The Ecology of Lake St. Clair Wetlands: A Community Profile

Char1 es E. Herdendorf 

Center for Lake Erie Area Research 

Department of Zoo1 ogy 

The Ohio State University 

Columbus, OH 43210 

and 

C. Nicholas Raphael 

Eugene Jaworsk j 

Department of Geography and Geology 

Eastern Michigan University 

Ypsil anti, MI 48197 

Project Officer 

Walter G. Duffy 

Natlonal Wet1 ands Research Center 

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

2010 Gause Boulevard 

S1 idell, LA 70458 

Prepared for 

National Wetlands Research Center 

Fish and Wild1 ife Service 

U. S, Department of the Interior 

Washington, DC 20240 

Fur salr by the Superizitt.ndrn: U! I)~c~rnenf, 

U.S. Guvernmrn! 

Printing Offrrc. U'ashrngton. D.C. 20102 

Biological Report 85(7.7) 

September 1986

tierdcndorf, Charle5 T. 

The ccolnqy of Lake St. Ila~r wetldnd~~. 

(R~oloqical rcport ; 8!7( J. i)) 

"Sep tcarirer 1911b." 

Supt. of Ilocc;. no.: I 49.R0/i':ti'~(i.?) 

I, tictlanci t~ology--Saint (,lair, I.crke (Micii. arid Oiit.) 

?. Ndn--1rif luent e on ndture--Sdint ("l~flr, I d/\~ (Mi~h. 

drld 011t.) 3. Lic)tlar~d ccoloc~y--Great i ~ ikrs Rccjion. 

4, Mdrr--1trfI~ic~ntc on rratut-c--Gr-edt I crkcs Krcjl'on. 

1, Ral)t?~tcl , t. Nictlolds, lQ'37- . l i. ,Icrwor-ikr, 

Eutjc.rie, i i l. Ndtiondl Wctfdr~rls iie$c-'rdt ti C~nter (11.4.) 

IV. T~tlc. V. Titlc: icolarjy of 1 akr 'Liint (Idi. 

wctlilndi. VI. C;ilt.ics: fiiolor~it~tl t*i")or+t (W(~rlshincjl.:~r~, 

l1.L.) ; !3!>-7* 7* 

fhii report may be cited as: 

Herdendnrf, C. t, , C. N. Rdyhac? , and E. Jaworskl 1986. The ecology of iake 

St. Ciair-weliarlas: d~~~ii~lilfr~it~~i~;i:~. 

3.5. Fi~f;W:id!. Ser-t. Sjc?. Rep. 

85(7.1) 187 pa,

This report on Lake S t , Clair 

wetlands is one of a series of community 

profiles that deal with marine and 

freshwater habitats of ecological impor- 

tance. The delta marshes, estuaries, 

lagoons, and channel wetlands which fri nge 

the Michigan and Ontario shores of Lake 

St. Clair, and the St. Clair and Detroit 

rivers, are among the most productive 

areas in the Great Lakes. Because they 

occur in the proximity of a densely 

populated, heavily industrial ized, and 

intense1 y farmed region, the marshes have 

suffered losses in both area and qua1 ity. 

However, the remaining marshes are vital 

habitats for migratory waterfowl, fur- 

bearers, and fish, and perform many 

important hydrological and ecological 

functions. The St. Clair Delta is unique 

in the Great Lakes and fosters some of the 

finest coastal wetlands in the region. 

The biological resources of Lake St. 

Clair have attracted man since prehistoric 

time. Not only were fish and wlldlife 

consumed but the wetland plants were used 

for crafts, cures, and kitchen utensils by 

the early Indian settlers. Archaeological 

sites and early explorers of the region 

have recorded the close interactJon of 

early man and the coastal environment. 

Lake St. Clafr was lldiscoveredN by 

Europeans on Saint Clalreqs Day, August 

12, 1679, and was named in honor of the 

saint. Early fur traders were consls- 

tently overwhelmed by the bountiful fish 

and wildlife stocks of the lake and often 

remarked in their journals about the 

tranquil beauty of the marshesc flora. A 

colorful episode of the regfon was l inked 

to the prohibitton era. During this time, 

local residents claim that the St. Clair 

Flats, or delta, was a hub of activity for 

the importation of i 1 legal 8 but excel 1 ent 

quality* whiskey from Canada to the United 

States. Today, Lake St. Clais is one of 

PREFACE 

the most intensively utilized lakes in 

North America with its International 

wetlands continuing to be significant 

contributors to recreational activities 

throughout the year. Without these wet- 

lands, the value of the lake would be 

greatly diminished. 

Lake St. Clair is noted for its 

storms and rapid water level changes. The 

moderate energy produced by these storms 

1 imits the existence of coastal wetl ands 

to places where some type of natural or 

artificial protection is available. 

Corresponding1 yr the coastal marshes of 

Lake St. Clair fall Into four categorf es: 

1) delta wetlands, 2) coastal lagoons 

behind protective barrier beaches, 3) 

estuarine tributary mouths, and 41 managed 

marshes protected by earthen and rip-rap 

dikes. According to Gowardin et al, 

(1979) these wetl ands would include 

elements of riverine, 1 acustrf ner and 

palustrine systems of the recently 

developed National Wet1 and Cl ass T f ication. 

The li.Jossary Geol09y (Bates and 

Jackson 1980) def f nes '"freshwater estu- 

aries" for the Great Lakes as, '%he lower 

reach of a tributary to the lake that has 

a drowned rtver moutht shows a zone of 

transition from stream water to lake 

water, and is influenced by changes fn 

lake level as a result of sefches or wind 

tides." Brant and Herdendorf ( 19721 were 

among the f f r st investigators to descrf be 

the characterfstics of Great Lakes 

estuaries. Such estuarfes are important 

wetland habitats in western Lake Erie. 

The definitfon gfven above provides an 

adequate physical decrfption for the 

purposes sf thf s report. 

The information in this report Is 

intended to provide a baslc understandfng 

of the ecological relatfonships wfthln the

Lake St. CY air wetlands and the impact of 

natural and man-i nduced disturbances on 

the coastal marsh community. References 

are provided for those seeking more 

detai 1 ed treatment of speci f l c aspects of 

the coastal marsh ecology. An appendix 4s 

included which lists the dimensions and 

ownership of the major marshes, and the 

important biologfcal species of a1 yae, 

macrophytes, invertebrates, fish, 

amphi bians, reptiles, birds# and mammals 

occurring in the coastal marshes, 

Any questions or comments about, or 

requests for this publication should be 

addressed to: 

Informat-ion Transfer Speci a1 ist National Wet1 ands Research Center 

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

NASA-Sl idell Computer Complex 

1010 Gause Boulevard 

Sl idell, LA 70458 

(50% i 546-73 10 FTS 680-73 20

FOR NlETRlC (SI) UNITS TO U.S. CUSTOMARY UNITS OF MEASUREMENT 

Metric (SI) units of measurement used in this report can be converted to U.S. 

customary units as follows: 

Linear measurements; 

mill imetres (mm) 

cent imetres (cm) 

metres (m) 

k i 1 ometres (km) 

square metres (m2) 

hectares (ha) 

square kilometres (km2) 

Yo1 ume measurements; 

cublc metres (dl 

cubic metres (dl 

cubic kilometres (kd) 

Mass measu r emenk 

grams (g) 

kilograms (kg) 

metric tons (m ton) 

Bate measurements; 

0.039 inches (in) 

0.394 inches (in) 

3.281 feet (ft) 

0.621 miles (mi) 

10.764 square feet (ft2) 

2.471 acres 

0.386 square miles (mi21 

35.318 cubic feet (ft3) 

1.308 cubic yards iyd3) 

0.240 cubic miles (mi31 

0.035 ounces (ozl 

2.205 pounds (lbf 

1.102 U.S. tons (ton) 

centimetres per second (cm/sec) 0.394 inches per second I1 n/sec) 

metres per second (m/sec) 3.281 feet per second (ft/sec) 

metres per second (m/sec) 1.943 nautical miles per hour (knot) 

cubic metres per second (m3/sec) 35.318 cubic feet per second (cfs) 

metres per hour (m/hr) 3.281 feet per second (ft/secf 

kilometres per hour (km/hr) 0.621 miles per hour (mphl 

degrees Celsius (oC) 9/jOC+?2 oegreesFahrenheZt (OF1

CONTENTS 

PREFACE ............................................................. i i i 

CO?4VERSX01! TABLE.. ..........................................*........ V 

FIGURES ............................................................. i x 

.............................................................. 

TABl.ES xiii 

ACKNOWLEDC&lENTS ..................................................... x vi 

Cbdpter 1 . IN?KODUI:TION ............................................ 1 

1.1 Coastal Wctldnds ot the (iredt Lakes ..................... 1 

1.1 Compari sori of b'udstal and Inland Marshes ................ 4 

1.3 C~inctron drrll Valur of Coastal Wettnntlz .................. 5 

1.4 lake St. Cia1 r Wpt landr .................... . .. . ..... . 6 

Chaptcar Y . I'IIYSIL'AL l NVIRONMENT .................................... 11 

7.1 (;ctoIoqy ..................................... ............ 11 

2.2 Climat~ and Wpdthpr ..................................... 23 

2.3 Hydrology ............................................... 26 

2.4 Wdter Quality ........................................... 35 

Chapter 3 . BIUTIC ENVIRONMENT ...................................... 43 

3.1 Plankton ................................................ 43 

3.7 ketland V~yutatron ...................................... 47 

3. 3 lnvertrkrates ........................................... 54 

3.4 t-lsh ................................. ......*.*.*....... 58 

3.5 Aniphthlans and Reptiles ..................... . ....... . 66 

3. b Htrds ................................................... 68 

3 . 7 Marnrr~als .......................++.....*......,.... 73 

C'haytcr 4 . FC0101;ICAL PKI)CErjSI-7 .................................... 78 

4.1 Or igi n and f vuiution of L.akt. St . Clair Wet lands ......... 78 

4.2 B~olog~ cal Product ion ................... . ............. 85 

4.3 Cornrriuri~ ty Procpssc. s ..................................... Yl 

4.4 Wctlands as Habitat to Fish dnd W~ldFlfe ................ 101 

Chapter 5 . HUMAN iMPACIS ANO APPLIED ECOLOGY ....................... 104 

5.1 Wet1cfnrfl)rsturt)anc~ .................................. 

104 

5.2 Wrt 1 d nd &nrr.~hlp ar~l Managc~ni~nt ........................ 120 

5.3 Prospects for tho Future 126 

................................ 

A U~rnens~ons of lake St . Cla~r and St . Llair 

1ilvt.r Wet idnd$ by tlnit~d Stat~s and Canatfa 

Vuadrangle Maps ......................................... 141 

B Mean Monthly St . Clair Klvpr Flows 19OO to 1980 ......... 144 

C A1 yae Occurrt ng ln Coastal W~tlands dnu Ncarshore 

Wdters of Lzke S? Clair ................................ 146 

. 

U looplankton Occijrrt ng I n the Loastal Wfhtlands and 

Nc2arsnore Wdters of Lake St . Clai r ...................... 152 

vii

- Page 

Vascular Aquatic Plants Occurring in Lake St. Clair 

Wetlands ............................................ 157 

Benthic Macroi nvertebrates of Nearshore Lake St. Cl ai r 

and Connecting Waterways .............................. 164 

Taxonomic Listing of Freshwater Mol lusca of Lake St. 

Clai r Coastal Marshes, Nearshore Waters, and Tributary 

Mouths ................................................ 169 

Habitat Preference of Freshwater Mollusca of Lake St. 

Cl ai r Coastal Marshes and Nearshore Waters .............. 173 

Fish Known or Presumed to Utilize the Coastal Wetlands 

of the St. Clair River and Lake St. Clair ............... 175 

Amphibians and Reptiles Occurring in the Coastal 

Wetlands of Lake St. Clair and the St. Clair River ...... 178 

Birds Occurring in the Vicinity of Lake St. Clai r and 

St. Clai r River Coastal Wetlands .................... . 180 

Mammals Occurring in the Coastal Wetlands of Lake 

St. Clair and the St. Clair Delta ....................... 185 

Ownership of Major Lake St. Clair Wetlands .............. 186 

viii

Pap of the Great Lakes drainage bastn .................... 2 

Map of St. Clalr Rl'vor-Lakc St, ClaJr-Detroit Rfver 

Ecosystem ............................................... 8 

Physical factors inf lutmcing tho occurrence of coastal 

wetlands .............................................. 11 

Dupositlanal fuaturcs and 1andfor.m~ of the St. Clair 

Oolta ................................................. 12 

Lfttlo Muscornoot Day, an interdlstributary bay botwoon 

Middle Channel and South Chdnnol of tho St. Clair 

r?ulta .................................................. 13 

Woll-developed crevasse deposits adjacent to Mlddls 

Channel of St. Clajr Dolta ............................... 14 

Deltaic landforms of I)lckfnson Island, Mfchfgan .......... 15 

Gaoloylc cross-section of the northern portfon of Lake 

St. Clair showlng depth to bedrock. and thjcknoss of 

glacl al, lacustrine, and deltaic deposlts 2 7 

................ 

Cross-sectlon of St. Clair Delta showing distrfbutlon 

of deltaic sedlmsnts ..................................... 18 

Chronology of lake levsls and lake stages 3n the 

t-iufon and Erie baslns .................................. 1 H 

................ 

Vagetatfan transoct on Uickinsen Island, St, Clair 

Oelta, showing character of wetland soils %2 

Monthly wind frequency dlagrams for Wlndsor, Ontario ..... 26 

Monthly wfnd froquoncy for Mt. Clomens, Mlchigan ......... 26 

Current patterns for Lake St. Clafr undor varjous 

wlnd condftlons .......................................... 28 

iake St. Clair-St. Clafr Rlver drainage basfn ............ ~ ( 7 

Mean monthly discharyc. of the St. Claf r River 

:~s-:%a ................................................ 31) 

St. Clair Dolta distributary channels .................... 3 1

Page 

Hydrograph of Lake St. Cl air and Lake Erie water levels 

showing the impact of a record ice jam in the St. Clair 

Delta in March and April 1984 ..........................,e 34 

Distribution of specific conductance in Lake St. Clair.. . . 36 

Mean water quality characteristics of Lake St. Clair ., , . , 38 

Characteristics of Lake Huron water mass and Ontario 

nearshore water mass ..................................... 42 

Temperature and dissolved oxygen relationship in a Lake 

St. Clair coastal wetland ............................... 42 

Concentration gradient of algal pigments across Lake 

St. Clair .............................................. 43 

Mean distribution and concentrations of zooplankton 

groups in Lake St. Clair ................................. 45 

Distribution of total rotifers and most abundant genus, 

j3rachlonur in Lake St. Clair ............................ 46 

Ontario shore1 ine of St. Clair River at Cathcart Park . . . . 47 

Vegetation transects on Harsens Island* St. Clair Delta . . 48 

Distribution of six aquatic macrophytes in the St. Clair 

River-Lake St. Clair-Detroit River ecosystem ............. 49 

Emergent stand of reed grass (Phraamites australis) 

along Chematogan Channel, Walpole Is1 and, Ontario . . . . . . 50 

Emergent stands of narrow-leaved cattail (m 

~ t i f oia l on Little Muscamoot Bay* Harsens Island, 

Michigan ................................................. 51 

Wetland plant communities of the St. Clair Delta .... . . , . . 53 

Wetland vegetation on Dickinson Island in 1964 ........... 56 

Wetland vegetation on Dickinson Island in 1975 .........., 57 

Walleye spawning and nursery areas in the Detroit River 

and Lake St. Clair ....................................... 61 

Yellow perch spawning and nursery areas in the Detroit 

River and Lake St, Clair ................................. 62 

Lake sturgeon spawning and nursery areas in the Detroit 

River, Lake St. Clair, and St. Clair River ... . . . . .. . . . . . . 63 

Rock bass, pumpkfnseed/bluegill, largemouth bass, and 

smallmouth bass spawning and nursery areas in Lake 

St. Clair ................................................ 6 4

Number 

......................... 

3 8 Northern piker muskellunge, channel catfish, and carp 

spawning areas in Lake St. Clair 65 

Sport fishing areas by specjes in the vicinity of St. 

Clair Delta wetlands ....................L.,............ 66 

Least bittern (Jkobrvchu~ exllis) with young in broad- 

leaved cattail (Tveha latifoliq) nest .................... 73 

Food chain of the great blue heron (brdea herodlas) 

in Lake St. Clair ........................................ 74 

Muskrat ffhousesw i n a well populated section of Magee 

Marsh, western Lake Erie, Ohio ........................... 75 

Raccoon (procvon lotar), a common predator of duck 

nests in Lake St, Clair wetlands ......................... 77 

Twelve wet1 and habitats recognized in Lake St. Clair ..... 81 

Cycling of energy and material through the Lake St. Clair 

coastal wetland ecosystem ................................ 87 

Energy pyramid in Lake St. Clair coastal marshes ..,.,.,., 88 

Seasonal growth of dominant submersed macrophytes in the 

St. Clai r River-Lake St. Cl air-Detroit River ecosystem ... 92 

Successional changes on Dick i nson Is1 and in response t o 

water level fluctuations ................................. 94 

Wet1 and pl ant community displacement model for Dickinson 

Island ................................................... 94 

Fall migration corridors for dabbling ducks (Tribe 

Anatini) across Lake St. Clair ........................... 98 

.......................... 

Fall migration corridors for diving ducks (Tribe 

Aythyini) across Lake St. Clair 99 

Fall migration corridors for Canada geese (w 

ranadensis) across Lake St. Clair ........................ 100 

Historic trends in Lake St. Clair wetland disturbance .... 105 

Aerial photograph of the mouth of the Clinton River* 

Macomb County, Michigan .................................. 107 

55 Aerial photograph of St. John's Marsh on Bouvier Eay, and 

North Channel, St. Cl a1 r Delta (April 1949) .............. 108 

56 Aerial photograph of North Channel, St. Clair Delta* and 

St. John's Marsh on Bouvier Bay (May 1980) ............... 109 

57 Commercial development in Marsens Island wetland ......... 11 3

Mercury concentration in sediment core from western Lake 

Erie near mouth of Detro'it River ......................... 114 

Wetland losses along the Ontario shore1 ine of Lake 

St. Clair ................................................ 117 

Comparfson of Lake St. Cl air coastal wetlands dfstrib- 

ution in 1873 and 1968 ................................... 118 

Location map of individual coastal wetlands of the St. 

Cl ai r Rfver-Lake St. Cl ai r ecosystem ..................... 120 

Ownership map of the Michigan portion of the St. Clair 

Delta ............................................... 121 

Locatlon map of Lake St. Clair diked coastal wetlands .... 122 

Aerial photograph of Dickinson Island wetlands, St. 

Clafr Delta (May 1980) ................................... 124 

xii

Number 

TABLES 

1 Comparison of emergent coastal wetlands for the 

Laurentian Great Lakes ................................... 3 

Economic value of Michigan's coastal wetlands, 1980 ...... 6 

Wild1 i fe use and other functions of coastal wet1 ands 

at low and high water levels ............................. 7 

Estimated dimensions of Lake St. Clair and St. Clafr 

River wet1 ands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 

Interpretation of the events related to the origin of 

the St. Clair River Delta . . . . . .. . . . . ., .. . . . . .. . . , ,. . .. .. . 19 

Sediment discharge rates and characteristics in the 

St. Clair River .......................................... 21 

Mean monthly temperatures for three selected stations .... 24 

Mean monthly precipitation for three selected stations .. , 25 

St. Clair River flow time and velocity from Lake Huron to 

Lake St. Cl air . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 

Record storm surge levels of Canadlan stations on Lake 

St. Clair and connecting channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 

Average monthly water transfer factor parameters . . . . . . . . . 35 

Water level data for Lake St. Clai r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 

Lake St. Cl air water qua1 ity measurements dur'ing the 1973 

growing season ........................................... 37 

Chemical and physical characteristics of Lake St. Clair 

and adjacent waters ...................................... 39 

Geochemlcal composition of sediments In Big Point Marsh, 

Ontario on Lake St. Clair , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . 40 

Chemical composition of water in Big Point Marsh, Ontario 

on Lake St. Clafr .,.......,......... e L O a I I a I e e * r * + e e a * L e L 40 

Comparison of chemical characteristics of Lake St, C1 af r 

and associated waters ......................ee.ss.L).ee*il*e 41 

xiii

3 1 

3 2 

Macrozoobenthos of Lake St. Clai r and the lower St. Clair 

River and Delta .......................................... 

Lake St. Clair unionid bivalves and their glochidial 

host fish ..... ....*.............................."e**...e 

............... 

............... 

Average annual sport fishing harvest for Michigan water 

of Lake St. Clair and connecting waterways 

Birds observed in St. Clair Delta wetlands 

Productivity and seasonal abundance of waterfowl in 

Bouvier Bay and Harsens Island wetlands .................. 

Species composltfon of ducks harvested in the St. Clair 

Flats State Game Area (1974-75) .......................... 

Muskrat harvest in Michigan and Ontario bordering Lake 

St. Clair and connecting waterways ....................... 

Factors influencing lake and marine delta morphology ..,.. 

Morphology and re1 ative physical relationships of the 

Lake St. Clair wetlands .................................. 

Concentrations of nutrients and metals in wetland plants 

at the stage of maximum development, Big Creek Marsh* 

Long Point, Ontario ..................................... 

Biomass and productivity of emergent wetl and pl ants 

of the Great Lakes region ................................ 

Estimates of standing crop biomass for submergent 

vegetatfon in Anchor Bay, Lake St. Clair ................. 

Seasonal estimates of standing crop biomass for 

submersed macrophytes at several locations in the Lake 

St. Clair system ......................................... 

Domlnant submersed aquatic macrophyte taxa of the 

Lake St. Clair system ................................... 92 

Vegetation changes on Dickinson Island in response to 

lake level fluctuatfons .................................. 95 

33 Status of wildlife in the vicinity of Lake St. Clair 

and connecting waterways, 1970 ........................... 102 

3 4 

Land use change at St. Johnrs Marsh ...................... 106 

3 5 Adverse impacts to the various morphology types of 

Lake St. Clair wetlands ................................. 111 

36 Historical dredg'ing totals of Corps of Engineers 

projects in Lake St. Clair, 1920-72 ...............a=.*... 112 

xiv

37 Metals concentrations in 1 Jvfng plant tissues from 

Big Point Marsh. Ontario. on Lake St . Clair .............. 115 

38 Michigan and Ontario wetland losses on Lake St . Clair .... 116 

39 Comparison of 1873 and 1968 Lake St . Clair wetland 

areas .................................................... 119

In preparing a comprehensive report 

such as this profile, it is not possible 

to mention a11 the individuals who pro- 

vided information, gufdance, and stimulus. 

Much of the credit goes to colleagues at 

The Ohio State University and Eastern 

Michigan University, including Ronald 

Stuckey, Milton Trautman, Cl arence Taft, 

David Johnson, and Loren Putnam. Students 

and staff of the F. T. Stone Laboratory at 

Put-in-Bay, and the Ohfo Sea Grant Program 

who helped In researching various aspects 

of the marsh scology, are Alan Riemer, 

Andrea W i l son, Gary Kfrkpatrick, Mark 

Wageman, Laura Fay, and Suzanne Hartley. 

Tim Donelly of Eastern Michigan University 

assisted with data collection. 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

Ted Ladewski of the University of 

Michfgan, Stan Bolsenga of the Great Lakes 

Environmental Research Laboratory (NOAA) , 

Karl Bednarik of the Ohio Division of 

xvi 

Wildlife, Susan Crispin of the Michigan 

Natural Features Inventory, Brooks 

Williamson of the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, Gary McCullough of the Canadian 

Wild1 ife Service, Joseph Leach of the 

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and 

Bernard Griswol d, Thomas Edsall , Bruce 

Panny, and Don Schloesser of the Great 

Lakes Fishery Laboratory, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, all provided useful 

informat ion and encouragement. 

Wiley Kitchens and Walt Duffy of the 

National Wet1 ands Research Center provided 

guidance and advice throughout the 

project. Funding for this project was 

provided by the Office of the Chief and 

the DetroTt District, U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers. And we especially want to 

thank Sandra Herdendorf for typing and 

editlng the manuscript. To all those who 

he1 ped, we are grateful.

CHAPTER 1. INTCRODeQCTUOM 

1.1 COASTAL WETLANDS OF THE GREAT wetland communityr a portion of the Great 

LAKES Lakes - the Lake St. Clair-St. Clai r River 

system. 

In recent years there has been an 

increasing awareness of the resource value 

of our coastal wetlands and the urgent 

need to protect and conserve these 

ecosystems. The wetlands of the Lauren- 

ti an Great Lakes have been greatly altered 

by natural processes and cultural prac- 

tfces, The impacts to coastal wetlands in 

the Great Lakes region has become a 

subject of particular concern for the 

emerging coastal management programs in 

the eight states and the one Canadian 

province bordering the lakes (Figure 1). 

Traditionally, wetl and conservation 

efforts along the Great Lakes have been 

aimed at protecting waterfowl breeding, or 

to a lesser degree, fish spawning and 

nursery habitat. More recent efforts 

toward preservation are based on the 

know1 edge that wetl ands provide additional 

benefits? including flood control, shore 

erosion protection, water management* 

control of nutrient cycles, accumulation 

of sediment, and supply of detritus for 

the aquatic food web. Although the 

intrinsic value of Great Lakes wetland 

areas are being more fully recognized, no 

comprehensive studies have been undertaken 

to characterize the ecological relationships 

within them. The U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Herdendorf et al, 

1981ar bsc) inventoried the existing 

l fterature of physical, biological, and 

cultural aspects of the coastal wetl ands 

associated with each of the Great Lakes. 

Their study pointed out many gaps in our 

knowledge of the resources found In Great 

Lakes wetl ands, partlcul arl y si te-spec1 f ic 

fnformation on marshes, This report is 

f ntended as a contrfbution toward ff 11 ing 

these voids by presenting a profile of the 

For the purposes of this report, 

wetlands are defined as areas which are 

peri odi call y or permanent1 y inundated w 1 th 

water and which are typically character- 

ized by vegetation that requires saturated 

soil for growth and reproduction. This 

definition i n cl udes areas that are 

commonly referred to as bogs, fens, 

marshes, sloughsr swamps, and wet meadows. 

The coastal wetlands of the Great Lakes 

are further defined as all wetlands 

1 ocated within 1 km of the lake shore or8 

if farther from the shore, those dl rectl y 

influenced by water level change of the 

lakes or their connecting waterways. 

Great Lakes coastal wetl ands are 

highly productive, diverse communities 

which interface between terrestrial and 

aquatic envf ronments. The most obvious 

and unique feature of these wetlands is 

thelr characteristic vegetationr whlch 

provides a diverse community structure 

offering cover and food for the animal 

components of the system. Because of the 

ability of this vegetation to siow the 

flow rate of water passing through? 

wetl ands are valuable for erosion control, 

trapping sediments before they reach the 

open lake# and attenuating the force of 

waves to lessen the4r destructive power, 

The same vegetation provides a natural 

pol 1 ution abatement mechanism by serving 

as a filter for coastal trlbutaries 

through the reduction of the quantity of 

nutrients and toxic pol 1 utants belng 

washed into the Great Lakes. 

Coastal wet1 ands are high1 y valued as 

recreational sites for activitfes such as 

hunting, trappfngr fishing, boatfng access 

to larger bodies of water, bdrdwatching?

and general aesthetic enjoyment. The 

combination of recreatlonal desi rab ll ity, 

agricultural and residential potential, 

and the proximity of coastal wetlands to 

larger bodfes of water have contributed to 

thei r status as endangered environments. 

Their unique properties are susceptible to 

numerous natural and human-caused factors 

that are now causing coastal wetlands to 

disappear at an alarming rate. 

The Laurentian Great Lakes system 

within the United States (Figure 1) 

extends from Duluth, Minnesota* at the 

western end of Lake Superior, to Massena, 

New York on the St. Lawrence River. It 

possesses a shoreline length of over 6,000 

km and a water surface area of 158,000 

km2. Herdendorf et a1 . (1981a) enumerated 

a total of lr370 coastal wetlands for the 

Great Lakes and thei r connect1 ng channel Sr 

for a combined wetland area of lr209 k d 

(Table 1). The greatest number and area 

of coastal wetlands ring Lake Michigan, 

the only Great Lake entirely wfthin the 

United States. Lake Super+or has the 

second highest number of wetlands, but 

they are relatively small in size. On the 

average* the 1 argest wet1 ands are found 

along Lake Huron and its discharge channel 

(the St. Clai r River); for example, the 

emergent wetlands of the St. Clalr Delta 

alone cover 36 km2. The highly 

industrialized Lake Erie shore has the 

smallest number and area of wetlands while 

Lake Ontario has the smallest average size 

of wetlands, 1 argely due to is01 ated 

marshes In the Thousand Islands area of 

the St. Lawrence River. The presence or 

absence of coastal wetl ands is 1 argely 

Table 1. Cogparison of emergent coastal wetlands for the U.S. Laurentian 

Great Lakes . 

Lake 

Total Mean Percent 

Shore Number of area of area of of total 

1 ength wet1 ands wet1 ands wet1 ands area 

Lake Superior and 1598 348 267 0.77 22.1 

St. Marys River 

Lake Michtgan and 2179 417 490 1.18 40.5 

Str. of Mackinac 

Lake Huron 832 177 249 1.41 20.6 

St. Clair River, 256 20 36 1.80 3 .O 

Lake St. Cl airr 

and Detroit River 

Lake Erie and 666 96 83 0.86 6.9 

Niagara River 

Lake Ontario and 598 3 12 84 0-27 6.9 

St. Lawrence 

River 

TOTAL/MEAN 6129 1370 1209 0.88 100.0 

a~ata source: Herdendorf et a?. (1981a1, 

3

dictated by the geomorphology of a given 

shoreline and the recent history of water 

level fluctuations. Each lake has a 

particular set of geomorphic features 

which exert control on the development of 

coastal wet1 ands. 

1.2 COA4PARISON OF COASTAL AND 

INLAND MARSHES 

The coastal wetlands of the Great 

Lakes differ in several ways from inland 

wetl ands. The coastal wetl cnds are 

subject to temporary short-term water 

level changes. Lake St. Claf r wetlands 

are subject to inundation and dewaterfng 

by seiches, Long-term cycl ic water level 

changesr related to water budgets of the 

lake basins, also affect the coastal 

wetlands. Such fluctuationsr occurring 

over a period of approximately seven to 10 

years, may cause vegetation dieback5 

erosion of the wetlands* or lateral 

dtsp? acements of the vegetative zones of 

wetlands. Many coastal wetlands, such as 

those along western Lake Erie, are exposed 

to relatively high wave energy. 

Coastal wetl ands a1 ong the Great 

Lakes do hot appear to exhibit the aging 

process associated with ini and freshwater 

wetlands. Because of the fluctuating 

water. levels of the Great Lakes, constant 

rejuvenation of wet1 and communi t5es 

occurs. As a consequencer diagrams 5n 

textbooks illustrating the gradual 

senescence of freshwater wetlands are more 

applicable to inland wetlands of the 

glaclated Midwest than to the Great Lakes 

coastal wetlands. Many inland freshwater 

wetlands undergo senescence and converslon 

to terrestrial environments as a result of 

dnorganic and organic depositlon (e.g., 

formation of peat deposits). 

Coastal wetl ands often display a 

diversity of 1 andforms not normal 1 y 

encountered in other wetland environments. 

Owing to changes in the water levels of 

the Great Lakes since the retreat of the 

Pl e i skocene ice sheetsr 1 and forms such as 

coastal barrfersr deltas, and natural 

levees have been deposited. These 

geamaspholagf ca? features have f n f 1 uenced 

the formatf on of coastal wetlands. The 

continuing fluctuatiloc of water levels f n 

the Great Lakes 1s also an important 

varfable In determining many of the 

distingulshfng characteristics and the 

diversity of Lake St. Clair coastal 

wetlandsr as well as those of the 

1 andforms the wetl ands occupy. 

Coastal wetlands exhi b f t topograph- 

ical proflles which are more gentle than 

what is generally observed in inland 

wet1 ands. Many l nl and wet1 ands are formed 

in confined glacial features such as 

kettle lakesp which exhibit abrupt slopes 

on their perimeters. Because of the low 

angle slope conditionss vegetation zona- 

tion Is more dfstlnct and better displayed 

In coastal wetlands. As described in this 

report, the St. Clafr Delta is colonized 

by several broad submersed and emersed 

wet1 and zones. In1 and wetl ands* howeverr 

are more conftned and do not display the 

extensive zonation observed in the coastal 

zone. 

Water levels in coastal wetlands are 

determined by climatic factors over 

several years. Generallyr annual higher 

water levels in the Great Lakes occur in 

late summer and lower levels occur in 

January. Water level changes in inland 

wetlands respond to immediate or short 

term runoff condftions. High water most 

often, occurs in the spring when runoff 1s 

highest; low water levels occur in early 

fall. 

Furthermore* the contribution of 

groundwater flow is more significant to 

Inland wetlands, During the dry summer 

months with high evapo-transpiration 

rates, the survival of such wetlands may 

depend on groundwater i nf 1 ow. Great 

Lakes' controlled wetlands, however, shift 

1 andward or lakeward depending upon water 

level conditions over several years. 

Clearly, the relationship between 

groundwater and wetlands is intimate in 

inland areas, but this relationship in the 

coastal zone is less significant. 

In the Great Lakes, with few 

exceptions, the substrate is composed of 

mineral sediments. Because of the 

f 1 ushing action of seiches and periodic 

water level changes, organic deposits are 

not common. Conversely, the hydrolsgic 

connect1 vfty of in7 and wetl ands is poorer. 

Fine mineral soils, with high organic 

content f n the inland marshes, contri bute

to thefr gradual senescence and account one may refer to the dollar value of a 

for more ac-ld-tolerant vegetation than waterfowl hunting dayl as well as to 

that found 5n the coastal wetl ands. Peat concepts such as margfnal lty (or scarcfty 

fs not typicalfy found along the coast of value) and opportunf t y costs. 

Lake St. Cfafr. Nevertheless, not a1 3 wetland functions 

(e.g,, flood water storage) are vendable 

In the marketplace. 

1.3 FU NCTlON AND VALUE OF COASTAL 

WETLANDS 

Coastal wetlands fn the Great Lakes 

are mu1 t f -f unct ional because these 

environments are part of both the up1 ands 

and the open-water ecosystems, It is the 

fnterface with the Great Lakes that 

mu1 t ip1 ies the wetland functtons and 

contr-ibutes to the "open system" dynamics. 

Streams and coastal waterways enhance the 

ecosystem connectlvf ty, whil a obstacles 

such as earthen berms and dikes result in 

coastal wetl and f ragmantation and 1 oss of 

function. Functional loss then, can 

result from both bank-derlved and lake- 

derfved forces. An awareness of the 

ef f s ct of 1 ong-term lake level changes on 

the functlon of the coastal wetlands is 

begfnning to emerge, and the concept of 

pulse stablllty fs being ascribed ta these 

envf ronments, 

Durlng the past decade, considerable 

research was carried out regardlng the 

functfon and value of wetl ands. Important 

general sources Include Tfner (19841, 

Greeson et al, (19791, and Messman et al. 

(19771, In reference to the Great Lakes, 

slgnl f icant contr7butlons were made by 

Herdendorf et a1 . ( 1981al b,c), Raphael and 

Jaworski (19791, Jaworskf t 1981) r Jaworskf 

and Raphael (19781, and f f 1 ton et al, 

(1978). According to the U, S. Fish and 

WfldJ f fe Service Classification (Cowardin 

et a1. 1979), most Great Lakes wetlands 

would be classified as lacustrine or 

palustrine, 

Wet1 and functions are those processes 

occurrf ng fn wetlands whfch are associated 

with the functioning of the ecosystem or 

with the hydrosystem. Examples of such 

functions are primary production and water 

storage, In contrast, wetland values are 

those wetland products or servfcss whfch 

satfsfy a human need. Comonly, economic 

values are employed to such wetland 

commodities and services. As a result, 

In response to Sectjon 404 and other 

permitting authority, the U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers (Reppert and Sigleo 1979) 

developed the following list of wetland 

functions and ssrvlces: 

1. Natural biological functions 

a. net primary productivity 

b. food chain (web) support 

2. Habitat for aquatic and wetland 

speci es 

3. Aquatic study areas, sanctuaries 

and refuges 

4. Hydrologic support functlons; 

a. shoreljne protection from wave 

attack 

b. storage of storm and flood waters 

c. water purlflcatlon through 

natural filtration, sediment 

trapping* and nutrient cycling 

uptake 

d. groundwater recharge 

5. Cultural or auxll fary values 

fncluding consumptive and noncon- 

sumptfve recreation as well as 

aesthetic value. 

Except for item 5, these wetland benef fts 

tend to accrue to the public, and are not 

general 1 y vendable by a private 1 andowner. 

Quantlta;fve economlc value data for 

Great Lakes wetlands are avaflable, A 

study by Jaworski and Raphael t19781 

basicall y addressed the cultural values 

using a gross annual economic return 

method01 ogy, whereas TIlton et al, (1978) 

focused on ecosystem replacement values fn 

regard to f fsh productton, waterfowl 

feed fng/breedIng, nutrfent removal and 

control# and water supply. By combinf ng 

the results af these two studfes and 

updatfng the data to 1980# a mare complete 

account of the economfc value of 

Mfchf gan's coastal wetl ands can be 

presented (Table 2).

Although methodologies are mlxed, 

Table 2 f s useful in establ ishing economic 

values within an order of magnitude and in 

priority. Notf ce that nutrient control J 

sport fishing, and fish production are 

clearly of more value than the traditfonal 

uses, i .e. , waterfowl huntingp trappfng* 

water supply, and commercial fishing, 

Conversely, these data are presented as 

average economic values, even though not 

all wetlands are a1 ike. Moreover, the 

methodologies did not consider surpf us 

value* as would be assessed by the 

wfllingness to pay technique. 

Table 2. Economic vaJue of Michigan's 

coastal wetlands, 1980. 

Economic sector 

Runoff Nutrient Control 

Sport Fishing 

Fish Production 

Waterfowl Breedbng/Feedi ng 

Nonconsumptl ve Recreation 

Waterfowl Hunting 

Trapping of Furbearers 

Water Supply 

Commercial FishIng 

a~ata source: Jaworski ( 1981). 

- 

(per (per 

hectare) acre) 

Wetland functions and values vary 

from wetl and t o wetland (f .e., spatially) 

as well as from year to year (i.e., 

temporally), particularly as a result of 

precipitation and hydrologic changes. 

Jaworskf et ale (19791, studied the effect 

of water level fluctuatfons on seven 

wetland complexes in the Great Lakes 

reg3 on, including Dickinson Island of the 

St. Clair Delta. As fllustrated in Table 

3, wild1 ife use and wetland functjons 

change as water levels fluctuate, As 

discussed in Section 2.3, law water levels 

occurred in 1964-65 whereas record high 

levels took place during the 1972 to 1974 

$nterlrn. 

very dense and the water table lies 

beneath the mean level of the marsh 

surface, It Is at such low water 

conditf ons that waterfowl management calls 

for diking and flooding of these emergent 

communities. Converselyr during hfgh 

water periods the hydrologic clrculat~on 

Is facilitated and lake water can enter 

the wetland via inlets, canals, and 

breaches in barrier beaches. Excessive 

high water is associated wlth plant 

community retrogression as we1 1 as erosion 

of the nearshore vegetation and beaches. 

Therefore, the function and value of a 

coastal wetland is most dynamic, and 

short-term studf es of wetl and values 

should receive careful interpretation. 

In summary, a multi-functioning 

wetland tends to have a higher value than 

those with fewer functions, Converse1 y, 

coastal wetlands which are isolated by 

barriers or degraded by factors such as 

land drainage* exhibit fewer functions and 

have 1 ower- values. Moreover, wet1 ands 

vary in value from place to place and 

temporal 1 y as we1 1 r especi a1 1 y in response 

to lake level changes. In addition, 

continual wetl and acreage loss results in 

a marginality value of those extant 

wetlands. The Lake St. Clair wetlands 

have exceptional value due to their 

ecosystem relationship wfth the lake and 

connect1 ng channel s. The decline of 

western Lake Erte marshes has a1 so 

enhanced the re1 ative value of the Lake 

St. Clair wetlands. 

In recognitfon of the specfa1 

environmental val ue of wetl ands, Federal 

and State leglslatlon has recently been 

enacted to pratect these areas. In 

concert with the National Wetland 

Inventory programr each State in the 

Unlted States has begun the process of 

inventorying and mapping thei r wetl and 

resources. Wet1 ands whose hydro1 ogic 

regime has been altered or destroyed may 

be mitigated. 

1.4 LAKE ST. CLAlR WETLANDS 

Durlng low water levels* the emergent The outlet of Lake Huron is through 

communftles of cattails and sedges are the St. Clair River, Lake St. Clair, and

the Detroit River to Lake Erie (Figure 21, 

a distance of 139 km with a fall of 2.4 m. 

Lake St. Clair is an expansive* shallow 

basin having a distinctive heart shape. 

Although not one of the world's largest 

lakes, f t does rank 122 on the basis of 

surface area (Herdendorf 1982). The lake 

has a surface area of 1,110 km2 and a 

drainage basin of 16,900 km2. A 29 km- 

long navigation channel, dredged to a 

depth of 8.2 m below low water datum 

( LWD) , extends f rom the mouth of the St. 

Clair River to the head of the Detroit 

River. Lake St. Clair has a shoreline 

length of approximately 272 km. The shore 

of the St. Clair River, including main 

distributary channels, adds 192 km and the 

head of the Detroit Rfver, plus Belle 

Isle, add 32 km of shoreline to the study 

area. Of this total shoreline length of 

496 km, approximately 188 km or 38% can be 

classified as coastal wet1 ands (Table 4 

and Appendix A). 

The delta is the most characteristic 

feature of the St. Clair River-Lake St. 

Table 3. Wildlife use and other functions of coastal wetlands at low and high 

water 1 eve1 s. 

Use/Functions of wetlands 

Mildlffe use 

Blue-winged teal (breeding) 

Red-w i nged b1 ackb i rd 

Ma1 1 ard (breeding) 

Sedge wren 

Muskrat 

Black tern 

Ye1 lowheaded b1 ackbird 

Great blue heron 

Belted kingfisher 

Crayfish 

Frogs and turtles 

Fish spawning (pikes) 

Forage fish 

Dabbl ing ducks (feeding) 

Diving ducks (feeding) 

tionq 

Peat accumul at1 on 

Sediment trapping 

Hemi-marsh 

Water ci rcul atf on 

Dominance of l and drainage 

Dom,inance of lake water masses 

Turbidity levels 

Export of detritus 

Re-suspension of In slf;ra clay 

a~ata source: Jaworski et a1 . (1979). 

Water levelb 

Low Water High Water 

b~se or function relative to water level fndi cated by 1 $nee 

7

Clairsystem. The St. Clair Flats 4s a 

massive deposit formed by a series of 

active and inactive distributaries at the 

mouth of the river. This is the largest 

delta in the Great Lakes system. The 

Michigan portion of the delta has been 

urbanized to some extent* but the Ontario 

portion has been set aside as an Ind'ian 

reservation. The Ontario side of the 

delta, along with State wildlife areas on 

the Michigan side, represent the finest 

coastal wetlands in the Lake St. Clair 

system. 

The shore1 lne of the St. Cl ai r River 

has been intensively developed for 

residential, commercial, industrial, and 

recreational use. The only extensive 

natural areas are on the delta wetlands 

(St. Clair Flats), formed where the river 

enters Lake St. Clair. The vegetation of 

the St. Clair Delta occurs in broad 

arcuate zones which extend from the apex 

near Algonac, south into Lake St. Clair. 

The zones show a progresslon from hardwood 

MICHIGAN 

Figure 2. Map of St. Clair River-Lake St. 

Clair-Detroit River ecosystem. 

forests near Algonac to cattail and 

bulrush marshes at the lake. 

Lake St. Clair has a shallow# 

expansive basin with low marshy shores. 

Other than the delta, the best coastal 

marshes are found on the east shore of the 

lake between Mitchell Bay and the mouth of 

the Thames River (Ontario) and in Anchor 

Bay between the delta and the mouth of the 

Cl lnton River (Michigan). The only other 

notable wetlands are submerged beds cf 

aquatjc plants in the vicinity of Peach 

Island and Belle Isle at the head of the 

Detroit Rf ver. 

Lake St. Clair, the smallest lake Jn 

the Laurentian Great Lakes system, has a 

mean depth of only 3.0 m, a maximum 

natural depth of 6.4 m, and a volume of 

Table 4. Estimated dimensions of Lake St. 

Clair and St. Clail; River emergent and 

submergent wetl ands, 

Coastal length Area of 

Jurisdiction of wet1 ands wet1 ands 

(km) (krn2) 

MICHIGAN 

Wayne County 4.0 0.7 

Macomb County 6.6 11.2 

St. Clair County 75.2 140.7 

Michigan Total 85.8 152,6 

ONTARIO 

Essex County 11.5 6.8 

Kent County 26.5 62.8 

~arnbton County 64.4 161.7 

Ontario Total 102.4 231.3 

TOTAL 188.2 383.9 

a~ata sources: United States Geological 

Survey, Dept. Interior, 7.5-minute Quad- 

rangle Maps (1:24,000 scale) ; Canada 

Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, 

7.5-minute Quadrangle Maps (1:25,000 

scale); Direct fie1 d and aircraft obser- 

vations, 1983 and 1984.

4,O km3. Its deepest waters are found 

along a dredged navigation channel which 

extends from the mouth of the St. Clair 

River to the head of the Detroit Rfver. 

Approximately 98% of the water flowing 

into Lake St. Clair enters through the St. 

Clair Delta. The Detroit River, the on1 y 

outlet, drains Lake St. Clair at a rate of 

5,044 m3/sec. This yields a retention 

time for the lake basin of only 9.2 days. 

The St. Clzir River is one of the 

four major connecting channels on the 

Great Lakes, fl owl ng between Lake Huron 

and Lake St. Clair. The two principal 

cities on the river are Port Huron, 

Michigan, and Sarnia, Ontario, both at the 

head of the river at Lake Huron. The St. 

Clair River has two characteristic 

sections, the upper channel, and the 

lower, or delta, portion. The upper 

channel runs from Lake Huron to the head 

of Chenal Ecarte, a distance of 43 km. 

There are two islands in the upper portion 

of the river, Stag Island and Fawn Island. 

At Chenal Ecarte, the river begins to 

branch out i n t o a number o f 

distributaries, forming a vast pattern of 

islands, marshes, and waterways that are 

known as the St. Clalr Flats. 

The St. Clair River receives most of 

Its flow from Lake Huron. Prfncipal 

tributaries in Michigan are the Belle, 

Black, and Pine Rivars. Water quality 

throughout the St. Clair River is 

genera1 1 y excel lent. Some degradation 

occurs i n localized areas where 

tributaries join the river. The width of 

the St. Cl air River ranges from about 250 

to 750 m, and the maximum depth ranges 

between 11 and 15 m. The river's annual 

average discharge is about 5,070 m2/sec. 

Because the river's main water source is 

Lake Huron rather than surface runoff9 

seasonal f 1 ow variations are minimal . 

Herdendorf et al. (1981~1 1 isted four 

wetland complexes that are located in the 

lower portions of the St. Clair River. 

The Pointe Aux Tremble Wetland (15 

hectares), the Pointe Aux Chenes Wetland 

(7 hectares), and the Russell Island 

Wetland (5 hectares) are all located in 

the North Channel of the St. Clair River. 

The Algonac Wetland (64 hectares) is 

1 ocated 0.3 km f rom the shore1 f ne of the 

river. The Cuttle Creek Area Wetland (1,s 

hectares) and the Port Huron Area Wetland 

(1.2 hectares) are both located along the 

upper portion of the river. 

A1 though the 1 argest area of wetl ands 

1s found i n the St. Clair Delta, there are 

fragments of wetl ands around the perimeter 

of Lake St. Clair. Beginning at the mouth 

of the Detroit River, small patches of 

rfveri ne, pal ustri ne, and 1 acustri ne open- 

water wetlands exist along Belle Isle, 

Aquatic beds of submersed vascul ar pl ants 

dominate as a park and other developments 

havs resulted in the removal of the upper 

communities. 

Along the southwestern shore of Lake 

St. Clair9 from Grosse Pointe to the 

Clinton River* the shoreline is inten- 

sively developed. Much of the shoreline 

is protected by seawalls, and pjers and 

marinas are scattered a1 ong th i s stretch. 

Although the shoreline is classified as 

1 acustrine open-water wet1 ands9 there is 

l i ttle wetland vegetation except for 

pollution-tolerant submersed aquatics such 

as coontail and Eurasian water-mil fofl 

growing in the boat channels and slips 

(see Appendix E for common and scientiftc 

names of vascular plants). 

Where the Clinton River empties Into 

Lake St. Cl airr along the western shore of 

Lake St. Clair9 there are two coastal 

wetland areas. South of the riverr in the 

Metropolitan Beach area, over 4 hectares 

of palustrine emergent and pal ustrine 

open-water wetlands exist. North of the 

Metropol itan Parkway highway, i .e, , along 

Black Creek, which is an old tributary of 

the Cl inton River, there are sedge meadow* 

cattaf 1 and open-water (aquae lc bed 1 

communities. Because the connectyon wfth 

Lake St. Clair is poor, the water 

frequently stagnates resulting in lower 

fish and benthic invertebrate values, 

North of the Clinton River, located 

between Sand Point and Self ridge Air Force 

Basep is an open wetland. This wetland 7s 

largely a palustrine system with submersed 

aquatic plant communities. 

The shoreline of Anchor bay^ sftuated 

in northwest Lake St. Clairr is a150

largely urbanized. Residential develop- 

ment, marinasr and boat sljps are common 

in the mouths of streams as we11 as in 

lakeshore points. Very 1 ittle undisturbed 

wetland exists and much of the shorel ine 

is elther bulkheaded or piled with rip-rap 

to reduce erosion assocjated with the 

current high water levels. Although the 

entire shoreline i s classifled as 

lacustrine open-water wetl ands, on1 y 

scattered patches of emergent cattails and 

submersed aquatics exist along the creek 

mouths and behf nd bulkheads. Clumps of 

bulrushes occur along the shorel ine9 along 

with strips of wild celery and other wave 

tolerant submersed aquatics. 

