7.0 Wetland Dynamics on the Long Point Bay

7.3 Causes, extent and future threats of wetland loss on Long Point Bay and its associated wetlands

Figure 7.3 Trends in Cottage and Marina Development on Long Point Bay, 1945-1990.
M = marina, D = development (cottages, buildings, etc.)

Table 7.3 an Overview of the State of the Emergent Aquatic Plants of Some Coastal Wetlands. Those with the Highest Score Afford the Worst Habitat for Waterfowl.

While the extent of wetland loss at Long Point has been both less severe, and less noticeable, than at places such as Point Pelee, Rondeau, and Lake St. Clair, the Long Point area has experienced incremental wetland loss over the past 70 years. It continues today. Although the primary cause of coastal wetland loss on the Great Lakes has been the desire for waterfront property, followed by conversion to agriculture, cottage and marina development has had the primary impacts at Long and Turkey Point.

During the early part of this century, the Long Point peninsula was primarily used by hunters and trappers; a few cottages had already been built along the base of the spit by the 1920s. In 1928 with the construction of the Causeway and the first road access to Long Point, the construction of cottages steadily increased (Jessen et al. 1983). The number of dwellings increased from around fifty in 1940 to 900 by 1990 (Figure 7.3)(Lawrence and Nelson 1994). Cottage development in the Turkey Point area also began in the 1920s, and by the mid 1970s there were 530 cottages and 134 permanent homes (Figure 7.3). Cottage owners often fill in marshland to construct their cottages, as well as their lawns and gardens, and breakwall development is also sometimes required. With increased recreational use came the need to construct marinas to house boats. Marina development usually requires the infilling of marshes for buildings and trailers, wetland displacement for boathouses, and the dredging of channels. An estimated 13 marinas with 2800 boat slips and 1500 trailer and campsites covered the majority of the north shore of the Inner Bay by 1994 (Lawrence and Nelson 1994), and the numbers continue to increase. The highest concentrations of cottages and marinas are in the most significant and ecologically sensitive areas of the lakeshore between Long Point and Turkey Point (Jessen et al. 1983). These developments have resulted in the slow yet incremental loss of a portion of Long Point's wetlands. It has also been suggested that this loss is continuing unabated, as the great majority of development applications for these areas are approved despite violation of regulatory procedures and the potential for natural hazards (Jessen et al. 1983).

With ever increasing human populations on the lower Great Lakes, the demand for more marinas, cottages and trailer parks will inevitably increase. In addition to direct wetland loss, the cumulative impact of ever increasing boat traffic in the Inner Bay will be increased turbidity, increased physical damage, uprooting of aquatic vegetation (Murphy and Eaton 1984), and a decline in waterfowl food availability. Increased boat traffic will also elevate the level of human disturbance to staging waterfowl (see Chapter 8).

The wetlands of the Inner Bay have developed in the presence of and are dependent on long- and short-term Lake Erie water level fluctuations to remain productive. This can be attributed to the fact that high water periods kill dominant species such as cattail, thereby preventing marshes from becoming overgrown and unproductive. It has been suggested that any stabilization of water levels would likely reduce marsh area, vegetation diversity, and plant species diversity (Keddy and Reznicek 1986). Because Lake Erie's water levels are not presently stabilized to any substantial degree, this represents a possible future threat rather than a present cause for concern.

Figure 7.3 Trends in Cottage and Marina Development on Long Point Bay, 1945-1990. M = marina, D = development (cottages, buildings, etc.)

The result of widescale wetland loss in many areas of the Great Lakes has been that remaining portions of major wetland complexes need to be intensively managed for waterfowl habitat. For instance, the Ohio coastal zone has been extensively developed for industrial, commercial, agricultural, and recreational uses. In response to this large scale wetland loss, Federal and State agencies have diked remaining wetlands and now manipulate water levels in an attempt to maintain the highest possible levels of wildlife production (Hardy and Nelson 1979). The only diked area at Long Point is an impoundment in the Big Creek National Wildlife Area constructed by Ducks Unlimited, Canada (Prince et al. 1992). Once again, the relative lack of wetland loss at Long Point and the pristine and healthy character of its aquatic vegetation communities (Table 7.3) have fortunately made the implementation of sophisticated marsh management technology for the most part unnecessary.

Table 7.3 an Overview of the State of the Emergent Aquatic Plants of Some Coastal Wetlands. Those with the Highest Score Afford the Worst Habitat for Waterfowl.
Adapted from Crowder and Bristow 1988.