|
| Spring 2003 Newsletter | Edited by Steve Windels | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
In This Issue:
FEATURE ARTICLES: THE EFROYMSON RESTORATION AT KANKAKEE SANDS: Restoration of a prairie / wetland / black-oak barrens mosaic in northwest Indiana -Chip O'Leary and John Shuey, The Nature Conservancy, Indiana Chapter The central tallgrass prairie of the eastern Midwest spans from eastern Kansas to the western half of Indiana. The prairie peninsula of northwest Indiana once covered over one million acres. At the time of European settlement, the peninsula was composed of scattered shallow lakes with extensive marshes and wet prairies, and scattered sand rises supporting black-oak barrens. Portions of these wetlands, for example the Grand Kankakee Marsh, were world famous for their waterfowl hunting and size. But this is now the corn-belt. Agricultural improvement drove settlers to drain the lakes, and till the marshes and prairies. Many of the black oak barrens survived because they were too dry and sandy to farm. However, they generally were grazed and thanks to fire-suppression survive today in an overgrown, closed canopy state. In northern Newton County, Indiana, a landscape-scale restoration is taking place in an attempt to re-establish a semblance of the original habitat mosaic. Anchored by three ecosystem remnants, The Nature Conservancy is attempting to reconnect and rebuild a biologically diverse landscape. Conrad Savanna is an 800-acre black-oak barrens that defined the northern edge of the project area. Beaver Lake Prairie, a 640-acre xeric to mesic sand-prairie is surrounded by the restoration. Willow Slough Fish and Wildlife Area, a 10,000 acre reserve with black-oak barrens, pin-oak flatwoods, and a 3,000 acre artificial lake, anchors the southern edge of the project area.  As part of a strategy to conserve these ecosystem remnants, The Nature Conservancy purchased 7,200 acres of agricultural land in 1996 that effectively reconnects these three natural areas. While past conservation efforts have been designed to protect, manage and restore these sites themselves, the Efroymson Restoration is designed to heal the intervening landscape that isolates the sites, effectively creating a single, landscape-scale conservation area. Habitat fragmentation and loss is thought to be the biggest threat to the long-term viability of Indiana prairie and savanna remnants. Small, isolated prairies and barrens can and do lose species with time, especially the rare, vulnerable and area sensitive species that most need our attention. With no new colonists to re-populate these sites available in the immediate vicinity, this means that our remnants will with time, become mere shadows of their former selves – species-poor relicts of a once rich ecosystem.The Efroymson Restoration is designed to alleviate this threat. Where now isolated grasslands seemingly float in a sea of biologically hostile agriculture, the restoration will create connections that allow these remnants to ecologically communicate with one another. In short, we expect that the restoration will cease to be the harsh matrix in which the scattered patches of high-quality grassland remnants are currently dispersed, and will be transformed into a single expanse through which imperiled species and ecological processes flow and ebb. What was once row crop will be transformed over time into a botanically diverse mosaic of prairie, savanna and wetland, altering the landscape dynamics of the Kankakee Sands Macrosite into a viable system.  There are two reasons for this ambitious approach. The first is to provide a genetic pathway between remnants for the plants and animals trapped on them. Plants, invertebrates, and fossorial vertebrates cannot cross the intervening miles if we simply replace monotypic croplands with low diversity grasslands. These species will require new habitat that they can expand into and use as a bridge to the next natural area. An obvious side benefit beyond enhanced connectivity will be a tremendous expansion of available habitat for many species. We expect to see significant population expansion of regionally rare grassland species as the restoration progresses. Secondly, our emphasis on restoring a complex mosaic of species-rich grasslands, wetland and uplands addresses the needs of animals with complex life history requirements and dynamic population structures. Many invertebrate, bird and herptile species require both uplands and wetlands to complete their life cycles. The restoration is designed to provide multiple examples of habitat arrays across the property, providing the ecological redundancy required for long-term metapopulation persistence and to provide stepping-tone habitats for habitat-restricted species across the landscape.There are two types of restoration activities on the project -- rehabilitation of fire-suppressed black oak barrens, and restoration of agricultural lands. The rehabilitation of the black-oak barrens revolves mainly around two strategies. The heavy canopy common in these barrens shades out the extremely diverse herbaceous understory. The initial work phase involves opening the canopy and understory by cutting out shrubs and selected tree removal. Herbicide is used to prevent resprouts. Once this is accomplished, fire is re-introduced to maintain the open canopy, to reduce leaf litter, and to reinvigorate the understory plant community. The restoration of the intervening agricultural landscape is more complex. It requires three types of broad-scale restoration activities: hydrologic restoration, native community seeding, and ecological process regime restoration. . When purchased, the property was crisscrossed by a network of surface drains (ditches) and subsurface tiles that quickly removed rainwater from the ground and channeled it into a tributary of the Kankakee River. The ditch network has lowered the naturally high water table. This drainage system drastically