Plant Community Composition and Waterfowl Food Production on Wetland Reserve Program Easements Compared to Those on Managed Public Lands in Western Oregon and Washington
- 410 Downloads
The Wetland Reserve Program (WRP) is one conservation tool used to mitigate national wetland loss, but few studies have evaluated the WRP for wildlife. During falls 2008 and 2009, we evaluated wetland plant communities and seed densities on 23 WRP wetlands in relation to 23 reference wetlands on managed public lands in the Willamette Valley and Lower Columbia River Valley (LCRV) of western Oregon and southwest Washington. Plant community on WRP easements differed by management intensity (A = 0.111, p = 0.002) with perennial and introduced species indicative of unmanaged easements and annuals indicative of actively managed wetlands, but plant community composition did not differ between WRP and reference wetlands (A = 0.003, p = 0.21). Overall, seed biomass was similar between WRP and reference wetlands (F1, 41 = 2.44, p = 0.12), but this relationship varied by study region (F1, 41 = 12.6, p = 0.001) related to management intensity. Seed biomass was greater on actively (765 ± 105 kg/ha) vs. passively (349 ± 105 kg/ha) managed sites (F3, 34 = 9.90, p = 0.003). Seasonal wetlands on WRP easements can achieve a structure and function similar to reference sites. However, we suspect that in the absence of active management the value of WRP sites will decline as the plant community shifts to being dominated by introduced perennial species like reed-canary grass that will reduce the diversity of native wetland plants and lower seed abundance for waterbirds.
KeywordsPhalaris arundinacea Plant community Seed biomass Oregon Wetland Reserve Program Washington Willamette Valley
We thank the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Pacific Coast Joint Venture, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife at Oregon State University for funding this research. We also appreciate the Natural Resource Conservation Service, Portland Metro, US Fish and Wildlife Service, and numerous private landowners for access to their land, and their time, knowledge, and assistance. Finally, we are indebted to J. Adams, S. Doddenhoff, T. Fox, C. King, S. Paroulek, B. Peters, and E. Weiner for help, friendship, and arduous labor in the field and lab.
- Abraham K, Anderson M, Clark R, Colpitts L, Reed E, Bishop R, Eadie J, Petrie M, Rohwer F, Tome M, Rojo A (2007) North American waterfowl management plan continental progress assessment final report. http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/NAWMP/files/FinalAssessmentReport.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2011.
- Anderson DH, Dugger BD (1998) A conceptual basis for evaluating restoration success. In: Wadsworth KG (ed) Transactions of the 63rd North American Wildlife and Natural Resource Conference, 20–24 March, 1998, Orlando, Florida. Wildlife Management Institute, Washington, pp 111–121Google Scholar
- Benner PA, Sedell JR (1997) Upper Willamette River landscape: a historical perspective. In: Laenen A, Dunette DA (eds) River quality: dynamics and restoration. Lewis Publishers, New York, New York, USA, pp 23–47Google Scholar
- Beyer HL (2004) Hawth’s analysis tools for AcrGIS. http://www.spatialecology.com/htools. Accessed 8 May 2008.
