RFP- Recontamination of Restored Wetlands in the Hudson-Raritan Estuary

Overview

Request for Proposals: Literature Review on Recontamination of Restored Wetlands in the Hudson-Raritan Estuary

The New York-New Jersey Harbor & Estuary Program’s (HEP’s) Restoration Work Group seeks a researcher or team of researchers to conduct a scientific literature review on the relative risks and benefits of urban wetland restoration to wildlife in the Hudson-Raritan Estuary.

HEP’s Restoration Work Group brings together technical experts to share best practices, identify solutions to problems common to the restoration community, and pursue research and greater understanding that leads to better restoration projects and overall habitat quality. This group develops and steers the habitat and ecological health actions in HEP’s Action Agenda and recommends habitat restoration and research projects for HEP and others.

Habitat loss is the most significant driver of threatened species extinction globally, and wetland restoration is needed to meet federal and local habitat goals. Wetlands restored in urban areas have unique challenges, such as historical and ongoing contamination, that pose risks to wildlife; however, restored urban wetlands also provide numerous ecosystem services and benefits to wildlife, and restoration inaction carries its own risks. HEP is requesting proposals for a literature review that evaluates how the (re)contamination of restored urban wetlands impacts wildlife, weighing these risks against the benefits of urban restoration and the risks of inaction, such as habitat loss. The deliverable should be a manuscript for submission to a peer-reviewed journal that can be used to inform decision-making in the Hudson-Raritan Estuary.

Eligibility

_We've imported the main document for this grant to give you an overview. You can learn more about this opportunity by visiting the funder's [website]().
_

Application Details

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS:
LITERATURE REVIEW ON
RECONTAMINATION OF RESTORED
WETLANDS IN THE HUDSON-RARITAN
ESTUARY
Release Date March 19, 2025
Letter of Intent Due April 11, 2025 · 5:00 PM
Invitation to Submit Full Proposal April 2025
Proposal Due June 27, 2025 · 5:00 PM
Announcement of Awards August 2025

Table of Contents
Introduction ______________________________________________________________________ 1
New York New Jersey Harbor & Estuary Program ____________________________________ 1
Background _______________________________________________________________________ 1
Scope of Work ____________________________________________________________________ 2
Available Budget __________________________________________________________________ 3
Timeline __________________________________________________________________________ 3
Qualifications ____________________________________________________________________ 4
Proposal Elements ________________________________________________________________ 4
Evaluation ________________________________________________________________________ 5
References _______________________________________________________________________ 5

Introduction
The New York-New Jersey Harbor & Estuary Program (HEP) seeks a researcher or team of
researchers to conduct and publish a scientific literature review of research on the relative
risks and benefits of urban wetland restoration to wildlife in the Hudson-Raritan Estuary. The
review should seek to evaluate how the risks of urban wetland restoration, such as
(re)contamination, impact wildlife. This evaluation should consider how such risks can be
weighed relative to the benefits of urban restoration, including the risks of inaction, such as
habitat loss. Various types of literature should be incorporated, including peer-reviewed
publications, white papers, and reports. The final deliverable should be a manuscript for
submission to a peer-reviewed journal that can be used to inform decision-making around
restoration opportunities within the Hudson-Raritan Estuary.
New York New Jersey Harbor & Estuary Program
The New York - New Jersey Harbor & Estuary Program (HEP) engages people, partners, and
communities to collaboratively advance understanding, improve stewardship, and enhance
our shared waters and watersheds. Created by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) at the request of the governors of New York and New Jersey, HEP is an ongoing effort to
develop and implement a consensus driven plan to protect, conserve and restore the
Estuary. HEP decisions and activities are carried out by staff and partners organized through
the committees and work groups.
HEP’s Restoration Work Group brings together technical experts to share best practices,
identify solutions to problems common to the restoration community, and pursue research
and greater understanding that leads to better restoration projects and overall habitat
quality. This group develops and steers the habitat and ecological health actions in HEP’s
Action Agenda and recommends habitat restoration and research projects for HEP and
others. Members of the Restoration Work Group include non-governmental, municipal,
state, and Federal representatives with expertise in habitat restoration or preservation.
Background
Habitat loss is the most significant driver of threatened species extinction globally (Hogue &
Breon, 2022), and habitat loss is particularly prominent in urban and industrial areas, such
as the Hudson-Raritan Estuary. Wetland restoration is essential to meet federal “no net loss”
goals (Zedler, 2004) and State and local habitat goals such as the Comprehensive
Restoration Plan (US Army Corps of Engineers & The Port Authority of NY & NJ, 2016),
1