reduces wet and mesic habitats, eliminates seasonal hydrologic cycles, and biases the adjacent remnants towards the xeric end of the spectrum. Our operational goal is to re-establish a self-maintaining hydrologic gradient across the restoration that maximizes water retention and infiltration across the site. Our ecological goal is to maximize the hydrologic performance required to sustain wet prairie across the restoration. To accomplish this, the plan is to retain as much water as possible on the property. Whenever possible, within the limits of drainage laws and good neighbor relations, surface drains are plugged. Earthen plugs are placed at the outflow end of ditch segments to stop water flow off of the property, which allows the water table to rebound to more natural levels and to more closely approximate natural seasonal cycles. As the restoration proceeds, most of the interior surface ditches will be eliminated and contoured to achieve two goals. First, wherever possible, seasonal sheet flooding will be re-established to support wet prairie and sedge meadows on hydric soils. Based on the actual hydrologic performance at specific sites, small patch communities like cordgrass swales, sedge meadows, and wet prairie should develop over time with appropriate seeding. Second, a network of small (0.2-2 ha.) wetlands, designed to imitate prairie potholes, will be constructed across appropriate sites on the restoration. These wetlands are designed to create a variety of available hydroperiods as habitat, ranging from permanent to highly ephemeral, with the majority intended as seasonal pools. Amphibian habitat requirements were specifically used to develop the hydrologic performance criteria for the seasonal pools. The plan includes no long-term artificial manipulation of hydrology. Every hydrologic restoration is designed to function passively to produce hydrologic seasonal cycles as close to natural as possible, given the limitations mentioned earlier.  After the hydrology is restored, the appropriate plant communities for each hydric soil
type are planted. Using the surrounding natural areas and what is known from historical records,
we have created a list of over 400 plant species that would have been found in this area at the time of settlement. In order to reduce the effect of the plantings on the genotype of plant species in the remnants, we set a seed collection limit of 50 miles from the property. This limit has necessitated the creation of an on-site native seed nursery that can supply local genotype seed in the large quantities needed. Seed from these 400 species are then used to create our planting mixes. Typical mixes are emergent wetland, wet, mesic, and xeric prairie mixes. These mixes are sufficient to provide the necessary plant diversity for the project. A second set of specialized habitat mixes, including short-grass prairie, wet sand flats, sedge meadow, and savanna mixes, were designed to create the diversity in habitat structure that many bird species require. Seed is collected, dried, cleaned, and stored in our on-site seed processing facility. It is broadcast in pre-designated hydric or structural planting zones
across the restoration acres. In a typical year, 500 acres are planted in this manner. Our goal is to create a dynamic ecological system where overall biodiversity is maintained in a shifting patch mosaic at the appropriate scale. We are able to influence two ecological processes that effect patch dynamics - hydrologic fluctuations and fire. As mentioned previously, the hydrology of the site was disrupted to the point that natural hydrologic fluctuations had little influence on surface vegetation. Our hydrologic restorations are designed to bring seasonal near-surface water table fluctuations to the surface. These seasonal cycles of shallow sheet flooding have a dramatic influence on the creation and maintenance of wet and mesic prairie communities. Hydrologic fluctuations will not be directly manipulated, but once restored will cycle naturally in response to regional weather patterns.  Similarly, fire had been actively suppressed in the natural areas adjacent to the Kankakee Sands Project until quite recently. The consequence was a reduction in the diversity of under-story species in the black oak savanna areas and an increase in heavy woody encroachment into the prairie areas. Recently, natural area managers have been working hard to reverse this trend on the ecosystem remnants by hand clearing shrub understories and opening the canopy in savanna habitats and removing invasive woody encroachment from open grasslands. Fire is being used as an important management tool at Kankakee Sands during the initial botanical planting phase and as a dynamic force in the long-term maintenance phase. Project Status To date, over 1,700 acres have seen some form of hydrologic restoration, with 11 wetland pockets created and over 4 miles of ditches filled. During the first few years of observation, our hydrologic restorations have performed within our qualitative expected range of variation. Extensive sheet flooding of wet prairie habitats occurs each spring, contracting to seasonal pools by July. A few deep pockets have remained permanently flooded, and will likely dry only during extended periods of drought.  