natural features inventory and management …erie metropark depicts the park as supporting beech-...

Natural Features Inventory and Management Recommendations for HuronMeadows and Lake Erie Metroparks

Prepared by:Michael A. Kost, Joshua G. Cohen, Ryan P. O’Connor, and Helen D. Enander

Michigan Natural Features InventoryP.O. Box 30444

Lansing, MI 48909-7944

For:Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority

13000 High Ridge DriveBrighton, MI 48114

March 31, 2005

Report Number 2005-05

Cover photograph: Joshua Cohen, MNFI Ecologist, in a prairie fen with tamarack swamp in the backgroundat Huron Meadows Metropark (Photo by Michael Kost).

Metroparks Inventory Page- i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 1Landscape Context ...................................................................................................................................... 1Vegetation circa 1800.................................................................................................................................. 2Present Land Cover ..................................................................................................................................... 3

METHODS .................................................................................................................................................... 13Natural Communities ................................................................................................................................ 13Rare Plant Inventories ............................................................................................................................... 13

RESULTS ...................................................................................................................................................... 16Natural Community Inventories Results ................................................................................................... 16Rare Plant Inventory Results ..................................................................................................................... 16

SITE SUMMARIES AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................. 20Huron Meadows Metropark ...................................................................................................................... 20Lake Erie Metropark ................................................................................................................................. 25

DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................................ 28Rare Plants ................................................................................................................................................ 28Fire as an Ecological Process .................................................................................................................... 30Implications for Forest Management ........................................................................................................ 31Oak Barrens Restoration ........................................................................................................................... 31Lakeplain Prairie Restoration.................................................................................................................... 32Invasive Species ........................................................................................................................................ 33Deer Densities ........................................................................................................................................... 34Setting Stewardship Priorities ................................................................................................................... 34

High Priority Sites at Huron Meadows ............................................................................................... 34High Priority Sites at Lake Erie .......................................................................................................... 35

CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................. 36ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................................... 37LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................................................. 37

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Ecoregions of Lower Michigan. ........................................................................................................ 4Figure 2. Surface Geology of Huron Meadows Metropark ............................................................................... 5Figure 3. Surface Geology of Lake Erie Metropark .......................................................................................... 6Figure 4. Vegetation circa 1800 of Huron Meadows Metropark. ...................................................................... 7Figure 5. Vegetation circa 1800 of Lake Erie Metropark. ................................................................................. 8Figure 6. Huron Meadows Metropark 1995 Land Cover. ................................................................................. 9Figure 7. Lake Erie Metropark 1995 Land Cover. .......................................................................................... 10Figure 8. Huron Meadows Metropark 1998 Aerial Photo. ............................................................................. 11Figure 9. Lake Erie Metropark 1998 Aerial Photos. ....................................................................................... 12

Metroparks Inventory Page- ii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Survey site names and associated site codes ..................................................................................... 13Table 2. Rare plants surveyed by associated natural communities .................................................................. 14Table 3. Natural Community Occurrences. ..................................................................................................... 17Table 4. Rare Plant Occurrences. .................................................................................................................... 17Table 5. Stewardship needs for high-quality natural communities ................................................................. 18

LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS

Photograph 1. American lotus bed in Lake Erie Marsh .................................................................................. 19Photograph 2. Purple loosestrife invading wet meadow/prairie fen complex of Huron Meadows ................. 21Photograph 3. Floodplain forest along the Huron River in Huron Meadows Metropark ................................ 23Photograph 4. Eastern prairie-fringed orchid in Lake Erie Metropark ........................................................... 25Photograph 5. Great Lakes marsh in Lake Erie Metropark. ............................................................................ 27Photograph 6. American lotus flower from Great Lakes marsh in Lake Erie Metropark ................................ 28Photograph 7. Dwarf hackberry from Huron Meadows Metropark. ............................................................... 29Photograph 8. Wet meadow/prairie fen complex from Huron Meadows Metropark. ..................................... 35

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1. Plant species observed at Huron Meadows Metropark. .............................................................. 41Appendix 2. Plant species observed at Lake Erie Metropark .......................................................................... 52

Metroparks Inventory Page-1

INTRODUCTION

During the summer of 2004 Michigan NaturalFeatures Inventory (MNFI) surveyed for exemplarynatural communities and rare plants in two Huron-Clinton Metroparks, Huron Meadows and Lake Erie.In addition, surveys were conducted to evaluatemanagement needs on lands considered to have goodpotential for supporting high-quality naturalcommunities with active land management andrestoration. This report summarizes the findings ofMNFI’s surveys and evaluations of Huron Meadowsand Lake Erie Metroparks.

Landscape ContextRegional landscape ecosystems of Michigan have

been classified and mapped at three hierarchical levels(section, subsection, and sub-subsection) based on anintegration of climate, physiography (topographic formand geologic parent material), soil, and naturalvegetation (Albert 1995). The regional classificationprovides a framework for understanding broad patternsof natural community and species occurrences andnatural disturbance regimes across the state, which isuseful in integrated resource management andplanning, as well as for biological conservation. Theclassification is hierarchically structured with threelevels in a nested series, from broad landscape regionscalled sections, down to smaller subsections and sub-subsections.

All of the Huron-Clinton Metroparks occur withinthe Washtenaw Subsection (VI.1) of southern LowerMichigan (Figure 1) (Albert 1995). The WashtenawSubsection contains three sub-subsections that differfrom each other in their soils, glacial landforms,climate, and vegetation. Huron Meadows Metroparkoccurs within the Ann Arbor Moraines Sub-subsection(VI.1.2) and the Jackson Interlobate Sub-subsection(VI.1.3). Lake Erie Metropark occurs on the MaumeeLake Plain Sub-subsection (VI.1.1) (Albert 1995). Thelocal landforms within the metroparks reflect thosetypical of their regional landscape ecosystems andrespective sub-subsections.

Huron Meadows MetroparkThe Ann Arbor Moraines Sub-subsection (VI.1.2)

is a long, narrow band of fine- and medium-texturedend moraine and ground moraine bordered by flat lakeplain on the east and sandy outwash, end moraine, andice-contact features to the west. The Sub-subsection ischaracterized by rolling topography and loam- andsandy loam-textured soils. Fine-textured soils,primarily silt loams and clay loams, are more commonon the eastern edge. In the 1800s, the loams and sandy

loams originally supported oak and oak-hickoryforests. White oak appeared to be the most commonspecies of the oak forest. Black oak was common onthe drier ridge tops and red oak was most common onlower slopes. Beech and sugar maple were restricted tosilt loams and clay loams. Windthrow was theprevailing disturbance within the forested moraineswith fire occasionally spreading into the Sub-subsection from adjacent outwash plains. Oaksavannas, dominated by white and black oak, occurredalong the western edge of the Sub-subsection, wherefires from Sub-subsection VI.1.3 were carried bywesterly winds. Almost all of the ground moraineshave been farmed, whereas the steeper morainesremain forested with oak forests. Most of the land wascleared for agriculture by the mid-nineteenth century.

The Jackson Interlobate Sub-subsection (VI.1.3)contains broad expanses of glacial outwash sands thatsurround sandy and gravelly end moraines and groundmoraines (Albert 1995). The soils on the moraines aretypically well drained or excessively well drained andin the 1800s supported drought-tolerant, fire-dependentnatural communities such as oak barrens, oak savanna,oak forest, and hillside prairie. The outwash soils varyfrom excessively well-drained sands, which oncesupported oak barrens, oak forests, woodland prairies,and dry sand prairies, to poorly-drained organicdeposits that supported a variety of open and forestedwetland types.

Huron Meadows Metropark occurs along theHuron River in southeastern Livingston County and asnoted, is located within both the Ann Arbor Morainesand the Jackson Interlobate. The southeastern portionof the park contains fine-textured glacial till (groundmoraine) of rolling topography and falls within theAnn Arbor Moraines (Farrand and Bell 1982) (Figure2). The remainder of the park falls within an outwashplain of the Jackson Interlobate. The outwash containscoarse-textured, well-drained sands in the flat tomoderately sloping uplands and poorly-drained areaswith organic deposits. The Huron River flows througha narrow, steep-sided glacial outwash channel (toosmall to be mapped by Farrand and Bell) that dissectsfine-textured till plain in the central portion of thepark. Floodwaters from the Huron River andgroundwater seepage from the adjacent morainesupport a diverse wetland complex along the narrowfloodplain of the Huron River. Three lakes occurwithin the park; Maltby Lake in the northern portion ofthe park and two small unnamed lakes just north of theHuron River. Ore Lake occurs just west of themetropark and drains into the Huron River.


Lake Erie MetroparkLake Erie Metropark occurs at the confluence of

the Detroit River and Lake Erie within the MaumeeLake Plain Sub-subsection (Figure 1). This Sub-subsection is comprised of a flat, clay lake plain,dissected by broad glacial drainage ways of sandy soil(Albert 1995). Beach ridges and small sand dunes arecommon feature within the glacial drainage ways ofthe Maumee Lake Plain. Clay soils of the lake plainare generally wet with low permeability and poordrainage. In the past, these poorly-drained soilssupported broad expanses of lowland hardwood forest.In contrast, the soils on the upland beach ridges anddunes of the sandy glacial drainage ways areexcessively drained and once supported extensive buroak and white oak savannas. The sandy glacialdrainage ways also supported vast wet prairies andmarshes, which commonly occurred in depressions onpoorly- to very, poorly-drained soils (Comer et al.1993). Lake Erie Metropark occurs entirely on a broad,flat expanse of lacustrine clay and silt (Figure 3).

Vegetation circa 1800By interpreting the notes of the Michigan General

Land Office surveyors (recorded from 1818-1856),MNFI ecologists were able to piece together arelatively accurate picture of the state’s vegetation inthe early 1800s (Comer et al. 1995). A digital map ofvegetation encountered by the land surveyors duringthis period reveals that Huron Meadows Metroparkwas almost entirely occupied by fire-dependentcommunity types such as oak barrens, oak-hickoryforest, and wet prairie (Figure 4). Large blocks of oakbarrens occurred on outwash plain in the northeasternportion of the park and in the southern part of the park,south of the Huron River. The mean diameter at breastheight (dbh) of trees recorded by the surveyors withinthe oak barrens was 43 cm (17 inches) with a widerange of diameters observed (13 to 91 cm, or 5 to 36inches). These barrens, dominated by widely-spacedwhite oak (Quercus alba) and black oak (Quercusvelutina), likely contained pockets of dry sand prairiein areas with high fire frequency. Morainal featuresand portions of glacial outwash supported oak-hickoryforest, which occurred in uplands that tended to burnless frequently. The Huron River, Ore Lake, MaltbyLake, and the associated wetlands functioned as firebreaks and these oak-hickory stands occurred adjacentto these features. In addition to white oak and blackoak, red oak (Quercus rubra), hickories (Carya spp.),and basswood (Tilia americana) were importantcanopy trees in these dry-mesic southern forests.Average dbh for the oak-hickory forests was 43 cm (17inches) with a range from 23 to 61 cm (9 to 24 inches).

A large block of wet prairie was noted by the surveyorsalong the Huron River in the western portion of thepark. Because the original land surveyors did notdifferentiate among the many different types of open,grass- and sedge-dominated wetlands, this areadesignated as wet prairie on the circa 1800 vegetationmap was likely to have also supported other types ofopen, fire-dependent wetlands such as wet-mesicprairie, prairie fen, and wet meadow. These wetlandtypes once occupied over 856 acres (270 ha) along theHuron River. A large (137 acres or 56 ha) mixedconifer swamp also occurred on the outwash plain eastof Ore Lake and north of the Huron River. Tamarack(Larix laricina) and northern white-cedar (Thujacanadensis) dominated this swamp complex. Recordeddbh for tamarack trees ranged between 15 to 25 cm (6and 10 inches) with a mean dbh of 23 cm (9 inches). Asmall pocket of lowland hardwood forest occurredwithin the floodplain of the Huron River in theeasternmost portion of the park.

The digital map of vegetation circa 1800 for LakeErie Metropark depicts the park as supporting beech-sugar maple forest, wet prairie, and marsh (Figure 5).On the lake plain, the mesic forests typically containeda diverse mix of tree species and in some places, likeLake Erie Metropark, were dominated by species otherthan American beech (Fagus grandifolia) and sugarmaple (Acer saccharum). A close look at the originalnotes of General Land Office surveyors reveals that theforests in the area now occupied by Lake ErieMetropark were predominately forested with whiteoak, black oak, hickories, and basswood. Additionalcanopy associates recorded by the surveyors includedblack ash (Fraxinus nigra), red maple (Acer rubrum),and American elm (Ulmus americana). Trees noted bythe surveyors included basswood, American elm, redmaple, black oak, and white oak. The presence ofblack oak and white oak, which are highly dependenton open conditions in their early development,indicates that in the past, some areas of the metroparklikely supported fire-dependent, lakeplain prairie andlakeplain oak openings (an oak savanna ecosystemunique to lake plains of the Great Lakes) (see naturalcommunity abstracts, Albert and Kost 1998a and1998b, and Cohen 2001a). In the southern portion ofthe metropark, wet prairie occurred along CampauRoad, Point Mouilee Road, and in portions of the golfcourse. Marsh occupied the low areas along theshoreline and surrounded Cherry Island.

The surveyors noted several other significantfindings within and nearby what is now Lake ErieMetropark. For example, the surveyors recorded thelocation of a corn field south of Cherry Island Roadand east of River Road. Another farm field was noted


just north of the metropark between present day RiverRoad and South Gibraltar Road, near GibraltarCemetery. Lastly, a “sulfur spring” was noted in thenorthern portion of the metropark near thenorthwestern corner of section 12.

Present Land CoverThe 1995 Land Cover maps (Figures 6 and 7) were

produced by overlaying circa 1980 National WetlandsInventory data over the Southeast Michigan Council ofGovernments (SEMCOG) 1995 land cover data set.The accuracy of land cover types within eachmetropark was further enhanced through photointerpretation and ground truthing.

Comparisons between circa 1800 vegetation andpresent land cover reveal drastic changes across thelandscape (Figures 4 - 9). The most drastic change forHuron Meadows is the loss of oak barrens, the mostprevalent cover type circa 1800. Nearly all of the oakbarrens at Huron Meadows (and in the remainder ofthe Midwest) have been converted to old field (e.g.,abandoned agricultural fields), recreation areas (golfcourse, picnic areas, etc.), or have succeeded to closed-canopy oak forest in the absence of natural, periodicfires (Cohen 2001b). The conversion of oak barrensand oak savanna to closed-canopy oak forest wasrapid, typically taking place within 30 years followingthe onset of fire suppression (Curtis 1959). The matureoak-hickory forest that now remains is highlyfragmented, with many small, isolated blocks of forestsurrounded by old fields, residential areas, anddegraded forest. Exotic species have invaded allstructural levels of the upland systems with the mostsevere incursions in the understory and in degradedoak barrens. Fire suppression of the fire-dependentwetland systems has resulted in a severe reduction ofopen wetlands along the Huron River with extensiveshrub encroachment by the pervasive, exotic glossybuckthorn (Rhamnus frangula). The large block ofswamp forest east of Ore Lake and north of the HuronRiver was described by the original land surveyors as

lowland conifer forest dominated by tamarack andcedar. This block of swamp forest has been convertedto deciduous hardwood swamp. Cedar and tamarackwere likely harvested for use in building and as fenceposts. Later, tamarack was also harvested for use aswheel spokes by the early automotive industry. Theconversion of tamarack-dominated wetlands to otherwetland types has also been facilitated by periodicoutbreaks of the larch sawfly and fire suppression(Kost 2001a).

At a larger scale, the areas adjacent to HuronMeadows have been transformed to a semi-urbanizedlandscape, with the metropark and adjacent BrightonState Recreation Area providing some of the onlyremaining natural habitats.

Today, Lake Erie Metropark supports mowedlawn, agricultural fields, a golf course, Great Lakesmarsh, and several very small patches of forest thatharbor a diverse assemblage of tree species. Theremaining small patches of forest were once part of anexpansive mesic southern forest that occurredthroughout southeast Michigan and stretched into theThumb region and further north and west (Comer et al.1995). For detailed information on mesic southernforest please see the natural community abstract byCohen (2004). The small forest fragments at Lake ErieMetropark have hard edges and are bordered bymowed lawn, old field, and marsh.

Metroparks serve an increasingly important role inthe conservation of the biodiversity for southeastMichigan. The areas surrounding both HuronMeadows and Lake Erie Metroparks are rapidlyconverting to an urbanized landscape. As developmentproceeds, the metroparks, along with other publiclands will likely harbor some of the only remainingexamples of native ecosystems in southeast Michigan.Protecting and stewarding the remaining naturalhabitats within the metroparks is an extremelyimportant component of any long-term strategy forbiodiversity conservation in southeast Michigan.


� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� !��""#��$��%��&��'��(��!��!��)�� )��*��%��'��+� �!��,��-�� .��/��,��(��.��0%��&��!�1��2�(��$%��,��3��

,

�

��*��%��*

�

4 ��5��%��*

Figure 1. Ecoregions of Lower Michigan (Albert 1995).


Figure 2. Surface Geology of Huron Meadows Metropark (Farrand and Bell 1982).

�

��

� ��

��

!��" ��#�!��$��%�� &��

�� "��'�� (�� )��(*�� +�� !��!*��,--.�� +�� +� �� +�� "�� #�� +�,'/��#��#��+��!��0��&��#�,-.1��


Figure 3. Surface Geology of Lake Erie Metropark (Farrand and Bell 1982).

�

��

� ��

�� !�� !�� "##$� %�� &�� %�� &�� ' �� "�(��'��' �� )�!� �� *� +��' "#$,�

*��

!��' ��!��*�-� .�� /��0�� +��

&�� 1��


Figure 4. Vegetation circa 1800 of Huron Meadows Metropark (Comer et al. 1995).

��

� ��

�� !��!"�#��!$��%&��'�!"�#�(��#&��#�%&��'�!"�#��$��%)��*(!��+�$��%)%(�,��%&��' ��-��)��%(&�)�'��!�!�

� �.�%��/�0��

(1� ��. 2�� 3�/�� 1�.��

�

#��% 1��4��5��6��.��4��!��.�7� /��5��-��.��77��%1��8*��98��::9�� /��0�'��;�0�#��<��0�(��&��0��(��0�;��<0�#��'��0�#��5��0�� 0��.�#��&��%�51��5��1��$��1��!�� 0��!��=��>�.��/��


Figure 5. Vegetation circa 1800 of Lake Erie Metropark (Comer et al. 1995).

��

�� !"� #!$��%%#$��&��'�($�)$'��$��$��*��'�+$�$�,��'�-$��$�+��'�)$-$�.��*'��$��$�(��'��$��$�/�� '�.$��$�&��'��$�,$�� $�� 0��$��'��$��1 ��$�2��

3 3$4 3$! ��

5�� 33-66&+"�7��.��(�6�0�.6�8��/69.�56.�+.7-��,��(96�6.�6�8��.�+,68�(.��.�6

.��'�.��:�6��;��-��

�


Figure 6. Huron Meadows Metropark 1995 Land Cover.

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

��

��

��

� ��

�� !��"��#��$�#��%�&��$'(��#��

��)�*��+��+�(!

,��

�(�-��.��

.��+%�&��'��%,��#�� (!�/

#��!��#��

�-��)�0��

1�(��)��+�(!

��(�2� �"��

*��+��3!!��/�(��0��$

4

,��#�


Figure 7. Lake Erie Metropark 1995 Land Cover.

�

��

��

� ��

��

��!��"#$��%��&��%��

��&��

��'��(��

��)��

��$�*�'�)��'��

�� (�� +((��,�$��-��"

�

�

�

�

�

�

��


Figure 8. Huron Meadows Metropark 1998 Aerial Photo.

��

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

��

��

� ��

��

��

�


Figure 9. Lake Erie Metropark 1998 Aerial Photos.

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

�

�

Site

s H -

K


within the region. Table 2 lists the rare species byassociated natural community that were focused onduring the surveys. Rare plant inventories wereperformed by meander survey of appropriate habitatduring periods when the plants are most recognizable(usually flowering or fruiting periods). When a rareplant was encountered, an MNFI special plant formwas filled out, selected photos were taken, and whennecessary a voucher specimen was collected for laterdetermination.

METHODS

Table 1. Survey site names and associated site codesfor accompanying maps (Figures 6, 7, 8 and 9).

Site Name Site Code

Huron Meadow MetroparkRicket Road Wet Meadow/Prairie Fen Complex AWinans Tamarack Swamp BOre Lake Swamp CHuron River Floodplain Forest DHuron Meadows Oak-Hickory Forest EMaltby Lake Fen FHuron Oak Barrens G

Lake Erie MetroparkErie Prairie HErie Golf Course Wetlands IErie Marsh JErie Woods K

Natural CommunitiesNatural community surveys were conducted inconjunction with rare plant surveys. Prior to surveys,aerial photos were interpreted to determine the types ofnatural communities likely to be present within each ofthe metroparks. Field surveys concentrated onidentifying high-quality natural areas and recordingmanagement concerns, such as evidence of firesuppression, excessive deer herbivory, hydrologicmanipulation, farming, logging, and invasive species.Species lists were compiled for high-quality sites andsites deemed to have potential to significantly improvewith restoration. Site names and site codes used in theaccompanying metropark maps (Figures 6 - 9) arelisted in Table 1. Partial species lists were recorded formost of the areas visited and are included asappendices for each metropark (Appendices 1 and 2).Site summaries were written for all high-qualitynatural communities and sites thought to have goodpotential for significant improvement with restorationand management. Species lists for this report weretabulated with the Florist Quality Assessment Programand species nomenclature follows Herman et al.(2001).

Rare Plant InventoriesRare plant species were targeted for survey based onthe natural communities determined to be present inthe park through aerial photo review and knownhistorical and current rare plant distribution patterns


Table 2. Rare plants surveyed by associated natural communities. State status abbreviations are as follows: E,endangered; T, threatened; SC, special concern.

Community Scientific Name Common Name

Castanea dentata American chestnut EAristolochia serpentaria Virginia snakeroot TCarex oligocarpa Eastern few-fruited sedge TCarex platyphylla broad-leaved sedge TDentaria maxima large toothwort TGalearis spectabilis showy orchis TGentianella quinquefolia stiff gentian THybanthus concolor green violet THydrastis canadensis goldenseal TPanax quinquefolius ginseng TPolymnia uvedalia large-flowered leaf-cup TSpiranthes ovalis lesser ladies'-tresses TTipularia discolor cranefly orchid TTrillium recurvatum prairie trillium TTriphora trianthophora three-birds orchid TAdlumia fungosa climbing fumitory SCJeffersonia diphylla twinleaf SCLiparis liliifolia purple twayblade SC

Chelone oblique red turtlehead EArabis perstellata rock-cress TCamassia scilloides wild hyacinth TCarex conjuncta sedge TCarex davisii Davis’s sedge TCarex lupuliformis false hop sedge TCarex typhina cat-tail sedge TCorydalis flavula yellow fumewort TDiarrhena americana beak grass TFraxinus profunda pumpkin ash TJusticia americana water-willow TLycopus virginicus Virginia water-horehound TMertensia virginica Virginia bluebells TMorus rubra red mulberry TPolemonium reptans Jacob's ladder TSilphium perfoliatum cup-plant TTrillium recurvatum prairie trillium TValerianella chenopodifolia goosefoot corn-salad TWisteria frutescens wisteria TCarex squarrosa squarrose sedge SCEuonymus atropurpurea wahoo SCGymnocladus dioicus Kentucky coffee tree SCHybanthus concolor green violet SCLithospermum latifolium broad-leaved puccoon SCViburnum prunifolium black haw SC

State Status

Mesic Southern Forest

Southern Floodplain Forest


Table 2. Rare plants surveyed by associated natural communities (continued).


