Summary of Final Session

The two-day symposium concluded with a panel discussion. The panel discussion concentrated on the different potential areas of wetland priority research. Summarized below are the important recommendations related to the symposium theme and some research needs, especially in the area of general wetland management.

There is a major concern regarding the lack of support for scientists interested in taxonomy, systematics, and natural history in both the U.S. and Canada. These branches of biology are basic to any ecological study on wetlands, with plant taxonomy being fundamental to boundary delineation. The assessment of species diversity in wetlands is important in wetland evaluation; and the field of taxonomy must receive special status in wetland research. Further studies on the common and dominant wetland ecotypes are recommended.

There is a lack of clear understanding of the linkages among the plant-soil-hydrology triune. Correlation studies of these three components, especially in a wetland-upland gradient, are needed.

There are major limitations in existing methods used to delineate boundaries that have evolved during the past 30 years. The Primary Indicators Method, as discussed in Chapter 8, represents an important step in the right direction for developing an appropriate boundary delineation method. Adjustments to the method, however, may have to be developed in response to whether one is discussing mapping wetlands in the field as opposed to mapping a wetland at 1:24,000 scale. As well, the need exists to have the methods adjustable if the delineation of a wetland boundary is a “tax mapping”, where one tenth of a hectare can make a significant difference in somebody’s tax bill vs. mapping wetlands at the regional scale or at the watershed or county scale.

For establishing necessary buffer widths, selecting an appropriate method depends on the scale. For example, methods for developing buffer guidelines differ for wetlands at the watershed or site-specific scales. The CREAMS Model, for establishing buffers (Chapter 17), is a suitable model at a fairly local scale, but at the watershed scale an appropriate model is not so well developed. An important point of discussion is whether there is a need to set minimum and maximum buffer widths. This leads to the question of considering wetland functional boundaries and the necessity to examine such boundaries for establishing buffers.

280Regarding ecotones and their role in wetland ecology, Dr. Holland’s specific recommendations on research needs are as follows:

Study the importance of upland/wetland ecotones in a variety of landscapes simultaneously.

Characterize the relationship between wetland size, hydrologic characteristics, and dimensions of the ecotone on the assimilative capacity of the wetland patches and ecotones.

Use existing management questions to develop a series of experiments that will test our ability to successfully maintain or enhance the functions of wetland ecotones.

Identify traditional, low-intensity management techniques that have successfully maintained or enhanced the functions of wetland ecotones in the past.

Utilize existing descriptive and predictive models to identify parameters of wetland patches and ecotones that need to be better understood.

Establish lateral transects crossing from uplands to wetlands to open water ecosystems and assess biological diversity in wetland/upland and wetland/open water ecotones.

The following recommendations for research relate to the management of wetland patches and ecotones. The wise use of wetland patches and ecotones requires action on a large scale, where consideration is given to all factors affecting wetlands and the drainage basins of which they are a part. A good fundamental understanding of ecosystem and hydrological processes is necessary for good management. Careful emphasis and integration might ultimately result in national wetland policies which include consideration of upland/wetland and wetland/open water ecotones. The major items for developing such policies may include:

Need for a national inventory of wetland patches and ecotones

Need to identify the benefit and values of these wetland patches and ecotones

Need to define the priorities for each site in accordance with the needs of socioeconomic conditions

Require a proper assessment of environmental impact before development projects are approved, a continuing evaluation during the execution of projects, and the full implementation of environmental conservation measures which take full account of the recommendations of this process of environmental assessment and evaluation

Use of development funds for projects which permit conservation and sustainable utilization of wetland resources

A strong concensus was apparent on the necessity for long-term studies on wetlands. The discontinuation of some of the long-term studies was deprecated by all members attending the symposium. One classic example, quoted from Ontario experience, was the case of the Wally Creek Drainage Project near Cochrane, a multimillion dollar project which was discontinued. Similarly, the Irish Creek Wetland study in southern Ontario is having difficulty to sustain the 281research activity. There was a plea to combine long-term wetland studies with the establishment of reference wetlands in the U.S. and Canada. Such reference wetlands could be used for accumulation of detailed ecological data. It was also suggested that the reference wetlands should be fairly representative and not necessarily “unique areas” which may not have transfer value. An example of a reference wetland was a USGS site in Minnesota under a program called Interdisciplinary Research Initiatives.

A popular recommendation was the need to encourage and establish interdisciplinary studies. There were serious reservations on the ongoing piecemeal research where separate wetlands are examined for hydrology, soils, fauna, and flora. To undertake interdisciplinary studies, it is imperative that scientists willing to share and integrate results are rewarded in some way. The focus should be in developing more meaningful and useful products from an environmental management perspective and not just in discussing a single feature such as “birds” in isolation. An example from The Netherlands that was quoted was the Plantago multidisciplinary study financially supported by the Government of the Netherlands and the European Community. The project was started five years ago with the cooperation of six universities and included genetic, physiological, ecological, landscape, and nature management approaches.

Several participants questioned the relevancy of wetland research and its usefulness to others. An interesting example from the U.S. illustrated this point. Regarding the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program, the U.S. Congress in fact at one time asked for “assessment” and not for the production of tons of reports. What was questioned were the costs and benefits of such programs. It is also important that the results of scientific investigations on wetlands be presented in such a way that they are understood by a wider audience.

Another aspect that needs immediate attention is to combine wetland research efforts with wetland planning and management. It is important to understand how land uses modify and alter wetland functions and values. Further, development of mitigative measures of land use impacts should receive immediate attention. At the present time there are frequent conflicts and controversies on urban development in and around significant wetlands. This involves regulatory agencies and public institutions like the university on one side and the development industry on the other. An important constituency that is generally excluded is the public/citizens who play a major role in educating society. A positive change in societal attitudes towards the natural environment in general, and a concern for wetlands in particular, is expected to moderate the ongoing strife with the development industry and those agencies with the mandate of protection and conservation.

The concluding recommendation is for wetland groups in different regions of the world to improve networking for exchange of information and to achieve international cooperation and collaboration.