Over 2,100 acres have been planted to native prairie seed with an average of about 220 species planted each year (330 species in 2002). Our goal is to plant approximately 500 acres or more each year until the initial seeding is completed. Once the entire site is seeded, work will continue on enrichment plantings and adjusting the restoration to meet some of the species- specific habitat requirements for animal species. One of our important restoration targets is a robust grassland bird community. Even in the early stages of the restoration, results are good, with a number of rare or declining grassland birds colonizing the site, including Henslow’s sparrow, short-eared owl, and upland sandpiper. However, it is apparent that the sparsely vegetated areas used by horned larks, grasshopper sparrows, and upland sandpipers will disappear as the restoration matures. To maintain low stature vegetation in the long-term, we need a real short-grass community. Typical habitat management strategies for these bird species are grazing, mowing, and even non-native grass plantings. We have opted to create a native short-stature grass and forb community that meets the needs of these bird species. Another target is shorebird stopover habitat. Again, the initial results are good, with 15 species utilizing the site during migration last year, including dunlin, Baird’s sandpiper, and piping plover. Wet open ground is abundant due to our hydrologic construction activities. And again, the long-term maintenance of this habitat becomes an issue as these constructed areas re-vegetate. We have two strategies to maintain stopover habitat. The first is the creation of a wet sand-flat species mix that uses short stature wetland plants that do not form heavy ground cover. The second is to use prescribed fire to keep selected wet areas clear of heavy vegetation in the early spring. Other notable successes include a strong response by frog species to the construction of potholes, a very strong breeding grassland bird community, and a variety of uncommon wetland birds including black tern, yellow rail, stilt sandpiper, white-faced ibis, and confirmed breeding of black rails and Wilson’s phalaropes (last nesting records for Indiana for both species were from the 1930’s and 1940’s). The movement of reptiles and invertebrates from the remnants into the restoration is occurring at a slower pace, but populations are expanding into habitats as they are restored. Botanically, restoration plantings in wet ground are progressing much more quickly than those in dry ground. Species diversity in plantings in all hydric categories is steadily increasing, however. Continued monitoring, and iterative adjustments to restoration strategies will hopefully bring us ever closer to achieving a robust and diverse complex of natural communities in the 20,000 acre landscape. OTHER ARTICLES  THE GLACIAL RIDGE PROJECT - Jason Ekstein, Restoration Ecologist, The Nature Conservancy Background Located in the Northern Tallgrass Prairie Ecoregion, the 925 square mile (over 600,000-acre) Agassiz Beach Ridges landscape is on the eastern set of ridges formed by Glacial Lake Agassiz. At its greatest extent, Lake Agassiz covered about 124,000 square miles of North America. The beach ridges form a very diverse prairie landscape where variable layers of sand, silt, and clay, with narrow beach ridges of coarse sands and gravel create a complex mosaic of wet to dry prairie types. Groundwater seepage zones are a common feature giving rise to calcareous fens and gently sloping wet prairies, often in close juxtaposition to dry gravel prairie. This mixture of grassland and wetland areas within the landscape provides an excellent interspersion of habitat types especially suited for prairie nesting birds and grassland animals. The Agassiz Beach Ridges landscape has been identified by several sources as a key area for the conservation of the prairie/wetland mosaic that historically covered the Prairie Pothole Region. Restoration of key sites has been identified as the most important strategy to create a contiguous expanse of the prairie/wetland mosaic and improve the ecological functioning of these systems. Acting on this recommendation, The Nature Conservancy purchased the 24,000 acre Glacial Ridge property near the town of Crookston, Minnesota in the fall of 2000 (Figure 1). Over 17,000 acres of this site has been drastically altered by row crop agriculture, wetland drainage, and gravel mining.
The Nature Conservancy, supported by a suite of partners and collaborators, intends to restore the prairie/wetland complex and the key ecological processes to Glacial Ridge. This restoration effort rivals in size and complexity to a handful of nationally significant restoration projects that are currently ongoing. It is the largest northern tallgrass prairie/wetland restoration project ever undertaken by The Nature Conservancy and is one of the largest projects in the entire Prairie Pothole Region. Less than 1% of Minnesota’s native prairie remains intact, and within the Agassiz Beach Ridges landscape, many of these remnant prairies are clustered in a patchwork mosaic around Glacial Ridge. Upon completion of the restoration work, this project will link together over a dozen tracts of remnant native habitat currently under protection and restore an estimated 8,000 acres of wetlands. Due to the importance of this restoration in improving habitat, water quality, water flow regimes, and in advancing restoration knowledge, a Master Plan is being developed to guide the methods and phase-in the restoration. We are integrating data collected for the project area and the knowledge of experts from around the country to focus on the methods and management during three different forums; native plant community restoration, hydrologic restoration, and monitoring. The results from these forums will be available in 2003. Management The overarching goal for this project is to restore the natural hydrology and the essential plant species within each of the 11 identified communities. The hydrologic restoration on this project is complicated by a railroad, several roads, gravel pits, and large and small ditches used to improve drainage for agriculture. The hydrologic objective is to restore the natural flow of water on the landscape by restoring topography or removing the alterations to water movement (Figure 2). Water will move across the land in the direction it did historically, i.e. never through a beach ridge. Ditches, both small and large will be filled back to the original topography and the hydrologic alterations from drain tile will be removed.