The first large area of deltaic 

wetland occurs along Bouvier Bay, and Is 

locallv referred to as St. Johnqs Marsh. 

~~~roximatel~ 1,000 hectares in sJze, this 

traditional 1 y p? anted in corn and other 

artificial waterfowl foods. Most of 

Dickinson Island and the lower half of 

Harsens Island together make up the St. 

Clafr Flats Wildlife Area, which is 

managed by the Michigan Department of 

Natural Resources for waterfowl hunting. 

With reference to the Ontario side of 

the St. Clair Delta, that wetland complex 

i n cl udes port ions of Bassett Is1 andt 

Squirrel Island, Walpale Island# and St. 

Anne Is1 and. Bassett Is1 and consi sts 

mostly of cattail marsh with open-water 

ponds and a thin beach colonized by shrubs 

and herbaceous pl ants. Squi rrel Is1 and is 

also largely a natural cattail marsh* but 

the northern part, where sedge marsh would 

naturally occur, i s diked off and 

cu1 tivated. 

Canada's major wetland complex in the 

is found both 'Ides delta focuses on Walpole Island where 

Of M-29? and extends from Fair 

Goose Lake and Johnston Bay are located. 

Haven to Pearl Beach. Plant communities 

Deciduous woodlands, shrubs, and sedge 

in this are by meadows form the upper part of this 

and sedge 

meadows cattaf1s8 bul and 

leaved and submersed aquat icr. 

CDnstructi on Of access roads and 

f'll jng Iror residential as 

"11 as the Of highway M-29 have 

fragmented this wetl and. 

island* but much of the natural shrub and 

meadow zones have been cleared and owed 

into row-crop agrlculture, A diked and 

water-level regulated cattail marsh occurs 

north of Goose Lake. South of Goose Lake 

the wetlands are dominated by cattails and 

sedqe communities along the distributary 

~ i ~ 1 ~ and k1 js i the ~ 1 argest ~ ~ 

chaknels 

~ 

and shorel ine beaches. The 

natural undeveloped, and functioning Wetlands near Johnston are open to 

wetland complex along Lake St. Clair. LakeSt*Clair* 

Approximately lr200 hectares, this wetland 

has a continuum of environments. To the 

north, where elevations average 1.5 to 3 m 

above North Channel* swamp forest and 

dogwood shrub communities occur. In the 

mfddle of this deltaic island, several 

abandoned river channels bisect vast 

stretches of sedge meadow and cattail 

communit f es. Along the shore1 ine, the 

emergent wetlands give way to various 

The wetlands on St. Anne Island 

appear much more managed. Large corn 

fields on the upper and middle portions of 

the island extend to the limit of the 

cattail marsh. At this point* the marshes 

are diked for the benefit of private 

waterfowl clubs. On1 y the shorel f ne 

fringe of the wetlands is open to Lake St. 

C1 air. 

open-water aquatic bed-type wetlands, 

The last major wetland area along the 

Ontario side of Lake St. Clalr Is in the 

Another major wetland complex along Mitchell Bay area. Because of the 

the American side of the St. Clai r Delta proximity of the managed marshes on St. 

is Harssns Island. Only the lower quarter Anne Island and the cultivation by 

of thls deltaic island remains a wetland, Canadian farmers rtght up to the lakeshore 

consisting largely of hybrid cattail 

(Typha x ~lauca) colonies along with the 

assocfated floating-1 eaved and submersed 

canal and shore1 Sne communities. The 

center of Harsens Island is part of the 

St. Clafr Flats Wildlife Area and is 

in Kent and Lambton counties, the wetlands 

of Mitchell Bay consist mainly of openwater 

ar submerged cammunlties. Moreover, 

considerable diking and waterfowl nesttng 

improvements have taken place along 

Mitchell Point.

This section contains a description 

of the geographic location of the study 

areao including a discussion of topog- 

raphy, morphometry, and coastal geomor- 

phology, Although no bedrock or glacial 

features are directly related to the 

distribution of wetlands there are bio- 

geographical associations with more recent 

landforms such as natural levees, crevasse 

deposits, interdistributary bays, and 

other del talc deposits. 

The occurrence and distribution of 

wetlands is determined, to a significant 

degree, by a combination of physical 

factors. In the Great Lakes, coastal wet- 

lands are at the interface of land, water, 

and atmosphere. These three components of 

the biosphere are delicately balanced to 

produce and maintain the biologi.ca1 

resource. In this chapter the physical 

parameters of the Lake St. Clair wetlands 

are exam1 ned. 

Wetlands occur in basins or topo- 

graphical depressions whlch are wet or 

flooded for at least several months of the 

year. The occurrence of the resource is 

therefore in part determined by water 

depth, which is in turn determined by the 

submarine topography, sed imentationr and 

character of 1 ake level oscillations. 

Another factor responsible for wetl and 

distribution is wave action in open water 

bodies and current characteristics in 

riverine and 1 ittoral areas. Many of 

these factors are in turn directly related 

to climatic conditions. A simplified 

diagram illustrating these relationshjps 

appears in Figure 3. 

The more extensive wetlands of the 

Great Lakes are located in ancient lake 

bottoms or in areas of h5gh sedi mentation 

CHAPTER 2. PHYSICAL EIUIVOIRBWMENT 

I CLIMATE I 

1 

BOTTOM TOPOGRAPHY 

Figure 3. Physical factors influencing 

the occurrence of coastal wetl ands. 

rates. In the geological past, water 

levels in the Great Lakes were higher and 

progl aci a1 1 akes inundated the lower 

terrain, As the water levels of the lakes 

droppedr a series of clay lake plains were 

exposed which were colonized by vast 

wetl ands. Western Lake Erie, includfng 

the Maumee River embaymentp for examplep 

was an extensive wetland known as the 

Black Swamp. The margins of Lake St, 

Clai r, especially in Ontarf or are composed 

of a similar deposit. 

The rivers flowing f nto take St. 

Clai r deposited sediments a1 ong valley 

floors to create floodplains which were 

colonized by wetland communities. At the 

same time deposition in the lake created 

the St. Clafr Delta. Although most of 

Michigan has a glacfal herttage, coastal 

wetlands are a product of fluvial, 

deltaic? and lacustrine sedimentation. 

The St, Clai r DeTta has been depos- 

ited* in past because of the shallowness 

of Lake St. Clair. Compared to marfne 

shore1 inesp ongolng coastal deposit ion 

which produces subaeri a1 l andforms such as 

the delta is not common in the Great

Lakes. In fact, no other signff icant 

deltas occur in the Great Lakes, The 

combination of a shallow receivfng basfn 

and an abundance of sediments fs largely 

responsible for the deposttion of the St. 

Clafr Delta which fs colonized by the most 

extensive wetlands in the coastal Great 

Lakes. 

The progradatton or recession of the 

coastal zone is 1 argely influenced by wave 

and currents. High energy environments 

discourage the establ i shment of pal ustri ne 

and lacustrine wetlands. Also high wave 

energies hinder delta deposition and 

growth. In Lake St. Clair wave and 

current energy are not excessive. Thls 

physical condition has allowed the 

development of the delta with its diverse 

wetland habjtats. Also the low wave 

energies have encouraged wetland coloniza- 

tion north of the Thames River along the 

eastern shore1 ine of the 1 ake. 

The climatic elements Including 

temperature, precfpi tation* evaporation, 

and wfnd velocities and dire~tions exert a 

control on water levels and wave 

parameters, These in turn dictate wetland 

occurrence and types. With changes In 

water levels the geographfcal di stributlon 

of wetlands shfft or "pulse stabi71tyw 

occurs. Also the character of sedimentation 

is altered to a point where water 

quality (i.aer turbidity) levels are 

impacted. 

It has been determfned that wetlands 

in the Great Lakes colonize a diversity of 

geomorphic settings such as backbarrfer 

flats, alluvial flood plains and deltas. 

The St. C1 air Delta (Figure 4) is rnade up 

of a suite of landforms which support a 

diversity of wet1 and types, Deltaic 

deposits in the Great Lakes are rare 

features, suggesting that fluvial sedirnen- 

tation is not abundant and/or wave 

energies are too high thus not permfttlng 

delta development to occur. Therefore the 

St. Cl ai r Delta Is a unique Great Lakes' 

Figure 4. Depositional features and landforms of the St. Clair Delta. 

12

coastal feature supporting abundant and 

diverse wet1 and communities not found on 

other Great Lakes' shore7 i nes. 

Since the classical study of Lake 

Bonneville by Gilbert (18901, deltas in 

lakes* with only a few exceptions, have 

been largely ignored by geomorphologists. 

The major deltas of the world are located 

on contlnental shelves and have held the 

interest of geologists and geographers 

because of petroleum resources, agricul- 

tural production, and waterborne activi- 

ties. A1 though 1 ake deltas are smaller, 

they share most of the processes 

characteristic of marine deltas. However, 

a unique aspect of lake deltas is their 

dynamic response to re1 atively rapid 

changes of base level that not only 

produce special 1 andforms, but dl sti nctive 

vegetation zonation as we1 1. 

The St. Clair Delta is the largest 

delta in the Great Lakes basfn. Despite 

the delta's recreational sign1 f icance and 

commercl a1 importance with regard to 

navigation, literature on the area has not 

been abundant, The first significant 

investigation was done several decades ago 

by Cole (19031 who determined that the 

delta was beina deposited atop deep water, 

proglacial 1 &e clays. p ore recent1 yr 

Wfghtman (1961) attempted to establish a 

1 ate Quaternary chronology for the del tats 

formation. Detailed investigations by 

geol og 5 sts have part1 ally documented the 

sediment01 ogical composition of the 

deltaqs surface, parti cularly in Muscamoot 

and Goose bays (Pezzetta 1968, Mandelbaum 

1969). During the 1950~8 engineering 

studies by the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers preceded construction of the 8-m 

deep St. Clair Cutoff Channel through the 

delta. Although not published, much of 

these data, in the form of bore records* 

are on file at the Detroit District 

Office. Recent environmental studies 

associated with flooding problems on the 

shores of Lake St. Clair and dredged spoil 

disposal sSte locations have also 

contributed some useful data for this 

outlets of the Great Lakes were changing 

or even blocked, causing the lake levels 

to oscillate several meters. Lake Erie 

established its present level some 4,000 

years ago and Lake Huron shortly 

thereafter. The St. Clair River and its 

delta came to existence during these 

changing lake levels. 

As a lake delta, the St. Clair 

exhibits several of the landform 

characteristics of marine deltas* such as 

active and inactive distributaries, 

interdfstrfbutary bays (Figure 5)s and 

crevasses or wlde breaches in the channel 

banks which lead into interdistributary 

bays (Figure 6). The St. Clair Delta has 

a classical bi rd-f oot morphology , as does 

the Mississippi River Delta. However, 

significant landform differences are also] 

apparent. Atypical landforms include a 

premodern surface at the apex of the delta 

and unusual ly wide distributary channels. 

section of the study (U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers 19741, 

Wfth tke retreat of the Late 

Figure 5. Little Muscamoot Bay, an interdistri 

butary bay between Middle Channel 

and South Channel of the St. Cfair 3e7ta 

W i sconsin ice sheet some 13,000 years ago, (August 1984). Note emergent cattails 

a series of moraines and till plains were (Typha an ustifolia) and solitary 

deposited in the Great Lakes basln. The pied-bili&~ddilymbus podiceps).

Figure 6. We1 1-developed crevasse deposits adjacent to Middle Channel of St. Clair 

Delta. These crevasses have been intermittently active for over 100 years. Dickinson 

Island is to the upper left and Harsens Island is to the lower right. 

The active dJstributaries--Norths 

Middlet and South C,hannel s--average some 

500 m in width and 11 m in depth. 

Howevert widths of 675 m and depths of 26 

m are not uncommon. At the mouths of the 

dfstrfbutarfes, channel depths decrease 

abruptly Indicating the presence of river 

mouth bars 2 to 4 m below mean lake level. 

As a deposftional basin, Lake St. Clafr fs 

relatfvely small with a maximum natural 

depth of 6.4 m and width of 40 km. 

North, Middle* and South Channels 

exhibit shoulder-1 i ke features or shoals 

along both the cutbank and point-bar sides 

(Ffgure 71, A sfmjlar morphology has been 

attrfbutsd to periodic cut and ffll 

associated wfth slfght base level 

oscillations (Butzer 1971). Borings 

obtained from the Corps of Engineers 

reveal that the distributary channels of 

the St. ClaSr Delta are entrenched in 

laeustrine c1 ays which 1 ie beneath a 3.5 

to 5 m veneer of coarser deltaic 

sediments. Qn the cutbank side, where 

flow velocftfes may be relatlvely high 

during high water condltlons, an erosfonal 

berm usually less than 2.5 m below the 

water surface slopes gently from the 

cutbank toward the channel center, These 

features may be caused by lateral erosion 

of the fine, sandy deltaic sedtments which 

over1 ie the 1 acustrfne clays. On the 

inside bank, especially along Middle 

Channel , point bar deposits characterized 

by ridge and swale topography are 

conspicuous. Here the distributary 

shoulders probably represent a fill 

deposit which is colonized by emergent 

vegetati on during 1 ow-water periods. 

Because the water level fluctuates 

only 45 to 60 cm seasonally, spring floods 

are not a normal occurrence within the 

delta, hence natural levees are scarcely 

dfscernable adjacent to modern distrib- 

utaries. Even though levees are poorly 

developeds averaging 10 to 45 cm in 

elevationr flooding and subsequent 

overbank flow does occur. Overbank flow 

is assocfated with breaching of levees in 

abnormally low areas along a levee. As a

................. 

............... 

MODERN SURFACE 

SUBMERGED RIVER 

RELICT CHANNEL 

Figure 7. Deltaic landforms of Dickinson Island, Michigan,

levee fs breachedr crevasse deposits are 

Introduced into the interdistributary bays 

at right angles to the channels (Figure 

71. With contf nued depositionp the open- 

water bay w i l l be filled with crevasse 

deposits and colon 1 zed by sedges and 

emergent aquatics. 

Crevasse channel s9 1 ocal l y known as 

"highwaysw (see Figure 57 in Section 5,1Ir 

are operative for several years. 

Nevertheless, deposition into the bays i5 

not rapid, A comparison of navigation 

maps reveals zhat such features may be 

part of the delta landscape for over a 

century. Pezzetta 11968) graphical1 y 

compared the western portton of the delta 

front between 1903 and 1961. Over the 58- 

year perjod crevasse fills were minor. In 

fact human-mads a1 terati ons such as 

dredging and bulkheadlng dominated the 

1 andscape. This suggests that crevasse 

channels are active intermittently and 

transport l i t tle sediment into the 

interdistributary bays. 

During the winter and early spring 

when Lake St. Clair is frozen, pack ice 

accumulates at the mouths of distributarjes 

forming ice jams. Channel flow is 

then dfverted lnto crevasses and some 

overbank flow may occur, Because the 

dominant grain size is sand, 1 ittle bed 

load sedlment is transported fr~m the deep 

distributaries Into the interdistributary 

bays. Thus, In the St, Clair Delta the 

filling of interdistrSbutary bays and 

delta growth Is a slow process. 

In contrast, the Mississippi Delta 

crevasse depos f ts rapidly convert open 

interdistributary bays into mud flats 

which are subsequently colonized with 

marsh grasses. During flood stage, the 

crevasse channels are scoured deep enough 

to be maintained and rapid depositlon 

occurs, In the past 135 years, crevasse 

deposf t s have transformed the open 

interdistributary bays of the modern 

Mississippi Rfver Delta into a complex of 

marshy subdeltas (Coleman 1976). 

Beaches on the present delta 

shorel ine are poorly developed and appear 

transgress'ite in orf~fn, On t he Canadian 

side, where the beaches are somewhat 

better developed* the berms may reach I t o 

1.5 m In height and are colonfzed with 

sumac and small trees, Borings reveal 

that the principal constituents of these 

beaches are coarse sand or f lne gravel 

(0.3 m or -L.5 phi unJts) separated by 

layers of sand and organic materials 

including rafted logs, bulrush stems, and 

other debris. Coarse sands and fine 

gravels are not evident, and storm berms 

seldom exceed 0.7 m In elevation. 

Characteristic vegetation of these 

shorel ine features are either sedge marsh 

or a complex community of grasses, 

thistles8 and other nonwoody species. 

Within the interd9stributary marshes, 

especf a1 1 y on lower DiC~inSon and Harsens 

is1 ands, are arcuate-shaped features 

resembling beach ridges. Borings through 

one of these ridges revealed up to 3 m of 

flne sand (Raphael and Jaworski 1982). 

The absence of washover deposits and 

organlc sediments indicate that these 

features may be regressive beaches and 

represent shorelines as delta accretion 

took place. 

A comparison between the eastern and 

western portions of the St. Clair Delta 

illustrates two other distinct dif- 

ferences. On the CanadSan side, Chenel 

Ecarte and Johnson Channel are narrow, 

shall ow distributaries which do not carry 

a significant portion of the volume of the 

St. Clair River. Moreover9 open Inter- 

distributary bays are few and are 

colonized by marsh vegetation. Delta 

extension has ceased and maximum delta 

accretion ls now occurring to the west as 

evidenced by the active dlgital 

dtstributaries of North, Middle, and South 

Channels, and Chenal A Bout Rond. In the 

past, Chematogan and Bassett Channels were 

approximately 500 m wide comparable to the 

modern distributaries, but have been 

alluviated and colonized with aquatfc 

plants as abandonment occurred. 

In most deltas with large fluvial 

systems, lateral migration of the delta 

occurs because of the changes in the 

course of the river upvalley. The 

premodern 1 ateral displ acements of the 

Mississippi River Delta originated within 

the alluvial valley several miles from the 

Gulf of Kexico% coast. Such a dlversfon 

process is evident in some lake deltas as 

well. Several older deltas of the Omo 

Rlverr for example, have been identi f fed

and related to the former positlon of the 

rfver within its alluvial valley (Butzer 

1971). 

The St. Clair Delta# however, has no 

comparable a1 luvial uall ey, and de1 ta 

migration has occurred from east to west 

at the shoreline of Lake St, Clair. As 

the Canadian distributaries degeneratedr 

new distributaries were created on the 

western side of the delta. 

A series of borings, cores, and 

exposures indicates that i n cross sect i on 

the St. Clair Delta is a thin and sandy 

deposit. An east-west cross section 

reveals that above the shale bedrock, 

1 acustrine c1 ays have been deposited over 

a thin deposit of glacial till (Figure 8). 

The coarse deltaic deposits, having a 

maximum thickness of 7 m rest upon blue 

lake clays. 

The north-south cross section from 

the apex of the delta into Lake St. Cl air 

Soft 

Clay 

f 11 ustrates the near-surface stratigraphy 

(Figure 9). Topographically however, this 

cross section reveals two distl nct 1 evels, 

a modern and the equally obvious premodern 

surface. The premodern surface,, standing 

about 1.5 rn above take St. Clair, consists 

of coarse* 0x1 dized sand and is confined 

to the apex of the delta complex. It has 

been dissected by long, sinuous channels 

which have been alluviated. Occasionally 

during high 1 ake levels these channels 

have been reoccupfed~ particularly in 

areas such as Dickinson Island, where 

human interference has been minimal. 

Because this hfgher surface i s 

topographically and sedimentologically 

distinct, it must be a surface which was 

deposited during a pre-existing higher 

lake level. The modern delta with its 

fine sand sediment (0.25 to 0.125 mn or +2 

to 3 phi units) is located at present mean 

lake level and is represented by the 

active crevasses and interdistributary 

marsh deposits. 

Based on the chronology of the 

progl acial Great Lakes*. field data, and 

Figure 8. Geologic cross-section of the northern portion of Lake St. Clair showing 

depth to bedrock, and thickness of glacial, lacustrine, and deltaic deposits, 

Soft 

Clay

61 inkc 

St. Clair 

I 

Modern Delta Premodern Delta 

Bassett Harrens 

Island Island 

Walpole 

Island 

I North 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Miles 

I I I --LL--l I I I I 

Deltaic Sediments 

a ORGANIC 

SILTY SAND 

SANDY CLAY 

Figure 9. Cross-secti on of St. Clair Delta showi 

L .~ - A-2 

.- . --.-- - _I 

stribution of deltaic sediments. 

available Carbon-14 data, the relative materfals range in age from 6,100 + 80 to 

geomorphological events of the St. Clafr 98300 + 200 years. These organic 

Delta may be determined. Sfnce the materials do not appear to behsifad and 

retreat of the Late Wisconsin ice sheet, 

the outlets of tho Great Lakes, and hence 

lake levels in the St. Clair basin, have 

oscillated sufficient1 y to construct two 

deltas. Compared to other proglacial 

Great Lakes, Lake St. Clafr was a less 

permanent feature as the lake bottom was 

exposed to subaerial modlf ication due to 

the f 1 uctuatf ng ice sheet which determl ned 

lake level conditl~n~ (Figure 10). 

One C-14 date retrieved from the 

upper portion of the lake claysr but 

beneath the premodern delta, f ndicates 

that both deltas are less than 7,300 + 80 

years old, Based upon older proglacial 

Great Lakes chronology, the premodern 

delta may have been deposited during the 

. . .580' 

T-- - 7 

12000 9000 

Years belore the present 

ALGONQUIN STANLEY NIPISSING 

latter stage of Algsnquf n time (Wightman Figure 10. Chronology of lake levels and 

19611, Additfonal C-14 dates have been lake stages in the Huron and Erie basins 

obtained by Mandelbaum (1969). The dated (Darr and Eschman 1970).

they have not been jncluded in our 

interpretation, However, even if the 

latter dates were used they would not 

detract from our argument. Pezzetta 

(1968) also has radiogenic data that 

reveal that the minimum age of ,the delta 

sediment is 4,300 years before present 

(B.P. 1. 

With the subsequent retreat of the 

ice during the Lake Stanley low-water 

stager an outlet for the Lake Huron basin 

to the St. Lawrence was created via North 

Bay, Ontario. During this stage the pre- 

modern sands of the St. Clair Delta may 

have been exposed, oxidized, and dissected 

(Figure 10). Following the low-water 

stage, Lake Huron once again rose to the 

Nipissing stage and drained into the lower 

Great Lakes via the St. Clair River. 

As determined by the more recent 

chronology, the premodern delta may have 

been deposited during Nipissing time some 

3,500 to 5,000 B.P. and not during 

Algonquin time (Dorr and Eschman 1970). 

The premodern delta was deposited during a 

higher than present lake level and the 

subsurface sediments range In age from 

7,300 to 9,300 B.P. It i s suggested that 

fol lowf ng the Lake Stanley stage (i.e., 

Nipissing stage), the St. Clair River once 

again flowed south into Lake St. Clair and 

the premodern delta was deposited at an 

elevation sl ightly higher than the modern 

delta (Table 5). 

On many coasts, evidence for lower 

than present sea levels is determined by 

depositional surfaces which dip beneath 

younger sediments (Shelemon 1971). Had 

the premodern delta been deposited du r i ng 

the Algonquin stage and the subsequent 

early Lake Stanley stage, evidence of that 

event as a depositional surface beneath 

the modern delta or as a paleosol should 

be apparent. Numerous borings suggest 

that the premodern delta does not plunge 

beneath the modern sediment. Since the 

stratigraphy imp1 ies that lake levels were 

lower than present only once, a Nipissing 

stage is favored for the depositton of the 

Table 5. Interpretation of the events related to the origin of the St. 

Clair Delta. a 

Approximate Lake stage Event 

Dates B.P. 

3,500 to Present Modern Lake St. Cl air Flow of Lake Huron continues 

and Algoma Phase southward; deposition of 

modern St. Cl air River Delta 

and dissection of premodern 

surface 

3,500 to 5,000 Lake Nipissing Deposltion of premodern delta 

approximately 1.5 m (5 ftl 

above present mean 1 ake level 

5,000 to 10,500 Lake Stanley Lake St. Clair basin exposed; 

outlet for upper Great Lakes 

via North Bay* Ontario 

101500 to 12,500 Lake A1 gonqui n Val ders Maximum 

and Post-Algonquin 

Phases 

a~ata sources: Dorr and Eschman (19701, Raphael and Jaworski 619825,

premodern delta. Organic deposits, com- 

monly composed of large wood fragments 

(probably red ash) 1le beneath both 

deltas. Assuming that the peat accum- 

ulated from organic growth above the water 

table, it probably was deposited during a 

low-water period prior to the Niplssing 

stage ( possl bl y Lake Stan1 ey 1. 

Following the Lake Nipissing high 

level, Lakes St. Clair and Huron fell to 

their present levels. The premodern 

channels were sl lghtly entrenched and the 

premodern surface oxidized during the last 

3,500 years. Towards the apex of the 

premodern delta, beyond the areas of 

flood1 ng, a mix of hardwoods has colonized 

the oxidized soils and evidence of 

drowning of a pre-Lake Stanley delta by 

Niplssing high water levels is lacking. 

With the fa11 to the approximate present 

lake level, the modern delta was deposited 

in Lake St. Clair. 

Deltaic landforms occur where 

substantial quantities of clastic sediment 

are Introduced and deposited into a 

receiving basin. Sediment is normally 

eroded from a drainage basin and 

transported down an alluvia1 valley by a 

master stream and its tributaries. 

Therefore the rate of delta development is 

dependent upon the flow regime and the 

avaf 1 abil ity of sediments. 

The St. Clair River maintains a 

relatively stable channel and i s not an 

alluvlal stream In the common connotatlon. 

Fundamentally. the river is a strait 

connecting two large water bodies and 

therefore does not have a high variability 

of flow. Flow measurements during the 

ice-free season in 1959 revealed that 

discharge ranged from a low of 3,900 

m3/sec to a high of 5,700 m3/sec. By 

contrast the Mississippi River flow 

between Baton Rouge and the Gulf of Mexico 

varies from a minimum of 1,400 d/sec to a 

maxJmum of 44,400 m3/sec (Duane 1967). 

Therefore* for the St. Clair River, low 

flow was 68% of the high flow as compared 

to the Mississippi River where low flow 

was only 31% of the high flaw. The 

discharge of the St. Clatr River is 

relatively constant and averages about 

5~097 m3/sec (International Joint 

Commissfon 19811, Instead of a spring 

flood typical of most rivers, discharge in 

Lake St. Clair fs s1 ightly Increased In 

late-summer when lake levels In Lake Huron 

are highest, Thus, overland flow and 

flooding Is not an annual event and -its 

occurrence is dependent in part upon 

seasonal 1 ake l eve1 condi tions. 

Greatest delta extension occurs In 

areas of highest flow and sediment yield. 

Flow di stribution data make it clear that 

the most active portlon of the delta is 

presently confined to the western side of 

Lake St. Clair. Much of the flow of the 

St. Clair River is carried by the large 

distributaries on the Amerlcan side of the 

delta. North, Middle, and South Channels 

account for approximately 95% of the flow 

volume whereas the principal Canadian 

distributary, Chenal Ecarte, accounts for 

5%. Although North Channel appears to 

have been the main channel a century agoj 

-. - 

construction and continual dredsins of the 

St. Clair Cutoff Channel has fncreased the 

f1 ow of South Channel. 

Because the St. Clair River is not a 

true river system and has few tributary 

streams the source area for the deltaic 

sediments is not solely of fluvial origin. 

Rather, the principal source appears to be 

the shorelines of southern Lake Huron. 

Although some organic matter is carried In 

suspension, the clastic fraction is 

dominant. In terms of composftion, quartz 

sand Is the most commonr but fragments of 

feldspar, chert, carbonate minerals and 

igneous and metamorphic rock fragments 

also occur. According to Duane (19671, 

the mean diameter of the suspended river 

sediment ranges from 0.17 to 3.16 KWI while 

the mean diameter of the bed load varies 

from 1.98 to 2.64 mm. Detailed sedimen- 

tological studies suggest that the shallow 

bays of the delta are composed of fine 

sand (0.115 mm) deposits and the sorting 

Is fair (Mandelbaum 1966). It may be 

concluded that the St. Clair Delta is 

composed of sand-sized sediments. In 

contrast most marine deltas consist of a 

finer sediment fraction. Also where 

organic deposlts occur on the delta 

surface or subsurfacer they were formed in 

place and not transported into the de1 t a 

comp l ex. 

Estimates of the sediment discharge 

rates were compiled by Pezzetta (1968) and

are summarized on Table 6. The high 

variability is probably a reflection of 

the time of sampling and of refinements in 

sampling and analytfc techniques. 

Furthermore, the load is not distributed 

uniformly from one reach to anotherr a 

fact which accounts for the variable 

transport rates, 

Under storm conditions there is a 

marked increase in the suspended load of 

the St. Clair River. The suspended sed- 

iment load is directly related to wind 

velocities and duration over southern Lake 

Huron. During periods of northerly wfnds 

the suspend load is decreased. River 

velocities are competent to transport 

material comprised of the beach sediment 

from southern Lake Huron. Sediment 

deposits in the nearshore zone of Lake 

Huron have a mean diameter of 0.125 mm to 

0.25 mm; and according to Duane (19671, 

most clastic sediments suspended in the 

St. Clair Delta have mean diameters of 

slightly finer sizes. Particle size data 

suggest that the sediments of the delta 

are derived from reworked nearshore 

sediments in Lake Huron. 

The soil types of the St. Clair 

wetlands ref 1 ect the late Quaternary 

history of the regfon and may be divided 

into two broad categor'les. The soils of 

the St. Clair Delta proper are derived 

from sources adjacent to Lake Huron 

whereas the soil types along the eastern 

shore of the 1 ake are derived from lake 

pl a? n sediments i n southwestern Ontario. 

As such the delta soils general 1 y have a 

coarser texture than the soils of eastern 

Lake St. Clair. 

Table $5. Sediment discharge rates and characteristics in the St. Clair 

River. 

Transfer rate Location Load type Sediment 

grade 

54,700 1n3/~ear Shore of Lake Huron at Tract ion Sand 

head of St. Clair River 

61,600 d/year St. Clair River at Bay Point Suspended Sf1 t-cl ay 

Light (after storm) 

37,500 m3/& St. Clair River bottom 12 km Traction Cl ay 

between St. Clair 8 Marine 

City (after severe storm) 

40,100 St. Clair River Channel Tract ion --- 

wall between St. Cl a3 r 

8 Marine City 

19,900 d/year St. Clair River bank between Traction --- 

St. Clair & Marine City 

15,100 d/&y Surface and bottom of Chenal Total Clay 

A Bout Rond, 3 km below North 

Channel (after a storm) 

15,200 m3/year Entire St. Clair River Total Sand 

a~ata sources: Cole ( 1903 1 r Duane ( 19671, Pezzetta ( 1968).

The soi.78 of the St. Clair Delta were 

derived from the shoreline and nearshore 

zone of Lake Huron. The sediment was 

transported,by the St. Clair River and now 

forms the delta proper. Two sofl types 

are evident in the delta. At the apex of 

the landform, 1.5 to 2 m above mean lake 

level, Sanilac loam (Col wood fine sandy 

loam in Ontario) is prevalent. This soil 

is a very fine sandy loam and occurs on 

moderate (0-8) slopes. The soil formed 

in limey, water-laid sediment of very fine 

sandy loam and loamy very fine sand (U.S. 

Department of Agriculture 1974). A1 though 

the surface layer is dark-brown (0-15 cm), 

sand pits reveal that the deeper soil is 

ye1 lowish-brown (Munsell color code = 10 

YR 5/61, a fact suggesting slight 

oxidation. This soil type represents a 

premodern delta that was formed at higher 

lake levels in the geologic past. 

The wetlands proper are characterized 

by the Bach loam ("marshw soils in 

Ontario). The sol1 has a very fine sand 

Y., 1 

loam texture which farmed in limey 

lacustrine sediments (Figure 11). 

Occurring on land with a slope of 2% or 

less, the soil is often water l ogged, In 

a typlcal profile the surface layer is 

black* calcareous, very fine sand loam, 18 

cm thick. The subsoil is 75 cm th9ckv and 

is made up of several layers of gray, 

calcareous, very friable* very fine sand 

loam. It represents the modern delta 

front, local depresslons~ and ancestral 

channels of the St. Clair dlstributaries. 

The Clyde loam is a poorly drained 

loam occupying the eastern shoreline of 

Lake St. Clair. It is characterized by 0 

to 20 cm of very fine, very soft, very 

dark gray silt-cl ay with large quantities 

of organic debris. From 20 to 30 cm deep. 

Clyde loam is dark gray, fine, firm silt 

and clay (Mudroch 1981). This sofl type 

developed on older, more f i ne-grained 

sediments of a lake plain and i s therefore 

finer and generally has a higher organic 

content than the delta soils. 

6rrvsmad Jvlm 26, 1977 

re.1 *.t.r, 

I -- 1 I 1 1 1 

r-" 

100 

--- 

400 600 800 

--- -T -, 

1000 I200 

1 

1400 1600 

I 

1800 ZOO0 2200 2100 2600 2800 IOOOFI 

0 :a0 ZOO 100 

100 100 600 I00 800 900 1 

tread R(4p. 

$and and Peat alack 

Srrvr#ad Ocl 7, 1977 

' 5-7- 

Ebst 

115.5 

115.0 

171,s 

-----I a 

3000 3200 1100 1600 3804 4040 4200 1400 4600 4800 5000 5200 5400 5600 5100 6000fl 

-- I-- - 

I-- 

(st*) 1000 i:5t IZJO lion ICOG !fn@ !do0 1300 1800 8 

Figure 11. Vegetation transect on Dickinson Island, St. Clair Delta, showing character 

of wetland soils (Jaworski et a7. 1981). 

22 

116 0 

115 1 

11s 0 

li4 5

The soils in the Lake St. Clafr 

region are basically derived from 

unconsolidated sediments deposited over 

bedrock in early Holocene time (1 .ear past 

20,000 years). These sofls contribute to 

the geochemical composition of bottom 

sediments of the wetlands. Typically, the 

wetland sediments investigated by Mudroch 

f 1981) are submerged mineral soils, with a 

pH ranging between 6.9 and 7.2. The 

wet1 and sediments from the Walpole Island 

sector of the delta are coarser: more than 

half of the particles are at least sand 

size whereas the eastern shore of Lake St. 

Clair silt size particles are dominant. 

The absence of extensive peat or 

organic rich soils is noteworthy. Peat 

accumu1ations are poor and were probably 

formed in place rather than transported 

into the wetlands. Deltaic wetlands are 

often characterized by blanket peat 

deposits especially in sheltered local- 

ities such as bays and backbarrler flats. 

In the Great Lakes coastal wetlands, peats 

are with few exceptions (e.g.$ western 

Saginaw Bay) uncommon. This suggests 

several possibil itles: 1) wetlands during 

recent geologlc time were not abundant, or 

2) peat deposlts decomposed rapidly Or9 3) 

water exchange between the wetlands and 

lake was efficient in exporting organic 

material. In any caser clastic sediments 

are dominant in the wetland soils of Lake 

St. Clair. 

2.2 CLIMATE AND WEATHER 

The variable weather elements such as 

windr precipitation, air temperature, 

humidity* and growing season influence the 

physical and biological character of Lake 

St. Clair. A unfque aspect of this water 

body Is rapid water level change due to 

seiches or wind tides. Also; spring ice 

jams can significant1 y a1 t er the water 

level of the lake. 

The climatic variables such as 

temperature, wind, atmospheric pressure, 

and precipitatfon play a stgnjf icant role 

in the terrestrial and lacustrfne 

environment of Lake St. Cl ai r. These 

elements are primarily responsible for the 

water budget of the lake as well as wave 

activityt the extent of the growing season 

in the wetlands, the distribution and 

length of ice cover, and the water level 

conditions on a daily, monthly, and 

seasonal bas 1 s. 

The climate of the lake i s 

characterized by cold wlnters (coldest 

month below 0% and warm summers (warmest 

month above 220C) with precipitation 

uniformly distributed through the year 

(climate type Daf based on the Koppen 

system). Cyclonic storms occur through 

the yearr but decrease in frequency durfng 

late June, Julys and August. Durlng this 

time convectional up1 ift is frequent and 

thunderstorms are common. Most of the 

moisture that falls on the Great Lakes 

basin as precipitation originally 

evaporated from the tropical At1 antic 

Ocean or the Gulf of Mexico (Phil1 ips and 

McCulloch 1972). On an average day, 10 

billion m3 of water in the form of water 

vapor are advected across the Great Lakes 

basin. The efficiency of precipitation 

mechanisms is such that only about 15% or 

1.4 billion m3 fa11 as rain on a given 

day. 

The frost-free season is defined as 

the interval in days between the last 

occurrence of frost in spring and the 

first occurrence in fall and is thus an 

indicator of the length of the growing 

season. The mean annual frost-free period 

for Lake St. Clair is 160 days. With the 

exception of the south shore of Lake Erie, 

Lake Ontario* and the south shore of Lake 

Michigan; which experience 180 f rost-f ree 

days annually, Lake St. Clafr has the 

longest frost-free period in the Great 

Lakes basin. The spring cooling exerted 

by the lake prevents premature growth of 

the vegetation thus lessening the chances 

of crop loss due to late spring frosts 

(Eichenlaub 1979). Conversely, the slow 

cooling in autumn retards the occurrence 

of the first fall frost thus extending the 

growing season. 

C1 osel y re7 ated to the length of the 

frost-free season is the accumulation of 

growing degree days as an index of the 

amount of heat available d~ring the 

growing season. The index is usually 

defined as the number of degrees of mean 

daily temperature above a base of 5,SoC.

The growing degree-day concept has been 

applied to delimit areas suitable for 

particular vegetation types and as a means 

of predicting the hatching date of various 

insects (Baker and Strub 1965). On the 

basis of using mean monthly temperature 

and the number of days in a month, the 

accumulated number of degrees above a base 

of 5.60C in a normal year is 2,340 OC in 

the southern portion of take St. Clair and 

29200 OC in the northern sector of the 

1 ake. 

Table 7 reveals that the mean annual 

average air temperature for three selected 

stations is 9.4OC. Mean monthly 

temperatures in January and February are 

well below freezing (-3.50C) but summer 

means exceed 220C. Such continental 

conditions commonly occur in regions which 

are remote from maritime air masses. 

One of the characteristics of the 

climate of the Great Lakes is the lack of 

any marked seasonal i t y of prec i p i t at i on. 

Mean monthl y precipitation values for 

three stations (Table 8) average 77.83 cm. 

It should be noted that the Detroit and 

Windsor stations are located in highly 

urbanized areas compared to the Mount 

Clemens station, As noted on the table* 

the precipitation is 1 owest at Mount 

Clemens. Research in urban precipitation 

patterns indicates that the presence of a 

1 arge city such as Detroit does cause an 

increase in precipitation in the urban 

areas (Sanderson 1980). Therefore9 Mt. 

Clemens i s more representative of 

temperature conditions over Lake St. 

Clair. 

Wind direction and frequency are 

significant with regard to waves, ice jams 

and short term (i.e., seiches) water level 

changes in Lake St. Clair. According to 

Ayres (19641, the circulation in Lake St. 

Clair is strongly influenced by prevail ing 

wind direction as are longshore currents. 

Figures 12 and 13 illustrate the average 

monthl y di rectfonal frequency of winds for 

Windsor and Mt. Clemens respectively. The 

more spherical wind roses (e.g. March, 

April) have the greatest variabil ity in 

wind direction. The more skewed wind 

Table 7. a Mean monthly ternperatures for three selected 

stations. 

Mount Cl er,~ens, Detrolt City W i ndsor 

Michigan Airport Airport 

1940- 1969 1940-1969 1941-1970 

Month OF OC OF OC OF OC 

January 

February 

March 

Aprll 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December 

Annual average 48.3 9.0 50.1 10.1 48.6 9.2 

a 

Data sources: Sanderson (1980); U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Weather 

Service. 

24

Table 9. a Mean monthly precipitation for three selected 

stations. 

Mount Cl emens Detroit CSty Windsor 

Michigan Airport Airport 

- - 

Month inches cm inches cm inches cm 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December 

Annual average 28.07 71.29 30.95 78.60 32.91 83.59 

a 

Data sources: Sanderson (1980); U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Weather 

Service. 

roses (e.g., June, July, August) reveal a 

more prevailing wind. It is evident that 

predominant winds In the region are from 

the westerly direction# especially from 

the southwsst quadrant. Additional wind 

data for Windsor airport suggests that 

January, February, and March have the 

highest wind speeds averaging 20 km/hr 

while June, July, and August have the 

lowest at 13 km/hr. Furthermore, winds 

from the west-northwest have the highest 

speeds at 21 km/hrr and the lowesfwind 

speeds, 13 km/hro are from the southeast. 

Ice Cover 

A major physical feature on Lake St. 

Cl air is the occurrence of ice. Using 20 

years of datar Assel et a1 . (1983 1 

documented and mapped the distribution of 

ice on the Great Lakes. The concentration 

of ice varies over the period of record 

mainly because of the shallowness of the 

lake. Although synoptic data on ice 

thickness especial 7y over the centrai 

portion of Lake St. Clair are poor# 

maximum thickness during severe winters is 

approximately 49 cm and maximum thickness 

during mild winters is about 5 cm, 

Normal 1y during mi d-December through 

February the 1 ake i s ice covered with the 

exception of Its exit--the Detroit River. 

During mild winters the only persistent 

ice cover in January and February occurs 

along the eastern shore1 ine of the 1 ake. 

However, during severe winters persistent 

ice will cover 100% of Lake St. Clair from 

mid-December to mid-Apri 7. 

The impact of ice and ice jams on 

wet1 and vegetation is poorly understood, 

and can have negative as well as positSve 

effects, Ice jams migrating down 

distributary channels uproot aquatic and 

persistent vegetation from the substrate. 

Conversely, ice in the nearsh~re tone 

protects 1 acustrine wetlands by acting as 

a buffer and absorbing the impact from 

incoming waves. The coastal protectfon 

offered by the ice In the nearshore zone 

is particularly significant during mild 

winters when most of the lake is not 

frozen and also durin~ the sprfng whe~ 

storms frequently occur and wave energies 

are higher.

Jenuery February March , FEBRUARY 

/ 

October I 

-- '$ 

August 

November 

'i (/ 

/ ' C 5 

June 

September 

December 

Figure 12. Monthly wi nd frequency diagrams 

for Windsor, Ontario, 1955-1972 (Sanderson 

1980). 

OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER 

Figure 13. Monthly wind frequency for Mt. 

Clemens, Michigan (Sel fridge Air Force 

Base) for period 1936-1953 (Ayers 1964). 

Note only velocities greater than 4 mph 

plotted; winds less than 4 mph shown as 

percent time. 

2.3 HYDROLOGY CirculatI~n in Lake St* Clajr 

n'storically water levels 

Of Lake 

Investigations reveal that two major 

water masses occur in Lake St. Clair. 

C1air ranged apprOximate'y in Ayres (1964) modeled field data before and 

response changJng water budgets= Water after the construction of the St. Clair 

budgets In 

turn are to jnf l Ow and Cutoff Channel and found that the current 

Outflow as as evaporation and structure in the lake rnainta.lned semi- 

precipitation* The impact Of changing permanent patterns. The distributfon 

water levels within the basin On the pattern was altered according to changing 

shorelJne has been wind patterns, Leach (1980) also 

signi jcante HistorScal identified two discrete water masses in 

displacements have been documented with the 1 ake on the basis of cluster analysis 

the use of aerial photography over time. of physical and chemical data, 

Wetland vegetation transects and 

geographical dlstributions over time have The main flow of water entering Lake 

a? so been determined . St. Clair is from the St. Clair River.

Thfs river contrfbutes about 98% of the 

total Inflow t o the lake. The 

constructfon~ of the St. Lawrence Seaway 

and the opening of the South Channel 

Cutoff i n 1962 have increased the 

proportfon of St, Clair River water 

arriving directly into the main lake 

basin. The greater cross-sectional area 

of the Cutoff Channel for outflow which 

now exists and the straightening that the 

arti f ici a1 channel provides have decreased 

the frlctlonal effects and promoted a 

greater discharge of the st.-Clair River 

water directly into the main basin, 

In Lake St. Clair the extent and 

geometry of the ci rculatfng water masses 

are related to wind direction. The 

predominant winds in the region are from 

the southwest quadrant (Sanderson 1980). 

Figure 14-D illustrates the two principal 

patterns in the eastern and western 

portion of the St. Clair basin derived 

from prevailing southwest winds. Figure 

14-A revsaxs a more djstinctive 

circulatory pattern associated with a 

north wind, Based upon Ayresl (1964) 

model, water in Anchor Bay originates from 

two distinct sources. Wl th southwest 

w'inds there are both a net diminution of 

outflow through North Channel and the 

creation of a discrete gyre in Anchor Bay 

composed of Clinton River water. With a 

north wind, though, Anchor Bay becomes 

dominated by water from the North Channel 

of the St. Claf r River as the Clinton 

River water is reduced in the bay. 

The significance of the two main 

water masses is their relationship to the 

productivity of the lake. The water mass 

adjacent to Ontario is more influenced by 

nutrient load1 ngs f rom the Sydenham and 

Thames rivers and the smaller tritrutaries 

from Ontario. These waterways drain an 

intensive1 y cultivated lake plain. Urban 

development on the south shore of Lake St. 

Clair also contributes to the loading. 

Because this water mass is more enriched 

and more stable than the mass associated 

with St. Clair River water, It has yielded 

greater productivity (Leach 1972, 1973 1. 

Due in part to the flushing time of 

lake St. Clair, which is theoretically 

about 9 days, the fish communities have 

changed 1 fttle, with the exception of some 

col dwater species. According to Johnston 

(19771. the walleye and the yellow perch 

stocks over the past century have remained 

reasonably stable in spite of more 

intensive agricultural practices in the 

watershed, increased settlement in the 

coastal zoner and exploitatio~ of the 

resource from commercial f isheries. The 

flushing action of relatively clean water 

from Lake Huron has prevented concentratlon 

of nutrients and eutrophication in 

most of Lake St, Clair. 

ater Discharae Into l ake St. Clair 

In addltlon to the principal source 

of water from the St. Clair River, 

several other river basins contribute 

water to the lakes including the Blackr 

Belle9 Clinton* Thames, and Sydenham 

Rivers (Figure 15). The St. Clair River 

is not a true fluvial system but rather a 

strait connecting two large water bodies 

(Lake Huron and Lake St. Clair). It 

therefore does not exhibit typical river 

discharge characteristics. Furthermore, 

depositional processes associated with 

rivers are normally directly linked to 

extreme flow regjmes. But St. Clafr River 

flows and ultimate sediment distribution 

in the St. Clair Delta are more closely 

linked to ice conditions or high lake 

level condftfons. 

Of the total average fa11 of 2.5 m 

from the Lake Huron level to Lake Eriet 

1.5 m occur in the St. Clair River 

(Korkigian 1963). Its banks and bed have 

been relatively stable except for 

navigation improvementsr and sand and 

grave1 dredging over several decades. 

Figure 16 illustrates mean monthly 

discharge from 1900 through 1980 (Quinn 

and Kelley 1983). Average monthly 

discharge is 5,121 &/see and the range of 

discharge is 4,254 m3/sec (February) to 

5,483 m3/sec (September). Detailed 

monthly data are included in Appendix 8, 

With flow velocities up to 3.2 km/hr the 

travel time through the system is 

re1 atively high, As determined by Dereckl 

(1983)~ the flow time of water from the 

international bridge at Port Huron to Lake 

St. Clair is 21,1 hours (Table 9). The 

flow time through the Detroit River (Belle 

Isle south to Geleron IsSandE fs 20.9 

hours, The initial travel timetable was 

developed for normal flow condltfons.

Based on the geomorphologic history South channels, which in turn each spllt 

Of the St* C1aBr Delta? the active before entering Lake St. Claire The flow 

portion of the landform at the present 

time 1s to the west. As the St. Clair is therefore proportional 1 y distributed 

River enters the Sk. Clair basin f t through the channels as illustrated In 

bifurcates near Algonac Jnto the North and Figure 17, 

. . . * . WATER LEFT LI PRLVIOUJ NlHb 

NORTH WINO 

-. cn~nlt EtA*Te (I JW**fOn CHI)IXEL 

-' ST CLSIR RIVER 

IU- * CLINIOW nivcn 

- * -WATER LLFY EY PREVIOU5 WlWU 

-----, - ~~lijvu~hci: OUTFLOW P ISCIPCOEHI 

WEST WINO C 

-' CUENhL fCI\RTE 4 JOHNSTON CIllNntL 

I--". 

ST. CLIlR RIVER 

I-- CLIITOR RIVER 

WATER LEFT aY PUEVIOUJ WINO 

NORTHWEST WIND 

-- 

CIIENIL CCARTE 8 JOMNSTOW CHANNEL 

------L. ST. CLllR RIVER 

-+r - CLINTOM RIVER 

- ........ -L . NITER LEFT BY PREVIOUS WIND 

-----r . SUISURFACE CSCAPIYLnT 

SOUTHWEST WIND D 

Figure 14. Current Patterns for Lake St. Clafr under various wind conditions (Ayers 

1964).

Artificial modif icatlon In the past and 1925# and uncompensated navigation 

85 years has altered river levels and the improvements for the 7.7-m and 8.3-rn 

water volume i n Lake St. Clair. projects completed in 1933 and 1962 

Art.fficia1 channel changes 'In the St, respective1 y (Derecki 1982). These 

Clair River s'lnce 1900 include dredging channel changes increased the discharge 

for commercial gravel removal between 1908 through the St. Cl air River and caused a 

---L. CHENAL LCARTE O JOHNBTOH CHANNEL 

-----* - 51. CLAIR RIVER 

--.CZ. CLINTON RIVER 

. , . , . , , . . . r WhTER LEFT BY PREVIOUS WIND 

SOUTH WlND 

--C. CHENAL CCARTe 6 JOUNSTON CHANNEL 

-----r- 1 ST. CLAIR RIVER ---u. CLINTON RIVER 

....... . W.PTER LEFT BY PREVIOUS WINO 

EAST WlND 

G 

E 

Figure 14. (Continued) 

29 

- ST. 

-----H. 

-r CRENAL ECARTE 6 JOHNLTON CHANNEL 

CLAlR WVER 

CLINTON RIVER 

WATER LEFT BY PREVIOU8 WlND 

-----+ BUSSURFACE OUTFLOW 

SOUTHEAST WlND 

-- 

CHENAL LCARTE 6 JOHNSTOH CtiAhlNEL 

-- ST CLAIR RIVER 

--M r CLfNTOH RIVER 

- *=WATER LEFT BY PREVIOUS WIND 

NORTHEAST WIND H

Figure 15. Lake St. Cl ai r-St. Clai r River drainage basin show- 

ing location of precipitation and water level gages. 

Table 9. 

veloci$y 

Clair. 

St. Clair River flow time and 

from Lake Huron to Lake St. 

Statlon Tf me Distance Velocity 

(hr) (km) (km/hr) 

Lake Huron 0.0 

Blue Water Brldge 0.1 

Black River 0.9 

Stag Island 4.4 

St. Clair City 6.0 

Marine City 9.8 

Roberts Landing 12.0 

Algonac Lt, 12,5 

St. Clair Cutoff 17.9 

J F M A M J J A S Q N O 1.1 

Lake St, Gfair 21.1 60.5 

Figure 16. Mean monthly discharge sf the 

St, Clair River 1900-1988. a~ata source: Derecki (1983).

Figure 17. Location map of St. Clair Delta distributary channels 

showing average discharge (cubic meters per second) and flow distri- 

bution (percent of total ) .

permanent lowering of the lake's level. 

The impact of these channel changes 

resulted in the l ~ ~ ~ r of i nthe g Lake 

Michigan and Lake Huron water levels by 

0.27 m. Thfs depth superf mposed on the 

combined areas of Lakes Mfchlgan and Huron 

represents a permanent water loss of 32 

km3 or nine times greater than the volume 

of Lake St. Cl air. 

Lake level changes and thef r duration 

play an important role in the character of 

Lake St. Clair, its shoreline and its 

wetland connnunities. In general r high and 

stable water levels are most beneficial to 

the fish stock of the lake whereas low and 

stable or unstable conditions are least 

desf rable from an ecological standpoint. 

Converse1 y hf gher water levels when 

combined w l th storm events encourage 

higher flood f requencles and coastal 

erosion. The wetland communities of Lake 

St, Clalr respond to longer term water 

changes and hence adjust to such changes 

over time. 

All the Great Lakes includfng Lake 

St. Clair experience changes in water 

levels due to short-term and long-term 

weather and cl imat ic conditions. Short- 

term changes are due to steep barometric 

gradients which may alter water levels for 

a period of several hours. During the 

winter months ice jams on the St. Claf r 

River cause abrupt water level changes 

whlch may span a period of 60 days. Long- 

term oscillations are related to water 

lnput and water output to and from Lake 

St, Clair. Such water level changes, 

al though non-cycl lcr occur over a period 

of several years. Pre-1946 storm surges 

on Lake St, Clair and its connecting 

channels have been documented by Murty and 

Polavarapu (197.5 1 armd are summarlzed in 

Tab1 e 10. As noted* the water levels at 

Tecumsshp Ontario dropped 0,5 m and rose 

again over a perfod Qf approximately 48 

hours. Short-term depressions of water 

levels due to storm surges provide some 

flushing action and the fntroduction of 

nutrfents fraorn the marshes fnto the bays 

and nearshore waters of the lake. 

However, the event is probably Loo short- 

1 ived to have signif posltfve impact, 

Table 118, Record storm surge levels of 

Canadian stations o$ Lake St. Clair and 

connecting channel s. 

Maximum 

Date of Observat l on surge 

storm stat i on (m) (ft) 

November1913 Fighting Islandb 0.48 1.56 

Isle Aux Pechesc 0.28 0.91 

October 1916 Fighting 1s1 andb 0.71 2.34 

Isle Aux Pechesc 0.51 1.67 

November 1940 ~ecumsehd 0.54 1.76 

a~ata source: Murty and Pol avarapu (19751, 

b~ower Detroit River. 

'upper Detroit River. 

d~ake St. Clair. 

Ice jams are a common occurrence on 

the St. Clair River and often detafn 

Interlake shipping. Ice blockades usually 

form in February and March in the St. 

Clair River and occasionally extend into 

April. On the average, ice retards the 

flow by 16%. Ice-jamming reduces the 

outflow from Lake Huron and raises its 

level and at the same time reduces inflow 

to Lake St. Clai r and lowers its level. 

During the winters of 1904-1905 and 1905- 

1906, average inflow from Lake Huron to 

Lake Erie decreased 1,369 m3/sec over 4 

months and 904 m3/sec over 5 months, 

respective1 y (Bajorunas 1968). 

During the spring of 1984, strong 

winds from the east and north caused a 

massf ve fce jam south of Lake Huron. 

Brash ice clogged the 62.5 km-course of 

the St. Clair River until the end of 

April, and jams of 3 m or more in depth 

developed at the apex of the delta. This 

situation led to a decrease in discharge 

from the monthly average of 5,096 m3/sec 

for April, to about 2,50Om3/sec below the 

projected mean volume for that month. 

Also there was a subsequent drop fn the 

Lake St. Clair water level by more than 

0.76 m from March 21 to April 19 t 175.40 

to 174.59 m above mean sea level). In the 

closing days of Aprtl a convoy of Canadian 

and Amerfcan ice breakers, alded by 

unseasonably mild temperatures broke the 

ice jam at the upper end of the St. Clair

Delta allowing 70 vessels anchored In the Although non-cyclicr the water levels 

Detrolt River and western Lake Erje to appear to have a high water period and a 

enter the upper Great Lakes. low water period every 7 to 10 years. 

Figure 18 records the impact of this 

ice jam in the St, Clafr River on the 

water level of Lake St. Clair. Water 

level began its drop in mid-March 1984 and 

did not recover until the end of May 1984. 

The change (March 15-April 15) in the 

water level was 0.48 m. Ice jams 

temporarily a1 ter the hydrology of the St, 

Cl af r Delta, As the distributary channels 

are jammed, river water is diffused 

through crevasses into the bays (e.g., 

Muscamoot and Goose Bays), This process 

is responsible for subaqueous 

sedimentation in the bays and the 

subsequent colonFzatfon by emergent 

wet1 ands. 

February 1984 was relatively mild and 

Lake Huron was largely ice freer but 

exceptionally cold weather followed and an 

ice cover formed over the entire lake by 

about March 10th (Great Lakes Commfssion 

1984). By the outset of April, Lake Huron 

again was nearly Ice free except at the 

head of the St. Clair River. Unusually 

strong and persistent westerly winds 

reduced the movement of drifting ice down 

the river by blowing much of it from the 

south end of Lake Huron eastward. 

Following this event? winds from the east 

and north forced the jumbled ice into the 

St. Clair River over a 3-week period. 

Water level data for Lake St. Clair 

have been continuously recorded since 

1899. The long-term level of the 1 ake is 

determined by the inputs of water derived 

from runoff or inflow of connecting 

channels and tributaries to the lake, and 

precipitation over the lake basin. The 

outputs are due to evaporatfon and outflow 

via the Detroit River. Long-term lake 

level oscfllations are usually thought of 

as volumetric changes which are 

cl imatically controlled. Changes in 1 ake 

storage may be sumnarlzed as follows: 

Water voTume and lake level of a 

given 1 ake bast n are dependent upon water 

inflow and 0utf10wr which in turn is 

determined by factors such as overwater 

precipitation, evaporationr and runoff 

fnto and out of the basin. These factors 

are interrelated and may be expressed as a 

transfer factor. The transfer factor is 

defined as the sum of the monthly 

precip itati on and runoff minus the 

evaporatfon and change in storage. QuInn 

( 1976 1 computed transfer factors for Lake 

St. Clair (Table 11). The runoff from the 

land into Lake St. Clai r was determined 

independently for the four river basins 

draining fnto the lake. They are the 

Be1 1 e, Cl i nton, Thames, and Sydenham 

Basins (Figure 15). On an annual basis 

and during most of the year, the transfer 

factor is most sensitive to runoff. The 

evaporation however, becomes the most 

important factor during the high 

evaporation months of August to October. 

Figure 18 records the water level 

history of Lake St. Cl ai r for 1900 to 

1984. The lake has a mean monthly 

elevation of 174.87 m above sea level at 

Father Pofnt, Quebec in the Gulf of St* 

Lawrence. However, as the figure 

demonstrates, the water level in recent 

years has been we1 1 above this 1 eve1 . 

Table 12 indicates that the lake has had a 

record high of 175,64 m (June 1973) and a 

record low of 173.71 m or a range of 1.93 

m. Low water or chart datum is 174,25 m. 

This level is a fixed reference plane 

selected by the United States and Canada 

so that the majority of time during the 

navigation season the Great Lakes actual 

levels w i l l be above that plane. Water 

levels are lowest in February; based on a 

1900-1983 mean, the level for this month 

i s 174.47 m. HIghest water levels Bccur 

in July; the 1900-1983 average for thi s 

month is 174.94 m. 

S = (P-E) + (1-0) Lake level fluctuations occur 

naturally on Lake St. CSair and are the 

where: S = change in storage volume result of prolonged periods of precip- 

P = precipitation itation, drought* storm-related events, or 

E = evaporation ice conditions, The lake level depends on 

I = inflow the balance between the total water 

0 = outflow supplied to the lake from precipftation on

LEGEND 

I 1 

LAKE LEVELS 

Hydrographs are In feet above (+) 

or below (-) Chart Datum, the plane 

-' 

REGORDED on each lake to whrch navigation 

chart depths and Federal navigatton 

ImprOvement depths are re- 

PROBABLE 

ferred. 

1900-1 983 

Chart Datum and all other eleva- 

AVERAGE 

tions sire in feet above mean water 

level at Father Point, Quebec (In- 

MAXIMUM m,E 1973 ,973 ternattonai Great Lakes Datum - 1955). To convert feet to meters, 

MINIMUM 1936 1934 1926 multiply feet by o 30480. 

- 

Figure 18. Hydrograph of iake St, Clair and Lake Erie water levels, showing 

the impact of a record ice jam in the St. Clair Delta in March and April 1984 

(U,S, Army Corps of Engineers), Note the slight dip in iake Erie water levels 

in May in response to the St. Clai r Be1 ta ice jam.

Table 11. take St, Clair average monthly water transfer factor parameters. a 

Cubic &rs oar ntglrth 

Parameter J F M A M J J A S O N D 

Precipitatfon 23 20 25 34 25 34 31 31 25 23 28 28 

Tributary runoff 156 190 342 277 136 62 37 28 25 42 79 153 

Lake evaporation 25 25 11 8 48 37 34 45 59 51 42 20 

