Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Invasive ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

<strong>Proceedings</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Third</strong> <strong>International</strong> <strong>Conference</strong> on Invasive SpartinaChapter 2: Spartina Distribution and SpreadBroad cover-class boundaries also contribute toimprecision. For example, if a polygon area is within a coverclass, e.g. 10-30%, <strong>the</strong>n it is assigned <strong>the</strong> midpoint <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>class, 15% in this example. In both 2001 and 2003 CogswellMarsh fell within cover class 10-30%. Ei<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>re was nochange in cover between 2001 and 2003 or <strong>the</strong> differencewas not large enough for 2003 to be assigned to <strong>the</strong> nextlarger class. Thus, a trend <strong>of</strong> expansion or contraction willbe detected only when it crosses a cover class boundary.However, <strong>the</strong> cover classes are useful for determining anapproximate infestation level and can be used to prioritizeremoval efforts.Accuracy <strong>of</strong> Field IdentificationGenetic tests were also performed to confirm speciesidentification by field staff at each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> InventoryMonitoring Sites. The genetic tests confirmed that field staffwere accurately identifying both S. alterniflora hybrids(89%) and S. foliosa (100%). The samples labeled as“unknown” or “unidentifiable” by field staff were found justas likely to be hybrids as S. foliosa (55%-45%).Trained field biologists can accurately identify <strong>the</strong>majority <strong>of</strong> non-native Spartina plants, but genetic testing <strong>of</strong>ambiguous hybrid specimens is necessary to reduce <strong>the</strong> risk<strong>of</strong> overlooking non-natives and <strong>the</strong>ir hybrids.EfficacyPost-treatment monitoring was done at five sites thatwere treated in 2002 and pre-treatment monitoring wasdone at seven sites. Manual removal (digging) <strong>of</strong> S.densiflora at Piper Park was effective; however, a number<strong>of</strong> divots remained visible in <strong>the</strong> marsh plain severalmonths after <strong>the</strong> clones were removed. It is uncertain howlong <strong>the</strong>se features will remain in <strong>the</strong> marsh and it isunclear what effect <strong>the</strong>y may have on <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>marsh habitat. We observed that volunteer removal effortsare excellent for public outreach, but it was frequentlynecessary for organizers and ISP staff to complete workbegun by volunteers.Clones in Bolinas Lagoon and Point Reyes that hadbeen dug or trampled and covered were reduced by 95%.However, <strong>the</strong> clone that was dug out in Bolinas Lagooncontinued to produce some shoots around <strong>the</strong> clone edgethat required pulling. A single clone at Pier 98, which hadbeen partially dug out and covered with geo-textile fabricby volunteers, had a number <strong>of</strong> remaining shoots thatrequired fur<strong>the</strong>r control. Clones must be entirely coveredfor <strong>the</strong> treatment to be effective. Roots and rhizomesshould be confirmed dead as was done at Point Reyesbefore uncovering treated clones. Preliminary posttreatmentmonitoring <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Emeryville treatment site thatwas mowed in 2002 indicated no noticeable treatmenteffect.CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONSData from 28 sites showed that non-native Spartinaspecies are spreading at a rapid rate in <strong>the</strong> San Francisco BayEstuary. Between 2000-2001 and 2003, <strong>the</strong> average percentincrease in area covered by all non-native Spartina speciesin <strong>the</strong> Estuary was 244%, and by hybrids, 317%. Some siteshad several hundred percent increases. While hybridsincreased in area at all site types, spread was greatest forfringing tidal