Native prairie harvests from within roughly 60 miles of the project area are being used to establish the vegetation in the restorations. Data from General Land Office Survey Notes, County Biological Survey information, National Wetlands Inventory maps, soil maps, and Digital Elevation Models are being used to determine what communities need to be restored, the locations for these plant communities, and the essential species within each community. We used the results of releve surveys in native prairie remnants to identify the essential species for each of the 11 plant communities at the site (Table 1). The list of essential species was then compared to the composition of seed in native harvests and vegetation established in nearby restorations of mesic, wet, and dry prairies. Results from this data are being used to determine which species did not establish or need additional supplementation in the restorations.
Table 1. Native plant communities to be restored within the Glacial Ridge Project. *Similar plant communities or subtypes are described together. In determining essential species, individual analyses of these lumped communities showed similar results. Research The tremendous scale of the restoration project allows tests for all sorts of landscape level responses. The U.S. Geological Survey is conducting a five year hydrologic study to measure any reduction of sedimentation in ditches, improvements in water quality, increases in groundwater recharge, or reduction of downstream flooding potential. The USGS study area encompasses the Glacial Ridge Project and neighboring land for a total of 250,000 acres. The intent is to come back in 10 years after the original study is complete and conduct the same study to look at the effect of landuse change on these variables when the bulk of the restoration is completed on the ground. Restoration The restoration work on the Glacial Ridge Project started in June 2001. Within the last two years, we have planted approximately 2600 acres of former agricultural land to locally native prairie harvest and plan to plant an additional 1800 acres this coming season. Approximately 60 acres of wetlands were restored in 2002. This coming season, we plan to restore 50 wetlands (estimated 600 acres) and fill in approximately 3 miles of ditch. For more information contact: Jason Ekstein Restoration Ecologist The Nature Conservancy Glacial Ridge Project 31077 State Hwy 32 S Mentor, MN 56736 218-637-2146 218-637-2147 (Fax) WORKING GROUP NEWS - Steve Windels SCHEDULE OF RWG ACTIVITIES AT 2003 TWS MEETING IN VERMONT Saturday, September 6: Field Trips One full-day or 2 half-day fields are currently being organized by Marcia Wolfe to tour local restoration projects. These tours will be free for RWG members with a nominal fee applied to nonmembers to help defray transportation costs. Members interested in the field trips will be asked to sign up 2-4 weeks before the conference to help us plan transportation, etc. Sunday, September 7: Business Meeting The annual RWG business meeting will be held from 12-2pm on Sunday. Topics to be discussed will include planning fields trips and a restoration symposium for the 2004 TWS conference in Calgary. Sunday or Monday, September 8: Afternoon Social We are planning on organizing an afternoon/evening social event during the conference with an informal poster session during which current RWG members and potential new members can gather and talk about restoration. We are still waiting for the conference organizers to tell us the exact time and date for our afternoon social at this time - most likely it will be from 3:30-5:30pm or from 4:00-6:00pm on Sunday or Monday. Beverages and appetizers will be provided. __________________________________________________________________ NOMINEES NEEDED FOR RWG OFFICER POSITIONS Nominations are sought for upcoming elections in August 2003 for the four regional board member positions (2-year terms), secretary-treasurer (1-year), and chair-elect (2-years). Contact Derek Hall (HallDB@nv.doe.gov) with nomination information or questions. ___________________________________________________________________ RWG WEB SITE IS GAINING MOMENTUM Working group members and the public at-large have been using the Restoration Working Group site with increasing frequency since its creation during the Fall 2001. As of Mar 12, 2003, 566 hits were recorded on the main web page. Hits on "quarterly" newsletter pages were as follows: Winter 2003 - 98 hits Fall 2002 - 219 hits Spring 2002 - 501 hits Fall 2001 - 501 hits Further, the RWG site appears in the top 50 sites when a simple search on "Google" of the general terms "wildlife" and "restoration" is performed. In other words, people are tuning in to view the content in the newsletters. Hopefully, this will offer some encouragement for RWG members to keep submitting project summaries, newspaper articles, scientific abstracts, etc. to include in future newsletters. Thanks again to Bill Standley of Wildlifer.Com for designing and maintaining our site. _____________________________________________________________________ The restoration working group is an organization formed to facilitate communication amongst its members. Therefore, it is only as valuable as its members are willing to make it! Please consider submitting an article, project update, book review, links to restoration related websites, newspaper articles, etc. To future issues of the newsletter. Send submissions (or questions) to Steve Windels, newsletter editor, skwindel@mtu.edu; (906)249-4593; 243 Kawbawgam Rd., Marquette, MI 49855. RESTORATION RELATED PUBLICATIONS PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLES This is a new edition to our newsletters. Everyone is encouraged to submit abstracts of recently (i.e. 2002/2003) published peer-reviewed articles. 