Change in storage -76 42 79 42 17 17 -6 -17 -37 -48 -25 14 

a Data source: Quinn (1976). 

Table 12. Water level data for Lake St. Clair. a 

Parameter Meters Feet Remarks 

Low water datum 174.25 571.70 

Month1 y water levels 

Average 174.87 573.72 1900-1983 data base 

Record high 175.64 576.25 June 1973 

Record low 173.71 569.90 January 1936 

a~ata source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 

the lake and runoff from the surrounding 

drainage area and the amount of water 

discharged from the Detroit River or by 

evaporation. The relationship between 

long-term changes in lake level and the 

climatic events which cause the changes is 

usually quite evident, even though there 

is generally a time lag in the response of 

1 ake levels to imbalances in the system. 

The high levels of 1973 on Lake St. Clair 

as well as the other Great Lakes were 

attributed to a 16% increase In precip- 

itation and a 24% decrease in evaporation 

during 1972 compared to the long-term 

average for both precipitation and 

evaporat I on. 

2.4 WATER QUALITY 

Lake St. Clair waters are usually 

we11 mSxed by both horizontal and vert-ical 

currents. The two major factors affectfng 

current patterns and water quality are the 

flow-through current of the St. Clair 

River (Figure 19) and the seasonal water 

temperature changes, Variations in water 

density, largely caused by changes in the 

water temperature and amount of suspended 

sol ids, and winds affect the 1 ateral 

movement at the lake surface, while tur- 

bulence created by storms, and rec- 

reational and commercfal boatfng actlv- 

ities affect the vertical movement (U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers 1974). 

Water quality informatfon fs presented 

here f n terms of nutrlents and 

contaminants which either enhance or 1 imit 

wetland productivlty. Of particular concern 

are phosphorusr nltrogenr df ssol ved 

oxygen, alkal lnftyt pH, major fans, trace 

elementst and toxic organic compounds. 

Tharmaf structure, ! fght penetration" and 

sediment load are also addressed f n terms 

of Impacts to wetland stab4llty and 

habftats,

Figure 19. Distribut.ion of specific conductance in Lake St. Clair 

(Bricker et al. 1976). Note low values from the St. Clair River and 

high values at the mouths of the Thames River and Clinton River. 

In March 1970 the Canadlan government 

announced that 5,500 kg of commercially 

caught walleye I L !LjAB@) 

from Lake St. Cl afr were destroyed because 

of mercury contamination. In the early 

19705s mercury concentrations in fish in 

Lake St, Clair ranged from 0.3 ppm to over 

5 ppm, the higher values were usually 

found in larger fish and in predacious 

species. The United States and Canada 

adopted a concentration of 0.5 ppm in fish 

muscle as a maximum for commercial fish, 

Both governments closed commerci a1 fishing 

in the St. Clair River and Lake St, Clair, 

as well as walleye fishing in western Lake 

Erie, 

The mercury pollution was largely 

attributed to waste discharges from chlor- 

alkali processing plants on the St. Clair 

and Detroit Rivers which began operation 

in the 1950s. Several of these plants 

ceased operation in the early 1970s and as 

a result, mercury contamination has 

diminished in the environment. Levels of 

total mercury In walleye collected in Lake 

St. Clair have decl jned from a mean of 

over 2 ppm in 1970 to 0.5 ppm in 1980. In 

western Lake Erie, 1968 levels of mercury 

were 0.8 ppm as compared to only 0.3 pprn 

in 1976. The rapid environmental response 

subsequent to the cessation of major point 

source d fscharges at Sarnia, Ontario, and

at Wyandotte, Mfchlgan* can be attributed 

to rapid flushing by the St. Clair-Detrolt 

Rivers system and rapid burial of 

contaminated sediments by the high load of 

suspended sediment delivered to western 

Lake Erie. 

Few comprehensive water quality 

investigations have been conducted on Lake 

St. Clair and measurements in the coastal 

wetlands are rare. The Michigan Water 

Resources Commission (1975) conducted a 

thorough study of the open lake and bays 

along the American shore in 1973 (Table 

13 1 and Leach (1972, 1973, 1980) reported 

on conditions in CanadIan waters (Figure 

20). The U.S. Envl ronmental Protection 

Agency operates a national water qua1 i ty 

data storage and retrieval system 

(STORET). Pub1 ished and unpubl i shed Lake 

St. Clair data from several Federal, 

state, provincial, and local agencies have 

been entered into this STORET for the 

period 1967-1982. Table 14 represents a 

retrieved STORET summary (mean values) for 

22 parameters measured in the St. Cl air 

Rfver, Lake St. Clair, Detroit River, and 

western Lake Erie during this period. 

Mudroch and Capobianco (1978) determfned 

the geochemical composition of the 

surface sediments (0 to 20 cm) and the 

overlying rnarshwater in Big Point Marsh on 

the Ontario shore of Lake-St. ClaOr 

(Tables 15 and 16). Mineralogically the 

sed irnents are composed of ill ite, quartz, 

calclte, dolomite, K-fe1 dspars, 

pl agi ocl ose, and mi nor amounts of chl ori te 

and kaol inite. The water can be 

characterized as hard with high levels of 

nutrients. The pH of the marsh sediment 

is about 7.0, while the overlying water 

ranges between 8.1 and 8.4. 

Two important features which 

determine the water temperature of Lake 

St. Clair are the lake's shallowness and 

the high flow rate from Lake Huron. 

Because of the shallow depth of Lake St. 

Clair, it warms quickly in the spring and 

cools rapidly In the fall. The lake is 

too shallow to stratify thermally; 

therefore the water is almost always 

isothermal from surface to bottom, The 

high inflow from the St. Clalr River 

Table 13. Lake St. Clair water quality measurements for 1973 growing season, a 

Parameter 

-lake-- 

July Aug Sept July Aug Sept July Aug Sept July Aug Sept 

Secchi depth (rn) 1.9 1.6 2.2 2.0 1.3 1.7 2.0 1.4 2.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 

Conductlvlty(umohs/cm) 184 203 202 181 213 205 183 214 210 340 273 274 

Temperature OC 19.1 22.3 21.2 19.4 23.5 22.0 20.2 22.9 21.9 23.3 24.6 21.1 

pH (units) 8.6 8.6 8.8 8.5 8.7 8.8 8.6 8.6 8.7 8.5 8.8 8.5 

DIssolvedoxygen(mg/l) 8.1 8.2 7.2 8.3 8.7 7.7 6.9 8.0 7.6 8.5 7.9 7.1 

Suspendedsollds (mg/l) 7.3 11.6 1.8 4.0 12.0 15.0 4.3 6.9 12.0 35.7 11.7 26.3 

Dlssolved solids (mg/lf 127 129 -- 127 120 -- 127 124 - 218 153 -- 

Alkalfnlty (mg/l) 80 81 90 78 80 88 80 80 90 114 90 108 

Hardness (mg/l) -- -- 95 -- -- 95 -- - 96 -- -- 119 

Sodium (t~~/l) 5.1 6.1 5.2 5.1 5.5 5.3 5.3 5.6 5.1 15.8 9.7 12.7 

Magnesium (mg/l) 7.8 -- 8.0 8.0 - 7.9 8.0 - 8.0 12.1 -- 9.8 

Calclurn (rng/l) -- 26.1 24.9 -- 26.0 25.0 -- 26.9 25.3 -- 31.0 31.7 

Potassfurn (mg/l) -- -- 0.8 -- -- 0.9 -- -- 0.8 -- -". 1.6 

Sulfate (mg/l) -- 18.8 17.7 -- 17.5 17.5 -- 18.7 17.9 -- 19.1 22.9 

Phosphorus, total (ug/l) 29 60 15

Figure 20. Mean water quality characteristics of Lake St. Clair from April 

through November 1971 (Leach 1972). Note increased concentrations near the 

southeast shore in the vicinity of the Thdmes River mouth.

Table 14. Chemical and physical characgeristics of Lake St. Clair and 

adjacent waters (mean record 1967-1982). 

Parameter 

Temperature OC 

Di ssolv%fed oxygen mg/l 

D,O, saturation % 

Conductivity (250C) umohs/cm 

Df ssol ved so1 f ds mg/ 1 

Suspended sol ids mg/l 

Secchi depth m 

Alkalinity mg/l 

pH 

Calcium, total 

units 

mg/l 

Magnes i um, total mg/ 1 

Potassi um, total mg/l 

Sod 1 urn, total mg/l 

Chloride, total mg/l 

Sulfate, total mg/l 

Fl uori de, total mg/l 

Silica, dissolved ug/1 

Ammonia, dissolved 

Nitrate + Nitrite, diss. 

ug/l 

ug/l 

Phosphorus, total ug/l 

Phosphorusr dissolved ~g/l 

Chlorophyll p ug/l 

St. ~lairb Lake Detrolt Western 

Uni t s River St. Clair River Lake Erie 

a ~ ta a source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Large Lakes 

Station, Grosse Ile, Michigan, STORET Data System. 

b~eadings do not reflect mean concentration at the St. Clair River due 

to location of sampling stations near major outfall s. 

(approxlmatel y 5,000 m3/sec) quick1 y 

rep1 aces the water in the lake with water 

from Lake Huron (in about 9 days). Thus, 

the temperature of Laks Huron has a strong 

influence on the temperature of Lake St. 

Clair. This is especially true in Anchor 

Bay and along the Michigan shore because 

most of the water from the St. Clair River 

enters the lake via the North Channel 

(33%) a t the east side of the bay. 

Ljke Lake Erie, highest temperatures 

are reached in August. On the Ontarto 

shore, water temperatures average about 

240C in July and August. On the western 

side of the lake, which is influenced more 

by the cool water from Lake Hurcn, 

temperatures are usually 2 to 40C lower. 

Temperatures are highest in the shallow 

coastal wetlands, reaching over 28OC, The 

typfcal summer thermocl ine of deeper 1 akes 

in the Great Lakes system is non-exlstent 

in Lake St, Clair. 

In the fa1 1, the 1 ake Is warmest on 

the western sfde* a reversal of the summer 

pattern. Water is coolest in the shallows 

near shore and warmest near the mouth of 

the St. Clair River. Normally Lake St, 

Clair Ss almost completely ice covered by 

mid-January. Ice break-up usually occurs 

in early March. 

Mid-summer water transparency (Secchf 

dfsc) In Lake St. @lair normally ranges 

from 0,7 m along the Michigan shore to 2,6

Table 15. Geochemical composition of 

sediments in B+g Point Marsh, Ontario, on 

Lake St. Clair. 

Parameter Concentration ( ppm) 

Sf02 

A1 203 

Fe2~3 

CaO (%I 

Na2o 

K20 

Ti02 

MnO 

'205 

C r 

Ni 

Cd 

Co 

Cu 

Organic C (%I 

63.7 

93.7 

%ata source: Mudroch and Capobianco 

(19781, 

km near the center of the lake to 0.6 m 

along the Ontario shore (Herdendorf 1970). 

In the nearshare reglons the water color 

is brownish-green. Water in the vfcinfty 

of the navigation channel Is a d$stincttva 

cloudy-green but near the center of She 

lake away from the channel is a cfear- 

green. 

Table 16. Chemical composition of waterd 

Big Point Marsh, Ontario, Lake St. Clair. 

Parameter 

Ammonia-Nitrogen 

Nitrate-Nitrogen 

Nitrogen, Kj 

Phosphorus, total 

Potass 1 urn 

Cal cl um 

Magnes f urn 

Sod i um 

Alkalinity, total 

Lead 

Zinc 

Chromi um 

Copper 

Cadmi um 

Min. Max, 

(mg/l) (mg/l) 

a Data source: Mudroch and Capobianco 

(1978). 

The minimum intensity of subsurface 

light that permits photosynthesls has been 

set at 1.0% of incident surface light 

(Cole 1983). The zone of a lake from the 

surface to a depth at which 99% o f the 

surface light has been absorbed is known 

as the euphotic zone. Below this depth, 

primary productivity is considered n i 1. 

The relationship between Secchi disc 

transparency and the thickness of the 

euphotic zone provides a simple way to 

estimate the photosynthetically active 

region of a lake. A ratio of 3.0 to 3.5 

has been empirically determined for this 

relationship, yielding a thickness of the 

euphotfc zone rangfng from about 2 m along 

the shores to over 9 rn near the center of 

the lake, 

Nitrogen* phosphorus, and sil ica are 

the primary lfmfting nutrients in Lake St. 

Clair. Bicarbonate alkalintty is in such

great abundance (>80 mg/l) that a source 

carbon for primary productivity is never 

lackfng. Relatively high nitrate (>400 

vg/1It phosphorus (>ZOO ug/l) and silica 

(>2 mg/7) in the nearshore waters of the 

wetland bays (Table 13) reflect high 

watershed inputs, Leach (1972) also found 

high nutrient loading from the Thames 

River (Table 17). The mid-lake lower 

concentrations reflect low nutrient 

loading from Lake Huron water. The mean 

Lake St. Clair concentrations of nutrients 

lie between values for tha upper Great 

Lakes and those of western Lake Erie 

(Schelske and Roth 197318 yielding a 

mesotrophic classification for this lake. 

On the basis of water chemistry, 

Leach (1980) identified two distinct water 

masses i n Lake St. Clair: 1) a 

northwestern mass consisting primari 1 y of 

Lake Huron water flowing from the main 

channels of the St. Clair River and 2) a 

southeastern mass of more stable water 

enriched by nutrient loadings from Ontarlo 

tributaries and shoreline urban devel- 

opment. The margins of the water masses 

shift according to the wind di rectf on and 

characteristics of the two water masses 

for the period 1971-1975 is shown in 

Figure 21. 

Because thermal stratification does 

not occur* due to the lake's shallowness 

and rapid flow of the St. Clair River, 

dissolved oxygen concentrations are 

usually at saturation. In Bradley Marsh, 

north of the Thames River, Mudroch and 

Capobianco (19781 found that the 

temperature and dissolved oxygen 

saturation in marshwater during the 

growlng season are inversely related 

(Figure 22), but the 0, saturatian did not 

fa1 l below 75%. The Lcoastal marshes are 

shallow and well mixed by wind, and 

consequent1 y the water temperature Is 

affected di rectly by air temperature. The 

diurnal temperature changes are 1 arge8 for 

example in July 1976, they found 

marshwater temperature at 0600 hours to be 

20°C and at 1500 hours* 27%. These 

changes coupled with wind maintain high 0 

levels In the marshwater during thg 

summer. 

speed, but the-overall discreetness of the 

distribution 1s maintained during the ice- 

free periods of the year ( April-December) . The Michigan Water Resources 

A compression of the water quality Commission (1975) reported that 

Table 17. Comparison of cJemica1 characteristics of Lake St. 

Clair and associated waters. 

De1 t a Lake Thames 

Parameter (units) Channels St. Clair River 

Chlorophyll 3 (vg/l) 1.2 

Pheopigments (ug/ll 0.4 

Part. org. carbon (mg/1) 0.7 

Sol. react. phosphate (pg/1) 0.6 

Total phosphate (vg/l) 2.5 

Nitrate (pg/l) 17 8 

Nitrite (vg/l) 1.6 

Sol. react. silicate (mg/l) 0.3 

Total a1 kal tnity (mg/l) 87 

Sul fate (mg/l) 15.3 

Chloride (mg/l) 8.1 

'Flat3 source: Leach ( 19721,

sooi 

1 ". . .." . . ---- - - . 

' CHLOROPHYLL 5? (ug/L) 1 

Figure 21. Characteristics of Lake Huron 

water mass (A) and Ontario nearshore water 

mass (B) in Lake St. Clair from 1971 to 

1975 (Leach 1980). Solid line is mean 

water qua1 i ty for each water mass and 

dashed line is prediction based on a 

central station in each water mass. 

chlortnated hydrocarbon concentrations in 

sedfments are low throughout the lake. 

Lindane, aldrin, endrin, heptachlor 

(detectfon limits 0.001 mg/kg)r and 

chlorodane (detectton 1 imi t 0.005 mg/kg) 

concentrations were below detection, and 

dfeldrfn (detection limlt 0.001 mg/kg) was 

only detected at a few stations, then at 

maximum levels of only 0.006 rng/kg, DOE* 

TDE, and DDT (detection 1 Smit 0.002 mg/kgl 

were below detection at most stations, but 

high concentrations (0.039 mg/kg) were 

found In L'Anse Creuse Bay near the 

Clinton Rfver splllway. PCB (detection 

limits 0.05 mg/kg) levels were below 

detectfon in most nearshore areas, but 

concentrations ranged from 0.50 to 1.10 

mg/kg near the splllway, indicating that 

the Cl inton River is an important source 

of PCBfs. 

# 

o Temperature 

Apr ~ 6 y , I .lul Aug Sep 1976 

Figure 22. Temperature and dissolved 

oxygen relationship in a Lake St. Clair 

coastal wetland, near the mouth of the 

Thames River, Ontario (Mudroch and 

Capobianco 1978).

3.1 PLANKTON 

Phvto~l Sessf 1 e A- 

Planktonic and sessfle algae, 

although not as important as macrophytes 

in the coastal marshes9 are signif icant 

primary producers of organfc matter in 

wetlands, converting the sun's energy into 

chemical compounds that in turn are used 

as food by animals and nonphotosynthetic 

mtcro-organisms. In the nearshore and 

open waters of Lake St. Clair, however9 

alga productivity dominates. Phyto- 

plankton production and distribution are 

fnfluenced by sun1 ight, temperature, 

nutrients, morphometry, water movementsr 

grazing by zooplankton, and other factors. 

Many inorganic elements are required for 

algal cell growthp incl uding nitrogens 

phosphorus, potassium, calcium, and iron. 

Algae reproduce rapidly when phosphorus is 

added to the water9 and continue to 

reproduce as more phosphorus is added. 

However, nitrogen and other nutrients must 

also be present if algal production is to 

contlnue, Recycling of nutrients within a 

marsh may be sufficient to promote algal 

blooms for several years after the initial 

loadfng (Sawyer 1954). 

Pieters (1893) was the first botanist 

to describe the algae of Lake St. Clairr 

largely from the marshes of Anchor Bay. 

He noted that over 60 species of green 

algae, largely desmids, were associated 

with the vascular aquatlc plants of the 

coastal wetlands. W i nner et ale (19701 

and the Michigan Water Resources 

Commission (1975) have made more recent 

studies of phytoplankton populations in 

Ontario and Michigan nearshore waters 

respectively. The results of these in- 

vestigations are summarized in Appendix C. 

Diatoms are the most abundant forms of 

pl anktonlc algae in the surface waters of 

the lake. r mr and 

are important genera throughout 

the water column. Filamentous forms such 

as -r are common where sol id substrate 

is available, whjle Sp$roqaa is 

found in open waters of the marshes. 

The distribution of the algal 

pigment, chlorophyll gr in Lake St. Clair 

can be used as an indicator of the 

re1 ati ve abundance of phytoplankton. 

Leach (1972) found that starting at the 

delta channels, the concentrations of 

chlorophyll g and pheopi gments increase 

toward the southeast (Figure 231, reaching 

the highest levels (20 pg/l) fn the 

marshes at the mouth of the Thames River. 

Figure 23. Concentration gradient of 

algal pfgments across Lake St, Clair from 

the St. Clair Delta to the mouth of the 

Thames River (Leach 1372).

The strongest positfve correlat~on was 

Found during the spring plankton blooms. 

SIl ica also has a strong relationship 

to the phytoplankton composftion. De- 

pletion of sil lca toward the end of the 

summer greatly reduces the percentage of 

df atoms in the phytoplankton community. 

In the southern portion of Lake St. Clair, 

diatom concentration falls from 95% of the 

total phytoplankton population in May to 

10% of the population in July. Con- 

verse1 y, cyanophytas (b1 ue-greens) i n- 

crease from 0% of the total population in 

May up to 25% of the population in July 

(Leach 1972). 

The term periphyton generally refers 

to microfloral growth, particuTar1 y 

sessile algae, on submerged substrate. 

Modifiers are normally used to indicate 

type of substrate: epipelic - growfng on 

sediment; epilithic - growing on rock; 

epiphytic - growing on macrophytes; and 

epfzooic - growing on animals (Wetzel 

1975). The periphyton of western Lake 

Erie consists of predominant1 y 1 lttoral 

communitfe~r most commonly associated with 

wet1 and vegetation, A greater number of 

species occurs in the littoral zone than 

in the llmnetlc zone of the lake due to 

the greater diversity of habitats 

available in the nearshore region, 

Although no detalled studies have been 

done in the Lake St. Clair wetlandsr 

Millie (1979) examined the epiphytlc 

diatom flora of aquatic macrophytes fn 

marshes along the south shore of western 

Lake Erie. Three common species of 

wetland macrophytes were studied as hosts, 

narrow-leaved cattail (w -usti - 

white water lily ( 

and swamp smartweed ( 

a), 157 were new 

ds. Centrlc forms, 

were the most common taxa, but each marsh 

possessed a dlstfnct flora and 

suecessJona1 pattern. Millie attributed 

this heterogeneity to the diversity of 

littoral habitats in the marshes* 

particularly differences in chemical and 

physical factors, Because of the nearness 

and similarity of the Lake Erie marshes to 

the wetlands along the Ontario shore of 

Lake St. Claj r, comparable peri phyton 

communlties would be expected for both 

1 akes, 

In Lawrence Lake, Michi ganr A1 1 en 

( 1971) measured the annual net production 

of aquatic macrophytes and their attached 

algal forms. He found that the epiphytic 

algae were responsible for approxf matel y 

31% o f the total 1 ittoral production in 

the lake. Brock (19701, working in the 

Everglades, observed that epiphytf c algae, 

rather than macrophytes were responsible 

for the majority of the primary production 

of bl adderwort ( sp. 1 com- 

munities. Diatoms were found to be the 

most abundant form of 1 ittoral periphyton, 

both in number and biomass, In several 

Ontario 1 akes (Stockner and Armstrong 

1971). Likewiser it is anticipated that 

epiphyttc diatoms are an important 

component of the energy base in Lake St. 

Cl a1 r marshes. 

By definition, plankton are floating 

organisms whose movements are more or less 

dependent on currents. However# some 

zoopl ankters exhibit active swimming 

movements that aid in maintaining vertical 

posltion. Zoopl ankters are diverse in 

their feeding habits. Herbivores graze on 

phytoplankton, periphyton, and macrophytes 

within the coastal marshes. Carnivores 

prey on attached protozoans and other 

zooplankters, while omnivores feed at all 

trophlc levels. In turn, zooplankton are 

important fish and waterfowl food. Every 

fish species and many duck species 

urilizing the Lake St. Clair wetlands eat 

zooplankters during some portion of the1 r 

lffe cycle. 

The anlmal components of the wetland 

plankton (Figure 24) consist of three 

groups: protozoans, rotifers (Figure 251, 

and microcrustaceans (primarily 

cl adocerans and copepods) . Common zoo- 

pl ankters, including sessile or periphytic 

protozoans# occurring fn Lake St. Clair 

wetlands are listed in Appendix D. 

The first study of Lake St. Clair 

zooplankton, and one of the earl lest 

1 imnol ogical investigations in the Great 

Lakes, was organized by Refghard (1894) 

and included work by many of the leading

Figure 24. Mean distribution and concentrations of zoo- 

plankton groups in Lake St. Clair for April through Novem- 

ber 1972 (Leach 1973). Note correlation between total 

zooplankton population and a1 gal pigments.

CARFA ENLARGED / 

Figure 25. Distribution of total roti fers and most abundant genus, 

Brachionus, in Lake St. Clair during July-September 1973 (Bricker et al. 

" m N b t e high concentration in the vicinity of the Clinton River Cutoff 

Channel. 

specfalists of that perlod. Species lists 

of Protozoa (Smfth 18941, planktonic 

Rstlfera (Jennings 18941s Gladocera (Bi rge 

1894)r and Copepoda [Marsh 1895) were 

compiled from samples collected among 

aquatic plants fn Anchor Bay and at other 

nearshore stations along the west shore of 

take St, Clai r, Planktonic organ1 sms 

remained negl scted untll Winner et a1 . 

(2970) obtained zooplankton data from two 

estuary mouths on the Canadian shore. 

Leach ( 1973 ) col lected zooplankton samples 

from the South Channel of the St. Clair 

Daita* Mitchell Bay* the estuary mouth of 

the Thames Rivsrr and other nearshore and 

offshore stations on Lake St. Clalr. 

Brfcker et a7, (1976) documented the zoo- 

plankton populatfons of Anchor Bay, the 

nearshore region in the vicinity of the 

Clinton River estuary* and offshore re- 

gions of Lake St. Clair. The results of 

these collections are included in Appendix 

0. 

The distribution of zooplankton in 

Lake St. Clair is largely dependent on the 

prevailing currents of the lake. Other 

inf l oences, such as temperature, algal 

abundance, and chemical characteristics 

a1 so determine the concentratlons of 

zooplankton. Because these factors vary 

greatly throughout the lake, the 

distributions of zooplankton also vary 

consf derabl y in different portlons of the 

lake (Bricker et al. 1976). A persistent 

eddy structure In the southeastern portion

of the lake (Figure 141 promotes 

entrajnrnent of the waters and allows 

nutrient and algal levels to increase 

above other portions of the lake (Leach 

1972). Because of the high phytoplankton 

levels in this area, the zooplankton 

biomass is greater here than in any other 

regton, The rapid flow conditions of 

water through the delta and the Michigan 

portion of the lake inhibits any great 

concentration of zooplankton; therefore, 

the biomass is greater on the Ontario side 

(Figure 24). Despite rapid flow rates, 

zooplankton biomass is elevated near the 

Cl lnton Rfver Cutoff Canal (Figure 25) due 

to nutrient loading from the watershed 

(Bricker et al, 1976). 

Because of the rapid flushing rate of 

Lake St. Clair (9 days) and the dense 

subrnergent macrophyte populations competing 

for available nutrients, the total 

biomass of plankton in Lake St. Clair is 

low. Zooplankton that succeed the best in 

this environment are those that have a 

short 1 ife span and a fast turnover rate. 

For that reason* rotlfers are the most 

abundant forms of zooplankton found. Mean 

numbers of rotifers ranged from 

approximately 62/1 in July and 69/1 In 

August down to 10/1 in September (Leach 

1973 1 . These organisms are thirty times 

more abundant at the Clinton River Cutoff 

Canal (Bricker et a1. 1976). Crustaceans 

have a consistently low abundance in the 

lake ranging from a high of around 6/1 to 

a low of 0.3/1. As with rotifers, the 

peak abundance occurs in July and the low 

occurs in September. Cyclopoid and 

ca1 anoi d copepods, and cl adocerans (water 

fleas) are the predominant microcrustaceans 

found in the lake (Figure 24). 

Protozoans vary fn abundance but have the 

second highest occurrence following the 

rot1 fers. They compose an average of 37% 

of the total zooplankton communlty. 

3.2 WETLAND VEGETATltON 

Although wetland communities exist in 

the St. Clair River (Figure 261, Clinton 

RJver, Marsac Pofntt Swan Creakp and St, 

Clair Delta complexes, only the latter 

area has been w'ell studied. Therefore? 

the description of the pl ant communities 

Figure 26. Ontario shore1 ine; of St. Clair 

River at Cathcart Park (August 1984), 

herein is based on the St, Clair Delta 

wet1 andsr particular7 y those on DJck f nson 

Is1 and. Important 1 iterat~re sources, by 

wetland area, are: St. John" Marsh 

(Roller 19761, Dfckinson Island (Jaworski 

et al. 1979, 19813, Canadian sfde of the 

St. Clair Delta (Eayly 1975)? and the 

enti re del ta complex ( Jaworski and Raphael 

1978; Raphael and Jaworskf 1982). Lyon 

(1979) mapped the wetlands communfties on 

the Michigan side of the St. C1 alr Delta 

using the wetlands classfficatfon of the 

U, S, Fish and Wildlife Service and a map 

scale of 1:24b000, Hayes (1964) surveyed 

the plant communities of a wet prairle on 

Harsens Is1 and,

Several distinct environmental types* 

or pl afit zones, have been identified 

wfthin the St, Clair Delta wetland complex 

located in northeastern Lake St. Clair. 

These zones are part of a vegetation 

continuum (Figure 27). For example, on 

the 11.3 km2 Dickinson Island* the plant 

comrnuniPles grade from cattafl marsh along 

the southwest shore to upland hardwoods on 

the northeast point. Lake level 

fluctuations control the development and 

areal extent of the various zones 

(Jaworski and Raphael 1978). The 

important aquatic macrophytes of Lake St. 

Clair are 1 isted in Appendix Er and 

distribution maps of several species are 

presented In Figure 28, 

1.5 me Certain species, such as the 

cattails and the bulrushes can withstand 

moderate wave energy. Common vascular 

pl ants Include the following specfes: 

(eel grass, 

(pickerel weed) 

(yellow water Illy) 

water smartweed) 

(Eurasian 

(hybrid cattail) 

(hard-stem bul rush) 

(three-square 

(sago 

pondweed) 

Char9 sp. (muskgrass or stonewort). 

This type includes plant communities 

such as those present in Goose Bay, 

Gooseneck Pond of Fisher Bay, and Little 

Muscamoot Bay. Species are largely sub- LOW* narrow beaches of fine sand and 

merged and emergent aquatic macrophytes. stands of emergent vegetation (Ff gu r e 29) 

Habitats consist of low-wave energy lake are found on the Canadian sfde of the 

bottoms and nearshare environments of bays delta. The sand extends down less than 1 

where the water depths range from 0.3 to m and exhibits alternatqng layers of clean 

.3 

SW. 

July 1972 dlarcs~ooi Bay 

DOGWQOR 

MCAROW SE THREE 

E SQUARE BULRUSH 

-IY 0 

0 

5 

-5 +-- T-. r-- ?--I 

0 

ASPEN 

2 00 

V € r 20 V+(l.letbw notfc rtal* 

--r---7. - - - ,- 

8 

400 LOO 800 1W0 3600 3800 

"71-__7__7,-- T---- -- 

FEET 

October 1974 

FEET 

I 

40W 

BULRUSH 

- --- 0 

---.. 

---- 5 

1000 3600 

Figure 27. Vegetation transects on Harsens Island, St. Clair Delta, showing impact of 

rising water levels (Jaworski and Raphael 1976). 

4%

MICHIGAN 

ANCHOR BAY 

PORT 

HUROiL 

MICHIGAN 

ANCHOR BAY 

ONTARIO 

/ ST. CLAlR S 

MICHIGAN 

PORT 

HURON 

Potarnogeton crispus Potanlogeton ri chardsoni i Butornus umbel 1 atus 

(curly pondweed) (Richardson's pondweed) (flowering rush) 

PORT HURsEU 

MICHIGAN hllCHlGAN MICHIGAN 

ANCHOR BAY 

Val 1 i sneria americana 

(wil d celery) 

ANCMOR BAY 

Heteranthera dubia 

(water stargrass) 

Myriophyl lum spicatum 

(water-mil foil ) 

Figure 28. Distribution of six aquatic macrophytes in the St. Clair River-Lake St. 

Clair-Detroi t River ecosystem (Schloesser and Manny 1982, unpubl ished data supplied by 

R. L. Stuckey).

Fiaura 29. Emeraent stand of reed qrass 

(fhragmi tes austbl is) a1 ong he ma tog an 

Channel, Wal pole Island, Ontario (August 

sand and organic-rich sand or peat. 

Stranded or transgressive, beach ridges 

are low, sandy features on the delta 

Islands that can be up to 100 m wide. 

Normally these ridges are only slightly 

above the water level. Characterfstfc 

vegetation of these sandy habltats 

Includes the following vascular species: 

bindweed). 

( staghorn sumac) 

(touch-me-not, 

(swamp thistle) 

This marsh type is prevalent within 

abandoned channels and fn cattail marshes 

where open water and sandy sediments 

occur. Bulrushes are also common In 

shallow water along the Lake St, Clair 

shore and in bays, as in Anchor Bay. 

Water depths range from 0.6 to 1.2 m. 

Representative plants include the 

followfng species: 

Scir~us acut~ (hard-stem bul rush) 

Ce~ha1 anthyg occidental I 5 

(buttonbush) 

Char3 sp. (muskgrass or stonewort) 

Various emergent and submergent 

species. 

Cattai 1 Marshes 

These marshes are broad zones located 

on the lower portions of the delta islands 

where water depths exceed 15 cm. They are 

also found on inundated shoulders of river 

channels and bottoms of shallow ponds and 

bays. Pure colonies of cattails (lyebq x 

are associated with peaty or 

clayey sediments (FJgure 30). In small, 

shall ow open i ngs in the cattall marshes, 

duckweeds (hmna minor and SDI rode1 q 

~glyrhlzg), water-mil foils (Nvrio~t).ylJm 

al_tecniflorum and d % ~icatum), and 

bl adderwort (Ib;triculariq. vulgari~) are 

abundant. 

Sedae Marshes 

Thfs mdian type comprises a narrow 

zone between the cattail marsh and the 

grassy meadow or the dogwood shrub zones. 

Sedge mavshes are also found along river 

channels* at the base of old shore1 ines 

now stranoed in cattail marshes, and along 

the edge of eroding lake and bay 

shorelines. These marshes form on 

occasional 1 y flooded wet sites where 

permanent water depths do not exceed 15 

cm. Common species present include the 

fol lonring: 

ana ad ens is (bluejoint 

mex strictq (tussock sedge) 

!2E.S% (tussock sedge) 

!a% (tussock sedge) 

1 anuainosq (tussock sedge) 

Carex sartwell i I (tussock sedge)

Figure 30. Emergent stands of narrow- 

leaved cattail (Typha angustifolia) on 

Little Muscamoot Bay, Harsens Island, 

Michigan (August 1984). 

So1 a w 

gfffcinale$ (common comfrey) 

(nightshade). 

iN&&u@m 

These habitats include artificial 

canals and openings in the marshes 

(ponds), Water depths are general 1 y 

shallow, 0.3 to 0.6 m, and sediments are 

usually clayey or organic. Communities 

can be quite variable. Typical species 

fnclude the following: 

ellow water lily) 

(white water lily) 

Lemna minor (duckweed) 

Wederi g 5;ordata (pickerel weed) 

,- ~anadens-ls (waterweed) 

mjgm (water smartweed) 

Potamoael;on 5:ris~uq (curly pondweed) 

Potamq&&Qn sp~. (oondweeds) 

Ce~hal anthus o~cid&ntal is 

(buttonbush) 

W sp. (muskgrass or stonewort) 

C1 ildo~hora sp. ( f il amentous green 

algae). 

Abandoned distributary channels in 

the delta are generally shallow, less than 

1 m deep, and have silty or peaty 

sediments. The variable plant communities 

include the following species: 

Nuohar advena (yellow water Illy) 

$uberosa (white water lily) 

M~rioptydJm 

-- 

tr!lterniflor~ (little 

water-mll foil 

Wttaria latifolfa (common 

arrowhead) 

,cutus (hard-stem bulrush) 

Sci rpus americanus (three-square 

bulrush) 

(buttonbush). 

This type 4s a zone of transition 

vegetation or ecotone, between the sedge 

marshes and the hardwood community. This 

zone 1 fes sl ightly above the water table 

and is infrequently flooded. The 

communities consist of a mixture of 

grasses, herbs and shrubs, and water- 

tolerant trees, including the fallowing 

species: 

po~ul uz Qemuloide~ (quaking aspen) 

(red ash) 

d osier 

~alustrSs (swamp rose) 

Sol i &gg spp. (goldenrods) 

sp. [panic grass) 

(rattlesnake

Carey strictp (tussock sedge) 

wamp mi 1 kweed) 

ush) 

(marsh fern) 

sf 1 verweed) , 

This type also represents a tran- 

sition into up1 and hardwood vegetatfon. 

The depth to the water table is normally 

0.5 to 1.0 m in this zone. Communities 

are mlxed shrubsr water-tolerant treesr 

and some understory plants typical of the 

meadows. Prominent plants include the 

following species: 

1- (eastern 

cottonwood 

PODU~Y+ tremu181das. (quaking aspen) 

Fraxiw Pennsvlrnnca (red ash) 

Gornus ~tolonifera (red osier 

dogwood 

Qxnuj racemosa (gray dogwood) 

oalmata (wlld grape) 

sp. (hawthorn). 

During low-water periods, these shrubs and 

swamp trees invade the sedge marshes. 

However, during high water condi tions, as 

fn the 1970~~ flooding and dle back of 

woody plants in the shrub zone are common. 

Stands of oak-ash hardwoods occur in 

the upper portion of Dickinson, Harsens, 

St. Anne, Squirrel, and Walpole is1 ands at 

elevations ranging from 1 t o 3 m above 

mean lake level. The major species of 

these stands are Eraxinus eann+~lvanica 

(red ash) and (swamp white 

oak), Assocfated hardwoods occurring In 

this type include the following species: 

American elm) 

The wetland plant communities of the 

St. Clair Delta occur in broad, arcuate 

zones which extend from the vlcinity of 

Algonac* Mlchfgan, southward into Lake St. 

Clair (Figure 311, In spfte of extensive 

cultural mod1 fications, sufficient natural 

wetland vegetation remains to reconstruct 

the communlty zonation, On the various 

islands of the delta, five major 

macrop hyte communities can be mapped. 

These communitfest from the driest to the 

wettest habitats, include: oak-ash 

hardwoods, dogwood meadow9 sedge marsh, 

cattail marsh, and bulrush marsh. Other 

fdentlfiable communities which are 1 imited 

In extent include: canal-pond-abandoned 

channel, lakeshore and bay bottom8 and 

reed grass communities. 

Lakeward of the hardwoods i s a 

complex of communfties referred to as the 

dogwood meadow. This vegetation zone 

occurs as a transftion zone between the 

hardwood forest and the wetter sedge 

marsh. It appears that periodic high lake 

level and human disturbance (such as 

burning and mowing) prevent woody species 

from dominating this zone. Major plant 

species herein are bluejoint grass 

(ww -1, soft rush 

(m gffusus) , gray dogwood, red os i er dogwood, and quakfng aspen. 

The sedge marsh forms a narrow zone 

between the dogwood meadow and the cattail 

marsh, as well as along eroding lake and 

bay shorel ines, particularly on the 

Michigan side of the delta. This 

community also occurs along lower dlstributary 

channels and on old shorel i nes. 

The sedge marsh is associated with the 

alkaline, inorganic soils which are either 

saturated or occasional ly flooded. 

However, permanent Inundation of the sedge 

tussocks results in dieback of the sedges. 

Major plant species are sedges of the 

genus Carex and bluejoint grass. Carex 

stricta is particularly abundant on 

Dickfnson Island, whereas L lacustri~ is 

common on Walpole Island, 

Located on the lakeward margin of the 

delta, where water depths exceed 15 to 30 

cm, is the broad cattail marsh zone. 

Zones of cattail also occur on inundated 

shoulders of the river channels, on lower 

ends of distributary channels, and on 

crevasses. Pure stands of cattail are 

assocfated with peaty or clayey sediments. 

The hybrid cattail (TyDha x glauc(a)r which 

attafns 2 to 3 m in height and grows in

ANCHOR BAY 

a OAK-ASH 

HARDWOOD 

DOGWOOD MEADOW 

0 DREDGED DISPOSAL 

0 CULTIVATED LAND 

Figure 31. Wetland plant communities of the St. Clair Delta (Raphael and Jaworski 

1982). 

53

circular colonlesP is the domlnant 

species. Some narrow-leaved (L, 

and broad-1 eaved cattall s 

1 can also be identified. 

The bulrush marsh i s found in 

abandoned river channels, in 1 arge open- 

water areas of the cattafl marsh* and on 

sand bars in low-wave energy areas of Lake 

St. Clair and Anchor Bay. Colonies of 

bul rush are associated with sandy 

substrates and water depth of 0.5 to 1,25 

m. The prfncipal species of the marsh is 

hard-stem bulrush. Buttonbush i s 

associated with the bulrush community in 

abandoned distributary channels where some 

water flow occurs. 

In canals, abandoned river channel sr 

marsh open1 ngs, and other stagnant water 

environments, a variety of floating and 

submersed aquatic communities occur. 

Water depths range from 0.24 to 1.0 m and 

water circulation is minimal except for 

wind-driven currents. Organic substrates 

are common along with turbidity due to 

humlc acids and suspended particulate 

organic matter. Whereas species diversity 

fs the ruler abundant plant species 

include duckweedsp pickerel weed, 

waterweed, water-mllfoll, and water 

smartweed. Other associated species are 

whfte water lily 

Lake and bay-bottom communities occur 

along low wave energy bottoms and 

nearshore anvi ronments such as Little 

Muscamoot Bay. Water depths generally 

range between 0.3 and 2.0 m, Major 

species in this zone include wild celery, 

muskgrass or stonewort (w sp,), and 

flexed naiad. Brown (1983) reported the 

dominance of along with pondweeds, 

Eurasian wat foil, waterweed* and 

varfous emergenks growfng about Sand 

Island In Anchor Bay. Because of higher 

wave energy, lake and bay-bottom 

communities are less widespread on the 

Canadian slde of the delta. In Lake St. 

Clair, Schloesser and Manny (1982) found 

few macrophy%esp which excludes 

, beyond 1,25 km from shore. 

Although conspicuous where pressnt, 

the feed grass community I s of 

insufficient dJstrlbutfon to map in the 

St. C1air Delta. Dense colonies of reed 

grass ( )I usually less 

than 0.5 hectares in extent* are located 

In scattered patches on the drowned 

shoulders and natural levees of North, 

Middle, and South channels. 

Wetland vegetation is not static from 

year to year (Section 4.3) . Dynamic 

change occurred In the plant cornrnunitles 

during the interlm 1964 and 1975 as water 

levels In Lake St. Clair fluctuated from 

very low levels to extreme high water 

conditions, Dicklnson Island, which has a 

full complement of wetland zonest and 

except for the dredged material disposed 

in the early 1970~~ had 1 i ttle development 

(Figures 32 and 33). In particular, large 

shifts occurred among the bulrushsubmersed 

commun ! ties and the emergent 

sedges and cattai 1 s. 

A literature search by Herdendorf et 

a1. (1981~) revealed no plant species in 

the St. Clatr Delta complex which appeared 

on Federal or State lists of endangered 

species. However, there Is a very small 

patch of the rare plant, wild rice 

) located on lower Hareover, 

Wagner (1977) 

reported the fo1 low1 ng threatened vascul ar 

plant species (Michigan) for Harsens 

Island: marsh sedge ( ~ i s t v l i s 

auberul.a) frtnged orchid 

(Habenarln 1, Hill's thi stle 

(CIrs1~ hi11 ii) , panrc grass (Panicurn 

JelbergjJ,), and sand grass (m 

ourouraa) * 

In 1976 and 1977, the U. S. Fish and 

Wildlife Servfce (Hfltunen 1980; Hfltunen 

and Manny 1982) conducted surveys of the 

macrozoobenthos of the lower St. Clafr 

River and Lake St. Clair. These surveys 

Jndicatad that the St. Clair Rfver and 

Delta support a dfverse and abundant 

macrozoobenthos. The number of taxa and 

densfty found fn the river system was

signJficantly greater than that found in 

Anchor Bay or the open portions of Lake 

St, Cl afr (Table 181, 

In the St. Clair River and Delta, 

oligochaete worms are the most abundant 

macrozoobenthos (55%). Sixteen species 

are commons with the tubif icid genera 

and 

d the naidld genera and 

dominating. Dfpteran 1 arvae 

are the second most abundant group (26%). 

By number, the chironomids compose 95% of 

the dipterans. Crustaceans are among the 

less abundant forms and are represented by 

the amphipods of the four genera, 

Gamm.ar_us* my !Zmgaux, and 

Ponto~oreia. The first three are 

permanent residents of the river wetlands; 

the fourth populates the deep waters of 

the Great Lakes and is probably transient 

from Lake Huron. The insect orders, 

Trichoptera and Ephemeroptera together 

compose on1 y 1% to 2% of the total number 

of macrobenthos. Caddisfl ies are not as 

numerous as the mayflies, but are 

represented by a greater number of genera. 

The mayfl fes are 1 argel y Nexaaen l a (90% 9. 

Although the density of mayflies and 

caddisfl ies Is low, these organ isms are a 

significant part of total fauna because 

the biomass of their populations is 

greater than that of other insect groups 

(Hi 1 tunen 1980). 

The richness of the benthic fauna of 

Lake St. Clair is evident in the high 

diversity of taxa present in the wetlands 

of Anchor Bay and elsewhere in the lake 

(Table 181. The moderate abundance of 

01 igochaetes as compared to other groups 

indicates the quality of the benthic 

environment is high. Hi ltunen and Manny 

(1982) found the mean percent composition 

of the pol lution-tolerant 01 igochaetes 

ranged from 25% in Anchor Bay to 49% 

elsewhere in Lake St. Clair. The values 

are far below the standard of 60% 

01 igochaetes in pol 1 uted environments 

proposed by Goodnfght and Whit1 ey (1960). 

The presence of pollution-intolerant 

Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera in 

substantial numbers (300/m2) at a 

nearshore station in Anchor Bay 3 supports 

the conclusion that the benthic 

environment of Lake St. Clalr is not 

severe1 y impai red by pollutjon (Hiltunen 

and Manny 1982). 

Macrozoobenthos constitutes an 

important source of food for fish and 

waterfowl in the Lake St. Clair-St. Claf r 

River wetlands. Price (19631, working In 

western Lake Erier showed that rainbow 

smel tr alewives~ glzzard shad, spottail 

shiners* trout-perch, yellow perch, 

channel catf ishr white bass, and walleye 

feed heavily at different life stages on 

01 igochaetesr leeches* cladocera, ostra- 

cods, amphlpodsr mayfl less caddisfl iesr 

rnf dges, snails, and bivalves. Although 

1 fttle published work exists on the food 

habits of St. Clair River fishes, the 

aforementioned fish species and the 

invertebrates that they feed upon are all 

abundant In Lake St. Clair and the St. 

Clair River (Hiltunen 1980). Dawson 

(1975) has observed that many of the 

macrozoobenthos reported for Anchor Bay 

are also important sources of food for 

waterfowl inhabiting that bay. A list of 

the important benthic invertebrate species 

of the St. Clai r River-Lake St. Cleir 

ecosystem is presented in Appendix F. 

Duri ng four different stages of the 

Pleistocene Epoch, which itself lasted 

from about one million to about ten 

thousand years agor the Lake St, Clair 

basin was covered with glacial ice. 

Within the glaciated region all benthic 

organ1 sms were destroyed, but each time 

the ice receded they reinvaded the 

previously ice-covered region. The 

Pleistocene mollusks of the intsrgl acial 

lakes and their paleoecology are well 

documented by La Rocque (1966). Many 

species, particularly the unioni d bivalves 

and the 1 arge prosobranch snails8 require 

a continuous waterway for mfgration. 

Glochidia may be carried over long 

distances while attached to their fish 

host. The rich molluscan fauna of the 

Lake St. Clair region was largely 

repopulated from the Ohfo-Mississippi 

system when glacf a1 meltwaters in this 

region flowed south. Additf onal ly, Clarke 

(1981) speculated that most small snails 

(pulmanates) and small clams (sphaeri fds) 

are carried about imbedded fn the feathers 

of water birds, in mud attacked to their 

feet or clamped to the appendages of 

1 argep flying aquatlc insects. Appendix G 

provides a lysting of the mollusks

0 5000 Feet 

t=TFL-r-e 7--rlf=74 

0 1500 Meters 

Figure 32. Wetland vegetation on Dickinson Island in 1964. 

L-3 Developed 

. . 

assoclated with the coas.ta1 wetlands and descended from land snails, must come to 

nearshore waters. Append fx H contains the surface periodf cally for air. 

Information on the hab 1 t at preference of 

these spectes. 

Most aquat tc snalls are vegetarians. 

The veneer of livfng algae which covers 

most submerged surfaces is their chief 

We1 ?-vegetated portions source of food, but dead plant and animal 

of unpolluted embayments* marshes, beach materjal is frequently ingested. 

ponds, and slugglsh tributary mouths are Dissolved oxygen is an Important Ifmiting 

the most productJve localities for factor; most gilled species require high 

freshwater snails Jn Lake St. Clafr. They concentratfons. wSth limpets such as 

Ilve an submerged vegetation* on rocks and mrissb being found only where the water 

on the bottom at the water's edge and out remains near saturation (Pennak 1978). 

to a depth of several meters. Two However, -1omp dec.ls_umr and Amnlico'ia 

subclasses, pro sob ranch^ and Pulmonata, l.imasa have been col lected in water with 

are we1 1 represented In Lake St. Clair less than 2 ppm oxygen (Harman 1974). The 

coastal marshes. The former group 1s concentration of dissolved sol Ids in Lake 

characterized by internal re y St. Clair, particular1 y bicarbonate 

gJlls (~tenidia)~ or as in , alkalinity at over 80 mg/l, provfdes 

external gflls, and an oP@rcuIum used to adequate essential materials for shell 

seal the shell aperaturee The latter construct;Son. Appendix W shows the 

group does not have gfllst but obtajns habitat preferences for the 47 species of 

oxygen through a riIung-like" pulmonary gastropods which have been reported for 

cavjty, Pul monate snaf 1 s p whlch have the coastal marshes and Rearshore waters. 

56

Shore1 ine 

- 0 5000 Feet 

D 

0 1500 Meters 

Bul rush-Submersed (sparse) 

Cattails (some die back) 

a Dogwood Meadow 

Woodlands 

0 Developed 

Disposal Site 

Figure 33. Wet1 and vegetation on Dicki nson Island in 1975. Previous shore1 ine refers 

to 1964 shore shown in Figure 32. 

Dl ec- The bivalved molluscan 

fauna of Lake St. Clair consists of three 

families. The majority of the species 

belong to the Unionidae (freshwater 

mussels or naiades) and Sphaerlidae 

(fingernail clams). The third family, 

Corbicul fdae (1 fttle basket clams), fs 

represented by an f ntroduced Asiatic 

species, Bivalves are most abundant 

nearshore* especially in water less than 2 

m deep, Stable gravel and sand substrates 

with a good current support the largest 

populations. Common1 y mussels inhabit 

substrates free of rooted vegetat i on, but 

there are numerous exceptionsv i nc1 udi ng 

Anodonta arandis and 

Stomach contents of unionid mussels 

are commonly mud, desmidsv dfatoms, and 

other unicellular a1 gae, protozoans* 

rotifers, flagellates, and detritus. The 

1 argest populations of mussels develop 

below areas where disintegration of rich 

vegetation is occurring (Churchill and 

Lewis 1924). 

The female pocket-book mussel 

(Wsflb ysntrfcc&a) is capable of 

extending and pulsatl ng the posterior edge 

of the mantle fn such a way that it 

resembles an injured mf nnow (Clarke 1981). 

This activity attracts fish such as 

bluegill, white crappje, smallmouth bass, 

and yellow perch. and Increases the 

opportunitf es for juvenile mussels 

(glochidia) to attach themelves to a fOsh 

after they have been ejected from the 

parent. The larvae are released by the 

parent when its light rsnsftlve spots are 

stimulated* for example, by the shadow of 

a passing fish. %veral unionid blvalves 

possess special mantle structures adapted 

to lure fDsh their vicinity. The 

glochidia of each species of freshwater 

mussel (correspo~ds Oa vel dgsr larvae af 

marine bivalves) musk attach to the gills

Table 18. Macroziobenthos of Lake St. Clair and the lower St. Clair River 

and Delta (1977). 

Major 

taxa ComposStion Density Composition Density Composition Density 

(% (no./m2) (8) ( no./mZ) (%I (no./m21 

Nemert i nea 

Nematoda 

Hi rund i nea 

01 igochaeta 

Polychaeta 

Amphipoda 

Isopoda 

Diptera 

Ephemeroptera 

Col eoptra 

Lepldoptera 

Trlchoptera 

Hydracarlna 

Gastropoda 

Pel ecypoda 

Totals 

a Data sources: Hiltunen (19801, Hiltunen and Manny (1982). 

b- Absent 

+ Present but not enumerated. 

and fins of a particular fish species or 

small group of species (Table 19) before 

further development can take place, Most 

glochidia never accomplish this, but those 

that do succeed remain attached for a few 

weeks as they metamorphose into tiny 

mussels. The young mussels then drop from 

the fish to take up an independent lSfe on 

the lake bottom, moving about and 

siphoning water for respiration and to 

obtain plankton as a source of 

nourishment, Appendix H indicates the 

habitat preferences of the 64 species of 

pelecypods which have been reported for 

coastal marshes and nearshore waters. 

3.4 FlSH 

Lake St. ClaJr, along with the St. 

Clair Rfver and the Detroit River* forms 

the connecting waterway between Lake Huron 

and Lake Erie, and is therefore an 

important fish conduit. The bays and wet- 

lands of Lake St. Clair, especially in the 

St. Clair Delta area at the mouth of the 

St, Cl air River, are important spawning 

and nursery areas for many species that 

support major fisheries in Lake St. Clair 

as well as Lake Huron and Lake Erie 

(Johnston 1977; Goodyear et al. 1982arb,c; 

Hatcher and Nester 1983). Studies 

conducted at a number of widely separated 

sltes in the Great Lakes indicate that the 

nearshore waters are spawning and nursery 

grounds for most fishes (Boreman 1976). 

More than 70 species of fish have been re- 

corded as residentsr or migrants, in Lake 

St. Clair; of these, 48 species are depen- 

dent on or known to use the marshes and 

shallow areas of the lake (Appendix I). 

Although many species of fish utilize 

coastal wet1 ands, comparative1 y few

Table 19. Lake St, Clair unionid bivalves and their glochidial host fishea 

Fish hostsb AM5 FUS QUA ELL ALA LAS SIM AN0 STR TRU PRO CAR LEP ACT LIG LAM 

Northern pfke X 

Carp X X 

Golden shiner X 

Creek chub X X 

White sucker X 

N hog sucker X 

N Sh redhorse X 

01 bull head X 

Ye bull head X 

Br bull head X 

Ch catfish X X 

Bk stickleback X 

White bass X X 

Rock bass X X X 

Gr sunfish X X X X 

Pumpkinseed X 

Or-sp sunfish X 

Bluegill X X X X 

Sm bass 

Lm bass X X X X 

Wh crappie X X X X X X X 

B1 crappie X X X X 

Iowa darter . X 

Johnny darter X X 

Ye perch X X 

Wa1 1 eye 

Freshwater drum X X X X 

Mottled sculpin X 

Mudpuppy X 

(amphibian) 

a~ata sources: Full er (1974) r Clarke (1981) 

b ~ - 

northern CAMB - ~1ic- 

Sh- shorthead FUS - Fusc;onafa flpyg 

B1-bl ack QUA - guduh and P, 

Ye-ye1 1 ow ELL - Elliat_io dllatata 

Br-brook ALA - 

Gr-green LAS - 

Or-sp-orange-spotted SIM - 

Sm-smal lmouth AN0 - 

Lm-1 argemouth STR - 

Wh-white TRU - 

PRO - 

CAR - 

LEP - 

ACT - 

LIG - 

LAM - 

C 

X X X 

X X 

X X X 

X X X 

X X

specles are strongly dependent an aquatic 

vegetation for spawntng, feeding8 or 

cover. The more common wetland-dependent 

species found fn Lake St, Clair and 

occurring frequently in the coastal 

wetl ands I nc1 ude 1 ongnos 

-1, bowfin (m 

pike (&&,& luciu@, gras 

-) , central mudmlnnow (Y-a 

m), golden shiner ( 

blacknose sh 

, blackchln shiner (&&roois 

mic shfner f 

1 sand shiner 

1 P lake chubsucker f 

, rock bass ( 

1, green sunf 

smallmouth bass 

generally associated with lotic waters and 

clean sand or gravel bottoms8 but they are 

also common in coastal lake waters, where 

they may util ize deep lacustrine coastal 

wetlands with sand or gravel bottoms. The 

bet.erod~ll)~ tadpole madtom (lig&dus 

-9, banded killifish (Egn&ulus 

green sunfish, rock bass, and smallmouth 

bass, are signif lcant game species. Among 

-haw) r pumpkinseed (l&pomi~ commercial and game species the walleye 

-1, Iowa darter ( F a - u ) r ($tizostedioo y. -1 and native or 

and brook stickleback (w inconslam). introduced salmonids apparently have 

Several other species are largely little direct association with coastal 

restricted to vegetated waters but are wetl ands, Other specles of recreational 

either uncommon or rare In Lake St. Clair. or commercial Importance, including ye1 low 

These are the spotted gar (- 

perch (parca -1, whlte bass 

$xuh$u), muskellunge (&&x -1 , (w -1, and freshwater drum 

pugnose shiner (- -1 and ( ~ i n o t u -1, r 

as we1 1 as 

pugnose minnow (m ~miliu). important forage species, including spot- 

However, a signif icant native, selfsustaining 

populatfon of muskellunge 

exists in Lake St. Clair (Haas 1978) and 

tail shiner (Notroo hudson_ius) and 

emerald shiner (- j&hgchm,)r 

are ubiquitous in the coastal zone of Lake 

spawns in the delta wetlands. Here, it is 

harvested by the Chippewa Indians on the 

Walpole Island Indian Reserve, Ontario. 

St. Clair and may be locally commmon in 

certain coastal wetl ands, 

Known ffsh spawning areas fn the St, 

Several fish species found in the Clair system have been documented by the 

Lake St. Clair basin are common to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Goodyear 

abundant in wetlands and adjacent waters, et a1. 1982arbrc1, including site specific 

although they are often associated with information on ffsh spawning and nursery 

non-vegetated habitats as well. 

-1, 

The gl z- 

goldfish 

areas for sturgeon (- ful\~asce&), 

alewife (w a s e u d o m ) , rainbow 

trout (SalmP -1, smelt (Osmru.s 

-1, white sucker (&&ostom~ 

-1, smallmouth bass, rock bass, 

yellaw bull head (m na$al f S) r 

walleye, and ye1 low perch. Goodyear and 

her colleagues summarized information on 

a17 past and presently known spawning 

areas in Lake St. Clair and the St. Clair 

River. These areas include the marshy and 

occur in quiet* low-gradient waters with 

bottoms of mud or clay. These species are 

general 1 y cover-oriented and may be common 

in sheltered riverine and l acustrine 

coastal wet1 ands along Lake St. Cl air. 

All except the gizzard shad, goldfish, 

bl untnose rnf nnon, and fathead minnow are 

significant game spectes, 

shallow bay areas along the shore1 ine and 

the wetlands of the delta. While the 

relationship of submersed aquatfc 

macrophytes in 1 ittoral waters to f i shery 

productf vi ty is not fully understood, 

prel lminary results of recent studies 

indicate that the submersed littoral 

macarophyte habitat is important to fish 

production in these waters (Schl oesser and 

Manny 1982). 

Walleye migrate through Lake St. 

Clair and use the channels of the St.

Clair Delta for spawning areas (Figure 

34). Tagging studles (Ferguson and Derksen 

1971; Wolfert st a1. 1975) indicated 

considerable movement of wall eye between 

Lake St, Clair and adjofning lakes Erie 

and Huron. Each lake has many known and 

some suspected spawni ng areas. Sf nce 

walleyes prefer to spawn close to their 

p 1 ace of or i g i n ( Eschmeyer 1950; Ferguson 

and Derksen 1971) there appears to be a 

number of semi-di screte stocks coexisting 

in these lakes. Tagging studies have not 

been sufficiently intense, however# to 

delimit these stocks within time and 

space. 

Yellow perch (w flayescm,sI is 

one of the most abundant fish in Lake St. 

Clalr and is known to spawn over aquatic 

vegetation in most inshore areas of the 

lake (Figure 351, but it is not known 

whether discrete stocks exist. Commercial 

fishermen belleve that Lake Huron fish can 

be identified by shape and color in Lake 

St. Clair. Similarlys Ohio fishermen 

postulate that a postspawning movement of 

large yellow perch comes into the western 

basin of Lake Eries presumably from Lake 

St. Clair. There is no evidence to 

support or reject these views, The scant 

tagging that has been carried out with 

yellow perch suggests that they are 

capable of moving between the lake systems 

(Johnston 1977). However, the maintenance 

of a number of age-groups in Lake St, 

Clair is in direct contrast to the 

situation in Lake Erie. 

Sturgeons a threatened species in 

Mfchigan and an endangered species in 

Ohlor are common in the deeper portions of 

the delta and channels. The major known 

spawning area for Lake St. Clair sturgeon 

is the North Channel of the St, Clalr 

River (Figure 36). These sturgeon migrate 

up to the North# South, and Middle 

channels to spawn at a site in the North 

Channel ; young-of-the-year sturgeon 

migrate from this spawning site to the 

marsh between Bouvier and Goose Baysv 

where they are found among the rushes 

(Goodyear at al. 1982a~b). The channels 

are also productive fishing areas for 

muskellunger smallmouth bass# 1 argemouth 

bass* freshwater drum* and northern pike, 

Flgures 37 and 38 depict spawning and 

nursery areas for several of these 

species. 

[ /fi\ WALLEYE 

Spawning area 

2.:. Nursery area 

Figure 34. Walleye spawning and nursery 

areas in the Detroft River and Lake St. 

Clair (Goodyear et al. 1982b,c), 

Lake St. CSair has been acclaimad one 

of the best fishing areas in Elarth America 

(Figure 39). This fishery is fostered by 

the marsh habitats which sustain species 

number and diversity, Sport fishing in 

wetlands exhfbits high sconomlc values, 

Jaworski and Raphael ( 1878) calcul atad the 

value of Mfchigan's coastal wetlands with

Detroit River 

~atrolt 

YELLOW PERCH 

Spawnlnp area 

AY. Nuraery area 

Figure 35. Yellow perch spawning and 

nursery areas in the Detroit River and 

Lake St. Clair (Goodyear et at, 1982b,c). 

respect to sport f l shfng at $ll6/wetland 

hectare/year, Lake St. Cl air exhibits the 

highest sport flshery value for Great 

lakes coastal wet1 ands because of its 

proximity to Detroit and the high qua1 i ty 

of angl i ng for wa1 l eyer smallmouth bass, 

and yellow perch (Table 20). Current 

estimates indicate that the St, Clafr 

Delta wetlands average 8 to 16 angler- 

day s/wetl and hectare/year (Werdendorf et 

a%. 1981~1. 

Major game fish species whfch furnish 

a recreational fishery in Bouvier Bay 

Wetland, known also as St. Johnts Marsh, 

include northern pike, 1 argemouth bass9 

ye1 low perch, bull heads* and various 

panflsh (Posplchal 1977). Recreational 

fishing is popular from shore sites as 

well as from boats In the shallow bays and 

channels of St. Johnrs Marsh, Within the 

St. Clair Flats State Wildlife Area on 

Dickinson Island and on Harsens Island, 

recreational fishing is popular for 

muskellunge, northern pike, wall eye, 

yellow perch, smallmouth bass, channel 

catfish (fctalurs punctatus), bull heads, 

bluegill other sunfishes, crappie, rock 

bass, white bass, lake sturgeonr coho 

salmon (Qncorhv- steel head 

trout and other species. The area is also 

a prolific producer of bait-minnows. Bow 

and arrow fishing for carp is a growing 

springtime activity, which generates 3,000 

to 5,000 angler-days of recreation per 

year (Pospichal 1977). Ice fishing 

(commonly by hook and line) Is also an 

active sport in January and February. 

Common species pursued include ye1 1 ow 

perch (85%) s sunfish (10%)r walleyer and 

northern pike. More than 95% of 

recreation ice fishing is for wetland 

associated species. 

Other than species composition and 

recreational use of the flsh fauna of Lake 

St. Clairr knowledge of the wetland 

fishery of Lake St, Clair Is lacking in 

several respects. Other important con- 

siderations include: 1) actual relation- 

ships of the species to the wetlands in 

terms of their utilization for spawning, 

nursery, and feeding areas, 2) fish 

community structure, 3 1 niche occupation, 

and 4) interspecific relationships within 

wetlands. The coastal wetlands of Lake 

St. ClaJr appear to support a mlxed fish 

fauna of warmwater and coolwater species. 

In addl ti on to wetland dependent speciesr 

many species common in other coastal 

habltats are also common in coastal 

wetlandsE dependlng on condition of 

shelter, bottom type, water clarity, water 

depth, and density of vegetation. Because 

of the obvious voids in fisheries 

information wfthin coastal wet1 ands, 

research in this area ranks high priority.

MlCHlGAN 

LAKE STURGEON 

Spawning area 

.* .+ Nursery area 

Middle Channel 

outh Channel 

Figure 36. Lake sturgeon spawning and nursery areas in the Detroit River, Lake St. 

Clair, and St. Clair River (Goodyear et a1 . 1982a,b,c). 

63

Figure 37. Rock bass, pumpkinseed/biuegill, largemouth bass, and smallmouth bass 

