Acoustic camera and net surveys reveal that nursery enhancement at living shorelines may be restricted to the marsh platform.

Rapid human development in coastal areas is introducing significant amounts of novel habitat and leading to widespread habitat simplification. To predict how species will respond to these changes, it is important to understand how organisms interact with novel habitats versus naturally existing habitats. In this study, we used traditional fish sampling gear (fyke nets and minnow traps) and a Dual-Frequency Identification Sonar (DIDSON) to conduct fish surveys along natural and modified estuarine shorelines in North Carolina, USA. The overall objective of our study was to investigate how fish abundance and other community metrics change as a function of shoreline type (natural marsh, living shoreline, or bulkhead), sampling location (marsh platform or the shallow subtidal area offshore of the structure), and time of day (day or night). Using fyke nets, we caught significantly more fish and recorded higher species richness on the marsh platform at living shorelines versus natural marsh shorelines. However, we found no significant differences in fish abundance in the shallow unvegetated habitats seaward of the different shoreline types, which may have been affected by low sampling efficiency and replication when sampled using minnow traps and the DIDSON. Our findings, in conjunction with similar studies, may reflect a localized shoreline effect where the nursery enhancement observed at living shoreline sites is restricted to the living component of the shoreline (i.e., the marsh). Additionally, the preliminary results from our limited daytime versus nighttime DIDSON sampling show no significant differences in fish detections. This contrasts with many previous studies using traditional fish sampling techniques that report substantially higher fish catches at night. This unexpected finding is worthy of additional research as it may suggest that traditional fish sampling techniques are underestimating fish abundances during the day, perhaps due to visual gear avoidance. Ultimately, a careful consideration of the social and ecological goals of any shoreline stabilization project is needed before choosing a final design; however, maximizing habitat restoration and limiting the use of artificial materials is likely to confer the greatest ecological benefit. • Living shorelines have high fish abundances and species richness. • Fish abundances are enhanced behind the sill structure but not in front of the sill. • Preliminary DIDSON surveys reveal no differences in fish detections between day and night. • DIDSON may be a powerful tool for investigating diel patterns in fish use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]