HomeMy WebLinkAboutwildlife Monitoring program-2015 BOLTON 8L M F==N K , I NC®
Consulting Engineers & Surveyors 52.p 1-oyt��p, VcL
2638 Shadow Lane, Suite 200•Chaska, MN 55318-1172
Phone(952)448-8838•Fax(952)448-8805
www.bolton-menk.com
Preconstruction Meeting Minutes
Project: Nelson Restoration Project
City of Orono,MN
Date/Time: January 27,2015
Place: Orono City Hall
Attendance: Please complete sign in form when passed around
Purpose: Introduce involved parties;identify their involvement and their contact people.
Review contract requirement,expectations and establish protocol.
Owner: Private
City Contacts:
• Melanie Curtis,City Planner
o mcurtis@ci.orono.mn.us
o (952) 249-4627
• Adam Edwards, City Engineer/Director of Public Works
o aedwards@ci.orono.mn.us
o (952) 249-4661
• Dave Martini,Bolton &Menk
o davidma@bolton-menk.com
o (612)756-4315
Owner Contacts:
• Doug Mensing,AES
General Contractor:
• Matt Lasch,AES
Plan Review/Revisions:
• Approved plan dated August 13, 2014.
• Plan revisions must be reviewed and approved by the City.
Construction Schedule:
• Evasive specie removal has begun.
• Plantings have been completed in some areas.
• Staking was completed yesterday.
• Compost removal will require temporary displacement of erosion control devices.
• Top foot of excavation will be removed from site. Should require 2-3 days to complete.
• 807 Cubic Yards of material will be removed from site.
• Remaining excavated material will be spread on site(1' or less).
• Excavation will begin once freezing weather returns(possibly next week).
H:\ORNO\C13107766\12-0975 Nelson Restoration\Pre Con Minutes.doc
C)
= BOL .TON & M E—=N K , I N C®
Consulting Engineers & Surveyors
" 2638 Shadow Lane,Suite 200•Chaska, MN 55318-1172
Phone(952)448-8838•Fax(952)448-8805
www.bolton-menk.com
• Additional seeding will occur in the spring along with herbicide treatment.
• Channel connections will be completed towards the end of the project.
Permits:
• City—Approved
• County—Approved
• NPDES—Approved
• MCWD—Approved
• Corp. of Engineers—Pending
Maintenance and Control of Traffic:
• Maintenance of traffic is the Contractor's responsibility.
• Must follow traffic control per Hennepin County requirements.
Storage/Staging: On-site
Construction Concerns:
• Hours of Work
0 7:00 a.m. To 8:00 p.m. Weekdays.
0 8:00 a.m. To 8:00 p.m.Weekends or holidays.
• Access per Hennepin County and MCWD requirements.
• Street cleaning needed until project completion.
Erosion Control: In place prior to start of construction. Must be maintained throughout construction.
Rock construction entrance.
• Plugged culverts are a pre-existing condition.
• Coordination with MCWD will be required before erosion control devices can be removed and
permits can be terminated.
HAORNO\C13107766\12-0975 Nelson Restoration\Pre Con Minutes.doc
Sign-In Sheet Nelson Restoration Project
Pre-Construction Meeting City of Orono
January 27, 2015
Name & Organization Representing Address Phone# Email Address
(952) 249-4627 Office
Melanie Curtis, City of Orono Orono, MN Cell mcurtis@ci.orono.mn.us
(952) 249-4616 Fax
(952) 448-8838 Office
Dave Martini, Bolton & Menk Chaska, MN (612) 756-4315 Cell davidma@bolton-menk.com
(952)448-8805 Fax
(952) 249-4661 Office
Adam Edwards, City of Orono Orono, MN Cell aedwards@ci.orono.mn.us
Fax
Office
Brad King, AES Prior Lake, MN (651) 387-6732 Cell
Fax
(952)447-1919 Office
Matt Lasch, AES Prior Lake, MN Cell
Fax
(952)447-19190ffice
Doug Mensing, AES Prior Lake, MN (612) 202-2252 Cell dougm@appliedeco.com
(952) 447-1920 Fax
(952)473-2855 Office
Cortney Hall, MCWD Minnetonka, MN Cell chall@minnehahacreek.org
Fax
(952) 641-4580 Office
Lora Pohtilla, MCWD Minnetonka, MN Cell 1pohtilla@minnehahacreek.org
Fax
Office
Cell
Fax
u1 +
H:\ORNO\C13107766\12-0975 Nelson Restoration\Pre Con Sign In Sheetdoc x' ,F Page—of—
NELSON WETLAND RESTORATION PROJECT
WILDLIFE MONITORING PROGRAM
2014 BASELINE REPORT
j
t�•
li
•( J
Pi
W.� • t r C I i fin' '� '+.