2003 Hufford, K.M., and S.J. Mazer. 2003. Plant ecotypes - genetic differentiation in the age of ecological restoration. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18(3). Abstract -- Recent studies illustrate the emerging field of restoration genetics: a synthesis of restoration ecology and population genetics. The translocation of organisms during the restoration of native ecosystems has provoked new questions concerning the consequences of sampling protocols and of intraspecific hybridization between locally adapted and transplanted genotypes. Studies are now underway to determine the extent of local adaptation among focal populations and the potential risks of introducing foreign genotypes, including founder effects, genetic swamping, and outbreeding depression. Among plant biologists, data are needed to delineate "seed transfer zones," or regions within which plants may be moved with little or no consequences for population fitness. We address the revival of transplant and common garden studies, the use of novel molecular markers to predict population genetic consequences of translocation, and their combined power for the determination of appropriate seed transfer zones in restoration planning for native plant populations. Taft, O.W., and S. M. Haig. 2003. Historical wetlands in Oregon's Willamette Valley: Implications for restoration of winter waterbird habitat. Wetlands 23:51-64. Abstract -- Before agricultural expansion in the 19th century, river valleys of North America supported expanses of wetland habitat. In restoring these landscapes, it is important to understand their historical condition and biological function. Synthesizing historical primary accounts (from explorers, travelers, settlers, and farmers) with contemporary knowledge of these wetland systems, we developed a profile of the wetlands and their use by nonbreeding waterbirds (e.g., waterfowl, wading birds, and shorebirds) within the Willamette Valley, Oregon, ca. 1840. We found evidence for three types of wetlands used by non-breeding waterbirds, but only while native Kalapuyans managed the region with fire. Since the mid-1800's, four species, in particular, have decreased their use of the Willamette Valley: trumpeter swan (Cygnus buccinator), snow goose (Chen caerulescens), sandhill crane (Grus canadensis), and long-billed curlew (Numenius americanus). Information suggests that ca. 1840, waterbirds and their habitats were more abundant in the Willamette Valley than today. Restoration of the Willamette valley landscape is warranted, and today's agricultural wetlands-former wetland prairie-hold highest restoration potential. Larkin, J.L., J.J. Cox, M.W. Wichrowski, D. Bolin, and D.S.Maehr. 2003. Demographic characteristics of a reintroduced elk population. Journal of Wildlife Management 67 (in press). 2002 Twedt, D. J., R. R. Wilson, J. L. Henne-Kerr, and D. A. Grosshuesch. 2002. Avian response to bottomland hardwood reforestation: The first 10 years. Restoration Ecology 10(4):645-655. Abstract -- Bottomland hardwood forests were planted on agricultural fields in Mississippi and Louisiana using either predominantly Quercus species (oaks) or Populus deltoides (eastern cottonwood). We assessed avian colonization of these reforested sites between 2 and 10 years after planting. Rapid vertical growth of cottonwoods (circa 2 - 3 m / yr) resulted in sites with forest structure that supported greater species richness of breeding birds, increased Shannon diversity indices, and supported greater territory densities than on sites planted with slower-growing oak species. Grassland birds (Spiza americana [Dickcissel], and Sturnella magna [Eastern Meadowlark]) were indicative of species breeding on oak-dominated reforestation £10 years old. Agelaius phoeniceus (Red-winged Blackbird) and Colinus virginianus (Northern Bobwhite) characterized cottonwood reforestation £4 years old, whereas 14 species of shrub-scrub birds (e.g., Passerina cyanea [Indigo Bunting]) and early-successional forest birds (e.g., Vireo gilvus [Warbling Vireo]) typified cottonwood reforestation 5 to 9 years after planting. Rates of daily nest survival did not differ between reforestation strategies. Nest parasitism increased markedly in older cottonwood stands, but was overwhelmed by predation as a cause of nest failure. Based on Partners in Flight prioritization scores and territory densities, the value of cottonwood reforestation for avian conservation was significantly greater than that of oak reforestation during their first 10 years. Because of benefits conferred on breeding birds, we recommend reforestation of bottomland hardwoods include a high proportion of fast-growing, early successional species such as cottonwood. Twedt, D. J. and R. R. Wilson. 2002. Supplemental planting of early successional tree species during bottomland hardwood afforestation. Pages 358-364 in K.W. Outcalt, editor. Proceedings of the Eleventh Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference, Knoxville, TN, 20-22 March 2001, General Technical Report SRS - 48, Ashville, NC. Abstract--Reforestation of former bottomland hardwood forests that have been cleared for agriculture (i.e., afforestation) has historically emphasized planting heavy-seeded oaks (Quercus spp.) and pecans (Carya spp.). These species are slow to develop vertical forest structure. However, vertical forest structure is key to colonization of afforested sites by forest birds. Although early-successional tree species often enhance vertical structure, few of these species invade afforested sites that are distant from seed sources. Furthermore, many land mangers are reluctant to establish and maintain