Isotria medeoloides smaller whorled pogonia E, LTPlantago cordata heart-leaved plantain EPopulus heterophylla swamp cottonwood EDryopteris celsa log fern TEupatorium fistulosum hollow-stemmed joe-pye-weed TIsotria verticillata whorled pogonia TPoa paludigena bog bluegrass TCuscuta glomerata rope dodder SCLysimachia hybrida swamp candles SC

Gentiana flavida white gentian ERhyncospora globularis globe beak-rush EScelaria pauciflora few-flowered nut-rush EAristida longespica three-awned grass TAsclepias sullivantii Sullivant’s milkweed TBartonia paniculata panicled screw-stem TPlatanthera leucophaea eastern prairie-fringed orchid E, LTSilphium laciniatum compass plant TSisyinchium atlanticum Atlantic blue-eyed grass TCarex frankii Frank’s sedge SCHypericum gentianoides gentian-leaved St. John’s-wort SCLudwigia alternifolia seedbox SCScelaria triglomerata tall nut-rush SC

Prairie FenBerula erecta cut-leaved water-parsnip TCypripedium candidum small white lady’s-slipper TMuhlenbergia richardsonis mat muhly TPhlox maculata spotted phlox TPolemonium reptans Jacob’s ladder TSangiusorba canadensis Canadian burnet TValeriana edulis var. ciliata edible valerian TSporobolus heterolepis prairie dropseed SC

Panicum leibergii Leiberg's panic-grass TRuellia humilis hairy ruellia TSolidago missouriensis Missouri goldenrod TTrichostema brachiatum false pennyroyal TTrichostema dichotomum bastard pennyroyal TPenstemon pallidus pale beard-tongue SCTradescantia virginiana Virginia spiderwort SCTriplasis purpurea sand grass SC

Lakeplain Wet-Mesic Prairie

Dry sand prairie

Southern Swamp

State Status


Table 2. Rare plants surveyed by associated natural communities (continued).

RESULTS

The surveys identified five new elementoccurrences (EOs). (All state and federally listed rarespecies and high-quality natural communities arereferred to as elements and their occurrence at aspecific location is referred to as an elementoccurrence or EO.) Natural community surveysidentified one new high-quality community occurrence(Table 3). Surveys for rare plants resulted in four newelement occurrences and three existing plant recordswere reconfirmed (Table 4). It is possible thatadditional rare species may be found in the future,especially with active restoration and management. Allnew natural community and rare plant occurrenceshave been entered into the statewide database managedby MNFI and all previously existing records have beenupdated.

Natural Community Inventories ResultsNatural community surveys resulted in the

identification of a prairie fen at Huron Meadows(Figures 6 and 8: A) and a previously documentedelement occurrence of Great Lakes marsh was revisitedin Lake Erie Metropark (Photograph 1 and Figures 7and 9: J). In addition to these exemplary naturalcommunities, both metroparks contain areas that havegreat potential of becoming high-quality naturalcommunities with ecological restoration. The high-quality natural communities and sites with goodpotential for restoration are listed in Table 5 along withtheir associated stewardship needs. Detailed sitedescriptions and management recommendations foreach area are included in the Site Summaries andManagement Recommendations section ().

Rare Plant Inventory ResultsRare plant surveys resulted in three new rare plant

occurrences at Lake Erie including goldenseal(Hydrastis canadensis), American lotus (Nelumbolutea), and Frank’s sedge (Carex frankii). A new rareplant occurrence for purple twayblade orchid (Liparisliliifolia) was also discovered at Huron Meadows(Table 4). At Lake Erie, previously known records ofeastern prairie-fringed orchid (Platantheraleucophaea) and swamp rose mallow (Hibiscusmoscheutos) were reconfirmed and found in previouslyundocumented areas of the park. At Huron Meadows,a previously reported colony of dwarf hackberry(Celtis tenuifolia) was reconfirmed and also found innew areas of the park. A record of broad-leavedarrowhead (Sagittaria montevidensis) from Lake Eriewas sought but could not be relocated.

At Lake Erie, rare plants were found primarily inmarshes and adjacent open wetlands. American lotuswas found in deeper water of emergent marshes, andswamp rose mallow was commonly located at theborder between tall emergent marsh vegetation andadjacent uplands. Wet meadows throughout the parksupported colonies of Frank’s sedge. Eastern prairie-fringed orchid was also found in wet meadow habitatas well as old fields with moist soils. One plant,goldenseal, was found on the edge of a seasonally wet,dry-mesic forest.

At Huron Meadows, rare plants were found in dryupland habitat. Dwarf hackberry was located in dry-mesic forests and oak barrens remnants, and a smallcolony of purple twayblade was discovered in a pineplantation that was likely a former oak barrens.


Eupatorium sessilifolium upland boneset TAngelica venenosa hairy angelica SCCeltis tenuifolia dwarf hackberry SCQuercus shumardii Shumard's oak SC

Nelumbo lutea American lotus TSagittaria montevidensis broad-leaved arrowhead TZizania aquatica var. aquatica wild rice THibiscus laevis smooth rose-mallow SCHibiscus moscheutos swamp rose-mallow SCStrophostyles helvula trailing wild-bean SC

State Status

Dry-Mesic Southern Forest

Great Lakes Marsh


Community Site Name (used for report) Metroparkprairie fen Ricket Road Wet Meadow/Prairie

Fen Complex2004 2004 Huron Meadows

Great Lakes marsh Erie Marsh 1988 2004 Lake Erie Metropark

Year First Observed

Year Last Observed

Table 3. Natural Community Occurrences.

Table 4. Rare Plant Occurrences. Status abbreviations are as follows: E, state endangered; LT, federallythreatened; T, state threatened; SC, state special concern.

Species

Site Name (used for this report)

Status

Year First Observed

Year Last Observed

EO#

Metropark

Carex frankii Frank’s sedge

Erie Golf Course Wetlands SC 2004 2004 14

Lake Erie

Celtis tenuifolia Dwarf hackberry

Huron Meadows Oak-Hickory Forest and Huron Oak Barrens

SC 1973 2004 4 Huron Meadows

Hibiscus moscheutos Swamp rose mallow

Erie Marsh SC 2003 2004 30 Lake Erie

Hydrastis canadensis Goldenseal

Erie Woods T 2004 2004 77

Lake Erie

Liparis liliifolia Purple twayblade orchid

Huron Oak Barrens SC 2004 2004 18

Huron Meadows

Nelumbo lutea American lotus

Erie Marsh T 2004

2004 21 Lake Erie

Platanthera leucophaea Eastern prairie-fringed orchid

Erie Golf Course Wetlands E, LT 1993 2004 2 Lake Erie

Sagittaria montevidensis Broad-leaved arrowhead

Erie Marsh T 1988 1988 12 Lake Erie


Table 5. Stewardship needs for high-quality natural communities and sites with good potential forimprovement through restoration and management.

Metropark Site Name Community Type Management Recommendations

Huron Meadows Metropark- remove invasive species- reduce shrub and tree cover- implement prescribed fire program- reduce deer densities

relict conifer swamp - remove invasive species- remove red maple trees and saplings- reduce deer densities- implement prescribed fire in surrounding uplands to

reduce seed source for encroaching red maple and invasive shrubs

Ore Lake Swamp southern swamp - remove invasive species- reduce deer densities- reduce impacts of forest fragmentation by directing

succession of adjacent open fields towards forestor oak barrens

- monitor for emerald ash borer

southern floodplain forest - remove invasive species- reduce deer densities- reduce impacts of forest fragmentation by directing



- remove invasive species- reduce deer densities- implement prescribed fire program to promote oak

regeneration- reduce impacts of forest fragmentation by directing


Maltby Lake Fen prairie fen - remove invasive species- reduce shrub and tree cover- implement prescribed fire program- reduce deer densities

Huron Oak Barrens - remove invasive species- implement prescribed fire program- reduce shrub and tree cover- reduce deer densities- encourage large, scattered oaks

degraded oak barrens and dry southern forest

Ricket Road Wet Meadow/Prairie Fen Complex

Winans Tamarack Swamp

Huron River Floodplain Forest

dry-mesic southern forest and mesic southern forest

Huron Meadows Oak-Hickory Forest

southern wet meadow, prairie fen, and southern shrub-carr


Table 5. Stewardship needs (continued).

Photograph 1. A primary stewardship need for the Lake Erie Marsh is to limit invasive species encroachment,especially where there are concentrations of rare plants such as this extensive bed of American lotus (Photo byRyan O’Connor).

Metropark Site Name Community Type Management Recommendations

Lake Erie MetroparkErie Prairie - remove invasive species

- implement prescribed fire program- reduce shrub and tree cover- reduce deer densities- encourage large, scattered oaks

- avoid mowing wet meadows from June through September

- reduce shrub encroachment in wet meadows- avoid overspray of broad spectrum herbicide in wet

meadows

Erie Marsh Great Lakes marsh - remove invasive species

Erie Woods mesic southern forest - remove invasive species- reduce deer densities- reduce impacts of forest fragmentation by directing

succession of adjacent open fields towards forestor lakeplain oak openings


wet meadow areas in golf courseErie Golf Course Wetlands

lakeplain wet-mesic prairie or lakeplain oak openings


Rickett Road Wet Meadow/Prairie Fen Complex(Site Code: A)

A large wetland complex occurs on the southernside of the Huron River, just west of Rickett Road(Photograph 2 and Figures 6 and 8: A). The complex iscomposed of several different types of naturalcommunities including southern wet meadow, prairiefen, emergent marsh, and southern shrub-carr. Over100 plant species were identified within this diversewetland (Appendix 1). The wetland occurs within adepression on a broad glacial outwash plain andborders a fine-textured moraine. Hydrology of thewetland is maintained by a steady flow of calcareousgroundwater seepage and by over-the-bank floodingfrom the Huron River. Southern wet meadow is thedominant community type within most of the complex,especially along the Huron River and in the easternportion of the open wetland complex. Areas of open,very diverse prairie fen occur in several places buthave been significantly reduced in size as a result oftree and shrub invasion. Emergent marsh is limited tothe areas adjacent to the river that experience thegreatest flooding frequency. Vegetation of the emergentmarsh is characterized by broad-leaved cattail (Typhalatifolia), sweet-flag (Acorus calamus), common bur-reed (Sparganium eurycarpum), and softstem bulrush(Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani), with some areasdominated by the invasives reed canary grass (Phalarisarundinacea) and giant reed (Phragmites australis).

Open wetlands throughout this complex aresubject to shrub encroachment due to prolonged firesuppression. Southern shrub-carr is most prevalent inthe western portions of this wetland complex and inareas where the floodplain is narrowest. Prevalentshrubs include silky dogwood (Cornus amomum), graydogwood (Cornus foemina), red-osier dogwood(Cornus stolonifera), Michigan holly (Ilexverticillata), Bebb’s willow (Salix bebbiana), hoarywillow (Salix candida), meadowsweet (Spiraea alba),and nannyberry (Viburnum lentago). However, manyareas of shrub-carr are completely dominated by glossybuckthorn, which forms impenetrable thicketsespecially in the narrow portions of the floodplain.

The prairie fen has been entered into the MNFIdatabase as a natural community occurrence. Thecommunity is dominated by sedges (Carex lasiocarpaand Carex stricta), big bluestem (Andropogongerardii), shrubby cinquefoil (Potentilla fruticosa),poison sumac (Toxicodendron vernix), and tamarack.The prairie fen contains many species that occur in few

other natural communities types including bog valerian(Valeriana uliginosa), hoary willow, slender wheatgrass (Agropyron trachycaulum), bog birch (Betulapumila), grass-of-parnassus (Parnassia glauca),Riddell’s goldenrod (Solidago riddellii), and boggoldenrod (Solidago uliginosa). Prevalent graminoidsinclude twig rush (Cladium mariscoides), beak-rush(Rynchospora capillacea), fringed brome (Bromusciliatus), marsh wild-timothy (Muhlenbergiaglomerata), smallhead rush (Juncus brachycephalus),and path rush (Juncus tenuis). Common wetland forbsinclude tall flat-top white aster (Aster umbellatus), boglobelia (Lobelia kalmia), common boneset(Eupatorium perfoliatum), sneezeweed (Heleniumautumnale), marsh pea (Lathyrus palustris), swamp-betony (Pedicularis lanceolata), common mountainmint (Pycnanthemum virginianum), and black-eyedsusan (Rudbeckia hirta).

As noted, southern wet meadow is the mostprevalent community type within the wetland complexwith large blocks occurring along the south side of theHuron River and in the eastern portion of the wetlandcomplex, just west of Rickett Road. The tussockforming sedge, Carex stricta, dominates most of themeadows and Carex lacustris, a wide-leaf sedge, isalso a dominant in some places. Other abundantspecies occurring in the wet meadow include blue-jointgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis), joe-pye-weed(Eupatorium maculatum), sensitive fern (Onocleasensibilis), swamp aster (Aster puniceus), marsh fern(Thelypteris palustris), cut grass (Leersia oryzoides),swamp milkweed (Asclepias incarnata), marsh pea,northern bugle weed (Lycopus uniflorus), commonmountain mint, common skullcap (Scutellariagalericulata), late goldenrod (Solidago gigantea),swamp goldenrod (Solidago patula), purple meadow-rue (Thalictrum dasycarpum), swamp thistle (Cirsiummuticum), nodding bur-marigold (Bidens cernuus),arrow-leaved tear-thumb (Polygonum sagittatum), andgray dogwood. Shrub and tree encroachment issignificant in some portions of the community and ifleft unchecked, woody species are likely to dominatethese areas in the future. Common shrub and treespecies include gray dogwood, silky dogwood, red-osier dogwood, hoary willow, red ash (Fraxinuspennsylvanica), silver maple (Acer saccharinum),quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), eastern red-cedar (Juniperus virginiana), and American elm.Several areas are completely dominated by the exoticspecies reed canary grass. In these areas little other

SITE SUMMARIES AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

HURON MEADOWS METROPARK


vegetation can compete with the dominant mat of reedcanary grass.

Overall management of the wetland complexshould include a significant reduction in shrub and treecover, control of invasive species, and prescribed fire.Shrub and tree encroachment into the open sedgemeadow can be controlled by cutting shrubs and treesand applying herbicide directly to the cut stumps.Reducing shrub and tree cover will help maintain theopen conditions required by most of the community’splant and animal species. Several invasive specieswere observed within the wetland including glossybuckthorn, purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria)(Photograph 2), reed canary grass, and giant reed.Glossy buckthorn should be cut and its stumps treatedwith herbicide to prevent further spread (Reinartz1997). Similarly, purple loosestrife can be controlledby cutting flowering stems and applying herbicide tothe cut stems. The patches of reed canary grass shouldbe monitored annually and controlled if they appear tobe spreading. Control of reed canary grass can beaccomplished by applying an herbicide when thespecies is in flower. Prescribed fire can help maintainopen conditions and species diversity and should beregularly used as a management tool in this wetlandcomplex, especially in the pockets of prairie fen.Historically fires likely spread from the large area ofoak barrens to the south into the open wetlands alongthe Huron River. The Huron River to the northprovides an excellent fire break for conductingprescribed fires. For detailed information on prairie fenand southern wet meadow, refer to the MichiganNatural Features Inventory abstracts for thesecommunities (Spieles et al. 1999, Kost 2001b).

Winans Tamarack Swamp (Site Code: B)A small tamarack swamp or relict conifer swamp

occurs south of the Huron River (Figures 6 and 8: B).The tamarack swamp is fringed by an extensive prairiefen and wet meadow complex to the north and east,and dry-mesic southern forest on the morainal slopes(of the floodplain terrace) to the south. Soils within theswamp are marly and moderately alkaline pH (8.0).The hydrology of the wetland is maintained bycalcareous groundwater seepage from the adjacentmoraine. The overstory is dominated by tamarack,which ranges in dbh from 7 to 30 cm (3 to 12 inches),with scattered canopy red maple and American elm.Common shrub species include poison sumac, bogbirch, spicebush (Lindera benzoin), Michigan holly,Bebb’s willow, shrubby cinquefoil, silky dogwood,red-osier dogwood, and nannyberry. The ground layeris diverse with some portions of the swamp supportinga dense bog mat with sphagnum moss. Commonground layer species include sedges (Carex stricta, C.buxbaumii, and C. lacustris), bog goldenrod, Riddell’sgoldenrod, dwarf raspberry (Rubus pubescens), twigrush, marsh wild-timothy, marsh marigold (Calthapalustris), marsh bellflower (Campanula aparinoides),joe-pye-weed, common boneset, northern bugleweed,four-leaved loosestrife (Lysimachia quadrifolia), wildmint (Mentha arvensis), grass-of-parnassus, commonmountain mint, pitcher-plant (Sarracenia purpurea),common skullcap, sensitive fern, marsh fern, andspotted touch-me-not (Impatiens capensis) (Appendix1).

The only invasive species observed of significancewas glossy buckthorn. This species should be removedusing herbicide and the area closely monitored todetect further recruitment. As hardwoods, especiallyred maple, become established within the swamp theywill eventually create a closed canopy and causesignificant reductions in the amount of light thatreaches the understory and ground layer. Light-demanding species such as tamarack and many of theshrub and ground layer species will eventually beeliminated unless measures are taken to reducedominance of hardwoods such as red maple. Importantbasking sites for reptile species are also eliminatedwhen relict conifer swamps are invaded by red maple.In order to maintain biodiversity within the tamarackswamp, red maple should be cut and herbicide appliedto the stumps to prevent resprouting. Red maple treesand saplings can also be girdled. For detailedinformation on relict conifer swamp or tamarackswamp, refer to Michigan Natural Features Inventoryabstract for this community (Kost 2001a).

Photograph 2. Purple loosestrife isbeginning to invade portions of the extensivewet meadow/prairie fen complex. (Photo byJoshua Cohen).


Ore Lake Swamp (Site Code: C)The Ore Lake Swamp is a forested wetland

dominated by deciduous trees species. This southernswamp occurs north of the Huron River in the outwashplain east of Ore Lake and extends east to the shores ofthe small lake east of the canoe launch (Figures 6 and8: C). The road to the canoe launch divides the swampinto two blocks and has likely altered the hydrology ofthis system as manifest by the increased tree mortalitydue to flooding near the road. The swamp occurs northof floodplain forest along the Huron River and isintermixed with dry-mesic southern forest and smallareas of mesic southern forest. Soils of the swamp aremucky, saturated organics. Interpretation of originalland surveyor notes and the presence of scatteredconifer stumps and sphagnum-covered, decayingconifer logs indicate that this swamp has convertedfrom a conifer-dominated system to a hardwoodswamp. Current canopy dominants include red maple,silver maple, swamp white oak (Quercus bicolor), andred ash. Additional canopy components includeAmerican elm, black ash, yellow birch (Betulaalleghaniensis), and basswood. Red maple, yellowbirch, and tulip poplar (Lireodendron tulipifera) weremost common in the ecotone between the hardwoodswamp and the adjacent dry-mesic southern forest andon slight rises within the swamp. Diameters of canopytrees typically range from 23 to 48 cm (10 to 20inches). In the mature portion of the swamp, theunderstory layer is scattered with spice bush, blue-beech (Carpinus caroliniana), Michigan holly,buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), and smoothhighbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum) ascharacteristic shrub species. Closer to the Huron Riverand to the lakes, the swamp forest is younger withsmaller diameter canopy trees and a heavy shrubcomponent in the understory. In some areas, glossybuckthorn completely dominates and forms densethickets. Additional exotic shrubs include Japanesebarberry (Berberis thunbergii), common privet(Ligustrum vulgare), and multiflora rose (Rosamultiflora). Common ground cover species includepoison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), riverbank grape(Vitis riparia), fowl manna grass (Glyceria striata),white grass (Leersia virginica), false nettle(Boehmeria cylindrica), enchanter’s-nightshade(Circaea lutetiana), wood nettle (Laporteacanadensis), common water horehound (Lycopusamericanus), northern bugle weed, fringed loosestrife(Lysimachia ciliata), golden ragwort (Senecio aureus),water-parsnip (Sium suave), skunk cabbage(Symplocarpus foetidus), nettle (Urtica dioica), ostrichfern (Matteuccia struthiopteris), royal fern (Osmundaregalis), marsh fern, water hemlock (Cicuta

maculata), spotted touch-me-not, and clearweed (Pileapumila). Two exotic species were found to be commonin the ground layer, ground ivy (Glechoma hederacea)and bittersweet nightshade (Solanum dulcamara)(Appendix 1).

Management for the swamp forest should focus oninvasive species control with removal of glossybuckthorn, barberry, privet, and multiflora rose as themain priority. These shrubs should be cut and theirstumps treated with herbicide to prevent resprouting(Reinartz 1997).

Huron River Floodplain Forest (Site Code: D)Mature floodplain forest occurs along portions of

the Huron River, especially in areas east of the canoelaunch on the north side of the river (Photograph 3 andFigures 6 and 8: D). West of the canoe launch, on bothsides of the river, the floodplain forest is much youngerwith a heavy component of the invasive shrub, glossybuckthorn. On the south side of the river, east of thecanoe launch where the floodplain is wide, thewetlands are open with wet meadow dominating. Inareas where the floodplain is narrow the slope to theupland terrace is steep and dominated by dry-mesicsouthern forest, which is degraded on the north side ofthe river and high quality on the south side.The mature floodplain forest is dominated by medium-sized silver maple, with additional red ash, cottonwood(Populus deltoides), basswood, American elm, andswamp white oak as important canopy components.Swamp white oak, American elm, and black ash aremost prevalent in areas of backswamp at the base ofthe terrace slope. Diameters of canopy trees rangefrom 20 to 89 cm (8 to 36 inches). The closed canopyforest contains many multi-stemmed silver maple,

Photograph 3. The floodplain forest along theHuron River is characterized by numerouswindthrows and frequent flooding (Photo byJoshua Cohen).


numerous canopy gaps from windthrow, and highlevels of coarse woody debris (Photograph 3).Flooding was observed throughout the growing seasonwith up to a foot of standing water in the spring andbetween three and four feet of standing water in someareas in August. Areas susceptible to heavy floodingtended to have a significant amount of canopy die-backwith numerous standing snags. These areas were alsocharacterized by an open canopy and dominance in theground layer by the invasive exotic reed canary grass.In areas prone to less flooding, important ground coverspecies include Virginia creeper (Parthenocissusquinquefolia), poison ivy, riverbank grape, side-flowering aster (Aster lateriflorus), false nettle, woodnettle, arrow-arum (Peltandra virginica), commonarrowhead (Sagittaria latifolia), and lizard’s-tail(Saururus cernuus). Mature portions of the floodplaincontain a sparse understory with spice bush and blue-beech and scattered pockets of buttonbush. As notedearlier, areas of younger floodplain forest contain aheavy understory component dominated by glossybuckthorn. Additional invasive exotics that pose athreat to the native vegetation of the floodplain includeJapanese barberry and autumn-olive (Elaeagnusumbellata) (Appendix 1).

