‘‘Cave A’’ through ‘‘Cave F’’. Survey methods consisted of entering hibernacula during winter and counting Townsend’s Big-eared Bats. We are acutely aware that Townsend’s Big-eared Bats are sensitive to human disturbance (BC Wildlife 1998; WBWG 2005), and waking from torpor in midwinter is metabolically expensive (Thomas and others 1990), so we developed rapid-reconnaissance survey methods (Kunz 2003; Tuttle 2003) to minimize disturbance as much as possible. We surveyed only every other year, and each cave was surveyed only once during survey years. GENERAL NOTES

Do Private Conservation Activities Match Science-Based Conservation Priorities?

BackgroundPrivate land conservation is an essential strategy for biodiversity protection in the USA, where half of the federally listed species have at least 80% of their habitat on private lands. We investigated the alignment between private land protection conducted by the world's largest land trust (The Nature Conservancy) and the science driven identification of priority areas for conservation. This represents the first quantitative assessment of the influence of defining priority areas on the land acquisitions of a conservation non-governmental organization (NGO).Methodology/Principal FindingsThe lands acquired by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) were analyzed using GIS to determine to what extent they were in areas defined as priorities for conservation. The spatial analysis of TNC lands was broken up into land known to be acquired in the last five years, five to ten years ago, prior to ten years ago, and anytime during the last sixty years (including previous sets of data plus acquisitions lacking a date). For the entire history of TNC the proportion of TNC lands within the priority areas was 74%. Prior to 10 years ago it was 80%, 5–10 years ago it was 76%, and in the last five years it was 81%. Conservation easements were found to have lower alignment with priority areas (64%) than outright fee simple acquisitions (86%).Conclusions/SignificanceOverall the location of lands acquired was found to be well aligned with the priority areas. Since there was comparable alignment in lands acquired before and after formalized conservation planning had been implemented as a standard operating procedure, this analysis did not find evidence that defining priority areas has influenced land acquisition decisions.

Hydrologic effects of a wet prairie restoration

This study is a first approach to understand the hydrologic system of the region by monitoring the water table at six wet prairie restoration sites and correlating it to rainfall records from a nearby weather station. Transects of piezometers perpendicular to Wiregrass ditch were installed to monitor the water table and hyporheic zone (Figure 3). The specific location for the transects depended on the proximity to the restoration areas within protected property of The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and Toledo Metroparks (Figure 4).