spawning and nursery areas in Lake St. Clair (Goodyear et al. 1982b).

FISHING AREAS 

f_l_j YELLOW PERCH 

SMALLMOUTH BASS 

MICHIGAG ONTARIO 

Figure 39. Sport fishing areas by species In the vicinity of St. Clair Delta wetlands 

(Lake St. Clair Advisary Committee 1975). 

33 AMPHlBlANS AND REPTILES 

The assemblage of amphlbfans and 

reptlles reported For the Lake St. ClaSr 

regfon can be divided into four major 

groups: 11 those specfes almost always 

found In wetlands and somehow dependent on 

wetland habitats to the degree that they 

are uncommon elsawherer 2) aquatic and 

semiaquatic species found in a wide range 

of law1 and wet habf tats, including coastal 

wetlands. 3) terrestrial species which 

enter water or wetlands only fnc5dentally 

or to breed* and 4) aquatfc and 

semiaquatic specles found prSmar4l y in 

upland or lotic waters and not common to 

coastal wetlands (Herdendorf st a7. 

1981~). The latter are not disussed in 

thls report. Four species recorded In the 

literature as occurring fn the coastal 

zone of Lake St. Clalr are largely wetland 

dependent: mudpuppy (i&&uxi 

JMGW 

red-spotted newt ( Y&k 

, eastern fox snake (w 

eastern massasauga 

1. The mudpuppy is 

largely an open lake species which is most 

sonmon around large 1 acustrine wetlands 

with submersed vegetation, whereas the 

red-spotted newt is found primarily in 

small ponds and sheltered palustrine or 

riverine wetlands. The eastern fox snake 

is common in large coastal emergent-type

Table 20. Average annual number of sport fish takenafrom Michigan waters of 

Lake St. Clai r and connecting waterways (1975-1979). 

Species Lake St. Clair Detroi t Total 

St. Clafr River River individuals 

Lake trout 

Rai nbow/steel head 

Brown trout 

Coho salmon 

Chi nook salmon 

Wal leye/sauger 

Bass 

Northern pike/musky 

Yellow perch 

Sunf ish/bluegill 

Crappie/white bass 

Bull head/catf ish 

Rock bass 

Sucker 

Whitefish/cisco 

Other 

Angler days 1,079,031 320,701 4529376 lr 852,108 

Fishermen 100,622 32,523 41,674 174s 819 

a Data source: Michigan Department of Natural Resources (unpublished data). 

wetlands, but the rarer eastern massasauga 

is primarily restricted to swamp forest 

and bogs. 

Amphibians found in a wide range of 

lowland wet or aquatic habitats in the 

Lake St. Clafr coastal zone include the 

blue-spotted salamander (&nbvstoma 1 atec a), spotted salamander ( A m 

n@&ulatu!q), four-toed salamander (Hemi- 

Utv1 i -1, eastern tiger sa1 a- 

mander t,4mbvsta =), gray treefrog 

(fjYLB yersIcQ&x), northern spring peeper 

(liyljl ~ ruci fer) western chorus frog 

(pseudacris triseriata), Blanchardqs 

crfcket frog C-5 -1 r 

bullfrog (m -1, green frog 

(m m1 ano-I, pickerel frog 

(Baas pa1 ustris) , and northern leopard 

frog (m ploiens). The salamanders may 

often occur in moist terrestrial habitats, 

but the1 r larvae are always aquatjc. 

Aquatic and seml-aquatic reptiles which 

probably occur in Lake St. Clair coastal 

wetlands or their border lands include the 

northern ringneck snake (Digdoahfs ~unctatlls 

edwar_dsl), eastern milk snake 

(mm -1 northern 

water snake (&&& SL northern 

brown snake (Storerb L 1, northern 

red-bellied snake (sore* p, ~sg@ito - 

1par:ulatg), Butlerts garter snake (m 

eastern gar 

Several amphfblans of the Lake St. 

Clafr coastal zone are largely terres- 

trial, although they are found in lowland 

areas and are dependent on water for 

breeding. Consequent1 y the adults ar 

l arvae may occur in coastal wetlands or

their margfns at least seasonal 1 y. These 

specles 1 nclude the red-backed salamander 

)C the Amerfcan 

d the wood frog 

trial reptf le5 

may occur in the margins of Lake St. Clair 

coastal wetlands or incidentally in the 

wetlands themselves 

smooth green snak 

m ) r blue racer 

1, and black rat snake ( 

I. 

Although few species of reptiles and 

amphibians are absolutely dependent on the 

coastal wetlands of Lake St. Clair for 

habitat, the continued abundance of most 

species in the coastal tone is probably 

dependent on the presence of extensive 

coastal wet? ands. The relatively un- 

disturbed coastal hab 'f t at a1 ong most of 

the St. Clair Delta probably supports a 

present herpetofauna similar to that of 

pre-settl ement ti mesr both in composition 

and relatf ve abundance of specles. 

Appendix J Ilsts the specles known or 

presumed to occur in or adjacent to the 

coastal wetlands; because of the scarcity 

of published records, this list is 

somewhat specul atlve. 

species 1s wetland-dependent and was once 

common and restricted to coastal emergent 

wetlands and wetland margins of western 

Lake Erie and the coast of Lake St. Cl air. 

The black rat snake is also listed as 

threatened In Michfgan and may occur fn 

drier margins af Lake St, Clafr coastal 

wetlands. The eastern massasauga is a 

candidate for Federal listing on the 

threat.ened/endangered speci es 1 ist. The 

following species, considered rare in 

Michigan, may also occur in these coastal 

wetlands: eastern spiny Softshellr spotted 

turtle ( 18 and fourtoed 

salamander, 

The extensive wetlands of the St. 

Clair Delta are utilfzed for nesting and 

during migration by waterfowl wading 

birds, gulls, terns, and shorebirds. 

Appendix K lists the Important bird 

species which occur in the vicinity of the 

Lake St. Clair wetlands. Waterfowl 

commonly observed in the wetlands include 

mallard (BagS whvn-), black duck 

(81195 -1, blue-wlnged teal (m 

$i%cocs). wood duck (&1X -1, American 

wigeon (m -18 and northern 

shoveler (u ~lvpeata) . In addi tion, 

canvasback (m val f +=i-1 scaup 

(m spp.1, ruddy duck (Ilxylrra 

&gnat and hooded merganser 

The presence of water, food, and 

cover, and the relative isolation from the 

cultural development which occurs around 

most other bodies of water are among the 

factors that contribute to the importance 

of wetlands in maintaining the coastal 

zone herpetof auna. The recreational or 

(w ~ 1 1 a t u s utilize ) the 

habitat for nesting . Several endangered 

commerci a1 importance of the coastal and threatened species (Michigan) of birds 

herpetofauna is unknown8 but the bullfrog, have been reported In the coastal zone. 

green frog* eastern spiny softshell, and 

snapping turtle are edible species which 

may be harvested. In addition, reptiles 

Osprey (Pandi_nn ha1 iaet~~5.1 and the Caspian 

tern (Sterna -1 have been reported in 

scattered localities along the shore1 I ne. 

and amphi bians such as the northern water Nest1 ng colonies of ye1 law-headed 

snake and the snapping turtle, serve as 

food sources for many species of fish, 

birds, and mammals, or may themselves be 

blackbird ( 18 

black tern (m -1, and common 

tern (Sf;arna hi run&? have been observed 

predators of economf tally important, fish in several wetlands. The common tern is 

and wild1 ife. Beyond ~m3ra1 background presently on the Michigan endangered 

on the occurrence and relative abundance 

of reptiles and amphibians in the coastal 

specles list. 

wetlands* little publfshed information 

exists pertaining to papu1atlon8 community 

structurer and dynamics of the 

Waterfowl are a most Important 

component of the bIotic envf ronment. The 

importance of the Lake St. Clair wetlands 

herpetof auna, 

to ducks, geese, and other waterfowl is 

The eastern Cox snake is listed as 

threatened by +Re State of Michtgan, This 

based primarily on the location of these 

wetlands in relation to waterfowl flyways, 

the productivity (in terms of waterfowl

foods) of the wetlandso and the declfne of 

other coastal wetland systems. Except for 

that of mallard, black duck and blue- 

winged teal, nesting appears to be a 

secondary use of these wetlands with 

feeding and resting during migratlon bejng 

of primary importance. 

Based on waterfowl feeding and 

resting use durfng migratfon as well as on 

duck harvest and production of young, the 

wetlands and associated open waters of 

Lake St. Clair may be the most important 

wetland system in the Great Lakes region 

with the possible exception of Long Point 

in Lake Erie. With reference to the Great 

Lakes-Chesapeake Bay migration torrider* 

the principal flight paths of the tundra 

swan, formerly whist1 ing swan, (CYQILUS 

-1. canvasback, bufflehead 

( -1, and ruddy duck in- 

clude a resting stopover fn Lake St. Clair 

(Bell rose 1976). In reference to water- 

fowl harvesting in Michigan, St. Clai r 

County, which includes most of the wetland 

on the American side of Lake St. Clafr, is 

the leading harvest county (Carney et a1 . 

1975). Production data for the Bouvier 

Bay (including St. John" Marsh) and 

Harsens Is1 and wetlands reveal an average 

of 240 young produced per km2 EHerdendorf 

et al. 1981~). 

Important 1 lterature sources re- 

garding the waterfowl use of the wetlands 

are Jaworski and Raphael (1978) as we11 as 

Herdendorf et al. (1981~). The latter 

source is especially important in regard 

to the Bouvier Bay, Dickinson Island, and 

Harsens Island wetlands. The St. Clair 

Flats State Game Area comprises the lower 

portions of Harsens Island and Dickinson 

Island, plus the two former areas of the 

Lake St. Clair National Wfldllfe Refuge, 

one at the mouth of North Channel in 

Anchor Bay, and another in between the end 

of Middle Channel and Channel A Bout Rond. 

In Ontario, the Canadian Wildl ife 

Service (Dennis and Chandler 1974, Dennis 

et a1. 1981) have documented the util ity 

of wetlands with regard to waterfowl. In 

terms of total use durlng migration, the 

Lake St. Clair wetlands rank second to 

Long Point (Lake Erie), Ontario. The 

coastal marshes are presently the most 

important staging areas in southern 

Ontario for mallard, black duck, Canada 

1, and tundra 

ons of .the North 

asback* redhead 

1, and tundra swan also 

util ize the Lake St. Claf r marshes during 

migratlon staging periods. 

Walpole Island possesses extensive 

marshes, particularly at its southern end 

where the shore fronts on Lake St. Cl ai r. 

There are flve major islands that make up 

the 24,000-hectare Wal pole Is1 and Indi an 

Reserve. Here many nesting species of 

birds rare in both the region and Ontario 

as a whole have been observed, including 

canvasback, redhead, ruddy duck, northern 

harrier (Circus little gull 

(m -1 , Forsterts tern (w 

-1, and king rail (&Uui 3 

(Goodwin 19821, Wooded areas e 

island include sections of oak savannah 

which accommodate a rookery of blackcrowned 

night-herons ) 

and great egrets (- allus). 

As indicated In Table 21, a diversity 

of waterfowl rely on the St. Clair Delta 

wetlands. Waterfonl use during migration 

is more Important than use of these 

wet1 ands for breeding purposes. Moreover, 

ducks are much more numerous than are 

swans and geese. With regard t o dabbling 

ducks, the most abundant migrants include: 

mallard, black duck, American wigeon as 

we1 1 as pintail (&as 

teal, and green-winged 

Among the more abundant migrant diving 

ducks are canvasback, great6 

(&j&ygj -1, lesser scaup 

ilfflnfs) * 11 a 

goldeneye ( and buffle- 

head. 

The use of the St. Clair Delta 

wetlands for feeding by both dabbling and 

diving ducks fs of prime importance (Table 

22). Plant foods from shallon marshes and 

waste gralns from nearby agricultural 

fields are especially important in the 

diet of dabbl ing ducks, parti cul arly 

mallards and black ducks as well as Canada 

geese, whereas submersed aquatic plants 

and thei r associated i nrertebrate fauna 

constitute important fwd items far diving 

ducks such as canvasback, redhead* and 

scaup (Jaworski and Raphael 1978). Corn

Table p. 

1977). 

Birds observed in St. Clair Delta wetlands (1975- 

Species Bouvi er Dickinson Harsens 

~ayb Is1 and Is1 and 

Tundra swan 

Canada goose 

Snow goose 

Ma1 1 ard 

Black duck 

Gadwall 

Pintail 

Amerlcan wigeon 

Green-wi nged teal 

Bl us-w i nged teal 

Northern shoveler 

Wood duck 

Red head 

Ring-necked duck 

Canvasback 

Greater and lesser scaups 

Common go1 deneye 

Buff 1 ehead 

Ruddy duck 

Hooded and comon mergansers 

Horned grebe 

Piad-bi 1 led grebe 

Be1 ted kingf lsher 

Sedge and marsh wrens 

Great blue heron 

Green-backed heron 

Great and cattle egrets 

Black-crowned night-heron 

American and least bitterns 

K4ng and Virginia rails 

Sora 

Common moorhen 

Amerfcan coot 

Herring gull 

Ring-btlled gull 

ForsPerss and black terns 

Comon tern 

Eastern meadow1 ark 

Ye1 1 ow-headed blackbird 

Red-w i nged bl ackbi rd 

Common snipe 

American woodcock 

cooperfs hawk 

Red-tat led hawk 

Rough-1 egged hawk 

Northern harri er 

'~ata source: Herdendorf at a1. ( 1981~1. 

b~ote: Bouvier Bay survey included St. John's Marsh; other 

surveys less i ntense,

- - - 

Summer Fa1 1 Spring 

Adult Young Total Duration Total Duration 

'$able 22. Productivity and seasonal abundance of watesfowl in Bouvier 

Bay marshes and Harsens Island interior wetlands (1974). 

Area and pai rs 

waterfowl ( no/ km2 pop. (wks) pop. (wks) 

Dabbl lng ducks 35 222 41800 4-10 4r900 3-4 

Divers 2 14 200 - 5~000 3-4 

Geese 1 4 0 0 0 0 

Swans 0 0 0 0 0 0 

-- 

Total 38 240 5 r 000 

Dabblfng ducks 33 210 1,400 4-10 1~500 4-5 

Divers 4 22 100 10 2,400 4-5 

Geese 1 5 - - - - 

Swans 38 237 lr500 - 3 * 900 - 

-- 

Total 76 474 3 r 000 

a~ata sources: Herdendorf et al. (1981c)r Michigan Department of Natural 

Resources (unpubl lshed data), 

and other grains grown on the Harsens 

Island State Game Area and on the upland 

portions of the Canadian side of the delta 

attract dabbl ing ducks and Canada geese. 

In contrast* submersed aquatic plants i n 

the diet of diving ducks include wild 

celery, pondneeds, and waterweed. 

The significance of the plant and 

invertebrate food base of the St, Clair 

Delta wetl ands in relation to waterfowl 

can not be overstated. An important study 

by Dawson (1975) of Anchor Bay in northern 

Lake St. Clair, indfcates that only a 

small percentage of the preferred aquatic 

pl ants and invertebrates avail able to 

migrating waterfowl fn Lake St. Claf r 

wetlands are currently being utilized. 

Waterfowl food supplies are especially 

important during sprf ng migration because 

preferred foods are general 1 y less 

abundant and breeding females must arrive 

in good condition on the breedfng grounds. 

Thus the spring migration is less 

restricted to specific feeding areas and 

waterfowl can be observed in lakes and 

wetlands whSch they did not frequent in 

the fall. For exampf er note in Table 22 

that divfng ducks are more numerous Jn the 

relatively shallow Bouvfer Bay and Harsens 

Island wetlands in sprfng than in the fall 

migration season. Waterfowl migratjon is 

discussed in more detail in Sectton 4.3. 

With regard to production of 

waterfowl In the wetlands along take St. 

Clair, these wetlands appear to be of 

moderate importance on1 y. Some pre- 

lfmlnary data collected by JaworskS and 

Raphael (1978) suggested that Michigan's 

coastal wetl ands have a duck nesting 

density of 32 breedjng pafrs per km2 and 

that goose and swan nestlng was 

Insfqniffcant, Data reveal that the pairs

of dabbling ducks slfghtly exceed this 

prel iminary average, but that paf rs of 

diving ducks were much less than the man 

(Table 22) . Eterdendorf et al. (1981~1 

reported that ma1 1 ard, blue-winged teal# 

and cinnamon teal are the most common 

nesters in the delta wetlands along wlth 

smaller numbers of black duck, wood duck, 

pintall, redhead, and ruddy duck. Small 

but signi f icant numbers of the re1 at1 vel y 

rare redhead duck nest in St. Johnrs 

Marsh, on lower Harsens Island* and along 

coastal Walpole Island. Both mallard and 

blue-winged teal are cl assif fed as meadow 

nesters, but the mal 1 ard exhibits great 

versatility In regard to selection of 

potential nesting sites. 

Lake St. Clair has long been renowned 

as an excel? ent duck huntfng area. 

Hunting pressure from both the land and 

water is common on the American and 

Canadlan sides of the delta. The main 

species harvested in these coastal 

wetlands are the mallard, along with 

lesser numbers of black duck, pintail, and 

teal (Table 23) . However, In open-water 

areas of Lake St. Clair, where hunting 

from boats and floating blinds prevails* 

the majorfty of the ducks harvested are 

divers# i.e., scaup and the now restricted 

canvasback and redhead, rather than 

dabbling ducks. 

The type of shores range from sandy 

beaches to mudflats. The beaches attract 

small flocks of shorebirds In migration. 

Those species commonly seen feeding are 

bfrds, such as herons and egrets, gather 

to feed in the mud flats near larger 

streams. 

Nesting species in the St. Clair 

Flats (Figure 409 include such specIes as 

Table 23. Species composition of ducks 

harvested In the St., Clair Flats State 

Game Area (1974-1975). 

Annual 

Spechs harvest Percent 

(avge of total 

individ.) 

Ma1 1 ard, 4,362 

including domestic 

Black duck and hybrids 498 

Plntail 242 

Green-w 1 nged teal 173 

American w l geon 13 8 

Ri ng-necked duck 78 

Bl ue-w i nged teal 7 1 

Scaup 34 

Gadwall 30 

Wood duck 28 

Merganser 19 

Buf fl ehead 18 

Northern shoveler 10 

Common go1 deneye 9 

Redhead 4 

Ruddy duck 3 

Oldsquaw 0 

Canvasback 0 

Scoter 0 

- - 

TOTAL 5,717 100.00 

a~ata source: Jaworski and Raphael (1978). 

Lake St. Clair wetlands support the 

following nesting waterbirds In wooded 

habitats: great blue heron ( 

-1, black-crowned night-h 

green-backed heron (- .-US), 

great egret, American woodcock (3~01 

OD= 

-1, be1 sher (Cerv1 Q D 

bald eagle Jeuc-1, and 

osprey. 

Investigations in 1954 of a rookery 

on Dfcki nson Is1 and found approximately 

350 pairs of great blue herons and 20 

pairs of black-crowned night-herons a1 ong 

with seven pafrs of great egrets. TheIr 

numbers have declined over the past three 

decades. Nearby Harsens Island supports a 

rookery of bl ack-crowned night-herons 

(U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1974). 

S 

Herons are a solitary bl ).d except 

when breeding. They are colonfd nesters

Figure 40. Least bittern (Ixobr chus 

exilis) with young in broad-leaved __Y-r catta 1 

(Typha latifolia) nest (Michigan Department 

of Natural Resources). 

who requlre a habitat with an abundance of 

twigs and sticks for nest-building. These 

long-legged waders prefer a diet of f ishp 

but w i l l also feed on insectsr 

crustaceans, amphibians, reptiles, 

mo1 lusca, and rodents (Figure 41). They 

are strong fliers and are known to fly 

great distances in search of food, For 

example in Lake Erie, herons fly 15 km 

from their rookery on West Sister Island 

to feed fn the marshes at Locust Point on 

the Ohio mainland (Meeks and Hoffman 

1980). 

Wading birds usually forage in the 

shore1 i nes of the tributary streams and 

rfthin the coastal marshes of the St. 

Clatr Delta. Their diet consists of fish 

for the most part, but crayfish and 

fnsects are also consumed in significant 

quantities. 

Short-eared owls (m 

red-tai 1 ed, 

1 have been 

reported fn St, John's Marsh in Bouvier 

Bay (Pospichal 1977). Bald eagle and 

osprey nest in wooded habitats assxiated 

with delta wetlands (Kelley et a1. 19639. 

3.7 MAMMALS 

The wetlands of Lake St. Clair are 

important habitat for several species of 

mammals (Appendix L). Wetlands are 

essential for muskrat (I)nda.tra gjhethi-1 

and mink (w -1. The Virginia 

opossum (U~&J&IS 1, striped 

skunk (w whiti,~)~ and red fox 

(m u) 

are commonly observed in 

the wetlands. Furbearers are a valuable 

resource fn many coastal wetlands* 

particularly those associated with the 

Lake St. Clair Delta, including St. John's 

Marsh (a portion of Bouvier Bay wetlands), 

Dickinson Island* Harsens Island* Hal pole 

Is1 and, and Mitchell Bay wetlands. 

Fifteen species of mammals have been 

reported from the delta fslands (Hayes 

1964, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 19749~ 

ossum, eastern 

f10ridanus)~ Eur 

Limited deer and upland game hunting is 

permltted on the delta i slands. 

The pri nci pal mmal inhabit+ ng Lake 

St. Claf r wetlands in terms of occurrence 

and economf c value is the muskrat. Based 

on fts feeding and lodging habitsf the 

density of muskrats per unit of coastal 

wetland can be estimated, Jaworski and 

Raphael ( 19781 determfnsd that Macomb

DEA'D PLANTS AND 

MINERAL NUTRIENTS 

Figure 41. Food chain of the great blue heron (Ardea herodias) in Lake 

St. Clair (U.S. Amy Corps of Engineers 1974).

County* Michigan wetlands have sustained 

yield of 16 muskratsfhectare. This is a 

relatively high yfeld for coastal wetlands 

which usually range from 5 to 15/hectare. 

The food supply of these omnivorous 

herbivores may be diverse, especi a1 1 y 

durf ng periods of stress. Baumgartner 

(1942) has identified 34 food items for 

muskrats in Michigan. The preferred food 

is cattail, bulrush, and bluejoint grass. 

These emergent plants are common in Lake 

St. Clair wet1 ands, 

Little site specific research has 

been conducted on Lake St. Clair muskrats, 

but work done on this species in western 

Lake Erie can provide some insight. 

Several structures observed In Lake Erie 

coastal marshes are associated with the 

activity of muskrats (Bednarik 1956). The 

most noticeable structure 1s the muskrat 

"house", a dome-shaped pile of emergent 

vegetation, primarily cattail (Figure 42). 

The average house varies in slze from 1 to 2.5 rn In diameter at the base and from 0.7 

to 3 m in height. They are located in 

stands of emergent vegetation or along the 

periphery of such stands. They are often 

constructed on protuberances in the marsh 

bottom, util izing plants in the Immedi ate 

area. The majority of houses are 

constructed during the fall, chiefly from 

October to November. Building activity 

occurs mainly during perlods of darkness. 

Typical densities of active muskrat houses 

in Sandusky Bay marshes average 4/hectare. 

Small houses have one living chamber and 

larger houses have two or three lfvfng 

chambers above the water 1 ine. The 1 iving 

Figure 42. Muskrat "houses" in a well- 

populated section of Magee Marsh, western 

Lake Erie, Ohio (Bednarik 1956). 

chamber is about 35 to 50 cm in height and 

is formed by the muskrat chewing out the 

vegetation. Most houses have two 

underwater exits or plunge holes. 

Other structures made by muskrats are 

associated with feeding activity. Rafts 

are constructed from stems of plants piled 

in a circular fashion to serve as a 

feed1 ng platform. "Feeding bogsw are 

covered, floating platforms which are 

smaller in dimensions than the muskrat 

house and are no higher than 40 cm, 

averaging 60 cm in diameter. These 

structures are usual 1y located some 

distance from the larger muskrat house and 

serve as protected feeding sites. Itpush- 

upsn are built only in the winter and are 

small, hollowr dome-shaped shells of 

submergent vegetatton over a plunge hole 

in the ice. These protected plunge holes 

allow the muskrat to extend the area over 

which it can forage since It can travel 

greater dfstances under the ice. 

The reproductive cycle of the muskrat 

on Sandusky Bay of Lake Erie has been 

documented by Bednari k (1956) and Donohoe 

(1966). Reproductive activity begins in 

January and ends In September, with the 

greatest acti vl ty occurring I n February 

and March. The time of ff rst mating is 

determined in part by the time of ice 

breakup. The gestation period varies f ram 

20 to 28 days. Females usually have two 

1 itters of young per season although some 

may have three litters. Placental scar 

counts indicate that the mean number of 

young per 1 itter Is l l r but Bednarik 

concluded that at the time of birth, the 

average Iltter size is eight. Sandusky 

Bay has habitats similar to those of Lake 

St. Clair and Is located on the south 

shore of Lake Erie approximately 100 km 

southeast of Detroit. 

Predation by mink occurs but is not 

an important influence on the muskrat 

population because of the low numbers of 

mink in the marshes. Predation on juv- 

enlle muskrats by raccoons and Norway rats 

occurs In early summer and is not an 

Important mortal f t y factor. Some mortal - 

fty is attributed to hemorrhagic or 

"Erringtonts" disease, This disease can 

cause signif icant fluctuatjons in the 

muskrat populatfsns 3n western Lake Erie 

marshes (Bednarik 19561 and presumably 

also in lake St. CPaSr marshes,

The annual harvest of muskrat in the 

Michigan countfes and Ontario areas 

borderfng Lake St, Clair is glven in Table 

24. The harvest from Mlchigan and Ontario 

marshes can exceed 100,000 individuals per 

year. With a pelt plus carcass price of 

approximately $10.00 per animals muskrat 

trapping Is a million dollar a year 

Industry in the Lake St. Clair region, 

Jaworskl and Raphael (1978) observed that 

furs from the coastal wetlands are of high 

quality8 hence the fur prices in these 

areas are usually high. The recent 

decline In Ontario production is 

attributed to roughly a 30% decline in 

- 

Table 24. Muskrat harvest in Michigan and 

Ontario bordering Ldke St. Clair and 

connect1 ng waterways. 

Year St. Clair Macomb Wayne Total 

1965 2,675 1,272 112 4,059 

1966 15,515 4,084 2,700 22.299 

1967 24,335 2,658 392 27,385 

1968 13,395 5,469 1,006 19.870 

1969 

- 

16,063 6,012 1,484 23,559 

1970 30,350 3,479 1,149 34,978 

Annual 

mean 17,055 3,829 1,141 22,025 

Year Dover Twnshp. Walpole Is. Total 

1974 23,512 67 880 91,392 

1975 22,591 73 r 796 96,387 

1976 21,174 31,212 52,386 

1977 13 r 174 14,790 31,964 

1978 11,658 15,385 27 1 043 

1979 12,715 37,340 50,055 

1980 15,138 26,891 42 029 

1981 

1982 

8,886 

9,215 

26,363 

29,780 

35t249 

38,995 

Annual 

~ a r 15,785 ~ 

35,937 51,722 

a Data sources: Jaworski and Raphael (19781 

and George Ducknorth, Ontar30 Ministry of 

Natural Resources (pers, cm. ) . 

wetland area during the same period IG. 

Duckworthv Ontarlo Ministry of Natural 

Resources; pers. corn. 

Again* little direct information is 

available on the ecology of raccoons in 

Lake St. Clair wetlands# but western Lake 

Erie studies can be helpful in 

understanding this ant ma1 . Several as- 

pects of the life history of the raccoon 

in Sandusky Bay marshes were investigated 

by a trapping and telemetry study (Urban 

1968, 19701, The density of the raccoon 

population was estimated to be 17/km2. 

The juvenile to adult female ratio was 

1.2xl.0, indfcating a moderate 

productivity for the raccoon population. 

The mean weights of both adults and 

juveni 1es increased from sprlng untll 

early winter and then decreased over the 

winter. 

The telemetry portion of the study 

provided information on raccoon movements, 

home ranger and denning. General lyr raccoons 

spend the daytime period in or near 

dens. The amount of nocturnal movement is 

related to the size of the home range, 

Raccoons w i th 1 arger home ranges move 

greater distances. Raccoons move at a 

mean rate of 162 m/hr. Marshland f s the 

major habitat type encompassed in an 

average night of travel and the habitat 

type in which raccoons spend the most 

time. Raccoons spend approximately 73% of 

the time in the vicinity of shallow water 

(Figure 43). Male juvenile raccoons 

disperse from the marsh in the fall. 

Raccoons do not appear to search out 

waterfowl nests, since little change 

occurs in their movement patterns when 

waterfowl nesting is initiated. Dikes 

receive high usage in proportion to the 

amount of area they represent in the 

marsh. Movements of female raccoons 

encompass more wooded area per night than 

the male raccoons. Home range for the 

average raccoon is 51 hectares in size. 

Food items of raccoons in Sandusky 

Bay marshes (Lake Erie) include muskrat, 

crayf ishr fish, duck eggs, p1 ant materf a? 

seeds, and birds (Andrews 1952~ Bednarik 

1956, Urban 1968). Fish, crayfish, and 

plant material were the chlef food items

In all seasons. Muskrat fur was found in 

only 8% of raccoon scats collected year 

round, but In 47% of scats collected in 

the sprfng. Andrews (1952) noted that 

chln~ney crayfish 1 Is a 

favorite food of raccoons in the summer, 

Raccoons were responsible for the 

termlnat-lon of 39% of the waterfowl nests 

built on the Sandusky Bay dikes in 1967 

and 1968 (Urban 1970). 

Raccoons are the most signlf icant 

furbearer In the Lake St, Clair wetlands 

Sn terms of pelt value of the total 

harvest. The density of raccoons in Lake 

St. Clair wetlands has been estimated at 

about 0.3jhectare by Jaworskl and Raphael 

Figure 43. Raccoon (Procyon lotor), a (1978) They fndlcate a value per pelt 

common predator of duck nests in Lake St. PIUS carcass of about $40.00 for the early 

Clair wetlands. to middle 1970s. Therefore, the 38,000 

hectares of wetlands wfthfn the study area 

has a total raccoon value of about 

$456 r 000.

4.1 ORIGIN AND EVOLUTlOM OF LAKE ST. 

CLAlR WETLANDS 

The relationship of water levels, 

topography and the geomorphic devel opment 

of the Lake St. Clair coastal zone is 

significant to b fogeographlcal development 

and maintenance of the wetlands and 

their areal development. This is particularly 

true for the St. Clair Deltar which 

is constantly changing its morphology. 

Because of shifting channels, variable 

flow regimes, and sedimentatfon, the 

geological nature, (and hence the 

b~ologlcal characteristic of the 1 f ttoral 

zone and wetlands) has not been constant. 

Sfnce not a11 rivers which debouch 

into a basin deposft deltas, the marine 

processes are slgniffcant. A delta is not 

solely a praduct of river deposition. 

Basicall yp del taf c 1 andforms are a product 

of both river and marine processes. The 

rfver contributes the sediments to the 

receiving bas1 n. Whether the sediments 

accumulate in the mouth is dependent upon 

the marine processes such as wave action 

and long-shore currents? and the geo- 

morphlc character of the submarf ne topo- 

graphy. If there is a dominance of the 

marine process the sediments may be trans- 

ported down coast and a delta may not be 

extensive, Conversely? a rlver domlnated 

system contributing an excess of sediment 

coupled wjth a low wave climate w i l l 

prsmote deltaic development. 

Several of our concepts of delta 

development have been obtained from the 

M$ssiss$ppi deltafc plain, Because of off 

and gas exploratfan, rfver and marine 

CQmm63rCer and f he extensive wet1 ands in 

the arear the Missfssippi River Delta has 

been extensive1 y studied geologicall yr 

blologica~lyr and geographically. It 

CHAPTER 4, ECOLOGllCAL PROCESSES 

serves as a model by which other marine 

and 1 acustrjne deltas are compared. 

Traditlonally deltas have been 

classified on the basis of their 

morphology and descriptive terms such as 

arcuate, b i rd-foot, and cuspate have been 

applied to the various delta shapes. 

Using this classification the St. Clair? 

like the Misslssippi Delta may be 

described as bird-foot, It is generally 

assumed that a given set of processes is 

responsible for each deltaic morphology. 

Although* morphological sf mil aritles are 

evident, significant differences also 

occur (Table 25). 

A unfque aspect of a delta's 

geomorphology is related to its changfng 

base levels. The base level of all marine 

deltas appears to have been eustatf call y 

stable over the past 4*000 years. In the 

Misslssippi Delta? because of the stable 

sea level? the ancestral streams deposited 

a serles of delta lobes along the 

Louisiana coast. A t Lake St. Clalr, 

changing base levels have produced two 

distinct deltas at different levels, the 

premodern and the modern. Examples of 

this base level change are apparently rare 

with regard to deltaic deposition. 

Marine deltas are often characterized 

by subsidence due to sediment loading. 

Geosyncl i nal downwarping and sediment 

compaction in response to sediment ac- 

cumulation in the Mississippi Delta has 

allowed up to 122 m of deltaic deposits to 

accumulate since the termination of the 

Late Wisconsin glacial ice (Morgan 1970). 

With continued sedimentation and 

subsidence, the shtftjng delta lobes 

overlapped# burying older deltaic 

envf ronments. Thereforer the traditional 

sedimentologlcal units, top-setr fore-set,

Table 25. Factors influencing lake and marine delta morphology. a 

Factors Characteristics St. Clair Delta Mississippi Delta 

Geomorphic: Base 1 eve1 Long- and short-term Stable 

variations 

Flow regime Seasonally constant Seasonally variable 

Channel d iversl on Downstream (spring Wfthfn alluvial 

ice jams) valley (sprfng floods) 

Structural behavior Stable 

of basin of deposition 

Sediment compaction 

and significant 

subsidence 

Dominant sedlment size Fine to coarse sand Clay to silt 

Relative rate of S1 ow 

sedimentat ion 

Marine: Relative wave energy Low Low 

Rapid 

Offshore profile Flat to gently Flat to gently 

slopfng sloping 

Vegetative: Vegetatlon Deciduous trees to Predominantly fresh 

zonation freshwater marsh to brackish to salt 

marsh 

Control of vegetation Short-term 1 ake level Salinity, substrate 

distribution changes composition, and tidal 

range 

a Data source: Jaworski and Raphael (1973). 

and bottom-set beds, identified on the 

margins of Lake Bonneville by Gilbert 

(1890) do not occur in the Mississfppi 

Delta complex. 

Subsurface data reveal that the St. 

Clair Delta is stable. Sediments ac- 

cumulating in the delta are not of 

sufficient thickness to allow any 

significant downwarping to occur, Borfngs 

on several beaches suggest that the base 

of these depositional features Is at 

apgroxlmately low water datum. Apparently 

the beaches have not subsided as the 

cheniers have done on the flanks of the 

Mississippi Delta, 

Isostatic rebound i n the St. Clafr 

basin, due to the waning of Wisconsin ice 

fo1 lowing the Valders maximum some 10~500 

to 1Zt500 years ago, has been minlmaf , 

Pertinent zero isobases since the Valders 

maximum ice advance are the Algonquin and 

Nipissing hinge 1 friest which are oriented 

east-west and located in the central 

portion of Lake Huron. Therefore, crustal 

displacement due to regional glacial 

rebound or 1 ocal ired sed imen%atlcn does 

not appear to have direct1 y influenced the 

vertical and horizontal morphology of the 

St. Claf r Dslta, The St, Clair Delta has* 

in fact, extended itself across an es- 

sentiall y rlgid platform.

Although structural stabil tty and 

mfnimum subsfdence characterize the St. 

Clair Delta, significant changes in the 

level of Lake St. Clair in the past few 

millenla have contributed to the mor- 

phology of the delta. Based upon a 

structural framework* deltas may be de- 

posited in one of three geologic 

envlronments: a subsiding area, a stable 

area, or an elevating area. The 

Mtssissippf Delta with its thick ac- 

cumulation of recent sediments* is a 

classic example of a subsiding delta. 

Although the Lake St. Clair basin is 

geologically stable, the effect of a "tower 

lake level on the delta complex is similar 

to elevatlng the 1 and, Since base level 

in Lake St. Clair has dropped in the 1 ast 

4,000 years, the focus of depostion has 

shifted lakeward creating the modern St, 

Cl ai r Delta and wetl and habitat. 

The configuration of deltas is 

related to offshore slope" relattve wave 

power in the nearshore zone, and riverine 

Influence (Wrlght and Coleman 1972). A 

delta such as the Mississippi with its 

digltal distributaries and marshy 

embayments 1s dominated by Its rlver since 

Its offshore slope is flat to convex and 

the nearshore wave power is low. Although 

long-term wave data have not been recorded 

for Lake St. Clair, wave energy must be 

considered to be low since the maximum 

fetch for wave generation for the delta is 

only 40 km. The subaqueous delta front is 

shallow and concave, causing waves 

generated In the shallow lake to attenuate 

lakeward of the delta, Also, marshes have 

become establ ished on exposed off shore 

areas between Johnson Bay and the -2 m 

contour suggesting that law wave energy 

conditfons prevafl, Although there may be 

an occasional dominance of martne 

pracessss as evidencad by the presence of 

transgressive beaches, f t must be 

concluded that the geometry of the St. 

Clair Delta, like that of the Mississippi, 

is prfncfpally dTctated by Its rfver, 

The pkevtous discussion suggests that 

although the St, Clafr and Mississippi 

river deltas have similar appearances 

several dissfmf l ar features and p rocssses 

prevafl . For example, the domfnant 

sediment size in the Misslssfppi Delta 1s 

silt to clayo whereasr the St, Clair Delta 

Is fine t o coarse sand. Alsos the 

relative rate of sedfmentation in the St. 

Clafr Delta is slow compared to the rapid 

rate of the Misslssfppi Delta. The 

wetl ands dlscussed in this community 

profile exhibit a dfversity of form. 

However, thef r distributfon can be re1 ated 

to fundamental geomorphic features some of 

which are unique. Jaworski et a1. (1979) 

examined and developed geomorp hic model s 

for the coastal wetlands of the Great 

Lakes as a step to understanding their 

origin, stability, and distribution. 

The occurrence, distrfbution, and 

diversity of coastal wetlands are, in 

part, determined by the morphology of 

coastal Lake St. Clair. Perhaps in no 

other b f ogeograp hic envi ronment i s the 

relationship between 1 and forms and 

vegetation so evident. All wetlands occur 

in topographical depressions created by 

nature or more recently by humans. These 

topographical lows may be erosional fn 

origin such as river channels or 

depositional fn origin such as lagoons or 

floodbasins. 

Although elevations of the St. Clair 

Delta are low, a diversity of landforms 

exists (Sectlon 2.1) . When the entire 

shorel ine of Lake St. Cl air is considered, 

the habitat diversity is even greater. 

Twelve wetl and sett 1 ngs have been 

identified in Lake St. Clair (Figure 44). 

A l l but one s e t t i n g (f.e., 

diked/disturbed) are of a natural origin. 

The St. Clair Delta exhibits a greater 

diversity of wetland settings because it 

is a product of river as we71 as marine 

processes. The habitats beyond the 

deltaic plain are fewer in number but 

unfque to the lake shoreline. A third 

suite of wet1a:jd habltats occurs both In 

the delta complex and on the shorel jne. 

The followfng section discusses the 

12 wetland habitats recognized in Lake St. 

Claf r. The deltaic habitats are descrfbed 

first followed by the coastal envi ronmsnts 

of wetland occurrence. Finally, wetl ands 

occurrfng in both the St. Clafr deltaic 

and coastal plains are described: 

1, are shall ow submerged 

features of the df stributary channels

1. River shoulders 


4. Crevasse deposits 

5. Shallow interdistributary bays 

6. Deep water interdistributary bays 

7. Transgressive beaches 

10. Transitional areas 

Premodern 

2. Abandoned channels 

8. Shallow shelves 

9. Barrierllagoons 


Plain 

12. Diked areas 

Figure 44, Twelve wetland habitats recognized in Lake St. Clair. 

of the St. Clair De1 ta. Paralleling 

the shore1 ine of the channels, the 

submerged river shoals extend 35 m into 

the rlver and have maximum depths of 2 

m. The sediment consists of fine sand. 

The feature is reasonably continuous 

along the length of the channels but fs 

normally absent on the outsfde or 

cutbank side of the channel. The 

feature attains a maximum width at 

submerged point bars. At the channel 

shoreline, reeds such as the robust 

are dense (Figure 

29); however, submergent aquatics are 

dominant. An aggressive fnvader, 

Euraslan water-mll fol 1 has become more 

abundant in the last decade in the 

distributary channels (Schloesser and 

1 1. Eustuarinelflood 

basin 

Manny 19823, It appears to be a common 

submersed macrophyte and a minor 

nuisance to recreational boating In the 

delta region as well as in Anchor Bay, 

Furthermore, the plant denslty appears 

to be greater in the non-commercial 

navigation channels (i.e., North and 

Middl e channels). 

2. dissect the 

up1 and surface of the delta and merge 

into the modern delta when traced 

lakeward. The channels are long and 

linear and of varfable width. The 

1 argest channel on Dickfnson Island is 

some 500 m wjde, but usual channel 

wfdths are about 100 m. The sediments 

have a fine texture and a high organfc

content suggesting gradual decay over 

time, The boundary between the 

premodern delta upland and the 

abandoned channel is usual1 y distinct 

especial1 y at the apex of the delta. 

During years of low lake level several 

of the ancient channels are above the 

water table and plant stress may occur. 

Emergents such as hard-stem bul rush 

(Scfrow+ -1, arrowhead ( 

lati f ol la), and three-square 

colonize the deeper water 

nels (1 m) as do water 

ccasionally buttonbush 

3. are generally 

similar to the abandoned 

channels discussed except that they are 

st111 in the process of decay. 

Chematogen Channel 3s a dlstrlbutary 

channel which contfnues to conduct St. 

Clalr Rlver water to Lake St. Clalr. 

These channels are malnl~ on the 

Ontario sido of the delta ind were 

responslble for the depositfon of the 

Canadian portion of the delta. Since 

that time this area was abandoned and 

the more recent depositlonal act iv'i ty 

began in Michfgan. As abandonment 

occurred, the channels were gradual 1 y 

s l l t e d so that only narrow 

distributaries remain today. Such 

channels not only dlssect the premodern 

delta but the modern surface as well. 

The sedlment of the channel fflls .Is 

fine sand, but some silts have been 

deposited from the adjacent 1 ake pl afns 

as well. Since these channels occur on 

the modern delta, slopes are more 

gentle. In contrast abandoned river 

channels are on the premodern surface 

and slopes to the channels more 

distinct. The channel fills of the 

recent1 y abandoned channels are often 

submerged beneath 15 cm of water and 

colonized by sedges E- spp.1 and 

more sporad?call y by blue-joint grass 

spp. and pondweeds (e.g., curly 

pondwsed ~ r i s ~ colon9 u ) ze 

the narrowfng active channels. 

occur on the f7anks 

of dfstrlbutary bays and have a lobate 

form, Since they are flood or hlgher 

energy deposits they are composed of 

coarser sand. Channel depths are 

approximatel Y 4 m and are not 

COI onjzed, but the sand deposits 

adjacent to the "highwaysn support 

commun itf es of bul rush ~PP. 1. 

Most crevasse deposits are at the lower 

end of the active dfstributary channels 

and thus exposed to wave act Ion. 

Because of higher wave energies and 

perhaps due t o Ice damage and 

recreational boating the emergent 

aquatics are not particularly dense, 

The landward side of the crevasse 

deposfts appear to be better protected 

from wave action and thus support a 

denser stand of emergent vegetation 

including not only bulrush fn deeper 

habitats but cattails (Iy&h spp.) in 

shallower areas of the deposit. Also 

crevasse deposits closer to Lake St. 

Clair (farther down the distributary 

channels) are exposed to greater wave 

actfon and are sparsely colonized with 

bulrush. 

aallow interdlstributgILy_ bavg occupy 

extensive areas between the open lake 

and the equally obvious higher 

premodern deltas. On the flanks these 

shallow wetland hab i tats are bordered 

by natural levees. Occasionally, 

particularly in Michigan, narrow 

discontinuous beaches occur. The 

sediment In the bays was derived from 

crevasses during high water periods and 

are thus silty-sand size particles and 

mostly mineral in character. Organic 

sedfmsnts are sparse and discontinuous. 

A t the surface the organic 

accumulatlonr where present, ranges in 

thickness from 5 to 15 cm. Water 

depths average 5 to 30 cm. The shallow 

Interdlstrfbutary bays are almost 

excl us I vel y col on i zed by dense stands 

of cattails of which the hybrid TvDha x 

standlng 2 to 3 m high 

dominates. A t slightly higher 

elevations sedges are interspersed with 

cattafls. The high cattail produc- 

tivity and the low organic accumulation 

suggests that these habitats are 

flushed durJng high water periods. The 

sedimentation process is relatively 

complete throughout the deltaic plain, 

though a few small lakes (e.g., Goose 

lake) stfll persjst.

interdfstrf butary bays. The landward 

slde is bordered by low, poorly 

developed transgressive beaches. Their 

flanks are characterized by slightly 

higher, poor1 y developed natural levees 

which are permanently breached by 

crevasse channels. Lakeward these bays 

are exposed to wave action of the open 

lake. As clastic sediments are 

introduced into these bays, the basins 

w i l l evolve Into shallow interdistributary 

bays. Water depths range 

from 0.5 to 1.75 m and the bay bottom 

consists of fine sand. Occasionally 

in sheltered areas si 1 t deposits w i 11 

accumulate, but organic deposits are 

sparse through the habitat. Wave 

action prohibits the colonization of 

dense emergents; however, n! spp. 

are prevalent. The deep water bays are 

confined to the Michigan portion of the 

de1 ta where the distributary channels 

are most active and where natural 

levees extend into Lake St. Clair. 

Common submersed aquatics include 

Characeae and f f s 

(Schloesser and Manny 1982). The 

d istributjon of submersed macrophytes 

may be due to a lack of suitable 

substrate for attachment or excessive 

wave actlon. 

are best 

developed wlthin the St. Clair Delta 

but do sporadically occur along the 

Ontario shore1 ins. The beaches are 

wave deposited features standing 

approximately 30 cm above the lake. As 

noted in Figure 4, older beach deposits 

occur landward of the active 

transgressive beach in the shallow 

i nterdistributary bays. They are 

composed of stratified coarse sand, 

gravel and organic debris. Although 

they vary in width, most beaches are 

about 5 m wfde. Borings through the 

beach deposits reveal alternating 

layers of coarse clastics and thin (1 

cm) wave deposited organic 1 enses. 

This clearly suggests that the features 

were deposited during periods of 

erosion. During higher wave energy 

conditions the beaches are not 

breached; but rather overwash occurs, 

causing rafted debris to be deposited 

atop the shallow interdistributary 

marsh. Woody vegetation includfng 

eastern cottonwood (P-, 1, 

7. * 

willows (531 i x spp.) and staghorn sumac 

(m colonize the beaches. 

During higher water years sedges (Carex 

strictq) r reed-canary grass ( 

udinace_a), and jewelweed (- 

spp.) commonly colonize the beaches. 

The latter three species are more 

common on the overwash deposits 

landward of the beaches. 

8. Shallow shelf enviroqg&i& border the 

nearshore zone of most of Lake St. 

Clair. The shelves are composed of 

silt-sized clastic fragments. The 

shelves are approximately 200 m wide, 

1.5 m fn depth and are turbid 

especially following storms. Wetlands 

colonizing this habitat exist as a low 

dense fringe parallel to the shore and 

remaln exposed to lake effects such as 

wave action. This habitat is best 

displayed along the eastern shore of 

the lake and is colonized wfth 

emergents and submergents. The 

dominant vegetation is emergent 

macrophytes such as cattail. Other 

wetland species include lake sedge 

(Carex -1, large stands of 

pickerel weed (Wderia EPCP-) , 

water-mil foil ( k l v r l m 

hetero- 

-1, and white water lily 

(Nvmr>haea odorata) (Mudroch 19811, 

9, Barrier/l a-lexs~ occur south of 

Mftchell Bay along the eastern 

shoreline of Lake St. Clair. The 

barriers are poorly developed and stand 

approximately 50 cm above the lake. 

However, they do provide some 

protection from wave action and 

seiches, especially during 1 ower water 

years. The lagoon is approximately 

1,000 m in width and i s characterized 

by a si 1ty bottom. Morphologically 

this habitat is similar to the shallow 

she1 f environment except for the 

occurrence of a low barrier, The 

bottom sediments not only Include silts 

but 1 oose, partial 1 y decomposed organic 

fragments which may be j.~ or may 

have been transported into the lagoon 

by streams from the adjacent lake 

plain. Emergent macrophytes dominated 

by cattalls ( 1 occur in 

the area. The landward side of these 

wetlands has a gentle natural slope 

which in most fnstances along Lake St, 

Clair is abrupt1 y termfnated by

artificial dikes. It is important to 

note that the Ontario shoreline north 

of the Thames River has not experlenced 

signlf lcant coastal recession in recent 

years (Boulden 1975) whereas the south 

shore of the 1 ake has. This suggests 

that the barrier and adjacent wetlands 

retard wave action on this coastal 

reach. 

10. are broad zones 

i a1 wetl ands from 

well-drained upland surfaces. In some 

instances, such as on Harsens Island 

and along the eastern shoreline of Lake 

St. Clairr the transitional areas have 

been incorporated in diked farmland or 

water level-control led wetl ands and 

thus do not exist. However, good but 

rather iselated examples occur on 

Dickinson Island and east of St. John's 

Marsh in -bIichigan. The sediments 

consist of fibrous peat macrof ragments 

which are underlain by fine# mottled 

sand. The transition zone is normal 1 y 

not permanent1 y flooded and water 

tables are about 15 to 30 cm below the 

surface. The lakeward slde of this 

environment Is characterized by sedge 

sediments are derived from flood events 

and are usually fine sand and stlt wlth 

a sign1 f icant organic content. Natural 

levees adjacent to the channel are 

poorly developed and vegetation 

zonation difficult to detect. The 

water level -in this wetland habitat is 

vartable and depends In part on the 

rdver dfscharge. Durlng dry years the 

wetlands may be stressed because of a 

low water table. Therefore the wetland 

may be seasonal in nature. A t the 

confluence of river and lake, water 

tables are most often at or very near 

the surface and the floodbasin w i l l 

sustain dense emergents in most years. 

At the mouth of the Clinton Rlver dense 

stands of cattails have been observed 

for many years. Upstream the marshes 

grade into bottom1 and swamps. 

-. 

12. are a cultural modification 

of a wetland rather than a 

physical entity. Included in this 

category are transitional zones which 

have been dfked and drained for farming 

or recreational purposes. Since these 

tussocks (u spp.) interspersed with 

sparse cattails. Where water tables 

wetlands transcend physical boundaries 

such as soil/sediment types and slopest 

their morphologfcal framework is less 

are deeper, the transition zone is meaningful. On Harsens Island the 

colonized by a meadow which includes Michigan Department of Natural 

but is not limited to red osier dogwood 

(Carnus &lonifera)r gray dogwood (C. 

Resources has diked and drained much of 

the shallow distributary bay area and 

1, panic grass (j2gmiam spp.1. the transition zone. The land cover of 

and bluejoint grass. On the landward the central portion of the island is 

embl ing aspen (m in corn and grain crops which are utilis 

abundant. Because of ized as part of a waterfowl hunting 

the variable elevation and depth to 

groundwater thJs zone exhibits a 

management scheme. Wal pole Is1 and is 

the largest island in the delta. A 

diversity of wetl and plants. Similar large part of the island, which is now 

wetland species have been observed on 

the premodern surface of the St. Clair 

cultivated mainly for corn and soybean, 

was a1 so a shallow interdisciplinary 

Delta. Here local depressfons are bay. The diked marshes along the east 

underlain by clay pan which results in 

a perched water table which commonly 

shore of Lake St. Clair have long been 

used for private duck hunting. Wasupports 

dogwood/meadow vegetation, 

ter level in these marshes is regulated 

by pumps, dikes, and canals. The 

fl, habltats are 

characterized by marsh vegetation 

marshes are landlocked and water depths 

range from 10 to 50 cm (Mudroch 1981). 

bordering a rfver which debouches into 

the lake, The Clinton River and 

Emergents colonize these marshes. Dominant 

macrophytes are the cattail and 

several small streams tributary to Lake sedge. Also large stands of pickerel 

St. Clafr support such wetlands, The 

extent of the vegetated wetland is 

weed, water mil foil (M rio hyllum 

heteropbyll um) , and white* 

often restricted by a steep backslope occur in the channels within these 

paralleling the flood plain. The diked wetl ands.

Table 26 summarizes the identified 

morphological wetland settings Sn Lake St. 

Clalr in terms of selected physical 

characteristics, For thf s investigation 

the coastal and deltaic wetlands are 

classified into four major vegetative 

zones: 

1. Submergent (e.g., pondweeds, 

coontai 1 1 

2, Emergent (e.g.$ cattail, bulrush) 

3. Sedge/meadow (e.g. sedge* canary 

grass) 

4. Shrub (e.g., dogwood, willow, sweet 

gal el. 

Wetland diversity exhibited by submergent, 

sedgep and shrub vegetation is most 

evident in the abandoned channels (2) and 

the transitional (10) zones. Here, 

topography is variable, wave or river 

current action is low or not applicable 

and turbidity is low. Conversely the 

wetl and community is less diverse along 

river shoulders (l), crevasse (4), and 

estuarine/flood basfn (11) environments. 

These rather monotypfc wetlands appear to 

be assocfated with hiqher wave/current 

action and higher turbidity levels. The 

exception is the shallow interdistributary 

bay (5) environment which is composed of 

dense and robust stands of cattails. 

Perhaps the combined perfodic exposure and 

a hlgher organic content of the substrate 

account for the dominance of the 

emergents. 

4.2 BlOLOGlCAL PRODUCTION 

Examination of energy flow in coastal 

wetlands shows that the entire 

heterotrophic component of the wetland Is 

dependent on organic matter produced 

during photosynthesis. In many cases, 

utilization of the material is through 

grazing of lfving tissues. Many species 

of waterfowl feed on various parts of 

aquatfc hydrophytes. The seeds of 

muskrat, mice, and deer browse heavily on 

several species of aquatic hydrophytes. 

Phytophagous fnsects are the food supply 

for several species of birds, fishes, 

reptiles, and mammals (Tilton et ale 

1978). 

A more significant form of 

uttlization is the direct consumption of 

detritus or alternatively, the microbial 

populations associ ated with organic 

particulate matter. Numerous inverte- 

brates re1 y completely on these food 

sources. These organisms in turn form the 

food supply for fish, amphibians, 

reptiles, birds, and mammals. 

In addition to plants being a direct 

or indirect food source for many species 

of animals, aquatic plants provSde cover 

and nesting areas for waterfowl. Several 

species of fish9 such as the northern pike 

(b 3 uc i spawn in vegetated wetl and 

areas and muskrats (w &ethiu) 

prefer emergent vegetation for construction 

of feeding platforms and houses. 

Nutrient cycl ing is important to the 

continuation of primary and secondary 

production in wetlands (Figure 45). 

Coastal wetland vegetation immobilizes 

certain amounts of nutrients, a portlon of 

which are released upon senescence and 

decay of the plants. Depending on the 

sedimentation characteristlcs of the 

wetlandsr nutrients are stored in the 

wetland as organic sediment or peat. In 

the marsh sol 1 sr microb 1 a1 processes 

transform some of the nutrients from 

organfc to inorganic forms. The net 

effect of these processes is generally a 

reduction In the concentration of 

nutrients in water flowing through the 

wetl and. Therefore, the coastal marshes 

are important in control 1 i ng nutrient 

loading to nearshore waters of Lake St. 

Clai r (Tilton et a?. 1978). 

Studies of metals uptake by aquatic 

plants provide some information on 

nutrient cycling. Mudroch and Capobianco 

(1978) studied the uptake of metals from 

the water and sedtrnent by emergent, 

submersedl and floatfng-leaved plants fn 

marshes along the Ontario shore of Lake 

St. Cl a i r. They found that submersed

Table 26. Morphology and relative physical relationships of the Lake St, Clair 

wetlands. 

Wet1 and Water Dominant Current/ 

envl ronment Substrate deptha vegetatf on wave actionb Turbidfty 

(m) 

1. River shoulders sand -6.0 submergent high/l ow moderate 

2. Abandoned river silt/ -1.0 emergent/ 1 ow/NA 1 ow 

channel s organics subme rgent/ 

sedge/scrub 

3. Recent1 y aban- silt/ -0.5 emergent/sedge med/NA high 

dwned channel s organics 

4. Crevasse deposlts sand -1.5 emergent high/med high 

5. Shallow intar- fine sand/ -0.3 emergent 1 ow/low 1 ow 

distributary bays arganics 

6, Deep water inter- f Ins sand -1.5 emergent/ high/hfgh high 

distributary bays 5u bme rgent 

7. Transgrasslve coarse i-0.5 sedge/scrub low/high N A 

beach deposlts sand/ 

organics 

8. Shal low shelves silt/cl ay -1.0 emergent/ low/high htgh 

submergent 

9. Barrler/lagoon si lt/cl ay -1.0 emergent/ low/Jow hlgh 

compl ex submergent 

10. Transi tlonal fine rand +0.3 emergent/ NA/NA N A 

areas submergent 

11, Estuarfne 

floodbasin 

sand/s i 7 t +O. 2 emergent high/NA high 

12. Diked areas variable -0.1 emergent/ low/l ow moderate 

submergent 

" Below level of lake 

+ Feature usually above lakt3 level. 

NA Not appl fcable.

plants accumulated the highest concen- 

trations, considerably higher than the 

source water and sediment, and that these 

elements were retained in the plant 

tfssues until decay processes incorporated 

them into surface sediments. 

1. ENERQV 3. WATER 6. SEDIMENTS 

2. GASES 4. NUTRIENT$ 8. ANIMALS 

INVERTEBRATE 

Figure 45. Cycling of energy and material 

through the Lake St. Clair coastal wetland 

ecosystem (Ti1 ton et a1 . 1978). 

Mudroch (1980) also studied the 

geochemical composition of sediment, 

uptake of nutrients and metals by 

macrophytes, and nutrient and metal 

composition in the water at Big Creek 

Marsh on the northeast shore of Lake Erie 

in Long Point Bay. The maximum 

concentrations of most metals (Pb, Nip Car 

Crr and Zn) in marsh sediments were loner 

than concentrations found in Lake Erje 

surf ici a1 muds, presumably due to uptake 

by the aquatic plants In the mud, 

Submerged plants (Ghim Spet Mvr1clgMlhm 

sp., and sp.) accumulated larger 

quantities of Cat Pbr Cur Nf, Cr, and Cd 

than emergent plants (m spp.1, but 

nutrfent concentrations were relatively 

uniform for all species (Table 27). She 

found that the biomass production of the 

macrophytes In the marsh was related to 

the subhydric soil fertility as we11 as 

the nutrient content in the marshwater. 

She concluded that short-term supplies of 

nutrient-rich sewage to the surface 

subhydrlc soil layer can have a prolonged 

effect on macrophyte production by 

enrichment of the nutrient pool maintained 

In the perennial plant system. 

The flow of energy through a food 

chain is often represented by a pyramid 

which illustrates the quantitative 

relatfonshfps among the varfous trophic 

levels (Figure 46). Juday (1943) was one 

of the earliest investigators to Introduce 

trophic levels concepts, developed the 

Table 27. Concentrations of nutrients and metals in wetland plarlts at the 

stage of maximum development, Big Creek Marsh, Long Point, Ontario. 

Species 

a Data source: Mudroch (19801, 

- 

K N P C a 

-- - - .-. - -----

'-\ 

--._--_------SOLAR ENERGY 

Figure 46. Energy pyramid in Lake St. 

Clair coastal marshes (Upper Great Lakes 

Regional Commission). 

concept from studies of freshwater 

wetlands. He determined the vardous 

components of the aquatic population in 

Weber Lake, Wisconsinr as they existed in 

midsummer. The dissolved organic matter 

composed about 60% o f the total pyramid, 

the fish9 only 0.5Xr and the other animals 

slightly less than 5% of the total. 

In coastal marshes there are often 

four major sources of energy for aquatic 

consumers: 1) marsh detritus, 2) phyto- 

plankton production, 3) detritus from 

terrestrial sources brought in by drainage 

and, 4) planktonic material carried into 

the marsh from the open lake, Although 

much research remains to be done on food 

chain production and ecosystem energy 

re1 ationshi ps9 particular1 y of freshwater 

wetlandsr there are a few general 

principles which appear to have validity: 

PI food cycles rarely have more than five 

trophic levels, 2) the greater the 

separation of an organism from the basic 

source of energy (solar radiation), the 

less the chance that it w i l l depend solely 

upon the precedjng trophic 1 eve1 for 

energy* 3) at successively higher levels 

in the food cycle, consumers seem to be 

progressive1 y more efficient 4n the 

utilization of food supply, and 4) In 

wetl and successl on productivity and 

photosynthetic efficiency increase Prom 

01 igotrophy to eutrophy and then decl ins 

as the marsh undergoes senescence 

(Jaworski et ale 19779. 

A1 though no specf fjc works have been 

published on the fntricats structure of 

energy flow in Great Lakes coastal 

wet1 ands* Ti %ton 6% a1 , (1978) have 

general ized the important processes based 

on studjes in other wetlands'. The 

conversion of solar energy -into bjomass by 

autotsophs is perhaps the most important 

process. Conversion into a form avail able 

to heterotrophic organisms serves as the 