Stewardship priorities for this site should focus onremoval of invasive shrubs scattered occasionallythroughout the mature floodplain. Target shrubs forremoval include glossy buckthorn, Japanese barberry,and autumn-olive. The shrubs can be cut and theirstumps herbicided to prevent their further spread.Efforts to control the domination of reed canary grassshould also be implemented. Control of reed canarygrass can be accomplished by applying an herbicidewhen the species is in flower. Notably absent at thissite was garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata) and Dame’srocket (Hesperis matronalis), two highly invasiveherbaceous species that often invade floodplainhabitats. Vigilant monitoring and quick eradication ofany adventive colonies of these species is critical to thestewardship of this site. We also recommendmonitoring for ash mortality caused by the emerald ashborer (Agrilus planipennis) within the floodplain forestand the adjacent hardwood swamp. Emerald ash boreris a recently discovered Asiatic beetle that has alreadykilled millions of ash trees in southeastern Michiganand southeastern Ontario and threatens to drasticallyalter the region’s forests (USDA Forest Service 2002,Roberts 2003). A crucial research need is to determineif it is possible to prevent this pest from radicallyaltering ash-dominated forests. For detailedinformation on floodplain forest, refer to the MichiganNatural Features Inventory abstract for this community(Tepley et al. 2004).

Huron Meadows Oak-Hickory Forest (Site Code: E)Four distinct, relatively high-quality stands of dry-

mesic southern forest occur within the metropark(Figures 6 and 8: E). The largest block occurs alongthe hiking path west of the road to the canoe launch,extending across to the east side of the road. Thisforest occurs on moderate slopes of ground moraine,intermixed with hardwood swamp, and containspockets of mesic southern forest and seasonally wetdepressions. South of the Huron River along theterrace slopes and on upland islands within thefloodplain is another noteworthy block of dry-mesicsouthern forest. This forest is bordered by degradedfloodplain forest to the north and degraded oakbarrens/old field to the south. Further south, in theclosed-canopy forest north of Winans Lake Road is anarea with extreme rolling topography. In the center ofthis forested block is mature dry-mesic southern forest.However, the edges are characterized by degradedforest with high levels of exotic species in theunderstory and ground cover. The final stand ofrelatively high-quality dry-mesic southern forest occurson the southern slopes of Maltby Lake just north ofHammel Road.

The dry-mesic southern forests can becharacterized as oak-hickory forest. Soils are sandyloams with very slightly acid to neutral pH. Numeroussnags and coarse woody debris are found throughout.Large-diameter trees dominate the canopy with dbhtypically ranging from 28 to 74 cm (12 to 30 inches).Using tree rings from a cut oak stump of comparablediameter, the age of the canopy cohort of these standsis estimated to be over 150 years. Canopy dominanceis shared by white oak, red oak, black oak, shagbarkhickory (Carya ovata), and pignut hickory (Caryaglabra). Additional canopy associates includebasswood, big-toothed aspen (Populus grandidentata),white ash (Fraxinus americana), tulip poplar,American beech, and sugar maple. American beechand sugar maple occur in small pockets of mesicsouthern forest found within the mature forest north ofthe Huron River and west of the canoe launch road.This forested block also contains numerous seasonallywet depressions dominated by buttonbush andMichigan holly. Forested vernal pools provide criticalbreeding habitat for amphibians, as well as an insect-rich food resource for northward-migrating songbirdsin the spring. Species characteristic of the dry-mesicsouthern forest understory include dwarf hackberry(special concern, SC), witch-hazel (Hamamelisvirginiana), Juneberry (Amelanchier arborea),ironwood (Ostrya virginiana), flowering dogwood(Cornus florida), maple-leaved arrow-wood (Viburnumacerifolium), and blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium).


A diversity of species are common within theground cover including Carex pedunculata, Carexpensylvanica, bottlebrush grass (Hystrix patula),doll’s-eyes (Actaea pachypoda), red baneberry (Actaearubra), soft agrimony (Agrimonia pubescens), jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), big-leaved aster(Aster macrophyllus), enchanter’s-nightshade,clustered-leaved tick-trefoil (Desmodium glutinosum),naked tick-trefoil (Desmodium nudiflorum), white wildlicorice (Galium circaezans), wild geranium(Geranium maculatum), white avens (Geumcanadense), round-lobed hepatica (Hepaticaamericana), lopseed (Phryma leptostachya), may-apple (Podophyllum peltatum), jumpseed (Polygonumvirginianum), black snakeroot (Sanicula gregaria),blue-stemmed goldenrod (Solidago caesia), yellowviolet (Viola pubescens), maidenhair fern (Adiantumpedatum), and hog-peanut (Amphicarpaea bracteata)(Appendix 1).

Numerous invasive species were observed withinthe dry-mesic southern forest stands including Orientalbittersweet (Celastrus orbiculata), Japanese barberry,autumn-olive, common privet, Amur honeysuckle(Lonicera maackii), and Tartarian honeysuckle(Lonicera tatarica). In addition, an extremely invasivetree species, the tree-of-heaven (Ailanthus altissima),was found just east of the canoe launch parking areaalong the degraded slopes above the river. Thesespecies, especially the tree-of-heaven, should becontrolled through cutting, accompanied by herbicideapplication to the stumps to prevent resprouting. Theblocks of forest along the slopes above the HuronRiver and north of the river on the west side of theroad contain moderate levels of invasive exotic speciesand a concerted effort to eliminate non-nativevegetation in conjunction with the implementation ofprescribed fire would restore these systems to high-quality dry-mesic southern forest. Prescribed fireshould be used to help reduce understory density andhelp control invasive species. Fire may also help createlight gaps, which will facilitate oak reproduction.Removal or girdling of shade-tolerant trees like redmaple may also help facilitate oak reproduction. Theseforested blocks should be monitored annually duringthe spring for garlic mustard, and if detected, all plantsshould be removed before setting seed.

Maltby Lake Fen (Site Code: F)Just below the Sunset Ridge Picnic Area along the

east shore of Maltby Lake is a small, diverse prairiefen (Figures 6 and 8: F). Bordered to the east by asteep oak-dominated ridge, the fen is maintained by aconstant supply of calcareous groundwater seeping outof the base of the slope. Tamarack, quaking aspen,hoary willow, Bebb’s willow, and gray dogwood

dominate the tree and shrub layer, and characteristicspecies such as Carex stricta, common mountain mint,shrubby cinquefoil, Riddell’s goldenrod, and purplegerardia (Agalinis purpurea) occur in the ground layer(Appendix 1).

Management opportunities at this fen include aminimal amount of shrub control, particularly of a fewscattered common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica). Aprescribed burn would also benefit this site, and wouldbe relatively easy to control given the naturalfirebreaks in the form of dense shrub-carr to the south,Maltby Lake to the west, and a moist seep to the east.This site also contains a unique opportunity forlandscape-level restoration with the adjacent oak forestto the east. Dominated by large black and white oak,the steep west-facing slope contains pockets ofvegetation associated with oak savanna. A prescribedburn encompassing both the fen and adjacent oakforest would greatly enhance biodiversity in bothcommunities. In addition, restoring and maintainingopen conditions in the fen and oak forest will create animportant scenic vista and allow the metroparks toprovide unique educational opportunities from theadjacent picnic area. For detailed information onprairie fen refer to the Michigan Natural FeaturesInventory abstract for this community (Spieles et al.1999).

Huron Oak Barrens (Site Code: G)Several prairie-like openings are scattered south of

Hammel Road on the north side of the Huron Riverand just south of the river in an old field/degraded oakbarrens complex (Figures 6 and 8: G). These openingsare the remnants of oak barrens that characterizedmuch of southern Livingston County circa 1800. Thesesites typically have somewhat droughty, infertile soilsand at Huron Meadows are found on relatively flatglacial outwash terraces above the Huron River. Theoverstory canopy is sparse in these openings, and istypically dominated by black oak, though numerousother species are present, including black walnut(Juglans nigra) and aspen (Populus grandidentata andP. tremuloides) as well as non-native species likeSiberian elm (Ulmus pumila), white mulberry (Morusalba), and apple (Malus sp.). Several pine plantationswere established in the area north of the river. Thesebarrens were once much more open, which is clearlyevident on aerial photographs taken in 1937. Over thepast 60 to 70 years, many of the oak barrens in thepark have filled in with young trees and tall shrubssuch as wild black cherry (Prunus serotina), graydogwood, hawthorn (Crataegus sp.), and red-cedar aswell as invasive shrubs like autumn-olive andmultiflora rose. Dwarf hackberry (SC) is also present,but is concentrated along the edges of more mature


dry-mesic forests. Fragrant sumac (Rhus aromatica) isalso prevalent throughout. In the remaining openings,a strong compliment of native groundflora is mixedwith exotic plants of old fields. Some characteristicnative species include wild bergamot (Monardafistulosa), black-eyed susan, bush-clovers (Lespedezacapitata, L. hirta, and L. virginica), tick-trefoils(Desmodium canadense, D. ciliare, D. illinoense, andD. sessilifolium), goldenrods (Solidago speciosa, S.nemoralis, and S. canadensis), rough blazing star(Liatris aspera), and northern dewberry (Rubusflagellaris) as well as grasses like little bluestem(Andropogon scoparius), hair grass (Deschampsiaflexuosa), and three-awned grass (Aristidapurpurascens). Also occurring in the pine plantationnorth of the river is a small colony of the purpletwayblade orchid (Liparis lilifolia), a species of specialconcern. Unfortunately, many of the remnant barrensare degraded with non-native invasive species.Ranging from occasionally present to locally dominantin more degraded areas are invasive species such asspotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa), white sweet-clover (Melilotus alba), common St. John’s-wort(Hypericum perforatum), sheep sorrel (Rumex

acetosella), smooth brome grass (Bromus inermis),timothy (Phleum pretense), red fescue (Festucarubra), and Canada bluegrass (Poa compressa)(Appendix 1).

Management in these remnant oak barrens shouldfocus on maintenance and expansion of openings andcontrol of invasive species. Shrub and small treespecies are encroaching on the native groundflora andshould be removed. Resource managers should takecare to maintain large-diameter, open-grown oaks topreserve the structural character of barrens of an opencanopy with scattered overstory trees. Combiningshrub removal with prescribed burning will stimulatenative species and over time will help control exoticgrasses and forbs. Some hand-pulling of troublesomeweeds like sweet-clover may also be necessary forrestoration. The pine plantation south of HammelRoad should also be removed and could eventually berestored to oak barrens, though care should be taken tominimize heavy disturbance to the area immediatelysurrounding the purple twayblade orchid site. Fordetailed information on oak barrens, refer to theMichigan Natural Features Inventory abstract for thiscommunity (Cohen 2001b).

LAKE ERIE METROPARK

Erie Prairie (Site Code: H)The Erie Prairie consists of several small, level,

agricultural fields and abandoned old fields that areseparated by hedgerows, a gravel road, and a narrowchannel of Great Lakes marsh (Figures 7 and 9: H).The site borders old fields on the Point Mouillee StateGame Area to the south and the Lake Erie MetroparkGolf Course to the north. The Erie Prairie site harborsa population of eastern prairie-fringed orchid, which islisted as state endangered (E) and federally threatened(LT) (Photograph 4). Because the eastern prairie-fringed orchid is extremely rare as a result of habitatconversion to agriculture, this site represents anexcellent opportunity to undertake an ecologicalrestoration project for a lakeplain prairie/lakeplain oakopenings complex in partnership with the MichiganDepartment of Natural Resources (DNR), which ownsthe adjoining old fields. Once widespread throughoutthe lake plain in southeast Michigan, lakeplain prairieand lakeplain oak openings are now globally rarenatural communities. A joint effort in partnership withthe DNR to restore these rare natural communities andimprove habitat for the eastern prairie-fringed orchidat Erie Prairie will greatly contribute to biodiversityconservation in southeast Michigan.

Photograph 4. Eastern prairie-fringedorchid, a globally imperiled species,occurs at Lake Erie Metropark.Restoration of lakeplain prairie wouldbenefit this ecologically significantpopulation (Photo by Ryan O’Connor).


Management of the site should include 1)removing hedgerows, 2) establishing appropriatenative prairie plant species, 3) controlling exoticplants, 4) prescribed burning, and 5) maintaining orplanting scattered oaks. Removing the hedge rows thatseparate the small fields will create a large opengrassland/savanna and provide potential habitat fornumerous rare and declining grassland birds such asthe northern harrier (Circus cyaneus, SC), bobolink(Dolichonyx oryzivorus), savanna sparrow(Passerculus sandwichensis), Henslow’s sparrow(Ammodramus henslowii, SC), grasshopper sparrow(Ammodramus savannarum, SC), short-eared owl(Asio flammeus, E), dickcissel (Spiza americana, SC),migrant loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianusmigrans, E), and western meadowlark (Sturnellaneglecta, SC) (Herkert et al. 1993, Sample andMossman 1997). The majority of the orchids observedduring the surveys occurred in an old field dominatedby exotic plants, particularly tall fescue (Festucaarundinacea). Other exotic species observed at the sitethat pose a threat to the orchids include white sweet-clover, yellow sweet-clover (Melilotus officinalis),quack grass (Agropyron repens), and Morrowhoneysuckle (Lonicera morrowii) (Appendix 2).Successfully restoring prairie vegetation to the site willrequire the removal and control of invasive species.Long-term maintenance of the site should includeprescribed burning to prevent tree and shrubencroachment, bolster plant diversity, and create amosaic of grassland/savanna habitats (e.g., recentlyburned and unburned patches). Where oaks persist,resource managers should take care to maintain orpromote large-diameter, open-grown oaks to create thestructural character of lakeplain oak openings ofscattered overstory trees in a grassland matrix. Fordetailed information on lakeplain prairies andlakeplain oak openings, refer to the Michigan NaturalFeatures Inventory abstracts for these communities(Albert and Kost 1998a and 1998b, Cohen 2001a).

Erie Golf Course Wetlands (Site Code: I)Numerous wetlands in various states of

degradation occur along the margins of the golf course(Figures 7 and 9: I). Somewhat surprisingly, thesewetlands also support a number of rare species. This isespecially remarkable given the fact that prior to theconstruction of the golf course many of these areaswere actively farmed for the better part of the pastcentury. The most prominent of these wetlands islocated immediately north of the clubhouse andstretches north between the tenth and eighteenthfairways of the golf course. Other important areasinclude wetlands between the second and fourthfairways, and between the fifth and eighth fairways.

These wetlands are mostly open and are dominatedby sedges and rushes, as well as common boneset, andspotted touch-me-not. Purple loosestrife is alsocommon but sufficiently controlled by beetles and fewflowering stalks were observed. Three rare species alsooccur in wetlands along the golf course. Numerousindividuals of eastern prairie-fringed orchid wereobserved, including several within a few feet of themaintained fairways. Dense colonies of Frank’s sedge(SC) also occur, and are particularly common alongthe wetland margins north of the clubhouse.Numerous individuals occur immediately adjacent tothe maintained fairways. Swamp rose mallow (SC)was observed in a ditch along the southern border ofthe golf course and has the potential to occur along theedges of other waterways and wetlands within the golfcourse.

Management of these wetlands need not conflictwith management of the golf course, but care shouldbe taken to minimize expansion of the mown fairway.Whenever possible, golf course maintenance staffshould avoid mowing moist portions of the rough andwetland borders between early June and lateSeptember. Minimizing overspray and drift of broadspectrum herbicides and fungicides applied to the golfcourse during the growing season will also help reduceimpacts to rare species that occur in the rough.Additionally, wetlands should be maintained in arelatively open state, and small trees and tall shrubs ofspecies such as cottonwood, rough-leaved dogwood(Cornus drummondii), and willows should becontrolled (Appendix 2). If possible, shrub cuttingshould be done during fall and winter, to minimizeimpacts to rare species during the growing season.Managing the rough areas in ways that will allow therare plants to survive and even thrive will contribute tobiodiversity conservation in southeast Michigan.

Erie Marsh (Site Code: J)A large network of marshes is located in the

eastern portion of the park (Photographs 1 and 5 andFigures 7 and 9: J). An element occurrence of GreatLakes marsh was originally document in 1988 at Pt.Mouille State Game Area and extends into the southernportion of the metropark intersecting both the EriePrairie and Erie Golf Course Wetlands sites. This areaof Great Lakes marsh is associated with the mouth ofthe Huron River and within the metropark is heavilyinfested with giant reed, a robust invasive grassspecies. Additional areas of Great Lakes marsh occurin the central and northern portions of the metropark.These areas of marsh occur in wide channels that runparallel to the Detroit River and along the shore of theDetroit River. The hydrology of several of the channelsin the north end of the park appears disrupted by past


dredging, and long-time area residents recall a localdredging operator storing equipment in an embaymentnear a constructed causeway. Despite this pastdisturbance, the hydrology of the marshes remainsrelatively intact and water levels still fluctuate withchanging water levels in Lake Erie, a feature thatdistinguishes Great Lakes marshes from hydrologicallyisolated emergent marshes.

According to park naturalists, the character of themarshes has changed drastically over the past 5-10years. During higher lake levels, the marshes weredominated by open water with emergent vegetationconfined to the margins of the wetland. Currently,however, many of the marshes are dominated byextremely tall, dense giant reed and narrow-leavedcattail (Typha angustifolia). Small pockets of moreopen marsh occur in deeper water sections of theswales and along a small section of natural Lake Erieshoreline east and north of the wave pool. Theseportions of the marsh also support large beds ofAmerican lotus (T), a plant with large, round, peltateleaves and beautiful, large flowers (Photographs 1 and6). Other common species in the emergent marshesinclude swamp rose-mallow (SC), common boneset,and swamp milkweed. In deeper, open watersubmergent aquatic vegetation is more common andincludes species such as eel grass (Vallisneriaamericana), coontail (Ceratophyllum demersum),sweet-scented waterlily (Nymphaea odorata),pondweeds (Potamogeton gramineus and P. natans),common waterweed (Elodea canadensis), commonarrowhead, water-plantain (Alisma plantago-aquatica),common water meal (Wolffia columbiana), andduckweeds (Spirodela polyrhiza and Lemna minor)(Appendix 2).

Management in the marshes at Lake ErieMetropark should focus on maintaining hydrologicconnectivity to Lake Erie and controlling invasivespecies. The marsh contains numerous invasive speciesincluding common water hyacinth (Eichhorniacrassipes), reed, purple loosestrife, glossy buckthorn,narrow-leaved cattail, black alder (Alnus glutinosa),and flowering rush (Butomus umbellatus). Unlike mostof the other invasive plants mentioned above, commonwater hyacinth is not presently widespread. Thus,efforts to control water hyacinth can be cost effectivelyundertaken at this time. Further south, water hyacinthspreads rapidly and has proven very difficult tocontrol. Efforts to control or eradicate the otherinvasive species listed above should be targeted toareas that support populations of rare species or areprime observation points for the public. In attemptingto control invasive species, it is important to monitorthe success of control efforts and follow up withadditional treatments where necessary. For detailedinformation on Great Lakes marsh, refer to theMichigan Natural Features Inventory abstract for thiscommunity (Albert 2001).

Erie Woods (Site Code: K)Lake Erie Metropark contains several small

woodlots that are similar in species composition andstructure (Figures 7 and 9: K). Like other upland areasof the park, the soils of these woodlots are dominatedby clay and hold water at or near the surface for muchof the year. Vernal ponds are a common feature of thewoodlots and provide critical breeding sites foramphibians such as frogs and salamanders. With 22tree species documented during the surveys, it is clearthese woodlots support a diverse assemblage of trees.Mature oaks are abundant within the woodlots as aremaples, especially near vernal ponds. Common treespecies include the following: basswood, silver maple,American elm, black walnut, honey locust (Gleditsiatriacanthos), red ash, swamp white oak, white oak, buroak (Q. macrocarpa), and red oak, with one measuring108 cm (42 inches) in diameter. Ten invasive specieswere identified, several of which have the potential tosignificantly reduce species diversity (Appendix 2).Signs of deer herbivory were abundant within thewoodlots.

Management of the woodlots should includeremoval and monitoring of invasive species, especiallygarlic mustard and the following shrubs: Japanesebarberry, Morrow honeysuckle, common privet,multiflora rose, european highbush-cranberry(Viburnum opulus), glossy buckthorn, and commonbuckthorn. For detailed information on mesic southernforest, refer to the Michigan Natural FeaturesInventory abstract for this community (Cohen 2004).

Photograph 5. Great Lakes marsh provides criticalhabitat for spawning fish and for migrating,feeding, and nesting waterfowl (Photo by RyanO’Connor).


DISCUSSION

Rare PlantsEastern prairie-fringed orchid is state

endangered and federally threatened. The majority oforchid populations are known from wet prairies onglacial lake plain in the Saginaw Bay and Lake Erieregions, with smaller populations also found insouthern Michigan bogs. Despite being observed in 40locations in Michigan, it is considered very rarethroughout its current range due to habitat alteration.Virtually all of the vast prairies it once thrived in wereconverted to agriculture at the time of settlement. InMichigan, these lakeplain prairie regions also occur inrapidly expanding metropolitan and suburban areas.Much of the remaining habitat is subject to shrubinvasion unless maintained in an open conditionthrough periodic mowing or prescribed fire. Thepopulations of prairie-fringed orchid at Lake ErieMetropark, while significant in size, are widelyscattered across old fields and the margins of the golfcourse. This presents a potential problem, since theorchid is pollinated only by particular species of night-flying hawkmoths (the Hermit sphinx, Sphinx eremitis;Pandorus sphinx, Eumorpha pandorus; and theAchemon sphinx, Eumorpha achemon), and it isuncertain if moths could locate and pollinate isolatedorchid individuals or colonies (Cuthrell et al. 1999).The orchid is easily recognized while flowering, whichtypically occurs in the first or second week of July.Seed set and dispersal is thought to occur inSeptember. As with other species of orchids, the tinyseeds require special conditions for germination,including the presence of certain mycorrhizal fungi.Conservation strategies to maintain and enhancepopulations of prairie-fringed orchid includecontrolling shrub invasion through periodic mowing orprescribed fire, and maintaining natural hydrologicregimes that allow soil moisture to fluctuate withchanging Great Lakes’ water levels. It is also importantto note that population levels fluctuate from year toyear, and individuals, and even entire colonies, may ormay not flower in any given year. Thus, suitablehabitat, especially along wet-mesic areas of the golfcourse and other moist meadows at Lake ErieMetropark should be monitored annually for new orexpanding colonies. For additional information oneastern prairie-fringed orchid, refer to the MichiganNatural Features Inventory abstract for this species(Penskar and Higman 2000).

