Comparing wetland field protocols for practical, informative monitoring of invasive species

Session: 32. - Long-Term Monitoring: Achievements, Challenges, and Solutions

Sarah Grelik, Michigan Tech Research Institute, [email protected]
Amanda Grimm, Michigan Tech Research Inst., [email protected]
Laura Bourgeau-Chavez, Michigan Tech Research Inst., [email protected]
Colin Brooks, Michigan Tech Research Institute, [email protected]
Phyllis Higman, Michigan Natural Features Inventory, [email protected]
Emily Schaefer, Saginaw Bay Cooperative Invasive Species Management Area, [email protected]

Abstract

Management (herbicide, burning and mowing) to control invasive Phragmites has been implemented across the Great Lakes with varying success. Monitoring the effects and outcomes of treatment activities (e.g. standing dead stems, regrowth of the invader or restoration of native plants) over at least several years is needed for effective management and control; however, monitoring is often not included in management plans. Effective monitoring must provide useful information to inform adaptive management based on site management goals, but it must also be reasonable for managers to implement in terms of available time, resources and skills. We tested several existing monitoring protocols with different levels of complexity at Phragmites treatment sites in coastal wetlands across the Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron shoreline, and quantified and compared the time and resources required for each. We also compared the information that each protocol can provide regarding the effects of varying treatment techniques on wetland plant biodiversity. Finally, we compared the data obtained via these field protocols to that provided by supervised classification of drone-collected high-resolution aerial imagery of treatment sites. The conclusions reached here can be applied to the development of monitoring plans for other wetland and submerged aquatic habitat management activities.

1. Keyword
Phragmites australis

2. Keyword
biodiversity

3. Keyword
monitoring