- Checkett JM, Drobney RD, Petrie MJ, Graber DA (2002) True metabolizable energy of moist-soil seeds. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30:1113–1119Google Scholar
- Dahl TE (2006) Status and trends of wetlands in the conterminous United States 1998 to 2004. U.S. Department of the Interior; Fish and Wildlife Service, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- Dufrêne M, Legendre P (1997) Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecological Monographs 67:345–366Google Scholar
- Evans-Peters G (2010) Assessing biological values of Wetland Reserve Program wetlands for wintering waterfowl. Thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis, USAGoogle Scholar
- Fleishman E, Noss RF, Noon BR (2006) Utility and limitations of species richness metrics for conservation planning. Ecological Indicators 65:43–553Google Scholar
- Fleming KS (2010) Effects of management and hydrology on vegetation, winter waterbird use, and water quality on Wetland Reserve Program lands, Mississippi. Thesis, Mississippi State University, University, USA.Google Scholar
- Frazier S, Galat DL (2009) Analysis of Missouri Wetlands Reserve Program easement monitoring data. Final Report, Conservation Effects Assessment Project, Resource Inventory and Assessment Division, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Beltsville, Maryland, USA.Google Scholar
- Fredrickson LH, Taylor TS (1982) Management of seasonally flooded impoundments for wildlife. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Resource Publication 148, Washington, D.C., USA.Google Scholar
- Guard BJ (1995) Wetland plants of Oregon and Washington. Lone Pine Publishing, RentonGoogle Scholar
- Hagy HM (2010) Winter food and waterfowl dynamics in managed moist-soil wetlands in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley. Dissertation, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, USAGoogle Scholar
- Harmond JE, Brandenburg NR, Klein LM (1968) Mechanical seed cleaning and handling. Agricultural handbook no. 354, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. USA.Google Scholar
- Hicks BM (2003) Habitat contribution and waterbird use of Wetland Reserve Program sites in the Cache River Watershed, Illinois. Thesis, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, USAGoogle Scholar
- Hitchcock CL, Cronquist A (1978) Flora of the Pacific Northwest, 4th edn. University of Washington Press, SeattleGoogle Scholar
- Hulse DW, Gregory S, Baker J (eds) (2002) Willamette River Basin Atlas: trajectories of environmental and ecological change. Oregon State University Press, CorvallisGoogle Scholar
- Johnson GE, Thom RM, Whiting AH, Sutherland GB, Berquam T, Ebberts BD, Ricci NM, Southard JA, Wilcox JD (2003) An ecosystem-based approach to habitat restoration with emphasis on salmonids in the Columbia River estuary. Final Report, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland, Oregon, USA.Google Scholar
- King SL, Twedt DJ, Wilson RR (2006) The role of the Wetland Reserve Program in conservation efforts in the Mississippi River Alluvial Valley. Wildlife Society Bulletin 34:914–920Google Scholar
- Littell RC, Milliken GA, Stroup WW, Wolfinger RD, Schabenberger O (2006) SAS for mixed models, 2nd edn. SAS Institute, Inc., CaryGoogle Scholar
- Martin AC, Barkley WD (1973) Seed identification manual, 2nd edn. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
- McCune B, Mefford MJ (2009) PC-ORD. Multivariate analysis of ecological data. MjM Software, Gleneden BeachGoogle Scholar
- Mielke PW (1984) Meterological applications of permutation techniques based on distance functions. In: Krishnaiah PR, Sen PK (eds) Handbook of statistics. Volume 4. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, pp 813–830Google Scholar
- National Research Council [NRC] (1995) Wetlands: characteristics and boundaries. National Academy Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] (2010) Conservation Programs. Wetlands Reserve Program. <www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/wrp/index.html.>Accessed 8 Feb 2010.
- Naylor LK (2002) Evaluating moist-soil seed production and management in Central Valley wetlands to determine habitat needs for waterfowl. Thesis, University of California, Davis, USA.Google Scholar
- Olmstead VG (2010) Evaluation of management strategies on moist-soil seed availability and depletion on Wetland Reserve Program sites in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley. Thesis, Arkansas Tech University, Russellville, USA.Google Scholar
- Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife [ODFW] (2006) Oregon conservation strategy. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, SalemGoogle Scholar
- Rewa CA (2005) Wildlife benefits of the Wetland Reserve Program. In: Haufler JB (ed) Fish and wildlife benefits of Farm Bill conservation programs: 2000–2005 update. The Wildlife Society Technical Review, Bethesda, pp 133–145Google Scholar
- Institute SAS (2004) SAS/STAT user’s guide. SAS Institute, CaryGoogle Scholar
- Summers, EA (2010) Evaluating ecological restoration in Tennessee hardwood bottomland forests. Thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USAGoogle Scholar
- U.S. Department of Agriculture [USDA] (2010) Natural Resource Conservation Service, Plant Database. http://plants.usda.gov/ Accessed 3 April 2010.
- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] (2010) Division of Bird Habitat Conservation. North American Waterfowl Management Plan. http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/NAWMP/index.shtm. Accessed 8 April 2010.