American lotus (Photographs 1 and 6) is a state-threatened species occurring in marshes and rivermouths near the Great Lakes in southern lowerMichigan. It is known from 21 sites in Michigan, but

only seven of these are viable populations seen in therecent past. Occurrences typically range from only afew plants up to several thousand individuals in largecolonies. The colonies at Lake Erie are particularlylarge and the park represents a significant site from thestandpoint of conservation of the species. Americanlotus is easily recognized throughout the growingseason by its large emergent leaves, and itscharacteristic yellowish-white flowers also grace thelarge aquatic beds from late July through August. Likemany plants of the Lake Erie marshes, the sizes oflotus colonies are related to fluctuations in water levelsof the Great Lakes. In addition, competition from tall,aggressive emergent marsh species such as giant reedand narrow-leaved cattail also likely affect theAmerican lotus. Conservation strategies for thisspecies include maintaining hydrologic connectivity tothe naturally fluctuating water levels of the GreatLakes and, if necessary, controlling invasive emergentmarsh vegetation.

Goldenseal is a state-threatened plant. Prior to thisstudy, there were 70 known occurrences of goldenseal.This species has declined throughout its range due toexploitation of roots for herbal medicine andsignificant loss of habitat due to development andmodification. In Michigan this species is concentratedin the southern three tiers of counties in the LowerPeninsula. Typical habitat for goldenseal includes richhardwood forests with beech/sugar maple/basswood orred oak/sugar maple canopies and occasionally uplandrises in floodplain forests. The population at Lake Erie

Photograph 6. Large colonies of American lotusthrive in Lake Erie Metropark. Conservation ofthis species depends on maintaining the hydrologyof Great Lakes marshes and controlling invasivemarsh vegetation (Photo by Ryan O’Connor).


is very small. Goldenseal can be easily recognized inearly May when it is flowering. Conservation strategiesinclude the preservation and restoration of ecologicallyviable tracts of rich woodland habitat, monitoringknown populations to determine if plants are beingpoached or browsed, and educating the public aboutthe detrimental effects caused by poaching and the useof wild herbs in the herbal market. For additionalinformation on goldenseal, refer to the MichiganNatural Features Inventory abstract for this species(Penskar et al. 2001).

Swamp rose mallow is listed as a species ofspecial concern. Plants are given the status of specialconcern when the status of the species is unknown. Aspecies remains on the special concern list untilspecialists are able to determine whether the speciesshould be elevated to state threatened or endangeredstatus or is common enough to remain untracked.Recent surveys have shown this species to be morecommon and less threatened than previously assumed.As a result, in 2005, swamp rose mallow was proposedfor delisting. However, this species is still quite aunique feature of this metropark and efforts should bemade to protect this population and others to preventfuture listing. Currently there are 31 occurrences ofswamp rose mallow in the state, most occurring in thesouthern three tiers of counties. This species occupiesmoist meadows, ditches, and the edges of emergentmarshes, and generally occurs more frequently inmarshes and river mouths along Lake Michigan andLake Erie. Swamp rose mallow is easily recognized byits large pink flowers during late July and August.Conservation strategies to protect this species includemaintaining naturally fluctuating hydrologic regimes,especially in wetlands adjacent to the Great Lakes, andcontrolling aggressive invasive species such as giantreed and narrow-leaved cattail.

Frank’s sedge is also a species of special concern.Prior to this study, there were 12 known sites for thisspecies, with only four of these estimated to be viablepopulations. In 2005, botanical specialists determinedthat Frank’s sedge was more common and lessthreatened than previously thought and as a result, thespecies has been proposed for delisting. Regardless ofthe potential change in status, this species is still quitea unique feature of this metropark and efforts shouldbe made to protect this population and others toprevent future listing. Frank’s sedge is found across thesouthern two tiers of counties, with the majoritylocated in southeast Michigan. The colonies at LakeErie Metropark are significant in size and mayconstitute the second-largest population currentlyknown in the state. This species occupies wet-mesic

prairie and moist meadow habitats. Frank’s sedge canbe recognized by its characteristic fruiting structuresfrom July through September. Conservation strategiesto maintain and enhance populations of Frank’s sedgeat Lake Erie include maintaining open areas of wet-mesic prairies and golf course rough areas, andavoiding mowing moist meadows to low heights(approximately less than 4 inches) during the growingseason.

Dwarf hackberry (Photograph 7) is listed as aspecial concern species. First identified in 1973, thissmall tree occurs in 36 sites in the southern portion ofMichigan, and is almost exclusively found in glacialinterlobate regions in the southeast and southwestportion of the state where the oak barrens habitat itthrives in was most common. Despite a relatively largenumber of occurrences, most populations are knownfrom roadsides and very few large colonies in naturalhabitat have been documented. At Huron Meadows,the species is prevalent in degraded oak barrens andalong south facing slopes of dry-mesic southern forest.This dwarf hackberry population is quite extensive;close to 300 stems were documented during surveys.Dwarf hackberry is easily recognized throughout thegrowing season by its short stature and leavesresembling the larger northern hackberry (Celtisoccidentalis). Conservation strategies to conservedwarf hackberry populations center on habitatrestoration, including clearing closed-in oak barrens ofinvasive species and weedy native plants andimplementing prescribed burning regimes to maintaina semi-open canopy.

Photograph 7. Dwarf hackberry occurs in HuronMeadows in degraded oak barrens and oak-hickory forest. Efforts to restore oak barrens andimplement prescribed fire in oak-hickory forestwill benefit this species (Photo by RyanO’Connor).


Purple twayblade is also a species of specialconcern. Of the 17 occurrences known in Michiganprior to this study, most occurred in the two southerntier counties. Despite a sizable number of populationsknown from Washtenaw County to the south, thecolony found at Huron Meadows represents the onlyknown occurrence in Livingston County. Purpletwayblade occurs in a variety of disturbed uplandhabitats, ranging from brushy second-growth thickets,to mixed oak woods to pine plantations. This orchidcan be identified by its two broad basal leaves andpurple flowers which bloom in late June through July.The habitat requirements of this orchid are poorlyunderstood, but it is likely that it requires some shade.Conservation strategies to protect this species includerestoring areas of degraded habitat by carefullyremoving invasive species and gradually convertingpine plantations back to oak barrens and oakwoodlands.

Broad-leaved arrowhead is a state-threatenedspecies that had been previously reported from LakeErie but was not reconfirmed during the 2004 surveys.In 1988, the species was reported from marshes nearthe Nature Center, but thorough searches in this areaand adjacent marshes failed to locate the species. Parknaturalists reported that the character of the marsheshas changed significantly in the past several years withthe lowering of water levels in the Great Lakes andsubsequent invasion of formerly open water marsheswith tall, aggressive giant reed and narrow-leavedcattail. Despite not finding broad-leaved arrowheadduring this survey, large areas of suitable habitatremain. As water levels rise and if marsh restorationpractices are implemented, there is a high likelihoodthat the species could be found again.

Fire as an Ecological ProcessMany of the areas within the metroparks we

surveyed once supported fire-dependent ecosystemssuch as wet meadow, prairie fen, oak barrens, oak-hickory forest, lakeplain prairie, and lakeplain oakopenings. In the past, lightning- and human-inducedfires frequently spread over large areas of southernMichigan and other Midwestern states (Curtis 1959,Dorney 1981, Grimm 1984). In the absence of frequentfires, open oak savanna and prairie communitiesconvert to forest such as oak-hickory forest or mixedoak forest (see oak barrens abstract, Cohen 2001b).The reduction of wildfires in Midwestern statesfollowing the loss of indigenous cultures in the early1800s is well documented and resulted in a loss of fire-dependent natural communities through both activeconversion for farming and succession from openbarrens and prairie to forest (Curtis 1959).

The conversion of open barrens and prairie toforested communities continues today and often resultsin a loss of species and habitat diversity (Curtis 1959,McCune and Cottam 1985, McClain et al. 1993). Thiswas evident at many of the sites we surveyed. AtHuron Meadows Metropark the open character ofprairie fen, oak barrens, and dry-mesic southern forestis being lost as the communities actively succeed toclosed-canopy, shrub- and tree-dominatedcommunities. As shade-tolerant woody species andcanopy closure increases, light levels are reduced andlight-demanding species such as prairie forbs, grasses,and oak seedling and saplings are unable to remainviable. As a result, both species diversity and habitatheterogeneity are reduced.

Some of the biggest changes as a result of firesuppression have taken place within the wetlands southof the river where shrub-carr has invaded previouslyopen wetlands. Reintroduction of fire into thesewetlands will help restore open systems such as prairiefen and wet meadow. More long term changes areoccurring within the oak-hickory forest as the result ofalteration of historic fire regimes. At present, oaks andhickories dominate the canopies of dry-mesic forests atHuron Meadows. However, oak regeneration withinthese forests is limited to slopes, light gaps, and edgesof forest blocks and suppression of the historic fireregime has allowed thin-barked, shade-tolerant speciessuch as red maple to infiltrate the subcanopy and forestunderstory (Abrams 1998). Repeat prescribed burnswill eliminate the red maple seedlings and saplingsand help control the exotic shrub invasion. A sustainedfire management regime will allow for increasedrecruitment of oak seedlings and saplings.

The establishment of red maple within oak-hickoryforests also results in significant changes in adjacentwetland communities. For example, at HuronMeadows fire suppression has enabled red maple toestablish within the dry-mesic forest and the species isnow beginning to colonize an adjacent relict coniferswamp (Huron Meadows Oak-Hickory Forest andWinans Tamarack Swamp, Figures 6 and 8: E and B).Species loss following invasion of relict conifer swampby red maple can be significant. The shift from conifer-dominance to hardwood-dominance also results in adrastic reduction in shrub cover (Kost 2001c). Thereduction of shrub cover that results from red mapleinvasion can adversely impact a wide range of bothanimal and plant species. In particular, many birdspecies rely heavily on the fruit of these wetland shrubsduring fall migration and winter. While fire is not afrequent form of natural disturbance for relict coniferswamp, its absence in the broader landscape hassignificantly altered wetland successional pathways tothe detriment of light-demanding species like


tamarack. Thus, actively cutting or girdling shade-tolerant hardwoods such as red maple from relictconifer swamps may be needed if this importantnatural community type is to be maintained.

Plant communities, whether upland or lowland,benefit from prescribed fire in several ways.Depending on the season and intensity of a burn,prescribed fire may be used to decrease the cover ofexotic, cool-season grasses and woody species, andincrease the cover of native warm-season grasses andforbs (White 1983, Abrams and Hulbert 1987, Tester1989, Collins and Gibson 1990, Glenn-Lewin et al.1990, Anderson and Schwegman 1991). Prescribed firehelps reduce litter levels, allowing sunlight to reach thesoil surface and stimulate seed germination andenhance seedling establishment (Daubenmire 1968,Hulbert 1969, Knapp 1984, Tester 1989, Anderson andSchwegman 1991, Warners 1997). Important plantnutrients (e.g., N, P, K, Ca, and Mg) are elevatedfollowing prescribed fire (Daubenmire 1968, Viro1974, Reich et al. 1990, Schmalzer and Hinkle 1992).Prescribed fire has been shown to result in increasedplant biomass, flowering, and seed production(Abrams et al. 1986, Laubhan 1995, Warners 1997,Kost and De Steven 2000). Prescribed fire can alsohelp express and rejuvenate seed banks, which may beespecially important for maintaining species diversity(Leach and Givnish 1996, Kost and De Steven 2000).

Impacts to faunal communities should also bestrongly considered when planning a prescribed burn.Dividing a large area into smaller burn units that canbe burned in alternate years or seasons can protectpopulations of many species. This allows unburnedunits to serve as refugia for immobile invertebrates andslow moving amphibian and reptile species. Whenburning larger areas it may be desirable to strive forpatchy burns by igniting during times of high relativehumidity. The unburned patches may then serve asrefugia, which facilitate recolonization of burnedpatches by fire-sensitive species. Burning underovercast skies and when air temperatures are cool(<55°F) can help protect reptiles, since they are lesslikely to be found basking above the surface whenconditions are cloudy and cool. Lastly, conductingburns during the dormant season (late October throughMarch) may also help minimize impacts to reptiles andamphibians (Kingsbury and Gibson 2002).

The southern portion of Huron Meadows offers anexcellent opportunity for prescribed fire management.In this portion of the metropark, several fire-dependentcommunities occur adjacent to each other includingprairie fen, wet meadow, dry-mesic southern forest,and degraded oak barrens. With prevailing winds fromthe southwest, the Huron River and Rickett Roadprovide excellent fire breaks along the north and east

sides of the site. Thus, the area is well suited forconducting a landscape-scale burn that encompassesseveral different natural communities, including bothuplands and wetlands.

Implications for Forest ManagementIn the absence of natural fires, the oak-hickory

dominated, upland forests at Huron Meadows arelikely to continue to undergo significant changes instructure and species composition as the oaks arereplaced by more shade-tolerant tree species.Management of dry-mesic forests at Huron Meadowsshould focus on maintaining conditions suitable foroak regeneration, that is, an open canopy with highlight levels. As noted, the first management stepshould be the reintroduction of fire. If a sustained firemanagement program does not result in an increase inoak and hickory regeneration and the reduction of redmaple recruitment and other shade-tolerant species,metropark managers should consider more intrusivemeasures. Cutting or girdling shade-tolerant specieslike red maple is often effective. By removingcompetitors and also planting acorns or oak seedlingswithin large light gaps such as those created by recenttree-falls, metropark staff can direct the ecologicalsuccession of some portions of the forest. Anymanagement for oak recruitment must also includereducing densities of white-tailed deer and protectingseedlings from browsing.

Another important forest management goal at bothHuron Meadows and Lake Erie will be to reduce forestfragmentation. At present, a hard edge is maintainedalong many of the forest stands within the metroparks.Allowing oaks and hickories to establish within the oldfields between blocks of forest and then directing thesuccession of these fields towards oak savanna or oakforest will enable isolated blocks of forest to beenlarged and connected. The formation of largerblocks of forest will help improve nesting success forraptors, neotropical migrant songbirds, and ground-nesting species because their nests are less likely to beparasitized and predated in larger blocks of forest(Wilcove et al. 1986). In addition, invasions by exoticspecies are reduced in larger blocks of contiguoushabitat, since the ratio of interior habitat to edgetypically increases with patch size.

Oak Barrens RestorationAt Huron Meadows, two large areas of the park

were historically oak barrens and mixed oak forest.Portions of both areas (see Figures 6 and 8: G) nowharbor large pockets with prairie grasses and forbs andscattered oaks. They also contain areas of heavy shrubcover and closed-canopy oak, black cherry, and redcedar forest. These areas provide a very good


opportunity to restore large blocks of oak barrens,especially south of the river. Burning these areas willreduce canopy cover and allow native prairie andsavanna species to expand or reestablish. Areas offormer savanna and prairie often contain seed banksthat are expressed with canopy opening andreintroduction of fire. Reduction of canopy and shrubcoverage can also be accomplished by cutting and/ormowing.

Lakeplain Prairie RestorationAn excellent opportunity for restoration of a

lakeplain prairie/lakeplain oak openings complex ispresent at the Erie Prairie site within Lake ErieMetropark and the adjacent Pt. Mouille State GameArea. This restoration effort has the potential to serveas a prime example of ecosystem management inwhich multiple local, state, and federal partners worktogether to fund and implement a critical habitatrestoration for a globally rare species and ecosystem(e.g., eastern prairie-fringed orchid and lakeplainprairie/lakeplain oak openings). The Huron-ClintonMetropolitan Authority (HCMA) in collaboration withthe DNR, DEQ, MNFI, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS), and Great Lakes National Program Officeof the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(GLNPO) can all play important roles in restoring thissite. The HCMA and DNR can provide planning,management, and monitoring resources. MNFI canassist in grant proposal development, and site planningand monitoring. The USFWS can assist in monitoring,management planning, and funding. The DEQ CoastalZone Management grant program and the GLNPO aretwo very good partners for funding an ecologicalrestoration project of this type.

By removing the hedgerows that separateagricultural fields and old fields within the metroparkand adjacent State Game Area and maintaining orplanting scattered oaks, over 100 acres of lakeplainprairie and lakeplain oak openings can be created. Anarea of native, open grassland/savanna of this sizewould represent a significant resource to grasslandbirds, many of which are rare or experiencing sharppopulation declines due to habitat loss and changingagricultural practices (e.g., early mowing of hayfields).

The significance of this restoration project isfurther heightened because the site includes a portionof an element occurrence for Great Lakes marsh,which like lakeplain prairie and lakeplain oakopenings, is also considered a rare natural community.In addition, the potential juxtaposition of Great Lakesmarsh and lakeplain prairie and lakeplain oakopenings at this site would significantly contributes tohabitat heterogeneity, which further increases its

importance to wildlife as many animal taxa such asturtles, snakes, birds, and invertebrates require thepresence of both intact wetlands and uplands duringtheir life cycles.

Several very helpful guides are available forrestoring prairies and savannas. See Packard andMutel (1997) for a comprehensive treatment of thesubject and additional references. In addition, detailedmanagement guidelines have been developed formanaging grasslands for grassland birds by Herkert etal. (1993) and Sample and Mossman (1997). Listedbelow are several of the recommendations suggestedby Herkert et al. (1993) (see publication for completelist of management guidelines).

1. Avoid fragmentation of existing grasslands.2. Grassland restorations aimed at supporting

populations of the most area-sensitive grasslandbirds should be at least 125 acres and preferablymore than 250 acres in size. Area sensitive speciesrequiring large patches of grassland (>100 acres)include northern harrier (SC), bobolink, savannahsparrow, Henslow’s sparrow (SC), grasshoppersparrow (SC), eastern meadowlark (Sturnellamagna), western meadowlark (SC), sedge wren(Cistothorus platensis), sharp-tailed grouse(Tympanuchus phasianellus, SC ), uplandsandpiper (Bartramia longicauda), short-eared owl(E), and barn owl (Tyto alba, E) (Herkert et al.1993, Sample and Mossman 1997). Patches ofgrassland less than 50 acres will benefit the leastarea-sensitive grassland birds such as northernbobwhite (Colinus virginianus), red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), American goldfinch(Carduelis tristis), Vesper sparrow (Pooecetesgramineus), field sparrow (Spizella pusilla), songsparrow (Melospiza melodia), dickcissel (SC), andcommon yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas)(Herkert et al. 1993).

3. Maximize interior grassland habitat byestablishing circular (best) or square grasslandplantings and avoiding long, narrow plantings,which increase edge habitat.

4. Where grassland habitats border forests, strive tocreate a feathered edge by allowing prescribedfires to burn through adjacent forests as opposed toinstalling firebreaks along the forest edge.Grasslands with feathered edges experience lowerrates of nest predation than those with sharplycontrasting edges (Ratti and Reese 1988).

5. Grassland plantings should not be bordered byfence lines or groves of trees because thesefeatures attract nest predators and nest parasites.


6. Establish a mixture of native warm season grassesand forbs that will provide a diversity of both shortand tall structure.

7. Use a prescribed burn rotation in which portions(e.g., 20 to 30%) of the area are burned annually toprovide habitat for both species that prefer recentlyburned sites and unburned sites.

8. In large areas of grassland, encroaching woodyvegetation that exceeds the height of the dominantgrasses should be removed to decrease thefrequency of nest predation and nest parasitism.

9. Restrict trails and activities to the edges ofgrassland plantings.

10. Avoid mowing grasslands through late July orearly August and use a rotational mowing schedulesimilar to that described above for prescriptionburning.

Invasive SpeciesInvasive species pose a major threat to species and

habitat diversity within the metroparks. Byoutcompeting and replacing native species, invasiveschange species composition, alter vegetation structureand successional dynamics, and reduce native speciesdiversity, often causing local or even completeextinction of native species (Harty 1986, Gorchov andTrisel 2003). Invasive exotic species can also upsetdelicately balanced ecological processes such astrophic relationships, interspecific competition,nutrient cycling, soil erosion, hydrologic balance, andsolar insolation (Bratton 1982). Lastly, exotic invasivespecies often have no natural predators and spreadaggressively through rapid sexual and asexualreproduction.

While numerous invasive species occur within themetroparks the species highlighted below are likely topose the greatest threat to biodiversity because of theirability to invade intact communities and quicklydominate. Invasive species abstracts, which includedetailed methods for controlling invasive species, canbe obtained at the following web site: http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/.

Garlic mustard, in particular, is of seriousconcern even in very small numbers because it is self-fertile, thus a single plant can establish an entirepopulation and quickly result in a large infestation.While it invades all types of forested habitats, it isespecially aggressive in mesic and wet-mesic sites(Meekins and McCarthy 2001). Garlic mustard shouldbe removed prior to seedset wherever it is encountered.

Glossy buckthorn can also severely reducespecies diversity, especially in alkaline, wetlandhabitats like prairie fen and relict conifer swamp. Leftuntreated, it can form large, impenetrable, monotypicstands in place of open, species diverse wetlands.

Purple loosestrife is another pernicious invader ofwetland habitats, often completely replacing nativeemergent marsh communities. Some success incontrolling purple loosestrife has recently occurredwith the application of biological control agents,Galerucella beetles, which are native to purpleloosestrife’s European habitat (Hight and Drea 1991,Blossey 1992).

Giant reed dominates vast stretches of GreatLakes marsh and has become widespread at Lake ErieMetropark. Because of its robust stature, giant reeddisplaces native marsh vegetation and degradeswildlife habitat.

Water hyacinth is a plant of open wetlands thathas been called the worst invasive aquatic plant in theworld. Native to the Amazonian basin, water hyacinthreproduces prolifically by vegetative shoots andcolonies can double in size in as little as twelve days. Apernicious pest causing severe ecological andeconomic disruption in Florida and other sub-tropicalregions, it cannot tolerate cold winters and is limited inits northern distribution. Research has shown thattemperatures near or below freezing for fourcontinuous weeks are sufficient to kill water hyacinth(Owens and Madsen 1995). However, park naturalistshave noted that this species appears in marshes insmall amounts year after year in late summer. Despiteobservations that colonies do not appear to bespreading, it is recommended that the species beaggressively controlled to limit potential impacts in thefuture, both within the park and to prevent accidentaltransportation of the species by boat traffic to otherregions.

