<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>Now that you have more context around designing a vegetation Standard Operating Procedure (SOP), do you agree with the assumptions that we shared as a foundation to framing the vegetation SOP? Comment by clicking &quot;+&quot; below each assumption by Katie Kahl</title>
      <link>https://padlet.com/kkahl6/MassMarshVegSOP</link>
      <description>(see slides 7-13 that were emailed on 3/25; Note slider bar at the bottom of the screen, to see all the way to the right)</description>
      <language>en-us</language>
      <pubDate>2025-03-25 11:22:15 UTC</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>2025-04-01 15:43:18 UTC</lastBuildDate>
      <webMaster>hello@padlet.com</webMaster>
      
      <item>
         <title></title>
         <author></author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/kkahl6/MassMarshVegSOP/wish/3385542822</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Not discussed and may be helpful is a design SOP-- where and how should project proponents place veg transects, how often to collect data, how to summarize data?</p>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2025-03-27 18:51:25 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/kkahl6/MassMarshVegSOP/wish/3385542822</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title></title>
         <author></author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/kkahl6/MassMarshVegSOP/wish/3385547262</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Synthesis of well-designed monitoring data will help determine efficacy of restoration projects.  This has been a big gaps for monitoring required under permits.  Who's synthesizing the data and determining effectiveness-- doing power analysis, etc.  Will this team consolidate data across different sites-- how do they account with different site conditions that influence response (is that collected as part of the SOP)?  Are there veg response that is already learned at some sites that can be applied more broadly (i.e. Plum Island? Barnstable)?  Where are the gaps where more monitoring is needed?</p>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2025-03-27 18:55:41 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/kkahl6/MassMarshVegSOP/wish/3385547262</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title></title>
         <author></author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/kkahl6/MassMarshVegSOP/wish/3385550265</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>High marsh community will depend on techniques... tidal restriction removal may convert existing high marsh into low marsh.  There is a strong tie between marsh accretion, and marsh elevation in relation to tidal prism.  More flooded marshes that S. alterniflora may accrete much faster than S. patens-- would be good to understand this interactions; and make some recommendations on how to prioritize what to restore/ promote at different sites.</p><p><br/></p>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2025-03-27 18:59:05 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/kkahl6/MassMarshVegSOP/wish/3385550265</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title></title>
         <author></author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/kkahl6/MassMarshVegSOP/wish/3388483824</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Goals of restoration or climate adaptation action will define target vegetation, or marsh zones, or plant species of interest. The target vegetation might vary depending upon the restoration or climate adaptation action under consideration and the site where the implementation is planned. High marsh may often, but not always be the target vegetation, or high marsh might only be one of multiple marsh zones/species of interest.  High marsh is important for marsh sparrow nesting, and high marsh is a target vegetation for restorations with the goal of building sparrow habitat. For other projects: return of salt marsh species to a freshwater impoundment might be the target; reduction of exotic/invasive species such as Phragmites australis and an increase of native salt marsh species might be the target;  or return of a diverse assemblage of salt marsh species (high and low marsh zones) after sediment placement to build resiliency might be the target.</p>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2025-03-31 02:08:18 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/kkahl6/MassMarshVegSOP/wish/3388483824</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title></title>
         <author></author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/kkahl6/MassMarshVegSOP/wish/3391268529</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>It could be worthwhile to consider tiers within the vegetation SOP. One concern that has repeatedly come up from various stakeholders is feasibility. A tiered/optioned approach may draw in more practitioners and participation. Tier 1 would establish the bare minimum expected ( pre and post restoration photos from the same areas, pre and post vegetation zones (low, high, and phrag), pre and post large bare areas.  Tier 2 would be a more robust approach than Tier 1, while Tier 3 would provide the most comprehensive survey and monitoring methods.</p>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2025-04-01 15:43:17 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/kkahl6/MassMarshVegSOP/wish/3391268529</guid>
      </item>
   </channel>
</rss>