foundation for several complex and dynamic 

food webs. 

The coastal wetland community 

possesses two basic complexes of 

interrelationships: 1) invertebrates ( primarily 

insects)o fishes, bf rdsr and 

mammals which util ize 1 ivi ng p7 ant tissues 

and 2) organisms which utilize detrftus or 

dead plant tissues, Living plant tissue 

(7 .e., algae, 'leaves, and 

rhizomes) serve as food for phytophagous 

animals such as stem boring and leaf 

mining insects as well as certain aphids 

and beetles. Many specfes of waterfowl 

graze extensively on plant material r and 

muskrats are important pl ant consumers. 

The next higher trophic level in the ftrst 

complex consists of animals whlch prey 

upon the phytophagous organisms. Spiders, 

predatory beetles, dragonfllesr certsln 

fishes, frogs, birdsr and small 

insectivorous mammals are important 

organisms of this upper trophic level. 

The second complex consists of a vast 

number of insect larvae which rely on 

organic detritus as a dlrect energy source 

or by stripping microbial populations from 

the surface of organic particles, 

Gastropods and annelids are also important 

organ isms in the detritophagous complex. 

Whatever residual that is not util fzed by 

these animals is subjected to further 

decomposition by bacterf a1 and fungal 

populations, As with the phytophagous 

complexr there exists in the detritophagous 

complex a wide spectrum of animals 

which prey on the detritus-feeding 

organisms. Several species of insects, 

amphibians# waterfowlr and mammals compose 

this level, and many of these species are 

not selective in thelr prey* utilizing 

organ f sms from both compl exes. 

Teal (19629 found that a smaller 

percentage of the total energy represented 

f n the primary product 1 on of wetl ands

passes through the phytophagous complex 

than the detritophagous complex. 

Submergent vegetation tends to be 

inhabited and grazed more heavily than 

emergent forms (Krecker 1939) because the 

submergent aquatic macrophytes lack the 

more impenetrable structural tissues 

prevalent in the emergent type. Estimates 

of the proportlon of material processed 

through each complex (Ti lton et a]. 19781, 

favors the detritus web (80% t o 95%) over 

the grazing web (5% to 20% 1. Ti 1 ton et 

a1 . (1978) a1 so point out that the 

Importance of an organism to an ecosystem 

may exceed its role in energy flow, 

Muskrats utilize only a fraction of the 

available energy stored in the 1 lve plants 

they cut and harvest In the wetlands* but 

they may be of signiffcant value to the 

detritophagous complex. Similarlyo the 

teeming populations of phytophagous 

insects may consume on1 y a small fraction 

of plant tissuet but through this activity 

may reduce the growth of host plants and 

the primary production of the wetland 

ecosystem. 

The energy budget for cattai 1 (Iyehg 

sp. marshes in Minnesota has been 

investigated by Bray (1962) and may 

provide insight for Lake St. Clafr 

wetlands. During the growing season the 

distribution of the various components of 

solar radiation energy was as follows: 

a1 bedo (reflection1 22.0 

evapotranspiration 38.4 

conduction-convectlon 38.5 

primary production 1.1 

Thf s apparently 1 ow ut 11 f zat i on of sol ar 

radiation by sp. is cons'lstent wlth 

other wetland studfes and supports the 

general view that most plant communltfes 

utilize only 1% to 2% of the total solar 

energy for primary production (Ttlton el 

al, 1978). sp. In Austrian 

wetlands ranges from 1-24 t o 2.0% for Ma 

through July (Sieghardt 1973) and 

sp. in Georgfan estuarfes utilizes 1,4% of 

total solar radiation (Tea? 19621, The 

uni formity of these results suggests that 

emergent wetlands in the take St. Claf r 

system utfl ize approximately 1.2% of solar 

radiation for prdmary production. 

Emergent wet1 and communities are 

among the most productive areas on earth. 

West1 ake (1963) estimated that freshwater 

emergent macrophytes have a net primary 

productivity of 3,000 to 8,500 g/rnZ/yr 

comparable in productivity to salt marshes 

and tropical rajn forests. Productivity 

of freshwater submerged macrophytes ranges 

from 400 to 2,000 g/m2/yrr less than ha1 f 

of thefr marine counterpart. Site 

specif ic primary productivfty studies of 

coastal emergent wetlands in Lake St, 

Clair do not exist. Table 28 lists the 

maximum blomass and productivity of 

several emergent species (common in Lake 

St. Clalr) for other areas of the Great 

Lakes region. Extrapolation of these data 

to the cattail marshes of Lake St. Cl ai r 

can provide an approximate and reasonable 

estimate of product lvi ty, Jv~ha marshes 

appear to be one of the most productive 

communities, yielding vaf ues (approxfmately 

2,500 g/mz/yr) near the lower end 

of the range expected for freshwater 

emergent macrophytes. 

Lake St, Cl ai r, particularly Anchor 

Bay and Mitchell Bay, are known for thetr 

we1 1 developed submerged aquatic 

macrophyte beds. Dawson (19751 found that 

considerable spatial varfation in standing 

crop exists in Lake St. Clair bays (Table 

29). He est'imated mean dry weights of 

varlous submerged communities to range 

from 4 g/m2 in sha71ow areas characterized 

by sparse cover of stonewo 

to 316 g/m2 in areas domfna 

of water-milfoll ( 

1. Schloesser ( 1982) 

monthly abundance of submersed macrophytes 

in the St. Clair River and Lake St. elair 

during the 1978 growing season (Table 30). 

He found that the amount of submersed 

vegetation was low in early sprfng, No 

vegetatfon was Sound at the mouth of the 

Clinton Rtver or the head of the Detrolt 

River (Belle Isle) in April or May, and 

the only vegetation collected at Stag 

Islands Algonac and Anchor Bay during 

these months consfsted of decabSng or 

dormant material f ram the previous growf ng

Table 28. Biomass ,arid productivity of emergent wetland plants of the 

Great Lakes region. 

Species 

'~ata source: Tilton et a1. (1978). 

Maximum Net 

Common name b i omass product 1 on 

broad-1 eaved cattai l 

hybrfd cattail 

giant bur reed 

common arrowhead 

manna grass 

reed grass 

wild rice 

sp i ke-rush 

lake sedge 

beaked sedge 

river bulrush 

great bul rush 

soft rush 

Mean 

(g/m2) (g/m2/yr) 

Tabla 29. Estimates of standing crop biomass for submergeni vegeta- 

tion in Anchor Bay, Lake St. Clair (September, October 1974). 

Dominant Weedbed Range in Percent of 

taxa in community area (km2) dry welght (g/m2) submergents 

TOTAL 108.8 4-3 16 100.0 

"~ata source: Dawson ( 1975).

Table 30. Seasonal estimates of standing crop biomass for submersed 

rnacrophytes at several locations in the Lake St, Clair sys~em (1978). 

Dominant 

Locatl on June July Rug Sept kt taxa 

St. Clair Rfver (Stag Is.) 72 267 103 38 15 SPP 

St. Clafr Delta (Algonacl 54 97 158 174 284 

Anchor Bay (Sand Is,) 85 113 135 133 146 

Clfnton River (mouth) 24 63 118 33 16 V a l l i w 

Detroit River (Belle Isle) 0 38 52 38 17 Yalli- 

iaowkaB 

a~ata source: Schloesser (1982). 

season. By mid-June dominant plants 

sprouted new growth at stem and leaf 

nodes, and by mid-July new growth which 

did not orfginate from overwintering 

dormant material was found at a17 

locations (Table 30). Higher maximum 

bfomass values were generally observed at 

locations where dormant overwinterfng 

vegetatjon was observed in early spring. 

Flgure 47 shows that the maximum biomass 

was reached In July in the St. Clair River 

(267g/m21; in August In the Gl inton River 

mouth (118 g/m2f and Detroit River head 

(53 g/m2); and in October in the St. Clair 

Delta (284 g/m21 and Anchor Bay f 146 

g/m2). The submersed macrophytes became 

senescent and the biomass values decreased 

by late fall at all locations. The 

results of thfs study indfcated that 

little or no submersed macrophyte growth 

takes place before June or after October 

in the rfver or lake. The dominant taxa 

found at each location are given in Table 

31, 

4.3 CQMMUNiTY PROCESSES 

Given the transittonal or ecotone 

character of wetlandsr the Lake St. Clafr 

wetlands are even more dynamic due to the 

pulsing nature of the lake level changes 

and the connectivlty due to the numerous 

distributary channels and embaymentst 

particularly wlthin the St. Clair Delta. 

By outlfning the community processes in 

these dynamlc and interrelated envi ron- 

ments, the high prlmary and secondary 

producti vi ty can be more full y understood. 

The Lake St. Clalr wetlands are 

actually composed of a variety of habitats 

f ncl ud 1 ng open ponds, cattai?/reed 

marshes, earthen dikes, barrler beaches, 

delta flats, and wooded swamps. 

Col7ectfvely these habitats are known as 

the coastal marsh community, Each habitat 

attracts its own species of plants* blrdsr 

mamnalsp reptiles, amphibianst and fn some 

cases, fish. The result Is more varfety 

in plant and animal life than in any other 

area of equal size fn the intarior of the 

bordering states and province. The 

overall conditions of the uncontrolled 

coastal marshes are stf 17 very primitive, 

some having been visited by no more than a 

handful of people in the last several 

decades. W i thln those marshes where 

natural processss are allowed to take 

place, zonatfon and succession in response 

to changing envf ronmsntal condftions are

ANCHOR BAY 

MICHIGAN 

Sand Island 

\ LAKE 

Figure 47. Seasonal growth (dry weight) of dominant submersed macrophytes in the St. 

Clair River-Lake St. Clair-Detroi t River ecosystem (Schloesser 1982). 

Table 35 Dominant submersed aquatic macrophyte taxa of the Lake St. Clair 

sys tern. 

Taxa 

- 

St. Clair St. Clair Lake St. Clinton Detroit 

R'iver Delta Cl ai r River River 

(Stag Island) (Algonac) (Anchor Bay) (mouth) (Belle Isle) 

%ata sources: Dawson ( 19751 r Schloesser (1982).

among the important commun l t y processes. 

Water level fluctuationr and the resultant 

plant and anfmal responser is often the 

most sfgnificant drivjng force. 

Because the water level of Lake St. 

Clair is not stable, but has oscillated 

over 2 m during the period 1900 to 1977 

(Jaworski et a1. 19793, the wetland 

vegetation a1 ong the 1 ake margi ns exhibits 

pulse stability. The concept of pulse 

stability imp1 ies that it is these water 

level fluctuations which result tn the 

maintenance of the wetl and communities. 

Thus* even though wetland plant 

communfties retrogress during hlgh lake 

level periods and shift lakeward during 

low water level conditionsr these 

successional changes prevent the wet1 ands 

from being dominated by either aquatic or 

up1 and communities. Moreovers coastal 

wetlands do not become senescent or 

exhibit conversion t o terrestrial 

environments as compared to inlands 

pal ustrine wetl ands. 

It is important to distinguish 

between annual (or seasonal 1 water level 

fluctuations and longer term oscillations, 

With regard to annual water level changes 

fn Lake St. Clair, the average magnitude 

is approximate1 y 0.5 m, with highest 

levels occurrtng in June-July and lowest 

levels during the winter months. This 

seasonal water level pattern is opposite 

that in shallowr freshwater swamps which 

may dry up during the middle of the 

growing season. Cattails appear to be 

favored by low water levels in winter 

because oxygen diffuses through exposed 

stalks down into the roots and rhizomes 

(Jaworski et al. 1979). 

However, it is the longer term lake 

level osclllatlons which have the greatest 

effect on vegetation succession. In the 

Great Lakes the hydroperiod for these 

longer term oscillations is 8 to 20 years 

(U.S. Dept. of Commerce 1976). Near 

record low water levels - at about 174 m 

above datum (IGLD) - occurred in 1964- 

1965, whereas record highwater levels - at approximately 176 m above datum (IGLD) - 

took place during the 1972 to 1974 

The latepal shifts of the plant 

communities in response to water level 

fluctuations are illustrated by Figures 32 

and 33 of Section 3-2. DickYlnson Island 

was utiljzed for this dtscussion because 

it has an intact envi ronmental gradient 

over which vegetation shifts can occur. 

El sewhere on Warsens Island as we1 1 as on 

the Canadian side of the St. Clair Delta9 

the cattail marsh ends abruptly against 

dikes or canals, and much of the sedge end 

other drier habftat communities have been 

devel oped. 

These successional changes can be 

documented by a series of transects taken 

over time across the same survey 1 ine. As 

indicated by Figure 48, water level 

changes in the coastal wetlands of Lake 

St. Clai r caused dramatic vegetation 

changes. Beginning in July 1964s one can 

observe extensive comunjties of cattail r 

sedge, and dogwood meadow, Howevers 

during the high water period of the 1970~~ 

widespread ddeback occurred as far inland 

as the shrub/swamp frfnge which borders on 

the oak-ash hardwoods. During such 

condltlonsr much of the cattall marsh 

consisted of open water as well as 

communities of bulrushes and submersed 

aquatics. Notice that by the summer of 

1977 r considerable reestablishment began 

to take place as water levels dropped 

somew hat. 

A plant commundty displacement model 

can be used t o predict community 

succession associated with water level 

fluctuati ons. As f 11 ustrated in Figure 

49s each wetland plant community has been 

placed at its proper elevation in relatlon 

to the long-term mean water level. The 

length of the l ine under the plant 

community's name lndjcates the amount sf 

vertical shifting which that community 

exhibits. To use PhSs model* note that 

the communities shOft lakeward (to the 

left) durlng low water levels and displace 

communities along thef r lakeward margfn. 

To simulate S U C C ~ S S during ~ ~ ~ rfsing lake 

levels, shift the comunfttes to the right 

a1 ong the1 r respective dlspl acement 1 f nes, 

As one moves upward along the 

envi ronmenisl gradtent, the extent of 

cornunity displacement is less and core 

areas persfst durfng both low and hlghinterim. 

Because of thess CYC~IC 

water water pert ads, f herefore* the shrub/swamp 

level oscillations, succession is a1 ways fringe zone shifts least and Os displaced 

taking place in the plant communities. less by the adjacent $1 ant comunf iy.

WEST 

Feet Drowned 

Tree-Shrub 

678 

670 

Lake Dead 

Cottonwood 

Cottonwood 

June 1975 EAST 

Meters 

A 

July - Qct. 1977 

July 1964 

Mixed 

- - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

T-"I ---1-7- - T-*---T--- 7-----r--- --T- -7- -- --r 

+ 1x , _1T_11_1_T1_1r11_7-~T_I_ - - 

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 Ft. 

r-- --7""- , 

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1800 1800 Meters 

Figure 48. Succes~iorial changes on Dickinson Island in response to water level fluctu- 

ations, 

flll UCTCHS 

hi." 1 

Shri~b/Swa~lip I 

I - - - 

Meadow -- ,, 

Sedge Mdrstl i - 

"" . . - . - - - - .- .- Llf6.0 

. . - . - - - - .- .- Llf6.0 

Mcan iakc Level 1 

Figtars 43. Wetland plant community dis- 

placement rnode'l for Dickinson island 

showing predicted response to water level 

changes, 

176 

175 

174 

As shown in Table 32, the wetland 

pl ant communities not on1 y change location 

but alter their areal extent in response 

t o these long-term water level 

oscillations. The dominance of the 

emergent cattail and sedge marsh during 

low-water levels is clear. In contrast, 

during high water periodsr the wetlands 

exhibit extensive floating leaved and 

submersed communities along with the 

cattails. The cattail marsh actual 1 y 

appears more widespread during high water 

conditions than it is because the dead 

cattail stalks often remain in place for 

several years. Notice, toor that the area 

of the shrub/swamp changes very 1 ittle as 

the water levels change. This situation 

prevails because the shrub/swamp community

Table 32. Vegetation cianges on Dickinson Island in response to 

lake level fluctuations. 

Percent of total areab 

Vegetation class Low water Mean level Hiah water 

1964 1975 

Open water 

Floating leaved/ 

Submersed 

Emergents (cattails) 

Sedge marsh 

Dogwood meadow 

Shrub/Swamp 

Developed areas 

a Data source: Jaworski et a1 . (1979). 

b~ote: Total area lr130 hectares (2,800 acres). 

is slightly higher in elevation than the 

high water mark and it is difficult to 

separate dieback shrub from live brushy 

vegetation. Also? cattail is an ag- 

gressive invader compared to sedges and 

dogwood. 

The zonation exhibited by the wet1 and 

plant communities has previously been 

illustrated by Figures 26 and 33 and 

described in Section 3.2. These plant 

zones, in order from upland to aquatic 

sites, are: shrub/swamp? dogwood meadow? 

sedge marsh? cattail marshr and open water 

floati ng/submersed commun f t i es . In many 

wetlands along Lake St. Clair urban 

development and other land uses have 

progressed from the adjacent upland areas 

lakeward to the emergent marsh. On1 y on 

Dickinson Island, and to some extent in 

Bouvier Bay (i.e., St. John's Marsh)? does 

a complete environmental gradient? or full 

zonation of wetlands* exist today. 

Species diversity of invertebrates 

tends to be hlgher fn St. Clair Delta 

wetland ecosystems than f n nearshore 

benthic and profundal benthic zones of 

Lake St. Clair. Invertebrate productivtty 

also tends to be higher in wetlands 

compared to open water areas and ft 

appears that invertebrate productivity 

tends to. be higher in emergent wetlands 

compared to submergent wet1 ands (Ti 1 ton et 

al, 1978). Invertebrate populations in 

coastal wetlands are a food source for 

higher trophic levels in the food webt 

comprising a major fraction of the diet of 

numerous species of fish* reptiles? 

amphibians, blrdsr and mammals. 

Several species of forage fish 

(spottail? black nose^ and emerald shiners9 

feed or spawn In wetland ecoysystems, 

These forage fish are consumed by 

piscivorous fish as well as birds and 

mammals. toss of wetlands whjch produce 

forage fish can cause a reduction in the 

numbers of piscivorous fish as we11 as 

birds such as the kingfisher and common 

mergansers (Ti 1 ton et a1 . 1978). 

Zonation has also been demonstrated 

for larval fish populations in western 

Lake Erie (Cooper et al. 1981ar 1981b. 

1984; Mizera et ale 3.9811. A series of 

studies in the estuaries and open waters 

of western Lake Erie has shown that the 

estuaries of the Maumee and Sandusky 

Rivers contained the hfghest densities of

larval fish when compared with other 

nearshore and offshore areas. Glzzard 

shad, white bass, and freshwater drum 

dominated the estuarfne populatfons. The 

highest densjty of yellow perch was found 

in nearshore areas assocfated wfth sandy 

bottoms, particularly north of Woodtick 

Peninsuia and in the vicinity of Locust 

Pofnt. The followtng depth/denslty re- 

lationship was observed for thls species: 

The same general relationship was found 

for most species, fndfcatlng a greater 

preference for spawning and nursery 

grounds fn the coastal areas. A sfmilar 

pattern is suspected for Lake St. Clair. 

Surveys conducted by Hatcher and Nester 

E1983)~ although not in the lake proper, 

show high densities Jn the St. Clair Delta 

and at the head of the Detroit River. 

Johnson (1984) belleved that the most 

important factor influencing production of 

flsh larvae in #%stern Lake Erie marshes 

is predatfon. Although no information Is 

avaflable on predator-prey tnteractlons 

involving larval fJsh In Lake St. Clair 

wetlands* related research has Indicated 

habftat structure can be Smportant in 

medtatlng the outcome of aquatic predator- 

prey interactions. Glass (1971) found 

argemouth bass ( a4.L 

predat f on succes s the 

Ity of habitat structure increased. 

Crowder and Cooper (19791 concluded that 

areas of hSgh structural complexity should 

create an effective refuge for prey and 

onhance their survfval, However, 

(19791 found prey-sized bluegill ( 

1 were strongly attracted to 

shade produced by I m diameter floats in 

wh~ch no submerged structure was present, 

He ~oncluded prey fish in shade can detect 

a predator (in sun) long before the 

predator can detect the prey. 

Therefore prey specles and prey- 

sized fSsh may act1 vely escape predators 

by dfsappearfng Snto areas of high 

struct~ral complexity or by seeklng shade 

so as to gajn the visual advantage. 

Consequentlys fish larvae in wetlands may 

use floating habitat types to gain the 

vjsual advantage while other larvae may 

use submergent or emergent habitat types 

to hide from potential predators, Open 

water areas in Lake St. Clair coastal 

marshes may be expected to have low larval 

use during the day because of the 

increased success of visual predators in 

this habitat type, but these areass 

particular1 y the uncontrolled wetlands, 

may be Important to fish larvae at night, 

The coastal marshes of Lake St. Clair 

attract large numbers of migratory 

waterfowl. Located at a crossing point on 

two major flyways, these marshes attract 

ducks from eastern Canada headlng for 

wintering grounds on the Mississippi River 

bottoms and ducks from the prairie 

provinces of Canada which winter along the 

Atlantfc coast. Beds of wfld celery are 

partjcul arl y attractive to great numbers 

of canvasbacks (m 1, red- 

heads ( ), and scaups 

(w 

spp. migrating southeastward to 

thef r wintering grounds on Chesapeake Bay 

(Andrews 1952). 

Lincoln (1935) introduced the concept 

that all populatlons of migratory birds 

adhere to their respectfve flyways as they 

make thef r semt annual fl lghts between 

breeding grounds and wintering grounds. 

Four distinctive flyways have been 

Identified for North America, two of whqch 

cross western Lake Erie and Lake St. 

Clair: the Atlantic Flyway and the 

Mississippi Flyway, These routes are used 

by all of the migratory waterfowl and 

other waterbirds which frequent the 

coastal wetlands. Each flyway has its own 

individual population of birdsp even for 

those specfes which have a broad 

contJnenta1 distribution. The breeding 

grounds of two or more flyways may, and 

often dor overlap broadly so that during 

the nesting season extensive areas may be 

occupfed by bjrds of the same species, but 

which belong to dffferent flyways. 

In the fall, the Atlantlc Flyway 

recsivas accretion of waterfowl from 

several fnterlor migration paths starting

at the breeding grounds on the Arctic 

tundra. Canada goose )V 

and df vfng ducks8 incl SI 

redheads and scaup come from their 

breeding grounds on the great northern 

plains of central Canaaa, follow the 

general southeasterly trend of the Great 

Lakes? rest in the St. Clair Delta, cross 

Lake Erje in the islands region, and 

continue over the mountains of 

Pennsylvania to w i nter along the Atlantic 

coast in Chesapeake and Delaware bays. 

Concurrent1 y, dabbl ing ducks such as 

1, black ducks 

1, and blue-winged teals 

1 that have gathered in 

staging areas of southern Ontario 

(fncludfng the St. Clair Delta) also leave 

these feeding grounds, cross western Lake 

Erie and proceed southwest over a course 

that leads down the Ohio and Mississfppi 

valleys (Mississippi Flyway), However, 

part of this duck population, upon 

reaching the St. Clair Flats, swings 

abruptly to the southeast, crosses the 

Appalachian mountains and winters along 

the Atlantic coast (Lincoln 1950). 

The Mississippi Flyway is easily the 

longest migration route of any in the 

Western Hemisphere. Its northern terminus 

is the Arctic coast of Alaska, whlle its 

southern end 1 ies In the Patagonia region 

of Argentina. Although the main path of 

the flyway lies to the west of the Great 

Lakes major branches follow the southern 

trend of Lake Michigan and the 

southwestern trend of Lake Erle and the 

Maumee Rf ver valley. Some of the black 

ducks ma1 1 ardsr and teals that cross the 

Great Lakes in the viclnfty of Lake St. 

Clair do not turn abruptly to the 

southeast, but continue on to the 

southwest as members of the Mississippi 

Flyway bound for the Gulf of Mexico coast 

rather than the Atlantic seaboard. Fall 

migration is at Its peak in September and 

October, but the main shorebird passage is 

underway in August. 

Sprlng migration begins in late 

February with the appearance of rlng- 

billed gulls ( 1 In Lake 

St. Clair. Ma 11 bring 

h waterfowl mov-ntr ducks and loons 

( sp.1 appearing 5n open leads as 

blackbf rds ( 

large numbers starting in late March. The 

huge Canada goose movement normally takes 

place In early April. With April and May 

comes the major push of spring migration, 

especizlly the landbirds. Migrants are 

less selective than breeding birds In 

their choice of habitat, nevertheless, 

waterb i rds prefer shore1 lnes wf th pockets 

of vegetation. Coastal marshes and stream 

mouths comnly attract migrating dabbl f ng 

ducks. The open water shorelines 

concentrate the diving duck migrants and 

other waterbirds including loons, grebes, 

cormorants ( 

For over three decades after Lincoln 

defined and mapped his four waterfowl 

flyways of North America, little new work 

was pub1 ished on the subject. Then, 

Bell rose (1968) pub1 ished his outstanding 

treatise on waterfowl migratlon corrldors 

east of the Rocky Mountains. In addition 

to these data and ground observatlons~ 

Be1 1 rose used such advanced techn I ques as 

visual sightings from aircraft and radar 

su rvei l 1 ance. One impetus for undertaking 

this revision was the Increasing hazard to 

aircraft from migrating birds. 

Be1 l rose found that Llncol n s f 1 yway 

concept, although still valid on a grand 

scale, tended to oversfmpllfy the 

migratjon process. He observed that 

flyways were In reality e complex of 

corridors (Figures 50-52). Each corridor, 

in turn? Is a web of routes as opposed to 

a single, narrow band rigidly followed by 

the waterfowl. The migration corridors 

represent passageways sac h connecting a 

serles of waterfowl habitats. Migration 

corridors differ from flyways in being 

smaller and more precisely deflnsd as to 

specles. Bell rose cons lders the f l yways 

proposed by Lincoln to be prfmarily 

geographical and secondarily biological, 

while his corridors are primarily 

biological and secondarif y geographical. 

As waterfowl migrate between breeding 

grounds and wfntering areas, they stop to 

rest and feed in wet1 ands, These wetl ands 

2re referred to as nconcentratlon areas." 

The coastal wetl ands of Lake St. Claf rr 

the lower Detroit Riverr and western Lake

DABBLING DUCKS 

ESTIMATED NUMBER 

USING A CORRIDOR 

PENNSYLVANIA 

Figure 50. Fa1 1 migration corridors for dabbling ducks (Tribe Anatini ) across 

Lake St. Clair (Be1 l rose 1968). 

Erie provide some of the finest 

concentration areas of this type along the 

flyways. These areas are characterized by 

an abundance of waterfowl foods, as well 

as by low wave energy and low human 

disturbance. Canvasbacks, redheads* 

animal foods, Canada geese and mallards 

also feed heavf ly on waste grains fn 

agricultural fields. Food availability 

may be more important than food 

preference, especially during the sprf ng 

migration when food supplies are less 

abundant. Food availabil ity f n wetlands 

is reduced by extreme high and low water 

levels, heavy siltationr turbidity, heavy 

hunting pressure* and other disturbances. 

Jones (1982) examined the food 

preference of wintering go1 deneye, greater 

scaup, and lesser scaup at the mouth of 

the Detroit River. He determined that 30 

food taxa were utilized by the waterfowl 

including 10 plant and 20 animal 

references. Wild csler 

1, pondweeds ( 

and other plant speci es made up over 60% 

of the food budget of most of the sampled

- - 

DIVING DUCKS 



Figure 51. Fa1 1 migration corridors for diving ducks (Tribe Aythyini) across 

Lake St. Clair (Be1 lrose 1968). 

waterfowl. Miller (1943) and Bell rose 

(1976) have found that other diving ducks* 

particularly canvasbacks and redheads* 

feed on submersed aquatics such as those 

noted above as well as waterweed Elc&& 

s2amku&) 

In western Lake Erie marshes, 

Bednar f k (19751 found that preferred 

natural foods of diving ducks* such as 

wild celery* appeared to be more adversely 

affected by turbidity and siltation than 

foods of dabbling ducks and geese. In 

general, Great Lakes conservation agencies 

do not encourage the creation of resident 

wintering flocks# particularly in the Lake 

St. Clafr region* because of the problem 

of waterfowl starvation during severe 

winters. Waterfowl that reach the spring 

breeding grounds in good condition tend to 

exhibit greater nesting success than those 

which are undernourished (Bell rose 1976). 

Q&l&lng duck These ducks are so 

ca1 led because they normal 1 y do not dive 

below the water for food, but merely 

dabble on the bottom In shallow water. 

Annually about 17r500r000 ma1 1 ards and 

pintail s migrate down fl ight corrldors 

from Canada to the United States east of 

the Rocky Mountains (Bellrose 19681, The 

l argest portion, about 12r275r000s enter 

the geographfcal conffnes of the 

Mississippi Flyway from the northern Great 

Plains, About 20% of these birds continue 

across the Mississfppf Flyway and move 

down the Atlantic Flyway. In addition, 

anotRer 650,000 black ducks move south 

from Ontario and Quebec. 

_

CANADA GEESE 



75,100 - 150,000 

5,100 - 25,000 

Figure 52. Fall migration corridors for Canada geese (Branta canadensis) across 

Lake St. Clair (Bellrose 1968). 

Several corridors carrying dabbllng As the name suggests, 

ducks cross the Great Lakes region (Flgure these ducks normally dive below the water 

50). An estimated 65,000 mallards, 35,000 for food. About 40200r000 diving ducks 

wigeons, and 25r000 pintalls move eastward annually migrate south into the United 

along the Chesapeake Bay Corridor. The States east of the Rockies (Bell rose 

corrldor starts In the upper Mfss'lssfppi 113681, Slightly over 609% of these are 

Rf ver Val ley and Progresses eastward scaups. Redheads are second fn abundance 

through Wlsconsin, Mlchiganr and Ohlo. It at ZO%5 while canvasbacks and ring-necked 

encompasses the marshes of Lake St. Clafr ducks each form about 7% of the 

and Lake Erie f ram Algonacr Mlchfganr to populaticn. As with the dabbling ducksr 

Sandusky Bay. From these marshes it is a nume;.ous diving duck mfgration corridors 

645 km* non-stoP flight to Chesapeake Bay cross the Great Lakes region (Figure 51). 

where most of these ducks winter, The 

Bl ack Duck Corridor extends southwest~ard The Southern Michigan Corrfdor takes 

from eastern Ontario5 across Lake St. the maln flow of diving duck passage from 

CIair to the confluence of the Wabash and eastern WJSCO~SSR~ across southern Mich- 

Qhfe, riversr and on south to Arkansas. lgan to Saginaw Bay and the Lake St. 

Approximately 35#QOO black ducks use this Cl a i r-Detroi t River-Lake Erte wet1 ands 

path, areas. Diving ducks congregate on SagJnaw 

100

Bay to the extent that peak numbers 

include 22,000 lesser scaupsr 22r000 

redheads, and 7,000 canvasbacks. 

Approximately 160 km to the south, peak 

populations of 380,000 lesser scaupsr 

260r 000 canvasbacks, and 42r000 redheads 

have been observed fram Lake St. Cl ai r to 

western Lake Erie. Although as many as 

15,000 diving ducks may winter on the 

Detroit River, at least 700,000 fly on 

Prom Lake St. Clalr to wintering grounds 

in the Atlantfc Flyway. This route is 

known as the Chesapeake Bay Corridor and 

is a similar route to the one taken by 

mallards and pintails. 

More than any other species 

of waterfowl, Canada geese have radical1 y 

altered their migration routes In the past 

few decades. Bell rose (1968) attrf buted 

this great change tn their migration 

habits to their rapid adoption of newly 

created waterfowl refuges, They are still 

in the process of evolvtng new migration 

corridors, Currently, about lr300s000 

Canada geese leave Canada in the fall for 

wintering grounds in the United States. 

The largest number, 600~000 use the 

Atlantic Flyway, while another 475,000 

take the Mississippi Flyway. Most of the 

Atlantic Flyway crossings of the Great 

Lakes take place over Lake Ontarfor but 

one corridor uses the marshes of Lake St. 

Clair (Figure 52). The main migration 

corridor for Canada geese i n the 

Mississippi Flyway extends down the west 

shore of Lake Michigan, 

Mississippi River valley. 

then down the 

Snow geese (m 1 use 

the Misstssippi Flyway. Each October 

about 450r000 birds 1 eave Canada for 

wfntering grounds on the coastal marshes 

of Louisiana. The main corridors follow 

the east and west shores of Lake Michiganr 

converging fn the Mississippi River valley 

north of Loulsi ana. The easternmost 

flfght corridor, used by about 15,000 

geese, runs from the south end of James 

Bay to the marshes of Lake St. Clair and 

western Lake Erie, then turns south- 

westward across Indiana, A somewhat 

Jarger number of birds uses a corridor 

that extends from James Bay through 

Saginaw Bayr and then merges with the 

flight path from Lake St. Clair, 

4.4 WETaNDS AS HABITAT TO FISH AND 

WlLDLlFE 

Because the Lake St. Clair wetlands 

are composed of a variety of habitats 

including open ponds, cattail/reed 

marshesr earthen dikes, barrier beachesr 

delta flats, and wooded swamps, many 

species of plants and animals are 

attracted to the coastal marsh community. 

Of particular importance to fish and 

nil dl i fe, both resident and transient 

species# are the following considerat~ons: 

1) food chain production and energy flow, 

2) ffsh productionr spawningr and nursery, 

31 waterfowl migration, wintering and 

nesting, 4) mammal forager and 5) 

invertebrate habftat. Dole (1975) er- 

timated the density of wildlife in the 

vicinity of Lake St. Clair (Table 33). 

Most animals showed a stable trendr but a 

few important species are decreasing in 

abundance. 

Although there are scattered patches 

of wetlands around the perimeter of Lake 

St. Clair, the wetlands in the St. Clair 

Delta provide the most valuable habitat 

for fish and wlldllfe, includtng water- 

fowl. Mot only ara these deltaic wetlands 

productlver they are diverse and exhibit 

high connectivity to the St. Clair River 

channels as well as to Lake St. Clair. 

With regard to fish spawning in these 

wetlands, important species include the 

following: lake sturgeon* northern piker 

rnuskell unget carp, golden shiner, emerald 

shiner, common shinerr spottai l shlner, 

spotffn shiner, channel catf ishr bull- 

heads# rock basst pumpkf nseed, bl ueglll , 

sunfish, and walleye (Figure 39). It has 

been suggested that ice fishing$ as f n 

Little Muscamoot Bay of Harsens Islandp is 

particul arl y good because wet1 ands are an 

important source of fish foods in winter 

(W. C. Bryant, MDNRI Ffsheries Division, 

pers. corn.). Howevers except for gtzzard 

shad, most f I sh mlgrate to deeper waters 

in fall and return to the shallows 

nearshore envi ronrnents fs1 lowing ice 

breakup (Werner and Manny 19791, Because 

wetlands warm up more quickly than Lake 

St. Clair in the sprfnge these coastal 

environments may be a crftical source of 

food for ftsh attracted to the sharelines,

Gable 33, Status of wildlife in ttge vicinity of Lake St. 

Clair and connecting waterways (1970). 

Wild1 lfe group 

and species Density Trend 

Big game 

White-tailed deer 

Waterfowl 

Ducks 

Geese 

Small game 

Cottontail rabbit 

Ring-necked pheasant 

Ruffed grouse 

Gray squ i rrel 

Fox squirrel 

Woodcock 

Mourning dove 

Bobwhite qua11 

Furbearers 

Muskrat 

M'lnk 

Beaver 

Weasel 

Raccoon 

Skunk 

Opossum 

Badger 

Non-game 

Woodchuck 

Red fox 

Gray fox 

Crow 

Rod squirrel 

Coyote 

Raptars 

Rare and endangered 

Bald eagle 

American osprey 

Unusual or unique 

Sandhi1 1 cranes 

Golden sag1 e 

a Data source: Dole (1975). 

1 ow i ncreasi ng 

high 

rned f um 

rned i urn 

high 

1 ow 

1 ow 

medi um 

1 ow 

high 

1 ow 

high 

rned i um 

1 ow 

rned i urn 

rned i um 

high 

high 

1 ow 

rned i urn 

med l um 

rned i um 

high 

1 ow 

1 ow 

rned f urn 

rned i urn 

rare 

stabl e 

increasing 

stable 

stab1 e 

stabl e 

decreasing 

stable 

stabl e 

stable 

stab1 e 

stabl e 

stabl e 

decreasl ng 

stable 

'lncreas'lng 

increasing 

stable 

stab1 e 

stable 

stabl e 

stabl e 

stable 

stabl e 

stabl e 

stabl e 

decreasing 

decreasing 

stabl e 

translent

With regard to wildlife habitats the 

St. Clair Delta wetlands are also 

exceptional, The main reasons for this 

outstandfng habitat qua1 l ty are: 1) large 

areas of relatively pristine wetlandsJ 2) 

habitat diversity (several wetlands 

exhibit cornpl ete envl ronmental con- 

tlnuums), and 3) relatively few barriers 

to movements. Dickinson Island and the 

Bassett Is1 and-Goose Lake areas represent 

relatively pristine wetl ands with direct 

hydrologic connection to Lake St. Clafr 

and few barriers to movements or 

migration. In Figure 31, one can readily 

see the habitat diversity, juxtaposition 

of environments, and mix of open water and 

vegetation which contributes to high 

wild1 ife values (We1 l er and Spatcher 

1965). 

The importance of the coastal 

wetlands along Lake St. Clair with 

reference to waterfowl has a1 ready been 

discussed in Section 3.6. A1 though some 

waterfowl breeding does occur in the delta 

wetlands, the primary importance of the 

St, Clair River wetlands is in regard to 

resting and feeding habitat during 

migration. Because of availability of 

preferred plant and invertebrate foods 

(Dawson 19751, as well as fts location 

along the Atlantic and Missfssippi Flyways 

(Be1 1 rose 1968, 19761, these wetlands 

serve as concentration areas and stopover 

points for both dfving and dabbling ducks. 

Habitat degradation along western Lake 

Erie and Saginaw Bay, due to excessive 

turbidity, siltation and water quality 

decline (Martz and Ostyn 1977; U.S. 

Department of Interior 19771, i s 

associated with greater re1 iance on the 

St. Clair Delta wetlands. In this regards 

the waterfowl habltat deficien~les 

predicted for southeast Michigan as of the 

year 2000 are most significant (U.S. 

Department of Interior 1971). 

Large numbers of furbearers as we11 

as birds, reptiles, and amphibians have 

been identified in the St. Clair Delta 

wetlands (Herdendorf et al, 1981~). 

Muskrats abound in the cattafl marshes and 

raccoons are particul arly numerous where 

large trees occur. In comparison to the 

Canadian wetl ands, whfch consist largely 

of cattafl marshes and open-water areass 

the Dickinson Island wetlands on the 

American side of the delta exhibit much 

greater habitat diversity. Given access 

by boat via the abandoned channel which 

winds across Dickinson Island, both 

consumptive and nonconsumptive users can 

easfly enjoy this rich wildlife resource. 

To evaluate fish, wildlife and other 

values of wetlands, the Michigan Depart- 

ment of Natural Resources has developed a 

field evaluation manual (Wolverton 1981). 

However, the St. Clair Delta wetlands have 

not been rated by thfs agency. 

Neverthel essJ because of its exceptional 

fish, waterfowl, and other wildlife 

values, along with its accessibility to 

users and re1 at i vel y undeveloped nature, 

particularly Dickinson Is1 and# these 

wetl ands may we11 be among the mast 

valuable in the Great Lakes region.

5.4 WETLAND DISTURBANCE 

CHAPTER 5. HUMAM 81MPA67S AND APPLiED ECOLOGY 

A new awareness has arisen in the 

last decade over the alarming loss of 

wetlands. In Michigan, 71% of the coastal 

wetlands have been lost (Jaworski and 

Raphael 1978) and much of the remaining 

42r420 ha have been altered because of 

degraded water quality, changes in 

hydrology, and other factors, However, 

losses and degradation are not solely due 

to human intervention. Western Lake Erie 

has suffered a significant loss of aquatic 

vegatatlon, possfbl y because of changing 

1 ake 1 eve7 s, water movements, and carp 

feeding habits (Core 1948; Stuckey 1971). 

Saiches and flooding may temporarily 

reduce emergent wetlands; however, 

regeneration usually occurs. Converse1 y, 

human impacts such as dredging, filling, 

diking* and draining have a permanent 

adverse impact on the resource base. 

Adverse impacts in the St. Clair 

wetlands began wlth the exploitation of 

fish and wildlife prior to European 

contact and continued Into the 1850s. 

Howeverr these impacts were modest and the 

losses somewhat replaceable through 

natural reproducllon. Impacts which fol- 

lowed were more permanent. We w i l l 

discuss the adverse impacts within a 

historical framework spanning about 125 

years (Figure 53). This is how our 

present problems emerged and this is the 

way they have been addressed. 

Historicallyr modlficatfon of the 

wetlands of Lake St. Clair began shortly 

after European contact. Historical 

accounts suggest that the wetlands of Lak? 

St, Clair were not excessively exploited 

by the fur traders as were other wetlands 

of the Great Lakes such as those along 

western Lake Erie. An abundance of 

wildlife and fish attracted farmers from 

the settlement at Detroit. The desirable 

quallty and quantity of fish and wildlife 

led to the establlshment of fishing and 

huntlng clubs. In the mid-19th century* 

one such club, the Lake St. Clair Fishing 

and Shooting Club, spent $80r000 to 

improve the property it occupied in the 

delta (Jenks 1912). 

Historic maps reveal that the 

wet1 ands were not impacted sfgnif icantly 

In the 1850s (Meade 18571, Although 

maritime commerce was carried on through 

the lake and its distributary channels, 

emergent aquatics were abundant and 

diverse throughout the St. Clair Delta and 

the mouth of the Clinton River. Jenks 

(1912) noted that wild rice (Zlrsnls 

aauatlca) was abundant as were at least 

116 specfes and 25 varieties of wetland 

macrophytes, including sedges. Fish and 

wildlife were exploited in a non- 

commercial capacity in the area. In 1857 

New Baltimore was the only community in 

the northern part of Lake St. Clair. 

Significant wetland disturbances are 

associated with two interrelated cultural 

processes: agricultural development, which 

was followed by urban growth. The 

surveyor-general of the United States 

reported in 1815 that a large part of the 

southeastern regfon of the Michigan 

territory was swamp and practically 

worthless. As early as 1826 attempts were 

made for reclamation; but It was not until 

September 1850 that a general swampland 

law was enacted. Its purpose was to allow 

for draining and dikfng of nworthless 

public lands, lying as marshes or subject 

to periodic overflow by adjacent water- 

coursesw (Donaldson 19701, 

The 1850 swamp act stimulated 

significant wetland alteration. By 1873

Drec?ging, Filling, Rulkheadir~g 

- URBANIZATION - 

Figure 53. Historic trends in Lake St. Clair wetland disturbance, 

the land cover between the Detroit and establishment of the St, Clair Ship Canal, 

Clinton Rivers was in agriculture. The a 6 m channel dredged through South 

north shore of the lake a1 so supported Channel for commerclal navigation. 

agriculture. Establ ished villages such as 

New Baltimore grew, and new urban centers When the Grand Trunk Railway, the 

such as Anchorville were founded. thirdmode, wasconstructed, it dissected 

Wetlands at the head of the Detrof t Rlver the remaining wetlands in several places. 

were also being dredged. On the St, Clair However, on this shore1 ine most of the 

Delta, hardwoad forests of the premodern wetlands had a1 ready been drained so the 

deltawere cleared for farmland. About effect of this railroad was not 

half of the modern delta on Harsens Island particularly adverse. 

was diked. 

Several sportsmen's clubs were 

Three of trans~ortat'on which between 1850 and 1873 in 

were by the mid-1870s Ontarlo on portions of the delta which are 

provided improved access to the shoreline 

by boat, For example, in 

and An ra'lway was Ontario the Ste, Anne Club and the Canada 

constructed the perimeter of the Cl ub were founded, while In Mlchigan the 

lake Detroit to A1gonacv The Grande Paint- and the Old Clubs were 

was On the h4gher ground' establ j shed. Hotels Lo accommodate summer 

generally avofdfng the remaining 

tourjsts from Detroit were constructed on 

between New BaltimOre and 

the South Channel levee. Since the levees 

*lgonacr the bed was constructed were law and subject to periodic flood'ing, 

through St. John's Marsh# a shall0w jnter- bul k-headf ng began to appear. Iso1 ated 

distributary bay col onired with emergent fill jng and bulkheadjng was most fntense 

aquatics, a1 ong South Channel f the ~aSn navigatfon 

A second mode of transport with channel) and In ii few Isolated localities. 

adverse impacts on the delta was the The first road on the St, ClaJr Delta was 

105

constructed on the west side of South 

Channel to allow access and settlement. In 

contrast, the shore1 ine from the ihames 

River northward remained unaltered except 

for 1 imited settlement in the northern 

port1 on of Wal pol e Is1 and. 

Channel ization for commercial nav- 

igatfon began in earnest In 1886. The 

U. S. Congress authorized the deepening of 

the ClSnton River (Figure 54) to 2.4 m, 

and Lake St. Claf r and the St. Clair Flats 

Channel to a depth of 8.4 m. By 1892 the 

St. Clair Rlver was dredged as we1 1. On 

the lower portlon of South Channel, 

channels were dredged through the natural 

levees into Big Muscamoot Bay and 

bulkheading and backfilling for summer 

houslng contlnued. By 1903 the modern 

delta wetlands (the shal low inter- 

distributary bay) of Harsens Island 

continued to be drained, diked, and used 

for agriculture. 

The period 1900-1930 was the 

beginning of urbanlzation. Channels and 

roads were constructed a1 ong Middle and 

South Channels. The electric rail road was 

removed and replaced by highway M-29, 

linking Algonac with communities to the 

west. Recreational boating facflfties 

began to appear. Urban areas and 

waterways expanded at the expense of 

agriculture. Urbantzation more than 

doubled and agricultural land use declined 

to one-half in the St, John's Marsh area 

(Table 34 and Figures 55 and 56). Direct 

lmpacts on the wetlands contlnued. 

In 1945 Intense commercIa1 and urban 

growth began. Urban strip development 

extended from Detroit t o Algonac. 

Dredging, f i 11 f ng, and channel ization 

consumed and drained a sjgnificant portion 

af St, John's Marsh. Urban development 

also extended along the perimeter of 

Harsens Is1 and. To improve waterfowl 

habitat, most of the remalnlng portion of 

Marsens Island was diked and planted i n 

corn and other crops. Although most of 

the Ontarto portfon of the St. Clair Flats 

stfll remadns as the Walpole Island Indian 

Reserve, south of Wftchell Bay wetlands 

have been drained and channelized for 

agriculture. Dfkes were constructed to 

a1 1 e vi ate f 1 ood i ng and control water 

levels fn formerly unrestricted wet1 ands. 

The diking projects on Harsens Island and 

fn Ontario extended into the cattail 

marsh, Sedge and dogwood/meadow wet1 ands 

which are located at or just above the 

water table? were the areas initially 

drained for agrfculture. An analysis of 

coastal land use, based on 1973 

topographfc maps during record high lake 

levels reveals that the only significant 

areas of intact wetlands in Michigan were 

within the interdistributary basins of the 

St. Cl ai r Flats and a small area south of 

the Clinton River. In 1985 the Michigan 

wetlands of Lake St. Clair represented 

only some 29000 hectares of the land 

cover. 

Commerci a1 and recreational traffic 

has also had a considerable impact on Lake 

St. Clair. Bulk cargo and recreational 

boating have requ 1 red channel deepening. 

New channel and marine construction on the 

Lake St, Clair shoreline continues. 

Public maintenance dredging to accommodate 

1 ake carriers and private recreational 

craft is estimated to be 122,000 m3 

annual 1 y ( Rap hael et a1 . 1974) exclusive 

of the St. Clalr River. The construction 

of highway 1-94 from Detroit northward to 

Port Huron has improved access to the Lake 

St, Clair shoreline. Reduced driving time 

from Anchor Bay and Algonac to Detrolt has 

encouraged suburban devel opment, 

partlcularly along the western shoreline 

of Lake St. Clair. All of these factors 

have stimul ated development of the 

shoreline and have had adverse impacts on 

many of the wetlands. 

In part, because of the exceptional 

fish and wildlife productivity and 

Table a34. Land use change at St. John's 

Marsh. 

Land 

use -.LcuL- ..1974 

ha acres ha acres 

Urban 126 313 320 793 

Agriculture 822 2,035 431 1,066 

Waterways 21 52 109 269 

a Data source: Roller (1977 1.

Figure 54. Aerial photograph of the mouth of the Clinton River, Macomb County, 

Michigan, showing a coastal wetland (Verchev's Marsh) isolated from Lake St. Clair by 

channelization and residential development (June 1975).

Figure 551, Aerial photograph of St. John's Marsh on Bouvier Bay, and North Channel, 

St, Clair Delta (April 1949), Note wetlands established during low lake levels. Com- 

pare with Figure 56,

Figure 56. Aerial photograph of North Channel, St, Clair De'l ta, and St. John's Marsh 

on Bouvier Bay (May 1980). Compare with Figure 55, Note wetlands lost during high 

lake levels, residential development, dredge spoil sites, and highway (M-29) bi fur- 

eating marsh.

ecreational value of Lake St. Clalrr 

visitors from Mfchigan and Ontarfo 

continue to be attracted to the lake. The 

lake is readfl y accessible to the urban 

areas of metropolitan Detroit and Windsor 

as well as numerous small urban areas such 

as Flint, Saginaw, Port Huron, and Sarnia. 

Lake St. Cl air is the most valuable Great 

Lakes area for non-salmonid sport fish in 

Mlchlgan. For example, in 1975* nearly 

half of the total Great Lakes fishing 

effort was expended on Lake St. Clair 

(Jaworski and Raphael 1978). Furthermorer 

fur (rwskrat and raccoon) production of 

the area is among the highest in the 

State. 

Wlth increased commerce 4n the Great 

Lakes, a cutoff channel was dredged at 

South Channel where it debouches into Lake 

St. Clair. To accomodate Seaway traffic, 

a 8-m channel was dredged in 1952 through 

the interdistributary marsh for a dfstance 

of 10 km. Seaway Island, a large disposal 

site now occupies a portion of the 

Jntardistributary marsh. To improve 

recreational boating facillties and 

mitigate against further erosion, 

bulkheading and filling along all 

urbanized shore1 ines have occurred over 

the decades. Seawalls extendfng we1 1 

above hfyh water levels have replaced the 

natural levees which extended south from 

Harsens Island into Lake St. Clair, The 

number of crevasse channels which 

transported water, sediment, and nutrients 

into Muscamoot Bay has decreased. 

The degeneratfon of the St. Clair 

wetlands follows a historical pattern 

similar to that of other large wetland 

complexes in the United States, Initially 

stlrnulated by the 1850 swamp acts, 

agricultural activity occurred. A second 

signfffcant stlmulant was access5billty 

dus t o ssveral transportatton 

devslapments. Inter-urban electric 

raf 1 roads, excursfon vessels, and 

eventually, roads and interstate highways 

made the wetlands and the shoreline 

readily accessible. Ef f l cient transport 

routes have encouraged urban and suburban 

expanston, changfng summer residences to 

year-round housing , 

By contrast, access to the delta and 

the shoreline of Ontario is more dffficult 

because of the lack o f roads. 

Furthermore, southern Ontario is less 

populous and much of the eastern portion 

of the delta is an Indtan reserve, These 

physical and social factors have not 

encouraged as much wetland loss as seen in 

Michigan* except at the northern end of 

Walpole Island which has experienced 

wetl and loss. 

With the exception of the electric 

railroad through St. John's Marsh9 wetland 

losses occurred on the periphery of the 

resource; that is, modification began at 

the boundary between the marsh and the 

adjacent upland. In the St. Clair Delta 

agriculture was initiated on the premodern 

surface and gradual 1 y expanded southward 

to the transition (dogwood/meadow) zone 

and eventual f y into the shall ow inter- 

distributary bays. The natural levees 

were modifled by bulkheading in the 1870s. 

Filling, aided by bulkheads, extended into 

the deep interdistributary bays and onto 

the river shoulders. This pattern of 

development has continued to the present 

because wetland boundaries are difficult 

to ascertain, especial 1 y i n the Great 

Lakes where temporary lower lake levels 

provide a false perception of the position 

of the shore1 ine. 

Adverse impacts to the artificial 

(diked wetrands1 and 11 natural 

envi ronments identif led in section 4.1 as 

Lake St. Clair wetlands are shown in Table 

35. With the exception of the recently 

abandoned channels, which are in Ontar i or 

and the transgressive beaches which are 

generally Is01 ated, al? the wet1 ands have 

had adverse impacts. Bulkheads and fills 

have been constructed on the river 

shoul ders, crevasses, and margins of the 

deep-water Interdistributary bays for over 

a century. To construct roads, spoil was 

dredged from the landward side of the main 

channels which inadvertently led to the 

channel ization of the shallow bays. 

Bulkheads are a common structural feature 

along many shorelines of the lake and 

delta and appear to be detrimental to 

submersed aquatics ( Schl oesser and Manny 

1982). Bulkheads constructed on river 

shoulders occupy the shallowest portion of 

the rlvsr. Consequently, as dredge and 

f i 11 occursr submersed wetl ands are 

df spf aced i akeward where bottom attachment 

fs more difffcult because of stronger 

currents and greater depths.

Table 35. Adverse impacts to the various morphology types of Lake St. 

Clair wetlands. 

Wet1 and 

morphology type 

Impact Exampl e 

1. River shoulders bulkheaded, South Channel 

dredged dl sposal 

2. Abandoned river drainedr agriculture Harsens Island 

channels 

3. Recently abandoned no change 

channels 

4. Crevasse deposits channel 1 zed, 

bulkheaded 

Bassett Channel 

South Channel 

5. Shallow inter- di ked/drained, Harsens Is1 and 

dlstrlbutary bays agrtculture~ 

channel i zed 

6. Deep lnterdis- bulkheadedr 

tributary bays channel ized 

Harsens Is1 and 

7. Transgress1 ve minor urban Big Muscamoot Bay 

beaches settlement, 

bul kheaded 

* , 

8. Shallow shelves dikedr filled, Mitchell Bay 

channel i zed 

9. Barrier/l agoon channel fzed 

* 

~orth of Thames River 

10. Transi tional areas diked, agriculturer 

filled for residenti 

a1 devel opment 

Harsens Is1 and 

11. Estuarl ne/ 

floodbasf n 

12. Diked 

diked/drainedr St. John's Marsh 

agriculture/urban 

d i ked/drai ned 

East shore1 i ne 

(orfgf nally shelves) (O~tarlo)

To accommodate rec reattonal boating 

and commerci a1 shippl ng, channels to 

depths of 8 m have been dredged on the 

perimeter and In the basin of Lake St, 

Clair. Also there is considerable 

residential pressure on the shore1 fne to 

include the wetlands of the basin, 

Bu?kheadtngr ftlling, dtking9 and djsposal 

of dredged materials have occurred since 

the early 1900s. 

Because of the need for commercial 

navigation and recreational boating fn 

take St. Clair, a significant amount of 

channel dredging has occurred. The U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, which Is 

responrj-i ble for harbor maintenance, has 

conducted dredging and disposal activities 

at the Cl inton and St. Claf r Rfvers and 

the 8 m navigation channel bisecting the 

lake, In Ontario the Department of Public 

Works mafntains the St. Clair Cutoff 

Channel and the harbor at Wallaceburg, 

east of the St, Clalr Rlver Delta. To 

maintafn channels at the proscribed 

depths, the aceumul ated sedlment was 

normal 1 y hydraul Jcall y dredged and 

dfsposud of in convenient areas such as in 

designated portions of the open lake. 

The volume of materfals dredged for 

take St. ClaJr and the St, Clair River 

navjgatlon projects Is shown on Table 36. 

Over the 52-year perJodp about 782,800 m3 

were dredged from U.S, project sites in 

the two areas. More recent data indicate 

that from 1971 through 1984 dredging 

activity in Lake St, Clair totaled 382r300 

m3, The average for the 14-year period Is 

27t300 m3 annually which is considerably 

less than the historlcal average of 

313,200 m3 for Lake St. Clalr. On the 

Cl inton RIver the 1971-1984 total was 

45,000 d, which approximates the historic 

average. 

The Ontario maintenance dredging and 

new work dredging averaged about 195,800 

m3 annually. Most of the dredging in 

Ontario is confinad to the St, Clair 

Cutoff Channel (182,400 d/year). 

In 1970 the U.S. Congress enacted 

Pub1 dc Law 91-611 (River and Harbor Flood 

Control Act), which authorized the Corps 

to construct, operate, and malntain 

confined disposal sites for containment of 

polluted dredged spoil in the Great Lakes 

for a period not to exceed 10 years. At 

that timer the St. Clair Cutoff Channel 

and Lake St, Clajr sediments were 100% 

polluted9 and the Clinton River was 85% 

polluted (Raphael et al. 19741. The 

pollutant was primarily mercury, although 

the conventional pollutants were also 

beginning to reach limits set by the U.S. 

Table 36. Hiituricaa dredging total 5 of Corps of Engineers projects in Lake 

St. Cldir 1320-1972. 

--- 

Mafntenance New work Annual 

d redgi ng dredgl ng Total average 

Channel oF Laire St. Clair 2~894r400 13~634.600 1Sr529,000 317,900 

Cl inton Rlver 237 r 400 96,900 334,300 6,400 

St. Cl air River 3 ,125,300 20~879~200 24r004r500 461,600 

a Data source: Raphael et aS, (19741. 

i 12

Envl ronmental Frotactfon Agency. To 

comply wlth PL 91-631, two conflned 

disposal sites with a combtned cdpaclty of 

1.5 mllfion m3 were constructed at the 

north end of Dfckinson Island. Both sltes 

were placed on tho premodern surface of 

the St. Clair Delta. The west site 

enclosed an area of about 22 hectares and 

the east site about 48 hectares (U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers 1974). In Ontarfo the 

St. Clair Cutoff Channel was constructed 

in the early 1950s to accommodate Seaway 

traffic along South Channel, The channel 

was dredged through the fnterdistrlbutary 

bay and was 1 inked to the main navigation 

channel in Lake St. Clalr. Dredge spoll 

was put Sn a disposal sltu (Soaway Island) 

along the east bank of South Channel. The 

facflity covers an area of about I1 km2, 

which was prlmarlly colonized wfth 

emergent macrophytes typical of an Inter- 

dl stributary bay snvl ronment. 

Private or contract dredglng (under 

Sec.10 permit of the U. S. River and 

Harbor Act of 1899) is done by local 

cftizens or homeowners to fmprove access 

to Lake St. Clalr or to construct 

boatslfps along the lake or the 

dfstributaries (Figure 57). The data are 

not normally tabu1 ated; however, based on 

our estimates, private dredging volumes 

probably average about 7,600 to 11,400 m3 

annually. SSgnff tcant areas of dradglng 

for restdential development have occurred 

Figure 57. Commercial development tin Har- 

sens Is1 and wetland (August 1984). 

on the shoreline of Anchor Bay, St. John's 

Marsh, at the mouth of the Clinton RIver 

and along the distrfbutary channels of the 

dsl ta, parttcul arl y North and South 

channels. Prfvate dredging in btarfo is 

lim~ted to approach channels for 

recreational craft Jn Mitchell Bay and a 

marina complex near Belle River on the 

south shore of Lake St. Clafr. 

Dfking fragments coastal wetlands, 

separating the managed parcels from the 

adjacent littoral and upland environments. 

General1 y, as the slre of the wetland is 

diminfshed, so Is the vegetative and 

wildlife diversity (Larsen 1973). 

Furthermore, dik 1 ng of wet1 ands reduces 

vegetation diversity because water level 

controls are established to maintain a 

particular vegstatfon type or envlron- 

mental condftlon. Stabll $zing water 

levels tends to eliminate those plant 

species whfch raqul re low-water periods 

for regenerat 1 on, and promotes domfnance 

of a few tolerant spectes such as cattafl 

( spp. 1 and woody plants (Keddy and 

Reznfcek 1984). 

The hydrologic isolation of dlked 

systems 1s reflected In their greatly 

reduced flsh use and simpllfled 

1 nvertebrate commun5t~esr particularly 

where wlnter ice and summer temperatures 

reduce df ssol ved oxygen and otherwise 

reduce the water qua1 ity. The effect of 

earthen dtkes on waterfowl mfaratlon, 

other wild1 ffe movementsr and prtrdatfon Is 

not well known. Howevert DennTs and North 

(1981) have shown a dramatlc decline in 

the use of the Lake St. Clair marshes by 

true marsh-dwellfng specles such as the 

Amerlcan wigeon ( 

), green-wfnged tea2 ( 

ood duck (&.& 

1968-69 to 1976-77 the use by these 

dabbl lng ducks decl fned by 73% durf ng the 

spring pertod. Autumn marsh use also 

declfned by 40%. Howeverr the 

investigators noted that sprlng use 

generally provides a batter f ndicatlon of 

the value of the wetlands to mfgrant 

waterfowl si nee the managemnt techn l quas 

whfch were used during the fall huntfng 

seasons are not Implemented during the 

sprf ng,

Discovery of mercury contaml natfon In 