Several invasive species also threaten the uplanddry-mesic forests of Huron Meadows. Among the mostproblematic of these are oriental bittersweet,common buckthorn, tree-of-heaven, and exotichoneysuckle shrubs (Amur, Morrow, and Tartarianhoneysuckle). By invading the shrub layer of semi-open forest communities, these species severely reducethe amount of light available to the ground layer,causing the elimination of many ground layer speciesand preventing the reproduction of overstorydominants (Gorchov and Trisel 2003). Orientalbittersweet is especially problematic. A twining vine, itcan literally strangle large trees by tightly wrappingaround the trunk and preventing new growth ofcambium tissue, effectively girdling the stem. Thesespecies can be effectively controlled by stem removal,but cutting without immediate herbicide applicationshould be strictly avoided, since resprouting typicallyresults in the proliferation of multiple stems, thusmaking it even more difficult to eliminate theseproblematic species.


Deer DensitiesMany studies have shown that high deer densities

adversely impact local ecosystems and vegetation(Alverson et al. 1988, Balgooyen and Waller 1995,Waller and Alverson 1997, Augustine and Frelich1998, Rooney 2001, Horsely et al. 2003). Deer browsewas evident throughout both metroparks. Deerherbivory may be limiting oak regeneration within theoak-hickory forests of Huron Meadows (Strole andAnderson 1992). Through preferential grazing ofnative species, high deer densities are also thought tocontribute to the spread of invasive, exotic speciessuch as garlic mustard (Victoria Nuzzo pers. comm.1998). It is recommended that the Huron-ClintonMetropolitan Authority work cooperatively with theMichigan Department of Natural Resources to assessmetropark deer densities and reduce deer densities ifdetermined to be higher than recommended by theDNR.

Setting Stewardship PrioritiesWhile invasive species occur in nearly all natural

communities surveyed in this study, managementpriority should be given to the highest quality sites. Byconcentrating effort on a few high-quality sites, limitedresources of time, personnel, volunteer effort, andmoney can be directed to make a significant impact onbiodiversity. How should metropark managers andnaturalists determine which sites to manage? Thatdecision is one best made by metropark resourceprofessionals, but evaluation criteria should include thefollowing:

1) A preference toward high-quality sites withminimal infestations of invasive species.Biodiversity is most easily and effectivelyprotected by preventing high-quality sites fromdegrading, and invasives are much easier toeradicate when they are not yet wellestablished.

2) A focus on sites that harbor high levels ofnative species diversity or unique elements ofbiodiversity (e.g., prairie fens, tamarackswamps, floodplain forests, springs, rarespecies, etc.). Wetlands in particular, harbor adisproportionate number of rare species andprovide critical habitat for many species.

3) Sites that enhance core areas of high-qualityhabitat or act as critical corridors for wildlife.Reducing forest fragmentation at Lake Erie orrestoring oak barrens at Huron Meadows willenhance many of the existing high-qualitysites.

4) High-profile sites that are viewed by manyvisitors such as well-used trails or sites withscenic overlooks or picturesque views.Opportunities to educate the public onbiodiversity and stewardship are maximized byactively working to restore frequently-visitedsites. Restoring sites that provide scenic vistaswill promote an appreciation of the park’snatural resources.

A brief summary of sites with high restorationpotential in each park follows below. Detailed sitedescriptions and management recommendations areincluded in the Site Summaries and Managementsection (Page 20).

High Priority Sites at Huron MeadowsAt Huron Meadows, we identified several sites

with high restoration potential. As noted earlier, thesouthern portion of the park offers a uniquemanagement opportunity in that several high-quality orrestorable natural communities can be managed andrestored simultaneously with the use of prescribed fire.These communities include prairie fen and wetmeadow (Rickett Road Wet Meadow/Prairie FenComplex), dry-mesic southern forest (HuronMeadows Oak-Hickory Forest), and oak barrens(Huron Oak Barrens). The Rickett Road WetMeadow/Prairie Fen Complex (Photographs 2 and 8and Figures 6 and 8: A) contains many high-qualitypockets and would greatly benefit from shrub and treeremoval and prescribed burning. The HuronMeadows Oak-Hickory Forest (Figures 6 and 8: E)is characterized by moderate levels of exotic species inthe understory and ground cover that can be controlledwith a concerted management effort. Repeat prescribedburns will help control exotic shrub invasion and alsoeliminate red maple seedlings and saplings. Inaddition, portions of the Huron Meadows Oak-Hickory Forest are highly visible and easilyaccessible. The nature trail passes through the block ofmature dry-mesic southern forest just north of thecanoe launch. Fire management of the Maltby LakeFen (Figures 6 and 8: F) carried out in conjunctionwith burning of the adjacent oak-hickory forest slopewould provide visitors with a unique glimpse ofecological restoration in action and an enhanced viewof Maltby Lake. The most intensive restoration wouldinvolve the rehabilitation of the Huron Oak Barrens(Figures 6 and 8: G). Reintroduction of a sustained fireregime, likely in conjunction with extensive cutting,mowing, and herbicide would be required. Though thisprocess would require heavy investment of time andmoney, the oak barrens restoration would pay rich


biodiversity dividends because of the rarity of oakbarrens ecosystems and the species that depend onthem. Other sites at Huron Meadows may also meritattention and should be evaluated for work based onavailable resources.

High Priority Sites at Lake ErieLake Erie contains several regionally significant

natural features and important sites for restoration.1). The Erie Marsh (Photographs 1 and 5 and Figures7 and 9: J) provides important fish and wildlife habitatand harbors several rare species. Reducing thedominance of giant reed will significantly improvehabitat for native plants and animals that depend onGreat Lakes marsh. 2). The Erie Prairie (Figures 7and 9: H) has the potential to be restored as a lakeplainprairie/lakeplain oak openings complex. The siteprovides critical habitat for the eastern prairie-fringedorchid, a globally rare prairie plant. With thecooperation of the DNR managers at Point MouilleState Game Area, which borders the site to south, thesite has the potential to provide habitat to rare anddeclining grassland birds. Lakeplain prairie andlakeplain oak openings are considered globally rarenatural communities and efforts to restore thesesystems are critically important to the long-termprotection of biodiversity. 3) Erie Woods (Figures 7and 9: K) currently consists of several isolated blocksof forest with hard edges. Managing these sites toprevent colonization of invasive species like garlicmustard, buckthorn, and honeysuckles will help ensurethat they continue to harbor a diverse assemblage ofnative species. In addition, softening the forest edgesby allowing succession of some of the adjacent oldfields and mowed lawns to forest or savanna willincrease breeding habitat for forest species and helpprotect the core areas of mature forest. Other sites atLake Erie may also merit attention, and should beevaluated for work based on available resources.

Photograph 8. The juxtaposition of the extensivewet meadow/prairie fen complex with oak-hickory forest and degraded oak barrensprovides HCMA stewards of Huron Meadowswith the unique ecosystem managementopportunity of conducting landscape-scale burnsthat encompass several different naturalcommunities and include wetlands and uplands(Photo by Joshua Cohen).


CONCLUSION

The Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority has theconsiderable responsibility of stewarding numerouspopulations of rare species and ecologically significantnatural communities. As the region becomes moredeveloped, the prominence of natural features harboredby the metroparks is substantially heightened. Bothrare and common native species are threatened by therapid pace of development in southeast Michigan. Inaddition, changes taking place outside the metroparkboundaries are having significant repercussions withintheir borders. For example, as new roads, subdivisions,shopping centers, and industries are built outside thepark, invasive plants used in landscaping quickly findtheir way into the park and cause severe degradation tonatural communities and their associated complementof native species. Historic wildlife corridors aredisrupted, and cosmopolitan edge species such aswhite-tailed deer increasingly seek refuge within theconfines of the metroparks. The increased deerdensities within the metroparks result in extirpation ofnumerous plant and animal species as their effects onecosystems reverberate at multiple trophic levels(McShea and Rappole 1992, Waller and Alverson1997, Augustine and Frelich 1998, Rooney 2001). Asrare plants and high-quality natural communities arelost due to development, the regional significance ofsafeguarding these natural features within themetroparks becomes even more important.

Conservation scientists and practitioners are moreaware today than ever before that protecting rarespecies and ecologically significant naturalcommunities requires far more than simply buildingpreserves to prevent their outright destruction (Janzen1986). Because changes occurring outside themetropark boundaries result in significant impactswithin the park, protection of rare species and naturalcommunities today requires the active participation bymetropark staff in stewarding the land for ecologicalintegrity. This formidable task requires metropark staffto identify significant natural features, developconservation strategies, and apply their considerableexpertise in resource management to the activestewardship of ecological integrity.

Both Huron Meadows and Lake Erie Metroparkssupport significant natural features that are threatenedby events taking place within the parks as well asoutside their boundaries. The metroparks have lost aconsiderable amount of their biodiversity as a result offire suppression, infestation of pernicious invasivespecies, and high white-tail deer populations.Restoring the ecological process of fire to theecosystems at Huron Meadows and Lake Erie willprofoundly enhance their ecological integrity. Primeopportunities exist for restoring oak barrens in HuronMeadows Metropark and a lakeplain prairie/lakeplainoak openings complex in Lake Erie Metropark. Theloss of biodiversity caused by infestations of invasiveplants can be reversed by developing monitoring anderadication programs that are focused on protecting thecenters of biodiversity, namely the prairie fens, wetmeadows, dry-mesic southern forests, mesic southernforests, floodplain forests, southern swamps, relictconifer swamps, and Great Lakes marsh. Activemanagement of the local deer herd is likely to result inthe recovery of many plants and ground- and shrub-nesting animal species over time.

Tremendous ecological benefits can also be gainedby directing the ecological succession of old fieldstowards oak barrens, lakeplain oak openings, oakwoodlands, mesic southern forest, or floodplain forest.Connecting isolated forest patches, enlarging currentwoodlands, and creating a more natural transitionbetween open field and forest edge will help increasenesting success rates of ground-nesting birds andmammals, forest raptors, and neotropical migrantsongbirds, many of which are experiencing sharpdeclines in their populations.

The diversity of natural features found within theHuron Meadows Metropark and the Lake ErieMetropark are threatened by a wide range of factors.Mitigating these threats and enhancing biodiveristypresents the HCMA staff with a diverse array ofstewardship opportunities. As southeastern Michigancontinues to develop, the responsibility for conservingregional biodiversity within these metroparks willbecome increasingly imperative.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSFunding for the project was provided by the

Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority and theMichigan Department of Natural Resources. We aregrateful to Paul Muelle and Dave Moilanen, HCMA,for their support and assistance throughout thismultiyear project. We thank Jerry Wykes, the naturalistat Lake Erie, for providing valuable natural historyinformation that both improved our success in the fieldand advanced the level of information contained in thisreport. Jerry also kindly let us borrow a canoe tofacilitate marsh surveys. We wish to thank members ofthe Huron River Watershed Council and MichiganNatural Areas Council for encouraging and supportinga natural features inventory of the Huron-ClintonMetroparks. We express our sincere gratitude to Dr.

Tony Reznicek, University of Michigan Herbarium, forproviding information on many of the metroparks andassisting with identification of rare plants. Wesincerely appreciate the assistance of numerous MNFIstaff for supporting the project in many ways. Inparticular, we wish to acknowledge the followingMNFI staff for their contributions: Mike Penskar andPhyllis Higman supplied their invaluable expertisewith plant identification and rare plant surveymethodologies; Patrick Brown, Lyn Scrimger, SueRidge, and Connie Brinson provided very helpfuladministrative support; and Rebecca Boehm, MichaelFashoway, and Meghan Burns carefully reviewed allelement occurrence data for accuracy. Finally, thanksto Martha Gove for providing editorial assistance.

LITERATURE CITED

Abrams, M.D. 1998. The red maple paradox: Whatexplains the widespread expansion of red maple ineastern forests? BioScience 48: 355-363.

Abrams, M.D., and L.C. Hulbert. 1987. Effect oftopographic position and fire on speciescomposition in tallgrass prairie in northeastKansas. The American Midland Naturalist 117:442-445.

Abrams, M.D., A.K. Knapp, and L. C. Hulbert. 1986.A ten year record of aboveground biomass in aKansas tallgrass prairie: Effects of fire andtopographic position. American Journal of Botany73: 1509-1515.

Albert, D.A. 1995. Regional landscape ecosystems ofMichigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin: A workingmap and classification. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-178.St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture,Forest Service, North Central Forest ExperimentStation. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research CenterHome Page. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/1998/rlandscp/rlandscp.htm (Version 03JUN98).

Albert, D.A. 2001. Natural community abstract forGreat Lakes marsh. Michigan Natural FeaturesInventory, Lansing, MI. 11 pp. http://web4.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/abstracts/ecology/Great_lakes_marsh.pdf

Albert, D.A., and M.A. Kost. 1998a. Naturalcommunity abstract for lakeplain wet-mesicprairie. Michigan Natural Features Inventory,Lansing, MI. 4 pp. http://web4.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/abstracts/ecology/Lakeplain_wet-mesic_prairie.pdf

Albert, D.A., and M.A. Kost. 1998b. Naturalcommunity abstract for lakeplain wet prairie.Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Lansing, MI.4 pp. http://web4.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/abstracts/ecology/Lakeplain_wet_prairie.pdf

Alverson, W.S., D.M. Waller, and S.L. Solheim. 1988.Forest too deer: Edge effects in northernWisconsin. Conservation Biology 2: 348-358.

Anderson, R.C., and J.E. Schwegman. 1991. Twentyyears of vegetational change on a Southern Illinoisbarren. Natural Areas Journal 11: 100-107.

Augustine, D.J., and L.E. Frelich. 1998. Effects ofwhite-tailed deer on populations of an understoryforb in fragmented deciduous forests.Conservation Biology 12: 995-1004.

Balgooyen, C.P., and D.M. Waller. 1995. The use ofClintonia borealis and other indicators to gaugeimpacts of white-tailed deer on plants incommunities in northern Wisconsin, USA. NaturalAreas Journal 15: 308-318.

Blossey, B. 1992. Impact of Galerucella pusilla Duft.and G. calmariensis L. (Coleoptera:Chrysomelidae) on field populations of purpleloosestrife (Lythrum salicaria L.). Proceedings ofthe Eighth International Symposium on BiologicalControl of Weeds. 2-7 February, 1992.

Bratton, S.P. 1982. The effects of exotic plant andanimal species on nature preserves. Natural AreasJournal 2(3): 3-13.


Cohen, J.G. 2001a. Natural community abstract forlakeplain oak openings. Michigan Natural FeaturesInventory, Lansing, MI. 9 pp. http://web4.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/abstracts/ecology/Lakeplain_oak_opening.pdf

Cohen, J.G. 2001b. Natural community abstract foroak barrens. Michigan Natural Features Inventory,Lansing, MI. 8 pp. http://web4.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/abstracts/ecology/Oak_barrens.pdf

Cohen, J.G. 2004. Natural community abstract formesic southern forest. Michigan Natural FeaturesInventory, Lansing, MI. 12 pp. http://web4.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/abstracts/ecology/Mesic_southern_forest.pdf

Collins, S.L., and D.J. Gibson. 1990. Effects of fireon community structure in tallgrass and mixedgrass prairie. Pp. 81-98 in S.L. Collins and L.L.Wallace, eds., Fire in North American TallgrassPrairies. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman,OK.

Comer, P.J., D.A. Albert, H.A. Wells, B.L. Hart, J.B.Raab, D.L. Price, D.M. Kashian, R.A. Corner, andD.W. Schuen. 1995. Michigan’s presettlementvegetation, as interpreted from the General LandOffice Surveys 1816-1856. Michigan NaturalFeatures Inventory, Lansing, MI. Digital Map.

Comer, P.J., D.A. Albert, L.J. Scrimger, T. Leibfreid,D. Schuen, and H. Jones. 1993. Historicalwetlands of Michigan’s Coastal Zone andSoutheastern Lakeplain. Report to the MichiganDepartment of Natural Resources, Land and WaterManagement Division. Michigan Natural FeaturesInventory, Lansing, MI. 105 pp.

Curtis, J.T. 1959. Vegetation of Wisconsin. TheUniversity of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI. 657pp.

Cuthrell, D. L., P. J. Higman, M. R. Penskar, and J. L.Windus. 1999. The Pollinators of Ohio andMichigan populations of Eastern prairie-fringedorchid (Plantanthera leucophaea). Report to U. S.Fish & Wildlife Service. Michigan NaturalFeatures Inventory report number 1999-08. 19pp.

Daubenmire, R. 1968. Ecology of fire in grasslands.Advances in Ecological Research 5: 209-66.

Dorney, J.R. 1981. The impact of Native Americanson presettlement vegetation in southeasternWisconsin. Transactions of the WisconsinAcademy of Science, Arts, and Letters. 69: 26-36.

Farrand, W.R., and D.L. Bell. 1982. Quaternarygeology of southern Michigan. Dept. of GeologicalSciences, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,MI. Map.

Glenn-Lewin, D.C., L.A. Johnson, T.W. Jurik, A. Akey,M. Leoschke, and T. Rosberg. 1990. Fire incentral North American grasslands: Vegetativereproduction, seed germination, and seedlingestablishment. Pp. 28-45 in S.L. Collins and L.L.Wallace, eds., Fire in North American TallgrassPrairies. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman,OK.

Gorchov, D.L., and D.E. Trisel. 2003. Competitiveeffects of the invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii(Rupr.) Herder (Caprifoliaceae), on the growth andsurvival of native tree seedlings. Plant Ecology166: 13-24.

Grimm, E.C. 1984. Fire and other factors controllingthe big woods vegetation of Minnesota in the mid-nineteenth century. Ecological Monographs 54:291-311.

Harty, F.M. 1986. Exotics and their ecologicalramifications. Natural Areas Journal 6(4): 20-26.

Herkert, J.R., R.E. Szafoni, V.M. Kleen, and J.E.Schwegman. 1993. Habitat establishment,enhancement and management for forest andgrassland birds in Illinois. Division of NaturalHeritage, Illinois Department of Conservation,Natural Heritage Technical Publication #1,Springfield, IL, 20pp. (Available at: http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/othrdata/manbook/manbook.htm)

Herman, K.D., L.A. Masters, M.R. Penskar, A.A.Reznicek, G.S. Wilhelm, W.W. Brodowicz, andK.P. Gardiner. 2001. Floristic quality assessmentwith wetland categories and computer applicationprograms for the state of Michigan. MichiganDept. of Natural Resources, Wildlife Division,Natural Heritage Program, Lansing, MI.

Hight, S.D., and J.J. Drea, Jr. 1991. Prospects for aclassical biological control project against purpleloosestrife (Lythrum salicaria L.). Natural AreasJournal 11(3): 151-157.

Horsely, S.B., S.L. Stout, and D.S. DeCalesta. 2003.White-tailed deer impact on the vegetationdynamics of a northern hardwood forest.Ecological Applications 13: 98-118.

Hulbert, L.C. 1969. Fire and litter effects inundisturbed bluestem prairie in Kansas. Ecology50: 874-877.

Janzen, D.H. 1986. The eternal external threat. Pp.286-303 in M.E. Soule, ed., Conservation Biology:The Science of Scarcity and Diversity. SinauerAssociates, Sunderland, MA.


Knapp, A.K. 1984. Post-burn differences in solarradiation, leaf temperature and water stressinfluencing production in a lowland tallgrassprairie. American Journal of Botany 71: 220-227.

Kingsbury, B., and G. J. Gibson. 2002. Habitatmanagement guidelines for amphibians andreptiles of the Midwest. Partners in Amphibian andReptile Conservation publication. 57 pp.

Kost, M.A. 2001a. Natural community abstract forrelict conifer swamp. Michigan Natural FeaturesInventory, Lansing, MI. 6 pp. http://web4.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/abstracts/ecology/Relict_conifer_swamp.pdf

Kost, M.A. 2001b. Natural community abstract forsouthern wet meadow. Michigan Natural FeaturesInventory, Lansing, MI. 5 pp. http://web4.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/abstracts/ecology/Southern_wet_meadow.pdf

Kost, M.A. 2001c. Potential indicators for assessingbiological integrity of forested, depressionalwetlands in southern Michigan. Michigan NaturalFeatures Inventory, Lansing, MI. 69 pp.

Kost, M.A., and D. De Steven. 2000. Plantcommunity responses to prescribed burning inWisconsin sedge meadows. Natural Areas Journal20: 36-49.

Laubhan, M.K. 1995. Effects of prescribed fire onmoist-soil vegetation and macronutrients.Wetlands 15: 159-166.

Leach, M.K., and T.J. Givnish. 1996. Ecologicaldeterminants of species loss in remnant prairies.Science 273: 1555-1558.

McClain, W.E., M.A. Jenkins, S.E. Jenkins, and J.E.Ebinger. 1993. Changes in the woody vegetationof a bur oak savanna remnant in central Illinois.Natural Areas Journal 13: 108-114.

McCune, B., and G. Cottam. 1985. The successionalstatus of a southern Wisconsin oak woods. Ecology66:1270-1278.

McShea, W.J., and J.H. Rappole. 1992. White-taileddeer as keystone species within forest habitats ofVirginia. Virginia Journal of Science 43: 177-186.

Meekins, F.J., and B.C. McCarthy. 2001. Effect ofenvironmental variation on the invasive success ofa nonindigenous forest herb. EcologicalApplications 11: 1336-1348.

Nuzzo, V. 1998. Natural Area Consultants, Groton,NY.

Owens, C.S., and J.D. Madsen. 1995. Lowtemperature limits of water-hyacinth. Journal ofAquatic Plant Management 33: 63-68.

Packard, S., and C.F. Mutel. 1997. The tallgrassrestoration handbook for prairies, savannas, andwoodlands. Island Press, Washington D.C. 463 pp.

Penskar, M.R., and P.J. Higman. 2000. Special plantabstract for Platanthera leucophaea (easternprairie fringed-orchid). Michigan Natural FeaturesInventory, Lansing, MI. 3 pp. http://web4.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/abstracts/botanyPlatanthera_leucophaea.pdf

Penskar, M.R., E.G. Choberka, and P.J. Higman 2001.Special Plant Abstract for Hydrastis canadensis(goldenseal). Michigan Natural Features Inventory,Lansing, MI. 3 pp. http://web4.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/abstracts/botany/Hydrastis_canadensis.pdf

Ratti, J.T., and K.P. Reese. 1988. Preliminary test ofthe ecological trap hypothesis. Journal of WildlifeManagement 52: 484-491.

Reich, P.B., M.D. Abrams, D.S. Ellsworth, E.L.Kruger, and T.J. Tabone. 1990. Fire affectsecophysiology and community dynamics of centralWisconsin oak forest regeneration. Ecology 71:2179-2190.

Reinartz, J.A. 1997. Controlling glossy buckthorn(Rhamnus frangula L.) with winter herbicidetreatments of cut stumps. Natural Areas Journal17: 38-41.