marshes, mudflats, and estuarine beaches (SiteType II). There was a slight trend in increase <strong>of</strong> hybrid coverwith latitude (south to north trend). Aerial photo areameasurements were compared with field measurements atfive sites where both methods were used in 2003. There wasno difference in <strong>the</strong> mean coverage between methods, butgiven <strong>the</strong> small sample size and that no regressionrelationship was found, aerial photo interpretationmeasurements should be used with caution to estimate fieldmeasurements for a single site. The increasingly rapid rate <strong>of</strong>spread <strong>of</strong> Spartina, in particular hybrids, continues tothreaten existing habitat and species assemblages andpotentially threatens <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> ongoing and plannedrestoration projects within <strong>the</strong> San Francisco Estuary andouter coast marshes. Successful control will only beachieved with dedication <strong>of</strong> adequate resources, attention t<strong>of</strong>ollowing protocols completely, and follow-up monitoringand periodic re-treatment as needed.ACKNOWLEDGMENTSFunding for <strong>the</strong> Monitoring Program was provided by<strong>the</strong> California Coastal Conservancy and <strong>the</strong> CalFed BayDelta Program (Interagency agreement 4600001875).Thank you to Alex Lee who performed <strong>the</strong> geneticanalyses and to Aimee Good, Johanna Good, TrippMcCandlish, Erik Grijalva, numerous landowners,managers, and stakeholders for <strong>the</strong>ir able assistance with <strong>the</strong>fieldwork. We also thank Peggy Ol<strong>of</strong>son, Director <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>Invasive Spartina Project, and Patricia Bossak and MaxeneSpellman <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> California Coastal Conservancy for <strong>the</strong>iradministrative and staff assistance. Peggy Ol<strong>of</strong>son andOliver Burke deserve special thanks for <strong>the</strong>ir editorialassistance.REFERENCESAnttila, C.K, A.R. King, C. Ferris, D.R. Ayres, and D.R. Strong.2000. Reciprocal hybrid formation <strong>of</strong> Spartina in San FranciscoBay. Molecular Ecology 9:765-771.Anttila, C.K., C.C. Daehler, N.E. Rank, and D.R Strong. 1998.Greater male fitness <strong>of</strong> a rare invader (Spartina alterniflora,Poaceae) threatens a common native (S. foliosa) with hybridization.American Journal <strong>of</strong> Botany 85:1597-1601.ArcView 3.3 (2002). Environmental Systems Research Institute,Inc. (ESRI), 380 New York Street, Redlands, California.http://www.esri.com.Ayres, D.R., K. Zaremba, C.M. Sloop, D.R.Strong. 2008. Sexualreproduction <strong>of</strong> cordgrass hybrids (Spartina foliosa x al--81-
Chapter 2: Spartina Distribution and Spread<strong>Proceedings</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Third</strong> <strong>International</strong> <strong>Conference</strong> on Invasive Spartinaterniflora) invading tidal marshes in San Francisco BayDiversity and Distributions 9:187-195.Ayres, D.R., D.R. Strong, and P. Baye. 2003. Spartina foliosa—acommon species on <strong>the</strong> road to rarity? Madroño 50: 209-213.Ayres, D.R., D. Smith, K. Zaremba, S. Klohr, and D.R. Strong.2004. Spread <strong>of</strong> exotic cordgrasses and hybrids (Spartina sp.) in<strong>the</strong> tidal marshes <strong>of</strong> San Francisco Bay. Biological Invasions6:221-231.Ayres, D.R., D. Garcia-Rossi, H.G. Davis, and D.R. Strong. 1999.Extent and degree <strong>of</strong> hybridization between exotic (Spartina alterniflora)and native (S. foliosa) cordgrass (Poaceae) in California,USA determined by random amplified polymorphic DNA(RAPDs). Molecular Ecology 8:1179-1186.Ayres, D.R. and D.R. Strong. Evolution <strong>of</strong> Invasive Spartina Hybridsin San Francisco Bay. 2010. In: Ayres, D.R., D.W. Kerr,S.D. Ericson and P.R. Ol<strong>of</strong>son, eds. <strong>Proceedings</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Third</strong> <strong>International</strong><strong>Conference</strong> on Invasive Spartina, 2004 Nov 8-10,San Francisco, CA, USA. San Francisco Estuary InvasiveSpartina Project <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> California State Coastal Conservancy:Oakland, CA. (this volume).California State Coastal Conservancy. 