My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
wildlife Monitoring program-2015
Orono
>
Property Files
>
Street Address
>
T
>
Tonkawa Road
>
0520 Tonkawa Road - 05-117-23-32-0005
>
Misc
>
wildlife Monitoring program-2015
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/22/2023 3:13:17 PM
Creation date
5/20/2019 2:09:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
x Address Old
Address
0520 Tonkawa Rd
Document Type
Misc
PIN
0511723320005
Supplemental fields
ProcessedPID
Updated
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• Total Wetland-Associated Species–For birds only,the total species associated with wetlands. <br /> • Diversity Index–Shannon-Wiener Diversity Index accounts for species richness and evenness, <br /> or the distribution of total individuals across the total number of species. <br /> A baseline monitoring report is prepared after collecting the first year's data. This monitoring report <br /> describes the baseline conditions for select wildlife species richness and abundance before significant <br /> ecological restoration occurred. Limited restoration occurred in 2014 which did not significantly affect <br /> wildlife species. Buckthorn removal occurred in upland and lowland forests early in the year before <br /> wildlife monitoring began. Follow-up spot-herbiciding of resprouting buckthorn and garlic mustard took <br /> place in summer. Cattails in the marsh were herbicided in mid-summer. In late summer native trees <br /> and shrubs were planted in the upland and lowland forests. The restoration work that significantly <br /> affects the wetland—cattail removal,excavation,and planting of wet meadow vegetation—will occur in <br /> late 2014 and in 2015. Post-restoration data will be collected in 2015 and 2016 after the significant <br /> work in the wetland is completed. After the 2016 sampling event, pre-restoration conditions will be <br /> compared to post-restoration conditions and the assumptions of the restoration plan assessed and <br /> modified as needed. <br /> Trends in wildlife at the Nelson Wetland may be positive, negative or neutral for individual species and <br /> for the groups of birds, insects,and amphibians. Positive trends indicate that the restoration approach <br /> is successful,while negative trends indicate that the restoration approach should be changed. It is <br /> assumed that post-restoration conditions will result in: <br /> • Increase in the number of species and individuals of wetland-associated birds; <br /> • Increase in the number of species and individuals of dragonflies and damselflies; <br /> • Increase in the number of species and individuals of frogs and toads; <br /> • Increase in the diversity index. <br /> A visual inspection of graphs of these metrics for 2014 baseline and 2015-2016 post-restoration data will <br /> determine whether the assumption that wetland species will benefit from the restoration is correct. <br /> Negative trends, however,can be due to natural phenomena,such as drought or wet years. Sometimes <br /> a catastrophe,such as tornado or disease,affects plant and animal species, producing a temporary <br /> negative trend. Due to this natural variability,two years of post-restoration monitoring are needed <br /> before trends are considered real. <br /> Trend data will help decide whether to change a restoration technique. A decision about changing the <br /> restoration technique based on trend data should not, however, be made lightly. The cause may be <br /> natural variability,for example. Rather,trend data merely give notice that something should be looked <br /> at more carefully. Investigating negative trends is a normal part of implementing a restoration plan and <br /> within the adaptive management cycle. Given uncertainty about the ultimate effect on wildlife of a <br /> restoration,setting a target condition is not useful. It is useful to ensure that the initial establishment of <br /> a planting played out as intended. Achieving a certain percent of native cover,for example, is expected <br /> by the third year after planting and will be measured in the separate vegetation monitoring program. <br /> 6 1 P a g e <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.