especially on shorelines where existing wetlands face pressures from both coastal
development, environmental degradation, and sea level rise. In the Hudson-Raritan Estuary,
wetland restoration is complicated by many factors, notably historic and ongoing
contamination and pollution. Even with the removal of localized contamination during
restoration, clean restoration materials can potentially be recontaminated by suspended
sediment from tidal inundation, flooding (Hart, 1982), or from air deposition (Souch et al.,
2002). Therefore, wetlands restored in urban areas may pose uncertain risks to wildlife that
can hinder both restoration efforts and the protection of species health.
Restored urban wetlands provide numerous ecosystem services (Alikhani et al., 2021) and
benefits, such as supporting biodiversity at levels similar to undisturbed reference wetlands
(Sievers et al., 2018), providing critical habitat for local populations, and combatting habitat
loss caused by sea level rise (Liu et al., 2021). Inaction – not restoring in urban areas – has
its own risks; urbanization is one of the driving causes of biodiversity loss globally (Seto et
al., 2011) and failure to conserve and restore habitat in urban areas could impact regional
biodiversity (Knapp et al., 2021; Simkin et al., 2022). Misconceptions about the quality of
urban habitat (Soanes et al., 2019) limit restoration opportunities; yet, urban habitats can
support high ecosystem health (Gallagher et al., 2018), suggesting that biotic resiliency and
adaptation may be underestimated in these landscapes (Hagmann et al., 2015). A holistic
approach that characterizes relative risks to wildlife of urban wetland restoration versus
inaction (no restoration) is necessary to inform decision-making in urban and industrial
regions like the Hudson-Raritan Estuary.
Scope of Work
The New York-New Jersey Harbor and Estuary Program (HEP) is requesting letters of interest
from a researcher or team of researchers to conduct a literature review on the topic of
relative risk to wildlife of urban wetland restoration. The geographic focus should be on the
Hudson-Raritan Estuary, but the review should also include literature from other urban areas
outside this region, when relevant.
The literature review should evaluate the relative risk and benefits of urban habitat
restoration with regards to wildlife, accounting for:
• Risks of urban wetland restoration to wildlife and impacts of recontamination of
clean fill used in wetland restoration and its transference to wildlife. Assessment of
this risk may include topics such as:
▪ Evidence of recontamination in wetlands restored with clean material
▪ Ecological pathways to recontamination and wildlife exposure
2

▪ Contaminant mobilization, bioavailability, and ecotoxicity in wetlands
▪ How well empirical thresholds such as effects range median (ERM) and
effects range low (ERL) translate to contaminant uptake and effects to
wildlife in wetlands
▪ Assessments of wildlife health (e.g., individual fitness) and community and
population level measurements (e.g., biodiversity, density) in restored
urban/industrial wetlands compared to unrestored, undisturbed, or
reference sites
• Benefits of urban restoration and the risks of inaction (no urban wetland restoration)
to wildlife. This may include topics such as:
▪ Habitat loss to development or sea level rise
▪ Effects on biodiversity and impacts to regional biodiversity
▪ Sea level rise driven erosion of unrestored sites exposing historic
contamination
▪ Implications of value/funds and wetland mitigation opportunities leaving the
Estuary
Prior to the start of the project, NY-NJ HEP will organize a workshop with the lead researcher
and restoration workgroup members to discuss the plan with multiple stakeholders and
ensure a variety of perspectives are considered.
The Researcher(s) will craft a manuscript to be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. This is
needed to evaluate the impacts and benefits of urban wetland restoration on wildlife. This
final deliverable should also describe the scientific consensus (or lack thereof) of restoration
impacts to wildlife and address any knowledge gaps that arose from the literature review,
which may inform future research needs.
Available Budget
The available budget for this opportunity is $25,000.
Timeline
This is anticipated to be a year-long contract. NY-NJ HEP will select the Researcher by
August 2025 and the anticipated due date of a submission-ready manuscript is August
2026.
3

Qualifications
The researcher(s) should have demonstrated experience conducting literature reviews in
the field of ecology, with specific expertise in aquatic ecology, urban ecology, restoration
ecology, wildlife health and ecotoxicology, or wetlands preferred. Cross-disciplinary teams
or researchers with experience working across disciplines are preferred, as addressing
these topics holistically may require a broad view. A history of publishing in peer-reviewed
academic journals is preferred.
Proposal Elements
Letter of Intent (due April 11, 2025)
Applicants should submit a letter of intent (LOI) to apply by 5:00 PM April 11, 2025, through
HRF’s application portal. The letter of intent should include:
1. Title Page– The title of the proposed project. For the program, select “Literature
Review of Restored Wetland Recontamination (LRRWR).”
2. Anticipated Budget– Please list the total budget amount requested, not to exceed
$25,000.
3. Applicant/PI– Contact information, affiliation, and a 2-page CV.
We strongly recommend that you create your account and update your personal
profile in HRF’s application portal as soon as possible. If your institution is not
already registered in the portal, it can take up to two days to validate that institution.
Anyone on your team who needs access to the proposal (e.g., institution signing
official, fiscal officer, grant administrator, co-PI) should do the same.
4. Key Personnel (if applicable)– The team members who will participate in the project,
their roles, and their institutional affiliations. Note that 2-page CVs required for all
team members.
5. Research Team (limited to 1600 characters – approximately 250 words)– The roles
and contributions of each Team member and how their experience aligns with the
Scope of Work.
6. Research Questions and Objectives (limited to 3200 characters – approximately 500
words)– Describe the research questions and objectives of the review and how they
address the topics outlined in the Scope of Work.
7. Project Description (pdf, limited to 1-page)– Describe the methodological approach
to the research objectives. Include a timeline for the work and a description of the
4