h
Submitted to:
Dr. Glen Nelson
500 Tonkawa Road
Long Lake, MN 55356-9724
Prepared by:
Genesis Mickel, Kim Chapman and Alex Waltz
Applied Ecological Services, Inc.
21938 Mushtown Road, Prior Lake, MN 55372
Phone: (952) 447-1919
Email: info.mn@appliedeco.com
December 15, 2014
momwr7911111111 Applied
'1n
. r or 11111
"a A Ecological
Services, Inc.
AES 12-0975
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................................1
2 Wildlife Monitoring Program................................................................................................................2
2.1 Goals................................................................................................................................................2
2.2 Target Species..................................................................................................................................2
2.3 Field Equipment and Supplies.........................................................................................................3
2.4 Survey Protocol................................................................................................................................3
2.5 Data Management,Analysis and Reporting....................................................................................5
3 2014 Baseline Survey Results...............................................................................................................7
3.1 Birds.................................................................................................................................................7
3.2 Dragonflies and Damselflies............................................................................................................8
3.3 Frogs and Toads...............................................................................................................................8
4 Discussion.............................................................................................................................................9
5 References............................................................................................................................................9
TABLES
Table 1. Field equipment and supplies........................................................................................................3
Table 2. 2014 wildlife survey summary........................................................................................................7
Table 3. Bird species and individuals observed during surveys...................................................................7
Table 4. Dragonfly and damselfly species and individuals observed during surveys..................................8
Table 5. Frog and toad species observed at Nelson during surveys............................................................8
MAP EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT 1. SITE HABITAT&WILDLIFE MONITORING LOCATIONS
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A. WILDLIFE MONITORING FIELD DATA FORMS
APPENDIX B. REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOS
Citation: Applied Ecological Services, Inc. 2014. Nelson Wetland Restoration Project: Wildlife
Monitoring Program 2014 Baseline Report. Minneapolis, MN.
i I P a g e
1 INTRODUCTION
In 2013, Dr. Nelson,owner of the Nelson Wetland, began planning and implementing the restoration of
a marsh wetland and surrounding upland habitats at 520 Tonkawa Road, Long Lake,Minnesota (Exhibit
1). Ecological restoration in the uplands began in 2014. Permits to carry out the wetland restoration
were obtained in 2014 and this restoration work will begin in 2015. It is expected that the wetland
restoration will be substantially complete in 2015. Follow-up management of the young plantings will
occur for three years after construction,as required by permit.
Monitoring of vegetation and wildlife is underway in order to understand the effect of an experimental
technique for restoring marshes dominated by invasive species of cattails. Tens of thousands of acres of
invasive-cattail wetlands exist in the Twin Cities metro area,with additional hundreds of thousands of
acres across the Midwest. The experiment at the Nelson Wetland involves removal of the shallow
cattail root mass, burial of the area with material excavated from the wetland (which creates create an
area of open water),and planting of a wet meadow on the former cattail area. Advantages of the
technique is that less material must be removed from the marsh,cattail seed is buried,and the slight
increase in elevation reduces future cattail invasion after the wet meadow is established. The total area
of wetland remains the same, resulting in no net loss of wetland, but the quality of the wetland is
improved by removal of invasive cattails and the addition of two wetland types,wet meadow and open
water. Dr. Nelson,the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District,City of Orono, and others are interested in
learning whether this is a useful technique for dealing with invasive-cattail marshes.