stands of fast-growing plantation trees. Therefore, on 40 afforested bottomland sites, we supplemented heavy-seeded seedlings with 8 patches of fast-growing trees: 4 patches of 12 eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides) stem cuttings and 4 patches of 12 American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) seedlings. To enhance survival and growth, tree patches were subjected to 4 weed control treatments: (1) physical weed barriers, (2) chemical herbicide, (3) both physical and chemical weed control, or (4) no weed control. Overall, first-year survival of cottonwood and sycamore was 25% and 47%, respectively. Second-year survival of extant trees was 52% for cottonwood and 77% for sycamore. Physical weed barriers increased survival of cottonwoods to 30% versus 18% survival with no weed control. Similarly, sycamore survival was increased from 49% without weed control to 64% with physical weed barriers. Chemical weed control adversely impacted sycamore and reduced survival to 35%. Tree heights did not differ between species or among weed control treatments. Girdling of trees by deer often destroyed saplings. Thus, little increase in vertical structure was detected between growing seasons. Application of fertilizer and protection via tree shelters did not improve survival or vertical development of sycamore or cottonwood. Twedt, D. J. and R. R. Wilson. 2002. Development of oak plantations established for wildlife. Forest Ecology and Management 162:287-298. Abstract -- Extensive areas that are currently in agricultural production within the Mississippi Alluvial Valley are being restored to bottomland hardwood forests. Oaks (Quercus spp.), sown as seeds (acorns) or planted as seedlings, are the predominant trees established on most afforested sites. To compare stand development and natural invasion on sites afforested by planting seedlings or by sowing acorns, we sampled woody vegetation on ten 14- to 18-year-old oak plantations established to provide wildlife habitat. Stem densities of about 900 oaks/ha were comparable between stands established by sowing 4,000 acorns/ha and stands established by planting 900 seedlings/ha. Densities of oaks in stands established from seedlings increased 38% from densities detected when these stands were 4 to 8 years old. Densities of oaks established from field-sown acorns increased >100% during this same 10-year span. Oaks that were planted as seedlings were larger than those established from acorns but trees resulting from either afforestation method were larger than trees naturally colonizing these sites. Natural invasion of woody species varied greatly among afforested sites but was greater and more diverse on sites sown with acorns. Afforested stands were dominated by planted species, whereas naturally invading species were rare among dominant canopy trees. When afforestation objectives are primarily to provide wildlife habitat, we recommend, sowing acorns rather than planting seedlings. Additionally, planting fewer seeds or seedlings, diversifying the species planted, and leaving non-planted gaps will increase diversity of woody species and promote a more complex forest structure that enhances the suitability of afforested sites for wildlife. Larkin, J.L., D.S. Maehr, J.J. Cox, and C. Logsdon. 2002.Yearling males successfully breed in a reintroduced elk (Cervus elaphus nelsoni) population in Kentucky. Southeastern Naturalist 1:279-286. Maehr, D.S., J.J. Cox, and J.L. Larkin. 2002. Landscape history: linking conservation approaches for large mammals. Pages 321-340 In: (J.A. Bissonette and I. Storch eds.), Landscape Ecology and Resource Management: linking theory and practice Island Press, Washington, D.C. 2001 Cecilia L Meyer and Thomas D Sisk. 2001. Butterfly response to microclimatic conditions following Ponderosa Pine restoration. Restoration Ecology 9:453-461. William B Block, Alan B Franklin, James P Ward, Jr. and Gary C White. 2001. Design and implementation of monitoring studies to evaluate the success of ecological restoration on wildlife. Restoration Ecology 9:293-303. RESTORATION IN THE NEWS Everglades Plan to Raze 77 Homes Compromise Measure to Revive Park After 14-Year Delay By Michael Grunwald Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, February 17, 2003 MIAMI, Feb. 16 -- Congress has approved a plan to destroy 77 homes at the edge of Everglades National Park, jump-starting efforts to restore flows to the ailing River of Grass after 14 years of delay. The compromise measure to buy out the most flood-prone portion of what is known as the 8.5 Square Mile Area, a tight-knit Cuban American neighborhood of mango groves and horse pastures, was supported by President Bush and Gov. Jeb Bush (R), as well as by regulators and environmentalists. Tucked into last week's $397 billion budget bill, it would revive the Modified Water Deliveries Project of 1989, a long-stalled plan to rehydrate the parched eastern side of the park. The revival of "Mod Waters" would also help the much larger $8.4 billion Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, the most ambitious environmental project in history. The law authorizing the overall Everglades restoration in 2000 specified that several key elements could not proceed until Mod Waters is complete. "The logjam is broken," said Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.), the original sponsor of Mod Waters as well as the new measure to get it moving. Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) and Rep. E. Clay Shaw Jr. (R-Fla.) also helped push the buyout, overcoming property-rights opposition from Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska). Environmentalists had pushed for a buyout of the entire 8.5 Square Mile Area, but most were happy with the compromise, which is to buy out 44 percent of the land and 12 percent of the homes. The residents of the area, however, were furious, even though their congressman, Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.), attached language requiring the Army Corps of Engineers to offer owners of the 77 affected homes land elsewhere in the neighborhood. Today, the residents held a protest rally in Miami's Little Havana neighborhood, accusing Jeb Bush of turning his back on Cuban American supporters. They carried signs, in English and Spanish, vowing: We will not sell. "This is a shameful travesty," said Alice Pena, president of the local homeowners group. "We're going to keep fighting." The one bright side, Pena said, was the language assuring the residents a chance to stay in the 8.5 Square Mile Area, even though it is now slated to become a 4.5 square-mile area. Many residents had suggested that the compromise plan was part of a government conspiracy to ease them out of the neighborhood, but Pena said the new language suggests that the neighborhood is here to stay. "It's a bit of a relief," she said. "We're very disappointed, though. We live in America. We're supposed to have rights." The original Mod Waters plan would have protected the entire neighborhood, but park officials warned that it would also drain 30,000 acres of Everglades wetlands, defeating the purpose of the plan. The compromise, they say, will allow true restoration. ____________________________________________________________________ Wetlands face new threats Dennis Anderson, Minneapolis Star-Tribune March 28, 2003 Somehow we've arrived at a juncture where the same old fight to save wetlands must be joined again. Given that in some parts of Minnesota more than 95 percent of original wetlands have been drained, one would think the pressure to eliminate and/or diminish wetlands would have abated. If anything, it has increased. New threats exist on the state and federal levels. Neither is more or less imposing than the other, in that we can ill afford to lose any more wetlands. But the scope of the federal problem makes it the bigger deal. Here's a summary: In 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision involving what was essentially an accidental wetland formed at an Illinois landfill. The wetland, as it were, had wildlife benefits, particularly for migratory birds. Deciding the case, the court said the Clean Water Act can't be used to justify federal protection of what it termed "isolated" wetlands if the sole assumption for doing so was that it was used by migratory birds. Left in the wake of that decision was a huge void, particularly for waterfowl-producing states such as North Dakota and South Dakota that possess many "isolated" wetlands. In those states, the problem is also particularly serious because they (and many other) states, unlike Minnesota, have no (or few) state wetland protection laws. Now, in advance of proposing a federal rule defining the meaning of "isolated" and the level of federal protection that should be given such wetlands, the Bush administration has asked for comments from, among others, wildlife and environmental protection agencies and groups. The deadline is April 16. "From what we understand, the response has been overwhelming," said John Jaschke, land and wetland section administrator with the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources. Jaschke is among experts who are writing Minnesota's response, which he expects will be signed by the BWSR and perhaps by the Department of Natural Resources and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The long and detailed Minnesota letter, a draft of which I reviewed Thursday, begins by stating that Minnesota is home to more wetlands than any state other than Alaska. The letter goes on to say, importantly, that the argument over what is and what is not an "isolated" wetland is essentially specious, in that very, very few, if any, wetlands are truly isolated in a hydrologic sense. Whether this point ultimately carries weight with the Bush administration is yet to be determined. But it is the crux of the issue because, ultimately, all waters are connected, upstream and down, whether above the surface or below. The latter point -- whether water is flowing to or from an "isolated" wetland above or below the surface -- is one on which developers and others hoping to weaken federal wetland protection are hanging their hats. Their argument is that a wetland must be connected to another body of water by surface waters not to be considered isolated. They also argue that the surface water connection must be continual, rather than sporadic or intermittent. The Minnesota letter counters, in effect, that the nation's hydrologic mosaic is far too complex and interdependent for many, if any, of its components to be considered "isolated" from its many other components. This is especially true when weather variations, season to season and even day to day, are taken into account. After all, a wetland that appears to be isolated in fall might well be part of a vast flooded network of waters in spring. Additionally, a wetland that might appear to be isolated on any given day might in fact exist as part of a subsurface water system that escapes easy detection. Also, that "isolated" wetland might in fact play a key, albeit unseen, role in cleansing water for an aquifer far below. Good arguments? Yes. Good enough to extend the same protection to "isolated" wetlands that existed before the Supreme Court decision? Maybe not. Stay tuned. Other developments on the wetland-protection front: • Rep. Jim Oberstar, D-Minn., and others in Congress have introduced a wetland-protection bill that would