Review of ecological valuation and equivalency analysis methods for assessing temperate nearshore submerged aquatic vegetation

Abstract

Nearshore seagrass, kelp, and other macroalgae beds (submerged aquatic vegetation [SAV]) are productive and important ecosystems. Mitigating anthropogenic impacts on these habitats requires tools to quantify their ecological value and the debits and credits of impact and mitigation. To summarize and clarify the state of SAV habitat quantification and available tools, we searched peer‐reviewed literature and other agency documents for methods that either assigned ecological value to or calculated equivalencies between impact and mitigation in SAV. Out of 47 tools, there were 11 equivalency methods, 7 of which included a valuation component. The remaining valuation methods were most commonly designed for seagrasses and rocky intertidal macroalgae rather than canopy‐forming kelps. Tools were often designed to address specific resource policies and associated habitat evaluation. Frequent categories of tools and methods included those associated with habitat equivalency analyses and those that scored habitats relative to reference or ideal conditions, including models designed for habitat suitability indices and the European Union's Water and Marine Framework Directives. Over 29 tool input metrics spanned 3 spatial scales of SAV: individual shoots or stipes, bed or site, and landscape or region. The most common metric used for both seagrasses and macroalgae was cover. Seagrass tools also often employed density measures, and some categories used measures of tissue content (e.g., carbon, nitrogen). Macroalgal tools for rocky intertidal habitats frequently included species richness or incorporated indicator species to assess habitat. We provide a flowchart for decision‐makers to identify representative tools that may apply to their specific management needs.

Bibliographic Information