tha St. Clafr Rfver-Lake St. Clafr-Detrolt 

RJver-Lake Erie system in 1970 generated 

great pub1 l c Interest In the mercury 

levels of water and flsh, Subsequent 

banntng of sport and commercial ffshlng 

led to testing for trace mercury by 

varjous State and Federal agencies to 

def f ne the extent of the pollution and to 

determf ne its major sources. Two chemfcal 

plants, Dow Chemical Corporatlon, Sarnia* 

Ontarfo, and BASF Wyandotte Chemical 

Corporatlon, Wyandotte, Mfchfgan, were 

fdentff fed as major contributors to the 

mercury pollution of Lake St. Clair and 

Lake Erie (Waiters et al. 19741, These 

companfes manufactured chlorf ne gas and 

caustlc soda by the alactrolytlc process, 

whlch lnvolves the slectrolysis of brfne 

to produce chlorlne gas and a mercury- 

sodium metal ama'lgarn. The amalgam 1s 

contacted wlth water to produce sodium 

hydroxf de, the mercury metal belng 

recycled ta tho afectrotytfc coll, The 

rate of accfdental mercury release from 

these two plants has been sstfmated to be 

25 kg per day from 1950 to 1970 for the 

Dow Chsmlcal plant and S to 10 kg per day 

from 5939 to 1970 for the OASF Wyandotte 

plant (Federal Water Oualfty 

Admfnfstratfsn l970). 

Waltars @t at, (19741 calculated that 

228 metrlc tons of mercury pol Jution had 

been laadad to the top 20 cm of western 

Lake Erie sediment durlng tho p~rlod 1939 

to 1971, Sodlment cores takan at the 

mouth of the Detroft Rfver and wastern 

Lake Erica y folded surfaca mercury valutls 

up to 3.8 ppm whleh generally decreased in 

concentratton exyonentfally wfth depth 

f FIgurs $81. Several yoars after the 

chlor-alkalf plants diminished aperation 

ths area was agafn carad (Wflson and 

Wdlturs 19789 vfth analyses shovfng that 

recent deposits covered the high1 y 

contrrnlnated sedfnrcsnt wfQh a thrn layer of 

new material vhlch had mercury 

concentrat l ons approaching backgraund 

lsvsls 6B,b ppm). As a result af these 

discharges, marcury fn flsh of take St. 

Clnlr and western Lake Erfe was a major 

contaminant problem In the early 1970s. 

Levels of total mercury in walleye 

C L 1 col lectsd from 

Figure 58. Mercury concentration in sedi- 

rrient core from western Lake Erie near 

mouth of Detroit River (Halters et al. 

1974). Note mercury-enriched surface zone 

over1 yi ng sediment havi ny natural back- 

ground mercury level s (dashed 1 ine). 

Lake St. Clair have decl ined from over 2 

ug/g In 1970 to 0.5 ug/g In 1980. In 

western Lake Erie, 1968 levels of mercury 

were 0.BA3ug/g as compared to only 0.31 

ug/g in 1976. The rapid environmental 

response subsequent to the cessation of 

the point source discharges at Sarnia, 

Ontarlo, and Wyandotte* Michigan, can be 

attributed to rapid flushing of the St. 

Cl a1 r-Detroit Rf ver system, the high load 

of suspended sediment delivered to western 

Lake Erier and t h e high rate of 

productivity (International Jolnt Com- 

missjon 1981). 

Mudroch and Capob-ianco (1978) studied 

the relatlonshlp between the concentration 

of seven metals In sediment and 

marshwater, and uptake of these metals by 

emergent, submersed, and fl oat1 ng-l eaved 

plants growing In wetlands located on the 

east shore of Lake St. Clair. They found 

a hf gh correl atton between metals and 

organfc carbon contents In the sediments. 

The accumulation of metals In plants 

varied fram specfes to species (Table 37) 

and showed a complex relatfanshlp with 

metal concentratfons i n the sed i ment . 

Water-mf l foil ( spp.) and 

pondweed ( lated more 

metal than the ather aquatic plants.

Table 37. Metals concentratiorls in livirly plant tissues from Big Point 

Marsh, Ontario on Lake St. Clair. a 

Metals (ggm) 

Specles Pb Zn C r N! Cd Go Cu 

a Data source: Mudroch and Capobianco (1978). 

Metal concentrations In roots of broad- 

leaved cattat purple 

loosestrjfe ( , and 

pickerel weed were 

found to be hlgher than in the aboveground 

biomass. The metals taken up by marsh 

flora are retafned In the tissues and 

after decay they become a part of the 

marsh surface sediment. 

Jaworskf and Raphael (1976) compiled 

comprehensfve data on wetland loss for the 

Mlchfgan sjde of Lake St. Clair. In 1873 

the U.S. portion of Lake St. Clair 

supported 7,274 hectares of wetland 

vegetation (TabTe 381. By 1973 this 

habitat had dwlndled to 2,020 hectares. 

Significant losses not on1 y occurred on 

the St. Clair Delta and St. John" Marsh 

but on the entire margin of the lake as 

well. Gaukler Polnt at the head of the 

Detroit River was colonized with 187 

hectares of wetlands and the Clfnton River 

had over 1,295 hectares of habitat at its 

mouth and f t s flood basln. Some coastal 

areas* particular1 y north of the Cl i nton 

River appear to have been drained for 

agriculture in the 1860s suggestfng that 

the 1868-1873 data represent rninjrnum 

rather than maxlmum wetland acreage. 

In contrast to Michigan's wetlands 

being lost to the ongofng urbanizationr 

Ontarfo wetlands are being lost to 

agriculture, The wetlands from the Thames 

River north to Chenal Ecarte dwindled Prom 

about 3,600 hectares in 1965 to 2,900 

hectares in 1970 (McCul lough 1982). About 

700 hectares or nearly 20% of the 

prlvately owned resource base was lost 

over the 5-year period. Figure 59 and 

Table 38 reveal specific areas of wetland 

loss of the coastal Ontarlo wetlands 

excluding the Walpole Island Indian 

Reserve. Drai nlng for agricultural use 

has accounted for 91% of the wetland loss 

whereas marina and cottage development has 

consumed 9% of the resource. Clearly, 

urban pressure Is presently a problem In 

Michigan and agriculture pressure a 

problem in coastal Ontario, 

Although the Ontario shore of Lake 

St, Clair is low lying and subject to 

flooding, erosion has on7 y been tdentified 

as a hazard from the Thames Rfver westward 

(Boul den 1975). This suggests that 

permanent loss of wetland habitat north of 

the Thames River 1s due t o human 

interventton. During the record high lake 

l eve1 fn the early 1970~~ about lrOOO 

hectares of emergent shore1 f ne marsh f rom 

Mitchell Bay southward to the Thames River 

were temporarily lost (McCullough 19821. 

This loss was tempered in part by the 

flooding of transitjon vegetation which 

occurred on the upland (east) margfn of 

the wetlands, Slmflarly the delta and 

Anchor Bay are subject to flooding, though 

erosion ds not identified as a serfous 

problem (Great Lakes Basfn Commission

Table 38. - 

a 

Michigan and Ontario wetland losses on Lake St, Clair. 

Mlchigan 

1 ocat i on 

1868-73 

(ha) 

1973 

(ha) Loss (ha) 

St. Clair Flats 5,473 

Swan Creek 75 

Marsac Point 6 1 

New Baltimore 2 1 

Salt River 162 

Cl i nton River 1,295 

Gaukler Polnt 187 

Total 7,274 2 r 022 5,252 

Ontar lo 1965 to 1973 Wet1 and 

1 ocat i on Area loss (ha) type Cause 

Thames Rfver 59 

Thames Rlver mouth 7 4 

Bradley Marsh 327 

Balmoral Marsh 11 

Snake Island Marsh 156 

St. Lukes Bay 22 

Patricks Cove 5 9 

Mitchell Bay 7 

Mud Creek Marsh 167 

Tota 1 882 

diked 

open 

diked 

diked 

diked 

diked 

diked 

d I ked 

d l ked 

agriculture 

mari ne/cottage 

construction 

agriculture 

agriculture 

agriculture 

agriculture 

agriculture 

agriculture 

agriculture 

a Data sources: Jaworski and Raphael (19761, McCullough (1982). 

1975). The recent losses here are due to 

dlktng and/or ffllfngr fn most Instances, 

Par urban growth. 

The wetlands of Lake St, Clair hav~ 

been mapped from older navfgatton charts 

and recent topagraphlc maps CFlgure 60). 

Thfs figure illustrates signiffcant losses 

between 1873 and 1968 on the periphery of 

the lake, However, the most apparent 

1 mpacts are evident in the Clinton River, 

the St. Clai r Delta* and the eastern shore 

of the lake. It is ev4dent that the 

wetlands in all three areas have been 

modified along their margins. The 

wetlands on the eastern shore1 ine were 

approximately 2.5 km wide. Since 1873 

they have been impacted from the landward 

side and are now about 0.8 km in width. 

The progression of losses Jn the St. Clair 

Delta follows a similar geographic 

pattern. The losses in both areas were 

fnf tial ly stimulated by agriculture. In 

the Cl inton River area, wetl and losses 

occurred from both the landward as well as 

the 1 akeward boundary. Fundamental lyr an 

1 sol ated wetl and has been created.

Figure 59. Wetland losses along the Ontario shore1 ine of Lake St. C'lair 

(McCul lough 1982).

Figure 60. Comparison of Lake St. Clai r 

1968. 

Table 39 represents a summary of 

wetland losses in Lake St. Clalr. Since 

the topographic quadrangles and the 

navigation charts only dlsplay emergent 

wetlands, the area values of submergent 

aquatics were estimated. The re1 atlve 

1 osses between the historical perf ods are 

evldent. The losses on Table 39 are 

greater than that noted by Jaworski and 

Raphael (1976) because thais data did not 

include what is now surm!sed to be 

submersed vegetation, The percentage of 

wetland area lost fn Michfgan is greater 

than In Ontario (45% vs. 34X)r but the 

actual area lost in Ontario exceeds that 

lost in Michigan. In Michigan as well a5 

fn Ontario* more of the wetland base was 

l ost along the shore1 ines than in the 

delta. Slnce the coastal zone wetlands 

are parallel to Lake St. Clair, their 

accesslbilfty plays an faportant role in 

thefr modification. The St. Clafr Delta 

conversely projects into Lake St. Clafrr 

limfting accessibi7ity and hence adverse 

LAKE 

38.968 

coastal wetlands distribution in 1873 and 

impacts. It should not be inferred from 

the data that the wetland quality and 

diversity have not changed over the 95- 

year period. In sum, 9r 136 hectares of 

the resource base have been lost. 

Both natural disturbances, such as 

water-level fluctuations (as the Great 

Lakes water levels oscill ate) as we1 7 as 

cultural disturbances ( ~ . g . diking) ~ 

affect the wetland ecosystems. A s 

reflected In Eugene Odurnts qlpulse 

stability concept," some of these 

disturbances can be beneficial. In this 

section, however, the lmpacts of adverse 

cultural effects have been reviewed. Of 

particular concern are the following: 1) 

wet1 and loss* 2) dikl ng, fragmentationr 

and loss of hydrologic connectivity and 

3) changes in the environmental gradient 

and plant communities.

Table 39. Comparison of 1873 and 1968 Lake St, Clair wetland areas. 

Location 

St. Clair Delta 5,414 3,077 9,641 7,234 15,055 10,311 

Cl 1 nton River 19192 248 -- -- 1,192 248 

Remaining Mich. 

shore1 I ne 1,900 806 -- -- 1,900 806 

Remai njng Ontario 

shore1 1 ne -- -- 4,219 1,862 4,219 1,862 

-- -- -_IL 

Total 7,506 4,131 13,860 9,096 22,366 13.227 

As discussed in this section, during 

the period 1873-1968? approximately 9,136 

hectares of coastal wetlands have been 

lost. This amounts to a 41% reductlon in 

the original coastal wetl and resource base 

of Lake St. Clair. The greatest 

percentage loss has been on the American 

side and the greatest area loss on the 

Canadian side. More wetlands have been 

destroyed along the shorel ines than in the 

delta. In additionr except for Dickinson 

Island and St. John's Marsh* the upper 

zones (i.e.# the sedge marsh-shrub-swamp 

fringe) were converted to other land uses. 

The juxtapositfon of corn fields and diked 

cattail marshes on St. Anne Island is a 

case in point. At present, nearly half of 

these extant wetl ands along Lake St. Clair 

consist of cattail communities. 

Loss of coastal wetlands along the 

Michigan sfde of Lake St. Clalr results in 

a loss of wetland function and value. For 

example, public drains installed to 

improve runoff now occupy former creek 

channels, which no longer benefit from the 

flood water storage, sedfment trapping, 

and nutrient uptake afforded by the 

natural wetlands. Nor do the remalnlng 

wetlands along the river mouths and 

shorel ines, which have been reduced f n 

size, partially developed (especi a1 1 y on 

the lakeward sfdeIo and otherwfse 

impacted, have the fish and wildlife 

valves they once had. 

hectares* fn the St. Clafr Delta are now 

diked. This includes St. John's Marsh, 

which is isolated from Lake St. Clafr by 

earthen berms, but is not subject to water 

level controls. With the exception of St. 

John's Marsh, the upper part of the St. 

Clair Flats State Game Area, and a few 

other small parcels, over 75% of the diked 

wetlands are colonlred by cattails and 

associated submersed aquatic comunlties. 

The phrase "diked cattail marshesn is 

indeed appropriate. What is important 

here is that it fs the remainfng open- 

system wetl ands which are contributing to 

flsh production, wild1 lfe habitat, and 

dlving duck feeding of Lake St. Clair. In 

contrast, the diked wetlands provide more 

of a single purpose - that of attracting 

dabbling ducks, especially mallards for 

waterfowl hunters. 

The adverse impact of isolatfng and 

fragmenting wetlands by means of roadbeds, 

canals, earthen dikes, and other 

developments appears not to be fully 

recognfzed. For example, many conser- 

vat1 onists 1 n Michigan are advocating the 

preservation of St. John's Marsh, but feb 

call for an increase In Its hydrologfc 

connectfvfty to Lake St, Clafr. more over^ 

unless a wetland fs physically destroyed, 

not mere1 y f ragmentedr most wet1 and 

researchers would not refer to an Is01 ated 

wetland as be'lng gtlost.gt 

Approxlmately one-half of the Current coastal development not on1 y 

remafnfng coastal wetlands, f .e., 5,280 results .fn fragmentation and loss of 

119

hydrologic connectivity, but also 

frequently Is assocfated with the loss of 

As indtcated in Appendix M and on 

Figure 61r most of the ownership of the 

upper p1 ant communities (Jaworski and larger* extant coastal wetlands 1 ies in 

Raphael 1976). Therefore, most of these public hands. Exceptions are St, Johnts 

extant wetlands conslst of just cattail 

and submersed aquatfc communities, rather 

Marsh, whlch the State of Michigan is 

attempttng to purchase from the remal n l ng 

than a compl eta wet1 and communfty private ownersr and Walpole Is1 and, 

contfnuum. Changfng of water levels In Ontarior which forms an Indian Reserve. 

the Great Lakes w i l l t then, result in the Many of the undfked coastal wetlands on 

loss ofthe current functfon fn a given 

wetland as opposed to the shift of this 

theCanadian side of the St. CJaSr Delta 

are owned by the Province of Ontario, wlth 

function laterally in accord with the the exception of Walpole Island, Canada's 

vegetatfon movements. In contrast, as 

exemplified by Dickinson Island, wetlands 

Department of the Environment (DOE) owns 

the Lake St. Clair National Wildlife Areap 

which are connected directly to Lake St. whereasDucks Unlimited has ownership OF 

Clair and sxhlbit a full environmental 

gradient, tend to experience lateral 

diked marshes south of Mitchell Bay. 

shifts In function and values. 

Furthermore, they are mafntained at little 

The land ownership of the Michigan 

portion of the delta is shown in Figure 

or no cost to the pub1 ic. 62. Two open water parcels, f.e.* Units A 

and B of the St. Clair Waterfowl Refuge, 

Small, isolated wetlands near 

developments such as suburban housing* 

marinas, etc., oxhibit proximity and offsite 

Impacts. Proximity impacts include 

ambfent noise levels as well as human and 

pet intrusions. Off-site affects center 

on nutrfent and sediment loading resulting 

f rem wlnd and water transport mechanisms. 

Xf the extant parcel of wetland is zoned 

for resldentlal or some other intensive 

use, there are pressures for filling and 

development. Fl rep as a disturbance, 

seams to be limfted to the cattafl and 

sedge marshes of Dickinson Island 

(Jaworskl et a1, 1979). 

5.2 WETLAND OWNERSHIP AND 

MANAGEMENT 

Wetland ownarship Js in the hands of 

individuals as we91 as State, provincial 

and Federal agencies. The management of 

the wetlands by these groups follows 

df verse strategies. The current ownership 

of the coastal wetlands as well as the 

zoning and long-range plans wf 11 strong? y o 5 10 15 20 

affect the future use of these Slatule M~les 

envfronmenls. In thfs section, an attempt 

has been made to project the future land Figure 61. Location map of individual 

use of these areas, and by usinpa those coastal wetlands of the St. Clair 

p r ogect 1 ans address the issues of River-Lake St. Clair ecosystem; character- 

managemnts restorationl and arti f i ci a1 istics and ownership of each wetland are 

construct don of wet1 ands, given in Appendix M. 

728

Figure 62. Ownership map of the Michigan portion of the St. Clair Delta. 

are administered by the Michigan DNR. 

Approximately 40% of Dickinson Island is 

in private ownership, especially the 

northern and eastern shores as well as a 

block in the south-central area. In 

addition, the U,S. Army Corps of Engineers 

manages two disposal sites on Dickinson 

Is1 and along North Channel, and there are 

private bottom1 and patents along the 

distributary channels of both Dickinson 

and Harsens Islands. Although the 

Department of Natural Resources is slowing 

the residential and summer home 

development along these dfstributary 

channels, the land remains in private 

ownership. At present, the lower part of 

Harsens Is1 and, and much of Dickinson 

Is1 and, and those unpatented wet1 ands and 

adjacent shall ow-water bottomlands would 

be considered part of Michigan's St. Clair 

Flats State Game Area. Ownership of the 

small, undj ked wet1 and parcels scattered 

along Anchor Bay and along the westerns 

eastern, and southern shores sf Lake St. 

Cl air is generally private. 

At present, in the delta there are 

two basic management stradagjes: 1) 

natural and 2) managed for waterfowl 

hunting and perhaps breeding as well. The

pub1 icly owned* open wetland systems are 

natural responding to seasonal and 1 ong- 

term water level fluctuatlons. In 

comparf son, the diked wetl ands consf st 

largely of cattail marshes that are 

managed by means of electric pumps, flood 

gates and weirs. In several managed 

marshes, crops are grown, then flooded to 

facll itate waterfowl feedfng. 

No sf gnif fcant changes in the wetland 

management practices are antlclpated. It 

fs expected that the status quo w i l l 

generally continue. Further diking of 

wetl ands is strong1 y d 1 scouraged because 

of the adverse impacts discussed earller, 

With regard to the management of the 

currently dlked areas, It i s recommended 

that waterfowl breedlng be encouraged In 

a1 1 of the contained marshlands by means 

of nesting platforms and areas. Moreover, 

to facilitate flsh use, perhaps the 

wetlands could be opened up during the 

spring spawning season or at least during 

those years when no water-level 

manipulat 1 on is necessary for waterfowl 

management. Creating artlf icial islands 

and allowing better-drained areas to 

revert to shrub or maadow communities may 

also add dlverslty. 

DFTRO/T RIVER 

---*. 

.,. - - ~. 

KILOMt lHf S 

Figure, 63. Location map of Lake St. Clair 

diked coastal wetlands (see text for 

explanation of numbers). 

Other practices, such as experimental 

marsh burning* have improved the waterfowl 

loafing population in Ontario's diked 

wetlands (Ball 1984). Fertflfration 

however, is not recomnended at this time. 

Wherever possible, hydrologic connectivity 

should be increased. 

St. Clalr Delta wetlands are diked: St. 

Johnrs Marsh (no. l)r lower Harsens Island 

(no. 2)s lower Walpole Island near Goose 

Lake (no. 31, lower St. Anne Island (no. 

4 ) ~ and Mitchell Bay-Thames Rtver mouth 

regfon (no. 5). Nearly one-ha1 f of the 

total delta wetlands, some 5,280 hectares, 

Dlcklnson xsland~ because of Its 'pen 

system nature and nt act ronment 

gradients. must be managed se~aratel~ as 

it may be the 

wetland in the Great Lakes region, 

Keepfng P t an open system, with only 

passive recreation permitted, w i l l Insure 

are separated from Lake St. Clair by 

earthen dfkes. Most of these djked 

environments occur .fn zones where cattai 1s 

natural 1 grow and el evat range 

between 175 and 176 m above Internatfonal 

Lakes datum* 

Its multiple functions for fish, Except for the wetlands in St, John's 

waterfowl, other wildlffe* and food chain Marsh and those along western Lake St. 

support, Once fil ledr the confined Clair, most of these dfked marshlands are 

disposal sitesrnay be used for wildlife, managed for waterfowl purposes. Dikjng 

but not for a theme park as suggested by and water-level manlpulatlon of wetlands 

some local residents, The provfslon of for the benefit of waterfowl hunters is a 

public utilfties, on either Dickinson or traditional practice in the Great Lakes 

Harsens fslands* would Jnitiate reglon among both private and public 

uncontrol 1 ed development pressures. shooting clubs. The earthen dfkes Impound 

As indfeated 

water insfde the marshlands during towwater 

perfods in the Great takes, but also 

in Figure 53# several large areas of the f~ncti~n to protect the marsh from erosion 

12.2 

A

and excessive high water during above- 

average lake level conditions, The St. 

Clair Flats State Game Area, Canada Club* 

and the Ste, Anne Club marshes are among 

the venerable diked wetlands managed for 

waterfowl huntlng during the fall 

migration, 

St. Johnfs Marsh, whlch straddles 

Hjghway M-23 in Clay Township9 is included 

as a diked wetl and because the l i ne of 

houses and access road along Bouvier Bay 

(of Lake St. C1 air) hydrologically 

separate it from Lake St. Clair (Figure 

56). Approximately 217 hectares of dfked 

marshlands are sftuated west of hlghway M- 

299 and about 478 hectares lie east of 

this roadway. Interior dikes and the 

roadbed with only one bridge (or culvert) 

further fragment this wetl and and preclude 

water exchange, Although there are five 

openfngs to Bouvier Bay, water exchange 

and fish access are limited. 

Much of lower Harsens Island is 

contafned within the St. Clair Flats State 

Game Area (1,085 hectares) and is managed 

by Michtgan DNR as a public waterfowl 

hunting facility. In the upper section, 

which consists of 515 hectares, crops such 

as corn are grown and flooded in fall to 

attract migratory waterfowl, The more 

lakeward portion of the game area is 

essential1 y a water-level control led 

cattail marsh which provides cover and 

some breeding habitat for the waterfowl. 

During the 1974-75 waterfowl hunt, 76% o f 

the harvest from the 60 blinds on the game 

area consisted of mallard along with 

lesser numbers of black duck, pintail, 

green-winged teal and American wigeon 

( Jaworski and Raphael 1978). 

In Ontario, diking i s commonly 

practiced (Table 38). As shown on Figure 

63, diked area no. 3 consists of three 

diked systems located on lower Walpole 

Island. The area of these dfked 

marsh1 ands totals 1,097 hectares. 

Cattails and submerged aquatfcs appear to 

dominate the vegetation. Some of the 

wetl ands of the northernmost d ?ked area 

are now being utilized for cultivated 

crops. 

Diked area no. 4 on Figure 63 refers 

to two dfked systems on lower St. Anne 

Island. The diked area located on the 

west side of Chenal Ecarte consists of 660 

hectares, whereas the dlked system on the 

east side is comprised of 415 hectares. 

Aerfal photographs indicate dense colonies 

of cattails in these managed wetlands, 

with few canals or other human 

disturbances. The most 1 akeward diked 

wetland on lower Walpole Island also has 

few canals across it. Pumping stations 

and flood gatas or welrs are employed to 

manage water levels here and at the other 

waterfowl shooting club marshes. 

Along eastern Lake St. Clair many of 

the coastal wetlands are diked. Diking is 

done by the local farmers who wish to 

cultivate as close to Lake St. Clair as 

possible. In addition, at Mitchell Point 

there is a managed wetland, and two more 

exist near the mouth of the Thames River. 

The areas of these three dfked systems 

are: 194 hectares, 393 hectares, and 500 

hectares. The latter two are designated 

as Area IV and Area 111, respective1 yr on 

the Tflbury (Ontario) Quadrangle. 

Moreoverr east of Area IV, there is a 156- 

hectare, square-shaped diked area. A 

total of 1,329 hectares were planimetered 

on current maps of this coast. Cattails 

appear to be the domfnant vegetation type, 

The adverse impacts of diking coastal 

wet1 ands are poor1 y understood. Never- 

theless, several adverse impacts include: 

1) loss of fishery function, 2) blockage 

of water exchange, 3) loss of food cha'ln 

support, 4) fragmentation and isolation of 

diked wetlands, and 5) lower diversity and 

water quality of diked areas. Loss of 

fish habitat and associated fishery 

functions is perhaps the principal adverse 

impact of coastal wetland diking. Diking 

has long been a source of conflict between 

waterfowl- and f ishery-resource managers. 

Clearly, most fish9 with the exceptton of 

extremely tolerant species such as carp 

and bullheads, do not spawn in dfked 

wetl ands. Furthermore, l arval and juve- 

nile fish cannot easily disperse Into nar 

tolerate the f 1 uctuatlng water temper- 

atures and water qua1 Jty of these 

contained systems. The authors have 

noticed that predator fish tend to forage 

only fn those coastal wetlands where lake 

water masses f nvade the open wetlands, 

For example, on Dickfnson Island one may 

observe 'l argemouth bass and bl uegi 71 s on? y

Figure 6$1 i'ier ial jir~otoornijii of !)i~kin*of~ Xs'lana wctlancis, St, Clair DPI ta {May 19R0je 

Molr, df~+jn,%rl~ fr-rrn top IC,;I'.;TA! f1t2r~hf"~ :n ~?F~E>'I' Ray (rrsff ~irie!, Vpv.fh ch;?nne'l ic +t 

t8?c?i!rwl Fq iti tilf2 tv~tt~)rli ~f LOP pirotagraph, 

the ?ti$, Il'lfj~ll?~ 

324

in cl rcul ating marsh waters, particularly 

near culverts* or where lake water masses 

prevai 1, 

Di k i ng prevents water exchange 

between the wetland and the adjacent water 

body. Thusp the waters of the canals and 

open-water areas of the contafned sites 

stagnate, cover with f f lm, and exhibit 

l arge diurnal temperature ranges (Mudroch 

and Capobianco 1978). Although the 

dissolved oxygen levels In the dlked 

wet1 ands remain above 75% satu rat1 on 

(Figure 22)r in response to atmospheric 

dfffusion and photosynthetic activityr 

excessive daytime water temperatures in 

summer reduce the dissolved oxygen 

concentrations to critical levels. During 

the cold winter months with abundant snow 

cover, oxygen depletion may occur under 

the ice cover, resulting in fish kf 11s and 

die-off of invertebrates. 

zooplanktonr and ye1 low perch caught over 

macrophyte-free areas contained hfgher 

numbers of these invertebrates than did 

fish caught over macrophyte areas. The 

paradox in these data may be explafned by 

marsh drafnage which 4s associated with 

large numbers of f I? ter-feeding zooplankton 

and yellow perch regardless of 

the occurrence of vegetated substrates. 

Only two areas 

of coastal wetland are jdentifjed for 

restoration. First, the function and 

value of St. John's Marsh could be 

increased with 1 mproved hydro1 og ic 

connectivity (Figure 56). It fs 

recommended that the culverts connecting 

this wetland to Bouvier Bay be en1 arged to 

f aci 11 tate greater water mass exchange, 

Also, water exchange across M-29 could be 

Improved with the addltion of another 

larqe culvert close to Pearl Beach. 

~dditionally, the water quality near the 

definitive research has Perch Isle Point subdivision should be 

been conducted which the monitored9 and some of the fnterfor dikes 

exceptional fish production in Lake St. west of N-29 should be breached or 

Clair (Hatcher 1982) r it is be1 ieved that 

the wetlands are important in the food 

webs. The St. Clair Delta wetlands are 

important sources of nutrients, 

particul ate organic matter, phytop? ankton, 

small zooplankton, and drift organisms, 

Zoopl ankters probably f $1 ter the preferred 

food items out of the marsh drainage. 

Figure 64 illustrates drainage from the 

delta wetlands. Leach (1980) found that 

the waters from the main channels of the 

St. Clair River are lower in nutrients 

than the waters derived from the 

tributaries on the Canadian side of the 

delta. Because Chenal Ecarte and the 

other Ontario tributaries Incorporate 

considerable flow from the adjacent 

wetlands, it is felt that these waters 

contain important quantities of nutrients, 

detrftus, and living matter for the food 

webs of Lake St. Clair. 

Poe ( 1983 attempted to demonstrate 

the relationship of the aquatic 

macrophytes and associated perlphyton to 

the fish production of Lake St. Clair, In 

spite of some positive relatfonships 

establ ished i n some sampl l ng stationsp 

Poets data for Muscanoat Bay seemed 

contradictory. Sampling of Muscamoot Bay 

revealed that macrophyte-free areas had 

higher numbers of macrophytoplankton and 

removed. 

Second1 y the fragmented wetland 

complex south of the Cllnton Rfver Estuary 

should be restored (Figure 543, Perhaps 

this area should be comprehensively 

planned since a private developer has 

already attempted t o construct 

subdivisions in that area. The DetroSt 

District Corps of Engineers refers to this 

threatened wetland as Verchev9s Marsh. A 

comprehensivs plan which fncludes the 

funct-ion of the Black Creek* the impact of 

the Metropol i tan Beach development# and 

connectivtty to Lake St. Clair is 

suggested. Restoratfon of a wetland on 

this western side of Lake St. Clajr could 

partially mitigate the historic wetland 

losses in this coastal stretch, Moreover* 

certaln fdsh such as northern pike and 

1 argemouth bass require spawning habitat 

ddstributed every 8 to 10 km along a coast 

because they are not Isng-dqstance 

migrants (Jaworski and Raphael 1978). 

No al-ti-fi- 

cjaf construction of wetlands is 

recommended at this time because the 

current wet1 ands appear adequate and Lake 

St, Clair Js very productfve, If the 

current wetland resource base can be

conserved and/or Improved, then the important ecological cornmunlt~es, These 

present ecology of: the lake may well be coastal wotlandst par-tfcularly the St. 

assured. ClaJr Delta wetlands, have had and should 

continue to have signSPIcant functions 3n 

perform 

va'uable functions for 

munfcf~alft'es* They ~rovlde habjtats for 

desfred plants and animals, they filter 

pollutants and sedfments from storm 

the Lake St. Clair ecosystem. Conclusions 

fn thls sectlon are based an physical. 

blologfcal econamfc, and poi lt-jcal 

factors. 

drainage, and they protect coastal The rocent history of the Lake St, 

structures from wave attack, On the other ~1 a and fs cha ratter zed by 

handr wetlands are often barriers to lake rel stabf 1 as wel 1 as h 

access and are susce~tibfe to function and value. Gjven the general 

filng* and which 

in turn lmpaf rs thef r natural functfons. 

degradatfon whlch has taken place the 

lower Great Lakes durfng the past several 

The fmportant functfons of wetlands the future prospscts for the 

are often dfsregarded by those wishing to 

are 

develop an area, State of Michfgan reasonably brfght* As coastal wetlands fn 

has recogn'lzed this and has forrnul ated 

adjacent lakes the re' st've 

pol cy to wetlands. 

~h~ 'Importance of the Lake St. Clalr wetlands 

Shore1 ands Protection and Management Act is increasfng* there has a 

of 1970. provfdss programs whlch include 4X' loss In the Lake St* wet'ands8 

the protection of wetlands in the Great 

and Of the extant wet'ands are dfkedr 

Lakes shorelands. At the local level* a 

special problsm facfng declslon-makers is 

the delta wetlands have not suffered 

degradation comparable to that of Green 

Saginaw Bay, and westerr1 Lake Erie. 

the tdentf f fcatjon and regulation of 

adequate buffer areas surrounding the, 

desf gnated wetlands, 

Tha physfcal framework of Lake St, 

Cl alr wstl ands partla1 ly explafns the high 

In Mlchlgan, once "areas of concernw productf vl ty of these wet1 ands. Firstr 

have bean establ lshed~ the level of the total area of coastal wetlands Is 

control must be determined. Speclal use large In comparfson to the relatively 

psrmlts and 1 lsts of acceptable 

csnstruetton near wetlands provfde a 

small sfze of Lake St. Clafr. Second, 

these deltafc wetlands are dlstrfbuted 

method of mlnlmizfng wetland dlsturbance over a large area of the northern part of 

by permitting only those %ctlvltfes which the 1 ake, Thf rd, physical dlvorsity 

contrfbute least to change. Wet1 ands are fact 1 ltatss mu1 tfple subsystems. This 

unsuitable for most klndg of development. creates numerous aquatic habttat and 

D'isruptfve dredging and fdlf fng are often coastal wet1 and interfaces which are 

necessary to create a usable area for the located in remote areas and thus buffered 

constrirctfon af bulld.fngsr parkfng areas, fr~n cultural 4mpacts. In addition, the 

and access foads. On-sfte sanitary sewage St. Clalr Delta Is geologlcal1y stable. 

treatment is dffficu'ft because of poor Subsldenca Is not occurring and delta 

percoIat4on and the high water table. 

Recregtfori usas can be developed around 

extensi on or erosion have not been 

slgnificant over the last century. 

wetlands in a manner compatfble wfth 

natural systems, Camping# canoeing, and Qn the ecosystem level, as well as an 

nature tratls make use of the water a local habltat scalet the hydrology and 

recrezrtfonel value of wet1 ands. with such hydrolog ic connectlvl ty of the St, Clafr 

precautionsr construc9lan need not. cause Delta wetlands are most favorable. 

excessive damage, Re? atlvel y cool, hfghly-oxygenated, and 

5.3. PROSPECTS FOR THE FUTURE 

non-turbld waters enter from Lake Huron 

and pass through the deltaic wetlands, 

The df stributaries and crevasse channels 

(1 ocally celled "hfghwaysn) dl stribute 

this high-qua1 f ty tnput water throughout 

The freshwater wetlands along Lake the wetlands, For example, an abandoned 

St, CT a1 r w $1 1 canttnue to corratltuts dlstrftsutery channel permits water flow 

7%

across the entire length of Djckinson 

Island. Given a residence time of on1 y 7 

to 9 days in Lake St. Clairr circulatlon 

is well established and little stagnation 

occurs. Water exchange between the lake 

and coastal wetlands is a1 so f aci 1 itated 

by seiches. 

The we? 1-known turbidity problems of 

other coastal wetland systems? such as 

Green Bay and Saginaw Bay, are not a major 

adverse impact in the Lake St. Clair 

wetlands. SiltatJon and turbidity are low 

in the deltaic wetl ands because the St. 

Cl ai r River has a very low suspended load 

and the bedload consists of fine sand. 

Some local turbidity occurs at the mouth 

of the Cl inton and Thames Rivers durlng 

spring runoff and flooding. Also, within 

Lake St. Clai r, resuspension of bottom 

sediments, as In Anchor Bay during storms, 

can discolor the water over 1 arge areas. 

Wetland erosion is not a problem 

along Lake St. Clair due to the relatively 

short fetch and shallowness of the lake 

basin. Coastal erosion resulting from 

eustatically rising water levels and f ram 

long-term lake level fluctuations is not a 

significant problem as it is in Lake Erie, 

Because the deltaic wetlands are largely 

open systems that slope lakeward, lake 

level oscillations do not result in 

wetl and die-back or senescence ' as is true 

in many other coastal wet1 and systems. 

Rather, Lake St. Clair wetlands shift up 

or down the gradient, maintaining their 

productivity at various 1 ake levels. 

Dickinson Is1 and is an excellent example. 

Biological 1 y, these coastal wet1 ands 

exhibit relatively high habitat and 

species diversity, Productivity in St. 

Clair Delta wetlands is also high. Such 

conditfons manifest themselves in surplus 

waterfowl foods and Impressive flsh 

catches. Open wetlands systems, with 

complete envi ronmental gradients and 

numerous ecotones, exhibit "pulse" 

stability and high productivity. Although 

further research is needed to define the 

importance of the flux of particulate 

organic matterr drift organisms, and other 

organic foods from the wetlands into Lake 

St. Clairr there i s an apparent 

association of waterfowl r game fish, and 

other wildlife with these wetland 

discharges. The high dissolved oxygen 

levels and high flushing rates, 

accompanied by relatively low contaminant 

and turbid1 ty levels* are positively 

correlated with the high productlvfty. 

From an economic vjewpoi nt these 

coastal wetlands exhibit high fish and 

wildlife values. Because these functions 

and values are linked to the ecology of 

Lake St. Clair, they cannot easil y be 

replaced or mitigated. Wfth regard to 

human uses, passive recreation and open 

space designation appear to be more 

suitable than intensf ve activl ties. Uses 

involving hydro1 ogic modification of the 

wetlands and permanent intrusions often 

create large and irreparable 

disturbances. It i s expected that urban 

development w i l l result in the filling or 

destruction of most coastal wetlands along 

western Lake St. Clair, northward to St. 

John's Marsh. Moreover, south of Mitchell 

Bay, agricultural encroachment may is01 ate 

all but the cattail marsh fringe. It is 

unlikely that the Clinton River mouth and 

the St. John's Marsh wetlands w i l l be 

restored. Neverthelessr because of the 

recognized value of the remaining 

wetlands, we believe that most of the 

extant wetlands w i l l be preserved in their 

present state. 

The future impacts on Lake St. Clair 

wetlands are dependent upon leg is1 ative 

efforts and public awareness in the Great 

Lakes basin of the value of the resource 

base. Legislatively, the State of 

Michigan has been a leader i n 

environmental protection of wet1 ands. For 

example, the followfng laws have been 

enacted : 

-- 

Public Act 247 of 1955, as amended* 

prohibits constructing or dredgi ng any 

artificial body of water that would 

ultimately connect with a Great Lake. 

This act also requires a permit from 

the Department of Natural Resources to 

f i 11 any submerged 1 ands in a Great 

Lake, including Lake St, Clalr. 

ment Act -- PublJc Act 245 of 1970t as 

amended* designates wetlands adjacent 

to a Great Lake or a connecting 

waterway such as the St. Clair River as 

envf ronnental areas necessary to 

preserve flsh and wildl $fee

connectivity Is good and the wetland 

diversity Is well displayed, Converse1 yr 

regulates wet1 ands through several many wetlandsp especially In Ontarfor have 

important laws relating to shorelands 

and submerged 1 ands. 

been diked and are less diverse s'lnce 

there Ss a dominance of cattail. It %s 

often pointed out that Lake St.,Cla%r is 

In Ontarfo, wetlands are viewed as located tn waterfowl flyways and is aw 

recreational land and are thus taxed as important staging area for migration, a 

such. Taxation of agricultural land is fact which gustlffdes dfking to some 

less than recreational 1 and. This degree, Howevers as noted earlier, the 

unbalanced tax structure ls an incent-fve economlc value of sport fishing greatly 

to drain and dlke wetlands In Ontario for 

agrlcul tural purposes (G. B. McCulloughr 

exceeds waterfowl hunting and trapping 

combined, More specifically, the economic 

Canadian Wildlife Service; pers. comm.1, value of Lake St. Clair to sport flsh'ing* 

Several wetlands north of the Thames River including coldwater species, has a value 

including huntlng clubs lands have of $59641 per wetland hectare/year 

succumbed to the tax pressure and have (Jaworski and Raphael 197131. To detach 

been converted to agriculture. the sportfish habltat from the wetland 

ecosystem may well decrease wetland 

It is most fortunate that large dlversity and the economic value of the 

tracts of wetlands are owned by State or St. Clalr Delta. Also the cost for dike 

Federal agencies. Assuming that the construction and maintenance in view of 

governling agencies wf 11 preserve the decreasing diversity ought to be 

resource9 most of the Michigan portion of 

the St, Clair Delta w j l l be protected from 

considered. 

future development. In Ontario the Coastai erosion is modest on the 

Wal pole Island Indian Reserve encompasses shore1 lnes of the laker and selches and 

Seaway, Squirrel, Wal pole and St. Anne flooding are beneficial flushing agents 

Islands. The preservation prospects for and nutrient transport mechanisms to the 

this portion of the modern delta are open-water bodies of the bays and lake. 

reasonably bright. D i k 1 ng preserves a rather monoiyp fc 

wetland9 prohibits adequate hydrologfc 

The MichZgan DNR has made a concerted connectlvityr and decreases wetland 

and sustained effort to inform the publlc utlllty In a low wave energy environment. 

of the value, in terms of economic Dikfng--to preserve wetlands in higher 

returns, of the State's wetlands. Through wave energy environments or in coastal 

funded wetland research and literatures areas dominated by fine clastic sediments 

the assetsof the wetland resources have or where geological subsidence fs 

been dissemfnated to the public, occurring such as western Lake Erie-appears 

to have some justiflcation and 

In spite of legislative an3 public trade-off value. In Lake St. Clair the 

awareness efforts# there are still areas envf ronmental (i .eeP hydrological and 

sf concern. Both in Michigan and Ontario, geological 1 considerations ought to 

bul kheading and f i 11 i ng for small encourage wetlands preservatlon to be 

residential development continuer particu- dfrected t o optlmurn hydrologic 

larly along the natural levees of South connectivity between the resource and the 

and M-lddle channels and the shelf areas, open lake, 

In spite of Michfgan PA 247 and PA 24Sr 

dfked disposal sftes for polluted dredge In November 1984, a "Great Lakes 

spoil were const rlscted on the premodern Coastal Wet1 ands Col loqui um, " co-sponsored 

def tr? of Dickinson Island in the mid- by the Sea Grant Program and Envfronment 

f97Ds, Although Michigan@s efforts to Canada* was held on the campus of Michigan 

preserve these coas;tal wetlands have been State University to explore natural and 

posltfve, alteratton is continuing. manipulated water levels in Great Lakes 

wetlands, Resides pr~vidjng a forum for 

Dick;nson Island pr~vides an example the exchange of current research 

of a coastal wetland which has not been linformationr the rneetjng resulted In the 

signfficantly altered, The hydrological establ lshment of a network of wet1 and 

1 28

ecolog~sts and managers In the Great Lakes 

region and plans for the pub1 fcation of a 

quarterly newsletter for such workers, 

Although the conference pofnted out the 

need for more research djrected toward 

understanding processes and wild1 ife 

utllizatjon of the coastal marshes* an 

equally important consSderatlon was the 

alarming loss of wetlands. If there was a 

central theme of the conference* it would 

have to be that the conferees were in 

agreement that the existing coastal 

wetlands must be vigorously preserved if 

these valuable habitats are to survjve 

Intense development pressures. 

Gary B. McCullough of the Canadian 

Wild1 i fe Service documented the extensive 

conversion of coastal marshes to 

agricultural 1 ands along the Ontario shore 

of Lake St. Clair which has taken place in 

the past several decades. He estimated 

that 36% of the original wetlands have 

been lost. Much of the remaining wetland 

area south of the St. Clair Delta is 

protected by dikes and water level control 

structures. John Ba7 1 of the University 

of Guelph reported that in these marshes, 

such as the ones owned by Ducks Unlimited 

or within the St. Clalr National Wildlife 

Area (Canada)# waterfowl utilization can 

be enhanced by clearing open areas in the 

cattail marshes (Ball 1984). To attract 

migrating ducks the optimal size of the 

opening appears to be approximately 50 m. 

The col 1 oqu ium concluded with the remarks 

of Harold H. Prince, underscoring the 

"signaturew which coastal wetlands impart 

to the fish and wildlife resources of the 

region. He pointed out that the 

significance of these marshes can be 

appreciated by recognizing: 1) that so 

many animals have embraced wet1 and 

habitats as part of their 1 ife strategy 

and 2) that wetlands are indicators of 

llttoral and upland environmental quality. 

The ideas put forth at this conference are 

1 ikely to shape the direction of wetlands 

research in the Great Lakes region for the 

next decade.

Allen, H.L. 1971. Primary productivity, 

chemo-organotrophy, and nutritional 

interactions of epiphytic algae and 

bacteria on macrophytes in the 

1 ittoral of a 1 ake. Ecol . Monogr. 

41(2): 97-127. 

Andrews, R. 1952. A study of waterfowl 

nesting on a Lake Erie marsh. M.S. 

Thesis. Ohio State Univ., Columbus. 

85 PP. 

Assel, R.A., F.H. Quinn, G.A. Leshkevich, 

and S. J. Bolsenga. 1983. Great Lakes 

ice atlas. U.S. Dept. Commerce, Great 

Lakes Envir. Res. Lab. Ann Arbor, MI. 

115 pp, 

Ayres, J.C. 1964. Currents and related 

problems at Metropol itan Beach, Lake 

St. Clair. Great Lakes Res. Div. 

Spec. Rep. No. 20, Univ. Michigan, 

Ann Arbor. ,55 pp. 

Bajorunasr S.J. 1968. River ice jams; a 

literature revlew. U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers. Res. Rep. 5-5, Detroit* 

MI. 570 pp. 

Baumgartner, L . L. 1942, Ecological survey 

of muskrat populations and habitats. 

Mich. Dep. Nat. Resour., Proj. Rep. 

14-R. 128 pp. 

Bayly, I. 1975. Preliminary study of the 

nutrient regime of marshland of the 

St. Clair National Wildlife Area - 

Dover Township, Ontario. Rep. to 

Can. Wildl. Serv., London, Ontario, 

27 PP* 

Bednarik, K.E. 1956. The muskrat in Ohio 

Lake Erie marshes. Ohio Dep. Nat. 

Resour., Ohio Div. Wildl. 67 pp. 

Bednar i kr K. E. 1975. Environmental impact 

assessment report, Magee Marsh 

Wildlife Area dike construction. Ohio 

Dep. Nat. Resour,, Crane Creek Wildl. 

Exp. Sta., Oak Harbor. 13 pp. 

Behler, J.L. and F.W. King. 1979. The 

Audubon Society field gufde to North 

American reptiles and amphibians. 

Alfred A. Knopf, New York. 743 pp. 

Bellrose, F.C. 1968. Waterfowl migration 

Baker, DeG.r and J.G. Strub, Jr. 1965. corridors east of the Rocky Mountains 

Climate of Minnesota. Part 111: 

In the United States. Illinois Nat. 

temperature and its appl ication. History Survey Biol, Notes. No. 61. 

Unfv. Minnesota, Agr. Expr. Sta. 

Tech. Bull. 254. 43 pp. 

24 PP- 

Ball, J.P. 1984. Habitat selection and Bellrose, F.C* 1976- Ducks* geese* and 

optimal foraging by mallards; a field swans of North America* 2nd ed. 

experfment. M.S. Thesfs. Unfv. Stockpol e Books* Harrf sburg, PA. 544 

Guelphr Guelph, Ontario. 44 pp. 

PP. 

Bates, R.L., and J.A. Jackson, eds. 1980. 

Glossary of geology, 2nd ed, Am. 

Berry* E.G. 1943, The Amnicalfdae of 

Mfchigan: d4stributfonr wology and 

Geol. Instit.# Falls Church, 

PP* 

VA. 749 taxonomy. Unfv. Michigan, Mus. Zool. 

Misc. Publ. 57. 68 pp.

Mirge, E.A. 2894, A report on a collectfun Churchlllr ESP., Jr. and S.1. l-ow"is, 1924, 

of Cladocera, mostly from take St. 

Gfafrr Mtchfgan, Pagss 43-47 fn J. E. 

Food and feeding In fresh-water 

mussels. Bull, U.S. Bur. FSsh. 

Welghard, ed., A bfologScal 39:439-471. 

examfnatlan a% take St. Clalr. Bull, 

Mfch. flsh Corn. No, 4. Clarke, A.M. 1901. Tho freshwater molluscs 

Boreman# J., ed. 1976, Gruat Lakes ffsh 

egg and 1 arv&a tdantiffcat'lon: Proc, 

of a workshap, U.S. Ffsh Wlldl. Serv. 

FWS/W5-76/B. 220 pp. 

of Canada. tdatfonal Museums of 

Canada, Ottawa. 446 pp. 

Cola. G.A. 1983. Textbook of 1 imnologyt 

3rd ad. @. V. Mosby Co., St. Louis. 

B~uidsn~ R.S. r ed. 1975, CanadaiOntarlo 

Great Lakes shore damage survey, 

Tech. Rap. Envlr, Canada and Ontarto 

MOn, Nat. Resaur, Toronta, 97 pp, 

Brant, R,A, and C,E, Herdandorf. 2971. 

Delfnlatfan of Great takas sstuartss. 

Pagss 710-718 & Proc. 15th Conf. 

Graat Lakes Wos,r Xnt. A$soc. Great 

Lakes Ros, 

Bray, 3.8, l962. EstimsLori of energy 

budgets for a (sattnlll marsh, 

Scfence 1368 1119-1120* 

Brlcksri K.S.* F.4, Glrfcker, and J.E. 

Gannon, 1976, Distrlbutlon and 

abundance aF zwplanktan dn the U.S. 

watars of Lake St. Clairr 1973. J, 

Great lakes Bas, 2( 2 1 :256-271, 

Brock, 1",C). 1970, Phetasynthesfs by elgal 

spfphytes af in Ever- 

gladas Netlonal Perk. Bull. Mar, 5ci. 

26~952-956. 

Brawn, C,t, X9B3, Producttvlty of iiquatlc 

mircrophyter and ask~oclated par'fphyton 

In Loke St, Clalrt a data report. 

U,S, Ftsh Wtldl . Sorv,, Grsat Lakas 

Ffsh. Lab,* knn Arbor, MI 41 po. 

Butzsr* K,W, 1972. Recent hfstory sf an 

Ethlopfan dalta. Unfvsrslty of 

CRl~ago Press, Chicago. 184 pp, 

401 pp. 

Colie, L,J. 1903, The delta of thu St. 

Clais Rivsr. Gaologfcal Surv. Mlch. 

19 : 1-28 

Coleman* J .M, 1976, Deltas: processes of 

dapositlon and models for axplora- 

tfon. Contlnulng Education Publ . Co. 

1nc.r Champatgn, It. 102 pp. 

Comntt R. 1975. A Fleld gulda to reptfles 

and amphfbfans of aastsrn and central 

North Amurjca. Noughton MSFflln Co.# 

Boston. 429 pg. 

Cooper, C,L. I W, C, Partholomewr C. E. 

Eiordendorf, J. N. Reuttar, and F. C. 

Snyder. 19Bla. Limnetlc larval ffsh 

of the Maumas and Sandusky River 

estuaries. J. Great Lakes Rcs. 

7(11:51-54. 

Cooper, C.1 ,, M,R, Henfkonr and C,F, 

Werdsndorf. 1981b. Llmnatlc larval 

fish In the Ohlo portlan of the 

western basln of taka Erie, 1995- 

1976. J. Gruat Lakas Rss. 7(3) :326- 

329, 

Cooper, Get. J .3, Mfzora, and C.E. 

H~rdendorf. 1984. Distribut +on, 

abundance and antra J nmtrnt of larval 

ffrhes In the western and csntral 

basins of Lake Erfe. U.S. Envfron. 

Prot. Agency, Project Summary EPA- 

690/53-84-017. 3 pp. 

Marlan, 1975, Bistfibutlern of statas 

and count fes af waterfowl spe~cles Corer F.C. 1948, The flora of the Erls 

harvested during 1961-1978 huntfng islands, an annotated llst of 

sealon, U,S, Ffsh Wild3. S~arv,, Spec, vdsrular plants. Ohio Sttte Univ,* 

ScF, Rep, 187, Wash-Sogtonr D, C, 132 Franz Theodore Stone Lab. Gontrib. 9. 

PP 106 PP*

Cowardln* L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and 

E.T. La Roe. 1979. Classification of 

wetlands and deepwater habitats of 

the United States. U.S. Fish Wildl. 

Serv. FWS/OBS-79/31, Washington, D.C. 

103 pp. 

Crowderr L.B., and W.E. Cooper, 1979. 

Structural complexity and f i sh-prey 

interactions in ponds: a point of 

view. Pages 2-10 D.L. Johnson and 

R,A. Stein, eds. Response of fish to 

habitat structure in standing water. 

N. Central Div. Am. Fish, Soc., Spec. 

Pulb. No. 6, Bethesda, Md. 

Dawson? S.A. 1975. Waterfowl food 

production and util ization i n Anchor 

Bay9 Lake St. Clair, Michigan. M.S. 

Thesis* Univ. Michiganr Ann Arbor. 

124 pp. 

Dennis, D.G., and R.E. Chandler. 1974. 

Waterfowl use of the Ontario 

shoreline of the southern Great Lakes 

during migration. Pages 55-65 H. 

Boyd* ed.? Canadian Wildlife Service 

Waterfowl Studies in Eastern Canada. 

Can. Wildl. Serv. Rep. Ser.29, 

Ottawa, Ontario. 

Dennis, D.G., G.B. McCullought N.R. North, 

and R.K. Ross. 1981. An update 

assessment of migrant waterfowl use 

of the Ontario shorelines of the 

southern Great Lakes. Can. W i 1 d 1 . 

Serv. Rep. Ser. (manuscript rep. 1 

Dennis, D.G.? and N.R. North. 1981. 

Waterfowl use of the Lake St. Clair 

marshes during migration in 1976-77 

versus 1968-69. Can. Wildl. Serv. 

Rep. Ser. (manuscript rep.) 

Derecki, J.A. 1982. Effect of channel 

changes in the St. Clair River since 

1900. U. S. Dep. Commerce Great Lakes 

Envir, Res. Lab Rep. ERL GLERL-40# 

Ann Arbor, MI 20 pp. 

Derecki, J.A. 1983. Travel times in the 

Great Lakes connecting channels. U.S. 

Dep. Commerce Great Lakes Envir, Res. 

Lab Rep, No. 370, Ann Arbor, MI 12 

PP* 

Dolep S,A., ed. 1975. Great Lakes basin 

framework study? Appendix 17: 

Wildlife. Great Lakes Basin C~rnrn.~ 

Ann Arbor? MI 140 pp. 

Doneldson, T. 1970. The public domain: its 

history with statistics. Johnson 

Reprint Corp., New York. 1,343 pp. 

Donohoe, R. 1966. Muskrat reproducti on in 

areas of control led and uncontrol 1 ed 

water level units. J. Wildl. Manage. 

30(2) :320-326. 

Dorrr J.A., and D.F. Eschman. 1970. 

Geology of Michigan. University of 

Mich. Press, Ann Arbor. 476 pp. 

Duane, D.B. 1967. Characteristics of the 

sediment load in the St. C:air River. 

Pages 115-132 In Proc. 10th Conf. 

Great Lakes Res., Int. Assoc. Great 

Lakes Res. 

Edmondson, W .T. ed, 1959, Ward and 

Whipple's fresh-water bio10gyr 2nd 

ed. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 

York. 1~248 pp. 

New 

Eichenlaub, V,L. 1979. Weather and climate 

of the Great Lakes regfon. Unfversity 

of Notre Dame Press# South Bend, IN. 

335 pp. 

Esrhemeyer, P.H. 1950. Life history of the 

walleye, m n vltreum Yltreum 

(Mitchell), in Michigan. Mich. Dep. 

Conserv. Bull. Inst. Fish Res. No. 3. 

99 PP* 

Federal Water Qua1 i ty Administration. 

1970. Investfgation of mercury in the 

St. Clair River-Lake Erie system, 

U.S. Dsp. Interior, FWQA, Chlcago. 

108 pp. 

Ferguson, R.G., and A.J. Derksen. 1971, 

Migrations of adult and juvenile 

walleyes ( Yif;r 

-1 In southern Lake Huron, Laue 

St. Clairr Lake Erie and connecting 

waters. J, Fish. Res. Bd. Canada. 

28: 1133-1142,

Fuller, S.L. 1974. Clams and mussels 

(Mol1usca:Bivalvla). Pages 215-273 

C.W. Hart, Jr. and S.L. Fuller* eds. 

Pollution ecology of freshwater 

invertebrates. Academic Press# New 

York. 389 pp. 

Gilbert, G.K. 1890. Lake Bonnevllle. U.S. 

Geol. Surv. Monog. No. 1, Washington, 

D.C. 438 pp. 

Great Lakes Basin Commiss$on 1975, Shore 

use and erosfon. Appendix 12 Great 

Lakes Basan Framework Study. Great 

Lakes Basin Corn., Ann Arbor, MI. 

111 pp. + Appendix. 

Great Lakes Commission. 1984. Ice 

conditions hamper start of the 1984 

inter1 ake commerce. Great Lakes 

Newsletter, Vol . 24(6) 23-4. 

Greeson, P.E.r J.R. Clark, and J.E. Clark, 

Glass, N.R. 1971. Computer analysis of eds. 1979. Wetland functions and 

predation energetics in the values the state of understanding. 

largemouth bass. Pages 325-363 JJ Proc. National Wetlands Symposium. 

B.C. Patten, ed. Systems analysis and Tech, Publ. No. TPS79-2. Am. Water 

simul ati on ecology, Vol . 1. Academic Resour. Assoc. Minneapol is, MN. 674 

Press, New York. PP e 

Goodnight, C.J., and L.S. Whitley. 1960. Haas, R.C. 1978. The muskellunge in Lake 

Oligochaetes as indicators of St. Clair. Am, Fish, Soc. Spec. Publ. 

pollution. Pages 139-142 In Proc. 11. pp 334-339. 

15th Industrial Waste Conf.. Purdue 

Univ. , West Lafayette, IN Harman, W.N. 1974. S n a i l s 

(Moll usca:Gastropoda) . Pages 275-312 

Goodrich, C.r and H. Van der Schalie. a C.W. Hart, Jr., and S.L. Fuller, 

1932. The naiad species of the Great 

eds. Pollution ecology of freshwater 

Lakes. Univ. Michigan, Mus. Zool. invertebrates. Academic Press, New 

Occas. Pap. 238. 14 pp. 

York. 389 pp. 

Goodwin, C.E. 1982. A bird-flnding guide 

to Ontario. University of Toronto 

Press, Toronto, Ontario. 248 pp. 

Goodyear* C.D.r T.A. Edsallr DIM. Dempsey, 

G.D. Moss, and P.E. Polanskf. 1982a. 

Atlas of the spawning and nursery 

areas of Great Lakes fishes. Vol. VI: 

St. Clair River. U.S. Fish Wildl. 

Serv,, FWS/O%S-82/52rAnn Arbor, MI. 

18 PP* 

Goodyear, C.D., T.A. Edsallr D.M. Dempsey, 

G.D. Moss, and P.E. Polanskl. 1982b, 


areas of Great Lakes fishes. Vol VII: 

St. Clair Lake. U.S. Fish Wildl, 

Serv., F#S/OBS-82/52. Ann Arbor, MI. 

35 PP. 

Hatcher, C.O. 1982. The structure and 

productivity of fish communities in 

the St. Clair - Detroit River 

Ecosystem, as effected by shore1 i ne 

and lakebed modifications. U.S. Fish 

Wild. Serv.8 Great Lakes Fish. Lab. 

Res. Comp. Rep. 51 pp. 

Hatcher, C.O., and R.T. Nester. 1983. 

Distribution and abundance of fish 

larvae in the St. Clair and Detroit 

Rlvers. U.S. Fish Wildl, Serv.8 Great 

Lakes Fishery Lab., Ann Arbor, MI, 

Admln. Rep. 83-5. 41 pp. 

Hayes, B.N. 1964. An ecological study of a 

wet prai rle on Harsens Island, 

Michigan. Mlch. Bot. 3(3) :71-83. 

Goodyear, C.D.* T.A. Edsall, D.M. Dempsey, Helfman, G.S. 1979. Fish attraction to 

G,D. Moss, and P.E. Polanski. 1982~. 


floating objects in lakes. Pages 49- 

57 In D.L. Johnson and R.A. Stein, 

areas sf Great Lakes fishes, Vo1. eds. Response of fish to habftat 

VIII: Detroit River. U.S. Fish Wildl. structure in standing water. N. 

Serv., FWS/BS-82/52, 

33 PP* 

Ann Arbor, MI. Central Div. Am. Fish. SOC. Spec. 

Publ. No. 6. Bethesda. MD.

Herdendorf, C.E. 1970. take Erle physlcal Wildl. Serv.8 Great Lakes Fish. Lab., 

1 4mnol ogy cruise, midsummer 1967. Ann Arbor, Mich., Admin. Rep. 80-2. 

Ohfo Dep. Nat, Resour., Div. Geol. 87 PP= 

Surv. Rep. Invest. 79. 77 pp. 

Herdendorf, C.E. 1982. Large lakes of the 

world. J. Great Lakes Res. 8(3):379- 

412. 

Herdendorf, C.E.8 S.M. Hartley, and M.D. 

Barnes, eds. 1981a. Fish and wildlife 

resources of the Great Lakes coastal 

wetlands within the United States. 

Vol. I: Overview. U,S. Fish Wildl. 

Serv., Washington, D. C. FWS/OBS- 

81/02-vl. 469 pp, 

Herdendorf, CdEer and S.E. Herdendorf. 

1983. Flora and fauna of the islands 

region of western Lake Erie. Oh1 o 

State Unlv.. Cent, Lake Erie Area 

Res. Tech. Rep, 285. 190 pp. 

Hiltunen, 3.K. 1971. Limnological data 

from Lake St. Clair, 1963 and 1965. 

Natl. Mar, Fish, Serv.8 Data Rep. 54. 

45 PP* 

Hunt, G.S. 1962. Water pollution and the 

ecology of some aquatic invertebrates 

in the lower Detroit River. Pages 29- 

49 In Proc. 5th Conf. Great Lakes 

Res. Div., Univ. Michigan, Ann Arbor. 

International 301 n t Commf sslon ( IJC) , 

1981. Report on Great Lakes water 

quality for 1981. IJC, Water Qua1 i ty 

Board* Windsor, Ontario. 74 pp. 

Herdendorf, C.E.8 S.M. Hartley* and M.D. 

Barnes* eds. 1981b. Fish and wild1 ife 

resources of the Great Lakes coastal 

wetlands within the United States. 

Vol. 3: Overview. U.S. Fish Wildl. 

Jaworsk f , E. 1981. The economics of 

wetland protection. Pages 1-10 In A. 

Champagne* ed. Proc. Ontario Wet1 ands 

Conf. Ryerson Polytech. Institute, 

Toronto, Ontario. Sept. 1981. 

Serv.? Washington* D.C. 

81/02-v3. 505 pp. 

FWS/OBS- 

Jaworski* E. * J .R. McDonald* S. McDona1 dr 

and C.N. Raphael. 1977. General 

Herdendorf, C.E., S.M. Hartley* and M.D. functions and values of freshwater 

Barnes? eds. 1981c. Fish and wildlife wetlands in the glaciated midwest. 

resources of the Great Lakes coastal Michigan State Univ., Kellogg 

wetlands within the United States, Biological Station. 69 pp. 

Vol. 4: Lake Huron. U.S. Fish Wildl. 

Serv. 

811'02-v4. 

Washington* D.C. 

792 pp, 

FWS/OBS- 

Jaworski, E., and C.N. Raphael. 1973. A 

morphological comparison of the St. 

Clair and Mississippi deltas. Proc. 

Assoc. Am. Geograp. 5(1):121-126. 

Jaworski, E., and C.N. Raphael. 1976. 

Modification of coastal wetlands of 

southeastern Michigan and management 

a1 ternatives. Mich. Acad, 8(3) :303- 

317. 

Jaworski* E.8 and C,N. Raphael. 1978, 

Fish, wildlife, and recreational 

Hiltunen, J.K. 1980. Compositlonr 

values of Michigan's coastal 

distribution* and denslty of benthos 

wetlands. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv.. 

in the lower St. Clair River, 1976- 

Twin Cities* MN. 209 pp. 

. . 

1977. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv., Great 

Lakes Fish. Lab., Ann Arbor. Mich.~ Jaworski, E,p eN ~ ~ ~ p. h J . ~ ~ 1 

Admin. Rep. 80-4. 27 pp. 

Mansfield, and B.B. Williamson, 1979, 

Hiltunen* J.K., and B.A. Manny, 1982. 

Impact of Great Lakes water level 

fluctuations on coastal weti ands. 

Distribution and abundance of ProJect No. 5-045-MICH. Inst. Water 

macrozoobenthos in the Detroit River Res.8 Michigan State Univ., East 

and Lake St. Clair* 1977. U.S. FOsh Lansing. 351 pp.

Jaworsk i E., G.N. 

Mansf l%ldr and B.B. 

Raphael r P,J. 

W l l l iamson, 1981, 

Korkfgianl I.I.9. 1963, Channel changes fn 

the St. Cfafr RIver slncs 1933. J. 

Impact of Great Lakes water level 

f 1 uctuat tons on coastal wstl ands. 

Pages 106-300 In C.E, Herdendorf, 

S.M. Hartley, and M,D. Barnes, eds. 

Waterways and Harbor Dlvi sf onr Proc, 

her. Soc, Cfvii Eng. 89tMay)rl-14. 

Krecker, F.W. 1939. A comparative study of 

Ffsh and wdldlife resources of the the anfmal populatfon of certa'ln 

Great Lakes coastal wetlands w4thfn submerged aquatic plants. Ecology 

the Unlted States. Volume 1: 

Ovsrvfew. U.S. Flsh Wlldl. Ssrv., 

20(4) :553-562, 

Washington* D.C. FWS/08S-B1/02-~1. La R~cqusr A. 1966. Pleistocene Mollusca 

Jenks, W.L. 1912. History of St, Clafr 

of Ohlo. Ohio Dtv. Geol. Surv. Bull, 

62, Pt. 1. 111 pp. 

County, Lewis Publfshing Co.* 

Chlc&ga. 2 vols. 904 pp. Lake St. Clai r Advisory Committee, 1975, 

Jennlngs, H.S. 1894. A llst of the 

Fishlng chart and gulde, Lake St, 

Claf rr St, Clair RIver, and upper 

Rotatorla of the Eraat Lakes and some Detroft River. St. Clair Consultants, 

of the Inland lakes of Mlchlgan. 

Bull. Mlch. Flsh Corn. NO. 3. 34 pp. 

Royal Oak, MI. 12 pp. 

Johnsonr 0.1, 1984, Preference of fish 

Lake St. Clair Advfsory Committee, 1983, 

Ftshing chart and guide, Lake St, 

larvae for habftat types in a C1airr St, Clafr River" and upper 

contrallsd Laks Erfs wetland. Ohfo 

State Univ,, Water Res. Center, 

Detro4t Rfver. Revfsed ad. Mt. 

Clamens. MI. II pp. 

Columbus. 22 pp. 

Larsen, J.S,, ed. 1973. A gulda to 

Johnston, D,A, 1977. Popul atfon dynaml~s important characteristfcs and values 

of walleye [ XI32 of freshwater wetlands 3n the 

CBU~) and yellow perch ( f 2 ~ ~ ~ 3 northeast. Water Resour. Ras. Center 