Roberts, D.L. 2003. The emerald ash borer: A threat toash in North America. Michigan State UniversityExtension, East Lansing, MI. Available: http://w w w. m s u e . m s u . e d u / r e g _ s e / r o b e r t s / a s h /eab_threat03.pdf. (Accessed: March 1, 2004.)

Rooney, T.P. 2001. Deer impacts on forestecosystems: A North American perspective.Forestry 74: 201-208.

Sample, D.W., and M.J. Mossman. 1997. Managinghabitat for grassland birds: A guide for Wisconsin.Bureau of Integrated Science Services, Departmentof Natural Resources, Madison, WI. 154 pp.

Schmalzer, P.A., and C.R. Hinkle. 1992. Soildynamics following fire in Juncus and Spartinamarshes. Wetlands 12: 8-21.

Spieles, J.B., P.J. Comer, D.A. Albert, and M.A. Kost.1999. Natural community abstract for prairie fen.Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Lansing, MI.4 pp. http://web4.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/abstracts/ecology/Prairie_fen.pdf

Strole, T.A., and R.C. Anderson. 1992. White-taileddeer browsing: Species preferences andimplications for central Illinois forests. NaturalAreas Journal 12: 139-144.


Tepley, A.J., J.G. Cohen, and L. Huberty. 2004. Naturalcommunity abstract for floodplain forest. MichiganNatural Features Inventory, Lansing, MI.14 pp. http://web4.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/abstracts/ecology/floodplain_forest.pdf

Tester, J.R. 1989. Effects of fire frequency on oaksavanna in east-central Minnesota. Bulletin of theTorrey Botanical Club 116: 134-144.

USDA Forest Service. 2002. Pest Alert – Emerald AshBorer. St Paul, MN. Available: http://www.na.fs.fed.us/spfo/pubs/pest_al/eab/eab.htm.(Accessed: March 1, 2004.)

Viro, P.J. 1974. Effects of forest fire on soil. Pp. 7-45in T.T. Kozlowski and C.E. Ahlgren, eds., Fire andEcosystems. Academic Press, New York, NY.

Waller, D.M., and W.S. Alverson. 1997. The white-tailed deer: A keystone herbivore. Wildlife SocietyBulletin 25: 217-226.

Warners, D. P. 1997. Plant diversity in sedgemeadows: Effects of groundwater and fire. Ph.D.dissertation, U. of Mich., Ann Arbor, MI. 231 pp.

White, A.S. 1983. The effects of thirteen years ofannual prescribed burning on a Quercusellipsoidalis community in Minnesota. Ecology 64:1081-1085.

Wilcove, D.S., C.H. McLellan, and A.P. Dobson.1986. Habitat fragmentation in the temperatezone. Pp. 237-256 in M.E. Soule, ed.,Conservation Biology: The Science of Scarcity andDiversity. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.


Site

Nam

e

Win

ans

Tam

arac

k Sw

amp

Ore

Lak

e Sw

amp

Hur

on R

iver

Flo

odpl

ain

Fore

st

Mal

tby

Lak

e Fe

nH

uron

Oak

Bar

rens

Site

N

ame

WM

PF

WT

SO

LS

HR

FF

HO

HF

ML

FH

OB

Site

C

ode

AB

CD

EF

GSc

ient

ific

Nam

eC

omm

on N

ame

Lif

e F

orm

CA

cer

negu

ndo

box

elde

rN

t Tre

e0

--

-x

x-

-A

cer

nigr

umbl

ack

map

leN

t Tre

e4

--

--

x-

-A

CE

R P

LA

TA

NO

IDE

SN

OR

WA

Y M

APL

EA

d T

ree

0-

--

-x

--

Ace

r ru

brum

red

map

leN

t Tre

e1

-x

x-

x-

-A

cer

sacc

hari

num

silv

er m

aple

Nt T

ree

2x

-x

x-

--

Ace

r sa

ccha

rum

suga

r m

aple

Nt T

ree

5-

--

-x

--

Ach

illea

mill

efol

ium

yarr

owN

t P-F

orb

1-

--

-x

-x

Aco

rus

cala

mus

swee

t-fl

agN

t P-F

orb

6x

--

x-

--

Act

aea

pach

ypod

ado

ll's-

eyes

Nt P

-For

b7

--

--

x-

-A

ctae

a ru

bra

red

bane

berr

yN

t P-F

orb

7-

--

-x

--

Adi

antu

m p

edat

umm

aide

nhai

r fe

rnN

t Fer

n6

--

--

x-

-A

galin

is p

urpu

rea

purp

le g

erar

dia

Nt A

-For

b7

--

--

-x

-A

grim

onia

pub

esce

nsso

ft a

grim

ony

Nt P

-For

b5

--

--

x-

-A

grop

yron

trac

hyca

ulum

slen

der

whe

at g

rass

Nt P

-Gra

ss8

x-

--

--

-A

ILA

NT

HU

S A

LT

ISSI

MA

TR

EE

-OF-

HE

AV

EN

Ad

Tre

e0

--

--

x-

-A

lism

a pl

anta

go-a

quat

ica

wat

er-p

lant

ain

Nt P

-For

b1

--

-x

--

-A

LL

IAR

IA P

ET

IOL

AT

AG

AR

LIC

MU

STA

RD

Ad

B-F

orb

0-

--

-x

--

Am

elan

chie

r ar

bore

aju

nebe

rry

Nt T

ree

4-

--

-x

--

Am

phic

arpa

ea b

ract

eata

hog-

pean

utN

t A-F

orb

5-

x-

-x

--

And

ropo

gon

gera

rdii

big

blue

stem

Nt P

-Gra

ss5

x-

--

--

xA

ndro

pogo

n sc

opar

ius

little

blu

este

m g

rass

Nt P

-Gra

ss5

x-

--

--

xA

nem

one

cylin

dric

ath

imbl

ewee

dN

t P-F

orb

6-

--

--

-x

Ane

mon

ella

thal

ictr

oide

sru

e an

emon

eN

t P-F

orb

8-

--

-x

--

Site

Cod

e A B C

ML

FH

OB

D E F G

Hur

on M

eado

ws

Oak

-Hic

kory

For

est

Site

Abb

revi

atio

nW

MPF

WT

SO

LS

HR

FFH

OH

F

Ric

ket R

oad

Wet

Mea

dow

/Pra

irie

Fen

Com

plex

App

endi

x 1.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Hur

on M

eado

ws M

etro

park

. "X

" ind

icat

es th

e sp

ecie

s occ

urre

d w

ithin

the

site

. "-"

indi

cate

s spe

cies

was

not

obs

erve

d at

the

site

. Cap

italiz

ed sc

ient

ific

and

com

mon

nam

es in

dica

te n

on-n

ativ

e sp

ecie

s. Li

fe fo

rm a

cron

yms a

re a

s fol

low

s: N

t,na

tive;

P, p

eren

nial

; Ad,

adv

entiv

e; B

, bia

nnua

l; A

, ann

ual.

"C" i

s the

Coe

ffic

ient

of C

onse

rvat

ion

for e

ach

spec

ies (

Her

man

et a

l. 20

01).


Site

N

ame

WM

PF

WT

SO

LS

HR

FF

HO

HF

ML

FH

OB

Site

C

ode

AB

CD

EF

GSc

ient

ific

Nam

eC

omm

on N

ame

Lif

e F

orm

C

Api

os a

mer

ican

agr

ound

nut

Nt P

-For

b3

--

xx

xx

-A

pocy

num

and

rosa

emif

oliu

msp

read

ing

dogb

ane

Nt P

-For

b3

--

--

x-

-A

pocy

num

can

nabi

num

indi

an h

emp

Nt P

-For

b3

--

--

x-

xA

ralia

nud

icau

lisw

ild s

arsa

pari

llaN

t P-F

orb

5-

-x

-x

--

Ari

saem

a tr

iphy

llum

jack

-in-

the-

pulp

itN

t P-F

orb

5-

-x

-x

--

Ari

stid

a pu

rpur

asce

nsth

ree-

awne

d gr

ass

Nt P

-Gra

ss8

--

--

--

xA

scle

pias

am

plex

icau

liscl

aspi

ng m

ilkw

eed

Nt P

-For

b10

--

--

--

xA

scle

pias

exa

ltata

poke

milk

wee

dN

t P-F

orb

6-

--

-x

--

Asc

lepi

as in

carn

ata

swam

p m

ilkw

eed

Nt P

-For

b6

xx

x-

--

-A

sple

nium

pla

tyne

uron

ebon

y sp

leen

wor

tN

t Fer

n2

--

--

x-

xA

ster

bor

ealis

nort

hern

bog

ast

erN

t P-F

orb

9x

--

--

--

Ast

er la

evis

smoo

th a

ster

Nt P

-For

b5

x-

--

--

-A

ster

lanc

eola

tus

east

ern

lined

ast

erN

t P-F

orb

2x

--

--

--

Ast

er la

teri

flor

ussi

de-f

low

erin

g as

ter

Nt P

-For

b2

--

-x

--

-A

ster

mac

roph

yllu

sbi

g-le

aved

ast

erN

t P-F

orb

4-

--

-x

--

Ast

er n

ovae

-ang

liae

New

Eng

land

ast

erN

t P-F

orb

3-

--

--

x-

Ast

er p

unic

eus

swam

p as

ter

Nt P

-For

b5

x-

--

--

-A

ster

um

bella

tus

tall

flat

-top

whi

te a

ster

Nt P

-For

b5

x-

x-

xx

-A

thyr

ium

fili

x-fe

min

ala

dy f

ern

Nt F

ern

4-

-x

-x

--

BE

RB

ER

IS T

HU

NB

ER

GII

JAPA

NE

SE B

AR

BE

RR

YA

d Sh

rub

0-

-x

xx

--

BE

RT

ER

OA

IN

CA

NA

HO

AR

Y A

LY

SSU

MA

d A

-For

b0

--

--

--

xB

etul

a al

legh

anie

nsis

yello

w b

irch

Nt T

ree

7-

-x

-x

--

Bet

ula

pum

ilabo

g bi

rch

Nt S

hrub

8x

x-

x-

--

Bid

ens

cern

uus

nodd

ing

bur-

mar

igol

dN

t A-F

orb

3x

-x

--

--

Boe

hmer

ia c

ylin

dric

afa

lse

nettl

eN

t P-F

orb

5x

-x

xx

x-

Bot

rych

ium

vir

gini

anum

rattl

esna

ke f

ern

Nt F

ern

5-

--

-x

--

Bra

chye

lytr

um e

rect

umlo

ng-a

wne

d w

ood

gras

sN

t P-G

rass

7-

--

-x

--

Bro

mus

cili

atus

frin

ged

brom

eN

t P-G

rass

6x

x-

--

--

BR

OM

US

INE

RM

ISSM

OO

TH

BR

OM

EA

d P-

Gra

ss0

--

--

x-

xC

alam

agro

stis

can

aden

sis

blue

-joi

nt g

rass

Nt P

-Gra

ss3

x-

x-

--

-C

alth

a pa

lust

ris

mar

sh m

arig

old

Nt P

-For

b6

xx

-x

--

-C

ampa

nula

am

eric

ana

tall

bellf

low

erN

t A-F

orb

8-

--

-x

--

App

endi

x 1.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Hur

on M

eado

ws M

etro

park

(con

tinue

d).


Site

N

ame

WM

PF

WT

SO

LS

HR

FF

HO

HF

ML

FH

OB

Site

C

ode

AB

CD

EF

GSc

ient

ific

Nam

eC

omm

on N

ame

Lif

e F

orm

C

Cam

panu

la a

pari

noid

esm

arsh

bel

lflo

wer

Nt P

-For

b7

-x

--

-x

-C

arex

alb

ursi

nase

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge5

--

--

x-

-C

arex

aqu

atili

sse

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge7

x-

--

--

-C

arex

bux

baum

iise

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge10

xx

--

--

-C

arex

cry

ptol

epis

sedg

eN

t P-S

edge

10-

--

--

x-

Car

ex h

yste

rici

nase

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge2

--

x-

-x

-C

arex

lacu

stri

sse

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge6

xx

xx

--

-C

arex

lasi

ocar

pase

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge8

x-

--

--

-C

arex

lupu

lina

sedg

eN

t P-S

edge

4-

-x

--

--

Car

ex m

uhle

nber

gii

sedg

eN

t P-S

edge

7-

--

--

-x

Car

ex p

edun

cula

tase

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge5

--

--

x-

-C

arex

pen

sylv

anic

ase

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge4

--

--

x-

-C

arex

str

icta

sedg

eN

t P-S

edge

4x

xx

x-

x-

Car

ex v

ulpi

noid

ease

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge1

--

--

-x

-C

arpi

nus

caro

linia

nabl

ue-b

eech

Nt T

ree

6-

-x

xx

--

Car

ya c

ordi

form

isbi

ttern

ut h

icko

ryN

t Tre

e5

--

--

x-

-C

arya

gla

bra

pign

ut h

icko

ryN

t Tre

e5

--

--

x-

-C

arya

ova

tash

agba

rk h

icko

ryN

t Tre

e5

--

--

x-

-C

EL

AST

RU

S O

RB

ICU

LA

TA

OR

IEN

TA

L B

ITT

ER

SWE

ET

Ad

W-V

ine

0-

-x

-x

--

Cel

tis te

nuif

olia

dwar

f ha

ckbe

rry

Nt S

hrub

5-

--

-x

-x

CE

NT

AU

RE

A M

AC

UL

OSA

SPO

TT

ED

KN

APW

EE

DA

d B

-For

b0

--

--

x-

xC

epha

lant

hus

occi

dent

alis

butto

nbus

hN

t Shr

ub7

--

xx

--

-C

erci

s ca

nade

nsis

redb

udN

t Tre

e8

--

x-

--

-C

helo

ne g

labr

atu

rtle

head

Nt P

-For

b7

-x

x-

--

-C

HR

YSA

NT

HE

MU

M

LE

UC

AN

TH

EM

UM

OX

-EY

E D

AIS

YA

d P-

Forb

0-

--

--

-x

Cic

uta

bulb

ifer

aw

ater

hem

lock

Nt P

-For

b5

xx

--

--

-C

icut

a m

acul

ata

wat

er h

emlo

ckN

t B-F

orb

4-

-x

x-

--

Cir

caea

lute

tiana

ench

ante

r's-n

ight

shad

eN

t P-F

orb

2-

-x

-x

--

Cir

sium

mut

icum

swam

p th

istle

Nt B

-For

b6

xx

--

-x

-C

ladi

um m

aris

coid

estw

ig r

ush

Nt P

-Sed

ge10

xx

--

--

-C

ollin

soni

a ca

nade

nsis

rich

wee

dN

t P-F

orb

8-

--

-x

--

App

endi

x 1.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Hur

on M

eado

ws M

etro

park

(con

tinue

d).


Site

N

ame

WM

PF

WT

SO

LS

HR

FF

HO

HF

ML

FH

OB

Site

C

ode

AB

CD

EF

GSc

ient

ific

Nam

eC

omm

on N

ame

Lif

e F

orm

C

Com

andr

a um

bella

taba

star

d to

adfl

axN

t P-F

orb

5x

--

--

--

CO

NV

AL

LA

RIA

MA

JAL

ISL

ILY

-OF-

TH

E-V

AL

LE

YA

d P-

Forb

0-

--

-x

--

Cop

tis tr

ifol

iago

ldth

read

Nt P

-For

b5

--

x-

--

-C

ornu

s al

tern

ifol

iaal

tern

ate-

leav

ed d

ogw

ood

Nt T

ree

5-

-x

--

--

Cor

nus

amom

umsi

lky

dogw

ood

Nt S

hrub

2x

x-

x-

--

Cor

nus

flor

ida

flow

erin

g do

gwoo

dN

t Tre

e8

--

--

x-

-C

ornu

s fo

emin

agr

ay d

ogw

ood

Nt S

hrub

1x

-x

xx

xx

Cor

nus

stol

onif

era

red-

osie

r do

gwoo

dN

t Shr

ub2

xx

--

--

-C

OR

ON

ILL

A V

AR

IAC

RO

WN

-VE

TC

HA

d P-

Forb

0-

--

--

-x

Cor

ylus

am

eric

ana

haze

lnut

Nt S

hrub

5-

-x

-x

--

Cus

cuta

gro

novi

ico

mm

on d

odde

rN

t A-F

orb

3x

x-

--

--

Cra

taeg

us s

p.ha

wth

orn

Nt T

ree

--

--

--

xC

yper

us f

ilicu

lmis

slen

der

sand

sed

geN

t P-S

edge

2-

--

--

-x

DA

UC

US

CA

RO

TA

QU

EE

N-A

NN

E'S

-LA

CE

Ad

B-F

orb

0-

--

-x

-x

Dec

odon

ver

ticill

atus

who

rled

or

swam

p lo

oses

trif

eN

t Shr

ub7

--

x-

--

-D

esch

amps

ia f

lexu

osa

hair

gra

ssN

t P-G

rass

6-

--

--

-x

Des

mod

ium

can

aden

sesh

owy

tick-

tref

oil

Nt P

-For

b3

--

--

--

xD

esm

odiu

m c

iliar

eha

iry

tick-

tref

oil

Nt P

-For

b10

--

--

--

xD

esm

odiu

m g

lutin

osum

clus

tere

d-le

aved

tick

-tre

foil

Nt P

-For

b5

--

--

x-

-D

esm

odiu

m il

linoe

nse

prai

rie

tick-

tref

oil

Nt P

-For

b6

--

--

--

xD

esm

odiu

m n

udif

loru

mna

ked

tick-

tref

oil

Nt P

-For

b7

--

--

x-

-D

esm

odiu

m s

essi

lifol

ium

sess

ile-l

eave

d tic

k-tr

efoi

lN

t P-F

orb

8-

--

--

-x

DIA

NT

HU

S A

RM

ER

IAD

EPT

FOR

D P

INK

Ad

A-F

orb

0-

--

--

-x

Dio

scor

ea v

illos

aw

ild y

amN

t P-F

orb

4-

--

xx

--

Dry

opte

ris

cart

husi

ana

spin

ulos

e w

oodf

ern

Nt F

ern

5-

-x

-x

--

Dry

opte

ris

cris

tata

cres

ted

shie

ld f

ern

Nt F

ern

6-

-x

--

--

Ech

inoc

ystis

loba

taw

ild-c

ucum

ber

Nt A

-For

b2

x-

--

--

-E

LA

EA

GN

US

UM

BE

LL

AT

AA

UT

UM

N-O

LIV

EA

d Sh

rub

0-

x-

xx

-x

Ele

ocha

ris

ellip

tica

gold

en-s

eede

d sp

ike-

rush

Nt P

-Sed

ge6

x-

--

--

-E

leoc

hari

s ro

stel

lata

spik

e-ru

shN

t P-S

edge

10-

x-

--

--

Ely

mus

vir

gini

cus

Vir

gini

a w

ild-r

yeN

t P-G

rass

4-

--

xx

--

Epi

fagu

s vi

rgin

iana

beec

h dr

ops

Nt P

-For

b10

--

--

x-

-

App

endi

x 1.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Hur

on M

eado

ws M

etro

park

(con

tinue

d).


Site

N

ame

WM

PF

WT

SO

LS

HR

FF

HO

HF

ML

FH

OB

Site

C

ode

AB

CD

EF

GSc

ient

ific

Nam

eC

omm

on N

ame

Lif

e F

orm

C

Epi

lobi

um c

olor

atum

cinn

amon

will

ow-h

erb

Nt P

-For

b3

x-

--

--

-E

quis

etum

arv

ense

com

mon

hor

seta

ilN

t Fer

n A

lly0

--

x-

x-

-E

quis

etum

flu

viat

ilew

ater

hor

seta

ilN

t Fer

n A

lly7

-x

x-

--

-E

rige

ron

stri

gosu

sda

isy

flea

bane

Nt P

-For

b4

--

--

--

xE

UO

NY

MU

S A

LA

TA

WIN

GE

D W

AH

OO

Ad

Shru

b0

--

--

x-

-E

uony

mus

obo

vata

runn

ing

stra

wbe

rry-

bush

Nt S

hrub

5-

--

-x

--

Eup

ator

ium

mac

ulat

umjo

e-py

e-w

eed

Nt P

-For

b4

xx

xx

-x

-E

upat

oriu

m p

erfo

liatu

mco

mm

on b

ones

etN

t P-F

orb

4x

xx

--

x-

Eup

horb

ia c

orol

lata

flow

erin

g sp

urge

Nt P

-For

b4

--

--

--

xE

utha

mia

gra

min

ifol

iagr

ass-

leav

ed g

olde

nrod

Nt P

-For

b3

x-

--

-x

-Fa

gus

gran

difo

liaA

mer

ican

bee

chN

t Tre

e6

--

--

x-

-FE

STU

CA

RU

BR

AR

ED

FE

SCU

EA

d P-

Gra

ss0

--

--

--

xFr

agar

ia v

irgi

nian

aw

ild s

traw

berr

yN

t P-F

orb

2-

--

--

-x

Frax

inus

am

eric

ana

whi

te a

shN

t Tre

e5

--

--

x-

-Fr

axin

us n

igra

blac

k as

hN

t Tre

e6

--

xx

--

-Fr

axin

us p

enns

ylva

nica

red

ash

Nt T

ree

2x

-x

x-

--

Gal

ium

apa

rine

annu

al b

edst

raw

Nt A

-For

b0

x-

--

x-

-G

aliu

m b

orea

leno

rthe

rn b

edst

raw

Nt P

-For

b3

xx

--

--

-G

aliu

m c

irca

ezan

sw

hite

wild

lico

rice

Nt P

-For

b4

--

--

x-

-G

aylu

ssac

ia b

acca

tahu

ckle

berr

yN

t Shr

ub7

--

--

x-

-G

entia

nops

is p

roce

rasm

all f

ring

ed g

entia

nN

t A-F

orb

8x

--

--

--

Ger

aniu

m m

acul

atum

wild

ger

aniu

mN

t P-F

orb

4-

--

-x

--

Geu

m c

anad

ense

whi

te a

vens

Nt P

-For

b1

--

--

x-

-G

LE

CH

OM

A H

ED

ER

AC

EA

GR

OU

ND

IV

YA

d P-

Forb

0-

-x

x-

--

Gly

ceri

a st

riat

afo

wl m

anna

gra

ssN

t P-G

rass

4-

-x

--

--

Hac

kelia

vir

gini

ana

begg

ar's

-lic

eN

t P-F

orb

1-

--

-x

--

Ham

amel

is v

irgi

nian

aw

itch-

haze

lN

t Shr

ub5

--

--

x-

-H

elen

ium

aut

umna

lesn

eeze

wee

dN

t P-F

orb

5x

--

--

--

Hel

iant

hem

um b

ickn

ellii

rock

rose

Nt P

-For

b10

--

--

--

xH

epat

ica

amer

ican

aro

und-

lobe

d he

patic

aN

t P-F

orb

6-

--

-x

--

HE

SPE

RIS

MA

TR

ON

AL

ISD

AM

E'S

RO

CK

ET

Ad

P-Fo

rb0

--

--

x-

-H

IER

AC

IUM

AU

RA

NT

IAC

UM

OR

AN

GE

HA

WK

WE

ED

Ad

P-Fo

rb0

--

--

--

x

App

endi

x 1.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Hur

on M

eado

ws M

etro

park

(con

tinue

d).