restore protection to "isolated" wetlands. If passed and signed by the president, the bill would render the above debate moot. But the measure faces an uphill battle. • Numerous anti-wetland bills have been introduced in the Legislature. The most disturbing would relieve road authorities, among them the state Department of Transportation, from replacing wetlands lost to road construction at all. • Less disturbing, but still threatening, is a bill that would allow road authorities to replace lost wetlands on a one-to-one basis, rather than the current two-to-one. Again, stay tuned. Dennis Anderson is a columnist for the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. ________________________________________________________________________ Midewin prairie supervisor sets lofty goals for 2003 Sunday, January 19, 2003 By Susan DeMar Lafferty Special to the Daily Southtown Logan Lee has worked all over — Oregon, Colorado, Minnesota — but it was the "uniqueness" of the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie near Joliet that lured her to Illinois. During her tenure with the U.S. Forest Service, Lee has managed national forests and grasslands, many of which have been in existence 100 years. That can't be said about Midewin. Established only about seven years ago, it's the first national tallgrass prairie in the country and the largest piece of protected open space in northeastern Illinois. For Lee, who took over as prairie supervisor in October, the appeal of helping shape Midewin's history is exciting. Literally starting from the ground up, it is the largest prairie restoration ever attempted in this country. And it is critical, she said, to get moving on this massive, 19,000-acre undertaking. At a meeting last week of the Midewin Tallgrass Prairie Alliance, Lee revealed a strategic plan for 2003. "When I first got to Midewin, I felt there were so many people going in so many different directions," she told a group of volunteers. Last year, a comprehensive plan was adopted for Midewin that spelled out goals for the next 10 to 15 years. Habitats are to be restored, 48 miles of trails and a visitors center built and portions of the former Joliet Arsenal property still to be cleaned. Crews have been demolishing buildings, removing nonnative plants and planting seeds. Lee's goal for this year is the implementation of the "first step" in the comprehensive plan. "We have to start building pieces that people can recognize. This will add interest and momentum," she said. That will be done by creating "a balance of programs that restore the prairie and build Midewin's reputation as a leader in prairie restoration, environmental education and public service," she said Goals for this year include: Volunteers, equipment and funds will be needed for all of the programs to bolster the financial support provided by the U.S. Forest Service and federal grants. "The future of Midewin directly relates to its (supporters)," Lee said. "If we do not have a lot of support, we could disappear quickly because of development pressures." UPCOMING MEETINGS 2003 April 13-16. Inaugural National Conference on Coastal and Estuarine Habitat Restoration, hosted by Restore America's Estuaries, will meet at the Hyatt Regency Inner Harbor Hotel in Baltimore, Maryland. Information is available at http://www.estuaries.org/ and from Heather Bradley at 703/524-0248, hbradley@estuaries.org. April 28-30. Second International Conference on River Basin Management, organized by the Wessex Institute of Technology, will be held in Las Palmas, Gran Canaria. Information is available at http://www.wessex.ac.uk/conferences/2003/riverbasin03/netscape6.html or by contacting wit@wessex.ac.uk. May 11-16. 27th Annual Conference of the Association of State Floodplain Managers will be held in St. Louis, Missouri. For details, contact Trisha Hoskins at 608/274-0123, asfpm@floods.org. June 8-13. 24th Annual Meeting of the Society of Wetland Scientists will meet at the Hyatt Regency in New Orleans, Louisiana. For more information, see the conference Web site at http://www.sws.org/regional/southcentral/2003.htm. June 28-July 2. 17th Annual Meeting for the Society of Conservation Biology will meet in Duluth, Minnesota. For details, visit http://www.d.umn.edu/ce/conferences/scb2003/ or contact Teri Williams at 218/726-8835, twillia1@d.umn.edu. September 6-10 The Wildlife Society's 10th Annual Conference in Burlington, Vermont. Visit the conference website for details: http://www.wildlife.org/conference/index.cfm?tname=2003prelim Nov. 19-22. 15th Annual Conference of Society for Ecological Restoration in Austin, Texas. Note the conference dates have recently been changed. 2004 September The Wildlife Society's 11th Annual Conference in Calgary, Alberta. November (?) SER 16th Annual Conference in Victoria, British Columbia, 2004 2005 SER 17th Annual Conference in Zaragoza, Spain, 2005 RESTORATION RESOURCES Join Society for Ecological Restoration's Restoration Network In the next month SER will begin sending out messages of interest to the restoration community regarding upcoming events, opportunities, SER news, etc. If you would like to join this listserv, send a message from the email you wish to subscribe to Majordomo@ser.org with the following command in the body of your email message: subscribe restoration-network The Wildlife Society's Restoration Working Group Newsletter is edited by Steve Windels. Send submissions, corrections, or comments to: skwindel@mtu.edu; ph: (906)249-4593; fax (906) 487-2915. PLEASE VISIT OUR WEBSITE AGAIN TO CHECK OUT THE NEXT EDITION OF OUR NEWSLETTER (SUMMER 2003) DUE OUT JULY 1 2003!!! | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Web site created by Wildlifer.com.
© Copyright 2003.