The Wildlife Monitoring Program is one of two at the Nelson Wetland Restoration Project. The other
monitoring program focuses on vegetation using two methods: a)wetland delineation with a review of
wetland function and value using the Minnesota Routine Assessment Method (MNRAM)and b) periodic
inspection of the vegetation with photo-documentation to evaluate progress of the restoration. A
baseline MNRAM assessment was completed in 2014. A follow-up MNRAM assessment will occur after
the restoration work and three years of management are completed. The results of the baseline, pre-
restoration MNRAM will be compared to the results of the post-restoration MNRAM in order to
document changes in wetland values and functions. With the removal of cattail over most of the site,
and replacement by wet meadow and open water, it is expected that the restoration will improve
wetland functions and values over pre-restoration conditions. The vegetation assessment and photo-
documentation will occur two or three times during the growing season for three years after the
restoration plantings are completed.
A goal of wildlife monitoring at the Nelson Wetland is to draw general conclusions about the effect of
the overall restoration and the experimental cattail reduction technique on wildlife populations. As the
restoration matures,and with the addition of uncommon wet meadow vegetation and open water,
wildlife populations should become more diverse. In the short term,the results of wildlife monitoring
will not change the intended restoration and management approach. At the end of three years,
however,when the restoration and three years of management are completed,trends will emerge in
the monitoring data. These trends will be evaluated and the restoration plan modified in order to
improve the outcome of the overall restoration initiative.
11 Page
2 WILDLIFE MONITORING PROGRAM
2.1 Goals
The goals of the Wildlife Monitoring Program at the Nelson Wetland are to:
1. Gather pre-restoration baseline data and post-restoration data in order to draw general
conclusions about the effect of the restoration on wildlife;
2. Assess the success of the restoration and management technique in order to facilitate adaptive
management.
2.2 Target Species
The focus of this wildlife monitoring program is the systematic collection of targeted wildlife data.
Detailed and standardized data are required for measuring animal populations in order to assess
changes and trends.
Wildlife is a useful indicator because it responds to the quantity and quality of available habitat. The
presence or absence of particular animals sheds light on the ecological health of a site or landscape.
While vegetation is relatively fixed and easy to survey,animals are more difficult to study because they
move, may be intermittently present,or are secretive or active at night. For this reason,three easily-
detected categories of wildlife were selected for monitoring:
• Birds,
• Dragonflies and damselflies,
• Frogs and toads.
Birds are relatively abundant, identifiable by trained non-experts,and indicators of habitat quantity and
quality. Bird surveys are conducted at an established sampling point(Exhibit 1). Detailed bird
monitoring protocols are in Section 2.4.1.
As plentiful food for many animals and as pollinators of plants,insects are a vital component of overall
ecosystem health. However,their small size, mobility,and challenging identification features make
insect populations difficult to monitor. Dragonflies and damselflies, however,are useful as indicators of
insect activity because they are abroad in the daytime,there are a limited number of species, and good
identification guides exist. Detailed insect monitoring protocols are in Section 2.4.2.
Frogs and toads are also relatively easy to monitor. Amphibians are known to be sensitive to
environmental changes and therefore useful as indicators of habitat quality. Frog and toad surveys will
be conducted at one amphibian monitoring point. This monitoring point was selected for proximity to
open water expected to be present during the frog and toad breeding season (April 15-July 10). Detailed
frog and toad monitoring protocols are in Section 2.4.3.
For birds,dragonflies and damselflies, all individuals and species seen (in the case of birds, heard)will be
counted. Frogs can be difficult to see, but calls are easily heard and the location of calls mapped.
21 Page
2.3 Field Equipment and Supplies
The following field equipment and supplies are useful in monitoring wildlife and vegetation (Table 1).
Table 1. Field equipment and supplies
Equipment Supplies Personal Gear
Camera Data Sheets(see appendices) Hat(Sun/Warmth)
Binoculars Field Log Paper/Notebook Light/Heavy Gloves
Compass Pens/Pencils(2) Raingear
Clipboard Field Maps Hiking Boots
Knapsack Field Guides Sunscreen
Insect net(if applicable) Camera batteries Sunglasses
GPS Unit(optional) First Aid Kit Insect Repellent
Bird Call CDs/Tapes Water Bottle
AOU Bird Alpha Codes
Frog and Toad Call CDs/Tapes
2.4 Survey Protocol
Bird, insect,and frog monitoring may be completed at the Nelson Wetland in one day. Four surveys are
conducted in late spring/early summer, mid-summer,early fall,and late fall. Since birds are easily
disturbed, bird monitoring is conducted before insect monitoring. Frogs and toads can be monitored
when they are calling,which is most vigorously in the early evening and early morning.