Site

N

ame

WM

PF

WT

SO

LS

HR

FF

HO

HF

ML

FH

OB

Site

C

ode

AB

CD

EF

GSc

ient

ific

Nam

eC

omm

on N

ame

Lif

e F

orm

C

HIE

RA

CIU

M C

AE

SPIT

OSU

MK

ING

-DE

VIL

Ad

P-Fo

rb0

--

--

--

xH

umul

us lu

pulu

sco

mm

on h

opN

t H-V

ine

3-

--

-x

--

HY

PER

ICU

M P

ER

FOR

AT

UM

CO

MM

ON

ST

. JO

HN

'S-W

OR

TA

d P-

Forb

0-

--

--

-x

Hys

trix

pat

ula

bottl

ebru

sh g

rass

Nt P

-Gra

ss5

--

x-

x-

-Il

ex v

ertic

illat

aM

ichi

gan

holly

Nt S

hrub

5x

xx

x-

--

Impa

tiens

cap

ensi

ssp

otte

d to

uch-

me-

not

Nt A

-For

b2

xx

xx

--

-Ir

is v

irgi

nica

sout

hern

blu

e fl

agN

t P-F

orb

5x

-x

x-

--

Jugl

ans

nigr

abl

ack

wal

nut

Nt T

ree

5-

--

--

-x

Junc

us b

rach

ycep

halu

sru

shN

t P-F

orb

7x

--

--

--

Junc

us te

nuis

path

rus

hN

t P-F

orb

1x

--

--

x-

Juni

peru

s co

mm

unis

com

mon

or

grou

nd ju

nipe

rN

t Shr

ub4

-x

--

x-

-Ju

nipe

rus

virg

inia

nare

d-ce

dar

Nt T

ree

3x

--

-x

-x

Lap

orte

a ca

nade

nsis

woo

d ne

ttle

Nt P

-For

b4

--

xx

--

-L

arix

lari

cina

tam

arac

kN

t Tre

e5

xx

xx

-x

-L

athy

rus

palu

stri

sm

arsh

pea

Nt P

-For

b7

xx

--

-x

-L

eers

ia o

ryzo

ides

cut g

rass

Nt P

-Gra

ss3

x-

xx

--

-L

eers

ia v

irgi

nica

whi

te g

rass

Nt P

-Gra

ss5

--

x-

--

-L

emna

min

orsm

all d

uckw

eed

Nt A

-For

b5

--

-x

--

-L

EO

NU

RU

S C

AR

DIA

CA

MO

TH

ER

WO

RT

Ad

P-Fo

rb0

--

-x

x-

-L

espe

deza

cap

itata

roun

d-he

aded

bus

h-cl

over

Nt P

-For

b5

--

--

--

xL

espe

deza

hir

taha

iry

bush

-clo

ver

Nt P

-For

b7

--

--

--

xL

espe

deza

vir

gini

casl

ende

r bu

sh-c

love

rN

t P-F

orb

5-

--

--

-x

Lia

tris

asp

era

roug

h bl

azin

g st

arN

t P-F

orb

4-

--

--

-x

LIG

UST

RU

M V

UL

GA

RE

CO

MM

ON

PR

IVE

TA

d Sh

rub

0-

-x

-x

--

Lin

dera

ben

zoin

spic

ebus

hN

t Shr

ub7

-x

xx

x-

-L

ipar

is li

lifol

iapu

rple

tway

blad

e or

chid

Nt P

-For

b8

--

--

--

xL

irio

dend

ron

tulip

ifer

atu

lip tr

eeN

t Tre

e9

--

x-

x-

-L

obel

ia c

ardi

nalis

card

inal

flo

wer

Nt P

-For

b7

x-

-x

--

-L

obel

ia k

alm

iibo

g lo

belia

Nt P

-For

b10

x-

--

--

-L

obel

ia s

iphi

litic

agr

eat b

lue

lobe

liaN

t P-F

orb

4-

-x

x-

x-

LO

NIC

ER

A M

AA

CK

IIA

MU

R H

ON

EY

SUC

KL

EA

d Sh

rub

0-

--

-x

--

LO

NIC

ER

A M

OR

RO

WII

MO

RR

OW

HO

NE

YSU

CK

LE

Ad

Shru

b0

--

--

x-

x

App

endi

x 1.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Hur

on M

eado

ws M

etro

park

(con

tinue

d).


Site

N

ame

WM

PF

WT

SO

LS

HR

FF

HO

HF

ML

FH

OB

Site

C

ode

AB

CD

EF

GSc

ient

ific

Nam

eC

omm

on N

ame

Lif

e F

orm

C

LO

NIC

ER

A T

AT

AR

ICA

TA

RT

AR

IAN

HO

NE

YSU

CK

LE

Ad

Shru

b0

--

--

x-

-L

ycop

us a

mer

ican

usco

mm

on w

ater

hor

ehou

ndN

t P-F

orb

2x

-x

x-

--

Lyc

opus

uni

flor

usno

rthe

rn b

ugle

wee

dN

t P-F

orb

2x

xx

--

--

Lys

imac

hia

cilia

tafr

inge

d lo

oses

trif

eN

t P-F

orb

4-

-x

--

--

LY

SIM

AC

HIA

NU

MM

UL

AR

IAM

ON

EY

WO

RT

Ad

P-Fo

rb0

--

-x

x-

-L

ysim

achi

a qu

adri

folia

four

-lea

ved

loos

estr

ife

Nt P

-For

b8

xx

--

--

-L

YT

HR

UM

SA

LIC

AR

IAPU

RPL

E L

OO

SEST

RIF

EA

d P-

Forb

0x

-x

x-

--

Mai

anth

emum

can

aden

seC

anad

a m

ayfl

ower

Nt P

-For

b4

--

--

x-

-M

alus

sp.

appl

eN

t Tre

e5

--

--

--

xM

atte

ucci

a st

ruth

iopt

eris

ostr

ich

fern

Nt F

ern

3-

-x

--

--

ME

LIL

OT

US

AL

BA

WH

ITE

SW

EE

T C

LO

VE

RA

d B

-For

b0

--

--

--

xM

enth

a ar

vens

isw

ild m

int

Nt P

-For

b3

xx

-x

-x

-M

itche

lla r

epen

spa

rtri

dge

berr

yN

t P-F

orb

5-

-x

-x

--

Mon

arda

fis

tulo

saw

ild b

erga

mot

Nt P

-For

b2

--

--

x-

xM

onot

ropa

uni

flor

ain

dian

pip

eN

t P-F

orb

5-

--

-x

--

MO

RU

S A

LB

AW

HIT

E M

UL

BE

RR

YA

d T

ree

0-

--

-x

-x

Muh

lenb

ergi

a gl

omer

ata

mar

sh w

ild-t

imot

hyN

t P-G

rass

10x

x-

--

--

Muh

lenb

ergi

a m

exic

ana

leaf

y sa

tin g

rass

Nt P

-Gra

ss3

x-

--

-x

-M

YO

SOT

IS S

CO

RPI

OID

ES

FOR

GE

T-M

E-N

OT

Ad

P-Fo

rb0

--

-x

--

-N

ymph

aea

odor

ata

swee

t-sc

ente

d w

ater

lily

Nt P

-For

b6

--

x-

--

-N

yssa

syl

vatic

abl

ack

gum

Nt T

ree

9-

-x

-x

--

Oen

othe

ra b

ienn

isco

mm

on e

veni

ng p

rim

rose

Nt B

-For

b2

--

--

--

xO

nocl

ea s

ensi

bilis

sens

itive

fer

nN

t Fer

n2

xx

xx

--

-O

smor

hiza

cla

yton

iiha

iry

swee

t-ci

cely

Nt P

-For

b4

--

--

x-

-O

smun

da c

inna

mom

eaci

nnam

on f

ern

Nt F

ern

5-

--

-x

--

Osm

unda

reg

alis

roya

l fer

nN

t Fer

n5

--

xx

--

-O

stry

a vi

rgin

iana

iron

woo

d; h

op-h

ornb

eam

Nt T

ree

5-

--

-x

--

Oxy

polis

rig

idio

rco

wba

neN

t P-F

orb

6x

--

--

--

Pani

cum

vir

gatu

msw

itch

gras

sN

t P-G

rass

4-

--

--

-x

Parn

assi

a gl

auca

gras

s-of

-par

nass

usN

t P-F

orb

8x

x-

--

--

Part

heno

ciss

us q

uinq

uefo

liaV

irgi

nia

cree

per

Nt W

-Vin

e5

-x

xx

x-

-Pe

dicu

lari

s la

nceo

lata

swam

p-be

tony

Nt P

-For

b8

x-

--

-x

-

App

endi

x 1.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Hur

on M

eado

ws M

etro

park

(con

tinue

d).


Site

N

ame

WM

PF

WT

SO

LS

HR

FF

HO

HF

ML

FH

OB

Site

C

ode

AB

CD

EF

GSc

ient

ific

Nam

eC

omm

on N

ame

Lif

e F

orm

C

Pelta

ndra

vir

gini

caar

row

-aru

mN

t P-F

orb

6-

--

x-

--

Phal

aris

aru

ndin

acea

reed

can

ary

gras

sN

t P-G

rass

0x

xx

x-

x-

PHL

EU

M P

RA

TE

NSE

TIM

OT

HY

Ad

P-G

rass

0-

--

--

-x

Phra

gmite

s au

stra

lisre

edN

t P-G

rass

0x

--

x-

--

Phry

ma

lept

osta

chya

lops

eed

Nt P

-For

b4

--

--

x-

-Ph

ysoc

arpu

s op

ulif

oliu

sni

neba

rkN

t Shr

ub4

x-

--

--

-Ph

ytol

acca

am

eric

ana

poke

wee

dN

t P-F

orb

2-

--

-x

--

PIC

EA

AB

IES

NO

RW

AY

SPR

UC

EA

d T

ree

0-

--

-x

--

Pile

a pu

mila

clea

rwee

dN

t A-F

orb

5-

-x

--

--

Pinu

s st

robu

sw

hite

pin

eN

t Tre

e3

--

--

x-

-PI

NU

S SY

LV

EST

RIS

SCO

TC

H P

INE

Ad

Tre

e0

--

--

x-

xPL

AN

TA

GO

MA

JOR

CO

MM

ON

PL

AN

TA

INA

d P-

Forb

0-

--

--

-x

Plat

anus

occ

iden

talis

syca

mor

eN

t Tre

e7

--

--

x-

-PO

A C

OM

PRE

SSA

CA

NA

DA

BL

UE

GR

ASS

Ad

P-G

rass

0-

--

-x

-x

Poa

palu

stri

sfo

wl m

eado

w g

rass

Nt P

-Gra

ss3

--

x-

--

-Po

doph

yllu

m p

elta

tum

may

-app

leN

t P-F

orb

3-

--

-x

--

Poly

gona

tum

pub

esce

nsdo

wny

sol

omon

-sea

lN

t P-F

orb

5-

--

-x

--

Poly

gonu

m h

ydro

pipe

rw

ater

-pep

per

Nt A

-For

b1

x-

-x

--

-Po

lygo

num

sag

ittat

umar

row

-lea

ved

tear

-thu

mb

Nt A

-For

b5

x-

x-

--

-Po

lygo

num

vir

gini

anum

jum

psee

dN

t P-F

orb

4-

--

-x

--

Popu

lus

delto

ides

cotto

nwoo

dN

t Tre

e1

--

-x

--

-Po

pulu

s gr

andi

dent

ata

big-

toot

hed

aspe

nN

t Tre

e4

--

--

x-

xPo

pulu

s tr

emul

oide

squ

akin

g as

pen

Nt T

ree

1x

--

-x

xx

Pote

ntill

a fr

utic

osa

shru

bby

cinq

uefo

ilN

t Shr

ub10

xx

--

-x

-Pr

unus

ser

otin

aw

ild b

lack

che

rry

Nt T

ree

2-

--

-x

-x

Prun

us v

irgi

nian

ach

oke

cher

ryN

t Shr

ub2

--

x-

x-

-Pt

erid

ium

aqu

ilinu

mbr

acke

n fe

rnN

t Fer

n0

--

--

x-

-Py

cnan

them

um v

irgi

nian

umco

mm

on m

ount

ain

min

tN

t P-F

orb

5x

xx

--

x-

Pyro

la e

llipt

ica

larg

e-le

aved

shi

nlea

fN

t P-F

orb

6-

--

-x

--

Que

rcus

alb

aw

hite

oak

Nt T

ree

5-

--

-x

--

Que

rcus

bic

olor

swam

p w

hite

oak

Nt T

ree

8-

-x

x-

--

Que

rcus

mac

roca

rpa

bur

oak

Nt T

ree

5-

-x

-x

--

App

endi

x 1.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Hur

on M

eado

ws M

etro

park

(con

tinue

d).


Site

N

ame

WM

PF

WT

SO

LS

HR

FF

HO

HF

ML

FH

OB

Site

C

ode

AB

CD

EF

GSc

ient

ific

Nam

eC

omm

on N

ame

Lif

e F

orm

C

Que

rcus

rub

rare

d oa

kN

t Tre

e5

--

--

x-

-Q

uerc

us v

elut

ina

blac

k oa

kN

t Tre

e6

--

--

x-

xR

anun

culu

s ab

ortiv

ussm

all-

flow

ered

but

terc

upN

t A-F

orb

0-

--

-x

--

Rha

mnu

s al

nifo

liaal

der-

leav

ed b

uckt

horn

Nt S

hrub

8-

x-

--

--

RH

AM

NU

S C

AT

HA

RT

ICA

CO

MM

ON

BU

CK

TH

OR

NA

d T

ree

0-

--

-x

x-

RH

AM

NU

S FR

AN

GU

LA

GL

OSS

Y B

UC

KT

HO

RN

Ad

Shru

b0

xx

x-

x-

-R

hus

arom

atic

afr

agra

nt s

umac

Nt S

hrub

7-

--

-x

-x

Rhu

s gl

abra

smoo

th s

umac

Nt T

ree

2-

--

--

-x

Rhy

ncho

spor

a ca

pilla

cea

beak

-rus

hN

t P-S

edge

10x

x-

--

--

Rib

es c

ynos

bati

pric

kly

or w

ild g

oose

berr

yN

t Shr

ub4

--

--

x-

-R

OB

INIA

PSE

UD

OA

CA

CIA

BL

AC

K L

OC

UST

Ad

Tre

e0

--

--

x-

xR

OSA

MU

LT

IFL

OR

AM

UL

TIF

LO

RA

RO

SEA

d Sh

rub

0-

-x

-x

-x

Ros

a pa

lust

ris

swam

p ro

seN

t Shr

ub5

xx

--

-x

-R

ubus

alle

ghen

iens

isco

mm

on b

lack

berr

yN

t Shr

ub1

--

--

x-

-R

ubus

fla

gella

ris

nort

hern

dew

berr

yN

t Shr

ub1

--

--

x-

xR

ubus

occ

iden

talis

blac

k ra

spbe

rry

Nt S

hrub

1-

--

-x

-x

Rub

us p

ubes

cens

dwar

f ra

spbe

rry

Nt P

-For

b4

xx

x-

--

-R

udbe

ckia

hir

tabl

ack-

eyed

sus

anN

t P-F

orb

1x

--

-x

-x

RU

ME

X A

CE

TO

SEL

LA

SHE

EP

SOR

RE

LA

d P-

Forb

0-

--

--

-x

Rum

ex o

rbic

ulat

usgr

eat w

ater

doc

kN

t P-F

orb

9-

xx

x-

--

Sagi

ttari

a la

tifol

iaco

mm

on a

rrow

head

Nt P

-For

b1

--

-x

--

-Sa

lix a

myg

dalo

ides

peac

h-le

aved

will

owN

t Tre

e3

--

x-

-x

-Sa

lix b

ebbi

ana

Beb

b's

will

owN

t Shr

ub1

xx

-x

-x

-Sa

lix c

andi

daho

ary

will

owN

t Shr

ub9

xx

xx

-x

-Sa

lix e

xigu

asa

ndba

r w

illow

Nt S

hrub

1-

--

--

x-

Salix

pet

iola

ris

slen

der

will

owN

t Shr

ub1

xx

--

--

-Sa

mbu

cus

cana

dens

isel

derb

erry

Nt S

hrub

3-

-x

--

--

Sani

cula

gre

gari

abl

ack

snak

eroo

tN

t P-F

orb

2-

--

-x

--

Sarr

acen

ia p

urpu

rea

pitc

her-

plan

tN

t P-F

orb

10x

x-

--

--

Sass

afra

s al

bidu

msa

ssaf

ras

Nt T

ree

5-

--

-x

--

Saur

urus

cer

nuus

lizar

d's-

tail

Nt P

-For

b9

--

-x

--

-Sc

hoen

ople

ctus

acu

tus

hard

stem

bul

rush

Nt P

-Sed

ge5

--

--

-x

-

App

endi

x 1.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Hur

on M

eado

ws M

etro

park

(con

tinue

d).


Site

N

ame

WM

PF

WT

SO

LS

HR

FF

HO

HF

ML

FH

OB

Site

C

ode

AB

CD

EF

GSc

ient

ific

Nam

eC

omm

on N

ame

Lif

e F

orm

C

Scho

enop

lect

us p

unge

nsth

ree-

squa

reN

t P-S

edge

5-

--

--

x-

Scho

enop

lect

us ta

bern

aem

onta

niso

ftst

em b

ulru

shN

t P-S

edge

4x

x-

--

--

Scir

pus

atro

vire

nsbu

lrus

hN

t P-S

edge

3-

--

--

x-

Scut

ella

ria

gale

ricu

lata

com

mon

sku

llcap

Nt P

-For

b5

xx

x-

--

-Se

neci

o au

reus

gold

en r

agw

ort

Nt P

-For

b5

--

x-

--

-SI

LE

NE

PR

AT

EN

SIS

WH

ITE

CA

TC

HFL

YA

d P-

Forb

0-

--

--

-x

Sium

sua

vew

ater

-par

snip

Nt P

-For

b5

--

xx

-x

-Sm

ilaci

na s

tella

tast

arry

fal

se s

olom

on-s

eal

Nt P

-For

b5

--

--

x-

-SO

LA

NU

M D

UL

CA

MA

RA

BIT

TE

RSW

EE

T N

IGH

TSH

AD

EA

d P-

Forb

0-

-x

--

--

Solid

ago

altis

sim

ata

ll go

lden

rod

Nt P

-For

b1

xx

--

-x

-So

lidag

o ca

esia

blue

-ste

mm

ed g

olde

nrod

Nt P

-For

b7

--

--

x-

-So

lidag

o ca

nade

nsis

Can

ada

gold

enro

dN

t P-F

orb

1-

--

--

-x

Solid

ago

giga

ntea

late

gol

denr

odN

t P-F

orb

3x

--

--

--

Solid

ago

nem

oral

isol

d fi

eld

gold

enro

dN

t P-F

orb

2-

--

--

-x

Solid

ago

ohio

ensi

sO

hio

gold

enro

dN

t P-F

orb

8x

--

--

--

Solid

ago

patu

lasw

amp

gold

enro

dN

t P-F

orb

6x

-x

--

x-

Solid

ago

ridd

ellii

Rid

dell'

s go

lden

rod

Nt P

-For

b6

xx

--

-x

-So

lidag

o ru

gosa

roug

h go

lden

rod

Nt P

-For

b3

x-

x-

x-

-So

lidag

o sp

ecio

sash

owy

gold

enro

dN

t P-F

orb

5-

--

--

-x

Solid

ago

ulig

inos

abo

g go

lden

rod

Nt P

-For

b4

xx

--

--

-Sp

arga

nium

eur

ycar

pum

com

mon

bur

-ree

dN

t P-F

orb

5x

--

x-

--

Spir

aea

alba

mea

dow

swee

tN

t Shr

ub4

x-

xx

--

-Sp

iran

thes

cer

nua

nodd

ing

ladi

es'-t

ress

esN

t P-F

orb

4x

x-

--

--

Stap

hyle

a tr

ifol

iabl

adde

rnut

Nt S

hrub

9-

-x

--

--

STE

LL

AR

IA G

RA

MIN

EA

STA

RW

OR

TA

d P-

Forb

0-

--

--

-x

Sym

ploc

arpu

s fo

etid

ussk

unk

cabb

age

Nt P

-For

b6

-x

xx

x-

-T

halic

trum

das

ycar

pum

purp

le m

eado

w-r

ueN

t P-F

orb

3x

--

--

--

Tha

lictr

um d

ioic

umea

rly

mea

dow

-rue

Nt P

-For

b6

--

x-

x-

-T

hely

pter

is p

alus

tris

mar

sh f

ern

Nt F

ern

2x

xx

x-

x-

Thu

ja o

ccid

enta

lisno

rthe

rn w

hite

-ced

arN

t Tre

e4

--

x-

--

-T

ilia

amer

ican

aba

ssw

ood

Nt T

ree

5-

-x

xx

--

TO

RIL

IS J

APO

NIC

AH

ED

GE

-PA

RSL

EY

Ad

A-F

orb

0-

--

--

-x

App

endi

x 1.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Hur

on M

eado

ws M

etro

park

(con

tinue

d).