~~~YBSEBBZ) in Lake St, Clalr, Pub. 31., Unfv. of Massachusettst 

especf a1 1y durfng 1970-1976. J, Fish hh~rst. 35 pp. 

Res. Board Can, 34~1868-1877. 

Leach# J.H, 1972. Distribution of 

Jones, J,J, 1982, Potential effects of chlorophyll g and related variables 

ulntsr shiplng on divlng ducks 

wintarlng on the Dstrolt Rlver. M.S. 

Thesisr Unfv, Mlchfganr Ann Arbor. 76 

PP* 

In Ontarlo waters of Lake St. Clalr, 

Pages 80-86 Proc. 15th Conf. Great 

Lakes Res,, Znt. Assoc. Great Lakas 

Ras . 

Judayl 6. 1943, The summer standfng crop Leach. J.H, 1373, Seasonal dfstrfbutfon, 

of plants and an2mals In four 

Wfsconsln lakes, Trans. Wfs. Acad, 

Scf . Arts Lett. 342103-135, 

comporltlon and abundance of 

rooplankton In Ontarfo wafers of Lake 

St. Cl at r. Pages 54-64 $n Proc, 16th 

Conf. Great Lakes Res., Int, Assoc. 

Great Lakes Res. 

Keddyr P.A., and ,%,A, Reznlcek, 1984. 

Vsgetailon dynamS cs and water-level 

fluctuatfons on the shore7 fnss of the Leach, 1980= Lfmnologfcal sampl lng 

Great Lakes. Discussion Paper, fntsnslty in Lake St. C?alr fn 

Wetlands Conf, Nove&er 1984# Kal Jogg relation to distribution of water 

C%nlarp Mlcklgan State UnJv. 21 pp, massss, J. Grsat Lakes Res. 6(21:141- 

145. 

Kall@yr A.H,# D,S, middle ton^ and W,P. 

~fckell, 1963, Bfrcfs of the DetroSt- Lincoln, F.C, X935. The waterfowl flyways 

Windsor area, Cranbr~ok Inst. of of North Amerlca. U.S. Dep. Agr. 

Sciencs, Detroft, I19 pp* 

Clrc. 342, 12 pp. 

1136

Lincolnp F,C. 1950. Mjgration of bfrds. 

U.S, Fish Wildl. Serv. Circ. 16. 102 

PP 0 

Lyon, J.G. 1979, Analyses of coastal 

wetland characteristics: the St,Clalr 

Flats, Michigan. M.S, Thesis, Un'iv. 

Michigan9 Ann Arbor. 65 pp. 

Mandelbaum, H. 1966. Sedimentatl on in the 

St. Clair River delta. Page 192-202 

j~) Proc. 9th Conf. Great Lakes Res., 

Int. Assoc. Great Lakes Res. 

Mandel baumo H. 1969. Analysis of sedlment 

cores from Big Muscamoot Bay and 

Goose Bay in the St. Clair River 

delta. Pages 271-299 111 Proc. 12th 

Conf. Great Lakes Res., Int. Assoc. 

Great Lakes Res, 

Marsh, C.D. 1895. Cyclopidae and Calanidae 

of Lake St. Clafr, Lake Michigan and 

certain lnland lakes of Michigan, 

Bull. Mich. Fish Comm. No. 5. 24 pp. 

Michigan Water Resources Commfssion. 1975. 

Limnological survey of the Michigan 

portion of Lake St. Clafr~ 1973. 

Mich. Dep. Nat. Resour., Lansing. 48 

PP * 

Miller, 3.S. 1943. Waterfowl survey, 

Saginaw Bay-Lake St. Clair-Lake Erie. 

Mich. Dep. Nat. Resour. Proj. No. 13- 

R., Lansing. 132 pp. 

Millfc, D.F. 1979. The epiphytic diatom 

flora of three species of aquatic 

vascular plants common to three Lake 

Erie marshes. M.S, Thesis, Bowling 

Green State Univ.* Bowling Green, OH. 

205 pp. 

Mizerar J.J., C.L. Cooper, and C.E. 

Herdendorf. 1981. Limnetfc larval 

fish in the nearshore zone of the 

western basin of Lake Erie. J. Great 

Lakes Res. 7(1):62-64. 

Modlin, R.F., and J. Gannon. 1973. A 

contribution to the ecology and 

dfstributfon of aquatic acari n the 

Martz, G.F. and D. Ostyn. 1977. Recovery St. Lawrence Great Lakes. Trans. Am. 

patterns of banded scaup harvested in Microsc. Soc. 92(2):217-224. 

Michigan, 1964-73. Mich. Dep. Nat. 

Res. , W i ldl . Div- Lansing, Rep. 2753- Morgan, J .P. 1970, Depositional processes 

17 PP. and products i n the deltaic 

environment In J.P. Morganr ed. 

Del talc sedfmentati on: modern and 

McCullough, G.B. 1982. Wetland losses in ancient. Soc. Econ. Paleontol. 

Lake St. Claf r and Lake Ontario. Mineral, 312 pp. 

Pages 81-89 In A. Champagner ed. 

roc. Ontarlo Wetlands ~onf. Ryerson Mudroc h A. 1 g 80. B i ogeoc hem q 

Polytech. Institute. Toronto, investigation of Bfg Creek Marshr 

Ontario. Sept. 1981. Lake Erie, Ontario. J. Great Lakes 

Res. 6(4) :338-347. 

Meade* G.G. 1857. Chart of the St. Clair 

flats. Office of Lake Surveys, 

Washingtonr D.C. One map. 

MUdroch, A, 1981. A study of selected 

Great Lakes coastal marshes. Environ. 

Can., Natl. Water Res. Inst., Sci. 

Ser. No. 

PP 

122. Burlington, Ontario. 44 

Meeks, R.L.# and R.D. Hoffman. 1980. Bird 

populations common to the Sister 

Is1 ands--the role of Navarre Marsh. 

Toledo Ed1 son Companyr Toledor OH. 60 

PP* 

Messman, L., R. Reppert, and E. Stokhiv. 

1977. Wetland values, interfin 

assessment and evaluation method- 

ology, U.S. Army Inst. for Water 

Resour., Fort Belvolr, VA. 5-61 pp. 

Mudroch, A., and J. CapobSanco, 1978, 

Study of selected metals in marshes 

on Lake St. Clair, Ontario. Arch, 

Hydrobfol. 84(1):87-108, 

Murtyr T.S., and 8.3. Palavarapu. 1975. 

Reconstruction of some of the early 

storm surges on the Great Lakes. J. 

Great Lakes Res. f(ll:116-129.

Pennak, R.W. 1.978. Fresh-water inverte- 

brates of the United States9 2nd ed. 

John Wiley 8 Sons, New York. 803 pp. 

Peterson, R.T. 1980. A field gulde to the 

birds east of the Rockies. Houghton 

Mifflin Co., Boston. 384 pp. 

Pezzetta, J.M. 1968. The St. Clair River 

delta. Ph.D. Dissertation, Univ. 

Michigan, Ann Arbor. 168 pp, 

Phillips, D.W., and J.A. McCulloch. 1972. 

The c1 imate of the Great Lakes Basin. 

Envlron. Can. Clfmatol. Stud. No. 20. 

Toronto, Ontario. 79 pp. 

Pieters, A.J. 1893, The plants of Lake St. 

Clair. Bull. Mich. Fish Comm. No, 2. 

11 PP. 

Poe, T.P. 1983.- Food habits of larval 

yellow perch as a potential indicator 

of water and habitat quality. U.S. 

Fish Wlldl. Serv.? Great Lakes Fish. 

Lab., Ann Arbor, Mich. Admin. Rep. 

83-2. 21 pp. 

Pospichal, L.B. 1977. St. John's Marsh 

management plan, St. Clair County? 

Michigan, Mich. Dep. Nat. Resour., 

Lansing. 17 pp. 

Price, 3 .W. 1963. A study of the food 

hablts of some Lake Erie fish. Ohio 

Biol, Surv. Bull. 2( 1) : 1-89. 

Qulnn, F.H. 1976. Lake St. Clair 

hydrologic transfer factors. U. S. 

Dep. Commer. Great Lakes Envir. Res. 

Lab. ERL GLERL-10, Ann Arbor, MI. 16 

PP. 

Qufnn, F,H., and R,N. Kelley. 1983. Great 

Lakes monthly hydrologic data. U.S. 

Dep. Commer. Great Lakes Envir. Res. 

Lab Report ERL GLERL-26, Ann Arbor, 

MI. 79 pp. 

Raphael* C.N.* E. Jaworski, C.F. Ojala, 

and D,S. Turner. 1974. Future 

dredging quantitfes fn the Great 

Lakes. U.S, Envfron. Prot. Agency 

Ecol. Res. Ser. 660/3-74-029, 

Corvall is, OR. 219 pp. 

Raphael, C.N., and E. Jaworskf. 1979. 

Economic vaf ues of fish, wild1 lfe and 

recreation fn Michigants coastal 

wet1 ands. J. Coastal Zone Manage. 

5(3) :181-194. 

Raphael, C.N., and E. Jaworski. 1982. The 

St. Clair River Delta, a unique lake 

delta. Geograph. Bull. 21(2) :7-28. 

Reighard, J.E. 1894. A biological 

examination of Lake St. Clair, Bull. 

Mich. Fish Corn. No. 4. 61 pp. 

Reppert, R.T., and W. Sigleo. 1979. 

Wet1 and values: concepts and methods 

for wetland evaluation. U.S. Army 

Inst. for Water Resour., Fort 

Belvoir, VA. 30 pp. 

Roller* N,E. 1976. Changes in the wetlands 

and land-use patterns of St. John's 

Marsh, St. Clair County, Michigan. 

Environ. Res. Inst. Mich.r Ann Arbor. 

8 PP. 

Roller, N.E. 1977. Remote sensing of 

wetlands. Office of University 

Affairs. Natl. Aero. Space Admin.* 

Washington, D.C. 156 pp. 

Ruthven, A.G., C. Thompson, and H.T. 

Gaige. 1928. The herpetology of 

Michigan. Univ. Mus. Handbook Ser. 

No. 3. Univ. Michigan, Ann Arbor. 50 

PP 

Sanderson, M. 1980. The climate of the 

Essex Region - Canada's southland. 

Dep. of Geography, Univ. Wlndsor. 

Windsor, Ontario. 105 pp. 

Sawyer, C.N. 1954. Factors involved in 

disposal of sewage effluents to 

lakes. Sewage Ind. Wastes. 26(3 1 :317- 

325. 

Schelske, C.L., and J.C. Roth. 1973. 

Llmnological survey of Lakes 

Michigan, Superior, Huron, and Erfe. 

Great Lakes Res. Div., Univ. 