Birds
Bird monitoring is conducted or supervised by a qualified birder with comprehensive knowledge of
Minnesota bird species. Several field guides,from technical to layperson-friendly, are available. AES
recommends the Peterson Field Guide to Birds of Eastern and Central North America (Peterson 2010).
Smartphone applications also are available to assist with field identification. Two useful ones are the
"Sibley eGuide to Birds"and "iBird Pro." Both include song recordings for most species.
Breeding bird surveys in 2014 were conducted in the early breeding season, in the late mid-summer
breeding season,and once each in the early and late fall migration. Future post-restoration surveys will
occur in the same periods.
Bird surveys are conducted from dawn to 10:00 am or until a noticeable drop in bird activity occurs.
Surveys are conducted in weather that promotes bird activity. Surveys are not conducted in steady rain,
poor visibility,or steady,strong winds over 2Smph. Brief periods of rain, light drizzle and gusts up to
30mph are acceptable if birds remain active. Since human movement through the area may disturb the
birds,the bird point-counts should be completed prior to insect and other data collection.
3 1 P a g e
Bird surveys will use the point-count method. A point-count sampling area is defined by a 100m-radius
circle from the sampling point(Exhibit 2). The surveyor arrives at a point and waits 5-10 minutes for
birds to habituate to the surveyor's presence. While waiting,the surveyor completes the general items
on the data sheet, including weather(see Bird Point Count Data Form,Appendix A). (The data form has
all the codes needed to complete a point count.) The surveyor sketches and labels the different habitat
cover types in and around the 100m-radius circle using AES's habitat classes(see Appendix A).
Dimensions of the habitat and distances from the sampling point are noted. Significant features in the
100m radius area are drawn: roads, hedgerows,structures,ditches, and open water.
The surveyor records all bird species seen and heard during a 10-minute sampling period and notes
whether individuals are inside or outside the 100m radius. Mapping of bird locations is done to avoid
double-counting individuals,to indicate the habitat a bird was using,and indicate whether a bird was
inside or outside the 100m radius. For each species,the number of individuals is recorded in three time
periods. A surveyor notes species by the American Ornithologist's Union alpha code for common names
(AOU 2012); codes for the bird's behavior is also recorded. The alpha code of each bird's location is
drawn on the map. Birds flying overhead at an elevation greater than 30m are not counted. In each
survey,a point-count is done twice at the same location and the results averaged for data analysis.
One point count sampling location was established, near the northeast corner of the wetland (Exhibit 1).
From this location the entire wetland is visible(although the southern portion is outside the 100m
radius).
For establishing trends(see below),the metrics used from bird surveys are the total species
encountered,total number of individuals seen,and total number of species that are associated with
wetlands.
Dragonflies and Damselflies
Dragonfly and damselfly presence is surveyed along a walking transect. On this predetermined path the
surveyor records all individuals of dragonflies and damselflies observed. Mead (2009) is an excellent
field guide to dragonfly and damselfly species in the Upper Midwest.
The dragonfly-damselfly transect at the Nelson Wetland begins in the parking area above the wetland,
continues northwest and downhill to the north edge of the wetland,then follows the wetland's
boundary, returning to the parking lot (Exhibit 1). The transect is walked slowly. When a dragonfly or
damselfly is encountered,the observer stops to record the species or genus,with the aid of binoculars if
necessary. Experts may use a net to carefully capture an individual and release it unharmed. Netting
should not be tried without experience as these insects are easily damaged or killed. Since walking the
transect will disturb birds, it is important that the bird point count is completed prior to beginning the
insect transect.
Surveys should occur in weather similar to that for birds—light or no winds and no significant rain.
