zimmerman phragmites ramshorn 052115
DESCRIPTION
Presentation given at the 4th Fact Finding Meeting for Piermont Marsh, NYTRANSCRIPT
-
Chris Zimmerman and Becky ShirerThe Nature Conservancy, New York
Trajectory of Native Plant Recovery:Management of Five Phragmites australis Stands
in a Hudson River Freshwater Tidal Wetland
Before After
1
-
Introduction
Phragmites australis alters vegetation composition and structure.
~ $4. 6 million spent on management between 2005 and 2009 (Martin and Blossey 2013).
Call for Monitoring of biological management outcomes.
Limited information on effectiveness of eliminating small stands and vegetation response.
2
-
RA
3
Ramshorn Marsh Hudson River 1,000 ha of freshwater
tidal marsh
~ 35% PhragmitesRamshorn Marsh 47 ha emergent marsh 3% Phragmites (1.5 ha)
3
-
Management Goals and Research Questions
Goals Eliminate 5 Phragmites stands to maintain 47 ha
of freshwater tidal marsh Restore native plant community within treatment standsQuestions Can small Phragmites stands (
-
Sample Methods and Design
5 treatment stands and control. 10 randomly located 1m2 plots in
interior and exterior of the stand.
Count live and dead Phragmitesstems in interior plots.
Estimate cover of all species and litter in all plots.
Total stem census in 3rd year
10
Patch 1 m2
5
-
Herbicide Treatment
Contracted with licensed aquatic applicator. 1st Treatment (2010): Broadcast application of
aquatic labeled glyphosate-based herbicide at labeled rate using a Marsh Master.
Follow up treatment: (2011 & 2012) Backpack sprayer at 1% solution.
6
-
Phragmites Treatment Efficacy
77
-
Phragmites Treatment Efficacy
3 Years Post-Initial Treatment (2013)
Stand Ha % Reduction Total Stems
1 0.76 98.6 4,309
2 0.30 98.2 1,897
3 0.30 95.4 3,497
4 0.04 99.9 3
5 0.04 96.0 139
8
-
Phragmites Treatment Efficacy
Stand1 Phragmites
Stem Density
9
-
Native Plant Recovery
1010
-
Photo Monitoring Stand 1 Pretreatment 2011
2012 2013
11
-
Similar Composition? Reference and Treatment
Stand Size(ha) A P
1 0.76 0.050 0.007
2 0.30 0.065 0.015
3 0.30 0.058 0.018
4 0.04 0.123 0.001
5 0.04 - 0.034 0.970
Multiple Response Permutation Procedure
12
-
Similar Composition? Reference and Treatment
Pre-treatment 3 Years Post-Initial Treatment
Non-metric Multidimensional Scaling (NMS) ordination of species composition
LEEORY
POLARI
13
-
Similar Composition? Reference and Treatment
Exterior (Reference) % Interior (Treatment) %Impatiens capensis 37.1 Leersia oryzoides 15.0Typha angustifolia 14.3 Sagittaria latifolia 11.5Peltandra virginica 10.7 Peltandra virginica 11.0Apios americana 10.0 Bidens cernua 10.0Convolvulus sepium 7.1 Impatiens capensis 9.0
Exterior (Reference) % Interior (Treatment) %Typha angustifolia 35.0 Typha angustifolia 40.5Peltandra virginica 24.0 Peltandra virginica 20.5Impatiens capensis 5.0 Impatiens capensis 3.0Iris pseudacorus 1.0 Sagittaria latifolia 1.5Acorus calamus 0.5 Iris pseudacorus 1.0
Stand 1 (0.80 ha)
Stand 5 (0.04 ha)
14
-
Conclusions Treatment Efficacy
Can small stands be eliminated? Stands < 0.10 ha may be feasible EDRR opportunities limited Larger stands will require management
over the long-term
Limiting factors Search effort and probability of stem
detection Rhizome viability and seed bank Herbicide effectiveness on small stems
15
-
Conclusions Native Plant Recovery
Three stands dominate by disturbance dependent species
Factors influencing recovery: Pre-treatment native species abundance Hydrologic inundation Thatch layer
To maintain native plant diversity will require managing for low Phragmites stem density (
-
Additional Resources
Zimmerman, C. and R. Shirer. 2013. Trajectory of vegetation recovery in five Phragmites australis stands in response to management in a Hudson River freshwater tidal wetland. The Nature Conservancy in eastern New York, Albany, NY
Invasive Plant Management Decision Analysis Tool http://ipmdat.org/
A Guide for Strategic management of Phragmites Australis in tidal Hudson River Wetlands
17
-
Acknowledgements
Audubon Scenic Hudson Stuart Findlay
Larry Federman Steve Young Laura Lukas Troy Weldy Jason BriedSuneeti Jog
Jeremy Roberts Arianne Messerman
Dan Sorenson
18
Trajectory of Native Plant Recovery:Management of Five Phragmites australis Stands in a Hudson River Freshwater Tidal Wetland IntroductionSlide Number 3Management Goals and Research QuestionsSample Methods and DesignHerbicide TreatmentPhragmites Treatment EfficacyPhragmites Treatment EfficacyPhragmites Treatment EfficacyNative Plant Recovery Photo Monitoring Stand 1 Similar Composition? Reference and TreatmentSimilar Composition? Reference and TreatmentSimilar Composition? Reference and TreatmentConclusions Treatment Efficacy Conclusions Native Plant Recovery Additional ResourcesAcknowledgements