expected deliverable(s); please describe how the deliverable(s) might be used to
inform decision-making related to urban wetland restoration.
8. Cited References (pdf)– The references cited in the Project Description.
Full Proposal (due June 15, 2025)
Select applicants will be invited to submit a full proposal in April 2025. Full proposals must
be submitted by 5:00 PM June 15, 2025, through HRF’s application portal. Details on the full
proposal will be provided along with the invitation to submit. Awards are expected to be
announced by August 2025.
Evaluation
Applicants should respond to the requirements of this RFP in a straightforward and concise
manner. Proposals will be evaluated by a review panel consisting of relevant technical
experts, HEP staff, and RWG members. Revisions may be requested before or after reaching
a final decision. Submissions will be evaluated based on:
• Completeness and responsiveness to the Request for Proposals
• How well the research objectives align with the goals of the RFP described in the
Scope of Work
• Approach and methodology
• Qualifications, experience, and capacity to implement the literature review
References
Alikhani, S., Nummi, P., & Ojala, A. (2021). Urban Wetlands: A Review on Ecological and
Cultural Values. Water, 13(22), Article 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13223301
Gallagher, F., Goodey, N. M., Hagmann, D., Singh, J. P., Holzapfel, C., Litwhiler, M., &
Krumins, J. A. (2018). Urban Re-Greening: A Case Study in Multi-Trophic Biodiversity
and Ecosystem Functioning in a Post-Industrial Landscape. Diversity, 10(4), Article
4. https://doi.org/10.3390/d10040119
Hagmann, D. F., Goodey, N. M., Mathieu, C., Evans, J., Aronson, M. F. J., Gallagher, F., &
Krumins, J. A. (2015). Effect of metal contamination on microbial enzymatic activity
in soil. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 91, 291–297.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.09.012
Hart, B. T. (1982). Uptake of trace metals by sediments and suspended particulates: A
review. In P. G. Sly (Ed.), Sediment/Freshwater Interaction (pp. 299–313). Springer
Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8009-9_31
5

Hogue, A. S., & Breon, K. (2022). The greatest threats to species. Conservation Science and
Practice, 4(5), e12670. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.12670
Knapp, S., Aronson, M. F. J., Carpenter, E., Herrera-Montes, A., Jung, K., Kotze, D. J., La
Sorte, F. A., Lepczyk, C. A., MacGregor-Fors, I., MacIvor, J. S., Moretti, M., Nilon, C.
H., Piana, M. R., Rega-Brodsky, C. C., Salisbury, A., Threlfall, C. G., Trisos, C.,
Williams, N. S. G., & Hahs, A. K. (2021). A Research Agenda for Urban Biodiversity in
the Global Extinction Crisis. BioScience, 71(3), 268–279.
https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biaa141
Liu, Z., Fagherazzi, S., & Cui, B. (2021). Success of coastal wetlands restoration is driven by
sediment availability. Communications Earth & Environment, 2(1), 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-021-00117-7
Seto, K. C., Fragkias, M., Güneralp, B., & Reilly, M. K. (2011). A Meta-Analysis of Global
Urban Land Expansion. PLOS ONE, 6(8), e23777.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023777
Sievers, M., Hale, R., Parris, K. M., & Swearer, S. E. (2018). Impacts of human-induced
environmental change in wetlands on aquatic animals. Biological Reviews, 93(1),
529–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12358
Simkin, R. D., Seto, K. C., McDonald, R. I., & Jetz, W. (2022). Biodiversity impacts and
conservation implications of urban land expansion projected to 2050. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(12), e2117297119.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2117297119
Soanes, K., Sievers, M., Chee, Y. E., Williams, N. S. G., Bhardwaj, M., Marshall, A. J., &
Parris, K. M. (2019). Correcting common misconceptions to inspire conservation
action in urban environments. Conservation Biology, 33(2), 300–306.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13193
Souch, C. J., Filippelli, G. M., Dollar, N., Perkins, S., & Mastalerz, M. (2002). Accumulation
Rates of Airborne Heavy Metals in Wetlands. Physical Geography, 23(1), 21–43.
https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3646.23.1.21
US Army Corps of Engineers & The Port Authority of NY & NJ. (2016). Hudson-Raritan
Estuary Comprehensive Restoration Plan (Volume 1, Version 1.0). New York - New
Jersey Harbor & Estuary Program. https://www.hudsonriver.org/wp-
content/uploads/2017/08/Hudson-raritan-0616.pdf
Zedler, J. B. (2004). Compensating for wetland losses in the United States. Ibis, 146(s1), 92–
100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00333.x
6