Dragonflies and damselflies are most active when temperatures are above 50 degrees F.,although a few
species fly at lower temperatures. As a result,they are most active in the growing season between 9am
and 5pm,and sampling should be conducted in this period. Surveys will be conducted from spring
through fall; peak dragonfly activity occurs in mid-to late summer.
4 1 P a g e
For establishing trends (see below),the metrics from dragonfly and damselfly surveys are the total
species encountered and the total number of individuals seen.
Frogs and Toads
Frog and toad monitoring will be conducted or supervised by people able to distinguish the calls of
species present at the site. Species most likely to be encountered at the Nelson Wetland are American
toad, Gray tree frog,Spring peeper,Wood frog, Green frog, Cope's gray tree frog, Northern leopard frog,
and Western chorus frog. Several field guides are available to identify frogs and toads. Since breeding
calls (excepting in tree frogs)generally are made in or near open water,one sampling location was
established at the north end of the wetland (Exhibit 1).
For field identification,AES suggests the Peterson Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of Eastern and
Central North America(Collins and Conant 1998). Since the identification of frogs and toads will be
based on calls, it is also important to know each species' call. The Wisconsin DNR maintains a website
with descriptions and call recordings for each species found in the state (WIDNR 2014). These are the
same species encountered in the Twin Cities region. Surveys generally use the Minnesota Frog and Toad
Calling Survey method (http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/volunteering/frogtoad survey/index.html).
Frogs and toads vocalize vigorously after sunset, but also call in early morning, during cloudy weather,
and even in the middle of the day(especially Western chorus frogs). Surveys are done in the breeding
season (April 15-July 10). The surveyor proceeds to the sampling point,which usually causes frogs and
toads to stop calling. The surveyor waits 5-10 minutes for calling to begin again,while completing the
general form items and weather information. Frog and toad calling locations are noted and drawn on
the map using a four-letter code for the common name. Listening and mapping should continue for ten
minutes.
For establishing trends (see below),the metrics from frog and toad calling are the total species
encountered and the total number of individuals seen.
2.5 Data Management, Analysis and Reporting
Data Management
After each sampling event,field data forms are labeled sequentially, scanned, and archived as hard copy
in a binder and as a pdf on a computer. Pertinent data from the forms are entered in a spreadsheet and
each subsequent year of data added.
Data Analysis and Summarization
The monitoring at Nelson Wetland will generate data to analyze trends in wildlife populations. Sampling
events for pre-restoration baseline data will be compared to the average of two years of post-
restoration data. Differences between baseline and post-restoration data will be identified and
visualizing in graphs.
Trend Detection
The metrics to assess habitat quality and quantity and to measure change in wildlife populations are:
• Total Individuals—The number of individuals observed in a sampling event;
• Total Species—The number of species present;
51Page
• Total Wetland-Associated Species–For birds only,the total species associated with wetlands.
• Diversity Index–Shannon-Wiener Diversity Index accounts for species richness and evenness,
or the distribution of total individuals across the total number of species.
A baseline monitoring report is prepared after collecting the first year's data. This monitoring report
describes the baseline conditions for select wildlife species richness and abundance before significant
ecological restoration occurred. Limited restoration occurred in 2014 which did not significantly affect
wildlife species. Buckthorn removal occurred in upland and lowland forests early in the year before
wildlife monitoring began. Follow-up spot-herbiciding of resprouting buckthorn and garlic mustard took
place in summer. Cattails in the marsh were herbicided in mid-summer. In late summer native trees
and shrubs were planted in the upland and lowland forests. The restoration work that significantly
affects the wetland—cattail removal,excavation,and planting of wet meadow vegetation—will occur in
late 2014 and in 2015. Post-restoration data will be collected in 2015 and 2016 after the significant
work in the wetland is completed. After the 2016 sampling event, pre-restoration conditions will be
compared to post-restoration conditions and the assumptions of the restoration plan assessed and
modified as needed.
Trends in wildlife at the Nelson Wetland may be positive, negative or neutral for individual species and
for the groups of birds, insects,and amphibians. Positive trends indicate that the restoration approach
is successful,while negative trends indicate that the restoration approach should be changed. It is
assumed that post-restoration conditions will result in:
• Increase in the number of species and individuals of wetland-associated birds;
• Increase in the number of species and individuals of dragonflies and damselflies;
• Increase in the number of species and individuals of frogs and toads;
• Increase in the diversity index.