2003. San Francisco EstuaryInvasive Spartina Project: Spartina Control Program. Volume 1:Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement/EnvironmentalImpact Report. September 2003. Preparedby and for <strong>the</strong> California State Coastal Conservancy and <strong>the</strong> U.SFish and Wildlife Service. 454 pp. www.Spartina.orgCallaway, J.C. and M. N. Josselyn. 1992. The introduction andspread <strong>of</strong> smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) in South SanFrancisco Bay. Estuaries 15: 218-226.Cohen, A.C. and J.T. Carleton. 1995. Nonindigenous aquatic speciesin a United States Estuary: a case study <strong>of</strong> biological invasions<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> San Francisco Bay and Delta. U.S. Fish and WildlifeService and National Sea Grant Report No. PB96-166525.Available at http://nas.er.usgs.gov/publications/sfinvade.htm.Collins, J.N., Debra Smith, S. Klohr and K. Zaremba. 2001. Guidelinesto Monitor <strong>the</strong> Distribution, Abundance, and Treatment <strong>of</strong>Non-indigenous Species <strong>of</strong> Cordgrass in <strong>the</strong> San Francisco Estuary.Report to <strong>the</strong> California Coastal Conservancy.Daehler and Strong. 1996. Status, Prediction and Prevention <strong>of</strong>introduced cordgrass Spartina spp. invasions in Pacific Estuaries,USA. Biological Conservation 78: 51-58.Daehler, C.C. and D.R. Strong. 1997. Hybridization between introducedsmooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora, Poaceae) and nativeCalifornia cordgrass (S. foliosa) in San Francisco Bay, California,USA. American Journal <strong>of</strong> Botany 85: 607-611.Goals Project. 1999. Baylands Ecosystem Habitat Goals. A report<strong>of</strong> habitat recommendations prepared by <strong>the</strong> San Francisco BayArea Wetlands Ecosystem Goals Project. First Reprint. U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, San Francisco, Calif./S.F. BayRegional Water Quality Control Board, Oakland, Calif.GPS Pathfinder Office v.3 (2003). Trimble Navigation LimitedMapping & GIS Systems, 645 North Mary Avenue, P.O. Box3642, Sunnyvale, California. www.trimble.com.Hall, R.J. A.M. Hastings and D.R. Ayres. 2006. Explaining <strong>the</strong>explosion : modelling hybrid invasions. <strong>Proceedings</strong> - Royal Society<strong>of</strong> London. Biological Sciences 273 :1385-1389.Hall, R.J., A.M. Hastings and D.R. Ayres. 2010. Modeling <strong>the</strong>spread <strong>of</strong> invasive Spartina hybrids in San Francisco Bay. 2010In: Ayres, D.R., D.W. Kerr, S.D. Ericson and P.R. Ol<strong>of</strong>son, eds.<strong>Proceedings</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Third</strong> <strong>International</strong> <strong>Conference</strong> on InvasiveSpartina, 2004 Nov 8-10, San Francisco, CA, USA. San FranciscoEstuary Invasive Spartina Project <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> California StateCoastal Conservancy: Oakland, CA. (this volume).Josselyn, M.,B. Larsson, and A. Fiorillo. 1993. An ecological comparison<strong>of</strong> an introduced marsh plant, Spartina alterniflora, inSan Francisco Bay. Technical Report <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Romberg TiburonCenter, Tiburon, CA.National Invasive Species Council. 2001. Meeting <strong>the</strong> InvasiveSpecies Challenge: Invasive Species Management Plan. 80pp.San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission(BCDC). 2001. San Francisco Bay Ecology and Related Habitats.Staff Report September 28, 2001. http://www.bcdc.ca.gov.SPSS (2000). SYSTAT 10 Statistics. SPSS, Inc. Chicago, Illinois.www.systat.com.Strahlberg, D., V. Toniolo, G.W. Page and L.E. Stenzel. 