Lobster use of eelgrass habitat in the Piscataqua River on the New Hampshire/Maine Border, USA

The relationship between lobsters and eelgrass beds was investigated in the Piscataqua River, which constitutes the lower portion of the Great Bay Estuary, New Hampshire and Maine. The goals of the study were to assess the numbers, size distribution, and sex distribution of lobsters in eelgrass beds, to determine whether lobsters in the eelgrass beds were transients or residents, and to investigate eelgrass density preferences among adolescent lobsters. Eighty percent of the lobsters collected from eelgrass beds were adolescents, measuring >40 to 70 mm carapace length (CL). Of the 295 lobsters collected at four different eelgrass beds, we found an average male-to-female ratio of 1.2. Tag/recapture efforts in eelgrass beds (1.5 to 4 mo interim period) yielded an average recapture of 5.5%. Twenty transects, each 10 m in length, sampled at two eelgrass sites revealed a lobster density of 0.1 m⁻². In mesocosm experiments, lobsters (53–73 mm CL) showed a clear preference for eelgrass over bare mud. Our investigations showed that adolescent lobsters burrow in eelgrass beds, utilize eelgrass as an overwintering habitat, and prefer eelgrass to bare mud.     

Funding Science that Links to Decisions: Case Studies Involving Coastal Land Use Planning Projects

Many reports have noted that a significant portion of coastal science that is funded to help society address resource management issues does not actually link to decisions. A few studies and reports have offered valuable but general advice on what the funders of this science can do to better link science with decisions; there are fewer still published empirical case studies assessing the impacts of innovative funder methods for getting more science used by intended audiences. Here, we report on three case studies involving new tools and science to help land use planners better protect coastal resources. Our qualitative analysis indicates that funder efforts to bring scientists and users into greater alignment did improve the extent to which science linked to decisions. However, these cases show that funders can and should do more if the paramount motivation behind the science is to address societal problems rather than generate new knowledge. Based on these findings, we assert that funders need to focus significantly more attention and resources on the user engagement aspect of science projects, making strong user engagement methods as important as strong biophysical science or social science methods.