A visual inspection of graphs of these metrics for 2014 baseline and 2015-2016 post-restoration data will
determine whether the assumption that wetland species will benefit from the restoration is correct.
Negative trends, however,can be due to natural phenomena,such as drought or wet years. Sometimes
a catastrophe,such as tornado or disease,affects plant and animal species, producing a temporary
negative trend. Due to this natural variability,two years of post-restoration monitoring are needed
before trends are considered real.
Trend data will help decide whether to change a restoration technique. A decision about changing the
restoration technique based on trend data should not, however, be made lightly. The cause may be
natural variability,for example. Rather,trend data merely give notice that something should be looked
at more carefully. Investigating negative trends is a normal part of implementing a restoration plan and
within the adaptive management cycle. Given uncertainty about the ultimate effect on wildlife of a
restoration,setting a target condition is not useful. It is useful to ensure that the initial establishment of
a planting played out as intended. Achieving a certain percent of native cover,for example, is expected
by the third year after planting and will be measured in the separate vegetation monitoring program.
6 1 P a g e
3 2014 BASELINE SURVEY RESULTS
Select baseline photos are in Appendix B. The GPS locations of photo points are stored in an ArcGIS
database. Photos will be repeated at future sampling events show changes in the vegetation over time.
The four 2014 sampling events occurred in favorable weather conditions(Table 2). Overall,June 17,
2014 was an ideal date for birds and frogs and toads. July 16, 2014 was a peak period for dragonflies
and damselflies, late in the bird breeding season, but past the peak calling period for frogs and toads.
October 10,2014 captured the late perching bird migration,early waterfowl migration,and late
dragonfly period. On November 13, 2014,only birds were surveyed. Migrating waterfowl and winter
resident birds were present. After the bird point count survey on November 13,the surveyors toured
nearby Lakes Minnetonka to determine whether migrating waterfowl were still present in the region.
The surveyors stopped at seven public access points and scanned the waters with binoculars. Good
numbers of waterfowl were present on several bays of Lake Minnetonka. Species seen were Common
merganser, Bufflehead, Common golden-eye, Mallard,and Canada goose. Other less common species
included Scoter,Common loon,and Red-necked grebe.
Table 2. 2014 wildlife survey summary
Survey Date Temperature(°F) Wind Sky Birds Insects Frogs Toads
June 17,2014 64 None Mostly cloudy x x
July 16,2014 64 1-3 mph <10%cloud cover x x
October 10,2014 53 1-3 mph Partly cloudy x x
November 13,2014 19 8-12 mph Partly cloudy x
3.1 Birds
The 2014 point counts detected 18 bird species in the wetland and adjacent uplands(Table 2). Only two
species of wetland-associated birds were seen, Red-winged blackbird and Common yellowthroat. The
other birds primarily used the lowland and upland forests or flew overhead (Chimney swift,Cliff
swallow). Almost twice as many bird species were seen in the summer than in the fall because by
October several species of perching bird had migrated south.
Table 3. Bird species and individuals observed during surveys
Alpha Jun. Jul. Oct. Nov.
Code Common Name Scientific Name 2014 2014 2014 2014
AMCR American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 5 2 2
AMGO American goldfinch Carduelis tristis 4 4 1 3
AMRO American robin Turdus migratorius 1
BCCH Black-capped chickadee Poecile otricapillus 2 3 5 5
BUA Blue jay Cyanocitto cristata 2 3
CHSW Chimney swift Chaetura pelagic 3
CHSP Chipping sparrow Spizella passerina 2
CLSW Cliff swallow Petrochelidon pyrrhonoto 1
7 1 P a g e
Alpha Jun. Jul Oct. Nov.