2010.Potential impacts <strong>of</strong> Spartina spread on shorebird populations inSouth San Francisco Bay. In: Ayres, D.R., D.W. Kerr, S.D. Ericsonand P.R. Ol<strong>of</strong>son, eds. <strong>Proceedings</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Third</strong> <strong>International</strong><strong>Conference</strong> on Invasive Spartina, 2004 Nov 8-10, SanFrancisco, CA, USA. San Francisco Estuary Invasive SpartinaProject <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> California State Coastal Conservancy: Oakland,CA. (this volume).Wolf, D.E., N. Takebayashi, and L.H. Rieseberg. 2001. Predicting<strong>the</strong> risk <strong>of</strong> extinction through hybridization. Conservation Biology15:1039-1053.Zaremba K. 2001. Hybridization and Control <strong>of</strong> a Native-Non NativeSpartina Complex in San Francisco Bay. Master <strong>of</strong> Arts <strong>the</strong>sis,San Francisco State University, San Francisco, California.Zaremba K. 2001. San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina ProjectField Identification Guides. Prepared for <strong>the</strong> California CoastalConservancy.Zaremba, K, M. McGowan, D. Ayres. 2004. San Francisco EstuaryInvasive Spartina Project Monitoring Report for 2003.-82-
Page 2 and 3:
Proceedings <stron
Page 4 and 5:
FORWARD & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe <stro
Page 6 and 7:
TABLE OF CONTENTSForward & Acknowle
Page 9 and 10:
Community Spartina Education and St
Page 11 and 12:
included the docum
Page 14:
CHAPTER ONESpartina Biology
Page 17 and 18:
Chapter 1: Spartina Biology
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 28 and 29:
Proceedings <stron
Page 30 and 31:
Proceedings <stron
Page 32 and 33:
Proceedings <stron
Page 34:
Proceedings <stron
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 42 and 43:
Proceedings <stron
Page 44: Proceedings <stron
Page 47 and 48: Chapter 1: Spartina Biology
Page 60 and 61: Proceedings <stron
Page 79 and 80: Chapter 2: Spartina Distribution an
Page 140: CHAPTER THREEEcosystem Effects <str
Page 143 and 144: Chapter 3: Ecosystem Effects <stron
Page 145 and 146:
Chapter 3: Ecosystem Effects <stron
Page 148 and 149:
Proceedings <stron
Page 150 and 151:
Proceedings <stron
Page 152:
Proceedings <stron
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 160 and 161:
Proceedings <stron
Page 162 and 163:
Proceedings <stron
Page 164:
Proceedings <stron
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 174 and 175:
Proceedings <stron
Page 176:
Proceedings <stron
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 184 and 185:
Proceedings <stron
Page 186 and 187:
Proceedings <stron
Page 188 and 189:
Proceedings <stron
Page 190 and 191:
Proceedings <stron
Page 192 and 193:
Proceedings <stron
Page 194 and 195:
Proceedings <stron
Page 196:
Proceedings <stron
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 204 and 205:
Proceedings <stron
Page 206 and 207:
Proceedings <stron
Page 208 and 209:
Proceedings <stron
Page 210 and 211:
Proceedings <stron
Page 212:
Proceedings <stron
Page 216 and 217:
Proceedings <stron
Page 218 and 219:
Proceedings <stron
Page 220 and 221:
Proceedings <stron
Page 222 and 223:
Proceedings <stron
Page 224 and 225:
Proceedings <stron
Page 226 and 227:
Proceedings <stron
Page 228 and 229:
Proceedings <stron
Page 230 and 231:
Proceedings <stron
Page 232 and 233:
Proceedings <stron
Page 234 and 235:
Proceedings <stron
Page 236 and 237:
Proceedings <stron
Page 238 and 239:
Proceedings <stron
Page 240 and 241:
Proceedings <stron
Page 242 and 243:
Proceedings <stron
Page 244 and 245:
Proceedings <stron
Page 246:
Proceedings <stron
Page 249 and 250:
Chapter 4: Spartina Control and Man
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 276 and 277:
Proceedings <stron
Page 278 and 279:
Proceedings <stron
Page 280 and 281:
Proceedings <stron
Page 282 and 283:
Proceedings <stron
Page 284 and 285:
Proceedings <stron
Page 286 and 287:
Proceedings <stron
Page 288 and 289:
Proceedings <stron
Page 290:
Proceedings <stron
show all

Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Invasive ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?