Michigan, Ann Arbor Publ. 17. 178 

PP.

Schloesser, D.W. 1982. Seasonal growth of 

submersed aquatic macrophytes in the 

St. Cl air-Detroit River ecosystem. 

U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv., Great Lakes 

Fish. Lab., Ann Arborp Mich., Admin. 

Rep. 82-5. 23 pp. 

Schloesserp D.W., and P.A. Manny. 1982. 

Distribution and re1 ative abundance 

of submersed aquatic macrophytes in 

the S t . Clair-Detroit River 

Stuckey, R.L. 1968. Distributional history 

of Butornu umbel 1 a t u (flowering 

rush) in the western Lake Erie and 

Lake St. Clair region. Mich. Bot. 

7: 134-142. 

Stuckey, R.L. 1971. Changes of vascular 

aquatic flowering plants during 70 

years in Put-in-Bay Harbor, Lake 

Erie, Ohio. Ohio J. Sci. 71(6):321- 

342. 

U*S* Fish 

Great Lakes Fish. Lab., 

Mich., Admin. Rep. 82-7. 

Ann Arbor* 

49 pp. 

stuckey, R. L, 1972. Taxononly and 

distribution of the genus 

(Cruciferae) in North America. Sida 

Contrih. Bot. 279-430. 

Schloesser, D.W., and B.A. Manny. 1984. 

Distribution of Eurasian water- 

mil foil (Mvrioohvllum ~oic-1 in 

the St. Clair-Detroit River system in 

1978. J. Great Lakes Res. 10(3):322- 

326. 

Scott, S.L., ed. 1983. Field guide to the 

birds of North America. National Geo- 

graphic Soc. Washington, D.C. 464 pp. 

Shelemon, P.J. 1971. The Quaternary 

deltalc and channel system in the 

central great valley, Cal i forn ia. 

Ann, Pssoc. Am. Geogr. 61(3):427-440. 

Sieghardt, H. 1973. Utilization of solar 

energy and energy content of 

di f ferent organs of Phra~mi tes 

somrnu Trin. Pol, P,rch. I-cydrobiol . 

20:151-156. 

Smith, F. 1894, List of protozoa and 

mollusca observed in Lake St. Clai r 

in the summer of 1893. Pages 42-44 

3. E. Heighard, ed., A biological 

examination of Lake St. Clair. Bull. 

Mich. Fish Comm. No. 4. 

Stansbery, I?. H. 1960. The Unionf nae 

(Molluscar Pelecypoda, Naiadacea) of 

Fishery Bay, South Bass Island, Lake 

Erie. Ph.D. Diss., Ohio State Univ., 

Columbus. 216 pp. 

Stockner, J .G., and F.A. Armstrong. 1971. 

Periphyton of the experimental 1 akes 

area, northwestern Ontario. J. Fish. 

Res. Board Can. 28(2):215-229. 

Stuckey, R.L. 1975. Aquatic vascular 

plants of the Sandusky River Basin. 

Pages 295-333 in D.B Baker, hl.P. 

Jackson, and P.L. Prater, eds. Proc, 

Sandusky River Basin Symposium. 

PLUARG/ I nt. Joint Comm., Great Lakes 

Regional Office, Windsorr Ontario. 

475 pp. 

Stuckey, R.L. 1979. The declfne of 

flowering lake plants. Pages 21-31 In 

J. Rousmaniere, ed. The enduring 

Great Lakes. W. W. Norton and Co., 

New York. 

Taftp C.E., and C. W. Taft. 1971. The 

algae of western Lake Erie. Ohio 

Biol. Surv. Bull. 4(1):1-189. 

Teal, J .M. 1962. Energy flow in the salt 

marsh ecosystem of Georgia. Ecology 

43 : 614-624. 

Tilton, D.L., P.H. Kadlec, and P.R. 

Schwegler. 1978, The ecology and 

values of Michigan s coastal 

wetlands. U.T. Fish Wildl. Serv., 

Twin Cities, MN. 98 pp. 

Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1984. Wetlands of the 

United States: current status and 

recent trends. Fish Wildl. Serv., 

U.S. Dep, of Interior 11. S. Govt. 

Print. Officer Washington, P.C. 59 

PP 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1974, 

Proposed diked disposal area on 

Dickinson Island, St. Glafr County, 

Michigan. Final Environniental Impact 

Statementar U.S. Army District* 

Detroit* MI. 235 pp.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1974. Soil 

survey of St. Clair County, Vichfgan. 

U.S. Govt. Print. Office, Washington, 

D.C. 113 pp. 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 1976. Great 

Lakes water levels9 1860-1975. 

National Cceanic and Atmospheric 

Administrat ion, Washington, D.C. 187 

PP- 

U.S. Department of Interior. 1971. Flyway 

habitat management unit project. Dl v. 

Wildl. Refuges, Bur, Sport Fish. 

Wildl. FHMUP Rep. 8. Washington, D.C. 

5 PP* 

U.S. Department of Interior. 1977. The 

Nation's renewable resources-an 

assessment* 1975. For. Res. Rep, 21. 

For. Serv. Washfngton, D.C. 243 pp. 

Urban, D. 1968. The ecology of raccoons on 

a managed waterfowl marsh in 

southwestern Lake Erie. M.S. Thesi sr 

Ohio State Univ., Columbus. 90 pp. 

Urban, D. 1970. Raccoon populations, 

movement patterns, and predation on a 

managed waterfowl marsh. J. W i ldl . 

Manage. 34(2) :372-382. 

Wagner, hi. J . , ed. 1977. Endangered, 

threatened and rare vascular plants 

in Michigan. Mich. Dep. of Nat. 

Resour., Lansing. 24 pp. 

Walters, L.J., T.L.. Kovack, and C.E. 

Herdendorf . 1974. Mercury occurrence 

in sediment cores from western Lake 

Erfe. Ohio J. Scf. 74(1):1-19. 

Weller, M.W., and C.E. Spatcher, 1965. 

Role of habitat in the distribution 

and abundance of marsh birds. Agr. 

Home Econ. Exp. Sta. Iowa State 

Univ,, Spec. Rep. No. 43. Ames. 31 

PP * 

Wernert M,T., and B.A. Manny. 1979. Fish 

distribution and limnological 

conditions under ice cover in Anchor 

Bay, Lake St. Clair, 1979. U.S. Fish 

Wildl. Serv., Great Lakes Fish. Lab., 

Ann Arbor, Mich,, Admin. Rep. 80-1. 

58 PP* 

Westlake, D.F. 1963. Comparison of plant 

productivity. Biol . Rev. 38:385-425. 

Wetzel, R.G. 1975. Limnology. W. B. 

Saunders c0.9 Philadelphia. 743 pp. 

Wightman, W.R. 1961. The St. Clair Delta, 

M.S. Thesis, Univ. Western Ontario, 

London. 142 pp. 

Wilson, J., and L.J. Walters. 1978. 

Sediment-water-biomass interaction of 

toxfc metals fn the western basin, 

Lake Erie. Ohio State Univ., Cent. 

Lake Erie Area Res. Tech. Rep. 96. 

113 pp. 

Winner, J.M,, A.J. Oud, and R.G. Ferguson. 

1970. Plankton productivity studies 

in Lake St. Clair, Pages 640-650 In 

Proc. 13th Conf. Great Lakes Res., 

Int. Assoc. Great Lakes Res. 

Wolcott, R.M. 1903. The North American 

species of Limnesja. Trans Am. 

Microsc. Soc. 24:85-107. 

Wolfertr D.R,, W.N. Busch, and C.T. Baker. 

1975. Predation by fish on walleye 

eggs on a spawning reef in western 

Lake Erie. 1969-71. Ohio J. Sci. 

75(3) :118-125. 

Wolverton, C. 1981. Manual for wetland 

evaluation techniques. Operational 

draft. Div. Land Resour. Prog.# Mich. 

Dep. Nat. Resour., Lansing. 30 pp. 

Wright, L. D., and J .M. Coleman. 1972. 

River delta morphology: wave cl imate 

and the role of the subaqueous 

profile. Science 176(4032):282-284.

DIMENSIONS OF LAKE ST. CLAIR AND ST. CLAIR RIVER WETLANDS BY UNITED STATES 

AND CANADA QUADRANGLE MAPSa 

Jurisdiction and 

quadrangle map 

MICHIGAN : 

Wayne County 

Be1 1 e Is1 e Quadrangle 

Detroit Quadrangle 

Subtotal 

Macomb County 

Grosse Point Quadrangle 

Mt. Cl emens Quad rangl e 

New Haven Quad rangl e 

Subtotal 

St. C1 air County 

A1 gonac Quad rangl e 

Marine City Quadrangle 

New Baltimore Quadrangle 

Port Huron Quadrang1 e 

St. Cl ai r Quadrangle 

St, Clair Flats Quadrangle 

Subtotal 

MICHIGAN TOTAL 

ONTARIO: 

Essex County 

Be1 le River Quadrangle 

Riverside Quadrangle 

Stoney Point Quadrangle 

Ti1 bury Quadrangle 

Subtotal 

Coastal length Area of 

af wet1 ands wet1 ands 

(km) (km2)

Jurisdiction and 

quad rangl e map 

Kent County 

Mi tche11 Bay Quadrangle 

Ti 1 bury Quadrangle 

Wall aceburg Quadrangle 

APPENDIX A (CONTINUED) 

Subtotal 

Lambton County 

Courtright Quadrangle 

Johnston Channel Quadrangle 

Mi tchel 1 Bay Quadrangle 

Sarn i a Quad rangl e 

Seaway Is1 and Quadrangle 

Sombra Quadrangle 

Wall aceburg Quadrangle 

Wal pol e Is1 and Quad rangl e 

Coastal 1 ength Area of 

of wet1 ands wet1 ands 

( km? ( km2 I 

Subtotal 64.4 161.69 

ONTARIO TOTAL 102.4 231.33 

-- 

LAKE ST, CLAIR/ST. CLAIR RIVER TOTAL 188.2 382.91 

%ata sources: United States Geological Survey, Dept. Interior, 7.5-minute 

Quadrangle Maps (1:24,000 scale?; Canada Department of Energy, Mines? and 

Resourcest 7.5-minute Quadrangle Maps (1:25,000 scale),

APPENDIX A (CONCLUDED)

MEAN MONTHLY ST. CLAIR RIVER FLOWSp 1900 TO 1980a 

Flaw In cubic meters per second 

WGTfl 

YEAR JAN FED MAR &PR M&Y JUN JUL AUO SEP OCT NOV DEC MERN 

1900 4190 3960 3960 5130 5240 5300 5440 5470 5530 5530 5640 5440 5077 

1901 4700 3570 4360 3600 3499 5720 5780 5780 5660 5610 5550 5300 5105 

1902 4130 4300 5180 5270 5320 5440 5410 5490 5380 5270 5300 5150 9141 

1903 3990 3880 4000 5240 5240 5320 5440 5440 5490 9610 5440 5150 3102 

1904 4330 4190 4360 5300 5520 3720 5780 5800 5780 5800 5490 5350 5304 

190% 3570 3940 4560 5550 566.0 5780 5930 5860 5360 5330 5720 5610 5321 

1306 5470 4250 4810 5460 5780 5780 5830 5800 5720 5610 5550 5150 5458 

1907 4420 4110 4900 5580 5640 5720 5830 5800 5330 5720 5810 5490 5395 

1908 3360 3740 4730 5440 5610 57YO 5330 5830 5630 '5550 5440 5380 3258 

1909 4810 3450 4360 25210 5380 5520 5L;SC) 5520 3490 f;3E:0 5210 5(:)40 5E1'3(1

APPENDIX B (CONCLUDED) 

Flow in cubfc meters per second 

WGTD 

YEW AN FEB I"ICIR APR MAY JUN JUL CSUG SEB OCT NOV DEC MEAN 

a Data source: U,S, Army Carps of Engineers.

ALGAE OCCURRING IN COASTAL WETLANDS AND NEARSHORE WATERS OF LAKE ST. CLAIRa 

Taxa Form and habitat 

Phylum Cyanophyta (blue-greens) 

Class Myxophyceae 

Order Chroococcal es 

Family Chroococcaceae 

Order Harmogonal es 

Famlly Osclllatoriacaas 

Family Nostocacaae 

SP * 

Fa 

Phylum Euglsnaphyta Cauglenoids) 

C7 ass Eugl enophyceas 

Order Eugl snal es 

Family Euglenaceae 

246 

Colonial; planktonic 

Colonial; planktonlc 



Colonial ; pl anktonfc 

Colonial ; p1 anktonic 

Colonial; gl anktanic 

Colonfal; planktonic 

Colonfal; pl anktonic 

Fi l amentous; pl ankton ic 

Fil amentous; sessile 8 

pl anktonfc mats 

Filamentous; planktonlc 

Colonial; among marsh p1 ants8 

sessile & planktonic 

Sol itary; pl anktonic 

Solftary; planktanic 

Sol i tary; pl ankton jc 

Sol ftary; p1 anktonic

APPEND SX c ( CrMlf NUED 1 

f axa Form and Rabftat 

Phylum Chrysophyta (golden-browns) 

Class Xanthophyceae (yellow-greens) 

Ordor Hoterococeales 

Family Chlorothaclacsae 

Qrdar kleterotrichal es 

Famlly Trlbonematacsaa 

SP * 

Order Hatoroslphonalas 

Farnfly Vauchorlacaae 

Class Chrysophyceas (goldan algae1 

Qrdcs Chrysomonadalas 

Famfly khromnadacsao 

Class Bacl llarlophycaa Idlatms3 

Order Centrales (centrfc dlatomsl 

Famlly Corcfnadfscacsas 

w 

Order Psnoal es ( psnnate d 1 atoms) 

Fanlly Frayllarlaceae 

Faml l y Achnanthacaae 

sP 

Family Navicul aceas 

SolStary; among marsh plants 

8 planktanfc 

Filamentous; planktonlc 

Filamentous; among marsh plants 


Sol ltary~ planktonlc 

So1 ftary; pl anktanic 

Sat ftary; planktontc 

$01 ftary; planktonfc 

Sot i tary; plankton f c 

$01 1 tary; planktanf c 

Sol 1 taryt planktonfc 

sol ltary; pl anktonds 

Sol I tary; p1 anktonfc 

Sol ftary; pf anktanfcr & 

attached to aquatic plants 

Sol ltary; ptanktonlc

f axa 

Famfly Gomphonsmaceas 

Family Cymbellaceas 

Phylum Pyrrhsphyta (fire algae) 

Class Dfnaphycsas (dinoflagellates) 

Qrdar Psridiniales 

FnmZ f y Per 4 dl n 1 aceat3 

Phylum Chlarophyta (greens) 

Class Chlorophycsaa 

Ordar Volvoealas 

Famfly Ghlamydmanadacea~ 

SP * 

BrQas Tetrasporal @s 

Fa 

Order Mf crssporal ss 

Fanfly Mlcrosporacsao 

spa 

Order Chaetopharaf ss 

5% 

Farm and habitat 

Sol itary; yl anktanfc 

So1 1 tasy; p7 anktonic 

Sol Ztary; planktonlc 

Sol l tary; planktonlc 

$01 1 tery; planktonic 

Calonlal; planktonfc 

Colonlal; planktonlc 

Colonial; planktonlc 

Colanfal; planktonic 

Colonlal; glanktanfc 

F$lamsntous; planktonic 

Filamentous; attached to 

aquatJc plants & debrfs

APPENDIX C (CONTINUED) 


Fami l y Protococcaceae 

Family Coleochaetaceae 

Order Cl adophoral es 

Fami 1 y Cl adophoraceae 

SP 

-- 

SP 0 

-- 

m b o r v a n u m 

Ped.i_arj.truml2ahsmanhtusum 

Order Oedogonial es 

Fami 1 y Oedogon i aceae 

Order Chl orococcal es 

Family Hydrodictyaceae 

ped i astrm -taturn 

-m- 

-mtetras 

Sorastrumsofnulasuol 

Fami 1 y Coel astraceae 

Family Botryococcaceae 

,l2uulu 

Solitary; planktonic attached 

to organic debris 


organic debris 

Fil amentous; attached to 

aquatic p1 ants 

Fi1 amentous; p1 anktonic 


aquatic plants 

Colonial ; pl anktonic 

Colonial; planktonic 8 

among marsh plants 

Colonial; planktonic 8 


Colonial ; p1 anktonic 

Colonial ; pl anktonic 


Colon i a1 ; pl ankton i c 

Col on i a1 ; pl ankton ic 

Colonial ; planktonic 


Colonial ; p1 anktonic 8 


Colon i a1 ; pl ankton i c 

Colon i a1 ; among marsh pl ants 


Colonial; planktonic


Famt 7 y Scenadesmaceae 

Order Zygnsmatales 

Family Zygnematacsae 

Family Ossmfdiateas Cdasmlds) 

So1 ltary; pl anktonfc 

Sol l tary; p1 anklon lc 

Colon4al; pl anktonfc 

Colonial; amang marsh plants 

Salltary; planktonlc 

Colonf a1 ; pl anktonlc 

Sol ltary; among marsh pl ants 

Colonial; planktonjc 



Colonial ; among marsh plants 

Colonial; amng marsh plants 

Colonf a1 ; pl anktsnic 

Colonfal; planktonlc 

Filamentous; planktonic 

Filamentous; marsh pools 

Filamantous; plantonfc 

Solitary; among marsh plants 

Sol i tary; amang marsh plants 


Solltnry; among marsh plants 

Sulftary; among marsh plants 

Sol ftary; amang marsh plants 

Saldtary; among marsh plants 

Solitary; attached Lo debrfs 

Salltary; among marsh plants 


5cZltaryy among marsh plants 

Sol l tary; amang marsh plants 

Sclftary; among marsh plants 

Solttary; among marsh plants 

So? f tary; among marsh pl ants 

Salltary; planktanfc & sessile 

Sol 4 tary; among marsh plants 


Solltary; among marsh plants 

Sot ttargr; air*orzy marsh pl atits 

Sol f fary; among marsh plants

WPENDIX C (CONCLUDED) 


Sol i tary; among marsh p1 ants 

Sol i tary; among marsh plants 


So1 i tary; among marsh pl ants 

Sol i tary; among marsh pl ants 

Fil amentous; among marsh pl ants 

Fil amentous; among marsh pl ants 



Sol 1 tary; among marsh pl ants 


So1 itary; among marsh pl ants 

Fi 1 amentous; among marsh pl ants 


Sol 1 tary; among marsh plants 


So1 i tary; among marsh p1 ants 





Sol i tary ; among marsh pl ants 


Sol itary; p1 anktonic & 


So1 i tary; p1 anktonic & 


Sol itary; among marsh plants 

Sol itary; planktonic 

Sol itary; among marsh pl ants 

So1 dtary; p1 anktonic & 




So1 itary; among marsh pl ants 

So1 i tary; among marsh plants 



Sol itary; among marsh plants 



a Data sources: Pfeters (189311 Winner et al. (19701, Taft and Taft (19713s 

Michigan Water Resources Commdssion (1975).

Phylum Protozoa fpsotoroansl 

C1 ass Sarcad l na 

Qrdar 

Class @Illopksre leflfalosf 

Order HaleP~lckEda 

FamSly Tracheldnldaa 

Order 925g(st,rlchlda 

Famfly Tlnttnfitda6 

ZWPLANKVQN OCGURRING Xt\B THE COASTAL WETLARDS 

AW NEARSHORE WATERS QF LAKE ST, CtAXWa 

1 52 

Abundance status 

Rare 

Cornon 

Camn 

Cornon 

Abundant 

Cornon

APPENDIX 0 (~oNTIMUED) 

Spec 1 es Abundance status 

Order Psri trichida 

Family Vorticallldae 

Family Ophrydiidae 

Phylum Rotatoria (rotifsrs) 

Class Monogononata (sfngle ovary rotifers) 

Order Flosculariacea 

Famf 1y Conochil idae 

unicorniq 

Family Tostudinellidae 

Order Co? 1 othecacea 

Famfly Collothscidae 

Order Ploimacea 

Family Notommatldae 

Family Synchaetidae 

Family Gastropodidae 

Occasional 

Common 

Rare 

Uncomnon 

Common 

Abundant 

Common 

Rare 

Rare 

Rare 

Rare 

Occasional 

Occasional 

Abundant 

Abundant 

Rare 

Rare 

Occasional 

Common

Spec 1 os Abundance status 

Rare 

Bcca5fonal 

ff are 

Rare 

Rare 

Occasional 

Rare 

Rara 

Rare 

Rare 

Abundant 

Rare 

Csmn 

kcas tonal 

kcas f anal 

Rare 

Ris re 

Rare 

Raro 

Rare 

Abundant 

Abundant 

Cornan 

Cmon 

Raro 

Rare 

Rare 

Rare 

Rare 

Rare 

Rare 

Rare 

Rare 

Rare 

Ram 

Ra ra 

Rare 

Rare

APPENDIX D (CONTINUED) 

Species Abundance status 

Family Tylotrochidae 

-- 

llxxEaG 

eriorlslghniq auadranu 

Phylum Arthropoda (joint-legged animals) 

Cl ass Crustacea 

Order Cl adocera (water fleas) 

Family Daphnidae 

aaPhnfa- 

DnDhn_aw- 

DaD.hnia- 

DaPbn.la- 

DaDhnLsaul_ex 

BaBhnlsret;racurvn 

-- 

Fami 1 y Leptodoridae 

Le~todoril hindtii 

Family Sididae 

Uahmxam -era1 anum 

smd- 

Fami 1 y Hol oped i dae 

LlmQCm 

Family Bosminidae 

Bosmlna- 

EubPsminm.coreaon5 

Fami 1 y Chydoridae 

Alona- 

Alona- 

Blneanuadranaularis 

81snella SPP* 

-a 

Gdmmaas- 

Family Macrothrici dae 

Rare 

Uncommon 

Fare 

Rare 

Common 

Common 

Occasional 

Uncommon 

Common 

Occasional 

Uncommon 

Uncornmon 

Rare 

Occasional 

Abundant 

Abundant 

Uncommon 

Rare 

Rare 

Rare 

Rare 

Rare 

Rare 

Occasional 

Rare 

Rare 

Rare

Spec 3 es 

Abundance status 

Unc mion 

hhc oarnor? 

SuBardtrr. bZ&rpaet Jc~Zda 4 hat-past lcofd cogspr~ds) 

e drrrf 1 y blasrpacticldao 

rn Rare

APPEMDlX E 

VASCULAR AQUATIC PLANTS KCURRING IN LAKE ST, CLAIR WETLANDSa 

Ecologicaf niche and species Abundance statusb 

Class Angiospermae (flowering p1 ants) 

Subclass Monocotyledonae (monocots) 

Qrdsr Pandanal es 

Family Typhaceae (cattails) 

(narrow-leaved cattail) 

road-1 saved cattail 

(hybrid cattail) 

Family Sparganium (bur reeds) 

(giant bur reed) 

Order A1 ismales 

Famlly Alismataceae (water plantains) 

(water plantain) 

mmon arrowhead) 

Family Butomaceae (flowering rushes) 

(flowering rush) 

Order Grami nal es 

Fami 1 y Grami neae (grasses) [bluejoint grass1 

tlesnake grass)

Ecological ndche and specles Abundance status 

Famf 1 y Cyperaceae (sedges) 

(tussock sedge) 

(redrooted cyperusl 

(rusty cyperus) 

f redfooted spiks-rush) 

unt spike-rush) 

1 (American bulrush, 

(dark green bulrush) 

(river bulrush) 

sat bul rush) 

Order Xyrldalas 

Fsmif y Pontedsriaceao (ptckeral weads) 

(water stargrass, mud plantain) 

(p fckarel wwd) 

Qrder ifllalaa 

Famlly Juncaceae (rushes) 

(soft rush) 

(knotted rush) 

CTorreyrs rush1 

Ordnr arch Idalss 

Family Orchidaceae (orchf ds) 

(prairfe fringed orchfdl 

5ubcIass Olcatyladanas tdfeotsl 

Order Sal fcales 

Famfly Sallcacaae (willaws) 

C eastern ca.t;tonwood) 

(quaking aspen) 

y wlSSaw9

WPENDXX E (CONTINUED) 

Ecof ogical niche and species Abundance status 

Order Myrical es 

Family Jug1 andaceae (walnuts) 

(shagbark hickory) 

Order Fagal es 

Family Fagaceae (beeches) 

bicolar (swamp white oak) 

(burr oak) 

(pin oak) 

Order Urtical es 

Fami 1 y Ul maceae (elms 1 

Y.lnrus mericana (American elm) 

Famlly Urticaceae (nettles) 

Ilrtica dioica (stinging nettle) 

Order Polygonal es 

Family Polygonaceae (smartweeds) 

Pol va- am~hi b ium (water smartweed) 

Po1 vgfau~~ ~occine~ (swamp persicaria) 

Po1 v m ~onvol- (black bindweed) 

Pol vaow Mi f o l u (nodding smartweed) 

& d y g p~nsvl ~ ~ ~ vanica (Pennsylvania smartweed, 

pi nkweed) 

pol vgonum punctat~ (water smartweed) 

R j 3 vertici,ll atus (swamp dock) 

Order Ranales 

Family Nymphaeaceae (water lilies) 

Jutes (American water-lotus) 

Nu~hu & v e ~ ( spatterdock, ye1 1 ow water 1 $1 y 1 

Order Papaverales 

Family Cruciferae (mustards) 

Wamine pensvlvania (bitter cress) 

IWiQJB i2-1 (marsh cress) 

Order Rosa1 es 

Family Crassulaceae (orpines1 

Pent- (ditch stonecrop) 

Fami 1 y Rosaceae ( roses) 

(sf 1 verweed) 

mp rose)

Order SapSnd&lea 

F emf 3 y Anacardf aceao I sum&

(btaghorn sumac) 

family Acoraceact Imaplus) 

MS % tsf3ver maple) 

Ut-4c.r hbal alas 

FamfXy eorna~sae (woyruodsl 

gray dqiwsrjda 

# r ran a5 4er d~xjhwjd 

1

AQPEHDIX E ( CONTINUED 1 

Ecological niche and species Abundance status 

Family Boragfnaceae (borages) 

(common comfrey) 

Family Solanaceae (nightshades) 

(nightshade) 

Order Pofemoniales 

Family Labiatae (mints) 

(water horehound) 

Family Acanthaceae (acanthids) 

(water wfllow) 

mad-dog sku1 lcap) 

Order Rub i a1 es 

Family Rubiaceae (madders) 

~ccidentali~ (buttonbush) 

Order Campanul a1 es 

Family Lobelliaceae (lobellas) 

(blue lobelia) 

Order Asteral es 

FamSly Composftae (composites) 

(nodding beggar tick) 

(purple-stemmed swamp beggar tick) 

(Hi11@s thistle) 

(bonset) 

Cl ass Ang i ospermae ( f 1 ower i ng pl ants 1 

Subclass Monocotyledonae (monocots9 

Order Na j adal es 

Fami 1 y Potamogatonaceae ( pondweeds) 

(knotty pondweed) 

Subclass Dicotyledonae Cdicots) 

Order Po1 ygonal es 

Family Polygonaceae (buckwheats) 

(water smartweed) 

(swamp smartweed)

APPENDIX E (CONCLUDED) 

Ecological niche and species Abundance status 

Order Xyridales 

Family Pontederiaceae (pickerel weeds) 

(mud plantain, water stargrass) C 

Subclass Dicotyledonae (dicots) 

Order 

- 

Ranal ss 

Family Ranunculaceae (buttercups) 

Jonairastris (water crowfoot) 

Order Myrtal es 

Family Ha1 oragidaceae (water mi 1 foils) 

Mvrf0~h~l1t,@ a1 terniflor_urn (1 Jttle water mil foil 

(water mil foil 1 

~~riophvllwm s~icatw (water milfoil) 

Family Onagraceae (evening primroses) 

(water primrose) 

Class Angiospermae (flowering plants) 

Subclass Monocotyledonae (monocots) 

Order AraZ es 

Family Lemnaceae (duckweeds) 

Lemnq $rI scu1 q (star duckweed) 

Subclass Dicotyledonae (dicots) 

Order Ranales 

Family Ceratophyllaceae (hornworts) 

Cerato~hvllace_ae demersw (hornwort, coontail) A 

Order Polemon fa1 es 

Family Lentibulariaceae (bladderworts) 

(bl adderwort) 

"0ata sources: Stuckey (1968, 1972, 1975, 19791, J aworski and Raphael 

( 1978) Herdendorf et a1 . (1981~). 

b~bundance 

status: A = abundant, c = common, 0 = cccasional, R = rare, 

U = uncormnon.

BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES OF NEARSWORE LAKE ST, CLAIR AND CONNECTING 

WATERWAYS (EXCLUDING MOLLUSKSIa 

Classfflcatfun and spscfss 

Phylum Porffera fsgongas) 

Class 0mosponglae (horny spangas) 

Famll y Spang11 l ldae ( fresh-water spanyes) 

SPP * 

Phylum Costante& ata (61 ass Cnf darfal 

Class Wydrozea (kydrozoans) 

Famtly Wydrldas 

SPP 

Phylum Platyhslmlnthes (flatworms) 

Class Turbel? aria t p1 anarl ansl 

Ordar Trfcladlda (triclads? 

Frtmlly Plannrlldae (planasfans1 

Phylum Namatoda (roundworms) 

Gl asa Adsnaphorao 

Family Trlpylfdae 

SP * 

Phylum Annelids (sagmented worms? 

GI ass Pal ychaeta 

FamE 1 y Sabal l idae ( Fan warmsr feather-duster worms1 

Class Bllgochaata laquatic aarthwarms) 

f emf l y Lun&r?cul idae

WPENDZX F (CONTINUED) 

Cl assi f ication and species 

Famdly Tubificidae (sludge worms) 

Famf ly Naididae 

sj2ik.h- 

Unc;.f- - 

Fami 1 y Gl ossoscol eci dae 

i2zIEE& 

Class Hirudinea 

-- 

(leeches) 

Family Glossiphoniidae 

He1 &dell a $riserial is 

Order Pharyngobdellida 

Family Erpobdellidae

Classffjcatlon and spscfes 

Phylum Arthrapada (joint-lsggod anlmalsl 

C1 ass Arachndda 

Order Acarina (mites and tIcks1 

Superfamily Mydracarfna dwatgr rnftss) 

Famfly Limnssifdao 

Fami l y Wygrabatidaa 

sp, 

Family Plonidae 

Cl ass Crustacea 

Subclass Bstracoda (ssod shrimps) 

Famfly Cypridae 

SPP * 

Subcl ass Ma1 acast raca 

Qrder Isopoda (aquatlc sowbugs1 

Family Assllldas 

Ordsr Amphfpoda fstdeswfmrs, scuds) 

Family Gamaridae 

Order Becapoda tcrayff shesr shrimps) 

Subardsr Raptantfa (crayfJskss1 

Famlly Gambarldas (crayffshosb 

SP * 

Class Xnsacta (a Msxapodal /Insects) 

Order Ephemroptera (may fl 3 @r,! 

Fsmlly Baetfscfdas 

5P *

APPENDIX F (CONTINUED) 

Classiffcat4on and species 

Family Ephemeridae (burrowing mayflies) 

Fami 1 y Pol ymi tarci dae 

Order Odonata (dragonflies and damselflies) 

Suborder Anisoptera (dragonfl ies) 

Family Gomphidae 

SP 

Suborder Zygoptera (damselflies) 

Family Coenagrionidae (narrow-winged damselflies) 

SP * 

Order Hemiptera (bugs) 

Family Corixidae (water boatmen) 

SP 

- 

Family Hydropsychidae (net-spinning caddfsflles) 

SP. 

SP. 

Order Trjchoptera (caddi sf1 ies) 

Family Hydroptilidae (micro-caddisflies) 

HyGm@m SP. 

- SP * 

Family Polycentropodidae (tube-making caddisflies) 

SP. 

Family Psychomylldae (trumpet-net caddisflies) 

l2admuh SP* 

Family Mol annidae 

SP * 

Family leptocerldae (long-horned caddisfl les) 

!&xiz&a SP. 

SP * 

SP *

Cl asst f icaP3on and speclas 

Order Coleaptera (bsotles) 

Farnlly Hallplldaa (crawling water bsotles) 

Famtly Elmfdae (rlffla beetles) 

sp. 

Order DIptera ltrus flles) 

Faml l y Chaobor ldaa (phanton midges) 

SP * 

Family Culicidas (mosquftaesf 

SP * 

'8ata saurcos: Wo3cotf ( 1903 1 @ Edmondsan ( 1959), Hunt ( 19621, Hf 1 tunen 

tE971r 1BBQ)r Modlin and Gwnnon 6197311 Pennak (1S78Is Mrdsndarf et al. 

il$8lcIt Mfltunen and Manny (1982)r Hardsndorf and Hardsndorf (1983).

TAXONOMIC LISTING OF FRESHWATER MOLLUSCA OF LAKE ST. CLAIR 

COASTAL MARSHES, NEARSHORE WATERS, AND TRIBUTARY MOUTHSa 

Specf es 

Cl ass Gastropoda (snai l s) 

Subclass Prosobranchia (gill-breathing snails) 

Order Mesogastropoda 

Superfamily Viviparidae (mystery snails) 

Famlly Vivfparidae (mystery snails) 

816) brown mystery sna?l 

r 1834) banded mys 

(Gray, 1834) (= Y, 

oriental mystery snail or Japanese snail 

Superfamily Valvatacea 

Family Valvatidae (valve snails) 

Valvat3 w e s s q Walker, 1906 flat valve snail 

Valvata piscf nal is (Mu1 ler, 1774) European valve snail 

slncer~ sincera Say, 1824 ribbed valve snail 

trlcarinata (Say, 1817) three-keeled valve snail 

Superfamily Rissoacea 

Family Hydrobiidae (spire snails) 

clncinnatiensis (Anthony, 1840) campeloma spire 

snail 

(Baker, 1928) fl at-ended spi re snail 

r, 1928) Pilsbryps spire snail 

Say, 1817) ordinary splre snail 

Pilsbry, 1898 small spire snail 

(Say, 1825) deep water spire snail 

Family Truncatellidae (looplng snails> 

(Say, 1817) river bank looping snail 

Family Bfthynjidae (faucet snails) 

l2mULb (Lfnnaeus, 1767) faucet snafl 

Superfamily Cersithiacea 

Family Pleuroceridae (horn snai 1s) 

Rafinesque* 1831 fl at-sided horn snaS9 

(Menke, 1830) Great Lakes horn snaS3 

--

Spsc .i tss 

APPENDIX C; (CONTINUED) 

Subclass Pulmansla Qfuny-breathing snafls) 

Ordsr Basomatophosa 

Superfamlly Lymnaeacea 

Famlly Lymnaefdea (pond snaf 1s) 

(Streng, 18961 shouldered northern fossarfa 

sa, laall graceful fossarja 

(Say, 18251 modest fassaria 

(Lea, 1841) amphlblaus fossarfa 

er, 1907) small pond snall 

{Say, 1817) AmerScan ear snail 

nney, 18671 slsnder pond snall 

y pond snall 

1817) great pond snafl 

(Say, 1817) lake stagnjcola 

sr, 19069 mini aturg 

(Sayt 18211 comon stagnfcola 

(Say, 1821) striped staynlsola 

Superfamlly Physacea 

Family Physfdaa (tadpals snaffs) 

Say, 1821 tadpols snafl 

eman, 1841 solid lake physa 

(Llnnaeu~~ 1758) polished tadpole snafl 

Superf amll y Pl anorbacoa 

Family Pl anarbldae (ramshorn snaj 1 s) 

ETyron, 1866) flatly colled gyraulus 

Baker, 1932 great carinate 

(Sayc 1816) larger eastern ramshorn 

Fa e f reshwatsr l impets9 

.G. Adams, 18411 dusky lily-pad lfmpet 

(Tyron, 1863) oval lake lfmpet 

Cl ass Pel ecypoda 

Order Eul amel l ibranchia 

Superf am1 1 y Un i onacea 

Family Unionidae (pearly mussels) 

Subfamily Ambleminae (button shells and relatives) 

(Say, 1817) three-ridge 

Rafinesque, 1820) plg-toe 

(Rafi nesgue, 1820) maple-leaf 

Lea, 1831) warty-back 

(Rafinesque, 1820) purple pimple-back 

inesque, 1820) spike, or lady-finger 

(Conrad, 1836) false pig-toe 

Subfamily Anodonti nae ( f l oater mussels) 

Raf inesque, 1820) brook wedge mussel 

Say, 1819 ridged wedge-mussel 

(Barnes, 1823) white heel-splitter 

29) brook l asmigona 

er fluted shell 

1 (Say, 1825) mudpuppy 

(Lea, 1834) cyl lndrical floater 

ay, 1829 common floater 

paper pond-she1 l 

SugAxku ur,ululaUs (Say, 1817) squaw-foot 

Subfamily Lampsi1 inae (1 amp-mussels) 

(Rafinesque, 1820) kidney shell 

gue, 1820 three-horned warty-back 

Jruncilla maciformis (Lea, 1828) fawn%-foot 

Truncilla fsunc- Rafinesque, 1820 deer-toe 

U (Say, 1817) pink heel-spl itter 

(Barnes, 1823) lilliput mussel 

(Raf inesque, 1820) round hickory-nut 

Raffnesque, 1820) olive hickory-nut 

Rafinesque* 1820) fragile paper-shell 

(Barnes, 1823) mucket 

, 1817) polnted sand-shell 

(Lamarck, 1819) bl ack sand-she1 1 

r 1820 wavy-rayed lamp-mussel 

(Barnes, 1823) fat mucket 

f Barnes, 1823 > pocket-book 

, 1831) bean villosa 

(Leal 1838) northern rfffle shell 

sque, 1820) trieorn pearly mussel

Spec l sf; 

APPENDIX &; 6. 

SuperfamDly Sphaarlacsa 

Famlly Corblculfdae (71ttle basket clams) 

lMullor, 2774) Aslatls clam 

Famlly Sphaerifdae (ffngornafl clams and poa clams) 

Subfamily Sphasrilnaa (fingarnail clams) 

nnaous, 17583 European flngernafl clam 

ssfn, 1876 Arctic-alpine Flagernall clam 

(Say, 18221 rho&ofd ffngernall clam 

y, 18161 grooved ffngernatl clam 

f lannarck, liWl8) strfated flngernaf I clam 

Mullsr, 27743 faks fingarnail clam 

(Say, 18221 swamp flngernafl clam 

fme, 18511 pond ffngernadl clan 

(Say, 1829) long ffngsrnafl clam 

Subfamtly Pi%ldl%nao Epsa clams or pill clams) 

(Muller, 17741 greater European pea clam 

Roper, 1890 giant northern pea clam 

me, 1852 Adamt% pea clam 

(Poli, 139%) ubdqultous poa clam 

Prfme, 1852 rfdged-beak pea clam 

Primer 1852 rsufid pea clam 

d, 1898 rfver pea clam 

Prlmsr 1852 rusty poa clam 

(Sheppardr 1895) Hsnslowts paa clam 

Clersint 1886 Lilljeborgqs pea clam 

1836 quadrangul ar plll cl am 

fisr L832 shlny pea clam 

rlme, 1852 fat pea clam 

Malm, 1855 shart-sndsd pea clam 

Primer 1852 triangular poa clam 

Primat 1851 globular pea clam 

rkll 1895 Walkorqs pea clam 

@lasainl 1877 Arctic-alplns poa clam 

SLerkf r 1895 perforatad pea clam 

-- 

& OaLa sources: Gosdrlch and Van dor fehalla (&93211 Berry (19431, Stansbary 

I196OT* Clarke (X98l1,

Species 

APPENDIX H 

HABITAT PREFERENCE OF FRESHWATER MOLLUSCA OF LAKE ST. CLAIR 

COASTAL MARSHES AND NEARSHORE WATERS 

Shallow Deep Gravel 

((2 m) (>2 m) Mud Sand & rock Plants Comments 

Eutrophf c 

Eutrophic 

Rare 

Rare

Spec t as 

APPENDIX W ICQNIINUED) 

Shall sw Deep Gravel 

((2 m) f >2 m) Mud Sand 8 rock PI ants Cornants 

x Eutrophic 

x Eutraphlc 

x Rare 

X 

x EutrophSc 

X 

x Eutrophic 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

Rare

Species 

Shall ow Deep Gravel 

((2 m) (>2 n) Mud Sand d rock Plants Comments 

X X X 

x x Rare 

X X 

X X 

X X X 

X X X X 

X X X 

X 

Rare 

a~ata 

sources: Goodrich and Van der Schal ie (1932) Berry (19431, Clarke 

( 1981 1.

Famlly and species 

Fsmfly Aclpenserldas 

FISH KNOWN OF4 F'Rt SlSMED TO U"I"TI_IZE THE COASTAL WETiADuUS 

OF THE ST, CLAXR RXVEM AND LAKE ST, CtAIRa 

( sturgeon 1 

Famfly kspfsostsldee (gars) 

l angnase gas) Coprm~n Gomon 

(spotted gar) Uncofnnrun Dncorman 

Family fso~ldas (pfkesl 

Cnorthsrn plksl Abundant Camn 

(musks1 1 ungo) 

(grass pfckarsl 1 

Camon 

Camon 

Uncomon 

Comn 

Famfl y Umbrf dae (mudm9 nnawsl 

(central mudmf nnow? 

Fa I rigs) 

(gfttard shad) 

Cyalden ~hjnerf 

blackchin shiner) 

spattat 1 shf narl 

femrald shingar) 

sand shiner) 

g fathead mS nhov I 

Camon 

Rare 

Ra rs 

Comn 

Camn 

Abundant 

Ataerndant 

Abtnradant 

Abundant 

Csmn 

Itncomn 

Comn 

Rare 

Rare 

Camn 

Cornon 

Abundart 

Abundant 

Camon 

C O ~ R 

Abundant 

Abundant

Famlly and species 

Family Catostomidea (suckers) 

(white sucker) 

e chubsucker) 

(spotted sucker) 

Family Ictaluridae (catfishes) 

.li&&uE (channel catfish) 

ma1 urus me1 as ( bl ack bull head 1 

Jctalurus ~ u l o s (brown u ~ bull head) 

Lctalurug natalis (yellow bullhead) 

Ngturus gvrinu (tadpole madtom) 

Family Cyprinodontidae (killifishes) 

Fundulu dlaohanur (banded killifish) 

Family Centrarchidae (sunfishes) 

Bmblo~l ites ~ e s t r i s ( rock bass) 

je~omi3 c~anellus (green sunfish) 

) I s albbosus (pumpkinseed) 

~ o c h i r u s (bluegill 

Micro~teru dolomiea (smal lmouth bass) 

Micro~teru salmoide~ (largemouth bass) 

Pomoxi~ gaaulari~ (white crappie) 

~1iaromacu1 atu (black crappie) 

Family Percidae (perches) 

fiheostoma exile (Iowa darter) 

Etheosto~ D I (johnny darter) 

perca f 1 avescens (ye1 1 ow perch 

Percina wades (1 ogperchl 

Stizostedion vitreu~ (walleye) 

Family Perichthyidae (basses) 

Nrone &- (white bass) 

Family Sciaenidae (drums) 

A~lodinotus grunniens (freshwater drum) 

Family Gasterosteidae (sticklebacks) 

Culea inconstans (brook stickleback) 

Family Cottidae (sculpins) 

(mottled sculpin) 

-- -- 

aorta source: Herdendorf et al. (1981~). 

Abundant 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Uncommon 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Abundant 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Uncommon 

Common 

Common 

Abundant 

Abundant 

Common 

Abundant 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Abundant 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Uncommon 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Abundant 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Uncommon 

Common 

Common 

Abundant 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Common 

Conimon 

Common

APPENDIX J 

WPWXRIANS AND REPTILES OGCURRING IN THE COASTAL WETLANDS 

OF LAKE ST. CLAIR AND THE ST. CLAlR RIVERa 

Spec 1 er Abundance status 

Class Amphfbfa (amphfbians) 

Order Gaudata (salamanders) 

PPY 

Crsd-spotted newt) 

Caastsrn tfger salamander) 

(blue-spotted sal amander) 

( spattad sal amanderf 

sd-backed salamander) 

(four-toed salamander) 

Order Saltantfa Cfroys and toads) 

tern chorus frog) 

% crfckot frog) 

Class Regtffla Creptflasl 

Ordar Squaaata (snakes and llzards) 

(northern water snake1 

(northern rlbbon snake) 

(northern red-ballfsd snake) 

brawn snake) 

mf dl and brown snake) 

f~astern hagnose snake) 

(northern rtngnsclk snake) 

rn $moth green snake) 

Comon 

Comon 

Common 

Comn 

Coman 

Abundant 

Rare 

Abundant 

Cam0 

Comon 

Comon 

Gomon 

Comon 

Comn 

Abundant 

Camnon 

Comn 

Abundant 

Abundant 

Uncomnon 

Abundant 

Uncomn 

Comon 

Comon 

Comn 

Coman 

Comn

Spec S es Abundance status 

feLd. (blue racer) 

eastern fox snake) 

rat snake) 

(eastern ml1 k snake) 

(eastern massasauga) 

Order Testudf nes (turtles) 

Z, ser~entlnq (snapping turtle) 

Common 

Rare 

Rare 

C0mm0~ 

Uncomnon 

Comnon 

Rare 

Common 

Common 

Abundant 

Comon 

Rare 

a~ata sources: Ruthven et al. (1928) * Conant (1975). Behler and King (1979). 

Herdendorf et a1 . (1981~).

BIRDS KCURRING IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE ST. CLAIR 

AND ST. CLAZR RIVER COASTAL WETLANDS3 

Spec f es Resf dance statush 

Class Avas (Bfrds) 

Qrdar Anserifarms 

Famlly Anatfdae (swans# go@$@, and ducks1 

SubfamJly Anserinae (swans and ge@sa) 

Trfbe Cygnlni 

(tundra swan) 

Subfamily Andtinaa Iducksl 

Trlbe CafrZninl 

(wood Buck) 

(dabbl f ng ducksf 

whfte-fronted goose) 

(canvasback)

Tribe Oxyurini 

APPENDIX K (CONTINUED) 

fflehead) W 

(hooded merganser) M 

common merganser) M 

( red-breasted merganser) M 

(ruddy duck) 

Order Podicipedi formes 

Family Podicipedidae (grebes) 

orned grebe) M 

(pied-billed grebe) BR 

Order Pelecaniformes 

Family Pelecanidae (pelicans) 

(white pelican) M 

Residence status 

Order Gruiformes 

Famlly Ra11 idae (rails, moorhensp and coots) 

BR 

(Virginia rail BR 

BR 

(common moorhen) BR 

merican coot) BR 

Order Ciconi i formes 

Family Ardeidae (herons) 

(American bittern) BR 

BR 

YR 

BR 

BR 

(green-backed heron) BR 

f bl ack-crowned BR 

n-ight-heron) 

Order Charadrllformes 

Family Charadri idae (plovers) 

(semi palmated plover) M

- OIIJL 

h 

e-. L 

UI a3 CI 

wl Q. I 

a, n- 

F Ira -g 

%--QIW L.r 

o m a c m a 

c m-- m am 

~ o a m c c 

a?= a a 

X3rCh mtn 

C 

vlL"-rn@a at- 

L@P- .P m a 

@i).t-)@-W--- L 

116s XQIF m*, Q 

+totmwa~ 

t +rn-mu~= 

a Cno 0-r 0 @F- 

E-=--uiQ. LP-ar- 

s 

x - 

u ."- 

at- 

3 3 

1 Cn 

x 

u w 

FO. c 

i r - F3

WPEMDXX K (CONTINUED) 

Spec f es Residence status 

Family Accipitridae

APPENDIX K (CONCLUDED) 

Spec l es Residence status 

Subfamily Emberizinae (sparrows) 

(swamp sparrow) Y R 

(savannah sparrow) BR 

a~ata sources: Peterson ( 19801, Herdendorf et a1 . ( 1981~1, Scott (1983). 

b~esi 

dence key : 

YR - Year-round resident BR - Breeding range (spring and summer) 

M - Migrant W - Winter range

APPENDIX L 

MAMMALS OCCURRING IN THE COASTAL WETLANDS OF LAKE ST. CLAIR 

AND THE ST. CLAIR DELTAa 

Species Abundance status 

Order Marsupialla (marsupials) 

Family Didelphidae 

(Vi rgfnia opossum) 

Order Lagomorpha 

Family Leporidae 

(eastern cottontail) 

(European hare) 

Order Rodentia 

Famlly Sciuridaa 

(woodchuck) 

ray squf rral 

rrel ) 

( red squirrel 1 

Family Cricetl dae 

Order Carnivora 

Family Canidae 

Yu1pcs. Lu.lxa (red fox) 

Famil y Procyon idae 

( raccoon 1 

(muskrat 1 

Family Mustel idae 

frenat~ (long-tailed weasel) 

Order Art i odactyl a 

Family Cervf dae 

(striped skunk) 

(white-talled deer) 

'~ata sources: Hayes ( 1964) r Herdendorf et a1 . ( 1981~). 

Common 

Rare 

Occasional 

Uncommon 

Uncommon 

Occasional 

Abundant 

Qccas ional 

Occasional 

Occasfonal 

Occasional 

Camon 

Rare

APPENDIX M 

OWNERSHIP OF MAJOR LAKE ST, CLAIR WETLANDS 

Wetland Name Re1 a t i ve Water-1 eval Veg . 

Pub1 i c Private areab controlC typed 

-- --- 

WAYNE COUNTY, MICHIGAN 

I. Belle Isle M/ F 

MACOMB COUNTY* MICHIGAN 

2, Black Creek - 

3. Clinton Rtver Estuary M 

4. Betvidere Bay - 

5. Salt River Estuary - 

ST. CLAJR COUNTY, MICHIGAN 

6. Marsac Paint . 

7, Swan Cresk Estuary - 

8. St. Johnts Marsh S 

9. Dickinson Island S/F 

10. Harsens Is1 and S 

11. Bslle Rfvar Estuary - 

12. Pine River Estuary M 

13, Marysvi 11 e - 

14, Port Huron - 

ESSEX COUNN, ONTARIO 

25, Peach Island 

16. Ruscom River 

17, Thames River Estuary 

KENT COUNTY p ONTARIO 

18, Bradley Marsh 

19. BJg Pofnt Marsh 

20, Tacky Marsh 

21. MJtchell Pafnt Marsh 

(Moon Island Marsh) 

22. Mitchell Bay 

CPlntal1 and Mud Creek 

marshes9 

23, Val 1 aceburg 

(Bear Creek and 

Pigeon marshes9

APPENDIX M (CONCLUDED) 

Wetland Name Re1 at i ve Water-1 evel Veg . 

Public Private area control type 

LAMBTON COUNTY, ONTARIO 

24. St. Anne Is1 and 

25, Wal pol e Is1 and 

26. Squirrel Island 

27. Bassett Island 

28. Seaway Island 

29. Port Lambton 

30. Fawn Island 

31. Stag Island 

- 

- 

32, Sarnia M 

a 

Ownership Key: b~rea Key: dVeg. Type Key: 

F = Federal S = Small (>500 ha) S = Submergent 

S = State or Provincial M = Medium (500-lrOOO ha) E = Emergent 

M = Municipal 

SC = Shooting Club 

L = Large (>l,000 ha) 

PM = Private, multiple owners CWater-1 eve1 Control Key: 

PS = Private, single owner D = Diked, managed marsh 

R = Indian Reservation U = Uncontroll ed wet1 and 

'~ote: Between Bradley Marsh (18) and Mitchell Bay (22) several shooting 

clubs operate small marshes, including Recess Club, Balmoral Club, St. Lukes 

Clubr Rex Club, Bay Loge Club* Rex/Cadotte Marsh, and Rankin/Sloan Marsh.

The Ecology of Lake St. Clair Wetlands: 

A Communi ty Prof i 1 e 

I R eW Dote 

September 1986 

b Ibr(.) 

Charles E. Herdendorf ,I C. Nicholas Raphael, Eugene ~aworski 

6. Pofformln(l O~anlzotlon Rem. No 

Authors' Affiliations: la CmimctfTesk/Work Unit NO. 

lCenter for Lake Erie Area Research 

The Ohio State University 

Columbus, OH 43210 

U w m O~llaniatlon Nome and Address 

National Wetlands Research Center 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Washington, DC 20240 

Geography 

and Geology 11. Controct(C) w Grnnt(O) No. 

Eastern Michigan University , 

Ypsilanti, MI 48197 

la Abstnct (Limit: loo words) I 

This publication reviews the ecological data and information on the wetlands 

of Lake St. Clair. The lake, whicn is a part of the Great Lakes ecosystem, is 

situated between southeastern Michigan and southwestern Ontario. Lake St. 

Clair contains a substantial portion of the remaining Great Lakes coastal 

wetlands, with extensive wetlands occurring in the vicinity af the St. Clair 

River Delta. These wetlands are among the most productive areas in the Great 

Lakes ecosystem. This publication summarizes the geologic history of the 

region leading to the development of wetlands and the present environment; 

biological production and community organization in the Lake St. Clair 

wetlands are also examined. The publication closes with a chapter on applied 

ecology which addresses issues such as wetland disturbance, management, and 

future prospects for these wetlands. 

LI. Mllltlfian/O$wt.Ended Terms 

Nutrient dynamics 

lrophic interactions 

Invertebrates 

Birds 

Great Lakes 

Navigation 

Rnthropogenic i n f 1 uences 

nt j 9 

- --- 

. Security Class (Thts Rrwm 21. No of Psges 

Unclassified 

Unlimited distribution -- - 

I Swd ANS1-339.11)) 

1 Unclassified 

22. Pncc 

I 

ORIOMAL FORM 272 (4-77) 

(Forwrly NJIS-35) 

Dapartment of ComWrC4

The Ecology of Lake St. Clair Wetlands: A Community Profile

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?