Code Common Name scientific Name 2014 2014 2014 2014
COYE Common yellowthroat Geothlypis trichos 1 1
DOWO Downy woodpecker Picoides pubescens 2 1
GCFL Great crested flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1
HOSP House sparrow Passerdomesticus 1 5 1
NOCA Northern cardinal Cardinolis cardinalis 2 1
RBWO Red-bellied woodpecker Melonerpes carolinus 2
RWBL Red-winged blackbird Ageloius phoeniceus 5 7
SOSP Song sparrow Melospiza melodia 2 1
WBNU White-breasted nuthatch Sitta caroliniensis 1 1 1
WTSP White-throated sparrow Zonotrichia albicollis 2
Total Individuals 27 31 12 16
Total Species 12 11 6 7
Wetland-Associated Species 2 2 0 0
Birds encountered outside the point count survey periods were also noted. Canada goose, Mourning
dove, Pileated woodpecker, House wren,and Ring-billed gull were heard or seen after or between point
counts. In the November 2014 survey,tracks of Wild turkey were seen.
3.2 Dragonflies and Damselflies
Six species of dragonfly and damselfly were observed on July 16,2014. A hatch of a meadowhawk
species appears to have occurred at the time of the survey, resulting in a high count of that species. On
October 10,2014,only the Green darner was seen. This large dragonfly is one of the few dragonfly
species that migrates south in the fall.
Table 4. Dragonfly and damselfly species and individuals observed during surveys
Common Name scientific Name Jul.2014 Oct.2014
Ruby or White-faced meadowhawk(juvenile) Sympetrum rubicundulum or S.obtrusum 50+ 0
Halloween pennant Celithemis eponina 2 0
Lance-tipped darner Aeshna constricta 1 0
Double-striped bluet(female or juvenile) Enallagma basidens 1 0
Sedge sprite Nehalennia irene 1 0
Blue dasher(juvenile) Pochydiplax longipennis 1 0
Common green darner Anax junius 0 2
Total Individuals 56+ 2
Total Species 6 1
3.3 Frogs and Toads
The single frog and toad survey on June 17,2014,documented only Gray tree frogs. These were heard
calling after sunset and were observed in the uplands east of the wetland and west of Tonkawa Road.
Three individuals were observed east of the wetland in a fountain near a house. Earlier that day a
81 Page
surveyor drove around Lake Minnetonka listening for frogs. Boreal chorus frogs were calling from many
wetlands in the region. The absence of this species at Nelson Wetland is likely due to lack of habitat.
Table 5. Frog and toad species observed at Nelson during surveys
Common Name Scientific Name Jun.2014
Gray treefrog Hyla versicolor 6
Total Individuals 6
Total Species 1
4 DISCUSSION
The Wildlife Monitoring Program at the Nelson Wetland Restoration will document changes in the
wildlife and inform future restoration and management efforts. This document provides baseline data
for comparison against future years after the majority of the restoration work is completed. Few
wetland-associated birds and species of frogs and toads were present. This may be due to the poor
habitat afforded by the dense stand of tall invasive cattails,the lack of water,or the small and isolated
nature of the wetland. (It is three acres in size and separated from other wetlands and Lake
Minnetonka.) Monitoring in 2015 and 2016 will shed light on these questions, as well as provide
information to evaluate the effectiveness of the restoration work and the experimental technique for
improving the quality of invasive-cattail wetlands.
5 REFERENCES
American Ornithologist's Union. 2012. Four-letter(English Name)and Six-letter(Scientific Name)Alpha
Codes for 2083 Bird Species(and 97 Non-Species Taxa)in accordance with the 53rd AOU
Supplement(2012). http://www.birdpop.org/DownloadDocuments/Alpha codes eng.pdf
(Accessed February 2014).
Mead, K. 2009. Dragonflies of the North Woods, Second Edition. North Woods Naturalist Series.
Kollath and Stensaas Publishing. Duluth, MN. 193pp.
Peterson, R. 2010. Peterson Field Guide to Birds of Eastern and Central North America,Sixth Edition.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WIDNR). 2014. Know Your Frogs.
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/caer/ce/eek/critter/amphibian/frogident.htm (Accessed February 2014).
