Skip to main content
Log in

A Landscape-Scale Comparison of Wetlands Associated with Surface Coal Extraction and Naturally-Occurring Wetlands in the Central Appalachian Mountains, USA

  • Wetlands and Global Change
  • Published:
Wetlands Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Surface coal extraction exerts substantial influences on the structure and function of ecosystems throughout the central Appalachian Mountains of eastern North America. In particular, the flattening of local terrain following surface mining predisposes many areas to incidental wetland formation, with other wetlands being intentionally constructed on former surface mines for stormwater control and mine drainage remediation. Past work has examined local-scale patterns in the water quality, floral assemblages, and wildlife use of mine-associated wetlands, although little to no information currently exists on landscape-scale patterns of wetland formation in response to surface mining. We inventoried naturally-occurring wetlands and wetlands associated with surface mining in the Guest River watershed in Wise County, Virginia, USA, one of the most heavily surface-mined watersheds in the Virginia coalfields. We found evidence of substantial wetland creation as a result of surface mining at the landscape scale, with mine-associated wetlands being located at significantly higher elevations, in different vegetative contexts, and significantly closer to nearby wetlands than unmined wetlands in the same watershed. Our results suggest that surface mining is a major source of wetland creation across the central Appalachian coalfields with potentially significant, landscape-scale implications for hydrological patterns, wetland-associated wildlife, and the distribution of wetland flora.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. The full habitat dataset for all 506 wetlands analyzed as part of this study is provided with this manuscript as Supplementary Information (Online Resource 2), as is the full ground-truthing dataset used to field-verify wetland conditions (Online Resource 3).

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

Jennifer Neuwald with Colorado State University’s Natural Science Education program aided in discussions surrounding the early conceptual development of this study. Hunter Hill and Garrett Stiltner assisted with data collection performed as part of ground-truthing visits to field-verify wetland conditions.

Funding

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Both authors contributed to the study conception and design. Data collection was performed by David Goodman, with data analysis performed by Walter H. Smith and David Goodman. The first draft of the manuscript was written by David Goodman, and Walter H. Smith and David Goodman contributed to revisions for the final manuscript. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Walter H. Smith.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

13157_2023_1750_MOESM1_ESM.pdf

Supplementary Material 1: Online Resource 1: Visual example of comparisons of (a) pre-mining (1995) versus (b) contemporary (2021) orthoimagery used to confirm wetlands’ association with landscape disturbance from surface coal extraction. Blue circles denote the location of present-day wetlands on orthoimagery from each date.

13157_2023_1750_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx

Supplementary Material 2: Online Resource 2: Habitat data for 506 wetlands surveyed across the Guest River Watershed, Wise County, Virginia, USA in 2022. Refer to the “Metadata” tab for a description of each habitat variable.

13157_2023_1750_MOESM3_ESM.xlsx

Supplementary Material 3: Online Resource 3: Summary of habitat assessments performed using contemporary orthoimagery and ground-truthing site visits at a subsample of 31 National Wetlands Inventory-listed wetlands in the Guest River Watershed, Wise County, Virginia, USA. “Vegetation” refers to predominant vegetation type (1 = open water, 2 = emergent, 3 = forested), “Stream” refers to degree of wetland isolation (1 = stream-associated, 2 = isolated from surface streams), “Landscape” refers to predominant upland vegetation within a 100 m buffer of each wetland (1 = barren/developed, 2 = field/grassland, 3 = scrub/shrub, 4 = forested), and “Disturbance” refers to the presence of indicators anthropogenic disturbance (1 = indicators of disturbance present, 2 = indicators of disturbance absent). Fields marked “n.a.” refer to one site that was ditched/drained prior to field visits for ground-truthing.

Supplementary Material 4

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Goodman, D.C., Smith, W.H. A Landscape-Scale Comparison of Wetlands Associated with Surface Coal Extraction and Naturally-Occurring Wetlands in the Central Appalachian Mountains, USA. Wetlands 43, 101 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-023-01750-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-023-01750-y

Keywords

Navigation