Site

N

ame

WM

PF

WT

SO

LS

HR

FF

HO

HF

ML

FH

OB

Site

C

ode

AB

CD

EF

GSc

ient

ific

Nam

eC

omm

on N

ame

Lif

e F

orm

C

Tox

icod

endr

on r

adic

ans

pois

on iv

yN

t W-V

ine

2-

xx

xx

--

Tox

icod

endr

on v

erni

xpo

ison

sum

acN

t Shr

ub6

xx

xx

-x

-T

RA

GO

POG

ON

DU

BIU

SG

OA

T'S

BE

AR

DA

d B

-For

b0

--

--

--

xT

riad

enum

fra

seri

mar

sh S

t. Jo

hn's

-wor

tN

t P-F

orb

6x

x-

--

--

TR

IFO

LIU

M C

AM

PEST

RE

LO

W H

OP

CL

OV

ER

Ad

A-F

orb

0-

--

--

-x

TR

IFO

LIU

M P

RA

TE

NSE

RE

D C

LO

VE

RA

d P-

Forb

0-

--

--

-x

Typ

ha la

tifol

iabr

oad-

leav

ed c

atta

ilN

t P-F

orb

1x

xx

x-

x-

Ulm

us a

mer

ican

aA

mer

ican

elm

Nt T

ree

1x

xx

xx

--

UL

MU

S PU

MIL

ASI

BE

RIA

N E

LM

Ad

Tre

e0

--

--

--

xU

rtic

a di

oica

nettl

eN

t P-F

orb

1-

xx

xx

--

Utr

icul

aria

inte

rmed

iafl

at-l

eave

d bl

adde

rwor

tN

t P-F

orb

10x

x-

--

--

Uvu

lari

a gr

andi

flor

abe

llwor

tN

t P-F

orb

5-

--

-x

--

Vac

cini

um a

ngus

tifol

ium

blue

berr

yN

t Shr

ub4

--

--

x-

-V

acci

nium

cor

ymbo

sum

smoo

th h

ighb

ush

blue

berr

yN

t Shr

ub6

--

x-

x-

-V

aler

iana

ulig

inos

abo

g va

leri

anN

t P-F

orb

10x

--

--

--

VE

RB

ASC

UM

TH

APS

US

CO

MM

ON

MU

LL

EIN

Ad

B-F

orb

0-

--

--

-x

Ver

bena

has

tata

blue

ver

vain

Nt P

-For

b4

x-

--

--

-V

erbe

na u

rtic

ifol

iaw

hite

ver

vain

Nt P

-For

b4

--

--

x-

-V

ibur

num

ace

rifo

lium

map

le-l

eave

d ar

row

-woo

dN

t Shr

ub6

--

--

x-

-V

ibur

num

den

tatu

msm

ooth

arr

ow-w

ood

Nt S

hrub

6-

-x

-x

--

Vib

urnu

m le

ntag

ona

nnyb

erry

Nt S

hrub

4x

xx

xx

--

VIB

UR

NU

M O

PUL

US

EU

RO

PEA

N H

IGH

BU

SH-

CR

AN

BE

RR

YA

d Sh

rub

0-

--

-x

--

Vio

la n

ephr

ophy

llano

rthe

rn b

og v

iole

tN

t P-F

orb

8-

-x

--

--

Vio

la p

ubes

cens

yello

w v

iole

tN

t P-F

orb

4-

--

-x

--

Vio

la s

oror

iaco

mm

on b

lue

viol

etN

t P-F

orb

1-

--

x-

--

Viti

s ae

stiv

alis

sum

mer

gra

peN

t W-V

ine

6-

--

-x

--

Viti

s ri

pari

ari

verb

ank

grap

eN

t W-V

ine

3-

-x

x-

--

Zan

thox

ylum

am

eric

anum

pric

kly-

ash

Nt S

hrub

3-

--

-x

--

Tot

al n

umbe

r of

spe

cies

obs

erve

d in

sur

vey

site

102

6510

068

145

4275

Tot

al n

umbe

r of

spe

cies

obs

erve

d in

Hur

on M

eado

ws

Met

ropa

rk:

338

App

endi

x 1.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Hur

on M

eado

ws M

etro

park

(con

tinue

d).


Site

Nam

eSi

te A

bbre

viat

ion

Site

Cod

e

Eri

e Pr

airi

eE

PH

Eri

e G

olf

Cou

rse

Wet

land

sE

GC

WI

Eri

e M

arsh

EM

JE

rie

Woo

dsE

WK

Site

N

ame

EP

EG

CW

EM

EW

Site

C

ode

HI

JK

Scie

ntif

ic N

ame

Com

mon

Nam

eL

ife

For

mC

Ace

r ne

gund

obo

x el

der

Nt T

ree

0x

--

-A

cer

sacc

hari

num

silv

er m

aple

Nt T

ree

2-

--

xA

cer

sacc

haru

msu

gar

map

leN

t Tre

e5

--

-x

Agr

imon

ia g

rypo

sepa

lata

ll ag

rim

ony

Nt P

-For

b2

-x

-x

AG

RO

PYR

ON

RE

PEN

SQ

UA

CK

GR

ASS

Ad

P-G

rass

0x

--

-A

lism

a pl

anta

go-a

quat

ica

wat

er-p

lant

ain

Nt P

-For

b1

--

x-

AL

LIA

RIA

PE

TIO

LA

TA

GA

RL

IC M

UST

AR

DA

d B

-For

b0

--

-x

AL

NU

S G

LU

TIN

OSA

BL

AC

K A

LD

ER

Ad

Tre

e0

--

x-

Ane

mon

e ca

nade

nsis

Can

ada

anem

one

Nt P

-For

b4

x-

--

Apo

cynu

m c

anna

binu

min

dian

hem

pN

t P-F

orb

3x

--

-A

RC

TIU

M M

INU

SC

OM

MO

N B

UR

DO

CK

Ad

B-F

orb

0-

--

xA

risa

ema

trip

hyllu

mja

ck-i

n-th

e-pu

lpit

Nt P

-For

b5

--

-x

Asc

lepi

as in

carn

ata

swam

p m

ilkw

eed

Nt P

-For

b6

-x

x-

Asc

lepi

as s

yria

caco

mm

on m

ilkw

eed

Nt P

-For

b1

x-

--

Ast

er la

teri

flor

ussi

de-f

low

erin

g as

ter

Nt P

-For

b2

--

-x

BE

RB

ER

IS T

HU

NB

ER

GII

JAPA

NE

SE B

AR

BE

RR

YA

d Sh

rub

0-

--

xB

iden

s ce

rnuu

sno

ddin

g bu

r-m

arig

old

Nt A

-For

b3

--

x-

Boe

hmer

ia c

ylin

dric

afa

lse

nettl

eN

t P-F

orb

5-

--

xB

olbo

scho

enus

flu

viat

ilis

bulr

ush

Nt P

-Sed

ge6

-x

--

BU

TO

MU

S U

MB

EL

LA

TU

SFL

OW

ER

ING

RU

SHA

d P-

Forb

0-

-x

-C

alam

agro

stis

can

aden

sis

blue

-joi

nt g

rass

Nt P

-Gra

ss3

--

x-

Cal

yste

gia

sepi

umhe

dge

bind

wee

dN

t P-F

orb

2-

-x

-C

arex

beb

bii

sedg

eN

t P-S

edge

4x

--

-C

arex

com

osa

sedg

eN

t P-S

edge

5-

-x

-C

arex

fra

nkii

Fran

k's

sedg

eN

t P-S

edge

4-

x-

-

App

endi

x 2.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Lak

e E

rie

Met

ropa

rk. "

X" i

ndic

ates

the

spec

ies o

ccur

red

with

in th

e si

te. "

-" in

dica

tes s

peci

es w

asno

t obs

erve

d at

the

site

. Cap

italiz

ed sc

ient

ific

and

com

mon

nam

es in

dica

te n

on-n

ativ

e sp

ecie

s. Li

fe fo

rm a

cron

yms a

re a

s fol

low

s: N

t, na

tive;

P, p

eren

nial

; Ad,

adv

entiv

e; B

, bia

nnua

l; A

, ann

ual.

"C" i

s the

Coe

ffic

ient

of C

onse

rvat

ion

for e

ach

spec

ies (

Her

man

et a

l. 20

01).


App

endi

x 2.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Lak

e E

rie

Met

ropa

rk (c

ontin

ued)

.

Site

N

ame

EP

EG

CW

EM

EW

Site

C

ode

HI

JK

Scie

ntif

ic N

ame

Com

mon

Nam

eL

ife

For

mC

Car

ex g

ranu

lari

sse

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge2

x-

--

Car

ex g

rayi

sedg

eN

t P-S

edge

6-

--

xC

arex

hir

tifol

iase

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge5

--

-x

Car

ex le

pton

ervi

ase

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge3

--

-x

Car

ex m

uski

ngum

ensi

sse

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge6

--

-x

Car

ex p

ensy

lvan

ica

sedg

eN

t P-S

edge

4-

--

xC

arex

pla

ntag

inea

sedg

eN

t P-S

edge

8-

--

xC

arex

rad

iata

stra

ight

-sty

led

woo

d se

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge2

--

-x

Car

ex s

tric

tase

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge4

x-

--

Car

ex v

ulpi

noid

ease

dge

Nt P

-Sed

ge1

xx

-x

Car

pinu

s ca

rolin

iana

blue

-bee

chN

t Tre

e6

--

-x

Car

ya c

ordi

form

isbi

ttern

ut h

icko

ryN

t Tre

e5

--

-x

Car

ya la

cini

osa

shel

lbar

k hi

ckor

yN

t Tre

e9

--

-x

Car

ya o

vata

shag

bark

hic

kory

Nt T

ree

5-

--

xC

eltis

occ

iden

talis

hack

berr

yN

t Tre

e5

--

-x

Cer

atop

hyllu

m d

emer

sum

coon

tail

Nt P

-For

b1

--

x-

Cir

caea

lute

tiana

ench

ante

r's-n

ight

shad

eN

t P-F

orb

2-

--

xC

IRSI

UM

AR

VE

NSE

CA

NA

DIA

N T

HIS

TL

EA

d P-

Forb

0-

xx

-C

ornu

s dr

umm

ondi

iro

ugh-

leav

ed d

ogw

ood

Nt S

hrub

6x

xx

xC

rata

egus

sp.

haw

thor

nN

t Tre

ex

--

-C

uscu

ta g

rono

vii

com

mon

dod

der

Nt A

-For

b3

--

x-

Cyp

erus

ery

thro

rhiz

osum

brel

la s

edge

Nt A

-Sed

ge6

--

x-

Cyp

erus

str

igos

uslo

ng-s

cale

d nu

t sed

geN

t P-S

edge

3-

-x

-D

IPSA

CU

S FU

LL

ON

UM

CO

MM

ON

TE

ASE

LA

d P-

Forb

0-

x-

-D

ryop

teri

s ca

rthu

sian

asp

inul

ose

woo

dfer

nN

t Fer

n5

--

-x

Ech

inoc

ystis

loba

taw

ild c

ucum

ber

Nt A

-For

b2

--

-x

EIC

HH

OR

NIA

CR

ASS

IPE

SC

OM

MO

N W

AT

ER

HY

AC

INT

HA

d A

-For

b0

--

x-

Elo

dea

cana

dens

isco

mm

on w

ater

wee

dN

t P-F

orb

1-

-x

-E

pilo

bium

col

orat

umci

nnam

on w

illow

her

bN

t P-F

orb

3-

-x

-E

PIL

OB

IUM

HIR

SUT

UM

GR

EA

T H

AIR

Y W

ILL

OW

-HE

RB

Ad

P-Fo

rb0

-x

--

Ere

chtit

es h

iera

cifo

liafi

rew

eed

Nt A

-For

b2

--

xx


Site

N

ame

EP

EG

CW

EM

EW

Site

C

ode

HI

JK

Scie

ntif

ic N

ame

Com

mon

Nam

eL

ife

For

mC

Eup

ator

ium

per

folia

tum

com

mon

bon

eset

Nt P

-For

b4

-x

x-

Fagu

s gr

andi

folia

Am

eric

an b

eech

Nt T

ree

6-

--

xFE

STU

CA

AR

UN

DIN

AC

EA

TA

LL

FE

SCU

EA

d P-

Gra

ss0

x-

--

Frax

inus

am

eric

ana

whi

te a

shN

t Tre

e5

-x

-x

Frax

inus

nig

rabl

ack

ash

Nt T

ree

6-

--

xFr

axin

us p

enns

ylva

nica

red

ash

Nt T

ree

2-

--

xG

aliu

m tr

iflo

rum

frag

rant

bed

stra

wN

t P-F

orb

4x

--

-G

eran

ium

mac

ulat

umw

ild g

eran

ium

Nt P

-For

b4

--

-x

Geu

m c

anad

ense

whi

te a

vens

Nt P

-For

b1

--

-x

Geu

m r

ival

epu

rple

ave

nsN

t P-F

orb

7-

x-

-G

ledi

tsia

tria

cant

hos

hone

y lo

cust

Nt T

ree

8-

--

xG

lyce

ria

stri

ata

fow

l man

na g

rass

Nt P

-Gra

ss4

--

-x

Hib

iscu

s m

osch

euto

ssw

amp

rose

mal

low

Nt P

-For

b7

-x

x-

HO

RD

EU

M J

UB

AT

UM

SQU

IRR

EL

-TA

IL G

RA

SSA

d P-

Gra

ss0

x-

--

Hyd

rast

is c

anad

ensi

sgo

lden

seal

Nt P

-For

b5

--

-x

Hys

trix

pat

ula

bottl

ebru

sh g

rass

Nt P

-Gra

ss5

--

-x

Impa

tiens

cap

ensi

ssp

otte

d to

uch-

me-

not

Nt A

-For

b2

-x

xx

Jugl

ans

nigr

abl

ack

wal

nut

Nt T

ree

5-

--

xJu

ncus

dud

leyi

Dud

ley'

s ru

shN

t P-F

orb

1x

--

-L

apor

tea

cana

dens

isw

ood

nettl

eN

t P-F

orb

4-

--

xL

athy

rus

palu

stri

sm

arsh

pea

Nt P

-For

b7

x-

--

Lee

rsia

ory

zoid

escu

t gra

ssN

t P-G

rass

3-

--

xL

eers

ia v

irgi

nica

whi

te g

rass

Nt P

-Gra

ss5

--

-x

Lem

na m

inor

smal

l duc

kwee

dN

t A-F

orb

5-

-x

-L

IGU

STR

UM

VU

LG

AR

EC

OM

MO

N P

RIV

ET

Ad

Shru

b0

--

-x

LO

NIC

ER

A M

OR

RO

WII

MO

RR

OW

HO

NE

YSU

CK

LE

Ad

Shru

b0

x-

-x

Lyc

opus

uni

flor

usno

rthe

rn b

ugle

wee

dN

t P-F

orb

2-

-x

-L

YSI

MA

CH

IA N

UM

MU

LA

RIA

MO

NE

YW

OR

TA

d P-

Forb

0-

--

xL

YT

HR

UM

SA

LIC

AR

IAPU

RPL

E L

OO

SEST

RIF

EA

d P-

Forb

0-

xx

-M

EL

ILO

TU

S A

LB

AW

HIT

E S

WE

ET

-CL

OV

ER

Ad

B-F

orb

0x

--

-M

EL

ILO

TU

S O

FFIC

INA

LIS

YE

LL

OW

SW

EE

T-C

LO

VE

RA

d B

-For

b0

x-

--

App

endi

x 2.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Lak

e E

rie

Met

ropa

rk (c

ontin

ued)

.


App

endi

x 2.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Lak

e E

rie

Met

ropa

rk (c

ontin

ued)

.

Site

N

ame

EP

EG

CW

EM

EW

Site

C

ode

HI

JK

Scie

ntif

ic N

ame

Com

mon

Nam

eL

ife

For

mC

Men

ispe

rmum

can

aden

sem

oons

eed

Nt W

-Vin

e5

--

-x

Men

tha

arve

nsis

wild

min

tN

t P-F

orb

3-

-x

-N

elum

bo lu

tea

Am

eric

an lo

tus

Nt P

-For

b8

--

x-

Nym

phae

a od

orat

asw

eet-

scen

ted

wat

erlil

yN

t P-F

orb

6-

-x

-O

enot

hera

bie

nnis

com

mon

eve

ning

pri

mro

seN

t B-F

orb

2-

-x

-O

stry

a vi

rgin

iana

iron

woo

d; h

op-h

ornb

eam

Nt T

ree

5-

--

xPa

rthe

noci

ssus

qui

nque

folia

Vir

gini

a cr

eepe

rN

t W-V

ine

5-

--

xPh

alar

is a

rund

inac

eare

ed c

anar

y gr

ass

Nt P

-Gra

ss0

xx

--

PHL

EU

M P

RA

TE

NSE

TIM

OT

HY

Ad

P-G

rass

0x

x-

-Ph

ragm

ites

aust

ralis

reed

Nt P

-Gra

ss0

-x

xx

Plat

anth

era

leuc

opha

eaea

ster

n pr

airi

e-fr

inge

d or

chid

Nt P

-For

b10

x-

--

POA

PR

AT

EN

SIS

KE

NT

UC

KY

BL

UE

GR

ASS

Ad

P-G

rass

0-

x-

-Po

doph

yllu

m p

elta

tum

may

-app

leN

t P-F

orb

3-

--

xPo

lygo

num

am

phib

ium

wat

er s

mar

twee

dN

t P-F

orb

6-

-x

-Po

lygo

num

hyd

ropi

per

wat

er-p

eppe

rN

t A-F

orb

1-

-x

-PO

LY

GO

NU

M P

ER

SIC

AR

IAL

AD

Y'S

TH

UM

BA

d A

-For

b0

--

x-

Poly

gonu

m v

irgi

nian

umju

mps

eed

Nt P

-For

b4

--

-x

Popu

lus

delto

ides

cotto

nwoo

dN

t Tre

e1

xx

xx

POT

AM

OG

ET

ON

CR

ISPU

SPO

ND

WE

ED

Ad

P-Fo

rb0

--

x-

Pota

mog

eton

gra

min

eus

pond

wee

dN

t P-F

orb

5-

-x

-Po

tam

oget

on n

atan

spo

ndw

eed

Nt P

-For

b5

--

x-

Pote

ntill

a si

mpl

exol

d fi

eld

cinq

uefo

ilN

t P-F

orb

2-

--

xPr

enan

thes

alb

aw

hite

lettu

ceN

t P-F

orb

5-

--

xPr

unus

ser

otin

abl

ack

cher

ryN

t Tre

e2

--

-x

Que

rcus

alb

aw

hite

oak

Nt T

ree

5-

--

xQ

uerc

us b

icol

orsw

amp

whi

te o

akN

t Tre

e8

--

-x

Que

rcus

mac

roca

rpa

bur

oak

Nt T

ree

5-

x-

xQ

uerc

us r

ubra

red

oak

Nt T

ree

5-

--

xR

HA

MN

US

CA

TH

AR

TIC

AC

OM

MO

N B

UC

KT

HO

RN

Ad

Tre

e0

--

-x

RH

AM

NU

S FR

AN

GU

LA

GL

OSS

Y B

UC

KT

HO

RN

Ad

Shru

b0

--

xx

Rhu

s ty

phin

ast

agho

rn s

umac

Nt T

ree

2x

--

-


App

endi

x 2.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Lak

e E

rie

Met

ropa

rk (c

ontin

ued)

.

Site

N

ame

EP

EG

CW

EM

EW

Site

C

ode

HI

JK

Scie

ntif

ic N

ame

Com

mon

Nam

eL

ife

For

mC

Rib

es a

mer

ican

umw

ild b

lack

cur

rant

Nt S

hrub

6-

--

xR

OSA

MU

LT

IFL

OR

AM

UL

TIF

LO

RA

RO

SEA

d Sh

rub

0-

--

xR

osa

setig

era

prai

rie

rose

Nt S

hrub

5x

x-

-R

UM

EX

CR

ISPU

SC

UR

LY

DO

CK

Ad

P-Fo

rb0

x-

--

Sagi

ttari

a la

tifol

iaco

mm

on a

rrow

head

Nt P

-For

b1

--

x-

Salix

exi

gua

sand

bar

will

owN

t Shr

ub1

-x

x-

Sam

bucu

s ca

nade

nsis

elde

rber

ryN

t Shr

ub3

-x

--

Sani

cula

gre

gari

abl

ack

snak

eroo

tN

t P-F

orb

2-

--

xSc

hoen

ople

ctus

acu

tus

hard

stem

bul

rush

Nt P

-Sed

ge5

-x

--

Scir

pus

atro

vire

nsbu

lrus

hN

t P-S

edge

3-

-x

-Sc

irpu

s pe

ndul

usbu

lrus

hN

t P-S

edge

3x

x-

-Sc

utel

lari

a ga

leri

cula

taco

mm

on s

kullc

apN

t P-F

orb

5-

-x

-Sc

utel

lari

a la

teri

flor

am

ad-d

og s

kullc

apN

t P-F

orb

5-

-x

-Si

um s

uave

wat

er-p

arsn

ipN

t P-F

orb

5-

-x

-Sm

ilaci

na r

acem

osa

fals

e sp

iken

ard

Nt P

-For

b5

--

-x

SOL

AN

UM

DU

LC

AM

AR

AB

ITT

ER

SWE

ET

NIG

HT

SHA

DE

Ad

P-Fo

rb0

-x

-x

Solid

ago

altis

sim

ata

ll go

lden

rod

Nt P

-For

b1

-x

--

Spir

odel

a po

lyrh

iza

grea

t duc

kwee

dN

t A-F

orb

6-

-x

-T

eucr

ium

can

aden

sew

ood

sage

Nt P

-For

b4

--

-x

Tili

a am

eric

ana

bass

woo

dN

t Tre

e5

--

-x

Tox

icod

endr

on r

adic

ans

pois

on iv

yN

t W-V

ine

2x

--

xT

RIF

OL

IUM

PR

AT

EN

SER

ED

CL

OV

ER

Ad

P-Fo

rb0

xx

--

Tri

oste

um p

erfo

liatu

mho

rse-

gent

ian

Nt P

-For

b5

--

-x

TY

PHA

AN

GU

STIF

OL

IAN

AR

RO

W-L

EA

VE

D C

AT

TA

ILA

d P-

Forb

0-

-x

-T

ypha

latif

olia

broa

d-le

aved

cat

tail

Nt P

-For

b1

-x

x-

Ulm

us a

mer

ican

aA

mer

ican

elm

Nt T

ree

1x

x-

xV

allis

neri

a am

eric

ana

eel g

rass

Nt P

-For

b7

--

x-

Ver

bena

has

tata

blue

ver

vain

Nt P

-For

b4

--

x-

Ver

bena

urt

icif

olia

whi

te v

erva

inN

t P-F

orb

4-

-x

xV

erno

nia

mis

suri

caM

isso

uri i

ronw

eed

Nt P

-For

b4

x-

--

Vib

urnu

m le

ntag

ona

nnyb

erry

Nt S

hrub

4-

--

x


App

endi

x 2.

Pla

nt sp

ecie

s obs

erve

d at

Lak

e E

rie

Met

ropa

rk (c

ontin

ued)

.

Site

N

ame

EP

EG

CW

EM

EW

Site

C

ode

HI

JK

Scie

ntif

ic N

ame

Com

mon

Nam

eL

ife

For

mC

VIB

UR

NU

M O

PUL

US

EU

RO

PEA

N H

IGH

BU

SH-C

RA

NB

ER

RY

Ad

Shru

b0

--

-x

Viti

s ri

pari

ari

verb

ank

grap

eN

t W-V

ine

3-

xx

xW

olff

ia c

olum

bian

aco

mm

on w

ater

mea

lN

t A-F

orb

5-

-x

-Z

anth

oxyl

um a

mer

ican

umpr

ickl

y-as

hN

t Shr

ub3

--

-x

Tot

al n

umbe

r of

spe

cies

obs

erve

d in

sur

vey

site

3132

5276

Tot

al n

umbe

r of

spe

cies

obs

erve

d in

Lak

e E

rie

Met

ropa

rk:

153

natural features inventory and management …erie metropark depicts the park as supporting beech-...

Documents