9 1 P a g e
�fvAE��JiVI( F yy ?. MQ— Aw
'
ak
r
`� r
t
3
t3r��A sf a�e3 ..'F.S � ♦, .��� �¢`'�.- '-�."�iJ$��k;'�y ��1���� ,.��iR� f
F ♦' :. �::. s �' �,*'.,..rte . - kk zw
Appendix A
Wildlife MonitoringField Data Forms
�
BIRD POINT COUNT DATA FORM
Project Name Sample Point ID X,Y coordinates(optional)
Date Start Time(24 hr format) Stop Time
Observer Initials Wind Speed Wind Dir. Sky Temp Dominant(>50%) AES Habitat Type
N
Other Habitats
Wind Sky AES Habitat Type
0=none 0=<10%clouds Developed
1=1-3mph 1=partly cloudy Cropland
2=4-7 mph 2=mostly cloudy Barren Land
3=8-12 mph 3=overcast Grassland
4=13-18 mph 4=rain Upland Shrub-Scrub
5=19-24mph 5=fog Upland Broadleaf Forest
6>24 mph Upland Coniferous Forest
w E Behavior Upland Mixed Forest
H=Heard,not seen Wetland Forested
P=Perched,on water or on ground Wetland Shrub-Scrub
F=Flying(flapping) Wetland Emergent
S=Soaring(updraft) Open Water
G=Gliding
K=Kiting
MI=Multi-bird Interaction(describe)
0=other(describe)
Notes:
Circle radius= In S
Number of Individuals
Alpha Behavior 0-3 3-5 5-10 Within
Note
Code Cale min min min loom
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
INSECT TRANSECT DATA FORM
Project Name Sample Transect ID X,Y coordinates(optional) Observer Initials
Start Time(24 hr format) Stop Time Wind Speed Wind Dir. Sky Temp
Dragonfly/Damselfly Species No. Habitat Note
Individuals
FROG AND TOAD POINT COUNT DATA FORM
Project Name Sample Point ID X,Y coordinates(optional)
Date Start Time(24 hr format) Stop Time Distracting Noise During Survey? Describe.
Observer Initials Wind Speed Wind Dir. Sky Temp Moon Visible? No.of Cars During Survey
N
Wind Sky AES Habitat Type
0=none 0=<10%clouds Developed
1=1-3mph 1=partly cloudy Cropland
2=4-7 mph 2=mostly cloudy Barren Land
3=8-12 mph 3=overcast Grassland
4=13-18 mph 4=rain Upland Shrub-Scrub
5=19-24mph 5=fog Upland Broadleaf Forest
6>24 mph Upland Coniferous Forest
Upland Mixed Forest
Wetland Forested
W E Wetland Shrub-Scrub
Wetland Emergent
Open Water
General Notes:
S
Circle radius= m
No.of Within
Species Individuals Habitat loom? Note
1 Wood frog
2 Boreal chorus frog
3 Spring peeper
4 N.Leopard frog
5 Pickerel frog
6 American toad
7 Gray treefrog
8 Cope's gray treefrog
9 N.cricket frog
10 Mink frog
11 Green frog
12 Bullfrog
13 Canadian toad
14 Great plains toad
15
16
17
Appendix B
Representative Photos
♦
i
Af•f �• �,`, �.
View from Tonkawa Road through north half of marsh to the bird point count location,July 16, 2014.
yL
View from south of the bird point count location in the northeast corner of the marsh,toward the south,
July 16, 2014. The frog point count location is here. The insect transect follows the trail.
w
r- ?��r i..•v..4y� ',�� �.;:t rft�i� s a� i`,(�'� � �3"�*�.��. � /""• '`
. .-+ ;k—.ate--+�4,�����•*,�t* ""� �i _ b — �-�t-, _ 2,�
_���. ,•�.L`s """"'Lim y•� i,�}'' ,.,i- ��
L
it
1 _
♦3
View through lowlandwoodlandin southeast • wetland tothe southwesttowardmarsh,July •
2014. European Buckthorn has been removed.
• mow.} -�.
View
E
through • • woodland in southeast • of • to the north, 1
transect follows
+4 s a 5l
row'-
,
Q.
View from the west edge of the marsh at Tonkawa Road to the southeast,September 14, 2014.
x
s"
View north along the west edge of the marsh at Tonkawa Road,July 16, 2014. The insect transect
follows the road shoulder.